"Abraham Kuyper once noted a difference between older and newer terminology in the subject of faith and grace. The Belgic Confession uses the older terminology in Article 24, where we read: "We believe that this true faith, being wrought in man by the hearing of the Word of God and the operation of the Holy Spirit, regenerates him and makes him a new man, causing him to live a new life, and freeing him from the bondage of sin." The relation between faith and regeneration as found here is suggestive of Calvin's statement "that we are regenerated by faith." The newer terminology is that used by later theologians, who limit regeneration in the ordo salutis to the beginning of the new life. Kuyper spoke of the older Reformation and confessional terminology as the result of an "unfinished conception," of which the later, more limited, idea of regeneration was "the consistent development." Kuyper approved this development, but not simply out of love for system. The refinement of terminology resulted, according to him, from a desire to protect the Reformed concept from misconception.
Nevertheless, we cannot share Kuyper's attitude toward the words of the confession. Kuyper said that later theologians abandoned "this more or less questionable manner of speech and set regeneration more in the foreground." He went on to say that the confession contained a "subjective conception." Here Kuyper's criticism of the confession suggests, I think, that he puts too m uch importance on the arrangement of the steps in the ordo salutis. The decisive point is the way in which faith is related to God's grace. And this was in the confession, as it was in Calvin, above reproach. It is just as unreasonable to brand the formulation which we find in Calvin and the confession as subjective conceptions as it is to charge post-confessional development with shifting interest from grace to man. Faith involves a certain subjectivity, but a subjectivity which has meaning only as it is bound to the gospel.
This is precisely the marvel of the work of the Holy Ghost--that He is the origin of this faith. It is not the order as such that is decisive. It is how one understands God's salvation that determines whether sovereign divine grace is properly respected. To make a system of a certain order of salvation does not insure purity of doctrine. Nor does simplifying the ordo salutis guarantee a pure confession of grace." ("Faith and justification" By Gerrit Cornelis Berkouwer, Lewis B. Smedes. pg. 30)
See here
These are good words from Berkouwer and Smedes. I agree with them that the ordo of Kuyper was an innovation or hybrid view, and not that of the first Calvinist Reformers. Though these "refiners" imagined that they were improving Calvinism, they nevertheless miserably failed, making things worse.
May 27, 2009
May 26, 2009
Addendum - Piper on Glorification
Under a subtitle "Why Is Sanctification Not Mentioned in the Chain?" Piper wrote (emphasis mine):
"First, where is "sanctification" in the chain of these verses? You recall what "sanctification" is. It was the theme of chapter six. Remember verse 22: "But now having been freed from sin and enslaved to God, you derive your benefit, resulting in sanctification, and the outcome, eternal life." So sanctification is the gradual process of our becoming holy which leads to eternal life.
Why is it not mentioned in this unbreakable chain in Romans 8:29-30? Paul mentions five links in the chain: Those whom he (1) foreknew he predestined; and those whom he (2) predestined he called; and those whom he (3) called, he justified; and those whom he (4) justified, he (5) glorified. Why didn't he say, "And those whom he justified he sanctified, and those whom he sanctified he glorified"?
The reason this matters is that someone might say, "Well, since it's not in the chain, it's either not necessary for heaven like the others, or it is not the work of God the way the others are." Both of those inferences would be a deadly mistake. Sanctification is necessary for heaven. That is why Romans 6:22 says that the outcome of your sanctification is eternal life! (See Hebrews 12:14; Galatians 5:21; 1 Corinthians 6:9). And that makes it all the more important that it is indeed God's work in us, so that the necessity of it doesn't throw us back on ourselves. It throws us desperately on God.
For example, Paul says in Philippians 1:6, "For I am confident of this very thing, that He who began a good work in you will perfect it until the day of Christ Jesus." And Philippians 2:12b-13, "Work out your salvation with fear and trembling; for it is God who is at work in you, both to will and to work for His good pleasure." And 1 Corinthians 15:10, "But by the grace of God I am what I am, and His grace toward me did not prove vain; but I labored even more than all of them, yet not I, but the grace of God with me."
So sanctification is both necessary and the work of God. So why is it not mentioned between justification and glorification. I think the reason is that in Paul's mind sanctification is included in glorification. So, in effect, he does make it part of the chain. Now why do I think this? What's the Biblical basis for it?
It comes from 2 Corinthians 3:18. Paul describes here how we are changed into the likeness of Christ — that is how we are sanctified. It happens by looking to Christ — the spiritual sight we talked about earlier (note the context!). He says, "But we all, with unveiled face, beholding as in a mirror the glory of the Lord, are being transformed into the same image from glory to glory, just as from the Lord, the Spirit."
Now what is so relevant in this verse for us is the word "glory." Our gradual change into the image of Christ is, Paul says, a moving "from glory to glory." And he says this is from the Lord. This is essentially the work of the Lord. So being glorified in Paul's mind is not only the final transformation at the end of the age at the resurrection when we get out new bodies; it is also the process of moving morally and spiritually toward that goal.
So in Paul's mind, when he said in Romans 8:30, "the justified are glorified" he meant, God works to make sure that those whom he justified move from one degree of glory to the next (sanctification) (and regeneration too, SG) and finally reach perfection with new and glorious bodies like Christ's (Hebrews 12:23; Philippians 3:21). So your progressive sanctification — your becoming like Jesus — is as sure and as firmly planned and worked by God as is your election and predestination and calling and justification and final glory."
