But my people would not hearken to my voice; and
Israel would have none of me. So I gave
them up unto their own hearts’ lusts:
and they walked in their own counsels (Ps. 81:11-12).
COMMON GRACE
ARGUMENT:
Q. “In God’s punishment of Israel for its
rebellion, we read that He ‘gave them up unto their own hearts’ lust’ with the
effect that ‘they walked in their own counsels’ (Ps. 81:12) … Similarly, in
Romans 1, where Paul describes those who suppress the truth by their
wickedness, God ‘gave them over to a reprobate mind, to do those things which
are not convenient’ (28) … Does not this ‘giving someone over’ imply that there
was previously a gracious restraint or influence of the Spirit upon them that
was removed? Is this not a ‘common grace’?”
(I)
Rev. Ronald Hanko
[Source: Covenant Reformed News, vol. 18, no. 16 (Aug. 2021)]
In giving up the men of Israel to their own hearts’ lust and [similarly in His] giving up the ungodly to a reprobate mind [Rom. 1:28], He most certainly did remove a previous restraint. We see such things happening in our societies. God, in His just judgment, removes the restraints that once kept homosexuality, murder of infants and other gross sins in check, as Romans 1 teaches. He does it because they hold the truth of God under in unrighteousness and do not like to retain God in their knowledge. So He takes even the knowledge that they are destroying themselves away from them. He does so that they may reach a certain measure of wickedness and become ready for judgment (cf. Gen. 15:16).
God does this by His Holy Spirit, just as He does all things by the Spirit, first restraining their sin and then removing His restraints through the sovereign operations of the Spirit. He does this for the sake of His beloved church and to bring to pass all that He has decreed, but this restraint is not grace to the reprobate. Its purpose in the salvation of His redeemed people is gracious but there is no grace of God in the restraint itself, no grace shown to those whose wickedness He restrains. His restraint is like putting a muzzle on a rabid dog. The dog is restrained from biting and others are protected from it, but its nature is not changed nor its disease cured. God even restrains Satan (Job 1:12; 2:6; Rev. 20:1-3) and that most certainly is not a gracious restraint. Indeed, it is proof that God is able to restrain wickedness by His almighty power without showing grace to those whose sin is restrained.
God uses many different means to restrain man’s wickedness: the fear of punishment; the desire for the praise of others; the social shame and disgrace that wickedness brings at times, even among the ungodly; the fear of revenge; the evil consequences of sin to one’s health, family or career. Even then, these restraints only just keep sin in check. When they are removed, it becomes evident that man’s heart was not changed by these restraints, for he is still just as depraved and prone to all evil as before.
God, in His justice, uses these wicked men themselves to remove those restraints. He uses their courts to legalize homosexuality, abortion and drug abuse. He puts the medical, financial and legal means in their hands to descend into lawlessness and gross wickedness. He gives them the knowledge to invent and create, and then turn it all to the service of sin and Satan. What a testimony to His justice and righteousness that is!
Our denial of common
grace, therefore, is not a denial of God’s restraint of sin, nor of the fact
that this restraint is the work of His Spirit, nor of His gracious purpose in
restraining sin. It is simply that there is no grace except in the cross and shed
blood of our Saviour, and no grace for those who are without Christ. Proverbs
3:33 reminds us that “the curse of the Lord is in the house of the wicked,” not
His grace. It would be strange grace, anyway, that first restrained their
wickedness and then withdrew.
---------------------------------------------------
(II)
Prof. Herman C. Hanko
[Source: Common Grace Considered (2019 edition), pp. 213-214]
The
meaning of [this text] is … that God punishes
sin with sin. God’s wrath is revealed in His terrible
judgments upon the wicked. One of those judgments is that God pushes, as it were, the sinner into greater sin. Romans 1 [also] uses the
language, “gives them over.” Idolaters,
who change the glory of God into an image made like unto corruptible man, are punished … by being given over to homosexuality. History is replete with examples of this. God
is, after all, sovereign. He gives the sinner over to the sin that his
wicked heart craves. Sin multiplies and
becomes worse. And all this takes place
until the cup of iniquity is filled. But all this has nothing to do with any
kind of “inner restraint of sin in the hearts of the wicked.”
