Opens in a new tab

Major Christian Church Councils. Part 3. Does A Command Of God Imply Ability?

September 8, 2026
People gathered in a large, ornate church hall.

Please note. Listening to the article may be hard to follow because of charts and formatting.

Next, we will consider the following.

👉 Whether God’s commands imply ability using specific passages—because that’s really the philosophical/theological hinge under everything we have been wrestling with.

Do God’s commands imply human ability to obey them?

This is exactly where Augustine of Hippo vs. Pelagius really divide, and it sits right underneath how we read Romans 5 and 9.

We will consider this in three parts:

  1. The key biblical passages
  2. The two opposing principles
  3. How each theological system handles the same texts

🔹 1. The Biblical Data (KJV)

đź“– Commands that seem to assume ability

🔸 Deuteronomy 30:19

“I have set before you life and death… therefore choose life…”

👉 Sounds like:

  • A real choice
  • A meaningful ability to respond

Notice that ChatGPT says we have a “meaningful ability to respond,” which suggests it is not an absolute ability to respond. I maintain that it is an absolute ability, or God is commanding things from us that no just person would command of another if they truly loved them. Would a good and loving parent command their children to do anything that they are incapable of doing unless it was absolutely clear that they could do it? To talk about it as only a “meaningful ability” suggests that the parents are unsure whether their children can do it. I do not believe it. God knows we can if we are willing (and He will help us), and that is why sin is so egregious.

🔸 Joshua 24:15

“Choose ye this day whom ye will serve…”

👉 Again:

  • Command to choose
  • Implies responsibility

There is no way around the implication that the ability to choose is absolute, and therefore it is demanded of us, and we alone are responsible.

🔸 Matthew 5:48

“Be ye therefore perfect…”

👉 A command that is:

  • Absolute
  • Seemingly beyond human reach

My, my, did you see what is going on? ChatGPT chose to call this command absolute, but not the other commands above. Then ChatGPT says that this command is “seemingly beyond human reach.” Why does ChatGPT do this? To make it seem as though God does, in fact, command things we are not able to perform, just like any good Augustinian Calvinist claims.

But is that the case? Is God commanding an impossibility here? Not at all. See my article on this passage of Scripture. In this passage, perfection is about loving our enemies. If we do that, we are perfect as God is perfect. It doesn’t mean that we have never sinned or that we can never sin. It means that, in the mind of Christ, perfection is loving your enemies. Obviously, we have the ability to love our enemies because love is a choice that leads to loving actions.

      There are many more passages that might be quoted which explicitly or implicitly reveal our ability to do as God commands, but ChatGPT gave us the ones we just looked at.

đź“– Passages that deny ability

🔸 John 6:44

“No man can come to me, except the Father… draw him…”

👉 Not “may not”—but cannot

Is this about Christ’s disciples or about all of humanity? Jesus said that he would die and draw all men (not just the elect few) to himself. God is not willing that any should perish (not just the elect few) is the clear testimony of Scripture. God wants everyone to be saved, but he forces no one against their will, contrary to Calvinism. Does any of this square with the idea that God made some of us unable to come to him?

🔸 Romans 8:7-8

“The carnal mind… is not subject to the law of God, neither indeed can be.”

👉 Strong inability language:

  • Not just unwilling
  • Unable

ChatGPT states that this is strong language regarding our inability. Is it really? No, it is not. Only the carnal mind is unable and not subject to the law of God. Why? Because that person’s mind is carnally minded and focused. It says nothing about an absolute inability to do what God commands. The carnally minded man or woman is one whose heart and affections are set on self-gratification, and in that state/condition they are unwilling and unable to please God.

🔸 1 Corinthians 2:14

“The natural man receiveth not… neither can he know them…”

👉 Spiritual truth requires:

  • Capacity humans don’t naturally have

Again, we are not talking about the spiritual man or woman but the natural man or woman. Natural is used to designate a carnally minded person as defined above. To state that humans do not have the natural ability to obey the commands of God is to make God an unjust despot.

🔹 2. The Two Competing Principles

🟢 Pelagian Principle

(Commands imply ability)

If God commands something:
👉 Humans must be able to do it

Otherwise:

  • God would be unjust
  • Responsibility would be meaningless

I do not know how any thinking and honest person can deny any of this. Scripture teaches it notwithstanding the typical Calvinist explanation to the contrary.

