The Joke of Calvinist Compatibilism

“The great problem of the incompatibilist conception is that it reverses the biblical order of priority in the relationship between God and human beings. It says, in effect, ‘I am free; therefore, God is limited by my freedom.’ But rather than the WILL OF GOD BEING DEPENDENT UPON THE CHOICES OF HIS CREATURES, Scripture teaches that the absolute dependence of all creatures upon God. This is the biblical ground of compatibilism. We cannot define God’s right or agency by our perception of freedom; rather we must understand what freedom means within the biblical witness to a divine sovereignty in which not one drop of rain falls without God’s sure command” (“Why I Am Not An Arminian” by Robert A. Peterson and Michael D. Williams. Downers Grove: InterVarsity Press, 2004, page 142).

Authors Robert Peterson and Michael Williams make fun of Arminianism in this statement. The authors themselves believe in compatibilism; but their definition of compatibilism is different than my definition of compatibilism.

For these Calvinist writers, compatibilism says that God’s will is done in the world—and God accomplishes this by making sure that my emotions, feelings, inclinations, thoughts, and actions all line up with what God desires. If God desires for me to do evil, then (which I pray a lightning bolt doesn’t strike me for saying, dear Lord), He will actually give me the inclination to do evil. My freedom, then, according to Bruce Ware, is that I am free to do evil; so, therefore, I will do evil because that’s all my freedom will allow.

But notice what Peterson and Williams say about Arminianism: [the] “will of God being DEPENDENT UPON THE CHOICES OF HIS CREATURES…” However, Arminianism doesn’t say this at all.
The will of God is not dependent upon the choices of His creatures. But it is non-dependent in a different way than the Calvinist maintains.

God’s will is not dependent upon His human creation because the very free will that mankind has been given COMES FROM GOD! The very dominion over the earth that man has been given was given to him by God Himself! Remember Genesis 1:26-27?

26 Then God said, "Let Us (P) make man in Our image, according to Our likeness. (Q) They will rule the fish of the sea, the birds of the sky, the animals, all the earth, [f] and the creatures that crawl [g] on the earth." (R)
27 So God created man in His own image;
He created him in the image of God;
He created them male and female. (Genesis 1:26-27, Holman Christian Standard Bible).

So God is responsible for man having free will. Surely then, if God gave man free will, and a choice involves at least two options, then God maintains sovereignty over man’s choices.

However, God, in His sovereignty, has allowed man the possibility of walking away from Him, has given man the power to choose a life apart from Himself. But God is only responsible for giving man power; He is not responsible for what man chooses to do with it!!!

I titled this post “the Joke of Calvinist Compatibilism” because Calvinists, in their assessment of God’s sovereignty and man’s free will, seek to find a way to make everything “work out.” But they try too hard: the solution is found in the fact that man’s free will IS FOUND IN THE WILL OF GOD, for God willed man to have free will (which is, as Irenaeus said, part of man’s being made in the likeness of God).

But Peterson and Williams make a huge statement in the last sentence of the above quote:

“We cannot define God’s right or agency by our perception of freedom; rather we must understand what freedom means within the biblical witness to a divine sovereignty in which not one drop of rain falls without God’s sure command.”

I think they’re right: we have to define freedom biblically, in which everything happens with God’s command. But free will only happens BECAUSE OF GOD’S COMMAND! God made man in His image, after His likeness, and gave him dominion over the earth, lordship over the earth. This then, was God’s command (in the same way God said “let there be light,” and light came into being).

The compatibilism that the Calvinists seek is what I call a “theological redundancy.” God made free will and His own sovereignty compatible when He decreed that MAN WOULD BE MADE IN HIS IMAGE, AFTER HIS LIKENESS! But Calvinists, adding their own “finishing touches” to Scripture, have decided to create ANOTHER compatibility of their own—and, in the making, have done a huge disgrace to the Word of God.

Foreknowledge and Predetermination

In my last post, I asked the question, “if this [special] people are known ‘before the creation of the world,’ does this mean that God PREDETERMINED who they would be?” I am here now to answer this question.

But to do so, we must define three terms. Robert Picirilli defines these terms:

“1. CertaintyThe certainty of a future event means, simply, the fact that it will occur. Certainty, as I am using it, means its ‘factness,’ its ‘eventness’ in the future. If God is omniscient, it follows logically that all things that occur are certainly foreknown by God. Everything that happens is certain and known as such by God from all eternity” (Robert Picirilli, “Foreknowledge, Freedom, and the Future,”. Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society. Issue 43, no. 2, June 2000, page 262.).

I looked up the word “certain” in Merriam-Webster’s dictionary and saw the following definitions:

1: FIXED, SETTLED 2: of a specific but unspecified character, quantity, or degree 3 a: DEPENDABLE, RELIABLE b: known or proved to be true : INDISPUTABLE 4 a: INEVITABLE b: incapable of failing : DESTINED —used with a following infinitive 5: assured in mind or action .

Of particular interest to me is definition 4b—“destined.” I clicked on the word “destined” and got the following definitions:

1: to decree beforehand : PREDETERMINE2 a: to designate, assign, or dedicate in advance;the younger son was destined for the priesthood; a trait that destines them to failure; b: to direct, devise, or set apart for a specific purpose or place
So it seems at first glance that every “choice” humans make has already been PLANNED or PREDETERMINED by God.

However, this is where Scripture casts the final “say-so”:

12 Blessed is a man who endures trials, [a] because when he passes the test he will receive the crown (J) of life that He [b] has promised to those who love Him. (K)
13 No one undergoing a trial should say, "I am being tempted by God." For God is not tempted by evil, [c] and He Himself doesn't tempt anyone. 14 But each person is tempted when he is drawn away and enticed by his own evil desires. 15 Then after desire has conceived, it gives birth to sin, and when sin is fully grown, it gives birth to death. (L)
16 Don't be deceived, my dearly loved brothers. (M) 17 Every generous act and every perfect gift is from above, coming down from the Father of lights; with Him there is no variation or shadow cast by turning. (James 1;12-17, HCSB)

Scripture tells us that “He [God] doesn’t tempt anyone. God doesn’t use sin and evil by which to tempt or “trick” anyone into sin. This is why James continues with the words, “DON’T BE DECEIVED, my dearly loved brothers. EVERY GENEROUS ACT AND EVERY PERFECT GIFT IS FROM ABOVE…” Every bad thing does not come from God—but every good thing does. Notice that, when someone is tempted, they shouldn’t even blame the Devil: “But each person is tempted WHEN HE IS DRAWN AWAY AND ENTICED BY HIS OWN EVIL DESIRES” (James 1:14, HCSB). When temptation comes and gives birth to sin (and sin to death), then man is responsible for sin—not God!

Because of this, we have to come to grips with the fact that God has foreknowledge but man chooses to do evil (for instance) of his own accord—for God cannot be charged with sin. I will clear this up soon.

Now, on to our other two terms. This is what Picirilli says about “contingency”:

“A contingency is anything that really can take place in more than one way. For an event to be contingent, it must not be the INEVITABLE or UNAVOIDABLE product of natural law or of the necessitating influence of God…certainty relates to the ‘factness’ of an event, to WHETHER IT WILL BE OR NOT; contingency relates to its NATURE as free or inevitably caused by some other force. I am saying, therefore, that the same event can be both certain and contingent at the same time…” (262).

Picirilli goes on to give an example of him coming to a crossroads and choosing which direction to take. The fact that he will have to turn is certain; but his choice of which direction to take is up for debate (for there are two directions, and initially, he hasn’t taken either road). Now, in the mind of God, Picirilli has already taken his direction—but in the present time, Picirilli has yet to make a decision. Although God knows which direction He will choose, God is not gonna cause him in any way to make a certain direction. God’s knowledge does not directly impact his decision.

And the same thing goes for us. The contingency of an event relates to what the choice will be based upon two or more options. The certainty of an event states that the person will make a turn; but the contingency gives the options. The certainty of an event does not NECESSITATE that I know what turns will be available.

A good example of foreknowledge versus predetermination can be seen in the case of Hezekiah in the book of Isaiah. These words are recorded in Isaiah 38:

1 In those days Hezekiah became terminally ill. (A) The prophet Isaiah son of Amoz came and said to him, "This is what the LORD says: 'Put your affairs in order, (B) [a] for you are about to die; you will not recover.' " [b]
2 Then Hezekiah turned his face to the wall and prayed to the LORD. 3 He said, "Please, LORD, remember how I have walked before You faithfully and wholeheartedly, (C) and have done what is good in Your sight." (D) And Hezekiah wept bitterly.
4 Then the word of the LORD came to Isaiah: 5 "Go and tell Hezekiah that this is what the LORD God of your ancestor David says: I have heard your prayer; I have seen your tears. Look, I am going to add 15 years to your life. (E) [c] 6 And I will deliver you and this city from the hand of the king of Assyria; I will defend this city. (F) 7 This is the sign to you (G) from the LORD that the LORD will do what [d] He has promised: [e] 8 I am going to make the sun's shadow that goes down on Ahaz's stairway return by 10 steps." (H) So the sun's shadow [f] went back the 10 steps it had descended. (Isaiah 38:1-8, HCSB).

We learn in Isaiah 38 that Hezekiah was near the point of death. According to Isaiah, the Lord told Hezekiah that he was soon to die. The Lord told Hezekiah, ‘You will not recover.’ In other words, it seemed INEVITABLE that Hezekiah was gonna die. But then, on account of the news, Hezekiah turned to the wall and prayed for the Lord to heal him; it is only after he prays that the Lord tells Isaiah to go tell Hezekiah that 15 more years were added to his life.

Although the Lord told Hezekiah, “You will not recover,” the Lord changed His answer to Hezekiah and granted him longer life than previously expected.

Here we see the Lord’s foreknowledge—the Lord knew that He would add fifteen years to Hezekiah’s life. In addition to years to his life, the Lord also told Hezekiah, “And I will deliver you and this city from the hand of the king of Assyria; I will defend this city.” The Lord’s sign to Hezekiah was the sun’s shadow regressing 10 degrees.

What I treasure most about the passage of Hezekiah’s prayer is that the Lord doesn’t make Hezekiah do anything; instead, Hezekiah’s response to his soon death is that he turns to God and prays, reminding the Lord of his walk before Him (not that the Lord needed reminding). But Hezekiah brings before God his faithfulness to the Lord and the Lord responds positively to Hezekiah’s request. Unlike the god of the Calvinists, the God of Scripture does not just order around His creation and dictate orders to them; instead, He gives them the ability to choose whether to follow or rebel—and then punishes them or rewards them accordingly. The Lord interacts with His creatures in a very dynamic way.

Regarding contingency, Hezekiah figured that he had another choice in the matter: while the Lord had told him he would die, he believed that if he appealed to the Lord in prayer, that there was the POSSIBILITY that his life could be spared. The Lord gave Hezekiah the fact of death—however, the Lord later reversed that decision. Now the Lord knew that He was gonna reverse the decision—however, the Lord works in time and space, constructs He made for human life. As a result, while God knows everything, He reacts to man’s actions in time and space—which means that, while He knows all, He gives man the power to choose his actions. The fact that God changes such decisions shows that the Lord desires to interact with His creatures such that, when they pray, He answers them in ways only known by Him.

The last term to be investigated is “necessity”:
“Necessary events are those that can transpire in just one way because they are caused by some other force and therefore must inevitably be the way they are. For such events there were causes leading to the event that allowed no freedom of choice, causes that NECESSARILY produced the event. These are cause-effect events, where the cause can issue in no other result than the effect” (262, 263).
Merriam-Webster’s online dictionary has an interesting definition of “necessary”:
“determined or produced by the previous condition of things.”

