Feeds:
Posts
Comments

Archive for the ‘reformed baptist’ Category

(Laughter) “Do You Really Think You Save Anybody Here?”

Posted in Indian River Baptist Church, Prison Ministry, reformed baptist, Truth, tagged , , on February 7, 2013 | Leave a Comment »

 Hebrews 7:25 (ESV)

25 Consequently, he is able to save to the uttermost those who draw near to God through him, since he always lives to make intercession for them.  

That was the response I received from a corrections officer as I was being escorted across the compound on my way to attend the weekly prisoner gathering early in 2012.

This arose as the officer took me across the grass instead of walking on the sidewalk and I had commented that I had been coming in for 15 years and that the prior week had been the first time I had been allowed to walk on the grass (which is against prison policy) and now this was the second time in two weeks I had been escortedktf in that manner.  The officer then asked me, “How long did you say you’ve been doing this?”  I said, “Fifteen years,” which elicited the response above.

The officer then asked me if I knew what “these guys” (prisoners) are like and I said I understood what was meant.  I tried (in the 15 seconds we had left) to explain what I do and why I do it and the response was just, “All I know is that when I’m old and don’t remember much, I’m going to remember some of the things I’ve seen here because they’ll never get out of my mind.”

Not having been a corrections officer of member of prison staff, I cannot pretend to know what she has seen in her time at that prison – which she said was almost the same as my fifteen years (at that time) of volunteer service.

Yes, many corrections staff see us as “Bible-thumpers” and “do-gooders.”  That’s OK.  If they are as yet unregenerate, one could expect nothing less and I don’t mean that in a derogatory manner.  It’s just a fact.  They – if unregenerate – cannot understand why we do what we do there.  Yes, one cannot deny that some prisoners feel that same way as we hear the mocking comments from prisoners who may be walking on the same sidewalks we walk or from prisoners well across the prison yard.

Several years ago I had occasion to have a conversation with an officer who had been one of those who checked us in every week.  That officer happened to mention that some of the prisoners who attended our study mocked us (volunteers) after we left.  Whether it was said truthfully or just to get a rise out of me, I don’t know, but my response was, “I don’t care.  As long as they’ll let me, I’m coming in here.”  The officer then responded, “You know, that’s exactly the attitude you should have.”

Chippewa Correctional Facility-EastThen I told the officer, “I know some of your colleagues aren’t too wild about us coming in here, either.”  ”Yeah,” she said, “you’re right about that.  There are some who wish you guys would just go away.”  The officer was a little taken aback when I said, “Well, I don’t come in here to make the staff happy.  I come in here because I have a message to bring and I’m coming as long as they let me whether the staff likes it or not.”  Her response?  I was then the one surprised.

“That’s exactly the attitude you should have.”

Unbelieving staff members cannot understand why someone would do what we do.  The comment in the title – “Do you think you really save anybody here?” – is a common one, whether spoken or not.  That’s OK.  We go there to proclaim a message.  We’re not the ones who bring dead people to life.  We’re the ones who proclaim a message which Almighty God uses to bring those dead people to life.  We understand we are inconvenience to them – officers have to walk up to half a mile in escorting us in and out and when it’s below zero and the wind is howling, that’s a long walk – for both of us.

We indeed don’t save anybody in there – but we proclaim the message of the One who can – and does – save, and He saves to the uttermost.

Read Full Post »

Free Will Friday: Jim McClarty – Sovereignty, Puppetry and Free Will

Posted in Calvinism, Free Will, Indian River Baptist Church, reformed baptist, tagged , , on November 2, 2012 | 2 Comments »

From Jim McClarty, pastor of Grace Christian Assembly.  See the bottom for a link to Jim’s free book, “By Grace Alone.”

—————-

Hello Pastor Jim,

Recently I have been watching your videos on YouTube of your messages and sermons about the Sovereignty of God, Calvinism, predestination, and Reformed Theology.

I am greatly encouraged by the messages but still confused because of how I was raised. People in the church I attended said Calvinists do not evangelize and they [Calvinists] think people are robots with no free will to love God.

So here are my questions:

  1. Are all events on earth already preordained by God?
  2. Do we have a “free will?”
  3. Are we robots already programmed?
  4. How does the aspect of love play into this if we are just puppets?

