Redemption, Adoption, and the Seal of the Spirit.
Note: The post you are about to read is adapted from chapter 7 of the book The Flower Falls: A Careful Examination of Calvinism’s TULIP. If you prefer to read the material in print or eBook form, you can find it on Amazon and Barnes & Noble.com, or ask your favorite bookseller to order it.
Redemption, Adoption, and the Seal of the Spirit
Paul wrote many wonderful truths that all followers of Jesus have in common. Though Israel is God’s chosen nation and the apostles and prophets were his chosen instruments to proclaim the mystery of his will to the Gentiles, Paul graciously reminded the Ephesians that Gentiles are fellow heirs, fellow members of the body, and fellow partakers of the promises of Christ Jesus (3:6). He also said they were sealed “with the Holy Spirit of promise who is given as a pledge of our inheritance, with a view to the redemption of God’s own possession” (1:13–14). And, when writing to the Romans, he wrote of Gentile believers in Jesus having redemption through his blood and being adopted children of God (3:23–24; 8:21–23).
So powerful are those truths that Calvinists might consider them unconditional guarantees of eternal life. It’s worth asking, though: If being adopted is a guarantee of eternal life, why would Paul mourn over and pray for the salvation of his Israelite brethren, to whom the adoption as sons belonged? (Romans 9:4; 10:1).
What do the Scriptures say about redemption, adoption, and the seal of the Holy Spirit? Do they provide an unconditional guarantee of salvation? Let’s begin finding out by taking a quick look at redemption.
Paul wrote in Ephesians 1:7, “In Him we have redemption through His blood, the forgiveness of our trespasses, according to the riches of His grace.” The Greek word apolutrosis, translated “redemption” here is used ten times in the Scriptures. It’s the word Jesus used in Luke 21:28 when he told his disciples to lift up their heads because their redemption was drawing near. It’s the word Paul used in Romans 8:23 where he wrote of having the first fruits of the Spirit, yet “waiting eagerly for . . . the redemption of our body.” It’s the word he used in Ephesians 1:13–14 where he wrote the Holy Spirit of promise “is given as a pledge of our inheritance, with a view to the redemption of God’s own possession.” And, it’s the word he used in Ephesians 4:30 where he wrote that they were sealed for the day of redemption. Much is wrapped up in these passages, but something often overlooked is the fact that each of them speak of redemption in a future sense. In fact, six of the ten times apolutrōsis is used in the Scriptures, it speaks of redemption in a future sense.
Christians today have differing ideas about redemption, but while it’s true that believers in Jesus have redemption through his blood, the greater context of the Scriptures indicates Paul didn’t believe redemption, adoption, or being sealed with the Holy Spirit carries an unconditional guarantee of eternal life. One place this is evidenced is in a conversation between him and the elders of Ephesus. Believing he would never see them again, he said:
“You yourselves know, from the first day that I set foot in Asia . . . I did not shrink from declaring to you anything that was profitable. . . . Therefore, I testify to you this day that I am innocent of the blood of all men. . . . For I did not shrink from declaring to you the whole purpose of God. Be on guard for yourselves and for all the flock, among which the Holy Spirit has made you overseers, to shepherd the church of God which He purchased with His own blood. I know that after my departure savage wolves will come in among you, not sparing the flock; and from among your own selves men will arise, speaking perverse things, to draw away the disciples after them. Therefore be on the alert, remembering that night and day for a period of three years I did not cease to admonish each one with tears. And now I commend you to God and to the word of His grace, which is able to build you up and to give you the inheritance among all those who are sanctified” (Acts 20:18–32).
Paul mentioned the church being purchased with God’s own blood. He also wrote of the inheritance promised to believers — something he wrote about in Ephesians 1:14. He didn’t say anything, however, about them being predestined to eternal life. Instead, he spoke of admonishing them for a period of three years, then warned them to “be on guard” and “be on the alert” so as not to be drawn away by people speaking perverse words.