So a prior condition CAUSES the event in question. This is indeed a cause-effect idea. For instance, if I push my glass of milk off of the table, then the effect will be that the glass will fall to the floor and the milk will spill. Or, if I spill the milk on the table, then the milk is gonna spread across the table. With the Calvinist, they believe that, since God knows everything, He must CAUSE everything that happens; however, God is not the “previous condition” of events— FREE WILL is the previous CONDITION of an event. For example, in the example where my milk spills all across the table, this was caused by me knocking over my glass of milk, not God ordaining it. God’s knowledge is NOT an action—while God knows everything, knowledge doesn’t imply culpability. God gave me choice regarding things like what liquid I would drink (milk, soda, water, etc.), the glass I would choose, and whether I would drink all the milk or spill it. It is on the basis of these choices that I knock over the milk; and when I do, the responsibility lies with me for so doing. What is necessary is my free will—without it, I can’t do any action. However, the action produced by my free will choices cannot be blamed on God…for God doesn’t push over the milk—I do.

It’s fascinating how, in the discussion of free will and sovereignty, Calvinists claim God causes everything; and yet, in our everyday lives, we are the direct causes of so many things!! Shouldn’t everyday experience in human nature give us a clue into the free will God has given us? If it doesn’t, nothing will.
I will continue my discussion of Robert Picirilli’s article “Foreknowledge, Freedom, and the Future” in my next post. In addition, I will continue my work on whether the “special people” that Christ will receive as an inheritance are PREDETERMINED by God.

Predestination in Ephesians, Part I

“For the first time Scripture gives the timing of election. God ‘chose us in him [Christ] before the creation of the world’ (Eph. 1:4). The Father chose His people before creation…when Paul says that God chose us before creation, he underlines God’s purpose in election. We didn’t exist before the foundation of the world and therefore could contribute nothing to election. Paul teaches the same truth in 2 Timothy 1:9 when he writes that God’s grace ‘was given us in Christ Jesus before the beginning of time’” (Peterson & Williams, “Why I Am Not An Arminian,” page 57).

Scripture does indeed present us with a time, as it does in the book of Revelation. We’ve already seen that those whose names are not written in the Lamb’s Book of Life will fall down and worship the beast. We’ve also seen the church at Sardis, for example, only had a few people in the ENTIRE CHURCH whom the Lord said would be victorious and reign with Him (because they had maintained righteousness despite trials and tribulations). He told the rest of the church at Sardis to repent and return to their original state—or else He would do away with them. But for those who would come out victorious, their names would never be erased from the Book of Life. It’s still hard to believe that the Lord vowed to erase the church’s name from the Book of Life—but it is, after all, the Lord’s Book; one can hardly tell Him what to do with it…

This is what Peterson and Williams have to say regarding Ephesians 1:

“As clearly as anywhere in the Bible, Ephesians 1 teaches that GOD CHOSE HIS PEOPLE FOR SALVATION BECAUSE OF HIS LOVE AND SOVEREIGN WILL. GOD’S LOVE, HIS GRACE, IS THE BASIS OF ELECTION. ‘In LOVE he predestined us to be adopted as his sons through Jesus Christ…to the praise of his glorious grace’ (Eph. 1:4-5; italics added).
Because the Father set his affection upon a MULTITUDE OF HUMAN BEINGS, HE CHOSE TO ADOPT THEM AS HIS CHILDREN” (Robert A. Peterson & Michael D. Williams, “Why I Am Not An Arminian,” page 57).

Peterson and Williams argue (from the quote above) that God’s love, DEMONSTRATED BY HIS GRACE, is what makes election possible. But if this is true, then hasn’t God shone His love UPON ALL MEN?

“In fact, we labor and strive for this, because we have put our hope in the living God, WHO IS THE SAVIOR OF EVERYONE, especially of those who believe” (1 Timothy 4:10, Holman Christian Standard Bible).

Notice that the group singled out from everyone (or “all men”) is “those who believe.” The living God is not the Savior of those HE HANDPICKED to believe, but of “those who believe,” who choose to profess faith in Christ. God is the Savior of every man; so, if this is true, then salvation must be available for all, thereby making God’s love (and grace) available for every man, woman, boy, and girl. If this doesn’t win the day, how about this Scriptural reference?

“For the grace of God has appeared, with salvation FOR ALL PEOPLE” (Titus 2:11, HCSB).

If God’s love was shown through His grace, then, since His grace was given to all through salvation (as Titus 2:11 tells us), God’s love was given to everyone. I’ll set up the syllogism here:

a. God’s love was shown through His grace (according to Peterson and Williams).
b. God’s grace is available to all men (Titus 2:11).
c. Therefore, God’s love is for all men.

If God’s love (and grace) are available for all, then how could God ever select one person over another WITHOUT requiring faith in either? How could one be selected over another apart from faith in the work of Christ? If Sally doesn’t accept Christ, then she is guilty because she refused to accept Him (not because Christ didn’t elect her). And the same goes for any other person.

Peterson and Williams then begin to attack the Arminian position:

“What does Paul mean when he says that God ‘chose us in Him’ (Eph. 1:4), that ‘in Him we were also chosen’ (Eph. 1:11)? Jack Cottrell summarizes the Arminian view: ‘[God] foreknows whether an individual will meet the conditions for salvation which he has sovereignly imposed…this is the import of Eph. 1:4, which says that ‘He chose us in Him’—in Christ.’ Is this correct?
Paul often (not always) uses ‘in Christ’ and ‘in him’ to signify union with Christ. At least six times in Ephesians 1, for example, this is the case: in Ephesians 1:1, 3, 6,7,9, and 13. And when Paul twice says God chose us ‘in Him’ (Eph. 1:4, 11), ‘in Him’ refers to union with Christ. What is the difference between Paul’s regular use of ‘in Christ’ and his use of it to refer to election? THE DIFFERENCE LIES IN THE TIME FACTOR. When speaking of election, Paul says God chose us in Christ BEFORE CREATION (Eph. 1:4). The other times that Paul uses this phrase he speaks of God’s actually joining people to Christ in history.
God’s choosing us ‘in Him before the creation of the world’ (Eph. 1:4, 11) refers to union with Christ before creation. The words cannot speak of actual union with Christ BECAUSE WE DIDN’T EXIST BEFORE WE WERE CREATED. Rather, they speak OF GOD’S PLANNING TO JOIN US TO CHRIST. The meaning of the whole expression God ‘chose us in Him before the creation of the world’ is that God NOT ONLY ELECTED A PEOPLE FOR HIMSELF; HE ALSO PLANNED THE MEANS BY WHICH THEY WOULD BE SAVED; HE PLANNED TO JOIN THEM TO HIS SON AND HIS SAVING BENEFITS” (58).

Peterson and Williams make it clear that the time factor is the reason why God picks people—because He plans their salvation BEFORE time began. However, is it possible that the time factor could show us God’s FOREKNOWLEDGE?

This is what David tells us of God’s foreknowledge in the book of Psalms:

“Lord, you have searched me and known me. You know WHEN I SIT DOWN AND WHEN I STAND UP; You understand my thoughts FROM FAR AWAY. You observe my travels and my rest; You are aware of ALL MY WAYS. BEFORE A WORD IS ON MY TONGUE, You know all about it, LORD.
For it was You who created my inward parts; You knit me together in my mother’s womb.
I will praise You, because I have been remarkably and wonderfully made. Your works are wonderful, and I know [this] very well.
My bones were not hidden from You when I was made in secret, when I was formed in the depths of the earth. YOUR EYES SAW ME WHEN I WAS FORMLESS; ALL [MY] DAYS WERE WRITTEN IN YOUR BOOK AND PLANNED BEFORE A SINGLE ONE OF THEM BEGAN” (Psalm 139:1-4, 13-16, HCSB).

In verse 2 of Psalm 139, David said, “You understand my thoughts from far away.” Even before David’s thoughts came to his mind, God already knew what David was going to think. And when he said, “Before a word is on my tongue, you know all about it, Lord,” he was acknowledging that God also knew what he was going to say BEFORE he said it! According to the Apologetics Bible (Holman Christian Standard):

“God knows not only every move we make in our daily routines, but also the motives behind our actions. The expression ‘from far away’ can be temporal or spatial; in this context it is probably temporal—BEFOREHAND, and not from a distance (see v.4)” (Apologetics Study Bible, page 906).

So God knows all of these things beforehand! This sounds like quite the Sovereign Lord. In my estimation, this doesn’t sound like a God whose power is compromised because of the choices of man—but a God who will bring all His purposes to pass IN SPITE OF man’s terrible choices. As Paul wrote in Romans 8:28, “all things WORK TOGETHER FOR GOOD for them that love God…” All things are not GOOD, and all things are not ORDAINED by God, but all things will TURN OUT or WORK OUT for good. The end result or goal is good for the children of God.

Verse 16 is a verse of great dispute. When David says that God saw him when he was formless, this means that God saw him in existence and knew he would be born BEFORE he was conceived in his mother’s womb. This once again, serves as a testimony to the foreknowledge of God. When it says “all my days were written in Your book and planned before a single one of them began,” David is saying that God knew everything about the number of his days before they started. God already knew the number of years of David’s life as well as what his days would involve, what he would do, where he would go, and so forth. Once again, we see that David’s days (as are ours) are already recorded in the Lord’s book before they even start; however, does this mean that God has planned EVERY SINGLE ACT in EVERY SINGLE DAY? For instance, did God plan that I would wear a red shirt and brown corduroys this morning when I woke up to get dressed? I will say that God knew it—He knows everything. But am I gonna go so far as to say that God PREDETERMINED for me to wear a red shirt and brown corduroys? Probably not. This, however, takes nothing away from the choices I make—or God’s sovereignty and knowledge. God knows that I was gonna choose a red shirt—but I don’t believe He PLANNED that I would wear a red shirt.

I do agree with Peterson and Williams, however, when they say that God not only elected a people to Himself, but also elected the means by which He would bring this people to Himself.

Let’s see what Scripture has to say about God bringing a people to Himself:

“He [Christ] gave Himself for us to redeem us from all lawlessness and to cleanse for Himself A SPECIAL PEOPLE, eager to do good works” (Titus 2:14, HCSB).
“For we are His creation—created in Christ Jesus for good works, which God prepared ahead of time so that we should walk in them” (Ephesians 2:10, HCSB).

Notice with Ephesians 2, the emphasis is on the good works being prepared beforehand, NOT the people! Titus 2:14 tells us that there will be a people as Christ’s inheritance that will be cleansed from their sins. Once again, however, we see that “good works” are mentioned. If you look back at Ephesians 2:10, we were created as His workmanship IN CHRIST JESUS for good works. It is by union with Him and Him ONLY, that we can do good works. In our original state, we were “dead in…trespasses and sins” (Eph. 2:1, HCSB).

However, if this people are known “before the creation of the world,” does this mean that God PREDETERMINED who they would be? Or did God KNOW who they would be? I think there is a difference between predetermination and foreknowledge—and this I will discuss in my next post.

Predestination in Romans, Part I

Throughout my series on Predestination from the book “Why I Am Not An Arminian” by Robert A. Peterson and Michael D. Williams, I have taken the concept of predestination discussed in the Gospel of John, Acts, and Revelation. Now, I will discuss the concept according to Paul in his epistle to the Romans. Peterson and Williams write the following:

“…’foreknew’ in Romans 8:29 has God as subject and His people as object. The words ‘know’ and ‘foreknow’ have a broad range of meaning in Scripture, and sometimes ‘foreknow’ means knowing facts beforehand. But that is not its meaning in Romans 8:29. Paul does not say that God foreknows certain facts (which of course he does; he knows all facts); instead he says that he foreknows certain people…when Paul says, ‘God foreknew’ people in Romans 8:29, therefore, he means that God PLANNED TO ENTER INTO A SAVING PERSONAL RELATIONSHIP WITH THEM, TO SET HIS LOVE UPON THEM” (Peterson & Williams, “Why I Am Not An Arminian,” page 55).

