Redeeming God

Liberating you from bad ideas about God

Learn the MOST ESSENTIAL truths for following Jesus.

Get FREE articles and audio teachings in my discipleship emails!


You are here: Home / Archives

Would Jesus be a Ferguson Protester?

27 Comments

Jesus in Ferguson Protests

Would Jesus be a Ferguson protester?

I suppose it depends on what you mean by “Ferguson Protester.”

In case you do not live in the United States (or even if you do and have been living under a rock), let me summarize what happened. On August 9, 2014, a Ferguson police officer named Darren Wilson shot and killed a young man named Michael Brown. Since Michael was black and unarmed, and the police officer was white, many are saying that this killing was racially motivated and that officer Darren Wilson should be condemned for murder. Darren Wilson contends that he was being attacked by Michael Brown and shot him in self-defense.

Protests in Ferguson have been occurring nonstop since August, most of which have been non-violent. On Monday, November 24, however, the Grand Jury announced that Officer Darren Wilson would not be indicted for the shooting of Michael Brown. In response to this verdict, many in Ferguson, MO turned to further violence.

In the following post, I have tried to imagine what Jesus would say and do if He lived in Ferguson, Missouri.

My thoughts are below. Feel free to agree or disagree in the comment section.

1. Jesus is deeply saddened by the death of Michael Brown.

This is the beginning place. God does not desire the death of anyone, whether they are innocent or guilty, young or old, male or female, black or white. God does not have a favorite race, a favorite age, a favorite gender, a favorite political party, or even a favorite class of people. He loves sinners as much as He saints.

It makes no real difference to Jesus whether Michael Brown was guilty or not. Jesus loves Him and is terribly saddened by His death.

For this reason, Jesus would be found among the mourners of Ferguson, Missouri.

Jesus would be deeply saddened by everything that has happened in Ferguson. He would mourn with the friends and family of Michael Brown.

2. Jesus is opposed to brutality wherever it exists.

Many are decrying officer Wilson’s actions as another example of police brutality and the over-militarization of our domestic law enforcement. Jesus is opposed to brutality and violence wherever it is found, especially among those who exist to “serve and protect.”

And yet…

Regardless of the decision reached by the Grand Jury, Jesus is deeply saddened that violence resulted in the death of a young man, and Jesus is deeply saddened by the violence and brutality that has been carried about by those who do not like the decision of the Grand Jury. Jesus would not call upon the people of Ferguson to riot or engage in any sort of violence toward the police or toward other people in town.

One thing Jesus definitely would not do is to offer a $5000 reward for anyone who kills Officer Wilson and his family members. This sort of blatant criminal activity only pours gasoline on an already raging inferno, and Jesus would condemn such calls to brutal violence.

Instead, Jesus would invite the people of Ferguson to love and forgive, and maybe even to do the most shocking thing of all — to give that $5000 to Officer Wilson and his family. Can you imagine the worldwide news stir that this would create? Instead, all we get is news about escalating violence.

Even when reporters try to allow the looters to provide their perspective, they receive only violence in return. Here are two examples:

This looks nothing like Jesus.

Whether or not Officer Wilson truly is guilty of brutal violence, more brutality from the people of Ferguson is not what Jesus would support. He would call for love and forgiveness, as these are the only things that can heal this broken community.

3. Jesus hates racism in all its forms.

Related to violence is the issue of racism. Was the killing of Michael Brown racially motivated? Nobody really knows, except for Darren Wilson.

ferguson police officersAnd again, maybe the Grand Jury will uncover some evidence which proves that Darren Wilson was racist, and if so, such actions and behavior can be rightly condemned by those who follow Jesus.

But again, just as Jesus would never call His followers to engage in brutal violence as a response to violence, so also, Jesus would never engage in any sort of racism as a response to real (or perceived) racism toward Him.

Jesus would not condone racist chants against white people (Warning: there is lots of profanity on that page). Racism is evil, whether it is white people hating black people, or black people hating white people.

Again, Jesus would call for forgiveness and love, not hatred and violence.

4. Jesus would point to the root of the problem.

Ultimately, if Jesus lived in Ferguson, Missouri and was taking part in the protests, He would point the root of the problem.

The root problem is not violence. The root problem is not even racism. It is definitely not the over-militarization of law enforcement in response to the militarization of gangs.

The real problem is scapegoating.

