Excerpts from The Daily-Throgmorton Debate:
Daily: 1. What does the death of Christ, apart from everything else, accomplish in the salvation of sinners? 2. Did Christ die for sinners really and absolutely as a substitute; that is, did he take the place of sinners in dying for them? Was his death for them vicarious or not? 3. Did Christ die for sinners in order to make the eternal salvation of all he died for possible on condition of faith?
My first argument in support of my proposition is that the death of Christ was necessary in order to the eternal salvation of sinners, and being necessary to that end, it was designed to accomplish it. For whatever is necessary to an end is designed to accomplish that end.
As God is all-wise, and as God is all-powerful, we are forced to the conclusion that whatever he designed in any undertaking of his will be accomplished; and that, therefore, to ascertain his design we have but to ascertain the final results.
If his design for sinners was not their eternal salvation, what was it? I maintain that the design was the eternal salvation of the sinners for whom he died.
When I think of God, whose name is “I am,” the self-existent one, who is from everlasting to everlasting , the Almighty God, as knowing all things, I cannot associate with such an idea of God any idea of a failure upon his part.
Matthew 18:11 “For the Son of Man is come to save that which was lost.”
I Thessalonians 5:9-10 “For God hath not appointed us to wrath, but to obtain salvation by our Lord Jesus Christ, who died for us, that, whether we wake or sleep, we should live together with him.”
Galatians 1:3-4 “Grace be to you and peace from God the Father, and from our Lord Jesus Christ, who gave himself for our sins that he might deliver us from this present evil world, according to the will of God our Father.”
God’s design in Christ’s dying for sinners was their eternal salvation from sin and their deliverance according to his will. His design is to be measured by its final results. Therefore, all for whom Christ died will be eternally saved.
My second argument is founded upon the annunciation of the coming birth of Christ by the angel to Joseph:
Matthew 1:21 “Thou shalt call his name Jesus, for he shall save his people from their sins.”
Since he will save his people from their sins, he will not save more than his people; he will not save fewer than his people. He will save just that many.
All whom he will save are reckoned as his people before they are saved, before he died for them, even before he came into the world.
It was not his mission to try to save them, or to give them a chance to save themselves, or to enable someone else to save them, but to save them himself.
A priest in making his priestly offering could not sit down until the offering was accomplished. Jesus Christ could not have sat down on the right of the Majesty on high if he had not purged the sins of those for whom he died.
As Aaron bore the names of the twelve tribes of Israel, those he represented, making sacrifice for them and acting as their intercessor, thus purging them typically, so Christ, the glorious anti-type, bears the names of all for whom he died as a sacrifice, on the breastplate of his love.
Christ and the Holy Spirit act with one consent together, the work of one being the complement to that of the other. Christ intercedes for those for whom he died, as an advocate in heaven, and the Holy Spirit quickens them and becomes an advocate within to bear witness with their spirits that they are the children of God. The Atonement and intercession of Christ and the work of the Holy Spirit cannot fail. Therefore, all for whom Christ died will be eternally saved.
My sixth argument is that the death of Christ was a ransom paid for sinners intended to redeem them. That ransom price was God’s own provision for the redemption of the sinners for whom Christ died, and therefore it cannot fail.
The death of Christ for sinners, the shedding of his blood, is the ransom price paid, by which those for whom he died are said to be purchased or redeemed.
I Corinthians 6:20 “For ye are bought with a price; therefore glorify God in your body, and in your spirit, which are God’s.
What is the price? It is the priceless shed blood of the blessed Jesus. That is the full price. That is God’s accepted price, to which there needs be no addition, to which there can be made no addition, which satisfies God in behalf of those for whom Christ die.
Acts 20:28 “Feed the church of God, which he hath purchased with his own blood.”
I Peter 1:18-19 “Forasmuch as ye know that ye were not redeemed with corruptible things, as silver and gold, from your vain conversation received by tradition from your fathers; but with the precious blood of Christ, as of a lamb without blemish and without spot.”
Revelation 5:9 “And they sung a new song, saying, Thou art worthy to take the book, and to open the seals thereof; for thou wast slain, and hast redeemed us to God by thy blood out of every kindred and tongue, and people, and nation.”
If the payment of such a price should fail to secure the everlasting salvation of any for whom it was paid, the failure would be to the everlasting shame and disgrace of the omnipotent one who proposed to accept the price and of the obedient one, the suffering one who paid it.
There can be no more God dishonoring doctrine than that which teaches that some for whom Christ died will be eternally lost. It says his blood was spilt in vain. It charges him and the everlasting Father with both failure and falsehood. It says the law demands two payments for the same offense.
Titus 2:13-14 “Looking for that blessed hope, and the glorious appearing of the Great God and our Savior Jesus Christ; Who gave himself for us, that he might redeem us from all iniquity, and purify unto himself a peculiar people, zealous of good works.”
Can redemption be for any one who is never redeemed? Can a price be paid as a ransom, and the ransom not be consummated? Can the judge be satisfied, justice be met, and the prisoners, any of them, remain forever enthralled?
My seventh argument in support of my proposition is: That salvation by the life of Christ is sure to follow reconciliation by his death.
Romans 5:6-10 “For when we were yet without strength, in due time Christ died for the ungodly. For scarcely for a righteous man will one die; yet peradventure for a good man some would even dare to die. But God commendeth his love toward us, in that while we were yet sinners, Christ died for us. Much more then, being now justified by his blood, we shall be saved from wrath through him. For if, when we were enemies, we were reconciled to God by the death of his Son, much more, being reconciled, we shall be saved by his life.”
