WHI-1125 | What Does it Mean to be Protestant?
Oct.28, 2012 by
in
2012 Show Archive, Recovering the Lost Tools of Discipleship, White Horse Inn
On this edition, the hosts walk through the central issues that they believe Protestants need to recover in our time. These issues include the solas of the Reformation, seeing law and gospel as central motifs in Scripture, being both missional and vocational in our outreach, recovering a Word and Sacrament ministry, passing on the faith to each successive generation through catechesis, and finally, holding fast to the truths of the Christian faith as summarized by our church’s confessions.
RELATED ARTICLES
Conversations for a Modern Reformation
Michael Horton
Michael Horton
The Crisis of Evangelical Christianity
Michael Horton
Michael Horton
The Distinction between Law & Gospel
Michael Horton
Michael Horton
WHI Discussion Group Questions
PDF Document
PDF Document
MUSIC SELECTION
Zac Hicks
PROGRAM AUDIO
RECOMMENDED BOOKS
Putting Amazing Back Into Grace
Michael Horton
Michael Horton
The Gospel-Driven Life
Michael Horton
Michael Horton
The Gospel Commission
Michael Horton
Michael Horton
RECOMMENDED AUDIO
The Courage to be Protestant
WHI-913
WHI-913
Good Advice vs. Good News
WHI-879
WHI-879
October 28th, 2012 at 10:25 am
In listening to the program what it means to be Protestant you say several times that there is nothing I can do to be saved. Then you turn right around and give me this list of things I have to do be saved !
Things like “you have to believe ” or you have to have ” a relationship ” with Christ, or you have to
” come to know The Lord ” or any number of one liners tha one “has to do” to be saved.
So which is it, what God has done or what I must do ?
October 29th, 2012 at 8:34 am
Bruce, the believing and knowing and relating that you must do is impossible apart from the work that God must first do in you. Sit still and consider what lengths God has gone to in order to redeem a cursed and wicked humanity. If in doing so you find yourself knowing and believing God, will you say that you have performed a work of salvation? No, salvation is of the Lord.
October 29th, 2012 at 10:56 am
Bruce, Christ has done it all. Just like Adam ruined it for mankind, Christ fixed it for mankind. Read Romans 5 (where through one man, Adam, sin and death entered the world, and through another, Christ, grace and eternal life entered the world) and also in the letter to the Corinthians Paul mentions the Ministry of Reconciliation that christians have to preach. Jesus Christ is the second Adam, and just like the first Adam ruined it for mankind with his disobedience, the second Adam (Christ) with his obedience atoned for the sins of the whole world.
That being said, the bible does not teach universal salvation where everybody will go to heaven because of Christ’s work on the cross. You have to know God. Salvation comes through the preaching of the gospel (Christ’s work of Salvation), and we must know God by faith in his Son Jesus Christ.
So though Christ did it all, at the same time salvation is by grace through faith and not every body is saved, this is the biblical teaching.
OK, for those that are wondering whether I believe in unlimited atonement (lutheran) or limited atonement (reformed), let me be clear that Christ died for the sins of all mankind and wishes the salvation of all men, but only the elect by grace are saved. This both the lutheran and reformed confessions teach, there’s no difference between the Heidelberg Catechism and the Book of Concord on this, and it’s also consistent with the Canons of Dort and Westminster Confession.
I do admit that John Calvin goes further in the Institute and actually taught that God predestines some men to condemnation and actually wills their damnation, this teaching though has been rejected by Lutherans as well as both the Westminster Confession and the Canons of Dort that teach that God elects some for salvation, but does not will the damnation of anybody (even though he passes by some men is clear in that the gospel is not preached everywhere and is not believed by everybody that is preached to) and it is entirely due to man’s wickedness that man is condemend and not due to God’s will.
I do believe this was a great program, I will probably add a comment to what was said on the third use of the law later.
October 29th, 2012 at 2:11 pm
Bruce, I realize I did not answer your question properly in my first attempt. I failed to tie the two terms that you call, “what God has done” and “what I must do”. It is true that you can do nothing to be saved and it is also true that you must believe, you must know Christ to be saved. Now I will answer this head on as I should have done. Because your question was about salvation, and my answer did not tackle your question head on. So here it goes in a straightforward manner.
1) Your best works, your best efforts, no matter how hard and for how long you try will always fall short of what God expects in his Law as expounded by Christ on the Sermon on the Mount. Now while you are despairing, realize this, Christ has already accomplished what you are failing to do no matter how hard you try. No matter how hard you try, you fail to obey the law of God as outlined by Christ on the Sermon on the Mount, but Christ has already done it! Christ has already obeyed God’s Law perfectly, Christ knew no sin and obeyed perfectly. And here’s the good newe God accepts Christ’s perfect obedience. Christ has also paid the penalty for sin, which is death, by dying on the cross for sinners. He who knew no sin, paid the penalty for sin that God demands from sinners. I have just finished answering the first part of your question, what it means that you can do nothing for your salvation and Christ has done it all.
2) Now going to the second part of your question you must believe, you need to accept, realize that you can not do anything for your salvation and Christ has done it all. Your sin you can’t overcome with your best efforts, but Christ has overcome sin on your behalf, and God accepts Christ’s obedience as if it were yours. Christ died for sinners like you and I. Believe this and you shall be saved. When you believe the gospel the good news that Christ dief for your sins, you are saved. This is God’s promise. So this answers your second question what man has to do.
3) I hope that in points number 1 and number 2 I have clarified what you thought was a contradiction that you must believe, you must know god, and yet you can’t do anything for your salvation. It’s already accomplished at the cross of calvary by Jesus, you need to only accept this by faith for salvation. You rely on God’s work on the cross and Christ’s perfect obedience to the Father, instead of your own works that you realize can’t satisfy almighty God (no matter how much effort you put into they are still polluted by sin).
Now once you have faith you will realize that this faith was a gift of God, God reveals to you the good news that Christ has satisfied all the demands of the law on your behalf, something you could never do. God uses his word as the means of grace, so it his by reading the bible, the reformed confessions (specially the Augsburg confession and the defense of the Augusburg confession), or the writings of Martin Luther (like his Commentary on Romans and Galatians or The Freedom of the Christian to name a few). I also found the salvation testimonies of John Bunyan and John Wesley as perfect examples of how God saves sinners and instills faith in their hearts instantaneously through his word.
October 29th, 2012 at 4:56 pm
Those reformed denominations that still even know and care about sola fide — the article upon which the church stands or falls — are precious few. They include the URC, OPC, PCA, LCMS, a few ‘Founders’ in the SBC and a smattering of IFB churches. Almost every other denomination including the vast majority of the SBC is pelagian and, as the WHI said, “worse off than the RCC was in the 16th Century.”
What tiny armies these few remaining denominations must be sending into the world to proclaim sola fide (vs. the sinner’s prayer). Perhaps defining what it means to be a Protestant doing the Great Commission anymore isn’t so easy. Perhaps, too, in a sex-soaked culture, sola fide is driving skyrocketing antinomianism in almost every denomination. And, if four of the finest Reformed scholars find themselves inadvertently supporting synergism in a half-hour show, perhaps the Reformation is all but over.
October 29th, 2012 at 6:00 pm
I find evangelism easy in light of the fact that God through The Holy Spirit prepared hearts to hear and respond to the gospel is this correct?
October 29th, 2012 at 7:52 pm
Bruce, you are correct, but I would add that the gospel itself is a primary instrument. So it is not so much that the Holy Spirit is working “over there” beforehand in isolation to prepare hearts, but rather that the Holy Spirit works through the Word to convict and bring new life (Rom 10:8).
October 30th, 2012 at 10:22 am
Bruce, in one old episode of WHI Rod answered your first question. The Reformers said that faith is something we actively do, that though it is a gift of the Holy Spirit it is not Christ who believes but we who believe, and yet it has no “merit” in it. God is offering us alms in the Gospel and faith is the empty hand which receives it, not a work which merits it. Faith is not the ground of salvation but the instrument by which we receive Christ.
October 31st, 2012 at 2:15 am
Fred
Where exactly in scripture do we find sola fide. I mean where do we find ‘pisteos monon’, the two words together. I have looked and looked and they are NOT THERE. Please explain.
October 31st, 2012 at 4:25 am
Bill in point no 1 you tell me I can do nothing , then in point no 2 you tell me I have to believe! So again my question, am I regenerated by my believing or am I regenerated so that I can believe? Because if it is the first then it’s me doing something, and if its the second then it’s God , through the Holy Spirit doing something in me
November 1st, 2012 at 1:17 am
Hi Bruce, God is always the initiator. To answer your question, I have to say yes to both!
You are regenerated so that you can believe, without God working in you, you can’t believve. God gives faith to the elect. FAith is a gift of god, by grace we are saved through faith.
At the same time when you believe the gospel you receive the holy ghost, and good works, the fruit of the spirit follows.
To summarize God produces faith through his word, but also at the time you believe you receive the holy ghost which produces good works. Good works always follow faith, faith in the gospel is the tree, good works are the fruit of a good tree (faith).
November 1st, 2012 at 2:26 am
Bill
I would have thought that if regeneration comes before faith ten at that point there are people in heaven who do not believe in Jesus Christ. Seems a bit odd.
November 1st, 2012 at 4:52 am
Steve if we are dead in sin opulent we have to have life, I e be born again to be able to believe?
How well did the thief on the cross know that Jesus was Lord ? Doesn’t regeneration enable us to know Christ? It seems that is what EZ 36 is telling us and the whole first part of the gospel of John!
November 1st, 2012 at 5:24 am
Bill
Jn 6:63 says the Spirit gives life ! Life has to be there for one to believe and if the Spirit was sent to regenerate ones soul then belief follows life . Your summarization says ” when you believe you receive the Holy Spirit, from what I can tell is you are given life by the Spirit so that you WILL believe.
That way there is no hint of man having to do something to gain salvation .
If new spiritual life comes first , which I believe the Bible teaches , then every aspect of that new spiritual life follows ie belief faith wanting to seek God , to know and obey Him . All of this is a result of our new birth not a cause of it .
Look at it like you would your physical birth, life begins at conception . Which is compared with the Holy Spirit breathing life into your soul. We don’t know when it happens but we know that it happened.
Because to say I have to believe to gain my faith or that I have to have faith to believe would mean I would have to be alive to do or have either.
Therefore I find that mans heart is prepared to receive either or both , by the Holy Spirit , so that when he hears the gospel , he can actually HEAR the gospel, unlike the Pharisees that are spoken of in Jn 6.
So the start of salvation appears to be when the Holy Spirit regenerates or breaths life into our dead souls. That way it is truely all of God , just like our physical life .
November 1st, 2012 at 9:14 pm
Steve, in principle I agree. There’s one exception, baptized babies of believers Augustine, Calvin, and Luther all maintained that baptized babies of believers are saved if they die while still babies.
Bruce, as long as long as you recognize that regeneration and faith both come with the preaching of the gospel, I have no problem with what you say. If you somehow believe that God regenerates sinners beforehand, and then when they hear the gospel afterwards they believe, I would have a problem with that. Regeneration does not precede the hearing of the gospel, it is the gospel that is the means of grace by which God saves sinners.
November 1st, 2012 at 10:27 pm
And let me add that God regenerates sinners by bestowing faith on them, by grace through faith you have been saved. So there is really no regeneration outside the christian faith, you can not be regenerated without having faith. The only exception as I mentioned to Steve is baptized children of believers that die before they are able to comprehend the gospel, let’s say if they die as babies.
Both Luther (as well as the lutheran confessions) and Calvin place justification (faith) before regeneration. Later reformed theologians reversed the order and place regeneration before justification. This in my opinion is a serious theological mistake in that you cannot be regenerated if you lack faith. The Westminster Confession errs gravely when it places regeneration before faith. It is actually faith in Christ that regenerates us. As a matter of fact God regenerates us by bestowing faith, it is when we apprehend the remission of sins in Christ, that we are regenerated. Faith is not a decision we make, is a gift of God, by grace. So we really do nothing, we are given a gift. The trust in Christ for the forgiveness of sins (faith) is by grace. God does not regenerate a sinner so that a sinner may believe later, God actually regenerates a sinner by giving him faith, faith (when the sinner apprehends the remission of sins in Christ Jesus) is the instrument God uses to regenerate a sinner. A lot of reformed theologians will disagree with me, but these theologians are also disagreeing with Luther, the lutheran confessions, and John Calvin.
Gordon H Clark in a letter to Present Truth Magazine criticizes an article and tries to claim that regeneration actually precedes faith. See his letter and the solid refutation of his arguments by the magazine’s editorial response http://www.presenttruthmag.com/archive/XXVII/27-3.htm which correctly claims that Luther and Calvin both placed regeneration subsequent to faith.
November 1st, 2012 at 10:37 pm
Bruce
Paul seems to think that faith (which is what we are talking about essentially) comes by hearing the word of God and hearing comes from someone going and telling them (Romans 10) So the Biblical process is clear. You hear the Word of God then you believe. You appear to have it around the wrong way. My feeling is that for Calvinists to get their doctrine to ‘swim’ they have to start altering the clear Biblical imperatives. This occurs all the time. From John 3:16 to Ephesians 1, Romans 9 etc. Once you begin on this path you wind up in all sorts of trouble and simply eisegete scripture to ‘fit’ your presuppositions.
November 2nd, 2012 at 10:23 am
Steve, not all calvinists put regeneration before faith. And I think very few calvinists equal regeneration with preparation of the heart as Bruce does. But maybe I should wait for some calvinists to jump in on this one, John Calvin himself places regeneration after faith. I admit though that many reformed theologians make the mistake of placing regeneration before faith.
As Steve correctly pointed out faith comes from hearing. God uses the gospel, his word preached alone to convert a sinner. There is no prior work taking place, no preparation of the heart. Christ teaches that the harvest is plentiful but the workers are few. All this means is that all that’s required is for the gospel to be preached, the people are ready to hear. God doesn’t go out there and mysteriously prepares somebody’s heart so that when the gospel is preached they will believe. This is unbiblical teaching and can be clearly proven from scripture. Luke 10 verses 13 to 16 makes it clear that all the people of Tyre and Sidon needed was to hear Christ preached, and they would have believed. No preparation of the hearts by God is required before the preaching of the gospel, the gospel preached suffices and Tire and Sidon would have repented. Demanding a work of regeneration prior to the preaching of God’s word is denying the sufficiency of the preached word to convert the sinner, it basically denies the sufficiency of God’s means of grace (God’s preached word).
Luke 10 (verses 13 to 16) irrefutably proves that there are people ready to receive the gospel and repent, and the sole reason they are not saved is because they don’t get to hear the gospel preached, but not because of a lack of preparation of their heart by God. Their hearts are ready for the gospel, God doesn’t need to prepare them.
Luke 10
13 Woe to you, Chorazin! Woe to you, Bethsaida! For if the mighty works done in you had been done in Tyre and Sidon, they would have repented long ago, sitting in sackcloth and ashes. 14 But it will be more bearable in the judgment for Tyre and Sidon than for you. 15 And you, Capernaum, will you be exalted to heaven? You shall be brought down to Hades.
16 The one who hears you hears me, and the one who rejects you rejects me, and the one who rejects me rejects him who sent me.
And it is in this context solely that the book of concord calls unbiblical teaching the claim that there is an inward call separate from the call of the gospel, God calls sinners to repentance through the gospel.
November 2nd, 2012 at 10:33 am
Now God does give the growth (converts sinners) through the preaching of the word, some plant and some water, but God gives the growth.
1 Corinthians 3:6-16. “I have planted, Apollo watered: but God gave the increase”
November 2nd, 2012 at 2:44 pm
Bill
Thanks for the reply. It seems to me that plenty of people hear the Word of God and then go away and consider it before making a decision. Paul had this experience with the Greeks (Acts 17). The case could me made that Nicodemus went through this process (John3). In the OT (Joshua 24)the people are asked to consider who it was that they were going to serve after hearing the facts. From this I conclude that the work of the Spirit is mysterious and it is difficult for us to make conclusive statements about how God is moving and in whom. So the question of God ‘preparing’ someone is a probability, surely. Not that I would necessarily word it this way. In fact Jesus encouraged people to count the cost (Luke 14)before following him.
The second point I would canvas is the notion that ‘not all Calvinists put regeneration before faith’. Is Calvinism that disparate? Do we have factions within factions? My reasearch tells me that if you follow Calvinism (5 point) to it’s conclusions you MUST end up with regeneration before faith because we can do nothing (according to Calvinists) and God does it all (monergism). Again, I would make the claim that once you start out on this road, to remain consistent, you must end up with certain conclusions including God is evil etc.
November 2nd, 2012 at 4:00 pm
Steve,
1) For me conversion is instantaneous, we pass from death onto life the moment God reveals himself and we apprehend him as our Savious, and see him as a forgiving God and no longer as a judge, we are assured by the holy ghost that our sins are forgiven. In that instant we are regenerated by grace through faith, it is this faith that regenerates us. Regeneration necessarily follows faith in Christ as our Saviour and it’s instantaneous, the instant Christ reveals himself and bestows saving faith we are regenerated. Even Cornelius who was a man of God, and God was working on him prior to meeting Peter, he was not regenerated until after he heard the gospel preached by Peter. Any preparatory work of the Spirit prior to Peter’s preaching was not sufficient for the new birth, only after Peter preached Christ and the forgiveness of sins was Cornelius and his household born again (regenerated).
2) With regard to your comment on Calvinism, I just want to say that Lutherans also affirm that prior to conversion sinners can do nothing and God does it all in salvation. Both lutherans and calvinists are equally monergistic. The question here is how does God quicken / regenerate a sinner unto life? God grants him faith, reveals himself as Saviour, enlightens the sinner’s mind so he now has knowledge that the penalty for sin has been cancelled and is all paid for. All this happens in one instant and it is accomplished in a monergistic way. It is the work of God and he accomplishes with no human cooperation.
November 2nd, 2012 at 9:42 pm
I just cannot see someone having faith before ther is a new heart to act upon it. How can that be? The dead cannot have faith. But the regenerate can because a new birth has taken place, a quickening has happened. Lazerus had to have life to hear Christ calling him from the grave. My back ground is more Agustiniane than Calvinistic, and that may be where the difference lies. More along the lines of ” reformed baptist ” maybe.
That is why I disagree strongly with Horton and others on infant baptisism. There is several clear examples of adults being baptized, including Christ Himself, but no where is there any command or clear scriptural rendering of baptizing babies.
Likewise there is clear evedience that the Holy Spirit quickens the dead so that the call can be heard, and He is spoken of like the wind, being felt but not knowing where He starts or stops.
So I must hold to the understanding that the breath of life come so that the call is heard and a desire to seek and respond is ingrained in the new heart that is granted ( or implanted) . It may all happen at once but in the sequence of rebirth and then life, otherwise dead men would be choosing to live.
And it’s all by Gods grace, the Spirits reviving, the ears hearing, the faith growing, and the heart being able to love God again.
Because once God starts a good work in us He will be faithful to complete it. Rejecting God is proof that the heart has not been regenerated.
So what is mans responcibility in all this? God holds him responsible for his sin. And what is Gods responsibility ? To save a group of people and give them to His Son as a “reward” or “bride” so to speak for accomplishing and obeying the Father including death on the cross.
Thanks for all the responses
Bk
November 3rd, 2012 at 4:35 am
Bruce
You are trying to figure something out that belongs to God. You mention so many things and none of them have any scripture references. It’s far too anecdotal. The major problem is that the scriptural pattern is first you hear the gospel and then you believe (faith). That’s what Paul says in Romans 10 (…faith cometh by hearing…the word of God…)So you hear and then you have faith to believe it. There is no scriptural pattern that states that someone has faith before they hear.
November 3rd, 2012 at 8:02 am
Steve I agree with you completely about faith comes by hearing, but the ability to hear the gospel message come because the Holy Spirit brought us to life first. Why else would Jesus tell the Jews in the Gospel of John “you do not hear me because My Father has not given you the ability to hear. Your are of your father the Devil.
Look at it this way, in our physical conception and birth. Life begins when egg and sperm meet. It is only then that God breaths life into that process. Well exactly at what moment does that life start? Only God knows, yes we know the process but only God knows the precise timing. Infact only God knows which sperm cell out of the millions available will enter and fertilize the egg.
Now why do you think the Bible likens our spiritual rebirth to our physical birth? So we can draw the comparison to our physical birth and gain some understanding.
God sends the Holy Spirit to breath life into our souls , but at what point? Well when the word is preached yes, but which time? How many times do we love our wives before there is a pregnancy?
This is the true mistery ! It involves God in His triune self, working within the hearts and souls of man
And is what makes salvation so great.
God sending the Holy Spirit to bring us back to life spiritually through the word and the gift of faith only because of His Grace. Every thing else follows,belief , spiritual growth , having a desire to seek God , all of the one liners we use comes after the Holy Spirit quickens us. Just like I our physical lives from conception through birth and until death, it is Gods enabling our every breath and heart beat.
Thanks again bk
November 3rd, 2012 at 8:09 am
Bruce,
When you are profoundly asleep and you hear a loud alarm clock or the fire alarm goes off, you wake up. You hear something that wakes you up. As Steve points out faith comes from hearing, but you have to hear first. So the loud ring of the alarm is the call of the gospel that quickens you, makes you alive, wakes you up. But to say that God needs to somehow work in your heart and wake you up before you can hear the alarm ring and answer the call and wake up ignores the sufficiency of the gospel to convert sinners. God through the call of the gospel wakes us up.
The Westminster confession’s unfortunate wording in chapter X is partly to blame for the mistake theologians have made of putting regeneration before faith,
“man, who is altogether passive therein, until, being quickened and renewed by the Holy Spirit, he is thereby enabled to answer this call, and to embrace the grace offered and conveyed in it.”
Some calvinists have interpreted the Westminster confession I just quoted as saying that in order to answer the call we need to be renewed first, instead of acknowledging that the call is what quickens and renews us! Going back to tha alarm clock analogy Calvinists are saying that in order to wake up in the morning somebody (God) needs to do some pre-work that wakes us up before the alarm rings! This is the mistake that those that put regeneration before faith make.
Bruce, God brings sinners to life by hearing his word. So you must hear before you can be born again. You are going to tell me that sinners are dead and can’t hear, I’m going to answer the gospel wakes them up, and is powerful enough to do it! When you say no, God needs to revive a dead person firs, I answer yes God needs to revive a dead person, but God revives the dead person through the gospel. God word gives life! Yes we are dead but the word of God is life, and when we hear the call of the gospel we are made alive! We are hearing God, when we hear his word, God is regenerating us through his word when we hear it!
November 3rd, 2012 at 9:27 am
Steve, when I answered you I said that both lutherans and calvinists are monergists. I do agree with you though, that calvinists are at risk of putting regeneration before faith. The main reason is some of them, don’t value the outward call of the gospel as much as lutherans do. Lutherans have inoculated themselves agaisnt this problem, the solid declaration of the formula of concord states the following XI,34:
“However, that many are called and few chosen is not owing to the fact that the call of God, which is made through the Word, had the meaning as though God said: Outwardly, through the Word, I indeed call to My kingdom all of you to whom I give My Word; however, in My heart I do not mean this with respect to all, but only with respect to a few; for it is My will that the greatest part of those whom I call through the Word shall not be enlightened nor converted, but be and remain damned, although through the Word, in the call, I declare Myself to them otherwise.”
And this is so important, because it makes it clear that the call of the gospel has the same intention for everybody. And this can be proven easy from the alarm clock analogy I used in my previous post. It is clear that a manufacturer of an alarm intends its ring to wake up everybody, the alarm is designed to work for everybody. Now when I was a kid and it rang in my house, out of the 5 of us a couple would hear it and wake up and the rest would remain asleep and wouldn’t hear it. It’s not that the alarm ring had the intention of waking up only two people, the manufacturer designed it to wake us all up! Same with the gospel the outward call, God wills the salvation of everybody equally when the gospel is preached. Calvinists have developed this inward (effectual) call / outward call distinction that has led some calvinists to believe the outward call of the gospel is not sufficient to convert sinners and God needs an inward call in addition to the outward call. The calvinist views on limited atonement and irresistible grace, leads them to not being being the satisfied that the outward preaching of God’s word is the sole means of grace. Limited atonement and irresistible grace lead calvinists to differentiate betrween an inward call that is more important than the outward call. Lutherans don’t have this issue at all because God intends to save all through the preaching of the gospel (like the alarm clock ring intends to wake up all) and that not all are saved resides with man who resists his grace (the fact that some days we don’t wake up when the alarm rings is our fault and not the alarm’s ring fault). So for some calvinists something else needs to wake them up in the morning so that they can hear the alarm ring that wakes them up completely, it’s like they need two calls, a pre-wake-up-call for the elect only (the inward call of regeneration only that enables them to believe later on) and a final wake-up call that God addressed to the wole world (the outward call of the proclaimed gospel which goes to all but only the elect who earlier received the pre-wake-up call and are regenerated are able to answer). And this is why some lutherans like Timothy McCain of LCMS think there’s too much false teaching in calvinism, and limited atonement and irresistible grace are unbliblical doctrines. Other lutherans think there’s way more in common, and they are the Reformation can not be divided.
November 3rd, 2012 at 2:43 pm
Bruce
The nature of faith is a question that is simply too large to deal with here. I am synergistic at best. I seriously do not think anybody really understands this mystery but for the purposes of enquiry and discussion I persist. One of my suspicions is that faith is contingent. I am reminded of Hebrews 4 where the unbelief and disobedience rendered the operation of faith necessary for the word to take root, nullified. This for me is the contingent nature of faith. In other words, faith comes when individuals step out and believe. In James 2 what activated Abrahams ‘friendship’ with God? It was his works when he offered up Issac on the alter. His works and faith were ‘sunergei’ James tells us. This I believe is the mystery. Our faith and works are synergistic. I am convinced that all humans are created with the ability to believe the gospel. Latent within all of us is faith waiting to be activated by the Gospel. What happens with some is that other things get in the way (as Jesus says). Same in Hebrews 4 etc. So for me there is no necessity for monergism in the Calvinist way. In Romans 1:18-22 Paul seems to say that we all have this inner ability to respond to God from ourselves based on what we see in creation. So I am persuaded that God has made it abundantly possible for all people to repsond. Having responded in the smallest possible way, God moves. Draw near to God and he will draw near to you (James 4:8) etc etc
November 3rd, 2012 at 4:35 pm
Steve, the problem with calvinism is not that they are monergist (lutherans are as monergist if not more as I explained when I anwered you yesterday). The issue resides in that because for a calvinist grace is irresistible and God only intends to save some (limited atonement), they deny the sufficiency of God’s word alone to convert all sinners. Read one of its best theologians, Martyn Lloyd Jones deny that the preached word, the outward call of the gospel that goes to the whole world, is sufficient for salvation. http://www.monergism.com/effectualregeneration.html What saves is an inward call according to Lloyd Jones that only goes to the elect. To me he is flat out denyng God’s means of grace and the its power to convert every single sinner on the face of the planet. It’s almost as if Christ is not enough. Lutherans rightfully have a problem with this, because you now in addition to God’s preached word (which is Christ revealing himself to the whole world and not to the elect only), you need something else, an inward call or effectual call that only the elect receive and that enables the elect to accept the outward call of the gospel that goes to the whole world. Because the non-elect do not receive this inward call, they can never be converted. Martin Lloyd Jones uses a lot of scripture and I highly recommend you read him to understand where calvinism is coming from http://www.monergism.com/effectualregeneration.html Still as I have stated his interpretation of scripture denies its power for the salvation of all mankind. When in fact the problem is with man that rejcts God’s word, and the gospel call has no defect, neither does it need a second inward or effectual call in order to be effective.
Both Calvinism and Arminianism fail to keep separate election and the gospel. Election is unconditional and for a few men, but the call of the gospel is universal to all men. This distinction is critical, when you mix election with the gospel you are headed into some serious trouble. Arminians put the gospel above election (which leads to a denial of unconditional election) and calvinists put election (predestination) above the gospel (which leads to the errors of unlimited atonement and irresistible grace). Election and the gospel ought to be kept separate from one another, and not one in submission to the other as calvinists and arminians do. I actually have no problem with an inward call or effectual calling used in the context of election, but it is a most serious error to use it in the context of the gospel as some calvinists do. The lutheran confessions address have avoided this error, but way before, Augustine’s disciple Prosper of Aquitaine warned the church about mixing election with the gospel. His brilliant treatise “The call of all Nations” that many of the Reformers read, is a masterpiece and it’s divided into a first section of election (defending the Augustinian view of unconditional election and special grace to the elect only) and a second section of the universality of the gospel call (with a brilliant exposition of Augustinian unlimited atonement). And this chruch father warns everybody in his book, please don’t try to mix or reconcile section 1 (election, special grace to the elect only) of the book with section 2 (the gospel call to all nations). Here’s the link to his book, you might find a better link if you google it, http://www.archive.org/stream/stprosperofaquit027573mbp/stprosperofaquit027573mbp_djvu.txt
November 3rd, 2012 at 9:46 pm
Steve I disagree with your point about Romans. Yes we all have a knowlage of God, or at least that there is a creator and sinners will all be held responsible for denying that fact. But to say we all have the ability to choose Him goes contrary to Romans 3. And later in Romans 9,10,and 11 it is clearly stated that God does the choosing and for what purposes He creates certain men for. This is the freedom of the potter has over the clay. That is why Paul states so strongly ” what business does the clay have objecting to the potter”. God , the potter, has every right to make us, man, the clay, into any any vessel , He chooses. And who are we to object? Who are we to say” that not fair”! Who are we to question Gods choices on who is saved and who is not? Job questioned God and His motives and if you read threw the last couple chapters it’s those same questions that were put forth to Job. And poor Job just wanted to call under the table.
No the logical progression of salvation has to be regeneration hearing the call faith, and belief, then growth and sanctification. The mystery is still when and how this all happens, instantly? Or step by step? I just wonder if we will even bother to ask or will we be taken aback with His glory and grace that it won’t matter.
May I recommend a couple books? Robert KM Wright – No Place for Sovereignty. Arthur Pink – The Atributes of God , and The Holy Spirit. And Dr White- The Potters Freedom
There many more but these impacted me greatly
Enjoy B K
November 4th, 2012 at 9:39 am
Bruce, you say the logical progression has to be regeneration, hearing the call, faith (which I gather you mean our response to the outward call). But look you are regenerated when you receive the holy ghost, the holy ghost is received after you hear the word preached. There are many examples of this in the book of acts, let’s look at Acts 10, the conversion of Cornelius household.
Acts 10
42 And he commanded us to preach to the people and to testify that he is the one appointed by God to be judge of the living and the dead. 43 To him all the prophets bear witness that everyone who believes in him receives forgiveness of sins through his name. 44 While Peter was still saying these things, the Holy Spirit fell on all who heard the word.
You see the holy ghost (regeneration) was given through the word and not prior to it.
November 5th, 2012 at 1:42 am
Bruce
I think you have completely misunderstood Romans. In particular, Romans 9. This is not a statement on particular redemption or anything else. Again, there is not enough room here to address all the issues but it is a discussion Paul addresses to the Jews and about the Jews. The context is Jewish. If we take the issue of the potter and the clay for instance, this points to Gods work with the Jews. God had been, was at the time and is now, working with His people as the potter works with the clay. As we know, He does not always get the outcome He wants with them but continues to work to mold them. This discussion is a polemic. The Jews believed they were right with God simply because they were ethnic Jews. Paul is working to remove this false foundation by stating that God chooses on the basis of faith. There is much more to say.
With regards to Romans 3. I am not sure what your point is in terms of the flow of this discussion.
But remember the Jewish context at all points.
I have read Pink and I think he falls way short in terms of the depth of his understanding. I just don’t think he is a scholar at all.
November 5th, 2012 at 5:27 am
Bill my question still remains , does the Holy Spirit prepare us, and our hearts to hear and recieve or take in the Gospel ? Or do we as humans have to do something IE hear, accept, believe, in the Gospel message in order to be saved?
I believe it to be the former because new life must be present in order for hearing, acting upon, receiving, accepting in faith, or what ever othe phrase you want to use, applies.
We we’re give new spiritual life SO THAT WE COULD do these things, just like Lazerus had to be given his physical life back so he could hear Christ call him out of the grave.
November 5th, 2012 at 5:44 am
Steve I agree that Romans is directed to the Jews but the application in Ch 3 applies to all of us. We all hate God , we all have gone astray, every one according to his or her own way. This is why Paul point out the application to “both Jew and Greek”
Also for you to say that” God doesn’t always get what He wants with the Jews” is not a true statement.
God being God always get what he wants, God always is in control of the situation. Because if He weren’t He wouldn’t be Sovereign, and therefore could not be God.
Besides that the whole of the Gospel went to the Jew first, and because of their rejection God told Peter to spread the Word through out the world. And although there were certain sign gifts given to the Apostles and early believers, the word and its application is for all of us . After all God created,molded us out of the same dust,clay that the Jews come from. And yes the Jew hold a special place in His heart so to speak but that has been set aside for now
Also if you believe Pink falls short , give John Pipers book on Romans 9 a read. There is depth there that even I struggle with.
November 5th, 2012 at 6:25 am
Bruce, I mentioned at the beginning but somehow it got lost. What I mentioned is that we do nothing when God gives us faith, so we don’t need to be regenerated. Regenerated for what? To do nothing. At the moment God bestows faith on us, we are dead, we can’t do anything. We can not answer any call in an active way, the sinner does nothing when he receives faith in salvation. Faith is given to the elect, it’s a gift, man does nothing. This is the other most serious error of the Westminster Confession chapter X, it fails to define how faith is received properly, which I quoted before and I’m quoting again below:
“man, who is altogether passive therein, until, being quickened and renewed by the Holy Spirit, he is thereby enabled to answer this call, and to embrace the grace offered and conveyed in it.”
You see it is a most grave an error to say we need to be quickened and enabled to answer the call. Man does not answer the call in an active way, God does it all when he saves a sinner by grace through faith, he doesn’t require human cooperation. You see we are totally passive until God gives us faith. The Westminster confession teaches that we are passive until we are quickened (regenerated), not true. We are dead until we receive faith. The WC makes faith a work, something we do, we respond to God’s call. This is not true, fait is faith is given to us, is given to the elect when we are still dead in trespasses and sins, and we are regenerated by faith. By grace through faith you have been saved. It can’t be clearer than this.
God came to save sinners, the wicked, he did not come to save regenerated people. The gift of faith is not for the regenerated but for sinners. Sinners are dead in their sins and can do nothing. But the fact of the matter is a sinner does nothing in his conversion when God bestows faith on him. The WC and the doctrine of regeneration before faith, now that I’m thinking, is not even monergistic. It leaves salvation with man, because it views this answering the call as something active that man does, an he needs to be regenerated first in order to do it. Lutherans would have a serious problem with this because man is totally passive when Christ reveals himself in the gospel to him, and gives him by faith,
Both you and the WC say man is dead until he’s regenerated. What I say is man is dead until he receives faith. Faith quickens the dead, and it’s a gift. Man is totally passive, God instills faith in him through the word. What you say is that man needs to be regenerated first so he can believe the gospel, I say believing the gospel is by grace and requires nothing from man. Faith regenerates. We both agree man can do nothing until he’s regenerated, what I’m saying is that the elect are regenerated by faith, and not prior to it. So we have a different understanding of faith, I say it’s a gift that doesn’t require human action and it’s given to dead people unable to answer the gospel call, you say man has to do something to have faith and needs to be regenerated faith.
You lutherans are more monergistic than some calvinists from this perspective. In that god does it all including the bestowing of faith in salvation, calvinists believe man has to do soomething and needs to be regenerated in order to do it.
November 5th, 2012 at 6:38 am
And further to what I just finished writing above I want to be fair to calvinists, pietist lutherans starting in the 17th century also put regeneration before faith which essentially makes faith a human work. Both Luther and Calvin put regeneration after faith, they both considered man dead before God bestowed faith on him, converted him by grace through faith. It was the 17th century theologians that departed from monergism, and taught that man was active in his conversion, and needed to be regenerated prior to being able to believe. Essentially this resembles roman cathlicism, in that God infuses grace in man(regeneration) in order that man may be able to respond to the call of the gospel this is a serious departure from traditional monergism and makes regenerated man a partner in the work of salvation, when the biblical teaching is the work of salvation is performed by God alone without human cooperation.
November 5th, 2012 at 8:05 am
I fail to see where Calvin says we have to produce faith after regeneration to be saved. From what I have read of both Calvin and Luther is that faith, believing, etc come as A RESULT of our regeneration.
It is a part of that new nature we were endowed with when God gave us the new heart. ( create in us a new heart oh Lord)
Yes ? No?
November 5th, 2012 at 8:36 am
You know it just occurred to me that Rome’s view of infused grace, the prevenient grace of arminianism, and the this “regeneration before faith” doctrine of some calvinists are all the same. So much for calvinists criticizing arminians for having previenient grace before faith, when calvinists say regeneration is required before faith. Roman catholics, arminians, and “regeneration-before-faith” calvinists all make the mistake of making faith a work of man. Even though calvinists claim regeneration is only for the elect, and their error may appear to be a lesser one than arminians and roman catholics, they still make man infused with grace the author of his own salvation in cooperation with God
This would have been unthinkable to Augustine. Faith was bestowed on man, it was of pure grace, requiring nothing from man. God saves by grace through faith wicked men, not regenerated men. Faith is not for the regenerated but for the wicked sinner. Man is totally dead until he receives faith from God, he’s not regenerated before having faith.
This is why Luther and Calvin never made this mistake, they were solidly grounded in Augustine. The last two writings of Augustine to the pelagians are a must read. They are very short readings, in probably an hour can be finished. Because we have forgotten that faith is a gift of God that requires no human cooperation, otherwise the roman doctrine of unfused grace
The gifts of initial faith and final perseverance are conferred on the elect only without any contribution from man, man is dead in trespasses and sins and can’t contribute anything. Only after he is saved by grace through faith a man can be said to have been regenerated, and his christian life has started. The he can respond to God, but prior to having faith he can not, he’s a sinner. There are no regenerated man prior to God giving them faith. Below is the link to Augustine’s last two antipelagian writings, these two letters that Augustine wrote in his 70′s before he died are in my opinion the two best works. And as I said it doesn’t take long to read them.
http://www.newadvent.org/fathers/15121.htm On the Predestination of the Saints
http://www.newadvent.org/fathers/15122.htm On the gift of perseverance
November 5th, 2012 at 9:04 am
Bruce, to answer your question.
The teaching of the original reformers Luther and Calvin is consistent with Augustine and is the biblical teaching. Salvation by grace through faith is for wicked sinners, it is not for regenerated men, it is not for men with infused grace, it is not for men with prevenient grace. Faith is the gift of God to dead sinners, it quickens and regenerates them. Regeneration or being born again or receiving the holy spirit is a work of God accomplished by his grace THROUGH FAITH. Faith is not the result of regeneration as you state, simply because regeneration is accomplished through faith, there is no regeneration without faith. God saves (regenerates) through faith and in no other way. He does not save (regenerate) first and give faith later.
November 5th, 2012 at 10:40 am
Bruce,
I realize we are looking at both faith and regeneration in man. From this perspective as I have outlined regeneration follows faith. A man has faith first and then regeneration follows instantly. Regenerataion results from faith or faith union wiht Christ. This is the order of salvation in Calvin’s institutes.
Now if I define regeneration as God’s action outside the believer (not regeneration inside the believer as in the previous paragraph) this changes the whole picture. If I define regeneration as God’s saving act of conferring faith to the believer. Then regeneration precedes faith. No question about it, since God acts first, He is the giver of faith. This is necessarily so, since the action of God (the giver) precedes anything that happens in the recipient (the elect believer). But when regeneration is viewed as something inside the believer (a change of heart, an infused grace) then the opposite is true, regeneration always follows faith.
So to summarize regeneration in a man’s heart is preceded by faith. But the actual act from God of regenerating man precedes faith, since God is the giver of faith, and has to give it first before man can have it.
November 5th, 2012 at 4:17 pm
I have been following this interesting conversation and though I would add a comment that might add some clarification (hopefully). There seem to be some confusion about where faith comes in. Before or after regeneration. My understanding of reformed theology involves a difference between regeneration and conversion. Regeneration being where God make us alive in Christ and gives us faith. This is totally and fully a work of God. Conversion being when we are aware of our faith and repent and turn to God and put our trust in Christ’s works. This in a exercise or act of the faith that we receive in regeneration but we do not receive faith at this time. We already had it at regeneration. Hope this helps.
November 5th, 2012 at 8:00 pm
Bill I agree with you, and have always looked at regeneration and faith [ and hearing, seeing, etc] as coming from God. Also I see Eric’s point that conversion comes because of and after regeneration and the gift of faith. What I find in the Bible is “Faith comes by hearing” and hearing is a gift of Gods also.
I base this on Jh 6, I believe, where Christ makes a statement to the Jews that they could “hear” Him because His father had not allowed them to hear. These men were still dead in their sin, and in order to ” hear” the would need to be “alive” in Christ would they not?
I also see “believing” as a gift from God and it is something I do, is it not? Where as faith is something I get, just like the Holy Spirit, and because of the gift of faith and the Holy Spirit I am given understanding, discernment,and maybe other “gifts of the Spirit”
So to reiterate what I perceive as the “process” of salvation [ and agree with with your summary] God regenerates, ie gives new life, through the gift of faith and the hearing, of the spoken word.
November 5th, 2012 at 8:33 pm
Bill and other readers, I have another question for you.
We obviously have some mistaken and differing views of the Gospel and Salvation. And because of Christs death are and will be forgiven for our mistakes and misunderstanding. So is the precise and correct understanding necessary for salvation? If so then what about those who have misunderstood?
And if we don’t have to have it exactly right then what? who’s saved and who is Not saved?
And if we are saved in-spite of our mistakes in theology, just how great can these mistakes be before one is not saved? Surely some of us hold to slightly different views of God than others.
What about Catholics and Seventh Day Adventist, and their view, or Jehovahs Witness, or Mormon.
The reason I ask is in looking at the thief on the cross next to Christ, He was saved with a very rudimentary understanding of who Christ was. There is no indication that he had any theological training, so how little or how much “correct” believing, understanding,or faith, did he have?
Just enough evidently.
So what about the people captured in these ” false” religions, as we call them. I know salvation is not universal, but could God save people out of these ” religions” as well as HE did the thief on the cross?
How much faith and believing is enough ? How much
“correct theology” do we have to have to know we are “in Christ”
Thoughts any one?
November 5th, 2012 at 10:52 pm
I have massive problems scripturally with a number of points raised around this blog. Firstly the Protestant concept of ‘dead’ is overcooked. In Ephesians for instance ‘dead’ simply means that we cannot respond to Jesus Christ whilst we live in our trespasses and sins. These trespasses and sins blind us until we hear the Gospel. But to say that we are literally dead is, as I say, overcooking the scripture. Also, the idea of ‘dead’ in Protestant dogma is part of a wider erroneous application of other ‘ideas’ or hypotheses such as the ‘sovereignty’ of God. Sovereignty does not mean that God needs (nor does he) to micromanage every nanometer of human activity and thought in a despotic fashion. Sovereignty in scripture is exercised in the way we see it in other monarchs. That is, God lays out the expectation of conduct that will be pleasing to Him (I use ‘Him’ knowingly)and then allows what I call ‘contextual freedom’ in which the subjects are encouraged to act in order to achieve salvation. I have never understood why Protestants would deny me the wonder of sacrificial giving to the Lord. I mean acts of giving up sinful ways or going without to bless others as deeds that strengthen the relationship and actively bring me closer to God. Isn’t that what a ‘relationship’ is all about. But Protestants scream ‘works righteousness’ and poo poo it all. Such confusion. And scripture backs me up. I will be rewarded for my deeds in heaven. Its very simple really. I do not need Protestant complications. Complications that need the scripture to be ‘fiddled’ with as the father of Protestantism (Luther) did. I never ‘hated’ God before I heard the Gospel.
November 6th, 2012 at 6:10 am
Steve
About your point on “dead in sin “. The reason the word is use is to direct us to an understanding of our complete helplessness. Our spiritual desires for God are the same as a dead person. That is why the clearest example of salvation is when Christ raised Lazerus from the dead. Christ did it all, from the call into the tumb, to commanding life return to Lazerus, and then “calling him out”. Another example is being ” born again” (Jn 3). God controls or micro manages, every thing, because if there was any roge atom that did something out side of Gods knowlage and control, He wouldn’t be God. So egg and sperm from any living thing have to come together for life to begin, and it is God who guides the sperm of his choice to the egg of His choice so that the DNA of His choice chain up together. God and God alone guides all of that.
So think about you being born. What imput did you have in your conception ? What imput did you have in you being you? Or the color of you ? Or what about your date and time of birth? Did you choose that? Or did you choose to be male instead of female? Think of. The number of times your parents made love, the number of sperm cells released each time, and the fact that each egg and sperm cell had different sets of DNA. Do you think for a minuite that this was random selection? Was it left up to ” chance”?
Those are the only two entities you have to choose from you know, God “micromanaging ” to the smallest detail or ” chance” . One has “being ” and substance, the other is just an empty word.
So it’s something with being, or it’s nothing but a word, and a word cannot control anything.
I find it overwhelmingly comforting to know God is in control of every detail, every atom, every dust particle that I see in the sunbeam coming through my bedroom window in the morning. And what is more, He know where each one is going to land, where they will go when the breeze blows them off the dresser , and how I am going to dispose of them. Because if He wasn’t that detailed in his control, He wouldn’t be Omnipotent, Omnipresent, Omniscient, and therefore couldn’t be God.
Yes He is that big of a God ! And it’s the Bible that says so, just look at the chewing out He did to Job! I know I would not want to be in that chair with God questioning me like that.
So with all of that being said, why is God like that ? Well because ” He is God, and there is none higher” Why does God do what He does? For His Glory because there is none higher, and I look forward to the day when I can bow before Him and worship Him face to face. In the meantime I look for ways to represent Him to the people that He puts before me, at work and play, keeping in mind always that these folks see a tiny bit of Him in me. Knowing always that if I screw it up Christ has me covered, and understanding the freedom I have now, in Christ, to make mistakes.
In Christ BK
November 6th, 2012 at 2:44 pm
Bruce
I disagree entirely. I mean I understand your points. I have heard them all before believe me. Your first point for instance is not a Biblical principle it is a theological hypothesis. When you say the idea of ‘dead’ is to direct us to an understanding of our helplessness. This is simply your idea or interpretation of what it might mean given your overall set of predispositions. That’s my point. Again, ‘our spiritual desires for God are the same as a dead person’ is simply you having extracted something from your overall system. Your reference to Lazarus is also an ‘idea’ that you have that this is a type of our salvation when really it is simply Christ exercising faith (and remember he scolds the disciples for their lack of faith in these kinds of matters)over the circumstances. So I worry about people who take from various scriptures ideas or hypotheses that are really nothing more than this and apply them as orthodoxy. When you say ‘think about when you were born..etc’. I think this is just simplistic nonsense. I have no doubt that all things are subsumed into God, that GOD IS (or if you like ‘I AM’) but the manner and the nature of that outworking is far from a despotic unilateral exercise of what you might call ‘sovereignty’. It has to be much more ‘interesting’ than this. So no, I do not think things are ‘chance’ but neither do I think that scripture points to fatalism either. This of course, raises questions about alternative futures that can be ‘of God’ etc. As for omniscient, omnipresent and omnipotent, where is all this in scripture. This is a big area but my feeling is that this is not in scripture. The motif, particularly in the OT is one of fidelity rather than omni anything. Agaian you have strayed into an automatic set of presuppositions that I guess you have picked up along the way without really looking at it. I know it is a favourite Protestant catch cry but that does not make it right. Job is an interesting case and should take us to a point where we take another step in our understanding of the divine nature. Generally though, I would say that the ideas you present are interesting but not compelling and that you have very Protestant cliched understandings of the meta narrative and one that misses some of the basic Jewish imports.
November 6th, 2012 at 2:57 pm
Eric
Your post is standard Calvinism and really is just at best guesswork. The problem with it is that it does not follow the scriptural pattern. As I said I am synergistic. But to repeat myself faith comes from hearing. So clearly, you need to hear the Gospel and then faith is enacted. The problem with Protestant ‘tick box’ approaches is that, among other things, salvation appears to be a process rather than a once off happening. Whilst I think it is an appealing and popular concept, that you make a decision and now you are ‘saved’ (it is seductive)the weight of scripture appears to be against it.So Eric, you sound so confident but your confidence is misplaced in my opinion and again,a systematized anecdotal construct. To be honest I think many people are lead astray on this stuff. The idea that now I am ‘saved’. It is in my opinion just so dangerous. Also, I would point to the western ‘church’ as an example of the abuse of scripture in these areas leading to the accommadation of all sorts of sin and reducing the western church to the mess it is today.
November 6th, 2012 at 10:26 pm
So Steve what’s the point? Because we don’t agree with your view , we are wrong and you aren’t ?
How does this affect ones salvation? We don’t have it because our views are different?
Like I asked before , does the blood of Christ cover us if we are wrong? And how wrong a view of salvation does one have to hold to not be saved?
Any one have a comment?
November 6th, 2012 at 11:32 pm
Eric, thanks for clarifying the definition of regeneration in reformed theology. It was useful to put closure to the issue. As long as regeneration is referred to God’s acting (and not a transformation that happens inside the believer) then it absolutely precedes faith. I was going by Calvin’s Institutes where you have faith (or faith union with Christ) first, which is followed by two benefits “justification” and “regeneration by faith, repentance” (the title in chapter 3 book 3 of the Institutes which I now see is what modern theology calls sanctification but Calvin calls regeneration). But based on the current definition in reformed theology, the one you provided, yes regeneration precedes faith.
Bruce, with regard to salvation or who’s a christian, and to answer your question whether a mormon or Jehova’s witness can be saved. I say anybody that believes the gospel is saved, because it is Christ’s work on the cross that saves, the penalty for sin has been paid, and whosoever puts his faith in Christ is saved. His blood was shed for the remission of sins of all mankind, and whosoever believes in him shall be saved. Nobody better than one of the White Horse Inn’s hosts Rod Rosenbladt. Let’s hear Rod tell us how there will be members of the cults in heaven, people that never set foot on a church, etc. How important is theology? Rod tells us jokingly that there may be even one or two theologians that make it to heaven! Here’s the link to Rod’s amazing proclamation of the Reformation’s sola fide gospel. It takes less than 4 minutes to listen to. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hhCfYCRnv2E
November 7th, 2012 at 3:22 am
Bill the question that remains with me is if faith comes by hearing and hearing is of God then doesn’t hearing come before faith and wouldn’t life have to come for one to hear?
November 7th, 2012 at 8:26 am
Steve is this the God you have come to know?http://www.desiringgod.org/resource-library/sermons/the-sovereignty-of-god-my-counsel-shall-stand-and-i-will-accomplish-all-my-purpose?lang=en
Sent from my iPad
November 7th, 2012 at 9:31 am
Bruce, when we look at what happens inside of man, faith comes first before any change in the believer’s heart. in his will, in his affections, or any type of infused grace, always follows faith.
I will quote John Calvin from the beginning of chapter 3 of the Institutes. By the way what Calvin calls repentance is what modern theologians call sanctification, what happens inside the believer, others call it infused grace. Calvin taught there are two main benefits derived from faith, justification and repentance (which Calvin also calls regeneration by faith, as the title of chapter 3 of his Institutes indicates).
John Calvin (Institutes Book 3 Chapter 3 section 1):
“That repentance not only always follows faith, but is produced by it, ought to be without controversy”
“Those who think that repentance precedes faith instead of flowing from, or being produced by it, as the fruit by the tree, have never understood its nature, and are moved to adopt that view on very insufficient grounds.”
The Augsburg confession and the defense of the Augsburg confession state even in clearer that the renewal of man follows faith, faith justifies, and any inside renewal of man comes after justification or justifying faith. Any renewal in man is the fruit of faith, a good tree (faith) can only produce good fruit, and a bad tree (lack of faith) can only produce bad fruit. The fruit (the renewal of man) can not produce the tree (faith), the tree (faith) can produce fruit (renewal in man).
November 7th, 2012 at 7:54 pm
Steve,
Thanks for the reply. It seems like the real issue here is what is man’s moral ability after the fall. Until that can be resolved I think we will have very different views of salvation. You said: “I am convinced that all humans are created with the ability to believe the gospel. Latent within all of us is faith waiting to be activated by the Gospel.” I just don’t agree that this is the biblical concept of man after the fall of man in Adam. Are all men spiritually dead since the fall or are they just sick? To me the biblical evidence is dead.
Your point is well taken on “a systematized anecdotal construct”, but I don’t think any of us approach the bible without a systemized approach (some just don’t call it systemized). But we do need to continually test our systems and structures of belief against scripture. If they don’t fit with the whole of scripture (not just our proof texts) we need it discard it. One reason I like to study systematic theologies (Reformed vs Lutheran vs Roman Catholic vs Orthodox, etc…) is that many of the doctrinal issues we face today have historically already been argued over by greater minds than mine. The danger of course we can just study these differences and make up our mind by what seems right to us without ever opening up the bible. One thing I like about these discussions is that it makes me go to the bible to see if my views line up with scripture.
Yes, I do take comfort in salvation being a one time event, and I do think this is the biblical view as well. It would be a mistake though, to think that one we are saved that we can just go on sinning as if it doesn’t matter since we are already justified. Paul repeatedly in his letters warns us against this (Romans 6, Colossians 3, 1 Thessalonians 4, etc…). So I don’t think that the problem is the system but that the bible in general is not being taught in its entirety in Western Christianity. I cannot take comfort in my own efforts since the bible tells me that all our best efforts are like filthy rags, but I am sure you would take exception with this.
When you say synergism do you mean God’s works along side your works to produce salvation, or God working through your works?
November 7th, 2012 at 8:43 pm
Bill, I will have to check out Calvin’s use of the word regeneration. I think though, that the modern concept of regeneration does involve a transformation that happens inside a person. It is just that the transformation is an act of God and not a act of man. “And I will give you a new heart, and a new spirit I will put within you. And I will remove the heart of stone from your flesh and give you a heart of flesh.” (Ezekiel 36:26) I am not sure where else this transformation would take place.
I also agree with you what whoever puts their trust in the biblical Christ and His Work on the cross is saved no matter what “church” they do or don’t attend. While I think how correct a person is in their theology is of little importance to an individual’s salvation, I think that when it comes to the Church, theology is vitally important. God’s truth is not to be taken lightly and it is the Church’s responsibilty to educate its members in the truths of God.
November 8th, 2012 at 3:19 am
Eric I whole heatedly agree with you. The Ez passage explains the renewing of the heart that takes place, going from stone cold dead to “alive”. The following passage carries an explanation of the desires, and nature of the new heart, and I quote” a heart that WILL SEEK AFTER ME”
I believe it is referred to in the New Testament as the Holy Spirit “quickening ” the dead.
The word “dead” carries a universal meaning” of ” with out life” whether it be physical or spiritual.
So shouldn’t it follow that ” after darkness light” or “after death life”? This is what leads me to believe that life must be bestowed, or in your example ” a heart of flesh” must replace” a heart of stone” and that new heart comes equipt with the faith needed to believe. Does this progression make sense?
I say this because I find Christ’s raising Lazerus from the dead the best example of who does what in giving life, and salvation. Lazerus could not have responded to Christ calling him out of the grave, unless and until life had been given to him. It is only after life entered into him that he could and would hear Christ calling him to come out, and only after life was granted would he be able to get up and walk out.
The other example I see evidenced in the Bible is being born again. Physical life begins at conception.
No one know the exact moment at which that takes place. Nor do we know the exact time of birth. Both of these are known only to God, because only He is the giver of life, both physically and spiritually.
Therefore salvation, or regeneration/conversion, going from death to life, is all of God. Once the heart has been regenerated, brought to life, if you like, or, we are given a new heart, we respond ” in faith” to the word.
” Faith comes by hearing” so God gives us ” life”, so that we can ” hear”. Hearing brings faith, and faith causes us to believe. All of this starts with God and ends with God causing it. No ” free will” no ” me acting upon” none of that ” me ” having to believe to be saved, or having to accept Christ into my heart, or choosing to follow Christ, or me giving my life to Christ, stuff. For all of these cleshays lead people to think ” they” did something for their salvation. They did nothing, God did it all, from conception to birth, from birth to the fullness of life in Christ, because even the Holy Spirits “sanctification ” or our growing in knowledge and grace, is a gift from God.
It’s all from God, even our next breath and heart beat, our ability to read and understand scripture, all of it.
Your thoughts are appreciated
Bk
November 8th, 2012 at 12:31 pm
As I said any inner transformation in man follows faith. And I have sufficiently proven it and I won’t repeat it. But let me add this to what I have said. I will explain what happens inside the believer since this is the focus after Eric’s last post. When I talk about faith I refer to saving faith that includes the saving fiduciary component.
So here it goes:
1) A man withouth faith is dead in trespasses and sins.
2) A man endued with faith is alive in Christ.
This is the bottom line. How does man move from a state 1 of death to state 2 of regeneration where faith is already present.
Now the question that calvinists keep bringing up is how can a dead man acquire faith? I have said it, he can’t, and luckily for him he doesn’t have to, it’s given by god. God gives us our first life through our parents (born of the flesh) and our second life (being born again)through faith. Faith is equal with life in the new birth (the spiritually dead man lacks faith, the spiritually alive man has faith). God gives life, is the same as saying god gives faith. This is why sola fide was so important to the Reformers, because faith is life. Once the believer receives faith, he is regenerated, it is this faith that when implanted in the believer by God regenerates him, quickens him, gives him life. Faith is the new heart that is implanted in man by God and gives him life. Faith causes regeneration, faith produces the quickening. No man is regenerated by God prior to faith having been implanted in his heart by God, faith has to be present first for the new life to start, regeneration always follows faith, because saving faith is life giving. Faith gives life. Calvin and Luther said it a million times faith is what makes the tree good, if there’s no faith there is no life, faith produces life.
Bruce is correct in saying that God gives the sinner a new heart. What is this new heart except saving faith? Faith is a man’s new heart. The new heart is not a new heart that is now capable of believing (there is no such thing in scripture as a regenerated man that capable of responding to the gospel, a regenerated man already has the gospel written in his heart by God), the new heart is faith itself that’s written into man’s heart by God’s hand through the proclamation of the gospel. Face is a gift of God that does not require human response. Regeneration defined as enabling human response to the gospel has no biblical foundation whatsoever, none, zero. The new birth does not happen before faith, the new birth is not God creating a new heart that is able to respond, God creates a new heart that has already responded, by that all I mean is that it is imbued with faith. The new birth is a result of faith, this faith is the gift of God, he writes it into the believer’s heart.
And to clarify I’m talking about saving faith, the fidusicary component of faith when we realize that God remembers our sins no more at the time he writes the gospel in our hearts. The illumination of our minds when it is revealed to us that we are covered by Gos’d mercy on account of Christ work on the cross. This is the new birth, it’s like the wind that we don’t know where it blows from or where it blows to, this is the saving faith I’m talking about. It has nothing to do with something we do, we don’t make a decision about it, it doesn’t require human response. It’s an illumination. Happens instantaneously, like John Bunyan walking in the forest and all of a sudden realizes that his righteousness is in heaven at the right hand of God, does not depend on him, his mind illumined by the doctrine of imputation. John Wesley’s heart being warmed up when hearing Luther’s preface to Romans is read and realizing that he is saved by Christ’s works and not his own. Augustine’s conversion happened walking in the garden. My personal conversion, I was reading Romans 3, 4, and 5 (which I had read many times before by the way but was not illumined by God those times) and boom it clicked that Christ has already done everything that was expected of me (the perfect obedience I couldn’t render, he’s already rendered). I didn’t have to respond, I did nothing, God enlightened me. This enlightening gave me life, God regenerated me by writing the gospel in my heart, illumining, enlightening my mind. I didn’t do a thing. I didn’t have to believe anything, I wasn’t faced with any kind of decision or intellectual process, all that happened way before, many years prior. Years and years ago I believed the historical facts of christ, intellectually I understood for many years that Christ’s forgives sins, it didn’t matter because god had not written the gospel in my heart, he gave me a new heart and the holy ghost many, many years after my intellectual assent to the gospel. No different from Augustine, no different from Wesley, no different from Bunyan, no different from Luther. And no dry hyper-calvinist pseudo logic can deny what I have just said.
November 8th, 2012 at 2:40 pm
Here’s another question that when answered proves that regeneration (what happens inside the believer) follows faith, faith regenerates (gives new life). Let’s look at these two questions. Which is true.
1) Does God create new life in man (the new birth) in a mystic way that is not revealed in the bible?
2) Does God create new life in man (the new birth) through faith?
The answer to question 1 is a resounding NO. Else we deny one of the solas of the Reformation, sola fide.
The answer to question 2 is a resounding YES. God creates life (the new birth) in man through faith. There’s nothing mystical, that God does in some sort of occult way. Quite the contrary God is crystal clear faith is his chosen instrument to create life. Faith alone produces produces life. The bible teaches we are saved by grace through faith, faith generates new life. God doesn’t do it any other way, he has disclosed his method in the bible. And yes the receiving of faith feels like the wind, we are without saving faith and one second later we are with saving faith and filled with the joy of the Lord knowing we are forgiven.
November 8th, 2012 at 3:03 pm
John 3:14 KJV says:
“Verily, verily, I say unto you, He that heareth my word, and believeth on him that sent me, hath everlasting life, and shall not come into condemnation; but is passed from death unto life.”
Nobody can question after reading John 3:14 of the order:
1) hearing the word
2) believing the word (saving faith)
3) everlasting life (the new birth or regeneration in the believer)
This is the biblical order. Hipercalvinists that reject it make the gravest error and deny the power of God’s word to give life, to regenerate man. They totally deny God’s means of grace. Calvinists reason in the flesh, and deny God’s word when they put regeneration before faith.
They also fail to understand that regeneration before faith is a departure from monergism as I explained in one of my posts above, and makes regenerated man the author of his own salvation in cooperation with God, robbing God of his work. Read my post above from a couple of days.
November 8th, 2012 at 3:05 pm
Sorry, my quotation from the KJV was John 5:24 not 3:14
November 8th, 2012 at 6:27 pm
Hey Bruce, I realize I didn’t really give you the feedback your requested. I think you put it in a very clear way. I loved what you wrote:
” a heart of flesh” must replace” a heart of stone” and that new heart comes equipt with the faith needed to believe.
I would have said the same thing, with slightly different wording like this:
” a heart of flesh” must replace” a heart of stone” and God supplies and installs that new heart that comes equipt with the faith in it.
You know in hindsight I didn’t have to write so much in my posts after your last one. It was not necessary, after your post this thing was nailed.
November 8th, 2012 at 9:48 pm
Your posts are a joy to read because it is so hard to find folks that understand it like you describe. For years now I have been trying to find a simple way to explain the process of salvation. For the most part when discribing as I have here, I am met with hostility. It’s like “how dare you tell me that becoming a Christian was not my idea” and from there their mind is shut. One gentleman listened intently as I explained that salvation is all of God, and how God changes our nature and will, and his final statement to me was” you will convince me of that”! Well quests what, he is right I won’t , God might.
You mention in one post John Wesley, I have visited Wesleyan churches and find it curious that they are so Arminian. Was Wesley as Arminian as their churches are today?
November 8th, 2012 at 9:58 pm
One other thing , in First John 1, 2, and 3 we are told that having faith, believing, seeking to know God are all evidences of our salvation not the cause of it and in the book “free will, no place for Sovereignty”
By R. K. M. Wright this is laid out guide well. Read it if you get a chance. And if you have questions, I have his phone number and you can call him.
November 9th, 2012 at 5:19 am
It also suprises and frustrates folks when I suggest that Gods plan of salvation was conceived by the Tirunity BEFORE TIME BEGAN! The fall of man was known, the selecting of the elect, the death of Christ. It was all thought out before the command was given to matter to form up into what we call creation.
People don’t like that and they think that the louder they make their argument the more valid it is. At least this discussion has remained civil so far, and I thank you all for that.
November 9th, 2012 at 1:49 pm
Bruce,
Wesley’s theology was arminian. First John mentions the what characteristics a saved person exhibits, does not talk about the order of salvation, what takes place before salvation. With regard to the plan of salvation, the new birth comes last. Calvinists mistakenly put it first. The order of salvation in the gospel of John, the book of acts, and Romans 10 is very clear. I’ll go over it again, a bit more detail than yesterday.
John 5:24 (there’s plenty of similar examples in the gospel of John)
“Verily, verily, I say unto you, He that heareth my word, and believeth on him that sent me, hath everlasting life, and shall not come into condemnation; but is passed from death unto life.”
1) Hearing the word
2) Believing the word (faith)
3) New Birth (passing from death to life)
Romans 10:13 and Romans 10:14
13 For whosoever shall call upon the name of the Lord shall be saved.
14 How then shall they call on him in whom they have not believed? and how shall they believe in him of whom they have not heard? and how shall they hear without a preacher?
