The Sovereignty of God

Written by Colin Maxwell

GOD HAS A PLAN THAT COVERS EVERY EVENT: Read: Genesis 17:1-8 INTRODUCTION: Why is God called God? Why does He call Himself Almighty God (Genesis 17:1) How Almighty is Almighty? Is there a stronger than He? Can He even be hindered? Is He forced to wait for what He desires? Does He ever desire something, but experience the reality of frustration and failure? What does the Bible mean when it declares that he can be limited? (Psalm 78:41) How can this be reconciled with His designation Almighty God? What does the Bible mean when it says that grace reigns? (Romans 5:21) All these questions will be answered over the next few studies. Doubtless, there be some difficulties encountered. What do the following verses relate to us in regard to this? A) Isaiah 55:8-9 B) Romans 11:33 C) Matthew 11:25-26http://www.freepres.org/WCFShort.htm D) Romans 9:19-20 1)  GOD WORKS TO A PLAN: A) What does God require of us in 1 Corinthians 14:40? We know that He does not require of us anything inconsistent with himself. B) What would inconsistency here lead to? (1 Corinthian 14:33) C) When does the Bible say that God made this plan? (Ephesians 3:11) 2) THIS PLAN MUST BE CONSISTENT WITH ALL HIS ATTRIBUTES: Already touched on this (above) From the Shorter Catechism of the Westminster Confession of Faith (Q4) point out the attributes of God: God is a spirit, Infinite/Eternal/Unchangeable in His… etc., There is nothing which God can plan which can run contrary to any of these attributes. He cannot decree anything that is unholy or foolish etc., 3) GOD MUST BE CAPABLE OF CARRYING OUT HIS OWN PLAN: A) We make plans…but often fail to see them carried out. We lack the power or the foresight required for guaranteed success. What are we required to prefix unto our plans? (James 4:13-15) B) Without going into great details, what basic arguments would you use to prove that God is more than capable of doing His will? C) What light does James 1:17/Malachi 3:6 have upon your investigations? Why could we never claim what God is here claiming?  D) Can you think of any "problem texts" which seem to contradict what God is claiming here? How do you explain them? 4) GOD'S PREORDINATION OF EVENTS EXTENDS TO THE VERY SMALLEST OF THINGS: A) What does God say about the birds of the air? (Matthew 10:29-31) Can you think of any incidents involving birds where it is evident that they were expressly doing the Father's will? B) What does Amos 4:7 relate? C) What does Amos 9:7 relate? We might multiply many events here. The Bible calls this providence. Indeed the Shorter Catechism (Q8) distinctly reminds us that God executes His decrees in the works of creation and providence. It is interesting to read the Bible and look for the providential hand of God e.g. Esther 6:1 etc., 5) GOD'S PRE ORDINATION OF EVENTS EXTENDS TO THE VERY LARGEST OF THINGS; A) What does Nahum 1:3/Psalm 148:8/Mark 4:39 show? B) Does Proverbs 8:15-16/Daniel 4:25/Romans 13:1 take things too far? What light does Esther 4:14 give? C) Ecclesiastes 3:1-2/Hebrews 9:27/Deuteronomy 32:39 show what?SALVATION Read:Acts 4:23-30 If God's plan covers every single event which ever happens (Ephesians 1:11) then it must include the work of salvation. It is illogical that this plan shou ld cover the very smallest and least important of events (Matthew 10:29) but leave undone the greatest event of all (Mark 8:36) Thankfully we have more than mere logic to base our observations on. The word of God makes clear the following observations: 1) GOD HAS ORDAINED THE MEANS OF SALVATION: Future studies will show how/why God must originate the work of salvation. Here we see the fact that He has ordained the means of that salvation. Two main thoughts: The work of Christ on our behalf (Objective) A) God has decreed that the wages of sin is death (Genesis 2:17/Ezekiel 18:4/Romans 6:23) What does God require in order to pardon sin? (Leviticus 17:11/Hebrews 9:22) B) What bearing does Exodus 12:3-7/13 and John 1:29 have upon our study? C) Point out the time scale of Revelation 13:8 How does this relate to the thought of a plan? The faith that saves (Subjective) A) Our justification is based on our believing God and He imputing it to us for righteousness. (Romans 4:5) This formula dates back to earliest Bible times (Genesis 15:6) and indeed before (Hebrews 11:4) It has been decreed from all eternity. There has ever only been one way of salvation. B) What does the Bible say of those who see fit to devise their own way of salvation? (Proverbs 14:12) Why is this? 2) GOD HAS ORDAINED THE CARRYING OUT OF THE WORK OF THE CROSS: A) The actual crucifixion of Christ is historically dated less than 2,000 years ago. What tense do the following statements, although spoken/written beforehand, use? Revelation 13:8 Isaiah 53:4-10 John 17:4 Why was this? (2 Samuel 23:5/2 Peter 1:19) B) Look at Acts 2:23. Who is said to have taken Jesus and crucified Him? How blameless were these crucifying hands? Yet…although blameworthy…how was Christ delivered? C) How did the Lord Jesus perceive this truth? (Matthew 26:24/Luke 22:22) D) Who else had a determination at the Cross? (Acts 3:13) Whose determination won this battle of wills? What does Acts 4:27-28 say about this? E) Are we really at liberty to try and think through the thought "what if…" Judas did not betray him or Pilate had stood firm against the Jewish pressure etc.? F) Out of the many OT prophecies concerning the death of Christ…can you think of any that were made null and void by the events leading up to and including Calvary so long ago? What light does Luke 18:31/John 19:28/Acts 13:29 shed on this? 3) GOD HAS ORDAINED THE RESULT OF CHRIST'S CROSS: Bearing in mind all that we have studied, could the result of Christ's suffering really have been hit and miss? Why/why not? A) What did Jesus consider had been achieved after He had suffered? (John 19:30) B) What does the Resurrection prove in this aspect? (Romans 4:25) For = because C) What would Isaiah 53:11 suggest? D) Can you think of any Bible verses which might even hint at the thought that failure was a possibility? Room for discussion:  How does this help you to read the whole of the Bible bearing Luke 24:44 in mind? How does it help you in assurance of salvation?THE TOTAL DEPRAVITY OF THE HUMAN RACE Reading: Romans 3:9-20 SHORT HISTORICAL BACKGROUND INFORMATION These "doctrines of grace" (commonly known as "Calvinism" after John Calvin who formulated them so brilliantly) were the standard teaching of Reformation Christianity. However, before his death in 1609, Dutchman Jacob Arminius challenged these doctrines. His followers (Arminians) pressed the matter further and in 1619 the Synod of Dort took up the challenge and ruled in favour