Tuesday, January 02, 2007

God's Sovereignty and Man's Responsibility

According to the Word of God, our God is absolutely sovereign. This is to say that God does as He pleases, how He pleases, when He pleases. As even the pagan King Nebuchadnezzar came to realize:

Daniel 4:35
All the inhabitants of the earth are accounted as nothing, but He does according to His will in the host of heaven And among the inhabitants of earth; And no one can ward off His hand Or say to Him, “What have You done?”

Put most simply, the sovereignty of God may be defined from Scripture as follows:

Psalm 103:19
The LORD has established His throne in heaven, And His kingdom rules over all.
(NKJV).


And in the absolute sovereignty of God, God has determined that man has responsibility to God – to both hear and to heed God’s voice. As the prophet Micah stated:

Micah 6:8
He has told you, O man, what is good; And what does the LORD require of you But to do justice, to love kindness, And to walk humbly with your God?

Clearly there is a hearing and a heeding – a listening and an obeying. Man is not some automaton without a will, without feeling and without emotion. God sovereignly calls and man is to simply obey. Sin has affected man’s ability to hear and to obey God, but the pattern is yet the same – God instructs and man is to follow.

1 Thessalonians 4:3
For this is the will of God, your sanctification [the instruction and command of God]; that is, that you abstain [man’s responsibility] from sexual immorality;


This pattern of God’s call and man’s complicity is interesting revealed in the life of John the Baptist. In Matthew 3, Jesus comes to John to be baptized. John rightfully recognizes the issue, namely that John himself needs to be baptized by Jesus. John is the sinner – Jesus the saint. John was concerned with the appearance of things and the text says that he sought to prevent the event. Interestingly enough the text says that John “tried” to prevent what the sovereign Lord had purposed. So, Jesus exhorts John, giving him the call and purpose of God saying,

Matthew 3:15
Permit it at this time; for in this way it is fitting for us to fulfill all righteousness.


Here is the call of God on John. Here is the will of God expressed to John. The great sovereign of heaven and earth has spoken. And what is John’s response to this? Consider the last phrase of Matthew 3:15 -

Then he [John] permitted Him [Jesus].

Those are intriguing words, are they not? John permitted Jesus? The sinner consents to the Savior? We see man’s responsibility to respond to the call of God. Jesus says, “permit” and John obeys. God’s sovereignty and man’s responsibility.

The verb “permitted” literally means “to allow something to go forth.” Man’s responsibility to the call and purpose of God in his life is “to allow it to go forth” to come to pass. God does not thrust personal and practical sanctification [the process of becoming holy or godly] upon man. Man, through belief in Christ and obedience to God’s commands, must permit – that is, he must yield himself over to such a purpose. Truly, it is the Lord alone who sanctifies and makes us righteous, but we must involve ourselves in the process. The apostle Paul makes this connection between God’s sovereignty and man’s responsibility in Philippians 2:12-13 -

12 So then, my beloved, just as you have always obeyed, not as in my presence only, but now much more in my absence, work out your salvation with fear and trembling [man’s responsibility]; 13 for it is God who is at work in you, both to will and to work for His good pleasure [God’s sovereignty].

O that our desire would be to permit the sovereign purpose and plan of God to be our duty and delight – that we would allow the benefits of following after God to so rule our lives. It is the stubborn, selfish sinfulness of man, his own unwillingness to live according to God’s ways in order to pursue his own, that forfeits this delighting in God, that refuses to yield to God to the detriment of his own soul.

O Lord, grant that we might “permit” Your sovereign goodness to come to pass in our lives. Remove our selfishness, our stubbornness, and our pride that leaves us wallowing in the muck and the mire of depravity rather than seeking Your perfect and pure presence through simple obedience to Your Word. Command us, O God, that we may joyfully comply.

Soli Deo Gloria,

Pastor Ed

3 comments:

Anonymous said...

"Man’s responsibility to the call and purpose of God in his life is “to allow it to go forth” to come to pass. God does not thrust personal and practical sanctification [the process of becoming holy or godly] upon man. Man, through belief in Christ and obedience to God’s commands, must permit – that is, he must yield himself over to such a purpose."