These cautions seem incompatible with the idea that they were predestined to eternal life. When warning them “from among your own selves men will arise, speaking perverse things to draw away the disciples,” he meant just what he said. The grammatical structure of the sentence seems to indicate he was referring to some of the elders as those who would speak perverse things, but it is possible he meant others in the church body. Their identity isn’t important at this point. What is important to consider is whether it makes sense that Paul would give these strong and specific verbal warnings, then write later that they were chosen and predestined to eternal life.
Calvinists might argue that Paul’s words about the church being purchased with Christ’s blood are enough to prove that all believers are unconditionally predestined to eternal life, but his choice of words doesn’t bear that out. The word translated “purchased” (peripoieo) doesn’t mean bought. Instead, since the time of the Greek historian Herodotus (who wrote more than 400 years before Paul) it has meant to reserve, to leave or keep safe, lay by; to make remain for oneself.(1) Forms of this word are used only two other times in the New Testament; Luke 17:33 where Jesus said, “Whoever seeks to keep his life will lose it” and 1 Timothy 3:13 where Paul wrote, “Those who have served well as deacons obtain for themselves a high standing and great confidence in the faith that is in Christ Jesus” (emphasis mine).
These passages highlight the importance of careful translation work. Darrell Bock is correct in saying that pronouns carry a big load, but the wider truth is that every word does. The New American Standard Bible, considered among the most literal word-for-word translations, translates peripoieo as purchased in Acts 20:28, but consider what would happen if it were to be translated purchased in the other two passages where it’s used:
Luke 17:33: Whoever seeks to purchase his life will lose it, and whoever loses his life will preserve it.
1 Timothy 3:13: “For those who have served well as deacons purchase for themselves a high standing and great confidence in the faith that is in Christ Jesus.”
Can a person purchase their life? The idea that a person can purchase their life is reminiscent of the indulgences offered by the Roman Catholic Church in the Middle Ages. Likewise, can deacons (or anyone else) purchase a high standing and great confidence in faith for themselves? The obvious answer is no. Instead, Paul told the Ephesian elders that the church is kept safe through God’s own blood (Acts 20:28).
Paul’s proclamation that the church is kept safe through the shedding of blood is pictured in the Old Testament account of the Passover and should be an incredible comfort to all believers in Jesus. Exodus 12:22–23 records Moses conveying instructions from God to the congregation of Israel in preparation for their exodus from Egypt. After telling them to put the blood of a slain lamb on their lintel and two door posts, he said, “And none of you shall go outside the door of his house until morning. For the Lord will pass through to smite the Egyptians; and when He sees the blood on the lintel and on the two doorposts, the Lord will pass over the door and will not allow the destroyer to come in to your houses to smite you.”
This short passage reveals God’s chosen people would be kept safe from the angel of death because of the lamb’s blood applied to their houses. In a similar way, the church is saved because of the shed blood of Jesus Christ, the spotless Lamb of God. However, just as the Israelites were cautioned that they would need to stay in the house to be safe, the New Testament resonates with the truth that we need to be “in Christ” if we are to be saved.
Purchased People and Swift Destruction
The New Testament doesn’t speak of people purchasing their salvation, but it speaks plenty about people being purchased by the blood of Christ. The word commonly translated purchased is agorazo which is used more than thirty times in the New Testament. This is the word used in Revelation 5:9 where the four living creatures and the twenty-four elders fall down before the Lamb singing, “Worthy are You to take the book and to break its seals; for you were slain and purchased [agorazo] for God with Your blood men from every tribe and tongue and people and nation.” It’s also the word used later in Revelation 14:3–4 where John spoke of the 144,000 who had been purchased from the earth.
These passages seem to reinforce the idea that purchased people are unconditionally predestined to eternal life, but it’s important to note that Peter used agorazo to remind God’s chosen people, “But false prophets also arose among the people, just as there will also be false teachers among you, who will secretly introduce destructive heresies, even denying the Master who bought [agorazo] them, bringing swift destruction upon themselves” (2 Peter 2:1).
