Category Archives: Sovereign Grace

The ‘Judge Not’ Bomb

Posted by Dan C. on

The passage that that becomes a bomb:

“Judge not, that you be not judged.” – Matthew 7:1

How many times have you heard that? As Christians, if we have never heard it, we might not have spoken much concerning the issue of sin. The ‘bomb’ is dropped by non-believers, as well as believers, when the topic of sin or some particular sin enters the discussion.

The logic behind the usage of the ‘judge not’ bomb seems to be this:

  • The Bible says don’t judge.
  • If we talk about sin, we are judging others.
  • Therefore, don’t talk about sin

The Problem:

Those who are skilled in dropping this bomb are mostly non-Christians whom we are trying to reach with the message of the gospel, but they are also Christians purporting to spread that same message. I know some of those Christians and I also remember when I was one of them.

Don’t get me wrong here, there is certainly something important in the admonition concerning not judging other people. We all have ‘eyesight’ problems, as the context of our passage in Matthew 7 reminds us:

“Or how can you say to your brother, ‘Let me take the speck out of your eye,’ when there is the log in your own eye? You hypocrite, first take the log out of your own eye, and then you will see clearly to take the speck out of your brother’s eye.” Matt 7:4-5

So now we’re not only judging others when we talk about sin, we are also hypocrites because we have not yet reached a state of sinlessness! That sounds like a bit of a double whammy, doesn’t it? We’d be far better off leading folks to Jesus by telling them all about the abundant life he promises, and all the great things he wants to do for us in terms of solving all of problems we face from day to day, wouldn’t we?

Well, all that sounds good, but it’s only valid if the ‘stuff of life’ was the reason Jesus came and died nailed to on a wooden cross a couple thousand years ago. That’s where we might have a little problem. If we peer into the New Testament we are told that Jesus came to die because of sin (our sins), beginning with the announcement from an angel to Joseph through the last chapter of Revelation.

What’s really going on?

To try and find out, let’s begin with our original logic model:

  • The Bible says don’t judge. (major premise)
  • If we talk about sin, we are judging others. (minor premise)
  • Therefore, don’t talk about sin (conclusion)

If we can break the logic chain, find a fallacy in it, we might be able set the matter straight. I submit that if our major and minor premises are valid, our conclusion might be equally valid. But are they?

Our major premise seems valid, since it a direct quote from a passage of scripture. Even though there is a bit more to it than simply not judging, there is some truth there. Our minor premise certainly sounds valid, but is it really? Well it might be, depending on the circumstances in which the topic of sin is being discussed. Let me explain.

It’s certainly possible that the person who brings up the subject of sin, in general or with a specific sin in mind, does so with a ‘judgmental’ attitude, however it is equally possible that the topic was brought up for other reasons. The sinfulness of a particular activity or behavior might be the topic of discussion, or the issue of sin might have been brought up as the central issue that the message of the gospel addresses. Either way, the ‘don’t judge’ bomb is dropped because someone is being judged, according to our minor premise.

And that’s the fallacy in our logic model – our minor premise – that if we talk about sin at all, we are ‘de facto’ judging others. Let me explain what I think is going on.

When the topic of sin is approached, every single time, either in general terms or with specific sin(s) in mind, someone’s going to feel guilty. Feelings of guilt do come from having been judged, and the easiest target for complaint is against the messenger. On the other hand, when we lovingly make it clear that we are sharing God’s opinion (and can back it up scripturally), it is God who judges, and not the one passing on His opinion.

So where are we at?

Let me break it down.

God has decreed that the preaching of the gospel is the most significant means by which lost sinners are saved. (Rom 10:14)

It’s our duty (and great privilege) to share that gospel.

The gospel message, in order to qualify as ‘good news’ must include the ‘bad news’ concerning sin.

Talking about sin can and will drive away listeners who need the ‘good news’ before you have a chance to tell it. Bummer.

What do we do?

Remember a woman named Lydia:

“And on the Sabbath day we (Paul and company) went outside the gate to the riverside, where we supposed there was a place of prayer, and we sat down and spoke to the women who had come together. One who heard us was a woman named Lydia, from the city of Thyatira, a seller of purple goods, who was a worshiper of God. The Lord opened her heart to pay attention to what was said by Paul.” – Acts 16:13-14

Bear in mind that you will offend some people with the ‘bad news’ and that they will drop the ‘don’t judge’ bomb. Until God opens hearts to really ‘hear’ and realize that they are guilty and it is God who is judging, they just won’t get it. Keep your spiritual Kevlar on.

