Category Archives: Church History

Only One Life

Posted by Dan C. on

by Nathan Busenitz, The Cripplegate

The year was 1860.

A lot happened in that year. In 1860, the Pony Express sent its first riders from Missouri to California. That same year, Abraham Lincoln was elected the 16th President of the United States. And on December 20, 1860, South Carolina declared its secession from the union, setting events in motion that would culminate in the American Civil War.

It was in that same year, on December 2, 1860, that Charles Thomas Studd was born into a wealthy family in England.

Charles was a teenager when his father committed his life to Christ after attending an evangelistic meeting led by D. L. Moody. A short time later, at the age of 16, Charles himself came to saving faith in the Lord Jesus Christ.

Charles would go on to Cambridge where he would become one of the most well-known cricket players of his day, famous not only in Britain but around the world. When his time at Cambridge ended, Charles realized that he did not want to pursue a career in athletics. As he said it,

What is all the fame and flattery worth . . . when a man comes to face eternity?

I know that cricket would not last, and honour would not last, and nothing in this world would last, but it [is] worthwhile living for the world to come.

How could I spend the best years of my life in living for the honours of this world, when thousands of souls are perishing every day?

Armed with an eternal perspective and motivated by a desire to serve Christ no matter the cost, Charles Thomas Studd (often referred to by his initials, C. T.) left England to serve as a missionary in China, under the oversight of Hudson Taylor.

C. T. Studd spent a decade in China, much of that time working in a rehabilitation center for opium addicts, sharing the gospel and seeing lives transformed by Christ. While in China, he also married his wife Priscilla, and together they had four daughters.

After spending a few years back in England, the family moved to India, where Charles served as a local church pastor for seven years. Though he struggled with severe asthma, often staying awake most of the night just trying to breath, he faithfully preached the gospel. And as a result, many souls in Southern India were won to the Lord.

Shortly thereafter, C. T. Studd became convinced that God wanted him to take the gospel to the innermost jungles of Africa. He eventually reached the Belgian Congo in 1913, though it was not easy. At one point, he contracted a severe case of malaria; on another occasion, he woke up in the morning to discover that a poisonous snake had been sleeping by his side all night long.

Along with his fellow missionaries, Studd established a number of missionary stations in the heart of Africa — bringing the gospel to tribes that had previously never heard the name of Jesus Christ. He wrote over 200 hymns, translated the New Testament into the native language, and witnessed thousands of African people turn to Christ.

C. T. Studd died in Africa, at the age of 70, having spent almost his entire adult life in missionary service: 10 years in China, 7 years in India, and roughly 20 years in Africa. Through his unwavering perseverance, a vast number of souls were reached with the good news of the gospel.

As one might imagine, that kind of pioneering missionary work was extremely taxing. But C. T. Studd’s response was simple and sincere. He said,

If Jesus Christ be God and died for me, then no sacrifice can be too great for me to make for Him.

That undying commitment to serve Christ no matter the cost is perhaps best captured in the words of a poem he wrote. Perhaps you’ve heard these words before:

Two little lines I heard one day, Traveling along life’s busy way;
Bringing conviction to my heart, And from my mind would not depart;
Only one life, ‘twill soon be past, Only what’s done for Christ will last.

Only one life, yes only one, Soon will its fleeting hours be done;
Then, in ‘that day’ my Lord to meet, And stand before His Judgment seat;
Only one life, ‘twill soon be past, Only what’s done for Christ will last.

A Couple of Interesting Debates

Posted by Dan C. on

Recently Dr. James White and  Dr. Michael appeared on Revelation TV to debate predestination and healing in separate sessions, each with a separate Q&A session. Look for Parts 1 and 2 which are the debate and the Q&A, respectively.

Here’s the long link:

http://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLBby84KboLbHtgNyVQ7xu-fSsJTrDuvFZ

A “Lutheran” Case Against Infant Baptism ?