of the traditional Protestant doctrine. The Arminians believed that man was not totally depraved - that his election to eternal life was conditional upon his faith which God fores een - that Christ died for the sins of the reprobate - that God's Spirit could be finally resisted even by the elect - and that it was possible for a truly born again child of God to apostatise from the faith and be damned in hell. It was the Arminians who dictated the field of battle and so the "5 points of Calvin" are a response to these attacks upon the Reformed Faith. The battle has raged ever since. Our final court of Appeal ought not to be the Synod of Dort (with all due respect) but the written word of God. This leads us on to consider the following: 1) GOD ORDAINED THE CREATION OF MAN A) Note the link to the sovereignty of God in Psalm 135:6 Proverbs 16:4/Revelation 4:11 B) Show from Romans 9:20/Matthew 20:15 how this position of God as Creator endows Him with certain inalienable rights. (Although we say that "power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely"…such an observation cannot be applied to our Thrice Holy Creator/God: Revelation 15:3) 2) GOD ORDAINED THAT ADAM WOULD REPRESENT MANKIND IN EDEN: A) Such truth is observed from the events of Genesis 5:3  and expounded in Romans 5:12-19/1 Corinthians 15:22 The world too has its representative men. When Chamberlain declared on 3rd September, 1939 that "Britain is at war with Germany" he was not speaking as an individual, but as the  representative of Britain. Every British subject knew that it had far reaching implications. Adam represented us all. 3) GOD ORDAINED THAT ADAM WOULD FALL IN THE GARDEN: A) This leads us to the very thorny issue of the origin of sin. The Bible does not tell us of how/where sin originated. it is largely futile for us to probe into this. Speculation is useless. We just know that God is not its author. Do we now appreciate the observations of Psalm 36:6? Show how the following verses prove that God hates sin: Proverbs15:9/Habakuk 1:13/Jeremiah 44:4/1Kings 16:2 B) We may fall back on the general observations of scripture that "God works all things after his own will" (Ephesians 1:11/Isaiah 46:10)  Again…God's eternal provision of "the blood of the everlasting (eternal) covenant" points that way also. What light do you think the incident in Genesis 20:2-6 throws on what God could have done? Was God any less free to intervene in Eden? 4) ADAM PLUNGED THE WHOLE HUMAN RACE INTO SIN: A) Adam was our Federal Head and so the human race all bear his guilt (Romans 5:19) More than this, we inherit his sinful nature. Already mentioned Genesis 5:3. Show how Psalm 51:5/58:3 builds upon this. Also Job 14:4/Matthew 7:17-18/John 3:6 The question is: To what extent is our nature sinful? Is it partial or total? The Bible teaches us that it is total. 5) WHAT TOTAL DEPRAVITY MEANS: A) It means that "man became wholly defiled, in all the faculties and parts of soul and body." (WCF) What do the following verses teach? [1] Isaiah 1:5-6 [2] Jeremiah 17:9 [3] Mark 7:20-23/Proverbs 23:7 [4] Ephesians 2:1 [5] John 8:34/Ephesians 2:2/2 Peter 2:19 B) Such depravity has a knock on effect as regards the gospel. Man is unable to grasp the truth of the gospel…not because God has wilfully blinded Him…but because his sin blinds him to its central truth. What do the following verses teach? [1] 2 Corinthians 4:4 [2] John 6:44/65 Where does the inability lie? John 5:40 [3] 1 Corinthians 1:18/Acts 17:18 6) WHAT TOTAL DEPRAVITY DOES NOT MEAN: A) It does not mean that all men are equally bad or that every man's actions are murderous and every word is slanderous. What do the following verses show? [1] Luke 6:33 [2] Luke 10:33 B) Such acts of decency/compassion are as a result of God's intervening an d common grace. God has put a restraining order on man's sin. Left to himself, man's life would manifest the fruits of Genesis 6:5. But God often restrains wicked men (Genesis 20:2-6 is an example) and often overrules his wicked designs (Genesis 50:20) If God took off the brake and left man to his own devices…this world would be a veritable hell. C) 2 Kings 8:11-13/13:7 shows us how we cannot even plumb the depths of our own hearts (Jeremiah 17:9) It is only the mercy of God that holds us back from the worst excesses. D) What petition in the Lord's  Prayer (Our Father) teaches us the same truth of God's restraining hand? 7) WHY TOTALLY DEPRAVED MAN IS STILL RESPONSIBLE FOR HIS ACTIONS: A) We have been learning that man is under bondage to sin. This sinful bondage - which man enjoys (Romans 1:32) - makes man incapable of repenting or believing the gospel. Yet, we are still to urge sinful man to repent and believe (Mark 6:12/Luke 24:47/Acts 20:21) Is it fair/just to exhort men to do what they cannot do? Does the Bible give us any other examples of this? 8) OUTCOME OF THIS RESPONSIBILITY: A) Man is unable in himself to believe the gospel with a saving faith. He may produce a non saving faith similar to that of James 2:19 or a false repentance (2 Corinthians 7:10) but his own sin prevents him from coming savingly to Christ. No man can sin himself out of responsibility before God. It was CH Spurgeon's great maxim that: "Salvation is all of grace…damnation is all of sin." Show how the following verses emphasise man's responsibility in his own damnation: [1] Acts 1:25 [2] 2 Peter 2:12 [3] Psalm 9:16 [4] Proverbs 5:22/6:32/8:36/11:5/14:14 Room for discussion: It is necessary for us to understand the full impact of the effect of the fall upon the human soul. Bishop Ryle observed long ago: "He that wishes to attain right views about Christian holiness, must begin by examining the vast and solemn subject of sin. He must dig down very low if he would build high. A mistake here is most mischievous. Wrong views about holiness are generally traceable to wrong views about human corruption." How do you think such might manifest itself in this day of low theological understanding and yet mass evangelism?UNCONDITIONAL ELECTION Reading: Romans 9:10-29/Ephesians 1:1-12 In the last study on total depravity, we observed how the fall of Adam affected the whole human race and made man incapable of not only saving himself or contributing to his salvation, but even availing of God's salvation offer. We might repeat then the Apostle's question' Who then can be saved? Will there be anyone in Heaven? If so, who? And on what grounds?  This study answers those questions: 1) GOD DOES NOT OWE MAN ANYTHING: A/ If God be God, then He cannot be obligated to any of His creatures. Observe the challenges which God issues - who can honestly answer them? Job 41:11/Romans 11:35/1 Corinthians 4:7 If we keep this thought in mind - it will bring the whole matter of salvation into perspective. We must start with God - not with man.  