Posted on 05/30/2004 11:53:03 AM PDT by RnMomof7
God's Part and Man's Part in Salvation
John G. Reisinger
God and man must both do something before a man can be saved. Hyper-Calvinism denies the necessity of human action, and Arminianism denies the true nature of the Divine action. The Bible clearly sets forth both the divine and human essential in God's plan of salvation. This is not to say, as Arminianism does, "God's part is to freely provide salvation for all men, and man's part is to become willing to accept it." This is not what we said above, nor is it what the Bible teaches. In order to understand what God's Word really says, and to try to answer some straw dummy objections, we will establish the subject one point at a time.
ONE: A man must repent and believe the gospel in order to be saved. No one was ever forgiven and made a child of God who did not willingly turn from sin to Christ. Nowhere does the Bible even hint that men can be saved without repentance and faith, but to the contrary, the Word always states these things are essential before a person can be saved. The one and only Bible answer to the question, "What must I do to be saved?" is, "Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ and thou shalt be saved."
TWO: Every one who repents and believes the gospel will be saved. Every soul, without any exception, who answers the gospel command to come to Christ will be received and forgiven by the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ. Philip Bliss put the truth to music when he said, "Who-so-ever will, forever must endure..." If we can be absolutely certain about anything, we can be sure that Christ will never void His promise to receive "all who come to Him." As old John Bunyan said, "Come and welcome" is the Savior's eternal word to all sinners.
THREE: Repentance and faith are the free acts of men. Men, with their own mind, heart, and will must renounce sin and receive Christ. God never repented and believed for anyone - and He never will. Turning from sin and reaching out in faith to Christ are the acts of man, and every man who so responds to the gospel call does so because he honestly desires to do so. He wants to be forgiven and he can only be forgiven by repenting and believing. No one, including God, can turn from sin for us, we must do it. No one can trust Christ in our place, but we must personally, knowingly, and willingly trust Him in order to be saved.
Now someone may be thinking, "But isn't that what the Arminian teaches?" My friend, that is what the Bible teaches–and teaches it clearly and dogmatically. "But don't Calvinists deny all three of those points?" I am not talking about or trying to defend Calvinists since they come in a hundred varieties. If you know anyone that denies the above facts, then that person, regardless of what he labels himself, is denying the clear message of the Bible. I can only speak for myself, and I will not deny what God's Word so plainly teaches!
"But haven't you established the doctrine of free-will and disposed of election if you assent man must repent and believe and it is his own act?" No, we have neither proven free-will nor disproved election since it is impossible to do either. We have merely stated exactly what the Bible says a man must do in order to be saved. Let us now look at what the Scripture says a sinner is able to do and what he is not able to do.
FOUR: The same Bible that states man must repent and believe in order to be saved also emphatically states that man, because of his sinful nature, is totally unable to repent and believe. All of man's three faculties of mind, heart, and will, which must be receptive to gospel truth, have neither the ability to receive such truth nor even the desire to have such ability. In fact the exact opposite is true. Man's total being is not only unable to either come, or want to come, to Christ, but every part of his nature is actively opposed to Christ and truth. Rejecting Jesus Christ as Lord and Savior is not a passive non-action, but a deliberate volitional choice. It is deliberately choosing to say "No" to Christ and "Yes" to self and sin. No one is neutral in respect to God and His authority. Unbelief is just as much a deliberate act of mind, heart, and will as is faith. This is what Jesus meant in John 5:40 when He said, "You will (you are deliberately making a choice) not to come to me." Yes, unbelief is an act of the will. In fact unbelief is active faith, but unfortunately it is faith in myself.
To believe and preach points one, two, and three, without also preaching number four is to grossly misrepresent the gospel of God's grace. It is to give a totally false picture of the sinner and his true need. It shows only half of the man's sin. It misses the most crucial point of a lost man's need, namely, his lack of power or ability to overcome his sinful nature and its effects. The gospel which is concocted out of this view is only a half gospel. It is at this point that modern evangelism so miserably fails. It confuses man's responsibility with his ability, and falsely assumes that a sinner has the moral ability to perform all that God has commanded. The cannot texts of scripture are either totally ignored or badly twisted by this perversion of the true gospel of God's saving grace.
