Prevenient Grace (16)

Dr. John Piper

As stated before, I get irritated when people say that Calvinists believe that sinners are born again before faith and deny prevenient grace. It is worse when scholars and theologians say such when they ought to know better, and perhaps some of them do know better, but say this in order to poison the well against Calvinism or who want to be the authoritative definers of what is Calvinism. In the preceding chapters I have cited from several great Calvinist theologians who did believe that sinners were born again by faith and that God, via his prevenient grace, does things in the hearts, minds, and lives of lost sinners which are intended to bring them to salvation. 

Dr. John Piper deals with this subject very concisely (here) and cites Dr. Roger Olson, an historic or classical Arminian on the subject, and then gives his own thoughts upon it. Piper cites from Olson's book, giving us these citations from Olson:

"If anyone comes to Christ with repentance and faith, it is only because they are enabled by God’s “prevenient grace” to do so." (66) 

 

"Arminianism has always insisted that the initiative in salvation is God’s; it is called “prevenient grace,” and it is enabling but resistible." (169) 

 

"[Wesley] affirmed original sin, including total depravity in the sense of spiritual helplessness. But he also affirmed God’s universal gift of prevenient or enabling grace that restores freedom of the will." (129) 

 

"Classical Arminian theology...attributes the sinners’ ability to respond to the gospel with repentance and faith to prevenient grace." (67)

"[Prevenient grace is] the illuminating, convicting, calling, enabling power of the Holy Spirit working on the sinner’s soul and making them free to choose saving grace (or reject it)." (67)

"So in Arminian theology, a partial regeneration does precede conversion, but it is not a complete regeneration. It is an awakening and enabling, but not an irresistible force...[Prevenient grace is] God’s powerful attracting and persuading power that actually imparts free will to be saved or not." (171)

Piper says in rebuttal:

"Now, that’s the end of my quotations so that you could hear how a historic Arminian would describe his own understanding of prevenient grace."

Under the sub-title "What’s Ultimately Decisive?" Piper said: 

"Calvinism says God’s grace doesn’t just bring us up to a point of “partial regeneration” (that’s Olson’s term). Calvinism says God’s grace doesn’t stop and leave the outcome to our ultimate self-determination — now, that’s my term, ultimate self-determination." 

Here Piper is clearly wrong. In fact, he ought to agree with most of the citations from Olson. Piper objects to any idea of a "partial regeneration." However, he is himself guilty of such a fallacy. In the previous chapter I cited from Dr. Shedd who said that some post Reformation Calvinists gave a restricted definition to the term "regeneration" and other prior Calvinists gave a broad definition of it. The older Calvinists included evangelical conversion in the experience of regeneration, or actually saw them as being the same experience, but later Calvinists divorced conversion from regeneration and narrowly defined it. Many other theologians besides Shedd also have said the same thing. So, I find it ironic that Piper, who believes that regeneration precedes faith, and who divorces conversion from regeneration, would say that Calvinism does not believe in "partial regeneration," for clearly he is the one who believes in a partial regeneration.

Consider also that Calvin believed that it was better to view "regeneration" as only begun when one is born of God, and continues all through the life of a believer, just like being renewed, transformed, or conformed to the image of the Son, or being sanctified, etc. We can also say that our being "created in Christ Jesus" is both a past experience and a continuous one. That is why a famous Christian song says "he's still working on me to make me what I want to be. It took him just a week to make the moon and the stars, the sun and the earth, and Jupiter and Mars. How loving and patient he must be, he's still working on me." That truth is entailed in the fact that believers are daily being renewed and transformed. It is one of those instances of "already but not yet" that we see in scripture. I have been created in Christ Jesus but I hope he is not finished re-creating me for I know that I am not yet fully made into the perfect man.

We have affirmed in previous chapters the fact that regeneration has been defined by Calvinists in both a restricted way and in a broad way. The fact is, Piper, by divorcing conversion from regeneration has taught a partial regeneration. The very idea that a man may be said to have been regeneration before he has believed, repented, or received Christ and been united to him is absurd, biblically speaking. To affirm such a thing is indeed to speak of a very limited or partial regeneration.

Also, Olson is not saying that a person is partially regenerated before he believes, repents, and is converted, but is rather affirming that a person is not regenerated until he is converted. I think he is simply saying that a person is not regenerated until he has believed. Besides, why does Piper object to this when he believes the very thing he condemns? 

John Gill, who many consider to be a Hyper Calvinist, in his body of Doctrinal Divinity, in chapter 11, on "Regeneration," begins with this statement:

"Regeneration may be considered either more largely, and then it includes with it effectual calling, conversion, and sanctification: or more strictly, and then it designs the first principle of grace infused into the soul; which makes it a fit object of the effectual calling, a proper subject of conversion, and is the source and spring of that holiness which is gradually carried on in sanctification, and perfected in heaven." 

So, which way did he believe was the scriptural idea of it? In the same section Gill wrote:

"Though after all it seems plain, that the ministry of the word is the vehicle in which the Spirit of God conveys himself and his grace into the hearts of men; which is done when the word comes not in word only, but in power, and in the Holy Ghost; and works effectually, and is the power of God unto salvation; then faith comes by hearing, and ministers are instruments by whom, at least, men are encouraged to believe: "received ye the Spirit", says the apostle, "by the works of the law, or by the hearing of faith": (Gal. 3:2), that is, by the preaching of the law, or by the preaching of the gospel? by the latter, no doubt."

On I Cor. 4: 15 he wrote:

"...he preached Christ unto them, and salvation by him, and the necessity of faith in him; he directed them to him to believe in him, and was the means of bringing of them to the faith of Christ; and it was the power and grace of Christ accompanying his ministry, which made it an effectual means of their regeneration and conversion..."

On James 1: 18 Gill wrote: 

"Of his own will begat he us...The apostle instances in one of those good and perfect gifts, regeneration...it is done at once; there are no degrees in it...is born again, at once...no one is more regenerated than another, or the same person more regenerated at one time than at another."

I hardly see how the word of God can be a means to salvation before that word is believed. This fact is why those who say that regeneration precedes faith will deny that the word of God is a means in regeneration. If faith in the word follows regeneration, then how was the word a means of regeneration? 

Piper also said:

"According to Arminianism, the very final act that brings me into Christ, that decisive moment in conversion, is one that I perform, not God."

Is "believing" not an act people do to be saved? Is "coming" to Christ not something people do to enter into Christ? In fact, the Bible says that people "believe into Christ." I wrote about this in this post (here). I cited these texts:

In the New Testament the phrase "eis auton" (unto him) is used frequently.

"And this is the will of Him that sent Me, that every one which seeth the Son, and is believing on him (eis-unto him), may have everlasting life: and I will raise him up at the last day." (John 6:40)

"Jesus answered and said unto them, This is the work of God, that ye may be believing on him (eis-unto him) whom He hath sent." (John 6:29)

"Verily, verily, I say unto you, He that is believing on (eis, unto) Me is having everlasting life. I am that bread of life." (John 6:47-48)

Now of course faith is God's gift and becoming a believer is due to the working of God's mighty power. (See John 6: 65; Eph. 1: 19-20) Furthermore, many Calvinists agree with Armianism that it is at the point of faith in Christ that a person is united to Christ, which is what "into Christ" signifies. 

Piper in this article (here), titled "What Is Union With Christ?" actually said that one is united to Christ by faith. He said (emphasis mine):

"I’m saving my definition of union with Christ, which he asked for, for the end. It hangs in great measure on what the word “in” means in the phrase “in Christ.”

Under the sub-heading "From God, Through Faith" he also said: "What’s the cause of this in-ness — this being in Christ Jesus?" He then says:

"How then do we experience this day by day? Paul answers, “by faith”: “having been buried with him in baptism, in which you were also raised with him through faith” (Colossians 2:12). So you identify with him, and you die with him, and you rise with him through faith."

If faith in Christ is the means of union with Christ, as Piper clearly and rightly affirms in the above words, then it is indeed the "decisive moment" of salvation. So, why is Piper criticizing Olson, or any Arminian, for saying the same thing? Granted, Olson and Piper would disagree on how faith is produced in a sinner, but still it is true that faith is the demarcation point where a sinner who was dead is made alive. 

