|
Post by Admin on Feb 20, 2024 23:48:54 GMT -5
Christ's Sorrow Over Jerusalem's Sins (1) O Jerusalem, Jerusalem, thou that killest the prophets, and stonest them which are sent unto thee, how often would I have gathered thy children together, even as a hen gathereth her chickens under her wings, and ye would not! Matthew 23:37. A reader asks: "Will you please re-explain this passage?" I am happy to do that because it is an important and interesting passage which has often been misinterpreted. Apparently, I explained the passage in an earlier issue, but that was long ago and it will not hurt to look at the passage once again. Note that a parallel passage is found in Luke 13:34. * * * * The interesting aspect of the interpretation of this passage is found in the fact that it is usually used as proof for the well-meant gospel offer. The well-meant gospel offer teaches that God expresses in the gospel His desire to save all that hear the gospel, and even God's desire to save all men, even those who do not hear it. And, closely connected to this idea, is also the idea that God's expressed desire to save all men is indicative of His love, compassion, grace, and mercy towards all men. Such love, compassion, grace, and mercy are, therefore, common; and it is at this point that the defenders of the well-meant offer also hold to a common grace, or common love, mercy, and compassion. The ground for this view of the text is said to be found in the fact that Jesus Himself expresses His desire to gather Jerusalem's children as a hen gathers her chicks under her wings. Nevertheless, Jesus' desire is frustrated by the unwillingness and unbelief of the citizens of Jerusalem. Jesus is willing; the Jews are not. Jesus wants to save; the Jews persist in unbelief. Jesus longs to have them all in heaven; the Jews nonetheless go to hell because they will not believe in Christ. * * * * Now, apart from any other question, two things are perfectly obvious in this presentation. In the first place, it is so obviously Arminian in character that it remains a mystery how anyone professing to hold to the Reformed faith or, even, Calvinism, can possibly maintain it. It teaches openly and simply that Jesus is unable to accomplish what He wills, because man frustrates His desire. Thus, man's hard and rebellious will is decisive. It overrules the will of Christ. It determines the outcome of the whole matter of salvation. If man is able to frustrate the desires of Christ by his disobedience and refusal to accept Christ's overtures, then he also has the power to accept these overtures and receive Christ by the choice of that same will. This, it seems to me, is so simple that a small child can understand it. But let it be understood very clearly that this whole conception is neither Reformed nor Calvinistic, but is simply a wholesale sell-out of the Reformed faith to the blatant Arminianism condemned by the Synod of Dordt and by Reformed churches since Dordt. Nor do the plaintive and somewhat pathetic accusations of "hyper-Calvinism" made against those who deny the well-meant offer alter one whit the fact that those who hold to the well-meant offer have sold out the store and no longer have the right to claim to be Reformed. It is interesting to note as well that those who have adopted the well-meant offer have also made some significant concessions to Arminianism in other areas. We could, for example, mention the compromises in the doctrine of total depravity which well-meant offer defenders have made. But especially the crucially important doctrine of sovereign election and reprobation, the benchmark of all true Calvinism and of the Reformed faith, is denied in whole or in part. The denial of sovereign reprobation is probably the reason why a relatively recent issue of Pink's book, "The Sovereignty of God," is a truncated version without any mention of Pink's doctrine of reprobation, a doctrine which Pink believed to the end of his life, and which he had included in his book. The second remark is equally obvious. Whatever the text may mean, the defenders of the well-meant offer have no right to appeal to it as expressing a desire of Christ to save all men, when the text says nothing of the sort. Those who hold to the well-meant offer read the text as if it said: "How often would I have gathered thee together, even as a hen gathereth her chickens under her wings, and ye would not!" But the text does not say that. And it must not be made to say that. The text makes a very obvious and careful distinction between Jerusalem and Jerusalem's children. Christ expresses His desire to save Jerusalem's children, but Jerusalem did all in its power to prevent this. That is the meaning of the text -- on the very surface of it. Does this mean that Christ was unsuccessful in gathering Jerusalem's children? Of course not. He gathered Jerusalem's children during the days of His earthly ministry, and He gathered Jerusalem's children after He was ascended into heaven and poured out His Spirit upon the church. On that first day of the New Testament era, no less than 3000 of Jerusalem's children were gathered. But there is more to the text. We shall take another look at the same passage in the next issue. Why not save this issue in a handy place so that you can look it up when the next issue arrives? Prof. H. Hanko Christ’s Srrow Over Jerusalem’s Sins (2) —Unavailable Christ's Sorrow Over Jerusalem's Sins (3) O Jerusalem, Jerusalem, thou that killest the prophets, and stonest them which are sent unto thee, how often would I have gathered thy children together, even as a hen gathereth her chickens under her wings, and ye would not! Matthew 23:37. A reader asks: "Will you please re-explain this passage?" I am happy to do that because it is an important and interesting passage which has often been misinterpreted. Apparently, I explained the passage in an earlier issue, but that was long ago and it will not hurt to look at the passage once again. Note that a parallel passage is found in Luke 13:34. * * * * I have already called attention to the blatant Arminianism of those who argue for a well-meant offer of the gospel; and I have shown how these well-meant offer defenders misread this text to use it to prove their point. I had turned to a positive treatment of the text so that we may know precisely what the text does teach. It is clear from the text itself that the word "Jerusalem," which the Lord uses to address the city lying before Him, is used as the symbol of the nation of Judah, which was the church of the old dispensation. I ended the last article on Mt. 23:37 with a reference to Galatians 4:21-27. I referred to this text because it speaks of Jerusalem with her children, and it is, therefore, important for an understanding of the passage in Mt. 23. I want to quote the entire passage. "Tell me, ye that desire to be under the law, do ye not hear the law? For it is written, that Abraham had two sons, the one by a bondmaid, the other by a freewoman. But he who was of the bondwoman was born after the flesh; but he of the freewoman was by promise. Which things are an allegory: for these are the two covenants; the one from the mount Sinai, which gendereth to bondage, which is Agar. For this Agar is mount Sinai in Arabia, and answereth to Jerusalem which now is, and is in bondage with her children. But Jerusalem which is above is free, which is the mother of us all. For it is written, Rejoice, thou barren that bearest not; break forth and cry, thou that travailest not: for the desolate hath many more children than she which hath an husband." Several things about this passage are striking and worth our attention. In the first place, Jesus was referring to what Paul calls "the Jerusalem which now is." That Jerusalem is compared, in the first place, with Hagar, Sarah's slave and with her son Ishmael. Of Ishmael it is said that he was born "after the flesh." That is, he was born in the purely natural way of procreation, as any child is born. Both Hagar and Ishmael and the way Ishmael was born are also compared to Mt. Sinai, where the nation of Israel came under the law. So three things are compared here by Paul: Mt. Sinai, Hagar and Ishmael, and Jerusalem which now is with her children. That is, Jerusalem with her children are born according to the flesh under the law, and are, therefore, in bondage to the law, for "Mt. Sinai gendereth to bondage." That is, briefly the idea here. Children born in a natural way are in bondage because they are under the