Blog Archives
Predestination and Human Freedom
“In whom we have received an inheritance, being predestined according to the purpose of the one who works all things according to the counsel of his will, to the end that we who exist to the praise of his glory — those who first hoped in Christ; in whom you also, in hearing the word of Truth, the Gospel of our Salvation, in which you also believed and were sealed in the Holy Spirit who was promised.”
(Ephesians 1:11-13)
The other part of the “predestining” that needs to be fleshed out is the human part. One of the common challenges that people raise against the Biblical notion of predestination has to do with where there is room for the human will and responsibility. If God predestines all things, can it be said that we ever really make a choice of one thing over another? And, if God predestines all things, how can we be held accountable for that which we do?
These are matters that have brought debate within the Christian community across the centuries. In today’s world, it is at the heart not only of the debate between Calvinists and Arminians but extremes on both ends lead to heresy — namely hyper-calvinism on one side and open-theism on the other. Thus, it is worth picking at this question a little bit here.
To begin with, the “all” of “all things” is presented in the absolute. It is true that in some places in scripture, the “all” refers to “all kinds of things” or to “all kinds of people,” but context determines the reading of the word. In this case, there is nothing in the text to suggest anything but the most comprehensive use of the term πᾶς (pas)…or “all.” This is not a reference to God predestining this but not that; it is a reference to God predestining this and that — both the greatest things and the smallest things and all things in between.
It must also be said that the Bible affirms both that God is sovereign and that we are responsible for our actions. If we loose God’s sovereignty in our theology as does Open-theism, then we enter heresy. If we loose human responsibility in our theology as do the Hyper-calvinists, then again, we enter heresy. What the Bible affirms, we too must affirm.
So, how do we balance these two doctrines in a way that keeps our views consistent with that of Scripture? To begin with, we affirm the language we find here in Ephesians 1:11 — that God has predestined all things that come to pass according to the counsel of His will. From the birth and death of a sparrow to the birth and death of the Messiah, God is sovereign over all of these matters. Second, while our will is not free in the libertarian sense, we do make real choices every day of our lives. When I woke up this morning, I decided what I would wear and I decided what I would have for breakfast (amongst other things). These were genuine decisions where I had the option to do other than what I did. Yet, God is the one responsible for creating me and for forming my psyche as a Christian man. And thus, the decisions that I make are perfectly consistent not only with my character but with God’s eternal predestining design.
Does that mean that God has ordained my sin? In a sense, yes. Because we are fallen, we have inherited a sin-nature from our first parents, Adam and Eve. This sin nature means that I am bent toward sin. It is my natural default. Think about that toy car with a bent wheel axle. No matter how you push it, the car will drift to the side and not go in a straight line. Such is the case with humans, except that our bend is far worse and far more encompassing than a bent axle.
And so, God does permit our sin. At the same time, He also permits that sin for a purpose — most commonly for the glory of God and to draw us back to himself in repentance. In other words, sometimes we need to see and experience our own depravity before we will take that depravity seriously. Also, we will never understand grace until we really understand just how undeserving we are of it. Yet, not only are there no surprises when it comes to God and our sin, but it can be said that God is sovereign over our sin as well and further, that God uses our sin in a sinless way to do His will. Somewhere that is going to cause our brain to melt just a little bit, but as this is what the Bible affirms, this is what we too must affirm if we are to remain orthodox in our thinking.
A Predestined Inheritance
“In whom we have received an inheritance, being predestined according to the purpose of the one who works all things according to the counsel of his will, to the end that we who exist to the praise of his glory — those who first hoped in Christ; in whom you also, in hearing the word of Truth, the Gospel of our Salvation, in which you also believed and were sealed in the Holy Spirit who was promised.”
(Ephesians 1:11-13)
It is important to see the flow of Paul’s argument, which ties together Jewish believers and gentile believers into the single body of those whom God has called and predestined. Yet, with that said, as has been the case with much of this book, the theology of these three verses is incredibly compact and needs to be unpackaged somewhat to get to the heart of what Paul is teaching us.
