Predestination, Election & Grace¶
We've crafted an unofficial, source-cited, non-commercial index of Dr. R.C. Sproul's publicly available teachings, weighted by how many independent sources corroborate each point. The content is authored by Dr. R.C. Sproul and published by Ligonier Ministries (a few items are third-party YouTube re-uploads); see the Methodology & Rights page for more info. Quotations are brief, linked to their source, and reproduced for study under Ligonier's Copyright Policy (ligonier.org/copyright-policy). This site is humbly offered for personal use only, out of love and respect, and is not affiliated with or endorsed by Ligonier Ministries or St. Andrew's Chapel.
196 positions — 24 corroborated across multiple sources.
Well-attested positions¶
Independently stated in two or more of his messages.
The doctrine of predestination has roots in the teachings of the Apostle Paul, who in turn derived his doctrine from Jesus, who derived his from Moses.
I will take that one step further and say there was nothing in Augustine’s doctrine of predestination that was not first in the mind and teaching of the Apostle Paul. I would go even further than that and say there was nothing in Paul’s doctrine of predestination that was not first articulated by our Lord Himself. There was nothing in Jesus’ doctrine of predestination that was not first articulated by Moses in the Old Testament.
Corroborated across 5 sources: R.C. Sproul @ 9:53 · R.C. Sproul @ 5:08 · R.C. Sproul @ 9:38 · R.C. Sproul @ 4:29 · The Golden Chain (Ligonier)
The doctrine of predestination is a difficult subject that requires caution, care, diligence, and patience.
Context: Quoting John Calvin's view.
I think that the doctrine of predestination is difficult, and it causes a great deal of perplexity and bewilderment whenever it is discussed and whenever it is studied. And it's a question that requires, I think, not only caution, care, and diligence, but also a special measure of patience with each other as we struggle over the manifold implications that can easily be drawn from it.
Corroborated across 4 sources: R.C. Sproul @ 0:44 · R.C. Sproul @ 1:53 · R.C. Sproul @ 0:08 · Israel's Rejection & God's Justice (Part 2) (Ligonier)
The Bible teaches the doctrine of predestination, and those who deny it are clinging to a concept of free will that contradicts the biblical doctrine of the bondage of sin.
When people tell me that they don't believe in predestination, I'm going to grab them by the throat and say, "Why not? The Bible teaches it." And I'll say, "Enough of your humanistic clinging to your concept of free will that's as foreign from the biblical doctrine of the bondage of sin in the heart that you can find."
Corroborated across 4 sources: R.C. Sproul @ 5:21 · R.C. Sproul @ 4:42 · R.C. Sproul @ 5:29 · R.C. Sproul @ 23:11
Cassian taught that God's decision to predestine is based on His foreknowledge of how human beings will respond to the offer of grace, rather than being an independent act of God.
That is to say, he taught that though predestination is an act of God, God’s decision to predestine is based upon His foreknowledge of how human beings will respond to the offer of grace.
Corroborated across 3 sources: R.C. Sproul @ 38:27 · The Battle for Grace Alone (Ligonier article) · R.C. Sproul @ 38:46
Sproul is persuaded that the Augustinian view of predestination is the Pauline and biblical view.
I also need to warn you at the outset that I am persuaded of the Augustinian view of predestination, and I will be setting forth the Augustinian view of predestination in these seminars.
Corroborated across 3 sources: R.C. Sproul @ 44:59 · R.C. Sproul @ 14:22 · Israel's Rejection & God's Purpose (Ligonier)
The doctrine of election is a scriptural doctrine that people who dislike it often do not understand.
There is in Scripture, from Genesis to Revelation, a doctrine of election. You may not like the doctrine of election, and I suspect that if you do not like it, it is because you do not understand it.
Corroborated across 3 sources: Christ in Our Place (Ligonier) · Eternal Appointment (Ligonier) · The Return of the Seventy-Two (Ligonier)
The doctrine of predestination is a central and highly important subject for biblical Christianity, not a secondary concern.
And so what I'm suggesting is—is that this doctrine of predestination is not a peripheral, tangential, secondary matter of concern for biblical Christianity.
Corroborated across 2 sources: R.C. Sproul @ 1:23 · R.C. Sproul @ 3:19
True grace is not based on human merit or works, but is altogether gracious.
A grace that is given on the basis of human merit is not grace. A grace that is dispensed on the basis of human works, if the human works are the ground of that is not grace, and certainly there would be nothing amazing about it. But the amazing thing about grace is that it is altogether gracious.
Corroborated across 2 sources: R.C. Sproul @ 25:22 · R.C. Sproul @ 30:32
Augustine taught that grace and the grace of election are absolutely necessary for anyone to come to faith.
Context: Quoting Augustine's position.
Augustine said that grace and the grace of election is absolutely necessary for anyone to come to faith.
Corroborated across 2 sources: R.C. Sproul @ 30:58 · R.C. Sproul @ 36:03
The decision of whether a person is redeemed or lost is ultimately based upon their free will and choice.
And in this, in the final analysis the decision of whether you are redeemed or are lost is based upon your free will, on the choice that you make.
Corroborated across 2 sources: R.C. Sproul @ 39:20 · R.C. Sproul @ 39:31
The biblical doctrine of election teaches that some people receive grace, while the rest receive justice, meaning no one ever receives injustice from God.
But the biblical doctrine of election, get this point, teaches that some people receive grace, the rest receive justice. No one ever receives injustice from God.
Corroborated across 2 sources: R.C. Sproul @ 47:46 · R.C. Sproul @ 47:56
Luther's views significantly influenced John Calvin's theology, particularly regarding predestination and election.
Though Calvin is usually associated with the doctrine of predestination, it is often overlooked that there was nothing in Calvin’s view of predestination and election that was not first articulated by Luther, especially in Luther’s famous work The Bondage of the Will .
Corroborated across 2 sources: Crossing the Channel (Ligonier article) · How the Reformation Spread (Ligonier article)
The Reformed view of predestination is double (involving election and reprobation) but is not symmetrical in its mode of divine activity.
Context: Describing Brunner's position, not his own.
In sharp contrast to the caricature of double predestination seen in the positive-positive schema is the classic position of Reformed theology on predestination. In this view predestination is double in that it involves both election and reprobation but is not symmetrical with respect to the mode of divine activity.
Corroborated across 2 sources: Is Double Predestination Biblical? (Ligonier article) · Israel's Rejection & God's Justice (Part 2) (Ligonier)
If particular election is maintained, the notion that all salvation is based upon it requires speaking of double predestination.
If particular election is to be maintained and if the notion that all salvation is ultimately based upon that particular election is to be maintained, then we must speak of double predestination.
Corroborated across 2 sources: Is Double Predestination Biblical? (Ligonier article) · Israel's Rejection & God's Justice (Part 2) (Ligonier)
A symmetrical view of predestination suggests that God works grace by creating faith in the elect and works hardening by creating evil in the reprobate in an equal manner.
▷ A view Sproul explains or critiques — not his own position.
A symmetrical view of double predestination would say that in the case of the elect, God from all eternity decreed their election, and in the fullness of time, He intervenes in their lives and creates saving faith in their hearts by His grace. God invades the soul of an elect person and quickens him from spiritual death to spiritual life, brings him to faith in Christ, and redeems him. In a symmetrical manner, the reprobate are doomed from all eternity, and God, in the fullness of time, intrudes into their lives and creates fresh evil in their souls, ensuring their ultimate reprobation and damnation.
Corroborated across 2 sources: Is Double Predestination Biblical? (Ligonier article) · Israel's Rejection & God's Justice (Part 2) (Ligonier)
The Augustinian view of predestination is that it is double, meaning there are two sides to it, but the schema is 'positive negative,' not 'positive positive.'
Rather, the Augustinian view is that predestination is certainly double because not everybody is saved, that there are two sides to it. Some people are elect and some are not. So, we have two sides of the coin, and we have to deal with both sides of the problem. However, the schema is "positive negative."
Corroborated across 2 sources: Is Double Predestination Biblical? (Ligonier article) · R.C. Sproul @ 25:49
The simple presence of free will is insufficient to explain the origin of evil because it does not explain how a good being would choose evil.
The simple presence of free will is not enough to explain the origin of evil, in as much as we still must ask how a good being would be inclined freely to choose evil.
