While serving in a Baptist pastorate in Oklahoma, an influential couple visited me in the study over concerns with my theological convictions. They said something to the effect, “You’re a ‘chosen before the foundation of the world’ person, but we’re ‘whosoever will’ people.” I replied, “You don’t understand. It’s not an either-or, but a both-and. I’m a both-and type of person. I believe in election and evangelism, in predestination and ‘whosoever will’.” Unfortunately, they still didn’t understand. Part of the problem was that they heard many high profile leaders within the denomination denounce the doctrines of grace and those who affirm them as being unconcerned with the lost and with the task of evangelism. Though the couple had often heard from the pulpit that we must work for the advance of the gospel, though they witnessed the first adult missions team sent out from the church in nearly three decades, and though their pastor replaced the outdated, sun-bleached tracts in the foyer and encouraged members to utilize them weekly, they were unconvinced. The influence of high-profile personalities proved too steep for them. Vociferous pleas from such leaders as Adrian Rogers, Johnny Hunt, Jack Graham, Steve Gaines, Elmer Towns, Ergun Caner, and others, added with the vocal opposition of local associations and colleges , has proven too steep for many average laymen. Nonetheless, it is my hope that the internet, with its vast amount of information available at an individual’s fingertips, will be utilized by laymen and others to know what “Calvinism” actually asserts and what “Calvinists” actually believe and practice. It is with this hope that I provide an excerpt from J. I. Packer’s classic, Evangelism & the Sovereignty of God (InterVarsity Press, 1961). Dr. Packer writes about what the belief that God is sovereign in grace does not affect. I hope, even if you don’t embrace the doctrines of grace, that you will read with open eyes and an open heart. Dr. Packer, himself a “Calvinist”, asserts on behalf of historic Reformed theology:
The belief that God is sovereign in grace does not affect the necessity of evangelism. Whatever we may believe about election, the fact remains that evangelism is necessary, because no man can be saved without the gospel. . . . They must be told of Christ before they can trust Him, and they must trust Him before they can be saved by Him. Salvation depends on faith, and faith on knowing the gospel. God’s way of saving sinners is to bring them to faith through bringing them into contact with the gospel. In God’s ordering of things, therefore, evangelism is a necessity if anyone is to be saved at all. . . .
The belief that God is sovereign in grace does not affect the urgency of evangelism. . . . The world is full of people who are unaware that they stand under the wrath of God: is it not similarly a matter of urgency that we should go to them, and try to arouse them, and show them the way of escape? . . . The non-elect in this world are faceless men as far as we are concerned. We know that they exist, but we do not and cannot know who they are, and it is as futile as it is impious for us to try and guess. . . . Our calling as Christians is not to love God’s elect, and them only, but to love our neighbour, irrespective of whether he is elect or not.
The belief that God is sovereign in grace does not affect the genuineness of the gospel invitations, or the truth of the gospel promises. . . . The fact remains that God in the gospel really does offer Christ and promise justification and life to ‘whosoever will’. ‘Whosoever shall call upon the name of the Lord shall be saved.’ As God commands all men everywhere to repent, so God invites all men everywhere to come to Christ and find mercy. . . .
The fact that the gospel invitation is free and unlimited—‘sinners Jesus will receive’—‘come and welcome to Jesus Christ’—is the glory of the gospel as a revelation of divine grace. . . . Some fear that a doctrine of eternal election and reprobation involves the possibility that Christ will not receive some of those who desire to receive Him, because they are not elect. The ‘comfortable words’ of the gospel promises, however, absolutely exclude this possibility. As our Lord elsewhere affirmed, in emphatic and categorical terms: ‘Him that cometh to me I will in no wise cast out.’ . . .
The belief that God is sovereign in grace does not affect the responsibility of the sinner for his reaction to the gospel. . . . A man who rejects Christ thereby becomes the cause of his own condemnation. . . . The unbeliever was really offered life in the gospel, and could have had it if he would; he, and no-one but he, is responsible for the fact that he rejected it, and must now endure the consequences of rejecting it. . . . The Bible never says that sinners miss heaven because they are not elect, but because they “neglect the great salvation”, and because they will not repent and believe.
Thomas Twitchell
March 16, 2009 at 4:49 pm
Go ahead, stir the pot
Bob Cleveland
March 16, 2009 at 7:08 pm
I really am out of step with most, I suppose, but it seems to me that the Bible COMMANDS us to go, disciple, witness, etc. We don’t have to dream up reason to confirm that. We just need to do it.
Baptists seem to say we ought to do that because we love the people; when I was a Presbyterian we went and did it because we loved God.
I think I prefer the latter reason.
Stuart
March 17, 2009 at 9:04 am
Dr. Galyon,
I have a lot of work today, so I may not have time to pursue this much, but there is one fatal flaw with what Packer says. He never defines the Gospel for us. He just assumes that we all agree. The true universal atonement of Christ asserts that the Gospel is the objective proclamation to all men that “Christ died for our sins”, my sins and their sins. It is directed to them PERSONALLY. The false doctrine of limited atonement cannot confess this Gospel. The best it can say is that “Christ died for sinners”. But this is deceitful, because the limited atoner would have the person assume a universal atonement, when they do not at all mean a universal atonement. The person hearing assumes that “Christ died for ALL sinners”, of which they know they are one, and they thus correctly apply the statement to themselves. However, if pressed for clarity, the limited atoner must say that Christ DID NOT die for ALL sinners, but “Christ died for SOME sinners” (as according to them, He did not die for sinners from among the non-elect). This changes everything, and would necessarliy destroy the faith of the one who had just believed in the true Gospel, for now he does not know if he is one of those sinners for whom Christ died. This is why every true Christian should thoroughly reject and repudiate the false doctrine of limited atonement – because it fundamentally changes the definition of the one and only Gospel by which we can be saved.
Pastor Wood
Dr. James Galyon
March 17, 2009 at 12:30 pm
Pastor Wood:
Have you read the entire book, or just the excerpt as found here?
The Cross Current
March 17, 2009 at 9:15 am
Dr. Galyon.
Though I was trained in a largely Arminian school, over the past several years I have come to the overwhelming conclusion that the doctrines of grace are true and biblical. That having been said, this soteriological “collision” you speak of has caused a few unfortunate casualties in my own life and ministry as well.
I direct a local missions ministry and outreach broadcast in Canada called The Cross Current. We preach the Gospel on the streets each week and also help pastors equip their churches to share the Gospel with both loved ones and strangers. On several occasions, our team has encountered “extreme Calvinists” that have actually rebuked us for preaching the Gospel with such fervor and urgency! Though I wholeheartedly agree that salvation is of the Lord and we didn’t choose Him, He chose us (Jn. 15:16), we also must remember that if we love Christ we will obey His Word (Jn. 14:15; 23) and be His witnesses too (Acts 1:8)! Disobeying any of our Lord’s commands is sin…and failure to obey the Great Commission in the spirit of the Great Commandment will DEFINITELY require some serious explanation when we stand before His judgment seat to give account (2 Cor. 5:10)!
In conclusion, I really appreciate your posting and I look forward to picking up the Packer book you have specified. I trust it will better equip me to articulate a biblical balance in this vital area of life and witness.
Seeking And Saving,
Cory M.