🟣 Augustinian Principle

(Commands reveal duty, not ability)

God’s commands show:

  • What is right
  • Not what we are able to do in our fallen state

👉 Famous line from Augustine:

“Give what Thou commandest, and command what Thou wilt.”

Meaning:

  • God commands perfectly
  • But must give the ability to obey

Augustine and others want us to believe that God commands certain things because it is right for us to obey those laws, but God also knows that we are unable to comply with His commands. And what is the penalty for not obeying laws that we are unable to obey? Eternal damnation. Does that sound like something the God of Scripture does? I do not believe it. If we did that to our children, no right-thinking person would call that parent a just and loving one.

🔹 3. How This Plays Out in Key Texts

Let’s frame this in the Romans 5/Romans 9 framework.

đź“– In Epistle to the Romans Chapter 5

  • Humanity fell in Adam (but how and to what extent?)
  • Sin and death affect all

Pelagian reading:

👉 Commands must still imply ability
→ Therefore, the fall did not destroy the ability

Augustinian reading:

👉 Fall = real inability
→ Commands now expose our need for grace and our total inability to do what God commands

Commands now reveal our need for justice rather than grace, if Augustine is correct. Breaking commandments we are unable to keep makes us as innocent as infants, without blame or guilt.

đź“– In Romans 9

“It is not of him that willeth…”

Pelagian tension:

  • If willing is not decisive,
    → Where does responsibility come from?

Augustinian answer:

  • Responsibility = moral obligation
  • Ability = gift of grace

But remember that Augustine and Luther taught that grace gives us ability, but even with that ability, we continue to sin daily. So much for grace giving us the ability to obey God, as we continue to disobey God. Does this make sense to you?

🔹 4. The Three Major Resolutions

🟣 A. Augustinian / Reformed

  • Commands = standard of righteousness
  • Humans = unable due to Adam’s sin
  • Grace = must create ability

👉 So:

  • God is just to command
  • Even if humans cannot obey without grace

This is what Augustine believed later in his life. None of it makes sense to me in light of my understanding of the Word of God. How about you? This ugly thought from Augustine makes God out to be the most wicked parent in the universe for two reasons. First, God only gives grace to the elect few, and the rest are damned. And secondly, God’s grace is insufficient because Augustine and many other Calvinists/evangelicals believe that Christians sin daily for the rest of their lives.

🔵 B. Orange / Classical Catholic

(Second Council of Orange)

  • Agrees:
    • Grace is necessary even to begin
  • Softens:
    • Humans cooperate after grace

👉 So:

  • Commands still binding
  • Ability comes through a grace-enabled will

🟢 C. Arminian

  • Introduces prevenient grace (grace given to all)

👉 Solution:

  • Commands imply ability
  • Because God gives enabling grace to everyone

At least this position doesn’t make God out to be a despot like in Calvinism. But Arminianism is still polluted by the doctrine of Original Sin.

🔹 5. The Deep Philosophical Issue

Here’s the real crux:

👉 Is moral obligation dependent on moral ability?

If YES (Pelagian / Arminian tendency):

  • God must enable what He commands
  • Otherwise, the responsibility seems unfair and unjust

ChatGPT wants us to think that responsibility only seems unfair and unjust, not that requiring responsibility in this case is absolutely unjust and unfair. Is that not the absolute truth of the matter if we are unable to comply with God’s commands? Of course it is.

If NO (Augustinian):

  • Obligation comes from:
    • God’s holiness
    • Not human capacity

👉 Example:
A debtor still owes money, even if he cannot pay, according to ChatGPT

But a debtor first borrowed money, which created the obligation to repay. So, did God decree that the debtor should borrow money that he could not repay? Is that really what we should believe? Is this not a very poor example?

🔹 Final Clarity

So, we end up with this:

Everyone agrees:

  • God commands
  • Humans are responsible

The disagreement is:

👉 Does responsibility require ability?

  • Pelagius: Yes
  • Augustine: No
  • Orange: No (but softens implications)

In other words, according to Augustine, Orange, and Calvinism, we can rightly be held responsible by God for our sins even though we have no ability to obey God’s commands and to stop sinning. Do you honestly believe any of that religious nonsense?