Reply:

I understand your perplexity.  It takes time to sort through the things you’ve been taught and separate traditions from valid doctrines. One of the most difficult aspects of learning and embracing what the Bible actually says is un-learning our traditions, assumptions, and presuppositions.

The things that you’ve written here are typical responses to Calvinism.  For instance, people who do not know their church history will often claim that Calvinism inhibits evangelism.  But nothing could be further from the truth.  The fact is, some of the greatest revivals in history were led by Calvinists.  The first universities planted on U.S. soil were established by Calvinists.  Some of the most enduring missionary societies were established by Calvinists.  So, the claim that Calvinists do not evangelize is mere folly.

The following bit of history is from my book By Grace Alone (which is available as a free pdf download on the GCA website), including a pericope from David Steinmetz’s bookCalvin in Context.

Calvinism, as it is commonly called, has a rich European history, but it finds its most striking influence during the foundation of these United States. Owing to Martin Luther’s commitment to reform, the church that bears his name was founded on the teaching of God’s election and determinate predestination. John Knox, the founder of the Presbyterian Church, held these doctrines. Early American history reveals that the vast majority of the Pilgrims who landed at Plymouth Rock were Calvinistic Presbyterians. The Congregationalist Churches of early America were once bound by these doctrines. And the original Baptists were avid predestinarians, which is why their modern counterparts advertise themselves as “Free-Will Baptists” to distinguish themselves from their ancestors.

This English Calvinist strain was strengthened by the Dutch Calvinists of New York and New Jersey, the German Reformed of Pennsylvania and Maryland, and the Scots-Irish Presbyterians who settled in the mid-Atlantic and southern colonies.While not all settlers in the New World were Protestant and not all Protestants were Calvinist, nevertheless there was from the very beginning a strongly Calvinist influence on American thought and institutions. Calvinists founded universities, pioneered the New England town meeting, insisted on the separation of powers in the federal government, played a prominent role in the movement for the abolition of slavery, and even promoted such characteristic institutions of frontier revivalism as ‘the anxious bench’ and the ‘camp-meeting’… In short, although Calvinism is not the only ingredient in American intellectual and religious history, it is such an important ingredient that no one can claim to understand American history and culture without some appreciation of its Calvinist heritage.

Or, let’s look at it this way:  Calvinistic theology is drawn directly from biblical, Pauline doctrine.  Of all the New Testament writers, Paul wrote the most complete arguments in favor of God’s absolute predestination and electing grace.  Yet, Paul devoted his life, his wealth, his health, and everything in him to the work of evangelism.  Calvinists follow Paul’s example.  We teach everything that the Bible says and we do everything that the Bible instructs.  We evangelize vigorously because we do not know who God’s elect are.  And in reality, Calvinism inspires evangelism because we know that God’s word will not return to Him void; it will accomplish what God intends for it to accomplish.

So will My word be which goes forth from My mouth; It will not return to Me empty, without accomplishing what I desire, and without succeeding in the matter for which I sent it. (Isa. 55:11)

So we preach the good news full of hope and expectation.  By contrast, a person who believes in man’s autonomous free will has to fight the uphill battle of trying to convince someone to make a decision that is completely contrary to their nature and self-interest.  The Calvinist is convinced that only the power of God changing a person from the inside will result in salvation.  Therefore, the only tool we need is the truth of God’s word.  And we know His word will be successful; His people are out there and they will respond.  That takes a tremendous weight of pressure off of our shoulders and places responsibility for salvation exactly where it belongs — in God’s hands.

As for the robot argument, this YouTube sermon may help: http://youtu.be/ZJTjBg-QJ78

Basically, when someone poses the “robot” argument (also known as the “that would make us puppets” argument), it’s evidence that they have a sub-biblical anthropology.  They think human beings are essentially good, capable, and willing to follow God if you just give them sufficient inducement.  But, the Bible says just the opposite.  Psalm 53 and Romans 3 come to mind.