1) preaching of the word
2) hearing of the word
3) believing in Christ (faith)
4) Calling on the name of the Lord
5) Salvation (new birth, passing from death unto life)
The reason for this order is that although God makes alive sinners, he works through the preaching of the gospel, the word is the means of grace, and there is no salvation outside of Christ revealed in God’s word. And grace is resistible. God gave more grace to Israel than to the gentiles and yet they rejected Christ, while the gentiles did not. I quoted Romans 10 above and stopped at verse 14 to highlight the order of salvation. From verse 15 onwards it shows how the Israelites resisted God’s grace.
15 And how shall they preach, except they be sent? as it is written, How beautiful are the feet of them that preach the gospel of peace, and bring glad tidings of good things!
16 But they have not all obeyed the gospel. For Esaias saith, Lord, who hath believed our report? 17 So then faith cometh by hearing, and hearing by the word of God. 18 But I say, Have they not heard? Yes verily, their sound went into all the earth, and their words unto the ends of the world. 19 But I say, Did not Israel know? First Moses saith, I will provoke you to jealousy by them that are no people, and by a foolish nation I will anger you. 20 But Esaias is very bold, and saith, I was found of them that sought me not; I was made manifest unto them that asked not after me. 21 But to Israel he saith, All day long I have stretched forth my hands unto a disobedient and gainsaying people.
November 9th, 2012 at 4:38 pm
Bill,
I think I have finally clearly understood what you have been arguing against, and I have to disagree (regretfully) with you on several points:
1. Your order of salvation has dead men believing in Christ, receiving faith and calling on the name of the Lord.
2. You say having the new birth before faith denies the power of the Word. This simply isn’t true. It’s the power of the Holy Spirit through God’s Word that quickens dead men and gives them faith. God the Holy Spirit works through the preached Word to give life. (Rom. 10) This life is faith.
3. I think I would deny both of your scenarios (1. Does God create new life in man (the new birth) in a mystic way that is not revealed in the bible? or 2. Does God create new life in man (the new birth) through faith?). Faith is given in the new birth. God doesn’t work through faith; he gives faith, and works through the Word, and we have salvation through or because faith.
4. The passages you cite to prove the order of salvation don’t demand that order. They are a list of facts. “Verily, verily, I say unto you, He that heareth my word, and believeth on him that sent me, hath everlasting life, and shall not come into condemnation; but is passed from death unto life.” Instead I think this passage is consistent with the new birth being prior to believing. Hearing the word, and believing is the evidence that one has passed from life unto death.
5. You also say grace is resistible. This is the problem I have always had with Lutheran monergism (I was raised in the Lutheran church) is they say God must give faith, which is true, but then man must not resist it. This is the same as saying man must accept God’s grace in giving faith. Salvation falls back into being dependent on man.
I am sure we could both provide “proof texts” on our various points of view, but I just see the overall message of the bible is that God gives life(faith) then we believe; where you have faith, then belief and then new life.
Forgive me if you have already answered all these objections but the thread is getting so long that it is hard to follow everything, and I think your last post succinctly brought everything together that you were trying to say that I just focused on your last few posts.
I was hesitant to post this because it seems like there has already been a lot of back and forth on this topic and this could go on and on, and I don’t think we will resolve it here. One thing I think we can agree on, regardless of the implications the other sees in our differing positions, is that Salvation is an act of God and that unless God acts on man, man is lost (by his own doing, and not because of God) and has no hope of salvation and that everyone who calls on the name of the Lord will be saved. This is the message that the lost world needs to hear and is the reason the White Horse Inn hosts can come together, even though they have slightly different views and traditions.
November 9th, 2012 at 7:41 pm
Eric I concur with your statement but dont mind the back and forth stuff. It helps me understand opposing points of view and lets me refresh what I believe. It also points out where I need to change when I am wrong.
I have found very few people willing to go back and forth like this with out someone getting angry. i have also found the view you hold to the most aligned with what I have learned over the last 15 years.
Coming from an Arminian back ground I joined to a Baptist church that was moving away from that view, to a more reformed view. The pastor himself was struggling with the change but felt convicted by his study of Romans [over 300 sermons] that the reformed view, of salvation at least, was the more correct view. He still disagrees with infant baptism because it is believers that are commanded to do so. Also having no clear biblical example of babies being baptized and Christ himself setting the example along with the eunuch and others, he is convinced its not proper. I just wished there was a church in my area that taught this stuff
Thank you everyone for particapating
BK
November 10th, 2012 at 1:55 am
Eric & Bruce,
Let’s nip this one in the bud.
The new birth comes at the end in the order of salvation. You say my order of salvation would have dead men with faith. Well, doesn’t God justify the ungodly? How can anybody be born again, and have life if God doesn’t declare him righteous first (justifies). And god does it on account of faith in Jesus. Abraham believed and it was counted to him as righteousnes. Is that not true?
So you have faith first, justification follows, and only afterwards we have the new birth or regeneration. And yes this is the beauty of the gospel God creates life from death, dead sinners are pronounced righteous on account of Christ. New life is primarily forensic, John 5:24 which I’m quoting for the third time equals the new birth with not coming into judgment (ESV) or condemnation (KJV). This is the whole point that I was objecting to in calvinists that put regeneration before faith, like Rome they emphasize infused grace, the new birth has nothing to do with infused grace which is roman catholicism. The new birth is not about an infusion of grace so that the sinner can respond to the gospel. So this is the order, and I had to introduce justification because there is no regeneration without justification first and there is no justification without faith.
1) Faith
2) Justification
3) Regeneration / New Birth
Now the three happen pretty much at the same time when we are converted, but there is a logical order. God creates life by declaring a sinner righteous on account of Christ, and this happens after the sinner embraces Christ’s mercy by faith.
And you know if regeneration were to precede faith, we would have christian / regenerated unbelievers that God hasn’t justifed yet, and that is impossible.
November 10th, 2012 at 9:30 am
This has been a good discussion, and I will certainly study it further. Bruce, I too, go to a Baptist church, but one that doesn’t teach the doctrines of grace (not Arminian though, either). I am glad to hear that your pastor is teaching the doctrines of grace. That cannot be easy in a church coming from an Arminian background. I also, find that people get pretty worked up about this topic! I have actually been studying infant baptism. A friend challenged me on it and I realized I didn’t have a good biblical argument for or against it. A good article on the reformed view of infant baptism is by R Scott Clark. http://rscottclark.org/2012/09/a-contemporary-reformed-defense-of-infant-baptism/
Bill, I will let you have the last word, even though it is hard for me to do
(Well, almost; Rom. 10:10?) You have inspired me to open up my dusty copy of Calvin’s Institutes and I saw this passage that I thought was quite relevant:
“We grant, indeed, that so long as we are pilgrims in the world faith is implicit, not only because as yet many things are hidden from us, but because, involved in the mists of error, we attain not to all. The highest wisdom, even of him who has attained the greatest perfection, is to go forward, and end endeavor in a calm and teachable spirit to make further progress. Hence Paul exhorts believers to wait for further illumination in any matter in which they differ from each other (Phil. 3:15). And certainly experience teaches, that so long as we are in the flesh, our attainments are less that is to be desired. In our daily reading we fall in with many obscure passages which convict us of ignorance. With this curb God keeps us modest, assigning to each a measure of faith, that every teacher, however excellent, may still be disposed to learn.”
I know I still have a lot to learn, and enjoy studying and learning God’s Word, and am thankful for discussions like these.
November 10th, 2012 at 4:01 pm
Eric
Yes it is a good discussion and we all must remember that which ever way you look at salvation it does not cause us to loose it. Our mistaken understanding is forgiven also.
November 11th, 2012 at 7:41 am
Bill in reading Romans 10 I come across this passage” and faith comes by hearing, and hearing through the word of Christ . Now this shows me that faith is not the first order of salvation , the Word is.
( Christ being the Word, Jn ch 1) Christ, and He alone, giving the ability to hear. This is shown in Jn ch 8 when speaking to the Pharisees Jesus states ” you cannot hear my words because my Father has not given them to you. You are of your father the devil” So again I have to conclude that it is that new life that Christ ( the Word) gives me, that enables me to hear and respond, because of the faith that I was given when I was born again. One cannot hear unless one is alive. Hearing does not make us alive, one would have to be alive to hear, and when one hears, one responds in,or because of, the gracious gift of faith that was given to us at our new birth.
This is the conclusion I have to come to when looking at salvation being all of God because of Christ, through the quickening of the Holy Spirit.
I was dead in sin, wanting nothing to do with God, as explained by Paul in Romans 3. I was made alive in Christ by the Holy Spirits Quickening, that being the removing of my heart of stone and replacing it with a heart of flesh,” a heart that WILL seek after Me “God says in Ez.36. That new heart gave me the ability to hear the word, have faith in what I heard , and believe it. All of these things were gifted to me by God for His Glory . I did not ” do” any of these, I was given them, the new heart , the ability to hear, the faith in the words I heard , and believing or trusting in what I was told. This takes me out of the picture completely when it comes to my salvation. It is only after all of this that I see my desires change ( proof of my salvation) and I find my self seeking to know God more. And even that desire to know Him more is a continuing gift from the Father through the working of the Holy Spirit in me.
I hope this explains why I believe what I do, because it is the only way I can see salvation being all of God.
Bk
November 11th, 2012 at 11:45 am
Thanks Eric.
Bruce, you wrote: “One cannot hear unless one is alive. Hearing does not make us alive, one would have to be alive to hear, and when one hears, one responds”
Bruce, what you are saying is completely unbiblical. Of course many dead people have the ability to hear the gospel. I addressed this long time ago in this discussion. Luke 10 verses 13 to 16. The people of Tyre and Siddon, they all had ability to hear the gospel, and they were not born again, they didn’t know God. Augustine in his antipelagian letter “On the Predestination of the Saints” already taught that, http://www.newadvent.org/fathers/15122.htm pkease read chapters 22, and 23, and 24 wheere Augustine talks abut the men in Tyre and Sydon, they all had ability to hear the gospel and all were condemned to hell, not because they lacked ability to hear the gospel but because they never had a chance to hear the gospel.
This is the fatal error of many modern calvinists, the unbiblical claim that all dead men have no ability to hear the gospel. The bible teaches that some dead men (the men in Tyre and Siddon as an example) have ability to hear the gospel and others don’t have ability to hear the gospel.
Ability to hear the gospel has nothing to do with being alive, you are alive after you’ve heard the gospel. And many people with ability to hear and respond to the gospel will die in theri sins because the gospel was never preached to them.
November 11th, 2012 at 12:02 pm
The ability to hear the gospel is natural in man, not all men have it, some do and some don’t. This is why we need to preach the gospel. The harvest is plentiful but the workers are few. The gospel needs to be preached so that those with ability to hear and respond to the gospel don’t perish due to a famine of the preaching of the word. Otherwise we will have many people able and capable to answer the gospel call, that will perish because the word of God was never preached to them. This is the Great Commission.
November 11th, 2012 at 12:15 pm
And the only reason I said the ability to hear and answer the gospel call is natural in man, is because the non-elect have it. Read Augutine’s chapters I mentioned on the link I provided above regarding the people in Tyre and Siddon. This is biblically supported in Luke 10 verses 13 to 16.
November 11th, 2012 at 3:09 pm
Bruce, just to summarize:
1) Before faith and conversion dead men have an ability to hear and respond to the outward call of the gospel before conversion (all the elect have it and but only some of the non-elect have it ,e.g.the people in Tyre and Siddon). We are talking here about the ability to hear the outward gospel call that goes to all unconverted sinners / dead men in the world. This ability dead men to hear and answer the(all the elect and some of the non-elect) have it before conversion and precedes faith. This ability is not the cause of conversion, otherwise conversion would be based on merit. This abiliity is really irrelevant in the field of theology because it’s inherent to natural man before he has heard the gospel.
2) Now only after faith and conversion can we say a man is alive and can truly understand the gospel. Only now we can say that he has his ears open to the matters of God. The ability to hear before his conversion shouldn’t really matter to theology as I indicated in the first paragraph.
The natural man is dead, but not so dead that he is incapable of being waked up by the outward gospel call! Even some of the non-elect (there’s plenty of Tyres and Siddon in the history of the world) as mentioned in paragraph 1 have the ability to answer and respond to the outward gospel call, if only it was preached to them but they perish as a result of lack of preaching (famine of the word).
November 11th, 2012 at 5:34 pm
Also what Luke 10:13 proves is that Chorazin and Bethsaida resisted God’s grace. Because the same grace if it had been applied in Tyre and Sidon it would have converted them.
God’s call was efficacious for salvation, but the holy ghost was resisted and the call didn’t succeed. There was no lack of grace, but man frustrated the operation of the holy ghost. This is the sin against the holy ghost that Chorazin and Bethsaida committed, they resisted the holy ghos. The holy ghost is always present in God’s word (and nowhere else) but it can be resisted Acts 7:51, only the elect are converted, the non-elect resist the same grace that converts the elect. Calvinists think that God treats the elect and non elect differently during the gospel call, lutherans maintain that the holy ghost through the gospel call when preached works in the elect and non elect in exactly the same way, but the non elect reject the holy ghost. I agree with Eric we will never agree on this because Calvinism’s doctrine of irresistible grace requires before conversion a quickening of the elect only. Lutherans flat out reject this. I hope my analysis of Luke 10:13 helps you understand where lutherans are coming from. I’ve also copied pasted from Wikipedia below for you guys to see as well.
ANYWAYS IT WAS A GREAT CONVERSATION, THANK YOU ALL.
This is from Wikipedia, where they show the difference between the calvinist call of the gospel versus the lutheran call of the gospel, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Irresistible_grace
“Calvinists distinguish between a resistible, outward call to salvation given to all who hear the free offer of the gospel, and an efficacious, inward work by the Holy Spirit. Every person is unwilling to follow the outward call to salvation until, as the Westminster Confession puts it, “being quickened and renewed by the Holy Spirit, he is thereby enabled to answer this call, and to embrace the grace offered and conveyed by it. Once inwardly renewed, every person freely follows God and his ways as “not only the obligatory but the preferable good, and hence that special renewing grace is always effective.
Contrary to the Calvinist position, Lutherans hold that whenever the Holy Spirit works outwardly through the Word and sacraments, he always acts inwardly through them as well. Unlike Calvinists, Lutherans believe the Holy Spirit always works efficaciously. The Word heard by those that resist it is just as efficacious as the Word preached to those that convert. The Formula of Concord teaches that when humans reject the calling of the Holy Spirit, it is not a result of the Word being less efficacious. Instead, contempt for the means of grace is the result of “the perverse will of man, which rejects or perverts the means and instrument of the Holy Ghost, which God offers him through the call, and resists the Holy Ghost, who wishes to be efficacious, and works through the Word…”
Lutherans are certain that the work of the Holy Spirit does not occur merely alongside the means of grace to regenerate, but instead is an integral part of them, always working through them wherever they are found. Lutherans teach that the Holy Spirit limits himself to working only through the means of grace and nowhere else. so that those who reject the means of grace are simultaneously resisting and rejecting the Holy Spirit and the grace he brings”
November 12th, 2012 at 6:35 am
Bill I respectfully disagree. Everything God wills to come to pass, comes to pass. Every one that God has chosen unto salvation will be saved ” all those My Father has given Me WILL come” . Yes the call goes out to all, but only those who are quickened by the Word (Jesus is the word) and Spirit, will hear, and recieve the gift of a new life in Christ with all that goes with, it namely faith hope understanding belief and all the other gifts for the Spirit listed. I believe and logic dictates that this all begins with a new heart, created in us, by God, and came equipt with, and having the desire to, seek God, do His will and obey His commands. That heart still battles against our human nature, as Paul discribes the fight with in, of do we shouldnt and not what we should.
When we get to heaven maybe we can get the full explanation. I am sure we will be in awe no matter what view we hold here.
November 12th, 2012 at 7:35 am
Bruce, you say “Everything God wills to come to pass, comes to pass. Every one that God has chosen unto salvation will be saved ” all those My Father has given Me WILL come”
You know what, I couldn’t agree more with you. What you are missing is that reisitible grace is not incompatible with God’s sovereignty. Judas Iscariot was one of the apostales and received more grace than anybody (save for the other 11 apostles and Paul), and yet he resisted it more fiercely. He frustrated God’s grace. Judas Iscariot had more grace than you, and I combined together, imagine he saw Jesus, something you and I could never dream of. It is part of God’s sovereign plan that man will resist God’s grace, and the condemnation of those that resist the holy ghost (like Judas) is greater, and God made it come to pass that Judas would resist Jesus. Those that resist God’s grace like Judas are part of God’s plan, it is God’s will that men like Judas would resist his grace, nobody had more grace than Judas, he knew Jesus, was side by side with Jesus all his life, saw his miracles etc. This is why it would have been better not to be born for the Son of Perdition. You see Judas frustrated God’s grace, resisted it, but he did not frustrate God’s plan! It was part of God’s plan! Resistible grace and unconditional election are not contradictory with each other. You should have known by now that I’m no arminian, I believe that God sovereignly elects at his good pleasure those that he will save, he keeps a remnant for himself. And He sovereignly saves the elect only. In his unscrutable counsel he lets the rest perish. This teaching is totally compatible with resistible grace, as Judas Iscariot proves, as well as Luke 10 verses 13 to 16 which I extensively went over it.
November 12th, 2012 at 7:59 am
And here lies the genius of Luther (and the lutheran theology that follows), in “The Bondage of the Will” Luther makes the distinction between God hidden (in his inscrutable counsel of election and reprobation wills the salvation of the elect only and lets the rest perish) and God revealed (in Christ and the gospel who wills the salvation of all men and that none should perish).
There is no doubt that it was part of God’s plan to fulfill prophesy that Judas would be lost. At the same time though there can be no doubt that Christ (God revealed) willed the salvation of Judas, it was Christ that picked him as one of his Apostles, it was Christ allowed him close to him, it was Christ that gave him more grace than other men, and yet Judas rejected it this abundance of saving grace that was given to him.
And this is the problem of calvinism, they confuse God revealed in Christ (the gospel) with God hidden (election). The grace of the gospel is resistible. God’s hidden counsel in election no man can resist, God makes his will come to pass both on the elect and the reprobate.
November 12th, 2012 at 12:39 pm
I thought that it’s not enough to disagree with reformed theology. and I would try to provide a pathway for reformed theology in the future.
I think the question for the reformed theologian should be, how can they incorporate into their theology universal grace (god revealed as luther called it, christ, the gospel, the holy spirit working in the non-elect as hard or harder than in the elect only to be rejected e.g Judas) without losing particular / special grace (the decree of election and reprobation of the hidden God). Both universal grace (the gospel) and particular grace(election) are true. The lutherans already have both particular garce and the universal grace in their theology is progressing at the speed of light (I will provide some links on where they are heading now). Reformed theology, although they may not know it, it already has a lot of the answers as well in theri own tradition. The biggest challeng they have right now is to accept both the election doctrine of the hidden God of Calvin and the universal grace of Karl Barth. It’s not about who was right Barth or Calvin, both were right. Calvin looked at predestination from God hidden, Karl Barth looked at predestination from Christ (god revealed). It is now the job of Reformed theology, to keep that tension, between Barth and Calvin, universal grace and particular grace. And this has to be done without sacrificing one at the expense of the other.
As for lutheran theology, where does the future lie? The confessional churches have accepted objective justification (the ministry of reconciliation that Paul tells the corinthians that ought to be preached, the Christ of Romans 5 that justified all mankind just like Adam brought sin to all mankind Christ removed sin’s condemnation in every man), this doctrine is based on the Book of Concord but has only recently been developed by confessional lutherans in depth. It doesn’t replace subjective justification by faith, but it expands on the universality of the atonement. It goes as far as saying that every sinner on earth has been imputed the righteousness of Christ, the difference is that believers know it and the unbeliever doesn’t know it. Here are a couple of great lutheran modern theology summaries that explain how objective and subjective justification relate to each other in confessional lutheranism. This is conservative confessinal lutheranism at its best, monergism at its highest. It’s been adopted by both Missouri Synod and Wisconsin.
http://www.wlsessays.net/files/DobbersteinJustification.pdf
http://www.wlsessays.net/files/DeutschlanderDistinction.pdf
The time has come for Reformed theology to put Calvin (special grace, God hidden) and Barth (universal grace, Christ) together instead of pitting one agains the other. You can’t mix Calvin with Barth, but you have to have both in your theology. I thought I would try something constructive before leaving this topic for good. It’s perfect to disagree, it’s perfect we don’t know everything, it’s perfect to say God will reveal it to us when we meet Him in Heaven, but I also wanted to go further and challenge reformed theologians and show the road ahead and where to focus.
The genius of Luther (and also Prosper of Aquitaine whom I quoted earlier and provided a link to his book) was not just to distinguish between law and gospel. Luther’s excellence was to distinguish between election (God hidden, special grace) and the gospel (Christ, universal grace). The Reformed have it at ther hand in Calvin and Barth, thy just need to realize that both Calvin and Barth are correct instead of trying to figure out who’s right and who’s wrong. With regard to election and the doctrine of grace when it comes to the hidden God go to Calvin, when it comes to Christ and the gospel Barth is the man. I have to admit though the challeng for the reformed is so much harder than the lutherans who already have it in their confessions and it’s a matter of expanding on it as they are already doing (links provided on this post).
November 12th, 2012 at 9:44 pm
Bill I see your point about resisting Gods grace. With the way you explain it it would appear that you would agree that every one resists. Some until they are saved and others until death. Because a sense of God is written into all people. This would be why the lost “hear ” but do not respond and the elect
” hear ” and respond.
May I recommend a book called ” the Potters Freedom” by Dr White , I think you would like his perspective.
November 13th, 2012 at 7:59 am
Bruce, you are correct that everybody resists God until they are saved and some until death. Where we disagree is that in Christ God has mercy on all Romans 11:32, he shows mercy on the reprbate (who resist it) and on the elect. Calvinism teaches that God has mercy on the elect only.
Dr. White’s exegesis of Romans 9 ranks among the worst I’ve ever seen.
Dr White is great at understanding the hidden God of Romans 9:18 that hardened Pharaoh and showed no mercy on him. But Paul is not talking about Christ in Romans 9:18, he’s talking about the hidden unscrutable will of God, the secret decree of election and predestination .
James White has no understanding of Christ who has mercy on all, Romans 11:32. Christ showed more mercy to Pharaoh than to most of the old testament saints and he trampled it under foot. God revealed himself to Pharaoh with the most powerful works and miracles, he provided relief time and time again (Pharaoh asked God to remove the frogs, he got it read starting at Exodus 8:8 and this went on and on, favour after favour God bestowed on Pharaoh), the holy spirit was working 24/7 to convert Pharaoh. The grace of the Lord was overflowing, but Pharaoh resisted and thus the judgment that follows every time he resists God’s grace. Christ wills the conversion of the reprobate, and through the holy ghost in powerful works and miracles Pharaoh received more mercy than most of the old testament saints. Pharaoh is the Judas of the old testament. Nobody (outside a few of the saints of Israel) was bestowed with more favours than Pharaoh. The judgement on Pharaoh was so harsh because Pharaoh so fiercely resisted the gospel call. He resisted the holy ghost till the end which is the unforgivable sin that Jesus talks about.
You can not build a theology on a secret decree of predestination as James White does. Any theology needs to include both Christ who has mercy on all and only in light of Christ;s universal grace (christ has mercy on both the elect and reprobate) should you look at God’s hidden counsel in predestination (God has mercy on whome he will and hardens whom he hardens).
November 13th, 2012 at 9:29 am
To summarize a good exegesis on Romans 9 should include both special grace and universal grace:
1) God in his hidden unscrutable counsel condemned Pharaoh to damnation, not on account of anything Pharaoh did, but solely on God’s good pleasure in his hidden decree of election and reprobation. No different from Jacob and Esau Romans 9:11
2) At the same time God revealed in Christ who is full of mercy willed the salvation of Pharaoh in the same manner as he wills the salvation of the elect. Through the mediation of Aaron and Moses, saving grace upon saving grace was bestowed on Pharaoh. This saving saving grace had it been applied to other men would have converted most of them, but Pharaoh rejected God’s grace.
Luther’s commentary on Romans 9 accounts for both point 1 (God hidden decree) and point 2 (Christ). John Calvin’s commentary of Romans 9 only accounts for point 1 (God hidden decree). Right now calvinistic reformed theology has an incomplete exegis of Romans 9, it’s missing Christ. I suggested a solution for Reformed theology yesterday. It needs to incorporate Barth who looks at election from Christ’s standpoint and not God’s hiddend counsel as Calvin does. This is what reformed theology needs to do in order to have a complete exegis of Romans 9, lutherans already have it.
In the doctrine of unconditional election:
Barth (christ) + Calvin (god’s hidden decree) = Luther
November 13th, 2012 at 9:51 am
Bill,
Do you think Lutherans have closed themselves off to the broader Christian community? One thing that struck me as odd growing up in a Lutheran church (LCMS) is how unwilling our church was to interact with the broader Christian community. It seems like there are very few serious attempt the reach Christianity with Lutheran theology. You just don’t run across theology books from Lutheran perspective. You have to search them out, and even then they are more preaching to the choir. The popular Lutheran books I have read are more as to why Lutheran theology is best rather than explaining what it is.(You don’t have to search very hard at all to find books explaining reformed theology to a lay person in a clear and understandable way.) I would think Lutheran Theology, with its affirmation of monergism, but still affirming universal atonement, would appeal to a great many Christians seeking a stronger God, yet not going as far as Calvinism and its limited atonement. I would think Lutheran theology could make large inroads into the Arminian community if they were willing to interact with broader Christianity. Rod Rosenbladt is the only Lutheran that I know of that is in the Christian culture with non-Lutherans. I am sure there are others but I just have not seen them. I just get the impression that Lutheran’s are content fellowshipping with themselves rather than standing beside other Christians. (I remember a bible study comparing denominations where the pastor went to great lengths to separate Lutherans from the rest of protestants. There was Roman Catholics, Orthodox, Lutherans, and then all other Christians lumped together.) They have their theology but don’t really feel the need to share it with other Christians. While I have moved away from Lutheranism theologically, I still have great respect for the Lutheran confessions and liturgy, and I think they have a lot to offer Christianity.
November 13th, 2012 at 10:09 am
By Arnimian I really meant semi-pelagian. I think current pop christianity is more semi-pelagian than Arminian. I don’t know of very many true Arminians.
November 14th, 2012 at 6:20 am
Bill in what I have read of Dr White, and what I think you are referring to, he calls common grace, I hear this in some of the reformed circles also. They explain it as the call going out to every one in what ever form you care to refer to it. For pharaoh it was the mighty work of the plagues, revealing God power, and the fact that God allowed him to live after saying Israel could leave and then saying the couldn’t, shows Gods universal grace as you put it. For others it is the beauty of creation, and so on. Every one resist God, and the fact that they aren’t all struck down on the the first sign of rebellion shows His universal grace. Not being reformed my self per say, I find your view of Luther as the only one having the correct view a bit surprising. Especially when Lutherans hold to infant baptisms, and in those few who would talk to me about it , seem to believe that salvation is passed on to the child through infant baptism, from the parent. Do all Lutherans believe this ?
Second. I found Dr White and John Pipers exegesis of Romans 9 very thorough. They might not hold your view but I found both had gone into great detail laying out their arguments over these details. I have heard both talk about how the death of Christ was sufficient to cover the sin of all man kind, but its affect was and will be in saving only the elect. Who those elect are, is Gods hidden grace.
As Eric pointed out its hard to come up with books on Lutheran theology, and harder still to for a layman like my self, to spend the time that is needed to dig into Luther’s reasoning.
Suffice it to say God was gracious to me in allowing me to believe and gain an understanding of the greatness of my sin against Him, how He graciously gave me a new heart, against my will I might ad, and then showed me through His word the greatness and graciousness of His saving work , in me .
November 16th, 2012 at 9:41 am
Eric, this is the way I see it. I’m going to first answer your question with regard to Lutherans being isolated from the Christian community at large.
1) Confessional reformed churches are at least as closed to the broader evangelical community as confessional lutheran churches. When I attended a URC (same denomination Mike Horton belongs to) they had almost no relationship at all with other evangelical churches. I’m in Canada, and the confessional lutheran churces in Canada (some of them), actually are more open to dialogue with evangelical churches than the URC.
2) Now you are right that reformed theology has penetrated evangelicalism more than lutheran theology. I believe the reason this has happened is because the Reformed are “softer” on the means of grace than Lutherans. For example there are many reformed Baptist churches, there’s the 1689 baptist confession of faith for example. The Reformed have been from the outset more flexible and accepted adult baptism. Lutherans have not. Same with the Lord’s Supper. For Lutherans the Lord’s Supper is the true body and blood of Jesus Christ (although the benefits of receiving the sacrament come not from the physical eating and drinking, but from Jesus’ spoken promise and assurance). There are serious differences on the word of God as a means of grace, for lutherans the word of God when it’s preached the holy ghost works on both the elect and non-elect in exactly the same way. For the reformed there is an effectual call for the elect, lutherans reject the effectual call in the preaching of the gospel, there are no favorites when the gospel is preached, Christ wants to save all sinners and doesn’t distinguish between elect and non-elect when the gospel is preached, unlike calvinists that have effectual call .
3) You have this young, restless, and reformed movement, the gospel coalition and so forth. Many Reformed see it as if reformed theology has penetrated evangelicalism. And on surface it has but if we look further we are going to find out that there are serious issues with some of this “so called” reformed evangelicals. Llet’s look at Mark Driscol for example, friend of Rick Warren, big supporter. And there’s many other examples. Are these guys truly reformed? Just because somebody says so doesn’t mean they are, a lot of these guys are seeker sensitive, they also give good advice (instead of the gospel) in their preaching, not to mention that they don’t focus on the Great Commission but make the social gospel and helping the secular community at large the mission of the church instead of focusing primarily on preaching the gospel and baptizing.
November 16th, 2012 at 9:58 am
With regard to engaging the christian culture more. Absolutely I would love to see lutherans more involved. Would love to see more independent lutheran churches, there are very few. And it is totally true that there is a lot of antagonism towards calvinism in the semi-pelagian or pelagian evangelical church, and lutheran theology would not be resisted as much.
It’s interesting lutherans have strived so hard to keep their doctrine pure, that as a result they have isolated themselves. Before the canons of Dort and the Westminster confession there was dialogue and efforts made to unify the reformation. Unfortunately the calvinist – arminian controversy has shut the door for further dialogue for many lutherans, who oppose both calvinism and arminianism (lutherans reject the arminian doctrine of election that God elects those that he foreknows will believe in Christ, election is not on condition of faith otherwise it would be based on merit).
With regard to lutheran theology there’s plenty out there. Concordia Publishing House has many books and there are others as well.
I highly recommend you read the two links I provided earlier:
http://www.wlsessays.net/files/DobbersteinJustification.pdf
http://www.wlsessays.net/files/DeutschlanderDistinction.pdf
They are a great summary of lutheran theology. And you will see your concerned about resistible grace addressed. Although those that reject Christ have resisted his saving grace, those that accept Christ are not saved on account of having believed otherwise faith would be a work. Unbelief is the cause of damnation but faith or accepting Christ is not the cause of salvation (otherwise faith would be a work). Faith is a gift that requires nothing from the recipient, it’s 100% of God. Those two documents explain it in great detail.
November 16th, 2012 at 1:15 pm
Bruce, think about what you said. This is the reason calvinism is so unpopular in a lot of circles. Like Eric said the universal atonement of lutheranism would be an incredible weapon of evangelism and it should appeal to the broad evangelical community that has a problem with limited atonement. Ler me be specific about what you said.
Let’s say the gospel is being preached to many unvconverted sinners. Let’s say an evangelist were to do today what a George Whitfield or John Wesley did in the 18th century. Are you going to tell those that were not converted that they only received common grace (which doesn’t save a single soul, and frankly I wouldn’t even call it grace if it can’t save) and God didn’t want them to have eternal life while those that were converted were effectually called with saving grace? A lutheran would say they were all called in an equally forceful manner by that preacher, they all got the gospel message with the holy ghost working through it, but those that rejecte Christ trampled on the means of grace and truly rejected the holy spirit. Big difference, because in the first case you are saying that God didn’t want to save them (only gave them common grace which doesn’t save) and this is why they are not saved.
The Canons of Dort / Westminster Confession says that the reprobate are passed by God and left in unbelief, even when the gospel is preached to them. Lutherans would teach that if the gospel was preached God didn’t pass by anybody. Huge difference. Not to mention if you are talking to unbelievers and you were to tell them, hey guys you can listen to a preacher or read the bible but if you don’t believe is because God didn’t give you grace, didn’t call you effectually. A lutheran woud tell unbelievers if you listen to a preacher or read the bible you will be accessing God’s means of grace and if you believe you will be saved, if you don’t believe you will be damned because you rejected God’s grace for you.
November 16th, 2012 at 1:32 pm
And don’t get me wrong God has passed by whole nations in the past. Even in the new testament Paul is led by the spirit to go to certain regions and not others. And yes God never was without witness and many nations received what you would call as common grace. Lutherans agree with calvinists on this. But this isn’t the point, the point is that when the gospel is preached nobody is passed by. We can’t call word of God, the gospel, common grace.
Leaving all this aside lutherans have total respect for both calvinist and arminian godly men and women. We are saved regardless of theology as long as we have put our trust in Christ for the forgiveness of sin.
An total respect for reformed and arminian brothers in Christ. It is Christ that unites us and theology shouldn’t divide us.
November 16th, 2012 at 6:18 pm
And here it goes, I just found a beustiful lutheran sermon thta compares the Westminster confession with the lutheran confessions. This sermon is short and to the point adn pastor Rick Ritchie tells us the differences between lutheran and reformed. Interestingly enough he says in brief summarized manner what it took mw so long. Read a lutheran tell us why the Westminster confession makes faith a work (defines it as evangelical obedience), why effectual calling (two different cals one for the elect and one for the non-elect) is unbiblical, and under god justifies the wicked the lutheran concern that God does not need to give sight so that sinners can believe later , something I tried so hard to explain.
This is a gem, short sermon that summarizes the gospel call and how the lutheran view of justification by faith is different from the reformed. this is a gem. Bruce and Eric, if you want a brief summary on everything that was discussed up here, you have it, beaufiful summary of the differences between the reformed and lutheran view of salvation and man’s sinful condition, and why in Reformed theology faith is a work.
http://solochristo.com/theology/God/RickRitchie_GodGlorifiedinJustification.html
November 17th, 2012 at 5:01 pm
Bill I agree with most of what you say. God does call the elect and the reprobate with the same forcefulness. If you read back through my posts you will see where I state that it isn’t a rejection of the call but an inability to hear the call , because of being dead in sin. Gods call ( grace) is sent out to all but it is only heard by those who have been regenerated or those who the Holy Spirit has quickened.
I know you don’t agree with this but this is the conclusion research has brought me to .
I’m sorry if this upsets you but this is where I stand
Bk
November 18th, 2012 at 8:38 am
Bruce, it doesn’t upset me at all. I just think you are looking at the hidden God of election, and there’s plenty of scripture to prove that the reprobate can’t hear, but scripture is not talking about Christ. Actually God hidden gave them ears so that they can’t hear, he hardens. This isn’t the Christ we preache, has nothing to do with the gospel call. Romans 9 clearly teaches when we speak about the gospel they all hear and they all understand both elect and reprobate. Luke 10 verses 13 to 16 is the same those cities clearly heard and understood the gospel and rejected it the holy ghost. Judas and Pharaoh heard and understood the gospel as well and rejected the holy ghost.
What about First John? Those that went out from us because they were not from us. The heard and understood the gospel, but they lacked perseverance. 1 John 2:19 What about Hebrews? What about Hebrews 6:4 those that have been enlightened and tasted the heavenly gift. God doesn’t quicken the elect only, God quickens the reprobate as well. And they commit apostacy. Augustine in the letter I referenced earlier clearly teaches that not all that come to saving faith will persevere. God’s grace is resisted not just by unbelievers, but by believers also. The sin of final apostacy by those that resist the holy ghost after receiving the gift of salvation is biblical. Augustine taught that only the saints persevere, but who those saints are we can not know since many will not persevere till the end. Lutheran theology teaches this as well, believers quickened by God will not persevere till the end because they resist the holy ghost.
Scripture is stacked against calvinism’s claim that God only quickens the elect, God also quickens the reprobate. And I have quoted that scripture above.
November 18th, 2012 at 8:44 am
Hebrews 6:4 is irrefutable proof that God quickens the reprobate.
November 18th, 2012 at 9:48 am
I meant to say Romans 10 (not Romans 9) when I said they all hear and understand the gospel call Romans 10:18 Romans 10:19
November 18th, 2012 at 6:53 pm
If God were to quicken the reprobate wouldn’t that be contrary to Phlip. 1:6? And the Heb passage is referring to the Jews who tasted Gods goodness and rejected Christ.
November 18th, 2012 at 7:46 pm
Bruce, Augustine in his letter “On the Gift of Perseverance” correctly teaches that as to why some believe for a while and others persevere till the end is a mystery, why God’s grace keeps some and allows others to fall away is a mystery and it belongs in God’s hidden counsel of election and reprobation. I provided the link before but here it is again to Augustine’s biblical doctrine of perseverance http://www.newadvent.org/fathers/15122.htm
Philippians 1:6 refers to the Saints, it is a letter addressed to the Saints. Sure all the Saints will persevere. Luther, Calvin, and Augustine agree on this. Phippians 1:6 refers to the elect, has nothing to do with what I was talking about that many of the reprobate have saving faith for a while and don’t persevere. They have heard and understood the gospel perfectly, as good as the elect have, and yet they trample on Christ after having tasted in the heavenly gift and shared in the holy spirit Hebrews 6:4 says clearly they have shared in the holy spirit with the elect. These are spirit filled believers that lose the holy ghost and don’t persevere till the end.
But many (will fall away (not the Saints, not the elect), endowed with saving faith for a while, they will not persevere. Hebrews 6:4 Hebrews 6:5 and Hebrews 6:6 refers to those that have clearly heard and understood and believed the gospel for a while. They tasted the good word of God and they fell away, it uses the word falling away. It is clearly believers in Christ that were believers for a while (they are not the elect). I hate to give an example but I would say King Saul for sure falls into the category of those that believed for a time and then committed apostacy. Salomon falls into this category as well. He was certainly quickened but only for a while, he wrote proverbs, he was the wisest man on earth, his writings are in the old testament, but he spurned the holy ghost and the gift of salvation that God gave him. Matthew Henry writes this about Salomon’s final state:
“The account we have of Solomon’s apostasy from God, in the latter end of his reign (1 Kings xi. 1), is the tragical part of his story; we may suppose that he spoke his Proverbs in the prime of his time, while he kept his integrity, but delivered his Ecclesiastes when he had grown old (for of the burdens and decays of age he speaks feelingly ch. xii.), and was, by the grace of God, recovered from his backslidings. ”
The parable of the sower shows the different types of soil (men that believe not, men that believe for a while but when tribulation comes they fall away, men that believe but the cares of the world end up choking their faith, and men that believe with perseverance and produce fruit). The word of God fails because of bad soil, men reject it. Some do it right away others believe for a while.
Ephesians 1:6 is for sure a comfot for sincere believers. I believe in all my heart that God will keep me, no matter what. Lutherans also teach this that it’s a comfort to the believer to know that they are kept by God’s grace. Again this does not invalidate that many commit apostacy, and after being enlightened and quickened through the word of God, they leave the faith.
There’s thousands of people in that condition for different reasons. Rod Rosendbladt from the White Horse Inn speaks here about the many that have trusted in Christ for salvation and left the church to never come back. They were believers, put their faith in Christ.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jj2bm5-PMAI
November 18th, 2012 at 7:59 pm
The Augsburg confession is clear:
“They condemn the Anabaptists, who deny that those once justified can lose the Holy Ghost”
Now some lose the holy ghost only for a while and are brought back to repentance, others never repent and perish after rejecting the holy spirit they once had. I can not speak for the state in which Salomon died but he certainly lost the holy ghost, whether he repented before death or not, I do not know. Only God knows it.
In article 43 of the Smalcald articles (part of the lutheran confessions) Luther wrote about King David’s sin that he cast out the holy ghost as well before repenting:
“43] It is, accordingly, necessary to know and to teach that when holy men, still having and feeling original sin, also daily repenting of and striving with it, happen to fall into manifest sins, as David into adultery, murder, and blasphemy, that then faith and the Holy Ghost has departed from them [they cast out faith and the Holy Ghost]. For the Holy Ghost does not permit sin to have dominion, to gain the upper hand so as to be accomplished, but represses and restrains it so that it must not do what it wishes. But if it does what it wishes, the Holy Ghost and faith are [certainly] not present. For St. John says, 1 John 3:9: Whosoever is born of God doth not commit sin, … and he cannot sin. And yet it is also the truth when the same St. John says, 1:8: If we say that we have no sin, we deceive ourselves and the truth is not in us. “
November 18th, 2012 at 10:08 pm
What about Galatians 5:4 where Paul talks about falling from grace. The whole book of Galatians actually warns about falling from grace and back into the law.
November 19th, 2012 at 6:27 am
Bill, of all those who God the Father gave to Christ the Son as a reward for obedience, Christ will loose none!
I find it interesting as I talk to the different religious sects through out the world. Each has set out a standard of beliefs that they claim is right. Be it Catholic, Luthern, Methodist,, Reformed, Mormon, Seventh Day Adventist, Baptist, Assembly of God, Four Square, and now even the emergent church movement. They, like you hold tightly to what they believe is truth, taking passages from the Bible, squaring them up with what their leaders have historically told them the passages mean and holding onto them with great fervency.
Each believes themselves to be right, and will tell me why they are the only right ones.
I on the other hand started with scripture first because that is all I had. from there I lay it along side the books written about the passages I was reading. I find your perspective interesting only because books on the Luthern view seem to be quite scares. As you can tell, I lean toward the reformed view in most instances, but have a real problem with their, and your view of infant baptisism. Your view of grace and justification , and the ability to loose it, the baptist Arminian view of salvation, the view of God ,Christ and salvation held by the Mormons and the Jehovah’s Whitness, and the works based salvation of the Adventist, and emergent church movement.
Thus far as I have stated previously in this discussion, I have concluded that one is regenerated by the Holy Spirit and thus given faith and the ability to hear and believe the Gospel, in that order. The Holy Spirit has also equipt the newly regenerated one with a new desire for God, a new will and new understanding, and a deep appreciation for what was given him or her. I believe that all of this happens only, at and after the Holy Spirits regenerating work, going from death to a newness of life, in Christ, for the Glory of God and God alone. Never to return or be snatched back into the grip of death. Because God was gracious enough to elect me, before the foundations of the world, faithful to send the Holy Spirit to bring me life, and strong enough to keep me until the end.
This is where I stand and as of yet you have not convinced me that the position you hold is more correct. I will continue to review the links you have provided but from what you have laid out thus far, and what I have come to understand as I have read scripture, I find the Reformed position on salvation more aligned with scripture.
Again thank you for your input. B K.
November 19th, 2012 at 6:45 am
“Bill, of all those who God the Father gave to Christ the Son as a reward for obedience, Christ will loose none!”
Bruce you are missing the point again. I don’t disagree with what you say. Because those that lose the holy ghost after being justified are not the ones that the Father gave to the Son. Losing your salvation is totally compatible with “all those who God the Father gave to Christ the Son as a reward for obedience, Christ will loose none!”
Nobody before Calvin, not even Augustine ever taught that you can not lose your salvation.
Augustine chapter 19 On the gift of perseverance http://www.newadvent.org/fathers/15122.htm :
Chapter 19.— Why Does God Mingle Those Who Will Persevere with Those Who Will Not?
Let the inquirer still go on, and say, “Why is it that to some who have in good faith worshipped Him He has not given to persevere to the end?” Why except because he does not speak falsely who says, “They went out from us, but they were not of us; for if they had been of us, doubtless they would have continued with us.” 1 John 2:19 Are there, then, two natures of men? By no means. If there were two natures there would not be any grace, for there would be given a gratuitous deliverance to none if it were paid as a debt to nature. But it seems to men that all who appear good believers ought to receive perseverance to the end. But God has judged it to be better to mingle some who would not persevere with a certain number of His saints, so that those for whom security from temptation in this life is not desirable may not be secure. For that which the apostle says, checks many from mischievous elation: “Wherefore let him who seems to stand take heed lest he fall.” 1 Corinthians 10:12 But he who falls, falls by his own will, and he who stands, stands by God’s will. “For God is able to make him stand;” Romans 14:4 therefore he is not able to make himself stand, but God. Nevertheless, it is good not to be high-minded, but to fear.
November 19th, 2012 at 8:00 pm
Bill that leaves me out because My wife and I left the church over ten years ago!
November 19th, 2012 at 10:45 pm
Bruce, actually Rod in that video (which is the longer version of the 3 minute video I posted a link earlier) says that there will be many in heaven that never stepped foot on a church. Never mind you that have attended in the past. It’s Christ So you’ve got nothing to worry.
You just hold onto the the very basic teaching that Christ died for your sins and rose again, as Rod says in that video it is that simple. Paul teaches the same in 1 Corinthians 15:1 and 1 Corinthians 15:2
Theology is fine but it’s not important in my opinion. Many arminians, many calvinists, and many lutherans will be in heaven. And we all have to be extremely careful not to allow theological differences to get in the way of love for our christian brothers. This is what I like about the White Horse Inn, there are reformed, baptist, and lutheran hosts all sharing Christ despitee their different theological backgrounds. It is paramount to maintain christian unity, in the face of theological differences.
November 20th, 2012 at 5:22 am
I just don’t see it like you do where God ” saves” some for a little while and then let’s them go. I do see a comparison in Christ’s work while here on earth, when after feeding the five thousand He preached to them and it says many left Him because His words were hard. They loved the free food but that was about it.
But to believe that people are actually saved ” for a little while” and then gave up their salvation puts men and women in control of their salvation, and not God, and to say God gives them salvation and then takes it away from them does not appear to be Bliblical.
November 20th, 2012 at 5:51 am
Bill theology helps us understand but I often wonder just how correct our understanding has to be, to be saved. Is the Mormon view to erroneous ? How about the Jehovah’s Whitness, or Seventh Day Adventist? They all hold to a view of God as Supreme, and hold to a form of believing ” in Christ” Or even the Roman Cathloic view of God and Scripture, where does that put them? Some how God has to help those of us who are ” really saved” to know and see the real truth, doesn’t He?
Otherwise there would be no assurance for any of us ! How would we know if at some time in the future God was going to let us fall away, or worse yet, take away our salvation! What a frightful way to live! Or even more bizarre, we, being able to believe what ever we want because He will save us inspire of all that.
No I think the real truth lies in the fact that God regenerates the elect, only, enables and empowers them with saving faith, belief, and true understanding of His Word, and holds them in the hollow of His hand, redeemed and secure, until He brings them home. Something, if my understanding of what you are saying is correct, you don’t agree with.
November 20th, 2012 at 6:35 am
Bruce, I don’t disagree that we can trust God to keep us by his grace till the end. I mentioned that. Those promises are true and biblical. At the same time they are not incompatible with some that believe for a while, are endowed with saving faith, and cast it away. Let me show you how the LCMS words it. Assurance of salvation and men rejecting the holy http://www.lcms.org/Document.fdoc?src=lcm&id=578spirit are both biblical truths, and equally true. On page 6 http://www.lcms.org/Document.fdoc?src=lcm&id=578
Q: One of your FAQ answers states that it is possible for one to lose his salvation. However, in your
Theses on Justification (1983) on this website it says plainly that believers have eternal assurance
(paragraph 58). Which is it?
A: Lutherans believe both are true and Scriptural: It is possible for a believer to fall from faith and lose
salvation, and it is possible for a believer to have complete assurance of eternal salvation through faith
in Jesus Christ. If this seems paradoxical to human reason, then (Lutherans say) this is only because the
teaching of Scripture itself on this issue (as on many other issues) appears paradoxical to human reason.
For Lutherans, this is essentially a matter of properly distinguishing between Law and Gospel: Warnings
against falling from faith are the strongest form of God’s Law, intended to warn against “carnal security”
based on “good works” or against the attitude that “since I’m saved, I can do anything I want to do.”
Assurances of God’s constant and eternal love in Christ are the sweetest and purest form of Gospel,
intended to comfort those who are plagued by their sins and by their failures to keep God’s Law
perfectly.
November 20th, 2012 at 6:45 am
Bruce, I provided two links in my first post, the first one is incorrect, the second one is the correct one. You don’t have to open it since I copied pasted anyways, just to let you know.
You see assurance of salvation is absolutely biblical as I just posted, but so is that many resist God’s grace and reject Christ There is biblical evidence for both. Here’s from page 10 from the same LCMS document http://www.lcms.org/Document.fdoc?src=lcm&id=578
Q: Can you lose your salvation and if you can, what do you need to do to regain it again?
A: The Lutheran Church—Missouri Synod believes and teaches that it is possible for a true believer to
fall from faith, as Scripture itself soberly and repeatedly warns us (1 Cor. 10:12; 1 Pet. 5:8; 2 Pet. 3:17;
Heb. 2:1-3; 3:12-19; 6:4-8, etc.). Such warnings are intended for Christians who appear to be lacking a
right understanding of the seriousness of their sin and of God’s judgment against sin, and who,
therefore, are in danger of developing a false and proud “security” based not on God’s grace, but on
their own works, self-righteousness, or freedom to “do as they please.”
By the same token, the LCMS affirms and treasures all of the wonderful passages in Scripture in which
God promises that He will never forsake those who trust in Christ Jesus alone for salvation (John 10:27-
29; Romans 8; Heb. 13: 5-6, etc.). To those who are truly repentant and recognize their need for God’s
grace and forgiveness, such passages are powerful reminders of the true security that is ours through
sincere and humble faith in Christ alone for our salvation.
A person may be restored to faith in the same way he or she came to faith in the first place: by
repenting of his or her sin and unbelief and trusting completely in the life, death and resurrection of
Christ alone for forgiveness and salvation.
Whenever a person does repent and believe, this always takes place by the grace of God alone and by
the power of the Holy Spirit working through God’s Word in a person’s heart.
November 20th, 2012 at 6:48 am
I meant to say page 13 in my last post and not page 10
November 21st, 2012 at 12:21 am
Bruce, with regard to your question on the cults do some research on the internet. But let me summarize a bit for you with regard to what the specific ones you asked:
Mormons: Definitely a cult. They have added to the word of God. The book of Mormon has been put on par with the bible or higher than the bible, it’s regarded as scripture. Joseph Smith claimed to be a prophet who received the Book of Mormon from an angel.
Jehova’s Witness: A cult as well. They deny the deity of Christ, his physical resurrection, and salvation by grace.
Seventh Day Adventists: I would say they are a christian body with some heterodox doctrine. Others consider them a cult. Some of their teaching is pretty good, specially on salvation by grace through faith. I have known a few guys, and they had a solid understanding of the gospel. Some of their prophetic teaching is awful though, and Ellen White their founder missed completely when she tried to predict Christ’s return. Also their teaching on the Sabbath is legalistic. Not to mention they maintain the true church of Christ worships on Saturday, and they consider denominations that worship on Sunday not the true church. So there are serious problems in some areas, but they are very good in other areas (like their understanding of the gospel).
With regard to the roman catholic church, ask Luther and Calvin who considered the Pope the Antichrist. So obviously there are problems with Rome. Rome hasn’t changed that much since the Reformation, the mass is pretty much the same, praying for the dead, praying to the saints, pilgrimages as good works, etc. Plus Rome still denies that the imputed righteousness of Christ alone saves, read all the anathemas of the Council of Trent. They have not retracted.
November 21st, 2012 at 6:15 pm
Bill do you realize how confusing your explanations are? You can’t loose your salvation but you can loose it if you choose. The elect will all come to Christ and be saved but some who aren’t really elect will be saves and then loose Salvation. You have to believe to be saved but you can’t believe until you have faith and you have to have faith to hear the gospel but you won’t be regenerated until after all this happens to you while you are dead in sin, and then you say there is a little bit of life in some one that the Bible call dead.
Sorry your discourse is becoming so confusing to me. It fails the test of order and logic from what I can grasp of it. Especially the referral to Gods hidden grace and His revealed grace.
I will stick with ” from death to life, from a heart of stone to a heart of flesh, a heart filled with a desire to know God more, a heart that was given the ability to believe and have faith in the Word as a result of the Spirits regeneration. God made it possable for someone to actually hear and understand the call of the gospel, because they were regenerated, they have faith because they were regenerated. They have faith in what the Word says because they were regenerated. And lastly they will persevere because salvation is all out side of us, and God will complete what He started at regeneration. That being presenting the elect ( all of them) to Christ as His bride.
After reading and viewing your links and doing a quick exegesis on them I find these interpretations way off the mark. If these are the views of the Luthern faith in general I fail to see where they come from.
November 21st, 2012 at 7:49 pm
Hey Bruce, do so, stick to calvinism. A lot of calvinists think that lutheran theology fails the test of logic. Lutherans on the other hand feel that calvinists have built a theological system based on logic ignoring scripture that clearly contradicts calvinist logic. Lutherans truly can’t care less if fallen man finds there’s no logic in scripture, they will follow scripture alone with all its teachings that are way beyond man’s ability to understand under the rules of man’s faulty logic. Calvinists on the other hand search for logic and try to get into how God logically operates, lutherans will have none of that, simply because his ways are past finding out and man can not logically understand them.
As I told you this was a nice discussion. That said theology at this level of detail is irrelevant for salvation. I only answered your first question because I thought you were somebody that was just curious. It was not my intention to engage in a theological debate with calvinism.
What matters is what the White Horse Inn hosts talked about on this program, and if you noticed they didn’t get at all into what we discussed here. In hindsight I shouldn’t have answered your first question, had I known you already knew the answer for yourself.
Here’s the thing what truly matters and it is what unites Reformed and Lutherans, the 5 solas (sola scriptura, sola fide, sola gratia, solus christus, soli deo gloria), penal substitution with the imputation of Christ’s righteusness to man and the penalty for sin having been paid by Christ, justification as the article on which the church stands or falls. This is what matters and makes the protestant reformation unique. You would never have asked about Roman Catholicisms and the cults, if you had this first and foremost. The 5 solas and justification by grace through faith alone is what the Reformation is all about and distinguishes it from the cults and Roman Catholicism.
November 22nd, 2012 at 4:45 pm
Bill as I said before I lean more reformed in my thiking but by no means a Calvinist. So if being reformed means I accept logic to interpret scripture then that is what I have to do.
I am using logic to present the gospel, and rely on God to renew peoples hearts so they can hear it. It takes a logical explaination as to why there is suffering in the world and a logical progression through the Bible to show people, Gods big picture for the world He created.
I also find it confusing when you say people will be saved with out knowing theology and if I understand it you correctly, one needs a grasp of the Solas, justification, and grace, to be saved, all very confusing and not logical. Nor is it logical for God to save some people permenantly, and others only temperarly, especially if He promises to complete the good work He started in the ones He set aside unto salvation. Man deciding to give up his or her salvation goes contrary to what Luther sayed to Malancton, telling him “go out and sin bravely, for salvation is all outside of you” Salvation IE new spiritual life, is given tous by God and God alone, and cannot be accepted by man and rejected later. Those whome He set aside unto salvation WILL BE SAVED, and those who werent wont.God, being Sovereign and Just, and can do no wrong. He loved Jacob and Hated Esau. He created some of us for glory and some distruction. He is the potter and we the clay, so He gets to choose how He uses each of us. It is as simple and logical as that.
November 22nd, 2012 at 7:05 pm
Also the original statement in this section is, what does it mean to be Protestant or a protest-ant. The Church of Rome was being protested against. Mostly because of their belief system and its corruption,and the confusing of the gospel message. I too am a protest-ant to any organized religion that confuses the simplicity of the gospel. And I still have the question of ” what level of belief does one have to hold to, or is there a certain belief level one has to achieve, be saved. The thief on the cross believed Christ when he was told he was headed to paradise that day. Does it take more than that? Does all our bantering make us better Christians ( if there is such a thing, being Christ did all that was necessary and Gods satisfaction is in Him and Him alone). Then what is enough and what isn’t ? If it lies in us we are doomed. If it lies in God then He will be gracious to those he will be gracious to. that isnt to confusing is it? I just don’t see how you have come to interpret the scriptures you have listed, the way that you have, when everything I read contradicts what you are saying, and what you are saying creates confusion. I don’t see the God of the Bible as a God of confusion and the paradox you speak of is very confusing, and it shouldn’t be. But man tend to make it that way , and I don’t know why.
November 23rd, 2012 at 9:44 pm
Bruce, you ask:
“The thief on the cross believed Christ when he was told he was headed to paradise that day. Does it take more than that?”
No it does not take more than that, the thief of on the cross believed Christ’s promise, that’s all it takes.
Bruce, you mention:
“I just don’t see how you have come to interpret the scriptures you have listed, the way that you have, when everything I read contradicts what you are saying, and what you are saying creates confusion.”
Where’s the confusion? I said two things about election which are equally true, but man’s carnal mind refuses to accept because in their mind it defies logic. Yet the scripture clearly teaches the following two doctrines, and I’m sorry you find Scripture confusing:
1) Christ died for the sins of all mankind. He is the second Adam. If through Adam sin and death entered to every man, in Christ grace and salvation also was for all men (and not for the elect). Romans 5 compares Adam to Christ and the extent of sin into all men, with the extent of grace to all men.
1 Timothiy 4:10 and 1 John 2:2 specifically mention that Christ died for christians but also for all the non-christians that reject Him. Scripture is consistent with the christological view of election of Karl Barth as well as the lutheran doctrine of objective justification (Christ’s death and resurrection justified every man 2000 years ago, just like Adam’s sin had previously condemned the whole human race).
2) As to why not everybody is saved and only a few enter the narrow gate is a mystery. And we ought not to inquire further into God’s secret counsel (the decree of election and reprobation of Romans 9). Suffice it to say that God has abundantly provided for the salvation of all men in Jesus Christ where everybody has been elected to salvation as Karl Barth correctly taught.
Theology needs to be Christ centered and can not be based on a hidden God that saves some and doesn’t save others. God preached (Christ) has already accomplished the salvation of everybody, and this is the Ministry of Reconciliation (2 Corinthians chapter 5) that we ought to preach to sinners (those that are unaware that God has already saved them 2000 years ago when he died for their sins). We have not been called to preach a hidden God that loves some and hates others, this is not the Christ revealed in Scripture, who as the second Adam has saved and justified all sinners and in the atonement he showed his love for all with no discrimination between the elect and non-elect. That most men resist their Saviour who died for their sin is most difficult to understand, but such is the wickedness of man, and their unbelief condemns them.
November 23rd, 2012 at 10:03 pm
I misspelled 1 Timothy 4:10 in my post above. It can not be more clearly put that Christ is the Saviour of all men, not the believers only. From the KJV:
10 For therefore we both labour and suffer reproach, because we trust in the living God, who is the Saviour of all men, specially of those that believe.
Do calvinists get 1 Timothy 4:10 ? Of course not, their theology is incapable of explaining how God saves those that never come to faith in this life as 1 Timothy 4:10 teaches. 1 Timothy 4:10 actually refers to the universal atonement that accomplished the salvation of all (objective justification) but calvinists deny universal grace.
November 24th, 2012 at 5:40 am
Bill Christ death was not so that all men could be saved . In Johns gospel, Christ’ statement ” My sheep hear my voice, so you are not of my sheep. Because you do not hear my voice. ”
We don’t know who will hear the call, therefore we preach to all men. Some never respond, for others they appear to hear but their hearts remain unchanged, a third group is saved but reflects only a glimmer of the salvation they have received, the wheat mixed with the tares, and the last group that grow in grace and knowlage. The mistery you speak about is not that some are saved and then give it up. The real mistery is who are the elect and why God chose them.
I see no evedience of God saving some for a little while and others permanently. Christ death was enough to save all men but its true affect was for the elect, His sheep. Christ says,” for all those the Father has given Me , I will lose none.” ” for neither death nor life, Princapalities nor powers, shell ever snatch them out of my hand.” Even Luther him self, when questioned by Malankton about how far one must fall from grace to loose ones salvation, was told, ” go out and sin bravely” for salvation is all outside of you. Again I do not see where salvation is granted and then lost.
November 24th, 2012 at 8:20 am
Bruce, keep ignoring scripture ( 1 John 2:2 and 1 Timothy 4:10 )and keep repeating yourself. Only then you are able to stick with 5 point calvinism.
The most beautiful example of the paradox that all are saved (universal grace) and few go to heaven can also be found in John 3:17 where Christ states the Son of Man came to save the world (everybody in the world) and not to condemn it (there is no reprobation in Christ, everybody is elected to salvation as Barth teaches). Right afterwards in John 3:18 and John 3:19 Christ explains that the condemnation lies in unbelief. The universal grace of John 3:17 and the special grace of John 3:18 and 3:19 are both biblical teaching.
Luther in the Smalcald articles wrote that you can lose your salvation through serious sin (why do you think the apostle Paul in 1 Corinthians chapter 3 handed over to Satan the man that committed fornication with his mother in Law). Below is Luther from the Smalcald articles (article 43):
“43] It is, accordingly, necessary to know and to teach that when holy men, still having and feeling original sin, also daily repenting of and striving with it, happen to fall into manifest sins, as David into adultery, murder, and blasphemy, that then faith and the Holy Ghost has departed from them [they cast out faith and the Holy Ghost]. For the Holy Ghost does not permit sin to have dominion, to gain the upper hand so as to be accomplished, but represses and restrains it so that it must not do what it wishes. But if it does what it wishes, the Holy Ghost and faith are [certainly] not present. For St. John says, 1 John 3:9: Whosoever is born of God doth not commit sin, … and he cannot sin. And yet it is also the truth when the same St. John says, 1:8: If we say that we have no sin, we deceive ourselves and the truth is not in us. “
November 24th, 2012 at 8:32 am
Actually Calvin as well taught that if faith is not accompanied by good works, it is not saving faith. There’s differences between Calvin and Luther, reformed and lutheran, but both teach that faith without works is dead, it’s not the christian faith. It is true that salvation is outside us but it is also true that it is always accompanied by good works (the fruit of the spirit). Nobody is justified that is not also sanctified. All the reformers were unanimous on this. The teaching that salvation is outside us and a man is saved no matter how much he sins, is condemned by both Reformed and Lutheran theology, the whole protestand reformaation condemns this teaching which is called antinomianism.
The heresy of “once saved always saved” has no place in the protestant reformation, both cavinist reformed theology and lutheran theology deem it unbiblical. This false doctrine is only taught by some dispensational evangelicals, but it is foreign to both calvinism and lutheranism.
November 24th, 2012 at 9:13 am
And Bruce, sounds like you’ve never attended a calvinist church. When I attended the URC (same church Mike Horton is ordained) there was one excommunication for serious sin every 3 to 4 months. No denomination is so serious about church discipline as the Reformed are. As a matter of fact I’ve never seen somebody excommunicated and published on the church bulleting except in the URC, which is the purest form of a Reformed Church. You might not lose your salvation in calvinist theology, but they will tell you that you’ve never been saved when somebody shows no repentance and persists in sin after being admonished.
November 24th, 2012 at 7:25 pm
You are correct that I am not from the Calvinist type of church.I picked up a series from John Piper about 12 yrs ago on the subject of election, predestination and free will and it was a life changer for both my wife and I. No more striving, no more hoping we are being good enough, finally realizing that our desire for good works and for God came from being saved.Kind of like Luther is a small way. That is why I believe once saved always saved. If salvation is a heart change like Ez.36 says it is, then the evidence is born out in action. True faith produces truely good works. That is why faith with out works is dead,there is no faith at all. True salvation = true faith, belief and understanding. Where I come from, good works that others can see, were expected. If you made confession of your faith. It didn’t matter if you believed or not. as long as you did what looked good in their eyes, you were in like Flynn. That is why I am so sure that my heart was changed first, faith , believing , and understanding all came after God changed my heart. It was only after my regeneration that I started to put the pieces together, throwing out the errors I was taught and assembling an understand of the God of the Bible and His work in the lives of men and women. That is also why I don’t agree with you that God saves and then men walk away. It cant be, not for the truely saved. If they truely understood what salvation was how could they?
Christ Himself said that those truely saved would not CONTINUE in sin, not that they would sin no more, but with a new Heart they just can’t continue to offend God. Its not natural any more because of the new nature that comes with the new heart. No new heart, no change of desires, no saving faith, no salvation. The old nature is still in control.
November 24th, 2012 at 9:40 pm
Agree. Can’t argue with what you just wrote.
I think we have to put closure to this discussion. Frankly with regard to the saints that persevere till the end I don’t see major differences between lutheran and calvinist theology. The differences relate to those that are not the elect.
