The Doctrines of Grace

So, the big question is, what about the unbeliever who is doing the praying. They are, after all, praying for good things.

As mentioned previously, their prayer is being used by God for both the benefit of the elect and the sanctification and definite redemption of His creation. Does this count as redemptive credit to the unbeliever, in some way bringing them closer to salvation?

The short answer, to steal a phrase from Paul, is “May it never be!”. In other words – absolutely not. In fact, quite the opposite, as we shall see.

Actually there are two groups to consider here: unbelievers passively in the audience and the unbeliever praying.

1.The passive unbelieving attendee.

First, this is not the ‘yet unsaved’ member of the elect. They were dealt with in the Part 1 post.

This is the other passive unbelieving attendees.

The way of the wicked is an abomination to the LORD, but he loves him who pursues righteousness. Prov 15:9

Since all of the fallen, that is all of mankind throughout all of the ages since the Fall, are at enmity with God, in active rebellion against Him, and serving Satan, nothing in this situation affects their status. The wicked are all those who are not redeemed.

However, that is not to say that they do not contribute to God’s program of redemption, but only that this contribution (since God uses all things to the benefit of His program) does not benefit their status before Him. The only thing that can change that is salvation.

Further, since this situation, like all of creation, confronts them with the sovereignty of God, they are herein implicitly commanded to acknowledge His sovereignty. Their denial and failure to do so is an ongoing affront (wickedness) to Him.

In a post some time ago I said “Now, in reference to apparent good verbal acts of the unsaved, these are good in the natural sense. They can not, however, appear good to God since their root does not emanate from God.” I would like to follow this train of thought a bit further. Fasten your set belts please, as the going may get a tad rough.

Let me pose a scenario: You are visiting a group of friends or family, and you sitting down to a meal together. Or you are at a large, primarily secular gathering where a meal is being served. Countless other scenes are possible in your memory I am sure. In line with modern inclusiveness and in deference to you or other ‘religious’ folk in the room, the non-Christian leader says a prayer for the meal and all who are in attendance.

Now let us look Biblically at the attitude of God to and efficacy of this praying.

We know that “for those who love God all things work together for good, for those who are called according to his purpose.” (Romans 8:28). First, this covers the believers in attendance. This is not qualified and is irrespective of the current circumstance. It is also exclusive. That is, God works in the interests of His elect only. As such, they are blessed. I think that I would even extend this to any yet unsaved elect in attendance, since they are headed for the Lord, so to speak.

Next, “all things work together for good” is inclusive of all circumstances working for the ongoing sanctification and redemption of the elect in God’s purposes. So we have not only individual benefit to the elect but also to the Lord’s “purposes” in creation. This would included the benefit to the earth of eventually being released from the effects of the Fall, under which it continually suffers. Again, this is irrespective of circumstance or in this case who is the active agent in the scenario.

So God uses all circumstances for the good of His elect and His creation, all in the movement forward of His program.

Since He is absolutely sovereign in all things, there are no surprises or variances to Him. His program can not be thwarted and even the worst scenario will be used in the interest of the elect and towards Heaven.

Next, the sticky part…

A few weeks ago I taught about the Trinity in our Basic Theology group. As part of the discussion we covered a number of significant heresies that had dogged the church in its early days (200~500BC). These erroneous beliefs had been declared as heresy and put to rest by various church councils. At least that is what we thought about them. They were well outside of the foundational orthodoxy and heterodoxy of all of the orthodox church landscape. But the work of the evil one is persistent.

One of the key errors concerned the Trinity, and was known as Modalism.

Okay, so there I was visiting a local nursing home this afternoon. I was chatting with a lady, and in brief the significant part went something like this (with the small talk left out):

Me: Where are you from?

Her: The ….. (a Pacific Rim country)

Me: I have a number of friends from there. I know them from church. Are you a Christian?

Her: Yes

Me: Do you go do church?

Her: Back home I did, but not here.

