Human Moral Inability and the Gospel

 "I know, O Lord, that the way of man is not in himself, that it is not in man who walks to direct his steps" (Jeremiah 10:23). 

I have written many times about the doctrine of total depravity. This is the doctrine of total inability, which is closely related, but distinct. Total depravity is the condition, while total inability is the result. That is, sin has affected every faculty of our humanity, the result of which is that there REMAINS no native ability in us to perform any moral good. The two things are often equated, but I am treating them separately, because I think that Scripture addresses them separately. 

It is a common error of supporters of free will that the doctrine of total inability is an invention of John Calvin, based on a misreading of the writings of Paul. I deliberately chose the verse above from Jeremiah to show that both aspects of that accusation are wrong. Total inability is an invention of neither Paul nor John Calvin. 

Rather, we see in the prophet his concern that men are unable to obey God from any ability in ourselves. As he faced the coming prospect of the exile of Judah in Babylon, he lamented that Judah could not reform himself. So, he pleaded, "correct me" (verse 24), because I cannot correct myself. That is, speaking on behalf of his people. 

As theologian John Frame has said, "Although fallen persons are capable of externally-good acts (acts that are good for society), they cannot do anything really good, I. e., pleasing to God (Romans 8:8). God, however, looks on the heart. And from His ultimate standpoint, fallen man has no goodness, in thought, word, or deed. He is, therefore, incapable of contributing anything to his salvation."

That is the connection of this doctrine to the gospel. The inability of men to display the righteous nature that God requires would naturally doom all men to eternal judgment (Hebrews 12:14), would display, not injustice on God's part, but rather hopelessness on the part of men. Instead, God established a righteousness which is by faith alone, the imputation of the perfect righteousness of a surety, an alien righteousness, granted to every sinner for whom He died on the cross, Jesus of Nazareth (Isaiah 26:12, John 6:37-39, II Corinthians 5:21). 

The Commandments of God in Stone and the Hearts of Men

Most people are not aware that God gave Moses the Ten Commandment not once but twice. The first time is described in Exodus 24:12: "The Lord said to Moses, 'Come up to Me on the mountain and wait there, that I may give you the tablets of stone, with the law and the commandment, which I have written for their instruction.'" And again in 31:18: "And He gave to Moses, when He had finished speaking with him on Mount Sinai, the two tablets of the testimony, tablets of stone, written with the finger of God." These tablets were the ones shattered by Moses in anger at the idolatry of the Israelites in their worship of the golden calf (chapter 32).

After shattering the original tablets, Moses was then tasked with replacing them with a new pair of tablets, which he himself fashioned. "The Lord said to Moses, 'Cut for yourself two tablets of stone like the first, and I will write on the tablets the words that were on the first tablets, which you broke'" (Exodus 34:1). As when Adam fell into sin, when Moses broke the commandments, literally, he was cursed with an increase in labor, having to carve and carry the stone tablets himself. 

This historical event came to my mind during a recent Sunday school lesson at my church. Part of that lesson dealt with the law of God written on human hearts. We see this in two places in the New Testament. First, Paul mentions it in Romans 2:15: "[Gentiles] show that the work of the law is written on their hearts, while their conscience also bears witness, and their conflicting thoughts accuse or even excuse them." Then the writer of Hebrews mentions it again as part of the new covenant, which he, in turn, borrowed from the Prophet Jeremiah: "This is the covenant that I will make with them after those days, declares the Lord: I will put My laws on their hearts, and write them on their minds" (Hebrews 10:16, from Jeremiah 31:33). 

Notice the parallels between these two pairs of events. In each, God gave His holy commandments, but they were broken by men. And then God gave them again. 

By this pairing of breaking and restoration, we see two magnificent things. First is that God does not lower His standards merely because men cannot meet them. To do so would be to betray His own holiness. And second is His mercy. While the breaking of the law naturally incurs the death penalty (Romans 6:23), God's work is restorative, not punitive, for His elect. He restores His law (Isaiah 42:21). And He restores His elect through the imputation by faith of the perfect obedience of His only-begotten Son, Jesus Christ (John 1:17, II Corinthians 5:21, Romans 3:21-22). 

"Religious Neutrality" in Government Is Treason Against King Jesus

One of the stories which we best remember about the Prophet Elijah is his confrontation with the prophets of Baal (I Kings, chapter 18). The people of Israel had reached an historical point in religion in which they had eschewed fanaticism, giving equal devotion, in their own eyes, to Jehovah, their covenant God, and Baal, a fertility deity popular in much of the region around Israel. They chose to be neutral, giving both gods some attention, in the hope that one or the other would reward them. 

However, Elijah rejected the religious neutrality of the rest of Israel, challenging them, "How long will you go limping between two different opinions? If the Lord is God, follow Him; but if Baal, then follow him" (I Kings 18:21). His challenge was outside the cultural norm of that time, in which Israel was lackadaisical about religious devotion. Neutral, if you will. Trying to cover all of their bases. 