The act of reconciling is here ascribed to the death of Christ. It was declared to be done when the sinners for whom he died were enemies, ungodly ones, and sinners without strength. It does not say they were reconciled when they became God’s friends, when they repented and believed on Christ, but when they were enemies. All for whom Christ died were reckoned sinners, they were reckoned ungodly, and enemies to God. These enemies were all for whom Christ died, who lived in the ages before he lived, at that time, and who would live in subsequent ages.
All who were reconciled to God by the death of his Son will be eternally saved by his life. Therefore, all for whom Christ died will be eternally saved.
Throgmorton: It is true that God takes no pleasure in the death of any of them: Ezekiel 18:32 “For I have no pleasure in the death of him that dieth, saith the Lord God; wherefore turn yourselves and live.”
Daily: God is here addressing National Israel and speaking of the disobedient ones among National Israel. As his promises to that nation were conditional promises, if they obeyed God under that national law, God preserved them; if they did not, God afflicted them. He had no pleasure in such affliction in case of disobedience under national law.
Throgmorton: God is not willing that any should perish. II Peter 3:9 The Lord is not slack cncerning his promise, as some men count slackness; but is long suffering to usward, not willing that any should perish, but that all should come to repentance.”
Daily: It is God’s work to save sinners, and since he doeth according to his will as the Bible declares, he will save all he wills to save. Therefore if this passage means all mankind, all will be saved. To come to repentance is to come to Christ. Christ says no one can come to him except the Father draws him. Then all the Father wills to come to Christ will be drawn. If this passage means all mankind, all will repent and be saved.
Throgmorton: I Timothy 4:10 “For therefore we both labor and suffer reproach, because we trust in the living God, who is the Savior of all men, specially those who believe.” What about the living God, Paul? “He is the Savior of all men.” Of how many men? All men. What else have you to say? “Specially of those that believe.” You see Paul makes a distinction. And all men that believe are the elect. And unless all men be saved eternally there will be some for whom he died that will not be eternally saved.
Daily: This passage was I Timothy 2:6, where he said he gave himself a ransom for all. Ransom is here translated from antilutron (antilutron). The preposition anti is here joined to the verb. Antilutron is a strong word translated ransom in this text. Anti means over against, corresponding to in place of, in retribution or return for. Lutron (lutron) is from the verb luw (luo) which means to loosen, unbind, set at liberty. So the word anti-lutron means the payment of such a price as retribution or return for as results in loosing or setting at liberty all for whom the ransom is paid. This fact is strengthened still by the phrase uper pantwn (huper panton) “for all.” Huper (for) means in the attitude of protection, so that the idea of protection over all for whom the ransom was paid is definitely expressed. This makes it infallibly certain that all for whom this ransom was paid, for whom this blessed Mediator gave himself as a ransom, will be eternally saved. So when he says he gave himself a ransom for all he did not mean the whole human race. If he did, the whole race is going to heaven.
Throgmorton: The book plainly says in so many words that he tasted death for every man. Hebrews 2:9 “That he by the grace of God should taste death for every man.”
Daily: Speaking of Christ tasting death for every man, in Hebrews 2:9, he claims “every man” means the entire human race. Let’s see. The phrase “for every man,” is translated from the Greek phrase, uper pantos (huper pantos). It is not uper pantos antropos “for every man,” but uper pantos “for every.” The word “man” is not in the original. This might be translated “for every one,” if taken distributively, which means every one of the many brethren mentioned in the context, for whose salvation Jesus was made a perfect captain. Through suffering he was made the perfect captain of the salvation of all finally brought to glory by him, and not of all the human race. If he tasted death for every one of the human race, and thus became the captain of their salvation through suffering for them, they will all be saved and be brought to glory. So he tasted death for those only for whom he was made a perfect captain.
Throgmorton: We read of one weak brother for whom Christ died that perished. I Corinthians 8:10-11 “For if any man see thee which hast knowledge, sit at meat in the idol’s temple, shall not the conscience of him which is weak be emboldened to eat those things which are offered to idols? And through thy knowledge shall the weak brother perish, for whom Christ died?” In the Revised Version, American, it reads: For through thy knowledge he that is weak perisheth, the brother for whom Christ died.” It doesn’t mean a brother in Christ, because we have seen that those in Christ will never perish, but here is a brother in Adam for whom Christ die, who perishes. The Greek word apoleitai (apoleitai) is the same as in John 3:16, where the word perish occurs.
Daily: He speaks about the weak brother perishing: I Corinthians 8:11. Now the Apostle is there writing to brethren in the church, and speaks of a weak brother in the church perishing. The argument of my friend is, that one who belongs to the church, is a brother in the church, might eternally perish. Do you believe in apostasy? If not, why did you call attention to that? Did that mean a brother in Adam? How do you know it did? The Apostle is not writing to the Adamic family, but to the Church of God. He means a brother in Christ. There might be many ways in which a person can perish and then not go to hell. There are different ways in which a person may perish.
Throgmorton: I Timothy 4:10 “For therefore we both labor and suffer reproach, because we trust in the living God, who is the savior of all men, specially those who believe.” What about the living God, Paul? “He is the Savior of all men.” Of how many men? All men. What else have you to say? “Specially of those that believe.” You see Paul makes a distinction. And all men that believe are the elect. And unless all men be saved eternally, there will be some for whom he died that will not be eternally saved. So my opponent’s proposition is gone. He is the Savior of all men in that he has saved all men from the guilt of Adam’s transgression. He is the special Savior of those that believe, because when they believe, he pardons all their actual transgressions. Many for whom he died, and whom he saved from Adam’s guilt, become actual transgressors and never believe and so are lost forever.
