The PuritanBoard  

Go Back   The PuritanBoard > Theology > Theological Forum

Theological Forum Systematic Theology, Biblical Theology and just plain Theology discussions
Grow in the grace and the knowledge of our Lord Jesus Christ (2 Pe. 3:18)

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1 (permalink)  
Old 06-15-2008, 03:08 PM
Presbyterian Deacon's Avatar
Puritanboard Senior
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Rockville, CT
Posts: 2,556
Thanks: 422
Thanked 581 Times in 458 Posts
Salvation and Reprobation

Is there anything wrong with this explanation?

From: Shedd, William G. T., Commentary on Romans (1879)

Quote:
God is the author of salvation, because He elects; but He is not the author of perdition because He reprobates. In the first instance, He is efficiently active by His Spirit and word; in the second instance He is permissively inactive. If John Doe throw himself into the water, and is rescued by Richard Roe, the statement would be that he is saved because Richard Roe rescued him. But if John Doe throw himself into the water and is not rescued by Richard Roe, the verdict of the coroner would be suicide and not homocide: 'Drowned because he threw himself in' and not 'Drowned because Richard Roe did not pull him out.' So it is with salvation and reprobation.
There's something about it that doesn't seem right to me. Perhaps it's this matter of God being "permissively inactive." I'd be interested in your thoughts on this.

NOTE: If a moderator thinks this would be better in the "Wading Pool" feel free to move it. I almost put it there anyway. Thanks
__________________
Sterling Harmon
Coventry, CT
PCA
Deacon

________________

"Whatever is laudable in our works proceeds from the grace of God."
-- John Calvin, Institutes III:xv.3.

"Our Lord God must be a good man, to be fond of worthless fellows. I cannot like them, and yet I, myself, am one."
-- Martin Luther, Table Talk
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!
Reply With Quote
  #2 (permalink)  
Old 06-15-2008, 03:14 PM
Hippo's Avatar
Puritanboard Sophomore
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: London, UK
Posts: 544
Thanks: 66
Thanked 180 Times in 111 Posts
I think that it is correct as far as it goes, and perhaps this is as far as it is proper to go.
__________________
Mike
London City Presbyterian Church
London
England

"Surely, we wish to be orthodox, but we must first learn what real orthodoxy is. Surely, we wish to be progressive, but we must first have a basis to progress from."
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!
Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to Hippo For This Useful Post:
Presbyterian Deacon (06-15-2008)
  #3 (permalink)  
Old 06-15-2008, 08:37 PM
Presbyterian Deacon's Avatar
Puritanboard Senior
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Rockville, CT
Posts: 2,556
Thanks: 422
Thanked 581 Times in 458 Posts


Any other comments?

__________________
Sterling Harmon
Coventry, CT
PCA
Deacon

________________

"Whatever is laudable in our works proceeds from the grace of God."
-- John Calvin, Institutes III:xv.3.

"Our Lord God must be a good man, to be fond of worthless fellows. I cannot like them, and yet I, myself, am one."
-- Martin Luther, Table Talk
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!
Reply With Quote
  #4 (permalink)  
Old 06-15-2008, 08:39 PM
Presbyterian Deacon's Avatar
Puritanboard Senior
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Rockville, CT
Posts: 2,556
Thanks: 422
Thanked 581 Times in 458 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hippo View Post
I think that it is correct as far as it goes, and perhaps this is as far as it is proper to go.
Any thoughts on the concept of God being "permissively inactive"?
__________________
Sterling Harmon
Coventry, CT
PCA
Deacon

________________

"Whatever is laudable in our works proceeds from the grace of God."
-- John Calvin, Institutes III:xv.3.

