Our question for this issue is: "Can someone who is theologically Arminian be truly saved?" This is not an easy question.
We want to emphasize at the beginning that Arminianism is another
gospel that is no gospel (Gal. 1:6-7). Its teaching denies the
sovereignty of God in salvation and the power and effectualness of
Christ's death on the cross (by teaching that Christ died for all it
teaches that His death actually saves no
one). It also denies that salvation is by grace alone with its teaching
concerning the sovereignty of the human will. These are fundamental
doctrines of the Christian faith. Not only that, but we believe
that Arminianism has crept into the teaching of many Reformed churches
under the guise of a love of God for all men, a desire on God's part
that all men without exception be saved, and the teaching that there are
gifts of grace and benefits of the cross for all. This poses a deadly
danger to Reformed churches. We agree, therefore, with the
following quote: "False doctrine is worse when it goes under the cover
of the truth, and when it quotes Scripture, and sings Amazing Grace.
Satan is always at his best in opposing the truth when he does it in the
name of Christ. There has never been a more subtle expression of false
doctrine than which affirms all the 'truths' of the Christian faith on
the basis of human effort, merit of works, foreseen faith, or 'free
will.' To affirm grace on the condition of works is the ultimate
perversion. It is The Lie" (John K. Pederson, Sincerity Meets the Truth,
pp. v, vi). But does this mean that those who hold to free
will and other teachings of Arminianism cannot be and are not saved? We
do not believe that. Even here, however, we wish to be very careful in
our answer. We would insist that a person who truly and consistently
believes that he is saved by his own willing and running, contrary to
Rom. 9:16, cannot be saved; he has denied the very heart of the gospel.
The teaching that man is saved by his own running is Rome's, the
teaching that he is saved by his own willing is that of apostate
Protestantism, but really they are no different. That teaching,
according to Romans 10:1-4, is ignorance of and refusal to submit to the
righteousness of God, and leaves a person in need of salvation. By his
emphasis on will and works a consistent Arminian sets himself outside
Christ (Gal. 5:4). Nevertheless, many people inconsistently
confess both grace and works. They ascribe their salvation wholly to
God's grace, and yet speak of having chosen Christ, of having free will,
and of God being dependent in salvation on their own free will choice.
They thank GOD for their salvation and yet speak as though they were the
ones who made the decisive choices. Usually this is the fault
of the teaching they have received - teaching which speaks along two
lines. It is a teaching that affirms grace on the basis of works and
free will. Those who teach such things have the greater fault.
Nevertheless, those who think along these lines, though they may be
saved, also need to realize that what they believe is not the truth, and
need to repent of it. So too, as the author quoted above says:
"We need rather to be greatly ashamed of ourselves for our tolerant
friendship with the doctrine of human sovereignty which lies at the
rotten core of evangelicalism, and which, on account it, of our sleepy
indifference to is a testimony to our own cowardice." Grace saves, not
free will and works.
Ronald Hanko
http://www.prca.org/resources/publications/cr-news/item/731-can-arminians-be-saved
http://www.prca.org/
Election as a doctrine of the church is often either little
understood, or emphatically contradicted. There is either ignorance
of this truth, or a deliberate misunderstanding of it.
What is the scriptural truth of election? We could define election as
God's eternal, sovereign, gracious decree by which He chooses a church
as the body of Christ, with all of its individual members, each in his
own place, to eternal salvation and glory.
Let us examine the various parts of this definition more closely.
In the first place, election is that decree of God by which He chooses
a definite number of individuals to salvation and glory. God
is not uncertain of who will be saved and will spend eternity with Him
in heaven. He knows each of His people by name, since He has chosen
each of them; and those names He has recorded in the Book of Life. Scripture speaks of election this way in
Acts 13:48: "As many
as were ordained to eternal life, believed." Again,
concerning Jeremiah we read (1:5), "And before I formed thee in
the belly, I knew thee; and before thou camest forth of the womb, I
sanctified thee, and I ordained thee a prophet unto the nations."
Now I know that this applies to Jeremiah in particular, but it is very
evident in this passage that God did sanctify him and did prepare him
before he was ever born. God chose Jeremiah. Again, we read in
Romans 9:13, "As it is written, Jacob have I loved, but Esau have
I hated." That is not a n indefinite number, but God
pointed out definite individuals. Before they were ever born, God
said, "I have loved Jacob; I have hated Esau."