By that I mean apply liberal amounts of ‘BDA’ prayer (Before, During & After) to your evangelistic endeavors. It goes without saying that such applications will give you great courage and boldness to proclaim the ‘bad news’ with the ‘good news’, add to the harvest of souls for the Kingdom of God, and bring great glory to our Savior.

Delivering the complete gospel message boldly and with utmost love will keep you (or someone else) from having perform another form of ‘BDA’ (Battle Damage Assessment) because you fell for the ‘invalid premise’ and left the critical issue out of the message. It’s a pretty tough job persuading those who think they are saved, that they might be deceived.

The message of the Cross is first and foremost about the problem of sin, and has been since the Fall of man in the Garden. Be like the Apostle Paul:

  • “I am eager to preach the gospel to you also who are in Rome. 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 1:15-15
  • “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.” – 1 Corinthians 15:3-4

May God bless open hearts to ears to hear, eyes to see, and hearts to ‘pay attention’ to that precious message!

“Hearts are won to Jesus by the silent conviction which irresistibly subdues the conscience to a sense of guilt, and by the love which is displayed in the Redeemer’s becoming the great substitutionary sacrifice for us, that our sins might be removed. . .” – C. H. Spurgeon

Share

How Wonderful Is the Love of God!

Posted by Dan C. on

Since, therefore, we have now been justified by his blood, much more shall we be saved by him from the wrath of God. For if “. . .while we were enemies we were reconciled to God by the death of his Son. . . – Rom 5:10

The following is an excerpt from the final section of a Jonathan Edwards work called “Men Naturally are God’s Enemies” which presents a Biblical view of the natural man in his fallen state. After stating his case, Edwards presents the following as "Practical Improvement".

"How wonderful is the love that is manifested in giving Christ to die for us. For this is love to enemies. “While we were enemies, we were reconciled to God by the death of his Son.” How wonderful was the love of God the Father, in giving such a gift to those who not only could not be profitable to him, but were his enemies, and to so great a degree! They had great enmity against him; yet so did he love them, that he gave his own Son to lay down his life, in order to save their lives. Though they had enmity that sought to pull God down from his throne; yet he so loved them, that he sent down Christ from heaven, from his throne there, to be in the form of a servant; and instead of a throne of glory, gave him to be nailed to the cross, and to be laid in the grave, that so we might be brought to a throne of glory."

"How wonderful was the love of Christ, in thus exercising dying love towards his enemies! He loved those that hated him, with hatred that sought to take away his life, so as voluntarily to lay down his life, that they might have life through him. “Herein is love; not that we loved him, but that he loved us, and laid down his life for us.”

"If we are all naturally God’s enemies, hence we may learn what a spirit it becomes us as Christians to possess towards our enemies. Though we are enemies to God, yet we hope that God has loved us, that Christ has died for us, that God has forgiven or will forgive us; and will do us good, and bestow infinite mercies and blessings upon us, so as to make us happy . All this mercy we hope has been, or will be, exercised towards us forever."

______________________

“Men Naturally are God’s Enemies” can be read in its entirety here, or at:

http://www.biblebb.com/files/edwards/enemies.htm

The Knock!

Posted by Dan C. on

(the following is by Spurgeon)

“With unfailing love I have I drawn you to myself.” – Jeremiah 31:3

The Master came one night to the door, and knocked with the iron hand of the law; the door shook and trembled upon its hinges. But the man piled every piece of furniture which he could find against the door, for he said, “I will not admit that man.”

The Master turned away, but by-and-by He came back, and with His own soft hand, using most that part where the nail had penetrated, He knocked again — oh, so softly and tenderly. This time the door did not shake, but, strange to say, it opened, and there upon his knees the once unwilling host was found rejoicing to receive his guest!

“Come in, come in; you have so knocked that my affections are moved for you. I could not think of your pierced hand leaving its blood mark on my door. I yield, I yield, Your love has won my heart.”

So in every case, the love of Christ wins the day. What Moses with the tablets of stone could never do, Christ does with His pierced hand!

Such is the doctrine of effectual calling. Do I understand it experimentally?

