Coming to Faith - a polemic
A reply to Mr. Phillip Way who
accused me of denying the Gospel. Though this was written in a
polemic spirit, it certainly addresses the foundation of Reformed
theology as it pertains to "Coming to Faith." Though it address
the concern of "denying the Gospel", it is neutral in its point to set
forth Reformed Teaching on how one comes to faith, and what God
accomplishes in that work. Regardless of the circumstances
surrounding how this came about, it is still a basic and useful work on
Reformed Theology.
Preface to the
article:
On
February 8th, 2006 at 10:54pm, this writer posted on A
Puritan’s Mind a newly composed article called
“The “god” of Arminianism is Not Worshippable”.
It was not an article unlike those written before, or an
article espousing some new doctrine. It was not written in a spirit or
desire that was different from the historic Christian church, especially
that blessed and most godly council referred to as the
Synod of Dordt, or even in the grave and heavy spirit that one
would find in reading Dr. John Owen’s
“A Display of Arminianism.”
In comparison to such historical benchmarks, this article was tame,
weak, and inconsequential. This writer simply prays it would be
used for the glory of God.
In
brief, this new article asserted that historic Arminianism is
heretical, following other historical Christian documents and writers
with no surprises, and then gave a warning to the reader that the paths
and degrees of erroneous teaching in the modern church may inevitably
lead one into the heresy of historic Arminianism, and many times already
have. It warned the reader that there are degrees of error tending
toward this heresy, and one should guard themselves against this error
in order to not fall headlong into the heresy of historic Arminianism.
(One can click the link above and read the article if there is any
question or doubt to this as the content of the article.) This article
caused a great deal of controversy on the
Puritanboard (an online bulletin board for Reformed and
reforming believers to talk about Jesus Christ, theological doctrine, and
historical doctrine). To this writer’s surprise and dismay, the
thread became one of the most heated and lengthy threads since the
board’s inception. One would have hoped that Reformed Christians would have (as
Dr. John Owen pressed) picked up their pens against the heresy of
Arminianism, instead of defending it, or those who believe it.
How
did this article come to be written? What was its catalyst?
As a
result of posting this article, and the debate that rose up on the Puritanboard, on
February 11, 2006 at 7:11pm, one of the board’s former members (and a
former moderator) Mr. Phillip Way, pastor of
Maranatha Community Church in Round Rock, Texas, posted a subsequent
thread called “A
Critical Examination of Statements Published by C. Matthew McMahon”.
He also posted it at his
blog, though he subsequently removed it from there after a short
time. Critical examinations, as far as “articles” go in Christian
circles, usually take up being careful, thoughtful, scholarly, and
edifying as a polemic work (one that corrects error in the church),
though they are disapproving. It is this writer's opinion that Mr. Way did not actually post a
“critical” examination as far as articles go in this regard, but a short
two-page “blurb” that was simply “critical of this writer’s view of
the Gospel” – critical in the sense of being “unfavorable,
disparaging, disapproving, judgmental, and derogatory,” quite far from
being “polemical.” In this “examination” Mr. Way quoted five (5)
previously published articles, and the original newly composed article
on Arminianism. Mr. Way’s purpose in writing this “critical
examination” was to demonstrate “that he [this writer] has
begun to teach that one must believe the doctrines of grace in order to
be saved.” Mr. Way’s desire was to demonstrate that “Matt has
published a number of works that insist that if one is not holding to
all five points of the doctrines of grace (TULIP), then that person is
not saved, has believed a false gospel, is not a believer in Jesus
Christ, and is not going to heaven when they die.” Mr. Way claims
that this writer believes that “Trusting Christ is not enough,”
and that “one must be a Calvinist in order to be converted.” At
the end of this “critical” examination selectively choosing articles
without quoting all of them, Mr. Way accused this writer of a “denial
of the Gospel of Jesus Christ.” Certainly, this is a grave and
somber charge – one that should never be made lightly. To tell someone
that they have “denied the Gospel” is akin to saying they are going
to hell, but simply said in a more "user friendly tone." Mr. Way will probably not admit
that is what he meant, but his words hold that "ring" to them. Who
can deny the Gospel and go to heaven? As far as this writer
understands the Gospel, no one can deny the Gospel and go to heaven.
It was saddening to see that Mr. Way selectively
quoted only a small portion of the articles on A Puritan’s Mind
dealing with Calvinism, quoted nothing on any of the articles
this writer had written on explaining the Gospel, and inside of a span
of just over two and a half days, he had condemned this writer of
denying the Gospel of Jesus Christ. Certainly, as a minister
of the Gospel of Jesus Christ, this writer was taken back at such an
accusation.
It
equally disheartening that Mr. Way did not quote the
primary text of this writer’s main Gospel tract “The
Gospel of Jesus Christ Seen in the Tract Called The Treasure Map”
set in the left-hand margin over every page of A Puritan’s Mind,
or many of the other articles that clearly set down the Gospel, or even
this writer’s book on the Gospel called “Eternity
Weighed in the Balance.” It is strange, then, that a “critical
examination” would be written without consulting everything this
writer actually wrote on the Gospel. Furthermore, that main Gospel tract has not
only been situated in plain view at A Puritan’s Mind, but has
been used in tract form in every pastoral setting this writer has
ever been blessed to be in. It is, in this writer's opinion, a
very good explanation of the Grace of Christ and the work of God in the
sinner to save him from hell. Instead, Mr. Way, in a manner unbecoming a
responsible examination of these works, selectively quoted what he wanted in order to
build a case of accusation against this writer. If one is to take
Mr. Way
at his word, in that he is simply trying to defend the Gospel, one
wonders which Gospel he is speaking about. Ironically, Mr. Way concludes his “critical examination” by asking this
writer to “recant.”
The reader should note that the
proverb is true, Proverbs 29:20, "Do you see a man hasty in his words?
There is more hope for a fool than for him." Mr. Way has not only been
hasty with his words, but exceedingly careless and unbecoming one
following any careful study of the material.
It has
taken two months for a proper response to Mr. Way’s accusations to be
posted. This was not because this writer did not want to respond, or
was lazy in responding (the work below was finished in about two
weeks). The delay revolved around a review that this writer’s
Presbytery in the Reformed Presbyterian Church General Assembly desired
to have in order to read the response first. The Gospel is too
important to be strewn around lightly. This writer sent his Presbytery
a copy of the response to Mr. Way (which is posted below) to Dr. Ken
Talbot and Dr. Gary Crampton. Both reviewed the article. In their
response to reading it, though they disagree with Presumptive
Regeneration (which is briefly noted in the response paper to Mr. Way
for certain reasons that will become evident in the reader’s perusal of
the work) they said, “We both read the paper and…everything seems in
order from a Reformed Presbyterian perspective.”
The following is what this writer believes,
and has always believed as a Reformed Christian, concerning the Gospel
of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ.
Hopefully, when Mr. Way reads this article on the Reformed
understanding of the biblical Gospel, he will agree as well. This
is written with a polemic spirit behind it, demonstrating this writer's
view of the gospel in opposition to all those who would question his
teaching and wanted clarification. Hopefully this becomes
exceedingly to clear to all who read it: Jesus Christ saves sinners.
Coming to Faith:
A Polemic
Examining Theological Paradigms Pertaining to Neophytes
and Heretics in the Essentials of Christianity
By Dr. C. Matthew McMahon
Prolegomena
Introduction
Regeneration is that grace which makes faith possible. In other words,
without sovereign grace, there is no hope of a man believing or
understanding anything saving about the Gospel that may aid in
converting him, or in understanding an electing knowledge of the Gospel
of Jesus Christ. On a number of fronts, these two initial sentences may
cause the reader some anxiety. First, many confuse the order of grace
and belief, thinking that belief will illicit grace. Secondly,
others will have a hard time reconciling how subsequent acts of
“conversion” fit with the previous acts of “regeneration” which already
save a man through the sovereign grace of God’s applied redemption in
Christ via the supernatural work of the Holy Spirit. The first group
has succumbed to Arminian teaching that overthrows the nature of what it
means to be saved twisting the Gospel into an aberration that
holds no real Gospel in it. The second group needs a longer,
more detailed explanation, for those two initial sentences in order to
overcome their problem of understanding the Reformed mindset behind the
ordo salutis, or order of salvation. In this paper, then, the
idea is to rescue the Gospel of Sovereign Grace from misconception,
while at the same time placing at ease the minds of those who are having
trouble seeing how that Gospel relates to neophytes, as well as
heretics, without overthrowing the Gospel or changing it into something
that it is not. Unfortunately, this cannot be accomplished in brief.
Instead, it will systematically be dealt with biblically, as well as
quoting and alluding to the standards and teachers of the past. In this
survey nothing new appears. Rather, much should simply be echoed both
biblically and historically.
Decree and Covenant
The Gospel of
Sovereign grace to fallen sinners begins with the sovereignty of God to
save whosoever He desires based on His good pleasure, not on
obligation. No one has ever been saved, and no one can be saved,
without sovereign grace. God takes initiative to save fallen human
beings by sovereign grace by way of “covenant.” Simply, a “covenant” is
a pact or agreement made between two parties. This relates to
how sovereign grace actually works in the life of a fallen sinner
because it relies on God’s covenant oath with His Son and its
application by the Holy Spirit. God made an intra-Trinitarian pact to
save men through the decree of the Father, the work of the Son and the
application of that work by the Holy Spirit. The Westminster
Confession of Faith states, “By the decree of God, for the
manifestation of his glory, some men and angels are predestinated unto
everlasting life; and others foreordained to everlasting death” (1 Tim
5:21; Jude 1:6; Matt. 25:31, 41; Eph. 1:5-6; Rom. 9:22-23; Prov. 16:4).
