Bible Study: Romans 4:13-25 "not for his sake alone"

For the promise to Abraham and his offspring that he would be heir of the world did not come through the law but through the righteousness of faith. For if it is the adherents of the law who are to be the heirs, faith is null and the promise is void. For the law brings wrath, but where there is no law there is no transgression.

That is why it depends on faith, in order that the promise may rest on grace and be guaranteed to all his offspring—not only to the adherent of the law but also to the one who shares the faith of Abraham, who is the father of us all, as it is written, “I have made you the father of many nations”—in the presence of the God in whom he believed, who gives life to the dead and calls into existence the things that do not exist. In hope he believed against hope, that he should become the father of many nations, as he had been told, “So shall your offspring be.” He did not weaken in faith when he considered his own body, which was as good as dead (since he was about a hundred years old), or when he considered the barrenness of Sarah's womb. No distrust made him waver concerning the promise of God, but he grew strong in his faith as he gave glory to God, fully convinced that God was able to do what he had promised. That is why his faith was “counted to him as righteousness.” But the words “it was counted to him” were not written for his sake alone, but for ours also. It will be counted to us who believe in him who raised from the dead Jesus our Lord, who was delivered up for our trespasses and raised for our justification.

"In the close of the chapter, he applies all to us; and, having abundantly proved that Abraham was justified by faith, he here concludes that his justification was to be the pattern or sampler of ours: It was not written for his sake alone. It was not intended only for an historical commendation of Abraham, or a relation of something peculiar to him ...no, the scripture did not intend hereby to describe some singular way of justification that belonged to Abraham as his prerogative. The accounts we have of the Old-Testament saints were not intended for histories only, barely to inform and divert us, but for precedents to direct us, for ensamples for our learning." -Matthew Henry

The ABC's of the Bible- Mystery

"the hidden, eternal plan of God that is being revealed to God’s people in accordance with His plan." -Nelson's New Illustrated Bible Dictionary

"The word mystery, so often used by Paul, does not mean something incomprehensible, but something that had been kept secret and now has been disclosed. In Paul’s cultural and religious milieu, the term was often used with reference to the mystery religions. Adherents to the mystery religions used the term to speak of the secret knowledge of the religion revealed only to the initiated ones. In contrast, Paul uses the word to speak of a secret that has been openly revealed to all." - New Illustrated Bible Commentary

Grace and Peace,
Stephen

Legh Richmond on Theology apart from Faith

It is much easier to be a 'Bible scholar'--than a sincere Christian. It is much easier to be a 'theologian'--than a true pastor. Theology itself, important as are its themes--sinks into a mere science of literary attainments, unless accompanied by an earnest and devotional application of its principles to the soul. -Legh Richmond

How to Put God in a Box

When you grow up in evangelical churches one of the things you will eventually realize is that there are certain words and phrases that you have heard all of your life that people outside the Christian sub-culture don’t use. I’m not talking about words like “sanctification” or “propitiation” but, rather, phrases like “hedge of protection.” I have realized that many of the phrases I have grown up hearing and even using have shaped me to some degree and, in most cases, I don’t know where they are, if anywhere, in the Bible.

One term that I don’t recall using (except perhaps when poking fun at it) is the idea of “putting God in a box.” Growing up at Markham Street Baptist Church (9 of the best years of my life) I heard this term quite a bit. Now I hear the same term a lot but it seems to have a different meaning than it did at MSBC.

In light of this discovery I have done some research (which basically means I thought about it for approximately 5 minutes) and discovered that there are two primary uses of the term “God in a box” that have completely different meanings.

Definition 1. To compartmentalize God. To act as if He doesn’t exist unless needed in times of trouble. To act like a Christian some of the time.

For Example:

A sermon point- "Some people don't spend time in your bible 6 out of 7 days a week and they would only pray if their plane was going down or their 401k was in the tank. They just try to keep God in a box until they need someone more powerful than themselves to do their bidding.

Also known as: Genie in a bottle god.

Definition 2. To act as if God only works in certain ways. To say that God doesn’t do something. To speak of boundaries on God’s actions.

For Example:

A conversation with a fictional person with cool glasses named Bob Rell:

Me: Hey man, I'm really concerned because my Buddhist friend Rich won't even listen to me when I try to share the gospel.

Bob Rell: Stephen, you're view of God is way too small. It's like you're putting God in a box when you say that he can't be saved apart from Christianity. God's plan is so much bigger than that.

Also known as subtraction by addition or heresy.

I think the first use of this term is an accurate commentary on the way many people act. The second way of using it, however, is usually used in a way that is incredibly unbiblical. Regardless of what the Bible says there are some people who will simply say that God will do things that He will not do. To say He won't do something because the Bible says He won't isn't "putting God in a box" it is simply believing Scripture.

Grace and Peace,
Stephen

What do you think? How have you heard this term used? Do you think it was a valid use?

Stand

Anything I thought gain,
Let me count it as loss.
May the fragrance I leave,
Be of Christ and the Cross.
Any worldly success,
Any measure of fame,
May it glorify You
For the sake of Your name.

[chorus]
I’ll stand on Your promises.
I’ll stand in the grace You give.
I’ll stand when the darkness falls.
Upheld by Your right hand, I’ll stand.

In my talents and gifts,
In the word I apply,
May humility reign.
In the strength You supply.
Should I persevere
In the faith You have sown
Then Your glory I’ll sing
When I stand at Your Throne.

I’ll stand on Your promises
I’ll stand in the grace You give
I’ll stand when the darkness falls
Upheld by Your right hand, I’ll stand.

If you should mark my sin, Lord
How could I stand?
But You reached down from the cross, Lord
And take my hand.

-Marc Heinrich

Romans 4:1-12. From Abraham to David to Paul

What then shall we say was gained by Abraham, our forefather according to the flesh? For if Abraham was justified by works, he has something to boast about, but not before God. For what does the Scripture say? “Abraham believed God, and it was counted to him as righteousness.” Now to the one who works, his wages are not counted as a gift but as his due. And to the one who does not work but believes in him who justifies the ungodly, his faith is counted as righteousness, just as David also speaks of the blessing of the one to whom God counts righteousness apart from works:

“Blessed are those whose lawless deeds are forgiven,
and whose sins are covered;
blessed is the man against whom the Lord will not count his sin.”

Is this blessing then only for the circumcised, or also for the uncircumcised? We say that faith was counted to Abraham as righteousness. How then was it counted to him? Was it before or after he had been circumcised? It was not after, but before he was circumcised. He received the sign of circumcision as a seal of the righteousness that he had by faith while he was still uncircumcised. The purpose was to make him the father of all who believe without being circumcised, so that righteousness would be counted to them as well, and to make him the father of the circumcised who are not merely circumcised but who also walk in the footsteps of the faith that our father Abraham had before he was circumcised.

"What did Abraham find? Abraham found grace in the eyes of the Lord, through faith alone. God drew him to faith and God counted the faith as a righteousness - as a right standing with God. Abraham became right with God -acquitted, forgiven, accepted, justified - by faith alone apart from works. " -John Piper

"Abraham was justified only by faith, David was justified only by faith, and every believer before and after them has been justified only by faith. A sinner’s faith is graciously accepted by God and counted for him as righteousness for Christ’s sake." -John MacArthur (MacArthur New Testament Commentary Series: Romans)

The ABC's of the Bible- Law

Why do I as a Christian eat bacon?

Most Christians have a pretty basic understanding of the biblical concept of Law. The Law of Moses is given by God in the books that are also called the Law (or Torah). But it seems that Christians can often be tripped up with the relationship they now have with the Law.

Several years back I tried to start a witness encounter with a man before realizing that he was Seventh-Day Adventist. So I asked him several questions about the 10 Commandments trying to show him that he has a fallen nature and he countered with a question for me about how I had kept the 4th commandment (Exodus 20:11). I didn't know why I treated Sunday more like a Sabbath than I did Saturday.

Though this post isn't necessarily about the Sabbath I would have been helped if I had a better understanding of the Law. So here are a few ways people deal with the Law.

1. Divide the Law into 3 groups:

Civil Law- Laws which related only to the government of Israel.
Ceremonial Law- Laws relating to religious Israel.
Moral Law- Laws that are universally concerned with God's moral character. Some might just put the 10 commandments here.

2. Only obey that which has been reinstituted in the New Testament:

Christ fulfilled the Law right (Matthew 5:17)? So proponents of this view would say that we should only treat that which is commanded under the New Covenant as a commandment. What does that leave you with? 9 of the 10 commandments (all but the Sabbath).

3. Obey all of the Law except that which is uninstituted in the New Testament:

Christ said that he didn't come to abolish the Law and that it wouldn't pass away right (Matthew 5:18)? So we should follow what the Old Testament says until the New Testament tells us to stop. What does that leave you with? 9 of the 10 commandments (all but the Sabbath).

"Therefore let no one pass judgment on you in questions of food and drink, or with regard to a festival or a new moon or a Sabbath." (Colossians 2:16)

So what are my views on the Sabbath you ask? That's pretty complicated. Why do I eat bacon? Any of these 3 ways of dealing with the Law allow it. Maybe Joel should be less concerned with offending people because of food and more concerned with offending them with the Cross.

Grace and Peace,
Stephen

Finally Alive!

"Blessed be the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ! According to his great mercy, he has caused us to be born again..."

John Piper's new book "Finally Alive" is out. More importantly, Tim Challies' review of "Finally Alive" is out. Here's an excerpt of the review:

Piper's tone is gracious and compassionate throughout this book. He shows the heart of a pastor from the first page to the last. But he also shows the skill of a theologian and the passion of a prophet. I'm inclined to agree with my friend Adrian Warnock who says of Finally Alive, "I believe this is the most important book Piper has written." I cannot recommend this book too highly. I really believe it is Piper's best.

I haven't read the book yet but I have listened to the sermon series from which it was adapted. I would highly recommend the book (which you can buy in stores or download from Desiring God for free!), the sermon series, and even Tim Challies' review of the book.

Grace and Peace,
Stephen

Faith and Reason- Tertullian's View

This is the first of some occasional posts on the relationship between worldly wisdom (science, philosophy, etc...) and the Bible. If you have a blog and had to write a paper on something like this you would want to get some mileage on it too.

Tertullian believed that reason corrupts faith. Describing Tertullian’s view Harry Shields and Gary Bredfeldt write, “Christian theology was seen as heavenly and full of truth, whereas philosophy was deemed to be worldly and empty of truth” (25). It is possible that Tertullian came to this conclusion from the amount of time he spent refuting early heresies.

It is interesting to me that Tertullian was such an opponent of gnosticism and yet his view here appears to have been influences by gnostics. That's not to say that people who lean in the direction of fundamentalism are heretics (there are too many people to my left for me to say that) but for Tertullian to reject the benefits of philisophical reason (when it doesn't contradict or override clear Scriptural teaching) is kind of ridiculious.

As Christians we need to avoid the thinking that the Bible deals exclusively with spiritual matters and all things in the flesh are corrupt. The Bible teaches that man is fully capable of learning things apart from Scripture. Though, as the apostle Paul points out, it only adds to their judgment.

The apostle Paul claims that the most wicked of humans “knew God” (Romans 1:21) because of His “invisible attributes [which have been] clearly perceived in the things that have been made” (Romans 1:20). Furthermore, in chapter two Paul argues that the morality of humans is the very grounds for their judgment (2:13-15). So rather than arguing like Tertullian that reason apart from faith is corrupt, the Bible argues that man’s ability to reason is good enough to provide sufficient grounds for the punishment of crimes against Him.

I hope this is beneficial.

Grace and Peace,
Stephen

It is Well

When peace, like a river, attendeth my way,
When sorrows like sea billows roll;
Whatever my lot, Thou has taught me to say,
It is well, it is well, with my soul.

It is well, with my soul,
It is well, with my soul,
It is well, it is well, with my soul.

Though Satan should buffet, though trials should come,
Let this blest assurance control,
That Christ has regarded my helpless estate,
And hath shed His own blood for my soul.

My sin, oh, the bliss of this glorious thought!
My sin, not in part but the whole,
Is nailed to the cross, and I bear it no more,
Praise the Lord, praise the Lord, O my soul!

For me, be it Christ, be it Christ hence to live:
If Jordan above me shall roll,
No pang shall be mine, for in death as in life
Thou wilt whisper Thy peace to my soul.

But, Lord, ‘tis for Thee, for Thy coming we wait,
The sky, not the grave, is our goal;
Oh trump of the angel! Oh voice of the Lord!
Blessèd hope, blessèd rest of my soul!

