Effectual Calling, Pt. 2

A sermon by Thomas White

The DOCTRINE I present from my text maybe this:—

There are some persons in the world that are effectually called; or, which is all one, who are “called according to the purpose of God.”

There is a call of the gospel that is not effectual: of this our Saviour speaketh, when he saith, “Many are called, but few chosen.” (Matt. 20:16.) How many of the poor ministers of the gospel may complain of multitudes in this generation, saying, with the children that sat in the market-place “We have piped unto you, and ye have not danced; we have mourned to you, and ye have not lamented!"(Luke 7:32.) “Neither the delightful airs of mercy, nor the doleful ditties of judgment, have moved you.” But the election will certainly obtain; and the call that is “according to God’s purpose,” reacheth not ears only, but hearts also: “The hour is coming, and now is, when the dead shall hear the voice of the Son of God.” (John 5:25.)

This work of grace is presented to our view in a various dress of words. In the scriptures it is sometimes a “teaching,” sometimes a “drawing,” sometimes a “conversion,” sometimes a “regeneration” and all these in divers respects which I cannot stand to unfold. In the schools it is gratia prima, “the first grace,” praeveniens, “preceding grace,” operans, “operating grace.” Among Divines of the Reformed way, it is “an internal and effectual call,” vocatio alta et efficax, after the mind of St. Augustine.

When it is offered to our consideration under this notion, it presupposeth two things:—

1. That natural men stand at a distance from God.—We do not usually call those that stand close by us. This was once the condition of the Ephesians: “Ye sometimes were afar off.” (Eph. 2:13.) “Sometimes;” when? Surely in the time of their unregeneracy. “Far off” from whom? From Christ, from the church, from God, and consequently from themselves. But how could they be “far off” from God? Not in spaces of place; for God “filleth all places with his presence” as to his essence and providential works, he is “not far from every one of us; for in him we live and move” (Acts 17:27, 28): but as to their hearts and affections, all natural men are far from God: “God is not in all their thoughts” (Psalm 10:4): they do not know him, fear, love, and delight in him; they do not breathe after communion with him. Even when they “draw nigh unto him with their lips, their hearts are far from him.” (Isaiah 29:13.)

If it sometimes happens that we call those that are at hand, then usually they are such as are asleep. Sin is a deep sleep of the soul; and as sleep bindeth all the senses of the outward man, so sin all the powers of the inward. A man under the dominion of sin can do nothing for God, neither can he enjoy anything from God. It may be, he dreams of great satisfaction [that] he receiveth from the world’s dainties; but when “he awaketh, his soul is empty.” (Isaiah 29:8.) Or, further: if they be not asleep, they are such as mind something else than He would have them. All natural men mind something else than God would have them: they “mind earthly things.” (Phil. 3:19.) Herod mindeth the dancing of a lewd strumpet more than the preaching of the holy Baptist: the young man mindeth his great possessions; the epicure, his belly; the farmer, his barn; Judas, his bag; the silversmith, his shrines; the Gadarenes, their swine; Pilate, the favour and applause of the people. Let the best men speak ingenuously, and they must needs confess that there were many things (if I may call them “things,” rather “nothings”) which they minded more than God or Christ or heaven, more than the highest concernments of their immortal souls, the weightiest business of eternal salvation. They were all Gallios in respect of these things, they “cared for none of them,” till they were roused out of their waking dreams by the effectual call of the most gracious God. This is the condition of every natural man.

2. It presupposeth, that it is an easy thing with God to bring us home to himself, though we be never so far distant from him.—To awaken us to his service, though in a dead sleep of sin; to raise our minds to higher objects, though they be never so deeply immersed in the things of this present world. Is any thing hard to the Almighty? With a word he made us, with a word he can renew us.

When “darkness covered the face of the deep,” he did but say, “Let there be light: and there was light"(Gen. 1:2,3): with the like facility can he “shine in our hearts, giving us the light of the knowledge of the glory of God in the face of Jesus Christ,” (2 Cor. 4:6.) “He uttereth his voice,” saith David, “and the earth melteth.” (Psalm 46:6.) Let but God utter his voice, and the rocks and mountains of our corruptions will melt away like wax.

Effectual Calling, Pt 1

A sermon by Thomas White

“To them who are the called according to his purpose.”—Romans 8:28.

