You quoted Hendryx yet didn't read his words apparently. His friend said God had no desire to save the reprobate yet also believed iin the free and promiscuous proclamation of the Gospel to all. Hendryx assured his friend that he didn't regard him as a hyper-Calvinist.
You need to actually support your view by quoting someone who agrees with you. ;)
P4T, with all due respect brother, you keep diverting the topic to needless quibbling.
I just read through the thread and Ben was clearly saying that if their is a love of God for reprobates that it must be "full of darkness."
Which I take to mean that this kind of "love" only leads to a life of hopeless darkness ending with an eternity in hell.
That is not about Iconoclast.
It is clearly about a view concerning "two types of divine love."
He DID not even imply that Iconoclast was in darkness, only you did thus causing this needless bickering.
As the author of the OP (not as a moderator) may I politely request that you stay on topic and avoid diverting with needless accusations and the like? Please.
He said, "The Hyper-Calvinists will argue that God has no desire whatsoever that all men be saved."
But, you are correct that he goes on to explain what he believes the difference in that statement and the statement regarding God not desiring to save the reprobate as it relates to hyper-calvinism.
Those here appear to me to be saying the former, not the latter, which is the point I was attempting to make.
But, you should know Hendryx and I are not in agreement regarding his distinctions.
I only pointed to the article to show the distinction to Icon and others who say God doesn't desire that all men be saved and it relation to Hyper-Calvinism.
I believe Phil Johnson (MacArthur's ghost writer and known Calvinistic scholar) covers this pretty extensively as well.
Google The Faith of the Saints by Ernest C. Reisinger, a Reformed author. In this article he describes how unregenerated men can have a counterfeit "spurious" faith. A quote from this article;
This author is quite correct if Calvinism is true. You cannot possibly know for a certainty if you have true saving faith if you do not know for a certainty you are regenerated. It is a vicious circle of doubt.
Just copy that statement and paste it in Google and this detailed article should show up.
I thought I'd add another respected Reformed scholar to the mix:
The reformed theologian Jonathan Edwards explained,
"Though He hates sin in itself, yet He may will to permit it, for the greater promotion of holiness in this universality, including all things, and at all times. So, though He has no inclination to a creature's misery [He desires none perish], considered absolutely, yet He may will it, for the greater promotion of happiness in this universality."
("Concerning the Divine Decrees," The Works of Jonathan Edwards, Vol. 2 (Edinburgh: Banner of Truth Trust, 1974), pp. 527-28.)
So you believe that Christ is the Advocate,Intercessor of of every single person who has and shall live? Has Christ propitiated --removed the wrath of the Father from every single person --past,present and future? That is the most absurd fiction.
Nonsense. He DID too imply this. :) It IS about Iconoclast. Pay attention.
Ben never said if there is a love of God for reprobates that it must be "full of darkness." He said clearly the love that Iconoclast preaches is a "love full of darkness."
Ben said this in response:
"his preaching" being Iconos.
and towards Iconoclasts preaching he said:
See? You is Iconoclast. There is no "quibbling" on my part. He concisely says above that Icon OTOH preaches some other kind of love "which is also full of darkness.'" Nothing about this has a thing to do with "reprobates" as you claim.
Ben never taught that if there is a love of God for reprobates this kind of love must be "full of darkness." Provide proof by quoting.
No. He specifically said that the love that which Icono preached was a love "full of darkness."
He ended his indictment upon Iconoclast with my first quote of him above which again is this:
...which was a response to this that I said, specifically:
While at the same time he affirms, "The Hyper-Calvinists will argue that God has no desire whatsoever that all men be saved."
How can that be?
Read the article.
It's the same two-wills of God explanation we see in Piper's article.
The point is that historical Calvinists affirm God's love for all people and his desire for all to come to salvation.
Do you deny that point, or are you only taking issue with my use of the Hendryx article?
I most certainly deny that non-point. There have been a host of Calvinists since at least the early 17th century who have stated that God does not have a love for all. I'll dig that info up at a later time.
God's love for the reprobates would be full of darkness, wouldn't it?
They are born in darkness, they do remain in darkness and die and go to a dark hell, right?
Either way, he is not addressing Iconoclast personally, only his view of God's love (or common grace) for reprobates.
That is not a violation of any rules.
Now, please, I'm begging you.
Stay on topic and stop trying to pick fights.