law, and the law cannot save. That was the Jerusalem of Jesus' day. It was in bondage to the law. It was forever attempting to gain salvation by keeping the works of the law. But such is forever impossible; and it was, in fact, in bondage. It manifested the horror of its bondage by rejecting Christ, the One to whom the whole law pointed (Gal. 3:24). But there is another Jerusalem, a Jerusalem which Paul says "is above." That Jerusalem also has children. It is the true Jerusalem of which the earthly Jerusalem is only a picture. It is the Jerusalem spoken of in the visions of the prophet John: "And I saw the holy city, new Jerusalem, coming down from God out of heaven, prepared as a bride adorned for her husband" (Rev. 21:2). That Jerusalem also has children. But these children are like Isaac who are born, not according to the flesh, but "by promise." That is, they are born by the power of the promise of God, and through the power of that promise they are born as children of the heavenly Jerusalem; i.e., they are regenerated as sons and daughters of God Almighty. The barren who can only bring forth children dead in sins and trespasses now brings forth many more children than any with a husband. This is a beautiful and striking passage of the apostle Paul! Now we must return to the passage in Mt. 23:37. Jesus is addressing that apostate Jerusalem which was from below. Their house is left unto them desolate. They killed the prophets and stoned them who were sent to them. They will presently fill the cup of iniquity by killing the Christ. They are ripe for judgment because they seek their salvation by their own works and are smug in the satisfaction of their own work-righteousness. Their sin is very great. But we still have a few more things to say about this passage, and it would be good for you to keep handy the three we have thus far written so that you can refer to them next time. Prof. Herman Hanko
|
|
|
Post by Admin on Feb 22, 2024 19:42:44 GMT -5
SAVED BY GRACE (FIVE POINTS OF CALVINISM) 26TH INSTALLMENT - LETTER “L” OF TULIP CHAPTER IV - LIMITED ATONEMENT G. RELATION TO THE OTHER FOUR POINTS The doctrine of limited atonement, as we have already to some extent seen, is inseparably related to the other four points. It is, therefore, really impossible to be a three- or four-point Calvinist and reject this doctrine while maintaining all or most of the others. As far as unconditional election is concerned, that doctrine, with the emphasis on unconditional, insists that man's faith is not in any sense of the word a condition to his salvation but that salvation is all of grace. This must also be true at the cross. If salvation through the cross is conditional and depends on man's acceptance of it, then election cannot be unconditional, since election is not a mere choice of those who will be saved but the actual planning of the way of salvation as well. So also election would be in vain if salvation in the cross still depended on man's choice or decision for Christ, for whether or not God chose someone would really make no difference. All would still hinge on man's own free will and decision. As far as total depravity is concerned, that doctrine is the reason why the atonement must be efficacious for all those whom God has given to Christ, for the doctrine of total depravity teaches us that man has of himself no power to accept Christ or believe in the cross. He can have that power only through the cross and by the cross. If the power of the cross really depended on our acceptance of Christ, the doctrine of total depravity says that no one at all could possibly be saved by the cross. Likewise, the doctrines of irresistible grace and perseverance follow from this doctrine, for to teach limited atonement is to teach also efficacious atonement, as we have seen, and that simply means that by His cross Christ purchased all that was necessary for our salvation and purchased it for us with the price of His own blood so that it belongs to us and so that we belong to Him and cannot be let go or lost. Thus the power of the cross is the guarantee of our salvation by the power of efficacious grace and our perseverance until the end. Rev. Ronald Cammenga and Rev. Ronald Hanko This extract article from “Saved by Grace” is posted with permission from its publisher, Reformed Free Publishing Association, Grandville, Michigan Next: Chapter V Irresistible Grace- A. The Doctrine
|
|
|
Post by Admin on Feb 24, 2024 17:22:23 GMT -5
Can Arminians be Saved? Our question for this issue is: "Can someone who is theologically Arminian be truly saved?" This is not an easy question. We want to emphasize at the beginning that Arminianism is another gospel that is no gospel (Gal. 1:6-7). Its teaching denies the sovereignty of God in salvation and the power and effectualness of Christ's death on the cross (by teaching that Christ died for all it teaches that His death actually saves no one). It also denies that salvation is by grace alone with its teaching concerning the sovereignty of the human will. These are fundamental doctrines of the Christian faith. Not only that, but we believe that Arminianism has crept into the teaching of many Reformed churches under the guise of a love of God for all men, a desire on God's part that all men without exception be saved, and the teaching that there are gifts of grace and benefits of the cross for all. This poses a deadly danger to Reformed churches. We agree, therefore, with the following quote: "False doctrine is worse when it goes under the cover of the truth, and when it quotes Scripture, and sings Amazing Grace. Satan is always at his best in opposing the truth when he does it in the name of Christ. There has never been a more subtle expression of false doctrine than which affirms all the 'truths' of the Christian faith on the basis of human effort, merit of works, foreseen faith, or 'free will.' To affirm grace on the condition of works is the ultimate perversion. It is The Lie" (John K. Pederson, Sincerity Meets the Truth, pp. v, vi). But does this mean that those who hold to free will and other teachings of Arminianism cannot be and are not saved? We do not believe that. Even here, however, we wish to be very careful in our answer. We would insist that a person who truly and consistently believes that he is saved by his own willing and running, contrary to Rom. 9:16, cannot be saved; he has denied the very heart of the gospel. The teaching that man is saved by his own running is Rome's, the teaching that he is saved by his own willing is that of apostate Protestantism, but really they are no different. That teaching, according to Romans 10:1-4, is ignorance of and refusal to submit to the righteousness of God, and leaves a person in need of salvation. By his emphasis on will and works a consistent Arminian sets himself outside Christ (Gal. 5:4). Nevertheless, many people inconsistently confess both grace and works. They ascribe their salvation wholly to God's grace, and yet speak of having chosen Christ, of having free will, and of God being dependent in salvation on their own free will choice. They thank GOD for their salvation and yet speak as though they were the ones who made the decisive choices. Usually this is the fault of the teaching they have received - teaching which speaks along two lines. It is a teaching that affirms grace on the basis of works and free will. Those who teach such things have the greater fault. Nevertheless, those who think along these lines, though they may be saved, also need to realize that what they believe is not the truth, and need to repent of it. So too, as the author quoted above says: "We need rather to be greatly ashamed of ourselves for our tolerant friendship with the doctrine of human sovereignty which lies at the rotten core of evangelicalism, and which, on account it, of our sleepy indifference to is a testimony to our own cowardice." Grace saves, not free will and works. Rev. Ronald Hanko (Calvin comments on I Tim. 2:4): "The other texts adduced are not declarative of the Lord's determination respecting all men in his secret counsel: they only proclaim that pardon is ready for all sinners who sincerely seek it (Ps.145:9). For if they obstinately insist on its being said that God is merciful to all, I will oppose to them, what is elsewhere asserted, that 'our God is in the heavens; he hath done whatsoever he hath pleased' (Ps. 115:3). This text, then, must be explained in a manner consistent with another, where God says, 'I will be gracious to whom I will be gracious, and I will show mercy on whom I will show mercy' (Ex. 33:19). He who makes a selection of objects for the exercise of his mercy, does not import that mercy to all. But as it clearly appears that Paul is there speaking, not of individuals, but orders of men, I shall forbear any further argument...." (Calvin's Institutes, Book III, Chap. 24, XVI) _________________________
