The Truth Shall Set You Free

Tuesday, July 25, 2006

Extreme Calvinism -- "Born Again Before Faith"...

Calvinism -- the very word raises emotions, sparks debates and arguments, begets name-calling, and in general fosters divisiveness that liters the past and most likely will continue in the future until such time as the Lord returns. I will be the first to admit my understanding of the Calvinist's position was cursory at best and certainly not something I spent much time pondering. After numerous on-line encounters of Blogs, websites, conventional books by well-respected authors and of course much prayer and study of the Scripture on these matters; I can honestly say I do have a solid understanding of the issues as they lie today.

As evidenced by my recent posts, I have gleaned much from Dr. Geisler's fine book Chosen But Free. This book goes into great detail in outlining the 'history' of Calvinism and contrasts it with what is known today as 'extreme' or 'hyper' Calvinism. It also does a masterful job of exposing extreme Arminianism versus Arminianism and how they differ from historic Calvinism.

In studying Calvinism, I quickly discovered, as evidenced by some of the comments associated with my previous posts, the concept that one must be regenerated so that they can then place faith in Jesus. I've been a Christian for 37 years, I've read the Bible from cover to cover numerous time, shared the gospel with people, prepared in-depth Bible studies for Sunday School, Bible seminars, and teaching series, and I must confess this idea of being born again or regenerated prior to faith never lept off the pages of the Bible as I prayed and studied these many years. Furthermore, this concept of being born again prior to faith has not been raised by an unregenerate or lost person regarding salvation when I've talked to them about the Lord. My 'extreme' Calvinist defenders might argue that they will never bring that up because they don't understand the things of God and it is foolishness to them. Moreover, the doctrine of salvation is beyond an unregenerate person's capacity.

To me, the best way to examine a situation is to test it against the clear Word of God. I'm constantly drawn to the Philippian jailer and his encounter with God. I can not find any indication in the Scriptures that the man was regenerated so that he could then place faith in Jesus. Where is that to be found in Scripture? Actually, what we do find is a lost man asking the apostle what he must do to be saved! Now, either he was lost when he asked that question or he was saved! You can't have it both ways. I proclaim he was lost because of a several clear reasons:

1) The Bible was explicit in its use of the language that was uttered from the man's lips -- he admitted to the apostle he was lost.

2) Those that argue he was 'secretly' regenerated prior to this so that he could then place faith in Jesus must prove that from Scripture. If this doctrine was clearly taught in Scripture, don't you think the apostles of all people would have an excellent working knowledge of it and would have taken every opportunity to preach it? I can't find where they did.

3) The apostle responded to the jailer's enquiry with the simple words, believe on the Lord Jesus Christ and thou shalt be saved... In other words, it could not be any clearer -- you believe and then you are saved!


I'm pasting for your reading pleasure a paragraph from James White's Statement of Faith found on his website here.

We believe that God, in His sovereign grace and mercy, regenerates sinful men by the power of the Holy Spirit, not by any action of their own, bringing them to new life. God grants to them the gifts of faith and repentance, which they then exercise by believing in Christ and turning from their sins in love for God. As a result of this faith, based upon the sacrifice of the Lord Jesus Christ, God justifies or makes righteous the one who believes. God's gift of faith and the continuing work of the Holy Spirit in the lives of the elect, results in good works. These good works flow from true, saving faith; they are a necessary result of faith, but are not to be considered necessary to the gaining of justification, which is by God's grace through faith alone, so that no man can boast.

When you read this paragraph carefully you see this order:

1) God regenerates sinful man by the power of the Holy Spirit
2) God brings them to a regenerated state of new life
3) Then, God grants them the gifts of faith and repentance, which they then exercise by believing in Christ

I'm not making this up, it is what James White believes the Scriptures teach and he is not alone -- there are many other extreme Calvinists who agree with him. But sadly, I have yet to see any clear exegetical effort from Scriptural proof texts that show the progression noted above.

In Him,

Eye

74 Comments:

  • Eye,

    You said there is no scriptural support for election preceding faith.

    John 6:44 - No man can come to me, except the Father which hath sent me draw him.

    God must draw a person or that person will not have faith.

    2 Tim 2:25 - In meekness instructing those that oppose themselves; if God peradventure will give them repentance to the acknowledging of the truth.

    Repentance is a gift of God that results in a person acknowledging the truth of the gospel; if God does not give repentance, that person will not admit that the gospel is true.

    1 Cor 1:23-24 - But we preach Christ crucified, unto the Jews a stumblingblock, and unto the Greeks foolishness; But unto them which are called, both Jews and Greeks, Christ the power of God, and the wisdom of God.

    Those who practice Judaism and other non-Christians find the crucifixion offensive. Evangelists like Paul preach to everyone, but only those who receive the effectual calling from God will recognize the power and wisdom of Christ.

    2 Cor 4:4-6 - In whom the god of this world hath blinded the minds of them which believe not, lest the light of the glorious gospel of Christ, who is the image of God, should shine unto them. For we preach not ourselves, but Christ Jesus the Lord; and ourselves your servants for Jesus’ sake. For God, who commanded the light to shine out of darkness, hath shined in our hearts, to give the light of the knowledge of the glory of God in the face of Jesus Christ.

    Satan has blinded all the people in this world to the truth of the gospel, but God has shined in the hearts of believers to make them know that Christ is the glory of God.

    Acts 16:14 - 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.

    Lydia was a proselyte to the Jewish worship of God, in other words, the religion of Judaism. But the Lord opened her heart to accept the gospel of Christ that Paul was preaching. Note: first the Lord opened her heart, then she attended to Paul's preaching.

    These and other scriptural supports for Calvinism can be found here:

    http://www.desiringgod.org/library/topics/doctrines_grace/tulip.html

    Dr Davy

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at July 26, 2006 7:48 AM  

  • Dr Davy said:
    John 6:44 - No man can come to me, except the Father which hath sent me draw him.

    God must draw a person or that person will not have faith.

    Eye's response: This verse clearly teaches that God draws the individual, but this verse does not teach that faith is a gift of God. If you continue on into verse 45 of John 6, it reads, 'They will all be taught of God.' The method of obtaining faith is not mentioned. However, the Bible does say in Romans 10:17 that 'faith cometh by hearing and hearing by the Word of God.' Furthermore, being drawn by God is conditioned upon the individual's faith. The context of their being drawn (6:37) was he who believes (6:35) or 'everyone who believes in Him' (6:40, v. 47). Those who believe are enabled by God to come to Him. (John 6:65).

    Eye does not see where this verse is a proof text for regeneration before faith...

    Dr Davy said:

    2 Tim 2:25 - In meekness instructing those that oppose themselves; if God peradventure will give them repentance to the acknowledging of the truth.

    Repentance is a gift of God that results in a person acknowledging the truth of the gospel; if God does not give repentance, that person will not admit that the gospel is true.

    Eye's response:

    I think your point here is that faith and repentance are 'gifts' given to the elect and are essential and necessary for them to exercise these gifts to be saved. The verse you cite affirms the fact that the opportunity to repent is a gift of God. He graciously allows us the opportunity to turn from our sins, but we must do the repenting. God does not repent for us. Repentance is truly an act of our will supported and encouraged by His grace.

    Dr Davy said:

    1 Cor 1:23-24 - But we preach Christ crucified, unto the Jews a stumblingblock, and unto the Greeks foolishness; But unto them which are called, both Jews and Greeks, Christ the power of God, and the wisdom of God.

    Those who practice Judaism and other non-Christians find the crucifixion offensive. Evangelists like Paul preach to everyone, but only those who receive the effectual calling from God will recognize the power and wisdom of Christ.

    Eye's response:

    This verse does not teach regeneration before faith... Actually, the power of the gospel and the preaching of the word are the means by which the Holy Spirit 'regenerates' the individual who believes 'the gospel'. You must believe before you are regenerated. Yes, a person who is dead in their trespasses and sins can believe the gospel as a result of the preaching and power of the gospel!

    Dr Davy said:

    2 Cor 4:4-6 - In whom the god of this world hath blinded the minds of them which believe not, lest the light of the glorious gospel of Christ, who is the image of God, should shine unto them. For we preach not ourselves, but Christ Jesus the Lord; and ourselves your servants for Jesus’ sake. For God, who commanded the light to shine out of darkness, hath shined in our hearts, to give the light of the knowledge of the glory of God in the face of Jesus Christ.

    Satan has blinded all the people in this world to the truth of the gospel, but God has shined in the hearts of believers to make them know that Christ is the glory of God.

    Eye's response: We were all blinded and in our sin because we are all lost before becoming regenerated. Clearly it is God who gives, initiates and brings to pass the salvation of those who will believe the gospel. But again, I do not see where these verses teach regeneration before faith -- I don't see faith even mentioned in the passage, nor regeneration. I do see the preaching of the Lord Jesus Christ and therein lies the 'power' of the gospel to save those who will believe. Jesus never promised anyone He would do the believing for them. He did call everyone to repent. You must do that and believe the gospel before you can be born again!

    Dr Davy said:

    Acts 16:14 - 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.

    Lydia was a proselyte to the Jewish worship of God, in other words, the religion of Judaism. But the Lord opened her heart to accept the gospel of Christ that Paul was preaching. Note: first the Lord opened her heart, then she attended to Paul's preaching.

    Eye's response:

    Eye certainly does not deny that God moves upon the hearts of unbelievers to persuade and prompt them to exercise faith in Jesus. However, I do deny that God does this coercively by irresistible grace and that He only does it on some persons (the elect). Clearly the Holy Spirit is convicting the world of sin, righteousness, and judgment...(World means all men, not just some). God does not force anyone to believe in Him.

    Hope this gives us more dialogue!

    In Him,

    Eye

    By Blogger Eye, at July 26, 2006 8:41 PM  

  • Eye, you said, "...but we must do the repenting." and "However, I do deny that God does this coercively by irresistible grace and that He only does it on some persons (the elect)."
    Well put.
    I believe you can throw out the concept of God electing individuals for salvation "before the foundation of the world" altogether...it's possible to do that and still not be an Arminian. It clears up many, many issues (and I remember it being one reason I didn't understand Geisler's book completely; he seems like a smart enough guy to realize that the Bible doesn't teach individual election to salvation), not the least of which is that God's character is at stake. Truly His heart is for the whole world.

    Dr. Davy: Are you a Piper fan? If so, I was right there with you for quite some time, Dave, believe me.

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at July 27, 2006 10:04 AM  

  • Mike,

    Thanks for stopping by again.

    To quote Geisler's book Chosen But Free, p. 148-9..."The Bible is a balanced book. It affirms both God's sovereignty and man's free choice. It teaches both that God is in complete control and that humans can choose to receive or reject salvation."

    I sees this from my study and I do believe the balance is there. A tension exists that is as incomprehensible (in my opinion) as the 'trinity' or for that matter eternity. Sure, we can grasp the concepts while never coming close to comprehending the beauty and complexity of the truth of these things...


    In Him,

    Eye

    By Blogger Eye, at July 27, 2006 11:39 AM  

  • Eye,
    Not looking for a fight, just wondering where the Bible teaches individual election to salvation. If individual election to salvation is true at all on any level, then regardless of any other contradictory statement one may make, God's character is not what He declares it to be. If "Jacob I loved, and Esau I hated" is to be taken as individual election to salvation, that God's purpose in election [of individuals to their eternal destiny] might stand, then we have a problem. I suppose that's where I didn't understand Geisler's point of view. I have no problem with unsolvable concepts such as the Trinity, I can accept that we are not to understand the motives/judgments of God; however, when He says one thing and does another, then I have a problem. He has either elected individual people to salvation or He hasn't. If He has, then He is not Whom He has declared Himself to be, which makes Him a liar.
    I don't see where the "tension" is between God's sovereignty and man's will. God created man to rule over nature, God gave the earth to man for man to subdue it. At that point it seems that God would be delegating authority to man. What happens to God's sovereignty? He still has it, of course, just like a CEO still has the authority even when his vice presidents and sub-managers are making decisions for him. To me, no tension exists between the CEO's authority and the manager's decisions. So why is there tension all of a sudden when talking about God and His will? Because of the ideas of Augustine and Calvin, et al. Paul never talks about tension or contradictions, only mysteries, and those mysteries have nothing to do with man's will, only God's plan throughout the ages.
    Make sense?

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at July 27, 2006 12:14 PM  

  • Mike,

    I agree with you that Romans 9:11-13 is misused by extreme Calvinists to support their position. I believe the Bible clearly teaches that God is not speaking about the individual Jacob but about the nation of Jacob (Israel). Rebekah was told in Gen 25:23 there are two nations in your womb... This refers to corporate election.

    So, even though we are dealing with corporate election, each individual still has to accept the Messiah to be saved.

    And, I think this is very important -- God's 'love' for Jacob and 'hate' for Esau is not speaking of those men before they were born, but rather long after they lived!! Moreover, the Hebrew word for hated really means 'loved less'

    The above points are what I believe the Bible teaches and I will say they are also documented clearly in Geisler's book.

    I'm not sure I follow your example of a CEO and his managers. Taking it a step further, the CEO had to 'hire' these managers first. I would say the hiring part is comparable to salvation in that the CEO 'chose' each manager out of stack of potential candidates and made the ultimate and final decision. From the manager's perspective -- he sought out the employer, worked his resume, had an appointment, got an offer and then decided to accept that offer. But, ultimately the CEO 'hired' the manager.

    I say all of that to say this, I see your example of a CEO and his managers as being comparable to God and His people/the elect. Do you mean something else by it?

    After all, God grants authority to those in leadership and government and we know they aren't all saved.

    Perhaps the word tension is a poor one, I agree that 'mystery' is better.

    I know Dawn will smile when she reads this, "According as he hath chosen us in him before the foundation of the world..." Ephesians 1:4.

    He chose me -- I ddidn't choose Him back there in eternity past.

    By Blogger Eye, at July 27, 2006 12:49 PM  

  • Eye: "I know Dawn will smile when she reads this, "According as he hath chosen us in him before the foundation of the world..." Ephesians 1:4."

    Yes, I'm smiling. :-)

    Mike, I see it like this. God chose us individually from before the foundation of the world because He knew we would believe.

