What Is Faith?

0:10 Faith is often reduced to one of three 0:12 inadequate definitions. Wishful 0:14 thinking, intellectual agreement, or 0:17 moral effort. However, what scripture 0:19 actually gives us is a better in every 0:21 way, more believable, rational, and 0:24 meaningful. Faith is not pretending 0:27 without evidence, merely acknowledging 0:29 facts, or earning through religious 0:31 effort. Each of those erroneous 0:33 interpretations can distort more than 0:35 merely the doctrine of faith. They can 0:37 distort our understanding of the God who 0:39 calls us to faith. Because if his faith 0:42 is irrational, then it's not wise. If 0:44 it's transactional, then it's not 0:46 gracious. And if it's coercive, then 0:49 it's not loving. 0:51 Faith is the unbreakable adhesive that 0:53 fixes the spirit of a true believer to 0:55 the spirit of God permanently. If you're 0:58 in agreement with that already, great. 1:01 But if you came to examine the weeds 1:03 with me more than just to prove yourself 1:05 or someone else right or wrong, but to 1:07 refine your belief under the heat of 1:09 scripture, then you should appreciate 1:11 the following deep dive into the concept 1:14 of faith. By the end, after we've worked 1:17 through those weeds step by step, I'll 1:19 cut back through them with a parable and 1:20 final exhortation meant to bring the 1:23 whole discussion back to a simple 1:25 actionable center. Believe, repent, 1:28 trust, and follow Christ. 1:32 I'm Jacob Mlan and this is the wisdom 1:33 crucible, where wisdom distills 1:35 transformation through the word of God. 1:39 beyond just the doctrine of faith. I'm 1:42 considering this episode a theology of 1:44 faith. What I mean by that contrast is 1:47 that while I do intend to use scripture 1:49 to define the doctrine, that being the 1:51 definition according to biblical belief, 1:54 I'm also going to trace the implications 1:56 of doctrine to consider how it relates 1:59 to our theology, our study and 2:02 understanding of God, his word, and our 2:04 relationship with him. 2:07 I could say that there are at least a 2:08 few reasonable angles of approach for 2:10 this topic. But since my purpose is to 2:12 facilitate a well-rounded understanding 2:14 of biblical faith, I'm going to focus on 2:16 what scripture affirms and support the 2:18 completion of that understanding by 2:20 addressing what seem to me to be the 2:22 most common misunderstandings that we 2:24 may encounter. 2:26 While I will mention some specific 2:28 arguments from certain theologians and 2:31 teachers such as John Piper, my focus is 2:35 not on taking sides with people, but 2:37 with scripture. 2:39 I believe that while a consensus against 2:42 you should cause you concern that you 2:44 may need to re-evaluate your position, 2:47 we must also be willing to side with God 2:49 against any consensus of man. With that 2:52 in mind, I will be more focused on the 2:55 arguments of scripture than the 2:56 arguments of others. Of course, I won't 2:59 be able to cover every question that one 3:01 might ask. So, if you still have a 3:03 burning question that you can't answer 3:05 or let go of by the end of this 3:07 discussion, then I invite you to pose 3:09 that question in any way that you 3:11 prefer, whether that's through the 3:13 podcast or YouTube comment section, an 3:16 email to the wisdom [email protected], 3:20 or a direct message on x. 3:23 In addition to the plain preaching and 3:26 soapbox moments that you might expect 3:28 from a talking head online, I will also 3:31 be using a plethora of scripture to 3:33 demonstrate how I've developed my 3:35 doctrinal and theological statements 3:37 regarding the Christian faith. That 3:40 said, let's dig in together. 3:47 My understanding of biblical faith has 3:49 evolved substantially as I've progressed 3:51 beyond the simple children's church 3:53 lessons to ask the obvious questions 3:55 that arise from a close examination of 3:58 the scriptures pertaining to the nature 4:00 of faith. That's not to complain about 4:02 the way I was taught as a child, but 4:04 merely to point out that a childish 4:06 understanding of faith is not enough to 4:08 answer the kind of kinds of questions 4:10 that a more mature mind may consider, 4:13 such as when trying to reconcile human 4:15 will and responsibility with the 4:17 doctrine of grace enabled and god- 4:20 dependent faith. In case you feel that 4:22 by saying that I should be rebuked along 4:25 with the disciples for rejecting 4:27 childlike faith, let me first remind you 4:29 that in Matthew 18:4, Jesus is 4:32 responding to a question that probably 4:35 stemmed from their sinful human pride. 4:38 What he said was, "Whoever humbles 4:40 himself like this child is the greatest 4:42 in the kingdom of heaven." 4:45 I believe that the key word in that 4:46 verse reveals to us the value that he is 4:49 teaching in this passage which may help 4:52 to clarify Luke 18:17 4:55 and Mark 10:15 as well. How do we 4:59 receive the gift of faith, the blood of 5:01 Christ and the kingdom of heaven? 5:03 [clears throat] 5:04 Humbly. Because we have done nothing to 5:06 earn it. A newborn has done nothing to 5:10 earn its mother's love by the time of 5:11 birth. In fact, the baby has spent 5:14 months making her miserable to some 5:16 degree and adding nothing tangibly 5:19 helpful to the mother's daily life. 5:23 I don't love my children because they 5:25 have somehow earned it. As parents, we 5:28 love our children because God loves his 5:30 children and he designed us to love our 5:34 children. 5:35 So barely past the introduction, the 5:38 theology of faith has already taught us 5:40 something about God's fatherly nature 5:42 and our relationship to him as children 5:45 to a parent. He offers out of love what 5:49 we could not earn yet so desperately 5:51 require for our very survival into 5:54 eternity. 5:56 Furthermore, God also tells us in 5:59 Proverbs 22:6 to train up a child in the 6:02 way they should go. and in Mark 12:30 to 6:06 love God with all our strength, soul, 6:09 heart, and mind. 6:11 I can try to support a variety of 6:14 opinions from any one of these verses, 6:17 but the synthesis of scripture is that I 6:19 receive the gospel with childlike 6:22 humility and dependence and reach to 6:24 grasp its meaning and implications so 6:26 that I am not only loving God 6:28 emotionally or religiously, but with my 6:31 mind also through the pursuit of 6:34 understanding and wisdom. 6:38 Now, as I step off my first soap box of 6:41 this episode, let us refocus on the task 6:44 at hand. For the purpose of this 6:46 episode, I'm going to define the central 6:48 tension through the following questions. 6:51 Does scripture teach that faith itself 6:53 is a gift? And if so, why and how does 6:57 it teach us to believe and receive 6:59 faith? Often when I've heard faith 7:03 discussed in a sermon or conversation, 7:06 the emphasis isn't on our need to be 7:08 faithful. 7:10 While I don't think that's necessarily 7:12 wrong, it does allow the inference of 7:14 some people that faith is dependent 7:16 solely on us as though it's our side of 7:19 the bargain, the thing that we bring 7:21 into our relationship with God. 7:23 In contrast, when reading carefully 7:26 crafted doctrinal statements of faith, 7:28 what I have also often seen is the 7:31 emphasis instead of being on the gifting 7:33 of grace and our dependence on God for 7:36 it. 7:37 In fact, for many professing the 7:39 Christian faith, this is not only a 7:42 matter of emphasis, but a genuine 7:44 difference in doctrine with farreaching 7:47 implications for other aspects of 7:49 theology such as salvation and the 7:52 unchanging attributes of God. 7:56 While there are innumerable nuanced 7:58 perspectives that could be considered, I 8:00 believe that the three most common 8:02 understandings of faith within 8:03 Christianity are as follows. 8:06 faith as man's contribution, faith as a 8:09 grace enabled response, and faith as the 8:12 inevitable result of irresistible grace. 8:17 I'm going to propose the following as a 8:19 summary of my conclusion after studying 8:22 scripture and considering my own 8:23 personal experience with God. 8:27 Without God's initiative to reach out to 8:30 us, we would not be able to acquire 8:32 faith independently. and through God's 8:35 gracious initiative to create us and to 8:38 provide the faculties and call necessary 8:41 for the opportunity and ability to 8:44 perceive and respond to his 8:46 self-revelation. 8:47 He enables us to participate in 8:49 relationship with him through faith. 8:53 That means that faith is impossible to 8:55 acquire apart from God's grace. But he 8:58 still holds each individual accountable 9:00 for their response to the gospel through 9:02 their God-given gift of free will. 9:06 Furthermore, knowing that faith is given 9:08 in the context of God's fornowledge of 9:11 our response, I consider the nature of 9:14 faith as a gift to be further revelation 9:16 of his mercy 9:18 rather than evidence for determinism. 9:22 Because fornowledge by itself does not 9:24 require the conclusion that God coerces 9:27 or effectively forces our decision. 9:31 While he could rightfully do that, 9:33 acknowledging God's fornowledge only 9:35 really requires the conclusion that he 9:38 has always known what choice will be 9:40 made even before we have the chance to 9:42 make that choice. 9:44 This would lend support to a theory that 9:46 some hold to that his desire to save 9:49 people from suffering could be a 9:51 potential motive for what the Bible 9:53 describes as God hardening the hearts of 9:56 those who ultimately reject the faith 9:58 since greater revelation imparts greater 10:01 responsibility which in turn requires 10:04 greater consequence for rebellion. 10:07 I won't be building a case for that in 10:09 this discussion. 10:11 Although for now I consider it 10:13 reasonable speculation because it seems 10:16 plausible to infer from the text. But it 10:19 is also not explicitly stated and does 10:22 not seem to me as of yet obviously 10:25 implied as a comprehensive answer to the 10:28 question regarding hardened hearts. 10:32 Returning to the topic of faith itself, 10:34 I also want to point out before I 10:36 present the primary evidence that the 10:38 tension between the gifting and command 10:41 to receive is not due to contradiction, 10:44 but I think most likely it is due to the 10:47 difficulty that some people have with 10:49 either accepting or understanding that 10:52 they are responsible for their choice to 10:54 receive and participate with that gift. 10:58 If all that seems at first overly 11:00 convoluted, I think the examination of 11:03 relevant scriptures one at a time 11:05 followed by an examination of the meta 11:07 narrative of the Bible will make it 11:09 clear enough by the end of this study. 11:17 As we examine scriptures pertaining to 11:19 the nature of faith, I want to begin 11:21 with those that differentiate biblical 11:23 faith from what I refer to as blind 11:26 belief. The reason being that one who 11:28 has blind belief without good or reason 11:30 can also be led astray to blind 11:33 disbelief without good reason. Some 11:36 people use the term blind faith to 11:38 describe this same concept, but biblical 11:41 faith is by definition not blind. So 11:45 instead, I prefer the term blind belief, 11:48 which doesn't necessarily imply evidence 11:51 or reasoning. A belief can be reasoned 11:54 or whimsical, whereas genuine faith 11:57 requires genuine reason. Faith does not 12:00 require walking through life in darkness 12:02 imposed by religious blindfolding. It is 12:05 letting go of the blindfold of the enemy 12:07 that keeps us in the darkness so that we 12:10 can walk in the light of God's glory. 12:13 In this way, the faith that we are 12:15 called to reflects the mind of a God who 12:18 is not threatened by honest examination, 12:21 evidence, or reasoning because he is 12:23 himself the source of truth. General 12:26 revelation in creation provides enough 12:29 evidence to leave us with no excuse to 12:32 disbelieve the reality of our creator. 12:35 Special revelation through scriptures 12:37 and incarnation of Christ has brought us 12:40 the gospel. And the work of God in every 12:43 believer's spirit is the final nail in 12:45 the coffin of our once destined death. 12:49 Except that while the grave is destined 12:52 to hold the old nature of sin and death 12:54 forever, it has no hold on the reborn 12:57 spirit of the church that is made new by 13:00 the Holy Spirit. 13:02 Faith does not manufacture truth. Faith 13:05 receives truth from the God who 13:07 originates and reveals it. 13:11 Listen to what scripture has to say 13:12 about this. Beginning with Romans 1 18- 13:16 21. For the wrath of God is revealed 13:19 from heaven against all ungodliness and 13:22 unrighteousness of men who by their 13:24 unrighteousness suppress the truth. For 13:27 what can be known about God is plain to 13:29 them because God has shown it to them. 13:31 For his invisible attributes, namely his 13:34 eternal power and divine nature, have 13:36 been clearly perceived ever since the 13:38 creation of the world in the things that 13:40 have been made. So they are without 13:43 excuse. For although they knew God, they 13:46 did not honor him as God or give thanks 13:48 to him, but they became futile in their 13:52 thinking, and their foolish hearts were 13:54 darkened. 13:56 End quote. 13:58 In scripture, we find that no one has an 14:00 excuse. There is a general revelation of 14:03 at the bare minimum the power and 14:05 divinity of God through the witness of 14:07 creation. It is futile and foolish 14:10 thinking that prevents people from 14:12 recognizing God in creation even without 14:15 hearing the gospel of Christ. The 14:17 foolishness is in the rejection of 14:19 reality. The futility is in the 14:22 inability to change that reality through 14:24 disbelief. The creator doesn't stop 14:27 existing just because the creation 14:29 pretends that he isn't real. 14:35 Let's next consider Romans 2:es 14:39 12-6. 14:43 For all who have sinned without the law 14:45 will also perish without the law, and 14:48 all who have sinned under the law will 14:50 be judged by the law. For it is not the 14:52 hearers of the law who are righteous 14:54 before God, but the doers of the law who 14:56 will be justified. For when Gentiles who 14:59 do not have the law by nature do what 15:01 the law requires, they are a law to 15:04 themselves. Even though they do not have 15:07 the law, they show that the work of the 15:09 law is written on their hearts. while 15:11 their conscience also bears witness and 15:14 their conflicting thoughts accuse or 15:16 even excuse them on that day when 15:19 according to my gospel God judges the 15:21 secrets of men by Christ Jesus 15:25 end quote 15:27 in this letter the to the Romans God 15:29 reveals that not only do we have the 15:31 external witness of creation to direct 15:33 our attention to God but we also have 15:36 his law written on our hearts which we 15:39 experience through what is called the 15:41 conscience. The obvious evidence is in 15:44 the substantial overlap of moral laws 15:47 across the ages and cultures of the 15:50 world. A man's conscience must be dulled 15:53 by his own selfdeception to believe that 15:56 something such as murder is acceptable 15:58 because God granted us the law written 16:00 into our beings to afford us a guide to 16:04 show us how to combat our sin nature. 16:07 By understanding this, we can also 16:09 understand that the truth of God's 16:11 nature and presence is not hidden by the 16:14 lack of evidence. 16:16 Rather, human perception is obscured by 16:19 the darkness of sin. 16:25 Next, we will consider Romans 10 14-1 16:30 17. 16:33 How then will they call on him in whom 16:35 they have not believed? And how are they 16:38 to believe in him of whom they have 16:40 never heard? And how are they to hear 16:42 without someone preaching? And how 16:44 [clears throat] are they to preach 16:45 unless they are sent? As it is written, 16:47 how beautiful are the feet of those who 16:49 preach the good news. But they have not 16:52 all obeyed the gospel. For Isaiah says, 16:55 Lord, who has believed what he has heard 16:57 from us? So faith comes from hearing and 17:00 hearing through the word of Christ. 17:03 End quote. 17:06 This passage teaches us that faith in 17:08 Christ comes from hearing the gospel of 17:10 Christ. Without some form of exposure to 17:13 the gospel of Christ, you would not know 17:15 who Christ is and have the opportunity 17:18 to have faith in him. From this we can 17:22 also know that faith is not a blind 17:24 self-generated belief but a response to 17:27 the revelation of God. As with the 17:30 divine attributes apparent from general 17:32 revelation, reading the Bible and 17:35 listening to preachers are not the only 17:37 ways to receive revelation of the gospel 17:40 of Christ. Either Paul knew of the 17:42 gospel. Although I can't define the 17:45 limits of what he knew prior to his 17:47 conversion, I do know what Acts chapter 17:49 9 tells us, which is that he was still 17:51 breathing threats of murder against the 17:53 followers of Jesus Christ, right up 17:55 until the moment that Jesus revealed 17:57 himself personally to Paul on the road 18:00 to Damascus. 18:03 I've heard numerous other stories of 18:05 people having dreams, visions, or other 18:08 types of encounters with God since then. 18:11 some long ago and some in the modern 18:14 day. My point is that Romans chapter 10 18:17 is not saying the people who aren't 18:19 evangelized by conventional natural 18:22 methods are simply out of luck. That 18:24 still doesn't remove the urgency for 18:27 evangelism. 18:29 Because even though God can evangelize 18:31 supernaturally, he also gives us the 18:34 great commission in Matthew 28 18:36 commanding that we go out and make 18:39 disciples. 18:41 One truth that we must remember is that 18:43 our commission doesn't shift the 18:45 responsibility for saving people from 18:47 God to us. What it does do is provide 18:50 yet more miraculous evidence for God in 18:54 the form of sinners transformed by the 18:57 Holy Spirit proclaiming their death and 18:59 resurrection in Christ. 19:02 Next, consider with me Hebrews 2:es 2-4. 19:09 For since the message declared by angels 19:11 proved to be reliable, and every 19:13 transgression or disobedience received a 19:16 just retribution, how shall we escape if 19:19 we neglect such a great salvation? It 19:22 was declared at first by the Lord, and 19:24 it was attested to us by those who 19:25 heard, while God also bore witness by 19:28 signs and wonders and various miracles, 19:31 and by gifts of the Holy Spirit 19:34 distributed according to his will. End 19:37 quote. 19:39 Why did the writer of Hebrews imply that 19:41 there is a great offer of salvation that 19:44 they can't neglect? 19:46 Because the message declared by the 19:48 angels proved to be reliable. 19:52 Not because they had a hunch or a gut 19:55 feeling or they felt at peace about it 19:57 all, but because it was proven to them. 20:01 God the Son brought the gospel. God the 20:04 Father testified to the legitimacy of 20:06 the Son through the miracles culminating 20:08 with the resurrection. And God the 20:10 Spirit confirms the fruit of salvation 20:13 through spiritual gifts. 20:16 The first generation of Jesus's 20:18 disciples did not have a blind faith. 20:21 The Gospel of John tells us in 20 11-14 20:25 that Mary Magdalene was weeping outside 20:27 of the tomb when Jesus first appeared to 20:30 her. He asked why she was weeping. In 20:33 response, she claimed that her Lord's 20:34 body had been stolen from the tomb. 20:37 Despite the fact that Jesus had 20:39 predicted his death and resurrection to 20:42 his disciples prior to the crucifixion, 20:44 Mary Magdalene did not presume that 20:46 Jesus had risen from the dead at that 20:48 time. Probably because, like most 20:51 people, she understood that the dead 20:53 aren't known for walking out of their 20:55 tombs. He had to say her name and draw 20:58 her full attention to himself for her to 21:01 recognize him. Yet she was so thoroughly 21:05 convinced from a close inspection of him 21:08 that she immediately obeyed his command 21:10 to go to the other disciples and 21:12 proclaim the resurrection. 21:15 The related passage in Luke 24 notes in 21:19 verse 11 that after Mary and the other 21:21 women with her proclaimed the 21:23 resurrection to the apostles, they 21:25 considered it no more than idol chatter. 21:29 This is the kind of embarrassing detail 21:31 that you wouldn't add to your story if 21:33 you were giving a false witness or 21:36 trying to start a baseless religion. 21:39 The apostles, of whom several later went 21:42 on to die a martyr's death for the 21:45 gospel of Christ, did not believe the 21:47 gospel when they first heard it. Even 21:50 when Jesus appeared before them later in 21:53 verse 36 and spoke to them face to face, 21:56 the text informs us that they initially 21:58 thought they saw a spirit. 22:00 To their credit, John 20:1 19 notes that 22:04 the doors were locked when Jesus 22:06 appeared before them, seeming to imply 22:08 that Jesus entered the room miraculously 22:10 without opening the door. in their 22:13 shoes, I probably would have thought he 22:15 were a spirit as well or that I was out 22:17 of my mind. Which is probably why Jesus 22:20 appeared at least 11 times before his 22:23 ascension to people individually in 22:26 small groups and also to over 500 people 22:29 at once. 22:31 There's no logical foundation for 22:34 rationalizing that historical account as 22:37 hundreds of people all sharing the same 22:39 hallucination of the same risen savior. 22:43 Especially since they were initially 22:45 convinced that he was dead and were 22:48 evidently more prone to believe in the 22:50 appearance of a ghost than a bodily 22:52 resurrection. 22:54 John 20 24-28 tells us that Thomas 22:58 refused to believe in the gospel until 8 23:01 days after people had begun to report 23:03 the resurrection when Jesus again 23:06 appeared suddenly within a locked room 23:08 and told Thomas to place his fingers in 23:11 the scars of his savior. 23:14 The apostles did not have a blind faith. 23:18 They responded finally and appropriately 23:21 when their resurrected Lord appeared 23:24 before them and proved himself to them 23:27 personally. 23:28 Despite their initial disbelief, he 23:31 still pursued them to the depths of 23:33 their confusion and despair to change 23:36 everything. 23:38 Is that not also the testimony of most 23:40 Christians today? 23:43 Nearly every time that I've heard 23:44 someone explain why they believe Christ 23:46 is Lord, it boils down to the fact that 23:49 they genuinely believe that God has 23:52 revealed himself to them and renewed 23:54 their spirit, changing their very 23:57 identity. 23:59 We do not have a blind faith. Our faith 24:03 is an appropriate response to the 24:05 revelation of God in our lives. You will 24:08 not believe in God because I tell you 24:10 to. You will believe in God because he 24:13 is revealed in creation and active in 24:16 your life. 24:22 Having established that faith is not 24:24 blind, we now need to confirm why 24:27 revelation alone is not enough. 24:29 Therefore, the next step in this 24:31 theology of faith requires us to 24:33 understand the necessity of grace and 24:35 its function in the process of 24:37 redemption for mankind. This requires 24:40 much more than simply agreeing that God 24:42 covers our sins with his grace. Because 24:44 while that is enough for children's 24:46 church or elevator speech evangelism, it 24:50 doesn't explain what grace is and why 24:52 it's necessary. 24:54 So, let's consider the shape of our need 24:57 and how God's grace immaculately fills 24:59 that desperate need. To state it simply, 25:02 for mankind, the ministry of grace is 25:05 necessary for life because the ministry 25:08 of law provides us only death. 25:12 Consider 2 Corinthians 25:15 3:es 4-6. 25:18 Such is the confidence that we have 25:19 through Christ toward God. Not that we 25:22 are sufficient in ourselves to claim 25:24 anything is coming from us, but our 25:26 sufficiency is from God, who has made us 25:29 sufficient to be ministers of a new 25:31 covenant, not of the letter, but of the 25:34 spirit. For the letter kills, but the 25:37 spirit gives life." End quote. 25:41 The scriptures meaning here is clear. If 25:44 all that we had was the law, we would 25:46 remain dead in our sins, destined for an 25:49 eternity, separated from our just 25:51 creator. 25:53 But why is it that the law requires our 25:56 death? Because, as is plainly stated in 25:58 Romans 6:23, the wages of sin is death. 26:04 Some might wonder who that applies to, 26:07 who has sinned and earned death. The 26:10 answer is quite simple. all who fall 26:12 short of the glory of God. So, who has 26:15 fallen short of the glory of God? The 26:18 answer yet again is quite simple and 26:20 quite unfortunate. 