There is a problem, however, with Peterson’s and Williams’ analysis. The problem is found when you consider that they seem to combine the two factors of Romans 8:29 into one. In the quote above, I have capitalized the authors’ words regarding God’s plans for “those he foreknew.” The reason why I did this is because Peterson and Williams seem to argue for predestination—but leave out foreknowledge: “God planned to enter into a saving personal relationship with them, to set his love upon them.”

Look at Romans 8:29. The first phrase is, “For those He foreknew…” What is the “for” there for? What is the significance of the “for” in verse 29? The answer is found in Romans 8:28, where Paul begins his argument concerning God’s children. The reason why verse 29 happens is because verse 28 tells us that all things God works out in the end for good. However, what do we do with “those He foreknew?” Paul doesn’t mention this title in verse 28, so why is it there? “Those He foreknew” describes the children of God mentioned in verse 28—who are referred to there as “those who love God” and “those who are called according to His purpose.”

Yes, as Peterson and Williams argue it, God chose to set His love first. As 1 John 4:19 says, “We love Him because HE FIRST LOVED US.” However, we are not FORCED to love Him because He first loved us. God, granting free moral agency to mankind, allows us to choose whether or not we will reciprocate God’s love. So, regarding “those He foreknew,” these are the ones God knew would “love Him” return. This is why they are called “those who love God”—because, while the Lord foreknew ALL of mankind, not all will choose to love Him back. God also called these people to a heavenly calling; however, just like Abraham, we too, must answer the call to labor in the Lord’s Service.

1 John 3:16 tells us that God loved the world so much that He gave His only Son; the purpose for so doing was to allow anyone who believes in Him to have eternal life.

And then come the wonderful words of John 3:17—

“For God sent not His Son into the world to CONDEMN the world, but that THE WORLD THROUGH HIM MIGHT BE SAVED.”

So God’s purpose for sending His Son was to save THE WORLD, not just a limited few or a special group, and bring them to Himself. If the Lord chose anyone to save, it was ALL OF THE WORLD.

Peterson and Williams are right that “those He foreknew” refers to those God planned to enter into a saving relationship with; however, they’re wrong when it comes to whether or not that group is the world or a few. Peterson and Williams are gonna argue that God only intended to save a select few—those that He picks. The problem with this interpretation is that Paul says in Romans 8:28 that all things work out for the good of THOSE WHO LOVE GOD. God does plan good things for these persons, but these people HAVE RESPONDED TO GOD IN LOVE, which is only possible because of the Father’s act of love at Calvary, where He offered up His one and only Son to die for the sins of the world. God has not arbitrarily selected people to place His love upon.

Verse 29 says, “For those He foreknew, He also predestined to be conformed to the image of His Son, so that He would be the firstborn among many brothers” (Romans 8:29, Holman Christian Standard Bible). For those He knew would love Him in return (before the foundation of the world), He planned for those who love Him to grow into the image of His Son (become imitators of Christ). And how are we to conform to the image of Christ? Paul tells us earlier in Romans 8:

“The Spirit Himself testifies together with our Spirit that we are God’s children, and if children, also heirs—heirs of God and co-heirs with Christ—SEEING THAT WE SUFFER WITH HIM SO THAT WE MAY ALSO BE GLORIFIED WITH HIM” (Romans 8:16-17, HCSB).

There is a condition to glorification noted here—that condition is that believers suffer. So, contrary to the Calvinist idea of verse 30, that glorification is GUARANTEED, Paul here gives a condition of glorification—that it will only come about through suffering. Paul says the exact same thing in Philippians:

“[My goal] is to know Him and the power of His resurrection and the fellowship of His sufferings, being conformed to His death, ASSUMING THAT I WILL SOMEHOW REACH THE RESURRECTION FROM AMONG THE DEAD. NOT THAT I HAVE ALREADY REACHED [the goal] OR AM ALREADY FULLY MATURE, but I make every effort to take hold of it BECAUSE I ALSO HAVE BEEN TAKEN HOLD OF BY CHRIST JESUS. Brothers, I DO NOT CONSIDER MYSELF TO HAVE TAKEN HOLD OF IT. But one thing I do: Forgetting what is behind and reaching forward to what is ahead, I pursue as my goal the prize promised by God’s heavenly call in Christ Jesus” (Philippians 3:10-14, HCSB).

Notice that Paul’s desire was to have “the fellowship of His [Christ] sufferings” and to thereby be “conformed to His death” in order to “reach the resurrection from among the dead.” The key to being raised with Christ, or being glorified with Christ, was to SUFFER WITH CHRIST! Paul states here in Philippians 3 that he did not “consider…to have taken hold of it.” Paul didn’t believe he had obtained it yet—and it behooves us to think the same way: “Therefore, all who are mature SHOULD THINK THIS WAY” (Phil. 3:15, HCSB).

For this post, two other comments should be made: one refers to the importance of suffering in sanctification (and hopefully, glorification) and the issue of election in Scripture. The first issue concerns the importance of suffering in sanctification (and glorification). Read these words from the apostle Paul:

“Therefore, since we have been declared righteous BY FAITH, we have peace with God through our Lord Jesus Christ. Also THROUGH HIM, we have obtained access BY FAITH into this grace in which we stand, and we rejoice IN HOPE OF THE GLORY OF GOD” (Romans 5:1-2, HCSB).

Here the apostle Paul tells us that faith in the work of Christ has brought us peace, access to grace, and the glorification. Notice that the rejoicing is not due to OBTAINING the glory of God—but the HOPE that we will do so (final attainment of glorification). Glorification is that which is TO COME, not that which already IS. Yet, for the believer who perseveres, the hope of glory is NOW as well as TO COME.
But there is also something else to take joy in:

“And not only that, but we also rejoice IN OUR AFFLICTIONS, because we know that affliction produces ENDURANCE, endurance produces PROVEN CHARACTER, and proven character produces HOPE. THIS HOPE DOES NOT DISAPPOINT, because God’s love has been poured out in our hearts through the Holy Spirit who was given to us” (Rom. 5:3-5, HCSB).

Notice that believers are to rejoice in their afflictions because OF THE GOOD that the afflictions produce. The afflictions are not good in and of themselves—but they are used to produce good in the believer. I believe this is what Paul was talking about with Romans 8:28 when he wrote,

“We know that all things work together for the good of those who love God: those who are called according to His purpose.”

We rejoice in our afflictions, our sufferings, because “we suffer with Him so that we may also be glorified with Him” (8:17). It is the suffering that leads to glory, NOT the guarantee itself.

Notice the fruit of afflictions in Romans 5: endurance, proven character, and hope. The afflictions themselves allow us “to be conformed to the image of His Son” (Rom. 8:29). And it is a result of this growing conformation to Christ’s image that makes us yearn for eternal glorification:

“For we know that the whole creation has been groaning together with labor pains until now. And not only that, but WE OURSELVES who have the Spirit as the firstfruits—WE ALSO GROAN within ourselves, EAGERLY WAITING for adoption, THE REDEMPTION OF OUR BODIES. Now IN THIS HOPE WE WERE SAVED, yet hope that is seen is not hope, because WHO HOPES FOR WHAT HE SEES? But if we hope for what we do not see, WE EAGERLY WAIT FOR IT WITH PATIENCE” (Romans 8:22-25, HCSB).

Notice that we as believers “eagerly wait” for our bodies to be redeemed, transformed (v. 23), and we were saved in the HOPE of redemption but must wait for it “eagerly” and “with patience” (v. 25). Patience serves then, as a condition of perseverance. We not only need FAITH, but also PATIENCE, or what we call PERSEVERANCE, if we plan to obtain our bodily redemption and eternal transformation.

Romans 5 and 8 make many interesting connections in Paul’s theology. What we do know from the apostle Paul, though, is that he was a strong believer in what 1 Thessalonians 5:8 calls “the hope of salvation.” While a believer has been saved, he or she has been saved “in hope” (Rom. 8:24), which means that the salvation itself is a FUTURE event (“will be saved,” from Romans 10:9). As a result, we can have confidence in our final salvation because “this hope does not disappoint” (Rom. 5:5); nevertheless, we can also throw away our confidence, and thereby lose our reward (that being eternal life):

“So don’t throw away your confidence, which has a great reward. For YOU NEED ENDURANCE, so that after you have done God’s will, you may receive what was promised.
‘For in yet a very little while, the Coming One will come and not delay.
But My righteous one will live by faith;
And if he draws back,
My soul has no pleasure in him.’
But we are not those who draw back and ARE DESTROYED, but those who have faith and OBTAIN LIFE” (Hebrews 10:35-39, HCSB).

Those who draw back, who DO NOT ENDURE, are those who “are destroyed,” those who forfeit eternal life. Only those who have faith and ENDURE “obtain life,” that is, to receive what was promised (Hebrews 10:36).

Predestination in Acts, Part II

“Paul and Barnabas’s ministry in Pisidian Antioch on the first missionary journey is met alternatively by faith in their message (Acts 13:42-44, 47-49) and persecution (Acts 13:45-46, 50-51). As a result the apostles are up (Acts 13:42-44), down (Acts 13:45-46), up (Acts 13:47-49) and down (Acts 13:50-51). In the midst of the vacillating responses, the Gentiles turn to the Lord. ‘When the Gentiles heard this, they were glad and honored the word of the Lord; and ALL WHO WERE APPOINTED FOR ETERNAL LIFE BELIEVED’ (Acts 13:48). Luke presents A DIVINE CLASSIFICATION OR APPOINTMENT TO ETERNAL LIFE. AND THAT APPOINTMENT TO ETERNAL LIFE PRECEDES FAITH ON THE PART OF THE BELIEVERS- ‘all who were appointed for eternal life believed’” (Robert A. Peterson & Michael D. Williams, “Why I Am Not An Arminian,” page 52).

Peterson and Williams use their clever tricks here again with Acts 13:48. But, as the evidence will show, they are wrong on this text in Acts as well.

I looked up this verse in my Apologetics Study Bible, produced by the Holman Christian Standard publishing company. They interpreted the verse as thus: “And all who HAD BEEN APPOINTED TO ETERNAL LIFE BELIEVED.” However, there is a problem with the HCSB: the issue of the verbs.

To figure out what to do with this verse, I decided to look the verse up in my “Reader’s Greek New Testament,” produced by Zondervan. I’ll produce the verse here so that you can get an idea of the problem caused by the Holman Christian Standard rendering:

Akouonta de ta ethne exairon kai edoksazon ton logon tou kuriou kai episteusan hosoi esan tetagmenoi eis zoen aionion;

The words “hosoi esan tetagmenoi eis zoen aionion” are translated (reading from left to right), “as many were appointed into (or to) life eternal.” I want us to go back, though, and look at the beginning of the verse.

The words “akounta de ta ethne exairon kai edoksazon ton logon tou kuriou kai episteusan” are translated as “hearing but the Gentiles rejoiced and glorified the word of the Lord and believed.” When we arrange words in a proper English order, we get the following: “but the Gentiles hearing [the Word] rejoiced and glorified the word of the Lord and believed.”

What you have in the early part of verse 48 is the proper order in which salvation is appropriated to the believer: first, the Gentiles “heard” the word; then, they rejoiced and glorified the Word of the Lord; last but not least, they believed. Their hearing the Word caused them to rejoice and glorify the Word of the Lord (for they understood the Word after hearing it); then, as a result of understanding how wonderful the Word is, they then believed the Gospel—and were appointed to eternal life.

