God's Sovereignty vs Human Free Will / Closed vs Open Communion - J. Edwards Run Out of Northampton

Jonathan Edwards and the Great Awakening

So this is part 3 of lesson number 11.

From.

Reformation to revival so we ended last week talking about the Great Awakening and the influence Jonathan Edwards had on the Great Awakening. I think we talked about or ended somewhere around his sermon sinners in the hands of an angry God and He preached that sermon in Enfield Connecticut and it says the sermon stirred up many in the congregation to cry out for God's mercy and Repent of their hypocrisy, and I've heard different things about this.

Basically this has gone down in history as One of the most powerful sermons ever preached obviously Peter on the day of Pentecost. No one can match that I don't think. But at least in church history since or in recent times Edward sermon, I mean this gets studied in Secular universities just for the literature of it.

So This is a very well-known sermon that really played a role Believed to have played a role in the Great Awakening so just to continue with Edwards that says in the 1740s in response to the dramatic conversions that occurred during the Great Awakening Edwards emphasized the fruit of genuine salvation works like a treatise on religious affections published in 1746 explained that true conversion is evidenced by spiritual fruit such as a love for God and Love for others now, is that a biblical concept that Genuine salvation is going to produce Fruit or have some evidence.

Yes. Yeah, I think of the book of James I think this is the whole purpose of why James wrote his letter, especially Chapter two, you know, he James says well Even the demons believe in tremble right because people enjoy and we talked about this last time.

It's gonna come up again. Jonathan Edwards was preaching in the church in Northampton and he believed based on the way People in this congregation were living he believed that many of them were not true believers.

Or at least he he wouldn't allow them to take communion and that created a big stir and they they ran him out of town. But his whole argument would have been yeah, look at the book of James you can't just say Why believe I believe in Jesus and then go out and live a life of debauchery like it doesn't work like that James chapter 2 says faith without works.

It doesn't have works. What is it? Dead and the clear implication of James. Is that that type of faith is really not a Faith at all air. It's a dead faith. It's not a saving faith so this is one of the things that came out of the Reformation and.

Certainly.

Was part of Edwards teaching. So moving on to section 3 Edwards later life.

It says in.

1747 Edwards was impacted by the life and death of David Brainerd who served as a missionary to Native American tribes in New England. In 1749 Edwards published Brainerd's biography and diary. This work would influence later missionaries such as William Carey and we're going to get into these Great missionaries in the next chapter.

So chapter 12 or lesson 12 is Titled the gospel goes forth and I'm going to talk about Carey Judson and the modern missionary Missions movement, but just to stick with Edwards. It says due to a number of issues Including his refusal to serve communion to church members who had not been truly converted Edwards was voted out of his church after serving there for more than 20 years.

He preached his farewell sermon in 1750. Okay, so he refused to serve communion to church members. Have any of you ever been in a church where that happened? No, have you ever heard of a church or a pastor doing that dad.

Tell me that they will not. They cannot receive Communion if the priest has found some sin in their life, right?

Right.

Yeah, I mean if you divorce your spouse, I mean, I don't know how the Catholic Church is today. But if you divorce your spouse For no good reason and I don't know that the Catholic Church believes there is a good reason they're very strict on that which isn't necessarily a bad thing, but If you do that, you can't just show up the next Sunday and take communion.

I mean they expect people to Uphold the standard so I have I have heard of the Catholic Church refusing to serve communion. Let's go to 1st Corinthians 11 just while we're talking about communion but here's the thing you probably are aware of this that Communion is handled differently in the Catholic Church than it's handled in your average Baptist or non-denominational Church, what's the obvious?

Visual thing that is clearly different In the way the Catholic Church does communion and we have different beliefs about it. And what the bread represents is that the literal body of Christ? Is it a symbol but just the way it's handed out in the Catholic Church?

The the priest is up there and you come to him and he Hands out the wafer, right? Well, that's a pretty easy thing to do if somebody comes up and okay. I'm not giving it to you. He can do that In a Baptist Church though or just most churches the way it's done today at least among Protestants.

