Sovereignty of God in Salvation (Part 2) "Flower's Question"

 

Leighton Flowers, opposing the Sovereignty of God in Salvation, objecting from the provisionist perspective poses this question and suggests no Calvinist has answered it with any substance. Let's examine the question and see if there are any answers with substance. 

(Flowers) A Question for my Calvinistic Friends

When we object to the concept of divine determinism (God's Sovereign work to bring about all things whatsoever that come to pass) [ I object to his use of "divine determinism". Flowers is redefining a Biblical concept articulated in Scripture with the pagan determinism philosophy. He also only quotes a partial phrase from the Reformed Confession making it appear to say something it clearly does not. The Biblical understanding of God's sovereignty in salvation can be seen in verses such as these

(Ephesians 1:11 (ESV) 11 In him we have obtained an inheritance, having been predestined according to the purpose of him who works all things according to the counsel of his will,) (Proverbs 16:4 (ESV) 4  The Lord has made everything for its purpose, even the wicked for the day of trouble.) (Isa 14:26  This is the purpose that is purposed concerning the whole earth, and this is the hand that is stretched out over all the nations. Isa 14:27  For the LORD of hosts has purposed, and who will annul it?) (Dan 4:35  all the inhabitants of the earth are accounted as nothing, and he does according to his will among the host of heaven and among the inhabitants of the earth; and none can stay his hand or say to him, “What have you done?”) Flowers redefines this doctrine of God's Sovereignty and likens it to divine determinism, 

Determinism /dĭ-tûr′mə-nĭz″əm/

noun

(1) The philosophical doctrine that every state of affairs, including every human event, act, and decision, is the inevitable consequence of antecedent states of affairs.

(2) The doctrine that the will is not free, but is inevitably and invincibly determined by motives, preceding events, and natural laws.

(3)The doctrine that all actions are determined by the current state and immutable laws of the universe, with no possibility of choice. (The American Heritage® Dictionary of the English Language, 5th Edition.) 

"Determinism is the idea that everything that happens in the world is determined completely by previously existing causes. We all know that the world runs on cause and effect. Imagine a shot in a game of pool. You hit the cue ball which then strikes another, and the movement of the balls is determined by the laws of physics. But once you’ve hit the ball, neither you nor the balls have any say in which way things turn out! Once the initial cause (you hitting the cue ball) is set in place, everything just follows along through the laws of physics." Does that sound anything like what we read in the previous Scriptures? Flower's question begins dishonestly by forming a false narrative.] 

[Flowers question continues], and you appeal to the crucifixion as your proof that God brings about all moral evil, [I see why no one has bothered to engage his question with any substance, there is no substance to the question. Flowers again redefines the Calvinist doctrine, which does not allow God to bring about moral evil. "neither is God the author of sin" Westminister Confession of Faith (1689) the other part of the Confession Flowers did not quote.] [Flowers continues], are you saying that God is sovereignly working so as to redeem the very sins He sovereignly worked to bring about? [No, that is not what the doctrine states.] Is Calvary just about god cleaning up His own mess, redeeming His own determinations? [No, that is not what the doctrine states] There is not a Reformed Confession or Calvinist doctrine that suggests God is working to bring about sin. Flowers again is redefining the Reformed doctrine of God's Sovereignty to fit his narrative. Below are doctrines stated by Reformed Confessions of Faith]

 III. 

Westminister Confession of Faith (1646)

Of God's Eternal Decree

1. God from all eternity, did, by the most wise and holy counsel of His own will, freely, and unchangeably ordain whatsoever comes to pass: (Eph. 1:11, Rom. 11:33, Heb. 6:17, Rom. 9:15,18) yet so, as thereby neither is God the author of sin, (James 1:13,17, 1 John 1:5) nor is violence offered to the will of the creatures; nor is the liberty or contingency of second causes taken away, but rather established. (Acts 2:23, Matt. 17:12, Acts 4:27–28, John 19:11, Prov. 16:33) 

St. Augustine (354-430 AD) writes in his Enchiridion: “What happens contrary to his will occurs, in a wonderful and ineffable way, not apart from his will. For it would not happen if he did not allow it. And yet he does not allow it unwillingly but willingly. But he who is good would not permit evil to be done, unless, being omnipotent, he could bring good out of evil.” [Agustine points out God may permit evil to be done but does not bring it about.]

London Baptist Confession (1689)

Paragraph 1. God hath decreed in himself, from all eternity, by the most wise and holy counsel of His own will, freely and unchangeably, all things, whatsoever comes to pass; yet so as thereby is God neither the author of sin nor hath fellowship with any therein; nor is violence offered to the will of the creature, nor yet is the liberty or contingency of second causes taken away, but rather established; in which appears His wisdom in disposing all things, and power and faithfulness in accomplishing His decree.

Abstract of Principles (1858)

IV. PROVIDENCE

God from eternity, decrees or permits all things that come to pass, and perpetually upholds, directs, and governs all creatures and all events; yet so as not in any wise to be the author or approver of sin nor to destroy the free will and responsibility of intelligent creatures.