Next, we will be looking at specific cases where God commands what seems impossible (like “be perfect,” “repent,” “believe”) and asking:

  • Is the command exposing inability?
  • Or presupposing ability?

That’s where the debate becomes very concrete and, honestly, unavoidable. This is where the issue stops being abstract and becomes very concrete. Let’s look at specific commands God gives that appear, on the surface, to require something humans cannot do apart from grace, and then examine how each framework handles them.

🔹 1. “Be Perfect” — A Command Beyond Reach?

đź“– Matthew 5:48 (KJV)

“Be ye therefore perfect, even as your Father which is in heaven is perfect.”

The tension:

  • This is not “try your best”
  • It is absolute moral perfection, per ChatGPT

It most certainly is not absolute moral perfection, as defined by ChatGPT and Calvinists, as they would have us believe. We have already covered this verse previously. Be perfect is to love your enemies, and it never claims to be about never having sinned.

  • 🟣 Augustinian reading (Augustine of Hippo):
  • This command reveals:
    • God’s holy standard
    • Human inability
  • Purpose:
    • Drive us to grace

👉 The command is diagnostic, not proof of ability.

I do not believe it. It is most certainly proof of our ability to comply with the command. If Augustine is correct, then God commands us to be perfect, even though He knows full well we are totally unable to love our enemies and be perfect. Is that what a just and loving God would do? Let us think.

🟢 Pelagian reading (Pelagius):

  • God would not command perfection if it were impossible
  • Therefore:
    • Humans must be capable of it

Amen, and could a just and loving God condemn His own children for not doing impossibilities? I do not believe it, nor does the Word of God teach such a monstrous idea. The problem is how perfection is defined. Define it God’s way, and the problem vanishes. We can love our enemies; we are capable of it, but many are simply unwilling. That is the problem.

🔵 Orange (Second Council of Orange):

  • Affirms:
    • The command is real
    • But fulfillment requires grace-enabled transformation

I can agree with this without agreeing that the problem is our inability. Our problem is our willingness, not our inability. The grace of God voluntarily transforms us if we are willing to repent, so that we do love our enemies. We must choose new life in Christ. Sinners must become saints. And with God’s help they can do just that.

2. “Repent and Believe” — Can the Dead Respond?

đź“– Mark 1:15

“Repent ye, and believe the gospel.”

đź“– Acts 17:30

“God… commandeth all men everywhere to repent.”

The tension:

  • Repentance and faith are commanded
  • Yet elsewhere…

đź“– John 6:44

“No man can come to me, except the Father… draw him…”

🟣 Augustinian reading:

  • Command = duty
  • Ability = gift of grace

👉 God commands repentance
👉 God grants repentance

(Compare: Acts 11:18 — “God also to the Gentiles granted repentance”)

🟢 Arminian reading (Jacobus Arminius):

  • God gives prevenient grace to all
  • Therefore:
    • Everyone can respond

đź”´ Pelagian reading:

  • Humans already have full ability
  • Command simply calls them to act

❌ Rejected historically by:

  • Council of Carthage

I have already exposed the truth that Augustine and certain church councils departed from historic Christian truth believed and taught by the early church fathers. So what if the Council of Carthage rejected the church fathers’ teachings? Which one has the most credibility? I go with the early church fathers; how about you?

🔹 3. “Love God Fully” — The Greatest Commandment

đź“– Matthew 22:37

“Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart…”

The tension:

  • Total, undivided love
  • Yet…

đź“– Romans 8:7

“The carnal mind… is not subject to the law of God, neither indeed can be.”

See previous comments regarding the meaning of this chapter. There is no tension here at all, only in the minds of Augustinian Calvinists. The carnal mind is an unsaved mind, not the mind of a new person in Christ.

🟣 Augustinian reading:

  • The command shows:
    • What we ought to be
    • What we cannot be apart from grace

👉 Love for God must be poured into the heart (cf. Romans 5:5)

And because an entailment of this Augustinian system demands that we believe that God decrees who will and who will not have this love poured into their hearts, yet God demands that they do the impossible. Moreover, God demands that we honor Him and glorify His name. Preposterous.

🟢 Pelagian reading:

  • The command implies:
    • Humans retain the ability to love God fully

And ability is the basis for any sin. For without the ability to do as commanded, there can be no sin and no blame.