Here’s the thing Luther, Calvin, and Barth are in my opinion the three greatest protestant theologians in history. On the Roman Catholic side (all prior to the Couuncil of Trent) you’ve got Augustine and Aquinas primarily, and others like Anselm and Athanasius as well. With regard to the three big protestant ones, Luther, Calvin, and Barth, the three adhere to the 5 solas of the reformation in their theology and are doctrinally sound. I read Calvin’s Institutes from cover to cover and loved it. Theology does its best to systematically explain biblical content, no theological system is probably perfect, simply because we can’t fully capture God’s mind.
November 25th, 2012 at 5:56 am
I agree that I have not gone through your 1Timothy 4 passage but I rely on verses like Jn 10:25-29 and 1Jn 2 the whole chapter,especially vs 19,”They went out from us, but they were not really of us; for if they had been of us, they would have remained with us; but they went out, so that it would be shown to us that they all are not of us.” (1 John 2:19 NASB) and others I have quoted as proof texts for my understandings. These folks were never saved and their falling away proved it. Just like the Jn 10 shows the security of those saved and remained in Christ.
Other than your Timothy passage I find no reference to people being saved and then loosing or giving up their salvation, because that would put salvation under mans control, which can not be if you hold to the sola’s. Just like I find absolutely no passage commanding me to baptize my infant children, nor any example thereof. Circumcision of the male children on the 8th day, yes , baptizing them, especially girls, no command, no clear example ( as there is with adults ) no mention of it at all any where in the Bible.therefore I reject that also.
Again I appreciate your input and all you have contributed to my understanding of these issues
Thank you again
November 25th, 2012 at 7:02 am
Bruce, let me ask you a question, do you resist God’s grace? I do, I resist it daily. Not to the point that I cast out my own salvation as others have done, but for sure I sin daily and the Lord’s Prayer addresses this in that we need to ask our Lord to forgive us our trespasses. Now a calvinist would say that they sin because God didn’t give them grace in that area. The Westminster Confession goes as far as saying that God leaves believers in sin for long periods of time. Well, come on, why are we blaming God for our sin?
But there is no mention that man tramples on God’s grace. You see I think God’s grace is very resistible, and is resisted daily by christian believers. We have a a free will, specially after salvation, and we can obey God. But why is our obedience so imperfect? Lack of grace? Sure, God doesn’t give the same amount of grace to everybody in every area. Do we reject God’s grace for us and live in sin? Absolutely, to say that our sins as believers are entirely due to God not giving us sufficient grace is blaming God for our sin. Everything I have is of grace, but a lot of what I don’t have as a christian is because I have spurned God’s grace, trampled on it.
Even the Westminster Confession goes onto admit that saved believers cast out God’s means of grace when it mentions “the neglect of the means of perseverance”,
Chapter XII of The Perseverance of the Saints
“III. Nevertheless they may, through the temptations of Satan and of the world, the prevalancy of corruption remaining in them, and the neglect of the means of their perseverance, fall into grievous sins; ad for a time continue therein: whereby they incur God’s displeasure, and grieve his Holy Spirit; come to be deprived of some measure of their graces and comforts; have their hearts hardened, and their consciences wounded; hurt and prevalancy others, and bring temporal judgments upon themselves.”
November 25th, 2012 at 7:11 am
Here’s the thing, specially after conversion, irresistible grace is a very problematic doctrine. Because it denies that christians have a free will. I believe that christians can either obey God or resist God’s grace. Now without God’s grace christians can do nothing, but this grace is not irresistible. Man can’t boast of having anything that is not from above, at the same time he can’t blame lack of grace for his sin. Denying the free will of believers and saying God’s grace is irresistible I see it as unbiblical teaching. We will because God wills in us as Paul teaches in Philippians, and this is true of every good work, but when it comes to our sin we can not say the same. God is not the author of sin. Lutherans teach that believers can resist God’s grace, even to the point of casting out their salvation, in the most extreme of rebellion. Nevertheless without going that far, christians do resist God’s grace daily and need to rely on God’s forgiveness.
November 25th, 2012 at 7:35 am
Resistible grace can be summarized like this:
As a Christian all I have is from God. But God gave me way more than what I have and I have wasted it.
Irresistible grace can be summarized like this:
As a Christian all I have is what God gave. What I don’t have is because God didn’t give.
I believe irresistible not to be biblical teaching. God gave us way more than what we have, just as Israel did, so do we cast out God’s gifts and don’t make full use of his bountiful grace. Some go as far as casting out their whole salvation, but at the very least we temporarily grieve the holy spirit like Peter did (first by denyng Jesus and after Pentecost like Paul mentions in the letter to the Galatians by not fully accepting the gentiles). We resist God’s grace.
The good news is, we can be so much better! God gave us free will, and it’s not for lack of grace that we fail. So we need to fully utilize the grace God gave us. We can not shun human responsibility, when God has already provided the grace, and it’s us that are only to blame for failing to utilize. Yes christians can resist God’s grace and do it daily!
November 25th, 2012 at 7:53 am
Titus 2:11
“For the grace of God that brings salvation has appeared to all men”
Titus 2:11 teaches that the grace of God that brings salvation has appeared to all men, it’s not talking about common grace, but saving grace available to all men. God’s grace has to be resistible before salvation, otherwise everybody would be converted, and it is also resistible after salvation otherwise christians would be much more obedient in doing God’s will, no to mention Israel would not have rebelled.
November 25th, 2012 at 9:58 am
Acts 5 Anania and Sapphira, two baptized born again believers throwing away their salvation.
Simon Magus after being born again and baptized by Peter throws away his salvation. We don’t know if he later on repented or not, the bilbe doesn’t tell us his final state, Acts 8
Christians are not under the law but when they abuse their christian freedom they cast out their salvation and put themselves back under the law.
Galatians 5:13:
13 For you, brethren, have been called to liberty; only do not use liberty as an opportunity for the flesh, but through love serve one another.
Galatians 5:19
19 Now the works of the flesh are evident, which are: adultery, fornication, uncleanness, lewdness, idolatry, sorcery, hatred, contentions, jealousies, outbursts of wrath, selfish ambitions, dissensions, heresies, 21 envy, murders, drunkenness, revelries, and the like; of which I tell you beforehand, just as I also told you in time past, that those who practice such things will not inherit the kingdom of God.
Let me be clear also that those that sin to that extent lose the witness of the spirit and their assurance of salvation as well. The holy spirit departs and faith is cast out. The warnings from Paul in Galatians 5 are addressed to christian believers, Paul would not issue those warnings if it was not possible for believers to lose their salvation.
In First Corinthians 9:27 the apostle Paul recognizes that even himself is not immune to falling away. And nobody can question that the apostle Paul had assurance of salvation, but as I have maintained before assurance of salvation is perfectly compatible with the belief that christians can and do fall away. And I gave two examples from the book of acts in this post of christians that lost their salvation after baptism.
November 26th, 2012 at 12:41 am
Gods saving grace did appear before all men. It does not say it was accepted by all men, if that were true then all men would be saved and we know that wont happen. There are plenty of people who jumped on board the wagon claiming they were saved, even today, going through all the rituals because they either wanted what others got , like in Ananis and Sapphira wanting the fame of giving like the rest of them. And Simon the ability to heal( for profit and fame) just like a lot of TV preachers today. But we have no way of knowing who was saved and who wasn’t . Some sinned unto death, but was this spiritual death, or physical death to stop them from sin even more? Others were and are brought unto repentance through church discipline, and restored which proved their salvation, and came back among us, as spoken about in1Jn 2:19. So did they get saved loose it then get saved ? How many times can you do that? And how far do you have to fall away each time before your not saved and have to be saved again? And what if you were thinking about repenting and got killed before you repented completely. We’re you almost saved again but just missed it because you didnt quite believe it enough? Did you just make it because you were thinking about coming back and that is what God knew was going to happen so He let you back in?
Doesn’t this put the power of salvation into your hand? By your work? For your Glory?
Is this what you call assurance? Hoping you didn’t fall to far from the cross to loose your salvation? Not knowing how much sin is to much to come back from. And then you say man has a free will? What does that mean? Its never spoken of in the Bible, except in relation to offerings in the Old Testament. Paul refuted that idea, when he said we are either a slave to sin or a slave to Christ,( and free from sins power). What a messed up and scary way of believing. Never knowing for sure if your saved or not, whether you believed enough, or sinned to much? How assuring is that? What ever happened to ” I will never leave you or forsake you” or”But in all these things we overwhelmingly conquer through Him who loved us. For I am convinced that neither death, nor life, nor angels, nor principalities, nor things present, nor things to come, nor powers, nor height, nor depth, nor any other created thing, will be able to separate us from the love of God, which is in Christ Jesus our Lord. (Romans 8:37-39 NASB). That my friend is assurance. Not what you are talking about. What you discribe is confusing and a fearful way to live. Always second guessing, wondering if you have gone to far this time. Wondering if you missed repenting of something that may have disqualified you. All the things Luther struggled with before he came to understand salvation, sitting for hours in the confessional trying to remember all the wrong he committed, and get them confessed.
That is no way to live and that is NOT what gives assurance of ones salvation.
Knowing God changed ones heart and keeps it until the end does. Because the new heart has the new nature, with its new desires, abilities, faith, and understandings. All given by God grace and for Gods glory, to Gods elect, secured by Gods Son, as a reward for His obedience even unto death.
What you appear to be talking about puts God gambling with His Sons Life in hope that some make it to the end.
And to that I say no way. You might not look at it that way but that is how I see what you are describing
November 26th, 2012 at 7:45 am
The best definition of apostacy I’ve ever seen comes from Thomas Aquinas. You can leave the church (apostacy by withdrawing from religious life) and you can commit serious sin (rebelling from God commandements as David did) but as long as faith is kept intact you are still united to Christ. But as soon as unbelief takes root you have lost your salvation.
From Summa Theologica – Thomas Aquinas:
“Apostasy denotes a backsliding from God. This may happen in various ways according to the different kinds of union between man and God. For, in the first place, man is united to God by faith; secondly, by having his will duly submissive in obeying His commandments; thirdly, by certain special things pertaining to supererogation such as the religious life, the clerical state, or Holy Orders. Now if that which follows be removed, that which precedes, remains, but the converse does not hold. Accordingly a man may apostatize from God, by withdrawing from the religious life to which he was bound by profession, or from the Holy Order which he had received: and this is called “apostasy from religious life” or “Orders.” A man may also apostatize from God, by rebelling in his mind against the Divine commandments: and though man may apostatize in both the above ways, he may still remain united to God by faith.
But if he give up the faith, then he seems to turn away from God altogether: and consequently, apostasy simply and absolutely is that whereby a man withdraws from the faith, and is called “apostasy of perfidy.” On this way apostasy, simply so called, pertains to unbelief.”
November 26th, 2012 at 7:46 am
This is the link to my Aquinas quote above http://www.newadvent.org/summa/3012.htm
November 26th, 2012 at 7:56 am
Augustine treats on those that have not received perseverance (they receive saving faith for a while equal to the elect, but they don’t persevere so they are not the elect) in his very short anti-pelagian writing “On Rebuke and Grace”,
Augustine:
“Chapter 11 [VII.]— They Who Have Not Received the Gift of Perseverance, and Have Relapsed into Mortal Sin and Have Died Therein, Must Righteously Be Condemned.
If, then, these things be so, we still rebuke those, and reasonably rebuke them, who, although they were living well, have not persevered therein; because they have of their own will been changed from a good to an evil life, and on that account are worthy of rebuke; and if rebuke should be of no avail to them, and they should persevere in their ruined life until death, they are also worthy of divine condemnation for ever. Neither shall they excuse themselves, saying—as now they say, “Wherefore are we rebuked?”— so then, “Wherefore are we condemned, since indeed, that we might return from good to evil, we did not receive that perseverance by which we should abide in good?” They shall by no means deliver themselves by this excuse from righteous condemnation. For if, according to the word of truth, no one is delivered from the condemnation which was incurred through Adam except through the faith of Jesus Christ, and yet from this condemnation they shall not deliver themselves who shall be able to say that they have not heard the gospel of Christ, on the ground that “faith comes by hearing,” Romans 10:17 how much less shall they deliver themselves who shall say, “We have not received perseverance!” For the excuse of those who say, “We have not received hearing,” seems more equitable than that of those who say, “We have not received perseverance;” since it may be said, O man, in that which you had heard and kept, in that you might persevere if you would, but in no wise can it be said, That which you had not heard you might believe if you would.
Chapter 12.— They Who Have Not Received Perseverance are Not Distinguished from the Mass of Those that are Lost.
And, consequently, both those who have not heard the gospel, and those who, having heard it and been changed by it for the better, have not received perseverance, and those who, having heard the gospel, have refused to come to Christ, that is, to believe in Him, since He Himself says, “No man comes unto me, except it were given him of my Father,” John 6:65 and those who by their tender age were unable to believe, but might be absolved from original sin by the sole laver of regeneration, and yet have not received this laver, and have perished in death: are not made to differ from that lump which it is plain is condemned, as all go from one into condemnation. Some are made to differ, however, not by their own merits, but by the grace of the Mediator; that is to say, they are justified freely in the blood of the second Adam. Therefore, when we hear, “For who makes you to differ? And what have you that you have not received? Now, if you have received it, why do you glory as if you had not received it?” 1 Corinthians 4:7 we ought to understand that from that mass of perdition which originated through the first Adam, no one can be made to differ except he who has this gift, which whosoever has, has received by the grace of the Saviour. And this testimony is so great, that the blessed Cyprian writing to Quirinus put it in the place of a title, when he says, “That we must boast in nothing, since nothing is our own.”
November 26th, 2012 at 8:05 am
This is the link to Augustine (from where I quoted chapter 11 and 12)
http://www.newadvent.org/fathers/1513.htm
And to those that say God has no right to give saving faith and then not grant perseverance I reply with Paul:
Romans 9:20
20 But indeed, O man, who are you to reply against God? Will the thing formed say to him who formed it, “Why have you made me like this?”
And the same Augustine in the same letter on chapter 33 entitled “What is the Difference Between the Ability Not to Sin, to Die, and Forsake Good, and the Inability to Sin, to Die, and to Forsake Good?” explains that the elect are much better than Adam. Adam had free will (the ability not to sin and not to fall away) but the elect have way more than Adam! The elect have been given the inability to sin and the inability to forsake good. They have full assurance of salvation, salvation is not in their free will.
November 26th, 2012 at 10:26 am
Bruce, you are correct though in that because Augustine allows for believers to have saving faith for some time and then perish for lack of perseverance, he clearly taught that nobody can claim they are of the elect. Only because nobody is assured that he will perservere, God is free from removing his grace, and only the elect will persevere, but nobody can know if they are elect or not. Actually calvinism is split on this one, many follow Calvin who unlike Augustine taught that we can be sure that we have received the gift of perseverance, other Calvinists side with Augustine that nobody can claim that they are the elect.
Here’s Augustine Chapter 40
http://www.newadvent.org/fathers/1513.htm “On Rebuke and Grace” on of his anti-pelagian letters he wrote towards the end of his life
“Chapter 40.— No One is Certain and Secure of His Own Predestination and Salvation.
But, moreover, that such things as these are so spoken to saints who will persevere, as if it were reckoned uncertain whether they will persevere, is a reason that they ought not otherwise to hear these things, since it is well for them “not to be high-minded, but to fear.” Romans 11:20 For who of the multitude of believers can presume, so long as he is living in this mortal state, that he is in the number of the predestinated? Because it is necessary that in this condition that should be kept hidden; since here we have to beware so much of pride, that even so great an apostle was buffetted by a messenger of Satan, lest he should be lifted up. 2 Corinthians 12:7 Hence it was said to the apostles, “If you abide in me;” John 15:7 and this He said who knew for a certainty that they would abide; and through the prophet, “If you shall be willing, and will hear me,” Isaiah 1:19 although He knew in whom He would work to will also. And many similar things are said. For on account of the usefulness of this secrecy, lest, perchance, any one should be lifted up, but that all, even although they are running well, should fear, in that it is not known who may attain—on account of the usefulness of this secrecy, it must be believed that some of the children of perdition, who have not received the gift of perseverance to the end, begin to live in the faith which works by love, and live for some time faithfully and righteously, and afterwards fall away, and are not taken away from this life before this happens to them. If this had happened to none of these, men would have that very wholesome fear, by which the sin of presumption is kept down, only so long as until they should attain to the grace of Christ by which to live piously, and afterwards would for time to come be secure that they would never fall away from Him. And such presumption in this condition of trials is not fitting, where there is so great weakness, that security may engender pride. Finally, this also shall be the case; but it shall be at that time, in men also as it already is in the angels, when there cannot be any pride. Therefore the number of the saints, by God’s grace predestinated to God’s kingdom, with the gift of perseverance to the end bestowed on them, shall be guided there in its completeness, and there shall be at length without end preserved in its fullest completeness, most blessed, the mercy of their Saviour still cleaving to them, whether in their conversion, in their conflict, or in their crown!”
November 26th, 2012 at 4:41 pm
1 John 5:16 from the KJV
16 If any man see his brother sin a sin which is not unto death, he shall ask, and he shall give him life for them that sin not unto death. There is a sin unto death: I do not say that he shall pray for it.
It is clear that this sin unto death that John refers to is apostacy. John is addressing this letter to christians and says if any man sees his brother commit a sin unto death. This is more than sufficient proof that christians can eternally perish if they sin unto death. I love Calvin but he went into dangerous territory by being the first theologian to ever deny that a regenerated man can eternally perish and be proven to be part of the pool of the reprobate as scripture teaches. First John 5:16 is irrefutable proof that christian brothers can sin unto death and perish eternally.
November 26th, 2012 at 8:21 pm
How could Adam have a free will when God set His plan of salvation into motion “before the foundation of the world” Gods will trumps mans will every time. If not then God is not Sovereign and therefore not God. Christ WILL SAVE all whom the Father gives Him. It says nothing about saving a bunch that later are lost. That would be a waste of Christ’s death. Oh we will save this large group, but only give perserverence to this smaller group over here, and the rest will fall away.
Can’t you see how bizarre that is?
November 26th, 2012 at 9:39 pm
As i said before Bruce, the reprobate are not this ones that the Father gave to Christ. Those that have faith for a while, but then abandon the faith are under God’s decree of judgment and reprobation. They can not be saved. Even John Calvin despite everything the confessions say and despite anything he wrote in the Institutes, just like Augustine, did recognize in his commentary of John 5:16 that the sin unto death a christian commits is apostacy. Here’s the man himself, John Calvin on his commentary of John 5:16 unabashedly admitting that apostacy is the only sin unto death that a christian believer can commit and instantly and eternally perish.
John Calvin: http://www.ccel.org/ccel/calvin/calcom45.v.vi.v.html
There is a sin unto death I have already said that the sin to which there is no hope of pardon left, is thus called. But it may be asked, what this is; for it must be very atrocious, when God thus so severely punishes it. It may be gathered from the context, that it is not, as they say, a partial fall, or a transgression of a single commandment, but apostasy, by which men wholly alienate themselves from God. For the Apostle afterwards adds, that the children of God do not sin, that is, that they do not forsake God, and wholly surrender themselves to Satan, to be his slaves. Such a defection, it is no wonder that it is mortal; for God never thus deprives his own people of the grace of the Spirit; but they ever retain some spark of true religion. They must then be reprobate and given up to destruction, who thus fall away so as to have no fear of God.
Were any one to ask, whether the door of salvation is closed against their repentance; the answer is obvious, that as they are given up to a reprobate mind, and are destitute of the Holy Spirit, they cannot do anything else, than with obstinate minds, become worse and worse, and add sins to sins. Moreover, as the sin and blasphemy against the Spirit ever brings with it a defection of this kind, there is no doubt but that it is here pointed out.
But it may be asked again, by what evidences can we know that a man’s fall is fatal; for except the knowledge of this was certain, in vain would the Apostle have made this exception, that they were not to pray for a sin of this kind. It is then right to determine sometimes, whether the fallen is without hope, or whether there is still a place for a remedy. This, indeed, is what I allow, and what is evident beyond dispute from this passage; but as this very seldom happens, and as God sets before us the infinite riches of his grace, and bids us to be merciful according to his own example, we ought not rashly to conclude that any one has brought on himself the judgment of eternal death; on the contrary, love should dispose us to hope well. But if the impiety of some appear to us not otherwise than hopeless, as though the Lord pointed it out by the finger, we ought not to contend with the just judgment of God, or seek to be more merciful than he is
November 27th, 2012 at 4:47 am
But where does it say the individual was saved to begin with? Where does it indicate that this was a brother in Christ and not just a physical brother or brother in arms or any other way we use the word brother. I see sin unto death happening all around. Unrepentant people continue to sin until they die. This too is a grave situation or grievous sin as Calvin states.
November 27th, 2012 at 5:54 am
Much as I hate to argue with the dialectical method…
After taking quite a bit of time to read the thread, I thought I might throw out a question or two.
Is Christ, by showing infinite mercy and grace to all in order to bring all to salvation (every person who has ever lived), working against the predestination of God the Father(who does not elect all)?
Just an observation here. And before I am labeled with blasphemy, let me just say…the answer is: no. Both parties (not excluding the Holy Spirit)are the same in their agreement, purposes, council, power, and will. The three are in agreement. Christ agrees with the father in His elective council (who only elects some), and he knows those that the Father has given Him–desiring to save them.
Also, if all were really and truly imputed the righteousness of Christ, then they would all be saved, since the requirement of eternal life is perfection before God. Now if God has given this perfection through Christ–even if they don’t know it yet–then they are saved, since the reality of penal substitution and imputation is still true before God in Christ for all these people. If it’s happened, then let’s just say that it’s happened–never mind if I know it or not. Anyway, end of that one.
Lastly, if I am woken up, or made alive at the hearing of the gospel and by the hearing of the gospel, that is great! He accomplishes his purpose by means of grace, namely His gospel. I hear the saving gospel in a natural body that has physical ears to hear it, then I am woke up by it…made alive; regenerate even! Now where do we place faith in all of this? WORD —> GOES INTO THE EAR —> REGENERATION or NEW BIRTH or LIFE EVERLASTING —> SIGHT or LOVE OF GOD or FAITH (BELIEF/TRUST IN CHRIST).
It all comes down to: “why doesn’t God do this for everyone, or save every equally-spiritually-dead person.” And we don’t know, but this is what he does and he is still good, loving, pure, all-powerful, all sovereign, etc.
Chris Jager,
Tillamook, OR
November 27th, 2012 at 8:44 am
Bruce, the apostle John is talking about praying to a christian brother, some brothers commit sin not unto death and some the sin unto death. Calvin calls the sin unto death apostacy in his commentary. Which means turning from the faith, those that commit apostacy were in the faith. You can twist scripture all you want to, and make it fit any warped theology. That’s why I quoted Calvin, if you want to disagree with Calvin go ahesd. Simple impenitence is not the sin unto death or the sin against the holy ghost. The sin against the holy ghost is committed by renewed, regenerated men that have the holy spirit, and trample on it. An impenitent man can not commit the sin against the holy ghost, only the regenerated, by that meaning those that have understood the gospel, dead men don’t understand the gospel and can not commit the sin unto death or the sin against the holy ghost. Only the regenerated commit this sin. I’m going to show you in my next post Calvin’s commentary on the sin against the holy ghost, and by the way Calving teaches the same in his Institutes on this sin. Dead men that haven’t heard the gospel or that don’t have ears to understand the gospel can not sin against the holy spirit. My next post will show Calvin from his commentaries explaining this, and clearly stating that impenitence or unbelief due to lack of understanding the gospel is not the sin against the holy ghost.
November 27th, 2012 at 8:54 am
Here’s John Calvin explaining that simply rejecting Christ is not the sin against the holy ghost, it is rejecing Christ after being enlightened (regenerated) Spirit through the preaching of the gospel.
John Calvin: http://www.ccel.org/ccel/calvin/calcom32.ii.xiii.html
All sin and blasphemy. As our Lord declares blasphemy against the Holy Ghost to be more heinous than all other sins, it is of importance to inquire what is the meaning of that term. Those who define it to be impenitence127may be refuted without any difficulty; for it would have been in vain and to no purpose for Christ to say, that it is not forgiven in the present life. Besides, the word blasphemy cannot be extended indiscriminately to every sort of crimes; but from the comparison which Christ makes, we shall easily obtain the true definition. Why is it said that he who blasphemes against the Spirit is a more heinous sinner than he who blasphemes against Christ? Is it because the majesty of the Spirit is greater, that a crime committed against him must be punished with greater severity? Certainly that is not the reason; for as the fullness of the Godhead (Colossians 2:9) shines in Christ, he who pours contempt upon him overturns and destroys, as far as it lies in his power, the whole glory of God. Now in what manner shall Christ be separated from his Spirit, so that those who treat the Spirit with contempt offer no injury or insult to Christ?
Already we begin to perceive, that the reason why blasphemy against the Spirit exceeds other sins, is not that the Spirit is higher than Christ, but that those who rebel, after that the power of God has been revealed, cannot be excused on the plea of ignorance. Besides, it must be observed, that what is here said about blasphemy does not refer merely to the essence of the Spirit, but to the grace which He has bestowed upon us. Those who are destitute of the light of the Spirit, however much they may detract from the glory of the Spirit, will not be held guilty of this crime. 128We do not maintain, that those persons are said to pour contempt on the Spirit of God, who oppose his grace and power by hardened malice; and farther we maintain, that this kind of sacrilege is committed only when we knowingly endeavor to extinguish the Spirit who dwells in us.
The reason why contempt is said to be poured on the Spirit, rather than on the Son or the Father, is this. By detracting from the grace and power of God, we make a direct attack on the Spirit, from whom they proceed, and in whom they are revealed to us. Shall any unbeliever curse God? It is as if a blind man were dashing against a wall. But no man curses the Spirit who is not enlightened by him, and conscious of ungodly rebellion against him; for it is not a superfluous distinction. that all other blasphemies shall be forgiven, except that one blasphemy which is directed against the Spirit. If a man shall simply blaspheme against God, he is not declared to be beyond the hope of pardon; but of those who have offered outrage to the Spirit, it is said that God will never forgive them. Why is this, but because those only are blasphemers against the Spirit, who slander his gifts and power, contrary to the conviction of their own mind? Such also is the import of the reason assigned by Mark for the extreme severity of Christ’s threatening against the Pharisees; because they had said that he had the unclean spirit; for in this manner they purposely and maliciously turned light into darkness; and, indeed, it is in the manner of the giants,129as the phrase is, to make war against God.
But here a question arises. Do men proceed to such a pitch of madness as not to hesitate, knowingly and willfully, to rush against God? for this appears to be monstrous and incredible. I reply: Such audacity does indeed proceed from mad blindness, in which, at the same time, malice and virulent rage predominate. Nor is it without reason that Paul says, that though he was
a blasphemer, he obtained pardon, because he had done it ignorantly in his unbelief,
(1 Timothy 1:13;)
for this term draws a distinction between his sin and voluntary rebellion. This passage refutes also the error of those who imagine that every sin which is voluntary, or which is committed in opposition to the conscience, is unpardonable. On the contrary, Paul expressly limits that sin to the First Table of the Law; 130and our Lord not less plainly applies the word blasphemy to a single description of sin, and at the same time shows, that it is of a kind which is directly opposed to the glory of God. 131
From all that has been said, we may conclude that those persons sin and blaspheme against the Holy Spirit, who maliciously turn to his dishonor the perfections of God, which have been revealed to him by the Spirit, in which His glory ought to be celebrated, and who, with Satan, their leader, are avowed enemies of the glory of God. We need not then wonder, if for such sacrilege there is no hope of pardon; for they must be desperate who turn the only medicine of salvation into a deadly venom. Some consider this to be too harsh, and betake themselves to the childish expedient, that it is said to be unpardonable, because the pardon of it is rare and difficult to be obtained. But the words of Christ are too precise to admit of so silly an evasion. It is excessively foolish to argue that God will be cruel if he never pardon a sin, the atrocity of which ought to excite in us astonishment and horror. 132Those who reason in that manner do not sufficiently consider what a monstrous crime it is, not only to profane intentionally the sacred name of God, but to spit in his face when he shines evidently before us. It shows equal ignorance to object, that it would be absurd if even repentance could not obtain pardon; for blasphemy against the Spirit is a token of reprobation, and hence it follows, that whoever have fallen into it, have been delivered over to a reprobate mind, (Romans 1:28.) As we maintain, that he who has been truly regenerated by the Spirit cannot possibly fall into so horrid a crime, so, on the other hand, we must believe that those who have fallen into it never rise again; nay, that in this manner God punishes contempt of his grace, by hardening the hearts of the reprobate, so that they never have any desire towards repentance.
November 27th, 2012 at 9:07 am
There is no doubt that deepest area of the pit of hell will be populated by those that Spirit of God regenerated, and they resisted God’s grace after having been regenerated by his Spirit. These are the worst of the reprobates. Below some of John Calvin’s quotes in his commentary on the sin against the holy ghost that assert this (I copied pasted from my last post above where I quoted Calvin’s commentary)
John Calvin:
http://www.ccel.org/ccel/calvin/calcom32.ii.xiii.html
“Those who are destitute of the light of the Spirit, however much they may detract from the glory of the Spirit, will not be held guilty of this crime.” John Calvin
“it is, not only to profane intentionally the sacred name of God, but to spit in his face when he shines evidently before us.” John Calvin
“But no man curses the Spirit who is not enlightened by him” John Calvin
“for blasphemy against the Spirit is a token of reprobation” John Calvin
November 27th, 2012 at 9:16 am
I also have some supporting texts as well, if anyone wants to hear them. Luther might see it my way. On the other hand maybe Calvin. But not Beza…since he came after Calvin. Oh, and then maybe even Augustine would also support my supporting texts–he had a lot of authority! Or Christ, or Paul, or Apollos, or Cephas.
I’m sure I’m commiting any number of logical fallacies right now, but hey, I’m tired. Or maybe I’m just testing how you will respond, if at all. How will you perceive or read into, or appraise my words and reactions. Should you take them at face-value, or is there some other point to my madness? Confused yet? Can you relate to Bruce yet? But now I’m surely wrong, because I’m causing confusion. But didn’t Bill confuse Bruce also? So now Bill, who might accuse me of causing confusion, is also a confusor. Shall I label him as well? Well, maybe I shouldn’t use the word “shall…” because it’s too arrogant. So then I shouldn’t question my judgment.
What do we accept, and where do we stop? It seems that we must use reason to understand anything at all…or to produce even the simplest arguement. But is it our reason, or the revelation of God in His Word apart from our reason? No one can contest that the revelation of God far exceeds the reason of man. So now in my reason I will attempt to justify the revelation of God. “What?” you say–”no,” I say. Because the Word of God is plain…it does not need to be met with human reason…only plain teaching or exposition. So then where do the words “unlimited” come from–because they’re in the Scriptures, right? (Actually I don’t know because I haven’t looked it up; I’m just trying to make a point.) But man’s regenerated brain (mind), which is commanded to seek godly renewal for transformation, has to think about real words in its re-created and regenerate free-will. It thinks about the words it hears and reads (which is another way of hearing, metaphorically speaking, I think). It can even think about–reason with–the words that God speaks. Wait, here it comes so painfully from this wretched man in its quotable predictability: “Come, let us reason together.”
God can’t be asking for man to actually reason, right? Oh sure…right. We can, but only so far. When our reason runs out, then we must trust God. Don’t try to solve puzzles…especially God’s. Don’t try to exercise your reason, and continue to meditate and ponder on the word of God, because you might gain more reasoning, which is–really–an attempt to become equal with God. Just like Satan. So now the person who meditates on Scripture–past his own reason in order to understand what the Scripture is trying to say–is not trying to come to draw near to God, he is sinning and doing the work of Satan.
Or…maybe I’m just unregenerate or an apostate. Truth is, you don’t know. But I am not worthy to even speak, or teach you anything. I am an unsubstantiated man, miserable and without a prayer. Unless I have written to you, in this way, on purpose. Do you care? Or do you give up on me? If I leave a bad taste in your mouth, do you chew and swallow, or spit. Not everything that is bitter is evil. What if I’m broccoli?
OK, enough of this foolishness. My diatribe is over. Go ahead and erase me.
Your bond-servant,
Chris Jager,
Tillamook, OR
November 27th, 2012 at 9:41 am
I guess I just kind of wanted someone to answer Bruce out of understanding and not annoyance and accusation. Question him and get to know why he thinks the way he does…then you will be able to teach him from the Scriptures and counsel him right where he is at, instead of blindly giving him information, albeit truth, that he isn’t equipped to handle yet.
If he is repetative and asking the same questions over and over again, maybe he just needs more explanation and patience…to spend a little time on the subject and really get to know the particulars. Don’t assume that he is dull just because he doesn’t seem to pick it up right away. Use your office–your gift of teaching–to train him. But as a teacher, please recongnize the cognizance of your pupils so as to instruct them clearly.
And I do apologize for the diatribe; only I hope it did at least some good.
Thank you for the Calvin quotes, as well.
Chris Jager,
Tillamook, OR
November 27th, 2012 at 1:07 pm
Chris, what you asked would be a whole new topic. Without the dialectical method or paradox in scripture it is impossible to understand the trinity, and the work of God the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit in conversion. The grace of the holy spirit is resistible by man, but the will of the Father never fails, and the work of the Son on the cross also accomplished its purpose (saved all of mankind) and can’t be resisted by man whether they believe it or not. The lutherans and the neo-orthodox (Karl Barth) are in agreement on this. Actually I believe objective justification in lutheranism, although the church lutherans claim it was always taught by them, it is right out of the pages of Karl Barth and I have no doubt that reformed neo-orthodoxy has pervaded lutheranism.
Even Calvin is forced to resort to paradox, that we must believe with equally strong faith that those that God regenerates won’t fall, but also that those that God regenerated and failed can not be recovered and have been given up to a reprobate mind.
The dialectical method of lutheranism (God hidden and God revealed) to a great extent and neo orthodoxy to a much larger extent is like modern physics that started with Einstein’s theory of relativity. The logical method of Augustine and Calvin resembles Newtonian physics or traditional logic. Nobody is saying that logic needs to be thrown out the window (and sadly many neo orthodox and Karl Barth followers have done that), the dialectical methond needs to be incorporated and added to logical theological thinking. Modern physics didn’t throw out Newton, neither should we throw out Calvin, but we have to get past Calvin and this can not be done without the dialectical method and neo orthodoxy.
With regard to Bruce, there’s so much I can do. I can’t change people’s minds, only God can do this through his spirit and scripture. Bruce has been brainwashed by 5-point TULIP calvinists like Piper and James White, and I can’t change this only God can. Some of this TULIP is cultic in that it’s become a religion in itself with no biblical support, the minds of this people are shut, and the bible interpreted in light of TULIP. You are right that this problem started with Theodore Beza, and was compounded with the Canons of Dort and Westminster Confession. It basically divided protestantism and lutherans shut the door on calvinism. Very different was John Calvin (whom even Arminius stated he had no problems with his writings, and it was Beza’s writings that provoked Arminius reaction) who was friends with Philip Melancthon, and called him a Saint, all this despite Melancthon’s synergism that the lutheran confessions rejected. Modern calvinists will have nothing to do with Melancthon, but John Calvin signed the modified Augsburg Confession (the doctrine on the Lord’s Supper being the only change made to bridge the gap between lutheranism and calvinism). Let me say this John Calvin would have never signed the Canons of Dort nor the Westminster Confession. This was the birth of rationalism and set back reformed theology for centuries to come. It was only in the 20th century that Karl Barth has revived again reformed theology.
November 27th, 2012 at 1:34 pm
Bruce, when I said stay with Calvinism. If this system works best in your mind to grasp the grace of Christ, it is not my intent to shake this.
Assurance of salvation is precious, we have look for it in Christ’s finished work on the cross. Look to Christ alone.
One thing I’ve noticed with Calvinists, is that if you ask them why they are the elect, first they look for evidence of salvation in themselves. Firtst they tell you they have faith and second that there is some evidence of good works, faith is working through love. Well this is not ideal, because you will start questioning do you have enough works, do you have enough faith, and then realize that you can lose that faith instantly through apostacy. So my message to calvinists is just look at Christ and his finished work on the cross and his promises, from there only you can get assurance of salvation. And you will realize that the doctrine of election and reprobation is totally irrelevant to your salvation, because your salvation comes from what Christ did and already accomplished on the cross. And the work of Christ is irresistible, no human can change, it is accomplished and finished. Fix your eyes on Christ and you will have full assurance.
November 27th, 2012 at 1:44 pm
And think about it, has anybody ever been converted by Romans 9? But how many have been converted by Romans 3 to Romans 5 or Romans 1 to Romans 5. Luther was, Wesley was, I was as well. It is Christ that saves and it is Christ that keeps us saved, not the decree of election and reprobation in Romans 9.
November 27th, 2012 at 4:00 pm
And Chris, let me expand a bit since you seem interested in how the trinity works in unison and not one against the other. God the father in his inscrutable decree of election and reprobation (Calvin) excutes his will unfailingly. Due to Adam’s sin the whole human race has fallen into perdition, and so the second Adam, Christ is sent and with his blood purchases the salvation of all mankind (he is the elct as Karl Barth puts it). This was necessary so that the gospel of Christ can be preached to everybody sincerely and effectually, and that truly whosoever believes may be saved. The atonement sacrifice of Christ can not be resisted, the universal grace being irresistible, Christ the second Adam brought grace to everybody just like Adam brought sin to everybody. Now the universal grace of Christ in the atonement needs to be personally applied, and the holy ghost works through the word to convert sinners. The work of the holy ghost can be resisted by man. However, the holy ghost accomplishes its work without human cooperation, man doesn’t contribute anything. This is very important to understand because some erroneously think that because the grace of the holy ghost is resistible, it requires human cooperation for the grace to be effectual. This is not true, the holy ghost accomplishes its work without human cooperationm as the letter of the Phillippians teaches we will and do because God wills and does in us. The holy ghost not only gives us a will but also performs what he wills. Man is incapable of willing or performing what God commands, the holy ghost does not assist us, but actually does it for us wihtout our cooperation. It’s the height of monergism.
The parable of the sower would illustrate this. The ground (man) whether good, bad, or ugly, by itself can do nothing/ The seed (god’s word with the holy ghost inside it) alone can produce a fruitful tree. However if that seed falls in bad ground, as the parable of the sower teaches, it can’t produce fruit through no fault of its own, even the best seed that falls on rocks can do nothing. This is how man resists the holy ghost. Now if the seed falls in good ground and a tree blooms with fruit all the credit goes to the good seed, the ground was entirely passive, it didn’t do a thing, the seed and treee took all the nutrients by themselves the ground was entirely passive. And so is with fruitful believers, they contribute nothing, the holy ghost does all the work with no human cooperation.
Philippians 2:13 summarizes it perfectly:
“For it is God which worketh in you both to will and to do of his good pleasure.”
You see God through the holy ghost not only wills but he also performs in us. So it’s pure monergism.
November 27th, 2012 at 4:12 pm
And in my last post I summarized where I see the future of Reformed theology. Today many calvinists lash out at Barth and label him a relativist full of contradictions, and many Barthians lash out as Calvin as somebody that totally misunderstood scripture and invented a monstruous god. This needs to stop because both were godly men and in my last post I synthesized how the theologies of Barth and Calvin can be integrated.
November 27th, 2012 at 6:51 pm
Just to clarify to everybody, I am not neo orthodox or Barthian. I think Barth contributions have been great, but he never understood reformed or lutheran predestination and threw it out, instead of building on it. He also criticized Luther for the theology of a God hidden and a God revealed, for Barth there was only a God revealed Christ. So just for the record I’m not Barthian. Actually Luther handled paradox way better than Barth, in that Luther understood the trinity better, for Barth it was only Christ, Luther understood the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost. Also can’t figure out why Barth had to use so many words to say something so simple. His over 9000 page church dogmatics being an example of this, to the point that even Barthian followers are divided on what Barth taught. So as much as I think paradox is of value, I look for simple things, the way Prosper of Aquitaine wrote or the way Luther wrote. The Hegellian convoluted style of Karl Barth I can’t support. YOu need to be able to communicate in simple terms. Some people are confused by Lutheran theology, although Luther was down to the point. Barth’s style and Hegellian dialectics, I am not sold on it myself.
Bruce, my apologies if I confused you. Also Chris is right that I’m not a good teacher and just throw things out without explaining. In all honesty though I put so much time into some of these posts that I have hardly any energy. Also if I knew how to show it in a simpler way I would have done. Calvin’s bible commentary is the best out there, the general link, Calvin expounded scripture with objectivity unlike modern TULIP calvinists that try to justify TULIP from scripture. As a matter of fact I can’t find TULIP in Calvin, least of all on his bible commentary. Here’s the link in case you want to check any of the scripture passages I quoted http://www.ccel.org/ccel/calvin/commentaries.i.html
November 27th, 2012 at 9:45 pm
Bill it all goes back to the topic at hand ” what does it mean to be Protestant ” . I have waded through Luther’s ” bondage of the will “. And some of his biographal materal along with Arminus, Augistine, Calvin, Barth and now Bonhooeffer. Each had their own unique belief systems and yet all held some common ground, as do we with the Church of Rome. The question that remains for me is, how right does one have to be on this stuff ? How much is revelent for salvation? Does knowing all the ins and outs make a difference? Does the fact that you hold to your views or me with mine or Chris with his, give any of us a leg up on the salvation ladder? Contrary to what you think about me being brain washed by Piper, White , Sproul, Boice, or any other “Calvinist” that is popular today. I am just a gatherer. I take what you through out here and start digging. I ask my self ” why does Bill believe what he does, and then sift through what you have laid out , to determine if its relevant for salvation. So far I have found it interesting to read through what you have posted. I see where it came from, and draw my own conclusions. Because the one thing that I have found over the years is whether you are Luthern, Calvinist, Arminian, Palagien, Agustiniane or Jew, you all will fight for what you believe is true. And no one will ever change your mind. Each thinks they are right and the other is wrong or at least off the mark on some of these issues. Each has a starting point after which they systematically gather information and verses to prove their point is the correct one( which is the one of the reasons I left the orgenized church so many years ago) . It’s sad to see how the Calvinist camp detests the Lutherns, Arminians, Catholics, and Jews. How the Lutherns shun the Calvinist, and so on?
It all goes back to ” what must one do to be saved?” And for me the answer is NOTHING. I am a sinner. God saves me. The only thing i have that I bring to the table is my sin, and I don’t even know it until the Holy Spirit quickens me and points me to Christ and says , see, hear, have faith, and believe.
That is my salvation, my regeneration, my new heart. That is Christ in me.
All this other stuff,although interesting,is of no value when it comes to “saving someone” BECAUSE WE DON’T SAVE ANYONE. We just get to participate when we preach Christ and Him Crucified.
And just how many times have we presented the Gospel to someone while trying to prove our points on this blog? For me , zero, I get so tied up, looking through all the stuff you have posted that I forget what my call is. At any rate we did it, I learned from it. And now need to go use it. And hope you do the same. Just remember people don’t care what you know, they want ot know that you care.
November 27th, 2012 at 10:11 pm
Agree 100% with what you just wrote,
Bruce:
“It all goes back to ” what must one do to be saved?” And for me the answer is NOTHING. I am a sinner. God saves me. The only thing i have that I bring to the table is my sin, and I don’t even know it until the Holy Spirit quickens me and points me to Christ and says , see, hear, have faith, and believe.
That is my salvation, my regeneration, my new heart. That is Christ in me.”
Perfect summary and I totally agree with what you wrote afterwards as well:
Bruce:
“All this other stuff,although interesting,is of no value when it comes to “saving someone” BECAUSE WE DON’T SAVE ANYONE. We just get to participate when we preach Christ and Him Crucified.
And just how many times have we presented the Gospel to someone while trying to prove our points on this blog? For me , zero,”
November 27th, 2012 at 10:15 pm
Bruce:
“The question that remains for me is, how right does one have to be on this stuff ? How much is revelent for salvation? Does knowing all the ins and outs make a difference? Does the fact that you hold to your views or me with mine or Chris with his, give any of us a leg up on the salvation ladder?”
Bruce it’s totally irrelevant, as I have just said in my last post where I quoted what you wrote that is the only thing that matters.
On this note we need to put closure to this and focus on more important things!
November 28th, 2012 at 12:27 am
What we have discussed is important no doubt for understanding the greatness of God and the fallenness of man. Thinking about it and discussing it should bring us to our knees in worship, repentance, and in deep appreciation, for what He has done. I want to say ” to” us because that is really what He did. I listen as people tell me their view of salvation through the years and see where it has gone from how great a gift Gods salvation is to ” I chose” therefore I’m saved. Compare this to what I have read in Bonhoeffers book shows our theology to be very shallow and our churches full of tickled ears. So do I miss orginized religion ? Not at all. What I long for is the “the Church,” the Bride of Christ, but where is it ? Who are they ? And why are they so hard to find? Why do they look just like the world? Those are just a few of the questions I have. What it means to be Protestant is one I care very little about, because being Protestant is not important. Being Christ like is. And being able to have a discussion like this, not so much to prove we are right, or impress others by what we know, but to help us realize how little we are and how big God is, makes this worth while to me. Will we ever agree this side of heaven? I doubt it. But going from a man of the world to being Calvinist as you call it, with ” understanding ” God and His gift of salvation. That’s been a long journey for me. And the question ” why did God elect some and not others” isn’t the real question. Why me ? Is! And it’s because He is the Potter and we are the clay, and as the Potter He does with the clay as He wills, ANd I have no right to question that, or object to it. Just trust and obey.
November 28th, 2012 at 2:28 am
Bravo, Bruce. Bravissimo!
That is the goal–our sanctification. And to that end, the goal of the church–or our fellowship–is edification. I believe that has happened here, and we have all been mutually encouraged. Isn’t that what “coming together” is all about? In the assembly of believers the idea is for God to provide His people with nourishment: that we are refreshed and sustained after having been reminded of how small we are, and how great Christ is.
One of my favorite movies is called, “Amazing Grace.” It’s a drama about the life of William Wilburforce. In that movie the character John Newton, in his monologue admonishing Wilburforce to abolish the slave trade, exemplifies the very spirit of hope that we have as Christians. He says, “There are two things I am sure of: I am a great sinner, and Christ is a great savior.”
Newton counted himself as nothing, but Christ as everything. It sounds like something Rod Rosenbladt would say, doesn’t it?
Thank you, friends, for everything. And Bill–I think you are a wonderful teacher! Very rich and robust in your breadth of knowledge, with a capacity to understand and encourage so many people. I can’t tell you how many times I gave hearty, “Amen”s to what you said. Especially concerning the Gospel.
We all need admonishment and gentle rebuke from time to time, though. I just wish I could have followed my own advice and gotten to know you, before responding the way that I did–which was neither graceful or gentle.
Bill, maybe some other time we could discuss the harmony of the Trinity? I do appreciat your labors. You should read our thread on infant baptism under, “Exploring Covenant Theology.”
And Bruce, I praise God that after such a hard road, God has opened your eyes with the true Gospel that saves; seeing at last yourself as nothing, but Christ as everything. It is a wonderful thing to join with the saints and proclaim the marvelous works of our God in Christ Jesus, Amen?!
“In him you also, when you heard the word of truth, the gospel of your salvation, and believed in him, were sealed with the promised Holy Spirit, who is the guarantee of our inheritance until we acquire possession of it, to the praise of his glory.
For this reason, because I have heard of your faith in the Lord Jesus and your love toward all the saints, I do not cease to give thanks for you, remembering you in my prayers, that the God of our Lord Jesus Christ, the Father of glory, may give you the Spirit of wisdom and of revelation in the knowledge of him, having the eyes of your hearts enlightened, that you may know what is the hope to which he has called you, what are the riches of his glorious inheritance in the saints, and what is the immeasurable greatness of his power toward us who believe, according to the working of vhis great might that he worked in Christ when he raised him from the dead and seated him at his right hand in the heavenly places, far above all rule and authority and power and dominion, and above every name that is named, not only in this age but also in the one to come. And he put all things under his feet and gave him as head over all things to the church, which is his body, the fullness of him who fills all in all.”
Ephesians 1:13-23
Joyfully,
Chris Jager
Tillamook, OR
November 28th, 2012 at 6:58 am
Bill Chris many questions remain 0ne being how far does one fall away before salvation is lost. What is a”sin unto death”. And what is Gods purpose in saving the nonelect?
November 28th, 2012 at 7:10 am
Kim Riddlebarger is great with those questions. You should check out his site if you haven’t already. Lots of sermon audio there.
http://kimriddlebarger.squarespace.com/
And of course, just bringing up Kim segues into the question of eschatology. Lots of discussion there too!
Chris Jager
Tillamook, OR
November 28th, 2012 at 11:47 am
Chris,
The trinity in a nutshell as it relates to the atonement:
Reformed theology starts primarily with God’s decree of election and reprobation, Christ chief purpose is to execute this decree and he purchases with his blood the salvation of the elect, the holy spirit’s main concern is also to effectually execute the decree of election and reprobation and he effectually calls the elect only and passes by the reprobate.
The gospel is not good news for the world, has only good news for the elect, since Christ has not accomplished the redemption of the world. This is why reformed theology as Bruce indicated considers the outward call of the gospel common grace and not saving grace. So those that reject the gospel are not rejecting saving grace but common grace that was offered to them.
The trinity in Lutheran theology starts with God creating man in his own image followed by the universal fall of man in Adam. The chief problem is sin and death. Christ’s chief purpose is to destroy the works of the devil, and where sin abounded grace abounded more. Sin extended to all men in Adam and grace extended to all men in Christ. The holy spirit applies Christ’s grace personally for salvation through the preaching of the word.
So in Lutheran theology the decree of election (Lutherans deny reprobation) is accomplished by the work of both the Son and the holy spirit. The Son reconciles all creation that was separated from God after the fall by dying on the cross, and the holy spirit accomplishes the saving of the elect through the preaching of the gospel.
Here’s a summary of the atonement from the arminian. Calvinist, and Lutheran perspective. The arminian and Lutherans are opposite, Calvinists are in the middle.
Lutheran: Christ purchased with his blood the salvation of all men
Calvinist: Christ purchased with his blood the salvation of the elect (saving grace) only but made it possible for the reprobate (common grace for the reprobate) to be saved as well (the atonement in itself makes it possible for everybody to be saved, is sufficient for all according to the Canons of Dort, it’s not deficient, but it only saved the elect)
Arminian: Christ made it possible for all to be saved (salvation is conditional on having faith but the atonement did not secure the salvation of anybody, only made it possible)
Only in the lutheran atonement was salvation accomplished and Christ finished his work. Both Calvinists and arminians preach a Christ that has not finished his job. The Lutheran teaching is the biblical teaching of irresistible grace at the atonement level. Christ did not leave an unfinished job, he did not make salvation possible as the arminians teach and the Calvinist teach, he accomplished salvation. Inserting common grace into Christ’s work on the cross as the Calvinist does is nowhere in the bible.
November 28th, 2012 at 12:10 pm
Bruce, don’t worry. The sin unto death like Calvin and Aquinas taught is final apostacy, you have to deny Christ as your Saviour. Every other sin God forgives.
And adding to what I just wrote on the atonement. Christ did not leave anything up to man, the reconciliation accomplished by Christ in the atonement is done, it doesn’t make salvation possible as the Canons of Dort teaches, it accomplishes salvation. We don’t preach an atonement that makes things possible, the work of Christ is not an unfinished work.
November 28th, 2012 at 1:11 pm
Great summary below from a lutheran web site,
T: “total depravity”
Calvinism: Man after the Fall has no ability to cooperate with God’s grace in conversion
Arminianism: Man after the Fall can cooperate with God’s grace in conversion
Lutheranism: Agrees with Calvinism on total depravity
Relevant Bible passages: Romans 3:9-20; Gal. 3:22
U: “unconditional election”
Calvinism: Before the world was created, God unconditionally elected some (the elect) for salvation and the others (reprobates) for damnation.
Arminianism: Before the world was created, God foresaw those who would choose Him of their own free will and elected them to salvation
Lutheranism: Before the world was created, God unconditionally elected some (the elect) for salvation but did not reprobate (chose for damnation) any.
Relevant Bible passages: Romans 9:11-13; 1 Timothy 2:3-4; 2 Cor. 5:14-15; Mat. 25:34, 41.
L: “limited atonement”
Calvinism: Jesus only died for the elect, objectively atoning for their sin, but he did not die for the sins of the reprobates.
Arminianism: Christ died to give all the possibility to be saved.
Lutheranism: Christ’s death objectively atoned for all the sin of the world; by believing we receive this objective atonement and its benefits.
Relevant Bible passages: John 1:29; 1 John 2:2; 2 Cor. 5:14-15, 19.
I: “irresistable grace”
Calvinism: In all of God’s outward actions (preaching, baptism, etc.) there is an outward call which all receive, yet there is also a secret effectual calling which God gives to the elect alone. This effectual calling alone saves and is irresistable.
Arminianism: God gives in His outward actions the same grace to all; this grace can be resisted by all.
Lutheranism: The question is not answerable; for the elect, grace will irresistably triumph, yet those who reject Christ have rejected that Grace; yet the grace is the same.
Relevant Bible passages: Eph. 2:1-10; Acts 13:48; James 1:13-15
P: “perseverance of the saints” (sort of like “once saved, always saved.”)
Calvinism: Salvation cannot be lost. Those who have truly put their faith in Christ may temporarily lose the evidence of their faith and even live for a time in grave and unrepentant sin, without losing their salvation.
Arminianism: Salvation can be lost through unrepentant sin and unbelief.
Lutheranism: Salvation can be lost through mortal sin and unbelief, but this legal warning does not cancel the Gospel promise of election
November 28th, 2012 at 1:16 pm
[...] few days ago I listened to the “White Horse Inn’s” podcast What does it mean to be a Protestant? where the hosts “walk through the central issues that they believe Protestants need to [...]
November 28th, 2012 at 7:23 pm
Bill,
I’m not sure what to call it, but there is an incredibly great “comedic irony,” to the closure of my last post with Ephesians 1:13-23.
I don’t know if you used this text in the many days of discussion (most likely), but the ordo salutis is right there plain as day in the first verse (Ephesians 1:13). Hearing and (belief (faith)), then the promised deposit of the Holy Spirit.
“When you heard the word of truth…AND believed in him…were sealed.”
The grammer, context, and syntax are almost indefinitely concrete. Still thinking, but I’m just about 100% sold. Kind of like switching from Dispensationalism to Amillenialism. You know it’s true, but you have to take several double-takes.
Chris Jager,
Tillamook, OR
November 28th, 2012 at 8:36 pm
Chris, I used multiple other passages that said the same as Ephesians 1:13. Also I referred to Tyre and Sidon where it is irrefutably proven that dead men can hear. The gospel was never preached in Tyre and Sidon but had it been preached Christ said they would have repented. The people in Tyre and Sidon perished because the gospel wasn’t preached, not because of any lack of hearing ability.
It was very frustrating, calvinists are taught as dogma that dead men can’t hear and they need to be regenerated first. They don’t understand that the gospel has the holy ghost in it and it’s powerful enough to give life to dead men after they have heard it and believed it. This is the purpose of the gospel, if dead men can’t hear the gospel then the gospel is useless and has no power. For anybody to say that dead men can’t hear the gospel is equivalent to say the holy ghost (who is in the gospel preached and nowhere else) can’t convert a sinner.
John 3 verses 18 to 22 teaches is so clear that the light came into the world. Some men loved darkness and chose to stay there and some loved the light and came into the light. When the gospel is preached calvinists don’t understand that the light shines for everybody the same way, they teach that everybody is blind and can’t see the light, and God has to remove their blindness first. Regeneration before faith is totally unbiblical. And this is my problem with calvinism for them the calvinistic doctrine stands over and above the biblical truth. I know they are trying to be monergistic, but they don’t realize that there are way better ways of being monergistic.
November 28th, 2012 at 8:45 pm
Bill, Chris,as I made the switch from Arminian free will theology, to a more reformed understanding, I have come to believe the following.
Bill
In your over view of the Calvinist, you state that Christ came to execute God decree and the Holy Spirits job is to effectually call the elect. The conclusion I have come to is that the Holy Spirit regenerates the heart of the elect SO THAT they can hear the call, have faith in it and believe. I do not believe that the Holy Spirit passes over the ” non elect” or what is called double predestination by some people Some elected to salvation and some to reprobation. We are all born reprobate, and God chose to save some, period. You also state that Christ’s death saved the elect and made salvation possible for the non elect. I have never heard a Calvinist state this. All I have read on the Calvinist view is that Gods saving grace is bestowed on the elect. Common grace is what God bestowed on the world in general to prevent total anarchy. It is this grace that is withdrawn during the tribulation period (something Calvinist don’t believe in) and man is left unto himself. Which is why it becomes such a terrible time. It is also during this time that God reveals Himself to those who remain by displaying His power by the cups of wrath poured out upon the earth. Whether any one is save during this is something I don’t know enough about yet.
Christ’s coming is good news for the world in that the cosmos or world will no longer suffer under the affects of the fall once Christ’s eternal rule is established.
Christ’s work on the cross was complete in that all the sin for all the elect ,past present and future, was atoned for. There was no need to save all men and then have them loose salvation because they were not part of the elect. Nor do Calvinist profess that salvation was made possible for the non elect, a position held by the Arminian camp.
As a former Arminian you are correct in saying they believe Christ’s death made salvation available to all but was effectual only to those that freely chose it. IE free will.
I have come to learn that mans will is either a slave to sin ( our sin nature) or once redeemed a slave to Christ . ( our new nature) the only mention of free will in the Bible of free will so in reference to giving in the Old Testament.
November 28th, 2012 at 8:48 pm
You see for the calvinistic the holy ghost works only in the elect who are regenerated by the holy ghost first, the elect are born again, and then they believe the gospel after being born again. It is due to irresistible grace, for the calvinist the holy ghost is irresistible, so those that reject the gospel call reject common grace but did not reject the holy ghost.
Calvin would blast modern calvinism, they basically deny the sin against the holy ghost, the unforgivable sin that Calvin so well explained in his Bible Commentary that I provided a link above. The holy ghost can never be rejected for a calvinist because the holy ghost only works on the elect. It is as unbiblical as it gets and John Calvin would not be a calvinist today if he knew what’s being taught so-called calvinists. Reformed theology abandoned Calvin with the Canons of Dort and Westminster Confession, and its become dogma that can’t be biblically supported.
November 28th, 2012 at 8:54 pm
Are you people insane??
Kidding, sort of,
–Stuart
November 28th, 2012 at 8:59 pm
As a matter of fact the modern calvinist totally denies Matthew 12:31 and I quoted Calvin’s commentary on it, because the holy ghost doesn’t work on the reprobate only on the elect according to effectual calling. So it’s impossible for any man according to modern calvinism to reject the holy ghost, since it works only in the elect in an irresistible fashion! Can it get more unbiblical than this?
Matthew 12:31
31. Therefore I say to you, All sin and blasphemy shall be forgiven to men; but the blasphemy against the Spirit shall not be forgiven to men
November 28th, 2012 at 9:54 pm
Stuart, the Canons of Dort are insane! Not us here. I just re-read them, it’s beyond belief. They teach that the elect are regenerated by the holy ghost and born again in this wonderful act so that afterwards they are able to repent and believe the gospel! When the gospel is preached the following happens:
1) The elect receive the holy ghost accompanied by the gospel and the holy ghost regenerates them so that they are able to believe afterwards.
2) The non-elect receive the gospel with no holy ghost in it. So they are unable to believe because the gospel comes with no holy ghost!
This is serious, I’m not kidding. How can the reprbaate ever reject the holy ghost? Based on the Canons of Dort the reprobate can not reject the holy ghost because the holy ghost only visits the elect. Those that are not of the elect accoriding to Dort, they receive an empty gospel with no holy ghost.
As I said Dort Calvinism denies Christ teaching that the reprobate reject the holy ghost.
November 28th, 2012 at 11:00 pm
Bruce, sorry I missed your post there. I was in the middle of posting when yours sneaked in. The Canons of Dort teach that the atonement is sufficient for the salvation of all men. Sounds like Christ didn’t finish his job and salvation is now in the hands of man.
SECOND HEAD: ARTICLE 3
“The death of the Son of God is the only and most perfect sacrifice and satisfaction for sin, and is of infinite worth and value, abundantly sufficient to expiate the sins of the whole world.”
My response to this weak calvinistic atonement is that the atonement has accomplished the salvation of the whole world. It’s not sufficient to expiate the sins of the whole world, it hasn’t made it possible, it has accomplshed it, it has expiated the sins of the whole world.
November 29th, 2012 at 5:06 am
Bill.
My new Poodle puppy is keeping me awake tonight. On my day off.
So I can’t stop thinking of the atonement. The word “when,” and its implications. And how pervasive the canine whimper is.
At the same time, while I appreciate the wealth of information that you are so ready to pass on–and how it has given me much to think about–I feel like I need to remind you that we need time. I could not possibly process and wade through all of the many facets of this conversation that you are so eager to see me understand. That is, in so little time.
Give us a piece at a time. I can eat meat…but not the whole cow all at once. This would take me many hours out of the day; avoiding my family; to come to grips with. I am still back at the word “when” in Ephesians 1:13. Are all Lutherans so quick? So bright? It’s like the tortoise and the hair.
I want to keep up, but feel like I’m being left in the dust. Give me time to make an opinion and to arrive at a conclusion for each topic and issue as it arises.
That being said, let’s start fresh with your last comment:
“the atonement has accomplished the salvation of the whole world.”
AND
“it has accomplished it, it has expiated the sins of the whole world.”
I know that you are not a universalist. You stated that there is a heaven, hell, and elect and damned. So I know you’re not meaning “salvation” in the complete and final sense. In the Reformed circles, when you are talking salvation, you are linking true conversion with perseverance and sanctification, resulting in glorification on the last day. Salvation is all of Christ all of the time. From our justification, it is made final; hence the “golden chain” of Romans.
But I gather, this is not what you are talking about when you say, “salvation.” I believe you mean “regeneration,” or, “saved-status.” Hope I’m getting this accurate. Because if the salvation–or final glorification of the whole world has been accomplished and we are just living out our time on this earth until it happens, then “the whole world,” receives “salvation/glorification” in the end, because it has been accomplished finally for every person in the whole world. I’m being repetitive here so as to be clear. Because “accomplishment” means a done deal; and in the case I just gave–for everyone in the world. Meaning everyone gets caught up in glory and no one goes to hell.
Since this isn’t what you meant, there is only one other alternative, which follows:
Monergistically, God regenerates the whole world of fallen sinners, since to have one’s sins expiated on account of Christ’s work means to stand–through someone else’s goodness–perfect, though not inherent in the self of the one forgiven. Since to receive salvation (wrapped up in the expiation of sins) necessarily means to have heard and believed the gospel, everyone to whom salvation has been accomplished has also heard and believed the gospel and become regenerate thereby.
So you see how I think you must mean “regeneration” and not “salvation”–in Reformed terms? You’ll notice that the previous quote from the Cannons of Dort makes no mention of final salvation–the word isn’t there. It does talk about the forgiveness of sins, though; which makes me call into question your statement that the sins of the whole world “have been expiated” and “have been accomplished.” (directly: “has accomplished it”…”has expiated”)
FOR:
If this is true as you say, then the basic Reformed premise of the (I wish we had italics) “extent” of the atonement cannot stand. Meaning: all the sins of the regenerated, for all time, are not washed away–either at Calvary or conversion.
Which opens up a whole other can of worms.
I think the premise of total forgiveness, or justification for all time of the regenerate, is the Reformed basis for specific atonement (or “limited atonement” in the TULIP model).
If someone has been forgiven their sins for all time, receiving the imputed righteousness of Christ so as to stand boldly before God, then how can that person, once regenerate and forgiven, actually lose the forgiven-for-all-time status given to Him by God through His Christ? By definition, ALL TIME means forever, which can’t be undone–just as it is impossible for God to lie. And if you are forgiven for all time, aren’t you saved for all time…lest God throw anyone into hell at the judgment whom he calls “completely forgiven for all time” as a result of the power of the blood of His Son?
So–if indeed I see where you’re coming from–not everyone goes to heaven, but everyone’s sins are accomplished, and it is possible for someone who has been forgiven for all time to be thrown into hell?
I need clarification…and remember…in small bites.
November 29th, 2012 at 5:23 am
Stuart,
Did you actually read the whole thread?? I did and look where I’ve ended up–almost a universalist, jk!
You were very helpful from the get-go. Do you think that some of the reformed confessions have been taken out of context, and/or misrepresented in this comment thread?
I’m still going over Ephesians 1:13 –the “when” part– in my mind. Help!
Chris Jager,
Tillamook, OR
November 29th, 2012 at 7:03 am
Bill,
What about, “no man comes to the Father unless the Spirit draws him.”
Not all men come to the Father.
