Election Verses Foreknowledge Isn’t Even the Point; the Gospel is the Point
I am amazed at how God’s people have been distracted throughout the years over the election/foreknowledge debate. Wow, what a boondoggle for people of Reformed theology who don’t want folks looking too closely at what Calvin, Luther, and Augustine really believed. And if Calvin is Luther/Augustine light, there is even a bigger problem.
Yes, the Calvin Institutes are 1000 pages of mind-numbing theology, but if you know how to look, you can find the crux of the issues before Calvin lulls you into a hypnotic state with his linguistic drones. I was poking around in the Institutes in an effort to discover what Calvin believed about the final judgment of mankind, and in the process, discovered Calvin’s blatant false gospel on pages 508 and 509. Like his New Calvinist children, he believes that sanctification maintains justification, or stated another way, sanctification is justification in action. This makes sanctification very, very, very, tricky business—don’t try it at home without Plato’s Philosopher Kings or John Piper.
Fact is, people who believe that God elected some before creation and passed over others are not heretics. You may not like their view of God, but they are not heretics. Fact is, people who believe that God elected based on what He foreknew people would do, are not heretics either. But folks who believe that we must maintain Christ’s representation for an ongoing justification by believing a certain way in sanctification are heretics. Maintaining justification by doing something, doing nothing, thinking a certain way, or anything else boils down to our participation in justification. If sanctification and justification are fused together —this is unavoidable. It’s a false gospel. Plainly, Calvin states on the aforementioned pages of the Institutes that justification is “perpetual”:
Moreover, the message of free reconciliation with God is not promulgated for one or two days, but is declared to be perpetual in the church (2Cor 5:18,19). Hence believers have not even to the end of life any other righteousness than that which is there described. Christ ever remains a Mediator to reconcile the Father to us, and there is a perpetual efficacy in his death, i.e., ablution, satisfaction expiation; in short, perfect obedience, by which all our iniquities are covered. In the Epistle to the Ephesians, Paul says not that the beginning of salvation is of grace, “but by grace are ye saved,” “not of works, lest any man should boast” (Eph 2:8,9).
A: “Moreover, the message of free reconciliation with God is not promulgated for one or two days, but is declared to be perpetual in the church (2Cor 5:18,19).”
The message of “free reconciliation” is “perpetual” “in the church,” ie, sanctification by faith alone- which has never been orthodox. Justification by faith alone has always been orthodox, but not the former. Moreover, 2Cor. 5:18,19[20] is clearly speaking of a ministry of reconciliation that we proclaim to the world as ambassadors, and is not a message to be continually propagated “in the church.”
B: “Hence believers have not even to the end of life any other righteousness than that which is there described.”
Yes, because to claim any good works is to do so in the context of justification. If “free reconciliation” is “perpetual,” then our efforts would be works salvation. But, by the same token, it is impossible to avoid that reality if the two are joined—regardless of any special formula that the Reformers supposedly came up with. No wonder the Institutes are 1000 pages; it goes back to the primary point of my first book: it’s a formula that attempts to instruct one on putting a round peg in a square hole. Secondly, the idea that the saints have NO righteousness is a denial of the new birth as actual new creature-hood, as opposed to being merely translated into a different realm.
C: “Christ ever remains a Mediator to reconcile the Father to us, and there is a perpetual -efficacy in his death, i.e., ablution, satisfaction expiation; in short, perfect obedience, by which all our iniquities are covered.”
Here, Calvin states that the “perfect obedience” of Christ is continually applied to our lives to cover for our inability to possess any righteousness. This is the continual imputation of Christ’s active obedience to KEEP us saved (“Mediator to reconcile”). This is heresy. In essence, we must continually practice a justification by faith alone in sanctification. We participate in maintaining justification by faith alone apart from works because justification is progressive. This is plainly a false gospel.
D: “In the Epistle to the Ephesians, Paul says not that the beginning of salvation is of grace, ‘but by grace are ye saved,’ ‘not of works, lest any man should boast’ (Eph 2:8,9).”
Calvin is clearly making sanctification part of the justification/salvation process. He makes no distinction between God’s graces in sanctification and justification. The grace of God based on the works of Christ to declare us righteous is not a finished work, though Christ Himself said it was.
paul
Divorce: The Ultimate “I won’t Forgive You”
It’s hard to deny and difficult to understand, but God binds relationships through agreements. This was true at the very beginning. The following is an excerpt from another post:
“God created man for the purpose of being blessed by God and bearing his image. He was to have dominion over God’s creation. He was also created for the purpose of being fruitful and multiplying. But God also put something between himself and man, a standard:
‘Then the LORD God took the man and put him into the garden of Eden to cultivate it and keep it. The LORD God commanded the man, saying, ‘From any tree of the garden you may eat freely; but from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil you shall not eat, for in the day that you eat from it you will surely die'” (Genesis 2:15-17).