26:22 All have fallen short of the glory of 26:24 God. 26:28 Consider Romans 3:es 19-31. 26:34 Now we know that whatever the law says, 26:36 it speaks to those who are under the 26:37 law, so that every mouth may be stopped 26:40 and the whole world may be held 26:42 accountable to God. For by the works of 26:44 the law, no human being will be 26:46 justified in his sight, since through 26:49 the law comes knowledge of sin. 26:52 But now the righteousness of God has 26:54 been manifested apart from the law, 26:56 although the law and the prophets bear 26:58 witness to it. the righteousness of God 27:01 through faith in Jesus Christ for all 27:03 who believe. For there is no 27:05 distinction. For all have sinned and 27:08 fall short of the glory of God and are 27:10 justified by his grace as a gift through 27:13 the redemption that is in Christ Jesus 27:15 whom God put forward as a propitiation 27:18 by his blood to be received by faith. 27:24 This was to show God's righteousness 27:26 because in his design forbearance he had 27:29 passed over former sins. It was to show 27:31 his righteousness at the present time so 27:34 that he might be just and the justifier 27:36 of the one who has faith in Jesus. 27:41 Then what becomes of our boasting? It is 27:43 excluded. By what kind of law? By a law 27:46 of works? No, but by the law of faith. 27:50 For we hold that one is justified by 27:53 faith apart from works of the law. Or is 27:56 God the God of Jews only? Is he not the 27:59 God of Gentiles also? Yes, of Gentiles 28:02 also, since God is one who will justify 28:05 the circumcised by faith and the 28:07 uncircumcised through faith. Do we then 28:10 overthrow the law by this faith? By no 28:13 means. On the contrary, we uphold the 28:16 law. 28:17 End quote. 28:19 So because all have sinned and fallen 28:21 short of the standard of righteousness, 28:23 we are dependent on the redemptive love 28:25 of God for salvation through faith in 28:27 Jesus Christ by the sacrifice of his 28:30 blood to pay for our sins. In this way, 28:33 God has satisfied his law's requirement 28:36 of righteousness and justice through 28:38 faith. In other words, grace does not 28:42 mean that God ignores justice, but that 28:45 he fulfills it in himself for the sake 28:47 of sinners. 28:49 He provides the means for faith in 28:51 Christ on our behalf and calls us to 28:54 join in this faith which is offered to 28:57 us by grace because we cannot earn it. 29:00 This idea comes straight from the 29:02 writings of Paul in Romans 11 6. 29:08 If it is by grace, it is no longer on 29:10 the basis of works. Otherwise, grace 29:13 would no longer be grace. 29:16 End quote. 29:18 Anyone who earns their way to heaven by 29:20 upholding the perfect standard of 29:22 righteousness doesn't need grace. 29:25 Grace is by definition something that is 29:27 not earned. And according to scripture, 29:29 our faith for salvation is dependent on 29:32 grace. Thus, the act of believing which 29:36 we do in obedient response to God's call 29:39 is not a work. It is merely our humble, 29:43 open-handed response to accept the gift 29:45 of salvation. 29:48 For faith to be a work, it would have to 29:51 earn salvation. 29:53 But consider this. You don't treat gifts 29:56 that way when given by someone other 29:58 than God, do you? If someone gives you a 30:01 birthday gift, do you negate the gifting 30:04 and earn that gift by willingly 30:06 receiving it? No, of course not. 30:10 Furthermore, any good work that we do 30:13 accomplish is too late to save us 30:15 because from the earliest days that we 30:18 can be held accountable for, we all have 30:21 sinned. God's standard is perfection. 30:25 Not being perfect for a moment, but 30:27 endless eternal perfection 30:30 from the first sin of your life. You 30:33 earned separation from God according to 30:36 his justice as taught through the law. 30:39 So you should repent and believe 30:41 earnestly in the gospel of Christ, the 30:43 gift of grace that allows you to 30:45 participate in a redeemed relationship 30:47 with God because the Christ is the only 30:50 man to ever live a sinless life by 30:54 perfectly upholding the standard of 30:56 righteousness. It is because he upheld 30:59 the law that he was able to suffer on 31:01 our behalf the consequences of sin and 31:04 offer to us saving grace. Humanity's 31:08 deepest problem has never been lacking 31:11 information as to how to obtain 31:13 salvation. Humanity's deepest problem is 31:16 the spiritual corruption of the sinful 31:19 nature of the flesh. We are easily 31:22 inclined to suppress the light of truth 31:24 to preserve the ignorance afforded by 31:26 the darkness that we cling to. 31:30 This leads to moral failure which 31:32 further incentivizes us to cling to the 31:35 dark rather than risk the discomfort of 31:38 exposure and disinfection in the light. 31:42 This destructive cycle produces exactly 31:45 one fruit in our lives, death. As we 31:49 already know from Romans 6:23, 31:53 in John chapter 6, Jesus talks about the 31:55 bread of life. He reminds the Jews that 31:58 after the Exodus from Egypt, the 32:00 Israelites in the wilderness ate the 32:02 mana from heaven, but they all still 32:05 died at the eventual end of their 32:07 mortality. 32:09 Christians eat the bread of life and are 32:12 sustained by it for eternity. 32:15 This parallels the reality of human 32:17 works failing to save us from the death 32:20 required by the law. Whereas the gift of 32:23 faith is the means by which God provides 32:26 for completed salvation in us. This 32:29 passage teaches us many things, one of 32:32 which is the dependence of the Christian 32:34 faith on God's grace. 32:37 In the interest of understanding the 32:39 context that informs the interpretive 32:42 work that comes next, I'm going to read 32:44 John 6:es 24-65. 32:50 When the crowd saw that Jesus was not 32:52 there, nor his disciples, they 32:55 themselves got into the boats and went 32:57 to Capernaum, seeking Jesus. When they 32:59 found him on the other side of the sea, 33:01 they said to him, "Rabbi, when did you 33:03 come here?" Jesus answered them, "Truly, 33:06 truly, I say to you, you are seeking me, 33:09 not because you saw signs, but because 33:11 you ate your fill of the loaves. Do not 33:14 work for the food that perishes, but for 33:16 the food that endures to eternal life, 33:19 which the Son of Man will give to you, 33:21 for on him God the Father has set his 33:24 seal." 33:26 Then they said to him, "What must we do 33:28 to be doing the works of God?" Jesus 33:31 answered them, "This is the work of God, 33:33 that you believe in him who he has 33:36 sent." So they said to him, "Then what 33:39 sign do you do that we may see and 33:41 believe you? What work do you perform? 33:44 Our fathers ate the mana in the 33:46 wilderness. As it is written, he gave 33:48 them bread from heaven to eat. Jesus 33:51 then said to them, truly, truly, I say 33:53 to you, it was not Moses who gave you 33:56 the bread from heaven, but my father 33:58 gives you the true bread from heaven. 34:00 For the bread of God is he who comes 34:03 down from heaven and gives life to the 34:05 world. They said to him, "Sir, give us 34:08 this bread always." 34:11 Jesus said to them, "I am the bread of 34:13 life. Whoever comes to me shall not 34:15 hunger, and whoever believes in me shall 34:18 never thirst. But I said to you that you 34:21 have seen me and yet do not believe. 34:28 All that the Father gives me will come 34:30 to me, and whoever comes to me, I will 34:32 never cast out. For I have come down 34:35 from heaven, not to do my own will, but 34:38 the will of him who sent me. And this is 34:41 the will of him who sent me, that I 34:43 should lose nothing of all that he has 34:45 given me, but raise it up on the last 34:47 day. For this is the will of my father, 34:50 that everyone who looks on the Son and 34:52 believes in him should have eternal 34:54 life, and I will raise him up on the 34:56 last day. So the Jews grumbled about him 35:00 because he said, "I am the bread that 35:02 came down from heaven." They said, "Is 35:05 not this Jesus, the son of Joseph, whose 35:08 father and mother we know?" How does he 35:11 now say, "I have come down from heaven." 35:13 Jesus answered them, "Do not grumble 35:16 among yourselves. No one can come to me 35:18 unless the Father who sent me draws him, 35:20 and I will raise him up on the last day. 35:23 It is written in the prophets and they 35:25 will all be taught by God. Everyone who 35:28 has heard and learned from the Father 35:30 comes to me. Not that anyone has seen 35:32 the Father except he who is from God. He 35:36 has seen the Father. 35:39 Truly, truly, I say to you, 35:43 whoever believes has eternal life. 35:46 I am the bread of life. Your fathers ate 35:49 the mana in the wilderness and they 35:51 died. This is the bread that comes down 35:54 from heaven so that one may eat of it 35:56 and not die. I am the living bread that 35:59 came down from heaven. If anyone eats of 36:02 this bread, he will live forever. And 36:04 the bread that I will give for the life 36:06 of the world is my flesh. 36:10 The Jews then disputed among themselves, 36:12 saying, "How can this man give us his 36:14 flesh to eat?" So Jesus said to them, 36:17 "Truly, truly, I say to you, unless you 36:19 eat the flesh of the Son of Man and 36:21 drink his blood, you have no life in 36:24 you. Whoever feeds on my flesh and 36:26 drinks my blood has eternal life, and I 36:29 will raise him up on the last day. For 36:32 my flesh is true food, and my blood is 36:35 true drink. Whoever feeds on my flesh 36:38 and drinks my blood abides in me and I 36:41 in him. As the living Father sent me, 36:44 and I live because of the Father, so 36:46 whoever feeds on me, he will also live 36:49 because of me. 36:52 This is the bread that came down from 36:54 heaven, not like the bread the fathers 36:56 ate and died. Whoever feeds on this 36:58 bread will live forever. 37:01 Jesus said these things in the synagogue 37:04 as he taught in Capernaum. 37:07 When many of his disciples heard it, 37:09 they said, "This is a hard saying. Who 37:11 can listen to it?" But Jesus, knowing in 37:14 himself that his disciples were 37:15 grumbling about this, said to them, "Do 37:18 you take offense at this?" Then what if 37:21 you were to see the Son of Man ascending 37:22 to where he was before? It is the spirit 37:25 who gives life. The flesh is no help at 37:28 all. The words that I have spoken to you 37:30 are spirit and life, but there are some 37:32 of you who do not believe. For Jesus 37:35 knew from the beginning who those were 37:37 who did not believe and who it was who 37:39 would betray him. And he said, "This is 37:42 why I told you that no one can come to 37:44 me unless it is granted him by the 37:46 Father." 37:48 End quote. 37:51 Now that we've examined the entire 37:53 scene, let's take a closer look at a few 37:55 theological statements that Jesus made 37:57 throughout this passage. Starting with 37:59 verses 29, sorry, 27- 29. 38:05 This exchange is composed of a 38:06 theological statement followed by a 38:08 question followed by a clarifying 38:11 statement regarding the original 38:13 statement. 38:14 First, in verse 27, Jesus tells the 38:17 people that instead of working for food 38:19 that perishes, they should work for the 38:21 food that sustains eternal life. In 38:23 verse 28, the people ask Jesus to 38:26 clarify what work is considered the work 38:28 of God, which leads to eternal life. 38:31 Finally, in verse 29, Jesus reveals that 38:34 work in his metaphor is not meritorious 38:37 labor, but believing in the gospel that 38:40 Jesus is bringing to them. It's 38:43 important to follow the flow of ideas 38:45 through the whole conversation rather 38:47 than just interpreting one verse at a 38:49 time. Because if you read verse 29 out 38:51 of context, then you could adopt one of 38:53 a couple easy misinterpretations. 38:56 Due to the translated wording of the 38:59 work of God, which was the same in all 39:02 four common translations that I checked, 39:04 you might think that Jesus is saying 39:06 that God is the one doing the work of 39:08 believing. Another possible and more 39:12 serious error, I think, would be to 39:14 interpret Jesus to be teaching that 39:16 belief in him is a meritorious work. 39:20 Meaning that it actually contributes to 39:22 you meriting or earning grace from God 39:25 for salvation. 39:28 Jesus is not using the word for work in 39:31 this discussion the way that theologians 39:33 typically do in sotiological 39:36 discussions, those pertaining to the 39:38 topic of salvation. 39:41 you would have a hard time justifying 39:43 that interpretation of John 6:29 in 39:46 light of all the other scriptures that 39:48 describe grace as a gift that we cannot 39:51 earn for ourselves, but as earned 39:54 entirely by the salvific work of Jesus 39:58 through the cross. 40:00 Jesus is simply being consistent with 40:03 the metaphorical language that he had 40:05 been using from the start of that 40:07 discussion when he told the people not 40:10 to work for food that perishes but for 40:12 that which leads to eternal life. The 40:15 point was not that belief is a work but 40:18 that they should stop focusing their 40:19 labor on things that would not be 40:21 beneficial for eternity. 40:24 Furthermore, if you examine the Greek in 40:26 verse 29, you'll find that it uses a 40:29 form of the same Greek word for work as 40:32 is used in 1 Corinthians 15:58, 40:36 which says the following. 40:39 My beloved brothers, be steadfast, 40:41 immovable, always abounding in the work 40:43 of the Lord, known that in the Lord your 40:46 labor is not in vain." 40:49 End quote. 40:51 How could the work of the Lord refer to 40:53 something God himself is doing rather 40:56 than godly work that we are doing when 40:59 in the very same breath it says to not 41:02 let your labor be in vain. 41:06 That's obviously not referring to God's 41:09 labor, but our own human labor. 41:12 The point is not that we work for our 41:15 salvation, [clears throat] 41:17 but that because of our salvation, we 41:19 should do good works. 41:22 Acquiring salvation isn't a 41:23 business-like transaction where we 41:26 simply and justly acquire something for 41:29 a payment of our own means. 41:32 You cannot be genuinely indwelt by the 41:35 Holy Spirit of God that brings the 41:37 fruits discussed in Galatians 5 and 41:39 converts doubters to martyrs without 41:42 being transformed into a new being that 41:45 is more inclined to godliness. 41:48 That increased inclination to godliness 41:50 that the spirit of God develops in us as 41:53 we experience ongoing sanctification to 41:56 become more like God should result in us 41:59 doing more godly works. Not to merit 42:02 salvation for the sake of 42:03 self-preservation, but for the sake of 42:05 being obedient to God and becoming more 42:09 like God so that you can bring glory to 42:13 his name and serve as salt and light in 42:16 this cursed world. 42:19 Doing good works may benefit you, but 42:22 that should not be your focus. Your 42:24 focus should be on blessing God and 42:26 others. 42:28 that is a sign of the eternal gift of 42:30 the spirit which is love. 42:33 I have more to discuss regarding that in 42:36 a later section of this episode in which 42:38 we'll consider the fruitfulness of 42:40 faith. For now, the primary point is 42:43 that belief or faith in the gospel is 42:45 not a meritorious work that earns 42:48 salvation. 42:50 Let's return to John 6 to consider 42:53 carefully Jesus's statements in verse 42:56 44. 42:59 He says, "No one can come to me unless 43:02 the father who sent me draws him." 43:07 This is the verse in this passage that I 43:09 think is most likely to be used by a 43:11 reformed or Calvinist theologian to 43:14 support a doctrine of deterministic 43:16 irresistible grace. 43:18 That doctrine asserts that because 43:20 humans are so completely spiritually 43:23 depraved, God must save us by 43:25 effectively calling those who are 43:27 predestined according to his 43:29 unconditional election, which I would 43:32 argue necessarily implies that it 43:35 functionally disregards our individual 43:38 wills since it requires grace to either 43:40 ignore or bypass our wills or forcibly 43:45 or effectually change our wills. such 43:48 that it removes the genuine possibility 43:50 of ultimately rejecting the gospel. 43:54 This also seems to necessarily imply 43:57 that those who are destined for hell 43:59 have effectively been prevented from 44:01 ever having a genuine opportunity to 44:04 receive salvation since they are not 44:06 provided the irresistible grace that is 44:09 necessary to overcome total depravity. 44:13 In essence, the punchline is this. If 44:16 the total depravity of humanity means 44:18 that no one can receive salvation 44:20 without irresistible grace and God 44:23 withholds that necessary irresistible 44:25 grace from the non-elect, then the 44:28 non-elect never have a genuine 44:30 possibility of receiving salvation. 44:35 One such as myself, who does not conform 44:37 to reformed theology and does not affirm 44:40 this doctrine of irresistible grace, 44:42 might argue that such a doctrine 44:44 effectively removes our personal 44:46 responsibility for the reception of 44:48 faith, since we are apparently not able 44:51 to make a decision one way or the other 44:53 of our own wills. 44:56 Genuine responsibility requires genuine 44:59 choice, which seems functionally removed 45:02 under the doctrine of irresistible 45:03 grace. Of 45:06 course, a reformed theologian will not 45:08 likely appreciate the way that I've 45:10 described the irresistible grace 45:12 doctrine because my description 45:14 emphasizes what I understand to be an 45:16 obviously unbiblical implication, which 45:19 seems necessarily derivative of that 45:22 doctrine. 45:23 I wouldn't break fellowship with someone 45:26 over this disagreement, but I still 45:28 consider a serious doctrinal 45:30 disagreement that can impact the way 45:32 that we represent God to the world as 45:35 his image bearers as well as our broader 45:38 theological beliefs such as the nature 45:41 of our relationship with God and the 45:43 urgent purpose of evangelism. 45:47 That said, let's consider the key 45:49 question that leads us to the doctrine 45:51 of faith that is truly taught in John 45:54 6:44. 45:56 That question is this. What does Jesus 45:59 mean when he says that the father draws 46:01 people to him? Does the draw of the 46:04 father coersse or force our compliance? 46:08 or does it still allow and require the 46:11 response of our individual wills to 46:13 accept the call that leads to belief and 46:16 faith? 46:19 A reformed or Calvinist theologian may 46:21 propose the argument that the second 46:23 half of verse 44 where Jesus says, "And 46:27 I will raise him up on the last day," 46:29 indicates that everyone drawn by the 46:31 father must be saved. 46:34 The problem with this claim is that it 46:35 requires the assumption that Jesus is 46:38 defining every person whom God ever 46:41 draws rather than describing just those 46:44 who actually respond to him. The one who 46:47 comes to Jesus in faith will certainly 46:49 be raised. But this does not prove that 46:51 God draws to himself in such a way as to 46:55 prevent the possibility of resistance. 46:58 Especially when John 12:32 47:01 says that Christ will draw all people to 47:04 himself and scripture plainly teaches 47:07 that not all people will be saved. 47:10 It's easy enough to simply contest 47:13 isolated verses that seem to imply 47:15 irresistible election by pointing to 47:18 those that seem to require a free will 47:20 choice. But first, I want to show the 47:24 interpretive extent and limitation of 47:26 the Greek in this passage and a related 47:29 verse that comes shortly thereafter. 47:32 The reason I think this can be helpful 47:34 is that while having English 47:36 translations is great for people who 47:38 can't read Greek, the syntax of a 47:41 translation is not necessarily inspired 47:44 in the same way that the original 47:46 writing of the scripture was inspired by 47:48 the Holy Spirit. 47:50 I say that because I know that people 47:52 sometimes hinge entire doctrines on the 47:55 wording of a particular translation of a 47:58 particular verse that doesn't always fit 48:01 very well with the original text. 48:04 This is why I try to remember to check 48:06 multiple translations and occasionally 48:09 perform word studies for key words that 48:12 could change the development of entire 48:14 doctrines. So, let's consider a little 48:17 Greek and Jesus's use of the word 48:20 translated draw in multiple contexts. 48:25 John 12:32 records Jesus saying that he 48:29 will draw all people to himself. 48:32 In this case, Strong's definition for 48:34 Heluo, the Greek word translated to draw 48:38 in this text, indicates that it can be 48:40 used in a literal or figurative sense. 48:44 I would also like to note that the Greek 48:46 uses the term pontas, a form of pass 48:50 rendered in this text as all people, 48:53 which like the term for draw is also not 48:56 a special term that can decide this 48:58 issue by its definition alone. 49:01 In short, from researching these terms, 49:04 I have found no indication that the 49:06 definition of these terms alone require 49:10 narrowing the scope from including all 49:12 individuals, whether elect or not. In 49:17 both cases, according to the normal 49:20 semantic range, there is room for 49:22 interpretation. 49:24 That being true, it's clear that we must 49:26 look beyond these isolated terms to 49:29 their greater context. to interpret the 49:32 intended meaning of this scripture. 49:35 To that end, consider that for the word 49:38 draw to indicate an irresistible 49:41 summons, one of two things must be true. 49:45 Either all people who have ever lived 49:48 must be saved, which would be 49:50 universalism, 49:52 or the all people in this text must only 49:55 refer to those who will receive Christ. 50:00 First, I will note that universalism 50:03 directly contradicts the passages of 50:05 scripture that refer to those who will 50:07 not be allowed into the kingdom of God. 50:10 Second, I will also note that the narrow 50:13 application of this statement to 50:15 Christians or the elect exclusively is 50:19 not apparent in the text of John. The 50:22 best evidence that I have found for 50:24 supporting that interpretation says that 50:26 because Jesus was speaking to the Jews 50:29 at that time and Greeks were mentioned 50:32 earlier in the text, perhaps he meant to 50:34 explain that Gentiles would be included 50:37 in the drawing along with Jews. 50:41 That proposition might allow one to 50:43 still affirm the possibility of 50:45 irresistible grace, but only if the 50:49 context requires such a narrowed 50:52 reading. And the weight of that if seems 50:55 concerning to me since the purpose of 50:58 this speculation is to reconcile a 51:00 doctrine of grace with biblical 51:02 principles that I would say preclude any 51:05 definition of grace that functionally 51:08 excludes the genuine possibility of 51:11 individual choice to receive the gift of 51:14 faith. 51:16 A point of inclusion for Gentiles and 51:18 Jews together in the faith can be true 51:21 without proving that all people means 51:24 only all who receive Christ. 51:29 So consider this. Do you believe that 51:32 all people who have ever lived will be 51:35 ultimately saved unto eternity as 51:38 universalism affirms? 51:40 If so, who then are the goats whom Jesus 51:43 will separate from the sheep to be sent 51:45 to the eternal fire according to his 51:47 parable in Matthew 25 31-46? 51:52 They to whom Jesus will say, "I was 51:54 hungry and you gave me no food." Who 51:57 then are the invited guests found 51:59 unworthy in the parable of the wedding 52:01 feast between Christ and his church in 52:04 Matthew 22:es 52:06 1-14. 52:09 My point regarding the text of John 12 52:12 is that it seems to plainly refer to 52:14 literally all people with no apparent 52:17 qualifier to narrow the scope. This 52:21 leaves me with the conclusion that the 52:23 text genuinely says what it appears to 52:25 say, that God will draw everyone to 52:28 himself. 52:30 My next question is, does this fit with 52:33 the character of God as revealed 52:35 throughout scripture? 52:37 Indeed, it fits quite well as is 52:40 evidenced through numerous other 52:42 passages such as 1 Timothy 2:4 and 2 52:46 Peter 3:9. 52:49 1 Timothy 2:4 says that God our Savior 52:53 desires all people to be saved and to 52:55 come to the knowledge of the truth. 52:59 Second Peter 3:9 says 53:04 that the Lord is patient toward you, not 53:07 wishing that any should perish, but that 53:09 all should reach repentance. 53:11 As a minor point of critique, I find it 53:14 interesting that some seem to suggest 53:16 the terms draw and grant repentance in 53:20 the texts are proof of unconditional 53:23 election. Yet, it seems to me that this 53:25 case is no more convincing than if one 53:28 were to say that second Peter must imply 53:31 human sufficiency since it reveals God's 53:34 desire that all reach repentance. If 53:37 drawing and granting must imply human 53:39 pacivity by definition or connotation, 53:43 then perhaps one could also say that to 53:45 reach conversely must imply only human 53:49 initiative. 53:51 To avoid any confusion regarding this 53:53 point, that is not my actual argument. 53:56 I'm only suggesting that to argue from 53:58 the position that God's drawing and 54:00 granting must necessarily imply only 54:04 God's action which therefore excludes 54:07 functionally meaningful individual 54:09 agency to accept or reject the gospel is 54:13 just as faulty as arguing from the 54:15 position that human reaching must 54:17 necessarily imply only human action 54:21 which therefore excludes the necessity 54:24 of God's initiation. 54:27 Thus, yet again, I must insist that we 54:30 cannot hinge our understanding of this 54:32 doctrine on isolated terms, but on the 54:35 synthesis of all scripture. 54:39 That being said, if God desires for all 54:42 to be saved, draws all to himself, and 54:44 yet not all are saved, then the idea of 54:47 the chosen being drawn to God cannot be 54:50 flattened and distorted into 54:52 irresistible coercion. 54:55 At this point, insisting on another 54:57 interpretation of John 6 seems less 55:00 likely to me to be a result of 55:02 responsible ex Jesus drawing the natural 55:06 meaning out of the text and more likely 55:08 is Jesus reading an unnatural 55:11 interpretation into the text motivated 55:14 by the need to satisfy a theological 55:16 agenda that must interpret verse 44 as 55:20 irresistible grace that effectively 55:23 forces faith. upon us regardless of our 55:26 wills. 55:27 I know that those holding truly 55:29 irresistible grace probably wouldn't 55:31 like that description, but I haven't 55:34 been able to find or figure a better 55:36 explanation that doesn't blatantly 55:39 contradict other plain statements of 55:41 scripture in all of my time studying 55:43 this issue issue. So, I think my 55:46 description is fair. 55:48 If you interpret Jesus in John 6 to mean 55:51 that everyone whom God will draw must 55:54 respond with faith, then I suggest that 55:57 you should also interpret the same 55:59 connotation for draw in chapter 12 to be 56:02 consistent as there is no apparent 56:04 indication in the text to convey a 56:07 different meaning. 56:08 Let's consider what Jesus says in verse 56:12 verses 63- 65. 56:18 It is the spirit who gives life. The 56:21 flesh is no help at all. The words that 56:23 I have spoken to you are spirit and 56:25 life. But there are some of you who do 56:28 not believe. And he said, "This is why I 56:30 told you that no one can come to me 56:32 unless it is granted him by the father." 56:35 End quote. 56:37 With that last statement in verse 65, 56:40 Jesus reveals the explanation for why no 56:42 one can come to him without the father 56:44 granting it. The theological basis came 56:48 just prior in verse 63. The spirit gives 56:52 life. The flesh is no help at all. 56:55 This shouldn't be surprising at this 56:57 point because we've already established 56:58 that only the spirit of God is the 57:01 source of life and the one who renews 57:03 our spirits. Furthermore, only God can 57:06 reveal himself according to his will. If 57:10 he did not desire and act to reveal 57:12 himself, then we would have no ability 57:14 to seek and find him. 57:17 That's the contrast between the 57:19 inability of the flesh and the necessity 57:21 of God to reach out with the offer of 57:24 grace. 57:25 This is why no one can come to Jesus 57:27 without the father granting it. Without 57:30 the call of God to direct us, we are 57:32 like the blind searching for a light. 57:35 more than merely lost. We are genuinely 57:38 incapable of overcoming the corrupted 57:41 flesh without God's grace. As with 57:44 physical blindness, the blind in this 57:47 simile can be both totally dependent on 57:49 a helper and yet also responsible for 57:52 accepting or rejecting the necessary 57:55 offer of guidance from a helper. 57:58 Regarding this discussion of grace and 58:00 faith, the conclusion that I'm left with 58:03 is that God enables our faith through 58:05 his gracious call to believe in Jesus. 58:09 This is where grace fits in. While it is 58:12 according to God's justice that he 58:14 condemns evil, it is according to his 58:16 grace that he also offers the gift of 58:19 faith through the call to believe and 58:21 respond to the gospel of Christ. 58:24 If he did not freely offer it, we could 58:26 not choose to receive it. 58:29 Because of this, faith is a gift fully 58:33 dependent on God, but only released from 58:36 his hand into our lives to be 58:38 experienced after our willing reception 58:41 that requires, as God decrees throughout 58:44 scripture, that we repent and believe. 58:48 This is not because God couldn't force 58:50 it upon us, but because it is his 58:53 expressed will that we participate with 58:56 him in a genuinely loving relationship. 59:00 As we know from scriptures handling of 59:02 godly love, the difference between 59:04 genuine love and robotic or coerced 59:06 servitude is the genuine ability and 59:09 option to receive him or reject him. 59:13 This is why despite faith being a gift 59:16 dependent on God's grace, we are still 59:18 each held personally accountable for our 59:21 response to receive it. 59:28 So now that we understand that faith 59:31 which leads to salvation is a gift, we 59:34 can move on to the next most obvious 59:36 question regarding the nature of faith. 59:39 I don't think this is a particularly 59:41 perplexing question, but its mere 59:43 presence is enough for some people to 59:45 claim that there's a contradiction 59:47 between the prior idea and what I'll 59:49 present as the biblical answer to that 59:52 question. Furthermore, how this question 59:55 is answered is one of the most notable 59:57 differences between the original primary 1:00:00 branches of the Protestant tradition 1:00:02 that broke away from the from 1:00:03 Catholicism in the 16th century with the 1:00:07 intent to return to the apostolic roots 1:00:09 and realign the church with scripture 1:00:12 first. 1:00:15 In my own words, the question that I'm 1:00:18 referring to is this. If faith is a gift 1:00:21 freely given, how do we interpret the 1:00:23 frequent command throughout scripture to 1:00:25 believe, to have faith, to be faithful? 1:00:30 I've spent a lot of time thus far in 1:00:32 this episode emphasizing the gifted 1:00:34 nature of faith, but I can easily show a 1:00:36 larger sample size of verses commanding 1:00:39 people to be faithful in a way that 1:00:42 gives some people the impression that 1:00:44 it's something that we provide 1:00:46 independently from within ourselves. 1:00:50 That said, you may have heard that 1:00:52 context is king when it comes to 1:00:54 interpreting scripture. regarding this 1:00:57 discussion at the least I think that 1:01:00 doesn't quite sufficiently express the 1:01:02 necessary caution because when we are 1:01:04 trying to draw implications 1:01:07 for a whole theological system from 1:01:10 single verses we need much more than 1:01:12 just the immediate context of that 1:01:15 sentence paragraph or even chapter. 1:01:19 We need to consider the entire book and 1:01:22 how that book fits within the greater 1:01:24 context of scripture as a whole. We need 1:01:27 to consider the purpose and implications 1:01:30 of that isolated text and the grand meta 1:01:33 narrative, the overarching story that 1:01:36 God has authored through creation. 1:01:39 First and foremost, we must acknowledge 1:01:42 that scripture interprets scripture and 1:01:44 the writers of scripture were not a 1:01:47 collection of isolated ancient 1:01:48 imbeiciles making up a religion as they 1:01:51 went along. They were spiritually 1:01:53 inspired disciples of the one true all- 1:01:57 knowing God. 1:01:59 What that means for us in this 1:02:01 circumstance is that when two small 1:02:03 snippets of scripture seem like they 1:02:05 could contradict each other or at least 1:02:08 don't seem to be painting quite the same 1:02:10 picture, we need to expand our 1:02:12 perspective and consider the greater 1:02:14 framework of our great God to understand 1:02:18 how they fit together. There are no 1:02:21 contradictions in the inspired truth 1:02:23 claims of scripture. There are 1:02:25 recordings of people whose words 1:02:27 contradict claims of scripture, but 1:02:29 those are descriptive rather than 1:02:31 prescriptive 1:02:33 records of others errors discussed 1:02:36 within the inherent word of God. If 1:02:39 describing faith as a gift and as 1:02:42 something that we are responsible for 1:02:44 taking hold of still seems contradictory 1:02:46 to you, then carefully considering both 1:02:49 of these perspectives as they are 1:02:51 offered throughout scripture and how 1:02:53 they can complement each other should 1:02:56 reveal the missing piece. 1:02:59 Let's do that by considering now the 1:03:01 emphasis of scripture on our reception 1:03:04 and personal responsibility. Beginning 1:03:06 with the beautifully grace revealing 1:03:09 analogy in John 12:es 35-36. 1:03:15 In that passage, Jesus is recorded 1:03:18 saying this to the people, "The light is 1:03:21 among you for a little while longer. 1:03:24 Walk while you have the light, lest 1:03:26 darkness overtake you. The one who walks 1:03:29 in the darkness does not know where he 1:03:30 is going. while you have the light, 1:03:33 believe in the light that you may become 1:03:35 sons of light." End quote. 1:03:40 In this analogy, Jesus explains to us 1:03:42 that God gives light, but people are 1:03:45 also commanded to respond to it. How can 1:03:48 people be responsible for belief if it 1:03:51 is enabled by grace? By the same means 1:03:54 that we are responsible with the choices 1:03:56 that we make based on what we can see. 1:04:00 Even though we need an external source 1:04:02 of light in order to see, the very 1:04:05 physiological mechanism of sight teaches 1:04:08 us something profound about God. 1:04:12 Our eyes can't directly perceive 1:04:14 anything in this world without light 1:04:17 coming into them and providing a picture 1:04:19 on the retina for our brain to 1:04:21 interpret. Thus, while you have the 1:04:24 light, believe what you have seen. 1:04:27 There will come a day when that light 1:04:29 will no longer be available and you will 1:04:31 be lost in darkness if you didn't walk 1:04:33 the narrow road when you had the chance. 1:04:37 This is one of many examples throughout 1:04:39 the Bible where we are taught not merely 1:04:42 to take hold of one aspect of God's 1:04:45 nature at a time, but to hold together 1:04:47 in our understanding all aspects of his 1:04:50 nature at all times. 1:04:53 Theology must not be haphazardly crafted 1:04:56 from fragmented doctrines, but drawn out 1:04:59 of scripture with open-minded submission 1:05:02 to the Holy Spirit's inspired 1:05:04 complimentary explanations found within 1:05:07 scripture itself. 1:05:09 God's grace does not exist in isolation. 1:05:12 It exists in the light of his justice, 1:05:15 mercy, and love. 1:05:17 Next, let's reexamine John 6 47. 1:05:24 Only a few sentences after Jesus's 1:05:27 comment regarding the father's drawing 1:05:29 people to Jesus, he then says the 1:05:31 following in verse 47 pertaining to 1:05:34 belief in himself. Whoever believes has 1:05:38 eternal life, 1:05:40 implying that whoever does not believe 1:05:43 will not have eternal life. 1:05:46 This moves the emphasis from the giver 1:05:48 to the receiver from the gifted nature 1:05:51 of faith to the responsibility of 1:05:54 choosing to receive it. Nevertheless, 1:05:58 that shift of emphasis is not due to 1:06:00 contradiction, but seemingly in order to 1:06:03 communicate an urgent exhortation for 1:06:06 proper response. If we have a 1:06:08 responsibility to respond with belief, 1:06:11 then it seems safe to say that it's more 1:06:13 important for us to understand and 1:06:15 accept that fact than it is for us to 1:06:18 understand how faith mechanistically 1:06:20 functions as a gift. 1:06:23 While both concepts are necessary for a 1:06:26 completed and perfect theology of faith, 1:06:29 it is not actually our first priority to 1:06:32 achieve the full wisdom of God to 1:06:34 understand all things perfectly. His 1:06:37 thoughts are higher than our thoughts. 1:06:39 His mind as unknowable as the vastness 1:06:41 of creation. Our need is not perfected 1:06:46 understanding of all things as only God 1:06:48 has, but sufficient understanding to 1:06:51 repent and believe. If all one hears is 1:06:55 that faith is a gift and they are not 1:06:57 told that they need to respond and 1:06:59 believe in the gospel, then they might 1:07:02 just respond with something like, "Oh, 1:07:03 that's neat." and then shove it in the 1:07:06 back of their mind where they will do 1:07:08 nothing with it. At least not anytime 1:07:10 soon. 1:07:12 Our responsibility for response is the 1:07:15 reason for the urgency in the frequent 1:07:17 command to believe. When Jesus says, 1:07:20 "Whoever believes has eternal life," he 1:07:22 is not describing bare mental ascent. 1:07:25 The context makes that clear. This 1:07:28 belief is connected with coming to 1:07:30 Christ, receiving life from Christ, 1:07:33 feeding upon Christ as the bread of 1:07:35 life, and being raised by Christ on the 1:07:38 last day. So the belief Jesus calls for 1:07:41 is not mere acknowledgment of a fact, 1:07:44 but trusting reception of him. 1:07:47 The distinction between faithful belief 1:07:50 and mere mental ascent is critically 1:07:53 important because as it says in James 1:07:56 2:19, even the demons believe and 1:07:59 shudder. 1:08:01 Obviously, not all categories of belief 1:08:04 lead to saving faith. Otherwise, the 1:08:07 demons who shudder in fear of God would 1:08:09 be saved as well. And we know that this 1:08:12 is not the case because their destiny is 1:08:14 the lake of fire. 1:08:17 The difference between the one described 1:08:19 in John 6:47 and the demons described in 1:08:23 James 21:19 is this. Belief that merely 1:08:27 causes you to shudder in fear merely 1:08:29 acknowledges the reality of a coming 1:08:31 punishment. Belief that results in one 1:08:34 entrusting their spirit to Christ leads 1:08:37 to saving faith. 1:08:40 This interpretation of belief is 1:08:42 consistent with its use in other 1:08:44 scriptures as well. 1:08:47 One particularly interesting reference 1:08:49 for this topic, I think, is Mark 9 23 1:08:53 where Jesus said to the father of a boy 1:08:55 possessed by an evil spirit that all 1:08:57 things are possible for one who 1:08:59 believes. 1:09:01 The Greek text in that passage that the 1:09:04 ESV translates to for one who believes 1:09:07 contains the same Greek verb and a very 1:09:10 similar grammatical construction that is 1:09:13 present in John 6:47. 1:09:16 Yet what else do we read in verse 24 1:09:19 about the belief of the boy's father 1:09:22 just before Jesus cleanses the boy? I 1:09:25 believe. Help my unbelief. 1:09:29 This should be a great comfort to 1:09:31 everyone who ever struggles with doubt 1:09:34 after coming to Jesus, which seems to be 1:09:37 quite a common experience. 1:09:40 While the boy's father still had doubt, 1:09:42 he committed to trust in the Lord. And 1:09:45 Jesus's response shows us that this kind 1:09:48 of belief is enough for him to act upon, 1:09:52 even if it doesn't demonstrate the full 1:09:54 confidence that God deserves. 1:09:57 While this text isn't explicitly about 1:10:00 spiritual salvation in the same sense as 1:10:02 John 6:47, it's still using the same 1:10:05 Greek to talk about belief that leads to 1:10:08 miraculous intervention from Jesus to 1:10:10 cleanse an unclean spirit. With this 1:10:13 passage in particular, it would not make 1:10:15 sense to interpret belief as coerced 1:10:18 since the father of the boy expressed 1:10:20 doubt even in the act of committing to 1:10:23 trust Jesus to save his son. 1:10:26 He believed because Jesus revealed 1:10:28 himself as the Lord capable and worthy 1:10:31 of faith. And Jesus vindicated that 1:10:34 belief with a miracle despite the 1:10:37 obvious presence of doubt. 1:10:40 The only way to support an 1:10:42 interpretation of coerced belief from 1:10:44 this passage would be to say that God 1:10:47 forced the man to believe and doubt 1:10:49 simultaneously. 1:10:52 While we could say that God is capable 1:10:53 of such a thing, I cannot fathom a 1:10:56 justification for thinking that this is 1:10:59 consistent with God's revealed character 1:11:02 and the greater narrative of scripture 1:11:04 or [snorts] even the plethora of 1:11:06 anecdotal evidence that is available 1:11:08 from the personal testimonies that I've 1:11:09 witnessed. 1:11:11 Let's briefly consider a few more 1:11:13 examples. 1:11:16 Mark 1:es 14-15 1:11:20 says Jesus came into Galilee proclaiming 1:11:23 the gospel of God and saying the time is 1:11:27 fulfilled and the kingdom of God is at 1:11:29 hand. Repent and believe in the gospel. 1:11:32 End quote. 1:11:35 This is Christ's simple repeated 1:11:37 command. Repent and believe in the 1:11:39 gospel. meaning turn away from your sins 1:11:42 and have faith in God for salvation 1:11:44 through the death and resurrection of 1:11:46 the son of man Jesus Christ. 1:11:51 Acts 17:es 30 through31 says the times 1:11:55 of ignorance God overlooked but now he 1:11:58 commands all people everywhere to repent 1:12:00 because he has fixed a day on which he 1:12:02 will judge the world in righteousness by 1:12:05 a man whom he has appointed. and of this 1:12:08 he has given assurance to all by raising 1:12:10 him from the dead. End quote. 1:12:15 God has proven the identity of Christ 1:12:17 through the resurrection as the one who 1:12:19 will judge the world and calls us to 1:12:22 repent before the coming day of the 1:12:24 Lord. Once again, we wouldn't have the 1:12:27 gospel without grace paving the way for 1:12:30 faith. But we can't avoid the 1:12:32 responsibility implicit in the command 1:12:35 to repent and believe. 1:12:38 In Actsap 2 38 during Peter's sermon at 1:12:43 Pentecost, he said to the crowd, "Repent 1:12:46 and be baptized every one of you in the 1:12:48 name of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness 1:12:51 of your sins, and you will receive the 1:12:53 gift of the Holy Spirit." End quote. 1:12:57 Again, 1:12:59 we see that when people learn who Jesus 1:13:01 is and what he has done for them and 1:13:03 they ask what they should do, the answer 1:13:06 is to take action, to respond 1:13:09 appropriately, which is to repent, 1:13:11 believe, and receive the Holy Spirit of 1:13:14 God. to proclaim to the world through 1:13:16 baptism in the name of Jesus Christ that 1:13:19 you will be found in him on the day of 1:13:21 resurrection because his life is now 1:13:24 your life. 1:13:27 Notice that in the next verse, Peter 1:13:29 said that the promise of God for 1:13:31 salvation is for everyone whom the Lord 1:13:34 our God calls to himself. And earlier in 1:13:38 verse 21, he quoted Joel 2:32 from the 1:13:41 Old Testament, which says, "It shall 1:13:45 come to pass that everyone who calls 1:13:46 upon the name of the Lord shall be 1:13:48 saved." 1:13:50 That dynamic describes a call and 1:13:53 response that doesn't fit well with the 1:13:55 idea of an irresistible draw that some 1:13:58 are granted while others are 1:14:00 inexplicably left to perish for lack of. 1:14:05 That assessment is further strengthened 1:14:08 by Joshua 24-15 1:14:12 which says, "Now therefore fear the Lord 1:14:15 and serve him in sincerity and in 1:14:18 faithfulness. Put away the gods that 1:14:20 your fathers served beyond the river and 1:14:22 in Egypt and serve the Lord. If it is 1:14:26 evil in your eyes to serve the Lord, 1:14:28 choose this day whom you will serve, 1:14:31 whether the gods your fathers served in 1:14:33 the region beyond the river, or the gods 1:14:36 of the Amorites in whose land you dwell. 1:14:38 But as for me and my house, we will 1:14:41 serve the Lord." End quote. 1:14:45 How could we choose what master we will 1:14:47 serve if God's call is selective and 1:14:50 irresistible? 1:14:52 How could we serve God with sincerity if 1:14:54 it is effectively forced? 1:14:57 This verse affirms the free choice of 1:14:59 will to choose what master we will serve 1:15:01 and implicitly refers to the type of 1:15:04 relationship that God wants with his 1:15:06 people. One of sincere love rather than 1:15:09 puppeteer reaction or robotic servitude. 1:15:14 That doesn't negate our reliance on God 1:15:16 for providing the call. It acknowledges 1:15:19 the reality that he illuminates the 1:15:22 narrow road and awaits our choice to 1:15:24 walk it with him. Though he already 1:15:26 knows what choice each of us will make. 1:15:31 At this time, I'd like to acknowledge 1:15:32 that I can't consider this a thorough 1:15:34 discussion of the nature of faith 1:15:36 without addressing what some may 1:15:38 consider one of the most critical 1:15:40 loadbearing pillars for the reformed 1:15:43 doctrine of irresistible grace. That 1:15:46 being a particular idea often plucked 1:15:49 out of 2 Timothy 2 25. 1:15:53 However, rather than diving straight 1:15:56 into that verse and presenting a 1:15:58 contrary conclusion to my reformed 1:16:00 brothers and sisters in Christ, I want 1:16:02 to first examine two earlier passages of 1:16:05 scripture that I believe clearly 1:16:07 established the framework for how that 1:16:10 later passage would have been and should 1:16:13 also now be interpreted. 1:16:15 The first of those passages is Romans 1:16:18 10:es 8-1 17. 1:16:23 I've already read some of those verses, 1:16:25 I believe, but we now need to consider 1:16:27 them with expanded contextual 1:16:30 perspective. 1:16:31 The scripture says, "What does it say? 1:16:34 The word is near you in your mouth and 1:16:37 in your heart." That is the word of 1:16:40 faith that we proclaim. Because if you 1:16:43 confess with your mouth that Jesus is 1:16:45 Lord and believe in your heart that God 1:16:47 raised him from the dead, you will be 1:16:49 saved. For with the heart one believes 1:16:52 and is justified, and with the mouth one 1:16:54 confesses and is saved. For the 1:16:57 scripture says, "Everyone who believes 1:16:59 in him will not be put to shame." For 1:17:02 there is no distinction between Jew and 1:17:04 Greek. For the same Lord is Lord of all, 1:17:07 bestowing his riches on all who call on 1:17:09 him. For everyone who calls on the name 1:17:11 of the Lord will be saved. How then will 1:17:15 they call on him in whom they have not 1:17:17 believed? And how are they to believe in 1:17:19 him who they have never heard of? And 1:17:22 how are they to hear without someone 1:17:24 preaching? And how are they to preach 1:17:26 unless they are sent? As it is written, 1:17:29 "How beautiful are the feet of those who 1:17:31 preach the good news?" But they have not 1:17:33 all obeyed the gospel. For Isaiah says, 1:17:36 "Lord, who has believed what he has 1:17:38 heard from us?" So faith comes from 1:17:40 hearing and hearing through the word of 1:17:43 Christ. End quote. 1:17:47 I could walk through that passage phrase 1:17:49 by phrase to explain it, but that's not 1:17:51 particularly necessary in this instance 1:17:53 because verse 17 interprets what is 1:17:56 needed for us. And as we should 1:17:58 acknowledge, the ultimate interpretation 1:18:00 of scripture is that which is found in 1:18:03 scripture itself since all scripture is 1:18:05 the inspired word of God. Verse 17 says 1:18:09 that faith comes from hearing and 1:18:11 hearing through the word of Christ. This 1:18:14 is why the gospel must be preached 1:18:16 because the reality is that if no one 1:18:18 preaches it, then no one hears it. And 1:18:20 if no one hears it, then no one believes 1:18:22 it. You can dismiss that if you want by 1:18:25 saying that God can preach just fine on 1:18:27 his own. He can call directly and 1:18:30 effectively anyone that he chooses, to 1:18:33 which I'll concur. Yes, indeed, he can 1:18:37 call out directly to anyone whom he 1:18:39 chooses, effectively replacing the need 1:18:41 for human preaching. He can speak with a 1:18:44 voice like thunder or call to us in our 1:18:46 dreams and all the world could hear the 1:18:49 gospel of Christ without a preacher ever 1:18:51 taking the stage. 1:18:54 The problem is that's not what God tells 1:18:56 us to presume he will do. And it 1:18:59 contradicts what he has commanded us to 1:19:03 do. People need to hear the gospel and 1:19:06 God wants us to do his will by 1:19:08 witnessing to them on his behalf. 1:19:11 You don't have to understand why this is 1:19:13 true in order to act on it. You just 1:19:15 have to believe his word and obey. 1:19:19 In some instances, he may directly 1:19:22 intervene and reveal himself 1:19:23 miraculously, even by name, to those who 1:19:26 have not heard the gospel from human 1:19:28 lips. Similarly to his known prior 1:19:31 miraculous revelations throughout human 1:19:33 history. But we can't use that as an 1:19:36 excuse to neglect the command to be his 1:19:39 hands and feet. to neglect the desperate 1:19:41 need of those who are not ready for the 1:19:44 second coming because they haven't heard 1:19:46 the good news yet. 1:19:48 Verses 8-1 17 are supported shortly 1:19:50 thereafter by verse 21 1:19:54 in which the God of Israel says 1:19:59 all day long I have held out my hands to 1:20:02 a disobedient and contrary people. 1:20:06 I appreciate this verse because it 1:20:08 follows right after emphasizing our 1:20:11 responsibility to preach the gospel so 1:20:14 that people can receive the knowledge of 1:20:16 truth to remind us that God's hand is 1:20:18 never removed from his people. 1:20:22 While he commands us to preach, he 1:20:25 himself continues to reach out his hands 1:20:27 towards a people that are disobedient 1:20:29 and contrary to him. 1:20:32 The second verse that I want to examine 1:20:34 prior to Paul's message in 2 Timothy is 1:20:36 from Paul's message in 1 Timothy 2:es 1:20:40 3-4 which says, "God our savior desires 1:20:44 all to be saved and to come to the 1:20:46 knowledge of the truth." 1:20:49 Again, the message is plain and simple 1:20:51 so that none of us should miss it. 1:20:54 God desires that everyone learns the 1:20:56 truth that leads to salvation. And as we 1:20:59 just read from Paul's earlier letter to 1:21:01 Rome, that requires the preaching of the 1:21:04 gospel according to the will of God. 1:21:08 Now, finally, let's consider the later 1:21:10 passage in 2 Timothy 2:2. 1:21:13 First, I'll read just the particular 1:21:16 phrase within verse 25 that reformed 1:21:18 theologians are likely to lean on so 1:21:20 that it's clear how easily one can 1:21:22 arrive at their typical conclusion. 1:21:25 Following that, I want to explain the 1:21:26 potential issues with allowing that 1:21:28 phrase in isolation to settle the 1:21:30 doctrinal question, measure our 1:21:33 expectations for remaining mystery, and 1:21:36 finally consider the greater context of 1:21:39 the verse itself. 1:21:41 This will require that we consider not 1:21:43 only the immediate context of the 1:21:45 statement in verse 24- 26, but also that 1:21:51 we direct our attention to the apparent 1:21:53 purpose of the entire passage so that we 1:21:56 can allow the immediate context to help 1:21:58 clarify the bounds of our interpretive 1:22:01 liberty with the isolated phrase in 1:22:04 question. 1:22:06 The key phrase is the following excerpt 1:22:08 from verse 25 which says, "God may 1:22:12 perhaps grant them repentance leading to 1:22:14 a knowledge of the truth." 1:22:17 It's easy to see how this verse could 1:22:19 lead one to the conclusion that God 1:22:21 effectively grants repentance directly 1:22:25 to people rather than allowing it to 1:22:27 happen functionally of their own free 1:22:29 will. The primary issue that I and 1:22:32 others hold against this interpretation 1:22:34 is that it is functionally equivalent to 1:22:37 God forcibly overriding human will in a 1:22:41 matter that he also seems to clearly 1:22:43 affirm the responsibility of our own 1:22:46 will to make a decision. 1:22:49 A reformed theologian may say that even 1:22:52 if God does grant repentance directly 1:22:55 through effectively willing it, that 1:22:57 wouldn't contradict free will because 1:23:00 they find both the responsibility of 1:23:03 creaturely will and the effectual will 1:23:06 of God in scripture. 1:23:09 Essentially, because they see both 1:23:11 concepts decreed by God, they must both 1:23:14 be true. 1:23:17 The risk of with accepting this 1:23:19 reasoning too quickly is that by that 1:23:23 method of arguing, one could 1:23:25 hypothetically try to justify 1:23:27 practically any manner of false doctrine 1:23:30 while evading critique by simply 1:23:33 claiming that it is derived from 1:23:34 scripture. So even if it seems to 1:23:37 contradict something else that one also 1:23:39 claims to derive from scripture, they're 1:23:41 both true. Anyway, 1:23:44 I have great respect for the apparent 1:23:47 humility of a person to say that even if 1:23:50 it makes no sense to them, they will 1:23:52 believe what God decrees. 1:23:54 That said, prior to that humble 1:23:57 acceptance, I think the reasoning of the 1:23:59 conclusion in question is insufficient. 1:24:04 So any humble bowing out of further 1:24:06 consideration seems an acceptance of 1:24:10 more troubling mystery than scripture 1:24:12 genuinely enforces on us in this case. 1:24:17 God doesn't owe us the answer to every 1:24:19 question. But he has provided his word 1:24:22 to read, his spirit to guide, and our 1:24:25 minds to consider as we reason through 1:24:27 the evidence. 1:24:29 Furthermore, as I said near the 1:24:31 beginning of this episode, Mark 12:30 1:24:34 tells us to love God not only with our 1:24:36 strength, soul, and heart, but also with 1:24:38 our God-given mind. 1:24:41 Therefore, I propose that to love God 1:24:44 with all our mind indicates that we 1:24:46 should strive to ensure that we have 1:24:49 achieved our best reasonable 1:24:51 understanding of what he has provided 1:24:54 prior to holding seemingly contradictory 1:24:57 statements together. through premature 1:24:59 acceptance of mystery when a shift in 1:25:02 perspective may reveal the greater 1:25:04 fullness of truth that was missing. 1:25:08 In my view, reformed thought among 1:25:11 others regarding faith and grace stops 1:25:15 just short of that. 1:25:18 That's not to say that reformed 1:25:19 theologians lack intelligence or 1:25:21 sincerity, 1:25:23 just that even careful human 1:25:25 argumentation can be influenced by the 1:25:28 fallibility of humanity. 1:25:31 I'll discuss later in this episode the 1:25:33 degree of mystery that seems truly 1:25:35 unavoidable. 1:25:37 And to that I will absolutely commend 1:25:40 humility as our response to God's 1:25:42 unfathomable wisdom. 1:25:44 But first, let's consider whether we can 1:25:47 derive any further clarity from 1:25:49 scripture. 1:25:51 I will admit that the danger of human 1:25:53 pride in such circumstances is that I 1:25:56 might wrongly think myself to have the 1:25:58 superior reasoning and so wrongly 1:26:00 believe that my argument must be the 1:26:02 correct one. 1:26:04 Thus, I might discard whatever doesn't 1:26:07 seem to be explained by my reasoning or 1:26:10 just consider it part of the remaining 1:26:12 mystery that can't be explained within 1:26:14 the bounds of human limitations of 1:26:17 knowledge and comprehension. 1:26:19 That's why I did my best in preparing 1:26:21 for this episode to ensure that my 1:26:23 presuppositions did not predetermine my 1:26:26 conclusions rather than allowing the 1:26:28 reasoning of scripture itself to guide 1:26:31 my understanding. 1:26:33 And in consideration of that, I'm all 1:26:36 the more grateful to God that my 1:26:38 salvation has never hinged on my perfect 1:26:41 understanding of all things, but only on 1:26:43 faith in Christ through which I repent 1:26:47 and believe in the gospel. 1:26:49 All that said, my issue with conclusions 1:26:53 that inform a sotiology or theology of 1:26:56 faith that require ineffectual will 1:26:59 which results in irresistible grace 1:27:02 selectively offered is that I think it 1:27:05 causes more apparent mystery and 1:27:07 confusion in regards to the 1:27:09 interpretation of scripture and the 1:27:11 character of God than the alternative 1:27:13 that I'm presenting in this exploration 1:27:16 of the theology of faith. 1:27:19 That is because the reformed doctrine 1:27:22 seems to require contradictions in the 1:27:24 inherent word of God. Whereas my current 1:27:28 understanding of the apparently more 1:27:30 biblically sound alternative seems to 1:27:33 not require any such contradictions. 1:27:36 I don't want to accidentally affirm 1:27:38 false doctrines through appeals to 1:27:41 mystery. 1:27:42 I would rather say confidently that I 1:27:45 can reconcile the evidence without 1:27:47 apparently necessary remaining 1:27:50 contradiction or else simply say that I 1:27:52 don't understand it yet if I ever will. 1:27:56 To those who have witnessed it, I've 1:27:58 proven in the past that I'm willing to 1:28:00 change my mind with sufficient evidence, 1:28:03 and I'm also willing to accept whatever 1:28:05 degree of mystery that God requires of 1:28:07 me. 1:28:08 In fact, I've even refined my position 1:28:11 regarding this very doctrine in the nots 1:28:13 recent past in such a way that I would 1:28:16 not now describe faith the way that I 1:28:19 might have in the past. 1:28:22 I recall a memory that I believe to be 1:28:24 from my time in graduate school in which 1:28:27 I described faith to a friend summarily 1:28:30 as our contribution to the equation for 1:28:33 salvation. 1:28:35 While I'm confident that I can qualify 1:28:37 that in a way that makes it true in a 1:28:39 sense, I think the conclusion that it 1:28:42 seemed to affirm for my friend at that 1:28:44 time was human sufficiency in a 1:28:47 contradiction to the gifted nature of 1:28:49 biblical faith. 1:28:52 With that methodological caution in 1:28:54 mind, let's return to Paul's second 1:28:56 letter to Timothy chapter 2 and consider 1:28:59 verses 24- 26. Now the scripture says, 1:29:05 "The Lord's servant must not be 1:29:07 quarrelome, but kind to everyone, able 1:29:10 to teach, patiently enduring evil, 1:29:13 correcting his opponents with 1:29:15 gentleness. 1:29:17 God may perhaps grant them repentance, 1:29:19 leading to a knowledge of the truth, and 1:29:22 they may come to their senses and escape 1:29:24 the snare of the devil after being 1:29:26 captured by him to do his will." End 1:29:29 quote. 1:29:32 What is the purpose of this passage? 1:29:35 Paul is explaining from the beginning of 1:29:37 verse 24 through the beginning of verse 1:29:39 25 how a servant of God must fulfill his 1:29:42 role. Consider the following paraphrase 1:29:45 of those verses in my own words which I 1:29:47 think conveys the point clearly. 1:29:50 The Lord's servant must be a good 1:29:52 teacher who corrects people gently. God 1:29:55 may blaze a trail to repentance by which 1:29:58 they may escape the snare of the devil 1:30:00 and receive the knowledge of truth. 1:30:04 This entire chapter of second Timothy is 1:30:06 focused on how to identify or be a 1:30:09 leader in the church. So why would Paul 1:30:12 say in verse 25 right after explaining 1:30:14 that the Lord's servant should be good 1:30:16 teachers that God may grant people 1:30:19 repentance leading to knowledge of 1:30:21 truth? 1:30:23 This is why I wanted to consider the 1:30:25 earlier passages in Romans 10 and 1 1:30:27 Timothy prior to 2 Timothy. 1:30:31 1 Timothy 2:4 reveals that God desires 1:30:34 for all people to be saved and come to 1:30:36 knowledge of him the truth. Second 1:30:39 Timothy 2:25 comments that God may grant 1:30:42 repentance leading to the knowledge of 1:30:44 truth. Therefore, God's granting of 1:30:47 repentance must be considered and 1:30:50 understood in harmonious conjunction 1:30:52 with his revealed desire that all be 1:30:55 saved so that our interpretation doesn't 1:30:58 contradict his message. And Romans 1:31:01 chapter 10 shows us how this works out 1:31:04 practically. 1:31:06 God provides grace through Christ. 1:31:08 Christ lives out the gospel. The gospel 1:31:10 is preached to sinners. Sinners hear the 1:31:13 truth. and some repent and believe 1:31:16 leading to salvation. 1:31:18 By this way, faith comes by hearing and 1:31:21 God grants repentance. 1:31:26 For the sake of those who might find 1:31:27 themselves stuck on what I would 1:31:29 consider an unnecessarily narrow 1:31:32 interpretation of God's granting, allow 1:31:35 me to paint a clear metaphorical picture 1:31:38 to explain my understanding of granting 1:31:41 in general. 1:31:43 I could fairly say that a parent grants 1:31:45 their child ice cream, even if the child 1:31:48 receives the ice cream themselves, 1:31:50 retrieves the ice cream themselves from 1:31:53 the freezer as long as the parent had to 1:31:56 allow the child the opportunity, such as 1:31:59 by purchasing it from the store, 1:32:01 producing it from scratch, or even just 1:32:04 telling the child where to find it. 1:32:08 My confidence in the interpretation of 1:32:10 God's granting of faith that I've 1:32:11 presented comes not just from how well 1:32:14 it explains each proof text 1:32:16 individually, but more importantly, how 1:32:19 it allows them to speak not just as 1:32:21 individuals, but as a choir proclaiming 1:32:24 a unified gospel of truth. 1:32:27 That unity of purpose and message is 1:32:30 precisely what I would expect from an 1:32:32 omnisient sovereign God. And that's what 1:32:35 I find in scripture. 1:32:37 Furthermore, 1:32:39 I propose that this understanding 1:32:40 explains why God emphasizes throughout 1:32:43 the scriptures that we receive the gift 1:32:45 of faith rather than accept that we may 1:32:48 or may not be effectually willed to 1:32:50 receive it. 1:32:52 God grants what he commands by means of 1:32:55 his gracious initiative to provide a 1:32:58 path to salvation and light the way for 1:33:01 us. 1:33:02 Since I've been addressing ideas and 1:33:04 theological camps without naming any 1:33:06 specific instances of an individual's 1:33:09 actual defense of them, I'm now going to 1:33:12 pivot for a few minutes to address more 1:33:14 directly certain names and arguments 1:33:16 pertaining to the debate debate of 1:33:19 prevenient grace. Grace that precedes 1:33:22 and enables a genuine response versus 1:33:25 irresistible grace. Grace that 1:33:27 effectually secures the desired 1:33:29 response. 1:33:31 The reason that I ultimately decided 1:33:33 this is a worthwhile addition to this 1:33:35 episode is that it seemed to me that any 1:33:38 thorough theology of faith necessarily 1:33:41 becomes also a theology of God's will. 1:33:44 What he commands, what he desires, what 1:33:47 he enables, and what he effectually 1:33:50 causes in a direct manner. Essentially, 1:33:54 my methodology for certain apparent 1:33:56 issues of clarity in scripture is in a 1:33:59 sense to treat it similarly to an 1:34:02 algebra problem. 1:34:04 I almost can't believe I'm actually 1:34:06 using algebra right now, let alone in 1:34:09 the context of theological methodology. 1:34:13 Nevertheless, 1:34:14 consider this approach. 1:34:17 If the doctrine of faith is one 1:34:18 variable, the doctrine of God's will is 1:34:21 another variable, and the final 1:34:23 theological conclusion is the result 1:34:25 that scripture requires us to preserve 1:34:28 when combining those variables, 1:34:30 then we should use the clearest biblical 1:34:33 data pertaining to those variables to 1:34:35 help us understand what is less 1:34:37 immediately clear. 1:34:40 In this instance, I would propose that 1:34:42 the doctrine of faith and the revealed 1:34:45 contours of God's nature, purposes, and 1:34:48 character are more plainly clarified in 1:34:51 scripture than the hidden mechanics of 1:34:54 God's will. 1:34:55 Therefore, we should allow the clarity 1:34:58 pertaining to faith and God's other 1:35:00 aspects to enlighten us regarding his 1:35:03 will. Essentially, 1:35:06 if scripture speaks clearly about faith 1:35:09 being commanded and grace enabled and 1:35:12 also speaks clearly about God's justice, 1:35:14 mercy, love, and sincerity, then those 1:35:17 truths must constrain how we understand 1:35:20 the more mysterious workings of God's 1:35:23 will. 1:35:25 To simplify this methodology, if A + B 1:35:29 equals C and I have a greater degree of 1:35:32 certainty regarding A and C, then I can 1:35:35 use that information to inform my 1:35:37 evaluation of B. Methodology aside, I 1:35:42 will say that I have greatly appreciated 1:35:44 most of what I've heard and read from 1:35:47 Dr. John Piper. But on this particular 1:35:51 topic, my conclusions will align more 1:35:53 closely to the Armenian sotiology that 1:35:56 he was arguing against in the book 1:35:59 chapter that I'm going to reference for 1:36:00 this discussion. 1:36:02 That chapter is available in the form of 1:36:04 an article on desiring God.org titled 1:36:08 Are There Two Wills in God? from 1995. 1:36:12 By the way, I always include lists of 1:36:14 primary and secondary references when 1:36:17 appropriate in my YouTube video 1:36:18 descriptions. So, if you would like to 1:36:21 examine those more conveniently for 1:36:23 yourself, you can refer to the 1:36:24 corresponding YouTube videos description 1:36:27 for now. 1:36:29 At a yet undetermined time in the 1:36:31 future, I will have a website where all 1:36:33 of my episodes, notes, and references 1:36:36 will be more conveniently organized and 1:36:39 consolidated. For now, let's return to 1:36:42 the topic at hand, the aforementioned 1:36:44 article pertaining to God's will. In it, 1:36:48 Dr. Piper said the following. We know it 1:36:50 was not the will of God that Judas and 1:36:53 Pilate and Herod and the Gentile 1:36:55 soldiers and the Jewish crowds disobey 1:36:57 the moral law of God by sinning in 1:37:00 delivering Jesus up to be crucified. But 1:37:03 we also know that it is the will of God 1:37:06 that this came to pass. Therefore, we 1:37:08 know that God in some sense wills what 1:37:11 he does not will in another sense. End 1:37:14 quote. 1:37:17 I agree with the observation that God 1:37:19 can in some sense will that certain 1:37:22 things occur while not willing them in 1:37:25 another sense. What I disagree with is 1:37:28 the conclusion that this logically 1:37:30 requires multiple wills in God. 1:37:34 I propose instead that God has a single 1:37:37 unified will with ordered priorities by 1:37:41 which he may account for and permit what 1:37:44 he does not morally delight in because 1:37:47 it serves the greater purpose that he 1:37:50 truly wills. 1:37:52 To be fair to Dr. Piper, I don't think 1:37:54 that his conclusions at the time that he 1:37:56 wrote that article were completely 1:37:58 misguided. 1:38:00 In fact, I think he did an excellent job 1:38:02 of explaining his case, and I can 1:38:04 clearly see how he drew his conclusions. 1:38:07 I also can't say for certain that Dr. 1:38:09 Piper hasn't changed his position by the 1:38:12 time that I'm evaluating this writing 1:38:14 from over 30 years ago, but I suspect it 1:38:17 wouldn't still be on his ministry's 1:38:18 website if he had to a substantial 1:38:21 degree at least. 1:38:23 Even if he hasn't, I believe that were 1:38:26 we to converse together for long enough, 1:38:28 then we would find that we agreed on far 1:38:31 more than we disagreed. 1:38:33 Nevertheless, regarding this matter, it 1:38:36 is my opinion that the conclusions 1:38:38 presented in the aforementioned article 1:38:41 are what I refer to as almost but not 1:38:44 quite. 1:38:46 I'll explain why shortly. And it's not 1:38:48 because I think I'm smarter than Dr. 1:38:50 Piper. I don't think that I'm presenting 1:38:52 any new or novel theology or doctrine in 1:38:55 this episode. The only novelty that I'm 1:38:58 trying to bring to the discussion is my 1:39:01 own voice, perspective, and way of 1:39:03 explaining the eternal truths of God 1:39:06 that have always been and always will 1:39:09 be. 1:39:10 Times and cultures may change, but God 1:39:13 remains the same. That's not because 1:39:15 he's stubborn or close-minded, 1:39:18 but because he has always been all 1:39:20 knowing and perfectly holy. So there's 1:39:24 no reason for him to change. 1:39:27 No better version of him to become. 1:39:30 He already is perfect and sufficient in 1:39:33 all regards. 1:39:35 That said, consider now my reasoning for 1:39:38 why Dr. Piper's ultimate conclusion of 1:39:41 the two-will nature of God is almost but 1:39:45 not quite. 1:39:47 First, I want to draw attention to the 1:39:49 reality that scripture allows us to 1:39:52 distinguish between what God commands, 1:39:54 what God permits, and what God brings to 1:39:56 pass. However, those distinctions must 1:40:00 never be defined in a way that makes God 1:40:02 contradict himself. Because as it says 1:40:04 in Ephesians 1:1, God works all things 1:40:08 according to the counsel of his will. 1:40:11 And as it says in 2 Timothy 2:13, he 1:40:15 cannot deny himself. 1:40:18 In the aforementioned article, Dr. Piper 1:40:20 says the following. Affirming the will 1:40:23 of God to save all while also affirming 1:40:26 the unconditional election of some 1:40:28 implies that there are at least two 1:40:30 wills in God or two ways of willing. End 1:40:34 quote. 1:40:36 To take this statement as it is by 1:40:39 itself would be to start from the 1:40:41 presupposition of unconditional election 1:40:44 that effects faith through irresistible 1:40:47 grace. the theology that he is defending 1:40:49 in this excerpt and use it to determine 1:40:52 an aspect of God's nature. 1:40:56 That's fine if you've proven the 1:40:58 doctrine of unconditional election from 1:41:00 scripture. But if there's a more 1:41:03 reasonable interpretation of the 1:41:05 scriptures used to support that 1:41:07 doctrine, then any inference from that 1:41:10 doctrine about the nature of God is 1:41:12 suspect. 1:41:14 However, instead of merely 1:41:16 deconstructing Dr. Piper's explanation 1:41:19 outright, what we first have to do is 1:41:21 affirm what is known about God from the 1:41:25 plane of reading of scripture, what is 1:41:28 reasonable according to his revelation 1:41:30 as we possess it and then either use 1:41:32 that to inform our developing theology 1:41:35 or compare it to our established 1:41:37 theology with the intention to throw out 1:41:40 any doctrine that doesn't fit. 1:41:44 I'm not saying that Dr. Piper reversed 1:41:46 this process as I have suspected some 1:41:49 other people of doing, but I do think 1:41:51 that there is another perspective 1:41:53 informed by responsible exesus that 1:41:56 looks beyond the isolated proof texts to 1:41:58 the meta narrative of scripture as well 1:42:01 as reasonable philosophical observations 1:42:04 of God's creation. 1:42:06 As a disclaimer, I would like to say 1:42:08 that if terms obviously related to 1:42:11 philosophy are a concerning sign to you, 1:42:14 please understand that what I consider 1:42:16 good philosophy is the study of the 1:42:18 nature of knowledge, reality, and 1:42:21 existence informed by the revelation of 1:42:24 God through creation, his word, and 1:42:27 miraculous personal experiences from 1:42:30 God, which of course cannot truly 1:42:33 contradict his other forms of 1:42:35 revelation. 1:42:36 due to his unchanging consistency. 1:42:40 I'm not talking about anti-religious or 1:42:42 pseudointellectual 1:42:44 so-called philosophy that you may hear 1:42:46 from people who try and inevitably fail 1:42:49 to wield academia as an eraser against 1:42:52 spiritual reality. 1:42:55 Digression aside, the theologians that 1:42:58 I've read and listened to discuss this 1:43:00 topic often use terminology such as 1:43:03 revealed versus secret or preceptive 1:43:06 versus decorative that seems to suggest 1:43:09 that scripture forces us to one of two 1:43:12 conclusions. 1:43:14 One of those being that he can desire 1:43:16 things that he does not will, which I 1:43:19 think is not a careful use of words with 1:43:22 consideration for their definitions. 1:43:25 The other is that God has a will for 1:43:27 what he desires that is functionally 1:43:29 distinct or effectively separate from 1:43:33 what he actually wills effectually 1:43:37 which seems like competing wills in 1:43:40 every way that I've seen or considered 1:43:41 it explained. Although I am well aware 1:43:45 that those holding to traditional 1:43:47 reformed theology will disagree on that 1:43:50 characterization. 1:43:52 I just don't think that their 1:43:53 explanations can avoid adopting that 1:43:56 characterization by virtue of their 1:43:59 necessary implications. 1:44:03 Nevertheless, this seems to be the 1:44:05 two-wheel theory that Dr. Piper 1:44:08 supported in the aforementioned article. 1:44:11 Since I'm referring to specific use of 1:44:14 certain terms here, I would like to take 1:44:18 some time to discuss the use of a 1:44:20 certain term within a quotation that I 1:44:23 found elsewhere in the article where Dr. 1:44:25 Piper referred to a statement by Dr. Ian 1:44:28 Howard Marshall from Pinnex case for 1:44:31 Arminianism. 1:44:33 To be clear, I haven't read the full 1:44:36 original context of this statement in 1:44:38 its source material. only its use in the 1:44:41 aforementioned article by Dr. Piper. As 1:44:44 such, I don't intend to comment on Dr. 1:44:47 Marshall's intended meaning or argument. 1:44:50 Instead, I'm going to intentionally 1:44:53 focus on the wording of the isolated 1:44:55 statement as quoted to demonstrate how 1:44:58 even fair use of a quotation can provide 1:45:01 an opportunity for unintended 1:45:04 interpretations that may be plausible 1:45:07 due to either suboptimal wording or 1:45:10 simply lacking the necessary context of 1:45:12 the source material to clarify the 1:45:15 intended meaning. 1:45:17 That said, the primary conclusion that I 1:45:19 intend to support for the purpose of 1:45:21 this episode with the results of my 1:45:24 analysis is that we can't use the excuse 1:45:27 that it's merely a matter of semantics 1:45:29 to avoid civil discourse regarding this 1:45:32 doctrine. That only works when the 1:45:35 difference in semantics doesn't change 1:45:37 the plausible meaningful outcomes or 1:45:40 theological implications of the 1:45:42 doctrine. 1:45:44 In this case, I think that the quotation 1:45:46 from Dr. Marshall in isolation as 1:45:49 presented by Dr. Piper can be an example 1:45:52 of how the semantics of a phrase can 1:45:55 accidentally contribute to confusion in 1:45:57 discussion, especially when it pertains 1:46:00 to the systematic workings of a 1:46:02 theological concept where God hasn't 1:46:05 necessarily given us the faculties andor 1:46:08 data to comprehensively comprehend the 1:46:12 inner mechanisms of those theological 1:46:14 systems. 1:46:16 And to be clear, I think that faith 1:46:19 qualifies to be considered within that 1:46:22 category. 1:46:24 I would also like to note that despite 1:46:26 calling this a critique of the quote as 1:46:28 presented in Dr. Piper's work, I'm not 1:46:31 claiming that he unfairly used the 1:46:33 quote. 1:46:35 I merely think that separated from its 1:46:37 context, as quotes often are, the range 1:46:41 of plausible interpretation from what 1:46:44 little text is given provides an 1:46:46 opportunity to make a relevant point. 1:46:50 If this begins to seem an overlong 1:46:52 excursus from the main topic of 1:46:54 discussion, bear with me until I have 1:46:56 the chance to demonstrate how this line 1:46:58 of reasoning has informed my approach to 1:47:01 developing and presenting this theology 1:47:04 of faith. 1:47:06 I'm aware that the following critique 1:47:08 might at first seem like nitpicking, but 1:47:10 try to consider with me the potential 1:47:12 implications of what I'm going to draw 1:47:14 attention to under the hypothetical 1:47:17 circumstance that the original context 1:47:20 did not clarify the quoted statement 1:47:22 effectively. 1:47:24 To understand the critique, what I want 1:47:26 to draw attention to is Dr. Marshall's 1:47:29 particular way of using the term will in 1:47:32 the following quotation. 1:47:34 It says, "We must certainly distinguish 1:47:36 between what God would like to see 1:47:39 happen and what he actually does will to 1:47:42 happen." 1:47:44 End quote. 1:47:46 I think that the presented term of the 1:47:48 use will in isolation could be 1:47:50 considered not careful enough to prevent 1:47:53 a certain plausible misunderstanding. 1:47:56 My reasoning is that the way this 1:47:58 sentence reads out of context easily 1:48:01 fits a careless philosophy of will which 1:48:04 might claim that desire with infinite 1:48:07 power requires perfected short-term 1:48:10 outcomes according to each individual 1:48:14 desire. 1:48:16 Not only would that be a logical problem 1:48:19 since desiring two opposing outcomes 1:48:22 from the same situation would result in 1:48:25 a genuine paradox. It would also be a 1:48:28 theological problem because it would 1:48:31 seem to require that God does what he 1:48:33 himself says that he cannot do which is 1:48:36 to contradict himself. 1:48:39 That conclusion would be genuinely 1:48:41 required according to the careless 1:48:44 philosophy of will that I'm describing 1:48:46 because as Dr. Piper pointed out in the 1:48:49 aforementioned article, we have clear 1:48:51 indication in scripture that God can in 1:48:54 some sense will something that he also 1:48:56 does not will in another sense. 1:49:00 A prime example being the murder of 1:49:02 Jesus Christ on the cross. God does not 1:49:05 delight in evil. Yet in some sense it 1:49:08 was his will as revealed in scripture 1:49:11 that Christ die on the cross for the 1:49:13 extraordinary redemption arc of 1:49:15 humanity. 1:49:18 What he had delight in was the good 1:49:21 outcome that he had planned from the 1:49:23 beginning which accounted for the evil 1:49:25 that would occur which is morally 1:49:28 distinct from delighting in evil itself. 1:49:32 In concluding my analysis of Dr. Piper's 1:49:35 two will method of justifying 1:49:38 unconditional election and irresistible 1:49:40 grace. I will attempt to support an 1:49:43 alternative explanation for why the 1:49:45 apparent contradiction of desires can 1:49:48 follow logically without implying 1:49:51 contradiction within any aspect of God. 1:49:56 For now, we have a few remaining steps 1:49:58 to work through before we arrive at that 1:50:00 conclusion. 1:50:02 My justification for the extent of this 1:50:05 excursion is the assertion that the 1:50:07 issue in question is not merely 1:50:09 regarding the application of a single 1:50:12 word but whether our application of 1:50:14 words describes God as 1:50:16 self-contradictory. 1:50:18 That said, if one granted according to 1:50:21 the aforementioned philosophy of will 1:50:24 that God could contradict himself, then 1:50:27 one might also say that he does so by 1:50:30 one of two means, at least by my 1:50:32 thinking. 1:50:33 if trying to explain away the apparent 1:50:35 contradictions to that conclusion in the 1:50:38 Bible. 1:50:40 One of those explanations might be that 1:50:42 God deceives us through scripture by 1:50:44 claiming that he wills or desires things 1:50:47 that he truly doesn't will in any sense. 1:50:51 The alternative explanation would be 1:50:53 that he can effectually will an outcome 1:50:56 to occur, but he also effectually wills 1:50:59 to not occur. meaning that he both 1:51:02 causes it to happen and simultaneously 1:51:05 causes it to not happen. 1:51:08 In that case, I'm not sure how one might 1:51:11 try to reconcile the apparent cognitive 1:51:13 dissonance, if not by seemingly 1:51:16 nonsensical conclusions, such as a split 1:51:19 in reality, where one timeline now 1:51:21 exists from one outcome and another 1:51:24 timeline exists from the other outcome. 1:51:28 That aside, to eliminate the possibility 1:51:30 of God lying, which is not the same as 1:51:33 saying that he can allow or cause a 1:51:35 deception to occur, because that can be 1:51:38 done easily without actually lying. We 1:51:41 can refer to Malachi 3:6 in which God 1:51:44 states that he does not change. Hebrews 1:51:48 6:18, in which God states that he cannot 1:51:51 lie. and again to 2 Timothy 2:13 in 1:51:54 which God states that he cannot deny 1:51:57 himself. 1:51:59 I think it clear that by such statements 1:52:01 in scripture, God has provided guard 1:52:03 rails for our understanding, not merely 1:52:06 to teach us what his attributes are, but 1:52:08 also to teach us how to properly use 1:52:11 logical reasoning. 1:52:14 In this case, these verses guard against 1:52:16 the misunderstanding which is seemingly 1:52:18 affirmed by some that because God is 1:52:21 sovereign and all powerful, he can cause 1:52:24 outcomes that are so nonsensical by 1:52:27 definition that they can't logically 1:52:29 occur regardless of any miraculous 1:52:32 intervention. 1:52:34 While I admire the unquestioning trust 1:52:37 in God that seems implied by such a 1:52:40 confession, I think that it is less 1:52:42 attributable to biblical evidence-based 1:52:45 faith, but more indicative of unfinished 1:52:49 rationale leading to blind belief. 1:52:53 And I think that scripture provides us 1:52:55 what we need to better complete that 1:52:57 line of reasoning. 1:52:59 To be clear, I do believe in the 1:53:02 possibility of miracles that can 1:53:03 contradict the apparent natural laws of 1:53:06 creation. 1:53:07 However, I think that some laws which 1:53:10 are not originated in the natural realm 1:53:14 despite being observable in the natural 1:53:16 realm are unchangeable because they seem 1:53:20 to be evident in the unchanging God 1:53:22 himself 1:53:24 as revealed through scripture. 1:53:27 Granting that truth, it seems reasonable 1:53:30 to say that God cannot cause something 1:53:32 that is by its very definition genuinely 1:53:35 illogical because he is the source of 1:53:38 genuine logic. To counter the inevitable 1:53:42 critique of some who might retort by 1:53:44 claiming that God defies logic such as 1:53:47 through miracles, I will disagree by 1:53:49 means of definition because the word 1:53:52 logic can be used a few different ways. 1:53:55 What I am referring to as logic in this 1:53:58 context where I'm claiming that God is 1:54:00 the source of logic and therefore cannot 1:54:03 contradict it is the mode of reasoning 1:54:06 from the principle of validity. 1:54:09 Meaning that if performed correctly, a 1:54:12 truly logical process will inevitably 1:54:15 result in a truly necessary conclusion. 1:54:20 By that definition, if God seems to 1:54:23 contradict human logic, it is humanity 1:54:26 which is at fault, not the abstract 1:54:29 concept of logic itself. 1:54:32 Also following that line of reasoning, 1:54:34 if God says that he cannot do something, 1:54:37 then it must be truly illogical in the 1:54:40 sense that it contradicts the nature of 1:54:42 God to do it. Even in the case of God 1:54:46 promising that he will never again 1:54:47 destroy the earth by flood, the 1:54:50 inability to perform that previously 1:54:53 completed action still ultimately 1:54:56 terminates in God's nature because it it 1:55:00 would require that he change his 1:55:02 unchangeable nature that he lie and deny 1:55:06 himself. 1:55:07 This is how one can say that there are 1:55:09 some things which God cannot possibly do 1:55:13 despite him being truly sovereign and 1:55:16 all powerful. And furthermore, that any 1:55:20 promisebased impossibility 1:55:23 still fits the explanation of logical 1:55:26 impossibility that I've presented. 1:55:30 A particularly approachable example that 1:55:32 I've heard a few times before used to 1:55:35 demonstrate this is the idea that God 1:55:37 can't make a square circle. 1:55:40 That's not to say that God can't change 1:55:42 a shape into another shape. He could 1:55:45 turn a square or a circle of any 1:55:48 material into any other shape of any 1:55:52 material instantaneously. 1:55:55 That would be a miracle of course and it 1:55:58 would defy logic to say that a human 1:56:01 could accomplish that outcome by 1:56:03 ordinary natural means. But I would not 1:56:06 say that such a miracle would contradict 1:56:09 logic itself. 1:56:11 By contrast, a square circle is by 1:56:14 definition impossible. 1:56:17 The very idea cannot even be described 1:56:21 sufficiently to imagine what it would 1:56:23 look like because it requires that a 1:56:26 shape be simultaneously 1:56:28 two distinct shapes at the same time. 1:56:33 We may be able to approximate the words 1:56:36 square and circle in a sentence by 1:56:39 saying square circle, but that doesn't 1:56:42 mean that the idea of a square shaped 1:56:45 circle can be truly reconciled. 1:56:49 I don't hold to this reasoning because 1:56:51 it's my reasoning or my favorite 1:56:54 theologian's reasoning. I hold to it 1:56:57 because it seems to be God's reasoning 1:57:00 regarding himself found in scripture, 1:57:03 albeit with an extra biblical example to 1:57:07 make the logic itself more apparent. 1:57:10 By stating that he cannot lie or deny 1:57:12 himself, God is telling us that there 1:57:14 are things that he cannot do in a sense. 1:57:17 This doesn't contradict his sovereignty 1:57:19 or omnipotence because it's not a matter 1:57:22 of authority or power. It is because of 1:57:24 the unchanging quality of God's nature 1:57:27 which is also the source and standard 1:57:29 for genuine logic per the definition 1:57:32 that I clarified earlier. 1:57:35 If God does not change then he cannot 1:57:37 deny himself because it would contradict 1:57:40 his unchanging nature. 1:57:42 Therefore, since he is perfect in all 1:57:45 his unchanging ways and reasoning, he 1:57:48 also cannot contradict the very logic 1:57:50 that he applies to himself. 1:57:53 to apply that to the theology of will. 1:57:56 Since God cannot change and he cannot 1:57:59 deny himself, he also cannot lie about 1:58:02 his will or cause simultaneous outcomes 1:58:05 that logically contradict each other. By 1:58:08 definition, 1:58:10 the very idea of God effectually willing 1:58:13 an outcome that he simultaneously 1:58:15 effectually wills against is inherently 1:58:19 illogical because God is unchanging and 1:58:22 cannot contradict or deny himself. Just 1:58:25 as with the square circle example, in 1:58:28 summary, it seems that God teaches us 1:58:31 through scripture that he can do 1:58:32 anything which can logically be done, 1:58:36 whereas he can't do anything that is 1:58:38 logically nonsensical in that it 1:58:41 contradicts his divine nature's innate 1:58:43 logic itself. 1:58:46 In that sense, the seriously 1:58:48 consequential question that we need to 1:58:50 answer is whether an idea is truly 1:58:54 illogical by way of contradicting God's 1:58:56 nature, such as revealed by his decree, 1:59:01 or if it only seems illogical according 1:59:04 to the fallible reasoning of feeble 1:59:06 minds, that being all of humanity by 1:59:10 comparison to God, 1:59:12 that includes all of us, from the humble 1:59:15 to the brilliant from the students to 1:59:18 the professors. 1:59:20 One way in which I could demonstrate 1:59:23 error by consequence of elevating my own 1:59:26 opinion of God beyond the reality of his 1:59:30 clear revelation might be to say that 1:59:32 God would never punish people for sin 1:59:34 because God is kind and punishment is 1:59:37 unkind. 1:59:40 No matter how convinced a person might 1:59:42 be of the validity of that reasoning, 1:59:45 they would be wrong. 1:59:49 I don't have to appeal to personal 1:59:52 brilliance to support that claim because 1:59:54 the logic is plain as day in scripture 1:59:57 itself. God clearly and unavoidably 2:00:01 decrees in his word that sin requires 2:00:04 punishment, which is why Jesus had to 2:00:07 bear the weight of our sins on the 2:00:08 cross. 2:00:10 If sin did not require punishment, then 2:00:12 the sacrifice of Jesus Christ as 2:00:14 propitiation for our sins would have 2:00:17 been completely unnecessary. 2:00:20 The critical difference between arguing 2:00:23 from what I think seems good to me and 2:00:26 what is apparent in scripture is that I 2:00:29 am fallible. Well, God is not. And 2:00:32 because scripture is the word of God, it 2:00:35 must also be inherent by nature. 2:00:39 This is why I propose that we must 2:00:42 submit to the authority of scripture, 2:00:45 not only to provide doctrine pertaining 2:00:47 to subjects which are traditionally 2:00:49 considered to be religious by nature, 2:00:53 but regarding all things great and 2:00:56 small, natural and supernatural, feeling 2:01:00 and thinking. 2:01:02 To pretend that we must separate logic 2:01:05 from religion is to grant an arrow in 2:01:08 the quiver of certain dissenters. Those 2:01:11 who, as I said earlier, try to wield 2:01:13 academia as an ironically blunt 2:01:16 instrument against spirituality and 2:01:18 theology. 2:01:20 Those who sadly are convinced that 2:01:24 science contradicts Christianity. 2:01:27 If science is the observation of reality 2:01:30 to gather information and draw logical 2:01:32 conclusions, then the reality of my God 2:01:35 is the most logical scientific 2:01:38 conclusion that I can conceivably arrive 2:01:40 at. 2:01:43 Let's return to the context of Dr. 2:01:45 Piper's quote of Dr. Marshall in the 2:01:49 referenced article. 2:01:50 On that note, I want to further clarify 2:01:53 in case any forgot or didn't notice 2:01:55 earlier that I'm not attempting to 2:01:57 present any claims pertaining to Dr. 2:01:59 Marshall's original statement as may be 2:02:02 found in its source material. I only 2:02:05 wish to use the isolated quote that I 2:02:07 read as an example of how even a fairly 2:02:10 used reasonable statement by an 2:02:12 intelligent individual can still 2:02:14 accidentally support an unreasonable 2:02:16 conclusion by way of unintended 2:02:19 implication 2:02:20 especially when encountered outside of 2:02:22 the original context and without 2:02:24 sufficient explanation. 2:02:27 This is why we have to be very careful 2:02:28 with our words, especially when trying 2:02:31 to precisely describe simultaneously 2:02:34 critical and complex ideas. 2:02:38 The original real life consequence that 2:02:41 motivated my reasoning for addressing 2:02:43 this is that when people spend hours and 2:02:46 days and years studying certain minds or 2:02:50 texts, then they can begin to adopt 2:02:53 unrecognized presuppositions from 2:02:56 certain consistent phrasing that lead to 2:02:59 unbiblical theological conclusions. 2:03:02 Allow me to reread the quote for you. 2:03:05 Dr. Marshall was quoted to say that we 2:03:07 must certainly distinguish between what 2:03:10 God would like to see happen and what he 2:03:12 actually does will to happen. With that 2:03:15 wording, it could be said that he is 2:03:17 implying that God desires some things 2:03:19 which are not at all part of his genuine 2:03:22 will. But I would assert that such a 2:03:25 conclusion doesn't rationally follow 2:03:27 from the nature of will itself, since to 2:03:31 desire something is to have a will for 2:03:33 it. Unless what you mean by will is 2:03:37 exclusively the act of affecting a 2:03:40 desire or actively forcing a desired 2:03:44 outcome. 2:03:46 I'm not commenting on what Dr. Marshall 2:03:47 actually meant to say, but the 2:03:49 implication that I've presented does 2:03:51 seem to me to be a reasonable 2:03:53 interpretation of that statement in 2:03:55 isolation as quoted by Dr. Piper. 2:03:58 Therefore, to reinforce the point before 2:04:00 moving on, I think that we need to be 2:04:02 very careful to consider as many 2:04:04 reasonable implications of our 2:04:06 theological explanations as possible to 2:04:10 minimize the opportunity for a careful 2:04:12 reader or listener to arrive at 2:04:15 confusion rather than clarity. 2:04:18 to return to the multi-will theory of 2:04:21 God's nature. Supporting theologians may 2:04:24 argue that this is a necessary 2:04:26 conclusion due to the reality of 2:04:28 scripture showing us that some of God's 2:04:30 desires do not always line up with what 2:04:33 he effectually wills or as I would 2:04:37 propose it clarified to forcibly wills 2:04:40 into reality. 2:04:42 I don't want to project motive onto 2:04:44 anyone in this instance, but I wonder if 2:04:48 the reason that I have continually found 2:04:50 reformed thinkers using particular 2:04:53 terminology such as effective or 2:04:56 effectual pertaining to the will of God 2:04:59 could have started as a conscious or 2:05:02 subconscious attempt to avoid what I 2:05:05 would say is more intuitive language 2:05:09 such as force or coersse. 2:05:12 due to the negative connotation of such 2:05:15 terms. 2:05:16 That's pure conjecture on my part. 2:05:19 However, since I will use such terms 2:05:22 again for clarity sake, I want to be 2:05:25 clear about my meaning when I apply the 2:05:27 terms force or coers in this context. I 2:05:32 don't mean that God is dragging people 2:05:34 kicking and screaming against their 2:05:35 will, but rather that there is at least 2:05:38 an implication that God is forcibly 2:05:41 changing their will by what is often 2:05:43 referred to as the effectual call, which 2:05:46 cannot be resisted. I have yet to find 2:05:49 what I could consider a sufficient 2:05:52 explanation for why that doesn't 2:05:53 necessarily contradict free will and 2:05:56 genuine loving relationship. 2:05:59 Any way that you word it, if grace is 2:06:02 functionally irresistible, 2:06:04 then I think that its label should have 2:06:06 a negative connotation because a 2:06:09 consistent integration of that idea into 2:06:11 my theology seems to degrade the 2:06:14 goodness of God by rational necessity. 2:06:19 By that I mean that if God effectively 2:06:22 guarantees saving faith in some people 2:06:25 and denies it to others, then it seems 2:06:28 rather unconvincing to argue that this 2:06:31 model preserves the goodness of God as 2:06:34 revealed through scripture. 2:06:36 We could redefine good to simply equal 2:06:39 whatever this alternative moral standard 2:06:41 is, but I don't think that standard fits 2:06:44 the model of goodness presented in 2:06:46 scripture. Any better than a square can 2:06:49 fit into a circle. 2:06:52 functionally overriding human will for a 2:06:54 select group would suggest that God 2:06:57 inexplicably desires some people to do 2:07:00 evil against their will. In which case, 2:07:04 they wouldn't really be individuals with 2:07:06 genuine choices to be responsible for. 2:07:10 I can't hold raindrops accountable for 2:07:12 falling from the sky for the same 2:07:14 reason. They don't have a choice in the 2:07:16 matter because gravity forces the 2:07:18 outcome. 2:07:20 God certainly has the power and 2:07:21 authority to treat us that way. But then 2:07:25 it would seem that he were only 2:07:26 pretending to want genuine loving 2:07:28 relationship with us since love requires 2:07:31 the choice to deny God in order to have 2:07:34 the choice to deny the self which is a 2:07:37 necessity of biblical love most 2:07:40 incredibly demonstrated by Jesus on the 2:07:43 cross. 2:07:45 I simply don't think that the 2:07:47 justifications that I have examined from 2:07:49 reformed theologians attempting to 2:07:51 clarify this issue are sufficient. And 2:07:54 perhaps more importantly, I also think 2:07:56 that there is another explanation which 2:07:59 seems to fit God's revealed nature, 2:08:02 character, and purpose as revealed in 2:08:04 scripture more closely. 2:08:07 I don't think that we need two different 2:08:09 wills. 2:08:10 It seems the simple plain reality to me 2:08:14 that the difference between effecting a 2:08:16 willed outcome and desiring but allowing 2:08:18 another outcome is simply the order of 2:08:22 priorities within the will. Working for 2:08:25 the sake of a third option that allows 2:08:28 the most complete fulfillment of God's 2:08:31 will. 2:08:33 I'm going to explain this idea in three 2:08:35 different ways because I think it is 2:08:37 immensely important and I want to ensure 2:08:40 that it can be fully understood. 2:08:42 If the first explanation seems hard to 2:08:44 follow, refer to the summary explanation 2:08:47 and example that I'll provide 2:08:50 immediately after. 2:08:52 My most thorough explanation of the 2:08:54 conclusion that I'm attempting to 2:08:56 present is as follows. 2:08:59 If affecting a particular willed outcome 2:09:02 precludes a more prioritized willed 2:09:05 outcome, but allowing the prioritized 2:09:08 willed outcome to be affected would not 2:09:11 preclude the first willed outcome, then 2:09:14 the impeccable wisdom of God will act to 2:09:17 pursue the fulfillment of the first 2:09:19 priority so that the entire will can be 2:09:22 most completely satisfied. 2:09:26 In the life of mankind, impatience may 2:09:28 lead to sacrificing a priority for a 2:09:31 lesser outcome when we believe that the 2:09:34 priority will not be met. But perfect 2:09:37 godly wisdom recognizes when acting to 2:09:40 force a lesser outcome will effectively 2:09:43 prevent a better outcome. Or in God's 2:09:46 case, when trying to satisfy one desire 2:09:49 of the will prevents the genuine 2:09:51 satisfaction of the greater will. That's 2:09:55 important since God cannot contradict 2:09:57 himself and he describes his will 2:09:59 singularly as seen in Ephesians 1 11 2:10:04 where the text refers to the council of 2:10:07 his will even while other passages refer 2:10:10 to God with terms indicating plurality 2:10:13 of personhood such as in Isaiah 6:8 2:10:17 where God has said whom shall I send and 2:10:21 who will go for us. 2:10:25 I would summarize the main idea as 2:10:27 follows. 2:10:28 If doing something to cause a desired 2:10:31 result prevents a more desired result, 2:10:34 then through wisdom, one chooses to do 2:10:37 what supports the order of priorities 2:10:40 and satisfies the greater will. For 2:10:43 example, a parent's will can desire a 2:10:47 chore to be done while still choosing to 2:10:49 give a child the opportunity to obey. I 2:10:52 think that this explanation works for 2:10:54 both of the primary scriptural examples 2:10:57 that Dr. Piper used in the 2:10:58 aforementioned article. It seems like 2:11:02 reformed theology doesn't well account 2:11:05 for a single unified will to have the 2:11:08 ability to either desire for something 2:11:10 to occur or desire to force that 2:11:14 something to occur. 2:11:16 Reading or listening to explanations of 2:11:19 reformed theology consistently gives me 2:11:21 the impression that they are presuming 2:11:24 the conclusion that the combination of 2:11:26 both sovereign will and unlimited power 2:11:30 necessitates that God forces every 2:11:33 individual willed outcome. 