Response to "What Pelagianism And Calvinism Have In Common" by Derek Oullete

Response to “What Pelagianism and Calvinism Have In Common” By Derek Oullette


By D. Anthony Jones, April 26, 2012


This blog post was submitted to a Facebook group as a “must read” concerning Calvinism, the perseverance of the saints, and Assurance. I have taken the challenge to answer it from a biblical and logical position. It is not meant as a personal attack on Brother Derek. It is a critique of his soteriology, for the purpose of continued discussion. Derek’s post is in the plane font, my response to his points, are in grey italics. It is my Prayer that God may be honored by both of our efforts.

_______

What Calvinism and Pelagianism Have In Common By Derek Ouellette | April 22, 2012 | Arminianism, Calvinism, Reformed Theology

I want to put aside for a moment the question of the validity of Calvinism. There are many Calvinists I respect – none of which I would consider to be in the same camp as the neo-reformed. Mike Bird, Michael Patton, Denny Burk, to name a few. But rather than argue against the validity of Calvinism, I want to zero in on one tiny but enormous point Calvinists would rather seekers just not know.

Often when people convert from one intra-Christian tradition to another, it’s usually for reasons other than doctrinal validity as the book Journey’s of Faith reveals clearly enough. People convert for many reasons, not least because they have a sense of incompleteness. They feel that another tradition offers something that their current tradition lacks. Whether it be a worship style and attitude, freedom or liturgical structure, perhaps sacraments, people are always moving back and forth between traditions in search for a sense of something.

In the case of Calvinism, I believe the number one feature which draws people to it is the doctrine of the preservation of the saints.

The phrase "I Believe" tells of two things that we need to keep in mind: 1. He is stating a personal conviction 2. It is an opinion. Is there any actual statistical data that would support his claim? He supports this claim by giving three examples seen below


They want to feel eternally secure. Exhibit A: I have grown up with people personally who have become Calvinists because of the attractiveness of this very doctrine. I knew one man whose brother, a Pentecostal minister, was decidedly Pelagian when he taught. As a result my friend, who had difficulty managing those things he desired most – women, alcohol and popularity – wanted to find eternal security. Obviously his brothers Pelagian tendencies, and the insecurity that comes with it, lended itself to my friends decision to become a Calvinist. Of course there were other complex factors involved, but escaping a perceived Pentecostal Pelagian insecurity seemed to be a vital one.

It appears that this young man’s convert to Calvinism, was for the sole reason of dealing with the insecurities concerning the sin in his life. How genuine was this conversion? Did he share his brother’s theological persuasion? I ask this because the point of this conversation is that the conversion is from "one intra-Christian tradition to another." Did He share his brother’s convictions? If he did, did he completely renounce his Pelagian beliefs and embrace the doctrines of Grace as a whole, being that Calvinism is practically the polar opposite of Pelagianism? Did he take upon himself the convictions of total depravity and limited atonement? Did he acknowledge the truth of an election according to the will of God, and an effectual irresistible grace? Or was he a backslidden Christian who became a Calvinist because one of the five points helps him to deal with his insecurities. If the only reason he became a Calvinist was to feel secure in the guilt of his sin, He did not become a Calvinist. Calvinist as a norm embrace the doctrines of grace as a systematic whole concerning their soteriology. The fact is, one does not have to embrace Calvinism in order to believe in the Eternal security. Fundamental Baptists, as one example, believe in eternal security. They are VERY anti-Calvinistic, to the point of editing the Calvinism from Spurgeon and Edwards sermons posted in their literature.

Exhibit B: I am a member of an online Arminian group where a few months back William Birch, upon announcing his resignation from the group (and before his recent heart wrenching shenanigans) had stated that his views on the preservation of the saints had changed. He had hoped that holding to a doctrine of once saved always saved will help make his Arminian soteriology more palatable to his Baptist Calvinist brethren. The general response among the Arminian group was to cheer and applaud this move, acknowledging that less people would convert to Calvinsim if more Arminians embraced once saved always saved. Or, to put that backwards as the very idea suggests, many Baptists Calvinists are Calvinists primarily because of the doctrine of the preservation of the saints. People want to feel secure and Arminianism doesn’t offer that (supposedly).

