Dialogue on Matthew 5:27-30
To Gordan Runyan's response to the challenge (August 8, 2007), concerning Matthew 5:27-30
Gordan makes the case that if there were unbelievers in the crowd (which probably made up a majority of the people present) and if there was a devil among the disciples (Judas), then it would be only natural that Jesus mention hell in His warnings, and hence this passage would pose no problem for Calvinism's fifth point. Interesting logic, but it raises a crucial question: Many heard, believing, disbelieving, elect, and non-elect; but to whom was it addressed? To escape hell as Christ exhorts us to do is to enter into life. Jesus employs similar terminology a few chapters later when He states,
Wherefore if thy hand or thy foot offend thee, cut them off, and cast [them] from thee: it is better for thee to enter into life halt or maimed, rather than having two hands or two feet to be cast into everlasting fire. (Matthew 18:8, echoed in Mark 9:43)
Which specifically mentions that if one thus escapes from hell, he will enter into eternal life (the logical corollary...unless you're Catholic...). Were this warning addressed to those who would not believe in Christ, then all the cutting off of limbs and plucking out of eyes in the world would be utterly fruitless as this would not help them enter life (or escape hell for that matter, for they were already dead in sin), making Christ's words completely redundant and of no effect.
The question is not if unbelievers were present, but if believers (and those who would later believe) were, and if the warnings were addressed to them, for if this warning were addressed to even a single one among the elect, then guaranteed perseverance of the saints is disproven regardless of how many scoffers happened to hear it. Indeed, many heard what Christ said but God did not give them understanding (Luke 8:10), this did not stop the gospel from hitting its intended targets. But we see not only does the Lord's admonition concern hell, but it concerns how to escape it, which (if you believe in specific election as I and all TULIPers do), concerns only the elect. He not only threatened hell, but promised heaven as well (as chapter 18 and Luke 9 state more specifically); so no matter how many skeptics were present, the application was to those who do and will believe.
-------
August 8, 2007
Joshua Hitchcock posted a response as well. In it he makes a point about Jesus' purpose in the words He spoke,
"Jesus' intention is to teach the crowd and disciples, believers and unbelievers, that the Pharisee's understanding of the law was not a complete understanding."
With which I actually agree. This being one of the purposes of His sermon however does not negate the warning that He gave or make the teaching inapplicable to Christians. Indeed, no true follower of Christ discounts His equating lust with adultery in verse 28 as just some point to the Jewish law that we can safely ignore; it is as much in force for us today as it was then. Likewise, His intent in showing their deficiency in understanding and their sinful state does not negate His very next statement,
"And if thy right eye offend thee, pluck it out, and cast [it] from thee: for it is profitable for thee that one of thy members should perish, and not [that] thy whole body should be cast into hell."
Josh then raises another objection,
"To assert that this passage teaches conditional security is to read into the text an unwarranted presupposition that Jesus is only speaking to believers."
As I'd said when addressing Gordan's response, Jesus was indeed speaking to a multitude of both sinner and saint, though contextually this warning can only be addressing believers specifically. Were Christ addressing unbelievers, then as Josh rightly observes,
Taking Jesus admonition literally, we could also formulate a doctrine that the way to heaven is by self-mutilization, seeing that cutting out your eyes and cutting off your arms keeps you out of hell. Here Jesus would be advocating a works based salvation...
Which drives home the point that it must be believers He was specifically addressing, for no amount of self-mutilation will keep one who does not believe out of hell; but to those of us who believe, the cost of life, limb, family, and all we have should be counted as rubbish for the sake of following Christ.
He that findeth his life shall lose it: and he that loseth his life for My sake shall find it. (Matthew 10:39)
-------
August 12, 2007 - Josh Hitchcock delivers his final defense of unconditional security, starting with Matthew:
He concludes his response by holding on to his unwarranted presupposition that Jesus was specifically addressing believers, which is no where stated in the text.
That's right, there's not a huge stamp a page and a half wide in the text that says, "THIS IS SPECIFICALLY TO BELIEVERS!" Romans 8:38-39 doesn't have such a qualifier either (chapter 8 doesn't even have the words believe or faith in it), yet these are obviously spoken to Christians. The fact that Matthew 5:27-30 is addressed to believers is evident from the fact that I previously listed: One who does not believe cannot enter into life no matter how much he tries to follow what is right, therefore this passage by process of elimination must be addressed specifically to those who believe. Josh isn't done there though, he attempts advance by another route.
Ok, so he agrees that one is saved by grace through and not by self-mutilization [sic]. But, he does believe that it is a believer’s works that keeps that individual saved. While faith is what may bring one to salvation initially, according to Joshua Thibodaux, although he will not admit this, it is works that will ultimately keep a person saved, thus holding to some view of salvation by works.
Ah yes, the other classic Calvinist blunder: When all else fails, pull out the heresy of salvation by works card. If Josh had actually known what I teach, he would not have let such a silly presupposition guide his writing. Salvation both begins and continues through faith in Christ, yet if one falls in love with and lets himself be hardened by the things of this world such as riches (Matthew 13:22) or sin (Hebrews 3:13), then he rejects the faith of Christ, for,
...know ye not that the friendship of the world is enmity with God? Whosoever therefore will be a friend of the world is the enemy of God. (James 4:4)
Hence it was not 'salvation by works' for Jesus to tell the rich young ruler,
Yet lackest thou one thing: sell all that thou hast, and distribute unto the poor, and thou shalt have treasure in heaven: and come, follow me. (Luke 18:22)
Merely selling things was not his means for salvation, for faith is implicit in following Christ as he was also commanded. But the Master knew that the things in the young man's life and his love for them were poisonous to his faith, and therefore stated that they should be done away with. So it should be no surprise that Christ should speak a similar warning to those following Him, that if even our very bodily members cause us to be led into sin and away from trusting Him, then it is better that they be done away with than it is for we ourselves to suffer eternal condemnation.
Copyright © 2005-2007, InDeathorLife.org
The information on this page may not be reproduced or republished on another website, webpage or other printed media without express permission from the author of this site. Other material(s) referenced on this site are the property of their respective authors or copyright holders, and where applicable are used by permission.