Is Grace Resistible? Sure it is!

The following quotation was found in a recent post on a popular Arminian blog. It is by James Arminius, the founder of Arminianism, and purports to put the whole controversy between Calvinists and Arminians into perspective by getting down to the root issue:

The representations of grace that the scriptures contain, are such as describe it capable of “being resisted,” (Acts 7:51) and “received in vain” (2 Cor 6:1), and that it is possible for man to avoid yielding his assent to it and refuse all cooperation with it (Heb 12:15, Matt 23:37, Luke 7:30).  While, on the contrary, this [Calvinist] Predestination affirms that grace is a certain irresistible force and operation.

************

In this manner, I ascribe to grace the commencement, the continuance and the consummation of all good.  To such an extent do I carry its influence that a man, though already regenerate, can neither conceive, will, or do any good at all, nor resist any evil temptation , without this preventing [i.e. preceding] and exciting, this following and co-operating grace.

From this statement it will clearly appear, that I by no means do injustice to grace, by attributing, as it is reported of me, too much to man’s free will.  For the whole controversy reduces itself to the solution of this question, “Is the grace of God a certain irresistible force?’  That is, the controversy does not relate to those actions or operations which may be ascribed to grace (for I acknowledge and inculcate as many of these actions or operations as any man ever did), but it relates solely to the mode of operation, whether it be irresistible or not.  With respect to which, I believe, according to the scriptures, that many persons resist the Holy Spirit and reject the grace that is offered. (From Arminius Speaks: Essential Writings on Predestination, Free Will and the Nature of God, ed. John Wagner, pp. 45, 69)

Resistance is Futile.

If I was an Arminian I would avoid presenting this quotation, for it only proves that Arminius did not understand the teachings of Calvinism on this subject. We do not teach, "Grace is Irresistible," and just leave the statement there as if it was an absolute fact in all cases. On the contrary, we teach that "Grace is Irresistible when it Works to Effect the Salvation of the Elect." We name this working of grace the Effectual Call because it consists in both the outward and inward call of the Gospel, which, working in combination, bring us out of our blind rebellion and into genuine faith. We call it "saving grace" simply because its effect is to save. Grace is extended and offered to the non-elect as well, but it does not result in salvation. Thus it is not called "saving grace" and it is not irresistible. The person effectively (and voluntarily) resists this grace that could have saved him, had he not resisted. Arminius thoroughly misreads the Calvinist's view.

Scripture is clear regarding the fact that grace is resisted by unbelievers:

Jonah 2:8 Those who pay regard to vain idols forsake their hope of steadfast love.
Isaiah 26:10 If favor is shown to the wicked, he does not learn righteousness; in the land of uprightness he deals corruptly and does not see the majesty of the LORD.

Calvinists actually affirm, with these and other statements of Scripture, that grace is resisted continually by the non-elect--and by the elect themselves prior to their conversion. This is mankind's default mode under Adam. The obvious question is: what could ever be so powerful as to turn a person from this self-destructive course? Well . . . nothing but the irresistible saving grace of a Sovereign God!

It has been said that the real divide between Calvinists and Arminians lies in this question: Whose will is ultimately decisive in salvation: my will, or God's? Both wills are clearly involved; but which one is ultimately decisive? Those who say "God's will" are monergists of one sort or another; those Christians who say "my will" are synergists of some kind (and badly mistaken, I might add). Calvinists are among those who joyously declare, "God's will was ultimately decisive! He chose to save me when, otherwise, I would only have resisted Him forever." And they thank Him for turning their stubborn hearts, granting repentance, bestowing faith in Christ, and bringing them from death to life.

They know it was not their will, but His mercy, that accomplished their salvation. They know because they remember how utterly lost they were when they themselves resisted that mercy.

Here is a song by Sovereign Grace Music that sums it all up very well:



10/13/13 Addendum 
An Arminian commenter has insisted that Arminius actually did understand the Calvinistic teaching on Irresistible Grace, and has asked that I amend my post to reflect this. So noted. I may have misread Arminius (which seems easy to do, since his writings are not as clear as, say, Calvin's, or even Wesley's). In any case, I believe Arminius is now in heaven with the Lord, so he certainly understands the whole truth today, including Irresistible Grace, and likely thanks God for it on a regular basis. Perhaps he is even singing the song in the video above right at this moment!

