Temporary Faith and the Reprobate, What Happened to It?

Posted on by

What has happened to the doctrine of temporary faith in the ‘Reformed Orthodoxy’ of today? I find it interesting that much of the ‘Reformed faith’ today really comes off much more sterile and modernized relative to the theology that they are supposedly carrying forward.

Below is a quote from R. T. Kendall describing the teaching of ‘temporary faith’ vis-a’-vis the reprobate. If what Kendall is describing is true, then again, I just wonder what has happened to the “Reformed faith?” Kendall is using William Perkins as the touchstone in regards to understanding how temporary faith was articulated by one of the Puritan’s best:

It is crucial to grasp Perkins’s doctrine of the temporary faith of the reprobate. While a rigid predestinarianism was not new to English theology, Perkins’s doctrine and use of the notion of temporary faith — the central idea in Whether a Man — was. Whether a Man actually begins with the assumption of the inalterable decree of reprobation. Its comprehensive title is given as a warning to professing Christians to examine themselves lest they happen to possess but a temporary faith — a lofty position to which the reprobate, though doomed from the start, may attain. In his preface Perkins cites the Parable of the Sower (Luke 8:4-15) and urges his readers to consider that a man ‘may seeme both unto himselfe and to the Church of God to bee a true professour of the Gospel, and yet indeede be none’. One may have the ‘certaine fruites’ that a true child of God has, be ‘perswaded in a generall and confused manner’, and still be unregenerate because of a definite number of such are so predestined from eternity. Whether a Man opens with ‘Certaine Propositions declaring how farre a man may goe in the profession of the Gospell, and yet be a wicked man and a Reprobate’. (R. T. Kendall, “Calvin And English Calvinism To 1649,” 6-7)

What has happened to this teaching today? What has happened to what once known as the Experimental Predestinarian faith? Is this teaching still alive and well amongst the ‘Orthodox Reformed’ today; or has this teaching been jettisoned for a more moderate and domestic form of this teaching — maybe these concepts are still alive, it’s just that the ‘OR’ have chosen to use a different vocabulary and grammar to articulate it?

I am really curious. If you are Classically Calvinist (or Federal in orientation), would you mind satisfying my curiousity on this issue?

45 thoughts on “Temporary Faith and the Reprobate, What Happened to It?”

  1. In his preface Perkins cites the Parable of the Sower (Luke 8:4-15) and urges his readers to consider that a man β€˜may seeme both unto himselfe and to the Church of God to bee a true professour of the Gospel, and yet indeede be none’. One may have the β€˜certaine fruites’ that a true child of God has, be β€˜perswaded in a generall and confused manner’, and still be unregenerate because of a definite number of such are so predestined from eternity.

    Help me out, Bobby. Are you promoting this sort of thinking concerning temporary faith or refuting it?

    I understood your position to be that “experimental predestination” is dangerous as it is human-performance-centered rather than Christ centered. I expect there can be people who appear to believe yet who are unregenerate, but the quote seems to place any professing Christian who isn’t “perfect” under suspicion of being reprobate.

  2. Oh no, I’m not promoting this kind of thinking whatsoever!!! I’m asking the Classic Calvinist where this kind of teaching has gone; I never hear them speak of temporary faith for the reprobate, yet this is an integral part of their doctrine, historically. So this post is rhetorically framed somewhat; esp. for the Classic Calvinist.

    Experimental Pred. is a terrible teaching, and indeed is man-centered. Isn’t this a terrible thing though? I would imagine this is why we don’t hear CC teaching this stuff (at least explicitly) nowadays.

  5. Oooh, Bobby, good question. I guess that one faded out of sight without even knowing about it. I remember hearing quite a bit about it 10-15 years ago. Maybe there’s some kind of built-in mechanism for letting certain types of doctrines fade away instead of attacking them head-on. Experimental Predestination may have been replaced with speculation over whether the discussing of theology on the internet is biblical.

  6. And in from left field…

    Hey Bobby,

    I was just getting aquainted with the music of Jason Gray. He did a song “More Like Falling in Love”.
    It sounds very “Affective”. His website is linked to a blogsite which is a collaboration of musicians, one of which wrote from Oswald Chambers. I have tried Rev. Chambers a couple times. He is a very difficult daily devotional for me: all I hear is performance and failure. I don’t need more failure, and I don’t think I need more performance to remind of that. If I did, I should certainly doubt my “election”. Do you know Chambers well enough to say whether or not I am misreading him?