"Our Lord God must be a good man, to be fond of worthless fellows. I cannot like them, and yet I, myself, am one."
-- Martin Luther, Table Talk
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!
Reply With Quote
  #5 (permalink)  
Old 06-15-2008, 08:53 PM
armourbearer's Avatar
Moderator
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Rockhampton, Queensland, Australia
Posts: 4,425
Thanks: 521
Thanked 1,854 Times in 733 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by Presbyterian Deacon View Post
Any thoughts on the concept of God being "permissively inactive"?
WCF 5:4, "The almighty power, unsearchable wisdom, and infinite goodness of God so far manifest themselves in His providence, that it extends itself even to the first fall, and all other sins of angels and men; and that not by a bare permission, but such as has joined with it a most wise and powerful bounding..."
__________________
Yours sincerely,


"Illum oportet crescere me autem minui."
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!
Reply With Quote
The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to armourbearer For This Useful Post:
Cotton Mather (06-16-2008), Pergamum (06-16-2008), Presbyterian Deacon (06-15-2008)
  #6 (permalink)  
Old 06-15-2008, 09:00 PM
Puritanboard Sophomore
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Mountain Lake Park, MD
Posts: 683
Thanks: 203
Thanked 144 Times in 100 Posts
I think God does more than just not redeem the lost; I think he made the lost. Prov.16:4 - "God has made everything for its purpose, even the wicked for the day of trouble."
__________________
Charles Plauger
Member/Grace Reformed Church
Oakland, MD
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!
Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to moral necessity For This Useful Post:
Presbyterian Deacon (06-15-2008)
  #7 (permalink)  
Old 06-15-2008, 09:03 PM
Presbyterian Deacon's Avatar
Puritanboard Senior
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Rockville, CT
Posts: 2,556
Thanks: 422
Thanked 581 Times in 458 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by armourbearer View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by Presbyterian Deacon View Post
Any thoughts on the concept of God being "permissively inactive"?
WCF 5:4, "The almighty power, unsearchable wisdom, and infinite goodness of God so far manifest themselves in His providence, that it extends itself even to the first fall, and all other sins of angels and men; and that not by a bare permission, but such as has joined with it a most wise and powerful bounding..."

"...and otherwise ordering and governing them, in a manifold dispensation, to his own holy ends..."

Exactly. And thus my problem with Shedd's wording here. I have read with profit much from Shedd, but this idea of "permissive inactivity" really puzzles me. Am I just "straining at gnats here, or is Shedd really as "off" on this as I think he appears to be?
__________________
Sterling Harmon
Coventry, CT
PCA
Deacon

________________

"Whatever is laudable in our works proceeds from the grace of God."
-- John Calvin, Institutes III:xv.3.

"Our Lord God must be a good man, to be fond of worthless fellows. I cannot like them, and yet I, myself, am one."
-- Martin Luther, Table Talk
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!
Reply With Quote
  #8 (permalink)  
Old 06-15-2008, 09:06 PM
Semper Fidelis's Avatar
Administrator
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Northern Virgnia
Posts: 11,794
Thanks: 912
Thanked 2,244 Times in 1,059 Posts
I obviously disagree with the notion that reprobation is on the basis of bare permission for that would undermine the idea of Providence altogether.

I do think, however, that there is a distinct difference in the character of workmanship and activity toward the elect in comparison to the reprobate. There is asymmetry and not symmetry. God is the author and finisher of our faith. Christ is interceding for us and ensuring that He who began a good work in us will see it to completion. There is not a corollary in the Scripture with respect to God's activity toward the reprobate. He is not the author of sin and He is not given credit for man's rebellion in the way He is given for the redeemed man's obedience unto Him.
__________________
Rich
Northern VA
OPC

WebsiteMaven - Web Hosting Reviews, Guides, and Advice to build and promote your web site.
SoliDeoGloria.com - A Community for Reformed Thought and Discussion

Click to get: Board Rules -- Signature Requirements -- Suggestions?
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!
Reply With Quote
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Semper Fidelis For This Useful Post:
Cotton Mather (06-16-2008), Presbyterian Deacon (06-15-2008)
  #9 (permalink)  
Old 06-15-2008, 09:08 PM
Presbyterian Deacon's Avatar
Puritanboard Senior
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Rockville, CT
Posts: 2,556
Thanks: 422
Thanked 581 Times in 458 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by moral necessity View Post
I think God does more than just not redeem the lost; I think he made the lost. Prov.16:4 - "God has made everything for its purpose, even the wicked for the day of trouble."
Would you say then that reprobation, rather than being based in "permissive inactivity" is based more along the lines of an active decree?
__________________
Sterling Harmon
Coventry, CT
PCA
Deacon

________________

"Whatever is laudable in our works proceeds from the grace of God."
-- John Calvin, Institutes III:xv.3.

