"But you are a chosen generation, a royal priesthood, a holy nation, His own special people,
that you may proclaim the praises of Him who called you out of darkness into His marvelous light."
(I Peter 2: 9 nkjv)
Is God unjust in choosing some to save and not others? Choosing a person to salvation is not the problem with many, but his not choosing other persons gives many difficulty. Favoring one (the word 'grace' denotes favor) is also not much objected to, although "favoritism" is looked upon as bad. God's choice not to favor or not to give grace is what is often resisted. Most want rather to believe that God equally favors all, thinking that such a belief makes God more fair and just, more loving and good, if he chooses everyone. But, a choice implies a refusal or rejection of others. So, a choice of Trump to be president was a rejection of Harris. So we read where the psalmist says: "Moreover he refused the tabernacle of Joseph, and chose not the tribe of Ephraim: But chose the tribe of Judah, the mount Zion which he loved." (Psa. 78: 67-68 kjv) God chose Isaac but chose not, or refused, Ishmael. God chose and loved Jacob, but chose and loved not Esau. To choose is to accept and to choose not means to refuse or to reject. This is the chief idea in God "hating" Esau. Some say that by "hate" is meant "love less" and there is some support for this in scripture. Notice these words about how Jacob felt about his wife Rachel over his wife Leah:
"And he went in also unto Rachel, and he loved also Rachel more than Leah, and served with him yet seven other years. And when the LORD saw that Leah was hated, he opened her womb: but Rachel was barren." (Gen. 29: 30-31 kjv)
Here Jacob loved Rachel more than Leah, or we might say, Leah was loved less than Rachel. And, the text says that being loved less was all the same as being hated. But, even if we grant that God hating Esau meant that God loved him less, how then does that scenario make God to appear fair? Is it fair for God to love one more than another for no seeming reason? Further, there are scriptures that indicate that God has a general love for all his creatures viewed merely as creatures, just like he is good to all, both godly and ungodly. But, the scriptures also speak of a special love that God has for his elect, for his people, that is much greater than his common love for all. By God hating Esau or all those not chosen is not meant as an emotion in God, but a choice to reject. We may read the text therefore in this way - "Jacob have I accepted and Esau have I rejected." Involved in this rejection (or non election) is the loss of favor or grace and a denial of good things as a result. If salvation is a choice to salvation (and it is), then to not be chosen is a denial of salvation. We see that in many texts. Notice these words in Romans:
"Even so then, at this present time there is a remnant according to the election of grace. And if by grace, then it is no longer of works; otherwise grace is no longer grace. But if it is of works, it is no longer grace; otherwise work is no longer work. What then? Israel has not obtained what it seeks; but the elect have obtained it, and the rest were blinded." (Rom. 11: 5-7 nkjv)
In Romans chapter nine Paul speaks of "the purpose of God according to election," and here in chapter eleven he speaks of "a remnant according to the election of grace." We also in this text once again see how God's choice was unconditional, being of grace and not of works, a thing Paul emphasized in the ninth chapter. And in light of this fact, Paul rhetorically asks "what then?" In other words, what can we deduce from the fact that God's election is of grace, or is totally unmerited, i.e. "not of him who wills or runs"? We can deduce that it is God's election of a man that makes all the difference in the world.
When Paul says "Israel has not obtained what it seeks" he is stating the same thing he has stated in other places in his writings. Even a few verses later in this chapter he writes:
"What shall we say then? That Gentiles, who did not pursue righteousness, have attained to righteousness, even the righteousness of faith; but Israel, pursuing the law of righteousness, has not attained to the law of righteousness. Why? Because they did not seek it by faith, but as it were, by the works of the law. For they stumbled at that stumbling stone." (9: 30-32 nkjv)
Here is another thing that Israel did not obtain by their own works in law keeping, i.e. "attaining to righteousness," or righteous standing with God. Further, "they sought it not by faith." So, we have two reasons why Paul's lost Jewish brothers were not saved, first because they were not chosen by God and second because they sought salvation by their own works. They did not see salvation as an unmerited gift of divine grace and mercy but as a reward. They did not look for salvation through the Messiah.
