Posted on 03/16/2002 10:02:15 AM PST by ReformedBeckite
The concept of common grace is seldom discussed outside of Calvinistic circles, although all Christian theologies must come to grips eventually with the issues underlying the debate over common grace. The phrase itself goes back at least to the days of colonial American Puritanism. I came across it on several occasions when I was doing research on the colonial Puritans’ economic doctrines and experiments. The concept goes back at least to John Calvin’s writings.’
Before venturing into the forest of theological debate, let me state what I believe is the meaning of the word “grace.” The Bible uses the idea in several ways, but the central meaning of grace is this: A gift given to God’s creatures on the basis, first, of His favor to His Son, Jesus Christ, the incarnation of the second person of the Trinity, and second, on the basis of Christ’s atoning work on the cross. Grace is strictly unmerited, for Christ merits every gift, but in terms of the merit of the creation —merit deserved by a creature because of its mere creature hood—there is none. In short, when we speak of any aspect of the creation, other than the incarnate Jesus Christ, grace is defined as an unmerited gift. The essence of grace is conveyed in James 1:17: "Every good gift and every perfect gift is from above, and cometh down from the Father of lights, with whom is no variableness, neither shadow of turning.”
Special Grace
Special grace is the phrase used by theologians to describe the gift of eternal salvation. Paul writes: “For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God: Not of works, lest any man should boast” (Eph. 2:8-9). He also writes: “But God commendeth his love toward us, in that, while we were yet sinners, Christ died for us” (Rom. 5:8). God selects those on whom He will have mercy (Rom. 9:18). He has chosen these people to be recipients of His gift of eternal salvation, and He chose them before the foundation of the world (Eph. 1:4-6).
Common Grace
But there is another kind of grace, and it is misunderstood. Common grace is equally a gift of God to His creatures, but it is distinguished from special grace in a number of crucial ways. A debate has gone on for close to a century within Calvinistic circles concerning the nature and reality of common grace. I hope that this essay will contribute some acceptable answers to the people of God, though I have little hope of convincing those who have been involved in this debate for 60 years.
Because of the confusion associated with the term “common grace,” let me offer James Jordan’s description of it. Common grace is the equivalent of the crumbs that fall from the master’s table that the dogs eat. This is how the Canaanite woman described her request of healing by Jesus, and Jesus healed her because of her understanding and faith (Matt. 15:27~28). Dogs in Israel were not highly loved animals, so the analogy with common grace is biblically legitimate. “And ye shall be holy men unto me: neither shall ye eat any flesh that is torn of beasts in the field; ye shall cast it to the dogs” (Ex. 22:31). If we assume that God loves pagans the way that modern people love their dogs, then the analogy will not fit.
For the moment, let us refrain from using the word grace. Instead, let us limit ourselves to the word gift. The existence of gifts from God raises a whole series of questions:
Does a gift from God imply His favor?
Does an unregenerate man possess the power to do good? Does the existence of good behavior on the part of the unbeliever deny the doctrine of total depravity? Does history reveal a progressive separation between saved and lost?
Would such a separation necessarily lead to the triumph of the unregenerate?
Is there a common ground intellectually between Christians and non-Christians?
Can Christians and non-Christians cooperate successfully in certain areas?
Do God’s gifts increase or decrease over time?
Will the cultural mandate (dominion covenant) of Genesis 1:28 be fulfilled?
This is a key point of dispute between those who affirm and those who deny the existence of common grace . . . . . . .. . The Bible does not indicate that God in any way favors the unregenerate. The opposite is asserted: “He that believeth on the Son hath everlasting life: and he that believeth not the Son shall not see life; but the wrath of God abideth on him” (John 3:36). The prayer of Christ recorded in John 17 reveals His favor toward the redeemed and them alone. There is a fundamental ethical separation between the saved and the lost. God hated Esau and loved Jacob, before either was born (Rom.9:10-13).
What are we to make of the Bible’s passages that have been used to support the idea of limited favor toward creatures in general? Without exception, they refer to gifts of God to the unregenerate. They do not imply God’s favor. For example, there is this affirmation: “The Lord is good to all: and his tender mercies are over all his works” (Ps. 145:9). The verse preceding this one tells us that God is compassionate, slow to anger, gracious. Romans 2:4 tells us He is longsuffering. Luke 6:35-36 says:
But love ye your enemies, and do good, and lend, hoping for nothing again; and your reward shall be great, and ye shall be the children of the Highest: for he is kind unto the unthankful and to the evil. Be ye therefore merciful, as your Father also is merciful.
