Answering John Hendryx's Challenge
J.C. Thibodaux
I recently read a challenge to all Synergists by Monergism.com's John
Hendryx at
http://www.monergism.com/thethreshold/articles/onsite/prayer_synergist.html.
I was curious as to what Hendryx's challenge consisted of, so I gave
it a read. What I saw wasn't pretty. Hendryx repeatedly employs
several errors in logic and outright fallacies, and keeps droning them
again and again, apparently trying to produce some hypnotic effect
through constant repetition of the same drivel (in accordance with the
internet/mob rule: 'repeat it enough times and it becomes fact'). His
challenge is so littered with them that it gets hard to keep up with
them all. So instead of just rebutting him every time, we'll cover the
major fallacies up front, then shoot off a reminder phrase when we
spot them again, in the interest of both brevity and keeping the
audience awake.
For starters, Hendryx claims that Synergistic faith is from 'natural
capacity' or 'innate moral ability.' This is completely untrue.
Traditional, Non-Pelagian Synergistic belief (Classical Arminianism
and similar systems) is that men cannot come to faith apart from God's
grace. Prevenient grace is more than just a 'level playing field' or
'neutral ground,' but is God actively drawing sinners to Himself.
Many, myself included, believe that faith is a gift from God that he
grants to those who hear and receive the message of Christ as we are
drawn by His grace (and hence we believe through grace). I furthermore
hold that the grace of God drawing one is absolutely necessary for one
to believe in Christ. Jesus Himself said,
"No one can come to Me unless the Father who sent Me draws him; and
I will raise him up at the last day." (John 6:44)
If faith were merely from our 'natural capacities,' there would be no
need for us to be drawn by God, since we could just up and believe of
our own accord apart from grace (that's essentially what the Pelagians
taught) which obvious fact Mr. Hendryx seems to miss. To demonstrate
the weight that he assigns to this faulty and slanderous belief, all
future references to,
* Faith being from natural capacity or innate moral ability
* Sinners producing faith from their fallen nature
* Synergistic faith not being of God or by God's grace
* Synergistic ability to come to faith has nothing to do with the Holy Spirit
and equivalents will be highlighted by our good friend, The Tick, as
he gives his battlecry:
Hendryx's second major fallacy is assuming that belief, if synergistic, is somehow meritorious or boastworthy, and for reasons known only to Calvinists, makes us worthy of glory.
Christ warned against this sort of thinking in the gospels,
Does he thank that servant because he did the things that were
commanded him? I think not. So likewise you, when you have done all
those things which you are commanded, say, 'We are unprofitable
servants. We have done what was our duty to do.' (Luke 17:10)
Doing what God requires of us is, scripturally speaking, nothing
worthy of praise on our part, much less is it anything to boast of or
consider meritorious, nor does fundamental logic require that it be
so, since conditions and merits are not necessarily equivalent. Quite
frankly, this argument is so dumb and outdated that it shouldn't have
to be refuted, and once is perhaps too much. So for future sightings
of it in this essay, we'll largely refrain from further rebuttal and
simply quote everybody's favorite angsty, semi-pacifist wandering samurai, Himura Kenshin,
The third major fallacy Hendryx pushes is that Synergists 'believe
they cooperate in regeneration.' Untrue. We believe that we may freely
accept the word of God (and thereby come to Christ) or reject it.
Regeneration is a work done by God to the sinner when he or she has
come to faith in Jesus. Hendryx inaccurately frames the sentence so
that it makes Synergistic regeneration through faith out to be man
doing some of the work in regenerating himself, which is complete
nonsense. Future references to this ludicrous slur will be marked with the dying words of Orson Welles' greatest protagonist:
Hendryx's fourth fallacy is the, 'if person A and B both had the
same grace, then what made person A choose and not person B?' dilemma.