    The Ephesians 1:4 scripture Eye has given does say that God has chose US (those who believe and receive Jesus) in Him before the foundation of the world. But I think Romans 8:28-30 gives us further insight in that we are chosen individually. But it is not an arbitrary choosing.

    The bible teaches that God's plan from the beginning was to save mankind from their sin. As you well know, Jesus was the ultimate sacrifice and it was the pleasure of God's good will that Jesus be the perfect sacrifice. It was also His pleasure to save those who would believe on His name and give us an inheritance. (I Corinthians 1:21 & Ephesians 1:5-14) God knew this from eternity past. He FIRST drew us and we responded.

    Hope this helps. Tell me where you think I've gone wrong.

    By Blogger Dawn, at July 27, 2006 4:13 PM  

  • Mike: "Truly His heart is for the whole world."

    I agree. God's heart truly IS for the whole world. I don't believe indidividual election negates that, it's just that God KNEW who we would be, though He has given ALL mankind many, many chances to have been one of the chosen.

    Remember, we're the one's stuck in time, God is not. :-)

    By Blogger Dawn, at July 27, 2006 4:18 PM  

  • Here's the deal; for a theological system to be correct it must work with the Bible. I, as well as Dawn and others, can give numerous Biblical examples of people coming to salvation in Jesus by believing the gospel.

    God doesn't make them believe -- He draws, convicts, puts people in their path that share the gospel over and over again with them (if necessary), woos them some more, and yes, God manages this entire process and even knows the outcome of all of this when the individual does not. Still, the individual must believe the gospel before they are saved and that is the responsibility of the individual. God does not make anyone repent or believe -- he leaves that up to the individual.

    That said, where are the numerous Biblical examples of the hyper-Calvinist's theological system as James White meticulously outlines for us that dogmatically proclaims that God does it all and man does nothing?

    In Him,

    Eye

    By Blogger Eye, at July 27, 2006 5:41 PM  

  • Eye,
    Thanks for the prompt replies.

    Is Ephesians 1 really the only place you get the idea of individual election to salvation? I've never heard of someone not using Romans 9 but using Ephesians 1...what reason do you have to interpret Ephesians 1 that way? Let's be blunt about it, if He chose me individually for salvation from before the foundation of the world and He did not choose my unsaved neighbor for salvation, then He didn't choose my unsaved neighbor. If He did not choose my unsaved neighbor for salvation when it was in His power to do so, then He is not the God that He has declared Himself to be. Make sense? If Geisler's point is that God chooses someone for salvation because that person chose to believe, then I might not have a problem with him, though that's not my own personal view. But I believe Geisler's point is that unconditional election can remain in our theology, isn't it?

    In the CEO example, the point that I was going for (which I failed to explain) is that delegation of power doesn't equal "giving up" power. In other words, a CEO is sovereign over the corporation, even though the manager's all do what they want to individually. I suppose what I'm proposing is that God has delegated "power" to each individual as to their choices, and has also delegated power such as government, as you mentioned. Does this make Him any less power-ful? No. He's the One Who started it all, and still the Owner, so of course all power belongs to Him. Hence we can make decisions, and there's no tension or mystery in why we're responsible for our decisions - God gave us the authority to make decisions. He created man to rule over the earth - that means God wasn't going to rule, man was. That make sense?

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at July 27, 2006 5:43 PM  

  • Mike,

    For now -- check out Dawn's blog here. It contains a very good back and forth on Ephesians 1.

    I'll give a more thorough response later, but for now I must go out to dinner with 'she who must be obeyed' as David Feherty says...


    In Him,

    Eye

    By Blogger Eye, at July 27, 2006 6:32 PM  

  • Eye,
    Yeah I think we're saying the same thing; I must have misunderstood what you were saying previously. Forgive me.
    I thought Geisler was trying to keep unconditional election in that book....is he not? Maybe I misunderstood that as well.
    Thanks for your thoughts, as always.

    Dawn,
    I don't think you've gone wrong. :)
    Nice post. I don't mind if you interpret Eph and Rom to say that God chose, as long you attach the idea that He didn't choose some and not others arbitrarily. I remain unconvinced in my own mind of conditional election to salvation, or any kind of election to salvation really. But I certainly have nothing against your view, it's well supported (Biblically and scholarly) and logically feasible.

    That being said, I don't understand where the mystery would come into play with either of your views, as there's really no mystery to it - faith saves.
    The whole 2-sided door that says "Whosoever will" and "Before the foundation of the world" seems to me to be a different view than what you two are proposing, no?

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at July 27, 2006 6:48 PM  

  • By the way, if I haven't said so before, I really like you guys (er, guy and girl). It's rare to run into such good theology on these online things.

    Eye,
    "the one who must be obeyed..."
    is it worth it? I'm considering cementing things with my girlfriend, but if I have to obey her... :)

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at July 27, 2006 6:50 PM  

  • Mike,

    Thank you for your kind words!! It means a lot, and I do appreciate your saying you enjoy the blog posts and commentary. That's refreshing.

    Yes, it is definitely worth it when the Lord leads you to the right woman. The part about 'she who must be obeyed' reflects my sometimes sarcastic humor. David Feherty is an interesting man -- but his life story is very sad. I think he hides in his over the top humor at times and one of the things I read in one of his golf columns was the comment about his wife. He never refers to her as the Mrs., rather 'she who must be obeyed' and that struck my funny bone...

    I hope to post on Irresistible grace in the next 24 hours. Hopefully you will find it to be worth the read. I will get into Biblical examples of men that clearly resisted God when He personally dealt with them in their sin...

    Mike asked: The whole 2-sided door that says "Whosoever will" and "Before the foundation of the world" seems to me to be a different view than what you two are proposing, no?

    Eye's reply: Truly God did choose before the foundation of the world and He chose those who would believe. Does His foreknowledge come into play? Personally, I do think so. Mike I think you clearly made an excellent point in your article regarding humanity's limitation with respect to linear time. We live in the river of forward flowing time. We can't swim back to the past nor can we swim ahead to the future. That said, God can because He created the concept!

    So, God can look at every result of man dealing with the conviction of the Spirit and know the outcome. God doesn't 'make' or'force' the outcome -- He simply 'knows' it. When the Holy Spirit gave Paul the words to pen in Ephesians, I used to get real nervous about all of this and I had a hard time with it. But the more I've meditated on this, the Bible makes it real clear that no one goes to hell because God damned them there without a choice. Rather it clearly teaches that man's choice to reject the gospel sends them to Hell.

    Back to the door -- Whosoever will is on the front of the door. God calls all! 'Many are called, but few are chosen'. Why? Because the many reject the gospel. They refuse to in faith reach out and 'receive' the free gift of salvation. Once they do and walk through the door they turn and read the plaque on the backside and it says, 'chosen before the foundation of the world'.

    Hope this helps dear brother.

    In Him,


    Eye

    By Blogger Eye, at July 27, 2006 9:55 PM  

  • Eye,

    This is interesting and fun, digging into the Word and theology like this! It is my prayer that those who read these discussions will know what they believe and why they believe it, and that it will be based on Scripture and sound logic. Then when they are challenged by difficult times in their life, or when they are called on to explain or defend their faith, they will have a firm foundation to work from.

    Eye said: "And, I think this is very important -- God's 'love' for Jacob and 'hate' for Esau is not speaking of those men before they were born, but rather long after they lived!! Moreover, the Hebrew word for hated really means 'loved less'"

    First, the Hebrew word for hate means hate. See Deut 12:31 for example: "for every abomination to the LORD, which he hateth, have they done unto their gods." God hates pagan practices, He doesn't just love them less than godliness.

    Theologians and grammarians have determined that in Lk 14:26 (If any man come to me, and hate not his father, and mother, and wife, and children, and brethren, and sisters, yea, and his own life also, he cannot be my disciple.), Jesus meant "love less" when He used the word. Whether Paul was using "hate" to mean "love less" in Rom 9 (or Malachi at Mal 1:3) is another question.

    Second, it is true that Rom 9 (and Mal 1) was written long after they lived, but verse 11 says that it does have to do with God making a decision before the children were born. Before the boys Jacob and Esau were born, God had decided to honor Jacob and his descendants Israel and not to honor Esau and his descendants the Edomites.

    The seeker will ask, "But what if Esau wanted to worship God? Did God make that impossible? Did God reject Esau unfairly?" One answer to that question, that makes us feel good, is, "God knew beforehand that Esau would reject Him."

    But Paul poses a similar seeker question in Rom 9:14 and 19, and Paul doesn't answer the question with an answer based on foreknowledge. His answer is based on the sovereignty of God in creation and election. God had a right to create Esau and treat him the way He did, just as He had the right to create Pharaoh to be a vessel of wrath fitted for destruction.

    And in this explanation of God's election of some and rejection of others, Paul clearly states that man's free will has nothing to do with election: "So then it is not of him that willeth, nor of him that runneth, but of God that sheweth mercy."

    And this is not just about nations--it is not just corporate. It is individuals: "Even us, whom he hath called, not of the Jews only, but also of the Gentiles?" This is not about calling Jews or Gentiles, but about calling individuals from among the nations. (Mal 1 is about nations, but Rom 9 is also about individuals.)

    Mike doesn't like the idea of double predestination. It is indeed a difficult doctrine, but what does Rom 9:18 teach? "Therefore hath he mercy on whom he will have mercy, and whom he will he hardeneth." We can't reject a doctrine just because we don't like it. Our challenge is to let Scripture dictate our theology, not the other way around.

    Dr Davy

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at July 28, 2006 7:41 AM  

  • Dr. Davy,
    Excellent statement with, "Our challenge is to let Scripture dictate our theology, not the other way around." I fully agree..(Which is why I find these disussions so amusing - if it really is that simple, why so much confusion over it?) :)
    You said, "It is indeed a difficult doctrine, but what does Rom 9:18 teach? 'Therefore hath he mercy on whom he will have mercy, and whom he will he hardeneth.'"
    Since Scripture should dictate our theology, Scripture must be our guide for interpreting other Scripture. If the rest of the Bible wasn't filled with God pleading with wicked people to turn from their ways, then I would say that your interpretation of Romans 9:18 is correct. But since the rest of the Bible is filled with God literally pleading with man to turn from his wicked ways and trust in the Lord, I cannot interpret Rom 9:18 the calvinist way. The important question to ask when it comes to this whole chapter in Romans is this: "What are the possible ways to interpret this passage? Which way fits with the rest of the Bible, matching God's character as He's revealed it through His Word, through prophets, and through His Son?"
    If the fruit of the Spirit (the very character of God) is love, then how does He hate someone in any eternal sense? I have no problem with Him using different people for different tasks - He chose to use Jacob's line as the line for the Messiah, instead of Esau. He chose to reveal His Word to Jacob's line, not Esau's. He raised Pharaoh up (arguably knowing that Pharaoh would resist Him) to his position to use his rebelliousness to His glory, just as He used Joseph's brothers' wickedness for good, even though it was they who were wicked, not God. The context of Romans 9 could possibly be God's plan and how he uses people, and not eternal salvation from hell. If Pharaoh is such a good case of God hardening whom He will in an eternal sense, then why does the Scripture record Pharaoh hardening his heart before God hardens it? Seems God could've made it much clearer that He was the One really pulling the strings, that He caused Pharaoh to harden his heart and then He hardened Pharoah's heart directly.
    If the only thing seperating me from hell is an arbitrary decision of a God who hates 3/4 of humanity and actually created them for hell, then I am not entirely sure why I'd be thankful to Him. (And, interestingly, He commands us to love them more than He does!) This idea is no different than that of the Old Testament Jews, who believed the Gentiles were logs created to fuel the fires of hell, and that God's chosen people (the Jews) were the only ones who would enter into paradise. Same malignment of God's character, different time in history.
    As always, God has mercy on whom He wills, truly: for He resists the proud, but gives grace to the humble.

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at July 28, 2006 10:30 AM  

  • Dr. Davy,
    I'm assuming both of us are going to come away from this discussion with little to no difference in our thinking; at least it looks that way at the moment. (I would at least encourage you to consider that there might be a consistent way to interpret the Bible apart from Calvinism or Arminianism.)

    But if you reply, can you include a reply to the following questions? I'd like to hear from a Calvinist's point of view.

    If God has determined people's choices, then what need has He to be longsuffering? What need has He to be jealous? What need has He to be patient? What need has He to be grieved? I believe one only needs to be longsuffering if one can be frustrated by another's choices, one only needs to be jealous if one can be ignored/replaced by another's choices, one only needs to be patient (or slow to anger) if one can be angered by another's choices, and one only needs to be grieved when one can be disappointed by another's choices. These are all attributes that God Himself has revealed are part of His character, and yet, what place do they have in a God who has determined the choices of people? Perhaps He has multiple personalities, one which determines and one which reacts, or doesn't realize He is talking out of both sides of His mouth. These are the only answers with which I can come up, but would be interested to hear any other suggestions.
    I'm also curious as a side note, do you believe that moral responsibility requires moral ability?

    Thanks in advance for any answers you may provide.

    Eye, sorry if I hijacked this post...wasn't my intent.

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at July 28, 2006 12:15 PM  

  • Dr Davy said:

    This is interesting and fun, digging into the Word and theology like this! It is my prayer that those who read these discussions will know what they believe and why they believe it, and that it will be based on Scripture and sound logic. Then when they are challenged by difficult times in their life, or when they are called on to explain or defend their faith, they will have a firm foundation to work from.

    Eye said: "And, I think this is very important -- God's 'love' for Jacob and 'hate' for Esau is not speaking of those men before they were born, but rather long after they lived!! Moreover, the Hebrew word for hated really means 'loved less'"

    Eye’s response: First – Amen to your sentiment!!! Second – I would like to delve into the Hebrew word for hate and its relative usage with regard to love. See these verses:

    Gen 29:30 And he went in also unto Rachel, and he loved also Rachel more than Leah, and served with him yet seven other years.
    Gen 29:31 And when the LORD saw that Leah [was] hated, he opened her womb: but Rachel [was] barren.

    These verses use the word love and hate and they are so clear in the context of 'loved less'...

    Dr Davy said:

    Theologians and grammarians have determined that in Lk 14:26 (If any man come to me, and hate not his father, and mother, and wife, and children, and brethren, and sisters, yea, and his own life also, he cannot be my disciple.), Jesus meant "love less" when He used the word. Whether Paul was using "hate" to mean "love less" in Rom 9 (or Malachi at Mal 1:3) is another question.