    By the way, Jason Gray highly recommends a bio of “Mr Rogers”: I Am Proud Of You.
    Which just sounds like he lived out the “affective” life.

  7. Clarification: the name of the Fred Rogers biography by Tim Madigan is “I Am Proud of You”.

  8. Yeah, it’s definitely not a talking-point on most Reformed blogs. The Heidelblog comes closest when he is discussing Olievanus’ theology.

  9. I’ve read some of Chambers. He probably does fit a performance based spirituality; I haven’t really read him enough to say.

    On election. There is no room for doubting this, since Christ is objectively elect humanity for all; what great news!

    I’ll have to check out Jason Gray.

  10. That is certainly an interesting quote from Perkins. Having been a Calvinist in my former days/ways I am aware that this idea of ‘temporary faith’ is still around amongst some conservative PCA people, for example Peter Leithart is one such proponent, see also the Federal Vision of which Dr Leithart is a leading proponent. The so-called Federal Vision is a tiny movement, but has caused must distress within the PCA and other like minded denominations in the USA. In fact, Heidelblog has spent a great deal of energy denouncing the Federal Vision proponents as non-Reformed.

  11. I find the exhortation to examine youself to see if you are really in the faith or reprobate from before time a rather humorous notion. If I am decreed to be reprobate, what would examining myself do other than possibly causing me to die from apoplexy. They are asking to send a poor sinner to his anti-reward on the fast track. “Doubt your salvation in this life, so that you can start hell early”.
    On the other hand, if the decree refers to Christ, then examining oneself is certainly understandable to ensure that one is trusting in Christ, not one’s own efforts.

  12. Not that this changes anything but the notion of temporary faith is explicitly presented by Calvin in the Institutes. I have always thought it to be a rather silly notion, a sort of convenience doctrine devised to fit ones system, although I have to admit that in recent years I have not exactly accepted the idea but something like it is a useful category for those who look like, smell like, sem like Chrisitans but finally prove themselves not to be.

  13. Myk, in what sense would you say folks “prove” themselves not to be? In other words, what criteria are you looking at to discern whether someone is “saved” or “not-saved?”

  14. Hi Tony,

    Where do you land, theologically, nowadays?

    Yes the Federal Vision is problematic; but in my mind, no more so than is Westminster Calvinism of today. And this is what confuses me, a bit; Scott Clark, for example, tries to undercut FV, but at the same time the heritage he is forwarding is built upon the same framework that I see FV only trying to make explicit.

    What do you think?

  15. This is the problem that William Perkins himself ran into himself; supposedly even on his death bed he was “doubting his salvation.”

    Certainly we are called to examine ourselves; but of course the Pauline context from which that is taken needs to be considered exegetically and contextually vs. dogmatically (only).

  16. Hi Bobby,

    Where do I land, theologically, nowadays? That is a very good question. For a long time I was solidly Westminsterian and then I came across the Federal Vision, with which I flirted for about 3-4 years. Over the past 2-3 years I have spent a good deal of time reading Barth and I much appreciate Barth’s view of election, covenant and Scripture. At the same time I have been profoundly moved by the theology of J. Moltmann and intrigued by the theology of W. Pannenberg. Having said all of that, I do still follow the various conservative and Reformed blogs out of some sort of sentimental interest. Although I wouldn’t call myself a Calvinist of any description, I do appreciate what you have contributed in this discussion; I have been lurking for quite a while.

    As for Scott Clarke, what can one say … I think your summation of his project is right on the money. My personal frustration with Clarke and others like him is that in reality they elevate their β€˜sub-ordinate standards’ to the level of Scripture. I am not at all convinced that the only β€˜good’ theology was done in the 16th and 17th centuries. Both the Westminsterian Calvinists and the Federal Vision Calvinists give me that impression, although Dr Leithart does seriously and genuinely engage with a lot of modern scholarship).

    Thanks again for your thoughtful posts. Keep up the good work.

    Tony

  17. I don’t want to barge in on this conversation, but I do want to say that your question is a great one Bobby. That’s what I’ve tried to get others to answer within my own “camp”. It’s seems to me that the exhortation to make sure you are in the faith, or to examine yourself, or make your calling and election sure are not directed at one person looking at others to make sure their faith is true, but to look inward.

    So there, I’ve broken out of my “lurking” status.

