I was just reading the newest Protestant Reformed Theological Journal, and in a review of Turretin's Institutes of Elenctic Theology, it says,

"By the time of Turretin -- some one hundred years after the death of Calvin -- the view of the covenant with Adam in Paradise as a covenant of works was well established in Reformed theology. There is in Turretin a full-blown doctrine of a covenant of works, including the notion that Adam, by his obedience, might have obtained the immortal, heavenly life that believers now have in Christ." What is all this hypothetical nonsense? "If Adam would not have sinned, then he would have merited eternal bliss."

What? It's along the same lines as the well-meant offer and hypothetical universal atonement: "If the reprobate would believe, then Christ's atonement would be sufficient for him, and he would be saved." What kind of nonsense is that? Adam would have remained sinless just as much as the reprobate will believe. If I were an eagle, then I could fly! If I were God, then I would know everything! It's that ridiculous!

E.D. Manard, in his new book, says this:

"God, as far as the external sound of the Gospel, promises to save even the reprobates, if they too would believe the promise. That's what THE Gospel declares: 'Whosoever' believes God's promise of salvation conditioned on Christ, according to the expressed terms of the Gospel proposition, their salvation is most sure, unfailing, certain, and doubtless, because not only is the death of Christ, as to its internal worth, extensive enough for the whole world of sinners to partake of, if they but would, but also Christ established the necessary righteousness demanded to satisfy God, the Father, as sufficient Sponsor for just such sinners as they."

See what he's saying? God promises to save the reprobate according to certain terms (Manard goes into these "terms" -- it is something the sinner must do in order that the promise be made effectual; he calls the Gospel a "contract" in which both parties have to do something to make it effectual), on the basis of Christ's atonement that is "extensive enough for the whole world of sinners to partake of, if they but would." It's the "sufficient for all, but efficient only for the elect" heresy. Christ's atonement is sufficient for the reprobate and would be efficient if the reprobate would only meet the "terms" of the covenant. What hogwash. I could go on and on! It all boils down to destroying the gospel by universalizing the atonement, thus making salvation conditional.



E-mails, Forums, and Letters