Arminius on Providence

Being caught up recently with a dispute over the equating of Calvinist descriptions of determinism and allowing, I found an examination of Arminius' Sentiments helpful in clarifying the distinction between determining or ordaining actions and allowing events to occur. Our Calvinist brethren have a tendency to blur the distinctions bringing themselves to the precipice of blasphemy against the character of God with regard to evil. One of our common scriptural objections to hard determinism is the passage in Jeremiah where the LORD expresses His clear distancing from the actions of men whose purpose is strange and separate from those of the LORD. … "Because they have forsaken me, and have estranged this place, and have burned incense in it unto other gods, whom neither they nor their fathers have known, nor the kings of Judah, and have filled this place with the blood of innocents; They have built also the high places of Baal, to burn their sons with fire [for] burnt offerings unto Baal, which I commanded not, nor spake [it], neither came [it] into my mind: Therefore, behold, the days come, saith the LORD, that this place shall no more be called Tophet, nor The valley of the son of Hinnom, but The valley of slaughter." (Jer 19:4-6 AV). The passage raises the issue of theological providence and how we bring ourselves to reconcile the allowances of God with His decrees. Arminius sets his thoughts on this matter of providence making clear the truth that a Arminians we do not question providence as some charge us but we instead define such away from the unscriptural distractions of hard determinism. The following comments provide that insight beneficial and substantial to understanding our Christian doctrine.

THE PROVIDENCE OF GOD

I consider Divine Providence to be "that solicitous, continued, and universally present inspection and oversight of God, according to which he exercises a general care over the whole world, but evinces a particular concern for all his [intelligent] creatures without any exception, with the design of preserving and governing them in their own essence, qualities, actions, and passions, in a manner that is at once worthy of himself and suitable to them, to the praise of his name and the salvation of believers. In this definition of Divine Providence, I by no means deprive it of any particle of those properties which agree with it or belong to it; but I declare that it preserves, regulates, governs and directs all things and that nothing in the world happens fortuitously or by chance. Beside this, I place in subjection to Divine Providence both the free-will and even the actions of a rational creature, so that nothing can be done without the will of God, not even any of those things which are done in opposition to it; only we must observe a distinction between good actions and evil ones, by saying, that "God both wills and performs good acts," but that "He only freely permits those which are evil." Still farther than this, I very readily grant, that even all actions whatever, concerning evil, that can possibly be devised or invented, may be attributed to Divine Providence Employing solely one caution, "not to conclude from this concession that God is the cause of sin." This I have testified with sufficient clearness, in a certain disputation concerning the Righteousness and Efficacy of Divine Providence concerning things that are evil, which was discussed at Leyden on two different occasions, as a divinity-act, at which I presided. In that disputation, I endeavored to ascribe to God whatever actions concerning sin I could possibly conclude from the scriptures to belong to him; and I proceeded to such a length in my attempt, that some persons thought proper on that account to charge me with having made God the author of sin. The same serious allegation has likewise been often produced against me, from the pulpit, in the city of Amsterdam, on account of those very theses; but with what show of justice such a charge was made, may be evident to any one, from the contents of my written answer to those Thirty-one Articles formerly mentioned, which have been falsely imputed to me, and of which this was one.

Arminius Sentiments on the Providence of God

 

Playing With Fire in the Tent of God

Apologia brings out a strange character in many souls. There is something about defending one's beliefs that easily crosses that invisible line separating what should be a scriptural call and instead feigning honor while offending another's beliefs and sensibilities. It happens a lot in the Arminian vs. Calvinist discussions. Just ask anybody on the other side regardless of your own and you will find a plethora of souls offended in some manner by the aggressiveness of an opponent's rhetoric. Most often, these offenses are the result of heated excitement and carrying the polemical thrust a bit further than originally intended. We all do it, perhaps I more than most yet at the end of the day we should be able to set aside those sectarian differences and recognize one another as fellow brethren in Christ. At least that is what we tell ourselves.