The Cross Current
The Cross Current
March 17, 2009 at 9:18 am
BTW…I forgot to leave the link to a POWERFUL blog posting, courtesy of our radio show writer/producer here: http://thecrosscurrent.com/contact/blog/2009/03/hell-hit-home-yesterday/
As you read, please keep in mind that he and I share very similar theological views in this area.
Cory M.
The Cross Current
Barry Wallace
March 17, 2009 at 11:09 am
When our church was between pastors a few years ago, a local youth pastor, who filled in one Sunday, said in his sermon that he didn’t believe in predestination, he believed in John 3:16.
Afterward, I asked him why he didn’t believe in both, since both were taught in Scripture. I also asked him why he wanted to pit two truths against each other. Why not rather believe both? He received that well. What struck me, though, was that I don’t think it had ever occurred to him that you could believe both.
Stuart
March 17, 2009 at 12:50 pm
Dr. Galyon,
I have not read any of the book, only the excerpts that you presented. However, if he holds to limited atonement (as I believe he does), then the statement I made above is irrefutable, and there is nothing else that really matters to me. Do you acknowledge the truth of what I wrote in post #3? If not, where is the flaw?
Thanks,
Pastor Wood
http://arlomax.googlepages.com/takingthemaskoffcalvinism%3Athedangerofhum
Dr. James Galyon
March 17, 2009 at 4:23 pm
Pastor Wood:
If you would like to comment about the post, please feel free to do so. This particular post has to do with the fact that those who affirm the doctrine of election also believe in the importance of evangelism (not particular redemption). Since you have not read Packer’s book, you might want to do so to see how he defines the gospel, etc. That will enable you to make an informed comment upon the matter if it receives focus in an upcoming post. In regard to this post, would you like to say as a Lutheran that you affirm both the doctrine of election and the importance of evangelism?
Bob Farmer
June 12, 2009 at 12:35 pm
Irrefutable? What that salvation is universal? This is the most easily refutable heresy ever… or have you not heard of Judas? If atonement is universal then why evangelize? Won’t God save them. You should get out more Woody…
Bob Farmer
June 12, 2009 at 12:43 pm
Boy do I feel foolish, I thought I was on the latest thread, don’t know how I did that. If any one reads this I apologize for being so snippy but Pastor Wood really torked me off with his comment, lets see… three months ago.
Packer’s book is great, I read it about 20 years ago and have a copy close by for reference. Another great article is Packer’s intro to a reprint of John Owen’s “The death of death in the death of Christ”. Packers intro is as good a read as Owens and a lot more concise. Thanks Dr. Galyon from Dr. Bob.
Dr. James Willingham
March 17, 2009 at 1:10 pm
DEar Brothers: What a tempest in a teapot. Jesus preached limited atonement, particular redemption, unconditional election to a woman in need. Consider Mt.15:21-28 where he said to his disciples in the hearing of the woman of Canaan, “I am not sent but to the lost sheep of the house of Israel.” Now she was not a Jew. Why didn’t our Lord say, “i am sent for you as well as the lost sheep of the House of Israel?” But He did not. Instead He seemed to be saying as He actually did, “My mission is the lost sheep of the house of Israel.” Wha was her response to His particularism, His limited atonement? Why, she came and worshipped. Then he brought up te subject of her reprobation, “It is not right to take the children’s bread and cast it to dogs.” A dog is a good illustration of depravity and reprobation, and that woma surely knew that the Jews look down on all gentiles as “dogs.” What was her response, “True, Lord.” True? True that she was total depraved? True that she was reprobate? Yes, she agrees that He is right, but even a dog has to eat. Humbly she argues, “even the dogs eat the crumbs that fall from their masters’ table.” There is humility. Whatever Jesus said about me is true, and that He says it to me now i an invitation to seek Him for salvation. So every one of the doctrines of the tulip outline, Total Depravity, Unconditional Election, Limited Atonement, Irresistible Grace, and Perseverance are inviations to be saved and grow in agrace along with Predestination and Reprobation. Thseare the doctrines which along with the Heavenly Presence produced the First and Second Great Awakenings, the Great Century of Missions, Religious Liberty, the Freest Nation on earth (which has been from the get go a charade which the perpetrators are so fearful the American people will find it out and make the charade in to a reality). And they will find out and te whole earth will be utterly transformed. The Third Great Awakening is not far off. Can it be that we are hearing a sound of a going in the mulberry trees? Can the controversy over calvinism (I still prefer Sovereign Grace as a more accurate biblical description of the truth) be the precursor of the tsunmai, the tidal wave of grace, which might come in like a silent flood and rise up and engulf us? Yea, the whole earth is prophesied to be filled with His know ledge and glory as the waters that cover the sea (Isa.11:9;Hab.2:24). And does it not say (Roms.5:2), “Where sin abounded, Grace did superabound”? the idea of God’s grace and truth, His knowledge and glory covering the whole earth like the waters that cover the sea reminds me of the old lady who had been in limited circumstances all of her life. some frinds took her to see the ocean for the first time in her life. When she saw it, she just sat down and stared. finally, she said, “Well, this is the first time I every saw anything, where there was more than enough of.” When the enemy comes in like a flood, and he has, the Spirit of the Lord shall raise up a standard against him, perhaps it might be rendered, raise up a counter flood, a greater flood, against him and so overwhelm him and defeat all of his works of evil.(Isa.59:19) Interesting thought in the light of filling the earth with His knowledge and glory like the waters cover the sea.
Stuart
March 17, 2009 at 4:47 pm
Dr. Galyon,
In answer to your questions, yes, all true Lutherans affirm both the doctrine of election and the importance of evangelism. I’m not sure, however, why you regard my post (#3) off topic. The topic is about the Doctrines of Grace (which for you includes limited atonement) and evangelism (which is sharing the Gospel). My post was about how this false doctrine of limited atonement doesn’t allow one to preach the true Gospel. While you may not agree with my point, it certainly is true to the topic.
Also, since I have not read Packer’s book (and you have), perhaps you could give us Packer’s definition of the Gospel. Would he agree that the Gospel is the objective proclamation to all men that “Christ died for THEIR sins”, Good News directed to them PERSONALLY? If not, how would he define the Gospel?
Pastor Wood
Dr. James Galyon
March 17, 2009 at 7:15 pm
Pastor Wood:
Packer, indeed, discusses this very issue. Perhaps I’ll post on the issue some time.
Charles Page
March 17, 2009 at 6:54 pm
Pastor Wood
Dr Galyon, like yourself believes in the universal offer to the sinner. You keep addressing him with the limited atonement argument. He is a hypo-Calvinist, “hypothetical universal atonement” His views are aligned with the views of Moise Amyraunt, seventeenth century theologian. He is a four point Calvinist with a variant view of limited atonement, much like the previous post.
Both of you should consider the following questions: Has God ever offered anyone eternal life to be rejected or accepted?
Shall anyone for whom Christ died suffer eternal punishment and torment?
I assume both of you will answer yes, but the answer is no to both questions.
The depraved sinner is never in any condition to accept or reject eternal life. Christ’s promise of redemption will never return void. His word is dependable and not conditional on man.
True Biblical evangelism should never presume to maks an offer to the sinner only bear witness unto Christ before the whole world. Proclaim the gospel not an offer. The Holy Spirit regenerates the sinner and we then follow up regeneration with instructions in accordance with the Word.