    Eye’s response:
    Well said – here’s a link to your point on ‘loved less’ if anyone is interested.

    Dr Davy said:

    Second, it is true that Rom 9 (and Mal 1) was written long after they lived, but verse 11 says that it does have to do with God making a decision before the children were born. Before the boys Jacob and Esau were born, God had decided to honor Jacob and his descendants Israel and not to honor Esau and his descendants the Edomites.

    The seeker will ask, "But what if Esau wanted to worship God? Did God make that impossible? Did God reject Esau unfairly?" One answer to that question, that makes us feel good, is, "God knew beforehand that Esau would reject Him."

    But Paul poses a similar seeker question in Rom 9:14 and 19, and Paul doesn't answer the question with an answer based on foreknowledge. His answer is based on the sovereignty of God in creation and election. God had a right to create Esau and treat him the way He did, just as He had the right to create Pharaoh to be a vessel of wrath fitted for destruction.

    Eye’s response:

    Keep in mind that in the context of Romans 9:12 we see God making a statement – the elder shall serve the younger… V.13 again quotes from Malachi 1:3 and the word hate in context of Genesis 29:30-31 makes sense,, don’t you agree? Also in Malachi 1 – Edom, the nation, is tied directly to the reference of Esau…

    I think we are pretty close here – just some fine points of clarification…

    Dr. Davy said:

    Mike doesn't like the idea of double predestination. It is indeed a difficult doctrine, but what does Rom 9:18 teach? "Therefore hath he mercy on whom he will have mercy, and whom he will he hardeneth." We can't reject a doctrine just because we don't like it. Our challenge is to let Scripture dictate our theology, not the other way around.

    Eye’s response:

    Extreme Calvinists believe God elects to salvation and He actively elects to damnation. They say God is active in choosing both categories. The moderate Calvinist holds to God actively choosing the elect and they believe He is not involved in choosing the non-elect. In other words He is passive in not choosing the non-elect. Problems with hyper-Calvinism with regard to double predestination make God the direct author of evil. Hyper-Calvinists say God does not merely permit evil, He causes it!!! Matt 5:48, Hab 1:13, James 1:13 and other Scriptures refute this! Also, hyper-Calvinists confess that God in not all-loving as they teach He hates the non-elect.

    One verse – God is love!

    In Him,

    Eye

    By Blogger Eye, at July 28, 2006 1:13 PM  

  • Hey,

    Lots of great discussion going on here by folks who are kind, concerned for the veracity of Scripture and the truth!

    Praise God!

    That said -- does anyone want to defend "Born Again Before Faith"??? -- the topic at hand...

    :)

    In Him,

    Eye

    By Blogger Eye, at July 28, 2006 1:16 PM  

  • I'm responding to a post Dr Davy made under the Limited Atonement Post -- this reply goes with this topic:

    Dr Davy said:

    Our question about regeneration before salvation is a little bit of a semantic question. We agree that God works an act of grace in the hearts of unbelievers.

    quoting Eye, "I go back to our friend the Philippian jailer. Could this lost man save himself? NO. Hey, under the power of the gospel he knew he was lost! That's why he asked the question about salvation."

    Dr Davy asks: What is this "power of the gospel"? The Calvinist would say it is the power to regenerate a "dead" person, to open his eyes to the beauty of Christ. The Arminian would say that it is grace working in a person's heart, but it is not regenerating and it is not irresistible.

    What about Paul's commission, as he recounted it in Ac 26:17-18: Jesus was "Delivering thee from the people, and from the Gentiles, unto whom now I send thee, To open their eyes, and to turn them from darkness to light, and from the power of Satan unto God, that they may receive forgiveness of sins, and inheritance among them which are sanctified by faith that is in me."

    What was involved in Paul's mandate "to open their eyes"? The Calvinist would say Paul, as an ambassador of Christ, sometimes mediated the power of God to regenerate dead people so that they would believe.

    Eye’s reply:

    Since this post is more applicable to ‘born again before faith’ – I will respond here. The answer is really very simple from Scripture. You are either born again or you are not. Either the Philippian jailer made a true confession or he did not. I say he did. He was lost and knew he needed to be saved even though he was (dead, lost, sick, not born again, separated, etc.) How could he know he needed to be saved – by the power of the gospel.

    Romans 1:16 "For I am not ashamed of the gospel of Christ: for it is the power of God unto salvation to every one that believeth; to the Jew first, and also to the Greek."

    This verse in Romans 1:16 clearly states that the ‘gospel of Christ’ is the POWER (dunamis – supernatural power of God; we get dynamite from the root dunamis) of God unto salvation to every one that believeth (believeth -- pistus in Greek – same word as faith). What’s incredibly interesting to me based on this verse is the fact that the Bible says the gospel of Christ is the power or catalyst that gets one saved, not some mystical or ‘secret work of regeneration’ that occurs prior to someone placing faith in Jesus. I’ve yet to find that teaching anywhere in clear Scripture. Actually the opposite is what the clear teaching of Scripture states. We must first place our faith in Jesus before we can be born again. Please see this Scripture:

    John 1:12-13 "But as many as received him, to them gave he power to become the sons of God, [even] to them that believe on his name: Which were born, not of blood, nor of the will of the flesh, nor of the will of man, but of God."

    Now the word power (EXOUSIA) is indeed a very interesting word in the Greek – please see Strong’s definition below. For brevity, I stopped after the 3 point – it continues in detail beyond…

    1) power of choice, liberty of doing as one pleases
    a) leave or permission
    2) physical and mental power
    a) the ability or strength with which one is endued, which he either possesses or exercises
    3) the power of authority (influence) and of right (privilege)

    This clearly teaches that the new birth is conditioned upon you receiving Jesus Christ. To qoute one old preacher, “There is not a case in the history of the universe where any man was ever ‘born again’ until he received Jesus Christ, and to say that total depravity extends to acts of the will is nonsense.” EXOUSIA pretty much confirms that – see definition above. First you must ‘receive’ Him, and then He gives you the power to become the sons of God. You don’t receive in a vacuum; again just study Cornelieus’ testimony as outlined in the Scripture.

    By Blogger Eye, at July 28, 2006 1:33 PM  

  • Dear Eye,

    Discovered you by accident.

    I need to applaud mike's quote:

    "By the way, if I haven't said so before, I really like you guys (er, guy and girl). It's rare to run into such good theology on these online things."

    By Blogger Jerry Grace, at July 31, 2006 8:50 AM  

  • Dear Jerry,

    Thanks so much! Please drop by any time and add your thoughts to the mix!

    In Him,

    Eye

    By Blogger Eye, at July 31, 2006 9:55 AM  

  • Mike,

    You said: "If Pharaoh is such a good case of God hardening whom He will in an eternal sense, then why does the Scripture record Pharaoh hardening his heart before God hardens it? Seems God could've made it much clearer that He was the One really pulling the strings, that He caused Pharaoh to harden his heart and then He hardened Pharoah's heart directly."

    But clear back in Ex 4:21 God announced that He would harden Pharaoh's heart, and again in Ex 7:3. Then in Ex 7:13 God does it. How do you conclude that Pharaoh does it first?

    Dr Davy

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at August 02, 2006 9:35 AM  

  • Mike,

    You wrote: "If God has determined people's choices, then what need has He to be longsuffering? What need has He to be jealous? What need has He to be patient? What need has He to be grieved? ... Perhaps He has multiple personalities, one which determines and one which reacts, or doesn't realize He is talking out of both sides of His mouth. These are the only answers with which I can come up, but would be interested to hear any other suggestions."

    These are good questions. From Scripture we know that God is grieved etc. We also know that your suggested answers are unacceptable. I'll have to give these questions more thought.

    I do have a counter-question for those who champion free will. If men have unqualified free will, how can God accomplish anything at all? How can He answer prayer for my unsaved brother without encroaching on someone's will? How can He protect me from a mugger without encroaching on the mugger's will? How can He see to it that I live out His plan for my life without encroaching on the wills of every person I ever encounter? Therefore, how can I trust Him to protect me if He can't do anything about the various dangers?

    You wrote: "I'm also curious as a side note, do you believe that moral responsibility requires moral ability?"

    Paul poses that same question in Rom 9:19. The question is, if Pharaoh had no moral ability, why is he responsible? And the answer is, essentially, God is God and you are not; God may do what He wants without answering to you. These things are too deep to understand, but we do understand that God is loving and God is just.

    Dr Davy

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at August 02, 2006 9:54 AM  

  • Eye,

    You wrote: "Keep in mind that in the context of Romans 9:12 we see God making a statement – the elder shall serve the younger… V.13 again quotes from Malachi 1:3 and the word hate in context of Genesis 29:30-31 makes sense,, don’t you agree? Also in Malachi 1 – Edom, the nation, is tied directly to the reference of Esau…

    "I think we are pretty close here – just some fine points of clarification…"

    Dr Davy's reply: I agree that in Malachi Esau and Edom are tied directly. But Paul seems to be referring to individuals. Romans 9 starts with the question of the salvation of Israel (Rom 9:4). But from the question of the salvation of the nation of Israel, he turns to the fact of the salvation of individuals from Israel (9:6). To illustrate, he uses God's dealings with the individuals Isaac, Jacob, Esau, and Pharaoh.

    I agree that in Gn 29:30-31 "hate" means "love less," but that doesn't settle what it means in Mal 1:2-3. The Hebrew word sane' sometimes means "love less" but it most often means "hate." For example, in Gn 37:4-8 Joseph's brothers hated him enough to kill him. Just because it CAN mean "love less" doesn't mean it DOES mean "love less" in Mal 1:2-3.

    A question is, Can God hate a person? In Ps 11:5 it says that the Lord hates the one who loves violence, and Pr 6:19 describes two kinds of people God hates, a false witness and a divisive person.

    Dr Davy

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at August 02, 2006 10:38 AM  

  • Eye,

    (Sorry I'm doing these one at a time. I just keep seeing things to respond to.)

    You said: "Problems with hyper-Calvinism with regard to double predestination make God the direct author of evil. Hyper-Calvinists say God does not merely permit evil, He causes it!!! Matt 5:48, Hab 1:13, James 1:13 and other Scriptures refute this!"

    We have to figure out how to balance those passages with Is 45:7, "I form the light, and create darkness: I make peace, and create evil: I the LORD do all these things." And Amos 3:6, "Shall a trumpet be blown in the city, and the people not be afraid? shall there be evil in a city, and the LORD hath not done it?" And Lam 3:37-38, "Who is he that saith, and it cometh to pass, when the Lord commandeth it not? Out of the mouth of the most High proceedeth not evil and good?"

    And right there is Lam 3:31-36, "For the Lord will not cast off for ever: But though he cause grief, yet will he have compassion according to the multitude of his mercies. For he doth not afflict willingly nor grieve the children of men. To crush under his feet all the prisoners of the earth, To turn aside the right of a man before the face of the most High, To subvert a man in his cause, the Lord approveth not."

    It is complicated.

    Dr Davy

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at August 02, 2006 10:47 AM  

  • Dr Davy,

    I found this on Christiananswers.net...

    Isaiah 45:7 - What does it mean? The word translated "evil" here is the Hebrew word ra'. A better translation in modern English is "calamity" or "disaster" or "woe," as this word is translated in this verse in more recent translations. Dr. Henry Morris points out: "God did not create light, for He is light. It was the primeval darkness which He created in order to have a division between day and night. 'Evil,' as used here, refers to evil of a physical nature (storms), not moral evil." See other uses of the words "light" and "evil" in the Bible: Gen. 1:4; Exo. 10:22; 31:2; Lam. 3:38.

    In Him,

    Eye

    By Blogger Eye, at August 02, 2006 9:59 PM  

  • Eye,

    You quoted another source as saying, "Isaiah 45:7 - What does it mean? The word translated "evil" here is the Hebrew word ra'. A better translation in modern English is "calamity" or "disaster" or "woe," as this word is translated in this verse in more recent translations."

    Are you saying the KJV is wrong and more recent translations are better? :-0

    In Isaiah the inspired prophet is saying that both /shalom/ and /ra'/ come from God. When a sentence uses polar opposites, the intended meaning of each is probably whatever aspect(s) of one is opposite the other. /shalom/ means political or personal peace, safety, prosperity, well-being, or freedom from illness. /ra'/ means moral evil or wickedness, calamity, distress, or trouble. In this case you are right, it is quite possible that what is intended is political peace vs. calamity. Both come from God. In other words, God brought 9/11. But if we admit that God brought 9/11 and other political calamities, we haven't completely avoided the moral issue that God brings what appears to most people as "evil".

    I also quoted Amos 3:6, "Shall a trumpet be blown in the city, and the people not be afraid? shall there be evil in a city, and the LORD hath not done it?" Here the context is clearly military calamity. Trumpets were blown to warn of impending attack.

    And I quoted Lam 3:37-38, "Who is he that saith, and it cometh to pass, when the Lord commandeth it not? Out of the mouth of the most High proceedeth not evil and good?"

    This is the most difficult one. Here evil (ra'ah) is opposite good (tob). Since the latter refers to qualitative or moral goodness in the abstract, the former must refer to qualitative or moral evil. Both come from God. What are we going to do with this? Assuming that God does not contradict Himself in Scripture, how do we fit this with Matt 5:48, Hab 1:13, and James 1:13?

    I would begin my answer with Job 1 & 2 and Matt 10:29 - "Are not two sparrows sold for a farthing? and one of them shall not fall on the ground without your Father." No evil happens unless God permits it.

    That, by the way, also allows me to trust Him. The mugger can't bop me on the 'ead unless God lets him.

    I feel my main calling in life is to show people how complicated theology can be. ;-)

    Dr Davy

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at August 03, 2006 7:51 AM  

  • dr davy,

    Good post.

    You asked:
    Are you saying the KJV is wrong and more recent translations are better? :-0

    Eye's reply: You know me better than that by now! By the way, I checked Webster's with regard to the definition of evil (noun) and it reads -- something that brings sorrow, distress, or calamity...

    In context of Isa 45:7, God is explaining to us his usage of Cyrus. Scripture clearly teaches us that God allows evil to be used to further His purposes but it does not teach us God is the creator of evil in the sense He created sin. I might add, God certainly knew before the foundation of the world (His foreknoweldge and sovereignty) in eternity past that Lucifer would sin and Adam would also choose to sin. God created them both 'good'. They both had free will to choose good versus evil and they both chose evil (SIN).