Daily: In reference to I Timothy 4:10, Christ is referred to there. God the Father is referred to, and in saying he is the Savior of all men and especially those that believe, he teaches that he is the preserver of all men by his protection over them, particularly and especially them that believe. The word Savior here in the Emphatic Diaglott is translated preserver. In Hind’s Interlinear Greek Testament it is also translated preserver, so that the literal rendering would be preserver of all men, and especially those that believe. Now if he is the Savior of all men, he will save all, because it takes that to be a Savior.
Throgmorton: Romans 5:18 “Therefore as by the offense of one, judgment came upon all men to condemnation.” Whose was the one offense? Adam’s. Who were the “all men” upon whom the condemnation came by Adam’s disobedience? What does Paul say? As by the offense of one judgment came upon all men to condemnation.” Not by their own transgression, but because of Adam’s transgression. “Even so by the righteousness of one,” that is, the righteousness of Jesus Christ wrought out and finished on the cross, “Even so by the righteousness of one, the free gift came upon”—how many? “Upon all men,” the same “all men” mentioned in the first part of the verse. My opponent says if that means all men, all men will be eternally saved, and told me “good bye.” It does mean universal salvation from Adam’s transgression, but not from actual transgression. There will never be a man in hell at last on account of Adam’s transgression, unless it is Adam himself.
Daily: In reference to the 5th chapter of Romans (Romans 5), “Therefore, as by the offense 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.” Does that justification of life mean eternal life? Does it mean they all received eternal life, when it speaks of the free gift coming to all? If justification of life doesn’t mean eternal life, what kind of life does it mean? If it does mean eternal life, how can any fail to be saved forever? Answer that, and we will have more on that subject.
Throgmorton: Brother Daily refers to Ephesians 1:7 and to Colossians 1:14, “In whom we have redemption.” This redemption is not something that we obtained on the cross when Christ died. Redemption is forgiveness! When did you get forgiveness, Brother Daily? Back there? Or in the hour in which you first believed? Tell us! Colossians 1:14 “In whom we have redemption through his blood, even the forgiveness of sins.” When were you forgiven? When Christ suffered on the cross? Or when he met you in faith?
Daily: In the way of redemption through his blood, in quoting that, he says we do not have redemption until we have forgiveness, because redemption is forgiveness. Now Christ obtained eternal redemption for us before he entered the Holy Place, did he not? If Christ obtained eternal redemption before he entered the Holy Place, then will we not get the redemption that Christ obtained for us? If not, why? Is Christ’s work a failure? Will Christ obtain eternal redemption for a sinner when he died on the cross, and then that sinner fail to receive that redemption that Christ had obtained for him? I proved that ransom signified a loosing, that it was to redeem that which was ransomed, and he hasn’t answered the argument, and he will not do it.
Throgmorton: The blood of Christ purges our conscience from dead works. When? Back there when the blood was shed? Tell us. Is that what you mean—that your conscience was purged from sin when Christ died on the cross? Mine was purged in my lifetime by the application of that blood. And Christ’s blood when shed on the cross per se, cleanses no one. That only the application of the blood can do. It is the blood applied that does this thing. Let me read you Acts 15:7-9. It will show you when the purification takes place: “God made choice among us, that the Gentiles by my mouth should hear the word of the gospel, and believe. And God, which knoweth the hearts, bare them witness, giving them the Holy Ghost, even as he did unto us;”—now listen!—“and put no difference between us and them, purifying their hearts by faith.” Not without faith—not yet when the blood was shed; but by faith when the blood was applied. That is when the purging takes place as to the actual transgressor.
Daily: Speaking of the conscience being purged from sin, that is not the purging of the sins mentioned in Hebrews 1st chapter. He purged our sins in a different sense when he died on the Roman cross. There was a sense in which he purged our sins, when he died on the cross, was there not? So there was a sense in which he purged sins. The Apostle says he purged our sins before he sat down on the right hand of the Majesty on high.
Daily: What does the death of Christ, apart from everything else, accomplish in the salvation of sinners? For instance, in the case of those who die without hearing the gospel, what does the gospel accomplish in their eternal salvation? You deny that all for whom Christ died will be eternally saved. You contend that some will be eternally damned. Now what does Christ’s death accomplish in the case of those who never hear the gospel preached?
Let us illustrate the gentleman’s theory. Let this represent those that are lost, and this those who are saved (using two books). That Christ died for these he admits, but also argues that he died for these just the same. No difference in the death. What does the death of Christ do for these? They go to endless ruin. They suffer in an endless hell, though Christ died for them. What makes the difference between the two? The death of Christ? No, sir. Anything Christ did? No, sir. He did just as much for these as these. Nothing that Christ did makes the difference. My Friend’s position is that what these did, and not what Christ did, is what made the difference between the classes. So that those in heaven are there for what they did, and not by reason of what Christ did for them!
Daily: Galatians 3:13 “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.” When was that redemption accomplished? When he was made a curse for us. When was he made a curse for us? When he died on the Roman cross. That agrees with the other text, that he entered heaven, having obtained eternal redemption for us. So Christ has redeemed us, for it is written, “Cursed is every one that hangeth on a tree.” The meaning is: he was made a curse over us, in the sense of protection. This represents him as being a curse in an attitude of protection over them for whom he died. The Greek work uper (huper) means over, so that the curse due to them fell upon him. They were shielded by him.
