Questions about reprobation

[strengthinweakness]

I have had a few questions in my mind recently concerning reprobation. If the reprobate are passed over by God (or actively damned by Him, depending on how one understands Scripture) in this life, and left to their God-hatred, which they actually already prefer (as do the elect, prior to receiving undeserved grace), then where exactly does the punishment lie for them in going to Hell? For the reprobate, isn't Hell simply going to be a eternal version of this life-- where they will wallow in the sin that they loved in this life, only this time, for eternity? If the answer to that question is that in eternity, the reprobate will finally see the folly of their sinful ways, and thus suffer greatly for eternity, then there seems (I say "seems," not necessarily "is") to be a question about God's justice. Please understand-- I hope that no one will react harshly about anything that I write in this post, because I am honestly trying to think through these issues in a Biblical way. I am more than willing to admit that any current understanding (or lack thereof) that I may have of the nature of reprobation, and of the reprobate's state in Hell, could be wrong, or perhaps just not completely "on point" theologically. Biblically speaking, as God reveals Himself to us in His word, does He refuse to grant a depraved sinner the ability to see the true folly of his/her sinful ways in this life, and then send that same depraved sinner to an eternity in which he/she could not help but see that folly-- and yet now have no way out of it? Is this an accurate statement of what God does in reprobation? I'm not meaning at all to be, or even to sound, disrespectful of divine justice. I was once a depraved sinner with no love for God at all. I have some small understanding of how repugnant sin is to Him (not as much understanding as I should have, but He is working on that), and I do accept that He would have been just to send me, as a God-hating sinner, to Hell to be apart from Him forever. I guess I'm just wandering about the nature of Hell for the reprobate. What exactly is the punishment in being eternally separated from God, for sinners who have no love for Him in the first place, and never will have any love for Him? Can someone help with these questions?

 

[cygnusx1]

I have had a few questions in my mind recently concerning reprobation. If the reprobate are passed over by God (or actively damned by Him, depending on how one understands Scripture) in this life, and left to their God-hatred, which they actually already prefer (as do the elect, prior to receiving undeserved grace), then where exactly does the punishment lie for them in going to Hell? For the reprobate, isn't Hell simply going to be a eternal version of this life-- where they will wallow in the sin that they loved in this life, only this time, for eternity? If the answer to that question is that in eternity, the reprobate will finally see the folly of their sinful ways, and thus suffer greatly for eternity, then there seems (I say "seems," not necessarily "is") to be a question about God's justice. Please understand-- I hope that no one will react harshly about anything that I write in this post, because I am honestly trying to think through these issues in a Biblical way. I am more than willing to admit that any current understanding (or lack thereof) that I may have of the nature of reprobation, and of the reprobate's state in Hell, could be wrong, or perhaps just not completely "on point" theologically. Biblically speaking, as God reveals Himself to us in His word, does He refuse to grant a depraved sinner the ability to see the true folly of his/her sinful ways in this life, and then send that same depraved sinner to an eternity in which he/she could not help but see that folly-- and yet now have no way out of it? Is this an accurate statement of what God does in reprobation? I'm not meaning at all to be, or even to sound, disrespectful of divine justice. I was once a depraved sinner with no love for God at all. I have some small understanding of how repugnant sin is to Him (not as much understanding as I should have, but He is working on that), and I do accept that He would have been just to send me, as a God-hating sinner, to Hell to be apart from Him forever. I guess I'm just wandering about the nature of Hell for the reprobate. What exactly is the punishment in being eternally separated from God, for sinners who have no love for Him in the first place, and never will have any love for Him? Can someone help with these questions?

Hi brother , good question/s.
Scripture depicts the reprobate in several ways .
First off they are deserving of nothing but condemnation (the same as the Elect)
Secondly they have many testimonies to both God's love and kindness every day.
Thirdly many of them have been given the Gospel and have heard the command of God to repent , to believe on Christ and to be saved.
The testimony of God is that He has shown Himself to them , they are without excuse.
Compare two distinct features
1.God's plan
2.God's longsuffering

It is clear that God does not create without first having a purpose .
So even reprobates were created with a prior purpose in mind.
The destruction of the reprobate for their sin is central to the purpose to vindicate God's justice and hatred of sin.
God wills to show not only mercy but Justice also.
This is why God doesn't intervene and save the reprobate ....
Rather He permits the reprobate to grow ripe for judgment .
There are several scriptures that speak of God waiting for the vessel of wrath to fill up the full measure of his/their sins.

Yet this should never be thought of as any negative thing done by The Lord , for God has blessed the reprobate with many temporal blessings , daily granting food , clothing , rain sun and life.
These blessings are meant (second purpose) to awaken a sense of obligation and humbling to the reprobate , they should have seen the Gospel message is further evidence that God is good and that sinners do not deserve either the Gospel or common blessings.
They ought to repent.
4 Or despisest thou the riches of his goodness and forbearance and longsuffering; not knowing that the goodness of God leadeth thee to repentance? 5 But after thy hardness and impenitent heart treasurest up unto thyself wrath against the day of wrath and revelation of the righteous judgment of God; 6 Who will render to every man according to his deeds. Romans 2


I think that once you recognise the difference between moral inability (we will not have this man Reign over us / You will not come to me that Ye may have life) and 'mechanical inability' (man cannot come because he has no brain ; will ; reason ; evidence etc ...........) then you will percieve the difference between Divine Government and Pure Determinism.

Greetings Cygnus

 

[cygnusx1]

Romans 9

Romans 9 is Paul laying out God's Soverign choice of individuals for mercy and for wrath. (Jacob , Esau , Pharoah etc)

the passage isn't primarily to do with Gentiles at all , but it is to do with God and Israel.... and God's MERCY !

The chapter (Romans 9) summed up ..........
How is it if the Jews are God's chosen people and they are deeply loved by God that they are not saved ???
The answer Paul gives is that God sees things completely different to the natural mind.
1st , God's word has not failed , on the contrary it has been fulfilled ...................
many assumed because the Jews rejected Jesus that God's Word including many predictions for the Jews has failed..........
after all the Jews as a nation a people had rejected Jesus.
Paul explains that in fact just the opposite of God's word 'failing' has occured!!!
God's word has been fulfilled to the letter.

Paul then explains using a number of illustrations that God chooses the individual for mercy ... "Jacob I loved"
then Paul does not hide the opposite truth , that God also chooses who He will harden ....... "Esau I hated" and "Pharoah I raised up .... to smash down !!!

Paul then insists God has a perfect right over all clay .........
'free-willers' deny this right , but Paul insists God not man is the potter and we are the clay ..... (man was made from clay)

God being every man's Creator has absolutely every right to do with each person as He sees fit .

But Paul sees a natural objection arise ..........

"but if this is the case , then who can resist God's will ?"

the idea is , how can God act like this , how can God decide the destiny of each creature , and each and every person?
It seems almost beyond belief that God would fashion a person for Glory or for destruction based upon His FREE WILL ....... because then how can He hold us responsible ?

Paul recognises the objections , but instead of denying God's absolute right over HIS creation and assuring the objector that man's free-will has primary focus in God's plan , Paul says that God's Free-will is paramount and man should not baulk at it , for baulking at it is sin and crazy .... who do you think you are , you are just a man , God made you not You God ..... so how do you have the stupidity and the audacity to reply against God!

Finally Paul shows that there is in fact two sides to God's plan .........
God loves Sovereignly (Jacob I loved but Esau I hated and that was before the children were born or had done anything good or bad)

yet ... the vessels of wrath (notice the plural , it isn't just Pharoah in view) fitted to destruction (by God , He is The Potter) have history !!!

It is not merely a question of fitting someone to destruction ..... there is a process involved.

The process is easily spotted by reading the account of Pharoah , yet furthermore this process involves much longsuffering from God over these vessels of wrath ......... God actualy is patient with them and He grants them many wonderful gifts , God does them good , God gives them many opportunities to repent , the only thing stopping them is their miserable sin loving and God hating desires.

and the reason God puts up with this pain , is in order to make known His wrath !

and the reason God has mercy is to make known the riches of His Glory.

Paul then adds that this Sovereign Salvation (for that is precisely what mercy is) is not just for the Jews but also for the Gentiles !

all of these things were predicted , including Israel's fall (and recovery) and the Gentiles being found when they DIDN'T seek God!

 

[strengthinweakness]

Hi brother , good question/s.
Scripture depicts the reprobate in several ways .
First off they are deserving of nothing but condemnation (the same as the Elect)
Secondly they have many testimonies to both God's love and kindness every day.
Thirdly many of them have been given the Gospel and have heard the command of God to repent , to believe on Christ and to be saved.
The testimony of God is that He has shown Himself to them , they are without excuse.
Compare two distinct features
1.God's plan
2.God's longsuffering

It is clear that God does not create without first having a purpose .
So even reprobates were created with a prior purpose in mind.
The destruction of the reprobate for their sin is central to the purpose to vindicate God's justice and hatred of sin.
God wills to show not only mercy but Justice also.
This is why God doesn't intervene and save the reprobate ....
Rather He permits the reprobate to grow ripe for judgment .
There are several scriptures that speak of God waiting for the vessel of wrath to fill up the full measure of his/their sins.

Yet this should never be thought of as any negative thing done by The Lord , for God has blessed the reprobate with many temporal blessings , daily granting food , clothing , rain sun and life.
These blessings are meant (second purpose) to awaken a sense of obligation and humbling to the reprobate , they should have seen the Gospel message is further evidence that God is good and that sinners do not deserve either the Gospel or common blessings.
They ought to repent.
4 Or despisest thou the riches of his goodness and forbearance and longsuffering; not knowing that the goodness of God leadeth thee to repentance? 5 But after thy hardness and impenitent heart treasurest up unto thyself wrath against the day of wrath and revelation of the righteous judgment of God; 6 Who will render to every man according to his deeds. Romans 2


I think that once you recognise the difference between moral inability (we will not have this man Reign over us / You will not come to me that Ye may have life) and 'mechanical inability' (man cannot come because he has no brain ; will ; reason ; evidence etc ...........) then you will percieve the difference between Divine Government and Pure Determinism.