We’ll take a closer look at those words in a later chapter. For now, perhaps we can agree that Peter’s caution that false teachers would deny the Master who bought them, combined with Paul’s warning to the Ephesian elders in Acts 20:28 and Moses’ warnings to the Israelites in Exodus 12, present sufficient reason to question Calvinistic ideas about unconditional election. Similarly, Paul’s statements about adoption and the seal of the Spirit give rise to questions.
Adoption and the Seal of the Spirit
Calvinists look to Paul’s words in Ephesians 1 about adoption and the seal of the Spirit as evidence of an unconditional guarantee of eternal life. They see the word adoption and think permanent. They see sealed and think forever. Their understanding of those words might seem reasonable to twenty-first century readers, but while the truths revealed in the Scriptures are useful for every generation, Paul’s letter was addressed to first-century Christians whose laws and customs were very different from our own. So, if we hope to understand his words, we’ll need to interpret them through first-century lenses.
Paul is the only New Testament writer who used the term adoption (huiothesia), referring to it a total of five times: once in his letter to the Ephesians, once in Galatians, and three times in his letter to the Romans. The most well-known of these is likely Romans 8:15 where Paul encouraged them: “For you have not received a spirit of slavery leading to fear again, but you have received a spirit of adoption as sons by which we cry out, ‘Abba! Father!’”
Those beautiful words indicate adoption brings believers into such an intimate relationship with the Creator of the universe that they can call him Abba. In today’s vernacular, we might say Dad or Daddy. However, Paul went on to speak of adoption in a future sense:
“The Spirit Himself testifies with our spirit that we are children of God, and if children, heirs also, heirs of God and fellow heirs with Christ, if indeed we suffer with Him so that we may also be glorified with Him. . . . For the anxious longing of the creation waits eagerly for the revealing of the sons of God. . . . For we know that the whole creation groans and suffers the pains of childbirth together until now. And not only this, but also we ourselves, having the first fruits of the Spirit, even we ourselves groan within ourselves, waiting eagerly for our adoption as sons, the redemption of our body” (8:16–23).
By tying adoption to the redemption of our body and saying “we ourselves” are waiting eagerly for it, Paul indicated the Roman believers’ adoption was yet to be fulfilled. The future state of adoption is further supported seventeen verses later where he wrote of adoption as it pertains to Israel. Rather than suggesting it carries an unconditional guarantee of eternal life, he said:
“I am telling the truth in Christ, I am not lying, my conscience testifies with me in the Holy Spirit, that I have great sorrow and unceasing grief in my heart. For I wish that I myself were accursed, separated from Christ for the sake of my brethren, my kinsmen according to the flesh, who are Israelites, to whom belongs the adoption as sons, and the glory and the covenants and the giving of the Law and the temple service and the promises, whose are the fathers, and from whom is the Christ according to the flesh, who is over all, God blessed forever. Amen” (Romans 9:1–5).
Paul’s expression of grief over his kinsmen who had received the adoption is inconsistent with the idea that adoption carries an unconditional guarantee of eternal life. It is consistent, however, with the greater context of the chapter and his statement that Israel did not attain righteousness because they did not pursue it by faith (vv. 30–33). It is also consistent with the understanding that, although the adoption belonged to his kinsmen according to the flesh, their unbelief was a rejection of the inheritance due to them as sons.
Knowing many of his kinsmen did not believe in Jesus, Paul referenced Isaiah 28:16 in the last verse of Romans 9, “He who believes in him will not be disappointed” (v. 33). When interpreted out of context, this passage can be used to provide comfort. But Paul’s love for his readers and knowledge of the unbelief of many of his Israelite kinsmen suggest he meant it as cautionary rather than comforting. Consider his next words: “Brethren, my heart’s desire and prayer to God for them is for their salvation” (10:1).
When considering those words in light of Calvinistic views of adoption, it seems reasonable to ask: If being adopted carries an unconditional guarantee of salvation, why would Paul would pray for the salvation of and wish himself accursed for the sake of those “to whom belongs the adoption as sons”?
