Effectual Call and Gospel Call

 

#effectualcall #gospelcall

1689.10.3
"Elect infants dying in infancy are regenerated and saved by Christ through the Spirit; who works when, and where, and how He pleases; so also are all elect persons, who are incapable of being outwardly called by the ministry of the word."

"... so also are all elect persons, who are incapable of being outwardly called by the ministry of the word," THAT IS, there are elect souls who do not have the gospel sent to call them from darkness to light... EVEN THOUGH they are effectually called out of their native state of sin and death to that of grace and salvation.

The effectual call and the gospel call are distinct:
- The former is independent, both logically and chronologically, before the latter

- The former is monergistic; the latter is synergistic.

- The former is the free and sovereign application of the eternal salvation to each elect personally, the latter brings experiential knowledge of the former.

- The former makes the latter possible only.

- The former is absolutely certain and immutable; the latter involves human factors, thus involving variables.

 - an elect who is effectually called but without the gospel call and an elect who has both the effectual call and the gospel call - both are equally saved in the eternal sense; the gospel call brings a child of God varying degrees of practical/temporal salvation.

Thomas Paul Simmons' statement implies that every elect soul, without exception. shall have the gospel call out of darkness to light; that's a fable of many modern neo-Calvinistic Baptists. They believe that the gospel call and effectual call is a "package deal" - like McD's combo deal.

p/s
Yes, it is "elect infants" and not just "infants"; chapter 10 is on the effectual calling of the ELECT, therefore, the context demands "elect infants." Revisionists insist infants, even all the aborted and those infanticided. 

--------

Reggie Lee
Well said!

Mark Thomas
Powerful truth stated. Thank you, Bro. Sing.

Bill Taylor
Many have greatly erred from this truth by ignoring or denying the last statement in your response. "Revisionists insist infants." You are spot on that only elect infants are considered.

========

Some Gouty Fables of Mr Spurgeon

 

#gouty_fables

If that be so, then every elect of God shall be EQUALLY regenerated (which, fortunately, is true), EQUALLY converted, EQUALLY sanctified, and EQUALLY faithful (the latter three are only gouty fables).

The mighty, efficacious, and irresistible grace of God alone shall most certainly accomplish the exact saving effect on each and every elect.

Regeneration is monergistic; the other three are synergistic; the extent of them is conditioned upon the responses of those already regenerated.
---------

Patrica
I do not agree with Spurgeon

Roger Campbell
AMEN !!!!! Sharing. 👍💖🙏

Robert Cook Sr.
If this meme is biblically true, then why don't all "Christians" believe the same doctrine? Is God the author of this confusion????

Reggie Lee
Yeah... I get that. He did overstate a truth, causing error to proceed from his lips... but these Calvinists are safe. They are not far at all from the truth... and they are much closer to how we believe than any other group of Christians.

Harrison Paul Violet
Amen

Daniel Samons

Spurgeon on Grace

STATEMENT
“We believe that the work of regeneration, conversion, sanctification, and faith, is not an act of man’s free will and power, but of the mighty, efficacious, and irresistible grace of God.” (Charles Spurgeon, gleaned from a social media post)

----------

RESPONSE
This Spurgeon quote is a sloppy representation of sovereign grace theology. While it is true that our eternal salvation is a work of God alone, the items that Spurgeon lumps together are a combination of works that God alone does (i.e., monergistic works associated with our eternal salvation) and works that men do in cooperation with the Spirit’s enablement (i.e., synergistic works of God and man associated with our temporal salvation). Consider:

1. Regeneration is an immediate and direct work of God alone (John 5:25) Man has no active, participatory involvement in this work. He is merely the passive beneficiary thereof. Once quickened he is in possession of eternal life in a vital sense. He has been given everlasting life and shall never perish (John 10:28).

