Why the Blindness?

Hello JD,

I didn't read all the posts so if I make a point that someone else has already made my apologies, but this struck me and I wanted to respond.

>It's been well known for a long time that freewill theology has NO VIABLE EXPLANATION for God's purpose in "blinding" people.

I disagree because I believe in man’s free will but I also think I have a pretty good grasp of God’s purposes in blinding people.

On the issue of man’s free will, I believe that God presents His truth to all men at some point in their lives, in most cases repeatedly throughout a man’s life when the Spirit of God reaches down and through some incident or event, big or small, He speaks some word to a man’s heart, and through that word God woos and pleads with him, often even chastening and convicting him, but always drawing that man closer to Himself. Thus God is always the initiator and sole cause of salvation, not man. But every time God engages a man’s heart with the truth, He gives that man complete freedom to choose how he responds when He hears God call, whether he responds with “Yea Lord, here I am” or, as so often is the case, he simply ignores God and doesn’t respond at all, which in itself is a response.

But to my mind, this continual action and reaction between God and man is wonderfully good news, because think of what it ultimately means . . . that every day, every hour, with every breath we draw we are given another chance to respond to the Spirit of Grace that is continually being offered to us and to make right with God anything in our hearts and lives that is not pleasing and glorifying to Him, and I must in all good conscience confess that, as often as I fail and miss the mark . . . I need all the chances I can get! Although, in truth, for those who are children of God, it’s not so much that we continually fail and miss the mark, but that the closer we draw to God the more clearly we see how absolutely Good and Perfect God is, and in contrast just how helpless we are to do any thing that could even remotely measure up to “good” when we have such a HOLY God to measure ourselves against. A little dose of spiritual reality makes us finally concede that in and of ourselves we can’t even know what is right, let alone choose it, which in turn leads us to throw ourselves continually on the Mercy of God, which is why the Way of God always, always, always leads us back to the Cross.


But on the issue of men being blinded, I don’t think it’s that complicated. God has blinded different people at different times in different ways for different reasons.

I agree that all men who are spiritually dead are therefore spiritually blind, because the spiritual eyes of a dead spirit can no more see spiritual things than the bodily eyes of a dead body can see bodily things. That’s what blindness means, whether spiritual or physical.

But when the Scriptures speak of God blinding the Jewish people, it’s not just talking about general spiritual blindness to which all men are subject, but this is speaking of a particular way in which the Jewish people were struck blind, that way being that even though Moses had foretold them all about the coming and the person and the work of Messiah, they could not “see” (comprehend, understand) what he meant. This is taught by Paul in 2 Corinthians 3 when he says that was the meaning of Moses putting the veil over his face, so that the Jews could not “look to the end of that which is abolished,” which means the Jews could not see what Moses and the Law was saying about Jesus. Think about that. The Law was a schoolmaster given the Jewish nation to teach them about and consequently bring them to Jesus, and yet they were blinded by God to what those things taught about Jesus. Now Scripture says there were two reasons for that: first, if the Jewish people had understood what Moses was saying about Jesus they never would have crucified him (1 Corinthians 2:8); but secondly, by blinding the Jewish people (then and now) to what Moses says about Jesus they are put in the same position as Gentiles, the playing field is leveled, and they have no advantage with God over other men or nations just because they were born of Abraham, are the people of the covenant, and had Moses and all the prophets sent as messengers to them. But instead, they too have to take Jesus “on faith,” (Romans 4:13-16) which means, ultimately, just like every other sinner in the world, they too have to throw up their hands and lift their face to heaven and beat their breasts and simply begin to say . . . “Lord, have mercy upon me, a sinner . . .”

This blindness of the Jewish people is “temporary” in this respect, that when the heart of a Jew turns to the Lord, that veil is taken away and they begin to see how Jesus is the Christ of whom Moses and the Prophets spoke (1 Corinthians 3:15-16).

So I don’t agree that believing in man’s free will as I do means I don’t have a viable explanation for God having blinded people.

In Christ,
Deborah

 

Hello JD,

>I understand that freewillers believe in blinding for historical purposes, but when people say that God is "trying" to save every person, then why does He blind some of them? Is He "trying" to save someone He has blinded? I don't think so.

Well, I believe in free will but I don’t agree at all that God is “trying” to save every person. I do believe that every person can be saved; as long as a man has breath it is never too late to call on the Lord for mercy and forgiveness. But to say God is “trying” to save every person, when clearly the great majority of people never get saved, is implying that God has failed, but God is omnipotent and cannot fail. Therefore I believe the fault for men being lost lies with men, not God.