1. It appears that this man William Burch did not embrace Calvinism as a whole, but sought to use the preservation of the saints to make his soteriology of Arminianism more palatable, to his "Baptist Calvinist" Brethren. He was not drawn to Calvinism as a whole, just to the one point. This is not an example of someone who is drawn to Calvinism because of the God’s Sovereignty in salvation. He was drawn to the preservation of the saints alone. Once again, you don't have to become a Calvinist to hold to the belief of Eternal security. I also find it sad that an entire group of Arminians would be willing to embrace his supposed change To the believers security, not because he is seeking the truth, or seeking deeper common ground with his Calvinistic Baptist brothers, but to keep people from converting to Calvinism. Applying one point of the doctrines of grace to prevent others from embracing the other four points and Calvinism as a whole is nothing more than compromise, shows a lack of conviction concerning the Arminian "truth" of conditional salvation..2. This quote “Many Baptists Calvinists are Calvinists primarily because of the doctrine of the preservation of the saints. “Once again comes without any statistical evidence. Most Baptists believe in a form of eternal security without ever converting to Calvinism. To say that a the reason a person is a Calvinistic or Particular Baptist is because of the desire to be eternally secure, is Thus far an unsubstantiated opinion and nothing more

Exhibit C: On the progressive scholarly front, Michael Bird embraces this view as a part of the package of his Calvinist soteriology. Scot McKnight rejects the Calvinist soteriology at preciously this point. Since Hebrews teaches that someone can abandon their faith, the Calvinist soteriology must be wrong. N.T. Wright chimes in, coming up the middle between these views since it seems he doesn’t embrace a Calvinist soteriology wholesale, but he also pushes back a bit on McKnight by saying of Hebrews, “that’s not the right question.” (But I think if it’s not the question Hebrews is asking, it is at the very least precisely the issue Hebrews takes up.)

He now goes on to show the theological positions of three scholars concerning the security of the believer. Nothing in the paragraph points to his belief that people convert to Calvinism on the basis of the preservation of the saints.

Sooo. He believes that the primary reason people come to Calvinism, is because they want to feel secure in their faith.... What evidence does he give for this? Nothing really. Exhibit A, a man who "Converts to Calvinism “for no other reason than to assuage the guilt of his sin, Exhibit B, a man who Compromises his Arminian convictions to make his Arminianism more attractive, never actually converting to Calvinism as a whole, and Exhibit C, offering nothing to show his stated belief as true. At best I'd give him 1 out of 3. And would highly question Exhibit A...

But no matter where you land on this issue, whether you believe in the perseverance of the saints or you believe that it is possible for an individual to abandon the faith to which they once clung, one thing is certain: the idea that God elects some to salvation and “passes over” most others is not the most difficult idea that Calvinism has to offer. No. The most difficult idea Calvinism has to offer is that there is no way in this life that you can know if you have been passed over or not. No way to know if you are one of the elect!

I feel like repeating that last three sentences. Read it again.

As a person who is, or has been, a part of many Facebook discussion rooms, I can tell you from personal experience that the most difficult and hotly debated topic is LIMITED ATONEMENT v. UNIVERSAL ATONEMENT followed by the issue of free will. Discussions on How a person knows he is elect are few and very far between...I have no exact numbers, but a simple examination of any Facebook Calvinist/Arminian group will show this true.

The most terrifying part of Calvinism’ soteriology (and it’s best kept secret) is that there is no way to know if you are one of the elect. None. Read on.

While documenting the rise of the so-called new Calvinism, Collin Hanson interviews many young Piper cubs who admit that the most difficult part to accept while journeying towards Calvinism was the idea that God elects to salvation some and passes over others. This is Exhibit D that many people who convert to Calvinism have not thought through it’s doctrine of the perseverance of the saints. Because surely I would think the most difficult part to accept while journeying to Calvinism wouldn’t be that God passes over others, but that God may have passed over you! And there’s no way to know.

You mention Collin Hanson’s documentation, but you do not reference where we can find this information...For reasons we need not discuss here, I refer to this as a "Rob Bell" maneuver. You should not give documented facts concerning an issue without providing reference to that documentation, so that it can be verified. Most people will take your word for it, much need to see for themselves...

Exhibit D, once again states an opinion? Evidence? The phrase "Because surely I would think" This phrase shows everything following it is, once again, an opinion...

Let me say this another way – and yes, I am hammering home this point until you get it! – Calvinism offers about as much security to the believer as full blown Pelagianism!