A Biblical Ordo Salutis for Biblical Calvinists

Calvinists are well known for their desire to order things. They are characterized by a love of explaining the sequence in which events occur. There is nothing wrong with this. Indeed, much is right with it, and perhaps this is part of the reason so many of us love history (besides the fact that history serves as one of the great confirmations for our Scripture-saturated doctrine--where better to provide examples of Total Depravity, for example?). Some Reformed theologians have even attempted to reach back into the pre-historic depths of eternity to logically "order" the divine decrees hidden in the heart and mind of a timeless and incomprehensible God. That doesn't seem wise or even possible.

The folly of attempting to chronologically arrange events that took place in eternity should be obvious (notice that even this way of attempting to say it is paradoxical--can we accurately say that "events" take place in eternity without thereby viewing eternity as just another form of time as we know it?). Nevertheless, the general ordering of events related to the conversion of souls (that is, an ordo salutis or "order of salvation")  is both wise and useful. 

Why is an ordo salutis wise and a sequence of decrees impossible? Simply because conversion occurs in the lives of human beings and in time, while the divine decrees are relegated to pre-creation and hidden in the secret and eternal counsels of God.

With all of that said, the following is an attempt to articulate a Biblical ordo salutis. May the contemplation of these truths lead to greater joy, delight and exaltation of our great and gracious and glorious God in the hearts of His saints! This is no mere theological exercise, but a call to worship God alone.

A BIBLICAL ORDO SALUTIS

1. Election (before Creation)

Election is God's PLAN from before time to accomplish Justification, Redemption, Reconciliation, Adoption, Sonship, Sanctification, Forgiveness and Mercy in Christ for the benefit of His chosen ones. God hasn't revealed much about what He did before the world began, but He has made it abundantly clear that He elected His chosen ones to salvation at that "time."

2. Atonement (AD 33)

The Gospel is God's ACCOMPLISHMENT and OFFER of Justification, Reconciliation, Redemption, Adoption, Sonship, Sanctification, Forgiveness and Mercy in Christ. At this point the plan has been accomplished in Christ, and an infinite provision has been made, but it is not yet fulfilled in or applied to the unconverted elect. The atoning work of Christ is sufficient ground for all of the benefits of the Gospel to be sincerely offered to all people, and it is the basis of the believer's salvation.

3. Regeneration & Conversion (when the Gospel is heard and received by faith)

Regeneration is God's ACT of uniting the elect to Christ through the gift of Repentance and Faith, bringing forensic Justification, applied Redemption, positional Reconciliation, legal Adoption & Sonship, definitive Sanctification, confirmed Forgiveness and saving Mercy to the elect. At this point all the benefits of Christ's sacrifice are received by the believer objectively, by faith, but they are not yet subjectively experienced in their fullness.

4. Discipleship (earthly life following conversion)

The Christian life is the believer's ongoing EXPERIENCE of received Justification, celebrated Redemption, enjoyed Reconciliation, recognized Adoption & Sonship, progressive Sanctification, accepted Forgiveness and received Mercy in Christ. At this point the believer actively and outwardly responds to God's Word and work within, living as God's instrument of righteousness and grace in this world.

 

5. Glorification (upon seeing the Lord face to face, i.e. at death or the Lord's return)

Glorification is the CONSUMMATION and completion of the believer's experience of Justification, Redemption, Reconciliation, Adoption, Sonship, Sanctification, Forgiveness and Mercy in Christ. At some point in future, all of the pieces will come together in the believer's experience of a glorified resurrection body. Thus we shall delight in and serve the Lord with all of our heart, mind, soul and body forever.