Thus the Spirit, though present in the Word of the Gospel, does not draw all the men who hear it. So the Holy Spirit does not work on all men in the same way, and/or equally, with the preaching of the Gospel. It is dependent on the drawing of the Spirit, not the resistance of man.
The light shines in the darkness and all have resisted it. All resist until they are born again and can see the kingdom of God. The only reason we stop resisting, and come in to the light, is because He has effectually “called us out of darkness and into His marvelous light;” speaking into the darkness (that we all know and used to love) and transferring us into His kingdom…just as He said “let there be light.”
We all resisted God when we were unregenerate and could not have obeyed Him, or answered His call, unless the Holy Spirit had enabled us.
God gives grace to us, his elect, by calling us out and overcoming our rebellion by the Spirit through the Gospel. So when we hear and believe, we are sealed and guaranteed–but only because we have first been given grace from God to hear and believe. We are chosen by God and are drawn by the Holy Spirit to the Father, called by the hearing of the Gospel to believe and then sealed up with the Spirit in finality.
But those who are not elect are not given saving grace and continue to resist the Holy Spirit, though they hear the saving message of the Gospel with the natural man. They “have ears [naturally], but do not hear [spiritually].” They don’t spiritually hear because they are spiritually dead and cannot appraise spiritual things, until they are made spiritually alive–able to discern spiritual words and believe them.
Chris Jager,
Tillamook,OR
November 29th, 2012 at 7:28 am
Chris, when I say the atonement accomplished the salvation of the whole world I’m referring to it objectively. The calvinist teach that the atonement accomplished the salvation of all the elect objectively. Both teach the atonement is a finished work in that sense.
Of course no confessional lutheran is a universalist! You still need to subjectively apply that salvation, you need faith in Christ’s atoning work that the holy ghost works in you through the preaching of the gospel. I provided a couple of lutheran links earlier that talk about ojbective justification (the atonement) and subjective justification (salvation by grace through faith). If you can’t find them I’ll repost the link.
November 29th, 2012 at 7:38 am
Chris, read this, it explains the lutheran theology. These are the two links I provided earlier.
http://www.wlsessays.net/files/DobbersteinJustification.pdf
http://www.wlsessays.net/files/DeutschlanderDistinction.pdf
By the way the reformed teach that at Calvary Christ accomplished the redemption of the elect objectively. Lutherans teach that the redemption of the world was objectively accompllished at Calvary. here’s a quote from the Canons of Dort that in the atonement Christ purchased with his blood the salvation of the elect, lutherans teach that Christ purchased with his blood the salvation of the whole world.
Canons of Dort
Article 8: The Saving Effectiveness of Christ’s Death
For it was the entirely free plan and very gracious will and intention of God the Father that the enlivening and saving effectiveness of his Son’s costly death should work itself out in all the elect, in order that God might grant justifying faith to them only and thereby lead them without fail to salvation. In other words, it was God’s will that Christ through the blood of the cross (by which he confirmed the new covenant) should effectively redeem from every people, tribe, nation, and language all those and only those who were chosen from eternity to salvation and given to him by the Father; that Christ should grant them faith (which, like the Holy Spirit’s other saving gifts, he acquired for them by his death). It was also God’s will that Christ should cleanse them by his blood from all their sins, both original and actual, whether committed before or after their coming to faith; that he should faithfully preserve them to the very end; and that he should finally present them to himself, a glorious people, without spot or wrinkle.
November 29th, 2012 at 8:07 am
More from the Canons of Dort, errors it rejeccts. So Calviists as well as lutherans teach that the atonement accomplished salvation. Calvinists for the elect only, lutherans for the whole world. Objective justification is a both a lutheran and calvinist doctrine that happened at the cross, the difference is the extent the elect (calvinists) vs the whole world (lutherans)
Canons of Dort, Rejection of errors
II
Who teach that the purpose of Christ’s death was not to establish in actual fact a new covenant of grace by his blood, but only to acquire for the Father the mere right to enter once more into a covenant with humanity, whether of grace or of works.
For this conflicts with Scripture, which teaches that Christ “has become the guarantee and mediator” of a better—that is, a new—covenant (Heb. 7:22; 9:15), “and that a will is in force only when someone has died” (Heb. 9:17).
III
Who teach that Christ, by the satisfaction which he gave, did not certainly merit for anyone salvation itself and the faith by which this satisfaction of Christ is effectively applied to salvation, but only acquired for the Father the authority or plenary will to relate in a new way with humanity and to impose such new conditions as he chose, and that the satisfying of these conditions depends on human free choice; consequently, that it was possible that either all or none would fulfill them.
For they have too low an opinion of the death of Christ, do not at all acknowledge the foremost fruit or benefit which it brings forth, and summon back from hell the Pelagian error.
November 29th, 2012 at 8:17 am
Chris, in addition to those two links that perfectly summarized the lutheran position:.
http://www.wlsessays.net/files/DobbersteinJustification.pdf
http://www.wlsessays.net/files/DeutschlanderDistinction.pdf
read this one which compares lutheran and reformed justification, then come back if you have more questions:
http://www.angelfire.com/ny4/djw/lutherantheology.marquartjustification.html
November 29th, 2012 at 9:59 am
Louis Berkhof, page 419 of his Systematic Theeology also acknowledges objective justification at the atonement (but for the elect only, unlike lutherans that do it for the whole world):
Louis Berkhof:
There are some things that should be borne in mind in connection with the ordo salutis, as it appears in Reformed theology.
a. Some of the terms are not always used in the same sense. The term justification is generally limited to what is called justification by faith, but is sometimes made to cover an objective justification of the elect in the resurrection of Jesus Christ, and the imputation of the righteousness of Christ to them in the pactum salutis
November 29th, 2012 at 10:19 am
2 Corinthians 5:19 is objective justification, which has nothing to do with faith. Objective justification does not require faith.
2 Corinthians chapter 5 verse 19
To wit, that God was in Christ, reconciling the world unto himself, not imputing their trespasses unto them; and hath committed unto us the word of reconciliation.
The world was declared righteous, God did not impute their trespasses unto them. Both reformed and lutherans agree on this. Nobody can disagree with such obvious scripture. The question is, what does the world mean? For the reformed the elect only were pronounced righteous by God at the time of Christ’s death and resurrection. For lutherans and Barth everybody was declared righteous and their sins not imputed any more. This is the ministry of reconciliation, all of Barth’s theology comes from 2 Corinthians 5:19
November 29th, 2012 at 10:36 am
Chris, you wrote:
“What about, “no man comes to the Father unless the Spirit draws him.”
Not all men come to the Father.
Thus the Spirit, though present in the Word of the Gospel, does not draw all the men who hear it. So the Holy Spirit does not work on all men in the same way, and/or equally, with the preaching of the Gospel. It is dependent on the drawing of the Spirit, not the resistance of man.”
Chris you are correct in that for the elect it is solely dependent on the drawing of the Spirit. But in those that reject the gospel it is solely dependent on the resistance of man. Man do resist the holy ghost, re-read Calvin’s commentary.
November 29th, 2012 at 3:24 pm
Romans 5:18 is up there as one of the clearest with regard to the universal grace that came to all men in the atonement.
Romans 5 verse 18
“Therefore as by the offence 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.”
November 29th, 2012 at 3:53 pm
And Romans 5:18 is exactly what lutherans and Barth teach, in the atonement justification of life came to all men. Every man was justified. Just like every man was condemned by Adam’s offense. The objective justification of Romans 5:18 is the opposite of Adam’s original sin, one bringing condemennation to all men, the other justification to all men. In this sense only Christ is the truly the second Adam.
Romans 5 verse 18
“Therefore as by the offence 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.”
November 29th, 2012 at 6:37 pm
And so that you guys understand, this isn’t some esotericc teaching. This is the official doctrine of Missouri Synod and Wisconsin. Confessional lutheranism in the US has unanimously adpoted the doctrine of objective justification, for which I have provided verses biblically supporting it. Anybody that wants to argue this, bear in mind you are going against the leadership of confessional lutheranism. Just google “objective justification” “luthenarnism” and there’s thousands of web pages explaining the doctrine. You don’t need to go to the links I provided which are super good, but I’m sure you might be able to find a better one yourself.
November 29th, 2012 at 8:57 pm
Bill this makes sense to me “Chris you are correct in that for the elect it is solely dependent on the drawing of the Spirit. But in those that reject the gospel it is solely dependent on the resistance of man.
It is the resistance of man that makes him culpable for his sin. This is what Paul is saying in Romans 3.
And by the way I have not brain washed into being Calvinist. I, unlike you, started with nothing but the Bible. No preconceived notions no systematic theology, no seminary training, and no church attendance ( probably why I still don’t attend today)
You through a lot out there as if your are trying to impress us with all that you know or overwelm us some how into believing your way. I would like to but it seems every verse comes with a Luthern point of view. Evedience of a Luthern back ground and training. And maybe a desire to convince us that only Luther had it right.
Years ago I started with just the Bible and since then, tried to lay what was being taught, alongside of what I had read in scripture. There is a lot I don’t understand but a lot more that I do understand and a lot of what you have espoused here I neither agree with or disagree with, but will take into consideration as I continue on my journey. A lot of what I have posted is what I have come to believe. Like the order of salvation. Believers baptisism, and others that I have mentioned.
I still question what it means to be Protestant. How much of all spoken here is nesessary for salvation? You say ” believe on The Lord Jesus Christ and you shell be saved ” believe what? How much do I need of “belief” to be saved ? Where is there any assurance of salvation in all that you have stated. How does one know he or she isn’t going to loose it some day ? Do we have to keep working for it? How much work does it take ? Being a scholar like you?
In a previous post I asked how far one must fall to loose salvation. I didn’t see an answereither,have I missed it?
I refer you to the thief on the cross, Christ saved him. Did he say he believed? I don’t read where he said anything after informing him that paradise awaits him.
Is it as simple as that or not?
Just curious bk
November 29th, 2012 at 9:45 pm
Funny, you say that Bruce. I’m not a scholar at all! Actually I’m a Finance professional! Seriously, all I have is an undergraduate business degree and an MBA. When I started this topic I had no clue what objective justification even meant! I learned on the fly pretty much. When my first post on this topic started I was sitting on the fence sort of, if you look at the beginning I was extremely accepting of Dort and the Westminster Standards, even stating the differences with the lutheran confessions were immaterial. I have also in other White Horse Inn blogs said that I’m all for the confessions to be taught by evangelical churches and didn’t care if they were the reformed or lutheran. So you are wrong that I am a hard core lutheran with pre-conceived notions. Beside the bible all I have read are the book of concord and the reformed confessions, Calvin’s Institutes is the only theology book I ever read, except for a bit of Aquinas online (check a topic here or there in his Summa Theologica), four anti-pelagian writings of Augustine, Propsper of Aquitaine’s a Call to all Nations, and Mike Horton’s Christless Christianity, the Gospel Driven Life, and a bit of Barth online here or there. There you have it that’s all the theology books I ever read. How many lutheran theology books? None, other than the confessions.
And hey Bruce I believe honestly that none of this is necessary for salvation. Some calvinists (few of them) believe that you need to adhere to the 5 points of calvinism to be saved, and surprise, surprise some luthernas believe that unless you believe objective justification (universal atonement) you can’t be saved. Let me say this clearly, they are both wrong, you need to believe that Christ died for your sins personally, that is saving faith. You can have faith in Christ by believing in a universal atonement or an atonement for the elect only.
I even made one mistake that I want to retract. I know many will disagree with my conclusion but I have to be honest with what I think. I stated that Augustine taught unlimited atonement, and regardless what others may think it was a mistake for me to say that. Prosper of Aquitaine his disciple did. But Augustine like Calvin understood that when the bible teaches that God saves the world or wills the salvation of the whole world, the world means the elect. I can’t find in Augustine universal grace. Augustine has this “handbook of faith, hope, and love” which is like his theology summary he wrote, it’s online at christian classics ethereal library. CHAPTER XXVII. “Limits of God’s Plan for Human Salvation” convinced me that Augustine was a calvinist in the sense that he did not teach universal grace. I only read this chapter a couple of days ago.
Far from a scholar! Thanks for the compliment though that you thought that I’m a scholar. With that said if I came as arrogant, shame on me.
November 29th, 2012 at 9:56 pm
Also, I’m glad I’m not a scholar. How many guys in the New Testament had PHDs in theology? None, though Paul was very instructed in the Law, the others were fishermen or tax collectors. I believe we are taugh of God through his word, as well as preaching and the writings of the saints in all ages. Our main instructor though is God who wrote the gospel in my heart through his word. This is why without being arrogant i’m not afraid to challenge any Phd in Theology if I see something unbliblical, salvation is of the Lord and the holy ghost is wiser than anybody and anything taught at the best theology seminars. I forgot where in the Old Testament it says that we shall all be taught of God.
John 6:45 It is written in the Prophets, ‘And they will all be taught by God.’ Everyone who has heard and learned from the Father comes to me
There you go, I’m not a scholar. And not ashamed of not being a scholar, but I have been taught by God. Even so, Humility dictates that what I know of God is infinitesimal, only in glorification will I understand him fully.
November 29th, 2012 at 10:10 pm
OK, I forgot I did read in addition to what I mentioned from Luther the Commentary on Romans, Commentary on Galatians, and the Bondage of the Will. Also online a while back I’ve read a couple of John Owen’s writings on sanctification. And I may have forgotten something else but anything else would have been something online that I found, a few chapters here or there from a certain book.
I do have a bunch of lutheran books to read that I got a few weeks ago. As well as the Gospel Commission by Mike Horton is at home ready to be read, together with John Murray’s Redemption Accomplished and Applied. Actually I can’t wait to read John Murray’s book, because it will equip me to deal with some false teaching going on at Westminster Seminary in Philadelphia, Lane Tipton & Co.. I was not impressed by Lane Tipton calling Mike Horton a lutheran late last year, as well as his criticism of lutheranism.
November 29th, 2012 at 10:39 pm
OK, how could I have not mentioned the White Horse Inn. I think I hardly missed an episode in the last 4 or 5 years. These guys have been my teachers, and the best of the best. The clarity with which the gospel is proclaimed is amazing. I went as far as calling Mike Horton the greatest theologian of the 21st century in a couple of posts I made on other blogs here at the WHI. And my favourite, Martin Luther’s Heidelberg Disputations and On Christian Freedom, they are brief writings, they are online.
November 30th, 2012 at 12:42 am
Hey Bill,
The poodle is whining again!
I did say,
“Thus the Spirit, though present in the Word of the Gospel, does not draw all the men who hear it. So the Holy Spirit does not work on all men in the same way, and/or equally, with the preaching of the Gospel. It is dependent on the drawing of the Spirit, not the resistance of man.”
But let me elaborate briefly.
My point, if you continue on in the post, is that all men resist the Holy Spirit. In my Pseudo-Arminian days, I used to laugh every time that I was told that men are totally depraved–but this is key to understanding the Gospel and the depth of our sin. The doctrine is biblical truth…yet I resisted it as a believer. I resisted the Word; the Spirit.
When I sin in the flesh, I resist the Word of God, the Gospel, and the Holy Spirit even as a believer. With my own free will–whether it be a totally depraved freewill, or a weak, albeit regenerate freewill–I resist the Holy Spirit in my flesh and do the sinful things that I want to do. Galatians 5:17.
That being said, all men resist the Spirit–in His Word and His Gospel. All men are bent in on themselves, as is the human condition. However, though the Holy Spirit is present in the Gospel, it does not work to overcome man’s resistance in the reprobate.
The Spirit does not work the same or equally for every individual. It does not “work” in a saving or drawing manner for those who are not elect. Rather, it holds those who suppress the truth accountable for their sin and resistance, and in justice, according to the inscrutable counsel of God and His purpose for election, leaves them in their sin–withholding the grace that is necessary for anyone to overcome their own resistance. The Spirit does not make them resist; working on them so that they will resist and rebel–but it does leave them in their own resistance and hardness of heart.
What I am saying is that yes–man is held responsible for their own resistance. They don’t get off the hook for hating or suppressing God’s truth. But I am also saying that God has the same power over the elect and the non-elect. He chooses to save some and to leave some to their own end; drawing unto salvation only the elect. Regenerating and forgiving, for all time, only the elect–or else all would be saved and there would be no hell; no judgment for the enemies of God (who we would all be, were it not for God’s gracious selection of a remnant-bride for His Son).
For His own purposes and according to reasons known only to Him, our Father chooses not to draw others but leave them. Since God did not choose to draw them and overcome their hardness, they remain under judgment while the chosen and grateful receive mercy and grace and promise.
Thanks Bill,
Chris Jager,
Tillamook, OR
November 30th, 2012 at 3:28 am
Bruce,
One thing that gets me up out of bed on Sunday morning is the desire to not miss feast that I know the Lord will provide. Within the ministry of the faithful church, God provides a feast for the believer.
Going to “fellowship with other people” is secondary. Incidentally, knowing that there will be a feast from God Himself motivates me to bring others to it as well, resulting in wondrous fellowship indeed. But it all starts on God providing–not in me bringing. Yes, I can do many things for God, but Sunday service is all about Him giving to me.
Because I believe this way, I really want to be there. I want my kids to witness the table and the benefits, and feed on it forever. Though it is only a shadow of what we will have in glory-land, I’ll take all I can of heaven–and fellowship with Christ–right now. I know we always have fellowship with him and that He is always with us; but I believe there is something special about the service that comes on Sunday, and it keeps me going. Something actually happens there…when the ministry is–and this is the hard part that you must search out– faithful and according to Scripture. What constitutes a service from God? That is the question of church.
But what I really wanted to talk to you about is what you said in the last post (the last paragraph). You are absolutely right. It is as simple as that. The their believed that Jesus Christ was God. He saw that our Savior was an innocent man, but that he was a low and detestable thief. He saw that he had no hope, but believed–with only a glimmer of hope–that Jesus–this true God in human flesh–could save Him from despair if He granted it and wanted to. So he asked, “Master, remember me in paradise.” And then he received the promise.
That is what being Protestant is all about. We protest that we have anything to bring to the table, as Rome taught in Luther’s day and Calvin’s day…and still teaches today (counsel of trent). We protest against anything–any stronghold–that keeps sinners from being saved; sinners like the thief at the cross.
Following Rome’s teaching, the thief would go to purgatory. Since he had purchased no indulgences–not even free ones–and had done nothing meritorious in his life, he would be in purgatory for a long, long time until he actually reached perfection. He had faith in Christ, but that wasn’t enough for Rome! And it isn’t enough for the heretics today. These vipers who put weights on sinners and make them even more depraved than they already are….more lost then they were. More hardened. More self-sufficient.
We protest against those who mangle and use the Word of God for their own agendas and reasons, at the expense of other’s freedom in Christ. Ultimately, we protest against the enemy and the powers and principalities. To remain silent is to condone their practices. But to confess the truth and uphold the saving message and story of the Gospel is to carry out the will of our God. Matthew 28:19-20.
The difference between us and the thief, though, is that we are not getting a face-to-face promise from Him. We have the Word of God sealed up in the Scriptures. But the apostles held their office and were faithful to show us that Christ’s promises–just as real as if he were here giving them to us face to face–are true and sure not only for those who saw him, but especially for those who have not seen him.
We don’t have to believe the list of right things, we only have to know that Christ has given us–His beloved–life in His Son. We know from history who the Son of God was–God veiled in flesh. We know it just as sure as the thief trusted Christ, though He didn’t know just HOW God would save him from death and despair, but only that He WOULD. And His belief was met with a promise of assurance.
So we believe, and so we too have a promise from the Lord, as the Apostles reveal.
Consider the book of Hebrews chapter 3. In verse 10 and 11 it says, “(Hebrews 3:10, Hebrews 3:11).”
Who NEVER enters His rest? Never, ever–not even for awhile. Who?
Check out verse 18 and 19. (Hebrews 3:18, Hebrews 3:19). It is those who “always go astray in their heart.” The disobedient. Those who harbor unbelief all of their days, like those in Israel who did not enter the rest in the land of promise.
So if we really and truly believe that God will save us–that Christ will save us guilty sinners from what we deserve–then we are not included with those above, who never enter because of unbelief. This is why I know that those who truly believe this, after having truly trusted and believed that Christ is the judge who grants them salvation, can never lose the salvation found in the promise of Christ; which salvation, after having received the promise, is thereafter absolute and sealed-up for the one who has received that Word of Promise.
But the promise found in Hebrews is not as discreet, weak, and hidden as I have seemingly shown this far. Hebrews 4 is worth quoting at length here. (Hebrews 4: 1-11).
———————
Therefore, while the promise of entering his rest still stands, let us fear lest any of you should seem to have failed to reach it.
For good news came to us just as to them, but the message they heard did not benefit them, because they were not united by faith with those who listened.
FOR WE WHO HAVE BELIEVED ENTER THAT REST, as he has said, “As I swore in my wrath, ‘They shall not enter my rest,’” ALTHOUGH HIS WORKS WERE FINISHED from the foundation of the world.
For he has somewhere spoken of the seventh day in this way: “And God rested on the seventh day from all his works.”
And again in this passage he said, “They shall not enter my rest.”
Since therefore it remains for some to enter it, and those who formerly received the good news failed to enter because of disobedience, again he appoints a certain day, “Today,” saying through David so long afterward, in the words already quoted, “Today, if you hear his voice, do not harden your hearts.”
For if Joshua had given them rest, God would not have spoken of another day later on.
So then, there remains a Sabbath rest for the people of God, for whoever has entered God’s rest has also rested from his works as God did from his. Let us therefore strive to enter that rest, so that no one may fall by the same sort of disobedience.
—————
So there remains a sworn oath that all who are not joined to the Word of God in faith–thereby obeying His desire that they believe Him–shall not enter His Sabbath rest and never cease from their works. But we who HAVE BELIEVED enter that rest, just as sure as His works were completed from the foundation of the world. Our works end, just as His. We cease to strive for merit, but rest in the merit of Christ, given to us by faith in Him: the faith that believes that He is the Son of God, the one who is willing and able to save us sinners who trust in Him.
There is more explanation. (Hebrews 5:16-20)
——————
For people swear by something greater than themselves, and in all their disputes an oath is final for confirmation. So when God desired to show more convincingly to the heirs of the promise the unchangeable character of his purpose, he guaranteed it with an oath, so that by two unchangeable things, in which it is impossible for God to lie, we who have fled for refuge might have strong encouragement to hold fast to the hope set before us.
We have this as a sure and steadfast anchor of the soul, a hope that enters into the inner place behind the curtain, where Jesus has gone as a forerunner on our behalf, having become a high priest forever after the order of Melchizedek.
——————–
(Hebrews 7:21-22)
but this one was made a priest with an oath by the one who said to him: “The Lord has sworn and will not change his mind, ‘You are a priest forever.’”
This makes Jesus the guarantor of a better covenant.
———————-
He is the guarantor of a better covenant in His blood. He grants that we–who are called; who believe; who trust in Him; who ARE sanctified and ARE BEING sanctified for perfection; are included in the new and better covenant.
So if we have believed and trust, we are granted life by the permanent priest-guarantor, who Has made a final sacrifice for sins, for all time! (Hebrews 10:10, Hebrews 10:12, Hebrews 10:14). AND has cleansed us for all time by that sacrifice!
Only hold on to your trust in that promise until the end–proving you trust and do indeed believe (which also proves your election). Fear for ever losing that hope and confession, lest you never get out of your unbelief and show that you — when the rubber met the road — did not trust in His salvation promise after all. If you believe a promise, you hold onto it like a child–or like a child who has grown old, remember it in the end.
“Therefore, while the promise of entering his rest still stands, let us fear lest any of you should seem to have failed to reach it.” (Hebrews 4:1)
… we HAVE COME to share in Christ. Hebrews 3:14
—————-
(Hebrews 10:19-23; 39)
Therefore, brothers, since we have confidence to enter the holy places by the blood of Jesus,
by the new and living way that he opened for us through the curtain, that is, through his flesh,
and since we have a great priest over the house of God, let us draw near with a true heart in full assurance of faith, with our hearts sprinkled clean from an evil conscience and our bodies washed with pure water. Let us hold fast the confession of our hope without wavering, for he who promised is faithful…
But we are not of those who shrink back and are destroyed, but of those who have faith and preserve their souls.
————————
To be protestant is to continue to boast; but to boast only in the Lord.
Talk to you later, Bruce.
Chris Jager,
Tillamook, OR
November 30th, 2012 at 4:35 am
Bruce–
One more thing.
Rejecting full revelation from the Holy Spirit is the Blasphemy of the Spirit. To know all that one needs to know of the Spirit for salvation, and then to trample Him underfoot. To merely taste and see who the Holy Spirit is — not consume Him entirely. To benefit from the knowledge of the gospel of peace — but not believe it. Kind of like being a Native American and getting the tribal benefits and moral upbringing, but not believing in their spiritual teachings and projected spiritual entities. You’d survive the foolishness of their teaching, but only for the benefit of staying among them and being called one of them.
I think Peter says it all in 2 Peter 2:9-22; especially here in verse 20 (2 Peter 2:20).
This is speaking of the unregenerate, who have not been forgiven for all time in Christ by the application of His blood upon their belief. Again, they share in everything, but reject Him with finality. They are worse off for knowing Him! The words of Peter ring true indeed.
There you go!
Chris Jager
Tillamook, OR
However, no one but God knows who has received all that they need to know from the Spirit.
November 30th, 2012 at 5:58 am
Chris, I agree with many of what you say such as man’s free will bent on sin before salvation and even after salvation the battle between the flesh and the spirit. Now wie have to be careful with regard to the operation of the spirit being different in the elect and reprobate. This is something I can not agree with. The holy spirit is one and has only one way of operating when the word is preached. So to day that the holy spirit draws the elect in one way but the reprobate in another is unbiblical.
From the time you started writing the following:
“The Spirit does not work the same or equally for every individual. It does not “work” in a saving or drawing manner for those who are not elect …”
From then on and until the end of your post I disagree with everything you wrote. Now I put my biblical lutheran hat and tell you why in my next post.
The formula of concord rejects effectual calling and states the following XI,34:
“However, that many are called and few chosen is not owing to the fact that the call of God, which is made through the Word, had the meaning as though God said: Outwardly, through the Word, I indeed call to My kingdom all of you to whom I give My Word; however, in My heart I do not mean this with respect to all, but only with respect to a few; for it is My will that the greatest part of those whom I call through the Word shall not be enlightened nor converted, but be and remain damned, although through the Word, in the call, I declare Myself to them otherwise.”
And let me tell you the underlying basis for this, lutherans reject double predestination. I didn’t want to get into this double vs. single predestination but your question has forced me to do it. I will elaborate in my next post why double predestination is heresy and can’t be found anywhere in the bible. I will also elaborate how unconditional election works and conditional reprobation in lutheran theology.
November 30th, 2012 at 6:10 am
OK, that God elects some for salvation without any antecedent merit and draws them by the Spirit and converts him with no human cooperation is something calvinists and luterhans agree on. I would go further and say that grace works irresistibly in the elect.
Now with regard to reprobation lutherans correctly teach that God does not reprobate anybody. There is no such thing as unconditional reprobation. When the gospel is preached the lutheran doctrine of election correctly states that God foreknows that those that are not of the elect will resist the holy ghost, not because the holy ghost worked any differently in the elect, but because the operation of the holy ghost was thwarted by the reprobate. You see, reprobation in lutheran theology is entirely due to man, man is in control of his salvation when it comes to reprobation, and not God.
To summarize in reprobation, the arminians are correct in that reprobation is due to God foreknowing that man will resist his grace. In election though the calvinists are correct and the arminians err gravely by making God`s election contingent on man`s acceptancce of the gospel. But in reprobation the opposite is true the arminians are correct that when it comes to the preaching of the gospel man is reprobated as a result of rejecting the gospel.
This is the lutheran and the biblical teaching of unconditional election or single predestination. Calvinists teach unconditional reprobation and make God the author of sin.
November 30th, 2012 at 6:25 am
There`s abundant proof in scripture that the holy spirit draws the reprobate with the same power that converts the elect, but the reprobate resist him. Read my commentary on Luke 10 verses 13 to 16 that I wrote towards the beginning of my posts. i extensively proved this. `
Also Matthew 23:24
”Wherefore, behold, I send unto you prophets, and wise men, and scribes: and some of them ye shall kill and crucify; and some of them shall ye scourge in your synagogues, and persecute them from city to city’”
You see God gives saving grace to the reprobate an this leaves them without excuse. So the holy spirit works as hard on the reprobate as in the elect, the spirit works the same way, but the reprobate trample on God`s grace.
Going back to the parable of the sower. The seed that falls on shallow ground is the same seed that the one that falls on good ground. Both seeds grow the same way, but one seed dies because the ground was bad. The same thing with the holy ghost in the word it works the same way on the elect and reprobate, it draws both the same way, but the reprobate thwart and resist the holy ghost that worked as hard to convert them as it worked in the elect. God did not pass by the reprobate and left them on their sin, the reprobate rejected the operation of the holy ghost, so the holy ghost despite its intending to convert the reprobate and elect in the same way, is unsuccessful in converting the reprobate. The holy spirit fails, just like the good seed fails when it ends up on rocky or shallow ground. So reprobation is entirely up to man and it`s not Godd`s will.
November 30th, 2012 at 6:45 am
To summarize Calvin’s double predestination teaches that God elects and reprobates man, it is God’s will both to elect and to reprobate. Lutheran single predestination teaches that God elects some men to salvation and salvation is entirely due to God’s will, but when it comes to reprobation it is entirely due to man’s will.
Karl Barth is similar to lutheranism in that it teaches that everybody is elect to salvation by God in Christ. And the only reason man perishes it is because it rejects his own election.
Thomas Aquinas also sides with lutheran theology by distinguishing between God’s antecedent will that wills the salvation of all men, and God’s consequent will by which the reprobate are condemned because of their sin (they reject the gospel).
Eaekiel 18:23 is clear that God does not delight over the death of the wicked, he truly wills their salvation through the operation of the spirit like he wills the salvation of the elect. With that said the wicked resist the spirit when the spirit draws them into conversion.
November 30th, 2012 at 6:55 am
It is also true though that God in his just judgment withholds grace, and gives up man up to his reprobate mind. This punishment could extend for generations or to entire nations. The Formula of Concord and the lutheran confessions recognize this as well. But this doesn’t mean that in the preaching of the gospel the holy ghost doesn’t will the salvation of those that reject it in the manner that I have explained.
November 30th, 2012 at 7:21 am
And going back to your first question, you are right that the elect only are converted. Did the holy spirit operate differently in the elect and the reprobate? He drew both to Christ, he wills the salvation of all men. But the reprobate resisted the drawing of the spirit and this is the sole reason for the difference in operation of the spirit who wills the salvation of all men. This does not mean the elect can take any credit for their own salvation, without Christ and without the spirit they can do nothing. Why does the spirit overcome resistance in the elect and not on the non-elect? As I said the spirit like a good seed wants to always become a fruitful tree, but if the ground is bad, it doesn’t matter how good the seed is, it’ll die. And so happens to the holy spirit, man has the ability to kill its operation, and in this sense the reprobate are fully responsible for their damanation. And the elect can’t take any credit for their salvation since anything they do is due to the spirit, and we will and do only because God wills and does in us.
November 30th, 2012 at 7:28 am
Before you guys dive into more books le me suggest one .Bonhoffeer Pastor Prophet Martyor. Spy.
It really lays out the undercurrent in Germany from about 1900-1945. How thr political system and rhe church was in such disarray tha a man like Hitler could come to power.
There is a lot of parallels with the conditions in America today. Class warfare, law makers breaking their own laws and with no conciquences. Disregarding their constitution. Hyper inflation and a general lack of godlyness.
David Wells talks about this in America in his book God in a Wasteland, on how God is something out there but carries no weight in any of our actions and decisions. Something to be studied as a curiosity per say but not to be taken seriously.
Let me know if you get a chance to read it.
Bruce kamminga
At yahoocom
November 30th, 2012 at 7:31 am
And this should remind all of us that the spirit is willing but the flesh is weak. And this warning from Jesus to Peter is true for every christian. Chris, as i said in my first post replyng to you we both agree on this. At the same time the key is that the spirit is always willing when the gospel is preached, both before and after conversion. The holy spirit does not pass by the reprobate, the reprobate oondemn themselves as a result of rejeting the work of he spirit.
November 30th, 2012 at 7:46 am
I wrote a couple of posts back:
“And so happens to the holy spirit, man has the ability to kill its operation, and in this sense the reprobate are fully responsible for their damanation.”
I really should have made it more clear and my wording that man has the ability to kill its operation was very poor wording on my part. Rocky ground always kills good seed but good ground never kills good seed. The reprobate always kill the spirit, it’s not that they have the ability, but they always do it. They are incapable of being drawn by the spirit, always resist it. The elect on the other hand are incapable of resisting the spirit, like good ground can not resist good seed.
November 30th, 2012 at 11:48 am
The calvinist doesn’t understand reprobation, the arminian doesn’t understand election.
Election is unconditiona and is of grace. What this means is that God elects not based on merit. In election merit follows grace always. Calvin teaches this correctly. God’s grace precedes any merit in man.
However in reprobation, which is judgment, Arminius correctly teaches that man’s actions alone bring about the judgment of God and not the other way around as Calvin teaches. The just punishement of God follows the actions of man as Arminius correctly teaches. No judge would issue a verdict prior to a crime being committed. So reprobation works the opposite of election. In election God acts first in mercy and chooses the elect, in reprobation man acts first and chooses his own reprobation. This is why there is no such thing as a decree of reprobation, because reprobation is based on God foreseeing what man will do. Election on the other hand is based on God’s sovereign actions. God is not sovereign in reprobation as calvinism teaches, otherwise he would be the author of sin, reprobation is determined solely by man and can not be attributed to a decree from God. Reprobation lies entirely with man, although God foresees it and only in this sense was Esau hated. Man is sovereign in his own reprobation and God is sovereign in the election of grace of his own elect.
This way only can we say that God elects unto grace and doesn’t reprobate anybody, but man elects himself unto condemnation.
November 30th, 2012 at 11:57 am
God is not sovereign in reprobation was not a good phrase. God is a sovereign judge in reprobation is what it was meant, but it is man that brings God’s judgment upon himself. Like a criminal that draws the judge to himself and provokes the judgment. So man draws God in reprobation, and provokes the wrath of God. in election the opposite happens God draws man and gives him the gifts of faith, love, and hope.
November 30th, 2012 at 12:00 pm
Again, not well phrased but just wanted to point out there’s no decree of reprobation. Reprobation is brought about by man. Election on the other hand is of God. This is biblical single predestination.
November 30th, 2012 at 1:55 pm
In two workds here:
Election (mercy), unconditional.
Reprobation (judgment), conditional on man’s actions.
God is sovereign both in mercy and judgment. But God’s mercy works different from God’s judgment, one’s unconditional the other one conditional.
November 30th, 2012 at 4:50 pm
Actually I am surprised that Reformed theology even affirms unconditional double predestination, where God of his good pleaure elects some and reprobates others. Their own covenant theology contradicts this in that:
1) the elect are in an unconditional covenant of grace (they get what they don’t deserve entirely due to God’s mercy)
2) the reprobate in a conditional covenant of works (they get what they deserve entirely due to God’s justice)
November 30th, 2012 at 7:48 pm
Bill I disagree. Most Calvinist I have talked to do not hold to the view of double predestination. You may find some, but most believe man is born in sin and thus reprobate at birth, much like the Lutheran view. That is why I disagree with Infant baptism. Man making a covenant with God, that in affect is saying “By baptizing this child I agree bring my sinful child up in the admonition of the Lord, but I want You Lord to set him or her aside unto salvation, If I do this for you, you need to do that for me.” deal or no deal?
All people are sinners because of Adams sin. God doesn’t elect them into re-probation, He allows all those He has not elected to continue in their sin. He doesn’t cause them to sin any more than He caused Adam to sin.
Man does not become a sinner when he or she sins. we sin because we are born to do so. It comes natural to us, Its because its our nature.
God could, if He so chooses, condemn us all and send us all to Hell because we all sin. He doesn’t choose some to be reprobates. We do that on our own.
What he does do, is take those that He set aside “before the foundations of the world” as the Bride of Christ, and saves them and them alone.
Its not like He chooses a batch for Hell and another batch for Heaven, He chooses a batch for Heaven out of the whole, that is bound for hell. They were destined for hell all along.They sinned, they are held responsible for their sin, and condemned because of it. It was done for His Glory, hence he is glorified for His showing some grace, and He is glorified for showing others His Justice.
That was the whole argument between Palagus and Augustine.
Augustine prayed for Gods help in doing “what we could not do”, and Palagus declared that God would not and could not hold us responsible by requiring us to “do what we could not” therefore God must allow us to make a choice, and the concept of “free will” was born.
Some of the Calvinist views you mention are ones i have never heard of
December 1st, 2012 at 5:36 am
Bruce,
You summed up in one single sentence what I have been writing about (on my notebook paper) for several pages in response to Bill.
You said, “Its not like He chooses a batch for Hell and another batch for Heaven, He chooses a batch for Heaven out of the whole, that is bound for hell.”
I don’t know that I’ve ever heard it said better than that!
I’m typing up my written response right now. I had to write it to keep track of all of the points Bill was bringing up.
Hope you enjoy it shortly,
Chris Jager
Tillamook, OR
PS–I’d still like to discuss baptism in covenant context. I really don’t think it will divide us, just make us think about what we already know a little more thoroughly. Just like this long comment thread.
December 1st, 2012 at 6:07 am
Bruce,
I should have added a while ago that if I could not find a faithful church, I would be doing exactly what you are doing right now.
The church I go to isn’t just what I would want it to be (I would rather go to a UNRCA church), but it is faithful to the gospel–the ministry of the word, and I believe, the means of grace.
Thanks,
Chris Jager
Tillamook, OR
December 1st, 2012 at 6:37 am
Chris on the bottom of one of my posts is my email address , you and Bill are welcome to contact me through that. And no baptism won’t devide us , nor should discussions like this because we should keep in mind that we are to Glorify God in all of this and do so by growing in grace and knowledge.
It’s iron sharpening iron , we accept and reject certain teachings based on what we find in scripture.
I reject a lot of what Luther sets forth just like Bill does with Calvinist views. But I also learn stuff because of what he has pointed out. You have obviously done the same as you have left your Arminian roots, like I did so many years ago. ( although mine was more Palagian than Arminian)
Reading about Luther and how he did all he could to reason with the Church of Rome in his day and now reading how Bonhoeffer worked with the different faiths from WW1 through the end of WW2 when he died sets a good example. I tend to shy away from churches that don’t believe what I do because it causes strife do to the unwillingness of people to compare what they believe with what scripture says.
We spend time in the word with another couple holding similar beliefs , going through scripture, sermons, and lectures we find on the Internet. This way we consume Gods word daily together. Others are free to join and we never demand they believe only what we do, only to show us why they believe what they believe.
Bill is an excellent example of this by showing his sources. He appears to have a lot of time to search out the information and lays out the information.
I find it interesting that Bill is quick to counter the verses we use with verses of his own, but doesn’t take the verse at hand and show how our interpretation is not correct. I ran into this a lot when discussing these issues with those of the Arminian view.
Anyway email me and let’s talk about infant baptizism.
Bk
December 1st, 2012 at 7:48 am
Bruce, you hit it on the nail,
“I find it interesting that Bill is quick to counter the verses we use with verses of his own, but doesn’t take the verse at hand and show how our interpretation is not correct.”
I yesterday read John 10 (the Good Shephered who dies for his sheep, who knows and calls his sheep only, and his sheep know him and answer his call) and was convicted by the holy spirit. I believe and confess that John 10 is either in substantial or total agreement with Calvinism. I confess and believe that John chapter 10 rips apart lutheranism’s teaching of universal grace.
But I also believe and confess that the biblical passages I quoted on this blog rip apart calvinism. The holes in calvinism aren’t small, they are impossible to plug, even though if the whole of the doctrine of scripture where to depend on tht tenth chapter of John Calvinism will stand as the only biblical form of christianity.
So which one is it? I will answer this myself for you guys later in the day.
For now and being consistent with what I told earlier to Bruce, scripture trumps doctrine or dogma entrenched in Canons or Confessions. No doctrine, whether lutheran or reformed that does not stand the test of scripture should be taught as mandatory for believers to have. So I knocked down the Westminster Confession and the Canons of Dort they do not pass the test of scripture. Although some scripture backs them up, like the tenth chapter of John there’s too much scripture stackedup against them. But now led by the Spirit of God after reading John chapter 10 I have to knock down The Formula of Concord and the Solid Declaration of the Formula of Concord. There you go for those that thought I would defend every lutheran doctrinal statement, I have just identified the two lutheran confessions where universal grace is taught and I would refuse to confess and believe them as universal biblical truths. Same goes for objective justification, it doesn’t meet the standard of universal biblical truth.
I recognize there is value in the Westminster Confession, Canons of Dort, Formula of Concord, and Solid Declaration of the Formula of Concord. I recognize that there is scripture that can back all of the cntents in these confessions, but I also recognize that there is scripture that can expose all these confessions as heresy as this blog has proven.
So what’s left? We need creeds and confessions to teach in the churches. The following I believe to be non-controversial and non-contradictory with each other:
Belgic Confession, Heidelberg Catechism, Augsburg Confession, the 39 Articles of the Anglican Church as written at the time of the Reformation, and the Second Helvetic Confession.
December 1st, 2012 at 7:52 am
when I said Augsburg confession i should have said the whole lutheran book of concord (except the Formula of Concord and the Solid Declaration of the Formula of Concord).
December 1st, 2012 at 8:00 am
Next time anybody asks me if the atonement is universal or not? My answer will be why do you care? Some scripture clearly points in that direction, but other scripture clearly points the opposite direction. It is clear that it was not God’s will for man to know the answer. When we preach from scripture we should preach God’s word, depending which verse we are expounding on Christ would have died for all or for the elect only.
Same for irresistible grace and the same for perseverance of the saints (can christians lose their salvation or not). It is clearly not God’s will for man to inquire into this and establish a universal doctrine. There are verses in scripture that go one way or the other and we need to accept scripture by faith where it teaches one or the other. Trying to build universal doctrine in these areas can not and should not be done. This blog has sufficiently proven it. Just when I thought I was done with calvinism and expose its flaws, the Lord led me to read John 10 and forced me to recant in the way I did in my earlier post today.
December 1st, 2012 at 8:42 am
Like wise for me Bill , I find discussions like this brings out points I would otherwise never consider.
If you take your new found understanding and apply it to Jn 1-3 holding on to the indicative / imparitive in these chapters you still find the sola’s we hold to. Look at Jn 3:16 and following
“For God so loved the world, that He gave His only begotten Son, that whoever believes in Him shall not perish, but have eternal life. For God did not send the Son into the world to judge the world, but that the world might be saved through Him. He who believes in Him is not judged; he who does not believe has been judged already, because he has not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God. This is the judgment, that the Light has come into the world, and men loved the darkness rather than the Light, for their deeds were evil. For everyone who does evil hates the Light, and does not come to the Light for fear that his deeds will be exposed. But he who practices the truth comes to the Light, so that his deeds may be manifested as having been wrought in God.” (John 3:16-21 NASB)
Here Christ points out that salvation is for the believer ,NOT as the Arminian believes when the words
” who so ever” are believed to mean every one who chooses correctly. Otherwise ” he who does not believe” could not be judged already.
The elect were destined to be saved , out of sinful humanity, before the foundations of the world.
Otherwise God would have to have a “wait and see” additude to see who would reject His grace.
Paul makes it clear in Rom. 3 that we ALL reject God and with out His intervention we would all would continue to do so until the day we die. The power of Christ’s salvation was sufficient to save all men, but it’s affect was on the elect. God’s bride for His Son, chosen before time.
Christ’s sheep hear his voice, the Jewish leadership he was addressing couldn’t, because His Father had not enabled them.
Also jn6:44 the word “draw” as in relationship to getting a bucket of water out of a well. The water does not jump into the bucket, it’s got to be picked.
Just keep in mind that understanding you arrived at when reading Jn 10. It changed the way I looked at myself in light of the Gospel, the greatness of God in saving me into the fold. And where I was headed with out His interdiction. WOW
December 1st, 2012 at 10:51 am
“Its not like He chooses a batch for Hell and another batch for Heaven, He chooses a batch for Heaven out of the whole, that is bound for hell.”
Chris, lutherans still have a problem with this in that God chooses a bunch for heaven but lutherans deny that God passes by those that are bound for hell. Those that are bound for hell reject God’s grace which God gives when the gospel is preached to everrybody. Big difference between the lutheran and calvinist gospel call. Man reject saving grace in lutheranism, they reject the holy spirit, in calvinism man rejects common grace.
You asked me the questioon, does the spirit draw the elct in a different way as in the reprobate. The answer in lutheranism is yes, in this way man elects himself to damnation. In Calvinism God passes by man, so God elects man to damnation and leaves him in their sin.
Anyways as I said before there is biblical evidence for Calvinism in John 10, there is biblical evidence for lutheranism that I provided extensively as well.
From my point of view how God operates is his business and man has no business coming to conclusions on how this works. Whether the effectual call (a call issued to the elect only) is biblical as calvinists teach or unbiblical as lutherans teach, I am going to leave it with God. Because I now believe God does not want us to inquire into this, as I stated in my previous post. Because an argument can be made that God draws his sheep only through the holy spirit, but there is sufficient biblical evidence that the call of the Shepherd goes out to the goats as well and his grace is bestowed on them the same way as it is on the elect, yet they resist and the judgment of God is harsher. Mercy and judgment go hand in hand, the more mercy God bestows, the more judgment. This was the case of Israel. Can anybody really teach that the God did not call the Goats in Israel, god bestowed on those goats more grace than anybody else and scripture so teaches in many passages. But the goats rejected this grace. The holy ghost draws the goats to himself with a more powerful grace than he draws the elect, but they resist it. And this is the reason why the judgment on these goats is so harsh. If the holy ghost simply passes them by and leaves them in unbelief, the condemnation would be milder, than if the holy ghost draws them and they blaspheme agaisnt it.
Anyhow as I said I do not hold a position on this any more. I believe both the lutheran and reformed positions are plausible, and maybe one is right and the other wrong. At the same time I am inclined to believe that God does not want us to establish a doctrine on this topic, else he would have clearly outlined it in Scripture.
December 1st, 2012 at 11:32 am
“Its not like He chooses a batch for Hell and another batch for Heaven, He chooses a batch for Heaven out of the whole, that is bound for hell.”
You see in God’s secret counsel a resounding yes. In the gospel call a resounding no. God through the holy spirit draws everybody to himself when the gospel is preached, the holy ghost through the word doesn’t distinguish between elect and reprobate. The unbeliever resists the holy ghost and the elect is converted irresistibly. The doctrine of election does not belong in the gospel call, in that God does not pass by anybody when the gospel is preached, man resists God.
December 1st, 2012 at 11:39 am
that’s the lutheran position the one I just outlined, but as I said I have backed off from it. I don’t want to get into God’s business and how he converts sinners.
This is why I now reject not only the Canons of Dort and Westminster Confessions, but also the two lutheran confessions that have taken a position on this. The Fomula of Concord and Solid Declaration.
This doctrine is divisive and in my opinion it has divided the reformed and lutheran reformation. Lutherans are to blame as well when they passed their own doctrine in the Formula of Concord and the Solid Declaration around 1580. These are the two last documents and they went way too deep into how God’s mind operate. The same sin was committed by the Westminster divines and those that wrote the Canons of Dort.
December 1st, 2012 at 4:17 pm
Bruce,
There’s a lot of scripture to support you, like John 10 and other chapters of the gospel of John as well. Unfotunatel there’s a whole bunch of other scripture going against you as well which I have quoted in this blog. Lutherans and Barthians are as monergistic as calvinists, yet they can rip up calvinism and back it up with scripture. Calvinists are perfectly capable of doing the same to lutherans. Forget Arminians, those are the easy ones to refute because they deny that salvation is by God’s sovereign grace without any human cooperation. Lutherans and Barth will teach that salvation is of God’s grace and the elect are drawn irresistibly by the holy spirit. Yet they affirm universal atonement, resistible grace (the holy spirit is resisted by sinful man), and perseverance of the saints (man endowed with true saving faith can lose their salvation).
This is why I have concluded that adopting the creeds and cnfessions of the Reformers prior to 1580 is the most advisable. And I have listed a few of them in one of my posts earlier today. Otherwise the body of Christ is divided by non-essentials. Not to mention that the church becomes like Rome, issuing confessions binding on members, that are really the doctrines of man in that it’s man’s best attempt at expounding scripture. And when I see saints disagreeing on this after extensive work (like those that drafted the Formula of Concord are opposed to those that drafted the Canons of Dort), I have to conclude it’s a non-essential, not only that but most likely an area that God reserved for himself and does not want man to pry into.
December 1st, 2012 at 4:46 pm
Bill that wasn’t my point. When you look at scripture use both points of view. It helps using each perspective when reading through the verses we all like to quote. If you know the position the other guy holds and you look at it from their side you will understand why they believe that way. After all it there is no harm in either view, its just a matter of understanding.
December 1st, 2012 at 5:38 pm
Bruce, absolutely agree 100%. This is what I do, that’s why it was so easy for me when I read John 10 yesterday to identify with calvinism! While at the same time when I read Romans 5 or 1 Timothy 4:10 or 1 John 2:2 or 2 Corinthians 5:19, Romans 3:24 John 1:29 I see universal grace and objective justification.
The key for me is to never twist scripture to fit your own doctrinal standards. Otherwise not only do I not enjoy scripture, but I start second guessing myself, and asking am I trying to read into scripture that is not saying just to a doctrinal statement drafted by man. You wouldn’t believe it but lots of Arminians, Lutherans, and I heard Rick Warren as well in order to deny the limited atonement taught in John chapter 10 quote Jesus when he said he had another sheep not of his fold that he meant those were the goats and he died for the goats as well! Even though Jesus clearly states that those sheep not of his fold were to be saved (he was referring to all the other elect believers that would later come to faith in him). Unreal, but this is what people do when they want to fit their own personal beliefs. I don’t let anything control what scripture says, on the contrary I let scripture control every one of my thoughts. Calvinists do it too I was reading of a presbyterian minister in florida that taught the sin unto death of First John is when an elect believer sins and dies physically as a result, God punishes him physically, but he’s taken to heaven right away! Unbelievable what a calvinist will do to deny apostacy.
When we twist scripture like this to fit our dogma, God is not pleased, the holy spirit is grieved, and our minds are filled with doubts whether we interpreted scripture correctly or not.
December 1st, 2012 at 5:43 pm
So where scripture teaches limited atonement I accept it as I did yesterday with no reservations. If Jesus says he laid down his life for his sheep that’s where it ends for me. I don’t argue with God. Couldn’t care less that the lutheran church teaches universal atonement if Jesus says otherwise. AT the same time when universal atonement comes up I believe by faith as well.
This is why I am so convinced that it was never the will of God that man draft a theology of the atonement in a vacuum as theology has done after 1580. Before then nobody in their sane mind ever decided to come up with a “philosophy” of the atonement and how it works, what is that God wills, what God intends to accomplish, how … etc. When we pry into the mind of God we are bound to err and scripture is going to prove us wrong at some point or another, and God is going to have the last laugh. Both Calvinists and lutherans are not immune to this.
December 1st, 2012 at 7:02 pm
I too have heard the ” sin unto death” as you described it but never gave it much thought. If that pastor would just think through what he said he should come to realize that it could not apply to some one saved. Especially if he took into consideration the new heart and nature that comes with salvation. I think Christ said if one is truly saved he will “not continue in sin”. How could they!
My understanding of “other sheep” has been those of us who are non Jew. We are the wild olive branches who were grafted into the domestic olive tree by Gods grace and to make the Jews jealous and come back to the Fold.
Man has always wanted to do the very opposite of what God commands, starting with Adam. Don,t eat of that tree, so what does he do? Eats
The things revealed belong to man and the things not revealed belong to God,like When He saves, Why He saves,and Who He saves, These are all hidden things.
We know how He saves because scripture tells us but as humans we demand to know the answers to the rest of the questions also, and he isn’t going to tell us, just like He didn’t tell Job why all the stuff happened to Him.
So I work at ” be still and know that I am God” It helps me to keep my view forward to the day I meet Him face to face,
and enjoy Him for ever.
December 1st, 2012 at 9:45 pm
Bruce, this is one of the best I’ve heard on regeneration!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=shxQcczYuAA
This is a reformed baptist preacher, he’s on fire! If you don’t go to church tomorrow listen to this. You’ll love it. Totally reformed and biblical.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=shxQcczYuAA
December 2nd, 2012 at 2:08 am
Bruce,
In responding to Bill, you said, “I think Christ said if one is truly saved he will ‘not continue in sin’. How could they!”
Are 1 John 3:6 NASB and 1 John 3:9 NASB the Scriptures you are referring to?
I find it interesting that John says that the one who is born of God, “cannot sin;” especially taking into account verse 6 (above). This is interesting because he seems to say the opposite in 1 John 1:8 NASB and 1 John 1:10 NASB. And again in 1 John 2:1 NASB; especially when he says, “if anyone sins,” as he talks to believers.
This seems to be in contrast with his statement that the children born of God “cannot sin.”
I believe Scripture explains this with the reality of being “in Christ.” Double imputation. Christ gets all of our sin for all time, and we get His perfect righteousness before God. Our sin is dead; without effect.
That’s why you have John talking about children born of God who cannot sin. In Christ there is no sin. We are perfect for all time. We cannot sin in Christ, since no sin abides in Him. His finished work has cleansed all of our sin.
And the one who has been born of God–the one who is in Christ–since he cannot sin ever, will always abide in Him without sin, “because he is born of God.” The conviction that we really have “no sin” before God because of Christ, and that we “cannot sin,” completely relinquishes fear of judgment and punishment; perfecting our love of him. (1 John 4:17-18 NASB) Indeed, after coming to know this final cleansing by the perfect love of God, we no longer retain any fear before God, but, abiding in Christ, we boldly enter His throne-room without sin as little and humble children.
John shows that we do indeed sin, shown in the previous examples. (1:8-10 and 2:1). We cannot claim to know the truth without admitting our sin…even our every day sin. But he also shows us that, before God’s final judgment throne, we are to have an attitude of “no sin” because we are indeed “in Christ,” and, “born of God.” If we are ever afraid of God, or his acceptance of us as children because of our ongoing and indwelling sin, we are to remember that (in view our new birth in Christ Jesus) we “cannot sin” and have “no sin.” I think this is what Paul means when he says that we are “clothed with Christ.” We are clothed with His righteousness in His ever-remaining and indwelling presence.
John even goes as far as to say–and sometimes in the same breath–that with this new birth and indwelling Spirit, we do not “practice sin,” or “continue in sin.” So while we do sin–and our sin has no hold on us–those who abide in God and are His children don’t “practice sin” (for you practice that which you wish to continue and increase). That is, they hate their own sin and despise their own wrongdoing.
That is the purpose of Christ’s coming–to stop the “practice” of sin in His people and to erase its accusations before God. (1 John 3:8 NASB) “The son of God appeared for this purpose, to destroy the works of the devil.”
Thanks,
Chris Jager,
Tillamook, OR
December 2nd, 2012 at 5:24 am
You are correct . I think these passages are there for two reasons,1 to assure us of our salvation, and
2 to make us think about our salvation or ” work out our salvation with fear and trembling ”
The desire not to sin is proof for us of being saved, the reminding us of sins non effect, is and should assure us when we do sin that we are not lost.
A pastor friend discribes it this way. When we are in Christ we are surrounded or literally in side the body of Christ. So when our Heavenly Father looks upon us all He can and does see IS CHRIST AND CHRIST ALONE, or wrapped /robed in His righteousness.
So God sees no sin. We on the other hand should see our sin and turn from it. Our desire to turn from it shows we have that new heart, assuring us again we are saved.
It all comes down to ” what do you want” honor Christ or honor self. The very struggle Paul discribes in Romans.
December 2nd, 2012 at 7:30 am
Bruce,
Wouldn’t you agree that in Christ our sins are not being “counted” against us, just as if God does not see them, but that God is, nevertheless, aware of them? He is still omniscient, but His wrath has been satisfied toward us. Metaphorically, it is as if He does not see them. Legally and actually, He does not count them against us on account of Christ Jesus and his substitutionary atonement. But as the Almighty, Omniscient God that is all-sovereign, he is indeed aware that we still sin. Nothing passes from his sight.
Chris Jager
Tillamook, OR
December 2nd, 2012 at 9:47 am
I have to agree with Brucce on this one.
By the way Chris you are correct that when we are clothed in Christ we have no sin. And Paul mentions that in many of his epistles. However this relates to our assurance of salvation.
As Bruce correctly pointed God wants us to have two things equally important. And one can not destroy the other. Bruce said it perfectly:
“I think these passages are there for two reasons,1 to assure us of our salvation, and
2 to make us think about our salvation or ” work out our salvation with fear and trembling ”
First John as Bruce correctly points out talks about both Chris, the way you present it is as if First John talks only about assurance, he does not. Two elements are essential in sanctification:
1) Assurance of Salvation
2) The fear of God
The fear of God is the beginning of wisdom is how the book of Proverbs starts. Without this fear we can’t obey him. Many unbelievers don’t fear God, they just think God will forgive them, because he’s a loving God. Other unbelievers are terrified at God and have no assurance. Only the Christian has both the fear of God and the assurance of salvation.
How far should this fear go? According to Calvin in his Institutes Book 3 when he writes about Repentance this fear should go as high as possible without destroying the assurance of salvation. The apostle Paul in his epistles to Christians warns Christians that they will not inherit the kingdom of heaven if they murder, lie, commit adultery. St John warns about th sin unto death for which we shouldn’t pray any longer for a christian brother. The fear of God includes the fear of losing your salvation, and Calvin teaches that a christian should fear that he will lose the witness of the spirit if he entangles himself in sin and hte spirit will abandon him. These threats are for christians, however so are the promises of the gospel that assure us that God will never leave us nor forsake us, that his children are assured of the inheritance. Both are true. Calvin was a master of keeping both assurance and fear of salvation, his chapters on repentance in his Institutes.
To summarize the fear of God is the beginning of wisdom both before and after salvation. We can’t get converted without the law that shows us that we are headed to hell and then the forgiveness of sins is accepted in the gospel. Once we are converted though, and grounded on this assurance of salvation, the fear of God sanctifies us by working our salvation with fear and trembling. The third use of the law that is preached to christians follows the gospel. Prior to conversion the proper order is law – gospel. After conversion is gospel – law. But the law that works fear in the christian can never destroy our assurance of salvation. So you need both, if somebody tells me that the more assured they are of their salvation is a sign of christianity, I wholeheartedly agree. However if the fear of God is missing, this person has not grown in sanctification, his heart still lacks the fear of God. And this was the problem with the Corinthian churh where immorality and bickering abounded.
To summarize as Bruce indicated you need both the assurance of salvation and the fear of God. The fear of God is a sign of salvation as much as it is the assurance of salvation. Neither of us saves us since we are saved by Christ. We whould not boast in our spiritual gifts, nobody should boast in faith, love, or hope since God gave the three gifts, however love is the most important of those three gifts of God as the apostle teaches. And love is grounded both in the assurance of salvation and the fear of God.
December 2nd, 2012 at 10:01 am
It’s not that we obey God to gain merit from him. This merit is already ours by grace. Yet this grace does not cancel the fear of God, it actually increases in the hearts of the christian. But it’s not like the fear of the unbeliever that is grounded on despair, but a fear grounded on assurance. Mevertheless is a true fear, that if we don’t obey God will punish us, the consequences of sin do not distinguish between a christian and non christian. The only diffeerence is like Proverbs teaches that the christian falls 7 times and gets back up 7 times, while the unbeliever when he falls he doesn’t get back up. Yet the fear of God is a virtue that only the believer has, and it is one of highest virtue a believer can have. It is as precious as the assurance of salvation in the gospel. Godly fear is a blessing, and like Salomon taught it’s the beginning of wisdom. Without the fear of God the unbeliever can’t get converted and the believer can’t do good works, this is why Paul teaches to work our salvation with fear and trembling, this message is for believers as are all the exhortations, warnings, and threats in the new testament letters. Some think these warnings are for hypocrites in the church, and it is true that they are for them as well, but the hypocrite doesn’t fear God only the believer does and can benefit from these exhortations and threats. It is also true that the believer is not under the law. But we need to believe both by faith, even though for the carnal mind they contradict each other.
December 2nd, 2012 at 10:06 am
That the fear of God should not destroy our assurance of salvation is ture. But that our assurance of salvation should not destroy the fear of God (including the fear that we may lose our salvation) is an equally true teaching.
1 Corinthians 10:12 should believed with faith, a faith as strong as the one that grasps the assurance of salvation. The assurance of salvation precedes the fear of God, since nobody can truly fear God who has not been saved by God first.
12 Wherefore let him that thinketh he standeth take heed lest he fall.
December 2nd, 2012 at 2:41 pm
The law works wrath in the unbeliever. But for David it was different, he delighted in the law of God and meditated in his commands. He prayed to God that he would write the law in his heart and fill him with a love for his commands. We all need to pray that God would pour his love in our hearts and put his fear in our hearts. Because the fear of God is like the repentance that leads unto life as Paul teaches and not the repentance that leads to sorrow as it does in the unbeliever. This repentance only God can work in our hearts. And we must realize that we belong to God and he’s a jealous God and we have to give our entire lives, all our have to be made captive to him. But we can not do this on our own only God can perform this work in us, we need God to circumcise our hearts and pour his love on them. And this is how a christian sees the law of God, but it’s not something that anybody can say in words. It’s something God alone can work in the heart of the believer. And in this sense the law applies to the Christian. And we need to pray that God would put his fear in our hearts, we can’t make a decision to fear the Lord, God instills godly fear in the heart of the believer. And those exhortations and threats are real, but the believer loves a God that disciplines his children. I remember when my father told me if I didn’t get good grades in school he would kick me out of the house and I had to make a living by myself, this was a loving father disciplining. And he would say those things even though I already had good grades, but so that I would keep doing well. If our earhtly fathers discipline us, so much more does the Lord who as scirpture teaches disciplines his children. It is the unbeliever that hates God’s law and hates God’s discipline. It’s hard for me to explain this theologically, and I think very few theologians and preachers understand it. It is the puritans that truly understood it the best.
December 2nd, 2012 at 6:05 pm
Because there was no really good work other than fear that is what is used. It is explained as a reverent fear or something like a pauper being summoned before the King. Even being assured that there is nothing wrong and that the King wanted to have the pauper appear before Him to speak well of him, the pauper enters with fear and trepidation, thinking back trying to figure out or “work out” what he has done to be summonded like this. But once before the good King he stands in awe or like the prophet Isaiah and all the others who came face to face with God fell on their face and worshipped.
On a side note,did you ever notice that worship always followed God revealing Himself ? And did you ever wonder why we do all that singing in the first part of our services here in America? Having to ”
” get in the mood “so to speak. Did you ever realize that it’s done that way in order to get our minds off the gods of this age and direct our attention to the One True God?
Just wondering
December 2nd, 2012 at 6:42 pm
Chris. It is true that our sins are not counted against us but it goes deeper than that. It’s even more than being pardoned. Our sins are separated from us ” as far as east from west is distant.” Notice it doesn’t say north from south because go north long enough and you wind up heading south, not so with east and west.
It’s not like the file has been retired on us, it’s been taken out and burned. There is no trace. The Bible says we are wrapped or ” robed in the righteousness of Christ” and I believe that means He only sees Christ’s righteousness.
So is He aware of our sin? I don’t know.You will have to ask Him when you see him. I tend to hold on to what I wrote above. And I think Luther thought so to, because he told his sidekick Malangton ” go out and sin bravely”
can we sin all we want ? Yes we can! BUT knowing how great salvation is, and the price paid, is that what you want to do?
This is what leads us to the book of first John. Test your desires and see where your heart is. Godly desires, Godly heart. Sinful desires, sinful heart.
Ah and you say we sin every day, yes we do, but now our heart is at war with our sinful desires. And at a far greater scale than before we were saved.
What helps me do the right thing is to think of how Christ has let me represent Him and how that diminishes Christ when I sin. It not only affects how people see me but how they see Christians because of me, and ultimately Christ.
Hope this helps
December 2nd, 2012 at 9:04 pm
Bruce, services in America how they are structured it varies.
I do agree by the way that God does not see our sin. It is not imputed for the sake of Christ. However in judgment we will all have to account for every one of our works. Although we can’t get credit because any good work that we did is a result of grace, it is as if we get rewarded for what God gave us, grace for grace as Augustine put it! And yes God pardons the sin in our imperfect works that otherwise would be like filthy rags.