    God allows His creation in their evil state to further His work and plan. God can do no evil, but He can use the evil of His creation for His good purposes.

    God is good, not evil...

    God is love, not hate...

    ps -- I would love to read your thoughts on irresistible grace!

    In Him,

    Eye

    By Blogger Eye, at August 03, 2006 4:13 PM  

  • Eye,

    You asked my position on irresistible grace. I suppose I toe the party line of a Calvinist. Very briefly: Non-Christians are dead, blind, lost, etc. (Eph 2), and consider God-talk to be foolishness (1Cor 1:23; 2:14). God wakes them up or opens their eyes, so that they see the glory and wisdom of God in Christ (1Cor 1:24; 2:10; Eph 2:5). This calling of the elect is effectual (Jer 10:23; Pr 16:9; 19:21; Rom 9:19 [no one can resist God's will]), and not one of those called is lost (Rom 8:29-30).

    Grace is irresistible for two reasons. First, when a person actually sees the glory and wisdom of God in Christ, it is overwhelmingly attractive. "And for joy thereof goeth and selleth all that he hath, and buyeth that field." Second, no one can resist God's sovereign will. Of course, this statement has to be nuanced with some explanation of God's preceptive and decretive will (Deut 29:29).

    Dr Davy

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at August 04, 2006 7:43 AM  

  • Eye,

    You wrote: "By the way, I checked Webster's with regard to the definition of evil (noun) and it reads -- something that brings sorrow, distress, or calamity..."

    Two things. If you want to know what the KJV means, you shouldn't look in a modern dictionary. You should find a 1611 dictionary, or, better yet, a 1611/2006 bilingual dictionary. Words change. You need to know what "evil" or "reins" or "neesings" meant back in 1611 in order to know what the KJV translators meant when they translated the Hebrew.

    This brings us to the second point. It is not so important what the English word "evil" means, or even what it meant in 1611. What we really want to know is what the Hebrew word /ra'ah/ meant when Jeremiah wrote Lam 3:38.

    When /ra'ah/ "evil" is paired with /tob/ "good" it often, though not always, speaks of moral good and evil (Gen 2:9; 1Sam 25:3; 2Sam 14:17; 1Kgs 3:9; Ps 37:27; Pr 14:19; Eccl 12:14; Isa 5:20; 7:16; Jer 4:22; Ezk 36:31; Am 5:14-15). Sometimes it has to do with beneficial vs. harmful (Deut 30:15; Josh 23:15; Job 2:10; Pr 11:27; Jer 21:10; 32:42; 42:6).

    It would be fair to argue that Job 2:10 and Pr 11:27 should inform our definition of "good and evil" in Lam 3:38 -- that is, that it has to do with blessing and adversity.

    When Job's blessings turned to adversity, he said to his wife, "Thou speakest as one of the foolish women speaketh. What? shall we receive good at the hand of God, and shall we not receive evil? In all this did not Job sin with his lips." And Solomon wisely stated that we reap what we sow: "He that diligently seeketh good procureth favour: but he that seeketh mischief [/ra'ah/], it shall come unto him."

    So we have dodged the bullet. It is not moral evil that come from God in Lam 3:38 but adversity. Of course, the apologist still has to explain how the God of love can send adversity, but that's easy given the concept of "tough love."

    Okay, what about Ac 2:23? Christ was "delivered [to the cross] by the determinate counsel and foreknowledge of God." God, in His counsel, determined to make Jesus sufer on the cross. What about 1Sam 16:14? "But the Spirit of the LORD departed from Saul, and an evil spirit from the LORD troubled him."

    As I said, my job is to show people how complicated it is.

    Now, if you want to say, "I know Jesus died for my sins, and that's good enough for me," fine, I'll leave you alone. I'm not here to make the faithful doubt. But if you say that this Calvinism/Arminianism debate is simple, or that the Trinity is simple -- that is, if you are over-simplifying complex issues -- I'm here to shoot down your baloons.

    Dr Davy

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at August 04, 2006 8:45 AM  

  • dr davy asked: What about 1Sam 16:14? "But the Spirit of the LORD departed from Saul, and an evil spirit from the LORD troubled him."


    Eye's reply: Remember Job 1? What about this account?

    1Ki 22:18 And the king of Israel said unto Jehoshaphat, Did I not tell thee that he would prophesy no good concerning me, but evil?
    1Ki 22:19 And he said, Hear thou therefore the word of the LORD: I saw the LORD sitting on his throne, and all the host of heaven standing by him on his right hand and on his left. 1Ki 22:20 And the LORD said, Who shall persuade Ahab, that he may go up and fall at Ramothgilead? And one said on this manner, and another said on that manner. 1Ki 22:21 And there came forth a spirit, and stood before the LORD, and said, I will persuade him. 1Ki 22:22 And the LORD said unto him, Wherewith? And he said, I will go forth, and I will be a lying spirit in the mouth of all his prophets. And he said, Thou shalt persuade [him], and prevail also: go forth, and do so. 1Ki 22:23 Now therefore, behold, the LORD hath put a lying spirit in the mouth of all these thy prophets, and the LORD hath spoken evil concerning thee.


    Did God make that lying spirit do what it did? No! He asked a question -- got an answer He knew He would get and then simply used it for His purposes...

    As to letting the Bible define its terms (the word evil in context) a hearty AMEN on that...

    Back to point on this installment -- dr davy, do you believe God regenerates someone prior to their placing faith in Jesus?

    If so, does God do the believing for them?

    Theology is only as difficult as you want to make it my friend.

    That's partly why EYE is here -- to take it back to the simplicity of the gospel.

    In Him,

    Eye

    By Blogger Eye, at August 04, 2006 10:08 AM  

  • Eye,

    This is a concept that I have thought on for quite a while. As those participating in this discussion understand, regeneration before faith follows the logic of the Reformed view. If one is dead spiritually (Eph 2:1) and at enmity with God (Rom 8:7) then said person may only believe because of being made spiritually alive by God hence regeneration before faith. This Reformed view presupposes that there is no general working of the Holy Spirit for the entire world that results in some degree of being able to accept the gospel by faith. This general work of grace is the Methodist (Weslyan) concept of a prevenient grace. The difference between the reformed view and the weslyan view is that the former is only for the elect while the latter is for the whole world. Interestingly, both accept total inability but the Weslyans believe that God intervened with this prevenient grace. Prevenient grace, of course, sends strict Reformed people into an apoplectic fit. Yet it does seem to solve some problems such as are being discussed in this forum. The glory of this view is that it allows for the function of free will. But it still clashes with what seems to be the more biblical view of God creating faith by the word of God Romans 10:17. (Eye, I think you stated something like this) God does not go into the inner working of how - He only states that faith is created in the hearer by the Word of God.

    I understand that Calvin himself rejected that regeneration preceeds faith. I believe that Bob Ross and Charles over at the Flyswatter have documented that very well. I think Charles mentions that Timothy George in his book documents that as well.

    I did find an interesting note in Calvin’s Institutes that states,

    “Those who think that repentance precedes faith instead of flowing from, or being produced by it, as the fruit by the tree, have never understood its nature, and are moved to adopt that view on very insufficient grounds.” Book 3, page 509, Eerdmans 1994 reprint.

    I believe that Calvin equated repentance and regeneration to some degree so he must have defined the terms differently than we do today, or more likely I have more to learn.

    So for me it is not clear that regeneration preceeds faith. The one time that regeneration is used in scripture seems to refer to that which occurs after faith is exercised - Titus 3:5-6. Regeneration and renewing is through Christ Jesus.

    Blessings,
    Leo

    By Blogger Leo, at August 05, 2006 8:31 AM  

  • Dear Leo,

    Wonderful post! Thanks for bringing your knowledge and study of this important issue to us.

    Amen on Titus 3:5-6.

    Blessings.

    In Him,

    Eye

    By Blogger Eye, at August 05, 2006 12:16 PM  

  • Exactly Eye! None of these scriptures speaks of regeneration BEFORE faith. And I agree with your comments on the following scriptures; just thought I'd add my two cents. :-)

    2 Timothy 2:24-26: “And the servant of the Lord must not strive; but be gentle unto all men, apt to teach, patient, In meekness instructing those that oppose themselves; if God peradventure will give them repentance to the acknowledging of the truth; And that they may recover themselves out of the snare of the devil, who are taken captive by him at his will.

    Dr. Davy, I agree that the continual act of repentance is a gift from God, but I think you have it backwards. Rather, it is once we acknowledge the truth that God gives us the "power" to actually repent. We're willing to repent. Look at verse 26. It says that “THEY” may recover “THEMSELVES” out of the snare of the devil. It is up to the individual to believe the gospel. It is up to the saints to be patient, meek and gentle while dealing with people who don’t believe the gospel.

    It doesn’t take God’s giving of repentance for a person to admit the gospel is true. There are millions who believe the gospel to be true, but they are not willing to lay down their lives for the gospel. They want to do what they want to do; therefore, God does not grant them repentance.

    Dr. Davy:1 Cor 1:23-24 - “But we preach Christ crucified, unto the Jews a stumblingblock, and unto the Greeks foolishness; But unto them which are called, both Jews and Greeks, Christ the power of God, and the wisdom of God.”

    Those who practice Judaism and other non-Christians find the crucifixion offensive. Evangelists like Paul preach to everyone, but only those who receive the effectual calling from God will recognize the power and wisdom of Christ.


    First, we are ALL called. I've forgotten, why do you say that only SOME are called?

    Second, the operative word here his is effectual calling. Those who are effectually called are those who are the elect. Why is their calling effectual and why are they the elect?; because they BELIEVED the gospel. Faith/belief, then rebirth.

    Dr. Davy:2 Cor 4:4-6 - “In whom the god of this world hath blinded the minds of them which believe not, lest the light of the glorious gospel of Christ, who is the image of God, should shine unto them. For we preach not ourselves, but Christ Jesus the Lord; and ourselves your servants for Jesus’ sake. For God, who commanded the light to shine out of darkness, hath shined in our hearts, to give the light of the knowledge of the glory of God in the face of Jesus Christ.”

    Satan has blinded all the people in this world to the truth of the gospel, but God has shined in the hearts of believers to make them know that Christ is the glory of God.


    2 Corinthians 4:1-7Therefore seeing we have this ministry, as we have received mercy, we faint not; But have renounced the hidden things of dishonesty, not walking in craftiness, nor handling the word of God deceitfully; but by manifestation of the truth commending ourselves to EVERY MAN’S conscience in the sight of God. BUT if our gospel be hid, it is hid to them that are lost: In whom the god of this world hath blinded the minds of them which believe not, lest the light of the glorious gospel of Christ, who is the image of God, should shine unto them. For we preach not ourselves, but Christ Jesus the Lord; and ourselves your servants for Jesus' sake. For God, who commanded the light to shine out of darkness, hath shined in our hearts, to give the light of the knowledge of the glory of God in the face of Jesus Christ. But we have this treasure in earthen vessels, that the excellency of the power may be of God, and not of us.” (emphasis added)

    It is the Calvinist contention that Satan blinds people so that they will not believe. But that is not what this scripture teaches and it is not what the rest of the scriptures teach. We are blinded due to our refusal to believe the gospel.

    Matthew 13:15For this people's heart is waxed gross, and their ears are dull of hearing, and their eyes THEY have closed; lest at any time they should see with their eyes, and hear with their ears, and should understand with their heart, and should be converted, and I should heal them.

    See the entire context, Matthew 13:1-23.

    The point of the parable? The condition of the soil (read: heart) is what caused the seed not to grow. It doesn't state anything about being born again before they are able to believe.

    By Blogger Dawn, at August 07, 2006 11:12 AM  

  • Mike: "That being said, I don't understand where the mystery would come into play with either of your views, as there's really no mystery to it - faith saves."

    I agree. There is no mystery. It has been revealed that Jesus is the savior and that it is faith in Him that we are saved.

    By Blogger Dawn, at August 07, 2006 11:18 AM  

  • Mike, great questions to Dr. Davy. And great comments on Romans 9.

    Thank you for the kind words to Eye and me.

    And thank you Dr. Davy for your kindness and civility.

    By Blogger Dawn, at August 07, 2006 11:24 AM  

  • Eye,

    You said: "Back to point on this installment -- dr davy, do you believe God regenerates someone prior to their placing faith in Jesus?

    "If so, does God do the believing for them?

    "Theology is only as difficult as you want to make it my friend.

    "That's partly why EYE is here -- to take it back to the simplicity of the gospel."

    Dr Davy's reply: I agree that the gospel is simple. It's apologetics and systematic theology that is complicated.

    As to regeneration preceding faith, I believe Leo has helped a lot in this discussion.

    So let me rephrase my position. People are dead and in enmity to Christ. God does something to them to allow them to believe. Regeneration may not be the correct term for this; it has something to do with election and calling. The result is that they repent, they are regenerated, and they have faith. God does not do the believing for them, but he makes it possible for them to believe.

    To summarize: Because people are totally depraved, no one will believe apart from the gracious calling/election of God (Jn 6:44; Eph 2:1-10). Further, those who are called/elect will certainly be saved; neither the elect nor any other person can thwart God's purpose in election (Rm 8:28-39; 9:11-12,16). Those who in the end do not believe were not elect in the first place (1Jn 2:19). God does not believe for the elect; He grants faith to them (2Tim 2:25-26).

    Leo said: "The one time that regeneration is used in scripture seems to refer to that which occurs after faith is exercised - Titus 3:5-6."

    Dr Davy's reply: Titus 3 doesn't mention the order of regeneration and faith. In fact, I can easily conclude from this passage that regeneration precedes faith.

    Titus 3:3-7 "For we ourselves also were sometimes foolish, disobedient, deceived, serving divers lusts and pleasures, living in malice and envy, hateful, and hating one another. But after that the kindness and love of God our Saviour toward man appeared, 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; Which he shed on us abundantly through Jesus Christ our Saviour; That being justified by his grace, we should be made heirs according to the hope of eternal life."

    We were foolish, deceived, and hateful, but God showed kindness and saved us "by ... regeneration, and renewing of the Holy Spirit." This was done "through Christ" and "by His grace."