This is of course simply begging the question of Determinism, since if
we have power of contrary choice, then nothing made us choose. When I
email debated John before, he kept presenting the 'why does one choose
and not the other?' question, to which I replied with 1 Corinthians
10:13,
No temptation has overtaken you except such as is common to man;
but God is faithful, who will not allow you to be tempted beyond what
you are able, but with the temptation will also make the way of
escape, that you may be able to bear it. (1 Corinthians 10:13)
From Hendryx's reasoning, this raises the question, 'Why does one
believer resist temptation and another fall into it if they're both
given a way of escape by God?'
If God gives us means to escape temptation and grace to endure it, the
fact that some do not endure and fall into temptation anyway
establishes that ability being given does not necessitate action being
performed ('can' does not mean 'will'), therefore people do to some
extent have contrary choice. Hendryx's dilemma does nothing more than
assume that something must have irresistibly caused the choice and
then ask what it was that did so. Future instances of this debunked silliness will be handled by the infamous Knights Who Say
Hendryx's fifth big error is assuming that those who refuse heed the gospel and reject the grace of God (in the Synergistic view), must have no ability to receive it. This is related to the last fallacy; again he assumes Determinism, then reasons that anyone who did not receive must not have been able to do so. Again this is quite incorrect, as someone being drawn by the Father thereby has the ability to come, but also has the ability to refuse.
See that you do not refuse Him who speaks. For if they did not escape who refused Him who spoke on earth, much more shall we not escape if we turn away from Him who speaks from heaven....
(Hebrews 12:25)
For if the word spoken through angels proved steadfast, and every
transgression and disobedience received a just reward, how shall we
escape if we neglect so great a salvation, which at the first began to
be spoken by the Lord, and was confirmed to us by those who heard
Him.... (Hebrews 2:2-3)
This is again, exceptionally silly, and will be noted as such with the
immortal verbiage of Mystery Science Theater 3000's Tom Servo:
To clarify:
The traditional, Synergist view of human depravity, prevenient grace,
regeneration and redemption is that fallen men are inherently depraved
and incapable of seeking God of their own power. Grace is the
unmerited favor of God, and also the power of God in opening the
hearts of sinful men through the work of the Holy Spirit, and drawing
us to believe the gospel of His Son. Sinners may resist God's work in
their hearts, but one who refuses to hear Him doesn't resist for lack
of grace, but because he willfully chooses to. Hence, the ability to
come to faith in Christ isn't of our own power, but hinges entirely
upon God's grace. Regeneration itself is a work of God within
believers that man does not do himself; redemption is conditioned upon
faith, but is itself entirely the work of Christ, being paid for
solely by His blood.
So without further ado, on with Hendryx's challenge.
Here is a prayer that would be consistent with the synergist's theology if he really believed that faith is a product of our unregenerated human nature and not the result of grace alone:
"God, I give you glory for everything else, but not my faith...
...This is the one thing that is my very own that I produced of my fallen natural capacities.
For this little bit the glory is mine. So I thank you Lord that I am not like other men who do not have faith.
When you extended your grace to all men some did not make use of it, BUT I DID. While You deserve glory for all I have Lord, my faith was the one part that I contributed to the price of my redemption, ...
Now since when did faith become part of the price for redemption? It's true that faith is a necessary condition for justification (Romans 3:23, 5:1, Galatians 2:16, 3:24), but the price that was paid for
redemption was Christ's blood. It's very illogical to confuse the condition for payment to be effectuated with the payment itself.
...apart from and independent of the effectual work of Your Holy Spirit."
As a quick reminder of terms:
Monergism is the biblical doctrine that regeneration (the new birth) both precedes and elicits faith in Christ in those whom the Holy Spirit sovereignly determines to dispense His grace upon (John 1:13; 6:63-65; Acts 16:14b; 1 John 5:1). When preached in the power of the Holy Spirit, the gospel has the power to open blind eyes and unstop deaf ears. Those dead in sin, therefore, play no part in their own new birth and are just as passive as a new born physical baby in the
regenerative act.