Posted by Dan C. on

Let me be perfectly clear. I an not interested in a long discussion about infant v. believer baptism. I was just in one of those. I heard folks on both sides of the fence become rather ‘animated’ in defense of their positions.

Although I might have even spent too much time in the discussion, my only real point was that one type of baptism had specific examples and one did not. Also,  As good Lutheran baby I was sprinkled, however years later, after a long time as a prodigal, I started reading my Bible again, God got hold of me for REAL and I wanted to know what the source book really had to say about baptism. All I could find that was explicit was believer baptism, so I was baptized as a believer.

During the discussion I became interested in learning more about infant baptism from the Lutheran perspective because the most animated of the pro-infant baptism crowd in the discussion were Lutherans. I don’t even think the covenantal Reformed position was debated one way or the other. In all my researching, I found a lot of material produced by Lutherans that only presented the same arguments I already knew. Likewise, the material from Protestants (mostly Baptist) presented very familiar arguments.

I did however find one very interesting article called “A Lutheran Case Against Infant Baptism” that really caught my attentions. It’s a lengthy but fascinating article and you can find it online here. Here are a couple of excerpts:

Because the doctrine Luther championed was nothing other than what the Bible says, he “freely admitted that infant baptism is neither explicitly commanded or explicitly mentioned in Scripture. There are no ‘specific passages’ referring to infant baptism. The direct witness of scripture is by itself not strong enough to provide an adequate basis for beginning infant baptism were it not already practiced.” (The Theology of Martin Luther, by Paul Althaus, page 361)

However, because infant baptism had been the universal practice of all churches from ancient times, Luther felt that He could not abandon it in good conscience. Nevertheless, once certain radical sects (known collectively as Anabaptists) began to attack infant baptism for all of the wrong reasons, he was forced to defend it. While some of those sects were moderate, others could hardly be called Christian. In addition, they disagreed among themselves and had little in common other than an emphasis on works, and a commitment to adult baptism. Furthermore, instead of helping the cause of the Gospel, they tried to discredit Martin Luther, while using their attack on infant baptism to justify doctrines that were clearly contrary to God’s Word.

. . . even though Martin Luther had been baptized as an infant, he did not claim to be saved until he came to faith in Christ. In describing that moment he said, “I felt myself to be reborn and to have gone through open doors into paradise.” (Here I Stand, by R. H. Bainton, page 49) He later described true repentance this way, “That a man do first acknowledge himself by the law, to be a sinner and that it is impossible for him to do any good work… The second part is: If thou wilt be saved, thou mayest not seek salvation by works, ‘for God hath sent His only–begotten Son into the world, that we might live through Him.’” (Commentary on Galatians, page 68) By coming to baptism we do nothing to earn salvation, we simply accept God’s offer of forgiveness in Christ. At the same time, God uses baptism to tell us, and all who repent, that He has washed away our sins (Acts 22:16, 1John 1:7-9).

There is much more to the article than the above excerpts, and if you are interested in the history and current practice of infant baptism, I highly encourage you to ready it in its entirety. If you just want to be armed with more points against infant baptism for the ‘great debate’ don’t. I’m filing it away. If I ever end up in an objective discussion concerning Luther’s views and stance, it would be quite useful.

The Dangerous Ramifications of the Continuationist Position

Posted by Dan C. on

In the final chapter of his book “Strange Fire”, John  Mac Arthur makes an appeal to his continuationist friends, those who believe that the miraculous sign gifts given to the Apostles to authenticate their ministry being from God, in which he presents eight dangerous ramifications of the continuationist position. They were not presented with anything but a deep love for the church and those who hold to a biblical gospel while embracing continuationism.  Below are the major points that Dr. MacArthur makes:

1. The continuationist position gives an illusion of legitimacy to the broader Charismatic Movement.

2.The continuationist position degrades the miraculous nature of the true gifts that God bestowed on the first-century church.

3. The continuationist position severely limits the ability of its advocates to confront others who fall into charismatic confusion.

4. By insisting that God is still giving new revelation to Christians today, the Continuationist movement opens the gates to confusion and error.

5. By insisting that God is still giving new revelation to Christians today, the Continuationist Movement tacitly denies the doctrine of Sola Scriptura.

6. By allowing for a irrational form of tongues-speaking (usually) as a private prayer language), the Continuationist Movement opens the door to the mindless ecstasy of charismatic worship.

7. By asserting that the gift of healing has continued to the present , the continuationist position affirms the same basic premise that undergirds the fraudulent ministries of charismatic faith healers.

8. The continuationist position ultimately dishonors the Holy Spirit by distracting people from His true ministry while enticing them with counterfeits.

All of the above points were carefully and thoroughly discussed in the book itself, as well as in the conference sessions.

If you have not read the book, I encourage you to do so. It is available at Amazon.com, as well as other book retailers. I bought my copy at Barnes and Noble. I read the book after having  listened to the conference sessions. In addition to the thorough treatment of “Strange Fire” in the Charismatic Movement, there is an Appendix called Voices From Church History containing quotations concerning the Apostolic gifts spanning a period of time from 344 A.D. to the twentieth century.

The Geneva Bible

Posted by Dan C. on

For some years now I have had the habit of reading or listening through the Bible during the year. The reason for this post is that for this year’s journey through the Bible, I have chosen The Geneva Bible as the translation I would use. My beautiful bride had heard me talking about it as a 2013 project and decided to order it for me, but it took some time to arrive. I received an edition of the 1599 Geneva Bible sometime last Spring, and was already engaged in my project for 2013, which was listening through the entire ESV Bible. Therefore I postponed the literary excursion through what is perhaps the first English language ‘study Bible’ until this year.   To assist in my little journey, I am using the year-long Bible reading plan provided by The Gideons International, an organization we (Dan & Dee) joined this last year. I can remain in tune with the other Gideons in our local Camp and also include all of the study/marginal notes provided in The Geneva Bible in smaller units.

The information below is excerpted from an online article , ‘History of the Geneva Bible. ’  I recommend the entire article, especially if you are interested in the history of The Bible. Enjoy!

Overview

Despite being virtually unknown today, the Geneva Bible is most revolutionary of all English Bibles. It was born out of persecution and takes its name from the initial city of publication. When Mary I, also known as “Bloody Mary,” took the throne in 1553, English Bibles were made illegal and heavy persecution broke-out against Protestants and proponents of English Scripture. Hundreds fled England and many of these exiles settled in Geneva, Switzerland, where they produced a new English Bible—the Geneva Bible.

The Geneva Bible was the first English version to be translated entirely from the original languages of Hebrew, Aramaic, and Greek. Though the text is principally just a revision of William Tyndale’s earlier work of 1534, Tyndale only translated the New Testament and the Old Testament through 2 Chronicles before he was imprisoned. The English refugees living in Geneva completed the translation of the Old Testament from Hebrew to English for the first time. The work was led by William Whittingham.

When the Geneva translation of the New Testament appeared in 1557 and the entire Bible in 1560, it was innovative in both text and format, and quickly became the household Bible of English speaking people. It was the first English Bible to have modern verse divisions as well as modern chapter divisions. It was the first Bible to use italics to indicate words not in the original language and the first Bible to change the values of ancient coins into English pound sterling equivalents. It was also the first to use plain Roman type, which was more readable than the old Gothic type, and it was in a handy quarto size for easy use. With prologues before each book, extensive marginal notes, and a brief concordance, the Geneva Bible was in fact the first English “study Bible.”

Between its first edition of 1560 and its last edition in 1644, 160 editions, totaling around a half million Bibles, were produced. And for the first time common people could not only understand the words in the Bible, they could actually own one. Its widespread use first solidified the English language among the common people, not the 1611 King James Bible as many assume. Actually, the King James Bible required decades to surpass the popularity of the Geneva and supplant it from the hearts of the English speaking world.