---------------------------------------------------
(III)
Herman Hoeksema (1886-1965)
(a)
[Source: The Protestant Reformed Churches in America (1947), pp. 372-374]
22. Is this interpretation [i.e. that the phrase “to give them up” or “He gave them over” merely means a “ceasing from restraining them any longer”] tenable?
No, for in the first place it does not allow the full significance to the term “to give up” or “to give over.” The word used in the original in the passages quoted by synod is frequently employed in Scripture and always refers to a positive act of delivering up. Thus the word is used in all the four gospel narratives to denote the act of Pilate whereby the he delivered up Jesus to be crucified, where the word certainly cannot signify the same as “to let go.” And in this sense it is used in many other places, while it never has the meaning which the synod would ascribe to it in the passages quoted. Hence, the interpretation of synod distorts the true meaning of Scripture in these passages.
23. Is there not another reason why the interpretation of synod is untenable?
Yes, the reason namely, that no such restraint of sin can possibly be presupposed as preceding the moment of the “giving up” in any of the passages quoted. The very opposite is true. In Psalm 81:11, 12 and Acts 7:42 the reference is to wicked Israel, to whom God had sent His word by Moses and the prophets, but who had constantly revealed that they would not hearken to the voice of the Lord. They had not been restrained by an operation of common grace, but, on the contrary, they were hardened in sin. Sin had taken its course and over against the Word of God had hardened their hearts. It was then that the Lord turned to give them up to worship all the host of heaven. The giving up, therefore, is a positive act of God as a punishment for their sin in which they had developed and increased.
Still more clearly evident this is in the passages which synod quoted from the first chapter of the epistle to the Romans. From verses 18-23, the apostle certainly does not describe a restraining influence of the Holy Spirit upon the wicked heathen world, whereby the heathen had lived a morally good life in this world, but, on the contrary, speaks of a manifestation of the wrath of God from heaven all through the ages of history, from the very beginning of the world’s sinful course against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men who hold the truth in ungodliness. Instead of common grace, wrath is, therefore, revealed from heaven. And instead of a tolerably good life as a fruit of the operation of the Holy Spirit, there is found in men a holding of the truth in unrighteousness. They knew God, but they glorified Him not as God, neither were thankful. And what was God’s attitude over against this ungodliness of wicked men? Did He restrain them? Did He cause a gracious operation of the Holy Spirit to work in their hearts, so that they would not corrupt themselves? The very opposite is taught in the passages which synod quotes. He gave them over. He made them foolish, so that they worshipped men and beasts and creeping things. And not only did He deliver them up to religious folly and darkness, but He also gave them up to moral uncleanness and corruption, to vile affections, to a reprobate mind, to do things which are not convenient.
Except for the fact, then, that the
synodical committee that composed the three points and the synod after them
blindly followed Dr. A. Kuyper, Sr., in the use and application he makes of
these passages, it may be considered inexplicable that these passages were at
all adduced in support of the second point. They teach the very opposite from that which synod attempted
to set forth.
(b)
[Source: The Rock Whence We Are Hewn (RFPA, 2015), p. 406]
Further, synod
referred to a triplet of texts, Psalm 81:12–13; Acts 7:42; and Romans 1:24–26,
28, which teach that God gives the sinner over to all manner of evil, iniquity,
and corruption. No exegesis can possibly deduce from these passages the
doctrine of a general operation of the Holy Spirit whereby the progress of
corruption is checked in the fallen human nature. Directly the texts teach exactly the opposite, for “to give over”
is the very opposite of “to restrain.” Nor do the texts presuppose a restraint
by the Holy Spirit prior to the giving over.
---------------------------------------------------
(IV)
More to come! (DV)
No comments:
Post a Comment