Whether or not this is correct depends on what you mean. Certainly, God does not force men against their wills (coaction) as a captor might force a prisoner. However, Scripture does not teach that sanctification is synergistic (two workers supplying fresh power to the work). That is, it is not true that God merely makes our sanctification possible and then leaves it to us whether or not we will improve upon His grace and be sanctified. Instead, the Bible teaches that God powerfully works in us to produce new desires that inevitably result in new obedience to God's commands. Believers are in the new covenant and so have the law of God written on their hearts (Heb 8). Sanctification is monergistic (one Worker (God), who originates the power in sanctification, which work necessarily creates a response of faithful loving obedience in us).

"Work out your salvation with fear and trembling, for it is God who is at work in us to will and to work for His good pleasure" (Phil 2:13).

Note that we work "for" God works. That is, God's work causes our work.

"But by the grace of God I am what I am, and His grace toward me did not prove vain; but I labored even more than all of them, yet not I, but the grace of God within me" (1 Cor 4:10). That is, God's grace never merely makes it possible for us to be sanctified, since then it might be in "vain," should we fail to improve upon it. Instead, we are what we are in sanctification solely because of God's grace. We work, yet it is not us, but God, who is the originating, sustaining, and effectuating power in sanctification.

O that our desire would be to permit the sovereign purpose and plan of God to be our duty and delight – that we would allow the benefits of following after God to so rule our lives.


God's sovereign purpose and plan does not wait for our permission. The Bible says, "Truly I have spoken; truly I will bring it to pass. I have planned it, surely I will do it" (Isaiah 46:11). A sovereign king does not wait for permission from his subjects before enacting the purposes he has deemed good and wise for his kingdom. God's benefits flow to us from His eternal counsel and from the effectual power of the cross of Christ. Our regeneration, faith, repentance, choice to follow Christ in God's ways, and obedience to His commands are all themselves graces from the hand of God. "Lord command what you will, but grant what you command" (Augustine).

O Lord, grant that we might “permit” Your sovereign goodness to come to pass in our lives.


The fact that you say, "grant" that we might "permit" makes me wonder what you really mean. It is true that in order to experience the blessings of Christian joy in this life and heaven in the next, we must "permit" ourselves to follow God's commands to trust and obey Him. Yet even our "permission" of ourselves to trust and obey Him is "granted" by God. If this is all you mean, then I'm not sure I have any substantive disagreement with you, though I would never use the terminology you use.

Pastor Ed Godfrey said...

Dear sbts,

Thank you for your comments. I am reminded that we must always be careful in how we present something so as not to cause confusion or error.

Anyone that knows me knows that I fully embrace a monergistic salvation. As the prophet Jonah so aptly stated, "Salvation is from the LORD" (Jonah 2:9).

I evidently did a poor job of communicating my point. I was fascinated at the statement of Matthew 3:15 where it states that John the Baptist, “permitted” Jesus to be baptized. How does John “permit” or “prevent” anything of the divine agenda? Our Lord’s intent and sovereign will was that He would be baptized by John. Could John have prevented this? Could he have thwarted the call and purpose of Jesus? I think not. But why does the text say that John “permitted” or “allowed” the sovereign Lord to be baptized? The answer to this lies in the fact that John heard the will and purpose of Jesus and then obeyed. From the human perspective, he “permitted” or “allowed” the will of God prevail. His will was not forced or coerced into conformity to this purpose of God. He chose to do it, but, as you aptly pointed out, not because of some inherent goodness in him, but rather because God was at work in Him.

The word “permitted” is a seemingly strong word to us, but in the context of Matthew 3:15, John’s “permission” was the only godly response to the statement of Jesus. My point is that sometimes in the Christian’s life, there are choices that we must make, either to disobey the expressly revealed will or command of God or to yield to the only godly response, that is to obey [“allow” or “permit”] the command, directive, exhortation of God. Only the believer, in whom God has placed His Spirit and is working, will ever “permit” these divine directives to have authority in his life. Please remember, I did not choose the word “permitted” and that is why I defined it as “to allow something to go forth” which seems to be a softer rendering than the NASB’s “permit.”

