Hypo-Calvinism's Resistible Grace

Hypo-Calvinists often make the very same arguments against Calvinism that Arminians make. For example, they lift out of Scripture isolated verses which seem to suggest that God's grace can be resisted to support their false teaching of a universal resistible grace of God which does not actually save. When they do this they behave as heretics not interpreting according to the rule of Scripture which clearly teaches:

Therefore hath he mercy on whom he will have mercy, and whom he will he hardeneth. Thou wilt say then unto me, Why doth he yet find fault? For who hath resisted his will? Nay but, O man, who art thou that repliest against God? Shall the thing formed say to him that formed it, Why hast thou made me thus? (Rom. 9:18-20)

I have declared, and have saved, and I have shewed, when there was no strange god among you: therefore ye are my witnesses, saith the LORD, that I am God. Yea, before the day was I am he; and there is none that can deliver out of my hand: I will work, and who shall let [prevent] it? (Isa. 43:12-13)

Sometimes the hypo-Calvinists claim that they only want to teach that there is a different grace of God which concerns common gifts like rain and sunshine (good providence, but not grace, and which is turned into a trap and a snare to the unthankful and ungodly; Ps. 69:22), that has nothing really to do with salvation, except that it supposedly restrains sin by making people less than totally depraved (in fact, God has appointed many other ways in which the expression of sin is restrained). At the same time, their concern is to prove that God somehow has a will or desire to save the reprobate which is unfulfilled (or effectually resisted). In their clamour to find passages to support this idea (and because the only grace that Scripture knows is saving grace), they fall upon passages that are clearly speaking about salvation.

One of these passages is Acts 7:51, in which Stephen accuses his Jewish hearers (and accusers) that they are uncircumcised in heart and always resist the Spirit just as their fathers did (after giving many examples of the resistance of their fathers to the Spirit). The saving work of the Spirit throughout the entire Old Testament is in view here (not common good gifts like rain and sunshine or any kind of inner restraint of sin). The Arminian and the hypo-Calvinist latch on to the term "irresistible" in the doctrine of "irresistible grace" as if that meant that this grace cannot be resisted in any sense. In fact, the doctrine of irresistible grace is that the grace of God cannot be resisted effectually (because it is God's grace, and God cannot be resisted effectually). Can God be resisted? Yes, of course, Scripture is literally full of examples (as Stephen's speech proves). For example, one might resist God by resisting the powers He has appointed (Rom. 13:2) or by resisting His truth (II Tim. 3:8). But all of this resistance fails miserably:

And all the inhabitants of the earth are reputed as nothing: and he doeth according to his will in the army of heaven, and among the inhabitants of the earth: and none can stay his hand, or say unto him, What doest thou? (Dan. 4:35)

Why do the heathen rage, and the people imagine a vain thing? The kings of the earth set themselves, and the rulers take counsel together, against the LORD, and against his anointed, saying, Let us break their bands asunder, and cast away their cords from us. He that sitteth in the heavens shall laugh: the Lord shall have them in derision. (Ps. 2:1-4)

But the passage itself tells us they were unable to resist the wisdom and Spirit by which Stephen spoke (Acts 6:10; cf. Luke 21:15). Does that mean they didn't resist in any sense? Of course not, the whole passage is a description of their energy and zeal to resist, culminating in their stoning Stephen to death. But they could not effectually resist, so that by their efforts the witness of the church spread further and all the more powerfully (Acts 8:4). Even then they were not satisfied and continued and increased their persecution. One of these persecutors was Paul. Paul also resisted the Spirit in Stephen's witness, even consenting unto his death (Acts 8:1). Yet Paul failed to effectually resist God's will to save him when the time came on the Damascus road.

Did God really only will to save men in general using resistible grace (as the Arminian claims), or did God will to save Paul in particular and make him an apostle to the Gentiles?