Piper is correct here. When, in other writings, however, he attempts to put regeneration before justification, sanctification, and glorification, he is contradicting what he says in places like this where he puts sanctification (and logically, therefore, regeneration) as part of glorification, or what follows calling and justification.
See here
"First, where is "sanctification" in the chain of these verses? You recall what "sanctification" is. It was the theme of chapter six. Remember verse 22: "But now having been freed from sin and enslaved to God, you derive your benefit, resulting in sanctification, and the outcome, eternal life." So sanctification is the gradual process of our becoming holy which leads to eternal life.
Why is it not mentioned in this unbreakable chain in Romans 8:29-30? Paul mentions five links in the chain: Those whom he (1) foreknew he predestined; and those whom he (2) predestined he called; and those whom he (3) called, he justified; and those whom he (4) justified, he (5) glorified. Why didn't he say, "And those whom he justified he sanctified, and those whom he sanctified he glorified"?
The reason this matters is that someone might say, "Well, since it's not in the chain, it's either not necessary for heaven like the others, or it is not the work of God the way the others are." Both of those inferences would be a deadly mistake. Sanctification is necessary for heaven. That is why Romans 6:22 says that the outcome of your sanctification is eternal life! (See Hebrews 12:14; Galatians 5:21; 1 Corinthians 6:9). And that makes it all the more important that it is indeed God's work in us, so that the necessity of it doesn't throw us back on ourselves. It throws us desperately on God.
For example, Paul says in Philippians 1:6, "For I am confident of this very thing, that He who began a good work in you will perfect it until the day of Christ Jesus." And Philippians 2:12b-13, "Work out your salvation with fear and trembling; for it is God who is at work in you, both to will and to work for His good pleasure." And 1 Corinthians 15:10, "But by the grace of God I am what I am, and His grace toward me did not prove vain; but I labored even more than all of them, yet not I, but the grace of God with me."
So sanctification is both necessary and the work of God. So why is it not mentioned between justification and glorification. I think the reason is that in Paul's mind sanctification is included in glorification. So, in effect, he does make it part of the chain. Now why do I think this? What's the Biblical basis for it?
It comes from 2 Corinthians 3:18. Paul describes here how we are changed into the likeness of Christ — that is how we are sanctified. It happens by looking to Christ — the spiritual sight we talked about earlier (note the context!). He says, "But we all, with unveiled face, beholding as in a mirror the glory of the Lord, are being transformed into the same image from glory to glory, just as from the Lord, the Spirit."
Now what is so relevant in this verse for us is the word "glory." Our gradual change into the image of Christ is, Paul says, a moving "from glory to glory." And he says this is from the Lord. This is essentially the work of the Lord. So being glorified in Paul's mind is not only the final transformation at the end of the age at the resurrection when we get out new bodies; it is also the process of moving morally and spiritually toward that goal.
So in Paul's mind, when he said in Romans 8:30, "the justified are glorified" he meant, God works to make sure that those whom he justified move from one degree of glory to the next (sanctification) (and regeneration too, SG) and finally reach perfection with new and glorious bodies like Christ's (Hebrews 12:23; Philippians 3:21). So your progressive sanctification — your becoming like Jesus — is as sure and as firmly planned and worked by God as is your election and predestination and calling and justification and final glory."
Piper is correct here. When, in other writings, however, he attempts to put regeneration before justification, sanctification, and glorification, he is contradicting what he says in places like this where he puts sanctification (and logically, therefore, regeneration) as part of glorification, or what follows calling and justification.
See here
Sanctification is Glorification - Packer
J.I. Packer wrote:
"Paul's use of glory in 2 Corinthians 3:18 shows that for him sanctification of character is glorification begun. Then the physical transformation that gives us a body like Christ's, one that will match our totally transformed character and be a perfect means of expressing it, will be glorification completed (Phil. 3:20-21; 1 Cor. 15:49-53)." (emphasis mine)
Sanctification - The Christian Grows in Grace
J.I. Packer (from Concise Theology)
See here
If Packer is correct (and he is), then he is contradictory when he says that regeneration precedes justification and glorification.
If glorification encompasses sanctification, and sanctification encompasses regeneration, then regeneration follows calling and justification.
"Paul's use of glory in 2 Corinthians 3:18 shows that for him sanctification of character is glorification begun. Then the physical transformation that gives us a body like Christ's, one that will match our totally transformed character and be a perfect means of expressing it, will be glorification completed (Phil. 3:20-21; 1 Cor. 15:49-53)." (emphasis mine)
Sanctification - The Christian Grows in Grace
J.I. Packer (from Concise Theology)
See here
If Packer is correct (and he is), then he is contradictory when he says that regeneration precedes justification and glorification.
If glorification encompasses sanctification, and sanctification encompasses regeneration, then regeneration follows calling and justification.
Pauline Ordo Salutis?
"And we know that in all things God works for the good of those who love him, who have been called according to his purpose. For those God foreknew he also predestined to be conformed to the likeness of his Son, that he might be the firstborn among many brothers. And those he predestined, he also called; those he called, he also justified; those he justified, he also glorified." (Romans 8: 28-30 NIV)
Does Paul give us an inspired "ordo salutis" in this passage? Does he list the parts of salvation in a logical or chronological order? Some think yes, while others think no.