But Piper contradicts himself on this matter if one looks at his writings on this subject. He believes one is regenerated before faith, and if faith is the medium of union with Christ, then he has an odd character, one who is regenerated without union with Christ.

Charles Spurgeon in his "Morning and Evening" on I John 1: 6 titled “Fellowship with him" said: 

"When we were united by faith to Christ, we were brought into such complete fellowship with him, that we were made one with him, and his interests and ours became mutual and identical." (See here)

Piper also said:

"Calvinism says that God does more in our conversion; namely, he overcomes all of our resistance and opens the eyes of our hearts to make Christ so real and so beautiful and so compelling that our will gladly embraces Christ as our Savior and Lord and Treasure."

What does Piper mean by "conversion"? Does he not believe it is a separate experience that follows regeneration? Does he teach that conversion is not a part of regeneration?

Under the sub-title "Raised from the Dead" Piper said: 

"The question is, Which of those is the biblical view of how God’s grace brings us to faith and salvation? Does it make us free to choose grace or reject it? Or does it overcome our rebellion and blindness so that we are drawn triumphantly by the beauty of Christ to embrace what is true and real?"

I don't see how believing in prevenient grace is unbiblical. I agree that the Calvinists who believe in prevenient grace do not believe that it makes a depraved sinner free from sin. The Puritan Calvinists, as we have seen, believed that God did things prior to regeneration as preparations for regeneration. As I have shown, it is because of special or abundant grace, and of greater divine power exerted, that some sinners (the elect) are made believers, and that grace preceded their salvation. If Piper believes that the word or gospel of God is a means in regeneration, then he believes in prevenient grace. However, those like Piper, who say regeneration precedes faith, often deny that the word or gospel of God is a means thereto. 

Piper said further:

"'I’ll point to one passage of Scripture that I think shows the complete saving effectiveness of God’s grace and that God provides more than a partial regeneration in order to bring us to faith. That passage is Ephesians 2:4–7. So let me read it.'"

After reading the text above, Piper said:

"I don’t think that text can be fairly interpreted to mean that there is a split in regeneration or a split in making alive."

If there is no split in regeneration as Piper affirms, then the question must be asked - "does he believe conversion (evangelical faith and repentance) is part of regeneration?" Also, if one looks at how Paul describes "regeneration" in Ephesians chapter two he will see that Paul describes it in terms of evangelical conversion. In verse eight of that chapter the apostle says - "for by grace are you saved through faith." By "saved" he is talking about what he has been describing in verses one through seven which Piper says is regeneration. That being so, Paul affirms that people are regenerated by faith. Also, one cannot be made spiritually alive apart from being joined to Christ who is Life and Piper has already said that union with Christ is by faith. The apostle John said - "whoever has the Son has life." (I John 5: 12) A person receives and possesses the Son by "receiving" the Son and this "receiving" is equated with "believing" into the Son. So the same apostle wrote:

"But as many as received Him, to them He gave the right to become children of God, to those who believe in His name." (John 1: 12 nkjv)

People become children of God when they receive Christ and believe in him. According to the apostle this is the decisive moment.

In verses eleven through thirteen of Ephesians chapter two Paul speaks of the time when the Ephesian believers were "without Christ," "without God," and were "strangers and aliens" from the commonwealth of Israel, and were "without hope." Paul's regeneration or salvation brought a believer into union with the Father and Son and a "good hope through grace." (II Thess. 2: 16)

Piper continued:

"Now, let me insert a comment here. Just to be clear, he (Olson) says the ability to respond is given with prevenient grace. But it’s an ability to believe or not to believe. And he’ll make that really plain in just a minute."

The kind of prevenient grace I am positing is the same kind posited by other Calvinists, such as the Puritan Calvinists. The word of God is able to convict sinners before they are converted. The law of God is able to show a lost man that he is guilty. Man is therefore able to feel guilt and to realize his need for salvation while still lost in sin. "By the law," said the apostle Paul, "is the knowledge of sin." (Rom. 3: 20) It is by the law that men realize that they are "guilty before God." (vs. 19) In chapter seven he says "I would not have known sin except through the law." (vs. 7) He says that the law arouses his sinful nature and makes sin to revive. (vs. 5, 8-9) He says the law killed him. (vs. 10-11) In verse 13 he says:

"But sin, that it might appear sin, was producing death in me through what is good, so that sin through the commandment might become exceedingly sinful."

The Puritans believed that God used the law to show depraved sinners that they were guilty and exceedingly sinful and to kill them and that this killing was a necessary step to humble them, to bring them to seek salvation in Christ. In this way "the law is our schoolmaster to bring us to Christ." (Gal. 3: 24) The law has that power and sinners are able to feel guilt and be convicted of sin while they are dead in trespasses and sins. The gospel also, being "the power of God unto salvation" (Rom. 1: 16), is also able to do things in the hearts of dead sinners. 

Piper continued:

"I don’t think that text can be fairly interpreted to mean that there is a split in regeneration or a split in making alive. It is not as if he does part of it, and then he waits to see what we will do with the rest of it, if we will finish the making alive and bringing ourselves into union with Christ. I don’t think that will work."

Again, I say, it is Piper and his brethren who say "regeneration precedes faith" who split up regeneration into parts. Further, many Calvinists, who believe that regeneration is synonymous with rebirth, say that rebirth is a process like physical birth. Physical birth takes in conception, then development in the womb, and then birth deliverance from the womb. This was the prevalent view of most Hardshell Baptists of the nineteenth century. It was also the view of many Presbyterians. It was the view of Arthur Pink, a well known Calvinist, who I am sure Piper has read. In this post (here) I cited from several Calvinists who held this view. Is this not a splitting up regeneration? So, the point is, Piper condemns Olson for splitting up regeneration into a partial regeneration versus a full regeneration and yet many Calvinists do the same, even Piper himself. 

Under the sub-title "The Real Difference" Piper said: 

"The difference between me (and I think I speak for virtually all Calvinists on this point) and Arminians is not that one believes in total depravity and the other doesn’t. No, that’s not it. And the difference is not that one believes that grace must precede faith and the other doesn’t. No, that’s not the difference either. Rather, I believe that God’s saving grace not merely restores a kind of free will that can accept or reject Christ, but rather opens our blind eyes and grants us to see the compelling truth and beauty and worth of Jesus in such a way that we find him irresistible. Then we gladly and willingly embrace him as our Savior and Lord and Treasure. He brings us all the way to the point of conversion so that we give him all the glory for our receiving of Jesus."

Much of what Dr. Piper says is true. However, he fails to see how both common grace and prevenient grace, like common operations of the Spirit, may be given in a greater measure to the elect than to those not chosen to salvation. He rightly says that some are so enlightened that they are compelled by the truth and are so attracted to the beauty they have seen in Christ that they find him irresistible. What he fails to understand, however, is that common and prevenient grace is shown even to the non-elect and they experience some common operations of the Spirit and it is these that they resist as Stephen said. (Acts 7: 51) 

Prevenient Grace (15)

In "The Doctrine of Prevenient Grace in the Theology of Jacobus Arminius" (here) A.F. Hernandez wrote some things on the history of the doctrine of prevenient grace which are worth our consideration. Under the title "The Beginning of the Christian Concept of Prevenient Grace" (a scholarly work) he wrote (emphasis mine):

"In Augustine of Hippo the theological conceptualization of prevenient grace found its primary interpreter. For this reason, any consideration of the beginning point of the development of prevenient grace has to consider Augustine. Therefore, in this section I pay attention to the contributions of Augustine to the doctrine of prevenient grace, especially in his anti-Pelagian writings."

Of course, "the beginning point of the development of prevenient grace" did not begin with Augustine (354-430) if it is taught in the bible, and I firmly believe it is, as did Augustine, and the previous chapters have been written to demonstrate that fact. In the first chapter of this series I cited from J.L. Packer who correctly stated that Augustine believed in prevenient grace but falsely stated that Augustine equated prevenient grace with regeneration rather than with pre-regeneration grace and acts of the Spirit preceding salvation. Augustine used the term "gratia praeveniens" to refer to what God does prior to regeneration to produce regeneration, to God's initiatory activity. He also, as I do, saw "common grace" as instances of prevenient grace.