🔹 4. “Make Yourself a New Heart” — The Sharpest Example

đź“– Ezekiel 18:31

“Make you a new heart and a new spirit…”

But then:

đź“– Ezekiel 36:26

“A new heart also will I give you…”

The tension:

  • One passage: You do it
  • Another: God does it

🟣 Augustine’s synthesis:

Both are true, but in order:

  • Command → reveals duty
  • Promise → reveals God must act

👉 God commands what He alone can ultimately supply

I do not believe it. It is not either/or. It is both/and. Salvation requires both God and man. In the Eastern Orthodox Church, this is called synergy because that is what the Word of God actually teaches.

This became foundational for later theology.

🔹 5. “Lazarus, Come Forth” — A Living Illustration

đź“– John 11:43

“Lazarus, come forth.”

The reality:

  • Lazarus is dead
  • Dead men do not respond

🟣 Augustinian interpretation:

This is a picture of salvation:

  • Command goes forth
  • Power accompanies it
  • The dead are made alive by the command itself

👉 The command creates the ability

Think about this last comment for just a moment. ChatGPT says Augustine’s understanding of salvation is that dead men (Lazarus, for example) must hear God’s command, which is irresistible. “The command creates the ability”. That is exactly what Pelagius claimed. The command of God means we have the ability to obey it.

🔹 6. Bringing It Back to Romans 5 & 9

From the Epistle to the Romans:

Romans 5:

  • Humanity = dead in Adam
  • Not just weak—ruined

Romans 9:

  • God = the one who shows mercy
  • Not based on human will

Augustinian conclusion:

  • Commands do not imply ability, according to ChatGPT

That is moral confusion at its finest and something a holy and loving God would never sanction. Commands absolutely demand the ability to comply with them. If that is not true, then God is neither holy nor just.

  • They reveal:
    • Obligation
    • Dependence on grace

Alternative conclusion:

  • Commands must imply some form of ability because a just and loving God would never command His children to do something they were totally unable to do.
  • Therefore, grace must be:
    • Universal (Arminian), or
    • Unnecessary (Pelagian)

Grace is universal per Titus 2, but it is not irresistible. It is not some magical power. It is the truth of God, applied by the Spirit of God and the Word of God, that transforms us from the inside out if we are willing to repent of our sins (stop sinning) and believe God.

🔹 Final Insight (The Real Divide)

Everything comes down to this:

👉 What is the purpose of God’s commands?

If commands are:

Instructions for what we can do
→ Ability must be present

If commands are:

Revelations of God’s standard
→ They may expose our inability and drive us to grace

This is morally incoherent. Augustine’s ideas about God make God out to be more wicked than the devil.

Think about it. If we are unable to do as God commands and God’s commands reveal our inability, how can that revelation drive us to grace, as ChatGPT suggests? It can’t because we are unable to go to grace. Do you not see the contradiction in this?

🔹 Why This Matters So Much

This is not just philosophical—it shapes:

  • How we understand conversion
  • Whether faith is self-generated or given
  • Whether grace is help or resurrection

Next, we will consider these questions?

Many Christians claim that saving faith itself is a gift of God and not something that comes from within ourselves. Does Scripture teach that? We will consider the following:

  1. The key biblical texts (KJV)
  2. How they’ve been read
  3. How they were used in the controversy
  4. A final synthesis tying it all together

🔹 1. The Key Biblical Passages

đź“– Ephesians 2:8-9 (KJV)

“For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God:
Not of works, lest any man should boast.”

See my article on this verse, “Saved By Grace Through Faith”. It is on my website, seekgointruth.com.

The key question:

👉 What does â€śit is the gift of God” refer to?

  • Grace only?
  • Or grace + faith together?

đź“– Philippians 1:29

“For unto you it is given… to believe on him…”

👉 Very direct:

  • Believing is something “given.”

To take one passage and assume that is all that is said on this matter is a good way to be misled. Many Christians believe that grace, faith, and repentance are gifts from God that He bestows by His decree; belief is given and irresistible.

But what do we do with passages that say to be saved, we must repent and believe in the Lord Jesus Christ? That clearly states that our repentance and faith in Christ are conditions of salvation we must meet. Is that not true? Consider the following passages:

“Now after that John the Baptist was put in prison, Jesus Christ came into Galilee, preaching the gospel of the kingdom of God, And saying, the time is fulfilled, and the kingdom of God is at hand: repent ye, and believe the gospel.” Mark 1:14-15.