"Our Lord God must be a good man, to be fond of worthless fellows. I cannot like them, and yet I, myself, am one."
-- Martin Luther, Table Talk
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!
Reply With Quote
  #10 (permalink)  
Old 06-15-2008, 09:13 PM
armourbearer's Avatar
Moderator
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Rockhampton, Queensland, Australia
Posts: 4,425
Thanks: 521
Thanked 1,854 Times in 733 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by Presbyterian Deacon View Post
"...and otherwise ordering and governing them, in a manifold dispensation, to his own holy ends..."

Exactly. And thus my problem with Shedd's wording here. I have read with profit much from Shedd, but this idea of "permissive inactivity" really puzzles me. Am I just "straining at gnats here, or is Shedd really as "off" on this as I think he appears to be?
No, you are rightly dividing the word of truth. Shedd often taught sub-Calvinistic concepts; perhaps the influence of the New England school upon him.
__________________
Yours sincerely,


"Illum oportet crescere me autem minui."
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!
Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to armourbearer For This Useful Post:
Presbyterian Deacon (06-15-2008)
  #11 (permalink)  
Old 06-15-2008, 09:15 PM
Presbyterian Deacon's Avatar
Puritanboard Senior
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Rockville, CT
Posts: 2,556
Thanks: 422
Thanked 581 Times in 458 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by Semper Fidelis View Post
I obviously disagree with the notion that reprobation is on the basis of bare permission for that would undermine the idea of Providence altogether.

I do think, however, that there is a distinct difference in the character of workmanship and activity toward the elect in comparison to the reprobate. There is asymmetry and not symmetry. God is the author and finisher of our faith. Christ is interceding for us and ensuring that He who began a good work in us will see it to completion. There is not a corollary in the Scripture with respect to God's activity toward the reprobate. He is not the author of sin and He is not given credit for man's rebellion in the way He is given for the redeemed man's obedience unto Him.
Thank you. I appreciate the comment about asymmetry rather than symmetry, but a few verses come to mind that make me wonder.

Peter speaks of those who "stumble at the Word...where unto they were appointed..." And Jude speaks of those who were "before of old marked out for this condemnation..." and Paul talks about "vessel of wrath prepared for destruction..." So, it seems to me that God is indeed active in the reprobation of the lost.
__________________
Sterling Harmon
Coventry, CT
PCA
Deacon

________________

"Whatever is laudable in our works proceeds from the grace of God."
-- John Calvin, Institutes III:xv.3.

"Our Lord God must be a good man, to be fond of worthless fellows. I cannot like them, and yet I, myself, am one."
-- Martin Luther, Table Talk
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!
Reply With Quote
  #12 (permalink)  
Old 06-15-2008, 09:18 PM
Presbyterian Deacon's Avatar
Puritanboard Senior
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Rockville, CT
Posts: 2,556
Thanks: 422
Thanked 581 Times in 458 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by armourbearer View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by Presbyterian Deacon View Post
"...and otherwise ordering and governing them, in a manifold dispensation, to his own holy ends..."

Exactly. And thus my problem with Shedd's wording here. I have read with profit much from Shedd, but this idea of "permissive inactivity" really puzzles me. Am I just "straining at gnats here, or is Shedd really as "off" on this as I think he appears to be?
No, you are rightly dividing the word of truth. Shedd often taught sub-Calvinistic concepts; perhaps the influence of the New England school upon him.
I've been reading Shedd on Romans, and I've agreed with most everything I've read from him up to this point. It was rather startling then when this section just seemed to come out of no where. Thanks for your help.
__________________
Sterling Harmon
Coventry, CT
PCA
Deacon

________________

"Whatever is laudable in our works proceeds from the grace of God."
-- John Calvin, Institutes III:xv.3.