Peterson and Williams would like to have us believe that people are given eternal life BEFORE they believe—but this simply isn’t true! Understand these words from the apostle Paul:

“So faith comes from what is heard, and what is heard comes through the message about Christ” (Romans 10:17, HCSB).

In the context of Romans 10, Paul is discussing the issue of the Jews who have not achieved righteousness through the law, and the Gentiles who have achieved righteousness by faith (Rom. 9:30). Israel’s problem, though, doesn’t seem to be that they haven’t heard the message, but rather that they did not respond properly to it:

“But I ask, ‘Did they not hear?’ Yes, they did:
Their voice has gone out to all the earth, and their words to the ends of the inhabited world.
But I ask, ‘Did Israel not understand?’ First, Moses said:
I will make you jealous of those who are not a nation; I will make you angry by a nation that lacks understanding.
And Isaiah says boldly:
‘I was found by those who were not looking for Me; I revealed Myself to those who were not asking for Me.’
But to Israel he says: ‘All day long I have spread out My hands to a DISOBEDIENT AND DEFIANT PEOPLE’” (Romans 10:18-21, HCSB).

Israel’s problem had nothing to do with whether or not she was ELECTED to be saved or given eternal life; rather, Israel’s problem was that she was “disobedient and defiant” (as Romans 10 illustrates). So, while Israel did indeed hear the message, she did not respond to the message by professing faith. Instead, she revolted against it, still trying to do things her own way—by works of the law.

Listen to what Paul has to say to the Ephesians in the midst of a chapter discussing
their election IN CHRIST:

“In Him you also, when you heard the word of truth, the gospel of your salvation—in Him WHEN YOU BELIEVED—were sealed with the promised Holy Spirit” (Ephesians 1:13,
HCSB).

First, the Ephesians heard the word of truth, the gospel; then they believed in what they heard from the Word—and, as a result, they believed and were saved. And what was the evidence of their salvation? “when you believed—were sealed with the promised Holy Spirit.” They were not sealed IN HIM until AFTER THEY BELIEVED, not before!

The problem with Peterson and Williams’ assessments of Acts is that it disagrees with the rest of Scripture. And in the event that one’s individual interpretation disagrees with the rest of Scripture, then he or she must go back and change their own interpretation to match the voice of Scripture. This is indeed the key to UNDERSTANDING (or standing under) the Word of God.

Now, back to the Greek text itself. The first part of Acts 13:48 tells us that the Gentiles heard the Word, rejoiced, glorified the Word, and believed. But the Greek text then says, “hosoi esan tetagmenoi zoen aionion.” The words “esan tetagmenoi” translate to “were had been appointed.” The word “tetagmenoi” is a perfect passive participle. The passive participle translates to a past tense verb—for example, “believed.” This is the basic passive participle. If the verb is a perfect passive, this means that the passive tense is attached to a perfect tense. The perfect tense translates in English to “has” or “have”. The perfect passive translates to “had been.” In this case, the word “tetagmenoi” translates to “having been appointed.”

But the problem comes in when you have to consider the verb before “tetagmenoi”—the word “esan.” The word “esan” is an imperfect verb, meaning “were.” The verb is a passive tense of the verb “to be” (usually written as “is”). So the text reads “were having been appointed.” In cases like this, when you have a passive verb meeting another passive verb, one of the passives must yield to the other. Because “were” is vital to this verse, then “having been appointed” must be changed accordingly. The best way to combine these two verbs is to translate the phrase as “were appointed.”
To say then, that these people “were appointed” before they believed is to do the text a terrible disgrace. Take the following example:

“All those who caught the swine flu were admitted to the hospital.”

Would I interpret this verse to mean “all those who were admitted to the hospital caught the flu” and state that only after the patients were admitted to the hospital that they caught the swine flu? Of course not! Yet, this what Peterson and Williams do to the text: they claim that those who believe were appointed to believe BEFORE they did, which is not what Scripture teaches. Even with Ephesians 1, we see that it is only AFTER THEY BELIEVED that they were sealed in Christ with the Holy Spirit. If the effects happen AFTER the belief instead of before, then we are not inclined to believe that God has handpicked those who would believe in Him.

Acts 13:48 shows us a “cause and effect” plot: first, the Gentiles accept the Word, hear it, and rejoice in its truth—then they believe and are appointed to eternal life. It is usually a good rule of thumb to match interpretations with the known factors in Scripture. Peterson and Williams, though, stick to a presupposition. We can all stand to benefit from their mistake…

Predestination in Acts, Part I

“In Corinth on his second missionary journey, Paul, discouraged by Jewish opposition, stops preaching in the synagogue and turns to the Gentiles (Acts 18:5-8). The Lord speaks to Paul in a vision one night telling him to continue preaching the gospel (Acts 18:9). God promises the apostle, ‘I have many people in this city’ (Acts 18:10). Paul obediently stays on in Corinth for eighteen months ministering the Word of God (Acts 18:11). Luke teaches that people in Corinth BELONGED TO GOD EVEN BEFORE THEY BELIEVED THE GOSPEL. Again we see God’s election of people to salvation. Interestingly, although some claim that an emphasis on God’s sovereignty in salvation hinders evangelism, that emphasis encouraged Paul to continue preaching” (Robert A. Peterson & Michael D. Williams, “Why I Am Not An Arminian,” pp. 52-53).

Robert Peterson and Michael Williams attempt here to do what they’ve done throughout all of the Gospel of John as well as Revelation: hide certain details about the text.
In Acts 18, they write regarding verse 10, “God promises the apostle, ‘I have many people in this city.’” The problem with this, however, is that they leave out the earlier part of verse 10:

“For I AM WITH YOU, and NO ONE WILL LAY A HAND ON YOU TO HURT YOU, because I have many people in this city” (Holman Christian Standard Bible).

So the reason why the Lord tells Paul that He has many people in the city is so that Paul would be assured that “no one will lay a hand” on him. This is why in Acts 18:9, the Lord tells Paul, “Don’t be afraid, but KEEP ON SPEAKING AND DON’T BE SILENT.” There would be people in the city who would believe the gospel and profess faith in Christ. As a result of the gospel, Paul would have friends amongst the unbelievers in the city.

As we see, the Lord’s words to Paul about not keeping silent had to do with Paul’s fear of losing his life—not primarily about those who would believe the gospel, although the new converts would be protection for Paul. We do read in verse 11 that “he stayed there a year and six months, teaching the word of God among them.”
If we look back to the early verses of Acts 18, we find that in Corinth, the Jews refuse to believe the gospel:

“When Silas and Timothy came down from Macedonia, Paul was occupied with preaching the message and solemnly testified to the Jews that the Messiah is Jesus. But WHEN THEY RESISTED and BLASPHEMED, he shook out his clothes and told them, ‘Your blood is on your own heads! I am clean. From now on I will go to the Gentiles’” (Acts 18:5-6, HCSB).

Notice that the Jews “resisted and blasphemed” in response to the gospel message. Just like those Jews of Acts 7 who heard Stephen preach, these Jews resist Paul’s preaching of the gospel as well. To the Calvinist I pose the question, if we have in Acts TWO INSTANCES (chapters 7 and 18) where people are resisting the gospel, then how is it that there can be a concept of “Irresistible Grace”? And to make matters worse, how is it that Christians, after getting saved, can RESIST the Spirit of Grace (if grace is irresistible)?

As I said earlier, the Lord told Paul about many people of His in the city because this would serve as proof that Paul would be protected by the Lord.
We have one more passage to tackle in Acts: Acts 13. And that is what my next post will be all about.

Predestination in Revelation, Part II

Today I’m gonna continue my series on Predestination in Revelation. I’ve been tackling Peterson and Williams’ book titled, “Why I Am Not An Arminian,” and investigating their misunderstandings of biblical passages. I’m hanging around their aforementioned verses in the book of Revelation because they quote them as referring to God’s spiritual protection upon His people. However, as we will see, the spiritual protection of believers comes through their faith and endurance—and both of these will be needed for the time on earth of which Revelation 13 speaks.

I’ll print the main verses here:

1 And I saw a beast coming up out of the sea. (A) He [a] had 10 horns and seven heads. On his horns were 10 diadems, (B) and on his heads were blasphemous names. (C) [b] 2 The beast I saw was like a leopard, his feet were like a bear's, and his mouth was like a lion's mouth. (D) The dragon gave him his power, his throne, and great authority. 3 One of his heads appeared to be fatally wounded, [c] but his fatal wound was healed. The whole earth was amazed and followed the beast. (E) [d] 4 They worshiped the dragon (F) because he gave authority to the beast. And they worshiped the beast, saying, "Who is like the beast? (G) Who is able to wage war against him?"
5 A mouth was given to him to speak boasts and blasphemies. (H) He was also given authority to act [e] [f] for 42 months. (I) 6 He began to speak [g] blasphemies against God: to blaspheme His name and His dwelling—those who dwell in heaven. 7 And he was permitted to wage war against the saints and to conquer them. He was also given authority over every tribe, people, language, and nation. (J) 8 All those who live on the earth will worship him, everyone whose name was not written from the foundation of the world in the book [h] of life (K) of the Lamb who was slaughtered. (L) [i]
9 If anyone has an ear, he should listen: (M)
10 If anyone is destined for captivity,
into captivity he goes.
If anyone is to be killed [j] with a sword,
with a sword he will be killed. (N)
Here is the endurance and the faith of the saints. (Revelation 13: 1-10, Holman Christian Standard Bible).

The chapter itself refers to the beast of Revelation, the one whom the dragon will give power to the beast. The dragon will be the beast’s serpent—and everyone will bow down to the best. Notice the praise given to the beast: “Who is like the beast? Who is able to wage war against him?” These words parallel those ascribed to the Lord in Exodus:

LORD, who is like You among the gods?
Who is like You, glorious in holiness,
revered with praises, performing wonders? (Exodus 15:11, HCSB)

Moses and the Israelites praised God for His victory over the Egyptians at the Red Sea; but in Revelation, “everyone whose name was not written from the foundation of the world in the book of life of the Lamb who was slaughtered” would praise and worship the beast (Rev. 13:8).

But in verses 9 and 10, we have something entirely different from what we would expect. Peterson and Williams may not have seen it, but it is pretty evident to most:

9 If anyone has an ear, he should listen: (M)
10 If anyone is destined for captivity,
into captivity he goes.
If anyone is to be killed [j] with a sword,
with a sword he will be killed. (N)
Here is the endurance and the faith of the saints. (Rev. 13:9-10, HCSB)

Here the Spirit tells us to listen to what He is saying. What is He saying? He’s already told us that those whose names are not written in the Lamb’s book of life will worship the beast. Their lives will be spared because they worship him and are useful to him. But what about the believers? Will Christians be spared? No. To see this, go back to Revelation 13:7—the beast was given authority not just over every tongue, tribe, and nation, but “he was permitted to wage war against the saints and conquer them” (13:7a). This means that all power and authority on earth belongs to him at this point in the book. With all this power, he is now allowed to harm the saints of God—something that, evidently, wasn’t apparent through the earlier chapters of the book. With this power EVEN OVER THE SAINTS, the beast will now have his way with them. And what exactly do the saints have to look forward to?
They will be killed with the sword and taken into captivity: “if anyone is destined for captivity, into captivity he goes. If anyone is to be killed with a sword, with a sword he will be killed” (Rev. 13:10).