>Sinners are born spiritually blind, and they do not require additional blinding to die in their sins.

I agree. All men are born spiritually blind because all men are born spiritually dead, a death inherited from Adam, and it’s because man is born spiritually dead already that man sins . . . it is the fruit of our fallen nature that we are born with. (“Wherefore, as by one man sin entered into the world, and death by sin; and so death passed upon all men, for that all have sinned.” Romans 5:12).

>The part of your post that I really must disagree with is when you say "that when the heart of a Jew turns to the Lord, that veil is taken away and they begin to see how Jesus is the Christ of whom Moses and the Prophets spoke", you imply that the Jew can initiate this "turning". But how can they "turn", having been blinded by God? It's obvious that they can not turn unless God lifts the blindness He has imposed (as well as the Adamic blindness inherent in them), enabling the heart to turn, and the veil to be lifted.


Three points:

First, the verse says “when” the heart turns the vail shall be taken away. It doesn’t say when the vail is taken away the heart will be turned. So I think you have that backwards.

“But even unto this day, when Moses is read, the vail is upon their heart. Nevertheless when it shall turn to the Lord, the vail shall be taken away.” 2 Corinthians 3:15-16

And second, it’s not just about who “initiates” the heart turning, of course God initiates the whole process, when He sends His Word deep into a man’s heart (call to mind Jesus’ parable of the sower and the seed) and begins to deal with that man, convicting him of his sin and calling him to repentance and salvation, so of course God is always the initiator. But He leaves it up to man how that man responds to the prompting and urging of the Holy Ghost. Man can turn to God, or he can turn away from God. Hasn’t that been your experience? It certainly has been mine. Even now, those of us who love and serve God with all our hearts, are still free to make choices about how we walk with God, which is what makes this Way so difficult in that it makes us totally dependent upon the empowering of the Holy Spirit which requires us to continually walk in a spirit of prayer and submission to the leading of the Spirit. So it’s certainly not through any fault or failing on God’s part if I choose to walk in a way that does not glorify Him, the fault is my own, because I have chosen to draw away from God and to follow after some spirit or prompting that is not from above. So even after we are saved, we still have to make choices about how we walk with God.

And last but certainly not least, your view has spiritual sight being given to men who are still spiritually dead. One must first be born of the spirit in order to be given spiritual eyes to see spiritual things.

“But the natural man receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God: for they are foolishness unto him: neither can he know them, because they are spiritually discerned . . .” 1 Corinthians 2:14

One quick final comment: Psalm has it right in that one must become like a little child, which simply means God does not require us to see and understand spiritual mysteries in order for Him to reach down and lift us out of the pit, He knows all too well that we are blind and therefore cannot see and understand . . . all God requires is that in the very midst of our darkness we simply call out to Him in faith believing in Him even when we cannot see Him.

In Christ,
Deborah

 

That's a very good last point, deb. Calvinists seem to believe that they are "spiritual men" (1Cor 2:14) even before they hear the gospel -- which would clearly mean that they could understand that mysteries and parables which you and I say we were blind to until we converted.

skypair

 

And again you are misrepresenting Calvinists. We believe we are in spiritual darkness until the Holy Spirit of God causes us to be born again. Why do you continue to misrepresent people? Did you know that continual intentional misrepresentation, making a practice of misrepresenting people, is practicing sin?
To intentionally misrepresent someone is bearing false witness. A false witness is a liar. I know you could not be a liar sky, so why not repent of this?

 

Hello JD,

>I believe the fault for men being lost lies with men, not with God.
> Agree!

I readily admit I know little of Calvanist doctrine, but I would think that would be a contradiction. When you remove from the equation man’s ability to choose between good and evil, you therefore remove man’s culpability.

>But how does the heart of the natural man turn?

In my experience it has been the Loving Mercy of God that is manifest in the Cross of Christ that turned my heart heavenward, and it is that same Loving Mercy that keeps my heart engaged with God. But we are all created as unique individuals and He deals with each of us in a personal way, so for others it may have been some other great truth which first shone upon and melted their hearts . . . you know, the Hebrew word for repentance is “turn,” and yes that word does mean to “change directions” or in the sense you and I are using it, to turn toward God, but it is also the word that was anciently used for a plow share, it was called a “turn plow,” because it broke and literally “turned” the earth preparing it for the seed to be sown. I think that has a wonderful spiritual context too, think about Jesus’ parable of the sower and the seed. And couple that with the one thing that always preceeded these things . . . first came the rains . . . which fell upon the dry and thirsty ground and began to soak in and soften the earth so that it could be “turned.”

