The Canons Of Dort Re.P.R

Discussion in 'Baptist Theology & Bible Study' started by Rippon, Oct 31, 2008.

  1. Rippon

    Rippon
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 12, 2005
    Messages:
    17,404
    Likes Received:
    328
    Second Head of Doctrine,Article 8.

    For this was the sovereign counsel,and most gracious will and purpose of God the Father,that the quickening and saving efficacy of the most precious death of his Son should extend to all the elect,for bestowing upon them alone the gift of justifying faith,thereby to bring them infallibly to salvation:that is,it was the will of God,that Christ by the blood of the cross,whereby he confirmed the new covenant,should effectually redeem out of every people,tribe,nation,and language,all those,and those only,who were from eternity chosen to salvation,and given to him by the Father;that he should confer upon them faith,which together with all the other saving gifts of the Holy Spirit,he purchased for them by his death;should purge them from all sin,both original and actual,whether committed before or after believing;and having faithfully preserved them even to the end,should at last bring them free from every spot and blemish to the enjoyment of glory in his own presence forever.
     
  2. Rippon

    Rippon
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 12, 2005
    Messages:
    17,404
    Likes Received:
    328
    The Second Head of Doctrine...

    Of The Death Of Christ,Article 9.

    The purpose proceeding from everlasting love towards the elect,has from the beginning of the world to this day been powerfully accomplished,and will henceforwards still continue to be accomplished,the gates of hell vainly opposing,so in due time may be gathered together into one,and that there never be wanting a church composed of believers,founded in the blood of Christ,which may steadfastly love,and faithfully serve him as their Savior,who as a bridegroom for his bride,laid down his life for them upon the cross,and which may celebrate his praises here and through all eternity.

    _____________________________________________________________

    The above was taken from the book :The Voice Of Our Fathers : An Exposition Of The Canons Of Dordrecht,by Homer Hoeksema.Mr.Hoeksema (the son of the more famous or infamous in some circles -- Herman Hoeksema) rendered the traditional English wording a bit differently.

    BTW,'P.R.' in my original heading means 'Particular Redemption'.Dort was specific about Specific Redemption.
     
  3. OldRegular

    OldRegular
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 21, 2004
    Messages:
    22,678
    Likes Received:
    53
    A hearty AMEN!
     
  4. Rippon

    Rippon
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 12, 2005
    Messages:
    17,404
    Likes Received:
    328
    1st Head Of Doctrine : Article 7

    On Predestination

    Election is the unchangeable purpose of God,whereby,before the foundation of the world,he hath out of mere grace,according to the sovereign good pleasure of his own will,chosen,from the whole human race,which had fallen through their own fault,from their primitive state of rectitude,into sin and destruction,a certain number of persons to redemption in Christ,whom he from eternity appointed the Mediator and Head of the elect,and the foundation of Salvation.
    This elect number,though by nature neither better nor more deserving than others,but with them involved in one common misery,God hath decreed to give to Christ,to be paid by Him and effectually to call and draw them to his communion by his Word and Spirit,to bestow upon them true faith,justification and sanctification;and having powerfully preserved them in the fellowship of his Son,finally,to glorify them for the demonstration of his mercy,and for the praise of the riches of his glorious grace;as it is written:"According as he hath chosen us in him,before the foundation of the world,that we should be holy,and without blame before him in love;having predestinated us unto the adoption of children by Jesus Christ to himself,according to the good pleasure of his will,to the praise of the glory of his grace,wherein he hath made us accepted in the beloved." Eph.1:4,5,6.And elsewhere: "Whom he did predestinate,them he also called,and whom he called,them he also justified,and whom he justified them he also glorfied." Rom.8:30.
     
  5. skypair

    skypair
    Expand Collapse
    Banned

    Joined:
    Jun 25, 2006
    Messages:
    4,657
    Likes Received:
    0
    Rip,

    Apparently you are offering to let us share your "daily devotionals" with you. Is that it?

    You didn't, by any chance, find these on plates of gold that you dug up out of the ground, did you?

    I'll have to admit, they are very "flowerdy."

    I really wish that these men had used the "marriage" pattern that both OT and NT do to describe salvation. In marriage, there is a "courtship" and a choice on both sides before there is a marriage and a life together and shared inheritance. But there is also the "field" (as in "playing the field") from which many are "chosen" but, in the end, only one mutually agreeing couple is married.

