As Christians, reading Romans 8-9 requires one to look at how they view the ideas of predestination and election. There is probably some school of thought I'm not aware of, but it seems to me you either see this passage as an affirmation of the sovereignty of God who determined, based solely on His good will before the foundations of the earth were laid, to only save certain people or you see it as an affirmation of a sovereign God who, based upon foreknowledge, looked through the corridors of time prior to the foundations of the earth being laid and elected those whom he saw would ultimately decide of their own free will to place their faith in Christ.
If God only saves those who he determined beforehand based solely on the pleasure of His will and not on any decision we might make out of free will, then He also chose, by not electing others, to condemn some without them even having an opportunity to do anything about it. This automatically evokes feelings within us that this isn't just. How could God condemn someone whom He didn't give the opportunity to be saved?
On the other hand, if everyone has the opportunity to choose to place faith in Christ according to free will and God looked through time and elected those whom He foreknew would place their faith in Christ according to that free will and only condemns those who choose not to follow Christ, then our fate is in our own hands. There are no feelings that God is unfair in this scenario. We all have the opportunity for salvation and our choice determines our own fate. What is unfair about that?
The latter scenario sure feels better to me according to my fallen view of justice. So if this is what Paul is teaching, why does he anticipate objections from his audience here and here? Unless Paul is teaching that salvation is the sovereign choice of God based on His will alone and not based upon any decision we make, there would be no objection. I can't believe that Paul, guided by the Holy Spirit, would anticipate an objection to something none would object. This leads me to believe that, as uncomfortable as it is to me, my salvation rests upon God's sovereign grace alone and not because of any decision I was able to reason out on my own. My choice was simply a natural response to the supernatural opening of my eyes by the Holy Spirit.
If God only saves those who he determined beforehand based solely on the pleasure of His will and not on any decision we might make out of free will, then He also chose, by not electing others, to condemn some without them even having an opportunity to do anything about it. This automatically evokes feelings within us that this isn't just. How could God condemn someone whom He didn't give the opportunity to be saved?
On the other hand, if everyone has the opportunity to choose to place faith in Christ according to free will and God looked through time and elected those whom He foreknew would place their faith in Christ according to that free will and only condemns those who choose not to follow Christ, then our fate is in our own hands. There are no feelings that God is unfair in this scenario. We all have the opportunity for salvation and our choice determines our own fate. What is unfair about that?
The latter scenario sure feels better to me according to my fallen view of justice. So if this is what Paul is teaching, why does he anticipate objections from his audience here and here? Unless Paul is teaching that salvation is the sovereign choice of God based on His will alone and not based upon any decision we make, there would be no objection. I can't believe that Paul, guided by the Holy Spirit, would anticipate an objection to something none would object. This leads me to believe that, as uncomfortable as it is to me, my salvation rests upon God's sovereign grace alone and not because of any decision I was able to reason out on my own. My choice was simply a natural response to the supernatural opening of my eyes by the Holy Spirit.
No comments:
Post a Comment