However, Jehovah rejected the neutrality of Israel. While the prophets of Baal received no answer from that deity, Jehovah certainly responded: "Then the fire of the Lord fell and consumed the burnt offering and the wood and the stones and the dust, and licked up the water that was in the trench" (verse 38). When the Israelites saw that Jehovah answered while Baal remained silent, they saw the emptiness in their illusion of neutrality: "When all the people saw it, they fell on their faces and said, 'The Lord, He is God; the Lord, He is God'" (verse 39) Then, in the words of Elijah ("my God is Yah"), "'Seize the prophets of Baal, let none of them escape.' And they seized them. And Elijah brought them down to the brook Kishon and slaughtered them there" (verse 40). 

What Israel learned that day is that there could be no neutrality between the living God of their forefathers, and the pagan idols of the peoples around them. "Limping between two opinions" did not rescue them from the consequences of equating truth with falsehood. 

In a similar way, we in the United States live on land that was dedicated to that same God of the Bible. Then, when our nation was founded, our leaders included a provision in the Constitution saying that the new federal government could not establish a religion. Did they mean to equate Islam, Hinduism, and atheism with Christianity? Not at all. Rather, they intended for the federal government not to show favoritism among the Christian denominations of the new country. 

That plan did not remain in force, especially since the 1960's, when the courts unilaterally decided to eliminate the Christian religion from public forums. Those courts decreed that no establishment of religion meant neutrality toward all religions and irreligion. Prayer and bible reading were removed from government schools, and Christian symbols, such as crosses and placards of the Ten Commandments, were removed from government buildings, parks, even from "polite" discussion. 

Has this "neutrality" fared any better than did that of Elijah's day? Not by any definition. Rather, we have discovered the awful fact that neutrality toward God makes the state the new arbiter of all absolutes. As should have been anticipated. Where Jesus told us, "Your word, [Father], is truth" (John 17:17), now the state is the dispenser of truth. And where Jesus told us, "All authority in Heaven and on earth has been given to Me" (Matthew 28:18), the state says that all authority now belongs to it. Thus, "neutrality" has become an opportunity for tyranny, and our health as a nation sinks further every day.

Free Grace and the Creator-Creature Distinction

"Esteem not yourself the better for what you may carry with you. Think not to be accepted because of your present. It is not your money, Isaiah 55:1, John 7:37, nor your double money in your hand that will fetch you corn from above, though it may come from Egypt. Silver and gold, your own works and worthiness, are of no value at the mint of free grace. But there it is, and thence you must have whatever may hinder you welcome at the court of Heaven." -Puritan Elisha Coles, "A Practical Discourse of God's Sovereignty" 

People like to bargain. "If you do X, then I will do Y for you." That is part of our existence as creatures of a similar class. However, seeing our autonomy from our fellow creatures, we imagine that we have a comparable stand with our Creator, offering Him some good works, according to our own standards, in exchange for His forgiveness. 

However, our relationship with God is not of the same sort as that with our fellow creatures. We may be equal to them, and with the autonomous right to offer voluntary exchanges, but neither applies to our relationship as creature to our Creator. 

As our Maker, God retains an absolute right over His creatures. The Bible compares that relationship to that between the potter and his clay: "O House of Israel, can I not do with you as this potter has done? declares the Lord. Behold, like the clay in the potter's hand, so are you in My hand, O House of Israel" (Jeremiah 18:6; see also Romans 9:21). And what does the lump of clay have that it can exchange with the potter to change its form? Nothing. 

That is why the justification of God's people can be only by His voluntary condescension. "What shall we say then? Is there injustice on God's part? By no means! 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 depends not on human will or exertion, but on God, who has mercy... So then, He has mercy on whomever He wills, and He hardens whomever He wills" (Romans 9:14-18). 

Sovereign Grace as the Only Rational Basis for Assurance

"Let your souls be filled and enlarged with everlasting admirings [sic] of that grace (that sovereign grace) which has so impregnably secured the salvation of His chosen, that no manner of thing, whether within them or without them, shall be able to defeat it or hinder them of it. No, not the gates of hell. Nay, not so much as one of the stakes thereof shall be removed, and that forever. Shaken you may be, and tossed with a tempest, but not overturned, because ye have an eternal root. Electing love is of that sovereignty that it rules and overrules all, both in heaven and in earth." -Puritan Elisha Coles, "A Practical Discourse of God's Sovereignty" 

In this paragraph, Coles paraphrases and summarizes several passages of Scripture, primary of which is Romans 8:38-39: "I am sure that neither death nor life, nor angels nor rulers, nor things present,nor things to come, nor powers, nor height nor depth, nor anything else in all creation, will be able to separate us from the love of God in Christ Jesus our Lord." 

