The Gospel - The Means of Grace XVII

Cleansing of the Conscience &
Application of the blood

"And not only so, but we also joy in God through our Lord Jesus Christ, by whom we have now received the atonement." (Romans 5: 11)

For one to be saved, he must not only have had Christ make "atonement" (reconciliation) for him, but he must "receive" the "atonement." The atonement must be imputed to a person, the blood of Christ must be applied to the sinner, both forensically and experimentally. How does one "receive" the atonement? Is it not when he is saved or born again?

"Receiving the atonement" simply means the receiving of the fruits or benefits of the atonement. On this verse the great old Baptist, Dr. John Gill, wrote:

"by whom we have now received the atonement; atonement is not made, but received by us; which denotes the application of the atoning blood and sacrifice of Christ to the conscience, the Spirit's witness of interest in it, and the office of faith, as a recipient of it: it is not faith, nor anything else of the creature's, that makes the atonement, only Christ; but faith receives it from him, and by him..." (commentary)

The word "receive" in this verse deserves special attention.

One writer wrote:

"In the words of John Murray, the ‘word ‘receiving’…does not refer [in 5:17] to our believing acceptance of the free gift but to our being made the recipients’ of it. Indeed, Paul rarely used ‘lambano’ (‘to receive’) in the sense of ‘to take hold’ or ‘to accept believingly’. To receive something in his sense is simply to be the object or the recipient of it, as Murray says. We see this clearly in Romans 13:2, where those who receive (or incur) judgement are the objects or the recipients of it; they receive judgement in much the way that a boxer might receive severe blows to the head. Similarly, in Romans 1:5 those who ‘have received grace’ and in Romans 5:11 those who ‘have now received reconciliation’ are clearly the recipients of these effects in the same passive sense that a newborn baby receives life."

On the same web page, a commenter disagreed, and said:

"The word "receive" is in the active voice, which means its something YOU do. The word "receive" should have been translated ACCEPT, not receive. Or it should have translated TAKE. Its the Greek word "Lambano" which literally means to take hold of."

http://www.evangelicaluniversalist.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=14&t=1116

So, which is it, active or passive voice? And, what are the consequences in either case?

A. T. Robertson says that "lambano" (received), in Romans 5: 11, is "second aorist active indicative."

So, though it is true that the word "lambano" (received) often is in the passive voice, it is sometimes put in the active voice. Often people receive things passively, and such things are put in the passive voice in the Greek. Dead people receive life, but they are passive in it. Receiving slaps on the face is also passive. But, when in the active voice, "receiving" means "accepting," or "laying hold of" (grabbing), or "taking." Thus, Murray is wrong.

It is not a denial of Calvinism and sovereign grace for the will to be active in salvation. The experience of salvation is not in every way passive, nor is it in every way active. In some respects the sinner is being acted upon, but in other respects the sinner is acting. Action is necessarily involved in being saved. The question is this, however: Is all the action and activity God's? or all the sinner's? Or, does salvation not involve action on the part of both God and the sinner? This leads to the debate about monergism and synergism.

Though these terms are often used by Calvinists, their definitions of them are often biased and misleading. Many Calvinists today, like John Hendryx, affirm that Calvinism is strictly monergistic and that Arminianism is synergistic in regard to being "born again" or "regenerated." In professional writings on this subject, "monergism" denotes passivity (passive voice) and "synergism" denotes activity (active voice). So, "what saith the scriptures?" Do the scriptures speak of regeneration in totally monergistic and passive terms? Or in totally synergistic and active terms? Or, in a combination of both? What does the old London Confession of 1689 say?

1689 London Confession on Effectual Calling

1._____ Those whom God hath predestinated unto life, he is pleased in his appointed, and accepted time, effectually to call, by his Word and Spirit, out of that state of sin and death in which they are by nature, to grace and salvation by Jesus Christ; enlightening their minds spiritually and savingly to understand the things of God; taking away their heart of stone, and giving unto them a heart of flesh; renewing their wills, and by his almighty power determining them to that which is good, and effectually drawing them to Jesus Christ; yet so as they come most freely, being made willing by his grace.

Here it seems that the old Baptists blended both passive and active, both monergistic and synergistic, factors to the experience of salvation or regeneration. God acts upon the sinner. The sinner is passive. But, the sinner, being acted upon, acts himself, "so that they come most freely." Their being "willing" is the result of God's action, but it is nevertheless their action in coming. Is the sinner regenerated before his will has been changed? Before it is made willing? Before it comes to Christ?

It is true that this work cannot be called a "cooperation" in the general sense of that term. It is also true that God's act is always effectual, being irresistible. "Drawing" denotes this. God's power is the efficient cause, but the will of man is the instrumental cause. God causes the will of the sinner and the will of the sinner causes the sinner to come.

2._____ This effectual call is of God's free and special grace alone, not from anything at all foreseen in man, nor from any power or agency in the creature, being wholly passive therein, being dead in sins and trespasses, until being quickened and renewed by the Holy Spirit; he is thereby enabled to answer this call, and to embrace the grace offered and conveyed in it, and that by no less power than that which raised up Christ from the dead.

Can a man be said to be "called" and "quickened" who has not "answered" this call? Before he has "embraced" the grace offered and conveyed? Job, in speaking of his coming resurrection, said "you will call and I will answer." (Job 14: 15) Was Lazarus raised from the dead when Jesus called unto him or when he answered the call? Thus, regeneration (or resurrection) does not simply comprehend the cause but also that which is effected by the call.

Dr. Archilbald Alexander, the great teacher of Princeton Calvinism, and forerunner of Charles Hodge, wrote:

"Sometimes regeneration is considered distinctly from the acts and exercises of the mind which proceed from it, but in the Holy Scriptures the cause and effect are included..."

http://baptistgadfly.blogspot.com/2009/02/dr-grudems-errors.html

Those Calvinists who say that "regeneration" is the act of God that causes regeneration is false, for such a definition says that one is regenerated before he is regenerated, which is nonsensical. Such a definition limits regeneration to the cause of it, but not to the effect of it. Some of these Calvinists will say that the "drawing" = regeneration, but if this is so, then one is regenerated, or has spiritual life, before he "comes" to Jesus. But, Jesus put life after coming. (John 5: 40) The order given by Christ is drawing-->coming-->life. If the "drawing" = "receiving life," then one is alive before he is alive. But, again, this is nonsensical.