First, note the language of the inheritance. As co-heirs with Christ (Romans 8:17; Galatians 3:29; Ephesians 3:6; Titus 3:7), we are given the right to an inheritance. Some translations prefer to use the word, “obtained,” with respect to this inheritance, but to do so would imply that the inheritance was somehow earned or merited — something contrary to what Paul says immediately in the next clause. The word in question, κληρόω (klaro’o), typically refers to those things gained by drawing lots (something over which God is sovereign — Proverbs 16:33), and not something that is earned or given meritoriously.
No, this inheritance is toward those who were “predestined according to the purpose of the one who works all things according to the council of his will.” When I first became convinced of the Calvinistic view of the sovereignty of God, this verse became my “go-to” verse when I was asked to make my point. In many ways, it is still my go-to verse.
For God to predestine something, that means that God decided beforehand what would take place — deciding before I had done anything on my own — in light of Ephesians 1:4, deciding before the foundation of the earth. And, furthermore, the reason that God decided these things beforehand, according to the Apostle Paul, is because he willed it to be so. God did not foresee our actions and declare it to be the case nor did he act in response to other actions that I had chosen. No, God sovereignly ordained these things to take place entirely on the basis of his sovereign will. One cannot read the scriptures carefully and come away with any other conclusion. God is sovereign over all things that come to pass — nothing is left to chance and hallelujah that it isn’t. All things are done according to the Council of God’s will — as Paul writes in Romans 11:33-36:
Oh, the depths of the riches and of the wisdom and of the knowledge of God! How unfathomable are his decrees and incomprehensible are his ways!
“For who is he who knows the mind of the Lord? Who is he that has become his counselor? Who is he that first gave to him that he might receive repayment? For out of him and through him and for him are all things. For to him is the glory unto eternity, amen!”
Predestination and Man’s Distorted View of Freedom
“Predestining us for adoption through Jesus Christ into Him, according to the pleasure of His will,”
(Ephesians 1:5)
Predestination is one of those words that often causes people to recoil. The funny thing is that the Bible uses the term six times in the New Testament, so somewhere along the way, people need to wrestle through the word, what it means, and how it relates to God and mankind. The Greek word in question is προορίζω (proorizo), which very literally means, “to decide upon something beforehand.”
One might contest that you and I also decide to do things beforehand. We plan out road trips and vacations weeks or months in advance, deciding that on such and such a day we will go to this place or eat dinner at that restaurant. Yet, we already know from the context of this passage that the choosing, or electing, work of God is something that took place before the foundation of the earth. Thus, the context of this deciding also must be understood as a pre-creation decision. So, before anyone existed, before anyone could do anything good or bad, before the Fall of Adam took place, God had decided to adopt his chosen elect through Jesus Christ and His work.
Some have suggested that perhaps this pre-deciding is something that took place on the basis of God’s foreknowledge. Given that God knew all things that would or could happen (in philosophical terms, that is what we call God’s knowledge of all “eventualities”), they suggest that God, on the basis of that knowledge, just chose those who would eventually choose him. The nature of God that such a response presents is as unsatisfying as it is unBiblical. It presents God as responding to our actions like a human would respond to the actions of others and it strips God of any claim of sovereignty over history, let alone, over human salvation. He merely knows the things we will do and responds accordingly. It is only the illusion of sovereignty that such a view attributes to God. If you or I could somehow look into the future and discover who won the World Series, would that knowledge imply that we had any control over the victor of those games? No, it would not.