The fact of Baptism should dispel the sinners’ notion of whether he is elect or not. He should hear the word of sins remited in Jesus’ name and know for certain he has eternal life. He has the assurance from the Father, Son and Holy Spirit he is indeed God’s own.
thomastwitchell
March 17, 2009 at 9:00 pm
Would he agree that the Gospel is the objective proclamation to all men that “Christ died for THEIR sins”
True Biblical evangelism should never presume to maks an offer to the sinner only bear witness unto Christ before the whole world.
Simply amazing that in one passage, both Charles and stuart are weighed in the balances and found wanting. Jesus was speaking to a mixed crowd so there can be no getting around the free-offer, nor the fact that the universal offer is hidden even from those who hear it. So even if Jesus is interpreted to say “Ya’ll come now, heeer!” it would not be heard by some at all.
Amazing. Still wondering stuart where the blood of the sacrifice is? And if it was made for just anyone, why then will it only be applied to those for whom Christ comes in reference to salvation, with none of it wasted? That blood was shed and carried into the Holy of Hollies in Heaven and was then and has always been the blood of the eternal covenant. Now, Hebrews says, in the case of a will, that is a covenant, there is the necessity of the death of the testator. However, a will does not include just anyone, but only those for whom the seal of the covenant was applied and is in effect at the point of death for those it was intended. Bought, purchased, sealed and delivered, are only those whose names are covered by the blood, whose names are written in the Book. See, you think the blood was applied to us. It wasn’t, it was offered to the Father and applied to the covenant, the blood by which Christ sanctified himself and all those who were in him.
What you say, you weren’t in him? You didn’t die with him? If one died for all then all will be justified, but you weren’t one of them till you did what? Oh, that’s right, that’s the question you wouldn’t answer, nor can.
Tough cookies if you think His blood is no better than the blood of goats and bulls and trample underfoot the precious blood of Christ which you think can apply to yourself or disregard at will. Yours is a disgusting doctrine which makes you the very thing you accuse Dr. Galyon of, a preacher of a false Gospel and of the most deadly kind, for it in reality says the blood of Christ was an unclean thing.
Charles, the free offer is all over the OT and NT. Stop tempting the Lord in your refusal to acknowledge the plainly wirtten word of God.
Down the Via De la Rosie…
Barry Wallace
March 18, 2009 at 7:42 am
James,
You have the patience of Job.
Thomas Twitchell
March 18, 2009 at 12:31 pm
Patience is his job.
Stuart
March 18, 2009 at 2:28 pm
Though devils all the world should fill,
All eager to devour us;
We tremble not, we fear no ill,
They shall not overpower us.
This world’s prince may still
Scowl fierce as he will;
He can harm us none;
He’s judged – fore’er undone,
One little word can fell him.
For you, dear Rosie, that word is “our” (1 Cor. 15:3).
Dr. James Galyon
March 18, 2009 at 4:26 pm
Who trembles not? Who fears not? Who shall not be overcome?
1 John 5:1-12
Romans 8:28-39
Stuart
March 18, 2009 at 5:01 pm
Dr. Galyon,
In order to know the who, you must be able to identify the who’s adversary. I don’t think it is too difficult to recognize who this adversary is when he plainly states that God’s one and only holy Gospel is “a disgusting doctrine” which declares “the blood of Christ” “an unclean thing”. I would withdraw from such a one more quickly and more decisively than the Israelites withdrew from Korah. I fear for anyone who could stand with such a blasphemer.
Thomas Twitchell deserves an open and unqualified rebuke from you, the blog owner, or else we must assume yoiur agreement.
Pastor Wood
Dr. James Galyon
March 19, 2009 at 10:48 am
Pastor Wood:
1) The absence of a rebuke from me does not necessarily imply agreement. There have been many comments made the past couple of years on this blog on which I have not responded, and many which are yet to be made to which I will not respond. The absence of my response does not and will neither imply agreement nor disagreement. The Bob Ross argument is invalid here.
2) Thomas Twitchell’s hard-line position is, in many respects, no different than yours. You have called him a blasphemer, me and others (John MacArthur, Charles Spurgeon, and William Carey and other “limited atoners”) non-Christians, and so forth. My feeling, on one hand, is that if you want to dish it out, you’ve got to be able to take it as well. On the other hand…
To All –
I sincerely hope that while you blog/comment/debate, you consider the words of the Apostle Paul in Ephesians 4:26-32 – 26 Be angry and do not sin; do not let the sun go down on your anger, 27 and give no opportunity to the devil…. 29 Let no corrupting talk come out of your mouths, but only such as is good for building up, as fits the occasion, that it may give grace to those who hear. 30 And do not grieve the Holy Spirit of God, by whom you were sealed for the day of redemption. 31 Let all bitterness and wrath and anger and clamor and slander be put away from you, along with all malice. 32 Be kind to one another, tenderhearted, forgiving one another, as God in Christ forgave you. Whether you’re Lutheran, Baptist, Presbyterian, Methodist, Anglican, Charismatic, or other, if you claim the name of Christ, please seek to love Him and love your brothers and sisters in Christ in all things at all times. If you think you’re dealing with a “heretic,” then after you’ve stated your piece, just let them alone, as Scripture admonishes (Titus 3:9-11).
Charles Page
March 18, 2009 at 6:25 pm
twitch
It is not a question if the free offer is all over the O and NT, it is the question as to who it is offered to. It is offered to covenant Israel as conditional but not to non-covenant nations.
it is not offered to dead sinners in the NT but is offered to regenerate people to be obeyed. The NT says clearly to regenerate ones, repent and be baptized for the remission of sins.
What good is it to say to a unregenerate sinner, “repent and be baptized for remission of sins?” It would be a conditional salvation based on obedience to a command! How is that according to scripture?
There is a free offer to be obeyed! There is a continual life of submission to Christ’s commands. But not toward the unregenerate. There are people who preach obedience to the commands for regeneration. there are thoes who preach baptism for regeneration. All these people are all wrong.
Charles Page
March 19, 2009 at 6:07 am
Twitchell
I am surprised you would be so presumptuous to write this: “Stop tempting the Lord in your refusal to acknowledge the plainly wirtten word of God.”
Tempting the Lord is a grevious sin by Satan himself and Christ rebuked him with the Word. So if I believe in limited atonement I am equal to Satan? If I disagree with you I am in violation of the very Words of God Himself? The infallible Dr Twitchell! You are above the esteemed pastor Wood.
It is not James’ patience but your patience which is gone.
Charles Page
March 19, 2009 at 6:19 am
http://triablogue.blogspot.com/2009/03/hypo-calvinism.html
“It’s worth noting that by the standards of Hypo-Calvinism, Benjamin Warfield was a Hyper-Calvinist since Warfield made no allowance for a disjunction between what God wants, intends, decrees, and causes.”
Thomas Twitchell
March 19, 2009 at 11:12 am
No turning them over to Satan for the destruction of their flesh…
Drats.
Stuart Wood
March 19, 2009 at 11:47 am
Dr. Galyon,
Your words are well-taken, especially your reference to the Ephesians passage. Just for the record, though, before Mr. Twitchell blasphemed the one and only true saving Gospel, I do not believe I had made any personal attacks upon you, or him, or anyone else. I have said that a person who does not believe that Christ died for his sins (based upon the objective saving Gospel Word that He died for all) is not a Christian. I have left that as a general statement of truth, and have refrained from applying it to specific people on this blog. My intention has been to let each man wear the shoe as it fits.