I believe there is a divine "ordo" in these words. Those who reject the idea of an "ordo" in these words will often ask rhetorically - "then where are regeneration and sanctification in the order?" Or, "why are regeneration and sanctification omitted?"
Is the "calling" the same as regeneration or new birth? If so, then it precedes justification and glorification. Or, is "calling" a post regeneration "conversion," as some affirm?
If "calling" be regeneration, then the Hyperist has an argument in affirming that regeneration precedes justification. But, if "calling" be conversion, that which is by faith in the gospel, then where is regeneration? Is it part of justification or of glorification?
The Catholics, because they do not see justification as strictly forensic, and believe in "infused" righteousness as well as "imputed" righteousness, make sanctification a part of justification. But, Protestants, for the most part, have viewed justification as strictly forensic, and sanctification as internal renovation, and put it after justification in the order of things. However, those Protestants, like the "Reformed" Calvinists, or Hyperists, who put regeneration before justification, are following the ordo salutis of Rome.
I believe rather that regeneration or transformation or renewing is contemplated under the term "glorification," and therefore it is what logically follows calling (conversion, or faith and repentance), and justification or pardon.
But, how can "glorification" be equated with regeneration or transformation?
John Piper wrote (emphasis mine):
"The transformation that comes from beholding the glory of Christ in the gospel happens incrementally. "Beholding the glory of the Lord, (we) are being transformed into the same image from one degree of glory to another." Speaking of our transformation in terms of "glory" shows that Christian glorification begins at conversion, not at death or resurrection. In fact, in Paul's mind sanctification is the first phase of glorification." (God is the Gospel By John Piper, pg. 93)
See here
First, I agree with John Piper. The passage cited by Piper from Paul prove that glorification is connected with spiritual renewal and transformation, or regeneration. Conversion is the first phase, or beginning of sanctification; And, regeneration is part of sanctification. If regeneration, or conversion, is part of glorification, then it properly follows both calling and justification.
Romans 8: 28-30, when rightly interpreted, refutes the ordo salutis of both Arminians and Hyper Calvinists.
I plan on elaborating on these verses in the book I am working on, called "The Ordo Salutis Debate."
"But we all, with open face beholding as in a glass the glory of the Lord, are changed into the same image from glory to glory, even as by the Spirit of the Lord." (II Corinthians 3: 18 KJV)
Does Paul give us an inspired "ordo salutis" in this passage? Does he list the parts of salvation in a logical or chronological order? Some think yes, while others think no.
I believe there is a divine "ordo" in these words. Those who reject the idea of an "ordo" in these words will often ask rhetorically - "then where are regeneration and sanctification in the order?" Or, "why are regeneration and sanctification omitted?"
Is the "calling" the same as regeneration or new birth? If so, then it precedes justification and glorification. Or, is "calling" a post regeneration "conversion," as some affirm?
If "calling" be regeneration, then the Hyperist has an argument in affirming that regeneration precedes justification. But, if "calling" be conversion, that which is by faith in the gospel, then where is regeneration? Is it part of justification or of glorification?
The Catholics, because they do not see justification as strictly forensic, and believe in "infused" righteousness as well as "imputed" righteousness, make sanctification a part of justification. But, Protestants, for the most part, have viewed justification as strictly forensic, and sanctification as internal renovation, and put it after justification in the order of things. However, those Protestants, like the "Reformed" Calvinists, or Hyperists, who put regeneration before justification, are following the ordo salutis of Rome.
I believe rather that regeneration or transformation or renewing is contemplated under the term "glorification," and therefore it is what logically follows calling (conversion, or faith and repentance), and justification or pardon.
But, how can "glorification" be equated with regeneration or transformation?
John Piper wrote (emphasis mine):
"The transformation that comes from beholding the glory of Christ in the gospel happens incrementally. "Beholding the glory of the Lord, (we) are being transformed into the same image from one degree of glory to another." Speaking of our transformation in terms of "glory" shows that Christian glorification begins at conversion, not at death or resurrection. In fact, in Paul's mind sanctification is the first phase of glorification." (God is the Gospel By John Piper, pg. 93)
See here
First, I agree with John Piper. The passage cited by Piper from Paul prove that glorification is connected with spiritual renewal and transformation, or regeneration. Conversion is the first phase, or beginning of sanctification; And, regeneration is part of sanctification. If regeneration, or conversion, is part of glorification, then it properly follows both calling and justification.
Romans 8: 28-30, when rightly interpreted, refutes the ordo salutis of both Arminians and Hyper Calvinists.
I plan on elaborating on these verses in the book I am working on, called "The Ordo Salutis Debate."