    Basically, what you have quoted is "speculative sotierological doctrine." You were never "eyewitnesses" to any of it and are now trying to "see" the unseen. Yes, we have biblical accounts of it --- but yours don't match with the patterns given elsewhere in scripture and are, therefore, flawed. Not totally inaccurate. Just not inclusive of the whole truth.

    skypair
     
  6. J.D.

    J.D.
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Feb 21, 2006
    Messages:
    3,553
    Likes Received:
    8
    From post #4: "Whom he did predestinate, them he also called, and whom he called, them he also justified" (underline mine)

    Ah yes! The unbreakable chain! Not even Skypair can break it.
     
  7. Rippon

    Rippon
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 12, 2005
    Messages:
    17,404
    Likes Received:
    328
    The point of this thread is to demonstrate that the Canons of Dort are specific about particular redemption.But you don't read too well so I guess you didn't pick that up.


    Ever the neologist.


    No.What I quoted is very biblical.Scriptural language was used throughout.You oppose what the Bible teaches.
     
  8. skypair

    skypair
    Expand Collapse
    Banned

    Joined:
    Jun 25, 2006
    Messages:
    4,657
    Likes Received:
    0
    Um, J.D. Aren't you forgetting something? God FOREKNEW who would believe before He predestinated them.

    It was a understandable ommission for you, though, seeing as how you think that foreknow means predestinate anyway --- though it doesn't. And yet I can add it using my biblical, free will definition of foreknow and the "chain" is still unbroken! :thumbs:

    skypair
     
  9. skypair

    skypair
    Expand Collapse
    Banned

    Joined:
    Jun 25, 2006
    Messages:
    4,657
    Likes Received:
    0
    There is a new thing happening in the church today. I don't know if you have kept up with it but it fits right in to this kind of interpretation of scripture. It's called the "emerging church." But the thing the is quite disturbing about it (aside from it likely originating from the Reform theology) is that they teach that the "works of God" can always be justified in the "word of God." Does that sound backward to you?

    Let's say, for instance, that they teach predestination. Predestination is in the Bible, it is true. But if the "work of God" supplies us with our definition going in, then, of course, we begin to "flavor" all our scriptures in the "word of God" with the "work of God" that we perceive in the world of men.

    That's what we see in the CoD, friend. People of all economic, social, political, etc, statuses were just getting their hands on the Bible and, Berean-like, beginning to compare what tradition had taught with what the words of scripture said. Unfortunately, there was huge political compulsion to accept tradition and to reject what the leadership called "heretical." Hey, it was better than RCC, but it was only "on the road" to scriptural exegesis.

    skypair
     
  10. Rippon

    Rippon
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 12, 2005
    Messages:
    17,404
    Likes Received:
    328
    You have absolutely no idea what you are talking about but you really don't care;do you?I would suggest a lot more reading before you spout-off on this and other subjects in which you have nary a clue.
     
  11. Brandon C. Jones

    Brandon C. Jones
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    May 3, 2005
    Messages:
    598
    Likes Received:
    0
    Hi Rippon,

    The canons were forged to oppose the Arminian position. But if you notice carefully article 8 never espouses what is known today as limited atonement. What it does claim is that Christ effectually and infallibly redeems all those and only those who were elect. Yes, that goes against the Arminians, but Amyraut and other hypothetical universalists still agreed with it. What it needs to say for you to be right would be for those words "saving efficacy" and "effectually" to be missing. But it includes such words, so it never denies hypothetical universalism where one affirms that Christ's atonement had saving efficacy for and only for the elect, but holds that Christ paid the penalty of sin for everyone (i.e., Amyraut and others).

    Likewise, article 9 goes against the Arminians, but never denies the positions of the hypothetical universalists that affirm that Christ's atonement had saving efficacy for and only for the elect. It does not pronounce on the extent of the atonement beyond that.

    If by particular redemption, all is meant that Christ's atonement included effectually saving the elect, then many hypothetical universalists can affirm it. All too often, people use the phrases particular redemption and limited atonement interchangeably, and the canons would affirm one understanding of the former but do not pronounce on the latter (at least as it is often defined as Christ's atonement, not just its saving efficacy, being limited only to the elect). Of course if one means by particular redemption that Christ only paid the penalty of sin for the elect, then the hypothetical universalists would go against it, but Dort does not pronounce on this issue.

    Trust me, I've read the canons, and Muller has too.

    BJ
     
    #11 Brandon C. Jones, Nov 4, 2008
    Last edited by a moderator: Nov 4, 2008
  12. Bob House

    Bob House
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 15, 2008
    Messages:
    8
    Likes Received:
    0
    You might want to check on your understanding of eastern "courtship". The son's bride was chosen by the father! Enough said...
     