SUMMARY

Several important theological values drive this ordo salutis:

• From start to finish, salvation is God's sole work
• Beginning with conversion, each step involves the believer in a deeper experience of God's work
• Beginning with discipleship, each step involves the believer in a greater participation in God's work
• Christ's finished work is the sole basis of conversion, discipleship and glorification
• The Holy Spirit monergistically grants faith to the elect at the point of conversion
• Faith brings the believer into union with Christ
• All of the benefits of salvation are received in Christ Himself, by faith alone, and through the Spirit
• In the objective sense, the various aspects of salvation (justification, reconciliation, definitive sanctification, etc.) are all received concurrently
• Forensic aspects of conversion (e.g. legal Justification) and experiential aspects of discipleship (e.g. progressive Sanctification) are necessarily distinct from one another (this is usually expressed as a strict separation between "justification" and "sanctification")
• In salvation, the forensic is the ground of the experiential, the unconditional is the guarantee of the conditional, divine action is the source of human activity, the instantaneous leads to the progressive, and the objective is the basis of the subjective

DOES REGENERATION PRECEDE CONVERSION?

Some Calvinists insist that regeneration precedes conversion. It should be noted that this does not necessarily imply chronological precedence, but a precedence in the logical ordering of events. They ask: "Logically, how can a radically depraved sinner believe the Gospel without first being regenerated by the Holy Spirit?" However, there is no Biblical or logical need to assume that regeneration takes place either before or after conversion. Why shouldn't regeneration take place at the precise moment of conversion (chronologically) and in conjunction with conversion (logically)? Faith does not arise from man's "free will" (rather, it frees his bound will!); it is graciously given by the Holy Spirit at the time of conversion. Faith need not precede union with Christ, and union with Christ need not precede faith, but conversion and regeneration happen simultaneously as the Holy Spirit gives both Christ and faith (or faith IN Christ) to a sinner via Effectual Calling. Right along with faith comes the believer's union with Christ, and vice versa. Our faith is quite literally "in Him." In this union with Christ the believer objectively possesses all of the benefits of salvation. As the believer abides in Christ, he subjectively and progressively experiences those benefits. This is discipleship. At the moment of glorification, the believer's subjective and progressive experience of salvation becomes immutable, eternal and complete. In the resurrection body, glorification is comprehensive.

REFLECTION

Think of that wondrous, manifold gift which God planned to give you from eternity past, provided for you in the sacrifice of His Son, imparted to you by irresistible grace, continues to work in you by sanctifying grace, and promises to complete through your ultimate glorification in Christ! We are a blessed people indeed! We have been brought from death to life!

If you have a theological mind and Reformed convictions, please evaluate this ordo salutis and feel free to offer any thoughtful critique. If there are important points I have missed here, feel free to address them.

More importantly, preach the Gospel to yourself and others today. Live the Gospel by the grace He gives. And thank Him for it.
_____________________________________________________________________________
Grateful acknowledgement is made to David Ponter for numerous suggestions which contributed to the improvement of this essay.

Common Grace and Saving Grace: Flood Light and Spotlight

Here's an important fact to remember about Common Grace and Saving Grace: one never negates the other, as if one were darkness and the other light. Both are lights. They can strengthen one another, but they can never darken or diminish one another.

Some in the Reformed tradition, having accepted the glorious doctrine of unconditional election, begin to view everything through "election glasses" which tend to limit every aspect of God's nature and action.
  

Election Glasses may be stylish and comfortable,
but they can be theologically reductionistic.

It is dangerous to start building our theology with the divine act of election and then read that back into every other divine attribute and action. Some would reason this way: "God only elects some so He must only love some" ... however, God in His Word veritably shouts the exact opposite! Why not say, "God only elects some, so He only has the power to save some?" No Christian would ever say that, yet God has never defined Himself in Scripture as "power," while He has defined Himself emphatically as "love."

A spotlight is directed toward a limited and particular area

The fact that God loves the elect in a special way does not negate His general love for all, any more than an effectual call can negate the reality of a general one. Both work together.