Man doesn't 'help' God in regeneration, but this has nothing to do
with the fact that believers are active in receiving God's gift of
faith unto salvation. A proof-text often cited by Monergists is,
For who makes you differ from another? And what do you have that
you did not receive? Now if you did indeed receive it, why do you
boast as if you had not received it? (1 Corinthians 4:7)
Which they interpret as meaning that God since God makes us differ, that must mean that He irresistibly regenerates the elect, but they miss the point entirely: we differ because of what we have received from God, the word for 'receive' is of active voice (i.e. the action spoken of is performed by the subject), the gift of salvation and its benefits aren't just imperatively thrust upon us, we actively and freely receive the good that God gives. Because we receive His Son, God saves us from our sins, washes us in the blood of Christ, imparts spiritual life through Him, and sends the Holy Spirit to live within us, thus making us differ from those in the world who have no hope. Because it is God who gives these things to us and not we ourselves, there can be no tenable room for boasting, for all that we have is what we've received from His hand. Those ridiculous enough to argue that receiving a gift is reason to boast, I refer to this post by Keith Schooley.
Thus, man does not cooperate in his regeneration but rather, infallibly responds in faith as the Holy Spirit changes our hearts' disposition.
Mind you, he's trying to contrast Monergism to Synergism....
Faith is not something produced by our unregenerated human nature.
The fallen sinner has no moral ability or inclination to believe prior to the new birth.
At which point we'd heavily disagree, since that's exactly what prevenient grace allows a sinner.
Instead, the Holy Spirit must open one's ears to the preaching of
the gospel if one would hear.
That part we agree on.
While there is no temporal sequence, regeneration gives rise to all
other aspects of our salvation. They all happen simultaneously like
the turning on of the light, which is the cause of faith,
justification, sanctification, new affections, and the like.
I honestly don't know where or why they come up with this
'regeneration prior to faith' business. Such a concept is entirely
foreign to scripture. Jesus said,
Most assuredly, I say to you, the hour is coming, and now is, when
the dead will hear the voice of the Son of God; and those who hear
will live. (John 5:25)
Our turning to God doesn't start with regeneration, for our spiritual
life proceeds from being in His Son. We live through Christ, for He
states that the dead who hear Him will live, not 'those who have
already been raised from the dead will hear Him.' Scripture further
confirms that it is through faith that God gives spiritual life to
those who believe,
In Him you were also circumcised with the circumcision made without
hands, by putting off the body of the sins of the flesh, by the
circumcision of Christ, buried with Him in baptism, in which you also
were raised with Him through faith in the working of God, who raised
Him from the dead. (Colossians 2:11-12)
Hendryx goes on,
Synergism (or synergistic regeneration) is the erroneous doctrine
which believes that faith precedes and gives rise to regeneration. Man
cooperates with God in regeneration.
Faith is produced by our unregenerated human nature. The fallen
sinner has the ability and potential inclination to believe even prior
to the new birth.
While synergism believes grace plays a role in salvation yet he
does not believe salvation is by grace alone - instead it is grace
plus our response which makes us to be born again.
Grace alone does not preclude willing response, it precludes merit.
Synergists believe the theology that all unsaved persons receive an
equal amount of "grace" before God.
Some Synergists believe that; I, among others, do not. That issue is
beside the point though.
Those who cooperate with this grace are saved and those who don't
are lost. So my question is why does one man cooperate and not
another?
This makes salvation entirely depend on what we independently do
with that information by drawing on some principle (moral ability)
within us...
Notice that he uses the errantly employs the word
'independently,' when the Synergist view is that coming to salvation
is dependent upon grace. 'Freely' does not necessarily entail
having no dependencies. He then uses this error as a basis for some
rather inane conclusions....
...that our neighbor, who does not cooperate, does not naturally have.
