Вы находитесь на странице: 1из 47

The Canons of Dort

and

T-U-L-I -P

Lim Jyh Jang, Pastor


Pilgrim Covenant Church

October–November 2000
Contents
Page

The Canons of Dort ......................................... 3


Total Depravity ............................................... 8
Unconditional Election .................................... 14
Limited Atonement ......................................... 19
Irresistible Grace ............................................. 25
Perseverance of the Saints ................................ 31
Practical Implications of Calvinism ................... 37
Bibliography ................................................. 42
Index .......................................................... 43
The Canons of Dort
In less than a month’s time1, many Reformed but would lash out at hyper-Calvinism, then you
churches around the world would be commemorat- know that something is seriously wrong within the
ing the Great Protestant Reformation which begun camp. Yet, this is indeed what is happening. Most
in Germany on 31 October, 1517. On that providen- believers in the pews are not comfortable with theo-
tial day, Martin Luther nailed his famed 95 Theses logical jargons, not to mention being able to detect
on the door of the castle church of Wittenberg. In no the incursion of subtle errors into the church. But
time, without Luther’s knowledge, this paper was when ministers of the Gospel are also unconcerned
copied, and reproduced in great numbers with the about what errors have already been dealt with by
then recently invented printing machine, and dis- the Church in the ages of learning in the past, then
tributed throughout Europe. This paper was to be we know the floodgates of apostasy are being opened;
used by our Sovereign Lord to ignite the Reforma- and who knows how far the torrents will carry the
tion, which saw the release of the true Church of Church in the next generation? The attitude of
Christ from the yoke and bondage of Rome. Four preachers, we must remember, will inevitably rub off
hundred and eighty-three years have gone by since on the members of the church, some of whom may
then. Today, there are countless technically Protes- become leaders of the church by and by.
tant churches (i.e., those which can trace back to
the Reformation in terms of historical links) around It is for this reason, I believe, that we must go back
the world, but there are few which still remember to our past. We must remember the great work of
the rich heritage of the Reformers. In fact, a great God in and through the Church in the past, and seek
number of churches which claim to be Protestant to learn from the mistakes of our forebears (cf. Deut
have, in fact, gone back to Rome by way of doctrine 2:30; 3:3; Ps 105:5–6). It is especially pertinent for
and practice, and some even make it their business us to do so as we remember the Great Reformation.
to oppose the Reformers and their heirs.
Last year2, we look at five key Reformers who were
I am convinced that one of the chief reasons for this greatly used by God to shape His Church. This year,
state of affair in the Protestant Church is a contemp- we shall move a hundred years ahead to look in-
tuous attitude towards past creeds and confessions stead at the history and doctrine of the Canons of
and the historical battles against heresies. When, for Dort (or Dordrecht). In this article, we shall take a
example, there are fundamental defenders of the faith quick look at the events leading up to the Synod of
teaching in Bible Colleges, who have not so much as Dort. From next Lord’s Day, we shall examine the
heard of the Canons of Dort or the Synod of Dort, doctrine of the Canons in the order of the well-known

1 2
This article was written on 15 October, 2000. That is, 1999.

Canons of Dort • 3
acronym, T-U-L-I-P, that has developed since then. by the churches of Dutch origin, as part of the three
Since the attitude of disdain for historical theology Forms of Unity (which include the Belgic Confes-
is already quite entrenched in many of our hearts, sion and the Heidelberg Catechism), the findings
it would be needful that the doctrinal articles be of the Synod were and are held in great esteem in
derived directly from the Scriptures rather than Calvinistic churches throughout the world, and the
from the Canons (which we believe to be consist- essence of it, as summarised in the Five Points of
ent with Scriptures). But we shall quote the canon Calvinism or TULIP (the national flower of Hol-
where appropriate to show the wisdom, foresight land!), is regarded as the yardstick of Calvinistic
and biblical fidelity of the framers of the Canons. orthodoxy in most English-speaking churches in
the world.
In Brief
The Canons of Dort was the product of a synod of Jacobus Arminius
Reformed churches, which met between the 13 No- Jacobus Arminius (c. 1559–1609), also known as
vember, 1618 and 6 May, 1619 in Dort, Holland, to Jacob Haemensz, was born in Oudewater, Holland.
examine the teachings of the disciples of Jacobus Although Arminius was, in fact, not the originator
Arminius, known as the Remonstrants. These had of the doctrine of the Remonstrantia, and had, fur-
wanted their articles of faith to be adopted by the thermore, already died for about 10 years by the
churches in Holland, and so had petitioned the time the Synod of Dort was convened, it is not with-
Dutch Parliament with a Remonstrantia contain- out historical reasons why the doctrine refuted by
ing five points. The parliament called for the Synod, the Synod is popularly known as Arminianism.
and the result was that the five articles of the Arminius was, after all, the man who made the
Remonstrantia were condemned. The Canons of doctrine espoused by his students popular.
Dort documented the findings of the Synod. The
full and revealing title of the document reads: In 1576, at 17 years old, Arminius was enrolled as
Judgement of the National Synod of the Re- a theological student in the University of Leiden (or
formed Churches of the United Netherlands: held Leyden). Five years later, in 1581, he went to Ge-
in Dordrecht in the year 1618 and 1619; which neva, and there studied under Theodore Beza, who
was assisted by many excellent theologians of had succeeded John Calvin as lecturer in theology.
the Reformed Churches of Great Britain, the Elec- It appears, however, that Arminius was never really
toral Palatinate, Hessia, Switzerland, Wetteraw, comfortable with Beza’s doctrine of election and rep-
Geneva, Bremen, and Emden: Concerning the robation, though he did not show it.
well-known five heads of doctrine, about which Not long after his call to a pastorate in Amsterdam
a difference arose in the Reformed Churches of in 1587, Arminius was asked to refute a pamphlet,
the said United Netherlands.
written by a man by the name of Coornhert, criti-
In all, 81 theologians (56 Dutch and 25 foreign) cising Calvin and Beza’s doctrine of predestination.
met for 154 sessions, and at the end of it condemned With personal discomfort and unresolved questions
the five points of the Remonstrantia as being con- in his heart, it was not surprising that instead of
trary to Scripture and heretical. The articles of the being able to refute Coornhert’s objections,
Canons were essentially a systematic apology of the Arminius was won to his side. And soon, his theo-
doctrine of salvation as taught by John Calvin. logical biases began to surface in his sermons, such
Though the Canons themselves were only adopted as when he preached that Paul was referring to

4 • PCC, Oct–Nov, 2000


himself as an unconverted man in Romans 7:14– The Remonstrantia
25. We need only to read the text to know the impli-
This document of the Arminians, being designed
cation of his view, for it would make Paul able to
to subvert the established doctrine of the church,
desire to do good while unregenerated, which would
was drafted very craftily so as to give an impression
mean that he was not radically depraved in his
that it is consistent with orthodoxy. In fact, my guess
heart. Soon, Arminius began to be vigorously op-
is that most of us who read this document today
posed by Plancius, one his fellow ministers in Am-
will have difficulty finding fault with it at all! Of
sterdam.
course, in part, this is due to the ulterior care with
Arminius was a popular man in the pulpit. And he which it was written, but I suspect, the lack of theo-
was a brilliant scholar, refined in manners and ap- logical sensitivity that characterises most of us to-
pearance. Most importantly, he had many power- day is to be blamed too.
ful friends in the government. At that time the uni-
Those interested to examine the articles may find
versities were under state rather than church con-
them in Dutch, Latin and English in Philip Schaff,
trol, and so despite the controversy that was inten-
Creeds of Christendom (Baker, reprinted 1995),
sifying in Amsterdam as Arminius began preach-
3.545–49. We reproduce just the first two articles,
ing from Romans 9, he was appointed to the chair
which most clearly show the Remonstrants’ depar-
of theology at the Academy of Leyden.
ture from orthodoxy:
At first, Arminius was opposed strongly by Article I. That God, by an eternal, unchangeable
Franciscus Gomarus who was then a professor of purpose in Jesus Christ his Son, before the foun-
theology at Leyden. But Arminius managed to per- dation of the world, hath determined, out of the
suade Gomarus of his orthodoxy by subtlety and fallen, sinful race of men, to save in Christ, for
craft, and Gomarus relented. Later Gomarus was Christ’s sake, and through Christ, those who,
to regret his decision, for as soon as Arminius was through the grace of the Holy Ghost, shall be-
in the chair, then he began promoting his heresies lieve on this his Son Jesus, and shall persevere in
to the students. In this way the doctrines of Arminius this faith and obedience of faith, through this
began to spread abroad, and soon the whole coun- grace, even to the end; and, on the other hand,
try was in turmoil and several conferences were to leave the incorrigible and unbelieving in sin
called to settle the disputes. and under wrath, and to condemn them as al-
Before anything could be settled, however, in Octo- ienate from Christ, according to the word of the
ber of 1609, Arminius died. His followers, however, gospel in John 3:36… and according to other
continued to pursue their teacher’s purpose. The passages of Scripture also.
following year, under the influence of a powerful Article II. That, agreeably thereto, Jesus Christ,
court preacher, Janus Utyenbogaert, the disciples the Saviour of the world, died for all men and
of Arminius gathered together in the city of Gouda for every man, so that he has obtained for them
to draw up a document known as the all, by his death on the cross, redemption and
Remonstrantia. By this document, the party hoped the forgiveness of sins; yet that no one actually
to have the parliament call for a revision (more enjoys this forgiveness of sins except the believer,
like re-writing) of the existing confessions of the according to the word of the Gospel of John
Dutch churches. 3:16…. And in the First Epistle of John 2:2….

Canons of Dort • 5
Are you able to detect the heresy? If not, you will their opinions. Not only that, they also tried to win
find the other three articles even more subtle. In the sympathy of the foreign delegates by depicting
the first article, the doctrine being proposed is that the national delegates as schismatics and persecu-
God’s election and reprobation is based upon God’s tors of the innocent and simple.
foreknowledge, i.e., those whom God foresaw will
It should be noted that though the national del-
believe were elected, those He foresaw would reject
egates were almost consistently Calvinistic, some
the Gospel were reprobated. The Remonstrants very
of the foreign delegates were not so. The delegates
carefully avoided saying,—that election is there-
from Bremen appeared to be totally in agreement
fore conditional, and that salvation is therefore not
with the Arminians. Also among the delegation of
sovereignly brought about by God though it be by
five from Great Britain, there were clearly those who
grace,—which is what they were teaching. In the
leaned either to Arminian or Amyraldian (mid-way
second article, it is essentially teaching that Christ
between Calvinism and Arminianism) position.
did not die to save. Rather, He died for all without
exception to make salvation possible; and whether By 14 January, 1619, when the Arminians again re-
a person is saved depends on his response to the fused to submit to the authority of the Synod in the
Gospel. matter of their examination, Bogerman’s patience
ran out. He burst out:
In a nutshell, the other three articles teach that man
has the ability to do good when assisted by the Holy The foreign delegates are now of the opinion that
Spirit, but the Holy Spirit’s help may be resisted and you are unworthy to appear before the Synod.
You have refused to acknowledge her as your
a Christian may lose his salvation.
lawful judge and have maintained that she is
your counter-party; you have done everything
The Great Synod according to your own whim; you have despised
The Synod was convened in November, 1618; the decisions of the Synod and of the Political
though it did not begin to deal with the Arminians Commissioners; you have refused to answer; you
until 6 December. In line with proper ecclesiastical have unjustly interpreted the indictments. The
procedures and the principle that accepted verities Synod has treated you mildly; but you have—
are to be regarded as truth unless proven otherwise, as one of the foreign delegates expressed it—
the Synod was appointed to examine and try the “begun and ended with lies.” With that eulogy
Arminians. Johannes Bogerman, the pastor of we shall let you go. God shall preserve His Word
Leuwarden, a fiery and capable Contra-Remon- and shall bless the Synod. In order that she be
strant, was elected the president of the Synod. no longer obstructed, you are sent away! You are
dismissed, get out!
The Arminians were naturally unhappy with this
arrangement, and vehemently protested against the With the departure of the Arminians, the Synod
fact that their polemical opponents had been set could finally get down to work. Though the former
over them as judges. From the onset, therefore, they could no longer present their arguments person-
tried to stall the proceedings. First, they attempted ally, they were allowed to submit written defences
unsuccessfully to get Bogerman replaced. Then, of their position. This they did, and wrote rather
rather than submitting themselves to the exami- voluminously. A committee was appointed by the
nation of the Synod and defending themselves doc- Synod to consider these writings and to write a doc-
trinally, they kept asking for more time to prepare trinal consensus of the Synod together with rejec-

6 • PCC, Oct–Nov, 2000


tion of errors. This was completed in about three
months, and was signed by all the delegates.

Conclusion
With the probable exception of the Westminster As-
sembly, the Synod of Dort was possibly the greatest
assembly of notable Reformed scholars to have
gathered to deliberate on any doctrinal issue. Some
may question the nature of the proceedings in the
Synod, that it did not give occasion for irenic de-
bate such as in the case of the Westminster Assem-
bly, but when we examine the Canons of Dort (see
Schaff, Creeds, 550–597; Thomas Scott, The Arti-
cles of the Synod of Dort [Sprinkle Pub., 1993];
Homer Hoeksema, The Voice of Our Fathers [RFPA,
1980]) and the doctrine it propounds, we see that
there is really little to debate about. At stake was the
doctrine of the sovereignty of God, as well as, an
unbiased and logical interpretation of the Word of
God.
We may say that it was by the providence of God
that the controversy arose in the first place; for
through it the Church was not only enriched with
a Creed to serve as a standard for future churches,
but also caused to see the logical beauty and self-
consistency of the biblical doctrine of salvation as
revealed in the Word of God. As we examine the five
petals of the TULIP in the next five articles, I be-
lieve this assertion would become clearer to the
praise and glory of our Almighty God who has re-
vealed all things for our instruction and enjoyment
of Him.

Canons of Dort • 7
Total Depravity
The Five Points of Calvinism,—viz., Total Deprav- Now, if you have never had any instruction on the
ity, Unconditional Election, Limited Atonement, Ir- Five Points of Calvinism, you may want to skip the
resistible Grace and Perseverance of the Saints,— rest of the introduction and begin reading at the first
provide perhaps the most succinct, logical and bibli- section in the main text1. The rest of the introduc-
cal way of understanding God’s work of salvation of tion does require a little background knowledge of
sinners. These five points were never presented by the doctrine to make sense. But if you have had any
John Calvin in this way. They are derived, with some instruction on Calvinism and know something about
re-ordering, from the Canons of Dort (e.g., Total what Total Depravity means, then read on.
Depravity corresponds to the third Head of the Can-
Let us begin with a couple of important quotations
ons of Dort). But all five propositions may be found
on the doctrine we are considering:
to be more or less clearly taught in Calvin’s writings.
1.That man has not saving grace of himself, not
As we examine the five points, two things will be- of the energy of his free will, inasmuch as he, in
come clear. Firstly, these points can be individually the state of apostasy and sin, can of and by him-
derived from the Scripture and not from human ex- self neither think, will, nor do any thing that is
perience. And so when we study these points of doc- truly good (such as saving Faith eminently is);
trine, we are simply studying a biblical doctrine with but that it is needful that he be born again of God
the help of a systematic framework. Secondly, these in Christ, through his Holy Spirit, and renewed in
points are logically tied to one another so that it is understanding, inclination, or will, and all his
really impossible to take any one point out or change power, in order that he may rightly understand,
any point without falling into irrationality. Biblical think, will, and effect what is truly good, accord-
Christianity, we must remember, is not irrational ing to the Word of Christ, John 15:5: “Without me
because the Bible is inerrantly and infallibly inspired ye can do nothing.”
by God. Though we may not fully comprehend God, 2.In [the state of man after the Fall], the Free Will
we know that God cannot possibly be contradictory, of man towards the True Good is not only
or there is no way for man to know Him at all. So no wounded, maimed, infirm, bent, and weakened;
contradictory propositions can possibly be derived but it is also imprisoned, destroyed, and lost: And
from the Scripture when it is properly exegeted. Thus, its powers are not only debilitated and useless
because of the logical consistency of the Five Points, unless they be assisted by grace, but it has no pow-
anyone who denies any of the five points will, by logi- ers whatever except such as are excited by Divine
cal necessity, deny all the other four points too. We
will demonstrate this when we look at Limited Atone-
ment. 1
“Total Depravity Defined” on page 10.