    In Christ,
    Ten Cent

  18. Ten Cent
    It’s seems to me that the exhortation to make sure you are in the faith, or to examine yourself, or make your calling and election sure are not directed at one person looking at others to make sure their faith is true, but to look inward.

    It is essential that we examine ourselves rather than attempt to make judgments about others…..

    However, I’d add that if internal examination causes a person to get stuck looking for answers there, it takes attention off of our only source of Help and is actually quite destructive. The look inward ought to drive us to look outside of “self” for assurance and guidance.

    I expect you already know this, but couldn’t resist tossing that into the pot.

  19. I knew when I wrote ‘prove’ that it would be the wrong thing :-). I simply meant to say that those outside of Christ at the last day may have appeared to have faith at some point of time but in reality they didn’t. Nothing more. I don’t have a list stahsed in my back pocket with which to check people. However, Calvin and the Reformed faith generally do have pastoral advice to offer to see if you are in the faith: 1) do you believe/trust in the promises of Scripture and the Christ of Scripture? 2) the internal testimony of the Holy Spirit (linked to both 1 and 2 of coruse), and 3) the evidences of good works in ones life, and 4) confirmation of holiness by the community of faith.

    So not a legalsit checklist but certainly pastoral and biblical advice for assurance as one is led back to Christ and his presence and promises.

  20. Tony,

    Thanks for sharing your background a little bit more. Ironically it was my reading of Barth that led me to Torrance that led me to his style of Evangelical Calvinism and the Scottish Theology it is indebted to. I’ve read a little of Moltmann, and a tiny bit of Pannenberg (but there’s only so much time πŸ˜‰ ).

    And I agree with you about the 16th and 17th century; which is why I like Torrance the Scottish theologians he is impressed with — because of their dependence, in many instances, on the “Church Fathers” like Athanasius (which then brings us back to Barth πŸ™‚ ) .

    Thanks for reading!

  21. Ten Cent,

    It’s been along time, great to hear from you!

    I don’t think I want to call folks to look inward, but instead upward to Christ; who is the objective and subjective ground of our salvation. I think looking inward is what got Perkins and the Reformed in trouble.

    What do you think?

  22. Myk,

    Do you think that scripture really ever addresses the issues of assurance in the ways and categories that it is often appealed to by pastors — or even Calvin?

  24. Yes, Heather. You’re absolutely correct. Maybe I’m using the wrong words, but what I meant by the inward look is for me to look at what I’m believing…or rather Whom I’m believing.

    What I’m reacting to is some who might see a brother/sister in Christ sinning and their first reaction is to assume that they are not saved. They’ve judged their eternal state by what they’ve seen on the outside. So instead of treating that one as a brother/sister in Christ who is in need of correction/exhortation/reproof/encouragement…someone who is need of the love and help of others in the Christian community, they right them off as an unbeliever.

    But on the flip side, there are some who profess to know Christ, but in fact do not. So that’s why I said Bobby’s question was a good one. How does one discern if a person in fact a believer in need of Biblical help or an unbeliever pretending to be a Christian.

    I do feel like that in either case, the solution is the same…the Gospel. Yet, how we might apply the Gospel in either case would be different.

  25. Hey Bobby,

    Yes, I agree with you. You can see my reply to Heather above. I tried to clarify what I meant.

    I’m glad God has seen fit to keep you alive and blogging. I enjoy being challenged in my views.

    Thanks for blogging and keep it up.

    In Christ,
    Ten Cent

  26. Ten Cent,

    I gotcha. And I believe we are in agreement.

    As someone who got stuck in the inward looking whirlpool, I just have a “thing” for pointing out where to look when we come face to face with what we’re really like. πŸ™‚

  27. Ten Cent,

    I’m glad I’m alive too πŸ™‚ !!!!

    I saw your clarification to Heather; it all makes sense, thanks for clearing that up, brother!

    In Christ

  28. Actually, while I am not sure I can be definitively defined as anything, I certainly lean towards Classical Calvinism. I have also looked at temporary faith as a category, and tried to argue for it with a Calvinist friend (Southern Baptist). He wasn’t convinced, but I’m still of the opinion that it has legs.

  30. Bobby, I doubt I’ll make a more compelling case than Perkins, and even if I begin to try, I forsee rehashing of words like “Scotist” and so on that I haven’t the time to engage in. So let me merely say:
    The Bible teaches predestination (sure, in Christ first, if you like).
    The Bible teaches perseverance.
    The Bible teaches that some truly experience evidences of Christ and then fall away (Hebrews 6/10 et al).
    And that’s about it.

