What is your perpective on Matthew 11.21-22?

[theseed]

[bible]Matthew 11:19-22[/bible]

This passage is usually cited to explain the concept of molinism which is very similar to Armenianism. Molinism teaches that God can forsee every possible contigency and God elects individuals based on what they would have done under certian circumstances. Although I agree that God can forsee every possible outcome, I reject Molinism in salvation because The Bible teaches that no one comes into the light unless God brings him/her there--we are total depraved (John 3.18-21; Romans 3).

However, I am having trouble reconciling Total Depravity with this passage. As a Calvinist, I believe that we seek God despite our circumstances because of God's efficacious grace. Yet this passage, seems to indicate otherwise. What do yo think? On the other hand, this passage also contradicts the idea that God gives everbody an equal chance at salvation. In other words, thos people in those cities could have been saved if God had simply sent someone to do miracles, however God allowd them to remain in their sin even though they could have been saved by thier circumstances.

What do you think?

 

[CoffeeSwirls]

Molinism is the opposite of grace, don't forget that. If you are selected for anything you did, are doing or will do, it is something you can earn and boast about. God saves us, not because of who we are but in spite of who we are. I don't know the answer to your question, but I do know that Molinism contradicts clear scripture.

 

[reformedfan]

The elect do convert because of efficacious grace, but they don't wake up one day Christian, & say 'wow, how cool! NOw to find a church to attend!' God puts His elect through whatever it will take for them to convert, that's why every Christian has a different testimony. If Tyre, Sidon, etc had been the elect, God would have known what it would have taken to draw them, this is hyperbole, Christ didn't demonstrate His works there to the extent that He had here, else they would have converted. this is the peek into the secret counsel of God, is that whatchu mean?

 

[theseed]

The elect do convert because of efficacious grace, but they don't wake up one day Christian, & say 'wow, how cool! NOw to find a church to attend!' God puts His elect through whatever it will take for them to convert, that's why every Christian has a different testimony. If Tyre, Sidon, etc had been the elect, God would have known what it would have taken to draw them, this is hyperbole, Christ didn't demonstrate His works there to the extent that He had here, else they would have converted. this is the peek into the secret counsel of God, is that whatchu mean?

That may be the best explanation to the concerns of bost Calvinists and non-Calvinists. I'm going to see what Matthew Henry says about the passage.

 

[theseed]

Taken from Matthew Henry's Complete Commentary on The Whole Bible (Dated 1721).

[1.] That Tyre and Sidon would not have been so bad as Chorazin and Bethsaida. If they had had the same word preached, and the same miracles wrought among them, they would have repented, and that long ago, as Nineveh did, in sackcloth and ashes. Christ, who knows the hearts of all, knew that if he had gone and lived among them, and preached among them, he should have done more good there than where he was; yet he continued where he was for some time, to encourage his ministers to do so, though they see not the success they desire. Note, Among the children of disobedience, some are more easily wrought upon than others; and it is a great aggravation of the impenitency of those who plentifully enjoy the means of grace, not only that there are many who sit under the same means that are wrought upon, but that there are many more that would have been wrought upon, if they had enjoyed the same means. See Ezek. iii. 6, 7. Our repentance is slow and delayed, but theirs would have been speedy; they would have repented long ago. Ours has been slight and superficial; theirs would have been deep and serious, in sackcloth and ashes. Yet we must observe, with an awful adoration of the divine sovereignty, that the Tyrians and Sidonians will justly perish in their sin, though, if they had had the means of grace, they would have repented; for God is a debtor to no man.

[2.] That therefore Tyre and Sidon shall not be so miserable as Chorazin and Bethsaida, but it shall be more tolerable for them in the day of judgment, v. 22. Note, First, At the day of judgment the everlasting state of the children of men will, by an unerring and unalterable doom, be determined; happiness or misery, and the several degrees of each. Therefore it is called the eternal judgment (Heb. vi. 2), because decisive of the eternal state. Secondly, In that judgment, all the means of grace that were enjoyed in the state of probation will certainly come into the account, and it will be enquired, not only how bad we were, but how much better we might have been, had it not been our own fault, Isa. v. 3, 4. Thirdly, Though the damnation of all that perish will be intolerable, yet the damnation of those who had the fullest and clearest discoveries made them of the power and grace of Christ, and yet repented not, will be of all others the most intolerable. The gospel light and sound open the faculties, and enlarge the capacities of all that see and hear it, either to receive the riches of divine grace, or (if that grace be slighted) to take in the more plentiful effusions of divine wrath. If self-reproach be the torture of hell, it must needs be hell indeed to those who had such a fair opportunity of getting to heaven. Son, remember that.

 

[theseed]

After reading Henry's commentary, although grace is not mentioned, it should be assumed. No one comes to Christ with the help of the Holy Spirit. In light of that fact, we see hear that God simply allowed those people to remain in thier sins.

 

[cygnusx1]

I like Spurgeon on this ........... he said " I come out of a Church meeting and I see a beggar on the street , he is starving and poorly clothed , he holds himself from the cold........ I reach into my pocket and find a Sovereign (an old British coin) I look at the man with pity and I give him freely the coin .... Now , someone says "hah , you gave that coin to that man because you knew you would " nonsense , I say , I gave to that man because I wanted to , and I had the compassion to , to say otherwise for my motive devalues my reasons ........ "

that is roughly how I remember C H Spurgeon on this subject