Rick Richardson Reimagining Evangelism: Inviting Friends on a Spiritual Journey
The Deliberate Church: Building Your Ministry on the Gospel
Bill M. Sullivan New Perspectives on Breaking the 200 Barrier
« Learning Through Evaluation 2 | Home | Twitter Updates for 2008-06-19 »
Let’s Get Controversial Up In Here… Divine Election
By jason | June 19, 2008
I’ve been working through Ephesians over the last few months and I’m reading Hoehner’s mamouth commentary on Ephesians (it’s one I haven’t read to this point). Very good. Very insightful.
Chapter 1.3-14
- These verses form one single sentence in the greek and are one of eight very long sentences (1.3-14; 15-23; 2.1-7; 3.2-13, 14-19; 4.1-6, 11-16; 6.14-20).
- The structure is spelled out as such:
- Pronouncement of praise to God (3)
- God’s great plan and action (4-12)
- The application of this plan in the lives of believers (13-14)
- Alternative structure might look like this:
- Every spiritual blessing given to believers in Christ (3). This blessing spelled out:
- Election of the Father.
- Redemption of the Son.
- Seal of the Holy Spirit.
Verse 4: He chose us in Him
From this verse the doctrine of election springs. The question that arises from this verse is: what exactly is the nature of election. Yes, the Father chose believers (in eternity past) in Christ. But what does that mean, how did that happen exactly.
Hoehner’s proposal (175-176; 185-193):
- In most instances in the OT and NT, as it is here, God is the subject.
- The subject did not choose in a vacuum but in the light of all known options.
- There is no indication of any dislike towards those not chosen.
- It is in the middle voice, as is in almost every instance, indicating a personal interest in the one chosen. (The subject - God - is involved in the choosing.)
- The one who is chosen has no legal claim on the one who chooses. (God did not choose anyone based on their merit. The point is if God had not taken the initiative, no one would have his everlasting presence and life.)
- The object of choice is “us.” (Contra Barth, et al, who claim Christ as object of choice.)
Summary to make sense of Hoehner’s argument:
God’s choice of individuals occurs in eternity past and has nothing to do with forseen merit or faith (because no one seeks God). It is only by God’s sheer, sovereign grace that anyone is saved. (If it were based on merit or forseen faith then the one chosen would have legal claim over the one choosing.) This doesn’t indicate that he dislikes those who are not chosen, no instances of “chosen” in OT or NT give credence to this notion. And it is not a random, impersonal choice - God is personally and intimately involved in the choice showing great concern for the one chosen (hence, it is for the Father’s benefit that we chosen to be holy and blameless).
Alrighty. I’ve opened a can of worms. What do you think?
Topics: The Scriptures, Theology |
June 19th, 2008 at 11:03 pm
Disclaimer: Gross oversimplification resulting in theoretical inconsistencies ahead.
God determines when and where we live in such a way that we will seek Him. (Acts 17:26-7)
Suppose God knows that if he places John in space-time A, John will not seek Him (or “freely choose”, although i hate to even use those words because they are so loaded).
Suppose God also knows that if he places John in space-time B, John will seek Him.
If God chose to place John in B, does that negate the “fact” that John sought Him of his own free will or that it was ultimately God’s decision? I don’t think so, personally. Does this align with Hoehner’s view?
I call this a Calvinist-leaning middle knowledge position, but wot would appreciate any help with proper theological terms.
June 20th, 2008 at 9:44 am
Aside from theological truths…
In my experience, the doctrine of election is among the most abused doctrines in the entire Bible. Jesus told us to “go forth and make disciples”, and everything else (including election) is secondary to this command.
June 20th, 2008 at 11:24 am
Melinda,
You realize you’ve made a very theological claim, right? Do you see the irony in your proposition?
Also, how does your statement comport with the notion that all scripture is God-breathed and profitable?
June 20th, 2008 at 3:13 pm
And you’ve made such a typical knee-jerk Christian reaction that it kinda sickens me.
If you don’t see how this scripture could be abused, then you’ve got much bigger problems than figuring out how God feels about divine election.
June 20th, 2008 at 4:04 pm
Melinda,
What knee jerk reaction are you talking about? Where did Jason made any reference to not seeing how this scripture could be abused?
Seriously…
And yeah, I can quite confidently say Jason has bigger problems than figuring out how God feels about divine election. I’m not sure where he indicated otherwise.
June 20th, 2008 at 10:26 pm
Melinda,
An honest question about this statement:
“Jesus told us to ‘go forth and make disciples’, and everything else (including election) is secondary to this command.”
Who makes this determination, that one certain doctrine can take priority over another? Is it in the Scriptures?
June 21st, 2008 at 8:19 am
Matt,
that’s precisely why I pointed out that her statement is theological. It’s a statement about the text, not a statement of the text.
Melinda,
Not sure how I was knee-jerk in my statement. Just pointing out what seems to be a fallacy in your statement.
Also, you’re demanding I see how the doctrine of election can be abused. That’s fine. One problem, you’ve not described how it’s been abused in your mind.
And if the scripture has been the object of abuse, isn’t the answer to correctly understand and teach it?
June 21st, 2008 at 8:39 am
Melinda.
You seem to often decry Christians inability to converse honestly with each other, so please understand why I’m confused when you ridicule those who ask you challenging questions.
If you contend that the problem with Christians is the way they treat other people, it seems that you are undermining your argument when you attack the motivation, character and integrity of those who communicate together on this blog.
