An example of Providence in my life

I twisted my ankle today, trying to catch the red bus. It wasn’t too bad. At the time, I just hoped nobody saw me trip. On the way back, I also just missed the blue bus; I had to walk 10 minutes in light rain to get back to the dorm. So as I was heading up the North Avenue stairs, a man called to me and asked if I could help him. So I went over, seemingly to his surprise, and asked what I could do. Most of the time someone asks me something in downtown, I ignore them. Why I didn’t do the same thing, God only knows – literally.

I thought he was going to ask me for directions. He asked if I knew the area well, and I told him I knew it fairly well. He told me that I was the first person who had acknowledged him today, which explained the surprised expression on his face. The turn of the conversation surprised me too, as I thought that on any other day I would probably have been one of those people who ignored him. I just replied that it didn’t really make sense nobody would talk to him for a minute.

He then asked if I was in Christ. At first, I thought I misheard him. Actually, I asked him to repeat himself. So doing, I answered that I was. It sort of shocked me to hear him just ask me outright. I had imagined this kind of situation numerous times – someone witnesses to me, I reply that I’m a Christian, we go talk about theology somewhere, and leave feeling in good spirits. The other possibility running through my head was that he wanted to learn about Christ, and that I would have to witness to him. That is a hypothetical which I’ve also thought about several times. What would I say? What would I do?

The look on his face at my reply was one of confused disbelief. He actually asked me if I was really telling the truth. Understandable, I guess. If I were an atheist and I thought I someone was about to witness to me in a public area, I might feel uncomfortable enough to lie. But, as I’m not, and as I wrote notes on Christian epistemology throughout the previous class period (a class which I now only have to attend to get an A, so don’t judge me!), I unpacked my notes and showed him some of the subjects I was reading. I told him I was going through the concept of the Christian canon. Amazed, he looked up and told me he was going to commit suicide before I talked to him.

I imagine I had a sort of deer-in-the-headlights look on my face. What was I supposed to say? The guy was obviously going through some deep emotional trial, and I’m not exactly the kind of guy who deals in emotions. So I did what any person like me would do: I let the guy do all the talking. He said that the bridge overlooking highway-85 had a hole somewhere in it he had thought about jumping through. He kept looking back at the various notes I had written and saying (more to himself than to me): “this is deep stuff.”

I suggested that we should go somewhere to get something to eat or sit down and talk, to which he agreed. This was nearly as much to buy some time to figure out how in the world I would proceed as it was in genuine concern for his safety. As we were walking toward Wingnuts, he said what I was thinking: “I’m not really hungry, can we just sit in here and talk?” (I actually despise Wingnuts, so that suited me.)

I left the man at a table while I went, to the chagrin of the cashier, to order two waters. Sitting down, the man started to open up a bit more about why he was considering suicide. He said that although he had a beautiful wife and nine month old daughter, things were becoming stressful for him. He said that he was an orphan as a child, and never was adopted even though he had asked God for foster parents. He lost his job, and as he committed a crime when he was 22, he said that getting a decent job had been tough. He’d been told he was about to be evicted… on Thanksgiving. He told me that on Thanksgiving – which he did say was a cozy meal – he asked God to reveal Himself, something for which he had apparently been praying for a while. He couldn’t understand why he was suffering. He wasn’t asking for the luxuries that he sometimes sees others endowed with. He was only asking for God to provide for his family. He also didn’t understand why God would allow people to suffer in general. This observation seemed more whimsically philosophical, as though he didn’t expect an answer.

I think at this point he apologized for what he thought was dumping his problems on me. I stopped him quickly and told him that this was a discussion I probably needed as much as he did. Given that I’m not very experienced in relating my own testimony to God’s Providence, I though I should tell him about a recent event in my life that was evidence of God’s plan for me (see here). In response to his question about why bad things seemed to be happening to him, I cited Romans 8:28, which he recalled, as finished the quote with me. I also told him that, since Romans is one of my favorite books, he should also read 9:22-23. Having read about the common objection against Christianity grounded on human suffering, I felt pretty comfortable telling him what I had learned: some people are put in situations of trial for the benefit of others. For example, those who are vessels of wrath enable vessels of mercy to see God’s grace and mercy in a way they could not were there no vessels of wrath. And, while that may be of little comfort to one who is in the situation of trial, when I asked if we deserved the blessings of, say, a good wife and daughter, all he could say was “word.”

When he said that the churches he had been going to weren’t helping him, I figured that since the money I had won for the essay wasn’t really mine anyways, the $80 I gave him for diapers and food (so he said) was the least I could do. He called his wife on my phone to tell her that he got the money, and I heard him say “Thank you? Why are you thanking me?” When he hung up, he said that he realized that she should have been thanking God. It was pretty cool. He’s supposed to call later to find out the information about my church, so please pray that goes well. He kept falling over himself thanking me even as we were getting up to leave, and asking (i.e. defying) me to tell Him that this wasn’t God’s working. Just as my experience writing the essay for the TF contest, there were too many coincidental "might as wells" and "ifs" for me to not recognize that this was God's work. If I hadn't twisted my ankle, I'd have gotten off the bus at a different location than the way which I walked back to the dorm. If I hadn't decided to actually help a guy who asked for it, someone might have died today. If he hadn't gotten discouraged enough to just follow through on his dark thought, he would have never seen God's working. Too many ifs, if you ask me.