    To me, this seems to clearly teach that we were depraved and dead, at enmity with God, and He took the initiative to save us by regenerating us. Our regeneration has everything to do with God's kindness, love, and grace through Christ, and nothing to do with our free will or exercise of faith.

    Your brother the sharpening steel,

    Dr Davy

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at August 07, 2006 11:31 AM  

  • Dr. Davy: "But Paul poses a similar seeker question in Rom 9:14 and 19, and Paul doesn't answer the question with an answer based on foreknowledge. His answer is based on the sovereignty of God in creation and election. God had a right to create Esau and treat him the way He did, just as He had the right to create Pharaoh to be a vessel of wrath fitted for destruction."

    I agree. God did have a right to create Pharaoh to be a vessel of wrath fitted for destruction. But God didn't CAUSE Pharaoh to become evil, but we KNOW he KNEW because elsewhere it tells us that God foreknows all. God COULD have had mercy on Pharaoh, but chose not to. Though, I think God did show mercy with Pharaoh throughout Pharaoh's life because tells us He is longsuffering and merciful.

    Dr. Davy: "And in this explanation of God's election of some and rejection of others, Paul clearly states that man's free will has nothing to do with election: "So then it is not of him that willeth, nor of him that runneth, but of God that sheweth mercy.""

    It IS ALL God's sovereignty. This election is one of SERVICE, not salvation. Where do you get salvation out of Romans 9:16? However, in the matter of salvation, He shows mercy on those who believe and hardens those who do not.

    By Blogger Dawn, at August 07, 2006 11:58 AM  

  • This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

    By Blogger Dawn, at August 07, 2006 12:08 PM  

  • Dr. Davy:

    "Mike,

    You said: "If Pharaoh is such a good case of God hardening whom He will in an eternal sense, then why does the Scripture record Pharaoh hardening his heart before God hardens it? Seems God could've made it much clearer that He was the One really pulling the strings, that He caused Pharaoh to harden his heart and then He hardened Pharoah's heart directly."

    But clear back in Ex 4:21 God announced that He would harden Pharaoh's heart, and again in Ex 7:3. Then in Ex 7:13 God does it. How do you conclude that Pharaoh does it first?
    "

    Exodus 3:19 "And I am sure that the king of Egypt will not let you go, no, not by a mighty hand."

    God tells us in Exodus 3:19 of his foreknowledge that Pharaoh will harden his heart. (Exodus 5:1-2)

    Exodus 6:1 "Then the LORD said unto Moses, Now shalt thou see what I will do to Pharaoh: for with a strong hand shall he let them go, and with a strong hand shall he drive them out of his land."

    I go into detail here: Pharaoh's Hardens His Heart FIRST

    By Blogger Dawn, at August 07, 2006 12:19 PM  

  • Excellent post Leo! Great to see you!

    By Blogger Dawn, at August 07, 2006 2:31 PM  

  • Dr Davy, Leo, Mike, Dawn and Jerry:

    Thank you each for your thoughtful and on-topic posts! I also want each of you to know I truly appreciate your time, knowledge and convictions on this subject.

    I suppose I'm asking each of you to answer this question for me if you will -- Do you agree that an individual is either 'lost' or they are 'saved/born again'; in other words there is no middle ground?

    I go back to Cornelius, the Philippian Jailer, and many others in the Bible where the Scriptures give us clear exegetical teaching that lost people can and do believe the gospel. They are believing the gospel all the while in their state of lostness... Technically speaking you are lost until such time as the Holy Spirit quickens your dead spirit causing it to come alive in Him.

    That's why I bring up Luke 7:45-50. Only Jesus can forgive someone's sins and He did that for this woman in verse 48. Let's examine the chain of events from this passage again. I believe the timeline plays out like this:

    Lost woman comes to the Pharisee's house in search of the Savior.

    She finds Him!

    She asks for forgiveness as evidenced by Jesus giving the parable to whom much is forgiven, they love much!

    We see the encounter of the Savior with one of His lost creatures in verse 48 and see that she leaves 'saved' as evidenced by verse 50.

    Her faith led her to Jesus prior to her being forgiven -- only Jesus can forgive a person's sins and make them whole.

    She was lost until she was forgiven! In her state of lostness she sought the Savior and found Him. Jesus even says her faith was instrumental in her salvation -- in other words it prompted her to find Jesus.

    This is what I exeget or draw out of this text and I believe the same chain of events are found with Cornelius and the Philippian Jailer...

    In Him,

    Eye

    By Blogger Eye, at August 07, 2006 4:27 PM  

  • To all:

    Regarding Cornelius, we see that He was quickened and 'filled' with the Holy Ghost such that he began to speak in tongues! My point here is that once this gentile was 'quickened', 'regenerated', 'born again' or 'saved' if you will, he spoke in tongues, not before he became 'regenerated' or saved. He clearly did not speak in tongues while he was lost. Moreover, the angel also affirms Cornelius' lostness by stating men will come and tell you and your household words wherby you can be saved (ie the gospel).

    True, God regenerated him while the gospel was being preached! But, I submit that wasn't going to happen until first Cornelius believed the gospel being preached to him.

    Again, back to my feeble analogy with the stargate -- the iris was open while Peter was preaching and Cornelius believed that gospel enough he was willing to walk through that gate and when He did he grabbed that shoulder radio and spoke in tongues for the world to hear...

    In Him,

    Eye

    By Blogger Eye, at August 07, 2006 4:43 PM  

  • Eye, I just wanted you to know that I fully intend on answering you about Luke 7:45-50, but I'm working on about 50 million things at once. (Obviously I'm exaggerating, but you know what I mean.)

    By Blogger Dawn, at August 08, 2006 9:18 PM  

  • Dr. Davy:You [Eye] said, "I go back to our friend the Philippian jailer. Could this lost man save himself? NO. Hey, under the power of the gospel he knew he was lost! That's why he asked the question about salvation." What is this "power of the gospel"? The Calvinist would say it is the power to regenerate a "dead" person, to open his eyes to the beauty of Christ. The Arminian would say that it is grace working in a person's heart, but it is not regenerating and it is not irresistible.

    What about Paul's commission, as he recounted it in Ac 26:17-18: Jesus was "Delivering thee from the people, and from the Gentiles, unto whom now I send thee, To open their eyes, and to turn them from darkness to light, and from the power of Satan unto God, that they may receive forgiveness of sins, and inheritance among them which are sanctified by faith that is in me."

    What was involved in Paul's mandate "to open their eyes"? The Calvinist would say Paul, as an ambassador of Christ, sometimes mediated the power of God to regenerate dead people so that they would believe.


    Eye has already given an excellent response to this scripture, but I thought I'd add my two-cents worth.

    Paul's mandate? To preach the gospel and to tell of his own experience.

    What is the gospel? It is truth. Paul was sent to simply tell people the TRUTH: You're a sinner and the only way to salvation is through Jesus Christ. Paul is opening their eyes by telling them the truth: from Genesis to the crucifixion, and then whatever else the Lord revealed to him. IF, IF, IF they believe the gospel, they will THEN be turned from darkness to light and from the power of Satan, and receive forgiveness of sins, and their inheritance.

    Who is it that will receive these things? It is those who are sanctified by faith that is in the Lord. And God knows who these people are that WILL believe of their own accord. Not that the Spirit and word of God didn’t have anything to do with it, but it is OUR faith that must be exercised to bring about God’s blessing of salvation. That is what God teaches us throughout the bible. He tells us to choose. He tried to get Cain to CHOOSE the RIGHT way so that He would be accepted by God.

    We ALL have general faith. Once we are presented the gospel and we exercise that general faith toward a belief in what we are hearing, God then regenerates us. It is OUR faith that saves us. Now that is not to say that we are able to SAVE ourselves, but it is what God REQUIRES before He will give us SAVING faith and the power to become the Sons of God.

    Acts 26:20But shewed first unto them of Damascus, and at Jerusalem, and throughout all the coasts of Judaea, and then to the Gentiles, that THEY should repent and turn to God, and do works meet for repentance.

    Paul was to be a witness of all that he had experienced (vs. 16) to try to persuade the people. Verse 20 states that Paul first "SHEWED" those in Damascus, etc. that they were sinners and that they needed a Savior and what they must do to be saved. The power of God was present in the word (as always) and was available for those who WOULD believe so that they could do works meet for repentance.
    The only way one could see it any differently is if they had a presupposition that God would regenerate them FIRST in order to MAKE them believe.

    I'll expound more in my next response to you on this thread.

    By Blogger Dawn, at August 10, 2006 1:36 AM  

  • Dawn,

    Amen! Without faith it is impossible to please Him.

    In Him,

    Eye

    By Blogger Eye, at August 10, 2006 8:31 AM  

  • Eye,

    Sorry I had thought the thread was more or less closed.

    I would agree that there is no middle ground - one is either saved or lost. I believe though that there are degrees of enlightment within the community of lost humans. By degrees of enlightment I mean that the Holy Spirit convicts the world of sin - some of those have the advantage of having an evangelist (anyone with a clear understanding of the gospel with the God-given ability to communicate it) minister the gospel clearly so that there is no misunderstanding. One cannot forget the influence of the saints praying for the lost ones conversion.

    I seem to remember comments about Calvin and/or Spurgeon mentioning temporary believers – those enlightened so as to clearly know the truth of the gospel but falling back into unbelief. Neither Calvin or Spurgeon believed that one could lose salvation so this seems to be a technical postulate to ptentially explain a Hebrews 6 type position. I’ll have to look into that since I do not recall clearly

    By Blogger Leo, at August 12, 2006 12:23 PM  

  • Eye: "She was lost until she was forgiven! In her state of lostness she sought the Savior and found Him. Jesus even says her faith was instrumental in her salvation -- in other words it prompted her to find Jesus."

    Eye, I agree that we are either lost or we're saved. There is no middle ground.

    It was HER faith that saved her. She heard about the Savior and she sought Him out on her own. Notice that Jesus didn't say that the faith that HE gave her saved her. Right? I think if that were the case, He would have been explicit about it.

    By Blogger Dawn, at August 13, 2006 9:12 AM  

  • Dr. Davy:So let me rephrase my position. People are dead and in enmity to Christ.

    I agree that people are dead and are at enmity with Christ, but I do not believe that these scriptures teach us that we are incapable of choosing to believe God’s word. The reason I don’t believe it is not because of my own opinion, but rather the Bible doesn’t teach it.

    Ephesians 2:1-10And you hath he quickened, who were dead in trespasses and sins; Wherein in time past ye walked according to the course of this world, according to the prince of the power of the air, the spirit that now worketh in the children of disobedience: Among whom also we all had our conversation in times past in the lusts of our flesh, fulfilling the desires of the flesh and of the mind; and were by nature the children of wrath, even as others. But God, who is rich in mercy, for his great love wherewith he loved us, Even when we were dead in sins, hath quickened us together with Christ, (by grace ye are saved;) And hath raised us up together, and made us sit together in heavenly places in Christ Jesus: That in the ages to come he might shew the exceeding riches of his grace in his kindness toward us through Christ Jesus. For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God: For we are his workmanship, created in Christ Jesus unto good works, which God hath before ordained that we should walk in them.

    What does it mean to be dead in trespasses and sins? It means that we have a dead spirit; we have a sin nature; we are sinners; we enjoy our sin and fulfill the desires of our flesh and mind; we cannot worship God in Spirit and in truth; we have no fellowship with God; we possess no true goodness within ourselves; our righteousness is as filthy rags; we have no forgiveness of sin; and we are sentenced to eternal death. The wages of sin is death. (Romans 6:23)

    It does not mean that we are incapable of choosing to save ourselves from Hell. If we are capable of refraining from murder, etc., then I think we are quite capable of making a decision to do the right thing and agree to follow Jesus.

    Please tell me where it states that we are incapable of choosing to believe God or put our trust and faith in Him. You’ve given I Corinthians 1 & 2 as examples, but that is not what those scriptures are saying.

    Chapter 1 is saying that those who perish think God’s word is foolish. It doesn’t state that they are UNABLE to believe, rather they are UNWILLING to believe.

    Chapter 2 is saying that the NATURAL man doesn’t RECEIVE/ACCEPT/TAKE the things of the SPIRIT because they seem absurd or silly (foolish). These things (which I think are the deeper things) are only revealed through the spirit of God. I.e., the meat of the word as seen in chapter 3 vs. 1-3.

    Vs. 10 of Ephesians is stating that God has foreordained those who believe on Him (Ephesians 1:12-14) to walk in Jesus’ good works; in other words, this is our calling. It is through Jesus that we are made righteous.

    Romans 8:7Because the carnal mind is enmity against God: for it is not subject to the law of God, neither indeed can be.

    This scripture is simply stating that we CANNOT keep the law of God. We don’t want to keep His law, and we are sinners who love our sin to one degree or another. It doesn’t state that we are incapable of realizing that we are sinners on our way to Hell if we don’t believe the gospel and repent. At least not while God is ever drawing and calling us to Him by His Spirit.

    Please remember that we’ve already established that Jesus loves all and died for all. (John 3:16) Also, we must remember that God is no respecter of persons. He accepts us when we fear him via our belief and faith in Him.

    Acts 10:34-35Then Peter opened his mouth, and said, Of a truth I perceive that God is no respecter of persons: But in every nation he that feareth him, and worketh righteousness, is accepted with him.” (emphasis added)

    Dr. Davy:God does something to them to allow them to believe.

    Right, the very creation points to God, He’s written the laws on ALL of our hearts and His Spirit is upon the earth. God has given us ALL access to Him, IF we will acknowledge Him. Once we acknowledge Him He enlightens us more and more. I agree that God gives us the power to believe unto salvation, but we must first believe and repent on our own BEFORE we receive that power. (John 1:12-13)

    In other words, we make a conscious decision to follow God and God gives us the power to do so. God doesn’t just choose for no reason. He chooses on specific terms: belief and repentance.

    To be clear, it is not what we have willed, but it is what God has willed. (vs. 13) He has willed that those who believe, receive and repent are saved.

    (Saved=Regenerated=Called (effectually called)=Elect)

    Dr. Davy:Regeneration may not be the correct term for this; it has something to do with election and calling. The result is that they repent, they are regenerated, and they have faith. God does not do the believing for them, but he makes it possible for them to believe.