|
|
|
Post by Admin on Feb 26, 2024 23:36:41 GMT -5
THE “DOCTRINE” OF IRRESISTIBLE GRACE 27th INSTALLMENT - letter “I” of TULIP Saved by Grace (Five Points of Calvinism) A. The Doctrine 1. The saving of the sinner is due to the power of God's grace alone. That sinner has been unconditionally elected to salvation in eternity by God the Father. In time he has been redeemed by the death of Jesus Christ. But this sinner must also be saved, that is, the benefits of Christ's death must be applied to him and he must be made to possess the salvation that God has willed for him. He must be converted in heart and life from a dead, unbelieving, and disobedient sinner to a living, believing, and obedient child of God. The power of God that works this radical change in the sinner is grace. Salvation is by grace and by grace alone. That in the history of the church has proved to be the pivotal issue: grace alone! Always there have been those who, although they spoke of salvation by grace also attributed salvation, at least to some extent, to the work and ability of man. Yes, salvation is due to the grace of God, they said. But that grace of God cooperates with the work and will of the sinner. Yes, the power of God accomplishes salvation. But the power of God depends on the willingness of the sinner. What this means is that salvation is due to the grace of God and something else rather than to the grace of God alone. The Scriptures teach clearly that salvation is by grace. In Ephesians 2:8 the apostle Paul teaches, "For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God." In Acts 20:24 the same apostle speaks of the gospel as "the gospel of the grace of God." Concerning himself he says in I Corinthians 15:10, "By the grace of God I am what I am." That we are saved by grace means that we are not saved by works. Salvation by grace alone means that our works do not at all contribute to our salvation. That grace rules out works as the cause of salvation is plain from the Scriptures. We read in Romans 11:5, 6: "Even so then at this present time also there is a remnant according to the election of grace. And if by grace, then it is no more of works: otherwise grace is no more grace." Galatians 2:16 teaches the same truth: "Knowing that a man is not justified by the works of the law, but by the faith of Jesus Christ, even we have believed in Jesus Christ, that we might be justified by the faith of Christ, and not by the works of the law: for by the works of the law shall no flesh be justified." In Titus 3:5 Paul declares, "Not by works of righteousness which we have done, but according to his mercy he saved us, by the washing of regeneration, and renewing of the Holy Ghost." 2. This grace of salvation is an irresistible grace. On the surface of it, it is plain that the power of grace must be a great power. Man is the sinner; God must be the Savior. Man is incapable; God must be able. Man is powerless; God must be omnipotent. Man is weak; God must be sovereign. We are like the man whom Jesus healed at the pool of Bethesda (John 5:1-9). Just as he was physically impotent so are we spiritually impotent, absolutely unable to walk (spiritually) at all. And our condition is due to our sin, as was the case with the impotent man. "Afterward Jesus findeth him in the temple, and said unto him, Behold, thou art made whole: sin no more, lest a worse thing come unto thee" (John 5:14). The saving of the sinner demands great power. The devil must be defeated; a rebel must be subdued; a heart of stone must be made a heart of flesh; a new creature must be brought forth; the dead must be raised. This work calls for great power, power that is beyond the power of a mere mortal: miraculous power, supernatural power. On the part of God, great power is required. Mere begging, pleading, or coaxing will not do. But there must be the exercise of almighty power, such power as was exhibited in the creation of the world. Really every child of God is living evidence of the almighty power of God. On the part of anyone who has been the object of the saving grace of God, there can be no question of the sovereignty of God in salvation. Anyone who knows himself knows the sovereignty of God. Granted that the power of irresistible grace is a great power, the question remains whether or not it is irresistible power. Granted that the sinner is dead, granted that God must work in salvation, granted that His work is powerful; could it not yet be that this work is not so powerful as to be resisted and frustrated by the sinner? Could it not be that God works to give all men the ability to come to Christ, if they chose to do so? Might not grace only enable men to come to Christ, always conditioned on their free will, so that man could very well choose not to come to Christ, refuse to come to Christ, and resist grace? So the crucial question is this: is the grace of God irresistible? The answer of the Scriptures and the Reformed faith is: yes! Grace, if it is grace, must be irresistible grace. Because God is an irresistible, sovereign God, His grace is an irresistible and sovereign grace. God and God's grace cannot effectively and ultimately be resisted by the most obstinate of sinners. When God's grace operates to save the sinner, that grace shall triumph in the salvation of that sinner. He will be saved. God will have the victory. Not the power of the devil, not the power of the wicked world, not the power of the sinner himself, shall be able to prevent, overthrow, or frustrate the work of God's grace. The God of the Scriptures is the God Whom Isaiah says in Isaiah 46:10 "... declares the end from the beginning, and from ancient times the things that are not yet done, saying, My counsel shall stand, and I will do all my pleasure." He is the God before Whom Daniel says in Daniel 4:35, "... all the inhabitants of the earth are reputed as nothing; and he doeth according to his will in the army of heaven, and among the inhabitants of the earth: and none can stay his hand, or say unto him, What doest thou?" The god of resistible grace is not the God of the Scriptures. He is a weak god, an ineffective god, a powerless god. In reality, he is no god at all, but an idol god. So serious is the denial of irresistible grace! Rev. Ronald Cammenga and Rev. Ronald Hanko This extract from “Saved by Grace” is posted with permission from its publisher, Reformed Free Publishing Association, Grandville, Michigan Next: Chapter V Irresistible Grace- B. Scripture Passages
|
|
|
Post by Admin on Feb 27, 2024 22:16:05 GMT -5
Can Arminians be Saved? Our question for this issue is: "Can someone who is theologically Arminian be truly saved?" This is not an easy question. We want to emphasize at the beginning that Arminianism is another gospel that is no gospel (Gal. 1:6-7). Its teaching denies the sovereignty of God in salvation and the power and effectualness of Christ's death on the cross (by teaching that Christ died for all it teaches that His death actually saves no one). It also denies that salvation is by grace alone with its teaching concerning the sovereignty of the human will. These are fundamental doctrines of the Christian faith. Not only that, but we believe that Arminianism has crept into the teaching of many Reformed churches under the guise of a love of God for all men, a desire on God's part that all men without exception be saved, and the teaching that there are gifts of grace and benefits of the cross for all. This poses a deadly danger to Reformed churches. We agree, therefore, with the following quote: "False doctrine is worse when it goes under the cover of the truth, and when it quotes Scripture, and sings Amazing Grace. Satan is always at his best in opposing the truth when he does it in the name of Christ. There has never been a more subtle expression of false doctrine than which affirms all the 'truths' of the Christian faith on the basis of human effort, merit of works, foreseen faith, or 'free will.' To affirm grace on the condition of works is the ultimate perversion. It is The Lie" (John K. Pederson, Sincerity Meets the Truth, pp. v, vi). But does this mean that those who hold to free will and other teachings of Arminianism cannot be and are not saved? We do not believe that. Even here, however, we wish to be very careful in our answer. We would insist that a person who truly and consistently believes that he is saved by his own willing and running, contrary to Rom. 9:16, cannot be saved; he has denied the very heart of the gospel. The teaching that man is saved by his own running is Rome's, the teaching that he is saved by his own willing is that of apostate Protestantism, but really they are no different. That teaching, according to Romans 10:1-4, is ignorance of and refusal to submit to the righteousness of God, and leaves a person in need of salvation. By his emphasis on will and works a consistent Arminian sets himself outside Christ (Gal. 5:4). Nevertheless, many people inconsistently confess both grace and works. They ascribe their salvation wholly to God's grace, and yet speak of having chosen Christ, of having free will, and of God being dependent in salvation on their own free will choice. They thank GOD for their salvation and yet speak as though they were the ones who made the decisive choices. Usually this is the fault of the teaching they have received - teaching which speaks along two lines. It is a teaching that affirms grace on the basis of works and free will. Those who teach such things have the greater fault. Nevertheless, those who think along these lines, though they may be saved, also need to realize that what they believe is not the truth, and need to repent of it. So too, as the author quoted above says: "We need rather to be greatly ashamed of ourselves for our tolerant friendship with the doctrine of human sovereignty which lies at the rotten core of evangelicalism, and which, on account it, of our sleepy indifference to is a testimony to our own cowardice." Grace saves, not free will and works. Rev. Ronald Hanko (Calvin comments on I Tim. 2:4): "The other texts adduced are not declarative of the Lord's determination respecting all men in his secret counsel: they only proclaim that pardon is ready for all sinners who sincerely seek it (Ps.145:9). For if they obstinately insist on its being said that God is merciful to all, I will oppose to them, what is elsewhere asserted, that 'our God is in the heavens; he hath done whatsoever he hath pleased' (Ps. 115:3). This text, then, must be explained in a manner consistent with another, where God says, 'I will be gracious to whom I will be gracious, and I will show mercy on whom I will show mercy' (Ex. 33:19). He who makes a selection of objects for the exercise of his mercy, does not import that mercy to all. But as it clearly appears that Paul is there speaking, not of individuals, but orders of men, I shall forbear any further argument...." (Calvin's Institutes, Book III, Chap. 24, XVI)
|
|
|
Post by Admin on Mar 2, 2024 19:47:55 GMT -5
“DIFFICULT PASSAGES” OF IRRESISTIBLE GRACE 29th INSTALLMENT - letter “I” of TULIP Chapter V – Irresistible Grace C. Difficult Passages Against the doctrine of irresistible grace, appeal is often made to certain passages of Scripture which seem to teach that it is indeed possible for the sinner to resist and thus frustrate the grace of God. Two passages may be cited as representative. In Matthew 23:37 Jesus laments, "O Jerusalem, Jerusalem, thou that killest the prophets, and stonest them which are sent unto thee, how often would I have gathered thy children together, even as a hen gathereth her chickens under her wings, but ye would not!" Acts 7:51 records Stephen's accusation against the unbelieving Jews, "Ye do always resist the Holy Ghost: as your fathers did, so do ye." In explanation of these passages let it be understood that the doctrine of irresistible grace does not mean that the natural man does not stand opposed to God, God's Christ, God's Spirit, and God's Word. He certainly does. He is a rebel against God and a hater of God. There is no love of God in him nor desire to please God. This is simply what it means that the sinner is totally depraved. In this sense it certainly is true that the sinner resists God and salvation. But the question is: can the sinner effectively resist God's grace? Can he maintain his resistance against God even when God has determined to save and has begun to save him? Can he frustrate the Holy Spirit when once the Spirit has begun to work in his heart and life? The answer to all these questions is: no! In this sense, God cannot be resisted. His grace is an irresistible grace. 1. Matthew 23:37. As far as Matthew 23:37 is concerned, yes, the wicked leaders of the Jews did everything they could to prevent Jesus' gathering of Jerusalem's children. They stoned the prophets and opposed Jesus' preaching and teaching. They discredited Jesus before the people and threatened reprisal against any who openly confessed Him. In no way does this imply, however, that these wicked leaders succeeded in preventing Jesus from gathering Jerusalem's children. They were gathered and saved, that is, the elect among them, not withstanding the resistance of the wicked rulers. 2. Acts 7:51. Stephen's accusation against the unbelieving Jews in Acts 7:51, that as their fathers had always resisted the Holy Ghost, so did they, does not either imply that grace is resistible. Stephen is not talking about these wicked Jews effectively resisting the grace of the Holy Spirit working within them to save them. Not at all! He is rather talking about their opposition to the Holy Spirit in the sense that they constantly opposed the word of the Holy Spirit in the Scriptures and the prophets who were the instruments of the Holy Spirit to bring that word. As their fathers resisted Moses and Aaron, so did the Jews of Stephen's day resist Jesus and His apostles. They did not resist the Holy Spirit within them, for they were devoid of the Holy Spirit. The proof is their rejection and stoning of Stephen. But their resistance was to the external call, commands, reproofs, and teaching of the servants of God sent by the Spirit. Rev. Ronald Cammenga and Rev. Ronald Hanko
|
|
|
Post by Admin on Mar 5, 2024 17:32:42 GMT -5
“OBJECTIONS” AGAINST IRRESISTIBLE GRACE 30th INSTALLMENT - letter “I” of TULIP Chapter V – Irresistible Grace D. Objections 1. Man is saved against his will. Against Calvinism's teaching of irresistible grace the enemies of this truth raise several objections. One of their objections is that if God's grace is irresistible, then man is actually saved contrary to his will. The caricature of Calvinism is that it teaches that Christ draws sinners kicking and screaming into heaven; that God forces men against their wills to be saved. Those who hold to irresistible grace are charged with teaching that God deals with men as senseless stocks and blocks. We reject this charge! This is not the teaching of Calvinism, but a gross misrepresentation. Neither is it the case that one defends the truth of sovereign grace by denying, or downplaying, the activity of faith. One does not show himself to be a staunch advocate of irresistible grace by getting nervous whenever someone speaks of our repenting, our believing, or our coming to Christ, as if this puts the emphasis on man, man's work, and man's ability, and jeopardizes the truth of sovereign grace. The reality is that the fruit, the infallible effect of God's grace in the sinner is that although before he did not believe in Jesus Christ, now he believes in Jesus Christ. Although before he did not repent of his sins, now he repents of his sins. Although before he would not come to Christ, now he wills and actually does come to Christ. Irresistible grace does not rule out repentance and faith but rather guarantees that the sinner will repent and will believe in Jesus Christ. An illustration of this truth we have in Jesus' miraculous healing of the lame man at the pool of Bethesda in John 5. That impotent man had absolutely no ability in himself to walk, nor was he in any position to cooperate with Jesus in the miracle of his healing. But when Jesus spoke the word that healed him, that impotent man was healed and the effect of his being healed was that he did what he could not do before - he took up his bed and walked. That our willing and doing are the effect of God's grace at work in our lives is plainly taught in the Holy Scriptures. In Psalm 110:3 David declares, "Thy people shall be willing in the day of thy power." In Philippians 2:13 Paul writes, "For it is God which worketh in you both to will and to do of his good pleasure." 2. Preaching and the other means of grace are unnecessary. Another objection against the truth of irresistible grace is that it effectively rules out the use of means, particularly the means of the preaching of the gospel. If man does not have the ability in himself to believe, to accept Jesus Christ and salvation, why call men to faith in Jesus Christ? If it does not lie in the ability of every man to cooperate in salvation, why preach the gospel to all men? If God's grace is irresistible and if the will of God to save certain men will certainly come to pass, why should the church be concerned to preach the gospel at home or on the mission field? Will not God save his people regardless? This objection does violence to the truth that although God's grace is irresistible, that irresistible grace of God is worked in men through definite means, chief of which is the preaching of the gospel. The divine rule in this matter is that God works and God maintains His grace in the hearts of His elect people by means of the preaching of the gospel. The warning of the Canons of Dordt, III, IV, 19 is in order here. As the almighty operation of God, whereby He supports this our natural life, does not exclude, but requires the use of means, by which God of His infinite mercy and goodness hath chosen to exert His influence, so also the before-mentioned supernatural operation of God, by which we are regenerated, in no wise excludes, or subverts the use of the gospel, which the most wise God has ordained to be the food of the soul. Wherefore, as the apostles, and teachers who succeeded them, piously instructed the people concerning this grace of God, to His glory, and the abasement of all pride, and in the meantime, however, neglected not to keep them in the exercise of the Word, sacraments and discipline; so even to this day, be it far from either instructors or instructed to presume to tempt God in the church by separating what He of His good pleasure hath most intimately joined together. Rev. Ronald Cammenga and Rev. Ronald Hanko
|
|
|
Post by Admin on Mar 7, 2024 11:08:49 GMT -5
“DENIALS” OF IRRESISTIBLE GRACE 31st INSTALLMENT - letter “I” of TULIP Chapter V – Irresistible Grace E. Denials of Irresistible Grace
1. Free will. The outstanding denial of irresistible grace is the popular teaching concerning the free will of the sinner. Those who hold to free will not only teach that man has the ability within himself to accept Jesus Christ but also teach that it is in the power of every man also to reject Jesus Christ, to resist and frustrate the operations of God's grace, and to prevent Christ's efforts to save him. This was the teaching concerning the power of free will by Erasmus at the time of the Reformation. In his book On the Freedom of the Will, Erasmus states: "I conceive of free-will ... as a power of the human will by which a man may apply himself to those things that lead to eternal salvation, or turn away from the same." The Arminians at the Synod of Dordt ascribed the same power to free will. To the Synod they stated their position as follows: That this grace of God is the beginning, continuance, and accomplishment of all good, even to this extent, that the regenerate man himself, without prevenient or assisting, awakening, following, and cooperative grace, can neither think, will, nor do good, nor withstand any temptations to evil; so that all good deeds or movements, that can be conceived must be ascribed to the grace of God in Christ. But as respects the mode of operation of this grace, it is not irresistible. Although the statements of Erasmus and of the Arminians at the time of the Synod of Dordt are somewhat guarded, the greatest claims for free will are made today. Almost unlimited power is ascribed to the will of the sinner. Free will is able to accept Jesus Christ offered in the gospel, mighty to open up the heart to a pleading Savior, capable of making a decision for God. Indeed, free will is more powerful than God Himself, for it can resist God and prevent the operations of God's saving grace. It ought to be clear that to teach free will is to deny irresistible grace. If the power of free will is not only that it can accept Jesus Christ and salvation but also reject the same, man is able effectively to resist God' grace. If God desires the salvation of all men, but salvation depends on the exercise of his free will, it is necessarily implied that although God desires the salvation of a certain man, that man may be able to frustrate God's desire to save him. In fact, not only is the teaching of free will a denial of the irresistible character of God's grace, it is really a denial of grace altogether. If salvation depends on a power in man, a power that is able either to accept or to reject salvation, salvation becomes a work of man. And if salvation is due to a work of man, however small that work may be, it is not any longer due to the grace of God.
2. Common grace. The teaching of common grace leads to a denial of irresistible grace. That is not hard to demonstrate. Common grace is a grace of God that is shown to all men but a grace of God that, although it is shown to all men, does not save them. To teach a non-saving grace of God, to teach a grace of God of which all men are the objects, is the first step towards denying irresistible grace. In fact, in those churches in which common grace has become accepted dogma, there has been a weakening and even on occasion open renunciation of the doctrine of irresistible grace.
3. The free offer of the gospel. The teaching of the free offer of the gospel, inasmuch as it presupposes the free will of the sinner, is also an implicit denial of the irresistibility of grace. If the gospel is not any longer the power of God unto salvation, as Paul says that it is in Romans 1:16, not the means by which God works grace in the hearts of the elect, but only an offer of salvation, dependent on the sinner's acceptance of that offer; then it is clearly implied that the sinner may very well choose to reject the gospel and the offer of grace and salvation in the gospel. Then, although God wants to save him, although God expresses His love for him in the gospel, the sinner is able to frustrate that desire and love of God. The doctrine of irresistible grace is effectively thrown out the window. Rev. Ronald Cammenga and Rev. Ronald Hanko
|
|
|
Post by Admin on Mar 11, 2024 22:16:53 GMT -5
“PRACTICAL IMPORTANCE” IRRESISTIBLE GRACE 32nd INSTALLMENT - letter “I” of TULIP Saved by Grace (Five Points of Calvinism) Chapter V – Irresistible Grace F. Practical Importance The importance of this doctrine is great. It belongs to the message of the gospel. That makes it an important doctrine. From various points of view it is important for the church and for every Christian personally to hold to the truth of irresistible grace. 1. Salvation by grace. The maintaining of irresistible grace is important for our confession of the truth that salvation is of grace. To deny irresistible grace, to teach free will, is to teach that salvation depends upon the will and work of man. It is to teach grace plus works rather than grace alone. That is not the gospel, but another gospel, a false gospel, a gospel that is no gospel at all. 2. Assurance of salvation. The believer's assurance depends on the truth of irresistible grace. If it is possible that God's grace can be resisted, that after God has begun his saving work in me, it is still possible that I can resist it and lose it, how can I ever be sure of my salvation? I cannot be. The doctrine of free will and the teaching of resistible grace are cruel doctrines. They strip the child of God of the assurance of salvation. Then he must live in constant doubt and fear whether he will ever be saved. That is frightening! That is paralyzing! That is depressing! 3. Intercessory prayer. If God's grace were not irresistible, it would be foolish to pray for the conversion or repentance of anyone. If God stands by powerlessly before the dread majesty of man's free will, what sense would there be to pray for Him to convert anyone. What despair for the Christian married to an unbelieving mate! What despair for those believing parents who have a wayward child! What despair for that church that has straying members! On the other hand, what hope we may have when we understand, as each of us knows by our own experience, that the grace of God is a sovereign and an irresistible grace. Rev. Ronald Cammenga and Rev. Ronald Hanko
|
|
|
Post by Admin on Apr 4, 2024 15:11:28 GMT -5
“RELATIONS TO THE OTHER FOUR POINTS” 33rd INSTALLMENT - letter “I” of TULIP Saved by Grace (Five Points of Calvinism) Chapter V – Irresistible Grace G. Relations to the Other Four Points Certainly the truth of irresistible grace establishes the truth of the sovereignty of God. If God is sovereign, and He is, the grace of God must be an irresistible grace. To deny irresistible grace is to deny really the sovereignty of God. Then God and God's will are dependent on man and man's will. Then Christ is reduced to a beggar. And the Holy Spirit is a weakling. God is put in the position of Darius who earnestly desired to save Daniel from the lion's den, but could not ( Dan. 6). Because God is God, the almighty God, His grace is irresistible grace. Irresistible grace is necessitated by man's total depravity. Exactly because man is the sinner, unworthy of salvation, his salvation must be by grace. And since man is such a sinner that there is no good in him, no ability for good, no desire even for the good, that grace of salvation must be an irresistible grace. Unconditional election establishes the basis for irresistible grace. As God's salvation of men eternally did not rest on any worth or works in those men, was completely unconditional, so His salvation of them in time does not rest on any of their worth or works. And that is exactly the teaching of irresistible grace. The teaching of irresistible grace preserves the truth of limited atonement. For if free will and resistible grace are true, then it were very well possible that Christ would have died in vain. Then, although Christ died for a man and wants to save that man, Christ is frustrated because of the unwillingness of the sinner to be saved. Irresistible grace also guarantees the preservation of the saints. Since God's grace that brings salvation to a man is a sovereign, almighty grace, the grace of God that continues to abide in a man is a sovereign, almighty grace. Just as it cannot be frustrated in its initial operations, neither can it be frustrated ultimately. Those who are brought to salvation by the irresistible grace of God are by the power of that same grace preserved in salvation. Rev. Ronald Cammenga and Rev. Ronald Hanko
|
|
|
Post by Admin on Apr 7, 2024 11:24:35 GMT -5
THE “DOCTRINE” OF PERSEVERANCE OF THE SAINTS 35th INSTALLMENT - letter “P” of TULIP Saved by Grace (Five Points of Calvinism) Chapter VI – Perseverance of the Saints B. The Doctrine Whatever name is used for this doctrine, it teaches that all those who receive salvation can never again lose it or fall away from it, i.e., "once saved, always saved." The words perseverance, preservation, and eternal security all emphasize this. 1. Saints. When we speak of the perseverance or preservation of saints, then we are emphasizing the truth that those who are saved persevere to the end as a result of the grace of God, not as a result of their own strength or works, but always in the way of real, personal holiness. The name saints when it is applied to believers (as it is in almost all of the epistles of Paul, i.e., Rom. 1:7; I Cor. 1:2; II Cor. 1:1; Eph. 1:1; Phil. 1:1; etc.) is a name that refers to their holiness. The name, in fact, means holy ones. And it is very important for our discussion that the doctrine is not just called perseverance, or preservation, but the perseverance or preservation of saints. It is important, first of all, because it reminds us of the real issue. The question raised by this doctrine is not just whether or not the Bible teaches that a person once saved is always saved but also what the Bible teaches about saints. Our definition of a saint will probably determine whether or not we believe in this doctrine and how we interpret the teaching of the Scriptures. If a saint is a self-made person, i.e., one who has made himself holy or who is able to be holy by his own strength, then, obviously, whether or not he will always be holy also depends on him and whether or not he will continue to make himself holy. The Bible, however, indicates that saints are holy only by the grace of God, that they are only sinners of themselves and have no natural holiness or power to be holy, thus teaching us that it is God Who makes saints. Then, too, it is clear that if saints are made such by God, their continuing in holiness also depends on Him and on His grace and not on themselves. If you define a saint, therefore, as one who is chosen unconditionally from eternity, whose sins are fully paid for by the blood of the atonement, and who is inwardly regenerated and renewed by the irresistible power of the Holy Spirit, then it is impossible to believe in anything else but the preservation and perseverance of that same saint. 2. Preservation. It is exactly this that the name preservation of saints emphasizes - that God by His grace and in His goodness, sovereignly and eternally preserves those in whose hearts He has begun to work and finally brings them to glory in Christ. From this point of view, the doctrine is only an extension of the doctrine of irresistible grace, for it is exactly that irresistible grace which preserves and keeps safe God's saints and brings them to glory. To deny this is to teach that God's work can come to nothing and His power be thwarted, in other words, that His grace is not after all irresistible. 3. Perseverance. However, that God sovereignly preserves His chosen and redeemed saints does not take away their responsibility to live holy and thankful lives. True Calvinism has never taught this and never will. God does preserve His people in salvation but always in such a way that they also persevere in holiness. That is why the Canons of Dordt use the name perseverance of saints: to make it as clear as possible that this doctrine does not give His saints the excuse to be anything but saints in their conduct. It is emphatically saints who are preserved by the grace of God. Those who are unholy, wicked, and profane do not and cannot have the hope of being preserved. 4. Falling but no falling away. On the other hand, this doctrine does not mean that God's saints never fall into sin or temptation. The very names that are used, preservation and perseverance, imply that God's people are surrounded by spiritual dangers and enemies and that they themselves are always liable to fall into temptation and to be overcome by their enemies, the devil, the wicked world, and their own sinfulness. All the doctrine means is that as far as God is concerned, He never allows them to fall away completely or to lose their salvation but always brings them back. As far as they are concerned, it means that they, by the grace of God, always come again to repentance and begin anew the struggle to be holy. The parables of the lost sheep and of the prodigal son are illustrations of what this doctrine teaches, the former parable teaching especially the preserving power of God in and through Jesus Christ, our Shepherd and the latter parable demonstrating our repentance and spiritual renewal. In summary, then, this doctrine teaches the following: a. That saints are such by election, the atonement, and sovereign grace. b. That they cannot, therefore, be lost. c. That this assurance of eternal salvation does not remove the obligation they have to live as saints in the world, holy and obedient. d. That they must be preserved and persevere exactly because of their own weakness and sinfulness and because of their spiritual enemies, the devil and the wicked world. Rev. Ronald Cammenga and Rev. Ronald Hanko
|
|
|
Post by Admin on Apr 19, 2024 9:53:23 GMT -5