Scapegoating is done when we blame other people for our own problems. Scapegoating is when we believe that yet another death will atone for the evils of the past. Scapegoating is when we refuse to admit our own failures and sins, and instead blame others for the way our lives turn out or our actions unfold. Scapegoating is when we refuse to take responsibility for our decisions, and instead blame others for our behavior.

What Response in Ferguson Looks Like Jesus?

Jesus would invite the police to revisit their recruitment process and training procedures so that people of all backgrounds and races are treated fairly and justly.

Jesus would invite the people of Ferguson to forgive Officer Wilson, knowing that although the death of Michael Brown was wrong, nothing will bring Michael Brown back, and seeking the death of another person only amplifies the problem and perpetuates the violence.

Jesus would remind the people of Ferguson that death does not do away with injustice. Only forgiveness does that. That the proper response to racism is not hatred, but love.

Jesus in ferguson

Jesus would invite all the people in Ferguson, whether they are black or white, rich or poor, in power or without, that “other people” are not the problem. “We” are the problem. Each of us is responsible for our own actions. And while we cannot, should not, and must not force others to relinquish power, to be generous with their money, or to love and forgive in return, we can love as we want to be loved; we can forgive as we want to be forgiven; we can serve as we want to be served.

So would Jesus be a Ferguson protester? Yes, but He would also be protesting the protests. He would be a friend to the Brown family in their loss, and He would also be a friend to the Wilson family in their fear. He would call for racial reconciliation, for peace, for love, and for forgiveness.

This is the response that brings hope and healing. This is the response that looks most like Jesus.

Concluding Thoughts

In the end, I agree completely with what Alan Cross wrote yesterday about the Ferguson Protests:

I have seen quite a bit of vitriol, mocking, and derision directed their way today from white Christians in social media who have reposted racial jokes and memes and have condemned them heartily. I do abhor violence and destruction of property and am praying for peace and for those whose businesses were destroyed. It is wrong and it should not be happening and those breaking the law should be arrested and brought to justice. There is really no discussion on that point. But, not all who disagree with what was decided are violent or want to do destroy things. And, even worse, what has affected me today is the energy that some people have exhibited in making fun of the crowds and mocking them and saying that they would never be them.

Then, I saw a tweet from David Fitch, professor/writer, that referenced Mark 6:34 and it got me thinking. I turned to the parallel passage in Matthew and it says this:

“And Jesus went throughout all the cities and villages, teaching in their synagogues and proclaiming the gospel of the kingdom and healing every disease and every affliction. When he saw the crowds, he had compassion for them, because they were harassed and helpless, like sheep without a shepherd. Then he said to his disciples, ‘The harvest is plentiful, but the laborers are few; therefore pray earnestly to the Lord of the harvest to send out laborers into his harvest.'” (Matthew 9:35-38)

Christmas is the season that we celebrate the coming of Jesus, born as a baby in Bethlehem to Mary and Joseph. We call his birth the Incarnation because the Son of God came and put on flesh and made his dwelling among us. He came and lived among US. He taught and healed and told us about the Kingdom of God. His Kingdom invaded our own little kingdoms and he told us a better story – a True Story. He gave us life. He did not stand afar off from us in our sin or misery or destructive ways. He did not mock us or make fun of us or declare how stupid we were. He didn’t reject us. He became one of us and in so doing, saved us all – all who will come to Him.

WE were the crowd. Harassed and helpless. Sheep without a shepherd, not knowing where to turn, where to go, or what to do. So, we followed the loudest voices we could hear – the voices of our culture or our past or of temptations or seducing spirits or ourselves. We went after them looking for life and answers and we became harassed on every side. Helpless to do anything to save ourselves or change our situations. Some turning to violence. Some to pride. Some to greed and anger and some to judgment and condescension so they could establish themselves as better than others. But, Jesus came for us all. The privileged and the powerful, the poor and the angry. All of us, even those whose sins look more respectable than others.

Agree? Disagree? Share this post with others and weigh in with your own comments below!

You Look Like Jesus!

13 Comments

Jeremy MyersI have long hair.

Recently a Christian man came up to me and said, “Don’t you know that it is an abomination to God for a man to have long hair?”

I could have argued with him by correcting his misquote of 1 Corinthians 11:14. I could have showed him the cultural reasons why Paul’s words don’t really apply to us today. I could have stated that even if long hair was dishonorable, maybe the reason I had long hair was that I wanted to be dishonored. I also could have brought up the fact that in most artistic renderings of Jesus, He had long hair, but nobody thinks that it was an “abomination” for Him.

