Article 1: God’s Right to Condemn All People
Since all people have sinned in Adam and have come under the sentence of
the curse and eternal death, God would have done no one an injustice if it
had been his will to leave the entire human race in sin and under the curse,
and to condemn them on account of their sin. As the apostle says: “The
whole world is liable to the condemnation of God” (Rom. 3:19), “All have
sinned and are deprived of the glory of God” (Rom. 3:23), and “The wages
of sin is death” (Rom. 6:23).
It has been established before the word, “all” and “the whole world” does not have to refer to every human that ever lived.
NIV Ro.3:19 “Now we know that whatever the law says, it says to those who are under the law, so that every mouth may be silenced and the whole world held accountable to God”.
“Accountable” does not convey the same meaning as condemned. Righteous people are still accountable to God even though they are righteous and do not stand condemned in their righteousness.
An unborn baby can be accountable to God but is the baby condemned?
Article 1 is thus wrong, since it is trying to convey the idea even unborn babies stand condemned, by making “all” include all humans (including the unborn).
It supports this falsehood by using the fact all can physically die at any time. The idea being that physical death for all humans is a punishment upon all humans because of Adam and Eve’s sin, but physical death is not a “punishment” for sin, but is needed to help some willing humans in their fulfillment of their objective.
Yes, all sinners do “die” spiritually and all humans do die physically, unless the Lord comes first, but that actually helps willing individuals in the fulfillment of their earthly objective.
How is the “death”, discussed in Romans, punishment for the saved since they most likely will die physically and have dies spiritually by sinning?
NIV Ro. 3:22 “… There is no difference between Jew and Gentile, 23 for all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God,” Paul is not addressing in Romans, unborn children, but the Jew and Gentile Christians in Rome (adults). Paul throughout Romans is repeatedly showing how the Jewish and gentile Christians are equal (here “all” have sinned).
NIV Ro. 6: 21 What benefit did you reap at that time from the things you are now ashamed of? Those things result in death! 22 But now that you have been set free from sin and have become slaves of God, the benefit you reap leads to holiness, and the result is eternal life. 23 For the wages of sin is death, but the gift of God is eternal life in Christ Jesus our Lord.
Paul again is specifically addressing the Christians in Rome (Jews and Gentiles) with a contrast being draw between eternal life for the saved and death (spiritual death and even the second death) being for the sinner. The contrast is not between physical death (the righteous experience that) but the second death and eternal life.
Article 5: The Sources of Unbelief and of Faith
The cause or blame for this unbelief, as well as for all other sins, is not at all in God, but in humanity. Faith in Jesus Christ, however, and salvation through him is a free gift of God. As Scripture says, “It is by grace you have been saved, through faith, and this not from yourselves; it is a gift of God” (Eph. 2:8). Likewise: “It has been freely given to you to believe in Christ” (Phil. 1:29).
NIV Phil. 1: 29 For it has been granted to you on behalf of Christ not only to believe in him, but also to suffer for him, 30 since you are going through the same struggle you saw I had, and now hear that I still have.
Phil. 1:29 is not saying “God gave you faith to believe in Christ”, but these Christians not only have the privilege and honor of believing in Christ, but also the honor to suffer with Christ. It is really about the standing up to suffering.
The article uses an interpretation of Eph. 2:8 which is grammatically incorrect and highly unlikely.
People use Eph 2:8 “For it is by grace you have been saved, through faith—and this not from yourselves, it is the gift of God” to show “faith” is a gift and forget about verse 9 which says: “not by works, so that no one can boast.” The gift cannot be grammatical correct and be “faith”, but you do not have to know Greek, just look at verse 9. If “faith” were the gift then Paul is telling us faith cannot be worked for and earned which is not logical or discussed as even an option anywhere else. How would people go about working to obtain faith anyway (it is to quit working, trying to do it yourself and start trusting). The “gift” in Eph. 2:8 is the whole salvation process which Paul talks about in other places, showing people trying to earn salvation.
I can look up genders and dust off my Greek New Testament, but here is what Barnes and Robertson have to say and they do an honest job as far as I can tell:
And that not of yourselves - That is, salvation does not proceed from yourselves. The word rendered "that" - ͂ touto - is in the neuter gender, and the word "faith" - ́ pistis - is in the feminine. The word "that," therefore, does not refer particularly to faith, as being the gift of God, but to "the salvation by grace" of which he had been speaking. This is the interpretation of the passage which is the most obvious, and which is now generally conceded to be the true one; see Bloomfield. Many critics, however, as Doddridge, Beza, Piscator, and Chrysostom, maintain that the word "that" ( ͂ touto ) refers to "faith" ( ́ pistis ); and Doddridge maintains that such a use is common in the New Testament. As a matter of grammar this opinion is certainly doubtful, if not untenable; but as a matter of theology it is a question of very little importance.
Robertson, on the topic of pronouns, wrote:
9. Gender and Number of outos. ... In general, like other adjectives, outos agrees with its substantive in gender and number, whether predicate or attributive. ... In Eph. 2:8 , ..., there is no reference to pisteos in touto, but rather to the idea of salvation in the clause before. (A. T. Robertson, A Grammar of the New Testament, p.704)
Robertson, on the topic of particles, wrote:
(ii) Kai. ... The Mere Connective ('And') ... kai tauta (frequent in ancient Greek). See in particular Eph. 2:8 , kai touto ouk ex umon, where touto refers to the whole conception, not to chariti. (A. T. Robertson, A Grammar of the New Testament, pp. 1181-1182)
Robertson, on the topic of prepositions, wrote:
(d) dia ... 3. 'Passing Between' or 'Through.' The idea of interval between leads naturally to that of passing between two objects or parts of objects. 'Through' is thus not the original meaning of dia, but is a very common one. ... The agent may also be expressed by dia. This function was also performed in the ancient Greek, through, when means or instrument was meant, the instrumental case was commonly employed. dia is thus used with inanimate and animate objects. Here, of course, the agent is conceived as coming in between the non-attainmnet and the attainment of the object in view. ... Abstract ideas are frequently so expressed, as sesosmenoi dia pisteos (Eph. 2:8 ), ... (A. T. Robertson, A Grammar of the New Testament, pp. 580-582)
"Gift" and "faith," are both nouns and would not need to agree. However, agreement in gender is necessary between a pronoun and its antecedent. The demonstrative pronoun will change its gender to match the previous noun (or other substantive) to which it refers.
This verse tells us that the antecedent for "This" is also the "gift of God." But the "gift" cannot be "faith" because there is no agreement in gender between "faith" and the demonstrative pronoun, "touto" (This).
You can look up lots of Greek scholars work and let me know if you find any one disagreeing with this, because I have not among scholars.
Article 6: God’s Eternal Decree
The fact that some receive from God the gift of faith within time, and that others do not, stems from his eternal decree. For “all his works are known to God from eternity” (Acts 15:18; Eph. 1:11). In accordance with this decree God graciously softens the hearts, however hard, of the elect and inclines them to believe, but by a just judgment God leaves in their wickedness and hardness of heart those who have not been chosen. And in this especially is disclosed to us God’s act—unfathomable, and as merciful as it is just—of distinguishing between people equally lost. This is the well-known decree of election and reprobation revealed in God’s Word. The wicked, impure, and unstable distort this decree to their own ruin, but it provides holy and godly souls with comfort beyond words.
Article 6 is where the Canons of Dort really makes God look bad. It is built on the false premise that some are granted faith and others are not granted faith mostly from a miss translation of Eph. 2:8.
God has granted all mature adults with a “natural” faith that can be used to worship false gods, people and things, but this God given faith can also be directed by the person, toward the Creator of the Universe. This is part of the Good News we present to the nonbeliever.
Article 6 puts the blame on God for not granting everyone equally the “faith” required for salvation. It would be more Loving and just as easy for God to provide this faith to everyone, but article 6 gives no “reason” why a Loving God would only grant a few people with this “faith”. It appears to be totally arbitrary, which does not speak well of God. The description of God’s “behavior” is only described as “unfathomable”, but it is “unfathomable” because it is totally contrary to God’s Loving nature and His Biblical description justice and injustice. It is never “just” or fair to treat people differently in areas which truly matter, and nothing matters more then salvation.
Article 7: Election
Election is God’s unchangeable purpose by which he did the following:
Before the foundation of the world, by sheer grace, according to the free good pleasure of his will, God chose in Christ to salvation a definite number of particular people out of the entire human race, which had fallen by its own fault from its original innocence into sin and ruin. Those chosen were neither better nor more deserving than the others, but lay with them in the common misery. God did this in Christ, whom he also appointed from eternity to be the mediator, the head of all those chosen, and the foundation of their salvation.
And so God decreed to give to Christ those chosen for salvation, and to call and draw them effectively into Christ’s fellowship through the Word and Spirit. In other words, God decreed to grant them true faith in Christ, to justify them, to sanctify them, and finally, after powerfully preserving them in the fellowship of the Son, to glorify them.
God did all this in order to demonstrate his mercy, to the praise of the riches of God’s glorious grace.
As Scripture says, “God chose us in Christ, before the foundation of the world, so that we should be holy and blameless before him with love; he predestined us whom he adopted as his children through Jesus Christ, in himself, according to the good pleasure of his will, to the praise of his glorious grace, by which he freely made us pleasing to himself in his beloved” (Eph. 1:4-6). And elsewhere, “Those whom he predestined, he also called; and those whom he called, he also justified; and those whom he justified, he also glorified” (Rom. 8:30).
Article 7 has: “God did all this in order to demonstrate his mercy, to the praise of the riches of God’s glorious grace.”
By this description, God is only showing “mercy” on a few people and is totally lacking mercy for the other people, which shows an extreme lack of Love for people in general. We do not see this lack of Love in Christ nor are we to limit our Love for others, so is our Love to be greater then God’s Love?
We know God chose from the beginning of time, to save those who were willing to humbly accept God’s forgiveness, but we have nothing saying: before time began God chose individual by name He would save in the future.
This should be enough to show just some of the false teaching in the Canons of Dort.