Something else is going on in some circles. There is a desire to kill, to consume and to dismember whole segments of the body of Christ in the guise of intellectual and theological curiosity. Somebody is lighting matches in the house of God with tinder in every crook and cranny. I was going to tackle a particular sectarian and zealous blog with full force when I began putting these thoughts together but as I began typing I realized that it is just one brick of an unholy wall. Remove one brick and there are a thousand zealots ready with trowel to patch it up and hurl further than before. I think the better response is a moat, keeping with the analogy. Isolate those whose zealotry and murder are an offense and do so with plain scriptural truth. Within the walls of the zealots keep is a language that bears little resemblance to our own and that of Christian orthodoxy. The language uses terms and phrases similar to our own yet communicates ideas foreign to us and our churches as understood for 2,000 years. Knowing this, carrying an intellectual discourse with them, an apologizing defense, becomes a fruitless endeavor for what is good has become bad and what is most undesirable seems to be admirable. I suspect it is a human trait and as with all things human, all is in a bad way lacking the grace of God. Yet the Apostle states "Let your speech be alway with grace, seasoned with salt, that ye may know how ye ought to answer every man." (Col 4:6 AV). Salt being a preservative, it strikes me as a hard thing to curse with feigned wit while thinking one as the salt of the earth.

I don't have a particular soul or group in mind as I close these thoughts. I did when I began but having come back to this as I let it settle in my own mind, I think these things are appropriate to all who pick up a sword, however tempered and controlled. I cannot see the LORD as kind to the zealot's reproach and this should strike some measure of fear in each of us when we lace up for theological battle.

Another Take on Christian Perfection

I encountered this interesting discussion of Christian Perfection while thinking about Arminius' comments in the previous post. This is a Mennonite perspective bringing an Anabaptist view of Holiness that seems to address the issue with civility and maturity. While it is relatively short, the author, Robert Friesen, sums up his conclusions rather well. Following is his conclusion with a link to the full article.

Christian Perfection - Robert Friesen

The Scope of the Call To Be Teleios

The call to be teleios is addressed to all believers. With the call to enter the kingdom comes the call to be one of the teleioi. It is a call to discipleship. The teleioi are to be perfect as the heavenly Father is perfect. Jesus, who came to show us the Father, is the example to be followed. The perfect ones are willing to take difficult, radical steps to follow their Lord.

Characteristics of the Teleioi

The teleioi are wise and possess knowledge which the immature do not have. This wisdom is not equivalent to what the world considers wisdom nor is there knowledge based on superior intelligence. Because of the Holy Spirit's enlightenment they are able to receive and understand the kind of solid teaching which Paul calls meat as opposed to milk (the elementary principles of the Gospel).

The wisdom and understanding of the teleioi is evident in their actions. They are able to distinguish right from wrong and they live according to what is right. The wisdom of the teleioi is knowledge turned into proper action in life.

The teleioi are those who love God. This love is demonstrated in a life of discipleship. They love their brothers and sisters in the Church and desire to use their Spirit-given gifts to edify them. They also love those who are not in the Church. Their love, in fact, extends even to those who are their opponents.

The teleioi are not portrayed as those who have attained absolute perfection. They always strive toward perfection and are not content to settle for less. The English word "mature" is often a good translation, but even that word does not catch all the nuances of the Greek teleios. The English "perfect" may be too absolute, but "mature" may be too mild. Jesus did not call us simply to be 'mature' as our heavenly Father is 'mature'. We consider people mature even though they have many imperfections which need not necessarily be changed. The teleioi have never arrived at their goal. They are mature, but they are moving on to a greater maturity. Because of this problem of finding the best word, the new translations use both "perfect" and "mature" to render teleios in different contexts. {31}

The Process of Becoming Teleios

The New Testament is clear that the teleioi are involved in a process of growth. Tomorrow they should be more closely conformed to Jesus' example of perfection than they were today.

The teleioi are dependent upon the rest of the body of Christ for the process of growth. All the members of the body have responsibilities to have others to mature. They carry out this work with the enablement of the various gifts which the Holy Spirit gives to the Church.

