Reprobation
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
| Part of a series on Calvinism by WikiProject Calvinism |
|
 |
|
| John Calvin | |
|
Background |
|
|
Distinctives |
|
|
Documents |
|
|
Influences |
|
|
Churches |
|
|
Peoples |
|
Reprobation, in Christian theology, is a corollary to the Calvinist doctrine of unconditional election which derives that since (in this view) some of mankind (the elect) are predestined by God for salvation, the remainder are necessarily pre-ordained to damnation, i.e. reprobation. In Calvinist terminology, the non-elect are often referred to as the reprobate. Similarly, when a sinner is so hardened as to feel no remorse or misgiving of conscience, it is considered as a sign of reprobation.
The English word, reprobate, is from the Latin root probare (English: prove, test), and thus derived from the Latin, reprobatus (reproved, condemned), the opposite of approbatus (commended, approved).
Contents |
[edit] Introduction to the Calvinist doctrine of Reprobation
- As stated in the Canons of Dordrecht, First Head (Chapter 1) Article 15 [1]:
- Moreover, Holy Scripture most especially highlights this eternal and undeserved grace of our election and brings it out more clearly for us, in that it further bears witness that not all people have been chosen but that some have not been chosen or have been passed by in God's eternal election-- those, that is, concerning whom God, on the basis of his entirely free, most just, irreproachable, and unchangeable good pleasure, made the following decision: to leave them in the common misery into which, by their own fault, they have plunged themselves; not to grant them saving faith and the grace of conversion; but finally to condemn and eternally punish them (having been left in their own ways and under his just judgment), not only for their unbelief but also for all their other sins, in order to display his justice. And this is the decision of reprobation, which does not at all make God the author of sin, but rather its fearful, irreproachable, just judge and avenger.
- As explained by Loraine Boettner, The Reformed Doctrine of Predestination (Eerdmans, 1932). Copyright not renewed -- Public Domain.
- The doctrine of absolute Predestination of course logically holds that some are foreordained to death as truly as others are foreordained to life. The very terms “elect” and “election” imply the terms “non-elect” and “reprobation.” When some are chosen out others are left not chosen. The high privileges and glorious destiny of the former are not shared with the latter. This, too, is of God. We believe that from all eternity God has intended to leave some of Adam’s posterity in their sins, and that the decisive factor in the life of each is to be found only in God’s will. As Mozley has said, the whole race after the fall was “one mass of perdition,” and “it pleased God of His sovereign mercy to rescue some and to leave others where they were; to raise some to glory, giving them such grace as necessarily qualified them for it, and abandon the rest, from whom He withheld such grace, to eternal punishment.”
- The chief difficulty with the doctrine of Election of course arises in regard to the unsaved; and the Scriptures have given us no extended explanation of their state. Since the mission of Jesus in the world was to save the world rather than to judge it, this side of the matter is less dwelt upon.
- In all of the Reformed creeds in which the doctrine of Reprobation is dealt with at all it is treated as an essential part of the doctrine of Predestination. The Westminster Confession, after stating the doctrine of election, adds: “The rest of mankind, God was pleased, according to the inscrutable counsel of His own will, whereby He extendeth or withholdeth mercy as He pleaseth, for the glory of His sovereign power over His creatures, to pass by, and to ordain them to dishonor and wrath for their sin, to the praise of His glorious justice.”
[edit] Further development
The term "double predestination" is largely a pejorative term and has been used to refer to the dual concepts of election and reprobation in Reformed theology (see Predestination (Calvinism)). It has been used as a synonym for a symmetrical view of predestination which sees election and reprobation being worked out in an equally parallel mode of divine operation. That is, God positively and actively intervenes in the lives of the elect to bring them to salvation, and in the same way God positively and actively intervenes in the life of the reprobate to bring him to sin. Such a view makes God the author of sin who punishes a person for doing what he himself monergistically and irresistibly moves that person to do. This is not the Reformed view of predestination, but a form of hyper-Calvinism that involves a radical form of supralapsarianism. Such a view of predestination has been nearly universally rejected by Reformed thinkers.
