PREDESTINATION; LIVE BY GRACE; NOT BY WORKS (WEEK 8)

St. Louis Center for Christian Study ^ | Greg Johnson

[Dr. Eckleburg]

If salvation is all of grace -- if God is God and he has chosen us for salvation even though we did nothing to deserve it -- then we ought to live by the grace we have received. Of course, some of you will look at that and say to yourselves, “Yeah, I really need to do better at living by grace. I’ve really been a failure there. I hope God will forgive me again.” If that’s you, you still don’t get it. Go back and re-read the last seventeen pages and (if you’re a believer) remember that you’re one of the elect!

Our hearts so quickly try to relate to God on a works-basis! It’s our pride, really. I’m convinced that that’s the problem with free-will Arminianism. People naturally process it like this: God requires one work from me, to believe. Once I believe, I’ve done my work and deserve heaven. Of course, in more hard-line Arminian circles, it goes a step further. Unless I’m holy enough, I’ll still go to hell, and maybe I’ve even committed the unpardonable sin and will be damned even if I’m sinlessly perfect from here on out. Legalism. Legalism. Legalism. Such a religion is barely recognizable as Christianity.

But Calvinists can fall into legalism just as easily. You see, I understand predestination. I’m a superior Christian. I’ve got all my theological “t”s crossed and my Reformed “i”s dotted. I sure am close to God. Pride is the Presbyterian’s favorite form of legalism, so watch out! But if God really is for us, and if we had nothing to do with that decision -- if even our faith was given to us by the Father -- then there’s no room for boasting. God’s sovereign choice of us leaves us free from pride. It leaves us aware of our brokenness and humble before God, but all the while confident that his eternal purpose will stand, that we will glory in God forever as objects of his saving mercy. As God’s eternal blessing really begins to sink from our heads into our hearts, we see a new freedom that we never would have imagined when we first encountered the raw, holy, sovereign power of God. Among the newfound freedoms:

1. Freedom from shame, guilt & Insecurity

Read Romans 8:28-39. Nothing can separate you from God’s love -- nothing in the past, nothing in the future. No one can stand against you. No one can accuse you. Even bad things (“all things”) are working right now to your benefit, to make you more like Jesus. God didn’t choose you because of your faith, and Jesus is not ashamed of you—even at your worst (Hebrews 2:11). He’s proud to have you in the family, proud to call you brother or sister -- even knowing what he knows. He’s displaying the glory of his mercy, remember. God’s law is no longer your enemy, but a friend. You can have confidence before God.

2. Freedom from destructive Perfectionism

If God really is for you, then you can quit trying to look good. If you’re trying to be good enough for God, he’s not buying it -- he didn’t choose you because of your great faithfulness. If you’re trying to be good enough for other people, don’t bother. God wants to display his mercy -- that means we have to be broken. God’s glory is not displayed by trying to look like you have it all together. Faith is not a work, and even if it were it still wouldn’t earn you any brownie points. Let God be God. If you won’t show your weakness, then others won’t see God’s power displayed in it.

3. Freedom from legalistic man-made rules

Some of the biggest practical opponents to living by grace are those legalistic little rules that we live by. We love to judge other with them -- they make us look good, and help us feel better about ourselves. (Pride again.) Dress this way, not that way. Wear this much makeup, not that much. Work. Don’t work. Home school is God’s way. Public school is God’s way. Christian school is God’s way. Drink. Don’t drink. Smoke. Don’t smoke. Dance. Don’t dance. This is God’s worship style. If we’re all about God’s glory, there’s no room for any of this. Do whatever you do for God’s glory without comparisons. God has freed you from judging others. You don’t understand God’ sovereign grace until you realize you are a beggar who’s been blessed without cause. You had nothing to do with it -- you’re just a receiver.

4. Freedom from Penance

Even repentance can be a sham if we’re trying to approach God with some vestige of self-reliance. Biblical repentance is a freedom we can enjoy daily, while penance is its counterfeit.

Repentance/Penance

Comes with empty hands/Tries to bargain with God

Acknowledges real sin as against God/Makes excuses for sin

Grieves over displeasing God/Grieves over getting caught

Asks for help to do better/Promises to do better

Is willing to publicly confess, if needed/Is too proud to publicly confess

Relies on God's promises to us/Relies on own promises to God

Turns outward, away from self, to God/Turns inward on self

Produces freedom, joy, and confidence/Produces guilty feelings, anxiety

God has obligated himself to receive any repentant sinner who comes to him. Without this realization, true repentance is impossible. Until we realize that God is for us, we cannot truly be for God.

[xzins]

define free

I agree. Add to that: "Define Will."

As alamo-girl has so ably point out, there are a host of if/then's throughout the bible; there are commandments; and there are instructions to "choose."

All of these indicate what is commonly referred to as free will.

The word "supralapsarian" (or infralapsarian) does not appear anyplace in scripture. And it doesn't have anywhere near the support of scripture as does "free will" and "prevenient grace."