8 • PCC, Oct–Nov, 2000


grace: For Christ has said, “Without me ye can do The object of this, and the following articles, is an
nothing.” St. Augustine, after having diligently attempt to present the Five Points as clearly and pre-
meditated upon each word in this passage speaks cisely as possible. But familiarity breeds contempt,
thus: “Christ does not say, Without me ye can do and I am afraid that, if you do not give some care
but little; neither does He say, Without me, ye can- and thought as you read, you may not benefit at all
not do any arduous thing, nor Without me ye can from the articles, and your idea of Calvinism may
do it with difficulty: But he says, Without me ye remain at best vague or at worst some form of Armin-
can do nothing! Nor does He say, Without me ye ian notion.
cannot complete any thing; but Without me ye
But before I leave the introduction to explain the
can do nothing.”
doctrine of Total Depravity, I must quickly remark
Can you agree with the statements above? Now con- that though Arminius and the Arminians do hold to
sider the following quote: the total fall of man (unlike Pelagians), they also
Total depravity does not mean that man is not able believe that fallen men can co-operate with the Holy
to do good towards his fellow men. It does how- Spirit to bring about regeneration. That is, though
ever mean that man’s nature is wholly sinful, cor- the will of man by itself cannot achieve any real good,
rupt, and perverse to the extent that sin has af- it can,—assisted by prevenient grace (i.e., grace that
fected his parts rendering him absolutely incapa- is before salvation) or common grace (as purchased
ble of saving himself from the judgement to by the death of Christ for all men),—respond to the
come… Even when man performs good works, call of the Gospel. Remember that when the Armin-
his motives for doing so are often not pure. ians speak about being “born again” they do not
mean as the Calvinists do: that it is a sovereign act of
Compare this quote with the earlier two quotations,
God, which is irreversible. Arminius makes this clear
and I am sure that if you have even a vague idea of
when he teaches that “regeneration and illumina-
what is Total Depravity, you will find the first two
tion is not completed in one moment; but that it is
quotations to be much more stronger expressions
advanced and promoted, from time to time, by daily
of the doctrine. But, the shocking news is that the
increase” (Op. Cit., 195). By “illumination” in this
third quotation is from a professedly Calvinistic theo-
context, Arminius is essentially referring to the in-
logian, whereas the first quotation is the Third Ar-
ternal vocation (call) of God to an hitherto unre-
ticle of the Remonstrantia, and the second quo-
generate person to embrace Christ as Saviour and
tation is from Jacobus Arminius (The Works of James
Lord. For the Calvinist, this call is irresistible. But for
Arminius, vol. 2, trans. James Nichols [Baker, re-
Arminius:
printed 1996], 192)! I suspect that the true Ar-
Internal vocation is granted even to those who do
minian would even object to the third quotation
not comply with the call.
as being more Pelagian than Arminius was, albeit
its vagaries. All unregenerate persons have freedom of will, and
a capability of resisting the Holy Spirit, of reject-
Over the years, I have come to realise that many who ing the proffered grace of God, of despising the
claim to be Calvinistic or to understand the Five counsel of God against themselves, of refusing to
Points of Calvinism have only a very vague idea of accept the Gospel of grace, and of not opening to
this doctrine and, as a result of it, they either carica- Him who knocks at the door of the heart; and these
ture the Arminians or promote a kind of Calvinism things they can actually do, without any differ-
that is neither scriptural nor confessional. ence of the Elect and Reprobate.

Total Depravity • 9
The two carefully crafted Arminian statements quoted Essentially, this would also rule out the Arminian
earlier sound very orthodox because they neglect to notion that the natural man can exercise faith and
mention all these additional facts. But you can see so co-operate with the Holy Spirit to respond to the
how the same statements provide for what we are call of the Gospel. The only way man can be saved is
making explicit here (see Canons, Heads 3 & 4, Rej. if God sovereignly, monergistically (God working
5). alone) frees him from his natural bondage to sin,
and translates him into the state of grace so that he
Total Depravity Defined is enabled freely to will and to do that which is spir-
itually good, including evangelical repentance and
Total Depravity refers to the fact that man’s moral faith (see WCF 9.4).
nature since the fall is corrupt, perverse and sinful
throughout, so that nothing he does, think, or speak, Yet another way of looking at Total Depravity is to
can be in any way good or pleasing in God’s sight at think of it as Radical Corruption. This refers to the
all. Note that Total Depravity does not mean that since fact that the natural man is corrupt in his heart or
the fall, man has become as utterly depraved as he the core of his being. The heart is the well-spring
can be, else the world would be filled with psycho- from which all that a person does, thinks or says,
paths or Hitlers. Neither is the doctrine concerned flows. Thus Solomon tells us: “Out of [thy heart]
at all on whether a deed may appear to be benevo- are the issues of life” (Prov 4:23). Thus the Lord Him-
lent and good in the eyes of man. But Total Deprav- self says: “A good man out of the good treasure of
ity does mean that all that the natural man does, the heart bringeth forth good things: and an evil man
including what appears to be good in the sight of out of the evil treasure bringeth forth evil things”
man, is sinful in God’s sight (see Canons, Heads 3 (Mt 12:35; cf. 7:18; 15:19). Now, if the heart is cor-
& 4, Art. 4). Even his righteousnesses are as filthy rupt, than nothing that the will does can be good.
rags in the eyes of God (Isa 64:6). The natural man We must remember that the liberty of man’s will was
is enslaved to sin and Satan, blind to truth and re- not affected by the Fall. But the will is not free to act
bellious towards God. He is dead in sin, not just mor- independently. It is always bounded to the heart of
ally sick. man, and always does what the heart regards as most
Another way of thinking about Total Depravity is to desirable. Since the heart of the natural man is cor-
think of it as Total Inability, i.e., that the natural man rupt and hates God, it can never desire God, and so
is unable to do any that may be regarded by God as the will can never choose God. And since the love
good, and therefore contributory to his own salva- and glory of God is never in the heart of the natural
tion. The Westminster Confession of Faith (WCF man, his motive can never be pure, and he does not
9.3) views Total Depravity from this angle: fail to sin in every exercise of his will. When we think
of Total Depravity as Radical Corruption, we see im-
Man, by his fall into a state of sin, hath wholly
mediately that the door of salvation is not shut to
lost all ability of will to any spiritual good accom-
anyone. But the natural man hates the owner of the
panying salvation [Rom 5:6; 8:7; Jn 15:5]; so as,
house and will flee from the door, unless his heart is
a natural man, being altogether averse from that
changed.
good [Rom 3:10, 12], and dead in sin [Eph 2:1,
5; Col 2:13], is not able, by his own strength, to This fact alone would destroy the Arminian argu-
convert himself, or to prepare himself thereunto ment that the ability to obey the Gospel must be uni-
[Jn 6:44–65; Eph 2:2–5; 1 Cor 2:14; Tit 3:3–5]. versal, viz.: (1) God cannot command us to do any-

10 • PCC, Oct–Nov, 2000


thing beyond our ability, for otherwise He cannot hold as when he insists: “Wherefore, as by one man [i.e.,
us responsible for failing to obey. (2) The Word of Adam] sin entered into the world, and death by sin;
God does command all men without exception to and so death passed upon all men, for that all have
obey the Gospel on the pain of damnation. (3) There- sinned” (Rom 5:12); and “For as in Adam all die,
fore the ability to obey the Gospel must be universal. even so in Christ shall all be made alive” (1 Cor
15:22).
Notwithstanding the sovereign predestination of
God, the inability of the reprobate to obey the Gospel Just as the righteousness of Christ is imputed on His
rests in their hearts. But there is more, for the Scrip- elect whom He represents, the guilt of Adam was
ture proves beyond doubt that the natural man is imputed on the world. Now, if you think of Total De-
totally depraved. pravity from the angle of Total Inability or Radical
Corruption, it will probably occur to you that the guilt
Total Depravity Proven of Adam’s sin does not directly affect our motions in
The doctrine of Total Depravity is seen throughout life. But think for a moment of infants dying in in-
the Scriptures. Particularly, there are verses and pas- fancy or in the mother’s womb. Such may not have
sages, which speak of its source and propagation; occasions yet to engage in actual transgressions, but
and there are verses, which speak of its universality; are they not regarded as sinners in the sight of God
and there are verses, which clearly indicate the depth too? Yes, for “all have sinned” (Rom 5:12). Even elect
of our depravity. infants dying in infancy must be “regenerated [to
remove original inclination to sin], and saved by
Its Source and Propagation Christ [by the application of His blood], through the
When Adam and Eve fell into sin, they did not fall as Spirit” (WCF 10.3).
private individuals. Adam was God’s appointed rep- Secondly, the fact that all mankind, descending from
resentative for all mankind who would descend from Adam by ordinary generation (i.e., not supernatu-
him by natural generation. rally conceived), inherits Adam’s fallen nature is at-
When Adam fell, his Fall affected all mankind in two tested by Job: “Who can bring a clean thing out of an
principle ways,—comprehended in the theological unclean? not one” (Job 14:4). His friend Eliphaz
term Original Sin,—namely: (1) all men are im- correctly concurred: “What is man, that he should
puted (credited) with his guilt and so are regarded be clean? and he which is born of a woman, that he
as guilty before God; (2) all men inherit Adam’s fallen should be righteous?” (Job 15:14).
nature. Our catechism expresses the doctrine el-
David was essentially expressing the same notion in
egantly:
his penitential psalm: “Behold, I was shapen in in-
The sinfulness of that estate whereinto man fell, iquity; and in sin did my mother conceive me” (Ps
consists in the guilt of Adam’s first sin, the want
51:5). Note that David was not so much as referring
of original righteousness, and the corruption of
to his mother’s sin, as if to blame his sin on his
his whole nature,—which is commonly called
mother. He was rather referring to the fact that he
Original Sin; together with all actual transgres-
was a sinner from birth. We sin because we are sin-
sions which proceed from it (WSC 18).
ners, we do not become sinners because we sin. “The
Firstly, the fact that we are imputed with Adam’s guilt wicked are estranged from the womb: they go astray
is clearly taught particularly by the Apostle Paul, such as soon as they be born…,” says David (Ps 58:3).

Total Depravity • 11
Its Universality the blindness of their heart” (Eph 4:18). His “heart
The fact that Adam’s depravity passes down to all men is deceitful above all things, and desperately wicked”
ought to be sufficient to convince us of its universal- (Jer 17:9). And he cannot savingly understand any-
ity—that it affects all except the Lord Jesus Christ thing spiritual: “But the natural man receiveth not
who was not born of ordinary generation. But the the things of the Spirit of God: for they are foolish-
Scripture leaves us without doubt by clear statements ness unto him: neither can he know them, because
which specifically focuses on the universality of de- they are spiritually discerned” (1 Cor 2:14).
pravity. The Psalmist reflects this thought in various
Thirdly, the natural man is described as being an
verses, such as: “If thou, LORD, shouldest mark iniq-
enemy of God (Rom 5:10) whose “carnal mind is
uities, O Lord, who shall stand?” (Ps 130:3) and “And
enmity against God: for it is not subject to the law of
enter not into judgment with thy servant: for in thy
God, neither indeed can be” (Rom 8:7). He is a slave
sight shall no man living be justified” (Ps 143:2).
to sin (Rom 6:20) and a captive of Satan to do his
The point is, if God were to judge men without mercy,
will (2 Tim 2:26; cf. 1 Jn 3:10). By this imagery, we
none will be innocent because all have sinned. Paul
see than the natural man cannot possibly do any-
confirms this doctrine in his epistle to the Romans:
thing to please God at all. He is radically corrupt and
… we have before proved both Jews and Gentiles, totally unable.
that they are all under sin; As it is written, There is
none righteous, no, not one… They are all gone
out of the way, they are together become unprofit- The Consequence of
able; there is none that doeth good, no, not one Total Depravity
(Rom 3:9–10, 12). What is the consequence of Total Depravity? Simply
stated: man has “wholly lost all ability of will to any
Its Depth
spiritual good accompanying salvation [and] is not
We have seen that Total Depravity extends to the able, by his own strength, to convert himself, or to
whole world without exception. We must prove now prepare himself thereunto” (WCF 9.3). This fact is
that Total Depravity extends to the whole being of again very clearly taught in the Scripture: “Can the
man. This is most emphatically taught in the Scrip- Ethiopian change his skin, or the leopard his spots?
tures using several imageries. then may ye also do good, that are accustomed to do
Firstly, the Apostle Paul declares that while we were evil” (Jer 13:23). In fact, since the natural man does
natural men, we “were dead in trespasses and sins” not understand spiritual things, he does not seek af-
(Eph 2:1; cf. Col 2:13). This is a most important ter God: “There is none that understandeth, there is
imagery, which we should constantly bear in mind. none that seeketh after God” (Rom 3:11).
An unregenerate man is spiritually dead. He can be
The corollary to this fact is that a sovereign inter-
compared to Lazarus in the grave, but not to sick
vention by God is necessary for a man to enter into
man who can stretch out his hand to take a life-sav-
the kingdom of God. The Lord Jesus Himself tells us:
ing pill.
“No man can come to me, except the Father which
Secondly, the heart of the natural man is blind and hath sent me draw him” (Jn 6:44a) and “Except a
his understanding is dark: “Having the understand- man be born again, he cannot see the kingdom of
ing darkened, being alienated from the life of God God” (Jn 3:3). It is only in the new birth that the gift
through the ignorance that is in them, because of of saving faith (Eph 2:8) is granted.

12 • PCC, Oct–Nov, 2000


We shall see more of these verses on regeneration
and others in our article on Irresistible Grace. But
for now, we should already realise that were it not for
God’s intervention, none of us will ever believe the
Gospel. Such a thought ought to humble us to the
dust while at the same time fill our hearts with grati-
tude to the Triune God who loves us with an ever-
lasting love, provided the propitiation for our sins
and changed us sovereignly.

