THE term, Predestination, as used by theologians has a variety of meanings. It is used to designate (1) all God’s eternal purposes and is equivalent to decree; (2) those purposes of God which specially respect His moral creatures, angels and men; (3) the counsel of God concerning fallen man, including the sovereign election of some and the righteous reprobation of others; (4) the eternal election of God’s people to everlasting life; it will be remembered by those familiar with the Westminster Confession of Faith that it is in this sense the Divines use the term. It is in the first sense, however, that the term is used in a recently published volume* by the Sovereign Grace Union. The great subject is handled with skill and becoming caution by Zanchius and this reprint of Tiplady’s translation places within reach of all interested a volume of much interest and instruction. The whole subject is of the greatest importance to all interested in God’s revealed will. There are great, inscrutable mysteries involved in the doctrine of the divine decrees but that is no reason why preachers should remain silent on what God has plainly revealed provided they state the doctrine with the caution and reserve of Holy Scripture and pay heed to the warning of the Westminster Divines when they say: “The doctrine of this high mystery of predestination is to be handled with special prudence and care, that man attending the will of God revealed in His Word, and yielding obedience there-unto, may, from the certainty of their effectual vocation, be assured of their eternal election. So shall this doctrine afford matter of praise, reverence, and admiration of God, and of humility, diligence, and abundant consolation, to all that sincerely obey the Gospel” (Confession of Faith, chap. iii., sec. viii.).
*The Doctrine of Absolute Predestination Stated and Asserted with a Preliminary Discourse on the Divine Attributes; translated from the Latin of Jerom Zanchius by Augustus Montague Tiplady, A.B. London: 98 Camberwell Grove, S.E. 5. Price, 5s.
Whatever difficulties beset us in connection with the doctrine and however repellent some aspects of it may be to our fallen nature there is no getting away from the fact that it is plainly revealed in Scripture. It has as its general background the truth that God has a divine purpose and that this purpose is unalterably fixed. It indicates something worse in the mind than inability to solve a mystery when a doctrine so plainly revealed is rejected. Such a state of mind brings us right up against the Satanic rebelliousness of our depraved natures.
The word to elect (eklego) is used twenty-one times in the New Testament. It signifies (1) Christ’s choice of men to be apostles (Luke vi. 13; John vi. 70); (2) God’s choice of the Jewish nation as a special people (Acts xiii. 17); (3) the choice of men by God or the church for some special service (Acts xv. 7, 22); the choice made by Mary of the better part (Luke x. 42); (5) in the great majority of cases God’s eternal election of men to everlasting life (John xv. 16; 1 Cor. i. 27, 28; Eph. i. 4; James ii. 5). Election (ekloge), the noun, occurs seven times in the New Testament. It signifies (1) election to the apostolic office (Acts ix. 15); (2) those chosen to eternal life (Roms. xi. 7); (3) the purpose or act of God in choosing His own people to salvation (Roms. ix. 11; xi. 5, 28; 1 Thess. i. 4; ii. Pet. i. 10). In addition to these words predestination is denoted in the New Testament by the verb foreknow (proginosko) and the noun foreknowledge (prognosis) and also by predestinate or determine (proorizein). The word to foreknow (proginosko) occurs in Roms. viii. 29—”Whom He did foreknow (proegno), He also did predestinate;” in Roms. xi. 2—”God hath not cast away His people whom He foreknew (proegno); in 1 Pet. i. 20—”Who verily was foreordained (proegnosmenos) before the foundation of the world.” The noun, foreknowledge (prognosis), occurs in Acts ii. 23—”Delivered by the determinate counsel and foreknowledge (prognosis) of God;” again, in 1 Pet. i. 2—”Elect, according to the foreknowledge (prognosis) of God.” “Foreknow” is not used here in the sense of the divine omniscience or knowledge.
“The terms foreknow and predestinate,” as Dr. Shedd points out, “denote two aspects of the same thing. Roms. xi. 2 might read: ‘God hath not cast away His people whom He predestinated.’ When one is distinguished from the other, as in Roms. viii. 29, to foreknow means to choose or single out for the purpose of predestinating. Foreknowledge, in this use of the word, is election: It is the first part of the total act of predestinating. The word know, in this connection, has the Hebraistic not the classical signification. To know in the Hebrew sense, means to regard with favour; denoting not mere intellectual cognition, but some kind of interested feeling or affection toward the object. Compare Gen. xviii. 18, 19; Ps. i. 6; Ps. xxxvi. 10; Ps. exliv. 3; Hosea viii. 4; Amos iii. 2; Nahum i. 7; Matt. vii. 23; John x. 14; 1 Cor. viii. 3; 1 Cor. xvi. 18; 11 Tim. ii. 19; 1 Thess. v. 12. Traces of this use of gignoskein, to foreknow, are seen in the earlier Greek usage; gnotos equal gnostos signifies a kinsman, a friend . . . It is to be carefully observed, that foreknowledge in the Hebraistic sense of election means a foreknowledge of the person simply; not of the actions of the person—’Whom He foreknew’ (Roms. viii. 29) does not mean: ‘Whose acts He foreknew’ but ‘Whose person He foreknew.’ It signifies that God fixes His eye upon a particular sinful man, and selects him as an individual to be predestinated to holiness in effectual calling. This is proved by the remainder of the verse: ‘Whom He foreknew, He also did predestinate to be conformed to the image of His Son.’ The holy actions of the elect are the effect, not the cause, of their being foreknown and predestinated . . . In Roms. xi. 2 Paul affirms that ‘God hath not cast away His people whom He foreknew.’ It would be nonsense, even to suppose that God has cast away a people whom He foreknew would keep His commandments. This, therefore, cannot be the sense of proegno. The ground of predestination, is God’s foreknowledge; and this foreknowledge is not a foresight that a particular individual will believe and repent, but a simple pre-recognition of him as a person to whom God in His sovereign mercy has determined to ‘give repentance’ (11 Tim. ii. 25); and to give faith since faith is the gift of God (Eph. ii. 8) and since ‘as many as were ordained to eternal life believed’ (Acts xiii. 48). In making the choice God acts ‘according to the good pleasure of His will’ (Eph. i. 5) and not according to any good action of the creature, so ‘that the purpose of God according to election might stand not of works but of Him that calleth’ (Roms. ix. 11). Foreknowledge, in the Hebraistic use of the word, is prior in the order to predestination, because it means electing compassion, and persons are referred to; but foreknowledge in the classical sense is subsequent in the order to decree, because it denotes cognition, and events are referred to. God foreknows, that is, elects those persons whom He predestinates to life. God decrees the creation of the world, and thereby foreknows with certainty the fact” (Dogmatic Theology, I. 417, 418). It will thus be seen that the Arminian view that election is dependent on the foreknowledge of God is untenable.