Let's see if we can find some actual EVIDENCE that this statement is sound... he come up short thus far...

Let me explain how by making three points about Calvinism:

1. Calvinism fits squarely within the holiness tradition (as does Pelagianism and Semi-Pelagianism). That some people run around claiming to teach that someone can make a sincere confession of faith and then live their life nilly-willy any way they wish and still get to heaven is patently not Calvinism. Whatever it is – and yes, I have people like Charles Stanley in mind – it is not Calvinism.

This is a telling statement, and brings to mind a question. Since you give no indication that your friend in "Exhibit A" repented of his womanizing and drinking, can we assume that his conversion to Calvinism is at best, questionable?

In the book Why I Am Not An Arminian the co-authors – both Calvinists – Robert Peterson and Michael Williams write:

“Easy believism, the view that persons are to be regarded as Christians who have made professions of faith but whose lives are unchanged, is incompatible with biblical teaching. On this point Arminians and Calvinists agree.” (p.81, emphasis mine)

2. Calvinism teaches that if God has elected someone for salvation, that person will be saved by the grace of God. There is no chance that they will not be saved. No one can snatch them from the Fathers’ hand (John 10:28).

Hmmmm. This is not quote from any of John Calvin’s writings, it is a quote From Jesus Christ himself. The entire context of John Chapter 10 states that Jesus gives his life for a specific group of people, his sheep. Through His sacrifice they are given ETERNAL life and secured by the power of the Father, as well as Christ himself.

3. If someone who was among God’s people walks away, this is clear evidence that this person was never really saved in the first place (1 John 2:19). Peterson and Williams write again:

“If they don’t believe to the end, they have not come to share in Christ. This indicates not a loss of salvation but a demonstration that the professed Christians had not really been united to Christ in the first place.” (p.80, emphasis mine)

So far this is pretty standard stuff. Calvinism does not shy away from teaching that if someone “falls away” it is clear proof that they were never saved in the first place. But there’s a catch. An emphasis that is never brought up either by Calvinists, Arminians or otherwise.

Let’s look at the verse in First John:

“They went out from among us, but THEY WERE NOT OF US; for if they had been of us, they would have CONTINUED WITH US. But they went out, that it might be made apparent that they were NOT all of us”

This did not come from some Calvinist textbook, it is BIBLE doctrine. This verse, within the context of the appearance of many Antichrists, tells clearly why an Apostate does not continue in the faith. They do not continue. Why? They were not of the “Little Children.”

Its easy to judge a person who walks away as being someone who was never saved after the fact. But what about before they walk away?

The person comes to church week after week, singing with all sincerity of heart. Perhaps preaching or teaching your children in Sunday School. Perhaps they lead your Churches mission and evangelistic programs. Or maybe they were your worship leader. And how did they get to those positions unless others around them also saw “fruit” of their salvation. Are we to say that through all of those years they were just pretending? Perhaps for some small portion of them that is true, but it is beyond reason to suggest that every person who has shown clear fruit of a life devoted to Christ was just faking all along. No. Rather these people – at the time – where as sincere a follower of Jesus are you are today. But for whatever reason – perhaps church abuse, tragedy in their lives or any number of other reasons – they were never saved in the first place.

The above is an appeal to emotions, with no scriptural basis. Matthew Chapter 7:21-22 make it clear that many will stand before judgment proclaiming the wonderful works they have done, only to be condemned. They can be as fruitful and sincere as any True Christian, even up to their death, but if Christ does not know them, and remember John 10, Jesus knows his sheep, they were never saved…Calvinism’ teaching is clear enough. If they do not hold firm to the end, it is proof that they were never saved in the first place. Once again, he takes the clear didactic statement in scripture, and attributes it to “Calvinist Teachings”

But then what were they, if not genuine Christians?

1 John 2: 19. Those who leave the faith are not Christians, and Antichrist.

2 Peter 2 ends the chapter by saying those who deny the Master (reference to God the Father) are dogs who return to their own vomit and sows that return to their pigsty. They are Apostates.