Please note a few texts of Scripture that dogmatically state some things that a lost man cannot do:
Man cannot see - until he first be born again. John 3:3.
Man cannot understand - until he first be given a new nature. I Cor. 2:14.
Man cannot come - until he first be effectually called by the Holy Spirit. John 6:44,45.
We do not have space to go into all the cannots, but these three are sufficient to show that a sinner absolutely cannot (notice it is not will not) come to Christ until God first does something in that sinner's nature. That something is what the Bible calls regeneration, or the new birth, and it is the exclusive work of God the Holy Spirit. Man has no part whatever in regeneration.
FIVE: The new birth, or regeneration, is God giving us the spiritual life that enables us to do what we must do (repent and believe), but CANNOT DO because of our bondage to sin. When the Bible says man is dead in sin, it means that man's mind, heart, and will are all spiritually dead in sin. When the Bible speaks of our being in bondage to sin, it means that our entire being, including our will, is under the bondage and power of sin.
We indeed need Christ to die and pay the penalty of our sin, but we just as desperately need the Holy Spirit to give us a new nature in regeneration. The Son of God frees us legally from the penalty of sin, but only the Holy Spirit can free us from the power and death of our depravity in sin. We need forgiveness in order to be saved, and Christ provides complete forgiveness and righteousness for us in His death. However, we also need spiritual life and ability, and the Holy Spirit provides it for us in regeneration. It is the Holy Spirit's work of regeneration that enables us to savingly receive the atoning work of Christ in true faith.
God is a triune God, and no person can understand "so great salvation" until he sees each blessed Person of the Godhead playing a distinct and necessary part in that salvation. No man can declare the "glorious gospel of grace" and leave out the Father's sovereign electing love and the Holy Spirit's regenerating power as essential parts of God's work in saving sinners. To speak of God's part in salvation as only being one of providing forgiveness and man's part as being willing to accept it is to ignore both the Father's work of election and the Spirit's work of regeneration. This not only makes man a full partner with God in the work of salvation, it credits man with playing the decisive roll in the deal.
How dreadful, and ridiculous, to give Christ the glory for His work on the cross, and then give sinners the credit for the Father's work in eternity (election) and the Spirit's work in our hearts (regeneration). It does great dishonor to the Sovereign Spirit to say, "The Holy Spirit will perform His miraculous work of quickening you unto life as soon as you give Him your permission." That's like standing in a graveyard saying to the dead people, "I will give you life and raise you up from the grave if you will only take the first step of faith and ask me to do it." What a denial of the sinner's total spiritual inability. Amazing!
The root error of the Arminian's gospel of freewill is its failure to see that man's part, repentance and faith, are the fruits and effects of God's work and not the essential ingredient's supplied by the sinner as man's part of the deal. Every man who turns to Christ does so willingly, but that willingness is a direct result of the Father's election and the Holy Spirit's effectual calling. To say, "If you will believe, God will answer your faith with the New Birth," is to misunderstand man's true need and misrepresent God's essential work.
SIX: The Scriptures clearly show that faith and repentance are the evidences and not the cause of regeneration. Suppose a man who had been dead for twenty years greeted you on the street one day. Would you conclude that the man had gotten tired of being dead and decided to ask a great doctor to perform a miracle and give him life? I'm sure you would, instead, exclaim in amazement, "Man, what happened to you? Who brought you back to life?" You would see he was alive because he was walking and breathing, but you would know these were evidences of a miracle having been performed on him from without and not the results of his own power or will. Just so when a spiritually dead man begins to perform spiritual acts such as repentance and faith; these spiritual fruits show that the miracle of the new birth has taken place.