Calvinistic Methodists of Wales (1823)

5. Of God’s Decree.

God, from eternity, after the council of his own will, and for the manifestation and exaltation of his glorious attributes, decreed all that he would do in time and to eternity, in creation, in the government of his creatures, and in the salvation of sinners of the human race; yet so that he is not the author of sin nor constrains the will of his creature in its actions (a). The decree of God depends not in the least upon the creature nor upon the foreknowledge of God himself; on the contrary, God knows that certain things will be, because he has decreed that they should be (b). God’s decree is infinitely wise (c), and perfectly just (d); eternal (e), free (f), comprehensive (g), secret (h), gracious (I), holy (j), good (k), unchangeable (l), and effectual (m).

Flowers is asking a question about a reformed doctrine that does not exist. He uses the philosophy of determinism and gives it a divine aspect, then applies that definition to the Sovereign decree of God. However, that is not the definition offered by reformed confessions of faith. 

Flowers' understanding seems to be that God constrains the will of the creature, eliminating second causes (accidents) and the free will of men to do as they please to accomplish His purpose. Whereas the doctrine of God's divine Sovereignty as stated in the reformed confessions of faith specifically states that God accomplishes His divine decrees without doing violence to the will of the creature nor having any fellowship with the creature's sin.   

Flower's reference to the crucifixion saying, [and you appeal to the crucifixion as your proof that God brings about all moral evil] is found in Acts Chapter 4. 

Act 4:24  And when they heard it, they lifted their voices together to God and said, “Sovereign Lord, who made the heaven and the earth and the sea and everything in them, 

Act 4:25  who through the mouth of our father David, your servant, said by the Holy Spirit, “‘Why did the Gentiles rage, and the people plot in vain? 

Act 4:26  The kings of the earth set themselves, and the rulers were gathered together, against the Lord and against his Anointed’— 

Act 4:27  for truly in this city there were gathered together against your holy servant Jesus, whom you anointed, both Herod and Pontius Pilate, along with the Gentiles and the peoples of Israel, 

Act 4:28  to do whatever your hand and your plan had predestined to take place.

Flower's question concerning this verse is, why do Calvinists appeal to the crucifixion as their proof that God brings about all moral evil. Calvinists make no appeal from any scripture that God brings about moral evil. His question is irrelevant and dishonest. 

As to Acts Chapter 4, Luke records that Herod, Pilate, the Gentiles, and the people of Israel all did what God had pre-determined to take place. It takes place at the exact time and place God had ordained. It involved the people God had determined to use. Flowers calls this divine determinism. We have already defined determinism which has nothing to do with God's Sovereignty over His creation. 

What we do see is described in the reformed confessions, the sin involved in the crucifixion was not brought about by God, but by the people committing the sin. Being a sinner does not remove you from the Sovereign acts of God. God's infinite ability of Omnipotence and omniscient uses the sinner with his sin and the saint alike to accomplish His will and purpose, God does this without violating the "will of the creature."  As stated in the London Baptist Confession of 1689, Paragraph 1. God hath decreed in himself, from all eternity, by the most wise and holy counsel of His own will, freely and unchangeably, all things, whatsoever comes to pass; yet so as thereby is God neither the author of sin nor hath fellowship with any therein; nor is violence offered to the will of the creature, nor yet is the liberty or contingency of second causes taken away, but rather established; in which appears His wisdom in disposing all things, and power and faithfulness in accomplishing His decree. 

That is simply stating God can accomplish his will and purpose using the sin of the sinner, and do so without violence being done to the free will of the sinner who is committed to his sin. How God accomplishes this is a mystery, but the fact He does is demonstrated in Acts Chapter 4. and throughout redemptive history. 

[Flowers continues] Appealing to God's sovereign work to ensure the redemption of sin so as to prove that God sovereignly works to bring about all the sin that was redeemed is a self-defeating argument. [Only in the manner in which Flowers re-frames the statement.] It would be tantamount to arguing that because a police department set up a sting operation to catch a notorious drug dealer, that the police department is responsible for every single intention and action of all drug dealers at all times. Proof that the police department worked in secretive ways to hide their identities, use evil intentions, and work out the circumstances in such a way that the drug dealer would do what they wanted him to do (sell drugs) at that particular moment in time does not suggest that the police are in any way responsible for all that drug dealer has done or ever will do. [Irrevelant analogy, the police department is not omnipotent nor omniscient, it is self-defeating to compare the police department to an infinite God] [Flowers continues] We celebrate and reward the actions of the police department because they are working to stop the drug activity, not because they are secretly causing all of it so as to stop some of it. Teaching that God brings about all sin [Flowers is again creating a false narrative, as you can see in the reformed confessions, that is not taught] based on how He brought about Calvary is like teaching that the police officer brings about every drug deal based on how he brought about one sting operation.

Yes, at times the scriptures do speak of God “hardening” men's hearts (Ex 7; Rm. 9), blinding them with a “spirit of stupor” (Rm. 11:8) and delaying their healing by use of parabolic language (Mk. 4:11-12, 34; Matt. 16:20), and He always does so for a redemptive good. But the reason such passages stand out so distinctly from the rest of scripture is because of their uniqueness. [They don't stand out from the rest of Scripture, they agree with and affirm the whole of Scripture concerning God's Sovereign Decree] [Flowers continues] If God worked this way in every instance these texts would make no sense. After all, what is there for God to harden, provoke, or restrain if not the autonomous will of creatures? 