From the very beginning, the foundation of relationship between God and man was God setting the standard or structure and man following in obedience, or being faithful to God’s structure. When man did not hold to his part of the relationship, no words could adequately describe the disaster that followed. God is truly one who utilizes covenants in his relationships, and places a very high premium on them. When man failed, the foundation of the relationship was destroyed, and God chose to take action to restore the relationship. As one theologian said: “He bankrupted Heaven to do it.”
Very early and often in Scripture, God established the institution of Marriage to represent the covenant between him and his people. God chose Abraham to found a great nation of people to execute his restoration to the world. This nation, called Israel, would oversee the preservation of God’s word and his message to the world. From this nation would come the Messiah and Savior of the world. Unfortunately, Israel would fail as Adam did. Here is what God says concerning the above reality:
‘Thus says the Lord GOD to Jerusalem, ‘Your origin and your birth are from the land of the Canaanite, your father was an Amorite and your mother a Hittite. As for your birth, on the day you were born your navel cord was not cut, nor were you washed with water for cleansing; you were not rubbed with salt or even wrapped in cloths. No eye looked with pity on you to do any of these things for you, to have compassion on you. Rather you were thrown out into the open field, for you were abhorred on the day you were born. When I passed by you and saw you squirming in your blood, I said to you {while you were} in your blood, ‘Live!’ Yes, I said to you {while you were} in your blood, ‘Live!’ I made you numerous like plants of the field. Then you grew up, became tall and reached the age for fine ornaments; {your} breasts were formed and your hair had grown. Yet you were naked and bare. Then I passed by you and saw you, and behold, you were at the time for love; so I spread My skirt over you and covered your nakedness. I also swore to you and entered into a covenant with you so that you became Mine, declares the Lord GOD. Then I bathed you with water, washed off your blood from you and anointed you with oil. I also clothed you with embroidered cloth and put sandals of porpoise skin on your feet; and I wrapped you with fine linen and covered you with silk. I adorned you with ornaments, put bracelets on your hands and a necklace around your neck. I also put a ring in your nostril, earrings in your ears and a beautiful crown on your head. Thus you were adorned with gold and silver, and your dress was of fine linen, silk and embroidered cloth. You ate fine flour, honey and oil; so you were exceedingly beautiful and advanced to royalty'” (Ezekiel 16:3-13).
The following verses in chapter 16 describe Israel’s horrific betrayal of God’s trust. Said another way by God, he instructs the prophet Hosea to literally take a prostitute for a wife as an in your face living illustration:
When the LORD first spoke through Hosea, the LORD said to Hosea, “Go, take to yourself a wife of harlotry and {have} children of harlotry; for the land commits flagrant harlotry, forsaking the LORD” (Hosea 1:2,3).
However, here is where we begin to see that the culmination of the covenant did not, does not, and will not, depend on the performance of Israel. Hosea is instructed to go to the local auction and buy his wife back who had left him to resume her harlotry:
Then the LORD said to me, “Go again, love a woman {who} is loved by {her} husband, yet an adulteress, even as the LORD loves the son of Israel, though they turn to other gods and love raisin cakes.” So I bought her for myself for fifteen {shekels} of silver and a homer and a half of barley. Then I said to her, “You shall stay with me for many days. You shall not play the harlot, nor shall you have a man; so I will also be toward you” (Hosea 3:1-3).
It’s pretty obvious isn’t it? Hosea’s love for Gomer and God’s love for Israel didn’t depend on their performance. In the Abrahamic Covenant, God put Abraham in a deep sleep and consummated the covenant himself because it did not, could not, and would not depend on anybody but God [Genesis 15].
The concept of a marriage relationship between God and his people is replete throughout the Old Testament and int0 the New. Marriage then, at least in part, symbolizes God’s forgiveness, mercy and dedication to his covenant elect.
I have often wondered why God said he hated divorce (Malachi 16:2). I wonder, because he never specifically states why he hates divorce. However, I think we have a hint in Ephesians 5:25 where Paul instructs husbands to love their wives as Christ loved the church. How did Christ love the Church? The same way he loved Israel. God’s devotion to Israel has never depended on their performance and the church is no different. Why would it be? God only brought in the Gentiles to make Israel jealous anyway (Romans 10:19, Romans 11:11). Marriage then, is symbolic of God’s forgiveness, his mercy, his covenants, and especially the gospel. God’s covenants exemplify his mercy and forgiveness.
If you know what the Scriptures teach about forgiveness, it’s not hard to understand why God hates divorce. Those who will not forgive, do not understand how much they have been forgiven. Those who will not forgive, do not see themselves in Gomer. Those who will not forgive, do not see themselves in Ezekiel 16:15-63. Christ made it clear, “For this reason I say to you, her sins, which are many, have been forgiven, for she loved much; but he who is forgiven little, loves little” (Luke 7:47). Mark 6:14 speaks of our responsibility to forgive “men” (mankind in general) in order to be forgiven by God ourselves. Luke 6:35 speaks of being kind to the wicked in order to be “sons of the Most High.” How much more towards the one whom which you share an intimate relationship ordained by God and symbolic of his gospel covenant? In the sermon on the mount, the subject of divorce among other subjects, is nestled squarely between anger and retaliation, and Christ makes it clear that just cause for divorce is very narrow indeed.