Corroborated across 2 sources: The Mystery of Iniquity (Ligonier article) · Why Does God Allow Evil? (Ligonier article)
A Christian should refuse to vote for any candidate who supports abortion, regardless of agreement on other policies.
I could never vote for a candidate who supported abortion--even if I agreed with that candidate on every other policy position. If he supported abortion I would not vote for him and I urge you to do the same.
Corroborated across 2 sources: Principles for Voting (Ligonier article) · John Preaches (Ligonier)
Salvation depends solely on God's sovereign grace, not on human will or choice.
Only one vote that counts, and from the foundation of the world God cast His ballot with your name on it if it so be that you are in Christ, so that it depends not on him who runs, not on him who chooses, not on him who wills, but on the sovereign grace of God.
Corroborated across 2 sources: A Sure Salvation (Ligonier article) · R.C. Sproul @ 46:40
Unconditional election means that God's decision to save people is not based on any foreseen action or condition performed by human beings, but rather rests solely on God's sovereign decision.
Whereas the Reformed view is called unconditional election meaning by this that there is no foreseen action or condition met by us that induces God to decide to save us, but that election rests upon God's sovereign decision to save whomsoever He is pleased to save.
Corroborated across 2 sources: TULIP and Reformed Theology: Unconditional Election (Ligonier article) · R.C. Sproul @ 0:14
The Apostle Paul's letter to the Ephesians contains the original word for predestination, which was present from the beginning.
Let me direct your attention for a moment to Paul's letter to the Ephesians, in the first chapter, where Paul in giving his greetings to the saints at Ephesus, says: "Grace to you and peace from God our Father and the Lord Jesus Christ. Blessed be the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ who has blessed us with every spiritual blessing in the heavenly places in Christ, just as he chose us in him before the foundation of the world, that we should be holy and blameless before him, in love. He predestined us to adoption as sons through Jesus Christ to himself, according to the good pleasure of his will, to the praise of the glory of his grace, which he freely bestowed upon us in the beloved." In verse 11, "Also, we have obtained an inheritance, having been predestined according to his purpose who works all things after the counsel of his will."
Corroborated across 2 sources: R.C. Sproul @ 7:07 · R.C. Sproul @ 10:10
Virtually every church must confess some statement about predestination because the Bible speaks clearly about it.
What I'm saying, simply, is virtually every church has a doctrine of predestination. Now, not all of those churches agree on the meaning of the doctrine of predestination or the extent of the doctrine of predestination or how the doctrine of predestination touches people's lives where they live, but because the Bible so clearly speaks about it, every Christian church has been constrained to say something in their creedal statements regarding predestination.
Corroborated across 2 sources: R.C. Sproul @ 30:15 · R.C. Sproul @ 6:01
God's sovereign election guarantees that the chosen person will come to faith, and human witnessing is merely the means by which God fulfills His divine purposes.
when God, from all eternity, elects somebody to salvation, you can bet the last dollar you have that person is going to come to faith. God does not make those sovereign determinations and leave their fulfillment up to chance. The point we have to see in the New Testament is that our witnessing and our preaching are the means by which God brings to pass the ends of His divine purposes.
Corroborated across 2 sources: R.C. Sproul @ 7:30 · If we do not witness and share the gospel will some people not go to heaven? (Ligonier Q&A)
The speaker views abortion as a serious ethical issue because it involves the destruction of human life, which government is meant to protect.
In my opinion, the most serious ethical issue that this nation has ever had to deal with, more serious than slavery, is abortion on demand—the slaughter of the innocent. Today, people do not even argue that what is being destroyed is not human life. It is openly acknowledged that it is.
Corroborated across 2 sources: Behave Like a Christian (Part 1) (Ligonier) · Submit to Government (Part 2) (Ligonier)
Further positions¶
Drawn from a single high-trust (official transcript) source.
Using human policies to determine salvation is dangerous because that authority belongs only to God.
But when we use these human policies to bind the conscience in an ultimate way and make such policies determinative of one’s salvation, we venture dangerously into territory that is God’s alone.
Source: 3 Types of Legalism (Ligonier article)
Cassian argued that Augustine's teaching on predestination was detrimental, causing despair and hindering moral effort.
Context: Attributed to Cassian
Cassian said that Augustine’s teaching on predestination “cripples the force of preaching, reproof, and moral energy…plunges men into despair and introduces a certain fatal necessity.”
Source: The Battle for Grace Alone (Ligonier article)
Cassian taught that God's decision to predestine is based on His foreknowledge of how humans will respond to grace, rather than being an irresistible act.
Context: Attributed to Cassian
That is to say, he taught that though predestination is an act of God, God’s decision to predestine is based upon His foreknowledge of how human beings will respond to the offer of grace.
Source: The Battle for Grace Alone (Ligonier article)
Cassian argued that while grace is necessary for righteousness, the human will is ultimately responsible for choosing to do good.
Again, for Cassian, though God’s grace is necessary for salvation and helps the human will to do good, in the final analysis it is man, not God, who must will the good.
Source: The Battle for Grace Alone (Ligonier article)
Cassian denied the idea of irresistible grace, asserting that man retains the power to choose whether or not to cooperate with grace.
In the final analysis, what Cassian was denying in the teaching of Augustine was the idea of irresistible grace.
Source: The Battle for Grace Alone (Ligonier article)
A majority view of predestination, even in evangelical circles, holds that it relies on God's foreknowledge of human choice rather than God's eternal decree.
The majority view of predestination, even in the evangelical world, is that predestination is not based on God’s eternal decree to bring people to faith but on His foreknowledge of which people will exercise their will to come to faith.
Source: The Battle for Grace Alone (Ligonier article)
The semi-Pelagian controversy is characterized as an internal debate among believers, not a dispute between believers and unbelievers.
▷ A view Sproul explains or critiques — not his own position.
The semi-Pelagian controversy, though a serious one, is not deemed to be a dispute between believers and unbelievers, but an intramural debate between believers.
Source: The Battle for Grace Alone (Ligonier article)
The speaker questions whether God's eternal purpose was to make salvation certain for His elect.
Or was it God’s eternal purpose and design of the Cross to make salvation certain for His elect?
Source: Biblical Scholasticism (Ligonier article)
The church is wrongly forced to choose between personal salvation and social concern, when in fact, the truth is that both are necessary and cannot be separated.
The choice that the church has is never between personal salvation and mercy ministry. It is rather a both/and proposition. Neither pole can be properly swallowed by the other.
Source: Do We Believe the Whole Gospel? (Ligonier article)
The term 'double' predestination is often distorted when used in contrast to 'single' predestination.
The term apparently means one thing within the circle of Reformed theology and quite another outside that circle and at a popular level of theological discourse.
Source: Is Double Predestination Biblical? (Ligonier article)
If God elects some but not all, logic dictates that those who are not elected are not predestined to election, which implies reprobation.
If God has predestined some but not all to election, does it not follow by what Luther called a “resistless logic” that some are not predestined to election? If, as Brunner maintains, all salvation is based upon the eternal election of God and not all men are elect from eternity, does that not mean that from eternity there are non-elect who most certainly will not be saved?
Source: Is Double Predestination Biblical? (Ligonier article)
The concept of 'single' predestination is fundamentally flawed and nonsensical.
Such a notion of predestination is manifest nonsense.
Source: Is Double Predestination Biblical? (Ligonier article)
The classic Reformed view of predestination involves both election and reprobation, but this relationship is not symmetrical regarding the mode of divine activity.
In this view predestination is double in that it involves both election and reprobation but is not symmetrical with respect to the mode of divine activity. A strict parallelism of operation is denied.
Source: Is Double Predestination Biblical? (Ligonier article)
Reformed theology views predestination in terms of a positive-negative relationship, rather than a strict parallelism of operation.
Rather we view predestination in terms of a positive-negative relationship.
Source: Is Double Predestination Biblical? (Ligonier article)
Humanity naturally tends toward a semi-Pelagian view, believing they are not slaves to sin and that true freedom means coming to faith without the power of saving grace.
▷ A view Sproul explains or critiques — not his own position.
We don’t want to believe that we are burdened by negative inclinations and outright enmity toward God, as the Bible teaches us (Rom. 3:9–20). We think that true freedom means having the ability to come to faith without the vanquishing power of saving grace.
Source: Escaping the “Cage Stage” (Ligonier article)
If free will is defined as a will unencumbered by sin, it is an overly exalted term to apply to humanity.
Context: Quoting Calvin's remark.; Quoting Calvin.