Me: Oh, what church?

Her: The Church of the One God.

And then she added “We don’t believe in the Trinity.”

Well, I don’t know if she saw my ears perk up or the “Say what?” expression on my face but…

Without being too pushy, I trolled a bit more and realized that I was in the presence of a real, live Modalist! I was back in the early church era!

Folks, just to be clear, this is not squabbling about drums in the worship service. This is serious stuff that can affect the very grounds and sufficiency of the Gospel.

Now, admittedly, there are lots of people in today’s evangelical church who hold slightly Modalistic views without realizing it. They have never been exposed to the biblical truth (shame on their church and Pastors – but that is for another post some time later). For example, they regard the Holy Spirit as only an extension of God’s power, rather than a full person of the Godhead with the same being, power and authority as the Father and Son. This, however, appeared to be much more than that. This was flat out denial of the Trinity, period.

I am still somewhat in dis-belief.

I will certainly meet this lady again and I will plum the depths of this some more. At her relatively young age, it is most certainly a result of bad and heretical teaching, but it does show that there are large groups of people who have run seriously amuck and into dangerous territory.

The doctrinal wolves among the sheep indeed.

The local church in this case is saying that we choose Christ, triggering (that is, causing)  Him to appoint us to eternal life. There is not mention of any prerequisite work of the Spirit. This means that we are at some point in the process completely responsible for initiating our salvation and that we are capable of doing so as we stand. This is the error.

This vests the decision of who is save and who is not solely in the hands of a man, making him sovereign in initiating his ascension to eternal life. One can argue semantics but that is what they are saying.

Scripture, on the other hand, is unequivocal that the decision of who is to be save and who will believe is made solely by God BEFORE creation.

Further, Scripture makes it clear that man can NOT turn to Christ in his natural, unchanged state. Only the work of the Holy Spirit BEFOREHAND changes a man’s heart so that he can turn to Christ.

The Scriptural truth places the decision of who is saved, as well as how and when, solely in the hands of  God.  God is therefor solely and wholly sovereign in the ascension of the sinner to eternal life.

By take a ‘high view’ for man’s sovereignty, the belief under review demeans the sovereignty of the Creator. Man is conceived as not only sovereign over himself, but since his action causes God to act, God is in fact obligated to act on man’s behalf subsequent to the belief  ‘decision’.

Man is no longer the humble clay before the potter, but the sovereign clay who controls the potter’s action. This is a recipe for pride and hubris in man and for the believer to feel exalted in himself.

Once a believer casts himself  into this salvation creating role, the proper biblical attitude of obedience and acceptance toward God will surely evaporate over time. Man’s role will expand in significance to one assuming a God who is not omnipotent but limited.

This is an afront to and direct challenge to the God of the Bible. Throughout redemptive history, such attitudes have not been well received before the Lord…

I came across the quote below in the Doctrinal statement of an unnamed emergent church plant…

“When we put our faith in Christ, it triggers a spiritual chain reaction. We become the Temple of the Holy Spirit (I Cor. 6:19). Our names are written in the Lamb’s Book of Life (Rev. 3:5).”

Sound pretty good? Appears to be based in Scripture? Looks can be deceiving. Please read it again.

It denies the foundational and critical sovereignty of God as clearly stated in the bible. Let’s see how…

Reducing their statement to the logic and intent we have  “When we put our faith in Christ, it triggers a spiritual chain reaction…Our names are written…”.

Action -> Result 1 and Result 2

You put our faith in Christ resulting in your inclusion in the Book of Life

I honestly can’ t see that anyone could interpret this any other way.

Well, to be blunt, that is wrong, wrong, wrong.

Let’s look at the truth of Scripture in Ephesians 1:4-6
“even as he chose us in him before the foundation of the world, that we should be holy and blameless before him. In love ⁵ he predestined us for adoption as sons through Jesus Christ, according to the purpose of his will” (italics mine)

Their statement stays that the believer was were chosen after they believed and because they decided to believe.

