God Loves… Himself

One of the greatest differences between the evangelical Calvinists and those they deride as “Hyper-calvinists,” is the evangelical Calvinists believe Arminians and Pelagians are otherwise sound “Christians,” and refer to them as their brothers and sisters. The Hyper-calvinists believe that as long as one is unconverted from his natural freewill state by the operation of the Spirit of God, and converted to the free grace of God by the Gospel of the grace of God, there is insufficient evidence to consider such as a “Christian,” or a “brother or sister.” This is not to say that they consign them to hell–that is not their desire, for by their own experience they understand that before that gracious divine call out of darkness, they, too, were “vessels of wrath even as others.” Arminians and Pelagians are as much in need for the gospel as any “heathen” or pagan. Calvinists would do well to “evangelize” their Arminian or Pelagian “brothers and sisters.”
To the Reformers, the crucial question was not simply, whether God justifies believers without works of Law. It was the broader question, whether sinners are wholly helpless in their sin, and whether God is to be thought of as saving them by free, unconditional, invincible grace, not only justifying them for Christ’s sake when they come to faith, but also raising them from the death of sin by His quickening Spirit in order to bring them to faith. Here was the crucial issue; whether God is the author, not merely of justification, but also of faith; whether, in the last analysis, Christianity is a religion of utter reliance on God for salvation and all things necessary to it, or of self-reliance and self-effort. ‘Justification by faith only’ is a truth that needs interpretation. The principle of sola fide is not rightly understood till it is seen as anchored in the broader principle of sola gratia (Johnson & Packer’s intro to Luther’s Bondage of the Will).

What we must come to grips with is that the Gospel is not primarily about man, but is almost exclusively about the glory of God. While man receives great benefit from the Gospel, the Gospel is all about the wonder and glory of God’s grace in Christ Jesus by the Holy Spirit. As long as people focus on what they can do and focus on what they think that God has left for them to do, they will not be focused on grace alone, Christ alone, and the glory of God alone in the true Gospel of faith alone. The state of the autonomous will or the self-sufficient will or the free-will is one that man is saved from as opposed to using it to be saved. There may indeed be, and in fact certainly appears to actually be, something that tends to be Hyper-Calvinism. But that is quite a different thing than saying that all those (most?) accused of that are other than historical Calvinists who hold to the fact that the Gospel is monergistic (one worker) and are stridently opposed to the synergism (working together) of the vast majority today. The Gospel of grace alone is under attack at this very vital point.

Most in the modern day (within conservative Christianity) would agree that justification is by faith alone, or would agree that sinners are justified by faith alone. Most in the modern day (within conservative Christianity) would also agree that sinners are justified by grace alone and Christ alone. However, without knowing it or perhaps meaning to, it seems that virtually all are either adding one work or a few works to the Gospel and few are objecting to that. Monergism teaches that not only does God justify sinners apart from their works, but that the entire and whole work is His. Arminian teaching may not specifically deny that in theory or in words, but in reality the Arminian theology is built around a free-will that is free of depravity (to some degree) and free from grace. It has to be free from those or it could not be free at all and the choice would then be God’s.

The justification of sinners has to be without and apart from all works of the sinner in fact and not just in words. So when the Arminian position says that man has free-will and must exercise that free-will to make a free-choice so that God will save him, that is adding the work of faith and the work of the will to salvation and as such they have made faith out to be a work and mixed it with the Gospel. This is to say that their position demands them to look to self for faith which then makes faith a work of self as opposed to being the work of the grace of God. As the quote by Packer and Johnson point out above, this is utterly crucial. It is at the point of the will where we can see whether people really believe that man is dead in sins and trespasses and by nature is a child of wrath. It is at the point of the will where we can see whether men believe that God saves sinners by His grace alone and that to do so He is sovereign in that and He gives faith to the soul. This is the point where we see whether men will side with the supposed ability and freedom of man or with the freedom and ability of God. This is the point where we see whether men will adore free and sovereign grace or whether they will fight to retain some power for men who are dead in sins and trespasses. This is vital and eternally serious.

One of the greatest differences between the evangelical Calvinists and those they deride as “Hyper-calvinists,” is the evangelical Calvinists believe Arminians and Pelagians are otherwise sound “Christians,” and refer to them as their brothers and sisters. The Hyper-calvinists believe that as long as one is unconverted from his natural freewill state by the operation of the Spirit of God, and converted to the free grace of God by the Gospel of the grace of God, there is insufficient evidence to consider such as a “Christian,” or a “brother or sister.” This is not to say that they consign them to hell–that is not their desire, for by their own experience they understand that before that gracious divine call out of darkness, they, too, were “vessels of wrath even as others.” Arminians and Pelagians are as much in need for the gospel as any “heathen” or pagan. Calvinists would do well to “evangelize” their Arminian or Pelagian “brothers and sisters.”

To the Reformers, the crucial question was not simply, whether God justifies believers without works of Law. It was the broader question, whether sinners are wholly helpless in their sin, and whether God is to be thought of as saving them by free, unconditional, invincible grace, not only justifying them for Christ’s sake when they come to faith, but also raising them from the death of sin by His quickening Spirit in order to bring them to faith. Here was the crucial issue; whether God is the author, not merely of justification, but also of faith; whether, in the last analysis, Christianity is a religion of utter reliance on God for salvation and all things necessary to it, or of self-reliance and self-effort. ‘Justification by faith only’ is a truth that needs interpretation. The principle of sola fide is not rightly understood till it is seen as anchored in the broader principle of sola gratia (Johnson & Packer’s intro to Luther’s Bondage of the Will).

Here is the crux of the issue in many ways, perhaps in the most important ways. The primary goal of God in justifying sinners is not so that sinners would be saved, but so that the glory of His grace would be manifested. As noted in the quote just above, it was a crucial issue with the Reformers whether God is the author of the faith of the sinner or is the sinner the author of his or her own faith. Sinners were not thought to be saved by faith alone so as to give them a way to be saved by an act of their own wills, but instead justification by faith alone was asserted and declared in order that sinners could see that they were saved by grace alone to the glory of God alone.
The point of the Gospel is not just to set out a way for sinners to be saved, but it is a way for God to exalt and glorify His own name and manifest the sovereignty and beauty of His grace. One is not justified by faith alone when one believes that the creed teaches that one should believe that, nor is one saved because one believes that the Bible teaches that. One is only justified by (through) faith alone when one has the mighty work of God in his or her soul and that person has a God-wrought faith in the soul. In this case, then, we behold the glory of God and His grace in saving sinners by grace alone. Sinners are saved by faith in order that it may be by grace (Rom 4:16). It is not that they have to come up or can come up with faith on their own, but justification is by faith so that it can be by grace and grace alone. The real and true nature of faith is not just a belief in something nor is it an act of the free-will, but instead it is what God alone can work in the soul by unity with Christ.
While it may appear that justification by faith is simply opposed to a person working his or her way to salvation, it is opposed to any and all works. Somehow and someway we must seek the Lord to give us a view of His sovereign grace and the beauty of the glory of His grace. Someway we must being to view all things in light of who God is and His purposes for all things rather than viewing things through the lenses of human-centeredness and the purposes of self. Behold the glory and beauty of God’s centeredness upon Himself from Ephesians 1:

5 He predestined us to adoption as sons through Jesus Christ to Himself, according to the kind intention of His will, 6 to the praise of the glory of His grace, which He freely bestowed on us in the Beloved.
7 In Him we have redemption through His blood, the forgiveness of our trespasses, according to the riches of His grace 8 which He lavished on us. In all wisdom and insight
10 In Him 11 also we have obtained an inheritance, having been predestined according to His purpose who works all things after the counsel of His will, 12 to the end that we who were the first to hope in Christ would be to the praise of His glory. 13 …having also believed, you were sealed in Him with the Holy Spirit of promise, 14 who is given as a pledge of our inheritance, with a view to the redemption of God’s own possession, to the praise of His glory.

One of the greatest differences between the evangelical Calvinists and those they deride as “Hyper-calvinists,” is the evangelical Calvinists believe Arminians and Pelagians are otherwise sound “Christians,” and refer to them as their brothers and sisters. The Hyper-calvinists believe that as long as one is unconverted from his natural freewill state by the operation of the Spirit of God, and converted to the free grace of God by the Gospel of the grace of God, there is insufficient evidence to consider such as a “Christian,” or a “brother or sister.” This is not to say that they consign them to hell–that is not their desire, for by their own experience they understand that before that gracious divine call out of darkness, they, too, were “vessels of wrath even as others.” Arminians and Pelagians are as much in need for the gospel as any “heathen” or pagan. Calvinists would do well to “evangelize” their Arminian or Pelagian “brothers and sisters.”

It is of the utmost importance that people should clearly understand and be made thoroughly aware of their spiritual impotence, for thus alone is a foundation laid for bringing them to see and feel their imperative need of divine grace for salvation. So long as sinners think they have it in their own power to deliver themselves from their death in trespasses and sins, they will never come to Christ that they may have life, for “the whole need not a physician, but they that are sick.” So long as people imagine they labor under no insuperable inability to comply with the call of the gospel, they never will be conscious of their entire dependence on Him alone who is able to work in them “all the good pleasure of His goodness, and the work of faith with power” (II Thess 1:11). So long as the creature is puffed up with a sense of his own ability to respond to God’s requirements, he will never become a suppliant at the footstool of divine mercy.   Arthur Pink

One of the differences between Arminian teaching and the older calvinistic teaching is that the Arminian teaching wants to build up man so that he will make a choice, but the older Calvinists wanted to tear man from his pride that he would look to Christ alone and grace alone. The difference between these two positions is huge. The one (the Arminian one) focuses on man and his ability to choose and tries to build him up and get him to look to himself to make a choice. The other (older Calvinist) view wants man to see how he has no ability to choose and wants him to look away from self in all ways and look to Christ for all things regarding salvation and that includes faith.

It is in light of what Arminian theology does in evangelism that should awaken people to see how utterly false and dangerous it is. While Scripture teaches us that man is spiritually dead in sin, the Arminian teaching would still have man do something and look to self to do what needs to be done. Scripture teaches that man is by nature a child of wrath and as such must be born again and have a new nature, yet the Arminian teaching would have man look to himself and his old nature to make a choice for salvation. The evangelism of the Arminian is to get man to focus on himself in order for man to do something, which is as opposite to the old Calvinism as there can be. The evangelism of the older Calvinism told man that he needed to seek the Lord for a new heart.

The Arminian way, then, is in some way teaching men that their real hope is in self rather than Christ. True enough that is not the way it is phrased, but that is the essence of the teaching. Instead of looking to Christ alone for a new heart in order that the soul may truly believe, the Arminian has men looking to self for faith that God rewards. As Pink says in the quote above, until men clearly understand and are made thoroughly aware of the spiritual impotence, they will not see their absolute need of divine grace for salvation. When sinners are taught to look to themselves to deliver themselves from death and sin, they will not come to Christ for the whole work of salvation.

It cannot be overstated as to the importance of this. Men will either look to themselves or to the free and sovereign grace of God in terms of salvation. If men are to look to God alone for grace alone, they cannot be looking to themselves for help or have any hope in themselves. In another way of looking at it, God does not look to the sinner for anything to provide help, but instead He saves sinners for His own glory and does not need nor want any help in the matter for that would be sharing His glory with another. As long as men think they have some ability of some aspect of free-will, they will not look to free-grace alone and so will not be saved for the glory of God alone. We must always remember that God saves to the glory of His grace and whatever men hang on to regarding self and self-will is opposed to the glory of His grace.

One of the greatest differences between the evangelical Calvinists and those they deride as “Hyper-calvinists,” is the evangelical Calvinists believe Arminians and Pelagians are otherwise sound “Christians,” and refer to them as their brothers and sisters. The Hyper-calvinists believe that as long as one is unconverted from his natural freewill state by the operation of the Spirit of God, and converted to the free grace of God by the Gospel of the grace of God, there is insufficient evidence to consider such as a “Christian,” or a “brother or sister.” This is not to say that they consign them to hell–that is not their desire, for by their own experience they understand that before that gracious divine call out of darkness, they, too, were “vessels of wrath even as others.” Arminians and Pelagians are as much in need for the gospel as any “heathen” or pagan. Calvinists would do well to “evangelize” their Arminian or Pelagian “brothers and sisters.”

It is of the utmost importance that people should clearly understand and be made thoroughly aware of their spiritual impotence, for thus alone is a foundation laid for bringing them to see and feel their imperative need of divine grace for salvation. So long as sinners think they have it in their own power to deliver themselves from their death in trespasses and sins, they will never come to Christ that they may have life, for “the whole need not a physician, but they that are sick.” So long as people imagine they labor under no insuperable inability to comply with the call of the gospel, they never will be conscious of their entire dependence on Him alone who is able to work in them “all the good pleasure of His goodness, and the work of faith with power” (II Thess 1:11). So long as the creature is puffed up with a sense of his own ability to respond to God’s requirements, he will never become a suppliant at the footstool of divine mercy.   Arthur Pink

Just as a review, the first quote is from a man who believes that modern Calvinism is not the Calvinism of old (Reformation times). We have been examining that statement (or at least some thoughts it contains) and have tried to show how out of step modern Calvinism and Arminianism is with Luther’s Bondage of the Will. In the last BLOG we quoted Thomas Hooker in an effort to show that the whole nature of true faith is opposite to those who hold to the free-will position or at least think it is something that is not that serious. The free-will position is in fact, at least from the view of historical Christianity, in opposition to the Gospel of grace alone. It is not just some little view that is a little wrong; it strikes at the heart of Christianity as it was understood in the time of the Reformation. We need to be awakened from our ecumenical slumbers (in practice and theory) and realize that we are letting the very enemy of the Gospel of grace alone in the door as a friend.

Arthur Pink sets out for us how important it is for people to understand and to be made thoroughly aware of their spiritual impotence. It is only when people see just how impotent that they are that they will then see how they need grace and grace alone to save them. It is very true that as long as sinners think that all they need to do is something that is in their own power they will put that off and see no real urgency in the matter. How logical the sinner is when s/he thinks that as long as s/he can simply say a prayer or make a choice at the time and place of their own choosing, then there is no rush and no need for urgency at all. As long as a person thinks that spiritual death is not a big deal and that a simple choice will do the trick, then that person will not seek the Lord for the power to raise him or her from the spiritual dead. Instead, the poor deluded sinner will continue on in sin thinking that all is well because God is just waiting on him or her to make that one little choice.

The sinner who is deluded enough to think that it is all up to him to make that choice is a sinner that is blinded to his or her own depravity and to the real Gospel of grace alone. Minister after minister in our day are deluded as well and will not tell people just how dead they are and how they are completely unable to help save themselves and are totally at the mercy of God. These ministers are far guiltier than a physician who will not tell his or her patients what is really wrong with them and so allows a disease to progress far enough to where it is beyond hope for the patient. We are inundated with ministers who not only are telling people false gospels, but are are telling them things that will increase their damnation as these people trust and hope in themselves. They are telling them things that encourage people to put off what is necessary or blinds them to what is necessary for salvation. As Pink says (in thought), as long as people are blinded to their utter inability to comply with the Gospel, they will have no idea of their entire dependence on Him who alone can raise them from the spiritual dead. This is so sad.

One of the greatest differences between the evangelical Calvinists and those they deride as “Hyper-calvinists,” is the evangelical Calvinists believe Arminians and Pelagians are otherwise sound “Christians,” and refer to them as their brothers and sisters. The Hyper-calvinists believe that as long as one is unconverted from his natural freewill state by the operation of the Spirit of God, and converted to the free grace of God by the Gospel of the grace of God, there is insufficient evidence to consider such as a “Christian,” or a “brother or sister.” This is not to say that they consign them to hell–that is not their desire, for by their own experience they understand that before that gracious divine call out of darkness, they, too, were “vessels of wrath even as others.” Arminians and Pelagians are as much in need for the gospel as any “heathen” or pagan. Calvinists would do well to “evangelize” their Arminian or Pelagian “brothers and sisters.”

A modern editor of Luther’s great work underscores this fact: “Whoever puts this book down without having realized that evangelical theology stands or falls with the doctrine of the bondage of the will has read it in vain.”

While it is so common for people to be unaware of the vital nature of the doctrine of the bondage of the will, it is also as uncommon to find someone who has thought about the will but thinks of it as important. But, if the quote above is right, the whole of evangelical theology (older theology, theology of the Reformation) falls when this teaching is not taught or is simply not thought of as important. I would add that in places where it is nothing but an intellectual amusement or perhaps an object of intellectual exercises it will also not be dealt with as it should. The doctrines of the Gospel of grace alone, of what Christ has accomplished by grace alone, and what the Holy Spirit must do by grace alone if any would be saved all fall without the doctrine of the bondage of the will.

The nature of faith is this; it is the going out of the soul to another, and to see all-sufficiency in another, and to fetch all from another. To have supply in a man’s self, and to see all-sufficiency in Christ, those two cannot stand together. So that while the soul is thus possessed with his own sufficiency to procure ease to himself, it is certain this stops the work of faith, and hinders the pouring in of faith into the soul, whereby you should go wholly out of yourselves, and fetch all from Christ. Therefore mark now what follows. As contrition took away the former hindrance, so the Lord hath this work of humiliation, whereby He shuts back this bolt, and makes him to see an utter inability in himself to procure or receive any good. Thomas Hooker, The Soul’s Implantation, International Outreach, reprinted 2014)

Thomas Hooker, a wonderful writer from the 1600’s, in the paragraph just above, shows us just how the older evangelical theology stands or falls with the bondage of the will. True faith must always have an object and true faith must have a sufficient object. If true faith is in Christ alone, then a true faith must not be in self to do anything, but instead is to see Christ alone as all-sufficient. A true faith will find no sufficiency in self at all. As long as the soul has any hope (faith) in self, it cannot have a true faith in Christ. The soul that has some hope in self will look to self instead of look totally to Christ alone. True faith must be in Christ alone for all things and that includes faith and hope. True faith must come from or be accompanied with “an utter inability in himself to procure or receive any good.”

The last sentence in the previous paragraph (quote from Thomas Hooker) is of tremendous importance. Not only is it the case that unless man has an utter inability in himself to procure something man will not have true faith, but it is also the case that without the recognition of our own utter inability to receive apart from grace man cannot receive anything. True faith is necessary to receive grace, but one cannot have true faith to receive grace until man has lost all hope and trust in self to procure and receive any good. Romans 4:16 tells us that it is by faith in order that it may be by grace, so if hope or trust in our own will is the opposite of faith, it is clear that we must denounce the ability of our own will in order to have true faith.

Without going into great detail, we can simply point to the great danger of Arminian teaching concerning free-will if what Thomas Hooker and Scripture sets out as true. The Arminian teaches that others must make a choice of the free-will which means that the will be free of all things and it must make the choice. This tells us that the soul is looking to itself for something rather than Christ and rather than knowing that it has a total inability to procure or receive anything spiritual or good. The soul cannot pretend to look to itself and to Christ as that is not possible. One must look to Christ alone or one cannot look to Christ at all. The soul is either able to procure or receive to some degree by something it does or it cannot procure or receive anything of itself and Christ must do it all. This is the difference between Arminianism and old Calvinism, though it may not be thought of as all that important to many today. However, it is the difference between the Gospel of grace alone and a gospel of works with grace to help. The Gospel of grace alone stands with the doctrine of the bondage of the will, but falls with the teaching of free-will. We must wake up and see the great danger.

One of the greatest differences between the evangelical Calvinists and those they deride as “Hyper-calvinists,” is the evangelical Calvinists believe Arminians and Pelagians are otherwise sound “Christians,” and refer to them as their brothers and sisters. The Hyper-calvinists believe that as long as one is unconverted from his natural freewill state by the operation of the Spirit of God, and converted to the free grace of God by the Gospel of the grace of God, there is insufficient evidence to consider such as a “Christian,” or a “brother or sister.” This is not to say that they consign them to hell–that is not their desire, for by their own experience they understand that before that gracious divine call out of darkness, they, too, were “vessels of wrath even as others.” Arminians and Pelagians are as much in need for the gospel as any “heathen” or pagan. Calvinists would do well to “evangelize” their Arminian or Pelagian “brothers and sisters.”

A modern editor of Luther’s great work underscores this fact: “Whoever puts this book down without having realized that evangelical theology stands or falls with the doctrine of the bondage of the will has read it in vain.”

In the first quote above the author is trying to get people to see that what is known as Calvinism in the modern day is not the Calvinism of the old days. He is trying to get people to see that when the modern Calvinists believe in a wholesale way that Arminians and Pelagians are sound Christians and are brothers and sisters, they are not in line with the older teaching. Packer and Johnson wrote the introduction to the 1957 publication of Luther’s Bondage of the Will and they assert quite strongly that evangelical theology (at the time, theology of the Reformation) stood or fell with the doctrine of the bondage of the will and the failure to realize that was to read Luther’s work in vain. This is a very important statement as it is quite right. But of course the term “evangelical” has also changed from the time of the Reformation until today as well.

If I understand things correctly, it was the Calvinists of the day (Reformation time) who were referred to as evangelical. This is to say, then, that biblical Calvinism stands are falls with the doctrine of the bondage of the will. When people do not see it as important or even vital, as indeed Luther and Calvin did, then evangelical theology has changed from what they taught and is something else. It has to be clear to all that what was once evangelical theology in the Reformation is not the evangelical theology of the 1900’s, but even worse what is thought of as evangelical theology in the modern day is not even close to that of the 1900’s. What we simply must see (and “must” is not used lightly at this point) is that the Gospel of Jesus Christ (evangelical theology) is not the same teaching when one denies the bondage of the will as it is when one holds to it strongly.

The doctrine of depravity as understood by the Reformers was that men are so depraved that they are helpless and have no ability to do one thing in the spiritual realm. Just below is how the Westminster Confession of Faith (Chapter 6, Sections II & IV put it):

II. By this sin they fell from their original righteousness and communion, with God, and so became dead in sin, and wholly defiled in all the parts and faculties of soul and body.
IV. From this original corruption, whereby we are utterly indisposed, disabled, and made opposite to all good, and wholly inclined to all evil, do proceed all actual transgressions.

The bondage of the will is not just a nasty doctrine that Luther dreamed up to bash Erasmus over the head with, but instead it is the heart of the doctrine of depravity that the Reformers had and that the men at Westminster agreed with. Holding to the bondage of the will is a necessary teaching if one is to believe and sincerely hold to the depravity of man. Unless a person holds to the bondage of the will (Total Depravity of man), a person cannot consistently or even honestly believe in justification by grace alone as the Reformers articulated it. But again, the doctrines of the Reformation stand or fall along with a robust holding of bondage of the will. The teaching of free-will is not just a little wrong, it is the chink in the dyke that when removed the whole dyke will collapse. This is not just a diatribe against Arminianism, it is an effort to defend the Gospel of grace/Christ alone as set out by Scripture and trumpeted in the Reformation.

One of the greatest differences between the evangelical Calvinists and those they deride as “Hyper-calvinists,” is the evangelical Calvinists believe Arminians and Pelagians are otherwise sound “Christians,” and refer to them as their brothers and sisters. The Hyper-calvinists believe that as long as one is unconverted from his natural freewill state by the operation of the Spirit of God, and converted to the free grace of God by the Gospel of the grace of God, there is insufficient evidence to consider such as a “Christian,” or a “brother or sister.” This is not to say that they consign them to hell–that is not their desire, for by their own experience they understand that before that gracious divine call out of darkness, they, too, were “vessels of wrath even as others.” Arminians and Pelagians are as much in need for the gospel as any “heathen” or pagan. Calvinists would do well to “evangelize” their Arminian or Pelagian “brothers and sisters.”

But a man cannot be thoroughly humbled till he realizes that his salvation is utterly beyond his own powers, counsels, efforts, will and works, and depends absolutely on the will, counsel, pleasure and work of Another—God alone. As long as he is persuaded that he can make even the smallest contribution to his salvation, he remains self-confident and does not utterly despair of himself, and so is not humbled before God; but plans out for himself (or at least hopes and longs for) a position, an occasion, a work, which shall bring him final salvation. Martin Luther

According to Luther, until a person realizes that his salvation is utterly beyond his own power and will, he is not ready to be saved. According to Luther, a person must realize that salvation is utterly beyond his own power and will in order that s/he may depend absolutely on the will and work of God. According to Luther, as long as a person is persuaded that s/he can make the smallest contribution to salvation that person is self-confident and is not humbled before God. According to Luther, as long as a person is not humbled and despairing of self before God that person will plan for himself something in order to bring himself salvation.

The point, then, in this context, is that in order for a person to be a true Arminian that person must believe in free-will. A person with free-will does not recognize that his salvation is utterly beyond his own power and will and is not able to depend absolutely on the will and work of God. The person who believes that s/he has a free-will must believe that s/he makes some contribution in salvation since salvation depends on the choice of that person. This is directly contrary to what Luther taught about the will and about the Gospel of justification by grace alone through faith alone.

The position that we are driven to, I am arguing, is that we must consider the Gospel that burst forth during the Reformation time and consider whether it was biblical or not. If it was and is, then the modern evangelical Calvinist view that we can just easily accept Arminians and Pelagians as brothers and sisters must be examined. This is not to argue that no person who claims to be an Arminian is unconverted, but it is to argue that this wholesale acceptance is dangerous at best. In Galatians 1 Paul was quite clear of the danger of preaching a distorted Gospel which was different from the Gospel of grace alone in Christ. One can understand this as an attack on Arminians and Pelagians, or one can understand this as crying out that we must look to the Gospel again for what it is and be more careful.

The free-will state is not one that can look to the grace of God in Christ alone to save it, but instead the free-will state is what a person must be converted from. We cannot hold to a Gospel of free-grace while we hold a Gospel which allows for a free-will in it as well. The two cannot be joined as they are enemies and can never be reconciled. The Gospel of free-grace is all about the will and choice of God to do all as He pleases and when He pleases to the glory of His name. The gospel which includes free-will is all about the will and choice of man to do as he pleases and when he pleases. The Gospel of free-grace is all about the freedom and sovereignty of God, but the gospel which allows for free-will is all about the freedom and sovereignty of man. God is sovereign, but man has only thought he was sovereign in his depraved state as a result of the fall into sin. We must love the Gospel of free-grace alone enough that we will stand against any and all who oppose that, even in the name of religion.

One of the greatest differences between the evangelical Calvinists and those they deride as “Hyper-calvinists,” is the evangelical Calvinists believe Arminians and Pelagians are otherwise sound “Christians,” and refer to them as their brothers and sisters. The Hyper-calvinists believe that as long as one is unconverted from his natural freewill state by the operation of the Spirit of God, and converted to the free grace of God by the Gospel of the grace of God, there is insufficient evidence to consider such as a “Christian,” or a “brother or sister.” This is not to say that they consign them to hell–that is not their desire, for by their own experience they understand that before that gracious divine call out of darkness, they, too, were “vessels of wrath even as others.” Arminians and Pelagians are as much in need for the gospel as any “heathen” or pagan. Calvinists would do well to “evangelize” their Arminian or Pelagian “brothers and sisters.”

Luther taught that the heart of the issue of the Reformation was the doctrine of the enslaved will. He said that it was worth standing for even if it disturbed the whole world. On the other hand, in the modern day we have those who are not willing to cause a disturbance in a denomination to teach this doctrine. They are willing to hold hands and to build bridges with those who deny and hate this doctrine. The enslaved will is at the very heart of the Gospel and the Gospel has two twin truths that the enslaved will supports. 1) The helplessness of man in his sin and 2) the sovereignty of the grace of God. Apart from those twin truths there is no justification by faith alone.

The heart of the Reformation and the doctrines of the Gospel was the doctrine of the enslaved will. That basic thought should be shouted from the hills and the pulpits of the land. Apart from the twin truths of the helplessness of man in his sin and the sovereignty of the grace of God there is no justification by faith alone. That as well should be shouted from the hills and the pulpits of the land. The older Calvinist, in the sense of doctrine, believed that this was a vital teaching, but it is not so in our day. Is this a good thing or a bad thing? It depends on whether one is convinced of the necessity of preaching a Gospel of grace alone or not. It is impossible for a person that truly believes in free-will to preach the Gospel of grace alone. This is a vital teaching that must be gone over and over in order to grasp how important it really is. The Gospel of grace stands as a towering and beautiful shining forth of the glory of God, but the doctrine of free-will stands as a monument to the ability of man.

But a man cannot be thoroughly humbled till he realizes that his salvation is utterly beyond his own powers, counsels, efforts, will and works, and depends absolutely on the will, counsel, pleasure and work of Another—God alone. As long as he is persuaded that he can make even the smallest contribution to his salvation, he remains self-confident and does not utterly despair of himself, and so is not humbled before God; but plans out for himself (or at least hopes and longs for) a position, an occasion, a work, which shall bring him final salvation. Martin Luther

Luther argued that the soul must be thoroughly humbled before it could be saved, and by that he meant that the soul must be humbled utterly beyond its own power, will, and works. This is to say that Luther believed that a soul must repent of all hope and help in their own will and look entirely and totally to the will and work of God alone. A person cannot look entirely and absolutely to God alone unless that person has looked away from his own work and will. It is that simple to state, but the heart will wrestle with this until it enters eternity. This is not just an academic statement, but instead the grace of God must work self and free-will out of the soul that the will of God and His grace works humility before God so it would rest in the cross and His righteousness alone.

Luther said that as long as the soul is persuaded that he can makes the smallest contribution to his own salvation, that person has some self-confidence and will look for a way for self to bring something of salvation. Once again, for those with eyes to see this is a shattering blow to the teaching of free-will and an assertion of justification by grace alone through faith alone. Behold the glory of the grace of God in saving sinners at His own pleasure and by grace alone. Behold the wonders of Christ alone as He saves for the glory of God alone. There is no room for free-will in the Gospel of Christ, but instead it is an unwelcome intruder who wants to share in His glory. This is not Hyper-Calvinism, this is the glory of free-grace in historic Calvinism.

One of the greatest differences between the evangelical Calvinists and those they deride as “Hyper-calvinists,” is the evangelical Calvinists believe Arminians and Pelagians are otherwise sound “Christians,” and refer to them as their brothers and sisters. The Hyper-calvinists believe that as long as one is unconverted from his natural freewill state by the operation of the Spirit of God, and converted to the free grace of God by the Gospel of the grace of God, there is insufficient evidence to consider such as a “Christian,” or a “brother or sister.” This is not to say that they consign them to hell–that is not their desire, for by their own experience they understand that before that gracious divine call out of darkness, they, too, were “vessels of wrath even as others.” Arminians and Pelagians are as much in need for the gospel as any “heathen” or pagan. Calvinists would do well to “evangelize” their Arminian or Pelagian “brothers and sisters.”

Luther taught that the heart of the issue of the Reformation was the doctrine of the enslaved will. He said that it was worth standing for even if it disturbed the whole world. On the other hand, in the modern day we have those who are not willing to cause a disturbance in a denomination to teach this doctrine. They are willing to hold hands and to build bridges with those who deny and hate this doctrine. The enslaved will is at the very heart of the Gospel and the Gospel has two twin truths that the enslaved will supports. 1) The helplessness of man in his sin and 2) the sovereignty of the grace of God. Apart from those twin truths there is no justification by faith alone.

The Reformation is thought of as bringing back to light the great doctrine of justification by faith alone. But if Luther was correct, there is no justification by faith alone apart from the teaching that man is helpless in his sin and that twin teaching of the sovereignty of the grace of God. Apart from the bondage of the will, which is the opposite and even contradictory position of the free-will, there is no biblical teaching of justification by faith alone. This is to say, then, that modern Calvinist who most likely affirm and defend their confession which holds to justification by faith alone are inconsistent at best when the affirm Arminians (most likely, Pelagians) are brothers and sisters in Christ. It is also a sign that something drastic has changed or is a declaration that the magisterial Reformers were simply and plainly wrong.

We can say with certainty that when the magisterial Reformers asserted that the Gospel could only be seen in light of the bondage of the will or the enslaved will and yet modern people who think of themselves as Calvinists deny that in practice, something has changed. It was not Hyper-Calvinism that stood against Roman Catholicism and its incipient Arminian theology, it was the Reformers themselves that stood against that. Are modern Calvinists (in name) ready to brand Calvin and Luther as Hyper-Calvinists or are they willing to say that Calvin and Luther were simply wrong about the Gospel? We cannot have it both ways, it is one or the other.