June 23rd, 2008 at 2:51 pm
Perhaps my words were theological. But here’s what I wonder… I once heard a (very good) quote that said something like (really bad paraphrase), “the Bible is shallow enough for the weakest swimmer and deep enough for an olympian”.
So here’s what I wonder… theology is such an important thing for most Christians nowadays. I’ve seen it come to the point of, looking at the original Greek/Hebrew text, and how could that word be translated today, is there a mistake in the KJV/NIV/NLT/etc. I don’t totally discount the value of theology - I’ve taken a few seminary courses, exigeted a few passages, and learned so much about the Bible from those.
At the same time, though, Jesus says to become “like little children”. And I guarantee I’ve never a 5-year-old debating the possible translations of a particular word in the Bible. So there’s a great part of me that says, to be splitting hairs over something in the Bible is kinda counter-productive. I won’t pretend to be super familiar with what the Bible says about predestination and election and so forth, ‘cuz I’m not. I understand quite a bit about Calvinism and Armenianism, but I don’t have a particularly strong stance on that.
But, I am content to accept what the Bible says about it, as it is something that I know I will never be able to understand it entirely (at least not this side of Heaven). God’s way bigger than our little minds can comprehend, and to say he predestined us (or didn’t) is almost putting him a box. Like, it’s almost taking away his gift of free will and our responsibility in relation to that - first of all, accepting Jesus, and second of all, living a Christlike life.
June 23rd, 2008 at 4:04 pm
Melinda,
I think I understand what you’re saying better now…that being said, I can’t follow you all the way.
I just read your comment again, and it is ironic that you end with a very conclusive and theological statement about free will, predestination, and the responsibility of man.
What I hear you’re saying, and do correct me if I’m wrong, is that this doctrine is not understandable now and is therefore unimportant to how we live as Christians. If that’s your position, then that’s fine. It is theological, however, and therefore it’s fair for me to ask what Scripture you base it on.
And if that is your position, I would further ask, why did Paul bring it up to the Ephesians?
And please do take this in the best possible tone. I just want to make conversation
June 23rd, 2008 at 8:08 pm
Matt-
thanks for your comment.
I gotta be honest, quite frankly when it comes to a lot of this, I don’t know. I think it’s safe to say that there’s a lot of the Bible that we don’t understand, or at least, that we don’t understand as well as we will after we’re in heaven. This is a very challenging passage for me in that regard. On the one hand, I know that God can see things in a completely different way than we can - the whole omniscient thing. He knew every second that would happen in our lives before we were even born. The whole concept is really nearly impossible for our finite minds to grasp. At the same time, I struggle with the idea of a God that “chose” who would make the free will choice to believe in Him, and who would be banished to Hell. It’s like - in my finite mind, 2+2 is always going to be four. So to bring those things together - that we have free will BUT God already knows what we’re going to do - that’s tough.
So I have a couple of theories as to this passage in ephesians:
1)first, that this passage focuses primarily on God’s choice to bless us, and how He is completing our love and making our love for God a perfect love, and the choice of the word “predestined” is a translational thing (what can I say, I don’t know greek)
2)that this passage is strongly contextual - the word “predestined” or the other words used in this passage have different meanings to your everyday Greek. Similar to 2 Corinthians 12, where Paul refers to the “third heaven” - to the ancient Greek, this was not a reference to “three separate heavens” but to the heaven beyond the daytime sky and nighttime sky.
What are your thoughts?
June 26th, 2008 at 8:51 am
I think Melinda might have a point with her second theory, though I don’t think it has much to do with the Greek language. What has changed, however, is the cultural and societal emphasis. The author of Ephesians wrote to a church, a group of people, a corporate entity. What we struggle with now is reading a letter to a collective group in our current era of individualism. Perhaps the author’s understanding of “predestination” was corporately based. This would be consistent with the ideas of Galatians, that in Abraham’s true seed, all are blessed. I find this view particularly enlightening in the context, as the author is trying to re-assure Gentiles (traditionally non-”elect”) that they have just as much place in the people of faith as the Jewish Christians (traditionally “elect”). This carries much weight, particularly if the author is in fact Paul, because it essentially declares that all people, Jew or Gentile, slave or free, man or woman are all welcome to follow Jesus, a lifestyle that is by its nature, blessed and predestined. The election rests on those who follow Christ as a corporate entity, not on those individuals that God prefers.
June 28th, 2008 at 2:58 pm
Melinda,
I agree wholeheartedly that I can not possibly understand this issue. To reconcile our human experiences where we appear to have free will over our actions with the biblical record of election is just beyond us.
But, the concept of God’s grace as laid out in the Bible constrains us. And matt, this could be considered a response to you as well. God’s grace is active in personal salvation from eternal condemnation. Grace, as explained by Paul, is due to His will alone, not any foreseen good in us (Eph 2:8-10 compared with Eph 1:11-12). So then if we are saints, it is fully through the working of grace, and not any choice that we make.
And yet…the apostles still call for a choice to be made to follow Jesus in Acts (Acts 2:37-41).
I honestly just don’t understand the issue. Here’s Tim Keller’s answer to this question:
http://download.redeemer.com/rpcsermons/QandA/What_is_the_doctrine_of_Election.mp3
July 2nd, 2008 at 11:21 am
[...] on Twitter Updates for 2008-06-28Crystal Renaud on Visit to Westside Family ChurchMatt on Let’s Get Controversial Up In Here… Divine ElectionMelinda on Friday Linksmatt on Let’s Get Controversial Up In Here… Divine [...]