"But we all, with open face beholding as in a glass the glory of the Lord, are changed into the same image from glory to glory, even as by the Spirit of the Lord." (II Corinthians 3: 18 KJV)
May 25, 2009
Paul's Conversion the Pattern
“Paul as Pattern Convert”
A Sermon (excepts) Delivered by C. H. Spurgeon at the Metropolitan Tabernacle, Newington, London
“Howbeit for this cause I obtained mercy, that in me first, Jesus Christ might show forth all long-suffering, for a pattern to them which should hereafter believe on him to life everlasting.” (1 Timothy 1:16)
"It is a vulgar error that the conversion of the apostle Paul was an uncommon and exceptional event, and that we cannot expect men to be saved now-a-days after the same fashion. It is said that the incident was an exception to all rules, a wonder altogether by itself. Now, my text is a flat contradiction to that notion, for it assures us that, instead of the apostle as a receiver of the longsuffering and mercy of God being at all an exception to the rule, he was a model convert, and is to be regarded, as a type and pattern of God’s grace in other believers. The apostle’s language in the text, “for a pattern,” may mean that he was what printers call a first proof, an early impression from the engraving, a specimen of those to follow. He was the typical instance of divine long-suffering, the model after which others are fashioned. To use a metaphor from the artist’s studio, Paul was the ideal sketch of a convert, an outline of the work of Jesus on mankind, an example of divine long-suffering. Just as artists make sketches in charcoal as the basis of their work, which outlines they paint out as the picture proceeds, so did the Lord in the apostle’s case make, as it were, an outline sketch of his usual work of grace. That outline in the case of each future believer he works out with infinite variety of skill, and produces the individual Christian, but the guiding lines are really there. All conversions are in a high degree similar to this pattern conversion. The transformation of persecuting Saul of Tarsus into the apostle Paul is a typical instance of the work of grace in the heart."
"In the very midst of his rebellion the Lord saved him! He had not prayed to be converted, far from it; no doubt he had that very day along the road to Damascus profaned the Savior’s name, and yet mighty mercy burst in and saved him purely by its own spontaneous native energy. Oh mighty grace, free grace, victorious grace! This was long-suffering indeed!
When divine mercy had called Paul, it swept all his sin away, every particle of it, his blood shedding and his blasphemy, all at once, so that never man was more assured of his own perfect cleansing than was the apostle."
V. The MODE OF PAUL’S CONVERSION WAS ALSO MEANT TO BE A PATTERN, and with this I shall finish.
I do not say that we may expect to receive the miraculous revelation which was given to Paul, but yet it is a sketch upon which any conversion can be painted. The filling up is not the same in any two cases, but the outline sketch. Paul’s conversion would serve for an outline sketch of the conversion of any one of us. How was that conversion wrought? Well, it is clear that there was nothing at all in Paul to contribute to his salvation. You might have sifted him in a sieve, without finding anything upon which you could rest a hope that he would be converted to the faith of Jesus. His natural bent, his early training, his whole surroundings, and his life’s pursuits, all lettered him to Judaism, and made it most unlikely that he would ever become a Christian. The first elder of the church that ever talked to him about divine things could hardly believe in his conversion. “Lord,” said he, “I have heard by many of this man, how much evil he hath done to thy saints at Jerusalem.” He could hardly think it possible that the ravening wolf should have changed into a lamb. Nothing favorable to faith in Jesus could have been found in Saul; the soil of his heart was very rocky, the ploughshare could not touch it, and the good seed found no root-hold. Yet the Lord converted Saul, and he can do the like by other sinner, but it must be a work of pure grace and of divine power, for there is not in any man’s fallen nature a holy spot of the size of a pin’s point on which grace can light. Transforming grace can find no natural lodgment in our hearts, it must create its own soil; and, blessed be God, it can do it, for with God all things are possible. Nature contributes nothing to grace, and yet grace wins the day. Humbled soul, let this cheer thee. Though there is nothing good in thee, yet grace can work wonders, and save thee by its own might.
Paul’s conversion was an instance of divine power, and of that alone, and so is every true conversion. If your conversion is an instance of the preacher’s power, you need to be converted again; if your salvation is the result of your own power, it is a miserable deception, from which may you be delivered. Every man who is saved must be operated upon by the might of God the Holy Spirit: every jot and tittle of true regeneration is the Spirit’s work. As for our strength, it warreth against salvation rather than for it. Blessed is that promise, “Thy people shall be willing in the day of thy power.” Conversion is as much a work of God’s omnipotence as the resurrection; and as the dead do not raise themselves, so neither do men convert themselves.
But Saul was changed immediately. His conversion was once done, and done at once. There was a little interval before he found peace, but even during those three days he was a changed man, though he was in sadness. He was under the power of Satan at one moment, and in the next he was under the reign of grace. This is also true in every conversion. However gradual the breaking of the day, there is a time when the sun is below the horizon, and a moment when he is no longer so. You may not know the exact time in which you passed from death to life, but there was such a time, if you are indeed a believer. A man may not know how old he is, but there was a moment in which he was born. In every conversion there is a distinct change from darkness to light, from death to life, just as certainly as there was in Paul’s. And what a delightful hope does the rapidity of regeneration present to us! It is by no long and laborious process that we escape from sin. We are not compelled to remain in sin for a single moment.
Grace brings instantaneous liberty to those who sit in bondage. He who trusts Jesus is saved on the spot. Why, then, abide in death? Why not lift up your eyes to immediate life and light?
Paul proved his regeneration by his faith. He believed unto eternal life. He tells us over and over again in his epistles that he was saved by faith, and not by works. So is it with every man; if saved at all, it is by simply believing in the Lord Jesus. Paul esteemed his own works to be less than nothing, and called them dross and dung, that he might win Christ, and so every converted man renounces his own works that he may be saved by grace alone. Whether he has been moral or immoral, whether he has lived an amiable and excellent life, or whether he has raked in the kennels of sin, every regenerate man has one only hope, and that is centered and fixed in Jesus alone. Faith in Jesus Christ is the mark of salvation, even as the heaving of the lungs or the coming of breath from the nostrils is the test of life. Faith is the grace which saves the soul, and its absence is a fatal sign. How does this fact affect you, dear friend? Hast thou faith or no?"