Much of the error which abounds over this doctrine comes from this problem of being anthropocentric i.e. man centred. B/ Still in the same train of thought as above - who in particular is targeted with these penetrating questions? Job 35:7 2) SINFUL MAN DESERVES ONLY ETERNAL DEATH: "Man is not only non deserving, but ill deserving and hell deserving." (IRKP) A/ Ezekiel 18:4/Romans 6:23 reminds us of a vital point of theology that we all know only too well: When we grasp this…anything more is a real bonus! B/ What was the response of the following people when this truth laid hold upon them? Job (40:4/42:6) Isaiah (6:5) Peter (Luk e 5:8) Prodigal Son (Luke 15:18-19) C/ Do you think any of the above, having grasped something of their own sinfulness and God's holiness, would have insisted on any rights? 3) IF GOD IS NOT OBLIGED TO SAVE ANY - HE IS CERTAINLY NOT OBLIGED TO SAVE ALL: A/ Logical - yet goes beyond logic. If God owes no man anything and can rightly damn men in hell for of their sin, then the fact that He can, in His sovereignty, choose to save some cannot be attacked on any grounds. God's challenge: Isaiah 41:21 B/ Let the objector show from the Bible that God is obligated to save all if He would save any. Consider God's rebuke to such: Ezekiel 18:25/29/33:17/20 4) GOD PASSES SOME SINNERS BY - LEAVING THEM TO PERISH IN THEIR SIN: A/ This is the negative aspect of election (called reprobation) It is taught in Romans 9:10-29. Some people find this teaching very hard to grasp. One reason is that they have started with man. Another is that they practically believe that man was in a state of neutrality when God made His choice and that He arbitrarily chose to send some neutrals to Hell while arbitrarily deciding to send some neutrals to Heaven. What have we learned about this neutrality issue? Was man neutral? B/ In Romans 9:13, what is the greatest wonder? That God loved Jacob or that He hated Esau? C/ If a man perishes in His sins - who can he blame? D/ What insight does Romans 3:19 give into the portioning of blame? E/ Before Judas hung himself - going as it was determined of him:  Luke 22:22 - where did he put the emphasise? Matthew 27:4 How did Peter view it? Acts 1:25 In the extensive conversation recorded by the Rich Man in Hell in Luke 16:19-31, is there any mention of a feeling of injustice? If not…why not? 5) THOSE WHOM GOD PREDESTINES TO ETERNAL LIFE ARE ELECTED UNCONDITIONALLY: A/ What "conditions" are attached to election in Romans 9:15-16? B/ Some folk - generally Arminians (see last study for historical background) believe that God foreknew who would believe the gospel and on that "condition" elected them to everlasting life? This is based on their interpretation of Romans 8:29 Is this a true interpretation? Why/why not? C/ There is no doubt that justification is conditional upon faith (Acts 16:30-31/Romans 5:1) but is faith the cause of election or the effect of election? What light does Acts 13:48/Romans 9:16 throw on this? D/ Scripture declares that we are predestined or "chosen in Christ"  from before the foundation of the world (Ephesians 1:4).LIMITED ATONEMENT OR PARTICULAR REDEMPTION Reading: John 10:1-18 Like unconditional election, this point in the "Five Points of Calvinism" attracts great controversy. Many of those who describe themselves as "Four Point Calvinists" point to this particular doctrine as the grounds of their dissension. Yet, it is but a logical and scriptural point, especially when you start with God and His eternal purposes. Read on: 1. ALTHOUGH ELECT - THE SIN PROBLEM HAD STILL TO BE DEALT WITH: It is not enough simply that God in His sovereignty should elect some out of the mass of lost humanity and predestine them for salvation. Such a move in itself does not remove the guilt of their sin. The divine law still required the following: Leviticus 17:11/ Hebrews 9:22 2) CHRIST'S DEATH HAD TO FIT INTO GOD'S SALVATION PLAN: We have already seen that Christ's death was according to the "determinate counsel and foreknowledge of God" (Acts 2:23) It is the purpose of God that there be a chosen number - comparatively few (Matthew 20:16) - be saved and brought into the Kingdom of God. When Christ died on Calvary, He had these people in mind. Their sins must be atoned for - their sins must be blotted out etc., We cannot have two plans on the go. 3) CHRIST'S DEATH HAD A DISTINCT PURPOSE: A) We must consider here two distinct propositions: [1] Christ died merely to make salvation possible: This makes salvation but potential. Not even probable and certainly not definite. Just potential. Can you reconcile this with the thought of a plan that is "ordered in all things and sure?" (2 Sam 23:5) [2] Christ died to actually secure salvation. This makes salvation definite - not merely potential or probable…but definite. B/ Pick out in the following verses, the definite language which the Bible employs re: the coming of Christ into the world to die on the Cross: [1] 1 Timothy 1:15 [2] Luke 19:10 [3] Matthew 20:28 [4] Matthew 1:21 C) Who do the following verses tell us Christ died for in particular? [1] Ephesians 5:25 [2] John 10:11/15 [3] Matthew 20:28 Although we use the term "Limited Atonement" to denote the Calvinistic idea that Christ died only to definitely save the elect…the fact is that both sides limit the atonement in one way or another. If Calvinists limit the scope of the atonement (He died only for His elect) then Arminians effectively limit the power of the atonement (Christ only made salvation possible or potential) We may use the illustration of two bridges. Arminianism can be likened to a bridge that, although wide to admit every single sinner, does not go the whole way across. It cannot for it, depends for its success on the acceptance of the sinner who can reject it and so make it null and void. The second bridge, although much narrower, goes the whole way across for it depends on the decree of God which cannot know frustration, for He who decreed the Cross has said: My counsel shall stand, and I will do all my good pleasure. (Isaiah 46:10)  Although the Bible sometimes uses words like if or perhaps etc., yet such language is never used concerning the work of Christ… 4) CHRIST'S DEATH COULD NOT KNOW FAILURE: A/ We need to stress that there is nothing limited in the value of Christ's death. Why not? (Acts 20:28) Had God decreed to add one more soul to the number of the elect, it would not mean that Christ would be required to suffer more pain. Had it been the decree of God…then the suffering of Christ would have actually atoned for the sins of the whole world. We know that this was not the decree of God.  