And Lord, haste the day when my faith shall be sight,
The clouds be rolled back as a scroll;
The trump shall resound, and the Lord shall descend,
Even so, it is well with my soul.

It is well, with my soul,
It is well, with my soul,
It is well, it is well, with my soul. -Horatio Spafford

Design 1:24

Check out my brother Jonathan's new blog Design 1:24. He already has a couple of posts up explaining what he plans to do. So subscribe, follow, visit occasionally, or whatever you do to reach your favorite blogs.

Grace and Peace,
Stephen

Bible Study: Romans 3:27-31 "...justified by faith..."

Then what becomes of our boasting? It is excluded. By what kind of law? By a law of works? No, but by the law of faith. For we hold that one is justified by faith apart from works of the law. Or is God the God of Jews only? Is he not the God of Gentiles also? Yes, of Gentiles also, since God is one—who will justify the circumcised by faith and the uncircumcised through faith. Do we then overthrow the law by this faith? By no means! On the contrary, we uphold the law.

Christianity does not come to other religious systems and try to replace one way to work for God with another way to work for God. It comes with a declaration of amnesty. The one true God has made a truce at the cost of his Son's life. He offers pardon to every person freely and everlasting joy to those who will trust his Son...

...The gospel of Jesus Christ comes and says, "Justification (getting right with God) is by faith, not works. Therefore, having certain ethnic or religious advantages [such as circumcision] prove to be of no advantage. And not having certain ethnic or religious advantages proves to be of no disadvantage. The reason is that faith in Christ, by its very nature, looks away from distinctives (positive or negative) that you have in yourself, and looks to God's free grace in order to be justified and have eternal life. -John Piper

The ABC's of the Bible- Kingdom of God

"...it is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle than for a rich person to enter the kingdom of God." (Matthew 19:24)

“The time is fulfilled, and the kingdom of God is at hand; repent and believe in the gospel.” (Mark 1:15)

"...unless one is born of water and the Spirit, he cannot enter the kingdom of God." (John 3:5)

There are 67 verses in the New Testament (in ESV) that contain the term "Kingdom of God" so this post cannot give a full description of the term.

The kingdom of God in its universal aspect refers to God’s sovereign rule over all of His creation. In that broadest sense of the term, everyone is part of God’s kingdom, since “the Lord has established His throne in the heavens, and His sovereignty rules over all. -John MacArthur (MacArthur New Testament Commentary: John 1-11).

However, the definition above is certainly not the only sense of the word. Nelson's New Illustrated Bible Commentary describes the Kingdom of God as:

God’s rule of grace in the world, a future period foretold by the prophets of the Old Testament and identified by Jesus as beginning with His public ministry. The kingdom of God is the experience of blessedness, like that of the Garden of Eden, where evil is fully overcome and where those who live in the kingdom know only happiness, peace, and joy. This was the main expectation of the Old Testament prophets about the future.

Though Nelson provides a good explanation I think it puts the emphasis on the future state of the kingdom to the neglect of the major emphasis in the Gospels of the ushering in of the kingdom at Christ's coming. For this, D.A. Carson is also helpful:

One of the most startling features of the kingdom announced in [Matthew, Mark, and Luke] is that it is not exclusively future. The kingdom, God’s saving and transforming reign, has in certain respects already been inaugurated in the person, works and message of Jesus...If the kingdom does not dawn until the end of the age, then of course one cannot enter it before it comes. (Pillar New Testament Commentary on John)

Grace and Peace,
Stephen

Pink on Election

"Election is not as some have supposed--harsh and unjust--but is a most merciful provision on the part of God. Had He not from the beginning, chosen SOME to salvation--ALL would have perished! Had he not before the foundation of the world chosen certain ones to be conformed to the image of His Son--the death of Christ would have been in vain, so far as the human race is concerned!

