« Monkey Love | Main | Leave A Comment, Save A Life: Year 2 »

If Nothing Else, It Is Consistent

February 17, 2006

con-sis-tent adj. - In agreement; compatible: The testimony was consistent with the known facts. Being in agreement with itself; coherent and uniform: a consistent pattern of behavior.

There are many who would claim that there are many inconsistencies found in the Bible which I, of course, would disagree. I believe that the Bible as a whole is a consistent work with books that compliment one another completely in their inerrant revelation of God and His kingdom. I also believe that with a Bible that is consistent there should come a theology that is also consistent.

When I used to be the type of person to see everything at surface level I found myself agreeing with pretty much anybody who sounded like they knew what they were talking about. Therefore, the "if it feels good, do it" senario played itself out into my theology. I would only believe what sounded good to me, you know, the things that tickled my ear. It came to a point where I could take what this one person says, and add it to what this other person says and make some kind of frankenstein theology that is nothing more than bits and pieces of what different people believe about the Bible. Thus I carried around my inconsistencies and declared myself to be what was accepted at the time. Many of my Baptist friends would talk about how many points of Calvinism they actually agree with, and I would often tell people that I was a 3 point Calvinist as if that was a firm position. Even at school we would go around saying I am a 2 pointer or a 3 pointer. It was not until I began to process what that really meant that I found the major inconstancies in what I said I believed.

I ventured into a major struggle in my life, a battle that raged within me for months and months as I fought with and tackled theology and what I really believed, and in the process I did the one thing that was most important, I remained open to change, I was teachable. Had I not remained open or teachable then the struggle I faced would have been in vain. We have such hard heads sometimes when it comes to what we've heard for years upon years that we tend to defend things even beyond reason and we become unteachable, unchangeable, and unmovable and I struggle to understand how God can use someone who inevitably knows it all. I don't claim to have all the answers, but I do know that when dealing with God and Godly things He is unchangeable, unmovable, unshakable, and He does know it all. Thus I feel that God is unbelievably consistent, beyond our own understanding, and from his own divine consistency he brings forth a Word that is also consistent and that Word ultimately teaches us a consistent theology that aligns itself to the unchangeable, unmovable, and unshakable characteristics of God Himself. This Word from God makes sense in view of who God is, and is meant to bring to mere humans a revelation of the divine through the power of the Spirit and the immeasurable wisdom of the God who breathed it.

I firmly believe that if you are going to hold to a theology or belief that it should be one that is consistent with who God is, consistent with the Word of God, and consistent with the way God works in the world. I've already talked about the inconsistency of believing in total depravity and one's ability to choose Christ or reject Him. If you say that man is spiritually dead and cannot do good, then how can anyone say man has the ability to do the greatest good that he could ever do by choosing his own salvation? But what about the other inconsistencies found in being what I term a Cal-minian or a 2-3 point Calvinist?

Believing in total depravity or perseverance of the saints does not pose a threat or does not seem to be difficult to understand and therefore many will agree with these doctrines with no problems or issues. Maybe this conversation sounds familiar:

General Question: "Do you believe man is basically good or basically bad?"

Typical Baptist Answer: "I believe that man is bad. The bible says that no one can do good, not even one and that even our righteous acts are like filthy rags."

General Question: "Do you believe that once a person is saved they could ever lose their salvation?"

Typical Baptist Answer: "No way. Once you are saved, you are always saved. The Bible says that nothing can take you from the hand of Christ and God is faithful to see you through till the end. Jesus died only once for all of your sins."

Now lets deal with the other three major ideas that most people have trouble with, which are unconditional election, limited atonement, and irresistible grace.

Unconditional Election - The idea of unconditional election is that God chooses or elects individuals unconditionally, not based off of merits, future acts, or anything else he sees within an individual. This means God has elected, based solely upon the counsel of his own will, some for glory and others for damnation (Romans 9:15,21) and he did it all before the foundations of the world (Ephesians 1:4-8).

First of all, let me point out that many people will say "I don't believe in election." Well, taken literally that means you don't believe in parts of the Bible since election is talked about on several occasions. I think the more correct response would be to accept that election exists and then discover what you believe about it and why. Many feel that election is unfair, it is a violation of our rights to choose, it is not something a loving God would do, and it is a doctrine of hate and discrimination and not love. I believe, however, that election is the most consistent with total depravity and perseverance of the saints, the two doctrines that cal-minians and many Christians would agree with.

Total depravity says that no one is good, not one, and no one has the ability to do good because of the corrupt sinful nature of man. Being a man that is totally depraved and spiritually dead, then what do I deserve? Do we deserve salvation? Do we deserve to go to heaven? Have we earned it? I think the idea of total depravity is that we all deserve eternity apart from God. Therefore if God would make the choice not to save anyone, we would all deserve eternal damnation. If we agree to the concept of total depravity, then we must start from the idea that no one deserves to be saved, not one. This is the state of things, everyone has sinned, everyone has fallen short of the glory of God, no one can get to heaven because we all deserve hell and there is absolutely nothing that we can do to earn salvation and there is no way we can become self-righteous people and we call this being totally depraved. If this is the state of man, then it comes natural to understand that election is God choosing to pluck man out of a state of depravity and saving them from a punishment that they deserve. Thus, for those being saved there is unfathomable grace, and for those who are depraved there is mysterious justice and both serve to glorify the righteousness of God.