As surety of the covenant he stood to his engagement and made full reparation for the sins of those for whom he died. Because of his being made sin and a curse, the supporting and comforting presence of his father was withdrawn from him, so that he cried out, “My God, My God, why hast thou forsaken me:?” It was for no sin of his own, but because he became sin for those for whom he died, and because he died a curse for them.
Christ, in being made sin for those for whom he died, was their substitute, as the word uper (huper) positively declares. Every sinner for whom he died must be absolved or the substitution of Christ is a failure. Did Christ die for sinners as an absolute substitute? He has not said yes, or no, to that question. He has not even given an evasive answer to that question. He has paid no attention to it. He has said that Christ died to make the salvation to all possible, when he knows that he cannot stand upon that through this debate to save his life. He is gone if I were to stop here and give him the rest of the time. His position is that God has not made provision for the salvation of all. He will never get out of that hole. It will go down in the book with him in it, covered up with no possibility to escape.
Now all secured by Christ as their substitute, as their surety, will be eternally saved, because they are secured and redeemed from the curse of the law. Therefore all for whom Christ died will be eternally saved. He will not answer that question; he will not answer that argument. He will treat it as he has all the rest.
Daily: My tenth argument is founded on the unity of the Trinity. The three Persons in the Trinity co-operate, the work of each being a complement to the work of the others. God, and Christ, and the Spirit form a Divine Trinity—God the Father, Christ the Son, and the Holy Spirit. And these three operate in harmony, one being harmonious with the others in the accomplishment of the work.
Christ comes and acts as the representative and surety. He gives his very life for them, and purifies them to himself, a peculiar people, and finally ascends to his Father, having purged their sins by his death. The Holy Spirit, being one with the Father and Son, cannot fail to perform the important work assigned in the great economy of their salvation.
If the co-operation of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost is a harmonious work, then all for whom Christ died will be eternally saved. But the co-operation of these divine persons is a harmonious work, for these three are one. Therefore all for whom Christ died will be eternally saved.
Daily: My Eleventh argument is that positive fact stated by Paul, that just as certainly as God delivered up Christ to die for sinners, he will as surely and freely give them all things else necessary for their salvation. Romans 8:32 “He that spared not his own Son, but delivered him up for us all, how shall he not with him also freely give us all things?” The argument of the Apostle is this: If God gave the best gift he could in giving Christ for those for whom he died, he will not fail to give any other gift necessary to their eternal salvation. If he will not fail in giving any other gift necessary for their eternal salvation, then all for whom Christ died will be eternally saved. Your friends are wondering what you are going to do with that.
I Thessalonians 5:9: “For God hath not appointed us to wrath, but to obtain salvation by our Lord Jesus Christ, who died for us, that whether we wake or sleep, we should live together with him.” The great purpose for which Christ died for sinners is that they should live together with him. God spared him not. He will also give all things necessary to that end. The Holy Spirit which quickens them is a gift to them.
Romans 5:5: “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.” Then if God gave Christ to die for a sinner, he will give the Holy Ghost as well.
Romans 6:23: “The gift of God is eternal life through Jesus Christ our Lord.” He gave Christ to die for the sinner. He will give everything else necessary. Eternal life is necessary, therefore he will give eternal life.
To offset that conclusion my friend must show that God will not give all things to those for whom he gave Christ to die. When he proves that, he will prove the Apostle told a falsehood when he declared that God would give all things necessary, when he declared that God gave Christ, the greatest gift that could be given for sinners.
Daily: My next argument is based upon the plain statement of Peter, that the object of Christ’s suffering for sinners is that he might bring them to God. I Peter 3:18: “For Christ also once suffered for sins, the just for the unjust, that he might bring us to God.” In the phrase, “the just for the unjust,” the preposition here is uper (huper), and is translated “for,” signifying protection over the unjust, a substitute for the sins for those for whom Christ died. My opponent does not say whether Christ died as a substitute or not. He has not said yet. I have proved that. He knows that he has not.
Daily: It is just as he illustrated his idea of salvation yesterday by reference to a man who had been put in jail under a fine of $1,000.00, who was entirely unable to escape from the jail unless the $1,000.00 should be paid. When the $1,000.00 was paid, and the court dockets were cleared on account of the payment being made, the man was still in jail, he said. His idea seems to be, however, in regard to the salvation of the sinner, that after all the provision has been made, the payment and all preparation made, the sinner must then believe that it is made.
It seems to me to be ridiculous to suppose that the man in jail must believe that his fine has been paid or he will never get any benefit out of the payment. He will never be benefitted unless he believes. I desire not only to show the ridiculousness of my opponent’s position here, but to show just how this matter is, by calling your attention to Isaiah 49:8-10: “Thus saith the Lord, in an acceptable time have I heard thee, and in a day of salvation have I helped thee.” The Lord is here speaking to Christ. God the Father is addressing the Savior. “And in a day of salvation have I helped thee.” Still addressing the Savior, And I will preserve thee, and give thee for a covenant of the people, to establish the earth, to cause to inherit the desolate heritage.” Still addressing the Savior, “That thou mayest say to the prisoners, Go forth.”
He makes the payment, this Savior does, after which he is able to say to the prisoner, “Go forth, because I have made the payment.” If he should require them to believe in order that the payment be made, then the payment couldn’t be made until they believed, which is ridiculous, and any one with any degree of intelligence can see the ridiculousness of it. The idea of believing a thing to be true in order to make it true, is too absurd for an intelligent mind to accept.
In addition to that I want to say this: That if the ransom is paid for sinners, if the fine is liquidated and the docket is cleared on that account for sinners, and those sinners remain in jail forever, it would be to the everlasting disgrace of the law of the country under which they are held as prisoners, the debt being paid. Answer it if you dare. You may try.