It's handed out. So instead of people coming up to receive the bread in the cup. It's passed out to the congregation or it's out on a tape. So you anyone in theory can go along and just take it. So it's done very differently so it's it's almost I don't want to say impossible to forbid someone from taking it.

But it's just the way it's set up and the way it's handed out. It's it's different. Yeah.

Right, right.

Right, this is.

Yeah.

Did you hear what she said. Closed communion. So some churches right. I know of one church this I'm sure there's more than one but I'm only aware of one Church, and it's a Baptist Church that does closed communion.

So if you're not an active member in good standing you cannot take communion. And it's just understood that that's the way it is. In fact, they I'm not even sure they do it on Sunday morning. They might have a special time where it's understood.

Hey, if you're not a member like you're not you're not getting it. But that's pretty uncommon most churches and our church does it this way? Just the way we've always done it. I mean, maybe some of you could remember way back when it was different.

I don't know if it ever was but most churches practice open communion where It's left. It's it's left up to you. The pastor will say okay. Here's the requirements, but He leaves it up to each individual to follow it or not.

So it becomes your responsibility.

Larry.

So that was a member of their particular church. Not like if I'm going off and I go visit another church and they have closed communion. I'm a member of good standing here, right, but I'm just not a member of that church, right?

For bit right you would not be able to take it. You know and they might say well, you know, let's say you went to another church. That does it closed and you want to take it. You know, well, why can't I take it?

I'm a Christian and they might ask Well, why aren't why aren't you in your own church? Like if you're satisfied with your church, why are you here? I mean, which is a good question. Like if you're on vacation if you're traveling, I mean, that's one thing but and you know this go leads to other issues of you know church hopping and people who kind of bounce around from here to there and Like that was a thing in the past that was very much discouraged and seen as not healthy today.

I mean, you know how it is today today. It's kind of like a free-for-all in a lot of places, but Back in Edwards time clearly it was it was a different period and it was taken pretty seriously. Okay, first Corinthians 11 this is the passage that came to mind when Thinking about maybe the the gravity or the weight of the communion service Paul says Let's see pick up in verse 19 he says for there also must be factions among you that those who are approved may be recognized among you.

Therefore when you come together in one place Is it not to eat the Lord's Supper? For an eating each one takes his own supper ahead of others and one is hungry and another is drunk. Okay, so you had people in the church drunk at the communion table and Paul found out about it and I suspect Paul wasn't too happy to Hear that.

Why are you guys not doing anything about this? For an eating each one takes his own supper. Just skip ahead to verse Let's see verse 27 Therefore whoever eats this bread or drinks this cup of the Lord in an unworthy manner will be guilty of the body in blood of the Lord.

But let a man examine himself and so let him eat of the bread and drink of the cup. So it's not really stated anywhere. Whether or not it was handed out and it was up to you With the warning or whether or not you had to come up in the Corinthian leadership Handed it out.

We don't really know but one thing hopefully we should all agree on is that These types of warnings this stuff should be explained ahead of time. We're at the very least whoever is taking communion needs to know the gravity of the situation and Here at Morris corner we would I've said this I try to say it every time.

If you don't know Christ as your Savior, you shouldn't be partaking. I mean, that's clear or If you're living like if your heart isn't right between you and God or if there's some ish unresolved issue between you and a church member even Like communion is about unity.

So we want to deal with those things before we partake.

Okay.

So this is something that happened with Jonathan Edwards. He was he was run out of town because he refused to Serve communion because of that. Edwards any questions before we move on.

Okay.

Because of that Edwards moved to Stockbridge, Massachusetts where he followed in the steps of Brainerd engaging in evangelistic outreach to local Native American tribes. During this time he also published a treatise on the freedom of the will.

This important work demonstrated the compatibilism between God's sovereignty and Man's free will and that's where this handout I gave you comes in Here on this paper. I have a two columns free will and the sovereignty of God so there's a list of verses about free will or verses that I believe teach free will and Then there are verses that teach the sovereignty of God.