Calvin once remarked that if you mean by free will a will that is unencumbered by the weight of sin, you’ve used a term that’s far too exalted to apply to us.
Source: Escaping the “Cage Stage” (Ligonier article)
The Christian view holds that God creates humans with wills and a capacity to choose, but this freedom is inherently limited.
The Christian view is that God creates us with wills, with a capacity to choose. We are volitional beings. But the freedom given in creation is limited.
Source: Since God Is Sovereign, How Are Humans Free? (Ligonier article)
God's electing grace has a divine purpose, which includes making manifest His mercy and honoring Christ.
But, the New Testament makes it clear that there is a divine purpose in God’s electing grace, and part of that is to make manifest the riches of His grace, to display His mercy (Rom. 9:22–24)—that is, to reveal something about His marvelous character, which His grace certainly does.
Source: God’s Good Pleasure in Election (Ligonier article)
The judgment of a group or individual is not automatically correct, and one must discern between their judgment and the actual will of God.
The fact that a particular individual or group thinks we should be doing a certain task is not a guarantee that it is the will of God.
Source: God’s Will and Your Job (Ligonier article)
Individuals must be careful to discern between sound judgment and the vested personal interests of others who pressure them regarding their life choices.
We must be able to discern between sound judgment and the vested personal interests of other people.
Source: God’s Will and Your Job (Ligonier article)
From a biblical standpoint, remaining celibate is a legitimate option, and it is also viewed as a definite preference under certain considerations.
From a biblical perspective the pursuit of celibacy is indicated in some instances as a legitimate option. Under other considerations it is viewed as a definite preference.
Source: God’s Will in Marriage (Ligonier article)
Students mistakenly treated grace as an inalienable right or entitlement.
They had come to believe that grace was an inalienable right, an entitlement they all deserved.
Source: An Inalienable Right to Grace? (Ligonier article)
Common grace is not a saving grace and does not include the divine, sovereign, selective grace reserved only for the elect.
We must not think of common grace as a saving grace given indiscriminately or provided indiscriminately by God’s intent to the whole human race. That would be to step into a semi-Pelagian or Arminian understanding of common grace. Common grace does not include within it the divine and sovereign selective grace that is reserved for His elect.
Source: A Loving Provision (Ligonier article)
Common grace is the general benefit God provides to the whole world, such as in the arts, sciences, and government, which restrains depravity.
God blesses all sorts of people with gifts and talents, and these gifts all flow from His grace. They are not restricted simply to believers. In like manner, God’s law is given to benefit the whole of mankind. God established government initially with an angel guarding the entrance to Paradise.
Source: A Loving Provision (Ligonier article)
Christians should focus on the preceptive will—obedience and righteousness—rather than being preoccupied with the secret decretive will of God.
One of the great tragedies of contemporary Christendom is the preoccupation of so many Christians with the secret decretive will of God to the exclusion and neglect of the preceptive will.
Source: The Meaning of God’s Will (Ligonier article)
The doctrine of perseverance can be logically inferred from the doctrine of predestination, provided the inferences are necessary and drawn from Scripture.
if such inferences are not only possible inferences but necessary inferences, then I think it’s legitimate to draw such inferences. However, such inferences ought to be drawn from the truth of the Bible, as our doctrine consists not only of what is explicitly set forth in Scripture but what, by good and necessary consequence, is deduced from the premises of Scripture.
Source: More than Conquerors (Ligonier article)
Modern times have led to a surrender to relativism and pluralism, causing people to disregard serious doctrinal error in favor of peace.
Where our fathers saw these issues as matters of life and death, indeed of eternal life and death, we have so surrendered to relativism and pluralism that we simply don’t care about serious doctrinal error. We prefer peace to truth and accuse the orthodox of being divisive when they call a heretic a heretic.
Source: None Dare Call It Heresy (Ligonier article)
The speaker asserts that the pro-choice position, despite being framed as a legal right, is actually an argument concerning moral rights, which must be distinguished from legal rights.
We must distinguish between legal rights and moral rights. We may claim that the pro-choice position is an argument for legal rights, but, in actuality, we are talking about moral rights.
Source: Pluralism and Relativism (Ligonier article)
Leaders who prioritize political expediency over the welfare of the nation or institution are incapable of ensuring its survival.
No nation (or Christian institution, for that matter) can survive when its leaders are driven by a spirit of pragmatism or make their decisions according to political expediency.
Source: Principle vs. Pragmatism (Ligonier article)
Pragmatism and political expediency are detrimental because they are fundamentally opposed to biblical principles.
No nation (or Christian institution, for that matter) can survive when its leaders are driven by a spirit of pragmatism or make their decisions according to political expediency. Expediency is an obscene word. It is the word that is ever and always at war with principle.
Source: Principle vs. Pragmatism (Ligonier article)
Freedom of choice is not an absolute right and must end where it infringes upon another person's inalienable rights of life and liberty.
I believe it ends where my freedom of choice steps on another person's inalienable rights of life and liberty.
Source: What Does “Pro-Choice” Mean? (Ligonier article)
The right to choose does not include the arbitrary right to destroy a human life, and the unborn baby has no right to choose or deny its own destruction.
The right to choose, as sacred as it may be, does not carry with it the arbitrary right to destroy a human life. This is as much a miscarriage of justice as it is a miscarriage of a human baby.
Source: What Does “Pro-Choice” Mean? (Ligonier article)
The principle of self-determination is denied to every unborn, aborted child, whose life was dependent on the mother's choice.
It is this principle of self-determination—having a say in my own condition and future—that is brutally denied to every unborn, aborted child. I had no say in my mother's decision whether to have an abortion or to carry me to term.
Source: What Does “Pro-Choice” Mean? (Ligonier article)
In the Reformed view, God initiates and works regeneration and faith in the elect through a monergistic act of grace, while withholding this work from the non-elect.
In the Reformed view, God from all eternity decrees some to election and positively intervenes in their lives to work regeneration and faith by a monergistic work of grace. To the non-elect, God withholds this monergistic work of grace, passing them by and leaving them to themselves.
Source: The Reformed View of Predestination (Ligonier article)
The decree and fulfillment of election provide mercy for the elect, while the efficacy of reprobation provides justice for the reprobate.
The decree and fulfillment of election provide mercy for the elect while the efficacy of reprobation provides justice for the reprobate.
Source: The Reformed View of Predestination (Ligonier article)
The doctrine of double predestination has been carefully maintained throughout the history of the Church.
These examples selected from confessional formulas of the Reformation indicate the care with which the doctrine of double predestination has been treated. The asymmetrical expression of the “double” aspect has been clearly maintained.
Source: The Reformed View of Predestination (Ligonier article)
The importance of viewing the decree of reprobation in light of the fall is evident in the discussions between Reformed theologians concerning infra- and supralapsarianism.
The importance of viewing the decree of reprobation in light of the fall is seen in the ongoing discussions between Reformed theologians concerning infra- and supralapsarianism.
Source: The Reformed View of Predestination (Ligonier article)
The grace discussed in semi-Pelagian and Arminian theories is not efficacious, meaning it only makes salvation possible, not certain.
But the grace that is considered in all semi-Pelagian and Arminian theories of salvation is not an efficacious grace. It is a grace that makes salvation possible, but not a grace that makes salvation certain.
Source: What Does “Soli Deo Gloria” Mean? (Ligonier article)
The believer's ability to respond to God's grace is entirely due to God's sovereign election and regeneration, not to their own merit.
But the reason the believer makes the good response is because God in His sovereign election changes the disposition of the heart of the elect to effect a good response. I can take no credit for the response that I made for Christ.
Source: What Does “Soli Deo Gloria” Mean? (Ligonier article)
The essence of freedom is self-determination, meaning choices are determined by internal causes rather than external coercion.
The essence of freedom is self-determination . It is when my choices are forced upon me by external coercion that my freedom is lost. To be able to choose what I want by virtue of self-determination does not destroy free will but establishes it.
Source: The Meaning of Man’s Will (Ligonier article)
If the cause of a choice originates within the individual, the choice is considered self-determined or free.
If the cause is apart from me, then I am a victim of coercion. If the cause is from within me, then my choices are self-determined or free.
Source: The Meaning of Man’s Will (Ligonier article)
If all effects have causes, then all choices must have causes, and the source of that cause determines whether the choice is self-determined or coerced.