Conclusion
The Arminians are wrong that man can co-operate
with the Holy Spirit to effect his regeneration. How
could he when his will is captive to his radically de-
praved heart and the Scripture testifies that nothing
he does in his natural state can please God? The
Arminians may require only one stitch to the gar-
ment of salvation, but according to them our des-
tiny is in that stitch; while according to the Bible,
that stitch if added would pollute the righteousness
needed for our salvation, and would make the death
of Christ insufficient to save anyone.
Thank God for the doctrine of Total Depravity, for by
it I realise what a worm I am, that falling on my
knees before my Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ, I may
say with the psalmist: “What is man, that thou art
mindful of him? and the son of man, that thou vis-
itest him?” (Ps 8:4).

Total Depravity • 13
Unconditional Election
Let us begin our examination of the second petal of A third term must also be mentioned, namely, “rep-
our Calvinistic Tulip (First Article in the Canons of robation.” This is the antithesis of “election.” If God
Dort), with a few of definitions, because we can chose some individuals from all mankind to be saved,
hardly escape using these terms in this study. it follows that He must have ordained all the rest to
wrath for their sin, and therefore pass them by when
The first term we must define is “election.” Election He extends grace to the elect for their salvation. The
very simply refers to the act of God in choosing a Apostle Paul calls the reprobate: “vessels of wrath fit-
people unto Himself. Or, to put it in individualistic ted to destruction” (Rom 9:22). The Westminster
terms, it refers to God’s choosing of certain individu- Confession of Faith describes reprobation and the
als to be saved. The Canons of Dort puts it this way: reprobate thus:
Election is the immutable purpose of God, by The rest of mankind, God was pleased, according
which, before the foundations of the world were to the unsearchable counsel of His own will,
laid, He chose, out of the whole human race, fallen whereby He extendeth or withholdeth mercy as
by their own fault from their primeval integrity He pleaseth, for the glory of His sovereign power
into sin and destruction, according to the most over His creatures, to pass by; and to ordain them
free good pleasure of His own will, and of mere to dishonour and wrath for their sin, to the praise
grace, a certain number of men, neither better nor of His glorious justice (WCF 3.7).
worthier than others, but lying in the same mis-
ery with the rest, to salvation in Christ; whom He Arminian
had, even from eternity, constituted Mediator and
Conditional Election
Head of all the elect, and the foundation of Salva-
tion… (Head 1, Art. 7). With these definitions in mind, let us begin by con-
sidering a definition of the doctrine of election, viz.:
The second term is “predestination.” The most ob- That God, by an eternal, unchangeable purpose
vious meaning of this term speaks of God predeter- in Jesus Christ his Son, before the foundation of
mining our final destination, i.e., the final destina- the world, hath determined, out of the fallen, sin-
tion of our souls. But remember that biblical pre- ful race of men, to save in Christ, for Christ’s sake,
destination comprehends not just our final destina- and through Christ, those who, through the grace
tion, but all that happens in time and space as we of the Holy Ghost, shall believe on this his Son
head towards the final destination. To put it in an- Jesus, and shall persevere in this faith and obedi-
other way, election marks out the elect, while pre- ence of faith, through this grace, even to the end;
destination marks out their steps (Ps 37:23; Prov 4:18; and, on the other hand, to leave the incorrigible
Heb 12:1). and unbelieving in sin and under wrath, and to

14 • PCC, Oct–Nov, 2000


condemn them as alienate from Christ, accord- justified: and whom he justified, them he also
ing to the word of the gospel in John 3:36: “He glorified.
that believeth on the Son hath everlasting life: and
he that believeth not the son shall not see life; but The argument is that since the Apostle Paul places
the wrath of God abideth on him,” and according foreknowledge before predestination, it must be that
to other passages of Scripture also. foreknowledge (of the person’s faith) is the basis of
predestination. This is, however, far from what Paul
If you have been reading the first two articles in this is saying.
series, you will probably be quite on your guard as
you read this statement. You will probably suspect Firstly, a straightforward interpretation of the verse
that there is something wrong with it. And so there would suggest that foreknowledge here must be re-
is, for it is actually the first article of the ferring essentially to election in Christ or being loved
Remonstrantia. But can you detect what the prob- in Christ (Eph 1:4). Paul is simply saying that God
lem is? I am afraid that without prior warning, many predestinates those He elects, and therefore loves and
of us will simply accept the statement as biblical, and knows.
even with warning, many of us may have difficulty Secondly, Paul goes on to speak about what God
pin-pointing where exactly the error in the statement would do for those He foreknew, namely: call, justify
is. Such is the theological lethargy of our days. and glorify. Notice how Paul uses the past tense for
Well, the error lies in the fact that though the Armin- each of these acts, including “glorified.” This im-
ians have to admit that predestination is taught in plies that the acts follow one after another in an un-
the Scripture, they refuse to admit the obvious mean- broken chain so that none who were foreknown
ing and implications of the doctrine as derived from would not be called, justified or glorified. There is
the Scripture: namely, that the will of God and not simply no room for any condition based on human
our own will is the alone First Cause of our salva- response in the chain. Even the call must refer to
tion. In other words, when the Arminians says that the effectual call which leads to justification, for if it
God “hath determined” to save those who “through refers to the external call of preaching, then all who
the grace of the Holy Ghost, shall believe on this his hear the Gospel would be saved. In other words, Paul
Son Jesus, and shall persevere in this faith and obe- was saying that salvation is the work of God from
dience of faith, through this grace, even to the end,” beginning to end. It simply does not make sense for
what they mean is that God had determined to save him to be saying that God predestinates those He fore-
those whom He foreknew would exercise faith (as- knew will come to faith and persevere. Even if the
sisted by prevenient grace) to believe and persevere Arminian does not agree with the doctrine of Total
in the Lord Jesus Christ. Depravity which we have already explained, this text
(Rom 8:29–30) does not allow for any contribution
The favourite proof-text of the Arminians in support on the part of man to his own salvation.
of their error is Romans 8:29–30:
For whom He did foreknow, He also did predes- Thirdly, if Paul means that predestination is accord-
tinate to be conformed to the image of his Son, ing to God’s foreknowledge, then predestination ef-
that he might be the firstborn among many breth- fectively means nothing, since the elect will reach
ren. Moreover whom he did predestinate, them he their final destination based on their own efforts
also called: and whom he called, them he also (though assisted by prevenient grace).

Unconditional Election • 15
Biblical like me, Declaring the end from the beginning,
Absolute Predestination and from ancient times the things that are not yet
done, saying, My counsel shall stand, and I will
The doctrine of unconditional election has its foun-
do all my pleasure (Isa 46:9–10).
dation not only in the eternal love of God in Christ,
but also in the fact that God has ordained all things That the counsel of God comprehends and deter-
that come to pass according to the counsel of His mines all things and events of every kind,—whether
own will. This doctrine is in fact suggested by the great and small, good or evil,—is also clear from
Apostle Paul just one verse before the text used by Scripture. In the first place, even events that appear
the Arminians to prove their doctrine of election by insignificant, such as the dropping of our hair from
foreknowledge, for he says: “And we know that ALL our head, are brought about by God according to
things work together for good to them that love God, the counsel of His will (Mt 10:30). In the second
to them who are the called according to his purpose” place, even things that appear to happen by chance
(Rom 8:28, cap. emph. mine). It would be impossi- have been decreed and are brought about by the
ble for “ALL things [to] work together for good to counsel of the Lord: “The lot is cast into the lap; but
them that love God” if God is not in sovereign con- the whole disposing thereof is of the LORD” (Prov
trol over everything. If God be not in control over 16:33). In the third place, disasters are ordained and
just one thing, then the proposition that “all things brought to pass by God: “I form the light, and create
work together for good to them that love God” is no darkness: I make peace, and create evil [i.e., disas-
longer true. ter]: I the LORD do all these things” (Isa 45:7; cf.
The Westminster Confession of Faith (§3.1–2) Amos 3:6b). In the fourth place, even the acts of the
states the doctrine most succinctly: wicked are ordained by God: “The LORD hath made
I. God from all eternity did, by the most wise and all things for himself: yea, even the wicked for the
holy counsel of His own will, freely and unchange- day of evil” (Prov 16:4). This, God does without
ably ordain whatsoever comes to pass: yet so, as violating the freedom and responsibility of His crea-
thereby neither is God the author of sin, nor is tures. So Judas was condemned though it was de-
violence offered to the will of the creatures, nor is creed that Christ would be delivered by him (see Mat-
the liberty or contingency of second causes taken thew 26:24). So Peter, in his sermon at Pentecost,
away, but rather established. condemned the Jews for their wickedness of slaying
II. Although God knows whatsoever may or can the Lord though He was “delivered by the determi-
come to pass upon all supposed conditions; yet nate counsel and foreknowledge of God” (Acts 2:23;
hath He not decreed any thing because He fore- see also Acts 4:28).
saw it as future, or as that which would come to It is clear that whatever happens in this world, it is
pass upon such conditions. brought about by God according to the counsel of
This doctrine of absolute predestination is questioned His will. The counsel of God is His living will. It is
by many because it seems to be counter-intuitive, and sovereignly efficacious. No contingencies can frus-
appears to make men robots. But the fact that it is trate God’s will because all power belongs to Him (Ps
biblical can hardly be doubted. For example, God said 62:11b). It would hardly be possible to conceive of
through Isaiah: God’s choice of the elect as being contingent upon
Remember the former things of old: for I am God, God’s foreknowledge of what man would do. Surely,
and there is none else; I am God, and there is none God knows all things because He sovereignly decreed

16 • PCC, Oct–Nov, 2000


them and brings them to pass. The god of the con- (For the children being not yet born, neither hav-
sistent Arminian, who knows what is going to come ing done any good or evil, that the purpose of God
to pass, not because he ordained all things, but be- according to election might stand, not of works,
cause he simply foresaw all things, is simply not the but of him that calleth;) It was said unto her, The
God of the Bible, but an impotent god of man’s im- elder shall serve the younger (Rom 9:11–12).
agination.
The same thought of unconditional election appears
elsewhere, e.g., “… there is a remnant according to
Biblical the election of grace. And if by grace, then is it no
Unconditional Election more of works: otherwise grace is no more grace.…”
A consideration of the absolute sovereignty of God (Rom 11:5–6); and “[God] hath saved us, and called
ought to convince us that our election is uncondi- us with an holy calling, not according to our works,
tional. But there is more. The Bible explicitly informs but according to his own purpose and grace, which
us of that fact, to kill any remnant of pride that we was given us in Christ Jesus before the world be-
may retain. gan” (2 Tim 1:9; italics emph. mine).
First of all, the Apostle Paul explicitly declares that Thirdly, the Scripture teaches in numerous places
our election is made before the foundation of the that faith and repentance are the fruit of election.
world, according to the good pleasure of the will of For example, “For we are his workmanship, created
God and His eternal love for us on account of our in Christ Jesus unto good works, which God hath
being represented by Christ: before ordained that we should walk in them” (Eph
Blessed be the God and Father of our Lord Jesus 2:10; cf. Eph 1:4). Thus the Lord Jesus Christ declares
Christ, who hath blessed us with all spiritual bless- that all who come unto Him are those whom the
ings in heavenly places in Christ: According as he Father have given Him in the first place, i.e., elected
hath chosen us in him before the foundation of before the foundation of the world: “All that the Fa-
the world, that we should be holy and without ther giveth me shall come to me; and him that
blame before him in love: Having predestinated cometh to me I will in no wise cast out” (Jn 6:37).
us unto the adoption of children by Jesus Christ to We believe because Christ first laid down His life for
himself, according to the good pleasure of his will, us: “But ye believe not, because ye are not of my
To the praise of the glory of his grace, wherein he sheep” (Jn 10:26, cf. 10:14–15). This same truth of
hath made us accepted in the beloved.… In whom faith being the fruit of election is highlighted by Luke:
also we have obtained an inheritance, being pre- “… and as many as were ordained to eternal life
destinated according to the purpose of him who believed” (Acts 13:48b).
worketh all things after the counsel of his own
will (Eph 1:3–6, 11). If faith and repentance be the fruit of the elect, our
election certainly cannot be conditioned on them.
Secondly, the Scripture is emphatic that election is
not conditioned on our good works (including our Fourthly, God claims to have the sovereign preroga-
response to the Gospel). Paul was making this point tive to elect whom He will:
when he tells us that God has already declared His As it is written, Jacob have I loved, but Esau have I
love for Jacob rather than Esau (who were twins) hated.… So then it is not of him that willeth, nor
even before they were born or capable of doing any of him that runneth, but of God that sheweth
good or evil: mercy.… Hath not the potter power over the clay,

Unconditional Election • 17
of the same lump to make one vessel unto hon- What shall we say then? Is there unrighteous-
our, and another unto dishonour? (Rom 9:13, 16, ness with God? God forbid. For he saith to Moses,
21). I will have mercy on whom I will have mercy, and
I will have compassion on whom I will have com-
The biblical evidence from these four angles is clear,
passion.
and the conclusion inescapable: Our election is en-
tirely gratuitous, and based on God’s sovereign good The point is, we are saved by God’s unmerited
pleasure. In other words, our election is uncondi- mercy and grace. If we really want fairness, then we
tional. are really asking for strict justice, in which case
all deserve to perish. Does a prisoner in the death
Conclusion row for treason have the right to charge the king
for unfairness if he chooses, according to his mercy,
The doctrine of unconditional election and sovereign
to release another prisoner guilty of the same
predestination is controversial only because man
crime? Such a person would surely deserve the
refuses to summit to the God’s declaration of His
greater condemnation.
majestic sovereignty and man’s dismay nothingness.
Because of this, many objections are harnessed O glorious grace! I was dead in trespasses and sin,
against the doctrine. without hope in this world, deserving nothing but
God’s wrath. I hated my Maker, and the only one
Some say: “The doctrine is ridiculous because it
who could save me. Yet God, in His boundless love,
makes God drag ungrateful sinners kicking and sent His only begotten Son to suffer and die for me,
screaming into the kingdom, while denying entrance and then, in the fullness of time, sent His Spirit to
to those who truly want to enter into it.” It does not
open my eyes so that I could see my bleeding Sav-
take much to answer this objection, for no one is
iour nailed to the Cross for my crime. What can my
ever dragged into the kingdom kicking and scream-
response be, but a humble, “Why me, Lord?”
ing. Anyone who enters the kingdom enters as one
who is born again and finds Christ to be lovely be-
yond all measures (Jn 3:3). On the other hand, no
one is denied entrance into the kingdom who wants
to enter into it, because no fallen man will ever want
to enter, but the elect whom the Lord grants effica-
cious grace.
Some others object that unconditional election
makes it immoral for God to hold those who re-
ject the Gospel responsible for their unbelief. This
again is easily answered, for none who reject the
Gospel can honestly say: “God prevented me from
believing.”
Yet others say: “God is unfair to save only a few.”
The Apostle Paul anticipates this question and an-
swers it in Romans 9:14–15.