"Whom God hath set forth to be a propitiation through faith in his blood, to declare his righteousness for the remission of sins that are past, through the forbearance of God." (Rom. 3: 25)

"Propitiation" is a result of the sinner placing his trust in the sacrifice of Christ, in the righteousness of Christ. Again, this is in direct opposition to Hardshellism which teaches that faith in the blood of Christ is no condition or means for obtaining propitiation.

On this verse, Dr. Gill wrote:

"...'faith' in his blood is the means by which persons become partakers of the benefits of his propitiation; such as peace, pardon, atonement, justification, and adoption..." (Commentary)

Propitiation occurs through application of the blood of Christ. In the old testament typology, the blood was applied to the mercy seat and also applied to the people by sprinkling. During the inaugural of the first passover, the Lord instructed the people to apply the blood of the sacrificial lamb to the doors of their homes and this typifies the sinner's application of the blood to his own case by believing in Jesus. Further, in old testament atonement, the individual was required to lay his hands upon the sacrificial lamb and confess his sins as a way of appropriating the benefits of the atoning sacrifice.

Thus, since propitiation requires faith, and faith requires the hearing of the gospel, then the gospel is a means of grace and salvation.

"And I said unto him, Sir, thou knowest. And he said to me, These are they which came out of great tribulation, and have washed their robes, and made them white in the blood of the Lamb." (Rev. 7: 14)

The Greek word for "washed" is in the active voice, according to Robertson. Thus, regeneration is not, in every respect, a passive or monergistic experience. How do sinners wash their robes? Wrote Dr. Gill:

"The "robes" which they washed in his blood may either design themselves, their consciences, which this blood purges from dead works; or their outward conversation garments, which have their spots, and need continual washing; or else the robe of righteousness, and garments of salvation, or their justification, which is by the blood of Christ, Ro 5:9. The act of washing from sin, by the blood of Christ, is sometimes ascribed to Christ himself, as in Re 1:5; but here to the saints, and designs the concern which faith has in the blood of Christ, which deals with it for justification, peace, and pardon, for the removing of sin from the conscience, and for cleansing from all impurity, both of flesh and Spirit: and the effect of this is, that their robes were "made white"; that is, that they were freed from all sin, were without fault before the throne, not having spot, or wrinkle, or any such thing. This shows that these persons had no trust in themselves, or dependence on their own merits, and works of righteousness, but wholly trusted to, and depended on the blood and righteousness of Christ; which is the only way to come out of tribulation, and enter the kingdom." (Commentary)

"How much more shall the blood of Christ, who through the eternal Spirit offered himself without spot to God, purge your conscience from dead works to serve the living God?" (Heb. 9: 14)

This verse deals directly with the application of the blood of Christ to a person and occurs when one is saved, born again, or regenerated. Notice how this work is not non-cognitive as the Hardshells affirm. It involves the removing of ignorance (purging) and the giving of true saving knowledge. The word "conscience" denotes cognition, as does the word "serve." It is foolishness to speak of "born again pagans," as do the Hardshells, for pagans and all idolaters still serve false gods and are involved in "dead works," and do not serve the living God.

"Let us draw near with a true heart in full assurance of faith, having our hearts sprinkled from an evil conscience, and our bodies washed with pure water." (Heb. 10: 22)

Do pagans possess a "good conscience" or an "evil conscience"? The Hardshells affirm that many pagans are "born again," even though their consciences are yet unclean. Who has a "true heart"? Those who have faith or those who do not?

"Then Jesus said unto them, Verily, verily, I say unto you, Except ye eat the flesh of the Son of man, and drink his blood, ye have no life in you. Whoso eateth my flesh, and drinketh my blood, hath eternal life; and I will raise him up at the last day. For my flesh is meat indeed, and my blood is drink indeed. He that eateth my flesh, and drinketh my blood, dwelleth in me, and I in him." (John 6: 53-56)

This is another passage that deals with the application of the blood of Christ to a soul. Salvation is sometimes described as Christ being incorporated into a believer, and is sometimes described as the believer being incorporated into Christ. This is symbolized in the two ordinances of the Christian faith, in baptism and the Lord's Supper. In the typology of baptism, the sinner is pictured as being incorporated into Christ, but in the Supper Christ is pictured as being incorporated into the sinner. So, how is Christ incorporated into the sinner? It is by appropriating the sacrifice of Christ by believing in Christ and accepting his atonement. On this Dr. Gill wrote:

"But the words design a spiritual eating of Christ by faith. To eat the flesh, and drink the blood of Christ, is to believe that Christ is come in the flesh, and is truly and really man; that his flesh is given for the life of his people, and his blood is shed for their sins, and this with some view and application to themselves...only such that believe in Christ are living souls...between these acts of faith, and eternal life, there is an inseparable connection."

This is the old Baptist position and it is false for the Hardshells to claim that they are "Old Baptists" when they reject that position.

 

The Gospel - The Means of Grace XVI

Inheriting God's Promise

"Wherein God, willing more abundantly to shew unto the heirs of promise the immutability of his counsel, confirmed it by an oath." (Heb. 6: 17)

Those who are elect and called are they who have become the "children" or "people" of God, as was shown in a previous posting. And, says Paul, "if children, then heirs, heirs of God, and joint-heirs with Christ." (Rom. 8: 17)

What is this "inheritance"? What does it involve? What things has God promised to his children and to his heirs? Are they temporal things or eternal things? A temporal salvation or an eternal one? Sometimes a biblical writer will focus on one item of the inheritance, but at other times will affirm that to be an "heir of God" means that the heir is an "heir of all things." Yes, Jesus is the one true supreme "heir," or "the heir of all things," but so are all the saved and called, for they are "joint-heirs" with Christ. This is why Paul could say to Christians - "all things are yours." (I Cor. 3: 22)

The Means or Conditions

"That ye be not slothful, but followers of them who through faith and patience inherit the promises." (Heb. 6: 12)

"Inheriting the promises" involves being saved, whether it is past, present, or future salvation. Some of these things promised by God are received in initial salvation, in conversion, some are received during the Christian life, and some are to be received in the resurrection to eternal glory and life. Further, what God has promised, in his covenant, to the "heirs of promise," concerns their deliverance from their condemned state to their glorious immortal state. For Hardshells to read Hebrews and the apostolic epistles concerning inheriting the promises and make them to deal strictly with a "time salvation" is a wholly untenable theory.