But I said none of these things. I have learned that sometimes, it is best to just laugh off such outlandish accusations, and move on.

So instead of trying to show the man how wrong he was, I just cracked a joke. I said, “I have long hair because I’m trying to look like Jesus!”

He stared at me for a second, then shouted “Blasphemer!” and stalked away.

I am not exactly sure how my words were blasphemous, but then, nothing this man said made mush sense.

.. My poor attempt at a joke got me thinking.

Yes, we Christians are supposed to look like Jesus. In fact, “Christian” means “little Christ.” Yet I fear that we have misunderstood what it means to look like Jesus.

It doesn’t mean that we grow long hair, wear long robes, and go about with a holy half-smile on our lips, saying things like “Verily! Verily!” (On three different occasions over the past three weeks, I have had people come up to me and tell me that I look like Jesus. I am now thinking of cutting my hair…)

Looking like Jesus doesn’t mean that we set up a Jesus statue in our front lawns and point spotlights at it.

Looking like Jesus doesn’t mean that we shout his name at people through a bullhorn.

Looking like Jesus doesn’t even necessarily mean that we feed the hungry, heal the sick, and perform miracles.

What does it mean to look like Jesus?

Looking like Jesus means, among other things, that people will want to hang out with us for the same reasons they hung out with Jesus.

Looking like Jesus means that we will see what God is really up to in this world, and will seek to join Him in His work.

elect JesusLooking like Jesus means that we will not stand out in a crowd for how we are dressed or what we are saying, but will get noticed because of what we stand up for—or more precisely, who we stand up for.

Looking like Jesus may mean that we don’t get our “rights,” but instead end up sacrificing our rights–and maybe our very lives–for the sake of others.

Jesus doesn’t want us to look like Him. He wants us to look like us, but to live in the way that He lived, with His values, His goals, and His approach to God and people.

It used to be popular to attempt to live life by asking ourselves all the time “What would Jesus do?” In more recent years, I am not sure that this is the best way to live. I don’t think Jesus wants us to ask “What would Jesus do?” and then seek to do it. No, I think Jesus wants us to ask, “What would Jesus want me to do?” and then go do that. This means that while we may not look like Jesus, we will act and behave how Jesus wants.

That Looks Like Jesus….

My friend Sam Riviera often weighs in on church activities or theological topics by saying “That looks like Jesus.” Over the past several years, I have been reworking a lot of my life and theology, and have discovered that this “Jesus lens” is a good guide to making decisions about life and theology.

While Jesus may not have said anything about  the social/political/theological topics of homosexual marriage, immigration reform, or mega churches, we do know enough about Jesus from the Gospels to get a general tenor or trajectory of Jesus’ life to make an educated guess about what He might have said.

Toward that end, I am starting a new blog series called “Looks Like Jesus” in which I will try to apply this “Jesus lens” to various passages of Scripture (like the flood in Genesis 6), theological topics (Does God’s grace extend to gay people?), and social issues (What would Jesus say about immigration reform?). As I write these posts, I will publish them here on the blog for your input.

(And no, I am not giving up on my current series on Calvinism. The two series of posts will run concurrently. If you prefer one series over the other, please “vote” for it by sharing posts from that series on your social sites and by leaving blog comments.)

looks like Jesus

I am going to post my first (well, second I guess, since this is the first) post in the “Looks Like Jesus” series tomorrow. I will be looking at how Jesus would get involved in the Ferguson protests.

In future posts I will be looking at various theological and social topics through the lens of Jesus so that our response to these issues looks like Jesus.

Do you have ideas for this series of posts you would like to see covered in the future? What Bible passages do you want examined through the lens of Jesus Christ? What theological topics and social issues should be considered?

Leave your ideas in the comments below. Thanks!

 

You & Your Thoughts

18 Comments

You and Your Thoughts

The Bible teaches that “As a man thinketh in his heart, so is he.”

We also read in Paul that the key to becoming who God wants us to be is through the “renewal of our minds” (Rom 12:1-2).

It is for these reasons that Dr. Earl Radmacher wrote this book.

The battle for the mind is the most important battle in the life of any Christian. Most often, we do not even know that a battle for our mind is underway, but our minds are constantly bombarded from every direction, through our five senses, through the spiritual realm, through cultural and social pressure, through memories and imagination, and through a wide variety of other sources.