Augustine on Monergism - Summary

The following is a summary of Augustine's monergistic beliefs regarding the doctrines of grace, culled from his various works (links to fuller posts on the respective topics can be found in the parentheses):

On Depravity (link1, link2)

Augustine believed fallen man:

1. ”Is not be able to refrain from acts of inordinate desire…”
2. ”[Is not able to do]good works… [until]… rescued from his lostness.”
3. ”Had his…free will [to do right]… destroyed.”
4. ”[Lost all moral liberty except]…the liberty that loves to sin.”
5. ”…serves freely… the will of his master.”
6. ”[Is not]…free to do right unless he is delivered from the bondage of sin and begins to be the servant of righteousness.”
7. ”…is not yet free to act rightly.”
8. ”[Has not]…the capacity of not sinning…”
9. “[Sins of]…necessity.”
10. ”[Is] either unable to understand what [he] wants, or else… not strong enough to accomplish what [he has] come to understand.”
11. “…do absolutely no good thing, whether in thought, or will and affection, or in action [apart from] the grace of God through Jesus Christ our Lord.”
12. “[Must have the Lord] remove [his] hard heart, out of which [he does] not act, and… give [him] an obedient heart, out of which [he] shall act.”
13. ”[Must be regenerated in order to come to the] faith… which obtains by prayer what the law commands.”
14. “[By] the Spirit of righteousness [have transferred] to them that faith which, of their own will, they could not yet have.”
15. ”Needs divine grace... to live well and righteously. For free will in the sinner did not perish [to the extent that] what they are pleased to do gives them pleasure.”
16. ”[Has no] power… of free will [to believe]; because it will not be free for good if the deliverer have not made it free; but in evil he has a free will.”
17. ”Is free in evil things because it takes pleasure in evil, is not free in good things, for the reason that it has not been made free.”
18. “Avails for sinning in men subjected to the devil; while it is not of avail for good and pious living, unless the will itself of man should be made free by God’s grace, and assisted to every good movement of action, of speech, of thought… born again in Christ.”
19. “Art made to differ [by] He… who bestows that… [regenerative] grace which is not due.”
20. ”[Is] free in evil, but for doing good it must be made free by God’s grace, [which] is opposed to the Pelagians; but in that we say [man’s will] originated from that which previously was not evil, this is opposed to the Manicheans.”

On Efficacious Grace (link1, link2, link3)

Augustine believed soteric grace:

1. ”[Is necessary due to the fact that]…out of a heart which is not good [we can do no good].”
2. ”[Is]…gratuitous and effectual.”
3. “…makes us to walk, to observe, to do.”
4. ”[Shows]…[faith and mortifying the deeds of the flesh]… to be God’s gifts, in order that we may understand both that we do them, and that God makes us to do them.”
5. ”[Is]…able to turn to belief wills that are perverse and opposed to faith.”
6. ”[Is such]…that [men] may act, not that they may themselves do nothing.”
7. ”[Is]…sufficient by itself.”
8. ”[Is the result of a God who]…makes us act, by applying efficacious powers to our will.”
9. “…remove[s] your hard heart, out of which you did not act and… give[s] you an obedient heart, out of which you shall act.”
10. “Operates without us.”
11. “…effect[s] that man will, and will so much, and love with such ardour, that by the will of the Spirit he overcomes the will of the flesh, that lusteth in opposition to it.”
12. “…is too little… not to be able without it either to apprehend the good or to continue in good if he will, unless he is also made to will.”
13. ”[Is]…so great and such a help as to will, [b]ecause by this grace of God there is caused in us…not only to be able to do what we will, but even to will to do what we are able.”
14. ”[Is given to the elect so that they]…should most invincibly will what is good, and most invincibly refuse to forsake this…”
15. ”[Is given by]…that God whom no man’s will resists when He wills to give salvation...”
16. “…is rejected by no hard heart, because it is given for the sake of first taking away the hardness of the heart.”
17. “Is that for which [man] gives thanks to God… [for] it is a vain and idle thing if He to whom he gives thanks did not Himself… worketh in the hearts of men with that calling according to His purpose… that they should not hear the gospel in vain, but when they heard it, should be converted and believe, receiving it not as the word of men, but as it is in truth the word of God.”
18. ”[Is such that]…[man] not only knows what it is he ought to do, but also actually does what he thus knows… [for] He so teaches, that whatever a man learns, he not only sees with his perception, but also desires with his choice, and accomplishes in action."
19. ”[Is such that the]…volition itself, and performance itself, are assisted, and not merely the natural “capacity” of willing and performing, [f]or if nothing but this “capacity” of ours were assisted by this grace, the Lord would rather have said, “Every man that hath heard and hath learned of the Father may possibly come unto me.””
20. “[Is such that]…every one who has learned of the Father not only has the possibility of coming, but comes; and in this result are already included the motion of the capacity, the affection of the will, and the effect of the action.”