Dortists will follow it "hook, line, and sinker."

Disengenuous dortists will even claim that grace doesn't exist prior to one's salvation. I'm betting that Calvin believed in some kind of common grace (prevenient), and that his writings will reveal the same.

Go figure.

[xzins]

Before you were a Calvinist, what were you?

[Forest Keeper]

The jailer said, "What must I do to be saved?" FK, what verse tells us the answer did Paul give to that Jailer? What does that verse say?

It is here:

Acts 16:31-34 : 31 They replied, "Believe in the Lord Jesus, and you will be saved—you and your household." 32 Then they spoke the word of the Lord to him and to all the others in his house. 33 At that hour of the night the jailer took them and washed their wounds; then immediately he and all his family were baptized. 34 The jailer brought them into his house and set a meal before them; he was filled with joy because he had come to believe in God—he and his whole family.

This says to me that Paul told a seeker what must happen for him to enter Heaven. He was correct. In the context of the jailer it is certainly true that he must at some point become a true believer if he is to go to Heaven. It is also true that God uses us Christians in the furtherance of that happening to the elect (in one sense, those already saved). God used Paul, and taught us how we will similarly be used, to bring a seeker toward the, in this case inevitable, goal of acceptance.

Now, God did not need Paul, and does not need us, but He has chosen to use us anyway as witnesses to His sole work. I see that it was actually a blessing TO Paul, and likewise us, to involve him (and us) in the transformation process. We get to watch, and what a wonderful blessing it is.

[xzins]

In the jailer story:

1. Which came first, believing or baptism?

2. Which came first, seeking or believing?

3. Which came first, believing or salvation?

4. Which came first, believing or regeneration?

[HarleyD]

If you want to criticize either something I have said or the Catechism, then please include the quotations, so as to avoid criticizing paraphrased straw men.

Hmmm....I haven't followed this conversation all that well but this statement rather intrigued me so, per your suggestion, I went through some of the Catechism on the Holy Spirit by the Catholic Church. Here's one that states the Holy Spirit is the Church:

691 "Holy Spirit" is the proper name of the one whom we adore and glorify with the Father and the Son. The Church has received this name from the Lord and professes it in the Baptism of her new children.

Here's another that states the Holy Spirit finds its greatest communication through the liturgy:

1108 In every liturgical action the Holy Spirit is sent in order to bring us into communion with Christ and so to form his Body. The Holy Spirit is like the sap of the Father's vine which bears fruit on its branches. The most intimate cooperation of the Holy Spirit and the Church is achieved in the liturgy. The Spirit who is the Spirit of communion, abides indefectibly in the Church. For this reason the Church is the great sacrament of divine communion which gathers God's scattered children together. Communion with the Holy Trinity and fraternal communion are inseparably the fruit of the Spirit in the liturgy.

There are more. It is an interesting read. Thanks for posting.

[HarleyD]

In the jailer story:

1. Which came first, believing or baptism?

2. Which came first, seeking or believing?

3. Which came first, believing or salvation?

4. Which came first, believing or regeneration?

Did the Holy Spirit work on the Jailer's heart before or after he believed? Did the Jailer received faith so that he could believe or did he received faith in response to his "taking a step" on his own? Seems to me you've left out an important part of the action.

[P-Marlowe]

However, if that is the only way to properly use the term, then other Biblical terms like "predestination" and "election" must be explained.

Did Paul explain to the Jailer the intricate mysteries of predestination and election or did he just tell him that he needed to believe on Jesus Christ?

Are we missing a large chunk of scripture? Did someone edit out that part?

[HarleyD]

Isn't it true that the correct Calvinist answer is "Nothing. You can't do anything to be saved!" If so, then, if Paul was the Calvinist that all the GRPL seems to say he was, then why didn't Paul answer: "Nothing. There's nothing you can do to be saved!"?

The correct Calvinist response to the Jailer, "What must I do to be saved?" is "Repent and believe on the Lord Jesus and you shall be saved." It's a statement, not a plea.

If the Holy Spirit is working on the Jailer's heart, he will receive the words in faith that God has already given him and turn to God. If the Holy Spirit has not worked on the Jailer's heart, he will reject the message and turn away. The Christian shrugs their shoulders and move on knowing that God leads those who He will to repentence.

[xzins]

I didn't leave out anything that I was trying to get an answer to.

Please answer my 4 questions.

[P-Marlowe]

The correct Calvinist response to the Jailer, "What must I do to be saved?" is "Repent and believe on the Lord Jesus and you shall be saved." It's a statement, not a plea.

Then it looks like Paul must have goofed. Oh well, nobody's perfect.

[xzins]

Then it looks like Paul must have goofed. Oh well, nobody's perfect.

Not just Paul. "All scripture is inspired by God" is the message of the Bible.

Apparently, God goofed.

[adiaireton8]

Here's one that states the Holy Spirit is the Church:

691 "Holy Spirit" is the proper name of the one whom we adore and glorify with the Father and the Son. The Church has received this name from the Lord and professes it in the Baptism of her new children.

That is not saying that the Holy Spirit is the Church. In saying "The Church has received this name from the Lord", it is saying that the Church received from Christ the name "Holy Spirit" as the name of the Third Person of the Holy Trinity, not as the name of the Church.

-A8

[cornelis]

It's a great encouragement for the Philippians to work out their salvation in Paul's absence, reminding them that God is present and active in them.

[HarleyD]

I didn't leave out anything that I was trying to get an answer to.

Sure you did. Where does the Holy Spirit figure into any of this? I'll provide my answers and then please explain how the Holy Spirit works in a person's life and how a person is "born again" under your questions.

1. Which came first, believing or baptism?
Believing comes before baptism.

2. Which came first, seeking or believing?

No one seek after God. If anyone is seeking for God it is because the Holy Spirit is drawing them to Him. Under this question FIRST, comes the Holy Spirit drawing. SECOND comes the seeking. Then comes believing. (See Moses and Burning Bush)

3. Which came first, believing or salvation?
To elaborate on the first question, FIRST comes grace, SECOND comes the word of God, THIRD comes faith, THEN comes believing. All these steps (there's more) are part of the salvation process. Believing is one part of the salvation process so your question is wrong. It is not a this/that type of question. These steps are what being "born again" is all about.

4. Which came first, believing or regeneration?
If by "regeneration" you mean when do we have "faith", then it MUST be before we believe. Logic would state that one has to have faith before they believe in a thing since "faith is the assurance of things hoped for". You can't believe in something that you have no assurance of.

If by "regeneration" you mean being "born again" then that wouldn't make any sense either since your question would read, "Which came first, believing or being born again?"

[xzins]

The order of salvation (ordo salutis) as I understand it from you is. If this is incorrect, please rearrange it.

grace
drawing
seeking
Word of God
faith
regeneration
believing

(baptism) not part of the order of salvation, but in sequence it follows becoming a believer.

[HarleyD]

Then it looks like Paul must have goofed. Oh well, nobody's perfect.

LOL!! The Holy Spirit gives us what we need to say and to say it at the right time. We don't know if Paul told the jailor anything more than what is written. Paul could have told the jailor a number of things. Do you think that any of it would have made a difference?

BTW-Why did this jailer fall down and ask what he needed to do to be saved while Peter's jailers (Acts 5) never repented after a similar situation and were executed? What was the difference?

[P-Marlowe]

The jailer asked Paul for instructions on what he must do to be saved. Paul gave him instructions on what he must do to be saved. Paul did not attempt to correct his errant soteriology, did he? Perhaps it was becaue the jailer did not have an errant soteriology. Perhaps it was because there was a contingency and perhaps it was because the jailer really did need to believe in order to be saved.

So the question is, do those instructions apply to everyone? If your neighbor comes to you and asks "What must I do to be saved?" will you correct his errant soteriology and spend countless hours explaining the intricacies of Dortian Calvinism or will you simply reply, as Paul did, Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ and you will be saved?

I suggest that Paul's answer applies to every man that asketh.

[HarleyD]

MY order of salvation would be as follows:

New birth...

1. Grace (election)
2. Drawing (or calling) - e.g. Word of God


seeking (No one seeks after God.)

3. Regeneration through faith (given as a gift from God) -
4. Repentence
5. Justification (believing through His will)
6. Adoption


Slaves to Righteousness...

7. Sanctification
8. Perseverance
9. Death Yes-death is part of the process for us to be made like Christ.
10. Glorification

[Frumanchu]

As alamo-girl has so ably point out, there are a host of if/then's throughout the bible; there are commandments; and there are instructions to "choose." All of these indicate what is commonly referred to as free will.

Yes, they choose that which they desire most, which is indeed what is commonly referred to as "free will."

The word "supralapsarian" (or infralapsarian) does not appear anyplace in scripture. And it doesn't have anywhere near the support of scripture as does "free will" and "prevenient grace."

"Free will" as defined by one's ability to choose what they want, and "prevenient grace" as defined by the need for God's grace to be applied before man can do anything truly good, are indeed both prevalent in Scripture. That does not necessarily make them "more true" than other concepts which may not be as clearly or explicitly stated.

Dortists will follow it "hook, line, and sinker." Disengenuous dortists will even claim that grace doesn't exist prior to one's salvation. I'm betting that Calvin believed in some kind of common grace (prevenient), and that his writings will reveal the same.

Yes, he did. But the "common grace" Calvin understood to be enjoyed by all individuals everywhere is not the same as that grace which was necessarily precedent to free the will from its bondage to sin in order that it may do anything truly good.

[scripter]

Marking an interesting thread that I somehow missed the past couple of weeks.