This is why it is so important to learn how to “take every thought captive” and to learn what the Bible says about right thinking and how to change our minds.

Beginning with the that that we are what we think, Dr. Earl Radmacher invites the readers to take a journey of the mind, and then begin to transform their mind by beginning to think right about God, church, church leadership, and a variety of other topics.

This book is a classic from Dr. Earl Radmacher, and is essentially unchanged from the 1977 edition. It now has a Foreword from Ed Underwood, pastor of Church of the Open Door, Author of The Trail, and blogger at EdUnderwood.com

I have benefited from this book and recommend it for others.

See what others are saying about this book here:

The Church is an Elect People

14 Comments

church is chosen peopleThe church is a group of God’s elect (cf. Rom 8:33; Eph 1:4; Col 3:12; 1 Thess 1:4; 2 Tim 2:10; Titus 1:1; 1 Pet 1:1-2; 2:8-9; 5:13; Rev 17:14). As we have seen previously, Israel is another group of God’s elect.

The real difference, however, between Israel as God’s elect and the church as God’s elect, is that while not all Israelites were regenerate, every member of the church is. Of course, this is only true of the invisible, universal church of God; not the visible and physical “church” down on the street corner or identified by some denomination. All people who are spiritual members of God’s church are elect.

Did the Church Replace Israel?

In looking at the election of the church, it is important to recognize the similarities between God’s election of Israel and God’s election of the church.

First, it is popular in some circles to say that since Israel failed in her God-ordained mission to the world, the church has replaced Israel as God’s chosen people. Though Paul seems to hint at this sort of idea in Romans 9–11, I believe that this is not what Paul is teaching there, and that Israel was not set aside, nor did Israel fail in her mission.

Let me present the problem differently.

If Israel has been “successful,” how would the outcome have been any different? Would we not have the Bible? Would Jesus not have come? Would Jesus not have died? Would the church not have been born?

The answer to all such questions is clearly “No.”

The only “failure” on the part of Israel was to recognize the Messiah when He came. But this was not exactly a failure in regards to her role as God’s chosen nation, but was a failure she shares with all people on earth who do not believe in Jesus for eternal life. Just as God desires for all people to be saved (1 Tim 2:4), God desires all Israel to be saved as well (cf. Paul’s sentiment  in Rom 9:1-5).

So the only “failure” of God’s chosen people Israel was that they failed to enter into God’s elect church when it was formed. For vast numbers of Israelites, this “failure” continues to this very day, as it does for the majority of people on earth.

So Israel did not fail in her God-given vocation. She succeeded.

Through her came the Law and the Prophets, the promised Messiah, and the birth of the church, all of which are blessings to the entire world, which was Gods’ ultimate goal and purpose for Israel.

Therefore, we must never say that the church has replaced Israel or that because Israel failed, God has selected a “new chosen people.”

Never! God’s election of the church is not due to His setting aside of Israel, but rather due to the fulfilment of His plan and purposes for Israel. The church is an outcome of the fruit of Israel’s success; not her failure.

God never desired that all people on earth would become Israel. Israel is a nation with her own people, customs, culture, and laws. God did not choose them because their customs and culture was better than everybody else’s. No, He chose one group of people as a way to call all people to Himself.

God never wanted all people to become Israelites; He wanted all people to maintain their culture and customs, just as Israel had, but do so in connection with Him. This new communion of people who live in connection with God is what we now think of as church. The church is God’s assembly of all people from every tongue, tribe, and nation who live within their own customs and culture as members of His family. Why did God choose Israel? Not to make the whole world Israel, but to make the whole world His.

church is chosen by God

This helps us understand God’s election of the church.

If we understand why God chose Israel, then we can also understand why God chose the church.

If Israel’s task was to call all people to become God’s people, then this is the church’s task as well.

Just as Israel was called to provide a witness and a testimony to the surrounding people about the goodness and graciousness of God, to be God’s voice, hands, and feet on earth, and to call all people to turn from their destructive ways and follow God’s righteous ways instead, so also, this is the task of the church (cf. Col 3:12; 1 Pet 1:1-2; 2:8-9).

Israel was chosen to be a blessing to the world, and when the church lives up to its calling, it too will be a blessing to the world. To be a blessing is the purpose for which God has chosen the church.

