I'm sure you're all
aware of the fact that it's a maxim in
the United States, a law of our national heritage,
that we never discuss religion and politics, but any
time two Americans sit down and have a
discussion, it inevitably leads to matters of
religion and politics. And any time that there's
a discussion on religion, sooner or later, and
most often it's sooner, the discussion focuses on
some element of the doctrine of predestination. It's one of those
things that mystifies us and at the same time it
stimulates our minds. And the bewilderment
that we experience in the face of the
concept of predestination sometimes will encourage us to
dig more deeply into theology, and it's just one of
those subjects that generates a lot of
interest and discussion, and also controversy. And as I look at the history
of Christian scholarship, we see that every great
Christian teacher, every theologian that the
church has ever produced, at some point or
another, has had to address this question
of predestination; and though there's wide
divergence of interpreting the doctrine of
predestination, there's one thing that we can find
that every theologian I've ever examined agrees on, and that
is that this doctrine must be treated with great caution. It's a dangerous subject
because the more we study it, the tendency it has to raise
more questions than it answers. And I'm convinced that of
all the doctrines we struggle with in Christendom,
there's none that is more shrouded
in misunderstanding and confusion than the
doctrine of predestination. So that in itself calls
for a certain kind of sober caution as we
approach this subject. And I would add to the
theologians' warning of caution that I think it's also
a doctrine that requires an extra measure of charity
as we struggle with it, and that we need to be
patient with each other and with those who differ
from us in our views of this particular
question because I said there's a lot at stake here. And feelings can
run very high when we discuss the matter
of predestination, and we ought to be
careful to manifest the fruit of God's Holy
Spirit among ourselves as we try to deal with it. Now I've said all
of that knowing it won't work because once we
plunge into this doctrine, who knows what's going to happen. Let me just say at the beginning
by way of introduction, I also ought to say
this, that we're going to spend six periods
of lecture on the subject, and that may seem like an
awful lot of time devoted to one doctrine
like predestination; but let me assure
you at the outset that six lectures of
approximately half an hour each one can't
possibly do anything but skate over the
surface of this. There are so many
related questions that are provoked by any
study of predestination, that this, I'm convinced,
requires in-depth study that will take years
and years and years before we can ever hope to
get to the bottom of it. And so, I'm looking at this
course as an introduction to the doctrine
of predestination. Now, I keep saying the
doctrine of predestination, as if there were only one
doctrine of predestination, or if there even were such
a thing as a viable doctrine of predestination. There are those who look at
the question of predestination, and state it in
categories like this: They'll say to you (a discussion
between Christians, would be), "Do you believe in
predestination?" And some people will
answer that question either by saying, "Yes, I
believe in predestination," or they will say, "No, I don't
believe in predestination," as if everybody
understood what we were talking about
when we talked about the doctrine
of predestination. It may come as a
surprise to some of you that every church that
I know of historically, every denomination that
I'm aware of historically that has formulated a
doctrinal statement of sorts, has formulated some
doctrine of predestination. There is a Roman Catholic
doctrine of predestination, there is a Lutheran
doctrine of predestination, there is a Presbyterian
doctrine of predestination, there is a Methodist doctrine
of predestination, and so on. So we need to get that clear
at the beginning, that there are many, many different
doctrines of predestination. So there's no such thing as
the doctrine of predestination; although I suspect that when
people boil it down to one, usually what they
have in mind, is what doctrine of predestination? The Presbyterian variety of
the matter, or that one which is usually called the
Calvinistic doctrine of predestination, because John
Calvin and predestination seem to be almost synonyms
in the culture, as if the first
theologian in history ever to speak of
predestination was John Calvin. But we will see in a
brief historical survey that that's certainly
not the case. But what we're
interested in in this study is to look and try to
discern the biblical doctrine of predestination. The reason why so many
different denominations and different churches have
doctrines of predestination is because the Bible speaks
about predestination, and all Christians who take the
Bible seriously are therefore led to taking the
concept of predestination seriously because it's
a concept and a word that we find in
the New Testament. Let's just take
a moment, and let me read a couple of
passages to refresh your memory that introduce this
idea of predestination to us. I'm reading now from the
first chapter of Paul's letter to the Ephesians, where Paul,
in his opening greeting, says, "Blessed be the God
and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, who has blessed us
