July 30, 2013

Benjamin Austin (fl. 1641–1650) on God’s Favors to the Wicked

Who afore would not have supposed these murmuring Israelites to be in a happy estate, they did ask only for flesh and were fed with quailes, they desired cucumbers, melons, leeks, onions and garlic, God feedeth them a whole month with the daintiest food. Their bellies were now filled with God's hid treasure, and they had more then heart could wish. But at the length this proveth a curse, as all God's blessings are to the wicked: who punisheth men the more, because they make not the right use of his manifold favours, which he continually heapeth on them. God giveth them to show his love, and to draw men unto him, but proud man receiveth them as due debts, and not as any favours from the most High, and therefore are they not profited, not benefited by them.

July 19, 2013

Augustine on God’s Wish and Will

From The Spirit and the Letter:

Latin edition:
33. 58. Prius igitur illud dicamus et videamus utrum huic satisfaciat quaestioni, quod liberum arbitrium naturaliter adtributum a Creatore animae rationali illa media vis est, quae vel intendi ad fidem, vel inclinari ad infidelitatem potest et ideo nec istam voluntatem, qua credit Deo, dici potest homo habere quam non acceperit, quando quidem vocante Deo surgit de libero arbitrio, quod naturaliter cum crearetur accepit. Vult autem Deus omnes homines salvos fieri et in agnitionem veritatis venire, non sic tamen, ut eis adimat liberum arbitrium, quo vel bene vel male utentes iustissime iudicentur.

Quod cum fit, infideles quidem contra voluntatem Dei faciunt, cum eius Evangelio non credunt, nec ideo tamen eam vincunt, verum se ipsos fraudant magno et summo bono malisque poenalibus implicant experturi in suppliciis potestatem eius, cuius in donis misericordiam contempserunt. Ita voluntas Dei semper invicta est; vinceretur autem, si non inveniret quid de contemptoribus faceret aut ullo modo possent evadere quod de talibus ille constituit. Qui enim dicit verbi gratia: “Volo ut hi omnes servi mei operentur in vinea et post laborem requiescentes epulentur, ita ut quisquis eorum hoc noluerit, in pistrino semper molat”, videtur quidem quicumque contempserit contra voluntatem Domini sui facere, sed tunc eam vincet, si et pistrinum contemnens effugerit, quod nullo modo fieri potest sub Dei potestate. Unde scriptum est: Semel locutus est Deus, hoc est, incommutabiliter, quamquam et de unico Verbo possit intellegi. Deinde subiungens quid incommutabiliter sit locutus: Duo haec, inquit, audivi, quoniam potestas Dei est, et tibi, Domine, misericordia, qui reddes unicuique secundum opera sua. Ille igitur reus erit addamnationem sub potestate eius, qui contempserit ad credendum misericordiam eius. Quisquis autem crediderit eique se a peccatis omnibus absolvendum et ab omnibus vitiis sanandum et calore ac lumine eius accendendum illuminandumque commiserit, habebit ex eius gratia opera bona, ex quibus etiam secundum corpus a mortis corruptione redimatur, coronetur bonisque satietur non temporalibus, sed aeternis, supra quam petimus et intellegimus.
Holmes, Wallace, Warfield translation:
Let us then, first of all, lay down this proposition, and see whether it satisfies the question before us: that free will, naturally assigned by the Creator to our rational soul, is such a neutral4 power, as can either incline towards faith, or turn towards unbelief. Consequently a man cannot be said to have even that will with which he believes in God, without having received it; since this rises at the call of God out of the free will which he received naturally when he was created. God no doubt wishes all men to be saved5 and to come into the knowledge of the truth; but yet not so as to take away from them free will, for the good or the evil use of which they may be most righteously judged. This being the case, unbelievers indeed do contrary to the will of God when they do not believe His gospel; nevertheless they do not therefore overcome His will, but rob their own selves of the great, nay, the very greatest, good, and implicate themselves in penalties of punishment, destined to experience the power of Him in punishments whose mercy in His gifts they despised. Thus God’s will is for ever invincible; but it would be vanquished, unless it devised what to do with such as despised it, or if these despises could in any way escape from the retribution which He has appointed for such as they. Suppose a master, for example, who should say to his servants, I wish you to labour in my vineyard, and, after your work is done, to feast and take your rest; but who, at the same time, should require any who refused to work to grind in the mill ever after. Whoever neglected such a command would evidently act contrary to the master’s will; but he would do more than that,—he would vanquish that will, if he also escaped the mill. This, however, cannot possibly happen under the government of God. Whence it is written, “God hath spoken once,”—that is, irrevocably,—although the passage may refer also to His one only Word.6 He then adds what it is which He had irrevocably uttered, saying: “Twice have I heard this, that power belongeth unto God. Also unto Thee, O Lord, doth mercy belong: because Thou wilt render to every man according to his work.”7 He therefore will be guilty unto condemnation under God’s power, who shall think too contemptuously of His mercy to believe in Him. But whosoever shall put his trust in Him, and yield himself up to Him, for the forgiveness of all his sins, for the cure of all his corruption, and for the kindling and illumination of his soul by His warmth and light, shall have good works by his grace; and by them8 he shall be even in his body redeemed from the corruption of death, crowned, satisfied with blessings,—not temporal, but eternal,—above what we can ask or understand.
________________
4 [“Media vis,” a “midway power,” as Dr. Bright translates it; i.e., it is indifferent in itself, and neither good nor bad, but may be used for either.—W.]
5 1 Tim. 2:4.
6 John 1:1.
7 Ps. 62:11, 12.
8 Ex quibus.
Augustine, “A Treatise on the Spirit and the Letter: Chapter 58,” trans. Peter Holmes, Robert Ernest Wallace, and B. B. Warfield, in NPNF, 1st Series, ed. by Philip Schaff (Peabody, Mass: Hendrickson Publishers, 2004), 5:109De spiritu et littera, c. 58.

