Thanks for reading this short discussion of the amazing God whom we worship.
Of Him we say:
Psalm 8:9 O LORD our Lord, how excellent is thy name in all the earth!
Psalm 9:11 Sing praises to the LORD, which dwelleth in Zion: declare among the people his doings.
Why do we say this?
Psalm 90:2 Before the mountains were brought forth, or ever thou hadst formed the earth and the world, even from everlasting to everlasting, thou art God.
Psalm 33:6 By the word of the LORD were the heavens made; and all the host of them by the breath of his mouth.
Psalm 95:5 The sea is his, and he made it: and his hands formed the dry land.
Psalm 94:9 He that planted the ear, shall he not hear? he that formed the eye, shall he not see?
God made the world from nothing. He spoke and it came to be. He even made us human beings.
Psalm 139:14 I will praise thee; for I am fearfully and wonderfully made: marvellous are thy works; and that my soul knoweth right well.
But that's not all:
Psalm 74:17 Thou hast set all the borders of the earth: thou hast made summer and winter.
Psalm 104:19 He appointed the moon for seasons: the sun knoweth his going down.
God made time itself, and the measurements of time. God is not only powerful, having created the earth, but holy as well:
Psalm 22:3 But thou art holy, O thou that inhabitest the praises of Israel.
Psalm 145:17 The LORD is righteous in all his ways, and holy in all his works.
One of the aspects of God being holy is that God judges between righteousness and wickedness:
Psalm 1:6 For the LORD knoweth the way of the righteous: but the way of the ungodly shall perish.
Psalm 138:6 Though the LORD be high, yet hath he respect unto the lowly: but the proud he knoweth afar off.
God is not only able to see what people do, but God even knows what is in man's heart:
Psalm 44:21 Shall not God search this out? for he knoweth the secrets of the heart.
Psalm 94:11 The LORD knoweth the thoughts of man, that they are vanity.
Indeed, sin is the state of all men by nature:
Psalm 51:5 Behold, I was shapen in iniquity; and in sin did my mother conceive me.
Psalm 58:3 The wicked are estranged from the womb: they go astray as soon as they be born, speaking lies.
And the anger of God is powerful against sin and those who do sin:
Psalm 38:3 There is no soundness in my flesh because of thine anger; neither is there any rest in my bones because of my sin.
Psalm 90:7 For we are consumed by thine anger, and by thy wrath are we troubled.
Psalm 90:11 Who knoweth the power of thine anger? even according to thy fear, so is thy wrath.
Psalm 56:7 Shall they escape by iniquity? in thine anger cast down the people, O God.
Psalm 69:24 Pour out thine indignation upon them, and let thy wrathful anger take hold of them.
Psalm 21:9 Thou shalt make them as a fiery oven in the time of thine anger: the LORD shall swallow them up in his wrath, and the fire shall devour them.
God is not all anger, however. There is mercy in God as well:
Psalm 103:8 The LORD is merciful and gracious, slow to anger, and plenteous in mercy.
Psalm 145:8 The LORD is gracious, and full of compassion; slow to anger, and of great mercy.
Psalm 78:38 But he, being full of compassion, forgave their iniquity, and destroyed them not: yea, many a time turned he his anger away, and did not stir up all his wrath.
Psalm 30:5 For his anger endureth but a moment; in his favour is life: weeping may endure for a night, but joy cometh in the morning.
Psalm 25:8 Good and upright is the LORD: therefore will he teach sinners in the way.
What then is necessary for one to receive mercy from God rather than anger? The first answer is obvious. Ask for mercy.
Psalm 130:7 Let Israel hope in the LORD: for with the LORD there is mercy, and with him is plenteous redemption.
In hope, then, one must repent of sin or face destruction:
Psalm 90:3 Thou turnest man to destruction; and sayest, Return, ye children of men.
Psalm 119:79 Let those that fear thee turn unto me, and those that have known thy testimonies.
Psalm 78:34 When he slew them, then they sought him: and they returned and enquired early after God.
How does one seek for mercy? Here are some example:
Psalm 85:4 Turn us, O God of our salvation, and cause thine anger toward us to cease.
Psalm 27:9 Hide not thy face far from me; put not thy servant away in anger: thou hast been my help; leave me not, neither forsake me, O God of my salvation.
Psalm 6:1 O LORD, rebuke me not in thine anger, neither chasten me in thy hot displeasure.
Psalm 25:7 Remember not the sins of my youth, nor my transgressions: according to thy mercy remember thou me for thy goodness' sake, O LORD.
Psalm 26:11 But as for me, I will walk in mine integrity: redeem me, and be merciful unto me.
Psalm 44:26 Arise for our help, and redeem us for thy mercies' sake.
Psalm 86:16 O turn unto me, and have mercy upon me; give thy strength unto thy servant, and save the son of thine handmaid.
Psalm 6:4 Return, O LORD, deliver my soul: oh save me for thy mercies' sake.
Psalm 80:3 Turn us again, O God, and cause thy face to shine; and we shall be saved.
Psalm 85:4 Turn us, O God of our salvation, and cause thine anger toward us to cease.
More mechanically speaking the way is sacrifice:
Psalm 50:5 Gather my saints together unto me; those that have made a covenant with me by sacrifice.
But that sacrifice is the sacrifice that God himself made in the person of Jesus Christ. Accordingly, we do not any longer offer those burnt offerings of former times:
Psalm 40:6 Sacrifice and offering thou didst not desire; mine ears hast thou opened: burnt offering and sin offering hast thou not required.
Psalm 51:16 For thou desirest not sacrifice; else would I give it: thou delightest not in burnt offering.
Instead, we offer sacrifices of joy:
Psalm 27:6 And now shall mine head be lifted up above mine enemies round about me: therefore will I offer in his tabernacle sacrifices of joy; I will sing, yea, I will sing praises unto the LORD.
Sacrifices of thanksgiving:
Psalm 107:22 And let them sacrifice the sacrifices of thanksgiving, and declare his works with rejoicing.
Psalm 116:17 I will offer to thee the sacrifice of thanksgiving, and will call upon the name of the LORD.
Sacrifices of Repentance and Contrition:
Psalm 51:17 The sacrifices of God are a broken spirit: a broken and a contrite heart, O God, thou wilt not despise.
and Sacrifices of Righteousness:
Psalm 4:5 Offer the sacrifices of righteousness, and put your trust in the LORD.
Psalm 51:19 Then shalt thou be pleased with the sacrifices of righteousness, with burnt offering and whole burnt offering: then shall they offer bullocks upon thine altar.
Another way to characterize the mechanism is by redemption. After all, there is a sense in which sacrifice can be a payment for sins. We cannot, however, do this for ourselves or for one another:
Psalm 49:7 None of them can by any means redeem his brother, nor give to God a ransom for him:
Instead, God - through Christ - redeems:
Psalm 49:15 But God will redeem my soul from the power of the grave: for he shall receive me. Selah.
Psalm 72:14 He shall redeem their soul from deceit and violence: and precious shall their blood be in his sight.
Psalm 130:8 And he shall redeem Israel from all his iniquities.
Specifically, the Lord Jesus Christ is the redeemer:
Psalm 19:14 Let the words of my mouth, and the meditation of my heart, be acceptable in thy sight, O LORD, my strength, and my redeemer.
Psalm 31:5 Into thine hand I commit my spirit: thou hast redeemed me, O LORD God of truth.
So, the most particular way to seek mercy through the redeeming sacrifice of Jesus is to place your trust in Jesus Christ, the Son of God:
Psalm 2:12 Kiss the Son, lest he be angry, and ye perish from the way, when his wrath is kindled but a little. Blessed are all they that put their trust in him.
Jesus is the only-begotten Son of God:
Psalm 2:7 I will declare the decree: the LORD hath said unto me, Thou art my Son; this day have I begotten thee.
Yet for the salvation of His people God turned the hand of his power upon the Son, Jesus Christ:
Psalm 80:17 Let thy hand be upon the man of thy right hand, upon the son of man whom thou madest strong for thyself.
This was done for us, his people:
Psalm 68:28 Thy God hath commanded thy strength: strengthen, O God, that which thou hast wrought for us.
Psalm 126:3 The LORD hath done great things for us; whereof we are glad.
God did this because the redemption of His people is precious to Him:
Psalm 49:8 (For the redemption of their soul is precious, and it ceaseth for ever:)
Psalm 111:9 He sent redemption unto his people: he hath commanded his covenant for ever: holy and reverend is his name.
Psalm 78:35 And they remembered that God was their rock, and the high God their redeemer.
If you trust in Jesus Christ, you may find mercy, as others have:
Psalm 34:22 The LORD redeemeth the soul of his servants: and none of them that trust in him shall be desolate.
Psalm 85:3 Thou hast taken away all thy wrath: thou hast turned thyself from the fierceness of thine anger.
Psalm 36:7 How excellent is thy lovingkindness, O God! therefore the children of men put their trust under the shadow of thy wings.
Psalm 13:6 I will sing unto the LORD, because he hath dealt bountifully with me.
Psalm 71:23 My lips shall greatly rejoice when I sing unto thee; and my soul, which thou hast redeemed.
This has just been a small sampling of what the Psalms tell us about God and about Jesus Christ, and the Psalms are just a part of the whole Bible, which provides much more information about not only the greatness of God who created and governs all things, who is holy and before whom sinners cannot stand on the day of judgment, but also about the way of escape through repentance of sin and faith in the Lord Jesus Christ alone. So hear this now, while there is time, for judgment is coming:
Psalm 9:8 And he shall judge the world in righteousness, he shall minister judgment to the people in uprightness.
Psalm 96:10 Say among the heathen that the LORD reigneth: the world also shall be established that it shall not be moved: he shall judge the people righteously.
Psalm 96:13 Before the LORD: for he cometh, for he cometh to judge the earth: he shall judge the world with righteousness, and the people with his truth.
Psalm 98:9 Before the LORD; for he cometh to judge the earth: with righteousness shall he judge the world, and the people with equity.
Praise be to His Glorious name, both now and forever,
-TurretinFan
Thursday, October 15, 2009
Wednesday, October 14, 2009
Does Scripture Commend Roman Practices? A response to Steve Kellmeyer
Steve Kellmeyer (Roman Catholic) has provided some comments in response to my post on Forbidding to Marry (link to my post).
Mr. Kellmeyer asks:
Mr. Kellmeyer continues:
Revelation 14:1-5
And I looked, and, lo, a Lamb stood on the mount Sion, and with him an hundred forty and four thousand, having his Father's name written in their foreheads. And I heard a voice from heaven, as the voice of many waters, and as the voice of a great thunder: and I heard the voice of harpers harping with their harps: and they sung as it were a new song before the throne, and before the four beasts, and the elders: and no man could learn that song but the hundred and forty and four thousand, which were redeemed from the earth. These are they which were not defiled with women; for they are virgins. These are they which follow the Lamb whithersoever he goeth. These were redeemed from among men, being the firstfruits unto God and to the Lamb. And in their mouth was found no guile: for they are without fault before the throne of God.
The part to which Mr. Kellmeyer was trying to refer says that these 144,000 "were not defiled with women." It does mean "defiled," that's not a gloss on the Greek word ἐμολύνθησαν. The verse also clarifies that these 144,000 are "virgins." So, if one is going to try to argue that this verse is speaking in favor of general celibacy, one must also take the position that marriage is an example of defilement. Such a position is plainly contrary to Scripture, which declares:
Hebrews 13:4 Marriage is honourable in all, and the bed undefiled: but whoremongers and adulterers God will judge.
The better understanding of this text is, of course, a figurative understanding. The 144,000 represent the elect. We saw them previously in chapter 7, when they were sealed in their foreheads. Notice that this appears again in the current passage where the men have "his Father's name written in their foreheads." One hopes that Mr. Kellmeyer would not take this literally, whether or not he would consider the beasts in the passage literal beasts.
The sense of the purity and virginity of these men has to do with their faithfulness to their betrothed, the lamb to whom they are to be married as the bride of Christ. Thus, they are depicted as not being fornicators who defile themselves, such as with the whore of Revelation 17.
Mr. Kellmeyer continues:
The Scripture is not only the New Testament, but Old and New together. Some of those who were taught by the Apostles had the same problems understanding the apostles that the apostles had understanding Jesus.
Mark 16:14 Afterward he appeared unto the eleven as they sat at meat, and upbraided them with their unbelief and hardness of heart, because they believed not them which had seen him after he was risen.
Nevertheless, even if we did accord a special place of prominence to those so-called apostolic fathers who were allegedly taught by the apostles themselves, or the second generation fathers who were allegedly taught by someone who was taught by an apostle, we find only a few of their writings extant, those that are extant existing with rather troubling textual transmission histories, and even then those mostly addressing issues that don't have much to do with topic of mandatory celibacy of bishops/elders and deacons.
Mr. Kellmeyer concluded:
I've demonstrated to the contrary. Mr. Kellmeyer's rebuke is, of course, paraphrased from either Matthew 22 or Mark 12 (parallel passages) in which Jesus points out that there will be no marriage in heaven:
Matthew 22:29-30
Jesus answered and said unto them, Ye do err, not knowing the scriptures, nor the power of God. For in the resurrection they neither marry, nor are given in marriage, but are as the angels of God in heaven.
One wonders if Mr. Kellmeyer appreciates the impact of this verse on his attempted literal interpretation of the book of Revelation. Recall:
Revelation 19:9 And he saith unto me, Write, Blessed are they which are called unto the marriage supper of the Lamb. And he saith unto me, These are the true sayings of God.
Revelation 22:17 And the Spirit and the bride say, Come. And let him that heareth say, Come. And let him that is athirst come. And whosoever will, let him take the water of life freely.
There is a marriage supper there, and a bride, but not after a corporal and carnal manner. Revelation is full of figurative language which should be understood as such, and should be understood consistently with other passages of Scripture, such as:
2 Corinthians 11:2 For I am jealous over you with godly jealousy: for I have espoused you to one husband, that I may present you as a chaste virgin to Christ.
-TurretinFan
Mr. Kellmeyer asks:
Didn't Christ tell the apostles that eunuchs who made themselves so for the kingdom of God were blessed?I answer: No, Christ did not tell them that. In the passage to which you are attempting to refer, Christ told the apostles that there are "eunuchs, which have made themselves eunuchs for the kingdom of heaven's sake." (Matthew 19:112) Nevertheless, he neither calls them "blessed" nor encourages folks to emulate them. He certainly does not suggest that it should be a requirement for bishops/elders, apostles, or deacons that they be self-made eunuchs. Thus, this passage would be essentially irrelevant to the question, even if it were more blessed to make oneself a eunuch (but compare what the early church thought of self-made eunuchs)
Mr. Kellmeyer continues:
Doesn't Revelation have a those who refrained from intercourse with women sing a special song to the Lamb that only they can sing?I answer: again, no. The passage to which you are referring. Revelation 14:1-5 refers to the 144,000. Here's the passage:
Revelation 14:1-5
And I looked, and, lo, a Lamb stood on the mount Sion, and with him an hundred forty and four thousand, having his Father's name written in their foreheads. And I heard a voice from heaven, as the voice of many waters, and as the voice of a great thunder: and I heard the voice of harpers harping with their harps: and they sung as it were a new song before the throne, and before the four beasts, and the elders: and no man could learn that song but the hundred and forty and four thousand, which were redeemed from the earth. These are they which were not defiled with women; for they are virgins. These are they which follow the Lamb whithersoever he goeth. These were redeemed from among men, being the firstfruits unto God and to the Lamb. And in their mouth was found no guile: for they are without fault before the throne of God.