In "Prevenient Grace at Work in Augustine" (here), Daniel Sheets wrote (emphasis mine):

"He (Augustine) shows that God was showing him grace, even when he had nothing to offer Him, nor recognized his own need for salvation. God’s grace was evident in the way God had brought Augustine into the world, and how He had provided Augustine with everything he needed as an infant. This idea of God reaching out and showing grace and love to Augustine before he himself reached out to embrace God is a part of the Via Salutis. It is something that may be referred to as prevenient grace, or grace that goes before. This grace is what began the Via Salutis in the life of Augustine."

By "Via Salutis" is meant "the way of salvation" or "life of salvation." Further, if what Sheets says of Augustine is correct, Augustine saw what we would call common grace as prevenient grace. Even Calvinists who shy away from acknowledging prevenient grace will acknowledge that God engineers, via his providence, events in the lives of the elect, prior to their being regenerated or born again, which are intended to pave the way for their salvation. Many Calvinists believe that when Jude says of the elect "preserved in Jesus Christ and called" (or "kept for Jesus Christ") that the preservation being put before calling denotes what God did in the lives of the elect to keep them from death or any other thing that would prevent their later being called. So John Gill wrote in his commentary on the text:

"...they are preserved by him, and that before they are called, as well as after; wherefore this character is put before that of being called, though the Syriac version puts that in the first place: there is a secret preservation of them in Christ before calling..."

This preservation of and providence over human life is a kind of prevenient grace.

Sheets wrote further:

"Augustine continues his confessions by speaking of his life after having grown up from being an infant. He describes his childhood and how he had gone to school and learned about many different things. His childhood is also an example God’s prevenient grace as a part of the Via Salutis. He says, “I disliked learning and hated to be forced to it. But I was forced to it, so that good was done to me though it was not my doing” (I, ll. 102-3). Augustine recalls that as a schoolboy, he did not like being forced to learn, and that he only wanted to learn certain things. God, however, acted in grace, and caused him to be taught things that would be beneficial for him later in life. One such task was learning to read in languages such as Greek and Latin. "

Again, many Calvinists espouse "common grace" but not "prevenient grace," as we have previously written about, but Augustine rightly saw common grace as instances of prevenient grace.

Sheets wrote further:

"Augustine shows how he had experienced a great longing for something as a child. He had longed for a love deeper than what he knew. He searched for it in the Aeneid and other great works of literature, but he did not find what he was looking for in them. He found love, but not the love that would make him truly satisfied; he only found love that left him feeling empty. In this way, Augustine shows once again the act of God’s prevenient grace to him taking place as a part of the Via Salutis. Augustine recognizes that God had been calling out to his own heart, showing him that he needed Him to fill it with His love, but Augustine did not fully understand and he tried to fill the place in himself that needed God’s love with other loves."

God's "calling out" to the heart of Augustine for years prior to his conversion were instances of prevenient grace.

Returning to what Hernandez wrote, we cite these words:

"For Augustine, the doctrine of prevenient grace plays an essential role in preserving what he regarded as a critical concept of Christianity: the idea of God’s initiative in the salvation of humanity. This doctrine arose in consideration of the role of human will in relation to God’s grace in the work of salvation before and within the Pelagian controversy. This connection makes it important to consider the teaching of Pelagius concerning freedom of will and grace before discussing Augustine’s conceptualization of the doctrine of prevenient grace." (pg. 93-94)

Calvinists often stress the truth that God must make the first move in the salvation of any sinner. Those Arminians who say to lost sinners "you take the first step and God will meet you half way" shift the initiation to the sinner and away from God. However, James did say to sinners - "draw near to God and he will draw near to you." (James 4: 8) However, James realized that God must work in the mind of sinners prior to their decision to draw near to God. But, it is not only Calvinists who stress the fact that God must take the initiative in bringing sinners to salvation, for many Arminians do the same, especially those who are known as "Classical Arminians."

Hernandez wrote further:

"Augustine exalts God’s grace throughout his writings. The first action of God toward sinful humanity occurs through prevenient grace. Prevenient grace, according to Augustine, could be properly summarized in two main points:

First, it is the anticipation of God’s actions to rescue people from eternal perdition. Before any human movement toward God, says Augustine, God moves toward humans. In this manner, Augustine assures us that grace precedes human freedom of will. Thus, salvation begins by God’s direct initiative. 

He speaks of God who prepares the will, and perfects by his co-operation what He initiates by His operation. He works in us that we may have the will [prevenient grace], and in perfecting works with us when we have the will [subsequent grace]. He operates, therefore, without us, in order that we may will [prevenient grace]; but when we will, and so will that we may act, He co-operates with us.

Second, prevenient grace is a gracious gift of God. Augustine states that grace “is not rendered for any merits, but is given gratis, on account of which it is also called grace.” Because grace is given gratis preceding any meritorious human actions, prevenient grace is anti-merit. Humans in their sinfulness and corruption, massa damnata, do not deserve God’s grace and love (Romans 5:15), but solely condemnation and rejection. Consequently, grace could exclusively be granted by God’s free decision, love, and mercy." (pgs. 99-102)

Many Calvinists go to extremes when they insist that in being saved or born again the sinner is entirely passive and not in any sense active. In these two posts of mine titled "Passive or Active" (here, here) I address this question. I show that there are aspects of salvation where sinners are passive, but I also showed that there are aspects of it where sinners are active. Many Calvinists who promote what is called "monergism" deny that sinners are active in any way in their being saved. However, that idea is simply not biblical. As I have stated previously, the word "receive," a word connected with being saved, is in the active voice, not in the passive voice. A person who receives Christ and life thereby does so actively and willingly. A person who "comes" to Christ is active in that coming.

The Greek word lambanō is often translated as "receive," and is used when someone actively takes hold of something (like reaching out to take a gift). It contrasts with the Greek word dechomai, which implies a more passive reception.

In the first post in "Passive or Active" I cite from the Baptist theologian Dr. Alveh Hovey who said:

"The simple fact is, that man is both active and passive in regeneration. The first series of texts brings to view his activity; the second, his passivity. Man is active in thinking upon the truth, in exercising his sensibilities in relation to it, and in giving up his heart to God; he is passive in that he is acted upon by the truth, and also by the Holy Spirit. He both acts and is acted upon."  (See "Examination of the Alleged Discrepancies of the Bible" By John W. Haley, Alvah Hovey - Here)

In that same post I wrote:

"And I said unto him, Sir, thou knowest. And he said to me, These are they which came out of great tribulation, and have washed their robes, and made them white in the blood of the Lamb." (Rev. 7: 14)

The Greek word for "washed" is in the active voice, according to Robertson. Thus, regeneration is not, in every respect, a passive or monergistic experience."

In the second post in the above chapters "Passive or Active" I also wrote:

Dr. B.H. Carroll, in a message titled "THE HUMAN SIDE OF REGENERATION" (1894) wrote:

"I never hesitate to declare my own convictions when I have any that are clear to my own mind and are regarded as worth the telling. Let me say then, here and now and emphatically, that I believe, without the shadow of a doubt, that God’s Spirit deals with man’s spirit directly, immediately--the impact of naked Spirit on spirit. And this not only as a preparation for conviction, repentance, and faith, but oftentimes after one becomes a child of God. But I do not call this influence regeneration."

What the Hyper Calvinists do, as a means of dealing with the problems involved in making salvation to be wholly a passive experience, is to divorce "regeneration" from evangelical "conversion," from faith and repentance, arguing that regeneration causes conversion, sinners being passive in the former but active in the latter. The older Calvinists, however, did not divorce regeneration from conversion, but saw them as being the same experience, and that being true saw salvation as having both passive and active aspects to it. Those later Calvinists began however to restrict the definition of "regeneration" so as to exclude conversion, and would speak of "regeneration strictly defined" versus "regeneration broadly defined" (which included conversion). In my post titled "PaedoBaptist Shedd on Regeneration & Means" I cited the following words from Shedd, taken from his work "Various Uses of the Term Regeneration" (See here):

"The term regeneration has been used in a wide and in a restricted sense. It may signify the whole process of salvation, including the preparatory work of conviction and the concluding work of sanctification. Or it may denote only the imparting of spiritual life in the new birth, excluding the preparatory and concluding processes...The Lutheran doctrine, stated in the apology for the Augsburg Confession and in the Formula of Concord, employs regeneration in the wide meaning, but distinguishes carefully between justification and sanctification. In the Reformed church, the term regeneration was also employed in the wide signification. Like the Lutheran, while carefully distinguishing between justification and sanctification, the Reformed theologian brought under the term regeneration everything that pertains to the development as well as to the origination of the new spiritual life. Regeneration thus included not only the new birth, but all that issues from it. It comprised the converting acts of faith and repentance and also the whole struggle with indwelling sin in progressive sanctification." 

"This wide use of the term passed into English theology. The divines of the seventeenth century very generally do not distinguish between regeneration and conversion, but employ the two as synonyms. Owen does this continually (On the Spirit 3.5), and Charnock likewise (Attributes, Practical Atheism)."

"Consequently, there arose gradually a stricter use of the term regeneration and its discrimination from conversion. Turretin (15.4.13) defines two kinds of conversion, as the term was employed in his day."

"We shall adopt this distinction between regeneration and conversion. Regeneration, accordingly, is an act; conversion is an activity or a process."

When these new Calvinists divorced conversion, which involves faith and repentance, from regeneration, it was in part due to their embracing an unbiblical proposition which said that "regeneration is unconditional," a leading tenet of the Hardshell Baptists, the most extreme Hyper Calvinists. They knew that evangelical conversion was not unconditional, so in order to uphold their new proposition they had to sever conversion from regeneration, or to say that "strictly defined regeneration" excluded conversion but "broadly defined regeneration" included conversion. In the bible, however, it is clear that regeneration begins in conversion.

Hernandez wrote further:

"On the other hand, mainly using the Scriptures, Augustine also pointed to the external nature of grace. Grace as an external influence resonates, convinces, and draws humans to God’s offer of salvation." 

That summarizes my view as expressed in the previous chapter, and I am a Calvinist in the Augustinian tradition. Any Calvinist who believes that the preaching of the gospel is a means in regeneration or rebirth must believe in prevenient grace, for the gospel is the means of saving grace.

Hernandez wrote further:

"According to Augustine, external incentives on human perceptions will work by “evangelical exhortation” of the Church and “the commands of the law.” Then, the preaching of the Word and the Law rebukes humans of their frailties and advises them of their necessity of God’s grace. This is important because at this point Augustine concurs with Pelagius that the preaching of the Gospel and the commandment of the law have a role as external means of prevenient grace to make humans willing to believe. However, unlike Pelagius, Augustine strongly refuses to limit grace to these external aids. Grace is primordial to any human actions because God “in all things prevents [precedes] us with His mercy.” (pg. 103-04)

We have seen in previous chapters where many Calvinists agree in affirming that God uses the law to show men their guilt and thus be a means to lead them to Christ for justification. This was constantly preached by the Puritan Calvinists in their ideas about preparationism. They also saw the gospel, of course, as a means of grace and regeneration, and that being so, it is only a means for salvation for those who believe the gospel. We also saw how God uses the law, gospel, and providential events to humble sinners, to awaken them and get their attention, so as to lead them to Christ and salvation.

Hernandez wrote further about Augustine's view on prevenient grace:

"Prevenient grace results in a series of spiritual effects that lead humans to salvation. Prevenient grace liberates, empowers, and heals human freedom of will. Augustine assures that “by grace the healing of the soul from the disease of sin” and the “cure of the will” occurs, resulting in the establishment of the freedom of will. So, for Augustine, freedom of will is clearly not the result of nature, but the result of grace. Despite the corruption of the human will, prevenient grace gives humans a new supernatural predisposition that prompts the will before an individual ever wills. Then, grace frees, heals, and enables human free will, not only enlarging a person’s area of choice but by substituting the evil desires with a system of good choices."

I don't know whether it is true to say that Augustine believed that "prevenient grace liberates, empowers, and heals human freedom of will" prior to being regenerated. However, it is true that God works in the hearts of the elect, prior to salvation, "to will," as we have seen. The moment the will is changed is the moment the sinner is reborn. 

Many Calvinists simply make untenable assumptions about the implications of the doctrine of human depravity that are not sound and this leads them to embrace other unbiblical ideas. 

Hernandez wrote further:

"Another important spiritual effect of prevenient grace is faith. According to Augustine, prevenient grace moves human freedom of will toward faith. Because grace has already liberated free will, it is now able to exercise faith. Faith, like free will, for Augustine is therefore a gift of grace. God’s prevenient grace is the indispensable key that enables depraved persons to become spiritually alive again and believe in God. Augustine states that “by faith [comes] the acquisition of grace against sin, by grace the healing of the soul from the disease of sin, by the health of the soul freedom of will, by free will the love of righteousness.” Although faith is the source of grace and it is “in our own power,” Augustine scripturally clarifies that “there is no power but comes from God (Rom 13:1).” Then, everywhere in his writing, Augustine emphasizes that faith is rightly regarded as a gift of grace. Quoting two passages of Paul in 2 Timothy 4:7 and 1 Corinthians 7:25, Augustine concludes that “even faith itself cannot be had without God’s mercy, and that it is the gift of God.”

I would rather say, as previously stated, that though God operates on the will of sinners prior to their salvation, the will is not freed until it receives Christ. A sinner is not said to be free from bondage until he has been joined to Christ, until he has been enslaved by Christ. So wrote Paul:

"But God be thanked that though you were slaves of sin, yet you obeyed from the heart that form of doctrine to which you were delivered. And having been set free from sin, you became slaves of righteousness." (Rom. 6: 17-18 nkjv) 

The sinner is a slave to sin, which includes his will being enslaved, until he obeys from the heart that form of doctrine to which he was delivered, at which point his will is no longer enslaved to sin but enslaved to Christ and his teaching.

Under "Prevenient Grace in the Theology of the Protestant Reformation" (pg. 131) Hernandez wrote:

"A consideration of the way in which an individual turns away from sin to grace and submission to God was a central focus of the Reformers. In this context, the role of human will and God’s sovereign grace increasingly become a point of contention. On this topic, Martin Luther and John Calvin shared similar views, namely that later developments came to a more rigid and limited understanding of the role of free will in the work of salvation. They emphasized God’s sovereign grace and human weakness to do something to receive salvation to the point that it appears that humanity is only a passive agent in the whole process of redemption. 

It may "appear" that Calvinism with its view of human depravity leads to a sinner being entirely passive in being saved, but this is not so. I have read Luther's "Bondage of the Will" and find nothing to disagree with. As stated, the will is not liberated until it is "taken captive" by Christ at the time Christ chooses. So testified Paul in II Corinthians 10: 4-5, saying that the thoughts, which would include the will, are by the Lord, through his instruments, "brought into captivity to the obedience of Christ." It is said of Satan that he similarly "takes captive" sinners "to do his will," by his traps. Surely Christ is able to do the same, to liberate the will from Satan and sin and to bring it into conformity to his will. (II Tim. 2: 26)

Hernandez wrote:

"Calvin clearly affirmed the anticipation of grace to the human will in salvation. For him—and I would say for Arminius—it cannot be otherwise because the depravity of the will is so profound that it “cannot move and act except in the direction of evil.” It is this depraved will that is in need of conversion." (pg. 135)

God begins to operate on the will of lost sinners prior to his saving them, but the will is not freed from sin until Christ takes it captive.

Prevenient Grace (14)

"All that the Father gives Me will come to Me, and the one who comes to Me I will by no means cast out."

"Jesus therefore answered and said to them, “Do not murmur among yourselves. No one can come to Me unless the Father who sent Me draws him; and I will raise him up at the last day. It is written in the prophets, ‘And they shall all be taught by God.’ Therefore everyone who has heard and learned from the Father comes to Me." (John 6: 37; 43-45 nkjv)

In John chapter six we have this order for the salvation process: 1) Father speaks to sinners, 2) Father teaches sinners, 3) Father draws sinners, 4) those spoken to, taught, and drawn by the Father, come to Jesus, and it is when the sinner comes to Jesus that he is united to Christ, then justified, forgiven, born again, regenerated, saved, washed, sanctified, etc.