Others have suggested that as God is outside of time, he looks on all time and space simultaneously and similarly elects those who come to faith. While it is true that God is outside of time, this view presents the time and space continuum, as it were, as something that exists in its own right and is thus eternal as God is eternal. That would ultimately be a view propounded by gnostics over the years and is entirely unbiblical once again. The creation owes its very existence to God (Colossians 1:16), so how could it ever be said that it is co-eternal with God? Some would grant the error of Gnosticism, but would say that once God created all things, he took a step back as a passive observer, allowing the creation to run along on its own. This would be the error of Deism and is in contradiction to the very next verse which I cited just above, for Colossians 1:17 speaks of Christ holding all things together — actively engaging in the maintenance of the creation, not passively watching to see what it is that we will do.
Not only is such an idea contrary to the plain reading of Scripture, who would wish to worship such a God, if he could ever truly claim the title of being God at all? Here, he is portrayed as an all-knowing God, but one who is impotent to do anything or ordain anything in history. He is a slave, as it were, to what he knows to take place. In some senses, it makes God subservient to creation and not the Author, Keeper, and Lord of it. Woe to those who present God in ways that are so contrary to the way that God presents himself in Scripture and woe to those who settle for such a lowly God to worship.
Instead, the Scriptures present God as a God who knows all things because he has predestined and preordained all things to take place. The Scriptures present a God who is indeed not bound by time and space, but who has created it for His purposes and who governs it through his works and providence. The Scriptures presents us with a God who is absolutely and unapologetically sovereign over all things that take place, both great and small and who is surprised by nothing not simply because he has perfect foresight, but because he has ordained all things that come to pass (Ephesians 1:11). While many feel uncomfortable with such a depiction of God, that it constrains their free will, they need to recognize that this is the way God has presented himself and the wills that they so celebrate are bent and warped and twisted by sin, constraining them not just to bad behavior but to bad thoughts about their creator. While God may indeed conform our wills to His, his doing so is not a matter of constraint in a negative way, it is a matter of helping us conform to what is True and good for us in the first place.
Think about it in this manner — it is in heaven that we will be most free, yet we will be unable to sin in heaven and we will only be able to do what is right and good and pleasing to God. So where is your glorious human “free will” in that context? I present to you that what most people champion as a “free will” is nothing short of a will in bondage to sin. A truly free will is not one that can make any choice in any situation, but one that makes a choice in conformity to God’s will in all situations.
Understanding Predestination
Predestination:
The natural outworking of the Doctrine of God’s Decrees when applied to salvation is the language of predestination, of which election is a subset. Regardless of how you understand predestination to be worked out in history, the term (and terms surrounding predestination) need to be dealt with because they are employed within scripture. With this in mind, various views on the nature of predestination have been put forth including that of God’s foreordination of some to glory and some to reprobation (Calvinistic), God’s predestination based on divine foresight (classic Wesleyan), and God’s predestination of Christ as the only elect one and believers finding their election in him (modern Wesleyan).
To better frame out this discussion, the first question that needs to be raised is whether God is active or passive in his predestination. The Calvinist will typically hold that God’s predestination of believers to glory is active while his predestination of unbelievers to reprobation is a passive activity—that of literally choosing not to act in the life of some. The Wesleyans will hold that God’s predestination of both believers and unbelievers is passive, the final decision in terms of salvation being left in the hands of the individual who chooses either to believe or to reject the things of God.
The second question that is addressed is the question of who forms the object of predestination. The Calvinist will hold that all men, both good and evil, are the object of God’s predestinating work. The Wesleyan will either argue that men ultimately choose to become the object of the predestinating work (as the work is passive) or that Christ is the only object of God’s predestinating work. It is worth noting that these theologies typically apply the language of predestination to angels as well as to humans, thus it is God who predestinated Satan and his minions to fall or that it is Satan and his minions who chose to fall on their own free and un-influenced will.
The third question that must be addressed is that of the specific language of the New Testament surrounding predestination. There are several terms that feed our understanding of God’s decretive work when it comes to predestination.