"And for this cause he is the mediator of the new testament, that by means of death, for the redemption of the transgressions that were under the first testament, they which are called might receive the promise of eternal inheritance." (Heb. 9: 15)

Notice how the writer of Hebrews makes it clear that he is talking about eternal salvation for he speaks of "the promise of eternal inheritance" and of "redemption" from "transgressions."

What are the means or conditions for obtaining the promise of heirship, of the promise of "eternal inheritance"? The writer says - "though faith and patience (perseverence) inherit the promises." But, Hardshells deny that faith and perseverance are conditions for obtaining eternal inheritance, affirming that many heathens who are without faith in God and in Christ, are nevertheless to become recipients of the eternal inheritance. Also, those who receive eternal inheritance are identified as being "those that are called," and we have already seen how Paul affirms that this "calling" is "by the gospel." (II Thess. 2: 14)

Hardshells, in holding to unconditional election, have rejected all propositions that put conditions with salvation. Yet, the old Baptists, like John Bunyan, did not speak of salvation as being strictly unconditional, but also conditional. The old Baptists of primitive times spoke of salvation as being both unconditional and conditional, unconditional in one sense and conditional in another sense. The Hardshells, however, affirm that eternal salvation is conditional in no sense, not conditioned upon faith and perseverance. But, the writer of Hebrews was no Hardshell for he plainly affirms that becoming heirs of God's promises is conditioned upon one having faith, faith in God and in Jesus as Lord and Savior, and persevering in that faith to the end.

"That the blessing of Abraham might come on the Gentiles through Jesus Christ; that we might receive the promise of the Spirit through faith...For if the inheritance be of the law, it is no more of promise: but God gave it to Abraham by promise." (Gal. 3: 14, 18)

In a previous posting we looked at how the salvation experience is described as involving one "receiving" the Spirit of God, and the Spirit of Christ, and this verse also speaks of such a receiving of the Spirit in connection with the promises of the eternal covenant. And, how does he say that the Spirit is "received"? Is it not "through faith"?

"In whom also we have obtained an inheritance, being predestinated according to the purpose of him who worketh all things after the counsel of his own will: That we should be to the praise of his glory, who first trusted in Christ. In whom ye also trusted, after that ye heard the word of truth, the gospel of your salvation: in whom also after that ye believed, ye were sealed with that holy Spirit of promise, Which is the earnest of our inheritance until the redemption of the purchased possession, unto the praise of his glory." (Eph. 1: 11-14)

Hardshells love the part of this passage that deals with "predestination" and "election." But, they do not like that part that connects faith with salvation, or connects gospel preaching with being a means in the work of salvation. Who, according to the apostle, did God predestinate and purpose to ultimately be saved, or who should be "to the praise of his glory"? Is it not they who have "trusted in Christ"? Yet, Hardshells say that this purpose of God to make a people who become a matter of praise to God and his glory is not limited to believers in Jesus, affirming that many who do not believe in Jesus are saved people, and who will also be "to the praise of his glory."

Further, what does Paul say happened "after" they had believed and trusted in Christ? He says they were "sealed with that holy Spirit of promise." Why is this "sealing" not that which God purposed and predestinated, as the Hardshells will want to affirm? Why is this "sealing" not regeneration or conversion? Paul mentions this "sealing" in his other epistles.

"Who hath also sealed us, and given the earnest of the Spirit in our hearts." (II Cor. 1: 22)

Is he not alluding to regeneration and conversion? Is not the "giving" of the "earnest of the Spirit in our hearts" not the salvation experience? Does he not include in this same experience the work of God in "sealing"?

In the Ephesian epistle, Paul mention the same "sealing" again in chapter four, saying:

"And grieve not the holy Spirit of God, whereby ye are sealed unto the day of redemption." (4: 30)

Here the "sealing" is connected with "redemption." It is also, like calling and enlightenment, "once for all time," an effectual work that endures and that does not fail. One is "sealed UNTO the day of redemption."

The word "sealed" is from the Greek word "sphragizō" and means to seal or mark a thing, for the purpose of owning and authenticating it. It is a way of saying of something - "it belongs to me." When a person, in primitive times, "sealed" a letter, he put his stamp or mark upon it. This seal was often done on wax placed on the folded document. In the process of "sealing" the document an "impression" is made in the wax. Thus, when people are saved, after believing, they are "sealed," owned by God, impressed by God, which impression is in the nature, in the heart and mind. Certainly this "sealing" does not occur later than regeneration. Can we imagine a man regenerated who was not yet "sealed"? Not yet owned by God? Not yet impressed upon by God?

"That the Gentiles should be fellowheirs, and of the same body, and partakers of his promise in Christ by the gospel: Whereof I was made a minister, according to the gift of the grace of God given unto me by the effectual working of his power." (Eph. 3: 6, 7)

This verse absolutely destroys the Hardshell no means theory of salvation! How does one become a "fellowheir"? How does one become a "partaker of his promise in Christ"? Paul says it is "by the gospel"! Hardshellism uprooted! Hardshellism, the chaff which the wind of scripture blows away!

Notice also that this being made a partaker of Christ by the gospel is "by the working of his power."

 

The Gospel - The Means of Grace XV

A Description of the Saved

"For it is impossible for those who were once enlightened, and have tasted of the heavenly gift, and were made partakers of the Holy Ghost, And have tasted the good word of God, and (tasted) the powers of the world to come, If they shall fall away, to renew them again unto repentance; seeing they crucify to themselves the Son of God afresh, and put him to an open shame." (Heb. 6: 4-6)

Who can deny that the saved are described in these verses? Who can deny that being made a "partaker of the Holy Ghost" is salvation? What other characteristics does the writer give for the salvation experience? He says that those who are partakers of the Spirit are also they who have "tasted the good word of God." These two things are joined together, yet the Hardshells divorce them, contending that only a few of those who have been made partakers of the Spirit have also tasted of the good word of God.

Not only does the apostle describe the saved as those who have become partakers of the Spirit and word, but as those who have been "renewed" by "repentance." Do the Hardshells teach that renewing (regeneration) comes via repentance? Do they not rather deny it? Do the scriptures not teach that "repentance" is "unto life"? (Acts 11: 18) Do the Hardshells not rather teach that life is unto repentance? That life is unto an optional repentance?