See here
A Sermon (excepts) Delivered by C. H. Spurgeon at the Metropolitan Tabernacle, Newington, London
“Howbeit for this cause I obtained mercy, that in me first, Jesus Christ might show forth all long-suffering, for a pattern to them which should hereafter believe on him to life everlasting.” (1 Timothy 1:16)
"It is a vulgar error that the conversion of the apostle Paul was an uncommon and exceptional event, and that we cannot expect men to be saved now-a-days after the same fashion. It is said that the incident was an exception to all rules, a wonder altogether by itself. Now, my text is a flat contradiction to that notion, for it assures us that, instead of the apostle as a receiver of the longsuffering and mercy of God being at all an exception to the rule, he was a model convert, and is to be regarded, as a type and pattern of God’s grace in other believers. The apostle’s language in the text, “for a pattern,” may mean that he was what printers call a first proof, an early impression from the engraving, a specimen of those to follow. He was the typical instance of divine long-suffering, the model after which others are fashioned. To use a metaphor from the artist’s studio, Paul was the ideal sketch of a convert, an outline of the work of Jesus on mankind, an example of divine long-suffering. Just as artists make sketches in charcoal as the basis of their work, which outlines they paint out as the picture proceeds, so did the Lord in the apostle’s case make, as it were, an outline sketch of his usual work of grace. That outline in the case of each future believer he works out with infinite variety of skill, and produces the individual Christian, but the guiding lines are really there. All conversions are in a high degree similar to this pattern conversion. The transformation of persecuting Saul of Tarsus into the apostle Paul is a typical instance of the work of grace in the heart."
"In the very midst of his rebellion the Lord saved him! He had not prayed to be converted, far from it; no doubt he had that very day along the road to Damascus profaned the Savior’s name, and yet mighty mercy burst in and saved him purely by its own spontaneous native energy. Oh mighty grace, free grace, victorious grace! This was long-suffering indeed!
When divine mercy had called Paul, it swept all his sin away, every particle of it, his blood shedding and his blasphemy, all at once, so that never man was more assured of his own perfect cleansing than was the apostle."
V. The MODE OF PAUL’S CONVERSION WAS ALSO MEANT TO BE A PATTERN, and with this I shall finish.
I do not say that we may expect to receive the miraculous revelation which was given to Paul, but yet it is a sketch upon which any conversion can be painted. The filling up is not the same in any two cases, but the outline sketch. Paul’s conversion would serve for an outline sketch of the conversion of any one of us. How was that conversion wrought? Well, it is clear that there was nothing at all in Paul to contribute to his salvation. You might have sifted him in a sieve, without finding anything upon which you could rest a hope that he would be converted to the faith of Jesus. His natural bent, his early training, his whole surroundings, and his life’s pursuits, all lettered him to Judaism, and made it most unlikely that he would ever become a Christian. The first elder of the church that ever talked to him about divine things could hardly believe in his conversion. “Lord,” said he, “I have heard by many of this man, how much evil he hath done to thy saints at Jerusalem.” He could hardly think it possible that the ravening wolf should have changed into a lamb. Nothing favorable to faith in Jesus could have been found in Saul; the soil of his heart was very rocky, the ploughshare could not touch it, and the good seed found no root-hold. Yet the Lord converted Saul, and he can do the like by other sinner, but it must be a work of pure grace and of divine power, for there is not in any man’s fallen nature a holy spot of the size of a pin’s point on which grace can light. Transforming grace can find no natural lodgment in our hearts, it must create its own soil; and, blessed be God, it can do it, for with God all things are possible. Nature contributes nothing to grace, and yet grace wins the day. Humbled soul, let this cheer thee. Though there is nothing good in thee, yet grace can work wonders, and save thee by its own might.
Paul’s conversion was an instance of divine power, and of that alone, and so is every true conversion. If your conversion is an instance of the preacher’s power, you need to be converted again; if your salvation is the result of your own power, it is a miserable deception, from which may you be delivered. Every man who is saved must be operated upon by the might of God the Holy Spirit: every jot and tittle of true regeneration is the Spirit’s work. As for our strength, it warreth against salvation rather than for it. Blessed is that promise, “Thy people shall be willing in the day of thy power.” Conversion is as much a work of God’s omnipotence as the resurrection; and as the dead do not raise themselves, so neither do men convert themselves.
But Saul was changed immediately. His conversion was once done, and done at once. There was a little interval before he found peace, but even during those three days he was a changed man, though he was in sadness. He was under the power of Satan at one moment, and in the next he was under the reign of grace. This is also true in every conversion. However gradual the breaking of the day, there is a time when the sun is below the horizon, and a moment when he is no longer so. You may not know the exact time in which you passed from death to life, but there was such a time, if you are indeed a believer. A man may not know how old he is, but there was a moment in which he was born. In every conversion there is a distinct change from darkness to light, from death to life, just as certainly as there was in Paul’s. And what a delightful hope does the rapidity of regeneration present to us! It is by no long and laborious process that we escape from sin. We are not compelled to remain in sin for a single moment.
Grace brings instantaneous liberty to those who sit in bondage. He who trusts Jesus is saved on the spot. Why, then, abide in death? Why not lift up your eyes to immediate life and light?