Now, is it either or? There are some people that you'll meet who say listen God. I've never met someone who said God is not sovereign but when they hear about the sovereignty of God They they bristle at it and they're more on the free will side.

And then there's other people who are on the sovereignty of God side and they might deny free. I have heard people deny that free will exists. There are people on the Internet. I've never met anyone in person, but you know.

Here's my point and here's what we just read. The two are what what's the word begins with a C? Compatible. Now in our mind maybe in your mind. They might seem incompatible. How if God is sovereign. How can man truly be free or if man is free?

How can God be in control? I mean we're in control, right? Well, no, it's it's both like God is sovereign. God is in control. But at the same time I'm a volitional I can make whatever decision I want to make.

Or can I?

Larry.

Heard an illustration about Freedom through a train. You know a train. They maybe the engine wants to get off the track and go through this field.

But.

They can't. Because they have to stay on the rails. And so by staying on the tracks on the rails is where they find their freedom.

Yep.

Yeah, I Thought you were going to use the other Illustration of a train or a train track where people say that when you think of it a train track It's two rails running you know straight together and people will say that the the freedom of man and the Sovereignty of God are like two parallel lines that just go on but any but they meet in eternity or The other classic illustration when someone gets to heaven, they're at the at the pearly gates.

When you're walking through it says You know Whoever will may come and you you walk through the gates of heaven and then turn around on the other side from heaven's perspective. It's a predestined from the foundation of the world.

However, people illustrate it. I Really do think both are true. But it's it's the the mind of man that has a hard time Reconciling this so before we go over these verses, let me just say a few things at the outset.

I'm gonna approach this. I'm gonna try to approach this from a neutral standpoint. To kind of teach both sides Instead of advocate for one or the other and then the other thing. If someone is on one side, you're welcome here.

I'm glad you're here if someone takes the other point of view same thing. People are welcome. This is not something that I ever advocate dividing over. But we want to see what the Bible says. So on The free will side here's one verse somebody might use to teach free will.

Joshua.

2415 says and if it seems evil to you to serve the Lord Joshua says Choose for yourself this day whom you will serve whether the gods of your fathers Or the gods which your fathers served that were on the other side of the river or the gods of the Amorites in whose land You dwell.

But as for me and my house, we will serve the Lord now. What's the free will? Angle here. He's saying to people what?

Choose.

Make a choice. Are you gonna serve God or are you gonna serve Baal or Molech? It's your choice. Now that does seem to imply That people have the ability to choose whether or not to follow God or to follow after something else.

Right, doesn't that seem. What like what he's saying? Here's the thing I think. The term free will if it's how you interpret the word if it means that mankind is morally neutral and That you can choose the right and choose the wrong either way.

Yeah, I don't think mankind is free in that sense because of the sin nature. We have a we have a bent towards sin.

But.

Mankind certainly has the choice To serve God or not and it's really a sick. It's not so much taught in the Bible. It's assumed on every page that people have the ability to make choices, right? So I can understand the person reading the Bible and they think the Bible teaches free will because it's just it's literally on every page Of the Bible if that's how you're reading it.

So Okay, any comments on Joshua 24 15 pretty straightforward. I Choose to serve God and that isn't this what we do when we preach or evangelize. We're we're calling them upon people to make a decision a choice to put their faith in Jesus.

Okay. Now on the other side the sovereignty of God Side, I tried to have a verse that kind of not countered the other but balanced it, right? So John 15 verse 16. Here's what Jesus said to the disciples.

You did not choose me.

But what I.

Chose you and appointed you that you should go and bear fruit and that your fruit should remain. That whatever you asked the Father and my name he may give you. Okay, so Joshua says to choose to serve God or not.

But then Jesus says well, you really didn't choose me. I chose you. All right any comments on heifers? Now if you think that well, hey, that's kind of taking it out of context here like. This is the time to make these arguments.

I think one thing you could say is that Peter and the others that they chose to follow Christ. Because yes, Jesus chose them right. Jesus approached them and said follow me, right? So Jesus did choose them, but didn't they have the ability to say no?

Right.