2. Conversion is synergistic in that it involves the Spirit's enablement as well as man's willing and active participation (Acts 3:19). God does not “repent for you” neither does he “force a regenerate man to repent” or “to be converted by truth.” This too is evident from the many instances where God’s people oppose the truth, even the gospel (Matthew 16:21-23, Mark 16:14). While it is true that a man must be regenerate to be converted to the truth, the assertion that the exercise of faith is a monergistic work of God is false. Man’s will is involved in the exercise of the faith that God has given him in regeneration.

3. Sanctification is of two sorts. The first is legal/positional sanctification which is an act of God alone and is required for his eternal salvation (Hebrews 10:10). The second is ethical/practical sanctification which is a synergistic act of God and man that involves man's willing participation and is required for his temporal salvation (I Thessalonians 4:3), his salvation “from this untoward generation.” (Acts 2:40).

4. Faith is a spiritual capacity, a vital sign that is given in regeneration (Galatians 5:22). The exercise of this capacity, however, is a willing act of man under the enablement of the indwelling Holy Spirit. It is the proper motion of the new creature in Christ under gospel instruction. The fact of remaining sin proves beyond any dispute that God does not force us to exercise faith during our natural lives (I John 1:8).

Spurgeon's quote does not hold up under biblical scrutiny, regardless of the numerous affirmations it received on social media. While Spurgeon said a lot of good things, folks should be aware that his language is often more impressive than his logic. Spurgeon's soundbites are often more rhetorically forceful than theologically compelling. When encountering Christian ideas on the internet, we do well to take a deep breath and ask, “Is that true?” lest we dive headlong into the pool of shallow assertions.

Roy Armada Fidelis
But actually CH Spurgeon is inconsistent in this matter, he said in one of his writings MAN HAS A DUTY TO RESPOND TO THE GOSPEL CALL! How come he said that IT IS NOT AN ACT OF MAN'S FREE WILL!

What are the foundation and the end of the world in Heb 9:26?

The foundation of the "theocratic Israel" world
at the foot of Mount Sinai.

The foundation, and the end of the world

Heb 9
23 ¶ It was therefore necessary that the patterns of things in the heavens should be purified with these; but the heavenly things themselves with better sacrifices than these.
24 For Christ is not entered into the holy places made with hands, which are the figures of the true; but into heaven itself, now to appear in the presence of God for us:
25 Nor yet that he should offer himself often, as the high priest entereth into the holy place every year with blood of others;
26 For then must he often have suffered since the foundation of the world: but now once in the end of the world hath he appeared to put away sin by the sacrifice of himself.

Verse 26 speaks of "the foundation of the world" as well as "the end of the world."

Please tell, what is the world spoken of in both cases... the foundation of WHAT/WHICH world, and the end of what WHAT/WHICH world?

Thank you most kindly in advance for your help.

Your student.

The end of the "theocratic Israel" world.

========

Comments

PJ Walters
Would this be from the beginning of the dispensation of the Law to its abrogation?

Sing F Lau
Kindly elaborate, please. Thanks!

PJ Walters
He was not to be offered repeatedly as were those sacrifices in the Old Testament dispensation, for then it must needs be that He be offered in such manner since its institution; but He came and was offered once unto God (therein signifying that He Himself is anti-typical of those sacrifices) in the abrogation of the Old Testament, or end of the world.

Julius Stewart
The foundation of the world here has to be since the institution of tabernacle blood sacrifices according to the law. The end of the world has to deal with the sacrifice and offering of Jesus upon the cross. From that moment on, the destruction of the temple at Jerusalem grew closer and would be finally the last phase in that world's end.

Sing F Lau
Samuel, my question is quite specific:
Please tell, what is the world spoken of in both cases... the foundation of WHAT/WHICH world, and the end of what WHAT/WHICH world?

If you can stick to the questions, comment on.

[Samuel deleted his comments!]                 

Julius Stewart
The word world refers here to the law world. Here, it refers to an age. Contextually, it refers to the time of tabernacle or temple worship under the law. Unless you have a more specific thought than this. If you do bring it to our attention Sing.

