COMMON GRACE AND ELECTION Chapter 12 Dr. Danny Forshee

Transcription

1 1 COMMON GRACE AND ELECTION Chapter 12 Dr. Danny Forshee LESSON 12 COMMON GRACE AND ELECTION See Systematic Theology, p , and Christian Beliefs, p (second longest chapter in the book.) - This is going to be fun. I hope this lecture will help you. Probably the most divisive doctrine among Southern Baptists today is the doctrines of election, predestination, and reprobation. It is an honor to study these subjects. I will cover what Grudem teaches and will also share what I believe. I know for a fact that in our church and even in this room today, there are those who are more reformed or Calvinistic in their beliefs. Some are not. I ask that when you disagree that you do so with love, kindness, and humility. And whenever you address this subject of the sovereignty of God and the freedom of man, you have to admit that there is certainly an element of mystery. If any proponents to theological system, be it Calvinism or Arminian, totally remove mystery and claim to have the monopoly on the truth, then they are mistaken. - When I was in graduate school at SWBTS, our theology professor divided our class in two groups one was Calvinistic and the other Arminian. After a lengthy debate, Dr. Garrett, our professor, said these words, Holy tension. Class dismissed. - It is interesting to me that our two best theologians differ on this point. Dr. Mohler at SBTS is more Calvinistic and Dr. Patterson at SWBTS places more emphasis as I do on prognosis, foreknowledge. - In Christian Beliefs Grudem ends his chapter with common grace but in the Systematic Theology book, he begins with the topic of common grace. I will follow his sequence in the larger textbook. I. COMMON GRACE - A. DEFINITION OF COMMON GRACE - Common grace refers to the blessings that God gives to all mankind unrelated to salvation. When a person sins, he or she is not immediately judged and sent to hell, but allowed to live on this earth in some cases for decades and enjoy the innumerable blessings of God for mankind. - B. EXAMPLES OF COMMON GRACE - 1. Physical

2 - The very air we breathe is from God; the earth does not produce just thorns and thistles, but food and materials that supply our shelter and clothing. Read Matthew 5:44-45 about the Father making the sun rise on the just and the unjust and the rain to fall. 44 But I say to you, love your enemies, bless those who curse you, do good to those who hate you, and pray for those who spitefully use you and persecute you, 45 that you may be sons of your Father in heaven; for He makes His sun rise on the evil and on the good, and sends rain on the just and on the unjust. - An example of an unbeliever being blessed is Potiphar in Genesis 39:5 when the LORD blessed all he had in the house and field. Also, unbelievers also get to enjoy the amazing beauty of God s creation sunsets, oceans, mountains, flowers, etc Intellectual - Mankind is able to grasp truth and some are very intelligent, both saved and unsaved people. John 1:9 teaches that God gives light to every man in the world. He is able to know about God through general revelation so as Romans 1 states we are without excuse. God reveals Himself through nature, history, and conscience. Grudem, p.659, states that all science and technology carried out by non-christians is a result of common grace Moral - Common grace restrains mankind from being more evil. Paul speaks of the conscience of man in Romans 2:14-15 where he states that the law is written on their hearts and their conscience bears witness. Mankind has this innate sense of right and wrong and God gives this to all mankind. If we did not have that can you imagine the depths to which we would plummet? Even unsaved men can write laws that protect innocent lives and prohibit theft. God blesses those who are honest and work hard and faithful to their families and punishes those who commit sins against mankind and themselves. This points to a greater day of judgment that mankind can discern and this too is an example of common grace Creative - The ability man has to create, to play athletics, and exhibit such skills in the arts and music is a token of God s common grace. And whether people like Michael Jordan and LeBron James or Tiger Woods acknowledge it, and it appears they do not, it is still the result of God s great common grace to them Societal - The human family provides wonderful blessings to all both believers and unbelievers. Human government is another example of a societal institution that blesses all mankind or at least has the potential to do so unless corrupted. Governmental authorities are instituted by God; read Romans 13:1: Let every soul be subject to the governing authorities. For there is no authority except from God, and the authorities that exist are appointed by God. They are empowered to do well and provide protection. 2