Or perhaps, the more pressing question is, if they were as sure in their salvation then as you are now, how can you be certain that you are really saved?-

That is a big “If.” If they were so sure of their salvation, why did they fall away? No one who is an apostate will just toss their bible in the trash and say “I am out of here.” There are periods of doubt, perhaps some abiding sin, or some tribulation that causes them to doubt their faith. It comes to the point that the desire to be a Christian no longer exists, and they apostatize. And there is scriptural basis for this. You will find it in the Gospel of Luke. Luke 8:5-6 A sower went out to sow his seed: and as he sowed, some fell by the way side; and it was trodden down, and the fowls of the air devoured it. And some fell upon a rock; and as soon as it was sprung up, it withered away, because it lacked moisture. Luke 8:13 They on the rock are they, which, when they hear, receive the word with joy; and these have no root, which for a while believe, and in time of temptation fall away. Notice the interpretation of the parable. They received the Word with joy, and believed, but when a time of testing came, they fell away. Why did they fall away? The seed had no depth because the ground was not good. Continued examination of the parable will show that the ground of the parable is a metaphor for the heart of man. They fell away because they did not have a change of heart which comes from regeneration of the Holy Spirit. In other words, this person is not a Christian.

Ezekiel 36:26-27, A new heart also will I give you, and a new spirit will I put within you: and I will take away the stony heart out of your flesh, and I will give you an heart of flesh. And I will put my spirit within you, and cause you to walk in my statutes, and ye shall keep my judgments, and do them.

Once again, a person who falls away was never saved to begin with.

How does Calvinism answer this question? Have you read any books by Calvinists where the doctrine of the preservation of the saints is dug into deep enough to acknowledge this dilemma and offer some type of answer?

The certainty of any Christian’s salvation comes from the truth of God’s word. The New Testament is full of passages that speak of the Assurance of Salvation. And the basis of that assurance is the believer’s security. If God does not keep his people secure, which the bible is clear that He does, THEN you can never KNOW if you have salvation. Conditional salvation can never offer assurance, because your salvation will require you to maintain a standard of righteousness with no guarantee that you are righteous enough. “Enduring to the end,” Which should be considered a RESULT of salvation, becomes a condition for salvation, and assurance, if there is any, is based on WORKS. The bible is clear that salvation is not of works; therefore conditional security is a false gospel. It is not the Calvinist who has to worry about assurance….

Because the unspeakable answer seems clear enough. It’s terrifying really. The Calvinist John Frame, in his book against Open Theism titled No Other God, does reveal Calvinism’s answer to this question, albeit in a footnote:

“There are also cases where God chooses someone for a task and for a limited kind of fellowship with him, without the intention of giving him the full benefits of salvation.” (p.117, n.9, emphasis mine)

Read that answer again.

How do you know that does not describe you? How do you know that you have been given the “full benefits of salvation” and not just a “limited kind of fellowship with him”?

First of all I would have to see some biblical evidence that God will “Fellowship” with someone who is not redeemed. Our fellowship is based on the reconciliation we receive as a result of Christ’s Atonement. That is not to say that God does not used unsaved people as a means to accomplishing his will, but to say that God has fellowship, without giving the full benefits of salvation, is at best highly questionable. And this brings us to a problem. Because we cannot establish this as biblical truth, with what little was referenced, the question boils down to one of assurance. How do you know that you’ve been given Full benefits of assurance? The Promises of the Holy Word of God.

How?

For those who convert to Calvinism because in it they think will have obtained a teaching of eternal security that offers them assurance in their faith, answer that question:

How can you know?

You can’t.

Really?

John 20:30-31, And many other signs truly did Jesus in the presence of his disciples, which are not written in this book: But these are written, that ye might believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God; and that believing ye might have life through his name.

1 John 5:11- 13, And the witness is this, that God gave unto us eternal life, and this life is in his Son. He that hath the Son hath the life; he that hath not the Son of God hath not the life. These things have I written unto you, that ye may KNOW that ye have eternal life, even unto you that believe on the name of the Son of God.

Ephesians 1:13-14, In him you also, when you heard the word of truth, the gospel of your salvation, and believed in him, were sealed with the promised Holy Spirit, who is the GUARANTEE of our inheritance until we acquire possession of it, to the praise of his glory.

You can know you are saved, because you have God’s guarantee.

In Calvinism you may have been chosen for a limited fellowship with God, a specific task of – say – a missionary or pastor or evangelist, and not for the “full benefits of salvation”.

Even if the quote from John Frame were biblical, A person who has "Temporary Fellowship" without the full benefits of salvation is NOT SAVED. You would not be a Christian who loses his salvation, you would be a man who never received the full benefits of salvation, and you would be unsaved.