Furthermore, if we understand how a person became a member of Israel as God’s chosen people, then we can also understand how people become members of the church as God’s chosen people.

How did a person become an Israelite? For the most part, they were born into it.

So also with the church. We become members of the church by birth—not by physical birth, as was the case with the Israelites, but by spiritual birth; by being “born again” (John 3:1-8).

And if one enters the church through the new birth, then this also means that one enters God’s elect people through the new birth.

People sometimes think that Christians are members of the church because we are elect, when in reality, it is the other way around: we are elect because we are members of the church. By joining with Christ, the Elect One, through faith, we automatically become members of His Body, the church, and thus become numbered among the elect (Vance: Other Side of Calvinism, 379). We are elect only because we are in Him (Eph 1:4).

Election, Redemption, and Service

This truth further leads to the proper conclusion about the relationship between election and redemption.

chosen in ChristJust as election does not lead to our membership within the church, but is rather a result of being incorporated into Christ’s Body, so also, election is not what leads to our redemption, but is rather the result of redemption.

We are thinking of election backwards if we think that we are only in Christ because God first forgave and redeemed us. The truth of redemption and election is that we are redeemed because we are in Christ, and as a result of being in Him, we are elect.

Christ is belittled if we think that God first forgave and redeemed us and then put us in Christ; we should rather believe that it is only in Christ that we have received redemption and forgiveness. Christ is also belittled if we think that God first chose us and then put is in Christ; it is rather that those in Christ share in his election, and so are chosen in him. … When people enter into Christ then not only does his death become theirs, but his election becomes their election (Marston and Forster, God’s Strategy in Human History, 151, 154).

The election of the church, then, follows the same patterns we have seen previously with the election of Israel and the election of Jesus.

Election is not to eternal life, but to service. This is true of Israel, Jesus, and the church.

In eternity past, God did not choose who He would unconditionally and irresistibly bring into His church, but rather, decided that all those who believed in Jesus and in so doing became members of His church, to them He would give the task of being a blessing to the world by sharing serving one another, declaring God’s grace, and loving others just as He has loved us.

If you want to read more about Calvinism, check out other posts in this blog series: Words of Calvinism and the Word of God.

Jesus is the Elect One

14 Comments

Jesus the elect one

Did it ever occur to you that Jesus was unregenerate? He never had to be regenerated by God because He never lacked eternal life. He always had eternal life. In fact, Jesus is eternal life (John 1:4-5; 14:6; 1 John 5:11-12). Yet even though Jesus is eternal life, Jesus Himself was elected by God. Jesus was chosen. “A wide range of texts throughout the New Testament identifies Jesus as God’s Chosen or Appointed One” (Klein, The New Chosen People, 269).

Robert Shank overstates the case when he writes that “outside of Christ this is no election of any man” (Shank, Elect in the Son, 27). Nevertheless, it is safe to say that Jesus is the premier Elect One (Isa 42:1). Even when He hung dying on the cross, He was recognized by His enemies as being the chosen one of God (Luke 23:35).

Again, does this mean that Jesus was chosen by God to sovereignly receive the free gift of eternal life from God? Of course not! Yet Jesus was elected by God from all eternity. What for? As we saw in the case of Israel, God chose Jesus, not to be the recipient of regeneration, but to serve a purpose and fulfill a role in God’s plan of redemption.

Just as God’s election of Israel was an election to service, purpose, and vocation, so also, God’s election of Jesus was to service, purpose, and vocation.

Jesus was to be Israel’s righteous remnant, a light to the Gentiles, and God’s Suffering Servant (Isa 49:6-7; cf. Matt 12:18). “The Messiah, like the nation [of Israel], was chosen to do a task” (Marston and Forster, God’s Strategy in Human History, 147).

What task did Jesus accomplish as God’s Elect One?

According to Jesus Himself, He came:

  • to fulfill the law and prophets (Matt 5:17),
  • to reveal the Father (Matt 11:27),
  • to serve as a ransom for many (Matt 20:28),
  • to preach (Mark 1:38),
  • to call sinners to repentance (Mark 2:17),
  • to proclaim freedom for captives, give sight to the blind, and proclaim the year of God’s favor (Luke 4:18-19),
  • to preach the good news of the kingdom of God (Luke 4:43),
  • to save the world (John 3:17; Luke 19:10),
  • to give life (John 10:10, 28),
  • to do the will of the Father (John 6:38),
  • to bring judgment (John 9:39),
  • to share the words of the Father (John 17:8),
  • to testify to the truth (John 18:37).

elect JesusVarious New Testament authors confirm all of these, and additionally say that Jesus came

  • to destroy Satan’s power and works (Heb 2:14; 1 John 3:8),
  • to take away sin (1 John 3:5),
  • to taste death for everyone (Heb 2:9),
  • and to become a high priest (Heb 2:17).