The point of both Apostle Paul and Coles is that the assurance of the Christian is secure, not because of the power of the believer to maintain his spiritual condition, but because he is sustained by the same sovereign grace which saved him in the beginning. For, as Paul also says, "I am sure of this, that He who began a good work in you will bring it to completion at the day of Jesus Christ" (Philippians 1:6: see also 2:13). 

Does any Christian believe that God is unaware of our weakness, of our frailty, of the strength of the opposition (I Peter 5:8)? If He weren't, then we could have no rational basis for our assurance of eternal life. When Satan assails us with accusations of our unworthiness, he merely throws in our faces what is absolutely correct! However, Satan will never go to the next step, telling us of the grace and power of God the Son, our Redeemer Jesus Christ, because that would defeat all of Satan's designs against us. It is only in the Word of God that we are blessed with this promise: "My sheep hear My voice, and I know them, and they follow Me. I give them eternal life, and they will never perish, and no one will snatch them out of My hand. My Father, who has given them to Me, is greater than all, and no one is able to snatch them out of the Father's hand" (John 10:27-29, emphasis added). Our security is assured, not by any strength that we have, for we have none. Rather, it is guaranteed by the strength of the One who holds us.

Weariness and the Call of the Gospel

One of the most comforting statements in the Bible comes from the mouth of Jesus Himself: "Come to Me, all who labor and are heavy laden, and I will give you rest. Take My yoke upon you, and learn from Me, for I am gentle and lowly in heart, and you will find rest for your souls. For My yoke is easy, and my burden is light" (Matthew 11:28-30). His reference to "rest for your souls" is an indication that He was not speaking of physical weariness, or, at least, not primarily. Rather, He was describing the burden of sin, of which He alone is the cure. 

Turning from the weight of sin to liberation in Jesus is something that only the elect person can do. The reprobate, in contrast, while they experience the futility of sin, will turn to any other source for relief, whether it is substance abuse, moral reform, or a false religion. But, by his very nature, the reprobate is unable to depend on the only solution that works, i. e., redemption and sanctification by Jesus, received by grace alone through faith alone. 

An error is often committed here, even among folks who profess the Reformed Faith. And that error is to teach that Jesus is appealing to the undistinguished mass of humanity, whether elect or reprobate, because, they suppose, God wants "all to be saved" (out of context from I Timothy 2:4). They believe that God has two wills at war with each other, the will to save some, elected from prehistory, but not others, and another will that wants all to be saved. This is called by the misleading phrase "the well-meant gospel offer." That is, offered by God. No one disagrees that we men cannot know who is or is not elect, so we sincerely desire everyone with whom we share the Gospel to respond in saving faith. 

God, however, certainly does know. Yet this doctrine, admittedly the majority doctrine, holds that He, nevertheless, desires everyone without exception to believe unto salvation. This is in spite of what Jesus also tells us in another place: "No one can come to Me unless the Father who sent Me draws him" (John 6:44). So we have this doctrine of the well-meant offer claiming that God works at cross purposes, both drawing and refraining to draw the same men. How can such a schizophrenic being be God? 

Rather, God gives a general outward announcement of the gospel, to which He has decreed that a portion, the elect, will respond in saving faith.  To the reprobate, the hearing of the Gospel is not an invitation to believe, but is, instead, a declaration of judgment, because God has decided to harden them against the word that they hear. That increases their judgment. It is not an effort at cross purposes to the secret will of God. 

The doctrine of the well-meant gospel offer seems to be an effort by Calvinists to take the edge off the doctrine of election, to make it more palatable to the Arminians around us. Yet, how can the insult to the omnipotence of God be worth any softening of our opponents toward us? Not that I believe that Arminians are made any more hospitable thereby. The doctrine puts God in violation of the logical principle of non-contradiction; it violates the Scriptures that tell us that God necessarily achieves His will (e. g., Daniel 4:35 and Psalm 135:6). In support of it is no Scripture or logically-consistent principle. 

Therefore, I am compelled to reject it. 

God's Preservation of His People: The Perseverance of the Saints in Troublous Times

"Though I walk in the midst of trouble, You preserve my life; You stretched out Your hand against the wrath of my enemies, and Your right hand delivers me. The Lord will fulfill His purpose for me; Your steadfast love, O Lord, endures for ever. Do not forsake the work of Your hands." --Psalm 138:7-8 

As I write this, America is just past another wave of Covid-19 and the Russian invasion of Ukraine has just begun its third week. Unemployment is low, but inflation has jumped, especially in the prices of food and gasoline. We are in uncertain times. People are fearful, and many professing Christians have begun another round of talk about the Rapture and Mark of the Beast. 

Under such circumstances, unease is rational. Trusting in God does not mean that Christians don't have normal emotions. However, bad theology merely fans the flames of that unease, adding irrational fears to the rational unease. 