Burnaby translation:
58. Here the first point to be made, as a possible solution of the difficulty, is that the freedom of choice which the Creator has conferred in the way of nature upon the rational soul is a neutral power, which can either be exerted to faith or sink into unbelief. Accordingly it cannot be said that in the act of will whereby a man believes God, he possesses what he has not received, since it arises at God’s call from the freedom of choice which he received in the way of nature at his creation. God wills all men to be saved and to come to the knowledge of the truth; but not so as to deprive them of that freedom of choice, for the good or evil use of which they are subjected to the judgment of absolute Justice. By that judgment, the unbelieving act against God's will when they disbelieve his gospel; yet what they do is not to defeat his will but to cheat themselves of a supreme good and fall into the distress of punishment: in which they must lie under the power of him whose mercy in his gifts they have despised.98 Thus the will of God is ever undefeated: which would not be, had he no way of dealing with his despisers, or were there any escape for them from his sentence upon such. Suppose a master say: “I will that all these my servants work in the vineyard, and after their labour rest and feast; provided that any who will not so work shall grind for ever in the mill.” It might appear that one who should despise the order is acting 'against his master's will; but he will only defeat it if in his master's despite he escapes also from the mill. And that under the power of God is altogether impossible. So it is written: “God spoke once”—which we understand in the sense of “unchangeably,” though it might also be taken to mean a single utterance—and then we hear the matter of this unchangeable word: “these two things have I heard, that power belongeth unto God, and that mercy is thine, O Lord, who wilt render to every man according to his works” (Ps 62:11f). The despiser of his mercy, which calls for belief, must bear under his power the sentence of condemnation. But whosoever believes, and trusts himself to God for the absolution of all his sins, for the healing of all his sicknesses, for kindling and illumination by the warmth and light of God, shall have by his grace those good works which lead to deliverance even in the body from the corruption of death, to crowning and satisfaction with the good things which are not temporal but eternal, above all that we ask or think (Eph 3:20).
Augustine, “The Spirit and the Letter, in Later Works, trans. John Burnaby, LCC 8 (Westminster Press, 1955), 242–43. In footnote #97, Burnaby said, “Note that in this treatise Augustine does not find it necessary, as he did later, to explain away this text (cf. Enchrid., 103).