I Timothy 4:10 uses explicit language: “For therefore we both labor and suffer reproach, because we trust in the living God, who is the Saviour of all men, specially of those that believe.” The Greek word here translated as “Saviour” is transliterated sOtër: one who saves, heals, protects, or makes whole. God saves (heals) everyone, especially those who believe. Unquestionably, the salvation spoken of is universal—not in the sense of special grace, and therefore in the sense of common grace. This is probably the most difficult verse in the Bible for those who deny universal salvation from hell and who also deny common grace.4
The most frequently cited passage used by those who defend the idea of God’s favor to the unregenerate is Matthew 5:44-45:
But 1 say unto you, Love your enemies, bless them that curse you, do good to them that hate you, and pray for them which despitefully use you, and persecute you; That ye may be the children of your Father which is in heaven: for he maketh his sun to rise on the evil and on the good, and sendeth rain on the just and on the unjust.
It is understandable how such verses, in the absence of other verses that more fully explain the nature and intent of God’s gifts, could lead men to equate God’s favor and gifts. Certainly it is true that God protects, heals, rewards, and cares for the unregenerate. But none of these verses indicates an attitude of favor toward the unregenerate beneficiaries of His gifts. Only in the use of the word “favor” in its slang form of “do me a favor” can we argue that a gift from God is the same as His favor. Favor, in the slang usage, simply means gift—an unmerited gift from the donor. But if favor is understood as an attitude favorable to the unregenerate, or an emotional commitment by God to the unregenerate for their sakes, then it must be said, God shows no favor to the unrighteous.
Coals of Fire
One verse in the Bible, above all others, informs us of the underlying attitude of God toward those who rebel against Him despite His gifts. This passage is the concomitant to the oft-quoted Luke 6:35-36 and Matthew 5:44-45. It is Proverbs 25:21-22, which Paul cites in Romans 12:20:
If thine enemy be hungry, give him bread to eat; and if he be thirsty, give him water to drink: For thou shalt heap coals of fire upon his head, and the Lord shall reward thee.
Why are we to be kind to our enemies? First, because God instructs us to be kind. He is kind to them, and we are to imitate Him. Second, by showing mercy, we heap coals of fire on their rebellious heads. From him to whom much is given, much shall be required (Luke 12:47-48). Our enemy will receive greater punishment for all eternity because we have been merciful to him. Third, we are promised a reward from God, which is always a solid reason for being obedient to His commands. The language could not be any plainer. Any discussion of common grace which omits Proverbs 25:21-22 from consideration is not a serious discussion of the topic.
The Bible is very clear. The problem with the vast majority of interpreters is that they still are influenced by the standards of self-proclaimed autonomous humanism. Biblically, love is the fulfilling of the law (Rom.13:8). Love thy neighbor, we are instructed. Treat him with respect. Do not steal from him. In treating him lawfully, you have fulfilled the commandment to love him. In so doing, you have rendered him without excuse on the day of judgment. God’s people are to become conduits of God’s gift to the unregenerate.
This is not to say that every gift that we give to the lost must be given in an attempt to heap coals of fire on their heads. We do not know God’s plan for the ages, except in its broad outlines. We do not know God’s plan for the ages, except in its broad outlines. We do not know who God intends to redeem. So we give freely, hoping that some might be redeemed and the others damned. We play our part in the salvation of some and the damnation of others. For example, regenerate marriage partners are explicitly instructed to treat their unregenerate partners lawfully and faithfully. “For what knowest thou, O wife, whether thou shalt save thy husband? Or how knowest thou, O man whether thou shalt save thy wife” (I Cor. 7:16)? We treat our friends and enemies lawfully, for they are made in the image of God. But we are to understand that our honest treatment does make it far worse on the day of judgment for those with whom we have dealt righteously than if we had disobeyed God and been poor testimonies to them treating them unlawfully.