Paul proved his regeneration by his faith. He believed unto eternal life. He tells us over and over again in his epistles that he was saved by faith, and not by works. So is it with every man; if saved at all, it is by simply believing in the Lord Jesus. Paul esteemed his own works to be less than nothing, and called them dross and dung, that he might win Christ, and so every converted man renounces his own works that he may be saved by grace alone. Whether he has been moral or immoral, whether he has lived an amiable and excellent life, or whether he has raked in the kennels of sin, every regenerate man has one only hope, and that is centered and fixed in Jesus alone. Faith in Jesus Christ is the mark of salvation, even as the heaving of the lungs or the coming of breath from the nostrils is the test of life. Faith is the grace which saves the soul, and its absence is a fatal sign. How does this fact affect you, dear friend? Hast thou faith or no?"
See here
Fallen Christian Soldiers
Memorial Day
Christians have their own "fallen soldiers." Some of them we call "martyrs." These died for their loyalty and witness to Christ. We honor their memory. We identify with them. We pray for those today who are murdered for the sake of the gospel and who suffer great persecution for his name. Many of their names are in the New Testament's "hall of fame," or "hall of faith," as enumerated in Hebrews chapter eleven.
But, every Christian is a "witness," and the Greek word for "martyr" literally means "witness," though not necessarily a dead one. If he is a true witness, with genuine convictions, he will die for his faith.
Christians are "soldiers."
"No man that warreth entangleth himself with the affairs of this life; that he may please him who hath chosen him to be a soldier." (II Tim. 2: 4 KJV)
Christian soldiers! Warriors of righteousness! Recruits of Jesus! What a battle we face from day to day!
"Finally, be strong in the Lord and in his mighty power. Put on the full armor of God so that you can take your stand against the devil's schemes. For our struggle is not against flesh and blood, but against the rulers, against the authorities, against the powers of this dark world and against the spiritual forces of evil in the heavenly realms. Therefore put on the full armor of God, so that when the day of evil comes, you may be able to stand your ground, and after you have done everything, to stand. Stand firm then, with the belt of truth buckled around your waist, with the breastplate of righteousness in place, and with your feet fitted with the readiness that comes from the gospel of peace. In addition to all this, take up the shield of faith, with which you can extinguish all the flaming arrows of the evil one. Take the helmet of salvation and the sword of the Spirit, which is the word of God. And pray in the Spirit on all occasions with all kinds of prayers and requests. With this in mind, be alert and always keep on praying for all the saints." (Ephesians 6: 10-18 NIV)
If we are genuine soldiers of Commander Jesus, then we can be assured that though we often lose battles with sin, temptation, error, etc., we are assured of final victory in the war. But, we must become good soldiers, prepared for the battles, and so the need for preparation and training in the use of God's armor, the "armor of light." (Romans 13: 12)
So, today as we remember the "fallen in Israel," those who have given their lives for the gospel and for the sake of Christ, as the apostles, so today do we living soldiers re-dedicate our lives to the fight.
Christians have their own "fallen soldiers." Some of them we call "martyrs." These died for their loyalty and witness to Christ. We honor their memory. We identify with them. We pray for those today who are murdered for the sake of the gospel and who suffer great persecution for his name. Many of their names are in the New Testament's "hall of fame," or "hall of faith," as enumerated in Hebrews chapter eleven.
But, every Christian is a "witness," and the Greek word for "martyr" literally means "witness," though not necessarily a dead one. If he is a true witness, with genuine convictions, he will die for his faith.
Christians are "soldiers."
"No man that warreth entangleth himself with the affairs of this life; that he may please him who hath chosen him to be a soldier." (II Tim. 2: 4 KJV)
Christian soldiers! Warriors of righteousness! Recruits of Jesus! What a battle we face from day to day!
"Finally, be strong in the Lord and in his mighty power. Put on the full armor of God so that you can take your stand against the devil's schemes. For our struggle is not against flesh and blood, but against the rulers, against the authorities, against the powers of this dark world and against the spiritual forces of evil in the heavenly realms. Therefore put on the full armor of God, so that when the day of evil comes, you may be able to stand your ground, and after you have done everything, to stand. Stand firm then, with the belt of truth buckled around your waist, with the breastplate of righteousness in place, and with your feet fitted with the readiness that comes from the gospel of peace. In addition to all this, take up the shield of faith, with which you can extinguish all the flaming arrows of the evil one. Take the helmet of salvation and the sword of the Spirit, which is the word of God. And pray in the Spirit on all occasions with all kinds of prayers and requests. With this in mind, be alert and always keep on praying for all the saints." (Ephesians 6: 10-18 NIV)
If we are genuine soldiers of Commander Jesus, then we can be assured that though we often lose battles with sin, temptation, error, etc., we are assured of final victory in the war. But, we must become good soldiers, prepared for the battles, and so the need for preparation and training in the use of God's armor, the "armor of light." (Romans 13: 12)
So, today as we remember the "fallen in Israel," those who have given their lives for the gospel and for the sake of Christ, as the apostles, so today do we living soldiers re-dedicate our lives to the fight.