>I don't believe I can overthrow God's will.

But that’s just the point, it is God’s will that men choose whether or not to answer when He calls. There are countless thousands who hear the wonderful truth of the Gospel of Christ and yet they turn away, reject the call, and go their own way. Are they overthrowing God’s will by rejecting the call? No, because God’s will is that man’s answer be voluntary (Hebrew “nedabah;” spontaneous; free (-will) offering, freely, voluntarily, willingly offered), neither pre-programmed nor yet coerced.

>Of course we make choices, but does the Spirit have no affect on those choice?

Try to understand: whether or not we follow the leading of the Spirit IS the choice we must make. So how do you arrive at the conclusion that the Spirit has nothing to do with all this?

>If God can not save us from the power of sin, how can we be sure that He can save us from the penalty of sin?

Who says God can not save us from the power of sin? Only God can save us . . . but God will not save us if we refuse to accept the Way that He has prepared from the foundation of the world . . . salvation by faith in the blood of Christ for remission of sin. And even then, faith to believe is itself a gift, which comes by hearing the Word of God. But lots of people hear the Word of God, repeatedly throughout their lives, and yet they never come to a saving knowledge of God. Why? Because God has predetermined that they will remain blind? I don’t think so. I think it’s because, for whatever reasons, and they are myriad and complex, most men refuse the call of God. Scripture says it’s because their deeds are evil and they don’t want the light of the Gospel to shine in their hearts because they will be forced to confront their own wickedness, something most folks don’t want to do, because they love their little sins. And no, I do not believe God made them that way and therefore they have no choice in life. I believe they are led away by their own selfish desires. Their condemnation therefore rightly rests on their own heads because God has done everything necessary to save that poor sinner, but force him, or leave him no choice but to accept mercy . . . that God will not do!

>Again, the analogy gets tangled. Men are dead until God makes them alive, men are blind until God gives them sight, men are deaf until God give them hearing, etc., etc. Use whichever analogy you wish. Man can not produce his own spiritual conception, and he can not spiritually give birth to himself. It is the work of the Spirit.

Of course man can not produce his own spiritual conception, and I’m not sure where you are getting these ideas, they are not the logical conclusion to the free will view. Stated simply, I believe man has been given by God the freedom to choose the gift of salvation . . . not the power to effect it. There is a world of difference between those two ideas.

>If I can meet God's requirements through my own ability to obtain humility, then why the cross? And why the Spirit? Is salvation just for "good" people, who are humble enough to call out to God? Are some people just born, by chance, better than others? Am I a better person than my neighbor because I was humble enough to recognize my need for Christ?

I think you are jumping to a lot of faulty conclusions. No one gets up in the morning and, in and of them selves apart from God, decides out of the goodness of their own heart that they are going to humble themselves and get saved. Humility itself is a response to being confronted with the greatness of God’s love and mercy, not some natural attribute man has within himself. Indeed, quite the opposite, man in his fallen condition is a very proud and vain being so humility does not come naturally, nor does it come easily, as I’m sure we all can attest to personally. So no, salvation is not just for “good” people who are humble enough to call out to God. Salvation is for people who, when confronted with the greatness of the Love which God has shown in sending his own Son to die for our sins, are humbled by that precious truth to repent of the sin that made such a great sacrifice necessary.

From these comments you are making I don’t think you understand my view so allow me to try to summarize it: God has not written in the stars what choices each man will make in his life today. What God has written in the stars is what fruit those choices will bear.

In Christ,
Deborah

 

Sky, you confusing Mainstream Calvinism with those of Primitive Baptists. And No, they are not the same thing. There might even be a small faction you personally might know of but in all my studying of Calvinism I have never heard of such a thing. Not that they aren't out there but even if they were, they do not speak for the mainstream view historically nor today.

 

I agree with much of what you set forth, however I MUST take exception with your final line. BTW - I am not a Calvinist.

However, God has written the 'choices' each man will make in his life today. God knows ALL things. For example - He knows who will accept truth and who will not AND He knows what the fruit those choices will bear out because He is the one who decided what that fruit will be.

There are MANY examples of God 'knowing' what a person will choose to do. One place even regards those He knows will come to the knowledge of truth.

Every Believers name is ALREADY known to God and was so known BEFORE God formed the world.

We see the same thing about God knowing mens choices with Pharoah, Josephs brothers who sold him into slavery. They intended it for evil but God intended it for good.

So I would just say, that though your conclusion is poetic it is not accurate.

