In Reformed
theology, God, in the eternal past, elected those who would be saved and for whom
Christ died, and either actively or passively chose the reprobate (the supralapsarian
vs. infralapsarian debate), those who Christ did not die for and will be lost
in eternity. Furthermore, in Calvinism, while all men are commanded to repent,
God will only give the ability to repent/the gift of repentance to the elect
and the elect only. I have discussed
this and other topics in my paper:
I bring this
up as the following from a well-known Calvinist, J.I. Packer, addressing
evangelism and the (Reformed understanding of the) doctrine of God’s
sovereignty, Packer engages in doublespeak and often argues like an Arminian, not a Calvinist, vis-a-vis the question of who can truly repent and accept the Gospel:
The belief that God is sovereign in grace
does not affect the genuineness of
the gospel invitations, or the truth of
the gospel promises. Whatever we may believe about election, and, for that
matter, about the extent of the atonement, the fact remains that God in the
gospel really does offer Christ and promise justification and life to ‘whosoever
will’. ‘Whosoever shall call upon the
name of the Lord shall be saved.’ As God
commands all men everywhere to repent, so God invites all men everywhere to
come to Christ and find mercy. The invitation is for sinners only, but for
sinners universally; it is not for sinners for a certain type only,
reformed sinners, or sinners whose hearts have been prepared by a fixed minimum
sorry for sin; but for sinners as such, just as they are . . .The fact that the
gospel invitation is free and unlimited—‘sinners
Jesus will receive’—‘come and welcome to Jesus Christ’—is the
glory of the gospel as a revelation of divine grace . . . ‘hear also what Saint
John saith. ‘If any man sin, we have
an Advocate with the Father, Jesus Christ the righteous; and he is the
propitiation for our sins’ (1 Jn. ii.I).
Why are these words ‘comfortable’? Because
they are God’s words, and they are all true. They are the essential gospel.
They are the promises and assurance which Christians who approach the Lord’s
Table should come trusting. They are the word which the sacrament confirms.
Note them carefully. Note first their substance.
The object of faith which they present is not mere orthodoxy, not mere truth
about Christ’s atoning death. It is not less than that, but it is more than
that. It is the living Christ Himself, the perfect Saviour of sinners, who
carries in Himself all the virtue of His finished work on the cross. ‘Come unto me . . . He is the propitiation for
our sins.’ These promises direct our trust, not to the crucifixion as such, but
to Christ crucified; not to His work in the abstract, but to Him who wrought
it. And note second the universality of
these promises. They offer Christ to all who need him, all ‘that truly turn to him’, any
man who has sinned. None are shut out from mercy save those who shut themselves
out through impenitence and unbelief.
Some fear
that a doctrine of eternal election and reprobation involves the possibility
that Christ will not receive some of those who desire to receive Him, because
they are not elect. The ‘comfortable words’ of the gospel promises, however,
absolutely exclude this possibility. As our Lord elsewhere affirmed, in emphatic
and categorical terms: ‘Him that cometh to me I will in no wise cast out’ (Jn. vi. 37).
It is true that God has from all eternity
chosen whom He will save. It is true that Christ came specifically to save
those whom the Father had given Him. But it is also true that Christ offers
Himself freely to all men as their Saviour, and guarantees to bring to glory
everyone who trusts in Him as such . . . The belief that God is sovereign in
grace does not affect the responsibility
of the sinner for his reaction to the gospel. Whatever we may believe about
election, the fact remains that a man who rejects Christ thereby becomes the
cause of his own condemnation. Unbelief in the Bible is a guilty thing, and
unbelievers cannot excuse themselves on the grounds that they were not elect. The unbeliever was really offered life in
the gospel, and could have had it if he would; he, and no-one but he, is
responsible for the fact that he rejected it, and must now endure the
consequences of rejecting it. (J.I. Packer, Evangelism
and the Sovereignty of God [London: Inter-Varsity Fellowship, 1961], 100, 101-2,
104-5, italics in original, emphasis in bold added)
