Elder Bass on Hyper Calvinism

Dr. Jeremiah Bass, new pastor at Cincinnati Primitive Baptist Church recently preached another able discourse. On Cincinnati Church's web page under "Resources" (here) one can find the link to "articles" and find his notes and write up of the sermon. I want to share what he said with our readers as it is a worthy piece against Hyper Calvinism and Hardshellism. You can read the entire write up (here) and you can go to the "livestream" link which will take you to recent sermons on video. The last one (August 8th) is where he preached the sermon and you can listen to it. Here are some things he said:

Now some folks who love the doctrines of grace get nervous when you say that God commands all men everywhere to repent.  They get even more nervous when you say that God commands all men to put their faith in Christ.  And the primary reason they get nervous and object to this is that they misunderstand the doctrine of total depravity.  They believe that because the Bible teaches that no one can come to Christ or love God or submit to God’s commands apart from grace, that to call someone who is dead in sin to faith and repentance would be to say that the spiritually dead can do spiritual things.  This is a half-truth.  It is true that the natural man does not receive the things of the Spirit of God, neither can he know them, because they are spiritually discerned (1 Cor. 2:14; Jn. 6:44; Rom. 8:7-8).  But it is not true that the natural man is therefore off the hook for not believing and repenting, or that they should not be called to repentance and faith.

Why is this?  Behind this objection, an objection that is symptomatic of both hyper-Calvinism and Arminianism, is the assumption that ought always implies can.  In other words, if I am obligated to do something, I must be able to do it.  But this is not always true.  For example, just because I can’t pay back a debt, doesn’t mean that I’m not obligated to pay back that debt.  There is a moral obligation to pay my debts, even if I don’t have the money in my pockets to pay them back.  Think about the parable of the unforgiving servant in Matthew 18.  He could not pay back his debt (ver. 25), but that did not release him from his obligation to pay.  Now this is significant because our sins are likened to debts (“forgive us our debts as we forgive our debtors,” Mt. 6:12).  Just because you can’t pay your sin debt (and none of us can) does not mean that you are no longer guilty or obligated by them.  Ought does not always imply can.

But, as we all recognize, sometimes it does.  So, does it apply to the command to repent and obey?  Well, think about the command to love God.  Let me ask you this: Is it okay for an unregenerate man to hate God?  No, I think all of us would say it is not okay.  It is sin to hate God.  And this is true even though it is a fact that an unregenerate man cannot in any real sense love God.  It would always be wrong to give the impression that the ungodly are off the hook for their hatred of God just because they cannot love him apart from grace.  Like Joseph’s brothers; we are told that “they hated him [Joseph], and could not speak peaceably unto him” (Gen. 37:4).  Does the fact that they could not speak peaceably with him mean that it was okay that they could not, or that it would have been wrong to tell them that they ought to have spoken peaceably with him?  Of course not!  

This is true not only for the command to love God but also to believe the gospel.  When our Lord began his ministry, we are told that he “came into Galilee [a place that would ultimately reject him], 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” (Mk. 1:14-15).  We are not told that he limited this command to the elect or even to the regenerate.  All in Galilee who heard this message were commanded to repent and believe.  We don’t have to think that our Lord somehow believed that lost men had the ability in themselves to respond to the message.  Regardless of the disposition of their hearts, they were still under obligation to repent and believe.  

Someone may still say, “Well, I don’t see why God would condemn someone for not believing if they cannot.”  To this I reply that you don’t spare a snake because it is its nature to bite; you kill it precisely because it is its nature to bite.  (The analogy of the snake is apropos: for didn’t our Lord say to the Pharisees, “Ye serpents, ye generation of vipers, how can ye escape the damnation of hell?” Mt. 23:33.)  God will not put out the fires of hell because it is the nature of the sinner to sin; he will judge them precisely because it is their nature to sin.  It is just for God to hold sinners responsible for their sins even if it is their nature to sin.  The fact that it is their nature to sin and that without grace they will go on in their sin does not excuse it – if anything it makes it even worse.  Just because it is not in the nature of the unregenerate to repent does not mean that God cannot hold them accountable for refusing to repent.  

Another point of confusion has to do with the doctrines of election and limited atonement.  By election we mean that God, from all eternity, unconditionally chose out the human race some to be saved.  By limited atonement we mean that Christ died for the elect only.  Now here is where the confusion comes in: people will say, “If Christ died only for the elect, how can we call all men to believe in him?”  But this objection comes from a misunderstanding of what we are called to believe in the gospel message.  What I mean is this: when the gospel comes to me and calls me to believe in Jesus, it is not a call to believe that I am elect or even that he died for me.  Neither of those things may in fact be true.  Rather, the call of the gospel is a call to embrace Jesus as he is presented to us in the New Testament – as our Lord to whom we must submit our whole lives, and as the only one in whom forgiveness of sins can be found.  And the requirement to believe that Jesus is Lord and Savior is completely consistent with the doctrines of unconditional election and particular redemption.

Why am I saying all this?  I’m saying this because there are some folks who confuse a general call to repent and believe with a rejection of the doctrines of grace.  But that’s not based on a Biblical grasp of those doctrines; it is based on a misunderstanding of those doctrines.  We affirm, with Scripture, total depravity, unconditional election, particular redemption, effectual calling, and the perseverance of the saints.  We also affirm, with Scripture, that all men, regardless of their spiritual condition, are called to repent of their sins and embrace Jesus as Lord and Savior.  And we do this without retreating one inch from the Biblical insistence that we can only truly love God and repent of our sins and believe on his Son by the sovereign grace of God that gives new life to the spiritually dead.

Is it not good to hear a Primitive Baptist teach such sound doctrine? I pray our Hardshell brothers will study what Elder Bass has said and weigh it carefully in the fear of God. What he said is real "Old Baptist" doctrine, what our forefathers taught. What think ye?