Doctrines Of Grace

We must not suppose that if we succeeded in making everyone nice we should have saved their souls. A world of nice people, content in their own niceness, looking no further, turned away from God, would be just as desperately in need of salvation as a miserable world.
C.S. Lewis

Over at Monergism.com there is an excellent resource which lays out scripturally the Doctrines of Grace. If anyone has a quarrel or seeks to find out what it is reformed Baptists believe concerning The Doctrines of Grace or TULIP, I invite you to not only check this out but look up the passages and study to see if we are so dangerous and wrong.

I would invite anyone who has questions or disagrees with the interpretation of these passages to comment. I would truly be interested in your reasons for disagreement, or to be able to answer questions to the best of my ability. No fighting here. I would request discussion, even though it may get strong at times. Strong convictions and discussions are welcome here. Disagreement is welcome here.

You can also ask any question that you want, even if it is an attempt to stump me. Now is your chance.

Total Depravity-Why This One Doctrine Changed Me

Romans 14:23 “Whatever does not proceed from faith is sin.”

John Piper says of this passage:

This is a radical indictment of all natural “virtue” that does not flow from a heart humbly relying on God’s grace. The terrible condition of man’s heart will never be recognized by people who assess it only in relation to other men. Romans 14:23 makes plain that depravity is our condition in relation to God primarily, and only secondarily in relation to man. Unless we start here we will never grasp the totality of our natural depravity.

I have never been one to hide my belief in the Doctrines of Grace otherwise known as TULIP. I have stated on several comments concerning Calvinism that unless a person understands the doctrine of Total Depravity, it’s difficult to understand the other four points. In stating this it was then alleged that I believed a person must fully understand this doctrine in order to obtain salvation. Yet that is not what I said. Salvation comes through faith in Christ alone, not by meticulously understanding doctrine. I chalk it up to my failure to communicate clearly, which is difficult to do on a comment stream without taking up the entire stream. Thus, I will attempt to explain further here, and I will add it was this particular teaching that changed my life and continues to change it.

John Piper’s statement above simply says that we cannot compare our goodness or evil with the deeds of other people. We have to compare them next to a Holy God. When we do this, things look quite different. We see ourselves as God sees us, and the picture isn’t pretty.

Romans 3:9-12 says:

Rom 3:10 as it is written: “None is righteous, no, not one;
Rom 3:11 no one understands; no one seeks for God.
Rom 3:12 All have turned aside; together they have become worthless; no one does good, not even one.”

It’s why Paul continually said in Romans 7:18:

For I know that nothing good dwells in me, that is, in my flesh. For I have the desire to do what is right, but not the ability to carry it out.

Before Christ, we may seek after God. We may try to find him, we may do good works, but the motive is wrong. Unless God supernaturally takes the scales off of our eyes, we don’t see him for who He truly is, but for our own wants or needs. To be a better person, to better our marriage, any reason but because we are filthy, deserving hell, and in need of a Savior. In fact, we may want to escape hell, and that is why we seek God. Wrong reason again.

Apart from regeneration, which opens our eyes to the beauty of Christ, and the ugliness of our sin, we can’t seek God in a way a Holy God requires. It’s only by God’s gracing us, reaching down and changing us, that our definition of the word good changes.

Eph 2:3 among whom we all once lived in the passions of our flesh, carrying out the desires of the body and the mind, and were by nature children of wrath, like the rest of mankind.
Eph 2:4 But God, being rich in mercy, because of the great love with which he loved us,
Eph 2:5 even when we were dead in our trespasses, made us alive together with Christ–by grace you have been saved–
Eph 2:6 and raised us up with him and seated us with him in the heavenly places in Christ Jesus,

Faith is a gift from God, not a work, so that we have no reason to boast that I went forward on such and such a date. We may not even understand all that is happening to us, we just know that when we read that passage, heard that sermon, listened to the person who gave us the gospel, we believed. We knew what this person was saying is true. We were in need of a Savior. Not to get rid of the bad habits, not to make us a better person, but because we couldn’t do those things on our own. That we sinned against a Holy God. That we have no power to do good. That our good works are filthy rags to a Holy God. Why did God save us?