A Description of the Lost

"This I say therefore, and testify in the Lord, that ye henceforth walk not as other Gentiles walk, in the vanity of their mind, Having the understanding darkened, being alienated from the life of God through the ignorance that is in them, because of the blindness of their heart: Who being past feeling have given themselves over unto lasciviousness, to work all uncleanness with greediness. But ye have not so learned Christ; If so be that ye have heard him, and have been taught by him, as the truth is in Jesus." (Eph. 4: 17-21)

What Hardshell can deny that Paul describes the unregenerate state in these words? He speaks of the unsaved Gentiles as being "alienated from the life of God," as dead alien sinners. He speaks of them as being "beyond feeling," another characteristic of the "dead." But, this spiritual death is characterized by a darkened understanding, a lack of enlightenment, by blindness and ignorance. Conversely, spiritual life is characterized by enlightenment, by having understanding, by having "learned Christ," by having heard Christ and been taught by him. But, the Hardshells say that the regeneration experience is non-cognitive, an experience that imparts no knowledge. Paul, however, defines the regeneration experience as one in which sinners "learn Christ." Further, this learning of Christ Paul says comes by the gospel. "How shall they believe in him (learn about him) of whom they have not heard?" (Rom. 10: 14)

In the same epistle Paul had earlier spoken of their lost state before their conversion, before they came to "learn Christ." He wrote;

"Wherefore remember, that ye being in time past Gentiles in the flesh, who are called Uncircumcision by that which is called the Circumcision in the flesh made by hands; That at that time ye were without Christ, being aliens from the commonwealth of Israel, and strangers from the covenants of promise, having no hope, and without God in the world: But now in Christ Jesus ye who sometimes were far off are made nigh by the blood of Christ." (2: 11-13)

While they were in "ignorance" of Christ and the gospel, before they had "learned Christ," they were "strangers from the covenant of promise," and were "without hope," and "without God." Not only were they "aliens" from the "life of God," but "aliens" from the "commonwealth of Israel," aliens to Zion, aliens from the gospel truth. Before they had "learned Christ" and been given a saving understanding they were "uncircumcised," or unregenerate.

These descriptions of the saved and lost go contrary to the Hardshell descriptions and show how conversion and regeneration are spoken of as being the same thing by the apostle. Where does Paul make "conversion," or "learning Christ," to be a separate and distinct experience from partaking of the "life of God"? Does the description of the saving experience not show that the gospel is the means?

When Paul says "at that time" and "now," words alluding to two distinct periods of time, is he not referring to times well known by the Ephesians? To that time when they were converted to Christ by the gospel, when they came to know and love him, versus that time when they were ignorant of him?

 

The Gospel - The Means of Grace XIV

Becoming A Children Of God

"That is, They which are the children of the flesh, these are not the children of God: but the children of the promise are counted for the seed." (Rom. 9: 8)

Those who are "children" or "sons" of God are also known in scripture as the "people of God" (Rom. 9: 26) or "family of God." (Eph. 3: 15) Not only are saved people the "children of God," but are "children of the day," and "children of the light."

"Ye are all the children of light, and the children of the day: we are not of the night, nor of darkness." (I Thess. 5: 5)

It is inconsistent to be a child of the light if one is still in darkness, if one is still worshipping false gods, and if one is a stranger to the gospel.

"For ye were sometimes darkness, but now are ye light in the Lord: walk as children of light." (Eph. 5: 8)

When were the Ephesians "darkness"? Was it not before they were converted? Before they heard and believed the gospel? Paul speaks as if the Ephesians knew the time when they were once in darkness and when they came into the light. But, if as the Hardshells teach, most of the children of God do not know the time when they were born again, then they of course would not know when they went from being children of the night to children of the day. Most Hardshells would acknowledge that they know when they were converted, when they became believers in Jesus. Thus, if Paul is speaking of a time when the Ephesians knew that they became children of the light, then they must be referring to their conversion experience, and this conversion experience is when they went from being children of the darkness to children of the light.

"Which in time past were not a people, but are now the people of God: which had not obtained mercy, but now have obtained mercy." (I Peter 2: 10)

Again, what point in time is Peter alluding to? A time when his audience was regenerated in the womb? A time that his audience does not know anything about? Was it not the time when they were not Christians? When did Peter's audience become the people of God? Was it not when they became Christians?

"But if our gospel be hid, it is hid to them that are lost: In whom the god of this world hath blinded the minds of them which believe not, lest the light of the glorious gospel of Christ, who is the image of God, should shine unto them. For we preach not ourselves, but Christ Jesus the Lord; and ourselves your servants for Jesus' sake. For God, who commanded the light to shine out of darkness, hath shined in our hearts, to give the light of the knowledge of the glory of God in the face of Jesus Christ." (II Cor. 4: 3-6)

Obviously Paul taught that the work of God in making children of light involved the gospel. Those who are unbelievers in Christ and the gospel are those who are yet darkness and children of the night. Those who are gospel unbelievers are "blind" and have no light in them. Jesus said:

"While ye have light, believe in the light, that ye may be the children of light. These things spake Jesus, and departed, and did hide himself from them." (John 12: 36)

Jesus taught that God given faith was a medium through which God begets children of light. Paul taught the same, writing:

"For ye are all the children (sons) of God by faith in Christ Jesus." (Gal. 3: 26)

In C. H. Spurgeon's commentary on Galatians, he wrote:

"Those only are the children of God who are “the children of God by faith in Christ Jesus."

John taught the same when he wrote:

"But as many as received him, to them gave he power to become the sons of God, even to them that believe on his name." (John 1: 12)

Thus, it is impossible to say of any unbeliever that he is a child of God. Hardshells, however, teach that many are children of God who do not believe in the God of Israel and who do not believe in Jesus.

"Know ye therefore that they which are of faith, the same are the children of Abraham." (Gal. 3: 7)

To be the "children of Abraham" is all the same as being the children of God, spiritually speaking. "For he is not a Jew," said Paul, who is one outwardly in the flesh, but one is a Jew inwardly, by the work of the Spirit in regeneration and conversion. (Rom. 2: 28, 29) A person without faith in God and in Christ is no child of God, no child of light.