Augustine believed that the sovereignty of God is such that:

1. “…the human will is not taken away, but changed from bad to good, and assisted when it is good… [and] that it is… the inspired Scripture which has spoken to you, in the clearest testimonies of truth…”
2. “…He turns them whithersoever He wills, and whensoever He wills...”
3. “…not by a command [does] He bade [man], in which case… obedience would be praiseworthy; but He inclined… man’s will, which had become debased by his own perverseness, to commit… sin, by His own just and secret judgment.”
4. “…God uses the hearts of even wicked men for the praise and assistance of the good.”
5. “…the Lord both stirred up [man’s] spirit, and yet [men act] of their own will. For the Almighty sets in motion even in the innermost hearts of men the movement of their will, so that He does through their agency whatsoever He wishes to perform through them...”
6. “…God, wishing to punish [sin, can wrought it in] man’s heart...”
7. “…His own judgment [is] sometimes manifest, sometimes secret, but always righteous.”
8. ”[God]…is able, either through the agency of angels (whether good ones or evil)… to operate in the hearts even of the wicked…”
9. “…through the Holy Spirit, He works good in the hearts of the elect, who has wrought it that their hearts become good instead of evil…”
10. “…men’s wills cannot… withstand the will of God… since He does even concerning the wills themselves of men what He will, when He will.”

On Election (link1, link2, link3)

Augustine believed:

1. ”God calls whomsoever He deigns, and whom He wills He makes religious.”
2. ”It is God… who makes religious whomsoever He pleases” such that no one hastens to, depends upon, cleaves to, nor desires God “unless he be made by God...”
3. ”[Because]God acts upon us by the incentives of our perceptions, to will and to believe… whatever [man] possesses, and whatever [man] receives, is from God...”
4. ”[The mystery of why one should be persuaded of the gospel and another should not lies, not in human autonomy, but in] the depths of His riches!”
5. ”[We should not attribute what we have received to ourselves, because it is according to God‘s own mind and counsel that] He dispenses those benefits, making some deservedly vessels of wrath, others graciously vessels of mercy...”
6. ”God willed it to pertain only to His grace that man should approach to Him…"
7. ”[Christians]receive [the power to become sons of God] from Him who gives pious thoughts to the human heart, by which it has faith...”
8. ”We are not sufficient to think anything as of ourselves, but our sufficiency is of God, in whose power is our heart and our thoughts.”
9. ”No one… comes to Christ unless it were given him, and that it is given to those who are chosen in Him before the foundation of the world...”
10. ”[Foreknowledge] signif[ies] predestination.”
<
11. “[Paul] knew that he had not first given the beginning of his faith to God, and had its increase given back to him again by Him; but that he had been made faithful by God, who also had made him an apostle.”
12. “If any one dare to say, “I have faith of myself, I did not, therefore, receive it,” he directly contradicts this most manifest truth, not because it is not in the choice of man’s will to believe or not to believe, but because in the elect the will is prepared by the Lord.”
13. “God indeed calls many predestinated children of His, to make them members of His only predestinated Son, not with that calling with which they were called who would not come to the marriage, since with that calling were called also the Jews, to whom Christ crucified is an offence, and the Gentiles, to whom Christ crucified is foolishness; but with that calling He calls the predestinated which the apostle distinguished when he said that he preached Christ, the wisdom of God and the power of God, to them that were called, Jews as well as Greeks… [that is,] with that calling wherewith a man is made a believer.”
14. “...we [are not] called because we believed… [or because] we were going to be of ourselves holy and immaculate, but He chose and predestinated us that we might be so.”
15. “...if they had been elected because they had believed, they themselves would certainly have first chosen Him by believing in Him, so that they should deserve to be elected.”
16. “...if [‘He hath chosen us in Himself before the foundation of the world’] were said because God foreknew that they would believe, not because He Himself would make them believers, the Son is speaking against such a foreknowledge as that when He says, “Ye have not chosen me, but I have chosen you;” when God should rather have foreknown this very thing, that they themselves would have chosen Him, so that they might deserve to be chosen by Him.”
17. “…who can hear the Lord saying, “Ye have not chosen me, but I have chosen you,” and can dare to say that men believe in order to be elected, when they are rather elected to believe; lest against the judgment of truth they be found to have first chosen Christ to whom Christ says, “Ye have not chosen me, but I have chosen you”?”
18. “...if the apostle had wished us to understand that there were future good deeds of the one, and evil deeds of the other – which God, of course, foreknew – he would never have said "not of good works" but rather "of future works."”
19. “Since this judgment [of wrath] was due them both, [Jacob] learned from what happened [Esau] that the fact that he had not, with equal merit, incurred the same penalty gave him no ground to boast of his own distinctive merits – but, instead, that he should glory in the abundance of divine grace, because "it is not a question of him who wills nor of him who runs, but of God's showing mercy."“
20. ”…grace alone separates the redeemed from the lost, all having been mingled together in the one mass of perdition, arising from a common cause which leads back to their common origin.”
21. “[God] chose [the elect] in Christ before the foundation of the world as those to whom He intended to give His grace freely – that is, with no merits of theirs, either of faith or of works, preceding…”
22. “…the kindness which is bestowed on some freely [would not] appear, unless to other equally guilty and from the same mass God showed what was really due to both, and condemned them with a righteous judgment.”
23. “…in [election] God does not find made by another what He may choose, but Himself makes what He may find.”
24. “…[some think] the apostle thus said, “For we know that He worketh all things for good to them that love God, to them who are called according to the purpose,” so as to wish the purpose of man to be understood, which purpose, as a good merit, the mercy of the God that calleth might follow; being ignorant that it is said, “Who are called according to the purpose,” so that there may be understood the purpose of God, not man, whereby those whom He foreknew and predestinated as conformed to the image of His Son, He elected before the foundation of the world."
25. “…[lest] the carnal man in his foolish pride should, on hearing the question, “Who maketh thee to differ from another?” either in thought or in word answer and say: My faith, or my prayer, or my righteousness makes me to differ from other men, the apostle at once adds these words to the question, and so meets all such notions, saying, “What hast thou that thou didst not receive? now, if thou didst receive it, why dost thou glory, as if thou didst not receive it?”
26. “…if we first loved Him, in order that by this merit He might love us, then we first chose Him that we might deserve to be chosen by Him… He, however, who is the Truth says otherwise, and flatly contradicts this vain conceit of men.”
27. “… it was because they had been chosen, that they chose Him; not because they chose Him that they were chosen... [for] there could be no merit in men’s choice of Christ, if it were not that God’s grace was prevenient in His choosing them.”
28. “…for rebuke by the agency of man to avail, whether it be of love or not, depends only upon God.”
29. “…none of [the elect] perishes, because God is overcome by nothing.”
30. “Peter’s faith would then have perished if that will by which he was faithful should fail, and that it would have continued if that same will should abide…When, then, He prayed that his faith should not fail, what was it that he asked for, but that in his faith he should have a most free, strong, invincible, persevering will!”