Pastor Wood
Charles Page
March 19, 2009 at 8:20 pm
“Why can’t we all just get along?”
Charles Page
March 19, 2009 at 8:21 pm
Thank goodness my fate is not left to pastor Wood, I don’t think a lowly person like me would stand a chance!!!
Thomas Twitchell
March 20, 2009 at 12:58 am
I dint know they made braile computers.
Stuart Wood
March 20, 2009 at 7:58 am
Charles,
I, too, am thankful that your fate is not left to Pastor Wood. But your fate is left to the one and only true objective universal Gospel, how that “Christ died for YOUR sins”. Cling to the truth as God has stated it, and you are saved. Reject the truth as God has stated it, and you are lost. “And he said unto them, Go ye into all the world, and preach the gospel to every creature.
He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved; but he that believeth not shall be damned.” (Mark 16:15,16). How could God have made it any simpler?
Pastor Wood
Dr. James Galyon
March 20, 2009 at 3:22 pm
Charles,
I, too, am thankful that your fate is not left to Pastor Wood (or myself). But your fate is left to the one and only true God. Cling to Christ, as God has promised through the gospel (e.g., “Come to ME, all you who labor and are heavy laden…”), and you are saved.
Charles Page
March 20, 2009 at 3:45 pm
Pastor Wood and James,
neither of you should fret over my salvation I was already justified by faith in AD 60 (approx) Paul included me in the “we” of his letter to the Romans in 5:1! I had peace with God already then and I wasn’t even born and that means I will have peace with Him when I die! I am eternally secure!
Stuart Wood
March 20, 2009 at 4:08 pm
Dr. Galyon,
There is no way to cling to Christ without clinging to the Gospel, how that “Christ died for ours sins”. That Gospel is the very hand of God extended to us poor sinners. Whoever refuses that hand, does so to his own destruction no matter what he thinks about clinging to Christ. Only he who has the Gospel has Christ, and he who has Christ has all.
Also, Charles, feeling and thinking yourself secure within the true Passover House (the Gospel) is a good and right thing. However, feeling and thinking yourself secure outside of the House, would only be to your own hurt.
Pastor Wood
Dr. James Galyon
March 21, 2009 at 8:26 am
Pastor Wood:
The Gospel is the message about Christ and what He has done. We’re to cling to Christ. To separate the message from the Person of Christ is a grave mistake. Christ offers Himself as Savior to us. He declares, “Come to ME, all you who labor and are heavy laden, and I will give you rest.” The result of what you are proposing is to represent the saving work of Christ only in terms of the past, disconnected from the Lord Jesus Christ in the present and the Lord Jesus Himself as the entire object of our trust. It is not biblical to isolate the work of Christ from the Person of Christ. There is no place in the New Testament where the call to believe is expressed in such terms, (e.g., “Believe Christ died for your sins and be saved.”). The Scripture calls for faith in, into, or upon the Lord Jesus Christ Himself, that is, ifor people to place their faith in the living Christ who died for sins. The object of saving faith is not the atonement, but the Lord Jesus Christ who made the atonement. You are, essentially, proclaiming the benefits of the cross apart Christ to people who do not possess them. The only ones who possess the benefits of the cross of the Lord Jesus Christ are those who place their faith in Him. It does not belong to those who merely profess belief that He died on the cross. It belongs to those who have placed their faith IN HIM, the living God. As the Apostle Paul declared, “Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ, and you shall be saved.”
Barry Wallace
March 20, 2009 at 7:53 pm
Charles,
Please clarify something for me. Based on your last statement, am I to assume that you never were a child of wrath, as Paul says that he and all the Ephesian believers once were? (Eph. 2:1-3) It seems that they were justified when they believed (v. 8), but were just like the rest of mankind until then (v. 3).
Charles Page
March 21, 2009 at 6:20 am
“Cling to the truth as God has stated it, and you are saved. Reject the truth as God has stated it, and you are lost.”
How ridiculous can you be Doctor Wood?
My gospel saved me completely without my understanding it, while I was yet in sin, before I was born, before the worlds were formed.
Your conditional gospel is based on your understanding it. I don’t understand what you are saying so if I am lost God is to be blamed! He has not made it clear through you. I doubt that you understand your own gospel. If you say you do then you are in trouble.
My salvation is outside of me, apart from me and without me. Our understanding is mere theories as well as yours and James, even Thomas! Calvinism, Lutherianism, evolution are merely theories of men. (we don’t know whether to sprinkle or dunk so how r we to resolve complex issues) My salvation is not based on theory but God, Himself.
Charles Page
March 21, 2009 at 6:28 am
My security is in God, not the Bible!
I’m not sure yet that the KJV is the Word of God, maybe the NASV or the NIV. I’m not sure of King James’ intentions to translate the Bible into the Queen’s language.
My salvation is based on “God is…” naturally the Living Bible makes this plain to me!
Stuart
March 21, 2009 at 8:48 am
Dr. Galyon,
It is not I who am separating the messsage from the Person, but rather it is you. I see the two so intimately and incomprehensibly connected that to cling to one is to cling to the other, to deny the one is to deny the other. I will say it again, no one can cling to Christ (the Word) who does not cling to His Word, no one can cling to the Person of Christ who does not cling to His one and only holy Gospel. “Faith cometh by hearing and hearing by the Word of God” (Rom. 10:17). There is no such thing as saving faith that is not founded upon the objective verifiable Word of God. And there is no starting point for faith except the one and only holy Gospel, how that “Christ died for our sins”. This is the “first of all” (1 Cor. 15:3).
Incidentally, this is what I meant in one of my original posts with you when I said:
“I say, I know Christ died for MY sins because God’s Word says that He died for all, and I am one of the all. The truth that He died for my sins resides outside of myself. The truth remains the truth whether I believe it or not. In fact, I am forced to believe it, because if I don’t I make God a liar.
“You say, you know Christ died for YOUR sins because He promised you that IF YOU TRUST Christ alone for the forgiveness of sins, He would grant pardon on account of the Lord Jesus. So your faith rests upon your own perceived trust in Christ. If you trust Him, then the atonement applies to you. If you don’t trust Him, then the atonement does not apply to you. Am I correct?
“For me the crucial matter lies outside myself. For you it resides within yourself. For me I need the objective promise of the Gospel in the Word of God and if that Word fails I am ruined. For you you are looking to trust Jesus as a Person, with the idea that if you do, He will come through for you with His atoning work. Quite different.”
Remember that? We’ve come full circle.
Pastor Wood
Dr. James Galyon
March 21, 2009 at 9:06 am
Pastor Wood,
In many respects, this does bring us full circle. However, you are still incorrect to assert that my faith rests upon my own perceived trust in Christ. As I stated previously, “I am not trusting in my own faith for salvation, but Christ alone. Trusting in one’s faith is, indeed, idolatry, as is trusting one’s baptism. One must trust God alone in Christ Jesus for the forgiveness of sins. Even faith itself is a gift from God (Eph. 2:8-9), and is in no way a work. . . . The basis on which I believe Christ died for my sins is simply the promise of the Gospel. . . . God promised me (and all) that if I trusted in Christ alone for the forgiveness of sins that He would grant pardon on account of the Lord Jesus. Where do I derive that knowledge? Objectively, and most importantly, from the promise of God, which comes from His Word.”