The sacred scriptures are a Paradise, or “garden of delights.” This Epistle to the Romans is a most interesting and artful knot in that garden. This chapter is the richest division in that knot, furnished with sweetest flowers of consolation, antidoting the remnants of corruption that there are in our hearts, and the various afflictions that we meet with in the world. This verse that I have read unto you, is the fairest flower in that division: for, what can sooner revive a drooping soul, than to be assured that “all things shall work together for good?” “We,” saith the great apostle, “do not think, imagine, conjecture, but know, partly by divine revelation, partly by our own experience, that all things,—not only gifts, graces, ordinances; but all creatures, all providences, all changes, events, occurrences; even those things that appear most formidable; homo oppugnans, diabolus insidians, ‘the persecutions of men, the temptations of the devil,’—shall work, not singly and apart, it may be, but together, for good.”

For good! Yes; but it is unto those that be good. Hands off, wicked and profane wretches! You have no part nor lot in these heavenly consolations. Away, base swine, to your sties, to your muck and mire! These pearls are not for you. Out, ye dogs, to the garbage that lieth upon the dunghill! the children’s bread is not for you. “We know that all things shall work together for good to them that love God.” Why so? Because they are “the called according to his purpose.” So Pareus expoundeth the place; and with him I perfectly agree. That which God hath purposed, shall not be frustrated: “The Lord of hosts hath purposed, and who shall disannul it? and his hand is stretched out, and who shall turn it back?” (Isaiah 14:27.) What man will suffer his purposes, those purposes that he taketh up with best advice and most mature deliberation, to be disappointed, if he have power to accomplish them? The holy purposes of God,— as they are ordered and directed by infinite wisdom, so they have infinite power to bring them to pass: so that if I can say, “God hath a purpose to save me,” I may securely smile at all the attempts of men and devils against me; and if I can say, “God hath effectually called me,” I may be sure God hath chosen me, and hath a purpose to save me. For all the links in the golden chain of salvation are evenwrought, not one of them wider or narrower than another: if God have chosen, he will call; if God call, he hath chosen. Once more: if I can say, “I love God,” I may be sure I am called; for I cannot love God, except I have some acquaintance with him, some sense and experience of his love toward me. So, then, all our consolations are ultimately resolved into the “purpose” of God: this is the basis and foundation of them all. That purpose appeareth by our effectual calling; and that calling appeareth to be effectual by our love to God. Hence the conclusion is certain,—that “all things shall work together for good to them that love God, to them that are the called according to his purpose.”

But I forget myself. You have heard in former discourses, under what a sad, soul-killing disease poor man laboureth in his natural condition. You heard likewise of a sovereign remedy provided in the blood of Christ. I am now engaged to speak to the application of that remedy in our effectual calling. This effectual calling, according to St. Augustine, is ingressus ad salutem, our “entrance into a state of salvation;” the first step whereby God’s predestination descendeth to us, and we again ascend to the glory predestinated.

The Evils of Mysticism, Pt 4

We will now examine some biblical proofs that show the error and danger of mysticism.

1. There is no foundation for it in Scripture. Nowhere in Scripture is there any promise that the Spirit will indwell every believer as an immediate revealer of truth. The Old Testament revelation was revealed by God’s Spirit through a few prophets who were selected by God and authenticated as such. The New Testament was revealed through men Christ personally chose as His apostles. They were authenticated as His messengers. But NOWHERE is there Scriptural warrant to believe that every single believer is to be divinely inspired to convey or access revelation immediately from God’s Spirit. This is an implicit denial of the doctrine of Scripture!

2. Not only is there no Biblical support for mysticism, it is flatly contradictory to Scripture. Mysticism is not simply in contradiction to this or that isolated passage or teaching of Scripture; it is contrary to God's whole way of dealing with His people. The rule of faith has always been the teachings of God’s authenticated messengers. The appeal has always been, “To the Law and the testimony,“ (Isa. 8:20). The Church has always been held responsible to obey when the divinely appointed prophet said, “Thus saith the Lord.” Obedience was never required to what the Spirit revealed to each individual. Obedience was required to the outward Word, not the inner word. Christ extended this principle to the New Testament when He told the Twelve, “Go ye into all the world and preach the gospel to every creature. He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved” (Mar. 16:15, 16). What was the whole world to believe? They were to believe the gospel which they preached. Paul tells us that faith cometh by hearing. They he asks, “How shall they believe in him of whom they have not heard? and how shall they hear without a preacher?” (Rom. 10:14). God has determined to save men by the foolishness of preaching (1 Cor. 1:21). Paul declares that the preaching of the cross that is the power of God (v. 18). The gospel is the external revelation of God’s plan of salvation through Jesus. This is what is called the “power of God unto salvation” (Rom 1:16). This idea runs through the whole New Testament.