Reduced to its simplest terms, ELECTION means that God chose me--before I chose Him. Our Lord said, "You have not chosen Me--but I have chosen you." (John 15:16) We love Him--because He first loved us. Election means that before I was born, yes, before the foundation of the world--I was chosen in Christ and predestined unto a place in God's family! Election means that we believed--because He made us willing in the day of His power. Election then,
strips the creature of all merit,
removes all ground of boasting,
strikes us helpless in the dust,
and ascribes all the glory to God!" -A.W. Pink

George Whitfield on God's Love and Particular Redemption

If you belong to Jesus Christ, he is speaking of you; for says he, “I know my sheep”. “I know them”; what does that mean? Why, he knows their number, he knows their names, he knows every one for whom he died; and if there were to be one missing for whom Christ died, God the Father would send him down again from heaven to fetch him. -George Whitfield

Come Thou Fount of Every Blessing

Come, Thou Fount of every blessing,
Tune my heart to sing Thy grace;
Streams of mercy, never ceasing,
Call for songs of loudest praise.
Teach me some melodious sonnet,
Sung by flaming tongues above.
Praise the mount! I’m fixed upon it,
Mount of Thy redeeming love.

Sorrowing I shall be in spirit,
Till released from flesh and sin,
Yet from what I do inherit,
Here Thy praises I’ll begin;
Here I raise my Ebenezer;
Here by Thy great help I’ve come;
And I hope, by Thy good pleasure,
Safely to arrive at home.

Jesus sought me when a stranger,
Wandering from the fold of God;
He, to rescue me from danger,
Interposed His precious blood;
How His kindness yet pursues me
Mortal tongue can never tell,
Clothed in flesh, till death shall loose me
I cannot proclaim it well.

O to grace how great a debtor
Daily I’m constrained to be!
Let Thy goodness, like a fetter,
Bind my wandering heart to Thee.
Prone to wander, Lord, I feel it,
Prone to leave the God I love;
Here’s my heart, O take and seal it,
Seal it for Thy courts above.

O that day when freed from sinning,
I shall see Thy lovely face;
Clothed then in blood washed linen
How I’ll sing Thy sovereign grace;
Come, my Lord, no longer tarry,
Take my ransomed soul away;
Send thine angels now to carry
Me to realms of endless day. -Robert Robinson

Bible Study: Romans 3:23-26 A costly gift given freely.

For there is no distinction: for all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God, and are justified by his grace as a gift, through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus, whom God put forward as a propitiation by his blood, to be received by faith. This was to show God's righteousness, because in his divine forbearance he had passed over former sins. It was to show his righteousness at the present time, so that he might be just and the justifier of the one who has faith in Jesus.

It is by his grace, not by the grace wrought in us...confounding justification and sanctification, but by the gracious favour of God to us, without any merit in us so much as foreseen. And, to make it the more emphatic, he says it is freely by his grace, to show that it must be understood of grace in the most proper and genuine sense. It is said that Joseph found grace in the sight of his master (Genesis 39:4), but there was a reason; he saw that what he did prospered. There was something in Joseph to invite that grace; but the grace of God communicated to us comes freely, freely; it is free grace, mere mercy; nothing in us to deserve such favours: no, it is all through the redemption that is in Jesus Christ. It comes freely to us, but Christ bought it, and paid dearly for it, which yet is so ordered as not to [devalue] the honour of free grace. Christ’s purchase is no bar to the freeness of God’s grace; for grace provided and accepted this vicarious satisfaction. -Matthew Henry

This passage is the turning point in Paul's argument. His main focus shifts from the guilt of man to the grace of God.

Grace and Peace,
Stephen

The ABC's of the Bible- Justification

What is Justification?
Justification is a judicial act of God pardoning sinners (wicked and ungodly persons, Romans 4:5; 3:9-24), accepting them as just, and so putting permanently right their previously estranged relationship with himself. This justifying sentence is God’s gift of righteousness (Romans 5:15-17), his bestowal of a status of acceptance for Jesus’ sake (2 Corinthians 5:21).

What does Justification involve?

(1) Payment for sin.

...for all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God, and are justified by his grace as a gift, through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus, whom God put forward as a propitiation [wrath bearing sacrifice] by his blood, to be received by faith. This was to show God's righteousness, because in his divine forbearance he had passed over former sins. It was to show his righteousness at the present time, so that he might be just and the justifier of the one who has faith in Jesus.

(2) Imputed Righteousness.

"And to the one who does not work but believes in him who justifies the ungodly, his faith is counted as righteousness..." (Romans 4:5). " "Therefore, as one trespass led to condemnation for all men, so one act of righteousness leads to justification and life for all men. For as by the one man's disobedience the many were made sinners, so by the one man's obedience the many will be made righteous" (Romans 5:18-19).