2:11:37 I think that's an oversimplification of 2:11:39 the concept of will that ironically 2:11:43 results in the overmplification 2:11:46 of the doctrine of faith and the nature 2:11:49 of our relationship with God. 2:11:51 I believe that God has shown us through 2:11:53 the plethora of scriptural evidence that 2:11:56 I've discussed in this episode already 2:11:58 that this is how the council of his will 2:12:00 operates with his wisdom. He wills 2:12:03 different things for different reasons. 2:12:05 He wills kindness because it is innately 2:12:08 good. He wills the crucifixion of Christ 2:12:11 because it brings about good. The brutal 2:12:14 murder of the son of man through 2:12:16 crucifixion wasn't innately good in the 2:12:19 sense that kindness itself is innately 2:12:22 good. Yet God is still using that 2:12:25 atrocity to work out all things for 2:12:28 good. 2:12:29 Therefore, in a sense, it is good that 2:12:32 the crucifixion occurred, even though 2:12:35 the act itself was performed in hatred 2:12:37 by evil people who were actively 2:12:40 rebelling against God. 2:12:42 I believe that understanding is key to 2:12:45 begin to fathom how a good God can in a 2:12:47 sense will or desire something that 2:12:50 seems to contradict another thing which 2:12:52 he also wills or desires. 2:12:56 God's will to allow evil is not because 2:12:59 the of the wickedness along the way, but 2:13:01 because of the goodness of the final 2:13:03 destination. 2:13:05 The final point that I'd like to make 2:13:07 before I move on from Dr. Piper's work 2:13:09 on this topic entirely is in regard to a 2:13:12 statement that he made in a message also 2:13:14 available on desiring God.org called the 2:13:18 Providence of God session 8. In that 2:13:21 message, he said the following. If you 2:13:24 say, "I don't see how God can rule the 2:13:26 will and we still be accountable." I 2:13:29 would simply plead with you to live with 2:13:31 that mystery. I do. End quote. 2:13:36 This is a prime example of the kind of 2:13:38 reasoning that I can't find reason to 2:13:40 agree with. Why would I accept a greater 2:13:44 degree of mystery than I actually find 2:13:47 present in the text of scripture? 2:13:49 Shortly after that quote, he said that 2:13:51 because his conclusion is found in 2:13:54 scripture that it must be true. 2:13:58 Therefore, to think that this conclusion 2:14:00 contradicts scripture is the result of a 2:14:03 philosophical assumption rather than a 2:14:06 logic issue. 2:14:08 In response, I would assert that the 2:14:11 problem with that logic is that it is 2:14:13 ironically dependent on its conclusion, 2:14:16 which is essentially what he asserted 2:14:19 the complaint of contradiction to be. 2:14:24 In essence, the reasoning is circular 2:14:26 because the conclusion must be true for 2:14:29 the reasoning to lead to it. Yet, as 2:14:32 I've endeavored to demonstrate, I 2:14:35 believe that the conclusion is not 2:14:37 necessarily derived from scripture in 2:14:40 the presence of an alternative 2:14:41 explanation that seemingly better fits 2:14:44 the entirety of scripture when compared 2:14:47 to this single reformed doctrine which 2:14:50 only well fits its supposed proof texts. 2:14:54 If I do not grant the presupposition 2:14:57 that his conclusion is true, then by 2:14:59 simple reasoning, his evidence does not 2:15:02 naturally lead to his conclusion. 2:15:05 Maybe I'm missing something here and Dr. 2:15:07 Piper actually brilliantly transcended 2:15:10 my feeble attempt to work this out. 2:15:13 Maybe not. 2:15:15 Either way, I think that at the very 2:15:17 least, a valuable lesson that I have 2:15:19 learned from my time assessing others 2:15:22 work on this topic is that if people 2:15:24 considered with greater weight the 2:15:26 intended implications, 2:15:28 the inherent congruency of the 2:15:31 scriptural meta narrative, the necessary 2:15:34 perfection in the logical reasonings of 2:15:37 our all- knowing God, and the 2:15:39 consistency of God's character, then 2:15:42 they might not disagree so often. in 2:15:45 their interpretations of scripture, 2:15:47 especially where scripture explicitly 2:15:50 interprets itself, which actually occurs 2:15:52 quite often. 2:15:55 At this stage of the discussion, I have 2:15:58 one more counterpoint to my current 2:16:00 theology as it pertains to how we 2:16:03 receive saving grace through faith that 2:16:05 I would like to discuss. And it happens 2:16:07 to also be primarily offered by reformed 2:16:10 theologians in support of the effectual 2:16:13 call of irresistible grace, as they 2:16:15 might say. 2:16:17 That counterpoint is the presence of 2:16:19 scriptures that describe the elect or 2:16:22 chosen people of God in a way that can 2:16:24 in isolation allow a reasonable tur 2:16:27 person to find agreement with the 2:16:29 reformed doctrine of predestination 2:16:33 by which God is not said to simply forno 2:16:37 who will respond of their own creaturely 2:16:40 will to grace but that he actually 2:16:43 determined who would be effectually 2:16:45 called to salvation. 2:16:47 from before the beginning. 2:16:50 That distinction is essentially what 2:16:52 I've already been discussing in this 2:16:54 section, but from another angle, that 2:16:57 being the language of the elect or 2:17:00 chosen people. 2:17:02 However, as with the other proposed 2:17:04 evidences for irresistible grace, 2:17:07 responsible ex Jesus doesn't merely 2:17:10 assess the text in isolation, but 2:17:12 examines the relevant context, however 2:17:15 far it reaches through scripture. 2:17:18 In this case, the pattern of describing 2:17:20 a people as chosen was established in 2:17:23 the early books of the New Testament. 2:17:26 And I believe those examples are 2:17:28 relevant because they should inform our 2:17:30 understanding of God's meaning when he 2:17:32 inspires this pattern of language later 2:17:34 in the New Testament. 2:17:36 So let's examine this long-standing 2:17:39 tradition of covenant language that 2:17:41 began with God electing Israel as his 2:17:44 chosen people to represent him to the 2:17:46 other nations. 2:17:48 In this case, to avoid spending 2:17:50 excessive time in this episode in the 2:17:53 weeds of word studies, I'm going to 2:17:55 explain my conclusions first with 2:17:58 specific examples briefly examined after 2:18:02 to demonstrate how I'm interpreting 2:18:04 them. To clarify yet again that I'm not 2:18:08 inventing novel theology, I will affirm 2:18:10 that I did not originate this idea. 2:18:14 Other men serving as pastors and 2:18:16 theologians in various roles have been 2:18:18 teaching this since long prior to my 2:18:21 first foray into this thicket of debated 2:18:25 interpretations. 2:18:27 I'm explaining it in my own words 2:18:30 because I'm confident that many educated 2:18:33 individuals who may still disagree with 2:18:36 my professed theology of faith in favor 2:18:38 of a predetermined effectual will of 2:18:41 irresistible grace would bring this 2:18:44 exact topic to the table of discussion 2:18:46 if I don't first myself. [snorts] That 2:18:50 said, the argument that I'm in favor of 2:18:52 may be summarized as follows. 2:18:55 Election language in scripture does not 2:18:58 necessarily imply deterministic 2:19:01 individual selection unto salvation in 2:19:04 the sense that God irresistibly 2:19:06 overrides the will of the elect people 2:19:09 to effectively force the reception of 2:19:12 faith. 2:19:13 Much of the biblical background for 2:19:16 election or chosen people language comes 2:19:19 from the historical records of God's 2:19:22 covenantal choosing of a people for 2:19:24 himself, which never meant that all 2:19:27 individuals who are members of the 2:19:29 ethnic people of Israel would be elected 2:19:32 to salvation, nor that only those 2:19:35 naturally born from the bloodline of 2:19:37 Israel could be ultimately incorporated 2:19:40 into God's kingdom. 2:19:42 Therefore, when we read the same God of 2:19:44 the Old Testament speaking in the New 2:19:46 Testament of believers as elect or 2:19:49 chosen people, we should consider the 2:19:52 probability that such language is 2:19:54 drawing from covenant identity and union 2:19:57 with Christ before assuming that it 2:20:00 teaches irresistible determinism. 2:20:04 stated simply, "Because Israel is the 2:20:06 chosen people to whom Christ, the chosen 2:20:09 one, came to offer the ultimate 2:20:11 fulfillment of God's covenant, and 2:20:13 believers are found in Christ. We who 2:20:16 receive faith through the grace of 2:20:19 Christ are adopted into the chosen 2:20:21 people of God, not ethnically 2:20:24 transformed into Israelites, but invited 2:20:26 into the covenant people of God." 2:20:30 Instead of merely taking my word for it, 2:20:32 consider the scriptures themselves. 2:20:35 In Genesis 12, we see that God tells 2:20:38 Abram, later renamed Abraham, that from 2:20:41 him a great nation will arise. In 2:20:44 Genesis 28, God tells Abram's descendant 2:20:47 Jacob, in a dream that through his 2:20:50 descendants, all people of the world 2:20:52 will be blessed. In Genesis 32, God 2:20:57 calls Jacob by the name Israel for the 2:20:59 first time, which is affirmed later in 2:21:02 chapter 35, where God also affirms that 2:21:05 the covenant which God made with Abram 2:21:08 would beffected through the line of 2:21:10 Jacob, now called Israel. Deuteronomy 2:21:14 7:es 6-8 explains that God chose Israel 2:21:17 not because it was a greater people than 2:21:20 the other nations but by grace because 2:21:23 of his love in accordance with the 2:21:25 covenant made with their fathers going 2:21:27 back to Abram. 2:21:29 It also explains in verses 9-2 that 2:21:32 because God will not be lenient with 2:21:34 those who hate him, Israel must be 2:21:37 careful to follow the commands of God so 2:21:39 that through obedience they could 2:21:40 partake in the blessings of the covenant 2:21:43 of steadfast love which God swore to 2:21:46 their fathers. So, the Chronicles of 2:21:49 Israel reveal a pattern of election 2:21:51 language that pertains not directly to 2:21:55 individual salvation, but to covenant 2:21:58 relationship with God. Furthermore, the 2:22:02 histories also demonstrate that many of 2:22:04 the blessings of the covenant are 2:22:06 dependent on obedience as God blessed 2:22:09 the people when they followed and 2:22:11 punished them when they strayed. 2:22:14 Now, if we look to the New Testament, we 2:22:17 will see what I consider to be a 2:22:19 beautiful continuation of this language 2:22:21 that reveals how even a gentile such as 2:22:24 myself can become part of the chosen 2:22:26 people. And the reason does not appear 2:22:29 to be irresistible determinism. 2:22:32 Luke 9:35 in the ESV says that God the 2:22:36 Father names Jesus his chosen one. I 2:22:39 specify that this wording is present in 2:22:41 the ESV only because some translations 2:22:44 such as the KJV may instead say beloved 2:22:47 son according to a different textual 2:22:50 tradition which occurs because of a 2:22:52 variance in some manuscripts. 2:22:55 While I can't verify the weight of this 2:22:58 argument, I've read that this textual 2:23:00 variance is suspected by some to have 2:23:02 occurred due to pressure to harmonize 2:23:05 with the beloved son language present in 2:23:08 other passages such as Matthew 17:5 and 2:23:12 Mark 9:7. 2:23:14 My argument doesn't truly hinge on that 2:23:16 one phrase, so I don't really need to 2:23:18 settle that debate in this discussion. 2:23:20 Although I will say that even if the 2:23:22 original inscription of Luke meant to 2:23:24 say chosen one, this would not 2:23:26 necessarily be an issue because just 2:23:29 before that, even in the same 2:23:31 translation of Luke, it also says this 2:23:34 is my son, a phrase that closely matches 2:23:38 the other two accounts in question. This 2:23:41 could indicate that Matthew and Mark 2:23:43 simply left out the chosen one phrase in 2:23:46 their records. 2:23:48 Now, as we progress, let's slow down for 2:23:52 the last three passages that I want to 2:23:54 read as I close this section. 2:23:58 After following the line of covenant 2:24:00 promises from Abram to Jacob to Israel 2:24:02 and ultimately through Jesus, let's now 2:24:05 consider first Peter 2:es 6-10 which 2:24:09 says, "For it stands in scripture, 2:24:12 behold, I am laying in Zion a stone, a 2:24:15 cornerstone chosen and precious, and 2:24:18 whoever believes in him will not be put 2:24:20 to shame." So the honor is for you who 2:24:23 believe. But for those who do not 2:24:24 believe, the stone that the builders 2:24:26 rejected has become the cornerstone and 2:24:29 a stone of stumbling and a rock of 2:24:31 offense. They stumble because they 2:24:34 disobey the word as they were destined 2:24:36 to do. But you are a chosen race, a 2:24:39 royal priesthood, a holy nation, a 2:24:42 people for his own possession, that you 2:24:45 may proclaim the excellencies of him who 2:24:48 called you out of darkness into his 2:24:50 marvelous light. Once you were not a 2:24:53 people, but now you are God's people. 2:24:57 Once you had not received mercy, but now 2:25:00 you have received mercy. End quote. 2:25:04 There's a lot that can be learned from 2:25:06 this passage, but for the sake of this 2:25:08 discussion, I want to focus on the idea 2:25:10 that this is a particularly clear 2:25:11 example of covenant election language 2:25:14 being applied by Peter in the name of 2:25:16 the God of the Old Testament to the 2:25:18 believing receivers of the New 2:25:20 Testament. And I don't think that we can 2:25:22 narrow the interpretive scope of 2:25:24 application to merely ethnic Jews since 2:25:27 this statement contrasts those who are 2:25:30 or are not chosen with those who do or 2:25:34 do not believe. As is clearly stated in 2:25:37 verse 7. Once you were not a people, now 2:25:40 you are God's people. 2:25:43 God's word applies that truth to the 2:25:45 people of Israel from its humble 2:25:48 beginning under the old covenant. And 2:25:51 scripture also applies that truth to all 2:25:53 believers according to the new covenant 2:25:56 of the blood of Christ, which is the 2:25:58 price of adoption for all believers, 2:26:01 even the Gentiles. In the end, the 2:26:04 people of Israel will be all of mankind 2:26:06 who have chosen to believe in God and 2:26:09 receive the seal of Christ's blood to 2:26:12 enter into the family and house of God. 2:26:17 Before I move on from 1 Peter chapter 2, 2:26:19 I would be remiss to ignore what my 2:26:22 reformed fellows might want to draw 2:26:24 attention to at this moment. That being 2:26:26 the phrase in verse 8 which says they 2:26:29 stumble because they disobey the word as 2:26:32 they were destined to do. I'll deal with 2:26:35 the destined predestined language 2:26:37 shortly when I arrive at chapter 1 of 2:26:39 Ephesians. But for now, I'd like to 2:26:41 point out that even in the presence of 2:26:43 the concept of destiny, Peter's letter 2:26:46 does not frame the contrast between 2:26:48 those who stumble due to disobedience 2:26:51 and those who believe unto salvation as 2:26:53 some being irresistibly caused to 2:26:56 believe while others are denied the 2:26:58 possibility of faith. Again, the 2:27:01 distinction is between those who disobey 2:27:04 and those who believe. 2:27:07 Now let's move on to Galatians 3:es 26- 2:27:12 29 where scripture says, "For in Christ 2:27:16 Jesus, you are all sons of God through 2:27:18 faith. For as many of you as were 2:27:21 baptized into Christ have put on Christ. 2:27:24 There is neither Jew nor Greek. There is 2:27:26 neither slave nor free. There is no male 2:27:29 and female. For you are all one in 2:27:32 Christ. And if you are Christ's, then 2:27:34 you are Abraham's offspring, heirs 2:27:37 according to promise. 2:27:40 End quote. 2:27:42 According to the Gospel of Christ, all 2:27:44 who are baptized into Christ's death and 2:27:47 resurrection have taken upon themselves 2:27:49 in a spiritual manner the identity of 2:27:52 Christ and are Abraham's offspring 2:27:54 according to God's covenant that began 2:27:57 with Abram. Therefore, it makes sense 2:28:00 that God uses covenantal language to 2:28:03 describe those marked by the blood of 2:28:04 the lamb as the people of Israel whom 2:28:07 the angel of death will not destroy. 2:28:10 This is a typological echo of the story 2:28:13 of God saving his chosen people in Egypt 2:28:16 when he commanded them to mark their 2:28:18 houses with the blood of a lamb so that 2:28:20 they would receive the mercy of being 2:28:23 passed over on the night of judgment 2:28:25 when death came for the sons of the 2:28:27 disobedient. 2:28:30 It's parallel stories like this between 2:28:33 the Old and New Testaments that reveal 2:28:35 the impeccable planning of God's wisdom. 2:28:39 He knew all along that the story of 2:28:41 Israel's salvation from Egypt would 2:28:43 foreshadow the final salvation of the 2:28:46 people elected to eternity in the new 2:28:49 Jerusalem. 2:28:50 Those to whom the blood of the lamb is 2:28:52 applied. 2:28:54 Though I am ethnically a Gentile, I have 2:28:57 been spiritually adopted into the people 2:29:00 of Israel with all other true believers 2:29:03 because there is no Jew or Gentile in 2:29:05 Christ. And to that I say hallelujah and 2:29:09 amen. 2:29:12 Finally, I have but one more supposed 2:29:15 kryptonite of prevenient grace to 2:29:17 identify so that I can explain why it 2:29:20 actually complements my theology better 2:29:24 than it may at first seem depending on 2:29:27 how you may have been conditioned to 2:29:29 understand it. 2:29:32 In Ephesians 1:es 3-14, 2:29:36 we have one of the grandest depictions 2:29:39 of our grafting into the body of Christ, 2:29:42 which is admittedly considered by some 2:29:44 to be strong evidence against the model 2:29:47 of faith that I'm ultimately supporting 2:29:50 in this episode. After I read it, I'll 2:29:53 explain why I think it's not the problem 2:29:55 for pervenient grace that some people 2:29:58 have made it out to be. And that un that 2:30:02 understanding comes largely due to the 2:30:04 recurring themes that I that I discussed 2:30:07 regarding the last several biblical 2:30:09 references. 2:30:12 Consider this especially beautiful 2:30:15 passage of scripture with me. 2:30:17 Blessed be the God and Father of our 2:30:20 Lord Jesus Christ, who has blessed us in 2:30:22 Christ with every spiritual blessing in 2:30:25 the heavenly places, even as he chose us 2:30:29 in him before the foundation of the 2:30:31 world, that we should be holy and 2:30:33 blameless before him. In love, he 2:30:36 predestined us for adoption to himself 2:30:39 as sons through Jesus Christ, according 2:30:42 to the purpose of his will, to the 2:30:44 praise of his glorious grace, with which 2:30:47 he has blessed us in the beloved. In him 2:30:51 we have redemption through his blood, 2:30:53 the forgiveness of our trespasses, 2:30:56 according to the riches of his grace, 2:30:58 which he lavished on us in all wisdom 2:31:00 and insight, making known to us the 2:31:04 mystery of his will, according to his 2:31:06 purpose, which he set forth in Christ as 2:31:09 a plan for the fullness of time to unite 2:31:12 all things in Christ, things in heaven 2:31:14 and things on earth in him. In him we 2:31:18 have obtained an inheritance, having 2:31:20 been predestined according to the 2:31:22 purpose of him who works all things 2:31:25 according to the counsel of his will. So 2:31:28 that we who were the first to hope in 2:31:30 Christ might be to the praise of his 2:31:33 glory. In him you also when you heard 2:31:36 the word of truth, the gospel of your 2:31:39 salvation and believed in him were 2:31:42 sealed with the promised Holy Spirit who 2:31:45 is the guarantee of our inheritance 2:31:47 until we acquire possession of it to the 2:31:50 praise of his glory. 2:31:53 End quote. 2:31:56 Notice again that scripture explains 2:31:58 exactly how it is that we are chosen by 2:32:02 revealing that believers are chosen in 2:32:04 Christ. 2:32:06 I believe that I've already established 2:32:09 through the previous examples how that 2:32:12 fact reveals the means by which election 2:32:15 language is ultimately and finally 2:32:18 applied in the fullest sense as God 2:32:20 intended. 2:32:22 All people are blessed through Abram, 2:32:24 Jacob, and Israel because of God the Son 2:32:28 who was incarnated as the God man into 2:32:31 the bloodline of Abram to offer adoption 2:32:34 into the covenant people of God to all 2:32:38 people. 2:32:40 Now, I should discuss the obvious word 2:32:44 in this translation that I'm sure every 2:32:46 proponent of irresistible grace would 2:32:48 latch on to. That being the word 2:32:51 predestined. 2:32:52 What does it mean that God predestined 2:32:55 those found in Christ for adoption? 2:32:58 However we interpret that idea, if we 2:33:01 choose to do the work of interpretation 2:33:02 at all, as opposed to simply following 2:33:05 God's clear commands and considering the 2:33:08 rest of mystery, we must be consistent 2:33:11 with everything else that is revealed in 2:33:13 scripture because scripture is the word 2:33:15 of God and therefore cannot be in 2:33:17 contradiction with itself. 2:33:20 It would be easy to say that the 2:33:21 presence of the word predestined must 2:33:24 imply effectual will and irresistible 2:33:27 grace. But I think yet again there is a 2:33:30 simple explanation that fits more 2:33:33 reasonably with God's character and 2:33:35 nature as revealed in scripture. 2:33:37 First note that in Ephesians Paul did 2:33:41 not speak of predestination as an 2:33:43 abstract mechanism detached from Christ. 2:33:47 Rather, Paul says that we are chosen in 2:33:50 him, Jesus Christ, and predestined for 2:33:53 adop adoption through Christ, so that 2:33:57 those who believe in him would be sealed 2:33:59 with the Holy Spirit, as it says in 2:34:01 verse 13. 2:34:04 Within this divinely inspired text, Paul 2:34:07 guarded against a misinterpretation of 2:34:10 predestination by providing the 2:34:12 condition of belief within the immediate 2:34:16 context. 2:34:17 Thus, it seems more probable than 2:34:20 plausible that we should understand 2:34:23 God's predestination of all believers as 2:34:26 God's eternal purpose to save those who 2:34:28 would, as it says in the very same 2:34:31 passage, believe in Christ from hearing 2:34:34 the gospel and be adopted into the 2:34:37 chosen people, the new Jerusalem, the 2:34:40 body of Christ. 2:34:43 The fact that God describes his choosing 2:34:46 of those found in Christ harmonizes 2:34:49 beautifully with his description of the 2:34:52 church as the body of Christ, those who 2:34:55 put on Christ, as we just read in 2:34:58 Galatians 3:27. 2:35:00 It can be tempting to treat a word as 2:35:02 the key that unlocks a verse or a verse 2:35:05 is the key that unlocks a passage. But 2:35:08 if that's the only approach that we use 2:35:10 for interpretation, then we are blinding 2:35:13 ourselves to the clarity that context 2:35:15 provides for those key verses and words. 2:35:19 Stated simply, we can't specify the 2:35:22 scope of a word's intended meaning 2:35:24 without considering the implicit 2:35:27 defining limitations of its related 2:35:30 context. 2:35:32 This entire theological model of will, 2:35:35 grace, and faith also aligns 2:35:38 harmoniously with God's goodness and 2:35:41 purpose for genuine loving relationship, 2:35:43 which is a critical belief for the 2:35:45 Christian faith. Because as God himself 2:35:47 says, he truly is love and he truly does 2:35:51 love us even while we were yet still 2:35:54 unclean sinners. 2:35:57 Obviously, God's omniscience requires 2:36:00 that he fornows who will respond 2:36:03 obediently with faith. Yet, the emphasis 2:36:06 of this passage, which some might 2:36:09 consider a pillar of reformed sotiology, 2:36:12 is not on some mysterious hidden 2:36:15 mechanism that irresistibly causes 2:36:17 faith. Rather, the emphasis is on the 2:36:22 eternal plan of God fulfilled in Christ 2:36:24 and applied to those who hear the 2:36:26 gospel, believe the truth, and respond 2:36:29 faithfully to receive the seal of the 2:36:32 Holy Spirit. 2:36:34 The emphasis is on our reception of the 2:36:36 gift of faith more so than the gifted 2:36:40 nature of faith. 2:36:44 While I think that all I've discussed 2:36:46 thus far is sufficient to make the 2:36:48 necessary points for this section 2:36:50 pertaining to the biblical emphasis on 2:36:52 reception, I'd like to make a final, 2:36:55 perhaps relatively minor point of 2:36:57 philosophical conjecture. 2:37:00 This theory is less concrete by far than 2:37:03 most of my other lines of reasoning, but 2:37:06 I haven't been able to disprove it to 2:37:08 myself thus far. So, it seems to me to 2:37:11 remain an interesting possibility at the 2:37:14 very least. 2:37:16 I'm also not certain whether I'm the 2:37:18 first person to try to explain it 2:37:19 exactly this way. So, if this idea is 2:37:23 too novel for comfort, please take it 2:37:26 with a grain of salt. That said, here's 2:37:29 my theory. 2:37:31 Because God is eternal, we know that he 2:37:33 is not bound by the limits of time, 2:37:36 which is how he can be truly omnisient. 2:37:40 Since we know that he is eternal and 2:37:42 omnisient, we can also know that he has 2:37:45 always known who would respond to his 2:37:48 grace faithfully and take part in the 2:37:50 salvation offered through Christ. 2:37:54 Therefore, I believe it fair to propose 2:37:57 that in some sense he could say that he 2:38:00 predestines those who will respond with 2:38:03 faith by the very act of choosing to 2:38:05 create them. In essence, knowing what 2:38:09 will happen as a consequence of an 2:38:11 action followed by choosing to perform 2:38:14 that action is in some sense 2:38:17 predetermining the outcome. 2:38:20 Of course, this logic doesn't work if 2:38:22 you assert a very limited definition of 2:38:25 predestination, which requires directly 2:38:29 manipulating the variables at all times 2:38:32 to enforce the outcome 2:38:34 rather than including the possibility of 2:38:37 making strategically planned choices 2:38:40 that are known to lead to the desired 2:38:43 outcome. 2:38:44 However, I believe that I can fairly use 2:38:47 the term this way because I think that 2:38:49 to define predestination in a way that 2:38:52 necessarily disproves this hypothesis by 2:38:56 definition alone would require affirming 2:38:59 conclusions that I have already through 2:39:02 this episode labored to sufficiently 2:39:04 counter with better explanations. 2:39:07 To further explain my meaning with a 2:39:10 nons supernatural example that mirrors 2:39:13 imagery used by Jesus himself as 2:39:15 recorded in the gospel pertaining to 2:39:17 salvation, I could say the following. 2:39:20 If you are certain that a person will 2:39:22 freely accept an invitation to your 2:39:24 wedding if it is genuinely offered and 2:39:28 you then choose to send that invitation, 2:39:30 you have in some sense predetermined or 2:39:33 predestined that the person will be 2:39:35 present at the wedding without having to 2:39:38 coersse or force them through the door. 2:39:41 At the very least, you have 2:39:44 predetermined their acceptance of the 2:39:46 invitation, even if something happens 2:39:49 that prevents them from actually making 2:39:51 it there. 2:39:55 Knowing what choice another will make in 2:39:57 response to your offer does not mean 2:40:00 that your predestination of the outcome 2:40:03 is forcibly deterministic 2:40:05 like the theoretical mechanism of 2:40:08 irresistible grace is. As long as the 2:40:11 person still has the genuine ability to 2:40:13 reject the offer, you are simply 2:40:16 effecting your will through taking the 2:40:18 steps that you know will lead to the 2:40:21 desired outcome. Likewise, God has 2:40:24 effected his will to save the body of 2:40:26 Christ by taking the steps that he knew 2:40:29 would result in his chosen people being 2:40:32 found in Christ in order to predestin 2:40:35 them for salvation. 2:40:38 If all of that seems like nonsense to 2:40:40 you, that's all right. We don't have to 2:40:43 agree on the mechanistic explanation of 2:40:46 this particular matter to follow the 2:40:48 explicit direct commands of God and be 2:40:51 confident that we will have all of our 2:40:53 theology worked out together after we 2:40:56 are resurrected into the coming perfect 2:40:58 eternity in the presence of God. 2:41:01 In fact, as I implied earlier, I believe 2:41:04 that if we simply focus on the clear 2:41:06 commands of God in scripture and 2:41:08 committed all else that remains to be 2:41:10 considered unattainable mystery in this 2:41:13 life, then we would still have 2:41:15 everything that we need for practical 2:41:17 daily living and salvation according to 2:41:20 God's gospel of faith in Christ. 2:41:24 That's not going to stop me personally 2:41:27 from attempting to seek the more elusive 2:41:29 wisdoms and mysteries of scripture, 2:41:32 but I won't pretend that everyone else 2:41:34 in the world is required to dive this 2:41:36 deep into the weeds or agree with all of 2:41:39 my particular conclusions. 2:41:42 If at any point after this you decide 2:41:44 that you will hold to the doctrine of 2:41:45 irresistible grace in spite of the case 2:41:48 that I or anyone else may present for a 2:41:51 different theological model, then I 2:41:53 would finally at least beg you to 2:41:55 remember to be encouraged by the 2:41:58 assurance that this is not an issue 2:42:00 which I would consider breaking 2:42:02 fellowship over. 2:42:04 Furthermore, as Dr. Piper has suggested 2:42:07 in some of the material that I studied 2:42:09 for this project and in accordance with 2:42:12 James 4:12, "It is not our place to know 2:42:16 who is elected." 2:42:18 Even if you believe in an effectual 2:42:20 calling that is applied selectively by 2:42:23 irresistible grace without the 2:42:25 functionally present ability to resist 2:42:28 through independent will, you should not 2:42:30 try to determine for yourself who may or 2:42:34 may not be called. 2:42:36 You should not pick and choose to whom 2:42:38 the gospel should be shared, to whom it 2:42:41 should be evangelized or discipled based 2:42:43 on your own judgment, of who might be 2:42:46 one of the elect or chosen. 2:42:49 It's not our job to judge whether a 2:42:51 person is one of the elect. That's for 2:42:53 God and God alone to judge. There is but 2:42:56 one lawgiver and judge and you are not 2:42:59 him. To conclude this section in which 2:43:02 I've attempted to explain the emphasis 2:43:05 on the reception of the gift of faith 2:43:08 found throughout scripture, I will note 2:43:10 that while I think the effectual will 2:43:12 and irresistible grace doctrines are 2:43:15 inconsistent with God's expressed desire 2:43:19 that all know the truth, his universal 2:43:22 call to faith, the great commission, and 2:43:25 the meta narrative of scripture in 2:43:27 general. 2:43:28 I know that my reformed brothers and 2:43:30 sisters in Christ generally still affirm 2:43:33 the unambiguous command to preach the 2:43:36 gospel to all people, to disciple those 2:43:38 who choose to believe, and to leave the 2:43:40 rest of God. That's enough for me to 2:43:43 cross the aisle on this matter and 2:43:45 cooperate with our shared purpose to go 2:43:47 forth and do the will of God, however it 2:43:50 is that we think his will is effectively 2:43:52 applied within our experience of time. 2:44:01 Before I address works and boasting, I 2:44:04 want to first pivot to a brief 2:44:05 discussion of proximity or association. 2:44:09 Most people who have attended a local 2:44:11 church body very often probably 2:44:13 recognize that there is a seemingly 2:44:15 everpresent category of people that some 2:44:19 have called pew sitters or spiritually 2:44:22 lukewarm people who seem to be Christian 2:44:24 in name only. 2:44:27 These people tend to attend church 2:44:29 services at least somewhat regularly but 2:44:32 they also tend to not really immerse 2:44:34 themselves in the life and work of the 2:44:37 church. 2:44:38 However, what I think is even more 2:44:41 concerning than those whom we may feel 2:44:43 relatively confident identifying are 2:44:47 those who put on a show that will fool 2:44:49 all but the most discerning, even if 2:44:52 they can never fool God, who judges the 2:44:55 heart with perfect clarity. Some, such 2:44:58 as Judas a Scariot, may seem closer to 2:45:01 Jesus, closer to holiness and 2:45:04 righteousness than nearly anyone else 2:45:06 you've ever witnessed, until the mask 2:45:09 slips and they're revealed to be a 2:45:12 deceiving charlatan, a betrayer, an 2:45:15 apostate. 2:45:17 I think that Judas is the clearest 2:45:19 example of someone being called by Jesus 2:45:21 to faith in every way that we can 2:45:24 observe and yet ultimately choosing to 2:45:27 reject the gospel. 2:45:29 Not only did he receive his call to 2:45:31 disciplehip face to face with his 2:45:34 incarnated God and Messiah, he walked 2:45:37 with Jesus, heard his teachings, 2:45:40 witnessed his miracles firsthand, 2:45:43 shared in the ministry of the original 2:45:45 12 apostles, and was warned by Jesus 2:45:48 himself of the impending betrayal, 2:45:50 death, and resurrection. 2:45:53 Yet still, Judas ultimately betrayed 2:45:56 Jesus to the cross, committing one of 2:45:58 the greatest atrocities in all human 2:46:01 history by effectively sending the 2:46:03 Messiah of all mankind to the most 2:46:06 humiliating form of torturous execution 2:46:09 in that historical era. 2:46:12 If Judas the betrayer was not justified 2:46:15 by his position among the disciples of 2:46:17 Jesus, then we must recognize that 2:46:20 church attendance and spiritual titles 2:46:23 cannot impart moral holiness or faith 2:46:27 unto salvation. 2:46:30 A person can stand near the light and 2:46:32 still love the darkness, hear the words 2:46:35 of Christ without trusting the heart of 2:46:37 Christ, participate outwardly with 2:46:40 Christian activities, and yet remain 2:46:43 inwardly surrendered to their sin. 2:46:46 The example of Judas teaches a sobering 2:46:48 reality regarding the God who calls us 2:46:51 to faith. that is that he does not 2:46:54 confuse proximity with union or outward 2:46:57 participation with inward surrender. 2:47:01 This lesson emphasizes the need for a 2:47:03 genuine transformation of the soul 2:47:05 through spiritual rebirth in response to 2:47:07 the call of our savior. 2:47:10 My primary reason for bringing this to 2:47:13 the discussion is the following 2:47:14 cautionary recommendation. 2:47:17 I would urge all to recognize that any 2:47:20 doctrine of faith and means of teaching 2:47:23 and explaining it that we subscribe to 2:47:26 must preserve the caution of Judas's 2:47:28 example. 2:47:30 Unfortunately, 2:47:32 I think it's safe to say that our 2:47:34 churches still regularly shelter people 2:47:37 who are doing little more than walking 2:47:39 their dry bones in and out of the doors 2:47:42 without ever drinking from the spring of 2:47:44 living water. 2:47:46 You cannot quench your thirst just by 2:47:48 standing near the water, gazing a 2:47:51 reflection in it, or even submerging 2:47:53 your hand in it. You have to drink it to 2:47:56 internalize it. That also doesn't make 2:48:00 the act of drinking the saving agent 2:48:02 that remains with the living water 2:48:04 itself. More on that in the next 2:48:06 section. Before we get to that though, 2:48:09 consider what John 1 11-13 says 2:48:14 regarding Jesus Christ our savior. 2:48:18 He came to his own and his own people 2:48:21 did not receive him. But to all who did 2:48:23 receive him, who believed in his name, 2:48:26 he gave the right to become children of 2:48:28 God, who were born not of blood, nor of 2:48:31 the will of the flesh, nor of the will 2:48:33 of man, but of God. End quote. 2:48:38 It was not those who were considered his 2:48:40 people by proximity or blood that were 2:48:43 given the right to become children of 2:48:44 God, but those who believe in him. 2:48:47 Proximity to righteousness does not 2:48:50 impart holiness. 2:48:52 Internalizing righteousness through 2:48:54 faith, which leads to the indwelling of 2:48:56 the Holy Spirit, is the only means of 2:48:58 acquiring righteousness that justifies 2:49:01 one to God according to his will as 2:49:04 revealed in scripture. 2:49:09 The final aspect of faith that I think 2:49:11 needs to be addressed at this point is 2:49:13 the productive nature of faith beyond 2:49:16 merely the miracle of internal spiritual 2:49:18 rebirth leading to ultimate salvation. 2:49:22 That miracle is critically important of 2:49:24 course but also not the full picture of 2:49:27 faith's transformative effects in a 2:49:29 believer's life. Genuine faith should 2:49:32 also produce external fruit that can 2:49:34 bless those around us and show them that 2:49:37 there is a meaningful difference between 2:49:38 a dead life shackled to sin and the 2:49:41 productive freedom that is found in 2:49:43 Christ. 2:49:44 That said, the presence of fruit from 2:49:47 good works driven by faith does not 2:49:49 allow us to boast in our works, which I 2:49:52 believe would include the practice of 2:49:54 considering our works in any way 2:49:56 contributing to our justification before 2:49:59 God for salvation. 2:50:02 The reality of faith precluding boasting 2:50:05 testifies of a God who will not share 2:50:07 the glory of salvation with human merit 2:50:10 and yet will not leave his people's 2:50:12 lives barren after spiritual rebirth. 2:50:16 Consider the following a succinct 2:50:18 version of the conclusion that I'm next 2:50:20 going to trace the definition of through 2:50:22 scripture. 2:50:23 If faith is like a trophy that you earn 2:50:26 through your own good works, it has been 2:50:28 misunderstood. 2:50:30 It cannot boast in itself without 2:50:32 ceasing to be faith as defined by God's 2:50:35 word. The fruit of faith is good works 2:50:38 beginning with the Holy Spirit's work in 2:50:40 you which overflows into the rest of 2:50:42 your life. And the fruit that comes from 2:50:45 your good works is reflective of the 2:50:47 inherent goodness of God and his genuine 2:50:50 transformation of your life. Human faith 2:50:54 that boasts in itself has turned its 2:50:56 attention from the giver to the 2:50:58 receiver. Aside from reinforcing the 2:51:01 gifted nature of faith, this 2:51:03 understanding guards against any 2:51:05 doctrine of faith that regards works as 2:51:08 meritorious justification contributing 2:51:11 to our salvation. 2:51:13 The identity of Christ applied to us 2:51:16 through his blood is the only 2:51:18 justification that we need. 2:51:21 It is sufficient to cover all sins of 2:51:24 all people, no matter the timing or 2:51:27 severity. 2:51:29 Consider with me the thesis containing 2:51:31 passage of this topic found in Ephesians 2:51:35 2:es 8-10. 2:51:38 In this passage, the word of God says, 2:51:41 "By grace you have been saved through 2:51:43 faith, and this is not your own doing. 2:51:45 It is the gift of God, not a result of 2:51:48 works, so that no one may boast. For we 2:51:51 are his workmanship, created in Christ 2:51:54 Jesus for good works, which God prepared 2:51:57 beforehand that we should walk in them." 2:52:00 End quote. 2:52:02 We are saved by grace through faith. And 2:52:05 yet this is not a result of our work, 2:52:08 but a gift of God, so that no one may 2:52:11 boast in themselves, but only in Christ. 2:52:16 Furthermore, scripture does not pit 2:52:18 faith against good works as though good 2:52:20 works are evil. 2:52:22 Truly good works are indeed good by 2:52:25 definition, but not meritorious or 2:52:28 meriting more grace for us because they 2:52:30 cannot wash the stain of sin which 2:52:32 requires the blood of Jesus. 2:52:35 What scripture does pit faith against is 2:52:38 boasting, earning, and justification 2:52:42 from ourselves. 2:52:44 And as we see in Ephesians 2, it then 2:52:46 immediately tells us that those saved by 2:52:49 grace through faith are also created for 2:52:52 good works. Thus, we must keep the 2:52:55 separation clear in our doctrine between 2:52:58 what good works do and do not 2:53:01 accomplish. 2:53:02 They are the fruit of faith, not the 2:53:04 cause of faith. They show people 2:53:07 evidence of our salvation, but they do 2:53:09 not earn that salvation. 2:53:12 While I think Ephesians is clear enough 2:53:14 when it says that salvation is not our 2:53:16 own doing, not from our works and a gift 2:53:19 from God, there's one slightly more 2:53:21 subtle element of proof hiding in the 2:53:23 shadow of those monumental truths. That 2:53:27 is what it positively affirms about good 2:53:30 works, which is that we are created in 2:53:32 Christ for them. I think it's clear that 2:53:36 created in Christ refers to the 2:53:38 spiritual rebirth which we know is 2:53:40 performed by the Holy Spirit as a 2:53:42 consequence of faith in Christ. 2:53:45 So aside from the obvious appeal to the 2:53:48 gifted nature of faith, Ephesians also 2:53:51 seems to imply that we are made ready 2:53:53 for good works through being saved. Not 2:53:57 partially saved, not saved until we sin 2:54:00 again, but just saved by grace through 2:54:04 faith so that no one may boast. 2:54:07 The force of the position expressed in 2:54:10 these scriptures outweighs any mental 2:54:13 gymnastics that we could perform in an 2:54:15 attempt to understand faith as a 2:54:17 meritorious work of humanity in the 2:54:20 context of this discussion. In fact, if 2:54:23 you want to consider faith as a work, 2:54:25 then according to scripture, it seems 2:54:27 that you must consider it a work of God 2:54:29 freely given to you, as is well 2:54:32 established by the gifted nature of 2:54:34 faith that I attempted to explain in the 2:54:36 fourth section of this episode. 2:54:40 I know that some theologians, especially 2:54:42 those attempting to maintain the Roman 2:54:45 Catholic tradition, have tried to 2:54:47 distinguish initial justification from 2:54:50 final justification. in a way that gives 2:54:52 human works a role in our justification 2:54:56 unto salvation. But I just don't see how 2:54:58 the reasoning can survive the force of 2:55:01 the plain reading of scriptures such as 2:55:03 Romans 3, Romans 4, and Ephesians 2. 2:55:08 Even when considering the argument as 2:55:10 explained by some Catholic apologists, 2:55:13 the validity of the reasoning seems 2:55:14 empowered not by the unquestionable 2:55:17 authority of God's word so much as the 2:55:19 human authority of the papacy. And if 2:55:22 you would say that those are necessarily 2:55:24 one and the same, then I wonder how you 2:55:27 can justify the contradiction between 2:55:29 the two. 2:55:31 Even Roman Catholic history as recorded 2:55:34 by the Church of Rome itself contains 2:55:37 formally recognized cases where a pope's 2:55:40 handling of doctrine was later condemned 2:55:42 by church authority and that 2:55:44 condemnation later confirmed by another 2:55:47 pope. 2:55:49 One specific example is Pope Honorus the 2:55:52 first who was anatized by the sixth 2:55:55 ecumenical council which was affirmed by 2:55:58 Pope Leo II. 2:56:02 Roman Catholic apologists may point out 2:56:04 that his story does not meet inclusion 2:56:06 criteria for the later definition of an 2:56:10 ex cathedral. Papal statement being 2:56:13 recanted or more simply an authoritative 2:56:17 definition of doctrine meant to bind the 2:56:20 entire church being tossed out. But that 2:56:23 is precisely my point. Never mind the 2:56:27 concern regarding the claim of 2:56:29 divinelyapp appointed authority for an 2:56:32 office where one can be so wrong in 2:56:35 their theology that they are 2:56:37 anathematized while supposedly remaining 2:56:40 infallibly correct on all specifically 2:56:44 defined authoritative decrees. Papal 2:56:48 explanation and church tradition in any 2:56:51 case must not be treated as identical or 2:56:54 equal to the unquestionable authority of 2:56:57 God's inspired word. We must not deviate 2:57:01 from the plain truths of scripture to 2:57:03 align with doctrines that seem to 2:57:05 require non-scriptural sources to 2:57:08 construct. 2:57:11 Consider with me now Romans 3:es 23- 28. 2:57:18 which says, "All have sinned and fall 2:57:20 short of the glory of God and are 2:57:22 justified by his grace as a gift through 2:57:25 the redemption that is in Christ Jesus, 2:57:27 whom God put forward as a propitiation 2:57:30 by his blood to be received by faith. 2:57:33 This was to show God's righteousness 2:57:35 because in his divine forbearance, he 2:57:37 had passed over former sins. It was to 2:57:40 show his righteousness at the present 2:57:42 time so that he might be just and the 2:57:44 justifier of the one who has faith in 2:57:47 Jesus. Then what becomes of our 2:57:49 boasting? It is excluded by what kind of 2:57:52 law? By a law of works? No. But by the 2:57:56 law of faith? For we hold that one is 2:57:59 justified by faith apart from works of 2:58:02 the law. End quote. 2:58:05 Consider verse 27 for a moment. A law of 2:58:09 works would allow the possibility for us 2:58:11 to boast in ourselves because it would 2:58:13 require that we are saved by our earned 2:58:15 righteousness, our own meritorious 2:58:18 works. The problem with this kind of law 2:58:22 is that it's the kind of law which 2:58:23 Israel was given in the Old Testament in 2:58:26 order to show us God's standard and 2:58:29 prove for all time that no man will be 2:58:32 able to stand on his own works. Because 2:58:36 as it says in the first verse of this 2:58:38 reference, verse 23, all have sinned and 2:58:41 fall short of the glory of God. 2:58:45 Works only work for whoever has never 2:58:48 sinned. And unless you are Jesus Christ, 2:58:52 that is not you. 2:58:54 Therefore, your only recourse for 2:58:56 salvation from sin is the gift of faith. 2:59:00 Consider the following comment from 2:59:04 Romans 4:es 1-1. 2:59:08 What then shall we say was gained by 2:59:11 Abraham, our forefather according to the 2:59:13 flesh? For if Abraham was justified by 2:59:16 works, he has something to boast about, 2:59:18 but not before God. For what does the 2:59:20 scripture say? Abraham believed God and 2:59:23 it was counted to him as righteousness. 2:59:27 Now to the one who works, his wages are 2:59:29 not counted as a gift, but as his due. 2:59:32 And to the one who does not work, but 2:59:34 believes in him who justifies the 2:59:36 ungodly, his faith is counted as 2:59:38 righteousness. Just as David also speaks 2:59:42 of the blessing of the one to whom God 2:59:44 counts righteousness apart from works, 2:59:47 blessed are those whose lawless deeds 2:59:49 are forgiven and whose sins are covered. 2:59:52 Blessed is the man against whom the Lord 2:59:55 will not count his sin. 2:59:58 Is this blessing then only for the 3:00:00 circumcised or also for the 3:00:02 uncircumcised? For we say that faith was 3:00:05 counted to Abraham as righteousness. How 3:00:08 then was it counted to him? Was it 3:00:10 before or after he had been circumcised? 3:00:12 It was not after but before he was 3:00:15 circumcised. He received the sign of 3:00:17 circumcision as a seal of the 3:00:20 righteousness that he had by faith while 3:00:23 he was still uncircumcised. 3:00:26 End quote. So Abraham's righteousness 3:00:29 came from believing God, trusting in 3:00:32 God, having faith in God. Faith is not a 3:00:35 gift if it is earned because what is 3:00:37 earned is a wage. And as it says in 3:00:40 verse 5, the one who does not work but 3:00:42 believes in God is counted as righteous. 3:00:46 There's no wiggle room in the Bible for 3:00:48 partial justification. It's just not in 3:00:51 the text. 3:00:53 Abram wasn't counted partially righteous 3:00:56 by belief. He was counted righteous. 3:00:59 Period. 3:01:02 Folks, this passage precludes any 3:01:05 involvement of work in any kind of 3:01:08 salvific justification before God 3:01:10 because it says that the one who does 3:01:11 not work is still considered justified 3:01:14 by faith. 3:01:15 How can one have faith without 3:01:17 performing any work and yet still 3:01:20 consider faith a work? You cannot 3:01:24 because it doesn't logically follow by 3:01:26 any stretch of the imagination according 3:01:28 to the plain biblical definitions. 3:01:33 As was pointed out in verse 11, the sign 3:01:35 of faith, the work of circumcision in 3:01:38 this case, came after faith was acquired 3:01:41 and considered a seal of the 3:01:43 righteousness imparted by faith. A seal 3:01:46 is a sign of a preexisting reality, not 3:01:50 a causal factor of a new reality. A king 3:01:54 does not have authority because he has a 3:01:56 seal. His seal has authority because he 3:02:00 is a king. Consider 3:02:03 with me two more quick references to 3:02:06 hammer in the final nails in the coffin 3:02:08 of meritorious works for justification 3:02:11 prior to wrapping up with a bow on the 3:02:13 concept of boasting in Christ. 3:02:16 1 Corinthians 1:28-31 3:02:20 says that God chose what is low and 3:02:23 despised in the world, even things that 3:02:25 are not, to bring to nothing things that 3:02:28 are, so that no human being might boast 3:02:31 in the presence of God. And because of 3:02:34 him, you are in Christ Jesus, who became 3:02:36 to us wisdom from God, righteousness, 3:02:39 and sanctification, and redemption. 3:02:43 so that as it is written, "Let the one 3:02:45 who boasts boast in the Lord." 3:02:49 End quote. 3:02:51 If you think that Christ's blood is not 3:02:53 enough and your good works are part of 3:02:56 your final justification before Christ, 3:02:59 then you are contradicting 1 Corinthians 3:03:01 1:29, which says that no human will 3:03:04 boast in the presence of God. Because if 3:03:06 any part of your justification is by 3:03:09 your own merit, then you would be able 3:03:12 to boast on at least that merit. 3:03:16 Furthermore, this passage also tells us 3:03:20 what we can boast in, and that is the 3:03:22 Lord and Savior, God the Son, the one 3:03:26 who actually merits our justification 3:03:29 before God the Father. 3:03:32 Consider 3:03:33 also Galatians 6 14-15 which says the 3:03:38 following. Far be it for me to boast 3:03:41 except in the cross of our Lord Jesus 3:03:43 Christ by which the world has been 3:03:46 crucified to me and I to the world. For 3:03:49 neither circumcision counts for anything 3:03:52 nor uncircumcision but a new creation. 3:03:56 End quote. 3:03:58 I believe that the new creation phrase 3:04:00 in verse 15 is referencing the same 3:04:03 reality of spiritual rebirth which 3:04:06 Ephesians 2:10 refers to as created in 3:04:09 Christ. 3:04:12 Both the passage in 1 Corinthians and 3:04:15 Galatians 6 are reflected in this 3:04:17 statement from Galatians 5:6 3:04:20 which says in Christ Jesus neither 3:04:23 circumcision nor uncircumcision counts 3:04:26 for anything but only faith working 3:04:29 through love. 3:04:31 Do you see the parallel ideas presented 3:04:34 in these passages? 3:04:37 Galatians 5 and 6 in particular treat 3:04:40 circumcision status, the outward works 3:04:43 in this context as irrelevant, a zero 3:04:47 sum in the analogical formula for 3:04:49 salvation. 3:04:51 What matters is described by the 3:04:53 differing parallel descriptions which 3:04:55 all point to the same prerequisite. 3:04:58 Reduce these statements to algebraic 3:05:00 formulations for a moment. If a + b 3:05:04 equals c and a + b= c, then a + b= c. If 3:05:10 b equals circumcised or not and c equals 3:05:13 salvation, then what is a in this 3:05:17 context? A is the variable wording 3:05:20 between these texts which describes what 3:05:23 is missing from our works. It is the 3:05:26 only thing remaining that truly matters 3:05:28 in the search for salvation. Since, as 3:05:31 the text demonstrates, neither our work 3:05:34 nor our lack of work matters. Since we 3:05:38 already fall short from our first 3:05:41 instance of sin, 3:05:43 Ephesians 2 calls it created in Christ. 3:05:46 Galatians 6 calls it a new creation. 3:05:49 Galatians 5 calls it faith working 3:05:52 through love. 3:05:54 What does faith working through godly 3:05:57 love produce in us? 3:05:59 the regeneration of the Holy Spirit, the 3:06:02 new man, the spiritual rebirth of our 3:06:06 identity by which we take on Christ to 3:06:09 be found in Christ. So what is the 3:06:13 explanation for a plus b= c? Our works 3:06:17 amount to nothing. So to arrive at the 3:06:20 conclusion of salvation, we must add to 3:06:22 our zero sum merit the infinite sum 3:06:26 merit of God's grace through faith. 3:06:29 Through Galatians, we see that scripture 3:06:31 reinforces yet again that we boast in 3:06:34 Christ rather than in ourselves and adds 3:06:37 the final nail in the coffin of our 3:06:39 works merit by saying that neither 3:06:42 circumcision nor uncircumcision counts 3:06:45 for anything. 3:06:47 That is to say, the presence of work 3:06:50 doesn't matter in the context of 3:06:52 meriting salvation because we are not 3:06:54 under the law of works, but the law of 3:06:56 faith in which salvation comes prior to 3:07:00 and apart from any good works that we 3:07:03 may participate with. 3:07:06 All that said, we must not minimize the 3:07:09 importance of good works because while 3:07:12 they do not merit or purchase salvation, 3:07:15 the word found in the book of James does 3:07:18 not allow us to treat faith as a barren 3:07:21 claim. So when God's word in James 3:07:25 writing says that faith without works is 3:07:27 dead, he is not contradicting his word 3:07:30 in Paul's writing which says faith is 3:07:33 apart from works. He is openly 3:07:36 confronting counterfeit faith which 3:07:39 claims belief in Jesus yet with no 3:07:42 evidence to support the assertion of 3:07:44 true faith. 3:07:46 In other words, Paul's explanation 3:07:49 excludes works as the meritorious basis 3:07:53 of justification, while James 3:07:55 explanation exposes the reality of 3:07:58 barren faith that is not truly faith at 3:08:01 all. 3:08:03 Consider with me James 2:es 14- 26. 3:08:08 What good is it, my brothers, if someone 3:08:10 says he has faith but does not have 3:08:12 works? Can that faith save him? If a 3:08:15 brother or sister is poorly clothed and 3:08:17 lacking in daily food, and one of you 3:08:20 says to them, "Go in peace, be warmed 3:08:22 and filled without giving them the 3:08:24 things needed for the body." What good 3:08:26 is that? So also faith by itself, if it 3:08:29 does not have works, is dead. But 3:08:32 someone will say, "You have faith and I 3:08:34 have works. Show me your faith apart 3:08:36 from your works, and I will show you my 3:08:39 faith by my works." 3:08:41 You believe that God is one. You do 3:08:43 well. Even the demons believe and 3:08:45 shudder. Do you want to be shown, you 3:08:48 foolish person, that faith apart from 3:08:51 works is useless? Was not Abraham our 3:08:54 father justified by works when he 3:08:56 offered up his son Isaac on the altar. 3:08:58 You see that faith was active along with 3:09:01 his works and faith was completed by his 3:09:04 works. And the scripture was fulfilled 3:09:06 that says Abraham believed God and it 3:09:08 was counted to him as righteousness 3:09:12 and he was called a friend of God. 3:09:15 You see that a person is justified by 3:09:17 works and not by faith alone? And in the 3:09:20 same way was not also Rahab the 3:09:23 prostitute justified by works when she 3:09:25 received the messengers and sent them 3:09:27 out by another way. For as the body 3:09:30 apart from the spirit is dead, so also 3:09:32 faith apart from works is dead. End 3:09:36 quote. 3:09:39 A common mistake made when reading this 3:09:41 passage is to ignore everything else 3:09:43 that scripture says regarding faith and 3:09:45 enforce single-minded focus on the first 3:09:48 three verses which suggest that faith 3:09:51 without works is no good, even dead. 3:09:55 However, let's first ask ourselves, how 3:09:57 might the context of this letter inform 3:10:00 our reading of this particular 3:10:02 statement? Consider this. 3:10:06 Why is it that the book of James is 3:10:07 considered by some to be the proverbs of 3:10:10 the New Testament as is stated in the 3:10:12 ESV's introduction to this book? 3:10:16 That statement is reflective of the 3:10:18 purpose of this book. One quite similar 3:10:21 to Proverbs that is to provide wisdom 3:10:24 for daily living. 3:10:26 Now consider this. What is a critically 3:10:29 important concept to understand as it 3:10:31 pertains to faith for all those who are 3:10:34 called to the great commission that is 3:10:37 all Christians. 3:10:39 I will propose to you that it is the 3:10:41 need for outwardly visible evidence of 3:10:44 faith for the sake of those whom we 3:10:46 would minister to. If they see no fruit 3:10:50 of faith, then all they see is dead 3:10:52 faith. This text in James is not one of 3:10:56 those primarily explaining how to 3:10:58 acquire salvation. 3:11:01 All of those texts clearly preclude the 3:11:04 ability to boast or teach meritorious 3:11:06 works for justification before God. The 3:11:10 focus of this particular portion of 3:11:12 scripture is as it clearly states 3:11:14 immediately after referring to dead 3:11:17 faith without works, presenting us with 3:11:19 a critical reason that evident good 3:11:23 works really matter. Showing evidence of 3:11:26 our faith, shining the light of Christ 3:11:29 in the world. 3:11:30 Nowhere in this text does James teach 3:11:33 that works can merit justification for 3:11:36 salvation. 3:11:38 Rather, he teaches that faith which 3:11:41 receives salvation is living faith which 3:11:44 does not remain barren as the 3:11:46 contradictory witness of counterfeit 3:11:48 faith which produces no good works and 3:11:51 may be described as dead. 3:11:54 Works complete faith as its outward 3:11:56 expression rather than as a component of 3:11:59 its justification for salvation. In 3:12:02 other words, work is to faith as fruit 3:12:05 is to tree, completing the image of 3:12:08 visible life of the plant. 3:12:10 This is how James can get away with 3:12:13 referring to faith without works as 3:12:14 dead. Because he's making an analogy of 3:12:17 faith by suggesting that faith is not 3:12:19 effective for evangelism, ministry, or 3:12:22 disciplehip if it isn't demonstrated for 3:12:25 people through good works. Even prior to 3:12:28 this section, the first 13 verses of 3:12:31 chapter 2 are also more directly 3:12:33 concerned with the expressed 3:12:35 representation of the gospel than they 3:12:37 are with the mechanism of faith. 3:12:40 nutrients produces of trees fruit not 3:12:44 vice versa. 3:12:47 Likewise, a fruit of faith such as good 3:12:50 works cannot produce faith itself. It is 3:12:54 a natural consequence rather than a 3:12:56 causal factor. 3:12:58 Consider as another example the 3:13:00 following analogy. Good works are 3:13:03 evidence for faith in the same way that 3:13:04 an ID card is evidence of citizenship. 3:13:08 You don't have citizenship because you 3:13:11 have an ID card. You have an ID card 3:13:14 because you have citizenship unless it's 3:13:17 a fake ID. And there are probably an 3:13:20 unfortunate number of churchgoers 3:13:22 holding on to fake IDs as well in the 3:13:24 form of fake works facades to fool not 3:13:28 just others but sometimes the ID holder 3:13:31 themselves. 3:13:33 Those are the lukewarm the pews sitters 3:13:36 or even the wolves and sheep's clothing 3:13:39 in the case of those attempting to lead 3:13:40 others astray from within our 3:13:42 congregations 3:13:44 whether they do so intentionally or not. 3:13:47 These are people who mimic genuinely 3:13:49 good works of the spirit through 3:13:51 outwardly appearing beneficial deeds. 3:13:54 And to many people this can pass as an 3:13:56 ID for proof of citizenship in the 3:13:59 kingdom of heaven. 3:14:01 The problem that such people must come 3:14:03 to terms with eventually is that God 3:14:06 judges the heart, not merely the 3:14:08 appearance of our deeds. And only those 3:14:11 who obtain genuine citizenship in the 3:14:14 kingdom of God will be allowed through 3:14:16 the gates of eternity. 3:14:18 Your outwardly appearing good deeds do 3:14:20 not amount to genuinely good works if 3:14:23 they are a means of deception. Whether 3:14:26 that's to deceive others or yourself 3:14:28 into believing that you have genuine 3:14:30 faith. Good works are not the root of 3:14:33 faith, but the fruit of the root of 3:14:35 faith. 3:14:37 Returning to James chapter 2, I believe 3:14:39 that the strongest case in favor of 3:14:42 human works meriting grace in this 3:14:44 passage is in verse 24 where it says 3:14:46 that a person is justified by works and 3:14:49 not by faith alone. 3:14:51 However, if you believe that this is 3:14:54 referring to justification before God 3:14:56 for salvation, you are reading that into 3:14:59 the text rather than reading it from the 3:15:01 text. Because every other explicit 3:15:04 statement regarding salvific 3:15:07 justification clearly states that 3:15:10 justification is not by works at all, or 3:15:14 else it would not be according to grace. 3:15:17 I'll say again, these surface level 3:15:20 differences cannot be true 3:15:22 contradictions because all scripture is 3:15:24 breathed out by God. 3:15:27 Therefore, I must conclude that verse 24 3:15:31 is not suddenly changing the subject to 3:15:34 explain a contradictory means of 3:15:36 justification for grace. But continuing 3:15:40 along the same purpose of the rest of 3:15:42 this passage, that is to explain how we 3:15:45 demonstrate our faith to others for the 3:15:48 sake of evangelism and disciplehip. 3:15:51 How we justify our claim to faith in the 3:15:54 eyes of humanity. 3:15:56 The text itself seems to make this 3:15:58 argument by reminding us in verse 23 3:16:00 that Abraham was counted righteous for 3:16:02 believing in God. The same example that 3:16:05 is used by the same inspired author of 3:16:08 all scripture to explain in Romans 3:16:10 chapter 4 that faith comes apart from 3:16:13 works. 3:16:16 Set aside the narrow typical theological 3:16:19 interpretation of the term justify or 3:16:23 justification for a moment to consider 3:16:26 with an open mind the following paired 3:16:28 claims. 3:16:30 We justify our faith in Christ to people 3:16:33 by our work. God justifies the 3:16:36 application of grace to us by the 3:16:39 received gift of faith on the basis of 3:16:41 Christ's work. 3:16:44 I believe that in the context of a text 3:16:46 that is inspired by an all- knowing and 3:16:49 all good God that this is the only fair 3:16:52 way to interpret the passage in 3:16:54 question. 3:16:56 And I know that every other discussion 3:16:58 pertaining to this topic that I've 3:17:00 examined did not exclusively attempt to 3:17:03 make a case for works meriting salvific 3:17:06 justification has come to a similar 3:17:09 conclusion regarding the explanation of 3:17:11 this supposed pillar of Roman Catholic 3:17:15 doctrine of justification. 3:17:18 In fact, I propose that when read fairly 3:17:21 in the intended context, this text 3:17:24 stands as yet another pillar of the 3:17:26 gifted nature of faith by which we merit 3:17:29 nothing related to grace or salvation 3:17:31 unto God. 3:17:33 Galatians 5:6, 1 Thessalonians 1:3, and 3:17:38 2 Peter 1:es 5-8 emphasize that faith 3:17:42 works to produce fruit. Consider the 3:17:46 passage from second Peter. Make every 3:17:49 effort to supplement your faith with 3:17:51 virtue and virtue with knowledge and 3:17:54 knowledge with self-control and 3:17:56 self-control with steadfastness and 3:17:58 steadfastness with godliness and 3:18:00 godliness with brotherly affection and 3:18:03 brotherly affection with love. For if 3:18:05 these qualities are yours and are 3:18:07 increasing, they keep you from being 3:18:09 ineffective or unfruitful in the 3:18:12 knowledge of our Lord Jesus Christ. 3:18:17 What will be impacted for good if we 3:18:19 have these virtues active in our life? 3:18:23 Our ability to be effective and fruitful 3:18:26 with the knowledge of Christ. That's why 3:18:29 there is no fruit in those who have 3:18:31 knowledge of Christ yet without works to 3:18:33 express the virtues of Christ. As James 3:18:37 explained, we show our faith to others 3:18:39 through good works which are enabled by 3:18:42 the first genuinely good work in our 3:18:45 life. The miracle of regeneration by the 3:18:48 Holy Spirit. 3:18:50 By this we reflect the character of God 3:18:53 not as the seller of salvation but as 3:18:56 the cultivator of Christ likeness. 3:19:03 At this point I would like to 3:19:04 acknowledge the presence of remaining 3:19:07 mystery pertaining to the nature of God 3:19:09 and the gift of faith. Throughout this 3:19:12 episode, we've traced the narrative and 3:19:15 wisdom of scripture as it defines faith 3:19:17 and its implications for our 3:19:19 understanding of God and our 3:19:21 relationship with him. We can see that 3:19:23 faith is God's gift, freely given, 3:19:26 genuinely received, impossible apart 3:19:29 from grace, not merited by our works, 3:19:32 not imparted by proximity, and fruitful 3:19:35 when genuine. Yet the exact inner 3:19:39 mechanism by which divine grace, human 3:19:42 response, fornowledge and spiritual 3:19:45 rebirth interact remains beyond us. The 3:19:49 degree of remaining mystery will surely 3:19:52 vary from person to person as some of us 3:19:54 may understand more or less than others. 3:19:58 Thankfully, we aren't required to 3:20:00 comprehend the systematic theology or 3:20:02 deeper mysteries of faith to begin 3:20:04 taking part in it. We are simply called 3:20:07 to be obedient in our reception of faith 3:20:10 and let it produce the work of God in 3:20:12 us. 3:20:14 In the absence of perfect understanding, 3:20:17 be encouraged by the word from Romans 3:20:19 11:33 3:20:22 which says, "Oh the depth of the riches 3:20:25 and wisdom and knowledge of God, how 3:20:28 uncarchable are his judgments and how 3:20:30 inscrable are his ways." End quote. 3:20:35 Finally, for those of you less concerned 3:20:38 about your own understanding than you 3:20:40 are another person's salvation, recall 3:20:44 in addition to God's love and desire to 3:20:46 be known by his creation, the following 3:20:49 statement from Jesus as recorded in John 3:20:53 3:8. 3:20:56 The wind blows where it wishes, and you 3:20:58 hear its sound, but you do not know 3:21:00 where it comes from or where it goes. So 3:21:03 it is with everyone who was born of the 3:21:05 spirit. End quote. 3:21:09 You can appreciate the breeze without 3:21:11 knowing it's coming and going. But 3:21:13 unlike a natural wind, you can trust the 3:21:16 wisdom of the Holy Spirit to land on 3:21:18 everyone who will genuinely receive him. 3:21:22 The remaining mystery does not imply 3:21:24 that God is not trustworthy, but that 3:21:27 his ways are higher than our ways. His 3:21:29 thoughts are higher than our thoughts. 3:21:32 Or as one may might say, the wisdom of 3:21:35 the giver of faith is greater than that 3:21:37 of the receiver of faith. 3:21:45 Prior to my final exhortation, I'd like 3:21:47 to present a parable that I wrote in 3:21:49 order to depict the biblical theology of 3:21:51 faith as I understand it. Like any 3:21:54 parable, the following is not meant to 3:21:56 describe every element of the related 3:21:58 doctrines and theology, but the 3:22:00 relational depiction of gift, giver, and 3:22:03 receiver. It's not meant to represent 3:22:06 any specific individuals or churches, 3:22:10 but rather certain general responses to 3:22:13 the gospel. The parable is as follows. A 3:22:17 benevolent king left his throne to seek 3:22:20 those of his people in need of help. 3:22:22 Beyond the gates of his palace, he found 3:22:24 four men starved to the brink of death. 3:22:27 The king offered each of the men a gift 3:22:29 of food and a room in his palace. The 3:22:31 first man refused the gifts, so the king 3:22:34 grieved the man's fate, but left him 3:22:36 with the consequences of his decision. 3:22:39 The second man pointed to the food and 3:22:40 began to arently brag as though he had 3:22:42 earned this reward. So the king left him 3:22:45 outside the gate where he continued to 3:22:47 brag about the king's offer until he 3:22:49 perished. 3:22:51 The third man accepted the king's offer 3:22:53 but told the others outside the gate 3:22:54 that he had no choice in the matter and 3:22:57 so depicted the king as a tyrant without 3:22:59 regard for his subject's wills. 3:23:02 The fourth man humbly accepted the 3:23:04 king's offer and thanked him for the 3:23:06 food for enabling him to receive by 3:23:09 faith a secured future in the palace. 3:23:13 To explain this parable, the first man 3:23:15 refuses the gift. His destruction is 3:23:17 most obvious. The second boasts as 3:23:20 though he earned salvation, but never 3:23:22 genuinely accepted the gift. So, his 3:23:25 destruction is assured as well. The 3:23:28 third received, but misrepresented the 3:23:30 king as though grace disabled a 3:23:32 meaningful response. The fourth received 3:23:35 humbly, thanked the king, and knew even 3:23:38 his faith rested upon the king's mercy. 3:23:42 The call of scripture is not to 3:23:44 complicate faith, to pull ourselves up 3:23:46 by our bootstraps, or to wait passively 3:23:49 for an inevitable destiny. It's to trust 3:23:51 and obey Christ, to repent from sin, 3:23:55 believe the gospel, and proclaim Jesus 3:23:58 Christ as Lord, the one true God and 3:24:01 Messiah. 3:24:07 Finally, to commence the true conclusion 3:24:10 of this episode, I'm going to first 3:24:12 provide a condensed form of the 3:24:13 theological conclusions that I'm 3:24:16 convinced are critical to a proper 3:24:18 theology of faith. The following is 3:24:21 adapted from my personal statement of 3:24:23 faith, which I discussed at length in my 3:24:26 prior episode, the confession of faith, 3:24:28 with a slightly adjusted presentation 3:24:31 informed by the work I've done for this 3:24:33 episode. 3:24:34 Because God is just and all of mankind 3:24:37 have fallen short of the standard of 3:24:39 righteousness, we are dependent on God 3:24:41 for salvation. Yet God does not force 3:24:44 salvation upon us, but by his will, he 3:24:47 requires that we respond to repent and 3:24:50 believe. He judges each person perfectly 3:24:53 according to the degree of revelation 3:24:56 received. Spiritual rebirth produces 3:24:59 good works in our lives. But our good 3:25:01 works cannot produce spiritual rebirth 3:25:04 because no work of ours can wash away 3:25:06 the stain of sin. 3:25:09 Thus, salvation is acquired only by 3:25:11 God's grace through faith in Christ's 3:25:14 death and resurrection by which he 3:25:17 suffered the consequences of sin for all 3:25:19 believers despite having never been 3:25:22 guilty of sin himself. 3:25:25 Furthermore, even our faith is a gift 3:25:28 from God. And yet he still commands us 3:25:31 to receive it. By this God's gift is 3:25:35 shown to be not inconsiderately enforced 3:25:38 but lovingly offered. Faith is a gift 3:25:42 that originates from God's initiative 3:25:44 and is genuinely offered to all people 3:25:47 in conjunction with his fornowledge of 3:25:49 who would receive it. 3:25:51 We are entirely dependent on his grace 3:25:54 for the opportunity and ability to 3:25:56 receive and act upon this gift. 3:25:59 At this time, I believe that what I've 3:26:02 presented in this episode is an accurate 3:26:04 description of the doctrine of faith and 3:26:06 its impact on biblical Christian 3:26:09 theology as I understand it. 3:26:13 Before I truly conclude this episode, I 3:26:15 want to acknowledge that people have 3:26:17 tried to systematize the mysterious 3:26:20 mechanism of faith in numerous different 3:26:23 ways before now. And many of them would 3:26:26 disagree on some of the finer details. 3:26:29 Some describe it as irresistible grace 3:26:32 with unconditional election. Some others 3:26:35 describe it as prevenient grace with 3:26:37 genuine response. Yet others may not try 3:26:40 to describe it with any real detail, but 3:26:43 rather simply say what the Bible plainly 3:26:45 says, believe that whatever it means is 3:26:49 true, and do their best to obey the 3:26:51 simple command to believe and receive. 3:26:55 I just want to remind everyone from 3:26:57 every doctrinal camp that hears this 3:26:59 message that whatever terms we use or 3:27:02 reject, we must preserve all that 3:27:05 scripture says. Faith is commanded. 3:27:08 Faith is grace enabled. Faith excludes 3:27:11 boasting. Faith receives Christ. And 3:27:14 faith bears fruit. 3:27:17 At the end of the day, what I think we 3:27:19 need to remember and communicate through 3:27:21 our testimony is this. Faith does not 3:27:24 come through mere intellectual ascent, 3:27:27 emotional impulse, religious adherence, 3:27:31 self-generated virtue, or pariting 3:27:34 doctrinal statements. Faith comes 3:27:36 through responding to the invitation of 3:27:39 God unto holy spiritual rebirth. 3:27:44 It is a gift we are called but not 3:27:47 coerced to receive. And your 3:27:49 responsibility for your response to that 3:27:51 gift is not so that you can boast in 3:27:54 your ability to agree to a pardon that 3:27:56 you could never deserve, but so that you 3:27:59 can know that your relationship with God 3:28:01 is genuine. 3:28:04 He has proven his love for you through 3:28:05 the sacrifice of Jesus Christ. And now 3:28:08 he asks you to reciprocate love through 3:28:11 the one thing you can actually offer to 3:28:13 God. Again, not through your own power, 3:28:16 but through his enabling grace. That 3:28:19 offering is a repentant soul turned away 3:28:22 from sin and surrendered [clears throat] 3:28:24 to him. Even that you owe to him twice 3:28:28 over. First, because he owns you by 3:28:31 right as your creator and second because 3:28:33 he purchased your life by the blood of 3:28:36 Christ from the just consequence of sin 3:28:40 which is death. 3:28:43 Jesus says in John 14 6, I am the way 3:28:48 and the truth and the life. No one comes 3:28:51 to the father except through me. 3:28:56 By this we know that Jesus is the way. 3:28:59 There is no other way. No side door into 3:29:02 heaven, no cheat code to eternity. You 3:29:04 are either saved through faith in Jesus 3:29:07 or you are destined for hell. 3:29:11 Thinking through the word of God always 3:29:12 blesses me. And I hope the way I 3:29:14 presented scripture in this message 3:29:16 encourages genuine dialogue, both 3:29:18 private and public, rather than merely 3:29:21 passive media consumption. 3:29:23 If you're interested in further studies 3:29:25 and reflections related to the Holy 3:29:27 Bible, then you're welcome to subscribe 3:29:29 and engage with my other teachings and 3:29:30 reflections. Mediametrics drive the 3:29:33 algorithms, but the word of God is what 3:29:36 drives me, and that's what I want to 3:29:37 pass on. May the Lord bless you. 3:29:53 >> [music]