Revelation 13:10 parallels an Old Testament passage regarding God’s people. God promised to punish Old Testament Israel for her sins against God, her constant turning away from the One true living God. This is what the Lord gave Israel for her punishment:

“Then the Lord said to me: “Even if Moses and Samuel should stand before Me, My compassions would not [reach out] to these people. Send them from My presence, and let them go. If they ask you: Where will we go? You must tell them: ‘This is what the LORD says:
Those [destined] for death, to death;
Those [destined] for the sword, to the sword.
Those [destined] for famine, to famine;
Those [destined] for captivity, to captivity’” (Jeremiah 15:1-2, HCSB).

Because of Israel’s sin, God would let her experience “four kinds of judgment” (Jer. 15:3). However, this is placed in the context of Revelation 13, where God’s people, those who have been faithful, will endure harsh persecution because they REFUSE to bow down to the beast. Instead of the saints being persecuted for rebelling against God (which the Israelites did), they will now be punished for REBELLING AGAINST THE BEAST, and refusing to bow down and worship him!

The end of Revelation 13:10 is the part I want to emphasize:
“Here is the endurance and faith of the saints.”

Despite the persecution, Christians are called to maintain their faith and endurance (or perseverance).

Robert A. Peterson and Michael D. Williams would like to make readers believe that, no matter what, believers are spiritually protected. However, John in Revelation disagrees. To him, those who profess faith in Christ will be SPIRITUALLY VULNERABLE during the reign of the beast. Because of the power and authority given to him, every saint will be “under the microscope,” exposed to the world. And why? because the beast wants EVERYONE to worship him; and if he doesn’t have his way, then believers can expect to go to their deaths.

John states it here that those who profess faith will have to maintain FAITH AND ENDURANCE through this difficult time, a time that the world has yet to see. Whether or not a person endures is all based on that person: will the tribulation on the earth MAKE or BREAK the saints? That will all be revealed in time. However, we have Jesus words about the one who reigns victoriously with Him in the end:

“The victor will be dressed in white clothes, and I will NEVER ERASE HIS NAME FROM THE BOOK OF LIFE, but will acknowledge his name before My Father and before His angels” (Rev. 3:5, HCSB). I pray that we will inherit this promise.

Predestination in Revelation, Part I

I’ve finished my series on predestination in the Gospel of John. Today I’m gonna start with our continuing study of predestination from a different book altogether—the Book of Revelation. And, by the way, I’m still marinating in the book “Why I Am Not An Arminian” by Robert A. Peterson and Michael D. Williams.

“A theme from Revelation that pertains to the doctrine of election is ‘the book of life’ (Rev. 3:5; 17:8; 20:12, 15) or ‘the Lamb’s book of life’ (Rev. 13:8; 21:27). This book serves as the census register of the city of God. The names of the saints were enrolled ‘in the book of life from the creation of the world’ (Rev. 17:8). The chief use of that book is TO ASSURE THOSE LISTED THEREIN OF GOD’S SPIRITUAL PROTECTION (Rev. 3:5; 13:8; 17:8; 20:15; 21;27) Although Arminians sometimes claim that predestination does not result in salvation, the passages mentioning the book of life disprove that claim. That is because those whose names are written in the book from creation (Rev. 17:8) will be spared the lake of fire (Rev. 20:15) and will enter the New Jerusalem (Rev. 21:27)” (Robert A. Peterson & Michael D. Williams, “Why Am I Not An Arminian,” page 53).

To tackle the claim made by Calvinists (specifically the one above), I am gonna deal with the statement in bold: that the names are written in the book of life “TO ASSURE THOSE LISTED THEREIN OF GOD’S SPIRITUAL PROTECTION.”
Let’s start with Revelation 3:5—

“In the same way, the victor will be dressed in white clothes, and I will never erase his name from the book of life, but will acknowledge his name before My Father and before His angels” (Rev. 3:5, Holman Christian Standard Bible).

These words are the words of Christ. We know this because Jesus says just prior to this that “I will come like a thief” (a thief in the night- Rev. 3:3), and “you have a few people in Sardis who have not defiled their clothes, and they will walk WITH ME IN WHITE, because they are worthy” (Rev. 3:4). In addition, look at verse 5. Jesus says to those who overcome, “I will never erase his name from the book of life, but will ACKNOWLEDGE his name before My Father and before His angels.”

Notice that the person speaking CAN erase names from the book of life. Who else could do this but Christ alone?

“Then I saw in the right hand of the One seated on the throne a scroll with writing on the inside and on the back, sealed with seven seals. I also saw a mighty angel proclaiming in a loud voice, ‘Who is worthy to open the scroll and break its seals?’ But no one in heaven or on earth or under the earth was able to open the scroll or even to look in it. And I cried and cried because no one was found worthy to open the scroll or even to look in it.
Then one of the elders said to me, ‘Stop crying. Look! The Lion from the tribe of Judah, the Root of David, has been victorious so that He may open the scroll and its seven seals. Then I saw one like a slaughtered lamb standing between the throne and the four living creatures and among the elders. He had seven horns and seven eyes, which are the seven spirits of God sent into all the earth. He came and took the scroll out of the right hand of the One seated on the throne.
When He took the scroll, the four living creatures and the 24 elders fell down before the Lamb. Each one had a harp and golden bowls filled with incense, which are the prayers of the saints. And they sang a new song:
‘You are worthy to take the scroll and to open its seals; because YOU WERE SLAUGHTERED, AND YOU REDEEMED PEOPLE FOR GOD BY YOUR BLOOD from every tribe and language and people and nation” (Rev. 5:2-9, HCSB).

Secondly, Jesus says in the above passage of Revelation 3 that He would acknowledge the victorious one before His Father and the angels. Jesus says something similar to this in the Gospels:

“Therefore, everyone who will ACKNOWLEDGE Me before men, I will also acknowledge him before My Father in heaven. But whoever denies Me before men, I will also deny him before My Father in heaven” (Matthew 10:32, HCSB).

The last thing I wanna point out about the context concerns Jesus words of “coming like a thief” from Revelation 3:3. Jesus references Himself as a thief in Revelation 16:

“Look, I am coming LIKE A THIEF. Blessed is the one who is alert and remains clothed so that he may not go naked, and they see his shame” (Rev. 16:15, HCSB).

As context reveals, Jesus is the One speaking in Revelation 3 to the church at Sardis.

According to Peterson and Williams, predestination results in salvation (from their quote above), and they believe Revelation 3 proves that. But it doesn’t.

First, notice the condition of the church at Sardis:

“I know your works; you have a REPUTATION FOR BEING ALIVE, but YOU ARE DEAD. Be alert and strengthen what remains, WHICH IS ABOUT TO DIE, for I have not found your WORKS COMPLETE BEFORE MY GOD. Remember therefore what YOU HAVE RECEIVED and heard; KEEP IT, and REPENT” (Rev. 3:1b-3a).

The church at Sardis had a reputation for being a living church, a name for good works. They were well-known for righteousness. This, then, does not sound like a church that NEVER BELIEVED in Christ! I say this now because the rest of the context will demonstrate the necessity of this statement.

In addition, “what remains” at the church at Sardis is “about to die.” Don’t you find this a little puzzling, that their reputation for good works is without merit, that they are described as “dead” and that “what remains” is “about to die”? What is this regarding “about to die?” The context refers to their works. Jesus says it in the reference above that “I have not found your works COMPLETE before My God.” The church at Sardis has not done all it could do, has not done nearly enough as a church with a reputation for good works. Although they have clearly been saved, their work has not testified to their salvation. In the next statement above, Jesus says, “Remember therefore what you HAVE RECEIVED and HEARD; KEEP IT, and REPENT.” Not only did they hear the truth, they received the truth, welcomed the truth. Jesus said that the only way for them to be pleasing in His sight was to KEEP IT, and repent of their slothfulness. As we can see, “what remains” is “about to die.”
So this church is on the edge of spiritual apostasy, walking away from Christ. Their faith in Christ is about to die, about to wane completely, and the Lord tells them to repent right away of this and go back to what they were before their lapse in their spiritual walk. What will happen if they don’t repent?

“But if you are not alert, I WILL COME LIKE A THIEF, and you have no idea at what hour I will come AGAINST YOU” (Rev. 3:3, HCSB).

Jesus’ reference to Himself as a thief matches His words to the disciples in Luke 12:

“Those slaves the master will find alert when he comes will be blessed. I assure you: He will get ready, have them recline at the table, then come and serve them. If he comes in the middle of the night, or even near dawn, and finds them alert, those slaves are blessed. But know this: if the homeowner had known at what hour the THIEF was coming, he would not have let his house be broken into. You also be ready, because the Son of Man is coming at an hour that you do not expect” (Luke 12:37-40, HCSB).

Luke 12 continues where Christ gives the parable of the faithful servant put in charge of the household until the master returns; but once the master goes off, the slave responds, “My Master is delaying his coming, and starts to beat the male and female slaves, and to eat and drink and get drunk” (Lk. 12:45).When the master returns, “He will cut him to pieces and ASSIGN HIM A PLACE WITH THE UNBELIEVERS” (Lk. 12:46).

So when Jesus tells the church at Sardis that He would return like a thief in the night, He wasn’t joking. If He found that they had not repent and continued in good works, they too, would be assigned a place with the unbeliever.

The church at Sardis, then, consisted of those who had believed in the gospel and had become part of the body of Christ; but all that could “go up in smoke” if they had not remained faithful when the Lord returned.

But verse 4 is refreshing:

“But you have a FEW PEOPLE IN SARDIS who have not defiled their clothes, and they will walk with Me in white, because they are worthy. In the same way, the victor will be dressed in white clothes, and I will never erase his name from the book of life, but will acknowledge his name before My Father and before His angels” (Rev. 3:4-5, HCSB).

Despite the sad condition of the church at Sardis, there were a few who had continued to persevere despite the majority. The Lord doesn’t promise to destroy the entire church—just the majority that had given in to spiritual laziness.
But the verse we are to center in on is verse 5: why would the Lord have to write and promise never to “erase” names from the book of life? Because the majority of this church had begun to lose faith and walk away from Christ. And if they didn’t get their act together, their names WOULD BE BLOTTED OUT of the book of life (in contrast to those who had remained undefiled, whose names would never be taken out of the book).

Some people could say, “Well, see, those whose names would be taken out of the book of life were unbelievers to begin with.” But evidence within Revelation itself disproves this statement:

“All those who live on the earth will worship him [the beast], EVERYONE WHOSE NAME WAS NOT WRITTEN FROM THE FOUNDATION OF THE WORLD in the book of life of the Lamb who was slaughtered” (Rev. 13:8, HCSB).

Peterson and Williams claim that the book of life is “to assure those listed therein of God’s spiritual protection,” but Revelation 3 (unlike Revelation 13:8) refers to those who ARE in the book of life who COULD BE BLOTTED OUT of it if they don’t repent of their sin. Those of Revelation 13:8 have NEVER had their names in the book of life; those in Revelation 3 HAVE THEIR NAMES in the book of life, but “what remains” is “about to die” because they are “dead,” according to Christ Himself.
So the names in the book of life were not GUARANTEED to be protected—just those that persevered. Jesus says that only those “who have not defiled their clothes…will walk with Me in white, BECAUSE THEY ARE WORTHY” (Rev. 3:4, HCSB). The few that had remained faithful to God qualified to walk with Him in white as victors.

Revelation 3, then, is written to the church at Sardis to wake them up from their sinful, dead slumber. If they didn’t, their names would be blotted out of the Lamb’s book of life— those who had endured faithfully would overcome and reign with the Lamb. Contrary to Peterson and Williams, however, protection was not guaranteed—it came with the condition of perseverance. And this is the problem with unconditional election—it acts as if eternity is already guaranteed! But it is only to be appropriated PROVIDED that the believer endure to the end. As Jesus Himself said it in Matthew 24, “But the one who endures to the end will be saved” (Matt. 24:13, English Standard Version).