Daily: I want to call your attention to another predicament into which my worthy opponent plunged yesterday, and from which he will never be able to extricate himself. A corrupt tree, an alien sinner, cannot bring forth good fruit. Matthew 7:18 Faith is a good fruit, for the Apostle says it is a fruit of the Spirit. Therefore the alien sinner cannot bring forth faith. The conclusion of this syllogism will stand, because neither premise can be destroyed. It follows, therefore, that the alien sinner cannot bring forth the good fruit of faith. His theory requires him to do what he cannot do in order that the death of Christ be effectual in his salvation.
Daily: Now, Brother Throgmorton has been repeating [himself] a great deal. I will not have to repeat a great deal, because I have so much to bring forward, as you will see as this debate progresses.
But I have some more here that I want to give you on the term “the whole world,” as found in I John 2:2. According to his position, Christ died for all the sins of all the human family just alike. Then he died for those who were in hell when he died, who had died and were lost before he died, and he now stands as the propitiation for their sins. The passage says he is now the propitiation for the sins of the whole world, and so if Brother Throgmorton is right, he is the propitiation for the sins of all the host of the lost, those who had died before his death, and those who have died since. He is now their propitiation, being their advocate in heaven!
The term “whole world” is assumed to mean the entire human family. It is an assumption without proof. But his position on Romans 3:25, where God is said to have set Christ forth to be a propitiation through faith in his blood, is that faith is a condition in order for Christ’s being a propitiation for sins. That is a positive contradiction of his position on this text, for all have not faith. Since all have not faith, and since faith, according to his view, is a condition of Christ’s being the propitiation for sins, it follows as an unavoidable conclusion that the whole world, in I John 2:2, does not mean the entire human family.
The key to this passage is in Isaiah 49:6: “And he said, It is a light thing,” addressing Christ, “that thou shouldest be my servant to raise up the tribes of Jacob, and restore the preserved of Israel; I will also give thee for a light to the Gentiles, that thou mayest be my salvation unto the end of the earth.”
This key shows the “world” means Gentiles. The salvation which God has prepared unto the end of the earth. Wherever this salvation which God has provided reaches, whoever are saved by it, are included in the propitiation and advocacy of Christ. This includes all the world—that is, the Gentiles as well as the Jews; in fact, some of every kindred and tongue and people and nation. Revelation 5:9 Christ’s propitiation and advocacy propitiates the Father, conciliates, brings peace and secures his mercy. This is the design of his glorious work, and in this he cannot fail. So all for whom he is the propitiation and advocate, the world of Gentiles as well as Jews, will be eternally saved.
Daily: He says the death of Christ would have amounted to nothing had he not risen. His resurrection is not what made his death really effective, for his death was virtuous. I mean had virtue in it, as soon as he died. His resurrection showed his death to be effectual. Had he not been resurrected from the dead, it would have been demonstrated that his death was not satisfactory. it was necessary to show that his death had virtue in it.
Daily: He speaks of the light that lighteth every man that comes into the world, and I asked him how millions upon millions that go down to endless hell without having heard the gospel preached were enlightened. He hasn’t told me, and he will not dare to during this debate. Were the millions that go down to an endless hell without hearing the gospel ever enlightened by this true light, and if so, how were they enlightened by it?
Daily: I want to call your attention to another thing that was brought up yesterday by my opponent. In speaking of Jesus weeping over the condition of Jerusalem, because as he supposed, Jesus was not able to save them, not able to save, wanted to do it, gave his life to do it, and absolutely could not. Jesus weeping, because he couldn’t do what he wanted to do in the work of the salvation of these people!
Now listen: If Jesus wept on that account, may we not conclude that God the Father in heaven, Jesus Christ, the Divine advocate there, and the Holy Spirit, are now weeping over countless millions that have gone down to endless hell, whom they could not save! And as they might be supposed to be weeping in heaven, and as the children of God, in love with the Father, are in sympathy, they would join in the wailing, and all heaven would ring with wailings!! God the Father, the Holy Spirit, and all who are saved in heaven, weeping, because God could not save the countless millions that went to hell!! Draw down the curtains!!
Daily: My brother is repeating. He will continue to repeat. He will hammer upon I John 2:2, and some other things; but, my friends, I have enough to just keep on. I promise to bring up something every time, which he cannot answer, and that this day’s debate will close with still plenty on hand that I could have used, that would have been to his ruin as he stands upon the opposite side of this question. I respect my brother. When we parted the last time before we met here, I remarked to him, “I think we will meet again.’ He said: “We will, but we will meet as friends.” Thank you for your attention.
Throgmorton: And now my opponent wants me to explain how it is that God has given light to all men. I take the fact as God states it. What is the fact? “He (Christ) was the true light which lighteth every man that cometh into the world.” If I wanted to designate every member of the human race, could I do it in stronger language? I don’t have to explain how it is done, but it is done. God says it is done, and that is enough for me. It ought to be for you, Brother Daily.
Daily: How does God give light to all men? He said he didn’t have to take time to tell how. God gives light to all men. He doesn’t dare to say that God gave light to millions that go down without ever hearing the gospel preached.
Throgmorton: Christ’s mission and death were for the world in general. You see I am repeating. It is line upon line. John 3:16 “God so loved the world.” God’s love was for the world in general. When the term world refers to mankind, unless there is some modification it means all Adam’s posterity, not just two or three “ends of the earth.” Sometimes when modified it means all living at the time, except these that have been chosen of God and separated into another family. Sometimes it means all the race then living. Sometimes it means all the race for all time, except God’s people. It never means God’s people only.