[Flowers is again re-framing statements to assist in his narrative. Was Hitler as bad as he could have been? Are any sinners as bad as they could be? If God removed his restraint upon this sinful world we would be incapable of maintaining a society. His restraint upon man's sinfulness makes it possible for society and government to exist. When God removes a measure of this restraint the sinner's heart is hardened in proportion to that measure.] 

2Th 2:6  And you know what is restraining him now so that he may be revealed in his time. 2Th 2:7  For the mystery of lawlessness is already at work. Only he who now restrains it will do so until he is out of the way. 2Th 2:8  And then the lawless one will be revealed, whom the Lord Jesus will kill with the breath of his mouth and bring to nothing by the appearance of his coming. 

Proverbs 29:18 Where there is no vision, the people are unrestrained, But happy is he who keeps the law.

Psa 19:13  Keep back your servant also from presumptuous sins; let them not have dominion over me! Then I shall be blameless, and innocent of great transgression. 

Psa 141:4  Do not let my heart incline to any evil, to busy myself with wicked deeds in company with men who work iniquity, and let me not eat of their delicacies! 

[Flowers continues]

If everything is under the meticulous control of God's sovereign work what is left to permit and or restrain except that which He is already controlling? Is God merely restraining something that He previously determined? Why blind eyes from seeing something they were “naturally” predetermined not to see? Why put a parabolic blind fold on the corpse like dead sinner incapable of seeing spiritual truth? These are questions many Calvinists seem unwilling to entertain at any depth. Nothing in Flowers's closing statements is relevant to any Calvinistic doctrine or Confession of faith. One example of the Calvinist doctrine of God's Sovereignty is found in Acts Chapter 27, where we read the account of Paul's shipwreck. From Galatians 1:15 we discover Paul was called from his mother's womb.  What if Paul had not wanted to serve Christ? He certainly would not have been on the ship. But the Calvinist doctrine of God's sovereignty in Salvation states He (God) calls the elect to himself, yet he does so without violating the will or doing away with 2nd causes. 

So we understand Paul is called from his mother's womb, but it would be many years later on the road to Damascus before he would be converted. He would not have been considered a likely candidate for Gospel conversion, but God is sovereign in whom He calls. Paul's life is under the meticulous control of God's sovereign work and Acts 27 is only one such example in his lifetime. 

In Acts 27 we hear the words of the Angel to Paul, "Act 27:23  For this very night there stood before me an angel of the God to whom I belong and whom I worship, 

Act 27:24  and he said, ‘Do not be afraid, Paul; you must stand before Caesar."

Here we discover it was God's purpose for Paul to stand before Caesar, we can now see that all the events that led up to Paul being on that ship were due to that purpose. Paul's reasoning for appealing to Caesar, those thoughts and intents were made long before in Acts 25, and the decision in the minds of Festus and Agrippa to send him to Caesar was all according to God's purpose. God was meticulously in control bringing about His purpose using the minds and reasonings of all involved, yet doing so without violating their will and understandings. Paul standing in the counsel before Festus and Agrippa was a contingent event, a second cause that brought it all about. God (in His sovereign providence) meticulously brought everything according to His purpose. 

The event itself in Acts 27 is filled with meticulous control, the storm, the direction of the wind, and the time and place of each event of each day all bringing about God's purpose. Plots were made contrary to God's purpose, yet they were foiled through predetermined events that involved the reasonings and thoughts of those in key positions. The very survival of the crew is directly attributed to the meticulous providence of God. Verse 24, "And behold, God has granted you all those who sail with you.’ " When the ship broke apart, each individual had to make a decision when and where to jump, that decision would bring them to a board or piece of ship by which they could survive. All was their decision based upon their own reasoning of self-preservation, yet we understand from Scripture it was the providence of God fulfilling his purpose in all things.

This is God  Paragraph 1. God hath decreed in himself, from all eternity, by the most wise and holy counsel of His own will, freely and unchangeably, all things, whatsoever comes to pass; yet so as thereby is God neither the author of sin nor hath fellowship with any therein; nor is violence offered to the will of the creature, nor yet is the liberty or contingency of second causes taken away, but rather established; in which appears His wisdom in disposing all things, and power and faithfulness in accomplishing His decree. 

Flowers wants to call this Calvinistic divine determinism and attribute the sin of those who would kill Paul and abandon their post as being brought about by God. Yet God had no fellowship with their sin. It is a travesty that some would deny God His Sovereign Providence. Flower's statements refuting God's meticulous control are nothing but double talk.

dou·​ble-talk ˈdə-bəl-ˌtȯk  (Marriam-Webster)

1: language that appears to be earnest and meaningful but in fact is a mixture of sense and nonsense

2: inflated, involved, and often deliberately ambiguous language

It is so commonly understood in our society that God is in control of our world, when I typed in the search engine "God is not in meticulous control cartoon" there was not a single cartoon displayed. All cartoons displayed God as in complete control of everything. God's Sovereignty over His creation is necessary to the very doctrine of God. 

