Let’s play Name That Quote again:
“God so loved the World,” meaning the whole race of men. By the “world in this connection cannot be meant any particular part only, but the whole race. Not only the Bible, but the nature of the case, shows that the atonement must have been made for the whole world. For plainly if it had not been made for the entire race, no man of the race could ever know that it was made for himself, and therefore not a man could believe on Christ in the sense of receiving by faith the blessings of the atonement. There being an utter uncertainty as to the persons embraced in the limited provisions which we now suppose to be made, the entire donation must fail through the impossibility of rational faith for its reception. Suppose a will is made by a rich man bequeathing certain property to certain unknown persons, described only by the name of “the elect.” They are not described otherwise than by this term, and all agree that although the maker of the will had the individuals definitely in his mind, yet that he left no description of them, which either the persons themselves, the courts, nor any living mortal can understand. Now such a will is of necessity altogether null and void. No living man can claim under such a will, and none the better though these elect were described as residents of [city name]. Since it does not embrace all the residents of [city name], and does not define which of them, all is lost. All having an equal claim and none any definite claim, none can inherit. If the atonement were made in this way, no living man would have any valid reason for believing himself one of the elect, prior to his reception of the Gospel. Hence he would have no authority to believe and receive its blessings by faith. In fact, the atonement must be wholly void—on this supposition—unless a special revelation is made to the persons for whom it is intended.
Remember, Googling is cheating!
Update: This comes from a sermon called God’s Love for a Sinning World by Charles Finney. I think I might have more to say about this on Monday.
TrackBack URL: http://www.thirstytheologian.com/mt/mt-tb.cgi/1673
Share this post:
Posted in:
Link · 3 Comments · 0 TrackBacks
← Previous · Home · Next →
3 Comments:
#1 || 11·02·18··06:54 || vicki
I think this may be Charles Finney.
#2 || 11·02·18··07:22 || Beau
You had me nervous for a bit! Excellent post. My favorite line: "...no living man would have any valid reason for believing himself one of the elect prior to his reception of the Gospel."
#3 || 11·02·18··10:19 || Shamgar
Hmm. I don't know the quote at all, but from the analogy I would surmise that he's a deist of some flavor. I don't know any Christian who would compare God to a deceased relative w/out any ability to identify his heirs, or to so completely disrespect the Holy Spirit and His role in the life of the believer.