Good theology, on the other hand, brings comfort, and minimizes our fears. In particular, the knowledge that God, our God, reconciled to us through the blood of Jesus, always keeps us in His care: "We know that, for those who love God, all things work together for good, for those who are called according to His purpose. For those whom He foreknew, He also predestined to be conformed to the image of His Son, in order that He might be the firstborn among many brothers. And those whom He predestined, He also called; and those whom He called, He also justified; and those whom He justified, He also glorified" (Romans 8:28-30). This is hard for our egocentric hearts to accept, but the purpose of God is not about us; it is for the glory of His Son that He causes all things to work for good for those who belong to His Son. 

Beyond that, however, it is the purpose of the Son to care for His people without failure and without ceasing: "My sheep hear My voice, and I know them, and they follow Me. I give them eternal life, and they will never perish, and no one will snatch them out of My hand. My Father, who has given them to Me, is greater than all, and no one is able to snatch them out of the Father's hand" (John 10:27-29). Because of His love to His sheep, Jesus guarantees to us that He cannot fail to preserve His sheep for eternity, and He calls on the love of the Father for Him to guarantee what He desires for us.

Jesus the Shepherd and Effectual Calling

"That saying of Christ is much to our purpose: 'And other sheep I have, them also I must bring, and they shall hear My voice' (John 10:16). This must imports a duty not to be dispensed with. He had 'received a commandment for it from the Father' (verse 18), and this shall [imports] that effectual working 'whereby He subdues all things to Himself,' and whereby they are made to believe (Eph. 1:19). The sheep of themselves lie as cross to this work as other men. 'What have I to do with Thee?' cries the possessed Gadarene (Mark 5:7), but, being His sheep, He must make them willing (Psalm 110:3)." - Elisha Coles, "A Practical Discourse of God's Sovereignty" (emphasis in the original). 

A common Arminian objection to the doctrines of grace is their claim that "God has given us free will." And by that phrase, they mean a level of sovereignty, such that each man is able to chose God for himself or to reject God for himself, and God takes a hands-off attitude toward that decision. 

First, there is no such sovereignty. On the contrary, it was a false offer of sovereignty that Satan made to Adam and Eve in the first temptation. Satan said that a declaration of independence would enable them to decide for themselves what is good or what is evil. Yet, somehow, Arminians are unconcerned that their claim is the same as that made by Satan, by which he deprived the first couple of their blissful existence in the garden of Eden. And second, nowhere does the Bible say that men have any such authority. It is God's authority alone to determine right and wrong. 

Notice the scriptural citations in the quote above from Puritan Coles. Jesus is the shepherd, and His people are sheep. In the anti-type of that metaphor, it is the shepherd who selects his sheep, not the sheep who choose a shepherd. So it is with Jesus's sheep. His flock consists of those given to Him by the Father in their prehistoric intra-Trinitarian covenant (John 6:37-37). And, as Coles notes, Jesus never left the result to the sheep. Rather, He declared His divine intent, one which must be achieved, and the means shall be arranged, and the sheep will be brought into their eternal fold. Not once does the divine shepherd express a mere hope that the sheep will agree or that His calling would achieve its end. Rather, He expresses an unfailing assurance that such will definitely be the case: "This is the will of Him who sent Me, that I should lose nothing of all that He has given Me, but raise it up on the last day" (John 6:39, see also John 17:24).

Grace and the Means of Election

"If grace be perfectly free in choosing, it must be answerably free in giving and applying the means to bring about the end it hath chosen us to. For if the effect of the means should depend upon something to be done by men, which grace is not the doer of, then works would put in for a share in the glory of men's salvation. and so, the grace of God would be dethroned, and be as if it were not." --Elisha Coles, "A Practical Discourse of God's Sovereignty"

One will often hear the worst of the Arminians say that God has done "everything that He could" to save everybody. Then, they claim, it is up to the individual to accept or refuse what God has done. I have even seen a tract designed like a ballot: "Will you go to Heaven? God votes 'yes.' Satan votes 'no.' It's a tie! The deciding vote is yours." An example can be seen here. The blasphemy is appalling! As if the will of Satan or of a man is equal to God's will, or even has a veto over it! 

Instead, as Puritan Coles says above, election includes all of the means necessary for attaining its purpose. That is, God votes "yes" (or "no," as the case may be), and no other vote is entered. In prehistory, the Father chose a race to give to the Son to be redeemed and to the Holy Spirit to be regenerated unto new life. That choice isn't just for the first domino, with a hope that the rest of the dominoes will fall in the desired pattern. No, each domino is placed by the triune God, so that each step is infallibly achieved (John 6:27-39). The Puritans called this the Golden Chain of Redemption, from Paul's words in Romans 8:29-30: "Those whom He foreknew He also predestined to be conformed to the image of His Son, in order that He might be the firstborn among many brothers. And those whom He predestined He also called, and those whom He called He also justified, and those whom He justified He also glorified." Notice where the chain starts, that it is for the sake of Jesus, not of us. That is where Arminianism fails to address the Scriptures on this issue. The Arminian wants to reserve some level of autonomy for man, such that salvation is for man's sake. It isn't, because man isn't. God's plan is centered on Jesus, and the elect are a means to that end. God's Gospel is Christ-centered, while that of the Arminian is man-centered, and, therefore, false.