“Now when they heard this, they were pricked in their heart, and said unto Peter and to the rest of the apostles, men and brethren, what shall we do? Then Peter said unto them, repent, and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins, and ye shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost.” Acts 2:37-38

“And the times of this ignorance God winked at; but now commandeth all men everywhere to repent: Because he hath appointed a day, in the which he will judge the world in righteousness by that man whom he hath ordained.” Acts 17:30-31

“And how I kept back nothing  that was profitable unto you, but have shewed you, and have taught you publickly, and from house to house, testifying both to the Jews, and also to the Greeks, repentance toward God, and faith toward our Lord Jesus Christ.” Acts 20:20-21

“That if thou shalt confess with thy mouth the Lord Jesus Christ, and shalt believe in thine heart that God raised him from the dead, thou shalt be saved.” Romans 10:9-10.

These 5 passages together show a consistent pattern:

  • Repentance is commanded of us
  • Faith in Christ is required of us
  • The gospel call includes both our repentance and faith as conditions of being saved

And none of this is a gift we must wait on from God. All these passages, and many more, are a call to action on our part. God has done his part; all that is left is for us to do ours. That is the gospel, but many Christians think that is a works-based Pelagian gospel. They believe I am deceived, and I believe they are greatly mistaken. What do you think?

đź“– Acts 13:48

“As many as were ordained to eternal life believed.”

👉 Order matters:

  • Appointment → belief

In true Augustinian and Calvinistic fashion, it is assumed that God determines who will believe, for humanity is unable to repent or believe. This passage means this: all those who believe are ordained to eternal life. If we assume Augustine and Calvin are correct, the entire responsibility falls to God, not to us. God saves some and damns others. But what do we do with these passages that clearly claim the opposite?

Acts 17:30… “God…now commandeth all men everywhere to repent.”

1 Timothy 2:3-4…”Who will have all men to be saved, and to come unto the knowledge of the truth.”

2 Peter 3:9…Not willing that many should perish, but that all should come to repentance.”

Therefore, to be honest and to do justice to the whole counsel of God, we can’t interpret passages in a way that creates a blatant contradiction, as Augustinian Calvinists have done. These passages more clearly state that God genuinely wills the salvation of all men. They also claim that people genuinely resist or receive the grace of God of their own free will. Acts 13:48 is not a claim of determinism.

Only a very few early church fathers commented directly on this verse of Scripture, and ChatGPT could offer only one very clear position, from a contemporary of Augustine, John Chrysostom, in the 4th century. That is because this passage was not controversial until Augustine.

From Chrysostom’s Homilies on Acts, he writes the following. “And believed, as many as were ordained unto eternal life,” i.e., set apart for God. What he is not saying and what he is saying? He interprets “ordained” as set apart for God. He does not develop a doctrine of predestination from this passage, arguing that God determined who would believe. In fact, elsewhere he consistently and strongly emphasizes human freedom, responsibility to respond, and people resisting or receiving the gospel as if they had the ability to do so freely.

Secondly, a later summary of early church interpretive tradition, which included Greek fathers, notes: “Some took it as: ‘As many as had set themselves unto eternal life.” From Blue Hub. People align themselves toward eternal life, as my interpretation states.

Even when the early church fathers do not comment on Acts 13:48, the overall theological pattern is very consistent (Irenaeus, Justin Martyr, Origen):

  • God calls all people, and
  • Humans must respond
  • People can and do resist God and His grace
  • Salvation involves real human participation

They would not interpret this passage as Augustine, Calvin, and many others did.

The Eastern Orthodox Church looks like this.

  • God initiates
  • But does not compel
  • Salvation is synergistic (God and humans)

They reject Augustine’s and Calvin’s deterministic theology. For them, ordained means rightly disposed, aligned, and receptive. Bible Hub says, “the Gentiles were ‘ordaining themselves…unto eternal life.”

The context of this verse must determine the interpretation. In Acts 13:46, we read, “Ye judge yourselves unworthy of everlasting life.” The Jews rejected God and were judged. The Gentiles receive the word and align themselves with eternal life.” There is no deterministic God ordination at all.