With regard to your statement that sanctification is purely or only monergistic, I would have to take exception. I think that you are confusing the fact that monergism – that salvation is all of God to the glory of God, has some synergistic elements. By synergistic, I do not mean that man improves upon what God starts, but rather that man does have a part and responsibility in that specific area. There are two facets of sanctification; positional sanctification, which is wholly the work of God [monergistic] whereby, after justifying us, God makes us holy and blameless in His site by virtue of the definite atonement of Christ; and progressive sanctification, which is a work of God and man that makes us more and more free from sin and more and more like Christ in our actual lives. This work cannot be done apart from God working in us, but we do work, or cooperate with the divine will, “permitting” [allowing] the will of God to make us Christlike have pre-eminence in our lives.

Consider the following: R.C. Sproul says that the sanctification process is synergistic and it seems the Scriptures would also testify to this. The Scripture itself testifies to a synergistic sanctification...

“work out your salvation with fear and trembling; for it is God who is at
work in you, both to will and to work for His good pleasure.” Phil 2:12b,13.

This is a clear indication that there is a synergism taking place in our sanctification.

Prior to regeneration, due to our affection for the world, we would never desire to come to Christ of our own will (Rom 8:7, 1 Cor 2:14, ROM 3:11, John 3:19), yet the Scriptures make clear that sanctification is synergistic. This is not to say we could maintain our justification (judicial standing before God) by what we do since Christ's work is sufficient. But in our regeneration we were given a new nature (from God) which desires to please Him. In this way sanctification, unlike regeneration, isn't entirely a divine action while we just remain passive. Those who think we just remain passive and wait for God to change us cannot give Scriptural evidence to support this position. I have heard some brothers say, "if God wants to deliver me from this sin, He will do so in His own good time." But historically this is a theological error in the church known as quietism. Instead, with the gospel Christ as our constant abiding theme we are called to be ACTIVELY "putting sin to death" ... "For if you live according to the sinful nature, you will die; but if by the Spirit you PUT TO DEATH the misdeeds of the body, you will live." (ROM 8:13)

By God's unfailing grace we are enabled by the new principle within. Just as we must despair of any hope in ourselves as the first prerequisite of a sound conversion, in the same way we must lose all confidence in self if we are to grow in grace. We must look to Christ and, by His gospel power, we are to put to death all remaining sin (ROM 6). Because sin is no longer our master and God works in and through us to do this, we have great hope that sin can and will be overcome in our lives. Before regeneration, however, we were dead in sin and had nothing to draw upon, but now we are alive to God in Christ so the new nature empowered by the Holy Spirit is constantly working through us.

A. A. Hodge said,
"It must be remembered that while the subject is passive with respect to that divine act of grace whereby he is regenerated, after he is regenerated he cooperates with the Holy Ghost in the work of sanctification. The Holy Ghost gives the grace, and prompts and directs in its exercise, and the soul exercises it. Thus while sanctification is a grace, it is also a duty; and the soul is both bound and encouraged to use with diligence, in dependence upon the Holy Spirit, all the means for its spiritual renovation, and to form those habits resisting evil and of right action in which sanctification so largely consists."

Yet this is a synergism in which God receives the glory because the Holy Spirit indwells and enables our new desires yet it is we who make choices based on that new nature. In other words, biblical Theology teaches neither quietism nor pietism. Quietism would say "let go and let God" while remaining entirely passive letting God do all the work. Pietism, however, would say that we need to do all (or most of) the work of holy living and obeying God's law. Practice with perfectionistic tendencies is often emphasized at the expense of theology .

The best understanding of this from a biblical perspective, then, is that we need to, in light of the gospel, exert ourselves in prayer, evangelism, good works relying wholly on God for the reality of our new life in Christ. Of course, all that is really holy and gracious in a renewed sinner comes through the indwelling work of the Holy Spirit. The desires of the soul to be conformed into His image are the direct result of the grace of God, not something we generate from the flesh. (John 4:14; 7:38, 39). He has renewed our natures to be in conformity with the image of God. Our new nature inclines us to choose what is pleasing to God. We love God more than we love sin yet sometimes we are deceived by sin and choose it in unbelief. One who has undergone the new birth will be brought to repentance, however, due to the Holy Spirit dwelling within him. The man without the Spirit does not understand the things of God (1 Cor 2:14) but now that we were freely given the Spirit, our inclinations, desires and disposition has been changed. We willingly cooperate with God to work out our salvation.

"many people confuse regeneration and sanctification. Regeneration is exclusively God's work, and it is an act of His free grace in which He implants a new principle of spiritual life in the soul. It is performed by supernatural power and is complete in an instant. On the other hand, sanctification is a process through which the remains of sin in the outward life are gradually removed . . . It is a joint work of God and man"(Loraine Boettner, The Reformed Doctrine of Predestination , 172).

God's law is no longer seen as a burden for us. This is similar to a groom who is to be married. He limits himself for his bride willingly, not just because he is obligated to. He loves his bride so has no problem putting himself in this covenant relationship that has stipulations. Our relationship to God is similar. When he comes to transform us from the kingdom of darkness to the kingdom of light, when He makes our heart of stone into a heart of flesh, we willingly believe and obey His commands. It is our delight to do so. We can say now that we love God's law, whereas before in our unregenerate nature such was impossible. Our choices are always based on our desires and our desires are the direct result of who we are by nature. We work and God works for our sanctification but God gets all the glory since it was He who implanted the new desires when He gave us spiritual birth.

Hope this helps,

Soli Deo Gloria,

Pastor Ed

Anonymous said...

Dear sbts,

Thank you for your comments. I am reminded that we must always be careful in how we present something so as not to cause confusion or error.

Anyone that knows me knows that I fully embrace a monergistic salvation. As the prophet Jonah so aptly stated, "Salvation is from the LORD" (Jonah 2:9).


Pastor Ed, thank you for providing an answer to my reply. After reading through your response, I feel confident that any disagreement we might have is very likely purely semantic. And, I'm pretty sure that if I knew you, I would not have written the response that I did.

I evidently did a poor job of communicating my point. I was fascinated at the statement of Matthew 3:15 where it states that John the Baptist, “permitted” Jesus to be baptized. How does John “permit” or “prevent” anything of the divine agenda? Our Lord’s intent and sovereign will was that He would be baptized by John. Could John have prevented this? Could he have thwarted the call and purpose of Jesus? I think not. But why does the text say that John “permitted” or “allowed” the sovereign Lord to be baptized? The answer to this lies in the fact that John heard the will and purpose of Jesus and then obeyed. From the human perspective, he “permitted” or “allowed” the will of God prevail. His will was not forced or coerced into conformity to this purpose of God. He chose to do it, but, as you aptly pointed out, not because of some inherent goodness in him, but rather because God was at work in Him.

I agree.

The word “permitted” is a seemingly strong word to us, but in the context of Matthew 3:15, John’s “permission” was the only godly response to the statement of Jesus. My point is that sometimes in the Christian’s life, there are choices that we must make, either to disobey the expressly revealed will or command of God or to yield to the only godly response, that is to obey [“allow” or “permit”] the command, directive, exhortation of God. Only the believer, in whom God has placed His Spirit and is working, will ever “permit” these divine directives to have authority in his life. Please remember, I did not choose the word “permitted” and that is why I defined it as “to allow something to go forth” which seems to be a softer rendering than the NASB’s “permit.”

I agree with this too.

With regard to your statement that sanctification is purely or only monergistic, I would have to take exception. I think that you are confusing the fact that monergism – that salvation is all of God to the glory of God, has some synergistic elements. By synergistic, I do not mean that man improves upon what God starts, but rather that man does have a part and responsibility in that specific area. There are two facets of sanctification; positional sanctification, which is wholly the work of God [monergistic] whereby, after justifying us, God makes us holy and blameless in His site by virtue of the definite atonement of Christ; and progressive sanctification, which is a work of God and man that makes us more and more free from sin and more and more like Christ in our actual lives. This work cannot be done apart from God working in us, but we do work, or cooperate with the divine will, “permitting” [allowing] the will of God to make us Christlike have pre-eminence in our lives.

This is where we may have some semantic differences, but as far as I can tell I doubt that there are any substantive differences between us. While it's true that the word "synergism" by itself simply means "work together," Arminians and semi-Pelagians of various stripes have so utilized the term that “synergism” often means that God and man both originate energy in salvation. When used in that way, synergism conjures an image of two horses pulling a carriage, with each horse supplying fresh and original power to the forward movement. If “synergism” is defined in that way, then I reject “synergism” (as I expect you would too) because I do not believe that we contribute anything original to our salvation at any stage: regeneration or sanctification (whether definitive or progressive). In using the term “synergism,” I intended that semi-Pelagian meaning only.

By "monergism," I simply mean that God originates all of the power in our salvation. All of the excellent virtues in the Christian life are but “graces,” traceable to some necessitating/determining first cause of God. In this construction, there are indeed “two workers” and so one could describe it as “synergistic,” as long as it is understood that all of the work done by the human being is the “reflex” of some initiating work of God.

Consider the following: R.C. Sproul says that the sanctification process is synergistic and it seems the Scriptures would also testify to this. The Scripture itself testifies to a synergistic sanctification…

“work out your salvation with fear and trembling; for it is God who is at
work in you, both to will and to work for His good pleasure.” Phil 2:12b,13.

This is a clear indication that there is a synergism taking place in our sanctification.

Prior to regeneration, due to our affection for the world, we would never desire to come to Christ of our own will (Rom 8:7, 1 Cor 2:14, ROM 3:11, John 3:19), yet the Scriptures make clear that sanctification is synergistic. This is not to say we could maintain our justification (judicial standing before God) by what we do since Christ's work is sufficient. But in our regeneration we were given a new nature (from God) which desires to please Him. In this way sanctification, unlike regeneration, isn't entirely a divine action while we just remain passive. Those who think we just remain passive and wait for God to change us cannot give Scriptural evidence to support this position. I have heard some brothers say, "if God wants to deliver me from this sin, He will do so in His own good time." But historically this is a theological error in the church known as quietism. Instead, with the gospel Christ as our constant abiding theme we are called to be ACTIVELY "putting sin to death" ... "For if you live according to the sinful nature, you will die; but if by the Spirit you PUT TO DEATH the misdeeds of the body, you will live." (ROM 8:13)


Right. By “monergism” I never intended to imply “quietism.” In fact, I’m not sure I agree with Sproul (I understood you to indicate that Sproul wrote what’s above; so, correct me if I'm wrong) that we remain “passive” in regeneration in the sense in which he seems to intend the term “passive.” I don’t believe that we are “idle” (which is apparently what Sproul means by “passive”) at the very moment God is actively working upon us to regenerate us. Indeed, I would argue that our souls are most active in the moment God first applies recreative power to our souls.

I agree with you and Sproul that it would be disastrous for a pastor to teach a “quietistic” perversion of the faith. Pastors should be urging all men, believing and unbelieving alike, to turn from their sins, to trust the Lord and to obey Him in order to receive the conditional blessings of God’s gracious covenant. Christians can, must, and do discipline themselves to practice godly living.

By God's unfailing grace we are enabled by the new principle within. Just as we must despair of any hope in ourselves as the first prerequisite of a sound conversion, in the same way we must lose all confidence in self if we are to grow in grace. We must look to Christ and, by His gospel power, we are to put to death all remaining sin (ROM 6). Because sin is no longer our master and God works in and through us to do this, we have great hope that sin can and will be overcome in our lives. Before regeneration, however, we were dead in sin and had nothing to draw upon, but now we are alive to God in Christ so the new nature empowered by the Holy Spirit is constantly working through us.

I agree.