How is a person justified?

For we hold that one is justified by faith apart from works of the law. (Romans 3:28)

This is not contradictory to the words of James, " You see that a person is justified by works and not by faith alone" (2:24). For an explanation see "Does James 2:24 Contradict Paul's Understanding of Justification By Faith Alone?"

Grace and Peace,
Stephen

Did God Cause the Fall of Man? A Response to Arminian Today Part 4

This is the 4th and final installment of a series of posts. I encourage you to go read parts 1, 2, and 3 as well as Arminian Today's article, "Did God Cause the Fall of Man."

In the final paragraph of his post Roy writes:

To me it is not a question of sovereignty as much as it is a question of God's love. If God truly loved humanity why would he want to grant by his own sovereign choice that Adam would Fall and that this would plummet mankind into a horrible existence marked by death, destruction, and decay?

This is a fair question that does need to be addressed by myself and others who hold my position that God predestined the fall of man. The question in my own words is, "how can a John 3:16 God predestine such a catastrophic event that would hurt so many people?" Let's look at how the Bible defines the love of God.

As I have written in the past, I do not believe that Calvinists can simply replace the word "world" that appears in John 3:16 with the word "elect." It seems to me that a natural reading of the text indicates a love of God for the world. However, I am troubled at the emphasis that the word "world" gets from so many people when discussing such a Christ centered verse. In light of the context it seems best to understand John 3:16 as a wonderful description of God's willingness to save people from such an evil world. Because the verses that follow 3:16 explicitly disallow for a universal understanding of salvation we must realize the difference between God's love for the world in a general sense and His love for those whom He has chosen to save.

It was important for me to go through all of that to make the distinction between God's love for the world and His love for the elect because I think we can clearly see how God's love fits perfectly with predestining the fall of man.

Here are 5 verses that show the greatness of God's love and the necessity of the fall for that love to be demonstrated:
Red= God's loving purpose.
Bold= Necessary consequence of the fall of man.

"Greater love has no one than this, that someone lay down his life for his friends. You are my friends if you do what I command you." (John 15:13-14)

"Those whom I love, I reprove and discipline..." (Revelation 3:19)

"In this is love, not that we have loved God but that he loved us and sent his Son to be the propitiation for our sins." (1 John 4:10)

"I have loved you,' says the LORD. But you say, 'How have you loved us?' 'Is not Esau Jacob’s brother?' declares the LORD. 'Yet I have loved Jacob but Esau I have hated." (Malachi 1:2-3)

"Husbands, love your wives, as Christ loved the church and gave himself up for her, that he might sanctify her, having cleansed her by the washing of water with the word, so that he might present the church to himself in splendor, without spot or wrinkle or any such thing, that she might be holy and without blemish." (Ephesians 5:25-27)

"For while we were still weak, at the right time Christ died for the ungodly. For one will scarcely die for a righteous person—though perhaps for a good person one would dare even to die— but God shows his love for us in that while we were still sinners, Christ died for us." (Romans 5:6-8)

Just to recap. God's love is shown in:
Death.
Reproof and discipline (which doesn't happen without sin).
Loving people who don't love Him.
In contrast to those whom He does not love.
Removing wrath that was meant for sinners (that's what propitiation does).
The Church (the church is a called out assembly of believers in Christ).
Sanctification and cleansing (which doesn't happen to perfect people).
Our Weakness.
Our Ungodliness.
Our Sinfulness.

When we allow God to speak for Himself through the Scriptures it is clear how His love is best demonstrated. I am willing to accept the Arminian claim that they do not hold to their views because of free-will but, rather, because of their understanding of the love of God. However, I disagree that the Arminian understanding of God's love is the correct understanding. The Bible displays God's saving love as amazing for 3 reasons: (1) it is a love for such vile sinners, (2) it is a particular love for those whom He chose to love, and (3) it is a love with an infinite cost, namely, the death of the Son of God.


I think it is good for people to engage in civil debate from time to time. Roy and I would disagree on this subject whether I wrote a response to his post or not so I didn't think it would hurt to voice my disagreement. If you have questions or comments (whether positive or negative) I would love it if you would post them in the comment section.