Election by God is what brings God to enlighten those he has chosen. To not be elected ends in not attaining to righteousness (and justification), but also in staying blind, so Paul says "the rest were blinded." God's election is what causes Israel to obtain what Israel seeks after, which also includes the divine blessing and promises of eternal life, immortality, and a glorious inheritance ("seek for glory, honor, and immortality" Rom. 2:7).
Many Christians believe in election, but not in unconditional election. Some simply say that God elected those who he foresaw would believe and argued that this is what Peter meant when he wrote: "Elect according to the foreknowledge of God the Father, through sanctification of the Spirit, unto obedience and sprinkling of the blood of Jesus Christ: Grace unto you, and peace, be multiplied." (I Peter 1: 2 kjv) Others will say that God's choice of sinners to save is illustrated in God's choosing of Gideon's special military forces. That incident is recorded in these words:
"2 And the Lord said to Gideon, "The people who are with you are too many for Me to give the Midianites into their hands, lest Israel claim glory for itself against Me, saying, 'My own hand has saved me.' 3 Now therefore, proclaim in the hearing of the people, saying, 'Whoever is fearful and afraid, let him turn and depart at once from Mount Gilead.' " And twenty-two thousand of the people returned, and ten thousand remained. 4 But the Lord said to Gideon, "The people are still too many; bring them down to the water, and I will test them for you there. Then it will be, that of whom I say to you, 'This one shall go with you,' the same shall go with you; and of whomever I say to you, 'This one shall not go with you,' the same shall not go." 5 So he brought the people down to the water. And the Lord said to Gideon, "Everyone who laps from the water with his tongue, as a dog laps, you shall set apart by himself; likewise everyone who gets down on his knees to drink." 6 And the number of those who lapped, putting their hand to their mouth, was three hundred men; but all the rest of the people got down on their knees to drink water. 7 Then the Lord said to Gideon, "By the three hundred men who lapped I will save you, and deliver the Midianites into your hand. Let all the other people go, every man to his place." (Judges 7: 2-7 nkjv)
The three hundred who were finally chosen to be the small group whom God would use to conquer the Midianites were chosen because they cupped water into the hand and brought the water up to their mouths and rejected those who knelt down and lapped like a dog. The former showed that they were skilled in military things and superior to the others in keeping their eyes circumspect for a possible attack by the enemy. In response to this we have a several responses.
First, as we have seen, God did not choose any for salvation who were better than others. Over and over again the biblical writers affirm that God's choice "was not of him who wills or runs but of God who shows mercy." Second, even if we grant that God's choice of sinners was based upon foreseeing their good works or faith and repentance, it is still God who produced those good works and gave people that faith. (Isa. 26: 12) Third, as we have seen, Paul says that God chose the base things, the poor, and the inferior, rather than the superior (I Cor. 1). Fourth, in this election based upon superiority there would be occasion for boasting, whereas in God's election and salvation there is no room for boasting.
Consider also that in Peter's words election is "through" sanctification of the Spirit and "unto" obedience. If election is unto obedience, it cannot be a result of it.
Consider also that God's foreknowledge follows God's "determinate counsel" (Acts 2: 23), so that he foresees what he has predestined or ordained to be. So also James says "known unto God are all his works from the beginning" (Acts 15: 18). Also, since God is said to have "wrought all our works in us" (Isa. 26: 12), then obviously he predetermined to do those works in eternity and foresaw his own works.
Consider also these words of Christ:
"You did not choose Me, but I chose you and appointed you that you should go and bear fruit, and that your fruit should remain, that whatever you ask the Father in My name He may give you." (John 15: 16 nkjv)
In this text you have reference to both election and predestination (the latter denoted by the word "appointed") and it clearly says that the Lord's choice of the apostles was not based upon their choice of him. So, if we ask the question - "who chose who first" we must say that Christ chose the apostles first and that their choice of Christ followed. The Arminians will often reply that this was a choice to apostleship and not to salvation. However, the context makes it clear that Jesus is not referring to the apostles only. He also says this to all his disciples in that chapter: "If you were of the world, the world would love its own. Yet because you are not of the world, but I chose you out of the world, therefore the world hates you." (vs. 19) That cannot be limited to the apostles. Of all believers it may be said that they were chosen and appointed to salvation and to bear fruit that will last forever.