In fact, the Geneva Bible was the principal English Bible initially brought to American soil, making it the Bible that shaped early American life and impacted Colonial culture more than any other.

Born Out of Blood

Mary I, the daughter of Henry VIII and Catherine of Aragon, took the throne in England in 1553 and set the stage for the creation of the Geneva Bible. Sixteen years earlier her father, Henry VIII, had released the first Bible in English following his separation from the Catholic Church at Rome. However, once Mary was in power, she immediately began forcing all of England back under the authority of the Roman Church and suppressing the circulation of the Bible in the common (English) tongue. Specifically, Mary I issued proclamations in August 1553 forbidding public reading of the Bible and in June 1555 prohibiting the works of reformers Tyndale, Rogers, Coverdale, Cranmer, and others. In 1558 a proclamation was issued requiring the delivery of the reformers’ writings under penalty of death. A vicious persecution was instituted against anyone who supported the reformers’ views or attempted to circulate the scripture in English. Overall, nearly three hundred people were burned at the stake under Mary’s reign, and many more were imprisoned, tortured, or otherwise punished. Reformer John Rogers, who produced the Matthew’s Bible, was the first to be burned. Others who followed the same fate included Bishop Thomas Cranmer, who was involved with the second and subsequent editions of the Great Bible, Nicolas Ridley, Hugh Latimer, and John Hooper, who was often referred to as the “Father of Puritanism.”

It is estimated that during Bloody Mary’s reign as many as eight hundred reformers fled England to seek shelter on the Continent. Some settled in Strasburg, some in Zurich, and some in Frankfort. Many settled in Geneva, the “Holy City of the Alps,” where Protestantism was supreme. The city was under the control of the famed scholar, John Calvin, with the assistance of Theodore Beza. By 1556 a sizeable English-speaking congregation had formed in Geneva with Scottish reformer John Knox serving as pastor. William Whittingham, a tremendous scholar who according to tradition married a sister of Calvin’s wife, succeeded Knox as pastor in 1557.

The Translation

 

Immediately after the release of Whittingham’s 1557 New Testament, the English exiles entered upon a revision of the whole Bible. Assisted by Beza and possibly Calvin himself, several English exiles were involved in the translating, but it is impossible to say how many. Miles Coverdale, who produced the Coverdale and Great Bibles, resided in Geneva for a time and may have assisted, and a similar claim may be advanced in favor of John Knox. The famed sixteenth-century English historian, John Foxe, was also in refuge in Switzerland during this time. Yet the chief credit belongs to William Whittingham, who was probably assisted by Thomas Sampson, Anthony Gilby, and possibly William Cole, William Kethe, John Baron, John Pullain, and John Bodley.

The Old Testament from Genesis through 2 Chronicles and the New Testament were merely revisions of Tyndale’s previous monumental efforts. The works of Coverdale, Rogers, and Cranmer were also consulted, and the English exiles completed a careful collation of Hebrew and Greek originals. They compared Latin versions, especially Beza’s, and the standard French and German versions as well.

While Coverdale’s, Matthew’s, and the Great Bible were merely revisions of Tyndale’s translations from the original Hebrew and Greek, the Geneva Bible charted new ground. The scholarly English refugees in Geneva completed the translation of the remainder of the Old Testament directly from Hebrew into English for the first time. Tyndale had only translated the Hebrew (Masoretic) text up to 2 Chronicles before he was imprisoned in 1535, and it was not until this handful of scholars assembled in refuge in Geneva that there was sufficient familiarity with Hebrew among reformers to complete the translation of the Old Testament directly from Hebrew. Thus, the English scholars who escaped persecution in their native land and resided in Geneva produced the first English Bible ever completely translated from the original languages.

The work took over two years, and in 1560 the world witnessed a new English Bible, which is now known as the “Geneva Bible.” In a simple prefatory note, the Geneva Bible was dedicated to “Bloody Mary’s” successor, Queen Elizabeth I, the daughter of Henry VIII and Anne Bolyen.

Michael Jinkins: Myths and urban legends about John Calvin

Posted by Dan C. on

Recently I asked Serene Jones, president of Union Theological Seminary in New York, what resources she finds particularly helpful in her vocation as a theological educator and church leader. She said, “This may sound corny, but John Calvin.” I don’t think she sounds corny at all, but, then, I’m a Calvinist. Or a Neo-Calvinist. Or maybe a Crypto-Neo-Calvinist. Anyway I agree with Serene – and with David Steinmetz writing for "Faith & Leadership" here.

This year we Calvinists have been busy baking birthday cakes with 500 candles on them in honor of John Calvin whose influence has been noted, lamented or celebrated by figures as divergent as the sociologist and economist Max Weber, the journalist G. K. Chesterton and the novelist Marilynne Robinson. As a public service to all non-Calvinists, I have assembled a myth-busting primer on the Protestant Reformer.

Myth No.1: John Calvin was a sour puss.

Martin Luther is usually cast as the fun-loving, beer-swigging, warm-hearted Reformer while Calvin is caricatured as dour, the sort of person who (as one Episcopal bishop once notoriously described him) “sucked sour persimmons for fun.” In fact, Calvin was the Reformation’s chief apologist for fun. For example, he reminds us that God created food and drink “for delight and good cheer,” not simply for nourishment. Quoting the Psalms he tells us that wine is given to us to gladden the heart, and olive oil was made for dipping bread. Here’s a person who knew his way around a Michelin Star restaurant (never forget that Calvin was French!). According to Calvin, God did not create the world merely for utilitarian purposes, but for beauty and pleasure.

Myth No.2: Calvin was a tyrant.

Recently this myth got some highly visible air time in “The New York Times Magazine” in an article titled: “Who Would Jesus Smack Down?” The article profiled a preacher who justifies his refusal to listen to the criticism of lay leaders by citing Calvin. When a member of his congregation complained, for example, the pastor suspended the complainer’s membership, explaining, “They were sinning through questioning.” The author of the article commented, “John Calvin couldn’t have said it better himself.” In fact, Calvin could and often did say it much better than that. Calvin distrusted the vesting of power in any individual (himself included), and abided with decisions made by the ordered bodies of his church and city even when he did not agree with them. Calvin believed that God makes God’s will known through groups more reliably than through the will of individuals, and there’s no better guarantee against the abuse of a leader’s power than a vigilant group in which authority is shared.

Myth No.3: Calvin and Calvinism are identical.

This one’s tricky! There’s an assumption that everything we call “Calvinism” actually came from Calvin. A colleague recently mentioned that he was sitting on a plane reading a book about Calvin. The flight attendant saw what he was reading and said, “I know about Calvin. He’s the TULIP guy.” In fact, the well-known “five points of Calvinism,” memorialized in the acronym TULIP (Total depravity; Unconditional election; Limited atonement; Irresistible grace; Perseverance of the saints) dates from the century after Calvin (the Synod of Dort, 1618-1619), and represents the high water mark of “Calvinist Scholasticism” in which the warm personal evangelical movement that Calvin led was distorted by a calcified reactionism. Calvin scholars like James Torrance and T.F. Torrance, R. T. Kendall and Holmes Rolston, III, have helped us differentiate between Calvin and his latter-day disciples.

Myth No. 4: Calvin was a religious fanatic.

There certainly is a popular perception of Calvin as a sort of religious fanatic or zealot. After all, there are some Christian Fundamentalists to this day who claim him as their spiritual father, and let’s not forget the various heresy prosecutions that have followed in the wake of “Calvinism” especially in Scotland and the United States. In fact, Calvin himself deserves to be remembered both as a “Renaissance Man” and a “Humanist.” Calvin was part of that remarkable Renaissance movement that included Thomas More (the brilliant Catholic “Man for all Seasons”) and Desiderius Erasmus (the Dutch scholar known for his critical studies and satire). The humanist movement swept away the cobwebs of superstition and obscurantism and placed the Bible, freshly translated, in the hands of ordinary Christians. Calvin, like other humanists, was also a critical scholar of the Bible who believed that knowledge and wisdom, scholarship and science are not enemies of the faith.

Myth No. 5: Calvin was sadistic.

Obviously this myth is supported by the burning of Michael Servetus (a person who had the distinction of being considered a heretic by both the Protestants and the Roman Catholics and of being a physician who discovered how blood circulates in the human body). Calvin opposed Servetus’s teachings. Calvin denounced him to the Roman Catholic Inquisition. Calvin believed that Servetus’s heresies were dangerous to the future of the Church, and he wanted him silenced. In fact, however, what is less well known is that Calvin argued that Servetus not be burned at the stake. The conventional picture of Calvin cruelly twirling his moustache like Snidely Whiplash while Servetus burned is baseless. Calvin urged the courts to spare Servetus from burning, which Calvin considered a barbarous method of execution – and to behead Servetus instead. Okay, this one sounds like cold comfort even to me, and even if Calvin thought Servetus “had it coming” (to quote Clint Eastwood). The fact that Calvin believed the church was locked in a life and death struggle with Servetus, and that the magistrates had no other responsible alternative than to execute him, does not necessarily mean that Calvin was sadistic, though he does appear to have been a pretty typical product of a cruel age on this score. The burning of Servetus ignited a firestorm of controversy among Protestants as to whether such measures are ever justified. Incidentally, Servetus was opposed to the use of force to promote religion long before he was sentenced to death.

Michael Jinkins is academic dean and professor of pastoral theology at Austin Presbyterian Theological Seminary.

Augustine and Pelagius

Posted by Dan C. on

by R. C. Sproul

"It is Augustine who gave us the Reformation." So wrote B. B. Warfield in his assessment of the influence of Augustine on church history. It is not only that Luther was an Augustinian monk, or that Calvin quoted Augustine more than any other theologian that provoked Warfield’s remark. Rather, it was that the Reformation witnessed the ultimate triumph of Augustine’s doctrine of grace over the legacy of the Pelagian view of man.

Humanism, in all its subtle forms, recapitulates the unvarnished Pelagianism against which Augustine struggled. Though Pelagius was condemned as a heretic by Rome, and its modified form, Semi-Pelagianism was likewise condemned by the Council of Orange in 529, the basic assumptions of this view persisted throughout church history to reappear in Medieval Catholicism, Renaissance Humanism, Socinianism, Arminianism, and modern Liberalism. The seminal thought of Pelagius survives today not as a trace or tangential influence but is pervasive in the modern church. Indeed, the modern church is held captive by it.

What was the core issue between Augustine and Pelagius? The heart of the debate centered on the doctrine of original sin, particularly with respect to the question of the extent to which the will of fallen man is "free." Adolph Harnack said:

There has never, perhaps, been another crisis of equal importance in church history in which the opponents have expressed the principles at issue so clearly and abstractly. The Arian dispute before the Nicene Council can alone be compared with it. (History of Agmer V/IV/3)

The controversy began when the British monk, Pelagius, opposed at Rome Augustine’s famous prayer: "Grant what Thou commandest, and command what Thou dost desire." Pelagius recoiled in horror at the idea that a divine gift (grace) is necessary to perform what God commands. For Pelagius and his followers responsibility always implies ability. If man has the moral responsibility to obey the law of God, he must also have the moral ability to do it.

Harnack summarizes Pelagian thought:

Nature, free-will, virtue and law, these strictly defined and made independent of the notion of God – were the catch-words of Pelagianism: self-acquired virtue is the supreme good which is followed by reward. Religion and morality lie in the sphere of the free spirit; they are at any moment by man’s own effort.