The Election of the Gospel of John-- Part IV

“Jesus prays in anticipation of the cross and his return to the Father. The Son’s mission of salvation is governed by the Father’s prior election of people. Although the Father has ‘granted’ the Son ‘authority over all people,’ the Son only gives ‘eternal life to all those’ the Father has ‘given him’ (Jn. 17:2). The Son is thus sovereign over all people but only grants the gift of eternal life to the elect. Furthermore, Jesus explains his mission, ‘I have revealed you to those you gave me out of the world’ (Jn. 17:6). As a result, they accept the divine message and believe in the Son (Jn. 17:7-8).

Jesus’ prayers likewise reflect a PRIOR DIVINE DISCRIMINATION. ‘I pray for them. I AM NOT PRAYING FOR THE WORLD, but for those you have given me, for they are yours’ (Jn. 17:9). Jesus uses the word ‘world’ to refer to those not given to him by the Father…in this famous passage, John portrays election as the Father’s having given people to the Son. They first belonged to the Father, and he gave them to Jesus” (Robert A. Peterson & Michael D. Williams, “Why I Am Not An Arminian,” page 51).

As I’ve stated through the series on John, I do believe in a group called “the elect.” However, when Jesus talks about “thise you gave me out of the world” (Jn. 17:6), the Lord is here talking about the eleven disciples (minus Judas, of course!). When He talks about “those you have given me,” here the Lord is referring to the eleven disciples. Notice too, that the Lord prays this to the Father:

“I ask on THEIR behalf…of those whom You have given Me…” (John 17:9, NASB)

The Lord Jesus talks about the “men whom You gave me,” of verse 6; these men are the eleven disciples.
But in verse 20, the Lord prays for His future followers:

“I do not ask on behalf of these alone, but FOR THOSE ALSO WHO BELIEVE IN ME THROUGH THEIR WORD;” (John 17:20, NASB)

So now, we discover that Jesus also includes those who would believe in Him in the future. But, verse 20 indicates something different than the earlier verses of John 17: whereas the earlier verses talk about the disciples being chosen “out of the world,” verse 20 indicates that, in the future, those who would become disciples would BELIEVE in Christ. There is an elect group, but that group is elect IN CHRIST. There is not some arbitrary group that Christ has determined to believe in Him. Yes, the Father has given Him the inheritance of believers: but the inheritance of believers, His possession, are those who come to Him by faith.

Last but not least, in verse 21, the Lord prays that even the world would believe that the Father sent Christ. So even though the Lord prays that only the disciples in Him would be protected, He does pray for the salvation of the world (that the world would BELIEVE).

John chapter 17 goes back to John 3, where Jesus is talking to Nicodemus:

“For God so loved THE WORLD, that He gave His only begotten Son, that whoever believes in Him shall not perish, but have eternal life. For God did not send the Son into the world to JUDGE THE WORLD, but that THE WORLD MIGHT BE SAVED THROUGH HIM” (John 3:16-17, NASB).

So the Father gave His Son, Jesus, on behalf of the ENTIRE WORLD! Look in verse 17. Notice that the Son was not sent to CONDEMN or JUDGE the world, but for the purpose of SAVING THE WORLD. It was the Father’s desire that the world come to faith in His Son, not condemnation.

Well, what do we do with John 17? I believe that this has something to do with what we label this chapter: “The High Priestly Prayer.” Jesus is here acting as High Priest for all those who are in Him. Sounds like Hebrews to me:

“Therefore HOLY BRETHREN, PARTAKERS OF A HEAVENLY CALLING, consider Jesus, THE APOSTLE AND HIGH PRIEST OF OUR CONFESSION;” (Hebrews 3:1, NASB)

In Hebrews 3 the writer is talking to those who are children of God. And the Lord Jesus is labeled “The high priest OF OUR CONFESSION,” meaning that the audience is made up of those who have already CONFESSED the Lord Jesus and believed on His name (Romans 10:9). Therefore, if Jesus is in John 17 preceding for those the Father gave Him out of the world, to protect them, to unite them, and to keep them safe, then those Jesus is praying for are those who had made a confession and believed in Him.
Even though the world has not believed on Him in John 17, Christ still prays for the world to come to faith in Him. This is why He sends His apostles out into the world, to bring others to faith.

So John 17 is not about God foreordaining that some will come to faith while others will be condemned; it is about praying that more people will believe on His name. Remember, this is the same Lord who told Nicodemus (when discussing salvation) that “God did not send His Son into the world to condemn the world, but that the world might be saved through Him” (John 3:17). And this is the same God that “desires that none should perish, but that ALL SHOULD COME TO REPENTANCE” (2 Pet. 3:9). It is this optimism for the world that God the Father had in mind when He sent His Son Jesus to die for the sins of mankind. If the Father’s wish was to save some, then the Lord does come to condemn the world—which is in DIRECT VIOLATION of what Jesus Himself says in John 3:17.

The Election of the Gospel of John-- Part III

“John 15:14-19. After giving the analogy of the vine and the branches, Jesus assures his eleven disciples (Judas has already left to betray him), ‘You did not choose me, but I chose you and appointed you to go and bear’ lasting fruit (Jn. 15:16). The implication is THAT THE FRUITFUL BRANCHES SPOKEN OF EARLIER IN THIS CHAPTER ARE THOSE WHOM JESUS HAS CHOSEN. They bear fruit because he has chosen and appointed them to that end. Someone will say that Jesus’ choice is a choice of persons to be his disciples and not a choice to eternal life…here Jesus warns the disciples that the world will hate them because it has hated him first…the choice of John 15:16, 19 was a choice of the eleven disciples ‘out of the world’ that results in their belonging no longer to the world, but to Jesus…Jesus chose the eleven out of the world so that they would belong to Him (Jn. 15:19; salvation) and also so that they would bear lasting fruit (Jn. 15:16; service)” (Robert A. Peterson and Michael D. Williams, “Why I Am Not An Arminian,” pages 50-51).

I am now in part three of my series of rebuttals on predestination in the Gospel of John. Calvinists Robert Peterson and Michael Williams get themselves caught in a rut this time with John 15.

Contrary to what most believe, I agree with Peterson and Williams on the statement capitalized above: the Lord does speak of election here. However, Calvinists and Arminians, while both affirming election, do not affirm them in the same manner. Peterson and Williams don’t do enough here to let the reader know which side they’re on. As Calvinists, they are gonna say that John 15 refers to the idea of UNCONDITIONAL ELECTION, which states that God chooses some and damns others. Arminians on the other hand, will affirm CONDITIONAL ELECTION, which says that the choosing will be confirmed by the person’s faith in Christ and a lifestyle consistent with faith.

I do believe that the passage is referring to election: but I also believe that the passage is referring to CONDITIONAL ELECTION, or election by faith, and not unconditional election.

The language of John 15 just floods with the concept of conditional election. First, in verse 2 Jesus says, “Every branch IN ME that DOES NOT BEAR FRUIT, He takes away;” (NASB). Here we find that the person must be IN CHRIST, which indicates election; however, if the one IN CHRIST DOES NOT BEAR FRUIT, meaning the person that doesn’t live a life consistent with God’s Word, that person is the branch that is taken away. Being in Christ (election) is not unconditional, neither does it indicate unconditional perseverance. Rather, Christ’s election of a people (the church) unto Himself shows us God’s grace—but it also shows us God’s justice. And God will not keep around “branches” that are unfruitful: “every branch that bears fruit, HE PRUNES IT so that it may bear more fruit” (Jn. 15:2b, NASB).

Verse 6 is the warning to those who do not remain in Christ: “If anyone DOES NOT ABIDE in Me, he is thrown away as a branch and dries up; and they gather them, and cast them into the fire and they are burned.” The fact that the Lord talks about those who DO NOT ABIDE, indicates that a person can be in Christ for a time and yet, not REMAIN in Him. For those who remain in Christ for a short time only, the Lord promised that the unfruitful believer would be “thrown away,” “cast into the fire and burned.” Such conditions when it comes to theology!

Verse 8 stomps at the heart of Calvinist doctrine: “My Father is glorified by this, that you bear much fruit, and SO PROVE TO BE MY DISCIPLES.” The Calvinist says that God is glorified by UNCONDITIONALLY ELECTING some to salvation (and consequently, others to damnation); but that is not what Christ says here. What Christ says here is that, the way to bring glory to the Father is to live a life consistent with your election. The Father is most glorified in fruit, in abundance of harvest, in a multiplication of growth and progress in the Christian life. By bearing fruit, a person will “so prove to be My disciples,” meaning that your life will testify to the fact that you no longer belong to the world, but to Jesus. Here you have CONDITIONAL ELECTION (election by faith) and CONDITIONAL PERSEVERANCE (perseverance, or endurance, is the responsibility of the believer, not God).

In verse 10, the key to “abiding” in Christ’s love is to keep His commandments. It is then in verse 12, where Christ gives a commandment: “This is My commandment, that you love one another, just as I have loved you” (Jn. 15:12, NASB).

Verse 16 is where Peterson and Williams take us in John 15. However, they both confirm what I’ve already established here: conditional election and conditional perseverance:

“You did not choose Me but I chose you, and appointed you that YOU WOULD GO AND BEAR FRUIT, AND THAT YOUR FRUIT WOULD REMAIN, so that whatever you ask of the Father in My name He may give to you” (John 15:16, NASB).

Yes, the fact that the Lord says, “I chose you,” indicates an election. However, only context will clarify what kind of an election this is. I agree with Peterson and Williams—John 15:16 refers to service. The words of Christ here are echoed by Paul in his letter to the Ephesians:

“For we are HIS WORKMANSHIP, created IN CHRIST JESUS FOR GOOD WORKS, WHICH GOD PREPARED BEFOREHAND so that we would walk in them” (Ephesians 2:10, NASB).

Look at this verse. First off, notice that the “good works” are that which is “prepared beforehand,” NOT the believers! Secondly, as His [Christ’s] workmanship, or workers, we are created as such IN CHRIST, by virtue of our union with Christ. Last but not least, the good works were prepared “so that we would walk in them.” The standard is to walk in good works because to do so is to follow the words of Jesus in John 15: to PROVE to be Christ’s disciples!

With John 15:19, I would say that, yes, these words refer to an election. I’ll place them here:

“If you were of the world, the world would love its own; but because you are not of the world. But I chose you out of the world, because of this the world hates you” (John 15:19, NASB).

As I said before, this does refer to an election—but, from the context, it seems to be referring to a CONDITIONAL election, an election by grace through faith (what I have been calling “an election by faith”).

If you look back at the beginning of John 15, Jesus says these words:

“You are already clean because of the word which I have spoken to you” (John 15:3, NASB).

I took a look at the word “clean” in this verse in my NASB text, and it states that the word “clean” here refers to being “PRUNED like a branch.” So when Jesus talks about the branches that are pruned to bear more fruit (end of verse 2), His follow-up words to the disciples in verse 3 tells the reader that these men have bore fruit—and that the Lord has pruned them so that they would have the potential to bear future fruit…and thus, glorify God the Father by proving to be the Lord’s disciples (Jn. 15:8).

It seems as if John 15 was all too easy of a text by which to refute the Calvinist. It was. I applaud Peterson and Williams for tackling this passage; however, just because it signifies “election” doesn’t mean that it automatically refers to unconditional election. I will explore more of John tomorrow.

