Calvin on Baptism, Penance, and Absolution

Theologia ^ | 2002 | Rich Lusk

[RnMomof7]

Correct me if I'm wrong (and I probably am) but this seems to be the case in either circumstance. Whether God only chooses to save the chosen, or foreknows those who will choose, in either case, He has made men for the purpose of sure destruction. Right?
Or, is that your point, that the Arminians' attempt to salvage the justice of God fails?
If so, I still manage to seem some distinction. The Arminian leaves the burden for choice on the sinner, and if they choose to rebel against God, they are justly punished. By contrast, under strict Calvinism, it seems that God punishes arbitrarily, for free will is an illusion.

That is a point without a distinction .
For IF God is omniscient and IF God foreknows all things , then He foreknows who will "accept" Him under the Arminian Theology with certainity

And inspite of knowing that the person will burn for eternity He creates him for just that purpose

Calvinists believe that God restrains no man from coming to Him, all men are free to do so..every man stands before God without excuse. The "burden " is on all men to repent and believe.

[RnMomof7]

Do you deny predestination?


Have all men an equal opportunity to be saved?

[Dr. Eckleburg]

I think all predestination is "strong" and valid.

I don't have any problem with God deciding how His universe should run. Judas was created by God so that you and I could share eternity in heaven.

All creation leads up to the Cross. God knew from before time that Judas would do exactly as he was meant to do, wanted to do, had to do...just like all of us.

All men are fallen. We are all Judas. But through the grace of God, some are given everlasting life, their sins paid for by Christ's sacrifice.

[Gamecock]

The Arminian leaves the burden for choice on the sinner, and if they choose to rebel against God, they are justly punished.

Those of us who agree with Calvin believe that man has a free will. And in our sinful nature we will always choose to turn away from God and latch onto sin. It is only when the Holy Spirit touches our hearts that we turn to God. We do not become robots, we are not forced to Christ, it's just that when we see our sin for what it is, we crumble (there are numerous examples throughout the Bible) and see Christ as the only way out of our fallen state....

[FactQuest]

Calvinists believe that God restrains no man from coming to Him, all men are free to do so

Perhaps I misunderstand Calvinism, then. I thought that total depravity meant that man, apart from God's work of irresistable grace, is incapable of of choosing to come to God. And if that is what it means, I get hung up trying to understand how someone can be free to do something they cannot do.

Then I put that together with the doctrine of limited atonement, and it seems arbitrary.

If, however, grace is both a) offered to all men at some point in their life, and b) resistable, then I can see where the burden belongs on the man. But I suspect I'm oversimplifying it.

[FactQuest]

Those of us who agree with Calvin believe that man has a free will.

Thanks. I'm still in the process of graduating from a light theological background, and still working some of this out.

I guess the parts about irresistable grace, and total depravity, sure make it sound like man is a robot, without any "real" free will. Can you give me a pointer on how these are not mutually exclusive with free will?

[FactQuest]

But through the grace of God, some are given everlasting life

Yes, and all of us deserve hell, because we are sinners, the miracle is that any of us are saved.

But, is there any such thing as free will?

[RnMomof7]

Calvinism stresses the will

Who will come? No man is restrained .

The gospel is to be offered to all men and those that will ,will come

God does not remove from any man anything. Man has the "free will " left to them by Adam .

What we do know is that dead men can not choose life. That life has to be given to them .

So God Quickens the man dead in sin and He is born again. Once that happens that man will desire Christ, He will choose to repent and believe. His will is no longer in bondage to the sin of Adam..He is truly free to choose.(remember Luthers book?)
We know from looking around us that that grace is not given to all men , or all men would chose Christ .

The atonement is limited to the elect .


Fact, just consider this. How many men do you know that sat under the teaching of the bible , but never had the desire to choose Christ? I have known hundreds.

It is like the bible says they have eyes but do not see and ears but do not hear. They have no desire to repent.

How many do you konw that in an emotional service will come forward
and maybe attend church for a time but never have any fruit and then leave?