B/ What does Isaiah 53:11 tell us about Christ's satisfaction for His sufferings? Would this be possible if He suffered for the many who are on the broad road to Hell and who will reject the offer of salvation as Matthew 20:16 more than implies?   5) THE JUSTICE OF GOD DEMANDS WE BELIEVE IN PARTICULAR REDEMPTION: Some folk argue against our doctrine saying that it would be unjust of God to send a soul to hell without Christ at least having died to save it. But if we go back to the last study, we will recall how God was not obliged to save any body and therefore not obliged to save everybody. God is just to send souls to hell on account of their sin. We can point out that it would be unjust for God to send any soul to Hell if Christ died to atone for that particular soul. Take the Rich Man in Hell (Luke 16:19-31) A damned soul who will never escape perdition. [1] Did Christ die for Him? (Argument sake: Yes) [2] Just the same as He died for poor Lazarus who went to glory? (Argument sake: Yes) [3] No difference? (Argument sake: No) [4] Did Christ make definite atonement for the sin of Lazarus? i.e. Did He actually blot out his sins as a thick cloud…cleanse them…purge them etc., (Argument sake: Yes) [5] Is God's Law satisfied with what Jesus did on Lazarus' behalf? (Argument sake: Yes) [6] Can Lazarus suffer in Hell on account of His sins? (Argument sake: No) [7] Why not? (Jesus has already suffered/satisfied the law) [8] If Jesus has done the exact same for Lazarus as for the Rich Man…can the Rich Man suffer in hell? (Argument sake: No) [9] Why not? [(Argument sake: Because Christ has already paid the price of the Rich Man's sin] [10] Why then is the Rich Man in Hell? Payment God will not twice demand First at my Bleeding Sureties hand And then again at mine. Some answer: The Rich Man is in Hell because although Christ died for all His sins yet the Rich Man would not accept the work on his behalf. He refused the gift and so is lost. We reply: Did Christ die for that sin of unbelief i.e. make atonement for it? (Argument sake: Yes) Then why should it hinder/damn him more than any other sin? Is God exacting payment twice (Unjust) (Argument sake: No) Then Christ did not die for all his sins (Limited Atonement) Christ did something definite on the Cross. At a historical point in time, He actually made full atonement for sins. This work cannot be reversed, or undone. Men go to hell, not only because they reject God's offer of salvation (Proverbs 1:24-29/Hebrews 2:3) but because they are fornicators, liars. thieves etc., (Revelation 21:8) God exacts from them the price due for these sins. Which shows that He has not done so before i.e. at Calvary. 6) POTENTIAL PROBLEM TEXTS/ARGUMENTS AGAINST THIS DOCTRINE ANSWERED: We accept that there are verses of scripture which would appear to teach that Christ died for the whole human race. These are texts like: Isaiah 53:6/ 2 Corinthians 5:14-15 where the death of Christ is linked to "all" or John 1:29/1 John 2:2 where it is linked to the "world" and in both these sets of verses, the word "all and "world" is taken to mean every single soul ever born - elect, or reprobate. It is worth pointing out that the word "all" whilst it does refer at times to every single human being ever born (Romans 3:23) yet there are times when it is more limited in its scope. Likewise, the word "world" sometime has the widest possible scope attached to it (John 3:16) and other times it means the Gentile as well as the Jew. See: John 12:19-20 Consider the words of Luke 2:1 (both "all" and "world" and see if it will stand up to the view that "all" and "world" must mean every single human being ever born or yet to be born. The Bible tells us that our redemption is "in Christ" (Romans 3:24) Can we contribute something to our redemption? Or is "salvation of the Lord"? (Jonah 2:9)IRRESISTIBLE GRACE READING: John 6:35-44/65 Recap: Thus far we have considered that God has planned every event that comes to pass and this plan extends to the work of salvation. We then saw that man is totally depraved and this necessitates God making the first move. God's election of certain individuals is not conditional upon any faith foreseen. Men believe because they are elect and not vice versa. In the last study, we saw that Christ died only to redeem those whom God elects. It is impossible that Christ should bear away the sins of the non elect and then have the non elect pay the same penalty for their sins in hell. The question now is: How does the elect sinner, dead in trespasses and sins, enter into the reality of Christ's work for him on the Cross? 1. THE GOSPEL MESSAGE IS TO BE PREACHED INDISCRIMINATELY TO EVERY SINGLE PERSON, ELECT OR NOT: Apart from those who profess faith/evidence the fruits of the Spirit, we cannot tell who the elect are among those still without any profession. As far as the preacher is concerned, every single person is still potentially elect and he is to have the gospel presented to him and pleaded with to be saved. A) Show from the following verses the indiscriminate nature of Gospel preaching: Mark 16:15 Matthew 28:20 Revelation 5:9 Acts 13:38-41/46 " The gospel is to preached indiscriminately to the elect and to the reprobate…" (Calvin: Commentary on Isaiah) 2) SOME SINNERS CAN AND DO REJECT ALL THE STRIVINGS OF THE SPIRIT OF GOD UPON THEIR SOULS: Both the Bible and experience shows us this truth. A/ Pick out the key phrases in the verses below which show how far a reprobate can go with God without actually being saved: Hebrews 6:4-5  [Note these verses can prove to be very disturbing to consider. They were certainly played out in the life of Judas Iscariot. They are serious warning verses from God. They should drive us to Christ. They do not and cannot negate the simple fact that even the weakest faith in the finished work of Christ saves eternally. Remember our next study is on the perseverance of the saints.] B/ What light does Genesis 6:3 throw on this subject? C/ What was the charge which Stephen brought against the Jewish Council above whom he was arrayed and would be eventually martyred? Acts 7:51 What are the key damning words?  3) ELECT SINNERS CAN AND DO REJECT THOSE SAME STRIVINGS OF THE HOLY SPIRIT: At this stage, we should note that the theologians usually differentiate between the outward call of the gospel and the inward call of the Spirit, although (as far as the elect are concerned) the two are synonymous. The outward call is the call of the gospel preacher preaching the gospel. Many are called but few are chosen. The inward call is the prompting of the Spirit of God using the preaching to convict men of sin, righteousness and judgement to come (John 16:8) Often even the elect, thought yet unsaved, sinner will reject this call to repentance. Did you believe the first time you heard the gospel? Did the Apostle Paul? (Cp Acts 7:54/59/8:1/9:1-6) 4) EVENTUALLY THE ELECT SINNER WILL RESPOND POSITIVELY TO THE DRAWING OF THE HOLY SPIRIT: It is the will of God that His elect will respond positively to the indiscriminate preaching of the gospel. This will cannot know frustration (Isaiah 46:10/Proverbs 19:21) What does John 5:40 relate about the reason why sinners are not yet saved? What further light does John 6:44/65 throw the reason?  