Ronnie W. Rogers, “Taking every thought captive…”

As a pastor, I am intimately concerned about what is included in preaching of the gospel. I realize that all Christians are concerned, and rightly so; but since I do this week in and week out it is of utmost importance to not only understand the gospel, but to articulate the gospel message in such a way that it clearly reflects what the Scripture teaches and what I believe. I offer this article to elucidate my understanding of the call to preach the gospel. This is my eighth article concerning issues related to salvation.

I affirm the mandate to preach the gospel to everyone (John 6:44, 12:32; Revelation 22:17); further that the proclamation of the gospel appeals to the heart and mind in persuasiveness, aided by divine enablements of grace (see IV, 1), may result in salvation for anyone who hears. Further, to answer John Piper’s question, “What message would missionaries rather take than the message: Be glad in God! Rejoice in God! Sing for joy in God! …God loves to exalt himself by showing mercy to sinners.”¹ my answer is, the truth that when anyone hears this glorious message, that same someone has a chance, by the grace and mercy of God, to receive the truth of the message by faith; further, that message without opportunity for all sinners to accept, should be changed to say, “some can be glad in God if He predestined you”, “God loves to exalt Himself by showing mercy to some sinners.” That is the message of Calvinism, and I would appreciate their making that clear.

I disaffirm that while I am commanded to preach the power of the gospel—the good news—to the entire world, God has predetermined to make that power unavailable to the entire audience of the message and has limited it to only those chosen by God apart from faith (Acts 16:31-32, Romans 10:13).² Further, I disaffirm that God wants the gospel presented to all, and calls³ on all to repent, but has no intention of those offers of the gospel being real chances for salvation except for some; still further, that the whole mission enterprise is merely obedience, which has no real affect upon anyone’s opportunity for salvation.⁴

Moreover, I disaffirm that the answer that it is the means by which God saves is either satisfactory or adequate if, as the Calvinist believes, salvation is monergistic, and prior to monergistic regeneration any and every appeal to the heart and mind is meaningless to the person addressed by the Calvinist because regeneration is an act totally against the person’s will, mind, and heart, regardless of what they hear or have not heard. ⁵

I disaffirm that any person cannot repent, or by the grace of God answer the call of the gospel, which is the ultimate meaning of Calvinism because Calvinists believe that prior to regeneration a person cannot repent and after regeneration they cannot not repent. Further, that preaching out of mere obedience to God is the picture presented in Scripture, where Jesus (Matthew 23:37-39) and Paul (Acts 17:4, 18:4, 18:13, 2 Corinthians 5:11) passionately sought to persuade and were emotional because those they spoke to would not come or might not come, which seems disingenuous if they actually knew certain ones could come and they would, and certain ones could not come and they would not, and nothing could ever change that or even affect it in the most infinitesimal degree.⁶ Moreover, I disaffirm that it is an escapable reality of Calvinism that God must desire those who go to hell to be in hell since everyone He regenerates is saved from hell and the ones He chooses not to regenerate must go to hell. I wish they would preach this more often so that it could be compared to the quite contrary picture of God in the Scripture.

1. John Piper, Let The Nations Be Glad: The Supremacy of God in Missions, (Grand Rapids: Baker Books, 1993) p 33. [↩]
2. It seems that the message to the Philippian jailer, if Paul was a Calvinist, should have been, “Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ, which is the only thing you can do if you have been selected and the one thing you cannot do if you have not been selectively regenerated; consequently, while belief is necessary for salvation, it is not for you to worry about; you should worry about things you can do something about.” Outside of mere obedience and process, the underlying message of Calvinism allows no room for urgency or passionate and emotional pleading with the message to repent since all who are predestined to repent will and those who were not cannot repent i.e., irresistible grace.