The other word used in the New Testament to denote predestination is proorizein and is translated in our Version as ordain, determine, or predestinate. It occurs six times in the New Testament (Acts iv. 28; Roms. viii. 29, 30; I. Cor. ii. 7 and Eph. i. 5, 11).
The decree of predestination is divided into the decrees of election and reprobation. The latter is the antithesis of the former and necessarily follows from it. Election is the expression of the divine mercy; reprobation of the divine justice. Whoever holds the doctrine of election must hold the doctrine of reprobation. Reprobation implies that God simply passes by the sinner leaving him as he is. In election He makes choice of the sinner in His sovereign grace. Both are acts of the sovereignty of God.
Reprobation comprises preterition and condemnation. The Westminster Confession has clearly stated this distinction in sections iii. and vii. of the III. chapter—(1) there is a passing by of some—”fore-ordained to everlasting death” in the sovereign act of God (sec. iii.); (2) these are ordained to “dishonour and wrath for their sin” in the act of God as a just Judge (sec. vii.). Sinners are not punished for being passed over; they are punished for their sins. It was this failure on the part of the framers of the Free Church Declaratory Act of 1892 to distinguish between preterition and condemnation that resulted in the confused and blundering statement: “That this Church does not teach and does not regard the Confession as teaching, the foreordination of men to death irrespective of their own sin.” While as infralapsarians we hold that the choice was made of men in a fallen state and the passing by was of men in a similar state yet the election was not on account of any goodness in the chosen nor was reprobation on account of their sin. Both were sovereign acts of God irrespective of any goodness or want of goodness in the fallen mass of mankind. In putting the matter thus we are conscious of the difficulty of stating clearly what must be received by all who rightly understand the doctrine of God’s sovereignty in election and reprobation.
Dr. Shedd already quoted clearly states the matter thus: “(1) Preterition is a sovereign act; condemnation is a judicial act. God passes by an individual because of His sovereign good pleasure, but He condemns this individual to punishment, not because of His sovereign good pleasure, but because this individual is a sinner. (2) The reason of condemnation is known; sin is the reason. The reason of preterition is unknown. It is not sin, because the elect are as sinful as the non-elect. (3) In preterition God’s action is permissive; inaction rather than action. In condemnation God’s action is efficient and positive” (Dogmatic Theology I. 433). Dr. Warfield may be also quoted on the subject. “Sin,” he says, “is not the cause of preterition; election is the cause of preterition, i.e., the choosing of some is the cause that ‘the rest’ are left. Sin is the cause, however, of how the preterited ones are treated. And to guard this, the Westminster men were accustomed to use a phrase they borrowed from Wollevius which affirmed that sin is not the causa reprobationis but the causa reprobabilitatis, that is, sin is not the cause of reprobation (otherwise the elect, who also are sinners, would be reprobates), but it is the cause of men being in a reprobatable state” (On Revision of the Confession, pp. 47, 48.) We conclude our brief exposition of this solemn subject with the words of John Bunyan: “Eternal reprobation makes no man a sinner. The foreknowledge of God that the reprobate will perish makes no man a sinner. God’s infallible determining upon the damnation of him that perisheth makes no man a sinner. God’s patience and forbearance until the reprobate fits himself for eternal destruction makes no man a sinner” (Reprobation Asserted, xi.).
Satan has often made use of the high mystery of election to harass and perplex the minds of God’s people. He has so presented the matter when any concern has been awakened that it is necessary to make sure first of all that they are elected otherwise it matters not what will happen they will not be saved. Only those who have had to pass through such an experience can realise what a master the Devil is of Satanic logic, how skilfully he links up every point in the argument until the mind of the harassed seeker is in his carefully set snare. It is well that we should bear in mind that the Scripture nowhere asks the sinner to make his election sure before coming to Christ. It is believers who are called upon to do so and the fruits of the Holy Spirit borne by them are evidence that they are God’s elect—loved with an everlasting love before the foundation of the world.