3. Mysticism is contrary to fact just as is it contrary to Scripture. I am assuming a Christian worldview. I am a Christian and I believe that everyone outside of the Christian faith is doomed to hell. There is no salvation outside of belief in Jesus. This is simply the truth and I make no apologies for it. This being true, nothing is more obvious than that men are in complete darkness without the revelation of God’s written Word. No one anywhere has come to the same truths revealed in Scripture through inward revelation and experience. Period.

4. There is no criterion by which mystical experience can be tested. When Benny Hinn or Lady Julian of Norwich claims that Christ appeared to them, how do I authenticate it? More importantly, how do they? There just is no criterion available to test these inner impulses or revelations to determine whether they are from God, from the imagination, or from Satan acting as an angel of light. Even granting that the recipient of a true revelation knows it is from God (which, outside scripture, cannot be granted), how is the recipient of false revelation to know that it is not from God? Conviction is not enough. Sincerity is not enough. There are billions who believe false things to be true. And many hold as false things which are in fact, true. Therefore, to tell a man that he need only look within himself for authoritative spiritual guidance is to damn his soul to hell. Insanity and delusion appear very similar at this point. The recipient of the revelation may be satisfied, but he cannot expect anyone else to share his certainty. They have no way of verifying what he claims. Besides, this neglects one other important fact: It is possible for someone to say something true and not be from God.

In Acts 16:16 – 18, there is a slave girl with a “spirit of divination.” Luke writes, “And it came to pass, as we went to prayer, a certain damsel possessed with a spirit of divination met us, which brought her masters much gain by soothsaying: The same followed Paul and us, and cried, saying, These men are the servants of the most high God, which shew unto us the way of salvation. And this did she many days. But Paul, being grieved, turned and said to the spirit, I command thee in the name of Jesus Christ to come out of her. And he came out the same hour.” She was telling the truth: Paul was a servant of God. So how do we know that her message wasn’t from God? We know because she obtained her revelation through means explicitly forbidden by Scripture. Techniques aren’t neutral. God has ordained Scripture as the one and only source of revelation. All other means are forbidden, therefore their content is to be rejected out of hand, regardless of how true it sounds.

Jesus said that we would know them by their fruits. This same rule applies to doctrines. When doctrines produce undesirable results they are wrong either in how they are taught or lived. Mysticism has always produced evil. Whenever it appears in Christian garb it inevitably lead to devaluing of the Church, the sacraments, the ministry, and the Scriptures.

The Evils of Mysticism, Pt 3

A mystic may inconsistently claim reliance on Scripture, which he may even claim to be infallible. But his actions, which speak louder, tell us that he deems Scripture to be insufficient. He needs a new revelation from God. He needs a new experience, etc.

The danger with mysticism is that the ideas sound true and almost Scriptural at times. Many people appeal to language like the “Spirit’s witness.” Appeals are made to gifts of the Spirit. And of course, we all understand the importance of having a living experiential knowledge of the truths we believe. But that is exactly where things get dicey.

We have all heard wonderful testimonies of God’s work in someone’s life. We know the stories of ex-gang members of former drug dealers who have been converted. These stories are wonderful. They glorify God and they certainly have a place in the life of the Church. But, that place is not evangelism. Putting your personal experience with Jesus into the center of your evangelism, and urging others to come to Christ based on the hope that they too may experience something similar, is no different than the Mormon missionaries who tout their “burning in the bosom.” That experience, whatever it may be, is absolutely unverifiable. The only thing I have to go on is the testimony of the person claiming it. In matters of eternal salvation or damnation, that simply isn’t good enough.

Notice that in the New Testament the Apostles NEVER use personal experiences or testimonies as part of their evangelism. They shared the historical facts of Christ’s birth, life, death and resurrection. They proclaimed the historicity of these events and their occurrence as fulfillments of Old Testament prophecies.

This is not to say that in the history of mankind God has never had direct access to a human soul to proclaim truth. The Bible itself is a result of such occurrences. But the Bible itself tells us that such occurrences were rare and were restricted to a handful of people – prophets and apostles. Hebrews 1:1-2 tells us, “God, who at sundry times and in divers manners spake in time past unto the fathers by the prophets, hath in these last days spoken unto us by his Son.” Christ is God’s final word.

