Why is man obligated and responsible to believe when he cannot? Jonathan Edwards helps us here by distinguishing between natural ability and moral ability. This distinction is not original with him, but he sets it out for us in a clear way and those who followed him used it extensively. According to Archibald Alexander, William Twisse, the prolocuter of the Westminster Assembly, John Howe, and Isaac Watts used this distinction. Andrew Fuller made extensive use of it as well. The natural ability of man is that in which he can be blamed or praised. An example (drawn from Edward Griffin) is that of a stubborn child. If the child has the power to walk and yet will not walk because it is stubborn, we know that the child has the power or ability to walk but does not because of the sin of stubbornness. Yet if the child is paralyzed from a physical difficulty, we do not speak of the child as being able to walk. The man who is a drunkard certainly has the physical power to put down his drink, but there is an inability that goes to his heart and desires. Is there anything of the human nature whether inner or outer that keeps people from loving God other than a heart that hates God? Where did that heart come from? Are men to blame for having a heart that does not love God or is that the fault of another?
All try to blame God for their inability or lack of ability, but that is just a sign of a heart that is at enmity with God. Sinners do have power to love in one sense as they love themselves and the things of the world. The lack of understanding comes from disinclination to or enmity with God. The lack of affections for God comes from a love for self and the world and is against God when He stands in opposition to self. The lack of will or choice for God is not from a lack of natural ability as man makes choices all day for himself and his sin. That lack of will is from a moral disposition. It is possible for sinners to obey God outwardly and yet they do not. This is why those that love the Gospel must always be on the alert for those who have an outward reformation of life because it might be the self doing the outer things out of love for self rather than love for God.
In one sense we must stress that unbelievers have ability in order to show them the true nature of their inability. If we use the word “inability” and do not explain what it means and what it does not mean, the sinful hearts of man will blame God rather than see the true nature of his inability as moral and blameworthy. If we teach inability without showing the true nature of man’s ability, we are not teaching the true nature of man’s inability. Romans 8:6-8 sets out the teaching of inability for us: “For the mind set on the flesh is death, but the mind set on the Spirit is life and peace, 7 because the mind set on the flesh is hostile toward God; for it does not subject itself to the law of God, for it is not even able to do so, 8 and those who are in the flesh cannot please God.” In verse 7 we see that the unbelieving mind does not subject itself to the law of God “for it is not even able to do so.” In verse 8 those “in the flesh cannot please God” (highlighting mine). The words “able” and “can” are words of ability.
We must think through this text carefully. If an unbeliever is not able and in fact cannot please God, then surely (we are told) that person is not responsible. But the Reformed position is that the person’s inability only arises from his enmity with God and hatred toward Him. It is not that the person does not have the physical strength or that anything is wrong with him or her in any way except that the person is at enmity with God. What is wrong with a person that does not love God? That person hates God and loves self. What is wrong with a person that does not love his or her neighbor? It is because that person loves self and hates the God that the other person is made in the image of. The inability is in the person’s moral disposition. That is utterly devastating to the Arminian position. The person does have ability in all ways except for enmity with God. Can that person just decide to love God when in fact that person hates God? Is a person’s will really free if he or she is governed by hatred for God? If morality is ultimately determined by love for God, where does that leave a person when she or he hates God?
It is without question that all who believe in God will love God. All who do not believe or have faith in God through Christ will not love Him. The connection between faith and love cannot be separated. Where there is one the other will be there also. Man’s inability to believe is linked to his hatred of and enmity with God. One will never trust one that one is enemies with. The Arminian position requires that a person believe God and love God when in fact one hates Him. Biblical faith is not just to believe a fact, it is to believe with the whole heart and that out of a complete submission which requires trust and love. The inability of man is because man is at enmity with God and not because of any other inability. All the inabilities of man flow from man’s enmity with God. We will pick this up in the next BLOG.
God Loves... Himself 
Leave a comment