Flowers states, "Traditionalists [Traditionalists is a meaningless term used in this context] believe at times throughout history God does intervene to determine some things. That is what makes these things “of God” and uniquely supernatural. We also believe God uses means similar to what some Calvinists describe in these instances. We do not believe, however, these unique divine determinations prove God’s meticulous determination of all things, especially man’s evil intentions. In fact, in every one of the instances listed above, the purpose of God’s unique intervention is clearly redemptive. I refuse to believe God is merely seeking to redeem the very evil intentions and actions that He Himself predetermined."

 

Flowers states he believes things similar to what Calvinists believe, he is forced to say that because of the Scriptural witness. Numerous times in Scripture God simply turns men wherever he pleases. (Pro 21:1  The king's heart is a stream of water in the hand of the LORD; he turns it wherever he will.) (Dan 4:24  this is the interpretation, O king: It is a decree of the Most High, which has come upon my lord the king,  Dan 4:25  that you shall be driven from among men, and your dwelling shall be with the beasts of the field. You shall be made to eat grass like an ox, and you shall be wet with the dew of heaven, and seven periods of time shall pass over you, till you know that the Most High rules the kingdom of men and gives it to whom he will.)  

Flowers confuses this with God's working of providence over all his creatures. Though God can as Flowers suggests at will rule the mind of men, He doesn't need to turn the heart of a king or any man to accomplish His will. He simply works within the bounds of His Providence as in the previously stated reformed confessions of faith.  (yet so as thereby is God neither the author of sin nor hath fellowship with any therein; nor is violence offered to the will of the creature, nor yet is the liberty or contingency of second causes taken away).  

Flowers clarifies himself by stating, (he) unlike the Calvinist, does not believe God brings about man's evil intentions, [Neither does the Calvinist, Flowers is again being dishonest] I refer you to the Reformed Confessions. Flowers ends with double talk, suggesting God's Sovereignty in Salvation consists of God "merely seeking to redeem the very evil intentions and actions that He Himself predetermined." However, what God has actually done, is redeem man from his sinful nature, and He (God) decreed so from before the foundation of the world. 

Rev 13:8  and all who dwell on earth will worship it, everyone whose name has not been written before the foundation of the world in the book of life of the Lamb who was slain. 

1Pe 1:18  knowing that you were ransomed from the futile ways inherited from your forefathers, not with perishable things such as silver or gold, 

1Pe 1:19  but with the precious blood of Christ, like that of a lamb without blemish or spot. 

1Pe 1:20  He was foreknown before the foundation of the world but was made manifest in the last times for the sake of you 

1Pe 1:21  who through him are believers in God, who raised him from the dead and gave him glory, so that your faith and hope are in God.  

May God bless,

David 

Sovereignty of God in Salvation (Part 1)

 

How we approach certain scripture in our understanding is called doctrine. Doctrines usually are not directly stated in scripture but develop throughout its pages. One example is the Trinity, God's triune nature is not directly stated in specific terms in scripture. The Doctrine however becomes evident when scripture is viewed in full perspective. 

God's sovereignty in Salvation is understood in the same way. No scripture says God is sovereign in Salvation by direct statement. Only when one views scripture in its wholeness does it come to light. The Doctrine basically states that God is not limited by man in His ability to save him. If God saves a person He (God) does so by overcoming any resistance that person may have had to the Gospel. God is sovereign in His ability to save. 

However, there are groups within Christianity that call themselves Provisionist. They reject this understanding of the scripture and put forth the idea that God's grace is only provisional. In other words, God doesn't actually save the person but makes provisional grace available. It is up to the person to accept this provision of grace, if the person chooses to do so, God will then regenerate him, causing him to be born again, or save him. In this issue wherein lies the problem, it takes God's sovereign ability to save and places it in the hands of men and their fallen corrupt wills. 

It must be understood that God's sovereign ability to save is not God overcoming a person's will and forcing him to believe. Sometimes provisionists will insist that if God is sovereign in Salvation it makes man a robot. Robots act without thought or emotion, but God so works upon the will, that the person willfully and joyfully comes. God's grace so works in the person's understanding that the things he previously found detestable are now desirable. It is a gracious sovereign act of God. 

Leighton Flowers claims to be a former Calvinist but often articulates the Calvinistic view improperly by redefining reformed definitions and creating his own narrative to defend his position. In a recent commit on 1 Timothy 2:3-4 ESV

(3)  This is good, and it is pleasing in the sight of God our Savior, (4)  who desires all people to be saved and to come to the knowledge of the truth. 

Flowers put forth the argument that God desires to save all people but cannot because they simply choose to remain in unbelief, and God cannot do anything to overcome that unbelief. He puts forward an analogy of a boy trying to woo a young girl, He desires her, so he tries to win her affection. He demonstrates that the natural and reasonable response would be to find a girl who reciprocates his feelings for her. Obviously, he can't force this girl's affections. 