If all effects have causes, then all choices likewise have causes. If the cause is apart from me, then I am a victim of coercion. If the cause is from within me, then my choices are self-determined or free.
Source: The Meaning of Man’s Will (Ligonier article)
In situations with limited options, a person still exercises free choice by selecting the option for which they have the strongest desire at that moment.
The element of freedom that is preserved stems from the fact that you still have two options and that you choose the one for which you have the strongest desire at the moment.
Source: The Meaning of Man’s Will (Ligonier article)
If the will has no inclination toward or away from an action, it suffers from complete paralysis.
If there is no disposition toward, or away from, the action, then the will suffers from complete paralysis.
Source: The Meaning of Man’s Will (Ligonier article)
He suggests defining freedom as the ability to choose what one wants, following the church fathers.
The safest course to steer is to define freedom as the church fathers, such as Augustine, did: “the ability to choose what we want.”
Source: The Meaning of Man’s Will (Ligonier article)
The relativistic view defines conscience in evolutionary terms, seeing it as a reaction to societal taboos.
Within a relativistic framework, we see the conscience being defined in evolutionary terms: people’s subjective inner personalities are reacting to evolutionary advantageous taboos imposed upon them by their society or by their environment.
Source: The Question of Conscience (Ligonier article)
The current issue is not just about sola Scriptura, but also about embracing the whole counsel of God as revealed in the entirety of Scripture.
The issue that we face in our day is not merely the question of sola Scriptura but also the question of tota Scriptura , which has to do with embracing the whole counsel of God as it is revealed in the entirety of sacred Scripture.
Source: Tota Scriptura (Ligonier article)
A major theological controversy concerning election and predestination originated in the Netherlands and spread globally.
It began within the theological faculty of a Dutch institution that was committed to Calvinistic teaching. Some of the professors there began to have second thoughts about issues relating to the doctrines of election and predestination.
Source: TULIP and Reformed Theology: An Introduction (Ligonier article)
The five core theological issues that became known as the five points of Calvinism are total depravity, unconditional election, limited atonement, irresistible grace, and perseverance of the saints.
The five points, as they are stated in order to form the acrostic TULIP, are: total depravity, unconditional election, limited atonement, irresistible grace, and perseverance of the saints.
Source: TULIP and Reformed Theology: An Introduction (Ligonier article)
The core argument for unconditional election is that God's purposes stand regardless of what people might do, as demonstrated by the story of Jacob and Esau.
The point that the Apostle labors here is that God not only makes this decision prior to the twins’ births, He does it without a view to anything they would do, either good or evil, so that the purposes of God might stand.
Source: TULIP and Reformed Theology: Unconditional Election (Ligonier article)
The speaker prefers the term 'sovereign election' to describe the doctrine, arguing that God's choice to bestow or withhold grace is not an injustice.
Unconditional election is another term that I think can be a bit misleading, so I prefer to use the term sovereign election. If God chooses sovereignly to bestow His grace on some sinners and withhold His grace from other sinners, is there any violation of justice in this?
Source: TULIP and Reformed Theology: Unconditional Election (Ligonier article)
Only those who have experienced reconciling grace can find peace when confronting the overwhelming power, sovereignty, and immutability of God.
Only those who have experienced the sweetness of reconciling grace can look at the overwhelming power, sovereignty, and immutability of a transcendent God and find there peace rather than a drive for vengeance.
Source: The Unholy Pursuit of God in Moby Dick (Ligonier article)
True human dignity requires a divine origin, not merely secular or philosophical assumptions.
But if our human dignity is given by God and that is recognized by our culture, then we have fundamental human rights that inform how we treat other people under the law and even one on one at the personal level.
Source: We Are Not Germs: The Case for Human Dignity (Ligonier article)
For a substitutionary payment to be accepted, the Father must first make a decision to accept it, which is an act of grace.
There first must be a decision by the Governor of the universe that He will accept a substitutionary payment in order for my crime to be covered. The decision of God the Father to do so is one of sheer grace.
Source: What Is Sin? (Ligonier article)
Believing in the Reformed doctrine of predestination is not a requirement for being a Christian.
I don’t want to say that anybody who doesn’t believe in the Reformed doctrine of predestination isn’t a Christian. That’s exactly right.
Source: R.C. Sproul @ 20:56
Sproul questions the concept of 'freely' choosing, asking if a choice is truly free if God decreed it.
But the operative word here that’s not in your formula, Dr. Gerstner, is the word ‘freely.’ Freely choose the same. What do you mean, freely choose?
Source: R.C. Sproul @ 6:18
Sproul suggests that even in situations where choices are presented, the concept of 'free choice' is severely limited.
But even when he puts a gun to my head, do you call that free choice? Well, it’s – GERSTNER: As a matter of fact, if you were R.C. Sproul and not the Devil’s advocate, I’d be very surprised if somebody said to you denounce the Christian religion or take this bullet through your head, the R.C. Sproul I know wouldn’t hesitate a moment.
Source: R.C. Sproul @ 8:28
The ability to choose is based on the relative desirability of options, meaning that when things are not equal, a choice can be made.
That means if I – even though all things being equal I didn’t want to take that test, all things weren’t equal. Because the option to the taking the test was less desirable to me – – than going through the pain of taking the test. Alright, I can see in that instance – I chose what I wanted.
Source: R.C. Sproul @ 13:55
Pelagius believed that God's grace merely assists human beings in salvation, but it is not necessary.
▷ A view Sproul explains or critiques — not his own position.
Pelagius was of the opinion that the grace of God assists human beings to be saved, but is in no way necessary.
Source: R.C. Sproul @ 10:29
The Reformers' reformer who most emphasized predestination in the sixteenth century was Martin Luther.
The next man definitely belongs with Augustine, and he is the Reformers' reformer, the man who most emphasized predestination in the sixteenth century in the Reformation, and who was that? No, that wasn't John Calvin. John Calvin was his junior partner. The man who most adamantly defended the Augustinian view of predestination was Martin Luther.
Source: R.C. Sproul @ 17:42
All Christians agree that the God they worship is a sovereign God, but how this sovereignty applies to salvation is the point of division.
And the first thing that every Christian agrees on, is that the God that we worship is a sovereign God. How sovereignty works itself out, in the matters of salvation, is what divides us, and so in our next session we're going to look at the concept of the sovereignty of God.
Source: R.C. Sproul @ 30:26
The strongest statement regarding predestination is found in the ninth chapter of Paul's letter to the Romans.
Probably the strongest statement that we find anywhere in the Scriptures that deals directly with the question of predestination is found in the ninth chapter of Paul's letter to the Romans.
Source: R.C. Sproul @ 0:07
The foreknowledge view of election holds that predestination means God knows what people will do from eternity and chooses them based on that knowledge.
that predestination simply means that God, from all eternity looks down through time and knows in advance what people will do, and on the basis of that foreknowledge, then chooses them.
Source: R.C. Sproul @ 0:07
The foreknowledge view is flawed because it suggests that election is based on a good work.
The foreknowledge view says that God looks down into the future and He sees that some people will make the correct choice and others will make the incorrect choice. And what the foreknowledge view suffers from is that election in that view is based upon a good work, believing this is the work of God, to believe in the one whom He has sent.
Source: R.C. Sproul @ 8:00
The Arminian view is criticized because it places the final decision for salvation on human choice rather than divine action.
▷ A view Sproul explains or critiques — not his own position.
The Arminian view - it has very, various styles, and shapes, and forms - bottom line makes the final decision for our salvation rest upon a human choice, not upon a divine action.
Source: R.C. Sproul @ 8:46
God is not unjust, even when making sovereign choices before human actions.
Is there unrighteousness in God? And he answers his own question with an emphatic, "No! May it never be!"
Source: R.C. Sproul @ 11:34
The pagan and Humanist view of free will incorrectly asserts that man is free from all predisposition toward sin, which denies the reality of the Fall.
The Humanist doctrine of free will, the pagan view of free will, says that man is free not only from coercion, but man is free in the sense that his will is indifferent. It has no predisposition or inclination, bias or bent, towards sin because the pagan and the Humanist deny the radical character of the Fall.
Source: R.C. Sproul @ 3:00
Advocates for abortion rights conceived a strategy to connect the issue to the widely accepted right to free choice.
they said, "What we have to do is connect the issue of abortion to another issue that the rest of the churches, the mainline Protestant churches, will defend and what is more American, more sacrosanct in our culture than the right of free choice."
