I was considering responding to the comments of Antonio da Rosa on Jonathan Moorhead’s post “Quote of the Week: Zane Hodges.” However, there were many comments on that post, and it would be difficult to pick one or two that was substantial enough to respond to. In addition, Steve Hays has already taken time to respond to Antonio on a number of issues. Instead, therefore, I am going to respond to Antonio da Rosa’s newer article, “Why Sacrifice for God if You Can’t be Certain that Christ Sacrificed for You?” But more than that, I wish to present assurance from a Biblical perspective. I believe a word that would fairly represent Antonio and his position would be “Antinomian.” Basically, Moorhead had posted a brief critique of the “free grace” movement, and Antonio made noise about it in the comments on that post to such a degree that this particular post has now been passed around in the blogosphere just so that others may read Antonio’s comments! Antonio’s position is Antinomian in the sense that he does not believe in the possibility of false faith; he is against the Christian’s basing his assurance on testing the fruit of his faith. Another word that I would naturally use to describe Antonio’s position is “unbiblical.” Let’s look at what he has to say:
***QUOTE***
Why would anyone want to do works in the name of the blessed Lord Jesus Christ who does not have certain, absolute convinced assurance of eternal life, his right-standing before God, and his salvation? (Pause for you to actually consider this and give a good answer)…
The Calvinist cannot know for certain that he is saved! Why?
1) Due to the fact of their Perseverance theology. Only true believers will persevere in faith and obedient works until the end; so unless he is on his death bed (and not even then will it be certain because of their sins), he cannot have any certain assurance that he is saved.
***END-QUOTE***
This is not only ridiculous, but it is simply a misrepresentation. Calvinists do not base assurance on perseverance. Rather, they base perseverance on assurance. If the faith is genuine, then it will continue to the end, without question. Therefore, the first thing to discover is whether or not the faith is genuine, not whether or not you will persevere to the end.
Before we continue to look at what Antonio has to say, I’d like to present assurance from a Biblical perspective. This way, when we see Antonio both misunderstand and misrepresent Biblical assurance, we can point it out with ease. A good book of the Bible for Antonio to read over and over again is the book of 1 John. And Antonio, don’t read it with the perspective of, “John simply can’t mean that.” Rather, let it say what it is saying. 1 John is a very interesting book. Books like Romans, Ephesians, or Galatians systematize the gospel. However, books like 1 John and James want us to make sure that we are applying the gospel to our daily lives. Ephesians tells us that we are saved by grace through faith. But 1 John has us question whether or not we truly possess that faith. And John tells us in his book that the purpose of his writing is assurance:
1 John 5:13 I write these things to you who believe in the name of the Son of God that you may know that you have eternal life.
John writes these things to us that we might have assurance. The question is, what are these things? John lays out two positions: those who are in the light, and those who aren’t. For him, there is no in between. You are either in the light or you are not. Consider the comparison:
Those who are not Christians:
1. Those who walk in darkness
2. Those who walk in darkness and deny it
3. Not just a liar, but a disobedient liar!
4. Those who hate others
5. Those who love the world
6. Those who do not believe that Jesus is the Son of God
7. Those who keep on sinning
8. Those who do not love
True believers:
1. Believers love the light
2. They love obeying
3. They love others
4. They love Jesus
5. They love righteousness
6. They love purity
7. Pure and simple: they love
John very frankly states, “No one who abides in him keeps on sinning; no one who keeps on sinning has either seen him or known him” (3:6) and “Whoever says he is in the light and hates his brother is still in darkness” (2:9). But our response is “but John just can’t mean that!” Let’s not run to Galatians or Romans. Let’s make sure that the gospel is being applied to our lives. John knows that obedience demonstrates the veracity of our confession of faith. This is Biblical assurance. It isn’t just that we claim to have faith, for John states, “Whoever says ‘I know him’ but does not keep his commandments is a liar, and the truth is not in him” (2:4). Our faith is demonstrated in obedience. Faith that is not accompanied with the fruit of faith is not saving faith. James asks the question concerning fruitless faith, “Can that faith save him?” (James 2:14). This is certainly not salvation by works (as I know that Antonio will claim). But it is Biblical faith and assurance thereof.