The part to which Mr. Kellmeyer was trying to refer says that these 144,000 "were not defiled with women." It does mean "defiled," that's not a gloss on the Greek word ἐμολύνθησαν. The verse also clarifies that these 144,000 are "virgins." So, if one is going to try to argue that this verse is speaking in favor of general celibacy, one must also take the position that marriage is an example of defilement. Such a position is plainly contrary to Scripture, which declares:
Hebrews 13:4 Marriage is honourable in all, and the bed undefiled: but whoremongers and adulterers God will judge.
The better understanding of this text is, of course, a figurative understanding. The 144,000 represent the elect. We saw them previously in chapter 7, when they were sealed in their foreheads. Notice that this appears again in the current passage where the men have "his Father's name written in their foreheads." One hopes that Mr. Kellmeyer would not take this literally, whether or not he would consider the beasts in the passage literal beasts.
The sense of the purity and virginity of these men has to do with their faithfulness to their betrothed, the lamb to whom they are to be married as the bride of Christ. Thus, they are depicted as not being fornicators who defile themselves, such as with the whore of Revelation 17.
Mr. Kellmeyer continues:
And isn't it the case that the early Christians who were witnesses to the writing of Scripture, or taught by witnesses to the writing of Scripture, are in the best position to interpret that same Scripture?I answer:
The Scripture is not only the New Testament, but Old and New together. Some of those who were taught by the Apostles had the same problems understanding the apostles that the apostles had understanding Jesus.
Mark 16:14 Afterward he appeared unto the eleven as they sat at meat, and upbraided them with their unbelief and hardness of heart, because they believed not them which had seen him after he was risen.
Nevertheless, even if we did accord a special place of prominence to those so-called apostolic fathers who were allegedly taught by the apostles themselves, or the second generation fathers who were allegedly taught by someone who was taught by an apostle, we find only a few of their writings extant, those that are extant existing with rather troubling textual transmission histories, and even then those mostly addressing issues that don't have much to do with topic of mandatory celibacy of bishops/elders and deacons.
Mr. Kellmeyer concluded:
You know neither Scripture nor the power of God. You are quite wrong.I answer:
I've demonstrated to the contrary. Mr. Kellmeyer's rebuke is, of course, paraphrased from either Matthew 22 or Mark 12 (parallel passages) in which Jesus points out that there will be no marriage in heaven:
Matthew 22:29-30
Jesus answered and said unto them, Ye do err, not knowing the scriptures, nor the power of God. For in the resurrection they neither marry, nor are given in marriage, but are as the angels of God in heaven.
One wonders if Mr. Kellmeyer appreciates the impact of this verse on his attempted literal interpretation of the book of Revelation. Recall:
Revelation 19:9 And he saith unto me, Write, Blessed are they which are called unto the marriage supper of the Lamb. And he saith unto me, These are the true sayings of God.
Revelation 22:17 And the Spirit and the bride say, Come. And let him that heareth say, Come. And let him that is athirst come. And whosoever will, let him take the water of life freely.
There is a marriage supper there, and a bride, but not after a corporal and carnal manner. Revelation is full of figurative language which should be understood as such, and should be understood consistently with other passages of Scripture, such as:
2 Corinthians 11:2 For I am jealous over you with godly jealousy: for I have espoused you to one husband, that I may present you as a chaste virgin to Christ.
-TurretinFan
Tuesday, October 13, 2009
Am I Safe from Rome's Anathemas?
A pseudonymous blogger under the penname Reginald de Piperno (RdP), responding to my opening post in my series on Trent (link to post), stated:
RdP wrote: "For example, TF claims that he is under the anathema of Trent."
Yes. It's not just a claim, there is really no reasonable doubt about it.
RdP wrote: "But unless he is or was formally Catholic, this is flatly impossible."
I don't give out my background, but I will acknowledge that I have received Trinitarian baptism with water. I think most Roman Catholics would accept that baptism as "valid" whether or not it was performed by a Roman Catholic cleric.
The Code of Canon Law states: "By baptism one is incorporated into the Church of Christ and is constituted a person in it with the duties and rights which are proper to Christians in keeping with their condition, insofar as they are in ecclesiastical communion and unless a legitimately issued sanction stands in the way." (Canon 96)
It furthermore states: "The Christian faithful are those who, inasmuch as they have been incorporated in Christ through baptism, have been constituted as the people of God. For this reason, made sharers in their own way in Christ’s priestly, prophetic, and royal function, they are called to exercise the mission which God has entrusted to the Church to fulfill in the world, in accord with the condition proper to each." (Canon 204 §1.)
Thus, despite any desire on my part to be affiliated with Rome and her prelate, I am considered by Rome's current definitions to be a "Catholic" and part of the "Christian faithful."
I am not, however, in full communion with Rome: "Those baptized are fully in the communion of the Catholic Church on this earth who are joined with Christ in its visible structure by the bonds of the profession of faith, the sacraments, and ecclesiastical governance." (Canon 205)
RdP appears to lack this rather fundamental understanding of the scope of Rome's claims regarding herself. She claims for the pope a recognized headship over the Roman Catholic Church but an unrecognized headship over all those who have been validly baptized. That's part of the Roman Catholic Church trying to call itself the "catholic church." The "catholic church" by definition includes within it all Christians, and Rome recognizes as Christians all those who have been validly baptized.
Even if the pope did not claim to be my head, however, there is no limit in Trent's anathema as to it applying only to the Christian faithful. It says, quite plainly, "If any one saith" not "If any Roman Catholic saith" or "If any Christian saith."
RdP wrote: "I do not understand the seeming fondness of some Protestants for wanting to be condemned by the Catholic Church."
I have no particular desire either to be included within Rome's claims of jurisdiction or to be placed under her condemnation. The facts simply are what they are. I can understand that those seeking to proselytize "Protestants" might like to downplay the condemnation side (for the same reason that some "Protestant" proselytizers don't like to mention sin) but the facts remain.
RdP wrote: "Perhaps it is some sort of projection issue: these folks despise the Catholic Faith, and so maybe they think that naturally Catholics or the Church ought to despise them in turn."
One wonders whether RdP thinks that placing someone under an anathema means "despising" that person. If not, one wonders how RdP's amateurish psycho-analysis is supposed to connect to the matter at hand. It is clear that Rome is attempting to anathematize someone, and that someone is someone who says what I say. Despising or loving is not the issue under discussion.
RdP: "Their protests notwithstanding, it's just not so, as I've said before."
RdP's link is to a prior occasion on which he attempted to argue with me about whether Rome considered the Reformers to be Christians. That they did not so consider them could hardly be more clear. I am not going to re-argue that point now. Yet RdP ought to have read the sources he himself relied-upon more closely. For example, the so-called "Catholic Encyclopedia" that he himself quoted notes that: "The fact of having received valid baptism places material heretics under the jurisdiction of the Church, and if they are in good faith, they belong to the soul of the Church." (Catholic Encyclopedia, 1913, volume 7, p. 261, in the sub-section of the section on Heresy entitled "Ecclesiastical Jurisdiction over Heretics.")
RdP wrote: "This fact does not mean that Protestant error is no longer reckoned to be erroneous."
"Error" sounds nicer than "heresy," doesn't it? One wonders, though, how RdP would answer the question as to whether holding a damnable heresy is still damnable?
RdP wrote: "It simply means that most Protestants today are incapable of being the subject of any Catholic anathema whatever, because they do not meet a fundamental condition: they have never been Catholic."
See above.
RdP wrote: "If he wishes to say that his beliefs have been condemned by the Catholic Church, then he would get no argument from me (to the extent that his views are in fact false and actually under formal condemnation)."
What is interesting is that Trent's anathema (at least the one I've already discussed) is not against particular beliefs, nor even against particular statements but against the people who make those statements. RdP seems to have missed this fact in his analysis.
Aside from an introductory note, the remainder of RdP's comments in his post deal with the issue of Trent's bad faith or ignorance of the Reformed position. He doesn't offer any arguments on the merits of the issue, and so I'll simply leave that alone. As to his introductory question regarding being the inspiration for the series, the answer is that he is not. Nevertheless, he may end up being implicated in the discussion, since he has done a number of relatively recent posts on the topic of Trent and Justification.
-TurretinFan
For example, TF claims that he is under the anathema of Trent. But unless he is or was formally Catholic, this is flatly impossible. I do not understand the seeming fondness of some Protestants for wanting to be condemned by the Catholic Church. Perhaps it is some sort of projection issue: these folks despise the Catholic Faith, and so maybe they think that naturally Catholics or the Church ought to despise them in turn. Their protests notwithstanding, it's just not so, as I've said before. This fact does not mean that Protestant error is no longer reckoned to be erroneous. On the contrary: Trent has in no way been rescinded (of course). It simply means that most Protestants today are incapable of being the subject of any Catholic anathema whatever, because they do not meet a fundamental condition: they have never been Catholic. If he wishes to say that his beliefs have been condemned by the Catholic Church, then he would get no argument from me (to the extent that his views are in fact false and actually under formal condemnation).I answer line by line.
RdP wrote: "For example, TF claims that he is under the anathema of Trent."
Yes. It's not just a claim, there is really no reasonable doubt about it.
RdP wrote: "But unless he is or was formally Catholic, this is flatly impossible."
I don't give out my background, but I will acknowledge that I have received Trinitarian baptism with water. I think most Roman Catholics would accept that baptism as "valid" whether or not it was performed by a Roman Catholic cleric.
The Code of Canon Law states: "By baptism one is incorporated into the Church of Christ and is constituted a person in it with the duties and rights which are proper to Christians in keeping with their condition, insofar as they are in ecclesiastical communion and unless a legitimately issued sanction stands in the way." (Canon 96)
It furthermore states: "The Christian faithful are those who, inasmuch as they have been incorporated in Christ through baptism, have been constituted as the people of God. For this reason, made sharers in their own way in Christ’s priestly, prophetic, and royal function, they are called to exercise the mission which God has entrusted to the Church to fulfill in the world, in accord with the condition proper to each." (Canon 204 §1.)
Thus, despite any desire on my part to be affiliated with Rome and her prelate, I am considered by Rome's current definitions to be a "Catholic" and part of the "Christian faithful."
I am not, however, in full communion with Rome: "Those baptized are fully in the communion of the Catholic Church on this earth who are joined with Christ in its visible structure by the bonds of the profession of faith, the sacraments, and ecclesiastical governance." (Canon 205)
RdP appears to lack this rather fundamental understanding of the scope of Rome's claims regarding herself. She claims for the pope a recognized headship over the Roman Catholic Church but an unrecognized headship over all those who have been validly baptized. That's part of the Roman Catholic Church trying to call itself the "catholic church." The "catholic church" by definition includes within it all Christians, and Rome recognizes as Christians all those who have been validly baptized.
Even if the pope did not claim to be my head, however, there is no limit in Trent's anathema as to it applying only to the Christian faithful. It says, quite plainly, "If any one saith" not "If any Roman Catholic saith" or "If any Christian saith."
RdP wrote: "I do not understand the seeming fondness of some Protestants for wanting to be condemned by the Catholic Church."
I have no particular desire either to be included within Rome's claims of jurisdiction or to be placed under her condemnation. The facts simply are what they are. I can understand that those seeking to proselytize "Protestants" might like to downplay the condemnation side (for the same reason that some "Protestant" proselytizers don't like to mention sin) but the facts remain.
RdP wrote: "Perhaps it is some sort of projection issue: these folks despise the Catholic Faith, and so maybe they think that naturally Catholics or the Church ought to despise them in turn."
One wonders whether RdP thinks that placing someone under an anathema means "despising" that person. If not, one wonders how RdP's amateurish psycho-analysis is supposed to connect to the matter at hand. It is clear that Rome is attempting to anathematize someone, and that someone is someone who says what I say. Despising or loving is not the issue under discussion.
RdP: "Their protests notwithstanding, it's just not so, as I've said before."
RdP's link is to a prior occasion on which he attempted to argue with me about whether Rome considered the Reformers to be Christians. That they did not so consider them could hardly be more clear. I am not going to re-argue that point now. Yet RdP ought to have read the sources he himself relied-upon more closely. For example, the so-called "Catholic Encyclopedia" that he himself quoted notes that: "The fact of having received valid baptism places material heretics under the jurisdiction of the Church, and if they are in good faith, they belong to the soul of the Church." (Catholic Encyclopedia, 1913, volume 7, p. 261, in the sub-section of the section on Heresy entitled "Ecclesiastical Jurisdiction over Heretics.")
RdP wrote: "This fact does not mean that Protestant error is no longer reckoned to be erroneous."
"Error" sounds nicer than "heresy," doesn't it? One wonders, though, how RdP would answer the question as to whether holding a damnable heresy is still damnable?
RdP wrote: "It simply means that most Protestants today are incapable of being the subject of any Catholic anathema whatever, because they do not meet a fundamental condition: they have never been Catholic."
See above.
RdP wrote: "If he wishes to say that his beliefs have been condemned by the Catholic Church, then he would get no argument from me (to the extent that his views are in fact false and actually under formal condemnation)."
What is interesting is that Trent's anathema (at least the one I've already discussed) is not against particular beliefs, nor even against particular statements but against the people who make those statements. RdP seems to have missed this fact in his analysis.
Aside from an introductory note, the remainder of RdP's comments in his post deal with the issue of Trent's bad faith or ignorance of the Reformed position. He doesn't offer any arguments on the merits of the issue, and so I'll simply leave that alone. As to his introductory question regarding being the inspiration for the series, the answer is that he is not. Nevertheless, he may end up being implicated in the discussion, since he has done a number of relatively recent posts on the topic of Trent and Justification.
-TurretinFan
The Triune God of Scripture Lives
The following is a trailer for Dr. James White's first debate this year with Dan Barker, on the topic: "The Triune God of Scripture Lives."
The DVD of this debate is available in the Alpha & Omega Ministries Bookstore (link).
The DVD of this debate is available in the Alpha & Omega Ministries Bookstore (link).