This is a significant list, and they reveal that the election of Jesus as God’s Messiah was not an election to eternal life, but an election to service.

This fits which what we have already seen about God’s election of Israel. Just as it is best to understand the election of Israel as election to service, so also, the election of Jesus most naturally is understood as an election to service.

The first step in moving away from a rationalistic concept of predestination is taken when we begin to interpret this doctrine in terms of the election of Christ. No longer will predestination be … the arbitrary decision of an absolute sovereign power. The election of which we speak is that which has been revealed in Jesus Christ. The God who has chosen us we know and love as the God and Father of our Lord Jesus, his Chosen One (Hillman, “Scriptural Election: The Third Way,” Present Truth Magazine (Vol. 45), 17.)

If you want to read more about Calvinism, check out other posts in this blog series: Words of Calvinism and the Word of God.

Israel is God’s Chosen Nation … but what does that mean?

24 Comments

No, this is not a political post. This post is part of my ongoing series about Unconditional Election. In it, I intend to briefly discuss the nation of Israel as God’s election nation, His chosen people on earth. In this way, we will learn what is election is for.

Calvinistic author Loraine Boettner was absolutely correct when he wrote that “Throughout the Old Testament it is repeatedly stated that the Jews were a chosen people” (Boettner, Predestination, 88). Repeatedly throughout Scripture, Israel is referred to as God’s elect nation, His chosen people (cf. Deut 7:6-8; 10:14-15; Ps 33:12; 65:4; 106:5; Hag 2:23; Acts 13:17; Rom 9:11; 11:28).

Furthermore, as God plainly states in several of these texts, this sovereign choice of God had nothing whatever to do with Israel being a better nation than any other on earth, or that they were more wise, holy, or rich than any other nation. God’s choice of Israel was according to His own divine purposes.

Israel elect nation

Is Election Only Corporate Election?

There are some who note the prominent theme in Scripture of God’s election of the nation of Israel, and as a result, argue that there is no such thing as individual election, but that election is always corporate. That is, according to this view, God doesn’t elect individual people, but elects groups of people instead (Klein, The New Chosen People).

R. P. Shedd defended corporate election this way:

Election does not have individual emphasis in Paul, any more than it did for Israel in the Old Testament or the Early Jewish period. Rather, it implies a covenant-relationship through which God chooses for Himself a whole people. This collectivism is of supreme importance for the understanding of “election in Christ” (Shedd, Man in Community, 133).

In his comprehensive book on the subject of corporate election, William Klein summarized his position on what the New Testament teaches about election with these words:

The New Testament does know of the election of individuals to tasks or ministries. But when the issue concerns God’s choice for salvation, he has chosen a community—the body of Christ, the church. … The New Testament writers simply do not entertain the issue of whether God has selected specific individuals to becomes members of that body. The body is chosen; one enters that body through faith in Christ. … Election is not God’s choice of a restricted number of individuals whom he wills to save, but the description of that corporate body which, in Christ, he is saving (Klein, The New Chosen People, 266).

There is undoubtedly a corporate aspect to election, but we cannot say that election is only corporate. There are two main problems with the view that election is only corporate election. Both are mentioned by R. C. Sproul:

Some have argued that Paul [in Romans 9] is referring instead to nations or groups and that election does not apply to individuals. Apart from the fact that nations are made up of individuals, the salient point is that Paul explains election by citing as examples of God’s sovereign election two distinct, historic individuals (Sproul, Grace Unknown, 148).

I agree with Sproul’s overall argument, but disagree with his use of it in connection to Romans 9. We will consider Romans 9 later, but it is enough to note for now that even Paul does refer to “two distinct, historic individuals,” namely, Jacob and Esau, Paul does so in connection with them being heads or progenitors of two people groups: the Israelites and the Edomites. Nevertheless, Sproul’s overall point is valid: God does not only elect nations; He also elects individuals.