Paul warns that the work of teaching may be hard, wearisome toil. It is not a small task. He also indicates that teachers need to be wise. But it is not the world's wisdom that is needed. In order to do the work of the Church and to bring people to maturity, teachers need God's wisdom. James indicates that when the teleioi feel a lack of wisdom they are to pray with perseverance to God who will give the required wisdom.

In Colossians 4 Paul indicates that prayer can help to bring people to maturity even when a person is absent from the ones he prays for. This labour of prayer is an important task in the work.

The New Testament indicates that trials and suffering may be the context in which maturity is produced. It is essential that a person recognize these situations as possibilities for growth and use them as such.

In answer to the question "Who are the teleioi?" we must conclude: The teleioi are obedient disciples of Christ. The process of becoming teleios is a divine (i.e., God-empowered) process mediated by the members of the body of Christ in the context of prayer and love.

Christian Perfection by Robert Friesen

Arminius on Perfect Obedience

One of the Wesleyan teachings that causes some stir in a few circles is the idea of Christian perfection, oftentimes mistakenly represented as sinless perfection. Of course, the teaching of the Wesleyans is not one of sinless perfection with regard to perfect obedience to every aspect of law. Instead it is a doctrine of Christian perfection where faith is preeminent in all things subjecting every aspect of the believer in submission to Christ. This is not to say that all Christians are to find themselves in such a place but that the capability and means are evident through Christ. Wesley didn't invent something new with this. He explains much in his essay A Plain Account of Christian Perfection as well as with his similar sermon. While there are differences in the teachings of Arminius and Augustine for that matter, there are strong similarities in what Wesley presented as our expectation as saints in Christ knowing full well we most often fall short of those expectations. In the last of his Nine Questions, Arminius addressed this issue of perfect obedience with regard to the saint of God. His comments follow.

Can believers under the grace of the New Covenant, perfectly observe the law of God in this life?

May God, or may He not, require of those who are partakers of the New Covenant, that the flesh do not lust against the Spirit, as a duty corresponding with the grace of that covenant?

ANSWER TO THIS QUESTION

The performance of the law is to be estimated according to the mind of Him who requires it to be observed. The answer will be two-fold, since He either wills it to be rigidly observed in the highest degree of perfection, or only according to epieikeian clemency; that is, if he require this according to clemency, and if the strength or powers which he confers be proportionate to the demand.

(1.) Man cannot perfectly perform such a law of God, if it be considered as to be performed according to rigor.

(2.) But if he require it according to clemency, and if the powers conferred be proportionate, (which must be acknowledged, since He requires it according to the evangelical covenant,) the answer is, it can be perfectly observed. But the question about capability is not of such great importance, "provided a man confesses that it is possible to be done by the grace of Christ," as St. Augustine justly observes.

Arminius' Nine Questions

C. Michael Patton raised a poignant concern earlier in the following post on his blog. It is timely and appropriate in this internet age and I am thankful for his graciousness in this matter. We need to keep this brotherly example in the forefront for he reflects Christ as we should all.

An Admonishment For All of Us

What in Blues Blazes?

The internet does some funny things to people. It seems to give people a vaulted sense of importance to the point where they lose sight of who and what they are to be. I have briefly engaged an exchange with another blogger and in looking at his profile I found the following.

I'm a native of the greater Seattle area. I'm a TA at RTS. In theology, I'm a Calvinist, creationist, inerrantist, cessationist, classical Christian theist, and amil (with postmil sympathies). I'm a low churchman with a sympathy for a certain amount of high church symbolism. I'm a pragmatist about church polity. On the sacraments, I take them to be symbolic. I regard other issues in sacramentology as secondary to this primary position. In philosophy, I'm an Augustinian exemplarist. I'm a Cartesian dualist. I'm an alethic realist, but scientific antirealist. I believe in innate ideas, sense knowledge (I'm an indirect realist), and the primacy of divine revelation in Scripture. In ethics, I subscribe to traditional Christian morality, rooted God's revealed law as the source and standard of personal and social ethics. I also subscribe to a supralapsarian theodicy. Although I'm not a Lutheran, a traditional Lutheran service suits my taste in the style of worship.