With regard to preaching for christians though, in the New Testament is at least 25% law. And I believe this is proper preaching. The third use of the law is in all the confessions, lutheran and reformed. Although law to the proud and grace to the humble holds, as Calvin taught no christian can claim to be so perfect that he does not need the law preached to. The law whips the flesh to use Calvin’s words and wakes it up from lethargy, summons us for spritual warfare. Because the law does not condemn the christian who is not under the law, this third use of the law although it should never be confused with the gospel, it is really grace. It’s like the disciplining of parents, it’s done in love, it may hurt children but it is for the children benefit when the parent disciplines. The whole counsel of God needs to be preached to christians, and from what I see in the New Testament the law is as I said 25% law.
This is the law that calls us to obedience, not the self help tips of a seeker sensitive evangelical service. And in sanctification the law (in its third use grounded on the gospel, and preached following the gospel) plays a 50% role. A healthy christian diet has a lot of law in it! But as I said before the law in the third use is like a loving father disciplining, when he threatens his children with conssequenses it is for the children’s benefits.
December 2nd, 2012 at 9:12 pm
And did you fear your earthly dad? I sure did because he did not spare the rod if I was disobedient. Neither will our heavenly father with his children. If we sin boldly we will be disciplined boldly by God and it will hurt. The Lord does not spare his rod and disciplines his children. God’s sheep know this, and have true fear of God. Our good works are works of gratitude, but also out of reverence for God, and fear of the consequences of sin.
December 2nd, 2012 at 9:33 pm
Hebrews chapter 12 from the King James version, God punishes whom he loves. If God did not punish us we would not be his children Below from the KJV Hebrfews chapter 12 teaches exactly what I just mentioned, the punishement of the Lord on his children is sure proof that we are christians, otherwise we would be bastards as the KJV words it. This is why the exhortation from the apostles need to be taken seriously, unless we love punishment, we better obey him for he will not spare his rod. Anybody christian that sins boldly will face the tough love of God, and be discipline, it will hurt. Verses 6 to 11 from the KJV are listed below from Hebrews 12, we need to pray that the fear of God be put in us or we will face his discipline.
Hebrews 12
5 And ye have forgotten the exhortation which speaketh unto you as unto children, My son, despise not thou the chastening of the Lord, nor faint when thou art rebuked of him:
6 For whom the Lord loveth he chasteneth, and scourgeth every son whom he receiveth.
7 If ye endure chastening, God dealeth with you as with sons; for what son is he whom the father chasteneth not?
8 But if ye be without chastisement, whereof all are partakers, then are ye bastards, and not sons.
9 Furthermore we have had fathers of our flesh which corrected us, and we gave them reverence: shall we not much rather be in subjection unto the Father of spirits, and live?
10 For they verily for a few days chastened us after their own pleasure; but he for our profit, that we might be partakers of his holiness.
11 Now no chastening for the present seemeth to be joyous, but grievous: nevertheless afterward it yieldeth the peaceable fruit of righteousness unto them which are exercised thereby.
December 2nd, 2012 at 9:53 pm
The author of Hebrews of course is not talking about losing our salvation, this is not about justification. The author of Hebrews is talking about the consequences of sin and the pain that will be inflicted on us by God. This is precious scripture where our heavenly father is compared to our earthly fathers, and how much his discipline surpasses that of an earthly father. It is the most biblical teaching that as we obey our parents our of fear when we are children we ought to obey God much more out of fear, not fear of lossing our salvation, but fear that like Israel God will give us up to sinful man for destruction of the flesh as Israel was given up to sinful nations. I’m quoting this scripture again, where we are exhorted to obey the Lord out of fear like we obeyed our parents out of fear as Hebrews 12:9 plainly states that fear of punishment should motivate our obedience to God. There can be no sanctification in our lives without fear. Hebrews 12:9 “Furthermore we have had fathers of our flesh which corrected us, and we gave them reverence: shall we not much rather be in subjection unto the Father of spirits, and live?”
Hebrews 12 verses 5 to 11
5 And ye have forgotten the exhortation which speaketh unto you as unto children, My son, despise not thou the chastening of the Lord, nor faint when thou art rebuked of him:
6 For whom the Lord loveth he chasteneth, and scourgeth every son whom he receiveth.
7 If ye endure chastening, God dealeth with you as with sons; for what son is he whom the father chasteneth not?
8 But if ye be without chastisement, whereof all are partakers, then are ye bastards, and not sons.
9 Furthermore we have had fathers of our flesh which corrected us, and we gave them reverence: shall we not much rather be in subjection unto the Father of spirits, and live?
10 For they verily for a few days chastened us after their own pleasure; but he for our profit, that we might be partakers of his holiness.
11 Now no chastening for the present seemeth to be joyous, but grievous: nevertheless afterward it yieldeth the peaceable fruit of righteousness unto them which are exercised thereby.
December 2nd, 2012 at 10:26 pm
Chris, your description of the church service is really half true. You wrote:
“One thing that gets me up out of bed on Sunday morning is the desire to not miss feast that I know the Lord will provide. Within the ministry of the faithful church, God provides a feast for the believer.
Going to “fellowship with other people” is secondary. Incidentally, knowing that there will be a feast from God Himself motivates me to bring others to it as well,”
What you wrote is perfect, this is what God does for us. However when we go to a service we better come with our head bowed down, broken by the sin we committed during the week, examining ourselves. We bring our own sin, this in and of itself is not something I would describe as a feast. We confess our sins and he’s faithful and forgive us. To the Sunday service I bring a contrite heart and my sin with me, God brings Christ’s righteousness and holiness, and the forgiveness of sins. Yes it is a feast what God provides to us, but there’s two parts to it, God’s holiness and my sin. With that said I totally agree with you that the joy of having our sins forgiven and partaking in the sacrament of the Lord’s Supper is a feast.
December 2nd, 2012 at 10:57 pm
In the christian both are true and present:
1) He mourns and feels sorrow for his sin
2) He dances and parties and rejoices in the grace and forgiveness of the Lord.
December 2nd, 2012 at 11:04 pm
Or put it another way these two are always present in a christian as long as his old sinful nature is still present with him in his life on earth:
1) Oh wretched man that I am
2) I thank God through Jesus Christ our Lord
The first one brings sorrow, the second one brings joy. In glorification, it will all be a party, but while we are on earth we only get the first fruits and sin has not been completely eradicated.
December 3rd, 2012 at 2:45 am
Bill,
Thank you for clarifying for me. Though I rejoice at the feast, I do indeed carry my sin with me into the service, and there am directed to Christ and His righteousness.
This Sunday was a wopper! I felt pretty low, but God was so faithful to deliver, once again, the reality of His righteousness written on my heart and mind.
Chris Jager,
Tillamook, OR
December 3rd, 2012 at 4:52 am
Bruce,
I did not say “pardoned.” I said erased. All of our sins are simply not there at the throne of judgment. Our sins are separated from us and God, bore and done away with at the death of Christ. “For He made Him who knew no sin to be sin for us, that we might become the righteousness of God in Him” (2 Corinthians 5:21 NKJV).
What I am saying is that when we sin, God is aware–He is not blind. He sees our heart that is corrupt. He is God. But in light of this, because we are in Christ Jesus, though He is aware of the reality of when and where we sin–even if we groan inwardly because of it–He sees the righteousness of His Son written on our person; the eradication of all our sins in Him; and the purity of Christ that stands forever, which is all that remains. Sin cannot touch us–we are dead to it. Our sins are on Christ’s shoulders. His righteousness is all that remains for us to God. Our life, “is hidden with Christ in God” (Colossians 3:3 NASB).
Or else, why would Christ be, “at the right hand of God, who also intercedes for us” (Romans 8:34 NASB)? Why is there need for both the Spirit and Christ to interceed for us? (see also: Hebrews 7:25 NASB and Romans 8:26-27 NASB). God knows all–for God is One. He is aware of all that Christ knows and all that the Spirit knows–they are one, yet three-in-one!
Again, we sin, but our sins are not counted against us. There is no record; it has been erased. It is not merely excused, as if we had still sinned but are just not punished. No! It is much better than that. The record is removed from us and erased. We did not commit the sin. It never happened. The sin is pinned and counted and seen in Jesus Christ. We are remain totally clean. That is why it is a finished work that spans the ages–even the sin that we have yet to commit.
But God witnesses our action of sin–He is not blind. The Scriptue says, “If You, LORD, should mark iniquities,
O Lord, who could stand?” (Psalm 130:3 NASB). He literally says, “If you, YAHWEY, should mark iniquities, O Lord, who could stand.”
But our sins are not marked–they are removed from us; including the record of those that stood before we believed. Though he witnesses them, he does not mark them. He cannot write them on the righteousness of His Son, which is written into our very identity as children born of God.
Psalm 139:16 NASB. Hebrews 12:7-11 NASB confirms this.
“It is for discipline that you endure; God deals with you as with sons; for what son is there whom his father does not discipline? But if you are without discipline, of which all have become partakers, then you are illegitimate children and not sons. Furthermore, we had earthly fathers to discipline us, and we respected them; shall we not much rather be subject to the Father of spirits, and live? For they disciplined us for a short time as seemed best to them, but He disciplines us for our good, so that we may share His holiness. All discipline for the moment seems not to be joyful, but sorrowful; yet to those who have been trained by it, afterwards it yields the peaceful fruit of righteousness.
Why would “the Father of spirits” discipline us if He was currently unaware of our less-than-holy actions?
However, He sees our wrongdoing as a Father to a beloved son–not as a King opposed to an enemy.
You should also do a word study on the concept of fear in the bible, if you haven’t already. The word “fear,” in “fear and trembling” is the use of the Greek root “phobos,” which is not the reverant fear that you say. It’s the “I am so terrified that I am shaking” kind of fear. For example, “He had a certain phobia of insects.”
The religious reverence that you speak of is coined by the greek root-word, “ulabees.” Such as when Noah feared the lord and built the ark exactly like the specifications given. He was reverent, or circumspect–fearing to do all exactly as the lord had commanded out of a great sense of responsibility and safety in the face of the destruction of the world. By implication, there is a certain amount of apprehension in the root “ulabees.” But it is translated as “fear,” in that context of reverance and the concern for the accomplishment of God’s will. It’s also used very sparingly in the Bible–only 4 times in the New Testament.
But this isn’t used in Philippians 2:12. It is the phobos root, meaning a certain amount of actual fear. I think this has to do with our election, in that if we fall away in unbelief until the end, we cannot claim election, so we should fear, lest we fall away from the living God and prove our lack of trust in His promise–our lack of regeneration and of the deposit of the Spirit of Christ. We need to “hold on to our confession.” As far as obedience is concerned, we are to have a certain measure of fear. But in the presence of God and concerning our sin, we should have no fear of judgment or our status as children if we truly believe the promise, as 1 John 4:17-18 NASB teaches and also Hebrews 12:21-24 NASB.
Phobos is by far the biggest root word used in the bible. The only other root used is dilos, which is where we get the “timidity” of 1 Timothy 1:7. This is a certain belittling, shrinking fear of intimidation, which the Spirit does not incur on us.
I have done an extensive, though not exhaustive, report on the occurance of these words. If you want to read my results, I can e-mail them to you. It is some of my early work, but I think worth reading at least.
Thanks,
Chris Jager
Tillamook, OR
December 3rd, 2012 at 9:32 am
Chris, you write:
“Again, we sin, but our sins are not counted against us. There is no record; it has been erased. It is not merely excused, as if we had still sinned but are just not punished. No! It is much better than that. The record is removed from us and erased.”
Come on brother, was David not punished for his sin? Sampson? Moses? God shows his displeasure with every one of his Saints. We are talking sanctification here not justification. David’s sin with Bathsheba (adultery and murder) was severly punished (and the baby as a result of the adultery never got to live, plus all the other punishments that were dealt on David as a result) even though the sin was forgiven. Sampson’s sin was severely punished, even though he was forgiven, in Judges 16:20 it says the Lord departed from and he died in the hand of the Philistines as a result, and Moses was denied the promised land as a resultt of his sin.
December 3rd, 2012 at 10:03 am
Chris, you write:
“Why would “the Father of spirits” discipline us if He was currently unaware of our less-than-holy actions?
However, He sees our wrongdoing as a Father to a beloved son–not as a King opposed to an enemy.”
Scripture is plain. Why would God discipline us? Because he loves us. There’s no love witthout discipline, a God that doesn’t discipline is a God that doesn’t love.
Proverbs 3:11 and Proverbs 3:12 My son, do not despise the Lord’s discipline or be weary of his reproof, for the Lord reproves him whom he loves, as a father the son in whom he delights.
Prov 15:5 A fool despises his father’s instruction,
but whoever heeds reproof is prudent.
Hebrews 12:8 8 8 If you are left without discipline, in which all have participated, then you are illegitimate children and not sons.
Love and discipline go hand in hand. Does discipline hurt? Ask Moses, David, and Sampson, it sure does. Discipline is rooted in love.
Hebrews 12:11 For the moment all discipline seems painful rather than pleasant, but later it yields the peaceful fruit of righteousness to those who have been trained by it.
Job 5:17 and Job 5:18 Behold, blessed is the one whom God reproves; therefore despise not the discipline of the Almighty. For he wounds, but he binds up; he shatters, but his hands heal
Proverbs 20:30 Blows that wound cleanse away evil; strokes make clean the innermost parts.
Revelation 3:19 Those whom I love, I reprove and discipline, so be zealous and repent.
December 3rd, 2012 at 10:20 am
Bill,
You are misrepresenting my comments.
Did you read the entire post? The context of the quotation you cited from my post was the context of the judgment throne of God, where, “Our sins are separated from us and God, bore and done away with at the death of Christ.”
With the word, “again,” I was referring to something that I had previously stated (which was in the first paragraph).
I am talking on one hand about our justification (where God does not “count” or “mark” our iniquities), and our sanctification on the other (where God indeed punishes and disciplines us on this earth, because He is still most definitely aware of our ongoing sin).
We are justified–clear with no record of sin–before his heavenly court (justification). But our santification, whereby God disciplines us and conforms us to the image of His Son, still takes place on earth–proving that God is still aware of our sin, (even though our imperfection is not counted, or marked, against us before His great throne of judgment).
Thanks again,
Chris Jager,
Tillamook, OR
Jesus gets the wrath that was due to all of our sin; we get His righteousness [double imputation; justification]. However, being justified sinners, we are disciplined and conformed to the image of Christ [sanctification]–the Father remaining fully aware of our daily sin.
December 3rd, 2012 at 10:28 am
Bill,
Again, you did not understand what I wrote.
I did say “why would the father discipline us.” But then, in the same phrase I said, “if he was currently unaware.”
Take in all that I say. Not just pieces.
You know, the bible does say, “there is no God.” But right before that it says, “The fool says in his heart…”
Chris Jager
Tillamook, OR
December 3rd, 2012 at 10:30 am
Chris, in justification we agree. When I spoke of the fear of the Lord before your post I was clear that there could not be sanctification without the fear of the Lord. The fear of the Lord relates to obedience and sanctification. I made it clear that the fear of the lord can not destroy your assurance of salvation, but without that fear you can’t have obedience. It’s like children without discipline will be wayward children, so christians without discipline as Hebrews teaches are illegitimate children, they are bastards, they are not God’s children.
December 3rd, 2012 at 10:37 am
The fear of the Lord has no place in justification. Calvin teaches it in his chapters on repentanc in his institutes. It’s about obedience and sanctification. John Owen “On Temptation” and “the mortification of sin”, same way he talks about God’s fear but both treatises are on sanctification.
December 3rd, 2012 at 12:00 pm
Bill,
Our justification is the grounds for our sanctification. The same faith that saves us is the faith that sanctifies us. Our sanctification rises out of our view of the cross and the great lengths that God has taken to save us by that finished work of great love.
“the one who fears [continues to fear] is not perfected in love”
We are not to be afraid of God’s discipline, but accept and learn from it as we look to him.
But, if we are tempted to look away from God and return to our old ways–walking in them–then in view of our entire salvation we should indeed be terrified. Consider also Hebrews 10:26-27 NASB. If we trample underfoot the Son of God, who took us into the midst of the breathren and sanctified us, all that is left is fear of judgment. That is also the context of Philippians 2:12–judgment at the final exultation of Christ.
In this sense and in view of judgment without Christ, we should indeed fear and “work out our salvation,” coming to God in the recognition that it is He who draws us to come to Him and walk in Him. Fear, in view of judgment while looking away from God, is helpful and serves God’s purposes. But ongoing “phobos,” or fearing as we continue to look toward the father–even when he disciplines us–does not “perfect us in love,” (1 John 4:18 NASB).
Terror perfects no man in the love of God. It should, however, drive him to hold on to his confession in case he should ever wish to go back and turn away from the presence of God, or exult himself before God apart from the sole righteousness of Christ.
There are numerous texts to support this, such as Romans 8:15 NASB.
The only fear that scripture does admonish us to maintain, while in Christ Jesus, is the kind of fear that Bruce talked about, which we can find in Hebrews 12:28 NASB; the “reverant fear,” or “ulabees” fear which beholds the presence of God with awe and wonder.
Chris Jager
Tillamook, OR
December 3rd, 2012 at 12:05 pm
Sadness at our sin–that we have brought reproach to His name–is something entirely different.
Godly sorrow leads to repentance. 2 Corinthians 7:10 NASB.
December 3rd, 2012 at 1:43 pm
Chris, agree.
The only question is how much law needs to be preached to christians. I indicated that in sanctification it’s about 50%. First John is 50% law and 50% gospel. Paul uses the third use of the law extensively. Though sanctification is entirely from God, and he works in us, he uses his word to produce this sanctification. The law is a very important part of preaching to christians.
1) In justification the law leads to knowledge of sin. So when we preach to unbelievers we first preach the law and then the gospel follows.
2) When we preach to christians the opposite is true. We preach the gospel first, followed by the law exhortations to obedience. This obedience is due to both works rooted in gratitude and works rooted in fear of God’s punishment.
I will quote Calvin’s Institutes for you right after this post, for Calvin fear of God was the main driver of sanctification.
December 3rd, 2012 at 1:46 pm
Calvin in chapter 2 of book 3 speaks about faith. There’s two gifts we receive when we are united to Christ in faith, justification and repentance (modern theologians call it sanctification). Repentance follows faith in Calvin’s Institutes and it’s driven by the fear of God. Here it is Chapter 3 section 7 from Calvin’s Instituteshttp://www.spurgeon.org/~phil/calvin/bk3ch03.html#seven.htm :
John Calvin:
The second part of our definition is, that repentance proceeds from a sincere fear of God. Before the mind of the sinner can be inclined to repentance, he must be aroused by the thought of divine judgment; but when once the thought that God will one day ascend his tribunal to take an account of all words and actions has taken possession of his mind, it will not allow him to rest, or have one moment’s peace, but will perpetually urge him to adopt a different plan of life, that he may be able to stand securely at that judgment-seat. Hence the Scripture, when exhorting to repentance, often introduces the subject of judgment, as in Jeremiah, “Lest my fury come forth like fire, and burn that none can quench it, because of the evil of your doings,” (Jer. 4: 4.) Paul, in his discourse to the Athenians says, “The times of this ignorance God winked at; but now commandeth all men every where to repent: because he has appointed a day in the which he will judge the world in righteousness,” (Acts 17: 30, 31.) The same thing is repeated in several other passages. Sometimes God is declared to be a judge, from the punishments already inflicted, thus leading sinners to reflect that worse awaits them if they do not quickly repent. There is an example of this in the 29th chapter of Deuteronomy. As repentance begins with dread and hatred of sin, the Apostle sets down godly sorrow as one of its causes, (2 Cor. 7: 10.) By godly sorrow he means when we not only tremble at the punishment, but hate and abhor the sin, because we know it is displeasing to God. It is not strange that this should be, for unless we are stung to the quick, the sluggishness of our carnal nature cannot be corrected; nay, no degree of pungency would suffice for our stupor and sloth, did not God lift the rod and strike deeper. There is, moreover, a rebellious spirit which must be broken as with hammers. The stern threatening which God employs are extorted from him by our depraved dispositions. For while we are asleep it were in vain to allure us by soothing measures. Passages to this effect are everywhere to be met with, and I need not quote them. But there is another reason why the fear of God lies at the root of repentance, viz., that though the life of man were possessed of all kinds of virtue, still if they do not bear reference to God, how much soever they may be lauded in the world, they are mere abomination in heaven, inasmuch as it is the principal part of righteousness to render to God that service and honor of which he is impiously defrauded, whenever it is not our express purpose to submit to his authority.
December 3rd, 2012 at 1:51 pm
In section 16 Calvin describes the godly fear of the believer in an even more forceful manner, I admit though that lutherans would have problems with this. As I said the fear of God has been understood by Calvin and the puritans better than anybody else.
Section 15 of Chapter 3 book 3 http://www.spurgeon.org/~phil/calvin/bk3ch03.html#seven.htm
John Calvin:
The Apostle, in his description of repentance, (2 Cor. 7: 2,) enumerates seven causes, effects, or parts belonging to it, and that on the best grounds. These are carefulness, excuse, indignation fear, desire, zeal, revenge. It should not excite surprise that I venture not to determine whether they ought to be regarded as causes or effects: both views may be maintained. They may also be called affections conjoined with repentance; but as Paul’s meaning may be ascertained without entering into any of these questions, we shall be contented with a simple exposition. He says then that godly sorrow produces carefulness. He who is really dissatisfied with himself for sinning against his God, is, at the same time, stimulated to care and attention, that he may completely disentangle himself from the chains of the devil, and keep a better guard against his snares, so as not afterwards to lose the guidance of the Holy Spirit, or be overcome by security. Next comes excuse, which in this place means not defense, in which the sinner to escape the judgment of God either denies his fault or extenuates it, but apologizing, which trusts more to intercession than to the goodness of the cause; just as children not altogether abandoned, while they acknowledge and confess their errors yet employ deprecation; and to make room for it, testify, by every means in their power, that they have by no means cast off the reverence which they owe to their parents; in short, endeavor by excuse not to prove themselves righteous and innocent, but only to obtain pardon. Next follows indignation, under which the sinner inwardly murmurs expostulates, and is offended with himself on recognizing his perverseness and ingratitude to God. By the term fear is meant that trepidation which takes possession of our minds whenever we consider both what we have deserved, and the fearful severity of the divine anger against sinners. Accordingly, the exceeding disquietude which we must necessarily feel, both trains us to humility and makes us more cautious for the future. But if the carefulness or anxiety which he first mentioned is the result of fear, the connection between the two becomes obvious. Desire seems to me to be used as equivalent to diligence in duty, and alacrity in doing service, to which the sense of our misdeeds ought to be a powerful stimulus. To this also pertains zeal, which immediately follows; for it signifies the ardor with which we are inflamed when such goads as these are applied to us. “What have I done? Into what abyss had I fallen had not the mercy of God prevented?” The last of all is revenge, for the stricter we are with ourselves, and the severer the censure we pass upon our sins, the more ground we have to hope for the divine favor and mercy. And certainly when the soul is overwhelmed with a dread of divine judgment, it cannot but act the part of an avenger in inflicting punishment upon itself. Pious men, doubtless, feel that there is punishment in the shame, confusion, groans, self-displeasure, and other feelings produced by a serious review of their sins. Let us remember, however, that moderation must be used, so that we may not be overwhelmed with sadness, there being nothing to which trembling consciences are more prone than to rush into despair. This, too, is one of Satan’s artifices. Those whom he sees thus overwhelmed with fear he plunges deeper and deeper into the abyss of sorrow, that they may never again rise. It is true that the fear which ends in humility without relinquishing the hope of pardon cannot be in excess. And yet we must always beware, according to the apostolic injunction, of giving way to extreme dread, as this tends to make us shun God while he is calling us to himself by repentance. Wherefore, the advice of Bernard is good, “Grief for sins is necessary, but must not be perpetual. My advice is to turn back at times from sorrow and the anxious remembrance of your ways, and escape to the plain, to a calm review of the divine mercies. Let us mingle honey with wormwood, that the salubrious bitter may give health when we drink it tempered with a mixture of sweetness: while you think humbly of yourselves, think also of the goodness of the Lord,” (Bernard in Cant. Serm. 11.)
December 3rd, 2012 at 2:16 pm
Actually I take that back, there’s no difference between lutherans and calvinists as far as the fear of god is concerned. Although in practice as I said it was the puritans that perfected the biblical preaching of he law to believers.
From the lutheran confessions the third use of the law I’m quoting below
Solid declaration of the formula of Concord VI http://www.bookofconcord.org/sd-thirduse.php
9
“Therefore, because of these lusts of the flesh the truly believing, elect, and regenerate children of God need in this life not only the daily instruction and admonition, warning, and threatening of the Law, but also frequently punishments, that they may be roused [the old man is driven out of them] and follow the Spirit of God, as it is written Psalm 119:71 : It is good for me that I have been afflicted, that I might learn Thy statutes. And again, 1 Corinthians 9:27 : I keep under my body and bring it into subjection, lest that, by any means, when I have preached to others, I myself should be a castaway. And again, Hebrews 12:8 : But if ye be without chastisement, whereof all are partakers, then are ye bastards and not sons; as Dr. Luther has fully explained this at greater length in the Summer Part of the Church Postil, on the Epistle for the Nineteenth Sunday after Trinity.”
19
But as far as the old Adam is concerned, which still clings to them, he must be driven not only with the Law, but also with punishments; nevertheless he does everything against his will and under coercion, no less than the godless are driven and held in obedience by the threats of the Law, 1 Corinthians 9:27; Romans 7:18. 7:19
24
“For the old Adam, as an intractable, refractory ass, is still a part of them, which must be coerced to the obedience of Christ, not only by the teaching, admonition, force and threatening of the Law, but also oftentimes by the club of punishments and troubles, until the body of sin is entirely put off, and man is perfectly renewed in the resurrection, when he will need neither the preaching of the Law nor its threatenings and punishments, as also the Gospel any longer; for these belong to this [mortal and] imperfect life.”
December 4th, 2012 at 5:22 am
Bill,
By the word “punishments” they are talking about disciplines and corrections that are to be soberly respected and learned from–to train us to be devout and pious in our faith and walk. This is again related to the “ulabees” fear that I was talking about, by which we become sorrowful of our sin out of our ongoing affections toward Christ, and thereby come to repentance.
Our motivation for holiness should never be fear and terror of condemnation…that is, if we are indeed included in Christ. Remember, though the law reminds us of our sin and points out our wrongdoing in the light of God’s holiness, it has no power to unite us to its holiness and perfection. Therefore, the law and the fear that it generates are for the unbeliever and the one who would walk away from the faith. These serve to drive that person to Christ.
But it is Christ at the end of the law that motivates us into all of our obedience, out of a strong desire to please, honor, and imitate the God whom we love and cherish by that hopeful message of good news. Not fear. Not the law. These are schoolmasters and slavedrivers, from which we were liberated into the freedom of Christ. Now, after Christ, the law is an aspiration to us–not a fear–because Christ is now in view! We take ground and lay hold of it because we are motivated by the good news of Christ Jesus.
Behold Christ, and cherish him in love for what He has done for you. THEN strive to adhere to the law, painstaking as it may be; incurring discipline as it most certainly will; because you are making war on yourself and your sin from the steadfast ground of immovable love. You cling to Christ because of the promises that He has given and the hope that Has inspired within you by His very Spirit.
Fear only the prospect that you might lose hold of Him and His promises, if that were possible.
Beat that sinful man down (your flesh)–with hammers–and make war on Him, because he is opposed to Christ your King, in whom you have placed your trust.
Expose your sin with the light of the law, but with the gospel of Christ always in view, at the hatred of the sin that you see within, oppose it with confidence before God and walk in His love–by the power of the Spirit; obeying His teaching and commands at the love of God and your brother(1 Timothy 1:8-11 NASB).
But always remember and expose the sin–ever before you–that remains.
Later,
Chris Jager
Tillamook, OR
December 4th, 2012 at 10:24 am
Chris, I disagree. The fear of God includes primarily the fear of his judgment. Both before and after salvation, the chrisian needs to fear the judgment of God. Just before you accepted Christ doesn’t mean you won’t have to account for every single one of your actions 2 Corinthians 5:9 2 Conrinthians 5:10 and 2 Corinthians 5:11
9 Wherefore we labour, that, whether present or absent, we may be accepted of him.
10 For we must all appear before the judgment seat of Christ; that every one may receive the things done in his body, according to that he hath done, whether it be good or bad.
11 Knowing therefore the terror of the Lord, we persuade men; but we are made manifest unto God; and I trust also are made manifest in your consciences.
You will be judged, like every other man and you will be rewarded according to your works. Again this warnings I want to make it clear relate to the doctrine of sanctification and not justification. We are not declared righteous on account of our works, we are imputed Christ’s righteousness. Also although we are rewarded for good works, we can not boast, we are still unprofitable servants because we did what was due and also any good work we do is becausee of God’s grace. So God gives us grace to perform good works, and then he rewards that grace so we can’t boast in good works. Augustine called it grace for grace.
For Calvin the judgment seat of Christ should inspire fear, for lutherans also good works merit rewards from God both in this life and the after life.
Calvin, whom I quoted above if you read him said in Chapter section 7:
John Calvin http://www.spurgeon.org/~phil/calvin/bk3ch03.html#seven.htm
“The second part of our definition is, that repentance proceeds from a sincere fear of God. Before the mind of the sinner can be inclined to repentance, he must be aroused by the thought of divine judgment; but when once the thought that God will one day ascend his tribunal to take an account of all words and actions has taken possession of his mind, it will not allow him to rest, or have one moment’s peace, but will perpetually urge him to adopt a different plan of life, that he may be able to stand securely at that judgment-seat.”
The defense of Augsburg Confession teaches http://www.bookofconcord.org/defense_5_love.php :
“73] Here also we add something concerning rewards and merits. We teach that rewards have been offered and promised to the works of believers. We teach that good works are meritorious, not for the remission of sins, for grace or justification (for these we obtain only by faith), but for other rewards, bodily and spiritual, in this life and after this life, because Paul 74] says, 1 Cor. 3:8: Every man shall receive his own reward, according to his own labor. There will, therefore be different rewards according to different labors.”
“244] And yet the preaching of rewards and punishments is necessary. In the preaching of punishments the wrath of God is set forth, and therefore this pertains to the preaching of repentance. In the preaching of rewards, grace is set forth. And just as Scripture, in the mention of good works, often embraces faith, —for it wishes righteousness of the heart to be included with the fruits, —so sometimes it offers grace together with other rewards, as in Is. 58:8f, and frequently in other places in the prophets. 245] We also confess what we have often testified, that, although justification and eternal life pertain to faith, nevertheless good works merit other bodily and spiritual rewards [which are rendered both in this life and after this life; for God defers most rewards until He glorifies saints after this life, because He wishes them in this life to be exercised in mortifying the old man] and degrees of rewards, according to 1 Cor. 3:8: Every man shall receive his own reward according to his own labor. [For the blessed will have reward, one higher than the other. This difference merit makes, according as it pleases God; and it is merit, because they do these good works whom God has adopted as children and heirs. For thus they have merit, which is their own and peculiar, as one child with respect to another.] For the righteousness of the Gospel, which has to do with the promise of grace, freely receives justification and quickening. But the fulfilling of the Law, which follows faith, has to do with the Law, in which a reward is offered and is due, not freely, but according to our works. But those who merit this are justified before they do the Law. Therefore, as Paul says, Col. 1:13; Rom. 8:17, they have before been translated into the kingdom of God’s Son, and been made joint-heirs with Christ.”
As you can see both the reformed and lutheran traditions maintain that good works will be rewarded by God at the judgment seat of Christ. Good works don’t merit salvation (justification does) but they do merit rewards both in this life and in the life to come as the defense of the Augsburg Confession I just quoted puts it.
December 4th, 2012 at 11:58 am
Bill,
Thank you for your imput.
Chris Jager
Tillamook, OR
December 4th, 2012 at 12:54 pm
Chris, the key is to separate justification form sanctification and not mix them.
Only Christ’s obedience to the father and his death on the cross merits eternal life. The reward of eternal life can not be merited by any of man’s works. The best works of the saints are like filthy rags. This is justification.
Sanctification is different. Now once we are justified and our sins pardoned we have to run the race as Paul says. We want to run and finish first, go after the gold medal. Sanctification is brilliantly presented by Paul in 1 Corinthians 9:24
“24 Know ye not that they which run in a race run all, but one receiveth the prize? So run, that ye may obtain.”
The defense of the Augsburg Confession which I quoted above with a link puts it perfectly as well and makes it clear that in glory not all christians will receive the same reward:
http://www.bookofconcord.org/defense_5_love.php
“Every man shall receive his own reward according to his own labor. [For the blessed will have reward, one higher than the other. This difference merit makes, according as it pleases God; and it is merit, because they do these good works whom God has adopted as children and heirs. For thus they have merit, which is their own and peculiar, as one child with respect to another.] For the righteousness of the Gospel, which has to do with the promise of grace, freely receives justification and quickening. But the fulfilling of the Law, which follows faith, has to do with the Law, in which a reward is offered and is due, not freely, but according to our works. But those who merit this are justified before they do the Law.”
December 4th, 2012 at 7:24 pm
And we see the difference between justification and sanctification in the parables as well. The parable of the vineyard workers relates to justification, all the wokers got the same pay regardless what time of the day they started working. The parable of the talents on the other hand relates to sanctification, our own obedience, still grounded on grace sine it is the Lord that gives the talents at the start. And it is the Lord that took away the talent he gave to the unprofitable servant and gave it to the one that had 10 talents. It is all of grace, to whom it has more will be given, grace for grace as Augustine puts it, and to whom he has not even what he has will be taken away.
December 5th, 2012 at 1:36 am
The Psalmist says it far better than I.
Psalm 56
Be gracious to me, O God, for man tramples on me;
all day long an attacker oppresses me;
my enemies trample on me all day long,
for many attack me proudly.
When I am afraid,
I put my trust in you.
In God, whose word I praise,
in God I trust; I shall not be afraid.
What can flesh do to me?
All day long they injure my cause;
all their thoughts are against me for evil.
They stir up strife, they lurk;
they watch my steps,
as they have waited for my life.
For their crime will they escape?
In wrath cast down the peoples, O God!
You have kept count of my tossings;
put my tears in your bottle.
Are they not in your book?
Then my enemies will turn back
in the day when I call.
This I know, that God is for me.
In God, whose word I praise,
in the Lord, whose word I praise,
in God I trust; I shall not be afraid.
What can man do to me?
I must perform my vows to you, O God;
I will render thank offerings to you.
For you have delivered my soul from death,
yes, my feet from falling,
that I may walk before God
in the light of life.
Chris Jager
Tillamook, OR
December 5th, 2012 at 9:48 pm
Bill great link to the you tube sermon. Listened to it twice already and I know exactly what he is talking about. I went to those vacation bible schools and watched the same kids year after year go up for alter call. I remember the words , the 15 verses of “just as I am” and the unchanged hearts of those same kids as we went through high schools together. We have guys like Finney, Billy Sunday ( buck a soul Billy he was called because that’s how he made his money , a buck for everyone who came forward at the end of the service) even Moody in his earlier years was a part of that.
Even today churches and mission orginations are run like for profit corporations, trying to cater to the customers, giving people what they want instead of what they need. Church has become a weekly to do kind of thing for a lot of people, and church leadership is always watching for new trends to grow the church. The mission organizations we worked with are the same way, and will tell you how much it costs for every soul redeemed. All they have to do is read the book of Acts where it reads” and the LORD ADDED TO THE CHURCH THAT DAY.
Like the man said people are saved inspite of what these originations are doing.
I have been in contact with Gorden Taylor who heads up the reformed Baptist group that started in the late .90′s and a fellow by the name of Robert M K Wright who teaches in Atlanta Ga. Both good men and both great teachers who follow this same vain of thought.
Thanks again for the link I will listen to more of his sermons.
December 5th, 2012 at 10:09 pm
Bill, Chris r there is a web site called”one in Jesus . If you go there do a search for Ray VanderLaan Laan’s “follow the rabbi ” series. You should find it very insightful as to why Jesus said what He did and to whom it applied at the time.
Hope you enjoined it as much as I Have
Bk
December 5th, 2012 at 10:50 pm
Bruce / Chris,
I believe that Mike Horton in his book christless christianity was too nice in his assessment of the evangelical church. Just a couple of days ago I found out of a newly released documentary on the church growth movement. I would say this, apostacy has arrived. The video is called “Church of Tares” and shows what’s behind the church growth movement. Some of the stuff I saw there I couldn’t believe, for example there is a purpose driven pastor explaining that in the past it was necessary to be converted in order to enter the kingdom but right now they have discovered you can enter the kingdom as a muslim, hindu, atheist whatever religion. Another purpose driven pastor in a sermon saying that if you are a christian then this church is not for you, if you got converted last Sunday then you should find a different church. Basically I got the impression from this video documentary that the megachurch has been designed for the unbeliever. This video is right now spreading like wildfire and I think it’s a must see. It is not a reformed video, in that only a couple of he people that appear there like Phil Johnson (calvinist) and Chris Rosebrough (lutheran) I know for sure they adhere to the Reformation’s teachings. Not sure about the others, that said the video is a must see because it shows stuff that I couldn’t believe with my eyes when I saw it. There’s wheat in the megachurch, just tares.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kxY3VbBHTkY
December 5th, 2012 at 11:41 pm
There’s no wheat in the megachurch I meant to say in my last sentence, just tares. This may be harsh but the megachurch has purposefully been designed for tares. If there’s any wheat there, it’s by accident, but the purpose of these chruches is beyond doubt to appeal to the unbeliever. There’s too much evidence in the video link I provided.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kxY3VbBHTkY
December 5th, 2012 at 11:56 pm
Don’t get me wrong, I’m sure there’s probably thousands of people in this churches that will see the kingdom of heaven. However what I meant is that it’s like the roman catholic church at the time of Luther’s reformation, the corruption of doctrine and practice in these churches is sky high. The gospel may be able to survive in this environment as it did in roman catholicism at the time of Luther, some church attendants may have trusted Christ for salvation and ignored what the church teaches.
December 6th, 2012 at 3:52 am
Wow, guys. Absolutely unbelievable. Did we ever think it would actually get this bad in our time???
That said, check this out. It’s a secular link to a secular radio program (talk show). It they are talking about technical advances sounding gravely familiar to the tower of babel and man’s re-exultation…well, then…I guess it must be kind of obvious. You should watch the clip as a head’s up to where our worldly technological “pioneers” are headed.
Let’s hope there is still some wheat out there in other circles. There must be.
http://www.video.theblaze.com/media/video.jsp?content_id=25516627&topic_id=23419450
You gotta hear the whole 17 minutes to get the full-effect.
December 6th, 2012 at 5:06 am
Guys I have been working my way through Detrick Bonhoffeers book PASTOR PROPHET MARTYOR SPY and almost everything that this administration comes from Hitlers play book ! It has been amazing to see how the two duped the populace into thinking the country will be better off with their programs.
December 6th, 2012 at 7:57 am
Bill it took about 3 min. Of Rick warrens book for me to know he was a works based salvation advocate. When ever any one starts their salvation message wit ” all you have to do is believe, accept , commit, ask Jesus into your heart, etc. ”
Anything that begins with YOU is works based and its because the indicative / imparitive is forgotten.
The famous verse ” believe on The Lord Jesus and thou shalt be saved ” is a prime example.
It is imparitive that you believe on The Lord Jesus to be saved, it is indicative of all believers to believe this. And it will be indicative of all of the elect to believe, and therefore be saved.
That is why Jn 3:17-19 says those who don’t believe ARE CONDEMNED ALREADY. They are condemned already because they don’t AND WON’T believe. It’s imparitive for them to believe but it is indicative of the to NOT believe. It is not in their nature.
Gary Gilley was on that you tube video, he is a friend and has a paper he puts out, called Think On These Things. It is worth your whole to read some of his posts on his church web at Southern View Chapel.
December 6th, 2012 at 5:17 pm
Bruce, good to hear that Rick Warren hasn’t deceived you. Unlike Joel Osteen, Rick Warren does go after the elect, he’s a false prophet in the Matthew 24:24 sense:
“For false christs and false prophets will rise and show great signs and wonders to deceive, if possible, even the elect.” Matthew 24:24 (NKJV)
Joel Osteen is a wolf, period. But in all fairness what you is what you get with Osteen. Not so with Warren, he truly dresses himself in sheep’s clothing and comes like an angel of light. He’s much more difficult to discern. Even though there’s clear evidence to indict him based on what’s in that video, he appeals to calvinist. He is serious when he says he can convert anybody once he finds that person’s felt needs. He knows calvinism better than you and I, and he appeals to calvinists like John Piper and Tullian Tchividjian. You see Joel Osteen doesn’t go after christian churches to make them purpose driven, Rick Warren will do it. He tells muslims what they want to hear and he tells calvinists what they want to hear as well. He truly appeals to every demographic. Because of this it’s imppossible to know his heart, and we can’t really judge him, we don’t know if he’ll repent or not.in the end. I heard he’s the nicest guy you ever meet, and the most winsome, and he will tell you what you want to hear. His message is perfectly targeted to his audience, like the message of a marketer is to the customer demographic. Although the sings of reprobation are everywhere to be seen as the video I posted a link shows, the reality is only God knows his heart.
December 6th, 2012 at 5:31 pm
Bruce, you see with Joel Osteen as I said what you see is what you get. The guys is the same and has one consistent unbiblical message. Rick Warren on the other hand has a different message for each different audience, so you never know what he’s going to say. If I had supper with him he will be talking to me about Isaiah 53 and penal substitution!
December 6th, 2012 at 5:44 pm
Chris, did I ever think it was going to get this bad? Regardless what I think this is what scripture teaches. Also if you look at it we’ve seen this happening in the visible church all the time. Israel’s golden calf, the people complaining to God they wanted Kings, the killing of the prophets, thee Pharisees crucyfying Christ, the burning at the stake of Jan Hus (Martin Luther would have suffered the same fate if it wasn’t for the german authorities that saved him).
Rick Warren has stated that the biggest enemy of the church are christians. Those are the ones that hate him the most according to him. So surprised by what I saw in that video and not too surprised at the same time. So when I see a purpose driven preacher in that video mocking the sheep that want to be fed or teaching that christians are educated beyond their level of obedience (when Paul on the contrary taught that we need to increase in the knowledge of Christ) or when I see Rick Warren selling Jesus with a 60-day money back guarantee and the same applies to preachers bringing in motorcycles to entertain the goats. The following is from a few years ago but it still applies today:
“The Cirque du Soleil-styled production at Willow Creek Community Church in South Barrington, Ill., features live “angels” swinging from the ceiling like acrobats, a professional violist and a mist-filled stage. The “Imagine Christmas” program is expected to draw 95,000 people this year and is broadcast on a local television station on Christmas Eve and Christmas Day. The $1.3 million Christmas pageant at First Baptist Church of Fort Lauderdale, Fla., featuring pyrotechnical displays that light up the stage, is choreographed by professional Broadway producers.
Every year, megachurches strive to outdo the year before, putting on elaborate interactive productions with live animals, period costumes and professional sets and lighting. With such large congregations, there is no shortage of volunteers. In many cases, the actors are church members, as are the stagehands, directors and set designers”
December 6th, 2012 at 5:55 pm
Bruce, agree these are religions of works. There’s no undertanting of the total depravity of man and its need for redemption. There’s boasting of good works by unregenerate. If God’s main question at judgment is what you’ve done with what he’s given you as this works salvation guys teach, these guys are all in trouble. Not sure how they will explain that it was not necessary to preach Christ and him crucified. They don’t see it, they are boasting in dead works, and clothed with their own self righteousness. And there’s no repentance, the fruit of salvation is nowhere to be seen.
They appeal to good works and deceive many with their dead works. Their theology is the theology of glory that Martin Luther exposed in the Heidelberg Disputation. Purpose driven pastors that boast in “deeds not creeds” don’t either deeds or creeds. I will copy Martin Luther’s Heidelberg disputations right below where the dead works of men are exposed.
December 6th, 2012 at 5:59 pm
The Heidelberg Disputation
Brother Martin Luther, Master of Sacred Theology, will preside, and Brother Leonhard Beyer, Master of Arts and Philosophy, will defend the following theses before the Augustinians of this renowned city of Heidelberg in the customary place, on April 26th 1518.
THEOLOGICAL THESES
Distrusting completely our own wisdom, according to that counsel of the Holy Spirit, »Do not rely on your own insight« (Prov. 3:5), we humbly present to the judgment of all those who wish to be here these theological paradoxes, so that it may become clear whether they have been deduced well or poorly from St. Paul, the especially chosen vessel and instrument of Christ, and also from St. Augustine, his most trustworthy interpreter.
1) The law of God, the most salutary doctrine of life, cannot advance man on his way to righteousness, but rather hinders him.
2) Much less can human works, which are done over and over again with the aid of natural precepts, so to speak, lead to that end.
3) Although the works of man always seem attractive and good, they are nevertheless likely to be mortal sins.
4) Although the works of God are always unattractive and appear evil, they are nevertheless really eternal merits.
5) The works of men are thus not mortal sins (we speak of works which are apparently good), as though they were crimes.
6) The works of God (we speak of those which he does through man) are thus not merits, as though they were sinless.
7) The works of the righteous would be mortal sins if they would not be feared as mortal sins by the righteous themselves out of pious fear of God.
8) By so much more are the works of man mortal sins when they are done without fear and in unadulterated, evil self-security.
9) To say that works without Christ are dead, but not mortal, appears to constitute a perilous surrender of the fear of God.
10) Indeed, it is very difficult to see how a work can be dead and at the same time not a harmful and mortal sin.
11) Arrogance cannot be avoided or true hope be present unless the judgment of condemnation is feared in every work.
12) In the sight of God sins are then truly venial when they are feared by men to be mortal.
13) Free will, after the fall, exists in name only, and as long as it does what it is able to do, it commits a mortal sin.
14) Free will, after the fall, has power to do good only in a passive capacity, but it can always do evil in an active capacity.
15) Nor could free will remain in a state of innocence, much less do good, in an active capacity, but only in its passive capacity.
16) The person who believes that he can obtain grace by doing what is in him adds sin to sin so that he becomes doubly guilty.
17) Nor does speaking in this manner give cause for despair, but for arousing the desire to humble oneself and seek the grace of Christ.
18) It is certain that man must utterly despair of his own ability before he is prepared to receive the grace of Christ.
19) That person does not deserve to be called a theologian who looks upon the »invisible« things of God as though they were clearly »perceptible in those things which have actually happened« (Rom. 1:20; cf. 1 Cor 1:21-25),
20) he deserves to be called a theologian, however, who comprehends the visible and manifest things of God seen through suffering and the cross.
21) A theology of glory calls evil good and good evil. A theology of the cross calls the thing what it actually is.
22) That wisdom which sees the invisible things of God in works as perceived by man is completely puffed up, blinded, and hardened.
23) The »law brings the wrath« of God (Rom. 4:15), kills, reviles, accuses, judges, and condemns everything that is not in Christ.
24) Yet that wisdom is not of itself evil, nor is the law to be evaded; but without the theology of the cross man misuses the best in the worst manner.
25) He is not righteous who does much, but he who, without work, believes much in Christ.
26) The law says, »do this«, and it is never done. Grace says, »believe in this«, and everything is already done.
27) Actually one should call the work of Christ an acting work (operans) and our work an accomplished work (operatum), and thus an accomplished work pleasing to God by the grace of the acting work.
28) The love of God does not find, but creates, that which is pleasing to it. The love of man comes into being through that which is pleasing to it.
December 6th, 2012 at 6:03 pm
This is the link to the Heidelberg disputations that I just quoted, http://bookofconcord.org/heidelberg.php
You can see the defense by Martin Luther of his 28 thesis which I listed in my last post with full scripture if you go to that link.
We don’t need purpose driven theology of glory but the theology of the cross of the Reformers as outlined in the Heidelberg disputations.
December 7th, 2012 at 12:21 am
Here’s John Calvin saying the same thing as Luther in the Heidelberg disputations. Good works are only good because they proceed from faith and its sin is pardoned. Calvin talks about a justification of works that renders them acceptable to god. http://www.ccel.org/ccel/calvin/institutes.v.xviii.html Some quotes from Calvin on good works Chapter 17 of the Institutes”
John Calvin:
Section 8: “Forgiveness of sins being previously given, the good works which follow have a value different from their merit, because whatever is imperfect in them is covered by the perfection of Christ, and all their blemishes and pollutions are wiped away by his purity, so as never to come under the cognizance of the divine tribunal. The guilt of all transgressions, by which men are prevented from offering God an acceptable service, being thus effaced, and the imperfection which is wont to sully even good works being buried, the good works which are done by believers are deemed righteous, or; which is the same thing, are imputed for righteousness.”
John Calvin:
“10. In this way we can admit not only that there is a partial righteousness in works (as our adversaries maintain), but that they are approved by God as if they were absolutely perfect. If we remember on what foundation this is rested, every difficulty will be solved. The first time when a work begins to be acceptable is when it is received with pardon. And whence pardon, but just because God looks upon us and all that belongs to us as in Christ? Therefore, as we ourselves when ingrafted into Christ appear righteous before God, because our iniquities are covered with his innocence; so our works are, and are deemed righteous, because every thing otherwise defective in them being buried by the purity of Christ is not imputed. Thus we may justly say, that not only ourselves, but our works also, are justified by faith alone. Now, if that righteousness of works, whatever it be, depends on faith and free justification, and is produced by it, it ought to be included under it and, so to speak, made subordinate to it, as the effect to its cause; so far is it from 2113being entitled to be set up to impair or destroy the doctrine of justification.447 Thus Paul, to prove that our blessedness depends not on our works, but on the mercy of God, makes special use of the words of David, “Blessed is he whose transgression is forgiven, whose sin is covered;” “Blessed is the man unto whom the Lord imputeth not iniquity.” Should any one here obtrude the numberless passages in which blessedness seems to be attributed to works, as, “Blessed is the man that feareth the Lord;” “He that has mercy on the poor, happy is he;” “Blessed is the man that walketh not in the counsel of the ungodly,” and “that endureth temptation;” “Blessed are they that keep judgment,” that are “pure in heart,” “meek,” “merciful,” &c.,448 they cannot make out that Paul’s doctrine is not true. For seeing that the qualities thus extolled never all so exist in man as to obtain for him the approbation of God, it follows, that man is always miserable until he is exempted from misery by the pardon of his sins. Since, then, all the kinds of blessedness extolled in the Scripture are vain so that man derives no benefit from them until he obtains blessedness by the forgiveness of sins, a forgiveness which makes way for them, it follows that this is not only the chief and highest, but the only blessedness, unless you are prepared to maintain that it is impaired by things which owe their entire existence to it. There is much less to trouble us in the name of righteous which is usually given to believers. I admit that they are so called from the holiness of their lives, but as they rather exert themselves in the study of righteousness than fulfill righteousness itself, any degree of it which they possess must yield to justification by faith, to which it is owing that it is what it is.”
December 7th, 2012 at 12:29 am
And here’s Calvin in chapter 18 where he proves from Scripture that though God rewards the good works of the christian, this is not due to any merit of the works themselves. There will be no boasting of good works in heaven, none. This doectrine is precious and Calvin just like Luther in the Heidelberg disputations expounds it brilliantly. Calvin reconciles the rewards of good works that God gives, with the free pardon that is the sole cause of rewards and does not proceed from those works. The reward of good works does not proceed from the righteousness of those works as Calvin masterfully explains. Here’s the link to chapter 18 of the Institutes entitled THE RIGHTEOUSNESS OF WORKS IMPROPERLY INFERRED FROM REWARDS. Just like the Heidelberg disputations this is a must read.
http://www.ccel.org/ccel/calvin/institutes.v.xix.html
December 7th, 2012 at 8:42 am
We are sons of God and everything is inheritance, we don’t work for rewards. They are rewards of inheritance as Calvin teaches, even though they are also rewards for our works, they are still gifts. Like child that is a hockey player receivss as a gift a hockey outfit while one that is a soccer player receives a soccer outfit as a gift from his dad. The rewards are related to works but none of them are earned, they are gift. If a child is a guitar player his dad will probably buy him a new guitar for christmas and he plays the fiddle, a new fiddle. Sure every child gets a different gift from the Father related to their vocation, but they are all gifts.
The religion of the megachurch on the other hand turns children into slaves that have to work to earn wages. It is not christianity.
Here’s Martin Luther on Christian Freedom where he shows the doctrine of justification and good works in the christian in exactly the same was as Calvin and the Luther’s Heidelberg disputations. The “deeds no creeds” folks as I said don’t understan creeds or deeds, their deeds are the works of a slave. Good works relate to the vocation of a christian, and serving our neighbour, but they do not earn a reward from God, they are done freely under no compulsion. They are required to subdue the flesh as well as Luther explains, so that we not be unemployed and idle and indulge in the flesh. Just like Adam in paradise was asked to tend for the garden, but this would not earn him rewards with God as a worker earns wages. Here’s a link to Mattin Luther’s “Concerning Christian Liberty” where he explains both the passive righteousness of faith and good works, and the relationship between the two.
http://www.grtbooks.com/exitfram.asp?idx=2&yr=1566&aa=AL&at=TA&ref=luther&URL=http://www.bartleby.com/36/6/2.html
December 7th, 2012 at 8:56 am
Good works are the fruit of the spirit and proceed from faith.
A muslim or atheist will profit nothing by buying a plane ticket and go to Ruanda to implement the PEACE plan, this is not the fruit of the spirit. And yet even John Piper, Mark Driscoll, and Tullian Tchividjian have bought into this and claim that Rick Warren has done a lot of good works. These folks are dead works, you can’t purchase your ticket to heaven, neither can you expect rewards in heaven. At best you get a better spot in hell.
December 7th, 2012 at 9:19 am
If we want to praise somebody for his / her devotion to the poor we need to praise Mother Teresa instead. Not sure why Piper, Driscoll, and Tchividjian don’t heap praise on her good works instead of focusing on Rick Warren’s good works. I’m going to leave it at that.
December 7th, 2012 at 10:42 am
It is not that muslims, hindus, atheists can not do good works, they sure can specially with regard to the second table of the law. God’s providence wrote the law in the conscience of all men.
Romans 2:14
14 For when the Gentiles, which have not the law, do by nature the things contained in the law, these, having not the law, are a law unto themselves
Yet none of this merits eternal life, as the apostle teaches in Romans 1 to Romans 3. Atheists, muslims, and hindus need to repent and believe the gospel to be saved.
December 7th, 2012 at 10:55 am
If anybody could keep the law perfectly he would merit eternal life by the works of the law. But none can, we are all sinners by nature. And this we ought to preach. But let me tell you something when we preach this the world will hate us. We will not earn Nobel Peace prizes, we will not win the applause of world leaders, we won’t be in the spotlight with world leaders heaving praise on us.
John 7:7
The world cannot hate you, but it hates me because I testify about it that its works are evil.
John 15:18 and John 15:19
18 “If the world hates you, know that it has hated me before it hated you. 19 If you were of the world, the world would love you as its own; but because you are not of the world, but I chose you out of the world, therefore the world hates you.
December 7th, 2012 at 11:18 am
And though we are commanded to do works of charity, Jesus fed the 5000. But he also preached the gospel and condemned those that followed him because of the loaves of bread he gave them. Christian charity is always accompanied by the gospel.
John chapter 6 verses 25 tp 34
25 When they found him on the other side of the sea, they said to him, “Rabbi, when did you come here?” 26 Jesus answered them, “Truly, truly, I say to you, you are seeking me, not because you saw signs, but because you ate your fill of the loaves. 27 Do not work for the food that perishes, but for the food that endures to eternal life, which the Son of Man will give to you. For on him God the Father has set his seal.” 28 Then they said to him, “What must we do, to be doing the works of God?” 29 Jesus answered them, “This is the work of God, that you believe in him whom he has sent.” 30 So they said to him, “Then what sign do you do, that we may see and believe you? What work do you perform? 31 Our fathers ate the manna in the wilderness; as it is written, ‘He gave them bread from heaven to eat.’” 32 Jesus then said to them, “Truly, truly, I say to you, it was not Moses who gave you the bread from heaven, but my Father gives you the true bread from heaven. 33 For the bread of God is he who comes down from heaven and gives life to the world.” 34 They said to him, “Sir, give us this bread always.”
December 7th, 2012 at 1:53 pm
I didn’t mean to be negative. A lot of people will love us, and because of the gospel. John 6:34 They said to him, “Sir, give us this bread always.”
However a lot of people will turn away. John 6:66
66 After this many of his disciples turned back and no longer walked with him.
December 8th, 2012 at 12:15 pm
Am I sure the works of the purpose driven church are dead works? Yes I am.
Am I 100% sure? Yes I am
Beside the Heidelberg disputations do I have anything else to back it up? Yes I do, the Heidelberg disputations come from scripture. And there is scripture to back it up.
Where is the best place in scripture to prove the works of the purpose driven church are dead? The Heidelberg disputations are backed up everywhere in scripture, but nowhere better than in Matthew 23 verses 25 to 39
Can dead works really appear to be righteous? Yes, this is why the Heidelberg disputations teach that the law hinders man, because dead works comply with the letter of the law, but they are done to glorify man and not God. They are done in self righteousness.
How is this possible? Because God wrote in man’s heart his laws, man has some ideal of what’s right or wrong. So dead works will impress man when they comply with the law outwardly.
The works of the pharisees were dead works and they had the appearance of righteousness.
Matthew 23:27
27 Woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! for ye are like unto whited sepulchres, which indeed appear beautiful outward, but are within full of dead men’s bones, and of all uncleanness.
Matthew 23:28
28 Even so ye also outwardly appear righteous unto men, but within ye are full of hypocrisy and iniquity.
Matthew 23 verses 25 to 26
25 Woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! for ye make clean the outside of the cup and of the platter, but within they are full of extortion and excess.
26 Thou blind Pharisee, cleanse first that which is within the cup and platter, that the outside of them may be clean also.
This is why if we want to understand what good works are we need to read the Heidelberg disputations. And Calvin in chapter 18 book 3 of his Institutes which I linked in one of my posts yesterday quoting Augustine teaches exactly the same:
This is Augustine quoted by Calvin (chapter 18 book 3 of the Institutes)
“He who seems inferior in conduct, yet on account of the true faith in God by which he lives (Hab. 2:4), and in conformity to which he accuses himself in all his faults, praises God in all his good works, takes shame to himself, and ascribes glory to God, from whom he receives both forgiveness for his sins, and the love of well-doing, the moment he is set free from this life is translated into the society of Christ. Why, but just on account of his faith? For though it saves no man without works (such faith being reprobate and not working by love), yet by means of it sins are forgiven; for the just lives by faith: without it works which seem good are converted into sins,” (August. ad Bonifac., Lib. 3, c. 5). Here he not obscurely acknowledges what we so strongly maintains that the righteousness of good works depends on their being approved by God in the way of pardon.454″
This is why faith alone purifies the heart:
Acts 15:9
“And put no difference between us and them, purifying their hearts by faith.”
December 9th, 2012 at 9:52 am
Bill I have to agree with Chris in the fact we are not punished for our sin if we are saved. Once saved we, like Christ, grow in grace and knowlage. This is the promise made to all who are saved, that being, God will be faithful to complete what He started in us. Therefore dicipline must be in the form of training and guidence, not in punishment,
( although training can be punishing or gruling ). For God to punish us again for sine afer He punished Christ for the same, would be unjust and unbiblical.
December 9th, 2012 at 11:23 am
Bruce, God does punish his children. There is loss of reward in heaven as I have explained extensively, and I quoted multiple scripture to back it up as well as the lutheran confessions and Calvin. I explained this before I exposed the pharisaic pelagianism of the purpose driven church. So you have to go back and read that. I’m pretty sure Chris was fine with it, at least he thanked me for the input.
Do you think Kind David lost rewards in heaven as a result of his sin? I do. David is not mentioned in the New Testament once. He did not appear with Abaraham, Moses, and Elijah at the transfiguration of Jesus. He’s not mentioned in the book of Hebrews. Yes Rahab (the prostitute (and this is how she’s called in Hebrews 11:31) is higher in the kingdom of heaven than David the King if you have to go by the book of Hebrews where her faith is extolled. So David was punished by God and lost rewards in heaven. I”m not saying David isn’t in heaven, I’m saying his reward would have been much higher had he not sinned.
December 9th, 2012 at 11:25 am
Hebrews 11sts many Old Testaments saints, and David is conspicuously absent.
December 9th, 2012 at 11:28 am
Hebrews 11 lists many Old Testaments saints, and David is conspicuously absent.
December 9th, 2012 at 1:05 pm
Now a few things need to be clarified. Hebrews 11 is talking about faith, why is David not there? why was his sin more serious than SAmpson (who died physically at the hand of the pharisees) or Moses who didn’t enter the promised land? The difference is that David’s sin was unbelief. As Martin Luther teaches in the Smalcald articles, David lost the holy ghost. His sin was not only willful and pre-meditated, but David did not repent until the Lord sent Nathan to him. David’s sin was unbelief, he cast out faith as Martin Luther teaches in the Smalcald articles. If you think about it Read 2 Samuel chapter 12 where God administers punishment, the child dies and a curse to future generations of David is issued which the Lotd executes after David’s death. This is why Hebrews chapter 11 were the old testament faith is extolled by so many names misses the name of David.
We have to remember that biblical definition of good works is not attacking global giants like hunger or AIDS and publicly announcing it to everybody, as the purpose driven church teaches. Those works only impress man but are an abomination to the Lord.
The works of God unlike the works of man are unattractive but always merit rewards with God. As thesis number 4 of Martin Luther’s Heidelberg disputation explains how rewards are earned by good works, and it’s not based on merit!
http://bookofconcord.org/heidelberg.php#4
“Although the works of God are always unattractive and appear evil, they are nevertheless really eternal merits.
That the works of God are unattractive is clear from what is said in Isa. 53:2, »He had no form of comeliness«, and in 1 Sam. 2:6, »The Lord kills and brings to life; he brings down to Sheol and raises up.« This is understood to mean that the Lord humbles and frightens us by means of the law and the sight of our sins so that we seem in the eyes of men, as in our own, as nothing, foolish, and wicked, for we are in truth that. Insofar as we acknowledge and confess this, there is »no form or beauty« in us, but our life is hidden in God (i.e. in the bare confidence in his mercy), finding in ourselves nothing but sin, foolishness, death, and hell, according to that verse of the Apostle in 2 Cor. 6:9-10, »As sorrowful, yet always rejoicing; as dying, and behold we live.« And that it is which Isa. 28:21 calls the »alien work« of God »that he may do his work« (that is, he humbles us thoroughly, making us despair, so that he may exalt us in his mercy, giving us hope), just as Hab. 3:2 states, »In wrath remember mercy.« Such a man therefore is displeased with all his works; he sees no beauty, but only his depravity. Indeed, he also does those things which appear foolish and disgusting to others.
This depravity, however, comes into being in us either when God punishes us or when we accuse ourselves, as 1 Cor. 11:31 says, »If we judged ourselves truly, we should not be judged by the Lord«. Deut. 32:36 also states, »The Lord will vindicate his people and have compassion on his servants.« In this way, consequently, the unattractive works which God does in us, that is, those which are humble and devout, are really eternal, for humility and fear of God are our entire merit.”
I just finished quoting thesis 4 of the Heidelberg disputations. God rewards the good works of believers and punishes their sin as both Luther and Calvin teach. However the teaching of Luther and Calvin is the opposite of the teaching of rewards that Rick Warren teaches! It’s funny that Rick Warren teaches deeds not creeds, and he has no clue what good works are. Sadly though many reformed christians praise Saddleback Church’s works and fail to see that the problem with the purpose driven church is its works. Pharisaic works of helping the poor are dead works.
December 9th, 2012 at 1:06 pm
sorry Sampson died at the hand of the philistines not pharisees, my mistake in my previous post.
December 9th, 2012 at 9:21 pm
Folks, please read the Heidelberg disputations in its entirety. And then you will realized there is no contradiction between the fear of God and grace, between God who rewards his own works in a Christian (grace for grace as Augustine puts it) and salvation fy grace through faith alone. Martin Luther surpassed John Calvin in this area, Calvin was brilliant and I quoted him from the Institutes to show that he also believes that good works are those were sin is pardoned, but Luther outdid him. Each and every one of the 28 thesis of Martin Luther should be memorized. I’m going to quote a couple but guys please go to the link and read them all.
December 9th, 2012 at 9:36 pm
Here is thesis number 5 where it shows that what appears to the eye of man as a good work performed by an unbliever is a mortal sin. We are talking here about works that society would value highly like peace making or giving to the poor. Nobel prizes would be awarded and yet they are mortal sins.
“The works of men are thus not mortal sins (we speak of works which are apparently good), as though they were crimes.