Source: R.C. Sproul @ 24:44
The strategy involved presenting a 'middle ground' that emphasized the right of every individual to exercise their own choice.
They gave people a third alternative. Instead of saying "Are you for abortion or against abortion," they said "No, there's a middle ground here and that is," usually the middle ground is where the majority of people are. They said "that is pro-choice."
Source: R.C. Sproul @ 25:14
Voting for pro-choice legally is equivalent to voting for pro-abortion, as it involves participating in the process of legalization.
But remember, ladies and gentlemen, what we're talking about here that if -- if -- I'm convinced it is, but if abortion is murder that is like saying I personally wouldn't want to murder anybody, but I'll defend your personal liberty to do it if you like. I mean that's madness! But the thing that people don't perceive in this debate is that a vote for pro-choice legally is a vote for pro-abortion; got to understand that.
Source: R.C. Sproul @ 25:50
Using intentionally ambiguous formulas to maintain unity can be dangerous because it allows heretics to hide their views.
We can avoid the controversy, we can avoid the dispute, we can maintain Christian unity by using a formula that is intentionally ambiguous, that you can interpret your way, and you can interpret your way. That's what happens with the studied ambiguity, and historically, again, Calvin was right in saying that the studied ambiguity is the hiding place for the heretic.
Source: R.C. Sproul @ 18:04
God's plan, according to His secret counsel, was to predestine people, specifically concerning their adoption and salvation in Christ.
That before the world was created God had a plan, and that plan, according to His secret counsel and according to the good pleasure of His will, He made a decision to do something, a sovereign decision to do something, namely, to predestinate something for some reason. And I think we will see clearly that what He predestines are people, and what they are predestined unto or for is, as we are told here in the Scripture, adoption in the Beloved, in Christ.
Source: R.C. Sproul @ 13:25
The controversial question regarding predestination is determining the basis, conditions, or criteria by which God makes His choice.
But where it gets sticky, where it gets controversial, is when we ask the question, "On what basis does God make His choice?" How and why, and upon what conditions does God determine who will receive this amazing gift of saving grace?
Source: R.C. Sproul @ 11:55
The Reformed doctrine of predestination is not the idea that God forces reluctant sinners into His kingdom and arbitrarily refuses entrance to others.
Context: Describing the view of another theologian/professor, not his own stated position.
skilled theologian who understood predestination to mean that God coerces and forces some reluctant sinners into His kingdom and arbitrarily refuses entrance to others who so much want to be there. What a horrible caricature of the Presbyterian and Reformed doctrine of predestination!
Source: R.C. Sproul @ 18:10
The purpose of predestinating grace is to make people willing to pursue Christ and embrace the truth.
That's what predestinating grace is all about.
Source: R.C. Sproul @ 53:35
When the state fails in its commitment to defending life or promoting justice, the church and every Christian are obligated to speak out and vote.
But when the state fails to be the state, when the state becomes lax in defending and promoting and maintaining human life, when the state loses a passionate commitment to justice, then ladies and gentlemen, the church must speak and every Christian is called to speak and to vote on these areas.
Source: R.C. Sproul @ 26:38
Initial acceptance of difficult doctrines, such as predestination, can involve a reluctant acquiescence rather than genuine delight.
Well, I like the second part of this, the response of Peter: “Thou alone hast the words of eternal life. There’s no sense going anywhere else. You have it.” But you see, there’s sort of an atmosphere there, even in Peter, of reluctance, like: “Well, I can’t stand this teaching either, but where can I go? You are the One that has the words of eternal life, so I guess I have to just grin and bear it, grit my teeth and acquiesce to the teaching whether I like it or not.”
Source: R.C. Sproul @ 1:39
The friend stated that the lordship of Jesus Christ remains a nonnegotiable item in his Christian faith.
Context: Quoting the friend
Well, the first thing that’s still left,” he says that, “it’s a nonnegotiable item in my Christian faith is the lordship of Jesus Christ.”
Source: R.C. Sproul @ 2:54
The concept of election is not an abstract idea but is grounded in and cloaked by the love of God itself when encountered in the New Testament.
But when we encounter the teaching of election in the New Testament we never meet it as an abstract idea, but one that is cloaked and grounded in the love of God itself.
Source: R.C. Sproul @ 2:07
God's choice of those who receive grace is based on the good pleasure of his will.
And what it says is that God makes this choice of the objects of his grace according to the 'good pleasure of his will'.
Source: R.C. Sproul @ 16:27
The humanist view defines free will as the ability to make choices spontaneously, meaning the choices are not determined by any prior inclination or disposition.
In this scheme, free will is defined as our ability to make choices spontaneously, that is that the choices that we make are in no wise conditioned or determined by any prior prejudice, inclination, or disposition.
Source: R.C. Sproul @ 1:05
If choices are made spontaneously without prior inclination, they lack motivation, which raises questions about their moral significance.
If our choices are made purely spontaneously, without any prior inclination, any prior disposition - in a sense what we're saying is that there is no reason for the choice. There is no motivation, or motive for the choice.
Source: R.C. Sproul @ 2:31
A creature without any prior disposition, inclination, bent, or reason might not be able to make a choice at all.
But even deeper than that problem, we face immediately the question of whether or not such a choice could actually be made, not simply whether it would be moral if it were made, but could a creature without any prior disposition, inclination, bent, or reason even make a choice?
Source: R.C. Sproul @ 4:57
Moral choices require the mind to approve the direction of the choice, meaning the will acts in conjunction with the mind.
We do not make moral choices without the mind approving the direction of our choice. That is one of the dimensions that is closely related to the biblical concept of conscience: that moral choices are - that the mind is involved in moral choices.
Source: R.C. Sproul @ 10:08
Every choice a person makes is both free and determined.
I would like to make this statement: that in my opinion, every choice that we make is free, and every choice that we make is determined. Every choice that we make is free, and every choice that we make is determined.
Source: R.C. Sproul @ 20:14
Free will is fundamentally about the self's ability to determine its own choices.
Self-determination, which is not the denial of freedom, but is the essence of freedom. For the self to be able to determine it's own choices is what free will is all about.
Source: R.C. Sproul @ 22:41
The inferences drawn from the text by full preterists are possible but not necessary.
▷ A view Sproul explains or critiques — not his own position.
Now, what I'm saying again is that those inferences drawn from the preterists, the full preterists, are possible inferences from the text, but not necessary inferences from the text.
Source: R.C. Sproul @ 12:15
The application of evolutionary principles led to the rejection of supernatural biblical events, such as the virgin birth and the atonement.
anything that communicated miracle was rejected out of hand -- anything supernatural, such as the virgin birth of Jesus, the atonement as a cosmic event of reconciliation between the human and the divine, the resurrection, the ascension, and obviously the return of Jesus at the end of age was also considered part of the mythological trappings that were included in the biblical documents.
Source: R.C. Sproul @ 0:07
The practice of holding possessions communally in the early church was limited to a specific time and should not be taken as a perpetual mandate for communism.
for a particular moment in time, it was said that the early church did it, and some have taken from that a mandate for communism. They've drawn more from the narrative than the narrative requires.
Source: R.C. Sproul @ 22:12
The most popular view of election, which is the foreknowledge view, suggests God knows who will respond favorably to the gospel from eternity and then chooses them for salvation.
The most popular view is what’s called the prescient view of election, or we could call it the foreknowledge view, and that’s the idea that God from all eternity knows in advance who will respond favorably to the invitation of the gospel.
Source: R.C. Sproul @ 11:46
Humans are predestined to respond to the call, rather than their response being the ground for predestination.
So we are predestined not because we respond to a call, but we are predestined to respond to that call. That’s the point that the apostle is making here.
Source: R.C. Sproul @ 17:16
Defining the legal status of life at the point of viability is arbitrary because potential life exists throughout the entire pregnancy.
to put the legal definition of life at the point of viability is an exercise in despair because of its implicit arbitrariness.
Source: R.C. Sproul @ 30:37
The central debate regarding abortion revolves around how much legal right should be accorded to an unborn fetus or child.
but the question that divides us now centers on, "How much right should the law accord to an unborn fetus or child?"
Source: R.C. Sproul @ 13:52
The fundamental disagreement in the abortion debate stems from differing sources of authority used to determine ethical conclusions.
Part of the problem that we don't agree on our sources of authority in determining the answers to the most fundamental questions that are dividing us.