God has looked down from heaven upon the sons of men to see if there is anyone who understands, who seeks after God.  Every one of them has turned aside; together they have become corrupt; There is no one who does good, not even one. (Psalm 53:2-3)

As it is written, “THERE IS NONE RIGHTEOUS, NOT EVEN ONE; THERE IS NONE WHO UNDERSTANDS, THERE IS NONE WHO SEEKS FOR GOD; ALL HAVE TURNED ASIDE, TOGETHER THEY HAVE BECOME USELESS; THERE IS NONE WHO DOES GOOD,     THERE IS NOT EVEN ONE. THEIR THROAT IS AN OPEN GRAVE, WITH THEIR TONGUES THEY KEEP DECEIVING, THE POISON OF ASPS IS UNDER THEIR LIPS; WHOSE MOUTH IS FULL OF CURSING AND BITTERNESS; THEIR FEET ARE SWIFT TO SHED BLOOD, DESTRUCTION AND MISERY ARE IN THEIR PATHS, AND THE PATH OF PEACE THEY HAVE NOT KNOWN. THERE IS NO FEAR OF GOD BEFORE THEIR EYES.” (Romans 3:10-18)

In the YouTube video, I reviewed the various New Testament passages that describe the human condition from God’s point of view.  You mentioned previously that you have been taught that Calvinism eliminates man’s “free will to love God.”  The truth is, the Bibleeliminates man’s free will to love God. Nowhere in the Bible are human beings spoken of as being willing and capable of loving God unless God Himself awakens and quickens them.  Calvinism simply places the emphasis where it belongs — on God’s will instead of man’s.

Now, with that bit of introduction out of the way, let’s address each of your questions individually.

Are all events on earth already preordained by God?

The short answer is: Yes.

All Christians agree, in essence, that God is in charge of the really large events.  But the Bible also declares that God feeds the animals, hangs the stars, determines the days of every man’s life, and settles “the whole disposing” of things as minute as casting lots.  In other words, anyone who says that God is not in charge of everything in His universe must be able to tell us exactly where the line of demarcation is. What things is God in charge of and what things are beyond His scope?  Based on clear Scripture, I would inquire, what part of God’s creation does He restrict Himself from?  And where is He absent?

The Bible declares that He is everywhere, has all knowledge, and even gives Himself the proper name “God Almighty.”  So, if He has all the power, knows everything, and is everywhere, then there is nothing in His universe that escapes His grasp, is hidden from Him, or which He does not empower.  Otherwise, we would have to argue that He is limited in His knowledge and presence, or that there is another power in His creation that is separate and distinct from Him.  And that, biblically-speaking, is an impossible argument to win.

 Do we have a “free will?”

The term “freewill” has been utilized in Christian circles for so long that the concept is simply assumed to be true, despite the lack of clear biblical evidence. For instance, the only place in the entire Bible where the actual terminology “freewill” exists is as a type of Old Testament offering. But importantly, that word never shows up in the New Testament. Now that fact, in and of itself, does not automatically undermine the concept of free will. The word “Trinity” is also not in the New Testament, but the concept is plainly and repeatedly displayed. So, what we really have to determine is whether the concept of “free will choice,” as a part of the salvation process, is ever mentioned, implied, or stated in the New Testament.

Here are the facts: wherever the will of man is referred to in the Bible it is always in the negative. In other words, because human beings are sinful, their will is equally depraved and is therefore limited. To say it more simply, human beings cannot act outside of the confines of their nature.

My YouTube teaching video “Thinking About Free Will” may prove helpful in this regard. http://youtu.be/j3oSqbLDGxc

According to the Bible, our wills are limited by our inability –

Can the Ethiopian change his skin Or the leopard his spots? Then you also can do good who are accustomed to doing evil.  (Jeremiah 13:23)

So every good tree bears good fruit, but the bad tree bears bad fruit. A good tree cannot produce bad fruit, nor can a bad tree produce good fruit.  (Matthew 7:17)

Why do you not understand what I am saying? It is because you cannot hear My word.  (John 8:43)

…the mind set on the flesh is hostile toward God; for it does not subject itself to the law of God, for it is not even able to do so, and those who are in the flesh cannot please God. (Romans 8:7-8)

And which of you with taking thought can add to his stature one cubit? If ye then be not able to do that thing which is least, why take ye thought for the rest?  (Luke 12:25-26)

There is none that understands, there is none that seeks after God. (Romans 3:11)

Given our inability to do good, choose God, or enable our will against its nature, salvation must be the result of grace on God’s part and never the result of the “free will” decisions of any human. And the Bible states that repeatedly and emphatically.

