This is Part 2 of the series.

To summarize what the early church fathers and even Augustine himself taught until 412 A.D., Dr. Ken Wilson states:

The early Augustine’s traditional theology (My note – what orthodox Christianity taught at the time) pervasively asserts that humans can respond to God without divine assistance. “But miserable friends could be masters of this world if they were willing to be sons of God, for God has given them the power to become His sons” (On True Religion, 65). Contrary to the Manichaean misinterpretation of Ephesians 2:3 (“were by nature children of wrath” meaning at birth), Augustine denounced alienation from God by nature, “Remember what the apostle said, ‘In our lifestyle (behavior) we are alienated from God,’” and, “Augustine said: ‘I say it is not sin, if it be not sinned by one’s own will; hence also there is [a] reward, because of our own will we do right’” (Against Fortunatus the Manichaean, 21). Augustine clarifies that his free will statements concern current persons, not merely Adam’s original nature.[1]

What Augustine believed after his conversion to Christianity based on this quote is that Adam’s sin did not preclude a person from being able to believe. What many, if not most, Christians do today is to read into many verses a meaning not meant or taught by the authors and early Christians. This is especially true concerning the doctrine of original sin. As I mentioned earlier, today this doctrine is taught as though mankind is incapable of making any moral move toward God because of Adam’s debilitating sin. This is Augustine’s Gnosticism and Calvinism’s total inability. The church fathers taught instead that mankind was not culpable for Adam’s sin, but for their own. Erwin Goodenough examined the writings of church father Justin Martyr (100 AD – 165 AD) and summarized Martyr’s beliefs concerning divine sovereignty and human free will thusly:

Justin everywhere is positive in his assertion that the results of the struggle are fairly to be imputed to the blame of each individual. The Stoic determinism he indignantly rejects. Unless a man is himself responsible for his ethical conduct, the entire ethical scheme of the universe collapses, and with it the very existence of God himself.[2]

In other words, we are culpable for our own sin. This is not Pelagianism. It is also not a version of imputed sin, such as the federal headship model or personal imputation. All mankind after Adam inherited his condition, which inflames sin in our own selves, and thus receives a death penalty. Original sin is therefore not Adam’s sin in mankind but our inherited condition, which makes us sinners by constitution. Paul makes this argument in Romans 5:12-13, which I will discuss later in this teaching.

The Scriptures teach, as did the early church fathers (the disciples of the disciples) that God foreknows everything. He does not determine ahead of time that certain people will be saved or will be lost. He knows who will believe and who will not believe, but He does not determine that outcome in either circumstance.[3]

The Bible teaches that all people are born with a propensity to sin. The interpretation and implication of this truth is as wide as the vastness of the oceans of the earth. First John 1:8-10 says:

But this is not the same as saying that man is unable to hear the gospel and respond. Total inability is a Gnostic idea smuggled into Christianity by Augustine. For one thousand years, little was taught to condemn this teaching. Calvin and Luther revived the heresy of total inability, and this became a foundation of Calvinistic teaching. Of course, John 3:16 stands against Calvinism’s doctrine of total inability. The mental gymnastics Calvinists entertain to sidestep John 3:16 is that accepting God’s free gift is a work, and therefore believing in Christ or accepting God’s gift of salvation would not be by grace. Fortunately, Paul answers the Calvinist on this misuse of Scripture in Romans 4:5 which says, “But to the one who does not work, but believes in Him who justifies the ungodly, his faith is credited as righteousness.” Peter affirms free will to receive God’s free gift in Acts 10:43. There we read, “Of Him all the prophets bear witness that through His name everyone who believes in Him receives forgiveness of sins.”

As I have stated before, the church fathers held and taught free will, not bondage of the will. Here is a short list of church fathers and their doctrinal position concerning free will. These examples are hundreds of years before Augustine.

Justin Martyr in 165 AD in Second Apology 7 – Man acts by his own free will and not by fate. In Dialogue 141 Martyr wrote, “But if the word of God foretells that some angels and men shall be certainly punished, it did so because it foreknew that they would be unchangeable wicked, but not because God had created them so.

Tatian in 165 AD in Greeks 7 – Jesus created men and angels with free will. Jesus had foreknowledge of what free agents would do. There is no such thing as fate. In Greeks 9 Tatian wrote, Demons invented the concept of fate with astrology to enslave man into worshiping them. He also wrote, “Since all men have free will, all men therefore have the potential to turn to God to achieve salvation.”[4]

Irenaeus in 177 AD in Against Heresies 4.37 – God made man a free agent from the beginning. This is the ancient law of human liberty, for there is no coercion with God. In man, as well as in angels, He has placed the power of choice. The Gnostic teaching that some men are born good, and others born bad, is wrong.