Teske translation:
58. Let us, then, first set forth this idea and see whether it provides a satisfactory answer to our question. The free choice which the creator has given to the rational soul as part of its nature is a neutral power that can either turn to faith or fall into unbelief. Therefore, human beings cannot be said to have this will by which they believe God unless they have received it, when at God’s call it arises from the free choice which they received as part of their nature when they were created. God wills that all human beings be saved and come to the knowledge of the truth (1 Tim 2:4), but not so that he deprives them of free choice, since they will be judged with perfect justice according to their good or bad use of it. Consequently, unbelievers act against the will of God when they do not believe his gospel, but they do not on that account defeat his will. Rather, they deprive themselves of the great and supreme good and plunge themselves into evils which are punishments. They are destined to experience in punishment the power of the God whose mercy they held in contempt in his gifts. Thus the will of God is never defeated, but it would be defeated, if it could not find something to do with those who hold him in contempt or if they could somehow escape what he has appointed for them. He says, for example, I will that all these servants of mine work in the vineyard and that, after their labor, they rest and feast. But if any of them refuse to do this, they will forever grind grain at the millstone. Any who held him in contempt would seem to act against the will of their lord, but they would defeat it if they took flight from the millstone out of contempt—something that could never happen under God’s power. Hence, scripture said, God has spoken once, that is, immutably—though one could also understand this with regard to the only Word. Then, adding what he spoke immutably, it says, These two things have I heard: that power belongs to God and to you, Lord, belongs mercy; you repay all according to their works (Ps 62:12–13). Therefore, they will be liable to condemnation under his power who, with regard to believing, have held his mercy in contempt. But those who believe and entrust themselves to God to be forgiven all their sins and to be healed from all their wounds and to be enkindled and enlightened by warmth and light will have good works as a result of his grace. By them they will be redeemed from the corruption of bodily death; they will be crowned and satisfied with goods—not temporal ones, but eternal ones, beyond what we ask for and understand (Eph 3:20).
Saint Augustine, “The Spirit and the Letter,” in Answer to the Pelagians, ed. John E. Rotelle, trans. Roland J. Teske, vol. 23, The Works of Saint Augustine: A Translation for the 21st Century (Hyde Park, NY: New City Press, 1997), 182–83; De spiritu et littera, c. 33, 58; italics original.

July 18, 2013

Joseph Truman (1631–1671) on the Natural/Moral Ability Distinction in Twisse

That Distinction well understood, which is must insisted on by the French Protestant Divines, would much conduce herein, namely the distinction of Natural and Moral Impotency.

And though many of Dr. Twisses Judgment in other things, oppose it, yet he himself in many places, when pressed with difficulties, fled to it as his chief Sanctuary, Vindic. grat. lib. 2. Errat. 9. Sect. 6. pag. (mihi) 211.
Joseph Truman, A Discourse of Natural and Moral Impotency (London: Printed for Robert Clavel; and are to be sold at the Sign of the Peacock in St. Pauls Church-yard, 1675), 3.

Bio:
DNB

See one quote from Twisse here (click), and also Archibald Alexander's statements about Twisse and others (click).

July 14, 2013

Thomas Schreiner on 2 Peter 3:9

3:9 The first part of v. 9 draws an implication from v. 8. If God does not reckon or indeed experience time as we do, then it follows that he is not slow about keeping his promise (cf. Hab. 2:3). The promise (epangelia), of course, hearkens back to v. 4 and refers to the promise of the Lord's coming. God, that is, the Father, is not dilatory in fulfilling the promise uttered about his Son's coming again. The Son will come as promised, but the apparent slowness should not be misunderstood. The phrase "as some understand slowness" could possibly refer to those in the churches wavering under the influence of the false teachers.50 More likely the reference is to the false teachers themselves, referring to them negatively as "some" who lack an understanding of God's ways.51 The verse may be highly ironic. The false teachers use God's patience as an argument against God, when it should lead them to repentance.52

Peter explained why the coming is delayed. God is patient with his people. Notice that the verse says "patient with you (eis hymas). The reason for his patience is then explicated. He does not want "anyone to perish, but everyone to come to repentance." The idea that God is patient so that people will repent is common in the Scriptures (Joel 2:12-13; Rom. 2:4). That he is "slow to anger" is a refrain repeated often (Exod 34:6; Num 14:18; Neh 9:17; Psa 86:15; 103:8; 145:8; Joel 2:13; Jonah 3:10; 4:2; Nah 1:3), but he will not delay forever (see esp. Sir 35:18). We should note at the outset that perishing (apolesthai) refers to eternal judgment, as is typical with the term. Repentance (metanoia), correspondingly, involves the repentance that is necessary for eternal life. Peter did not merely discuss rewards that some would receive if they lived faithfully. He directed his attention to whether people would be saved from God's wrath. We must also ask who was in view when he spoke of "anyone" (tinas) perishing and "all" (pantas) coming to repentance. One option is that he considered every person without exception. Some understand 1 Tim 2:4 similarly, "God . . . wants all men to be saved and to come to the knowledge of the truth."53 We do not have space to comment on the text is 1 Timothy here, but we should note that debate exists over the meaning of "all men" in 1 Tim 2:4 as well. Or we can think of Ezek 18:32: "For I take no pleasure in the death of anyone, declares the Sovereign LORD. Repent and live!" (cf. also 18:23) In this latter instance God's regret over the perishing of anyone is clear. Nevertheless, we have to ask whether the verse in 2 Peter has the same meaning as the texts in Ezekiel. If it does, how does this fit with the teaching that God has ordained and decreed that only some will be saved? Many scholars, of course, doubt that the Scripture teaches that God ordains that only some will be saved, but in my estimation the Scriptures teach that God ordains that only some will be saved, but in my estimation the Scriptures do clearly teach such an idea (cf. John 6:37, 44-45, 65; 10:16, 26; Acts 13:48; Rom 8:29-30; 9:1-23; Eph 1:4-5, 11, etc.).54 Space does not permit a full answer to this question, but an answer that has a long pedigree in church history suffices. We must distinguish between two different senses in God's will. There is a decretive will of God and a desired will of God. God desires the salvation of all in one sense, but he does not ultimately ordain that all will be saved. Many think this approach is double-talk and outright nonsense.55 Again, space forbids us from answering this question in detail, but this view has been recently and convincingly argued by J. Piper.56 He demonstrates that such distinctions in God's will are not the result of philosophical sleight of hand but careful biblical exegesis.

Having said all this, 2 Pet 3:9 may not relate to this issue directly anyway. The "anyone" and "all" in the verse may be an expansion of "you" (hymas) earlier in the verse.57 Peter did not reflect, according to this view, on the fate of all people in the world without exception. He considered those in the church who wavered under the influence of the false teachers. God desires every one of them to repent. But even if this solution is correct, it does not solve the issue theologically, for Peter probably reflected on God's desired will instead of decreed will in this instance. That is, he was not teaching that all of those in the church whom God desires to repent will actually repent. Even if the verse is restricted to those influenced by the false teachers, Peter referred to what God desires, not to what he ordains. At the end of the day, restricting "anyone" to church members is not the most satisfying solution in this text. By extension we should understand 2 Pet 3:9 in the same way as Ezek 18:32. It refers to God's desire that everyone without exception be saved. It follows, then, that Peter spoke of the desired rather than the decreed will of God. God has not ordained that all will be saved since many will perish forever.58 Still, God genuinely desires in one sense that all will be saved, even if he had not ultimately decreed that all will be saved. Many object that a desire that is not decreed is nonsense and theological double-talk. I would reply that such a view is rooted in biblical exegesis, that the Scriptures themselves, if accepted as a harmonious whole, compel us to make such distinctions. Such complexity is not all that surprising since God is an infinite and complex being, one who exceeds our understanding. In other words, such exegesis is not a rationalistic expedient but an acknowledgement of the mystery and depth of God's revelation. Neither dimension of the biblical text should be denied. God really and truly desires that every person repent and turn to him. We should not retreat to God's decreed will to nullify and negate what the text says. Nor should we use this verse to cancel out God's ordained will. Better to live with the tension and mystery of the text than to swallow it up in a philosophical system that pretends to understand all of God's ways. God's patience and his love are not illusions, but neither do they remove his sovereignty.
_______________
50. Kelly, Peter and Jude, 362.
51. Bigg, Peter and Jude, 296; Moo, 2 Peter, Jude, 187.
52. I owe this insight to my research assistant, Jason Meyer.
53. Vögtle remarks that this verse rules out Calvinist theology (Judasbrief, 2 Petrusbrief, 231-32). Cf. also the comments of Fuchs and Reymond, 2 Pierre, Jude, 116.
54. For a defense of this view see T. R. Schreiner and B. A. Ware, eds., Still Sovereign (Grand Rapids: Baker, 2000).
55. This view is suggested already by J. Calvin (Commentaries on the Catholic Epistles [Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1948], 419-20).
56. J. Piper, "Are There Two Wills in God?" in Still Sovereign, 107-31.
57. Bauckham, Jude, 2 Peter, 313; Moo, 2 Peter, Jude, 188; Horrell, The Epistles of Peter and Jude, 180 (though he thinks all people can be included by extension). Fornberg argues, on the other hand, that the adversaries are included in God's desire for all to repent (An Early Church in a Pluralistic Society, 71).
58. We cannot adduce the evidence here, but not universalism is ruled out by many biblical texts.
Thomas R. Schreiner, 1, 2 Peter, Jude (The New American Commentary, vol. 37; Nashville, TN: Broadman & Holman Publishers, 2003), 380–383.