In Calvinism, the fundamental thing that separates the saved from the damned is faith. Those to whom God wants to save will be given the gift of faith, while those whom God does not want to save will never be given the gift of faith. In other words, in the Calvinist world view, there's nothing worse than being an unbeliever. But if this is the case, why does Saint Paul say it's possible to be "worse than an unbeliever"?
I believe 1 Timothy 5:8 is the scariest passage in all of Scripture, for it gives everyone a lot to think about: "If anyone does not provide for his relatives, and especially for members of his household, he has denied the faith and is worse than an unbeliever." St Paul is talking to Christian parents here, who have a grave obligation to care for their family. For those Christians willfully failing this duty, Paul has a most stern rebuke: they have denied the faith and are worse than an unbeliever. So contrary to Calvinism, what is worse than an unbeliever is a Christian who falls away from the faith.
Anyone who's an adult should have some fear in reading this passage, for they must realize that this could happen to them. But Calvinism expressly denies such a thing is possible. As such, they must try desperately to spin this verse to mean either the person in question was either (a) never really saved, or (b) that a Christian cannot really commit this sin.
The problem with saying they were never really saved is that such an assertion is purely begging the question and even goes against the plain reading of the text. To "deny the faith" in this context is clearly an act of apostasy. While Calvinists believe in apostasy, they just believe anyone who falls into apostasy was never saved, which makes no sense. One cannot fall away if they were never a member to begin with. The language of "worse than" an unbeliever further testifies to the fact this person is not an unbeliever, but rather of another category, that of being saved and not persevering (2 Peter 2:20-21).
The problem with saying that a Christian cannot really commit this would likewise be begging the question, and even presuming Paul wasn't serious. But even if Paul didn't think a Christian could commit this sin, Paul would still be making an inaccurate theological claim by saying there is such a thing as "worse than an unbeliever."
10 comments:
Not much is really expected from an unbeliever.
But one who is in Christ really ought to have concept of loving the neighbor, and sacrifice.
Interesting point made by Steve. Perhaps it is truly worse in the eyes of God to see a believer disobey his commands rather than a an unbeliever.
Steve Martin said...
Not much is really expected from an unbeliever.
But one who is in Christ really ought to have concept of loving the neighbor, and sacrifice.
Lutherans believe in faith alone, don't they? It is the pillar of your faith. How does this verse fit into the faith alone framework?11
JohnD said...
Interesting point made by Steve. Perhaps it is truly worse in the eyes of God to see a believer disobey his commands rather than a an unbeliever.
Scripture says:
Luke 12:46-48
King James Version (KJV)
46 The lord of that servant will come in a day when he looketh not for him, and at an hour when he is not aware, and will cut him in sunder, and will appoint him his portion with the unbelievers.
47 And that servant, which knew his lord's will, and prepared not himself, neither did according to his will, shall be beaten with many stripes.
48 But he that knew not, and did commit things worthy of stripes, shall be beaten with few stripes. For unto whomsoever much is given, of him shall be much required: and to whom men have committed much, of him they will ask the more.
Therefore, your comment is true. However, I believe it is besides the point. Steve is trying to sidestep the ramifications of this verse in terms of the false doctrine of faith alone. He wants us to overlook the fact that this proves, powerfully, that good works are supremely important for a good relationship with Our Lord.
De Maria,
Believers are free. Freed from the religious ascendancy project...and freed for the neighbor.
That we quite often refuse to love God and the neighbor exposes us. And we are led, by God's grace to repentance...and to forgiveness.
There's no such dynamic for unbelievers. So while it may be worse that believers refuse to act for the neighbor...it is far worse, in the long run, for the unbeliever who face being eternally lost.
Steve,
I don't get it. I asked you:
How does this verse fit into the faith alone framework?
This verse being 1 Tim 5:8
"If anyone does not provide for his relatives, and especially for members of his household, he has denied the faith and is worse than an unbeliever."
You reply:
Steve Martin said...
De Maria,
Believers are free. Freed from the religious ascendancy project...and freed for the neighbor.
That we quite often refuse to love God and the neighbor exposes us. And we are led, by God's grace to repentance...and to forgiveness.
There's no such dynamic for unbelievers. So while it may be worse that believers refuse to act for the neighbor...
Worse in what way? And why would it be worse than an unbeliever that is going to hell, if there is no connection between good works and salvation?
it is far worse, in the long run, for the unbeliever who face being eternally lost.
I don't see the connection between your explanation and the verse being discussed.
I also see a big error. God is not a respecter of persons. He judges all the same way. BY THEIR WORKS.
For He will repay according to each one's deeds: but glory and honor and peace for everyone who does good, the Jew first and also the Greek. For God shows no partiality. (Romans 2:6,10,11).
Nick,
Once again you show yourself to be an utterly unqualified critic of Calvinism. Observe:
>>In Calvinism, the fundamental thing that separates the saved from the damned is faith. <<
Every card-carrying Calvinist who might chance upon this statement will have to work real hard not to laugh at you. I tried, but failed and am now laughing at you.