Monday, October 12, 2009
Oral Tradition, The Early Church, and Paul Pavao's Astonishment
I had written (in this previous post):
Paul Pavao continued:
Paul Pavao continued:
Paul Pavao concluded:
Part 1
Part 2
Part 3
Part 4
-TurretinFan
That's rather the point about the early church fathers - they did not transmit an oral apostolic tradition to us, rather they were our predecessors in trying to search out the meaning of Scripture. Where they do a good job they are to be commended, and where they err they are to be corrected.Paul Pavao (affiliation unstated, but not Roman Catholic) responded:
I'm a little astonished you can say this. I'm not Roman Catholic, but the early church's appeals to the rule of faith/rule of truth are common. Irenaeus (A.H. III:2:2, I think) makes it clear that they referred gnostics to both the Scriptures and the traditions derived from the apostles.The rule of faith/rule of truth for the early church fathers was normally either Scripture or the creed (which was derived from Scripture). The creed itself was not in ipse an apostolic tradition, though it was based on the Scriptures (the only authentic apostolic traditions that we have). Irenaeus did refer the gnostics both to Scripture and tradition, as we ourselves do when we point back to what Irenaeus did. Irenaeus comment about heretics claiming to follow Scripture and tradition is a dead-on criticism of Roman Catholicism.
Paul Pavao continued:
There was obviously a rule of faith. It's summarized by Irenaeus, Tertullian, and later writers. Justin refers to it by talking about teachings that came from the apostles. (He even gives a reason for baptism that he said came from the apostles.)See above regarding the rule of faith. For more discussion, see J.N.D. Kelly's Early Christian Doctrines, pp. 88 et seq.
Paul Pavao continued:
There was an oral apostolic tradition passed down to the church, as well as an attempt to be Scriptural. So your statement's confusing because no one familiar with the pre-Nicene writings would agree with you. (There's a couple summations of the idea of the rule of faith in BakerAcademic's Evangelical Ressourcement Series; those are Evangelical and they treat the oral apostolic tradition as obvious as well.)There were, of course, men to whom the apostles preached the gospel. What they preached was not in substance different from the Scripture. However, and this is key, no reliable report of their oral teachings has come down to us apart from Scripture. There are some (extremely scattered) alleged oral traditions handed down from the apostles that we find recorded in the earliest centuries of the writings of the church fathers. Generally speaking, though, we find them relying (as do we) solely on the authority of the written tradition of the apostles (i.e. Scripture) to settle doctrinal disputes among themselves. The untrustworthiness of oral transmission can be seen not only in the Rabbinic traditions that made void the Scripture but also in examples from the early church fathers (example here).
Paul Pavao concluded:
I haven't even brought up 2 Thess. 2:15.I have:
Part 1
Part 2
Part 3
Part 4
-TurretinFan
Augustine on the "We Gave You the Scriptures" Argument
One argument that we sometimes hear from Roman Catholic apologists is an argument that Roman Catholicism gave us the Scriptures, in the sense of preserving them for us over the centuries. This claim is, of course, anachronistic (the folks who preserved the Scriptures from the 4th decade to the 4th century, for example, could hardly be called "Roman Catholic" in their doctrines and practices). Nevertheless, for some folks the argument seems to have some bite.
Like so many arguments, though, it is not a new argument. In the times of persecution there were times when the government attempted to destroy the Scriptures and commanded Christians to hand over the sacred writings for destruction. Christians, viewing the Scripture as inspired by God and absolutely necessary, did not willingly cooperate with these commands.
In fact, many were persecuted and even martyred for failing to turn over their Bibles to the government. Not everyone was equally willing to suffer and die for the Word of God. Some folks turned over the Scriptures to the government, and these were known as traditores (meaning someone who hands over), from which we get our word "traitor."
Later, in theological disputes, some folks attempted to use the faithfulness of their spiritual forebearers against the spiritual unfaithfulness of their oponenents' spiritual forebearers with respect to the preservation of Scripture. They essentially would say that theirs preserved Scripture, while their opponents' turned it over. Augustine addresses this argument in a powerful way in the following quotation that Pastor King brought to my attention.
Augustine (354-430) commenting on Psalm 58:3:
I realize that there will be many Roman Catholics who would like to focus only on the womb/church analogy. Furthermore, it should be noted that Augustine viewed himself as "Catholic" (not Roman Catholic) as distinct from the sectarian Donatists. He viewed them as having left the Catholic church and consequently as having spoken lies. That is the context for this discussion, and we realize that Rome would like to assert that the Reformed churches are in the same position as the Donatists (although there are numerous reasons to reject such a comparison).
Nevertheless, note that Augustine is quite willing to set aside the personalities (since they are not mentioned in Scripture) and to focus on the Scripture. Let Scripture take center stage, and let all the other things stand aside. Another friend of mine has stated that "I happen to agree with Warfield when, evaluating Augustine's theology, he concluded that the Reformation, inwardly considered, was just the victory of Augustine's doctrine of grace over Augustine's doctrine of the church." That may be the case (I'm less convinced that Augustine's doctrine of the church was accurately represented by the Romanists), but it should be noted that Augustine was willing to submit his doctrine of the church to the authority of Scripture: to let Scripture take precedence over history and to let the issue be "what does the Scripture say," as opposed to "who preserved the Scriptures."
-TurretinFan
Like so many arguments, though, it is not a new argument. In the times of persecution there were times when the government attempted to destroy the Scriptures and commanded Christians to hand over the sacred writings for destruction. Christians, viewing the Scripture as inspired by God and absolutely necessary, did not willingly cooperate with these commands.
In fact, many were persecuted and even martyred for failing to turn over their Bibles to the government. Not everyone was equally willing to suffer and die for the Word of God. Some folks turned over the Scriptures to the government, and these were known as traditores (meaning someone who hands over), from which we get our word "traitor."
Later, in theological disputes, some folks attempted to use the faithfulness of their spiritual forebearers against the spiritual unfaithfulness of their oponenents' spiritual forebearers with respect to the preservation of Scripture. They essentially would say that theirs preserved Scripture, while their opponents' turned it over. Augustine addresses this argument in a powerful way in the following quotation that Pastor King brought to my attention.
Augustine (354-430) commenting on Psalm 58:3:
But they [i.e., the Donatists] grow too deaf to hear the gospel, and will not allow us to read them the words of God. How ironic: they boast of having saved those words from the fire, but try to delete them with their tongues! Instead they speak words that are their own, and therefore empty. “That fellow handed over the books,” they say, “and that other one too.” Yes, all right; I will say the same: “That fellow handed them over, and so did that other,” and I am speaking the truth. But what has that to do with me? You can’t find the names of those you accuse in the gospel, can you? Nor can I read out to you from the gospel the names of those I mentioned. Let our documents be moved out of the way and God’s book take center stage. Listen to what Christ says, listen to truth speaking: And for repentance and forgiveness of sins to be preached in his name throughout all nations, beginning from Jerusalem. “No,” they reply, “listen to what we have to say. We don’t want to hear what the gospel says.” Sinners have been alienated even from the womb, they have gone astray even from the belly, they have spoken falsehoods. Let us speak the truth, because we have heard the truth, the truth that the Lord speaks, not what humans tell us. A human being can lie, but it is not possible for Truth to lie. From the womb of truth I recognize Christ, who is Truth itself, and from the words of Truth I recognize the Church, which participates in the Truth. Let no one who has strayed away from that matrix in the bowels of the Church speak falsehoods to me; I would wish to find out first what he wants to teach me. I see him as alienated from the womb, astray even from the belly; so what am I likely to hear from him, except falsehoods? They have gone astray even from the belly, they have spoken falsehoods.John E. Rotelle, O.S.A., ed., Works of Saint Augustine, Expositions of the Psalms 51-72, Part 3, Vol. 17, trans. Maria Boulding, O.S.B. (Hyde Park: New City Press, 2001), Exposition of Psalm 57 (58), p. 128 (editor's footnotes omitted)(read for yourself here).
I realize that there will be many Roman Catholics who would like to focus only on the womb/church analogy. Furthermore, it should be noted that Augustine viewed himself as "Catholic" (not Roman Catholic) as distinct from the sectarian Donatists. He viewed them as having left the Catholic church and consequently as having spoken lies. That is the context for this discussion, and we realize that Rome would like to assert that the Reformed churches are in the same position as the Donatists (although there are numerous reasons to reject such a comparison).
Nevertheless, note that Augustine is quite willing to set aside the personalities (since they are not mentioned in Scripture) and to focus on the Scripture. Let Scripture take center stage, and let all the other things stand aside. Another friend of mine has stated that "I happen to agree with Warfield when, evaluating Augustine's theology, he concluded that the Reformation, inwardly considered, was just the victory of Augustine's doctrine of grace over Augustine's doctrine of the church." That may be the case (I'm less convinced that Augustine's doctrine of the church was accurately represented by the Romanists), but it should be noted that Augustine was willing to submit his doctrine of the church to the authority of Scripture: to let Scripture take precedence over history and to let the issue be "what does the Scripture say," as opposed to "who preserved the Scriptures."
-TurretinFan
Spurgeon on Crosses in Worship
The following is something from Charles Spurgeon, who is not always a careful theologian, but certainly has a way with words:
There may be some rhetorical excesses in his words, but his point is quite right. The cross of Christ that we preach is a metonym for Him who died on the cross, namely Christ Jesus the crucified, buried, and risen.
-TurretinFan
I. First, let us enquire, WHAT IS THIS CROSS OF CHRIST to which some men are sadly said to be enemies?(source)(Courtesy of my friend Matthew Lankford)
Of course, it is not the material cross. It is not anything made in the shape of the cross. There are some who can fall down and adore a cross of wood, or stone, or gold, but I cannot conceive of a greater wounding of the heart of Christ than to pay reverence to anything in the shape of a cross, or to bow before a crucifix! I think the Savior must say, “What? What? Am I the Son of God and do they make even Me into an idol? I who have died to redeem men from their idolatries, am I, Myself, taken and carved, and chiseled, and molten, and set up as an image to be worshipped by the sons of men?” When God says, “You shall not make unto you any graven image, or any likeness of anything that is in Heaven above, or that is in the earth beneath, or that is in the water under the earth: you shall not bow down yourself to them, nor serve them,” it is a strange fantasy of human guilt that men should say, “We will even take the image of the Son of God, or some ghastly counterfeit that purports to be His image, and will bow down and worship it, as if to make the Christ of God an accomplice in an act of rebellion against the commandment of the holy Law.” No, it is not the material cross to which Paul alludes—we have nothing to do with those outward symbols! We might have used them much more, but they have been so perverted to idolatry that some of us almost shudder at the very sight of them!
There may be some rhetorical excesses in his words, but his point is quite right. The cross of Christ that we preach is a metonym for Him who died on the cross, namely Christ Jesus the crucified, buried, and risen.
-TurretinFan
The real Francis Turretin on: Propitiation and Chastisement
Don Bryant, at From My Heart, Out of My Mind, has a post consisting of a nice quotation from the real Francis Turretin on the complete propitiation that Christ has made as well as the relation of chastisements to the scheme of propitiation (link). This quotation is taken from material found in volume 4 of Turretin's works, rather than from his Institutes.
-TurretinFan
-TurretinFan
Sunday, October 11, 2009
Unconditional Love and Obedience
God loves his elect unconditionally and consequently gave His only-begotten Son to be their ransom. We who are loved unconditionally cannot earn that love, either by faith or works. It is simply bestowed upon us out of the riches of his grace (Ephesians 2:7), mercy, and compassion (Romans 9:15). Nevertheless, we ought not only to believe on the Son, but also unconditionally to obey the commands of God. We do so, not hoping for any eternal reward, but simply loathing and detesting the sin for which our Savior died. Perfect love, Scripture tells us, casts out fear (1 John 4:18). Show your love of God and your appreciation for the Son of God by avoiding sin. You will neither merit heaven nor increase your justification, but you will be walking as children of light (Ephesians 5:8).
Saturday, October 10, 2009
Not Everything Trent Says about Justification is Wrong
Before I get into the bad parts of what Trent says about Justification, it is worth noting that not everything Trent says in its canons on Justification is bad:
So, as you can see, just because Trent said it doesn't make it bad. I'm following a rather abbreviated format here, because I'm agreeing with Trent on these issues (with various qualifications). Nevertheless, we do not simply use an ad hominem standard that because Trent was a bad council, therefore everything it says was wrong. No, Trent sometimes anathematized errors, such as the errors of Pelagianism (denying the necessity of grace) and Antinomianism (denying any continued value to the law).
- TurretinFan
CANON I.-If any one saith, that man may be justified before God by his own works, whether done through the teaching of human nature, or that of the law, without the grace of God through Jesus Christ; let him be anathema.This canon correctly rejects salvation by works alone without grace. Its unnecessary qualification of "without the grace of God" is part of the reason we would not use this formulation ourselves, but in itself it is not wrong.
CANON II.-If any one saith, that the grace of God, through Jesus Christ, is given only for this, that man may be able more easily to live justly, and to merit eternal life, as if, by free will without grace, he were able to do both, though hardly indeed and with difficulty; let him be anathema.The thrust of this canon is similar to that of canon 1. This one emphasizes that grace doesn't simply make it easier for a man to justify himself through works. Again, we would tend not to formulate things this way, because we would deny that man's works have any role in justification. Nevertheless, this canon is not wrong in itself.
CANON III.-If any one saith, that without the prevenient inspiration of the Holy Ghost, and without his help, man can believe, hope, love, or be penitent as he ought, so as that the grace of Justification may be bestowed upon him; let him be anathema.This canon rightly rejects the idea that without God's aid man can believe, hope, love, or be penitent as he ought or obtain justification. We would never word the canon this way, because it suggests that man obtains justification on account of works that are simply encouraged by prevenient grace. Nevertheless, in itself this canon is not wrong.
CANON VI.-If any one saith, that it is not in man's power to make his ways evil, but that the works that are evil God worketh as well as those that are good, not permissively only, but properly, and of Himself, in such wise that the treason of Judas is no less His own proper work than the vocation of Paul; let him be anathema.As with a number of the canons of Trent, this one seems to be aimed in the general direction of the Reformed churches, but does not actually direct itself to what the Reformed churches teach. As such, what it condemns is error, and it s right to condemn it. It condemns the idea that God is directly active in sin or that man is inactive in sin.
CANON X.-If any one saith, that men are just without the justice of Christ, whereby He merited for us to be justified; or that it is by that justice itself that they are formally just; let him be anathema.This one is only half right. The first half that affirms the necessity of the justice (righteousness) of Christ for justification. That part is correct, while the second part is not (we will deal with that in another post).
CANON XIII.-If any one saith, that it is necessary for every one, for the obtaining the remission of sins, that he believe for certain, and without any wavering arising from his own infirmity and disposition, that his sins are forgiven him; let him be anathema.This is another one of those canons that appears to be aimed at the Reformed churches, but which misses. There is no requirement that one be absolutely free from wavering, although (of course) such wavering bad.