Greetings Cygnus

Thank you for answering, my brother in Christ! Your answers are helpful to me, to an extent, but I am still confused, in a way. I understand very much that no one, whether elect or reprobate, deserves any of God's blessings, whether those of common grace or the supreme blessing of salvation by grace through faith. I understand, in a certain sense, that the reprobate, especially after having been shown God's kindness through the blessings of common grace, ought to repent. Of course, all sinners ought to repent. We are obligated to repent before a perfect, holy, loving, and just God. However, with the reprobate, they are not granted the moral ability to repent. I do understand that God is just in doing as He pleases with all whom He creates. Still, I can't help but ask again (only because I am still confused on this point), what exactly is the punishment for the reprobate in going to Hell? Aren't they simply getting exactly what they want for eternity? If they suddenly have the scales knocked off their eyes in Hell, and they see how wrong they were while alive in their mortal frames, is that, then, their punisment-- to be granted by God the moral ability to see what they refused to see, but also could not see, in this life? Of course, they should have seen it, morally speaking, but if God didn't grant them the moral ability to see it, then there was no way for them to see it. Again, I affirm that He is just in doing as He pleases with those whom He creates... I guess this issue is just hard for me to grasp... or maybe, just completely accept emotionally?

 

[cygnusx1]

Thank you for answering, my brother in Christ! Your answers are helpful to me, to an extent, but I am still confused, in a way. I understand very much that no one, whether elect or reprobate, deserves any of God's blessings, whether those of common grace or the supreme blessing of salvation by grace through faith. I understand, in a certain sense, that the reprobate, especially after having been shown God's kindness through the blessings of common grace, ought to repent. Of course, all sinners ought to repent. We are obligated to repent before a perfect, holy, loving, and just God. However, with the reprobate, they are not granted the moral ability to repent. I do understand that God is just in doing as He pleases with all whom He creates. Still, I can't help but ask again (only because I am still confused on this point), what exactly is the punishment for the reprobate in going to Hell? Aren't they simply getting exactly what they want for eternity? If they suddenly have the scales knocked off their eyes in Hell, and they see how wrong they were while alive in their mortal frames, is that, then, their punisment-- to be granted by God the moral ability to see what they refused to see, but also could not see, in this life? Of course, they should have seen it, morally speaking, but if God didn't grant them the moral ability to see it, then there was no way for them to see it. Again, I affirm that He is just in doing as He pleases with those whom He creates... I guess this issue is just hard for me to grasp... or maybe, just completely accept emotionally?

Hi brother
It is not a mechanical inability ............... Jesus was seriously angry with hard hearted men because they "would not come to Him to find life"
The hardness of the human heart is an ugly self destructive vain condition ....... men truly think they can handle a judgment day !

I think if you dwell upon the scriptures you will see no stoic indifference towards sinners from God ......... God is "moved " often to anger and often to mercy and compassion for sinners .
Hell is not merely giving sinners what they want .......... (that is the humanist teaching creeping in) It is a place where none want to truly go , and it is a place where none want to stay ........ but God's Glory is revealed even in hell , God has said "vengeance is mine" so it is clear God is desiring to see Justice and His Law maintained even at the expense of vessels of wrath.

Go through the Old Testament and look and see just how God speaks to Israel , how He is not merely angry when she sins , but How He bemoans the fact that she will suffer punishment and wrath.

The Prophets message from God was often one of "come back to ME" .......... "why will Ye die" ?

 

[strengthinweakness]

Cygnus, in your second post, you write that "the only thing stopping" depraved sinners from repenting is their love of sin (and by definition, therefore, hatred of God). Is this really true though, Biblically speaking? I have studied Romans 9 so many times, and each time, the understanding that I get is that depraved sinners refuse to repent for 3 reasons: 1. From birth, they love sin. 2. From birth, they hate God. 3. From birth, God doesn't grant them the ability to not hate Him-- which explains the first two reasons why they refuse to repent. I don't understand, or am just having some trouble grasping, the third reason. Is it Biblically accurate?

 

[cygnusx1]

Cygnus, in your second post, you write that "the only thing stopping" depraved sinners from repenting is their love of sin (and by definition, therefore, hatred of God). Is this really true though, Biblically speaking? I have studied Romans 9 so many times, and each time, the understanding that I get is that depraved sinners refuse to repent for 3 reasons: 1. From birth, they love sin. 2. From birth, they hate God. 3. From birth, God doesn't grant them the ability to not hate Him-- which explains the first two reasons why they refuse to repent. I don't understand, or am just having some trouble grasping, the third reason. Is it Biblically accurate?

when you say God doesn't grant them the ability to repent , always keep in mind that He doesn't take away their "physical ability" to repent ............

years ago A W Pink impacted my thoughts with this , after the fall man was not stripped of intelligence , will , emotion and evidence .

Does God really need to do anything except leave a man to his own depraved heart for hell to be certain ....... I trow not !

Work beckons , catch you later brother

 

[strengthinweakness]

when you say God doesn't grant them the ability to repent , always keep in mind that He doesn't take away their "physical ability" to repent ............

years ago A W Pink impacted my thoughts with this , after the fall man was not stripped of intelligence , will , emotion and evidence .

Does God really need to do anything except leave a man to his own depraved heart for hell to be certain ....... I trow not !

Work beckons , catch you later brother

I'm not sure that I understand you here-- what is the "physical ability" to repent? Is it valid before God? If a sinner does not have the moral ability to repent, what does it mean to say that he/she has the "physical ability"? Please explain this, when you get a chance. Thanks! As for me, I must now get some sleep!

 

[strengthinweakness]

Thank you for the reply on the other thread of the same name, McWilliams! I'm just answering on this one in the the hope that the other thread will die out, as it was a mistaken one, based on my perception that my original questions had not gotten through the system to actually be posted the first time.

I need to pick up a copy of Pink's book. Do you have the original one, or the edited Banner of Truth edition? Do you have any idea as to why Banner edited the original text? I have heard that it may have been because Ian Murray didn't agree with Pink's chapter on reprobation. I don't know if if this is correct though.

 

[Imblessed]

strengthinweaknes,

those are very very good questions, and ones I've struggled with myself. I have never gotten a satisfactory answer except something close to what McWilliams said. Some things are best left to the Father.

Your initial thoughts sound very similar to what C.S.Lewis feels happens. One thing he says is that not only are people left to the sins they coveted most in life, but because the blessings of God have been taken away from them, their misery is so much greater. In his book "The Great Divorce", hell is like earth, but without light and without real substance. It has the "appearance" of earth, but nothing is substantial(the houses do not actually keep out the rain, etc). All the blessings of God have been taken away--everything the reprobate has taken for granted--so all that is left is people who have nothing restraining their evil ways.
It's a really amazing book, and while hell may not be anything like that, it is conceivable to me. Except the part where those in hell can take a 'bus' to this other place and they meet people from their past or angels who try to convince them if they let go of the sins they are clinging too, they can get to heaven. In the book 99% of the people are incapable of letting go and end up hating God even more for the "glimpse" of heaven they do get, which is painful to them. This part of the book is definately influenced by C.S. Lewis' more "catholic" thoughts, and I don't buy into 2nd chances.
Anyway, I dont' know how it applies here, but it is an interesting read!

I've never truly reconsciled hell in my mind, but I'm aware it's mostly because of my own sense of "justice" and "fairness". I'm one of those kind of people who consistantly tries to see the good in even the worst kind of people. It's hard for me to accept 'total depravity' personally. I know it's biblical, I know it's correct, so therefore, I must allow myselft to trust that God knows what's he's doing, you know? Because if I start thinking about it too much, my mind rails against it, and I don't want to embrace an idea that is unbiblical simply because I don't "like" it. God doesn't require me to like it, He requires me to believe it, and trust Him and His soveriegnity. It is the only thing I can do. Just as the arminians or universalists say they cannot worship a God who doesn't allow "free will" or a God who sends people to hell, I could not worship a God who is not absolutely soveriegn in ALL things...including the things i do not like to contemplate, or the things I do not "agree" with.

I don't know how much of this makes sense or helps, but it's my thoughts...helpful or not....

 

[strengthinweakness]

strengthinweaknes,

those are very very good questions, and ones I've struggled with myself. I have never gotten a satisfactory answer except something close to what McWilliams said. Some things are best left to the Father.

Your initial thoughts sound very similar to what C.S.Lewis feels happens. One thing he says is that not only are people left to the sins they coveted most in life, but because the blessings of God have been taken away from them, their misery is so much greater. In his book "The Great Divorce", hell is like earth, but without light and without real substance. It has the "appearance" of earth, but nothing is substantial(the houses do not actually keep out the rain, etc). All the blessings of God have been taken away--everything the reprobate has taken for granted--so all that is left is people who have nothing restraining their evil ways.
It's a really amazing book, and while hell may not be anything like that, it is conceivable to me. Except the part where those in hell can take a 'bus' to this other place and they meet people from their past or angels who try to convince them if they let go of the sins they are clinging too, they can get to heaven. In the book 99% of the people are incapable of letting go and end up hating God even more for the "glimpse" of heaven they do get, which is painful to them. This part of the book is definately influenced by C.S. Lewis' more "catholic" thoughts, and I don't buy into 2nd chances.
Anyway, I dont' know how it applies here, but it is an interesting read!

I've never truly reconsciled hell in my mind, but I'm aware it's mostly because of my own sense of "justice" and "fairness". I'm one of those kind of people who consistantly tries to see the good in even the worst kind of people. It's hard for me to accept 'total depravity' personally. I know it's biblical, I know it's correct, so therefore, I must allow myselft to trust that God knows what's he's doing, you know? Because if I start thinking about it too much, my mind rails against it, and I don't want to embrace an idea that is unbiblical simply because I don't "like" it. God doesn't require me to like it, He requires me to believe it, and trust Him and His soveriegnity. It is the only thing I can do. Just as the arminians or universalists say they cannot worship a God who doesn't allow "free will" or a God who sends people to hell, I could not worship a God who is not absolutely soveriegn in ALL things...including the things i do not like to contemplate, or the things I do not "agree" with.

I don't know how much of this makes sense or helps, but it's my thoughts...helpful or not....

Imblessed, your post makes very good sense, and it helps as much as anything has helped me, thus far, in this area of questioning and trying to understand reprobation, as it relates to Hell. I think that it is just a subject I may have to struggle with for a while, and I may not ever feel completely "at ease" with it, in my gut.... not that I have to... but I hate to feel uneasy about anything that I believe. I do accept things that I don't necessarily like though-- I accept that it may be God's will for me to be single for the rest of my life... but at this point, I will also say that I honestly hope it isn't His will! If it is, He will have to do much work in my heart to bring me to a peace about the situation!

Back to reprobation though, it isn't the thought of defiant, unrepentant, God-hating sinners going to Hell that troubles me. It is more the thought that all sinners are reprobate, and thus, bound for Hell, unless God grants them the ability to be willing to repent-- but then again, how much punishment can being separated from God be for people who already hate Him and prefer sin? Perhaps the situation is as you postulated, and Hell is terrible largely because it includes absolutely none of the "common grace" blessings that believers and non-believers alike receive in this world-- and then, as such, in Hell, non-believers will completely give in to the worst of their evil urges. Perhaps Hell is simply an eternity of complete debasement, with total hatred of self and of others, and no relief from any of it. Even the most sinful reprobate currently on earth couldn't possibly enjoy that. I will have to chew on this thought more, though it isn't the most pleasant thing to ponder! By the way, I have an old copy of The Great Divorce, from, I believe, not too long after Lewis died. I have never actually read it though. I think I should now, especially while thinking about this topic! Not that I think that Lewis's artistry and theological speculation will necessarily help me to understand Scripture on the subject of reprobation (I love Lewis, but as you alluded to, some of his views strayed far from the words of the Bible)-- but it may give me some insight into what Hell might be like for the reprobate, i.e. why it will be so horrible for them.

Everyone, including myself, let such thoughts stir us all the more to share the Gospel with lost people! How very desperately they need the truth!!! How we needed it, when we were dead in our sins-- and still need it now, when we are tempted, distracted, and often temporarily, willingly blinded by the sinful "pleasures" of this world... sin is really very, very frightening. We take it so, so lightly in this modern (or postmodern) age (even us, as Christians, often!)... and I know that God cannot be pleased about it! We need more writers like the Puritan Jeremiah Burroughs for today's church, to show us the true, raw, horrifying evil of even the supposedly "smallest" sins against God... but I will stop rambling here, as I need to catch up on sleep! Which reminds me-- not getting enough sleep is a sin... not treating my temple well... I have so far to go in sanctification... very, very far... may God have mercy on me, a sinner.

 

[mlqurgw]

I am not so sure that the reprobate will continue to practice sin in the smae way he does on earth now. I know that when the Lord comes in judgement they will cry for the mountains and rocks to fall on them to hide them from the wrath of the Lamb. Rev. 6:16 The Bible is very clear that the eternal punishment of the unbeliever is the wrath of God and that it is a torment that never dies. Christ speaks of it as a place of weeping and knashing of teeth. A place in which the worm of torment never dies. All of these things, plus the parable of Lazarus and the rich man, tell me that the reprobate will probably know what they are missing. We are told that every knee shall bow to Christ in that day. I take that to mean that those who have refused to bow before He comes in judgement willthen be made to know that He is who He said He is but for them it will be too late. I can think of no greater tormnt than to know that God has shown mercy in Christ and I didn't avail myself of it. 1John 5 tells us that unbelief is to call God a liar but then they will know that He didn't lie but they have no part in mercy. They will probably continue to hate God but then because they know His justice. It is like the criminal who hates the judge that sent him to prison. He knows he deserves the punishment but hates the punisher because of it.

 

[mlqurgw]

You can read Pink's Sovereignty of God in it's entirety here;

http://www.pbministries.org/books/pink/Sovereignty/sovereignty.htm

It is a link fron Pink's Archive that has just about all that he has written on it along with many other great links. Including on e to Gill's archive.

 

[cygnusx1]

I'm not sure that I understand you here-- what is the "physical ability" to repent? Is it valid before God? If a sinner does not have the moral ability to repent, what does it mean to say that he/she has the "physical ability"? Please explain this, when you get a chance. Thanks! As for me, I must now get some sleep!

Hi there brother , as I said , years ago Arthur W Pink impacted my thoughts concerning fallen mans "moral inability" ....... here in this well written quote he clearly spells out what I was getting at ........ this is from his book (available on-line) Man's Total Depravity '

WARNING LONG QUOTE


First, the fall does not result in the extinguishment of that spirit which was a part of man’s complex being when created by God. It did not either in the case of our first parents or in any of their descendants. It has, however, been argued from the divine threat made to Adam, "In the day that thou eatest thereof thou shalt surely die," that such was the case, that since Adam did not immediately die physically he must have done so spiritually. That is certainly a fact, yet it requires to be interpreted by Scripture. It is quite wrong to suppose that because Adam’s body did not die, his spirit did. It was not something in Adam which died, but Adam himself—in his relation to God. The same is true of his offspring. They are indeed "dead in trespasses and sins" toward God, from the beginning of their existence, but nothing within them is positively dead in the ordinary meaning of that word. In the scriptural sense of the term, "death" never signifies annihilation, but separation. At physical death the soul is not extinguished but separated from the body; and the spiritual death of Adam was not the extinction of any part of his being but the severance of his fellowship with a holy God. The same is true of all his children. The exact force of the solemn statement that they are "dead in trespasses and sins" is divinely defined for us as "being alienated from the life of God through the ignorance that is in them, because of the blindness of their heart" (Eph. 4:18). When Christ represented the father as saying, "This my son was dead, and is alive again" (Luke 15:24), He most certainly did not mean that the prodigal had ceased to exist, but that while he remained "in the far country" he was cut off from his father, and that he had now returned to him. The lake of fire into which the wicked shall be cast is designated "the second death" (Rev. 20:14), not signifying that they shall then cease to be, but that they are "punished with everlasting destruction from the presence of the Lord, and from the glory of his power" (II Thess. 1:9). That fallen man is possessed of a spirit is clear: "The LORD... formeth the spirit of man within him" (Zech. 12:1); "What man knoweth the things of a man, save the spirit of man which is in him?" (I Cor. 2:11); "The spirit shall return unto God who gave it" (Eccles. 12:7). Man was created a tripartite being, consisting of spirit and soul and body (I Thess. 5:23), and no part of him ceased to exist when he fell.
Second, the fall did not issue in the loss of any man’s faculties. It did not divest man of reason, conscience or moral taste, for that would have converted him into another species of being. As reason remained, he still had the power of distinguishing between truth and falsehood; conscience still enabled him to distinguish between what was right and wrong, between what was a duty and a crime; and moral taste capacitated him to perceive the contrasts in the sphere of the excellent and beautiful. It is most important to be clear on this point: The fall has not touched the substance of the soul—that remains entire with all its original endowments of intellect, conscience and will. These are the characteristic elements of humanity, and to deprive man of them would be to unman him. They exist in the criminal as well as in the saint. They all have an essential unity in the wholeness of the human person. That is to say, they are coordinate faculties, though each has a sphere that is peculiar to itself. Collectively, they constitute the rational, moral, accountable being. It is not the mere possession of them which makes men evil or good; the manner and motive of their use makes their actions sinful or holy.
Corruption of Man’s Spirit

No, the fall deprived man of no mental or moral faculty, but it took from him the power to use them right. These faculties were all brought under the malignant influence of sin, so that man was no longer capable of doing anything pleasing to God. Depravity is all—pervading, extending to the whole man. It was not, as different theorists have supposed, confined to one department of his being—to the will as contra-distinguished from the understanding, or to the understanding as contra-distinguished from the will. It was not restricted to the lower appetites, as contrasted with our higher principles of action. Nor did it affect the heart alone, considered as the seat of the affections. On the contrary, it was a disease from which every organ has suffered. As found in the understanding, it consists of spiritual ignorance, blindness, darkness, foolishness. As found in the will, it is rebellion, perverseness, a spirit of disobedience. As found in the affections, it is hardness of heart, a total insensibility to and distaste for spiritual and divine things. The entrance of sin into the human constitution has not only affected all the faculties, so as to produce a complete disqualification for any spiritual exercise in any form, but it has crippled and enervated them in their exercise within the sphere of truth and holiness. They were vitiated in respect to everything wearing the image of God, the image of goodness and excellence.
Third, the fall has not resulted in the loss of man’s freedom of will, his power of volition as a moral faculty. Admittedly this is a much harder point to cover than either of the above. Not because Scripture is ambiguous in its teaching, nor even because it contains any seeming contradictions, but because of the philosophical and metaphysical difficulties it raises in the minds of those who give it careful thought. The fall certainly did not reduce man to the condition of a stock or stone, or even to an irrational animal. He retained that rational power of volition which was a part of his original constitution, so that he was still able to choose spontaneously. It is equally certain that man is not free to do as he pleases in any absolute sense, for then he would be a god, omnipotent. In his unfallen state Adam was made subservient to and dependent on the Lord. So it is with his children. Their wills are required to be fully subordinated to that of their Maker and Governor. Moreover, their freedom is strictly circumscribed by the supreme rule of divine providence, as it opens doors for them or shuts doors against them.
As pointed out, though each distinct faculty of the soul has a sphere that is peculiar to itself, yet they are coordinate; therefore the will is not to be thought of as an independent, self-determining entity, standing apart from the other faculties and superior to them, capable of reversing the judgments of the mind or acting contrary to the desires of the heart. Rather the will is influenced and determined by them. As G S. Bishop most helpfully pointed out, "The true philosophy of moral action and its process is that of Genesis 3:6. ‘And when the woman saw that the tree was good for food [sense-perception, intelligence], and a tree to be desired [affections], she took and ate thereof [the will].’" Thus the freedom of the will is also limited by the bounds of human capabilities. It cannot, for example, go beyond the extent of knowledge possessed by the mind. It is impossible for me to observe, love and choose any object I am totally unacquainted with. Thus it is the understanding, rather than the will, which is the dominant faculty and factor. Hence, when Scripture delineates the condition of fallen men it attributes their alienation from God to "the ignorance that is in them" (Eph. 4:18), and speaks of regenerated men as being "renewed in knowledge" (Col. 3:10).
The limitations of human freedom pointed out above pertain alike to man unfallen or fallen, but the entrance of sin into the human constitution has imposed much greater limitations. While it is true that man is as truly free now as Adam was before his apostasy, yet he is not as morally free as he was. Fallen man is free in the sense that he is at liberty to act according to his own choice, without compulsion from without; yet, since his nature has been defiled and corrupted, he is no longer free to do that which is good and holy. Great care needs to be taken lest our definition of the freedom of fallen man clashes with such scriptures as Psalm 110:3; John 6:44; Romans 9:16; for he only wills now according to the desires and dictates of his evil heart. It has been well said that the will of the sinner is like a manacled, fettered prisoner in a cell. His movements are hampered by his chains, and he is hindered by the walls that confine him. He is free to walk, but in such a constrained way and within such a limited space that his freedom is bondage—bondage to sin.
Whether we understand "the will" to be simply the faculty of volition by which the soul chooses or refuses, or whether we regard it as the faculty of volition together with all else within us which affects the choice—reason, imagination, longing—still fallen man is quite free in exercising volition according to his prevailing disposition and desire at the moment. Internal freedom is here used in contrast with external restraint or compulsion. Where the latter is absent the individual is at liberty to decide according to his pleasure. Where the Arminian errs on this point is to confound power with "will," insisting that the sinner is equally able to choose good as evil. That is a repudiation of his total depravity or complete vassalage to evil. By the fall man came under bondage to sin, and became the captive of the devil. Even so, he first yields voluntarily to the enticements of his own lusts before he commits any act of sin, nor can Satan lead him into any wrongdoing without his own consent.
The natural man does as he pleases, but he pleases himself only in one direction—selfward and downward, never Godward and upward. As Romans 6:20 says of the saints while in their unregenerate state, "For when ye were the servants of sin, ye were free from righteousness." In all his sinning man acts as a free agent, for he is forced neither by God nor by Satan. When he breaks the law he does so by his own option, and not by coercion from another. In so doing he is freely acting out his own fallen nature. Thus it is a mistake to say that a bias of the mind or a propensity of heart is destructive of his volition. Both must be self-moved in order for there to be responsibility and guilt, and both are self-moved. The murderer is not compelled to hate his victim. Though he cannot prevent his inward hatred by any mere exercise of will, yet he can refrain from the outward act of murder by his own volition; therefore he is blameworthy when he fails to do so. These are indisputable facts of our own consciousness.
Fourth, the fall has not resulted in any reduction, still less the destruction, of man’s responsibility. If all of the above is carefully pondered this should be quite evident. Human responsibility is the necessary corollary of divine sovereignty. Since God is the Creator, since He is supreme Ruler over all, and since man is just a creature and a subject, there is no escape from his accountability to his Maker and rightful Lord. For what is man responsible? Man is obligated to answer to the relationship which exists between him and his Creator. Man occupies the place of creaturehood, subordination, utter dependency for every breath he draws, and therefore must acknowledge God’s dominion, submit to His authority, and love Him with all his strength and heart. Human responsibility is discharged by recognizing God’s rights and acting accordingly, by rendering Him His due. It is the practical acknowledgment of His ownership and government. We are justly required to be in constant subjection to His will, to exercise in His service the faculties He has given us, to use the means He has appointed, to improve the opportunities and advantages He has granted us. Our whole duty is to glorify God.
From the above definition it should be crystal clear that the fall did not, and could not to the slightest degree, cancel or impair human responsibility. The fall did not change the fundamental relationship between the Creator and the creature. God is the Owner of sinful man as truly and as fully as He was of sinless man. God is still our Sovereign, and we His subjects. Furthermore, as pointed out above, fallen man is still in possession of all those faculties which qualify for discharging his responsibility. Admittedly, the baby in arms and the poor idiot are not morally accountable for their actions. But it is reasonable that those who have reached the age when they are capable of distinguishing between right and wrong are morally accountable for their deeds. Fallen man, though his understanding is spiritually darkened, still possesses rationality. Fallen man, though under the dominion of sin, has his power of volition, and is under binding obligation to make a right and good choice every time, to resist temptations and refrain from evildoing, as any human court of justice insists. Whatever difficulties may be theoretically involved in the fact that man’s nature is now totally depraved and that he is in bondage to sin, still God has not lost His right to command because man has lost his power to obey. While the fall has cast us out of God’s favor, it has not released us from His authority. It was not God who took from man his spiritual strength and deprived him of his ability to do that which is well pleasing in His sight. Man was originally endowed with power to meet the requirements of his Maker. It was by his own madness and wickedness that he threw away his power. As a human monarch does not forfeit his rights to allegiance from his subjects when they become rebels, but rather maintains his prerogative by demanding that they cease their insurrection and return to their fealty, so the King of kings has an infinite right to demand that lawless rebels shall become loyal subjects. If God could justly require of us no more than we are now able to render Him, it would follow that the more we enslaved ourselves by evil habits, the less would be our liability—a palpable absurdity!

http://www.pbministries.org/books/pink/Depravity/deprave_06.htm

 

[strengthinweakness]

Thanks for the Pink quote, Cygnus! It may take me a while to actually read all of it, as long quotes on a computer screen are hard on my weak eyes, but I will try to read it in bits and pieces!

 

[strengthinweakness]

I am not so sure that the reprobate will continue to practice sin in the smae way he does on earth now. I know that when the Lord comes in judgement they will cry for the mountains and rocks to fall on them to hide them from the wrath of the Lamb. Rev. 6:16 The Bible is very clear that the eternal punishment of the unbeliever is the wrath of God and that it is a torment that never dies. Christ speaks of it as a place of weeping and knashing of teeth. A place in which the worm of torment never dies. All of these things, plus the parable of Lazarus and the rich man, tell me that the reprobate will probably know what they are missing. We are told that every knee shall bow to Christ in that day. I take that to mean that those who have refused to bow before He comes in judgement willthen be made to know that He is who He said He is but for them it will be too late. I can think of no greater tormnt than to know that God has shown mercy in Christ and I didn't avail myself of it. 1John 5 tells us that unbelief is to call God a liar but then they will know that He didn't lie but they have no part in mercy. They will probably continue to hate God but then because they know His justice. It is like the criminal who hates the judge that sent him to prison. He knows he deserves the punishment but hates the punisher because of it.

I guess that this is part of what I'm struggling with, mlqurgw--even though, as you write, when Christ comes, the reprobate will then "be made to know that He is who He said, the fact is, before He comes, they do not know who He is-- and although this is due to their refusal to repent, ultimately, from eternity's view, it is due to God deciding that they would be the reprobate and therefore not granting them repentance and faith in Christ. I am not saying that God does not have the right to whatever He pleases with all those whom He creates. He certainly does have that right. He is God, He is sovereign, and I am neither. It is just hard for me to think that many members of my family may be going to Hell, and if they do, it will have been by their "choice" from our viewpoint here on earth but by God's choice from before time began. Not that they are any more or less important than any other sinners because they are my family members... but the whole issue of reprobation by God's sovereign choice is just hard for me to deal with emotionally, thinking of them and their eternal fates. I can't base my acceptance or non-acceptance of the truth on emotion, but it's just not an easy issue for me.

 

[Seaioth]

I too had a question regarding reproobation, in fact I accidently quadruple posted the Covenant theology forum =p... The question is a bit different however

 

[mlqurgw]

I guess that this is part of what I'm struggling with, mlqurgw--even though, as you write, when Christ comes, the reprobate will then "be made to know that He is who He said, the fact is, before He comes, they do not know who He is-- and although this is due to their refusal to repent, ultimately, from eternity's view, it is due to God deciding that they would be the reprobate and therefore not granting them repentance and faith in Christ. I am not saying that God does not have the right to whatever He pleases with all those whom He creates. He certainly does have that right. He is God, He is sovereign, and I am neither. It is just hard for me to think that many members of my family may be going to Hell, and if they do, it will have been by their "choice" from our viewpoint here on earth but by God's choice from before time began. Not that they are any more or less important than any other sinners because they are my family members... but the whole issue of reprobation by God's sovereign choice is just hard for me to deal with emotionally, thinking of them and their eternal fates. I can't base my acceptance or non-acceptance of the truth on emotion, but it's just not an easy issue for me.

I completely understand the emotional aspect of it. I have several family members whom I doubt are saved. One happens to be my identical twin brother. I rest and find great comfort in the fact that whatever God does is right. I actually had to preach the funeral of my older brother who was not a believer. It was the most difficult thing I have ever done but the Lord gave much grace. This was my text;

Deu 29:29 The secret things belong unto the LORD our God: but those things which are revealed belong unto us and to our children for ever

 

[strengthinweakness]

I completely understand the emotional aspect of it. I have several family members whom I doubt are saved. One happens to be my identical twin brother. I rest and find great comfort in the fact that whatever God does is right. I actually had to preach the funeral of my older brother who was not a believer. It was the most difficult thing I have ever done but the Lord gave much grace. This was my text;

Deu 29:29 The secret things belong unto the LORD our God: but those things which are revealed belong unto us and to our children for ever

Thank you for this post, mlqurgw. It has helped me greatly, in dealing with this issue both emotionally and intellectually. I appreciated, and resonated with, every line of what you wrote, and the verse from Scripture was especially helpful. I don't know if I will ever find reprobation an "easy" doctrine, emotionally, but I do know that, as you well said, whatever God does is right.

 

[mlqurgw]

Thank you for this post, mlqurgw. It has helped me greatly, in dealing with this issue both emotionally and intellectually. I appreciated, and resonated with, every line of what you wrote, and the verse from Scripture was especially helpful. I don't know if I will ever find reprobation an "easy" doctrine, emotionally, but I do know that, as you well said, whatever God does is right.

For me to say that I am glad I could be of help just doesn't express what I want to say so I will just thank the Lord for using me to help you.