Sing F Lau
I posed the same question on a forum, and got this good reply from Elder Chase Harrison, and got his permission to paste it here for our learning.

=========

Hello Brother Sing,
Hope you are doing well!

I have typically viewed the two "worlds" in verse 26 as referring to the old covenant age, i.e. that Old Testament way of worship. As I'm sure you already know, the word "world" can have many different meanings and usages in the new testament. One meaning of the word "world" is an "age or era". I believe this is the meaning here in verse 26, especially since the book of Hebrews is one big compare and contrast of the Old Covenant to the New Covenant, i.e. the Old Testament to the New Testament.

In my understanding, in verse 26 he is contrasting the MANY insufficient sacrifices of the old testament to the ONE sufficient sacrifice of Christ in the new testament.

When it says, "the end of the world", I take that to mean the end of the old testament/old covenant "age" and way of worship. Christ's ONE sacrifice for the sins of His people on the cross was the ultimate fulfillment of what all the old testament animal sacrifices pointed to and typified. In Matthew 27:51, right after Jesus gave up the ghost on the cross, it is said that the earth quaked and the rocks rent and the veil of the temple was rent in twain, I believe symbolizing the total fulfillment and abolishment of the old testament way of worship that was according to Levitical law and animal sacrifices. Furthermore, consider the last verse of Hebrews 8:

"In that he saith, A new covenant, he hath made the first old. Now that which decayeth and waxeth old is ready to vanish away."

When it says, "the foundation of the world", I believe this could mean one of two things, and I wouldn't have a problem with a person believing either one:

1) the foundation of the old covenant world (age) and way of worship. I lean towards this one because of the overall context of Hebrews, comparing and contrasting the two covenants. Plus, the phrase "foundation of the world" is directly related and contrasted to the repetition of the animal sacrifices by the old testament high priests (verse 25). The contrasting point in verses 25 and 26 is that Christ did not have to offer Himself OFTEN like the high priests in the old testament did when they went into the holy place every year with the blood of others (animals), but rather Christ offered Himself ONE time (not often) at the end of the world, or old covenant age. So, I lean towards the view that both "worlds" and phrases should be similar and stay in context, but I'm not dogmatic on this part. Like I said, I lean. 🙂

OR,

2) the foundation of the created world (the creation). In Revelation, it speaks of "the Lamb slain from the foundation of the world" (Revelation 13:8). So, I could see where one could easily interpret it this way and I would be perfectly fine with it.

I think either one finds reasonable Biblical basis, and neither one does any harm to any foundational doctrinal principle, so I wouldn't debate anyone too hard over it, even though I prefer #1 over #2 personally. 🙂

When it comes to the context of Hebrews 9, I would say that I am firm on my interpretation of what the first phrase that I addressed means (the end of the world), and slightly less firm on what the second phrase that I addressed means (the foundation of the world).

These are my thoughts on the passage and on your question. Hope this has made some sense and been of some help.

God bless you,
Chase Harrison

Sing F Lau
Hi Brother Chase,
I want to thank you for your excellent reply... excellent because you answered the questions directly, and not because your answers are agreeable my understanding. Thank you VERY MUCH. You are a sharp-shooter like Elder Martin Smith (the one with aeronautics).

I left the same question on Facebook.

I would humbly request your permission to paste the reply below as a comment there.

Or please leave the comment there yourself. Thanks...

It is a good example of rightly dividing the word of truth!

already blessed through you,

sing

=====

Brother Sing,
Yes, if you would like to post my answer in Facebook, then that is fine with me... 

So, feel free to post my thoughts on Facebook if you desire.
Thanks and God bless,
Chase Harrison.

 

What are the Inseparable Fruits, Effects, and Consequences of Election?

 

How I wish Owen's statement is true!

Don't you, Parents, Elders, Reverends, Doctors of Divinity, etc.?