For He says to Moses, ‘I will have mercy on whom I have mercy, and I will have compassion on whom I have compassion.’ So then it does not depend on the man who wills or the man who runs, but on God who has mercy. (Romans 9:15-16)

But as many as received Him, to them He gave the right to become children of God, even to those who believe in His name, who were born, not of blood nor of the will of the flesh nor of the will of man, but of God.  (John 1:12-13)

But, here’s the really essential point — if free will (as the modern church defines it) were indeed an essential element in salvation, then the passages that deal with salvation should actually mention it. But, they don’t. You can read through every portion of Scripture that deals with eternal salvation and you will find words like: predestination, election, and “according to His will.”

But never — never once, not a single time — will you read the word “freewill.”

That really ought to tell us something. The language and concept of freewill in salvation is glaring in its absence.  So, why is it so popular among confessing evangelicals?  Despite the textual evidence, human beings love the idea that they contribute something to their salvation. It just seems more “fair” that way.  And, our egos being what they are, we want to insert ourselves into the process in some significant way so that we can assure ourselves on the basis of our own actions and behavior.  It is, for lack of a better term, human nature.  Corrupt, fallen, prideful, arrogant, rebellious human nature.

Now let me be clear. I am not denying that human beings have a will or that they make decisions. What I am saying is that the human will is not truly free in any libertarian sense. The human will is limited by our incapabilities, resulting from our sinfulness. The fact that we make choices does not prove that we can choose anything we would like. As Romans 3:11 says, we cannot simply choose to understand, nor can we choose to seek God. And that is a very serious limitation.

Also, whenever man’s “will” is referenced in the Bible, it is always in the negative.  “You were not willing…”   “You do always resist the Holy Spirit…”  “You will not come…” etc.   That is completely consistent with what the Bible teaches concerning man’s natural state.  Sinful humans are free to sin.  But no sinful human is free to do what is righteous, what is just, or what is holy.  In fact, there is no man who does anything that is good.  And there is no one who ever sought God.

And that leads us right back to the topic of Biblical Anthropology.  The first tenet of Reformed Theology (the “T” in the tulip acrostic) is Total Depravity.  If you start there, then the entire rest of the five points fall perfectly in line.  But if you deny that humans are “dead in trespasses and sins” (Eph. 2:1), then you will end up advocating for human capability and wind up in direct opposition to the clear declarations of Scripture.  It’s really just that simple.

Are we robots already programmed?

I offered a brief reply to this statement earlier, but let me also offer a bit of audio wherein I addressed this very question:

Puppet Argument

 How does the aspect of love play into this if we are just puppets?

The question of love is used as a “red herring” by those who oppose Calvinism.  They assume that human beings are free to love God or not love God according to their own “free will.”  But, as I wrote above, if the biblical description of mankind is accurate then no natural human being has the capacity to love God.  In fact, they hate Him with a vengeance.  They are referred to as His enemies:

 For if, when we were enemies, we were reconciled to God by the death of his Son, much more, being reconciled, we shall be saved by his life. (Romans 5:10)

The biblical reality is that only after God quickens and enlightens a person can they truly love God.  I get weary of hearing preachers say, “Only love that is freely given his genuine love!  Calvinism says that God forces His love on us.  Forced love is not real love.”  Norman Geisler went so far as to say that Calvinism posits a form of “divine rape.”

“Irresistible force used by God on his free creatures would be a violation of both the charity of God and the dignity of humans. God is love. True love never forces itself on anyone. Forced love is rape, and God is not a divine rapist!” (Norman Geisler, “God knows all Things,” Predestination and Free Will, (ed.) David Basinger and Randall Basinger (IVP, 1986), p. 69 ).

What sad rhetoric such men have to stoop to in order to avoid what the Bible says.  Again, the fact is that humans will never “freely” love God until God removes their hatred and enmity and puts His divine spirit within them.  And, as I have argued openly and often, God is indeed irresistible in every aspect of His character and dealings with mankind. http://youtu.be/e9SiY4HAgNg

So, how does the aspect of love play into this?  It is God’s divine and eternal love that resulted in the grace that saved fallen sinners like you and me. In response to that reality, and as a result of His quickening power, we loved Him.  But, as in all things, God is the “first cause.”  He does not love us in response to our love.  We love Him because He first loved us.