But you are close. The difference-maker isn't faith, but rather another five-letter word called "grace."
The only difference between those in hell and those in heaven is grace. For reasons known but to God alone, he has graciously chosen to give some his grace and mercy and the rest his justice, which he has every right to do.
Of course this isn't just a "Calvinist" view; rather it is common to all Augustinians (including Thomists, within the Roman Catholic tradition). And of course Augustine got his ideas mainly from Paul.
Faith is simply what God gives the elect in order to believe in him. But faith is only given to those whom God intends to save by his grace.
This is why Paul can say that "by grace you have been saved through faith." Notice the priority of grace and the instrumentality of faith.
So now we can ask what you version of Romanism teaches. What is the difference between someone in heaven and someone in hell? Cooperation, predicated on human autonomous choice. In other words, *essential* to one's being in heaven is that one has made a better choice than those in hell. We Calvinists would say that this is only *incidentally* the case.
If you could have traded places with Adam, Nick, do you think you would have made a better choice than he did?
Cheers,
Mike Taylor
Michael Taylor said...
Nick,
Once again you show yourself to be an utterly unqualified critic of Calvinism. Observe:
>>In Calvinism, the fundamental thing that separates the saved from the damned is faith. <<
Every card-carrying Calvinist who might chance upon this statement will have to work real hard not to laugh at you. I tried, but failed and am now laughing at you.
But you are close. The difference-maker isn't faith, but rather another five-letter word called "grace."
Problem. Faith is a grace, according to Scripture:
Romans 4:16
Therefore it is of faith, that it might be by grace;....
Faith is the predisposing grace of God without which we can't be saved.
The only difference between those in hell and those in heaven is grace.
That is Catholic Teaching.
For reasons known but to God alone, he has graciously chosen to give some his grace and mercy and the rest his justice, which he has every right to do.
Not exactly. God has given all His grace:
Matthew 5:45
That ye may be the children of your Father which is in heaven: for he maketh his sun to rise on the evil and on the good, and sendeth rain on the just and on the unjust.
But the wicked refuse His grace:
John 6:70
Jesus answered them, Have not I chosen you twelve, and one of you is a devil?
Of course this isn't just a "Calvinist" view; rather it is common to all Augustinians (including Thomists, within the Roman Catholic tradition). And of course Augustine got his ideas mainly from Paul.
No. You are explaining the Calvinist view. We believe in irresistible grace, but not in the same sense.
We believe that we nothing can stop the grace of God. We believe that we can receive the grace of God even through unworthy vessels.
Faith is simply what God gives the elect in order to believe in him. But faith is only given to those whom God intends to save by his grace.
That is your error. God gives all men the grace of faith. But some men choose to reject it:
2 Peter 2:20-22
King James Version (KJV)
20 For if after they have escaped the pollutions of the world through the knowledge of the Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ, they are again entangled therein, and overcome, the latter end is worse with them than the beginning.
21 For it had been better for them not to have known the way of righteousness, than, after they have known it, to turn from the holy commandment delivered unto them.
22 But it is happened unto them according to the true proverb, The dog is turned to his own vomit again; and the sow that was washed to her wallowing in the mire.
1 Timothy 1:19
Holding faith, and a good conscience; which some having put away concerning faith have made shipwreck:
cont'd
cont'd
Mike Taylor said:
This is why Paul can say that "by grace you have been saved through faith." Notice the priority of grace and the instrumentality of faith.
No priority there. He is explaining which grace results in salvation. Faith is that grace.
So now we can ask what you version of Romanism teaches. What is the difference between someone in heaven and someone in hell?
Grace:
James 2:19
Thou believest that there is one God; thou doest well: the devils also believe, and tremble.
Cooperation, predicated on human autonomous choice. In other words, *essential* to one's being in heaven is that one has made a better choice than those in hell.
Basically true. Moses made a better choice than Pharao. Jacob a better choice than Esau. Scripture is clear:
Deuteronomy 30:19
I call heaven and earth to record this day against you, that I have set before you life and death, blessing and cursing: therefore choose life, that both thou and thy seed may live:
We Calvinists would say that this is only *incidentally* the case.
If you could have traded places with Adam, Nick, do you think you would have made a better choice than he did?
I say, "Perhaps Nick might have made a better choice." But, we'll never know.
Besides, it was Eve who messed it all up:
1 Timothy 2:14
King James Version (KJV)
14 And Adam was not deceived, but the woman being deceived was in the transgression.
Cheers,
Mike Taylor
And to you,
Sincerely,
De Maria
Michael,
I'd say you're making a mountain out of a molehill in your grace/faith comments.
The main problem I had with your comments though was that you as a Calvinist espouse a Pelagian notion of grace and faith. To you, unfallen Adam didn't need grace because to you grace is the unmerited favor of God, simply crediting believers with a human (not divine) righteousness earned vicariously through Christ.
Post a Comment