The Pen is Mightier than the Sword
Election and Freewill – The Quest Begins
Two pillars of the Early Christian Church – Peter and Paul – wrote separately on the subject of salvation, yet with complete unanimity and absolute harmony. In other words, they both believed and taught the same truths concerning God, Christ and man, in that order. Yet it seems to me that there is a man-made system of theology which distorts these truths, clouding understanding.
Introduction
It is now some time since I wrote a twenty-page pamphlet entitled Election and Freewill. Written to address a local issue, it was never ever intended for publication – it was too caustic, too harsh, too ungracious, born out of a deep hurt caused by exposure to theological exposition that was completely alien to what I believe the Bible teaches – which, incidentally, was alien to what I had believed and taught myself for over half a century.
There were two reasons for writing that pamphlet. The first was to challenge the theology of a fellow elder whose responsibility within the Fellowship was to preach and teach on a regular basis. The second was an exercise in honesty, because I felt it was imperative that I should “nail my colours to the mast” and disclose exactly where I stood theologically within the eldership in particular and within the Fellowship in general. What I did not anticipate was the reaction which followed. To say the least, it was a great eye-opener!
The details of the confrontation are not important to these three articles, which are intended for publication through this Pen4God Ministries Website – even though they bear the same title as the original pamphlet – suffice to say that I discovered that Reformed Theology (which is really only another name for Calvinism) is an extremely controversial subject and people, who appear very spiritual and level headed normally, get very upset and emotional when the subject is brought up, and especially when they are challenged in their beliefs by those who cannot agree with them.
When things had settled down, I realised that I was faced with three choices. The first was to leave the Fellowship, but that was out of the question, because both my wife and I were under the conviction that God had led us to that Fellowship to serve Him, and until He moved us on, there we would stay! The second was to continue as before, keep quiet ("keep yourself to yourself," my wife counselled), say nothing out of place, act as if nothing had happened – because outwardly it appeared that everything had "settled" – and continue faithful to what I believe the Bible teaches. The third was to do something about it, with the prayer that some good would come out of what, to me, had been a very unpleasant experience.
I chose the third, and the results of that choice are what you read in these articles. My reasoning for this decision stemmed from the realisation that I was not alone in my concerns. Quite independently several people in the Fellowship, knowing absolutely nothing of the confrontation to which I had been subjected, spoke to me of their confusion, their discomfort, their unsettling, their discouragement, and all caused by the same problem that had faced me months earlier. I remained loyal to the eldership, however, disclosing nothing of my own painful experience, and counselled those who were concerned according to what I believe the Scriptures really teach. These articles set out to widen that counsel, making it available to those beyond my immediate sphere of spiritual ministry.
Those looking for a deep theological treatise on the subject of Reformed Theology, Calvinism, election, freewill of man, and the like, will be disappointed if they are looking for it here. This is a record of my own simple and sincere quest for the truth, a clarification in my own mind of that truth, and an “escape” from the strictly theological (reformed or otherwise) approach. There are many good books and booklets, some more academic than others, available on the subject. Readers requiring something less simple than that contained in these articles should turn to them. For those who wish to join me in my simple and sincere quest as hitherto described, read on!
What of the two pillars of the Early Christian Church introduced at the beginning of this Introduction? What do Peter and Paul have to say on the subject? Let us look firstly at what Peter wrote. “The Lord is not slack concerning his promise, as some men count slackness; but is longsuffering to us-ward, not willing that any should perish, but that all should come to repentance.” Now, did he really mean what he wrote, or did he not? To put it another way, do we believe what the Bible says, or do we reject it?
What is Peter saying here? We recognise firstly that the statements he makes are based on the promise of God – and what is that promise? It is revealed in many Scripture passages, the most familiar possibly being John 3:16, that “whosoever believes in the Lord Jesus Christ will have everlasting life.” Whosoever means whosoever, and to receive the gift of eternal life one must accept the gift of salvation first. That word “whosoever” is important. As Dr. H. A. Ironside states, “‘Whosoever’ means ‘whosoever’. Only a biased theologian with an axe to grind could ever think that it meant only the elect.”