Beloved, let us love one another: for love is of God; and every one that loveth is born of God, and knoweth God. He that loveth not knoweth not God; for God is love.  In this was manifested the love of God toward us, because that God sent his only begotten Son into the world, that we might live through him.  Herein is love, not that we loved God, but that he loved us, and sent his Son to be the propitiation for our sins.  Beloved, if God so loved us, we ought also to love one another. (1John 4:7-11)

Don’t allow people to mischaracterize Calvinism and tell you that it limits evangelism, does damage to man’s free will, makes us robots and puppets, or reduces divine love to forced rape.  I think you can see that those are all emotion-based arguments, not Biblical arguments.  People are naturally suspicious and afraid of things they do not understand.  I wish more of Calvinism’s critics would take the time to understand it before they begin criticizing it.

Grace and peace,

Jim Mc.

By Grace Alone is available via this link:http://www.salvationbygrace.org/uc/sub/docs/bygracealone.pdf

Read Full Post »

Food For Thought: R.C. Sproul On The Meaning Of “Draws” in John 6:44

Posted in Bible Study, Calvinism, doctrines of grace, Indian River Baptist Church, New Testament, reformed baptist, Sin, Theology, tagged , , , , , , , , on September 24, 2012 | Leave a Comment »

 John 6:44

No one can come to me unless the Father who sent me draws him. And I will raise him up on the last day.

In this clip, Dr. Sproul recounts the time he was asked to engage in a debate concerning this topic.  The word in question is ἑλκύω (helkuō).  It is found in the New Testament in the following verses:

John 12:32

And I, when I am lifted up from the earth, will draw all people to myself.”

John 18:10

Then Simon Peter, having a sword, drew it and struck the high priest’s servant and cut off his right ear. (The servant’s name was Malchus.)

John 21:6

He said to them, “Cast the net on the right side of the boat, and you will find some.” So they cast it, and now they were not able to haul it in, because of the quantity of fish.

Acts 16:19

But when her owners saw that their hope of gain was gone, they seized Paul and Silas and dragged them into the marketplace before the rulers.

Acts 21:30

Then all the city was stirred up, and the people ran together. They seized Paul and dragged him out of the temple, and at once the gates were shut.

James 2:6

But you have dishonored the poor man. Are not the rich the ones who oppress you, and the ones who drag you into court?

Definitions of this word include:

a prim. vb.; to drag:—drag(1), dragged(2), draw(1), draws(1), drew(2), haul(1).  Thomas, R. L. (1998). New American Standard Hebrew-Aramaic and Greek dictionaries : Updated edition. Anaheim: Foundation Publications, Inc.

ἑλκύω hĕlkuō, hel-koo´-o; or ἕλκω hĕlkō, hel´-ko; prob. akin to 138; to drag (lit. or fig.):—draw. comp. 1667.  Strong, J. (2009). Vol. 1: A Concise Dictionary of the Words in the Greek Testament and The Hebrew Bible (27). Bellingham, WA: Logos Bible Software.

ἑλκύω (helkuō): vb.; ≡ Str 1670; TDNT 2.503—an alternate lexical form based on the inflected form with an upsilon manifest, yet considered only a part of the inflection, MHT 2:236; see ἕλκω (helkō), just below ἕλκω (helkō): vb. [served by 1816]; ≡ Str 1670—1. LN 15.212 pull in, drag, draw, haul in (Jn 6:44; 12:32; 18:10; 21:6, 11+); 2. LN 15.178 lead by force (Ac 16:19; 21:30; Jas 2:6+)  Swanson, J. (1997). Dictionary of Biblical Languages with Semantic Domains: Greek (New Testament) (electronic ed.). Oak Harbor: Logos Research Systems, Inc.

(impf εἷλκον, fut ἑλκύσω, aor εἵλκυσα, subj 3 sg ἑλκύσῃ)
a pull: 15.212
b lead by force: 15.178  Louw, J. P., & Nida, E. A. (1996). Vol. 2: Greek-English lexicon of the New Testament: Based on semantic domains (electronic ed. of the 2nd edition.) (82). New York: United Bible Societies.