For crimes are such acts which can also be condemned before men, such as adultery, theft, homicide, slander, etc. Mortal sins, on the other hand, are those which seem good yet are essentially fruits of a bad root and a bad tree. Augustine states this in the fourth book of ›Against Julian‹ (Contra Julianum).“
And here is thesis number 6 where Martin Luther states that not one single work of the Saints is sinless, it is not just that we sin sometimes and do good works other times, but Luther goes further, not a single work of the Saints is sinless on its own merit (only because of Christ God accepts the work, not because of the work itself, there is no merit in the work itsel). Here it is thesis 6:
“The works of God (we speak of those which he does through man) are thus not merits, as though they were sinless.
In Eccles. 7:20, we read, »Surely there is not a righteous man on earth who does good and never sins.« In this connection, however, some people say that the righteous man indeed sins, but not when he does good. They may be refuted in the following manner: If that is what this verse wants to say, why waste so many words? Or does the Holy Spirit like to indulge in loquacious and foolish babble? For this meaning would then be adequately expressed by the following: »There is not a righteous man on earth who does not sin.« Why does he add »who does good,« as if another person were righteous who did evil? For no one except a righteous man does good. Where, however, he speaks of sins outside the realm of good works he speaks thus (Prov. 24:16), »The righteous man falls seven times a day.« Here he does not say: A righteous man falls seven times a day when he does good. This is a comparison: If someone cuts with a rusty and rough hatchet, even though the worker is a good craftsman, the hatchet leaves bad, jagged, and ugly gashes. So it is when God works through us.“
December 9th, 2012 at 9:44 pm
Thesis 7 to 9 teach that without the fear of God the works of the Saints would be mortal sins. It is the fear of god that makes a work good or bad, this is why the fear of God has to be extolled so much. It is the essence of sanctification and it determines whether a work is good or bad.
”7 The works of the righteous would be mortal sins if they would not be feared as mortal sins by the righteous themselves out of pious fear of God.
This is clear from Thesis 4. To trust in works, which one ought to do in fear, is equivalent to giving oneself the honor and taking it from God, to whom fear is due in connection with every work. But this is completely wrong, namely to please oneself, to enjoy oneself in one’s works, and to adore oneself as an idol. He who is self-confident and without fear of God, however, acts entirely in this manner. For if he had fear he would not be self-confident, and for this reason he would not be pleased with himself, but he would be pleased with God.
In the second place, it is clear from the words of the Psalmist (Ps. 143:2), »Enter not into judgment with thy servant«, and Ps. 32:5, »I said: I will confess my transgressions to the Lord.« etc. But that these are not venial sins is clear because these passages state that confession and repentance are not necessary for venial sins. If, therefore, they are mortal sins and »all the saints intercede for them«, as it is stated in the same place, then the works of the saints are mortal sins. But the works of the saints are good works, wherefore they are meritorious for them only through the fear of their humble confession.
In the third place, it is clear from the Lord’s Prayer, »Forgive us our trespasses« (Matt. 6:12). This is a prayer of the saints, therefore those trespasses are good works for which they pray. But that these are mortal sins is clear from the following verse, »If you do not forgive men their trespasses, neither will your father forgive your trespasses« (Matt. 6:15). Note that these trespasses are such that, if unforgiven, they would condemn them, unless they pray this prayer sincerely and forgive others.
In the fourth place, it is clear from Rev. 21:27, »Nothing unclean shall enter into it« (the kingdom of heaven). But everything that hinders entrance into the kingdom of heaven is mortal sin (or it would be necessary to interpret the concept of »mortal sin« in another way). Venial sin, however, hinders because it makes the soul unclean and has no place in the kingdom of heaven. Consequently, etc..”
”8 By so much more are the works of man mortal sins when they are done without fear and in unadulterated, evil self-security.
The inevitable deduction from the preceding thesis is clear. For where there is no fear there is no humility. Where there is no humility there is pride, and where there is pride there are the wrath and judgment of God, »for God opposes the haughty. Indeed, if pride would cease there would be no sin anywhere..”
”9 To say that works without Christ are dead, but not mortal, appears to constitute a perilous surrender of the fear of God.
For in this way men become certain and therefore haughty, which is perilous. For in such a way God is constantly deprived of the glory which is due him and which is transferred to other things, since one should strive with all diligence to give him the glory-the sooner the better. For this reason the Bible advises us, »Do not delay being converted to the Lord.« For if that person offends him who withdraws glory from him, how much more does that person offend him who continues to withdraw glory from him and does this boldly! But whoever is not in Christ or who withdraws from him withdraws glory from him, as is well known..”
December 9th, 2012 at 9:59 pm
OK this is the link http://bookofconcord.org/heidelberg.php from where I copied pasted literally both the thesis and defense. http://bookofconcord.org/heidelberg.php
You need to read the whole document it will take you 30 minutes but it is fundamental to understand the doctrine of good works (what God does in us) compared to good works according to the law which man admires. The law always hinders us as the Thesis number 1 states.
Romans 2:29 shows how the outward works of the law that man admires are worthless and the the inward work of God is what God praises and rewards,
Romans 2:29
29 But he is a Jew, which is one inwardly; and circumcision is that of the heart, in the spirit, and not in the letter; whose praise is not of men, but of God.
December 10th, 2012 at 7:09 pm
Bill
Over the years I have read through a lot of the things you have listed, although the stuff of Luther has been scarse.
As I have reread the blog here I find it interesting that you are so adamit about what you believe. But let me explain what I have read “into” what you have wrote thus far.
You believe that Christ death saved all people. Some reject the gracious act and they give up or loose their salvation, while the elect hold on to or remain saved.
You also said that God diciplines or punishes the sinner and the saved for the sins they commit but also rewards the saved for good works.
Here is the problems I have with what you stated. I am convinced that Christ death was capable of saving all men BUT His death and redemption only applied to the elect, His salvation was NOT applied to everyone.
This rolls right in to the whole punnishment thing you write about.
Think about this, God imputed all of our [the elect] sin into Christ and punished him for all that sin, then imputed Chist’s, rightousness unto us [the elect]. Now to me that says all of my sin, past present, and future, has been forgiven. and forgotten.
So if this true, and I believe it is, then why would I be punished again for sin that was forgiven by Christ 2000 years ago? And if Christ’s death did this for all men who sin, then is the sin of rejection of God and his grace a sin that is not covered by Christs death?
Do you see the the conflict here? Christ is punished for our sin and God punishes us also for our sin? How does that work? If all the sin of all people are forgiven then how can we be punished again for sin tha was supposed to be forgiven?
Please apply some logic to your explainations, like I said before you are very confusing.
Along with that I cannot believe that
December 10th, 2012 at 8:44 pm
Bruce, you have to distinguish between the eternal punishment of the unbeliever and the different rewards that God gives its children.
They are two separate topics.
Christ took the punishment for sin on the cross and whosoever believes in him shall be saved, has passed from death unto life, will not come into condemnation. This is by faith alone on account of Christ. Christ died for sinners.
What the above means is that christians have eternal life and they will not be punished with eternal death.
Now the above does not mean that every believer is equal in the eyes of God. All his children are precious. However if we go onto say that they are equal we are saying that every christian has the same level of grace and this teaching isn’t biblical. It also limits the freedom of God in his election of grace, in that you are saying all the elect have the same status. All the elect are equally loved, there’s no difference between the elect. This doctrine I can not find in scripture. God loves all his elect but loves some more than others. Why does scripture say that John was the disciple that Jesus loved? Does it mean that he didn’t love Peter, of course not, however scripture clearly tells us that it wasn’t Peter the disciple that Jesus loved, it was John. Just like God chooses freely his elect, he also discriminates between his elect. Some receive more gracce than others and we ought not to inquire into this.
John 21:7
7 Therefore that disciple whom Jesus loved saith unto Peter, It is the Lord. Now when Simon Peter heard that it was the Lord, he girt his fisher’s coat unto him, (for he was naked,) and did cast himself into the sea.
December 10th, 2012 at 9:02 pm
John 21:20 again confirms that it was John the disciple that Jesus loved and agains contrasts him with Peter,
John 21:20
20 Then Peter, turning about, seeth the disciple whom Jesus loved following; which also leaned on his breast at supper, and said, Lord, which is he that betrayeth thee?”
With regard to unlimited atonement I have said that I do not have a theology of it, and I am not interested in having one either. The same applies to irresistible grace, and perseverance of the saints (whether some can come to true saving faith and lose it as lutherans teach, or whether saving faith can never be lost) I am not interested in this, i don’t think there’s an answer to it. Even Beza’s double supralapsarian double predestination I am fine with it. There are very few areas that back up Beza, he’s got all sort of scripture stacked against him, however some verses in scripture teach double predestination. Who can argue with Proverbs 16:4 KJV:
Proverbs 16
4 The Lord hath made all things for himself: yea, even the wicked for the day of evil.
December 10th, 2012 at 9:21 pm
This is one thing I learned from this blog. I will never debate a calvinist again in the future. I learned from my mistake. There’s too much scripture that backs up their doctrine. At the same time I’m not a 5-point calvinist either in that there’s too much scripture that goes the other way.
My concern is with pelagians, those that deny the total depravity of man, they deny the sinful nature of man. They treat sin as if it was something we do, and all that’s required is for man to learn how to refrain from sinning. And a whole prescription of legalism follows. You know this is what’s killing the church today, it doesn’t subscribe to total depravity any longer. We are sinful by nature thus we sin, through one man sin and death entered the world. We are all born in sin, and this why we sin, it’s a corruption of nature. Sin is not something that man does, and if he applies himself he can refrain from doing, this is unbiblical teaching. The only cure for sin is the gospel of Jesus Christ that washes away sin with his blood, and not the pelagian human techniques of Rick Warren and the evangelical church.
At the Desiring God conference in 2010 Rick Warren for an hour nothing but pelagianism and no Jesus. Chris Rosebrough ripped him apart. Warren defined sin as mental illness and told the Desiring God Conference they were all mentally ill, and guess what, through theraoy and education we can overcome sin. Pure pelagianism. The christian answer is very different, man is dead, not mentally ill, and the blood of Jesus is the only answer.
Here’s Rick Warren’s speech to the Desiring God Conference of John Piper, Chris Rosebrough shows no patience for this heresy. And neither do I. Here’s the link. It’s long but if you have time on the weekend it’s more than worth listening.
http://www.extremetheology.com/2010/10/review-of-rick-warrens-lecture-at-desiring-god.html
December 10th, 2012 at 10:15 pm
@ Samuel chapter 12, of course God punishes his children. It is heresy to teach otherwise, God is not a permissive parent that doesn’t discipline. If you child stole or killed another child how would you deal with him? I tell you what, God is not a permissive parent, he disciplines his children and administers due punishment, this is what happened to David.
2 Samuel 12
1 And the Lord sent Nathan unto David. And he came unto him, and said unto him, There were two men in one city; the one rich, and the other poor.
2 The rich man had exceeding many flocks and herds:
3 But the poor man had nothing, save one little ewe lamb, which he had bought and nourished up: and it grew up together with him, and with his children; it did eat of his own meat, and drank of his own cup, and lay in his bosom, and was unto him as a daughter.
4 And there came a traveller unto the rich man, and he spared to take of his own flock and of his own herd, to dress for the wayfaring man that was come unto him; but took the poor man’s lamb, and dressed it for the man that was come to him.
5 And David’s anger was greatly kindled against the man; and he said to Nathan, As the Lord liveth, the man that hath done this thing shall surely die:
6 And he shall restore the lamb fourfold, because he did this thing, and because he had no pity.
7 And Nathan said to David, Thou art the man. Thus saith the Lord God of Israel, I anointed thee king over Israel, and I delivered thee out of the hand of Saul;
8 And I gave thee thy master’s house, and thy master’s wives into thy bosom, and gave thee the house of Israel and of Judah; and if that had been too little, I would moreover have given unto thee such and such things.
9 Wherefore hast thou despised the commandment of the Lord, to do evil in his sight? thou hast killed Uriah the Hittite with the sword, and hast taken his wife to be thy wife, and hast slain him with the sword of the children of Ammon.
10 Now therefore the sword shall never depart from thine house; because thou hast despised me, and hast taken the wife of Uriah the Hittite to be thy wife.
11 Thus saith the Lord, Behold, I will raise up evil against thee out of thine own house, and I will take thy wives before thine eyes, and give them unto thy neighbour, and he shall lie with thy wives in the sight of this sun.
12 For thou didst it secretly: but I will do this thing before all Israel, and before the sun.
13 And David said unto Nathan, I have sinned against the Lord. And Nathan said unto David, The Lord also hath put away thy sin; thou shalt not die.
14 Howbeit, because by this deed thou hast given great occasion to the enemies of the Lord to blaspheme, the child also that is born unto thee shall surely die.
15 And Nathan departed unto his house. And the Lord struck the child that Uriah’s wife bare unto David, and it was very sick.
December 10th, 2012 at 10:48 pm
Bruce, what matters is that God spared David on account of Christ. On this we we both agree. Also if we confess our sins he is fatihful and forgives us. He is a loving father, look at the prodigal Son. But God has to deal with his children disobedience, he is a loving parent, but he has to correct and discipline. If we love our father we will love his discipline, and I quoted multiple scripture from Proverbs. And this applies to our earthly and our heavenly father, and discipline of necessity entails rewards and punishement, otherwise it is no discipline at all. God is not a vindictive parent, even though he was angry at David’s sin, the goal of his discipline was to bring David back into repentance. God loves his children and only because of this he disciplines them. If we abhor discipline we are not his children. David did not get angry at God after Nathan spoke to him. He acknowledged his sin and repented.
December 10th, 2012 at 11:08 pm
Sometimes God punishes us not because we sinned, but to test our faith. I’m not an expert on the book of Job, some say he was punished by God because he was self righteous, but to me he was a god fearing man and God allowed the devil to take his whole family, all his property, and his health as well. That was a very harsh punishment, yet Job in all of it acknowledged God and his right to punish him. This was a testament to Job’s trust in God and the right of God to punish his children, even though in this case it doesn’t seem the punishment was given due to sin. And yet after Job went through this trial God rewarded him with more than he had before.
Denying God punishes his children is denyng scriptural teaching.
December 10th, 2012 at 11:31 pm
The only thing about Job and I haven’t read the book of Job in 3 or 4 years, but what I remember is at some point he felt he was a good man and didn’t deserve to be punished. It is ture that he was a god fearing man and God stated that, he was one of God’s best Job 1:1
Job chapter 1
1 There was a man in the land of Uz, whose name was Job; and that man was perfect and upright, and one that feared God, and eschewed evil.
And then we read:
8 And the LORD said unto Satan, Hast thou considered my servant Job, that there is none like him in the earth, a perfect and an upright man, one that feareth God, and escheweth evil?
9 Then Satan answered the LORD, and said, Doth Job fear God for nought?
10 Hast not thou made an hedge about him, and about his house, and about all that he hath on every side? thou hast blessed the work of his hands, and his substance is increased in the land.
11 But put forth thine hand now, and touch all that he hath, and he will curse thee to thy face.
12 And the LORD said unto Satan, Behold, all that he hath is in thy power; only upon himself put not forth thine hand. So Satan went forth from the presence of the LORD.
And this is the lesson of Job he truly loved God not because of what God gave him, he loved God because of who God is. And God proved that to Satan who took everything away from Job, and Job never denied God.
Job chapter 1
21 And said, Naked came I out of my mother’s womb, and naked shall I return thither: the LORD gave, and the LORD hath taken away; blessed be the name of the LORD.
22 In all this Job sinned not, nor charged God foolishly.
And here lies the key, Job accepted God’s punishment, he knew that we have to accept the good and the bad that God gives us, the blessings and punishments. And Job says exactly that in chapter 2 verse 10:
Job 2
10 But he said unto her, Thou speakest as one of the foolish women speaketh. What? shall we receive good at the hand of God, and shall we not receive evil? In all this did not Job sin with his lips.
This is a mark of the children of God, they love God, whether he does good or evil to them.
December 11th, 2012 at 12:07 am
And my mistake about David. He is one of the men of faith mentioned in Hebrews 11. Hebrews 11:32 mentions David. Serious, serious mistake on my part. Forget about anything I said about David being in heaven but not being as rewarded as others in heaven. God punished him, only as Samuel 2 which I quoted states.
Hebrews 11:32 and 11:33
32 And what more shall I say? I do not have time to tell about Gideon, Barak, Samson and Jephthah, about David and Samuel and the prophets
33 who through faith conquered kingdoms, administered justice, and gained what was promised; who shut the mouths of lions
December 11th, 2012 at 6:15 pm
Another reason God punishes his children is to develop humility in them. Paul’s thorn in the flesh, the messenger of Satan that God sent to Paul was so that he would not extol himself. Although Paul prayed that it be removed, God refused and told him “my grace is sufficient for my strength is made perfect in weakness”. 1 Corinthians chapter 12 verses 7 to 10, and see how Paul was taught to take pleasure in infirmitites and reproaches as verse 10 shows:
2 Corinthians chapter 10
7 And lest I should be exalted above measure through the abundance of the revelations, there was given to me a thorn in the flesh, the messenger of Satan to buffet me, lest I should be exalted above measure.
8 For this thing I besought the Lord thrice, that it might depart from me.
9 And he said unto me, My grace is sufficient for thee: for my strength is made perfect in weakness. Most gladly therefore will I rather glory in my infirmities, that the power of Christ may rest upon me.
10 Therefore I take pleasure in infirmities, in reproaches, in necessities, in persecutions, in distresses for Christ’s sake: for when I am weak, then am I strong.
God also disciplines and punishes so that we would cast ourself into his mercy even more, as Paul did in the passage I just finished quoting. 2 Samuel 24:12 2 Samuel 24:13 and 2 Samuel 24:14 shows how David (when he numbered Israel) right after God communicates to him the punishment to come, he throws himself into God’s mercy in verse 14.
12 Go and say unto David, Thus saith the Lord, I offer thee three things; choose thee one of them, that I may do it unto thee.
13 So Gad came to David, and told him, and said unto him, Shall seven years of famine come unto thee in thy land? or wilt thou flee three months before thine enemies, while they pursue thee? or that there be three days’ pestilence in thy land? now advise, and see what answer I shall return to him that sent me.
14 And David said unto Gad, I am in a great strait: let us fall now into the hand of the Lord; for his mercies are great: and let me not fall into the hand of man.
December 12th, 2012 at 3:50 pm
Bruce,
“Christ is punished for our sin and God punishes us also for our sin? How does that work?”
“Please apply some logic to your explainations, like I said before you are very confusing.”
Bruce, I believe we both are in substantial agreement. There are some minor differences on how you and I define punishment and probably on what the atonement accomplishedt. I believe the atonment achieved two key things. Christ died for out sins on the cross and in so doing accomplished the following two blessings for us:
1) Christ merited our acquittal on judgment day. We are blessed that we have passed from death unto life and shall not enter into condemnation. Revelation 20:6
“Blessed and holy is he that hath part in the first resurrection: on such the second death hath no power”
2) Christ by fulfilling the demands of the Law freed us from the law’s condemnation. Every day we live under grace and not under the law. This is outlined in Romans 6, 7, and 8 which are the great chapters on sanctification.
So the atonement achieves both our justification (God pronounced us not guilty) and sanctification (sin lost its power since the law can’t accuse us any more, so there has been a definitive break of sin’s power). Our sanctification is not yet complete, we only have the first fruits:
Romans 8
10 And if Christ be in you, the body is dead because of sin; but the Spirit is life because of righteousness.
Only in glorifiation, at the resurrection with a new incorruptible body we will be made fully perfect:
Romans 8
11 But if the Spirit of him that raised up Jesus from the dead dwell in you, he that raised up Christ from the dead shall also quicken your mortal bodies by his Spirit that dwelleth in you.
To me this is the atonement in a nutshell and the two gifts we receive. So both justification and sanctification are centered on Christ’s work on the cross, both our acquittal at trial day (justification) and that Christ fulfilled the requirements of the law and now we are dead to the law by which sin had its power (sanctification) are rooted in Christ’s work. By faith we lay hold of our justification and sanctification, we are neither justified or sanctified by faith, but by Christ’s work on the Cross we are both justified and sanctified through faith.
To me this is the extent of the atonement. Now I wouldn’t go further than this. You see you go quite a bit further by saying Christ was punished, and now we can’t be punished, I don’t see it that way at all. If God didn’t spare his own son as far as punishment and suffering, he will not spare us either. Quite the contrary Christ’s punishment should strengthen us in that when we are punished we know that we have a Mediator, and advocate with the Father that wsa punished as well and he was without sin. I know where you are heading, God is a just God and his justice was satisfied in Christ, and I can’t disagree with this. However if you read my definition of atonement, it achieves two things our justification or acquital and judgment day and our sanctification. I don’t see the atonement as obtaining the equality of all the elect in heaven, or the elimination of rewards and punishments etc. These areas probably we ought not to inquire too much, because we are really infringing on God’s freedom. Let’s content ourselves with being pronounced righteous and having been sanctified and having been rescued from the power of sin and the law (sanctification).
Bruce I hope this clarifes the confusion you were alluding to.
And since I just explained this, I may as well add that this is where I have serious differences with Westminster Seminary Philadelphia, Lane Tippton but also John Murray, since they don’t acknowledge the forensic origin of sanctification rooted in Christ’s work at the cross outside us. They call this a lutheran view and we saw that in the Mike Horton – Lane Tippton argument a year ago.
December 12th, 2012 at 4:03 pm
You see the punishment of Christ on the cross relates to the second death, and we will be spared the second death. However I don’t believe that the atonement takes away God’s right to reward his elect in different ways in this life and in the life to come, or to punish the sin of the elect specially temporal punishments on earth or loss of reward in heaven. So I see the atonement as securing the gift of eternal life and sanctification in this life as I explained in my last post but I would not extend it further than that as you do.
I hope Bruce I was able in this post and the last one to clarify for you.
December 12th, 2012 at 4:45 pm
And by the way I don’t deny the renovative aspect of sanctification, quite the contrary. That said it is the forensic as I have indicated when we by faith believe that we are not under the law since Christ satisfied its requirements, that the power of sin is loosened up in the believer. It is Christ’s work on the cross though, his paying the penalty for sin and redeeming us from the curse of the law as Romans 6 to 8 clearly teach, that sanctifies us when apprehended by faith. So the forensic drives the renovative contrary to what John Murray in his book Redemption accomplished and Lane Tippton teach. The mistake of Murray and Tippton is due to a misinterpretation of Romans 6, where they see the renovative aspect proceeding directly from faith (just like justification proceeds from faith), however the renovation of the believer in sanctification proceeds from Christ’s work on the cross that fulfilled the demands of the law. So the object of the faith that both justifies and sanctifies (renovates) is the work of Christ at the cross, his fulfilling of al the laws requkrements on our bahalf and the inputation of his righteousness.
December 13th, 2012 at 9:00 am
Bill Justification means “just as if I never sin” We are robed in the righteousness of Christ. Christ took ALL of our sin and gave us His righteousness. When God looks down on us the only thing He sees is His Sons Righteousness! So what is there to punish us for? Or better yet why would he punish twice for the same sin? Christ took the beating and now we have to also?
Christ death didnt just get us into heaven It removed all of sins stain now and in the future. That is why we are “whiter than snow. Otherwise it takes man right back to a works based reward system. I do agree that we will have different stations in heaven but when we are at the judgement seat there will be nothing to judge us on except Christ work.
Our file will be empty of everything else,and we will hear those gracious words ” well done thou good and faithful servant.
Even the crowns we receive will be cast upon His feet as a form of worship.
December 13th, 2012 at 9:51 am
Bruce, I agree 100 percent with what you wrote on justification. We are in agreement.
You have to be careful though the way you word the atonement. Although the atonement made full satisfaction for sin, the way you word it goes beyond what the bible teaches. I do agree totally on justification though. My only problem is with the following wording you keep using:
Bruce:
“Or better yet why would he punish twice for the same sin? Christ took the beating and now we have to also?”
You see Christ is not in hell, so he did not take the same beating we would have taken had he not died on the cross. You make it sound like the punishment of Christ was equivalent to the punishment the unbeliever would take or the punishment we would have taken had Christ not died on the crss. This is incorrect. Christ suffered temporal punishment, and we will suffer temporal punishment as well. We will die because of sin, the good news though is that we will be raised like Christ did. We are also called to suffer like Christ did. This is an important aspect of the atonement. Christ is the firstfruits, we are to be imitators of Christ. He died, we’ll die, he was rasied, we will be raised. Christ is not in hell, has not been condemned to eternal death, so let us be clear Christ never took the beating so that man will not take the same beating. As I said before God will not punish Christ more than he will punish us. We have to be very careful with penal substitution, because Christ was the perfect sacrifice for sin, a sin offering, but it is incorrect to say that he took a punishment and so that we won’t take the same punishment. Because we will perish eternally (God’s judgment on the unbeliever) if that was the case, since Christ never took that punishment on our behalf. God will not give Christ a harsher punishment than what he would give his Saints, from this perspective there is no substitution. Also one of the ways of glorifying Christ in the New Testament, and book of Revelation mentions it is the martyrs of the faith that died for their faith.
December 13th, 2012 at 11:15 am
Neither calvinists nor lutherans teach that Christ suffered the second death in our place so that we won’t be punished with the second death.
However there are differences between the reformed and lutehran. Calvin in his Institutes as well as Question 44 of the Heidelberg catechism consider Christ descent into hell as part of his suffering and humiliation. Lutherans do not, they consider Christ’s descent into hell was in victory and he went into hell to conquer the devil and not to suffer. Here’s a book of concord link that explains the difference in lutheran and reformed theology.
http://bookofconcord.org/historical-19.php
December 13th, 2012 at 12:37 pm
Bill You are so far off base as to what I say it scares me. I never said Christ was in Hell, never went to hell and wasn’t required to go there to defeat the Devil. I said none of that.
Christ suffered the torments of hell on the cross, that was when the Father abandon Him, or as some put it turned His back on His Son. The Father punished the Son for the sin we the elect committed. We the elect then received Christ’s righteousness. THERE IS NO PUNISHMENT FOR THOSE WHO ARE SAVED BECAUSE THERE IS NO SIN IN OUR RECORD BOOK, DO YOU UNDERSTAND THAT?
December 13th, 2012 at 2:18 pm
Sorry Bruce, I didn’t mean to get you upset. My apologies. I’m just trying to figure out why this dislike for punishment that David and Job rejoyced in. When we are called so many times to share in Christ’s sufferings. To take up the cross and follow him.
If you are talking about justification, as I said we are in agreement. Although your wording still gets me worried.
When you write:
“When God looks down on us the only thing He sees is His Sons Righteousness!”
You see if you had written instead, that God doesn’t count our trespasses and sins against us I would have been fine. If you had said blessed are those whom the Lord will not impute sin. Or blessed are those whose sins are covered in Christ. But the way you say it that God doesn’t see our sin goes beyond what we need to teach.
God saw David’s sin, he saw Sampson’s sin, he saw Moses sin. And they received temporal punishment for their sins. Daily we pray forgive us our trespasses. Also daily we feel our sin, this sin is far from unseen, both God and us see the sin, but we know it is buried in Christ and forgiven. And we are in pain because of our sin, waiting for the redemption of our bodies (and I’m sure God is pained by our sins as well, we can’t say tht he doesn’t see those sins):
Romans 8 verses 18 to 23
18 For I reckon that the sufferings of this present time are not worthy to be compared with the glory which shall be revealed in us.
19 For the earnest expectation of the creature waiteth for the manifestation of the sons of God.
20 For the creature was made subject to vanity, not willingly, but by reason of him who hath subjected the same in hope,
21 Because the creature itself also shall be delivered from the bondage of corruption into the glorious liberty of the children of God.
22 For we know that the whole creation groaneth and travaileth in pain together until now.
23 And not only they, but ourselves also, which have the firstfruits of the Spirit, even we ourselves groan within ourselves, waiting for the adoption, to wit, the redemption of our body.
I am sure you do agree with me, because a lot of your questions showed a serious concern for sin. And it is a sign of believers that they are sensitive to sin.
You see if you had said God sees both our sin and Christ’s righteousness, but he does not count our sin against us. Then we wouldn’t be having this discussion. God sees our sin but does not impute it to us.
Do you agree?
December 13th, 2012 at 2:23 pm
You see sin and righteousness go hand in hand. The need for Christ’s righteousness is our sin, if we were without sin we wouln’t need Christ’s righteousness. If God didn’t see our sin he wouldn’t need to see Christ’s righteousness either. So God sees our sins, but he sees them buried in Christ, they are forgiven.
December 13th, 2012 at 3:22 pm
Now the good news is that once God forgives our sins he remembers them no more. He sees our sin and he forgives it, but he not only forgives it but he forgets it as well. There are serval passages in Scripture of God remembering ours sins no more both in the Old and New Testament. Let’s go with Isaiah 43:25 that shows the depth of God’s forgiveness:
Isaiah 43
25 I, even I, am he that blotteth out thy transgressions for mine own sake, and will not remember thy sins.
December 13th, 2012 at 3:59 pm
Here’s a good summary from John McArthur on why the Saints that are justified still need the forgiveness of sin daily, need to confess their sins, and ask for God’s forgiveness. I would add that those that don’t do that show that they have not been forgiven and don’t have the love of God in them. From now until the end I will let John McArthur explain the paradox that we are righteous before God, all sins past, present, and future forgiven judicially (justification), and yet we still rely on God’s daily forgiving of our sins. It is proof that you have repented if you continue to repent today, it is proof that you are forgiven if you continue to count new forgiveness daily. This is why we are commanded to pray that God forgive our trespasses, and this command is for believers. Forgiveness is not a thing of the past, that is relied upon once on conversion. Here’s John McArthur:
http://www.oneplace.com/ministries/grace-to-you/read/articles/if-we-confess-our-sins-9344.html
John McArthur,
If we confess our sins, He is faithful and righteous to forgive us our sins and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness. —1 John 1:9
That is one of the first verses many new Christians memorize — and rightly so. It holds forth the comforting promise of forgiveness and cleansing for all of us who have struggled with guilt in this sin-stained world. Yet there are some today who, because they fail to comprehend the extent of divine forgiveness, deny the clear teaching of 1 John 1:9 and teach other to do the same. They say that to pray for forgiveness reveals unbelief. After all, a healthy Christian doesn’t experience guilt because he understands Christ’s total forgiveness. Why seek forgiveness when you already have it?
However, their guilt-free brand of Christianity not only burdens guilty people with more guilt, but also strips away the only means to alleviate the guilt of sin-confession. Rather than helping Christians draw near to God, they are reinforcing the barrier of sin that interrupts their relationship with God. But that’s not the end of the story.
The Bible clearly teaches that Christians should seek forgiveness. Consider this:
- In each one of the penitential psalms (Ps. 6; 32; 38; 51; 102; 130; 143), the psalmist is demonstrating the heart of a justified believer when he seeks forgiveness. In each case the psalmist is already a believer, fully forgiven.
- In the gospels, Christ taught believers to ask the Father to forgive their sins (Matt. 6:12; Mark 11:25; Luke 11:4). Some of those to whom He spoke were already born again. In 1 John 1, the verb tenses show that confession and forgiveness should be a continuous experience. Verse 7 literally reads, “The blood of Jesus His Son keeps cleansing us from all sin,” and verse 9 likewise says, “If we are continually confessing our sins.” Those to whom John wrote were already fully forgiven believers (cf. 5:13).
But the question remains: Why are you supposed to seek God’s forgiveness if He has already justified you? If justification takes care of sin past, present, and future, so there is no condemnation for those who are in Christ (Rom. 8:1), why pray for forgiveness? Aren’t you praying for something that is already yours?
The answer is that divine forgiveness has two aspects. One is the judicial forgiveness God grants as Judge. It’s the forgiveness God purchased for you by Christ’s atonement for your sin. That kind of forgiveness frees you from any threat of eternal condemnation. It is the forgiveness of justification. Such pardon is immediately complete — you’ll never need to seek it again.
The other is a parental forgiveness God grants as your Father. He is grieved when His children sin. The forgiveness of justification takes care of judicial guilt, but it does not nullify His fatherly displeasure over your sin. He chastens those whom He loves, for their good (Heb. 12:5-11).
Let me show you the difference:
- Judicial forgiveness deals with sin’s penalty — parental forgiveness deals with sin’s consequences.
- Judicial forgiveness frees us from the condemnation of the righteous, omniscient Judge whom we have wronged — parental forgiveness sets things right with a grieving and displeased but loving Father.
- Judicial forgiveness provides an unshakeable standing before the throne of divine judgment — parental forgiveness deals with the state of our sanctification at any given moment and is dispensed from a throne of divine grace. So the forgiveness Christians are supposed to seek in their daily walk is not pardon from an angry Judge, but mercy from a grieved Father.
Some object to the idea that God could ever be displeased with His own children. They ask: Can our once-and-for-all forgiven sins ever provoke divine displeasure? The answer is a resounding “Yes.” In fact, it is because of God’s righteous displeasure over your sin that He refuses to leave you the way you are — sinful.
In a very practical sense, God’s indignation over your daily sins demonstrates His love for you. That’s the thought of Hebrews 12:5-11 where some form of the word discipline is used seven times. Divine displeasure over your sin brings discipline, reproof, and scourging. That’s a good thing, not only because it helps rid your life of sin, but it also shows His love for you and confirms your relationship to Him — “those whom the Lord loves He disciplines, and He scourges every son whom He receives” (v. 6).
God’s discipline — sometimes involving punishment for disobedience — is painful; no one will argue with that. But you must remember: He is causing you to share in His holiness (v. 10); He is training you (v. 11); He is producing in you the “peaceful fruit of righteousness” (v. 11). So when you have sinned, humble yourself, confess your sin, and submit to His loving discipline.
Remorse over sin, daily confession, and a continual attitude of repentance are marks of a healthy Christian life. What’s the benefit? Look again at 1 John 1:9: “If we confess our sins, He is faithful and righteous to forgive us our sins and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness” (italics added). Forgiveness and cleansing — those promises are as refreshing to the sinner as a cold drink of water to a thirsty man.
David testified to the power of confession in Psalm 32: “When I kept silent about my sin, my body wasted away through my groaning all day long. For day and night Your hand was heavy upon me; my vitality was drained away as with the fever heat of summer…I acknowledged my sin to You, and my iniquity I did not hide; I said, “I will confess my sin to the Lord”; and You forgave the guilt of my sin” (vv. 4-5). The guilt of David’s sin affected him physically — he found relief only through full confession.
We’ve already discussed the difference between judicial and parental forgiveness — the latter is in view in 1 John 1:9. It is a subjective, relational kind of forgiveness. It is the restoration to a place of blessing in the eyes of a displeased father. Similarly, the cleansing of 1 John 1:9 doesn’t refer to regeneration. Rather, it is a spiritual washing to rid you of the defilement caused by sin in your daily walk. The verse is speaking of an ongoing pardon and purification from sin, not the cleansing and forgiveness of salvation.
The pardon of justification and the washing of regeneration do not eliminate the need for you to deal with the subjective reality of sin in your life. If you entertain such an idea, you will either be consumed by your guilt or you will steel yourself against the pangs of your conscience — either reaction will separate you from a loving Father.
Instead, keep confessing your sins; seek God’s forgiveness and cleansing daily. As the verse says, He is faithful to Himself to forgive your sins and He is just, having already made full atonement for your sins through the sacrifice of His beloved Son. When you confess your sins, you are restored by a loving Father who delights to shower the brokenhearted and repentant with His mercy and compassion.
Adapted from The Freedom and Power of Forgiveness, © 1998 by John MacArthur. All rights reserved.
December 13th, 2012 at 6:55 pm
Are you saying that our sin is not forgivin if we dont confess them? Doesn’t that imply that we would have unforgiven sin if we were to die suddenly? fall .car crash. Then what? We cant go to heaven with unforgiven sin, so do we loose our salvation? Dont you see the delema this puts us in as Christians! Doesn’t Christs death cover us past present and future?
December 13th, 2012 at 7:29 pm
I understand what you are saying about judical forgivnesws and parental forgivness. but this all goes back to the begining. When we are givin a new heart it comes with the desires. Everything you discribe as what Christians want comes from that new heart/nature, even their sorrow for sin.
This is what you mentioned and I concur, that it is our being sensitive to sin that shows our salvation. But I disagree with you [and McArther] that we are punished for our sin. This just does not pass muster with what I have come to understand.
December 13th, 2012 at 9:35 pm
Bruce, yeah what I meant about confessing our sins daily is that we are sensitive to sin all the time. We confess them and need Christ’s forgiveness daily. Every christian confesses his sins, so I’m not worried about a christian suddenly dying in an accident with unconfessed sin. All I meant is that we have to have repentant heart, and know that it is Christ’s that saves us and all our works are polluted by sin. This is all I meant by confessing daily. Like Luther taught, it would be impossible to confess every sin individually, some of them are even unknown to you. Anything that the spirit convicts you, you confess, plus the spirit would lead you to not trust in your own works so everything you do is polluted by sin. Fortunately Christ paid the penalty for sin and it’s not imputed to us.
It as McArthut that I quoted, I didn’t write about parental and judicial forgiveness, I copied and pasted John McArthur from the link I provided. Not sure why you would disagree with McArthur, he talks about how a parent disciplines a child with love, this is all that’s meant by punishment of sin in his children or disciplining. Gong back to Moses, he was punished by not being permitted to enter the promised land.
I can’t convince you, so we’ll have to disagree, I think if you re-read MacArthur you will realize what it means the discipline of God in sanctification.
December 13th, 2012 at 9:47 pm
And Bruce again, my apologies if I somehow confused you, was too harsh, or upset you. This is wrong on my part, if the effect of what I write upsets people. Totally apologize to you for that.
December 13th, 2012 at 10:03 pm
Also Bruce, to use MacArthur’s analysis refers to parental forgiveness and not judicial, so based on this dying with an unconfessed sin will not affect your salvation.
As long as you persevered till the end and died in the faith, and trusted in Christ you are one of the elect. That’s how I see it.
December 13th, 2012 at 10:11 pm
But honestly I don’t believe the elect have unconfessed sin. They are so aware of their sinful nature that it is impossible for them not to have ocnfessed their sin. They confess everything they do as sinful, just like the Heidelberg disputations that Luther wrote teach. So it is impossible to die with unconfessed sin, that’s the way I see it. And our confession is never perfect either, only on account of Christ’s forgiveness of sin do we make it to heaven.
December 15th, 2012 at 11:28 pm
One thing though that has now struck me, is that just like there is a risk in Arminianism to not credit God 100$ in the work of salvation, there is an equal risk in calvinism of not ascribing to man responsibility for his sin.
In arminianims man is active in accepting God’s grace and in rejecting God’s grace. In Calvinism man is totally passive, grace is irresistible. The problem with arminianism obviously is that there is human cooperation with God’s grace. The problem with calvinism is that those that are not saved didn’t receive God’s grace, so they truly aren’t responsible for their own damnation, but God is responsible since he withheld grace. I know what calvinists are going to say, that all men are lost and God just passes some by, so God is under no oblicagion to save all. I get it, but it’s not biblical. God does not pass by the reprobate, as I have sufficiently proven from scripture, and the fact that he doesn’t pass them by increases man’s condemnation. And makes man truly responsible for resisting God’s grace. The utmost sin is to resist God’s grace, to resist God’s will, this is the chief of sins. But because in calvinism nobody can resist God’s will, basically no man is held truly accountable.
When Paul teaches in Romans 9 that God will have mercy on whom he will and hardens whome he will, as I have explained with Pharaoh, the way God hardens is by giving grace and man resisting it. So Romans 9 needs to be interepreted as God having compassion on all and hardening nobody except those that reject his compassion. So man hardens himself by rejecting God’s grace.
The deepest area on the pit of hell will be populated with those that resisted God’s saving grace, not those that were passed by. God’s grae is resistible, and denying this is denying human responsibility in damnation. It is those that have received God’s grace that need to fear hell more than those that haven’t received God’s grace as Luke 22:48. Of course God’s grace is resistible, and the more grace man receives from God the further down he goes to hell. There are many men in hell that received more grace than many of the elect, but unlike the elect they rejected that grace.
Luke 12:48
48 But the one who did not know, and did what deserved a beating, will receive a light beating. Everyone to whom much was given, of him much will be required, and from him to whom they entrusted much, they will demand the more.
God gives grace to the reprobate, and it is a sign of reprobagtion the rejection of God’s grace. ?God told Moses that before he would pass judgment, he would give mergy to pharaoh, in order that his judgment might increase. In Exodus 7:3 God tells Moses and Aarong how he will perform powerful miracles in the eyes of pharaoh, but pharaoh will not beleive, this rejection of God’s grace is what prompted God’s judgment. Teaching irresistible grace is simply denying the method God uses to harden and punish the unbeliever when he resists God’s grace.
Exodus 7:3
3 But I will harden Pharaoh’s heart, and though I multiply my signs and wonders in the land of Egypt, 4 Pharaoh will not listen to you. Then I will lay my hand on Egypt and bring my hosts, my people the children of Israel, out of the land of Egypt by great acts of judgment.
I know I tried to compromise for a moment and back off, but I am convinced that the gospel message can’t be softened to satisfy calvinists or arminians. The lutheran position is the only that ascribes to God everything in salvation and ascribes man full responsibility for damnation. Arminians Godd’s sole credit for the salvation of man, and calvinisms softens man’s responsibility in damnation. And as I have said beofre calvinist christians resist God’s grace daily, even though they don’t admit. Lutherans know that they resist God’s grace daily and confess it.
Sorry fellow calvinists I can’t soften the gospel message for you. I thought I could compromise by saying some things are impossible to know, and although there are biblical passages that can be interpreted as calvinist, we need to look at the whole of scripture. And scripture is not on the calvinist’s side.
December 15th, 2012 at 11:57 pm
The secret will of God no man can resist Romans 9:19, God always achieves his purposes and uses the wicked for his own pupose as well. but his revealed will can be resisted, his rewealed will is that all men should repent and believe the gospel. And when men resist his grace that he offers when the the gospel is preached equally to both elect and reprobate who are drawn by the holy spirit both, they that resist his revealed will sin gravely, and God endures with long suffering those men Romans 9:22 KJV
And as I explained way before any theology has to be based on God’s revealed will, and not his secret hidden will.
Christians resist God’s grace daily, the anger of God with David was primarily because God gave so much wealth and women and other possessions to David and he was not satisfied with God had given him and chose a woman that God had given to another man, as I quoted Nathan the Prophet before carrying that messgae to David. It was a classic rejection of God’s grace. And Christians can reject God’s grace and refuse to repent, ultimately losing their saving faith and salvation. This teaching of resistible grace is the biblical teaching, and puts the sole responsibility for damnation in man when they fail to persevere in the faith.
December 16th, 2012 at 12:32 am
Here are Luther and Calvin on hidden and revealed will
Form http://www.aomin.org/aoblog/index.php?itemid=4727
Martin Luther:
We must discuss God, or the will of God, preached, revealed, offered to us, and worshipped by us, in one way, and God not preached, nor revealed, nor offered to us, nor worshipped by us, in another way…
Now, God in his own nature and majesty is to be left alone; in this regard, we have nothing to do with him, nor does he wish us to deal with him. We have to deal with him as clothed and displayed in his word, by which he presents himself to us. That is his glory and beauty, in which the Psalmist proclaims him to be clothed (Ps. 21:5)…God preached works to the end that sin and death may be taken away, and that we may be saved. ‘He sent his word and healed them’ (Ps. 107:20). But God hidden in majesty neither deplores nor takes away death, but works life and death, and all in all; nor has he set bounds to himself by his word, but has kept himself free over all things.
…The Diatribe [against which this book was written]…makes no distinction between God preached and God hidden, that is, between the Word of God and God himself. God does many things which he does not show us in his word, and he wills many things which he does not in his word show us that he wills. Thus, he does not will the death of a sinner – that is, in his word; but he wills it by his inscrutable will. At present, however, we must keep in view his word and leave alone his inscrutable will; for it is by his word, and not by his inscrutable will, that we must be guided. In any case, who can direct himself according to a will that is inscrutable and incomprehensible?…
So it is right to say, “If God does not desire our death, it must be laid to the charge of our own will if we perish”; this, I repeat, is right if you spoke of God preached. For he desires that all men should be saved, in that he comes to all by the word of salvation, and the fault is in the will which does not receive him, as he says in Matt. 23:37…But why the majesty does not remove or change this fault of will in every man (for it is not in the power of man to do it), or why he lays this fault to the charge of the will, when man cannot avoid it…as Paul says in Rom. 11: “Who art thou that repliest against God?” The Bondage of the Will, on Ezek. 18:23
John Calvin:
As the will of God, which he has delivered in his law, is good, I grant that whatever is contrary to it is evil: but when you babble about the contrariety of that hidden will, by which God distinguishes between the vessels of mercy and the vessels of wrath, and freely uses both according to his pleasure, you exhale a vanity as detestable as it is false, from the foetid ditch of your ignorance. I confess Christ speaks of his open will, when he says, “Jerusalem, Jerusalem, how often would I have gathered thy children together, but you would not;” he casts the same reproach on the Jews, as Moses did in his song.” Calvin on Secret Providence, article 7th.
December 16th, 2012 at 6:00 am
Bill. For he desires that all men should be saved, in that he comes to all by the word of salvation, and the fault is in the will which does not receive him, as he says in Matt. 23:37…But why the majesty does not remove or change this fault of will in every man (for it is not in the power of man to do it), or why he lays this fault to the charge of the will, when man cannot avoid it…as Paul says in Rom. 11: “Who art thou that repliest against God?” The Bondage of the Will, on Ezek. 18:23
This is the very heart of the matter! This is what Palagus argued against ! And this is what I have been stating all along ! Salvation comes through the Word, Johns gospel reads like this” the Word was with God, and the Word was God” later in John Christ told the Pharisees ” My sheep hear My voice, and I know them, and they follow Me; and I give eternal life to them, and they will never perish; and no one will snatch them out of My hand. (John 10:27, 28 NASB)
Jesus states two things here, His sheep and ONLY His sheep will hear his voice(His voice being the Word or Him being the word) ONLY His sheep follow Him, and only His sheep are given eternal life. And His sheep will never be called away, stolen, or last again. THIS IS SALVATION! The changing of the will that is a slave to sin, to a will that is a slave to Christ. That is why there is no such things as “free will” . Our will is a slave to our nature, old sinful nature, sinful will, a will that hates God as Romans 3 talks about, vs,a new nature in and through Christ , new will, new desires, the ability to hear, see, love God. Never saved then lost ! No way!
Even today in the Middle East, two or three shepards will herd up their sheep at night and in the morning each Shepard will call his or her flock out of the herd, and only those sheep will follow that Shepard. The sheep only answer to the call of the Shepard that owns them, and will not go to another. It is an amazing thing to watch. No brands, ear tags, or other ID is needed.
Those who’s will remains defective “are condemned already” Jn 3:18-19 they were never saved. They are held responsible for their sin. Those who are saved , Christ was held responsible for their sin, and they are gifted with Christ’s righteousness. Therefore with out sin. Therefore no need for punishment.
Only training, like Christ who grew up in grace and knowledge. You will never convince me ( and many others like me ) that as Christians we are still punished for sinning. The conciquences of our sin is to train us not to punish us. Just as the law was a tutor,as Paul states, to guide and prepare us for the Word.
I still don’t understand where you got such a convoluted view of salvation.
December 16th, 2012 at 6:22 am
Bill ,one more thing. Everything we can ever want to know about God is in the Bible. His interaction with man His revealed attributes His plan of salvation. It’s all there and it’s all that we are able to, and need to understand and know about Him. Let that be sufficient and let us be still and know He is God. Unsaved men are responsible for their sin. That is mans responsibility. They will be condemned
God is responsible for salvation. He saves whom He chooses. He is the potter and He does what ever He wants with His creations. Some for honor (salvation) some for dishonor(condemnation ).
Who these will be is His hidden will, and we will never know who they all are this side of Heaven
These are the two ” responsibilities” as revealed in the Bible. Man for his sin, God for mans salvation.
Making it more complicated than that is disservice to the Gospel.
December 16th, 2012 at 10:00 am
AS I have said for arminians man is active in salvation, both in accepting and rejecting the gospel. The problem is that this theology does not give 100% of credit to God in salvation, it requires human cooperation to be saved.
In Calvinism man is totally passive in salvation, because saving grace is irresistible and only the elect get it. The problem with this theology is that denies human responsibility in rejecting God’s saving grace. At judgment day the reprobate can well argue, Christ didn’t die for me, you treated the elect differently from me (which God does in his secret will, but not in his revealed will, and we need to totally ignore God’s secret will in theology and go by his revealed will).
In Lutheranism man is passive in salvation, he does not cooperate with God (just like calvinists teach), but when man rejects the gospel, he rejects the holy spirit, and is active in his own damnation thwarting God’s will and defeating the holy spirit (as arminians teach). This is the only biblical doctrine.
Every single epistle of Paul is addressed to believers, and in every single epistle there are not only warnings to christians not to fall from the faith, but also prophesy that many will fall from the faith. Falling from faith is within man’s power, and he does fall from faith, because he’s capable of resisting God’s grace. On the other hand man can’t persevere in the faith without God’s grace. So all credit in salvation go to God’s grace and all fault in damnation to man. The arminian theology softens God’s credit in salvation, the calvinist theology softens man’s responsitbility in damnation.
This is crystal clear, this is not convoluted. If calvinists are confused about this, all I will tell them is I’m not ashamed of the gospel. I’m not apologizing for their confusion. Lutherans reject both calvinist and arminian theology as equally false. With that said we consider both arminians and calvinists that have trusted in Christ for the forgiveness of sins brothers in Christ that we will be in heaven with.
December 16th, 2012 at 10:17 am
Bruce, amen to waht you wrote:
“My sheep hear My voice, and I know them, and they follow Me; and I give eternal life to them, and they will never perish; and no one will snatch them out of My hand. (John 10:27, 28 NASB)
Jesus states two things here, His sheep and ONLY His sheep will hear his voice(His voice being the Word or Him being the word) ONLY His sheep follow Him, and only His sheep are given eternal life. And His sheep will never be called away, stolen, or last again. THIS IS SALVATION!”
December 16th, 2012 at 10:33 am
You see Bruce, lutherans agree 100% with calvinists on God solely saving the elect without human cooperation. The passage of John 10 you quoted which I love is comfort for the believer.
The disagreement is with the reprobate, those that are not his sheep. Lutherans teach the reprobate resist God’s grace. Many believers will be snatched from Christ’s hand, those are not his sheep. They will not persevere till the end. Some reject the initial call of the gospel (because they are not his sheep), others believe the gospel, and later fall away (because they are not his sheep). Christ died for the sheep, for all the sheep, including those sheep that are not his. Those that are not his, God foreknows they will resist the call of the gospel, as arminians rightly teach.
December 17th, 2012 at 3:31 am
If that is. What you and the Arminian believers hold as true , you are wrong . The Bible states plainly that ONLY HIS SHEEP HEAR HIS VOICE, AND HE LOOSES NONE. No place do I find in the Bible does it state this. Those who don’t come or fall away were not His sheep. Your belief has no explanation as to how far one has to fall away to prove they weren’t His to begin with. And the other side of that coin leaves supposed believers always wondering if they are truely saved and always seeking some type of reassurance via works. That is why it can not be true!
December 17th, 2012 at 3:34 am
No place do I find what you are saying about loosing salvation in the Bible. You may see it that way but a true exegesis does not !
December 17th, 2012 at 9:19 pm
Bruce, just to clarify all I said is that there is a risk in calvinism to soften man’s responsitibility and in arminianism to soften the full credit God deserves in salvation.
Nevertheless the majority of calvinists and majority of classic arminians have not fallen on this trap. This is why I called them brothers in Christ. Also notice that I use the word soften, didn’t say eliminate.
Do I believe Geoorge Whitefield he calvinist is in heaven? Yes, you better believer. Do I believe John Wesley is in heaven? Absolutely, the man was a true Saint. Even Whitefield the calvinist requested that he preached his funeral sermon and Wesley did just that. Do I think calvinists and arminians can have full assurance of salvation, as much as lutherans? Definitely, totally think so.
I respect all christians, and this is probably why I wrote earlier that the Westminster Confession, Canons of Dort, and Formula of Concord went into too much detail. Because they split the church, and christian brothers have been separated from fellowship together. And this actually includes Arminians as well, because Arminius and I read a great portion of his works at goruless.net had no problem with Calvin. He stated that. I mean Calvin left election till the end in his Institutes. The Institutes is an evangelical text that preaches Christ and him crucified first, it was Theodore Beza that made this great deal about the sovereignty of God or God’s sovereign will (hi secret will) instead of the revealed will that really split the Reformation.
Tjere’s a difference with pelagianism where man of his own free will is capable of doing good, pelagianism denies original sin and the fall of Adam. Now this doctrine is the one I have a serious problem with. And this is the doctrine of the modern evangelical church. The problem of altar calls and decision evangelism wasn’t caused by arminians or Wesley, it was caused by Charles Finney who was a pelagian that denied original sin and though man was capable of making a decision for Christ.
December 17th, 2012 at 9:27 pm
Bruce I’m not going to repeat myself I provided a myriad of examples and names from the bible of people that lost their salvation and I even quoted Calvin’s bible commentary of the sin unto death which is losing your salvation, Calvin calls it a;postacy. Not going to go back and repeat what I wrote convincingly. And quoted Hebrews where it’s explicitly mentione that those that have been renewed into the faith can not be called into repentance agains if they trample under foot the Son of God that thaey possessed in faith. So if you can’t find in scripture that you can lose your saving faith (salvation) well I just reminded you some hints that I wrote extensively on it with scriptureal support.
December 17th, 2012 at 9:30 pm
No to mention that all the epistles of the New Testament have warnings that you can lose your salvation. And these epistles are addressed to Christians that are under grace,
Romans 8:13 is a warning to christians that if they do not mortify the deeds of the flesh they shall die. If this is not a warning of losing your salvation, I don’t know what it is. It is as clear as crystalline water to me.
Romans 8
13 For if ye live after the flesh, ye shall die: but if ye through the Spirit do mortify the deeds of the body, ye shall live.
December 17th, 2012 at 9:47 pm
Bill none of those verses you mention show one loosing their salvation . You make some grave misinterpret ion errors there. Once save always saved, or they were never saved at all.
December 18th, 2012 at 4:59 pm
This is the doctrine of election from the book of concord: http://www.bookofconcord.org/sd-election.php
13) Therefore, if we wish to think or speak correctly and profitably concerning eternal election, or the predestination and ordination of the children of God to eternal life, we should accustom ourselves not to speculate concerning the bare, secret, concealed, inscrutable foreknowledge of God, but how the counsel, purpose, and ordination of God in Christ Jesus, who is the true Book of Life, is revealed to us through the Word, 14] namely, that the entire doctrine concerning the purpose, counsel, will, and ordination of God pertaining to our redemption, call, justification, and salvation should be taken together; as Paul treats and has explained this article Rom. 8:29f ; Eph. 1:4f , as also Christ in the parable, Matt. 22:1ff , namely, that God in His purpose and counsel ordained [decreed]:
15] 1. That the human race is truly redeemed and reconciled with God through Christ, who, by His faultless [innocency] obedience, suffering, and death, has merited for us the righteousness which avails before God, and eternal life.
16] 2. That such merit and benefits of Christ shall be presented, offered, and distributed to us through His Word and Sacraments.
17] 3. That by His Holy Ghost, through the Word, when it is preached, heard, and pondered, He will be efficacious and active in us, convert hearts to true repentance, and preserve them in the true faith.
18] 4. That He will justify all those who in true repentance receive Christ by a true faith, and will receive them into grace, the adoption of sons, and the inheritance of eternal life.
19] 5. That He will also sanctify in love those who are thus justified, as St. Paul says, Eph. 1:4.
20] 6. That He also will protect them in their great weakness against the devil, the world, and the flesh, and rule and lead them in His ways, raise them again [place His hand beneath them], when they stumble, comfort them under the cross and in temptation, and preserve them [for life eternal].
21] 7. That He will also strengthen, increase, and support to the end the good work which He has begun in them, if they adhere to God’s Word, pray diligently, abide in God’s goodness [grace], and faithfully use the gifts received.
22] 8. That finally He will eternally save and glorify in life eternal those whom He has elected, called, and justified.
23] And [indeed] in this His counsel, purpose, and ordination God has prepared salvation not only in general, but has in grace considered and chosen to salvation each and every person of the elect who are to be saved through Christ, also ordained that in the way just mentioned He will, by His grace, gifts, and efficacy, bring them thereto [make them participants of eternal salvation], aid, promote, strengthen, and preserve them.
24] All this, according to the Scriptures, is comprised in the doctrine concerning the eternal election of God to adoption and eternal salvation, and is to be understood by it, and never excluded nor omitted, when we speak of God’s purpose, predestination, election, and ordination to salvation. And when our thoughts concerning this article are thus formed according to the Scriptures, we can by God’s grace simply [and correctly] adapt ourselves to it [and advantageously treat of it].
December 18th, 2012 at 5:31 pm
There are a lot of promises as you can see, however there is also a warning that if we don’t do our part:
“21] 7. That He will also strengthen, increase, and support to the end the good work which He has begun in them, if they adhere to God’s Word, pray diligently, abide in God’s goodness [grace], and faithfully use the gifts received.”
The New Testament is full of similar warnings to christians. I honestly believe that those that ignore these warnings and believe they are not addressed to them have never been saved and need to repent and believe the gospel. Either that or they forgot they have been cleansed from their sin 2 Peter 1:9 this is exactly what 2 Peter teaches. Peter as well teaches that apostacy is possible, and clearly identifies those that have forgotten they have been cleansed from their sin, they were once saved but now they have committed apostaccy. As I said before only the elect persevere. But not all that have faith are of the elect. A faith that doesn’t persevere, a faith that doesn’t work, is not the faith of the elect. 2 Peter admonishes us to make our electio sure, he also specifically tells christians to add to their faith and not be content with faith (which by the way it is evidence that somebody hasn’t been saved as Oeter teaches).
5 But also for this very reason, giving all diligence, add to your faith virtue, to virtue knowledge, 6 to knowledge self-control, to self-control perseverance, to perseverance godliness, 7 to godliness brotherly kindness, and to brotherly kindness love. 8 For if these things are yours and abound, you will be neither barren nor unfruitful in the knowledge of our Lord Jesus Christ. 9 For he who lacks these things is shortsighted, even to blindness, and has forgotten that he was cleansed from his old sins. 10 Therefore, brethren, be even more diligent to make your call and election sure, for if you do these things you will never stumble;
December 18th, 2012 at 5:38 pm
Let’s not even mention that of the 7 churches in Revelation only 2 to have persevered in the faith. The other 5 are in apostacy, and need to either repent and come back to Christ or perish. The only ones that are saved and persevered are the elect, not those that have faith, not those that have good works, not those that once trusted in the promise of the gospel. None of this is a guarantee of perseverance. Many, many fall from the faith.
Before Calvin nobody taught eternal security.
December 18th, 2012 at 9:20 pm
Now, can a christian know for sure he has the gift of perseverance? Absolutely, by faith in all the promises of the gospel that you Bruce quoted. Actually if you look at the summary I provided of election from the Formula of Concord, we believe that God will finish the good work that he has started. So personally by faith I believe that I will persevere till the end and that nobody can pluck me out of the hand of Christ. But this I know personally through the gospel revelation. With that said scripture teaches that some will lose their salvation, I can’t deny that apostacy is real, God warns about it and scripture is full of apostates. So how can I deny apostacy. So we have to both preach about apsotacy and firmly believe that we personally will not apostatized, since God grace is more than sufficient to keep us from falling.
December 18th, 2012 at 9:50 pm
In the Augsburg confession, losing your salvation is under Repentance, number 7 7] They condemn the Anabaptists, who deny that those once justified can lose the Holy Ghost. Now, what’s interesting is that John Calvin signed the Augsburg confession (the Variata, a version that made changes to the Lord’s Supper). This can lead somebody to believer that John Calvin himself taught that you can lose your salvation, or at the very least did not object to those that maintained this. Here’s the Augsburg confession full section on repentance, number 7 is where it is mentioned http://bookofconcord.org/augsburgconfession.php
Article XII: Of Repentance.
1] Of Repentance they teach that for those who have fallen after Baptism there is remission of sins whenever they are converted 2] and that the Church ought to impart absolution to those thus returning to repentance. Now, repentance consists properly of these 3] two parts: One is contrition, that is, 4] terrors smiting the conscience through the knowledge of sin; the other is faith, which is born of 5] the Gospel, or of absolution, and believes that for Christ’s sake, sins are forgiven, comforts 6] the conscience, and delivers it from terrors. Then good works are bound to follow, which are the fruits of repentance.
7] They condemn the Anabaptists, who deny that those once justified can lose the Holy Ghost. Also those who contend that some may attain to such 8] perfection in this life that they cannot sin.
9] The Novatians also are condemned, who would not absolve such as had fallen after Baptism, though they returned to repentance.
10] They also are rejected who do not teach that remission of sins comes through faith but command us to merit grace through satisfactions of our own.
December 18th, 2012 at 9:54 pm
your statements show me that you believe in human works based salvation, sanctification, and preservation.
I don’t believe in any of it, because the more I cross reference you statements with correct Biblical teaching, the more mistaken I find your theology and interpretations to be.
December 19th, 2012 at 2:46 pm
I guess you are calling the apostle Peter’s teaching human works based salvation, 2 Peter chapter 1 verses 5 to 10 commands believers to add works to their faith to make their election sure.
the lutheran confessions call delusional epicureans those that think they can not lose their salvation, and they should be warned that like idolaters and fornicators they will not enter the kingdom of heaven. If this does not shake their carnal security, only hell awaits. By the way Bruce I am not addressing this to you personally since I do not know your spiritual conditions, however let me quote from the Solid Declaration of the Formula of Concord: the lutheran confessions clearly teach and use the word christians justified by faith need to be told that they are headed to hell. Here it is from The Solid Declaration of the Formula of Concord:
.http://www.bookofconcord.org/sd-goodworks.php
31] Above all, therefore, the false Epicurean delusion is to be earnestly censured and rejected, namely, that some imagine that faith and the righteousness and salvation which they have received can be lost through no sins or wicked deeds, not even through wilful and intentional ones, but that a Christian although he indulges his wicked lusts without fear and shame, resists the Holy Ghost, and purposely engages in sins against conscience, yet none the less retains faith, God’s grace, righteousness, and salvation.
32] Against this pernicious delusion the following true, immutable, divine threats and severe punishments and admonitions should be often repeated and impressed upon Christians who are justified by faith: 1 Cor. 6:9: Be not deceived: neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, etc., shall inherit the kingdom of God. Gal. 5:21; Eph. 5:5: They which do such things shall not inherit the kingdom of God. Rom. 8:13: If ye live after the flesh, ye shall die. Col. 3:6: For which thing’s sake the wrath of God cometh upon the children of disobedience.
33] But when and in what way the exhortations to good works can be earnestly urged from this basis without darkening the doctrine of faith and of the article of justification, the Apology shows by an excellent model, when in Article XX, on the passage 2 Pet. 1:10: Give diligence to make your calling and election sure, it says as follows: Peter teaches why good works should be done, namely, that we may make our calling sure, that is, that we may not fall from our calling if we again sin. “Do good works,” he says, “that you may persevere in your heavenly calling, that you may not fall away again, and lose the Spirit and the gifts, which come to you, not on account of works that follow, but of grace, through Christ, and are now retained by faith. But faith does not remain in those who lead a sinful life, lose the Holy Ghost, and reject repentance.” Thus far the Apology.
December 19th, 2012 at 3:35 pm
Again, this was not addressed to you Bruce personally as I have mentioned. This is not daddressed to calvinist christians that are obedient to the Lord and in good faith they believe a christian can not lose their salvation. As the lutheran confessions state those warnings of eternal death are addressed to justified christians bhat believe they are secure in thier salvation no matter how much tehy sin, even if they do it willfully. Lutherans have tremendours respect to any christian that is faithful and obedient to Jesus Christ, and some of the best christians are calvinists.
December 19th, 2012 at 8:30 pm
Bill The difference is in the interpretation. I don’t see Biblicaly where the truely justified loose their salvation. How can someone wha has a changed heart and nature go back? They Can Not! it is no longer in their nature! They have been set free from the old nature and its desires. Going back proves they were never there in the first place. Why cant you see that.
The people you are talking about WERE NEVER SAVED. If they were they would not and could not continue in sin. The only thing they had was the Holy Spirit restraining them so they did not become as evil as the could possibly be. God will remove that restraining grace during the tribulation period and the world will be become utterly evil. weather that happens gradually or instantly I can not tell you. But your insistence of people losing their salvation does not stand up to Biblical exegesis. Not with Augustine, Calvin, Keach, Owens,Edwards, Spurgen, Edwards, Piper Sproul, Boise, Kennedy, Mc Arther, White, Armstrong, Wright, and a host of others that I have had the pleasure of reading from.
Your theology just doesn’t stack up to Biblical truth, from what I can see. Sorry if you think that way, but it just doesn’t. I am sticking with the theology that has stood the test of time. So type away because you have caused me to dig back through my books and notes which has me convinced more than ever.
December 19th, 2012 at 11:04 pm
Bruce, indeed there are so me beautiful promises that we can never lose our salvation. I don’t dispute those, neither do lutherans. We believe that we can not lose our salvation, and we also believe that we can lose our salvation. Because scripture teaches both. Since you mentioned the new heart here’s some scripture that teach us that we can never lose our salvation, that nobody can prevail against the will of God.
Ezekiel 36:
26 I will give you a new heart and put a new spirit within you; I will take the heart of stone out of your flesh and give you a heart of flesh. 27 I will put My Spirit within you and cause you to walk in My statutes, and you will keep My judgments and do them.
Jeremiah 24:7
J7 Then I will give them a heart to know Me, that I am the Lord; and they shall be My people, and I will be their God, for they shall return to Me with their whole heart.eremiah 24:7
Jeremiah 31
33 But this shall be the covenant that I will make with the house of Israel; After those days, saith the Lord, I will put my law in their inward parts, and write it in their hearts; and will be their God, and they shall be my people.
34 And they shall teach no more every man his neighbour, and every man his brother, saying, Know the Lord: for they shall all know me, from the least of them unto the greatest of them, saith the Lord: for I will forgive their iniquity, and I will remember their sin no more.
Ezekiel 36, here’s the full text of the New Covenant:
22 “Therefore say to the house of Israel, ‘Thus says the Lord God: “I do not do this for your sake, O house of Israel, but for My holy name’s sake, which you have profaned among the nations wherever you went. 23 And I will sanctify My great name, which has been profaned among the nations, which you have profaned in their midst; and the nations shall know that I am the Lord,” says the Lord God, “when I am hallowed in you before their eyes. 24 For I will take you from among the nations, gather you out of all countries, and bring you into your own land. 25 Then I will sprinkle clean water on you, and you shall be clean; I will cleanse you from all your filthiness and from all your idols. 26 I will give you a new heart and put a new spirit within you; I will take the heart of stone out of your flesh and give you a heart of flesh. 27 I will put My Spirit within you and cause you to walk in My statutes, and you will keep My judgments and do them. 28 Then you shall dwell in the land that I gave to your fathers; you shall be My people, and I will be your God. 29 I will deliver you from all your uncleannesses. I will call for the grain and multiply it, and bring no famine upon you. 30 And I will multiply the fruit of your trees and the increase of your fields, so that you need never again bear the reproach of famine among the nations. 31 Then you will remember your evil ways and your deeds that were not good; and you will loathe yourselves in your own sight, for your iniquities and your abominations. 32 Not for your sake do I do this,” says the Lord God, “let it be known to you. Be ashamed and confounded for your own ways, O house of Israel!”
December 20th, 2012 at 2:14 am
OK Bruce, it just occurred to me in the middle of the night that as I agreed with you yesterday on the new heart we all receive, I knew there was something that was missing and couldn’t pinpoint to you.
Salvation is not just the new heart that we receive at the time of justification. Yes we are justified and sanctified at the time we accept Christ and receive a new heart, this is an instanateneous experience. However in order to see the Lord we must die to sin, we still need to kill our old sin nature. This is sanctification and the warning from Romans 8 that if we don’t put to death (mortify) the sins of the flesh we shall die.
You see here’s the thing when we are born again and receive the new heart, this is when we receive the good news of the gospel, the work of salvation is finished in a sense for sure. However it is not in that now we are commanded to die to sin. In the new birth we receive something, both justification and sanctification, but in our christian life the opposite happen we need to die, Pauls said he dies daily, we need to slay the old man, die to sin. This is why we can’t claim victory prematurely, and we have to ensure to persevere till the end, until the old man dies completely. This is the daily battle of sanctification. And this is part of salvation, without it no man shall see the Lord. This is not salvation by works, in that we don’t merit anything in sanctification, we can’t add to Christ’s work on the cross. Yet the command is there in all the New Testament letters. Sanctification is a process and needs to be endeavoured seriously by any christian. Yes we have the new heart, but now we need to put it to use, we need to train it, have it develop its aerobic capacity to the fullest. God will do this work in the elect, but I do honestly believe that many will not finish the journey and fall from the faith. They will experience heart failure, yest the new heart can fail, and man lose his salvation. This is why we have to be vigilant and careful and slay the works of the flesh. Commit 100% to Christ, because there is no sanctification if we are not willing to give it all up. God doesn not accept 99% of us, he wants 100% or nothing.
December 20th, 2012 at 1:20 pm
Bill here is where we disagree again. We don’t ” accept” our new heart. God creates a new heart in us , without our permittion, in fact. That is what it means when the Bible talks about the Holy Spirit being like the wind. We don’t know where it starts or stops.
This was the very first point I made in that the Holy Spirit regenerates our heart/soul . This is the very start of salvation. From this point on we have the ability to hear the Word , we have the desire to seek God , and will respond to the gospel when it is preached.
God started this “good work In us and God will see to it that He finishes it in us. That is why every one that is saved , stays saved.
So again regeneration comes first. Every thing else follows AS A RESULT OF this single act of the Holy Spiritt. We believe because of this, are justified, because of this, then sanctified through out our lives( ( a process that goes on through out our lives), and finally glorified with Christ in heaven. It’s all a work of God in us, Our very nature ( spiritual nature) has been changed, with this new heart. The proof of that is in what we find our selves wanting, in what we do and how we act. That is why I say that people who you say fall away, loose their salvation, I say they never had it because its not in their new nature to fall away. Perserverence is the proof of salvation, and salvation is sure til the end.
That’s Gods promise to the elect.
December 20th, 2012 at 1:32 pm
You see Romans 6 clearly mentions we are already dead to sin and alive in Christ, so that we should obey in newness of life. This is the good news that we are dead to sin.
If you read Ezekiel 31 and the new heart, the forgiveness of sins isn’t mentioned even once. The grace of God is that he will make us walk in his statutes. The promise is that we will be cleansed from all unrightelusness. The promise is of infused grace. Now Jeremiah 31 promises both the forgiveness of sins and sanctification.
the question here is why do christians don’t obey? And Paul exhorts and rebukes christians constantly. There’s a few reasons:
1) they fail to give God the reasonable service God demands. Plain disobedience
2) Lack of faith. Unbelief. They don’t trust God’s promise that he will make them walk in his statues, that he will give them a clean heart. They don’t trust Christ’s work on the cross that they are dead with to sin, and sin has no dominion over them.
3) the old man is not totally slain
4) they have not counted the cost. Christ warns to anybody that wants to follow him that he should count the cost before doing it, because nobody should take on enterprise that he’s unwilling to accompliish. Without a willing heart to lay it all down for Christ, there is no salvation.
All this relates to the article of sanctification, and not justification. So sanctification needs to focus on these four areas that are the cause of disobedience. This is far from being salvation by works, the lutheran confessions teach that although faith alone saves, if anybody wants to know if they have faith or not they have to look at their works. Although Paul teaches us what faith is, James teaches us whether we have faith or not. The book of concord teaches that the only way a christian can know if he has faith is by looking as his works, there is no other way. Saying a prayer at the altar or trusting in Christ is n o evidence that a christian has faith, only works can prove faith. In this sense James teaches correctly that we are justified by works and not by faith, in that it’s impossible to know if we have saving faith in us or others unless we look at works. Also I will add we are justified by works in that those works are a fruit of fairh.
Here’s the link to the lutheran confessions where they teach that the sole way by which a christian can know if has faith is by his works, sin is evidence of unbelief in god’s promises.
http://www.bookofconcord.org/sd-righteousness.php items 42 and 43
42] Many disputations also are usefully and well explained by means of this true distinction, of which the Apology treats in reference to the passage James 2:20. For when we speak of faith, how it justifies, the doctrine of St. Paul is that faith alone, without works, justifies, Rom. 3:28, inasmuch as it applies and appropriates to us the merit of Christ, as has been said. But if the question is, wherein and whereby a Christian can perceive and distinguish, either in himself or in others, a true living faith from a feigned and dead faith, (since many idle, secure Christians imagine for themselves a delusion in place of faith, while they nevertheless have no true faith,) the Apology gives this answer: James calls that dead faith where good works and fruits of the Spirit of every kind do not follow. And to this effect the Latin edition of the Apology says: Iacobus recte negat, nos tali fide iustificari, quae est sine operibus, hoc est, quae mortua est. That is: St. James teaches correctly when he denies that we are justified by such a faith as is without works, which is dead faith.
43] But James speaks, as the Apology says, concerning the works of those who have already been justified through Christ, reconciled with God, and obtained forgiveness of sins through Christ. But if the question is, whereby and whence faith has this, and what appertains to this that it justifies and saves, it is false and incorrect to say: Fidem non posse iustificare sine operibus; vel fidem, quatenus caritatem, qua formatur, coniunctam habet, iustificare; vel fidei, ut iustificet, necessariam esse praesentiam bonorum operum; vel bona opera esse causam sine qua non, quae per particulas exclusivas ex articulo iustificationis non excludantur. That is: That faith cannot justify without works; or that faith justifies or makes righteous, inasmuch as it has love with it, for the sake of which love this is ascribed to faith [it has love with it, by which it is formed]; or that the presence of works with faith is necessary if otherwise man is to be justified thereby before God; or that the presence of good works in the article of justification, or for justification, is needful, so that good works are a cause without which man cannot be justified, and that they are not excluded from the article of justification by the particulae exclusivae: absque operibus etc., that is, when St. Paul says: without works. For faith makes righteous only inasmuch as and because, as a means and instrument, it lays hold of, and accepts, the grace of God and the merit of Christ in the promise of the Gospel.
December 20th, 2012 at 1:41 pm
This is what the lutherans confessions teach if any christisn wants to know he has faith, copying / pasting the relevatn portion from my post above:
“But if the question is, wherein and whereby a Christian can perceive and distinguish, either in himself or in others, a true living faith from a feigned and dead faith, (since many idle, secure Christians imagine for themselves a delusion in place of faith, while they nevertheless have no true faith,) the Apology gives this answer: James calls that dead faith where good works and fruits of the Spirit of every kind do not follow. And to this effect the Latin edition of the Apology says: Iacobus recte negat, nos tali fide iustificari, quae est sine operibus, hoc est, quae mortua est. That is: St. James teaches correctly when he denies that we are justified by such a faith as is without works, which is dead faith.”
December 20th, 2012 at 1:41 pm
I said exactly that! Our works and our desire to do good works comes from the heart we are given.
Even bad people , unsaved people , do good works. The only difference is WHY! The elect do it to bring God glory , the unsaved for self satisfaction.and ultimately their Condemnation.
December 20th, 2012 at 2:03 pm
Now in the 4 reasons I identified as the chief cause of sin in christians I excluded the forgiveness of sin, only because I was referring to christians that are already forgiven and know it. However those that have doubts whether there sins are forgiven or not, this is no doubt this is the biggest impediment to santification. Sanctification is grounded on justification, justification precedes sanctification.
December 21st, 2012 at 10:02 am
Bruce, I still think you underestimate or misunderstand the remaining olr / carnal nature in man. Because sanctification is only partial in this life and perfection is not possible, this is why there is still so much law on the New Testament. The christian is under grace, but because the old man is still present the law is preached. All this that I quoted from the lutheran confessions, applies to the old man. This is why all these warnings are out there.
14 For we know that the law is spiritual, but I am carnal, sold under sin. 15 For what I am doing, I do not understand. For what I will to do, that I do not practice; but what I hate, that I do. 16 If, then, I do what I will not to do, I agree with the law that it is good. 17 But now, it is no longer I who do it, but sin that dwells in me. 18 For I know that in me (that is, in my flesh) nothing good dwells; for to will is present with me, but how to perform what is good I do not find. 19 For the good that I will to do, I do not do; but the evil I will not to do, that I practice. 20 Now if I do what I will not to do, it is no longer I who do it, but sin that dwells in me.
Look at Paul a man under grace how in Romans 7 when he sins he feels the law’s condemnation on the flesh, not on him who is saved. The law is there to discipline the rebellious flesh, to kkep it in check. The apostle in Romans 7 who is under clearly applies the law to himself, to his flesh:
Romans 7
21 I find then a law, that evil is present with me, the one who wills to do good. 22 For I delight in the law of God according to the inward man. 23 But I see another law in my members, warring against the law of my mind, and bringing me into captivity to the law of sin which is in my members. 24 O wretched man that I am! Who will deliver me from this body of death? 25 I thank God—through Jesus Christ our Lord!
So then, with the mind I myself serve the law of God, but with the flesh the law of sin.
December 21st, 2012 at 10:11 am
I just quoted Romans 7 verses 14 to 25 with one comment in between the verses which I probably should have put it at the beginning. Regardless my point is that the law still condemns and acuses the christian. Obviously in Romans 8 there is deliverance from the law, the same deliverance that is explained at the beginning of Romans 7. Yet the apostle a christian went through the pain of the law’s accusations on his flesh (not on him) in Romans 7. The law needs to be preached in order to produce contrition in the christian, without the law there is no gospel, without the knowledge of sin there is no christ. The law is holy and reveals sin, and because christians still have thir old nature the first use of the law with all its threats is still valid, as long as it’s followed by the gospel as is in Romans 8.
Romans 8
1 There is therefore now no condemnation for those who are in Christ Jesus.[a] 2 For the law of the Spirit of life has set you[b] free in Christ Jesus from the law of sin and death. 3 For God has done what the law, weakened by the flesh, could not do. By sending his own Son in the likeness of sinful flesh and for sin,[c] he condemned sin in the flesh, 4 in order that the righteous requirement of the law might be fulfilled in us, who walk not according to the flesh but according to the Spirit.”
December 21st, 2012 at 10:30 am
This is why I had issues with some of your comments about God doesn’t see our sin, when in fact he exposes it through the law, or that we are not punished if we sin. For starters if we sin we bring the law’s condemnation on us, and we bring ourselves into Romans 7 where Paul looks at how wretched he is.
The christian is not under the law, and sanctification is powered by the gospel only, the not being under the law. But there’s a paradox here, when you read Romans 7 the apostle clearly brings the law on himself, Romans 7:22 and Romans 7:23, and he delights in it. Why because the law is good and exposes sin in the christian, or better sin in the flesh and not the christian. And yet the law accuses, due to the power of remaining sin in the believer, and deliverance is only through Jesus Christ where there is no condemnation.
1 Timothy chapter 1 tells us when the law is supposed to be used. The law does not apply to the just but to the lawless and disobedient, the apostle teaches. Now if a christian were perfect, the law would never apply to him, and we should not preach it at all. However when a christian sins the law has to be preached with all its threats, penalties and consequences. Otherwise we just won’t see our sin, become callous, carnally secure, and lose our salvation. God uses law to discipline the christian.
1 Timothy 1
8 Now we know that the law is good, if one uses it lawfully, 9 understanding this, that the law is not laid down for the just but for the lawless and disobedient, for the ungodly and sinners, for the unholy and profane, for those who strike their fathers and mothers, for murderers, 10 the sexually immoral, men who practice homosexuality, enslavers,[b] liars, perjurers, and whatever else is contrary to sound[c] doctrine, 11 in accordance with the gospel of the glory of the blessed God with which I have been entrusted.
December 21st, 2012 at 10:40 am
Law to the proud, grace to the humble. Law to the ungodly and gospel to the godly. I wish I wouldn’t need the law at all, unfortunately because of the flesh I do. In heaven there will be no law and no discipline from god, because there will be no sin. Unfortunately this isn’t the case on earth. Where christians like David murder the innocent and take his wife, this can happen in your local church. How should hte church deal with a murderer? A pastor that has an affair? Folks we are talking saved believers and very serious sins, these are not just sins that are being conceived in the heart and gotten beyond that stage, this sins have gotten beyond that stage and hurt or take the life or property of a neighbour. This is the reason the law is in the New Testament and this is the reason the lutheran confessions are well equipped to deal with this type of serious sin and the full consequence of the law including the loss of salvation should be brought agains christians that commit actual murder, rape, adultery, theft, fraud. The gospel is insufficient to deal with sin when it escalates to this level, the law needs to do its work first and convict this christians that they are about to pass from eternal life to eternal death, or that they have already passed unless they repent.
December 21st, 2012 at 10:50 am
And no christian is perfect enough that is exempt from this. Some that don’t commit murder and adultery like David may burn in their hearts with hatred and lust that exceeds David’s. They are murderers and adulterers worst than David, and had they been in a position of power as David was they would have sinned more greatly. The good news though is that once the law is finished with its work, the gospel cleanses us from all sin, and then the power of sin in the flesh is destroyed and we gladly obey. Isn’t this Romans 7 and 8? Paul who is under grace, a saved Christian, is crushed by the law and delivered by Christ. The interesting thing though is how the law threatens Paul due to the power of sin inside Paul, but the deliverance is a forensic and addresses the penalty of sin solely, there is now no condemnation in Romans 8. As a result of this forensic delievery the power of sin inside the believer is broken. This is why for lutherans justification is the article of which the church stands or falls, it takes away the penalty of sin, and consequently the power of sin (sanctification instantly follows), and then good works proceed.
December 21st, 2012 at 4:35 pm
I highly recommend that everybody read Mortification of Sin by John Owen
http://www.jesus.org.uk/vault/library/owen_mortification.pdf
He was a calvinist, but like the lutheran confessions he brings the full weight of the law on the christian, including capital punishment, the eternal death of the believer. Read chapter 10, but I recommend you read the whold book. Starting in chapter 9 he starts speaking about sins like Paul experienced in Romans 7. John Owen just like I said, teaches that the peace of the gospel can not eradicate such sins before the law crushed the christian and showed him eternal death. What the law does is it searches and finds and brings to light sin, this sin is then taken to the cross of Chist where it is put to death. Romans 9:1 and Romans 8:2 , where there is no condemnantion. However only the holy spirit can speak this peace to a christian and where there are habitual sins this usually does not happen right away, it could be days or weeks or months when the christian is under tha law with its full condemnation. This is what happened to Paul in Romans 7 when he cried for desparately for delivery, when he was doing the things he hated to do. Folks this is sanctification, lutherans teach it, calvinists teach it. When chritstians fall into seerious sins as the apostle Paul did in Romans 7 or the corinthian that slept with his mother in law, unless the law does its work first to expose those sins so that they can be brought to the cross of Christ for mortification, the alternative is that there is no salvation. Read John Owen’s book that I just put a link to it, this man was a man of grace, and he’d rather put a christian under the law to be delivered by the spirit of God than let him perish in carnal security. And if the apostle Paul after salvation experienced the pangs of the law, we better not assume that we are such great christians that we won’t need to go through the same purifying experience. This is not salvation by works, this is pure gospel, and the real christian life.
It is fantasy taht we get a new heart with new desisres and we do nothing but good, the new heart of the Corinthian that slept with his mother in laws should teach us all a lesson as the struggles of Paul in Romans 7. And this corinthain christian was a saved believer, in the second letter to the Corinthians Paul mentions that he’s back in the congregation after the chastisement. This is the real christian life, not the illusionary perception that we have a new heart, and we don’t need to be punished. The old man is still alive and spirit needs to slay him, he does it by convicting the christian of his sin through the law (romans 7) and by slaying or mortifying this sin through the gospel, the cross of Christ where there’s no condemnation.
This is not salvation by works like the galatians that wanted to justify themselves by works. Quite the contrary Paul teaches to bring the full force of the law on teh Christian to crush him and humble him, so taht the gospel might save him if God so wishes.
December 21st, 2012 at 4:36 pm
I meant Romans 8:1 in my last post and not Romans 8:2
December 21st, 2012 at 5:00 pm
The law was always ment to be a tutor for the saved and the reason for condemnation to the wicked.
December 21st, 2012 at 8:26 pm
John Owen in chapter 11 of Mortification on Sin which I provided the link to his short book above begs to disagree and so do I. The Law is not a tutor for the christian, this may be Rick Warren version of the law or the modern apostate evangelical version of the law. This is what the law does as John Owen puts it, in both the christian and the non-christian:
John Owen speaking about what the law should do to a christian:
“Whatever be the issue, yet the law hath commission from God to seize upon transgressors wherever it find them, and so bring them before his throne, where they are to plead for themselves.”
December 21st, 2012 at 8:34 pm
Sorry Bruce, just to clarify if by tutor you meant a coach that will make you better or a teacher that will educate you. No, the law does not do that. On the other hand if you meant a turot, in the sense that it will kill you, bring your sin to the cross, and bring Christ to kill your sin, then I agree with you.
John Owen is very clear and I happen to agree with him:
“Whatever be the issue, yet the law hath commission from God to seize upon transgressors wherever it find them, and so bring them before his throne, where they are to plead for themselves.”
December 21st, 2012 at 8:52 pm
Therefore the Law has become our tutor to lead us to Christ, so that we may be justified by faith. But now that faith has come, we are no longer under a tutor. (Galatians 3:25 NASB)
December 21st, 2012 at 9:46 pm
Bruce, this message was for the Galatians who were trying to justify themselves by the law. Of course christians are not under the law and I have said this.
With that said specially in the instances of serious habitual sin or other deep rooted sin, the law accuses again. It specially does it to christians, because the law exposes sin. It’s the work of the holy spirit, John Owen points out that the apostle Paul in Romans 7 was saved and yet the law accused him. This is a totally different circumstance from the galatians, the galatians were trying to justify themselves by the law, becoming self righteous, so Paul had to remind them if you do that you are fallen from grace. If you notice Paul in Romans 7 is being humbled by the law, so of course Christians are under the law from this perspective in that through the law there is knowledge of sin, otherwise their sin wouldn’t be exposed, they wouldn’t humble themselves, they wouldn’t confess their sin, and they wouldn’t be able to bring their sin to christ for forgiveness (and the resulting mortification).
Anyways, Merry Christmas! This is not a topic that is easy to talk over the internet, and also John Owen is speaking about christians that are going through the struggle between the flesh and the spirit, a matter of life or death. I’m going to tell you something, I’d rather have the law find my sin and expose my sinful nature (as it did to Paul in Romans 7) and bring the remnant of the carnal nature (the old man) to the cross to be slain. The alternative is that the devil will seize me and I will die with a false security of salvation. For me the options are clear.
Yes we were all delivered from the power of sin at justification when we were saved. But right now we need to deal with the remaining sin and ensure that we keep it in check.
YOu might not be able to grasp this now. Don’t worry about it, a few years ago when I was already a christian and read John Owen for the firsr time I thought he was a legalist, just like you think about me now. By the way I thought the same about Calvin when I went through some of his chapters of the Institutes. Sometimes we only want gospel, but both before and after conversion the law is needed to shed light on our sin, expose it to bight sunlight, to see its ugliness, but it doesn’t end there, God delivers us and there is no condemnation for that sin and when the spirit speaks those words to it, at the same time this sin is slain or severely weakened.
Nerrt Christmas, Bruce. Mortification of sin is not the topic I want to talk over Christmas! It’s ugly but it’s biblical. Read that book from Owen and then mull it over. If you find John Owen a legalist, (and he’s not, he’s one of the greates Saints to ever live), don’t get discoursged. Maybe your conscience can’t handle this doctrine at this stage of your christian life. You have to go by your conscience and what the holy ghost witnesses to you, of course it has to be based on God’s word through which faith and the holy ghost are given and kept.
December 21st, 2012 at 9:54 pm
Seriously, as recently as last year when I read Calvin’s chapters on Repentance (starting in chapter 2 of book 3) I felt the guy was putting me back under the law. But no, Calvin’s teaching is biblical. The old man is still under the law! Would you show mergy to him? Not me, I’m bringing to the cross whatever is left of him for annihilation. Yes only at the cross, and only the gospel can mortify the deeds of the flesh, the role of the law is to find that sin, to hunt it down, to bring it to the cross for crucifixion.
December 21st, 2012 at 9:57 pm
I meant “mercy” not “mergy” in my last post.
December 22nd, 2012 at 6:15 am
Bill I have noted Owens and several other authors , in a previous post . Maybe you missed that.
Any way I came across this series this morning, and found it to be spot on, so here is a over view of what I believe the bible teaches. It comes from Pipers seminar on TULIP. Please take the time to read it and listen it and to his series. I will not change from this point of view because I was convinced before, and am completely convinced now that John is correct in his representation here in. I will not be replying to any more of your posts because you seem to enjoy responding with out really reading or studying,what I and others are posting. I will be taking the next month or two going through this series and suggest you do the same.
TULIP, Part 1
Introduction
March 7, 2008 | by John Piper | Topic: The Doctrines of Grace / Calvinism
Subscribe to…
Watch:Full Length Listen: Full Length Download
See the rest of this seminar:
TULIP, Part 2: Assumptions – Irresistible Grace
TULIP, Part 3: Irresistible Grace – Total Depravity
TULIP, Part 4: Total Depravity – Unconditional Election
TULIP, Part 5: Unconditional Election
TULIP, Part 6: Unconditional Election
TULIP, Part 7: Limited Atonement
TULIP, Part 8: Perseverance of the Saints
TULIP, Part 9: Ten Effects of Believing the Five Points of Calvinisim
Seminar Notes
Assumptions
Total Depravity
Irresistible Grace
Limited Atonement
Unconditional Election
Perseverance of the Saints
1. Assumptions
1. “The Bible is the Word of God, fully inspired and without error in the original manuscripts, written under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit, and that it has supreme authority in all matters of faith and conduct” (Article One, “Bethlehem Affirmation of Faith”).
2. Right thinking about what the Bible teaches about God and man and salvation really matters. Bad theology dishonors God and hurts people. Churches that sever the root of truth may flourish for a season, but they will wither eventually or turn into something besides a Christian church.
3. The work of the Holy Spirit, and the pursuit of his work in prayer, is essential for grasping the truth of Scripture.
1 Corinthians 2:13-16
We impart this in words not taught by human wisdom but taught by the Spirit, interpreting spiritual truths to those who possess the Spirit. The unspiritual man does not receive the gifts of the Spirit of God, for they are folly to him, and he is not able to understand them because they are spiritually discerned. The spiritual man judges all things, but is himself to be judged by no one. “For who has known the mind of the Lord so as to instruct him?” But we have the mind of Christ.
4. Thinking is essential for grasping Biblical truth.
1 Corinthians 14:20
Brethren, do not be children in your thinking; yet in evil be infants, but in your thinking be mature.
2 Timothy 2:7
Think over what I say, for the Lord will grant you understanding in everything.
5. God ordains that there be teachers in the church to help the body grasp and apply the truth of Scripture.
Ephesians 4:11-12
And He gave some as apostles, and some as prophets, and some as evangelists, and some as pastors and teachers, for the equipping of the saints for the work of service, to the building up of the body of Christ.
Hebrews 13:7
Remember those who led you, who spoke the word of God to you; and considering the result of their conduct, imitate their faith.
2. Total Depravity
Seeing Our Depravity in Relation to God Is Crucial
1 Corinthians 10:31
Whether, then, you eat or drink or whatever you do, do all to the glory of God.
Romans 14:23
But he who doubts is condemned if he eats, because his eating is not from faith; and whatever is not from faith is sin.
James 2:10-11
For whoever keeps the whole law and yet stumbles in one point, he has become guilty of all. For He who said, “DO NOT COMMIT ADULTERY,” also said, “DO NOT COMMIT MURDER.” Now if you do not commit adultery, but do commit murder, you have become a transgressor of the law.
Human Depravity Is Total in at Least Five Senses
Depravity affects every human.
Romans 3:23
All have sinned and fall short of the glory of God.
1 Kings 8:46
There is no man who does not sin.
Psalm 143:2
And do not enter into judgment with Your servant, for in Your sight no man living is righteous.
1 John 1:8
If we say that we have no sin, we are deceiving ourselves and the truth is not in us.
Our rebellion or hardness against God is total, that is, apart from the grace of God there is no delight in the holiness of God, and there is no glad submission to the sovereign authority of God.
Romans 3:9-11, 18
What then? Are we better than they? Not at all; for we have already charged that both Jews and Greeks are all under sin; as it is written, “THERE IS NONE RIGHTEOUS, NOT EVEN ONE; THERE IS NONE WHO UNDERSTANDS, THERE IS NONE WHO SEEKS FOR GOD . . . THERE IS NO FEAR OF GOD BEFORE THEIR EYES.”
John 3:19-21
This is the judgment, that the Light has come into the world, and men loved the darkness rather than the Light, for their deeds were evil. For everyone who does evil hates the Light, and does not come to the Light for fear that his deeds will be exposed. But he who practices the truth comes to the Light, so that his deeds may be manifested as having been wrought in God.
Romans 1:18
For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men who suppress the truth in unrighteousness.
In his total rebellion everything man does is sin.
Romans 14:23
Whatever is not from faith is sin.
Hebrews 11:6
And without faith it is impossible to please Him, for he who comes to God must believe that He is and that He is a rewarder of those who seek Him.
Romans 7:18
For I know that nothing good dwells in me, that is, in my flesh; for the willing is present in me, but the doing of the good is not.
Man’s inability to submit to God and do good is total.
Romans 8:5-9
For those who are according to the flesh set their minds on the things of the flesh, but those who are according to the Spirit, the things of the Spirit. For the mind set on the flesh [literally: “the mind of the flesh”] is death, but the mind set on the Spirit [literally: “the mind of the Spirit”] is life and peace, because the mind set on the flesh [literally: “the mind of the flesh”] is hostile toward God; for it does not subject itself to the law of God, for it is not even able to do so, and those who are in the flesh cannot please God. However, you are not in the flesh but in the Spirit, if indeed the Spirit of God dwells in you. But if anyone does not have the Spirit of Christ, he does not belong to Him.
John 3:5-7
Jesus answered, “Truly, truly, I say to you, unless one is born of water and the Spirit he cannot enter into the kingdom of God. That which is born of the flesh is flesh, and that which is born of the Spirit is spirit. Do not be amazed that I said to you, ‘You must be born again.’”
Romans 6:17-18
But thanks be to God that though you were slaves of sin, you became obedient from the heart to that form of teaching to which you were committed, and having been freed from sin, you became slaves of righteousness.
Ephesians 2:1-5
And you were dead in your trespasses and sins, in which you formerly walked according to the course of this world, according to the prince of the power of the air, of the spirit that is now working in the sons of disobedience. Among them we too all formerly lived in the lusts of our flesh, indulging the desires of the flesh and of the mind, and were by nature children of wrath, even as the rest. But God, being rich in mercy, because of His great love with which He loved us, even when we were dead in our transgressions, made us alive together with Christ (by grace you have been saved).
Ephesians 4:17-18
So this I say, and affirm together with the Lord, that you walk no longer just as the Gentiles also walk, in the futility of their mind, being darkened in their understanding, excluded from the life of God because of the ignorance that is in them, because of the hardness of their heart.
John 6:44
No one can come to Me unless the Father who sent Me draws him; and I will raise him up on the last day.
1 Corinthians 2:14
But a natural man does not accept the things of the Spirit of God, for they are foolishness to him; and he cannot understand them, because they are spiritually appraised.
Jeremiah 17:9
The heart is more deceitful than all else and is desperately [incurably] sick; who can understand it?
Our rebellion is totally deserving of eternal punishment.
Ephesians 2:3
Among them we too all formerly lived in the lusts of our flesh, indulging the desires of the flesh and of the mind, and were by nature children of wrath, even as the rest.
2 Thessalonians 1:8-9
[God will] deal out retribution to those who do not know God and to those who do not obey the gospel of our Lord Jesus. These will pay the penalty of eternal destruction, away from the presence of the Lord and from the glory of His power.
Matthew 25:46
These will go away into eternal punishment, but the righteous into eternal life.
Summary and Conclusion
In summary, total depravity means that apart from any enabling grace from God, our hardness and rebellion against God is total, everything we do in this rebellion is sin, our inability to submit to God or reform ourselves is total, and we are therefore totally deserving of eternal punishment.
It is hard to exaggerate the importance of admitting our condition to be this bad. If we think of ourselves as basically good or even less than totally at odds with God, our grasp of the work of God in redemption will be defective. But if we humble ourselves under this terrible truth of our total depravity, we will be in a position to see and appreciate the glory and wonder of the work of God discussed in the next four points.
3. Irresistible Grace
Grace Can Be Resisted Until God Wills to Overcome Resistance
Acts 7:51
You men who are stiff-necked and uncircumcised in heart and ears are always resisting the Holy Spirit; you are doing just as your fathers did.
Ephesians 4:30
Do not grieve the Holy Spirit of God, by whom you were sealed for the day of redemption.
1 Thessalonians 5:19
Do not quench the Spirit.
Romans 10:21
But as for Israel He says, “All the day long I have stretched out my hands to a disobedient and obstinate people.”
Six Arguments for Irresistible Grace
Argument #1: Faith and repentance are a gift of God.
Ephesians 2:8-9
For by grace you have been saved through faith; and that not of yourselves, it is the gift of God; not as a result of works, so that no one may boast.
Romans 12:3
For through the grace given to me I say to everyone among you not to think more highly of himself than he ought to think; but to think so as to have sound judgment, as God has allotted to each a measure of faith.
2 Timothy 2:24-26
The Lord’s bond-servant must not be quarrelsome, but be kind to all, able to teach, patient when wronged, with gentleness correcting those who are in opposition, if perhaps God may grant them repentance leading to the knowledge of the truth, and they may come to their senses and escape from the snare of the devil, having been held captive by him to do his will.
Acts 11:18
When they heard this, they quieted down and glorified God, saying, “Well then, God has granted to the Gentiles also the repentance that leads to life.”
Acts 16:14
A woman named Lydia, from the city of Thyatira, a seller of purple fabrics, a worshiper of God, was listening; and the Lord opened her heart to respond to the things spoken by Paul.
2 Chronicles 30:6-12 (Hezekiah’s call for repentance)
“O sons of Israel, return to the LORD God of Abraham, Isaac and Israel, that He may return to those of you who escaped and are left from the hand of the kings of Assyria. Now do not stiffen your neck like your fathers, but yield to the LORD and enter His sanctuary which He has consecrated forever, and serve the LORD your God, that His burning anger may turn away from you. For if you return to the LORD, your brothers and your sons will find compassion before those who led them captive and will return to this land. For the LORD your God is gracious and compassionate, and will not turn His face away from you if you return to Him.” So the couriers passed from city to city through the country of Ephraim and Manasseh, and as far as Zebulun, but they laughed them to scorn and mocked them. Nevertheless some men of Asher, Manasseh and Zebulun humbled themselves and came to Jerusalem. The hand of God was also on Judah to give them one heart to do what the king and the princes commanded by the word of the LORD.
Argument # 2: We cannot come to Christ unless God draws us.
John 6:44
No one can come to Me unless the Father who sent Me draws him; and I will raise him up on the last day.
John 6:63-65
“It is the Spirit who gives life; the flesh profits nothing; the words that I have spoken to you are spirit and are life. But there are some of you who do not believe.” For Jesus knew from the beginning who they were who did not believe, and who it was that would betray Him. And He was saying, “For this reason I have said to you, that no one can come to Me unless it has been granted him from the Father.”
Argument # 3: God’s effectual calling overcomes resistance to the gospel.
1 Corinthians 1:22-24
Indeed, Jews ask for signs and Greeks search for wisdom; but we preach Christ crucified, to Jews a stumbling block and to Gentiles foolishness, but to those who are the called, both Jews and Greeks, Christ the power of God and the wisdom of God.
Argument # 4: The new birth enables us to receive Christ.
1 John 5:1
Whoever believes that Jesus is the Christ is born [literally: perfect tense, “has been born”] of God, and whoever loves the Father loves the child born of Him.
John 1:11-13
He came to His own, and those who were His own did not receive Him. But as many as received Him, to them He gave the right to become children of God, even to those who believe [= are believing] in His name, who were born, not of blood nor of the will of the flesh nor of the will of man, but of God.
John 3:3
Jesus answered and said to him, “Truly, truly, I say to you, unless one is born again he cannot see the kingdom of God.” Nicodemus said to Him, “How can a man be born when he is old? He cannot enter a second time into his mother’s womb and be born, can he?” Jesus answered, “Truly, truly, I say to you, unless one is born of water and the Spirit he cannot enter into the kingdom of God. That which is born of the flesh is flesh, and that which is born of the Spirit is spirit. Do not be amazed that I said to you, ‘You must be born again.’ The wind blows where it wishes and you hear the sound of it, but do not know where it comes from and where it is going; so is everyone who is born of the Spirit.”
Argument # 5: The New Covenant promises grace that will triumph over resistance.
Deuteronomy 29:2-4 (The problem with the Old Covenant)
And Moses summoned all Israel and said to them, “You have seen all that the LORD did before your eyes in the land of Egypt to Pharaoh and all his servants and all his land; the great trials which your eyes have seen, those great signs and wonders. Yet to this day the LORD has not given you a heart to know, nor eyes to see, nor ears to hear.”
Deuteronomy 30:6
Moreover the LORD your God will circumcise your heart and the heart of your descendants, to love the LORD your God with all your heart and with all your soul, so that you may live.
Jeremiah 31:31-33
“Behold, days are coming,” declares the LORD, “when I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel and with the house of Judah, not like the covenant which I made with their fathers in the day I took them by the hand to bring them out of the land of Egypt, My covenant which they broke, although I was a husband to them,” declares the LORD. “But this is the covenant which I will make with the house of Israel after those days,” declares the LORD, “I will put My law within them and on their heart I will write it; and I will be their God, and they shall be My people.”
Jeremiah 32:40
I will make an everlasting covenant with them that I will not turn away from them, to do them good; and I will put the fear of Me in their hearts so that they will not turn away from Me.
Ezekiel 11:19-20
And I will give them one heart, and put a new spirit within them. And I will take the heart of stone out of their flesh and give them a heart of flesh, that they may walk in My statutes and keep My ordinances and do them. Then they will be My people, and I shall be their God.
Ezekiel 36:26-27
Moreover, I will give you a new heart and put a new spirit within you; and I will remove the heart of stone from your flesh and give you a heart of flesh. I will put My Spirit within you and cause you to walk in My statutes, and you will be careful to observe My ordinances.
Argument # 6: Who then can resist his will?
Romans 9:14-23
What shall we say then? There is no injustice with God, is there? May it never be! For He says to Moses, “I will have mercy on whom I have mercy, and I will have compassion on whom I have compassion.” So then it does not depend on the man who wills or the man who runs, but on God who has mercy. For the Scripture says to Pharaoh, “For this very purpose I raised you up, to demonstrate my power in you, and that my name might be proclaimed throughout the whole earth.” So then He has mercy on whom He desires, and He hardens whom He desires. You will say to me then, “Why does He still find fault? For who resists His will?” On the contrary, who are you, O man, who answers back to God? The thing molded will not say to the molder, “Why did you make me like this,” will it? Or does not the potter have a right over the clay, to make from the same lump one vessel for honorable use and another for common use? What if God, though willing to demonstrate His wrath and to make His power known, endured with much patience vessels of wrath prepared for destruction? And He did so to make known the riches of His glory upon vessels of mercy, which He prepared beforehand for glory.
4. Limited Atonement
Definition of Atonement
The atonement is the work of God in Christ, by his obedience and death, by which he cancelled the debt of our sin, appeased his holy wrath against us, and won for us all the benefits of salvation.
Why Is an Atonement Needed for God to Save Sinners?
Romans 3:23-26
All have sinned and fall short of the glory of God, being justified as a gift by His grace through the redemption which is in Christ Jesus; whom God displayed publicly as a propitiation in His blood through faith. This was to demonstrate His righteousness, because in the forbearance of God He passed over the sins previously committed; for the demonstration, I say, of His righteousness at the present time, so that He would be just and the justifier of the one who has faith in Jesus.
2 Corinthians 5:21
He made Him who knew no sin to be sin on our behalf, so that we might become the righteousness of God in Him.
1 Peter 3:18
For Christ also died for sins once for all, the just for the unjust, so that He might bring us to God.
Romans 5:9-10
Much more then, having now been justified by His blood, we shall be saved from the wrath of God through Him. For if while we were enemies we were reconciled to God through the death of His Son, much more, having been reconciled, we shall be saved by His life.
Romans 8:32
He who did not spare His own Son, but delivered Him over for us all, how will He not also with Him freely give us all things?
Who Limits the Atonement?
Both Calvinists and Arminians.
Arminians limit the effectiveness of the atonement by denying that it purchased the promises of the New Covenant for irresistible grace.
Calvinists affirm this purchase of the promises of the New Covenant for irresistible grace, and therefore limit the full blessings of the atonement to those God irresistibly brings to faith.
What Are Other Names for “Limited Atonement”?
Definite Atonement
Meaning that it is designed for definite individuals who are effectively saved by it.
Particular Redemption
Meaning that God has particular people in view in the design of the atonement to purchase all the blessings of salvation for his people.
What Is Another Name for “Unlimited Atonement”?
Universal Redemption
Meaning that God’s design in the atonement is the same for all individual humans.
Do Calvinists Water Down John 3:16?
“For God so loved the world, that He gave His only begotten Son, that whoever believes in Him shall not perish, but have eternal life.”
No, because John 3:16 affirms that God loved the world so that anyone who believes will be saved by the death of his Son. Both Calvinists and Arminians affirm this: All who believe will be saved by the atonement of Jesus.
So What’s the Dispute?
Calvinists believe that the death of Christ accomplished or purchased something more than Arminians believe it did, namely, the effectual grace to believe and come to Christ. All the irresistible grace (or effectual calling) that we saw in the last two lessons, Calvinists believe, was purchased by the death of Christ.
For example:
Ephesians 2:8-9
For by grace you have been saved through faith; and that not of yourselves, it is the gift of God; not as a result of works, so that no one may boast.
2 Timothy 2:24-25
The Lord’s bond-servant must not be quarrelsome, but be kind to all, able to teach, patient when wronged, with gentleness correcting those who are in opposition, if perhaps God may grant them repentance leading to the knowledge of the truth.
Acts 16:14
A woman named Lydia, from the city of Thyatira, a seller of purple fabrics, a worshiper of God, was listening; and the Lord opened her heart to respond to the things spoken by Paul.
John 6:65
For this reason I have said to you, that no one can come to Me unless it has been granted him from the Father.
If Calvinists Believe the Atonement Purchased More Than Arminians Believe it Did, Why is it Called Limited Atonement?
It’s not a good label. But the “limitation” is in the conscious design or intention of the atonement by God. Calvinists believe that God really means to accomplish, through the atonement, the conversion of a definite (limited) group of people, not just hold out the opportunity to all people to believe.
Why Do Calvinists Believe That The Atonement Purchases Irresistible Grace?
Mainly because the New Covenant promises this grace to God’s people and the blood of Jesus purchased this covenant.
Luke 22:20
And in the same way He took the cup after they had eaten, saying, “This cup which is poured out for you is the new covenant in My blood.”
Matthew 26:28
This is My blood of the covenant, which is poured out for many for forgiveness of sins.
1 Corinthians 11:25
In the same way He took the cup also after supper, saying, “This cup is the new covenant in My blood; do this, as often as you drink it, in remembrance of Me.”
Jeremiah 31:31-33
“Behold, days are coming,” declares the LORD, “when I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel and with the house of Judah, not like the covenant which I made with their fathers in the day I took them by the hand to bring them out of the land of Egypt, My covenant which they broke, although I was a husband to them,” declares the LORD. “But this is the covenant which I will make with the house of Israel after those days,” declares the LORD, “I will put My law within them and on their heart I will write it; and I will be their God, and they shall be My people.”
Jeremiah 32:38-40
They shall be My people, and I will be their God; and I will give them one heart and one way, that they may fear Me always, for their own good and for the good of their children after them. I will make an everlasting covenant with them that I will not turn away from them, to do them good; and I will put the fear of Me in their hearts so that they will not turn away from Me.
Ezekiel 11:19
And I will give them one heart, and put a new spirit within them. And I will take the heart of stone out of their flesh and give them a heart of flesh.
Ezekiel 36:26-27
Moreover, I will give you a new heart and put a new spirit within you; and I will remove the heart of stone from your flesh and give you a heart of flesh. I will put My Spirit within you and cause you to walk in My statutes, and you will be careful to observe My ordinances.
How Does the Book of Hebrews Develop This?
Hebrews 13:20-21
Now the God of peace, who brought up from the dead the great Shepherd of the sheep through the blood of the eternal covenant, even Jesus our Lord equip you in every good thing to do His will, working in us that which is pleasing in His sight, through Jesus Christ, to whom be the glory forever and ever. Amen.
Hebrews 10:14-18
For by one offering He has perfected for all time those who are being sanctified. And the Holy Spirit also testifies to us; for after saying, “THIS IS THE COVENANT THAT I WILL MAKE WITH THEM AFTER THOSE DAYS, SAYS THE LORD: I WILL PUT MY LAWS UPON THEIR HEART, AND ON THEIR MIND I WILL WRITE THEM,” He then says, “AND THEIR SINS AND THEIR LAWLESS DEEDS I WILL REMEMBER NO MORE.” Now where there is forgiveness of these things, there is no longer any offering for sin.
Hebrews 2:9-18
But we do see [Jesus] who was made for a little while lower than the angels, namely, Jesus, because of the suffering of death crowned with glory and honor, so that by the grace of God He might taste death for everyone (huper pantos). For it was fitting for Him, for whom are all things, and through whom are all things, in bringing many sons to glory, to perfect the author of their salvation through sufferings. For both He who sanctifies and those who are sanctified are all from one Father; for which reason He is not ashamed to call them brethren, saying, “I WILL PROCLAIM YOUR NAME TO MY BRETHREN, IN THE MIDST OF THE CONGREGATION I WILL SING YOUR PRAISE.” And again, “I WILL PUT MY TRUST IN HIM.” And again, “BEHOLD, I AND THE CHILDREN WHOM GOD HAS GIVEN ME.” Therefore, since the children share in flesh and blood, He Himself likewise also partook of the same, that through death He might render powerless him who had the power of death, that is, the devil, and might free those who through fear of death were subject to slavery all their lives. For assuredly He does not give help to angels, but He gives help to the seed of Abraham. Therefore, He had to be made like His brethren in all things, so that He might become a merciful and faithful high priest in things pertaining to God, to make propitiation for the sins of the people. For since He Himself was tempted in that which He has suffered, He is able to come to the aid of those who are tempted.
Hebrews 9:27-28
And inasmuch as it is appointed for men to die once and after this comes judgment, so Christ also, having been offered once to bear the sins of many, will appear a second time for salvation without reference to sin, to those who eagerly await Him.
A Word from John Owen on the New and Old Covenants
With regard to Jeremiah 31:31-32 and Hebrews 8:9-11, John Owen says, “Wherein, first the condition of the covenant is not said to be required, but it is absolutely promised: ‘I will put my fear in their hearts.’ And this is the main difference between the old covenant of works and the new one of grace, that in that the Lord did only require the fulfilling of the condition prescribed, but in this he promises to effect it in them himself with whom the covenant is made. This then is one main difference of these two covenants – that the Lord did in the old only require the condition; now, in the new, he will also effect it in all the federates, to whom this covenant is extended” (The Death of Death, vol. 10, pp. 236-237).
Texts Often Used to Deny Limited Atonement
1 Timothy 2:6
Christ gave Himself as a ransom for all, the testimony given at the proper time.
1 John 2:1-2
My little children, I am writing these things to you so that you may not sin. And if anyone sins, we have an Advocate with the Father, Jesus Christ the righteous; and He Himself is the propitiation for our sins; and not for ours only, but also for those of the whole world.
Hebrews 2:9
But we do see Him who was made for a little while lower than the angels, namely, Jesus, because of the suffering of death crowned with glory and honor, so that by the grace of God He might taste death for everyone.
2 Corinthians 5:19
God was in Christ reconciling the world to Himself, not counting their trespasses against them, and He has committed to us the word of reconciliation.
John 1:29
The next day he saw Jesus coming to him and said, “Behold, the Lamb of God who takes away the sin of the world!”
2 Peter 2:1
But false prophets also arose among the people, just as there will also be false teachers among you, who will secretly introduce destructive heresies, even denying the Master who bought them, bringing swift destruction upon themselves (See 1 Corinthians 8:11; Romans 14:14:15).
Texts that Seem to Designate the Atonement for a Limited Group
Romans 5:8
But God demonstrates His own love toward us, in that while we were yet sinners, Christ died for us.
1 Thessalonians 5:10
Christ died for us, so that whether we are awake or asleep, we will live together with Him.
John 10:11, 14-15
I am the good shepherd; the good shepherd lays down His life for the sheep . . . I am the good shepherd, and I know My own and My own know Me, even as the Father knows Me and I know the Father; and I lay down My life for the sheep.
Ephesians 5:25
Husbands, love your wives, just as Christ also loved the church and gave Himself up for her.
Acts 20:28
Be on guard for yourselves and for all the flock, among which the Holy Spirit has made you overseers, to shepherd the church of God which He purchased with His own blood.
John 11:51-52
Being high priest that year, [Caiaphas] prophesied that Jesus was going to die for the nation, and not for the nation only, but in order that He might also gather together into one the children of God who are scattered abroad.
Hebrews 10:14
For by one offering He has perfected for all time those who are sanctified.
What’s the Dispute and How Do I Approach It?
Arminians take all the passages which say the death of Christ is “for us” (Romans 5:8; 1 Thessalonians 5:10) or for “his own sheep” (John 10:11, 15) or for “the church” (Ephesians 5:25; Acts 20:28) or for “the children of God” (John 11:52) or for “those who are being sanctified” (Hebrews 10:14) and say that the meaning is that God designs and intends the atonement for all people in the same way, but that God applies it as effective and saving only for those who believe and become part of “us” and “the sheep” and “the church” and “the children of God.”
In this view, then, the sentence, “Christ died for you,” means: Christ died for all sinners, so that if you will repent and believe in Christ, then the death of Jesus will become effective in your case and will take away your sins.
Now, as far as it goes, this seems to me to be acceptable teaching. But then Arminians deny something that I think the Bible teaches. They deny that the texts about Christ’s dying for “us” or “his sheep” or his “church” or “the children of God” were intended by God to obtain something more for his people than the benefits they get after they believe. They deny, specifically, that the death of Christ was not only intended by God to obtain benefits for people after they believe (which is true), but even more, Christ’s death was intended by God to obtain the very willingness to believe. In other words, the divine grace that it takes to overcome our hardness of heart and become a believer was also obtained by the blood of Jesus.
There is no dispute that Christ died to obtain great saving benefits for all who believe. Moreover, there is no dispute that Christ died so that we might say to all persons everywhere without exception: “God gave his only begotten Son to die for sin so that if you believe on him you may have eternal life.”
The dispute is whether God intended for the death of Christ to obtain more than these two things: 1) saving benefits after faith, and 2) a bona fide invitation that can be made to any person to believe on Christ for salvation. Specifically, did God intend for the death of Christ to obtain the free gift of faith (Ephesians 2:8) and repentance (2 Timothy 2:25)? Did the blood of Jesus obtain both the benefits after faith, and the benefit of faith itself?
Does the historic Arminian interpretation of any of the “universal” texts on the atonement necessarily contradict this “more” that I am affirming about God’s intention for the death of Christ? (Texts like: 1 Timothy 2:6; 1 John 2:1-2; Hebrews 2:9; 2 Corinthians 5:19; John 1:29; 2 Peter 2:1.)
I don’t think so. Arminians historically are just as eager as Calvinists to avoid saying that these texts teach “universal salvation.” So they do not teach that the death of Christ “for all” saves all. Rather, they say, in the words of Millard Erickson, “God intended the atonement to make salvation possible for all persons. Christ died for all persons, but this atoning death becomes effective only when accepted by the individual.” Erickson then says, “This is the view of all Arminians” (Christian Theology, p. 829, emphasis added). What has come clearer to me as I have pondered these things is that Arminians do not say that in the death of Christ God intends to effectively save all for whom Christ died. They only say that God intends to make possible the salvation of all for whom Christ died. But this interpretation of these “universal” texts does not contradict the Calvinist assertion that God does intend to obtain the grace of faith and repentance for a definite group by the death of Christ.
Arminians may deny this assertion, but they cannot deny it on the basis of their interpretation of the “universal” texts of the atonement. That interpretation simply affirms that all may have salvation if they believe. Calvinists do not dispute that. They only go beyond it.
Here’s the rub: if he did this “more,” he didn’t do it for everyone. So at this level the atonement becomes “limited.” And this is what Arminians stumble over: is there anything that God would do to get some unbelievers saved that he would not do for all? This “limitation” implies a choice on God’s part to save some and not all. This leads to “U,” unconditional election, which we will take up next.
Texts Supporting the Assertion That the Atonement Obtained the Grace of Faith
The Blood of the New Covenant
Luke 22:20
And in the same way He took the cup after they had eaten, saying, “This cup which is poured out for you is the new covenant in My blood.”
Ezekiel 36:26-27
Moreover, I will give you a new heart and put a new spirit within you; and I will remove the heart of stone from your flesh and give you a heart of flesh. I will put My Spirit within you and cause you to walk in My statutes, and you will be careful to observe My ordinances.
The Ingathering of the Children of God
1 John 2:2
He Himself is the propitiation for our sins; and not for ours only, but also for those of the whole world.
John 11:50-52
“It is expedient for you that one man die for the people, and that the whole nation not perish.” Now [Caiaphas] did not say this on his own initiative, but being high priest that year, he prophesied that Jesus was going to die for the nation, and not for the nation only, but in order that He might also gather together into one the children of God who are scattered abroad.
John 10:11
I am the good shepherd; the good shepherd lays down His life for the sheep . . . I am the good shepherd, and I know My own and My own know Me, even as the Father knows Me and I know the Father; and I lay down My life for the sheep.
Revelation 5:9
And they sang a new song, saying, “Worthy are You to take the book and to break its seals; for You were slain, and purchased for God with Your blood men from every tribe and tongue and people and nation.”
By His Wounds You Were Returned to Your Shepherd
1 Peter 2:24-25
He Himself bore our sins in His body on the cross, so that we might die to sin and live to righteousness; for by His wounds you were healed. For you were continually straying like sheep, but now you have returned to the Shepherd and Guardian of your souls.
Texts Showing the Design of the Atonement for God’s Chosen Ones
The Death of Christ for the Elect Is the Ground of Their Assurance
Romans 8:29-33
For those whom He foreknew, He also predestined to become conformed to the image of His Son, so that He would be the firstborn among many brethren; and these whom He predestined, He also called; and these whom He called, He also justified; and these whom He justified, He also glorified. What then shall we say to these things? If God is for us, who is against us? He who did not spare His own Son, but delivered Him over for us all, how will He not also with Him freely give us all things? Who will bring a charge against God’s elect?
He Tasted Death for All the Children God Gave to Him
Hebrews 2:9-18
But we do see [Jesus] who was made for a little while lower than the angels, namely, Jesus, because of the suffering of death crowned with glory and honor, so that by the grace of God He might taste death for everyone (huper pantos). For it was fitting for Him, for whom are all things, and through whom are all things, in bringing many sons to glory, to perfect the author of their salvation through sufferings. For both He who sanctifies and those who are sanctified are all from one Father; for which reason He is not ashamed to call them brethren, saying, “I WILL PROCLAIM YOUR NAME TO MY BRETHREN, IN THE MIDST OF THE CONGREGATION I WILL SING YOUR PRAISE.” And again, “I WILL PUT MY TRUST IN HIM.” And again, “BEHOLD, I AND THE CHILDREN WHOM GOD HAS GIVEN ME.” Therefore, since the children share in flesh and blood, He Himself likewise also partook of the same, that through death He might render powerless him who had the power of death, that is, the devil, and might free those who through fear of death were subject to slavery all their lives. For assuredly He does not give help to angels, but He gives help to the seed of Abraham. Therefore, He had to be made like His brethren in all things, so that He might become a merciful and faithful high priest in things pertaining to God, to make propitiation for the sins of the people (tou laou).
5. Unconditional Election
Definition From the Westminster Confession of Faith (Unconditional Election)
3.5 Those of mankind that are predestinated unto life, God, before the foundation of the world was laid, according to His eternal and immutable purpose, and the secret counsel and good pleasure of His will, hath chosen in Christ unto everlasting glory, out of His mere free grace and love, without any foresight of faith or good works, or perseverance in either of them, or any other thing in the creature, as conditions, or causes moving Him thereunto; and all to the praise of His glorious grace.
3.6 As God hath appointed the elect unto glory, so hath He, by the eternal and most free purpose of His will, foreordained all the means thereunto. Wherefore, they who are elected being fallen in Adam, are redeemed by Christ; are effectually called unto faith in Christ by His Spirit working in due season; are justified, adopted, sanctified, and kept by His power, through faith, unto salvation. Neither are any other redeemed by Christ, effectually called, justified, adopted, sanctified, and saved, but the elect only.
The Classic Arminian Position (Election Based on Foreknowledge)
“[God purposes] to save particular persons and to damn others, which decree rests upon the foreknowledge of God, by which he has known from eternity which persons should believe according to such an administration of the means serving to repentance and faith through his preceding grace and which should persevere through subsequent grace, and also who should not believe and persevere.” (Quoted in Carl Bangs, Arminius: A Study in the Dutch Reformation, 1971, p. 352).
The Contemporary Arminian Emphasis (Election Corporate, Not Individual)
The point is that the election of the church is a corporate rather than an individual thing. It is not that individuals are in the church because they are elect, it is rather that they are elect because they are in the church which is the body of the elect One. (R. T. Forster and V. P. Marston, God’s Strategy in Human History , 1973, p. 136).
…election is a corporate category and not oriented to the choice of individuals for salvation…. [Election has reference to] a class of people rather than specific individuals.” (Clark Pinnock, The Grace of God and the Will of Man: A Case for Arminianism, 1990, p. 20)
Is Election Not Individual Because It Is “in Him”?
Ephesians 1:3-6
Blessed be the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, who has blessed us with every spiritual blessing in the heavenly places in Christ, just as He chose us in Him before the foundation of the world, that we would be holy and blameless before Him. In love He predestined us to adoption as sons through Jesus Christ to Himself, according to the kind intention of His will, to the praise of the glory of His grace, which He freely bestowed on us in the Beloved.
Does “All Things” Include Our Faith?
Ephesians 1:11
In [Christ] also we have been chosen [eklerothemen], having been predestined according to His purpose who works all things after the counsel of His will.
Were We Dead and Unable to Believe So That Life and Faith Had to Be Given to Us?
Ephesians 2:4-9
But God, being rich in mercy, because of His great love with which He loved us, even when we were dead in our transgressions, made us alive together with Christ (by grace you have been saved), and raised us up with Him, and seated us with Him in the heavenly places in Christ Jesus, so that in the ages to come He might show the surpassing riches of His grace in kindness toward us in Christ Jesus. For by grace you have been saved through faith; and that not of yourselves, it is the gift of God; not as a result of works, so that no one may boast.
Is Election Individual and Are We in Christ Because of God?
1 Corinthians 1:26-30
For consider your calling, brethren, that there were not many wise according to the flesh, not many mighty, not many noble; but God has chosen the foolish things of the world to shame the wise, and God has chosen the weak things of the world to shame the things which are strong, and the base things of the world and the despised God has chosen, the things that are not, so that He may nullify the things that are, so that no man may boast before God. But by His doing (eks autou) you are in Christ Jesus, who became to us wisdom from God, and righteousness and sanctification, and redemption.
Is Election Individual?
James 2:5
Listen, my beloved brethren: did not God choose the poor of this world to be rich in faith and heirs of the kingdom which He promised to those who love Him?
Is Election the Effect or the Cause of Obtaining Salvation, That Is, of Foreknown Faith?
Romans 11:1-8
Do you not know what the Scripture says in the passage about Elijah, how he pleads with God against Israel? “Lord, THEY HAVE KILLED YOUR PROPHETS, THEY HAVE TORN DOWN YOUR ALTARS, AND I ALONE AM LEFT, AND THEY ARE SEEKING MY LIFE.” But what is the divine response to him? “I HAVE KEPT for Myself SEVEN THOUSAND MEN WHO HAVE NOT BOWED THE KNEE TO BAAL.” In the same way then, there has also come to be at the present time a remnant according to God’s gracious choice. But if it is by grace, it is no longer on the basis of works, otherwise grace is no longer grace. What then? What Israel is seeking, it has not obtained, but those who were chosen obtained it, and the rest were hardened; just as it is written, “GOD GAVE THEM A SPIRIT OF STUPOR, EYES TO SEE NOT AND EARS TO HEAR NOT, DOWN TO THIS VERY DAY.”
Is Election Based on Foreknown Faith or Does Faith Happen Because of Election?
Acts 13:48
When the Gentiles heard this, they began rejoicing and glorifying the word of the Lord; and as many as had been appointed to eternal life believed.
Do We Belong to God Because We Come to Jesus, or Do We Come to Jesus Because We Belong to God?
John 17:6-9
I have manifested Your name to the men whom You gave Me out of the world; they were Yours and You gave them to Me, and they have kept Your word. . . . I ask on their behalf; I do not ask on behalf of the world, but of those whom You have given Me; for they are Yours.
John 6:37-39
All that the Father gives Me will come to Me, and the one who comes to Me I will certainly not cast out. This is the will of Him who sent Me, that of all that He has given Me I lose nothing, but raise it up on the last day.
Are We Jesus’ Sheep Because We Believe, or Do We Believe Because We Are His Sheep?
John 10:24-27
The Jews then gathered around Him, and were saying to Him, “How long will You keep us in suspense? If You are the Christ, tell us plainly.” Jesus answered them, “I told you, and you do not believe; the works that I do in My Father’s name, these testify of Me. But you do not believe because you are not of My sheep. My sheep hear My voice, and I know them, and they follow Me.”
Is Evangelism Making Sheep or Gathering Sheep?
John 10:16
I have other sheep, which are not of this fold; I must bring them also, and they will hear My voice; and they will become one flock with one shepherd.
Is World Missions Begetting Children of God or Gathering Children of God?
John 11:50-52
[Caiaphas said,] “it is expedient for you that one man die for the people, and that the whole nation not perish.” Now he did not say this on his own initiative, but being high priest that year, he prophesied that Jesus was going to die for the nation, and not for the nation only, but in order that He might also gather together into one the children of God who are scattered abroad.
Acts 18:9-10
And the Lord said to Paul in the night by a vision, “Do not be afraid any longer, but go on speaking and do not be silent; for I am with you, and no man will attack you in order to harm you, for I have many people in this city.”
Did God Choose Us Because He Knows We Will Come, or Do We Come Because He Chose to Give Us the Will to Come?
John 6:44, 65
“No one can come to Me unless the Father who sent Me draws him; and I will raise him up on the last day. . . .” And He was saying, “For this reason I have said to you, that no one can come to Me unless it has been granted him from the Father.”
Acts 16:14
A woman named Lydia, from the city of Thyatira, a seller of purple fabrics, a worshiper of God, was listening; and the Lord opened her heart to respond to the things spoken by Paul.
Is Election Based on Foreknown Faith or Is Faith the Effect of Election?
Romans 8:28-33
And we know that God causes all things to work together for good to those who love God, to those who are called according to His purpose. For those whom He foreknew, He also predestined to become conformed to the image of His Son, so that He would be the firstborn among many brethren; and these whom He predestined, He also called; and these whom He called, He also justified; and these whom He justified, He also glorified. What then shall we say to these things? If God is for us, who is against us? He who did not spare His own Son, but delivered Him over for us all, how will He not also with Him freely give us all things? Who will bring a charge against God’s elect? God is the one who justifies.
Is Election Individual and Unconditional and Dealing with Eternal Destiny?
Romans 9:1-23
I am telling the truth in Christ, I am not lying, my conscience testifies with me in the Holy Spirit, that I have great sorrow and unceasing grief in my heart. For I could wish that I myself were accursed, separated from Christ for the sake of my brethren, my kinsmen according to the flesh, who are Israelites, to whom belongs the adoption as sons, and the glory and the covenants and the giving of the Law and the temple service and the promises, whose are the fathers, and from whom is the Christ according to the flesh, who is over all, God blessed forever. Amen. But it is not as though the word of God has failed. For they are not all Israel who are descended from Israel; nor are they all children because they are Abraham’s descendants, but: “THROUGH ISAAC YOUR DESCENDANTS WILL BE NAMED.” That is, it is not the children of the flesh who are children of God, but the children of the promise are regarded as descendants. For this is the word of promise: “AT THIS TIME I WILL COME, AND SARAH SHALL HAVE A SON.” And not only this, but there was Rebekah also, when she had conceived twins by one man, our father Isaac; for though the twins were not yet born and had not done anything good or bad, so that God’s purpose according to His choice would stand, not because of works but because of Him who calls, it was said to her, “THE OLDER WILL SERVE THE YOUNGER.” Just as it is written, “JACOB I LOVED, BUT ESAU I HATED.” What shall we say then? There is no injustice with God, is there? May it never be! For He says to Moses, “I WILL HAVE MERCY ON WHOM I HAVE MERCY, AND I WILL HAVE COMPASSION ON WHOM I HAVE COMPASSION.” So then it does not depend on the man who wills or the man who runs, but on God who has mercy. For the Scripture says to Pharaoh, “FOR THIS VERY PURPOSE I RAISED YOU UP, TO DEMONSTRATE MY POWER IN YOU, AND THAT MY NAME MIGHT BE PROCLAIMED THROUGHOUT THE WHOLE EARTH.” So then He has mercy on whom He desires, and He hardens whom He desires. You will say to me then, “Why does He still find fault? For who resists His will?” On the contrary, who are you, O man, who answers back to God? The thing molded will not say to the molder, “Why did you make me like this,” will it? Or does not the potter have a right over the clay, to make from the same lump one vessel for honorable use and another for common use? What if God, although willing to demonstrate His wrath and to make His power known, endured with much patience vessels of wrath prepared for destruction? And He did so to make known the riches of His glory upon vessels of mercy, which He prepared beforehand for glory.