Faith, Holiness, Assurance, and the Covenant of Grace

"This covenant [of grace] does not only give life upon terms of believing, but faith also and holiness the necessary means of attaining that [eternal] life. And this not upon your ingenious [sic, for "ingenuous"] compliance, as some term it, or better improvement of what you have in common with other men, (such allegations the Lord disallows, and often cautions against), but of grace. It is a covenant made up of promises, and promise, by scripture intention, is always free, both freely made and freely performed, without the desert or procurement of men." --Elisha Coles, "A Practical Discourse of God's Sovereignty" 

The difference between biblical Christianity and any of its competitors is that it stands on that great principle: Justification is by grace alone through faith alone in Christ alone for the glory of God alone. Every other religion, whether it falsely claims to be Christian or it is a distinctly-named religion, makes salvation based on the good works of the supplicant, whether in part or in whole. 

That is because the true Christian is aware that he has nothing in himself by which he can appeal to God as worthy of salvation. In answer, as the Puritan Coles says above, Jesus purchased everything, not just justification itself, but also the faith with which we respond and the holiness which it produces. By grace, He purchased them on the cross for everyone that the Father had given Him to be redeemed, and His blood cannot fail to achieve its purpose (John 6:37-39).

In contrast, the unbeliever is dead in trespasses and sins (Ephesians 2:1, Romans 3:23), and thereby under the just wrath of God (Ephesians 2:3, Romans 6:23). It is impossible for such a wretch to offer anything of himself to the offended God, because only a believer can do anything of spiritual good (Romans 14:23, Hebrews 12:14). The Father, apart from the intercession of the blood of Jesus, refuses even to look in love on such a one: "[God's] eyes are too pure to look on evil, and You cannot look on wickedness" (Habakkuk 1:13). Alas, even the prayers of the unbeliever are repugnant to Him (Proverbs 28:9). 

For those for whom Jesus died, that holy flood washed away our sins, the judgment for our sins, and purchased for us faith and holiness. It is only in Him that we can have hope, and have assurance that our hope is on a sound foundation.

God Hates Divination

One of the worst condemnations of Israel found in the Old Testament prophets is found in Zephaniah 1:12: "I will search Jerusalem with lamps, and I will punish the men who are complacent, those who say in their hearts, 'The Lord will not do good, nor will He do ill.'" God's judgment against His covenant people is not a matter of their denying of Him. They didn't become atheists or convert to a pagan religion. Rather, they denied His relevance. They professed that this God who had brought them out of captivity in Egypt had no place in their lives. 

One claim that the triune God of the Bible makes is to be the source of truth (e. g., John 14:6 and 17:17). Moreover, He claims to be the determiner of history: "I am God, and there is no other; I am God, and there is none like Me, declaring the end from the beginning, and, from ancient times, things not yet done, saying, 'My counsel shall stand, and I will accomplish all My purpose'" (Isaiah 46:9-10). Yet, they turned to other sources of immanency, or so they imagined, accusing Him of irrelevancy and insufficiency. 

God, being the jealous God that He is, rebukes them for such syncretism: "You shall not interpret omens or tell fortunes... Do not turn to mediums or necromancers; do not seek them out and so make yourselves unclean by them: I am the Lord your God" (Leviticus 19:26, 31). 

These things occur in today's America, and even more so in Europe. In some European countries, mediums outnumber Catholic clergy. Most Americans consider ourselves to be too sophisticated for such superstitions. Yet, do we not look to scientists in the same way? As I write this, we keep hearing "follow the science" as we deal with the covid-19 virus. However, we have been seeing it for much longer in the orthodoxy of Darwinian evolution. Rather than the determinative witness of the Creator, we look to the presumptions of, not science, but of scientists, people who have a vested interest in philosophical domination, but not in evidence. The declarations of orthodox scientists have become the Tarot cards and sheep entrails of the modern unbeliever. 

A Diagram For Interpreting Sheep Liver

God Blinds the Eyes

"He has blinded their eyes and hardened their hearts,

Lest they see with their eyes and understand with their hearts and turn, 

And I would heal them." 

-John 12:40 

In this verse (quoted from Isaiah 6:10), Jesus is responding to the unbelief of the Jewish audience which heard His words and saw His miracles, yet refused to believe. He describes the sad sentence on them, not for their unbelief, but as the reason for their unbelief: God had blinded them. In theology, we call this reprobation. 

Paul describes the same principle: "So then, He has mercy on whomever He wills [i. e., election], and He hardens whomever He wills" (Romans 9:18). 