They did and. Did anyone say no to following Christ.

Who?

Okay, well Judas. He said yes and was with him for three and a half years. But in the end he His heart wasn't there and. Then you could go back to. Well, it was prophesied that but it was still Judas's choice.

Okay, any comments on John 15 16,. I just think it gives balance. It's not that one is true and the other isn't or one side's right and the other's rights. Both are true, and I think these give balance.

But if I'm missing anything by all means.

Mark.

Well, okay, so if something is prophesied It's gonna happen because God knows it's gonna happen. The question is did God make Judas do that now that when you weren't use the word Predestined it gives the impression that God is the one who made him do it and that's the way some people would interpret that.

Here's my the way I try to handle this nowhere. Does it really. Well, let's turn to Acts chapter. See mark just has to complicate things here. So Let's turn to Acts 4. I think it is. I Mean Judas did make a choice and Judas is certainly responsible for the choice that he made.

But there is a verse. Let's see. Yeah, Acts chapter 4 Verse 27 It says for truly against your holy servant Jesus whom you appointed who's the you. Well, it's capitalized so I It's God, right? So for truly against your holy servant Jesus whom you Anointed sorry both Herod and Pontius Pilate with the Gentiles and the people of Israel were gathered together to do whatever your hand and your purpose Determined before to be done and actually I think that is the Greek word for predestination if I remember correctly.

Now Lord look on their threats and grant your servants that with all boldness they may speak your word. Okay. So according to this verse God anointed Jesus and God.

Determined.

And if someone has a way of looking this up while I'm Please do but I think it is the word predestined but God Determined that this would be done. Okay, so I can understand that argument that well It was prophesied Judas would do this God ordained it or God determined this would be done.

But at the same time you have to stick with the fact that Judas made this decision. It was still his choice. Because we're remember we're not saying it's one or the other. It's it's both or at least this book says it's both.

I think it's both. Is anyone confused. Thanks. But mark has a point. I mean that is what it says so I and I'm not sure of any argument that would undo that but. Okay. Now the second verse Proverbs 16 verse 9 and I wasn't sure which side to put this on so I put it on both.

So here's a verse that could I think apply to both the free will and sovereignty of God? Proverbs 16 verse 9 says the heart of man plans his way. But the Lord establishes his steps. Okay, so man man makes his own decisions his own choices, but at the same time God is.

Establishing.

What he does? God is guiding or God establishes his steps. Could this fit on both sides? Because the first half of the verse seems to be like free will man the heart of man plans his way. Sovereignty of God though the Lord establishes his steps and there are several verses like this.

So to me this seems to be saying both.

Brad.

Better application to the person who does choose to follow the Lord. Yeah, because then the Lord will strengthen and establish his ways. Good good.

Yep, Linda.

Or close the door.

Yeah, yeah, you could think okay, here's what I'm gonna do and here's how it's gonna work out and God says otherwise. And it's gonna end up this way. I mean, it's how you understand what's being said.

And I don't know that there's anything in the context to really sway me one side or the other but I just thought this passage was interesting. Okay, the next verse John 7 17 if anyone wills to do his will He shall know concerning the doctrine whether it is from God or whether I speak of my own authority.

And it's just that first part that really jumped out to me if anyone wills to do God's will. Okay, so you have God's will and you can will or you can choose to do God's will or do your own thing. To me, this is another Clear free will verse if you want to put it that way.

And again the term free will. You say well the word free will isn't in the Bible or it's only in the Bible in The Old Testament in regard in regards to free free will offerings.

Well.

Depending on your translation the word sovereignty isn't in the Bible some translations use it. But I think we know what we're talking about. So you could have all sorts of different arguments attached to this or any comments on 1st Corinthian or John 7 17.

All right, then the the balance would be Proverbs 1921. Many are the plans in a person's heart, but it is the Lord's purpose that prevails. Well, that's pretty clear. Okay, let's ask another question why does this matter.

This is what I was thinking about on the way the way here when talking about this like is this just like a classroom discussion to just Hey, let's talk about it to try to wake our brains up and to think and or does this actually matter.