- Transliteration: Helkuo
- Phonetic: hel-koo’-o
- Definition:
1. to draw, drag off
2. metaph., to draw by inward power, lead, impel
- Origin: probably akin to G138
- TDNT entry: 10:23,2
- Part(s) of speech: Verb (Thayer)

tn Or “attracts him,” or “pulls him.” The word is used of pulling or dragging, often by force. It is even used once of magnetic attraction (A. Oepke, TDNT 2:503).
sn The Father who sent me draws him. The author never specifically explains what this “drawing” consists of. It is evidently some kind of attraction; whether it is binding and irresistible or not is not mentioned. But there does seem to be a parallel with 6:65, where Jesus says that no one is able to come to him unless the Father has allowed it. This apparently parallels the use of Isaiah by John to reflect the spiritual blindness of the Jewish leaders (see the quotations from Isaiah in John 9:41 and 12:39–40).  Biblical Studies Press. (2006). The NET Bible First Edition Notes (Jn 6:44). Biblical Studies Press.

Yes, before one objects, there could be other nuances in 6:44, so the dictionaries/lexicons are not absolutely definitive here.  One should, however, give theological thought to these definitions – they do present a rather compelling (no pun intended) argument for what Dr. Sproul says in this clip:

 

 

 

Read Full Post »

“Ten Years Ago” Series – All Posts In One File

Posted in Calvinism, Forgiveness, Grief, Indian River Baptist Church, Prison Ministry, reformed baptist, tagged , , , , , , , , on September 18, 2012 | Leave a Comment »

Based upon reader requests, we have compiled our “Ten Years Ago” Series – a series written to commemorate the tenth anniversary of the death of our son, Jon - into digest format, with all posts in one PDF file, which can be downloaded here.  Perhaps the series will help someone in some small way who is going through some form of grief – please feel free to distribute the file as you see fit.

The series is actually incomplete.  There are still thoughts on grief I have yet to place in a coherent form and there is still much to be said about the exhaustive sovereignty of the living God – much.  That will follow at a later date.

We still miss Jon.  Terribly.

 

Read Full Post »

Indian River Baptist Church Sunday School, September 9, 2012: Apologetics, Part 4 – The Myth of Neutrality

Posted in Indian River Baptist Church, presuppositional apologetics, reformed baptist, Sin, Truth, tagged , , , , on September 9, 2012 | Leave a Comment »


We also addressed this graphic which you may have seen floating around the Internet.  We only made it halfway through and will finish addressing the issues in the graphic next week.  There is also a long delay until about 1:25 at the beginning while a handout was distributed.

Read Full Post »

Free Will Friday: John Calvin And The Babblers

Posted in Books, Calvinism, Church History, Doctrine, doctrines of grace, Free Will, Indian River Baptist Church, reformed baptist, tagged , , , , , on August 17, 2012 | Leave a Comment »

it is more than evident that they babble and talk absurdly who, in the place of God’s providence, substitute bare permission — as if God sat in a watchtower awaiting chance events , and his judgments thus depended upon human will. (Institutes of The Christian Religion, Battles translation, Book 1, Chapter 18, Section 1)

Read Full Post »

Free Will Friday: John Calvin

Posted in Bible Study, Calvinism, Church History, Doctrine, Free Will, Indian River Baptist Church, reformed baptist, Sovereignty, Theology, tagged , , , , , , , , , , on August 3, 2012 | Leave a Comment »

If any one, then, chooses to make use of this term without attaching any bad meaning to it, he shall not be troubled by me on that account; but as it cannot be retained without very great danger, I think the abolition of it would be of great advantage to the Church. I am unwilling to use it myself; and others if they will take my advice, will do well to abstain from it.

Institutes of The Christian Religion, Book 2, Chapter 2, Section 8.

Free Will Friday

Read Full Post »

God’s Statement On The Free Will Of The Unregenerate Person

Posted in Bible Study, Calvinism, Church History, Doctrine, Free Will, Indian River Baptist Church, reformed baptist, Sin, Theology, Truth, tagged , , , , , , , , , on July 20, 2012 | 3 Comments »

Breathed-out through the Apostle Paul…..