Clement of Alexandria in 192 AD in Stromata 2.3 – Christians teach saving faith is a gift that starts with God and is accepted by free choice. In Stromata 2.4 – The ability to freely choose salvation is a gift [started by] God, but true faith produces repentance. In Stromata 5.3 – Faith is the rational; assent of the soul exercising free will.

Tertullian in 190-210 AD in Marcion 2.5 – Man has free will.

Minicus Felix in 210 AD in 36 – The mind of man is free from birth and remains free throughout his life.

Origen in 230 AD in Against Celsus 4:70 – Man has free will.

Mathetes in 130 AD in Epistle to Diognetus 7 – Jesus, who is God come in the flesh, came to persuade, not compel us, to salvation because violence has no part in the character of God.[5]

Finally, there is an argument for free will I do not often hear made. Christians agree that all mankind was created to be an imager of God. The very nature of men and women is that they are all created in the image of God. Does this truth not necessitate an enduring free will? Else, how are people who have no choice to accept their God ordained fate of judgement an imager? What cruelty is this? I believe there is tremendous evidence within the writings of the church fathers to know for certain that the early church did not teach any type of deterministic fatalism. Augustine imported the heresies of the Stoics, Gnostics, and Platonists to pervert and derail orthodoxy in this area. Understanding this will assist us in grasping the intent of the authors of Scripture, how the early Christians understood it, and how we must interpret Scripture today.

There are many Scriptures which call upon the unregenerate man or women to come to God. Here are a few.

• Deuteronomy 4:29: But from there you will seek the Lord your God, and you will find Him if you search for Him with all your heart and all your soul.
• 2 Chronicles 15:2: and he went out to meet Asa and said to him, “Listen to me, Asa, and all Judah and Benjamin: the Lord is with you when you are with Him. And if you seek Him, He will let you find Him; but if you forsake Him, He will forsake you.
• Psalm 9:10: And those who know Your name will put their trust in You, for You, O Lord, have not forsaken those who seek You.
• Psalm 34:6: This poor man cried, and the Lord heard him and saved him out of all his troubles.
• Psalm 86:15: But You, O Lord, are a God merciful and gracious, slow to anger and abundant in lovingkindness and truth.
• Isaiah 55:7: Let the wicked forsake his way and the unrighteous man his thoughts; And let him return to the Lord, and He will have compassion on him, and to our God, for He will abundantly pardon.
• Jeremiah 29:13: You will seek Me and find Me when you search for Me with all your heart.
• Hosea 10:12b: For it is time to seek the Lord.
• Zephaniah 2:3: Seek the Lord, all you humble of the earth.
• Matthew 11:28: Come to Me, all who are weary and heavy-laden, and I will give you rest.
• Luke 18:13-14: But the tax collector, standing some distance away, was even unwilling to lift up his eyes to heaven, but was beating his breast, saying, ‘God, be merciful to me, the sinner!’ I tell you, this man went to his house justified rather than the other; for everyone who exalts himself will be humbled, but he who humbles himself will be exalted.
• John 7:37: Now on the last day, the great day of the feast, Jesus stood and cried out, saying, “If anyone is thirsty, let him come to Me and drink.
• Romans 1:16: For I am not ashamed of the gospel, for it is the power of God for salvation to everyone who believes, to the Jew first and also to the Greek.
• Hebrews 11:6: And without faith it is impossible to please Him, for he who comes to God must believe that He is and that He is a rewarder of those who seek Him.
• Revelation 22:17: The Spirit and the bride say, “Come.” And let the one who hears say, “Come.” And let the one who is thirsty come; let the one who wishes take the water of life without cost.

These and other Scriptures make no sense if salvation is predetermined by God’s choice. It would be hopeless for those not chosen to even attempt to seek God. The late Dave Hunt reminds us:

If the unregenerate man is unable to seek God, scores of Scriptures that urge man to do so and declare that many have sought and found Him are a gross deception. The entire Bible would then mock God by depicting Him as endlessly pleading for repentance from those unable to repent, those He has predestined to eternal doom. And it would mock the nonelect by offering a salvation they cannot receive.[6]

The point in this excursus into Augustinian Gnosticism is to demonstrate that present day Calvinism perverts the Gospel and casts God as morally responsible for the evil in the world because He deliberately chose some to a life of unbelief and judgment for what they had no capacity to change. Determinism of the Stoic and Platonic varieties is not biblical, yet that is the foundation of Calvinism.

Original sin as taught by the early church had nothing whatsoever to do with complete and total inability of a sinner to respond to God’s invitation. Yes, the sin nature of man affects every aspect of his being. It is also true to say that man is not as bad as he could be. God has revealed Himself in the least in His creation. Man can and many do take the light of the revelation of God and reject it or in the least do not act positively toward God through it. God is always ready to provide whatever additional persuasion a man needs once that man begins to act on the light he has received. This is why the proclamation of the Gospel to all people is of vital importance.