“With unfailing love I have I drawn you to myself.” -J eremiah 31:3

Misunderstandings of the Doctrine of Election

Posted by Dan C. on

(excerpt from Systematic Theology by Wayne Grudem, pp. 674-79, Inter-Varsity Press, Zondervan Publishing House)

1. Election Is Not Fatalistic or Mechanistic.

Sometimes those who object to the doctrine of election say that it is "fatalism" or that it presents a "mechanistic system" for the universe. Two somewhat different objections are involved here. By "fatalism" is meant a system in which human choices and human decisions really do not make any difference. In fatalism, no matter what we do, things are going to turn out as they have been previously ordained. Therefore, it is futile to attempt to influence the outcome of events or the outcome of our lives by putting forth any effort or making any significant choices, because these will not make any difference any way. In a true fatalistic system, of course, our humanity is destroyed for our choices really mean nothing, and the motivation for moral accountability is removed.

In a mechanistic system the picture is one of an impersonal universe in which all things that happen have been inflexibly determined by an impersonal force long ago, and the universe functions in a mechanical way so that human beings are more like machines or robots than genuine persons. Here also genuine human personality would be reduced to the level of a machine that simply functions in accordance with predetermined plans and in response to predetermined causes and influences.

By contrast to the mechanistic picture, the New Testament presents the entire outworking of our salvation as something brought about by a personal God in relationship with personal creatures. God "destined us in love to be his sons through Jesus Christ" (Eph. 1:5). God’s act of election was neither impersonal nor mechanistic, but was permeated with personal love for those whom he chose. Moreover, the personal care of God for his creatures, even those who rebel against him, is seen clearly in God’s plea through Ezekiel, "As I live, says the Lord God, I have no pleasure in the death of the wicked, but that the wicked turn from his evil way and live; turn back, turn back from your evil ways; for why will you die, O house of Israel?" (Ezek. 33:11).

When talking about our response to the gospel offer, Scripture continually views us not as mechanistic creatures or robots, but as genuine persons, personal creatures who make willing choices to accept or reject the gospel. Jesus invites everyone, Come to me, all who labor and are heavy laden, and I will give you rest" (Matt. 11:28). And we read the invitation at the end of Revelation: "The Spirit and the Bride say, ‘Come.’ And let him who hears say, ‘Come.’ And let him who is thirsty come, let him who desires take the water of life without price" (Rev. 22:17). This invitation and many others like it are addressed to genuine persons who are capable of hearing the invitation and responding to it by a decision of their wills. Regarding those who will not accept him, Jesus clearly emphasizes their hardness of heart and their stubborn refusal to come to him: "Yet you refuse to come to me that you may have life" (John 5:40). And Jesus cries out in sorrow to the city that had rejected him, "O Jerusalem, Jerusalem, killing the prophets and stoning those who are sent to you! How often would I have gathered your children together as a hen gathers her brood under her wings, and you would not!" (Matt. 23:37).

In contrast to the charge of fatalism, we also see a much different picture in the New Testament. Not only do we make willing choices as real persons, but these choices are also real choices because they do affect the course of events in the world. They affect our own lives and they affect the lives and destinies of others. So, "He who believes in him is not condemned; he who does not believe is condemned already, because he has not believed in the name of the only Son of God" (John 3:18). Our personal decisions to believe or not believe in Christ have eternal consequences in our lives, and Scripture is quite willing to talk about our decision to believe or not believe as the factor that decides our eternal destiny.

The implication of this is that we certainly must preach the gospel, and people’s eternal destiny hinges on whether we proclaim the gospel or not. Therefore when the Lord one night told Paul, "Do not be afraid, but speak and do not be silent; for I am with you, and no man shall attack you to harm you; for I have many people in this city" (Acts 18:9-10), Paul did not simply conclude that the "many people" who belong to God would be saved whether he stayed there preaching the gospel or not. Rather, "he stayed a year and six months, teaching the word of God among them" (Acts 18:11) – this was longer than Paul stayed in any other city except Ephesus during his three missionary journeys. When Paul was told that God had many elect people in Corinth, he stayed a long time and preached, in order that those elect people might be saved! Paul is quite clear about the fact that unless people preach the gospel others will not be saved:

"But how are men to call upon him in whom they have not believed? And how are they to believe in him of whom they have not heard? And how are they to hear without a preacher?" … "So faith comes from what is heard, and what is heard comes by the preaching of Christ." (Rom. 10:14, 17)

Did Paul know before he went to a city who was elected by God for salvation and who was not? No, he did not. That is something that God does not show to us ahead of time. But once people comes to faith in Christ then we can be confident that God had earlier chosen them for salvation. This is exactly Paul’s conclusion regarding the Thessalonians; he says that he knows that God chose them because when he preached to them, the gospel came in power and with full conviction: "For we know, brethren beloved by God, that he has chosen you; for our gospel came to you not only in word, but also in power and in the Holy Spirit and with full conviction" (1 Thess. 1:4-5). Far from saying that whatever he did made no difference, and that God’s elect would be saved whether he preached or not, Paul endured a life of incredible hardship in order to bring the gospel to those whom God had chosen. At the end of a life filled with suffering he said, "Therefore I endure everything for the sake of the elect, that they also may obtain salvation in Christ Jesus with its eternal glory" (1 Tim. 2:10).

