HB does a decent job on the subject, but fails in one instance. He like all infras, do not make the distinction between reprobation and condemnation. God most certainly does have the end in mind,the salvation of the elect in Christ, vs the just damnation of the reprobate dying in infallible unbelief. Scripture most certainly speaks upon this sequence.

1) Election of the people
2) the means of salvation through Christ
3)the purpose=His glory.

I do not understand HB's objections. And could be a mere talking past each other.

His use of possible men/possible redeemer make littel sense as if the council of God were a mere figmnet and not infallibly derterminate. Anyway, that is my take on HB not willing to digress this thread.

The point of my post was to verify that people who claim that reprobation is not active, make sin/ fallen man the cause of reprobation. Just as Messias is not the cause for Election, sin is not the cause for reprobation.

“Therefore they could not believe, because Esaias said again, He hath blinded their eyes, and hardened their heart; that they should not see with their eyes, nor understand with their heart, and be converted, and I should heal them, (John 12:39,40);

There is no such thing as conditional election nor conditional reprobation.

So when one objects, or ends up in the sproul, HB, "passing by" camp, one has not learned rightly that God is not passive in anything. Including the reprobation/condemnation of men.

I would never break fellowship over this, and believe the supra camp comes close to making God the "author of sin" in some writings of men, but because a few people ruin the truth, does not make it less true.

William Twisse has one of the best writings on the subject. Even though the WCF is basically infra, WT, the chairman, was most assuredly supra.




There never was a sinner half as big as Christ is as a Savior.