Calvinism Defended:

 

Of Decrees, Causes, and Temptation

 

By

 

John Orlando

 

This is the twelfth section of the e-mail exchange I had with Bill, an individual who objected to Calvinism.  Click here to go back to the table of contents, or here to go to the full 88 page exchange. 

    From My First E-mail:

4.  As I read your statement, I thought of some things that I think your statement implies.   It seems to me that (whether you meant to convey this or not, I don’t know, I’m just stating what I see as an implication of what you said) that your statement implies that since you believe that you have freewill (whatever that means), then according to what I believe about God’s absolute sovereignty, God would have decreed that you have that belief, which would mean, from my view, that God has decreed that you have a wrong belief about Him and freewill.

And so, we could ask, how could God decree that I, you, or anyone else, have a wrong belief about something?  Or, to put it in even stronger terms, how could God ordain that there be sin and evil?  Now, I certainly am not trying to put words in your mouth.  Again, I am just trying to state the things that came to my mind as read your comment.  Well, let’s assume for the moment that my understanding of “freewill” is incorrect.  If I say something that is not correct about God, or man, or any other topic for that matter, then what have I done?  I have sinned.  I have given false testimony concerning a certain matter (in this case, the nature of “freewill,” and by extension, the nature of God).  Now, the question is, did God ordain that to be the case?  Absolutely.  He has ordained all things that come to pass, even sin and evil, for His own purpose, and ultimately His own glory (Eph 1:11; Rom 9:22-23).  I deal further with this issue in an article I wrote that is posted on my website entitled “How Do You Reconcile Divine Sovereignty With Human Free Will?  So, God, as the first cause of all things, ensured that my belief would be incorrect.

 

Bill's Response:  Let the Apostle filled with the Holy Ghost speak and let everyone be silent: “Let no one say when he is tempted, ‘I am tempted by God’; for God cannot be tempted by evil, nor does He Himself tempt anyone.”

If you say God is the cause of everything, then when you are tempted, the cause of your temptation is God.  Well such teaching is against the divine revelation that says that even though you are tempted God does not cause your temptation.

Yes, I know that Calvinism is internally consistent, but is it consistent with divine revelation?  Now I want to hear it from you.  Did God cause your temptation to sin today and did He cause you to yield to that temptation?

My ResponseGod has ordained the arena where moral agents operate, determined their boundaries, and ensured through the most wise, holy, and unsearchable depths of His providence, that all that transpires in time would be only that which He does ordain.  To believe otherwise is to embrace atheism.  So, in that sense, God is the ultimate “cause” of everything, for in Him we live, and move, and have our being.  However, the fault does not lie in God, and God is not the one who is said to actually tempt anyone.  Please read the passage very carefully.  It says clearly that no one is tempted by God.  God is not the agent who is actually doing the tempting, some other agent (the devil, etc.) is.  However, those agents that are actually doing the tempting have no power to tempt, or to do anything, except by the providence of God.  Hence, as Luther maintained, the devil is just God’s lackey.  He is on leash, and can only go as far as the Lord has determined him to go, and wherever he goes, it is with a view to accomplishing the purposes of God.  This is seen throughout the Bible.  

Now, just from a human analogy, if I write a play where one character tempts another character, let us ask, who is it that is doing the tempting?  It is the character in the play who is doing the tempting, not me.  However, who is the ultimate cause of the events?  I am, because I have written the play.  Now, if you maintain, as I think you do, that God has exhaustive foreknowledge of all things, then how can you maintain something other than what I am maintaining here?  You see, any mention of God’s exhaustive foreknowledge means that all events, from the fall of man, to the redemptive work of Christ on the cross, to the final consummation, to my temptation, means that all of those things have been determined beforehand.  Before time even began God knew what would transpire, and the only reason any of it has transpired is because God has determined to have it all transpire in space-time history.  It is in that sense that God is the ultimate cause of everything.  Unless you want to maintain that God does not know the future, or that God could have not created the world in which He knew there would be all of the things we see.  The fact is, God did create the world we now see, with the full and exhaustive knowledge of everything that would come to pass.  And not only that, but, as I mentioned before, even one mention of prophecy moves God’s foreknowledge out of the realm of “simple,” in which God’s foreknowledge is completely passive, as if He were watching a video for the 5th time and, just as we know what happens in the movie by virtue of having watched it, God also knows what will happen.  God’s foreknowledge is never spoken of in that way.  The reason God foreknows the future is because He has determined the future.  He has determined the purpose of all things, and before any of it came to be, from God’s perspective, it was settled.   

Maybe some more poignant examples would be those people we see interacting with Jesus throughout His earthly ministry, such as the Pharisees and others who rejected Him, and His disciples.   

If the Pharisees and others rejecting Jesus was due to the fact that no one knows the Father except Son, and the one to whom the Son will to reveal Him (see Matt 11:25-27), then how can it be said that they had the ability, by the power of their “freewill” to, as you say, “reject God’s grace or yield to God’s grace.  And all of this for God’s glory!” when in fact the only thing that they were capable of doing was yielding to their temptation and rejecting God’s grace, and hence they were unable to yield to God’s grace?  As a matter of fact, in that passage (Matt 11:25-27), Jesus says that God has hidden these things (referring to salvation) from some, and has revealed them to others, and, this was actually good in His sight.  Here then we see that what glorifies God is not that we have the “freewill” to either reject or yield to God’s grace (because ultimately, the only thing that we can do by the power of our “freewill” is reject God’s grace), but that God has freely and sovereignly exercised His divine and sovereign rights and prerogatives as the Potter and is fashioning the clay as He sees fit (Rom 9:18-21), and has determined who it is that He is going to enable to “yield” to His grace. This is why we, as Calvinists, in accordance with the manifest testimony of Scripture, say that salvation is entirely of grace (undeserved favor), and that God receives all of the glory for it, because no flesh shall glory in His presence.    

To illustrate this even further, in John 10, Jesus is speaking to the Pharisees who have rejected Him, and He tells them first that He is the good shepherd who knows His sheep, and He is known by His own (John 10:14).  He then tells them in verse 15 that He lays down His life for His sheep (not the goats), and that it is Christ Himself who must bring His sheep to Himself (John 10:16) (but, why must Christ bring them if they have the power by their freewill to either reject or yield to God’s grace?).  After stating these things, the Pharisees begin to argue among themselves and finally they just ask Him if He is indeed the Christ (verses 19-24).  Jesus’ response is most telling.  He first tells them that despite His works which bear witness to the fact that Jesus was indeed the Christ, they nevertheless do not believe (verse 25).  Why don’t they believe?  Jesus says, “you do not believe, because you are not of My sheep…My sheep hear My voice…” (v. 26-27).  Here we see the classic law of cause and effect dramatically illustrated.  It’s not that a person believes (i.e., yield to God’s grace) in order to become a sheep.  He or she believes precisely because they already are one of Christ’s sheep.  The effect of believing is due to the cause of being a sheep, and a person is made a sheep by the sovereign election of God from the foundation of the world (Eph 1:4; John 6:37; John 17:2, etc., etc., etc.).  

Not only did the Pharisees and others reject Christ, and handed Him over to be crucified, but this all took place by the determined purpose and foreknowledge of God.  If this was all according to the determined purpose and foreknowledge of God, how can we then say that those who actually rejected Jesus (i.e., the Pharisees), betrayed Jesus (i.e., Judas), denied Jesus three times (i.e., Peter) had the autonomous freedom of will to do otherwise? The Scriptures declared the betrayal by Judas centuries before it happened.  So, could Judas have done otherwise?  Jesus told Peter that he would deny Christ three times before the cock crowed.  So, could Peter have done otherwise? Obviously, the answer to those questions is no, and if that is the case, how can we say that man’s will is “free” in the sense that most people seem to think?    

            If all of these things…all of these sins (which are the result of having been tempted), occurred according to the determined purpose and foreknowledge of God, then your argument isn’t with “Calvinism,” but with God and the Bible.  Your question is the same in essence as the question stated in Romans 9:19, “You will say to me then, why does He still find fault?  For who has resisted His will?”  It is only by understanding that there are first and secondary causes that we can have any hope of putting all of these difficult concepts together.

Home Page

Hosted by www.Geocities.ws

1