No principle displays the absolute sovereignty more forthrightly than this one, which is why it may be the most hated doctrine in Scripture, even among self-described Calvinists. It completely eliminates the spiritual autonomy of men, striking at the fallen heart of the unbeliever, and even pricking the remaining pride in the believer. Yet Scripture reveals it, so that we are compelled to believe it. 

Faith a Gift, Not a Work

"It has been granted to you that, for the sake of Christ, you should not only believe in Him, but also suffer for His sake" (Philippians 1:29). 

Arminians assume that Jesus did half of the work of salvation for every single person who has existed or ever will exist. Then some are saved when they match what He did with the work of faith on our part. And I do not choose that phrasing haphazardously; that is how I have had it stated to me. Thus, men are saved, not through faith, but by faith, as the completion of all that God could do on our behalf. 

In contrast, the Calvinist teaches, on the basis of what Scripture says, that faith is the means, not the basis, by which the atonement is effectually applied to everyone for whom it was purchased (see John 6:37-39). That purchase included the gift of faith, so that it is not a work, not a contribution, by the believer to complete the work of Christ on the cross (I Corinthians 2:2). In fact, the Calvinist considers the Arminian view on this subject to be a scandalous aspersion on the blood of Jesus, as if it is unable to save to the uttermost (Hebrews 7:25). 

Notice the verse at the top, Philippians 1:29. Paul tells the Philippian Christians that it has been granted to them to believe, not that salvation has been offered, contingent on their completion of it by working faith in themselves. We see the same thing in Ephesians 2:8, where the same Apostle told believers that God gave them their saving faith. 

The essence of this principle is that the atonement was sufficient for every person for whom it was intended, because it purchased everything necessary and sufficient for the salvation of that person. He need not, indeed cannot, add anything to what Jesus did on the cross and for him in Heaven: "He is able to save to the uttermost those who draw near to God through Him, since He ever lives to make intercession for them" (Hebrews 7:25).

King David and the Doctrine of Perseverance

 According to the superscription, David wrote this when he was taken prisoner by the Philistines: "You [God] have delivered my soul from death, yes, my feet from falling, that I may walk before God in the light of life" (Psalm 56:13). It may be this verse which inspired Jude, the half-brother of Jesus, to write centuries later, "Now to Him who is able to keep you from stumbling and to present you blameless before the presence of His glory with great joy, to the only God our Savior, through Jesus Christ our Lord, be glory, majesty, dominion, and authority, before all time and now and forever. Amen" (Jude 1:24-25). 

Both men exult not in some belief that they must sustain their own faith, as the Pelagian claims, but rather in the knowledge that it is God's power that will sustain them to the end. 

Jesus also talked about this: "My sheep hear My voice and I know them, and they follow Me. I give them eternal life, and they will never perish, and no one will snatch them out of My hand. My Father, who has given them to Me, is greater than all, and no one is able to snatch them out of the Father's hand" (John 10:27-29). 

David and Jude write from their experiences of the faithfulness of God. Jesus, however, writes as the God who is faithful. It is on that faithfulness that the perseverance of the true believer depends and is guaranteed. 

I have been told by both Catholics and Mormons that it is arrogant to be sure now of my eternal life. They both claim that no one can be sure until he arrives at his eternal destination. They consistently refer to Matthew 24:13: "The one who endures to the end will be saved." But neither one ever considers how the believer endures. As cited above, the Bible tells us that it is God's action that gives endurance, not the willpower of the believer. And God can never fail. Therefore, the believer has a sound foundation for his assurance, just as the Apostle John tells us: "I write these things to you [Christians] who believe in the name of the Son of God, that you may know that you have eternal life" (I John 5:13). The possession of eternal life is something that the true believer has now, not something for which he merely hopes.

Whom Does God Love? And Why?

A doctrine of humanism has seeped into the Christian Church: God loves everyone unconditionally. Thus, our culture has done away with the holiness and wrath of God. It is acceptable to say, "My god doesn't hate." That small "g" is not a typo; I did it on purpose, because that god is an idol, not the God of the bible. 

Even though it wasn't an issue in His time, Jesus said something which addresses this error: "The Father Himself loves you [i. e., the disciples], because you have loved Me and have believed that I came from God [the Father]" (John 16:27). So, His audience is His disciples, not people in general, and He gives a reason for the love of the Father to them, i. e., their love to Jesus and belief in His messianic work. 

Therefore, in one sentence, Jesus tells us that God does not love everyone; and that those whom He loves, it is on the condition of their relationship to, and, therefore, salvation by, Jesus His Son. The supposition that God loves everyone unconditionally is, thus, shown to be a doctrine foreign to biblical religion. 