Put that down. Christ was sent to save the world. I John 4:14 “And we have seen and do testify that the Father sent the Son to be the Savior of the world.” Hear that same John in that same I John 5:19 “And we know that we (the elect) are of God, and the whole world lieth in wickedness.” But John says we have seen it and we testify to it “that the Father sent the Son to be the Savior of the world.” And Jesus says, “If any man hear my words and believeth not, I judge him not, for I came not to judge the world, but to save the world.” John 12:47
Who are the world? Those that believe not. Jesus says he doesn’t judge them; he didn’t come to judge but to save them. It is to save them all. My friend says not. Jesus says he came to save them. Why doesn’t he save them? They don’t believe on him. Don’t forget Jesus said that, concerning those that believe not. “If any man hear my words and believe not, I judge him not, for I came not to judge the world, but to save the world.” That is in John 12:47.
Before men believe they are of the world; when they believe they are counted no more of the world. Jesus said of his apostles, “They are not of the world, even as I am not of the world,” John 17:16. He said, “I have chosen you out of the world,” John 15:19. Before they were separated from the world, they were part of it even as others. Ephesians 2:1-3 “And you hath he quickened, who were dead in trespasses and sins; wherein ye walked according to the course of this world, according to the prince of the power, 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”
God loved the world before his people were separated from it, and he loved it afterwards. Between those separated from the world and those left John distinguishes thus. I John 5:19 “And we know that we are of God, and the whole world lieth in wickedness.” Speaking of those now separated from the world, Paul described them thus: Ephesians 3:11-12 “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.” And yet my opponent says that they were then members of the bride of Christ!
Daily: In the negative argument he calls attention to John 3:16 “God so loved the world.” The Jewish idea was the Messiah was to come exclusively to the Jews, that he was to come to save them; but Christ tells them that he came in love to the Gentiles as well as the Jews. Love, in its very nature, is particular, definite and special. It must center upon some particular and special object of its exercise, and cannot go to everybody in general. When God says, “I have loved thee with an everlasting love,” he addresses not persons in general, but persons in particular. That the nations of the world meant the Gentiles is seen by a comparison of Luke 12:30 with Matthew 6:32, “For all these things do the nations of the world seek after; and your Father knoweth that ye have need of these things.” The Gentiles are here called the nations of the world, in conformity with the Jewish manner of speaking. Again, the Gentiles are denominated “the world” by Paul in Romans 11:15, “For if the casting away of them be the reconciling of the world, what shall the receiving of them be, but life from the dead?” So Paul calls the Gentiles “the world.”
That Christ did not mean the entire human family when he said, “God so loved the world,” is proved conclusively beyond successful dispute by Paul’s quotation, when he says, “Jacob have I loved, but Esau have I hated,” Romans 9:11-13. If he loved some and hated some at the same time, he did not love all alike; in fact, he did not love them at all.
The learned Moses Stuart, though he believed in a general atonement as a theologian, was too candid as a scholar to build an argument or found his faith on such passages as John 3:16. He says, “The sacred writers mean to declare by such expressions that Christ died really and truly as well and as much for the Gentiles as for the Jews.”
Subjunctive mode means doubt, he says. Not always, Brother Throgmorton, you assume the role of teacher. I am going to accord you that place. However, I want to correct you. Subjunctive mode doesn’t always mean doubt. It only just occasionally means doubt in English, and as used in the Greek, you know, after the conjunction hena it means a certain purpose, being properly translated, “in order that.” So he gave himself in order that he might bring us to God, the purpose being to bring us, not to try to bring us, or give us a chance to come, or enable somebody else to bring us, or place us where we have no chance to come, but to bring us.
Daily: I Peter 2:24 “Who his own self bare our sins in his own body on the tree, that we, being dead to sins, should live unto righteousness; by whose stripes ye were healed.” The fact that he actually bore the sins of all for whom he died in his body on the tree is emphasized by the appositive phrase “his own self,” and by the additional use of the word “own” to the pronoun “his” in its limitation or modification of the word “body.” “Who his own self bare our sins in his own body on the tree.” These adjectives are used to make the declaration emphatic. This cannot be successfully denied. Then it is proved that God laid on his Son the sins of those for whom he died, and that the Son, his own self, bore these very sins in his own body on the cross. I inquire as to the result. What became of those sins which the Father laid on his Son, which he bore in his body on the tree? Let the word of God answer, and let us all bow to the answer, and forever keep silent rather than deny the answer so plainly given.
Daily: My next argument is that the justification of sinners is necessarily connected with the death of Christ for them as the procuring cause of their justification. As the cause of the justification is the bearing of the sins of those for whom Christ died, all for whom Christ died will be justified.
Isaiah 53:11: “By his knowledge shall my righteous servant justify many, for he shall bear their iniquities.” If the mere results had been borne and not the iniquities themselves, then justification would have been impossible. Pardon there might have been, but justification there never could have been. The word of God, by one sweeping declaration, settles this matter forever. Listen: “By his knowledge (mark you, it is Jehovah speaking of his Son), “By his knowledge shall my righteous servant justify many, for he shall bear their iniquities.” If we ask why any sinner is justified, what is the cause of his justification, we find the answer in our text: Because Christ bore his iniquities.
As the iniquities of sinners being borne by Christ in his death on the cross is the cause of their being justified, as the text declares, then if he bore the sins of all the race, they will all be justified.
Daily: I attend first to the questions which my brother handed me.
The first is: “Does God require all men, elect and non-elect to seek him?” None are commanded to seek God except his children.