At what point does one recognize they are simply a lowly servant of the LORD, a Christian? Having backed off my "blogging" knowing I do this as a personal therapy of sorts, I have come to realize that my service to Christ and the simplicity of being a Christian is far more important than listing all the edges of sword used to identify my arsenal. This needs to be kept forefront when teaching our children and fellows the doctrines we subscribe to. Christ rather than dogma must always prevail and when asked what we are, Christian should be our first response.

 

A Calvary Focused Faith

"And you, being dead in your sins and the uncircumcision of your flesh, hath he quickened together with him, having forgiven you all trespasses; Blotting out the handwriting of ordinances that was against us, which was contrary to us, and took it out of the way, nailing it to his cross; [And] having spoiled principalities and powers, he made a shew of them openly, triumphing over them in it." (Col 2:13-15 AV)

During a recent discussion of the relevance of the resurrection with regard to Christ's crucifixion at Calvary, this passage from Paul's epistle to the Colossians came to mind. There is a thought I want to touch on dealing with the sufficiency of Christ's finished work at Calvary.

A pastor of mine from some years ago shared a wonderful teaching with his congregation regarding the proper faith of the Christian saint. We are of one body, crucified with Him, buried with Him in baptism and risen in newness of life as the scriptures teach, all of which is the result of a sinless and perfected sacrifice upon that rugged Cross of Calvary. Knowing this, we can understand our faith as needing both a proper object and as well, a proper focus. Being in Christ, Jesus is our proper object and realizing that the preaching of the Cross is indeed the power of God unto salvation, our focus must always be upon His finished work upon that Cross. It is where not only the power of God is made evident for salvation, it is where the Holy Spirit looks to affect His work of edifying and sanctifying the Body as it matures in faith. It is our Christocentric faith and direction as saints of the LORD. We need look to no other place, trust in no other person or work but that of Jesus of Nazareth.

Now it has been said by some that our salvation is not determined at Calvary but at the resurrection or some other consequential place or act. Of course it must be stated that the bodily resurrection of Jesus Christ is essential doctrine in any Christian setting. What could our faith possibly endure had Christ not risen? There could be no Christian church nor Body to withstand the assault of this ungodly world should Jesus remain in the grave to this day. The faith of Christ could not be if such were the case so it is clear the resurrection is vital to our understandings and purpose as saints. However, it is also critical to understand that the resurrection of Jesus Christ was the evidence of Christ's perfection at Calvary and not the cause of it in some other manner. It is the proclamation of Christ's triumph rather than the triumph itself. The ordinances against us were not nailed to the rock blocking the tomb but to the cross. It was not the sunshine of that morning of first fruits that cleansed us but it was the blood of the slain Lamb. Our Word-Faith friends from the Charismatic sects seem to have a lot of trouble with these truths as do some of the full preterist heretical sects. There is a sense among some of these fellows that there was a further work to be performed by Christ after his crucifixion yet the scriptures declare His shed blood to be the basis for all that saves us. We can search the scriptures and become overwhelmed by the glosses of "by blood" or through blood, the blood of Christ etc. We can find nothing concerning through resurrection or by the resurrection.

There is a reason for my comments that I am trying to work out and apply to a direction I see much of the church world moving in. We are a Christocentric church, especially among my Arminian fellows and the manner in which we stay Christocentric is to ensure our faith is Calvary centered. We live in an age when the lyrics of The Old Rugged Cross are an offense to some in the church world and this should never be. There are churches that refuse to sing or talk about Calvary, reject discussions about blood, conviction and sin. A church that has moved from a sure Calvary focus is one that has found a miry clay to stand upon and no church can be sustained on such a foundation. We need voices to stand in the gap and never be moved from our first love, our object and focus being Jesus Christ and His finished work at Calvary.