    We are ALL CALLED to accept Jesus. (Matthew 22:1-14) Those who DO accept Jesus are THE called (effectually called). Once we are called and we accept, we then have a CALLING. That CALLING is to serve God. How do we serve God? By obeying His word.

    The result of accepting the call of God through OUR faith in Him is the power to stay repentant and the power to have faith unto salvation, which IS regeneration. Our spirits are given life. We are a new creature. We are no longer under the bondage of sin. We are forgiven. We are redeemed from the curse of the law. We now have fellowship with God.

    Dr. Davy:To summarize: Because people are totally depraved, no one will believe apart from the gracious calling/election of God (Jn 6:44; Eph 2:1-10).

    Again, we are totally depraved in the sight of a Holy and Righteous God. God’s grace is with men always; therefore, we have the ability to believe with our own general faith. Through God’s word seed is planted into our hearts and watered. God is ever calling us. Those who don’t flat out reject those seeds will grow faith. At some point, our faith is at a point to where we agree to commit to the Lord and the Lord gives us SAVING faith and the power to repent.

    Eye has given a great response to what John 6:44 means.

    Eye's response:This verse clearly teaches that God draws the individual, but this verse does not teach that faith is a gift of God. If you continue on into verse 45 of John 6, it reads, 'They will all be taught of God.' The method of obtaining faith is not mentioned. However, the Bible does say in Romans 10:17 that 'faith cometh by hearing and hearing by the Word of God.'

    Furthermore, being drawn by God is conditioned upon the individual's faith. The context of their being drawn (6:37) was he who believes (6:35) or 'everyone who believes in Him' (6:40, v. 47). Those who believe are enabled by God to come to Him. (John 6:65).


    I'll add that in vs. 64 Jesus said, BUT there are some of you who believe NOT.

    Vs. 65 states, "THEREFORE said I unto you, that no man can come unto me, except it were given unto him of my Father." It is CLEAR that it was due to their unbelief that they were not given of the Father. Not that the Father chose certain people for no "apparent" reason.

    Throughout the gospels Jesus was giving the Pharisees (and all those whom He came in contact with) EVERY chance to believe that He was the Messiah. John 5:34 shows us that Jesus’ mission was to try to persuade them to BELIEVE on Him.

    Dr. Davy:Further, those who are called/elect will certainly be saved; neither the elect nor any other person can thwart God's purpose in election (Rm 8:28-39; 9:11-12,16). Those who in the end do not believe were not elect in the first place (1Jn 2:19).

    Again, we are ALL called. I agree, those who are effectually called (i.e., those who believe and are therefore the elect) will certainly be saved and no one can thwart God’s purpose in election.

    Where in Romans 9:11-12 does it state that this is speaking of salvation? In fact, it is speaking of one serving the other. This particular "election" is about service and not salvation. We know that it was through Jacob's (Israel) lineage that the Messiah would come, that the word of God would be preserved, etc. This is all to do with "service."

    Vs. 16 is simply stating that God is the one who decides how He will do things, not us. He uses His creation for HIS purposes. Some of His purposes happen to be very clear. I.e., He saves those who believe and does not save those who don’t believe.

    I agree, those who in the end did not really commit their lives to the Lord (i.e., believe) were never really saved in the first place; therefore, they were never one of the elect. It’s not that they don’t believe because they’re not elect, rather they were not elect BECAUSE they did not believe. (1 John 2:19)

    I’m not trying to be rude, but you are projecting Calvinism onto all these scriptures.

    Dr. Davy:God does not believe for the elect; He grants faith to them (2Tim 2:25-26).

    No, He grants repentance to them once they have acknowledged the truth. I like how Eye put it.

    Eye's response:

    I think your point here is that faith and repentance are 'gifts' given to the elect and are essential and necessary for them to exercise these gifts to be saved. The verse you cite affirms the fact that the opportunity to repent is a gift of God. He graciously allows us the opportunity to turn from our sins, but we must do the repenting. God does not repent for us. Repentance is truly an act of our will supported and encouraged by His grace.” (bold in original)

    By Blogger Dawn, at August 13, 2006 10:44 AM  

  • Leo: "I would agree that there is no middle ground - one is either saved or lost. I believe though that there are degrees of enlightment within the community of lost humans. By degrees of enlightment I mean that the Holy Spirit convicts the world of sin - some of those have the advantage of having an evangelist (anyone with a clear understanding of the gospel with the God-given ability to communicate it) minister the gospel clearly so that there is no misunderstanding."

    I agree with what you are saying here, but I believe that God doesn't necessarily need an evangelist to spread His word. I think if someone in a third world country had a heart toward God via (Romans 1:19-20) then God would either speak to this person audibly (like He did to Paul) or would send an evangelist/missionary to teach them.

    Acts 17:26-28 "And hath made of one blood all nations of men for to dwell on all the face of the earth, and hath determined the times before appointed, and the bounds of their habitation; That they should seek the Lord, if haply they might feel after him, and find him, though he be not far from every one of us: For in him we live, and move, and have our being; as certain also of your own poets have said, For we are also his offspring."

    By Blogger Dawn, at August 13, 2006 10:59 AM  

  • Dawn,

    You wrote: "I’m not trying to be rude, but you are projecting Calvinism onto all these scriptures."

    Dr Davy's response: Well, I'm not trying to be rude, but from my perspective you're denying the presence of Calvinism in all these passages.

    Dr. Davy wrote: “God does not believe for the elect; He grants faith to them (2Tim 2:25-26).”

    Dawn responded: "No, He grants repentance to them once they have acknowledged the truth."

    Dr Davy's response: Let's look more closely at 2Tim 2:25-26. "In meekness instructing those that oppose themselves; if God peradventure will give them repentance to the acknowledging of the truth; And that they may recover themselves out of the snare of the devil, who are taken captive by him at his will."

    Paul is exhorting Timothy in evangelism. His audience is "captive" to the devil, which I take as another way to say "dead"--that is, unable to respond to the gospel. They "oppose themselves" in that all their actions are self-destructive (or, perhaps, the KJV is wrong here: it means "opponents" of Timothy; see NASB). To this audience Timothy should direct his instruction. Then Paul says that God may "peradventure" (the archaic English word means "possibly") give them repentance so that they will acknowledge the truth.

    The KJV "if ... peradventure" translates the Greek /mepote/, which means "perhaps." So this is saying that if Timothy instructs them, God will perhaps give them repentance. The question is, why did Paul say "perhaps"? What is it that Paul did not know?

    We can eliminate one possibility. We know that if they believe, God will surely grant them repentance. Paul knew that.

    Okay, another possibility is that Paul did not know which of Timothy's audience would believe. Dawn wrote: "He grants repentance to them once they have acknowledged the truth." So here, maybe, Paul is saying that Timothy should preach to his audience and perhaps some will believe. Then God will grant them repentance. But this does violence to the plain meaning of the verse. It plainly says that God gives them repentance, which leads to (Greek /eis/) the ability to acknowledge the truth.

    It seems to me to say, plainly, that God will give to some the ability to repent. Which ones? Paul doesn't know, and Timothy doesn't know. Only God knows.

    You might appeal to the next verse, "they may recover themselves out of the snare of the devil." You may say that God doesn't recover them, they recover themselves. I have two responses. First, the Greek is not reflexive, it is third-person plural aorist active subjunctive: "they may come to their senses." When God wakes up a dead person, they come to their senses.

    Second--and this pertains to the fundamental difference between Arminians and Calvinists--be careful whenever you appeal to what man does toward his own salvation. Don't give man too much credit. As iron sharpens iron, Arminians and Calvinists can do each other the favor of protecting each other from the extremes, from the unintended logical consequences, from the bottom of a slippery slope.

    Calvinists, left to their own devices and without checks and balances, tend to become hyper-Calvinists. Witness two-seed-in-the-Spirit Predestinarian Baptists, who believed that all people are born either elect or non-elect, therefore evangelism is not necessary. In fact, they said, evangelism is insincere, since you might be making an offer of salvation to someone whom God hates. That kind of conclusion comes from too much human "reasoning" and not enough attention to Scripture, which clearly mandates evangelism.

    Arminians, left to their own devices, might put too much emphasis on what God can't do and what man must do for his own salvation. Man, then, has more power than God. Or they might put too much emphasis on the love of God and the universal invitation to salvation, and conclude, again with too much human "reasoning" and not enough attention to Scripture, that all men will be saved--Universalism.

    I have heard some say that Calvinists will all become fatalists, and I have heard others say that Arminians will all become Universalists. Perhaps it is in debates such as we are having on this site that, while we seldom talk anyone into jumping from one camp to another, we at least keep each other from heresy.

    Your brother,
    Dr Davy

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at August 14, 2006 12:46 PM  

  • Act 17:22 ¶ Then Paul stood in the midst of Mars' hill, and said, [Ye] men of Athens, I perceive that in all things ye are too superstitious. Act 17:23 For as I passed by, and beheld your devotions, I found an altar with this inscription, TO THE UNKNOWN GOD. Whom therefore ye ignorantly worship, him declare I unto you. Act 17:24 God that made the world and all things therein, seeing that he is Lord of heaven and earth, dwelleth not in temples made with hands; Act 17:25 Neither is worshipped with men's hands, as though he needed any thing, seeing he giveth to all life, and breath, and all things;
    Act 17:26 And hath made of one blood all nations of men for to dwell on all the face of the earth, and hath determined the times before appointed, and the bounds of their habitation; Act 17:27 That they should seek the Lord, if haply they might feel after him, and find him, though he be not far from every one of us: Act 17:28 For in him we live, and move, and have our being; as certain also of your own poets have said, For we are also his offspring. Act 17:29 Forasmuch then as we are the offspring of God, we ought not to think that the Godhead is like unto gold, or silver, or stone, graven by art and man's device. Act 17:30 And the times of this ignorance God winked at; but now commandeth all men every where to repent: Act 17:31 Because he hath appointed a day, in the which he will judge the world in righteousness by [that] man whom he hath ordained; whereof he hath given assurance unto all men, in that he hath raised him from the dead.

    For this discussion, let's not forget these wonderful verses! Bold emphasis added by Eye.

    What does Eye see?

    1. Men do have the ability to seek God -- verse 27!

    2. Men do have the ability to repent -- verse 30!!

    3. God's plan is inclusive of ALL men, and those that do seek and find Him and repent and believe the gospel then become the 'elect'!!! -- verse 31.

    In Him,

    Eye

    By Blogger Eye, at August 15, 2006 7:05 AM  

  • Eye,

    You wrote: What does Eye see [in Acts 17]?

    1. Men do have the ability to seek God -- verse 27!

    2. Men do have the ability to repent -- verse 30!!

    3. God's plan is inclusive of ALL men, and those that do seek and find Him and repent and believe the gospel then become the 'elect'!!! -- verse 31.

    Dr Davy's reply: V. 27 does not say men have the ability to seek God, it only says they should seek God. V. 30 doesn't say men have the ability to repent, it only says that God commands it.

    V. 31 only says that through the resurrection of Christ God gave incontrovertible evidence to all men that "He hath appointed a day to judge the world." It doesn't say anything here about the extent of the work of Christ.

    You will ask, if man doesn't have the ability to repent, how can God ask him to? I reply, God lays out His requirements to show us that we are sinners and that we need His grace. He commanded Israel to keep the whole law (Lv 22:31). He commanded Israel, and confirmed the commandment in the NT, to be holy or perfect just like He is (Lv 19:2; Mt 5:48). He commanded Israel and again confirmed it in the NT that we should love Him with our whole being (Dt 6:5; Mk 12:30). Of course, those things are impossible. That's why we need grace.

    It is a tenable biblical position, then, that it might also be impossible to seek or repent -- apart from the grace of God. The fact that God demands it does not mean it is possible.

    Dr Davy

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at August 15, 2006 9:15 AM  

  • Eye,

    What does Ps 33:14-15 mean?

    From the place of his habitation he looketh upon all the inhabitants of the earth. He fashioneth their hearts alike; he considereth all their works.

    ("Alike" in this case means "each and all of them." It comes from the Hebrew /yachad/, which means "together.")

    It plainly says that God "fashions" the "hearts" of "all" people. The word "fashions" is the word used of a potter and clay. And we all know that a person's "heart" is the seat of his will. Therefore this says that God molds everyone's will. This agrees with Philippians 2:13, "For it is God which worketh in you both to will and to do of his good pleasure." God works in Christians not only to do what He wants, but He makes us WILL to do what He wants. What Php 2:13 says of Christians Ps 33:14-15 expands to all mankind. God determines what all people will want to do.

    God graciously determines that some will want to seek Him.

    Dr Davy

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at August 15, 2006 10:26 AM  

  • dr davy,

    dr davy replied: V. 27 does not say men have the ability to seek God, it only says they should seek God. V. 30 doesn't say men have the ability to repent, it only says that God commands it.

    Eye's response: I have the ability to contemplate eternity, the gospel message, right from wrong, ask those I love to forgive me when I sin against them, etc., and that is possible in a state of eternal separation from God!! Remember Cain?

    Once again, the hyper Calvinist position of taking literal wooden meanings of certain descriptive words (like dead) used to give a word picture of our separation from God produces a misunderstanding and a hopelessness beyond comprehension! Does God do the work of Salvation? Yes. Can man glory in his free will choice to believe the gospel? I suppose he can, but I would hasten to add any such glory would soon dissipate as that new believer grows and understands the full import of saved by grace!! So I say that argument used by man extremers is non-sense in man glorying in making a decision others choose not to make.

    Think about it for a minute. If you believe only the 'elect' have the capacity to respond to the Gospel because God does a secret work in them so they can respond, and man has no ability whatsoever to comprehend and believe the gospel apart from this secret regeneration, then I believe you have severely misunderstood the thrust of the Scriptures on salvation. The logic of this belief clearly implies God only does a secret work in some, ie the Elect. So, what's the purpose of spreading the gospel? No need because God will do the secret work and things will work out! That's the road the hard-shells have taken and you and I both know it is wrong.

    It certainly didn't take a secret work for those who 'believed' God through Moses message of the passover! They were told what to do and it was up to them if they would in simple faith apply the blood. God made a promise to protect and save them, but man must operate in that belief and show faith towards that promise!!

    Let me say that again, it was UP TO THEM! The choice was theirs to make. I believe every great theologian worth their salt has written on the picture of Passover and how it foreshadows Salvation.