  

Election is a type of love, but it is not the only kind. Election magnifies God's love; it does not shrink His love. Election extends His love to include the salvation of certain worthless wretches ("election according to grace"); it does not rescind His love from the rest. Election makes His willingness to save (all) effectual (in the case of some), but it does not remove His love or His willingness to save from the rest. Election simply takes a general willingness to save and makes it a FIRM WILL to save. In other words, the spotlight of Saving Grace does not unplug the flood light of Common Grace. Both work together in perfect harmony without conflict or negation. Both shed positive light, but in different ways and to different ends. They may be two different kinds of lights, but both are lights indeed.
  

A flood light provides a general ambiance of light

Is There a Viable Non-Calvinist Interpretation for this?

Try as I might, I can't see any way to explain the following passage apart from Unconditional Election and the Effectual Call. No Arminian or Open Theist interpretation seems possible, let alone plausible. Maybe I've just been a Calvinist for too long, and have forgotten how to think the other way.

I Corinthians 1:26-31 For consider your calling, brothers: not many of you were wise according to worldly standards, not many were powerful, not many were of noble birth. But God chose what is foolish in the world to shame the wise; God chose what is weak in the world to shame the strong; God chose what is low and despised in the world, even things that are not, to bring to nothing things that are, so that no human being might boast in the presence of God. And because of him you are in Christ Jesus, who became to us wisdom from God, righteousness and sanctification and redemption, so that, as it is written, “Let the one who boasts, boast in the Lord.”

What does Paul mean by "calling", if not the divinely orchestrated Effectual Call? How does one explain, "God chose A [to have a particular effect upon] B", apart from Unconditional Election? What does Paul mean by, "because of Him you are in Christ Jesus", if not the monergistic action of God in saving His elect? And what prevents me from boasting, if salvation ultimately depends more on my own "free choice" than on God's?

John Wesley himself seems to have temporarily become a Calvinist in his notes on the passage:

I Cor. 1:26 Behold your calling - What manner of men they are whom God calls. That not many wise men after the flesh - In the account of the world. Not many mighty - Men of power and authority.

Wesley can't possibly mean the general call of the Gospel is kept from those who are wise and mighty after the flesh, can he? Does he believe in a special call? Based on these notes, he seems to.

I Cor. 1:27 [No entry exists in John Wesley's Notes for this verse]

Shocking!

I Cor. 1:28 Things that are not - The Jews frequently called the gentiles, "Them that are not," 2 Esdras vi. 56, 57. In so supreme contempt did they hold them. The things that are - In high esteem.

That's an interesting detail. Wesley is worth reading.

I Cor. 1:29 That no flesh - A fit appellation. Flesh is fair, but withering as grass. May glory before God - In God we ought to glory. 

Another good thought. I have nothing against Wesley, just his errors.

I Cor. 1:30 Of him - Out of his free grace and mercy. Are ye Engrafted into Christ Jesus, who is made unto us that believe wisdom, who were before utterly foolish and ignorant. Righteousness - The sole ground of our justification, who were before under the wrath and curse of God. Sanctification - A principle of universal holiness, whereas before we were altogether dead in sin. And redemption - That is, complete deliverance from all evil, and eternal bliss both of soul and body. 

Is God "free" to bestow His grace and engraft us into Christ when, where, and how He Himself wills? Does Wesley affirm man's total moral inability when he says we were "altogether dead in sin"?

I Cor. 1:31 Let him glory in the Lord - Not in himself, not in the flesh, not in the world. Jeremiah 9:23-24

Is there an Arminian, Open Theist, or other advocate of "free will" out there who can provide a more satisfying explanation for his passage? One that is faithful to Sola Scripture and the doctrine of Biblical inerrancy?

Business Theory or Theology?

I've been studying about Project Management applications in business and found an uncanny parallel between the traditional five steps in the life cycle of a project and the 5 points of Calvinism.


Project Management Steps:

1.  Initiate
2.  Plan
3. Execute
4. Control
5. Closure

The "5 Points" as God's "Project":

1. God initiates everything (including salvation, because we are totally depraved sinners)
2. Unconditional Election is God's plan to save
3. Particular Redemption is the execution of the plan
4. In the Effectual Call, He guides the outcome of the plan
5. The saints Persevere because God Preserves them, bringing the plan to perfect completion

See the parallels? God IS the greatest of all Project Managers.