Romans 8:7–8 (ESV)

7 For the mind that is set on the flesh is hostile to God, for it does not submit to God’s law; indeed, it cannot. 8 Those who are in the flesh cannot please God.  

Ripped out of context, you may say?  Not hardly.  Here’s the context:

 Romans 8:1–11 (ESV)

Life in the Spirit

8 There is therefore now no condemnation for those who are in Christ Jesus. 2 For the law of the Spirit of life has set you free in Christ Jesus from the law of sin and death. 3 For God has done what the law, weakened by the flesh, could not do. By sending his own Son in the likeness of sinful flesh and for sin, he condemned sin in the flesh, 4 in order that the righteous requirement of the law might be fulfilled in us, who walk not according to the flesh but according to the Spirit. 5 For those who live according to the flesh set their minds on the things of the flesh, but those who live according to the Spirit set their minds on the things of the Spirit. 6 For to set the mind on the flesh is death, but to set the mind on the Spirit is life and peace. 7 For the mind that is set on the flesh is hostile to God, for it does not submit to God’s law; indeed, it cannot. 8 Those who are in the flesh cannot please God.

9 You, however, are not in the flesh but in the Spirit, if in fact the Spirit of God dwells in you. Anyone who does not have the Spirit of Christ does not belong to him. 10 But if Christ is in you, although the body is dead because of sin, the Spirit is life because of righteousness. 11 If the Spirit of him who raised Jesus from the dead dwells in you, he who raised Christ Jesus from the dead will also give life to your mortal bodies through his Spirit who dwells in you.  

The passage addresses the contrast between the unregenerate person (whose mind is “set on the flesh”) and the regenerate person (whose mind is set on the Spirit), along with the contrast between the person who is dead and the person who has life.  Here, God says the unregenerate person not only does not obey God, he cannot obey God.  If he cannot obey God, he thus cannot – by a mere act of his “will” – do what God commands.  His will in that case is not “free,” but in bondage, as Jesus clearly stated to his audience in John 8.  That audience didn’t like hearing they didn’t have “free will” anymore than today’s person likes to hear it, eh?

Read Full Post »

Free Will Friday: Martin Luther

Posted in Bible Study, Calvinism, Church History, Doctrine, doctrines of grace, Free Will, Indian River Baptist Church, reformed baptist, Sin, Sovereignty, Theology, tagged , , , , , , , , , , , on July 13, 2012 | Leave a Comment »

From The Bondage of the Will – Section 26.

Over and over in his diatribe against Erasmus, Luther makes the point that for man’s will to be truly “free,” as Erasmus (and many today) wish to define it, then by necessity the only way it could be such is to fall into a Pelagian definition of “free will,” which has been denounced as heretical going back to the times of Augustine.

You describe the power of free-will as small, and wholly ineffective apart from the grace of God.

Agreed? Now then, I ask you: If God’s grace is wanting, if it is taken away from that small power, what can it do? It is ineffective, you say, and can do nothing good. So it will not do what God or His grace wills. Why? Because we have now taken God’s grace away from it, and what the grace of God does not do is not good. Hence it follows that free-will without God’s grace is not free at all, but is the permanent prisoner and bondslave of evil, since it cannot turn itself to good. This being so, I give you full permission to enlarge the power of free-will as much as you like; make it angelic, make it divine, if you can! – but when you add this doleful postscript, that it is ineffective apart from God’s grace, straightway you rob it of all its power. What is ineffective power but (in plain language) no power? So to say that free-will exists and has power, albeit ineffective power, is, in the Sophists’ phrase, a contradiction in terms. It is like saying ‘free-will’ is something which is not free - as if you said that fire is cold and earth hot. Fire certainly has power to heat; but if hell-fire (even) was cold and chilling instead of burning and scorching, I would not call it fire, let alone hot (unless you meant to refer to an imaginary fire, or a painted one). Note, however, that if we meant by the power of free-will the power which makes human beings fit subjects to be caught up by the Spirit and touched by God’s grace, as creatures made for eternal life or eternal death, we should have a proper definition.  And I certainly acknowledge the existence of this power, this fitness, or dispositional quality and passive aptitude (as the Sophists call it), which, as everyone knows, is not given to plants or animals. As the proverb says, God did not make heaven for geese!