In Eastern Orthodoxy, there is no hidden decree determining who will be saved and who will not. The Eastern Orthodox Church specifically rejects the following, which are all taught by Augustinian Calvinists:

  • Unconditional individual predestination
  • Irresistible grace
  • deterministic election

This entire argument exists because of the false belief of Original Sin, as Augustinian Calvinism teaches. Do away with that, and the Bible and all these passages make sense.

đź“– John 6:65

“No man can come unto me, except it were given unto him of my Father.”

👉 Reinforces:

  • Faith is granted, not self-generated

See prior comments on this passage and others that refute their understanding and its entailments. If Calvinism were true, then we should rejoice that God granted faith to a small part of our family and withheld it from most of those we love.

đź“– Hebrews 12:2

“Jesus the author and finisher of our faith…”

👉 Christ is:

  • The source of faith

Jesus is the source of faith but not the cause, as in an irresistible cause, as believed in Augustinian Calvinism, of our faith. That is a determinative difference.

🔹 2. The Interpretive Divide

🟣 Augustinian Reading

(Augustine of Hippo)

Faith is:

  • Not self-produced
  • Not the “one thing we contribute.”

👉 It is itself a gift of grace

On Ephesians 2:8-9:

  • “That not of yourselves” includes faith
  • Otherwise:
    • Faith becomes a subtle “work.”

Result:

  • Grace does not just make salvation possible
  • It brings about faith itself

See my article on Ephesians 2:8-10 and many other similar passages. Faith without works is dead, according to James, but not in Augustinian Calvinism. They believe a faith without works saves. James teaches that we are not saved by faith alone, but we are justified by works as well. See my article on James as well.

🟢 Arminian Reading

(Jacobus Arminius)

Faith is:

  • Enabled by grace
  • But personally exercised

On Ephesians 2:8-9:

  • “Gift of God” refers primarily to salvation by grace
  • Not necessarily faith itself

Result:

  • Grace enables
  • Humans respond freely

đź”´ Pelagian Reading

(Pelagius)

Faith is:

  • Entirely human
  • A natural capacity

❌ Rejected by:

  • Council of Carthage
  • Council of Ephesus

The only reason the ChatGPT posted this Pelagian reading is that it believes that the voice of an early church council is determinative and almost the final authority on the subject. But let us remember that Augustine deliberately changed Christian Orthodoxy. The early church fathers rejected what Augustine would sell to the institutional church.

🔹 3. The Role of the Council of Orange (529)

🏛️ Second Council of Orange

This council speaks very directly to this issue. But that doesn’t mean it is the final word on the subject or that they were correct.

Key statement (paraphrased from its canons):

The beginning of faith… is not from ourselves, but from grace.

What this means:

  • ❌ You do not initiate faith on your own
  • âś… God’s grace must precede and produce the beginning

But again, Orange qualifies:

  • It does NOT strongly define:
    • irresistible grace
    • strict predestination

👉 So it affirms:

  • Faith begins with grace
  • But allows:
    • cooperation afterward

And what exactly does that mean? Is cooperation conditional or unconditional? A little leaven leavens the entire lump.

🔹 4. Connecting This Back to Everything

Let’s bring all the threads together.

đź“– Per ChatGPT, From Epistle to the Romans Chapter 5:

  • Humanity fell in Adam
  • Spiritually unable

I do not believe any of this is Biblical. Total inability is the best excuse for sin ever devised by Satan.

đź“– From Romans 9:

  • Salvation depends on God’s mercy (This is true.)
  • Not a human willing (This is false, for there are conditions we must meet in order to be saved. See my article titled Causa finalis and sine qua non.)

đź“– From the commands we studied:

  • God commands belief, repentance, and perfection
  • Yet humans cannot fulfill these unaided

See prior comments. In other words, God commands us to perform impossibilities on pain of damnation. Is that what a just and holy God would do? I do not believe it. Nor does the Bible teach it.

đź“– From these faith passages:

  • Faith itself is:
    • “given”
    • “granted”
    • “authored” by Christ

🔹 Final Theological Conclusions

🟣 Augustinian line:

  • Faith is a gift
  • Grace is decisive
  • Salvation is monergistic at the root

And you and I received all this if God alone decreed it in eternity past. Apparently, the vast majority of humanity is not ordained to eternal life even before God created them. Do you honestly believe that?