- proori/zw (proorizo): This term that we typically translate as “predestine” is constructed from two root words: pro (pro), for “beforehand” and oJri/zw (horizo)—“to define, appoint, or set a limit to.” Thus, when the terms are combined, this refers to something that is predetermined or decided upon ahead of time. Thus, two ideas must be accounted for in interpreting this word. First is that this word carries with it the idea of willful determination. God determined to do something (scripture context and theology will determine what that something may be); there is an intentionality that is contained by this word. Second, this willful act is an act that takes place before said events are realized, arguably, based on passages like Ephesians 1:4-5, said willful act takes place before the act of creation.
- proginw/skw (proginosko): Again, this term can be broken down into two constituent parts: pro (pro) and ginw/skw (ginosko), which means, “to know.” Thus, this term refers to God’s knowing beforehand things and events. There are two ways in which this “foreknowing” has been understood. The Calvinists have consistently argued that God’s foreknowing is due to his foreordaining (God knows the end of the story because he wrote the book). The Wesleyans have typically held that God, being outside of time and not bound by the linear time-stream as we are, equally sees past, present, and future, viewing the entire timeline of history from his divine vantage point (God knows the end of the story because he read the story beforehand).
The Wesleyan view ties proginw/skw (proginosko) with proora/w (proorao), or “foresight.” Thus God knows because he sees. Yet, the Calvinist points out the theological connection between ginw/skw (ginosko) and the Hebrew term [d:y” (yada), “to know.” The Hebrew concept of knowledge is relational, thus, when Adam “knew” his wife, she became pregnant. The Calvinist would thus argue that it is impossible to have a relationship with something that is simply seen in time, but that the word demands the idea of God setting his affections on those he “foreknew” ahead of time.
- ejkle/gomai (eklegomai): This is the verb that we translate as “to elect” or “to choose,” noting that this verb implies a certain degree of intentionality. This idea is also communicated through two nouns: ejklekto/ß (eklektos)—“chosen one” or “elect”—and ejklogh/ (ekloge)—“a choice” or “an election.” This is a term with which we will deal in more detail in our unit on Soteriology, but it is an important part of the understanding of predestination in terms of God’s decretive work. For our purposes here, though, it is important simply to understand the idea of election as being something that is a result of God’s intentional choice, regardless of the means by which you understand that choice being made (foresight or foreordination) or of your understanding of the object(s) of God’s electing work (Christ alone or all believers).
There is a fourth question that must be addressed, and this question, though it is one that tends to be more subjective than objective, is one that carries with it more pastoral connotations, and thus, in the eyes of many, is likely the most important question to address. This question is, “Is the idea of God predestinating fair?” Certainly, one may dismiss this concern by quoting, “Who are you, O Man, to answer back to God?” And, indeed, it is important to be reminded that we are the ones who must answer to God and he does not answer to man or seek man’s counsel. We were not the ones who set the world into place nor do we even know what tomorrow will bring. God is sovereign and man is not. As the German composer, Samuel Radigast, wrote: “Whatever my God ordains is right…”
At the same time, as we discussed before, God is not capricious and he is not unjust. All God does, he does in perfect harmony and accordance with his will. Thus, the question is raised once again, how do we understand the idea of predestination in terms of the “rightness” or “fairness” of the act that is consistent with the goodness of God’s character? The answer that we must give falls under a right understanding of our fallen, sinful estate. While we will discuss sin further when we discuss Anthropology, let it suffice to say that as a result of Adam’s fall, what every man, woman, and child deserves is the judgment of God—that is what we have earned. Thus, in terms of “fairness,” what is fair is that all mankind would face eternal judgment. In turn, the redemption that is seen in the work of the Lord Jesus Christ must be seen as the greatest of mercies delivered to an undeserving people. Regardless of your particular view on the object or means of election, a right view of our sinful states places into its proper context the marvelous, gracious, and wonderful work of our Lord on the cross. It can be said that the more seriously you take sin and its effects, the more you will appreciate the mercy of the cross.