You stated previously that you needed two things in order to know you are saved: the atonement and baptism. Yet, you said Jesus Christ died (made atonement) for forgiven sinners who will be lost. What makes the difference with you? Baptism? But you stated a baptized believer can become an apostate. Again, what makes the difference with you?
Dr. James Galyon
March 21, 2009 at 9:18 am
Another question, Pastor Wood. Do you believe there is any connection between the work of the Lord Jesus Christ at the cross and His present work of intercession?
Stuart
March 21, 2009 at 9:10 am
Charles,
You are trying to take refuge in your supposed ignorance, but you are in reality just playing a game and deceiving your own self. For you do not really think you are ignorant, for you have asserted many things on this blog as being true. More importantly, you have flatly rejected the one and only saving Gospel that I have continuously placed before you, how that “Christ died for your sins”. I have to assume you do that with what you must believe to be “understanding”.
As to the importance of really understanding the contents of the Gospel, consider Jesus’ parable of the Sower and the Seed. Of the lost Jesus says, “When any one heareth the word of the kingdom, and understandeth it not, then cometh the wicked one, and catcheth away that which was sown in his heart. This is he which received seed by the way side” (Matt. 13:19). Of the saved Jesus says, “But he that received seed into the good ground is he that heareth the word, and understandeth it; which also beareth fruit, and bringeth forth, some an hundredfold, some sixty, some thirty” (Matt. 13:23).
Pastor Wood
Stuart
March 21, 2009 at 11:43 am
Dr. Galyon,
In answer to your first post, if you say your faith is not in your own faith, fine. But with limited atonement your faith is necessarily in something within yourself, whether your own faith, or your own self-perception, or your own fruit, or your own experiences, etc. The reason being that since you believe that Christ died only for the elect, and since you believe He died for you, you must have some reason from within yourself that you believe that you are one of the elect. This has to be, as there is no objective Word of God saying “Dr. Galyon is one of the elect”. Yours is truly a deduction (actually a presumption) based upon something you believe about yourself.
Take your “Come unto Me…” verse that you quote. The presumption here is that you are one of the “meek and lowly”, for that is who the verse is addressed to. Christ calls only “the meek and lowly” to Himself. But how do you know that you qualify? I have been in circles where you must know your own meekness and lowliness at a much deeper level than blind sinners commonly will confess. How do you know that you are one of those ones who has felt and confessed your own meekness and lowliness deeply enough? In fact, how could anyone ever know that he is truly one of the “meek and lowly”? Where would the line of demarkation be?
Also, I want you to know that this is not meant to be a personal attack, but just a necessary correlary to holding to the false doctrine of limited atonement. What’s true of you, would necessarily be true of all others holding this same lie.
Pastor Wood
Dr. James Galyon
March 21, 2009 at 12:32 pm
Pastor Wood:
With particular redemption, faith is not something within oneself. Faith is a gift purchased by the Lord Jesus Christ at the cross and applied and given by the Holy Spirit. Your argument that “since you believe He died for you, you must have some reason from within yourself…” is hollow. As I’ve stated previously and numerous times, the objective reason is the promise of God in the gospel on account of Christ. Period. It is the Lord Jesus Christ, who has made atonement for sins, who is to be our object of faith. It seems to me that my position is much more closely aligned with the Book of Acts.
Acts 10:43 – “Whoever believes in Him will receive remission of sins.”
Acts 13:38-39 – “Through this Man is preached to you the forgiveness of sins; and by Him everyone who believes is justified.”
Acts 16:31 – “Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ, and you will be saved.”
Acts 19:4 – “Believe on Him…that is, on Christ Jesus.”
As for the “Come unto Me” verse, my only presumption is that the Lord Jesus invites all to come unto HIM. That was the point of my statement, nothing else. Please don’t presume anything on my account. As far as your “necessary correlary”, how do you know that you have been saved? You stated previously that you needed two things in order to know you are saved: the atonement and baptism. Yet, you said Jesus Christ died (made atonement) for forgiven sinners who will be lost. What makes the difference with you? How do you know that, even though Christ has died for your sins, you won’t be lost? Because of your baptism? But you stated a baptized believer can become an apostate. Again, what makes the difference with you?
Do you believe there is any connection between the work of the Lord Jesus Christ at the cross and His present work of intercession?
Thomas Twitchell
March 21, 2009 at 2:27 pm
It is by the Spirit that we call out Abba Father, and further, who denies that Christ has come in the flesh, but the spirit of the anti-Christ. We know, not merely resting upon the objective word, but as Scripture clearly teaches us, we have the Spirit. He is called the Comforter. He is called that for good reason. Yet, there are some who would deny this inward witness even though to be Christ’s one must have the Spirit which he himself promised would be in us: “Even the Spirit of truth; whom the world cannot receive, because it seeth him not, neither knoweth him: but ye know him; for he dwelleth with you, and shall be in you.”
So, how do you know you have been born again, that you have eternal life? If it is only by the objecive word, that which is outside, you are a miserable lost soul. For the Spirit quickens and gives life to the word so that we behold the resurrected Word. The teachers of the Law believed that the way was merely external, that by studying the objective word, they thought they knew God. Jesus condemned that kind of thinking as the devilish thinking of those who would put him to death. We must have at least two witnesses, as it is written (for those who really care what is written). We must have the Spirit and the Word. Scripture won’t get it done, preaching won’t get it done. We must possess Him of whom they speak and the Spirit quickens us before we can even understand that.
I am still wondering about Abraham, the father of faith. Just how did he know that the Man who he called God, was God, seeing that he didn’t have the Scripture declaring it to be so? And just who was the preacher who preached to him, so that his faith might come by hearing?
Now, back the question which refuses to be answered. Unless one has experienced being born again, that is, unless one has the inward testimony, how would they know they are born again? If it is only external, you are still dead in your sin.
Stuart Wood
March 21, 2009 at 5:28 pm
Twitchell,
This is for you –
Luther writes, “Here also we need to give heed that we take the right way and not make the mistake which certain heretics have made in times past and many erroneous minds who think that God ought to do something special with them. They imagine that God will deal separately with each one by some special internal light and mysterious revelation…. We are to know that God has ordained that no one shall come to the knowledge of Christ, nor obtain the forgiveness of sins acquired by Him, nor receive the Holy Ghost without the use of external and public means. God has placed this treasure in the oral word and ministry.” (St. L. XI:1735 f.)
Luther writes, “This is the reason why our doctrine is most sure and certain, because it carries us out of ourselves, that we should not lean on our own strength, our own conscience, our own feeling, our own person, and our own works; but onto that which is outside us, that is to say, the promise and truth of God, which cannot deceive us” (St. L. IX:509). “You must be certain that your sins are truly and certainly forgiven you through the external Word; for Baptism and the Word will not lie to you” (St. L. XIII:2438).
