Since Ponter didn’t get the point the first time around, I’ll give it another go:
An offer is by definition (normal standard English usage) this, I am willing and able to give you this, if you are willing to receive it.
When God made his offer to Ahas [Isa 7:10-12] was sincere and remains sincere, despite Ahaz’ unwillingness to act upon it. Again, the sincerity is not indexed or underwritten or grounded in or keyed to the willingness or unwillingness of the offeree. Nor is it invalidated by the unwillingness or inability of the offeree. Again this is basic evangelical Calvinism.
Notice that Ponter’s statement about God’s offer to Ahaz directly contravenes his very own definition of an offer. According to Ponter, a genuine offer is predicated on the ability and willingness of the offeror to give what is tendered as well as the willingness of the offeree to accept when is tendered.
But Ahaz was unwilling to accept God’s offer. Therefore, by Ponter’s tailor-made definition, God’s offer to Ahaz was not a sincere or well-meant offer.
Ponter himself has defined an offer in conditional terms, where it’s contingent on the willingness of the offeror and offeree alike.
But this means, on Ponter’s own grounds, that when God offers the gospel to the reprobate, this is never a well-meant offer since the reprobate are never willing to accept the offer. God’s offer to the reprobate can never sincere inasmuch as they invariably fail to meet a necessary condition of a genuine offer–which Ponter himself defines in bilateral terms.
Ponter’s aim has been to argue that God’s offer to the reprobate is always a sincere or well-meant offer. But on his definition, the offer of the gospel is never a well-meant offer when directed at the reprobate.
So his argument ricochets on himself. Ponter is the reincarnation of Herman Hoeksema.
And if that isn’t bad enough for his position, it also follows, from his very own definition of hypercalvinism, that Ponter is a hypercalvinist:
Denial of a well-meant offer is the hallmark of hypercalvinism, if anything is.
Yet his definition of a genuine offer implicitly denies the well-meant offer in relation to the reprobate. Hence, Ponter is a Hypercalvinist.