"Our Lord God must be a good man, to be fond of worthless fellows. I cannot like them, and yet I, myself, am one."
-- Martin Luther, Table Talk
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!
Reply With Quote
  #13 (permalink)  
Old 06-15-2008, 09:18 PM
Zenas's Avatar
Puritanboard Junior
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Cordova, TN
Posts: 1,404
Thanks: 88
Thanked 327 Times in 220 Posts
Hmmm, could one hold to that asymmetrical view and yet ascribe to double predestination, or are they mutually exclusive of the other?
__________________
Andrew DeShazo, Deacon, Associate Reformed Presbyterian Church, Memphis, TN
"All of us stumble in many ways, but if anyone is never at fault in what he says, then he is mature, able to control his whole body."(James 3:2)
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!
Reply With Quote
  #14 (permalink)  
Old 06-15-2008, 09:30 PM
Presbyterian Deacon's Avatar
Puritanboard Senior
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Rockville, CT
Posts: 2,556
Thanks: 422
Thanked 581 Times in 458 Posts
Zenas--

Good question. Anyone?

__________________
Sterling Harmon
Coventry, CT
PCA
Deacon

________________

"Whatever is laudable in our works proceeds from the grace of God."
-- John Calvin, Institutes III:xv.3.

"Our Lord God must be a good man, to be fond of worthless fellows. I cannot like them, and yet I, myself, am one."
-- Martin Luther, Table Talk
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!
Reply With Quote
  #15 (permalink)  
Old 06-15-2008, 09:31 PM
Semper Fidelis's Avatar
Administrator
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Northern Virgnia
Posts: 11,794
Thanks: 912
Thanked 2,244 Times in 1,059 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by Presbyterian Deacon View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by Semper Fidelis View Post
I obviously disagree with the notion that reprobation is on the basis of bare permission for that would undermine the idea of Providence altogether.

I do think, however, that there is a distinct difference in the character of workmanship and activity toward the elect in comparison to the reprobate. There is asymmetry and not symmetry. God is the author and finisher of our faith. Christ is interceding for us and ensuring that He who began a good work in us will see it to completion. There is not a corollary in the Scripture with respect to God's activity toward the reprobate. He is not the author of sin and He is not given credit for man's rebellion in the way He is given for the redeemed man's obedience unto Him.
Thank you. I appreciate the comment about asymmetry rather than symmetry, but a few verses come to mind that make me wonder.

Peter speaks of those who "stumble at the Word...where unto they were appointed..." And Jude speaks of those who were "before of old marked out for this condemnation..." and Paul talks about "vessel of wrath prepared for destruction..." So, it seems to me that God is indeed active in the reprobation of the lost.
I didn't state he was inactive. I already noted that it was not a bare permission. My point is that there is no 4 chapter corollary to Romans 5-8 that speaks definitively about God's activity toward the reprobate. There is no "golden chain" of reprobation where the sinner sees God impelling Him toward sin and judgment. We need to recognize the very special care and attention that God pays toward His own and not assume that, on the reverse side of the coin, he's doing the exact opposite to every reprobate. Even Paul's language about the two vessels in Romans 9 is distincitively different in terms of care and attention. One vessel is being lavished with attention while the other is being endured.
__________________
Rich
Northern VA
OPC

WebsiteMaven - Web Hosting Reviews, Guides, and Advice to build and promote your web site.
SoliDeoGloria.com - A Community for Reformed Thought and Discussion

Click to get: Board Rules -- Signature Requirements -- Suggestions?
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!
Reply With Quote
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Semper Fidelis For This Useful Post:
Pergamum (06-16-2008), Presbyterian Deacon (06-15-2008)
  #16 (permalink)  
Old 06-15-2008, 10:23 PM
Presbyterian Deacon's Avatar
Puritanboard Senior
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Rockville, CT
Posts: 2,556
Thanks: 422
Thanked 581 Times in 458 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by Semper Fidelis View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by Presbyterian Deacon View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by Semper Fidelis View Post
I obviously disagree with the notion that reprobation is on the basis of bare permission for that would undermine the idea of Providence altogether.