Eph 2:7 so that in the coming ages he might show the immeasurable riches of his grace in kindness toward us in Christ Jesus.
Eph 2:8 For by grace you have been saved through faith. And this is not your own doing; it is the gift of God,
Eph 2:9 not a result of works, so that no one may boast.
Eph 2:10 For we are his workmanship, created in Christ Jesus for good works, which God prepared beforehand, that we should walk in them.

I didn’t understand this overnight, although I had been a church goer since childhood. In fact it took many years of study and searching. Taking notes home from sermons, getting my Bible out and prayerfully reading each and every passage over and over again. It was by doing this, that just as John Calvin discovered, Martin Luther discovered, Augustine, and Charles Spurgeon discovered, I could not do what a Holy God required. Without Christ I could not ever be righteous by my works. It was only through Christ and His works that I was righteous.

It was then that I saw the horribleness of my sin and I couldn’t repent enough. It was then that the chains of trying to work my way to heaven ended. It was then, that I cried out to God to save me, that I knew beyond a shadow of a doubt that He had answered, that my sins were forgiven. He had answered long before I had cried out to Him. I have not been the same since. That was nine years ago.
In summary of Total Depravity, I can’t say any better than John Piper, so again in his words:

…total depravity means that our rebellion against God is total, everything we do in this rebellion is sin, our inability to submit to God or reform ourselves is total, and we are therefore totally deserving of eternal punishment.

It is hard to exaggerate the importance of admitting our condition to be this bad. If we think of ourselves as basically good or even less than totally at odds with God, our grasp of the work of God in redemption will be defective. But if we humble ourselves under this terrible truth of our total depravity, we will be in a position to see and appreciate the glory and wonder of the work of God discussed in the next four points

And I might add that you don’t have to believe in the Doctrines of Grace or Calvinism for this to have happened. I believe it’s in the Bible so therefore it happens to all those who believe in Christ as their Savior and Lord. Calvinist and non-Calvinist. Whoseover will…

Elect Is Another Word That Is Used In The Bible

The specific word elect is used at least fifteen times in the new Testament. Mark 13:27;Luke 18:7; Romans 8:33;Romans 11:7;1 Timothy 5:21;2 Timothy 2:10;Titus 1:1;1Peter 1:1;2 Jn. 1:1;2 John 1:13. In each passage the word elect is used in the context of those chosen. For example Mark 13:27 reads:

And then he will send out the angels and gather his elect from the four winds, from the ends of the earth to the ends of heaven.

Luke 18:7 reads:

And will not God give justice to his elect, who cry to him day and night? Will he delay long over them?

Rom 8:33

Who shall bring any charge against God’s elect? It is God who justifies.

Rom 11:7

What then? Israel failed to obtain what it was seeking. The elect obtained it, but the rest were hardened,

1Ti 5:21

In the presence of God and of Christ Jesus and of the elect angels I charge you to keep these rules without prejudging, doing nothing from partiality.

This word and its use cannot be overlooked, nor can it be denied it is in there. The context is difficult to deny. So why is this exact word used in the context in which it is used? Elect cannot mean that we chose, although from a human viewpoint it may seem that way. The word is eklektos, which means chosen. Israel in the Old Testament was a perfect picture of what is meant by this word.

How would others interpret these passages and why is the specific word used elect?

John Calvin And Servetus

I don’t make an issue of my believing in the five doctrines of Grace. I don’t hide it, having written on it extensively in a previous blog that I had, but I also have always made it clear that I welcome disagreement from those who do not believe in any form of Calvinism. I have  stressed however, that this disagreement must be based on fact, and like so many other rumors, I find that most of the disagreements with Calvinism are based on either wrong facts concerning John Calvin or a misunderstanding of what Reformed doctrine teaches.

There have been comments on this blog and others concerning John Calvin and the killing of Servetus that are based on stories that have been circulating since the time of John Calvin, that just are not true, and I hope to set this to rest, if even for awhile. What I am now writing is what I hope will be passed around as I will be presenting the facts along with resources to support these facts.

John Calvin did not murder Servetus. He did not have the power to murder Servetus:

We have no wish to palliate any act of Calvin’s which is manifestly wrong. All his proceedings, in relation to the unhappy affair of Servetus, we think, cannot be defended. Still it should be remembered that the true principles of religious toleration were very little understood in the time of Calvin. All the other reformers then living approved of Calvin’s conduct. Even the gentle and amiable Melancthon expressed himself in relation to this affair, in the following manner. In a letter addressed to Bullinger, he says, “I have read your statement respecting the blasphemy of Servetus, and praise your piety and judgment; and am persuaded that the Council of Geneva has done right in putting to death this obstinate man, who would never have ceased his blasphemies. I am astonished that any one can be found to disapprove of this proceeding.” Farel expressly says, that “Servetus deserved a capital punishment.” Bucer did not hesitate to declare, that “Servetus deserved something worse than death.”

The truth is, although Calvin had some hand in the arrest and imprisonment of Servetus, he was unwilling that he should be burnt at all. “I desire,” says he, “that the severity of the punishment should be remitted.” “We endeavored to commute the kind of death, but in vain.” “By wishing to mitigate the severity of the punishment,” says Farel to Calvin, “you discharge the office of a friend towards your greatest enemy.” “That Calvin was the instigator of the magistrates that Servetus might be burned,” says Turritine, “historians neither anywhere affirm, nor does it appear from any considerations. Nay, it is certain, that he, with the college of pastors, dissuaded from that kind of punishment.”

It has been often asserted, that Calvin possessed so much influence with the magistrates of Geneva that he might have obtained the release of Servetus, had he not been desirous of his destruction. This however, is not true. So far from it, that Calvin was himself once banished from Geneva, by these very magistrates, and often opposed their arbitrary measures in vain. So little desirous was Calvin of procuring the death of Servetus that he warned him of his danger, and suffered him to remain several weeks at Geneva, before he was arrested. But his language, which was then accounted blasphemous, was the cause of his imprisonment. When in prison, Calvin visited him, and used every argument to persuade him to retract his horrible blasphemies, without reference to his peculiar sentiments. This was the extent of Calvin’s agency in this unhappy affair.

It cannot, however, be denied, that in this instance, Calvin acted contrary to the benignant spirit of the Gospel. It is better to drop a tear over the inconsistency of human nature, and to bewail those infirmities which cannot be justified. He declared he acted conscientiously, and publicly justified the act.

It was the opinion, that erroneous religious principles are punishable by the civil magistrate, that did the mischief, whether at Geneva, in Transylvania, or in Britain; and to this, rather than to Trinitarianism, or Unitarianism, it ought to be imputed.(Foxes Book Of Martyrs Chapter X111)

Michael Servetus was sentenced to death by the Council. Calvin was not even a citizen of Geneva until six years after the execution of Servetus.

Tim Challies has a well informed blog post on Calvin and Servetus that is worth taking the time to read. Another good source of Michael Servetus’ life, beliefs, trial, and execution can be found here. Scottish clergyman and leader of the Reformation, John Knox wrote a defense of the execution of Michael Servetus which can be read in its entirety here.

The incident of Calvin and Servetus should never be a cause to reject a doctrine based on this point alone. The Bible is the final authority, not a person’s deeds. The question should always be are the doctrines of Grace found in the Bible. I believe they are.

Michael Servetus denied the Trinity, and believed doctrine that shocked both the Protestant and Catholics of that time period. Servetus was promoting doctrine that we would reject today.

The facts should also be well known before condemning. Christians have not been pure in the treatment of human beings. We have had wrong treatment of women, children, slavery, the calling of heresy for disagreeing on non-essentials, the shout of disassociation with those whom we disagree with, the destruction of reputations in order to spur one to leave a denomination or position, not for heresy, but for viewing scripture differently in areas not pertaining to essential doctrine.  Instead preferring to label all things essential doctrine. All this has been said to be Biblical, and all done in the name of Christ. All were wrong. All were sin. I could pull writings out of our recent past full of things that horrify me today. This is not to condone everything Martin Luther or John Calvin wrote or thought, but Christ died for these and all of our sins, past, present, and future. That is the wonder and the beauty of His bringing in the New Covenant by which we all are under.