Wednesday, March 19, 2008

Mat 22:14 For many are called, but few are chosen.

Lorraine Boettner, a firm Calvinist, admits in Predestination (I am quoting the excerpt from Erickson's Christian Theology) that Isa. 55:1, Matt. 11:28 and other verses present a problem for Calvinists.

Boettner says "It is true that some verses taken in themselves do seem to imply the Arminian position. If, contrary to what these verses seem to imply, it is not God's intent that all persons be saved, he must be insincere in his offer."

Can God's call be insincere if only a few of those called are chosen? Or is it more likely that He truly desires all men to be saved and to come to the knowledge of the truth? If I simply take scripture at it's word and believe that his call is sincere and he truly has a heart for all men then I don't have to resort to philosophical hoop-jumping and make arbitrary distinctions between "external calls" and "internal calls".

2 comments:

Anonymous said...

Short, but to the point.

It's funny how we all have an interpretive grid. WE interpret the rest of Scripture based on the most simple understanding of some major verses like Ezek. 33.11; John 3.16-17; 1Tim. 2.4; 2Pet. 3.9, etc., while Calvinists interpret the rest of the Bible based on their understanding of Romans 8.30 and Ephesians 1.4-5.

I like the military mantra: Keep It Simple Stupid. If God says that He loves the whole world, I don't have to do theological and hermeneutic gymnastics to make it say "God only loves the Elect."

And BTW, IMO, even Boettner's title of his book is a misnomer. He confused predestination with election (as many Calvinists do). He wanted to equate predestination unto salvation (a term absent in the Bible) with election. Not good.

Billy

Lance said...

I don't question the authenticity of the quote by Boettner, but I would be interested in seeing more of the context from which it came. (Does anyone have that book handy?) I can't help but think he must have further qualified his statement. I cannot embrace the notion of a double-minded God. There must always be a way to harmonize passages that "simple understanding" finds to be in conflict with other passages. Otherwise we must abandon our confidence in a God-breathed Scripture.

There's no question in my mind that - as Billy notes - all human beings approach Scripture in the light of some traditional grid. The key to successfully overcoming our own preconceived notions of biblical truth is to first recognize we have biases and try to allow the text of Scripture to speak from its own literary context. That can be really hard to do.

But I will never settle for an approach that says, "You have your collection of Bible verses and I have mine. Let's just play nice and nobody gets hurt." I'm not saying that's what you are saying, but it is the response I've gotten from some Christians who are unwilling to face all of the texts and find a way to harmonize them.

One side note to Billy: Have you considered that God's love may be differentiated, even as men love their children differently than we might love our wives, our co-workers or even our enemies?