The second is: “Can a man be blamed for not accepting a gift which is not offered to him?” A man is not blamed for not accepting Christ. He is blamed for violating God’s law.
I have a question now for him. Can a man be blamed for not accepting Christ who never hears of him? Are heathens, who never hear of Christ, sent to hell for not accepting him?
“Is Christ offered to men, elect and non-elect, in the gospel?” Not offered to anybody.
“Does God command every sinner, elect and non-elect, to repent?” A man cannot repent without life, whatever kind of repentance it be, natural or spiritual.
“Does God censure sinners, elect and non-elect, for not believing on his Son?” Not believing is not the cause of condemnation. It is the evidence of it.
“What is the penalty due to sin?” Death.
“Where do you learn that only elect persons die in infancy?” All that die in infancy are saved in Heaven. I believe that. Those that are saved in Heaven are elect. Therefore only elect persons die in infancy.
“Can a man believe in Christ without believing that Christ died for him?” The devils did.
Throgmorton: Did they believe that Christ died for them?
Daily: Devils believe.
Throgmorton: On Christ, is what my question said.
Daily: Don’t interrupt, please.
“Is there any way for a sinner to repent or seek God except through the crucified Christ?” None repent or seek after God in a state of unregeneracy.
“Why does God favor a non-elect person with long life, and deny the same blessing to the elect?” Because it seems good in his sight.
“Would Christ have suffered any more in dying for all of Adam’s race than in dying for just one sinner?” No way of knowing.
“When Paul says, Christ loved me and gave himself for me, does he mean that Christ loved no one else and gave himself for nobody else?” No, he gave himself for all the elect.
“Can you name a passage in the New Testament where the word “world” means only the elect?” Yes, sir: I John 2:2. The “whole world means only the elect among the Jews and among the Gentiles.
Daily: He says his duty is to examine the proof text. His duty is to examine the arguments and proof text that I submit. He examines the proof texts, but the arguments he passes by. He quotes John 3:16. “He that believeth on the Son hath everlasting life.” His position is that he believes to get everlasting life. My position is that he believes because he has everlasting life. If his position were true, it would not be true that he that believeth hath everlasting life. It ought to be stated that he that believeth will get it.
Throgmorton: [I asked] “Where do you learn that only elect persons die in infancy?” He says he believes that all that die in infancy are saved. That is about like I thought you’d answer. Because you think it. I don’t want to find out what you think, but where you get the authority for your thought. His answer is he believes that all who die in infancy shall be saved!
Daily: He wants to know where I get my authority for saying that all infants that die in infancy are saved. That sounds like he disputes it. When a man calls for my authority, the inference, of course, would be that he rather doubts it. If not, why should he call for my authority? Now if I were to take the time, I think I could prove that infants that die in infancy are saved. I will just make this general statement, however, without entering further into proof, that everything that is said of that class in God’s word is favorable to it. David wept and fasted while his child was sick. He was glad in his heart, and so quit weeping when he learned that his child was dead, because he had the assurance that he could go to the child. All infants that die in infancy are saved with an everlasting salvation, and, therefore, they belong to the elect, since the elect are saved. That is plain.
Throgmorton: He wants to know, “if Christ is the savior of the damned in hell?” Yes, sir; he saved every one of them from the guilt of Adam’s transgression. I have proved that by Romans 5:18. Christ took Adam’s sin away.
Daily: He says that Christ is the Savior of the damned in hell by saving all of them from the guilt of Adam’s transgression. He has not proved, neither can he prove, that Christ by his death atoned for the entire human race by satisfying for Adam’s transgression. There is not a text in the Bible from the beginning of Genesis to the end of Revelation that says or intimates that Christ by his death on the cross atoned for Adam’s transgression for all the human race. If Christ could pay the debt on the cross for the Adamic transgression, I ask why could he not pay the debt of actual sins for sinners on the cross? You say he did pay the debt of the Adamic transgression on the cross. Do you have any proof that he atoned for the entire race? In Romans 5, the reference to which you called attention does not prove that, but to the contrary, for it has reference to those “who receive abundance of grace and the gift of righteousness,” and not the entire Adamic family. He says that is the work of God that the sinner believes on Christ. Well, if that is God’s work, and the sinner believes because God works in him to believe, why then cannot God reach them in unbelief and cause them to believe? You said he had to believe before God could reach him. There you are in the hole. If God works the belief in the sinner causing the sinner to believe, then cannot God reach him in unbelief, and cause him to believe? Yet you take the position that God could not save a sinner until that sinner believed! Draw down the curtains!!
Throgmorton: He thinks I ought to get up and acknowledge that the weak brother in I Corinthians 8:11, was one of God’s saints who had sinned and perished. I guess that would look well to him! But how does it look for you, Brother Daily, to get up here and say that a brother for whom Christ died may perish? How does it look for you to say that a true saint may perish? I will turn you over to the Methodists. I didn’t know you believed in the possibility of final apostasy! This brother in I Corinthians 8:11, you say was one of the elect, a brother in Christ. So, if you are right a child of God may perish—does perish. To escape this, he must show that to perish does not mean to be finally lost.
Daily: What does perish mean? It doesn’t always mean to perish in hell. I proved to you by the context that the brother for whom Christ died was the brother in the church, and he cannot answer it if he lived until dooms-day and tried all the time. The perishing in that case is in a different sense from perishing eternally. We perish in the sense of losing our religious enjoyment in the service of the Lord, by disobeying his commands. There is a perishing by losing your enjoyment. It is not perishing in hell, and he cannot prove that it is. He takes an affirmative, and if he could prove it he would prove apostasy.