Who will be drawn to Christ according to John 6:37? How is the same thought worded in Romans 8:30? Relates how Jeremiah 31:3 shows that this is automatic: How do you reconcile these thoughts with 1 Timothy 2:4 where we read that God will have all men to be saved and come unto the knowledge of the truth? [The answer to this perhaps lies best in the following comments from CH Spurgeon in his sermon on this very text. Sorry it is a little on the long side, but it is well worth reading and is unsurpassable in its wisdom. Spurgeon said: "I do not intend to treat my text controversially. It is like the stone which makes the corner of a building, and it looks towards a different side of the gospel from that which is mostly before us. Two sides of the building of truth meet here…It is quite certain that when we read that God will have all men to be saved it does not mean that he wills it with the force of a decree or a divine purpose, for, if he did, then all men would be saved. He willed to make the world, and the world was made: he does not so will the salvation of all men, for we know that all men will not be saved. Terrible as the truth is, yet is it certain from holy writ that there are men who, in consequence of their sin and their rejection of the Saviour, will go away into everlasting punishment, where shall be weeping and wailing and gnashing of teeth. What then? Shall we try to put another meaning into the text than that which it fairly bears? I think not. You must, most of you, be ac quainted with the general method in which our older Calvinistic friends deal with this text. "All men," say they,- "that is, some men": as if the Holy Ghost could not have said "some men" if he had meant some men. "All men," say they; "that is, some of all sorts of men": as if the Lord could not have said "all sorts of men" if he had meant that. The Holy Ghost by the apostle has written "all men," and unquestionably he means all men. I know how to get rid of the force of the "alls" according to that critical method which some time ago was very current, but I do not see how it can be applied here with due regard to truth. I was reading just now the exposition of a very able doctor who explains the text so as to explain it away; he applies grammatical gunpowder to it, and explodes it by way of expounding it. I thought when I read his exposition that it would have been a very capital comment upon the text if it had read, "Who will not have all men to be saved, nor come to a knowledge of the truth." Had such been the inspired language every remark of the learned doctor would have been exactly in keeping, but as it happens to say, "Who will have all men to be saved," his observations are more than a little out of place. My love of consistency with my own doctrinal views is not great enough to allow me knowingly to alter a single text of Scripture. I have great respect for orthodoxy, but my reverence for inspiration is far greater. I would sooner a hundred times over appear to be inconsistent with myself than be inconsistent with the word of God. I never thought it to be any very great crime to seem to be inconsistent with myself; for who am I that I should everlastingly be consistent? But I do think it a great crime to be so inconsistent with the word of God that I should want to lop away a bough or even a twig from so much as a single tree of the forest of Scripture. God forbid that I should cut or shape, even in the least degree, any divine expression. So runs the text, and so we must read it, "God our Saviour; who will have all men to be saved, and to come unto the knowledge of the truth." Does not the text mean that it is the wish of God that men should be saved? The word "wish" gives as much force to the original as it really requires, and the passage should run thus- "whose wish it is that all men should be saved and come to a knowledge of the truth." As it is my wish that it should be so, as it is your wish that it might be so, so it is God’s wish that all men should be saved; for, assuredly, he is not less benevolent than we are. Then comes the question, "But if he wishes it to be so, why does he not make it so? " Beloved friend, have you never heard that a fool may ask a question which a wise man cannot answer, and, if that be so, I am sure a wise person, like yourself, can ask me a great many questions which, fool as I am, I am yet not foolish enough to try to answer. Your question is only one form of the great debate of all the ages,- "If God be infinitely good and powerful, why does not his power carry out to the full all his beneficence?" It is God’s wish that the oppressed should go free, yet there are many oppressed who are not free. It is God’s wish that the sick should not suffer. Do you doubt it? Is it not your own wish? And yet the Lord does not work a miracle to heal every sick person. It is God’s wish that his creatures should be happy. Do you deny that? He does not interpose by any miraculous agency to make us all happy, and yet it would be wicked to suppose that he does not wish the happiness of all the creatures that he has made. He has an infinite benevolence which, nevertheless, is not in all points worked out by his infinite omnipotence; and if anybody asked me why it is not, I cannot tell. I have never set up to be an explainer of all difficulties, and I have no desire to do so. It is the same old question as that of the negro who said, "Sare, you say the devil makes sin in the world." "Yes, the devil makes a deal of sin." "And you say that God hates sin." "Yes." "Then why does not he kill the devil and put an end to it?" Just so. Why does he not? Ah, my black friend, you will grow white before that question is answered. I cannot tell you why God permits moral evil, neither can the ablest philosopher on earth, nor the highest angel in heaven. This is one of those things which we do not need to know. Have you never noticed that some people who are ill and are ordered to take pills are foolish enough to chew them? That is a very nauseous thing to do, though I have done it myself. The right way to take medicine of such a kind is to swallow it at once. In the same way there are some things in the Word of God which are undoubtedly true which must be swallowed at once by an effort of faith, and