18 • PCC, Oct–Nov, 2000


Limited Atonement
This third point of Calvinism (Second Head of the Amyraldian position (see PCC Bulletin, vol. 1, issue
Canons of Dort), is perhaps that most debated point 7). Often this capitulation to Arminianism is through
on the doctrine of salvation in the modern church. the influence and infiltration of Dispensationalism
But interestingly, the Arminian article on this point into the churches. Be that as it may be, the doctrine
is the most explicit of the five articles of the of Limited Atonement or Particular Redemption is
Remonstrantia: often so abhorred in some fundamental churches
That, agreeably thereto, Jesus Christ, the Saviour that members who hold to them find it impossible to
of the world, died for all men and for every man, continue in fellowship and membership.
so that he has obtained for them all, by his death
But all these are not important. What is important is
on the cross, redemption and the forgiveness of
whether the doctrine is biblical. If it is, we must hold
sins; yet that no one actually enjoys this forgive-
on to it tenaciously and preach it unashamedly. If it
ness of sins except the believer, according to the
is not, then we must reject it and denounce it.
word of the Gospel of John 3:16: “God so loved the
world that he gave his only-begotten Son, that It is my contention that the Canons is right: Christ
whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but did not die for the world to save the world without
have everlasting life.” And in the First Epistle of exception (Universalism), neither did He die for the
John 2:2: “And he is the propitiation for our sins; world to make man saveable (Arminianism), nor did
and not for ours only, but also for the sins of the He die hypothetically for the world, though actually
whole world” (Remonstrantia, Art. II). for the elect (Amyraldism).
Understandably, this article,—that Christ died for Note that when we speak of Limited Atonement, we
the world without exception,—would be affirmed by are not saying that the atonement is limited in power,
almost all professedly evangelical churches around but we are saying that the purpose of Christ’s atone-
the world since the majority of such churches (esp. ment is specifically for the salvation of His elect alone.
in America) are Arminian. But to complicate the It is not intended for the reprobates. To put it in an-
matter, there are those who profess to be Calvinistic other way, we are saying that Christ suffered and died
and fundamental, who would also defend the Armin- in the place of His elect (i.e., a substitutionary death;
ian doctrine on this point. This is particularly true cf. Heb 9:28) to pay the penalty of their sin, to satisfy
of churches that are professedly Dispensational (see the justice and wrath of God and to reconcile them
PCC Bulletin, vol. 1, issue 51). And to further com- to God (i.e., a propitiatory death, cf. Rom 1:18). This
plicate the matter, there are also churches that claim is achieved by a double imputation on the Cross, for
to be Reformed and Calvinistic which would either there the sin of the elect throughout the ages was
agree to this statement wholesale or adopt an imputed on Christ, who paid the penalty due by His

Limited Atonement • 19
suffering and death (Isa 53:4, 6, 11; 1 Pet 2:24; Col deserving of eternal death. The great Puritan John
2:14; Heb 9:28); and there the righteousness of Christ Owen puts the argument across beautifully:
merited throughout His perfectly righteous life was God imposed his wrath due unto, and Christ un-
imputed on the elect (cf. Rom 3:22; 5:17). derwent the pains of hell for, either [1] all the sins
The intent of His death was the salvation of His elect of all men, or [2] all the sins of some men, or [3]
some sins of all men. If the last [3], some sins of
alone, and therefore the extent (i.e., for whom) of
all men, then have all men some sins to answer
His atonement is the elect alone. There is no real
for, and so shall no man be saved…. If the sec-
difference between the intent and extent of the atone-
ond [2], that is it which we affirm, that Christ in
ment as some have of late promoted. Calvinists may
their stead and room suffered for all the sins of all
differ on the doctrine of the Well-Meant offer of the
the elect in the world. If the first [1], why, then,
Gospel, but that should be treated as a different,
are not all freed from the punishment of all their
though related subject.
sins? You will say, “Because of their unbelief, they
We shall proceed to demonstrate that the doctrine of will not believe.” But this unbelief, is it a sin or
Limited Atonement is scriptural in a few steps. First, not? If not, why should they be punished for it? If
we must show that logically only Limited Atonement it be, then Christ underwent the punishment due
makes sense. Secondly, we must show that the Scrip- to it, or not. If so, then why must that hinder them
ture clearly teaches that Christ did not die for every- more than their other sins for which he died from
one without exception, and thirdly, we must answer partaking of the fruit of his death? If he did not,
some objections to the doctrine. then did he not die for all their sins (The Death of
Death in the Death of Christ [BOT, reprinted
1959], 61–2).
Logical Derivation
In the first place, arguing from the integrity of the The Arminian conception of the death of Christ, that
Five Points of Calvinism, we note that (1) all men it simply makes salvation possible, really means that
are totally depraved and will die in sin unless God Christ’s death is not sufficient for the salvation of
intervenes; and (2) God has unconditionally elected anyone. This is “Limited Atonement” where the limit
some to salvation. Putting these two points together, is not on whom Christ died for, but on the power and
we must infer that God wills and desires the salva- value of the death of Christ!
tion only of the elect, and therefore, it stands to rea- In Arminianism, the atonement of Christ is like a
son that Christ, who is God, died only to save the great wide bridge that reaches half-way across, but
elect. for the Calvinist, the atonement is like a narrow
In the second place, we note that God is perfectly just bridge that reaches all the way across.
and will punish all sins. Either they are punished in
Christ (for those He represents) or they will be pun- Biblical Evidence
ished in the sinners themselves (for the reprobate). The biblical evidence for Limited Atonement can be
This being the case, if Christ died for all the sins of classed under two categories:
all men, all men will be saved. On the other hand, if
He did not die for any one sin of any individual, that Christ Did Not Die for Everyone
individual will have to pay for the sin himself with We have an indication in the Old Testament that the
eternal death: for every sin against an infinite God is Lord would die only for a limited number of people.

20 • PCC, Oct–Nov, 2000


In particular, the Prophet Isaiah, in speaking about even as Christ also loved the church, and gave him-
the substitutionary death of Christ, tells us that Christ self for it” (Eph 5:25). Christ did not lay down His
shall “justify many; for he shall bear their iniqui- life for the world, but for His bride, the Church.
ties” (Isa 53:11). In other words, Christ will justify
This explains why the Lord specifically indicates in
many by bearing their iniquities, which also mean
His High Priestly Prayer that He does not pray for
He would not bear the iniquity of everyone.
everyone, but for as many as have been given to Him,
Thus, the Lord Jesus Himself taught His disciples: i.e., His elect:
“For even the Son of man came not to be ministered As thou hast given him power over all flesh, that
unto, but to minister, and to give his life a ransom he should give eternal life to as many as thou hast
for many” (Mk 10:45). He did not give His life a given him.… I pray for them: I pray not for the
ransom for all, but for many. Then when institut- world, but for them which thou hast given me; for
ing the Lord’s Supper, He declares: “For this is my they are thine.… Neither pray I for these [i.e.,
blood of the new testament, which is shed for many those who have already believed] alone, but for
for the remission of sins” (Mt 26:28). them also which shall believe on me through their
word (Jn 17:2, 9, 20).
Who is the “many” that the Lord refers to? The Lord
leaves us without doubt that it is His sheep or His It would be absurd to think of Christ dying an ago-
elect: “I am the good shepherd, and know my sheep, nising death for everyone in the world and then re-
and am known of mine. As the Father knoweth me, fusing to pray for them. It has to be that He is not
even so know I the Father: and I lay down my life for concerned to save the world, but to save His elect for
the sheep” (Jn 10:14–15). It is clear that by “the whom He died, and so continues to intercede for them
sheep,” the Lord is referring to His sheep, for He goes and them alone (Heb 7:14–15).
on to rebuke those who are not His: “But ye believe
not, because ye are not of my sheep” (Jn 10:26). Christ Died to Save,
Christ, by His own testimony, died for His sheep, His Not to Make Salvation Possible
people, the elect. Those who are not His sheep are The Lord Jesus Christ affirms emphatically that His
not the elect, and will not believe. mission was to save the lost: “For the Son of man is
come to save that which was lost” (Mt 18:11; Lk
The same thought of particularlism in the redemp-
19:10). Never does He say that He came to make sin-
tion purchased by Christ is echoed by the Apostles.
ners saveable. The Apostles, accordingly, refer to the
Paul declares: “If God be for us, who can be against
work of Christ in definite terms.
us? He that spared not his own Son, but delivered
him up for us all, how shall he not with him also Thus, the Apostle Paul declares: “Christ Jesus came
freely give us all things?” (Rom 8:31b–32). Who is into the world to save sinners” (1 Tim 1:15); and
this “us”? Paul does not leave us to guess: It is the “we were reconciled to God by the death of his Son”
elect of God, for he continues: “Who shall lay any (Rom 5:10).
thing to the charge of God’s elect? It is God that
Thus, the Apostle Peter affirms: “[Christ Himself]
justifieth” (Rom 8:33).
bare our sins in his own body on the tree, that we,
In another passage, Paul seeking to encourage hus- being dead to sins, should live unto righteousness:
bands to love their wives to the point of being willing by whose stripes ye were healed” (1 Pet 2:24; cf. 1
to die for them, urges: “Husbands, love your wives, Pet 3:18).

Limited Atonement • 21
Thus, the writer of Hebrews emphatically asserts that this section, we must briefly deal with some of these
Christ had already obtained salvation for us with the passages. In the interest of space, we shall not quote
completion of His sacrifice of Himself: “Neither by the verses, but do request our readers to look them
the blood of goats and calves, but by his own blood up in the Bible.
he entered in once into the holy place, having ob-
John 1:29, 3:16, 4:42;
tained eternal redemption for us” (Heb 9:12).
1 John 2:2, 4:14
Notice how the Apostles use the past tense in these Arminians and those with Arminian tendencies will
verses to indicate that the work of redemption is com- often cite these verses and simply declare that “God
plete and our salvation depends on nothing else. loves the world and Christ died for the world”—by
which they mean every person who ever lived. But
Someone may object: “But if Christ came to make
these verses are easily explained by the fact that the
salvation possible, it would also be right to say that
word “world” (kovsmo~, cosmos) has at least eight
He came to ‘save sinners,’ just as a man who throws
different meanings in the New Testament. For ex-
a life-buoy to a drowning person is said to be saving
ample, in Luke 2:1, “the world” obviously refers to
his life.”
the Roman world under the rulership of Caesar
But one thing must be borne in mind: There is a Augustus; in Acts 17:24, it refers to the entire created
colossal difference between a drowning man and a order; and in John 15:18, it obviously refer to the
man dead in sin. A man dead in sin cannot help unbelieving world. In fact, one needs only to exam-
himself. If Christ merely makes salvation possible, ine the 187 times the word kovsmo~ occurs in the
he would never be saved. New Testament to realise that it very seldom refers to
“every single human being who ever live” (such as
If Christ came to save, and the salvation of the sin- in Romans 3:19). Anyone who tries to use the word
ner depends on nothing else but what Christ has done “world” or kovsmo~ to speak about Christ dying
in suffering and dying for them, then it follows that for everyone without exception is simply grasping
Christ must have died only for a limited number of straw.
sinners, for, obviously, not every sinner is saved. In-
deed, if Christ died for everyone without exception, What is the meaning of the word “world” as used by
than God would be unjust to punish any sinner for the Apostle John in all these passages? Well, what-
their sin, for it would mean that He would be pun- ever the meaning be, it cannot be “world without
ishing them twice: once in Christ, and another time exception.” If this is the meaning in John 1:29 or 1
in themselves. Moreover, the idea would make God John 2:2, then God would be guilty of injustice if He
punishes anyone in hell, for Christ would have made
self-contradictory, for in Christ “dwelleth all the full-
them in the sight of God not-guilty by taking away
ness of the Godhead bodily” (Col 2:9).
their sin. If John 3:16 refers to the world without ex-
ception, then we must conclude that God loves all
‘Problem’ Passages who are in hell, being punished for their sin, and
We have seen how the Scripture clearly, consistently that passages such as Romans 9:13 and Psalm 11:5
and logically shows that the atonement of Christ is are wrong. Again, if John 4:42 and 1 John 4:14 refer
limited by design. However, there are admittedly, sev- to the world without exception, then we must con-
eral texts in the Scripture which appear to be speak- clude that Christ failed in His mission because it is
ing of the death of Christ in universalistic terms. In evident that not the whole world is saved.

22 • PCC, Oct–Nov, 2000


Some very good sound Calvinistic theologians, such 1 TTimothy
imothy 2:4, 4:10
as John Owen, John Gill, A.W. Pink, George Gillespie, These two verses are also commonly urged to mean
Samuel Rutherford, Herman Hanko, etc., hold that that God desires to save all men, and that the only
“the world” in these passages refers to the “world of reason why not all men are saved is because God
the elect.” This view has merits and fits very well with has left the final decision to men. First of all, “all
the doctrine of Limited Atonement. men” in 1 Timothy 2:4 does not refer to all men with-
out exception, for in the immediate context, Paul
Personally, however, I prefer to see it as “world with- makes it clear that “all men” refers to all classes of
out distinction.” That is to say: (1) The Gospel pas- men:
sages refer to Christ as being not only the Saviour of I exhort therefore, that, first of all, supplications,
the Jews but also of the Gentiles, without distinguish- prayers, intercessions, and giving of thanks, be
ing between the elect and the reprobate. Ultimately, made for all men; For kings, and for all that are
Christ is the Saviour only of the elect, but here the in authority; that we may lead a quiet and peace-
emphasis is not on who Christ is particularly saving, able life in all godliness and honesty (1 Tim 2:1–
but on the fact that those He saves (the elect) are not 2).
restricted to the Jews. (2) The epistle passages carry
the same idea, but contrast between those already in Secondly, the context of 1 Timothy 4:10 suggests that
the church and those outside of it. Paul is not referring to salvation from sin and Sa-
tan, else the verse would suggest that “all men” are
For example, John 4:42 is a statement made by the in a certain sense saved. We agree with Calvin that:
Samaritans to indicate that Christ is the Saviour not … the word swth;r is here a general term, and
only of the Jews, but Samaritans and Gentiles as well denotes one who defends and preserves. He means
(contrast with Jn 4:22). Moreover, if John 3:16 refers that the kindness of God extends to all men. And
to the “world of the elect” then it seems superfluous if there is no man who does not feel the goodness
for the Lord to say: “whosoever believeth in him of God towards him, and who is not a partaker of
should not perish,” for all the elect will certainly be- it, how much more shall it be experienced by the
lieve. The fact is that the statement makes no direct godly, who hope in him? (in loc.).
mention of the elect, but only that God’s love is not
2 Peter 3:9
confined to the Jews. It is true that God’s love ulti-
mately rests only upon the elect, but this is a propo- This is another favourite text of the Arminians to
sition that must be found in other passages. And show that God desires that all without exception come
again, note how 1 John 2:2 parallels the prophetic to repentance since Christ died for all. However, if
statement of Caiaphas that: “Jesus should die for that that is the case, then the verse would either imply
universal salvation since God can and does carry out
nation [Israel]; And not for that nation only, but that
His will, or it would imply that Christ will never re-
also he should gather together in one the children
turn since God does not wish that anyone should
of God that were scattered abroad [i.e., the elect of
perish, but when Christ returns every unbeliever in
God in the other nations in the world]” (Jn 11:51–
that generation will perish regardless of whether they
52). Caiaphas was prophetically saying that Christ
have been “given sufficient time” to repent or not.
would be the propitiation for sins of the elect in Is-
rael: and not for only for them, but also for the sins The fact is that the words “all” and “any” in the
of the elect of God in other nations. verse are clearly restricted by the pronoun “us.” Pe-

Limited Atonement • 23
ter is clearly referring to believers (and, by exten- kind, but left the greater part of all nations in Old
sion, all the elect) when he says, “The Lord is not Testament times in darkness, and a large number of
slack concerning his promise… but is longsuffer- people in the world today without any opportunity to
ing to us-ward” (cf. 2 Pet 1:1–4; Acts 2:39). hear the Gospel. It is no wonder that Arminianism
leads so easily to liberalism. After all, the god pic-
Romans 5:18; 1 Corinthians 15:22; tured in Arminianism is an impotent god who is
2 Corinthians 5:14–15 helpless to save. How could anyone of us, knowing
The surface reading of 1 Corinthians 15:22 and Ro- this fact, be apathetic as to whether Calvinism or
mans 5:18 does suggest that Christ died for all. But Arminianism is right?
we need not take much effort to discover that the
“all” in the context of both verses mean “all the elect”
as contrasted with all who are represented by Adam.
Likewise, in 2 Corinthians 5:14–15, Paul was writ-
ing to encouraged the believers with the fact that
Christ died for them and therefore, they “should not
henceforth live unto themselves, but unto him which
died for them.” The verse would not make sense if
“all” refers to everyone in the world.

