speratus said: However, I was thinking that, perhaps, more moderate hyper-calvinists, considering the reprobate to be permenently dead spiritually, would say the reprobate are not even offered "common grace" in the gospel call as opposed to Calvinists in general who say reprobate are offered and may receive "common grace" in the gospel call.
speratus,
Perhaps you are confused <img src="/forum/images/graemlins/confused.gif" alt="" /> as to definition of terms and/or the nature or content of the gospel and/or of common grace? What is certain is that there is no offering of "Common Grace" in the gospel. There are residual effects enjoyed by the reprobate from the grace given to the elect in their salvation, but that is an entirely different matter. In the gospel, God extends to all men reconciliation, redemption and remission of sins, among other things to ALL who will repent and believe upon Christ. The "grace" in the gospel is strictly salvific.
As to "Common Grace", I will be the first to admit that it is a term which all too often leads to much confusion. In fact, I would have to say it is actually a misnomer, for "grace" is synonymous with "salvation". And salvation is not "common" but specific. Common Grace is actually the general kindness or benevolence of God to all men without discrimination and has to do more with His providential care of the creation without reference to the end of that creation.
In the thread, "Infant Salvation", I asked, "Baptism (which the WCF calls a sacrament) does confer grace to elect infants in His appointed time. What is grace other than a regeneration?" and you answered:
Quote
Again, you are confusing/intermixing terms. Grace is a very broad term which may be simply defined as God extending undeserved favor upon men. The term may even be sub-divided into two further categories; Salvific Grace and Common Grace. The former being extended to only those whom God has predestinated to salvation in Christ. The latter is that general benevolence of God whereby men are granted temporal favors, even physical life itself; i.e., the judgment that they deserve from the moment of conception is withheld during the time that the reprobate are allowed to live on earth. Regeneration was addressed above.
Hence my question regarding the view of hyper-calvinists as opposed to general (i.e., Westminister) calvinists. Would not the hyper-calvinists say that Baptism, a gospel call, does not confer additional "common grace" on baptized reprobate?
Perhaps, Calvinists don't consider Baptism to be a gospel call? Then, of course, both hyper and general Calvinists could say the reprobate receive favor through the keeping of the covenant in Baptism (1st use of the law).