  13. Rippon

    Rippon
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 12, 2005
    Messages:
    17,404
    Likes Received:
    328
    This quote was from my OP.There is no room here for the Amyraldian idea that God willed for Christ to die for anyone beyond the elect.

    I had said that I have the book :The Voice Of Our Fathers :An Exposition Of The Canons Of Dordrecht,by Homer Hoeksema.He devoted 3 and a half pages commenting on this article.He gives his understanding of Limited Atonement based on the Dort quote above.Here's a sample:

    It means that God never intended anything else than that the quickening (life-giving)and saving efficacy (efficacy is actual power and energy to save and to make alive)should extend to the elect only...Any other conception of election than that which is maintained by the Canons,that is,a sovereign,eternal,unchangeable,definite,personal election,vitiates and makes null and void any real saving efficacy in the death of Christ.And it is worthy of note not only that the Canons here make the limitation of atonement a divinely sovereign limitation,but that they literally speak of the purpose of God in the sense of intention.For the English "purpose" in this article is the Latin intentio.God's counsel,His will,and His intention are identical in the article.There is absolutely no room left for another purpose,will,intention,or counsel of God according to which He after all desires the salvation of all men.(pages 373,374)
     
  14. Rippon

    Rippon
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 12, 2005
    Messages:
    17,404
    Likes Received:
    328
    Brandon,it's already way past my bedtime here.My last post begins to address your prior post.This is going to be a heavy investment of my time and energy -- but I am willing to do it. I think that the Reformed Creeds and the Canons of Dort in particular, do in fact negate the possibility that an Amyraldian would be comfortable with the position of the Fathers (back in the early 17th century).
     
  15. Brandon C. Jones

    Brandon C. Jones
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    May 3, 2005
    Messages:
    598
    Likes Received:
    0
    We can disagree on it, but it says what it says. I'll make my case on what it actually says instead of what Hoeksema comments about it. The purpose or "intent" in the article is still limited to the saving efficacy of Christ's death.

    BJ
     
  16. skypair

    skypair
    Expand Collapse
    Banned

    Joined:
    Jun 25, 2006
    Messages:
    4,657
    Likes Received:
    0
    Not always. Jacob and Rebecca? Isaac's wife to be was chosen by Eliezer or, more likely, God. Sampson chose his own wife. And how did Israel/Jacob choose wives for Joseph?? Are you sure you are not referring to the Muslim side of the "eastern" tradition???

    skypair
     
  17. MB

    MB
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Apr 13, 2006
    Messages:
    2,535
    Likes Received:
    13
    Not always Bob. Mary for instance was chosen by Joseph. Not only that the woman's parents were the ones who did the choosing. The men them selves had to ask her parents permission.
    MB
     
  18. Rippon

    Rippon
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 12, 2005
    Messages:
    17,404
    Likes Received:
    328
    I just don't get it BJ.How much clearer does it have to be in the Canons?From Head 2,article 8 that I have quoted twice some excerpts follow :"...it was the will of God...should effectually redeem out of every people,tribe,nation and language all those,and those only,who were from eternity chosen to salvation and given to him by the Father;...He purchased for them by His death."

    The word "effectually" is included in the text,but so what?I don't see where this comforts the Amyraldian.


    Dort does indeed pronounce on this issue. A hypothetical universalist is given no protection with the Canons of Dort.
     
  19. Rippon

    Rippon
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 12, 2005
    Messages:
    17,404
    Likes Received:
    328
    Head One,Article 8:Of Divine Predestination

    There are not various decrees of election,but one and the same decree respecting all those,who shall be saved,both under the Old and New Testament:since the Scripture declares the good pleasure,purpose and counsel of the divine will to be one, according to which he hath chosen us from eternity,both to grace and glory,to salvation and the way of salvation,which he hath ordained that we should walk therein.
     
  20. Rippon

    Rippon
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 12, 2005
    Messages:
    17,404
    Likes Received:
    328
    Head One,Rejection Of Errors,Paragraph 2

    Of Divine Predestination

    Who teach:That there are various kinds of election of God unto eternal life: the one general and indefinite,the other particular and definite;and that the latter in turn is either incomplete,revocable,non-decisive and conditional,or complete,irrevocable,decisive and absolute.Likewise:that there is one election unto faith,and another unto salvation,so that election can be unto justifying faith,without being a decisive election unto salvation.For this is a fancy of men's minds,invented regardless of the Scriptures,whereby the doctrine of election is corrupted,and this golden chain of our salvation is broken:"And whom he foreordained,them he also called;and whom he called,them he also justified;and whom he justified,them he also glorified."Rom.8:30.
     

Share This Page

Loading...