CANON XIV.-If any one saith, that man is truly absolved from his sins and justified, because that he assuredly believed himself absolved and justified; or, that no one is truly justified but he who believes himself justified; and that, by this faith alone, absolution and justification are effected; let him be anathema.This is another one of those canons that appears to be aimed at the Reformed churches, but which misses. Justification is by faith in Christ, not in justification by faith in justification.
CANON XV.-If any one saith, that a man, who is born again and justified, is bound of faith to believe that he is assuredly in the number of the predestinate; let him be anathema.This is another one of those canons that appears to be aimed at the Reformed churches, but which misses. The key phrase here is that phrase "bound of faith" which describes the matter as being a necessary thing to be believed. Those who are born again and justiifed should be assured of their place among the predestinate. Nevertheless, that is not an essential doctrine.
CANON XIX.-If any one saith, that nothing besides faith is commanded in the Gospel; that other things are indifferent, neither commanded nor prohibited, but free; or, that the ten commandments nowise appertain to Christians; let him be anathema.This canon properly condemns antinomianism.
CANON XX.-If any one saith, that the man who is justified and how perfect soever, is not bound to observe the commandments of God and of the Church, but only to believe; as if indeed the Gospel were a bare and absolute promise of eternal life, without the condition of observing the commandments ; let him be anathema.Aside from the explanation "as if indeed the Gospel were a bare and absolute promise of eternal life, without the condition of observing the commandments," this canon simply similarly condemns antinomianism. That additional explanation suggests that Trent mistakenly viewed the Reformed position as antinomianism by mistakenly creating a dichotomy between the Gospel promise being absolute and unconditioned on works, and antinomianism. The Reformed position lies in the middle. The error of conditioning the Gospel on works will be addressed in another post.
CANON XXI.-If any one saith, that Christ Jesus was given of God to men, as a redeemer in whom to trust, and not also as a legislator whom to obey; let him be anathema.Again, this is a proper condemnation of antinomianism.
CANON XXII.-If any one saith, that the justified, either is able to persevere, without the special help of God, in the justice received; or that, with that help, he is not able; let him be anathema.This canon properly condemns the ideas either that perseverance is possible without God's aid or impossible with God's aid.
So, as you can see, just because Trent said it doesn't make it bad. I'm following a rather abbreviated format here, because I'm agreeing with Trent on these issues (with various qualifications). Nevertheless, we do not simply use an ad hominem standard that because Trent was a bad council, therefore everything it says was wrong. No, Trent sometimes anathematized errors, such as the errors of Pelagianism (denying the necessity of grace) and Antinomianism (denying any continued value to the law).
- TurretinFan
Guilty Consciences at Trent?
I'm about to embark on a short series of posts on the topic Trent's canons and decrees regarding justification. It's worth noting that my series will be bringing me under the anathema of that council. I'll come under its anathema because I'll be taking the position that the the Roman Catholic doctrine on Justification derogates from the glory of God and the merits of the Lord Jesus Christ. I find it interesting that saying this about Trent's doctrine is itself under Trent's anathema. Here's the actual text (translated into English, of course, from the original Latin).
Trent, Sixth Session:
In short, I think one would have to strain to find any positive value to this sort of canon. Instead, it seems that the denial of sola fide found in Trent was sufficiently plainly derogatory to the glory of God and the merits of Christ that they realized folks would criticize them along these lines. Accordingly, they have provided this canon as the final canon of the set to attempt to silence criticism. It does not address a heresy
-TurretinFan
Trent, Sixth Session:
CANON XXXIII.-If any one saith, that, by the Catholic doctrine touching Justification, by this holy Synod inset forth in this present decree, the glory of God, or the merits of our Lord Jesus Christ are in any way derogated from, and not rather that the truth of our faith, and the glory in fine of God and of Jesus Christ are rendered (more) illustrious; let him be anathema.Perhaps it is only me, but it seems to me that the folks at Trent realized that what they were doing was dishonoring to God and to the glory of the merits of Christ. Canon 33 is the sort of canon that does not help to define dogma but is instead a sort of "shut up and don't criticize us." It is totally superfluous to the other canons. After all, one could not very well both accept Trent's teaching and simultaneously claim that the glory of God or the merits of Jesus Christ are derogated from by them.
In short, I think one would have to strain to find any positive value to this sort of canon. Instead, it seems that the denial of sola fide found in Trent was sufficiently plainly derogatory to the glory of God and the merits of Christ that they realized folks would criticize them along these lines. Accordingly, they have provided this canon as the final canon of the set to attempt to silence criticism. It does not address a heresy
-TurretinFan
Friday, October 09, 2009
Baking Clay Pots - Subtracting Water or Adding Hardness?
Louis Ruggiero (aka LouRugg) asked my friend Dr. White:
One of the problems with the debate is that it does seem that LouRugg, despite apparently working on a book on Calvinism, has some significant gaps in his understanding of Reformed theology. That's why he was apparently shocked that I didn't argue that God zapped Pharaoh with hardening rather than withdrawing his blessing from him.
Where did I get the idea from? Well, I got it from Scripture. I got it from the fact that Paul contrasts hardening with mercy just as we might contrast light and darkness. Thus, I drew the inference that God's hardening of a man is God's act of not showing him some mercy. In the debate I called this God withholding from Pharaoh "common sense" though others might like the term "common grace."
The passage in Romans 9 gave me further confirmation of this approach through the analogy of the potter and the clay. As I was thinking about the hardening and the potter, I thought: how does a potter harden a pot? The answer is, at least in part, by baking the pot - removing the water from the clay. The water that provides the softness is removed rather than some additional chemical that causes hardness being added. Now, I know that there are other things that go into the hardening of earthenware vessels, but that aspect is a significant one.
And it is not as though this is just a conclusion to which I arrived, but upon which I am at odds with the Reformed churches. Quite to the contrary, it is the widely held Reformed position. To wit,
John Gill:
A.W. Pink:
R.L. Dabney:
Edward Payson:
John Calvin (who, you will note, suggests that in the case of Pharaoh God not only removed grace but also sent Satan):
The bottom line, though is that LouRugg should at least have read the Westminster Confession of Faith (1646) which states the general Reformed position (the London Baptist Confession saying essentially the same thing):
While God can send Satan to render us even more obstinate, it is sufficient for God to remove his grace from us. Like the earth that God softens with his showers (Psalm 65:10) or hearts can become instead hard and parched simply by his removal of the water of grace. And he can turn that parched ground into a pool if He wishes as well (Isaiah 35:7), showing mercy on whom he will show mercy and hardening whomsoever he wishes (Exodus 33:19 and Romans 9:15&18).
-TurretinFan
Oh and by the way, when Turretinfan said that God hardened Pharaoh's heart by taking away his common sense, I almost fell off my chair. Did he get that stuff from you, or did he make that one up on his own?I answer:
One of the problems with the debate is that it does seem that LouRugg, despite apparently working on a book on Calvinism, has some significant gaps in his understanding of Reformed theology. That's why he was apparently shocked that I didn't argue that God zapped Pharaoh with hardening rather than withdrawing his blessing from him.
Where did I get the idea from? Well, I got it from Scripture. I got it from the fact that Paul contrasts hardening with mercy just as we might contrast light and darkness. Thus, I drew the inference that God's hardening of a man is God's act of not showing him some mercy. In the debate I called this God withholding from Pharaoh "common sense" though others might like the term "common grace."
The passage in Romans 9 gave me further confirmation of this approach through the analogy of the potter and the clay. As I was thinking about the hardening and the potter, I thought: how does a potter harden a pot? The answer is, at least in part, by baking the pot - removing the water from the clay. The water that provides the softness is removed rather than some additional chemical that causes hardness being added. Now, I know that there are other things that go into the hardening of earthenware vessels, but that aspect is a significant one.
And it is not as though this is just a conclusion to which I arrived, but upon which I am at odds with the Reformed churches. Quite to the contrary, it is the widely held Reformed position. To wit,
John Gill:
God may be said to harden and blind, by denying them that grace which can only cure them of their hardness and blindness, and which he, of his free favour, gives to his chosen ones, (Ezek. 36:26, 27) but is not obliged to give it to any; and because he gives it not, he is said to hide, as he determined to hide, the things of his grace from the wise and prudent, even because it so seemed good in his sight, (Matthew 11:25, 26).- John Gill, Of the Decree of Rejection
A.W. Pink:
Thus it was with each of us whilst in a state of nature. Sin blinds and hardens, and naught but Divine grace can illumine and soften. Nothing short of the power of the Almighty can pierce the calloused conscience or break the sin-petrified heart.- A.W. Pink, The Restoration of David
R.L. Dabney:
Again: it is said, Scriptures teach, that the sin of the non–elect was not the ground of their preterition. "In John 10:26, continued unbelief is the consequence, and therefore not the ground of the Pharisees preterition" (Matt. 11:25; Rom. 9:11 18). "God’s will," they say, "and not the non-sin, is the ground of His purpose to harden." And "Esau was rejected as much without regard to his evil, as Jacob was elected without regard to his good deeds." To the first of these points I reply, that the withholding of God’s grace is but the negative occasion of a sinner’s unbelief, just as the absence of the physician from a sick man is the occasion, and not the cause, of His death.- R.L. Dabney, Predestination
Edward Payson:
The inspired writers teach us, very explicitly, that after a time, God ceases to strive with sinners, and to afford them the assistance of his grace. He gives them up to a blinded mind, a seared conscience, and a hard heart.- Edward Payson, Sermon 18
John Calvin (who, you will note, suggests that in the case of Pharaoh God not only removed grace but also sent Satan):
3. Ancient writers sometimes manifest a superstitious dread of making a simple confession of the truth in this matter, from a fear of furnishing impiety with a handle for speaking irreverently of the works of God. While I embrace such soberness with all my heart, I cannot see the least danger in simply holding what Scripture delivers. when Augustine was not always free from this superstition, as when he says, that blinding and hardening have respect not to the operation of God, but to prescience (Lib. de Predestina. et Gratia). But this subtilty is repudiated by many passages of Scriptures which clearly show that the divine interference amounts to something more than prescience. And Augustine himself, in his book against Julian, [The French adds, “se retractant de l’autre sentence;” retracting the other sentiment.] contends at length that sins are manifestations not merely of divine permission or patience, but also of divine power, that thus former sins may be punished. In like manner, what is said of permission is too weak to stand. God is very often said to blind and harden the reprobate, to turn their hearts, to incline and impel them, as I have elsewhere fully explained (Book 1 c. 18). The extent of this agency can never be explained by having recourse to prescience or permission. We, therefore, hold that there are two methods in which God may so act. When his light is taken away, nothing remains but blindness and darkness: when his Spirit is taken away, our hearts become hard as stones: when his guidance is withdrawn, we immediately turn from the right path: and hence he is properly said to incline, harden, and blind those whom he deprives of the faculty of seeing, obeying, and rightly executing. The second method, which comes much nearer to the exact meaning of the words, is when executing his judgments by Satan as the minister of his anger, God both directs men’s counsels, and excites their wills, and regulates their efforts as he pleases. Thus when Moses relates that Simon, king of the Amorites, did not give the Israelites a passage, because the Lord 268“had hardened his spirit, and made his heart obstinate,” he immediately adds the purpose which God had in view—viz. that he might deliver him into their hand (Deut. 2:30). As God had resolved to destroy him, the hardening of his heart was the divine preparation for his ruin.- John Calvin, Institutes of the Christian Religion, Book 2, Chapter 4
4. In accordance with the former methods it seems to be said,174174 Ezek. 7:26; Psalm 107:40; Job 12:20, 24; Isiah 63:17; Exod. 4:21; 7:3; 10:1; 3:19. “The law shall perish from the priests and counsel from the ancients.” “He poureth contempt upon princes, and causeth them to wander in the wilderness, where there is no way.” Again “O Lord, why hast thou made us to err from thy ways, and hardened our heart from thy fear?” These passages rather indicate what men become when God deserts them, than what the nature of his agency is when he works in them. But there are other passages which go farther, such as those concerning the hardening of Pharaoh: “I will harden his heart, that he shall not let the people go.” The same thing is afterwards repeated in stronger terms. Did he harden his heart by not softening it? This is, indeed, true; but he did something more: he gave it in charge to Satan to confirm him in his obstinacy. Hence he had previously said, “I am sure he will not let you go.” The people come out of Egypt, and the inhabitants of a hostile region come forth against them. How were they instigated? Moses certainly declares of Sihon, that it was the Lord who “had hardened his spirit, and made his heart obstinate,” (Deut. 2:30). The Psalmists relating the same history says, “He turned their hearts to hate his people,” (Psalm 105:25). You cannot now say that they stumbled merely because they were deprived of divine counsel. For if they are hardened and turned, they are purposely bent to the very end in view. Moreover, whenever God saw it meet to punish the people for their transgression, in what way did he accomplish his purpose by the reprobate? In such a way as shows that the efficacy of the action was in him, and that they were only ministers. At one time he declares, “that he will lift an ensign to the nations from far, and will hiss unto them from the end of the earth;” at another, that he will take a net to ensnare them; and at another, that he will be like a hammer to strike them. But he specially declared that he was not inactive among theme when he called Sennacherib an axe, which was formed and destined to be wielded by his own hand.175175 Isa. 5:26; 7:18; Ezek. 12:13; 17:20; Jer. 2:.23; Isa. 10:15. Augustine is not far from the mark when he states the matter thus, That men sin, is attributable to themselves: that in sinning they produce this or that result, is owing to the mighty power of God, who divides the darkness as he pleases (August. de Prædest. Sanct).
5. Moreover, that the ministry of Satan is employed to instigate the reprobate, whenever the Lord, in the course of his providence, has any purpose to accomplish in them, will sufficiently appear from 269a single passage. It is repeatedly said in the First Book of Samuel, that an evil spirit from the Lord came upon Saul, and troubled him (1 Sam. 16:14; 18:10; 19:9). It were impious to apply this to the Holy Spirit. An impure spirit must therefore be called a spirit from the Lord, because completely subservient to his purpose, being more an instrument in acting than a proper agent. We should also add what Paul says, “God shall send them strong delusion, that they should believe a lie: that they all might be damned who believed not the truth,” (2 Thess. 2:11, 12). But in the same transaction there is always a wide difference between what the Lord does, and what Satan and the ungodly design to do. The wicked instruments which he has under his hand and can turn as he pleases, he makes subservient to his own justice. They, as they are wicked, give effect to the iniquity conceived in their wicked minds. Every thing necessary to vindicate the majesty of God from calumny, and cut off any subterfuge on the part of the ungodly, has already been expounded in the Chapters on Providence (Book 1 Chapter 16–18). Here I only meant to show, in a few words, how Satan reigns in the reprobate, and how God works in both.