DOCTRINAL QUESTION Making Our Calling and Election Sure Wherefore the rather, brethren, give diligence to make your calling and election sure: for if ye do these things, ye shall never fall" (II Peter 2:10). One of our readers asked how it is possible to make our calling and election sure. This is a good question, and worthy of our consideration. It is a good question, first of all, because it has had some erroneous interpretations, which have resulted in a denial of certain cardinal doctrines of the Reformed faith. One of these interpretations is that election must be conditional, because the verse implies that we can lose our election. God elects us, but we must make it sure by what we do. The decisiveness of our election rests upon our faith in Christ and our perseverance in the way of obedience. If we fail to do our part, we will lose our election and be consigned to the eternal judgment of hell. This is bad exegesis of this verse, even from the point of view of the other parts of Scripture which speak of the certainty of our election. When a man has been chosen by God from all eternity as one of God's elect, there is nothing at all which the man needs to do to guarantee or seal that election. There is, therefore, no power on earth, in heaven, or in hell, which can possibly rob him of his election. Nor can anything he does be the cause of the loss of his election. The verse does not say anything like that, and it is gross error to teach it. Indeed, a doctrine such as this really robs the believer of his comfort. If my election depended in any way on me, I would lose it every moment of my life, for I constantly sin in everything I do, and those sins are so great in God's sight that they would necessarily be a forfeit on my election. Rather, the text means to say that we must diligently strive to live in the assurance of our calling and election. We make our calling and our election sure when we are assured of both. Let us make this clear. In God's work of salvation, election always precedes calling: the order is election, then calling. "For whom he did foreknow, he also did predestinateи. And whom he did predestinate, them he also calledи(Rom. 8:29-30). The reference in the text is to the efficacious call of the gospel which sovereignly and irresistibly calls out of the darkness of sin into the light of God's grace. Only the elect are called, and election precedes the call. Here, in the text the order is reversed. We must not make our election and calling sure; but we must make our calling and election sure. Why this reversal of the order? The answer is that we can make our election sure only when first we make our calling sure. The calling is first. The calling is first because when God sovereignly calls us through the preaching of the gospel, He works faith in our hearts so that we lay hold on Christ set forth in the gospel. And when we lay hold on Him, we know also that we are called, for Christ's sheep hear His voice, and they follow Him (John 10:2,3). After all, as the text expresses it, Christ calls His sheep "name by name" (vs. 3 - where the idea is that He calls His own name by name, i.e., each one by his name). If He calls our name, we are sure of our calling, for we hear Him call us. Election follows upon calling in the assurance of the child of God. The child of God hears the voice of the good Shepherd, follows Him, and knows that he is called. But, once knowing that he is called by the good Shepherd, he comes to know that Christ calls His own ("He called his own sheep by name, John 10:3). And so we come to be assured of our election, i.e., that we are elect in Christ and belong to Him. Election is the deepest reason for our call. How do we make our calling and election sure? The answer lies in the context of vss. 5-7: "Add to our faith virtue; and to virtue knowledge; and to knowledge temperance; and to temperance patience; and to patience godliness; and to godliness brotherly kindness, and to brotherly kindness charity." In short, we are to make our calling and election sure by laying hold on Christ through faith and finding in Him our full and complete salvation, and to trust in Him as our Savior. And, as Peter makes so graphically clear, we are to walk in sanctification. Part of our calling is to walk in obedience to our Lord and Savior. Then we make our calling sure. And, making our calling sure, we make our election sure. Let us then be very clear on this. If we walk in sin, we have no assurance of our calling and election. How could we? If we disobey God, trust in ourselves, walk as the world walks, deny our calling, we can have no assurance of that calling. And having no assurance of that calling, we have no assurance of our election. But when we forsake sin, flee to the cross for forgiveness and strength to walk as God's people, strive to live in obedience to Christ our King, then we know and are assured of our calling; and then the blessed and joyful conviction that our names are written in the Book of Life is ours. Prof. Herman Hanko
|
|
|
Post by Admin on May 8, 2024 9:44:08 GMT -5
“DIFFICULT PASSAGES” OF PERSEVERANCE OF THE SAINTS 37th INSTALLMENT - letter “P” of TULIP Saved by Grace (Five Points of Calvinism) Chapter VI – Perseverance of the Saints D. Difficult Passages There are a number of Scripture passages which are often cited as contradicting the doctrine of the perseverance of the saints. Before we look at these passages individually, there are several comments that need to be made that apply to them all in general. First, it cannot be denied that these passages do speak of persons "falling away" and perishing, even of their faith being "overthrown." Second, it cannot be that the Word of God contradicts itself. Either the Word teaches perseverance or it does not. And we do well at this point to remember that mere preponderance of passages which speak of God's faithfulness and of the power of Christ and of the Holy Spirit as the guarantees of continued and eternal salvation would indicate that the Scriptures do teach the perseverance of the saints. The passages which might seem to contradict this are only a few. Third, all these passages which are used to teach a "falling away of saints" can be answered by one passage of Scripture, I John 2:19; "They went out from us, but they were not of us; for if they had been of us, they would no doubt have continued with us: but they went out, that they might be made manifest that they were not all of us." I John 2:19 clearly teaches that those who fall away were never really part of the body of believers or of the faith, though it may have appeared for a time that they were. The very fact that they fall away, if indeed they fall away finally and forever, is proof that they never had a part or place in the kingdom of heaven and were never partakers of the saving grace of God in Christ Jesus. They never were elect, never were purchased by the blood, never did receive the Holy Spirit and regeneration, never were justified or sanctified, and never had the gift of holiness. They were the stony and thorny soil and the wayside in the parable of Jesus, and the Word, however it affected them, never had root or fruit. With that in mind the passages which are quoted against the doctrine of perseverance can easily be reconciled with it. 1. I Samuel 10:6: “And the Spirit of the LORD will come upon thee, and thou shalt prophesy with them, and shalt be turned into another man.” This passage speaks of King Saul's receiving the Holy Spirit and even says he would prophesy and be turned into another man. This is sometimes used to contradict the perseverance of saints in light of the rest of the story of Saul which shows him becoming more and more wicked and finally dying in his sins. We should remember several things about Saul, however. (1) That the Holy Spirit as the Spirit of prophecy was sometimes given to those who were not saved. The best examples are Balaam and Caiaphas. Thus, the fact that Saul prophesied does not prove him a child of God. (2) The Holy Spirit gives other gifts besides the blessings of salvation, and He certainly did give to Saul the gift of courage and zeal, both of which were necessary for his work as king (cf. 11:6). This is very likely all that Samuel meant when he said that Saul would become another man, since Saul was originally too fearful and cowardly to assume the duties of the kingdom (10:21, 22). (3) There is no indication in the Scriptures that Saul had any of the marks of regeneration. He never showed any signs of true repentance, even in the beginning, nor any zeal for God. (4) In fact, the testimony of the Scriptures leads us in the opposite direction and seems to indicate that Saul was not only an unregenerated person but was known as such in Israel, so that this prophesying became a byword among the people for anything out of character (cf. 10:11, 12). 2. Galatians 5:4: “Christ is become of no effect unto you, whosoever of you are justified by the law; ye are fallen from grace.” Here is a passage which actually uses the words "fallen from grace." Paul is speaking here to those who wanted to make circumcision a condition for salvation and for membership in the Christian church, and he tells them that if this is what they believe then not only is Christ become of no effect to them but they are fallen from grace. The correct explanation of this passage is very simple. Paul is not saying that these people once received the grace of God and have now lost it and are perishing, but that they, by their belief in salvation through law-works, have separated themselves from salvation by grace and from the cross of Christ. They stand by their own teaching as those for whom the cross is of "none effect" and to whom grace is meaningless. 