On Atonement (link)

Augustine believed:

1. “The whole world… is the Church.”
2. “He who chose the world out of the world, effected for Himself, instead of finding, what He should choose.”
3. “[Not all] human beings are… redeemed by Christ's blood.”
4. “[Christ] intercedeth for thee, Who on earth died for thee.”
5. “When we ask for the reason why not all are saved, the customary answer is: "Because they themselves have not willed it." But this cannot be said of infants, who have not yet come to the power of willing or not willing.”
6. “As far as [the depraved are] concerned, they did what God did not will that they do, but as far as God's omnipotence is concerned, they were quite unable to achieve their purpose. In their very act of going against his will, his will was thereby accomplished.”
7. “In a strange and ineffable fashion even that which is done against his will is not done without his will. For it would not be done without his allowing it – and surely his permission is not unwilling but willing – nor would he who is good allow the evil to be done, unless in his omnipotence he could bring good even out of evil.”
8. “The omnipotent God never doth anything except what he doth will, and doth everything that he willeth.”
9. “The word concerning God, "who will have all men to be saved," does not mean that there is no one whose salvation he doth not will – he who was unwilling to work miracles among those who, he said, would have repented if he had wrought them – but by "all men" we are to understand the whole of mankind, in every single group into which it can be divided: kings and subjects; nobility and plebeians; the high and the low; the learned and unlearned; the healthy and the sick; the bright, the dull, and the stupid; the rich, the poor, and the middle class; males, females, infants, children, the adolescent, young adults and middle-aged and very old; of every tongue and fashion, of all the arts, of all professions, with the countless variety of wills and minds and all the other things that differentiate people.”
10. “We could interpret [1 Timothy 2:4] in any other fashion, as long as we are not compelled to believe that the Omnipotent hath willed anything to be done which was not done.”