must not be chewed by perpetual questioning. You will soon have I know not what of doubt and difficulty and bitterness upon your soul if you must needs know the unknowable, and have reasons and explanations for the sublime and the mysterious. Let the difficult doctrines go down whole into your very soul, by a grand exercise of confidence in God. I thank God for a thousand things I cannot understand. When I cannot get to know the reason why, I say to myself, "Why should I know the reason why? Who am I, and what am I, that I should demand explanations of my God?" I am a most unreasonable being when I am most reasonable, and when my judgement is most accurate I dare not trust it. I had rather trust my God. I am a poor silly child at my very best: my Father must know better than I. An old parable-maker tells us that he shut himself up in his study because he had to work out a difficult problem. His little child came knocking at the door, and he said "Go away, John: you cannot understand what father is doing; let father alone." Master Johnny for that very reason felt that he must get in and see what father was doing -a true symbol of our proud intellects; we must pry into forbidden things, and uncover that which is concealed. In a little time upon the sill, outside the window, stood Master Johnny, looking in through the window at his father; and if his father had not with the very tenderest care just taken him away from that very dangerous position, there would have been no Master Johnny left on the face of the earth to exercise his curiosity in dangerous elevations. Now, God sometimes shuts the door, and says, "My child, it is so: be content to believe." "But," we foolishly cry. "Lord, why is it so?" "It is so, my child," he says. "But why, Father, is it so?" "It is so, my child, believe me." Then we go speculating, climbing the ladders of reasoning, guessing, speculating, to reach the lofty windows of eternal truth. Once up there we do not know where we are, our heads reel, and we are in all kinds of uncertainty and spiritual peril. If we mind things too high for us we shall run great risks. I do not intend meddling with such lofty matters. There stands the text, and I believe that it is my Father’s wish that "all men should be saved, and come to the knowledge of the truth." But I know, also, that he does not will it, so that he will save any one of them, unless they believe in his dear Son; for he has told us over and over that he will not. He will not save any man except he forsakes his sins, and turns to him with full purpose of heart: that I also know. And I know, also, that he has a people whom he will save, whom by his eternal love he has chosen, and whom by his eternal power he will deliver. I do not know how that squares with this; that is another of the things I do not know. If I go on telling you of all that I do not know, and of all that I do know, I will warrant you that the things that I do not know will be a hundred to one of the things that I do know. And so we will say n o more about the matter, but just go on to the more practical part of the text. God’s wish about man’s salvation is this,-that men should be saved and come to the knowledge of the truth."]  5) THE IRRESISTIBLE CALL OF THE SPIRIT OF GOD BRINGS THE ELECT SINNER INTO SAVING LIFE AND UNION WITH JESUS CHRIST: In other words, it applies to the heart the worth and work of the Person of the Lord Jesus Christ. This is the new birth that enables the sinner to repent and believe the gospel and so experience all the wonders of God's salvation. A/ How does John 5:25 describe this act? B/ How does Acts 26:18 describe this act?THE PERSEVERANCE OF THE SAINTS Reading: Romans 8:28-39 This is the last of the "Five Points of Calvinism" although not the last in this present series of Bible Studies. 1) THIS DOCTRINE IS THE LOGICAL OUTCOME OF ALL THAT IS GONE BEFORE: Underlining premise: God has a plan and that this plan must see complete fulfilment without any real let or hindrance. Sometimes the road to completion bends etc…but the counsel of the Lord stands for ever (Psalm 33:11) Remind ourselves again: What is God's plan regards salvation? Hebrews 2:10 Would this be possible if any son intended for glory apostatised and went to hell? Where would this leave the counsel of the Lord? And Psalm 33:11 with its bold statement? Therefore God states unequivocally: John 10:28-29 1 Samuel 2:9 Psalm 37:28 Romans 8:33-39 2) FALSE PROFESSORS CANNOT CLAIM SECURITY: We need to bear in mind that there is such a thing a false professing Christian - someone who has never really come to Christ for salvation. Perhaps self deceived or just deliberately living a lie…whatever: Such are not saved and therefore cannot lay hold on any of the promises of God's word for true believers. [1] What all did the folk in Matthew 7:22-23 manage to do? How do they address Christ? Were they saved? Indeed…were they ever saved? [2] Although there may be many empty professors of Christ, yet does the nature of the Bible in any way give grounds for any reason why this should be so? John 20:31/1 John 5:11-13 3) TRUE SAINTS EVIDENCE THEIR FAITH BY GOOD WORKS & OBEDIENCE TO GOD'S WORD: Obviously we are going to ask ourselves: Am I a real believer? Or just an empty professor? How can I tell? [1] Inwardly: Romans 8:16 Objection: Surely we can be deceived in our feelings? It need much more than a mere subjective "gut feeling" type experience - such as those in Matthew 7:22-23 probably had. Fair enough… [2] Outwardly: We evidence that we are true Christians by doing the things that Christians do. a/ We come savingly to Christ alone for salvation. Not depending on any sacrament or rite or deed done by any other or ourselves but Christ's work only. b/ Such coming entails a desire to forsake sin completely. We want to live obediently to God's word without any "ifs" and "buts" c/ We attend the appointed means of grace: The word of God/prayer/fellowship/service of God. d/ There is a noticeable work of grace in our hearts. Ignorance gives way to knowledge. Zeal -steadfastness- even opposition to us  because of our Christian faith etc., may all indicate that we are Christians. We love God and desire His will to be done in our hearts. We constantly seek His face and especially the ongoing cleansing blood of Christ (1John 1:7) [3] Note the 5 evidences of the new birth in 1John a/ 2:29 b/ 3:9 c/ 4:7 d/ 5:1 e/ 5:4 Warning: We can be forever chasing our tail in this matter. Such evidences do not demand absolute perfection. Although strong faith is preferable to weak faith, yet even weak faith is an evidence of salvation. The question is: Are the ev idences there? Do I trust Christ alone for my salvation in repentance? If so… Luke 7:50 is for me…personally. 