2 Peter 2:1
On surface reading, this verse does suggest that Christ
died to purchase redemption even for the false teach-
ers and prophets. But again, it cannot be that any-
one purchased by Christ could perish (Rom 8:34–
35). It must be that here Peter is using a form of ad
hominem argument by which he points out that
these false teachers actually claim that Christ bought
them too.

Conclusion
We have shown that Limited Atonement is a biblical
doctrine. The Arminian, rather than having an
atonement that is unlimited, is really propounding
an atonement of Christ that is weak and powerless
to save. Worst than that, it makes God to be a failure
because He desires to save all mankind, but His plan
has largely been frustrated because the greater part
of all mankind is currently in hell because of unbe-
lief. In fact, He would not only be a failure, but would
also be contradictory, for He desires to save all man-

24 • PCC, Oct–Nov, 2000


Irresistible Grace
Calvinistic theologians generally distinguish between ism. This order in the acronym beautifully shows
the external call of the Gospel and the internal call the work of the Triune God in our salvation: The
of the Word and the Spirit. The external call of the Father electing unconditionally, the Son dying for
Gospel is given in the preaching of the Gospel, and the elect, and the Holy Spirit quickening the elect
calls all without exception to repent of sin and be- who are by nature dead in sin, and planting spir-
lieve in Christ. This call is resistible, and thus the itual ears so that they may respond to the Gospel.
Lord teaches: “For many are called, but few are cho-
However, this may not be the best order to discuss
sen” (Mt 22:14; cf. Jn 8:43–44a). On the other hand,
the subject because the doctrine of Irresistible Grace
the internal call is given only to the elect. This call,
follows logically the doctrine of Total Depravity. In
which is referred to in Romans 8:30, involves the
the Remonstrantia, the Arminian expression which
planting of spiritual ears in the heart by the Holy
corresponds to this doctrine is found in Article IV,
Spirit, and is therefore always efficacious. The West-
which immediately follows Article III on Freewill or
minster Confession of Faith speaks of this effectual
the ability of man (antithesis of Total Depravity). The
call thus:
fathers of Dort, when drafting the Canons, which
All those whom God hath predestinated unto life,
follows the order of the Remonstrantia, found it
and those only, He is pleased, in His appointed and
accepted time, effectually to call, by His Word and necessary to treat the two articles together, viz. Head
Spirit, out of that state of sin and death in which III & IV: “Of the Doctrine of Man’s Corruption, and
they are by nature, to grace and salvation by Jesus of the Method of His Conversion to God.” This is be-
Christ; enlightening their minds spiritually and cause it is quite impossible to know how the Armin-
savingly to understand the things of God; taking ians differ from the Calvinists in the third article with-
away their heart of stone, and giving unto them out bringing in the fourth article. In the same way,
an heart of flesh; renewing their wills, and, by His we cannot get a full picture of Total Depravity with-
almighty power, determining them to that which out at least some reference to Irresistible Grace.
is good; and effectually drawing them to Jesus The reason for this is that the Arminians also claim
Christ; yet so as they come most freely, being made to hold to Total Depravity and that without grace not
willing by His grace (WCF 10.1). one may be saved. Thus, a Calvinist reading the third
When the Calvinist speaks about Irresistible Grace, article of the Remonstrantia by itself will probably
he is referring to the nature of this efficacious call. agree with it wholeheartedly. It is only when we be-
gin to discuss what grace is and does, that we begin
Controversy with Arminians to see where the two systems differ. When the Calvin-
We are plucking the petals of TULIP one by one in ist speaks about grace in the salvation of sinners, he
order, in our discussion of the Five Points of Calvin- is referring to God sovereignly and monergistically

Irresistible Grace • 25
changing the heart or nature of the sinner so that “is not irresistible, inasmuch as it is written concern-
his will, which is bounded to his inclination which ing many, that they have resisted the Holy Ghost. Acts
is hitherto dead to sin, is now made alive and freed 7, and elsewhere in many places.”
from the bondage of sin to embrace Christ (see Can-
We will have to examine the Scripture cited as well
ons Heads 3 & 4, art. 11). Arminius, on the other
as others cited by Arminius, but before we do so, it is
hand, writes: “grace is so attempered [sic] and com-
useful, I believe, to think for a moment what the
mingled with the nature of man, as not to destroy
Arminians are essentially saying. They are saying that
within him the liberty of his will, but to give it a right
when the Gospel is preached, the Holy Spirit tries His
direction, to correct its depravity, and to allow man
best to woo the hearer to believe, but that ultimately,
to possess his own proper motions” (Works 1.628–
it is the hearer who finally decides if he wants to be-
9). Note also that for the Arminians, regeneration
lieve. If the hearer refuses to believe, there is noth-
does not involve a permanent change. This is why
ing the Holy Spirit can do about it. In this way,
the Fourth Article of the Remonstrantia (shrewdly)
whether we profess to hold to Unconditional Elec-
refers to the operation of grace in the lives of the re-
tion or not, we will have to conclude that God’s grace
generate rather than unregenerate. For them, no
can be rejected and His will can be frustrated.
substantive change is wrought by regeneration,
whereas for a Calvinist the change is drastic, and is
the very subject of the doctrine of Irresistible Grace. Verses that Suggest
‘Resistible Grace’
From a different angle, one way of looking at the
Although the Remonstratia asserts that “it is writ-
difference is that Calvinists believe that grace is par-
ten concerning many, that they have resisted the Holy
ticular and monergistic: that it proceeds from the
Ghost… in many places,” it does not give any spe-
fountain of God’s electing love and sovereignly brings
cific examples. Arminius, however, lists three classes
about regeneration and conversion; whereas Armin-
of verses, viz: (1) such as teaches that grace is capa-
ians hold that grace is universal and synergistic: that
ble of “being resisted”—Acts 7:51; (2) such as
it proceeds from Christ’s death for the world and co-
teaches that grace can be “received in vain”—2 Cor-
operates with the freewill of man to effect faith and
inthians 6:1; and (3) those that suggest that “it is
regeneration.
possible for man to avoid yielding his assent to it;
Another way of looking at the difference is as pro- and to refuse all co-operation with it”—Hebrews
posed by Arminius himself when he quite rightly 12:15; Matthew 23:37; Luke 7:30 (Op. Cit., 1.629).
asserts: “The whole controversy reduces itself to the These verses must be examined. But once again, in
solution of this question, ‘Is the grace of God a cer- the interest of space, we will not quote the text but
tain irresistible force?’” (Works 1.664). We would of request the readers to check them up in the Bible.
course not say that God’s converting grace is an “ir-
resistible force,” which is an Arminian caricature to Acts 7:51
suggest that Calvinism teaches that the elect are This verse does indeed teach that the Holy Ghost can
forced into the kingdom kicking and screaming. But in some sense be resisted. Firstly, He is resisted when
it is fair to say that the difference is whether grace is the hearers resist the Holy Spirit speaking to them by
resistible or irresistible, or whether grace properly the prophets, Apostles and ministers of the Gospel.
denoted is necessarily efficacious or not. Thus the Secondly, He is resisted when the hearers resist the
fourth article of the Remonstrantia insists that grace convictions and dictate of their own conscience when

26 • PCC, Oct–Nov, 2000


their minds are in some sense irradiated with some bility of false professors being found in it. Again with
sparks of truth by the Holy Spirit (cf. Hebrews 6:4 the principle that the whole is to be known by the
and Calvin in loc.). better part, the congregation regarded as a whole may
be said to have received grace. But ultimately, those
In other words, the resistance against the Holy Spirit
who “fail of the grace of God” were never, in the first
that this verse speaks about is resistance to the work
place, recipients of grace (cf. Mt 24:13).
of the Spirit in the external call of the Gospel, which
no Calvinist will deny is possible. But the external Matthew 23:37
call for the reprobate, in the final analysis, can hardly We assume that Arminius is using this verse to show
be regarded as grace, for to these God “designs the that Christ desired the salvation of the Jews, but His
call to be a savour of death [cf. 2 Cor 2:16], and the desire is frustrated because they refused to come to
ground of a severer condemnation” (ICR 3.24.8). In Him, and this implies that the grace of God can be
any case, this verse does not at all suggest that the frustrated. But this interpretation could only stand
Holy Spirit’s work of regeneration can be resisted. if, in the Lord’s statement, “Jerusalem” refers to the
same group of people as “thy children.” But a plain
2 Corinthians 6:1 reading of this verse would show us immediately that
Again, this verse does not refer to the regenerating this is not the case. Although “Jerusalem” as a city is
work of the Spirit in the heart of sinners; rather, it personified in the Lord’s statement, His statement can
refers to the preaching of the Gospel (cf. 2 Cor 6:2). only be understood substantively if we view it as be-
The offer of the Gospel is here denoted “grace of God” ing received by the religious and political representa-
simply because it is a presentation of God’s grace. It tives of city. In other words, “O Jerusalem, Jerusa-
may be argued, from what we have said regarding lem” would refer to the leaders while “thy children”
Acts 7:51, that it seem incongruous to call the preach- would refer to the (elect) citizens in the city. The re-
ing of the Gospel “grace of God.” But we must re- sistance to being gathered under the wings of Christ
member that the primary purpose of the Gospel is come not from those whom Christ desired to gather,
for salvation rather than condemnation (Jn 3:17). but from the opposition of the leaders of the city.
Moreover, as Paul is addressing the members of a Whatever we may derive from this verse, it certainly
church of Christ, it is perfectly natural that he speaks does not mean Christ desires the salvation of every-
of the Gospel in the designation as it appertains the one in Jerusalem, much less the world.
better part of the congregation, namely the elect. In
other words, the Gospel to the church viewed organi- Luke 7:30
cally (as a whole) is the offer of God’s grace, and the The “counsel of God” must surely refer to the re-
reprobate are those who would receive the “grace of vealed will of God, rather than the decretive will of
God in vain.” God since the latter cannot be known, much less re-
jected. Therefore, this verse again furnishes no proof
Hebrews 12:15 that grace is resistible.
In this verse, it is unlikely that the phrase “grace of
God” refers to the Gospel. Rather it probably refers Irresistible Grace Proven
to the work of grace pertaining to regeneration and In order to prove Irresistible Grace, we need only to
conversion, albeit, the Apostle is not writing to an prove (1) that the natural man will not choose Christ;
individual but to a body of believers with the possi- (2) that regeneration is wholly a work of the Holy

Irresistible Grace • 27
Spirit without any co-operation from the sinner; and world, according to the prince of the power of the air,
(3) all who are elect will come to Christ. the spirit that now worketh in the children of diso-
bedience…, fulfilling the desires of the flesh and of
The Natural Man the mind; and were by nature the children of
Will Not Choose Christ wrath…” (Eph 2:2–3).
If the natural man is able, by prevenient grace (grace
prior to regeneration) or otherwise, to choose Christ, Regeneration is Wholly
and all who come to Christ come through co-opera- aW ork of the Spirit
Work
tion with prevenient grace, then it must follow that The grace of regeneration can only be resistible if it
the grace that leads to salvation is resistible. On the is received synergistically: through the co-operation
other hand, if no one,—whether elect or repro- of the wills of man and of God. But we find in the
bate,—has any ability to choose Christ, and yet the Scripture, that this is not the case. Regeneration is
elect are saved, then it must follow that the grace of always portrayed as wholly and sovereignly the work
conversion is particular and irresistible. of the Spirit. This fact is taught very powerfully and
clearly in the Scriptures by the use of several meta-
When we examine the Scriptures we find that it is
phors to describe regeneration.
indeed true that the natural man cannot choose
Christ. We have seen this fact more or less when we The Lord Himself uses the metaphor of child-birth
examined the doctrine of Total Depravity, so we will and blindness when He told Nicodemus: “Verily, ver-
simply highlight some verses from Scripture here. ily, I say unto thee, Except a man be born again, he
First, the Lord says: “No man can come to me, ex- cannot see the kingdom of God” (Jn 3:3). One who
cept the Father which hath sent me draw him” (Jn is not born again is blind in his heart (Eph 4:18),
6:44a). The word translated “draw” (eJ l kuv w , cannot see the kingdom of God (with spiritual eyes),
helkuô) is never used to mean “persuade” or “woo” and so there is no way for him to enter into it. But
or “co-operate with.” This can be seen in the six other just as a baby is totally passive in childbirth so is a
times in the New Testament, that it is used in a dif- man being born again by the will of God through
ferent context with John 6:44. In these instances, the Spirit of Christ (see John 1:12–13). The new birth
the word is used to describe the drawing of a sword or regeneration, in other words, is monergistic. It is
(Jn 18:10); the dragging up of a net (Jn 21:6, 11); totally the work of the Spirit with no contribution
dragging a person by force (Acts 16:19; 21:30; Jas 2:6). from man. Similarly just as a blind man cannot help
In none of these cases do we find the objects being his own blindness, a spiritually blind man cannot
drawn co-operating. So, it is quite clear that when help himself, but needs the healing of the Lord
the Lord say “except the Father… draw him,” He is (through regeneration).
referring to a sovereign work rather than simply
Another metaphor, which is used both by the Lord
moral persuasion.
and the Apostle Paul, is that of resurrection from the
Although man is a free agent, his will is bounded to dead. The Lord says: “For as the Father raiseth up
his inclination which, prior to regeneration, “loved the dead, and quickeneth them; even so the Son
darkness rather than light” (Jn 3:19). His will is taken quickeneth whom he will” (Jn 5:21; see also John
captive by Satan, and he cannot but sin. Paul ex- 5:24–25). Writing to the Ephesians, Paul says, “But
presses this fact when he suggests that in our unre- God, who is rich in mercy, for his great love where-
generacy, we walked “according to the course of this with he loved us, Even when we were dead in sins,