Ephesians 1:11-12 In him we have obtained an inheritance, having been predestined according to the purpose of him who works all things according to the counsel of his will, so that we who were the first to hope in Christ might be to the praise of his glory.
Ephesians 2:10 For we are his workmanship, created in Christ Jesus for good works, which God prepared beforehand, that we should walk in them.
Romans 8:28-30 And we know that for those who love God all things work together for good, for those who are called according to his purpose. For those whom he foreknew he also predestined to be conformed to the image of his Son, in order that he might be the firstborn among many brothers. And those whom he predestined he also called, and those whom he called he also justified, and those whom he justified he also glorified.

UPDATE: Ralph Petersen's insightful comments on this post can be read HERE. 

Your Doctrine of the Atonement is Too Small - Part 1

I have observed, among many Calvinists, a great zeal to defend the doctrine of Limited Atonement. Since this doctrine sits at the center of the TULIP, and the TULIP seems to function (for some) as the sole essence of Calvinism, and since the TULIP's validity is said to stand or fall on the veracity of each and every point, it's not surprising that Limited Atonement is defended with such ardor. Perhaps I should have said "Your Calvinism is too small." But that's another article. 


To lay my cards on the table, I do self-identify as a 5-point Calvinist, assuming the points are rightly defined (historically and Biblically), and the 3 points of common grace are equally affirmed. I'm not against limiting the intent or effect of the atonement within Biblical boundaries. I just don't want the doctrine of the atonement to become a dart gun when God intended it to be a howitzer. The problem with over emphasizing the limited aspects is that we have a tendency to shrink the doctrine down to manageable proportions. It's not meant to be manageable, but to induce real amazement, gratitude, and wonder in our hearts. We should marvel not only that God savingly loves the elect, but also that He loves the world. To keep things Biblically balanced, I propose the following expansions to the way we explain the doctrine of limited atonement:

1. We must widen our view of the atonement's PURPOSE to include a universal revelatory purpose as well as a limited redemptive purpose (that's the focus of this article). 

2. We must affirm the atonement's POTENCY as the power and potential to cover all sins and to save all sinners (which will be the focus of part 2).

Without these expanded articulations, we are apt to try to limit the atonement in ways Scripture does not, and we are liable to commit some exegetical atrocities and philosophical fallacies in the process. I have seen otherwise brilliant and respectable exegetes twist a passage of Scripture into an origami figure trying to defend a narrow version of limited atonement which isn't Biblically warranted.

Don't get me wrong. I stand in lock step with other orthodox Calvinists in affirming Particular Redemption against the confused mistake called "Universalism." And I oppose any view of the atonement that portrays God as sacrificing His only Son in some kind of desperate attempt to get our attention, with the vague hope that we just might turn to Him someday if He pleads enough and somehow gets our consent to be saved. I very firmly renounce every whiff of the ideas that the atonement is less than substitutionary, less than vicarious, or less than successful in achieving its ends. "He will save His people from their sins." (Mt. 1:21) And the cross is how He will do it. "For Christ also suffered once for sins, the righteous for the unrighteous, that he might bring us to God." (I Peter 3:18)

Without any doubt, the atonement is limited in certain respects - but it is more than just that. Yes, it is God's means of saving the elect, but that is not its only purpose.

The Redemptive and Revelatory Purposes

of the Atonement

The atonement made by Christ is intended as revelation to all the world, yet also as redemption to the elect.

Christ's atoning work is rich and potent, multi-faceted and deep - and part of its power lies in the fact that it is not simply efficacious, but revelatory. It is an emphatically PUBLIC display of God's generosity and grace, His redeeming power, His propitiated wrath, His just character, His call for sinners to believe, His forbearance and His ability to justify the ungodly (Romans 3:24-26). It's all right here in the text:

•  ... for all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God, 
• being justified as a gift by His grace 
• through the redemption which is in Christ Jesus;
• whom God displayed publicly 
• as a propitiation in His blood 
• through faith. 
• This was to demonstrate His righteousness, 
• because in the forbearance of God He passed over the sins previously committed; 
• for the demonstration, I say,of His righteousness at the present time, 
• so that He would be just 
• and the justifier 
• of the one who has faith in Jesus.