Whereof [the gospel] I was made a minister, according to the gift of the grace of God given unto me by the effectual working of his power. Unto me, who am less than the least of all saints, is this grace given, that I should preach among the Gentiles the unsearchable riches of Christ; And to make all men see what is the fellowship of the mystery, which from the beginning of the world hath been hid in God, who created all things by Jesus Christ: (Eph. 3:7-9)

And the salvation of Paul is a pattern for all of us who likewise by nature resist the Spirit:

And I thank Christ Jesus our Lord, who hath enabled me, for that he counted me faithful, putting me into the ministry; Who was before a blasphemer, and a persecutor, and injurious: but I obtained mercy, because I did it ignorantly in unbelief. And the grace of our Lord was exceeding abundant with faith and love which is in Christ Jesus. This is a faithful saying, and worthy of all acceptation, that Christ Jesus came into the world to save sinners; of whom I am chief. Howbeit for this cause I obtained mercy, that in me first [pre-eminently] Jesus Christ might shew forth all longsuffering, for a pattern to them which should hereafter believe on him to life everlasting." (I Tim. 1:12-16)

In the history related by Stephen, God actually accomplished His will (and promise) to save His people despite all the resistance. That's the apostolic explanation in Romans 9:

Not as though the word of God hath taken none effect. For they are not all Israel, which are of Israel: Neither, because they are the seed of Abraham, are they all children: but, In Isaac shall thy seed be called. That is, They which are the children of the flesh, these are not the children of God: but the children of the promise are counted for the seed. (Rom. 9:6-8)

Positively, God's word and promise was effectual! It cannot be otherwise, because it is God's word and promise. God's grace must always be effectual because it is God's grace. Besides, the passage (Acts 7:51) speaks about resisting the Spirit. The Spirit is the omnipotent God Himself who cannot be effectually resisted. God is almighty, therefore His grace is almighty. God is one, therefore His grace is one.

The Time, Necessity, and Activity of our Believing

Suggesting that because the Reformed faith rebukes the errors of hyper-Calvinists who deny that we believe unto salvation, we are somehow claiming credit for faith and teaching it as a condition rather than attributing all glory to God is absurd. Consider this passage in which Paul describes his teaching:

"And I, brethren, when I came to you, came not with excellency of speech or of wisdom, declaring unto you the testimony of God. For I determined not to know any thing among you, save Jesus Christ, and him crucified. And I was with you in weakness, and in fear, and in much trembling. And my speech and my preaching was not with enticing words of man's wisdom, but in demonstration of the Spirit and of power: That your faith should not stand in the wisdom of men, but in the power of God. Howbeit we speak wisdom among them that are perfect: yet not the wisdom of this world, nor of the princes of this world, that come to nought: But we speak the wisdom of God in a mystery, even the hidden wisdom, which God ordained before the world unto our glory: Which none of the princes of this world knew: for had they known it, they would not have crucified the Lord of glory. But as it is written, Eye hath not seen, nor ear heard, neither have entered into the heart of man, the things which God hath prepared for them that love him." (I Cor. 2:1-9)

1. Paul's preaching was Christ-centred, and specifically centred upon His crucifixion for us.
2. Christ suffered under Pontius Pilate (one of the princes of this world) historically, and was crucified at a specific time according to the determinate counsel of God (Acts 2:23), therefore the centre of Paul's preaching was primarily this historical event rather than the eternal counsel in which it was determined and planned.
3. The manner of Paul's speech was not that of a great orator trying to impress with his words, but of a man deeply humbled, broken before God, and in awe at the wondrous grace of God to him personally who was before a blasphemer and persecutor (I Tim. 1:12-16). I allow you to examine and apply this pattern to hyper-Calvinist preachers who typically attract followers by their demeanour and words and actions (with comparisons and incessant accusations against others) presenting themselves as somehow more orthodox and more profound and more powerful in their preaching than those who preach the simple gospel of Christ crucified. Paul simply presents Jesus Christ in power, and himself only in weakness.
4. The central subject and manner of his preaching were necessary for the source of their faith, because true faith does not stand in the wisdom of men, but in the power of the Spirit. The Spirit is the only source and power of true faith.
5. Our faith stands and our faith knows and our faith sees. These are inner spiritual activities (though not the works of our hands or deeds of the body). By faith, we stand, we know, and we see. Faith is living and active in us exactly because the source and power of faith is the living and active Spirit who bears witness in us by the word (Heb. 4:12). It cannot be otherwise.
6. Because the centre of Paul's preaching was Christ crucified, he also spoke about God ordaining this mystery before the world and God preparing these things for them that love Him. Not in or by itself, or as the centre of His preaching, but in connection with and for the sake of the preaching of Christ crucified in time.
7. By using the words "ordained before", "unto our glory" and "prepared", Paul instructs us that Christ crucified, as well as our faith purchased for us on the cross and by which alone we know what God has prepared for us, are after, in time, and historical, as well as absolutely and sovereignly determined, certain, fixed and caused by God alone, thereby excluding any and all external dependencies, conditions, or prerequisites.