Flowers insists that saying God is sovereign in Salvation would be like this young man giving the girl a love potion to make her love him. She will never really love him, but as long as this love potion flows through her veins the young man will experience this false affection. According to Flowers, this is supposed to be an insight into understanding the meaning of God's sovereignty in Salvation. When God is trying to win people's affections he must use a love potion on them. That is such a demeaning description of the grace of God that is worked upon the heart of a sinner.  Using such analogies has nothing to do with the nature and being of God and his relation to his creation. God's gracious work upon the heart of a sinner is not a potion, it's a sovereign work of God in Salvation. The love for God brought about in the sinner's heart is a real love and affection, to liken it to a potion is an affront to the grace of God.

Furthermore, what exactly does Flowers think happens at the new birth? Is that when a person is given this love potion? According to Flowers's example, the sinner must be given the love potion at some point or is Flowers saying the sinner loves God without first receiving grace. The sinner will not love God unless it is given to him through grace. Rom_5:5  And hope maketh not ashamed; because the love of God is shed abroad in our hearts by the Holy Ghost which is given unto us.

The last verses of 2 Timothy 2:23-26 ESV state, 

(25)  . . . . God may perhaps grant them repentance leading to a knowledge of the truth, (26)  and they may come to their senses and escape from the snare of the devil, after being captured by him to do his will. 

Concerning those who oppose the truth, Paul instructs Timothy to be patient, for God may grant them repentance, leading them to know the truth. Notice their understanding of the Gospel and its truth will come because God grants them repentance.  It will not come because God is trying to woo their affection. Flowers counters by saying, that God granting repentance to the Gentiles in Acts 11:18 is the same thing. Act_11:18  When they heard these things, they held their peace, and glorified God, saying, Then hath God also to the Gentiles granted repentance unto life. 

However, Paul is talking generally in Acts 11-18. Here he is talking specifically about those who oppose him, and he specifically states that if God grants them repentance it will be a repentance that leads them to the knowledge of the truth. Flowers's suggestion that it is the same as Acts 11:18 is senseless. Flowers also ignores second causes and contingencies and tries to take issue with the word "patients" in  2Ti 2:24  And the servant of the Lord must not strive; but be gentle unto all men, apt to teach, patient, 2Ti 2:25  In meekness instructing those that oppose themselves; if God peradventure will give them repentance to the acknowledging of the truth;, suggesting if God granting repentance caused them to repent it would not be necessary for Paul to encourage patients. 

God uses different means to bring us to repentance, our patients can be one of those means. But Flowers tries to turn that truth by presenting another analogy. A teacher wants all her students to listen and learn. Flowers explains they have all been programmed to not be interested in what she has to say. They do however have a switch on the back of their necks which she can switch on, and they will then listen. Flowers likens this to God sovereignly working upon the sinful heart of man to turn him from his sin. Man has no switch on the back of his neck, however, he does have a fallen and corrupt nature that is hostile toward God. Rom 8:7  For the mind that is set on the flesh is hostile to God, for it does not submit to God's law; indeed, it cannot.   This hostility is only overcome by God's Sovereign work of grace in Salvation.  It is unwise to compare God's sovereign work in salvation to such demeaning analogies. 

We need to approach this issue not with stories and analogies but with the scriptures themselves. Is God trying to woo us into choosing Him, or is He choosing us by His sovereign will and purpose? We'll return to 1 Timothy 2:3-4 ESV later, for now, let's look at a few scripture passages. 

Matthew 22:14 ESV (14)  For many are called, but few are chosen. Not wooed

Mark 13:20 ESV (20)  And if the Lord had not cut short the days, no human being would be saved. But for the sake of the elect, whom he chose, he shortened the days. The elect are chosen, not wooed.

Joh_13:18 KJV  I speak not of you all: I know whom I have chosen: but that the scripture may be fulfilled, He that eateth bread with me hath lifted up his heel against me. Speaking of Judas, he was chosen as a disciple, but not as a number of the faithful. Speaking of the other disciples who would be faithful John said, Joh_15:16 KJV Ye have not chosen me, but I have chosen you, and ordained you, that ye should go and bring forth fruit, and that your fruit should remain: that whatsoever ye shall ask of the Father in my name, he may give it you.

Rom_11:5  So too at the present time there is a remnant, chosen by grace. There is a remnant, (REM'NANT, n. [contracted from remanent. See Remain.] 1. Residue; that which is left after the separation, removal, or destruction of a part. Webster 1828) This remnant is chosen by grace, Ephesians 2:8-9 (8) For by grace you have been saved through faith. And this is not your own doing; it is the gift of God, (9) not a result of works, so that no one may boast.

Rom_16:13  Greet Rufus, chosen in the Lord; also his mother, who has been a mother to me as well. Rufus was chosen, not wooed.

Col_3:12  Put on then, as God's chosen ones, holy and beloved, compassionate hearts, kindness, humility, meekness, and patience, We are not God's wooed ones, we are God's chosen ones.

1Th 1:4  For we know, brothers loved by God, that he has chosen you, 1Th 1:5  because our gospel came to you not only in word, but also in power and in the Holy Spirit and with full conviction. You know what kind of men we proved to be among you for your sake. How did he know they were chosen, because what was preached to them was effectual through the power of the Holy Spirit. Those who are not chosen hear the word but are not affected by it positively.

1Pe 2:4  As you come to him, a living stone rejected by men but in the sight of God chosen and precious, 

1Pe_2:9  But you are a chosen race, a royal priesthood, a holy nation, a people for his own possession, that you may proclaim the excellencies of him who called you out of darkness into his marvelous light.

Using slightly different terminology but carrying the same effect, 1Th_5:9  For God hath not appointed us to wrath, but to obtain salvation by our Lord Jesus Christ, We have salvation not because we were wooed, but because we were appointed. (APPOINT'ED, pp.

1. Fixed; set; established; decreed; ordained; constituted; allotted. Webster 1828)

1Pe 2:7  Unto you therefore which believe he is precious: but unto them which be disobedient, the stone which the builders disallowed, the same is made the head of the corner, 

1Pe 2:8  And a stone of stumbling, and a rock of offence, even to them which stumble at the word, being disobedient: whereunto also they were appointed. 

1Pe 2:9  But ye are a chosen generation, a royal priesthood, an holy nation, a peculiar people; that ye should shew forth the praises of him who hath called you out of darkness into his marvellous light: Closely examine what Peter is saying, (verse 7) those who believe Christ see Him as precious, those who do not believe Christ, reject Him and are disobedient. (verse 8) those who stumbled at the word and rejected it were appointed, (verse 9) those who believed and saw Christ as precious were chosen with a purpose.

Act 13:48  And when the Gentiles heard this, they were glad, and glorified the word of the Lord: and as many as were ordained to eternal life believed. Why did they believe? Those that were ordained to eternal life. (ORDA'IN, v.t. [L. ordino, from ordo, order.]2. To appoint; to decree.

Jeroboam ordained a feast in the eighth month. 1 Ki 12. As many as were ordained to eternal life, believed. Acts 13. Webster 1828)

Jud_1:4  For there are certain men crept in unawares, who were before of old ordained to this condemnation, ungodly men, turning the grace of our God into lasciviousness, and denying the only Lord God, and our Lord Jesus Christ. Notice in Acts 13 that certain ones were ordained to eternal life, here certain ones were ordained to condemnation.

Provisionism suggests that some men can commit themselves to Christ by a choice of their own will. It is true, that many profess Christ of their own will for various reasons, but these are not those who are called and chosen, but those who later fall away. Joh 2:23  Now when he was in Jerusalem at the Passover Feast, many believed in his name when they saw the signs that he was doing. 

Joh 2:24  But Jesus on his part did not entrust himself to them, because he knew all people 

Joh 2:25  and needed no one to bear witness about man, for he himself knew what was in man. John does not tell us Christ did not entrust himself to some of them because some would not believe, but that He knew what was in man, all of them. This is conducive to what we find in Rom 3:11  no one understands; no one seeks for God. Rom 3:12  All have turned aside; together they have become worthless; no one does good, not even one.” 

Each of these scriptures could be expounded upon in great detail, but a brief look is sufficient to introduce the overwhelming consensus telling us God is sovereign in His Salvation. He is not wooing, but calling and choosing.  The Old Testament also demonstrates how God moved people and nations as He pleased. Flowers likens God's sovereignty in Salvation to determinism? God's decrees are not determinism, they are His Sovereign works of Salvation being worked out in His Providence.

Zec 11:12  Then I said to them, “If it seems good to you, give me my wages; but if not, keep them.” And they weighed out as my wages thirty pieces of silver. 

Zec 11:13  Then the LORD said to me, “Throw it to the potter”—the lordly price at which I was priced by them. So I took the thirty pieces of silver and threw them into the house of the LORD, to the potter. 

We know Zechariah was speaking of Judas because of Matthew, Mat 27:1  When morning came, all the chief priests and the elders of the people took counsel against Jesus to put him to death. 

Mat 27:2  And they bound him and led him away and delivered him over to Pilate the governor. 

Judas Hangs Himself

Mat 27:3  Then when Judas, his betrayer, saw that Jesus was condemned, he changed his mind and brought back the thirty pieces of silver to the chief priests and the elders, 

Mat 27:4  saying, “I have sinned by betraying innocent blood.” They said, “What is that to us? See to it yourself.” 

Mat 27:5  And throwing down the pieces of silver into the temple, he departed, and he went and hanged himself. 

Mat 27:6  But the chief priests, taking the pieces of silver, said, “It is not lawful to put them into the treasury, since it is blood money.” 

Mat 27:7  So they took counsel and bought with them the potter's field as a burial place for strangers. 

Mat 27:8  Therefore that field has been called the Field of Blood to this day. 

Mat 27:9  Then was fulfilled what had been spoken by the prophet *Jeremiah, saying, “And they took the thirty pieces of silver, the price of him on whom a price had been set by some of the sons of Israel, 

Mat 27:10  and they gave them for the potter's field, as the Lord directed me.” *Matthew attributes the quote to Jeremiah because the Hebrew Bible was divided into three sections: the Law, the Writings, and the Prophets. The Prophets began with Jeremiah, and it was common for people to refer to the whole section (which included Zechariah) as “the book of Jeremiah.”