Paul referred to his kinsmen again later, but there he went so far as to say some of them had been broken off because of unbelief:
“Quite right, they were broken off for their unbelief, but you stand by your faith. Do not be conceited but fear; for if God did not spare the natural branches, he will not spare you either. Behold then the kindness and severity of God; to those who fell, severity, but to you, God’s kindness, if you continue in His kindness; otherwise you will also be cut off” (11:20–22).
These words provide no support for the idea that adoption carries a guarantee of eternal life. Instead, Paul’s grief and sorrow over the Israelites’ rejection of the Savior seem to have added fuel to his passionate urging of the Romans to continue in God’s kindness so they would not be cut off.
The Fullness of Time
The Almighty God of the universe is not bound by humankind’s ideas, understanding, or approval of him. He had, and has the freedom to choose any way to redeem and save us. Or he could have chosen not to do so at all. However, in his infinite wisdom and in accordance with his abundant grace, he not only chose to come into the world to reconcile people to himself, he chose to identify with us in the process.
Paul wrote this incredible statement to the Corinthians:
“For though I am free from all men, I have made myself a slave to all, so that I might win more. To the Jews, I became as a Jew, so that I may win Jews; to those under the Law, as under the Law . . . so that I might win those under the Law; to those who are without the Law, as without the Law . . . so that I might win those without the Law. To the weak, I became weak, that I might win the weak; I have become all things to all men, so that I may by all means save some” (1 Corinthians 9:19–22).
Paul’s desire to become all things to all men reflects the heart of God, who, in coming to Earth as a man, became all things to all men, so he would “by all means save some.” And, as Paul told the Galatians, he did so in the “fullness of time.”
“But when the fullness of time came, God sent forth His Son, born of a woman, born under the Law, so that He might redeem those who were under the Law, that we might receive the adoption as sons” (4:4–5).
The fullness of time came at a particular point in history — purposefully. Not only did Jesus’ timely arrival fulfill numerous Old Testament prophecies, his birth in a small town in first-century Israel meant he was not only born under Hebrew law, he and the people he ministered to were also under Roman law.
This is of great significance. Knowing the historical context of Jesus’ teachings and those of the biblical authors is crucial if we hope to properly interpret them — especially regarding adoption. Paul told the Romans the “adoption as sons” belongs to Israelites (9:4), but the concept of adoption seems to have been largely foreign to ancient Israelites. In fact, there isn’t a single mention of it in the Old Testament. Roman adoption laws, however, had been in place for hundreds of years before Paul wrote.
These laws might have been left for people to speculate about if not for God providentially uncovering a copy of them about two hundred years ago. Written in the year 161, The Institutes of Gaius is a compilation of laws that had been in place for centuries in the Roman world — long before Christ’s birth. They had been given up as lost for nearly fifteen hundred years until a complete copy was discovered in Verona, Italy, in 1816.(2) As a result of this discovery, you and I have the opportunity to read laws regarding marriage, slaves, adoption, and inheritances — all of which the authors and recipients of the New Testament writings would have been familiar with since they lived under Roman rule. Knowledge of the laws under which the church was birthed provides great insight into the New Testament writings and a greater appreciation and joy over the truths presented therein.
Ancient Adoption Laws
Adoptions today are very different than those of the first-century Roman world. Most followers of Jesus today view adoption as an incredible way to bring orphans into families and show them God’s love. And it is! Ancient Roman adoption, however, seemed to have had little to do with love. Affection may have played a role in some adoptions; but typically, they were far more practical in nature. Often adoptions took place for the sole purpose of passing on a family name, business, or political situation. And, unlike today, Roman adoption took place between an older man and a younger man of full age and legal capacity.
The ancient name for adoption is adrogation which is derived from the Latin word for “ask.” In its simplest terms, adrogation meant both the adopting father and the potential son were asked whether they desired the adoption.(3) Interestingly, Roman law also required the adoption be found to be in the best interest of the son.(4) This portion of the law easily aligns itself with the adoption Paul wrote about, as becoming a child of the good and gracious King of the universe is in every person’s best interest. The Apostle John’s words come to mind: “Behold how great a love the Father has bestowed on us that we would be called children of God!” (1 John 3:1).