It is a settled truth, then, even on the basis of your own testimony, that we do everything of necessity, and nothing by free-will; for the power of free-will is nil, and it does no good, nor can do, without grace. It follows, therefore, that free-will is obviously a term applicable only to Divine Majesty; for only He can do, and does (as the Psalmist sings) whatever he wills in heaven and earth [Psalms 135:6]. If free-will is ascribed to men, it is ascribed with no more propriety than divinity itself would be – and no blasphemy could exceed that! So it befits theologians to refrain from using the term when they want to speak of human ability, and to leave it to be applied to God only. They would do well also to take the term out of men’s mouths and speech, and to claim it for their God, as if it were His own holy and awful Name. If they must at all hazards assign some power to men, let them teach that it be denoted by some other term than free-will; especially since we know from our own observation that the mass of men are sadly deceived and misled by this phrase. The meaning which it conveys to their minds is far removed from anything that theologians believe and discuss. The term free-will is too grandiose and comprehensive and fulsome. People think it means what the natural force of the phrase would require, namely, a power of freely turning in any direction, yielding to none and subject to none. If they knew that this was not so, and that the term signifies only a tiny spark of power, and that utterly ineffective in itself, since it is the devil’s prisoner and slave, it would be a wonder if they did not stone us as mockers and deceivers, who say one thing and mean another – indeed, who have not yet decided what we do mean!

Since, therefore, we have lost the meaning and the real reference of this glorious term, or, rather, have never grasped them (as was claimed by the Pelagians, who themselves mistook the phrase) why do we cling so tenaciously to an empty word, and endanger and delude faithful people in consequence? There is no more wisdom in so doing then there is in the modern foible of kings and potentates, who retain, or lay claim to, empty titles of kingdoms and countries, and flaunt them, while all the time they are really paupers, and anything but the possessors of those kingdoms and countries. We can tolerate their antics, for they fool nobody, but just feed themselves up – unprofitably enough – on their own vainglory. But this false idea of free-will is a real threat to salvation, and a delusion fraught with the most perilous consequences.

If we do not want to drop this term altogether – which would really be the safest and most Christian thing to do – we may still in good faith teach people to use it to credit man with free-will in respect, not of what is above him, but of what is below him. That is to say, man should realize that in regard to his money and possessions he has a right to use them, to do or to leave undone, according to his own free-will – though that very free-will is overruled by the free-will of God alone, according to His own pleasure. However, with regard to God, and in all that bears on salvation or damnation, he has no free-will, but is a captive, prisoner and bondslave, either to the will of God, or to the will of Satan.

Read Full Post »

Indian River Baptist Church AM Sermon, July 1, 2012 – David Maitland: Ephesians 1:1-12

Posted in Indian River Baptist Church, New Testament, reformed baptist, tagged , , , , , on July 1, 2012 | Leave a Comment »

This was the Installation Service for our pastor, Jeff Gwilt.

 Ephesians 1:1–12 (ESV)

Greeting

1 Paul, an apostle of Christ Jesus by the will of God,

To the saints who are in Ephesus, and are faithful in Christ Jesus:

2 Grace to you and peace from God our Father and the Lord Jesus Christ.

Spiritual Blessings in Christ

3 Blessed be the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, who has blessed us in Christ with every spiritual blessing in the heavenly places, 4 even as he chose us in him before the foundation of the world, that we should be holy and blameless before him. In love 5 he predestined us for adoption as sons through Jesus Christ, according to the purpose of his will, 6 to the praise of his glorious grace, with which he has blessed us in the Beloved. 7 In him we have redemption through his blood, the forgiveness of our trespasses, according to the riches of his grace, 8 which he lavished upon us, in all wisdom and insight 9 making known to us the mystery of his will, according to his purpose, which he set forth in Christ 10 as a plan for the fullness of time, to unite all things in him, things in heaven and things on earth.

11 In him we have obtained an inheritance, having been predestined according to the purpose of him who works all things according to the counsel of his will, 12 so that we who were the first to hope in Christ might be to the praise of his glory.  

Read Full Post »

Older Posts »

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 108 other followers

%d bloggers like this: