Prevenient Grace and Calvin

[Scott]

Was reading Calvin on Matt. 12:31-32, where Christ says that there is no pardon for blaspheming the Holy Spirit. Complete commentary is here. Reminded me of Joseph's thread on prevenient grace.

Calvin essentially says that there is no pardon for those who maliciously reject Christ after the Holy Spirit has revealed Himself to them. In other words, there are some who receive enough grace from the Holy Spirit to recognize Jesus as the Christ (as opposed to not recognizing Him as Christ due to the spiritual blindness that accompanies unbelief). Is this the same as or similar to prevenient grace? The grace is less than efficacious but it does place a person in a position of when he does reject Christ, he is eternally reprobated. It is a sort of in-between complete unbelief/spiritual blindness and saving faith.

Calvin does qualify with this:

As we maintain, that he who has been truly regenerated by the Spirit cannot possibly fall into so horrid a crime, so, on the other hand, we must believe that those who have fallen into it never rise again; nay, that in this manner God punishes contempt of his grace, by hardening the hearts of the reprobate, so that they never have any desire towards repentance.

But the analysis relies on a sort of in-between state. Is this similar to prevenient grace?

Scott

 

[WrittenFromUtopia]

I think prevenient grace would state that all men on earth are given the ability to recognize and choose Christ for themselves in a saving manner, not just some.

 

[Puritanhead]

I believe in sovereign grace not prevenient grace!!!

 

[govols]

Spurgeon believed in Prevenient Grace.

 

[Puritanhead]

Originally posted by govols
Spurgeon believed in Prevenient Grace.

Quite the contrary-- Spurgeon was a 5-point buck and a Sovereign Grace man...

 

[ChristopherPaul]

I believe interpreting the unpardonable sin to be rejection of Christ certainly supports, or fits nicely with, the prevenient grace view. However many devote Calvinists who believe the Spirit´s call is irresistible, have held to such an interpretation, such men being John Calvin and Jonathan Edwards.

Those who interpret Matthew 12 in this way are forced to rely on a "œsort of in-between state" analysis in my opinion. However, I am not convinced of Calvin´s interpretation of the passage.

 

[govols]

Originally posted by Puritanhead

Originally posted by govols
Spurgeon believed in Prevenient Grace.

Quite the contrary-- Spurgeon was a 5-point buck and a Sovereign Grace man...

Quite the contrary to your contrary. :bigsmile:

The prevenient grace that we know today wasn't necessarily the same definition of what is was then. The definition of prevenient doesn't state some universality of man's decisions. So the prevenient grace Spurgeon refers to is simply the definition of prevenient and he does call it prevenient grace as shown below:

III. I had many other things to say to you upon this point, but time
fails, so I must notice, thirdly, that Both Rain And Grace Fall Where We
Might Least Have Expected Them: "To satisfy the desolate and waste
ground."

Grace comes where there was no grace before. Where all was desert and waste, there comes the rain; and where all was graceless and godless, there comes the grace of God.

Grace comes where there is the greatest need of it. Here was a dreadful place; it was waste; it was a wilderness; yet the rain came there; and where there are men who feel themselves to be just as dead and barren as a desert, grace will come even there. The rain comes to wildernesses, and grace can come to you, poor guilty sinners. If you have nothing with which to entertain the grace, grace will bring its own company with it.

It will come into your empty heart, and make you one of the "people
prepared for the Lord." Grace waits not for men, neither tarries for the
sins of men. We call it prevenient grace, because it comes before it is sought, and God bestows it on a people who are utterly undeserving of it.