If the requirement of mutual desire and benefit to the son was confirmed, the laws of adrogation state that the adopted son (adrogatus) became like one born into the family, with all the authority and right of inheritance that comes with such a position.(5) This presents an incredible picture of a believer’s relationship with his or her heavenly Father and of being coheirs with Christ. And there’s more! While it was required that the adrogatus be at least the age of consent, he also may have been married with children. If that was the case, his children and spouse were automatically included in the adoption.(6) This portion of the law seems to be reflected in Paul’s words in 1 Corinthians 7 about the entire family being sanctified by a believing parent.
If all of this is not enough to show how fitting the metaphor of adoption is in providing a picture of a believer’s relationship with his or her Father God, consider the fact that all the debts of the adopted son were taken on by the adoptive father as a result of the extinction of the son’s “old persona”.(7) When reading this portion of the law, I can’t help but think of the glorious truths of Colossians 2:14 where Paul wrote of the debt of believers being canceled and nailed to the cross; and 2 Corinthians 5:16–17, where he wrote that people in Christ are new creations, “The old things passed away; behold new things have come.”
Each of these aspects of Roman adoption law are wonderfully supportive of scriptural truths and are, therefore, a cause for comfort and rejoicing. Other aspects of Roman adoption however, though also supportive of scriptural truth, are sobering. For example, though minor children were included in the adoption and received all the rights and privileges associated with it, they had the right to emancipate themselves after reaching puberty.(8) This seems to support the idea of an age of accountability that many followers of Jesus hold to.(9) In addition, the laws of adoption allowed for the adrogatus to emancipate himself from the adoptive father, thus terminating all rights and relations with the family of adoption.(10) And, though it’s difficult to think about, the father had the right to emancipate the son. The result of the emancipation, whether initiated by the son or the father, was that the emancipated person was again accountable for his personal liabilities.(11)
This may be shocking to those of us who have been taught and believed that adoption is permanent, but these laws shed light on Paul’s mourning over his brethren in Romans 9:2–3 and his prayer for the salvation of his kinsmen “to whom belongs the adoption” (Romans 10:1; 9:4). They also provide support for his words about some of the branches of Israel being “broken off” (Romans 11:20–22) and the possibility of the “elect” being denied (2 Timothy 2:12).
Thankfully, Justinian’s Institutes, which was published in the sixth century and largely taken directly from The Institutes of Gaius, tells us, “There is scarcely any way in which natural or adoptive children can compel their parents to emancipate them.”(12)
When applied to the adoption of a believer, those words reflect God’s grace, longsuffering, and desire for all people to be saved. However, the reality that adoption can be rescinded seems a reflection of his justice. This may account for statements Paul made in Romans 1 about some people who knew God but did not honor him as God or give thanks. Instead, they became fools and exchanged the glory of the incorruptible God for an image, causing him to give them over to their desires (Romans 1:18–28).
A picture of Roman adoption appeared in the 1959 movie Ben-Hur, based on the book of the same title written in 1880 by Christian author Lew Wallace. Set in the Roman colonies during the time Jesus was on Earth, the film includes a scene in which Judah Ben-Hur, who, as a young man had been willingly adopted by a Roman commander and given the seal of his father as a sign of his standing as son, later took off his signet ring and asked that it be returned to his father. In this simple act, he renounced his status and forfeited his inheritance. Thus, the adoption, though once complete and sealed, was renounced before the culmination: the giving of the inheritance.
In the same way that Ben-Hur was given proof of his standing as a son, people who believe in Jesus also are given a seal as proof of their standing as God’s children: the seal of the Holy Spirit. And, just as Ben-Hur’s seal was given as a pledge of more to come; referring to himself, Silvanus, and Timothy, Paul told the Corinthians, “Now He who establishes us with you in Christ and anointed us is God, who also sealed us and gave us the Spirit in our hearts as a pledge” (2 Corinthians 1:21). Similarly, he wrote to the Ephesians, “In him you also, when you heard the word of truth, the gospel of your salvation, and believed in him, were sealed with the promised Holy Spirit” (Ephesians 1:13 ESV).