And for Arminians who think that we need to adopt a doctrine of eternal security to make Arminianism more palatable, I suggest you think again.

In Closing, He failed to show any statistical evidence that people become Calvinists to be eternally secure. He brushed off Clear didactic bible passages as “Calvinist teaching”, while making an appeal to emotions as proof a Christian could walk away from the faith. Also, he failed to recognize the characteristics of an apostate, according to God’s word, and used an obscure quote, which is biblically questionable to try to rob the Calvinist of his assurance. He does all this with amazingly little use of Scripture. I can not see at all, based on his post that Pelagianism and Calvinism have any agreement.

Where It All Began

Some time ago , as I was finding a map location for my roommate, who is a school bus driver, I decided to Google my home city of San Antonio Texas. Every once in awhile I like to run along the virtual streets of my hometown, via Google World, and look at how much has changed. Sometimes I will go to websites of people who have played the tourist, and look At photos of places I have not seen in years. This often carries into the late hours... I miss my home.

This one particular time, as I was locating the Grace Community Church, which is on Commerce Street, and I decided to move the map to a location I thought was long gone. The place where God chose For me to hear the call of the Gospel. To my surprise, it was still there...

A Burger King... I was introduced to the King of Kings at a Burger King... Not only was it still there, they added a indoor playground...Cool...

My memory is somewhat fuzzy, but I recall sitting in the station foreman's office at the City Transit motor pool, located next to the restaurant. I had my bible, and a spread of magazines which included a "Plain Truth" and a "Decision" There was a spiritual need which I had tried to fill in the best way I knew how, with a mix of anything that appeared to be "christian" regardless of it's origin. I studied everything from Watchtower, to Worldwide Church of God, to Radio Bible Class, and Billy Graham literature.

It was in this state of confusion that Our Great God saw fit to send His evangelist, a dear brother of the Faith, Jimmy Alexander. He was a fellow Driver who went through the same training

classes as me. I can recall how during the down time of our training he was reading a small New Testament. Little did I know that he would see my struggling, and be led of God to show me the

Glorious light of the Gospel .

As I sat at the table, magazine's laid out, he stopped by, and made a statement that I can not quite remember verbatim, but I do recall him referring to my reading material as "garbage,"

and his desire to show me the "truth."

To make a already too long story short, over a couple of breakfast biscuits and some orange juice, Jimmy, using a napkin, drew images to show that God was Holy and I was a sinner separated from God. The great separation between me and God could only be bridged by Jesus Christ. He quoted verses

from Romans and 1st John. He drew a cross on the napkin that bridged the gap between God and I.

I came to Jesus Christ that day, and yes, I prayed a prayer asking Jesus Christ to save me. (Get over it Reformed brethern!) I have been a Child Of God ever since.

The one thing I remember clearly is the First verses Jimmy gave me once I was saved by God's Grace.

"And this is the record, That God hath given to us eternal life, and this life is in his Son. He that hath the Son hath life; and he that hath not the Son of God hath not life. These things I have written unto you that believe on the name of the Son of God; that ye may know ye have eternal life, and that ye may believe on the name of the Son of God."- 1 John 5: 11-13

He followed with this... "No one can take this from you."

I look back on this often and Praise God for his wonderful Grace and Mercy.

Limited Atonement from the Teaching of The Good Shepherd

John 10: 11-15 cross/ref John 10:26= LIMITED ATONEMENT
Simple, to the point, and irrefutable... and in light of the fact that these are the very words of Christ himself, an Arminian would be wise to seek for a proper interpretation of the verses that he has to Ginsu to fit his poor theology...

John 10:11 "I am the good shepherd: the good shepherd giveth his life for the sheep."

John 10:15 "As the Father knoweth me, even so know I the Father: and I lay down my life for the sheep."

John 10:26 "But ye believe not, because ye are not of my sheep, as I said unto you."

The Folly of Free Will in Salvation

Ever have a problem, when discussing God's Sovereign Grace, of people quoting Bible verses that show the action of "Believing or Seeking," to support their Belief in Free will? Or perhaps they point to a Bible character who excercises faith, and exclaim that he came to Christ of his own volition. Any Good "Calvinist" has run into this, and The "Free Willie" has usually deluded himself into thinking the case is closed..

However, far from being correct the Arminian (FREE WILLIE) has to deal with one problem...

None of the verses they quote show a free will decision... they are simply imposing free will on the text . That is why you have biblical contradictions such as:


Jeremiah 29:13-And ye shall seek me, and find me, when ye shall search for me with all your heart. (A favorite Free will verse)

and

Rom 3:11 There is none that understandeth, there is NONE THAT SEEKETH after God.


NOW IF HERE IS NONE THAT SEEKETH GOD, how can a man make a free will decision to seek and find God..


>=== HE CAN NOT ==<

But due to spiritual blindness, or lack of biblical understanding, or downright rebellion against the sovereignty of God...Arminians are willing to forgo the obvious contradictions, and impose free will on every text that says "seek" or "believe." There is no text that CLEARLY supports free will decisions... only the Theological presupposition of those who can't see the truth. Verse after verse has been shown concerning the total inability to come to Christ. yet THEY show not one verse that clearly states man can make a free will decision. NONE. The Bible is clear : ANYONE AND EVERYONE who exercises saving faith in the bible, WHETHER SEEKING OR FINDING OR BELIEVING does so because they are are chosen by God, and regenerated by the Holy Spirit. They WILL come to Christ, and He WILL save and Preserve them.. and They will, when glorified, Conform to the image to Jesus Christ, as predestined before the foundation of the world

Isaiah 64:7 "There is no one who calls upon your name, who rouses himself to take hold of you, for you have hidden your face from us and have made us melt in the hand of our iniquities

Does God Love Everyone?

Dr. Robert Morey ! What more can a man say!

Curse Motif of the Atonement

This is a beautiful and Powerful message by one of my favorite Theologians, Dr. R.C. Sproul.

God's Sovereignty A Stumbling Block? - a response

I was having a Facebook conversation with a Brother in Christ who does not share the Reformed position concerning the Doctrines of Grace. It was a standard back and forth , point-counterpoint discussion that I have encountered may times among my Facebook friends. As we Merrily continued to generate much smoke and no fire, as frequently happens in these discussions, he made a telling statement that I felt should be responded to. He basically informed me that to proclaim God's sovereign grace in Salvation, posed a stumbling bock to man's receiving Christ.

Can you imagine that.... To Preach God's Sovereignty in man's salvation, to totally disregard man's self will in the Salvation Process... is a Stumbling block to those who would come to our savior...

Yet, Were it not for God's sovereignty... NO ONE WOULD COME

You see dear Friend, Every man who has ever, or will ever existed has a major Stumbling Block that prevents him from coming to Christ, but it is NOT the sovereignty of God...

It is the depravity of man... His Total Depravity. That Complete sin corruption that by nature effects every aspect of his existence, and renders him Spiritually DEAD... A corruption that is his very nature, as it has been inherited from our original parents at the fall..

Depravity, and the total inability that stems from it. THAT is the stumbling block. That is what SEPARATES man from God...

Rom 3:10-12 As it is written, There is none righteous, no, not one: There is none that understandeth, there is none that seeketh after God. They are all gone out of the way, they are together become unprofitable; there is none that doeth good, no, not one.

We often become guilty of just casually glancing over a verse without experiencing the impact of what it is saying. Look at this verse...

1. There is none righteous... That us a Universal negative... None... righteous... NONE

How can a man make a "free will" decision to do the righteous act of coming to God, when he is NOT righteous? Isaiah 64:6 says we are Unclean, and that our righteousness is as a garment stained with menstrual blood... Filthy rags... that is how God sees the righteous acts of man.

2. There is none that understandeth

In his natural state man can not understand God. Spiritual things are beyond his grasp. 1 Corinthians 2:14 says man does NOT ACCEPT the things of the Spirit of God, for they are FOOLISHNESS to him neither can he KNOW them....

How can a make make a free will decision when he is ignorant of spiritual things? He By His Very nature, is without understanding... He can not understand God to make a spiritual decision...

3.There is none that seeketh after God.

Here is a telling statement...Natural man does not seek after God.. Ephesians 2:2-3 says that man walks according to The course of the world, and the devil, fulfilling the desires of the flesh and mind. John 3: 19-20 Says man loves the darkness more than light, he hates the light and he will not come to the light...

4. There is None that doeth good.

What is meant by this statement? Men do Good things. Charitable acts, Heroic Feats, Sacrificial deeds... men do good things... but... Those goods do NOT justify us before God.Let us look back at Isaiah 64:6. ALL our righteous acts are as Filthy rags. If our only justification before God is our good works, then we have a problem... our works are not good enough...Even when they are done in Jesus name. In Matthew 7:21-23, we see people who seek justification by their righteous works, and Jesus tells them to depart and calls them workers of iniquity...Why, because man in his natural unregenerate state, can do nothing to please God. There is none that doeth good.

"There is none who calls upon your name, who rouses himself to take hold of you for you have hidden your face from us, and have made us melt in the hand of our iniquities"- Isaiah 64:7

So if a man is not righteous, does not understand or seek after God, and he can do no good, who if not himself is the stumbling Block to his salvation?

Guess whose back!

After a vary long space of laziness, I have decided to reopen the blog. There are the same ol' posts with a new more, how can we say professional look...and The Approved resources are linked as before.
Looking to add more as stuff pops into my ever thickening skull.. the net is ripe with music for the worship music battle of the bands, and I will also be posting Bible lessons and, as always, my humble opinion on various issues...
Let's Get this party started! It's good to be back.

The Most Abused Verses in the Bible-- James 2:13, and Romans 4, Pt.1

"But to him that worketh not, but believeth on him that justifieth the ungodly, his faith is counted for righteousness."- Romans 4:5

"Even so faith, if it hath not works, is dead, being alone."- James 2:17

If you have ever had any dealings with people who do not hold to the eternal security of the believer, or dealt with a pseudo-christian sect such as a Jehovah's Witness or a Latter-day Saint, you have more than likely ran into these verses. Cults such as those previously stated use them to prove you must work in addition to the belief of the gospel, Protestant denominations and many prominent theologians use these verses to support their doctrine of Lordship Salvation, in that, A saving faith will/must be accompanied by good works. (A subject will deal with in another post.) Atheists and skeptics attack The Bible by showing how these verses are a contradiction. Even Martin Luther struggled with the canonicity of James, calling it an "Epistle of Straw," and declaring his desire to "Toss Jimmy into the Stove". The above verse in James was probably the most irritating to him in light if the writings of Paul.
Yet, James is very much a part of the canon of Scripture, and a proper interpretation is needed to deny false teachers and atheists a proof text . When properly studied we will see that These verses deal with entirely different aspects of justification, and when the compared , the contradiction disappears, and  the verses are actually very much compatible with each other

I. The Book of James

James is one of the eight catholic, or if you prefer, universal epistles, addressed to the "twelve tribes scattered abroad." It is not so much a epistle that is evangelistic, but rather an exhortation on living a godly life in the site of men and The Lord. In this letter the name of Jesus Christ only occurs twice, and the gospel and it's particulars are not mentioned at all. The references to the law are frequent, yet as you will see it is not the sacrificial law that is seen in the letter, but the moral law, A law that both Jew, and Gentile Christians are still accountable to. Written to the dispersed Jewish Christians, it shows Christianity not as some new religious concept, but a moral perfection, and completion of the of the Jewish faith.
Now keeping in mind that the letter as a whole is not evangelistic, we can more easily deal with the fact that the words "save", "faith" and "justified" are in the text.

II. Chapter 2- Justification

After dealing with the sin of partiality, in the first half of the second chapter, James moves on to the issue of faith and works. A Casual look at the text would show that the above claims have some truth, James does teach justification by works... But is the justification before God, or someone else? If this passage has to do with justification before God, then by all means. the passage contradicts the writings of Paul, but if it is justification before man, then the words "Justified," and "saved" have meanings other than our status before God...

III. Romans 4-Justification

In Romans chapter 3. Paul goes to great lengths to show that Man , both Jew and Gentile are totally depraved and unable to come to God, (Romans 3:10) and that men are justified freely by God's grace, through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus, (Romans 3:24) apart from the deeds of the law. (Romans3:28) In Romans 4, Paul adds support to his teaching by appealing to Characters in the Old Testament. one of those Characters, Abraham is also mentioned later in the second chapter of James. With these things in mind lets move to the passages in question.


IV. The Questions

Now if you notice, both of our passages of study, open with a question. In Romans 4, the question is "What has our descendant Abraham found?" Speaking of his standing before God, Paul then makes a clear statement of justification... It is not by works. Any ground that Abraham may have for boasting will not be before God. In Ephesians 2:8-9, says that God's Grace, His Salvation, and even your ability to respond in faith, are gifts of God, not of works lest any man should boast. Abraham had no basis to boast before God.