The synergist belief is that God only takes us all to a certain
half-way point by grace, but then leaves the final decision of whether
to believe entirely in the hands of autonomous, natural man.
A natural man and a natural man called by the grace of God are two very different things, a distinction which he conveniently overlooks.
One man responds positively and another negatively. Why is the question?
Synergists often tell me that while grace plays a role in salvation, yet the Holy Spirit and grace have nothing to do with their ability to come to faith in Christ, since the gospel is only an offer that carries no power in itself.
What on earth is he talking about? In the orthodox Synergist view, no
one has the ability to come to faith in Christ apart from God's grace
and the work of the Spirit. His assertion that they have "nothing to
do with their ability to come to faith in Christ" is completely and
utterly false, and an outright distortion. And how would that make the
gospel powerless?
In other words, They believe their independent faith cooperates
with grace...
Hendryx again gets it completely backwards: faith cannot be 'independent' in cooperating with grace if we in fact come to faith through grace.
...while someone else was not able to.
Again why?
This means, that in the synergists belief system, the Holy Spirit has not enabled people in any way to have saving faith, over my neighbor, since this decision is totally independent of God's action of grace.
That latter part of the sentence, 'this decision is totally
independent of God's action of grace' is again, a complete and total
fallacy on Hendryx's part, since it's impossible for one to come to
faith apart from grace, and therefore cannot be independent of God's
action of grace.
The result is that natural man must draw upon something within his
unaided natural self to determine his/her salvation. This means that
one man naturally had this capacity (to receive Christ)...
Again, Hendryx pulls the worst kind of misrepresentation. If the
fallen will is unable to receive the gospel apart from God's grace,
then he cannot have naturally had the capacity to receive Christ. How
he gets it so completely wrong is beyond me. Furthermore, because we
acknowledge that it's only by the aid of God's grace that fallen man
can be saved, it's beyond ridiculous to assert that we do so by our
'unaided natural self.' That is quite obviously pure distortion.
...while another (who rejected Christ) did not.
But our salvation does not depend on the humility or obedience of
man since it is a gift of grace itself that we are obedient and
humble. God is not responding to some virtue He sees in us, but saves
us because of His mercy alone.
I beg to differ, though obedience and humility come by grace, they are
not irresistibly conferred;
Likewise you younger people, submit yourselves to your elders. Yes, all of you be submissive to one another, and be clothed with humility, for "God resists the proud, But gives grace to the humble."
Therefore humble yourselves under the mighty hand of God, that He may
exalt you in due time.... (1 Peter 5:6-7)
The scriptures also make it crystal clear that God grants salvation to those who obey the gospel.
And having been perfected, He became the author of eternal salvation to all who obey Him.... (Hebrews 5:9)
While prayer recited above is indeed a caricature that no synergist
would dare pray, but is what a synergist would pray if he were
consistent in his theology.
Only what a Synergist would pray if he were consistent with Hendryx's mind-numbingly awful mischaracterization of normal Synergist theology....
But instead of giving in yourself for you faith ...give glory to God for all that you have.
I assume he means 'giving it yourself for your faith'.
I don't think it a glorious thing for myself that I believed, but it's a glorious thing indeed that the Almighty God by His grace could even draw a hard-hearted sinner unto faith in Christ.
Hendryx quotes,
"Who has ever given to God,
...........that God should repay him?"
For from him and through him and to him are all things.
........To him be the glory forever! Amen. (Rom 11:35-36)
I agree, God owes no one anything; and He alone deserves the glory.
For "What do you have that you did not receive?"
We touched on this one above....
...Believe the Scriptures when they say, "no one can say, "Jesus is Lord," except by the Holy Spirit" (1 Corinthians 12:3)...
Amen.
Won't you, then, also glorify God for the Holy Spirit who works faith in you as well?
Absolutely. Now won't you at least make an attempt at getting your facts about Synergism straight?