Charles Hodge wrote, “The common doctrine of the Christian Church is, that God has at sundry times and in divers manners spoken to the children of men; that what eye hath not seen, or ear heard, what never could have entered into the heart of man, God has revealed by his Spirit to those whom He selected to be his spokesmen to their fellow-men; that these revelations were authenticated as divine, by their character, their effects, and by signs and wonders, and divers miracles and gifts of the Holy Ghost; that these holy men of old who spake as they were moved by the Holy Ghost, communicated the revelations which they had received not only orally, but in writing, employing not the words which man’s wisdom teacheth, but which the Holy Ghost teacheth; so that we have in the sacred Scriptures the things of the Spirit recorded in the words of the Spirit; which Scriptures, therefore, are the Word of God, — i.e., what God says to man; what He declares to be true and obligatory, — and constitute for his Church the only infallible rule of faith and practice.” Systematic Theology Volume 1, Chapter 4.

Regardless of the apparent innocence of the mystical experience or its apparent agreement with Scripture, it is to be distrusted and discarded because it claims to be another revelation from God, making Scripture insufficient. If Scripture is sufficient, what is the need of these other revelations? No amount of mental gymnastics can evade that question.

Scripture is the final and ONLY revelation God has given to the Church. Later in life when Peter recalls the incident on the Mount of Transfiguration, he remembers how Christ’s appearance was changed, how the cloud of God’s glory overshadowed them, and how God’s voice audibly spoke. Yet, he says concerning Scripture, “We have also a more sure word of prophecy,” (2 Peter 1:19). Let that sink in a moment.

The Evils of Mysticism, Pt 2

Our previous post made some rather bold statements about mysticism, I now aim to make good on those statements.

Mysticism comes in two popular varieties, one with ties to Christian beliefs, and one without such connections. My contention is that at bottom, both are really the same anti-Christian practice.

The common elements of all forms of mysticism are exalting of experience over reason for the attainment of knowledge and looking inward to one’s self for ‘spiritual enlightenment.’ The problem with these two ideas is that they are both wrong.

When someone places their personal experience over reason as an organ of truth, they are automatically demonstrating an inordinate and unjustifiable amount of confidence in oneself. Why is the mystic so certain about his experiences? How is he confident in the truthfulness of the apparent content of the experience? What is his frame of reference against which to test such an experience? The answer is simple. The mystic unjustifiably relies solely upon himself. He makes himself the final arbiter all truth. He may talk about an external set of beliefs, such as Christianity, but in reality, he has placed his own experience in a superior position to all the doctrinal content of his professed belief system.

That this is true can be shown in many ways. First of all, how is the mystic so certain of his own ability to scrutinize his experience objectively? The only way to do so is to deny that his senses and soul are unaffected by sin and are thus in tune to some external spiritual reality. This is a direct contradiction of Scripture. Paul goes so far as to call down a curse on anyone, including angels, if they promote anything other than what is revealed in Scripture (Gal. 1:8). It doesn’t get much more mystical than angelic visitations!

A second issue with the mystic’s assumptions about himself is that they are inherently pantheistic. Now, this is no problem for a Hindu. But this is a huge problem for one who professes Christianity. Pantheism is the belief that God is everything. He is the sum total of all existence. Everything and everyone that exists is somehow a mode or manifestation of God. It is a small baby step to declaring one’s own godhood at this point. Many so-called Christian mystics have openly done so e.g., Kenneth Copeland, Benny Hinn, Morris Cerullo, etc.

Think about it, if all I need to do to get at ultimate spiritual truth is get in touch with my inner man (whatever that means!) – because there is within me (indeed within everyone) some inner light or ‘spark of the divine,’ - then I do not need an external God nor any external form of revelation. What is this but making oneself to be god? This is nothing else than the promise made to Eve by Satan – “You will be like gods” (Gen. 3:5) Only a pantheist can be self-consistent in the belief that there is some inner light or divine spark in all men. Since this is the plain underlying assumption behind all mystic experience, mysticism is, at core, pantheistic. A few Christian thinkers may try to deny this, but this contention is doubted by no serious student of mysticism.

Our next post will look at more reasons that plainly demonstrate the falsity of mysticism.