Martin Luther writes, “God has always followed this custom of giving a visible sign, a person, place, or spot, where He could certainly be found. For if we are not bound and held by a physical, external sign, every one of us will seek God wherever he pleases. For this reason the holy Prophets wrote much of the Tabernacle, the dwelling place and tent where He willed to be present. Thus God has always done. In a like manner He has built us Christians a temple where He would dwell, namely, the spoken Word, Baptism, and the Lord’s Supper, which also are perceptible things. But our false prophets, factious spirits, and ‘enthusiasts’ despise it and cast it aside, as though it were worthless, and say, ‘Truly, I will sit and wait until a flying Spirit and revelation comes to me from heaven. Beware of that!” (St. L. III:924f.).
Luther writes, “Over against all that reason suggests or would measure and fathom, yes, all that our senses feel and perceive, we must learn to cling to the Word and simply judge according to it…. For if you insist on judging according to what you see and feel and, when you are told God’s Word, urge your opposite feelings and say: You have good talking, but my heart talks quite another language, and if you felt what I feel, you, too, would talk differently, etc.: then God’s Word is not in your heart, but by your own thoughts, reason, and musings you have smothered and extinguished it. In short, if you will not esteem the Word above all your feelings, eyes, senses, and heart, you will inevitably be lost, and there is no help for you…. I also feel my sin, and the Law, and the devil on my neck, that I lie prostrate under it as under a heavy load. But what should I do? Were I to judge according to such feelings and my strength, I and all men would have to despair and perish. But if I desire to be helped, I must verily face about and look at the Word and learn from it to say: I indeed feel God’s wrath, the devil, death, and hell; but the Word says otherwise, namely, that I have a gracious God through Christ, who is my Lord, superior to the devil and all creatures.” (St. L. VIII:1102.)
Luther writes, “And in those things which concern the spoken, outward Word, we must firmly hold that God grants His Spirit or grace to no one, except through and with the preceding outward Word, in order that we may thus be protected against the enthusiasts, i.e., spirits who boast that they have the Spirit without and before the Word. All this is the old devil and old serpent, who also converted Adam and Eve into enthusiasts, and led them from the outward Word of God to spiritualizing and self-conceit…. In a word, enthusiasm inheres in Adam and his children from the beginning [from the first fall] to the end of the world, [its poison] having been implanted and infused into them by the old dragon, and is the origin, power, and strength of all heresy, especially that of the Papacy and Mahomet. Therefore we ought and must constantly maintain this point, that God does not wish to deal with us otherwise than through the spoken Word and the Sacraments. It is the devil himself whatsoever is extolled as Spirit without the Word and the Sacrament.” (Trigl. 495, Part III, Art. VIII, 3-10).
Luther correctly says that any man who bases his faith on his “experiences”, particularly on his possession of faith, is an “idolatrous apostate”. He further explains, “For he trusts and builds on his own, namely, on a gift which God has given him, and not on God’s Word alone, just as another builds and trusts in his strength, riches, power, wisdom, holiness, which as well are gifts given him of God” (St. L. XVII:2213).
Luther writes, “Why do you want to hear the Gospel, the Epicureans ask, since everything depends on being elected? — That is how Satan violently robs us of election, of which we are assured through the Son of God, and through the holy Sacraments… That is what would have happened to me, if Staupitz had not saved me when I was suffering this same temptation…. Dr. Staupitz used to comfort me by saying: ‘My dear friend, why do you plague yourself with these speculations and philosophical ideas? Fix your eyes on the wounds and blood of Christ, shed for you; then the election of God will become clear to you.’… There are many who did not thus resist this temptation, and as a result were plunged into destruction and eternal damnation… This is how the saints or Christians who are still novices tend to think of God, outside of Christ… This is why pious people should guard themselves against this and be concerned only with clinging to the infant Son of God, Jesus, who is your God and became man for your sake… If you have Him, you also have the hidden God along with the revealed God.” (Luther’s Works, Vol. 5, 47f.).
Pastor Wood
Charles Page
March 21, 2009 at 8:04 pm
…the love of God is shed abroad in our hearts by the Holy Ghost which is given to us.
Stuart
March 22, 2009 at 9:21 am
Charles,
“We love, because He first loved us” (1 Jn. 4:17). Also, Mr. Twitchell, I apologize for addressing you in my earlier post as “Twitchell”. That tone was not right. I was in a rush because of my wife’s birthday, and did not re-read that before I sent it, and later felt bad about the disrespectful tone of address to you. I vehemently disagree with your religion, but my contention is with your spirit, not your person. From my side, you too are a dear soul for whom My Saviour shed His precious blood (whether you believe it or not), and my hopes are truly not against you, but for you.
I hope that we can all see from this, and agree, that we have two different religions here, founded upon two different Gospels, which in turn are founded upon two different views of the extent of Christ’s atonement. Each of our religions are incompatible with the other, and require us to censure the other in the most unqualified terms. Both of us have our authors, and our lines of argument which support what we say. But only one of these religions can be true and saving. I hope that you will take an honest look at the verses that really separate us at the foundation. These are “behold, I bring you good tidings of great joy, which shall be to all people” (Luk. 2:10), “Behold the Lamb of God, which taketh away the sin of the world” (John 1:29), “For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son” (John 3:16); “This is indeed the Christ, the Saviour of the world” (John 4:42); “who is the Saviour of all men” (1 Tim. 4:10); “who will have all men to be saved” (1 Tim. 2:4); “who gave himself a ransom for all” (1 Tim. 2:6); “one died for all” (2 Cor. 5:14); “God was in Christ, reconciling the world unto himself, not imputing their trespasses unto them” (2 Cor. 5:19); “who tasted death for every man” (Heb. 2:9); “even denying the Lord that bought them” (2 Pet. 2:1); “whh is not willing that any should perish, but that all should come to repentance” (2 Pet. 3:9); “he is the propitiation for our sins: and not for ours only, but also for the sins of the whole world” (1 John 2:2); along with the equally clear Luke 14:16-24; 22:20, 21; John 3:17-18; 6:33, 51; 8:26; 12:47; 16:8, 9; Acts 13:26; 17:31; Rom. 14:15; 1 Cor. 8:11; 15:1-4; 2 Cor. 4:3,4; 1 Tim. 2:5; Tit. 2:11; 3:4; Heb. 10:28, 29; and 1 John 4:13, 14.
Pastor Wood
Dr. James Galyon
March 22, 2009 at 10:40 pm
Thomas:
I would argue that “normal” work of the Holy Spirit in bringing about the new birth is to utilize His Word.
Pastor Wood:
Two different religions founded upon two different gospels?!? Incompatible religions?!? Wow. I’m tempted to respond to you regarding all the verses you cited, but at this point, I’m not sure I see the point. Definitely no more citing St. Augustine for you.
Thomas Twitchell
March 22, 2009 at 4:26 pm
“And in those things which concern the spoken, outward Word, we must firmly hold that God grants His Spirit or grace to no one, except through and with the preceding outward Word, in order that we may thus be protected against the enthusiasts…”
So Luther believed in magic, turning the Word into a magic talisman, a parlor trick, an encantationalism, so what. So what, that he got is backwards: “One who heard us was a woman named Lydia, from the city of Thyatira, a seller of purple goods, who was a worshiper of God. The Lord opened her heart to pay attention to what was said by Paul.” You cannot get around the fact that the Holy Spirit quickened Lydia to understand and that that regeneration happened before she understood. The fact that she was hearing the words but inattentive means that the words had nothing to do with her being quickened, and the sequence is undeniable, first she was born-again, then she understood, John 3:3.