God, the Just Justifier

"The righteousness of God has been manifested apart from the law, although the Law and the Prophets bear witness to it— the righteousness of God through faith in Jesus Christ for all who believe. For there is no distinction: for all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God, and are justified by His grace as a gift, through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus, whom God put forward as a propitiation by His blood, to be received by faith. This was to show God’s righteousness, because in His divine forbearance He had passed over former sins. It was to show His righteousness at the present time, so that He might be just and the justifier of the one who has faith in Jesus."

- Romans 3:21-26 

In prehistory, when God decided to save a Church from their sins, God faced a dilemma (I am putting this in human terms). If sin is contrary to His nature, how could He save sinners without denying His own nature? How could God remain the holy deity which is He is, if He merely ignored the wickedness in men? As verse 26 puts it, how could God remain just while becoming the justifier of His people?

 First, let us consider whether the wickedness of men is contrary to God's nature. The Prophet Habakkuk asks God this question: "You who are of purer eyes than to see evil and cannot look at wrong why do You idly look at traitors and remain silent when the wicked swallows up the man more righteous than he?" (Habakkuk 1:13). The prophet asks the exact question that we are considering. How can the righteous God, to whom evil is an alien and contrary condition, allow wicked men to continue? Such a God cannot receive the evil of men into His fellowship. Therefore, the problem of sin requires a solution. How can His justice be satisfied apart from the destruction of every sinner? 

Then another steps forward and volunteers. This one is Himself God; not a different God, but God the Son, both the one God and a distinct Person within the Godhead. He voluntarily offered Himself, sinless and holy, just as God the Father is, on behalf of those whom the Father would give Him to be His body the Church (John 6:37-39, 10:7-18, 17:1-19, Ephesians 5:25). As represented by the Mosaic priestly sacrifices, Jesus's priestly offering of Himself as the true sacrifice (Hebrews 9:14) achieved the Father's desire. His judgment of sin fell on His own Son, so that His justice was satisfied, and the justification thus purchased was imputed to His elect, so that He could become their justifier. 

"Apart from the obedience and death of Christ in the stead of elect sinners, God may not justify guilty sinners. Apart from the cross of Christ, God would show Himself unrighteous were He to justify the ungodly. the Christian gospel is not simply that God justifies the sinner who believes in Jesus Christ. The Christian gospel is that God justifies the sinner who believes in Jesus Christ, on the ground of Christ's substitutionary obedience, especially the obedience of His suffering and death" (Rev. David Engelsma, "Gospel Truth of Justification," p. 266; emphasis in the original).

Everyone Whom God Calls Will Hear the Call

There is a common claim among some semi-Pelagian groups, namely Mormons, universalists, and professed unbelievers, that there is something unfair in God's judgment of all unbelievers to Hell, because such a large portion of the world's population has never had an opportunity to hear the Gospel. How can He justly condemn those who are ignorant of His existence and requirements? 

That the challenge comes from various varieties of Pelagians is a clue to the answer: They don't believe that men deserve to be judged for sin. Therefore, they object to the judgment of some, because they reject the biblical truth that all men deserve that judgment. "All have sinned and fall short of the glory of God" (Romans 3:23). With all of the talk of equality in our modern culture, this is an equality that they want to deny. 

However, we have the hope given to us in the Gospel: "God shows His love for us in that, while we were still sinners, Christ died for us" (Romans 5:8). For us, these people say, but what about those who don't know about that? 

Not understanding the sovereignty of God, the Pelagian cannot rationally connect two ideas: If God's love and wisdom could create a way to save His people, then that same love and wisdom can find a way to bring His people to a time and place in which they can hear of it. To the Calvinist, that logic is obvious; to the Pelagian, that logic is impossible. 

We see God's inspired description of that plan in the words of Paul at the Areopagus in Acts 17:26-27: "He made from one man every nation of mankind to live on all the face of the earth, having determined allotted periods and the boundaries of their dwelling place, that they should seek God, and, perhaps, feel their way toward Him and find Him." If we understand that God has planned all of history (Isaiah 46:10), then it is easy to conceive that He has organized that history, in part, to the end that all those for whom Jesus died would unfailingly come into contact with the gospel and to be converted (John 6:37-39; Acts 13:48). 

So the answer to the challenge of Mormons, universalists, and unbelievers, when they ask, "What about those who haven't had a chance to hear?", is that there are no such people. 

The Marital Faithfulness of Jesus to His Church

"I will betroth you to Me forever. I will betroth you to Me in righteousness and in justice, in steadfast love and in mercy. I will betroth you to Me in faithfulness. And you shall know the Lord." 

- Hosea 2:19-20 

This is a sweet promise. If you have read the rest of Hosea, then you know that much of it is about the unfaithfulness of Israel, the covenant community. Yet God takes it upon Himself to describe a time in which He will abolish the unfaithfulness of that community. 