The difference between Pelagianism and Semi-Pelagianism is more a difference of degree than of kind. To be sure, on the surface there seems like there is a huge difference between the two, particularly with respect to original sin and to the sinner’s dependence upon grace. Pelagius categorically denied the doctrine of original sin, arguing that Adam’s sin affected Adam alone and that infants at birth are in the same state as Adam was before the Fall. Pelagius also argued that though grace may facilitate the achieving of righteousness, it is not necessary to that end. Also, he insisted that the constituent nature of humanity is not convertible; it is indestructively good.

Over against Pelagius, Semi-Pelagianism does have a doctrine of original sin whereby mankind is considered fallen. Consequently grace not only facilitates virtue, it is necessary for virtue to ensue. Man’s nature can be changed and has been changed by the Fall.

However, in Semi-Pelagianism there remains a moral ability within man that is unaffected by the Fall. We call this an "island of righteousness" by which the fallen sinner still has the inherent ability to incline or move himself to cooperate with God’s grace. Grace is necessary but not necessarily effective. Its effect always depends upon the sinner’s cooperation with it by virtue of the exercise of the will.

It is not by accident that Martin Luther considered The Bondage of the Will to be his most important book. He saw in Erasmus a man who, despite his protests to the contrary, was a Pelagian in Catholic clothing. Luther saw that lurking beneath the controversy of merit and grace, and faith and works was the issue of to what degree the human will is enslaved by sin and to what degree we are dependent upon grace for our liberation. Luther argued from the Bible that the flesh profits nothing and that this "nothing" is not a little "something."

Augustine’s view of the Fall was opposed to both Pelagianism and Semi-Pelagianism. He said that mankind is a massa peccati, a "mess of sin," incapable of raising itself from spiritual death. For Augustine man can no more move or incline himself to God than an empty glass can fill itself. For Augustine the initial work of divine grace by which the soul is liberated from the bondage of sin is sovereign and operative. To be sure we cooperate with this grace, but only after the initial divine work of liberation.

Augustine did not deny that fallen man still has a will and that the will is capable of making choices. He argued that fallen man still has a free will (liberium arbitrium) but has lost his moral liberty (libertas). The state of original sin leaves us in the wretched condition of being unable to refrain from sinning. We still are able to choose what we desire, but our desires remain chained by our evil impulses. He argued that the freedom that remains in the will always leads to sin. Thus in the flesh we are free only to sin, a hollow freedom indeed. It is freedom without liberty, a real moral bondage. True liberty can only come from without, from the work of God on the soul. Therefore we are not only partly dependent upon grace for our conversion but totally dependent upon grace.

Modern Evangelicalism sprung from the Reformation whose roots were planted by Augustine. But today the Reformational and Augustinian view of grace is all but eclipsed in Evangelicalism. Where Luther triumphed in the sixteenth century, subsequent generations gave the nod to Erasmus.

Modern evangelicals repudiate unvarnished Pelagianism and frequently Semi-Pelagianism as well. It is insisted that grace is necessary for salvation and that man is fallen. The will is acknowledged to be severely weakened even to the point of being "99 percent" dependent upon grace for its liberation. But that one percent of unaffected moral ability or spiritual power which becomes the decisive difference between salvation and perdition is the link that preserves the chain to Pelagius. We have not broken free from the Pelagian captivity of the church.

That one percent is the "little something" Luther sought to demolish because it removes the sola from sola gratia and ultimately the sola from sola fide. The irony may be that though modern Evangelicalism loudly and repeatedly denounces Humanism as the mortal enemy of Christianity, it entertains a Humanistic view of man and of the will at its deepest core.

We need an Augustine or a Luther to speak to us anew lest the light of God’s grace be not only over-shadowed but be obliterated in our time.

R. C. Sproul is now the distinguished visiting professor of systematic theology and apologetics at Knox Theological Seminary.

Used by permission of Ligonier Ministries, copyright 1996. Review postings to a discussion forum on this article’s subject at Ligonier Ministries’ previous Web site location: http://www1.gospelcom.net/HyperNews/get/tt/ttsubrc-06-96.html.