Ditzel cuts God’s immanence out of the doctrine of justification from eternity If one views the few works on the subject of the immanent work of God in Christ from eternity that Ditzel lists, one, if Ditzel really studied it, must have caused his eyes to be opened. This was “Justification as an Eternal and Immanent Act of God” by John Gill.’ Now, Ditzel admits that God acts in eternity but denies, contrary to Gill, that God acts from eternity in time. Gill of course, argues in the work Ditzel claims to have read that in justification God acts from eternity in time, indeed, He is immanent everywhere. Sometimes Ditzel is very near to appreciating this truth but then he always recoils from it claiming that as Gill is wrong,… Full Article
Posts Tagged Justification
Accusing Gill of ‘blunders’ Peter Ditzel’s third essay of ‘rebuttals’ on his website takes a most astonishing turn. Not content with aiming his Don Quixote lance at George Melvyn Ella, whom he takes to be a veritable wind mill (pun intentional) he now rides on to combat that great edifice John Gill under the titles John Gill’s Blunder #1 and John Gill’s Blunder #2. Needless to say, it is no difficult task to point out that the blunders are all Ditzel’s. Talk of a midge attacking an elephant! Ditzel mainly strives to outwit Gill on the grounds of logic rather than Scriptural exegesis. Ditzel thus claims, ‘Much of John Gill’s argument for eternal justification (he means justification from eternity, I take it)… Full Article
Ditzel’s disagreement on Scriptural and Church History In his first website essay allegedly rebutting my doctrine of justification, Peter Ditzel promised to challenge my view of Scripture in a following article which he subsequently entitled ‘The Debate as Based on Scripture’. However, now in his second part, he ignores my Scriptural evidence on justification from eternity, centering rather on my Scriptural evidence given to show that God justifies those at enmity with Him and begins by also rejecting my evidence concerning Biblical scholars and Reformers of the past. Once again, in his second paper, I find that Ditzel has fully misunderstood my position and chastises me quite unfoundedly for advocating beliefs… Full Article
How things began Starting around 1996 and continuing for some ten years, I wrote several books and a number of articles on the question of the timing of justification in its relation to faith, conversion, adoption, reconciliation, the forgiveness of sins and indeed all the blessings that God gives to His own in Christ which is our Heavenly inheritance and our lot for all eternity. There was no great reaction to my writings as the topic did not appear to have been of great interest and, anyway, I was hardly known at the time. Indeed one of the few leading evangelical writers who thought it worthwhile to disagree with me, a man of little learning but with quite a large following, quite misrepresented my views and told his… Full Article
John Brine (1703-1765) and his Contemporaries as Seen by Modern Revisionists Part I. Brine’s Life
May 1
John Brine (1703-1765) and his Contemporaries as Seen by Modern Revisionists Part I. Brine’s Life First, a few words of explanation. You might think there is more George Ella and our present contemporaries in this lecture than John Brine and his. This is because there is a good deal of John Brine in George Ella and most of our contemporaries positively hate John Brine so we must deal with them firmly but fairly or Brine has taught us in vain. So I am very blunt and particular in my evaluation of Brine’s reception today amongst our self-styled ‘Moderate Calvinists’. Nowadays, these moderately Reformed ministers who strive immoderately to muzzle us are rejecting every single doctrine of the Reformation, ridiculing and… Full Article
John Brine (1703-1765), and his Contemporaries as Seen by Modern Revisionists Part II: Brine’s Theology In his Treatise on Various Subjects Brine says his calling is to defend the doctrines and principles of our religion, and to vindicate the sacred Word of God. As time is less than our subject craves, I shall select a few of his defences and vindications relevant to today’s debate and deal with justification, duty-faith, redemption, regeneration and sanctification. Justification Biblical justification involves the full salvation of sinners, including election, union with Christ, adoption, forgiveness of sins, imputation, redemption, regeneration and sanctification. Today’s Pseudo- Reformed claim that… Full Article
Ditzel’s Last Stand
Apr 26
Several weeks ago, I received a surprising letter from the NCT website The Word of His Grace, signed by Peter Ditzel. We had last corresponded personally, Peter informed me, in 2007 when I was very ill. So now, in April 2012, five years later Peter was writing to hear if I were now, once again, on my feet. That was the nicest bit about the letter. Then Peter mentioned that he had written some six essays a number of years ago on his site attacking my doctrine of Justification and he had since been informed by a third party that I had responded, though I only discovered the essays some time later when surfing the web for information on Justification. It appears that Peter now wanted a larger public than a mere… Full Article
Recently, I came across a long essay in six parts entitled, ‘A Rebuttal to George M. Ella’s ‘John Gill and Justification from Eternity’ on a website named Word of His Grace. The writer, Peter Ditzel, had obtained a part-copy of an armchair talk I gave to my host and friends on justification in Minnesota some years ago. The author claims that in rebutting me, he is also rebutting Peter Meney’s New Focus article ‘Ten Arguments for Justification from Eternity’. I commenced my talk by referring to Romans 4:5 on God’s justification of the ungodly, thus opening a discussion on the timing of justification. Ditzel claims that before rebutting my Scriptural application, he must… Full Article
Sir: Strictures against those who disagree with the Reformation Day Declaration outlined in Issue 7650 lose their force because the doctrine of forensic, declarative justification outlined therein is not that of our Reformers. It reflects the Humanism taught by Philip Melanchthon, often called Germany’s Erasmus. Unlike the bulk of Reformers including Bucer, Bullinger, Calvin and the English compilers of the 39 Articles and Homilies, the Melanchthon school taught a mere passive, non-causative, forensic justification turned into actual justification through obedience to natural law and the gospel. Because it was humanistic, it was man-centred. Sadly, the corrupt view of Reformation doctrine promoted in the declaration has… Full Article
Robert Williams on Wycliffe
Dec 19
Letter to the Evangelical Times on reading articles critical of John Wycliffe in the Christian Newspaper Sir: Robert Williams (41:11) believes that Wycliffe was not in tune with later mainstream Reformers. He cannot mean the 16th century Reformers as they obviously built on Wycliffe. So he is probably thinking of the many evangelical scholars of today who have sadly little in common with either Wycliffe or the Reformation. Williams appears to have taken over the Lechler/Green, late nineteenth century, critical interpretation of Wycliffe which was excellent in reviving Wycliffe studies but extremely weak in understanding Wycliffe’s doctrines. Like modern Reformed systematic theological appreciation, it was too… Full Article