(See also: Psalm 22:31, Galatians 3:1, Colossians 2:15)

For whom is this public display intended? For the same "all" who sinned and fell short of His glory in verse 23! Have only the elect sinned? Have only the elect fallen short of God's glory? Certainly not. Let us never become so dogmatic in emphasizing the limited effects of the atonement that we forget - or fail to communicate - the wider Biblical scope of its purposes. The cross communicates God's message to all mankind - and especially the elect.

. . . and also of judgment

Consider the revelatory purpose of the atonement. How does it speak to us about the people who will be saved? Does it speak of them definitively - as the elect - or conditionally, as those who believe?

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. (Romans 1:16) 

But what does it say? "The word is near you, in your mouth and in your heart" (that is, the word of faith that we proclaim); because, if you confess with your mouth that Jesus is Lord and believe in your heart that God raised him from the dead, you will be saved. (Romans 10:8-9) 

Now I would remind you, brothers, of the gospel I preached to you, which you received, in which you stand, and by which you are being saved, if you hold fast to the word I preached to you—unless you believed in vain. For I delivered to you as of first importance what I also received: that Christ died for our sins in accordance with the Scriptures, that he was buried, that he was raised on the third day in accordance with the Scriptures . . . ( I Corinthians 15:1-4)

The Gospel addresses sinners with a conditional promise of salvation, even as it definitively demonstrates God's ability to save and reveals His desire to save. By the word of the cross God says to sinners, "I have done everything that is needed for your offenses to be covered. I have given my one and only Son for you. Come to me in faith and you will be saved. Reject me and you will perish." The elect perceive this message and by irresistible grace begin to count Christ's blood as precious. By faith they discover the redeeming, reconciling, propitiating, covenant-making, sin-demolishing power of His blood! The reprobate perceive the very same message and respond by trampling Christ's blood underfoot, spurning the offer of mercy, ignoring the warnings and going on in God-hating unbelief. There is no fear of God before their eyes.

God did not sacrifice His Son in secret, behind a thick curtain or hidden away in the heavens, but out in the open on a Roman cross for all the world to see. This does not save every sinner, but it does tell every sinner he can be saved, and that God loves him and desires to save Him. It promises every sinner he will be saved if he believes, and it warns every sinner that he will remain condemned and perish if he continues in unbelief. We live in the realm of time and the world of the potential, so God speaks to us in potential and conditional terms while reassuring His converted elect that He has a definite plan and sovereign control.

The revelatory purpose of the atonement corresponds to the universal call of the Gospel. Just as the effectual call of the Gospel exists alongside the universal call, the particular redemptive purpose of the atonement stands alongside its universal revelatory purpose.

• God loves all but releases some to eternal judgment
• God desires all but elects some
• God calls all to salvation but effectually calls some
• Christ atones for all but redeems some

In Part 2, we will examine in greater detail the wrath-averting potency of the atonement. We will find that just as the message of the cross is directed to all the world but effectual only for the elect, the power of the cross is sufficient for all the world but efficient only for the elect.

Calvin on Isaiah 53:1

Calvin's comments on Isaiah 53:1 are instructive in several ways. In them we find hints of Calvin's belief in the free offer of the Gospel and the supra-logical, mysterious nature of the message of Christ (which, according to Calvin, "exceeds all human capacities"). These play alongside unsurprising affirmations of divine election and the necessity of an effectual call. Here's Calvin on Isaiah 53:1 . . .

Here the Prophet pauses, as it were, in the middle of his discourse; for, having formerly said that the name of Christ would be everywhere proclaimed, and would be revealed to unknown nations, and yet would have so mean an aspect that it might appear as if these things were fabulous, he breaks off his discourse, and exclaims that "Nobody will believe those things." At the same time, he describes his grief, that men are so unbelieving as to reject their salvation.