Much more could be said from this passage alone, but faith is knowing what God has prepared for us, and to castigate the Reformed faith as if we say that faith is a condition when we only insist that it is the necessary means by which we know what God has prepared for us, is nothing but baseless slander and a shameless twisting of our confession. Believing the promises is how we receive the promises, and this activity of faith itself is part of what God has prepared for us. By accusing us of teaching faith to be a condition, when we insist that it is a necessary means, the hyper-Calvinists themselves disconnect it from the promises of God and from eternal unconditional election, and by accusing us of teaching faith to be a work of man because we say it is living and active, the hyper-Calvinists themselves disconnect it from the power of the living and active Spirit and make our activity stand in the wisdom of men. Paul spoke concerning such as those who deny the power of God at work in us (chiefly our faith by which power we overcome the world; I John 5:4): "Having a form of godliness, but denying the power thereof: from such turn away." (II Tim. 3:5)

"But God forbid that I should glory, save in the cross of our Lord Jesus Christ, by whom the world is crucified unto me, and I unto the world." (Gal. 6:14)

Consider the official teaching of the Reformed faith in Canons Head I:

Art 3. And that men may be brought to believe, God mercifully sends the messengers of these most joyful tidings to whom He will and at what time He pleaseth; by whose ministry men are called to repentance and faith in Christ crucified. ...

Art 4. The wrath of God abideth upon those who believe not this gospel. But such as receive it, and embrace Jesus the Saviour by a true and living faith, are by Him delivered from the wrath of God and from destruction, and have the gift of eternal life conferred upon them.

Notice it is men who believe (not Christ or the Spirit or God for us, or in us, or on our behalf instead of us) which is described as the activities of receiving and embracing, and we do not have the gift of eternal life and are not delivered from the wrath of God until we believe. These are the ABCs of the Gospel 101 which are being denied by those who are obsessed with pushing everything, including the application of salvation, into eternity past, and who pretend that man's believing activity by which he receives and embraces Christ is a work and a condition rather than the gift of God by the power of the Holy Spirit working in him. And they have the gall to boast of this wretched impious confusion as if it makes them holier or more orthodox or more humble or more God-glorifying while throwing at us the most vehement and despicable accusations that we deny the Gospel.

There is a sound reason why the Canons took this doctrine of our activity of faith unto salvation as their starting point (Art. 1 teaching the justice of God in condemning all mankind, and Art. 2 teaching the manifestation of the love of God in sending Jesus Christ to give life to all who believe). Having explained this first, then the Canons are able to take up the subject of eternal election in its proper place, to explain why some believe and others do not, in contrast to the conditional theology of the Arminians.

Calvin very harshly admonishes his readers when he begins to treat the subject of predestination, since it has to do with God's eternal counsel, so much of which is unimaginably far beyond our comprehension and has not been revealed to us:

First, then, let them remember that when they inquire into predestination they are penetrating the sacred precincts of divine wisdom. If anyone with carefree assurance breaks into this place, he will not succeed in satisfying his curiosity and he will enter a labyrinth from which he can find no exit. For it is not right for man unrestrainedly to search out things that the Lord has willed to be hid in himself, and to unfold from eternity itself the sublimest wisdom, which he would have us revere but not understand that through this also he should fill us with wonder. He has set forth by his Word the secrets of his will that he has decided to reveal to us. (Institutes 3.21.1)

Calvin's approach to this subject, as all others, is to approach only by the "pathway of faith" in Christ crucified as revealed in God's Word alone. He quotes Augustine:

"We have entered the pathway of faith," says Augustine, "let us hold steadfastly to it. It leads us to the King's chamber, in which are hid all the treasures of knowledge and wisdom. For the Lord Christ himself did not bear a grudge against his great and most select disciples when he said: 'I have ... many things to say to you, but you cannot bear them now' (John 16:12). We must walk, we must advance, we must grow, that our hearts may be capable of those things which we cannot yet grasp. But if the Last Day finds us advancing, there we shall learn what we could not learn here." If this thought prevails with us, that the Word of the Lord is the sole way that can lead us in our search for all that is lawful to hold concerning him, and is the sole light to illumine our vision of all that we should see of him [i.e. by faith], it will readily keep and restrain us from all rashness. (Institutes 3.21.2)

Like brute beasts, the hyper-Calvinists charge into the throne room of God's eternal wisdom, not holding to the pathway of faith, not bridled by the revealed Word, and so rush headlong into a labyrinth of their own making, and present us with the rottenness they find there in their own imaginations as if it were God's own secret wisdom (Jude 1:10). From the wisdom of men, may the Lord deliver us, that our faith should stand in the power of the Spirit.

The Canons of Dordt concludes with practical application to keep us from this error, as applicable to the calumnies of modern hyper-Calvinists as it was to those of the Arminians:

... some whom such conduct by no means became, have violated all truth, equity, and charity, in wishing to persuade the public [of various slanders, accusations, false doctrines, and calumnies] and many other things of the same kind, which the Reformed Churches not only do not acknowledge, but even detest with their whole soul. Wherefore, this Synod of Dort, in the name of the Lord, conjures as many as piously call upon the name of our Savior Jesus Christ, to judge of the faith of the Reformed Churches, not from the calumnies, which, on every side, are heaped upon it; nor from the private expressions of a few among ancient and modern teachers, often dishonestly quoted, or corrupted, and wrested to a meaning quite foreign to their intention; but from the public confessions of the Churches themselves, and from the declaration of the orthodox doctrine, confirmed by the unanimous consent of all and each of the members of the whole Synod. Moreover, the Synod warns calumniators themselves, to consider the terrible judgment of God which awaits them, for bearing false witness against the confessions of so many Churches, for distressing the consciences of the weak; and for laboring to render suspected the society of the truly faithful. Finally, this Synod exhorts all their brethren in the gospel of Christ, to conduct themselves piously and religiously in handling this doctrine, both in the universities and churches; to direct it, as well in discourse, as in writing, to the glory of the Divine Name, to holiness of life, and to the consolation of afflicted souls; to regulate, by the Scripture, according to the analogy of faith, not only their sentiments, but also their language; and, to abstain from all those phrases which exceed the limits necessary to be observed in ascertaining the genuine sense of the holy Scriptures; and may furnish insolent sophists with a just pretext for violently assailing, or even vilifying, the doctrine of the Reformed Churches.

God's reproof of Cain's evil anger

I recently quoted commentaries from John Calvin, John Gill, and Matthew Henry in answer to a question on the meaning of Genesis 4:7.

"If thou doest well, shalt thou not be accepted? and if thou doest not well, sin lieth at the door. And unto thee shall be his desire, and thou shalt rule over him."

One surprising reply was this:

"Those are absurd commentaries, twisting the language to avoid the obvious. The passage is a direction for Cain to repent. It has nothing to do with Able [sic]. But when you deny free will, you have to twist God's words into something He did not say."

Nothing to do with Abel? Wasn't he the one who was murdered?

But to interpret it this way , "sin's desire shall be for you, but you shall rule over him" - I ask, how can sin (which is not a person) "desire"? And also, how can one say that Cain ruled over sin? Was it not the very opposite, that sin was Cain's ruler (cf. John 8:34; Rom. 6:16)?

And you have provided no answer to the argument given by Calvin: "I omit to notice that to the Hebrew word for sin is affixed the mark of the feminine gender, but that here two masculine relative pronouns are used."

From these arguments it is very obvious that the relationship between the firstborn Cain (and the ungodly) and Abel (and those saved by grace) is meant in this last phrase, as part of the reproof emphasising the wickedness of Cain's anger. It applies indirectly to all those who follow afterward, since it is ordinary for the ungodly to exercise dominion over the persecuted saints in this present evil age.

God says these things, and they are recorded here for us, to show us the sinfulness that is each one of us, apart from grace, since though Cain was reproved by God Himself, yet he reacted to that reproof by murdering his brother. In this we see more of the terrible results of the Fall, and the manifestation of the seed of the serpent.

In the murder of Abel, we see also that the destruction of this wicked seed is necessary for the salvation of the church, as God demonstrates when He sends the Flood to preserve His church (at that time reduced by apostasy and persecution to only Noah's family) as a type of the final judgement.

This is probably the worst place to look for something good in man's ability, since this passage only shows his slavery to sin despite being reproved by God Himself. God demonstrates by this what fruit we produce by our fallen nature, our hopelessness and misery apart from His grace. We see here our need for Christ, that promised seed of the woman (Gen. 3:15), in whom Abel trusted by the grace which Cain did not receive according to the sovereign purpose of God.

Enough of my thoughts, here are the excellent commentaries I referred to above:

Calvin explains:

"And unto thee shall be his desire. Nearly all commentators refer this to sin, and think that, by this admonition, those depraved hosts are restrained which solicit and impel the mind of man. Therefore, according to their view, the meaning will be of this kind, ‘If sin rises against thee to subdue thee, why dost thou indulge it, and not rather labor to restrain and control it? For it is thy part to subdue and bring into obedience those affections in thy flesh which thou perceivest to be opposed to the will of God, and rebellious against him.’ But I suppose that Moses means something entirely different. I omit to notice that to the Hebrew word for sin is affixed the mark of the feminine gender, but that here two masculine relative pronouns are used. Certainly Moses does not treat particularly of the sin itself which was committed, but of the guilt which is contracted from it, and of the consequent condemnation. How, then, do these words suit, ‘Unto thee shall be his desire?’ (240) There will, however be no need for long refutation when I shall produce the genuine meaning of the expression. It rather seems to be a reproof, by which God charges the impious man with ingratitude, because he held in contempt the honor of primogeniture. The greater are the divine benefits with which any one of us is adorned, the more does he betray his impiety unless he endeavors earnestly to serve the Author of grace to whom he is under obligation. When Abel was regarded as his brother’s inferior, he was, nevertheless, a diligent worshipper of God. But the firstborn worshipped God negligently and perfunctorily, though he had, by the Divine kindness, arrived at so high a dignity; and, therefore, God enlarges upon his sin, because he had not at least imitated his brother, whom he ought to have surpassed as far in piety as he did in the degree of honor. Moreover, this form of speech is common among the Hebrews, that the desire of the inferior should be towards him to whose will he is subject; thus Moses speaks of the woman, (Gen_3:16,) that her desire should be to her husband. They, however, childishly trifle, who distort this passage to prove the freedom of the will; for if we grant that Cain was admonished of his duty in order that he might apply himself to the subjugation of sin, yet no inherent power of man is to be hence inferred; because it is certain that only by the grace of the Holy Spirit can the affections of the flesh be so mortified that they shall not prevail. Nor, truly, must we conclude, that as often as God commands anything we shall have strength to perform it, but rather we must hold fast the saying of Augustine, ‘Give what thou commandest, and command what thou wilt.’"

Also Gill:

"but rather it refers to Abel; and the meaning is, that notwithstanding his offering was accepted of God, and not his brother Cain's, this would not alienate his affections from him, nor cause him to refuse subjection to him; but he should still love him as his brother, and be subject to him as his eider brother, and not seek to get from him the birthright, or think that that belonged to him, being forfeited by his brother's sin; and therefore Cain had no reason to be angry with his brother, or envious at him, since this would make no manner of alteration in their civil affairs: 'and thou shall rule over him', as thou hast done, being the firstborn."

And Henry:

"That he had no reason to be angry at his brother: “Unto thee shall be his desire, he shall continue his respect to thee as an elder brother, and thou, as the first-born, shalt rule over him as much as ever.” God's acceptance of Abel's offering did not transfer the birth-right to him (which Cain was jealous of), nor put upon him that excellency of dignity and of power which is said to belong to it, Gen_49:3. God did not so intend it; Abel did not so interpret it; there was no danger of its being improved to Cain's prejudice; why then should he be so much exasperated? Observe here, (1.) That the difference which God's grace makes does not alter the distinctions which God's providence makes, but preserves them, and obliges us to do the duty which results from them: believing servants must be obedient to unbelieving masters. Dominion is not founded in grace, nor will religion warrant disloyalty or disrespect in any relation. (2.) That the jealousies which civil powers have sometimes conceived of the true worshippers of God as dangerous to their government, enemies to Caesar, and hurtful to kings and provinces (on which suspicion persecutors have grounded their rage against them) are very unjust and unreasonable. Whatever may be the case with some who call themselves Christians, it is certain that Christians indeed are the best subjects, and the quiet in the land; their desire is towards their governors, and these shall rule over them."

This is much like how Paul instructs us to pray and seek the good of those who have the rule over us (because God will have all men to be saved - even kings and governors [not everyone nor even the majority, but of every sort]).

Cain of course, would not hear this reproof, and ignored the obvious injustice of his anger. So it is today. Despite the peacefulness of Christians waiting on the just vengeance of God in due time, seeking the good of their persecutors to whom they are subject, these sons of Cain still rise up to murder the children of God for no other reason than to satisfy their own rage. The wicked have no peace, like the troubled sea. 
photo credit: Fergal Mac Eoinin via photopin cc