God gives rebels enough rope to hang themselves for all eternity. This is a fundamental implication of the doctrine of common grace. The law of God condemns some men, yet it simultaneously serves as a means of repentance and salvation for others (Rom. 5:19-20). The same law produces different results in different people. What separates men is the saving grace of God in election. The law of God serves as a tool of final destruction against the lost, yet it also serves as a tool of active reconstruction for the Christian. The law rips up the kingdom of Satan as it serves as the foundation for the kingdom of God on earth.
Christ is indeed the savior of all people prior to the day of Judgment (1 Tim. 4:10). Christ sustains the whole universe (col. 1:17). Without Him, no living thing could survive. He grants to His creatures such gifts as time, law, order, power, and knowledge. He grants allof these gifts to Satan and his rebellious host. In answer to the question, “Does God show His grace and mercy to all creation?” the answeer is emphatically yes. To the next question, “Does this mean that God in some way demonstrates an attitude of favor toward Satan?” the answer is emphatically no. God is no more favorable toward Satan and his demons than He is to Satan’s human followers. But this does not mean that He does not bestow gifts upon them—gifts that they in no way deserve.
Section taken from an Appendix,( Appendix C) called “Common Grace, Eschatology and Biblical Law, by Gray North, pg. 623-629. Some Condensing done by myself.
The Appendix was from a book on on Post Millennialism: “THE DAYS OF VENGEANCE: An Exposition of the Book of Revelation” by David Chilton, published by Dominion Press 1987.
A note was added to the bottom of the first page, right before the footnotes, that reads: The original version of this essay appeared in the Winter, 1976-77 issue of The Journal of Christian Reconstruction, published by the Chalcedon Foundation, P.O. Box 158, Vallecito, California 95251.
Guess you need to read some history on the calvanist movement. :) John Calvin was an evil man who ruled his people much like saddam hussein. I think it was he who pioneered having children spy on their parents and turning them in for breaking the "law" etc.
Well there's many Calvinists on this forum, I think most of them would disagree with you, as I do to, on your concept of John Calvin and the calvinist movement then and now. I won't argue with you on it. I myself wonder thou if maybe they did go to far in the spying part. My concern in any movement is that it doesn't move from good ideas to legalism, and totally forgets the spirit behind the law. On the other hand, if the govenment/Church wants to spy on me, that's OK here since I don't have any thing to hide.
And Pre-destination is a tad elitist dontcha think.
I don't know about that, there's many here on this forum that debate the various aspect of it alot.
I have no problem with elitism - as long as you acknowledge that God is the most elite of all.
Excellent article. Theologian John Murray has a chapter on the same subject in one of the volumes of his work published by Banner of Truth.
Reformed we see the grace of God all around us.What mercy that He would have the sun shine on our face and rain water our crops. He demonstrates who He is and His sovereignity so there will be no question .
He has set His law in place and called all of mankind to obey. That is His common grace to all men. Life and order.
That is all of Gods grace that most will ever choose to know. A difficult but eternal truth.
When doctrine from the Word of God seems unreasonable to me, it is because my reasoning falls short. Then, I ask the Holy Spirit for His help in revealing His Word, to help me understand it better.
(Thanks for the bump, RnMom. Excellent article! :-)
I'd probably have to say you just haven't been looking hard enough. If what's going on now is "quiet" I don't want to stick around. But that's another story.
Who is Gray/Gary North? Do you have a link? Thanks
The Calvinist (and I count myself in that number) will proclaim that there was nothing to recommend himself to God, it was only through God's sovereign choice that I am any different than the unbeliever.
The free will position, on the other hand, ultimately must land on elitist grounds. When faced with the undeniable fact that many, indeed, perhaps the majority of people reject the Gospel and die unbelieving, the free will position must ultimately say that they were saved because of something they had -- either they were more intelligent, more spiritually attuned, or something. It is the Calvinist, who has an understanding of his own depravity, and how he was not at all able to respond to the Gospel but for God's initiating the work of regeneration, who ultimately not elitist.
And Washington owned slaves. So do you want to throw that baby out with the bath water too?
P.S.--I have been lurking on those articles, skim them, haven't really had a chance to read the whole article "A Defense of Calvinism of Calvin" but hope to find the time some day to skim through the whole thing.
I would point out Jude that all of us are responsible to choose Christ.The question goes to what is the first cause of that choice.They believe that they are just smarter and holier and more cleaver than the unsaved
Is that like a meat cleaver???
Struggling to keep back a smart-aleck comment........................................
Clever boy that you are..you have failed !
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.