28 • PCC, Oct–Nov, 2000


hath quickened us together with Christ, (by grace ye which worshipped God, heard us: whose heart the
are saved)” (Eph 2:4–5; cf. Col 2:13). Lord opened, that she attended unto the things which
were spoken of Paul” (Acts 16:14). Notice the order:
This metaphor is especially important because it The Lord opened her heart, and then she attended to
shows us that the unregenerate person is not as the Gospel. Again, it should be noted that this change
Arminius claimed him to be: a beggar who is able to
of heart, which results in repentance and faith, is
extend his hand to receive alms. Arminius had ar-
not something that is self-generated, but is granted
gued that such a stretching out of the hands to re-
sovereignly by God (Acts 11:18; Phil 1:29; 2 Tim 2:25–
ceive the gift does not at all make the gift not a ‘pure
26).
gift’ (Works 2.52). But the fact is that the Scripture
tells us the sinner is dead. He has to be made alive. So great is this change in heart or nature, that the
Before he is made alive, he contributes precisely noth- Scripture speaks the regenerate as being a “new crea-
ing to the receipt of the gift. tion”: “Therefore if any man be in Christ, he is a
new creature: old things are passed away; behold, all
Indeed, Paul goes on to say that even our faith is a things are become new” (2 Cor 5:17; see also Gala-
gift of God: “For by grace are ye saved through faith; tians 6:15).
and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God: Not of
works, lest any man should boast” (Eph 2:8–9). Of If we examine all these instances of Scripture with-
course, faith is not something that can be poured out bias, it is hard to escape the conclusion that the
into the heart, and so it must be a gift by way of spir- regenerating grace of God is wholly the work of the
itual resurrection, or effectual calling. Spirit without any co-operation from the sinner. If
that is so, then, it necessarily follows that the grace
Yet another metaphor of regeneration is that of heart of regeneration is irresistible: there is no room for
change representing a total change in nature. This co-operation, much less resistance.
is particularly used by the Lord through Ezekiel and
Jeremiah, for example, He said through Ezekiel: All the Elect Will Come
And I will give them one heart, and I will put a Yet another argument for the particularity and effi-
new spirit within you; and I will take the stony cacy of the grace of regeneration is the fact that all
heart out of their flesh, and will give them an heart who are elect will be saved. In other words, all whom
of flesh: That they may walk in my statutes, and God intends to save will be irresistibly drawn to Christ.
keep mine ordinances, and do them: and they shall Again, this is clearly taught in the Scripture.
be my people, and I will be their God (Ezk 11:19–
20; cf. 36:26–27; Jer 31:33). First, the Lord says: “All that the Father giveth me
shall come to me; and him that cometh to me I will
Notice how the words “I will” are repeated and em- in no wise cast out” (Jn 6:37). In other words, all
phasised to indicate that the change will be effected who are elected will come.
by God sovereignly, without co-operation from the
sinner. Luke, writing under the inspiration of the Spirit, af-
firms this fact when he describes the conversion of
In the same vein of thought, in the New Testament, the Gentiles in these words: “And when the Gentiles
Luke uses the idea of an opening of the heart to de- heard this, they were glad, and glorified the word of
scribe the conversion of Lydia: “And a certain woman the Lord: and as many as were ordained to eternal
named Lydia, a seller of purple, of the city of Thyatira, life believed” (Acts 13:48).

Irresistible Grace • 29
The Apostle Paul puts it in another way when he new birth, we find the door compellingly attractive,
paints the order of salvation as an unbroken chain and we enter into it willingly. No, we are not dragged
of God’s work beginning from election (foreknow) through the door kicking and screaming; we enter
to calling to glorification: in willingly, our hearts having been changed. We
For whom he did foreknow, he also did predesti- enter, thinking that we have found the door. But once
nate to be conformed to the image of his Son, that we enter the door, we discover that written at the back
he might be the firstborn among many brethren. of the door are the words: “You have not found me, I
Moreover whom he did predestinate, them he also have found you.” It was the Father who marked us
called: and whom he called, them he also justi- out from eternity in the first place; Christ had in the
fied: and whom he justified, them he also glori- second place paid for our sin; and the Holy Spirit
fied (Rom 8:29–30). had made us alive, and implanted spiritual ears and
eyes to see the door and to behold the majesty and
Notice how Paul speaks about the certainty of glori-
greatness of the King.
fication for all the elect. If all the elect will definitely
attain unto glorification, and the grace of God is only Calvinism alone is true to the Scripture and highly
for the elect, then it follows, once again, that the grace exalts the sovereignty and glory of God. Arminian-
of conversion is irresistible. ism exalts human free will and leads to humanism
and liberalism. Arminians have also no real argu-
Conclusion ment against the soteriology of Roman Catholicism
I believe we have proven beyond doubt that the grace (which is semi-Pelagian or Arminian) or even those
of God in conversion is irresistible. Many Calvinists who hold to Baptismal Regeneration (which is
today talk about common grace. I have no great dif- founded on the premise that faith precedes regen-
eration and therefore it is not wrong to add baptism
ficulty with the thought, if by it is meant that God
before regeneration).
sends the rain and the sunshine on all without dis-
tinction (Mt 5:45). However, we must be careful not
to extrapolate from there that God therefore desires
all to be saved; or that common grace is prevenient
grace which so assists, awakes, follows and co-oper-
ates with the unregenerate without distinction so that
all who comes under the preaching of the Gospel is
able to exercise faith unto salvation without being
irresistibly drawn by Christ. Such a doctrine is in-
herently Arminian.
One of the most powerful illustrations of salvation is
entering a door: “I am the door: by me if any man
enter in, he shall be saved” (Jn 10:9).
Hearing the outward call is like seeing the door to
salvation, but left to ourselves, we would refuse to
enter it. The world and sin seem to have so much
more to offer. But when the Holy Spirit grants us a

30 • PCC, Oct–Nov, 2000


Perseverance of the Saints
We are studying the final petal of the Calvinistic it is sometimes used by Calvinists who wish to make
flower, which is also the final head of the Canons of theology more easily acceptable to modern Chris-
Dort under the same name. In simple terms, this tians—many of whom have a distaste for theologi-
doctrine answers the question: Can a regenerate and cal terms. Unfortunately, this phrase has contributed
justified person fall from the State of Grace? The to the common modern notion that God’s work of
Calvinists says no! The Arminians, at least the salvation in the life of the sinner is completed when
Remonstrants, appear from the Remonstrantia to the sinner “prays to receive Christ.” One of the ef-
be unsure. We will briefly analyse their position fects of this misunderstanding is that many modern
shortly, but it will be helpful for us first to comment believers would find it very jarring to read important
on the various other phrases that professing Calvin- theological statements, such as in the WSC 91, which
ists use to describe this doctrine so that we have a speaks about the sacraments becoming “effectual
clearer understanding of what it entails. means of salvation.” And so there are some (includ-
ing well-known writers!) who, on account of these
Synonyms? statements, assert that the Westminster divines taught
First, one of the most common phrases used is “Eter- baptismal regeneration and salvation by works. The
nal Security.” This phrase is very popular among Dis- fact is that the older theologians have more correctly
pensationalists, but it often belies the acceptance of reflected the usage of the term “salvation” in Scrip-
the concept of “Carnal Christians.” We will say more ture (e.g., Phil 2:12; 1 Thes 5:8; etc.) when they speak
about “Carnal Christians” in another issue, but very about salvation as including the work of sanctifica-
simplistically, it teaches that once a person has prayed tion of the Spirit of Christ.
to receive Christ, he will be saved even if he exhibits One other phrase that is commonly used, often by
no repentance for sin and therefore does not have very sound Calvinistic theologians, is “Preservation
Christ as Lord. According to those who hold to this of the Saints.” This term has great merit and is espe-
doctrine (mostly Dispensationalists), such a person cially useful to emphasise the fact that the only rea-
will be saved as by fire. “Eternal Security,” when it is son why a Christian remains a Christian once he is
thus coloured with this doctrine of Carnal Christi-
regenerated and justified is the power of God. Per-
anity, is far from what the Synod of Dort propounded.
sonally, however, I would still prefer the wordings of
The Synod taught “Perseverance of the Saints,” not
the Canons, for it especially emphasises the fact that
“Preservation of Sinners.”
the saints (Christians) persevere as saints through-
The second phrase, which is commonly used, is: out their Christian journey. In this way, two of the
“Once saved always saved!” This phrase is often used common Arminian objections to the doctrine,—viz.:
with the same significance as “Eternal Security,” but (1) that it promotes carnal security; and (2) that

Perseverance of the Saints • 31


there are many real life examples of Christians who out of the Holy Scripture, before we ourselves can
fall out and denounce the faith,—are answered. The teach it with the full persuasion of our minds.
fact is, all Calvinists will maintain that anyone whose
Firstly, notice that the Arminians agree that “those
life shows no evidence of the working of grace can-
who are incorporated into Christ by a true faith…
not be regarded as a true Christian; and anyone who
[cannot] be misled nor plucked out of Christ’s
does not persevere to the end has simply never been
hands.” But, secondly, notice how they emphasise
a true Christian, united with Christ and possessing a
that the Christian is preserved only by the “assisting
true living faith in Him, in the first place. Positively,
grace of the Holy Ghost.” In other words, the Chris-
this means that: “They whom God hath accepted in
tian remains a Christian by his own effort, assisted
His Beloved, effectually called and sanctified by His
by grace. Remember that for the Arminians, regen-
Spirit, can neither totally nor finally fall away from
eration does not involve a permanent change. And
the state of grace; but shall certainly persevere therein
so, thirdly, since the freewill of the Christian is the
to the end, and be eternally saved” (WCF 17.1).
final determining factor in the Christian life, it can-
not be certain from a theological standpoint to as-
The Arminian Contention sert whether the Christian is “capable, through neg-
Although there are many flavours of Arminianism ligence, of forsaking again the first beginnings of
today, it is helpful for us to look at what was submit- their life in Christ… of becoming devoid of grace.”
ted to the Synod of Dort by the Arminians so that we
may better understand what the Calvinistic or bibli- The Response of Dort
cal doctrine is:
What did the Synod of Dort say to the Arminian con-
That those who are incorporated into Christ by a
tention? First, they reassert the fact that a Christian
true faith, and have thereby become partakers of
is a Christian by the purpose of God or, in other words,
his life-giving Spirit, have thereby full power to
strive against Satan, sin, the world, and their own
the perseverance of the saints flows from the foun-
flesh, and to win the victory; it being well under- tainhead of the electing grace of God (Head 5, arts.
stood that it is ever through the assisting grace of 1, 6; rej. 1). Secondly, they insist that the Christian is
the Holy Ghost; and that Jesus Christ assists them regenerated (permanently) by the Holy Spirit and set
through his Spirit in all temptations, extends to free from the dominion and slavery of sin (art. 1).
them his hand, and if only they are ready for the This means that the Christian has a new heart or
conflict, and desire his help, and are not inactive, principle of life which is not naturally inclined to
keeps them from falling, so that they, by no craft sin as in the case of the unregenerate. But thirdly,
or power of Satan, can be misled nor plucked out the Christian is “not entirely in this life [free] from
of Christ’s hands, according to the Word of Christ, the flesh and the body of sin” (arts. 1, 2). In other
John 10:28: “Neither shall any man pluck them words, the Christian has remaining corruption, and
out of my hand.” But whether they are capable, though by the grace of God, he is able and desirous
through negligence, of forsaking again the first to resist temptation, he is also capable of falling into
beginnings of their life in Christ, of again return- sin (arts. 3, 4). Nevertheless, fourthly, “God is faith-
ing to this present evil world, of turning away from ful, who confirms them in the grace once mercifully
the holy doctrine which was delivered them, of conferred on them, and powerfully preserves them
losing a good conscience, of becoming devoid of in the same unto the end” (arts. 3, 7). And fifthly, it
grace, that must be more particularly determined must be remembered that the saints persevere “not

32 • PCC, Oct–Nov, 2000


by their own merits or strength, but by the gratui- unchangeable love of God the Father; upon the
tous mercy of God… [so that] they neither totally efficacy of the merit and intercession of Jesus
fall from faith and grace, nor finally continue in their Christ, the abiding of the Spirit, and of the seed of
falls and perish” (art. 8). God within them; and the nature of the covenant
of grace: from all which ariseth also the certainty
In a word, the Synod of Dort disagrees with the and infallibility thereof (WCF 17.2).
Arminians that the perseverance of the saints is de-
pendent on the effort of the saints. Rather, it insists Note first from this statement how the Westminster
that the saints persevere because God sovereignly pre- divines nail the error of the Arminians on the head:
serves them in grace. He does so by firstly preserving they have made the perseverance of the saints ulti-
the immortal seed, by which they are regenerated (1 mately dependent upon man’s free will. Secondly,
Pet 1:23; 1 Jn 3:9); and secondly, by “His own Word notice the fourfold arguments: (1) God’s immuta-
and Spirit, He assuredly and efficaciously renews ble love and decree of election: since God’s love and
them to repentance” (art. 7). God, in other words, is decree are unchanging, how could the elect perish?
the author and cause of our perseverance. (2) The merit and intercession of Christ: Since Christ
paid an infinite price for our salvation, and He is
Also, the Calvinistic position follows logically from constantly interceding for us, how could we perish?
the other four points, which we have already proven (3) The abiding of the Spirit: since we are by the sov-
from Scripture. For example, if God has elected un- ereign will of God united with Christ through the
conditionally every Christian who will be saved, it indwelling of the Spirit, how could anything cut us
follows that none who is elected will be lost; for oth- off from Christ; and (4) The nature of the Covenant
erwise, it would either mean that God is not sover- of Grace: since the Covenant of Grace is unilateral
eign or that election can only be understood retro- and unconditional, how could we by our sin or oth-
spectively, which also means that God did precisely erwise perish?
nothing when it is said that He elected. Additionally,
if Christ died to pay for the penalty of the sin of the To prove the doctrine of the Perseverance of the
elect, then if any of the elect perish, it would mean Saints, we need only to prove these four propositions
that the death of Christ is insufficient even to pay for as given in the WCF. But let’s begin with some clear
the sins of these who perished. statements from the Scripture, which assert that none
who are in Christ will perish.
Perseverance of the Saints Clear Scriptural Affirmations
Proven Biblically Perhaps the most precious statement with regards to
The Westminster Confession of Faith, which was our perseverance as saints comes from the lips of
written some years after the Canons of Dort, not only our Lord Himself, the “author and finisher of our
provides the most succinct and eloquent definition faith” (Heb 12:2), for concerning the sheep for whom
of the doctrine of the Perseverance of the Saints; but He laid down His life (Jn 10:15), He says: “And I give
it also provides the most comprehensive argument unto them eternal life; and they shall never perish,
from Scripture for the doctrine: neither shall any man pluck them out of my hand”
This perseverance of the saints depends not upon (Jn 10:28). Three times in this one statement, does
their own free will, but upon the immutability of the Lord assure us that those who are in Him will
the degree of election, flowing from the free and never perish. First, he gives us eternal life, which is