Tell us, was John the Baptist born filled with the Spirit, or not. Was he, or was he not born-again before he ever heard the Word?
That is why we are not Lutheran, regeneration precedes the hearing of the Word. Luther was wrong. No one here has placed their confidence in our faith in Christ in experience alone, but without true knowing- active, participatory, experiential faith- there is none. The word remains in the grave, dead. Like you, a person without the Spirit, remains just an academic and above all the most miserable. And don’t whine about your salvation being challenged. The quotes you quote are directed in their condemnations toward me, so you challenge mine as you have challenged Revs. But, really, Grimer Wormtongue, who cares what you or Luther say? What matters is what Scripture says, and what it says is you are of the Spirit of the anti-Christ if you deny the power of God to grant the love of God (an active experiential reality) of Christ resident in us. And it must be there before we pay attention to the Word, Romans 8.
And, I don’t think you read Luther any better than you do Scripture. It would be one thing if you said that your faith hung on the Word of God, if you actually knew what it said.
Luther also said: “God will have all men to be saved” (1 Timothy 2:4), and he gave his Son for us men, and he created man for the sake of eternal life. And likewise: Everything is there for man’s sake and he is there for God’s sake in order that he may enjoy him, etc. But this objection [to God's sovereignty in salvation] and others like it can just as easily be refuted as the first one: because all these sayings must be understood only with respect to the elect [emphasis in original], as the apostle says in 2 Timothy 2:10, “All for the elect.” Christ did not die for absolutely all, for he says: “This is my blood which is shed for you” (Luke 22:20) and “for many” (Mark 14:24)- he did not say: for all- “to the remission of sins” (Matthew 26:28). [Martin Luther, Lectures on Romans, translated and edited by Wilhelm Pauck (Philadelphia: The Westminster Press, 1961), 252.]
Luther was a limited atoner. So why do you even go by his name? Why don’t you call him a hate-filled heretic, as you have us?
And why should we believe either you, or Luther, if experience is not also essential to faith? At least for me and for Paul, I know (an experiential thing) Him in whom I have believed. And I know without a doubt that in paradise I will surely be experiencing my faith. My experience far preceded any true knowledge of him. As with all saints, we are first quickened (an experiential thing) they we grow in the faith, or as it is said: Faith comes by hearing…” We understand, unlike those still dead in sin and trespass, that before we can hear( understand) the Words of faith, we must experience life.
As for you, begone with your anti-Christian rants that disallow for a personal relationship with the risen Christ.
That’s right Charles, but “Pastor” Wood denies the Word of God is true. And as long as the Word remains outside of him, he and his minions are already condemned.
thomastwitchell
March 23, 2009 at 12:01 am
“I would argue that “normal” work of the Holy Spirit in bringing about the new birth is to utilize His Word.”
Depends I guess if you what you mean by birth is conversion or regeneration. For the term is born again, not new birth, and the English word born which we use in the place of birthed is from the OE borne, meaning to be carried, and it is the conceptus which is carried and a child which is birthed, but it is not a child who is born. The English Language can confuse, no? This is a fact of life, a person is conceived, borne, then given birth. Confusing being birthed (born) with conception or being borne with conception, can be deadly, almost abortive. There’s a differnce between anothen gennao/anagennao and tikto. The ginomai verbs reflect beginning, conception, as in genesis, and not process as birth, tikto. What is quickened is that which is concieved, what is birthed is what is called forth by the Word. Conception happens by the Spirit apart from the words spoken or written, but are nonetheless attended by the Word. The confusion is a Nicodemian error. Understandable if one misunderstands the way a child is conceived, borne and birthed.
I have a much longer response to “Pastor” Wood. I will leave it for later. I can see already that you won’t agree, but I knew that already, and don’t even think you’re a heretic:)
Dr. James Galyon
March 23, 2009 at 12:43 am
Thomas,
As a confessionalist, I affirm the Baptist Confession (1689) which states, “Those whom God hath predestinated unto life, he is pleased in his appointed, and accepted time, effectually to call, by his Word and Spirit, out of that state of sin and death in which they are by nature, to grace and salvation by Jesus Christ; enlightening their minds spiritually and savingly to understand the things of God; taking away their heart of stone, and giving unto them a heart of flesh; renewing their wills, and by his almighty power determining them to that which is good, and effectually drawing them to Jesus Christ; yet so as they come most freely, being made willing by his grace. Elect infants dying in infancy are regenerated and saved by Christ through the Spirit; who worketh when, and where, and how he pleases; so also are all elect persons, who are incapable of being outwardly called by the ministry of the Word. . . . The grace of faith, whereby the elect are enabled to believe to the saving of their souls, is the work of the Spirit of Christ in their hearts, and is ordinarily wrought by the ministry of the Word.”
Stuart
March 23, 2009 at 10:14 am
Dr. Galyon,
Can you not see where this false doctrine of limited atonement leads? It leads one man to say, “My security is in God, not the Bible!” (#36), and another to say, “[R]egeneration precedes the hearing of the Word. Luther was wrong… My experience far preceded any true knowledge of him.” (#47).
As for me, I will stay with the little children’s song, “Jesus loves me, this I know, for the Bible tells me so.”
Pastor Wood
Thomas Twitchell
March 23, 2009 at 10:28 am
James-
Yes and don’t forget: This effectual call is of God’s free and special grace alone, not from anything at all foreseen in man, nor from any power or agency in the creature, being wholly passive therein, being dead in sins and trespasses, until being quickened and renewed by the Holy Spirit; he is thereby enabled to answer this call, and to embrace the grace offered and conveyed in it, and that by no less power than that which raised up Christ from the dead.
And:
Elect infants dying in infancy are regenerated and saved by Christ through the Spirit; who worketh when, and where, and how he pleases; so also are all elect persons, who are incapable of being outwardly called by the ministry of the Word.
Which you mentioned but failed to take into account that this is not just exceptional, but is foundational in the fact that always does regeneration precede the Word.
Or: When God converts a sinner, and translates him into the state of grace, he freeth him from his natural bondage under sin, and by his grace alone enables him freely to will and to do that which is spiritually good; (like listening to the effectual call)
What you quote is true, at some point in the effectual calling the Word does enter in. However, in the very chapter you quote you have this sequence: enlightening their minds spiritually and savingly to understand the things of God; taking away their heart of stone, and giving unto them a heart of flesh; renewing their wills, and by his almighty power determining them to that which is good…… and effectually drawing them to Jesus Christ (the Word, my emphasis); yet so as they come most freely, being made willing by his grace.
It is not the Word that Draws, but the Spirit in man that draw them to Christ.
And thus the enabling. Nothing inheres in the Word that is effectual in causing regeneration. The effectual call is a complex of things which must happen. The first of these is regeneration, then enablement of understanding, then the entrance of the Word which by its nature “enables” faith. Here’s the point, even though the Word is involved in this effectual call, effectual, should not be confused with the anagennao. The recreation must precede the attending effects, i.e. hearing the Word with understanding, conviction, repentance, faith et cetera. This is simple, as Jesus said, like the way a child is concieved and then born. The confession doesn’t rule this out. The necessity of the “new birth” before the attention to the Word is clearly marked out in it and in Scripture.
You quote: “The grace of faith”, but the grace of faith is not the grace of regeneration, not that grace of the indwelling Holy Spirit by which that faith is comprehended. You confuse several kinds of enablements.