2. Election Is Not Based on God’s Foreknowledge of Our Faith.

Quite commonly people will agree that God predestines some to be saved, but they will say that he does this by looking into the future and seeing who will believe in Christ and who will not. If he sees that a person is going to come to saving faith, then he will predestine that person to be saved. In this way, it is thought, the ultimate reason why some are saved and some are not lies within the people themselves, not within God. All that God does in his predestining work is to give confirmation to the decision he knows people will make on their own. The verse commonly used to support this view is Romans 8:29: "For those whom he foreknew he also predestined to be conformed to the image of his Son."

a. Foreknowledge of Persons, Not Facts:

But this verse can hardly be used to demonstrate that God based his predestination on foreknowledge of the fact that a person would believe. The passage speaks rather of the fact that God knew persons ("those whom he foreknew"), not that he knew some fact about them, such as the fact that they would believe. It is a personal, relational knowledge that is spoken of here: God, looking into the future, thought of certain people in saving relationship to him, and in that sense he "knew them" long ago. This is the sense in which Paul can talk about God’s "knowing" someone, for example, in 1 Corinthians 8:3: "But if one loves God, one is known by him." Similarly, he says, "but now that you have come to know God, or rather to be known by God …" (Gal. 4:9). When people know God in Scripture, or when God knows them, it is personal knowledge that involves a saving relationship. therefore in Romans 8:29, "those whom he foreknew" is best understood to mean, "those whom he long ago thought of in a saving relationship to himself." The text actually says nothing about God foreknowing or foreseeing that certain people would believe, nor is that idea mentioned in any other text of Scripture.

Sometimes people say that God elected groups of people, but not individuals to salvation. In some Arminian views, God just elected the church as a group, while the Swiss theologian Karl Barth (1886-1968) said that God elected Christ, and all people in Christ. But Romans 8:29 talks about certain people whom God foreknew ("those whom he foreknew"), not just undefined or unfilled groups. And in Ephesians Paul talks about certain people whom God chose, including himself: "He chose us in him before the foundation of the world (Eph. 1:4). To talk about God choosing a group with no people in it is not biblical election at all. But to talk about God choosing a group of people means that he chose specific individuals who constituted that group.

b. Scripture Never Speaks of Our Faith As the Reason God Chose Us:

In addition, when we look beyond these specific passages that speak of foreknowledge and look at verses that talk about the reason God chose us, we find that Scripture never speaks of our faith or the fact that we would come to believe in Christ as the reason God chose us. In fact, Paul seems explicitly to exclude the consideration of what people would do in life from his understanding of God’s choice of Jacob rather than Esau: he says, "Though they were not yet born and had done nothing either good or bad, in order that God’s purpose of election might continue, not because of works but because of his call, she was told, ‘The elder will serve the younger.’ As it is written, ‘Jacob I loved, but Esau I hated’" (Rom. 9:11-13). Nothing that Jacob or Esau would do in life influenced God’s decision; it was simply in order that his purpose of election might continue.

When discussing the Jewish people who have come to faith in Christ, Paul says, "So too at the present time there is a remnant, chosen by grace. But if it is by grace, it is no longer on the basis of works" (Rom. 11:5-6). Here again Paul emphasizes God’s grace and the complete absence of human merit in the process of election. Someone might object that faith is not viewed as a "work" in Scripture and therefore faith should be excluded from the quotation above ("It is no longer on the basis of works"). Based on this objection, Paul could actually mean, "But if it is by grace, it is no longer on the basis of works, but rather on the basis of whether someone will believe." However, this is unlikely in this context: Paul is not contrasting human faith and human works; he is contrasting God’s sovereign choosing of people with any human activity, and he points to God’s sovereign will as the ultimate basis for God’s choice of the Jews who have come to Christ.