Perseverance of the Saints • 33


not only a life of communion with God (Jn 17:3), not of us; for if they had been of us, they would no
but it is, as the word “eternal” (aijwnv io~, aiônios) doubt have continued with us: but they went out,
suggests, an everlasting life. Secondly, He assures us that they might be made manifest that they were not
that we shall never perish (ajpovllumi, apollumi) all of us” (1 Jn 2:19).
or be destroyed or to fall irrecoverably. But in case
someone thinks that if we cannot fall by ourselves, it God’
God’ss Immutable Love
does not mean that the enemies of God cannot de- and Decree
stroy us, the Lord assures us, thirdly, that no one will We have already previously seen how the Apostle Paul
be able to pluck (aJrpavzw, harpazô) or snatch us asserts in Romans 8:29–30 that those foreknown or
out of His hand. What an encouraging thought! He elected by God (cf. 2 Tim 2:19) will with certainty
who is the sovereign God is holding us in His strong attain unto glorification. This is because God’s de-
hands, how can we ever perish? cree to save the elect is unchangeable. If it were in
any sense changeable, the Apostle Paul could not
The Apostle Paul is essentially echoing this thought have spoken so definitively.
in his famous and sublime statement:
Who shall separate us from the love of Christ? shall The election of the saints by God is according to the
tribulation, or distress, or persecution, or famine, “good pleasure of his will,” and His predestination
or nakedness, or peril, or sword?… Nay, in all of the saints is founded upon His eternal love of the
these things we are more than conquerors through chosen in Christ (Eph 1:4–5). This is the same love
him that loved us. For I am persuaded, that nei- that Jehovah expressed to His saints of old through
ther death, nor life, nor angels, nor principalities, Jeremiah: “Yea, I have loved thee with an everlast-
nor powers, nor things present, nor things to come, ing love: therefore with lovingkindness have I drawn
Nor height, nor depth, nor any other creature, shall thee” (Jer 31:3). Notice how the Lord speaks of His
be able to separate us from the love of God, which love as being “everlasting.” This means that He will
is in Christ Jesus our Lord (Rom 8:35–39). never cease to love His elect. His love for them is un-
changing. When the elect of God sin against Him,
Notice how Paul’s statement speaks about our per-
they incur His Fatherly displeasure; this wrath is for
severance and not just our preservation, for he tells
them but for a moment (Ps 30:5). It never impinges
us that “we are more than conquerors through him
on the love of God for them. And since the final des-
that loved us.” In other words, Christ preserves us by
making us victors over all that may tempt us to fall tiny of man is entirely determined by the will of God,
away. we know for certain that those whom God loves will
never perish.
What about professing Christians who apostatise? Do
they not prove that the doctrine is wrong or that we Merit and Intercession
have misinterpreted both the Lord and the Apostle of Christ
Paul? Well, we must always interpret experience with We have already seen that Christ’s atonement for the
the Scripture and not the other way round. This is elect was not to make salvation possible for them but
particularly so in the case of the doctrine of the Per- to save them. The writer of Hebrews makes this point
severance of the Saints, for here we have the Apostle when he says: “… we are sanctified through the of-
John, writing under inspiration, asserting that any fering of the body of Jesus Christ once for all.… For
who apostatise have never been a Christian in the by one offering he hath perfected for ever them that
first place: “They went out from us, but they were are sanctified” (Heb 10:10, 14; cf. Heb 13:20–21;

34 • PCC, Oct–Nov, 2000


9:12–15; Rom 8:33–39). Notice the language of com- through the severed pieces of animals to indicate that
pletion and permanence in the phrase: “he hath His covenant with the seed of Abraham is unilateral,
perfected for ever.” This does certainly not leave room unconditional and everlasting (cf. Heb 6:13–20; Gal
for the possibility of a fall from grace, which if it oc- 3:16, 29; see PCC Bulletin, vol. 1, issue 9).
curs would not only mean that the atonement of
Elsewhere the same thought concerning the ever-
Christ is neither perfect nor sufficient, but would also
lasting nature of the covenant is repeated, e.g.: “And
imply that the Word of God is unreliable.
I will make an everlasting covenant with them, that
Christ, furthermore, did not just suffer and die for I will not turn away from them, to do them good;
the saints. He rose from the dead, is ascended to the but I will put my fear in their hearts, that they shall
right hand of the throne of God, is interceding, as He not depart from me” (Jer 32:40); “For the moun-
did before His death, for His saints whom the Father tains shall depart, and the hills be removed; but my
had given Him (Jn 17:11, 24). The writer of Hebrews kindness shall not depart from thee, neither shall
tells us that it is through this intercessory work of the covenant of my peace be removed, saith the LORD
Christ, that He preserves us to the very end: “Where- that hath mercy on thee” (Isa 54:10).
fore he is able also to save them to the uttermost that
come unto God by him, seeing he ever liveth to make This covenant, we must remember, is not made with
intercession for them” (Heb 7:25). We have an idea the Jews as a nation, but with the Jews as the cov-
of how the Lord intercedes for us in His words to Pe- enant people of God; and the covenant respects our
ter: “Simon, Simon, behold, Satan hath desired to eternal inheritance in Christ rather than the land of
have you, that he may sift you as wheat: But I have Palestine, which is but a shadow and type. And since
prayed for thee, that thy faith fail not…” (Lk 22:31– it is everlasting and unconditional, it follows that
32). The Lord is praying for us, that our faith fail none of those who are the elect or the children of the
not, and His prayers are always efficacious. promise (Rom 9:8) can either fail to be saved, or fall
away ultimately.
Abiding of the Spirit
We have seen the perseverance of the saints on the Conclusion
basis of the work of the Father and of the Son; it is
We have, I believe, proven beyond doubt that the
not surprising therefore to read that the Spirit is in-
doctrine of Perseverance of the Saints is sound theo-
volved in our perseverance too. The Lord indicates
logically and biblically. The Arminian vacillation on
this when He tells us that the Holy Spirit, the other
the doctrine is largely due to their errors respecting
Comforter, will abide with us for ever (Jn 14:16). Simi-
the election of God, the atonement of Christ and the
larly the Apostle John tells us that as the Spirit abides
efficacious call of the Spirit. Logically, from their
in us, we shall abide in Him (1 Jn 2:27; cf. 1 Jn 3:9).
theological propositions in these areas, they ought
Indeed, the Christian perseveres because the Spirit
to be very ready to reject perseverance altogether.
or the Seed of God remains in him to work effica-
However, it seems rather impossible to deny or re-
ciously in his heart (1 Jn 3:9), so that he cannot fall
interpret the scriptural assertions of preservation and
habitually, finally and totally into sin.
perseverance. Perhaps this is why the Arminians and
Nature of the Covenant the Remonstrants were not prepared to put their foot
of Grace down to say that it is definitely possible to fall from
The Covenant of Grace is most beautifully displayed grace. Nevertheless, later Arminians, such as the
in Genesis 15 where God, in a theophany, passed Wesleyans, insisted on the possibility.

Perseverance of the Saints • 35


Does the doctrine of Perseverance mean that the
Christian can live any way he chooses and yet perse-
vere all the way to glorification? Not at all, those who
understand this doctrine will know that anyone who
lives in disregard to the Word of God is simply not a
Christian in the first place. This is why the Apostle
Paul teaches us to work out our salvation with fear
and trembling (Phil 2:12), and the Apostle Peter re-
minds us to “give diligence to make our calling and
election sure” (2 Pet 1:10–11). But what a tremen-
dous assurance it is for all who, by God’s grace, walk
in the Way of Life, that we will be upheld and led by
our beloved Saviour all the way till we join the spirits
of just man made perfect in the Celestial City.

36 • PCC, Oct–Nov, 2000


Practical Implications of Calvinism
We have been looking at the Five Points of Calvin- of your mind, that ye may prove what is that
ism, or the biblical doctrine of salvation as taught by good, and acceptable, and perfect, will of God
John Calvin. This was crystallised in the Canons of (Rom 12:1–2; emphasis mine).
Dort in 1618, and then beautifully arranged by Eng-
In other words, the knowledge of theology ought to
lish theologians according to the acronym TULIP,
renew our minds for the purpose of transforming
the Dutch national flower. Today, these five points
are so identified with Calvin, that the term Calvin- our lives. If our lives are not transformed, then our
ism is often taken to be synonymous with the five knowledge would essentially be what may be known
points and a person will generally identify himself as “devil’s faith,” after the admonition of James:
as a Calvinist if he holds to the Five Points. This is “Thou believest that there is one God; thou doest well:
despite the fact that Calvin taught much more than the devils also believe, and tremble” (Jas 2:19).
can be summarised in five points (see, for example, Many of us, I believe, have on occasions come across
Leonard J. Coppes, Are Five Points Enough? Ten individuals who are able to defend Calvinism so logi-
Points of Calvinism [n.p., 1980]), and that many cally and eloquently that we cannot help but detect a
who hold to the Five Points of Calvinism would dif- tinge of pride in their tone as they cut down their
fer from Calvin in numerous areas, such as in wor- opponents. If indeed pride is involved, such individu-
ship, church government, sacraments, eschatology, als would be living a contradiction, for a proud Cal-
etc. vinist is a contradiction of terms. But more than that,
Naturally, as we are studying the Five Points, we shall often these same individuals are observed to mani-
have to restrict ourselves to the implications pertain- fest gross inconsistencies and compromises in their
ing to them. These implications are far-reaching, and lives. I am not sure if anyone who reads this article
it is important for all who embrace the Five Points to thinks that I am referring to him or her, but there is
consider them carefully. This is especially so since really no need to speculate. If you consider yourself
theology is never intended to simply enlarge our a Calvinist, and you feel indignation rising in your
minds or make us great debaters. The Apostle Paul, heart because you suspect that I may be pointing at
after writing 11 chapters of theology in the epistle to you, than you may know that I am speaking to you.
the Romans, most succinctly summarises the pur- But in any case, all of us need to be warned against
pose of knowing theology: the increase of knowledge without any concurrent
I beseech you therefore, brethren, by the mercies increase in piety.
of God, that ye present your bodies a living sacri-
fice, holy, acceptable unto God, which is your rea- With this in mind, let us consider how the knowl-
sonable service. And be not conformed to this edge of the Five Points of Calvinism ought to trans-
world: but be ye transformed by the renewing form our lives.

Practical Implications of Calvinism • 37


Humility, Humility, Humility son he does not break out into gross immorality and
The doctrine of Calvinism,—which exalts the holi- rebellion against God is because the hand of Christ
ness, glory and sovereignty of God, while debasing is upholding him. He is, as such, distrustful of him-
the ability, freedom and righteousness of man,— self. He constantly looks to Christ, the author and
ought, first of all, to humble us to the dust. It is not finisher of his faith, for guidance and help (Heb
surprising that the Christian virtue that Calvin him- 12:2); he has no difficulty esteeming others better
self and his theological progenitor Augustine found than himself (Phil 2:3); he is constantly aware of
to be most valuable and to be most fervently culti- his own depravity, and therefore poignantly and hon-
vated is that of humility: estly acknowledges the beam in his own eyes (Mt 7:3);
and he is forgiving because he knows how undeserv-
I have always been exceedingly delighted with the
ing he is of God’s forgiveness (Eph 4:32).
words of Chrysostom, “The foundation of our phi-
losophy is humility;” and still more with those of
Augustine, “As the orator, when asked, What is the Honest Scriptural
first precept in eloquence? answered, Delivery: Self-examination and
What is the second? Delivery: What the third? De- Assurance of Faith
livery: so, if you ask me in regard to the precepts Secondly, a proper understanding of Calvinism, far
of the Christian Religion, I will answer, first, sec- from making us fatalists, ought to drive out the com-
ond, and third, Humility.” By humility he means placency and presumption in our hearts with regards
not when a man, with a consciousness of some to our own spiritual state. It ought to encourage us
virtue, refrains from pride, but when he truly feels to take heed to the Apostle Paul’s admonition: “Ex-
that he has no refuge but in humility (ICR 2.2.11). amine yourselves, whether ye be in the faith; prove
The true Calvinist ought to be the humblest of men; your own selves. Know ye not your own selves, how
and as anyone who has been converted from Armini- that Jesus Christ is in you, except ye be reprobates?”
anism to Calvinism would testify, a proper under- (2 Cor 13:5).
standing of Calvinism is one of the most effective For example, when we consider the doctrines of To-
antidotes to pride. Calvinism kills pride because it tal Depravity and Irresistible Grace (Efficacious
shows us how deserving we are of eternal damna- Grace) together, we see that one who is not sover-
tion and how powerless we are to save ourselves. The eignly regenerated by Christ cannot possibly be a
man who truly understands Calvinism does not Christian, for he is dead in sin and cannot see the
charge God for unfairness that He has chosen to save kingdom of God (Eph 2:1; Jn 3:3). The Calvinist,
only a few (cf. Rom 9:14ff). He is amazed that God contemplating this fact, knows the possibility that
would even show mercy to any of us sinful creatures, he may be blinded to the fact that he is dead in sin
at the expense of the infinite suffering of Christ; and and so deluded about his faith. And so he seeks ear-
He is humbly overwhelmed by why God should spare nestly and honestly to examine himself according to
him and love him. In his astonishment, he does not Paul’s instruction.
ask: “Why dost Thou not save all?” Instead he asks:
Similarly, when we consider the doctrines of Uncon-
“What is man, that thou art mindful of him? and
ditional Election and Perseverance of the Saints to-
the son of man, that thou visitest him?” (Ps 8:4).
gether, we see that those who persevere in the faith
The Calvinist, furthermore, knows that although he may have the assurance that they are elect. Now, it
is regenerate and united with Christ, the only rea- may be asked: “How do I know that I am not fooling

38 • PCC, Oct–Nov, 2000


myself that I am elect by striving to enter the strait suffered and died to save His elect. He had to suffer
gate (Lk 13:24) and to walk in the narrow way (Mt and die to save us because we have incurred the wrath
7:14), and so, as it were, persevering by my own ef- of God on account of our sin. Sin is so hateful to God
fort?” Well, perseverance is not only about doing that God the Son had to be incarnate, and suffer and
things. It is about loving Christ, obeying Him out of die for it so that sinners may be reconciled to God.
love and reverence, not out of fear or mere duty. The There was a double imputation on the Cross of Cal-
Apostle John tells how we may know if we truly love: vary. It was an unfair exchange of infinite magni-
“For this is the love of God, that we keep his com- tude, for there on the Cross was the guilt of all the
mandments: and his commandments are not griev- sin of the elect of God, throughout the ages, heaped
ous” (1 Jn 5:3). If you can honestly say that it is not upon Christ; while, on the other hand, the righteous-
burdensome for you to keep the commandments of ness of Christ was imputed on all of them.
the Lord and that you are keeping them out of love The Calvinist understands this fact. His heart is there-
for Christ (Jn 14:15), then you can have the assur- fore filled with gratitude to the Lord. He knows that
ance that God has “begun a good work in you and from beginning to end, his salvation is of the Lord.
will perform it until the day of Jesus Christ” (Phil At the same time, He knows that Christ died on ac-
1:6). In which case, you need not fear that you are count of his sin, and that He had to die because sin
fooling yourself, nor need you worry that you will is hateful to the thrice holy, triune God—the Father,
fall, for the Apostle Peter says: “Wherefore the rather, the Son and the Holy Spirit. The Calvinist therefore
brethren, give diligence to make your calling and mourns for his own sin, knowing that the Spirit who
election sure: for if ye do these things, ye shall never indwells him hates sin. This leads us to our fourth
fall” (2 Pet 1:10). point.
Bear in mind that morbid doubt is often a manifes-
tation of distrust. We must indeed have a certain dis- Holiness: The Inexorable Goal
trust of our own honesty in self-examination, but of True Calvinism
we must not doubt God’s Word that we will not fall
The doctrine of Calvinism spurs us unto holiness.
finally and ultimately if we give diligence to make
Amazingly, we can see in Scripture a connection be-
our calling and election sure. Indeed, unlike the
tween every of the five points of Calvinism and a goal
Arminians, the Calvinist has the confidence that
of holiness in the saints.
whenever he falls, Christ will lift him up: “For a just
man falleth seven times, and riseth up again: but First, we must recall the account when the Lord com-
the wicked shall fall into mischief” (Prov 24:16). manded Peter to launch out and to lower the net for
a draught. Peter was amazed at how many fishes
Hatred for Sin and the net brought and he saw for the first time the glory
Gratitude to Christ and majesty of Christ. He knew that he was standing
before the thrice holy God and, feeling naked on ac-
The Calvinist, thirdly, must be one who understands count of his sin, he fell at the Lord’s knees, saying:
the sinfulness of sin and hates sin, especially his own “Depart from me; for I am a sinful man, O Lord”
sin; and is filled with gratitude to Christ for His vic- (Lk 5:8). To be sure, in this statement, Peter speaks
tory over sin. about his own utter depravity and says nothing about
This is particularly so as he contemplates the doc- his being motivated to holiness. But consider the fact
trine of the Limited Atonement of Christ, for Christ that there cannot be progress in sanctification ex-

