But says the objector it ought to be stated conditionally as follows— God first calls upon men to believe, and if they will believe, then Christ will become their Saviour, and then they will receive eternal life in him and not before. But does not the objector see that he has stated no fact for them to believe in order to make Christ their Saviour? I ask what does God call upon them to believe? There must be some truth presented before men can be called upon to believe. God calls upon men to believe, what—That Christ is their Saviour? But you said he was not their Saviour till after they believed. It then follows, according to the objector’s statement, that he is not the Saviour of unbelievers. Now do you not perceive that if you should call upon them to believe that he was their Saviour, you would call upon them to believe a lie—that you would call upon them to believe what did not exist? And what does not exist cannot be true. Grant says the objector that he is the Saviour of the world, still as many as do not believe in him shall never be saved. But how can he be the Saviour of a man, he never saves? Two individuals are drowning in the water; you exert all your power to save them, but fail. Can you call yourself the saviour of those two men from temporal death? Impossible. In order for Christ to be called the Saviour of the world, he must save the world; otherwise there is not a shadow of propriety in giving him that name. And John says “We have seen and do testify that the Father sent the Son to be the Saviour of the world.”—“We know, indeed, that this is the Messiah the Saviour of the world.”