The Potter's Freedom

James R. White

• Publisher: Calvary Press
• Year: 2000
• ISBN:
  9781879737846
• Topic: Theology & Religion
• Subtopic: Biblical Criticism & Interpretation

Geisler's Chosen but Free sparked a firestorm of controversy when he labeled Calvinism "theologically inconsistent, philosophically insufficient, and morally repugnant." White steps into the breach with his cogent response. His systematic refutation of Geisler's argument will help you understand what the Reformed faith really teaches about divine election and how Reformed thought conforms to the gospel. 337 pages, softcover from Calvary Pres

Chapter 1

The Vital Issue

The Society of Jesus (the Jesuits) was founded by the industry and endeavor of Ignatius of Loyola. This fiery Roman Catholic zealot dedicated his life to the defense of the Roman Church against the “heresies” of the Protestant Reformation. Toward the end of his life he wrote the following:

Seeing the progress which the heretics have made in a short time, spreading the poison of their evil teaching throughout so many countries and peoples, and making use of the verse of the Apostles to describe their progress, ‘And their speech spreadeth like a canker’, it would seem that our society [i.e., the Jesuits], having been accepted by Divine Providence among the efficacious means to repair such great damage, should be solicitous to prepare the proper steps, such as are quickly applied and can be widely adopted, thus exerting itself to the utmost of its powers to preserve what is still sound and to restore what has fallen sick of the plague of heresy, especially in the northern nations.

The heretics have made their false theology popular and presented it in a way that is within the capacity of the common people. They preach it to the people and teach it in the schools, and scatter booklets which can be bought and understood by many, and make their influence felt by means of their writings when they cannot do so by their preaching. Their success is largely due to the negligence of those who should have shown some interest; and the bad example and the ignorance of Catholics, especially the clergy, have made such ravages in the vineyard of the Lord.¹

One of the charges Loyola made to his followers involved the danger of allowing the Protestants to so emphasize the power of God that the “freedom of man” would be eclipsed. One of his followers, Luis de Molina, dedicated many years attempting to fulfill the vision of Loyola. He finally produced an entire philosophical theory of divine knowledge called scientia media (the concept of “middle knowledge”): the idea that God knows what free agents will do given certain circumstances, but their actions are still “free” in the sense that they are not fixed. The entire reason why the concept was developed was to “get around” the preaching of the Reformers that emphasized the sovereignty of God, the freedom of God, as ultimate in all things. The “heretics” were preaching that God is the Potter, men are the clay, formed as He wills, not as they will. Such a teaching was devastating to the Roman concept of the Church as the mediator and dispenser of graces. Such a system could speak often of grace as long as that grace was merely a necessary aid but never an efficient power that saves. As long as the ultimate “control” of salvation was kept out of God’s hands, all would be well. Sadly, to this very day, nominal “Protestants” embrace Molina’s desperate attempt to get around God’s freedom.

Loyola was not the first to see the Reformed emphasis upon the freedom of God and the creatureliness of men as a deadly threat to Roman Catholic theology. In fact, the first written debate of the Reformation itself was focused on the very same issue.

As Martin Luther closed his monumental response to the Roman Catholic scholar and theologian, Desiderius Erasmus, titled, The Bondage of the Will, he made it plain how he believed that the issue of God’s absolute freedom and man’s absolute dependence is, in fact, the very central issue of the entire Reformation. He affirmed, with clarity you will only rarely hear in modern Lutheran preachers or theologians, the utter dependence of man upon God:

For if we believe it to be true, that God fore-knows and fore-ordains all things; that He can be neither deceived nor hindered in His Prescience and Predestination; and that nothing can take place but according to His Will, (which reason herself is compelled to confess;) then, even according to the testimony of reason herself, there can be no “Free-will”—in man,—in angel,—or in any creature!²

But take careful note of how this great Reformer understood the absolute centrality of God’s freedom and man’s bondage in sin:

In this, moreover, I give you (Erasmus) great praise, and proclaim it—you alone in pre-eminent distinction from all others, have entered upon the thing itself; that is, the grand turning point of the cause; and have not wearied me with those irrelevant points about popery, purgatory, indulgences, and other like baubles, rather than causes, with which all have hitherto tried to hunt me down,—though in vain! You, and you alone saw, what was the grand hinge upon which the whole turned, and therefore you attacked the vital part at once; for which, from my heart, I thank you.³

A more modern translation of the passage goes like this:

Moreover, I give you hearty praise and commendation on this further account—that you alone, in contrast to all others, have attacked the real thing, that is, the essential issue. You have not wearied me with those extraneous issues about the Papacy, purgatory, indulgences and such like—trifles, rather than issues—in respect of which almost all to date have sought my blood (though without success); you, and you alone, have seen the hinge on which all turns, and aimed for the vital spot.⁴

Do not allow Luther’s words to pass you by. We must understand what Luther meant by “the thing itself” or “the real thing.” What is “the cause,” “the whole,” “on which all turns”? To what does he refer? To the very Reformation itself! Luther is speaking to his Roman Catholic opponent about the very essential and definitional issue of the entire Reformation. What, then, is the “grand turning point of the cause,” the “essential issue,” the “grand hinge upon which the whole turned,” and “the vital part”? The truth of predestination (God’s freedom) and man’s depravity (his will in bondage)! Here at the very inception of the Reformation the definitional issue is laid out: God is the absolutely free Creator, the Potter, who has complete sovereignty over the pots, humans, who, as fallen creatures, find their wills enslaved to sin, in bondage and unable to “cooperate” with any offered grace.