The bottom line, though is that LouRugg should at least have read the Westminster Confession of Faith (1646) which states the general Reformed position (the London Baptist Confession saying essentially the same thing):
VI. As for those wicked and ungodly men whom God, as a righteous judge, for former sins, doth blind and harden; from them he not only withholdeth his grace, whereby they might have been enlightened in their understandings, and wrought upon their hearts; but sometimes also withdraweth the gifts which they had; and exposeth them to such objects as their corruption makes occasion of sin; and withal, gives them over to their own lusts, the temptations of the world, and the power of Satan; whereby it comes to pass that they harden themselves, even under those means which God useth for the softening of others.- Westminster Confession of Faith, Chapter 5, Section 6
While God can send Satan to render us even more obstinate, it is sufficient for God to remove his grace from us. Like the earth that God softens with his showers (Psalm 65:10) or hearts can become instead hard and parched simply by his removal of the water of grace. And he can turn that parched ground into a pool if He wishes as well (Isaiah 35:7), showing mercy on whom he will show mercy and hardening whomsoever he wishes (Exodus 33:19 and Romans 9:15&18).
-TurretinFan
Thursday, October 08, 2009
John Knox on Free Will (Old Spellings)
Before I answer to the absurdities which of our doctrine ye collect, I must, in few wordes, put you in minde, that very foolishely ye joyn the free will of Adame with the free will of Christe Jesus, and with the libertie of God. For Adam's will was never so free but that it might (as that it did) come to thraldom; which weaknes you be never able to prove at any tyme to have bene in Christes will. Further, the will of Adam was alwaies under the impire and threatning of a law; to which subjection I think ye will not bring God. But now to your absurdities.
"If (say you) I shall grante that all thinges of mere Necessitio must come to passe, according to the prescience and foreknowledge of God, then had Adam afore his transgression no Free will." Your illation or consequence is fals, for the foreknowledge and prescience of God did neither take away free will from Adam, neither yet did compell it by any violence, but did use it as an ordinarie mean, by the which His eternall counsell and purpose should take effect. But for the better understanding hereof, we must adverte and note that which before we have touched, and promised after more largely to entreat the same; to witt, That God's prescience and foreknowledge is not to be seperated from his Will and decree. For none otherwise doeth God foresee things to come to passe, but according as He himself hath in his eternall counsell decreed the same. For as it apperteineth to His wisdom to foreknow and foresee all things that are to come, so doeth it appertein to his power to moderate and reule all things according to his own will. Neither yet therefor doeth it folow that His foreknowledge, prescience, will, or power, doeth take away the free will of his creatures. but in all wisdom and justice (however the contrarie appere to our corrupted judgements,) he useth them as best it pleaseth his wisdom to bring to passe in time that which before all tyme he had decreed. To the which purpose and end, they (I mean the creatures and their willes), whatsoever they purpose to the contrarie, or how ignorantly that ever they worke it, nevertheles do voluntarely, and as it were of a naturall motion, incline and bow to that end to the which they are created.
To make the mater more plain, let us take the creation and fall of Adam, with the creatures that served in the same, for example. For what cheif end did God create all things (of Salomon and Paule we have before declared), to witt, for his own glorie to be shewed; the glorie, I say, of the riches of his mercie towardes the vessels of mercie, and the glorie of his justice and most just judgements towards the vessels of wrath. And that this eternall counsell of God should take effect, as he had purposed, man was created righteous, wise, just, and good, having free will; neither subject to the thraldom of sinne nor of Sathan, at the first creation. But sodanly cometh Sathan, ennemie to God and to man his good creature, and first poured in vennom into the heart of the woman, which afterward she poured into the heart of Adam; to the which bothe the one and the other, without all violence used of God's part, dothe willingly consent; and so conspiring with the serpent, do accuse God of a lie; do fully consent to vendicat or challenge to themselves the power of the Godhead, of minde and purpose (so far as in them lay) to thrust downe and depose Him from his eternall throne. Here we see how the creatures and their willes, without compulsion, do serve God's purpose and counsell. For Sathan was neither sent nor commanded of God to tempt man, but of malice and hatred did most willingly and gredely runne to the same: The will of man being free before, was not by God violently compelled to obey Sathan; but man of free will did consent to Sathan, and conspire against God. And yet was the fall of man not only foresene and foreknowen of God, but also before decreed, for the manifestation of his glorie.
Let us yet take an other exemple, that the mater may be more evident. The death of Christ Jesus for man's redemption, was decreed in the eternall counsell of God before the foundations of the world were laid, as we were elected in him, and as he was the Lamb killed from the beginning; which death also was decreed in the same counsell of God to be in a certein time appointed; and that so certenly, that neither could the malice of any creature prevent the houre appointed of God thereto, neither yet could any policie or chance impede or transferre the same to any other tyme. For how oft Christ was afore assaulted, the Evangclistes do witnes; but alwaies his answere was, "My houre is not yet come." And what impedimentes did oucure immediatly before his death, is also evident. The feast of Easter was instant, the fame of Christ was great, the favor of the people with publick voices was declared, and the counsels of the Hie Priestes and Seniors had decreed, that, to avoid sedition, his death should be delayed till after that feast. But all these were shortly overthrowen, and Christ did suffer in the verey tyme appointed, as he before had forespoken.
But now to the instrumentes which serve in this mater, and whether they were compelled by God or not. Judas, we know, was not one of the least; and what moved him the Holie Ghost doeth witnes, to witt, his avariciousnes. The Scribes, Pharisies, Priestes anil Seniors, and people, led, some of malice and envie, some to gratifie their rulers, and altogether of set purpose to crucifie Christ, do consent with Judas. Pilate, albeit he long refused, and by divers nieancs studied to delyver Christ, yet in the end, for fear of displeasure, aswell of the priestes and people, as of the Emperor, he willingly, without all compulsion of God's part, pronounced an unjust sentence of deathe against Christ Jesus; which his soldiours also most willingly did execute. Thus, I say, we see that the creatures and their willes, without all compulsion, do serve God's counsell and purpose.
Here I know, that ye think that either I write against myself, or els that I conclude a great absurditic: For, if I say that God did nothing but foresee these thinges, and so permitted them (as after you speak) to folow their own train; that he worketh no more but as a simple beholder of a tragedie; then do I agree with you. And if I do say (as in verey dede I do understand and afiirme,) that the eternall counsell and purpose of God did so reule in all these thinges, that rather they did serve to God's purpose and most just will, then fulfill their most wicked willes; then will you cry, Blasphemie, and say that I deliver the Devill, Adam, and all the wicked, frome sinne, of the which I make God to be author. To the first I have answered before, that as I seperate not God's foreknowledge from his counsell, so do I affirme that He worketh all in all thinges, according to the purpose of the same his good will; and yet that he useth no violence, neither in compelling his creatures, neither constreining their willes by any externall force, neither yet taking their willes from them, but in all wisdom and justice using them as he knoweth most expedient for the manifestation of his glorie, without any violence, I say, done to their willes. For violence is done to the will of a creature, when it willoth one thing, and yet by force, by tyranny, or by a greater power, it is compelled to do the thinges which it wold not; as if a pudique and honest matron, or chaste virgine, should be deprehended alono by a wicked and filthie man, who with violence and force (thoghe the will of the woman did plainely repine) did deflowre and corrupte her. This is violence done to the will, and she of necessitie was compelled to suffer that ignominie and shame, which nevertheles she most abhorred.
Do we say that God did (or doeth) any such violence to his creatures? Did he compell Sathan to tempt the woman, when his will was contrarie thereto? Did the will of Adame resist the temptation of the woman, and did he so hate and abhorre to eate of that fruite, that it behoved God to compell his will repugning thereto to eat of it, and so to break his commandements? or, did he not rather willingly hear and obey the voice of his wyfe? Consider, I beseech you, how plainely we put a difference betwixt vidlence, which you call mere Necessitie, and God's secrete counsell and eternall purpose. But yet ye crie, "Wherein then did man offend? Who can resist the will of God ? Why doth he complein, seing that his counsell and purpose, by such meanes, is broght to passe?" Do ye not understand that these were the furious cries of those to whom Saint Paul imposeth silence, with this sentence, " 0 man, what art thou that darest reason against God ?" &c.
But lest that ye complein (as your common custom is) of our obscuritie and darke speaking, I will even in one or two wordes declare, Why the creatures offend even when they serve most effectually to God's purpose; to witt, becaus that they neither have the glorie of God in their actions before their eies, neither yet mynd they to serve nor obey God's purpose and will. Sathan, in tempting man, studied nothing to promote God's glorie; man, in obeying the temptation, looked not to the counsell of God; Judas, Ananias, Pilate, the soldiours, and the rest, had nothing less in mind then mannes redemption to be performed by their counsells and wicked workes. And therefor, of God's justice, were they everio one reputed sinners; yea, and some of them reprobated for ever. If these reasons do not satisfic you, yet shall they be a testimonie what is our doctrine; and, as I trust, shall also be a reasonable contentation to the godlie and simple reader. More would I have spoken in the same matter, and so to have put end unto it at once; but becaus that after, by the reason of your most unjust accusations, I wilbe compelled to have to do with you againe, I abyde opportunitie.
Now to your reasons: Mannes will, I say, in the self remained free, notwithstanding that God in his eternall counsell had decreed his fall; and that becaus no violence, as before is declared, was done unto it. The will of our Master and Saviour Christ Jesus, notwithstanding the immutable decree of his death, appointed to be at a certein time, was so free, that albeit the power of nature might have given unto him mo yeares of life; and also that the humaine nature did abhorre the crueil and ignominious death; yet did he subject bothe his will and the power of nature unto the will of his heavenlie Father; as he doeth witnes, saying, "Not that I will, Father, but let that be done which thou willest."
Wonder it is, that ye can not see how God's will can remaine in hbertie, except that he abyde m suspence or dowte, and so daily and hourely change his purpose and counsell, as occasion is offered unto him by men and by their actions. If this be to make God bounde, and to take frome him libertie, to affirme that lie is infinite in wisdom, infinite in goodnes, infinite in justice, and infinite in power, so doeth he most constantly, most freely, most justlie, and most wisely, bring that to passe which in his eternall counsell he hath determined; if this, I say, be to take from God freedom, wisdome, and libortie, as ye do rayle, I must confess myself a transgressor. But if your cogitations and foolishe conclusions of his eternal Godhead, be, as, alas! too manifestly ye declare yourselves, so prophane, so carnal, and so wicked, that long, you abiding in the same, can not escaip God's just vengeance; repent, before that in his anger he arrest, and declare that your justice, wherof so much ye bragge, is manifest blasphemie against his dear Sonne Christ Jesus! God the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ preserve his small flock from your vennom and most dangerous heresies, and stoppe your blasphemous mouthes, that thus dare jeast upon God, as if he were one of your companions, saying, " Then is he a goodly wvse God; Then is God bounde himself," &c.
(John Knox, "On Predestination," 19th Section, as presented in the Works of John Knox, Volume 5 (1856), pp. 140-46) (I've presented here the old spellings which ought to be readable to the average reader. God willing, I will provide a modernized version at a later date.)(The work is a response, written in 1560, to an response to an Anabaptist.)
"If (say you) I shall grante that all thinges of mere Necessitio must come to passe, according to the prescience and foreknowledge of God, then had Adam afore his transgression no Free will." Your illation or consequence is fals, for the foreknowledge and prescience of God did neither take away free will from Adam, neither yet did compell it by any violence, but did use it as an ordinarie mean, by the which His eternall counsell and purpose should take effect. But for the better understanding hereof, we must adverte and note that which before we have touched, and promised after more largely to entreat the same; to witt, That God's prescience and foreknowledge is not to be seperated from his Will and decree. For none otherwise doeth God foresee things to come to passe, but according as He himself hath in his eternall counsell decreed the same. For as it apperteineth to His wisdom to foreknow and foresee all things that are to come, so doeth it appertein to his power to moderate and reule all things according to his own will. Neither yet therefor doeth it folow that His foreknowledge, prescience, will, or power, doeth take away the free will of his creatures. but in all wisdom and justice (however the contrarie appere to our corrupted judgements,) he useth them as best it pleaseth his wisdom to bring to passe in time that which before all tyme he had decreed. To the which purpose and end, they (I mean the creatures and their willes), whatsoever they purpose to the contrarie, or how ignorantly that ever they worke it, nevertheles do voluntarely, and as it were of a naturall motion, incline and bow to that end to the which they are created.
To make the mater more plain, let us take the creation and fall of Adam, with the creatures that served in the same, for example. For what cheif end did God create all things (of Salomon and Paule we have before declared), to witt, for his own glorie to be shewed; the glorie, I say, of the riches of his mercie towardes the vessels of mercie, and the glorie of his justice and most just judgements towards the vessels of wrath. And that this eternall counsell of God should take effect, as he had purposed, man was created righteous, wise, just, and good, having free will; neither subject to the thraldom of sinne nor of Sathan, at the first creation. But sodanly cometh Sathan, ennemie to God and to man his good creature, and first poured in vennom into the heart of the woman, which afterward she poured into the heart of Adam; to the which bothe the one and the other, without all violence used of God's part, dothe willingly consent; and so conspiring with the serpent, do accuse God of a lie; do fully consent to vendicat or challenge to themselves the power of the Godhead, of minde and purpose (so far as in them lay) to thrust downe and depose Him from his eternall throne. Here we see how the creatures and their willes, without compulsion, do serve God's purpose and counsell. For Sathan was neither sent nor commanded of God to tempt man, but of malice and hatred did most willingly and gredely runne to the same: The will of man being free before, was not by God violently compelled to obey Sathan; but man of free will did consent to Sathan, and conspire against God. And yet was the fall of man not only foresene and foreknowen of God, but also before decreed, for the manifestation of his glorie.
Let us yet take an other exemple, that the mater may be more evident. The death of Christ Jesus for man's redemption, was decreed in the eternall counsell of God before the foundations of the world were laid, as we were elected in him, and as he was the Lamb killed from the beginning; which death also was decreed in the same counsell of God to be in a certein time appointed; and that so certenly, that neither could the malice of any creature prevent the houre appointed of God thereto, neither yet could any policie or chance impede or transferre the same to any other tyme. For how oft Christ was afore assaulted, the Evangclistes do witnes; but alwaies his answere was, "My houre is not yet come." And what impedimentes did oucure immediatly before his death, is also evident. The feast of Easter was instant, the fame of Christ was great, the favor of the people with publick voices was declared, and the counsels of the Hie Priestes and Seniors had decreed, that, to avoid sedition, his death should be delayed till after that feast. But all these were shortly overthrowen, and Christ did suffer in the verey tyme appointed, as he before had forespoken.
But now to the instrumentes which serve in this mater, and whether they were compelled by God or not. Judas, we know, was not one of the least; and what moved him the Holie Ghost doeth witnes, to witt, his avariciousnes. The Scribes, Pharisies, Priestes anil Seniors, and people, led, some of malice and envie, some to gratifie their rulers, and altogether of set purpose to crucifie Christ, do consent with Judas. Pilate, albeit he long refused, and by divers nieancs studied to delyver Christ, yet in the end, for fear of displeasure, aswell of the priestes and people, as of the Emperor, he willingly, without all compulsion of God's part, pronounced an unjust sentence of deathe against Christ Jesus; which his soldiours also most willingly did execute. Thus, I say, we see that the creatures and their willes, without all compulsion, do serve God's counsell and purpose.