I am amazed at the flippant attitude in our culture concerning marriage, even among Christians. It’s not a party, it’s an emblem of God’s covenant faithfulness. The execution of the marriage covenant will either reject God or uphold his Glory. Divorce not only proclaims a refusal to forgive the covenant partner, it proclaims that fact publicly, and even sues for the spoils and restitution. A single divorce can produce an impressive list of things contrary to the sermon on the mount which primarily addresses relationships at many levels.
My uneducated grandmother understood all of this. She was married to my lost grandfather for 35 years. Suffice to say, she had the liberty to divorce him by biblical standards several fold. But he never wanted to loose her, that’s for sure. Well, finally, shortly before his death, he was saved. My grandmother never remarried, but God blessed her abundantly in the several years she lived afterword. By most standards in Christianity today, she would be labeled a fool, but it was never about her. Enter Brad Pitt, he is getting divorced again. Apparently, from what I am reading, another wife did not live up to his standards. Remember the woman at the well? Five husbands did not meet her standards and she gave up on marriage all together. Statistics indicate that first time marriages only have a 50/50 chance of survival whether Christian or secular. An astounding 80% of second marriages end in divorce, and the beat goes on.
At the core is an unwillingness to forgive. We understand why unbelievers can’t forgive, they have never been forgiven. What is perplexing is the wide spread acceptance among Christians of the ultimate and public statement of unforgiveness: Divorce.
paul
How To Poke God In The Eye
So whats up with “Supercessionism?” That’s the belief that God has no future for Israel, that Israel has been replaced by the Church and all the promises made to Israel transferred to the Church accordingly. The promises made to Israel for the future are massive in the Bible. The only possible way to make “Israel” the “Church” in all the hundreds of Old Testament promises to Israel is to approach the Scriptures with a particular method of interpretation that yields the result you prefer. Obviously, not a literal interpretation. The following is only one example:
“In the latter days you will understand this. At that time,” declares the LORD, “I will be the God of all the families of Israel, and they shall be My people” (Jere 30:24-31:1).
Or how about this:
“Thus says the LORD, Who gives the sun for light by day And the fixed order of the moon and the stars for light by night, Who stirs up the sea so that its waves roar; The LORD of hosts is His name: If this fixed order departs From before Me,” declares the LORD, “Then the offspring of Israel also will cease From being a nation before Me forever.”Thus says the LORD, “If the heavens above can be measured And the foundations of the earth searched out below, Then I will also cast off all the offspring of Israel For all that they have done,” declares the LORD” (Jere 31:35-37).
Bottom line, if we can’t take that at face value, how do we even know that John 3:16 means what it says?
Furthermore, Supercessionism for the most part, comes out of Reformed Theology and to a large degree, New Covenant Theology. Both have a strong element of “election.” In the Bible, Isreal is called God’s “elect” ( Dt 7:6, Isa 45:4). They agree with everyone else being called elect in the Bible and use a literal interpretation accordingly, but when it comes to Israel, they implement the Redemptive Historical hermeneutic. This is plainly unacceptable. Also, a “new covenant” is only mentioned once in the Bible and is even set against the older covenant in the same context, but the “new covenant” is specifically promised to Israel!! GOOD GRIEF. By the way, God’s chosen people have always been Israel and will always be Israel. God told the woman at the well, “salvation is of the Jew’s.” The Church was initially a Jewish church and God had to do dramatic things to convince the Jews that he wanted the Gentiles in there (Acts Chapters 10 and 11). As a matter of fact, the baptism of the Spirit at Pentecost was a set-up to convince the Jews when the time was right (Acts 11:15-18). God only saved the Gentiles to make Israel jealous (Rom 11:13). The Gentiles are the ugly step children of salvation and it is high time reformed theologians get over it. For sobering warnings from God concerning wrong attitudes toward Israel, read Romans 11 for yourself.
I don’t know much about John Hagee, but I know he said this: “I believe all true Christians have a soft place in their hearts for Israel.” Why not? If we have God’s heart, certainly this should be true, especially if slighting the Jews is poking God in the eye. He (Hagee) also said this: “God told Abraham that he would bless those who blessed him and curse those who cursed him. If you go to a church where the leaders believe in Supercessionism, you do not go to a church that God is going to bless.” Yep, I agree. Denying what God has promised to the Jews is taking away from the word of God. In the book of Revelation, God says all of the curses in that book await those who do so. Would Supercessionism be in this category? I don’t know, but it’s kinda like what Ronald Reagan said about work: ” hard work never killed anybody, but why take the chance?”
paul
Paul's Passing Thoughts 
leave a comment