If this order is correct, then items one through three occur before salvation and are therefore preparations or means for salvation, or instances of prevenient grace. Those Calvinists who deny any kind of prevenient grace or preparatory experiences prior to "regeneration," and who push regeneration back to the very first thing the Spirit does in effecting regeneration, are forced to say that the "drawing" of the Father in John 6: 44 is regeneration. In doing this they must say that "coming to Christ" is not regeneration, but is rather a post regeneration experience denoting evangelical conversion consisting of repentance and faith. By this paradigm they create several insurmountable difficulties.

Those Calvinists who deny in toto prevenient grace or preparatory working of God leading to regeneration will say that regeneration takes place prior to coming to Jesus, in the drawing and hearing and teaching of the Father, but that is a mistake. The workings of the Father prior to a sinner's coming to Christ are works that lead to regeneration, salvation, or new birth. It is highly unbiblical to say that a sinner is spiritually alive before he comes to Jesus or prior to his being joined to Christ by faith. "Coming to Jesus" is synonymous with believing in and receiving of Christ and is when a sinner is united to Christ, what Paul called being "joined to the Lord" (I Cor. 6: 17). There can be no spiritual life without union with Christ and this union is by faith. So testified the apostle John, who wrote: "He who has the Son has life; he who does not have the Son of God does not have life." (I John 5: 12 nkjv)

One cannot "have" the Son until he "receives" the Son by faith. The word in the Greek for "receive" (lambano) means to actively take hold of, to embrace, to accept a gift that is given. Faith is the hand that receives the gift of eternal life. Some Calvinists say that sinners passively receive spiritual life, but the Greek word for receive never means a passive receiving but an active receiving, being a verb in the active voice.

All this being true, then the drawing, teaching, and learning of the Father is what precedes obtaining spiritual life. These then are things that are preparatory to regeneration and examples of prevenient grace. Jesus himself said to those who rejected him: "But you are not willing to come to Me that you may have life." (John 5: 40 nkjv) Coming to Jesus is in order to receive spiritual life. Such Hyper Calvinists must have the text to rather say - "you do not come to me because you do not have spiritual life."

So, in the above teaching of Jesus, we have the divine order. First we have the work of the Father in teaching and drawing, then the coming to Christ by faith as a result of that work, and then union with Christ and receiving spiritual or eternal life.

Is Coming to Jesus Regeneration?

John Gill wrote the following in his commentary on John 5: 40, and the words of Jesus to the unregenerate sinners who opposed him - "you will not come to me that you might have life":

"...but a spiritual coming to Christ, or a coming to him by faith is here meant; in which sense the phrase is frequently used in this Gospel, especially in the next chapter; see John 6:35; and those who come aright to Christ, come to him as the alone, able, suitable, and sufficient Saviour; and in themselves as sinners, and ready to perish; and as such they are received by him with a welcome...that ye might have life; that is, eternal life...and all that come to Christ by faith may, and shall have it: this is the will of the Father, the end of his giving of Christ, and of his mission and coming into the world, and is inseparably connected with believing in him."

When anything is drawn it is drawn away from something and to something else. A thing cannot be said to have been drawn to something if it has not reached the point to which it is being drawn. You cannot therefore say that a sinner has been drawn until he has come to Christ. It is like the word "called." We can see two ways to interpret the word "called." If I call a person on the telephone, I can say that I called that person even when the person did not answer the call. On the other hand, by saying that we called a person may mean we called a person and that person answered our call. Can we say the same about God's drawing? Can we say that a sinner has been drawn when he has yet not been drawn away from point A and to point B? So, if the Father is drawing a sinner away from self and to Christ, can you say that the sinner has been drawn before he has come to Jesus? 

Surely the drawn person of the text is NOT someone who has been drawn or pulled by the Father to Christ but who has not come to Christ. The drawing is the cause and the effect is coming to Christ or believing in him. Many Calvinists wrongly equate the "drawing" of the text strictly with the action of the Father to the exclusion of the effect on the sinner (coming to Christ) and call that "regeneration." This is an error because "regeneration" (or its cognates quickening, rebirth, etc.) is not defined in the bible as strictly denoting the exertion of divine power (cause) but includes, or focuses upon, the effect upon sinners as a result of that drawing. In this post (here) I cited from Dr. Archibald Alexander (1772-1851), professor at Princeton Theological Seminary who addressed this very point. I cite from that post:

"Curious inquiries respecting the way in which the word is instrumental in the production of this change are not for edification. Sometimes regeneration is considered distinctly from the acts and exercises of the mind which proceed from it, but in the Holy Scriptures the cause and effect are included; and we shall therefore treat the subject in this practical and popular form. The instrumentality of the word can never derogate from the efficient agency of the Spirit in this work. The Spirit operates by and through the word. The word derives all its power and penetrating energy from the Spirit. Without the omnipotence of God the word would be as inefficient as clay and spittle, to restore sight to the blind."

If the scriptures teach that coming to Christ or believing in Christ is that action by which spiritual life is obtained (regeneration), then the doctrine of prevenient grace is established, for hearing and learning from the Father, and being drawn by him, precede a sinner's coming to Christ. Many Calvinists, such as I (contrary to what so many falsely say, i.e that "faith precedes regeneration") believe that faith precedes regeneration, and this was the view of Calvin himself, along with a host of other Calvinists we could cite. It is the Hyper Calvinist or semi Hyper Calvinist who says that regeneration precedes faith, that one has spiritual life before he has come to Christ. My Old Baptist Test, Baptist Gadfly, and Ordo Salutis Debate blogs are filled with citations from Calvinists who agreed with Calvin that sinners are born again by faith. If that position is true, and it surely is, then again we say that prevenient grace is proven, for it is evident, as before stated, that the teaching and drawing of the Father precede salvation. 

This of course does not mean that the Calvinistic idea of prevenient grace is the same as John Wesley's or as the Arminians. The Arminian view includes the idea that sinners are born with a depraved nature and with the guilt of original sin (generally the Calvinist view) and therefore lack the ability to repent, believe, convert, etc. In their paradigm of prevenient grace the chief idea is that God "enables" the sinner who hears the gospel to positively respond to it if he wills. Such prevenient grace alleviates enough of the inability of the inherited depravity as to make it possible for sinners to believe and be converted. These are called "Classical Arminians." They would agree with my thesis that says that God, through various means, does things in the hearts and minds and lives of sinners prior to being saved and that they are instances of prevenient grace, but they add the tenet about negating depravity or inability enough through prevenient grace to make it possible for sinners to repent and believe and be saved. 

My view, and that of other Calvinists, sees the Wesleyan view to be a non-biblical concept of common or prevenient grace. We have addressed that point previously, stating rather that the power to believe for salvation attends the word of God and is not some power or ability given previously to hearing and believing the word or gospel of God. I cited from several Calvinistic sources that said that there is no power to believe in sinners prior to believing. When Jesus said to the man with the paralyzed and impotent arm to "stretch forth thine hand" (Matt. 12: 13, etc.) the power attended the word spoken so that the man was able to stretch forth his hand. When a sinner is saved by the gospel message it is because the word came not "in word only but in power and in the Holy Spirit." (I Thess. 1: 5)

Will All Be Drawn? How?

"And I, if I be lifted up from the earth, will draw all men unto me." (John 12: 32 kjv)

This is another text that is often debated between Arminians and Calvinists. There are several questions that must be asked and answered in regard to it. First, who is meant by "all men"? Second, how does the Savior draw all men? Third, why is Jesus the one doing the drawing when in John 6: 44 it is the Father who does the drawing? Fourth, does the verse imply that no one was drawn prior to Christ being "lifted up"? Fifth, is everyone who is called by the Lord through the gospel drawn by the Lord? And vice versa? Sixth, when Christ says that he "will" or "shall" draw all men, does he mean that he will draw even those who do not come to Christ, or does he mean that all who he draws will in fact be drawn to Christ and saved? Recall what we said about calling a person on the telephone. Seventh, is this drawing of either the Father or the Son irresistible? Eighth, what makes the drawing successful? 

First, I don't think that many bible students will affirm that infants and idiots are included in the "all men" of the text. Second, I also don't think that many bible believers will deny that old testament believers were drawn by either the Father or Christ and saved thereby. Third, I think that most Arminians and Calvinists alike will say that the drawing by the Father or the Son is done through the Spirit's use of the gospel or word of God. That being so, "all men" would be limited to those people who have heard the gospel and would not include any who lived and died without hearing the word of God. A person who is called to salvation is called by grace and by the gospel and this calling involves the drawing. The question - "are all drawn by the Father (via the gospel)?" is essentially the same question as "are all called by the Father (via the gospel)?" 