To be a child of God, one must bear some likeness to God, the Father, and some resemblance to one's mother, which is the "church of the firstborn" and "general assembly," composed of the "spirits of just men made perfect." (Heb. 12: 23) In the Hardshell system, however, the child of God has no mother, for they teach that the church is no means in the divine begetting. But, it is absurd to speak of one being a child without both a father and mother. God says by the prophet to his children:

"Look unto Abraham your father, and unto Sarah that bare you: for I called him alone, and blessed him, and increased him." (Isa. 51: 2)

Paul teaches in Galatians that the child of God has Jerusalem for a mother, which includes the gospel of the new covenant. This was the issue in the writings of Hosea, where God says to some "you are not my people." And why were they not his people? Because they did not recognize Jehovah as their father and Jerusalem as their mother, but gave these honors to other deities. Those who are the children of God are "children of Zion," people who own the teachings of Zion. (See Heb. 12: 22)

"They answered and said unto him, Abraham is our father. Jesus saith unto them, If ye were Abraham's children, ye would do the works of Abraham." (John 8:39)

This verse throws a monkey wrench into the Hardshell scheme of things. How so? They affirm that many are the children of God but who do not do the works of Abraham, do not believe in the one true God and in the promised seed through whom all the world will be blessed. Jesus said to those who pretended to be children of God and Abraham - "Jesus said unto them, If God were your Father, ye would love me." (John 8: 42) Hardshells teach that there are many who are children of God the Father but who do not love and believe in Jesus.

"Wherein in time past ye walked according to the course of this world, according to the prince of the power of the air, the spirit that now worketh in the children of disobedience. Among whom also we all had our conversation in times past in the lusts of our flesh, fulfilling the desires of the flesh and of the mind; and were by nature the children of wrath, even as others." (Eph. 2: 2, 3; 5: 6; Col. 3: 6)

Those who are the children of God are contrasted with the children of the devil. The children of God are children of the light and of the day, while the devil's children are children of the darkness and of the night. Further, the lost are "children of disobedience," while God's children are children of obedience. But, how can Hardshells say that those who "obey not the gospel" are children of obedience? Are they not rather children of disobedience? Paul identified the children of darkness as being "children of wrath." Are they not the unbelievers? Did Jesus not say that "the wrath of God abides" on him? (John 3: 36) Peter called the children of the devil, the children of the night, "cursed children" (II Peter 2: 14) Why are they cursed? Is it not because they love not the Lord Jesus as Paul said? (I Cor. 16: 22)

"And I will bring the third part through the fire, and will refine them as silver is refined, and will try them as gold is tried: they shall call on my name, and I will hear them: I will say, It is my people: and they shall say, The LORD is my God." (Zech. 13: 9)

Those who have been begotten of the Father are people who not only bear a likeness to him but who recognize him as such. God's people are they who say "The Lord is my God." They say to God "Abba." They know their Father, are not ignorant of him, as the Hardshells teach. (Gal. 4: 6) If one is a heathen and says to a false God - "you are my God and my father," then he is not a child of God.

"For this is the covenant that I will make with the house of Israel after those days, saith the Lord; I will put my laws into their mind, and write them in their hearts: and I will be to them a God, and they shall be to me a people." (Heb. 8: 10)

Those who are the children of God are those who have been given understanding of the one true God. Gospel laws, new covenant rules, are written into their hearts and minds. Regeneration produces cognition of the truth about God. The true people of God are they with whom God has made covenant. Making agreement with a person involves cognition.

"And what agreement hath the temple of God with idols? for ye are the temple of the living God; as God hath said, I will dwell in them, and walk in them; and I will be their God, and they shall be my people." (II Cor. 6: 16)

The people of God are described and identified as being those who have God, the true and living God, dwelling in them, and walking with them. But, those who worship idols and acknowledge other gods are not the temple of God. Hardshells teach, however, that many who worship false gods are nevertheless indwelt by God the Father!

 

The Gospel - The Means of Grace XIII

The Spirit Via The Gospel

"But ye are not in the flesh, but in the Spirit, if so be that the Spirit of God dwell in you. Now if any man have not the Spirit of Christ, he is none of his...But if the Spirit of him that raised up Jesus from the dead dwell in you, he that raised up Christ from the dead shall also quicken your mortal bodies by his Spirit that dwelleth in you...For ye have not received the spirit of bondage again to fear; but ye have received the Spirit of adoption, whereby we cry, Abba, Father." (Romans 8: 9, 11, 15)

Another aspect of salvation, or another way in which the salvation experience is described, is that of "receiving" the "Holy Spirit," or the "Spirit of Christ," and the "Spirit of the Father." Those who are saved are those who possess the Holy Spirit, who have the Spirit indwelling them. Is it possible to have the Spirit dwelling within and not know it, as the Hardshells teach? Can one "receive" the Holy Spirit without cognition, and without faith? Is this "receiving" done with the heart and mind? What are the evidences of the Spirit possessing a man?

Paul says that a man who belongs to God, who is a child of God, who is spiritually alive, is one who has received the Spirit and who has the Spirit residing within the heart, mind, and soul. How does this happen? Does the Spirit simply "zap" a man? Or, does this receiving of the Spirit involve decision? Does it result from request? The word "receive" often denotes to "welcome," as people "receive" guests into their homes. And, the heart is a house or home.

"He came unto his own, and his own received him not. But as many as received (welcomed) him, to them gave he power to become the sons of God, even to them that believe on his name." (John 1: 11, 12)

People can "receive" willingly or unwillingly. Do we think that the Lord and his Spirit are received unwillingly? Is it not willingly, as the old Baptist confession of 1689 states? How are they made willing? What is the result of this welcoming of Christ? This acceptance of him? Is it not the right to become sons of God? Further, this "receiving" of Christ involves "believing" in him.

"Behold, I stand at the door, and knock: if any man hear my voice, and open the door, I will come in to him, and will sup with him, and he with me." (Rev. 3: 20)

This verse is talking about how Christ and his Spirit come to enter into a person. It gives his modus operandi. He comes to the heart of the sinner and knocks and speaks. Receiving Christ is all the same as opening the door to him, all the same as welcoming him, of inviting him into our hearts. Hardshells and Hyper Calvinists deny this, however.

"For if he that cometh preacheth another Jesus, whom we have not preached, or if ye receive another spirit, which ye have not received, or another gospel, which ye have not accepted, ye might well bear with him." (II Cor. 11: 4)

Notice how "receiving" Christ is connected with "accepting" him. Receiving and accepting Christ and his Spirit is also connected with receiving and accepting the gospel.

"This only would I learn of you, Received ye the Spirit by the works of the law, or by the hearing of faith? Are ye so foolish? having begun in the Spirit, are ye now made perfect by the flesh?" (Gal. 3: 2, 3)

"That the blessing of Abraham might come on the Gentiles through Jesus Christ; that we might receive the promise of the Spirit through faith." (vs. 14)

"But this spake he of the Spirit, which they that believe on him should receive: for the Holy Ghost was not yet given; because that Jesus was not yet glorified." (John 7: 39)

These verses make it clear that the receiving of the Spirit and of being saved and born again is accomplished by the preaching of the gospel, that the Spirit is received "by faith." These verses overthrow the Hardshell notion that the Spirit is received apart from the gospel and apart from faith. People do not receive the Spirit in order to believe, but believe in order to receive the Spirit. The language is clear and unmistakeable. Those who do not believe in Jesus do not have the Spirit, and are therefore not children of God.