  31. Ali,

    I disagree with your last 3 points. But since you don’t have the time, I won’t tell you why πŸ˜‰ .

  33. Heather,

    I don’t see anywhere in scripture where “perseverance” per the strictures of the TULIP are taught (through the categories and emphases provided by this framework).

    I don’t believe Heb. 6 is referencing “justification” at all; the biblical theology, not dogmatic, needs to determine the emphasis and category of thought here.

    So maybe it was just actually the last 2 πŸ™‚ .

    See this old post on Heb. 6 to see what I’m getting at: http://recreatedinchrist.wordpress.com/2008/04/03/hebrews-6-dont-go-back/

  34. Right on Bobby,
    And so too, many of the passages in Romans supposedly adressing election, refer to national Israel, not individual election,

  36. Thanks for the link, Bobby. These three points:

    # That this epistle is written to Hebrew Believers
    # The occasion is dealing with Jewish believers tempted with falling away to β€œOld Covenant Judaism”
    # That the informing theology of this epistle is squarely couched within contrasting and comparing Old Covenant/New Covenant

    ..are things I’ve considered myself when reading Hebrews. I imagine these Jewish believers would have been under tremendous pressure to return to “the Law” instead of press forward into unknown territory while following the One to whom the Law always pointed.

    Also interesting to me is the account in Acts 19 of those who had believed and received John’s Baptism of repentance but had not been sealed by the Holy Spirit when Paul and Apollos encountered them. I’ve wondered whether the falling away is from an intellectual knowledge and feeling of sorrow for sin that has occurred apart from spiritual sealing. But, I think weird things sometimes.

  37. I’ve wondered whether the falling away is from an intellectual knowledge and feeling of sorrow for sin that has occurred apart from spiritual sealing.

    I meant the “falling away” that is referenced in Hebrews.

  38. I don’t think Acts should be taken in “normative” ways. As a narrative account it is describing (vs. prescribing) a very transitional period from Judaism to Christianity; therefore it does not parallel our situation now.

    So then, applying that kind of thinking to the Hebrews passage probably does not apply. In fact I would not say that the Acts context is referring to simply an intellectual knowledge, but instead that they were only familiar with the Baptism of John — so they were genuine “God-fearers,” like Cornelius, they just needed further insight (but again this is all framed in a “non-normative” context of transitioning from Judaism to Christianity — the Hebrews context is talking to folks who are beyond this more “primitive” situation found in Acts [at least that’s the way I read this]).

  41. Ah.
    I was just wondering whether the letter to the Hebrews might have been written about the same time frame as the Acts account–and possibly was dealing with a similar situation. That’s why I was asking.

    But I’m gathering you believe that’s not the case?

    Thanks for sharing your perspective on that.

  42. This is an interview with a lawyer who believes that Acts was a legal brief written by Luke to a Roman official “Most Excellent Theophiles” for use in the defence of Paul, who would be tried in Rome. The interview was done for Moody Broadcasting, when they had a nightly news magazine. It being a legal brief, would obviously make it evidenciary of the history of the early church. Might it have slightly less weight as a writing of theology, if it was not written as such?

    Here’s the link:

    http://moodyradiopaulbutler.wordpress.com/2009/11/20/book-paul-on-trial/

  43. One of my profs in Bible College, Dr Rex Koivisto, did his ThD diss on Acts; I think he offered the best thesis on what the theme of Acts is, and that is the “Spirit establishment of God’s church to the Jews, the Gentiles, the Nations.”

    I’ll have to check out the “legal brief” (which I am doubtful of). Luke seems to be picking up on his theme of the Holy Spirit in his Gospel (so Acts is a continuation of Luke).

  44. So even as you seek after God and love him and learn to live by His Law, you still have to worry that he might reject you when you need Him most. God’s most loyal servants will learn too late that God didn’t truly love them and they will have to pay for all eternity for trusting Him. Good Calvinist advice to a reprobate would be to be a libertine because no amount of being holy will save them. Same is true for the elect who are saved without even following the Gospel.

    The Gospel- believing in it can’t save the reprobate, disbelieving it can’t hurt the elect. The Gospel, in consistent Calvinist thought, is God’s practical joke to mankind.

Comments are closed.