A. A. Hodge said,
"It must be remembered that while the subject is passive with respect to that divine act of grace whereby he is regenerated, after he is regenerated he cooperates with the Holy Ghost in the work of sanctification. The Holy Ghost gives the grace, and prompts and directs in its exercise, and the soul exercises it. Thus while sanctification is a grace, it is also a duty; and the soul is both bound and encouraged to use with diligence, in dependence upon the Holy Spirit, all the means for its spiritual renovation, and to form those habits resisting evil and of right action in which sanctification so largely consists."


I suppose this depends on one’s definition of “regeneration.” The term has undergone some changes in Reformed theology, and even today, not all who are Reformed mean exactly the same thing by it.

By regeneration, if one means “the creation of a new nature in a sinner, which nature possesses a new life of love and delight for who God is in Himself,” then the sinner is certainly not passive. Love is not passive; therefore, at the moment God actually creates a new loving nature in a person, that person is not passive either because he is actively involved in loving God. But, if one limits the meaning of "regeneration" to “God’s activity in the creation of a new nature,” and so excludes the movement of love in that new nature at the instant of its own creation, then the creature is passive in regeneration by definition of the term. But, all of this is hair splitting. Both parties have essentially the same idea. They’re just labeling the parts differently.

Yet this is a synergism in which God receives the glory because the Holy Spirit indwells and enables our new desires yet it is we who make choices based on that new nature.

I agree, provided we say that the choices we make are made by compatibilistic freedom and not libertarian freedom, i.e., the power of contrary choice.

In other words, biblical Theology teaches neither quietism nor pietism. Quietism would say "let go and let God" while remaining entirely passive letting God do all the work. Pietism, however, would say that we need to do all (or most of) the work of holy living and obeying God's law. Practice with perfectionistic tendencies is often emphasized at the expense of theology.

I agree.

The best understanding of this from a biblical perspective, then, is that we need to, in light of the gospel, exert ourselves in prayer, evangelism, good works relying wholly on God for the reality of our new life in Christ. Of course, all that is really holy and gracious in a renewed sinner comes through the indwelling work of the Holy Spirit. The desires of the soul to be conformed into His image are the direct result of the grace of God, not something we generate from the flesh. (John 4:14; 7:38, 39).

Amen. All of these things are vital to the faith. We are totally responsible for our compatibilistically free choices because of God’s sovereign meticulous providence.

The man without the Spirit does not understand the things of God (1 Cor 2:14) but now that we were freely given the Spirit, our inclinations, desires and disposition has been changed. We willingly cooperate with God to work out our salvation.

Amen.

"many people confuse regeneration and sanctification. Regeneration is exclusively God's work, and it is an act of His free grace in which He implants a new principle of spiritual life in the soul. It is performed by supernatural power and is complete in an instant. On the other hand, sanctification is a process through which the remains of sin in the outward life are gradually removed . . . It is a joint work of God and man"(Loraine Boettner, The Reformed Doctrine of Predestination , 172).

John Calvin is apparently among those who “confuse” regeneration and sanctification. He frequently interchanged the two terms. As mentioned above, the only way to define regeneration exclusively in terms of God’s action is to exclude the responsive movement in creation that is the effect of that activity. I have no conceptual or theological problem with either of those positions.

God's law is no longer seen as a burden for us. This is similar to a groom who is to be married. He limits himself for his bride willingly, not just because he is obligated to. He loves his bride so has no problem putting himself in this covenant relationship that has stipulations. Our relationship to God is similar. When he comes to transform us from the kingdom of darkness to the kingdom of light, when He makes our heart of stone into a heart of flesh, we willingly believe and obey His commands. It is our delight to do so. We can say now that we love God's law, whereas before in our unregenerate nature such was impossible. Our choices are always based on our desires and our desires are the direct result of who we are by nature. We work and God works for our sanctification but God gets all the glory since it was He who implanted the new desires when He gave us spiritual birth.

Amen! We are responsible to work and must exert energy to do the work God instructs us to do. When we work (and believers will work) we do so because God is working that work in us.

Blessings and peace,
Pastor Tom