"And hereby we know that he abideth in us, by the Spirit which he hath given us." (I John 3: 24)

"Hereby know we that we dwell in him, and he in us, because he hath given us of his Spirit." (I John 4: 13)

These verses show that those who have the Spirit are not ignorant of the fact. John says that all those who possess the Spirit, who have welcomed the Spirit into their hearts and lives, are they who know it. The Hardshells, however, speak of people who possess the Spirit, who have received the Spirit, but who do not know it, who do not know that they have received the Spirit.

 

The Gospel - The Means of Grace XII

The Saved Love God

"And we know that all things work together for good to them that love God, to them who are the called according to his purpose." (Romans 8: 28)

In the previous posting in this series we looked at "calling," how the saved are designated as "the called of Jesus Christ," and how this calling was "by the gospel." (II Thess. 2: 14) The verse at the heading of this posting also refers to those who are "called according to his purpose." But, it further describes those who have been "called" as being all the same class as "them that love God." It is impossible to affirm that a person has been "called" (successfully) but who as yet does not "love God." All the called love God and all who love God have been called. These descriptive terms denote members of the same class.

Hardshells, however, do not teach that all the "called" are lovers of God. How can a man love God whom he knows nothing about? Paul said - "how shall they believe in him of whom they have not heard?" And, we may ask - "how shall they love him of whom they have not heard?" Further, it is not love for any God, or love for Zeus or Apollo, but love for the one true and living God, the God of Abraham, the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ.

Thus, as sinners are "called" to life and salvation "by the gospel," so are they brought to love God by the same means. Will the Hardshells tell us if one can be "called" and yet not know or love God? Will they tell us how any can love God without knowing him, and how they can know him without hearing about him?

Throughout the scriptures the saved are denominated as being those who love God or who have the love of God in their hearts.

"But as it is written, Eye hath not seen, nor ear heard, neither have entered into the heart of man, the things which God hath prepared for them that love him." (I Cor. 2: 9)

"But I know you, that ye have not the love of God in you." (John 5: 42)

"And hope maketh not ashamed; because the love of God is shed abroad in our hearts by the Holy Ghost which is given unto us." (Romans 5: 5)

When a man is saved he comes to love God. To affirm that many who do not know or love God, the one true God, are nevertheless the "called" of God, is a serious error. Hardshellism is no minor deviation from the truth.

"If any man love not the Lord Jesus Christ, let him be Anathema Maranatha." (I Cor. 16: 22)

What shall the destiny be for those who do not love God or Christ? Paul says they shall be "accursed" ('anathema'). Dr. Gill says that "anathema maranatha" means "let him be anathema in the coming of our Lord." He says that it is a reference to "the second coming of Christ to judgment, when all the wicked of the earth shall be accursed by him, and all such that love him not will be bid to depart from him." But, the Hardshells teach that many of the called do not love God, do not know and love Christ, and yet will be finally blessed with salvation.

"Jesus said unto them, If God were your Father, ye would love me: for I proceeded forth and came from God; neither came I of myself, but he sent me." (John 8: 42)

This is another verse that destroys hardshellism, for hardshellism teaches that not all those who are children of God, who have God as their Father, believe in or love Christ. But, Jesus plainly says that if one is a child of God, then he will love Christ. If a man does not love Christ, then he reveals the fact that he is not a child of God. Ask any Hardshell this question - "do all the regenerate love Christ?" They will say "no." But, what does Jesus say? Can a man love one without cognition? Can he love sub-consciously and unknowingly?

"For the Father himself loveth you, because ye have loved me, and have believed that I came out from God." (John 16: 27)

Jesus says that those who are loved by the Father are those who love and believe him. But, the Hardshells do not confess this, but avow that many who do not believe in Jesus, and who do not love him, are nevertheless "regenerated."

"Hearken, my beloved brethren, Hath not God chosen the poor of this world rich in faith, and heirs of the kingdom which he hath promised to them that love him?" (James 2: 5)

Those who will inherit the kingdom are they who have been "born again" (John 3: 3-5) and who "love" God. But, a man cannot love God if he has not heard the gospel. Contrary to hardshellism, James taught that the kingdom will only be enjoyed by those who love Jesus.

"Beloved, let us love one another: for love is of God; and every one that loveth is born of God, and knoweth God. He that loveth not knoweth not God; for God is love." (I John 4: 7, 8)

"And we have known and believed the love that God hath to us. God is love; and he that dwelleth in love dwelleth in God, and God in him." (I John 4: 16)

John equates being "born of God" with knowing and loving God, but Hardshells deny that being born again brings a man to know and love God and his Son Jesus Christ.

"Henceforth there is laid up for me a crown of righteousness, which the Lord, the righteous judge, shall give me at that day: and not to me only, but unto all them also that love his appearing." (II Tim. 4: 8)

"Blessed is the man that endureth temptation: for when he is tried, he shall receive the crown of life, which the Lord hath promised to them that love him." (James 1: 12)

Not only are those who love Christ promised the eternal kingdom, but are promised the "crown of righteousness," the crown of victory. Those who do not love Christ are promised no righteousness and no victory. This crown is promised to "all" who love Christ, not just to some of them.

 

The Gospel - The Means of Grace XI

Called By The Gospel 

"Whereunto he called you by our gospel, to the obtaining of the glory of our Lord Jesus Christ." (II Thess. 2: 14) 

 

These words annihilate the Hardshell "Spirit alone" or "no means" view of regeneration. When I was a Hardshell, these words deeply troubled me, for I saw how they taught contrary to what I had been trained to believe. The Hardshells have tried hard to make this passage to deal with their "time salvation," or to optional conversion and discipleship, in order to keep their view unscathed. But, this has proved impossible for them, for the context clearly connects this "calling" with being "chosen to salvation," and with being "sanctified by the Spirit," and with "obtaining the glory" of Christ. Some will simply add words to the text, as they do with other passages that destroy their Hardshell views. Some will say that the words of Paul mean - "whereunto he called you manifestly to the manifest obtaining..." Such perversion! Such rebellion! 