Practical Implications of Calvinism • 39


cept that the saint knows how far short he is of the brews has admonished: “Follow peace with all men,
holiness of God, and we can be quite sure that this and holiness, without which no man shall see the
discovery of his own depravity would have spurred Lord” (Heb 12:14).
Peter in a quest for holiness. I am persuaded that it
is for this reason that Peter, among all the other Apos- Hope in Prayer
tles, was chosen to remind the New Testament church and Witnessing
of the call of God: “Be ye holy; for I am holy” (1 Pet
The final implication of Calvinism directly answers
1:16).
the charges of the Arminians that Calvinism destroys
Secondly, the doctrine of Election also finds its frui- hope in prayer and discourages evangelism.
tion in holiness. This is made clear by the Apostle
Paul when he says: “According as he hath chosen In the first place, the Calvinist understands that sal-
us in him before the foundation of the world, that vation is the work of the Lord from beginning to end.
we should be holy and without blame before him He knows that without the Lord’s help he cannot grow
in love” (Eph 1:4). The saints are elected to be holy in sanctification. He knows that all his attendance
and without blame. A Calvinist who is not pursuing to, and use of the means of grace, are of no value
holiness by the grace of God either does not under- unless the Holy Spirit makes them effectual unto him
stand the doctrine of Election or is living a contra- for salvation. Therefore, he is constantly crying out
diction. to the Lord for His help, and he knows that the Lord
will hear his prayer because he knows that his sanc-
Thirdly, the particular atonement of Christ on be- tification is the will of God (1 Thes 4:3), and he knows
half of the elect is also for the purpose of gathering a that God will answer any plea of His children that is
holy people unto Himself: “Who gave himself for us, in consonant with His will (1 Jn 5:14) and are of-
that he might redeem us from all iniquity, and pu- fered in the name of Christ. Similarly, the Calvinist
rify unto himself a peculiar people, zealous of good is also encouraged to pray for the unconverted. He
works” (Tit 2:14). How then can one who defends knows that he must only pray according to the will
Limited Atonement live in sin and without regards of God, and he knows that the Apostle John is refer-
to the holiness of God? ring to the revealed will of God and not the eternal
Fourthly, it is clear also that one of the effects of the counsel of God (Deut 29:29). He knows that although
efficacious call of the Gospel is holiness. Again Paul God does not reveal who is elect and who is not, it is
says: “For God hath not called us unto uncleanness, His revealed will that sinners repent of their sin and
but unto holiness” (1 Thes 4:7). A person who is truly believe in the Lord Jesus Christ. And so he is encour-
a Calvinist, not just in thought but in heart, will know aged to pray that God would do so for his uncon-
that if his life remains unchanged or is character- verted loved ones. He knows that God alone has the
ised by uncleanness, then he is in all probability yet prerogative to answer his prayer according to His
in the state of nature. good pleasure, but he is encouraged to pray because
he knows that if his loved ones were to be converted,
Finally, the doctrine of Perseverance of the Saints
it cannot be by their own efforts, but by the grace
must go hand-in-hand with sanctification. The Cal-
and power of God.
vinist knows that God does not preserve sinners in
the way of life. He knows that a professing believer In the second place, the Calvinist is encouraged to
whose life is not transformed will be in for a rude witness for the Lord, and the Calvinistic church is
shock at the day of judgement, for the writer of He- encouraged to continue in the work of evangelism

40 • PCC, Oct–Nov, 2000


through the preaching of the Gospel, because these liberalism (anti-supernaturalism) is not Christi-
are the means that God has appointed to gather His anity at all but a counterfeit that has fooled a sig-
elect. The Arminians may get discouraged when they nificant portion of the church in the modern pe-
see little result to their efforts at ‘sharing the Gospel.’ riod (Wrongly Dividing the Word of Truth, 2nd
The Calvinist knows that God alone can make effec- ed. [SDG, 2000], 113).
tual our feeble efforts and that, because He has His While we may charitably regard Arminianism as
elect for whom Christ died, these will definitely be being inconsistent Christianity, we must warn that it
soundly converted. So the Calvinist prays that God is a short step from Arminianism to Pelagianism.
may bless his and his church’s efforts and that they Already, the humanistic techniques of Charles G.
may be instruments in the Lord’s hands. In the same Finney, the arch-Pelagian, which are designed to
way, the Calvinistic church continues to preach the create conversion and revival, are widely employed
Gospel each week even though she sees little result in evangelical churches. Already, the prince of Armin-
because she knows that though preaching is her ian preachers, Billy Graham, has capitulated to Pe-
business (2 Tim 4:2), conversion is not her business. lagianism by suggesting that Christ may be found
She is not tempted to introduce worldly innovations in other systems of religions too. Already, a very great
to attract the crowds because she knows that false part of Lutheranism and Methodism, which were
conversions can easily result from these methods. largely Arminian, is today Unitarian. Arminianism
She, moreover, knows that the regenerate needs to is inconsistent because it is a compromise between
hear the Gospel too, for we are so prone to wander humanism and theism. Who would want such a
and prone to forget our need of Christ. compromise but one who refuses to accept the the-
ism of the Bible, which reveals a sovereign and holy
Conclusion God who will punish sin in His infinite wrath. It is
Calvinism is not cold and intellectual as many no wonder that, as what is unstable often settles,
suppose. It is about knowing the God of the Bible Arminianism often settles on the side of unbelief.
and living Coram Deo (before the face of God). Cal- Have there not been defections in the Calvinistic
vinism is simply a synonym for Biblicalism sys- camp too? No doubt there have been, but history has
tematised. Calvinism alone leads to true biblical shown that such defections often begin with the in-
Christianity. roads of Arminianism and Pelagianism. May the Lord
Dr. John Gerstner has succinctly summarised the protect us from such a downward slide.
situation in Christendom today when he says: Confident that Christ will continue to build His
There have been essentially only three theologies Church; and the gates of hell shall not prevail against
in the history of the church. One is usually called it (Mt 16:18), we will continue to preach and live
Augustinian, Calvinistic, or Reformed. The second according to the old paths as revealed in His word
is called Semi-Pelagian, Arminian, or (often) and delivered unto the saints, which path is also
evangelical. The third is called Pelagian, Socinian, known as Calvinism.
or liberal (modernist).
—J. J. Lim
Only the first two (Calvinistic and Arminian) can
qualify for the terms Christian or Biblical. Cal-
vinism is consistent Christianity and Arminianism
is inconsistent Christianity, while Pelagianism or

Practical Implications of Calvinism • 41


Bibliography
Arminius, Jacobus. The Works of James Arminius. Hoeksema, Homer. The Voice of Our Fathers: An
Translated by James Nichols. Grand Rapids: Exposition of the Canons of Dordrecht. Grand
Baker Books, reprinted 1996. Rapids: Reformed Free Publishing Association,
1980.
Boettner, Loraine. The Reformed Doctrine of Pre-
destination. New Jersey: P & R Publishing, Lim, Jyh Jang. Church Bulletin of Pilgrim Covenant
1932. Church, Singapore. Volume 1, Numbers 7, 9,
51.
Calvin, John. Calvin: Institutes of the Christian
Religion. 2 Volumes. Edited by John T. McNeill. Long, Gary. Definite Atonement. New York: Backus
Translated by Ford Lewis Battles. Philadelphia: Book Publishers, 1997.
The Westminster Press, 1960.
Owen, John. The Death of Death in the Death of
Cammenga, Ronald, & Ronald Hanko. Saved by Christ. Edinburgh: Banner of Truth Trust, re-
Grace: A Study of the Five Points of Calvin- printed 1959.
ism. Grand Rapids: Reformed Free Publishing
Association, 1995. Schaff, Philip. The Creeds of Christendom With a
History and Critical Notes. Volume 3. Grand
Coppes, Leonard J. Are Five Points Enough? Ten Rapids: Baker Books, reprinted 1995.
Points of Calvinism. n.p., 1980.
Scott, Thomas. The Articles of the Synod of Dort.
Dabney, Robert L. & Jonathan Dickson. The Five Virginia: Sprinkle Publications, 1993.
Points of Calvinsim. Virginia: Sprinkle Publi-
cations, 1992. Sproul, R.C. Willing to Believe: The Controversy
Over Free Will. Grand Rapids: Baker Books,
Engelsema, David J. Hyper-Calvinism & The Call 1997.
of the Gospel. Grand Rapids: Reformed Free
Publishing Association, 1994.

Gerstner, John H. Wrongly Dividing the Word of


Truth. 2nd edition. Morgan: Soli Deo Gloria
Publications, reprinted 2000.

42 • PCC, Oct–Nov, 2000


Index of Scripture,
Canons, ICR, WCF, WSC, Remonstrantia
Genesis 53:11 21
15 35 53:4, 6, 11 20
54:10 35
Deuteronomy
2:30 3 Jeremiah
29:29 40 13:23 12
3:3 3 17:9 12
Job 31:3 34
14:4 11 31:33 29
15:14 11 32:40 35
Psalms Ezekiel
105:5–6 3 11:19–20 29
11:5 22 36:26–27 29
130:3 12 Amos
143:2 12 3:6b 16
30:5 34
37:23 14 Matthew
51:5 11 10:30 16
58:3 11 12:35 10
62:11b 16 15:19 10
8:4 13, 38 16:18 41
18:11 21
Proverbs 22:14 25
16:33 16 23:37 26, 27
16:4 16 24:13 27
24:16 39 26:24 16
4:18 14 26:28 21
4:23 10 5:45 30
Isaiah 7:14 39
45:7 16 7:18 10
46:9–10 16 7:3 38

Index • 43
Mark Acts
10:45 21 11:18 29
Luke 13:48 29
13:24 39 13:48b 17
19:10 21 16:14 29
2:1 22 16:19 28
22:31–32 35 17:24 22
5:8 39 2:23 16
7:30 26, 27 2:39 24
21:30 28
John 4:28 16
1:12–13 28 7 26
1:29 22 7:51 26, 27
10:14–15 17, 21
10:15 33 Romans
10:26 17, 21 1:18 19
10:28 32, 33 11:5–6 17
10:9 30 12:1–2 37
11:51–52 23 3:10, 12 10
14:15 39 3:11 12
14:16 35 3:19 22
15:18 22 3:22 20
15:5 8, 10 3:9–10, 12 12
17:11, 24 35 5:10 12, 21
17:2, 9, 20 21 5:12 11
17:3 34 5:17 20
18:10 28 5:18 24
21:6, 11 28 5:6 10
3:16 5, 19, 22, 23 6:20 12
3:17 27 7:14–25 5
3:19 28 8:28 16
3:3 12, 18, 28, 38 8:29–30 15, 30, 34
3:36 5, 15 8:30 25
4:22 23 8:31b–32 21
4:42 22, 23 8:33 21
5:21 28 8:33–39 35
5:24–25 28 8:34–35 24
6:37 17, 29 8:35–39 34
6:44 28 8:7 10, 12
6:44–65 10 9 5
6:44a 12, 28 9:11–12 17
8:43–44a 25 9:13 22

44 • PCC, Oct–Nov, 2000


9:13, 16, 21 18 Colossians
9:14–15 18 2:13 10, 12, 29
9:14ff 38 2:14 20
9:22 14 2:9 22
9:8 35
1 Thessalonians
1 Corinthians 4:3 40
15:22 11, 24 4:7 40
2:14 10, 12 5:8 31
2 Corinthians
1 Timothy
13:5 38
1:15 21
2:16 27
5:14–15 24 2:1–2 23
5:17 29 2:4 23
6:1 26, 27 4:10 23
6:2 27 2 Timothy
Galatians 1:9 17
3:16, 29 35 2:19 34
6:15 29 2:25–26 29
2:26 12
Ephesians
4:2 41
1:3–6, 11 17
1:4 15, 17, 40 Titus
1:4–5 34 2:14 40
2:1 12, 38 3:3–5 10
2:1, 5 10
2:10 17 Hebrews
2:2–3 28 10:10, 14 34
2:2–5 10 12:1 14
2:4–5 29 12:14 40
2:8 12 12:15 26, 27
2:8–9 29 12:2 33, 38
4:18 12, 28 13:20–21 34
4:32 38 6:13–20 35
5:25 21 6:4 27
Philippians 7:14–15 21
1:29 29 7:25 35
1:6 39 9:12 22
2:12 31, 36 9:12–15 35
2:3 38 9:28 19, 20

Index • 45
James ICR
2:19 37 2.2.11 38
2:6 28 3.24.8 27
1 Peter WCF
1:16 40 10.1 25
1:23 33 10.3 11
2:24 20, 21 17.1 32
3:18 21 17.2 33
3.1–2 16
2 Peter
3.7 14
1:1–4 24
9.3 10, 12
1:10 39
9.4 10
1:10–11 36
2:1 24 WSC
3:9 23 18 11
91 31
1 John
2:19 34
Remonstrantia
2:2 5, 19, 22, 23
Article II 19
2:27 35
Article III 25
3:10 12
Article IV 25
3:9 33, 35
Fourth Article 26
4:14 22
5:14 40
5:3 39

Canons of Dort
Head 1
Article 7 14
Head 5
Article 7 33
Article 8 33
Articles 1, 2 32
Articles 1, 6 32
Articles 3, 4 32
Articles 3, 7 32
Rejection 1 32
Head III & IV 25
Heads 3 & 4
Article 11 26

46 • PCC, Oct–Nov, 2000


Pilgrim Covenant Church
141 Market Street, #05-00, International Factors Building, Singapore 048944. Tel/Fax: 2258815
Pastor: J.J. Lim. Mobile: 97910845. Email: limjj@pacific.net.sg
Elder: Michael Sing. Pager: 95396554. Email: msing@singnet.com.sg
Website: http://www.PilgrimCovenant.com

Вам также может понравиться