Some Texts that May Seem Problematic for Unconditional Election
1 Timothy 2:1-4
First of all, then, I urge that entreaties and prayers, petitions and thanksgivings, be made on behalf of all men, for kings and all who are in authority, so that we may lead a tranquil and quiet life in all godliness and dignity. This is good and acceptable in the sight of God our Savior, who desires all men to be saved and to come to the knowledge of the truth (qe,lei swqh/nai kai. eivj evpi,gnwsin avlhqei,aj evlqei/n).
I. Howard Marshall, who is not a Calvinist and who writes on this text in “Universal Grace and Atonement in the Pastoral Epistles,” The Grace of God, the Will of Man: A Case for Arminianism, (p. 56), concedes that there are two levels of willing implied in this text:
To avoid all misconceptions it should be made clear at the outset that the fact that God wishes or wills that all people should be saved does not necessarily imply that all will respond to the gospel and be saved. We must certainly distinguish between what God would like to see happen and what he actually does will to happen, and both of these things can be spoken of as God’s will. The question at issue is not whether all will be saved but whether God has made provision in Christ for the salvation of all, provided that they believe, and without limiting the potential scope of the death of Christ merely to those whom God knows will believe.
But nowhere in the entire essay does Marshall mention the one text in the Pastoral Epistles that points most clearly to these two wills and what they are, namely, 2 Timothy 2:24-26 and 2 Peter 3:8-10.
2 Timothy 2:24-26
The Lord’s bond-servant must not be quarrelsome, but be kind to all, able to teach, patient when wronged, with gentleness correcting those who are in opposition, if perhaps God may grant them repentance leading to the knowledge of the truth, and they may come to their senses and escape from the snare of the devil, having been held captive by him to do his will.
Marshall poses the question whether any text in the Pastorals would lead us to believe that “faith and repentance are the gifts of God, who gives them only to the previously chosen group of the elect” (p. 66). He concludes that there is not, even though the text that comes closest to saying this very thing is passed over.
2 Peter 3:8-10
But do not let this one fact escape your notice, beloved, that with the Lord one day is like a thousand years, and a thousand years like one day. The Lord is not slow about His promise, as some count slowness, but is patient toward you, not wishing for any to perish but for all to come to repentance. But the day of the Lord will come like a thief, in which the heavens will pass away with a roar and the elements will be destroyed with intense heat, and the earth and its works will be burned up.
Ezekiel 18:23
“Do I have any pleasure in the death of the wicked,” declares the Lord GOD, “rather than that he should turn from his ways and live?”
Lamentations 3:31-33 (An example of God willing in one sense what he does not will in another sense)
For the Lord will not reject forever,
For if He causes grief,
Then He will have compassion,
According to His abundant lovingkindness.
For He does not afflict willingly,
Or grieve the sons of men.
6. The Perseverance Of The Saints
Definition of Perseverance from the Westminster Confession of Faith
17.1 They, whom God hath accepted in His Beloved, effectually called and sanctified by His Spirit, can neither totally nor finally fall away from the state of grace; but shall certainly persevere therein to the end, and be eternally saved.
17.2 This perseverance of the saints depends not upon their own free will, but upon the immutability of the decree of election, flowing from the free and unchangeable love of God the Father; upon the efficacy of the merit and intercession of Jesus Christ; the abiding of the Spirit, and of the seed of God within them; and the nature of the covenant of grace: from all which ariseth also the certainty and infallibility thereof.
17.3 Nevertheless, they may, through the temptations of Satan and of the world, the prevalence of corruption remaining in them, and the neglect of the means of their preservation, fall into grievous sins; and, for a time, continue therein: whereby they incur God’s displeasure, and grieve His Holy Spirit, come to be deprived of some measure of their graces and comforts; have their hearts hardened, and their consciences wounded; hurt and scandalize others, and bring temporal judgments upon themselves.
We Must Persevere in Faith if We Are to Be Finally Saved
1 Corinthians 15:1-2
Now I make known to you, brethren, the gospel which I preached to you, which also you received, in which also you stand, by which also you are saved, if you hold fast the word which I preached to you, unless you believed in vain.
Colossians 1:21-23
And although you were formerly alienated and hostile in mind, engaged in evil deeds, yet He has now reconciled you in His fleshly body through death, in order to present you before Him holy and blameless and beyond reproach – if indeed you continue in the faith firmly established and steadfast, and not moved away from the hope of the gospel that you have heard, which was proclaimed in all creation under heaven, and of which I, Paul, was made a minister.
2 Timothy 2:11-13
It is a trustworthy statement: For if we died with Him, we will also live with Him; If we endure, we will also reign with Him; If we deny Him, He also will deny us; If we are faithless, He remains faithful, for He cannot deny Himself.
Mark 13:13
You will be hated by all because of My name, but the one who endures to the end, he will be saved.
The Obedience or Holiness That Comes from Faith Is Necessary for Final Salvation
Hebrews 12:14
Pursue peace with all men, and the sanctification without which no one will see the Lord.
Romans 8:13
If you are living according to the flesh, you must die; but if by the Spirit you are putting to death the deeds of the body, you will live.
Galatians 5:19-21
Now the deeds of the flesh are evident, which are: immorality, impurity, sensuality, idolatry, sorcery, enmities, strife, jealousy, outbursts of anger, disputes, dissensions, factions, envying, drunkenness, carousing, and things like these, of which I forewarn you, just as I have forewarned you, that those who practice such things will not inherit the kingdom of God.
1 Corinthians 6:9-10
Or do you not know that the unrighteous will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived; neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor effeminate, nor homosexuals, nor thieves, nor the covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor swindlers, will inherit the kingdom of God.
Ephesians 5:3-5
But immorality or any impurity or greed must not even be named among you, as is proper among saints; and there must be no filthiness and silly talk, or coarse jesting, which are not fitting, but rather giving of thanks. For this you know with certainty, that no immoral or impure person or covetous man, who is an idolater, has an inheritance in the kingdom of Christ and God.
1 John 2:3-6
By this we know that we have come to know Him, if we keep His commandments. The one who says, “I have come to know Him,” and does not keep His commandments, is a liar, and the truth is not in him; but whoever keeps His word, in him the love of God has truly been perfected. By this we know that we are in Him: the one who says he abides in Him ought himself to walk in the same manner as He walked.
1 John 3:6-10
No one who abides in Him sins; no one who sins has seen Him or knows Him. Little children, make sure no one deceives you; the one who practices righteousness is righteous, just as He is righteous; the one who practices sin is of the devil; for the devil has sinned from the beginning. The Son of God appeared for this purpose, to destroy the works of the devil. No one who is born of God practices sin, because His seed abides in him; and he cannot sin, because he is born of God. By this the children of God and the children of the devil are obvious: anyone who does not practice righteousness is not of God, nor the one who does not love his brother.
1 John 3:14
We know that we have passed out of death into life, because we love the brethren. He who does not love abides in death.
1 John 4:20
If someone says, “I love God,” and hates his brother, he is a liar; for the one who does not love his brother whom he has seen, cannot love God whom he has not seen.
John 8:31
So Jesus was saying to those Jews who had believed Him, “If you continue in My word, then you are truly disciples of Mine.”
Those Whom God Has Justified Will Be Kept by God for Final Salvation
Romans 8:28-32
And we know that God causes all things to work together for good to those who love God, to those who are called according to His purpose. For those whom He foreknew, He also predestined to become conformed to the image of His Son, so that He would be the firstborn among many brethren; and these whom He predestined, He also called; and these whom He called, He also justified; and these whom He justified, He also glorified. What then shall we say to these things? If God is for us, who is against us? He who did not spare His own Son, but delivered Him over for us all, how will He not also with Him freely give us all things?
John 10:26-30
But you do not believe because you are not of My sheep. My sheep hear My voice, and I know them, and they follow Me; and I give eternal life to them, and they will never perish; and no one will snatch them out of My hand. My Father, who has given them to Me, is greater than all; and no one is able to snatch them out of the Father’s hand. I and the Father are one.
1 Peter 1:3-5
Blessed be the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, who according to His great mercy has caused us to be born again to a living hope through the resurrection of Jesus Christ from the dead, to obtain an inheritance which is imperishable and undefiled and will not fade away, reserved in heaven for you, who are protected by the power of God through faith for a salvation ready to be revealed in the last time.
1 Peter 5:8-10
Be of sober spirit, be on the alert. Your adversary, the devil, prowls around like a roaring lion, seeking someone to devour. But resist him, firm in your faith, knowing that the same experiences of suffering are being accomplished by your brethren who are in the world. After you have suffered for a little while, the God of all grace, who called you to His eternal glory in Christ, will Himself perfect, confirm, strengthen and establish you.
Jude 1:24-25
Now to Him who is able to keep you from stumbling, and to make you stand in the presence of His glory blameless with great joy, to the only God our Savior, through Jesus Christ our Lord, be glory, majesty, dominion and authority, before all time and now and forever. Amen.
1 Thessalonians 5:23-24
Now may the God of peace Himself sanctify you entirely; and may your spirit and soul and body be preserved complete, without blame at the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ. Faithful is He who calls you, and He also will bring it to pass.
1 Corinthians 1:8-9
[Our Lord Jesus Christ] will also confirm you to the end, blameless in the day of our Lord Jesus Christ. God is faithful, through whom you were called into fellowship with His Son, Jesus Christ our Lord.
Ephesians 1:13-14
In Him, you also, after listening to the message of truth, the gospel of your salvation — having also believed, you were sealed in Him with the Holy Spirit of promise, who is given as a pledge of our inheritance, with a view to the redemption of [God's own] possession, to the praise of His glory.
Jeremiah 32:40
I will make an everlasting covenant with them that I will not turn away from them, to do them good; and I will put the fear of Me in their hearts so that they will not turn away from Me.
Philippians 1:6
For I am confident of this very thing, that He who began a good work in you will perfect it until the day of Christ Jesus.
Philippians 2:12-13
So then, my beloved, just as you have always obeyed, not as in my presence only, but now much more in my absence, work out your salvation with fear and trembling; for it is God who is at work in you, both to will and to work for His good pleasure.
Hebrews 13:20-21
Now the God of peace, who brought up from the dead the great Shepherd of the sheep through the blood of the eternal covenant, even Jesus our Lord, equip you in every good thing to do His will, working in us that which is pleasing in His sight, through Jesus Christ, to whom be the glory forever and ever. Amen.
2 Timothy 4:18
The Lord will rescue me from every evil deed, and will bring me safely to His heavenly kingdom; to Him be the glory forever and ever. Amen.
Falling Away from Faith and Holiness Shows that We Never Belonged to Christ
1 John 2:19
They went out from us, but they were not really of us; for if they had been of us, they would have remained with us; but they went out, so that it would be shown that they all are not of us.
1 John 3:6
No one who abides in Him sins; no one who sins has seen Him or knows Him.
Hebrews 3:13
But encourage one another day after day, as long as it is still called “Today,” so that none of you will be hardened by the deceitfulness of sin. For we have become partakers of Christ, if we hold fast the beginning of our assurance firm until the end.
Therefore, Let Us Be Earnest to Make Our Calling and Election Sure
2 Peter 1:10
Therefore
December 22nd, 2012 at 9:53 am
Bruce, I was talking on sanctification. I am way past the TULIP, I might just check out part 9 of the Piper work, but that’s it.
I love calvinists, some of the puritan writings on sanctification are the best. they match Luther’s writings on vocation, and they teach some things that Luther never got to. The puritans are amazing and the evidence of their faith was their holy living. Even the unbeliever was forced to acknowledge what today is called the puritan work ethic.
My concern is that the current generation of calvinists is no match for the puritans. Take Tullian Tchividjian, his book Jesus + Nothing = Everything , what is the problem? There’s no sanctification. Tullian is a young man of God, and I’m hoping he’ll come up with a second book in the future on sanctification. His Ministry is awesome for the evangelicals that don’t know Christ and the gospel of justification by grace alone. His Ministry is awful for christians that have been justified. There’s a three part critique here:
Part 1 http://headhearthand.org/blog/2011/12/12/does-jesus-nothing-everything/
December 22nd, 2012 at 9:56 am
This is part 2 of the critique of Tchividjian’s book and doctrine of sanctification. And this anti-puritan doctrine of sanctification is shared by many reformed and lutherans. Instead of learning from the men that experienced true holiness in their lives we are trying to devise our own doctrines.
http://headhearthand.org/blog/2011/12/13/the-danger-of-making-ourselves-the-norm-for-others/
December 22nd, 2012 at 10:06 am
And here’s the third and last part of the series, where the author criticizes the passivity of the doctrine of sanctification of the modern reformed compared to the puritans.
http://headhearthand.org/blog/2011/12/14/does-jesus-respond-to-our-obedience-with-love/
It is a must that this be read, because Jesus plus Nothing = Everything is the antithesis of puritanism.
Because sanctification is so important, I feel compelled to give an example of a justified christian that is not sanctified, and one that has been both justified and sanctified. There’s a fundamental difference in doctrine and I will provide it with one example that’s going to make an impact that will never be forgotten. I’m not saying the justified christian will not go to heaven, simply because anybody that is justified is also sanctified, yet I will show plain how his thinking differs from the sanctified puritan teaching. This example I will provide later today draws from what a pastor once told me, a discussion between two christians. You will understand what puritan sanctification means after I’m done with it. Later today.
December 22nd, 2012 at 4:25 pm
OK, I am following your lead Bruce. I’m done and gone for Christmas. I changed my mind and won’t bring up anything else. This is my last post.
Always look outside of you, to Christ and his atonement in justification, your vocation in sanctification. Your justification is outside of you in Christ, your sanctification is outside of you in your works. God does not care about your works, your neighbour doesn’t care about your faith.
December 23rd, 2012 at 11:04 pm
Oh, was I right yesterday when I said we look to the cross for justification. But boy, was I wrong when I said you look to vocation for sanctification. You look to the same cross and the same work that took place in Christ 2000 years ago. Your sanctification is just there lying side by side to your justification.
After 5 AM in the morning when when I waked up I looked at the cross for justification, but something differet was there. God showed me all my sins pierced to the cross. I was looking for justification and God instead showed sanctification at the cross.
Suffice it to say it shattered my theology this second work of grace God wrought in me less than 24 hours ago. I used to believe justification comes from the cross and sanctification comes from justification (not being under the law). boy, was I wrong! Don’t get me wrong it is totally true that justification comes from the cross and then immediately afterwards as a result sin loses its power instantly at the moment of justification. And this is our salvation, the the work of grace which I received August 31, 2005 when reading the book of Romans chapters 1 to 5. And yet there is another truth, I would go as far as calling it a second work of grace, where our hearts are illumined with faith and God writes in our hearts that all our sins are piereced with Christ at the cross, and our sanctification flows directly from this faith and not from justification.
How do I express the theology of this sanctifying faith? Where is in the bible this second work of grace? It is in Romans 6 “Knowing this, that our old man is crucified with Him.”.
We can also see it clearly in Romans 7 where Paul is not under the law (he has received the first work of grace) but he is still not delivered, and a second deliverance comes in the last verse of Romans 7 and the first two verses of Romans 8. I don’t find this theology openly stated in any Reformed or Lutheran confession though it is implicit in all of them. John Owen also in Mortification of Sin teaches that a man when he reaches Romans 7 stage, he’s in deep trouble and needs a second injection of outside grace. It’s not that the first work of grace failed, it’s just that the old man grew back to the point that only fresh outside grace can bring him under control. Based on my personal experience this week this fresh grace will most likely come in the form of forgiveness of sins (refreshing in our memories the first work of grace), but with me the Lord went further and a couple of days thereafter he struck me with a different grace. When I was basking in the forgiveness of sins he wrote a new faith in my heart less than 24 hours ago, although I knew intellectually that the old man was dead the fiduciary component was missing, and the Lord delivered it when I was not seeking it.
So to summarize just like the forgiveness of sins has knowledge, assent, and trust and I obtained it when the Lord gave on August 31, 2005 the fiduciatry component that was missing, so sanctifying faith whose object is different from justifying faith as I have explained also has three components. It is a mystery why it took 7 years for God to reveal to me that sanctification though it comes from justification, there is another sanctification that comes directly from the cross, Christ’s death 2000 years ago.
Now I agree with Tullian Tchividgian that sanctification is not performance orented and good works flow of necessity from faith, but Tullian is wrong that tsanctification is solely getting used to justification. Sanctification is actually gettting used to sanctification! I’m not saying we need not preach ourselves the forgiveness of sins daily, but the main thing is we need to preach ourselves daily that all our sins (with the old man) are nailed to the cross.
Wow what a brutal change in my theology wrought by the spirit of God. I feel like Luther when he saw that no theologian before wrote about justification the way the spirit wrought it in him. I can say the same about sanctification today, no books really explain it the way the spirit works it. Most of the doctrine of sanctification is head knowledge, just like most of the doctrined of justification was head knowledge before Luther. But Luther who experienced justification in his heart wrote the doctrine in words. A clear doctrine on sanctification by grace through faith has not yet been penned, justifying faith has been properly identified, the sanctifying faith rooted in Romans 6 has not. There are glimpses in John Owen when he speaks of the need for a second work of grace, the other great puritan Thomas Goodwin taught that a sealing of the spirit after conversion was required. Yet nobody has really elaborated how all this looks like and transpires. I’m no theologian but could write a book on it after going through it. If I was a pastor this doctrine would be taught and preached every Sunday together with the forgiveness of sin. Because it all starts with head knowleddge, but only the Lord can seal it with heart knowledge.
Wow, what a Christmas gift I got! I would have given all my possessions if I could have purchased it, but you can’t purchase the grace of God. He bestows it on whom he wills whenever he wills it.
How do I know this was of the spirit? Well this sanctifying grace (that flows straight out of the cross) has exactly the same characteristics of the justifying and sanctifying grace (rooted in justification) in conversion. Namely the following:
1) Came from God unexpectedly, just like the wind that blows in one direction or the other and we don’t know it
2)Does not depend on my works but on Christ work on the cross
3) It was written in my heart by the spirit the way I look at the corss (the fiduciary component of faith)
4)Depends on God not man, it’s not of works but of faith wrought by the hand of God through his spirit
December 23rd, 2012 at 11:17 pm
The question for theologians is does Romans 7 represent the normal christian life? Some theologians believe it does, John Owen felt differently and said that if a Christian is Romans 7 confessiong his sin as in !st John won’t result in mortification, and a fresh infusion of outside grace was required to take him out of Romans 7. So for John Owen Romans 7 is not the normal christian experience, or let’s say it better it may be the normal christian experience but a second work of grace for salvation of the soul is required.
I’m going to leave this one with God. Paul was a christian in Romans 7 and was delievered. Some teach he was never delievered, I believer he was, and Galatians 5 also shows clearly that right after justification the spirit and the flesh fight against each other. But there is a deliverance in the form of additional grace. Some theologians disagree with John Owen and don’t consider the situation of Romans 7 as critical, and see it as part of the normal christian life. I disagree with these theologians, from reading Romans 7 Paul a christian was despairing unto death and fresh grace was supplied. This is my interpretation of Romans 7 and is consistent with John Owen’s who acknowledged the struggle of Paul as the struggle of a christian man but did not consider it as something normal. And if any christian thought that he was a christian because he was going through Romans 7, John Owen in his book Mortification of Sing, taught that person though he may be a christian better start thinking he may be an unbeliever and needs deliverance like Paul sought deliverance.
And with this I’m closing. Merry Christmas all.
December 24th, 2012 at 12:33 am
It is done. It is finished. Tullian Tchividjian is right, sanctification is gospel based 100%. No law can not sanctify or help attain sanctification, no human performance can achieve sanctification. SAnctification is 100$ gospel, accomplished by Christ 2000 years ago, and written in man’s heart by the holy spirit through faith. But only half of what was done is taught by Tullian in his book, that teaches justtification the forgiveness of sins as accomplished and done but does not preach the the death of the old self as accomplished and done as Romans 6:6 teaches “We know that our old self was crucified with him in order that the body of sin might be brought to nothing, so that we would no longer be enslaved to sin.”
How is it possible to believe that the old self is dead? It is impossible to believe it. Just like a dead unconverted man can not believe that his sins are forgiven and God makes him alive in justification, a jusified man can’t believe that his carnality is dead unless God gives him a secons work of grace. It is impossible for justified man to believe it, he will revert to Romans 7 and see that his old man is alive. But we don’t walk by sight we walk by faith. But faith is a gift from above, and unless God works a second work of grace the faith of Romans 6 can not be attained by the man justified by the faith outlined in Romans 1 to 5. The justified man of Romans 1 to 5 does not understand sanctifiation, and Paul says this clearly when he speaks to justified men in Romans 6:3 and Romans 5:4
“3 Do you not know that all of us who have been baptized into Christ Jesus were baptized into his death? 4 We were buried therefore with him by baptism into death, in order that, just as Christ was raised from the dead by the glory of the Father, we too might walk in newness of life.”
As you can see the justified man of Romans 1 to 5 is instructed in the faith of sanctification in Romans 6. The object of this faith is Jesus Christ death at the cross, and yet it points to the cleansing of the pollution of sin (the crucifixion of the old man) and not to the penalty of sin (justification of Romans 1 to Romans 5). Although only a converted justified man can attain to this sanctification. This is why Paul even in Romans 6 has to remind them of their conversion, that they are dead to the law.
How is this sanctifying faith of Romans 6 attained. No man can attain it, God gives it. I read Romans 6 many time and believed it in my head. But when I woke up yesterday morning I saw a vision from the holy spirit of God of all sins pinned to the cross and this faith was created in my heart. Although the faith was a gift from God where I did nothing, it was preceded by a long struggle with sanctification this week that some of you will notice in my posts before today. It was so painful that I had to flee back to mercy (the forgiveness of sins), and when I was content in the forgiveness of sins this new mercy of sanctification was given unexpectedly. That’s why I go as far as saying sanctification is a second work of grace wrought by the spirit. The holy spirit is given in justification (and there is an immediate break with sin at that point), however based on my experience I now can say there’s a second work of the holy spirit when we are sanctified entirely and by faith accept the crucifixion of all our sins (not the forgiveness of our sins that we already attained in our conversion) and the resulting death of the old man.
December 24th, 2012 at 7:06 am
Found this and found Piper express the same feeling in the tulip series I listened to this morning.
Subject: 3 ways to love – translation Hdi people
Pretty amazing story I found on the Wycliffe website.
By Bob Creson
Translator Lee Bramlett was confident that God had left His mark on the Hdi culture somewhere, but though he searched, he could not find it. Where was the footprint of God in the history or daily life of these Cameroonian people? What clue had He planted to let the Hdi know who He is and how He wants to relate to them?
Then one night in a dream, God prompted Lee to look again at the Hdi word for love. Lee and his wife, Tammi, had learned that verbs in Hdi consistently end in one of three vowels. For almost every verb, they could find forms ending in i, a, and u. But when it came to the word for love, they could only find i and a. Why no u? Lee asked the Hdi translation committee, which included the most influential leaders in the community, “Could you ‘dvi’ your wife?”
“Yes,” they said. That would mean that the wife had been loved but the love was gone.
“Could you ‘dva’ your wife?” Lee asked.
“Yes,” they said. That kind of love depended on the wife’s actions. She would be loved as long as she remained faithful and cared for her husband well.
“Could you ‘dvu’ your wife?” Lee asked. Everyone laughed.
“Of course not!” they said. “If you said that, you would have to keep loving your wife no matter what she did, even if she never got you water, never made you meals. Even if she committed adultery, you would be compelled to just keep on loving her. No, we would never say ‘dvu.’ It just doesn’t exist.” Lee sat quietly for a while, thinking about John 3:16, and then he asked,
“Could God ‘dvu’ people?”
There was complete silence for three or four minutes; then tears started to trickle down the weathered faces of these elderly men. Finally they responded.
“Do you know what this would mean?” they asked. “This would mean that God kept loving us over and over, millennia after millennia, while all that time we rejected His great love. He is compelled to love us, even though we have sinned more than any people.”
One simple vowel, and the meaning was changed from “I love you based on what you do and who you are,” to “I love you based on who I am. I love you because of Me and not because of you.” God had encoded the story of His unconditional love right into their language. For centuries, the little word was there—unused but available, grammatically correct and quite understandable. When the word was finally spoken, it called into question their entire belief system. If God was like that, and not a mean and scary spirit, did they need the spirits of the ancestors to intercede for them? Did they need sorcery to relate to the spirits? Many decided the answer was no, and the number of Christ-followers quickly grew from a few hundred to several thousand.
The New Testament in Hdi is ready to be printed now, and twenty-nine thousand speakers will soon be able to feel the impact of passages like Ephesians 5:25, “Husbands, ‘dvu’ your wives, just as Christ ‘dvu’-d the church.…” I invite you to pray for them as they absorb and seek to model the amazing, unconditional love they have received. As God’s Word is translated around the world, people are gaining access to this great love story about how God ‘dvu’-d us enough to sacrifice his unique Son for us, so that our relationship with Him can be ordered and oriented correctly. The cross changes everything! Someday, the last word of the last bit of Scripture for the last community will be done, and everyone will be able to understand the story of God’s unconditional love.
December 24th, 2012 at 8:48 am
And before anybody thinks this is what John Wesley taught with his second work of grace, I think I was super clear yesterday that our sanctification is not works based. Does not depend on our behaviour, the old man is dead regardless of our imperfect obedience. Sanctification is found 100% in Christ’s work and zero percent in our works. It is done, it is finished. You can’t lose lose your sanctification, just like you can’t lose your justification, because Christ secured it. Because it does not depend on you or what you do. With that said the fruit of sanctifying faith is good works, just like the frui of justifying faith is good works. Both justifying and sanctifying faith break the power of sin. Sanctification is simply an achievement of Christ that takes place at the cross, but it is apprehended by faith. You can have full assurance of your sanctification, just like your justification. Both are gospel, and not works based, but the evidence that you have believed the gospel (of justification and sanctification alike) is a clean heart and conscience towards God and good works that follow. Good works are the fruit though, and are excluded from the doctrine of justification and sanctification, both are attained by faith alone. We are sanctified the same way we are justified, by faith alone excluding works, sanctifying faith is separate from justifying faith in that it looks at different aspect of the atonement. Justifying faith is rooted in objective justification and sanctifying faith in objective sanctification, because the work of Christ includes two components our justification (paying the penalty for sin) and our sanctification (destroying the power of sin), so we are commanded to believe both. But only the holy ghost can give the gift of faith since man is incapable of believing by his own efforts, his mind needs to be enlightened by the holy ghost and faith imbued.
Other than Karl Barth who taught that your works don’t contribute anything to your sanctification, Christ didn’t leave sanctification up to you, he completed it himself. I am not aware other theologians having taught this doctrine. I am sure they did but it hasn’t been emphasized. Though Barth himself does not identify sanctification with the death of Christ at the cross as I did, he actually sees it more in the exaltation, his resurrection and victory. However it is clear from Romans 6 that the death of sin, the crucifixion of the old man took place at the cross. When Christ at the cross said it is finished, both justification and sanctification were accomplished.
December 24th, 2012 at 9:13 am
But Barth never mentions a second work of grace though. As I said yesterday no theologian has outlined sanctification in a way similar to what I have explained it occurs.
Even the Reformed and Lutheran confessions although both teach implicitly a second work of grace, the one that brings the christian back to final perseverance and salvation after backsliding, none of them elaborate too much on what this looks like. They don’t even mention a second work of grace!
And Wesley, well he looks for sanctification inside manm in his heart and not outside man, on the cross, in Christ. So he didn’t teach it either. Not to mention Wesley doesn’t even think Romans 7 describes a christian.
December 24th, 2012 at 9:29 am
Wesely correctly teaches that sanctification results in a clean and pure heart. Faith (justifying and sanctifying) cleans the heart. However he doesn’t emphasize that sanctification results straight from the cross, although he mentions it is by grace through faith, his emphasis is on the sinless perfection inside man more than on the crucifixion of the flesh (our sins) in the atonement as Romans 6 teaches. His focus is more on the human response faith than on Christ’s finished work that is the object of the faith. Wesley does not focus on the gospel of sanctification, it is done, it is finished.
December 24th, 2012 at 9:31 am
Also sinless perfection can only be found in Christ, not by introspection inside us, by checking ourselves how sinless we are. We won’t find sinless perfection there.
December 26th, 2012 at 8:40 pm
Bruce, I don’t know if you realized but I have basically admitted that you were right that I was being legalistic and mixing works with grace.
Our obedience (which is already accomplished by Christ) has nothing to do with salvation. Zero, it acts nothing to it and our disobedience subtracts nothing from it.
I also was misled by comparing our heavenly with our earthly farthers, and the commands of each. It is true that we can obey the commands of th our earthly fathers. However no man can obey the commands of our heavenly father, but Jesus the God Man who has already obeyed them. So paternal obedience to our earthly fathers can not be compared to paternal obedience to our heavenly father which is already fulfilled in Jesus. So MacArthur is wrong when he teaches we owe God a paternal obedience, we owe him an obedience that Christ has already rendered.
Anyhow I got caught in the trap of thinking justification is finished, but sanctification is a lifelong process, and our salvation includes both. Nope, we are saved by grace through faith, we are not just justified by grace through faith at the moment we believe and now we go through sanctification in our lives. We are saved by grace through faith, period, full salvation. Jesus (his works, his obedience, his righteousness, his blood shed for the forgivenss of sins) plus nothing equals everything. So the guy that criticized Tullian Tchividjian and I pur a link to the three parts of the article he wrote, although he is reformed and was very respecful (never called him an antinomian as others have) erred. In that he mixed works with gospel, by making good works part of sanctification.
In Christ we have full salvation (both justification and sanctification). Good works flow from it. But we are not called to be fruit inspectors and look at our works. 1 Corinthians chapter 4 verses 3 to 5 the apostle shows us the way himself when he clearly says he doesn’t judge himslef neither does he care about the judgment of others but the judgment of God alone. The focus of the apostle is on the cross of Christ alone:
1 Corinthians chapter 3
“3 But with me it is a very small thing that I should be judged by you or by any human court. In fact, I do not even judge myself. 4 For I am not aware of anything against myself, but I am not thereby acquitted. It is the Lord who judges me. 5 Therefore do not pronounce judgment before the time, before the Lord comes, who will bring to light the things now hidden in darkness and will disclose the purposes of the heart. Then each one will receive his commendation from God.”
December 26th, 2012 at 8:48 pm
Now, you see how Paul is so different from Romans 7. In 1 Corinthians chapter 3 Paul has full assurance of his sanctifiation, he’s not aware of anything against himself. This is the testimony of a Saint that is fully justified and sanctified (unlike Romans 7 whish is a Saint that has not experienced full sanctification and is looking inside himself), we see Paul with confidence affirm his clean conscience, not aware of anything against himself, this is the Paul of Romans 6 and Romans 8 that has apprehended sanctification is in Christ, and it excludes our works and obedience altogether.
December 26th, 2012 at 9:50 pm
1 Corinthians chapter 4 I meant
December 27th, 2012 at 3:17 am
Bill
You appear to be at the same point of understand salvation that I was at several years back. I too, continued to want to interject myself into the equation. I was sure that I had to do something IE cooperate or work for something to gain or hold onto salvation. If this were true then salvation
( all aspects of it) was not all of God. After all I get credit for something, right? WRONG!
It’s all of God, every aspect of it, and what I find the Bible telling me is my actions and activities, after God saves me, is just the proof of Gods actions on my heart and in my life.
We still deal with sin in our lives and the conciquences of it. God uses those conciquences to train us up, not as punishment.
You see a more correct view of salvation gives us a more correct view of God . In other words the greater our view of God , the greater our appreciation of salvation.
I know you said you studied TULIP, but I urge you to go through Pipers seminar series and show me where his exegetical work is mistaken. As I go through it again my self I am amazed again at the Holyness of God and the depth of His love, and His ” bigness”
And I ask again, why me? Why did He save me?
December 27th, 2012 at 9:20 am
Bruce, I don’t know if I need to study TULIP any longer. The whole argument between you and I started whether regeneration precedes faith or not. I do now see that regeneration precedes faith. Bruce, I think you said it perfectly way back then when we were arguing about this. Faith is evidence of regeneration, saving faith is evidence that we’ve been quickened. God regenerates and faith is the evidence of regeneration, of the work of the holy spirit in the elect.
December 27th, 2012 at 9:54 am
Also more important than faith that saves us is the faithfulness of God. The fulfilling of his promise to Abraham in Christ. Christ’s passive and active obedience, his fulfillment of a legal requirements. Not just being punished for our sins, but also having obeyed every command of the New Testament for christians, including the mortification of the deeds of the body the chief article of sanctification (according to John Owen) which Paul commands Christians to do but Christ fulfilled already in that our our flesh has been crucified with him Galatians 5:24, Romans 6:6. And we’ve also been raised with Christ Colossians 3:1 and we’ve also died with Christ at the cross Colossians 3:3 and Romans 6. At the cross also christians have put off the old man with his deeds. In Colossians 3:8 Paul commands chrsitians to put off the old man and in Colossians 3:9 Paul gives the gospel that the they have already put off the old man when they died with Christ. This is pure gospel, in that our sanctification has been accomplished, nothing is left to accomplish. Paul is clear when he answers the command “put off the old man” with gospel “it’s already done, you’ve already put off the old man when you were crucified at the cross with christ”.
So we are saved by Christ’s faithfulness (which I explained in the first paragraph as Crhist’s work on the cross), not by faith. Faith in the elect is evidence of a salvation already accomplished at the cross. Faith is also evidence, the result and evidence of election, it’s evidence of God’s work of regeneration in the believver which precedes faith. Faith in summary is a gift of the spirit to the elect like love and hope, as Paul correctly teaches in his letter to the Corinthians. Faith is not something we do but something we receive. God commands believe the gospel, but God fulfills the command himself by giving faith since it is impossible for man to believe the gospel on his own.
December 27th, 2012 at 10:41 am
Wow! I can’t believe how futile is human reasoning without the spirit (I’m talking about my reasoning by the way). It took me two full months to be able to answer your question in your opening post, Bruce. Not only that, but it took a second work of grace in me for the spirit to come up with the answer. So I was incapable of answering the question myself. You question Bruce on the opening post and I quote it was:
Bruce: “So which is it, what God has done or what I must do ?”
The answer is simple, it is what God has done. God commands you to repent and believe, but you are incapable of doing it. So God regenerates you and gives you repentance and faith. What you must do, you can not do, even though God commands it. So God fulfills the commandment himself and secures your salvation on his own.
The same in sanctification, it has nothing to do with our obedience. God commands obedience everywhere to christians in the new testament, but Christ has already fulfilled this obedience, so the work of salvation both justification and sanctification has been accomplished in Chrit, it includes zero obedience from us. Though we are commanded to obey, Christ has alrady fullfilled the command. Christ did not only take the punishment for our sins, he has obeyed everything we are commanded to obey. All law is fulfilled, this was Christ purpose when he came into the world to fulfill the law for the benefit of the elect.
December 27th, 2012 at 10:55 am
God commands repent and believe. Man can’t do it. God regenerates and fulfills himself in tbe believer the command of repent and believe by granting repentance and faith.
December 27th, 2012 at 11:42 am
Also we always need to look at the giver not the gift. It is Christ that saves and his gifts are evidence of that salvation. Faith, love, and hope don’t save per se, it is the giver of the gifts that is the saviour, Christ is our saviour through the holy spirit. Faith, love, and hope are evidence or the result of God’s salvation and election of grace. The three, faith, love and hope are gifts freely given by the holy spirit to the elect only. Sola fide (faith alone) needs to be understood in the context of sola gratia (grace alone(.
December 27th, 2012 at 7:47 pm
Bill my thought was to have you listen to how John explains each point and offers a simple concise explaination for the verses that go along with it. It may help you tie thing together in the way he did for me, so many years ago.
December 27th, 2012 at 9:48 pm
Bruce, thanks for the suggestion.
I have totally lost trust though in most of the Reformers. In that they defined sanctification as infused grace. Sanctification is as much God’s work outside the believer as justification is. Faith, love, and hope is what are the gifts of the spirit, infused grace in the believer. They are evidence of our justification and sanctification that took place at the cross 2000 years ago. Both justification and sanctification though have been accomplished in Christ and by Christ alone by his obedience, death, and resurrection. No human action, no infused grace, no human work adds one bit to our justification or sanctification which are finished. The gospel is to believe that everything God commands God accomplished in Christ by his own death, life, and resurrection. We can only attain to full assurance of salvation when we apprehend this by faith. Both the lutheran and reformed teachings of unfused grace, although better than John Wesley’s, fail to recognize that sanctification just like justification is by faith alone on account of Christ alone. There is nothing left to do but believe it is done by Jessus at the cross. Not one bit of our justification or sanctification takes place inside the believer’s heart. A change in the believer’s heart evidenced in faith, love, and hope is evidence of an accomplished salvation and new birth. However salvation lies solely in Jesus Christ, Sola Christus (Christ Alone) is the chief sola and the second most important one is sola deo gloria. Christ alone for the glory of God alone these are the two chief solas. Sola graia, sola fide, and sola scriptura follow in order of importance. The 5 solas are essential for theology, however salvation is to be found in Christ alone and his objective accomplishent of both justification and sanctification through his life, death, and resurrection. All our salvation is there, outside of us. Neither justification nor sanctification can be found inside the believer. Karl Barth was correct that justification, sanctification, and calling are in Christ, while faith love and hope are evidence in the believer (the gifts of the spirit) that he has been saved or effectually called.
I wrote a comment on sanctification being outside Christ in response to Mike Horton’s view on sanctification. At that time though I know knew this sanctification from an intellectual standpointt, I lacked sanctifying faith, which is the full assurance that sanctification is a complete in Christ Jesus and human works are specifically excluded fom the article of sanctification, in no less manner than they are in the article of justification.
In my next post I will provide the link where I wrote that earlier this year in reply to Mike Horton.
December 27th, 2012 at 9:56 pm
This is what I wrote back in March 2012 in reply to Mike Horton’s writing on sanctification. At that time what I wrote was just theology, it was not written in my heart by faith as it is today. It didn’t mean a lot to me, and it was just basic knowledge but not wrought in me by the holy spirit http://www.whitehorseinn.org/blog/2012/03/23/sanctified-by-grace/
Bill
March 24th, 2012 at 11:10 pm
When speaking about sanctification ( believe that it’s worthwhile mentioning Karl Barth. He had an extensive doctrine on sanctification which he developed in volume 4 of his Church Dogmatics.
For Barth sanctification was in Christ just as much as justification. There was only one man that was holy in all history, Jesus Christ. We are sanctified in Christ, God clothes us with Christ’s holiness, and we are holy because Christ is holy and not because of any good works of ours. For Barth searching for sanctification within us, is a futile attempt, since God accepts nothing but perfection, all believers will find that they are sinners if they examine themselves honestly against God’s standard of holiness. And yet believers are Saints, Paul calls them saints,they are already saints, it’s finished, it’s accomplished, because God clothes believers with Christ’s holiness. Believers are saints, only because Christ is A Saint, not because of any good works that they perform. Barth uses John 17:19 to back up his theology “And for their sakes I sanctify myself, that they also might be sanctified through the truth.” So the moment a believer trusts Christ for salvation he receives both justification and sanctification. So both sanctification and justification from this perspective are passive, in the sense recevies both by grace through faith, and that the believer rests in Christ. And this was the main meaning of sanctification for Barth, a de jure or objective sanctification that happens outside the believer. Now Barth did not stop there and went further, by saying that the believer appropriates this objective sanctification for himself (becomes subjective) by faith alone (when he believes and witnesses to the objective sanctification in Christ). And Barth recognized that a Christian is forever changed when he trusts in Christ, he was not antinomian in the sense that he believed that the gospel produces fruit in a believer’s life.
Barth’s definition of sanctification may not be perfect, yet it does solve the problem of how do I get full assurance of my sanctification. For Barth to be sanctified meant to be perfect, since God only accepts perfection, and the only Saint was Christ. So by looking at Christ’s life of holiness and perfect obedience to the Father, instead of our own good works, we can get full assurance of our sanctification.
Now somebody might object and say that Barth’s difinition of sanctification is no different from justification. This is not the case. Barth associated justification with the death of Christ on the cross, and sanctification with his resurrection (exaltation). But both justification and sanctification occurred objectively 2000 years ago and are entirely appropriated by the believer by grace through faith, and the good works of a christian contribute nothing to either justification or sanctification. Since the good works of the saints are like filthy rags in the sight of the Lord they can not contribute to our sanctification or justification.
I believe Karl Barth provided a great view on sanctification from the Reformed tradition, even though it may not be as orthodox as some would like.
December 27th, 2012 at 11:01 pm
Let me see if I can summarize in a couple of sentences how sanctification works.
In justification, God declares us to be righteous, in sanctification God declares us to be holy. Both justification and sanctification are declarations of God on account of Christ outside the believer. Both our righteousness and our holiness are in Christ and are apprehended by faith. This is justification and sanctification by faith alone.
Good works follow and are the result of justifiation and sanctification by faith, but should not be included in the articles of jusrification or sanctification.
This is an imperfect summary in words but all I intend is a clear message that our justification and sanctification are accomplished outside of us. Both justification and sanctification are gospel, good news, an announcement to be proclaimed that we are both righteous (justified) and holy (sanctified) in Christ. Good works always follow justification and sanctifiation, they flow from regeneration and justifying and sanctifying faith. However good works are the fruit of the gospel and not the gospel, the gospel is the good news that we are justied and sanctified by Christ;s work on the cross and nothing remains for us to do. Salvation is finished in Christ and we can not add anything to it. Living a godly life is getting used to justification (that we are righteous in Christ) and sanctification (we are are holy in Christ, the old man has been put off, the flesh has been crucified, we are dead to sin).
December 27th, 2012 at 11:15 pm
Inside of believer there is no righteousness and there is no holiness. Both are found in Christ at the cross. We need not only believe and preach that God will not impute our sin and declare us (justification by faith), but we also need to be believe that our old man has been crucified and we are dead to sin with Christ(sanctification by faith). Both are gospel and good news.
If somebody wants to say both the declaration of righteusness and the declaration of holiness belong in the article of justification I’m fine with that too. Romans 8 mentions whom he justifies he glorifies, there’s no mention of sanctification there so it is combined with justification.
December 28th, 2012 at 7:44 am
I too agree that sanctification is a God given gift. Which is another reason I do not participate in all that Calvin or Luther espouse. There are others like Keach and the early framers of the baptist movement that point out exegetical hard spots in Calvinist and Luthern theology, especially in the area of infant baptisism, with its inherent problems of assurance and faith.
December 28th, 2012 at 8:16 pm
Agree Bruce, and you were right that it goes way beyond the forgiveness of sins when we are clothed in christ’s righteousness. This is because we are clothed with Christ’s holiness, not just his righteousness. So from this perspective you are right, God does not see our sin. Let me explain this.
Sanctification happened at the cross. And a wonderful exchange took place at the cross. Like justification, sanctification is by imputation. And this the reformers failed to see completely. The big exchange that happened at the cross is that Christ took our old man who died with Christ at the cross and he gave us his holiness. So we exchanged our sinful nature for Christ’s holiness. It is wrong to teach that Christ only took our sins, Christ took our full sinful nature and was crucified with him. And he gave us his holiness. We are clothed in Christ’s holiness. We are holy because he is holy. When this is believed by faith there is a complete destruction of the power of sin. The power of sin in man is weakened in justification, but the second blow to the power of sin is when we believe that we are holy.
What do you think the devil thinks if we tell him we are Romans 7 christians? He has a field day with us. Sorry to say it but it is true. Justification although it weakens the power of sin it still leaves the christian with a Romans 7 normal christian life. The final deliverance from sin happens when we believe by faith that our carnal nature has been destroyed and that Christ has given us his holiness. The devil flees the holiness of Christ, he tried to tempt him three times when he was in the desert and failed miseerably, he won’t try it again. Romans 6:6 and Galatians 5:24 teaches the crucifixion of the flesh needs to be believed as an article of faith. Until this happens christians will be dealing with indwelling sin in a Romans 7 situation. The christian needs to be delivered from Romans 7 and this can only happen through faith. This faith is a gift of God and needs to be sealed by the spirit, the same way our salvation is when we receive the remission of sins, we now need to receive the death of our sinful nature by faith. Only then can we clothe ourselves with Christ’s holiness and walk in newness of life as Romans 6 teaches. I’m not saying those that believe in the forgiveness of sins don’t walk in newness of life, what I’m saying is that Christ work on the cross went way beyond forgiveness and destroyed the power of sin and our flesh was crucified, this article of faith needs to be believed in a addition to the forgiveness of sins. Only then we can have full assurance of our sanctification.
From this perspective Bruce, I agree that God doesn’t see our sin, because we are clothed with Christ’s holiness, we are holy because he is holy. All God sees in us is Christ’s perfection, at the same time this is all we should see as well. We need to believe we are perfect in Christ. This does not mean that if we look at ourselves outside Christ we won’t see sin, of course we will, and we should confess it. But God sees us only in Christ and so should we, though we need to be aware that this perfection is in Christ. His holiness is ours.
This is the doctrine of sanctification by faith. The Reformets got justification right, but their theology of sanctification is way off because they based it on inherent or infused righteousness instead of imputation of holiness. First Corinthians 1:30 teaches clearly that Christ is made unto us wisdom, and righteousness, and sanctification, and redemption. He’s all those things. Sanctification is in Christ not inside the believer.
Everything that is inside the believer is imperfect and God does not reward. Beside they are gifts of God, so the believer can’t boast about faith, love, or hope since they were all given by God and in themselves they have no merit. Neither faith, nor love, nor hope which are the highest gifts of the spirit merit salvation. Christ alone merited our salvation, our justification and sanctification. Faith is the instrument by which we apprehend this salvation, but this salbation is in Christ. Christ only is just and the justifier of those who believe, it is the giver Jesus Christ our Lord, and not the gifts of faith, love, and hope tha save. The gifts are evidence of salvation but they don’t add anything to our salvation which is in Christ.
December 28th, 2012 at 8:33 pm
See what the apostle teaches in Romans 13:14, “Put on the Lord Jesus Christ and make no provision for the flesh”. This scripture Augustine at the garden believed in his heart and was changed forever. He left his mistresses and all his sins behind him, the power of sin was destroyed in Augustine. Where’s the forgiveness of sins in Augustine’s conversion? Nowhere to be found. And yet Augustine by faith believed that he was clothed with the holiness of Christ, and indwelling sin and the devil left him. Augustine did believe in the forgiveness of sins, however it wasn’t nearly as important as it was to the reformers. No man can put on the Lord Jesus Christ, except it be faith, unless he believes that the command was already fulfilled in Christ at the cross where the old man died at the cross and the elect put on the resurrected Lord 3 days after his death. This is why we need to believe by faith we have put on the Lord Jesus Christ already, the command of God to all believers of putting on the Lord Jesus Christ is already done at the cross, but the christian needs to believe it by faith. And only then we can make no provision for the flesh, unless we put on the Lord Jesus Christ by faith (and believe it already happened at Calvary) the struggle with the flesh of Romans 7 will continue.
Faith goes way beyond thee forgiveness of sins. Not just our justification was accomplished at Calvary, our sanctification was accomplished there as well.
From this perspective Bruce I agree that God doesn’t just forgive our sins, it goes way beyond that. And unless the Lord reveals this to us and seals it by faith we are going to be missing much in our christian walk.
Romans 7 will happen in the christian life, but it is not the normal christian life. Faith alone and the imputation of Christ’s holiness in sanctification is the only way of deliverance.
December 28th, 2012 at 8:50 pm
Augustine mistake though was the same as Calvin, he thought God rewards the good works the believer performs from God’s grace. God rewards his own grace, so man can’t boast.
This teaching of inherent righteousness in sanctification needs to be rejected. God does not reward gifts that he already gave. God does not care about our performance, any good works we do are due to His grace anyways. Anything good we do are His gifts, and we don’t get any credit, so that there is no boasting. The only performance God accepts and the only works God accepts are his Son’s. God is perfect and only accepts perfection, Jesus Christ is the only righeous and holy, and him only God, and his works only God accepts and rewards. It is the imputation of everything Christ has done, and of Christ’s nature, of his holiness, that saves man. It is Christ alone, nothing in man contrubutes to his salvation, except the white robes he’s dressed with, the Lord Jesus Christ. Salvation is to put on the Lord Jesus Christ and nothing else. Be clothed perfectly in Him, and all the elect already are clothed with him, and their names are written in the Book of Life.
Uur sanctification is all of God just like our sanctifiation, and imperfect human works do not add one iota to our sanctification, heither are part of the article of biblical sanctification. God didn’t leave anything to man, he did it all. In Luke 18:27 Jesus taught this about salvation “What is impossible with men is possible with God.” Salvation, including sanctification, is 100% of God and 0$ of man.
December 28th, 2012 at 9:18 pm
What about our assurance of salvation? It is also 100% of God. Our assurance of salvation has nothing to do with our faith or good works, though they are evidence of salvation, we ought not to look at the gifts inside ourselves where corruption still lies and we only have the firstfruits,
but to the giver, the almighty holy God. And there’s two way of doing this:
1) Our assurance comes from Jesus Christ, life, death on the cross, and resurrection.
2) the witness of the holy spirit Romans 8:16
From God alone comes tha sssurance of salvation., not from his gifts of faith, love, and hope inside us, not from the works we perform by his grace. The assurance of salvation should not be sought in us but in God, in the work of Chirst at the cross and in the witness of ths epirit.
December 28th, 2012 at 9:26 pm
You shall know the truth and the truth shall make you freel, the apostle John quoted Jesus. Paul constantly prayed that the Saints would increase in the knowledge of Jesus Christ and his work. When knowledge is wrought in the heart by the holy spirit it is faith, so by increasing our faith is the only way to sanctification and holiness.
The first reformation was about justification by grace through faith, the second reformation or let’s call it revival of the first reformation build on justification by grace through faith but should add sanctification by grace through faith to it. This way everything is of god both our justification and sanctification, 100% of God, 0% of man.
December 28th, 2012 at 9:54 pm
Bruce, sounds like John Piper may teach that sanctification is by imputation, the imputation of Christ’s holiness. I just saw this website. I haven’t read the book, but here there’s a guy criticizing Piper for teaching the imputation of a real moral righteousness. Apparently Piper taught this in a book where he had a dispute with N T Wright. http://www.opensourcetheology.net/node/1863 Since you’ve been discipled by Piper, maybe that’s where you were taught that not only Christ forgives our sins but it goes way beyond that he actually clothes us with his moral perfection, his holiness, he literally gives it to us at the cross when we handed over to him the old man for crucifixion. The imputation of christ’s moral perfection which when apprehended by faith, produces a complete moral transformation in man, something the Reformers were clueless about and John Piper seems to have received this gift from God. I need to check Piper more, it might be the man to learn from. I can not say anything nor recommend him because I’m not very familar with him but from the link I just showed you sounds like this is where you learned about Christ and that he goes beyond the forgiveness of sins in the atonement.
Regardless the good news of the gospel is not about the forgiveness, it goes way beyond that. If we only teach the good news of the forgiveness of sins this is mainly what we’ll get, though I totally agree there is a moral transformation in man after he has been justified and the weight of the law hanging over his shoulders removed. Paul teaches is and I also attest to it from experence. With that said there is way more good news beside the forgiveness of sins and we should not content ourselves with the forgiveness of sins, Romans 6 is pure gospel good news of what Christ accomplished at the cross and we need to believe this good news, actually the fulfillment of every command of God for christians was achieved at the cross, we have to preach and believe the good news that our old man died at the cross and we put on the Lord Jesus Christ on Calvary.
December 28th, 2012 at 10:54 pm
That is why Christ said for those,in Him,our yoke is easy and our burden light, Christ gave us His right-ness, His Holy ness, His Justification, His sanctification. It’s like someone else aceing the class and we get the credits applied to our diploma. Come graduation we see what we have gained at some one else’s expense and we worship that person because of it. This is the only way it can be all of God.
Yes we do get crowns for what we do, but it was God that gave us the ability and desire( again by Gods work in us) to do those good works. This is why we cast those crowns before Him in worship. It was Him enabling us with those desires, just like He did when He saved us, desires that came with the new heart. This is why I believe regeneration comes first. And the proof of regeneration, is shown by what we desire to do IE, to bring glory to God.
So it is because of our regeneration that we have faith and belief. It is our desires and actions that shows our faith is genuine. ( no desire for good works=a dead faith or no real faith) It is our faith that encourages us onward into good works, because we realize it is by these good works that we can relay to others that we believe in God, in the hopes that they will ” come to have faith also”. We preach to all so that those who’s heart has been regenerated will recognize their faith, and act accordingly.
Are their importers out there absolutely. But God knows the heart. Which takes another burden off us,
That being, having to convince some one they need salvation. We are given the privilege to participate in the salvation of others, only through preaching the good news of the gospel. His sheep will hear His call and come follow Him garenteed . Non will be lost or stolen, non will miss the call, none will turn away because His calling is sure.
December 29th, 2012 at 5:44 pm
Bruce, well at least we have agreed. I think all our salvation is outside us at the cross and all gifts flow directly from Christ. This is the only place I focus. I do believe it’s dangerous to look at what we do or any type of inherent rightelusness, we are called to focus on Christ, whatever is in us and that we do is only the firstfruits and very imperfect. We are unprofitable servants, everything is in Christ, he alone is our saviour. Any doctrines of rewards for our good works is opening the door to the devil. I believe salvation was finished when Christ said it is finished and anything we do will not affect our status in heaven. Look at Lazarus, Luke 16:21 a guy whose wounds were being licked ty the dogs and he was eating what fell off the rich man’s table. Yet he’s in heaven, where are his works? A man that couldn’t support himself and had no family that would look after him. All of Christ’s works are his imputed to him, and so is Christ’s righteousness. As I said sanctification is entirely by imputation, and Christ’s works alone matter in sanctification, same as justification. In everything we are partakers with him. We partake in Christ, we are called to the cross where all salvation is. We do get the firstfruits of this salvation in our earthly life, the gifts of the spirit, our imperfect obedience etc. But this together with our eternal life was purchased by Christ on the cross. God redeemed us with his blood. Nothing in us contributes, adds, or detracts from Christ finished work, be it our faith or imperfect obedience. Faith, love,and hope are gifts of the spirit. But we do not get rewards for them. Actually they already are our earthly rewards. We don’t get rewards on top of rewards as Augustine and Calvin taught. We don’t get grace for what we received by grace. Every grace flows directly from Christ, we don’t get grace for grace. God does not reward the good works we do, those good works are already his reward.
1 Corinthians 4:7
7 For who makes you different from anyone else? What do you have that you did not receive? And if you did receive it, why do you boast as though you did not?
We will receive more gifts in the resurrection and eternal life is the gift, but this gift as well as all other gifts flows directly from Christ and not from a previous gift.
December 29th, 2012 at 5:57 pm
This might be the only area of disagreement. The new heart we receive or anything we do by grace are already gifts. So should not expect anything in return from what we do or from anything inside us. Everything God gives is on account of Christ’s work on the cross that is outside us.
Anyways I don’t want to argue this one, we can agree to disagree. At least we agreed on everything else in the end.
As Luther taught all that we do even through God’s grace is a mortal sin in the Heidelberg disputations, all the works of the saints are mortal sins if it wasn’t for the fact that God forgives the sin. God’s grace is perfect, yet like a genius musician that has to play with a broken guitar, the music won’t be good. And so is with God he works through us but because our mortal bodies are corrupt the best works that we do through God’s grace are corrupt as well. This is what Luther taught in the Heidelberg disputations. This is why the best works of the saints are like filthy rags and unfit to earn any reward in heaven if it weren’t for the fact that our sins are forgiven. So it is the forgiveness of sin in Christ Jesus that earns all the rewards for us, our works even the best works done through God’s grace don’t earn anything.
December 29th, 2012 at 11:31 pm
Bill I believe in grace upon grace, and the example I used was casting crowns at Jesus feet.
It is by grace alone that God saved us, and by grace alone we are justified, and sanctified, and it is by Gods grace that we are given the Crowns, because He gave us the ability and desire to be righteous, Holy, be a Martyr. It isn’t as though we chose to do or be these, they too are gifts from God, and will be used to Glorify Christ. A simple way to understand it is when our fathers gave us money to put in the collection plate. We didn’t earn it it was in a sense a gift from him to us and then us to Gods work.
December 30th, 2012 at 11:05 am
Bruce, I disagree. Mainly because the works of a christian, are works of thanksgiving to God, or the obedience of faith. God will give nothing to us for our works, no reward whatsoever, because he gave us the most precious reward Jesus Christ. This is our reward, Jesus, and it is the only reward and it was given freely.
Luke 17:9 and 17:10 are clear that God won’t even thank us for our works, least of all give any reward for them.
Luke 17
9 Doth he thank that servant because he did the things that were commanded him? I trow not.
10 So likewise ye, when ye shall have done all those things which are commanded you, say, We are unprofitable servants: we have done that which was our duty to do.
December 30th, 2012 at 11:11 am
Christian works is the christian saying thanks and obeying God, because of what God has already done. And we do this in our vocations. But as I said there is no reward for them. These are works of thankfulness from us to God, it is our reeasonable service, but God has already paid us and rewarded in Christ. Our works earn nothing, it is what we do for God (or better to our neighbour in our vocation for the glory of God). We love because he loved us first, but he doesn’t reward our love, his loved in Christ came first and it’s finished at the cross when he died for sinners, what a christian does is the response to God’s unmerited love but it doesn’t earn further love or reward from God.
December 30th, 2012 at 11:25 am
You see we are Christ’s slaves, slaves to righteousness as Romans 6 teaches. We got purchased by his blood and became slaves to Christ. We belong to him. This is the only reason we obey, to make our master look good and to serve him, not to earn rewards we already have. Luke 17:9 and 17:10 clearly teaches we are unprofitable servants, our master will not even thank us for the work we do.
What Christ did is he redeemed us from slavery to sin, so now we are free to sin, but slaves to Christ as Romans 6 teaches. Every man is a slave either to sin unto death or to Christ unto righteousness and salvation and eternal life as Romans 6 teaches.
December 30th, 2012 at 11:45 am
Bill dont you read before you post? No place and at no time did i say we earned these crowns, they are given to us as a gift to place at the feet of Christ as worship. God the Father gives them to us for worshiping His Son. We know where they came from, we know we didn’t earn them, they are given to us and we are privileged to use them in worship. Where do you get the crazy idea that we can earn anything from God?
December 30th, 2012 at 6:39 pm
OK, sorry Bruce maybe I don’t listen well to what you say sometimes or simply don’t get it. Sorry.
I think I know what you mean, when you say we lay down those crowns to him. Martin Luther in Two Kinds of Righteousness wrote that in the righteousness of faith that justifies God tells us “I am yours” and in the righteousness of works we tell God “I am yours”. Still when we do good works it’s our way of thanking God while acknowledging they are his works:
Luther http://www.mcm.edu/~eppleyd/luther.html
Therefore through the first righteousness arises the voice of the bridegroom who says to the soul, “I am yours,” but through the second comes the voice of the bride who answers, “I am yours.”
December 30th, 2012 at 6:46 pm
Interesting though everything I wrote about imputed sanctification, in that Luther link I provided is included under justification. So maybe it is not necessary to teach that sanctification is by imputations, howerver justification goes way beyond the forgiveness of sins. As Luther teaches in justification we get everything that is Christ’s. And Luther defines our righteousness of sanctification as coming entirely from the first alien righteousness. I am totally fine with this, as long as justification is defined to include all benefits from Christ and not just the forgiveness of sins, but our sanctification also. And Luther agrees there in that he defines the alien righteousness of justification by referring to 1 Corinthians 1:30 and include the alien righteousness of sanctification. Looking at it from this way, sanctification is not by imputation, howerver the alien righteousness of sanctification as Luther defines is included (among many other benefits, everything that is in Christ is ours) in justification.
December 30th, 2012 at 6:50 pm
Justification then is alien righteousness and sanctification the inherent (albeit imperfect) righteousnes that flows from the alien righteousness of justification.
This is the classic lutheran definition and I am perfectly fine with it. Bear in mind though that for Luther justification includes everything that belongs to Christ, it is a perfect alien righteousness that far exceeds the forgiveness of sins.
December 30th, 2012 at 11:00 pm
It’s very interesting also how Luther correctly teaches that justification increases, in addition to our justification at conversion we increase in justification as our christian life progresses. Im not saying everybody gets a definitive second work of grace where his justification is increased as I did before Christmas and testified to it here, but it is an increas in faith or increase in alien / imputed righteousness (the righteousness of faith) what determines the growth of the christian. Is not just getting used to justification, but it goes further God increases our justification (or justifying faith). Since infused righteousness or sanctification according to Luther flows from justification, only an increase in justification can result in an increase in infused righteousness. And this is what happened to you Bruce when you realized that everything was from God a few years back, and your christian life / walk got better. Here’s Luther writing on the increase in justification in the believer.
Luther http://www.mcm.edu/~eppleyd/luther.html
[5] Therefore this alien righteousness, instilled in us without our works by grace alone—while the Father, to be sure, inwardly draws us to Christ—is set opposite original sin, likewise alien, which we acquire without our works by birth alone. Christ daily drives out the old Adam more and more in accordance with the extent to which faith and knowledge of Christ grow. For alien righteousness is not instilled all at once, but it begins, makes progress, and is finally perfected at the end through death.
December 30th, 2012 at 11:10 pm
It is unbelievable how far we’ve drifted from Luther that we teach that sanctification is progressive but justification is instantaneous. When Luther correctly taught that only an increase in justification (justifying faith, knowled of the alien or imputed righteousness of christ) is the only way we can get an increase in infused righteousnes and good works, that are grounded in justification.
December 31st, 2012 at 9:45 am
Of course because the christian lives in the world and still has the flesh to contend with, everything that helps motivate and restrain the unbeliever applies to the flesh in the christian. As such all natural laws that God in his providence uses to sustain the world, a christian needs to avail himself from. In this sense he has a lot of common with the unbeliever and can learn from him. What motivates and restrains the flesh, rewards for hard work and punishments for being lazy, it all appplies to the christian as well in that he only has the first fruits but still needs to fully put to death the deeds of the body and discipline the body. This is Luther’s two kingdom doctrine, as far as the kingdom of God is concern it is through faith, but as far as our relationship with the world (government and work) God rules it by law and the christian needs to submit to all laws of government and society (work and professional standards) and be a good citizen for the glory of God.
As a matter of fact I venture to say this is one of the strongest motivators for good works, however it’s not the business of the church but of secular institutions to teach about civil righteousness. Christians should be involved with unbelievers in secular instittutions both profit and not for profit. The church although it should preach about civil righteousness, it’s only to remind the christian that there are important resources for good works in the unbelieving world and christians should not neglect them, since they are essential to restrain the works of the flesh. However the church should base its Ministry on the preaching of the gospel and administration of the sacraments and only refer or remind christians of the value of such secular institutions as schools, universities, businesses etc. Because the christian still lives in the world he needs to be reminded that he needs to be a model citizen of the world.
December 31st, 2012 at 9:53 am
When it comes to be a hard working individual, a good family member, a volunteer, the unbeliever can teach the christian a lot. Some of the most motivated athletes and successful businessmen are unbelievers, and the christian can learn from them. The ony caveat here is that the christian needs to be careful that although he ought to submit to society’s laws and rules, if this laws and rules exceed the realm of the secular and demand obedience contrary to the 10 commandements the Christian needs to follow the 10 commandments and ignore the authority of worldy leaders. Examples would be, a christian is not required to support oppressive governments like the Nazi one in Germany nor for example leadership of a business that has lack of integrity and does not fully comply with all laws. Neither is a christian bound to recognize a church and support its leadership, where the preaching of word and sacrament is not visible.
January 8th, 2013 at 5:49 am
Bill here is one of the last sermons my friend Dan preached before he died of cancer.
http://5pointscc.org/resources/media-library/entry/the_grace_of_a_frowning_providence.
I urge you to listen as he explains the difference between the grace of discipline, and it resulting sanctification, and punishment for sin. There is a big difference and he explains it well.