Who Said That?
"This then, is a plain proof that the doctrine of predestination is not a doctrine of God, because it makes void the ordinance of God; and God is not divided against himself.
[The doctrine of Predestination] directly tends to destroy that holiness which is the end of all the ordinances of God. I do not say, none who hold it are holy; (for God is of tender mercy to those who are unavoidably entangled in errors of any kind;) but that the doctrine itself, -- that every man is either elected or not elected from eternity, and that the one must inevitably be saved, and the other inevitably damned, -- has a manifest tendency to destroy holiness in general; for it wholly takes away those first motives to follow after it, so frequently proposed in Scripture, the hope of future reward and fear of punishment, the hope of heaven and fear of hell."
OK, who said that? Leave your guess in the comments section below. No google searches or cheating!
As many of you correctly guessed, this comes from John Wesley's famous sermon "On Free Grace," (1740).
Reader Comments (41)
Only because it is not as obvious as Finney or Wesley and Dr. Riddlebarger has mention him several times on the WHI
Loraine Boettner's classic book, "Reformed Doctrine of Predestination" is free online here: http://www.ccel.org/ccel/boettner/predest.toc.html
It is one of the classic treatments. Abraham Booth's "Reign of Grace" is also good and again, free: http://www.jude3.net/brgtoc.htm
Also, bone up on the biblical doctrine of the atonement. Read Turretin from his 'Elenctic Theology'. The substitutionary atonement is denied, and indeed it must if you reject the doctrines of grace, as Wesleyans do.
Finally, a more polemic work and very good one is Owen's 'Display or Arminianism"
http://www.lgmarshall.org/Owen/owen_arminianism00.html
(May I make a suggestion to make these posts a bit more interesting and get quotes not just from bad guys? It would be fun to mix and match sometimes.)
HOWEVER, if it rests in God's hands, 1.) it's perfectly safe and *he'll* NEVER drop it, and 2.) I can focus on making disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost, and teaching them to obey all that Jesus commanded.
"....If my salvation rests in my hands, then 1.) I'll never be able to hold it and will drop it 10 out of 10 times, and 2.) I'll always be completely preoccupied with trying to keep my hands around it.
HOWEVER, if it rests in God's hands, 1.) it's perfectly safe and *he'll* NEVER drop it, and 2.) I can focus on making disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost, and teaching them to obey all that Jesus commanded...."
I've never seen it laid out in a progression like this before, but I like it...I like it a lot. Good response!
Wesley seems never to have been able to understand what the Reformed doctrine of election is. First of all, despite his uncompromising adherence to an othodox (non-Pelagian) doctrine of Original Sin, he fails to understand that the majority of Reformed folk hold to an election from the 'mass of damnation' of humanity. That is to say, God has elected certain SINNERS to salvation, and has left the rest to perish in their sins. He has not just chosen men out of a mass of otherwise innocent humanity and said that he will make some sinners and some saints.
Secondly, Wesley creates a straw man when he makes election barely to salvation. The Bible teaches that we are elected 'unto good works'. That is to say that God renews the heart. One living carelessly in habitual sin has no reason to think that he is elected. But Wesley persistently says that "the elect will be saved do what they may, the reprobate will be damned, do what they can." Despite Wesley putting those words into the mouth of Augustus Toplady, no Calvinist has ever believed that. The reprobate (those whom God leaves in their sins) will be damned because of what they have done, and the elect will be saved UNTO holiness.
John Wesley seems to have held to the usual Arminian dodge of Prescient Election, that is, God elects unto salvation those whom He forsees will believe. But then they are saved because of something they have done, not by free grace, and in fact they can say that God loved them because (in logical order, not in time) they first loved Him.
Wesley also taught in places a 'general' election, in which God elects a class, not individuals. But I would turn Wesley's laguage on providence against him. As Wesley challenged those who held only to a 'general providence', I would say to him on election and the atonement: "What is a general without particulars?"