We have learned that Calvin affirms that “God's eternal decree, by which He compacted with himself what he willed to become of each man. For all are not created in equal condition; rather, eternal life is foreordained for some, eternal damnation for others” (Inst. III, 21, 5). The reason for this ordination is rooted in "God's good pleasure" as opposed to foreknowledge of merit, and in fact, we are incapable of merit since Adam's fall, and only through Christ's redemption is the salvation of the elect even possible.
James Arminius argued that predestination was not based on a "divine arbitrary decree", but upon God's foreknowledge of man's merit. Calvin forsaw this objection, as did Paul when He said in Romans 9 " You will say to me then, “Why does he still find fault? For who can resist his will?”. Calvin, accordingly, writes against this notion, "by thus covering election with a veil of foreknowledge, they not only obscure it but feign that it has its origin elsewhere"(Inst. III, 22, 1). Calvin contests that this view of foreknowledge makes man God's co-worker in salvation, and implies that election is ratified only by man's consent. This is to make the gravest of errors because it suggests that man's will is superior to God's plan, or at the very least, implies God's plan is partially dependent on man(Inst. III, 24, 3). In refutation of this view, Calvin asserts that "this plan was founded upon his freely given mercy, without regard to human worth"(Inst. III, 21, 7 emphasis added).
Calvin wisely proceeds to draw exhaustively from Scripture to buttress his argument citing that God chose us "before the foundations of the world were laid"(Eph.1:4a), "according to the good pleasure of his will"(Eph.1:5), in order "that we should be holy and spotless and irreproachable in his sight"(Eph.1:4b). Calvin observes that Paul sets "God's good pleasure" over against any merit of ours, declaring all virtue in man to be the result of his election(Inst. III, 22, 2). Calvin continues by arguing that if God chose us to be holy, it naturally follows that he would not have chosen us because he foresaw that we would be so(Inst. III, 22, 3). The fact that God chose the elect to be holy also refutes the accusation and misrepresentation that predestination overthrows all exhortations to godly living(Inst. III, 23, 13). Calvin reminds his opponents that election has as its goal, holiness of life, "therefore, it ought to arouse us to eagerly set our mind upon it than to serve as a pretext for doing nothing"(Inst. III, 23, 12). Calvin remarks that Paul afterward confirms what he had earlier said about the origin of our election when he states: "According to the purpose of his will"(Eph.1:5), "which he had purposed in himself"(Eph.1:9). This is to say that God considered nothing outside himself with which to be concerned in making his decree(Inst. III, 22, 2).
To more meticulously deal with the objection by some that God would be contrary to himself if he should universally invite all men to him but choose only a few as elect(Inst. III, 22, 10), Calvin draws heavily from the ninth chapter in Paul's letter to the Romans. Paul writes that before Jacob and Esau were born, or had done anything good or bad "in order that God's purpose of election might continue . . . the elder will serve the younger"(Rom.9:11,12). Calvin therefore argues that, "rejection does not occur on the basis of works"(Inst. III, 23, 11). He argues that Paul specifically emphasizes that point by showing that before Jacob and Esau had done anything good or evil, one was chosen, the other rejected(Rom.9:13). This is in order to prove that the foundation of divine predestination is not in works(Inst. III, 23, 11). Calvin also reminds us that the apostle Paul writes that God "has mercy upon whomever He wills, and He hardens the heart of whomever He wills"(Rom.9:18). "Has not the potter no right over the clay, to make out of the same lump one vessel for beauty and another for dishonour?"(Rom.9:21). God is free to determine a purpose for election, but that purpose has nothing to do with man's desire or effort. Nothing is more clear in Romans nine, "it does not therefore, depend on man's desire or effort, but on God's mercy"(Rom.9:16).
Calvin's argument is, not that God’s election is arbitrary, but that there is no reason found in us, but that is not to say that God has no reason in Himself. This is precisely what Calvin is trying to communicate when he reasons that we are saved by "God's eternal decree, by which He compacted with himself what he willed to become of each man"(Inst. III, 21, 5). It should now be apparent that while most bible-believing Christians do in fact acquiesce to some form of predestination they depart on the issue of the basis of this election. Arminians will contend that we are chosen according to foreknowledge of merit(Bettenson 268), while a Calvinist theology maintains that we are chosen "because He has willed it"(Inst. III, 23, 2). Calvin believes that if you proceed further to ask why he so willed, "you are seeking something greater and higher than God's will, which cannot be found"(Inst. III, 23, 2).
A problem that people often have with understanding Gods mercy is that they see it as an obligation, however the very nature of mercy is a voluntary act of under served, unmerited kindness.
All of mankind is not neutral. We are all enemies of God and hostile to Him in our mind and hearts in our natural condition ( Colossians 1:21, Romans 5:10, Romans 8:7 ) we are all deserving of Gods judgement. When God chose before the creation of the world to save some it meant He chose to save some from a whole race of people who would rebel and reject Him in every way. So we have one group that receives Gods just judgement, and another group of people who deserve Gods judgement which instead,however, receive Gods voluntary undeserved mercy. These are the ones God chooses to save. Now let me ask you a question- has God done wrong to anyone with this? The answer is no. God gives some what they deserve and other mercy which HE DID NOT HAVE TO GIVE, WHICH THEY DO NOT DESERVE. God could have left everyone to the judgement they deserve and God would have done no wrong to anyone. He would still be glorious because he was punishing evil. It just would mean that Gods mercy would have remained hidden. Now understanding this, and how bleak and desperate our situation is we can begin to appreciate how amazing Gods mercy is in not only choosing to save one person ( which on its own would have been extremely amazing and undeserved) but millions and millions of people from every country and background. This is phenomenal!!!
Does this mean God turns people away?
Some fear that a doctrine of eternal election and reprobation (that God passively elects some for damnation) involved the possibility that Christ will not receive some of those who desire to receive Him because they are not elect. The ‘comfortable words’ of the gospel promises, however, absolutely exclude this possibility. As our Lord elsewhere affirmed, in emphatic and categorical terms: ‘Him that cometh to me I will in no wise cast out’ and elsewhere that “no one can come to me unless the Father who sent me draws him, and I will raise him up at the last day.” (John 6:44) It is true that God has from all eternity chosen whom He will save. It is true that Christ came specifically to save those whom the Father had given Him. But it is also true that Christ offers Himself freely to all men as their Saviour, and guarantees to bring to glory everyone who trusts in him as such. See how He Himself deliberately juxtaposes these two thoughts in the following passage. “I came down from heaven, not to do mine own will, but the will of him that sent me. And this is the Fathers’ will which hath sent me, that of all which he hath given me I should lose nothing, but should raise it up again at the last day. And this is the will of him who sent me, that every one which seeth the Son, and believeth on him, may have everlasting life: and I will raise him up at the last day.” John 6:37-38.‘All which he hath given me’- here is Christ’s saving mission defined in terms of the whole company of the elect, whom He came specifically to save. ‘Every one which seeth the Son, and believeth on him’ – Here is Christ’s saving mission defined in terms of the whole company of lost mankind, to whom He offers Himself without distinction, ad whom He will certainly save, if they believe. The two truths stand side by side in these verses, and that is where they belong. They go together. Neither throws doubt on the truth of the other.
No comments:
Post a Comment