Let me illustrate this with a biblical example. Acts 16:14 is a clear proof of the above. By the way, as far as I know, this is the only place in the New Testament that uses the phrase opened heart, and the Bible gives the whole credit for this opening to God's power and not to man's will. Modern evangelism does the exact opposite and credits the opening of the heart to the power of man's free will. Remember that we are not discussing whether man must be willing to open his heart. We settled that under points One, Two, and Three. We are now looking for the source of power that enabled man to perform that spiritual act. Arminianism insists that man's free will must furnish the willingness or power, and the Bible says that the Holy Spirit of God furnishes that power or ability in the new birth.
Let us examine the one text in Scripture that uses the phrase "opened heart" and see if it agrees with our previous points:
And a certain woman named Lydia, a seller of purple, of the city of Thyatira, which worshipped God, heard us: whose heart the Lord opened, that she attended unto the things which were spoken of Paul. (Acts 16:14)
The NIV says:
The Lord opened her heart to respond to Paul's message.
First of all we note that Lydia did indeed attend or listen to the words of Paul. She gladly heard and willingly believed his message. As we have already shown, she had to do this in order to benefit from the gospel and be saved. Lydia's attending, or hearing and believing, illustrates points One, Two, and Three above, and refutes Hyper-Calvinism (which says the elect will be saved regardless of whether they hear and believe the gospel or not). Lydia did indeed choose to believe, and she did it only because she wholeheartedly wanted to. She did not do it unwillingly nor did God hear and believe for her. It was her own response and it was a most willing response.
Next, we notice exactly what God did. We see here demonstrated what God must do before Lydia can be saved. (l) He provided a salvation of "by grace through faith" that could be preached. Obviously the things spoken by Paul were the gospel facts concerning the death, burial, and resurrection of our Lord Jesus Christ, and surely this Lamb is God's gracious provision. (2) God also brought the message of His provision to Lydia. He sent a preacher to tell her about this great plan of salvation. God went to a lot of trouble to provide such a gospel - He gave His only begotten Son. He went to great ends to provide such a preacher as Paul - read about it in Paul's testimony in Act 22.
It is at this point that Arminianism departs from the Bible and proceeds to apply human logic to the above truths. They tragically fail to look at the rest of the biblical text and see that God must do something else. (3) God must open Lydia's heart (or give her spiritual life) so she will be able to believe. Her natural mind is blind, her natural heart is averse to God, and her will is in bondage to sin and spiritual death. Only the power of God can free her from this graveyard of spiritual depravity. The giving of this life and power is solely the work of God. Notice that the Bible explicitly gives God alone the credit for Lydia's heart being opened. If you do not see that in this text then you simply cannot read:
....whose heart the LORD OPENED...
Notice also how clearly the Holy Spirit teaches us the relationship between the cause and the effect in the conversion of Lydia. God was the One Who opened Lydia's heart, that is the cause, and He did so in order that she might be able to attend to the truths that Paul preached, that is the effect. Now that is what the Word of God says! Do not bluster about dead theology or throw Calvin's name around in derision, just read the words themselves in the Bible. If you try to deny that the one single reason that Lydia understood and believed the gospel was because God deliberately opened her heart and enabled her to believe, you are fighting God's Word. If you try to get man's free will as the one determining factor into this text, you are consciously corrupting the Word of God.
God's grace not only provides salvation, but His power also gives us the ability to both desire and receive it. He works in us both to will and to do. His working in us to will is the new birth, and, I say again, this work of regeneration is totally the work of the Holy Spirit.
The moment we lose sight of this distinction between being saved by faith (the act of man) and being born again by the Holy Spirit (the act of God), we are heading for confusion and trouble. We will be convinced that man is able to do what the Bible emphatically states he is unable to do. The necessity of the Holy Spirit's work being thus theologically denied, it will not be long before it is ignored in actual practice. This is the plight of modern day evangelism. Since they are convinced that the new birth is within the power and ability of man's will, their man made methodology has become far more important than the theology of the Bible. Organization and advertising become the absolute essentials to success while the necessary work of the Holy Ghost is all but forgotten. It is true that lip service is given to the need to "Pray for the Holy Spirit's guidance," and cards asking people to promise to pray every day are always sent out months in advance of the big campaign. However, some people are not sure if the promise to pray or the other pledge (to give money) which is always included (only your gifts can make this great campaign possible) is the most important to the success of the campaign.