Similarly, when Paul talks about election in Ephesians, there is no mention of any foreknowledge of the fact that we would believe, or any idea that there was anything worthy of meritorious in us (such as a tendency to believe) that was the basis for God’s choosing us. Rather, Paul says, "He destined us in love to be his sons through Jesus Christ, according to the purpose of his will, to the praise of his glorious grace which he freely bestowed on us in the Beloved" (Eph. 1:5-6). Now if God’s grace is to be praised for election, and not human ability to believe or decision to believe, then once again it is consistent for Paul to mention nothing of human faith but only to mention God’s predestining activity, his purpose and will, and his freely given grace.

Again in 2 Timothy, Paul says that God "saved us and called us with a holy calling, not in virtue of our works but in virtue of his own purpose and the grace which he gave us in Christ Jesus ages ago" (2 Tim. 1:9). Once again God’s sovereign purpose is seen as the ultimate reason for our salvation, and Paul connects this with the fact that God gave us grace in Christ Jesus ages ago – another way of speaking of the truth that God freely gave favor to us when he chose us without reference to any foreseen merit or worthiness on our part.

c. Election Based on Something Good in Us (Our Faith) Would Be the Beginning of Salvation by Merit:

Yet another kind of objection can be brought against the idea that God chose us because he foreknew that we would come to faith. If the ultimate determining factor in whether we will be saved or not is our own decision to accept Christ, then we shall be more inclined to think that we deserve some credit for the fact that we were saved: in distinction from other people who continue to reject Christ, we were wise enough in our judgment or capacities to decide to believe in Christ. But once we begin to think this way then we seriously diminish the glory that is to be given to God for our salvation. We become uncomfortable speaking like Paul who says that God "destined us … according to the purpose of his will, to the praise of his glorious grace" (Eph. 1:5-6), and we begin to think that God "destined us … according to the fact that he knew that we would have enough tendencies toward goodness and faith within us that we would believe." When we think like this we begin to sound very much unlike the New Testament when it talks about election or predestination. By contrast, if election is solely based on God’s own good pleasure and his sovereign decision to love us in spite of our lack of goodness or merit, then certainly we have a profound sense of appreciation to him for a salvation that is totally undeserved, and we will forever be willing to praise his "glorious grace" (Eph. 1:6).

In the final analysis, the difference between two views of election can be seen in the way they answer a very simple question. Given the fact that in the final analysis some people will choose to accept Christ and some people will not, the question is, "What makes people differ?" That is, what ultimately makes the difference between those who believe and those who do not? If our answer is that it is ultimately based on something God does (namely, his sovereign election of those who would be saved), then we see that salvation at its most foundational level is based on grace alone. On the other hand, if we answer that the ultimate difference between those who are saved and those who are not is because of something in man (that is, a tendency or disposition to believe or not believe), then salvation ultimately depends on a combination of grace plus human ability.

d. Predestination Based on Foreknowledge Still Does Not Give People Free Choice:

The idea that God’s predestination of some to believe is based on foreknowledge of their faith encounters still another problems: upon reflection, this system turns out to give no real freedom to man either. For if God can look into the future and see that person A will come to faith in Christ, and that person B will not come to faith in Christ, then those facts are already fixed, they are already determined. If we assume that God’s knowledge of the future is true (which it must be), then it is absolutely certain that person A will believe and person B will not. There is no way that their lives could turn out any differently than this. Therefore it is fair to say that their destinies are still determined, for they could not be otherwise. But by what are these destinies determined? If they are determined by God himself, then we no longer have election based ultimately on foreknowledge of faith, but rather on God’s sovereign will. But if these destinies are not determined by God, then who or what determines them? Certainly no Christian would say that there is some powerful being other than God controlling people’s destinies. Therefore it seems that the only other possible solution is to say they are determined by some impersonal force, some kind of fate, operative in the universe, making things turn out as they do. But what kind of benefit is this? We have then sacrificed election in love by a personal God for a kind of determinism by an impersonal force and God is no longer to be given the ultimate credit for our salvation.

e. Conclusion: Election is Unconditional:

It seems best, for the previous four reasons, to reject the idea that election is based on God’s foreknowledge of our faith. We conclude instead that the reason for election is simple God’s sovereign choice – he "destined us in love to be his sons" (Eph. 1:5). God chose us simply because he decided to bestow his love upon us. It was not because of any foreseen faith or foreseen merit in us.

This understanding of election has traditionally been called "unconditional election." It is "unconditional" because it is not conditioned upon anything that God sees in us that makes us worthy of his choosing us

Online Source