It continues, “As God hath appointed the elect unto glory, so hath he,
by the eternal and most free purpose of his will, foreordained all the
means thereunto.”
Not only does God decree the salvation of certain men, but all the means
whereby those men will be saved will come to pass by God’s power. How
did God practically work this “decree” out? He works His decree out by
way of the Covenant of Redemption and Covenant of Grace.
The Pactum
Salutis, or Covenant of Redemption is the intra-Trinitarian covenant
made with the Father, Son and Spirit based on the decree of God’s will
and good pleasure to save some of fallen humanity and redeem them as a
bride. John Calvin says, “Since there is nothing substantial in it (the
Old Testament shadows), until we look beyond it, the Apostle contends
that it behoved to be annulled and become antiquated, (Heb. 7: 22,) to
make room for Christ, the surety and mediator of a better covenant, by
whom the eternal sanctification of the elect was once purchased, and the
transgressions which remained under the Law wiped away.”
In the same vein, Caspar Olevian states, “The Son of God, having been
appointed by God as Mediator of the covenant, becomes the guarantor on
two counts: 1) He shall satisfy for the sins of all those whom the
Father has given him; 2) He shall also bring it to pass that they, being
planted in him, shall enjoy freedom in their consciences and from day to
day be renewed in the image of God.”
John Ball sets this theological idea inside the Christian’s comfort
when he says, “This covenant being transacted betwixt Christ and God,
here, here lies the first and most firm foundation of a Christian's
comfort.”
The practical commentary written on the Westminster Confession of
Faith called the Sum of Saving Knowledge is quoted here in
brief, “The sum of the covenant of redemption is this: God having freely
chosen to life a certain number of lost mankind, for the glory of his
rich grace, did give them, before the world began, to God the Son,
appointed Redeemer, that, upon condition he would humble himself so far
as to assume the human nature, of a soul and a body, to personal union
with his divine nature, and submit himself to the law, as surety for
them, and satisfy justice for them, by giving obedience in their name,
even to the suffering of the cursed death of the cross, he should ransom
and redeem them all from sin and death, and purchase to them
righteousness and eternal life, with all saving graces leading there to,
to be effectually, by means of his own appointment, applied in due time
to every one of them. This condition the Son of God (who is Jesus Christ
our Lord) did accept before the world began, and in the fulness of time
came into the world, was born of the Virgin Mary, subjected himself to
the law, and completely paid the ransom on the cross: But by virtue of
the foresaid bargain, made before the world began, he is in all ages,
since the fall of Adam, still upon the work of applying actually the
purchased benefits of the elect; and that he does by way of entertaining
a covenant of free grace and reconciliation with them, through faith in
himself; by which covenant, he makes over to every believer a right and
interest to himself, and to all his blessings.”
Though the Sum of Saving Knowledge is much more comprehensive and
careful in describing this covenant, the point the writer’s make is that
God decreed to covenant together to save some men for the glory of
God. This is classically summed up by Franz Burman, “It is a mutual
pact between Father and Son, by which the Father gives the Son as
Redeemer (lutrotes) and the head of foreknown people and the Son
in turn sets himself to complete that redemption (apolutosis).”
Such a summation and understanding of the Covenant of Redemption is not
unfamiliar to most Reformed Theologians. Geerhardes Vos states this
same idea but simply uses biblical information from Zechariah 6:13 when
he says, “In the dogma of the counsel of peace, then, the doctrine of
the covenant has found its genuinely theological rest point.”
John Owen practically applies the Covenant of Redemption when he says
this “hath influence into his whole mediation on our behalf. This is
that compact, covenant, convention, or agreement, that was between the
Father and the Son, for the accomplishment of the work of our redemption
by the mediation of Christ, to the praise of the glorious grace of God.”
The
Covenant of Redemption is practically applied to sinners when it is
fulfilled in all parties – that is the Father fulfills His end, the Son
His end and the Spirit His end. John Owen says, “The will of the Father
appointing and designing the Son to be the head, husband, deliverer, and
redeemer of his elect, his church, his people, whom he did foreknow,
with the will of the Son voluntarily, freely undertaking that work and
all that was required thereunto, is that compact (for in that form it is
proposed in the Scripture) that we treat of.”
In this same practical manner Turretin says, “election of men is made in
Christ.”
Thus, for Turretin, election is coextensive with God’s decree to save
men through Christ (i.e. the Covenant of Redemption). This, though, is
part of the eternal period of the pact in which the Son agrees to save
men, not part of the period that takes place in time (i.e. Turretin’s
twofold distinction of the Covenant of Grace). All the gracious aspects
of the agreement between the Father and Son are executed in time under
the guise of the Covenant of Grace through the application of the Holy
Spirit. This is why the Westminster Confession of Faith did not
entitle chapter 3 “On God’s Decree” as “The Covenant of Redemption”
though, practically, this means the same practical thing as if
they did. Turretin, though, like some of his contemporary predecessors,
simply divided the Covenant of Grace into two sections so that
practically, it worked the same way as it is did in post-reformation
Dogmatics.
Scripture
resounds with testimony to God’s decree, His election of men, and the
counsel of peace made with the Trinity. Luke 22:29 states, "And I
bestow upon you a kingdom, just as My Father bestowed one upon Me.” The
Greek word diati,qemai, “to dispose of a covenant” may be better worded
“and I engage by covenant unto you a kingdom, as my Father hath engaged
by covenant unto me.” (cf. Hebrews 7:22). He is a surety – He
represents the elect to God and communicates to the elect His promises.
He undertook to perform the condition of the covenant where men could
not. Galatians 3:17 says, “And this I say, that the law, which was four
hundred and thirty years later, cannot annul the covenant that was
confirmed before by God in Christ, that it should make the promise
of no effect.” The contracting parties of the covenant are the Father,
Son and Spirit. Isaiah 53:2 states, “For He shall grow up before Him as
a tender plant, And as a root out of dry ground. He has no form or
comeliness; And when we see Him, There is no beauty that we should
desire Him.” It was a covenant proposed by the Father (John 10:18, "No
one takes it from Me, but I lay it down of Myself. I have power to lay
it down, and I have power to take it again. This command I have received
from My Father."), and includes a promise and right to ask for a promise
upon obedience (John 10:18; cf. John 12:49, “For I have not spoken on My
own authority; but the Father who sent Me gave Me a command, what I
should say and what I should speak.” Also see Psalm 2:8, “Ask of Me,
and I will give You The nations for Your inheritance, And the ends of
the earth for Your possession.”) This is proposed clearly in Isaiah
53:10-12, “Yet it pleased the LORD to bruise Him; He has put Him to
grief. When You make His soul an offering for sin, He shall see His
seed, He shall prolong His days, And the pleasure of the LORD shall
prosper in His hand. He shall see the labor of His soul, and be
satisfied. By His knowledge My righteous Servant shall justify many, For
He shall bear their iniquities. Therefore I will divide Him a portion
with the great, And He shall divide the spoil with the strong, Because
He poured out His soul unto death, And He was numbered with the
transgressors, And He bore the sin of many, And made intercession for
the transgressors.” Each time the salvific work of the Father, Son or
Spirit is mentioned, it relates to their pact in the Covenant of
Redemption. This covenant was accepted by the Son. John 14:31 says,
“But that the world may know that I love the Father, and as the Father
gave Me commandment, so I do.” Psalm 40:7-8 states, “Then I said,
"Behold, I come; In the scroll of the book it is written of me. I
delight to do Your will, O my God, And Your law is within my heart."
This is echoed in the Counsel of Peace in Zechariah 6:13, “Yes, He shall
build the temple of the LORD. He shall bear the glory, And shall sit and
rule on His throne; So He shall be a priest on His throne, And the
counsel of peace shall be between them both." The Spirit’s work
surrounds the glorification of the Son, and then there is the
application of His work in the sinner. John 3:34-35 says, “For
He whom God has sent speaks the words of God, for God does not give the
Spirit by measure. The Father loves the Son, and has given all things
into His hand.” The Christ was anointed by the Spirit for His work in
Matthew 3:16, “…and He saw the Spirit of God descending like a dove and
alighting upon Him.” Matthew 4:1 demonstrates the work of the Mediator
directed by the Spirit, “Then Jesus was led up by the Spirit…” Matthew
12:28 demonstrates the power by which Christ performed and accomplished
His work, “But if I cast out demons by the Spirit of God, surely the
kingdom of God has come upon you.” John the Baptist, in speaking of the
work of the Messiah, knew that the power of the Spirit would attend Him
as He stated in Luke 3:16, “He will baptize you with the Holy Spirit and
fire.” The Father, Son and Spirit work together in “covenantal economy”
to bring to pass the work seen and accomplished in time.
As the
Covenant of Redemption is decreed eternally, the practical outworking of
that Covenant between Father, Son and Holy Spirit is applied in time.
This is called the Covenant of Grace (Foedus Gratiae). Dr. A.A.
Hodge says, “Now, what is commonly called the covenant of grace as
distinct from the covenant of redemption is just the human and external
side of this eternal covenant of redemption.”