On Perseverance (link)

Augustine believed:

1. “[Men do not persevere who have] not been chosen in Christ before the foundation of the world.”
2. “… if you say that it pertains to man’s free will… that any one should persevere in good, or should not persevere, and it is not by the gift of God if he persevere, but by the performance of human will… you strive against the words of Him who says, “I have prayed for thee, Peter, that thy faith fail not.”
3. "If God works our faith, acting in a wonderful manner in our hearts so that we believe… there [no] reason to fear that He cannot do the whole.”
4. “No one of His own is indifferent to [the Father’s] voice… for this reason also does He announce it to the [sheep], that he may abide perseveringly with Himself to the end.”
5. “…after the fall of man, God willed it to pertain only to His grace that man should approach to Him; nor did He will it to pertain to aught but His grace that man should not depart from Him.”
6. “It is He… who makes [men] to persevere in good, who makes them good. But they who fall and perish have never been in the number of the predestinated."
7. “Consider if in such a way any other result be gained than that the grace of God is given in some way or other, according to our merit, and so grace is no more grace.”
8. “It is [foreign to] the truth to deny that perseverance even to the end of this life is the gift of God; since He Himself puts an end to this life when He wills, and if He puts an end before a fall that is threatening, He makes the man to persevere even unto the end.”
9. "When Christ intercedes, therefore, on behalf of these, that their faith should not fail, doubtless it will not fail unto the end.”
10. “To the saints predestinated to the kingdom of God by God’s grace, the aid of perseverance that is given is not such as the former, but such that to them perseverance itself is bestowed; not only so that without that gift they cannot persevere, but, moreover, so that by means of this gift they cannot help persevering."

Augustine on Perseverance of the Saints

Augustine’s perspective on perseverance of believers unique, to say the least. He might say the saints persevere, but Augustine would qualify who a saint is differently than would one would adheres to the doctrine of Perseverance of the Saints. He would consider a saint to be an elect individual over against a believer. Why would Augustine think it necessary to make such a qualification?

“Therefore, of two infants, equally bound by original sin, why the one is taken and the other left; and of two wicked men of already mature years, why this one should be so called as to follow Him that calleth, while that one is either not called at all, or is not called in such a manner – the judgments of God are unsearchable. But of two pious men, why to the one should be given perseverance unto the end, and to the other it should not be given, God’s judgments are even more unsearchable. Yet to believers it ought to be a most certain fact that the former is of the predestinated, the latter is not. “For if they had been of us,” says one of the predestinated, who had drunk this secret from the breast of the Lord, “certainly they would have continued with us.” What, I ask, is the meaning of, “They were not of us; for if they had been of us, they would certainly have continued with us”? Were not both created by God – both born of Adam – both made from the earth, and given from Him who said, “I have created all breath,” souls of one and the same nature? Lastly, had not both been called, and followed Him that called them? and had not both become, from wicked men, justified men, and both been renewed by the laver of regeneration? But if he were to hear this who beyond all doubt knew what he was saying, he might answer and say: These things are true. In respect of all these things, they were of us. Nevertheless, in respect of a certain other distinction, they were not of us, for if they had been of us, they certainly would have continued with us. What then is this distinction? God’s books lie open, let us not turn away our view; the divine Scripture cries aloud, let us give it a hearing. They were not of them, because they had not been “called according to the purpose;” they had not been chosen in Christ before the foundation of the world; they had not gained a lot in Him; they had not been predestinated according to His purpose who worketh all things. For if they had been this, they would have been of them, and without doubt they would have continued with them.” (The Gift of Perseverance, Chapter 21)

Augustine believed – probably due in part to his belief in baptismal regeneration – that a believer could fail to persevere. Of course, this does not make Augustine unique; what makes Augustine unique is the fact that his soteriology was monergistic despite the fact he believed believers could fail to persevere:

“If, therefore, you confess that to persevere to the end in good is God’s gift, I think that equally with me you are ignorant why one man should receive this gift and another should not receive it; and in this case we are both unable to penetrate the unsearchable judgments of God. Or if you say that it pertains to man’s free will – which you defend, not in accordance with God’s grace, but in opposition to it – that any one should persevere in good, or should not persevere, and it is not by the gift of God if he persevere, but by the performance of human will, why will you strive against the words of Him who says, “I have prayed for thee, Peter, that thy faith fail not”? Will you dare to say that even when Christ prayed that Peter’s faith might not fail, it would still have failed if Peter had willed it to fail; that is, if he had been unwilling that it should continue even to the end? As if Peter could in any measure will otherwise than Christ had asked for him that he might will. For who does not know that Peter’s faith would then have perished if that will by which he was faithful should fail, and that it would have continued if that same will should abide?” (On Grace and Free Will, Chapter 17)

Consistent with the rest of his beliefs, Augustine believed God’s grace is the sole distinguishing factor that determines one’s state before God. This is a point Augustine stresses many times, even in the context of a doctrine which many use to assert the autonomy of men:

““He that endureth to the end, the same shall be saved.” No one of His own is indifferent to such a voice, a stranger does not hear it: for this reason also does He announce it to the former, that he may abide perseveringly with Himself to the end; but by one who is wanting in such persevering continuance with Him, such a word remains unheard.” (Tractates on the Gospel of John, 10:1-3)

““And they shall never perish:” you may hear the undertone, as if He had said to them, Ye shall perish for ever, because ye are not of my sheep.” (Tractates on the Gospel of John, 10:22-42)

“For rebuke by the agency of man to avail, whether it be of love or not, depends only upon God.” (On Grace and Free Will, Chapter 9)