In the second place, the doctrine of election teaches that the members
of the church are chosen as a body of Jesus Christ, with each
member in his unique place. There are illustrations in Scripture
which present the church as a body. The apostle Paul speaks of that church in
I Corinthians 12:12: "For as the body is one, and hath
many members, and all the members of that one body, being many, are
one body: so also is Christ." Now a body is a living organism.
One cannot add members to that body or take any away. As soon as one
tries that, he has an incomplete body or a monstrosity. A body
normally has ten fingers, two hands, two arms, two eyes, one
nose--that is all. Take away any of these members, or add to them,
and one does not have a complete body anymore. God also chooses unto
Himself a church as the body of Christ, that is, individual members
each in his own particular place in that body. God has a place for
each member, each elect of God, in that body. One's place may not always seem very important in man's eyes,
but it is his unique place. Just as the little finger is an
insignificant member, it is nevertheless necessary in order to make
the body complete; that finger has a place and function. So too, the
truth of election emphasizes the fact that God chooses each individual
member for a specific place in Christ's body -- and that place
he must and will fill.
In the third place, election is centered in Jesus Christ. One can never speak of election apart from Him. We read in
Ephesians 1:4,
"According as He hath chosen us in him (Christ) before the
foundation of the world...." That is the truth one finds
throughout Scripture. God chooses His people as members of Christ.
In the fourth place, election teaches that God chooses a people unto
eternal salvation and glory. God does not simply choose, but
He has an end or goal in mind. That eternal goal was that He would
bring His people to heaven. I quote, for instance, from
Romans 8:29-30: "For whom he did foreknow, he also did predestinate to
be conformed to the image of his Son, that he might be the firstborn
among many brethren. Moreover, whom he did predestinate, them he also
called; and whom he called, them he also justified; and whom he
justified, them he also glorified." So the final purpose of that
eternal election whereby God chooses His people is that He may glorify
them through Christ to the honor of His own Name.
Finally, election takes place in eternity. It is not an action taken
only in time. It is an act of God that took place in His counsel or
plan before time even began. Consider once again the passage of
Ephesians 1:4: "According as He hath chosen us in (Christ)
before the foundation of the world..." What does this
mean? This phrase suggests that God chose before there was any
creation, before there was time or space. Before the foundation of
the earth, there is only God. He has chosen, then, a people in Christ
from all eternity in His counsel. This is the testimony of
Scripture.
In connection with the truth of election, the question is often asked,
"Is election conditional or unconditional?" That is, did God
choose His people on the basis of some action they must perform first
-- or did He choose them freely and independently? Was election
conditioned on something man must first do -- or did God choose
certain people simply because it was His good pleasure to do so?
Scripture itself teaches that election rests solely upon the decree of
a sovereign God, and has nothing to do with any action man must first
perform.
Sad to say, however, this is not the thinking of many today. The view
that seems to have swept the church world of our day is that election
is dependent on the will of man and not God. Election depends on the
act of man in accepting Christ. God chooses those who first choose
Him. This view has its roots in the Netherlands, and was first
propounded in the year 1610. Its most influential proponent at that
time was a man named James Arminius. Since his time this error
concerning election has become synonymous with his name. It is called
Arminianism.
Arminius himself wrote concerning this view of election, "But it
(election) signifies the decree by which God determines to bestow
salvation on someone, then Faith foreseen is prior to election. For
as believers alone are saved, so only believers are predestined to
salvation. But the Scriptures know no Elect, by which God precisely
and absolutely has determined to save anyone without having first
considered him as a believer. For such an election would be at
variance with the decree by which he hath determined to save none but
believers" (Writings of Arminius, Vol. I, page 380).
Obviously, Arminianism, when it speaks of election, speaks of it as
conditional. Arminianism will not say that God elects, and
therefore we believe; but it says that God elects those whom He
foresees will believe. Arminianism maintains that election is
dependent ultimately upon a positive response by man. When man
accepts Christ, and perseveres in that, then God says, "I will
elect you." Perhaps this idea of Arminianism can be illustrated.
Suppose one were to place before you a weight of 1,000 pounds and were
to command you to lift that 1,000 pound weight above your head. You
would rightly say, "I can not." But were one to erect a
system of pulleys with a rope, attach the rope firmly to that weight,
then say again, "Lift that weight," now you would no longer
be able to say, "I can not." Rather, you must now say
either, "I will," or, "I won't." Obviously, it is
now within your power to lift that weight. It is in this way
that the Arminian also views the sinner. When man fell, he could do
nothing. He could not accept Christ. He could not believe. But then
God bestowed upon all men a certain grace (comparable to the system of
pulleys in the illustration), so that all men have within them the
power to believe if they will. But if they refuse, they are forever
lost.
What must one say of this teaching of Arminianism? It ought to be
clear that Arminianism essentially denies the sovereignty of God.
That God is Sovereign means simply that God is God: He rules over
heaven and earth. He will never relinquish His power to any creature.
He will direct all things according to His sovereign purpose. God
rules. The view of Arminianism denies this. An Arminian will insist
that he too believes that the sinner is saved only by grace. But do
not overlook the fact that, according to Arminianism, every
sinner has this grace of God. What then makes one man to differ
from another? Not God's grace, but the will of man which
either uses or refuses God's grace. One exercises his will for
Christ, another against Christ. The final determination as
to who is elect rests then upon man's act. Such a teaching denies the
sovereignty of God, for then the Sovereign, infinite, eternal God must
sit in His heavens and await the decision of man in order to
find out who will and who will not inherit His Kingdom. That is a
terrible error.
Calvinism insists upon the Scriptural truth that God unconditionally
elects a people unto Himself from all eternity. Not only John Calvin,
but also the earlier church fathers, insisted upon the same thing.
St. Augustine, 354-420, maintained that: "Faith, therefore, from
its beginning to its perfection is the gift of God. And that this
gift is bestowed on some and not on others, who will deny but he who
would fight against the most manifest testimonies of the Scripture?
But why faith is not given to all ought not to concern the believer,
who knows that all men by the sin of one came into must just
condemnation. But why God delivers one from condemnation and not
another belongs to His inscrutable judgments. And 'His ways are past
finding out.' And if it be investigated and inquired how it is that
each receiver of faith is deemed of God worthy to receive such a gift,
there are not wanting those who will say, 'It is by their human will.'
But we say that it is by grace, or Divine
predestination."
Augustine's view was firmly founded on Scripture. Throughout,
Scripture teaches that election is not conditioned upon any work or act of man.
Acts 13:48 states, "For as many as were ordained to
eternal life, believed." Now, which is first: belief or ordination? Plainly the latter. Or we read in
John 15:16: "Ye
have not chosen me, but I have chosen you and ordained you, that you should go forth and bring forth fruit...." And in
I John 4:10:
"Herein is love, not that we loved God, but that He loved us and
sent His Son to be the propitiation for our sins." Election is
surely unconditional according to all the teachings of Scripture.
Do you find comfort in such a truth? Some have insisted that this
doctrine provides no comfort. For, say some, if one believes
election, then the result will be that he becomes very careless and
profane on this earth. If God eternally determined that a person is
going to heaven, then what difference does it make what he does? If
he wants to sin, he will be saved regardless. Though he do no good
works, he will be saved anyway. Thus have many falsely presented this
truth of election!
But such is a distortion of this doctrine. It is true: God has
freely, eternally, sovereignly determined that His people will enter
into glory. Among that people is numbered the thief on the cross -- a
most horrible sinner. Among them is numbered Peter who denied Christ
three times. Among them is numbered ourselves -- also terrible
sinners. But does the doctrine of election allow one to sin if
he pleases? Scripture teaches that God has chosen us in order that we should be holy and without blame
(Eph. 1:4). See also
Ephesians 2:10. Election produces fruit: where there is no fruit of
righteousness, there is no evidence of election. Woe to the person who
dares to say, "I sin because it does not make any difference -- I
am already either elect or reprobate." To paraphrase words of
Christ, it will be more tolerable in the day of judgment for one who
never knew the truth of election, than for one who knew it and used it
as an excuse to sin!
The sad situation today is that many Reformed men want to hide this
doctrine. These insist that it is too difficult for the common people
-- and one surely must never speak of it on the mission field. But
Scripture never hides the truth of election -- it is plainly taught.
In fact, Paul writes of it in detail to the churches of Rome and
Ephesus especially. These churches were composed largely of Gentiles
who had never had contact with the Word of God before. They
were taught of election. If it was not too difficult then, ought
it to be too difficult today for the people of our educated
society?
How about yourself? Are you one of God's elect? That question has
troubled many people. Are you concerned about your election --
truly concerned? The reprobate wicked never care whether or not they
are elect. These only deny all of God's Word. But if you are
concerned about your election, then you give evidence
already in your life and heart of the fruit of election.
Just a few more questions. Do you believe in the Lord Jesus Christ?
Do you love His church and His truth? Do you hate all of your own
sin? Then there is really no question, is there? You see within you
the fruit and proof of election. You are still a sinner as are all
God's people. Sometimes we wonder, "How could God choose one
such as I?" Yet the fruits of election are evident. If you
believe, you have the evidence that God has eternally chosen you in
Christ. He did not choose you because you believe, but your
belief is the evidence and proof that He has chosen you. Do you
believe? Then blessed are you, for yours too is the kingdom of
heaven.
Rev. Gise J. Van Baren
http://www.prca.org/pamphlets/pamphlet_43.html
To those who murmur at the free grace of election and just severity of reprobation, we answer with the apostle: Nay, but, O man, who art thou that repliest against God? (Rom. 9:20), and quote the language of our Savior: Is it not lawful for me to do what I will with mine own? (Matt. 20:15). And therefore, with holy adoration of these mysteries, we exclaim in the words of the apostle: O the depth of the riches both of the wisdom and knowledge of God! how unsearchable are His judgments, and His ways past finding out! For who hath known the mind of the Lord? or who hath been His counsellor? or who hath first given Him, and it shall be recompensed unto him again? For of Him, and through Him, and to Him, are all things: to whom be glory for ever. Amen (Rom. 11:33-36). -Canons of Dordtrecht, I.18
IN THIS TRANSLATION the adjectives "free" and "just" are misplaced. The translation should be "To those who murmur at the grace of free election and severity of just reprobation."
In this article the fathers deal with two subjects: their answer to those who murmur against the doctrine of sovereign predestination and their attitude toward this doctrine in contrast with the attitude of those who murmur against it.
The first head of the Canons is closed with a fitting and scriptural doxology, a hymn of praise to the predestinating God of salvation. At the conclusion of the fifth head of doctrine is also a doxology, but already here it is as though the fathers could restrain themselves no longer, but in contemplation of the doctrine they had formulated and defended, they must break forth into the well-known words of the closing verses of Romans 11. IT is exactly a doctrine such as they have expounded that can and does occasion the adoring worship expressed in these words.
The article speaks of those who murmur against this doctrine. There have always been and still are those who murmur against both the
grace of gratuitous election and the severity of just reprobation. So
common is such murmuring that one may well judge the orthodoxy of his
doctrine of predestination by the criterion of this murmuring. You may
be certain that if you preach, teach, and maintain the pure, scriptural
doctrine of sovereign predestination, men will murmur against you and
your doctrine. The apostle Paul knew such murmuring. Augustine
knew it. Gottschalk had to suffer on account of it. John Calvin had to
hear it and answer it. The father of Dordrecht had to do battle against
these murmurers. Those who will be Reformed today and will adhere
strictly to this same doctrine will also have to face such murmurers.
That such murmuring can be a criterion of orthodoxy is because being the
object of such murmuring is the exclusive prerogative of the true
doctrine of predestination. Change that doctrine, compromise its
sovereignty, soften it by adopting a double-track theology, and you will
not hear any murmurings.
The fathers indicate the nature of these murmurings. The objections are against the "grace" of free election and the "severity" of just reprobation- carefully and wisely chosen words that point out clearly the gross wickedness of those who object to the doctrine.
Exactly against the grace of God they murmur. Especially they object to the grace of free election. If you insist that only the other blessings of salvation are gifts of God's grace and are all free, they might let your doctrine pass. The moment you insist that election is free, gratuitous, unmerited, and therefore a matter of grace and not works, they will murmur against your doctrine, for election is the anchor end of the chain of salvation. To use the figure of the Canons: "Election is the fountain and cause of all saving good" (Canons 1.8). If election is free, unmerited, and gracious, there is absolutely no room for man and free will. Hence they murmur against the grace of free election. This murmuring assumes more than one form. Usually men object that this doctrine makes men careless and profane or that this doctrine makes passive Christians.
