[soundofgrace] Re: [soundofgrace] Interesting quote

Message: < previous - next > : Reply : Subscribe : Cleanse
Home   : September 2003 : Group Archive : Group : All Groups

From: "John Reisinger" <jreisinger@...>
Date: Thu, 25 Sep 2003 19:49:24 -0400
> Hi John;
>
> Could you explain how CT denies point 9 in your previous post?
>
> (9)  I believe CT unwittingly destroys biblical evangelism, muddies up the
> doctrine of election, and flat out denies limited atonement.
>
> As I had previously noted, I am new here and this is one point which I am
> not sure where you are coming from.
> I had always thought that CT upholds these things, especially limited
> atonement.     Steve C.

C.T. has a radically different approach to "covenant" children and "pagan"
children. C.T. insists that we preach the law to guilty sinners before we
give them the Gospel. That is easy with pagan children and pagan adults. But
how do you tell a covenant child that he "in the covenant" in a special
relationship with God and at the same time he is a lost sinner under the
wrath of God needing to be saved. So use this  message to evangelize the
lost pagan child but we teach our covenant children something different. It
isn't hard to think of pagans as non-elect. If they were covenant children
why were they not born in a covenant home where they belong.

CT struggles with bordering on baptismal regeneration and assurance of all
their children being elect. If Romans 9:13 were not in the Bible I think
election would be guaranteed by birth and baptism in all covenant homes.

I spend ten years in evangelism. At least one third of my meetings were in
Presbyterian churches. If I would have stood up in a meeting where many of
the people were known to be unsaved and said the following: "God loves
everyone of you and Christ died and paid for the sins of every person here.
You need only accept what Christ has done for you" - The pastor would have
stopped the meetings because I was denying limited atonement. He would ask
me, "How do you know if all these people are among the elect for whom
Christ?" And he would be justified in accusing me of preaching universal
atonement.

But what if I were to ask the good Presbyterian pastor if he taught his
children, and instructed his congregation to teach their children, that God
loves every covenant child, meaning every child with one or more believing
parents, and Christ has died for them? When he said yes, I would ask him the
same question he asked me earlier. "How do you know if all these children
are among the elect for whom Christ?"

You see CT is militant in preaching a universal love of God and a universal
atonement of Christ. The only different between them and true and consistent
universalism is that they have reduced the universe to be the "covenant
community."

God loves all person born into the universe of the covenant community and
they need only ratify the covenant blessing purchased for them. What is the
basic difference between that and "God loves all men and sent Christ to die
for them and they need only exercise their free will and receive what Christ
provided for them.

Same horse just a different saddle.

JGR