Grace and Peace,
Stephen

Did God Cause the Fall of Man? A Response to Arminian Today Part 3

Now that I have made myself clear on the issue of whether or not God predestined or decreed that the fall of man would happen I must defend my position by answering Roy’s main question, "Did God cause Adam to fall into sin?" This is not an easy question to answer but I do believe we can look to the Bible for guidance. Continuing the quote from Roy’s post:

“The Scriptures clearly teach that God does not tempt men (James 1:13). Adam fell through the act of his own free will…But if there is really no such thing as free will then Adam fell because God essentially made him sin. This is the only rational response to the problem of Adam's sin.”

Before I can even address the majority of the content previously quoted I must make some distinctions that Roy does not make in his post. He writes, “Now to be fair, there are many Calvinist who would deny that Calvinism teaches that God caused the Fall. Most Calvinist would stop short of saying that God predestined the Fall of humanity…” (emphasis added).

Roy uses several words interchangeably that should be distinguished from one another. To predestine, to cause, to make someone do something, and to tempt are all different things. The fact that God predestined the fall to happen does not negate the fact that Adam willingly sinned against God.

One thing I like about Roy’s post is that he appeals to direct statements in Scripture. Though I certainly disagree with him on many of his conclusions I want to make it clear that he is most helpful when He goes to the inspired word of God and he does that quite often. It seems to me that his “knockout” verse is James 1:13. For the sake of context we will look at 13-15:

Let no one say when he is tempted, “I am being tempted by God,” for God cannot be tempted with evil, and he himself tempts no one. But each person is tempted when he is lured and enticed by his own desire. Then desire when it has conceived gives birth to sin, and sin when it is fully grown brings forth death.

The seeming contradiction that Roy presents between this text and the idea that God predestined the fall can be resolved when we look at James’ definition of temptation. Look at the text again and you will see that temptation is defined as a luring and enticing which is done by a person’s own desire. This is remarkably similar to Genesis 3:6 which tells us that Eve desired the fruit. I am not arguing that God tempted Adam and Eve to sin against Him. I am arguing that His sovereign will was that the fall would happen for His plan and purpose, namely, to bring about redemption for His glory. So I reject the idea that God’s decree of the fall means He tempted anyone to sin or even forced them to sin.

Undoubtedly many of you are wondering how Adam and Even fell into sin by God’s decree apart from God being the one to somehow tempt or push them into it. My answer is simply that I don’t know what the nature of Adam’s will was in a pre-fall state. But I will say that I don’t think it is helpful to insist that he must have had the ability to go against God’s sovereign plan. I briefly demonstrated in a previous post that free will, as defined by Arminianism, is not described in the Bible. The existence of choices, wills, and responsibility does not necessitate the unrealistic view many hold of ultimate free will. So unlike some Calvinists and Arminians who have thought through these things before me I do not offer a positive explanation of what Adam’s will was like. The Bible is silent on how Adam was capable of sinning apart from being born into sin and so I am silent on the issue as well.

In conclusion, I think the question is too vague for a simple yes or no. In light of my distinctions I will answer this way: God did cause the fall in that He predestined that it would happen exactly the way it happened. It could not have happened any other way or (in the strictest sense) not have happened. He did not, however, cause the fall by being a direct agent in the execution of the temptation or the sin itself. Scripture speaks on the relation of God’s decree of sin and the murder of Christ in this way:

…for truly in this city there were gathered together against your holy servant Jesus, whom you anointed, both Herod and Pontius Pilate, along with the Gentiles and the peoples of Israel, to do whatever your hand and your plan had predestined to take place. (Acts 4:27-28)

Be Courageous, Mr. President

He's no Rush Limbaugh...thankfully.




No, Mr. President, you are not protecting women’s health; you are authorizing the destruction of half a million tiny women every year.

No, Mr. President, you are not protecting reproductive freedom; you are authorizing the destruction of freedom for a million helpless people every year.

No, Mr. President, killing our children does not cease to be killing our children no matter how many times you call it a private family matter. Call it what you will, they are dead, and we have killed them. And you, Mr. President, would keep the killing legal.

My favorite line:

You don’t have to be the lapdog of those around you. You can stand for your daughters and the rest of us who don’t have your power. We will pray for you and we will believe that God will change your heart and we will be the happiest people on the planet that you are President.

Here's the full sermon, "The Baby Leaped in My Womb for Joy."

Grace and Peace,
Stephen