3 3 Police, laws, the judicial system are all graces that benefit all mankind. More institutions that benefit society are schools, businesses, and charitable groups. How did these come about? Did man just evolve to a place where he could create these institutions? Why do not apes do the same? They cannot because mankind is created in God s image and enabled by God to form these societal institutions that bless and benefit all Religious - Unbelieving leaders are blessed as a result of Christian s prayers (1 Timothy 2:1-2), and Jesus healed all who were brought to Him (Luke 4:40) and we do not read of them having to believe on Him as the Messiah in order for them to be healed. God intervenes in the lives of unbelievers and blesses and protects them though they would attribute it to fate or chance or luck, and yet God blesses them in His common grace. - Grudem points out the relationship between common grace and 2 Peter 3:9. 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. He delays His day of wrath so more can hear and be saved. God blesses even the unkind and ungrateful according to Luke 6:35. Read Psalm 145:9. The LORD is good to all, and His tender mercies are over all His works. - C. RESPONSES TO COMMON GRACE - 1. Those who receive common grace does not mean they will be saved. Even the most blessed, wealthy, intelligent people must receive Jesus Christ as Lord and Savior or be eternally condemned. Good ole boys won t make it into heaven. Our kind, blessed, unconverted neighbors will go to hell without Christ Unbelievers are able to do good things as a result of common grace. They can be our friends and do many good deeds. I think of Nik Ripken in the book, The Insanity of God, and how his best friend in Somalia was a Muslim The doctrine of common grace should make us more grateful to God. - God grants to all unbelieving sinners untold blessings and we are reminded of how we too are blessed with these common graces of natural beauty, societal organizations, governmental protection, technological advancements and many other blessings. God is so gracious to bless us in this multitude of ways. II. ELECTION - Election refers to God s choosing to save some people before the foundation of the world. Grudem hints at his take on total depravity when he says the sequence of salvation is as follows: hear the gospel, be regenerated by the Holy Spirit, then respond in faith and repentance, and

4 4 then God forgives and grants salvation. Predestination is another term associated with election. Those who are chosen by God are elected to salvation and those not chosen are passed over or also referred to as reprobation. - Grudem s definition of election is as follows: Election is an act of God before creation in which He chooses some people to be saved, not on account of any foreseen merit in them, but only because if His sovereign good pleasure. (p. 670). He grants that there has been much controversy and misunderstanding over this one doctrine. - Does the New Testament teach this doctrine of election? Yes, here are a number of texts that Grudem appeals to for support of his position Acts 13:48, Romans 8:28-30, 9:11-13, and 2 Thessalonians 2:13. He lists other biblical texts that speak to election or being predestined. - Grudem lists three ways the New Testament presents the doctrine of election. I. As a comfort. Since God has elected and predestined us from eternity past, and the recent past He called and justified us, and God promises to return for us and give us glorified bodies, then should we not rejoice that He will take care of us in the present? 2. Praise to God. Scripture links our being chosen by God to giving Him praise in verses like Ephesians 1:5-6, 12; and 2 Thessalonians 2: Encouragement to Evangelism. We are to be encouraged knowing that God will save the elect. He references Pauls enduring for the sake of the elect according to 2 Timothy 2:10. A. ELECTION AND FATALISM - One of the challenges people put forward against election is that it is fatalistic or mechanistic, meaning, since it is already decided what will happen as to who will be elect and who will not, then why does it matter what we do? Grudem counters these objections with numerous verses that teach man s responsibility to respond to the gospel message. He quotes verses like Ezekiel 33:11 and Revelation 22:17. - Grudem, p. 675, writes, We certainly must preach the gospel, and people s eternal destiny hinges on whether we proclaim the gospel or not. Paul did not know who was elect and who was not so he had to proclaim to everyone. Those who respond would be those who were elect. B. ELECTION AND FOREKNOWLEDGE - Grudem firmly believes that God does not elect based on His foreknowledge of who will believe or not. He spends a good portion of his chapter refuting this concept or interpretation of Scripture. He believes that it gives man too much credit and limits God s involvement. He says man will make this decision on his own and to him this gives man too much credit. Remember he believes in being regenerated by the Holy Spirit before one can believe and be saved.