This is the soil from which springs the Reformed emphasis upon sola fide, “faith alone,” the truth that one is justified not by any meritorious action or work but by faith in Jesus Christ alone. One cannot claim to be faithful to the Reformation by crying “sola fide” when the foundation of that call is abandoned. The truth that God saves by Himself, by His own power, on the basis of His own will, defines the message of the Reformers. Those who follow their lead are convinced that their faith is founded firmly upon the consistent interpretation of Scripture alone (sola scriptura) and all of Scripture (tota scriptura). One cannot claim to stand in harmony with Luther, Zwingli, Bucer, or Calvin without believing both in the doctrine of justification by faith as well as the truth of God’s absolute freedom and man’s bondage in sin.

Few have had the ability to speak with the clarity and force of Charles Haddon Spurgeon, the great Baptist evangelist of London. Regarding this issue he wrote:

There is no attribute of God more comforting to His children than the doctrine of Divine Sovereignty. Under the most adverse circumstances, in the most severe troubles, they believe that Sovereignty hath ordained their afflictions, that Sovereignty overrules them, and that Sovereignty will sanctify them all. There is nothing for which the children of God ought more earnestly to contend than the dominion of their Master over all creation — the kingship of God over all the works of His own hands — the throne of God, and His right to sit upon that throne.

On the other hand, there is no doctrine more hated by worldlings, no truth of which they have made such a football, as the great, stupendous, but yet most certain doctrine of the Sovereignty of the infinite Jehovah. Men will allow God to be everywhere except upon His throne. They will allow Him to be in His workshop to fashion worlds and to make stars. They will allow Him to be in His almonry to dispense His alms and bestow His bounties. They will allow Him to sustain the earth and bear up the pillars thereof, or light the lamps of Heaven, or rule the waves of the ever-moving ocean; but when God ascends His throne, His creatures then gnash their teeth; and when we proclaim an enthroned God, and His right to do as He wills with His own, to dispose of His creatures as He thinks well, without consulting them in the matter, then it is that we are hissed and execrated, and then it is that men turn a deaf ear to us, for God on His throne is not the God they love. They love Him anywhere better than they do when He sits with His scepter in His hand and His crown upon His head. But it is God upon the throne that we love to preach. It is God upon His throne whom we trust.⁵

The Christian loves God as He reveals Himself. The non-Christian seeks to conform God to an image that is less threatening to him in his rebellion. It is a work of grace in the heart that allows a person to love God as God really is, not as we wish He would be. The Christian desires to love God truly.

This is the single issue that separates the supernatural religion of Christianity from the man-centered religions that surround us. Whether the work of salvation is perfectly accomplished by God for His own glory or is dependent upon man’s cooperation and assistance is the watershed issue that separates biblical Christianity from everything else. The specifics of the debate revolve around what it means to confess that “salvation is of the Lord.” What does this necessarily mean with reference to man’s abilities (or inabilities)? What does this tell us about the atoning work of Christ, or the perfection of Christ’s work of salvation? These are the issues of the debate.

The Thrust of This Work

The writer of this work has absolute confidence that the Reformed proclamation of the Gospel will never pass from this world, and that the work of Christ’s kingdom represented by that proclamation will continue until He rules and reigns. Why? Because God’s Word will never fall. As long as the Holy Scriptures exist and the Holy Spirit brings regeneration in the hearts of men, the message of God’s free and glorious grace will continue.

The message of the gospel of grace is, first and foremost, a biblical message. It is not philosophy that leads the Reformed believer to his or her conclusions: it is biblical exegesis that does so. And for this reason the firm ground upon which the true Calvinist stands in defense of his belief in the absolute freedom of God is the text of Holy Writ. Because of this conviction, this work will focus primarily upon biblical issues. The argumentation provided by Dr. Geisler, and other proponents of a non-Reformed position, fails upon exegetical examination.

A Necessary Definition

What are the “doctrines of grace,” and why do they matter? Such is like asking, “What does the Bible teach about the very heart of the gospel, and does it matter one way or the other?” The doctr...

Table of contents

• Cover
• Title
• Copyright
• Dedication
• Acknowledgements
• Contents
• Preface
• Foreword
• Introduction
• 1. The Vital Issue
• 2. Determinately Knowing
• 3. The Inabilities of Man
• 4. The Will of Man
• 5. Unconditional Election a Necessity
• 6. CBF’s “Big Three” Verses
• 7. Jesus Teaches “Extreme Calvinism”
• 8. Unconditional Election
• 9. Responding to CBF on Romans 9
• 10. The Perfect Work of Calvary
• 11. Particular Redemption
• 12. Irresistable Grace is Resurrection Power
• 13. Irresistable Grace
• 14. The Potter’s Freedom Defended
• Scripture Index
• Appendices: Dr. Geisler’s Class Project Reviewed and Refuted
• Two Controversial Texts