Sadly, however, just as Ben-Hur forfeited his standing as son and his inheritance when he removed the signet ring, the Scriptures speak not only of Israelites renouncing their rights and the inheritance due them as God’s children, they speak of the possibility of Gentile believers doing the same.
Sealed for the Day of Redemption
After saying the Ephesians were sealed with the promised Holy Spirit, Paul said the Spirit “is given as a pledge of our inheritance, with a view to the redemption of God’s own possession” (Ephesians 1:14). Then, in chapter 4, he told them, “Do not grieve the Holy Spirit of God, by whom you were sealed for the day of redemption” (v. 30). Many people have been taught these verses mean the Ephesians, thus all followers of Jesus, were sealed until the day of redemption, but Paul didn’t say they were sealed until the day of redemption. He said they were sealed for it.
The word commonly translated “until” (heos) is used in John 2:10 where, after Jesus turned water into wine, the headwaiter remarked that the groom had saved the good wine “until now.” It’s also used in Matthew 17:9 where Jesus told Peter, James, and John not to tell anyone about his transfiguration “until” he had risen from the dead. The word Paul used to speak of being sealed for or toward the day of redemption, however, is eis; a word that speaks of direction, rather than completion.
Thayer’s Greek Lexicon describes eis as “a preposition governing the accusative, and denoting entrance into, or direction and limit.”(13) This is the word Jesus used when speaking of the narrow way that leads to life (Matthew 7:14). It’s the word Mark used to describe Jesus looking up toward heaven as he blessed the five loaves and two fish before feeding the crowd (Mark 6:41). And it’s the word he used in verse 45 where Jesus compelled his disciples get into the boat and go ahead of him to the other side while he sent the crowds away.
It’s true that possession of the Spirit is evidence of one’s standing as a child of God (Romans 8:9, 14, 23); but Paul didn’t say a person will always possess the Spirit. In fact, though people might be sealed for or toward the day of redemption, the Scriptures indicate the that Spirit can be put out, or leave them. Paul wrote in Ephesians 4:30 of the possibility of grieving the Holy Spirit, but he went beyond this in 1 Thessalonians instructing his readers: “Do not quench the Spirit” (5:19).
The word for quench is sbennumi and seven of the eight times it’s used in the Scriptures it speaks of the possibility of a fire being extinguished. Examples are found in Matthew 25:8, where Jesus spoke of the lamps of the foolish virgins going out before the bridegroom came; Mark 9:46–48, where Jesus spoke of the worm not dying and the fire not being quenched in hell; and Ephesians 6:16, where Paul wrote of taking up “the shield of faith with which you will be able to extinguish all the flaming arrows of the evil one.”
In light of the definition of quench and its use in other passages, Ephesians 4:30 and 1 Thessalonians 5:19 seem to indicate that, though believers may at one time possess the Spirit, they are capable not only of grieving but also extinguishing the Holy Spirit. Even worse, the Scriptures indicate it might not always be the result of an intentional and official rejection like Ben-Hur’s. Many Christians are resistant to that scenario, but King David, the man after God’s own heart, seemed to recognize the possibility of just such a thing. It was he who, in sorrowing over his sin with Bathsheba, prayed, “Create in me a clean heart, O God, and renew a steadfast spirit within me. Do not cast me away from Your presence and do not take Your Holy Spirit from me” (Psalm 51:10–11).
Christians today are quick to quote Hebrews 13:8 and agree that Jesus Christ is the same yesterday, today, and forever. Yet, many don’t seem to believe the same about the Holy Spirit. While many of us claim the Spirit will not leave people, David’s words reveal he had no such confidence. Perhaps this is because he knew of King Saul’s experience with the Spirit.