“To the saints predestinated to the kingdom of God by God’s grace, the aid of perseverance that is given is not such as the former, but such that to them perseverance itself is bestowed; not only so that without that gift they cannot persevere, but, moreover, so that by means of this gift they cannot help persevering. For not only did He say, “Without me ye can do nothing,” but He also said, “Ye have not chosen me, but I have chosen you, and ordained you that ye should go and bring forth fruit, and that your fruit should remain.” By which words He showed that He had given them not only righteousness, but perseverance therein. For when Christ thus ordained them that they should go and bring forth fruit, and that their fruit should remain, who would dare to say, It shall not remain? Who would dare to say, Perchance it will not remain? “For the gifts and calling of God are without repentance;” but the calling is of those who are called according to the purpose. When Christ intercedes, therefore, on behalf of these, that their faith should not fail, doubtless it will not fail unto the end. And thus it shall persevere even unto the end; nor shall the end of this life find it anything but continuing.” (On Grace and Free Will, Chapter 34)

“It is He, therefore, who makes them to persevere in good, who makes them good. But they who fall and perish have never been in the number of the predestinated. Although, then, the apostle might be speaking of all persons regenerated and living piously when he said, “Who art thou that judgest another man’s servant? To his own master he standeth or falleth;” yet he at once had regard to the predestinated, and said, “But he shall stand;” and that they might not arrogate this to themselves, he says, “For God is able to make him stand.”” (On Grace and Free Will, Chapter 36)

“…after the fall of man, God willed it to pertain only to His grace that man should approach to Him; nor did He will it to pertain to aught but His grace that man should not depart from Him.” (The Gift of Perseverance, Chapter 13)

“Wherefore, also He willed that He should be asked that we may not be led into temptation, because if we are not led, we by no means depart from Him. And this might have been given to us even without our praying for it, but by our prayer He willed us to be admonished from whom we receive these benefits.” (The Gift of Perseverance, Chapter 15)

“See now how foreign it is from the truth to deny that perseverance even to the end of this life is the gift of God; since He Himself puts an end to this life when He wills, and if He puts an end before a fall that is threatening, He makes the man to persevere even unto the end.” (The Gift of Perseverance, Chapter 41)

“…where he says, “I thank my God in every remembrance of you, always in every prayer of mine for you all making quest with joy for your fellowship in the gospel from the first day until now, being confident of this very thing, that He who has begun a good work in you will perform it until the day of Jesus Christ,” what else does he promise to them from the mercy of God than perseverance in good to the end?” (The Predestination of the Saints, Chapter 10)

This last quote refers to the confidence one should feel that the God who begins our salvation can surely secure it. Given that the apostles apparently knew who was among the elect, perhaps one might posit that Augustine believed one may be assured by God’s promises to the elect only if one was specifically told he was among the elect. Actually, Augustine wrote that the same assurance could be possessed by his readers:

“If God works our faith, acting in a wonderful manner in our hearts so that we believe, is there any reason to fear that He cannot do the whole; and does man on that account arrogate to himself its first elements, that he may merit to receive its last from God? Consider if in such a way any other result be gained than that the grace of God is given in some way or other, according to our merit, and so grace is no more grace.” (The Predestination of the Saints, Chapter 6)

For Augustine, however, this cuts both ways. If God is both the root cause that one perseveres over against another, and if indeed “…it is uncertain whether any one has received this gift [of perseverance] so long as he is still alive” (The Gift of Perseverance, Chapter 1), then one has no reason to believe God will finish what He began. This may explain why Augustine conflictingly writes that one should be fearful that he may lose his justification:

“God has judged it to be better to mingle some who would not persevere with a certain number of His saints, so that those for whom security from temptation in this life is not desirable may not be secure.” (The Gift of Perseverance, Chapter 19)

Further complications arise when one considers Augustine’s interpretation of 1 John 2:18-19 and John 6:60-66 (respectively):

“…there are some who are called by us children of God on account of grace received even in temporal things, yet are not so called by God; of whom the same John says, “They went out from us, but they were not of us, because if they had been of us they would, no doubt, have continued with us.” He does not say, “They went out from us, but because they did not abide with us they are no longer now of us;” but he says, “They went out from us, but they were not of us,” – that is to say, even when they appeared among us, they were not of us. And as if it were said to him, “Whence do you prove this? he says, “Because if they had been of us, they would assuredly have continued with us.” It is the word of God’s children; John is the speaker, who was ordained to a chief place among the children of God. When, therefore, God’s children say of those who had not perseverance, “They went out from us, but they were not of us,” and add, “Because if they had been of us, they would assuredly have continued with us,” what else do they say than that they were not children, even when they were in the profession and name of children? Not because they simulated righteousness, but because they did not continue in it. For he does not say, “For if they had been of us, they would assuredly have maintained a real and not a feigned righteousness with us;” but he says, “If they had been of us, they would assuredly have continued with us.” Beyond a doubt, he wished them to continue in goodness. Therefore they were in goodness; but because they did not abide in it – that is, they did not persevere unto the end – he says, “they were not of us, even when they were with us” – that is, they were not of the number of children, even when they were in the faith of children; because they who are truly children are foreknown and predestinated as conformed to the image of His Son, and are called according to His purpose, so as to be elected. For the son of promise does not perish, but the son of perdition.” (Rebuke and Grace, Chapter 20)