Here I know, that ye think that either I write against myself, or els that I conclude a great absurditic: For, if I say that God did nothing but foresee these thinges, and so permitted them (as after you speak) to folow their own train; that he worketh no more but as a simple beholder of a tragedie; then do I agree with you. And if I do say (as in verey dede I do understand and afiirme,) that the eternall counsell and purpose of God did so reule in all these thinges, that rather they did serve to God's purpose and most just will, then fulfill their most wicked willes; then will you cry, Blasphemie, and say that I deliver the Devill, Adam, and all the wicked, frome sinne, of the which I make God to be author. To the first I have answered before, that as I seperate not God's foreknowledge from his counsell, so do I affirme that He worketh all in all thinges, according to the purpose of the same his good will; and yet that he useth no violence, neither in compelling his creatures, neither constreining their willes by any externall force, neither yet taking their willes from them, but in all wisdom and justice using them as he knoweth most expedient for the manifestation of his glorie, without any violence, I say, done to their willes. For violence is done to the will of a creature, when it willoth one thing, and yet by force, by tyranny, or by a greater power, it is compelled to do the thinges which it wold not; as if a pudique and honest matron, or chaste virgine, should be deprehended alono by a wicked and filthie man, who with violence and force (thoghe the will of the woman did plainely repine) did deflowre and corrupte her. This is violence done to the will, and she of necessitie was compelled to suffer that ignominie and shame, which nevertheles she most abhorred.
Do we say that God did (or doeth) any such violence to his creatures? Did he compell Sathan to tempt the woman, when his will was contrarie thereto? Did the will of Adame resist the temptation of the woman, and did he so hate and abhorre to eate of that fruite, that it behoved God to compell his will repugning thereto to eat of it, and so to break his commandements? or, did he not rather willingly hear and obey the voice of his wyfe? Consider, I beseech you, how plainely we put a difference betwixt vidlence, which you call mere Necessitie, and God's secrete counsell and eternall purpose. But yet ye crie, "Wherein then did man offend? Who can resist the will of God ? Why doth he complein, seing that his counsell and purpose, by such meanes, is broght to passe?" Do ye not understand that these were the furious cries of those to whom Saint Paul imposeth silence, with this sentence, " 0 man, what art thou that darest reason against God ?" &c.
But lest that ye complein (as your common custom is) of our obscuritie and darke speaking, I will even in one or two wordes declare, Why the creatures offend even when they serve most effectually to God's purpose; to witt, becaus that they neither have the glorie of God in their actions before their eies, neither yet mynd they to serve nor obey God's purpose and will. Sathan, in tempting man, studied nothing to promote God's glorie; man, in obeying the temptation, looked not to the counsell of God; Judas, Ananias, Pilate, the soldiours, and the rest, had nothing less in mind then mannes redemption to be performed by their counsells and wicked workes. And therefor, of God's justice, were they everio one reputed sinners; yea, and some of them reprobated for ever. If these reasons do not satisfic you, yet shall they be a testimonie what is our doctrine; and, as I trust, shall also be a reasonable contentation to the godlie and simple reader. More would I have spoken in the same matter, and so to have put end unto it at once; but becaus that after, by the reason of your most unjust accusations, I wilbe compelled to have to do with you againe, I abyde opportunitie.
Now to your reasons: Mannes will, I say, in the self remained free, notwithstanding that God in his eternall counsell had decreed his fall; and that becaus no violence, as before is declared, was done unto it. The will of our Master and Saviour Christ Jesus, notwithstanding the immutable decree of his death, appointed to be at a certein time, was so free, that albeit the power of nature might have given unto him mo yeares of life; and also that the humaine nature did abhorre the crueil and ignominious death; yet did he subject bothe his will and the power of nature unto the will of his heavenlie Father; as he doeth witnes, saying, "Not that I will, Father, but let that be done which thou willest."
Wonder it is, that ye can not see how God's will can remaine in hbertie, except that he abyde m suspence or dowte, and so daily and hourely change his purpose and counsell, as occasion is offered unto him by men and by their actions. If this be to make God bounde, and to take frome him libertie, to affirme that lie is infinite in wisdom, infinite in goodnes, infinite in justice, and infinite in power, so doeth he most constantly, most freely, most justlie, and most wisely, bring that to passe which in his eternall counsell he hath determined; if this, I say, be to take from God freedom, wisdome, and libortie, as ye do rayle, I must confess myself a transgressor. But if your cogitations and foolishe conclusions of his eternal Godhead, be, as, alas! too manifestly ye declare yourselves, so prophane, so carnal, and so wicked, that long, you abiding in the same, can not escaip God's just vengeance; repent, before that in his anger he arrest, and declare that your justice, wherof so much ye bragge, is manifest blasphemie against his dear Sonne Christ Jesus! God the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ preserve his small flock from your vennom and most dangerous heresies, and stoppe your blasphemous mouthes, that thus dare jeast upon God, as if he were one of your companions, saying, " Then is he a goodly wvse God; Then is God bounde himself," &c.
(John Knox, "On Predestination," 19th Section, as presented in the Works of John Knox, Volume 5 (1856), pp. 140-46) (I've presented here the old spellings which ought to be readable to the average reader. God willing, I will provide a modernized version at a later date.)(The work is a response, written in 1560, to an response to an Anabaptist.)
Debate with LouRugg on Hardening the Heart of Pharaoh
Well, a few minutes ago, I finished a debate with Louis Ruggiero (aka LouRugg) (link to mp3)(link to wma) The volume is a bit low, but if you turn up the volume you should be able to hear it ok. Thanks to Matthew Lankford for recording it. The following is an out-line of the first five minutes of my opening speech.
God hardens and shows mercy according to the good pleasure of his will. This clear Scriptural truth is taught explicitly in Romans 9. This truth is part of the greater truth of the Sovereignty of God. Scripture calls God the “Almighty” and declares
But our God is in the heavens: he hath done whatsoever he hath pleased. (Psalm 115:3 )
In Romans 9 the Apostle provides an argument regarding the justice and faithfulness of God. One of the points that the Apostle makes is that God shows mercy on whom he wills and hardens whom he wills. Paul supports this claim in two ways: one is a verbatim quotation from God to Moses, and the other is the example of Pharaoh.
Paul is not simply using Pharaoh in his original context, he’s applying the principle of Pharaoh to the situation of salvation. God hardens some in unbelief and shows mercy on others. There are, and this important, only two possibilities: hardening and mercy, obtaining salvation and being blinded, unbelief and faith, obedience and rebellion.
Romans 11:7 What then? Israel hath not obtained that which he seeketh for; but the election hath obtained it, and the rest were blinded.
There is no third path. There is light and darkness. Scripture says (speaking to believers):
1 Peter 2:9 But ye are a chosen generation, a royal priesthood, an holy nation, a peculiar people; that ye should shew forth the praises of him who hath called you out of darkness into his marvellous light:
And in another place:
1 Thessalonians 5:5 Ye are all the children of light, and the children of the day: we are not of the night, nor of darkness.
And this is the result of the work of the Holy Spirit – not the original condition of us fallen men:
Ephesians 5:8-10
For ye were sometimes darkness, but now are ye light in the Lord: walk as children of light: (For the fruit of the Spirit is in all goodness and righteousness and truth;) proving what is acceptable unto the Lord.
Thus, we are “children of light” because of the regeneration of the Holy Spirit. We become children of light by being born of God who is that light.
This supernatural act of God is compared to the creation account by the Apostle Paul:
2 Corinthians 4:6 For God, who commanded the light to shine out of darkness, hath shined in our hearts, to give the light of the knowledge of the glory of God in the face of Jesus Christ.
Recall the commission that Paul was given by God:
Acts 26:18 To open their eyes, and to turn them from darkness to light, and from the power of Satan unto God, that they may receive forgiveness of sins, and inheritance among them which are sanctified by faith that is in me.
Remember that the light of the world is Jesus:
John 8:12 Then spake Jesus again unto them, saying, I am the light of the world: he that followeth me shall not walk in darkness, but shall have the light of life.
So there is light and darkness, no twilight zone.
What then of the who, what, and when of the hardening of Pharaoh’s heart?
Well, Pharaoh’s heart, as I said is used by Paul as an illustration. Pharaoh himself was hardened with respect to a particular command of God: “Let my people go.” God hardened Pharaoh’s heart so that Pharaoh would not let the people go.
How did God harden Pharaoh’s heart? The Scriptures don’t tell us exactly and that means we have to try to draw out the meaning from inferences in Scripture. There seem to be two main possibilities, by applying hardness to Pharaoh or withdraw softness from Pharaoh.
Now recall back to the light/darkness situation. God is the light, unbelievers are those in darkness. How is a person made dark? Is it by applying darkness too him? No, it is by removing light or better yet we could simply say not providing light. So it seems that it might be reasonable, and perhaps preferable to view the hardening of Pharaoh as the removal of God’s ordinary favor from him. He took away Pharaoh’s common sense, we might say. Or more to the point, since Pharaoh does not deserve common sense, we can simply say that God did not give Pharaoh common sense.
Thus, when Pharaoh was hardened 12 times as God had prophesied God takes the credit, though it is Pharaoh who acts wickedly in the absence of God’s giving him the gift of common sense.
This then is the whole thing in a nutshell. Pharaoh was harden because God did not make Pharaoh soft. Pharaoh was a fool because God did not make him wise. Pharaoh was in darkness because God did not give Pharaoh light.
Why? Because God wanted to destroy Pharaoh completely.
It wasn’t because Pharaoh was somehow too hard for God. No, let’s be clear, no matter how hard a man’s heart is it is not too hard for God:
Genesis 18:14 Is any thing too hard for the LORD? At the time appointed I will return unto thee, according to the time of life, and Sarah shall have a son.
Jeremiah 32:27 Behold, I am the LORD, the God of all flesh: is there any thing too hard for me?
-TurretinFan
See as well the three-part outline on hardening in the Scriptures (part 1, part 2, part 3)
God hardens and shows mercy according to the good pleasure of his will. This clear Scriptural truth is taught explicitly in Romans 9. This truth is part of the greater truth of the Sovereignty of God. Scripture calls God the “Almighty” and declares
But our God is in the heavens: he hath done whatsoever he hath pleased. (Psalm 115:3 )
In Romans 9 the Apostle provides an argument regarding the justice and faithfulness of God. One of the points that the Apostle makes is that God shows mercy on whom he wills and hardens whom he wills. Paul supports this claim in two ways: one is a verbatim quotation from God to Moses, and the other is the example of Pharaoh.
Paul is not simply using Pharaoh in his original context, he’s applying the principle of Pharaoh to the situation of salvation. God hardens some in unbelief and shows mercy on others. There are, and this important, only two possibilities: hardening and mercy, obtaining salvation and being blinded, unbelief and faith, obedience and rebellion.
Romans 11:7 What then? Israel hath not obtained that which he seeketh for; but the election hath obtained it, and the rest were blinded.
There is no third path. There is light and darkness. Scripture says (speaking to believers):
1 Peter 2:9 But ye are a chosen generation, a royal priesthood, an holy nation, a peculiar people; that ye should shew forth the praises of him who hath called you out of darkness into his marvellous light:
And in another place:
1 Thessalonians 5:5 Ye are all the children of light, and the children of the day: we are not of the night, nor of darkness.
And this is the result of the work of the Holy Spirit – not the original condition of us fallen men:
Ephesians 5:8-10
For ye were sometimes darkness, but now are ye light in the Lord: walk as children of light: (For the fruit of the Spirit is in all goodness and righteousness and truth;) proving what is acceptable unto the Lord.
Thus, we are “children of light” because of the regeneration of the Holy Spirit. We become children of light by being born of God who is that light.
This supernatural act of God is compared to the creation account by the Apostle Paul:
2 Corinthians 4:6 For God, who commanded the light to shine out of darkness, hath shined in our hearts, to give the light of the knowledge of the glory of God in the face of Jesus Christ.
Recall the commission that Paul was given by God:
Acts 26:18 To open their eyes, and to turn them from darkness to light, and from the power of Satan unto God, that they may receive forgiveness of sins, and inheritance among them which are sanctified by faith that is in me.
Remember that the light of the world is Jesus:
John 8:12 Then spake Jesus again unto them, saying, I am the light of the world: he that followeth me shall not walk in darkness, but shall have the light of life.
So there is light and darkness, no twilight zone.
What then of the who, what, and when of the hardening of Pharaoh’s heart?
Well, Pharaoh’s heart, as I said is used by Paul as an illustration. Pharaoh himself was hardened with respect to a particular command of God: “Let my people go.” God hardened Pharaoh’s heart so that Pharaoh would not let the people go.
How did God harden Pharaoh’s heart? The Scriptures don’t tell us exactly and that means we have to try to draw out the meaning from inferences in Scripture. There seem to be two main possibilities, by applying hardness to Pharaoh or withdraw softness from Pharaoh.
Now recall back to the light/darkness situation. God is the light, unbelievers are those in darkness. How is a person made dark? Is it by applying darkness too him? No, it is by removing light or better yet we could simply say not providing light. So it seems that it might be reasonable, and perhaps preferable to view the hardening of Pharaoh as the removal of God’s ordinary favor from him. He took away Pharaoh’s common sense, we might say. Or more to the point, since Pharaoh does not deserve common sense, we can simply say that God did not give Pharaoh common sense.
Thus, when Pharaoh was hardened 12 times as God had prophesied God takes the credit, though it is Pharaoh who acts wickedly in the absence of God’s giving him the gift of common sense.
This then is the whole thing in a nutshell. Pharaoh was harden because God did not make Pharaoh soft. Pharaoh was a fool because God did not make him wise. Pharaoh was in darkness because God did not give Pharaoh light.
Why? Because God wanted to destroy Pharaoh completely.
It wasn’t because Pharaoh was somehow too hard for God. No, let’s be clear, no matter how hard a man’s heart is it is not too hard for God:
Genesis 18:14 Is any thing too hard for the LORD? At the time appointed I will return unto thee, according to the time of life, and Sarah shall have a son.
Jeremiah 32:27 Behold, I am the LORD, the God of all flesh: is there any thing too hard for me?
-TurretinFan
See as well the three-part outline on hardening in the Scriptures (part 1, part 2, part 3)
Wednesday, October 07, 2009
Hardened Hearts - A Brief Biblical Survey - Part 3
(continued from part 2) (see also part 1)
6. The Hardenings of the Old Testament Israelites
a) During the Wilderness Journey
i) Old Testament Discussion
2 Kings 17:13-14
Yet the LORD testified against Israel, and against Judah, by all the prophets, and by all the seers, saying, Turn ye from your evil ways, and keep my commandments and my statutes, according to all the law which I commanded your fathers, and which I sent to you by my servants the prophets. Notwithstanding they would not hear, but hardened their necks, like to the neck of their fathers, that did not believe in the LORD their God.