First Samuel 10 records that after anointing Saul as ruler of Israel and giving him instructions from the Lord, Samuel told him, “The Spirit of the Lord will come upon you mightily, and you shall prophesy with them and be changed to another man” (v.6). The Spirit indeed came upon Saul, and the change in his life was so evident that people who knew him asked, “What has happened to the son of Kish? Is Saul also among the prophets?” (v.11).
The dramatic change in Saul corresponds well with Paul’s words in 2 Corinthians 5:17 about believers “in Christ” being made new. Nevertheless, though Saul was “changed to another man,” seemingly because of his continual disobedience and rebellion, Samuel later told him, “Because you have rejected the word of the Lord, He has also rejected you from being king” (1 Samuel 15:23). Moreover, 1 Samuel 16:14 reveals, “Now the Spirit of the Lord departed from Saul, and an evil spirit from the Lord terrorized him.”
Saul isn’t the only example of the Spirit departing from a person. The book of Judges tells us that the Spirit of the Lord who stirred in Samson (13:25) later departed from him. Judges 16:20 records Delilah telling Samson, “The Philistines are upon you” then adds this sad commentary: “And he awoke from his sleep and said, ‘I will go out as at other times and shake myself free.’ But he did not know that the Lord had departed from him.”
The Scriptures go on to say that Samson was captured, had his eyes gouged out, was brought to Gaza, bound with chains, and became a grinder in the prison (v. 21).
There is no indication that King Saul called on the Lord in the misery that ensued because of his rebellion, but Samson sure did. His days were spent as a grinder in the prison after the Spirit departed from him, but when chained between two pillars as entertainment for the Philistines during a feast to their god Dagon, he called out, “O Lord God, please remember me and please strengthen me just this time, O God, that I may at once be avenged of the Philistines for my two eyes” (Judges 16:21–28).
Thankfully, and not surprisingly, it appears God heard Samson’s cry and responded as a forgiving father. Not only was he given the strength to cause the collapse of a house and the death of many of God’s enemies in its fall, he is listed in Hebrews 11 as a man of faith. This should comfort all believers in Jesus. While the Scriptures reveal the Spirit can leave a person, Samson’s life is a wonderful example of God’s grace and forgiveness for people who call on him in faith.
Calvinists look to Paul’s statements about redemption, adoption, and the seal of the Spirit as support for their claim about an unconditional election to salvation, but Paul’s caution to the Ephesian elders, the future sense of redemption, the first-century laws of adoption, and the Old Testament’s mention of the Spirit leaving people all conflict with it.
Paul didn’t write his letters in a vacuum. While people in later generations have struggled to understand his warnings, the Ephesian, Roman, and Galatian Christians interpreted them in their first-century context. Therefore, they would not only have taken Paul’s warnings to them seriously, they would have taken seriously his words to Timothy that if believers deny God he will deny them (2 Timothy 2:12). With this in mind, it doesn’t seem a stretch to think the Roman Christians would have empathized with Paul’s grief and joined him in prayer for the salvation of his fellow Israelites who received the adoption yet were broken off (Romans 9:1–3; 10:1).
Moreover, although many twenty-first century Christians have been subtly conditioned to explain away Peter’s words about the destruction of people who would deny the Master who bought them (2 Peter 2:1) and David’s prayer that the Spirit not depart from him (Psalm 51:10–12), first-century readers would have understood them as written and taken them seriously.
Please take time to consider what you’ve read here then, if you’d like join me here where we’ll examine Romans 8 where Paul wrote about people being called, foreknown, and predestined. These are weighty words used to support Calvinistic ideas about salvation. Could this be where TULIP finds grounding in the Scriptures?
1. Joseph H. Thayer, Thayer’s Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament, https://biblehub.com/greek/4046.htm.
2. Lloyd Duhaime, “The 1816 Discovery of the Institutes of Gaius: One Small Step for Niebhur, One Giant Step for Mankind,” April 25, 2012, http://www.duhaime.org/LawMag/LawArticle-1405/The-1816-Discovery-of-the-Institutes-of-Gaius-One-Small-Step-for-Niebhur-One-Giant-Step-for-Mankind.aspx.