Luther said that the bondage of the will (enslaved will), as opposed to the free-will, was worth standing for even if it disturbed the whole world. But in our day, nothing appears worth standing for if it disturbs just a few. The doctrine of the will is not just some plaything for academics to discuss, it is vital for the common man to come to understand about himself if he is going to understand the Gospel of grace alone. Until the soul is humbled enough to where it sees that it has nothing in itself that it can do or depend on, it will not understand the Gospel of grace alone where man looks to God alone for all regarding to salvation and that God gives that by grace alone. Oh that Reformed people would understand these things today that they could preach and proclaim the Gospel of grace alone to those who still trust something in themselves and the acts of their own wills.

But a man cannot be thoroughly humbled till he realizes that his salvation is utterly beyond his own powers, counsels, efforts, will and works, and depends absolutely on the will, counsel, pleasure and work of Another—God alone. As long as he is persuaded that he can make even the smallest contribution to his salvation, he remains self-confident and does not utterly despair of himself, and so is not humbled before God; but plans out for himself (or at least hopes and longs for) a position, an occasion, a work, which shall bring him final salvation. Martin Luther

One of the greatest differences between the evangelical Calvinists and those they deride as “Hyper-calvinists,” is the evangelical Calvinists believe Arminians and Pelagians are otherwise sound “Christians,” and refer to them as their brothers and sisters. The Hyper-calvinists believe that as long as one is unconverted from his natural freewill state by the operation of the Spirit of God, and converted to the free grace of God by the Gospel of the grace of God, there is insufficient evidence to consider such as a “Christian,” or a “brother or sister.” This is not to say that they consign them to hell–that is not their desire, for by their own experience they understand that before that gracious divine call out of darkness, they, too, were “vessels of wrath even as others.” Arminians and Pelagians are as much in need for the gospel as any “heathen” or pagan. Calvinists would do well to “evangelize” their Arminian or Pelagian “brothers and sisters.”

Luther taught that the heart of the issue of the Reformation was the doctrine of the enslaved will. He said that it was worth standing for even if it disturbed the whole world. On the other hand, in the modern day we have those who are not willing to cause a disturbance in a denomination to teach this doctrine. They are willing to hold hands and to build bridges with those who deny and hate this doctrine. The enslaved will is at the very heart of the Gospel and the Gospel has two twin truths that the enslaved will supports. 1) The helplessness of man in his sin and 2) the sovereignty of the grace of God. Apart from those twin truths there is no justification by faith alone.

Can it be true that Luther was right about the enslaved will being at the heart of the Gospel and that two twin truths demand that the enslaved will be true? If that is true, then we live in a day where there has been a rapid departure from the Gospel of Jesus Christ, even by professing Calvinists. Once again, if we truly believe that God used the Reformers to bring the Gospel of grace alone and His glory alone back to the forefront in opposition to Roman Catholicism, then we must be awakened to these great truths again. It will not suffice to simply utter the words that are true and orthodox, we must be awakened to the concepts and the doctrines as they describe the reality of our fallen and enslaved wills and hearts to us. Arminian teaching is the essence of Roman Catholicism, at least in many ways, and we must understand that to go back to Arminian teaching is to return to the essence of Rome. The doctrines and practices of Rome depend on the free-will of man. For professing Calvinists to return with a friendly dialogue with Arminian teaching is to say that the Reformers were wrong.

This is not to say that there is no such teaching as Hyper-Calvinism and that there is nothing wrong at all with some of the people in history who went under that name, but it is to say that perhaps we need to go to Scripture first and to the Reformers second to find out just how vital the teaching of the enslaved will is. If the heart of the issue at the Reformation did indeed revolve around the enslaved will, then what are we doing now by not having all revolve around the enslaved will? It will show that we have departed from the two twin truths that the enslaved will supports: 1) The helplessness of man in his sin and 2) the sovereignty of the grace of God.”

When the quote above says “Apart from those twin truths there is no justification by faith alone,” it shows once again the heart of the Gospel as Luther and Calvin saw it. The heart of justification by faith alone is justification by grace alone. For the Gospel to be by grace alone, man cannot contribute one thing to it and there can be act of a free-will. For the will to be free, it must be both free of depravity and free of grace. A step back to Arminian teaching on the will is to step back from the Gospel of grace alone through faith alone to the glory of God alone. The Scriptures (Rom 11:6) teach us that if it is by grace, then it is no longer by works because that would mean that grace is no longer grace. Adding the act of a will is to add a work of a will and that is adding to grace which means that grace is no longer grace. This is not unkind to Arminians or to modern Calvinists, but it is an effort to show them that the Gospel is not just accepting a creed and it is not just having some intellectual knowledge. Being nice to ourselves and to Arminians is not as important as the Gospel. We must wake up to the glory of God and get back to the essential truths of the Gospel whether men like them or not.