The Election of the Gospel of John-- Part II

“John 10:26-30. Jesus, the Good Shepherd, says to his hearers who reject him despite his miracles, ‘You do not believe because you are not my sheep.’ By contrast, ‘My sheep listen to my voice; I know them, and they follow Me’ (John 10:25-27).
Jesus’ words divide his hearers into two categories: sheep and those who are not sheep (we’ll call them goats). People have one of these two identities, and Jesus implies that they are sheep or goats BEFORE they respond to him. Their response of belief or unbelief doesn’t cause them to become either sheep or goats. Instead, their responses REVEAL their prior identities…Jesus does not say that they are goats because they don’t believe, but the opposite: they don’t believe because they are goats. JESUS HERE TEACHES PREDESTINATION: PEOPLE ARE SHEEP OR GOATS BEFORE THEY BELIEVE OR REJECT JESUS, AND THEIR FAITH OR UNBELIEF MANIFESTS THEIR PRIOR IDENTITY” (Robert A. Peterson and Michael D. Williams, “Why I Am Not An Arminian,” page 50).

Today’s post will tackle another of Robert Peterson’s and Michael Williams’ interpretations of the issue of “election” in John’s Gospel. We’re here with John 10:26-30. I’ll print the text here so everyone can read it:

26"But you do not believe because (A)you are not of My sheep.
27"My sheep (B)hear My voice, and (C)I know them, and they follow Me;
28and I give (D)eternal life to them, and they will never perish; and (E)no one will snatch them out of My hand.
29"[a]My Father, who has given them to Me, is greater than all; and no one is able to snatch them out of the Father's hand.
30"(F)I and the Father are one." (John 10:26-30, NASB)

Jesus often makes statements in John like these that Calvinists attempt to use to argue for predestination. But the truth is that to understand context, is to crumble the Calvinist argument.

Our context involves Jesus in a discourse with the Pharisees. At the end of chapter 9, after Christ heals the man born blind from his birth, Jesus says these words:
“For judgment I came into this world, so that those who do not see may see, and that THOSE WHO SEE MAY BECOME BLIND” (John 9:39, NASB).

The Pharisees question him about their being blind, and Jesus responds,

“If you were blind, you would have no sin; but since you say, ‘We see,’ YOUR SIN REMAINS” (John 9:41, NASB).

The Pharisees don’t care to understand their spiritual blindness. Meanwhile, the man born blind from birth is able to teach them (John 9:30-33), and has not only his eyes opened, but also his heart. He becomes a follower of Jesus (John 9:37-38).
Dealing with the hostile Pharisees, Jesus is very blunt with them. But to read verses 26-30 without any immediate context is not wise. Look at the immediate verses above our featured text:

“The Jews then gathered around Him, and were saying to Him, ‘How long will you keep us in suspense? If You are the Christ, tell us plainly.’ Jesus answered them, ‘I told you, AND YOU DO NOT BELIEVE; the works that I do in My Father’s name, THESE TESTIFY OF ME. But you do not believe because you are not of My sheep” (John 10:24-26, NASB).

So right before our featured passage, Jesus has told them that He has given them signs to show who He is—but they still refuse to believe. All along, they have seen Him prove Himself again and again, but they don’t care to accept Christ. They’ve rejected Him because they choose to.

Look back at John 8. Here we find Christ in dialogue with the Pharisees:

“I speak the things which I have seen from My Father; therefore you also do the things which you heard from your father.’
They answered and said to Him, ‘ABRAHAM IS OUR FATHER.’
Jesus said to them, ‘IF YOU ARE ABRAHAM’S CHILDREN, DO THE DEEDS OF ABRAHAM. But as it is, you are seeking to kill Me, a man who has told you the truth, which I heard from God; this Abraham did not do. You are doing the deeds of your father. They said to Him, ‘We were not born of fornication; we have one Father: God.’ Jesus said to them, ‘If God were your Father, you would love Me, for I proceeded forth and have come from God, for I have not even come on My own initiative, but He sent Me. Why do you not understand what I am saying? It is because you cannot hear My word. You are of your father, the devil, and YOU WANT TO DO THE DESIRES OF YOUR FATHER. He was a murderer from the beginning, and does not stand in the truth because there is no truth in him. Whenever he speaks a lie, he speaks from his own nature, for he is a liar and the father of lies” (John 8:38-44, NASB).

So when the Lord tells the Jews that they do not believe because they are not His sheep, He is not saying that they don’t believe because they were predestined not to believe. He’s saying that they don’t believe because they CHOOSE not to believe: “I told you, and YOU DO NOT BELIEVE;” (John 10:25, NASB)

Then in verse 27, the Lord tells us something about His sheep: “My sheep HEAR MY VOICE, and I know them, AND THEY FOLLOW ME;” (John 10:27, NASB) The Lord’s sheep OBEY HIM, they seek Him, they pursue Him, they willingly follow Him. Not only do they follow Him, but they HEAR HIS VOICE and they listen to Him.

Notice that after Jesus’ words to them,

“The Jews picked up stones again to stone Him” (John 10:31, NASB).

Clearly Jesus’ message to them hit them hard. They don’t respond by saying something like, “Lord, but you made us this way,” or “Lord, it’s not our fault.” They clearly saw Jesus’ works, which validated His Deity; yet, they chose not to believe. They were not of Christ’s sheep, but that was not because God made them “goats” before, or God declared them “goats” before time began. The Lord knew their hearts, but they still bore a responsibility to believe like everyone else: “But I say these things so that you MAY BE SAVED” (Jn. 5:34b); “I am the door; if ANYONE enters through Me, HE WILL BE SAVED, and will go in and out and find pasture” (Jn. 10:9, NASB).

The Election of the Gospel of John-- Part I

“Jesus said to them, ‘I am the bread of life; he who comes to Me will not hunger, and he who believes in Me will never thirst. But I said to you that you have seen Me, and yet do not believe. All that the Father gives Me will come to Me, and the one who comes to Me I will certainly not cast out. For I have come down from heaven, not to do My own will, but the will of Him who sent Me. This is the will of Him who sent Me, that of all that He has given Me I lose nothing, but raise it up on the last day. For this is the will of My Father, that everyone who beholds the Son and believes in Him will have eternal life, and I Myself will raise him up on the last day.’ Therefore the Jews were grumbling about Him, because He said, ‘I am the bread that came down out of heaven.’ They were saying, ‘Is not this Jesus, the son of Joseph, whose father and mother we know? How does He now say, ‘I have come down out of heaven’? Jesus answered and said to them, ‘Do not grumble among yourselves. No one can come to Me unless the Father who sent Me draws him; and I will raise him up on the last day. It is written in the prophets, ‘And they shall all be taught of God.’ Everyone who has heard and learned from the Father, comes to Me” (John 6:35-45,NASB).

In this post, I’m tackling another key passage quoted by authors Robert A. Peterson and Michael D. Williams in their book, “Why I Am Not An Arminian.” The Calvinist authors spend a great deal of time focusing on what they take to be “election” passages from the Gospel of John. This is what they say regarding John 6 above:

“The Father’s giving people to the Son is s picture of election. In addition, the Father’s giving people to the Son PRECEDES their believing in Him for salvation. Election is not based on foreseen faith; it precedes faith and results in faith” (Robert A. Peterson and Michael D. Williams, “Why I Am Not An Arminian,” page 50).

This is the Arminian response to the Calvinist claim:

“…the Calvinist reading likewise fails to account fully for the context. Jesus is locked in strenuous debate with religious leaders who claim special knowledge of and standing with God. From this privileged position, they seek to discredit Jesus completely. Their implied charge essentially involves an attempt to SEVER JESUS FROM GOD, AFFIRMING THE LATTER WHILE REJECTING THE FORMER. In doing this, they wish to establish the right to claim, ‘We know God intimately, but you are utterly alien to us! We stand in right relationship to God, but we completely reject you” (Jerry Walls and Joseph Dongell, “Why I Am Not a Calvinist,” page 74).

Prior to this quote, Walls and Dongell demonstrate that when Jesus said that no one could come unless the Father drew him, He was saying that the Jews couldn’t come because the Father wasn’t drawing them! However, Christ was not affirming some arbitrary election of those who would come to faith. We’ll get into that for a minute…

Walls and Dongell above tell us that the Pharisees claimed to know God and believe in Him, but rejected Jesus (who also is God). Scripture confirms this:

“For this reason, the Jews were persecuting Jesus, because He was doing these things on the Sabbath. But He answered them, ‘My Father is working until now, and I Myself am working.’
For this reason therefore the Jews were seeking all the more to kill Him, because He not only was breaking the Sabbath, but also WAS CALLING GOD HIS OWN FATHER, MAKING HIMSELF EQUAL WITH GOD” (John 5:16-18, NASB).

It is because they refuse to believe Jesus that Christ also said these words: “For not even the Father judges anyone, but He HAS GIVEN ALL JUDGMENT TO THE SON, so that ALL WILL HONOR THE SON EVEN AS THEY HONOR THE FATHER. He who does not honor the Son does not honor the Father who sent Him” (Jn. 5:22-23, NASB). Christ was saying that if they honored the Father, then they would honor the Son, because the Father sent the Son. Jesus also goes on to tell the Jews, “And the Father who sent Me, He has testified of Me…YOU DO NOT HAVE HIS WORD ABIDING IN YOU, for you do not believe Him WHOM HE SENT” (Jn. 5:37-38, NASB). Not only do they not honor the Father, they don’t have the Father’s words inside of them, remaining with them. The Father’s words have not taken root in their heart, because they refuse to believe on the One that the Father has sent to testify of Himself.

In John 5:39-40, the Lord tells the Jews,

“You search the Scriptures because you think that in them you have eternal life; IT IS THESE THAT TESTIFY ABOUT ME; AND YOU ARE UNWILLING TO COME TO ME SO THAT YOU MAY HAVE LIFE.”

And in John 5:45-47?

“Do not think that I will accuse you before the Father; THE ONE WHO ACCUSES YOU IS MOSES, in whom you have set your hope. For if you believed Moses, you would believe Me, FOR HE WROTE ABOUT ME. But if you do not believe his writings, how will you believe My words?”

Look at John 5:47—

“But if you do not believe his [Moses] writings, how will you believe My words?”

Regarding this verse, Jerry Walls and Joseph Dongell write:

“In this question posed by Jesus we discover the key principle: REJECTING GOD’S FIRST OFFERINGS OF TRUTH WILL UTTERLY BLOCK FURTHER ILLUMINATION. God will not offer more truth or manifest his full glory (the eternal Son) while light at hand is being spurned. In other words, we can’t actively reject the Father and at the same time have any chance of accepting the Son…the Jewish opponents’ inability to come to Jesus did not lie, then, in the hidden, eternal plan of God but IN THEIR OWN TRACK RECORD OF TRAMPLING PRIOR LIGHT, OF HAVING ALREADY DENIED GOD HIMSELF AND SPURNED GOD’S CORRECTIVE PUNISHMENT. Had they received Moses fully, thereby coming to know the Father to the degree possible at that time, they would already have belonged to the Father’s flock…since they did not belong to the Father’s own flock, THEY WOULDN’T BE PART OF THE TRANSFER OF SHEEP ALREADY TRUSTING THE FATHER INTO THE FOLD OF THE SON (Jn. 6:37, 39)” (“Why I Am Not A Calvinist,” pages 74-75).

John chapter 5 shows all the witnesses to Christ’s deity: John (vv.33-35), Christ’s own works (v.36), the Father’s Word (vv.37-38), and Moses’ writings (vv.45-47). And Jesus tells us the problem with the Jews in John chapter 6:

“It is written in the prophets, ‘And they shall all be taught of God.’ Everyone who has heard and learned from the Father, comes to Me” (John 6:45, NASB).