In this passage, the hardening is attributed to the people and it is connected with them not believing in the LORD.
Nehemiah 9:16-17
But they and our fathers dealt proudly, and hardened their necks, and hearkened not to thy commandments, and refused to obey, neither were mindful of thy wonders that thou didst among them; but hardened their necks, and in their rebellion appointed a captain to return to their bondage: but thou art a God ready to pardon, gracious and merciful, slow to anger, and of great kindness, and forsookest them not.
Again, the hardening is attributed to the people. In this case, the hardness is connected with the rebellion of Israel.
Psalm 95:7-11
For he is our God; and we are the people of his pasture, and the sheep of his hand. To day if ye will hear his voice, harden not your heart, as in the provocation, and as in the day of temptation in the wilderness: when your fathers tempted me, proved me, and saw my work. Forty years long was I grieved with this generation, and said, "It is a people that do err in their heart, and they have not known my ways: unto whom I sware in my wrath that they should not enter into my rest."
Again, the hardening is attributed to the people. In this case, the hardness is connected with the children of Israel angering God.
Jeremiah 7:25-27
Since the day that your fathers came forth out of the land of Egypt unto this day I have even sent unto you all my servants the prophets, daily rising up early and sending them: yet they hearkened not unto me, nor inclined their ear, but hardened their neck: they did worse than their fathers. Therefore thou shalt speak all these words unto them; but they will not hearken to thee: thou shalt also call unto them; but they will not answer thee.
Again, the hardening is attributed to the people. In this case, the hardness is connected with the children of Israel not hearkening to God.
ii) New Testament Discussion
Hebrews 3:5-19
And Moses verily was faithful in all his house, as a servant, for a testimony of those things which were to be spoken after; but Christ as a son over his own house; whose house are we, if we hold fast the confidence and the rejoicing of the hope firm unto the end. Wherefore (as the Holy Ghost saith, "To day if ye will hear his voice, harden not your hearts, as in the provocation, in the day of temptation in the wilderness: when your fathers tempted me, proved me, and saw my works forty years. Wherefore I was grieved with that generation, and said, 'They do alway err in their heart; and they have not known my ways.' So I sware in my wrath, 'They shall not enter into my rest.'") take heed, brethren, lest there be in any of you an evil heart of unbelief, in departing from the living God. But exhort one another daily, while it is called To day; lest any of you be hardened through the deceitfulness of sin. For we are made partakers of Christ, if we hold the beginning of our confidence stedfast unto the end; while it is said, "To day if ye will hear his voice, harden not your hearts, as in the provocation." For some, when they had heard, did provoke: howbeit not all that came out of Egypt by Moses. But with whom was he grieved forty years? was it not with them that had sinned, whose carcases fell in the wilderness? And to whom sware he that they should not enter into his rest, but to them that believed not? So we see that they could not enter in because of unbelief.
Again, the hardening is attributed to the people. In this case, the hardness is connected with the unbelief of the children of Israel.
Hebrews 4:4-9
For he spake in a certain place of the seventh day on this wise, "And God did rest the seventh day from all his works." And in this place again, "If they shall enter into my rest." Seeing therefore it remaineth that some must enter therein, and they to whom it was first preached entered not in because of unbelief: again, he limiteth a certain day, saying in David, "To day," after so long a time; as it is said, "To day if ye will hear his voice, harden not your hearts." For if Jesus had given them rest, then would he not afterward have spoken of another day. There remaineth therefore a rest to the people of God.
Again, the hardening is attributed to the people. In this case, again, the hardness is connected with the unbelief of the children of Israel.
b) At other times (besides the Exodus itself)
2 Kings 17:13-14
Yet the LORD testified against Israel, and against Judah, by all the prophets, and by all the seers, saying, Turn ye from your evil ways, and keep my commandments and my statutes, according to all the law which I commanded your fathers, and which I sent to you by my servants the prophets. Notwithstanding they would not hear, but hardened their necks, like to the neck of their fathers, that did not believe in the LORD their God.
Again, the hardening is attributed to the people. In this case, again, the hardness is connected with the unbelief of the children of Israel.
Nehemiah 9:28-30
But after they had rest, they did evil again before thee: therefore leftest thou them in the hand of their enemies, so that they had the dominion over them: yet when they returned, and cried unto thee, thou heardest them from heaven; and many times didst thou deliver them according to thy mercies; and testifiedst against them, that thou mightest bring them again unto thy law: yet they dealt proudly, and hearkened not unto thy commandments, but sinned against thy judgments, (which if a man do, he shall live in them;) and withdrew the shoulder, and hardened their neck, and would not hear. Yet many years didst thou forbear them, and testifiedst against them by thy spirit in thy prophets: yet would they not give ear: therefore gavest thou them into the hand of the people of the lands.
Again, the hardening is attributed to the people. In this case, the hardness is connected with the rebellion of Israel. You will recognize that I had also included this passage in the immediately previous section, since it deals with the fact that Israel is repeating its rebellion.
Jeremiah 7:25-27
Since the day that your fathers came forth out of the land of Egypt unto this day I have even sent unto you all my servants the prophets, daily rising up early and sending them: yet they hearkened not unto me, nor inclined their ear, but hardened their neck: they did worse than their fathers. Therefore thou shalt speak all these words unto them; but they will not hearken to thee: thou shalt also call unto them; but they will not answer thee.
Again, the hardening is attributed to the people. In this case, the hardness is connected with the children of Israel not hearkening to God. This too is a repeated passage from the previous section to show that Israel's lack of hearkening continued from the Exodus onward.
Jeremiah 19:14-15
Then came Jeremiah from Tophet, whither the LORD had sent him to prophesy; and he stood in the court of the LORD'S house; and said to all the people, "Thus saith the LORD of hosts, the God of Israel; 'Behold, I will bring upon this city and upon all her towns all the evil that I have pronounced against it, because they have hardened their necks, that they might not hear my words.'"
Again, the hardening is attributed to the people. In this case, the hardness is connected with the children of Israel not hearing (in the sense of obeying) God.
Isaiah 63:17 O LORD, why hast thou made us to err from thy ways, and hardened our heart from thy fear? Return for thy servants' sake, the tribes of thine inheritance.
Finally, in this instance the hardening is attributed to God. This should not be seen as inconsistent with the previous examples but rather as compatible with them. God takes credit for hardening the hearts of the wicked and it is also true that the wicked harden their hearts.
c) Lesser Hardenings
Matthew 19:8 He saith unto them, Moses because of the hardness of your hearts suffered you to put away your wives: but from the beginning it was not so.
Mark 10:5 And Jesus answered and said unto them, For the hardness of your heart he wrote you this precept.
Both of these passages refer to the lesser hardening that Jesus mentions with respect to the Mosaic permission of divorce. He refers to divorce as being a provision for the hardness of the hearts of the Jews, but he does not specifically tie that hardness to anything.
Deuteronomy 15:7-8
If there be among you a poor man of one of thy brethren within any of thy gates in thy land which the LORD thy God giveth thee, thou shalt not harden thine heart, nor shut thine hand from thy poor brother: but thou shalt open thine hand wide unto him, and shalt surely lend him sufficient for his need, in that which he wanteth.
This passage relates to a hardness of heart specifically with respect to selfishness. The Israelites are commanded not to be selfish with their goods but to give to their brethren enough to satisfy the needs of their brethren. The same rule applies to Christians today.
7. The Hardenings of the New Testament Jews
a) The Pharisees and others
John 12:37-43
But though he had done so many miracles before them, yet they believed not on him: that the saying of Esaias the prophet might be fulfilled, which he spake, "Lord, who hath believed our report? and to whom hath the arm of the Lord been revealed?" Therefore they could not believe, because that Esaias said again, "He hath blinded their eyes, and hardened their heart; that they should not see with their eyes, nor understand with their heart, and be converted, and I should heal them." These things said Esaias, when he saw his glory, and spake of him. Nevertheless among the chief rulers also many believed on him; but because of the Pharisees they did not confess him, lest they should be put out of the synagogue: for they loved the praise of men more than the praise of God.
Here God takes the credit for the blinding and hardening of the Pharisees. Furthermore, God also ascribes purpose to the blinding and hardening, namely so that the people would not believe.
Acts 19:8-10
And he went into the synagogue, and spake boldly for the space of three months, disputing and persuading the things concerning the kingdom of God. But when divers were hardened, and believed not, but spake evil of that way before the multitude, he departed from them, and separated the disciples, disputing daily in the school of one Tyrannus. And this continued by the space of two years; so that all they which dwelt in Asia heard the word of the Lord Jesus, both Jews and Greeks.
Here the actor of the hardening is not stated, though the hardening is connected with unbelief. It is also connected with antipathy for the gospel.
Mark 3:1-5
And he entered again into the synagogue; and there was a man there which had a withered hand. And they watched him, whether he would heal him on the sabbath day; that they might accuse him. And he saith unto the man which had the withered hand, "Stand forth." And he saith unto them, "Is it lawful to do good on the sabbath days, or to do evil? to save life, or to kill?" But they held their peace. And when he had looked round about on them with anger, being grieved for the hardness of their hearts, he saith unto the man, Stretch forth thine hand. And he stretched it out: and his hand was restored whole as the other.
Here the actor of the hardening is not stated, though the hardening is connected with opposition to Christ and - it would seem - a general stubbornness.
b) The disciples
Mark 6:49-52
But when they saw him walking upon the sea, they supposed it had been a spirit, and cried out: for they all saw him, and were troubled. And immediately he talked with them, and saith unto them, Be of good cheer: it is I; be not afraid. And he went up unto them into the ship; and the wind ceased: and they were sore amazed in themselves beyond measure, and wondered. For they considered not the miracle of the loaves: for their heart was hardened.
Notice that the hardening hear is connected with a lack of recognition of Jesus' divinity. The effect of the miracles was not to prove his divinity to them, because their heart was hardened. The actor of the hardening is not stated.
Mark 8:15-17
And he charged them, saying, Take heed, beware of the leaven of the Pharisees, and of the leaven of Herod. And they reasoned among themselves, saying, "It is because we have no bread."
And when Jesus knew it, he saith unto them, "Why reason ye, because ye have no bread? perceive ye not yet, neither understand? have ye your heart yet hardened?"
In this case the hardness of heart relates to not understanding Jesus' teaching. The actor of the hardening is not stated.
Mark 16:9-14
Now when Jesus was risen early the first day of the week, he appeared first to Mary Magdalene, out of whom he had cast seven devils. And she went and told them that had been with him, as they mourned and wept. And they, when they had heard that he was alive, and had been seen of her, believed not.
After that he appeared in another form unto two of them, as they walked, and went into the country. And they went and told it unto the residue: neither believed they them.
Afterward he appeared unto the eleven as they sat at meat, and upbraided them with their unbelief and hardness of heart, because they believed not them which had seen him after he was risen.
The hardness of heart here again relates to their unbelief, though not directly of Jesus, their unbelief of the testimony regarding Jesus.
c) The Jews until the Fullness of the Gentiles
Romans 11:25-27
For I would not, brethren, that ye should be ignorant of this mystery, lest ye should be wise in your own conceits; that blindness in part is happened to Israel, until the fulness of the Gentiles be come in. And so all Israel shall be saved: as it is written, "There shall come out of Sion the Deliverer, and shall turn away ungodliness from Jacob: for this is my covenant unto them, when I shall take away their sins."
The actor of the blinding (which is the same concept as blinding, as we saw above in John 12:40) is not stated, though it should be clear from the context in Romans 11 that the actor is God:
Romans 11:7 What then? Israel hath not obtained that which he seeketh for; but the election hath obtained it, and the rest were blinded.
And similarly:
2 Corinthians 3:14 But their minds were blinded: for until this day remaineth the same vail untaken away in the reading of the old testament; which vail is done away in Christ.
We see the same general concept:
2 Corinthians 4:4 In whom the god of this world hath blinded the minds of them which believe not, lest the light of the glorious gospel of Christ, who is the image of God, should shine unto them.
And likewise:
1 John 2:11 But he that hateth his brother is in darkness, and walketh in darkness, and knoweth not whither he goeth, because that darkness hath blinded his eyes.
8) Men in General
Job 9:4 He is wise in heart, and mighty in strength: who hath hardened himself against him, and hath prospered?
The point here is that man hardening himself against God always results in the destruction of the man.
Proverbs 21:29 A wicked man hardeneth his face: but as for the upright, he directeth his way.
The point here is that hardening of the face of the wicked is the opposite of the righteous "directing his way," namely obeying the commandments of God.
Proverbs 28:14 Happy is the man that feareth alway: but he that hardeneth his heart shall fall into mischief.
The point here is that man hardening himself against God always results in the destruction of the man.
Proverbs 29:1 He, that being often reproved hardeneth his neck, shall suddenly be destroyed, and that without remedy.
The point here is that man hardening himself against God always results in the destruction of the man.
Romans 2:2-11
But we are sure that the judgment of God is according to truth against them which commit such things. And thinkest thou this, O man, that judgest them which do such things, and doest the same, that thou shalt escape the judgment of God? Or despisest thou the riches of his goodness and forbearance and longsuffering; not knowing that the goodness of God leadeth thee to repentance? But after thy hardness and impenitent heart treasurest up unto thyself wrath against the day of wrath and revelation of the righteous judgment of God; who will render to every man according to his deeds: to them who by patient continuance in well doing seek for glory and honour and immortality, eternal life: but unto them that are contentious, and do not obey the truth, but obey unrighteousness, indignation and wrath, tribulation and anguish, upon every soul of man that doeth evil, of the Jew first, and also of the Gentile; but glory, honour, and peace, to every man that worketh good, to the Jew first, and also to the Gentile: for there is no respect of persons with God.
The same point is here, namely that hardness of heart will lead to destruction.
9. Miscellaneous Hardenings in Job
Job mentions a few other hardenings. I include them simply for the interest of the reader.
Job 6:10 Then should I yet have comfort; yea, I would harden myself in sorrow: let him not spare; for I have not concealed the words of the Holy One.
Job 39:13-18
Gavest thou the goodly wings unto the peacocks? or wings and feathers unto the ostrich? Which leaveth her eggs in the earth, and warmeth them in dust, and forgetteth that the foot may crush them, or that the wild beast may break them.
Job 39:16 She is hardened against her young ones, as though they were not hers: her labour is in vain without fear; because God hath deprived her of wisdom, neither hath he imparted to her understanding. What time she lifteth up herself on high, she scorneth the horse and his rider.
(of Leviathan) Job 41:24 His heart is as firm as a stone; yea, as hard as a piece of the nether millstone.