Having laid this foundation, we continue to respond to what Antonio has to say:
***QUOTE***
2) Calvinism grounds its own brand of uncertain assurance of salvation on 3 things, 2 of which are completely subjective. One is the inner witness of the Spirit. But I ask, how exactly are we to know that it is the Spirit, and not an agent of Satan, who transformed himself into a minister of light; or the mind playing tricks on us; or some bout of emotionalism; or even the pastrami sandwich eaten for lunch? The second subjective ground is the introspection of self: the looking to one’s works and present sanctification. My experience is that there are one of two results when looking at one’s self as a base for assurance: a) self-righteousness and b) despair caused by musing on one’s sins.
***END-QUOTE***
It is amazing how John emphatically disagrees with Antonio’s conclusions. John wrote that we might know that we are saved, and he gave us a means of testing our faith.
***QUOTE***
So why would a Calvinist work for God if he is not certain he is saved? Why else other than that they believe that they must persevere in faith and good works until the end of life to actually gain “final salvation”!? That this is works-salvation is evident, but this has been discussed in other posts of mine. Here we are talking about assurance, and I am going to keep it on track.
***END-QUOTE***
Why is it that Antonio persistently asserts that Calvinists cannot be certain on the matter of their salvation? I have not read a single Calvinist who has ever stated that he is not certain that he is saved. John wrote that we might know, that we might be certain. The fact that Biblical faith is accompanied by Biblical works does not mean that assurance is thrown out the window, and for some reason Antonio does not understand this. After Antonio quotes some Reformed theologians, he states:
***QUOTE***
These quotes betray the utter bankruptcy of the Reformed theology to:
1) Relate to its adherents a certainty that they have been accepted by God, justified, and given eternal life. Doubts necessarily must abound. Some authors even claim that doubts can be good so that they will motivate us to good works and perseverance (apparently by fear of hell).
***END-QUOTE***
A few of the statements that John makes would rightly cause someone to question his salvation. This is indeed a good thing. However, the true Christian either passes the test, or repents if he is in sin. Questioning salvation does not add uncertainty on the matter of assurance. Rather, John makes it clear: you are either in the light, or you are not in the light. There is no in-between. At the end of the examination, you either pass, or you fail; and you know your own score.
***QUOTE***
2) Provide one of the greatest motivators for godly living: certainty of salvation! What are we left with here? Reformed people’s motivation is to work hard enough in order to gain some shadow of assurance, and thus make some conjecture that they may be saved. Instead of working out of gratitude that God has certainly saved them, they must work for God and persevere until the end for final salvation to be theirs!
How can you work for God if you are not certain that your name is written in the Book of life? Is that not like investing in a company that may not be yours; tricking out a car that may be repossessed at any time; devoting to a woman who hasn’t affirmed that she is your wife?
***END-QUOTE***
Again Antonio makes at least two errors:
1. He continues to insist that the Calvinist has no certainty concerning his salvation. This is simply a lie.
2. He claims that “Reformed people’s motivation is to work hard enough in order to gain some shadow of assurance, and thus make some conjecture that they may be saved.” This is as well false. We work because we know we have been saved. We do not work in order to be saved, or even in order to know we are saved. Rather, genuine faith will produce genuine works.
The article continues a bit further, but I would merely be repeating myself over and over again. Antonio simply persists in committing the above two errors. I have already presented assurance from a Biblical perspective, and if Antonio wishes to respond to anything he can respond to that.
[HT:Gene Bridges]
Hooah to that! I find is almost amusing that anyone can read 1Jn and come out with anything other than what you've outlined here. Praise be to God for the assurance that we are able to glean from this practical book of 1Jn.
ReplyDeleteI don’t think that you have fairly represented me or the Reformed position, nor listened to both Calvin and Luther on the matter, who take the position that assurance is of the essence of saving faith, which is my position as well. If anyone hasn’t read my post, it would be beneficial to at least read my post before commenting on this one. The post is linked above or can be seen
ReplyDeleteH E R E
----------
Uh, oh! Here’s another of those nasty theological words—antinomian! If the word “legalism” is wrapped in obscurity these days, the term antinomianism is enveloped in Stygian darkness!