5 - Grudem argues that God foreknew persons and not facts about them like the fact He knew they would believe. He argues that God simply knew them in advance whom He would elect as Romans 8:29 says nothing about God foreknowing that certain would believe or not. He disagrees with Karl Barth s belief that God foreknew groups of people. He elected Christ and those who would follow Christ. Grudem says quoting Ephesians 1:4 that God elects individuals not groups. I thought of the objection made by my evangelism professor in seminary that God elected or predestined the way of salvation Jesus would die for the sins of all; that is the plan and all who believe are elected. But election in Scripture speaks of people not the plan or process. - Grudem argues that Romans 9:11-13 teaches that nothing Esau or Jacob would do would influence God choosing Jacob over Esau. Simply, God chose Jacob and not Esau. (I agree that is what it teaches; however, by choosing Jacob to be the one through whom He would work and thus bring about the nation of Israel, did this mean God had no plan or purpose but only condemnation for Esau, I think not.) The same could be said of Isaac and Ishmael in Genesis 16. God still used and blessed Ishmael, but not like He did for Isaac, the son of promise. He argues that faith would be a work in the sense that man was doing something in the salvation process, which he cannot allow to keep his doctrine of election. (See p. 677.) He equates simple belief in Christ as something meritorious in us; but I do not see it that way. I see it as man choosing to believe, choosing not to act or work but simply believe as God s goodness (Romans 2:4) enables us to believe and repent. He sees 2 Timothy 1:9 where Paul says we are saved not in virtue or our works as us doing absolutely nothing, not even believing. But belief and faith are not works; faith is the opposite of works. - He believes that if God choose us based on His foreknowledge that we would believe would mean that those who believed would be prideful in their choice of Christ while others are inferior because they did not choose Christ. He believes that those who believe would see it as we were chosen because of our tendencies toward faith and belief within ourselves. But that is a straw man argument to me. I believe Ephesians 2:1 speaks of us being spiritually dead, nothing good within us. God comes to us by His Holy Spirit and invites us to believe and we do so or we do not based on our volition. God knows all along who will believe and who will not. He nullifies and disputes any action of man in the salvation equation. For man to believe he argues means he has some goodness or proclivity in him to believe, and that minimizes God s role. But I do not see it that way. God gives us a free will and a choice. We say yes or no, not that we are good or have any goodness apart from Christ. - Grudem champions the U in TULIP here meaning unconditional election God chooses us based on His sovereign will and grace and not on anything we will do not even faith. I do see this at times in Scripture where God did this to Jeremiah and John the Baptist and an argument 5

6 6 could be made for Samuel the prophet, but I see this as God choosing them for a distinct purpose to save them yes and also to use them to serve God and point others to God. I see this as an example of election unto service but never see in Scripture an election unto damnation, which is in essence reprobation. C. ELECTION AND MAN S FREE WILL - Grudem refutes any argument that election negates human free will or choice. He believes man has a free will and choice whether to receive Christ or not. But the elect will choose Christ voluntarily because God causes it to happen. Our choices must not be absolutely free of any outside influence in order to be free choices. God influences us to make a certain choice and yet Grudem says it is still our free choice. - He refutes the argument against election that says man really had no say in the matter of salvation. Or unbelievers never had a chance to believe and be saved if all was predetermined. He says in Scripture the onus is always on man When people rejected Jesus He always put the blame on their willful choice to reject Him, not on anything decreed by the Father (p. 681). He argues from Romans 9:20 that if we think it is unfair then who are we to argue with God? As I read Romans 9 I thought of the context of choosing Israel and hardening Pharaoh whose heart was already hard. And I thought of the objection the Jews might make as to why are we hardened and again He hardens hearts already that are choosing to reject Him. God allows this and does this for the salvation of the Gentiles. Or it means God hardens whom He will and makes to believe those He wants to believe. If that is the case then that is the case and God be praised. My friend Charlie at Southeastern Seminary said Ezekiel 33:11 was the most difficult biblical passage for Calvinists. I say the most difficult passage for non-calvinists is Romans Or a third option is God chooses whom He will based on His will and no influence by man, and man has free will that God honors and knows and elects based on foreknowledge and BOTH are true. Then therein lies the great mystery! - Grudem says if we think this is unfair then the fact that God saves any is most gracious. He could have cast us out like He did the angels that sinned and not one of them was spared (2 Peter 2:4). And if we persist in our objection that this is somehow unfair then go to Romans 9 and get over it. This is what God does and you cannot argue with God. - The fact that God saves some and not all, and the fact that God chooses some to be saved and others not to be saved is His sovereign choice and what god does is always right and fair. This may confuse us and we accuse God of being unfair, but Grudem argues that we cannot impose on God what we thin as appropriate or not. I do think of a verse that has helped and encouraged me when dealing with this subject, and it is Genesis 18:25 that closes this way Shall not the Judge of all the earth do right?