(to be continued, perhaps)
6. The Hardenings of the Old Testament Israelites
a) During the Wilderness Journey
i) Old Testament Discussion
2 Kings 17:13-14
Yet the LORD testified against Israel, and against Judah, by all the prophets, and by all the seers, saying, Turn ye from your evil ways, and keep my commandments and my statutes, according to all the law which I commanded your fathers, and which I sent to you by my servants the prophets. Notwithstanding they would not hear, but hardened their necks, like to the neck of their fathers, that did not believe in the LORD their God.
In this passage, the hardening is attributed to the people and it is connected with them not believing in the LORD.
Nehemiah 9:16-17
But they and our fathers dealt proudly, and hardened their necks, and hearkened not to thy commandments, and refused to obey, neither were mindful of thy wonders that thou didst among them; but hardened their necks, and in their rebellion appointed a captain to return to their bondage: but thou art a God ready to pardon, gracious and merciful, slow to anger, and of great kindness, and forsookest them not.
Again, the hardening is attributed to the people. In this case, the hardness is connected with the rebellion of Israel.
Psalm 95:7-11
For he is our God; and we are the people of his pasture, and the sheep of his hand. To day if ye will hear his voice, harden not your heart, as in the provocation, and as in the day of temptation in the wilderness: when your fathers tempted me, proved me, and saw my work. Forty years long was I grieved with this generation, and said, "It is a people that do err in their heart, and they have not known my ways: unto whom I sware in my wrath that they should not enter into my rest."
Again, the hardening is attributed to the people. In this case, the hardness is connected with the children of Israel angering God.
Jeremiah 7:25-27
Since the day that your fathers came forth out of the land of Egypt unto this day I have even sent unto you all my servants the prophets, daily rising up early and sending them: yet they hearkened not unto me, nor inclined their ear, but hardened their neck: they did worse than their fathers. Therefore thou shalt speak all these words unto them; but they will not hearken to thee: thou shalt also call unto them; but they will not answer thee.
Again, the hardening is attributed to the people. In this case, the hardness is connected with the children of Israel not hearkening to God.
ii) New Testament Discussion
Hebrews 3:5-19
And Moses verily was faithful in all his house, as a servant, for a testimony of those things which were to be spoken after; but Christ as a son over his own house; whose house are we, if we hold fast the confidence and the rejoicing of the hope firm unto the end. Wherefore (as the Holy Ghost saith, "To day if ye will hear his voice, harden not your hearts, as in the provocation, in the day of temptation in the wilderness: when your fathers tempted me, proved me, and saw my works forty years. Wherefore I was grieved with that generation, and said, 'They do alway err in their heart; and they have not known my ways.' So I sware in my wrath, 'They shall not enter into my rest.'") take heed, brethren, lest there be in any of you an evil heart of unbelief, in departing from the living God. But exhort one another daily, while it is called To day; lest any of you be hardened through the deceitfulness of sin. For we are made partakers of Christ, if we hold the beginning of our confidence stedfast unto the end; while it is said, "To day if ye will hear his voice, harden not your hearts, as in the provocation." For some, when they had heard, did provoke: howbeit not all that came out of Egypt by Moses. But with whom was he grieved forty years? was it not with them that had sinned, whose carcases fell in the wilderness? And to whom sware he that they should not enter into his rest, but to them that believed not? So we see that they could not enter in because of unbelief.
Again, the hardening is attributed to the people. In this case, the hardness is connected with the unbelief of the children of Israel.
Hebrews 4:4-9
For he spake in a certain place of the seventh day on this wise, "And God did rest the seventh day from all his works." And in this place again, "If they shall enter into my rest." Seeing therefore it remaineth that some must enter therein, and they to whom it was first preached entered not in because of unbelief: again, he limiteth a certain day, saying in David, "To day," after so long a time; as it is said, "To day if ye will hear his voice, harden not your hearts." For if Jesus had given them rest, then would he not afterward have spoken of another day. There remaineth therefore a rest to the people of God.
Again, the hardening is attributed to the people. In this case, again, the hardness is connected with the unbelief of the children of Israel.
b) At other times (besides the Exodus itself)
2 Kings 17:13-14
Yet the LORD testified against Israel, and against Judah, by all the prophets, and by all the seers, saying, Turn ye from your evil ways, and keep my commandments and my statutes, according to all the law which I commanded your fathers, and which I sent to you by my servants the prophets. Notwithstanding they would not hear, but hardened their necks, like to the neck of their fathers, that did not believe in the LORD their God.
Again, the hardening is attributed to the people. In this case, again, the hardness is connected with the unbelief of the children of Israel.
Nehemiah 9:28-30
But after they had rest, they did evil again before thee: therefore leftest thou them in the hand of their enemies, so that they had the dominion over them: yet when they returned, and cried unto thee, thou heardest them from heaven; and many times didst thou deliver them according to thy mercies; and testifiedst against them, that thou mightest bring them again unto thy law: yet they dealt proudly, and hearkened not unto thy commandments, but sinned against thy judgments, (which if a man do, he shall live in them;) and withdrew the shoulder, and hardened their neck, and would not hear. Yet many years didst thou forbear them, and testifiedst against them by thy spirit in thy prophets: yet would they not give ear: therefore gavest thou them into the hand of the people of the lands.
Again, the hardening is attributed to the people. In this case, the hardness is connected with the rebellion of Israel. You will recognize that I had also included this passage in the immediately previous section, since it deals with the fact that Israel is repeating its rebellion.
Jeremiah 7:25-27
Since the day that your fathers came forth out of the land of Egypt unto this day I have even sent unto you all my servants the prophets, daily rising up early and sending them: yet they hearkened not unto me, nor inclined their ear, but hardened their neck: they did worse than their fathers. Therefore thou shalt speak all these words unto them; but they will not hearken to thee: thou shalt also call unto them; but they will not answer thee.
Again, the hardening is attributed to the people. In this case, the hardness is connected with the children of Israel not hearkening to God. This too is a repeated passage from the previous section to show that Israel's lack of hearkening continued from the Exodus onward.
Jeremiah 19:14-15
Then came Jeremiah from Tophet, whither the LORD had sent him to prophesy; and he stood in the court of the LORD'S house; and said to all the people, "Thus saith the LORD of hosts, the God of Israel; 'Behold, I will bring upon this city and upon all her towns all the evil that I have pronounced against it, because they have hardened their necks, that they might not hear my words.'"
Again, the hardening is attributed to the people. In this case, the hardness is connected with the children of Israel not hearing (in the sense of obeying) God.
Isaiah 63:17 O LORD, why hast thou made us to err from thy ways, and hardened our heart from thy fear? Return for thy servants' sake, the tribes of thine inheritance.
Finally, in this instance the hardening is attributed to God. This should not be seen as inconsistent with the previous examples but rather as compatible with them. God takes credit for hardening the hearts of the wicked and it is also true that the wicked harden their hearts.
c) Lesser Hardenings
Matthew 19:8 He saith unto them, Moses because of the hardness of your hearts suffered you to put away your wives: but from the beginning it was not so.
Mark 10:5 And Jesus answered and said unto them, For the hardness of your heart he wrote you this precept.
Both of these passages refer to the lesser hardening that Jesus mentions with respect to the Mosaic permission of divorce. He refers to divorce as being a provision for the hardness of the hearts of the Jews, but he does not specifically tie that hardness to anything.
Deuteronomy 15:7-8
If there be among you a poor man of one of thy brethren within any of thy gates in thy land which the LORD thy God giveth thee, thou shalt not harden thine heart, nor shut thine hand from thy poor brother: but thou shalt open thine hand wide unto him, and shalt surely lend him sufficient for his need, in that which he wanteth.
This passage relates to a hardness of heart specifically with respect to selfishness. The Israelites are commanded not to be selfish with their goods but to give to their brethren enough to satisfy the needs of their brethren. The same rule applies to Christians today.
7. The Hardenings of the New Testament Jews
a) The Pharisees and others
John 12:37-43
But though he had done so many miracles before them, yet they believed not on him: that the saying of Esaias the prophet might be fulfilled, which he spake, "Lord, who hath believed our report? and to whom hath the arm of the Lord been revealed?" Therefore they could not believe, because that Esaias said again, "He hath blinded their eyes, and hardened their heart; that they should not see with their eyes, nor understand with their heart, and be converted, and I should heal them." These things said Esaias, when he saw his glory, and spake of him. Nevertheless among the chief rulers also many believed on him; but because of the Pharisees they did not confess him, lest they should be put out of the synagogue: for they loved the praise of men more than the praise of God.
Here God takes the credit for the blinding and hardening of the Pharisees. Furthermore, God also ascribes purpose to the blinding and hardening, namely so that the people would not believe.
Acts 19:8-10
And he went into the synagogue, and spake boldly for the space of three months, disputing and persuading the things concerning the kingdom of God. But when divers were hardened, and believed not, but spake evil of that way before the multitude, he departed from them, and separated the disciples, disputing daily in the school of one Tyrannus. And this continued by the space of two years; so that all they which dwelt in Asia heard the word of the Lord Jesus, both Jews and Greeks.
Here the actor of the hardening is not stated, though the hardening is connected with unbelief. It is also connected with antipathy for the gospel.
Mark 3:1-5
And he entered again into the synagogue; and there was a man there which had a withered hand. And they watched him, whether he would heal him on the sabbath day; that they might accuse him. And he saith unto the man which had the withered hand, "Stand forth." And he saith unto them, "Is it lawful to do good on the sabbath days, or to do evil? to save life, or to kill?" But they held their peace. And when he had looked round about on them with anger, being grieved for the hardness of their hearts, he saith unto the man, Stretch forth thine hand. And he stretched it out: and his hand was restored whole as the other.
Here the actor of the hardening is not stated, though the hardening is connected with opposition to Christ and - it would seem - a general stubbornness.
b) The disciples
Mark 6:49-52
But when they saw him walking upon the sea, they supposed it had been a spirit, and cried out: for they all saw him, and were troubled. And immediately he talked with them, and saith unto them, Be of good cheer: it is I; be not afraid. And he went up unto them into the ship; and the wind ceased: and they were sore amazed in themselves beyond measure, and wondered. For they considered not the miracle of the loaves: for their heart was hardened.
Notice that the hardening hear is connected with a lack of recognition of Jesus' divinity. The effect of the miracles was not to prove his divinity to them, because their heart was hardened. The actor of the hardening is not stated.
Mark 8:15-17
And he charged them, saying, Take heed, beware of the leaven of the Pharisees, and of the leaven of Herod. And they reasoned among themselves, saying, "It is because we have no bread."
And when Jesus knew it, he saith unto them, "Why reason ye, because ye have no bread? perceive ye not yet, neither understand? have ye your heart yet hardened?"
In this case the hardness of heart relates to not understanding Jesus' teaching. The actor of the hardening is not stated.
Mark 16:9-14
Now when Jesus was risen early the first day of the week, he appeared first to Mary Magdalene, out of whom he had cast seven devils. And she went and told them that had been with him, as they mourned and wept. And they, when they had heard that he was alive, and had been seen of her, believed not.
After that he appeared in another form unto two of them, as they walked, and went into the country. And they went and told it unto the residue: neither believed they them.
Afterward he appeared unto the eleven as they sat at meat, and upbraided them with their unbelief and hardness of heart, because they believed not them which had seen him after he was risen.
The hardness of heart here again relates to their unbelief, though not directly of Jesus, their unbelief of the testimony regarding Jesus.
c) The Jews until the Fullness of the Gentiles
Romans 11:25-27
For I would not, brethren, that ye should be ignorant of this mystery, lest ye should be wise in your own conceits; that blindness in part is happened to Israel, until the fulness of the Gentiles be come in. And so all Israel shall be saved: as it is written, "There shall come out of Sion the Deliverer, and shall turn away ungodliness from Jacob: for this is my covenant unto them, when I shall take away their sins."
The actor of the blinding (which is the same concept as blinding, as we saw above in John 12:40) is not stated, though it should be clear from the context in Romans 11 that the actor is God:
Romans 11:7 What then? Israel hath not obtained that which he seeketh for; but the election hath obtained it, and the rest were blinded.
And similarly:
2 Corinthians 3:14 But their minds were blinded: for until this day remaineth the same vail untaken away in the reading of the old testament; which vail is done away in Christ.
We see the same general concept:
2 Corinthians 4:4 In whom the god of this world hath blinded the minds of them which believe not, lest the light of the glorious gospel of Christ, who is the image of God, should shine unto them.
And likewise:
1 John 2:11 But he that hateth his brother is in darkness, and walketh in darkness, and knoweth not whither he goeth, because that darkness hath blinded his eyes.
8) Men in General
Job 9:4 He is wise in heart, and mighty in strength: who hath hardened himself against him, and hath prospered?
The point here is that man hardening himself against God always results in the destruction of the man.
Proverbs 21:29 A wicked man hardeneth his face: but as for the upright, he directeth his way.
The point here is that hardening of the face of the wicked is the opposite of the righteous "directing his way," namely obeying the commandments of God.
Proverbs 28:14 Happy is the man that feareth alway: but he that hardeneth his heart shall fall into mischief.
The point here is that man hardening himself against God always results in the destruction of the man.
Proverbs 29:1 He, that being often reproved hardeneth his neck, shall suddenly be destroyed, and that without remedy.
The point here is that man hardening himself against God always results in the destruction of the man.
Romans 2:2-11
But we are sure that the judgment of God is according to truth against them which commit such things. And thinkest thou this, O man, that judgest them which do such things, and doest the same, that thou shalt escape the judgment of God? Or despisest thou the riches of his goodness and forbearance and longsuffering; not knowing that the goodness of God leadeth thee to repentance? But after thy hardness and impenitent heart treasurest up unto thyself wrath against the day of wrath and revelation of the righteous judgment of God; who will render to every man according to his deeds: to them who by patient continuance in well doing seek for glory and honour and immortality, eternal life: but unto them that are contentious, and do not obey the truth, but obey unrighteousness, indignation and wrath, tribulation and anguish, upon every soul of man that doeth evil, of the Jew first, and also of the Gentile; but glory, honour, and peace, to every man that worketh good, to the Jew first, and also to the Gentile: for there is no respect of persons with God.
The same point is here, namely that hardness of heart will lead to destruction.
9. Miscellaneous Hardenings in Job
Job mentions a few other hardenings. I include them simply for the interest of the reader.
Job 6:10 Then should I yet have comfort; yea, I would harden myself in sorrow: let him not spare; for I have not concealed the words of the Holy One.
Job 39:13-18
Gavest thou the goodly wings unto the peacocks? or wings and feathers unto the ostrich? Which leaveth her eggs in the earth, and warmeth them in dust, and forgetteth that the foot may crush them, or that the wild beast may break them.
Job 39:16 She is hardened against her young ones, as though they were not hers: her labour is in vain without fear; because God hath deprived her of wisdom, neither hath he imparted to her understanding. What time she lifteth up herself on high, she scorneth the horse and his rider.
(of Leviathan) Job 41:24 His heart is as firm as a stone; yea, as hard as a piece of the nether millstone.
(to be continued, perhaps)
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