Much more frequently men murmur against the severity of just reprobation. A doctrine of election they claim to be able to endure; but they cannot stand the severity of reprobation, saying that it is a horrible doctrine. When the murmurers object to the severity of reprobation, they also oppose and mean to oppose the grace of free election. Remember, the Canons means by "just reprobation" not reprobation on the basis of foreseen sin and unbelief or on account of sin. If such is your doctrine of reprobation, you will never hear these murmurers, because that is the doctrine they want and which they claim does justice to human responsibility. But the just reprobation the Canons describe is not reprobation on account of sin, but reprobation unto condemnation in the way of man's own sin (Canons I.15). While it is just and unblamable, its severity nevertheless remains. This severity does not lie in the condemnation, but in the source of the decree in God's "sovereign, most just, irreprehensible, and unchangeable good pleasure" (Canons I.15). Even if you make it clear that the decree of reprobation is just, that it does not violate man's nature as a responsible moral and rational creature, and that the decree of reprobation is realized in history in the way of perfect justice, when you insist on the decree's absolute sovereignty, wicked men will murmur against you doctrine. What is the occasion for these murmurings? The goodness and severity of God, who is really God, is what is assailed by these murmurers, which is the same as saying that the stumblingblock for these murmurers is God's sovereignty.
To murmur is different from acknowledging that we cannot comprehend God's works and ways. Contemplating God's work of sovereign predestination, the believer will confess, "How unsearchable are His judgments, and His ways past finding out!" (Rom. 11:33). To murmur is to contradict and to rebel. It is the work of pride. He who murmurs presumes to know better than God, against whose work he murmurs. Murmuring is unbelief.
Notice how the fathers, with the Scriptures in hand, teach believers to answer these complainers. The fathers refer in both passages that they quote to instances of murmuring. In Romans 9, the apostle answers an objector against the doctrine that God has mercy on whom He will have mercy, and whom He will He hardens: "Thou wilt say then unto me, Why doth he yet find fault? For who hath resisted His will?" The article quotes only the first part of the apostle's answer: "Nay, but, O man, who are thou that repliest against God?" (vv. 19-20).
By quoting this answer and instructing believers to answer and instructing believers to answer the complainers in this language, the Canons point to the real nature of their objections. The trouble is not that they misunderstand. The trouble is not intellectual at all. It is ethical; it is a matter of the will and the heart. Their murmurings partake of the sin of answering against God.
The Canons, with the Scriptures, tacitly assume that the major premise of these objectors is correct, namely, that the free election is indeed sovereign severity.
The fathers, with the apostle Paul, insist that man, an infinitesimally small speck of dust, a priori has no right to contradict and to rebel against the infinite and sovereign God. When God speaks, there is only one attitude for man to assume: let him lay his hand upon his mouth, maintain utter silence, and simply listen! Anything else is nothing short of blasphemous rebellion.
The article might well have quoted the rest of the apostle's reply in Romans 9, but it turns to the parable of the laborers in the vineyard and quotes from it (Matt. 20:15). In the context Jesus tells of the laborer who objects when all who are hired by the lord of the vineyard receive a penny as wages, whether they have labored one hour or whether they have borne the burden and the heat of the day.
Without going into an explanation of the parable, we notice that apparently there is an element of justice in the objection. This fact serves to emphasize the Lord's point more strongly. The lord of the vineyard answers in the parable, "Friend, I do thee no wrong: didst not thou agree with with me for a penny?" Then he insists on granting unto the last servants even as unto the first. The reason that overrules all objection and that cannot be answered is, "Is it not lawful for me to do what I will with mine own?" Although there is in this instance not an objection against predestination, the principle of the reply is certainly applicable. If the lord of the vineyard may do as he pleases with his money, it is certainly true that the Lord of heaven and earth is not beholden to account for his actions to mere men, but is sovereignly free to do as he pleases with his own- his own creatures, his own salvation, his own damnation, his own heaven, and his own hell.
Let the church never flinch in the face of the complainers. Furnish them with a reply in harmony with Scripture.
Let our own attitude be that of adoration, expressed in the words of Romans 11:33-36. This is neither the time nor the place to give an exposition of these words. Suffice it to say that in the light of the context, both in the epistle to the Romans and in the Canons, no more fitting words could have been chosen. Although this doxology speaks of "all things," the context is that of truth of eternal predestination with a view to Israel and the Gentiles. In these words is truly expressed the attitude of holy adoration of these mysteries, for this doxology is preeminently theological: "Of Him, and through Him, and to Him, are all things: to Whom be glory for ever. Amen." This doxology is also a humble confession that when we contemplate the truths of election and reprobation, as they are mysteries revealed to us by God, we come face-to-face with the incomprehensible, unsearchable, and unfathomable God of our salvation.
Ever let the church confess the truth in such a way that its confession may end in holy adoration with the language of this doxology.
Homer C. Hoeksema
The Voice of our Fathers, pp. 140-144
http://rfpa.org/collections/books-by-homer-hoeksema/products/voice-of-our-fathers-the-ebook