Thus, it is a holy complaint made by one who wished that Christ should be known by all, and who, notwithstanding of this, sees that there are few who believe the Gospel, and therefore groans and cries out, "Who hath believed our report?" Let us therefore groan and complain along with the Prophet, and let us be distressed with grief when we see that our labor is unprofitable, and let us complain before God; for godly ministers must be deeply affected, if they wish to perform their work faithfully. Isaiah declares that there will be few that submit to the Gospel of Christ; for, when he exclaims, "Who will believe the preaching?" he means that of those who hear the Gospel scarcely a hundredth person will be a believer.

Nor does he merely speak of himself alone, but like one who represents all teachers. Although therefore God gives many ministers, few will hold by their doctrine; and what then will happen when there are no ministers? Do we wonder that the greatest blindness reigns there? If cultivated ground is unfruitful, what shall we look for from a soil that is uncultivated and barren? And yet it does not detract anything from the Gospel of Christ, that there are few disciples who receive it; nor does the small number of believers lessen its authority or obscure its infinite glory; but, on the contrary, the loftiness of the mystery is a reason why it scarcely obtains credit in the world. It is reckoned to be folly, because it exceeds all human capacities.

To whom (literally, on whom) is the arm of Jehovah revealed? In this second clause he points out the reason why the number of believers will be so small. It is, because no man can come to God but by an extraordinary revelation of the Spirit. To suppose that by the word "Arm" Christ is meant, is, in my opinion, a mistake. It assigns the cause why there are so few that believe; and that is, that they cannot attain it by the sagacity of their own understanding. This is a remarkable passage, and is quoted by John and Paul for that purpose. . . . Both of them declare that there will be no reason to wonder, if that which was long ago foretold shall happen; and they do so for the purpose of removing offense which might have arisen from the revolt of that nation, which ought to have acknowledged Christ, but obstinately resisted him.

Isaiah does not include merely the men of his own time, but all posterity to the end of the world; for, so long as the reign of Christ shall endure, this must be fulfilled; and therefore believers ought to be fortified by this passage against such a scandal. These words refute the ignorance of those who think that faith is in the power of every person, because preaching is common to all. Though it is sufficiently evident that all are called to salvation, yet the Prophet expressly states that the external voice is of no avail, if it be not accompanied by a special gift of the Spirit. And whence proceeds the difference, but from the secret election of God, the cause of which is hidden in himself?

Augustine on Free Will and Irresistible Grace

"Who am I, and what am I? What evil has not been in my deeds, or if not in my deeds, my words, or if not in my words, my will? But You, Lord, are good and merciful, and Your right hand has respected the depth of my death and, from the bottom of my heart, has emptied that abyss of corruption. And Your whole gift to me was not to will what I willed, and to will what You willed. But where was my free will through all those years, and out of what low and deep recess was my free will called forth in a moment so I could submit my neck to Your easy yoke, and my shoulders to Your light burden, Christ Jesus, my Helper and my Redeemer? How sweet it suddenly became to me, to lack the "sweetness" of those follies, and what I was afraid to be separated from was now a joy to part with! You cast them forth from me, You who are the true and highest sweetness. You cast them forth and entered in their place Yourself, You who are sweeter than all pleasure, though not to flesh and blood, brighter than all light, but more hidden than all depths, higher than all honor, but not to the lofty in their own conceits. Now my soul was free from the biting cares of seeking and getting, weltering in filth, and scratching off the itch of lust. And my infant tongue spoke freely to You, my brightness and my riches and my health, Lord my God."

The Confessions of Saint Augustine, published by Whitaker House, 1996, pp. 213-214 (emphasis mine)

Here Augustine describes his conversion in terms that reveal his firm belief in total depravity. He views his own sinfulness as an evil nature resulting in a bondage of the will. He recognizes that his faith was initiated by God's effectual calling rather than his own free will, which was trapped in a "low and deep recess" prior to the divine call. He posits a paradoxical "free will" which is limited by the boundaries of the sinful nature and in need of awakening by God's grace. And because of these things, Augustine gives all the glory to God.