🔵 Orange / classical:

  • Faith begins with grace
  • Humans participate after

🟢 Arminian:

  • Grace enables faith
  • But does not determine it

🔹 The Deepest Insight

This is the core issue:

👉 Is faith the cause of salvation, or the result of grace?

If faith is the cause:

  • Then it originates (at least partly) in us

If faith is the result:

  • Then even believing is grace at work

And we are right back to the idea that God decreed to save a few and rejected all the rest. God could have given grace to all men, for that is what the word of God claims: He wills the salvation of all men, not just the few who are elect.

🔹 A Final Way to See It, according to ChatGPT

You can frame the whole debate like this:

  • Pelagius:
    👉 “God saves those who believe.”
  • Augustine:
    👉 “God causes those He saves to believe.” (But he doesn’t cause all men to believe, just a few)
  • Orange:
    👉 “God enables belief first; humans then truly believe.” (But he doesn’t cause all men to believe; just a few. If God is love, why wouldn’t he save everyone?)
  • Early Church fathers were closer to Pelagius and Arminians than to Augustine and Calvin
  • Eastern Orthodox are closer to Pelagius and Arminians than to Augustine and Calvin

That’s the entire controversy in one line each, according to ChatGPT.

How does all this play out in practical preaching or evangelism—because that’s where these doctrines stop being theoretical and start shaping real ministry.

  1. What you say when you preach
  2. How you call people to respond
  3. What you believe is happening under the surface

🔹 1. The Same Gospel, Three Different Frameworks

No matter the system, the preacher still proclaims:

  • Christ crucified and risen
  • Repentance and faith
  • Forgiveness of sins

But the underlying expectations differ.

🔹 2. Augustinian / Reformed Approach

Rooted in Augustine of Hippo and later emphasized by John Calvin

🔸 What the preacher says

  • “Repent and believe the gospel.”
  • “You must come to Christ.”
  • “Turn from your sin.”

👉 The commands are real and urgent

Not really. God decrees everything, including the timing. They are neither urgent nor real commands at all if Augustine and Calvin are accurate.

🔸 What the preacher believes is happening

At the same time:

  • Humans are unable in themselves
  • God must grant repentance and faith

So preaching is not just informing—it is:

👉 The means God uses to awaken the dead

So what? It is still a determined end based on determined means flowing from an eternal decree of God that can’t be altered in any way at all. It changes nothing at all. God is the source of all evil and all good.

🔸 The Lazarus model

Think of:

“Lazarus, come forth.”

  • The command goes out
  • The power comes with it
  • The response is caused by the call

See my prior comments. Lazarus is a bad example. Why not consider the prodigal son instead? The son returned to the Father, and only then was he restored. Only then was he no longer lost and no longer dead. Is that not a better example?

🔸 Tone of preaching

  • Urgent
  • God-centered
  • Dependent on prayer

👉 “Lord, grant what you command.”

I find that comment highly offensive and a direct assault on God’s integrity. If a just and holy God commands something, it is based on our ability to comply, and God need not add or grant anything else. The grace of God comes into the picture when we fail God and sin. We sin not because God didn’t grant us the ability to obey the command, but because we let our selfishness direct our path.

🔸 Strength

  • Preserves:
    • God’s sovereignty
    • The necessity of grace

ChatGPT says these are the strengths of this system. It preserves God’s sovereignty. It does do that, but it also makes God out to be the most wicked person in the universe, even exceeding the evil of Satan himself.

Another strength of Augustinian Calvinism is its preservation of the necessity of grace. I do not believe it. In Augustinian Calvinism, there is neither grace nor justice. See my other articles on my website, such as this one, “There is no grace in Calvinism.”

🔸 Tension

  • Why do some respond and others don’t?
    → Answer: God’s mercy (Romans 9)

God has mercy on a few whom He has chosen, but He rejects the rest of humanity. That is despicable, not glorious, and not true. God extends mercy on those who confess and forsake their sins. All who meet these voluntary conditions will find the mercy of God. Augustine and Calvin deny all of that, but that is exactly what reason and the Bible affirm.