Of course the prayer will be rejected by the synergist, but you must ask him how it actually conflicts with his theology.
Merely in superficial areas like basic word definitions, underlying hermeneutics, and our foundational beliefs about the nature of grace, human depravity and salvation. Beyond that it seems okay.
I believe that it accurately reflects this erroneous belief system. So below I am offering a challenge to anyone, therefore, to show me where I am off target.
If that's his idea of accuracy, let's pray he never takes a job involving firearms.
If you feel I have set up a straw man in my portrayal of your theology you should be able to answer a few easy questions on what it takes to receive Christ. If you can answer these questions and show that you still believe in salvation by grace alone, apart from any
merit...
...(or sheer chance) then I shall admit defeat. ("I don't know" doesn't count) Here are the questions:
* Why is it that one unregenerate person believes the gospel and not another?
One freely chooses to receive the word of God, another freely rejects
it. I think Mr. Hendryx is assuming that one has to be irresistibly
caused to do something to perform it, which is again, begging
the question of Determinism.
* Was he able to generate a right thought, produce a right affection, create right belief, while at the same time man #2 did not have the natural wherewithal to come up with the faith to be saved?
No. Both have the capability of coming to faith in Christ by God's
grace. 'Capability' does not imply that one has to fulfill what he or
she is capable of.
* If they both made use of the same grace, did one make better use
of it than the other?
Yes. Because grace made them both able to receive the gospel, but the one who rejects it falls short of the grace of God, which even those who believe are warned against doing:
Pursue peace with all people, and holiness, without which no one
will see the Lord: looking carefully lest anyone fall short of the
grace of God; lest any root of bitterness springing up cause trouble,
and by this many become defiled.... (Hebrews 12:14-15)
This is why the apostles urged the church to continue in God's grace.
Now when the congregation had broken up, many of the Jews and
devout proselytes followed Paul and Barnabas, who, speaking to them,
persuaded them to continue in the grace of God. (Acts 13:43)
Grace doesn't irresistibly cause us to obey it, and can be rejected.
* If prevenient grace places us in a neutral state, then what motivates one man to believe and not another?
Prevenient grace does not produce merely a 'neutral state,' but draws us to the Father and motivates both to believe; though being motivated to believe does not mean that one is irresistibly compelled to do so, for one may resist the Spirit and the work of God,
You stiff-necked and uncircumcised in heart and ears! You always resist the Holy Spirit; as your fathers did, so do you. (Acts 7:51)
* What principle in him made him choose what he did?
For one who believes, nothing 'made' (irresistibly compelled) him to choose, Hendryx again assumes Determinism then wonders why Synergism is inconsistent with it.
* If all men are neutral in prevenient grace was it by chance that one believed and not another?
No, willing acceptance and chance are two very different things. If
you want to equivocate will and chance, one could just as easily ask,
'Did God just elect people by chance?'
* Is it the grace of God that makes you differ from unbelievers or is it your faith?
Both, especially since faith is something we receive from God through grace. As we touched on already concerning 1 Corinthians 4:7, our being different is based upon what we actively receive, which God
gives by grace.
show that you still believe in salvation by grace alone, apart from any merit (or sheer chance)
I address the 'by chance' issue above. I addressed the 'merit' issue at the outset, and reiterate that the scriptures make it clear that doing what God requires of us is in no way meritorious.
While salvation is by God's grace (not only His drawing us, but also God's undeserved and unmerited favor towards us), it is still conditional. The key to understanding such a concept is that something being conditional does not necessarily make it meritorious. Consider God's words to Israel,
"Do not think in your heart, after the Lord your God has cast them
out before you, saying, 'Because of my righteousness the Lord has
brought me in to possess this land'; but it is because of the
wickedness of these nations that the Lord is driving them out from
before you. It is not because of your righteousness or the uprightness
of your heart that you go in to possess their land, but because of the
wickedness of these nations that the Lord your God drives them out
from before you, and that He may fulfill the word which the Lord swore
to your fathers, to Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob. Therefore understand
that the Lord your God is not giving you this good land to possess
because of your righteousness, for you are a stiff-necked people."