3. II Timothy 2:18: “Remember that Jesus Christ of the seed of David was raised from the dead according to my gospel.” This is the passage that refers to the faith of some being overthrown by the false teaching of Hymanaeus and Philetus. There are two things that must be remembered here: (1) in the very next verse the Word of God assures us that the Lord knows them that are His and at least implies that those who are His cannot be overthrown, and (2) that the Scriptures do speak of a faith which is not a true and saving faith (Matt. 13:19-21; James 2:14-20). That is the only kind of faith which can be overthrown, for true faith is a gift and work of God. Those, then, of whom the Scriptures are speaking here are also those who never had true faith, whom the Lord never knew and who were never of the company of true believers and never departed from iniquity. They were hypocrites. 4. Hebrews 6:4-6: “For it is impossible for those who were once enlightened, and have tasted of the heavenly gift, and were made partakers of the Holy Ghost, And have tasted the good word of God, and the powers of the world to come, If they shall fall away, to renew them again unto repentance; seeing they crucify to themselves the Son of God afresh, and put him to an open shame.” This passage is probably most often used to teach a falling away of saints, since it speaks of those who were enlightened, tasted of the heavenly gift, were made partakers of the Holy Spirit, tasted the good word of God and the powers of the world to come, and who yet fall away and not only are not but cannot be renewed to repentance. Again, it should be remembered here that the Holy Spirit gives other gifts and does other works than salvation, and for the rest, that it is not impossible for an unbelieving person to see, at least intellectually and emotionally the blessedness of salvation, to the extent that he even feigns faith and obedience (Matt. 13:19-21; Acts 8:9-23; 26:28). Also, it may not be forgotten that this passage, rather than teaching that it is possible to come to be saved over and over again, instead teaches the impossibility of renewing to repentance these people who are described here. Finally, if this passage does indeed teach a falling away of saints, then it contradicts itself, for in verses 9-19 the chapter teaches the perseverance of saints, founding the hope of perseverance on the immutability of God's own counsel and oath. We must conclude, therefore, that this passage also speaks of those who do come under the gospel and its call, who are taught the Scriptures, hear the promises, and perhaps even respond emotionally to the gospel, but who are nevertheless spiritually dead and never bear true fruit like the barren earth of which Hebrews 6:8 speaks. Rather, therefore, than teaching a falling away of saints, it speaks of terrible judgment that shall come on all those who hear the gospel and turn from it and of their greater damnation, and it stands as warning to all who hear. 5. Hebrews 10:26, 27: “For if we sin wilfully after that we have received the knowledge of the truth, there remaineth no more sacrifice for sins, But a certain fearful looking for of judgment and fiery indignation, which shall devour the adversaries.” This passage is sometimes interpreted as though it teaches that it is possible for sacrifice to be made once for a person's sins and then for that person through unbelief to lose that salvation and come under the judgment of God. This is not what the text says, however. We should note that the passage very carefully speaks of "those who have received the knowledge of the truth" and does not say that sacrifice for sin was made for them. In fact, the word more in the KJV leaves an entirely wrong impression. The idea is not that there is no additional sacrifice for sin (over and above that which they have already received) but that there is no longer any possibility of sacrifice for sin for them. In other words, the passage is talking about those who commit what is sometimes known as the "unforgiveable sin," that is, those who with full knowledge of the truth wilfully reject it and who, by that, show themselves beyond any hope of salvation. 6. II Peter 2:1: “But there were false prophets also among the people, even as there shall be false teachers among you, who privily shall bring in damnable heresies, even denying the Lord that bought them, and bring upon themselves swift destruction.” This passage, too, at first glance might be taken as contradicting the perseverance of the saints, and so it is sometimes quoted as though it says that some come to deny the Lord Who bought them. The passage then would be speaking of those who had been purchased by the blood of Christ, and who perhaps had even been brought to believe that but now deny it to their own condemnation and destruction. It should be noted, however, that the text really says the opposite about these people. It not only calls them false teachers but says that they brought in, i.e., into the church, with them their damnable heresies. Nor is the idea of the passage that Christ bought them and now they deny Him but rather that their heresy is exactly that they deny the blood of atonement and that it was shed either for them or for anyone as the only way of salvation. Literally, the passage says that they deny "the Lord having bought them." And so the passage not only does not contradict the rest of the Scriptures but really does not speak to the matter of perseverance at all. Rev. Ronald Cammenga and Rev. Ronald Hanko This extract from “Saved by Grace” is posted with permission from its publisher, Reformed Free Publishing Association, Grandville, Michigan Next: Chapter VI Perseverance of the Saints - E. Objection _________________________
|
|
|
Post by Admin on May 14, 2024 20:19:13 GMT -5
“DIFFICULT PASSAGES” OF PERSEVERANCE OF THE SAINTS 38th INSTALLMENT - letter “P” of TULIP Saved by Grace (Five Points of Calvinism) Chapter VI – Perseverance of the Saints E. Objection The chief objection that is brought against the doctrine of perseverance is that it leads to carelessness on the part of Christians, so that they are not as concerned about holiness and Christian living as they should be. Against this objection stand all the passages cited above [in previous installments] which show that the doctrine of perseverance is in no sense of the word a denial of our responsibility to be godly and holy in all our conduct and speech and even in our thoughts and motives. It is interesting, though, that the Bible itself deals with this objection in several places. Both in Romans 3:5-8 and in Romans 6:1, 2 Paul deals with the idea that grace encourages sinning. That, of course, is a step beyond the idea that sovereign grace leaves a person without any reason to be holy. In this case, some were apparently saying that the doctrines of grace (including perseverance) were themselves a reason for sinning, since the more a person sins, the more God's grace is revealed. The Bible deals very harshly with this idea and with those who taught it. In Romans 3:8 Paul says that those who say such things speak slander and will suffer just damnation. His answer in Romans 6:2 is by itself a sufficient answer to all who might think this. "God," Paul says, "forbids it." But even in Romans 6, Paul goes on to explain what is really the answer of the Scriptures to all such objections, that is, that grace is one. The same grace by which we are chosen, redeemed, and preserved, also leads us inevitably to holiness by bringing us regeneration, sanctification, calling, and conversion. No one can have just part of that grace. He cannot possibly be chosen and justified without also being sanctified and made holy. If he has no holiness, the only possible explanation is that he is not chosen and redeemed either. There cannot possibly be such a thing as a "carnal Christian." Rev. Ronald Cammenga and Rev. Ronald Hanko This extract from “Saved by Grace” is posted with permission from its publisher, Reformed Free Publishing Association, Grandville, Michigan Next: Chapter VI Perseverance of the Saints - F. Denials
|
|