 

Wrote Dr. Gill: "Whereunto he called you by our Gospel,.... Salvation being appointed as the end in the decree of election, and sanctification of the Spirit, and belief of the truth, as means; the elect in the effectual calling are called to the participation of each of these; first to the one, and then to the other; to grace here, and glory hereafter: and the means by which they are called is the Gospel, which the apostle calls "our Gospel", not because they were the authors, or the subject of it; for with regard to these it is styled the Gospel of God, and the Gospel of Christ; but because they were intrusted with it, and faithfully preached it, and in opposition to another Gospel published by false teachers." (Commentary) 

 

Now, who are the real "Old Baptists"? Those who agree with Gill or those who do not? 

  

1689 London Confession Chapter 10: Of Effectual Calling 1. Those whom God hath predestinated unto life, he is pleased in his appointed, and accepted time, effectually to call, by his Word and Spirit, out of that state of sin and death in which they are by nature, to grace and salvation by Jesus Christ; enlightening their minds spiritually and savingly to understand the things of God; taking away their heart of stone, and giving unto them a heart of flesh; renewing their wills, and by his almighty power determining them to that which is good, and effectually drawing them to Jesus Christ; yet so as they come most freely, being made willing by his grace. 

 

(Romans 8:30; Romans 11:7; Ephesians 1:10, 11; 2 Thessalonians 2:13, 14; Ephesians 2:1-6; Acts 26:18; Ephesians 1:17, 18; Ezekiel 36:26; Deuteronomy 30:6; Ezekiel 36:27; Ephesians 1:19; Psalm 110:3; Canticles 1:4 ) 

 

These words are clear in their denial of the Hardshell paradigm of regeneration and conversion. Most Hardshells do not believe that "effectual calling" is by both God's "word" and "Spirit," but say it is by the "Spirit alone," by the Spirit separate and apart from the "word." Notice also the scriptures cited by these old Baptists to support their view. One of them is II Thess. 2: 13, 14, the passage we are investigating. Notice also their reference to Eph. 1: 17, 18. Many Hardshells deny that these verses are talking about the divine quickening, for it speaks of being made a Christian "believer." But, the old Baptists who wrote the confession believed that regeneration consisted in being made a Christian "believer." They believed that effectual calling produced believers in Jesus. 

 

Notice also how the old Baptists said that effectual calling enlightens the mind, gives understanding, but Hardshells deny this, affirming that regeneration is non-cognitive, sub-conscious, and that no ideas, beliefs, or knowledge is imparted in it. Notice also how the old Baptists said that effectual calling consisted in causing the elect to freely come to Christ, in their being made willing, in their being made to choose and obey. This too is contrary to many Hardshells who teach that obedience and choice can never be irresistible, or caused by God's sovereign power. 

 

2. This effectual call is of God's free and special grace alone, not from anything at all foreseen in man, nor from any power or agency in the creature, being wholly passive therein, being dead in sins and trespasses, until being quickened and renewed by the Holy Spirit; he is thereby enabled to answer this call, and to embrace the grace offered and conveyed in it, and that by no less power than that which raised up Christ from the dead. 

 

(2 Timothy 1:9; Ephesians 2:8; 1 Corinthians 2:14; Ephesians 2:5; John 5:25; Ephesians 1:19, 20) 

 

The old Baptists of the confession believed that "this effectual call" produced, instantly, an "answer" to the call, such "answer" being the "embracing of the grace offered and conveyed." Do the Hardshells believe in a "grace offered"? Do they believe that the grace of regeneration is "conveyed" in such an evangelical offer? Do they believe that the acceptance of this offer of grace is a result of irresistible power and a part of effectual calling? 

 

3. Elect infants dying in infancy are regenerated and saved by Christ through the Spirit; who worketh when, and where, and how he pleases; so also are all elect persons, who are incapable of being outwardly called by the ministry of the Word. 

 

These words have been debated and variously interpreted. Some have read far too much into them and charged the old Baptists with believing what they did not believe. Clearly they teach that at least some of those who die in infancy are elect and called. Some affirm that these words do not affirm that all who die in infancy were thought to be elect and called. Others deny such an inference, believing that the words affirm that all who die in infancy are elect and called. 

Further, some affirm that these old Baptists are affirming that some are "called" apart from the gospel, by the "Spirit alone," and thus uphold Hardshell views in some cases. Is this so? The distinction is not between those called by the word and those not, but between those called "outwardly" (externally) versus those called "inwardly" (internally). Both groups are called by the word and Spirit. The difference consisted in how the truth was applied to the heart and conscience. Infants, and others, like imbeciles, who were not humanly capable of understanding truth, were called to faith in the truth in an extraordinary way. They were called by the word but not externally so. After all, Paul says that the elect are "chosen unto salvation" through the means of "belief of the truth," and this is what is true of all the elect, not just of some of them. 

 

By "others" who are "incapable of being outwardly called by the ministry of the word" the old Baptists did not allude to the heathen, as some have imagined. If the old Baptists had the heathen in mind, they would be affirming the universal salvation of all those who have died without hearing the gospel. But, the confession plainly states that all the heathen are lost. 

  

"I marvel that ye are so soon removed from him that called you into the grace of Christ unto another gospel." (Gal. 1: 6) 

 

In this verse the apostle, like the London confession, connects being called into the grace of salvation with being called by the gospel. Being removed from the one who called is equated with being removed from the gospel. 

 

"But when it pleased God, who separated me from my mother's womb, and called me by his grace." (Gal. 1: 15) 

 

How did the Lord call the apostle? Was it not with a revelation? By enlightening the mind and understanding of the apostle? By bringing him to confess Christ as Lord? Was Paul's calling not both a regeneration and a conversion? Also, consider how Paul uses, in this epistle and in all his epistles, the words "grace" and "gospel" as denoting the same thing. Also, Paul says this calling was in order "to reveal his Son in me." Thus, Paul's regeneration and conversion was not non-cognitive, but included his coming to faith and understanding. 

  

"So the last shall be first, and the first last: for many be called, but few chosen." (Matt. 20: 16 & 22: 14) 

This verse shows that more are called than who are elect, or who are actually saved by it. But, Hardshells do not believe that God calls any, by the gospel, but the elect, or only those who are already regenerated. Unto what are all men, who hear the gospel, called? Is it not to grace and salvation? 