One final note in terms of the language of predestination, in particular with respect to the Decrees of God: while there are many and varying views on how one explains the theology and theological ramifications of predestination, one must not ignore the concepts because they are scriptural concepts. One must deal honestly with the language of texts like Acts 4:28 and others, and while one’s theology may make less or more of them, one must make something of such passages in order to be faithful to scripture.
Ordinarily, this approach is rather backwards. Normally, when doing exegetical work, one should examine the words and their meanings, working from what the text literally states within its context and then deriving an interpretation from that point. Yet, in discussions as theologically charged as this discussion can be, it is worth noting that one’s theological presuppositions will often color one’s understanding of the context within which particular words may be found. If one is aware of one’s own presuppositions as they approach a text like this, it is my belief that one will be more inclined to recognize the effect that said presupposition is having on interpretation, hopefully using more discernment as the words are defined and understood.
Note that one must not be too hasty in assuming that a word can be defined accurately by combining the definitions of its constituent parts. Just as the English word “hot-dog” does not refer to a cute, fuzzy pet on a summer-time afternoon, such is often the same with Greek terms. At the same time, just as in English, many compound words do carry with them the combined meanings of their parts, and thus is the case with proori/zw.
Typically, when we speak of the Decrees of God, we speak of them as having taken place prior to his creative work.
Matthew 22:14; Matthew 24:22; Mark 13:22; Romans 8:33; Colossians 3:12; 1 Timothy 5:21; 1 Peter 2:4; 2 John 1; Revelation 17:14.
It is important to note that a related debate in terms of predestination is that of single/double predestination. Some would argue that God actively elects some to salvation and passively permits unbelievers to condemn themselves to damnation. Others would argue that God actively elects some to life and elects others to condemnation. That debate is outside of the scope of this discussion, though it deserves to be referenced in this context.
Note that this question is often rephrased to say, “Is it just?” or “Is it consistent with my understanding of God’s character?”, but ultimately, if you read between the lines, the question that is being asked is whether or not God is being arbitrary and partial, which flies in the face of most of our understandings of “fairness.”
Romans 9:20—Here Paul is citing Elihu’s rebuke of Job (Job 33:13) and Isaiah’s illustration of a clay pot in the master’s hands (Isaiah 29:16).
Also note that predestination, even in a strict Calvinistic sense, is different from philosophical determinism. God did not make automatons of mankind and though we make choices that are set within God’s will, these choices are not coerced in a negative sort of way. This will be discussed further in our discussion of Anthropology.
The Decrees of God
The Divine Decrees of God[1]
In general, we can begin by defining what we mean by a “decree” of God. A decree reflects the definite plan of God; Wollebius[2] defined a decree as: “an internal act of the divine will, by which he determines from eternity, freely, and with absolute certainty, those matters which shall happen in time.”[3] Thus, when we are speaking of the “Decrees of God,” the definition is focused on three basic aspects:
- The Decrees were made in eternity, prior to God’s creative act. This is not a portrayal of God that pictures him working along through history, hoping that he can bring his desires into reality, but a God who is in sovereign control over history.[4]
- These Decrees were made in perfect consistency with God’s immutable will.[5] All these decrees flow out of his perfections and are good and right and designed for the bringing about of God’s purposes.
- These Decrees were made without outside influence[6] (as in eternity prior, there was nothing outside of our Godhead) and without any internal deficiency or need.
With this definition in mind, there are seven attributes or character traits that can be said to belong to these decrees: they are founded on divine wisdom; they are eternal; they are efficacious; they are unchangeable; they are unconditional; they are all-comprehensive; and they are permissive with respect to sin.