First, I want to point to the last word in that passage: Lord. That English word is used as a gloss for the tetragrammaton, Yahweh, or Jehovah, the name used by by the preincarnate Christ whenever He acted in His mediatorial role. It is Jesus, His cross work, and His resurrection that have purchased the Church, faithful Israel in the Old Testament and the united Jews and Gentiles in the New Testament. His purchase, being effectual in all for whom it was intended (John 6:37-39), cannot fail to make every true believer, not just a believer, but a faithful servant. 

He uses marital imagery, a common theme in both testaments (such as Isaiah 54:5-6, Jeremiah 3:14, and Revelation 19:6-9). This is why our own marriage ceremony includes the vow to be faithful "until death do us part." Granted, that vow has become a mere anachronism among us, but it is not an anachronism to God. His vows are eternal and unfailing, even though we, who call ourselves by His name, are certainly not. "If we are faithless, He remains faithful - for He cannot deny Himself" (II Timothy 2:13).  

This is why I believe so passionately in the perseverance of the saints. I don't use the phrase "once saved always saved," because of its antinomian implications. Rather, God's faithfulness works in His blood-bought people by keeping them faithful, both in the sense of having faith and in the sense of faithful obedience to His word. 

Watchtower Deception in John 1:1

In its New World Translation [sic] of the Bible, the Watchtower Society, commonly called Jehovah's Witnesses, says, "In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was a god." The Society claims that the absence of the definite article indicates the equivalent of the indefinite article in English, there being no such article in Greek. That statement by the Society about John 1:1 is highly deceptive. 

First, it is incomplete. That is something that can be indicated by the absence of the article. However, in the copulative, as in the sentence here, Greek uses the definite article to distinguish the subject versus the predicate nominative. That is because Greek didn't use word order the way English does. In the Greek, the word order is actually "and God was the Word." The word order is a means of showing emphasis. Therefore, to translate "god" in the definite sense in English is correct. 

Furthermore, notice that the NWT says "the beginning." Yet there is also no article in front of "beginning" in the Greek. The NWT inserts one there, while claiming that there is something suspect in doing the same thing for "god."

My purpose here is mainly my hope that some Jehovah's Witnesses will see this, and recognize that their loyalty to the Watchtower is undeserved. Turn to the true Christian Jesus, God the Son, for eternal life. 

I also hope that some less-prepared Christians will read this before they are next approached by a Witness, so that the Watchtower cannot use its deception to capture yet another soul. 

When Men Turn the Name of God into Vanity

Do you know the third Commandment? It is the one that says, "You shall not take the name of the Lord your God in vain, for the Lord will not hold him guiltless who takes His name in vain" (Exodus 20:7). In our modern understanding, this commandment means not to use "God" flippantly, such as, "Oh God, I love pizza!" And it certainly includes that. But isn't it in itself flippant to believe that one of the Big Ten would be about that? 

Our ancestors certainly gave it more weight: "What are the sins forbidden in the third commandment? Answer : The sins forbidden in the third commandment are, the not using of God’s name as is required; and the abuse of it in an ignorant, vain, irreverent, profane, superstitious, or wicked mentioning, or otherwise using his titles, attributes, ordinances, or works, by blasphemy, perjury; all sinful cursings, oaths, vows, and lots; violating of our oaths and vows, if lawful; and fulfilling them, if of things unlawful; murmuring and quarreling at, curious prying into, and misapplying of God’s decrees and providences; misinterpreting, misapplying, or any way perverting the Word, or any part of it, to profane jests, curious or unprofitable questions, vain janglings, or the maintaining of false doctrines; abusing it, the creatures, or anything contained under the name of God, to charms, or sinful lusts and practices; the maligning, scorning, reviling, or anywise opposing of God’s truth, grace, and ways; making profession of religion in hypocrisy, or for sinister ends; being ashamed of it, or a shame to it, by unconformable, unwise, unfruitful, and offensive walking, or backsliding from it" (Question 113, Westminster Larger Catechism). There is little in our mental or social lives that the divines did not put under the Third Commandment. 

I want to especially consider one aspect of the abuse of God's name, and that is the claiming of it by members of pseudo-Christian cults. The worst ones are the ones that simply create a false Jesus, by depriving Him of His full and eternal deity. This would include Mormons, Jehovah's Witnesses, and Oneness Pentecostals. They abuse God's name by applying it to idolatrous inventions of their cult founders. In this sense, the commandment is equivalent to the warning given by Jesus Himself: "See that no one leads you astray. For many will come in my name, saying, ‘I am the Christ,’ and they will lead many astray. For false christs and false prophets will arise and perform great signs and wonders, so as to lead astray, if possible, even the elect" (Matthew 24:4-5, 24)

The followers of these manmade pseudo-Christs claim the name of Christ, and will even expect others to acknowledge them as Christians. However, they have claimed the name, not of the Jesus of the Bible, but of an idol, and are, therefore, using His name in vain. And, as Moses wrote, God will not hold them guiltless. They remain in their sins (John 8:24).