4) IT IS GOD'S GRACE THAT PERSEVERES IN THE BELIEVER: [1] Discuss: Salvation is not so much me holding unto God but God holding unto me. Explain without denying that the believer has responsibilities i.e. Philippians 2:12-15/Isaiah 26:12/Hebrews 13:20-21 5) THE BELIEVER OFTEN FALLS IN TEMPTATION…BUT ALWAYS RISES UP AGAIN: [1] What does Proverbs 24:16 teach? [2]  What was the difference between Peter and Judas? [3] If you fell grievously…what would you do? 6) WHY THERE ARE WARNING PASSAGES IN SCRIPTURES ADDRESSED TO BELIEVERS: [1] Discuss the thought that God not only appoints the end but the means to that end. What means has God employed thus far to bring us to our present state of justification? [2] Some argue that this doctrine leaves room for Christians to live in sin, knowing that their mansion in Heaven is reserved for them. Is this a logical argument? What would you say to a professing Christian who was living in sin?THE OUTWORKING OF THE DOCTRINES OF GRACE So far we have examined the Doctrines of Grace. It would be very easy to leave them lying coldly on the pages of a theological study. If this is all we have done…then we have failed to grasp God's message to our hearts. In this study, we will examine the effect which the Doctrines of Grace have on 4 key areas. 1. CALVINISM AND HOLINESS: It is a charge of the enemies of these doctrines that they lead to licentiousness and ungodly living. No doubt such doctrines have been abused -natural man always turns the blessing of God into a curse. No doubt, there are those who teach that you can well nigh live as you please and because you are either saved or lost by the eternal decree of God, then your conduct has no bearing on your eternal destiny. These are they who turn the grace of God into lasciviousness (Jude 4) but their illegitimate religion cannot be fathered on the doctrine of God. A) What do the following verses say we were predestined and elected in order to be? Ephesians 1:4 Romans 8:29 B) Some of the most noted godly men - who praise is still in the churches - passionately believed the doctrines of grace. Robert Murray McCheyne comes immediately to mind. The man they called Holy Bradford is another. Those societies where these doctrines held sway were noted for their distinct absence of any serious crime. McFetridge said of the American Puritans (Calvinists): Amongst all the people in the American Colonies, they stood morally without peers. They were men and women of conscience, of sterling convictions… They were industrious, frugal and enterprising, and consequently affluence followed in their path and descended to their children and children's children. Drunkenness, profanity and beggary were things little known to them. They needed neither lock nor burglar proof to secure their honestly gotten possessions. The simple wooden bolt was enough to protect them and their wealth where honesty was the rule of life. (Calvinism in History: p.8) C) There is no reason why the doctrines of God's decree or perseverance of the saints should lead to ungodly living. When the truth of such wonderful evidences of God's grace is revealed to the heart…the proper response is that of gratitude to God as seen in Luke 7:41-43 2. CALVINISM AND ASSURANCE OF SALVATION: Again, it is often charged that Calvinism robs men of the assurance of salvation. Since the number of the elect is immutably fixed and cannot be increased or diminished - how can any one know for certain that he is among the elect of God? Easily answered: A) Christians from all different theological persuasions lose assurance of salvation. Not just Calvinists.< br />We might challenge what right has any Christian whose doctrine teaches him that he played some part in his coming to Christ have any assurance? If we can will ourselves into Christ…surely we can just as easily will ourselves out of Christ? B) Bible teaches we can make our calling and election sure (2 Peter 1:10) We cannot call or elect ourselves…but we can confirm what God has done and rejoice in it. C) Simple way to have assurance (under God: Romans 8:15/Galatians 4:6) is simply to come to Christ and lay hold by faith on that great promise: Romans 10:13. If I come to Christ…then I am truly elect for only the elect come and are never - then or later - cast out (John 6:37) See later study on hyper Calvinism for further discussion. 3. CALVINISM AND PRAYER: It is also contended that Calvinists do not believe in prayer meetings etc., because if God has already decreed whatever comes to pass…why bother asking for it. God will perform His good will whether you ask or not. Utter rubbish! A) Calvinists believe that God has ordained the means as well as the end. We pray because God has commanded it, especially that petition that His will be done on earth as it is in Heaven (Luke 11:2) Why did the Lord Jesus get us to so pray if God's will cannot know frustration - as taught by Daniel 4:35? Ans:- Because he has ordained the means as well as the end. Even though God knows the things we have need of before we ask - He would still have us ask (Matthew 6:8ff) B) Daniel, who believed in the absolute sovereignty of God (4:25/35), observed from reading the Bible that God "would accomplish 70 years in the desolations of Jerusalem" (9:1-2) Definite. This but spurred Daniel on to prayer (9:3) because he had every confidence that God would answer his prayer. True prayer is always founded on faith and that faith is in God's word. God is not playing word games.THE DOCTRINES OF GRACE, EVANGELISM AND HYPER CALVINISM: In the last study, we looked at the affect which the Doctrines of Grace have on holiness, assurance of salvation, and prayer. We answered our critics that Calvinism is a destructive force in these areas. In this study, we will look at the subject of Calvinism and evangelism and its associate subject of hyper Calvinism. This is the last study in this present series. CALVINISM AND EVANGELISM: A charge often made is that Calvinism deadens evangelistic zeal. Calvinists are painted as men who sit back and let the world go to hell, knowing that God will bring in His own elect whether they evangelise or not. This is actually a caricature of Biblical Calvinism. I personally have been confronted with this charge while engaging in indiscriminate tract distribution. It never seemed to dawn on my accuser that my activity as he was actually speaking to me belied his accusation. A) SOME OF THE GREATEST EVANGELISTS WERE CALVINISTS: Think of the great preachers who saw revival. Names like Whitefield, Jonathan Edwards, Daniel Rowlands of Wales and Spurgeon come to mind. Names of the great Reformers - Calvin, Luther and Knox - were all believers in these doctrines of grace and yet, under God, they saw entire nations transformed. Can we really charge these men with uncaring ease as to whether or not sinners were saved? William Carey is known as the "Father of Modern Missions?" What does this title tell you about a desire for lost souls? Yet Carey was a "5 point Calvinist" As indeed were other mighty evangelists including David Brainerd, William C Burns and Henry Martyn and a glorious host of others. B) WHY EVANGELISE? Why do you think? See before on why do we pray?  