7 7 - Grudem seeks to answer the substantive biblical argument against his views on election especially reprobation by distinguishing between God s revealed will and hidden will. Verses like 1 Timothy 2:4 and 2 Peter 3:9 state God s revealed will that God invites and commands all to repent, but not His hidden will or secret decrees as to who will actually be saved, the elect only. My first reaction to this paragraph on page 683 was to write in the margin of the book, What?! I still think it is a weak interpretation of these texts and many others like them that invite all men to be saved, and that it is God s will to save all, and He will save those who believe and repent. - He also argues that though God wills that all are saved, His greater will is only those who are elect will be saved and this brings God more glory. For Arminians, Grudem asserts, the higher form of God s will is not His own glory but the free will of man. But which brings god more glory, when someone chooses God because they want to or they have to? D. REPROBATION - Reprobation, defined by Grudem, p. 684, is the sovereign decision of God before creation to pass over some persons, in sorrow deciding not to save them, and to punish them for their sins, and thereby to manifest His justice? I have always had a real theological problem with reprobation, and it is not that I do not understand it and the concomitant doctrines associated with it, I do understand and do not believe it. One major objection is it is a conclusion based on one interpretation of election, and to me, it lessens the severity of hell. How does it bring God glory to allow people to be born and decided with no free will on their part they will be born only to die and go to hell. Hell is horrendous, painful, and eternal, but for some, or should we say most, unavoidable. - And Grudem admits as such when he writes that this doctrine is the most difficult one in Scripture because it sends some to hell and he admits it is a horrible place. But he is confined and has to carry his interpretation to this conclusion. I cannot. He writes, p. 685, It is something that we would not want to believe, and would not believe, unless Scripture clearly taught it. He references Jude 4 when it speaks of those designated for condemnation. He sees this as them having no choice they are simply designated. But I see it more as this is designated for those who reject Christ. He also references Romans 9:17-22 Pharaoh and other vessels of wrath made for destruction. Are these people who have hardened hearts that God hardens further, those who will reject God and in anticipation of them rejecting Him, He has prepared for their destruction? In referring to 1 Peter 2:8 that says about those who stumble and disobey that they were destined to do. Does destined mean preprogrammed to stumble and disobey or those God knew would reject Him to was determined that those who do reject Him would stumble and be judged; that is their destiny.

8 8 - To his credit, Grudem carries through with this teaching and embraces it though it is hard and does not accuse God of anything unfair. I wish he had the same, consistent in dealing with creation and the age of the earth Scripture seems to teach what is contrary to many evolutionary scientists but he will not come out and embrace what is the more clear teaching of the Bible that yom is a 24-hour period of time. - His belief that the Bible teaches reprobation leads him to conclude that this causes us to tremble in horror. Why would we tremble in horror? Would God do something to violate our basic sense of right and wrong? - Grudem concludes his chapter on election and reprobation by stating that election shows God s mercy toward His people and reprobation shoes His justice toward sinners. It grieves God according to Ezekiel 33:11 and the blame is squarely on the shoulders of those who reject God. Scripture never places the blame for condemnation on God but on fallen man and angels. - We too should feel great sorrow for the unbeliever because of his or her eternal destiny of hell. Grudem does not say we are to seek to share Christ with them at this point as I see Paul doing all he could for the salvation of the Jews. - Instead of moving toward mystery Grudem points out that the reason God feels sorrow over those He created to condemn is in some way this will bring God more glory. Even us humans do things that are hard and cause us sorrow but we still do them for a greater good. - God chose us not for anything He saw in us, again Grudem rejects foreknowledge, and God chose us because He decided to love us, and there is no greater purpose. I have always connected calling and election to missions but at this point Grudem cannot because it does not make sense to do so. God shoes Abraham in Genesis 12 to be a blessing to the nations; we see His blessing His people in Psalm 67 and Isaiah 43 so they will be witnesses for Him to the nations. Jesus told the disciples they did not choose Him, but He chose them so they would bear fruit (John 15:16). In 1 Peter 2:9 we read where God choses so His people will proclaim His praises. Read Jeremiah 1:5. CLOSING THOUGHTS - I respect Grudem and all those who hold this position and honestly see their interpretation on the verses mentioned in this study. And if they are right and I am wrong, so be it, they just may be. However I still hold to the election based on foreknowledge. And while Grudem extols the blessings of election because he is elect, where does that leave the one who is not elect and has no hope of salvation? How does he interpret 2 Corinthians 5:11 in light of his interpretation of Romans Paul said, Knowing therefore the terror of the Lord, we persuade men. He does not say we only persuade the elect, but men.

9 - If one embraces the doctrine of election to the exclusion of evangelism and a spirit of haughtiness then I cannot fellowship with that attitude. But if a Calvinist wants to seek out and save the lost like Jesus did in Luke 19:10 then I can fellowship with him. - I do not wish to put too much emphasis on the responsibility of man but you have to put some. - Someone asked CH Spurgeon what if he or she witnessed to one of the non-elect and they get saved? He replied that God would forgive him! He also said when one goes to heaven there will be a banner that reads whosoever will let him come and after he walks through into heaven the sign says chosen before the foundation of the world! - Calvinists and non-calvinists can walk in fellowship with one another as we do here in our church. I think of the historical example of George Whitefield and John Wesley who would very much disagree on major points of theology but were very good friends. - In Dr. Patterson s office he has multiple copies of Dave Hunt s book, What Love Is This? And it is a very good critique of the Reformed position and I encourage my Calvinist friends to read it and grapple with the challenges it presents as I have grappled and will continue to grapple with the writings of people like Grudem whom I respect. 9