Instead, Reformed theology views predestination as double (in that it involves both election and reprobation) but not symmetrical with respect to the mode of divine activity. That is, 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, but God passively withholds this monergistic work of grace from the non-elect, passing them by and leaving them to themselves in their total depravity. Thus God does not monergistically work sin or unbelief in their lives. The mode of operation in the lives of the elect is not parallel with that operation in the lives of the reprobate. God works regeneration monergistically but never sin.[2]
[edit] Opposition to the doctrine
Many Christians have been concerned over the idea of reprobation. John Wesley, founder of the Methodist movement, had grave reservations over the Calvinist view, largely due to his commitment to Arminian theology. To Wesley, any concept of reprobation (which he viewed as predestination to damnation) was irreconcilable with the loving nature of God. Wesley strongly rejected the theory of unconditional election because he felt that, "...it necessarily implies unconditional reprobation. Find out any election which does not imply reprobation, and I will gladly agree to it" (Works, Vol. X, p. 211).
Wesley preached several sermons and published several essays opposing reprobation. Despite the opposition of fellow Methodist leader George Whitefield, who supported a more Calvinistic approach to theology, Wesley's views have dominated Methodism, which still rejects reprobation.
Like the concept of original sin, also the concept of reprobation creates numerous problems and logical and conceptual conflicts, besides also being, as Wesley pointed out, irreconcibly contradictory with the concept of God being Love. These problems have been attempted to be averted in many ways:
- God is Love only to His own elect (doctrine of limited atonement). To everyone else he is Holy Wrath. This explanation, popular in Calvinism, is however a post hoc ergo propter hoc claim (see logical fallacies).
- God does not sentence anyone in damnation, but humans themselves decide to reject salvation (single predestination). This explanation, popular in Lutheranism, suffers from the problem of the concept of predestination itself, and God's omniscience: humans cannot decidedly reject salvation, since by default they are totally depraved by nature according to the doctrine of original sin.
- God is not Love at all, but a cosmic bully (Gnosticism). That means God is to be respected only for fear and not for love, or that the God Christianity worships, is actually an evil demiurge, and Christ came to liberate men from the grip of the demiurge. That would imply the whole traditional Christianity is a false doctrine.
- God makes the reprobated people sinners in the beginning and makes them to commit sins in order that he gets to condemn them in Hell. The conclusion is that God is source of the sin and therefore evil. While this claim is valid in Gnosticism, it is contradictory against all Christian denominations.
- God does not oblige on human concepts of justice and fairness. While this can be considered a straw man, if that claim was true, it would mean God is arbitrary and irrational, which is against all Christian denominations' doctrines.
- God is above the human logic. This is an argument from ignorance.
- God actually is the origin of the sin and treats humans as he wishes. This claim leads into hyper-Calvinism. On the other hand, this claim is in contradiction with the dogma of Universal Love.
- God has allowed the Fall to happen and has as punishment reprobated everyone, but He saves some people from eternal damnation by Jesus's atonement, and lets the other perish. Opponents suggest this is in conflict with John 3:16. Critics of this argument, however, suggest that John 3:16 is in fact referring to a clause - "whosoever believes" referring to those already believing, not to all in the world. Therefore, according to said critics, John 3:16 is not a valid argument against Calvinistic theology.
- God punishes justly the whole mankind from its mutiny against God. Given to assumed omnipotence of God, such foolish attempt to mutiny would have been doomed from beginning. But if an omnipotent being punishes mortals from an useless attempt, it would imply God being an utterly paranoid being. While this is in line with Old Testament image of God, most Christian denominations reject this concept.
- Those who are reprobated are not reprobated because of the sins they have committed; they commit sins because they have been reprobated. This was suggested by St. Augustine. Logically that is cum hoc ergo propter hoc fallacy. If this claim was true, the conclusion would be that God wills some people to be evil and commit sins; ergo God is evil and injust, and the reprobated cannot be held responsible of their actions.
[edit] See also
[edit] External links
[edit] Pro
- Loraine Boettner's view
- John Bunyan's view
- from the Canons of Dordrecht
- A. W. Pink's view
- Gise J. Van Baren's view
- Jerome Zanchius' view