Does this Make any difference in day-to-day life. What do you think? Now anytime somebody asked me a question does it Matt why does it matter to me if it's in the Bible it matters. We're told to preach, you know and teach all of God's words if it's if it's a biblical subject.

It matters even if you can't figure out why.

But.

What might be the application or what? How could this really impact a person to me? If somebody goes too far in one direction They could get all messed up. Let's say you go too far Into the sovereignty of God and you become what is called a hyper Calvinist.

Oh, yeah, you could just sit back. I'm just gonna sit in my couch today. And whatever is gonna happen has already been predestined from the foundation of the world. So, why should I tell anyone about you?

Why should I do anything? Because it's not gonna make a difference because it's all been for ordained by God. I mean, that's I Don't know anyone who's ever got into that State, but I have heard of people that don't evangelize.

They will not share Christ because they figure if someone's gonna believe they're gonna believe anyways, like that is a thing it's not that common, but. So if you go too far in that direction, can you see the problem?

Like why work and serve God? It's just gonna be done whether I'm here or not. That's a danger. What's the danger in the other direction if you if you're all about free will. Well, I think you might become a heretic In deny that God is even involved in the affairs of men.

I mean How that would play out in day-to-day life. Any ideas, yes.

Good.

Okay, good, I'm glad you mentioned that because this. Because because we mentioned evangelism to the hyper Calvinist. Why bother evangelizing? I'm not gonna tell anyone about Jesus because it's all fixed.

Anyways, okay. If you go too far in the free will direction, you think now it's all up to me. So if someone's gonna get saved we have to do it because it's all about your will. So this leads to people manipulating others.

Into.

Believing in Jesus like I have to twist people's arm I have to do whatever I have to do to convince them because God isn't going to do it. So we have to do it and it. There are Evangelism strategies that are very manipulative and I think that that is the danger.

So thank you very much for mentioning that. Yep.

Right.

Yeah, I mean if you really believe that someone going to heaven or hell is dependent on you I don't know how I could live with myself. Because every encounter that you miss throughout the day and you do miss things.

Now it's on you because this person it's not gonna believe because you didn't tell them and yeah that could be a hard thing to.

Deal with.

Okay, any any comments on that? So I think it does matter if you go too far in one direction or the other. That's why I think it's very important to stress that both are true. We need to find the balance.

Okay, first Corinthians 10 13. Another free will passage you could say no temptation has overtaken you that is not common to man. But God is faithful and he will not let you be tempted beyond your ability.

But with the temptation, he will also provide the way of escape that you may be able to endure it. So mankind has the ability to resist temptation like you have. You have a choice to obey to give in. You have the ability to obey God or not.

I don't know. I think this is a free will passage if you will.

I.

Heard a video this past week or a clip from John Piper. John Piper is John Piper is someone who's big on the other side of things the sovereignty of God side and John Piper basically in this clip. He said that God ordains sin or God the reason why Sin happens even the most heinous things that go on in this world.

God ordains it. He didn't say God causes it but and that's sort of what it sounded like that. Yeah. Oh, yeah, God ordains all of this and God determined or said it would happen and it's gonna happen and you know, obviously a lot of people take issue with that because it sounds like You going too far in the sovereignty of God that makes God the author of sin so.

To me that was a little too far in one direction that I just not willing to go unless I have a clear verse although Amos in the book of Amos that says if there is a disaster in the city, is it not the Lord.

Who? Who did it? So? It is a complicated subject. You do have a hand up.

Is he using God ordained as allowed.

That's not what it sounded like to me, but maybe I don't know, you know. Right, well see I think anyone would have to agree that God ordained it in the sense that he allowed it. How can you how could you disagree with that?

Like God clearly knows everything that's gonna happen and he he could stop it theoretically, so You know saying he allowed it. I don't see how anyone could argue with that. But okay the other side. Ephesians 1 4 and 5.

Just as he chose us in Christ before the foundation of the world though We should be holy and without blame before him in love having predestined us to Adoptions to adoption as sons by Jesus Christ himself according to the good pleasure of his will.

