I have decided to cite more examples from Hodge. Again, this is not to single him out for criticism, as if he is especially wrong or incompetent — no, his errors and inconsistencies are very widespread, and common to most Calvinists that I have read, and I read only the best. So I am saying that this is a serious problem, and I would like to give more examples so that readers will know what to look out for when studying theological works.

However, since in my own writings I have already addressed all the problems that are present in Hodge, I will offer only very brief comments for each example, and sometimes I will just state my position and move on, lest this series of articles become annoyingly long.

You can find my explanations and arguments to everything brought up in this series in my Systematic Theology, Ultimate Questions, Commentary on Ephesians, and the articles, "The Problem of Evil," "Arguing by Intuition," and "The Sincere Offer of the Gospel."

The permission of sin, in its relation both to the righteousness and goodness of God, is an insolvable mystery, and all attempts to solve it only darken counsel with words without knowledge. It is, however, the privilege of our faith to know, though not of our philosophy to comprehend, that it is assuredly a most wise, righteous, and merciful permission; and that it shall rebound to the glory of God and to the good of his chosen. (160)

Sin occurs not just by bare permission. Sin is not "an insolvable mystery," since Scripture does explain it. Hodge makes the issue "dark" enough already without help.

God possessing infinite foreknowledge and power, existed alone from eternity; and in time, self-prompted, began to create in an absolute vacuum. Whatever limiting causes or conditions afterwards exist were first intentionally brought into being by himself, with perfect foreknowledge of their nature, relations, and results. If God then foreseeing that if he created a certain free agent and placed him in certain relations he would freely act in a certain way, and yet with that knowledge proceeded to create that very free agent and put him in precisely those positions, God would, in so doing, obviously predetermine the certain futurition of the act foreseen…. (203)

Yet God's permissive decree does truly determine the certain futurition of the act; because God knowing certainly that the man in question would in the given circumstances so act, did place that very man in precisely those circumstances that he should so act. (210)

This is exactly how many Arminians and Open Theists explain God's sovereignty, that God exercises his "sovereignty" over men merely by placing them in certain situations in which God foreknows how they would think and act, rather than directly acting upon their minds to determine their thoughts and actions. What Hodge says here is not just inconsistent Calvinism — it is not Calvinism at all.

We have the fact distinctly revealed that God has decreed the free acts of men, and yet that the actors were none the less responsible, and consequently none the less free in their acts. — Acts 2:23; 3:18; 4:27, 28; Gen. 50:20, etc. (210)

He talks like this throughout the book, but whereas some of these passages explicitly state that the acts were predetermined by God, none of them say that those acts were free. In fact, it is rather obvious that these passages explicitly prove the very opposite of what Hodge claims, that all those acts were predetermined by God in a way that the men were not free. The "freedom" thus revealed is purely in Hodge's question-begging imagination.

Moreover, Hodge never proves that responsibility presupposes freedom, an unbiblical premise that has tainted most Calvinistic writings, and one that I have repeatedly and conclusively refuted.

The admission of sin into the creation of an infinitely wise, powerful, and holy God is a great mystery, of which no explanation can be given. But that God can not be the author of sin is proved —

1st. From the nature of sin, which is, as to its essence, want of conformity to law, and disobedience to the Lawgiver.

2d. From the nature of God, who is as to essence holy, and in the administration of his kingdom always forbids and punishes sin.

3d. From the nature of man, who is a responsible free agent who originates his own acts. The Scriptures always attribute to divine grace the good actions, and to the evil heart the sinful actions of men. (211)

Just because Hodge cannot solve something does not mean that it is a "great mystery, of which no explanation can be given." It is not a mystery if the Scripture clearly explains it, and it does.

Then, none of the three points prove that God cannot be the author of sin.

Point #1 does not show that God cannot be the author of sin; rather, if God is the author of sin, Point #1 just shows us what he has authored.

Point #2 also fails. It does not even begin to tell us why God cannot be the author of sin; rather, if God is the author of sin, it tells us that his act of authoring sin is a holy act. To "author" sin is not the same thing as to sin.

Point #3 begs the question, because in the previous pages of the book, he has tried but fail to show that man is a "free agent who originates his own acts." Then, the second part of Point #3, although commonly assumed, is outright false. Yes, Scripture blames sinful actions on men, and says that God will judge them, but it does attribute them to the sovereign decree and active power of God.

**
In the best Calvinists, you will usually find at least one such major blunder every several pages; in the average Calvinists, you will sometimes find several such major blunders on every page; and the worst Calvinists are really Arminians. I am not exaggerating — this is a serious and pervasive problem.

If we are going to be Christians, then let's discard all non-Christian premises, and if we are going to be Calvinists, then let's renounce all Arminian assumptions. Hodge is so severely crippled in his reasoning because he is dragging all the weight of Arminianism and humanism with him while he tries to be a Calvinist. Most Calvinists have been doing the same thing.

There will be two more articles in this series in which I will provide additional examples from Hodge.

(to be continued)

Recommended:

Vincent Cheung, Systematic Theology
Vincent Cheung, Commentary on Ephesians
Vincent Cheung, Ultimate Questions
(See www.rmiweb.org/books.htm)

Vincent Cheung, The Problem of Evil
Vincent Cheung, Arguing by Intuition
(See www.rmiweb.org/other.htm)

Vincent Cheung, The "Sincere Offer" of the Gospel, Part 1
Vincent Cheung, The "Sincere Offer" of the Gospel, Part 2

Gordon Clark, Predestination
Gordon Clark, God and Evil
(See www.monergismbooks.com)

Posted in Theology | Permanent Link