In answer to question number three above we think that the Father had been doing the drawing and the teaching that leads to salvation during the old testament period, but that since then the Father has been doing the drawing through the Son. Now let us return to these verses:

"No one can come to Me unless the Father who sent Me draws him; and I will raise him up at the last day. It is written in the prophets, ‘And they shall all be taught by God.’ Therefore everyone who has heard and learned from the Father comes to Me."

Calvinists generally teach that only the elect, those chosen by the Father before the world began and given by the Father to Christ as a covenant gift, will be the only ones drawn and that all who are drawn will be successfully drawn, and that this drawing cannot be successfully resisted. Arminians, however, teach that God draws all men by the Gospel but it more often than not fails to succeed, the success of the drawing being dependent upon the "free will" of the lost sinner. What therefore can we deduce from the above passages that will help us decide who is right on this question? 

Jesus plainly says in John 6: 37 (cited at the head of this chapter) that "All that the Father gives Me will come to Me." Notice that he did not say "all that the Father draws will come to me." What we can be certain about is that all who are given by the Father to Christ (generally believed to be those who the Father chose to salvation before the world began) will be drawn successfully by the gospel. That can be true and yet it also be true that those not chosen are also drawn though not successfully. 

If we equate the "drawing" of the Father with the speaking and teaching of the Father then it seems that all who are drawn will in fact be drawn to Christ, will come to Christ in faith and repentance. This is because Christ said "EVERYONE who has heard and learned of the Father comes unto me" will be "raised up at the last day." However, that may not be the case if we recall what we said about calling a person on the telephone. A person may be said to have been called when another person has called that person but got no answer from the person called, as well as to those who actually answered the call. Likewise, by the words "everyone who has heard and learned of the Father" may refer to those who have actually and savingly heard and learned, rather than referring to those who have heard but failed to learn. "Those who have heard and learned" are words similar to the words "those who have been called on the telephone." 

The next question to consider is whether the word "draw" means to drag irresistibly. In the bible the word draw is used of drawing water, drawing fish nets, drawing a sword, drawing or dragging criminals to jail. In all these cases there is no failure to successfully draw a thing when the power exerted in drawing exceeds the resistance. Drawing involves pulling and attracting. Magnets draw metals. If the metal is large and the magnet small, the magnet will be unable to successfully draw the metal though it is pulling it. So, as we have said in previous chapters, in the case of the elect God exerts greater power in drawing them to Christ. In thinking about how drawing is like an attraction, we observe that people are often attracted to something spontaneously and successfully or irresistibly. Beautiful things have this power of attraction. 

Salvation is in coming to Christ via faith and repentance and being thereby united to him. This being true, the speaking, teaching, and drawing of the Father are preparatory means or instances of prevenient grace and so the view of some Calvinists that the drawing is regeneration even before one has come to Christ is a serious error that has adverse consequences. Those given by the Father to Christ (the elect) will all be effectually drawn to Christ. 

Prevenient Grace (13)

Another passage worth considering in regard to either common grace or prevenient grace is the following. We will begin with these words of the apostle Peter:

"For if, after they have escaped the pollutions of the world through the knowledge of the Lord and Savior Jesus Christ, they are again entangled in them and overcome, the latter end is worse for them than the beginning. For it would have been better for them not to have known the way of righteousness, than having known it, to turn from the holy commandment delivered to them. But it has happened to them according to the true proverb: “A dog returns to his own vomit,” and, “a sow, having washed, to her wallowing in the mire.” (II Peter 2: 20-22 nkjv)

Christians debate whether the believers described above were true Christians or hypocrites, or false professors of the faith. I believe, like other Calvinists, that they are not true believers. That being the case, my argument for prevenient grace is directed to those Calvinists who deny prevenient grace, and the reason for calling attention to this text is in order to show that even lost sinners may receive some benefit or grace even by hearing the gospel and making a profession of faith. In the last chapter we called attention to those Calvinists who believe that the characters described in Hebrews 6: 4-6 who fell away were not truly saved people but false professors. We did this to show how they, by this interpretation, affirm that unsaved people may be "enlightened" to the truth of the gospel, may be "partakers of the Holy Spirit," may have "tasted of the good word of God and the powers of the age to come," and who can deny that these things are instances of grace?

Barnes in his commentary wrote (emphasis mine):

"For if after they have escaped the pollutions of the world - This does not necessarily mean that they had been true Christians, and had fallen from grace. People may outwardly reform, and escape from the open corruptions which prevail around them, or which they had themselves practiced, and still have no true grace at heart.

Through the knowledge of the Lord and Saviour Jesses Christ - Neither does This imply that they were true Christians, or that they had ever had any saving knowledge of the Redeemer. There is a knowledge of the doctrines and duties of religion which may lead sinners to abandon their outward vices, which has no connection with saving grace. They may profess religion, and may Know enough of religion to understand that it requires them to abandon their vicious habits, and still never be true Christians."

Gill in his commentary wrote:

"these, men may escape, abstain from, and outwardly reform, with respect unto, and yet be destitute of the grace of God; so that this can be no instance of the final and total apostasy of real saints; for the house may be swept and garnished with an external reformation; persons may be outwardly righteous before men, have a form of godliness and a name to live, and yet be dead in trespasses and sins; all which they may have through the knowledge of the Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ...by which "knowledge" is meant, not a spiritual experimental knowledge of Christ, for that is eternal life, the beginning, pledge, and earnest of it; but a notional knowledge of Christ, or a profession of knowledge of him, for it may be rendered "acknowledgment"; or rather the Gospel of Christ, which, being only notionally received, may have such an effect on men, as outwardly to reform their lives, at least in some instances, and for a while, in whose hearts it has no place."

So, here again we see how the gospel may have a positive effect on those who are never saved by it, and these positives are instances of prevenient grace. To know the truth, even if one does not fully or savingly embrace it, is an instance of prevenient grace. However, the apostle does say "it would have been better for them not to have known the way of righteousness" in view of their turning from it. He also says that the result of the apostasy of these temporary believers was that the latter end is "worse than the beginning." That is true because they become more antagonistic to the Christian faith. My point, however, is to show that "escaping the pollutions of the world" and having "known the way of righteousness" and having "turned to the holy commandment" are things that are experienced by even false professors. This only shows that divine blessings may turn into divine curses, but does not deny that knowing the way of the Lord is a gracious thing in itself. Jesus said of Judas that "it was better that he had never been born." (Matt. 26: 24) That statement does not negate the fact that Judas benefited from both common and prevenient grace by his having been with Christ during the ministry of Christ.

Some Grace is Given Conditionally

Here are some verses that show that grace is given conditionally. So, we are combating the error that says that grace is always irresistible and successful and is always given unconditionally. God's gifts are instances of God's grace. However, many reject these gifts, and many who receive them receive no lasting benefit from them.

"Let us therefore come boldly unto the throne of grace, that we may obtain mercy, and find grace to help in time of need." (Heb. 4: 16 kjv)

"Now when the congregation was broken up, many of the Jews and religious proselytes followed Paul and Barnabas: who, speaking to them, persuaded them to continue in the grace of God." (Acts 13: 43 kjv)

"But as you abound in everything—in faith, in speech, in knowledge, in all diligence, and in your love for us—see that you abound in this grace also." (II Cor. 8: 7 nkjv)

"But He gives more grace. Therefore He says: “God resists the proud, But gives grace to the humble." (Jam. 4: 6 nkjv)

Grace is available to both believers and unbelievers. Some however do not avail themselves of the grace that God has made available. They do not go to the throne of grace. They do not come to Christ who is "full of grace and truth." (John 1: 17) They do not humble themselves before the Lord and so do not receive grace. They hear the gospel or word of God, a grace of God, and yet do not take heed to it. The above texts indicate that grace is given to those who seek it and continue in it. Notice these verses that uphold this truth:

"Having then gifts differing according to the grace that is given to us, whether prophecy, let us prophesy according to the proportion of faith; Or ministry, let us wait on our ministering: or he that teacheth, on teaching; Or he that exhorteth, on exhortation: he that giveth, let him do it with simplicity; he that ruleth, with diligence; he that sheweth mercy, with cheerfulness." (Rom. 12: 6-8 kjv)

"But unto every one of us is given grace according to the measure of the gift of Christ." (Eph. 4: 7 kjv)

This is said to believers and the "grace" that "is given" is one of several gifts or talents given to each believer in Jesus. The exhortation of the apostle to each believer is to not neglect the grace given to them but to use that grace (gift) for the edification of others and the glory of God. Though these various gifts are given by God's grace, and each one being a grace, yet the reward enjoyed by being "stewards" of these gifts, "stewards of the manifold grace of God" (I Peter 4: 10) is conditioned upon being good stewards of those graces. In doing this believers will receive even more grace. So the apostle John wrote: "And of His fullness we have all received, and grace for grace." (John 1: 16 nkjv) This verse is also applicable to those who are enjoying common grace or experiencing prevenient grace. Prevenient grace will often bring saving grace, and saving grace will often bring the gifts of grace mentioned above. James also affirmed this truth when he said "But He gives more grace. Therefore He says: “God resists the proud, But gives grace to the humble." (Jam. 4: 6 nkjv) Not only is humbling oneself before God a means of grace but so too is faith. Wrote the apostle Paul:

"Therefore it is of faith, that it might be by grace; to the end the promise might be sure to all the seed; not to that only which is of the law, but to that also which is of the faith of Abraham; who is the father of us all." (Rom. 4: 16 kjv)

This text is in agreement with Ephesians 2: 8 where the same apostle said "for by grace are you saved through faith." But, as we have seen, faith is a gift of God's grace. In Acts 18: 27 we are told of those who had "believed through grace." So the grace of faith brings saving grace, which is an example of "grace for grace." Some Calvinists may object to this view of things and say that if saving grace is conditioned upon any act of the sinner, then this would equate with being saved by works and invalidate grace, using the following as their proof-text: 

"Even so then, at this present time there is a remnant according to the election of grace. And if by grace, then it is no longer of works; otherwise grace is no longer grace. But if it is of works, it is no longer grace; otherwise work is no longer work." (Rom. 11: 5-6 nkjv)

Notice that the apostle did not say "if it is of faith, then it is no longer grace." Had he had that idea in mind then he would have contradicted what he said in Romans 4: 16 (cited above). Further, in Romans chapter four he explicitly says that faith is not a work, saying "But to him who does not work but believes on Him who justifies the ungodly, his faith is accounted for righteousness." (Rom. 4: 5 nkjv) Further, as we have seen, faith in Christ is a gift of God and his grace, the grace of faith bringing saving grace. Also, we have shown that kinds of prevenient grace even preceded receiving the grace of faith. 

Falling From Grace

"I marvel that ye are so soon removed from him that called you into the grace of Christ unto another gospel." (Gal. 1: 6 nkjv)

"You have become estranged from Christ, you who attempt to be justified by law; you have fallen from grace." (Gal. 5: 4 nkjv)

It is clear from the first verse that by "the grace of Christ" is meant "the gospel of Christ." In previous chapters we have already seen how the gospel and word of God are gifts of God's grace, means of saving grace. For any believer in the gospel to turn from it and to embrace "another gospel" and "another Jesus" and "another Spirit" is to fall away from grace, fall away from the true gospel. (See II Cor. 11: 4) So, anyone who hears the gospel or has the word of God (bible) has grace in his possession.

In closing this chapter let us consider the exhortation of the apostle Peter who said:

"But grow in grace, and in the knowledge of our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ." (II Peter 3: 18 kjv)

Many Christians lack additional grace because they do not go to the throne of grace for it, do not humble themselves before the Lord in prayer for it, and do not choose to "grow in grace," and therefore do not receive "more grace." 

Prevenient Grace (12)

In the Old Testament, the Hebrew word for favor is "chen," which is often translated as grace. Favor is depicted as a divine blessing that results in prosperity, protection, and success. God is gracious and shows favor. One of the definitions of "grace" is "unmerited favor." Said Solomon: "He who finds a wife finds a good thing, And obtains favor from the LORD." (Prov. 18: 22 nkjv) This divine favor is a common grace, and makes us recall our mentioning Peter's words about husbands and wives being "heirs together of the grace of life." (I Peter 3: 7) Every good thing anyone possesses or enjoys in life is a divine favor and is an example of God's graciousness. Recall that Romans 2: 4 spoke of those depraved folk who "despise the riches of His goodness" (Rom. 2: 4), which goodness is an instance of common grace. James, the Lord's brother, wrote:

"Every good gift and every perfect gift is from above, and comes down from the Father of lights..." (James 1: 17 (nkjv)

Similarly John the Baptist said:

"John answered and said, “A man can receive nothing unless it has been given to him from heaven." (John 3: 27 (nkjv)

Every divine blessing is due to God's graciousness to the undeserving. So Christians sing - "Praise God from whom all blessings flow, praise him all creatures here below." We have seen that one of the purposes of these undeserved blessings was to lead lost sinners to repentance and to salvation and so common grace is intended to be a means of grace or prevenient grace. These good things that God gives to all, just and unjust, is because in doing this "He has not dealt with us according to our sins, Nor punished us according to our iniquities." (Psa. 103: 10 nkjv) 

In the preceding chapters we have seen where grace may be resisted, and we have also seen where it also may at times be irresistible. One of the objections some Calvinists make against the doctrine of prevenient grace is the assertion that whatever God begins to do with an intent that sinners be saved will never fail, or to affirm that grace is never resistible, but will always be successful. However, that is not true. Let us take a look at some scripture that shows this to be the case.

Grace May Be Resisted and Fail

"looking carefully lest anyone fall short of the grace of God; lest any root of bitterness springing up cause trouble, and by this many become defiled." (Heb. 12: 15 nkjv)

On this text John Gill wrote the following in his commentary:

"Lest any man fail of the grace of God; not the free favour and love of God in Christ, which is everlasting, unchangeable, and from whence there is no separation; nor the grace of God implanted in the heart in regeneration, which is incorruptible, never failing, but always remains, as do faith, hope, and love; but either the whole doctrine of the Gospel, which is a declaration of the grace of God; or particularly the doctrine of free justification by the righteousness of Christ, which men may receive in vain, and fall from, 2 Corinthians 6:1 to which these Hebrews might be prone..."

Concerning II Cor. 6: 1 we will have more to say shortly. Notice that Gill says that grace that has saved will never fail, which is true of God's special or abundant grace, for it always succeeds in its intended effects. But, he does acknowledge that "the whole doctrine of the Gospel" is a grace of God, to which we agree, having affirmed that "the grace of God" that has "appeared to all men" is the gospel. (Titus 2: 11) People "fail of the grace of God" when they resist it and are not saved by it. Every lost sinner who hears the gospel and rejects it is an instance of the grace of God failing, or of him "receiving the grace of God in vain." This failing of the grace of God brings a defilement, which is the height of irony seeing it was God's intention that his grace bring cleansing from sin. 

As we will see, this passage in Hebrews must be compared with what is said later in Hebrews chapter ten where the same inspired writer speaks of "insulting the Spirit of grace" and who are eternally condemned for so doing. On that passage we will have somewhat to say shortly.

Vincent, in his word studies, says: "Rend. "fall back from," implying a previous attainment. The present participle marks something in progress: "lest any one be falling back." Others, however, disagree, saying that the falling back denotes failing to receive the grace of God to begin with. So Barnes writes in his commentary (emphasis mine):

"Fail of the grace of God - Margin, "fail from." The Greek is, "lest any one be wanting or lacking" - ὑστερῶν husterōn. There is no intimation in the words used here that they already had grace and might fall away - whatever might be true about that - but that there was danger that they might be found at last to be deficient in that religion which was necessary to save them." 

The thing that must be ascertained about the text is what is the "grace of God" mentioned. Is it "saving grace," or is it the "grace" of the Gospel, a prevenient grace? If it is saving grace, does it mean failing to be saved by it or losing it after having been saved by it? I rather think it is talking about the grace of the gospel, being blessed to hear the good news, to have the means of salvation. In this case Vincent would be correct because everyone who hears the Gospel has obtained the grace of the means of salvation (a previous attainment) and those who reject it do fail of that prevenient grace. 

We must also address the statement of the writer that says "by this (or it) become defiled." Does this imply that the ones who fail of the grace of God were previously undefiled (thus saved)? It might seem so. I rather think it is a further defilement of minds and consciences. It is like the "hardening" of the heart. Many people who have a hard heart, as Pharaoh, are said to harden their hearts over and over again. Every time a sinner rejects the grace of the gospel he is further defiling his conscience. 

Insulting the Spirit of Grace

"For if we sin willfully after we have received the knowledge of the truth, there no longer remains a sacrifice for sins, but a certain fearful expectation of judgment, and fiery indignation which will devour the adversaries. Anyone who has rejected Moses’ law dies without mercy on the testimony of two or three witnesses. Of how much worse punishment, do you suppose, will he be thought worthy who has trampled the Son of God underfoot, counted the blood of the covenant by which he was sanctified a common thing, and insulted the Spirit of grace? For we know Him who said, “Vengeance is Mine, I will repay,” says the Lord. And again, “The Lord will judge His people.” It is a fearful thing to fall into the hands of the living God." (Heb. 10: 26-31 nkjv)

A thing that must be decided first about this text is what it means to have "received the knowledge of the truth." Are these words a description of those who are saved or simply of those who have heard the gospel or word of God preached? In the parable of the sower and the seed, or of the soils, all the four types of soils (signifying different people who hear the word of God) had received the seed of the word. However, not all of them were saved by merely hearing the word or receiving the seed. The first kind of hearer is described thusly:

“A sower went out to sow his seed. And as he sowed, some fell by the wayside; and it was trampled down, and the birds of the air devoured it...Now the parable is this: The seed is the word of God. Those by the wayside are the ones who hear; then the devil comes and takes away the word out of their hearts, lest they should believe and be saved." (Luke 8: 5, 11-12 nkjv)

Matthew writes it this way:

"When anyone hears the word of the kingdom, and does not understand it, then the wicked one comes and snatches away what was sown in his heart. This is he who received seed by the wayside." (Matt. 13: 19 nkjv)

Note these things about the wayside hearers of the word. First, they had "received" the seed or word of God. Second, they were never saved by it. By "receiving" the seed of the word is meant the hearing of the gospel of the kingdom. So, by itself, the words in the Hebrew text, "after we have received a knowledge of the truth" do not in themselves denote a saved state. The greater difficulty for those who believe that a person once saved can never lose that salvation are the other descriptors in the text, which are "counted the blood of the covenant wherewith he was sanctified" and "insulted the Spirit of grace" and "the Lord will judge his people." 

We must first realize that several of the descriptors may be applicable 1) to people who hear the gospel but who never believe it, and 2) to people who initially believe the word, become professing Christians, but who were never truly saved, being what we call "hypocrites." The latter kind are described in the parable of the soils in this way:

"Some fell on stony places, where they did not have much earth; and they immediately sprang up because they had no depth of earth. But when the sun was up they were scorched, and because they had no root they withered away....But he who received the seed on stony places, this is he who hears the word and immediately receives it with joy; yet he has no root in himself, but endures only for a while. For when tribulation or persecution arises because of the word, immediately he stumbles." (Matt. 13: 5-6, 20-21 nkjv)

Luke describes these stony ground hearers in these words:

"But the ones on the rock are those who, when they hear, receive the word with joy; and these have no root, who believe for a while and in time of temptation fall away." (Luke 8: 13 nkjv) 

The stony ground hearers are said to not only hear and receive the word but to believe it for a while. No doubt these are the ones Paul is describing in the Hebrews passage above. Many affirm that these shallow ground believers were genuine believers and had been truly saved. However, that is not what Christ intended to teach. The description of the shallow ground hearers forbids us believing that such were truly saved. First, they did not receive the word with an honest and good heart, the only one so doing was the one who had a good and honest heart styled "good ground." Second, the seed was received in shallow soil, and never took deep root, and never brought forth fruit, but soon perished because of that fact. Third, Jesus himself identified these shallow ground believers as not really being saved when he said:

"Therefore take heed how you hear. For whoever has, to him more will be given; and whoever does not have, even what he seems to have will be taken from him.” (Luke 8: 18 nkjv)

These words tell us that it is important to "hear" the word rightly. It suggests that many will hear the word in a manner that does not truly save, and may be received superficially, accepted in the mind but not in the heart. They also tell us that those who receive the word or knowledge of the truth may only be seemingly saved, and that they may have taken away from them not what they really have, but what they only seemingly had. It is this kind of believer that Paul is likely referring to in the above passage from Hebrews chapter ten. That being so, then they only seemingly had been "sanctified" by the "blood of the covenant" and were only seemingly the Lord's people. With all that said, let us return now and notice that lost sinners may not be genuinely saved by prevenient grace, by the grace of the gospel. By having "insulted the Spirit of grace" and "counted" or judged the blood of Christ a common thing, they showed that their previous faith was not saving faith but a hypocritical or seeming one.

Are They The Real Thing?

"For it is impossible for those who were once enlightened, and have tasted the heavenly gift, and have become partakers of the Holy Spirit, and have tasted the good word of God and the powers of the age to come, if they fall away, to renew them again to repentance, since they crucify again for themselves the Son of God, and put Him to an open shame." (Heb. 6: 4-6 nkjv)

This text has not only divided Arminians and Calvinists on the question of whether a truly born again child of God can so sin so as to lose salvation, but it has also divided Calvinists who believe that all the truly saved will persevere in their allegiance to Christ. Some Calvinists say that the ones described as falling away are not genuine believers, but hypocrites and false professors. Others, as I do, affirm that the description given of the characters under consideration are indeed truly saved people, and contend that the "if" is an "if" of reason, like when Paul said "if the dead rise not, then..." (I Cor. 15: 16)

If you are a Calvinist who believes that the characters Paul describes are fake believers and you also deny any kind of prevenient grace or pre-regeneration work of God in a sinner, then how do you explain how these characters could be "enlightened"? Could have "tasted the heavenly gift" and "the good words of God" and "the powers of the age to come"? Could have "become partakers of the Holy Spirit"? Are these things not good? Are they not the result of God's working and of prevenient grace? If these things can be experienced by sinners, then you must agree that they preceded salvation.

Receiving the Grace of God in Vain

"We then, as workers together with Him also plead with you not to receive the grace of God in vain." (II Cor. 6: 1 nkjv)

On this passage Barnes in his commentary rightly says (emphasis mine):

"That ye receive not the grace of God in vain - The "grace of God" here means evidently the gracious offer of reconciliation and pardon. And the sense is, "We entreat you not to neglect or slight this offer of pardon, so as to lose the benefit of it, and be lost. It is offered freely and fully. It may be partaken of by all, and all may be saved. But it may also be slighted, and all the benefits of it will then be lost." The sense is, that it was possible that this offer might be made to them, they might hear of a Saviour, be told of the plan of reconciliation and have the offers of mercy pressed on their attention and acceptance, and yet all be in vain. They might notwithstanding all this be lost, for simply to hear of the plan of salvation or the offers of mercy, will no more save a sinner than to hear of medicine will save the sick. It must be embraced and applied, or it will be in vain. It is true that Paul probably addressed this to those who were professors of religion; and the sense is, that they should use all possible care and anxiety lest these offers should have been made in vain."

John Gill in his commentary wrote (emphasis mine):

"...that ye receive not the grace of God in vain: by "the grace of God", is not meant the grace of God in regeneration, and effectual calling, which can never be received in vain; for the grace of God never fails of producing a thorough work of conversion; nor is it ever lost, but is strictly connected with eternal, glory: but by it is meant either the doctrine of grace, the Gospel of Christ, so called, because it is a declaration of the love and grace of God to sinners, ascribes salvation in part, and in whole, to the free grace of God, and is a means of implanting and increasing grace in the hearts of men. Now this may be received in vain by ministers and people, when it is but notionally received, or received in word only: when it is abused and perverted to vile purposes, and when men drop, deny it, and fall off from it..."

Both these able theologians affirm that the gospel is a grace of God. They also acknowledge that it is what precedes being saved, and thus is an instance of prevenient grace. When it is rejected it is received in vain, which was the case of the shallow ground hearers/receivers of the word. When those who seemingly receive this grace later fall away from it, then they too had received the grace of God in vain.