For instance, my copy of The American Heritage Dictionary of the English Language has only one definition for this word, which it designates as its meaning in theology. Listen to this: “antinomian n. Theology. A member of a Christian sect holding that faith alone is necessary for salvation.” Well, how about that! If that’s all we’re talking about under the term antinomian, I cheerfully confess to being one. But I take great comfort in the fact that under the American Heritage definition, the apostle Paul himself should be classified as an unreconstructed antinomian!
I would like to suggest that today the term antinomian is largely what you make it. That’s unfortunate, but I’m afraid it’s true. But of course the root derivation of the word simply means “opposed to law.” Not necessarily to the law of Moses per se, but simply to law as such. It would be nice if all parties in the current debate over the Gospel could agree to confine the term to those who are opposed to all forms of law in the Christian life. That is to say, an antinomian would then be one who held that there are no laws governing Christian behavior so that the Christian is entirely free from commandments and binding obligations. That kind of definition would clarify things a lot.
For one thing, under that definition, Paul was certainly not an antinomian. After all, it was Paul who said (1 Cor 9:21) that in seeking to win to Christ those who were “without law,” he became “as without law”—but he hastens to add, “not being without law toward God, but under law toward Christ.” In another place he can say, “Bear one another’s burdens, and so fulfill the law of Christ” (Gal 6:2). Regardless of the precise meaning of this text, it certainly shows that Paul could think in terms of Christian law. In addition, the NT everywhere asserts that our Lord left commandments that are binding on His followers today.
If we were to follow this definition, only those who are willing to bend the truth could accuse me of being an antinomian.
So you see what I mean. If we could confine the designation antinomian to those who will not acknowledge any such thing as a Christian law, we would clarify the situation greatly. But don’t hold your breath waiting for this to happen. Antinomian is too good a Christian “cuss-word” to retreat easily to the fringes of theological debate in the way I am suggesting. It just happens to be a very convenient cudgel with which to bludgeon theological opponents whose attributes and theology offend us. I regret to say that Christian polemicists do not readily retire their most useful brickbats, anymore than the nuclear powers easily discard their nuclear arsenals. It’s nice to have something with which to blow your opponents off the face of the map, and antinomianism serves very well for that purpose in some theological circles, namely Reformed.
If I can be accused of anything here, it would be that the grace of God that brings eternal life is free: free from provisos, free from caveats, free from strings. Grace isn’t popular. Neither is certain assurance.
Antonio:
ReplyDeleteIt is interesting that used so many words to concern yourself with my usage of the term "Antinomian" yet did not address a single piece of the "meat" of my post, nor handle the relevant passages addressed (i.e., those from 1 John). I certainly appreciate your stopping by. However, I simply wish that if you comment that it meaningfully responds to what has been stated.
Thank you,
Evan May.
Your tests cannot give you a certain assurance that you are saved. 1) You cannot pass those tests with flying colors. You may contend that you can, I contend greatly that you can't.
ReplyDelete2) Even if you delude yourself to pass with flying colors, there is no assurance that you will pass with flying colors anytime in the future.
I am very confused that you can say that you can have absolute assurance in Reformed theology. You cannot. You may have some measure of assurance based on your works, but what kind of assurance is that?
Your number seven for those who are not Christians: will keep on sinning. I don't know, have you reached sinless perfection? Do you not have to keep confessing your sins day in and day out? You must not be a Christian!
Do you understand what fellowship is? It is participation with God. Any time you sin, you are not walking in fellowship with God. God is only in the light. If you are not participating with Him in the light, guess where you are? You are walking in darkness. Anytime that you sin, you are walking in darkness.
You don't get caught up in any of the sins of the world? When you sin against God, prefering that which comes from the world over Him, you are loving the world and not loving God at that time.
Can you say that you are loving God at the same time that you are sinning against Him succumbing to the temptations of the world?
Frankly I do not have to go on. If your conscience does not affend you with any of those tests, then there is something wrong.
You are either sinless or self-righteous. Any sincere look of instrospection using your tests will betray that you are not fulfilling all of those requirements you give for assurance. You can't have assurance that way! Calvin knew it and Luther knew it and I know it, and you know it. Certain assurance of salvation will never come from looking to works, or from fulfilling your tests.
