One of the most divisive issues in the church today is the freewill verses predestination debate. Calvinists hold to the predestination side of things (often referred to as the "doctrine of election") and Arminians (so called after renaissance theologian Jacobus Arminius) believe that we have a freewill choice in the matter of accepting or rejecting Christ. The Arminian believes that we must choose Christ of our own volition, or we cannot enter into Heaven. The Calvinist believes that we do not have freewill, and are merely predestined to Heaven or Hell, and that there is nothing we as humans can do to affect our final destinations.
Obviously, both sides cannot be right. We either have a freewill choice in the matter of our salvation, or we do not. I believe that we most certainly do, and I'll try to illustrate just why in this document. Let's look first in the book of Romans...
Romans 8:29-30 For whom he did foreknow, he also did predestinate to be conformed to the image of his Son, that he might be the firstborn among many brethren. 30Moreover whom he did predestinate, them he also called: and whom he called, them he also justified: and whom he justified, them he also glorified.
The Greek word for "called" in verse 30 is "kaleo," which in this context means essentially to name or bestow a title on something, as in "God 'called' us His sheep." This is not the invitation to salvation that goes out to all mankind, which is referenced in Matthew chapter 22, verse 14:
14For many are called, but few are chosen.
In the above instance, "called" is interpreted from the original Greek word "kletos," which means to "invite." Many are invited, few are chosen. Essentially, those chosen are the ones who respond to the invitation which God extends to all mankind. In view of Matthew 22:14 the Calvinist is hard pressed to explain how some of those being called end up not being chosen. Those who accept God's invitation become the chosen, or the elect. And God knows, in His infallible foreknowledge, who those elect will be.
At the very beginning of 1 Peter, the apostle plainly states that the elect to whom he is writing are elect according to the foreknowledge of God:
1 Peter 1:1-2a 1Peter, an apostle of Jesus Christ, to the strangers scattered throughout Pontus, Galatia, Cappadocia, Asia, and Bithynia, 2Elect according to the foreknowledge of God the Father...
So again, we become elect when God's foreknowledge tells Him that we will respond favorably to His universal invitation (see again Matthew 22:14). Paul and Peter have affirmed this in their writings. Foreknowledge preceeds election. I have seen Calvinists such as John MacArthur try to redefine what foreknowledge means, but their reasoning is weak, and based on much presumption. Foreknowledge means what it means. Foreknowledge does not necessarily entail causing.
God foreknows, then He calls (kaleo) some of us His own. Which ones will He call His own? Those who receive Christ, of course! That's the way the scripture reads.
Is God unfair to those He does not choose to call His own? Of course not. God is not unfair to the "un-elect" because it is due to their own natures and actions that He doesn't choose them. But these might ask, as we see in Romans 9:19b:
Why doth he yet find fault? For who hath resisted his will?
But Paul tells them in verse 20 that they are in no position to question God for making them as they were. You see, these have misused their freewill and now want to blame God for trusting them with it!
Please understand that the only way to make Godly sense of Romans 9:19-20 is to realize that Paul is rebuking those who would accuse God of intending that they fall into Hell. What this protester is essentially saying is that since God knew that some men would fail to obtain salvation, it should follow that those who go unsaved are only falling within the will of God. But it is not God's will that any should perish--the failure is the total responsibility of the individual.
To better explain the point I would offer this analogy: A Marine Corp drill sergeant tells the new recruits that some of them will fail to complete boot camp. What if those who ultimately did fail went to the drill sergeant and said: "We were just fulfilling your will that some of us would fail. You should not blame us." But of course the truth is that those who did fail had the same opportunity to succeed as everyone else. They just blew their chance, and they failed. It's not the drill sergeant's fault; it's entirely the fault of those who failed. Just because the drill sergeant knew that some would fail we cannot assume that he intended that any fail.
Paul then asks this very interesting question: 9:21 Hath not the potter power over the clay, of the same lump to make one vessel unto honour, and another unto dishonour?