    Moreover, John the Baptist and Jesus both confronted the world with a specific message -- Repent for the Kingdom of Heaven is at hand!! Men in a state of depravity do repent -- the Scriptures are full of examples. Many who heard Jesus and John did repent and showed evidence of works meet for repentance! How about wee Zacchaeus, the publican, the woman of Luke 7? They all repented or their sins would not have been forgiven...

    Check out Luke 7:29-30. God says the Pharisees rejected the counsel of God! I suppose you could argue their state of total depravity made them do it, but that is not what God said!!!! Were they depraved, YES! But, they still could either repent and believe or reject and stay lost....

    I remember the account of the mighty city of Nineveh repenting....

    Truth is truth. When you recognize truth you see it for what it is. You either embrace the Truth or you reject it. There is no middle ground. Again, many have recognized the Truth over the years and sadly they don't repent and believe the gospel. That has nothing to do with the fact they are unable because they are 'dead' and blinded to it, rather it has everything to do with their decision and free will to reject the gospel when given the opportunity to believe.

    Remember Cain? Cain sought God on his own terms and yet God had the nerve to show up and meet with Him, even when he had deliberately disobeyed God! God even told him what to do and what the outcome of doing things God's way would mean to him if he would only obey. Sadly, Cain did not repent and believe... Hey, you can't deny Cain had the opprotunity!!

    So, if God loved Cain that much, where oh where does the Holy Writ proclaim a nullification of that great Love for all of mankind?? Rather, I believe it testifies in John 3:16 to the continuation of that great Love for mankind!

    In Him,

    Eye

    By Blogger Eye, at August 15, 2006 10:43 AM  

  • dr davy,

    Yes and it is His will to have all men to be saved...

    In Him,

    Eye

    By Blogger Eye, at August 15, 2006 10:46 AM  

  • Please tell me, Dr. Davy, why God needs His servants be gentle, apt to teach, patient, meek if He is the one pulling the strings. What on earth does it matter? Why does it matter if we have seeker friendly churches who don't preach the truth of the gospel?

    If God, like you said, makes us do and desire the things we do whether good or bad, then what does any of it matter?

    Dr. Davy: "God determines what all people will want to do."

    You're trying to tell me that God causes men to molest children? HE is the instigator? SURELY I have misunderstood you.

    By Blogger Dawn, at August 15, 2006 1:35 PM  

  • Dr. Davy, you haven't commented on Cain, yet. Do you plan to do so?

    By Blogger Dawn, at August 15, 2006 2:28 PM  

  • Eye: "Once again, the hyper Calvinist position of taking literal wooden meanings of certain descriptive words (like dead) used to give a word picture of our separation from God produces a misunderstanding and a hopelessness beyond comprehension!"

    That is so true. God allows us freedom of choice in everything, but our own salvation?

    Superb post, Eye!

    By Blogger Dawn, at August 15, 2006 2:49 PM  

  • Dr. Davy, I have a question for you.

    By Blogger Dawn, at August 15, 2006 2:56 PM  

  • Dawn,

    You wrote: "Please tell me, Dr. Davy, why God needs His servants be gentle, apt to teach, patient, meek if He is the one pulling the strings."

    Dr Davy's reply: I don't know why. I do know that it does matter, because God commands it. God saves people. God employs means. God commands us in the Bible to evangelize and be gentle, therefore we must be. But the Bible also says that God is the one who draws people.

    Dawn wrote: "You're trying to tell me that God causes men to molest children? HE is the instigator? SURELY I have misunderstood you."

    Dr Davy's reply: Well, then, what does Ps 33:14-15 mean?

    God sovereignly directs the actions of men, yet man is responsible for his actions. Both of these things are taught in the Bible, so we need to accept and teach both. But we might not be able to reconcile them in our heads, because God's ways are higher than ours.

    Job said that God took away, but he didn't sin in what he said and he didn't blame God (Job 1:21-22). So it looks like Job recognized that God was ultimately responsible for his losses, but Job did not blame Him. So somehow it is possible to say that God created evil (Is 45:7) and still not blame God for evil. Both are true, but it's hard to reconcile them in our heads, because God's ways are higher than ours.

    So don't deny something just because it doesn't make sense to you. We cannot fully comprehend God and His ways! What are the principles plainly taught in the Bible?

    p.s. I'll see if I can think of anything edifying to add to the Cain debate.

    Dr Davy

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at August 15, 2006 3:17 PM  

  • Dawn,

    You wrote: "You're trying to tell me that God causes men to molest children? HE is the instigator? SURELY I have misunderstood you."

    Dr Davy replies: Are you saying that God is helpless when a man is molesting a child, because that man has free will and God cannot intervene?

    No, I'm not saying God causes men to molest children. God does not instigate sin. Adam did. That's a biblical fact. But another biblical fact is that no evil can take place if God does not permit it (Job 1 & 2). Another fact is that God uses everything to work together for good for those who love Him (Rom 8:28), and even the wrath of men will praise Him (Ps 76:10).

    The fact that I most can't understand is the fact in Ps 33:14-15. The Bible says that God forms every person's heart the way a potter forms clay. That fact fits with the other biblical statements about God's sovereignty over human action (Job 12:23; 14:5; 139:16; Pr 16:9; 20:24; Jr 10:23; Dn 4:35; Ac 17:26). But it sure is hard to reconcile with our human sensibilities.

    In the book Trusting God by Jerry Bridges it says God is all loving, therefore He wants the best for us. God is all knowing, therefore He knows what is best for us. And God is all powerful, therefore He can accomplish what is best for us.

    If, as Arminians seem to teach, human free will trumps God's will, then how can a loving, wise God accomplish what is best for us? If man is more powerful than God, how do I trust God to keep some mugger from shooting me before it's my time to die? How does the little girl trust God to get her through or out of an abusive situation?

    If human free will trumps God's sovereignty, why pray? What can God do anyway? What does it matter? What does any of it matter?

    Dr Davy

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at August 15, 2006 4:09 PM  

  • Dr. Davy: "You [Dawn] wrote: "Please tell me, Dr. Davy, why God needs His servants be gentle, apt to teach, patient, meek if He is the one pulling the strings."

    Dr Davy's reply: I don't know why. I do know that it does matter, because God commands it. God saves people. God employs means. God commands us in the Bible to evangelize and be gentle, therefore we must be. But the Bible also says that God is the one who draws people.
    "

    Exactly. It DOES matter. Why does it matter? Because God's grace is IRRESISTIBLE and people need to be persuaded; some more than others. God wants us to plant seed and for us to water it. And if they choose to believe He will give the increase. God is DRAWING the people by US spreading His word.

    Dr Davy's reply:Dawn wrote: "You're trying to tell me that God causes men to molest children? HE is the instigator? SURELY I have misunderstood you."

    Well, then, what does Ps 33:14-15 mean?

    ("Alike" in this case means "each and all of them." It comes from the Hebrew /yachad/, which means "together.")

    It plainly says that God "fashions" the "hearts" of "all" people. The word "fashions" is the word used of a potter and clay. And we all know that a person's "heart" is the seat of his will. Therefore this says that God molds everyone's will. This agrees with Philippians 2:13, "For it is God which worketh in you both to will and to do of his good pleasure." God works in Christians not only to do what He wants, but He makes us WILL to do what He wants. What Php 2:13 says of Christians Ps 33:14-15 expands to all mankind. God determines what all people will want to do.

    God graciously determines that some will want to seek Him.


    Let’s look at it again.

    Psalms 33:14-15 (KJV) “From the place of his habitation he looketh upon all the inhabitants of the earth. He fashioneth their hearts alike; he considereth all their works.

    Psalms 33:14-15 (NIV) “From His dwelling place he watches all who live on the earth–He who forms the hearts of all, who considers everything they do.

    Here are the words in Hebrew:

    fashions

    3335. yatsar
    probably identical with 3334 (through the squeezing into shape);
    ((compare 3331)); to mould into a form; especially as a potter;
    figuratively, to determine (i.e. form a resolution):--X earthen, fashion,
    form, frame, make(-r), potter, purpose.

    See Hebrew 3334
    See Hebrew 3331

    3334. yatsar
    a primitive root; to press (intransitive), i.e. be narrow; figuratively, be in
    distress:--be distressed, be narrow, be straitened (in straits), be vexed.

    3331. yatsa
    a primitive root; to strew as a surface:--make (one's) bed, X lie, spread.

    hearts

    3820. leb
    a form of 3824; the heart; also used (figuratively) very widely for the
    feelings, the will and even the intellect; likewise for the centre of
    anything:--+ care for, comfortably, consent, X considered, courag(-
    eous), friend(-ly), ((broken-), (hard-), (merry-), (stiff-), (stout-), double)
    heart((-ed)), X heed, X I, kindly, midst, mind(-ed), X regard((-ed)), X
    themselves, X unawares, understanding, X well, willingly, wisdom.

    See Hebrew 3824

    3824. lebab
    from 3823; the heart (as the most interior organ); used also like 3820:--+
    bethink themselves, breast, comfortably, courage, ((faint), (tender-
    )heart((-ed)), midst, mind, X unawares, understanding.

    See Hebrew 3823
    See Hebrew 3820

    3823. labab
    a primitive root; properly, to be enclosed (as if with fat); by implication
    (as denominative from 3824) to unheart, i.e. (in a good sense) transport
    (with love), or (in a bad sense) stultify; also (as denominative from 3834)
    to make cakes:--make cakes, ravish, be wise.

    See Hebrew 3824
    See Hebrew 3834

    3834. labiybah
    or rather lbibah {leb-ee-baw'}; from 3823 in its original sense of fatness
    (or perhaps of folding); a cake (either as fried or turned):--cake.

    alike

    3162. yachad
    from 3161; properly, a unit, i.e. (adverb) unitedly:--alike, at all (once),
    both, likewise, only, (al-)together, withal.

    See Hebrew 3161

    3161. yachad
    a primitive root; to be (or become) one:--join, unite.

    At this point, I’m not sure what it means, exactly. But I know it doesn’t mean what you’re trying to say it means. I’m still meditating on this one. Your interpretation doesn’t make sense in light of SO MANY scriptures. Just ONE example I’ll give is one of the Calvinist’s favorite proof texts.

    Psalms 14:1-7To the chief Musician, A Psalm of David.>> The fool hath said in his heart, There is no God. They are corrupt, they have done abominable works, there is none that doeth good. The LORD looked down from heaven upon the children of men, to see if there were any that did understand, and seek God. They are all gone aside, they are all together become filthy: there is none that doeth good, no, not one. Have all the workers of iniquity no knowledge? who eat up my people as they eat bread, and call not upon the LORD. There were they in great fear: for God is in the generation of the righteous. Ye have shamed the counsel of the poor, because the LORD is his refuge. Oh that the salvation of Israel were come out of Zion! when the LORD bringeth back the captivity of his people, Jacob shall rejoice, and Israel shall be glad.

    God FORMS people’s hearts, makes them do the heinous things they do (including unbelief) and then He holds them accountable for the things that HE MAKES THEM DO or NOT DO?! Remember God tempts no man. Remember it is Satan that is our tempter, our accuser, our enemy, etc. Not GOD!

    Dr. Davy, much learning doth make thee mad! (Just kidding!) ;-)

    And I certainly don't agree that God graciously determines that only "SOME" would want to seek Him.

    Dr. Davy:God sovereignly directs the actions of men, yet man is responsible for his actions. Both of these things are taught in the Bible, so we need to accept and teach both. But we might not be able to reconcile them in our heads, because God's ways are higher than ours.

    I agree that, at times, God directs our actions for His purposes. He also allows EVERYTHING that happens to happen. There is no problem in reconciling that. He uses OUR good (and His good) and OUR evil for HIS purposes. Though I also believe that He allows the natural course of things, while still being in control. He doesn’t MAKE the sparrow fall, but He allows it to fall.

    Dr. Davy:Job said that God took away, but he didn't sin in what he said and he didn't blame God (Job 1:21-22). So it looks like Job recognized that God was ultimately responsible for his losses, but Job did not blame Him. So somehow it is possible to say that God created evil (Is 45:7) and still not blame God for evil. Both are true, but it's hard to reconcile them in our heads, because God's ways are higher than ours.

    God was ultimately responsible, but only in the sense that He ALLOWED the devil to have his way with Job TO A POINT! WE are truly responsible; as there is no good in us and we don’t deserve God’s mercy, but God gives us mercy because He is a loving God. We see that God is in complete control through the account of Job, even in allowing the devil to wreak havoc.

    I agree. God created evil, but God did NOT create each individual to be evil or good and that is the difference. WE choose to do evil or good. We have that freedom through the grace of God. (Not to be confused with God’s definition of good, which we have none of that in us. Our righteousness is as filthy rags.)

    Dr. Davy:So don't deny something just because it doesn't make sense to you. We cannot fully comprehend God and His ways! What are the principles plainly taught in the Bible?

    You misunderstand me. I don’t deny God’s word. It makes perfect sense to me. :-) What I deny is the Calvinist interpretation of His word. The Calvinist DOES make the word not make sense. I FULLY comprehend God and His ways as they relate to mankind. And I FULLY comprehend that His ways are Higher than ours.

    I'm going out of town for a few days so I will have to finish this later.

    Take Care!

    By Blogger Dawn, at August 18, 2006 10:25 PM  

  • Dr. Davy: "No, I'm not saying God causes men to molest children. God does not instigate sin. Adam did. That's a biblical fact. But another biblical fact is that no evil can take place if God does not permit it (Job 1 & 2). Another fact is that God uses everything to work together for good for those who love Him (Rom 8:28), and even the wrath of men will praise Him (Ps 76:10)."

    We agree here, but that is much different than what you stated in your previous post. I'm going to guess this is the clarification of what you actually meant to say?

    Dr. Davy:The fact that I most can't understand is the fact in Ps 33:14-15. The Bible says that God forms every person's heart the way a potter forms clay. That fact fits with the other biblical statements about God's sovereignty over human action (Job 12:23; 14:5; [Psalm] 139:16; Pr 16:9; 20:24; Jr 10:23; Dn 4:35; Ac 17:26). But it sure is hard to reconcile with our human sensibilities.