How if I say, "Health, wealth, and happiness are the inseparable fruits, effects and consequences of conception"? Well, I concede that an exceptional few - the insane billionaires, will say, "of course!"

The rest will politely inquire, "Which planet did you come from?" 🙂 😮

When the greatest minds fail to distinguish the eternal salvation by God's free and sovereign grace from the temporal salvation through the working (with fear and trembling) of His children, they INEVITABLY end up making false and erroneous statements.

"Justification, regeneration, adoption, and glorification are the inseparable fruits, effects, and consequences of election" is the truth.

Romans 8
30 Moreover, whom he did predestinate, them he also called: and whom he called, them he also justified: and whom he justified, them he also glorified.

(Nevertheless, Dr John Owen was probably one of the greatest, if not the greatest, Puritan theologians.)

Believing is a Work God Requires of His Children

Believing is a Work God Requires of His Children

Are you saved by grace through faith in Christ?
If so, then you are saved through works!!!

Believing is work! Christ Himself said so!

Why do so many carelessly contradict Him?

The act of believing in Jesus Christ is MOST CERTAINLY a work. Jesus Christ HIMSELF told men to do this work!

John 6
¶ 28 Then said they unto him, What shall we do, that we might work the works of God? 29 Jesus answered and said unto them, This is the work of God, that ye believe on him whom he hath sent.

The men inquired: ''what shall WE DO, THAT WE MIGHT WORK the works of God?" Christ replied: The work that God wanted them to do is: 'that ye believe on him whom he hath sent.' They were interested in WORKING the WORKS (PLURAL) of God, i.e. the WORKS that God requires of His children. [His children are those elect whom God has effectually called out of their native state of sin and condemnation to grace and salvation)

Christ points them to the FIRST and CHIEF work God requires of them. Christ said, 'First things first... believe on Him whom God has sent.'  Please don't contradict Christ and speak blasphemy that believing in Christ is not work! Christ said it is a work God requires His children to work!

The Lord God said, "This is my beloved Son: hear him" - it is a command to DO something, i.e. to believe Him! And ONLY God's children, i.e. regenerated elect, are able to do that work!

Even so, the popular slogan 'justification by faith alone through grace alone' - commonly understood is an oxymoron. Justification is not by faith, i.e. man's work of believing in Christ Jesus. Justification is by the faith of Christ, i.e. Christ's faithfulness in discharging His work of redemption.

Apostle John said,
"And this is his commandment, That we should believe on the name of his Son Jesus Christ, and love one another, as he gave us commandment." 1John 3:23.

"Believe on the name of His Son Jesus Christ" is a divine command; rendering obedience to a divine command is work.

Apostle Paul states it so plainly in Romans: the righteousness needed for the justification of a condemned criminal is the righteousness provided by God Himself through His Son Jesus Christ. It is stated as plain as noonday sun here:

Romans 3:
21 But now the righteousness of God without the law is manifested, being witnessed by the law and the prophets;
22 Even the righteousness of God which is by faith of Jesus Christ unto all and upon all them that believe: for there is no difference:
23 For all have sinned, and come short of the glory of God;
24 Being justified freely by his grace through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus:

He who ears to hear, let him hear!

Justification is FREELY by God's grace, NOT by your faith;

Justification is THROUGH the redemption that is in Jesus Christ; BY the faithfulness of Christ in His redemptive work.

Justification is not through your faith;

BUT justification is evidenced by your faith in Jesus Christ; even so, breath evidences life.

Your faith in Jesus Christ DEMONSTRATES that you have been FREELY justified by God's grace (the MANNER of your justification) based on the redemption that is in Jesus Christ (the GROUND of your justification).

You are saved by grace through the faith of Christ! (i.e. Christ's faithfulness in securing the redemption of His people. 

You are not saved by grace through your faith in Christ!

The former is the gospel; the latter is a lie of the devil!