Now this isn't saying that God spins one man off the potter's wheel and says: "This is an honorable vessel," then, of the next guy He says "Now here's a dung bucket, whaddaya think?" Rather, Romans 9:21 is saying that God knows (and the apostle Paul knows) that some of us will shipwreck our souls because we are autonomous beings--which is exactly what God desired to create. (That's why he called Adam and Eve "good" on the sixth day--even though He knew that they would fall into sin). God knew ahead of time that some of us would use our freewill to choose against Him, and therefore author our own destruction. He knew in advance that if He were to trust mankind with freewill (a necessity if our love toward Him was to be genuine) that some would be destroyed--but this was of their own choosing, and was a necessary byproduct of giving man freewill.
So the reprobate asks, upon realizing that he has become doomed because of his foolish unbelief, "Why did God trust me with this freewill if He knew I might misuse it and therefore die?" He might further wonder aloud "Since God knew that some of us would fail, why does He blame those of us who do fail? Who resists His will?" So Paul tells this inquisitor that such manner of questioning God's sovereignty is folly.
Does God intentionally create dishonorable vessels? Let's look to 2 Timothy 2:20-21 for our answer:
20But in a great house there are not only vessels of gold and of silver, but also of wood and of earth; and some to honour, and some to dishonour.
21If a man therefore purge himself from these, he shall be a vessel unto honour, sanctified, and meet for the master's use, and prepared unto every good work.
So we see that if a man purges himself of the negative qualities Paul mentions in the letter, then he shall be a vessel unto honor. Notice that it is the man's responsibility to purge himself. Freewill is strongly denoted here. God will of course guide our steps, but we must be willing to move our feet. If the reader has previously held to the notion that Romans 9:21 means that God intentionally makes dishonorable vessels, he should not, in full view of 2 Timothy 2:21 continue under such a delusion. We all have the God given ability to become vessels of honor. Understand that just because God knows that some of us will fail, that does not mean that He causes us to fail. There is big difference between knowing and causing.
It is helpful to realize that only freewill led, autonomous beings could truly honor and glorify God. If God made us as sock puppets (the Calvinist view, when you get right down to it), and then, as "glorified sock puppets," we turn--right on cue--and robotically glorify Him, what glory is that? True honor and glory and love toward God must come from somewhere outside Himself. Christ says in John 8:54:
54Jesus answered, "If I glorify Myself, My glory is nothing; it is My Father who glorifies Me, of whom you say, 'He is our God'; (NASB)
So we see here that Christ's glory came to Him from the Father, the first member of the Trinity. We do not count Christ as less than God, so it is right to believe that God Himself does not consider self-glorification true glory.
It is true that God intentionally created man with the ability to fail or succeed. In such a design God receives true love and glory when we seek and find Him. The dishonorable vessel wonders why God created him at all, if indeed God knew in His foreknowledge that he would end up in Hell. But to have placated such men by not making them at all would be to deprive the rest of us the chance to be with God. God would like for us all to be saved, but it is our freewill that keeps some of us away from Him.
Now, as pertaining to that universal invitation, let's look at Romans chapter 1 for a moment...
Romans 1:20-21 For the invisible things of him from the creation of the world are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even his eternal power and Godhead; so that they (the reprobate) are without excuse: 21Because that, when they knew God, they glorified him not as God, neither were thankful; but became vain in their imaginations, and their foolish heart was darkened. (or hardened, I think it's fair to say).
Notice that these verses indicate that those who had their hearts darkened actually knew God, but chose not to glorify Him. Since Paul labels these who did not glorify God as "without excuse" it is proper to say that they could have acknowledged God (otherwise Paul would not admonish them, rather he would pity them). So there falls the Total Depravity point of Calvinism, we should note; these could have glorified God.
When God chooses His elect, it is only because He is having mercy on us. He chooses to have mercy on those who He foreknows will accept that invitation that He speaks of in Matthew 22:14. And He chooses to harden those who He knows will reject His Son Jesus Christ. God knows the hearts of all the elect and all the reprobate. He knows the sheep, and He knows the goats. And when he has mercy on the sheep, it is mercy indeed because even these do not deserve eternal life. (For all have sinned and fallen short of the glory of God).
Regarding mercy and hardening...
God knows that the reprobate would never of his own volition receive Christ. And our Lord does not like lukewarmness. (See Revelation 3:15-16). God wants us to either accept and love Him, or otherwise turn completely from Him. We will then either be the recipients of mercy (if we sincerely seek God) or hardening (should we turn away from Him). This is our choice, and this decision has everything to do with whether God decides to have mercy on us or not.