“Are not these even in the words of the gospel called disciples? And yet they were not truly disciples, because they did not continue in His word, according to what He says: “If ye continue in my word, then are ye indeed my disciples.” Because, therefore, they possessed not perseverance, as not being truly disciples of Christ, so they were not truly children of God even when they appeared to be so, and were so called. We, then, call men elected, and Christ’s disciples, and God’s children, because they are to be so called whom, being regenerated, we see to live piously; but they are then truly what they are called if they shall abide in that on account of which they are so called. But if they have not perseverance – that is, if they continue not in that which they have begun to be – they are not truly called what they are called and are not; for they are not this in the sight of Him to whom it is known what they are going to be – that is to say, from good men, bad men.” (Rebuke and Grace, Chapter 22)

Indeed, Augustine writes that those who do not persevere should accordingly be regarded as indistinguishable “from that lump which it is plain is condemned, as all go from one into condemnation.” (Rebuke and Grace, Chapter 12). Apparently, Augustine’s doctrine of adoption is intrinsically tied to his doctrine of election. But as we cannot know that we are among the elect, one wonders on what basis one can claim to know he is a child of God. Furthermore, in his Homilies on the First Epistle of John, Augustine says that “all heretics, all schismatics went out from us, that is, they go out from the Church; but they would not go out, if they were of us” (2:17-18). Can we know that we are adopted or in the Church? Apparently not.

We needn’t color his beliefs. Augustine wasn’t entirely doctrinally sound, and he contradicted himself (as most men do) on some points. Be that as it may, Augustine is to be commended for his consistent upholding of God’s grace as that alone by which one is saved.

Summary

Augustine believed:

1. “[men do not persevere who have] not been chosen in Christ before the foundation of the world.”

2. “… if you say that it pertains to man’s free will… that any one should persevere in good, or should not persevere, and it is not by the gift of God if he persevere, but by the performance of human will… you strive against the words of Him who says, “I have prayed for thee, Peter, that thy faith fail not.” 

3. “If God works our faith, acting in a wonderful manner in our hearts so that we believe… there [no] reason to fear that He cannot do the whole.”

4. “No one of His own is indifferent to [the Father’s] voice… for this reason also does He announce it to the [sheep], that he may abide perseveringly with Himself to the end.”

5. “…after the fall of man, God willed it to pertain only to His grace that man should approach to Him; nor did He will it to pertain to aught but His grace that man should not depart from Him.”

6. “It is He… who makes [men] to persevere in good, who makes them good. But they who fall and perish have never been in the number of the predestinated.”

7. “Consider if in such a way any other result be gained than that the grace of God is given in some way or other, according to our merit, and so grace is no more grace.”

8. “It is [foreign to] the truth to deny that perseverance even to the end of this life is the gift of God; since He Himself puts an end to this life when He wills, and if He puts an end before a fall that is threatening, He makes the man to persevere even unto the end.”  

9. "When Christ intercedes, therefore, on behalf of these, that their faith should not fail, doubtless it will not fail unto the end.”

10. “To the saints predestinated to the kingdom of God by God’s grace, the aid of perseverance that is given is not such as the former, but such that to them perseverance itself is bestowed; not only so that without that gift they cannot persevere, but, moreover, so that by means of this gift they cannot help persevering.”

A short, theistic argument worth mentioning

Given that skepticism is a self-defeating epistemology (see here), one must give an epistemological account for what one thinks he knows. I mentioned the argument from morality a few posts ago, noting that moral nihilists had an adequate response to it. There is an equally short argument, however, which is destructive to all atheists. It might be called the argument from the contingency of knowledge:

For a being to claim to know a proposition is true presupposes that he knows it's truth is not contingent or, if it is, said being knows that upon which the veracity of the proposition is contingent. Let's call this being Ryan. This implies two things:

1. Ryan is omniscient or has acquired his knowledge from a being who is omniscient, as Ryan would be required to know the relation between a proposition and anything upon which the veracity of the proposition might be predicated (which in turn implies knowledge of everything, including respective contingencies).
2. Ryan's knowledge is infinite or has acquired his knowledge from a being whose knowledge is infinite, as there are infinitely many possible relations one might posit between the proposition in question and everything imaginable.

Or we may consider these questions: how does Ryan know the proposition he claims is true isn't contingent on x, y, or z? If Ryan doesn't know, can he justifiably claim to know the proposition is true? No.

What does this mean? A being necessarily exists who is omniscient, infinitely knowledgeable, and has revealed himself to men. While this isn't a unique evidence for Christianity - see the above blog post for that - it is a concise theistic argument that one may find useful.