  

"And sent forth his servants to call them that were bidden to the wedding: and they would not come." (Matt. 22: 3) 

This verse shows how the word "called" often denotes an invitation, but Hardshells deny that God invites all to come to Christ for salvation. 

  

"God is faithful, by whom ye were called unto the fellowship of his Son Jesus Christ our Lord." (I Cor. 1: 9) 

 

This verse shows that sinners are not only called to "life," but also called into the fellowship (communion) of Christ. To affirm that one has been called to life but who has not also been called into fellowship with Christ is to contradict the scriptures. "

"This persuasion cometh not of him that calleth you." (Gal. 5: 8) 

 

The idea here is that a persuasion comes with God's calling. But, Hardshells deny that any persuasion comes in effectual calling. 

  

"For, brethren, ye have been called unto liberty; only use not liberty for an occasion to the flesh, but by love serve one another." (Gal. 5: 13) 

Liberty, like life, results from this calling of God by the gospel. Liberty from sin, idolatry, and spiritual darkness and ignorance. Hardshells affirm, however, that many who are "the called of Jesus Christ" remain in heathen bondage and darkness. 

  

"And let the peace of God rule in your hearts, to the which also ye are called in one body; and be ye thankful." (Col. 3: 15) 

 

This calling brings about the rule of God, and his peace, in the heart. But, this is not what is believed by the Hardshells. 

  

"That ye would walk worthy of God, who hath called you unto his kingdom and glory." (I Thess. 2: 12) 

 

To be called into the kingdom of Christ involves becoming willing subjects of Christ the king, which is a cognitive experience. 

  

"For God hath not called us unto uncleanness, but unto holiness." (I Thess. 4: 7) 

 

To be called to life involves also being called to cleanliness and to holiness, which involves cognition of what is clean and holy. 

  

"Fight the good fight of faith, lay hold on eternal life, whereunto thou art also called, and hast professed a good profession before many witnesses." (I Tim. 6: 12) 

 

This call is not only to life, but to a "vocation" (Eph. 4: 1) and to be soldier, engaged in the "good fight of faith." But, Hardshells deny that the call to life includes these things. 

  

"But ye are a chosen generation, a royal priesthood, an holy nation, a peculiar people; that ye should shew forth the praises of him who hath called you out of darkness into his marvellous light." (I Peter 2: 9) 

 

The calling to life includes being called out of darkness and into light. Therefore, it is cognitive, and involves being called to a belief of the truth. 

  

"According as his divine power hath given unto us all things that pertain unto life and godliness, through the knowledge of him that hath called us to glory and virtue." (II Peter 1: 3) 

 

One is not only called to life and salvation but is called to "virtue," which involves cognition, revelation, enlightenment, and faith. 

  

"But we preach Christ crucified, unto the Jews a stumblingblock, and unto the Greeks foolishness; But unto them which are called, both Jews and Greeks, Christ the power of God, and the wisdom of God...For ye see your calling, brethren, how that not many wise men after the flesh, not many mighty, not many noble, are called." (I Cor. 1: 23, 24, 26) 

 

Many Hardshells use Paul's language in this chapter in an attempt to affirm that one is called before they hear and believe the gospel, but such is not Paul's meaning. First, it would contradict what he said elsewhere, where he affirmed that this call is "by the gospel." 

If one is "called by the gospel," then he is not called before he hears it. Paul said - "how shall they call upon him whom they have not heard?" Likewise, we may ask - "how shall they be called by the gospel before they hear it?" Hardshells say that Paul is affirming that the gospel saves those who are already saved (called). But, this is a perversion and makes Paul to contradict himself. 

  

"The called" may denote all who hear the gospel and its offer and invitation. But, it may also denote those who willingly respond to the call, or who hear it with faith, or savingly. Context will determine which sense is meant. Clearly Paul is using the class term "the called," in this chapter, in the latter sense. To those who have "answered" the call positively, as the London confession states, or those who become the actually or successfully called. These own and acknowledge (cognition) that the gospel and Christ are the power and wisdom of God. 

 

Notice how Paul describes and defines those who are "the called." He says they recognize Christ as the wisdom and power of God. "Unto us who are the called," says Paul, Christ is the wisdom and power of God. But, Hardshells affirm, that this is not true with most of the elect and regenerated! They say that many of those who are savingly "called" are unbelievers in Jesus and in the gospel! But, rather than the verses upholding a Hardshell "ordo salutis," they destroy Hardshellism by its definition and description of that class of people termed "the called of Jesus Christ." 

Paul, if he were a Hardshell, would have said rather - "unto some few of us who are called, Christ is (recognized as) the wisdom and power of God." But, what Paul says of the class termed "the called," is that they believe in Jesus as God's wisdom and power. 

 

In the circular letter for the Philadelphia Baptist Association in 1784, John Gano, the famous old Baptist preacher, wrote on "Effectual Calling," and said: 

  

IV. Its efficacy. It is effectual to bring the subjects of it to a piercing sense of their guilt and impurity. The mind is deeply convicted, that the fountain is in his very heart or nature, from which all its criminal actions have sprung; and that the lust within disposes us to violate the laws of God in as great a variety of ways as nature is capable of exerting itself, agreeable to Paul's expression, "Sin revived and I died." The soul is affected with a view of its sinfulness and the malignity of sin in its nature, as entirely opposed to the holy law of God; hence arises an abhorrence of sin, as vile and odious, and a sense of its demerit as deserving eternal death. This call produces a consciousness of the absolute impossibility of our contributing in the least degree towards a recovery from this wretched condition, and destroys all confidence of help in the flesh. It is a call to Christ, and gives a view of him in his suitableness and ability as a Saviour; the merit of his obedience and sacrifice, and the treasures of his grace are all brought into view, which creates desires of an interest in him, and resolutions of looking unto and relying wholly upon him for salvation; at the same time cordially acknowledging desert of rejection from him, and yet strengthened to rely entirely upon and surrender all unto the disposal of Christ; setting to our seals that God is true; believing the record he has given of his Son, which is eternal life, and that this life is in his Son. The changes produced are from darkness to light, from bondage to liberty, from alienation and estrangedness to Christ to a state of nearness and fellowship with him and his saints. This call administers peace of conscience towards God, and disposes its subjects to peace with mankind, so far as is consistent with righteousness." See here 

Obviously, John Gano expressed the view of the old Baptists of the 19th century, before "the rise of the Hardshells" and was no Hardshell in his views on effectual calling. The Hardshells, though calling their views "primitive" or "original" are clearly not so at all, but represent a novel or hybrid view.