Romans 9:18 says Therefore hath he mercy on whom he will have mercy, and whom he will he hardeneth.
This scripture doesn't indicate that God just arbitrarily, as in some great cosmic lottery, chooses a few to save at random. I think it is completely biblical to understand that this mercy for some and hardening for others is certainly based on something within the individual person's nature. God differentiates between individuals for some reason--even before they do good or evil, as it is written in Malachi, and quoted by Paul in Romans 9:13, where God said: Jacob have I loved, but Esau have I hated.
One possible characteristic in a person that is pleasing to God might be that person's response to God's creation--which is the undeniable evidence of His existence (see again Romans 1:20-21)... or the person's response to the ministering of the Holy Spirit. If God likes what He sees in His foreknowledge (remember?)--then He calls us His elect--because He knows that we will come to Jesus.
But is it even possible that an unsaved soul could act in such a way that God sees potential in them? The Calvinist would say no, but fortunately for us all the apostle Paul appears to differ: Romans 2:14-15a:
For when the Gentiles which have not the law do by nature the things contained in the law, these, having not the law, are a law unto themselves: 15 Which shew the work of the law written in their hearts, their conscience also bearing witness...
So it appears biblical to say that it is possible that some men, even before being saved, can respond properly--at least some of the time--to the laws which God has written on our hearts. Put another way, when we respond to and even cultivate a good conscience (notice that Paul even uses that very word "conscience" in the scripture shown above) we are moving in a Godly direction. And this is how, I would suggest, God chooses His elect. Using His foreknowledge, God saw a difference between Jacob and Esau. God knew what Esau would become, so God chose Jacob over Esau. God did not condemn Esau; Esau condemned himself. God did not predestinate Esau into Hell--Esau did this to himself. Further, God knew what Jacob would become, so God considered Jacob one of His elect.
Still speaking of Jacob and Esau, Romans 9:11 says: 11(For the children being not yet born, neither having done any good or evil, that the purpose of God according to election might stand, not of works, but of him that calleth;)
"What is the purpose of God according to election?" one might ask. Many Calvinists would say that this means that God caused Esau to fail and Jacob to succeed. The poor Arminian probably hasn't a clue about what to do with this verse. So what does it mean? It means just what it says: God's purpose according to election has nothing to do with working your way toward Him. Nor does it have anything to do with willing your way toward Him. Let's look quickly at Romans 9:16:
16So then it is not of him that willeth, nor of him that runneth, but of God that sheweth mercy.
God's purpose in election has nothing to do with will or works. A man might will himself toward communion with God, but that won't get him there. A man might do all sorts of good works, hoping that God will reward him for those works, but that won't get him elected either. (And do we not see many--even among our own church congregations--who attempt to will and work themselves into heaven?)
"Well," the Calvinist might ask, "if it is not according to a man's own will that he be saved, then how do you assert that man's freewill has anything to do with it?"
There is a difference between willing oneself into favor with God, and using our God given freewill to direct our lives in such a way that God finds favor in us. The condition of our heart is the key. We reflect this in how we respond to our fellow man. Think of the parable of the good Samaritan. Our Lord speaks favorably of this man's humanitarian action. Though the Samaritan was considered by the "well-churched" to be an undesirable, Christ shows us that He is pleased with such kindness of heart.
There are untold millions of church-going, professing Christians whose hearts will sadly remain--for all eternity--without Christ. Conversely, there are millions of professing atheists who will some day be called by God to believe on Christ--and these will come home, because God will have called them His own. God knows each of us--even before we do anything good or bad. He foreknows whom He will call His own.
So God shows mercy on whom He will and He hardens whom He will--based on His foreknowledge. Remember that those being hardened are not simply victims of God's "good pleasure" as many Calvinists would have it. These recipients of God's hardening have rejected Him; they have not acknowledged His existence unto glorification--even though they could have: Romans 1:20-21 is powerful and undeniable testimony that God expects us to respond positively toward Him, based only on our observation of His creation. Those who do not respond (and the undeniable implication is that they could and should respond) are again, in Paul's words, "without excuse."
Dan Newberry