I do think, however, that there is a distinct difference in the character of workmanship and activity toward the elect in comparison to the reprobate. There is asymmetry and not symmetry. God is the author and finisher of our faith. Christ is interceding for us and ensuring that He who began a good work in us will see it to completion. There is not a corollary in the Scripture with respect to God's activity toward the reprobate. He is not the author of sin and He is not given credit for man's rebellion in the way He is given for the redeemed man's obedience unto Him.
Thank you. I appreciate the comment about asymmetry rather than symmetry, but a few verses come to mind that make me wonder.

Peter speaks of those who "stumble at the Word...where unto they were appointed..." And Jude speaks of those who were "before of old marked out for this condemnation..." and Paul talks about "vessel of wrath prepared for destruction..." So, it seems to me that God is indeed active in the reprobation of the lost.
I didn't state he was inactive. I already noted that it was not a bare permission. My point is that there is no 4 chapter corollary to Romans 5-8 that speaks definitively about God's activity toward the reprobate. There is no "golden chain" of reprobation where the sinner sees God impelling Him toward sin and judgment. We need to recognize the very special care and attention that God pays toward His own and not assume that, on the reverse side of the coin, he's doing the exact opposite to every reprobate. Even Paul's language about the two vessels in Romans 9 is distincitively different in terms of care and attention. One vessel is being lavished with attention while the other is being endured.
Right, I get that. That is what WCF 5. 4 says:

Quote:
IV. The almighty power, unsearchable wisdom, and infinite goodness of God, so far manifest themselves in his providence, that it extendeth itself even to the first Fall, and all other sins of angels and men, and that not by a bare permission, but such as hath joined with it a most wise and powerful bounding, and otherwise ordering and governing of them, in a manifold dispensation, to his own holy ends; yet so, as the sinfulness thereof proceedeth only from the creature, and not from God; who being most holy and righteous, neither is nor can be the author or approver of sin.
I guess my "sticking point" right now is: Though we affirm it is not a matter of "bare permission," and that there is no "golden chain of reprobation," yet there definitely seems to be a sense of God's direct agency in the reprobation of the non-elect. Can we know "where the line is?" (so to speak). Or is this one of those areas that are a "mystery?" "How far" does Scripture allow us go in our understanding of God's agency in reprobation?
__________________
Sterling Harmon
Coventry, CT
PCA
Deacon

________________

"Whatever is laudable in our works proceeds from the grace of God."
-- John Calvin, Institutes III:xv.3.

"Our Lord God must be a good man, to be fond of worthless fellows. I cannot like them, and yet I, myself, am one."
-- Martin Luther, Table Talk
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!
Reply With Quote
  #17 (permalink)  
Old 06-15-2008, 10:26 PM
Puritanboard Sophomore
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Mountain Lake Park, MD
Posts: 683
Thanks: 203
Thanked 144 Times in 100 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by Presbyterian Deacon View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by moral necessity View Post
I think God does more than just not redeem the lost; I think he made the lost. Prov.16:4 - "God has made everything for its purpose, even the wicked for the day of trouble."
Would you say then that reprobation, rather than being based in "permissive inactivity" is based more along the lines of an active decree?
In my opinion, I would say so. I think he is actively working and restraining all things to his glory, both regarding the wicked and the just. In my mind, Godly passivity is just his negative activity. A wrestler uses both to get his opponent off balance and accomplish his desired end. I assume God does the same with the wicked and the just. He "works all things according to the counsel of his will".(Eph.1:11) He even makes vessels for dishonorable use, (Rom.9:21), so much so that such a one can say, "why have you made me like this?" (Rom.9:20).
__________________
Charles Plauger
Member/Grace Reformed Church
Oakland, MD
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!
Reply With Quote
  #18 (permalink)  
Old 06-15-2008, 10:58 PM
Semper Fidelis's Avatar
Administrator
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Northern Virgnia
Posts: 11,794
Thanks: 912
Thanked 2,244 Times in 1,059 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by Presbyterian Deacon View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by Semper Fidelis View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by Presbyterian Deacon View Post

Thank you. I appreciate the comment about asymmetry rather than symmetry, but a few verses come to mind that make me wonder.