Source: R.C. Sproul @ 22:19
He emphasizes that the issue is too serious to remain undecided, requiring an examined position, much like a jury reaching a verdict.
This issue is too serious for us to play on the fence forever. We need an examined position on it.
Source: R.C. Sproul @ 29:17
When theologians discuss the order of salvation, the term 'precedes' refers to logical priority, not necessarily temporal priority.
But when theologians talk with this language, you know we always have to make excuses for we theologians that are confusing to people, what is in view here in this formula with respect to what's called the order of salvation is what we call logical priority--logical priority.
Source: R.C. Sproul @ 5:37
The question of how God elects people is whether it is based on a foreseen response or activity of the elect.
The question at this point becomes then on what basis does God elect to choose or elect to save certain people? Is it on the basis of some foreseen reaction, response, or activity of the elect?
Source: R.C. Sproul @ 2:12
The basis for God giving salvation to some people rather than others is solely in God's determinate grace.
It didn't sit right at all to think that God dispenses His saving grace to some and not to others and that the reason for giving some salvation and not to others doesn't rest in us, but solely in the determinate grace of God.
Source: R.C. Sproul @ 7:55
The Apostle Paul anticipated objections or questions when setting forth the doctrine of sovereign grace.
He no sooner spells out the sovereign grace that is given to Jacob over Esau that he stops and says, "What then? Is there unrighteousness in God?"
Source: R.C. Sproul @ 6:44
God's sovereign choice to bestow grace on some and withhold it from others does not violate justice.
And ask the question if God chooses sovereignly to bestow His grace on some sinners and withhold His grace from other sinners is there any violation of justice in this?
Source: R.C. Sproul @ 15:08
The core of Reformed theology is that salvation is entirely dependent on the sovereign will and grace of God.
If the Bible teaches anything over and over and over again, it is that salvation is of the Lord. And this, yes, is at the heart of Reformed theology, not because we're interested in abstract question of sovereign predestination and that we just enjoy the intellectual titillation that speculation on this doctrine engenders, but rather the focal point in this theology, as it was in the T of total depravity going back to Augustine, is on grace that the accent here removes all merit from me, all dependence on my righteousness for my salvation and puts the focus back where it belongs on the unspeakable mercy and grace of God who has the sovereign, eternal right to have mercy upon whom He will have mercy; so that it is not of him who wills, except of the divine will, not of him who runs but of God.
Source: R.C. Sproul @ 17:51
The semi-Pelagians believe that grace is absolutely necessary for redemption, but it is combined with the exertions of the human will.
The semi-Pelagians differ with Pelagius at this point by saying, no, grace is absolutely necessary. It's a pre-condition for anyone's being redeemed. You can't be saved without grace. However, grace is not alone. It is grace plus something else--grace plus the exertions of the human will in the strength that remains in tact after the fall.
Source: R.C. Sproul @ 6:27
Human freedom is limited to choosing according to one's desires, which is insufficient because it does not address the problem of moral bondage.
Not only are we free in the sense that we choose according to our desires, but we cannot not be free at that point. We not only may choose what we want, but the only kind of a choice that is a real choice is the choice that is made according to what you want. And so we are all still free people in the sense that we can do what we want, but that's not the royal liberty of which the New Testament speaks.
Source: R.C. Sproul @ 20:03
The speaker is certain that God hates abortion and will judge nations that support it.
However, if I know anything about God—I don’t just think—I know without a shadow of a doubt that He hates abortion, and He will judge nations that support it.
Source: The Birth of John the Baptist (Ligonier)
The centurion understood grace by recognizing that Jesus' help was not dependent on his own worthiness or presence.
I’m not asking You to come to me because I deserve it. I’m not asking You to come to me because I’m worthy.”
Source: The Centurion's Servant (Ligonier)
When facing a conflict, one must first assess the resources and capabilities to determine if victory is possible or if peace negotiations are necessary.
What king, having ten thousand troops, will go out to meet another king coming against him with twenty thousand troops without first asking the question, ‘Do we have what it takes to win this war, or should we sue for peace?’”
Source: The Cost of Discipleship (Ligonier)
Cheap grace and easy believism are presumptuous because they allow one to willfully sin and knowingly sin while presuming on God's grace.
Imagine how presumptuous it is to sin willfully and knowingly, presuming on the grace of God. That is cheap grace and easy believism, which is not true faith at all.
Source: The Cost of Discipleship (Ligonier)
The relationship between sin and grace is not proportionate, but rather a superlative where grace far outweighs sin.
Paul might have said: “Where sin abounded, grace abounded—five pounds of sin, five pounds of grace. There’s a proportionate ratio between the degree of sin that we commit and the degree of grace that God gives to us.” No, Paul’s statement here is not a comparative; it is a superlative.
Source: Dead to Sin, Alive to God (Part 1) (Ligonier)
The metaphor of leaven illustrates that even a small amount of hypocrisy can permeate and eventually displace the owner of a tent.
He was saying that just a little bit of hypocrisy, when it enters your life, is like the camel who puts his nose into the tent and, before you know it, occupies the tent to such a degree that he expels the owner.
Source: Fearing God (Ligonier)
Unconditional election means that God chose a fixed number of people to be redeemed from all eternity, and this choice was not based on any foreseen conditions in the creature's life.
By way of introduction, that phrase unconditional election simply means that from all eternity, God chose or elected a fixed certain number of fallen human beings to be redeemed and conformed to the image of His Son. This election was unconditional in the sense that it was not based upon some foreseen or foreknown conditions met during the creature’s lifetime.
Source: The Golden Chain (Ligonier)
The mere order of the words 'foreknowledge' and 'predestination' does not prove that predestination is based upon a foreknowledge of human actions.
But do you see that the mere fact that the word foreknowledge comes before the word predestination does not necessitate that predestination is based upon a foreknowledge of human actions?
Source: The Golden Chain (Ligonier)
The purpose of predestination is that the elect will be brought into conformity with the Son of God by God's grace.
The purpose of predestination is that the elect may be brought by God’s grace into conformity, into a form of relationship, with the Son of God.
Source: The Golden Chain (Ligonier)
Paul's doctrine of predestination establishes a sequence where God foreknows, predestines, calls, justifies, and glorifies His people.
Paul says that those whom He foreknows, these same people He predestines, and all whom He predestines, He calls, and all whom He calls, He justifies, and all who are in the category of the justified, these also He glorifies.
Source: The Golden Chain (Ligonier)
The concept of 'all' implies that everyone God foreknows is predestined, and all who are predestined are also called.
All whom God foreknows in the way Paul speaks of here are predestined, and all of those who are in the category of the predestined are also in the category of the called.
Source: The Golden Chain (Ligonier)
All whom God foreknows are predestined, and all of those who are predestined are also in the category of the called.
All whom God foreknows in the way Paul speaks of here are predestined, and all of those who are in the category of the predestined are also in the category of the called.
Source: The Golden Chain (Ligonier)
The full chain of salvation dictates that God foreknows, predestines, calls, justifies, and glorifies all the elect.
Paul says that those whom He foreknows, these same people He predestines, and all whom He predestines, He calls, and all whom He calls, He justifies, and all who are in the category of the justified, these also He glorifies.
Source: The Golden Chain (Ligonier)
The doctrines of sovereign grace and election are comforting because they demonstrate that God chose humanity by His sheer sovereign good pleasure.
They are some of the most comforting doctrines that one can learn from sacred Scripture. As Paul says in verses 31 and 32: “If God is for us, who can be against us? He who did not spare His own Son, but delivered Him up for us all, how shall He not with Him also freely give us all things?”
Source: The Golden Chain (Ligonier)
Gamaliel advised the council that if their opposition to the apostles was merely human, it would fail, but if it was divine, they could not stop it.
And now I say to you, keep away from these men and let them alone; for if this plan or this work is of men, it will come to nothing; but if it is of God, you cannot overthrow it—lest you even be found to fight against God.
Source: If It Is of God (Ligonier)
The doctrine of God's sovereign election is a prominent theme found throughout the entire Bible, not just in obscure passages.
Rather, the doctrine of election appears on virtually every page of the Bible from Genesis through Revelation.
Source: Israel's Rejection of Christ (Ligonier)
The resistance to the sovereignty of God's grace is a built-in, inherent problem of the fallen nature.
That assessment of our natural hostility to the sovereignty of grace, a built-in allergy to sovereign election that we suffer from in our fallen nature, is not instantly cured by conversion.