God knows that which He will do and also the choices of men but men are still able to make that choice as God reveals truth to every man.

 

Amen brother Allan. I would say that although God does reveal truth to every man.... and every man turns it into something other than the true God.... God does not reveal the Gospel to every man. This is something I think we disagree upon. But hey.......... we agree upon most........ and especially those things that are worth dying for. :thumbs:

 

I don't hold that God reveals the 'Gospel' to every man. I believe God reveals 'Truth' to every man. Those who will receive it (and we are speaking of foreign countries here where no gospel is) God will send a preacher that they may know the FULL 'Truth' - the Gospel of His Salvation.

 

humm

I'm starting to miss the good old days where we never agreed on anything.

 

What further testimony do I need? "Regeneration precedes faith." You are "spiritual" before you hear the gospel.

I fail to see what you are objecting to and accusing me of misrepresenting.

skypair

 

Without having you go into the "mechanics" and implications of what you just said, I hear "regeneration precedes faith" everywhere I hear from Cavlies and that the elect could not even hear the gospel if such were not the case. A "spiritual man" is one who has been changed from darkness to light - regenerated already.

Would you call RC Sproul maintream or extreme? How about his professor from whom he took the notion?

skypair

 

Regeneration prior to salvation is what is known as Monergism. All TRUE Calvinists (Particular Redemptionists) believe in Monergism (at least, I have never heard of any or talked to any).

 

I am a monergist. I thought the whole world knew that. :smilewinkgrin:

Joh 1:12 But to all who did receive him, who believed in his name, he gave the right to become children of God,
Joh 1:13 who were born, not of blood nor of the will of the flesh nor of the will of man, but of God.


I believe that God gives us faith in the act of regeneration. When we are made new (regenerated) the new creature comes with faith (trust in Christ). This faith will grow through the process of sanctification.

Eph 2:1 And you were dead in the trespasses and sins
Eph 2:2 in which you once walked, following the course of this world, following the prince of the power of the air, the spirit that is now at work in the sons of disobedience--
Eph 2:3 among whom we all once lived in the passions of our flesh, carrying out the desires of the body and the mind, and were by nature children of wrath, like the rest of mankind.
Eph 2:4 But God, being rich in mercy, because of the great love with which he loved us,
Eph 2:5 even when we were dead in our trespasses, made us alive together with Christ--by grace you have been saved--
Eph 2:6 and raised us up with him and seated us with him in the heavenly places in Christ Jesus,
Eph 2:7 so that in the coming ages he might show the immeasurable riches of his grace in kindness toward us in Christ Jesus.
Eph 2:8 For by grace you have been saved through faith. And this is not your own doing; it is the gift of God,
Eph 2:9 not a result of works, so that no one may boast.
Eph 2:10 For we are his workmanship, created in Christ Jesus for good works, which God prepared beforehand, that we should walk in them.

I just don't see how synergism can be scripturally true, in the regenerative sense. Certainly after God makes us a new creation, we do work.... but this work in no way is the cause of regeneration.

All this has been explained and debated every since you came to the BB sky. You should know this by now... whether you agree with it or not.

 

Romans chapter five is a transitional text in the epistle to the Romans from the doctrine of salvation to the doctrine of sanctification. It is also transitional in the doctrine of grace (the supernatural and undeserved operations of the Holy Spirit).

In pre-salvific ministry of grace, the Holy Spirit is drawing all men to God through convincing (or convicting) of sin, righteousness, and judgment. The Spirit of God also brings sinners to understand the gospel and to the threshold of repentance/faith where they must believe or reject Jesus Christ and His open door into “the regeneration” (i.e. conditional election “in Christ”).

When a person understands, believes the objective facts of the gospel, and obeys the directive of the gospel, that person acts upon the gospel by receiving Christ as Savior (John 1:11-12), calling on His Name (Jesus; Romans 10:13) and confesses Him as Lord (Romans10:9-10; public acknowledgement and identification with His Deity and Authority), the Holy Spirit acts upon that expression and declaration of faith according to God’s Scriptural directive (John 3:16-19) and supernaturally breathes Himself into that individual’s body and that individual becomes a “living soul” (regeneration; the “grace wherein we stand”).

Once saved, the indwelling Spirit of God (Shekinah glory) wants to “shine” through the believer’s life (Matt. 5:16). In order for this shining to take place (the release of the power of the Spirit of God through the believer’s yielded life), the believer must be “filled with the Spirit” (Eph. 5:8-18). Once filled with the Spirit, the believer is not just living “in grace,” grace (the supernatural working of the Holy Spirit) is now shining from Him (the “fruit of the Spirit,” Gal 5:22-25). Romans 6:1-13 is detailed instruction regarding this post-salvific ministry of the Holy Spirit in the believer’s life and what is necessary for this “power” to be released.

Calvinism's Soteriology is wrong because its Pneumatology is wrong. For Calvinists, because of their presupposition of Unconditional Election (God has unconditionally selected certain individuals to be saved), there must be two kinds of grace (Conditional Election believes the elect are those "in Christ" who are their because they followed God's directions and believed; i.e., faith). For Calvinists, common grace is when God does not immediately send the reprobate to Hell and when His common love and kindness to the lost shows mercy to hopelessly lost people before they die in their sins. Only the elect receive His salvific grace (irresistible grace; Monergism).

Calvinists tend to be Monothetic regarding God’s Sovereignty or Will. For the Calvinist, whatever God has decreed, willed, commanded or ordained must come to pass. What God decrees, God must cause to happen. Calvinists cannot separate God’s foreknowledge of future events from God’s ordination/decrees in His prophetic revelation of His unfolding historical Plan of the Ages. In this Monothetic approach, God’s Sovereignty (Lordship) must translate into God’s Mastery (control).

“Monothetic and Polythetic Definitions - deriving from Greek for either one, alone (mono-) or many, much (poly-) that are ‘capable of placing,’ as in one-placement and many-placements. Monothetic definitions, which can be essentialist or functionalist, presume a limited set of necessary characteristics or purposes whereas polythetic (or what might also be termed multi-factoral) definitions identify a range of traits or functions, none of which is sufficient in order for the object to qualify as a member of a class.”
(http://www.as.ua.edu/rel/aboutreldefinitions.html)
​

The fact is, the Scriptural pattern is usually just the opposite of this Monothetic view of God’s Sovereignty/Will. What God is actually in His existence does not necessarily translate into what God is practically in the believer’s life and in this world. God’s will is not always obeyed. God’s authority can be rejected. This is called rebellion. Even believers (the elect) do this.

Jesus is Lord. He is ALWAYS Lord, whether or not a person acknowledges His Lordship. The practical issue of Christ’s Lordship has to do with a believer yielding his will to the will of God (Romans 6:11-13). This does not MAKE Christ Lord. Neither does yielding bring the believer’s life within or under the Lordship of Christ make Christ Lord, because all lives exist under the Lordship of Christ. Yielding merely reaps the practical benefits of the Lordship of Christ upon the yielded believer’s life ("fruit of the Spirit" and shining; i.e. glorifying God through our lives) .

“The term Lord in Acts 16:31 - or anywhere else it is used of Christ - does not mean Master over one’s life. Rather it is a descriptive title of who He is - the sovereign God”[FONT=&quot][1][/FONT]
​

[FONT=&quot][1][/FONT] Robert Lightner: Sin, the Savior, and Salvation: The Theology of Everlasting Life. Kregel Publications, 1991, Grand Rapids, Mich., page 206

 

Hello Allan,

>God has written the 'choices' each man will make in his life today. God knows ALL things.

There is a vast difference between God knowing something will happen (being omniscient) and God pre-determining that thing will happen (predestination). Of course I agree that God is omniscient. But I do not believe that means a man’s choices are therefore already determined by God, or “written in the stars,” or “set in stone,” or any of the other ways of expressing the idea of something being already predetermined by God and therefore immutable. They are “choices” precisely because we each can choose one of two paths. If our path was already chosen for us by God in the beginning, then we have no choice at all.

I think you are reading the verse in the Revelation to mean something it doesn’t. God has been writing the names of the righteous in the Book of Life since the foundation of the world, they were not prewritten based on God’s omniscience as you suggest. If that were true, then what about those whose names are blotted out of the Book? Did God make a mistake or not foresee their fall from grace or change his mind? God knew they would fall from grace and yet he wrote their names down anyway. So perhaps this Book of Life is not the prewritten and predetermining decree you are suggesting it is but a living, growing and ever changing roll call of the saints.

In Christ,
Deborah

 

If you were meaning 'regeneration' or becoming spiritually alive before salvation in the Calvinistic paradiagm then Yes, I agree with you. I 'thought' you were speaking of them believing they were saved before they had faith. If I misunderstood you on that, I acknowledge it.

Even Reformed will not argue the Cal view of regeneration before faith, but apparently he didn't understand you either. But remember this sky, many believe that regeneration and salvation happen at the same time (RB does) however, the logical order would presume to be (in their view) regeneration then salvation though it is practically simultanious.