Here is the link to Spurgeon's sermon

Also

If we have repented, our repentance was not a plant indigenous to the barren soil of our corrupt hearts- the seed of it was sown within by a gracious hand. If we have believed in Jesus, our faith was not fashioned on our own anvil, but bestowed upon us from the armory of God. Faith is as much the gift of God as salvation itself. Brethren, we cannot, in our own cases, do otherwise than ascribe all the glory to sovereign grace.
"Ye have not chosen me, but I have chosen you." "I am found of them that sought me not." No sinner is beforehand with God, but God's prevenient grace outruns the sinner's first desire; yea, grace comes to dead souls when as yet they are not capable of a right emotion. Mary's case, as it illustrates this principle, may help us to see clearly the great love wherewith Jesus loved us, even when we were dead in sins. Poor trembling soul, Jesus can come to you if you cannot come to him. If your miseries have shut you up, they cannot shut him out. Your extremity is God's opportunity, therefore be of good cheer.

Here is the link to another of Spurgeon's sermons

 

[R. Scott Clark]

There are different senses and uses of "prevenient." It means literally "foregoing," so Calvinists (with all Augustinians) believe in some version of prevenient grace.

The key is what one means by "grace." Some medievals had it that God has endowed all humans with a sort of "common grace" (not the Kuyperian sort) whereby we are able "to do what lies within" us which God then was said to recognize and meet with a kind of merit. Arminius modified this scheme.

When we say "grace" we mean sovereign, unmerited, demerited (we deserve something opposite, namely hell) favor. It doesn't simply give us the potential of doing "what lies within." It raises us from death to life, it unites us to Christ, it gives us justifying faith etc.

 

[govols]

Now I thought the definition of prevenient and it is evident that Spurgeon believed this too, that it meant Coming Before, Preceding or anticipatory.

 

[JKLeoPCA]

In Both Matthew and Mark where we find the pasages about this unpardonable sin, I find it interesting that the parable of the sower follows close after.

So would you say that those in whom good seed is sown, and then either by it being snatched away, or by their own hardness choke the seed out, have committed the unpardonable sin?

 

[ChristopherPaul]

Originally posted by JKLeoPCA
In Both Matthew and Mark where we find the pasages about this unpardonable sin, I find it interesting that the parable of the sower follows close after.

So would you say that those in whom good seed is sown, and then either by it being snatched away, or by their own hardness choke the seed out, have committed the unpardonable sin?

I am not convinced of such an interpretation. Taking the unpardonable sin passage within it's own context, it appears that man cannot commit such a sin. I have heard it explained that Jesus was discussing the fallen angels that will not be forgiven. The context he was speaking was in regards to the spiritual world. He addressed that man can blaspheme the Father and the Son and be forgiven, but not the Spirit. It is impossible for any man to commit the sin of demons, who will in fact not be pardoned.

 

[Scott]

I thought this was a good overview of the historical options, although it seems to leave out Calvin and the reformed view described above.

Berkhof (1941, pp. 252-253) provides an excellent summary of some of the views of leading theologians regarding the unpardonable sin. Irenaeus believed it was rejection of the Gospel. Jerome and Chrysostom believed the unpardonable sin was committed by those who were thoroughly convinced that Christ performed his miracles by the power of the Holy Spirit, but hardened their hearts and asserted the miracles were empowered by Satan. They believed this sin could only be committed during Christ's earthly ministry.
Athanasius believed the unpardonable sin was denial of Christ. Origen believed it was mortal sin after baptism. Augustine and several other highly respected theologians have thought the unpardonable sin was impoenitentia finalis, (persistence in sin until death). A number of Lutheran theologians, basing their arguments on the Hebrews 6 and 10 passages, have argued that only the regenerate (i.e., believers) can commit this sin, much to the consternation of their Reformed counterparts. Broadus (cited in Carson, 1984, p. 291) believed that it could only occur during the "age of miracles," when the Holy Spirit's power, as demonstrated through the miracles of Jesus and his followers, could be directly experienced and rejected. A common belief among some Christians today who fear they may have committed it is that the unpardonable sin involves unwittingly insulting Jesus or His works. Thus, we have at least eight possible definitions of the unpardonable sin.

I don't think the unpardonable sin can be limited to demons, as they are always in the context of people (off the top of my head thinking of Matt. 12 and Heb. 6).

Scott