Archive

Posts Tagged ‘Predestination’

Predestination is Practical

by Jeff Robinson

In some churches, it is a word that conjures up images of an angry and capricious God who acts arbitrarily to save some, but consigns most sinners—including deceased infants—to eternal perdition. For many professing Christians, it is the mother-of-all-swear-words.

Let the pastor breathe it in the presence of the deacon board and he risks firing, fisticuffs or worse. A God who chooses is anti-American, anti democracy. It bespeaks a long-faced religion, a doctrinal novelty invented by a maniacal 16th century minister whose progeny manufactured a theological “ism” that has plunged countless souls into a godless eternity.

 

 

 

Read the entire article here.

Free Ebook- God’s Decree and the Predestination of all Things

GOD’S DECREE

AND

THE PREDESTINATION OF ALL

THINGS

A Compilation of Twenty-Six Authors From 1696 to 2005 on the Subject OF THE

PREDESTINATION OF GOD

Published by:

The PREDESTINARIAN 1159 County Road 420 Quitman, Mississippi, 39355

A.D 2005

 

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Predestination, Jonas C. Sikes (1900)

A Discourse on the Decrees of God, Hercules Collins (1696)

God’s Determinate Counsel, Stanley C. Phillips

Article Seventeen, Anglican Communion

Chapter HI, Of God’s Decree, London Confession, (1689)

Predestination, Christopher Ness, (1700)

Predestination, John Gill (1752)

Particular Election and Perseverance, Isaac Backus (1789)

Sovereign Decrees of God, Isaac Backus (1773)

Chapter HI, Of God’s Decree, Abel Morgan (1775)

Absolute Predestination, Gilbert Beebe (1833 cf)

Absolute Predestination, Samuel Trott, (1833)

Predestination, James Wells (1839) 353

Predestination, Silas Durand (1901) 395

Absolute Predestination, Sylester Hassell (1902)

Absolute Predestination, William Smoot (1912)

Sovereignty Of God, J. B. Bowden (1926)

Absolutism Misrepresented, Joseph Fairchild (1926)

“Time Salvation” vs Predestination, P. IL James (1928)

Predestination, W. T. Judy (1929)

Predestination, J. R Hatcher (1929)

Predestination vs. Limited Predestination, J. W. Gilliam (1930)

Predestination, Frederick W. Keene (1930)

Predestination, John C. Hall (1936)

God’s Providence Over The Evil Acts of Men, Frank B. Beck (1963)

Exposition of the Doctrine, J. W. Gilliam (1932)

 

Download here (Pdf)

Free Founders Journal Out Now

51 page Pdf on God’s Decrees- Fall 2016/ Issue 106

Contents:

Introduction: Decrees | Tom Nettles

The Nature of God’s Eternal Decree An exposition of Paragraphs 1 and 2 of Chapter 7 “The Decree of God” From the 1689 London Baptist Confession | Tom Hicks

Predestined to Eternal Life Glory Hidden in the Mystery | Jared Longshore

Reprobation and the Second London Confession “the Second London Confession affirms reprobation, a doctrine which has been and continues to be the subject of much controversy” | Richard Blaylock

Like a Stone? The Perfect Confluence of God’s Providence And Human Freedom | Aaron Matherly

The High Mystery of Predestination An exposition of Paragraph 3 of Chapter 7 “The Decree of God” From the 1689 London Baptist Confession | Fred Malone

Book Review The Gospel Heritage of Georgia Baptists: 1772–1830 by Brandon F. Smith and Kurt M. Smith | Reviewed by Tom Nettles

 

Source [Founders]

Definitions of Doctrine-Volume 2-Part 2-Chapter 14-Predestination-Prophecy-Providence

November 13, 2015 Leave a comment

CHAPTER 14-PREDESTINATION-PROPHECY-PROVIDENCE

“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” (#Eph 1:11).

The three Bible words in the above caption express closely related doctrine, which find support in the above text. Since knowledge begins with definition, I shall begin with a definition of terms. Predestination may be defined as the purpose of God from eternity respecting future events. Prophecy is a declaration or revelation of future events and human actions. Providence is the work of God bringing to pass in history what is predestinated in eternity and prophesied in time. These three doctrines are based upon the will of God. And so we read that He “worketh all things after the counsel of His own will.”

We might put it like this: Predestination is the eternal determination or purpose of the Divine will; Prophecy is the revelation of the Divine will; and Providence is the execution of the Divine will.

This raises the question as to who or what is running this world. In answer to this question, there are four schools of thought. One school says that all things come to pass by a fixed law-the law of nature. According to this view, the Creator made the world, as a man might make a clock and wind it up, leaving it to run by itself without outside interference. The only part God has in world affairs is to allow it to run by natural and moral laws He Himself gave. This view rejects all miracles and believes only what can be accounted for on so-called scientific grounds. The second school says that things happen by a sort of chance; that nothing is fixed or determined, and that one thing is as likely to happen as another. The third school believes that everything comes to pass by a cold, impersonal force called fate. And finally there is the Bible and Christian view that all things come to pass by a Divine will called Providence; that is, by the administration of wise, loving, and almighty God. The God who created, sustains and rules to the praise of His own glory, and for the good of His people.

In our English Bible the word “providence” occurs only once: #Ac 24:2. Here it refers to the government or administration of Felix the Roman governor of Judea. The apostle Paul is on trial before Felix, charged by the Jews with the crime of insurrection, and as being a ringleader of the sect of the Nazarenes. Ananias, chief priest, and the elders bring with them a lawyer Tertullus, who prosecutes the case against Paul. But before pressing his case, Tertullus flatters the governor by saying, “Seeing that by thee we enjoy great quietness, and that very worthy deeds are done unto this nation by thy providence, we accept it always, and in all places, most noble Felix, with all thankfulness” (#Ac 24:2,3). What flattery and lying! During the administration of Felix, revolts in the nation were common and continuous, culminating in the final revolt that ended in the destruction of Jerusalem in A.D. 70.

While the word “providence” here refers to the rule of Felix over Judea, the word is much more applicable to the sovereign rule of God Whose kingdom is over all and from everlasting to everlasting.

SOME GENERAL OBSERVATIONS

1. While the Divine decrees and prophecies make a thing certain, there is no external force used in bringing it to pass. When an evil deed is predicted of someone, providence is not an external force that compels the act. We can never truthfully say that man had to sin as far as external force is concerned. God never forces anyone to sin; on the other hand He gives commandments and warnings and inducements not to sin. Nor can any man or group of men force another man to sin. If you should take me by physical force, place a gun in my hand, and by force compel me to pull the trigger, resulting in the death of someone, I would not be guilty of murder, or even a misdemeanor.

2. Let it be remembered and understood once for all that sin resides in the human heart—sin must be in the heart before it can be in the hand. “For out of the heart proceed evil thoughts, murders, adulteries, fornication, thefts, false witness, blasphemies” (#Mt 15:19). And let us also remember that God never put sin in the human heart. How it got there is a profound mystery. God made man in His own image and likeness and pronounced him good. In the mystery of the Divine administration, the first man sinned and lost the image of God in holiness. And the whole human race fell in the fall of the first Adam: “Wherefore, as by one man sin entered into the world, and death by sin; and so death passed upon all men, for that all have sinned: (For until the law sin was in the world: but sin is not imputed when there is no law. Nevertheless death reigned from Adam to Moses, even over them that had not sinned after the similitude of Adam’s transgression, who is the figure of him that was to come. But not as the offence, so also is the free gift. For if through the offence of one many be dead, much more the grace of God, and the gift by grace, which is by one man, Jesus Christ, hath abounded unto many. And not as it was by one that sinned, so is the gift: for the judgment was by one to condemnation, but the free gift is of many offences unto justification. For if by one man’s offence death reigned by one; much more they which receive abundance of grace and of the gift of righteousness shall reign in life by one, Jesus Christ.) Therefore as by the offence of one judgment came upon all men to condemnation; even so by the righteousness of one the free gift came upon all men unto justification of life. For as by one man’s disobedience many were made sinners, so by the obedience of one shall many be made righteous” (#Ro 5:12-19). “…God hath made man upright; but they have sought out many inventions” (#Ec 7:29). God is never the Author or cause of sin.