Peter speaks of those who "stumble at the Word...where unto they were appointed..." And Jude speaks of those who were "before of old marked out for this condemnation..." and Paul talks about "vessel of wrath prepared for destruction..." So, it seems to me that God is indeed active in the reprobation of the lost.
I didn't state he was inactive. I already noted that it was not a bare permission. My point is that there is no 4 chapter corollary to Romans 5-8 that speaks definitively about God's activity toward the reprobate. There is no "golden chain" of reprobation where the sinner sees God impelling Him toward sin and judgment. We need to recognize the very special care and attention that God pays toward His own and not assume that, on the reverse side of the coin, he's doing the exact opposite to every reprobate. Even Paul's language about the two vessels in Romans 9 is distincitively different in terms of care and attention. One vessel is being lavished with attention while the other is being endured.
Right, I get that. That is what WCF 5. 4 says:

Quote:
IV. The almighty power, unsearchable wisdom, and infinite goodness of God, so far manifest themselves in his providence, that it extendeth itself even to the first Fall, and all other sins of angels and men, and that not by a bare permission, but such as hath joined with it a most wise and powerful bounding, and otherwise ordering and governing of them, in a manifold dispensation, to his own holy ends; yet so, as the sinfulness thereof proceedeth only from the creature, and not from God; who being most holy and righteous, neither is nor can be the author or approver of sin.
I guess my "sticking point" right now is: Though we affirm it is not a matter of "bare permission," and that there is no "golden chain of reprobation," yet there definitely seems to be a sense of God's direct agency in the reprobation of the non-elect. Can we know "where the line is?" (so to speak). Or is this one of those areas that are a "mystery?" "How far" does Scripture allow us go in our understanding of God's agency in reprobation?
Personally, I'm not comfortable speculating beyond what the Scriptures reveal at this point. I believe that the will of the creature is not overthrown nor the contingency of secondary causes by God's decree of all things. I do not precisely understand the activity in reprobation.

One thing that really has struck me over the last several weeks as I'm going through Acts chapter by chapter is how the response of the Sanhedrin and other rejecters of the Gospel is in stark contrast to the same evidence and same News as others who were cut to the heart. I suppose I could speculate on God's agency in hardening their hearts to such clear Truths. I mean, really, what kind of hard heart does one require to see the healing of a lame man since birth and then tell the Apostles to stop preaching in the Name the man was healed?! It struck me, though, that this is exactly how they treated Christ's miracles.

There has got to be some sort of profound spiritual blindness that doesn't see the inconsistency between what they notice must be the case and how they decide to deny what they know. The Synagogue of the Freedman drum up charges against Stephen because they cannot withstand his exegesis. Instead of submitting to the Truth they kill the person with the Truth. Why? It makes no sense.

I cannot simply state that God is somehow the author of this because Romans 10, as elsewhere, never allows men the out to say "...God made me deny it...." Romans 1 clearly condemns men for their supression of the Truth.

I cannot be certain of how spiritual blinding works in all its details but I am very certain how it is I see and rejoice and that is by the agency of the Gospel and the regenerating work of the Holy Spirit. I can speak all day long about how God makes men alive who were dead in transgressions and sins but there is a respectful distance I maintain before I'll venture into speculation about the agency God uses to blind men. I know He does it and I know He'll be glorified in the punishment of men for it. I also know that nobody will be able to answer against their Creator for it and will have to acknowledge that His judgment is Just. That's enough for me.
__________________
Rich
Northern VA
OPC

WebsiteMaven - Web Hosting Reviews, Guides, and Advice to build and promote your web site.
SoliDeoGloria.com - A Community for Reformed Thought and Discussion

Click to get: