T.U.L.I.P

PERSEVERANCE OF THE SAINTS

Knowledge

It follows from what we saw in the last chapter that the people of God will persevere to the end and not be lost. The foreknown are predestined, the predestined are called, the called are justified, and the justified are glorified (Rom. 8:30). No one is lost from this group. To belong to this people is to be eternally secure.

 But we mean more than this by the doctrine of the perseverance of the saints. We mean that the saints will and must persevere in faith and the obedience which comes from faith. Election is unconditional, but glorification is not. There are many warnings in Scripture that those who do not hold fast to Christ can be lost in the end. 

The following eight theses are my summary of this crucial doctrine.

  1. Our faith must endure to the end if we are to be saved. 

This means that the gospel is God’s instrument in the preservation of faith as well as the begetting of faith. We do not act with a kind of cavalier indifference to the call for perseverance just because a person has professed faith in Christ, as though we can be assured from our perspective that they are now beyond the reach of the evil one. There is a fight of faith to be fought. The elect will fight that fight. And by God’s sovereign grace they will win it. We must endure to the end in faith if we are to be saved. 

In 1 Corinthians 15:1-2 Paul shows the necessity of perseverance: “Now I would remind you, brothers, of the gospel I preached to you, which you received, in which you stand, and by which you are being saved, if you hold fast to the word I preached to you—unless you believed in vain.” This “if you hold fast” shows that there is a false start in the Christian life. Jesus told the parable of the soils to warn against these kinds of false beginnings: 

As for what was sown on rocky ground, this is the one who hears the word and immediately receives it with joy, yet he has no root in himself, but endures for a while, and when tribulation or persecution arises on account of the word, immediately he falls away. As for what was sown among thorns, this is the one who hears the word, but the cares of the world and the deceitfulness of riches choke the word, and it proves unfruitful. (Matt. 13:20-22)

 In other words, there is, as Paul says in 1 Corinthians 15:2, a “believing in vain”—which means a false believing, a coming to Christ for reasons that don’t include a love for his glory and hatred for our sin. The evidence, Paul says, that our faith is genuine is that we “hold fast to the word”—that we persevere.

 Similarly Paul says in Colossians 1:21-23: “And you, who once were alienated and hostile in mind, doing evil deeds, he has now reconciled in his body of flesh by his death, in order to present you holy and blameless and above reproach before him, if indeed you continue in the faith, stable and steadfast, not shifting from the hope of the gospel.” And again in 2 Timothy 2:11-12: “The saying is trustworthy, for: If we have died with him, we will also live with him; if we endure, we will also reign with him.”

 Paul is following the teaching of Jesus in these words. Jesus said in Mark 13:13, “The one who endures to the end will be saved.” And after his resurrection Jesus said to the churches in Revelation, “To the one who conquers I will grant to eat of the tree of life” (Rev. 2:7). “Be faithful unto death, and I will give you the crown of life” (Rev. 2:10; cf. 2:17, 25-26; 3:5, 11-12, 21). This is what we mean by the necessity of perseverance— the statement that we must persevere. 

But a clarification is in order. Persevering in faith does not mean that the saints do not go through seasons of doubt and spiritual darkness and measures of unbelief in the promises and the goodness of God. “I believe; help my unbelief!” (Mark 9:24) is not a contradictory prayer. Measures of unbelief can coexist with a true faith. 

Therefore what we mean when we say that faith must persevere to the end is that we must never come to a point of renouncing Christ with such hardness of heart that we can never return, but instead only prove ourselves to have been hypocrites in our professed faith. An example of such hardness is Esau. 

See to it that no one fails to obtain the grace of God; … that no one is sexually immoral or unholy like Esau, who sold his birthright for a single meal. For you know that afterward, when he desired to inherit the blessing, he was rejected, for he found no chance to repent, though he sought it [repentance] with tears. (Heb. 12:15-17) 

Esau became so spiritually hard and calloused in his love for this world that when he tried to repent he couldn’t. All he could do is weep over the consequences of his folly, not the true ugliness of his sin or the dishonor he had heaped upon God in preferring a single meal to his entire God-given, God-accompanying birthright.

 On the other hand the New Testament is at pains to make sure we do not despair thinking that backsliding and waywardness in sin is a one-way street. It is possible to repent and return. That process of wandering and returning is included in “the perseverance of the saints.” For example, James says, “Whoever brings back a sinner from his wandering will save his soul from death and will cover a multitude of sins” (James 5:20). And John says, “If anyone sees his brother committing a sin not leading to death, he shall ask, and God will give him life…. All wrongdoing is sin, but there is sin that does not lead to death” (1 John 5:16-17). John’s aim here is clearly to give hope to those who might be tempted to despair, and to those who love them and pray for them. John began his letter the same way he is ending it: “If we say we have no sin, we deceive ourselves, and the truth is not in us. If we confess our sins, he is faithful and just to forgive us our sins and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness” (1 John 1:8-9). 

So when we speak of the necessity (and certainty, see below) of perseverance we do not mean perfection. And we do not mean that there are no struggles or serious measures of unbelief. We must keep in mind all that we have seen so far in this book. Belonging to Christ is a supernatural reality brought about by God and preserved by God (Jer. 32:40). The saints are not marked most deeply by what they do but by who they are. They are born again. They are a new creation. They do not go in and out of this newness. It is God’s work. And it is irrevocable. But the fruit of it in faith and obedience is a fight to the end. And perseverance says: The fight will be fought and will not be finally lost. 

  1. Obedience, evidencing inner renewal from God, is necessary for final salvation. 

This is not to say that God demands perfection. It is clear from Philippians 3:12 that the New Testament does not hold out the demand that those who are justified in Christ Jesus by faith be sinlessly perfect in order to be finally saved. “Not that I have already obtained this or am already perfect, but I press on to make it my own, because Christ Jesus has made me his own” (see also 1 John 1:8-10, and Matt. 6:12). But the New Testament does demand that we be morally changed and walk in newness of life. 

For example: 

• “Strive for peace with everyone, and for the holiness without which no one will see the Lord.” (Heb. 12:14) 

• “If you live according to the flesh you will die, but if by the Spirit you put to death the deeds of the body, you will live.” (Rom. 8:13) 

• “Now the works of the flesh are evident: immorality, impurity, sensuality, idolatry, sorcery, enmity, strife, jealousy, fits of anger, rivalries, dissensions, divisions, envy, drunkenness, orgies, and things like these. I warn you, as I warned you before, that those who do such things will not inherit the kingdom of God.” (Gal. 5:19-21. See also Eph. 5:5 and 1 Cor. 6:10.) 

• “And by this we know that we have come to know him, if we keep his commandments. Whoever says ‘I know him’ but does not keep his commandments is a liar, and the truth is not in him, but whoever keeps his word, in him truly the love of God is perfected. By this we may know that we are in him: whoever says he abides in him ought to walk in the same way in which he walked.” (1 John 2:3-

• “So Jesus said to the Jews who had believed him, ‘If you abide in my word, you are truly my disciples.’” (John 8:31. See also Luke 10:28; Matt. 6:14-15; 18:35; Gen. 18:19; 22:16-17; 26:4-5; 2 Tim. 2:19.) 

Again let there be a caution lest anyone take these texts in a perfectionistic direction. John’s First Epistle is written to help us maintain our biblical equilibrium here. On the one hand it says, “No one born of God makes a practice of sinning, for God’s seed abides in him, and he cannot keep on sinning because he has been born of God” (1 John 3:9). But on the other hand it says, “If we say we have (not “had” but present tense, “have”) no sin, we deceive ourselves, and the truth is not in us” (1 John 1:8). And: “I am writing these things to you so that you may not sin. But if anyone does sin, we have an advocate with the Father, Jesus Christ the righteous” (1 John 2:1). 

The perseverance of the saints is not the guarantee of perfection, but rather that God will keep us fighting the fight of faith so that we hate our sin and never make any lasting peace with it. 

  1. God’s elect cannot be lost. 

This is why we believe in eternal security—namely, the eternal security of the elect. The implication is that God will so work in us that those whom he has chosen for eternal salvation will be enabled by him to persevere in faith to the end and fulfill, by the power of the Holy Spirit, the requirements for a new kind of life.

 We have seen before the ironclad chain of divine work in Romans 8:30: “Those whom he predestined he also called; and those whom he called he also justified; and those whom he justified he also glorified.” What is evident from this verse is that those who are effectually called into the hope of salvation will indeed persevere to the end and be glorified. There are no dropouts in this sequence. These are promises of God rooted in unconditional election in the first place and in the sovereign, converting, preserving grace that we have seen before. The links in this chain are unbreakable, because God’s saving work is infallible and his new covenant commitments are irrevocable.

 Again, Paul is following the teachings of his Lord Jesus: 

“My sheep hear my voice, and I know them, and they follow me. I give them eternal life, and they will never perish, and no one will snatch them out of my hand. My Father, who has given them to me, is greater than all, and no one is able to snatch them out of the Father’s hand. I and the Father are one.” (John 10:27-30; see also Eph. 1:4-5.) 

We saw before that being a sheep of Jesus means being chosen by God and given to the Son. In other words, the promise of Jesus never to lose any of his sheep is the sovereign commitment of the Son of God to preserve the faith of the elect for whom he laid down his life.

  1. There is a falling away of some believers, but if it persists, it shows that their faith was not genuine and they were not born of God. 

1 John 2:19 says, “They went out from us, but they were not of us; for if they had been of us, they would have continued with us. But they went out, that it might become plain that they all are not of us.” Similarly, the parable of the four soils as interpreted in Luke 8:9-14 pictures people who “hear the word, receive it with joy; but these have no root, they believe for a while and in time of testing fall away.” 

The fact that such a thing is possible is precisely why the ministry of the gospel in every local church must contain many admonitions to the church members to persevere in faith and not be entangled in those things which could possibly strangle them and result in their condemnation. Pastors do not know infallibly who of his listeners are the good soil and who are the bad. His warnings and exhortations to persevere are the way he helps the saints endure. They hear the warnings and take heed and thus authenticate their humble and good hearts of faith. 

  1. God justifies us completely through the first genuine act of saving faith, but this is the sort of faith that perseveres and bears fruit in the “obedience of faith”. 

The point here is the emphasis above on the necessity of persevering faith and obedience does not mean God is waiting to observe our perseverance and obedience before he declares us completely righteous in union with Jesus Christ. Romans 5:1 says that we “have been justified by faith.” It is a past act. The first time we believe in Jesus we are united to Christ. In union with him, his righteousness is counted as ours, at that moment. Paul says that he aims to “be found in him, not having a righteousness of my own that comes from the law, but that which comes through faith in Christ, the righteousness from God that depends on faith” (Phil. 3:9).

 The ground of our acceptance with God is Christ alone—his blood and righteousness. “For our sake he made him to be sin who knew no sin, so that in him we might become the righteousness of God” (2 Cor. 5:21). “By the one man’s obedience the many will be made righteous” (Rom. 5:19).

 The role of our faith is not to be a performance of something virtuous that God rewards with salvation. The point is that faith is a receiving of Christ who performed what we could not, a punishment for our sin and provision of our perfection. Faith is not the ground of our acceptance but the means or the instrument of union with Christ who alone is the ground of our acceptance with God. The role of the obedience in our justification is to give evidence that our faith is authentic. Deeds of love are not the ground of our first or final acceptance with God. Their function is to validate, and make public, the sovereign work of God giving us new birth and creating the new heart of faith. Paul puts it this way: “In Christ Jesus neither circumcision nor uncircumcision counts for anything, but only faith working through love” (Gal. 5:6). What counts with God in justification is the kind of faith that works through love. It is not our love that causes God to be 100 per cent for us. It is God being 100 per cent for us through faith in Christ that enables us to love. Love is a fruit of the Spirit. And we have received the Spirit by our first act of faith (Gal. 3:2). 

Therefore, the necessity of perseverance in faith and obedience for final salvation does not mean he waits till the end before he accepts us, adopts us, and justifies us. We do not fight the fight of faith in order to make God be 100 per cent for us. That happened in our union with Christ on our first act of faith. Rather, fight because he is 100 per cent for us. Paul put it like this: “Not that I have already obtained this or am already perfect, but I press on to make it my own, because Christ Jesus has made me his own” (Phil. 3:12). Christ has made us his own. That is how we fight on. In the final judgment according to works (not on the basis of works), the point of those works in the divine courtroom in relation to justification will be as public evidence of unseen faith and union with Christ. Christ will be the sole ground of our acceptance then as now. 

  1. God works to cause his elect to persevere. 

We are not left to ourselves in the fight of faith, and our assurance is rooted in the sovereign love of God to perform what he has called us to do. The texts that follow here are all expressions of the new covenant that we discussed in chapter 5. Jesus purchased for us all the promises of God when he shed his blood (Luke 22:20; 2 Cor. 1:20). 

One of the most precious of all those promises relates the new covenant to God’s absolute commitment to cause us to persevere: “I will make with them an everlasting covenant, that I will not turn away from doing good to them. And I will put the fear of me in their hearts, that they may not turn from me” (Jer. 32:40). This promise recurs in many wonderful expressions in the New Testament:

 • “By God’s power [we] are guarded through faith for a salvation ready to be revealed in the last time.” (1 Pet. 1:5) 

• “Now to him who is able to keep you from stumbling and to present you blameless before the presence of his glory with great joy, to the only God, our Savior, through Jesus Christ our Lord, be glory, majesty, dominion, and authority, before all time and now and forever. Amen.” (Jude 24-25)

 • “May the God of peace himself sanctify you completely, and may your whole spirit and soul and body be kept blameless at the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ. He who calls you is faithful; he will surely do it.” (1 Thess. 5:23-24: 

• “I am sure of this, that he who began a good work in you will bring it to completion at the day of Jesus Christ.” (Phil. 1:6)

 • “[Jesus Christ] will sustain you to the end; guiltless in the day of our Lord Jesus Christ. God is faithful, by whom you were called into the fellowship of his Son, Jesus Christ our Lord.” (1 Cor. 1:8-9) 

• “Now may the God of peace who brought again from the dead our Lord Jesus, the great shepherd of the sheep, by the blood of the eternal covenant, equip you with everything good that you may do his will, working in us that which is pleasing in his sight, through Jesus Christ, to whom be glory forever and ever. Amen.” (Heb. 13:20-21) 

I sometimes ask people: Why do you believe you will wake up a Christian tomorrow morning? Why do you think you will have saving faith tomorrow when you wake up? I ask this to test what sort of view of perseverance someone has. The biblical answer is not: I know I will choose to believe tomorrow morning. I am committed to Jesus. That is very fragile confidence. 

The answer is found in all these texts. God is faithful. God will work in me. God will keep me. God will finish his work to the end. The answer is God’s ongoing work, not my ongoing commitment. When I ask this question I am fishing to see if anyone has the view that eternal security is like a vaccination. We got our vaccination when we were converted and can’t catch the disease of unbelief. That is a misleading analogy because it implies that the process of preservation is automatic without the ongoing work of the great physician. Perseverance is not like a vaccination, but like a life-long therapy program in which the great physician stays with you all the way. He will never leave us (Heb. 13:5). That is the way we persevere. That is the way we have assurance. 

  1. Therefore we should be zealous to confirm our calling and election. 

The book of 2 Peter 1:10-11 says, “Therefore, brothers, be all the more diligent to confirm your calling and election, for if you practice these qualities you will never fall. For in this way there will be richly provided for you an entrance into the eternal kingdom of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ.” Peter’s point is not that our calling and election are fragile and need to be propped up. We have seen plainly, for example, from Romans 8:29-30 that calling and election are the most solid realities under God. They are links in a chain of salvation that cannot be broken.

 What Peter means is: be zealous to maintain your assurance of them and to confirm them continually by walking in the joy of them. He explains in the preceding verses that God, by “his divine power has granted to us all things that pertain to life and godliness, through the knowledge of him who called us to his own glory and excellence” (2 Pet. 1:3). He has not left us to ourselves to confirm our calling and election. 

By his divine power we then grow in faith and virtue and knowledge and self-control and steadfastness and godliness and brotherly affection and love (2 Pet. 1:5-7). In other words we make eager efforts to trust the promises and power of God so deeply that sin is put to death in our lives by the Spirit and the goal of love is joyfully pursued. Faith working through love (Gal. 5:6) is the way we make our calling and election sure. 

  1. Perseverance is a community project.

 God never meant us to fight the fight of faith alone. We are to fight for each other. One of Paul’s most remarkable statements about the perseverance of the elect is 2 Timothy 2:10, “I endure everything for the sake of the elect, that they also may obtain the salvation that is in Christ Jesus with eternal glory.” To many this is astonishing. Isn’t it already sure that the elect will obtain salvation in final glory? Yes it is. Those whom he justified he glorified.

 But the question betrays an assumption that this last point is meant to remove—the assumption that certain outcomes imply that there’s no need to press on toward them. That is a mistake. Salvation is certain for God’s elect. It cannot fail. But the way God has ordained to make it certain is by means of empowering human partnership in the fight of faith. Paul sees his ministry of the word as essential to the perseverance of the elect. 

Take a simple example. Suppose God has predestined that a nail be in a two-by-four with its head flush with the surface of the board. It is certain that this will happen. God is God and he has planned it. Does that mean he is indifferent to hammers? No. In fact God has also ordained that the way the nail will get in the board is by being struck with a hammer. 

Similarly, the elect will certainly be saved in the end with eternal glory. Does that mean God is indifferent to the ministry of the world in getting them there? No. God has made it essential. And the reason that does not undermine the certainty of salvation is that God is just as sovereign over the means as he is over the ends. 

We see this truth applied to all of us in Hebrews 3:12-13, “Take care, brothers, lest there be in any of you an evil, unbelieving heart, leading you to fall away from the living God. But exhort one another every day, as long as it is called ‘today,’ that none of you may be hardened by the deceitfulness of sin.” God will not let any of his elect “fall away” into destruction. But the way he will keep us from falling (Jude 1:24) is by mutual exhortation of other believers in our lives. This is one of the highest tributes that could possibly be paid to the church. God ordains the body of Christ as the means of his infallible keeping of the elect. 

We close this chapter with the hope and prayer that you will go deeper into the grace of God’s persevering grace. If you linger over this truth and let it sink in, you will find that the certainty of God’s covenant-keeping grace to you, is a far greater and stronger and sweeter ground of your assurance than any view of eternal security that makes it more impersonal and automatic like a vaccination. To know that God chose you, and God called you, and God gave you faith, and will never leave you, and will preserve you, and present you blameless before the presence of his glory with great joy—that assurance brings an invincible joy and strength and courage into your life. May God take you down ever deeper into the divine grace of perseverance.

Filsafat Metafisika

HAKEKAT FILSAFAT METAFISIKA I

Knowledge

BAB I HAKEKAT METAFISIKA

  1. Tesis Dasar
  1. Argumen pendukung
  2. Pengantar

Untuk mejelaskan tentang hakekat metafisika kita harus melihat titik tolaknya yang tidak lain adalah paham tetnang filsafat itu sendiri. dimana filsafat selalu berusaha mempertanyakan prinsip asali dari realitas. Dan prinsip asali ini tidak lain mengantar orang pada pemahanan mengenai the many dan the one. The many terletak pada bagian indrawi-empiris sedangkan the one  terletak pada lapisan meta indrawi.

Karena pertayaan sentral menyangkut prinsipo asali maka munculnya pandangan dari para filsug. Dan Aristoteles dianggap sebagai peletak dasar untuk mengerti hakekat metafisika. Baginya setiap ilmu selalu berusaha mencari penjelasan (causa) tetnang suatu permasalahan. Walaupun masing-masing ilmu mencari penyebabnya sendiri tapi bagi Aristoteles pasti ada satu penyebab pertama atau causa prima.  Dan ilmu itu tidak lain adalah metafisika/filsafat pertama. Metafisika adalah penyebab prima dan ilmu lain adalah penyebab particular/filsafat kedua. Dengan demikian dapat dimengerti bahwa  ternyata dalam sejarah awal filsafat sudah ada perbedaan antara lapisan indrawi dan meta indrawi serta metafisika sebagai cabang filsafat yang bertanya secara radikal tentang filsafat.

  1. Pengertian metafisika

Berangkat dari pengertian yang paling sederhana metafisika adalah ilmu untuk mempelajari penyebab terakhir (ultimate causa). Dengan demikian ada 2 penegasan penting y ang ada, antara lain:

  1. Perlu dibedakan tetnang proximate cause dan ultimate cause. Proximate cause bersifat langsugn, terbatas dan particular. Sedangkan ultimate cause bersifat universal atau menyangkut realitas secara keseluruhan, tidak bersifat empiris dan radikal.
  2. Penjelasan mengenai pandangan bahwa metafisika mempelajari prinsip pertama. Namun harus diingat bahwaprinsip berbeda degnan penyebab. Karena kalau si A adalah penyebab maka si B adalah efek. Artinya penyebab tidak sebagai bagian dari intrinsic dari efek. Prinsip berarti konsep yang karenanya segala sesuatu dapat diulangi atau dimengerti. Dan metafisika bertugas menjelaskan prinsip2 tersebut untuk mengerti realitas secara keseluruhan.
  1. Objek studi dari Metafisika

Kalau setiap ilmu mempunyaiobjek penelitiannya sendiri maka metafisika juga secara spesfik mengemukakan pertnyaan tentang arti “pengada” dan “mengada”. Dan kalau metafisika punya objek penelitainya maka dapat dimengerti sebagai ilmu tentang “pengada” sekadar “pengada” (being as being). Dan untuk mengerti hal ini ada beberapa tahapan:

  1. Tidak ada ilmu yang mempelajari objek yang tidak ada. Namun tidak semua ilmu mampu bertanya tentang apa itu to be atau being, hanya metafisika. Karena itu objek metafisika adalah sebagai ilmu yang mempertanyakan tetnang being atau objek metafisika adalah lapisan terdalam dari realitas secara rasional. Kalau begitu bagaimana kita menjelaskan objek studi metafisika adalah “pengada” sekadar “pengada”? setiap ilmu mempelajari bagian tertentu dari realitas. Artinya setiap ilmu memiliki pandangan tersendiri tetnang suatu sudut pandang tertentu dari objek. Misalnya realitas tetnang manusia dijelaskan oleh setiap ilmu dengan sudut pandangan yang berbeda. Namun masing-masing ilmu tidak pernah bertanya mengapa objek itu ada? Hanya metafisika, maka objek metafisika adalah “ada’ sebagai prinsip riil yang paling universal untuk mengerti segala sesuatu. Dan yang dipelajari metafisika adalah being pada dirinya atau being as being.
  2. Persoalan bahasa. Ada beberapa istilah yang digunakan to be-being. Esse-eus (“ada” yang “mengada”). Namun secara filosofis penalaran ini tidak tepat maka digunakan istilah being yang kemudian diterjemahkan dengan “pengada”. Dan untuk menjelaskan pengada itu aktivitas “pengada’ menunjuk pada aktivitas “mengada”. Jadi suatu aktivitas :”mengada”-“pengada” merupakan suatu yang bereksistensi.
  3. Namun pengada harus dibedakand ari benda. Pengada adalah suatu yang ada atau bahwa sesuatu menyatu dengan aktivitas mengada. Jadi istilah “pengada” menunjuk pada suatu eksistensi dan harus dibedakan dengan benda yang menunjuk pada esensi dari suatu benda/barang. Dengan kata lain jika kita menyebut itu adalah burung maka sebutan itu ditujukan pada esensi dari burung itu. Tapi barang/benda itu punya hakekat yang dimengerti sebagai the whatness atau juga the quality, juga esensi berarti “keapaan”.
  4. Kita bertanya apa maksudnya pengada sekadar pengada? Yaitu objek formal metafisika yaitu being as being. dan objek material dari metafisika adalah realitas sebagai suatu totalitas .
  5. Selain itu metafisika juga mempelajari karakteristik dasar dari pengada seperti pengada dalam hubungan dengan kesatuan, kausalitas atau juga keindahan.
  6. Dalam hubungan dnegan Tuhan dibahas juga dalam metafisika. Dan Tuhan dimengerti sebagai prinsip metafisika dari realitas.
  1. Asal-asul metafisika

Untuk memahami hal ini kita harus melihat kembali pandangan para filsuf pra Socratis yang memusatkan studnya pada dunia empiris/fisik, dan filsafat pertama di Yunani adalah kosmologi. Zaman Aristoteles semua ilmu disebut filsafat yang mempelajari dunia fisik. Tapu harus ada filsafat lain yang mempelajari being dari realitas itu. Atau harus ada filsafat pertama yang menjadi dasar dari filsafat lainnya. Klau begitu apa objek studi dari filsafat pertama itu? Objek studi dari filsafat pertama dimengerti dalam dua arti: sebagai ta hyper ta physika ( yang melampaui dunia fisik) dan  ta meta ta physika (yang melandasi dunia fisik). Sampai disini Aristoteles m sepakat bahwa filsafat sendiri mempelajari dua objek formal di atas, namun ada perbedaan.

Plato:  kedua objek ini sama saja, dan Plato menyebutnya sebagai dunia ide. B erbarti filsafat pertama mempelajari dunia ide. Dan dunia ide adalah dunia yang melatarbelakangi dunia fisik, tanpa dunia ide tidak ada dunia fisik.

Aristoteles:  ia membantah teori Plato dengan teori substansi. Ia katakana substansi teori hilemorfisme yang fisik selalu menyatu dengan dunia ide. Artinya meski di bedakan antara ta hyper ta physika dan ta meta ta physica inamun keduanya harus menjadi satu bagian, tidak pernah ada materi tanpa bentuk, dengan demkian ta hyper  ta physica tidak harus berpisah dari ta meta ta phyica. Dan hal yang mendasari antara kedua hal ini adalah being. Maka wilyaha metafisika memang mempelajari tentang being namun aristotels tidak menggunakan istilah metafisika. Kalau begitu dari mana metafisika digunakan?  pertama tama digunakan oleh Adronikus lewat karangan-karanganya. Dan dalam perkembangan kemudian dibedakan metafisika umum dan khusus. Ada juga yang disebut “ontology” oleh Christian Wolf.  

  1. Metafisika sebagai Human Knowledge

Pertnyanaan sentaralnya bagaimana hubungan antara  metafisika dan pengetahuan manusia entah pengetahuan spontan atau pengetahuan sistematis? 

  1. Pengetahuan spontan berarti pengetahuan yang biusa diperoleh mansuaia tetnagn alam semesta berdasarkan kemampuan kodrati untuk bernalar maka manusia punya kemampuan tentang apa yang benar-salah, perbedaan tentang manusia dan alam semesta tetnang substansi dan aksidental dll. Sehingga pengetahuan spontan adalah pengetahuan yang berada di permukaan. 
  2. Pada level lain ilmu pengetahuan berefleksi secara sistemtis tentang objek particular tentang alam semesta. 
  3. Sedangkan pengetahuan sistematis adalah cabang filsafat yang berbicara tetnang hakekat objkek tertentu (secara particular) seperi filsafat manusia.
  4. Metafisika sebagai ilmu mempelajari being sebagai being yaitu prinsip universal yang mendasari seluruh realitas. Kalau sudah ada pengetahuan pengetahuan sponmtan dan sistematis apakah masih perlu metafisika? Ada beberapa alasan:
  1. Karena pengethuan spontan seringkali tidak lengkap, maka kita membutuhkabn pnegetahuan yang lebih mendalam dan bersifat ilmiah.
  2. Pengetahuan spontan dan ilmiah membutuhkan pertanggungjawaban secara fundamental dan secara metafisis
  3. Pengetahuan spontan dan ilmiah pada umumnya hanya mengandalkan objek2 sebagai pengada tanpa menyelidiki status pengada.  Karena itu metafisika dibutuhkan karena pengethuannanya lengkap dan mendalam tetnang realitas.  
  1. Hubungan Metafisika dan Moral

Punya hubungan erat dengan moral. Dalam pengalaman orang yang kehilangan keyakinan moral lasim pula kehilangan dasar intelektualnya dan terjebak dalam sekptisisme tentang kebanaran. Karen akebenaran moral yang diyakii selalu ada dalam level metafisis. Tanpa keyakinan moral dan metafisis kita akan terjebak adalam beberapa tahap:

  1. Skeptisisme:terhadap kebenaran direlativir.
  2. Agnostisisme: Terhadap kebenaran tentang Tuhan entah ada atau tidak.
  3. Sikap relativisme tetnang hukum moral.
  5. Hubungan metafisika dan Teologi

Teologi adalah refleksi ilmiah tetnang iman. Karena itu filsafat digunakan untuk menjelaskan iman. Kalau bagaimana menjelaskannya?  Ada sejarah panjang yang dimulai dari:

 Agustinus yang membedakan rasio interior (tingkatan pengetahuan ilmiah) dan rasio superior (instrument untuk iman dan teologi). Artinya ia mendudukan teologi di atas filsafat dan metafisika, dan teologi dianggap sebagai puncak dari semua pengetahuan.

Anselmus dari Contebery: ia terkenal dengan perkataannya fides querens inteklectum. Dengan begitu ia mendudukan teologi melampaui pengetahuan rasional.

Th. Aquinas menghargai gungsi filsafat dan metafisika. Karena itu ia membedakan level empiris dan level filosofis. Artinya wilayah teologi tidk dapat dimasukan oleh filsafat tapi juga ada wilayah yang bisa dijelaskan secara rasional.

Agus comte dengan teori tiga zaman: 1.zmaan posotivisme (berbicara tetnang hal-0hal kongkrit) 2 saman filsafcat (lebih maju, rasional tapi abstrak, tidak relevan)3. Saman mitos (level yang tidak rasional dan tidak masuk akal). Karena itu tidak penting sama sekali metafisika, dan bila dibandingkand engan teologi metafisika lebih maju.

Lingkungan Wina: dengan prinsip verifikasi yang melegitimasi posotivisme. Suatu halk bisa diterima jika relecvan dan bisa diukur. Dan teori Language games.

Whithead:  baginya kita harus memebdekan Tuhan teologis dan percakapan fisafat tetnang Tuhan selalu berada dalam konteks percakapan tentang kehidupan dari realitas sebagai seuatu kesatahuan. Jadi metafisika tidak lain dari upaya untuk memehami pengalaman hdiup secara keseluruhan dan dalam pengalaman ini kita berbicara tetnang Tuhan.

Paus Yoh. Paulus II: dalam ensiklik Fides et ratio ia menjelaskan hubungan iman dan rasio.babhwa teologi dogmatis membutuhkan filsafat kerana bahasa yang rasional dan komunikatif dari filsafat. Juga teologi moral membuthkan filsafat kerena teologi membutuyhkan instrument rational untuk moderat. Dalm hal ini metafisika juga dibutuhkan.

T.U.L.I.P

UNCONDITIONAL ELECTION

Knowledge

If all of us are so depraved that we cannot come to God without being born again by the irresistible grace of God, and if this particular grace is purchased by Christ on the cross, then it is clear that the salvation of any of us is owing to God’s election. He chose those to whom he would show such irresistible grace, and for whom he would purchase it. 

Election refers to God’s choosing whom to save. It is unconditional in that there is no condition man must meet before God chooses to save him. Man is dead in trespasses and sins. So there is no condition he can meet before God chooses to save him from his deadness. 

We are not saying that final salvation is unconditional. It is not. We must meet the condition of faith, for example, in Christ in order to inherit eternal life. But faith is not a condition for election. Just the reverse. Election is a condition for faith. It is because God chose us before the foundation of the world that he purchases our redemption at the cross, and then gives us spiritual life through irresistible grace, and brings us to faith.

 Election Prior to Faith

 Acts 13:48 reports how the Gentiles responded to the preaching of the gospel in Antioch of Pisidia. “And when the Gentiles heard this, they began rejoicing and glorifying the word of the Lord, and as many as were appointed to eternal life believed.” Notice, it does not say that as many as believed were chosen to be ordained to eternal life. It says that those who were ordained to eternal life (that is, those whom God had elected) believed. God’s election preceded faith and made it possible. This is the decisive reason some believed while others did not. 

Similarly Jesus says to the Jews in John 10:26, “You do not believe because you are not among my sheep.” Notice again, he does not say, “You are not among my sheep because you do not believe.” Who the sheep are is something God decides before we believe. It is the basis and enablement of our belief. “You do not believe, because you do not belong to my sheep.” We believe because we are God’s chosen sheep, not vice versa. (See also John 8:47; 18:37.) 

Unconditionality in Romans 9

In Romans 9, Paul stresses the unconditionality of election. In verses 11-12, he describes the principle God used in the choice of Jacob over Esau: “Though they were not yet born and had done nothing either good or bad, in order that God’s purpose of election might continue, not because of works but because of his call, [Rebecca] was told, ‘The elder will serve the younger.’” God’s election is preserved in its unconditionality because it is transacted before we are born or have done any good or evil.

 I know that some interpreters say that Romans 9 has nothing to do with the election of individuals to their eternal destinies, but only deals with corporate peoples in their historical roles. I think this is a mistake mainly because it simply does not come to terms with the problem Paul is addressing in the chapter. You can see this for yourself by reading the first five verses of Romans 9. When Paul says in Romans 9:6, “But it is not as though the word of God has failed,” what is clear is that something has made it look as though God’s promises have fallen. What is that? 

The answer is given in verses 2 and 3. Paul says, “I have great sorrow and unceasing anguish in my heart. For I could wish that I myself were accursed and cut off from Christ for the sake of my brothers, my kinsmen according to the flesh.” The deepest issue Paul is addressing is not why Israel as a nation has this or that historical role, but that individuals within Israel are accursed and cut off from Christ. In other words, individual eternal destinies are indeed at stake. And the nature of Paul’s argument confirms this, because the first thing he says to confirm that the word of God has not failed is: “For not all who are descended from Israel belong to Israel” (Rom. 9:6). In other words, the individuals in Israel who perish were never part of the true Israel. Then he moves on to show how God’s unconditional election was at work within Israel.

The unconditionality of God’s electing grace is stressed again in Romans 9:15-16: “‘I will have mercy on whom I have mercy, and I will have compassion on whom I have compassion.’ So then it depends not on human will or exertion, but on God, who has mercy.” The very nature of the mercy we need is willawakening, will-transforming mercy. We saw in the chapters on irresistible grace and total depravity that we are unable to love God or trust God or follow Christ. Our only hope is sovereign mercy, irresistible mercy. If that is true, what Paul says here makes sense. We are in no position to merit mercy or elicit mercy. If we are to receive mercy it will be at God’s free choice. That is what Paul says: “I will have mercy on whom I have mercy, and I will have compassion on whom I have compassion.” 

In Romans 11:7 Paul underlines again the individual nature of election within Israel: “Israel failed to obtain what it was seeking. The elect obtained it, but the rest were hardened.” So throughout Romans 9–11 Paul assumes that election deals with individuals and with eternal destinies, and that it is unconditional. There is, I believe, a divine covenantal commitment to corporate Israel, but that does not contradict or annul the individual, eternal thrust of Romans 9. The principle of unconditionality is seen most clearly in Romans 9:11. God elects this way so that “though they were not yet born and had done nothing either good or bad, in order that God’s purpose of election might continue.” 

Another Powerful Statement of Unconditionality 

Ephesians 1:3-6 is another powerful statement of the unconditionality of our election and predestination to sonship. 

Blessed be the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, who has blessed us in Christ with every spiritual blessing in the heavenly places, even as he chose us in him before the foundation of the world, that we should be holy and blameless before him. In love he predestined us for adoption as sons through Jesus Christ, according to the purpose of his will, to the praise of his glorious grace. 

Some interpreters argue that this election before the foundation of the world was only an election of Christ, but not an election of which individuals would actually be in Christ. This simply amounts to saying that there is no unconditional election of individuals to salvation. Christ is put forward as the chosen one of God, and the salvation of individuals is dependent on their own initiative to overcome their depravity and be united to Christ by faith. God does not choose them, and therefore God cannot effectually convert them. He can only initiate conviction, but finally must wait to see who will provide the decisive impulse to quicken themselves from the dead and choose him. 

This interpretation does not square well with verse 11 where it says that “we were predestined according to the purpose of him who works all things according to the counsel of his will.” Nor does it fit with the wording of verse 4. The ordinary meaning of the word for “choose” in verse 4 is to select or pick out of a group (see, for instance, Luke 6:13; 14:7; John 13:18; 15:16, 19). So the natural meaning of verse 4 is that God chooses his people from all humanity, before the foundation of the world by viewing them in relationship to Christ their redeemer. This is the natural way to read the verse. 

It is true that all election is in relation to Christ. Christ was in the mind of God crucified before the foundation of the world (Rev. 13:8). There would be no election of sinners unto salvation if Christ were not appointed to die for their sins. So in that sense they are elect in Christ. But it is they who are chosen out of the world to be in Christ. 

Also the wording of verse 5 suggests the election of people to be in Christ, and not just the election of Christ. Literally, it says, “Having predestined us unto sonship through Jesus Christ.” We are the ones predestined, not Christ. He is the one that makes the election and predestination and adoption of sinners possible, and so our election is “through him,” but there is no talk here about God having a view only to Christ in election. Christians come to faith and are united to Christ and covered by his blood because we were chosen before the foundation of the world for this destiny of holiness. 

Perhaps the Most Important Text 

Perhaps the most important text of all in relation to the teaching of unconditional election is Romans 8:28-33. 

We know that for those who love God all things work together for good, for those who are called according to his purpose. For those whom he foreknew he also predestined to be conformed to the image of his Son, in order that he might be the firstborn among many brothers. And those whom he predestined he also called, and those whom he called he also justified, and those whom he justified he also glorified. What then shall we say to these things? If God is for us, who can be against us? He who did not spare his own Son but gave him up for us all, how will he not also with him graciously give us all things? Who shall bring any charge against God’s elect? It is God who justifies. 

Often this text is used to argue against unconditional election on the basis of verse 29 which says that “those whom he foreknew he also predestined ….” So some say that people are not chosen unconditionally. They are chosen on the basis of their foreknown faith, which they produce without the help of irresistible grace and which God sees beforehand. 

But this does not work with the way Paul develops his argument. Notice that Romans 8:30 says, “And those whom he predestined he also called, and those whom he called he also justified, and those whom he justified he also glorified.” Focus for a moment on the fact that all whom God calls he also justifies. 

This calling in verse 30 is not given to all people. The reason we know it’s not is that all those who are called are also justified. There is an infallible connection between called and justified. “Those whom he called he also justified.” But all people are not justified. Therefore all are not called. So this calling in verse 30 is not the general call to repentance that preachers give or that God gives through the glory of nature. Everybody receives that call. The call of verse 30 is given only to those whom God predestined to be conformed to the image of his Son (v. 29). And it is a call that leads necessarily to justification: “Those whom he called he also justified.”

 We know that justification only happens through faith. “We hold that one is justified by faith apart from works of the law” (Rom. 3:28; cf. 5:1). What then is this call that is given to all those who are predestined and which infallibly leads to justification? We have seen this before in chapter 4 when discussing irresistible grace. It is the call of 1 Corinthians 1:23-24, “We preach Christ crucified, a stumbling block to Jews and folly to Gentiles, but to those who are called, both Jews and Greeks, Christ the power of God and the wisdom of God.” In other words, the calling is not the preaching, since that is done to all the Jews and Gentiles. Rather, the calling happens through the preaching in the hearts of some of the listeners. It wakens them from the dead and changes their perceptions of the cross so that they embrace it as God’s wisdom and power. In other words, the calling of Romans 8:30 is irresistible, faith-creating grace. 

Now consider the flow of Paul’s thought again in Romans 8:30. “Those whom he predestined he also called, and those whom he called he also justified, and those whom he justified he also glorified.” Between the act of predestination and justification, there is the act of calling. Since justification is only by faith, the calling in view must be the act of God whereby he calls faith into being. And since it always results in justification (all the called are justified), it must be sovereign. That is, it overcomes any resistance that gets in the way. So the calling of verse 30 is the sovereign work of God which brings a person to faith by which he is justified.

Now notice the implication this has for the meaning of foreknowledge in verse 29. When Paul says in verse 29, “Those whom he foreknew he also predestined,” he can’t mean (as so many try to make him mean) that God knows in advance who will use their free will to come to faith, so that he can predestine them to sonship because they made that free choice on their own. It can’t mean that because we have just seen from verse 30 the decisive cause of faith in the justified is not the fallen human will but the sovereign call of God. 

God does not foreknow those who come to faith apart from his creating the faith, because there are no such people. Whoever believes has been “called” into faith by the sovereign grace of God. When God looks from eternity into the future and sees the faith of the elect he sees his own work. And he chose to do that work for dead and blind and rebellious sinners unconditionally. For we were not capable of meeting the condition of faith. We were spiritually dead and blind. 

So the foreknowledge of Romans 8:29 is not the mere awareness of something that will happen in the future apart from God’s predetermination. Rather, it is the kind of knowledge referred to in Old Testament texts like Genesis 18:19 (“I have chosen [literally, known] him [Abraham] that he may command his children … to keep the way of the Lord”), and Jeremiah 1:5 (“Before I formed you in the womb, I knew you, and before you were born I consecrated you; I appointed you a prophet to the nations”), and Amos 3:2 (“You [Israel] only have I known of all the families of the earth”). God “knows” all the families of the earth in one sense. But the meaning here is; You only, Israel, have I chosen for my own. 

As C. E. B. Cranfield says, the foreknowledge of Romans 8:29 is “that special taking knowledge of a person which is God’s electing grace.” Such foreknowledge is virtually the same as election: “Those whom he foreknew (i.e., chose) he predestined to be conformed to the image of his Son.” 

Therefore, what this magnificent text (Rom. 8:28-33) teaches is that God really accomplishes the complete redemption of his people from start to finish. He foreknows (that is, elects) a people for himself before the foundation of the world, he predestines this people to be conformed to the image of his Son, he calls them to himself in faith, he justifies them through that faith alone, and he finally glorifies them. And nothing can separate them from the love of God in Christ forever and ever (Rom. 8:39). To him be all praise and glory!

 If you are a believer in Christ, you have been loved by God from all eternity. He set his favor on you before the creation of the world. He chose you when he considered you in your helpless condition. He chose you for himself unconditionally. We may not boast in our election. That would be a profound misunderstanding of the meaning of unconditionality. When we had done nothing to commend ourselves to God in any way, he set his favor on us freely. 

It was with us the way it was with the election of Israel: “It was not because you were more in number than any other people that the LORD set his love on you and chose you … but it is because the LORD loves you” (Deut. 7:7-8). Read that carefully: he loves you because he loves you. He chose to do that in eternity. And because his love for you never had a beginning, it can have no end. What we are studying in this book is simply the way God works out that eternal love in history to save his own and bring us to the everlasting enjoyment of himself. May God take you deeper and deeper into the experience of this amazing sovereign grace.

Limited Atonement

LIMITED ATONEMENT

Knowledge

The Atonement is the work of God in Christ on the cross in which he completed the work of his perfectly righteous life, canceled the debt of our sin, appeased his holy wrath against us, and won for us all the benefits of salvation. The death of Christ was necessary because God would not show a just regard for his glory if he swept sins under the rug with no recompense. That’s the point of Romans 3:25-26: 

God put [Christ] forward as a propitiation by his blood, to be received by faith. This was to show God’s righteousness, because in his divine forbearance he had passed over former sins. It was to show his righteousness at the present time, so that he might be just and the justifier of the one who has faith in Jesus. 

You can see from the emphasized words that the death of Christ was necessary to vindicate the righteousness of God in justifying the ungodly by faith. Why is that? Because it would be unrighteous to acquit sinners as though their sin was insignificant, when in fact sin is an insult against the value of God’s glory. And since the value of God’s glory is infinite, the offense is infinitely outrageous. Therefore Jesus bears the curse, which was due to our sin, so that we can be justified and the righteousness of God can be vindicated.

 What Did Christ Actually Achieve? 

The term “limited atonement” addresses the question, “For whom did Christ do all this?” “For whom did he die?” “Whose sin did he atone for?” “For whom did he purchase all the benefits of salvation?” But behind these questions of the extent of the atonement lies the equally important question about the nature of the atonement. What did Christ actually achieve on the cross for those for whom he died? That question will lead to a more accurate answer to the others.

 If you say that he died for every human being in the same way, then you have to define the nature of the atonement very differently than you would if you believed that Christ, in some particular way, died for those who actually do believe. In the first case, you would believe that the death of Christ did not decisively secure the salvation of anyone; it only made all men savable so that something else would be decisive in saving them, namely their choice. In that case, the death of Christ did not actually remove the sentence of death and did not actually guarantee new life for anyone. Rather it only created possibilities of salvation which could be actualized by people who provide the decisive cause, namely their faith. In this understanding of the atonement, faith and repentance are not blood-bought gifts of God for particular sinners, but are rather the acts of some sinners that make the blood work for them. 

You begin to see how closely this doctrine of the atonement is connected with the previous one, irresistible grace. What I think the Bible teaches is that this very irresistible grace is purchased by the blood of Jesus. The new birth is blood-bought. The effectual call is blood-bought. The gift of repentance is blood-bought. None of these acts of irresistible grace is deserved. They came to us because Christ secured them by his blood and righteousness. But that means, he did not secure them for all in the same way. Otherwise all would be born again, and all would be effectually called, and all would receive the gift of repentance.

 So the personal and experiential question we face here at the beginning of this chapter is: Do we believe that Christ decisively secured for me the call and life and faith and repentance I now have? Or do I contribute these things from myself so that what he died to achieve counts for me? For if Christ died for all people in the same way, then his death did not infallibly obtain regenerating grace or faith or repentance for those who are saved. We must have regenerated ourselves without the bloodbought miracle of Christ, and we must have come to faith and repentance ourselves without the blood-bought gifts of faith and repentance. 

In other words, if we believe that Christ died for all men in the same way, then the benefits of the cross cannot include the mercy by which we are brought to faith, because then all men would be brought to faith, but they aren’t. But if the mercy by which we are brought to faith (irresistible grace) is not part of what Christ purchased on the cross, then we are left to obtain our deliverance from deadness and blindness and rebellion another way. We are left to make our way into the safety of Christ another way, since he did not obtain this entrance (new birth, faith, repentance) for us when he died. 

Who Really Limits the Atonement Therefore, it becomes evident that it is not the Calvinist who limits the atonement. It is those who deny that the atoning death of Christ accomplishes what we most desperately need—namely, salvation from the condition of deadness and hardness and blindness under the wrath of God. They limit the power and effectiveness of the atonement so that they can say that it was accomplished even for those who die in unbelief and are condemned. In order to say that Christ died for all men in the same way, they must limit the atonement to a possibility or an opportunity for salvation if fallen humans can escape from their deadness and rebellion and obtain faith by an effectual means not provided by the cross. 

On the other hand, we do not limit the power and effectiveness of the atonement. Rather we say that in the cross, God had in view the actual, effective redemption of his children from all that would destroy them, including their own unbelief. And we affirm that when Christ died particularly for his bride, he did not simply create a possibility or an opportunity for salvation, but really purchased and infallibly secured for them all that is necessary to get them saved, including the grace of regeneration and the gift of faith. 

We do not deny that Christ died to save all in some sense. Paul says in 1 Timothy 4:10 that in Christ God is “the Savior of all people, especially of those who believe.” What we deny is that the death of Christ is for all men in the same sense. God sent Christ to save all in some sense. And he sent Christ to save those who believe in a more particular sense. God’s intention is different for each. That is a natural way to read 1 Timothy 4:10. 

For “all men” the death of Christ is the foundation of the free offer of the gospel. This is the meaning of John 3:16, “God so loved the world, that he gave his only Son, that whoever believes in him should not perish but have eternal life.” The sending of the Son is for the whole world in the sense that Jesus makes plain: so that whoever believes in him should not perish. In that sense God sent Jesus for everyone. Or, to use the words of 1 Timothy 4:10, God is the “Savior of all people” in that Christ died to provide an absolutely reliable and valid offer of forgiveness to all, such that everyone, without exception, who trusts Christ would be saved. When the gospel is preached, Christ is offered to all without discrimination. And the offer is absolutely authentic for all. What is offered is Christ, and anyone—absolutely anyone— who receives Christ receives all that he bought for his sheep, his bride. The gospel does not offer a possibility of salvation. It is the possibility of salvation. But what is offered is Christ, and in him the infinite achievement that he accomplished for his people by his death and resurrection. 

The Crucial Role of the New Covenant

 The biblical foundation for saying that Christ died not just to make salvation available for all who believe, but to actually purchase the faith of the elect is the fact that the blood of Jesus secured the blessings of the new covenant for his people. The faith of God’s chosen and called was purchased by “the blood of the covenant” (Matt. 26:28). 

The Arminian view portrays sinners as needing divine assistance in order to believe. That’s true. We do need assistance. But more assistance than Arminianism assumes. In that view the sinner, after being assisted by God, provides the decisive impulse. God only assists; the sinner decides. Thus, “the blood of the covenant” does not decisively secure our faith. The decisive cause of faith is human self-determination. The atoning work of Christ, they say, sets up this possibility. But it does not secure the outcome. But the new covenant, bought by the blood of Christ, teaches something very different. Let’s put the teaching of the new covenant before us.

 God spoke the terms of the new covenant through Jeremiah:

 The days are coming, declares the LORD, when I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel and the house of Judah, not like the covenant that I made with their fathers … my covenant that they broke, though I was their husband, declares the LORD. For this is the covenant that I will make with the house of Israel after those days, declares the LORD: I will put my law within them, and I will write it on their hearts. And … I will forgive their iniquity, and I will remember their sin no more. (Jer. 31:31-34) One fundamental difference between the promised new covenant and the old one “made with their fathers” is that they broke the old one, but in the new covenant, God will “put the law within them” and will “write it on their hearts” so that the conditions of the covenant are secured by God’s sovereign initiative. The new covenant will not be broken. That is part of its design. It lays claim on its participants, secures them, and keeps them. 

God makes this point even more clearly in the next chapter of Jeremiah: 

I will give them one heart and one way, that they may fear me forever, for their own good and the good of their children after them. I will make with them an everlasting covenant, that I will not turn away from doing good to them. And I will put the fear of me in their hearts, that they may not turn from me. I will rejoice in doing them good. (Jer. 32:39-41)

 God makes at least six promises in this text: 1) I will make with them an everlasting covenant; 2) I will give them the kind of heart that secures their fearing me forever; 3) I will never turn away from doing good to them; 4) I will put the fear of me in their hearts; 5) I will not let them turn away from me; and 6) I will rejoice in doing good to them. 

Here in Jeremiah 32 it becomes even clearer than in Jeremiah 31 that God is taking the sovereign initiative to make sure that the covenant succeeds. God will not leave it finally in the power of the fallen human will to attain or sustain membership in the new covenant. He will give a new heart—a heart that fears the Lord. It will be decisively God’s doing, not man’s. And he will act in this covenant so that “they may not turn from me” (Jer. 32:40). Thus John Owen comments, “This then is one main difference of these two covenants—that the Lord did in the old only require the condition; now, in the new, he will also effect it in all the federates, to whom this covenant is extended.”

 Similarly, Ezekiel prophesies in the same way: God will take the initiative and give a new heart and a new spirit. 

I will give them one heart, and a new spirit I will put within them.

 I will remove the heart of stone from their flesh and give them a heart of flesh. (Ezek. 11:19) 

I will give you a new heart, and a new spirit I will put within you. And I will remove the heart of stone from your flesh and give you a heart of flesh. And I will put my Spirit within you, and cause you to walk in my statutes and be careful to obey my rules. (Ezek. 36:26-27) 

An unregenerate heart of stone is the deep reason why Israel did not trust God’s promises, or love him with all their heart and soul and mind and strength. If the new covenant is to be more successful than the old covenant, God will have to take out the heart of stone and give his people a heart that loves him. In other words, he will have to take a miraculous initiative to secure the faith and love of his people. This is exactly what Moses says God will do: 

The LORD your God will circumcise your heart and the heart of your offspring, so that you will love the LORD your God with all your heart and with all your soul, that you may live. (Deut. 30:6)

 In other words, in the new covenant God promises that he will take the initiative and will create a new heart, so that people are made members of the new covenant by his initiative, not their own. If someone enjoys participation in the new covenant with all its blessings, it is because God forgave his iniquity, removed his heart of stone, gave him a tender heart of flesh that fears and loves God, and caused him to walk in his statutes. In other words, the new covenant promises regeneration. It promises to create faith and love and obedience where before there was only hardness.

 The Blood of Jesus Obtains the Promises of the New Covenant

 What we find when we come to the New Testament is that Jesus is the Mediator of this new covenant and that he secured it by his own blood. This is the connection between the atonement and the new covenant: Jesus’ blood is the blood of the covenant. The design of his death was to establish this covenant with all the terms we have just seen. 

According to Luke 22:20, at the Last Supper, Jesus took the cup after they had eaten and said, “This cup that is poured out for you is the new covenant in my blood.” Paul recounts this in 1 Corinthians 11:25: “He took the cup, after supper, saying, ‘This cup is the new covenant in my blood.’” I take this to mean that the promises of the new covenant are purchased by the blood of Christ. Or to use the language of Hebrews, “This makes Jesus the guarantor of a better covenant” (Heb. 7:22). “He is the mediator of a new covenant, so that those who are called may receive the promised eternal inheritance” (Heb. 9:15).

 Therefore all the promises of the new covenant are bloodbought promises. When they come true for us they come true because Jesus died to make them come true. This means that the particular promises of the new covenant to create a people of God and keep a people of God are what Jesus died for. 

The point I am making is that not all the promises of the new covenant depend on the condition of faith. Rather, one of the promises made in the new covenant is that the condition of faith itself will be given by God. That’s why I say that the new covenant people are created and preserved by God. “I will put the fear of me in their hearts, that they may not turn from me” (Jer. 32:40). God puts the fear of God in us in the first place. And God keeps us from turning away. He creates his new people and keeps his new people. And he does this by the blood of the covenant, which Jesus said was his own blood (Luke 22:20). 

The upshot of this understanding of the new covenant is that there is a definite atonement for the new covenant people. In the death of Christ, God secures a definite group of unworthy sinners as his own people by purchasing and guaranteeing the conditions they must meet to be part of his people. The blood of the covenant—Christ’s blood—purchases and guarantees the new heart of faith and repentance. God did not do this for everyone. He did it for a “definite” or a “particular” group, owing to nothing in themselves. And since he did it through Jesus Christ, the Great Shepherd, who laid down his life for the sheep, we say, “to [him] be glory forever and ever” (Heb. 13:21). This achievement is a great part of the glory of the cross of Christ. 

Jesus Lays Down His Life for the Sheep 

There are many Scriptures which support what we have just seen, and teach that God’s purpose in the death of Christ included the ingathering of a new-covenant people by means of his irresistible grace.

 For example, in John 10:15 Jesus says, “I lay down my life for the sheep.” This is not the same as saying I lay down my life for all people. In John’s Gospel “the sheep” are not everyone. Nor does the term “sheep” refer to those who have used their power of self-determination to produce faith. Rather they are those whom God has chosen and given to the Son (John 6:37, 44). Their faith is possible because they are sheep. 

We see this in John 10:26 where Jesus says, “You do not believe, because you do not belong to my sheep.” In other words, being a sheep enables you to believe, not vice versa. So the sheep do not first make themselves sheep by believing; they are able to believe because they are sheep. So when Jesus says, “I lay down my life for the sheep,” he means, by my blood I purchase those my Father has given to me, and I secure their faith and all the blessings that come to those who are united with me. 

John 17 points in the same direction. Jesus limits his prayer in John 17 to his sheep—those whom the Father has given him.

 I have manifested your name to the people whom you gave me out of the world. Yours they were, and you gave them to me … I am praying for them. I am not praying for the world but for those whom you have given me, for they are yours… And for their sake I consecrate myself, that they also may be sanctified in truth. (John 17:6, 9, 19) The consecration in view here is the death of Jesus which he is about to undergo. Therefore he is saying that his death is designed especially for those for whom he is praying. “I am not praying for the world but for those whom you have given me” (John 17:9). And for these he is consecrating himself. For these he is laying down his life.

 Jesus Died to Gather the Children of God

John tells us of a prophecy coming from the high priest which makes a similar point. 

“Nor do you understand that it is better for you that one man should die for the people, not that the whole nation should perish.” He did not say this of his own accord, but being high priest that year he prophesied that Jesus would die for the nation, and not for the nation only, but also to gather into one the children of God who are scattered abroad. (John 11:50-52)

 There are “children of God” scattered throughout the world. These are the “sheep”—the ones the Father has given to the Son and will irresistibly draw to Jesus. Jesus died to gather these people into one flock. The point is the same as John 10:15-16: “I lay down my life for the sheep. And I have other sheep that are not of this fold; I must bring them also, and they will listen to my voice.” The “gathering” in John 11:52 and the “bringing” in John 10:16 are the same work of God. And both are the divine design of the cross of Christ. Christ did not die just to make this possible, but to make this happen. 

It is described again by John in Revelation 5:9 where heaven sings to Christ: “Worthy are you to take the scroll and to open its seals, for you were slain, and by your blood you ransomed people for God from every tribe and language and people and nation.” In accordance with John 10:16, John does not say that the death of Christ ransomed all people but that it ransomed people from all the tribes of the world.

This is the way we may understand texts like 1 John 2:2, that some have used to argue against the doctrine of limited or definite atonement. In words very reminiscent of John 11:52 John says, “[Christ] is the propitiation for our sins, and not for ours only but also for the sins of the whole world.” The question is: Does this mean that Christ died with the intention to appease the wrath of God for every person in the world? From all that we have seen so far from John’s writing, it is not likely that it has that meaning. Rather the verbal parallel between John 11:51-52 and 1 John 2:2 is so close it is difficult to escape the conviction that the same thing is intended by John in both verses. 

“He prophesied that Jesus should die for the nation, and not for the nation only, but to gather into one the children of God who are scattered abroad.” (John 11:51-2)

 “He is the propitiation for our sins, and not for ours only but also for the sins of the whole world.” (1 John 2:2)

 The “whole world” is parallel with “children of God scattered abroad.” So it is natural to think that John’s point in 1 John 2:2 is to stress that God’s propitiating work in Christ is not parochial, as if he is only interested in Jews, or in one class or race. No grouping of humans should ever say, “He is the propitiation for our sins only.” No. His propitiating work is meant to gather people from the “whole world.” “I have other sheep that are not of this fold!” (John 10:16)—all over the world. These are the “sheep” for whom he died, the redeemed “children of God” scattered abroad, the ransomed people “from every tongue and tribe and people and nation.” 

A Ransom for Many 

In harmony with what we have seen, for example, in every tribe”), Jesus said in Mark 10:45, “The Son of Man also came not to be served but to serve, and to give his life as a ransom for many.” He does not say “ransom for all” but “ransom for many,” just as Revelation 5:9 says “ransomed from every tribe.” I know that the word “many” does not prove my case. “Many” could logically mean “all.” My point is simply to show that “many” (rather than “all”) fits with the limits we have seen already in this chapter. 

Similarly in Matthew 26:28, Jesus says, at the last supper, “This is my blood of the covenant, which is poured out for many for the forgiveness of sins.” And Hebrews 9:28 says, “So Christ, having been offered once to bear the sins of many, will appear a second time, not to deal with sin but to save those who are eagerly waiting for him.” And Isaiah 53:12 says that the suffering servant “bore the sin of many.”

 Christ Gave Himself for the Church

 One of the clearest passages on God’s particular intention in the death of Christ is Ephesians 5:25- 27. 

Husbands, love your wives, as Christ loved the church and gave himself up for her, that he might sanctify her, having cleansed her by the washing of water with the word, so that he might present the church to himself in splendor, without spot or wrinkle or any such thing, that she might be holy and without blemish. 

Here Paul says that the intended beneficiary of the death of Christ is the church, the bride of Christ. One of the reasons I am jealous for this doctrine of limited atonement or particular redemption is that I want the bride of Christ to be properly moved by the particular love that Christ had for her when he died. This was not only a world-embracing love; it was a bridepurchasing love. God knew those who were his. And he sent his Son to obtain this bride for this Son. From heaven he came and sought her To be his holy bride; With his own blood he bought her, And for her life he died. There is a particular love for the bride in this sacrifice that the church misses when she only thinks that God did not have any particular people in mind when he bought the church with his Son’s blood. I used to say to the church I served, “I love all the women of this church, but I love my wife in a very special way.” I would not want Noël to think that she is loved just because I love all women and she happens to be a woman. So it is with God and all the people of the world. There is a universal love for all, but there is a particular love that he has for the bride. And when Christ died, there was a particular aim in that death for her. He knew her from the foundation of the world, and he died to obtain her.

 The Precious Logic of Romans 8:32

 Another important text on this issue of the design and extent of the atonement is Romans 8:32. It is one of the most precious promises for God’s people in all the Bible. Paul says, “He who did not spare his own Son but gave him up for us all, how will he not also with him graciously give us all things?” The unanswered question anticipates our ability to answer it and turn it into a rock solid promise: “Since God did not spare his own Son but gave him up for us all, he will most certainly give us all things with him.” Who are the “us” in this verse? They are the people of verses 29-31: Those whom he foreknew he also predestined to be conformed to the image of his Son, in order that he might be the firstborn among many brothers. And those whom he predestined he also called, and those whom he called he also justified, and those whom he justified he also glorified. What then shall we say to these things? If God is for us, who can be against us? 

The reason Paul can make such a staggering promise to “us” as he does in verse 32—that God will infallibly give us all things with him—is that the ones being addressed are the foreknown, the predestined, the called, the justified. These are the “sheep,” the “children of God scattered abroad.” And for these people, Paul says, the death of Christ is the unshakable, absolutely certain guarantee that they will receive all things with him. This is the wonderful logic of Romans 8:32. 

But what becomes of this logic if God gave his Son in this way for thousands who do not receive all things, but in fact perish? The logic is destroyed. It becomes: “If God did not spare his own Son, but gave him up for all people in the world, then, since many of them are lost, it is not true that they will most certainly receive all things with him.” That is not the point of the verse. 

It says, Because of God’s giving the Son for his people, those people—foreknown and predestined from the foundation of the world—will receive everything God has to give. Therefore, the design of God in giving the Son is not only a general offer to the whole world, but a rock solid securing of infinite riches for his people. My great desire is that God’s people see this and go deeper into the grace of this particular redemption. We are loved specifically in the atonement, not just generally. Our future is secured particularly by the blood of Christ. 

In summary, the biblical point of limited atonement is that in the death of Christ God had a particular design for his elect. He was purchasing not just a possibility for them to believe and be saved, but he was purchasing the belief itself. The conversion of God’s elect is blood-bought. The overcoming of our deadness and rebellion against God is not performed decisively by us so that we then qualify for the atonement. God’s sovereign grace overcomes our deadness and rebellion. And that grace is purchased for us in the death of Christ. 

If we want to go deeper in our experience of God’s grace this is an ocean of love for us to enjoy. God does not mean for the bride of his Son to only feel loved with general, worldembracing love. He means for her to feel ravished with the specificity of his affection that he set on her before the world existed. He means for us to feel a focused: “I chose you. And I sent my Son to die to have you.”

 This is what we offer the world. We don’t hoard it for ourselves. And we don’t abandon it by saying, all we have to offer the world is God’s general love for all people. No, we offer this. We offer a full and complete and definite atonement. We offer Christ. We don’t say, Come to a possibility. We say, Come to Christ. Receive Christ. And what we promise them if they come is that they will be united to him and his bride. And all that he bought for his bride will be theirs. All that he secured with absolute certainty will be their portion forever. 

Their faith will prove them to be among the elect. And their coming to Christ will prove that they are already the particular beneficiaries of his particular redemption, his definite atonement. 

To solidify this deepening of our experience of God’s grace we turn now to the doctrine of election. For it is the elect for whom he died with this immeasurable design of everlasting love.

Five Points John Piper

IRRESISTIBLE GRACE

Knowledge

You will notice that I am changing the traditional order of T U L I P. The I stands for irresistible grace and usually comes fourth. I am putting it second after the T which stands for total depravity. The reason is that over the years my experience has been that most Christians have a conscious, personal experience of irresistible grace, even if they have never called it that. This personal experience of the reality of irresistible grace helps people grasp more quickly what these five points are all about. This in turn opens them to the biblical truthfulness of the other points. 

More specifically, I rarely meet Christians who want to take credit for their conversion. There is something about true grace in the believer’s heart that makes us want to give all the glory to God. So, for example, if I ask a believer how he will answer Jesus’s question at the last judgment, “Why did you believe on me, when you heard the gospel, but your friends didn’t, when they heard it?” very few believers answer that question by saying: “Because I was wiser or smarter or more spiritual or better trained or more humble.” Most of us feel instinctively that we should glorify God’s grace by saying: “There but for the grace of God go I.” In other words, we know intuitively that God’s grace was decisive in our conversion. That is what we mean by irresistible grace. 

But We Do Resist Grace

 The doctrine of irresistible grace does not mean that every influence of the Holy Spirit cannot be resisted. It means that the Holy Spirit, whenever he chooses, can overcome all resistance and make his influence irresistible. 

In Acts 7:51 Stephen says to the Jewish leaders, “You stiffnecked people, uncircumcised in heart and ears, you always resist the Holy Spirit. As your fathers did, so do you.” And Paul speaks of grieving and quenching the Holy Spirit (Eph. 4:30; 1 Thess. 5:19). God gives many entreaties and promptings which are resisted. In fact, the whole history of Israel in the Old Testament is one protracted story of human resistance to God’s commands and promises, as the parable of the wicked tenants shows (Matt. 21:33-43; cf. Rom. 10:21). This resistance does not contradict God’s sovereignty. God allows it, and overcomes it whenever he chooses. 

The doctrine of irresistible grace means that God is sovereign and can conquer all resistance when he wills. “He does according to his will in the host of heaven and among the inhabitants of the earth; and none can stay his hand!” (Dan. 4:35). “Our God is in the heavens; he does all that he pleases” (Ps. 115:3). When God undertakes to fulfill his sovereign purpose, no one can successfully resist him. “I know that you can do all things, and that no purpose of yours can be thwarted” (Job 42:2). 

God’s Work of Bringing Us to Faith

 This is what Paul taught in Romans 9:14-18, which caused his opponent to say, “Why then does he still find fault? For who can resist his will?” To which Paul answers: “Who are you, O man, to answer back to God? Will what is molded say to its molder, ‘Why have you made me like this?’ Has the potter no right over the clay, to make out of the same lump one vessel for honorable use and another for dishonorable use?” (Rom. 9:20-21). 

More specifically, irresistible grace refers to the sovereign work of God to overcome the rebellion of our heart and bring us to faith in Christ so that we can be saved. If the doctrine of total depravity, as we have unfolded it in the previous chapter, is true, there can be no salvation without the reality of irresistible grace. If we are dead in our sins, and unable to submit to God because of our rebellious nature, then we will never believe in Christ unless God overcomes our rebellion. 

Someone may say, “Yes, the Holy Spirit must draw us to God, but we can use our freedom to resist or accept that drawing.” But that is not what the Bible teaches. Except for the continual exertion of saving grace, we will always use our freedom to resist God. That is what it means to be “unable to submit to God.” “The mind that is set on the flesh is hostile to God, for it does not submit to God’s law; indeed, it cannot. Those who are in the flesh cannot please God” (Rom. 8:7-8). If a person becomes humble enough to submit to God, it is because God has given that person a new, humble nature. 

If a person remains too hard-hearted and proud to submit to God, it is because that person has not been given such a willing spirit. But to see this most persuasively, we should look at the Scriptures. 

Unless the Father Draws 

In John 6:44, Jesus says, “No one can come to me unless the Father who sent me draws him.” This drawing is the sovereign work of grace without which none of us will be saved from our rebellion against God. Again some may object, “He draws all men, not just some.” Then they may cite John 12:32, “And I, when I am lifted up from the earth, will draw all people to myself.” 

But there are several serious problems with this objection. One is that the word translated “all people” is simply “all” (Greek pantas). There is no word for “people.” Jesus simply says: “When I am lifted up, I will draw all to myself.” When we see that we have to ask from similar contexts in John what this “all” probably refers to.

One similar context is in the previous chapter—John 11:50-52. Caiaphas the high priest is speaking more truly than he knows, John says. 

“ … Nor do you understand that it is better for you that one man should die for the people, not that the whole nation should perish.” He did not say this of his own accord, but being high priest that year he prophesied that Jesus would die for the nation, and not for the nation only, but also to gather into one the children of God who are scattered abroad.

 These last words describe the scope of Jesus’s death as John presents it in this Gospel. Jesus died not just for one ethnic group, but “to gather into one the children of God who are scattered abroad”—all of them. This is a reference to Gentiles whom God will effectively draw to himself when they hear the gospel. They are called “children of God” because God has chosen them to be adopted, as Paul says in Ephesians 1:4-5. 

So if this is a good parallel, then the all in John 12:32 is not all human beings, but “all the children of God.” “When I am lifted up from the earth, I will draw all the children of God to myself.” From every tribe and tongue and people and nation (Rev. 5:9). 

Or you could say, “I will draw all of my sheep,” because Jesus says in John 10:15, “I lay down my life for the sheep”—all of them. And in John 10:27, “My sheep hear my voice, and I know them, and they follow me”—all of them. Or you could say, “I will draw all who are of the truth,” because Jesus says in John 18:37, “Everyone who is of the truth listens to my voice.” Or you could say, “I will draw all who are of God,” because Jesus says in John 8:47, “Whoever is of God hears the words of God.” Or you could say, “I will draw all that the Father gives to me,” because John 6:37 says, “All that the Father gives me will come to me.”

 In other words, running straight through the Gospel of John is the truth that God the Father and God the Son decisively draw people out of darkness into light. And Christ died for this. He was lifted up for this—that all of them might be drawn to him— all the children, all the sheep, all who are of the truth, all those whom the Father gives to the Son. What John 12:32 adds is that this happens today in history by pointing the whole world to the crucified Christ and preaching the good news that whoever believes on him will be saved. In that preaching of the lifted up Christ, God opens the ears of the deaf. The sheep hear his voice and follow Jesus (John 10:16, 27). 

But the main objection to using John 12:32 (draw all) to deny that the drawing of John 6:44 (“No one can come to me unless the Father who sent me draws him”) actually produces the coming, is the way John describes the relationship between God’s drawing and the failure of Judas to follow Jesus to the end. 

In John 6:64-65 Jesus says, 

“There are some of you who do not believe.” (For Jesus knew from the beginning who those were who did not believe, and who it was who would betray him.) And he said, “This is why I told you that no one can come to me unless it is granted him by the Father.”

 Notice that Jesus says the reason he said (back in John 6:44) that “no one can come to me unless it is granted him (=is drawn) by the Father,” is to explain why “there are some of you who do not believe.” We could paraphrase it like this: Jesus knew from the beginning that Judas would not believe on him in spite of all the teaching and invitations he received. And because he knew this, he explains it with the words, “No one comes to me unless it is given to him by my Father.” 

There were many influences in the life of Judas for good— in that sense Judas was wooed, and entreated, and drawn for three years. But the point of Jesus in John 6:44 and 6:65 is that Judas’s resistance to grace was not the ultimately decisive factor. What was ultimately decisive was that it was not “granted him” to come. He was not “drawn” by the Father. The decisive, irresistible gift of grace was not given. This is why we speak of “irresistible grace.” In ourselves we are all just as resistant to grace as Judas. And the reason any of us has come to Jesus is not that we are smarter, or wiser, or more virtuous than Judas, but that the Father overcame our resistance and drew us to Christ. All are saved by irresistible grace—amazing grace! 

Long my imprisoned spirit lay, 

Fast bound in sin and nature’s night; 

Thine eye diffused a quickening ray— 

I woke, the dungeon flamed with light; 

My chains fell off, my heart was free,

 I rose, went forth, and followed Thee. 

This is what happens when the Father “draws us” irresistibly and infallibly to Jesus. 

The Requirements for Salvation As Gifts of God

 Now consider the way Paul describes repentance as a gift of God. In 2 Timothy 2:24-25 he says, “The Lord’s servant must not be quarrelsome but kind to everyone, able to teach, patiently enduring evil, correcting his opponents with gentleness. God may perhaps grant them repentance leading to a knowledge of the truth.” 

Just as Jesus in John 6:65 said that coming to Jesus was “granted” by the Father, so here Paul says that repentance is “granted” by God. “God may perhaps grant them repentance.” Notice, he is not saying merely that salvation is a gift of God. He is saying that the requirements for salvation are also a gift. When a person hears a preacher say, “Repent, and come to Christ,” he can choose to resist that call. He can disobey. He can say, “No, I will not repent.” 

But if God gives him repentance, he cannot resist because the very meaning of the gift of repentance is that God has changed our heart and made it willing to repent. In other words the gift of repentance is the overcoming of resistance to repentance. This is why we call this work of God “irresistible grace.” Resistance to repentance is replaced by the gift of repentance. That is how all of us came to repent. 

Thousands of truly repentant people do not know this. They have been taught erroneous things about how they were converted, and therefore they are stunted in their worship and love. Perhaps you have been one of them. If that is true, don’t be angry at your teachers, rejoice with great joy that you have seen 2 Timothy 2:25, and let your heart overflow with thankfulness and brokenhearted joy at the new awareness at how amazing your repentance is. It is an absolutely free gift of God’s grace. Which means he loves you more particularly than you have ever thought. 

Never Against Our Will 

It should be obvious from this that irresistible grace never implies that God forces us to repent or believe or follow Jesus against our will. That would even be a contradiction in terms because believing and repenting and following are always willing, or they are hypocrisy. Irresistible grace does not drag the unwilling into the kingdom, it makes the unwilling willing. It does not work with constraint from the outside, like hooks and chains; it works with power from the inside, like new thirst and hunger and compelling desire. 

Therefore irresistible grace is compatible with preaching and witnessing that tries to persuade people to do what is reasonable and what will accord with their best interests. God uses the ministry of the word to accomplish his supernatural changes in the heart. These changes bring about repentance and faith.

 Paul writes in 1 Corinthians 1:23-24, “We preach Christ crucified, a stumbling block to Jews and folly to Gentiles, but to those who are called, both Jews and Greeks, Christ the power of God and the wisdom of God.” Notice the two kinds of “calls” implied in this text. 

First, the preaching of Paul goes out to all, both Jews and Greeks. This is a general call of the gospel. It offers salvation impartially and indiscriminately to all. Whoever will believe on the crucified Christ will have him as Savior and Lord. But often this general call to everyone falls on unreceptive ears and is called foolishness. 

But notice, secondly, that Paul refers to another kind of call. He says that among those who hear, both Jews and Greeks, there are some who, in addition to hearing the general call, are “called” in another way. “But to those who are called, both Jews and Greeks, Christ the power of God and the wisdom of God” (v. 24). In other words they are called in such a way that they no longer regard the cross as foolishness but as the wisdom and power of God.

 Something happened in their hearts that changed the way they saw Christ. Let’s describe this not as the general call but as the effectual call of God. This is like the call of Lazarus out of the grave. Jesus called with a loud voice, “Lazarus, come out” (John 11:43). And the dead man came out. This kind of call creates what it calls for. If it says, “Live!” it creates life. If it says, “Repent!” it creates repentance. If it says “Believe!” it creates faith. If it says “Follow me!” it creates obedience. Paul says that everyone who is called in this sense no longer regards the cross as foolishness, but regards the cross as the power of God. They are not coming to Christ under coercion. They are acting freely from what they truly value as infinitely precious. That is what has happened to them. Their resistance to the cross has been overcome because the call of God broke through their spiritual blindness and granted them to see it as wisdom and power. This is what we mean by irresistible grace. 

At Work Beneath Our Will 

How God works to change our will without coercion against our will is further explained in 2 Corinthians 4:4-6: 

The god of this world has blinded the minds of the unbelievers, to keep them from seeing the light of the gospel of the glory of Christ, who is the image of God. For what we proclaim is not ourselves, but Jesus Christ as Lord, with ourselves as your servants for Jesus’ sake. For God, who said, “Let light shine out of darkness,” has shone in our hearts to give the light of the knowledge of the glory of God in the face of Jesus Christ. 

Since men are blind to the worth of Christ, a miracle is needed in order for them to come to see and believe. Paul compares this miracle with the first day of creation when God said, “Let there be light.” One of the most wonderful statements about how all of us were brought from blindness to sight—from bondage to freedom, from death to life—is: “God has shone in our hearts to give the light of the knowledge of the glory of God in the face of Jesus Christ.” A real light—a spiritual light—shone in our hearts. It was the “light of the knowledge of the glory of God in the face of Christ” (v. 6). Or as verse 4 puts it, “the light of the gospel of the glory of Christ, who is the image of God.” In other words, God causes the glory—the self-authenticating truth and beauty—of Christ to be seen and savored in our hearts. 

From that moment on our will toward Christ is fundamentally altered. This is in fact a new creation—a new birth. This is essentially the same divine act as the effectual call that we saw in 1 Corinthians 1:24, “To those who are called … Christ [has now been seen as] the power of God and the wisdom of God.” Those who are called have their eyes opened by the sovereign, creative power of God so that they no longer see the cross as foolishness but as the power and the wisdom of God. The effectual call is the miracle of having our blindness removed. God causes the glory of Christ to shine with irresistible beauty. This is irresistible grace. 

“The Lord Opened Her Heart” 

Another example of it is in Acts 16:14, where Lydia is listening to the preaching of Paul. Luke says, “The Lord opened her heart to pay attention to what was said by Paul.” Unless God opens our hearts, we will not hear the truth and beauty of Christ in the message of the gospel. This heart-opening is what we mean by irresistible grace. It overcomes the willful resistance of blindness to beauty and deafness to the goodness of the good news. 

Another way to describe it is “new birth” or being born again. New birth is a miraculous creation of God that enables a formerly “dead” person to receive Christ and so be saved. We do not bring about the new birth by our faith. God brings about our faith by the new birth. Notice the way John expresses this relationship in 1 John 5:1: “Everyone who believes that Jesus is the Christ has been born of God.” This means that being born of God comes first and believing follows. Believing in Jesus is not the cause of being born again; it is the evidence that we “have been born of God.”

 New Birth: An Act of Sovereign Creation 

To confirm this, notice from John’s Gospel how our receiving Christ relates to being born of God. “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). So John says that God gives the right to become the children of God to all who receive Christ (v. 12). Then he goes on to say that those who do receive Christ “were born, not of blood nor of the will of the flesh nor of the will of man, but of God.” In other words, it is necessary to receive Christ in order to become a child of God, but the birth that brings one into the family of God is not possible by the will of man. Only God can do it. 

Man is dead in trespasses and sins (Eph. 2:1). He cannot make himself new, or create new life in himself. He must be born of God. Then, with the new nature of God, he sees Christ for who he really is, and freely receives Christ for all that he is. The two acts (new birth and faith) are so closely connected that in experience we cannot distinguish them. God begets us anew and the first glimmer of life in the newborn child is faith. Thus new birth is the effect of irresistible grace, because it is an act of sovereign creation—“not of the will of man but of God.” This glorious truth of the new birth and how it happens is so wonderful that I wrote a whole book about it called, Finally Alive: What Happens When We Are Born Again. If you want to go deeper into the wonders of irresistible grace, that might be a good place to turn.

We began this chapter by saying that most Christians know intuitively that God’s grace has been decisive in bringing about our conversion. We look at those who resist the gospel and say with trembling, “But for the grace of God, there go I.” Now at the end of the chapter I hope it is clearer why that is. God really did overcome out resistance. He really did draw us to himself. He really did grant us repentance. He really did cause us to be born again so that we received Christ. He really did shine in our hearts to give the light of the glory of Christ. He really did call us—like Lazarus—from death to life. It is not surprising then, that all true Christians, even before we have been taught these things, know intuitively that grace was decisive in bringing us to Christ. 

Often the heart precedes the head into the truth. That is surely the case for many Christians in regard to irresistible grace. But now we have seen this truth for ourselves in God’s word. My prayer is that because of this you will go even deeper in your experience of the grace of God. May you worship God and love people as never before. That is what a profound experience of sovereign grace does.

Total Devravity

TOTAL DEVRAVITY

Knowledge

When we speak of man’s depravity, we mean man’s natural condition apart from any grace exerted by God to restrain or transform man. 

The totality of that depravity is clearly not that man does as much evil as he could do. There is no doubt that man could perform more evil acts toward his fellow man than he does. But if he is restrained from performing more evil acts by motives that are not owing to his glad submission to God, then even his “virtue” is evil in the sight of God. Romans 14:23 says, “Whatever does not proceed from faith is sin.” 

” I agree with Thomas Schreiner that this verse is introduced precisely because it stands as a sweeping maxim with profound biblical warrant: Acting without faith is sinning. “Thus Augustine (On the Proceedings of Pelagius 34; On the Grace of Christ 1.27; On Marriage and Concupiscence 1.4; Against Two Letters of the Pelagians 1.7; 3.14; On the Predestination of the Saints 20) was right in claiming that any act done apart from faith is sin.” Romans, Baker Exegetical Commentary on the New Testament, Vol. 6 (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker, 1998), p. 739. Schreiner points out that Paul could very easily have made a more limited point by stopping with the first part of verse 23 (“But whoever has doubts is condemned if he eats, because the eating is not from faith”), but when he adds the unqualified maxim, “For whatever does not proceed from faith is sin,” he broadens the foundation to a general statement. Schreiner also points to the fact that in Romans 4:18-21, we see why this is so—namely, that acting in faith glorifies God, and we are to do that in every detail of life (1 Cor. 10:31). Not relying on God in any action or thought takes power and glory to ourselves (1 Pet. 4:11; 1 Cor. 15:10; Gal. 2:20). That is sin, even if the external deed itself accords with God’s will.”

This is a radical indictment of all natural “virtue” that does not flow from a heart humbly relying on God’s grace. 

An example might make this radical indictment of much human “goodness” clearer. Suppose you’re the father of a teenage son. You remind him to wash the car before he uses it to take his friends to the basketball game tonight. He had earlier agreed to do that. He gets angry and says he doesn’t want to. You gently but firmly remind him of his promise and say that’s what you expect. He resists. You say, Well, if you are going to use the car tonight, that’s what you agreed to do. He storms out of the room angry. Later you see him washing the car. But he is not doing it out of love for you or out of a Christ-honoring desire to honor you as his father. He wants to go to the game with his friends. That is what constrains his “obedience.” I put “obedience” in quotes because it is only external. His heart is wrong. This is what I mean when I say that all human “virtue” is depraved if it is not from a heart of love to the heavenly Father—even if the behavior conforms to biblical norms. 

The terrible condition of man’s heart will never be recognized by people who assess it only in relation to other men. Your son will drive his friends to the ballgame. That is “kindness,” and they will experience it as a benefit. So the evil of our actions can never be measured merely by the harm they do to other humans. Romans 14:23 makes plain that depravity is our condition in relation to God primarily, and only secondarily in relation to man. Unless we start here, we will never grasp the totality of our natural depravity. 

Man’s depravity is total in at least four senses. 

  1. Our rebellion against God is total. 

Apart from the grace of God, there is no delight in the holiness of God, and there is no glad submission to the sovereign authority of God. Of course, totally depraved men can be very religious and very philanthropic. They can pray and give alms and fast, as Jesus said (Matt. 6:1-18). But their very religion is rebellion against the rights of their Creator, if it does not come from a childlike heart of trust in the free grace of God. Religion is one of the chief ways that man conceals his unwillingness to forsake self-reliance and bank all his hopes on the unmerited mercy of God (Luke 18:9-14; Col. 2:20-23). 

The totality of our rebellion is seen in Romans 3:9-11 and 18. “We have already charged that all, both Jews and Greeks, are under sin, as it is written: ‘None is righteous, no, not one; no one understands; no one seeks for God.’ … ‘There is no fear of God before their eyes.’” Any seeking of God that honors God is a gift of God. It is not owing to our native goodness. It is an illustration of God mercifully overcoming our native resistance to God. 

Natural Man Not Seeking God It is a myth that man in his natural state is genuinely seeking God. Men do seek God. But they do not seek him for who he is. They seek him in a pinch as one who might preserve them from death or enhance their worldly enjoyments. Apart from conversion, no one comes to the light of God. 

Some do come to the light. But listen to what John 3:20-21 says about them. “Everyone who does wicked things hates the light and does not come to the light, lest his works should be exposed. But whoever does what is true comes to the light, so that it may be clearly seen that his works have been carried out in God.” Yes, there are those who come to the light—namely, those whose deeds are the work of God. “Carried out in (or by) God” means worked by God. Apart from this gracious work of God all men hate the light of God and will not come to him lest their evil be exposed—this is total rebellion. “No one seeks for God…. There is no fear of God before their eyes!”

  1. In his total rebellion everything man does is sin.

 In Romans 14:23 Paul says, “Whatever does not proceed from faith is sin.” Therefore, if all men are in total rebellion, everything they do is the product of rebellion and cannot be an honor to God, but only part of their sinful rebellion. Of course many of these acts which flow from inward unbelief conform outwardly to the revealed will of God (for example, obeying parents or telling the truth). But they do not conform to God’s perfect will because of that mere outward conformity. Let all things be done in love, the apostle says (1 Cor. 16:14); but love is the fruit of faith (Gal. 5:6; 1 Tim. 1:5). Therefore many outwardly good acts come from hearts without Christ-exalting faith, and therefore, without love, and therefore without conformity to God’s command, and therefore are sinful. 

If a king teaches his subjects how to fight well and then those subjects rebel against their king and use the very skill he taught them to resist him, then even those skills, as excellent and amazing and “good” as they are, become evil. 

Thus man does many things which he can do only because he is created in the image of God and which in the service of God would be praised. But in the service of man’s self-justifying rebellion, these very things are sinful. We may praise them as echoes of God’s excellence, but we will weep that they are prostituted for God-ignoring purposes.

 In Romans 7:18 Paul says, “I know that nothing good dwells in me, that is, in my flesh.” This is a radical confession of the truth that in our rebellion nothing we think or feel is good. It is all part of our rebellion. The fact that Paul qualifies his depravity with the words, “that is, in my flesh,” shows that he is willing to affirm the good of anything that the Spirit of God produces in him (Rom. 15:18). “Flesh” refers to man in his natural state apart from the work of God’s Spirit. So, what Paul is saying in Romans 7:18 is that apart from the work of God’s Spirit all we think and feel and do is not good. 

The Good That Really Counts

 We recognize that the word “good” has a broad range of meanings. We will have to use it in a restricted sense to refer to many actions of fallen people which in relation to God are in fact not good. 

For example, we will have to say that it is good that most unbelievers do not kill and that many unbelievers perform acts of benevolence. What we mean when we call such actions good is that they more or less conform to the external pattern of life that God has commanded in Scripture. 

However, such outward conformity to the revealed will of God is not righteousness in relation to God. It is not done out of reliance on him or for his glory. He is not trusted for the resources, though he gives them all. Nor is his honor exalted, even though that’s his will in all things (1 Cor. 10:31). Therefore even these “good” acts are part of our rebellion and are not “good” in the sense that really counts in the end—in relation to God. 

  1. Man’s inability to submit to God and do good is total.

 Picking up on the term “flesh” above (man apart from the grace of God), we find Paul declaring it to be totally enslaved to rebellion. Romans 8:7-8 says, “The mind that is set on the flesh is hostile to God, for it does not submit to God’s law; indeed, it cannot. Those who are in the flesh cannot please God.”

 The “mind that is set on the flesh” (literally, “mind of the flesh”) is the mind of man apart from the indwelling Spirit of God (“You, however, are not in the flesh but in the Spirit, if in fact the Spirit of God dwells in you,” Romans 8:9). So natural man has a mindset that does not and cannot submit to God. Man cannot reform himself. 

Ephesians 2:1 says that we Christians were all once “dead in trespasses and sins.” The point of deadness is that we were incapable of any spiritual life with God. We had physical life, but our hearts were like a stone toward God (Eph. 4:18; Ezek. 36:26). Our hearts were blind and incapable of seeing the glory of God in Christ (2 Cor. 4:4-6). We were totally unable to reform ourselves.

  1. Our rebellion is totally deserving of eternal punishment.

 Ephesians 2:3 goes on to say that in our deadness we were “children of wrath.” That is, we were under God’s wrath because of the corruption of our hearts that made us as good as dead before God. 

The reality of hell is God’s clear indictment of the infiniteness of our guilt. If our corruption were not deserving of an eternal punishment, God would be unjust to threaten us with a punishment so severe as eternal torment. But the Scriptures teach that God is just in condemning unbelievers to eternal hell (2 Thess. 1:6-9; Matt. 5:29-30; 10:28; 13:49-50; 18:8-9; 25:46; Rev. 14:9-11; 20:10). Therefore, to the extent that hell is a sentence of total condemnation, to that extent must we think of ourselves as totally blameworthy apart from the saving grace of God. 

This Terrible Truth of Total Depravity

 In summary, total depravity means that our rebellion against God is total, everything we do in this rebellion is sinful, our inability to submit to God or reform ourselves is total, and we are therefore totally deserving of eternal punishment.

 It is hard to exaggerate the importance of admitting our condition to be this bad. If we think of ourselves as basically good or even less than totally at odds with God, our grasp of the work of God in redemption will be defective. But if we humble ourselves under this terrible truth of our total depravity, we will be in a position to see and appreciate the glory and wonder of the work of God discussed in the next four points. The aim of this book is to deepen our experience of God’s grace. 

The aim is not to depress or to discourage or to paralyze. Knowing the seriousness of our disease will make us all the more amazed at the greatness of our Physician. Knowing the extent of our deep-seated rebellion will stun us at the longsuffering grace and patience of God toward us. The way we worship God and the way we treat other people, especially our enemies, are profoundly and wonderfully affected by knowing our depravity to the full.

T.U.L.I.P

Historical Roots

Knowledge

John Calvin, the famous theologian and pastor of Geneva, died in 1564. Along with Martin Luther in Germany, he was the most influential force of the Protestant Reformation. His commentaries and Institutes of the Christian Religion are still exerting tremendous influence on the Christian church worldwide. The churches which have inherited the teachings of Calvin are usually called Reformed as opposed to the Lutheran or Anglican/Episcopalian branches of the Reformation. While not all Baptist churches hold to a Reformed theology, there is a significant Baptist tradition which flowed out of that stream and still cherishes the central doctrines inherited from the Reformed branch of the Reformation. 

Arminius and the Remonstrants

 The controversy between Arminianism and Calvinism arose in Holland in the early 1600s. The founder of the Arminian party was Jacob Arminius (1560–1609). He studied in Geneva under Calvin’s successor, Theodore Beza, and became a professor of theology at the University of Leyden in 1603. 

Gradually Arminius came to reject certain Calvinist teachings. The controversy spread all over Holland, where the Reformed Church was the overwhelming majority. The Arminians drew up their creed in Five Articles, and laid them before the state authorities of Holland in 1610 under the name Remonstrance, signed by forty-six ministers. 

The official Calvinistic response came from the Synod of Dort which was held November 13, 1618, to May 9, 1619, to consider the Five Articles. There were eighty-four members and eighteen secular commissioners. The Synod wrote what has come to be known as the Canons of Dort. These are still part of the church confession of the Reformed Church in America and the Christian Reformed Church. They state the Five Points of Calvinism in response to the Five Articles of the Arminian Remonstrants. So the so-called Five Points were not chosen by the Calvinists as a summary of their teaching. They emerged as a response to the Arminians who chose these five points to disagree with. At the Heart of Biblical Theology It is more important to give a positive biblical position on the five points than to know the exact form of the original controversy. These five points are still at the heart of biblical theology. They are not unimportant. Where we stand on these things deeply affects our view of God, man, salvation, the atonement, regeneration, assurance, worship, and missions. Somewhere along the way (nobody knows for sure when or how), the five points came to be summarized in English under the acronym TULIP. 

T – Total depravity 

U – Unconditional election 

L – Limited atonement 

I – Irresistible grace 

P – Perseverance of the saints

I make no claim that these five points exhaust the riches of Reformed theology. Numerous writers, especially those with a more Presbyterian orientation, make that point today because so many people (like me, a Baptist) are called Calvinists while not embracing all aspects of the Reformed tradition. For example, Richard Muller in his book, Calvin and the Reformed Tradition,1 and Kenneth J. Stewart in Ten Myths About Calvinisme make clear that Calvin and the system of rivers that flowed from his labors are wider and deeper and more multi-faceted than the five streams I am focusing on here. These five points are focused on the central act of God’s saving sinners. Nor do I make the claim that these titles for the five doctrines of grace are the best titles. Like any shorthand version of a doctrine, they are all liable to misunderstanding. Justin Taylor gives a helpful summary of various attempts to restate these truths.

For example, Timothy George prefers R O S E S over T U L I P: Radical depravity, Overcoming grace, Sovereign election, Eternal life, Singular redemption. Roger Nicole prefers the acronym G O S P E L (which makes six points): Grace, Obligatory grace, Sovereign grace, Provision-making grace, Effectual grace, Lasting grace. 

Others abandon the effort to make an acronym altogether. For example, James Montgomery Boice suggests: Radical depravity, Unconditional election, Particular redemption, Efficacious grace, Persevering grace. Greg Forster proposes: 

• State of man before salvation: wholly defiled

 • Work of the Father in salvation: unconditional choice

• Work of the Son in salvation: personal salvation 

• Work of the Spirit in salvation: supernatural transformation 

• State of man after salvation: in faith, perseverance.

 Nor do I claim that this ordering of the doctrines (T U L I P) is necessarily the most helpful when teaching what they mean. To be sure, there is a good rationale for this traditional order. It starts with man in need of salvation (Total depravity) and then gives, in the order of their occurrence, the steps God takes to save his people. He elects (Unconditional election), then he sends Jesus to atone for the sins of the elect (Limited atonement), then he irresistibly draws his people to faith (Irresistible grace), and finally works to cause them to persevere to the end (Perseverance of the saints). 

I have found, however, that people grasp these points more easily if we go in the order in which we ourselves often experience them when we become Christians. 

1. We experience first our depravity and need of salvation. 

2. Then we experience the irresistible grace of God leading us toward faith. 

3. Then we trust the sufficiency of the atoning death of Christ for our sins. 

4. Then we discover that behind the work of God to atone for our sins and bring us to faith was the unconditional election of God.

 5. And finally we rest in his electing grace to give us the strength and will to persevere to the end in faith. 

This is the order we follow in the pages ahead. I will try to lay out what I believe the Scriptures teach on these five points. My great desire is to deepen your experience of God’s grace and to honor him by understanding and believing his truth revealed in Scripture. 

I pray that I am open to changing any of my ideas which can be shown to contradict the truth of Scripture. I do not have any vested interest in John Calvin himself, and find some of what he taught to be wrong. But in general I am willing to be called a Calvinist on the five points because this name has been attached to these points for centuries and because I find this Calvinist position to be faithful to Scripture. The Bible is our final authority. 

I share the sentiments of Jonathan Edwards who said in the preface to his great book The Freedom of the Will, “I should not take it at all amiss, to be called a Calvinist, for distinction’s sake: though I utterly disclaim a dependence on Calvin, or believing the doctrines which I hold, because he believed and taught them; and cannot justly be charged with believing in every thing just as he taught.” 

It might be helpful for some readers to summarize the meaning of each of the five points briefly before we go into more biblical detail. Perhaps this foretaste will awaken some sense of why I believe these truths magnify God’s precious grace and give unspeakable joy to sinners who have despaired of saving themselves. 

Total Depravity

 Our sinful corruption is so deep and so strong as to make us slaves of sin and morally unable to overcome our own rebellion and blindness. This inability to save ourselves from ourselves is total. We are utterly dependent on God’s grace to overcome our rebellion, give us eyes to see, and effectively draw us to the Savior. 

Unconditional Election 

God’s election is an unconditional act of free grace that was given through his Son Jesus before the world began. By this act, God chose, before the foundation of the world, those who would be delivered from bondage to sin and brought to repentance and saving faith in Jesus. 

Limited Atonement 

The atonement of Christ is sufficient for all humans and effective for those who trust him. It is not limited in its worth or sufficiency to save all who believe. But the full, saving effectiveness of the atonement that Jesus accomplished is limited to those for whom that saving effect was prepared. The availability of the total sufficiency of the atonement is for all people. Whosoever will— whoever believes—will be covered by the blood of Christ. And there is a divine design in the death of Christ to accomplish the promises of the new covenant for the chosen bride of Christ. Thus Christ died for all people, but not for all in the same way. 

Irresistible Grace

 This means that the resistance that all human beings exert against God every day (Rom. 3:10-12; Acts 7:51) is wonderfully overcome at the proper time by God’s saving grace for undeserving rebels whom he chooses freely to save. 

Perseverance of the Saints

 We believe that all who are justified will win the fight of faith. They will persevere in faith and will not surrender finally to the enemy of their souls. This perseverance is the promise of the new covenant, obtained by the blood of Christ, and worked in us by God himself, yet not so as to diminish, but only to empower and encourage, our vigilance; so that we may say in the end, I have fought the good fight, but it was not I, but the grace of God which was with me (2 Tim. 4:7; 1 Cor. 15:10). 

We turn now to give a biblical explanation and justification for each of the five points. I pray not that I will be proved right, but that the word of God will be truly explained and our minds would be softened to receive what is really there.

Pendidikan Kristen

Buku INSTITUTIO

Knowledge
INSTITUTIO

Dalam bukunya Yohanes Calvin yang berjudul: Institutio sangat bermanfaat jika dipakai untuk pengajaran para Katekesasi, karena melalui buku ini juga para katekesasi bisa mengerti dan mempelajari akan ajaran-ajaran ke-kristenan. Dan melalui ajaran tersebut bisa semakin kuat iman-Nya dalam Yesus Kristus, dimana Kristus sebagai penebus, Roh Kudus sebagai penolong, penghibur, bagi orang yang selalu memohon kepada-Nya.  

KITAB PERTAMA

PENGETAHUAN TENTANG ALLAH

YANG MENCIPTAKAN DUNIA

DAN YANG SENANTIASA MEMERINTAHNYA

Bab I-II      : Pengetahuan tentang Allah dan pengetahuan diri kita sendiri.

Bab III-IV  : Manusia mengaburkan pengetahuan tentang Allah yang telah                   ditanamkan dalam hatinya.

Bab V          : Manusia menyia- nyiakan penyataan Allah dalam alam semesta.

Bab VI-IX  :  Penyataan Allah di dalam Alkitab.

Bab X          : Sifat-  sifat Allah.

Bab XIII     : Allah Tritunggal.

Bab XIV-XV: Penciptaan dunia dan manusia.

BabXVI-XVII: Pemeliharaan Allah.

            Pada bagian pertama ini, akan menolong bagi para katekesasi untuk mengenal Allah sebagai pencipta segala yang ada di dunia dan sifat-sifat Allah. Melalui pengajaran ini para katekesasi bisa percaya dan tahu tentang keberadaan Allah melalui penyataan Allah secara umum dan penyataan Allah secara khusus. Karena melalui pengajaran tersebut imannya semakin kuat. Dan tahu kepada siapa yang akan disembahnya dan patut dipuji. Karena kalau tidak mengerti dan tahu akan keberadaan Allah maka akan percuma sebagai orang Kristen. Pada poin ini juga sangat menolong para pengajar untuk menerapkannya. Dimana sebagai pengajar memberikan sesuatu materi yang begitu, bagus didalam poin tersebut. Untuk perlu kita menerapkan akan poin pertama ini.

KITAB KEDUA

PENGETAHUAN TENTANG ALLAH YANG TELAH MENJADI PENYELAMAT KITA DI DALAM KRISTUS. PENGETAHUAN INI PERTAMA- TAMA DINYATAKAN KEPADA PARA BAPA LELUHUR YANG HIDUP DIBAWAH HUKUM TAURAT, KEMUDIAN JUGA KEPADA KITA YANG HIDUP DIBAWAH INJIL

Bab I: Dosa turunan.

Bab II-V: Dosa dan kebebasan kemauan manusia.

Bab VII: Makna Hukum Taurat.

Bab VIII: Uraian tentang hukum Kesusilaan (kesepuluh perintah).

Bab VI,XII-XIV: Kristus Sang Pengantara.

Bab-XVII: Karya Kristus.

            Dalam kitab yang kedua ini, bahwa pengetahuan tentang Allah yang telah menyelamatkan umat manusia dari dosa. Poin tersebut juga bisa kita terapkan dalam pengajaran kepada para katekasasi, supaya mereka bisa tahu darimana dosa itu berasal. Dan bagaimana caranya sebagai orang Kristen untuk menghindari pelanggaran-pelanggaran. Menurut saya dalam poin tersebut kita bisa, mengerti akan karya Kristus dalam hidup ini. Supaya dalam kehidupan sebagai orang percaya mengenal siapa yang telah menebus manusia dari dosa.

KITAB KETIGA

CARA KITA MENGAMBIL BAGIAN DALAM ANUGERAH KRISTUS; KEBAIKAN- KEBAIKAN YANG KITA PEROLEH DARINYA DAN HASIL- HASIL YANG DIBAWAHNYA

Bab I-III: Karya Roh Kudus.

Bab VI–X: Kehidupan Kristen.

Bab XI-XVIII: Pembenaran oleh Iman.

Bab XIX: Mengenai Doa.

Bab XXI–XXIV: Presdestinasi.

Bab XXV: Mengenai kebangkitan orang mati.

            Pada bagian ini, juga memberikan suatu yang sangat bermanfaat untuk dimengerti akan peran Roh Kudus dalam kehidupan orang percaya, dimana Roh Kudus sebagai penolong, penghibur, dan lewat Roh Kudus kita bisa mengerti tentang kebenaran Firman Tuhan. Dan melalui Roh Kudus juga mengingatkan kita akan firman Tuhan yang kita dengar. Dalam bagian ini, kalau kita pakai poin ini untuk memberikan pengajaran kepada para katekesasi, bisa menolong akan para katekesasi mengerti ajaran-ajaran Kristen pada umumnya. Calvin sangat menolong para kaum awam, para pengajar, para katekesasi, dimana dia telah menerbitkan buku Institutio ini, karena melalui buku ini bisa di pakai untuk mengajarkan tentang akan Allah dan sifat-sifatNya dan keberadanNya.

KITAB KEEMPAT

ALAT- ALAT ATAU SARANA- SARANA YANG DENGANNYA ALLAH MENGUNDANG KITA UNTUK MASUK KEDALAM PERSEKUTUAN DENGAN KRISTUS DAN MEMBUAT KITA TETAP MENJADI ANGGOTANYA.

Bab I: mengenai Gereja yang sejati dan kesatuannya.

Bab VIII: Kuasa Gereja; wewenangnya untuk menetapakan pokok- pokok ajaran.

mereka.

Bab VIII: Kuasa Gereja; wewenangnya untuk menetapakan pokok- pokok ajaran.

Bab X: Hukum Allah dan hukum manusia.

Bab XI-XIII: Kuasa Gereja dan menjalankan disiplin.

Bab XIV: Sakramen- sakramen pada umumnya.

Bab XIV: Sakramen- sakramen pada umumnya.

Bab XVI: Babtisan anak- anak.

Bab XVII: Perjamuan Kudus Kristus dan apa yang dianugerahkan- Nya kepada kita.

            Pada bagian ini, Calvin menjelaskan tentang alat-alat dan sarana-sarana untuk kita bisa masuk dalam persekutuan. Dimana gereja sebagai tempat dimana orang percaya bisa datang, berkumpul, memuji Tuhan sebagaimana mestinya. Calvin telah menjelaskan bagaimana peran gereja dalam pengajaran-pengajaran Kristen. Perlu kita menerapkan akan karya Calvin untuk memberikan materi yang bermanfaat bagi para anggota gereja supaya bisa mengerti tentang gereja. Oleh sebab itu buku sangat berguna bila kita pakai untuk mengajarkan para katekesasi tersebut dan tentang pokok-pokok ajaran keKristenan.

Doktrin Reformed

Apa itu Doktrin Reformed?

Knowledge

Pengetahuanku tidak menolongku sekarang; Dogma-ku juga tidak; hanya iman yang menyelamatkan aku

Herman Bavinck
Teolog Puritan

I) Doktrin.

1) Doktrin adalah sesuatu yang sangat penting.

Banyak orang kristen tidak senang pada ajaran yang bersifat doktrinal karena ajaran yang bersifat doktrinal dianggap bersifat teoritis dan tidak berhubungan dengan kehidupan kita sehari-hari.

Seorang Penginjil / Pendeta menulis surat kepada seseorang, dan dalam suratnya ada kata-kata sebagai berikut: “Kita bertengkar soal ‘sedikit’ domba yang suka berpindah pindah padahal ada ratusan juta tanpa kesaksian Injil, kita kedagingan ribut dengan ganas soal2 doktrin yang benar dan membiarkan orang kafir, bingung dan binasa”. Kelihatannya, Pendeta ini tidak terlalu peduli soal doktrin, dan ia rupanya beranggapan bahwa satu-satunya yang penting adalah penginjilan.

Tetapi pandangan-pandangan seperti ini salah sama sekali. Doktrin adalah sesuatu yang sangat penting. Mengapa?

a) Perlu diingat bahwa ‘Injil’ itu sendiri adalah sesuatu yang bersifat doktrinal, dan      Injil merupakan pondasi yang paling dasari dari kekristenan.

Doktrin adalah sesuatu yang sangat penting karena doktrin adalah seperti pondasi dan tiang-tiang beton dari suatu bangunan.

b) Ajaran doktrinal yang salah sangat mempengaruhi hidup kita.

  • Bisa membuat orang hidup dalam dosa.

Misalnya kalau seseorang tidak percaya pada kebangkitan orang mati, ia akan hidup seenaknya sendiri (1Kor 15:32).

  • Bisa membingungkan orang kristen, bahkan menggoncangkan imannya atau menyebabkan ia ragu-ragu apakah ia sudah beriman atau tidak.

Misalnya ajaran yang mengatakan bahwa orang yang mempunyai Roh Kudus harus berbahasa roh. Ini akan menyebabkan orang yang sungguh-sungguh sudah percaya tetapi tidak mempunyai bahasa roh menjadi ragu-ragu akan imannya sendiri.

  • Bisa menyebabkan orang kristen menjadi gelisah, takut, kuatir.

Misalnya ajaran Arminian yang mengatakan bahwa keselamatan bisa hilang, jelas bisa menimbulkan kekuatiran dalam diri orang kristen yang mempercayai ajaran yang salah itu.

c) Perbedaan antara kekristenan dan agama-agama lain, pada umumnya / hampir selalu terletak pada perbedaan doktrinal. Dalam hal-hal yang bersifat etika / moral, sekalipun ada perbedaan tetapi tidaklah terlalu banyak. Karena itu, kalau saudara adalah orang kristen yang tidak senang pada doktrin, sebetulnya tidak ada bedanya bagi saudara kalau saudara pindah ke agama lain.

d) Perbedaan antara ajaran kristen yang alkitabiah dan injili dengan ajaran kristen yang sesat / salah / tidak alkitabiah seperti Saksi Yehovah, Mormon, Liberalisme, Roma Katolik, dsb, juga hampir seluruhnya terletak pada perbedaan doktrin.

Tanpa pengertian yang baik tentang doktrin yang benar, maka kita dengan mudah bisa disesatkan oleh berbagai macam ajaran sesat tersebut. Tetapi kalau kita mengerti doktrin yang benar dengan baik, maka kita akan sukar sekali disesatkan oleh ajaran-ajaran sesat itu. Karena itu doktrin adalah sesuatu yang sangat penting, baik bagi gereja maupun bagi setiap individu kristen.

Sekalipun pelajaran doktrinal itu penting tetapi:

a. Pengertian doktrinal yang hanya bersifat intelektual tidak bisa menyelamatkan siapapun juga. Yang menyelamatkan hanyalah iman kepada Yesus Kristus sebagai Tuhan dan Juruselamat!

Dalam prakata dari buku ‘The Doctrine of God’ karya Herman Bavinck, penterjemahnya yaitu William Hendriksen, mengutip kata-kata Bavinck pada saat mau mati sebagai berikut:

“My learning does not help me now; neither does my Dogmatics; faith alone saves me” (= Pengetahuanku tidak menolongku sekarang; Dogma-ku juga tidak; hanya iman yang menyelamatkan aku).

b. Jangan bersikap ekstrim dengan hanya mau ajaran yang bersifat doktrinal saja. Ajaran-ajaran yang praktis, yang bersifat moral / etika, tentu juga sangat penting! Ilustrasi: biarpun daging itu adalah makanan yang penting dan bergizi, tetapi kalau saudara hanya makan daging saja, tidak mau makan sayur, buah, nasi dsb, maka itu tentu tidak baik. Demikian juga, sekalipun doktrin itu penting, tetapi kalau saudara hanya belajar doktrin saja, maka akan terjadi ketidakseimbangan dalam hidup kristen

saudara. Saudara mungkin sekali akan menjadi seperti ahli-ahli Taurat dan orang-orang Farisi pada jaman Yesus, yang hanya otaknya hebat, tetapi hidupnya kacau balau.

2) Doktrin adalah pelajaran yang sukar.

Memang ada doktrin yang mudah (seperti Injil), tetapi banyak doktrin yang sukar, seperti doktrin Allah Tritunggal, Kristologi, Eschatologi dsb). Ini menyebabkan pelajaran doktrinal dalam gereja menjadi semakin jarang. Banyak hamba Tuhan yang malas menyiapkan pelajaran doktrinal karena sukarnya pelajaran itu. Dan ada juga hamba-hamba Tuhan yang sebetulnya mau berjerih payah untuk menyiapkan dan mengajarkan pelajaran-pelajaran doktrinal, tetapi karena jemaat tak bisa menerimanya (karena tak terbiasa?), maka mereka akhirnya menuruti keinginan jemaat dengan mengajarkan hal-hal yang sederhana / praktis saja. Tetapi ini adalah sikap yang salah! Hamba Tuhan harus mengajarkan hal-hal yang dibutuhkan jemaatnya, bukan apa yang diinginkan oleh jemaatnya.

Ilustrasi: kalau saudara adalah orang tua yang baik, tentu saudara tidak akan selalu menuruti keinginan anak saudara pada waktu mau makan. Saudara akan memberikan (bahkan memaksakan, kalau perlu) apa yang dibutuhkan oleh anak saudara. Mungkin mengharuskannya makan sayur, atau minum susu, atau minum vitamin dan bahkan obat, yang baginya tentu saja tidak enak.

Bagian-bagian Kitab Suci di bawah ini jelas menunjukkan bahwa Tuhan tidak menghendaki orang kristen terus mendapat pelajaran yang sederhana terus menerus:

  • Mat 28:19-20 – Kata ‘murid’ dan ‘ajar’ secara implisit menunjukkan bahwa harus ada peningkatan dalam pengajaran.

Ibr 5:11-6:1 Yoh 16:12 1Kor 3:2 juga menunjukkan bahwa harus ada peningkatan pengajaran.

II) Reformed.

1) Apakah ‘Reformed’ itu?

Jangan menyamakan / mengacau-balaukan istilah ‘Reformed’ dengan istilah ‘Reformer(s)’. ‘Reformer(s)’ menunjuk kepada tokoh-tokoh Reformasi, seperti Martin Luther, John Knox, Zwingli, John Calvin. Sedangkan ‘Reformed’ menunjuk pada aliran yang mengikuti ajaran / theologia dari John Calvin. Karena itu ‘Reformed’ sebetulnya sama dengan ‘Calvinisme’.

2) Apakah salah kalau seseorang mempunyai aliran? Banyak orang kristen yang ‘alergi’ terhadap aliran, dimana mereka beranggapan bahwa orang kristen / gereja tidak boleh mempunyai aliran, dan bahkan banyak yang berpendapat bahwa kalau kita mempunyai aliran, kita adalah pengikut manusia. Karena itu kalau ditanya alirannya, mereka akan menjawab ‘aliran Yesus Kristus’, atau ‘aliran Kitab Suci’. Jawaban seperti ini sekalipun kelihatannya saleh, tetapi ini adalah jawaban dari orang yang tidak / kurang mengerti Kitab Suci / Theologia.

  • Ada juga yang berpendapat bahwa aliran menyebabkan gereja terpecah-pecah.

Tetapi semua ini salah! Mengapa?

  1. Harus diakui bahwa ada orang yang memegang alirannya sedemikian rupa sehingga ia memang mengikut manusia. Misalnya orang Calvinist yang secara membuta menganggap Calvin benar dalam segala hal. Tetapi hal semacam ini tidak harus terjadi. Orang yang mempunyai aliran tidak harus menjadi pengikut manusia. Saya mengikuti theologia Calvin, karena saya beranggapan bahwa theologia Calvin itu sesuai dengan ajaran Kristus / Kitab Suci (Bandingkan dengan 1Kor 11:1 dimana saudara akan melihat bahwa Paulus menyuruh orang Korintus mengikuti dia, karena dia sendiri mengikuti Kristus). Disamping itu, menjadi seorang Calvinist tidak berarti menerima segala sesuatu yang dipercayai / diajarkan oleh Calvin. Tentu saja, kalau hal-hal besar dalam theologia Calvin ia tolak (misalnya tentang Predestinasi atau Providence of God), maka ia tidak bisa disebut sebagai seorang Calvinist). Tetapi bisa saja seorang Calvinist menerima ajaran-ajaran pokok Calvinisme, tetapi dalam persoalan yang kecil-kecil ia tidak setuju dengan ajaran Calvin (Misalnya: mengapa Yunus marah dalam Yunus 4?).
  1. Harus diakui bahwa aliran memang bisa memecah gereja. Tetapi lagi-lagi hal itu sebetulnya tidak perlu terjadi. Kita bisa berbeda aliran, dan menyadari perbedaan itu, tetapi tetap bersatu karena kita menyadari bahwa semua orang kristen yang sejati, dari aliran apapun ia berasal (asal bukan aliran sesat), adalah anak Allah, sama seperti kita.

Illustrasi: suami dan istri berbeda, tetapi bisa tetap bersatu dan saling mengasihi.

Bertentangan dengan pandangan umum jaman sekarang yang anti aliran, saya berpendapat bahwa orang kristen, apalagi hamba Tuhan sebaiknya mempunyai aliran. Mengapa? Karena kalau kita tidak mempunyai aliran, atau kita mempunyai aliran ‘gado-gado’, maka biasanya terjadi pertentangan dalam pandangan kita sendiri. Misalnya kalau dari 5 pokok Calvin-isme, saudara hanya menerima 3, sedangkan yang 2 saudara menerima pandangan Arminian, maka saya yakin akan terjadi kontradiksi / ketidak-konsistenan antara 3 pokok yang saudara terima dan 2 pokok yang saudara tolak itu.

III) Urut-urutan belajar doktrin.

1) Theology – doktrin tentang Allah.

2) Anthropology – doktrin tentang manusia.

3) Christology – doktrin tentang Kristus.

4) Soteriology – doktrin tentang keselamatan.

5) Ecclesiology – doktrin tentang gereja.

6) Eschatology – doktrin tentang akhir jaman.

Sekalipun urut-urutan ini tidak mutlak harus diikuti, tetapi akan sangat membantu kalau diikuti

Pendidikan Kristen

PENDIDIKAN KRISTEN DI ZAMAN REFORMASI (John Calvin)

Knowledge

BAB VII

PENDIDIKAN AGAMA KRISTEN PADA ZAMAN REFORMASI PROTESTAN

A.    Riwayat Hidup Calvin

v Pemikiran Calvin tentang pendidikan, jarang sekali ia bahas, karena ia mentitik-beratkan dogmatika bukan pendidikan maupun pembinaan, tetapi dengan mutu karyanya yang begitu tinggi, dia berhak di gelari “Pengajar gereja”

v Calvin ditinggal ibu kangdungnya sejak ia berumur tiga tahun, dan tak lama kemudian setelah ibunya meninggal, ayahnya menikah lagi dan akhirnya calvin tinggal bersama ibu tirinya dan ayah kandungnya. Semasa itu Calvin hidup dengan kepribadian yang disiplin dan serius karena ia dididik oleh ayahnya.

v Ia mendapatkan gelar doctor hukum di universitas Orléans.

v Pada 1536 ia menetap di Jenewa, ketika ia dihentikan dalam perjalannya ke Basel, oleh bujukan pribadi dari William Farel, seorang reformator.

v Ia menjadi pendeta di Strasbourg dari 1538-1541, lalu kembali ke Jenewa. Ia tinggal di sana hingga kematiannya pada 1564. Yohanes Calvin berniat menikah untuk menunjukkan sikap positifnya terhadap pernikahan daripada kehidupan selibat.

v Pada 1539 ia menikah dengan Idelette de Bure, janda seseorang yang dulunya anggota Anabaptis di Strasbourg. Idelette mempunyai seorang anak laki-laki dan perempuan dari almarhum suaminya. Namun hanya anak perempuannya yang pindah bersamanya ke Jenewa. Pada 1542, suami-istri Calvin mendapatkan seorang anak laki-laki yang dua minggu kemudian meninggal dunia. Idelette Calvin meninggal pada 1549.

B.     Dasar Teologis pendidikan agama Kristen

v Calvin memiliki dasar teologi tentang pendidikan agama Kristen, yaitu

1.      kedaulatan Allah,

2.      Alkitab sebagai firman Allah,

3.      ajaran tentang manusia,

4.      ajaran gereja, dan

5.      tentang hubungan gereja dengan Negara.

1.    Kedaulatan Allah

v Calvin menjelaskan Allah dinyatakan sebagai Allah yang berdaulat atas dunia, karena Dialah yang menciptakan segala sesuatu yang ada, tidak ada kekurangan dalam diri Allah.

v  Hal ini Calvin menjelaskan bahwa setiap manusia yang di pilih oleh Allah harus memiliki tanggung jawab terhadap hidupnya. Boehlke menjelaskan melalui perumpamaan bayi yang lahir tanpa apa-apa, dengan dorongan alamiah hingga bertumbuh.

2.     Alkitab Sebagai Firman Allah

v Sumber pengetahuan yang dimiliki Calvin bersumber dari Alkitab.

v Alkitab adalah Firman Allah yang diucapkan demi kemajuan gereja secara rohaniah.

v Peranan Alkitab mutlak dalam kehidupan Calvin

v Bukan keputusan Gereja yang menyebabkan alkitab diterima sebagai  Firman Allah,sebab justru dalam Alkitablah dapat dibaca bagaimana Gereja dibangun di atas dasar para Rasul dan para Nabi, dengan Kristus sebagai batu Penjuru ( Efesus2:20).

3.    Ajaran Tentang Manusia

v Memandang manusia dalam dua sudut :

1).Manusia sebagai makhluk yang diciptakan segambar dengan Allah,

2). kemudian jatuh ke dalam dosa dengan dampak luas yang tersirat di dalamnya.

v Dalam pertumbuhan manusia yang semakin dewasa harus diberi pendidikan untuk lebih mengenal Allah, seperti yang diajarakan Yesus yaitu kasih.

v Melalui sejumlah pengalaman belajar yang dilaksanakan gereja, sehingga pertumbuhan rohani akan dihasilkan oleh mereka yang semakin dalam, pertumbuhan ini menjadikan tindakan-tindakan kasih terhadap sesamanya.

4.    Ajaran Gereja

v Calvin bercita-cita Gereja Am yang selalu ada dalam proses pembaharuan kembali.

v Pandangan Calvin tentang Gereja, Calvin ingin mengembalikan persekutuan Kristen kepada Gereja semula.

v Pemahaman tentang Gereja sangatlah oikumenis, Calvin ingin berusaha mencari jalan untuk mempersatukan semua orang percaya kepada Kristus ke dalam satu persekutuan yang esa.

5.    Ajaran Tentang Hubungan Antara Gereja dan Negara

v Pengertian Calvin tentang pokok Teologis bertitik tolak dari praduga utama,yaitu :

1). Calvin tidak dapat membayangkan negara yang terbagi menurut isi iman warganya

Ø  Demi keamanan negara semua warga wajib mengakui iman yang sama, kalau tidak ditangkap,  Calvin tidak setuju.

2).Setiap pemerintah yang dikenalnya dari dekat terdir