In terms of the roles that the Father, Son and Holy Spirit play in
redeeming men, this would be termed the economic roles of the
Trinity. The Father is the principle author of salvation (2 Cor. 5:19)
and appointed the elect to be heirs of Himself and co-heirs with His Son
(Rom. 8:17). The Son is the Mediator, Testator and distributor (John
10:28) of all the blessings acquired in this engagement. The Spirit
applies, signs, and seals the blessings to the elect (John 3:3ff).
Turretin says that the Covenant of Grace is, “a gratuitous pact entered
into in Christ between God offended and man offending.”
Offending man is saved by the work of the Redeemer applied
to him. God decrees their salvation, the Son comes to die as a surety
for sinful men, and the Holy Spirit applies that work. The practical
application of the work is accomplished in the Covenant of Grace. The
Westminster Confession of Faith says, “This covenant of grace is
frequently set forth in Scripture by the name of a testament, in
reference to the death of Jesus Christ the Testator, and to the
everlasting inheritance, with all things belonging to it, therein
bequeathed.”
Thus, all the practical benefits of this Covenant is bequeathed to men,
in time, by the power of the Holy Spirit. The Holy Spirit applies the
work of the Mediator, or Surety, for the salvation of men that God
decreed to save, and that Christ died for providing atonement. The
Canons of Dordt affirm this when they say, “Since we are to judge of
the will of God from His Word, which testifies that the children of
believers are holy, not by nature, but in virtue of the covenant of
grace, in which they together with the parents are comprehended, godly
parents ought not to doubt the election and salvation of their children
whom it pleases God to call out of this life in their infancy.”
Though men are called out for this salvation, and have this salvation
sovereignly applied to them, Van Mastricht is right to point out the
difference between their eternal election (decree) and the application
of that election by the Holy Spirit (grace applied in time). He says,
“I think we must distinguish most carefully between those promises
of the covenant of grace which are of the nature of means to an end,
such as are the obtaining of redemption through Christ,
regeneration, conversion, the conjunction of faith with purpose of
amendment; and those which are of the nature of an end, e.g.,
justification, adoption, glorification etc. If this is done, we seem
bound to say that the promises of the covenant of grace of the first
kind are plainly absolute. It involves a manifest contradiction to
require of man dead in sins a preliminary condition for the redemption
of Christ, like redemption etc. But promises of the second class, like
justification, adoption, etc. are altogether conditioned, yet in such a
way that the satisfaction of the conditions depends not upon the
strength of the free will (liberum arbitrium), but on the
absolute promises of this covenant.”
The conditional aspects of the Covenant of Grace are found, as Van
Mastricht says, in God’s promises which are in Christ. However, that
which God freely gives His people are the “all things” from Romans 8
which are applied by the Spirit in regeneration and then aspects of
sanctification.
Scripture is
filled with theological direction about the work of the Mediator,
applied by the Holy Spirit, on behalf of the elect. The Westminster
Confession of Faith lists the glorious work of Christ’s offices and
accomplishments in this way, “This office the Lord Jesus did most
willingly undertake; (Psa. 40:7-8; see Heb. 10:5-10; John 4:34; 10:18;
Phil. 2:8) which that he might discharge, he was made under the law,
(Gal. 4:4) and did perfectly fulfill it;(Matt. 3:15; 5:17; Heb. 5:8-9)
endured most grievous torments immediately in his soul, (Matt. 26:37-38;
27:46; Luke 22:44) and most painful sufferings in his body;(Matt.
26:67-68; 27:27-50) was crucified, and died, (Mark 15:24, 37; Phil.
2:8) was buried, and remained under the power of death, yet saw no
corruption.( Matt. 27:60; Acts 2:24, 27; 13:29, 37; Rom. 6:9). On the
third day he arose from the dead,( 1 Cor. 16:3-4) with the same body in
which he suffered,(Luke 24:39; John 20:25, 27) with which also he
ascended into heaven, and there sitteth at the right hand of his
Father,(Luke 24:50-51; 1 Peter 3:22) making intercession,(Rom. 8:34;
Heb. 7:25; see Heb. 9:24) and shall return, to judge men and angels, at
the end of the world” (Acts 1:11, 10:42; John 5:28-29; Rom. 14:10b;
Matt. 13:40-42; Jude 1:6: see 2 Peter 2:4).
The Spirit applies this work through regeneration, and subsequently in
sanctification. 2 Thessalonians 2:13-14 says, “But we are bound to
give thanks to God always for you, brethren beloved by the Lord, because
God from the beginning chose you for salvation through sanctification by
the Spirit and belief in the truth, to which He called you by our
gospel, for the obtaining of the glory of our Lord Jesus Christ.” 2
Corinthians 3:3 likewise gives the Spirit’s precedence as Paul asserts,
“clearly you are an epistle of Christ, ministered by us, written not
with ink but by the Spirit of the living God…” And he continues in 2
Corinthians 3:6, “…who also made us sufficient as ministers of the new
covenant, not of the letter but of the Spirit.” Again, Paul instructs
the Corinthians in 1 Corinthians 2:12, “Now we have received, not the
spirit of the world, but the Spirit who is from God, that we might know
the things that have been freely given to us by God.” Peter exhorts in
Acts 2:38, “Repent, and let every one of you be baptized in the name of
Jesus Christ for the remission of sins; and you shall receive the
gift of the Holy Spirit.” The Gospel itself and the joy one
receives as a result of having such things applied rests in the Holy
Spirit as Paul explains in Romans 14:17, “for the kingdom of God is not
eating and drinking, but righteousness and peace and joy in the Holy
Spirit.” Christians, then have the benefits of Christ applied to
them and sealed to them in the Holy Spirit. Paul again writes in
Ephesians 1:13, “…you were sealed with the Holy Spirit of promise…” And
it is this Spirit in Ephesians 4:30 that seals into the coming of the
ages, “by whom you were sealed for the day of redemption.” All
of this is a result of the work of the Spirit in the lives of the
saints. As Paul instructs Timothy in 2 Timothy 1:14, “That good thing
which was committed to you, keep by the Holy Spirit who dwells in us.”
Regeneration and
Effectual Calling
With some of
the preliminary ideas about “covenant” explained briefly, it is more
important, now, to deal with how one comes to faith. The entire
Reformed community is agreed on this biblical concept of “regeneration”
and the manner the Spirit of God works in “effectual calling.” The
Westminster Confession of Faith states that regeneration means
fallen sinners have been acted upon by the power of God based on the
decree of God and the work of applying the merits of Christ to them
through the Holy Spirit. The Spirit works in “enlightening their minds
spiritually and savingly to understand the things of God, taking away
their heart of stone, and giving unto them a heart of flesh; renewing
their wills, and, by his almighty power, determining them to that which
is good.”
The Westminster Larger Catechism states the same in question 67,
“What is effectual calling?” They answer, “Effectual calling is the
work of God's almighty power and grace, whereby (out of his free and
special love to his elect, and from nothing in them moving him
thereunto) he doth, in his accepted time, invite and draw them to Jesus
Christ, by his word and Spirit; savingly enlightening their minds,
renewing and powerfully determining their wills, so as they (although in
themselves dead in sin) are hereby made willing and able freely to
answer his call, and to accept and embrace the grace offered and
conveyed therein” (John 5:25; Eph. 1:18-20; 2 Tim. 1:8-9; Titus. 3:4-5;
Eph. 2:4-5, 7-9; Rom. 9:11; 2 Cor. 5:20; 6:1-2; John 6:44; 2 Thess.
2:13-14; Acts 26:18; I Cor. 2:10, 12; Ezek. 11:19; 36:26-27; John 6:45;
Eph. 2:5; Phil. 2:13; Deut. 30:6). Regeneration and effectual calling
are not the same as saying “justifying faith”. Regeneration is not
justifying faith. The component or step of faith is not something that
is exercised until after, though it is implanted in the elect upon
regeneration. In other words, the car has an engine ready to be turned
on when the key is turned. Regeneration is the key and faith is the
engine. This must be more explored to see the manner in which
regeneration works, and the manner of coming to faith after
regeneration.
Peter Van
Mastricht wrote a very helpful section to his Theoretico-Practica
Theologia (1699) that covered regeneration. It was so popular on
the subject, that even brilliant theologians such as Jonathan Edwards
marked Van Mastricht works as better than any other book in the world
besides the Bible. In this work, Van Mastricht basically taught “that
men are born again by grace alone, and that regeneration is that which
makes conversion possible.”
For Van Mastricht, and subsequently the Post Reformation community for
which he wrote, saw regeneration as a key doctrine for understanding the
complete dependence of man upon Christ and His work of redemption.
Regeneration is not used in its broader sense here, but in its more
refined and particular sense – this is “that power conveyed into the
soul by which the person who is to be saved is enabled to receive the
offer.”
Thus, Van Mastricht defined regeneration as “that operation of
the Holy Ghost whereby He begets in men who are elected, redeemed, and
externally called, the first act or principle of spiritual life, by
which they are enabled to receive the offered Redeemer, and comply with
the conditions of salvation.”
Thus, Van Mastricht rightly stated that a person’s will is changed so he
can embrace the truth presented to the mind. In
explaining regeneration in this light, those converted by the power of
the Holy Spirit are enabled to exercise saving acts that later may be
granted. Such is the case, for example, of an infant regenerated early
in its life and coming to exercised faith later on. This will hold great
implications in the manner that one is saved, but not yet
exercising faith. This will be more fully explained in a moment.
In previous
articles and lectures this writer has gone to great lengths to keep this
doctrine of regeneration clear and succinct, in hopes that salvation by
sovereign grace may be seen clearly and that fallen men may be converted
by God’s power. In the article The Holy Spirit, Regeneration, and
Sanctification this writer says, “The Spirit of God is the author of
this spiritual change. This spiritual change is wrought by spiritual
means employed by the Holy Spirit. Just as there is a remarkable event
in conception and birth of a human being, so even to a greater degree
there is a spiritual “event” of sorts that parallels birth, but into the
realm of the Kingdom of God’s beloved Son. This is the liberation, or
emancipation of the soul from spiritual bondage and death.”
This emancipation of the soul is the rebirth or “born again” terminology
that Christ uses in John 3 to explain to Nicodemas what it means to have
a heart changed by God. The article continues:
“Regeneration is the
term used for this spiritual change wrought upon the heart by the power
of the Holy Spirit sent forth from Christ’s throne. It is absolutely
necessary that regeneration takes place in order for a man to be
released from his fallen and depraved state to the Kingdom of God.
Christ, in John 3, rests upon the reality that man is so depraved and
fallen that his spiritual birth must take place first before he ever
perceives or understands of the spiritual realities of the kingdom of
heaven (John 3:3, 5). In this way, the Spirit’s work is crucially
important in delivering and changing the heart of these men so that they
may believe in the Lord Jesus Christ and be saved. This event, that
spiritual change, is impossible with men, but possible with God.
Without a manifestly true change on the mind of the person by God, they
cannot believe, nor experience any deep significant trust on Christ. No
unregenerate man, then, can see the kingdom of God unless God wills he
should see it and converts him to be able to see it. From all this, it
is manifest that redemption itself proceeds on the principle that God
must allow admission to His kingdom first, and to apply a spiritual
principle that quickens the soul to life.”
In another article
entitled A Summary of The Doctrine of the Holy Spirit this writer
says:
In the practical
application of the work of the Spirit upon the Christian, one may divide
His work into the three sections that Romans outlines: regeneration,
spiritual-mindedness, and walking after the Spirit (Romans 8:4, 6, 9).
Such a gracious salvation and indwelling of the spirit (walking in Him)
is of the Christian in any age. For Paul says in Romans 8:9, “But you
are not in the flesh but in the Spirit, if indeed the Spirit of God
dwells in you. Now if anyone does not have the Spirit of Christ, he is
not His.” If one does not “have” the Spirit, (e;cw (ekh'-o) meaning 1)
to have, i.e. to hold in the sense of wearing) then He is not God’s and
not Christ’s. He addresses those who walk after the Spirit, of whom we
have to understand contrary things to the former. He defines what it is
to be in the Spirit, or to be sanctified, that is, to have the Spirit of
God dwelling in us. Then he declares that sanctification is so joined
and knit to our grafting into Christ, that it can by no means be
separated. However, he says that anyone who does not have the Spirit in
this way is not of Christ, or not saved. Upon this verse alone it is
eminently apparent that all the saints, in any sage, were saved, filled,
and walking in the Spirit in this sense or they were not of Christ in
any saving sense. On this ground they are evidenced to be children of
the Spirit, adopted by God, and having a filial relationship with God as
His children.
Such a threefold
designation demonstrates that regeneration is the first of the three
occurrences and that regeneration is accomplished by the sovereign will
of God. The article also states, “The Spirit applies the work of
redemption to the individual in what theology calls regeneration. The
efficacious operation of the Spirit presupposes God’s sovereign election
on certain individuals to receive the benefits of Christ’s death for
them. This application of Christ’s work is done by the Spirit’s divine
application on the human soul, or heart.”
The practical ramifications of this work are stated in this way, “Jesus
demonstrates, emphatically, that men must be born again, or born from
above, which is the work of regeneration on the heart of the wicked
(John 3:3). As John 6:63 states, “It is the Spirit who gives life; the
flesh profits nothing.” Such a sovereign regeneration (a change of the
heart from stone to beating flesh) is by the blowing will of the Spirit
(John 3:1-8). The Spirit then convicts and sanctifies the individual by
purging unbelief (John 16:8). Those regenerated are then made new
creatures (2 Cor. 5:17). The Spirit inhabits the whole man and renews
him (Romans 8:9). These are adopted as sons, and are assured by the
Spirit of their sovereign election (Rom. 8:16; 1 John 3:2).”
The work of the Holy Spirit can be divided into two manners and has two
distinct functions as seen at present – 1) an operation that touches
every creature, animate and inanimate, in the upholding of their
constitution as well as gifting rational moral creatures for service,
and 2) the regeneration of the elect towards salvation, and their
subsequent upholding and progression in sanctification under the Word of
God. It is the latter, for these purposes, that is important.
To press the
point of “regeneration” more explicitly, looking at one of the more
famous passages in Scripture will be of great help: this is John
3:1-10. The salvation of man’s corrupted and fallen being throughout
the Bible is a God-centered act, not a man-centered action.
Unfortunately, to its own demise, much of the church has shifted from a
God-centered view of salvation to a man-centered view. Contemporary
preachers are preaching doctrine that surrounds and embraces either
Pelagianism, or Arminianism (which is semi-Pelagianism). One of
the most explicit passages concerning the manner of regeneration which
refutes both Pelagianism and Arminianism in every form is John chapter
3:1-10. This chapter, in this writer’s estimation, is also the most
widely abused section of Scripture since there is a common plea
to twisting John 3:16 over the teaching of Christ in the first ten
verses. John 3:1-10 reads as follows, "There was a man of the Pharisees
named Nicodemus, a ruler of the Jews. This man came to Jesus by night,
and said to Him, "Rabbi, we know you are a teacher come from God; for no
one can do these signs that You do unless God is with Him." Jesus
answered and said to him, "Most assuredly, I say to you, unless one is
born again, he cannot see the Kingdom of God." Nicodemus said to Him,
"How can a man be born when he is old? Can he enter a second time into
his mother's womb and be born?" Jesus answered, "Most assuredly, I say
to you, unless one is born of water and the Spirit, he cannot enter the
kingdom of God. That which is born of flesh is flesh, and that which is
born of Spirit is spirit. Do not marvel that I said to you, "You must be
born again." the wind blows where it wishes, and you hear the sound of
it, but cannot tell where it comes from or where it goes. So is everyone
who is born of the Spirit." Nicodemus answered, "how can these things
be?!" Jesus answered and said to Him, "Are you the teacher of Israel and
you do not understand these things?"
It
should be noted at the outset that the Pharisee, Nicodemus, a ruler (or
teacher) of the Jews, approaches Jesus "by night..." It would not be
profitable for the Pharisee to be seen with Jesus during the day
since the other Pharisees were hostile to Christ. Visiting Christ by day
would have brought Nicodemas a reproach among his sect. Nicodemus was
risking his own reputation by being seen with Christ, thus, he comes
under the cover of night. Secondly, Nicodemus compliments Jesus to
gain His favor and show a "humble" sign of respect. Jesus must
be a teacher who has come from God because "no one can do these signs
that You do unless God is with Him." Jesus heals the sick, causes lame
people to walk again, cures the blind, deaf and dumb, and more.
"Surely" He is from God! But at this juncture Christ wastes no time
with Nicodemus and does not readily acknowledge his "compliment."
Rather, Jesus says, "Most assuredly, I say to you, unless one is born
again, he cannot see the Kingdom of God." The force behind "most
assuredly" is as if Jesus was saying, "This is the way it is and you
need to listen!" The verbiage is used as an emphatic exclamation mark.
He then says, "Unless..." The word "unless" means, "something must
absolutely happen before something else happens." Unless
what? "Unless a man..." The word "man" in this context refers to "a
person." "Unless a person..." The masculine words "man" or "men" are
used to refer to mankind as a whole throughout Scripture. Jesus is
referring to the mass of people, of all mankind, and these people must
do something, unless... At this point it is unknown as to what needs to
be accomplished. All Jesus says is that something must happen to a
person, before something else must happen. But what? "Unless a
man is born again..." The words "born again" are literally
translated "born from above,” and are tied to the work of the
Holy Spirit. We see Jesus' use of the words have a spiritual
application instead of a physical application. He is saying that unless
people are spiritually renewed...then something follows. "Unless
a man is born again he cannot ...." There is a prerequisite for
doing something here. The “person” must be born again or he
"cannot" do something. "Cannot" is literally "he has no power."
The person has no power to do this “thing” Jesus is describing unless
that person is born again, or born from above (meaning that this person
must be spiritually renewed, or as commonly stated, "saved”). The whole
sentence reads, “Unless a man is born again he cannot see
the kingdom of heaven." Many mistranslate this verse to mean, "Unless a
man is saved, then he cannot enter into heaven when he dies."
But this is a misinterpretation, and a reading into the text. The
word "see" is not the Greek word "bleppow," which could have
yielded the mistranslation just given. "Bleppow" means to see
with the eyes. If this was the word, then the translation may be
“Unless a man is born again he cannot see with his eyes the kingdom of
heaven,” which then may refer to entering into heaven. But this
is not what the text is saying at all. Jesus does not use the word "bleppow"
but rather a derivative of "oraow," which is "ieadien,"
meaning "to see." But the seeing here is different than physical
sight. It is not seeing with the eyes, but rather, it literally means,
"to perceive, or spiritually understand something." It is as if someone
said, "I see what you are saying." “Seeing” in this light and
context is to spiritually perceive something and understand it. So the
verse would be translated accurately this way: Unless a person is saved,
he cannot spiritually understand anything about the Kingdom of
God.