What is different about you? You are no smarter or more holy before you were saved (sorry about that :>) ..but there was something..a quickening in your heart that made you run to Christ and the cross...That my friend is irrestible grace..not "forcing" men to love Him, but freeing them to for the first time.

Remember how light and free you felt? Ahhhh Amazing Grace How sweet the sound that saved a wretch like me..I once was lost but now am found was blind BUT NOW I see..yea God!!

[Gamecock]

still working some of this out

It took my wife years to finally accept the absolute soveriegnty of God.

Let's do this one step at a time, start with the term irresistable grace. I can't remember who used the analogy, but think of yourself in a desert without water. (use that as an analogy for sin) You come accross a pool full of cold, clear water (grace) Now, you certainly have free will, but what are you going to do? You are going to immerse yourself. You realize how thirsty you are can't resist. Yes you have free will, but are you cannot pass it by when you are dying of thirst/sin.

[Gamecock]

Now for part two, total depravity.

sure make it sound like man is a robot, without any "real" free will

Does total depravity mean that we are as bad as we can be, or that we are bad enough to reject God if left to our own devices? We are so bad that we will choose sin. Look at someone who is in a fallen state. They will continue their sinful behavior, unless called by God. They don't have the desire to come to God on their own. A bold statement? It is totaly based in scripture.

Romans 3, 9 What shall we conclude then? Are we any better? Not at all! We have already made the charge that Jews and Gentiles alike are all under sin. 10 As it is written: "There is no one righteous, not even one; 11 there is no one who understands, no one who seeks God. 12 All have turned away, they have together become worthless; there is no one who does good, not even one."

Friend, read this passage again. Does this say that we have enough good in us to come to Christ, or that no one will seek God?

Now, would you like more?

Genesis 8:21 And the LORD smelled a sweet savour; and the LORD said in his heart, I will not again curse the ground any more for man's sake; for the imagination of man's heart is evil from his youth; neither will I again smite any more every thing living, as I have done

Psalm 51:5 Behold, I was shapen in iniquity; and in sin did my mother conceive me.

Romans 7: 18 For I know that in me (that is, in my flesh,) dwelleth no good thing: for to will is present with me; but how to perform that which is good I find not.

Isaiah 64:6, "But we are all as an unclean thing, and all our righteousness are as filthy rags; and we all do fade as a leaf; and our iniquities, like the wind, have taken us away."

Read these verses and think about where the Bible says our hearts are and the term total depravity

[OrthodoxPresbyterian]

I am having a hard time understanding this article..it seems the author is saying that Calvin believed that baptism grants justification (by infusion?)??? That is far different than the traditional covenential teaching found in Presbyterian churchs today...

I believe that it is more correct to say, Calvin believes that Baptism respresents Justification (by imputation).

We shouldn't just "take the author's word" for it, even though I am sure he is making an honest attempt to analyze Calvin's theology. We should read the Calvin citations in question, for ourselves.

It is true that Calvin had a "high view" of the Baptismal Sacrament. But we can't just say, "Calvin had a high view of the Baptismal Sacrament" and leave it at that, as thought he were practically Roman Catholic on the matter. Calvin did indeed have a "high view" of the Baptismal Sacrament, but it definitely was NOT Roman Catholic.

Re-read the citations in question -- with my emphasis in bold, as a Presbyterian Calvinist:

"Now baptism was given to us by God for these ends (which I have taught to be common to all sacraments): first to serve our faith before him; secondly, to serve our confession before men...Accordingly, they [e.g., the Zwinglians and Anabaptists] who regarded baptism as nothing but a token and mark by which we confess our religion before men, as soldiers bear the insignia of their commander as a mark of their profession, have not weighed what was the chief point of baptism" [4]. Baptism, in reality, is God's work: "For inasmuch as [baptism] is given for the arousing, nourishing, and confirming of our faith, (note this point especially -- the confirming of faith. I.E., Calvin believed that Baptism confirms Faith, not that it "grants" faith) it is to be received as from the hand of the Author himself. We ought to deem it certain and proved that it is he who speaks to us through the sign; that it is he who purifies and washes away sins, and wipes out the remembrance of them; that it is he who make us sharers in his death, who deprives Satan of his rule, who weakens the power of our lust; indeed, that it is he who comes into a unity with us so that, having put on Christ, we may be acknowledged God's children. These things, I say, he performs for our soul within as truly and surely as we see our body outwardly cleansed, submerged, and surrounded with water [5]...And he does not feed our eyes with a mere appearance only, but leads us to the present reality and effectively performs what he symbolizes" [6].

"The first thing that the Lord sets out for us is that baptism should be a token and proof of our cleansing; or (the better to explain what I mean) it is like a sealed document to confirm to us that all our sins are so abolished, remitted, and effaced that they can never come to his sight, be recalled, or charged against us."

"Baptism also brings another benefit, for it shows us our mortification in Christ, and new life in him...[T]hrough baptism Christ makes us sharers in his death, that we may be engrafted in it" [9].

In Calvin's view, then, Baptism serves our Faith as it serves our confession before men... it confirms that which it symbolizes, as a token and proof which shows us our mortification in Christ.

Baptism does not "grant" faith. It serves Faith, it confirms Faith, it shows and symbolizes Faith... but nowhere does Calvin ever imply that it "grants" Faith. Mainly because, Calvin himself does not believe that Baptism "grants" faith -- rather, it "arouses, nourishes, and confirms faith" as a true Means of Grace (that is, a "sacrament")

As such, Calvin's view -- though highly sacramental -- was in some ways closer in theology to his AnaBaptist Opponents than to the Roman Catholics around him.

The disagreement, of course, would be whether or not it is true, as Calvin maintained, that the Infant Children of faithful believers could recieve the Gift of Faith even in infancy, and thus be accounted legitimate claimants to the "arousing, nourishing, and confirming of our faith" which is imparted in Baptism.

To which Calvinist Presbyterians can only cite the example of John the Baptist, and affirm: "Guilty as Charged". We believe that God is Faithful in his Promises to obedient Christian Evangelists; and likewise, We believe that God is Faithful in his Promises to obedient Christian Parents.

But we do not believe (and neither did Calvin) that Baptism "grants" faith. Rather, the sacrament serves for the "arousing, nourishing, and confirming" of that Faith which has already been imparted to Covenant Children... even in their mother's womb.

best, op

[FactQuest]

Thanks for the reply.

God does not remove from any man anything. Man has the "free will " left to them by Adam .

What we do know is that dead men can not choose life. That life has to be given to them .

So God Quickens the man dead in sin and He is born again. Once that happens that man will desire Christ, He will choose to repent and believe. His will is no longer in bondage to the sin of Adam...

The atonement is limited to the elect .

I'm still getting hung up on how "dead men can not choose life" seems to contradict "Man has the 'free will' left to them by Adam."

Does the "free will" left to Adam merely mean freedom to sin, and only sin? Then, is that freedom?

I'm not really suggesting man would ever seek or choose God on his own. But, perhaps the quickening is the grace of restoring the man so that he does have a choice to seek or choose God. But if that is irresistable, it seems like we've lost free will again.

Yes, the atonement is limited to the elect... sounds like a tautology. I don't believe in universalism - that everyone on the planet was saved by Christ, regardless of their choice to follow Jesus or not.

Thank you for your patience.

[FactQuest]

Thanks for your reply.

in a desert without water.

Nice analogy, I'll have to ponder this one for a while.

How would that extend to the person who hears the word of God, but doesn't accept?

Does he not recognize his thirst? Does he not recognize the water? What is different about him from the man who jumps in?

It still seems analogous to both leading the horse to the water AND making him drink...

[FactQuest]

Now for part two, total depravity.

Total depravity doesn't mean that we are as bad as we can be, but it does include that we are bad enough to reject God if left to our own devices. I think, I'm still fuzzy on the edges. I am satisfied with thinking of it as we all have sinned and fallen far short of the righteousness God requires.

They will continue their sinful behavior, unless called by God. They don't have the desire to come to God on their own.

I agree.

Romans 7: 18 For I know that in me (that is, in my flesh,) dwelleth no good thing: for to will is present with me; but how to perform that which is good I find not.

Just a nit, but this is describing a Christian, does it mean that we remain depraved? Or that we remain depraved only when we rely on our own strength?

[Gamecock]

I think that's where we go off into total depravity and a little into election.

We are such sinners we don't want the water, because there must be a bigger, better pool a little futher along. Or God doesn't even put the pool in their path. Regardless, our souls are moved to proceed in the direction of the pool and once we are there, we are quickened to dive in. As sinners who have not been quickened, we always look for something that in our mind is better, jsut a little futher down the road.

Eph.2
[1] And you hath he quickened, who were dead in trespasses and sins;
[5] Even when we were dead in sins, hath quickened us together with Christ, (by grace ye are saved;)
1Pet.3
[18] For Christ also hath once suffered for sins, the just for the unjust, that he might bring us to God, being put to death in the flesh, but quickened by the Spirit:

[Gamecock]

Just a nit, but this is describing a Christian, does it mean that we remain depraved? Or that we remain depraved only when we rely on our own strength?

That is a great question. On our own devices, even as a Christian, we are still pretty useless, until we have been Sanctified (made Christlike) Now when that happens is another story/argument. I think for some of us it happens pretty quickly in their walk, some others it takes years. Those in whom it takes years often provide a pretty interesting testimony...

2Tim.2 [21] If a man therefore purge himself from these, he shall be a vessel unto honour, sanctified, and meet for the master's use, and prepared unto every good work.

[FactQuest]

sanctification

Paul claimed depravity in himself, yet God was using him to set the Gentile world on fire.

Maybe we always do better to rely on God, even after we are sanctified... or maybe learning to always rely on God IS sanctification.

I don't think Paul was indulging in false humility, for that would be akin to pride.

[Gamecock]

Agreed! Paul realized that on his own devices was useless, he had to rely on God's power to do God's work....

[FactQuest]

We are such sinners we don't want the water, because there must be a bigger, better pool a little futher along.

Then this would be resistable grace. The water is offered, but we refused.

Or God doesn't even put the pool in their path.

And this would be the strongest of predestinations, no free will at all. Men, created soley for the purpose of populating hell?

I feel like a stubborn schoolboy refusing to understand that 2+2=4. But I still honestly haven't resolved this.

[Gamecock]

Then this would be resistable grace. The water is offered, but we refused

Not exactly, we see it (hear the Word) but in our sinful state we are unable to see that it is life. It is irrsistable grace for the elect because we see it for what it is and are drawn to the water.

And this would be the strongest of predestinations, no free will at all. Men, created soley for the purpose of populating hell?

Don't get wrapped around this argument. And by the way, what is spelled out in scripture, free will or predestination? Remember Paul is addressing this very thing in Romans, chapter 8: 14What then shall we say? Is God unjust? Not at all! 15For he says to Moses, "I will have mercy on whom I have mercy, and I will have compassion on whom I have compassion." 16It does not, therefore, depend on man's desire or effort, but on God's mercy. 17For the Scripture says to Pharaoh: "I raised you up for this very purpose, that I might display my power in you and that my name might be proclaimed in all the earth." 18Therefore God has mercy on whom he wants to have mercy, and he hardens whom he wants to harden. 19One of you will say to me: "Then why does God still blame us? For who resists his will?" 20But who are you, O man, to talk back to God? "Shall what is formed say to him who formed it, 'Why did you make me like this?' " 21Does not the potter have the right to make out of the same lump of clay some pottery for noble purposes and some for common use? 22What if God, choosing to show his wrath and make his power known, bore with great patience the objects of his wrath--prepared for destruction? 23What if he did this to make the riches of his glory known to the objects of his mercy, whom he prepared in advance for glory-- 24even us, whom he also called, not only from the Jews but also from the Gentiles?

Read verse 20 again? Isn't that the same question you put forth?

As far as God making souls to populate hell, that can be turned around on the free willers as God knew what decision we would make, and yet created those who would go to hell. Does that sound more plausable/palatable?

Try reading this guy, he gives an awesoome defense of election: http://www.spurgeon.org/calvinis.htm