God Makes It Live & Grow
"I have planted, Apollos watered; but God gave the increase. So then neither is he that planteth any thing, neither he that watereth; but God that giveth the increase." (I Corinthians 3: 6, 7 KJV)
By God "giving increase" to the planting and watering of the disciples with the word of God, he means his causing germination and growth. Again, we recall the words of the Psalmist who said - "Except the LORD build the house, they labour in vain that build it: except the LORD keep the city, the watchman waketh but in vain." (Psalm 127: 1 KJV)
All is made to depend upon the blessing of God. Seed does not grow and produce fruit apart from God's blessing it, or causing it to be productive.
Paul again lays the ultimate and final reason for why one becomes a Christian and another does not, though both hear the gospel and have equal opportunity for salvation. In the one case, it was blessed and made to germinate and grow. In the other, it was labor in vain, building in vain, for the Lord did not bless or give increase.
By God "giving increase" to the planting and watering of the disciples with the word of God, he means his causing germination and growth. Again, we recall the words of the Psalmist who said - "Except the LORD build the house, they labour in vain that build it: except the LORD keep the city, the watchman waketh but in vain." (Psalm 127: 1 KJV)
All is made to depend upon the blessing of God. Seed does not grow and produce fruit apart from God's blessing it, or causing it to be productive.
Paul again lays the ultimate and final reason for why one becomes a Christian and another does not, though both hear the gospel and have equal opportunity for salvation. In the one case, it was blessed and made to germinate and grow. In the other, it was labor in vain, building in vain, for the Lord did not bless or give increase.
Why The Difference?
"For who maketh thee to differ from another? and what hast thou that thou didst not receive? now if thou didst receive it, why dost thou glory (boast, brag, or take credit), as if thou hadst not received it?" (I Corinthians 4: 7 KJV)
These words of Paul argue very forcefully for unconditional election and particular redemption. No Christian can say he is different from the non-Christian because of his own free will and effort. If the difference between being saved or lost is ultimately left to the will of the sinner, then ultimately it is the sinner who makes himself to differ from another.
Paul says God is the author of this great difference. He chooses who is to be saved, according to his own sovereign will and pleasure. (See Romans 9 and Ephesians 1)
Why is one man different from another? Why, when the gospel is preached, does one man believe and repent, and another does not? Shall we lay the reason to the will of the sinner or to the will of God?
How does God make one to differ from another? Is it not because he "gives" to one what he denies to another? Is this not what Lord God was saying to Moses when he said:
"And the LORD said unto him, Who hath made man's mouth? or who maketh the dumb, or deaf, or the seeing, or the blind? have not I the LORD?" (Exodus 4: 11 KJV)
Thus, a man sees because God gave that man the faculty of sight. Another, who is blind, sees not because God gave him not the gift of vision. Likewise, one man hears, for God gives him the gift of hearing ears. Another, however, who is deaf, hears not because God gave him not the gift of hearing. Further, this denial of such "gifts" is viewed as God "making" or causing the blindness and deafness. So, who is it that "makes the difference" in these things?
Arminian theologian, Robert Piricilli, wrote (emphasis mine):
"Paul gives reason why pride is unjustified (v. 7). In essence, the reason is that God gives to men anything they have, and therefore no one has any grounds for self-glorying. Paul makes this point by asking three rhetorical questions, each leading to the next. The first one, "Who makes you different (from anyone else)?" might be answered in either of two ways: "No one makes you difference, in that you are all basically the same"; or "God is the one who makes one different from another." Some commentators assume one, some the other; I am more inclined to the latter.
Certainly that is the implication of the second question: No one has anything that he did not receive (implied: from God). Any talents or gifts that men have must be traced, ultimately, to God as their source. So what if one person has a native intelligence that others do not possess? He certainly did not get it for himself. All the more with spiritual gifts: each one is a manifestation of the grace of God (back to 1: 4-7 again; cf. 12: 11).
The third question obviously follows: then if every good thing a person has is something received (from God), how can he possibly justify glorying (boasting) as though he took it by his own doing? Answer: he cannot. And Paul's point has now become very clear. At first he had been speaking of himself and Apollos as simply doing what God gave them to do in His service. Now he means for the Corinthians to see that this applies to them, too. They have no right to glory in Paul or Apollos; neither do they have any right to glory in themselves. They are nothing more or less than God has made of them--even though what God makes of a man depends, in part, on how man develops or utilizes the capacities God gives him."
Randall House Bible Commentary By Robert E. Picirilli (pg. 54)
See here
"John answered and said, A man can receive nothing, except it be given him from heaven." (John 3: 27 KJV)
"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." (James 1: 17 KJV)
These verses are further evidence of the same fact. A man is different because God made him different and no one can boast in anything, for all that he is, or all that he has, is owing to God's gifting.
"Except the LORD build the house, they labour in vain that build it: except the LORD keep the city, the watchman waketh but in vain." (Psalm 127: 1 KJV)
So long as such verses are in the Bible I can never assent to Arminian free will theology. Success, victory, and safety are all of the Lord. (Proverbs 21: 31) His blessing of a work is the all determining factor of whether it succeed or not. All is vanity apart from God's blessing.
These words of Paul argue very forcefully for unconditional election and particular redemption. No Christian can say he is different from the non-Christian because of his own free will and effort. If the difference between being saved or lost is ultimately left to the will of the sinner, then ultimately it is the sinner who makes himself to differ from another.
Paul says God is the author of this great difference. He chooses who is to be saved, according to his own sovereign will and pleasure. (See Romans 9 and Ephesians 1)
Why is one man different from another? Why, when the gospel is preached, does one man believe and repent, and another does not? Shall we lay the reason to the will of the sinner or to the will of God?