After
Jesus states this reality, Nicodemus does not understand His words. This
demonstrates the case in point - since Nicodemus is not saved, he
cannot understand Jesus’ words. Instead of the spiritual
connotation of the sentence, Nicodemus thinks Christ is referring to
physical birth and so asks how a man can be born again physically,
a second time. Jesus clarifies his question and says, "Unless a man is
born of water and the Spirit he cannot enter the kingdom of God." The
"water" here, as Van Mastricht says, denotes in this place not the
material cause, but the efficient cause as in Romans 11:36 and Luke
1:35.
Thus, Christ speaks about spiritual water, or the water of the Spirit
which is like “water cleans[ing] in regeneration.” This is akin to
Titus 3:5, “not by works of righteousness which we have done, but
according to His mercy He saved us, through the washing of
regeneration and renewing of the Holy Spirit.” Thus, Jesus is
repeating Himself for sake of clarity. Fallen wicked men, unless they
are saved by the Spirit of God, (big "S" for “Spirit” in the verse) will
not spiritually perceive the Kingdom, nor will they enter the kingdom.
After
this statement, Jesus then explains exactly what He means in a more
simply manner for this “Pharisee.” He says, "That which is born of
flesh is flesh and that which is born of Spirit is spirit." Now, flesh
only gives birth to flesh. Flesh does not give birth to spirit. Only the
Holy Spirit, big "S," gives birth to man's spirit, little "s". Flesh, or
the fallen human nature, does not have the capacity to give birth to
spiritual things (cf. Genesis 6:5; Jeremiah 17:9; Romans 3:10ff; 1 Cor.
2:1ff). Only the Holy Spirit of God can "born someone again." Van
Mastricht says “that which is born of the flesh (that is, by natural
generation) is flesh,” or carnal, defiled with sin, “and that which is
born of the Spirit is spirit,” or spiritual and saving.”
Jesus then states, "Do not marvel that I said to you, "You must be born
again." The wind blows where it wishes, and you hear the sound of it,
but cannot tell where it comes from or where it goes. So is everyone who
is born of the Spirit." Jesus demonstrates, now by analogy, to
Nicodemus that the Spirit of God is sovereign over the salvation of
those He saves. He is like the wind, which blows "where it wishes." So
the Spirit blows upon whom He wishes to save, and then “borns them
again.” This reality is emphasized when Christ says, "So is everyone
who is born of the Spirit."
At
this point, Nicodemus cannot believe such a thing is true. He says, "how
can these things be?" His disbelief shows his inability to
perceive spiritual things, as Jesus has been saying all along.
Jesus answered and said to Him, "Are you the teacher of Israel and you
do not understand these things?" Jesus rebukes him as such and tells him
that people who are spiritual teachers and rulers of God’s chosen nation
should know basic concepts concerning the welfare of sinful people
before a righteous God. In other words, pastors, theologians,
teachers, etc., should not be teaching the people of God anything unless
they first understand the basics. Nicodemas should be intimately
aware of concepts as simple as salvation if he is a true teacher of
Israel; but Nicodemus was not.
Thus,
the use of the theological word "regeneration" with its explanation of
John 3:3ff, Paul uses Titus 3:5 as quoted above. It is, then, a
theologically-packed word which means that men are mentally blind and do
not perceive the things of the Spirit, or of the Kingdom, and regards
them as foolishness. They are spiritually discerned truths (1 Cor.
2:14). Man, in and of himself is not sufficient to think anything
spiritually good and “stands in need of illumination by regeneration in
order to see the kingdom of heaven, and of the renovation of his will,
in order to be “willing” to enter heaven. This “power is afterwards
excited in the exercises of faith and repentance, in conversion and
sanctification, but not at this point.
As it stands here, men are at this stage (effectual calling) simply
given the ability, or regenerated, to think about the Gospel
rightly. They may positively be deemed “born again,” yet, they have
still not exercised faith. Those regenerated are those born of
God. 1 John 3:9 states, “Whoever has been born of God does not sin, for
His seed remains in him; and he cannot sin, because he has been born of
God.” This interesting term, “born of God”, may be an allusion to what
the Jews called their proselytes in Old Testament Israel – recens
natos, or “men new born.”
Such men are God’s workmanship created for good works (Eph. 2:10).
This
concept of regeneration is essential in understanding salvation.
How does regeneration work? Man is sinful, and cannot believe or
perceive anything about the kingdom of God. The Spirit arrests his
heart and “blows” on him and changes his heart giving birth to
"spirit." The person is then able to believe and perceive the kingdom,
and does so because of the work of the Spirit. “The Spirit
enables regenerated Christians to discern good from evil, or sin from
holiness. He disposes the mind to accept truth and to know what the
Scriptures contain. Here the Spirit aids the Christian in expounding
Scripture in order to apply that Scripture to the Christian’s life and
further grow in the mystical union he now has with Christ (1 Cor.
6:17). The Spirit illuminates through His indwelling presence within
the individual (John 16:16; 2 Tim. 1:14; Rom. 8:9; Gal. 4:6; 1 Cor.
3:16; 1 John 4:13; Eph. 1:13).”
This regeneration (or effectual call) is of God's free and special grace
alone, not from anything at all foreseen in man, who is altogether
passive in it. It is a physical act that powerfully infuses
spiritual life into the soul. When the Holy Spirit quickens him he is
enabled to answer the Gospel call, and to embrace the grace offered and
conveyed in it. But this is not always as instantaneous as one would
think, although it can be. In other words, the response time may be
longer or shorter according to God’s good pleasure in bestowing help in
justifying faith (more on that later).
The
immediate affect of regeneration is “grace.” Zechariah 12:10 states
clearly that the pouring out of the Spirit on an elect sinner is simply
called “grace.” “And I will pour on the house of David and on the
inhabitants of Jerusalem the Spirit of grace and supplication.” Its
affect, or end result of grace, is what Christ called “spirit” (John
3:6). The spirit in this way is quickened or made alive. At this
point, the body of Christ should have no problem calling one quickened,
“saved” by God’s sovereign grace. As a matter of fact, at this point,
the Christian community should have no problem calling a regenerated man
“a new creature.” Colossians 3:10 says, “…and have put on the new
man…” and Ephesians 4:24, “and that you put on the new man which was
created according to God, in true righteousness and holiness.” This is,
as John states, being “born of God” (1 John 3:9). Paul deems this as
being in Christ. 2 Corinthians 5:17, “Therefore, if anyone is in
Christ, he is a new creation; old things have passed away;
behold, all things have become new.” When the understanding,
then, is illuminated, this is called “spiritual quickening.” Jonathan
Edwards called this, classically, “a supernatural and divine light.” He
said, “That there is such a thing as a spiritual and divine light,
immediately imparted to the soul by God, of a different nature from any
that is obtained by natural means.”
By this Edwards meant that it was a vital principle imparted to the mind
so that one may have a “real sense and apprehension of the divine
excellency of things revealed in the Word of God.” Turretin calls this
the “efficacious action upon our hearts.”
Turretin, like Van Mastricht and Edwards, says that regeneration is a
“change or renovation of nature” in fallen man.
Turretin even more particularly addresses the “power” which such an
action takes in men calling regeneration a “work of divine omnipotence”
which can never be ascribed to finite men. Such a divine power is
called, properly, a resurrection of sorts.
Turretin rightly points to the “proper definition of regeneration as
being eminently given in the work of the Synod of Dordt.
The Synod of Dordt defined regeneration in the III/IV heads of doctrine
in article ten where they stated, “But that others who are called by the
gospel obey the call and are converted is not to be ascribed to the
proper exercise of free will, whereby one distinguishes himself above
others equally furnished with grace sufficient for faith and conversion
(as the proud heresy of Pelagius maintains); but it must be wholly
ascribed to God.”
In this regeneration, or effectual calling, the Synod made a correct
distinction, which is distinguished in Reformed Theology between
regeneration, and then faith and repentance. They said, “so He calls
them effectually in time, confers upon them faith and repentance…”
Regeneration is not faith, and faith comes after regeneration. It is
subsequently conferred after regeneration takes place. This is why the
Reformed have always maintained that regeneration precedes faith. In
some it may seem instantaneous, but biblically, Christ’s discourse with
Nicodemas demonstrates that time (however long) elapses between the
two. Men are quickened, and then believe.
The
Reformed have agreed unanimously that regeneration was the same under
the Old Testament as the New Testament. Turretin says that it is a
fruitless objection that the grace of conversion cannot be described in
the New Testament the same way it is in the Old Testament.
Such would overthrow Christ’s statement to Nicodemas that regeneration
is something all teachers of Israel should know, which is an
Old Testament concept found in Ezekiel, among other places. Ezekiel
36:26 says, “I will give you a new heart and put a new spirit within
you; I will take the heart of stone out of your flesh and give you a
heart of flesh.” Augustine states that such an internal change in men
is done by God “who knows how to work internally upon the very wills of
men” to bring them to salvation, or being regenerated.
One ought not make the same critical blunder that Charles Spurgeon made
in believing that the Spirit was not given, not internalized,
until after Pentecost. Spurgeon says, “The Spirit of God was not given
till after Jesus had been glorified.”