- They are founded on Divine Wisdom. God neither pronounces his decrees randomly nor in a way that is arbitrary or fickle, but his sovereign decrees are pronounced in, by, and through his divine wisdom. This gives his decrees purpose and meaning and gives us every reason to trust in said decrees. They are his “good pleasure” to design, are grounded in God’s ever-wise foreknowledge[7], and they come to pass as a result of God’s ever-wise foreordaining.[8]
- They are eternal. The Decrees of God are formed from before the beginning of time and will relate to all things that will come to pass, beginning with God’s first spoken word of creation and continuing forever without end.[9]
- They are efficacious. What God decrees comes to pass. While man may plan, contrive, and anticipate all sorts of endeavors, he cannot so much as make one hair white or black[10], nor add an hour to his life.[11] Yet, God can do all things that he sets before himself to do; the God of the Bible is not a God who sits in submission to the works of men nor is he a God whose plans are able to be undone by the aspirations of man.[12]
- They are unchangeable. God is not a God who is fickle as men are fickle, nor is he a God of chaos. If God’s will is perfect, then, by definition, there is no room to improve on that perfection, and hence the concept of change in the decrees of God is nonsensical.[13]
- They are unconditional. God does not act in response to outside input; God’s actions and decrees are not caused by anything apart from his perfect will. Neither do God’s decrees rely on fallen man so that they may come to pass; they come to pass because God so decrees.[14]
- They are all–comprehensive. Some have made the suggestion that God’s decrees are only concerned with salvation and do not apply to anything else. Yet God has ordered all things according to the counsel of his will[15] and has set all things into being[16], from the greatest of things to the smallest. He numbers our hairs[17], feeds the birds of the air[18], and he has set the moon and stars into their respective orbits.[19] Even what we view as evil in this world is brought to pass through the will and decrees of God.[20] Note that this does not mean that God is the author of evil, yet he uses the evil that comes through sin and rebellion to accomplish his good and perfect will. There is nothing that we experience in this world that does not fall under the oversight of God’s decrees.[21]
- With reference to sin, they are permissive. God is not the author of sin[22], yet God yet permits sin to come about through secondary causes, using it to complete God’s good and perfect plan.[23]
Objections to the Doctrine of God’s Decrees:
There are several concerns that rise when we use the language of God’s decrees that ought to be addressed. The first is one which we have already dealt with in that the language of decrees can seem to imply that God is the author of sin. In discussing this, we must add to what has already been discussed the concept that sin is an attribute of the fall much in the same way that wisdom is an attribute of God. Wisdom is not so much a created thing as it is a reflection of God’s perfect being and actions. In the same way, sin is not so much a created thing, but it is a reflection of our fallen state and actions. We miss the mark, when it comes to God’s righteousness, and hence we sin. Even so, this doctrine does contain the idea that God willingly chose to permit the fall to take place and could have ordained otherwise. Yet, as Augustine suggested, there is a blessedness in the fall, for without the fall of man, we would not know the full extent of Jesus’ sacrificial love for us as his people.
The second concern that has been raised with the Doctrine of God’s Decrees is that such a doctrine robs man of his moral freedom and will, thus removing from him the liability for his sin, making the idea of salvation meaningless. This debate is at the core of the Calvinist-Wesleyan/Arminian[24] debate. It is not our purpose here to delve into this debate beyond the following principle: the scriptures present the God of the Bible as being sovereign over all things and the scriptures present man as being responsible and culpable for his sin. Any theology that does not affirm both of these principles is out of accord with orthodox Christianity and both the Calvinist and the Wesleyan seek to present a theology that affirms both of these principles. With this in mind, whether Wesleyan or Calvinistic, one is right to speak of the decrees of a sovereign God.
The third concern flows out of the previous question and leads us to the discussion of election and predestination. It is felt that in affirming a doctrine of God’s decrees (assuming that God has decreed who will come to him in faith) one robs man of the motivation for evangelism and of the responsibility to seek him in a stance of worship. Yet, this objection misunderstands the position of the Calvinist.[25] Scripture clearly affirms that man is used as a tool by God[26] to bring about his ends and that our primary task as the church is to go out and make disciples of all nations[27] through the process of preaching and proclaiming the Gospel of Jesus Christ.[28] Thus, regardless of your position on decrees and on predestination, the making of disciples through evangelism and teaching is the work we have been commissioned to do.[29]
[1] While we normally refer to “Decrees” of God in the plural, it should be noted that this is not meant to suggest the disunity of God’s decretive work. All of the decrees of God flow from his perfections in such unity that one could realistically speak of them as if they were a single, multi-faceted
[2] Johannes Wollebius (1586-1629) was a Dutch theologian and professor of Old Testament at the University of Basel.
[3] Compendium of Christian Theology (need more accurate citation)
[4] Acts 2:23; Job 11:7-9; 21:22; 1 Corinthians 8:6.
[5] Romans 8:28; Ephesians 1:11; Proverbs 16:4; Job 40:2.
[6] Romans 11:34-35; Isaiah 40:12-14; Job 34:13-15.
[7] There is an important distinction that must be made between foreknowledge and foreordination. Foreknowledge, drawn from the Greek term proginw/skw (proginosko), literally means, “to know beforehand.” Yet, we must understand that this knowledge is not simply a result of God gazing ahead in time and seeing what will come to pass. Knowing, in its Biblical usage, refers to a relational knowledge. Thus, foreknowledge not only reflects God’s perfect knowledge of all time from eternity prior, but it also reflects God’s setting his affections upon that which he foreknows or those which he foreknew. In contrast, foreordination is represented by several Greek words: pro/qesiß (prothesis), which means “to will beforehand” (Romans 8:28; Ephesians 1:11; 3:11); and proori/zw (proorizo), which means “to decide beforehand” or “to predetermine” (Acts 4:28; Romans 8:29; 1 Corinthians 2:7).
[8] Acts 15:18; Psalm 84:8-11; Ephesians 1:9-11.
[9] Ephesians 1:4; Isaiah 48:13; Matthew 25:34; 1 Peter 1:20; Revelation 17:8.
[10] Matthew 5:36.
[11] Matthew 6:27.
[12] Psalm 33:10; Proverbs 19:21; Isaiah 46:10; Acts 2:21.
[13] Ephesians 1:11; James 1:17; Job 23:13-14; Psalm 33:11; Luke 22:22.
[14] Ephesians 2:8; 1 Peter 1:2.
[15] Ephesians 1:11.
[16] Job 38.
[17] Matthew 10:30.
[18] Matthew 6:26.
[19] Psalm 8:3.
[20] Isaiah 45:5-7.
[21] Deuteronomy 18:22; Isaiah 42:9; Ezekiel 24:14.
[22] James 1:13; Job 34:10—note, the concept of God sinning is self-contradictory and nonsensical. Sin, by definition, refers to missing the mark—not living up to the righteous standard of God. Thus for God not to be able to live up to the standard that is set by his own essential character is a contradiction of the very term and makes no sense.
[23] Genesis 50:20.
[24] It should be noted that while many Calvinists confuse Wesleyanism with Arminianism, assuming their views to be synonymous, there is a distinction between the two. Wesley adapted the positions of the Remonstrance particularly in the area of the extent of the fall. The Arminians held that the fall did not affect the human will, thus allowing man freedom of choosing God rightly on one’s own. Wesley properly understood that the fall affected the will as well as the mind and flesh, yet argued that the work of the Cross made it possible for man to choose God when presented with the Gospel (falls under Wesley’s category of “Prevenient Grace”).
[25] It should be noted that one ought not confuse the position of the Calvinist with the heretical position of hyper-calvinism, which does, in fact, hold that believers have no obligation to evangelize because of God’s predestining work.
[26] Zechariah 9:13; Romans 9:19-24.
[27] Matthew 28:19-20; Mark 16:15; John 20:21; Acts 1:8.
[28] Luke 24:47; Romans 10:14-17.
[29] Sometimes it is easier to talk about these decrees in the negative: God is not the author of sin; God does not repress the will of created beings; God does not eliminate secondary causes; God does not relinquish his divine sovereignty.
The Preacher's Study 