P.S. Should anyone ask how I know that this argument is self-affirming, I'd point him to the Bible.

Empiricism

I was recently asked why I believe the scientific method is unable to produce facts. As I have been meaning to write a note about this subject, I replied with some effort. I thought about distinguishing between perception and sensation, but have to read a little more about that. Here is the post:

//Assuming a fact is a true statement, to state that through the scientific method we may obtain facts begs the question:

1. Such a claim is dependent on the veracity of empiricism, which states that knowledge is derivable from the senses. This is a seemingly inconsistent first principle - through what sense did one come to believe that the proposition is true?

2 Moreover, sensation is subjective, so to purport what one senses as objective fact is fallacious.

3. Still further, from my recent note, which I recommend you read:

//[Empiric principles are] predicated on reasoning which cannot account for all possible contingencies. One might wonder whether “[this desk is red]” is a proposition contingent on the veracity of the proposition “ducks can swim” or “the Protestant canon is fallible.” There are infinitely many such propositions one could posit, of course, meaning that if one is to know that [this desk is red], one must be infinitely knowledgeable.//

Essentially, to state one is observing a given thing is to imply one has accounted for all possible unknown variables which could bias one's observation (optical illusions &c.). For this reason, Karl Popper wrote:

//Although in science we do our best to find the truth, we are conscious of the fact that we can never be sure whether we have got it….In science there is no "knowledge," in the sense in which Plato and Aristotle understood the word, in the sense which implies finality; in science, we never have sufficient reason for the belief that we have attained the truth.…Einstein declared that his theory was false – he said that it would be a better approximation to the truth than Newton's, but he gave reasons why he would not, even if all predictions came out right, regard it as a true theory.//

4. The scientific method is inductive. Inductive reasoning cannot produce general principles which are certain. Observing many green blades of grass does not guarantee all blades of grass are green. Bertrand Russell, the creator of the "teapot argument" atheists so love to use, also wrote:

//All inductive arguments in the last resort reduce themselves to the following form: "If this is true, that is true: now that is true, therefore this is true." This argument is, of course, formally fallacious. Suppose I were to say: "If bread is a stone and stones are nourishing, then this bread will nourish me; now this bread does nourish me; therefore it is a stone, and stones are nourishing." If I were to advance such an argument, I should certainly be thought foolish, yet it would not be fundamentally different from the argument upon which all scientific laws are based//

5. The scientific method, when said to be able to derive facts from observation, is an argument which commits the fallacy of affirming the consequent:

The hypothesis: If x, then y.
The observation: y.
The conclusion: x.

You can compare this to the fallacy:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Affirming_the_consequent

6. Scientific equations assume an ideal reality and ideal observation. For example, Gordon Clark writes:

//The law of the pendulum states that the period of the swing is proportional to the square root of the length. If, however, the weight of the bob is unevenly displaced around its center, the law will not hold. The law assumes that the bob is homogeneous, that the weight is symmetrically distributed along all axes, or more technically, that the mass is concentrated at a point. No such bob exists, and hence the law is not an accurate description of any tangible pendulum. Second, the law assumes that the pendulum swings by a tensionless string. There is no such string, so that the scientific law does not describe any real pendulum. And third, the law could be true only if the pendulum swung on an axis without friction. There is no such axis. It follows, therefore, that no visible pendulum accords with the mathematical formula and that the formula is not a description of any existing pendulum.//

7. Scientific "laws" are constructed rather than discovered. As W. Gary Crampton writes:

//In the laboratory the scientist seeks to determine the boiling point of water. Since water hardly boils at the same temperature, the scientist conducts a number of tests and the slightly differing results are noted. He then must average them. But what kind of average does he use: mean, mode, or median? He must choose; and whatever kind of average he selects, it is his own choice; it is not dictated by the data. Then too, the average he chooses is just that, that is, it is an average, not the actual datum yielded by the experiment. Once the test results have been averaged, the scientist will calculate the variable error in his readings. He will likely plot the data points or areas on a graph. Then he will draw a curve through the resultant data points or areas on the graph. But how many curves, each one of which describes a different equation, are possible? An infinite number of curves is possible. But the scientist draws only one.//

Hence, the following statement of Karl Popper is correct: "...all theories, including the best, have the same probability, namely zero."

For an example of how to apply these facts in a debate, see here:
http://www.facebook.com/topic.php?uid=5584629838&topic=26189

For further reading, I suggest:
http://www.amazon.com/philosophy-science-belief-University-philosophical/dp/B0007E9YRO/ref=sr_1_7?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1251682067&sr=8-7
http://www.amazon.com/What-This-Thing-Called-Science/dp/0335201091/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1251682089&sr=1-1
http://www.vincentcheung.com/

Science cannot provide an epistemic account of the nature of reality. Instead, theology is the ruling discipline. Science, while pragmatic, is subordinate to theology. Again, this is not to say science is not useful, but rather that it should be used by men to fulfill God's commandment to subdue the earth over against use as an epistemological foundation.//