Then we come to Paul. He wrote, “For this is good and acceptable in the sight of God our Saviour; Who will have all men to be saved, and to come unto the knowledge of the truth. For there is one God, and one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus; Who gave himself a ransom for all, to be testified in due time.” The little word “all” in this passage is vitally important, because it confirms that God wants all to come unto the knowledge of the truth, for all to be saved, and that His Son, Jesus Christ, gave Himself a ransom for all. Now, does “all” mean “all”?
These two passages from Scripture, the first in 2 Peter 3:9 and the second in 1 Timothy 2:3-6, must surely strike a devastating blow to the Calvinistic aspects of Reformed Theology being addressed in this booklet. To support these particular doctrines they must ignore swathes of Scripture, and misinterpret the selected verses of Scripture upon which they base their erroneous teaching.
Not all Reformed Theology is wrong, of course. There is much to commend it, such as their reverence for the Scriptures, believing them to be completely without error, as indeed they are, and their emphasis on the sovereignty of God, with which no sincere Christian can quarrel. As George Zeller writes in his booklet, The Dangers of Reformed Theology,
There were two reasons for writing that pamphlet. The first was to challenge the theology of a fellow elder whose responsibility within the Fellowship was to preach and teach on a regular basis. The second was an exercise in honesty, because I felt it was imperative that I should “nail my colours to the mast” and disclose exactly where I stood theologically within the eldership in particular and within the Fellowship in general. What I did not anticipate was the reaction which followed. To say the least, it was a great eye-opener!
The details of the confrontation are not important to these three articles, which are intended for publication through this Pen4God Ministries Website – even though they bear the same title as the original pamphlet – suffice to say that I discovered that Reformed Theology (which is really only another name for Calvinism) is an extremely controversial subject and people, who appear very spiritual and level headed normally, get very upset and emotional when the subject is brought up, and especially when they are challenged in their beliefs by those who cannot agree with them.
When things had settled down, I realised that I was faced with three choices. The first was to leave the Fellowship, but that was out of the question, because both my wife and I were under the conviction that God had led us to that Fellowship to serve Him, and until He moved us on, there we would stay! The second was to continue as before, keep quiet ("keep yourself to yourself," my wife counselled), say nothing out of place, act as if nothing had happened – because outwardly it appeared that everything had "settled" – and continue faithful to what I believe the Bible teaches. The third was to do something about it, with the prayer that some good would come out of what, to me, had been a very unpleasant experience.
I chose the third, and the results of that choice are what you read in these articles. My reasoning for this decision stemmed from the realisation that I was not alone in my concerns. Quite independently several people in the Fellowship, knowing absolutely nothing of the confrontation to which I had been subjected, spoke to me of their confusion, their discomfort, their unsettling, their discouragement, and all caused by the same problem that had faced me months earlier. I remained loyal to the eldership, however, disclosing nothing of my own painful experience, and counselled those who were concerned according to what I believe the Scriptures really teach. These articles set out to widen that counsel, making it available to those beyond my immediate sphere of spiritual ministry.
Those looking for a deep theological treatise on the subject of Reformed Theology, Calvinism, election, freewill of man, and the like, will be disappointed if they are looking for it here. This is a record of my own simple and sincere quest for the truth, a clarification in my own mind of that truth, and an “escape” from the strictly theological (reformed or otherwise) approach. There are many good books and booklets, some more academic than others, available on the subject. Readers requiring something less simple than that contained in these articles should turn to them. For those who wish to join me in my simple and sincere quest as hitherto described, read on!
What of the two pillars of the Early Christian Church introduced at the beginning of this Introduction? What do Peter and Paul have to say on the subject? Let us look firstly at what Peter wrote. “The Lord is not slack concerning his promise, as some men count slackness; but is longsuffering to us-ward, not willing that any should perish, but that all should come to repentance.” Now, did he really mean what he wrote, or did he not? To put it another way, do we believe what the Bible says, or do we reject it?