See also: Mark 16:15/Matthew 28:20 There is no doubt that God can do things without human invol vement (Creation) but it pleases Him, for His own glory, to use human instruments of whatever moral standing i.e. righteous as well as wicked: Esther 4:14/ 2 Chronicles 36:22 C) WHY CALVINISM ENCOURAGES EVANGELISM: Consider if Arminianism is right. God has done all He can to save the sinner and ultimately it is up to man's free will to decide. God cannot lean on man's free will any lest He be accused of invading man's sovereign citadel. How does this scenario enthuse the gospel worker? What comfort can he draw as he hopes for a successful soulwinning ministry? On the other hand…what comfort do you think Dr Bennett Tyler drew from the word of God to Paul in Acts 18:9-10 when He said: "Then spake the Lord to Paul in the night by a vision, Be not afraid, but speak, and hold not thy peace: For I am with thee, and no man shall set on thee to hurt thee: for I have much people in this city."  Dr Tyler entitles his message on this text: "The doctrine of election: the only ground of encouragement to preach the gospel to sinners." Which of the two systems of thought actually ensures success? A sovereign God who gives mercy to whom He will or Sovereign Man totally able to frustrate every effort God makes to try and save him? Tyler asks: "What encouragement was there for Ezekiel to prophesy to the dry bones, unless God had determined in connection with his preaching to reanimate the dead?" D) IN EVANGELISM, WE PREACH THE GOSPEL IN AN INDISCRIMINATE FASHION TO EVERY CREATURE. Calvin rightly pointed out: "The gospel is preached indiscriminately to the elect and to the reprobate…" (Commentary on Isaiah) And again: "As we cannot distinguish between the elect and reprobate, it is our duty to pray for all who trouble us, to desire the salvation of all men." (Psalm 4:283) Robert Murray McCheyne preached on the text from Proverbs 8 where Wisdom issued the following summons: "Unto you O men do I call" McCheyne very wisely answered those who would object to coming on the excuse that they "were not elect": "The question is not: Am I one of the elect…but am I one of the human race?" Man has no reason to stay away from Jesus Christ. They all began to make excuse - but an excuse is not a reason. E) AN ARMINIAN PRAYING FOR SUCCESS IN EVANGELISM IS REALLY A CALVINIST AT HEART: Is this not true? Surely in praying, there is a recognition that God has not done all that He could to save the soul…but that further divine intervention is required. Are we really asking God to do something more? Consistent Arminianism would spend all its time pleading with the sinner to exercise his final choice. Calvinism both pleads with God and the sinner, knowing that God has the last word in saving who he will and that He uses the pleading of the preacher to accomplish that great end. THE HORRIBLE CURSE OF HYPER CALVINISM: Much of what men father on Calvin and Calvinism should actually be directed to those whom we call hyper Calvinists. A hyper Calvinist is not merely a zealous Calvinist. He denies certain truths central to the Calvinistic system of thought. A. As mentioned above, the Calvinist does believe that the gospel is to offered to all men. When we preach, we tell all men indiscriminately that there is a Saviour for them if they repent and believe the gospel. Note how the Apostles preached Acts 13:26 (Note limited sense in this verse - but it is not totally limited as will be seen in the others) See: 13:31-32/38/40/41 (note offered to those who would despise, wonder and perish) v46 (offered to those who judged themselves unworthy of everlasting life.) The hyper Calvinist does not believe in the free indiscriminate offer of the gospel, reserving it only for those who show signs that they are among the ele ct. So strong is the argument from Acts against them, that the articles of the Strict Standard Baptists (hyper Calvinists) declare: that it is unsafe from the brief records given of the way that the apostles preached to derive absolute and universal rules (Article 32) and this leads on to the claim that ministers ought not to address unconverted persons, or indiscriminately all in a mixed congregation to call upon them to repent, believe and receive Christ. (Article 33) The Hyper Calvinists believe that to exhort men to so believe etc., implies creature power and therefore they desist. We ask…why then did the Apostles in Acts 13 not desist? What is so dangerous about the God's word which at length shows the Apostles preaching (Acts 13) reasoning (Acts 17) etc., in mixed/hostile situations? B) The Calvinist believes that man is both responsible to repent (Matthew 11:20/22) and believe (John 16:7-9) although because of sin unable (John 6:44) This (under God) forces the sinner to realise his total helplessness, so that he cries out for salvation. Hyper Calvinists believe that since man is not able to believe, then he is not responsible. But since man lost his spiritual abilities, through the fall, this would absurdly mean that man could sin away his responsibilities. This hampers evangelism - kills it - but not the Calvinism which we believe. See above. C) Hyper Calvinism restricts all the offers only to the elect and says that you cannot avail of them unless chosen in Christ. It leads to inordinate subjectiveness "Am I elect?" causing the enquirer to look within and not to Christ. True Calvinism encourages the sinner to look with hope to Christ, emphasising the "whosoevers" of scripture and assuring him that if he comes, then he will find mercy etc., and so give evidence that he is indeed elect. Many hyper Calvinists do not have assurance of salvation. In avoiding the pit of easy believism, they have fallen into the opposite ditch. Either way, Satan sits entirely satisfied. If he cannot rob the believer of his salvation, he can certainly rob him of his joy, assurance and usefulness. He has certainly done so through this horrible curse of hyper Calvinism which is to be avoided and opposed like the plague. See the door saying "Whosoever will may come" Enter in and you will see it say: "Chosen in Christ from before the foundation of the world" As far as we are concerned, every man is potentially elect. God's secret decree is His business: Deut 29:29