Election is not only consistent with the idea of total depravity, it is also consistent with the idea of perseverance of the saints. A common Baptist doctrine is the belief that once you are saved you are always saved. You cannot lose your salvation. But this makes most sense in the view that God has willingly and freely elected those who are spiritually depraved to become spiritually alive. Jesus says his sheep will never perish (John 10:27-28) and Paul has said that we have passed out of judgment (Romans 8:1). It doesn't make much sense to say that we have an ability to choose salvation, but once we have chosen that road we have lost our freedom and we can't get out of it, even if we wanted to.

I admit that most Christians would say, well "who would want to get out of it" and then they would willingly conclude that no one would want to get unsaved and therefore that is silly to even think about the possibility that anyone would actually want to get unsaved and live apart from God and yet, if you have the freedom to get into it, then why don't you have the freedom to get out? It seems inconsistent with the whole concept of free choice. Unless of course our choices are dictated by a greater force. For instance, when we are utterly depraved and sinful and we can do no good, then our choices will always be sinful for we are a slave to a greater force within us, but when God changes us, we are saved and made Spiritually alive then we become what Paul calls "slaves to righteousness". When we are depraved we will never choose God and when we are saved we will always choose him in regards to salvation (which doesn't mean we won't sin).

This leads us into another one of the points of Calvinism called irresistible grace which says that when God calls people into salvation, they cannot or will not resist. The totally depraved person who cannot choose good will always reject God, but once the work of the Spirit regenerates a person and brings them to repentance then they not only have the ability to willingly and freely choose him, they will do so. This should make sense to the person who says "who would want to get out of salvation?" The answer is simple, nobody would. Once you have been regenerated by the Spirit and you realize that you were once dead and now you are alive, then there is no way you would ever go back and thus you will choose God and this is irresistible grace. Again, many choose to be Cal-minian or 2 pointers because they cannot accept the fact that God's call is irresistible since it intrudes on a person's freedom, however I think that it does not intrude on freedom at all since my freedom is not free outside the bounds of a greater influence. Meaning my will and choices are tied to my spiritual state, when I'm spiritually dead and depraved my choices will reflect that and when I am regenerate and alive my choices will reflect that. Those choices are free within my given state and thus my choice remains consistent with whichever state I reside in and yet it relies on the sovereign will of God and his mercy or justice. "But to all who did receive him, who believed in his name, he gave the right to become children of God, who were born, not of blood nor of the will of the flesh nor of the will of man, but of God." John 1:12-13.

This leaves us with the last point of Calvinism, Limited Atonement. This is the one that is rejected more than any other point, even when people don't realize what they are talking about. Most people say, "I don't believe in that election business", but what they really mean is they don't believe in limited atonement which says that Jesus died for only the elect. I must admit that I have and had the hardest time with this one. As a cal-minian I slowly climbed that ladder of acceptance until I hit limited atonement and then I became a 4 point Cal-minian, which is kind of weird if you ask me since it's hard to accept election as viewed by reformed theology and not accept limited atonement. Nonetheless, I found myself capable of the contradiction and held to it. What is the scriptural references for this? Well, there is Matthew 26:28 that says that Jesus died for 'many' and not for all and then there is John 10:11, 15 that talks about the sheep that Jesus died for and not the goats. Then we have John 17:9 that says that jesus interceded only for those that were given to Him and again in Isaiah 53:12 where it says that he bore the sins of many and not all. While this may be the hardest point to accept, it remains consistent with the other points.

All of this to say that the points of Calvinism are consistent with each other and do have Scriptural basis that seems to remain consistent as well. To agree with some of the points, or to be a cal-minian seems to bring about more inconsistencies and irrational thoughts than to agree with it as a whole. Instead of saying that we are 2 point calvinists or 3 point calvinists, we should recognize that anything but a 5 point calvinist or a no point calvinist is inconsistent. This probably means that most people who say they believe in total depravity, don't really believe in total depravity to the extent of calvinism and therefore they really can't say that they believe in that particular point of calvinism if you want to get technical about it, but thus I digress. Sometimes I just get a little to detailed and picky about things and that is my fault.

Really it doesn't matter as long as you are striving to make sure you are consistent in your beliefs and open to be teachable. I venture to say that none of us are completely right and it is only in Scripture that we will find the undeniable, unchangeable, and unshakable revelation of God that is completely consistent. It is in the study and spirit led revelation of God's Word that I believe we will find the truth and the truth shall set us free.

Comments

Posted by: dave
February 23, 2006 08:33 PM

Man that's a lot to chew on... great work.

We were discussing this issue in regards to Judas over at the Sheep's Crib and I pointed folks over here- keep it up-