What is Peter saying here? We recognise firstly that the statements he makes are based on the promise of God – and what is that promise? It is revealed in many Scripture passages, the most familiar possibly being John 3:16, that “whosoever believes in the Lord Jesus Christ will have everlasting life.” Whosoever means whosoever, and to receive the gift of eternal life one must accept the gift of salvation first. That word “whosoever” is important. As Dr. H. A. Ironside states, “‘Whosoever’ means ‘whosoever’. Only a biased theologian with an axe to grind could ever think that it meant only the elect.”
Then we come to Paul. He wrote, “For this is good and acceptable in the sight of God our Saviour; Who will have all men to be saved, and to come unto the knowledge of the truth. For there is one God, and one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus; Who gave himself a ransom for all, to be testified in due time.” The little word “all” in this passage is vitally important, because it confirms that God wants all to come unto the knowledge of the truth, for all to be saved, and that His Son, Jesus Christ, gave Himself a ransom for all. Now, does “all” mean “all”?
These two passages from Scripture, the first in 2 Peter 3:9 and the second in 1 Timothy 2:3-6, must surely strike a devastating blow to the Calvinistic aspects of Reformed Theology being addressed in this booklet. To support these particular doctrines they must ignore swathes of Scripture, and misinterpret the selected verses of Scripture upon which they base their erroneous teaching.
Not all Reformed Theology is wrong, of course. There is much to commend it, such as their reverence for the Scriptures, believing them to be completely without error, as indeed they are, and their emphasis on the sovereignty of God, with which no sincere Christian can quarrel. As George Zeller writes in his booklet, The Dangers of Reformed Theology,
“In general it has been a God-honouring movement which has preached Christ, detested sin, acknowledged that God rules on His sovereign throne and proclaimed the glorious doctrine of justification by grace through faith according to the Scriptures.”
The only reason why I mention Reformed Theology here is because the exposure to theological exposition referred to earlier, which caused me such deep hurt, came from one who embraced Reformed Theology, although it was the Calvinistic element which prompted my challenge, not the whole movement. My simple and sincere quest, therefore, is not into the teachings of Reformed Theology as such, but into Calvinism where it impinges on the Reformed tradition. In fact, we can delete the phrase Reformed Theology from our quest altogether. It is the truth we are seeking, not the exploration of a man-made theology system.
There is good reason for taking this decision, as C. H. Mackintosh explains in an article entitled One Sided Theology. He writes, “God has not confined Himself within the narrow limits of any school of doctrine – high, low or moderate. He has revealed Himself. He has told out the deep and precious secrets of His heart. He has unfolded His eternal counsels, as to the Church, as to Israel, the Gentiles, and the wide creation. Men might as well attempt to confine the ocean in buckets of their own formation as to confine the vast range of divine revelation within the feeble enclosures of human systems of doctrine. It cannot be done, and it ought not to be attempted. Better far to set aside the systems of theology and schools of divinity, and come like a little child to the eternal fountain of Holy Scripture, and their drink in the living teachings of God's Spirit.”
That is exactly what I intend to do in my quest, to come like a child to the eternal fountain of Holy Scripture, and drink in the living teachings of God's Spirit. The result will inevitably be very much in the form of questions and answers, but that is all to the good providing they are the right answers. This is where Mackintosh's words apply!
That is exactly what I intend to do in my quest, to come like a child to the eternal fountain of Holy Scripture, and drink in the living teachings of God's Spirit. The result will inevitably be very much in the form of questions and answers, but that is all to the good providing they are the right answers. This is where Mackintosh's words apply!
The Quest Begins
Having been greatly troubled in my spirit over the teaching emanating from some of our evangelical churches in recent years, and at one time from one Baptist church in particular, concerning predestination, foreknowledge, etc., and particularly the interpretation given to election and the freewill of man, it has forced me to prayerfully and systematically study the Scriptures for myself because I found it impossible for me to accept such teaching as the truth, especially as it was so contrary to what I have been preaching and teaching for well over fifty years, and seemed to reveal to me a God completely alien to the One I have worshipped and served since my conversion back in the early 1940’s.
