Predestination and Free Will - Part 1



Every denomination has an explanation for predestination. However, they all fall into one of three categories: Pelagianism, Semi-Pelagianism, and Augustinianism.  Some today would object to those categories but they’re accurate in where they came from historically.  Today we call Semi-Pelagianism = Arminianism and we call Augustinianism = Calvinism.

In the next few posts I will undertake the doctrine of biblical predestination/election, give some portion of its history through the NT church age, what it consists of and means, and why it matters.  This is by no means exhaustive.

So, let’s begin with how the debate began.

The church underwent a great many trials in the fourth century and the staunch defender of the faith who arose was Saint Augustine of Hippo in the fifth century. This was in Hippo Regius which was located in modern-day Annaba, Algeria. After some time, a British monk by the name of Pelagius was appalled by the moral laxity he observed among Christians in Rome and the clergy there. He blamed much of it on the teaching of Augustine who taught that righteousness could only be achieved by Christians with the special help of divine grace. Essentially that man could only be obedient to God, by God’s grace.

They underwent a great debate when Augustine penned the now-famous words, “Grant what Thou commandest, and command what Thou dost desire.” Pelagius had no trouble with the latter part of the statement. His primary objection was to the former. Pelagius reacted by saying that whatever God commands, implies the ability of the one who receives the command, to obey it. In other words, man should not have to ask for grace in order to be obedient [1].

This debate spiraled further toward discussions of sin, its affect on man’s will, and even to original sin itself. Pelagius philosophized that mankind were all created as Adam and Eve: Capable of sin but not born with a sinful nature.  In other words, if man desired, and was more disciplined than Adam was, he could live a perfect life without sin. Therefore, there was no transfer of sin or guilt to mankind after Adam. Each person began in their own proverbial garden of Eden as it were.

Pelagius believed in grace and contended that God gave grace to man but surmised that man did not ‘need’ God’s grace in order to be obedient.   When confronted with the sheer magnitude of scripture to the contrary Pelagius succumbed to stated that the only negative impact of Adam was that of being a bad example to his descendants, not that his sin continued through his bloodline to all mankind sentencing them all to guilt.

Further, that mankind may be assisted toward salvation by God’s grace but that it was not necessary for salvation. Man could be saved apart from the work and grace of God.

Augustine argued that while in the garden, Adam and Eve enjoyed free moral liberty. They were unencumbered by sin and therefore were without compromise. Their actions could please and honor God in obedience to His commands.  Liberty, he argued, refers to the ability to use that faculty to embrace the things of God.

Following Adam’s sin, Augustine stated that man’s will was still intact. He could still choose to do the things that he wanted to do.  However, that will was inextricably influenced by their now apparent bondage to sin which completely corrupted them. As a result, the moral liberty that Adam and Eve enjoyed, was destroyed by sin and they were now constrained by their sinful nature. They could not obey God apart from His divine grace granting their capacity to do so. Further, that moral liberty was only gained via God’s supernatural work of grace was poured out in the soul of the believer. So apart from God’s work, they were free to choose, but their choices could not be righteous because their nature was fundamentally corrupted in sin.

This controversy necessitated an address by the church multiple times.  Formally, in the years 418 (condemned by council of Carthage), 429 (Pelagius exiled to Constantinople), and again in 431 (condemned by the council of Ephesus), the church made proclamations about the orthodoxy of Augustine’s theology and affirmed it repeatedly while denouncing Pelagius.

To make it even more clear Augustine with the church’s support, added that the beliefs Pelagius was teaching were fundamentally anti-Christian. They were the proto-humanism of today and worthy of being considered complete heresy.

Full Pelagianism fell out of favor but a less extreme version developed quickly to fill the void.

Semi-Pelagianism

Semi-Pelagianism arrived as a softer version of Pelagianism and was advocated by Cassian at Marseille.  Semi-Pelagianism stated that man cannot be saved apart from the grace of God but there is something man must do in his fallen state, to cooperate with and assent to that grace of God before God can save him.  So, he is incapable of being saved apart from grace but it is left for man in the final analysis, to either cooperate with God’s grace or reject God’s grace. That becomes the deciding factor in whether one becomes saved or not.

Historically, this view was also denounced by the same church councils in Ephesus and later in the Council of Orange in 529.

Augustinianism

This theology says that man is so deeply sinful and fallen that he is totally dependent upon the grace of God, even to desire what the gospel offers to him.  His very cooperation and assenting to the gospel require God’s intervening grace so that he may see, perceive, desire, and respond to what is preached. This is not due to God’s restrictions but due to the restrictions sin has placed on the will of all mankind.

The very essence of the debate, which still rages today, hinges upon man’s ability to respond to the gospel in his fallen state.

These last two views are widely held in the church today under the terms Arminianism and Calvinism. A great many godly and faithful men and women have held to these views and have been used throughout history to advance the kingdom of God for His glory.

So, a little more history on these two:

Luther and Calvin
Calvinism as it has become known really became more prolific with Martin Luther.  Martin Luther attended college to be a lawyer.  On one fateful night as lightning struck all around him, he vowed that he would dedicate his life to be a monk if only his life were to be spared. His life was indeed spared and thus he followed through with his promise to the detest of his father.

