Personal Salvation: the Paradox of Gift and Response I
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
PERSONAL SALVATION: THE PARADOX OF GIFT AND RESPONSE I. INTRODUCTION A. CLARIFICATION OF TERMS. 1. Personal Salvation. The emphasis here is on God's gift of salvation by grace and the personal response to that gift. There are many aspects of salvation which will not be included. Salvation is far more complex than presented here. For example, the corporate aspects in personal salvation are not addressed. (It is an important topic, since it is basically ignored by many Christians.) That topic must be left for another time. However, out of respect for that ignored topic, the expression personal salvation will be used instead of individual salvation. 2. Paradox. There are several meanings to this word. We will restrict our usage to the following meaning: "Paradox is a statement or situation that seems contradictory, unbelievable, or absurd but that may actually be true in fact" (a dictionary definition). Our love for truth should demand that we hold paradoxical truths in tension and not force a resolution of the paradox. In some cases the paradox will be resolved as more insight becomes available. Some theological paradoxes will not be resolved until we get to heaven. Others will never be resolved. I like the label "eternal paradox" with this form, since, in reality, they have the nature of a true mystery. A true mystery cannot be solved. It is possible to further our understanding of some mysteries. In fact, the Bible speaks of mysteries being revealed (Dan 2:28-29, 47; Matt 13:11; Eph 3:3-9). But, for a true mystery, any such further understanding only deepens the mystery. We actually get further behind the deeper we go in probing true mystery, i.e., we have more questions than when we started. 3. Gift. All that is done by God in the act of personal salvation is referred to as a "gift" here, since it is an act of grace on His part. We neither deserve God's actions on our behalf nor is it possible to control these actions (i.e., in some way obligate God to act on our behalf). These gracious acts include, but are not limited to, the following aspects of personal salvation: calling, choosing (election), justification, sanctification, and glorification (final redemption) as well as conversion, regeneration, predestination, forgiveness of sin, reconciliation to and peace with God, union with Christ, inner renewal (e.g., dealing with corruption of sin), restoration (e.g., being recreated in the image of God), and being filled with the Holy Spirit (including empowering, cleansing, enlightening). 4. Response. Essentially all Christians believe that personal salvation is totally a work of God's grace, while at the same time it also is an event and process involving human agency. B. BIBLICAL PARADOX. It is my position that the Bible maintains the paradox of gift and response , even if in some places it seems to emphasize one side of the paradox more than the other. Personal salvation is a gift (God offers, provides, sustains, etc.) requiring a necessary human response (it must be accepted, maintained, etc.). Shall we accept it as an eternal paradox (mystery) and simply try to understand what we can about it, or shall we seek to resolve the paradox? I suggest that we hold together in paradoxical tension the necessity of both gift and response. I think the Bible encourages a healthy debate surrounding this paradox, with no side "winning" the debate. Instead, the challenge intensifies our search and produces deeper meanings and explanations. II. SOME HISTORICAL POSITIONS There is a general agreement among Christians that personal salvation consists of both gift and response (or "gift and task" as some choose to describe it). However, there is a wide diversity in what that means. Several basic positions will be described below, but even within these possibilities there is considerable diversity. It is better to think of the explanations as forming a spectrum of belief regarding personal salvation with these basic positions being somewhere along the spectrum. At one end of the spectrum would be monergism with Pelagianism at the other. These are true opposites of each other. Various forms of synergism then would be somewhere in between these two positions. Many views of salvation have existed since NT times. However, some issues come to the forefront through debates which arise. Three important debates will be mentioned here. The first one was between Pelagius and Augustine [who defended monergism] in the early part of the fifth century. A. PELAGIANISM. Pelagius, a British monk, denied the existence of original sin. He maintained that Adam's sin was not transmitted to his posterity. No human depravity resulted from the Fall. Humans can live without sinning. Divine aid is helpful but not necessary. Sin