Why does the Lord begin the end of His speech to the Jews in this manner? Because He was trying to let them know that the Father’s words through John the Baptist, and the Law of Moses should have been enough to open their understandings. However, “You do not have His [Father] word abiding in you, FOR YOU DO NOT BELIEVE HIM whom He sent” (Jn. 5:38, NASB). If the Father’s words were truly in the Jews, they would have believed the One the Father sent to tell of Himself. However, instead of believing Christ, the Jews rejected Him at every turn and even rejected His Godhood.

The Jews lacked understanding in the same way that Nicodemus did in his encounter with Jesus by night (John 3). Jesus uses the Old Testament with Nicodemus, a Pharisee and “ruler of the Jews” (Jn. 3:1)—

“As Moses lifted up the serpent in the wilderness, even so must the Son of Man be lifted up; so that whoever believes will in Him have eternal life” (John 3:14-15, NASB).

This reference comes from Numbers 21, which gives detail into the journey of the Israelites in the wilderness. In the Old Testament passage, the children of Israel had openly opposed God—and He caused serpents to come upon them and kill some of the nation. In response, they go to Moses and ask him to pray for them, that God would remove the serpents. Moses goes to God, and God tells him to make a bronze serpent to set on a pole; and all who looked at that bronze serpent would live. The people looked on the serpent and were healed.

Jesus was saying to Nicodemus that He, like that bronze serpent, must be lifted up for all to see—so that those who see Him and BELIEVE will live. How would He be “lifted up” for all to see? He would soon be crucified, and He would hang there on that cross at Calvary for all to see. He would be publicly shamed—in order that mankind would be redeemed. In John 3, unlike John 6, the Lord explains to Nicodemus that He is the summation of everything Moses wrote in the Law as well as John’s testimony.

John also served as a witness to Christ:

“For He whom God has sent speaks the words of God; for He gives the Spirit without measure. The Father loves the Son and has given all things into His hand. He who believes in the Son has eternal life; but he who does not obey the Son will not see life, but the wrath of God abides on him” (John 3:34-36, NASB).

John here testifies to the fact that the Son (Jesus) has been verified by the Father Himself (the Father has given everything over to Him, including eternal life). Consequently, to not believe in Him is to forfeit life eternal. Funny—this is what the Pharisees believed—that they could reject the Son and have eternal life!!

The interpretation of Walls and Dongell holds firm. The Jews had rejected the words of John and the Old Testament writings—so what else was there for them? Nothing. If they didn’t believe these things, as Jesus asked, how would they believe Him?
In contrast to the Jews, however, the Samaritan woman understood Scripture:

“The woman said to Him, ‘I know that Messiah is coming (He who is called Christ); when that One comes, He will declare all things to us.’

Jesus said to her, ‘I who speak to you am He’” (John 4:25-26, NASB).
All Jesus had to do was tell the woman He was the Messiah, and this was her response:

“So the woman left her waterpot, and went into the city and said to the men, ‘Come, see a man who told me all the things that I have done; this is not the Christ, is it?’” (John 4:28-29, NASB)

When Calvinist exegetes attempt to twist Scripture, it’s a sad affair. We’ll tackle more on the issue of election in John in the coming days.

The Election of Jacob

“In response to Isaac’s prayer, the Lord gave twins to him and his wife Rebekah (Gen. 25:21-22). When the babies moved violently within her womb, she asked the Lord for an explanation. He replied: ‘Two NATIONS are in your womb, and two PEOPLES within you will be separated; one people will be stronger than the other, and the older will serve the younger’ (Gen. 25:23)” (Robert A. Peterson and Michael D. Williams, “Why I Am Not An Arminian,” pages 43-44).

In today’s post I am discussing Jacob’s “election.” Robert Peterson is at it again in his book “Why I Am Not An Arminian,” and his evidence (first coming from Abraham) now includes Jacob being chosen over his twin brother, Esau. But look back at the reference from Genesis 25:23. Rebekah knew that she was pregnant with two babies (maybe not twins), but she wondered why the children were fighting so if she was to have children. It seemed to Rebekah that the odds were against her having children if they were fighting. But after consulting the Lord, He told her that the two children represented two NATIONS, two PEOPLES within her. He also tells her that the two nations will differ in strength.

However, he mentions something else: “and the older will serve the younger.” The context of Genesis 25 concerns the two children becoming two nations (two peoples). Here, the Lord has mentioned nothing of the individuals themselves—but what they represent!

But the following lines from Peterson are disturbing:

“Jacob and Esau represented NATIONS, even while within their mother’s womb, as the citation of Genesis 25:23 confirms. But God also dealt with the twins as INDIVIDUALS, as Paul explains:
‘ Rebekah’s children had one and the same father, our father Isaac. Yet, before the twins were born or had done anything good or bad—IN ORDER THAT GOD’S PURPOSE IN ELECTION MIGHT STAND: not by works but by him who calls—she was told, ‘The older will serve the younger.’ Just as it is written: ‘Jacob I loved, but Esau I hated.’ (Rom. 9:10-13, italics added)
God dealt with Jacob and Esau BOTH as INDIVIDUALS and as NATIONS. He chose Jacob as an individual to be a special recipient of his love AND to be heir of the covenant promises to the nation” (44).

Peterson does not elaborate here on the Jacob (as an individual) being elected by God. Clearly, we have seen the corporate election of a people coming from the loins of Jacob—but we haven’t seen where Jacob is elected SOLELY on the basis of Jacob’s life or Jacob’s walk with the Lord. He hints at this possibility when he quotes from Romans 9 where it says “the older will serve the younger,” but he appears to be wrong about this as well. The reference refers to more than just Esau serving Jacob:
“But Isaac replied to Esau, ‘Behold, I have made him your master, AND ALL HIS RELATIVES I HAVE GIVEN TO HIM AS SERVANTS…’” (Gen. 27:37, NASB).

To see this in even more detail, look back at Isaac’s words in his blessing to Jacob:
“May PEOPLES serve you, and NATIONS bow down to you; BE MASTER OF YOUR BROTHERS, and may your MOTHER’S SONS bow down to you” (Gen. 27:29, NASB).

Notice that Isaac tells Jacob, “Be master OF YOUR BROTHERS.” If this were just referring to Jacob and Esau, then Isaac would have said “be master of your BROTHER” (brother being singular, not plural), for Jacob and Esau were the only children born to Isaac and Rebekah. But for Isaac to tell him to rule over his BROTHERS implied that the nations that would come forth from Jacob and Esau would be in relationship with one another, even after the death of Isaac. The line of Jacob, Jacob’s sons becoming the twelve tribes, would rule over ALL their relatives, not just Edom, but the other countries maintain blood ties to the Israelites. Once again, the blessing is CORPORATE, or national, not individual.

This might not seem to be conclusive evidence. Someone might say, “Well, what’s all this talk about the two sons becoming two nations? Can it really be that the blessing conferred on Jacob was not so much about him as it was descendants of Abraham?" Yes.

My proof? Look at Genesis 25:30—

“and Esau said to Jacob, ‘please let me have a swallow of that red stuff there, for I am famished.’ THEREFORE HIS NAME WAS CALLED EDOM.” (Gen. 25:30, NASB)
Esau became known as “Edom,” which means “red,” because he asked for some of Jacob’s lentil stew. Look with me further in Genesis:

“Now these are the records of the generations of Esau (THAT IS, EDOM)” (Gen. 36:1, NASB).

“So Esau lived in the hill country of Seir; ESAU IS EDOM” (Gen. 36:8, NASB).

Esau, then, becomes known as “Edom.” He is not singled out with just his original name; he goes on to become the head of a nation of people (Gen. 36:9). The same happens with Jacob:

“God said to him, ‘Your name is Jacob; YOU SHALL NO LONGER BE CALLED JACOB, but ISRAEL SHALL BE YOUR NAME” (Gen. 35:10, NASB).

When the Lord enters this covenant with Jacob, He tells him the following:

“I am God Almighty; Be fruitful and multiply; A NATION AND A COMPANY OF NATIONS shall come forth from you…” (Gen. 35:11, NASB).

Not only will the Israelites come forth from Jacob, but other separate nations as well. As we can see, when Isaac blessed Jacob, he was telling Jacob that Israel would rule over “his mother’s sons,” that being all the descendants of Esau (the Edomites), as well as the other nations that would come from the loins of Jacob and Esau. It was always the corporate election that the Lord had in mind, NEVER an individual election. This is why with Abraham, the Lord told him to be fruitful and multiply (Gen. 17:6); with Isaac the Lord told him that He would multiply Isaac’s seed (Gen. 26:24); and with Jacob, as we saw a minute ago, the Lord told him the same thing (Gen. 35:11). The goal was always to bring forth the nations of the earth, NEVER to elect one nation as the only nation to receive salvation—or even a few individuals.

Now look at Romans 9. The idea asserted by Peterson is that people are elected on the basis of God’s random decision to do so. However, to interpret Romans 9 (vv.10-13 above) the way he does is to take the passage out of context. Why? because here’s what Paul writes after his argument in chapters 9 and 10:

“What then? What Israel is seeking, it has not obtained, but those who were chosen obtained it, and the rest were hardened;…” (Romans 11:7, NASB).

Israel was the chosen seed, right? Yes—the nation itself was elected. Paul tells us the corporate blessings of the nation:

“who are Israelites, to whom belongs THE ADOPTION AS SONS, and the GLORY and the COVENANTS and the GIVING OF THE LAW and the TEMPLE SERVICE and THE PROMISES, whose are the fathers, and from whom is the Christ according to the flesh, who is over all, God blessed forever. Amen. But it is not as though the word of God has failed. FOR THEY ARE NOT ALL ISRAEL WHO ARE DESCENDED FROM ISRAEL;” (Rom. 9:4-7, NASB)

In verse 4, we see that Israel has received a ton of material blessings along with the promises. However, she has not obtained the promises for herself—why? because she has not come to Christ by faith:

“What shall we say then? That Gentiles, who did not pursue righteousness, attained righteousness, even the righteousness which is by faith; but Israel, PURSUING A LW OF RIGHTEOUSNESS, DID NOT ARRIVE AT THAT LAW. Why? Because they DID NOT PURSUE IT BY FAITH, BUT AS THOUGH IT WERE BY WORKS” (Rom. 9:30-32, NASB).

So, back to Romans 9:10-13… what does Paul mean when he quotes the Lord telling Rebekah that “the older will serve the younger”? here, Paul is saying that when the Lord told her this, He was going against the Jewish way of thinking. As written above, in Romans 9 Paul expounds all the blessings of the Israelites. Nevertheless, Israel has not obtained the promises because of works. So, Esau represents the Law; the Law promised Esau, by virtue of being the oldest, that he would receive the inheritance (concept of primogeniture). However, the Lord tells Rebekah that her youngest son (Jacob) would receive the inheritance; and this was a test of faith because the youngest receiving the inheritance was not found in the Law. It was APART FROM THE LAW (Romans 3:21-22).

The same thing can be said for Romans 9:7-8. Isaac was the promised son, although the second-born (Abraham and Hagar conceived Ishmael). Ishmael as the oldest of Abraham’s sons, represented the Law. The Law also entitled Ishmael to the inheritance; but God, while promising to bless Ishmael because he was Abraham’s son, DID NOT choose Ishmael, but stuck with His original promise—that Isaac would be the chosen (Genesis 17:18-21).

Peterson and those who would seek to look at arbitrary election of persons disregard context. If they looked at the end of Romans 9 and not just pick out a few verses, they would see that the Gentiles receive faith APART FROM THE LAW. Despite the blessings of Israel, despite the fact that she is “first” (Romans 1:16), she has not received it because of unbelief. Jacob’s election then, instead of Isaac’s, is to show that those who believe are made righteous by faith, over those who still seek righteousness by the Law (Israel).