Furthermore, it is not “standard” Baptist doctrine, as evidenced by the teaching I received as a teenager in my home Baptist Church, and in the study of Baptist doctrine books since. Whilst I am writing this booklet from a Baptist standpoint, it applies equally to all evangelical churches of whatever denomination where this questionable doctrine is being expounded. This is not a case of supporting an Arminian stand, or opposing a Calvinistic stand (two extremes unacceptable), not even a Baptist stand, but a matter of taking a Christian stand! I am not interested in what Arminius said, or what Calvin said, or what anyone else said, I am only interested in what the Bible says – a principle I have rigidly adhered to throughout my ministry, a period of well over half a century at the time of writing this. Now that principle is being called into question!
It should be stated right at the beginning of this article that I have approached the subject with a completely open mind and a sincere prayer that the Holy Spirit would reveal to me the truth of the Word; like the Bereans, I have “received the word with all readiness of mind, and searched the scriptures daily, whether those things were so” (Acts 17:11), and, praise God, the truth has been revealed to me. This revelation is contained in this booklet. Throughout I have used the Authorised (King James) Version of the Scriptures because it is the version with which I am most familiar and the one in which I feel the most comfortable.
One final point as The Quest Begins, and I believe an important one! I accept fully and undeniably the sovereignty of God, predestination and foreknowledge, election and total depravity of man; how could I do otherwise when they are in the Bible! In the light of my very intensive study over recent years, however, what I cannot accept is the interpretation put on them in the teaching from those evangelical churches where evangelism should be the primary aim, but an aim which is severely compromised by such teaching. My reasons for being unable to accept The Interpretation are herein set forth.
One final point as The Quest Begins, and I believe an important one! I accept fully and undeniably the sovereignty of God, predestination and foreknowledge, election and total depravity of man; how could I do otherwise when they are in the Bible! In the light of my very intensive study over recent years, however, what I cannot accept is the interpretation put on them in the teaching from those evangelical churches where evangelism should be the primary aim, but an aim which is severely compromised by such teaching. My reasons for being unable to accept The Interpretation are herein set forth.
The Interpretation
This section, setting forth the unacceptable definition of Election, and the reasons for it being unacceptable, will form the basis of this booklet. Here, then, is The Interpretation, as I understand it.
Salvation is not for the “whosoever” – God exercised His sovereign will before time began (before the creation of the world) and decided who would be saved and who would be damned. In other words, because He has a right to do as He pleases, because He is a Sovereign God, He elected some to receive salvation and others from whom He would withhold the blessing. To put it another way, He arbitrarily selected some of His creatures to go to heaven and others to go to hell, purely on a whim, simply because He wanted to exercise His sovereign will!
The result of this definition means that, if I am elected (and I won’t know that this side of eternity) then it doesn’t matter what I do in this life, I’m in! No matter what sort of life I live, I can’t be lost because I’ve been elected. I have no say in the matter, it’s settled. On the other hand, if I am not one of the elect (and again, I won’t know this side of eternity) I can be the most religious person going, serve the Lord, take an active part in His Church, lead a Christian life according to the Scriptures, study my Bible and pray regularly, but it will all be a waste of time because I’m out! Putting it crudely, I’ve been conned, I’ve not been elected. As hard (and perhaps as crude) as this may sound, this is what The Interpretation really means!
Why is it unacceptable to me? Because all this fails to take into account the command of Scripture (in the words of Jesus Himself) to, “Go ye into all the world, and preach the gospel to every creature” (Mark 16:15) – why? What is the point? To every creature? Surely that should read, “Go ye into all the world, and preach the gospel to the elect!” Then there is that well-known verse in John 3:16, “For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life.” If the definition given of election is correct, then John 3:16 is definitely incorrect. It should read, “For God so loved the world” (perhaps that should read “the elect”) “that he gave his only begotten Son, that those he has elected, no matter what they believe or who they believe in, will not perish, but have everlasting life. The rest have no hope because they have not been elected.”