How does God make one to differ from another? Is it not because he "gives" to one what he denies to another? Is this not what Lord God was saying to Moses when he said:
"And the LORD said unto him, Who hath made man's mouth? or who maketh the dumb, or deaf, or the seeing, or the blind? have not I the LORD?" (Exodus 4: 11 KJV)
Thus, a man sees because God gave that man the faculty of sight. Another, who is blind, sees not because God gave him not the gift of vision. Likewise, one man hears, for God gives him the gift of hearing ears. Another, however, who is deaf, hears not because God gave him not the gift of hearing. Further, this denial of such "gifts" is viewed as God "making" or causing the blindness and deafness. So, who is it that "makes the difference" in these things?
Arminian theologian, Robert Piricilli, wrote (emphasis mine):
"Paul gives reason why pride is unjustified (v. 7). In essence, the reason is that God gives to men anything they have, and therefore no one has any grounds for self-glorying. Paul makes this point by asking three rhetorical questions, each leading to the next. The first one, "Who makes you different (from anyone else)?" might be answered in either of two ways: "No one makes you difference, in that you are all basically the same"; or "God is the one who makes one different from another." Some commentators assume one, some the other; I am more inclined to the latter.
Certainly that is the implication of the second question: No one has anything that he did not receive (implied: from God). Any talents or gifts that men have must be traced, ultimately, to God as their source. So what if one person has a native intelligence that others do not possess? He certainly did not get it for himself. All the more with spiritual gifts: each one is a manifestation of the grace of God (back to 1: 4-7 again; cf. 12: 11).
The third question obviously follows: then if every good thing a person has is something received (from God), how can he possibly justify glorying (boasting) as though he took it by his own doing? Answer: he cannot. And Paul's point has now become very clear. At first he had been speaking of himself and Apollos as simply doing what God gave them to do in His service. Now he means for the Corinthians to see that this applies to them, too. They have no right to glory in Paul or Apollos; neither do they have any right to glory in themselves. They are nothing more or less than God has made of them--even though what God makes of a man depends, in part, on how man develops or utilizes the capacities God gives him."
Randall House Bible Commentary By Robert E. Picirilli (pg. 54)
See here
"John answered and said, A man can receive nothing, except it be given him from heaven." (John 3: 27 KJV)
"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." (James 1: 17 KJV)
These verses are further evidence of the same fact. A man is different because God made him different and no one can boast in anything, for all that he is, or all that he has, is owing to God's gifting.
"Except the LORD build the house, they labour in vain that build it: except the LORD keep the city, the watchman waketh but in vain." (Psalm 127: 1 KJV)
So long as such verses are in the Bible I can never assent to Arminian free will theology. Success, victory, and safety are all of the Lord. (Proverbs 21: 31) His blessing of a work is the all determining factor of whether it succeed or not. All is vanity apart from God's blessing.
Spurgeon - Life By Faith
Brother Phil Johnson at pyromanics has a weekly citation from Spurgeon. This week's citation was interesting to me. Hyper Calvinists, like the Hardshells, often argue that the gospel cannot be a means in regeneration because the gospel is food and drink, and such can never be a means in giving life, but only a means for preserving life. From the citation from Spurgeon, one might think he agreed with the Hypers, except for his one statement that says that sinners have "life through believing on him," that is, have life through faith.
"OBSERVE carefully the order in which our Lord puts the two blessings he mentions;—first, life through believing on him, and then food to sustain that life;—first, He that believeth on me hath everlasting life;" and next to that, "I am that bread of life." Life comes first, and food follows afterwards. It is impossible for a dead man to feed, or to be fed; only the living can eat and drink."
See here
Were it not for Spurgeon's statement about life through believing, I might think he denied that the gospel brings life.
"OBSERVE carefully the order in which our Lord puts the two blessings he mentions;—first, life through believing on him, and then food to sustain that life;—first, He that believeth on me hath everlasting life;" and next to that, "I am that bread of life." Life comes first, and food follows afterwards. It is impossible for a dead man to feed, or to be fed; only the living can eat and drink."
See here
Were it not for Spurgeon's statement about life through believing, I might think he denied that the gospel brings life.
The Gift of Repentance
"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." (II Timothy 2: 24-26 KJV)
"Him hath God exalted with his right hand to be a Prince and a Saviour, for to give repentance to Israel, and forgiveness of sins." (Acts 5:31 KJV)
"When they heard these things, they held their peace, and glorified God, saying, Then hath God also to the Gentiles granted repentance unto life." (11: 18)
God commands all to repent but he does not give repentance to all. He desires all men to repent, but he especially desires it for his chosen people. God invites all to repentance, but the elect he effectually draws to it.
So, not only is faith a gift of God, but so also is repentance.
"Him hath God exalted with his right hand to be a Prince and a Saviour, for to give repentance to Israel, and forgiveness of sins." (Acts 5:31 KJV)
"When they heard these things, they held their peace, and glorified God, saying, Then hath God also to the Gentiles granted repentance unto life." (11: 18)
God commands all to repent but he does not give repentance to all. He desires all men to repent, but he especially desires it for his chosen people. God invites all to repentance, but the elect he effectually draws to it.
So, not only is faith a gift of God, but so also is repentance.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)