Zechariah was writing in the 4th century before Christ, so we can clearly see Judas betraying Jesus in specifics hundreds of years in advance. Flowers can call that determinism if he wants to, but it is God's sovereign work of Providence accomplishing all His purposes. Isa 46:9  remember the former things of old; for I am God, and there is no other; I am God, and there is none like me, 

Isa 46:10  declaring the end from the beginning and from ancient times things not yet done, saying, ‘My counsel shall stand, and I will accomplish all my purpose,’ 

Isa 46:11  calling a bird of prey from the east, the man of my counsel from a far country. I have spoken, and I will bring it to pass; I have purposed, and I will do it.  

Judas was like any other man, free to do as he pleased, he did as he pleased. Judas was like those in John Chapter 2 that Jesus would not commit himself to because He knew what was in man. Judas was like those in Roman Chapter 3 that had turned aside; together they all had become worthless; none sought after God, not even one. Judas' only hope was for God to turn his heart to Christ, he was like the men in Jude who had crept in unawares, who were before of old ordained to this condemnation, ungodly men, turning the grace of our God into lasciviousness, and denying the only Lord God, and our Lord Jesus Christ. 

Flowers will have you believe that one who holds to such a view of God's sovereignty in Salvation makes God out to be an unloving God who doesn't want certain people to be saved. Yet it is the scriptures that testify of God's sovereignty in Salvation! Flowers presents you with a planet full of people, (all of whom) could come to Christ if they so desired. They can do this because God has applied prevenient grace so they can choose if they will. But it is not a grace that actually turns their will to God. In light of the Scriptures, I cannot accept such an insufficient grace. The Scripture tells us that  Pro 21:1  The king's heart is a stream of water in the hand of the LORD; he turns it wherever he will. Yet Mr. Flowers tells us he cannot. Flowers tells us it would be wrong for God to choose some and not others, yet we find throughout scripture God does just that, Deu 7:6  “For you are a people holy to the LORD your God. The LORD your God has chosen you to be a people for his treasured possession, out of all the peoples who are on the face of the earth. 

Deu 7:7  It was not because you were more in number than any other people that the LORD set his love on you and chose you, for you were the fewest of all peoples, Was God unloving to all the peoples of the earth because he set His love only on Isreal? It cannot be, if it appears so to us, we simply misunderstand love as defined by God. Mat 5:44  But I say to you, Love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you, Mat 5:45  so that you may be sons of your Father who is in heaven. For he makes his sun rise on the evil and on the good, and sends rain on the just and on the unjust. 

I can appreciate the heart of the Provisionist, he only wants everybody to be saved. In his love for God, he wants to protect God's image from those who would mar it. Flowers, however, seems to use provisionism as a tool for his detestation of Calvinism. 

Let's now look at 1Ti 2:4 KJV  Who will have all men to be saved, and to come unto the knowledge of the truth.   Does it not say what the Provisionist suggests, God desires all men to be saved? It could be, but we know all will not be saved. It could mean all men everywhere, but then we will have to do some gymnastics as Mr. Flowers puts it with all those other verses concerning God's Sovereign choices. Could it be understood in a way that would bring it into agreement with the other scriptures we have been looking at concerning Salvation?

We ask, does all men necessarily mean all men everywhere at all times? Mr. Flowers suggests I'm doing gymnastics to ask that question, but I'm just trying to understand it in light of all the other scriptures.

Mat_10:22  And ye shall be hated of all men for my name's sake: but he that endureth to the end shall be saved. Does Matthew mean all men everywhere? Of course not, it is all men of a specific group.

Joh_3:26  And they came unto John, and said unto him, Rabbi, he that was with thee beyond Jordan, to whom thou barest witness, behold, the same baptizeth, and all men come to him. Does John mean all men everywhere came to him? Of course not, it is all men in a certain group.

Dare we do a few more gymnastics? 2Co_3:2  Ye are our epistle written in our hearts, known and read of all men: (πᾶς ἄνθρωπος) The phrase in 2Co 3:2 "all men" is the exact wording in the original language as the phrase "all men" in 1Ti 2:4  Who will have all men (πᾶς ἄνθρωπος) to be saved, and to come unto the knowledge of the truth. Did Paul mean in 2Co 3:2 that every man without exception knew of and had observed the Church at Corinth? Of course not, then why must we insist that Paul meant every man without exception in 1Ti 2:4? 

John Gill (1697-1791) would explain, "1Ti_2:1 are here intended, kings and peasants, rich and poor, bond and free, male and female, young and old, greater and lesser sinners; and therefore all are to be prayed for, even all sorts of men, because God will have all men, or all sorts of men, saved; and particularly the Gentiles may be designed, who are sometimes called the world, the whole world, and every creature; whom God would have saved, as well as the Jews, and therefore Heathens, and Heathen magistrates, were to be prayed for as well as Jewish ones." 