3. In bringing sinful deeds to pass all God does is to leave men to themselves to do what is already in their hearts. “Who in times past suffered all nations to walk in their own ways” (#Ac 14:16). It is frightening to think that God may again abandon whole nations to their own ways. In Romans, chapter one Paul describes the moral degeneration of the Gentile (heathen) nations. First, men held down or suppressed the truth about God in the book of nature. Pretending to be wise they became fools, and changed the glory of the incorruptible God into various images as objects of worship. There was the Apollo of the Greeks, the eagle of the Romans, the sacred bull of the Egyptians, and the serpent of the Assyrians. And God gave them up to degenerate from bad to worse. And the chapter closes with a long list of sins that are prevalent in our day, even here in so-called Christian American. It makes one shudder to scan the prophetic horizon. In “The earth also was corrupt before God, and the earth was filled with violence” (#Ge 6:11), we read that the earth was filled with violence in the days of Noah just preceding the flood and in “But as the days of Noe were, so shall also the coming of the Son of man be” (#Mt 24:37), we are told that these same conditions shall prevail just before our Lord returns in judgment. The masses will be so occupied with temporal and material matters that the judgment will take them unawares. Now back to our main thought, namely, that the eternal purposes and Scriptural prophecies make the predicted evils certain without imposing any necessity to do wrong upon anyone. God’s sovereignty and man’s responsibility are both true, although we may not be able to reconcile them.

SOME ILLUSTRATIONS AND EXAMPLES OF OUR MAIN THEME

1. Take the case of Judas Iscariot who was to betray Jesus. This was first predicted in “Yea, mine own familiar friend, in whom I trusted, which did eat of my bread, hath lifted up his heel against me” (#Ps 41:9), and quoted by Jesus in #Joh 13:18: “I speak not of you all: I know whom I have chosen: but that the Scripture may be fulfilled, He that eateth bread with me hath lifted up his heel against me.” Our Lord is here saying that He knew what He was doing when He chose Judas to be an apostle; He did it to make certain the fulfillment of Scripture. When Peter made his confession for the twelve, saying, “…we believe and are sure that Thou art that Christ, the Son of the living God,” Jesus corrected him by saying unto the twelve, “Have not I chosen you twelve, and one of you is a devil?” And John tells us that he was speaking of Judas Iscariot who should betray him. “And we believe and are sure that thou art that Christ, the Son of the living God. Jesus answered them, Have not I chosen you twelve, and one of you is a devil? He spake of Judas Iscariot the son of Simon: for he it was that should betray him, being one of the twelve” (#Joh 6:69-71). At the feast of the Passover, Jesus identified His betrayer by giving him the sop: “Jesus answered, He it is, to whom I shall give a sop, when I have dipped it. And when he had dipped the sop, he gave it to Judas Iscariot, the son of Simon” (#Joh 13:26). If Judas had not betrayed Jesus, both the Psalmist and the Saviour would have been found liars. And yet nobody made Judas do that awful deed; he did it of his own free will and accord. He was simply giving expression to what was already in his heart. Our Lord chose Judas because nobody but a devil would do what he did.