with every spiritual blessing in the heavenly
places in Christ, just as He chose us in
Him before the foundation of the world that we should be
holy and blameless before Him. In love, He predestined
us to adoption as sons through Jesus Christ to Himself
according to the kind intention of His will." And then if we move on down
the page in the first chapter of Ephesians,
verse 11, "Also, we have obtained an inheritance,
having been predestined according to His purpose
who works all things after the counsel of His will." Now this, of course, is not
the only place in the Bible that we encounter this
concept of predestination, but I just read that
passage so that everybody will see that the word
"predestination" is a biblical word. And because it's
a biblical word, all of those who have been
diligent students of the Bible have tried to understand
what the Bible means by divine predestination. Before we explore that closely,
let me give a little bit more historical background. There are many, many, many,
many different theologies to be found in the history
of the Christian church, just as there are many
denominations that we've already noted, but I
think it's safe to say that there are three basic,
generic types of theology, historically. And theologians speak of them
in these general categories: One is what we call Pelagianism. The second is what we
call Semi-Pelagianism, and the third is what
we call Augustinianism. Now the reason for this
threefold designation of basic types of
theology has its roots in the fourth century
when the church underwent a titanic struggle over many
serious issues of theology. And the one, the man who
was recognized and usually acclaimed as the
greatest theologian, at least of the first thousand
years of Christian history, if not the greatest theologian
of all Christian history, who defended the faith
at that period, was of course, Saint Augustine. And his chief opponent
in several debates at that period of
Christian history was a monk by the
name of Pelagius. And one of the critical things
about which they debated was how important or
necessary was the grace of God for human salvation. Pelagius was of the opinion
that the grace of God assists human beings to
be saved, but is in no way necessary. His fundamental assumption was
that man, in his natural state has within himself the capacity
to keep the commandments of God to such a degree
as to be redeemed without any help
from divine grace. Augustine stressed the absolute
dependence of the fallen sinner upon the grace of God for
that sinner's salvation, and really repudiated
Pelagianism as an early form
of sheer humanism. And Pelagianism was seen
not merely as a subdivision of Christian thought,
but really as sub-Christian in
it's thought, that is, not even worthy of
being considered Christian. Now, when I say there are three
basic trains of thought that have come down through
the church historically, I agree with this setup here. I didn't invent
this designation, but I agree with it. These are the three major
generic types of theology that have influenced
church history, and I see Pelagianism as
the father of liberalism, Socinianism came in the
sixteenth century, liberalism in the nineteenth
century; and so that you'll know
where I'm coming from, I would consider
Pelagianism as unchristian, fundamentally
antichristian, not an option for a Christian thinker. Now, the debates that have
gone on within the church between semi-Pelagianism
and Augustinianism, which reflected
later on in later history between the Remonstrants
in the sixteenth century and the Calvinists and so on,
and the Methodists, these I would regard as debates
within the household of faith. The arguments between
semi-Pelagianism and Augustinianism;
semi-Pelagianism says that man cannot be saved apart
from the grace of God, but there is
something man must do, even in his still-fallen state
to cooperate with and assent to that grace of God,
before God will save him. That is to say, you can't
be 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, and that becomes the
convincing point of whether or not a person
is saved, or not saved. Augustinianism says
that man is so seriously fallen that he is totally
dependent upon the grace of God, even for his initial
response to the gospel, even for the very
cooperating and assenting to the gospel of Christ
in the first place. And so you can see at the
outset that the debate has its roots in the
question of man's ability to respond to the gospel
in his fallen state. And I would say, as we
enter into any discussion of predestination, that lurking
always behind the scenes of discussions on predestination
is this fundamental debate right here, between
the semi-Pelagians and the Augustinians. Now I also need to
warn you at the outset that I am persuaded of
the Augustinian view of predestination, and
I will be setting forth the Augustinian view
of predestination in these seminars. I will be trying to explain it,
to clarify misunderstandings that I think abound
concerning it, and I will try to
respond to objections that are brought to it
from semi-Pelagian brothers and sisters and try to
convince you and persuade you that the Augustinian view is the
Pauline view, and consequently the biblical view, and
therefore the right one. But, of course, not
everybody believes that, not everybody agrees
with it; and I think, again, we have to be
honest at the outset and recognize that some
tremendously important Christian leaders who have had
