Pilgrim,

Methinks there is a strong odor of equivocation emanating from Speratus' usages of the term "efficacious".

While you and JE et al (had to use Joe's favorite phrase!) have clearly and consistently used efficacious solely in reference to the work of grace on the elect, as in "invariably, infallibly, without possibility of recall, effecting and securing the salvation of each of the elect"--which efficacy can in no way apply to the reprobate--your adversary Dr. S. has also been using the term in a broader sense in reference to the glory of God in all things, as in "Word and Sacrament, regardless of their effect on the individual, invariably bring glory to God as the gospel is preached through them".

By itself, that is a true enough statement. But his equivocation of the broader and narrower usages allows him to errantly argue that since:

1) all that God does is efficacious (broad)
2) Calvinists claim that grace is always efficacious for the elect and never for the reprobate (actually narrow, but he equivocates it as broad)
Thererfore, Calvinists deny (1), which is universally affirmed,
Consequently, (2) must be false.

This logical error--whatever its motivation--allows him to proceed along his thoroughly unbiblical lines in which man--just as in all other false gospels--can override the will of God.


In Christ,
Paul S