is an act; it has no separate existence (e.g., original sin). Sin does not change the person; it only brings penalty. Every child is born in a state of innocence, and perseverance in goodness is a human choice. All people, even the worst sinners, have the power of choosing God and salvation; it is an act of their own free will. It is even possible to move on to complete obedience and perfection. Most people holding this viewpoint would recognize the need for God's grace to reach these higher levels of development. But His assistance is not essential to personal salvation, nor is it necessary in order to live a sinless life. Some people consider Pelagianism to be a form of synergism (a cooperative endeavor between God and humans). (I don't think it should be viewed that way.) If so, for this theology, the focus is on the human agency. Humans are in charge; God is the one cooperating! Pelagianism was condemned as heresy by several synods between 412-418 and the condemnation was confirmed in 431 by the Council of Ephesus. A modified form (called Semi-Pelagianism) was held by some later in the fifth century. In this modified form, God's grace is given to everyone, but people must take the first step toward salvation. In some cases, the good will of a human person precedes divine mercy and grace. It was condemned as heresy at a synod at Orange in 529. Various forms of Semi-Pelagianism have been around ever since, if not in standard theologies, at least in the thinking of many who confess the Christian Faith. This type of fuzzy thinking finds expression in such statements as "God helps those who help themselves" and "If you take one step towards God, He will come the rest of the way to you", etc. B. MONERGISM. The basic meaning of the word is "works alone" (from "mono-" [one, alone], "ergon" [work]). Some historians think that Augustine actually modified his personal belief as a reaction to the views held by Pelagius. He moved to a more extreme position. (The irony of debate is that debate should help people find some middle ground, instead it more often moves people further apart.) It is important to note that monergism was not the position of the church at that time. In fact, neither the Roman Catholic Church nor the Orthodox Church have ever held this extreme doctrinal position. In brief, monergism insists that God does it all. Even the "human response" is completely God's work. C. LIBERAL MONERGISM [UNIVERSALISM]. This position maintains a belief in the ultimate, unconditional reconciliation of all humans with God. This reconciliation might even include fallen angels. D. EVANGELICAL SYNERGISM. The basic meaning of the word is "work together" (from "syn-" [with, together], "ergon" [work]). In general, synergism includes any belief where personal salvation involves a cooperation between God (doing the saving) and humans (being saved). One aspect that distinguish it from any form of Pelagianism is that God is the major player in this process. However, even though the human plays a minor role, this human response is still a crucial aspect of salvation. Typical of most "middle way" positions, it is difficult to describe it perfectly. Many monergists simply label any form of synergism as Pelagianism or Semi-Pelagianism and dismiss, as heretics, those holding such viewpoints. At the time of the Reformation, another debate took place. Some people do not know that the Protestant Reformation sparked a Catholic Counter-Reformation. Martin Luther and several (not all) other Protestants took a monergistic position. Erasmus, a Catholic reformer, took a synergetic viewpoint on personal salvation. Out of this debate came two books: On Free Will (by Erasmus) and On the Bondage of the Will (by Luther). Erasmus stated that due to God's grace, the human will can be enabled to accept or reject the gift of salvation. The initiative is with God. He provides a "prevening" [prevenient] grace. The words "prevening" and "prevenient" come from an earlier meaning of the word "prevent" [i.e., going before, preceding]. This prevenient grace is provided to humans before salvation. However, this grace can be resisted. God's grace assists people in making a free choice; the gift can either be accepted or rejected. The initiative is with God; the response is by the person. However, even this free acceptance of the gift is possible only by grace. God is at work throughout the entire process. Never, at any point, are the people being saved acting entirely on their own. They have nothing to boast about. The type of synergism described here is something called evangelical synergism to separate it from other forms which appear to allow for merit in the response. E. CATHOLIC SYNERGISM. It turns out that the viewpoint of the Catholic Reformer [Erasmus] discussed above never became the official position of the Roman Catholic Church.