However, since the structure of the sentence itself does not require a specific interpretation and if you wish to understand it as "all men" everywhere, it still does not of necessity negate God's sovereign will in Salvation. Albert Barnes (1798-1870) explains, "That is, it is in accordance with his nature, his feelings, his desires. The word “will” cannot be taken here in the absolute sense, denoting a decree like that by which he willed the creation of the world, for then it would certainly be done. But the word is often used to denote a desire, wish, or what is in accordance with the nature of anyone. Thus it may be said of God that he “wills” that his creatures may be happy - because it is in accordance with his nature, and because he has made abundant provision for their happiness - though it is not true that he wills it in the sense that he exerts his absolute power to make them happy. God wills that sickness should be relieved, and sorrow mitigated, and that the oppressed should go free, because it is agreeable to his nature; though it is not true that he wills it in the sense that he exerts his absolute power to produce it."

Before we formulate our doctrines we must weigh them against the entirety of the scriptures. Provisionism puts forth the idea that man is autonomous, "the rule" of his (own) destiny, the captain of his salvation. This must be weighed against what the scripture speaks of the nature of man. It must be considered how it affects the understanding of the attributes of God as revealed in scripture. 

Let us consider Judas again, Provisionism tells us Judas has a choice. To say he didn't according to Flowers would be determinism. However, according to Matthew Judas' betrayal was foretold in explicit detail hundreds of years before Judas actually betrayed the Saviour. Was Judas a robot? Was his life a product of determinism? Of course not. Judas did what Judas did because it was what Judas wanted to do. Provisionism tells us God provided grace for Judas if he would receive it. He could have been saved, as a matter of fact, that was what God desired for Judas. God in fact did all He could to save Judas. The Sovereignty of God in Salvation says otherwise, how else could the scriptures be fulfilled?

 Mat 27:9  Then was fulfilled what had been spoken by the prophet Jeremiah, saying, “And they took the thirty pieces of silver, the price of him on whom a price had been set by some of the sons of Israel,

 Mat 27:9  Then was fulfilled what had been spoken by the prophet Jeremiah, saying, “And they took the thirty pieces of silver, the price of him on whom a price had been set by some of the sons of Israel, 

Mat 27:10  and they gave them for the potter's field, as the Lord directed me.” 

Joh 17:12  While I was with them, I kept them in your name, which you have given me. I have guarded them, and not one of them has been lost except the son of destruction, that the Scripture might be fulfilled. 

Act 1:16  “Brothers, the Scripture had to be fulfilled, which the Holy Spirit spoke beforehand by the mouth of David concerning Judas, who became a guide to those who arrested Jesus. 

Act 1:20  “For it is written in the Book of Psalms, “‘May his camp become desolate, and let there be no one to dwell in it’; and “‘Let another take his office.’ 

In Acts 1:20 Peter assigns Psalm 69:25 to Judas which was spoken 800 years before Judas was born. Psa 69:25  Let their habitation be desolate; and let none dwell in their tents. 

Mr. Flowers presents the quandary by asking, why are some people not saved if God is not willing that any should perish? He then answers by stating, because they did not believe, it's that simple he says. Flowers' answer may be that simple, but it does not explain Judas. The only thing that explains Judas is God's Sovereignty in Salvation. Rom 9:15  For he saith to Moses, I will have mercy on whom I will have mercy, and I will have compassion on whom I will have compassion. Rom 9:16  So then it is not of him that willeth, nor of him that runneth, but of God that sheweth mercy. Mr. Flowers may do his so-called gymnastics with these verses, but they still say what they say. God has a Sovereign right to show mercy to whom he pleases. We must remember what mercy is, MER'CY, n. [L. misericordia.]

1. That benevolence, mildness or tenderness of heart which disposes a person to overlook injuries, or to treat an offender better than he deserves; the disposition that tempers justice, and induces an injured person to forgive trespasses and injuries, and to forbear punishment, or inflict less than law or justice will warrant. In this sense, there is perhaps no word in our language precisely synonymous with mercy. That which comes nearest to it is grace. It implies benevolence, tenderness, mildness, pity or compassion, and clemency, but exercised only towards offenders. Mercy is a distinguishing attribute of the Supreme Being. (Webster 1828).

No mercy was owed to Judas or anyone else, If God chose to withhold mercy he did Judas no wrong. We must submit our quandaries to the Sovereignty of God. He is an Omniscient Being, all-knowing from all eternity. What he decrees from eternity and what we see being worked out in time is difficult to understand. Can God decree events from eternity that must come to pass in Judas' life, yet love the man Judas in his betrayal? Who am I to question God in the essence of His being? 

Rom 9:20  Nay but, O man, who art thou that repliest against God? Shall the thing formed say to him that formed it, Why hast thou made me thus? 

Rom 9:21  Hath not the potter power over the clay, of the same lump to make one vessel unto honour, and another unto dishonour? 

Rom 9:22  What if God, willing to shew his wrath, and to make his power known, endured with much longsuffering the vessels of wrath fitted to destruction: 

Rom 9:23  And that he might make known the riches of his glory on the vessels of mercy, which he had afore prepared unto glory, 

Rom 9:24  Even us, whom he hath called, not of the Jews only, but also of the Gentiles?  

We will continue to examine God's Sovereignty in Salvation in the next post.

My God bless each of you,

David