Dort:
"...converts are not always so influenced and actuated by the Spirit of God..."
"When these [prayer and watchfulness] are neglected, they are not only liable to be drawn into great and heinous sins, by Satan, the world and the flesh, but sometimes the righteous permission of God actually fall into these evils."
"By such enormous sins, however, they very highly offend God, incur a deadly guilt, grieve the Holy Spirit, interrupt the exercise of faith, very grievously wound their consciences, and sometimes lose the sense of God's favor..."
"...lest by abusing his fatherly kindness, God should turn away his gracious countenance from them, to behold which is to the godly dearer than life: the withdrawing whereof is more bitter than death, and they in consequence hereof should fall into more grievous torments of conscience."
Absolute assurance is impossible if these things can be true of a regenerate person and if assurance must come from introspection.
So by your standards of assurance, and tests, true regenerate people cannot have certain assurance of their salvation.
Add to this the Reformed doctrine of 'temporary faith' and you cannot know that your faith is not spurious or merely evanescent. “You may be a spiritual defector who hasn’t defected yet." (John MacArthur)
I don't know. Either you aren't Reformed, you don't know the reformed doctrines of assurance, or you are making up your own doctrine of assurance.
I wouldn't know where to begin or end critiquing this message it is so full of holes.
you write:
----------
"Therefore, the first thing to discover is whether or not the faith is genuine"
----------
How do you do that in Reformed theology? Only by persevering in faith. Can you find out that your faith is genuine after one day of believing in Christ? How about a week, a month, a year, 10 years, 3 decades?
Robert L. Dabney says:
“There is a spurious as well as a genuine faith. Every man, when he thinks he believes, is conscious of exercising what he thinks is faith. Such is the correct statement of these facts of consciousness. Now suppose the faith, of which the man is conscious, turns out a spurious faith, must not his be a spurious consciousness? And he, being without the illumination of the Spirit, will be in the dark as to its hollowness.”
You may only have a spurious faith! Don't be so presumptious to assume that your faith is genuine. You haven't persevered enough, you haven't passed the tests, your consciousness may be fooling you.
Well, enough of this. I am going to go pray. The notion that a Calvinist can be SURE and CERTAIN of his salvation is, unfortunately, laughable, when the evidence is considered.
I'll end with Calvin:
"But if we have been chosen in Him, we shall not find assurance of our election in ourselves; and not even in God the Father, if we conceive Him as severed from His Son. Christ, then is the mirror wherein we must, and without self-deception may, contemplate our own election." (Institutes III.xxiv.5)
Calvin looks to Christ alone for his assurance:
"If Pighius asks how I know I am elect, I answer that Christ is more than a thousand testimonies to me" (Predestination, 130)
@Hello
ReplyDeleteThe entire church is 'elect' (many places indicate this in scripture). This is very clear throughout scripture. Falling away is only a characteristic of someone whom is not a true believer...'falling away' is a bit of a misnomer...as there is nothing 'true' about their faith to begin with. I'm not going to go into great detail on this...because time does not permit...but here are a couple of verses (among many) that point to this idea.
Joh 10:29
"My Father, who has given them to Me, is greater than all; and no one is able to snatch them out of the Father's hand.
Php 1:6
For I am confident of this very thing, that He who began a good work in you will perfect it until the day of Christ Jesus.
1 Jn 2:19
They went out from us, but they were not really of us; for if they had been of us, they would have remained with us; but they went out, so that it would be shown that they all are not of us.
John MacArthur continues this topic @ http://www.biblebb.com/files/MAC/J93-41-1.htm and in many other places on this site.
Hi brothers!
ReplyDeleteI have to admit I find it frustrating that your blogs aren't accepting my comments. Do you have a length restriction? Obviously as a big F/G loyalist I want to respond to your arguments. So I wish my longish comments were being accepted. Hopefully this one will be...
Bottom line is that our interpretation of books like 1 John and James fits the data better.
whoever says he is in the light and hates his brother is still in darkness
This is too clumsy to be an accurate way of stating what you argue it is stating. If your interpretation was right John would have said:
whoever says he is in the light and hates the brethren is still in darkness
We agree that the Scriptures aren't clumsy I'm sure.
God bless you and your readers!
Jodie