Scripture says that the believer was  chosen (and thus written in the Book of Life) before creation. These verses contain no caveats, individual conditions or other provisions for later causation.

These are two opposite positions, and they can’t both be correct. If the Bible is the sole statement of truth (Sola Scriptura), then this doctrinal statement is in error and at completely odds with Scripture.

So what? Next, we will examine why this is significant for all believers…

In the previous post containing the Good-O-Meter clip, I mentioned that the theology had some issues. What issues, you might ask?

Well, the meter implies in its evaluations that each of the lost individuals has some amount of good credited to them at judgment. It surges up to as much as the half way mark, then falls back to the level assigned by judgment – that of ‘bad’. Though this works well dramatically, it is very important to understand that this is not the case in reality. There is an implication that the ‘good’ parts of the individuals have some value before God. That is completely wrong.

Scripture is clear that all are tainted in every aspect, having no good at all unless they are regenerated in Christ. Works or virtues outside of Christ have no value whatsoever before God.

Isaiah 64:6 states it clearly “For all of us have become like one who is unclean, and all our righteous deeds are like a filthy garment”

Even the finest virtues and character of the unregenerate are a ‘filthy garment’ before God. All of the virtues and any good that is done by the unregenerate is tainted by the imputed sin that is passed on to every one of Adam’s seed. That makes every human being (past, present and future) that has not been saved unacceptable before a righteous and holy God. Scripture is again clear that nothing of them is counted as of any value.

So, in this clip, the meter should not move at all from initial ‘bad’ position except in the case of the regenerated.

That said, however, the most important point is made very clearly – salvation is through Christ Alone.

Let’s follow the discussion of fruits of the Spirit in the context of assurance a bit farther…

Before someone accuses me of discounting the fruits of the Spirit, let me state that they are indeed important markers. After all, in Galatians 5:22-23 we have “But the fruit of the Spirit is love, joy, peace, patience, kindness, goodness, faithfulness, gentleness, self-control…”.

So these are significant results of salvation. Fruits grow as the final result in the plant and they appear differently for not only species but occasional even the same type of plant. Scripture does not indicate that they are the root or even a determining factor for salvation, initial or eternal. To push the plant analogy further, an apple tree that does not produce fruit at some point is still an apple tree. The fruit is not determinate to the species.

If the fruits of the Spirit were in any way a determining factor, then we would have a salvation of works which would vest some of God’s sovereignty into our actions on our own behalf. For those not remembering, that reverts right back to Pelagian heresy of the 4th century. We won’t go there since this discussion assumes a Reformed theology.

We should also again stress that discernment of belief is in ones own heart before God, and the message of the Gospel must be believed at that level (the lack of which no doubt creates the tares among the wheat). We can not see into another’s heart and therefore can not determine their status before the Lord, nor would we be correct in doing so. As Scripture points out, only the Lord judges the heart. Our task is only to discern our own heart with the smiple, straightforward message of the Gospel. That places us with the saved, or not.

So, the fruits of the Spirit are significant marks of salvation, which may be observed in the regenerate at differing times and in differing ways. They may also be observed in the reprobate. The only assurance is from the belief in the heart of the Gospel message.

This has hug implications in the life of the believer. Those struggling with the flesh while truly believing on Jesus Christ in their hearts are not showing signs of being a reprobate. Their struggle is not the mark of the unsaved. Quite the opposite. The reprobate does not suffer angst over their sin. The angst suffered over our failures is a sign of election and cause to rejoice in the Lord. It is the sign that the law has fulfilled its sole function.

In conclusion, preaching the fruits of the Spirit as the marker of necessity for salvation, and assurance of such, is error, plain and simple. It does not reflect the message of Scripture and does harm to God’s people as they work through their salvation.

Assurance is drawn from ones true belief in the message of the Gospel, and that alone. And that message is about Christ, not fruit…