This writer remarks to this in his article, The Internalization of
the Law is Not New to the New Testament: quote:
Did Jesus believed that
men like Abraham, or any Old Testament saint among the Israelites, were
saved and indwelt by the Spirit having the law written on their hearts?
Yes. Jesus says in John 3:3 and 5 that “Verily, verily, I say unto
thee, Except a man be born again, he cannot see the kingdom of
God…Verily, verily, I say unto thee, Except a man be born of water and
of the Spirit, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God.” If Noah,
Abraham and Moses were not born again, they did not, they cannot, enter
heaven. This is why Jesus was so forthright with Nicodemas in
understanding the continuity of His rule and reign in the Old
Testament. In John 3:10 he rebukes Nicodemas for misunderstanding the
role of the Spirit, His indwelling and regeneration, when He says,
“Jesus answered and said unto him, Art thou a master of Israel, and
knowest not these things?” Nicodemas, a ruler of Israel, should have
known about the indwelling power of the regenerating Spirit of God in
changing the heart of the people of God. (cf. Ezek. 11:19; 18:31;
36:26). The implications here are enormous. If Nicodemas is a ruler of
the Jews, and a teacher of the people of God, this operation of the
Spirit of God should have been something he knew about and something he
was teaching the people of God as the prophets had always done. The
operation of the Spirit of God indwelling and regenerating the heart was
an Old Testament doctrine. Even 1 Peter 1:11 is quite plain, “Searching
what, or what manner of time the Spirit of Christ which was in them did
signify, when it testified beforehand the sufferings of Christ, and the
glory that should follow.” Here Peter is referring to the “prophets
(verse 2).” Certainly, Old Testament saints were indwelt by the Spirit
of the same Jesus that rose again from the dead four-hundred years after
those prophets had long died. Indwelling by the Spirit of God is not a
New Testament doctrine.
In this way,
regeneration, is a heart issue. It is not new to the New
Testament. Simply, the Apostle Peter states in 1 Peter 1:10-11, “Of
this salvation the prophets have inquired and searched carefully, who
prophesied of the grace that would come to you, searching what, or what
manner of time, the Spirit of Christ who was in them was
indicating when He testified beforehand the sufferings of Christ and the
glories that would follow.” Regeneration, then is not simply new to the
New Testament, but an Old Testament idea that has continued since God
has been regenerating His elect people.
An important
notion that Van Mastricht takes some time to develop based on the
Reformed dichotomy of regeneration and faith, is that regeneration
confers spiritual life in the first act only. This first act, then, is
a principle, not an operation. This idea of an operation
of grace, the Reformed have always defined as “habits or exercises” of
grace. Manton says, “The habits of all grace are brought into the heart
by regeneration.”
Turretin says, “Habitual or passive conversion takes place by the
infusion of supernatural habits by the Holy Spirit.”
These habits are exercised at a later time. Thus, fallen men who are
regenerated are capacitated to believe and repent, but regeneration is
not believing nor repenting. Such an action will come later.
Van Mastricht rightly says, “This power in conversion which succeeds
regeneration, proper circumstances being supposed, is in due time
brought into actual exercise. So that one truly regenerate may, as both
to habit and act, be for a time an unbeliever, destitute of repentance
and walking in sin. This appears more clear than the light of the sun
in the instances of those who are regenerated from their mother’s wombs,
or at their baptism, as Jeremiah (Jeremiah 1:5), John the Baptist (Like
1:15), and Timothy (2 Timothy 3:15), who nevertheless did not, till they
reached the age of discretion, perform the actual exercises of faith or
repentance. So that regeneration, in which the spiritual life is
bestowed in the first act or principle only, differs from conversion, by
which this principle of life is brought into actual exercise, not only
in the order of nature, but sometimes also in the order of time.”
Now, this is a very important aspect that Reformed Theology teaches as
seen in John 3:3 and the discourse with Christ and Nicodemas. Being
able to see is not seeing. Being able to see the kingdom
gives the individual the ability to see, but certain “proper
circumstances being supposed” such will see. But confusion
cannot be enacted on mixing regeneration with the exercise of faith in
these instances. For example of this, and the notion of “time” in
between regeneration and faith, an illustration may be of help. Instead
of using infants as an example, which is a biblical given, there is much
more to say about adults in this same manner. Imagine five men sitting
under the preaching of the word. These five men are all unregenerate.
The preacher stands up to the pulpit to preach a Gospel message, and the
Spirit of God falls on the room, and regenerates these five men to “see”
or “spiritually perceive” the message about to be given. At this point,
though the Reformed would never deny that it is often the case that a
sanctification of the Spirit, in a general sense, may be regeneration,
conversion, and sanctification all at one time, but in this
instance, regeneration is given, and each man begins to contemplate the
message. Imagine that “man one” is the smartest of the group or the
most intelligibly endowed. As the sermon is completed, “man one” wraps
up the message mentally in such a way that all the previous dealings he
has had with God over the years comes to fruition and within a minute,
he exercises faith and believes, repents and is converted. Now, “man
two” is not as quick as the first. It takes this man a longer time to
deal with the information, and he ponders these things for ten minutes
before it “clicks” for him and he is able to exercise faith based on the
simple Gospel message. “Man three” is less intelligibly endowed and it
takes him two hours. “Man four” takes a week because he was preoccupied
with some theology that did not sit right with him from being in a cult
for a short time, so certain theological ideas needed to be clarified in
his mind so that he would have a clear view of the Savior. “Man
five” takes a year. He seems to have been steeped in nothing at all.
He had never gone to church and never heard the name “Jesus” once in his
whole life (Visit China and see that such is the case with many.) With
“man five” he must first acquire the necessary information
and biblical ideas about “Christ” and “God” and “the Law” and
“salvation” and the like (make it as simple as one would like) before he
exercises faith. But for him, he is devoid of the information in a
manner that he can deal with it in “spiritually discerning it.” This is
why Van Mastricht said these things will take place supposing that such
necessary circumstances arise. In other words, for these men, as Van
Mastricht says, “We only mean that they may be separated as to time, and
that oftentimes this is actually the case.”
Being regenerate is one thing, but being able to exercise faith is only
possible after one comes into contact with the information that Christ
tells Nicodemas that one must “perceive.” Perceiving is to know
something. As Van Mastricht said, “this appears more clear than the
light of the sun.” This writer agrees. Hugo St. Peter states this
wonderfully when he says “Repairing grace first produces a good
will that it may exist; then it inspires it, that it may be
moved; first, it works it, then by it.”
In other words, the Reformed have always laid down that each step in the
conversion process is a step, and those steps take time,
no matter how short or long is inscrutable to the common Christian.
This “idea of
time” is not uncommon among the Reformed. Even in “preparationism”
(which will only be touched on here) there is a time period of “drawing”
the sinner in to be converted. Gerstner says, “All Reformed theology
always maintained that God himself prepares the elect unregenerate for
regeneration through His providential provision of the means of grace,
though the time may be long or brief.” Even Calvin went to lengths to
explain this “time” that previous to regeneration, occurred. Calvin
speaks of the law convicting men of sin, and giving them an image of
what they must strive for, so that “when they are called, they are not
utterly untutored and uninitiated in discipline as if it were something
unknown.”
William Perkins followed in this same idea that “something” was going on
with sinners before God actually regenerated them which “prepared” them
for regeneration to take place. Perkins said, “Beginnings of
composition are the inward motions and inclinations of God’s Spirit”
which are “the effect of regeneration begun.”
William Ames also used this terminology and idea in his Cases of
Conscience, book II chapter 4. This is not a confusion on Calvin’s
part or Perkins or Ames, but rather, they, as others before and after
them, saw “time” as an elapsed state that frequently took the form of a
period of preparation whether before regeneration, or after subsequent
to faith, that sinners went through in order for God’s purposes to be
fulfilled. Thomas Hooker warns the church not to mix up these ideas so
that they remain consistently separated, “Many think that every saving
work is a sanctifying work, which is false; for every saving work is
not a sanctifying work…”
Though, practically, it would behoove men to consider themselves as
perishing sinners than prepared sinners, which holds great merit in the
manner in which the Reformers and Puritans preached, though they did not
abandon their ideas surrounding intervals of time. In this way Gerstner
comments on Edwards’ Miscellany 276 when he says, “That is, here
he [Edwards] seems to be saying that a man may be saved without an
act of faith in Christ, though not without a disposition to
believe in Christ. He admits that the Bible requires an act of faith in
Christ but since the Bible also requires holy living Edwards argues that
only the disposition to believe and to live is absolutely necessary.”
Edwards then masterfully states what he learned from Christ in John 3,
“And as sometimes a person has this disposition within him who has in
times past felt the quickest exercises of it, yet may not sensibly feel
them for some time; so a man may have the disposition in him for some
time before he ever sensibly feels them, for want of occasion and other
reasons. ’Tis the disposition and principle is the thing God looks at.
Supposing a man dies suddenly and not in the actual exercise of faith,
’tis his disposition that saves him; for if it were
possible that the disposition was destroyed, the man would be damned and
all the former acts of faith would signify nothing.”
This is not Antinomianism on Edwards’ part, or even on the part of Van
Mastricht, Calvin, Turretin, etc. Rather, it is the separation of
regeneration from the conversion process of faith and repentance, which
is all they are trying to teach here. However, Antinomianism is
overthrown by knowledge; for one believing is not an unbeliever and will
not and cannot live as such. Thus, for Christ in John 3, and
subsequently the students of Christ’s school, divine illumination alone
(or regeneration) does not account for a person’s becoming a Christian,
though they are born again. Something more must occur, called faith
which will be more fully explained in a subsequent section.
It should
also be noted that since regeneration is a first principle, or the first
act of habitual grace, it is considered as “imperfect” in this respect.
Though one is killed, as Edwards demonstrated, while regenerate, and
with such a disposition would go to heaven, further activation of faith
or exercise of it, is needful for the sanctification process to ensue.
The regenerate, as those newly converted, are called “babes” in 1 Peter
2:2 and those who need to be given milk in Hebrews 5:12-14. Grace, in
this way is called irresistible. Regeneration, for all intents
and purposes is called “irresistible.” Grace must be so, or else man
would constantly overthrow it and resist it as that which is normal for
his fallen nature to enact. Isaiah 1:5-6 says, “You will revolt more
and more. The whole head is sick, And the whole heart faints. From the
sole of the foot even to the head, There is no soundness in it, But
wounds and bruises and putrefying sores; They have not been closed or
bound up, Or soothed with ointment.” And the Jews are rebuked in Acts
7:51, “You stiff-necked and uncircumcised in heart and ears! You
always resist the Holy Spirit; as your fathers did, so do you.”
What is the common opinion of the Reformed concerning
regeneration? Though the information above seems to cover this quite
nicely, the Reformed have said much concerning this as a result of
trying to clearly delineate the manner in which men are saved by
sovereign grace in the act of regeneration. Others may be helpful in
clearing up any misconception left. Dr. William Twisse states, “We
explain efficacious grace to be an operation of God affecting the will
of man, which is not moral but physical, that is immediately and really
working in us to do whatsoever good we perform, determining the will to
action, but yet so that it acts freely.”
Dr. Thomas Ridgley, in his exposition of the Larger Catechism states,
“From hence I am obliged to infer that the regenerating act, or
implanting this principle of grace, which is, at least, in order of
nature, antecedent to any act of grace put forth by us, is the immediate
effect of the power of God, which none who speak of regeneration as a
divine work pretend to deny.”
Dr. Stephen Charnock mentions the difference between regeneration and
conversion, “Regeneration is a spiritual change; conversion is a
spiritual motion.”
Dr. Herman Witsius defines regeneration as “that supernatural act of God
whereby a new and divine life is infused into the elect person,
spiritually dead, and that form an incorruptible seed of the Word of
God, made fruitful by the infinite power of the Spirit.”
The Westminster Shorter Catechism asks in question 32, “What
benefits do they that are effectually called partake of in this life?”
Their answer is the subsequent exercises that derive from regeneration.
They say, “They that are effectually called do in this life partake of
justification, adoption, and sanctification, and the several benefits
which, in this life, do either accompany or flow from them” (Rom. 8:30;
Eph. 1:5; 1 Cor. 1:30). Augustine differentiates, although not always,
the difference between regeneration and other spiritual graces. He
says, “Within this aid are included all those spiritual exercises which
we call regeneration, justification, perseverance to the end, — in a
word, all the divine
assistance by which, in being made Christians, we are made to differ
from other men.”
In this, Augustine calls regeneration “resurrection.”
Dr. R.C. Sproul states, “The key phrase in Paul's Letter to the
Ephesians is this: "...even when we were dead in trespasses, made us
alive together with Christ (by grace have you been saved)" (Eph. 2:5).
Here Paul locates the time when regeneration occurs. It takes place
'when we were dead.' With one thunderbolt of apostolic revelation all
attempts to give the initiative in regeneration to man are smashed.
Again, dead men do not cooperate with grace. Unless regeneration takes
place first, there is no possibility of faith.”
Rev. Samuel Hopkins states, “Let us consider the divine agency, the work
of the Spirit of God, by which persons are regenerated or born of God,
and which lays the only foundation for conversion or holy exercises in
the subject... The divine agency and operation, which is first, and lays
the foundation for all right views and exercises in the person who is
the subject, is called by divines regeneration. The holy views
and exercises of the subject, in which he receives Christ, or believes
on his name, is called conversion, and sometimes active
conversion, to distinguish it from that previous operation
and change wrought by the Spirit of God, in which God is the only agent,
and man, the subject, does not act, but is perfectly passive.”
Rightly, Hopkins continues, “This change is wrought by the Spirit of God
immediately; that is, it is not effected by any medium or means
whatsoever.” This can be concluded by Calvin and Augustine, “Let us now
hear Augustine in his own words, lest the Pelagians of our age, I mean
the sophists of the Sorbonne, charge us after their wont with being
opposed to all antiquity. In this indeed they imitate their father
Pelagius, by whom of old a similar charge was brought against Augustine.
In the second chapter of his Treatise De Correptione et Gratis,
addressed to Valentinus, Augustine explains at length what I will state
briefly, but in his own words, that to Adam was given the grace of
persevering in goodness if he had the will; to us it is given to will,
and by will overcome concupiscence: that Adam, therefore, had the power
if he had the will, but did not will to have the power, whereas to us is
given both the will and the power; that the original freedom of man was
to be able not to sin, but that we have a much greater freedom, viz.,
not to be able to sin. And lest it should be supposed, as Lombard
erroneously does, (lib. 2 Dist. 25,) that he is speaking of the
perfection of the future state, he shortly after removes all doubt when
he says, "For so much is the will of the saints inflamed by the Holy
Spirit, that they are able, because they are willing; and willing,
because God worketh in them so to will." For if, in such weakness, (in
which, however, to suppress pride, "strength" must be made "perfect,")
their own will is left to them, in such sense that, by the help of God,
they are able, if they will, while at the same time God does not work in
them so as to make them will; among so many temptations and infirmities
the will itself would give way, and, consequently, they would not be
able to persevere. Therefore, to meet the infirmity of the human will,
and prevent it from failing, how weak soever it might be, divine grace
was made to act on it inseparably and uninterruptedly. Augustine (ibid.
cap. 14) next entering fully into the question, how our hearts follow
the movement when God affects them, necessarily says, indeed, that the
Lord draws men by their own wills; wills, however, which he himself has
produced. We have now an attestation by Augustine to the truth which we
are specially desirous to maintain, viz., that the grace offered by the
Lord is not merely one which every individual has full liberty of
choosing to receive or reject, but a grace which produces in the heart
both choice and will: so that all the good works which follow after are
its fruit and effect; the only will which yields obedience being the
will which grace itself has made. In another place, Augustine uses these
words, "Every good work in us is performed only by grace," (August. Ep.
105.).
Infants, and the
Imbecile, and Regeneration
In the
section of the Westminster Confession of Faith dealing with
effectual calling, the divines added in the practical nature of
regeneration to elect infants and those mentally handicapped. They did
not, however, add this into the section on Predestination in chapter 3
on God’s Divine Decrees. Instead, they keep the practical use of the
doctrine in the section of Effectual Calling since that is applied
redemption under the guide of the Covenant of Grace, not the election of
men under the Covenant of Redemption which is essential what the decrees
of God teach. The Confession says, “Elect infants, dying in
infancy, are regenerated, and saved by Christ, through the Spirit, who
worketh when, and where, and how he pleaseth: so also are all other
elect persons who are incapable of being outwardly called by the
ministry of the Word” (Gen. 17:7; Luke 1:15; 18:15-16; Acts 2:39; John
3:3, 5; 1 John 5:12; John 3:8; John 16:7-8; 1 John 5:12; Acts 4:12).
This stems from the fact that everything needful for exercised faith is
implanted in the infant or imbecile. For example, an acorn holds in it
all the properties of the oak tree though it is not an oak tree yet.
As Edwards has said previously, that regenerated disposition is what
will save them (sovereign grace). This is exactly the same information
Christ fed Nicodemas. Such infinite regenerating power is enough to
implant everything needful for acceptance before God as a result
of God’s declaration of Christ’s finished work. It is simply the
exercise of the habits of grace that do not take place yet.
In
“infant faith”, which would also apply to the imbecile, Francis Turretin
deals extensively in his Institutes. Treating this idea of
“faith” now is important since infants cannot exercise faith, but can be
recipients of regenerating grace. He says:
Concerning the subject
of faith a question is moved as to infants. There are two extremes: (1)
in defect, by the Anabaptists, who deny all faith to infants and under
this pretext exclude them from baptism; (2) in excess, by the Lutherans,
who, to oppose themselves to the Anabaptists, have fallen into the other
extreme, maintaining that infants are regenerated in baptism and
actually furnished with faith, as appears from the Mompeldardensi
Colloquy (Acta Colloquy Mantis Belligartensis [1588], p. 459). "The
round assertion of our divines is that actual faith is ascribed to
infants with the most just right" (Brochmann, "De Fide Justificante," 2,
Q. 10 in Universae theologicae systema [1638], 2:429). The orthodox
occupy the middle ground between these two extremes. They deny actual
faith to infants against the Lutherans and maintain that a seminal or
radical and habitual faith is to be ascribed to them against the
Anabaptists. Here it is to be remarked before all things: (1) that we do
not speak of the infants of any parents whomsoever (even of infidels and
heathen), but only of believers, or Christians and the covenanted. (2)
Nor do we speak of every single infant as if such faith is given to all
without any exception; for although Christian charity commands us to
cherish a good hope concerning their salvation, still we cannot
certainly determine that every single one belongs to the election of
God, but leave it to the secret counsel and supreme liberty of God.
Since indeed the predestination of God makes a difference between
children (Rom. 9:11) and the promise of the covenant was ratified (v. 8)
not in the children of the flesh, but in the children of the promise, we
therefore treat here indefinitely of infants of every order and
condition (who pertain to the election of God, whom it is not for human
judgment to distinguish).”
Thus,
Turretin lays infant salvation in the hands of God and not in the work
of faith, although faith would occur as a result of the implanted
spiritual principle in them if it had time to come to fruition.
Turretin continues:
We embrace our opinion
in two propositions. The first is opposed to the Lutherans: "Infants do
not have actual faith." The reasons are first because they have not an
actual knowledge of anything. Hence they are said not to know good or
evil, nor can they discern between their right and left hand (Dt. 1:39;
Is. 7:16; Jon. 4:11). Nor ought the objection to be raised (a) "Still
the knowledge of many things is born with us." It is one thing to have
the principles and seeds of knowledge in the common notions implanted in
us (which we grant); another to have actual knowledge (which we deny),
(b) "Faith does not depend upon the use of reason; nay, it ought to
bring reason into obedience to it" (2 Cor. 10:5). It is one thing for
faith to depend on the use of reason as a principle; another for faith
to suppose reason as its subject. The former we deny with Paul, who on
this account wishes the reason to be captivated into the obedience of
faith. The latter we hold with him, who wishes our spiritual worship to
be reasonable (iogikon, Rom. 12:1). Therefore where the use of
reason is not, there neither the use or exercise of faith can be.
Second, infants are not capable of acts of faith, or of knowledge
because intellect does not exist without action; nor are they capable of
assent, which ought to be carried to the object known; nor of trust,
which is concerned with the special application of the promise of
grace. Therefore neither are they capable of faith, which consists of
these three acts. Nay, it is most absurd (asystaton) that there
should be a movement of the intellect or of the will without knowledge
(which is always supposed for them). Third, they are not capable of
hearing and meditating on the word from which faith is conceived: "for
faith cometh by hearing" (Rom. 10:17). Nor must it be said with
Brochmann that God appointed baptism as a laver of water for the
regeneration of infants in the word, as for adults he destined the
hearing of the word. Although baptism is the external sign of
regenerating grace (at whose presence God can give it to infants by the
Spirit without the hearing of the word), still it cannot be said that
actual faith is given to them (which cannot be such except insofar as it
actually exerts itself about the hearing of the word). The examples of
Jeremiah and John the Baptist indeed teach that infants are capable of
the Holy Spirit and that he is also given at this age, but it cannot be
inferred that they actually believed. Jeremiah is indeed said to have
been sanctified from the womb as a prophet of God, and John is said to
have leaped in his mother's womb at the presence of Christ, but neither
is said to have actually believed. Besides, even if any such thing were
ascribed to them, the consequence would not hold good; for this would be
singular and extraordinary from which a universal rule ought not to be
drawn.
In all
this, Turretin is rightly stating, “It is one thing to praise God
subjectively and formally from knowledge and affection; another to
praise him objectively and materially. Infants are said to praise God in
the latter, not in the former sense (inasmuch as God, in the care and
preservation of them, wonderfully manifests his own glory, Ps. 8:2).”
This spiritual principle is the foundation by which all covenant
blessings develop. Van Mastricht says, “The common opinion of the
Reformed is that the baptism of infants (at least of the elect)
presupposes regeneration as already effected because that which is not
cannot be sealed by baptism.”
Though infants or imbeciles cannot rehearse the Gospel exercised by
profession of faith, everything contained in the spiritual principles of
that knowledge are set and implanted in them. This is a union with
Christ that they have by sovereign grace. Ames says, “This grace is the
basis of that relation in which man is united with Christ, (John 3:3).”
This is what the Reformed have termed “passive receiving” of Christ.
Ames explains, “The passive receiving of Christ is the process by which
a spiritual principle of grace is generated in the will of man.”
The final result of infants being regenerated is the endowment of the
same rights, though in different (simple) degree, as adults.
Ames says, “This union is the spiritual relation of men to Christ by
which they obtain the right to all the blessings provided in him.”
It is essential to this to understand and remember, as Love points out,
that though infants are regenerated, this will not become an act in the
same accordance with the manner of adults. He says, “A child who cannot
act with reason, as he is a child, cannot have any of these particulars
wrought in him, at least in the way and the manner that men of years
have. A child, as it is an infant, does not have conversion in the way
a man has, although it has something equivalent to it.”
In other words, though a child and a man are regenerated, the adult, in
being able to reason coherently and profess faith, has the ability for
sanctification which the child does not have as a result of not being
able to reason in the same way yet. The spiritual life is the
same, and the union with Christ is the same, but the exercise of that
spiritual principle is not the same. Manton comments that this habitual
“sanctification” of the old man into a new man is done by grace, for
grace. He says, “For habitual sanctification, or that which is wrought
in the heart, I observe, that it is thorough, but not full.”
In the footnote to this he says, “As a child is a true man, though not a
perfect man, as soon as he is born, he hath all the parts, though not
the growth, and strength, and stature.”
Thus, a further step must be taken after regeneration, but which is not
regeneration. In elect infants dying in infancy, these have the habits
that would or could be exercised, but do not because of premature death
before exercised faith.
In
explaining the ideas surrounding “elect infants dying in infancy”, there
are many commentators for the catechism that conclude the same as has
been stated thus far by Van Mastricht, Turretin and Ames. Dr. Robert
Shaw states, “As infants are not fit subjects of instruction, their
regeneration must be effected without means, by the immediate agency of
the Holy Spirit on their souls. There are adult persons, too, to whom
the use of reason has been denied. It would be harsh and unwarrantable
to suppose that they are, on this account, excluded from salvation; and
to such of them as God has chosen, it may be applied in the same manner
as to infants."
Hodge states the same when he says, “If infants and others not being
capable of being called by the gospel are to be saved, they must be
regenerated and sanctified immediately by God without the use of means.”
Hodge also, in commenting on the Confession itself, brings up a
point made earlier but should be remembered at least in connection to
the Confession. He says the Confession, “is not intended to
suggest that there are any infants not elect, but simply to point out
the facts…the salvation of each infant, precisely as the salvation of
every adult, must have its absolute ground in the sovereign election
of God.”
Thus, agreeing with him, sovereign election is the grounds by which
regeneration occurs, and every infant or adult that is saved will
be saved in that manner: sovereignly. Gordon Clark mimics
Hodge here when he says, “the proof texts given in the footnotes are
taken as sufficient to show that all elect persons, whether infants or
adults, who are incapable of being outwardly called by the preaching of
the Word, are regenerated and saved notwithstanding.”
The
Scriptures are filled with texts dealing with regeneration in various
phrases and terminology. Aside from the explicit teaching of Jesus
Christ in John 3:1-10, other Scriptures help clarify what sovereign
grace in regeneration accomplishes, or how sovereign grace in
regeneration is described. It is called a “holy calling” in 2 Timothy
1:9, “who has saved us and called us with a holy calling, not according
to our works, but according to His own purpose and grace which was given
to us in Christ Jesus before time began.” It is called “workmanship” in
Ephesians 2:10, “For we are His workmanship, created in Christ Jesus for
good works, which God prepared beforehand that we should walk in them.”
It is referred to by God’s elective “call” in Romans 9:11 (for the
children not yet being born, nor having done any good or evil, that the
purpose of God according to election might stand, not of works but of
Him who calls).” It is called “spiritual discernment” in 1
Corinthians 2:14, “But the natural man does not receive the things of
the Spirit of God, for they are foolishness to him; nor can he know
them, because they are spiritually discerned.” It is called the
“washing of regeneration” and “renewing” in Titus 3:5, “through the
washing of regeneration and renewing of the Holy Spirit.” It is a
deposit made by God in Ezekiel 36:27, “I will put My Spirit
within you and cause you to walk in My statutes, and you will keep My
judgments and do them.” It is called being “born of God” in 1 John 3:9,
“whoever has been born of God does not sin, for His seed remains in him;
and he cannot sin, because he has been born of God.” It is called being
“begotten” of God in 1 John 5:1, “Whoever believes that Jesus is the
Christ is born of God, and everyone who loves Him who begot also loves
him who is begotten of Him.”
Faith
Though
defining faith is exceedingly important, one must take into account the
relationship, first, of regeneration to faith. Wilhelmus
A’Brakel states, “If one were to further ask if he must and can know the
moment when he exercised faith for the first time, I would answer that
he neither has to know this time nor is able to this with certainty. If
he were to begin with the first serious conviction, in all probability
he did not have faith as yet.”
What A’Brakel is trying to set at ease are those who want to place date
and time upon their “conversion” or the relationship between
regeneration and faith. This is something, he says, that is settled
upon what many of “conviction” has on the things he knows.
Truly, not everyone is as able to set down their conviction, or act on
their convictions at the same moment regeneration occurs, for
regeneration gives the recipient of Gods sovereign grace the ability, at
that point, to synthesize doctrine and then have conviction.
Knowing at such a time that this occurs, as A’Brakel states, is not
necessarily important, but that is occurs is very important! When faith
occurs, it has been called by the Reformed, a “reflex act.” It is a
reflex that is enacted by those who have the ability to reason and
profess the union sovereignly enacted on the sinner. In the article
The Active and Passive Obedience of Jesus Christ this writer states,
“The sinner, in the ordo salutis, has been regenerated, acts with |