2. Consider a few of the many prophecies concerning the death of Christ certain in many and minute details. The very first prophecy was in #Ge 3:15 “And I will put enmity between thee and the woman, and between thy seed and her seed; it shall bruise thy head, and thou shalt bruise his heel,” where the seed of the woman would bruise the serpent’s head, and have his heel bruised. In “Christ hath redeemed us from the curse of the law, being made a curse for us: for it is written, Cursed is every one that hangeth on a tree:” (#Ga 3:13). Paul quotes #De 21:23 “His body shall not remain all night upon the tree, but thou shalt in any wise bury him that day; (for he that is hanged is accursed of God;) that thy land be not defiled, which the LORD thy God giveth thee for an inheritance” to indicate that Christ would die by crucifixion, the Roman method of captial punishment. This necessitated a change of government, for if Jesus had been put to death by Jewish law, he would have been stoned. In Psalm 22 we have the cry of anguish (#Ps 22:1); the cruelty of the crowds (#Ps 22:12,17); and the parting of His garments and gambling for His vesture (#Ps 22:18). And all these predictions were fulfilled at the place called Calvary. Isaiah 53 we see the Messiah as despised and rejected of men, as being smitten of God, as making His grave with the wicked and with the rich in His death, as being satisfied with the result of His sufferings, and as praying for His enemies. Behold the mystery of Divine Providence in the fulfillment of all these predictions some 700 years later at Calvary. In #Joh 12:32,33 Jesus Himself predicted the manner and result of His death: “And I, if I be lifted up from the earth, will draw all unto me. This He said, signifying what death he should die.” In John, chapter ten, He speaks of Himself as the Good Shepherd giving His life for His sheep, and predicting that His sheep would hear His voice and follow Him and receive everlasting life. In His prayer as High Priest, recorded in John 17, Jesus acknowledges that the Father had given Him authority over all flesh so that He might give eternal life to all the Father gave Him, and that while He was on earth He had kept those given to Him so that not one of them was lost. And then He says that the son of perdition was lost that the Scripture might be fulfilled. Now in the gospel accounts of the death of Christ we see all these Scriptures fulfilled, everything coming to pass by Divine Providence. And in the book of Acts, Luke the historian, confirms the fulfillment of these prophecies. In #Ac 2:23 he says this: “Him being delivered by the determinate counsel (will) and foreknowledge of God, ye have taken, and by wicked hands have crucified and slain.” Here we have God’s will or purpose in the death of Christ being carried out by wicked hands. Nobody was forced to crucify Christ, men acted on their own free will and revealed the fact that the carnal mind is enmity against God. And the Lord Jesus was God wrapped in human flesh. In #Ac 4:27,28 we have a quotation from the second Psalm, with this comment: “For of a truth against thy holy child Jesus, whom thou hast anointed, both Herod, and Pontius Pilate, with the Gentiles, and the people of Israel, were gathered together, For to do whatsoever thy hand and thy counsel determined before to be done.” Here we have predestination (the determination or purpose of the Divine will), and providence (the execution of the Divine will) in the crucifixion of Christ. Politicians and religionists were doing God’s will, but their motive was not to carry out His will. They were simply acting out what was in their heart. God did not put the evil in their heart, but He did control and direct everything they did for the accomplishment of His eternal purpose in Christ. The human motive was bad, but God overruled it all for the salvation of sinners and to the praise of His grace. Here is one of many places where God makes the wrath of man to praise Him, and preventing that which would not: “Surely the wrath of man shall praise thee: the remainder of wrath shalt thou restrain” (#Ps 76:10). Because of the overruling providence of God, what Joseph’s brethren did in selling him into slavery was attributed to God Himself. When Joseph made himself known to his brothers, and they realized what they had done, they began to weep and be afraid. He confronts them by telling them that the hand of God was in it all for the salvation of human lives. “So now it was not you that sent me hither, but God” (#Ge 45:8). And in #Ge 50:20 we learn that what made the difference in the Divine will and the human deed was in the motive. Joseph says to his brothers, “But as for you, ye thought evil against me; but God meant it unto good, to bring to pass, as it is this day, to save much people alive.” And so what came to pass at Calvary was overruled to save many sinners from eternal punishment in hell.

To God be the glory!
Great things He hath done:
So loved He the world that He gave us His Son;
Who yielded His life an atonement for sin,
And opened the Life-gate that all may go in.
O perfect redemption, the purchase of Blood,
To every believer the promise of God;
The vilest offender who truly believes,
That moment from Jesus a pardon receives.
Great things He hath taught us,
Great things He hath done,
And great our rejoicing through Jesus the Son;
But purer, and higher, and greater will be
Our wonder, Our transport, when Jesus we see.

C. D. Cole-Definitions of Doctrine-Volume 2-Part 2

William Tyndale on God’s Sovereign Election

February 17, 2015 3 comments

William Tyndale was committed to the biblical teaching of the sovereign election of God. He believed God acted before time began, in eternal love, in choosing a people whom He would save. God set His heart upon a people, elected out of the mass of fallen humanity, to be His own possession. This election of man was not based upon any foreseen choice within man. Rather, it was entirely by the free exercise of God’s will:
“Predestination … and salvation are clean taken out of our hands, and put in the hands of God only … for we are so weak and so uncertain, that if it stood in us, there would of a truth be no man saved; the devil, no doubt, would deceive us.”

 

 

 

 

Read the entire article here.