🔹 3. Orange / Classical Synergistic Approach

Reflected in the Second Council of Orange

🔸 What the preacher says

  • Same commands:
    • “Repent”
    • “Believe”
  • Plus emphasis on:
    • Cooperation with grace

🔸 What the preacher believes is happening

  • Grace is already at work
  • God is drawing and enabling

But:

  • The person must not resist

🔸 Tone of preaching

  • Encouraging
  • Sacramental (historically)
  • Emphasizes participation

🔸 Strength

  • Holds together:
    • Grace first
    • Real human response

🔸 Tension

  • What ultimately explains why one responds and another doesn’t?

🔹 4. Arminian / Revivalist Approach

Associated with Jacobus Arminius (and later revival movements)

🔸 What the preacher says

  • Strong appeal:
    • “You can come.”
    • “Choose Christ today.”
    • “Don’t delay.”

🔸 What the preacher believes is happening

  • God gives prevenient grace to all
  • Everyone has the ability to respond

🔸 Tone of preaching

  • Persuasive
  • Urgent
  • Often emotional

👉 Emphasis on decision

🔸 Strength

  • Takes human responsibility very seriously

🔸 Tension

  • Why do some choose rightly and others don’t?
    → Often left in the realm of human response

🔹 5. Pelagian (for contrast, historically rejected)

Associated with Pelagius

🔸 Preaching emphasis

  • Moral effort
  • Obedience
  • Personal responsibility

🔸 Problem

  • Minimizes:
    • Sin’s depth
    • Need for transforming grace

❌ Rejected by:

  • Council of Carthage

My response to this is, so what? Christians have believed lies for centuries and still do. Think of how many Christians in the West continue to believe in the lie of Original Sin and inherited guilt as taught by Augustine and Calvin.

🔹 6. The Same Invitation, Different Meanings

Take one simple statement:

👉 “Believe in the Lord Jesus Christ.”

🟣 Augustinian hears:

  • A command that God must enable
  • Faith will be given to some, just a few prechosen elect

🔵 Orange hears:

  • A command made possible by preceding grace
  • You must cooperate

🟢 Arminian hears:

  • A command you are fully able to accept or reject

🔹 7. What Changes Practically?

🔸 Prayer

  • Augustinian:
    👉 “God, open their hearts.”
  • Arminian:
    👉 “God, help them choose.”

🔸 Confidence in evangelism

  • Augustinian:
    👉 Confidence in God’s power to save just a few he chose beforehand.
  • Arminian:
    👉 Confidence in clarity and persuasion

🔸 View of results

  • Augustinian:
    👉 Salvation = God’s work
  • Arminian:
    👉 Salvation = God + human response

🔹 8. A Crucial Clarification

Here’s something many people miss:

👉 All orthodox views still command faith and repentance

Even Augustine does not say:

  • “Wait passively.”

He still says:

  • “Believe”
  • “Repent”
  • “Come”

But Augustine did not believe that just anyone could respond, believe, repent, and come.

🟣 Augustinian preacher:

“Come to Christ—and may God give you the heart to do so.”

🔵 Orange-type preacher:

“God is working in you—do not resist His grace.”

🟢 Arminian preacher:

“You can come—choose Christ now.”

🔹 Final Thought

The outward message may sound similar, but underneath:

👉 The difference is where the decisive cause lies

  • In God alone
  • In God enabling + man responding
  • Or in man responding with help

ChatGPT ends this section with this statement.

“And that takes you all the way back to your original insight in maintaining that a command of God does, in fact, imply the ability to do as commanded. ChatGPT states this: “A command does not necessarily imply ability.” I do not believe that. How about you?

Don’t all our federal and state laws imply that we possess the ability to do as the law requires? Of course, they do, but Augustinian Calvinists do not see the moral inconsistency in demanding the impossible on pain of certain punishment. As depraved as our culture is, it has a better moral foundation than Augustinian Calvinism.

That single principle is like a thread—you can now see it running through:

  • Augustine vs. Pelagius
  • Romans 5 and 9
  • The councils
  • And even how a sermon is preached on Sunday

In Part 4, we will consider the actual conflict between Augustine and Pelagius.

Share:

Comments

Leave the first comment 

<!-- if comments are disabled for this post then hide comments container -->
<style> 
<?php if(!comments_open()) { echo "#nfps-comments-container {display: none !important;}"; }?>
</style>