God cannot be a God of justice or a God of love if He has settled everything before the world began, so that only those elected have any hope of salvation. Likewise, if He is a God who desires the love and companionship of His creatures (the created ones), which is why He created man “in the beginning”, if man has no choice in the matter, then it cannot be real love for God or real fellowship with Him. By this definition of election man is forced to love, forced into companionship, with his Maker, for he has no choice. He is elected! There are those who teach that since the Fall, man does not have “free-will” but where does it specifically state that in the Bible? I have searched most diligently, yet I cannot find it!
Such exponents of this doctrine insist that we must constantly keep before us the fact that the issue is not whether we wear the label Calvinist or Arminian, but is the doctrine of election biblical? Of course the doctrine of election is biblical, it is the interpretation being taught which is being questioned. That election is referred to in the Bible there is no doubt, as indeed are the allied words, predestination, foreknowledge, and so on. But a correct definition of election, and its related words, is necessary to understand (with the help of the Holy Spirit) what the Bible is really saying, which is why this study was undertaken.
Why is it unacceptable to me? Because all this fails to take into account the command of Scripture (in the words of Jesus Himself) to, “Go ye into all the world, and preach the gospel to every creature” (Mark 16:15) – why? What is the point? To every creature? Surely that should read, “Go ye into all the world, and preach the gospel to the elect!” Then there is that well-known verse in John 3:16, “For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life.” If the definition given of election is correct, then John 3:16 is definitely incorrect. It should read, “For God so loved the world” (perhaps that should read “the elect”) “that he gave his only begotten Son, that those he has elected, no matter what they believe or who they believe in, will not perish, but have everlasting life. The rest have no hope because they have not been elected.”
God cannot be a God of justice or a God of love if He has settled everything before the world began, so that only those elected have any hope of salvation. Likewise, if He is a God who desires the love and companionship of His creatures (the created ones), which is why He created man “in the beginning”, if man has no choice in the matter, then it cannot be real love for God or real fellowship with Him. By this definition of election man is forced to love, forced into companionship, with his Maker, for he has no choice. He is elected! There are those who teach that since the Fall, man does not have “free-will” but where does it specifically state that in the Bible? I have searched most diligently, yet I cannot find it!
Such exponents of this doctrine insist that we must constantly keep before us the fact that the issue is not whether we wear the label Calvinist or Arminian, but is the doctrine of election biblical? Of course the doctrine of election is biblical, it is the interpretation being taught which is being questioned. That election is referred to in the Bible there is no doubt, as indeed are the allied words, predestination, foreknowledge, and so on. But a correct definition of election, and its related words, is necessary to understand (with the help of the Holy Spirit) what the Bible is really saying, which is why this study was undertaken.
© 2009 Denis A. Wheadon. All rights reserved. Website: http://www.Pen4God.co.uk. This document is the property of the Author and
must not be displayed on any other websites without permission. Copies may be downloaded and printed for personal use only. Any contact with
the writer or comments concerning an article, can be made by email addressed to: denis.wheadon@Pen4God.co.uk
must not be displayed on any other websites without permission. Copies may be downloaded and printed for personal use only. Any contact with
the writer or comments concerning an article, can be made by email addressed to: denis.wheadon@Pen4God.co.uk
Navigation
By using the pull out menus from the
navigation tabs located on every page
you can surf anywhere you like through
The Pen4God Ministries Website
By using the pull out menus from the
navigation tabs located on every page
you can surf anywhere you like through
The Pen4God Ministries Website
Have Your Say!
If you would like to make a comment on any
or all of these three articles go to the
Pen4God Ministries WEBLOG
by clicking anywhere inside this box
If you would like to make a comment on any
or all of these three articles go to the
Pen4God Ministries WEBLOG
by clicking anywhere inside this box