James on the other hand, opens up with two questions. The first is "What does it profit if a man say he hath faith and hath not works?" Notice the phrase, "if a man say." form the very start it appears that James is referring to a man's profession of faith. He then poses a second question. Can faith save him? Notice James mentions nothing about justification before God... he is basically saying "What good is your profession of faith, if there is no evidence?"


V. The Appeals

Notice that as each passage opens with a question, they also follow the questions with an appeal.
In Romans 4, Paul immediately appeals to Scripture, in the character of Abraham, who had righteousness imputed to him on the basis of his faith.
James, on the other hand does not refer directly to scripture, but offers a scenario of a man who has the means to help someone needy, and doesn't. The question, "What does it profit?" refers to his previous statement in verse 14.   His appeal is to the Emotions of the people who he is writing to, in order to elicit a response to his next statement.


Now we come to the direct statements of each apostle. Paul makes it clear that those who work do not receive payment as a gift, but it is a wage. We do not receive the salvation of God because we earn it. All of our righteousness is as filthy rags. (Isaiah 64: 6) What we receive from God is a gift. Romans 6:23 states that the gift of God is eternal life through Jesus Christ our Lord. it is not something we work for, and we do not work to keep it either.
James on the other hand, appealing to the intellect of the people he writes to, says that if your faith does not show evidence, it is dead. like a corpse, it does nothing. it shows no proof of life. the Greek word for dead (Nekros) literally means lifeless.
As stated earlier, this is where grievous error and contradiction abound, both inside and outside the faith. These two verses are the heart of what seems to be a glaring contradiction, yet
as we examine both passages further, we will find that, not only is there no contradiction, but the verses fit as too pieces of puzzle, forming a full picture of real Faith actually is...

Secondary Appeals

In the above verses, notice once again that Paul appeals to scripture, from the writings of David. Quoting from the Psalms, (32:1) Paul states that even in the lives of the forefathers, prior to Christ, The man after God's own heart, was not justified by his works, but by Faith.  Notice the words of David. Iniquities covered, sins forgiven, and the last statement;

Blessed is the man to whom the Lord will not impute sin

The word impute. it means to account for... or to place into an account. the idea behind this statement, is that God does not count your sins against you.  This is in contrast to the unredeemed who "Treasure up God's wrath," having EVERY sin stored up against them.
(Romans 2:4-5) Herein lies your justification before God, in that your sins are not placed to your account. and that is in addition to them being covered. God forgives you because he chooses not to see your sins, and not to count them against you... He literally declares you righteous. not on the basis of your works, but on the imputed righteousness of His Son, which is also a gift.

(Romans 5:17) 

Get this now. the sins a Christian commits are not counted against them, but the righteousness of the Perfect Lord Jesus Christ is counted to them!!   All as a work of Grace, none of it requiring any work on your part...

James on the other hand, once again appeals to emotion without making a direct reference to Scripture. This is done in what appears to be a form of a challenge...YOU show ME YOUR faith,
without YOUR works, and I will show THEE, MY faith by MY works.. Notice something?
Where is God mentioned in this passage? James addresses the person with a challenge to SHOW HIS FAITH, without works... and it can't be done.

James is seeking visible evidence of a man's claim to be in the faith. He then goes on to imply that if all a man has is belief in God, he is no better off, as far as his testimony is concerned, than the demons, who also believe, and show evidence for their belief in fear. (v.19) 
From the passage we see that James is not saying man is justified before GOD by his works, but that works are evidence of a man's testimony of faith before his fellow man.. In other words, don't proclaim you are a Christian to others, unless you are doing the works to back it up.
 
One example that I recall clearly is from a preacher at a revival meeting, who said:
If you are at a restaurant, and want to leave a gospel tract for the waitress, NEVER stiff them on the tip."

God knows the heart of man, and knows who his children are. (John 10: 27, 2 Timothy 2:19) Man, who can not see what is in the heart of an individual, only sees evidence of faith, by the works of a Christian. (Matthew 7: 17) How he speaks, in particular, because his conversation is evidence of the condition of his heart. (Matthew 12:34)

Justification before God is by faith, apart from works, and justification before man, is by works in addition to faith. Paul and James were writing of two distinct things. This will be further evidenced as we examine both of the apostles view of Abraham, in the next post.

Part 2 coming soon...