    Again, these don’t say that God MAKES us good or evil, they state that God is in control over the things we do, whether good or bad. He allows the things that happen to happen, but WE do them. Not that He won't ever intervene because He will. He uses our good and OUR bad for His purposes.

    Our very being is of God. Yes, the good that is in us comes from God. The talent within us comes from God. Our personalities come from God. Our features and our form come from God. God has a plan for us.

    I think that Psalm 33:14-15 means what it says, that God fashions our hearts alike. I think it means that he’s written His law in our hearts and that we’re all on equal ground. (Romans 2:15) I think what we become after that is up to us (not that God doesn’t ever intervene when He sees fit because I think He does). But if He gives us a beautiful voice, we can use that voice to praise God or to seek the praise of men or even use it for evil.

    I think our environment can have a lot to do with how we develop the personalities God has given us. I think that is why God admonishes us to raise our children in Him; because it MATTERS how we are raised.

    I’m not saying that we’re not accountable for our own actions if we are abused and beaten as children and we continue the cycle, but it is true that abusers sometimes beget abusers, etc. And I’m not saying that God doesn’t intervene or that we can’t break the cycle on our own or that we can’t begin a cycle of abuse even if we were never abused. We just never know what is going on inside a person. God doesn't CAUSE this, but THROUGH ALL this God is in complete control. And God has perfect foreknowledge.

    Why does He allow it at all? Because we are products of the fall and sin has consequences. And, like you said, HE works all things togethr for OUR good. Those of us who are the called according to His purpose. What the devil meant for bad, God can make it good. Even if it means we suffer or die, or both. The joy of the Lord is our strength. He won't put more on us than we can handle.

    Dr. Davy:In the book Trusting God by Jerry Bridges it says God is all loving, therefore He wants the best for us. God is all knowing, therefore He knows what is best for us. And God is all powerful, therefore He can accomplish what is best for us.

    I agree with Jerry Bridges.

    Dr. Davy:If, as Arminians seem to teach, human free will trumps God's will, then how can a loving, wise God accomplish what is best for us? If man is more powerful than God, how do I trust God to keep some mugger from shooting me before it's my time to die? How does the little girl trust God to get her through or out of an abusive situation?

    I do not believe that human free will trumps God’s will. What I'm saying is that God allows us free will to a point. That point being that it does not go against His ultimate will. BUT, we have total free will when it comes to our salvation.

    I’ve never said that we can’t trust God to protect us, but we don’t know what the future holds. God knows when it is our time to die. He has perfect foreknowledge. Nothing will happen to us that God doesn’t allow. We die when we die. He knows our beginning and our end, and He ordains it. If someone tries to kill us or we do something stupid to get ourselves killed before God is finished with us, then I think He will intervene. That is all part of His foreknowledge.

    Dr. Davy:If human free will trumps God's sovereignty, why pray? What can God do anyway? What does it matter? What does any of it matter?

    Again, human free will does NOT trump the sovereignty of God.

    Why does it matter? There are many reasons.

    It matters because we do have free will. God HEARS our prayers and they are precious to the Lord. (Psalm 141:2; Proverbs 15:8; Revelation 5:8)

    We pray because our prayers are ABLE to move God if He so desires Himself to be moved. If it didn’t matter, He wouldn’t tell us to pray without ceasing. The other reasons He wants us to pray is because prayer also builds our faith and serves as a catharsis for us.

    I believe that God foreknows how mankind will act in every situation from creation to the time He makes the new heaven and new earth. He knows what we are thinking, when we will pray, how He will respond to those prayers, how we will respond to His response, etc. He has determined what He foreordained AND what He foreknew with His sovereignty INTACT.

    I think the real question is, “Why does it matter if we pray, IF there is no free will?” If God has determined who will and will not go to Hell, directed our EVERY step, put EVERY thought into our minds, etc., what does ANY of it matter?

    IF we have NO control whatsoever, how can He hold us responsible for ANYTHING? That would go against His very character.

    If God directs our every step and forms our hearts to be evil or good, then where does the devil fit into all this?

    By Blogger Dawn, at August 24, 2006 1:25 AM  

  • Dawn,

    Well said!

    In Him,

    Eye

    By Blogger Eye, at August 24, 2006 7:27 AM  

  • Dawn,

    Dawn wrote: "I think that Psalm 33:14-15 means what it says, that God fashions our hearts alike. I think it means that he’s written His law in our hearts and that we’re all on equal ground. (Romans 2:15)"

    Dr Davy replies: This is an example where the archaic language of the KJV is misleading. "Alike" doesn't mean equally. It means each one. That is, God fashioned each person's heart, one by one.

    (Here's a challenge on a side note: If you spoke 17th century British, you would understand the meaning of "alike" here. Since you don't speak 17th century British, either you should learn it, or you should use a modern American Bible.)

    The Hebrew is yachad. It literally means "one" or "alone." 33:15 is literally, "He shapes--one--hearts of them; the one understanding of all the works of them."

    KJV, like most versions, takes it as a distributive word: "He shapes one-by-one their works." That is, He distributed His acts of fashioning to each person.

    However, He worked differently with each person. Some He fashioned for honor, others for dishonor (Rom 9:21).

    Another possible way to understand it is that "one" modifies the subject, God. Holman CSB reads, "He alone shapes their hearts" (NJB is similar).

    I applaud you when you say, "I think [it] means what it says." But I caution you not to build your theology around a particular word in the KJV, only to find out that the archaic meaning isn't the same as the modern meaning.

    Or, worse yet, only to find that the KJV has chosen the wrong word to translate the Hebrew or Greek. That was the case with the original dispensationalists, who built their method on "rightly dividing the word of truth" in 2 Tim 2:15. Actually 3718 orthotomeo means to cut a clear, straight path without diversions (the LXX uses the same word in Pr 3:6; 11:5). So in the context of 2 Tim 2, Timothy is being urged to handle/teach the Word of God correctly, without being distracted by petty arguments. It has nothing to do with cutting the Bible into 7 or 8 pieces, as the dispensationalists did.

    So keep on accepting "what it says." But compare the KJV with modern Bibles, and if there is a difference, do a little digging to find out why.

    Another side note: When people ask my opinion about some secret numerical code in the Hebrew Bible, I generally respond, "Just read it! Don't cut it up and feed it into a computer and count the letters and assign each letter a number and look for a message. Just read it!"

    Dr Davy

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at August 25, 2006 8:27 AM  

  • Look at the entire Psalm. It's talking about the Lord and His power, glory, love and majesty.

    If the Lord forms our hearts and causes us to do evil, then why o why does it say that He foils the plans of the who? THE NATIONS. And thwarts the purposes of who? THE PEOPLE? What does the Lord bring to nought? The counsel of who? THE HEATHEN. What does He make of none effect? The devices. The devices of who? THE PEOPLE. Is God fighting with HIMSELF?!

    It's stating here that God knows us, He's created us, He knows our hearts and, yes, he forms our hearts, but not to be EVIL or GOOD. He considers our every thought and motion.

    This entire Psalm is saying that we can't put anything past Him and we can really do NOTHING without HIM. And that He keeps His eye on those of us who fear and put OUR hope IN HIM.

    Where does it state that yachad means "alone" or "one"? I agree that it can mean one in the since of being "united."

    alike

    3162. yachad
    from 3161; properly, a unit, i.e. (adverb) unitedly:--alike, at all (once), both, likewise, only, (al-)together, withal.

    See Hebrew 3161

    3161. yachad
    a primitive root; to be (or become) one:--join, unite.

    But let's say that you are right. That it does, indeed, mean that God forms each individual's heart because yachad means "one" (individually) or "alone". It doesn't mean that He forms them to BE EVIL OR GOOD.

    The Bible tells us that He writes the laws in our hearts. I believe God gives us specific talents and WE can use them for good or evil. He gives us our personalities and, again, WE can use them for good or evil. Are we stubborn? Stubbornness isn't always a bad trait. We can be stubborn for GOOD or we can be stubborn for EVIL. I think He does give us a WILL, but it is up to US how we choose to use our WILLS. Again, we can use any and everything God has given us for good or evil. But HE does NOT make us GOOD or EVIL. We do that all by OURSELVES.

    Once He's formed our hearts, He then considers OUR works. He judges them. He judges how we’ve developed our hearts.

    I know I’m not explaining this very well, but I think I’m at least able to get my point across.

    Dr. Davy: "However, He worked differently with each person. Some He fashioned for honor, others for dishonor (Rom 9:21)."

    Geisler states, “The image this [Romans 9:21] conjures up in a Western mind is often a deterministic one, if not fatalistic, one where they have no choice but are overpowered by God.

    "However, a Hebrew mind would not think this way, knowing the parable of the potter from Jeremiah 18. For in this context the basic lump of clay will either be built up or torn down by God, depending on Israel’s moral response to God. For the prophet says emphatically, “If that nation I warned repents of its evil, then I will relent and not inflict on it the disaster I had planned” (18:8). Thus, the unrpentent element of Israel becomes a “vessel for dishonour” and the repentant group a “vessel for honour”.

    “Further, there is a different use of prepositions in “vessel unto honour” versus a “vessel of wrath” (Romans 9:22). A vessel of wrath is one that has received wrath from God, just as a vessel of mercy has received mercy from God. But a vessel unto honor is one that gives honor to God. So a repentant Israel will, like a beautiful vessel unto [for] honor, bring honor to its Maker. But like a vessel of dishonor (literally, “no-honor”), an unrepentant Israel will not bring honor to God, but will rather be an object of His wrath.
    ” (emphasis in original) [Chosen But Free, pg. 93]

    Now, if you want to argue that Romans 9:21 is speaking along individual lines, then the same goes for the individual. Depending upon OUR choices God makes us vessels of honor or dis-honor.

    Rightly dividing the word, to me, means exactly what it says. For example, we aren’t SAVED by our works, but our works will bear out our faith. Faith without works is dead. There is a balance taught throughout the word of God. The bible can be paradoxical at times, but we KNOW that there are NO contradictions and that with a little, or a lot of, study we can reconcile the word of God. And some things we may never know until we get to heaven.

    My husband and I do own many different versions of the bible, but we prefer the KJV. He studies the different translations and digs in to find the differences. I, on the other hand, usually just consult the concordance and every once in awhile will go to a different version to see how they’ve worded a particular passage. But none of it has lead to Calvinism. :-)

    I guess that God has fashioned my heart to NOT believe Calvinism. ;-) (I stole that from my bible teacher...paraphrased.)

    Dr. Davy:Just read it!"

    Amen and Amen!

    By Blogger Dawn, at August 26, 2006 12:24 AM  

  • Dr. Davy, if God directs our every step and forms our hearts to be evil or good, then where does the devil fit into all this?

    By Blogger Dawn, at August 26, 2006 12:32 AM  

  • Excellent question...

    By Blogger Eye, at August 26, 2006 9:05 AM  

  • Dear Eye and Dawn,

    Scripture is clear as to the role of the devil. Satan is the accuser and the tempter. Just as every good thing comes from God, Satan/the devil is the agent of every bad thing. (Yet, Satan can do nothing unless God permits it. Perhaps that is why Is 45:7 says that God creates evil.)

    Scripture is also clear that every action of human beings is directed by God.

    Where Scripture is not clear is how these two facts fit into a rational system. That is a mystery.

    While theology will generally make sense to the rational mind, the challenge to those who would form a biblical theology is to resist the temptation to deny any fact that does not fit into a rational system. We are first and foremost biblicists, not rationalists. (Divine revelation has been around since creation; rationalism was invented in the 17th century.)

    Dr Davy

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at August 28, 2006 8:28 AM  

  • If God directs our every step, then He is the instigator of evil. And we know He is NOT. If He were then it would not be a sin to do evil. Besides the bible doesn't say that He directs our EVERY step, unless I've missed it. And unless by "direct" you mean "allow."

    I'm not saying that God never directs our steps in a particular way because I think He does. But He does not CAUSE a person to perform evil acts.

    No, Satan is not the agent of every bad thing, but he is the agent of every evil thing. Did not God kill David and Bathsheba's baby? Did He not kill Ananias and Sapphira? (Just two examples, and I don't see these things as evil.)

    I agree that Satan can do nothing unless God allows it. And that that is probably the correct interpretation of Isaiah 45:7. Though I do believe that God created the force of evil.

    Colossians 1:16 "For by him were all things created, that are in heaven, and that are in earth, visible and invisible, whether they be thrones, or dominions, or principalities, or powers: all things were created by him, and for him:"

    Dr. Davy: "Where Scripture is not clear is how these two facts fit into a rational system. That is a mystery."

    But it is clear. God created evil. The devil is the instigator of evil and God sometimes allows it. Of course this is all very complex, but very understandable.

    The mystery, to me, is why God chose to create evil at all. Again, that is where my faith comes in and I must remember that His ways are higher than our ways. But that is very different than God CAUSING or INSTIGATING the evil to happen.

    And I know this is where Calvinists say that non-Calvinists are simply not mature enough in their understanding of the scriptures. And this is where I say that Calvinists allow their intellects to get the best of them because their interpretation ignores the majority of scripture.

    Dr. Davy: "While theology will generally make sense to the rational mind, the challenge to those who would form a biblical theology is to resist the temptation to deny any fact that does not fit into a rational system."

    Non-Calvinists do not deny the facts of scripture.

    Dr. Davy: "We are first and foremost biblicists, not rationalists."

    I agree 100%; however, you seem to be implying that we cannot use reason to reconcile the Scriptures. Non-Calvinist reasoning does not supersede divine revelation, rather it takes into consideration the whole of the Scriptures.

    How convenient that it is divine revelation for a Calvinist to use reason when reconciling the Scriptures, but it is rationalism when the non-Calvinist does the same.

    Dr. Davy: "(Divine revelation has been around since creation; rationalism was invented in the 17th century.)"

    Rationalism may have been officially developed and defined in the 17th century, but rationalism has been around since creation, too. Did you forget about Lucifer's fall? Or did God MAKE him sin, versus Lucifer's own rationalizations?

    Non-Calvinists are NOT ignoring divine revelation by way of rationalism. Nor have we been denied divine revelation by God. Please correct me if I have misunderstood you.

    By Blogger Dawn, at August 30, 2006 8:30 AM  

  • This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at March 15, 2007 10:32 AM  

  • This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at April 26, 2007 5:02 AM  

Post a Comment

<< Home