In his time as a German monk he was incredibly convicted of his own sin. He would confess his sin to such a degree and frequency that the priest would begin shutting the door in advance of Luther to avoid his hours long confessions on the smallest and seemingly trivial of offenses to God.  Luther was overwhelmed by his sin and was reported to have spent hours on his knees crying out, “Oh my sin, my sin, my sin…”

He was saved while studying the book of Romans a short time afterward and in particular the doctrine of justification through faith.  It resulted in his famous 95 theses which threw the Roman Catholic world into total upheaval. The protestant reformation began and Luther penned many works including his most famous, “The Bondage of the Will.” John Calvin was his junior from Geneva, Switzerland. Luther repeatedly affirmed the doctrines of predestination and election and emphatically asserted that our will was in bondage to sin so that we could not do good, nor even desire it.

Calvin was also an attorney by trade and a brilliant mind from a very young age.  He became a Christian in his early twenties and within three years composed his most famous work, “The Institutes of the Christian Religion.”  A work that went on to become a mandatory text in nearly every seminary for hundreds of years to follow (event today).  He would go on to write more and prolifically influence the church in the reformation age. He continued the teachings of Augustine and Martin Luther enumerating them in greater detail.

To read internet articles today you might be presented with the idea that John Calvin was a murderer who oversaw the killing of a man by the name of Servetus. That was not the case historically speaking.  Geneva had no separation of church and state so theological errors were considered criminal offenses. [4]

Calvin was wanted by Catholic authorities to prevent him from teaching against many of the heresies that plagued the Roman Catholic church at the time.  John Calvin sought to reconcile Servetus and offered to meet him. Servetus wanted to meet in one of the areas where Calvin’s life was being sought. John Calvin risked his life to meet with Servetus away from Geneva. However, Servetus never showed up - it was just a ploy.

Later, Servetus was brought up on charges and imprisoned for Pelagianism (denial of original sin), modalism (an anti-trinitarian heresy), pantheism (rejections of distinctions between creator and created), and other theological errors. Calvin visited Servetus in prison and ministered to him.  Servetus returned rage and anger to Calvin's mercy.

As Bruce Gordon wrote, “Heresy was a capital offense, but Calvin did not want Servetus to die.” When the council ordered execution by burning at the stake, Calvin alone intervened to appeal for a more merciful beheading. The council refused.

Calvin showed genuine pastoral concern for Servetus and sought continually in person and through letters to reconcile him to God and the church only to be met with rejection.  Calvin held to the theonomy of the Old Testament wherein heresy was worthy of the death penalty. He did not call for it in this case but rather, tried to avoid the capital punishment he knew was going to be exacted on Servetus.

Arminius:
James Arminius was a Dutch man who was recognized for his keen intellect as well. He was not wealthy but a patron offered to pay for his university education. Eventually he was able to attend the University in Geneva but was expelled for insubordination and “a spirit of self-sufficiency.” Apparently, he spoke privately against the teachers to the other students to such a harmful degree that they had to remove him from the school altogether.

After expulsion he moved onto serving as a minister for several years before being offered a professorship at the University of Amsterdam, provided he adhere to the Belgic Confession. Arminius pledged loyalty to it but found himself in a scandal once more. As was his earlier practice, he would teach the confession in class but then hand out private confidential manuscripts which denounced the tenants of the confession and taught a version of Semi-Pelagianism.

He was brought up on charges in the church but Arminius denied the rumors stating that they were patently false. This was discovered to be a lie as the manuscripts he was handing to his students resurfaced. Nevertheless, Arminus would not submit to the council’s call for him to be tried theologically. He continued to refuse this theological challenge in an open forum of the church and died (1609) before he could be successfully brought before the church for ecclesiastical action.

Despite this scandal he had made his mark and persuaded a number of younger students to follow his example.  They formed a group called the ‘Remonstrants’ in the year following his death. This title means “vigorously objecting or opposing.” These students believed that they needed to codify Arminius’ theology into a more finely ordered fashion for teaching.

As a result of Prince Maurice’s determination to rid the Netherlands of Arminianism, on November 13, 1618 a national council commenced in the city of Dordtrecht (also abbreviated as “Dort” or “Dordt”.)   The synod consisted of 39 pastors and 18 ruling elders from Belgic churches, and 5 professors of the University of Holland.  There were also delegates from churches throughout the region.

The Synod of Dordt convened to examine the Arminian’s Remonstrance as well as their Christian walk.  Both their doctrine and life were “on trial.”  Both were exceedingly important since such scandal had already befallen Arminius and these men were propagating the same teachings.  It is regrettable, but the Remonstrants thought themselves ill-treated as a result of this, and did not attend the meetings except to submit their propositions in the form of 5 articles at the beginning.  The council assembled and deliberated for over a year. [2]

The Remonstrants submission later became known as the five points of Arminianism which asserted more clearly the theology of Arminius.  At the culmination of the synod of Dort, Arminianism was rejected entirely and “condemned them as unscriptural, pestilential errors,” [3] and its adherents were placed under ecclesiastical discipline.

That’s just the history of the theology – not my inflection.  These histories help us understand from whence theology has derived.

In the next post we’ll look at what the Semi-Pelagians and Augustinians presented as their convictions and what those assertions meant.

[3] The Articles of the Synod of Dordt, (Sprinkle Publications, Harrisonburg: 1993) Pages 2ff.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Fully Known

God's Sovereignty: Predestination & Free Will Part 2