The apostle Peter in his first epistle, speaks clearly on this issue. He says that people are born-again by the Word of God, i.e., the Gospel, not by an act of God that enables them to believe. 1 Peter 1:23 reads:

This background will help us understand several other verses in Ephesians 2.

Now let’s examine the text. The introduction of the idea that we are spiritually dead in verse 1 is meant by Paul to be juxtaposed with the power of God demonstrated in Christ in verses 20-23 of Chapter 1. What Paul is doing here is ensuring that believers have a firm knowledge of the truth that this same power of God toward and for Christ is now directed toward and for believers. This truth raises some important implications.

All people are dead spiritually because of sin. We have learned that means we are separated from God. It does not mean man is unable to respond to God. Remember that Paul told the Romans that the glory of the creation is enough to point people to the existence of God. There is nothing that anyone has done to die. They are dead because of an inherited constitution, otherwise called a sin nature. Remember also that Adam and Eve lost fellowship with God by their sin. They did not lose the relationship, nor did they lose the ability to obey God after their fall. Their relationship with God was certainly damaged but not lost completely. This same truth is magnificently demonstrated in the parable of the prodigal son. These are very important points.

In this first verse Paul begins to describe and define what I call “the great exchange.” We were once something but now in Christ we are something else entirely.

We spoke in the previous chapter about the work and ministry of the Holy Spirit within us as being focused on eradicating sin in our lives. Puritan John Owen (b.1616 – d.1683) wrote in his book Overcoming Sin and Temptation, that “The life, vigor and comfort of our spiritual life depend much upon our mortification of sin.”[7] Owen goes on to elaborate on the effects of sin in our lives that is not addressed.

In our ordinary walking with God, and in an ordinary course of His dealing with us, the vigor and comfort of our spiritual lives depend much on our mortification, not only as a causa sine qua non (My note – a necessary cause or condition), but as a thing that has been an effectual influence thereinto. For:

This alone keeps sin from depriving us of the one and the other. Every

unmortified sin will certainly do two things: It will weaken the soul and deprive it of its vigor. It will darken the soul and deprive it of its comfort and peace.

As sin weakens, so it darkens the soul. It is a cloud, a thick cloud, that

spreads itself over the face of the soul and intercepts all the beams of God’s love and favor. It takes away all sense of the privilege of our adoption; and if the soul begins to gather up thoughts of consolation, sin quickly scatters them.[8]

The Puritans had a deep and rich theology and certainly, a way with words. While I do not agree with Reformed Theology or Calvinism, which the Puritans are prime examples of both, I do appreciate some of their insights and Owens provides that here. Mortification of sin is part of the process of sanctification. Striving for godly sanctification depends upon the Holy Spirit’s indwelling for success and of our personal surrender and submission to its leading.

This is the point Paul made in Romans 7. Christians must die to self, must slay the flesh, must take every action necessary to ensure victory over the sin nature. This victory is ours through faith in Jesus Christ. As Paul wrote, “Who will set me free from this body of death? Thanks be to God through Jesus Christ our Lord!” (Romans 7:24-25)

Paul says to the Ephesians that all people begin life dead spiritually. Again, this means that all people are separated from God by their sin. But as we will learn shortly, it is our own sin that separates us from God, not someone else’s sin. We are not guilty because of Adam’s guilt nor by his sin imputed to us. Being dead spiritually because of our sin never meant to the early church or apostles that people are corpses incapable of understanding that God desires people everywhere to turn to Him in faith. Our free will remains intact even though we are sinners.

To be continued…

[1] Ken Wilson, The Foundation of Augustinian Calvinism, (Regula Fidei Press, 2019), p. 38.

[2] Erwin Goodenough, The Theology of Justin Martyr, (Jena: Verlag Frommannsche Buchhandlung, 1923), p. 219. Cited in Wilson, p. 21.

[3] It is worth mentioning here that God is omnitemporal. When we speak of God’s foreknowledge, we do so admitting that God is in the past, present, and future simultaneously. God’s foreknowledge is a type of anthropomorphism.

[4] Emily Hunt, Christianity in the Second Century: The Case of Tatian, (New York, NY: Routledge, 2003), p. 49. Cited in Wilson, p. 22.

[5] All church father’s quotations in this section are from Dr. Ken Johnson’s book, The Gnostic Origins of Calvinism, pp. 52-55. Available at BibleFacts.org The one exception is the second quote under Tatian which is noted.

[6] Dave Hunt and James White, Debating Calvinism: Five Points, Two Views, (Sisters, OR: Multnomah Press, 2004), pp. 77-78.

[7] John Owen, Overcoming Sin and Temptation, (Wheaton, IL: Crossway Books, 2016), p. 63.

[8] Ibid., pp. 64-65.

Image by Tommy G from Pixabay