   Of course I am well aware of the answers to this by Calvinism, but isn’t it a little disingenuous to proclaim the message without telling them the secret truth of Calvinism? If I preached to the jailer, and said Paul’s words, underlying that message would be the truth that the jailer, or any jailer who heard the message should and could repent, and that is what I believe Paul clearly believed and meant. However, if a Calvinist said it, the underlying message would be that “although I told you to believe you can’t until you are regenerated and if you are regenerated you cannot not believe” and that is a quite different gospel.

   Again, my concern has nothing to do with whether it is a good faith offer on the part of the Calvinist, but whether the person hearing it has a real chance to be saved or not. If all of the Scriptures that seem to indicate God really wants everyone to be saved and has provided for that possibility are what they appear to be; and if Calvinists really believe what their system necessitates, which is that He really does not want every one saved because according to irresistible grace if HE did they would be, I plead with Calvinist to please make sure that your message makes that clear because it is an incredibly important component of your message.

   Thus, I am satisfied that the Calvinist can make a good faith offer because he does not know who the elect are, and that is not my concern. I am concerned with the idea that some believe that claim exonerates God from appearing to make a real offer since He does know. Consequently, I affirm that my offer of the gospel is in good faith, and I affirm that God’s offer of the gospel is one of good faith as well. [↩]

3. The difference between the general call and efficacious call is that the general call is sufficient for all to be saved; whereas, the effective call consummates salvation for those whom God foreknew, predestined, called, justified and glorified (Romans 8:28-30)

   Those whom God foreknew would, once graciously enabled to be able to exercise faith or not exercise faith in Christ, trust His salvation message, quite unlike Adam did in the garden, receive the efficacious call that consummates His gracious and genuine offer of salvation. That God foreknows, and predestines those whom He foreknows “to be conformed to the image of His son” is not a point of contention. Neither is the reality that God efficaciously calls those He predestined to “be conformed to the image of His son” by sanctification, justification, and glorification since salvation requires not only enabling grace, but also sustaining and completing grace.

   What is the point of disagreement is whether foreknowledge means “to know beforehand” or “elect” “determine” etc. I believe that the evidence is that it means to know beforehand rather than to determine beforehand. Thomas R. Edger has written an extensive article on this issue which is worth reading.

   Further, to use verses such as Romans 8:28-30 or 1 Corinthians 1:24 in order to prove that the effectual call of God is as the Calvinist explain it is to read into the text more than is warranted. They simply assume the answer rather than prove it.

   Finally, faith preceding regeneration and therefore predestination is included in the word foreknowledge and therefore the efficacious calling of God. This condition was sovereignly determined by God. It is not a requirement for receiving the sufficient call of the gospel but it is a condition for receiving the efficient call of the gospel. [↩]

4. From a Calvinist view, it does not matter if anyone ever witnesses—beyond being merely a means to salvation or only an act of obedience. [↩]
5. The Calvinist is right to say that a person is not saved against his will since according to the doctrine of “irresistible grace” along with a compatibilist view of free will, God changes the nature of a person and the person will surely believe in Christ; however, the irresistible change of the nature that results in the free exercise of faith is an act which is absolutely forced upon the unsaved; thus, I say that regeneration is against the will of the unsaved not salvation by faith. This is a subtle but crucial distinction in understanding how Calvinist can say that a person is both irresistibly drawn and freely exercises faith. [↩]
6. Why don’t true Calvinists stand in the pulpit and say you cannot be saved unless God regenerates you: if He does you will be saved, if He doesn’t you won’t, and nothing can change that or add to it. To preach repent and believe is deceptive since they can’t, and if they are regenerated, they will. They may answer, “We preach believe and repent” because we are commanded to. I would agree, but we are also commanded to “speak the truth in love”; therefore, Calvinists need to tell what they really believe. Some Calvinists do this, and I appreciate and respect them for doing so. I am not referring to them. That the Scripture says to preach the gospel is true, but it does not affirm irresistible grace or the new birth before faith; it is like telling them to do the opposite of what actually happens. [↩]