Double Or Nothing: Martin Luther’s Doctrine of Predestination

December 22, 2014 1 comment

In fact, while many students of the Reformation today focus their attention to the obvious differences between Protestantism and Romanism, such as the Papacy, mass, indulgences, et cetera, Luther himself recognizes those issues to be entirely peripheral to the conflict. He wrote in 1525 to Erasmus of Rotterdam, with whom he had been debating the Sovereignty of God’s grace (in election and salvation) and the freedom of man’s will:

I give you hearty praise and commendation on this further account—that you alone, in contrast with all others, have attacked the real thing, that is, the essential issue. You have not wearied me with those extraneous issues about the Papacy, purgatory, indulgences and such like—trifles, rather than issues in respect of which almost all to date have sought my blood (though without success); you, and you alone, have seen the hinge on which all turns, and aimed for the vital spot.3

With this admission by the Father of the Protestant Reformation, the present study becomes highly important in understanding the Reformation. The debate over single versus double predestination has certainly been an issue throughout church history, but was it an issue among the Reformers? Specifically, were Luther and Calvin at odds on this issue? 19th Century Scottish theologian William Cunningham asserts,

When Luther’s followers, in a subsequent generation, openly deviated from scriptural orthodoxy on these points, they set themselves to prove that Luther had never held Calvinistic principles. . . But we have no hesitation in saying, that it can be established beyond all reasonable question, that Luther held the doctrines which are commonly regarded as most peculiarly Calvinistic, though he was never led to explain and apply, to illustrate and defend some of them, so fully as Calvin did.4

Though Cunningham is confident enough to make this claim, his reader may be disappointed that he fails to make a comprehensive case for his assertion (though his claim is not entirely without defense). Another Reformed5 theologian, Loraine Boettner, in his work The Reformed Doctrine of Predestination claims that “Luther. . .went into the doctrine [of predestination] as heartily as did Calvin himself. He even asserted it with more warmth and proceeded to much harsher lengths in defending it than Calvin ever did.”6 Boettner’s work displays a far better defense of his claim than Cunningham’s, but both fail to fully analyze Luther’s position.

What Cunningham and Boettner both fail to support, the present work intends to prove. Where their assertions fall short, this work will provide ample evidence to support their claims. The Modern Lutheran church does not stand with Martin Luther on the issue of predestination, and thus suffers from an internal contradiction. It’s efforts to modify Luther’s views and to present a more moderate case for predestination ultimately end in conflict with Luther’s uncompromising doctrine of God’s Sovereignty. However, before critically analyzing the writings of Luther, an examination must be made of the various presuppositions possible in approaching Luther’s writings.

 

 
Read the entire article here (Pdf 112 Kb).

 

 

 

3 Martin Luther, The Bondage of the Will, (Grand Rapids: Fleming H. Revell, 1992) p.319.
4 William Cunningham, The Reformers & the Theology of the Reformation, (London: Banner of Truth, 1967) p.109.
5 The term “Reformed,” unless otherwise indicated, denotes a scholar from the Calvinist tradition.
6 Loraine Boettner, The Reformed Doctrine of Predestination, (Phillipsburg: Presbyterian & Reformed,
1932) p.1.

Letter Three by Mrs. Marjorie Bond

1505 Scotland Street
Calgary, Alberta
December 7, 1959

Dear Dr. Cole:

Since writing my Christmas card to you, I have received your books, “The Heavenly Hope” and “Divine Doctrines”. Thank you very much indeed. I am thoroughly enjoying the magnificent study on the doctrine of God. How it magnifies and exalts Him and restores Him to His rightful position of King of kings and Lord of lords. I have felt for a long time that the Christian church needs a fresh vision of the holiness and majesty of God, and to realize that He is “the high and lofty one that inhabiteth eternity”. There is entirely too much spirit of camaraderie in our attitude toward God today.

I wish more of our present-day ministers preached doctrine. It seems to me that church members would be more firmly rooted and grounded in their faith if we had more doctrinal teaching and less “snackbar” preaching!

Apropos of our study on Election, I am still getting repercussions from it from some of my class members. Nothing that I have ever taught has stirred up such interest. I also gave a copy of your pamphlet to our minister; am awaiting his reaction!

We were visiting with some friends from another Baptist church a few weeks ago and something came up about my Bible Class and this teaching on election. Would you believe it— not one person in that room, apart from the members of my own immediate family who were present, had even heard about Election, let alone understood it? And yet they are all good Christian people—not just nominal church members.

We only got into a preliminary discussion of it when we were interrupted. But I could see that it was not at all favourably received! (As you say, we are all Arminians by nature!) One woman and her aged father who had moved away to Arizona about two years ago, are back in Calgary and were present that night. About a week ago, I ran into this woman at the post office in one of our local department stores. She is working there temporarily and as there were people waiting to be served she didn’t have too much time to talk to me. But as I was leaving the wicket, she said, “Oh, Marjorie; I want to have a talk with you some time on that matter that we were discussing at Thelma’s the other night.” For a minute or two, my mind was a complete blank—I couldn’t remember what she was referring to. She smiled and said, “You know, we started a discussion about it”. Suddenly light dawned and I said, eagerly, (this is my favourite subject now) “Oh yes, of course. I’ll be glad to any time you are free.” She nodded and said, “Well, it has set me thinking. I don’t understand it and don’t say that I agree but I want to learn more about it”. So there is another ripple from the stone you cast into the pool!

Dr. Cole, when you are so busy, I do hate to bother you with my questions but I feel that you are so learned in this subject that you are in a better position to help me than anyone else. May I trouble you with one or two further questions:

1. What is meant by making “your calling and election sure”? At first when I was reading #2Pe 1:5-10, in the light of my new knowledge on Election, it seemed to me that Peter spoke as if it were possible to lose one’s salvation. And yet, because I believe in the eternal security of the believer (even more so since I understood Election) I didn’t see how this could be. As I prayed about it, it seemed to me that perhaps what is meant is rather that a person who does what Peter admonishes is less likely to backslide rather than be lost? Do you think that is the meaning of it?

2. Is the “all” of #Ro 11:32 another example of “all” not being used in the absolute? I mean the part where it says “that He might have mercy upon all”. Some people argue that verse as being opposed to Election, saying that if God wanted to have mercy on all, He would not pick and choose people for salvation as the doctrine of election teaches.

3. Also, while we are still in Romans, is it true that even Christians will be judged for everything they have done since they were saved? Not in the sense of punishment for their sins, because Judgment on sin was passed at Calvary. But when the Bible says, “So then we must every one give an account of ourselves to God;” and again, #Ro 2:6 —”who will render to every man according to his deeds”; and #1Co 4:5.

I don’t know why it is, but the thought of having all my sins exposed to view, even though I am not going to be punished for them, robs heaven of considerable joy. I backslid very badly some years ago and although the Lord is dearer to me now than He ever was before, I sometimes feel that nothing can undo the sins of those years. God knows all about them and has forgiven me; why must they be published for all the world to see when I get to heaven?

I thought the passages in Psalms that “as far as the east is from the west so far have I removed thy transgression from thee,” meant that once we were saved God really blotted out our sins and we never had to hear about them again. But there seems to be several passages in the epistles which would lead one to think that, although we will not be punished for our sins in the sense of going to hell, we shall certainly have to account for them. If this is so, it seems to me that no Christian could die really at peace, knowing you had that ahead of you. (Why are we more afraid of man’s opinion than God’s?)

4. My last question has to do with pages 7-9 of your pamphlet “The Heavenly Hope”. I had always understood (prior to my study of Election), both from Scripture and various hymns and sermons that I had heard, that there is danger in delaying salvation; that a person could be cut off from this life before they had accepted Christ and be hurled into a Christless eternity.

But according to the doctrine of Election, no one who is elected for salvation can possibly die without being saved? Isn’t that true? (“All that the Father hath given to me, will come unto me…”) Therefore, anyone whom God has intended to save will be saved and cannot possibly be lost so there is no danger in delaying for them; and the non-elect will not be saved anyway. Isn’t that so?

It seems to me I just get things sorted out in my mind to where I understand them, when I read something that puts me off again!

As I say, I used to believe too that there was danger in delay. All the hymn-writers speak of it etc. But since studying Election, I concluded that I must have been wrong. There is no real urgency, in the sense of it being a life and death matter, because no one can die before he is saved, if God intends him to be saved. Therefore, why do ministers (even those like yourself who believe in Election) urge people to make haste and accept Christ before it is too late? It can never be too late for an elected person, can it? I should appreciate being straightened out on this point.

You will get so you dread to see a letter from me if I always write at such length. But there is so much I need to ask you about and modern ministers, like doctors, are so busy they haven’t time for people any more.

Thank you again for all your help and may God richly bless you in the year ahead.

Sincerely,

Marjorie Bond

 

Dr. C. D. Cole-The Bible Doctrine of Election-Part II-Questions and Answers on Election