Source: Israel's Rejection of Christ (Ligonier)
The doctrine of election is so clearly presented in Romans 9 that he does not see how God could have made it clearer.
When I look at this chapter, I believe it is so clear that I do not see how God in His Word could have made the doctrine of election any clearer than it is here in this great chapter of Romans 9.
Source: Israel's Rejection of Christ (Ligonier)
One common way people avoid the doctrine of election is by ignoring Romans 9 and discussing matters of grace in other parts of Scripture.
The first, easiest, and most common way of getting around what Romans 9 teaches is by ignoring it, avoiding it, and carrying the discussion about matters of grace and sovereignty to other portions of Scripture while studiously staying away from Romans 9.
Source: Israel's Rejection of Christ (Ligonier)
A second way people circumvent the doctrine is by limiting Paul's election to nations rather than individuals.
The second way in which it is gotten around, so to speak, is to come to Romans 9 and say that Paul is not talking about God’s sovereign election of individuals unto salvation but rather God’s sovereign election of nations to a particular historic destiny.
Source: Israel's Rejection of Christ (Ligonier)
Paul raises a rhetorical question to preemptively address the objection that God might be unjust or unrighteous in His sovereign election.
Paul raises a rhetorical question that is unthinkable: “Is there unrighteousness with God?” Why does he raise it? Paul is anticipating your response, my response, and the response of his Roman readership to what he has just been setting forth beginning in chapter 8 and now into chapter 9 where he talks about the sovereignty of God in election such that God, according to the good pleasure of His will, to establish His own sacred purpose, chooses Jacob and not Esau.
Source: Israel's Rejection & God's Justice (Part 1) (Ligonier)
The primary objections to election are that it suggests God is arbitrary, unjust, or unrighteous.
It seems to make God appear arbitrary, whimsical, and capricious. Even worse, in His arbitrary selection of one person over another from all eternity, there seems to be a shadow side of God’s character that indicates, in the final analysis, that even God is infected by sin, even God is unjust, even God is unrighteous, and even God behaves from time to time in an iniquitous manner.
Source: Israel's Rejection & God's Justice (Part 1) (Ligonier)
The Arminian position holds that God chooses people based on His foreknowledge of their future choices.
▷ A view Sproul explains or critiques — not his own position.
This is the Arminian position that says God chooses people based on His foreknowledge of what they are going to do. He knows in advance who will choose Christ and who will not, and on the basis of that foreknown choice that you or I make, God then makes His choice.
Source: Israel's Rejection & God's Justice (Part 1) (Ligonier)
The essence of grace is its voluntary nature, and God reserves the absolute right to give or withhold it.
The very essence of grace is in its voluntary character. God reserves to Himself the sovereign absolute right to give grace to some and withhold that grace from others.
Source: Israel's Rejection & God's Justice (Part 1) (Ligonier)
God eternally chooses to save His elect based solely on His good pleasure, independent of their actions or desires.
It is God’s good pleasure from all eternity to save His elect, not based on what they will, not based upon how they run, how they walk, or how they behave, but so that God may show forth His grace in salvation.
Source: Israel's Rejection & God's Justice (Part 1) (Ligonier)
The semi-Pelagian view of election is incorrect because it undermines God's sovereignty and exalts human decisions above God's grace.
If you are hanging on to your semi-Pelagian views of election, get rid of them. That theology undermines the sovereignty of God, the sovereignty of His grace, and the sweetness of His mercy.
Source: Israel's Rejection & God's Justice (Part 1) (Ligonier)
He prefers to avoid answering questions about predestination on the radio because the topic is too complex to cover briefly.
Every time someone asks me on the radio about predestination, I want to tell them that I would rather not answer that question, because I would rather say nothing than say too little since you cannot deal with this matter in two to five minutes.
Source: Israel's Rejection & God's Justice (Part 2) (Ligonier)
The speaker does not adhere to the symmetrical view of predestination, preferring a 'positive-negative' view.
▷ A view Sproul explains or critiques — not his own position.
I do not hold to that view of equal ultimacy or a symmetrical view of predestination. I hold to what is called, in theological jargon, a “positive-negative” view of double predestination.
Source: Israel's Rejection & God's Justice (Part 2) (Ligonier)
He rejects the view of equal ultimacy and instead advocates for a 'positive-negative' view of double predestination.
I do not hold to that view of equal ultimacy or a symmetrical view of predestination. I hold to what is called, in theological jargon, a “positive-negative” view of double predestination.
Source: Israel's Rejection & God's Justice (Part 2) (Ligonier)
Both supralapsarianism and infralapsarianism agree that God's decrees regarding election and reprobation are rooted and grounded in eternity.
Both sides understand that God’s decrees regarding election and reprobation are rooted and grounded in eternity.
Source: Israel's Rejection & God's Justice (Part 3) (Ligonier)
The supralapsarian position teaches that God first decrees election and reprobation, and then decrees the fall of humanity to accomplish that purpose.
On the other side of the coin, the supralapsarian position teaches that God decrees the fall in light of His doctrine of election. His first decree is to elect certain people to salvation and others unto reprobation. In order to accomplish that eternal purpose, He decrees the fall of humanity.
Source: Israel's Rejection & God's Justice (Part 3) (Ligonier)
The doctrine of election ultimately reveals that God's glory is characterized by unfathomable grace and mercy.
But in a very short time contemplating the riches of the glory of God, I began to see the sweetness of this doctrine, because what it screams is not so much sovereignty but grace, mercy that is unfathomable.
Source: Israel's Rejection & God's Justice (Part 3) (Ligonier)
The doctrine of predestination should not be studied abstractly, but rather in relation to the riches of God's glory.
We must never study the doctrine of predestination in the abstract. In the final analysis, though it certainly involves God’s sovereignty, His omnipotence, and His omniscience, the bottom line is that this doctrine is about the riches of God’s glory.
Source: Israel's Rejection & God's Justice (Part 3) (Ligonier)
The doctrine of unconditional election is most clearly and compellingly taught in Romans 9.
there is no portion of Scripture that teaches it more clearly, persuasively, and compellingly than Romans 9.
Source: Israel's Rejection & God's Purpose (Ligonier)
Many professing evangelicals deny the doctrine of unconditional election.
there are people—in fact, the majority of professing evangelicals in our day—who deny the doctrine of unconditional election.
Source: Israel's Rejection & God's Purpose (Ligonier)
The ability to believe is a key question regarding the doctrine of election.
Now tell me what this text says about who will believe or even who can believe.
Source: Israel's Rejection & God's Purpose (Ligonier)
The texts concerning election, particularly in Romans 9, focus on the individual rather than merely the selection of nations.
Strange, is it not, that when Paul makes his point about election, he mentions individuals, Jacob and Esau? How can you ignore that in the case Paul is setting forth, where he specifically discusses the selection of one individual over another, Jacob over Esau?
Source: Israel's Rejection & God's Purpose (Ligonier)
Paul's doctrine of predestination, as developed in Romans 8, is clearly related to personal salvation, not merely temporal or material blessings.
In Romans 8, Paul clearly puts the idea of predestination in the context of personal salvation, which he has been developing from chapter 1, where he is explaining the gospel to people who are unjust and in need of justification before the tribunal of God.
Source: Israel's Rejection & God's Purpose (Ligonier)
The idea that election is based on human works or will is incorrect and contradicts the point of the Apostle's teaching.
The prescient advocates, in the final analysis, say that our election is rooted and grounded in our will: It is of him who wills. They say that it is some work we do that is the grounds of divine selection and predestination. This is why we say that would be conditional election, that you would have to meet a condition in order for God to elect you, which flies in the face of the very point that the Apostle is laboring to overcome here in this portion of the text, that God’s purpose might stand.
Source: Israel's Rejection & God's Purpose (Ligonier)
God's knowledge of the future is tied to His sovereign will and election, not to human free will.
When God ordains that the people of Israel be restored in the last hour, He knows that it will happen because it is His sovereign will and in accordance with His sovereign election.
Source: Israel's Rejection Not Final (Part 3) (Ligonier)
The gift of grace is secure and cannot be revoked, even by the individual's own disobedience.
God will never, under any circumstances, revoke that gift. Even your disobedience, which may displease Him and provoke Him to corrective wrath, will not cause Him to take that gift away.
Source: Israel's Rejection Not Final (Part 3) (Ligonier)
God's sovereign election is always final, regardless of circumstances.