As a confessionalist I would think that you would know that before one can see the Kingdom, and therefore have faith, they must be born-again, anothen gennao, regenerated from above, or if you prefer, regenerated before the Word has any effect. John the baptist is not just an exception to the rule, he the type, but Christ is the more clear type of our regeneration. Jesus was not a monster, nor was John. Each in his turn, being born filled with the Holy Spirit, learned, came to understand. John does not even have a revelation of Christ until the Spirit sets upon Christ, for he did not know who he was, Scripture says, until then. For any of us, the conception precedes the birthing. And of course the Word and Spirit are one in the whole of this work. But, the Word has no effectual means except that the Spirit goes first. Try this, was the Word concieved by the Spirit? Or, did he concieve himself? You might not like this reasoning, but the fact is that the Spirit made man even though the Eternal Word is at work also. By the Spirit Adam was created, by the Spirit he was animated, and it was not until he was a man, a living breathing soul, that he beheld the Word in the Garden. And yes it is the Eternal Word who by the Spirit creates all things. This is the way it has always been. Man is concieved of the Spirit, and called forth by the Word. I was not going to post the really long response but alas, you do force this issue, because your nemesis rejects the idea that the Spirit bears witness to the Word; that our assurance rests only in the Word and not the Spirit testifying that the Word is true. And that can’t be, James, if the Word is first. Of course Jesus’ testimony is true, but he also said that there was another greater. The Spirit regenerates and it is that which witnesses to, reveals at the behest of the Father: “You are the Christ the Son of the Living God.” That is how we know to follow the effectual voice, because we are his sheep. Peter did not know because Jesus had been all along preaching the Gospel to him, but because the Spirit sent from the Father revealed it. Jesus overules his Word as the regerating agent with “flesh and blood has not revealed this to you but my Father in Heaven.” Indeed, Jesus completes this picture in saying that he would send the Spirit and that the Spirit, not the Word, would call to rememberance all that was spoken. That the Spirit takes of the Word and reveals it, needs to be understood, that the Word is a spiritual reality Paul says, only revealed by the Spirit.
The following is a response I didn’t post, its long, sorry bout that:
Don’t worry about it “Pastor” Wood, I neither deserve nor desire any respect from you.
Edwards in discussing Matthew 16:17, “And Jesus answered and said unto him, Blessed art thou, Simon Barjona: for flesh and blood hath not revealed it unto thee, but my Father which is in heaven,”
importantly aknowledges the insufficiency of flesh and blood in revealing the truth of the Word that stood before Peter’s eyes. Even though he had been long with the Lord by this time, Jesus confirms that it is not by the words spoken, or by any other machination that the truth is revealed, but
from the Father alone. Though the word indeed does attend to the inward it is neither the cause nor in any other way the instantiator of the knowledge. The sequence again, that one must have the Spirit, it is the Spirit that enlightens the mind. It is not without the Word, but indeed precedes it making straight the way. The Word is believed not in the preaching, nor in the reading as Jesus elsewhere confirms, but is without intermediary, immediately given by the Holy Spirit. No flesh and blood, no preacher can transfer this light. The preaching only confirms what is already there, Titus 1:1-3; “Paul, a servant of God and an apostle of Jesus Christ, for the sake of the faith of God’s elect and their knowledge of the truth, which accords with godliness, in hope of eternal life, which God, who never lies, promised before the ages began and at the proper time manifested in his word through the preaching with which I have been entrusted by the command of God our Savior.” Having been bornagain, all that we will become in being conformed into his image is already resident and will, as Scripture describes bring forth first the stem then the bud and then will bear the fruit of its kind. Just as when two gametes fuse and form a zygote, the genetic code is laid. All that a person will be is in that union. Will the Lord conceive and not bring to the matrix? The Word of God is the attending midwife that is involved in the birthing of what already preexists in the womb. This is what many of us call conversion but not all hold to this. It is not regeneration. In regeneration everything, all that the image of Christ encompasses, including the attentive ear and obedient heart, is present only waiting upon the external call to bring forth that which has been awoken by the quickening power of the Spirit of God internally. Without the Spirit’s residence there is no life to answer that call and thereby no internal call which can be effectual. Jesus said, “If I have told you earthly things and you do not believe, how can you believe if I tell you heavenly things?” The Newbirth is not unlike the old. We are conceived by the Spirit, not the word. We are alive by the Spirit and given the Mind of Christ by the Spirit so that we might freely understand the things of God. It is not the other way around though it might be simultaneous or so nearly so that there is no distinction. The ones who are called are the same ones who the Father knows and gives to his Son. Like Lazarus they are called forth, not becoming who they are when called forth, but they are called forth being who they were already. Except that the Spirit quickened Lazarus, unless the Spirit brings him forth, there would be no one for the attendants to remove the grave clothes. Even Jesus was outside, the preacher, and Jesus says essentially that the words he spoke were not the effectual agent, they were spoken so that people would know it was the Father who sends the Spirit and enlightens the mind. It was the Father, Jesus said, who is the one speaking, for Jesus said nothing of himself, nor did anything except what he saw the Father doing. In other words, Lazarus was alive in the Spirit before the words came out of Jesus mouth. The words were not “Lazarus awake!,” but “Lazarus come forth.” No matter how we look at it, whether with Adam or any other, before there is understanding of the Words of Life, there is life. God breathed into Adam and there was life. Just as there was with Jesus when, not by the Word, but by the Eternal Spirit of the LIving God, he was raised from the dead: “just as Christ was raised from the dead by the glory of the Father, we too might walk in newness of life….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…God the Father, who raised him from the dead….It is the Spirit who gives life; the flesh is no help at all. The words that I have spoken to you are spirit and life.” It is this power that the Gospel tells us about, it is this Gospel that is the life in us, but that Gospel is the power of God unto Salvation, not in the words of a preacher, not in the words of the Book, but the word which abides in us: “since you have been born again, not of perishable seed but of imperishable, through the living and abiding word of God.” There are many that have a form of godliness but deny the power of it, the very power to understand the
meaning if the Words of Life; that if the living Word is not at first within, abiding, it does not matter in whom or in what it is found outside. As Jesus
said flesh and blood has not revealed this. Truly he went so far as to say that it is because men are of their father the Devil if they do not hear. Then, one must be born-again, before he can hear. So it cannot be that the Word precedes the Spirit, but the opposite.
The following is from Edwards, a confessonal believer also:
So much for the warring commentaries. I agree with you. We indeed have a different Gospel. Let there be mutual anthemas all around.
Charles Page
March 25, 2009 at 7:06 am
commenter #51
as usual you are wrong on most things it was comment #35 not 36 and consistent with your reasoning you took that statement out of context. not surprising.
My salvation is in the God who is the rewarder of thoes who diligently seek him. Seems I have read that somewhere in the Bible. I don’t believe in your Biblical interpretation. I trust the infallible Word of God as a guide for my salvation. The Bible doesn’t save, Jesus saves. God speaks the Word of salvation and Jesus is that Word. The Bible tells me so.
What a mess if I had to depend on your, James or Thomas’ lenghty words for my salvation. What a mess I would be in if I had to search the KJV for my salvation! God puts the word in my mouth and he is nigh me.
Charles Page
March 27, 2009 at 7:12 am
awaiting a comment to the above, Pastor!