an enormous influence for good in the Kingdom of
God have not espoused the view that I will be
setting forth in this seminar. Let me just draw the
scorecard for you and try to be fair,
broadminded, and all that, and I'm going to list on
this side of the board the theologians in
Church history, who on this question of
predestination in my judgment would fall into the camp
of the Augustinian view. And then to balance
it off, I'll try to mention the names of
the theologians who fall on the other side of the thing. So we'll look first
of all on the pro side of the pro-Augustinian view. Now remember, we haven't really
defined the Augustinian view. This is still background. We'll get into what
that view actually is. Those that follow Augustine in
the doctrine of predestination would include - and
this may surprise you, and this may even be
challenged by some. But first let's put Augustine
himself since he did believe what he himself taught. So we'll put Augustine
at the top of the list. Then I would say Augustine's
perhaps most eminent disciple with respect to
theology in general and even these doctrines in
particular - in my judgment the man belongs on this side
of the column, Saint Thomas Aquinas. Francis Schaeffer,
I can almost hear him screaming at me from
heaven right now because he would certainly not
agree that Aquinas belongs in that category. But remember that
Aquinas himself indicated his indebtedness
to Augustine more than to any other theologian
in church history. But since Saint Thomas Aquinas
is the supreme theologian of the Roman Catholic Church,
and since contemporary Roman Catholic theology does not
embrace the Augustinian view of predestination,
Protestants generally make the assumption that
therefore Saint Thomas didn't either. You can challenge
that if you want. I will leave that open
to debate and discussion. The next man, there's no debate. The next man definitely
belongs with Augustine, and he is the
Reformers' reformer, the man who most
emphasized predestination in the sixteenth century in the
Reformation, and who was that? No, that wasn't John Calvin. John Calvin was
his junior partner. The man who most
adamantly defended the Augustinian view
of predestination was Martin Luther. Now that comes as a surprise
because in the world today, Lutheranism lines up
opposite Presbyterianism on this particular doctrine. That's because of a little
quirk in church history, where shortly after Luther's
death, the Lutheran body, under the leadership
of Philip Melancthon took a different
turn and did not follow Martin Luther
in his articulation of the view of predestination. But I think it's safe to
say that Luther wrote more on predestination than
Calvin ever dreamed of, and that there's nothing in
the doctrine of predestination that I can think of that John
Calvin ever taught that Luther didn't teach first, and louder. So then, now we can
stick Calvin in there as a junior partner
- John Calvin. And then I would add to this
side of the column Jonathan Edwards. Now, remember, we're going to be
honest and fair and aboveboard about all this. Now if you were to ask me this
question, "RC, who do you think are the five greatest
theologians that ever lived," I would have no difficulty
identifying the five greatest theologians that ever lived. They would be Augustine,
Aquinas, Luther, Calvin, and Edwards. Now I tell you what, they're way
ahead of the next five, whoever they may be. Now as biased as
that may be, I think that it would be safe to say,
that if we asked any hundred theologians from any different
denominations who the greatest ten theologians were in history,
at least 98 out of that 100 would mention these
five in the ten. I mean here are
recognizably five titans and giants of the
Christian faith, and if they all agree on
espousing the Augustinian view of predestination,
does that mean that the Augustinian
view of predestination is the correct one? Absolutely not, because
these five men disagreed on many things, and
though they agreed on the essence of
this particular matter is no guarantee that
their views, individually or collectively are
the correct version. We carry no brief
for the infallibility of human tradition, or
for the infallibility of Augustine, Aquinas, you
know, Luther, Calvin, Edwards, none of that, or even
all of them together. But I'll say this, when those
five agree on something, it gets my attention. And I labor this point for
this reason, that so often, the so-called "Reformed"
view of predestination is lightly dismissed as a
uniquely Calvinistic aberration in church history, and that's
just historically untrue. Now let's look at the
other side and see the great theologians that
have fallen on the other side. Well, there's Pelagius, there
was Erasmus, there was Finney, there was Wesley, and
there was Arminius, which are some important
names in church history. Now I can hear somebody
right now who's not persuaded of the
Augustinian position screaming bloody murder
in protest already saying, "That's not fair to put those
five up against those five!" So I'm ready to write
somebody else's name in there if you want to give me
some great theologians that took the other position. Keep in mind too, that
the overwhelming majority of evangelical Christians in the
world today are on this side. This is a minority report
in the contemporary scene. The thing that's striking
to me about this side is that in terms of the sheer
power of biblical scholarship, you don't find the
titans over here. You find them here. But maybe if we looked at