The sovereign election of God is always final, no matter what.
Source: Israel's Rejection Not Final (Part 3) (Ligonier)
God's grace is a free gift, not a repayment of a debt, and this is linked to the marvel of election.
He is not repaying a debt, but the gift of His grace is given freely from the abundance of His mercy and love. This is doxology, where Paul is praising the glory of God.
Source: Israel's Rejection Not Final (Part 3) (Ligonier)
The pagan view holds that the will is absolutely free, meaning that every choice must be made without any influence, compulsion, or prior bias.
For the will to be free, it must have no preconceived bias, no previous inclination, and no prior disposition in one direction or the other. That is what is meant by a will of indifference.
Source: Law Cannot Save from Sin (Part 2) (Ligonier)
When the doctrine of God's sovereignty and election is taught, people often protest that it contradicts human free will.
So deeply are we entrenched is this pagan notion of the will that when we preach about the sovereignty of God in His ministry of redemption, in His work of sovereign election, and the disposition of His saving grace through the good pleasure of His will, people immediately protest, often vociferously, sometimes with great anger and passion that this violates the free will of man.
Source: Law Cannot Save from Sin (Part 2) (Ligonier)
The ability to make choices requires a mind, as puppets or beings without a mind cannot have inclinations or make decisions.
Puppets do not make choices. Puppets do not have good desires; puppets do not have evil desires. They have no inclinations whatsoever. Why? Because they do not have minds.
Source: Law Cannot Save from Sin (Part 2) (Ligonier)
All choices have a cause, and the antecedent cause is what is called inclination or disposition.
All choices have a cause, and the antecedent cause for every choice that we make is what Edwards called inclination or disposition .
Source: Law Cannot Save from Sin (Part 2) (Ligonier)
After the Fall, humanity retains free will but loses the moral liberty or desire to please God.
After the fall, we still have free will, but we have lost the liberty. We have lost the desire to please God.
Source: Law Cannot Save from Sin (Part 2) (Ligonier)
Some people in the early church developed scruples about matters that were inherently morally neutral (adiaphorous).
Yet, in the early Christian church, some people began to have scruples about matters that in and of themselves were adiaphorous.
Source: The Law of Liberty (Ligonier)
The biblical term 'saeculum' refers to the present age or time, while 'mundus' refers to the physical, geographical world.
The difference is this: The mundus referred to this world spatially, this geographical location, this planet as distinguished from the “heavenlies” of which the Bible speaks. The other word for world was the word saeculum , which meant this age, this present time that is not informed by the eternal.
Source: Living Sacrifices to God (Ligonier)
Living beyond one's means and becoming prodigal is characterized as bad stewardship and contrary to God's will.
Credit card debt comes when we live beyond our means, when we become prodigal and profligate just like this man in the story. That is bad stewardship. It is not how God wants His people to live.
Source: The Lost Son (Part 1) (Ligonier)
The right to vote can be misused to impose taxes on others without their consent, leading to the tyranny of the majority.
What is so evil and destructive about it is that it gives people the right to vote to impose taxes on other people that will not be imposed on themselves.
Source: Love Your Neighbor (Ligonier)
Christians should avoid participating in unjust political systems, but they should conscientiously support righteousness and justice within any system they are involved in.
Christians ought never to be involved in that sort of injustice, ever. We ought to be involved with the paying of our taxes as a matter of conscience, and yet at the same time be scrupulous in supporting righteousness and justice in whatever system we are engaged in.
Source: Love Your Neighbor (Ligonier)
Voters should consider the ethical implications of their vote, recognizing that the political system can allow people to vote for privileges that take from others.
When you go into the voting booth and cast a ballot, think of the ethical implications you have when you cast your ballot.
Source: God and Caesar (Ligonier)
Jesus' actions, such as walking on the water, are presented as a self-conscious involvement in a theophany.
That is what Jesus was doing: “I’m going out to the boat. I’m going to walk on the water that I might pass by them.” Jesus was self-consciously involved in a theophany.
Source: Jesus Walking on Water (Ligonier)
Salvation must be received by grace alone, not earned or bought.
You have to receive it. It’s by grace and grace alone.
Source: The Rich Young Ruler (Ligonier)
Receiving grace means receiving something that is a gift, which is not earned, merited, or achieved by the recipient.
To be a recipient of grace is to receive something that you do not merit, to receive something that you have not earned, to receive something that you have not achieved. Rather it is to receive something that is a gift—and purely a gift—from a gracious God who bestows it upon us.
Source: The Mission of the Seventy-Two (Ligonier)
Currently, there are no Apostles in the biblical sense who meet the criteria established in the New Testament for Apostolic succession.
Beloved, there are no Apostles, in the biblical sense, today. No one would meet the criteria established here in the New Testament for Apostolic succession.
Source: A New Apostle (Ligonier)
God's sovereign foreordination of all events does not eliminate human free will, but rather works through the real decisions of people.
The Confession then teaches that God’s sovereign foreordination of all things that come to pass is not carried out in such a way as to eliminate secondary causes or do violence to the will of the creature. That is, when God brings His will to pass, He works in, through, and by the real decisions of real people.
Source: Peter's Sermon - Part 2 (Ligonier)
Pelagius argued that humans do not need God's grace to be obedient, asserting that the ability to obey is inherent.
▷ A view Sproul explains or critiques — not his own position.
What? Are you asking God to grant you what He commands? You don’t need any help from God to do what God commands. If God commands you to do something, doesn’t that mean that you have the moral ability to do it? God would never command you to do something that you can’t do.
Source: The Pharisee and the Tax Collector (Ligonier)
The speaker is introducing the doctrine of election, noting that it is a topic that causes controversy.
We are looking, in a very practical sense, at the doctrine of election—a doctrine that produces much controversy.
Source: The Return of the Seventy-Two (Ligonier)
Because believers are under grace, sin cannot have dominion over them.
For sin shall not have dominion over you, for you are not under law but under grace.
Source: From Slaves of Sin to Slaves of God (Ligonier)
The notion that humans have the moral power to choose yes or no in all moral issues is heretical and unbiblical.
One of the most destructive ideas we tend to bring to Scripture is the humanist, pagan notion that our free will is such that we are not bent in one direction or the other, but every time we have an option before us of a moral issue, we have the moral power to say yes or no, and the will is basically in a state of indifference by nature.
Source: From Slaves of Sin to Slaves of God (Ligonier)
Irresistible grace means that even if humans resist, God's grace will overcome that resistance to fulfill His eternal plan.
Irresistible grace means that even though we resist with all of our might, God’s grace trumps our resistance and brings to pass what His eternal plan has been, what His divine purpose is to bring it to pass.
Source: From Suffering to Glory (Part 2) (Ligonier)
When the wine ran out, the groom faced two problems: embarrassment and potential legal liability.
On the one hand, it was a massive embarrassment for the groom to run out of the refreshments he was providing at his own expense for the guests he had invited. Maybe he did not make enough provision in the first place, more people came than he anticipated, or they drank more than he anticipated. For whatever reason, they ran out of wine.
Source: The Wedding Feast (Ligonier)
One cannot know in this life whether they are elect.
So I cannot possibly know in this world that I’m not elect.
Source: How should we evangelize someone who claims they aren’t elect? (Ligonier Q&A)
The preceptive will refers to the commandments that God reveals to humanity, which are not necessarily sovereign, efficacious acts of His will.
This is where God reveals to us the commandments that He wants us to obey. However, God’s command that we love Him with all of our hearts is not a sovereign, efficacious act of His will.
Source: How many wills does God have? (Ligonier Q&A)
The belief that experiencing grace means one is no longer bound by the law, even in an instructive sense, is antinomianism.
If we’re talking about “hyper-grace��” in terms of grace covering everything, there are those in that movement who are basically antinomian. That is, they believe that once we experience grace, we’re no longer under the law in any sense, even in the instructive sense.
Source: How should we respond to the hyper-grace movement? (Ligonier Q&A)
The curse on the serpent contains the promise of the protoevangelium, which foretold a descendant of the woman who would crush the serpent's head.
Two, in the curse of the serpent that is part of the judgment of God for the fall, there is the promise of the protoevangel . That is, from the seed of the woman would come One who would crush the head of the serpent while its heel was being bruised.
Source: Is there evidence of Adam and Eve’s repentance and faith after the fall? (Ligonier Q&A)