But that's another subject for another day.
Game, set and match to you, RnMom.
I tried to skim through your Belgic, Heidelberg and Westminstre catechism links...I couldn't find anything about God foreordaining sin.
Would you be so kind as to provide specific quotations from those catechisms that prove that Calvinism believes all sins are pre-destines and foreordained?
I'm new to this whole topic, and I'm not interested in bashing or thrashing here. I'm just interesting in understanding.
I believe some sins were definitely predestined: Adam & Eve, Judas, Christ's crucifixion, etc. Those have eternal consequences for all mankind, and they helped further God's plan. But are ALL sins foreordained?
Did God foreordain September 11? Did He foreordain Hitler's Holocaust of 6 million Jews?
Then you'd better stick around. 8~)
I think you meant "obsessive-compulsive."
Do Freewill Baptist Churches teach that God offers salvation and man makes a conscious decision to accept God's offer?
Do Freewill Baptist Churches teach that God is knocking and man must open the door and invite God into his life?
Do Freewill Baptist Churches teach that faith is the cause of our salvation, not the fruit of our salvation?
These are the distinctions upon which the Reformation was fought. Arminians back-tracked to Rome by denying that salvation is entirely the work of God and insisting that man cooperates in his own salvation, thereby mitigating God's mercy. It's not mercy if God owes salvation to a man because he's "earned" it.
None of us can earn it. It's a gift.
Unfortunately, your response did not address the fact that the passages cited by the writer of the article did/do NOT say what he claimed that they said.
Can a dead man desire to see the Kingdom of God? With what eyes will he see it?
Isa 44:18 They have not known nor understood: for he hath shut their eyes, that they cannot see; their hearts, that they cannot understand.
Your statement, coupled with your first citation, may serve as an illustration of my point. The above verse is speaking to Israel. Specifically, it is speaking to those within Israel who made and worshipped IDOLS.
There is no indication that this verse was meant to describe "all of mankind, except those who were predestined..." As in the original three verses, the verse does not actually SAY what is claimed of it.
Mat 13:13 Therefore speak I to them in parables: because they seeing see not; and hearing they hear not, neither do they understand.
Again, this verse is specifically about (some of) Israel. His audience were Judeans (Jews), not the Gentiles.
Jhn 9:39 And Jesus said, For judgment I am come into this world, that they which see not might see; and that they which see might be made blind.
Here, there are two sets of people: " they which see not," and " they which see." Who are these " they which see" folks, anyway? And why will they "be made blind?" Do you imagine that these are people who are called, elected, predestined, to come to Yeshua? If so, How (and why) then are they to "be made blind?" What does this say about "perseverance of the saints?"
Eph 2:1 And you [hath he quickened], who were dead in trespasses and sins;
Eph 2:5 Even when we were dead in sins, hath quickened us together with Christ, (by grace ye are saved;)
Eph 5:14 Wherefore he saith, Awake thou that sleepest, and arise from the dead, and Christ shall give thee light.
We needed to be quickened. We were dead in our sin.
OK.
We could not desire what we could not see.
Consider this verse (there are more, if you need them):
Romans 8
24 For in hope we have been saved, but hope that is seen is
not hope; for who hopes for what he already sees?
God had to act on us first . Arise from the Dead...THEN Christ will give us light.
Paul is writing to people who are already Christians. This thought is repeated, here:
Romans 13
11 Do this, knowing the time, that it is already the hour for you
to awaken from sleep; for now salvation is nearer to us than
when we believed.
1 Thessalonians 5
6 so then let us not sleep as others do, but let us be alert
and sober.
The word Quicken is synonyms with being born.
It is more like "enliven," or "make alive."
No what he is saying that as natural men they could not receive the Gospel.
Again, that is NOT what the verse actually says. It is making the verse "fit" your theology.
He did nothing...He did not a stirring salvation sermon or sing 3 verses of Just as I am . He claimed not one wit of credit in the entire process. He said it was all entirely the work of the Holy Spirit . 100%
I do not argue against this idea, but it is NOT in the verse.
Verse 5)
1Cr 2:5 That your faith should not stand in the wisdom of men, but in the power of God.
The fact is the message is one Paul teaches over and over. Being Born again, Repenting and believing are all the work of the Holy Spirit.
Again, I am not arguing the point, merely that this is NOT what the verse actually says. Paul is clearly referring to "the power of signs and wonders, in the POWER of the Holy Spirit."
Romans 15
18 For I will not presume to speak of anything except what
Christ has accomplished through me, resulting in the obedience of the
Gentiles by word and deed,
19 in the power of signs and wonders, in the power of the
Spirit; so that from Jerusalem and round about as far as
Illyricum I have fully preached the gospel of Christ.
1 Corinthians 4:
20 For the kingdom of God does not consist in words but in power.
Unfortunately, the denial of this power is characteristic of many "Christians" of our time:
2 Timothy 3
1But mark this: There will be terrible times in the last days. 2People
will be lovers of themselves, lovers of money, boastful, proud, abusive,
disobedient to their parents, ungrateful, unholy, 3without love,
unforgiving, slanderous, without self-control, brutal, not lovers of the
good, 4treacherous, rash, conceited, lovers of pleasure rather than
lovers of God-- 5having a form of godliness but denying its power.
Have nothing to do with them.
Does a dead man have the Holy Spirit to understand spiritual things? Or would man need to have the Holy Spirit FIRST to understand spiritual things? Can a Dead man without the help of the Holy Spirit understand the gospel (a spiritual thing?) What does Paul say?
These are inappropriate questions. First, they do not address the fact that the verses cited in the article do not actually say what is claimed. Second, it presumes that the "work of the Holy Spirit," in leading the sinner to Christ, is the SAME as the "indwelling of," or "baptism of (or in, or into)," the Holy Spirit. Or, for that matter, being "born again."
It does not say EVERYONE IN THE ENTIRE WOLD will be taught of God. It says those drawn by the Father will come and those taught by the Father..they are both the same group ..
Perhaps my deeply ingrained prejudices color my understanding of these verses. You might consider other possibilities, too.
READ it as a letter and you will see that the everyone refers to the elect..those the father drew ..The Father draws the elect, He teaches the elect, He gives the elect to Jesus to save, Jesus saves them and loses none
That is what is being taught.
I understand that this is how you see it. You need to realize that, whether your belief is true or not, the verses do not so state. This is the problem, as I see it: we cannot, we MUST not, develop a theology which requires that we "fix," or "explain away," or re-state, many ordinary Bible passages.
Think about this OK ? The dead can not hear. It has to be given to them to hear . Those that have it given to them ( be born again ) will have ears to hear.
This illustrates another difficulty: you seem to presume that the work of the Holy Spirit in "convict[ing] the world concerning sin, and righteousness, and judgement;" [see John 6:8] is one and the same work, as "be[ing] born again."
There it is in a nutshell . It was give them to hear.
That is NOT what the verses say. It may very well have been "given them to hear," but these verses do not so state.
We agree that he who believes has eternal life. The question is who can believe? One that can hear the word of God, one that has ears to hear , one that is born again of the spirit and not the flesh.
I do not know why you keep mistaking "hearing" with being "born again." Is not the parable of the sower very clear, in saying that some (I think many) will be able to "hear," but later, "fall away."
Matthew 13:
20 "The one on whom seed was sown on the rocky places, this is the
man who hears the word and immediately receives it with joy;
21 yet he has no firm root in himself, but is only temporary, and
when affliction or persecution arises because of the word, immediately
he falls away.
22 "And the one on whom seed was sown among the thorns, this is
the man who hears the word, and the worry of the world and the
deceitfulness of wealth choke the word, and it becomes
unfruitful.
If you believe, as I do, that this parable sets forth actual reality, you must surely see that a person can "hear the word," and "immediately receive it with joy," and later "fall away." If, (as I understand your theology) one who "hears" must necessarily have already been "born again;" and (if I understand your theology) one who is "born again" will never fall away (perseverance of the saints), how then can these people who "hear" possibly "fall away?"
Please consider the above question to be a rhetorical question. It is intended to provoke meditation on these verses, no posted answer is required.
DG
Or else there is something more powerful than God whose will supersedes the will of God.
Did God ordain that Judas would betray the Son of God?
ONE: A man must repent and believe the gospel in order to be saved.
TWO: Every one who repents and believes the gospel will be saved.
THREE: Repentance and faith are the free acts of men.
Yes, I’m in disagreement. This is the Semi-Pelagius view that is prevalent in the churches today. It is in error. Consider the verse we just had at church today:
Titus 3:5-7 He saved us, not on the basis of deeds which we have done in righteousness, but according to His mercy, by the washing of regeneration and renewing by the Holy Spirit, whom He poured out upon us richly through Jesus Christ our Savior, so that being justified by His grace we would be made heirs according to the hope of eternal life.
If repentance ISN'T an act of righteousness what is it? How do you square up the author's three points against Paul's letter to Titus?
There is NOTHING we can do. It is ONLY because of God’s mercy.
***What do you have to say about the authors statement that there are a "hundren variations" of Calvinism? At least he is attempting to be intellectually honest.***
If YOU agree with him, how about listing ten different variants of Calvinism for us.
(BTW: I'm only asking for a tenth of them and I am not asking you to define love or justice as attributes of God which I know gives you the vapors.)
I mean, really, what do my alleged "obcessive"-compulsive behaviors have to do with whether or not Edwin Palmer is a Hyper-Calvinist and whether or not you have any proof that he is???
You can start by showing an accepted definition of Hyper-Calvinism to be the belief that God foreordains all things that come to pass.
So far, you have shown nothing close to this.
Jean
Belgic Confession:
Article 13:
The Doctrine of God's Providence We believe that this good God, after he created all things, did not abandon them to chance or fortune but leads and governs them according to his holy will, in such a way that ~nothing~ happens in this world without his orderly arrangement.
Yet God is not the author of, nor can he be charged with, the sin that occurs. For his power and goodness are so great and incomprehensible that he arranges and does his work very well and justly even when the devils and wicked men act unjustly.
We do not wish to inquire with undue curiosity into what he does that surpasses human understanding and is beyond our ability to comprehend. But in all humility and reverence we adore the just judgments of God, which are hidden from us, being content to be Christ's disciples, so as to learn only what he shows us in his Word, without going beyond those limits.
This doctrine gives us unspeakable comfort since it teaches us that nothing can happen to us by chance but only by the arrangement of our gracious heavenly Father. He watches over us with fatherly care, keeping all creatures under his control, so that not one of the hairs on our heads (for they are all numbered) nor even a little bird can fall to the ground20 without the will of our Father.
In this thought we rest, knowing that he holds in check the devils and all our enemies, who cannot hurt us without his permission and will.
For that reason we reject the damnable error of the Epicureans, who say that God involves himself in nothing and leaves everything to chance.
Heidelberg Catechism:
Lord's Day 10 Question 27: What dost thou mean by the providence of God?
Answer: The almighty and everywhere present power of God; (a) whereby, as it were by his hand, he upholds and governs (b) heaven, earth, and all creatures; so that herbs and grass, rain and drought, (c) fruitful and barren years, meat and drink, health and sickness, (d) riches and poverty, (e) yea, and ~all things~ come, not by chance, but be his fatherly hand. (f)
Westminster Confession:
Chapter 3 I. God, from all eternity, did, by the most wise and holy counsel of his own will, freely, and unchangeably ordain whatsoever comes to pass:[65] yet so, as thereby neither is God the author of sin,[66] nor is violence offered to the will of the creatures; nor is the liberty or contingency of second causes taken away, but rather established.[67]
II. Although God knows whatsoever may or can come to pass upon all supposed conditions,[68] yet hath he not decreed anything because he foresaw it as future, or as that which would come to pass upon such conditions.[69]
And, for good measure, I'll throw in a couple of quotations from John Calvin himself that professes the same belief:
Book III, Chapter 23, Section 7 7. They deny that it is ever said in distinct terms, God decreed that Adam should perish by his revolt. As if the same God, who is declared in Scripture to do whatsoever he pleases, could have made the noblest of his creatures without any special purpose. They say that, in accordance with free-will, he was to be the architect of his own fortune, that God had decreed nothing but to treat him according to his desert. If this frigid fiction is received, where will be the omnipotence of God, by which, according to his secret counsel on which every thing depends, he rules over all? But whether they will allow it or not, predestination is manifest in Adam's posterity. It was not owing to nature that they all lost salvation by the fault of one parent. Why should they refuse to admit with regard to one man that which against their will they admit with regard to the whole human race? Why should they in caviling lose their labour? Scripture proclaims that all were, in the person of one, made liable to eternal death. As this cannot be ascribed to nature, it is plain that it is owing to the wonderful counsel of God. It is very absurd in these worthy defenders of the justice of God to strain at a gnat and swallow a camel. I again ask how it is that the fall of Adam involves so many nations with their infant children in eternal death without remedy unless that it so seemed meet to God? Here the most loquacious tongues must be dumb. The decree, I admit, is, dreadful; and yet it is impossible to deny that God foreknow what the end of man was to be before he made him, and foreknew, because he had so ordained by his decree. Should any one here inveigh against the prescience of God, he does it rashly and unadvisedly. For why, pray, should it be made a charge against the heavenly Judge, that he was not ignorant of what was to happen? Thus, if there is any just or plausible complaint, it must be directed against predestination. Nor ought it to seem absurd when I say, that God not only foresaw the fall of the first man, and in him the ruin of his posterity; but also at his own pleasure arranged it. For as it belongs to his wisdom to foreknow all future events, so it belongs to his power to rule and govern them by his hand. This question, like others, is skillfully explained by Augustine: "Let us confess with the greatest benefit, what we believe with the greatest truth, that the God and Lord of all things who made all things very good, both foreknow that evil was to arise out of good, and knew that it belonged to his most omnipotent goodness to bring good out of evil, rather than not permit evil to be, and so ordained the life of angels and men as to show in it, first, what free-will could do; and, secondly, what the benefit of his grace and his righteous judgment could do," (August. Enchir. ad Laurent.)
Book I, Chapter 17, Section 5 5. By the same class of persons, past events are referred improperly and inconsiderately to simple providence. As all contingencies whatsoever depend on it, therefore, neither thefts nor adulteries, nor murders, are perpetrated without an interposition of the divine will. Why, then, they ask, should the thief be punished for robbing him whom the Lord chose to chastise with poverty? Why should the murderer be punished for slaying him whose life the Lord had terminated? If all such persons serve the will of God, why should they be punished? I deny that they serve the will of God. For we cannot say that he who is carried away by a wicked mind performs service on the order of God, when he is only following his own malignant desires. He obeys God, who, being instructed in his will, hastens in the direction in which God calls him. But how are we so instructed unless by his word? The will declared by his word is, therefore, that which we must keep in view in acting, God requires of us nothing but what he enjoins. If we design anything contrary to his precept, it is not obedience, but contumacy and transgression. But if he did not will it, we could not do it. I admit this. But do we act wickedly for the purpose of yielding obedience to him? This, assuredly, he does not command. Nay, rather we rush on, not thinking of what he wishes, but so inflamed by our own passionate lust, that, with destined purpose, we strive against him. And in this way, while acting wickedly, we serve his righteous ordination, since in his boundless wisdom he well knows how to use bad instruments for good purposes. And see how absurd this mode of arguing is. They will have it that crimes ought not to be punished in their authors, because they are not committed without the dispensation of God. I concede more - that thieves and murderers, and other evil-doers, are instruments of Divine Providence, being employed by the Lord himself to execute the judgements which he has resolved to inflict. But I deny that this forms any excuse for their misdeeds. For how? Will they implicate God in the same iniquity with themselves, or will they cloak their depravity by his righteousness? They cannot exculpate themselves, for their own conscience condemns them: they cannot charge God, since they perceive the whole wickedness in themselves, and nothing in Him save the legitimate use of their wickedness. But it is said he works by their means. And whence, I pray, the fetid odour of a dead body, which has been unconfined and putrefied by the sun's heat? All see that it is excited by the rays of the sun, but no man therefore says that the fetid odour is in them. In the same way, while the matter and guilt of wickedness belongs to the wicked man, why should it be thought that God contracts any impurity in using it at pleasure as his instrument? Have done, then, with that dog-like petulance which may, indeed, bay from a distance at the justice of God, but cannot reach it!
I hope that helps.
Jean
I'm gonna ignore the fact that this question violates Godwin's Law, which dictates that as an discussion becomes longer and longer, and more and more heated, the odds approach one that someone will bring up Nazis, the thread is over, and the person that brought them up lost the argument in progress.
In answer to your question, one must ask if God knew about the Nazis, and was able to stop them. IF you believe that God knew the Nazis wanted to kill the Jews and that He had the ability to stop them in their tracks, and yet did nothing to stop them, then you have already demonstrated a degree of God's ordaining the sins of mankind in that He must knowingly and intentionally allow them to happen. Assuming you're not into Middle Knowledge (which posits that God cannot know the outcome of future free choices of men because he has no justification for a true belief, because what has not yet happened cannot be true), then you must believe that God knew from eternity past that the Holocaust would have happened. If you have God knowing from eternity past that the Holocaust would happen, and doing nothing to stop it, you have, ipso facto, a tacit ordination that it may happen.
Now, this in no way makes God the author of sin. God's passive allowing of sin does not mean he actively makes a person to commit it -- men sin because we are by nature sinners and we enjoy it.
From: "John Reisinger" Add to Address Book
To: "my name deleted"
CC: moe.bergeron@comcast.net
Subject: Re: Question regarding Calvinism
Date: Mon, 31 May 2004 10:09:02 -0400
Moe forwarded your e-mail to me. The man in question is a hyper-Calvinists whether he admits it or not. God has never forced any person to do anything that person did not want to do. He has indeed made us willing to do some things which by nature which we are not able to do. It is one thing to say that God's predestination is involved in some way in all things, and it is quite another thing to say "that God planned and CAUSED every sin that every man has or will commit." Regardless of whether or not we can satisfactorily explain the origin of evil, we know that God cannot be charged with being the "guilty" author of any sin. JGR
----- Original Message -----
From: my name deleted
To: feedback@soundofgrace.com
Sent: Monday, May 31, 2004 12:58 AM
Subject: Question regarding Calvinism
Dear Sir:
I have been in discussion with an individual who says he is a Calvinist. He made what seemed to me to be a rather strange claim that God predestined and foreordained every sin that every man has or will commit. In other words, he is telling me that God planned and caused every sin that every man has or will commit.
Does Calvinism actually hold to this belief?
He also mentioned something about hyperCalvinism and said that above claim is not hyperCalvinism. Is he correct?
Thanks in advance for your reply.
Don
Anybody who asserts God predestined and foreordained any sin is worshipping a counterfeit god.
How many reformed/Calvinist denominations are there? There must be at least ten among the GRPL. And as you surely must know, there are disagreements even within those denominations.
Did you even read the whole post. Look at Gen 50.
Did you even read the whole post. Look at Gen 50.
There you go again switching definitions.
Are we talking about Calvinism as a theological system or denomination?
It is not the same.
The variety of Calvinistic denominations are usually not in disagreement with the doctrines of grace (Calvinism), rather they differ on points unrelated to soteriology.
If you are going to play these games find someone who cares.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.