But he says we can resist the Spirit by sinning, therefore all can resist in the call. How about that? When God calls us from death to life, can we, being dead, resist the call? We might, after he had called us to life, resist in the sense of disobeying the commands, but could we resist the call from death to life? The idea of a dead person resisting the call! The Apostle says, 2nd chapter of Ephesians (Ephesians 2), “You hath he quickened, who were dead in trespasses and sins.” The idea of the sinner resisting that call, because we may disobey God’s commands is too light to weigh anything. He is making out God trying and failing, and Christ trying and failing, and the Holy Spirit trying and failing. I do not believe in a Triune God that fails.
Daily: II Corinthians 5:15 “For the love of Christ constraineth us; because we thus judge, that if one died for all, then were all dead; and that he died for all, that they which live should not henceforth live unto themselves, but unto him which died for them, and rose again.” This cannot mean that he died for all who are dead in sins, for that would make his dying for them the cause of their being dead in sins.
Were they not dead in trespasses and in sins independent of his death for them? His dying for them didn’t cause them to be dead in trespasses and sins!
It did cause them to be dead in some sense. In what sense? If “one died for all, then were all dead,” means that he died for all that were dead in sins—then his dying for them is the cause.
No, it doesn’t mean that at all. All were dead in sins, and the death of Christ has nothing to do with that. All would have been dead in sins, and would have forever continued in that state if Christ had not died. So his dying for sinners did not cause them to be dead in sins.
The Greek shows that all died for whom Christ died. “If one for all died, then they all died,” is the literal rendering. I want to repeat that. “If one for all died, then they all died.” They died because he died. How? His dying for them was the cause of their dying, but in what sense are they dead, because he died for them? He died as their substitute, as the preposition uper (huper) shows, and they died because of his death.
As he, their substitute died for them, he died just as the substitute going to the war. If one takes the place of one in the army, then his death is the death of the one for whom he goes as a substitute. Christ died as their substitute, and for that reason we are dead because Christ died for us. All for whom Christ died are dead in that sense, therefore all are going to be finally saved.
Daily: All for whom Christ died shall be eternally saved, because the eternal perfection of all for whom Christ died is necessarily connected with his death for them.
Christ by the offering of his body once for all did perfect forever those for whom he died, by accepting their sins or by bearing their sins in his own body on the cross. Not one shall ever be lost whom Christ has forever perfected by this offering made for them. In him they have a perfect sacrifice for their sins, a perfect righteousness for their covering, a perfect advocate with the Father continually—the perfection of all they need to bring them home to glory and present them faultless and spotless before the throne of God. Therefore all for whom Christ died will be eternally saved.
Daily: My 18th argument is that all for whom Christ died are declared to be dead, because he died for them. They are dead in him as their substitute. It is said that they that are dead are freed from sin. Romans 6:7. Those who are freed from sin shall be eternally saved, therefore, all for whom Christ died shall be eternally saved.
II Corinthians 5:14-15 “For the love of Christ constraineth us; because we thus judge, that if one died for all, then were all dead; and that he died for all, that they which live should not henceforth live unto themselves, but unto him which died for them, and rose again.” This text declares that the reason for all being dead is that Christ died for them. Their death in sin cannot be meant, for that is not caused by Christ’s dying for them.
No other death can be meant than their death in him as their substitute, for no other death could be caused by his dying for them. Those for whom he died are dead, all of them, because he died for them. If he had not died for them, they would have died the eternal death. His death being accepted as their death, they are dead, because he died for them. So Paul says, “I am crucified with Christ.” Romans 6:8 “Now if we be dead with Christ, we believe that we shall also live with him.” All for whom Christ died are dead, because he died for them. All who are dead in this sense are freed from sin, shall live with him, and shall be eternally saved. There-fore all for whom Christ died will be eternally saved.
Daily: My next argument is founded on the covenant relation between Christ and the people he came to save, and for whom he died, represented as Shepherd and sheep. They are declared in the scriptures to have been his sheep before receiving eternal life, and before being brought to God by him.
Jesus said, “I give unto them eternal life.” John 10:28 And “Other sheep I have, which are not of this fold, them also I must bring.” This shows they were his sheep before receiving eternal life, or before being brought to the Father by him. This relation, therefore, is not a vital, but a covenant relation.
The sword of divine justice, that would otherwise have found its satisfaction in the everlasting destruction of the sheep, was called forth by Jehovah and required to strike his own Son with the death blow. Zechariah 13:7 “Awake, O sword, against my Shepherd, and against the man that is my fellow, saith the Lord of hosts; smite the Shepherd, and the sheep shall be scattered; and I will turn mine hand upon the little ones.”
Jesus says, “I am the good shepherd; the good shepherd giveth his life for the sheep,” John 10:11, and “I lay down my life for the sheep,” John 10:15.
There will be a final separation as taught in Matthew 25:31-34, “When the Son of man shall come in his glory, and all the holy angels with him, then shall he sit upon the throne of his glory; and before him shall be gathered all nations; and he shall separate them one from another, as a shepherd divideth his sheep from the goats, and he shall set the sheep on his right hand; but the goats on the left. Then shall the King say unto them on his right hand, Come, ye blessed of my Father, inherit the kingdom prepared for you from the foundation of the world.” Those who shall be eternally saved are the sheep; the others are the goats. It is not said Christ gave his life for the goats. He did not lay down his life for the goats. Christ died for the sheep. His sheep shall be eternally saved. Therefore all for whom Christ died shall be eternally saved.