So God before anyone was even created God chose us He predestined us and it's not based on you or this or that it's based on The good pleasure of his will that's definitely a sovereignty of God.

Verse.

And there are people that would deny it, I mean I've met Christians that don't believe in the doctrine of election. Just like well, what do you do with a verse like this? You know, and I don't know. I don't know how you explain it away, but All right, Revelation.

We're almost done. Okay Revelation 3 20 This is a classic verse Behold I stand at the door and knock if anyone hears my voice and opens the door I will come in to him and eat with him and he with me. So there it is.

Just putting it out there It's up to you to respond. The balance would be John 6 44 when Jesus says no man Can come to me unless the father who sent me draws him and I'll raise him up at the last day so according to Jesus nobody can even Express faith.

Nobody can come to me unless the father draws him. And then the final verse Revelation 22 17 and the Spirit and the bride say come and let Him who hears say come and let him who thirsts come whoever desires Let him take the water of life freely.

I think if there is any one Verse in the Bible to take this position and pick one verse. This would be it because it's clearly Putting it out for all people and it's up to you. So anyone who will Let them come.

But then John 6 65 Jesus reiterates what he said in John 6 44 He says again, therefore I have said to you that no one can come to me Unless it has been granted to him by the father. So ultimately the gospel goes out to all people Come believe in Jesus, but anyone who actually comes and believes it's because God drew them and God Granted it.

So in the end go back to the original statement in the book.

Both.

Both are true. Do you agree with that after all that? Yeah during this time.

Edwards.

Published the treatise on the freedom of the will this important work demonstrated the compatibilism between God's sovereignty and man's will. Says. In 1758 Edwards moved to New Jersey to serve as the president of the College of New Jersey later called Princeton University.

Shortly after he arrived he was Inoculated for smallpox instead of preserving his health. The inoculation proved fatal. Edwards died on March 22nd 1758. So. For all you anti-vaxxers out there I'm sorry, I shouldn't say that.

Even though he was 54 years old when he died. He remains one of America's most influential theologians. Okay, so for discussion. The Great Awakening was a revival among the churches of New England. People who had grown up in church But had never embraced Christ in saving faith were suddenly confronted with the reality of their spiritual condition.

What would you say to someone who claims to be? Christian simply because they attend church and try to be a good person. What passages of Scripture would you use to explain what it truly means to follow Christ.

I think this is where we ended last week, but we didn't really have any time to get into it. So does anyone have a response for this?

Yep.

Yep.

So I Mean the whole point that is trying they're trying to make in this book. Is that the person who truly believes in Christ? You can be a nominal Christian in name only. There actually has to be some Fruit.

There actually has to be some some evidence. Okay, so we get to finish this last section. Section number five in the footsteps of the Reformation Says at its core the Protestant Reformation was built on two foundational principles.

Number one Scripture alone. That is Sola Scriptura proved the authority for defining doctrine and determining conviction so This is opposed to the Catholic Church. Does the Catholic Church believe in Sola Scriptura?

That is the Bible alone is our authority. No, they don't believe that because they believe Pope Francis is an equal authority to the Bible. So whatever the Bible says that way we believe that. But if Pope Francis says something declare something that is equally true to what the Bible says.

Which I think is the fatal flaw in their system that that's so obviously problematic but.

The Bible.

Right.

And that has clearly happened many many times. Okay, so that's one key of the Reformation Sola Scriptura. The other is faith alone. Sola Fide articulated the gospel. Sola Fide Articulated the truth of the gospel that sinners are justified or declared righteous in God's sight by grace through faith in Jesus Christ apart from their own Self-righteous works.

Now again, this is the Reformation. They tried originally to reform the Catholic Church. Does the Catholic Church believe in faith alone? No, they believe in what faith.

Plus.

Works.

Yeah play faith plus the sacraments and all the rest. So these two principles are clearly evidenced by both the Puritans of the 18th century Church leaders who followed them and it says consider the Westminster Confession regarding both the authority of Scripture and justification by faith.