3. Gaius, et al., The Institutes of Gaius and Rules of Ulpian (Edinburgh: T & T Clark, 1880), 38–39, #99, https://archive.org/details/institutesofgaiu00gaiuuoft/page/38/mode/2up.
4. Lee, R.W., The Elements of Roman Law with a Translation of the Institutes of Justian (London: Sweet & Maxwell, Limited, 1946), “The Law of Persons,” 68, #99.
5. Gaius, 121–122, #136,
https://archive.org/details/institutesofgaiu00gaiuuoft/page/120.
6. Gaius, 40, #107, https://archive.org/details/institutesofgaiu00gaiuuoft/page/40/mode/2up.
7. Lee, 69–70, #101.
8. Lee, 73, #110.
9. John MacArthur, “The ‘Age of Accountability,’” Grace to You,
https://www.gty.org/library/articles/A264/the-age-of-accountability.
10. Lee, 70, #101; 73 #110.
11. Lee, 69–70, #101; 73, #110.
11. Lee, 69–70, #101.
12. Lee, 73, #110.
13. Thayer, https://biblehub.com/thayers/1519.htm.
NOTE: This post is adapted from Chapter 7 of my book The Flower Falls: A Careful Examination of Calvinism’s TULIP. You can find it on Amazon and Barnes & Noble, or ask your favorite bookseller to order it.
You can connect with me on Twitter (X), or email me at patti@theflowerfallsoff.com
To read more, return to the homepage or follow one of the links below.
The Illusionary Truth of Calvinism
Context and the Simple Truths of Scripture
The Sovereignty and Will of God
Chosen and Predestined Ephesians 1
Romans 8- Foreknown and Predestined
Romans 8:33- A Charge Against God’s Elect
Romans 9- Love & Hate, Potter & Clay
1 and 2 Peter-Chosen According to Foreknowledge
Acts 13:48, Appointed to Eternal Life
Jesus’ Drawn, Given, and Chosen
Total Depravity and Human Righteousness
Isaiah 64:6- Righteousness and Filthy Rags
Genesis 6- Only Evil Continually
Jeremiah 17 and Ephesians 2- Wicked Hearts and Dead Men
Limited Atonement and its Errors
1. Joseph H. Thayer, Thayer’s Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament, https://biblehub.com/greek/4046.htm.
2. Lloyd Duhaime, “The 1816 Discovery of the Institutes of Gaius: One Small Step for Niebhur, One Giant Step for Mankind,” April 25, 2012, http://www.duhaime.org/LawMag/LawArticle-1405/The-1816-Discovery-of-the-Institutes-of-Gaius-One-Small-Step-for-Niebhur-One-Giant-Step-for-Mankind.aspx.
1. Gaius, et al., The Institutes of Gaius and Rules of Ulpian (Edinburgh: T & T Clark, 1880), 38–39, #99, https://archive.org/details/institutesofgaiu00gaiuuoft/page/38/mode/2up.
2. Lee, R.W., The Elements of Roman Law with a Translation of the Institutes of Justian (London: Sweet & Maxwell, Limited, 1946), “The Law of Persons,” 68, #99.
3. Gaius, 121–122, #136,
https://archive.org/details/institutesofgaiu00gaiuuoft/page/120.
4. Gaius, 40, #107, https://archive.org/details/institutesofgaiu00gaiuuoft/page/40/mode/2up.
5. Lee, 69–70, #101.
6. Lee, 73, #110.
7. John MacArthur, “The ‘Age of Accountability,’” Grace to You,
https://www.gty.org/library/articles/A264/the-age-of-accountability.
8. Lee, 70, #101; 73 #110.
9. Lee, 69–70, #101.
10. Lee, 73, #110.
11. Lee, 69–70, #101.
12. Lee, 73, #110.
13. Thayer, https://biblehub.com/thayers/1519.htm.