the contemporary scene, it'd be a little different. If I said pro-Augustinian
view of predestination today, we would put in that - I won't
take the time to write them down but you would
include on the pro side, we would include Francis
Schaeffer and Gordon Clark and Cornelius Van Til and all
these Presbyterian theologians as well as some Anglican and
Episcopalian people like J.I. Packer and Roger Nicole and
people like that (Roger Nicole being Baptist, of course). On the other side, those who do
not believe in the Augustinian view would have such people
as Clark Pinnock, John Warwick Montgomery, Norman Geisler from
Dallas Theological Seminary. These are some very formidable
leaders in the contemporary evangelical world who
have not - Billy Graham, though not a theologian,
nevertheless is a very important Christian
leader who would fall on the non-Augustinian side,
though I trust his wife Ruth would be in the right column. But in any case, all I'm
trying to show you here is that Christians
are divided, and I want us to get the
attention that we need. If you are opposed to
the Augustinian view of predestination, in light
of the fact of those teachers of the church who
have espoused it, I think we need to look at
it very seriously before we dismiss it out of hand. I think they command
enough respect that we should listen to
what they have tried to teach the church on this point. All right, let's take
a few minutes then to do some basic definitions. The word "predestination"
in English is made up of a
prefix and a root. The prefix "pre" means "before,"
and the word "destination" is a word we're all familiar
with in the English language. Many of you came to
Ligonier this week because Ligonier was
your destination; it was the place to
which you were going. Any time you make travel
reservations with a travel agent, the thing
they want to know is, what is your destination,
that is where are you headed, where do you hope to end up? Now when we're talking about
the doctrine of predestination, we are not talking
specifically about questions of whether or not God directly
caused an automobile accident to take place, or if you
were determined in advance to be sitting in the
chair in which you are sitting right now. The doctrine of predestination
is concerned specifically with the question of our
ultimate destination. There are only two destinations
open to us as human beings - ultimately, they are
heaven or hell, that is, to be in a state of salvation or
to be in a state of damnation. And predestination
proper is concerned not with those daily
questions of whether or not I drop this chalk on the
floor, if that was predestined. That would fall
under the theological heading of providence. And those questions are
legitimate questions for theology - how much
God's sovereignty is involved in our everyday actions
and activities and so on. But the doctrine of
predestination proper is concerned about the
question of salvation, and predestination is
concerned about something that takes place before we
arrive at that destination. Predestination has to do
with God's involvement in the ultimate
outcome of our lives. Now this may strike
you as strange, but both Augustinians
and semi-Pelagians agree that predestination
is something that God does. Predestination has to do
with God's choice regarding salvation, God's
choice regarding the salvation of people. And this may also surprise
you, that both sides agree that God makes that choice
about our ultimate destination before we are even born, indeed,
at the foundation of the world, as we just read in
Ephesians that God chose certain people at
the foundation, before the foundation
of the world. Now that may surprise you. John Wesley believed that. Philip Melancthon believed that. (I meant to put Philip
Melancthon on that list a moment ago, too,
but I didn't). But in any case, where
the point of division is, is at this critical
juncture: On what basis does God choose to save
you before the foundation of the world? Is God's choice to save you
based upon His prior knowledge of something that He looks
down the corridors of time and sees that you
are going to do? And therefore, looking
down the corridors of time, He knows for example
Dick, that you're going to respond
positively to the gospel, that you're going
to choose Christ when the opportunity
avails itself to you? Knowing that you are
going to choose Christ, God then chooses
you to be saved. But He bases that choice
on His prior knowledge of Dick's decision. Is that clear? So that God is choosing
you for salvation, but He's choosing you
because of something He foresees in your life. The Augustinian view,
on the contrary, would say that what God
foresees in your life has nothing whatsoever to
do with His choice of you, that His choice is sheerly by
the good pleasure of His will without any view to
anything you may or may not do in the future. That's basically the
heart of the issue, of whether or not the choice
is with a view to what you do or without a view to
what you do or what you will do with respect to
the proclamation of the gospel. Now there are other things that
we all hold in common and then as we agree at certain points,
then the divergences come. And the first thing that
every Christian agrees on, is that the God that we
worship is a sovereign God. How sovereignty
works itself out, in the matters of salvation,
is what divides us, and so in our next
session we're going to look at the concept of
the sovereignty of God.