Purpose of God in his Longsuffering
In the text of Romans chapter nine Paul says that God "endures with much longsuffering" those who are described as "vessels of wrath." What is God's purpose in this longsuffering? Is it an act of mercy or common grace? Or is it his purpose to increase the wrath of God upon them and to further their destruction? I think both. We know that one of the purposes of God in his forbearance and longsuffering towards those not chosen is salvation for Peter writes:
"The Lord is not slack concerning His promise, as some count slackness, but is longsuffering toward us, not willing that any should perish but that all should come to repentance." (II Peter 3: 9 nkjv)
This appears to be a contradiction. God has not chosen sinner A to be saved and yet he is longsuffering to A in order that A might be saved. We might also cite the word of God to Ezekiel which says - "Say to them: ‘As I live,’ says the Lord GOD, ‘I have no pleasure in the death of the wicked, but that the wicked turn from his way and live. Turn, turn from your evil ways! For why should you die, O house of Israel?’" (Eze. 33: 11 nkjv) Or, we might cite these words of the apostle Paul: "who desires all men to be saved and to come to the knowledge of the truth." (I Tim. 2: 4 nkjv)
The solution to this conundrum is to say that God does in some sense, or on some level, desire the salvation of all but in another sense or on another level does not. Even the deniers of unconditional election must also acknowledge this truth if they agree with scripture which says that hearing and believing the word of God is a necessary means or condition for being saved. Let us consider all those millions of people who lived and died without ever knowing anything about Jehovah, Jesus Christ, or what is taught in the bible. If God wanted them to be saved, why did he not have the gospel preached to them? It seems that he did not really desire their salvation. We can certainly say that none of them were saved for they must hear the word of God to be saved, as we have seen.
God desiring the salvation of all sinners does not negate him choosing to insure that some will be saved, making certain that they, the elect, will be provided all the means of salvation.
Further, God is not unlike us in that we have levels or degrees to our desiring, willing, wanting, etc. Some things we want more than other things. That is why it is entirely appropriate for us to say "I especially want..." So we may say that God wants all to be saved but he especially wants the elect to be saved. This is why many theologians speak of "common grace" (and love) and "special grace." It is also why the word "especially" or "particularly" is used in the bible in regards to God's willing and desiring.
"For to this end we both labor and suffer reproach, because we trust in the living God, who is the Savior of all men, especially of those who believe." (I Tim. 4: 10 nkjv)
The Greek word "malista" translated "especially" ('specially' kjv) is elsewhere in the NT translated as "most of all," or "chiefly." Notice these two texts with the same word:
"As we have therefore opportunity, let us do good unto all men, especially unto them who are of the household of faith." (Gal. 6: 10 nkjv)
"But if anyone does not provide for his own, and especially for those of his household, he has denied the faith and is worse than an unbeliever." (I Tim. 5: 8 nkjv)
The text above in Timothy does not say that God "equally desires" all men to be saved. The fact is God desires the salvation of some more than others. We might say that those who God providentially provided the means of salvation manifests that God desires their salvation more than those who were not provided with that revelation. Some people are born in a time and place where there is abundance of means and opportunities for coming to a knowledge of the truth and becoming a believer. Others are born in a context where there is little or no such means and opportunities.
So, when the text says that God "endured with much longsuffering the vessels of wrath" (also called "vessels unto dishonor") it may well be for their salvation. It could also mean that God is merely "putting up with" (which is another way to define longsuffering) the wicked not elected in order to increase their condemnation. I think it is true in both senses in certain cases. Recall that Peter connected longsuffering with salvation when he said "God is not willing that any should perish but that all should come to repentance" but also said "and consider that the longsuffering of our Lord is salvation" (II Peter 3: 15 nkjv). That text does not say that everyone to whom God is longsuffering will be saved, but that the longsuffering of God is intended to lead to salvation. In some cases God's longsuffering is a means of bringing salvation, in other cases it is a means of increasing condemnation.
Paul says that the longsuffering that God shows towards the vessels of wrath and for dishonor is "much longsuffering." God is tolerating or putting up with those who are the objects of his wrath and it is mostly to show them mercy and afford them opportunities to turn themselves around. Pharaoh hardened his heart and broke his promise ten times and God showed him much longsuffering during that drama between God and Moses and Pharaoh. Lord God put up with a lot of Pharaoh's shenanigans.
It will involve a couple more chapters before we can conclude our examination of the doctrine of election as it relates to the justice of God.
No comments:
Post a Comment