Dear Sirs,

I enjoyed your magazine. It reminded me of hymns like He owns the cattle on a thousand hills with The Greatest King and Take it to the Lord in prayer for Enmity of Covenant Grace. 

My problem is with the book review. Did Peter in Acts 2 give a free will offer of the Gospel or a general call? I say he gave a free offer of the Gospel but only 3000 were saved. Wasn’t the crowd bigger? Wouldn’t that prove limited atonement? Caiaphas and Annas talked to Jesus. Did they accept Jesus as the Messiah? Another proof of limited atonement. The purpose of missions and every pastor is to preach the gospel. The Holy Spirit brings the believer to hear the word and repent in his heart. If not for the Holy Spirit, you will be putting people to sleep. It is a gift of the Spirit to be able who will be saved and who will be not? I know I can’t tell That is why Waldron should have picked Matthew 28:19. That is the crux of the free offer of the Gospel.

Darryl Kooy

REPLY

Dear Mr. Kooy,

Your objection to my book review concerns my condemnation of what you call the “free offer” of the gospel and could more accurately be called the well-meant offer of the gospel. In his book, author Sam Waldron defends the well-meant offer. This is the doctrine that in the preaching of the gospel, as for instance the preaching of Peter in Acts 2, God has a desire to save all who hear the preaching, out of a (would-be saving) love that he has for all in the audience alike. This implies that Christ Jesus died for all humans without exception (universal atonement) and that the salvation of sinners depends upon their acceptance of God’s gracious offer to all.

This teaching of the preaching of the gospel as a well-meant offer to all is the heresy of Arminianism. It is the false doctrine that the Reformed confession, the Canons of Dordt, condemns as the raising again of the heresy of Pelagianism out of hell. This is the doctrine that Sam Waldron defends in the book I reviewed, to which review you object, at least in part. It is the error of making salvation depend upon the will of the sinner rather than upon the sovereign will of God in election. The truth is that God sincerely desires the salvation only of the elect in the audiences of preachers and missionaries. He does not well-meaningly offer Christ and salvation to all in the audience. But by the preaching of the gospel he efficaciously draws the elect in the audience unto Jesus Christ (John 6:44; Acts 13:48; Canons of Dordt, 3–4.14). God is gracious only to his elect, for whom Christ died (see Romans 8–9 and the Canons of Dordt).

In order to accomplish this drawing of the elect unto Christ, God has the gospel preached to many humans, including those whom he has reprobated unto eternal damnation. In the preaching, God certainly does seriously call all who hear, with what the Reformed faith calls the external call, to repent and believe, adding the promise that all who do believe will be saved. But this call is not a well-meant offer to all, or what you call a “free offer.” To the elect it is a gracious call, irresistibly bringing them to the Savior. To the rest it is a serious command that leaves them without excuse.

The grace of God in the preaching of the gospel is particular, not universal or general. It depends for its saving of sinners upon God’s election, not upon the will (acceptance) of the sinner. And this truth of salvation is not a minor matter; it is fundamental.

Cordially in Christ,

Prof. David J. Engelsma