(Deuteronomy 9:4-6)
They weren't only not righteous enough to merit God's favor and
blessing of being given the promised land, but rather stubborn against
Him to boot! Yet God showed them mercy and enabled them to overcome
their enemies.
"No man shall be able to stand before you all the days of your
life; as I was with Moses, so I will be with you. I will not leave you
nor forsake you. Be strong and of good courage, for to this people you
shall divide as an inheritance the land which I swore to their fathers
to give them." (Joshua 1:5-6)
But notice that God giving them victory was still conditioned upon
them following Him,
"Only be strong and very courageous, that you may observe to do
according to all the law which Moses My servant commanded you; do not
turn from it to the right hand or to the left, that you may prosper
wherever you go." (Joshua 1:7)
When they disobeyed, they were powerless.
"Israel has sinned, and they have also transgressed My covenant
which I commanded them. For they have even taken some of the accursed
things, and have both stolen and deceived; and they have also put it
among their own stuff. Therefore the children of Israel could not
stand before their enemies, but turned their backs before their
enemies, because they have become doomed to destruction. Neither will
I be with you anymore, unless you destroy the accursed from among
you." (Joshua 7:11-12)
Now Israel following God's commands in their conquest of Canaan didn't
constitute them driving out the Canaanites by 'their own innate human
power,' and it clearly did not make them deserving of God's blessing,
much less inherently worthy of His mercy. God did not owe them the
promised land because of their obedience, and to what degree they did
follow Him was nothing meritorious to say the least, but was rather a
condition that God required of them, and when they did not fulfill it
God removed His protection and blessing from them.
The new covenant is not based upon the keeping of laws, but rather
upon faith in Christ. Believing in Christ doesn't make us deserving of
God's mercy or serve as 'partial payment' for our sins, and receiving
Him doesn't 'earn' us a place in glory. If not for God's grace and
mercy in choosing to pardon sinners who believe, no one would be
saved, as no amount of faith, obedience, humility, repentance, or
perseverance can atone for sin, nor make God a debtor to grant a man
eternal life. The condition God has decreed for pardon is simple: Believe on the One
God has sent, the High Priest, King, and Mediator between God and man,
Jesus Christ. It is not because of our righteousness that God gives us
life in Christ, for even if we could do what is required apart from
grace, even if a man of his own will and power could turn from his sin
entirely and live a life so spotless, pure, and self-sacrificing it
would put the apostles themselves to shame, he would still not be good
enough to merit God's forgiveness -- his sin has already condemned
him, his righteousness is filthy rags apart from God's mercy and the
atoning work of Christ. We are called by grace, we believe through
grace, we follow through grace, we are sustained by grace; we can
perform no actions good enough to earn God's mercy, but are only saved
because He shows us grace! 'Grace alone' doesn't imply a lack of
willing response to God's gracious call by the unregenerate, it means
that we are saved because despite not being deserving of God's mercy,
which He shows to those who believe on Jesus Christ. Salvation by
grace apart from any merit is wholly necessary, for the only thing any
sinner truly merits for himself is hell fire.
In short, Hendryx's challenge isn't a strawman, it's a 10-acre field littered with strawmen shoddily cobbled together with ad nauseum repetition of misinformation and begged questions, garnished with poor and unoriginal research, and supported with preposterous distortions.
Final Tally:
(man gets saved by his own inherent power) - 10
('why does one choose and not another?') - 6
(those who don't believe must have had no ability given them) - 4
(belief is meritorious/boastworthy) - 4 (tie)
(Synergists 'cooperate in regeneration') - 3
See also:
Hendryx attempts to deflect my criticism with a red herring.
Part 3: Response to John Hendryx
Copyright © 2005-2008, 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.