Second Rebuttal - Peter Pike

While Mr. Guthrie appeared to think I had dropped my points on Romans 9, this is not the case at all--in my previous rebuttal, I just focused on how a person can come to believe in the first place (the Father must enable). However, let's return to the passage! Romans 9 does not, as Guthrie has suggested, open up the atonement to all types of people, but rather firmly establishes that the atonement is given to those whom God desires, and none other. "I will have mercy on whom I have mercy" God states, and Paul writes, "Therefore God has mercy on whom he wants to have mercy, and he hardens whom he wants to harden." (Romans 9:18). The fact that this has nothing to do with our desire or effort (verse 16) proves that it is unconditional. This firmly establishes unconditional election--the passage starts out talking about Jacob and Esau (and it says God demonstrates His purpose in election through them) and here shows it's not conditioned upon what we desire. This shows the entire doctrine of unconditional election right here.

Guthrie writes, "God directs and influences us in our pursuit of righteousness but He never compromises our freedom to choose otherwise." This, however, puts the created above the Creator! Instead, "Does not the potter have the right to make out of the same lump of clay some pottery for noble purposes and some for common use?" (verse 21). In fact, the only freedom we have at all is that which God allows us to have, and He will never allow us to have freedom that will compromise His sovereignty. To do so, He would no longer be God.

Guthrie brought up John 6:45. "Everyone who listens to the Father and learns from him comes to me." However, John 8:47 clearly states, "He who belongs to God hears what God says. The reason you do not hear is that you do not belong to God." Before we can hear, we must belong to God, so we cannot listen until we belong to God. The question is, if we can't listen before we belong to God, how do we belong to God? For we cannot come to Christ (and be saved) until we first hear God. The answer is that God shows mercy to some, and not to others. He unconditionally elects some and not all.

Guthrie asked me to clarify "how a creature is free and yet disabled from choosing salvation." The answer is found in Total Depravity, which is not the focus of this debate. However, to briefly explain, we want to sin and not do good, so when we act freely, we act evilly. In our carnal state, our freedom will only lead to sin, and therefore we are disabled from choosing salvation and are still free to do as we please. If by free will you mean doing what we want to do, then I agree we have free will. If, on the other hand, by free will you mean we can choose whatever we want in any given situation no matter what, I disagree that we have free will at all.

In regards to 2 Peter 3:9, Guthrie stated, "[I]t makes no sense to desire Christians to come to repentance if they are already determined for salvation." However, this is a misunderstanding of determinism. God desires something, and that's why it is determined. If God did not desire it, it would not be determined for, so it makes perfect sense that He would desire His plan to succeed.

One final thought to examine is the passage that Guthrie brought up about God drawing all men to Himself (John 12:32). I would agree that "in some sense" God does draw all, but in what sense is that? I do not believe He draws all equally. If God did draw all equally, then it would depend on the individual as to who would be saved. This would make salvation something that certain people could do or understand, and others could not, making God a respecter of persons. It is no different than God saying, "If you run a 4 minute mile, you are saved." It is giving us something we must do (respond in faith) in order to be saved, and salvation is no longer a gift. Instead of God drawing all equally, He draws some to salvation, and the others enough to establish their guilt so they have no excuse for their evil behavior.