Of course, the true salient point is not whether or not God elects nations (He does), but rather, what He elects them for. Since many Calvinists equate divine election with God’s sovereign choice of whom He will regenerate, it is sometimes thought that everyone whom God “chooses” will also be sovereignly regenerated by God. But a moment’s reflection reveals the sheer folly of this idea.

Israel, as God’s elect nation, was not ever composed entirely of regenerate people. Israelites do not get to go to heaven simply because they are members of God’s chosen people. Though God selected Israel as His chosen people, not all end up as regenerate people who will spend eternity with God.

The fact that all Israel can be elect but not all Israel will receive eternal life clues us in right from the start that there is something else going on with election than what the Calvinist claims. For if, as Calvinists teach, God, in eternity past, chose some people to be the beneficiaries of His grace so that they, out of all the people of the world, might alone receive eternal life from Him, then Israel, as God’s elect people, should all unconditionally receive eternal life from God.

But this did not happen, and never will. Quite to the contrary, Israel, as God’s elect nation, has always been composed of both regenerate and unregenerate people. So almost from the very beginning of Scripture, we have the curious situation of having people who are elect but unregenerate.

To get around this, Calvinists have two basic approaches.

1. “Elect” Israel is only Believing Israel

First, some argue that when the Bible speaks of Israel as being “elect,” it is only referring to the regenerate people within Israel; not to all Israel as a whole. In defense of this idea, they point to Paul’s statements in Romans 9:6-13 that “they are not all Israel who are of Israel” and Romans 11:1-4 about the remnant of Israel which God has always reserved for Himself through “the election of grace” (Rom 11:5). We will look at Romans 9–11 later to see what Paul is talking about in these famous chapters. For now, it is enough to note that in the attempt to get around the problem of having unregenerate elect people, some Calvinists must artificially limit the nation of Israel as God’s elect to only include the regenerate people within Israel. Yet this sort of limitation has no basis anywhere in Scripture. In the Bible, Israel is God’s chosen nation on earth—not some of Israel, but all Israel.

2. Israel was Elected to Service; not Salvation

Most people recognize this, and so fall back on the second way to explain the existence of unregenerate elect Israelites. They do this by falling back on the idea of “corporate election” summarized above. Those who do this say that God’s election of Israel, though still a sovereign act of His grace, was not an election unto eternal life, but was an election of a group of people unto a specific task or purpose.

Israel elect nationBy choosing Israel as His people, God elected the nation, not to eternal life, but to be the vehicle through which the prophets would record God’s Word and Jesus would arrive as the promised Messiah. This sort of view of election allows God to elect Israel as His chosen people, but does not require that every single individual person within Israel receive eternal life from God.

The debate over election would be over if those who adopt this “election to service” approach regarding Israel and certain individuals in the Old Testament would apply the exact same approach to election throughout the rest of Scripture. Just as Israel, as God’s elect nation, was elected to serve God in a specific task, but this does not mean that every individual Israelite was regenerate, so also, election elsewhere in Scripture has nothing to do with whether or not someone has eternal life, but has everything to do with what role God wants them to serve in His plans and purposes for the world.

As we will see throughout the rest of these posts on election, election is never to eternal life. Instead, election is to service and purpose in this life.

Israel as God’s Elect Nation

To summarize then, God election of people or nations is not to receive eternal life, but rather, to play a role or fulfill a purpose in His divine plan. This understanding of election allows God to elect entire nations, not because He plans to get them all into heaven, but because He plans to call that nation to some purpose within world history. God chose Israel, not because He decided to redeem every Israelite, but because He decided to use Israel to play an important role in bringing about redemption for the entire world (cf. Marston and Forster, God’s Strategy in Human History, 139).

This is the view we are going to see throughout the pages of Scripture. Election is not to eternal life, but to service in God’s plan for human history. Often this election involves regenerate people, but not always, as in the case of Israel.

If you want to read more about Calvinism, check out other posts in this blog series: Words of Calvinism and the Word of God.

Reconciling Mark Driscoll

36 Comments

I am sure you have heard about Mark Driscoll and his recent resignation from Mars Hill in Seattle.

This post is not really about Mark Driscoll, but about how his resignation is a symptom of a wider problem in Western Christianity.

As much as I never really cared for Mark’s preaching, approach to ministry, or theology, I always felt a bit sorry for him. He was another victim of the corporate, celebrity-style Christendom that operates under the word “church” in most of the western world.

mark driscoll

About ten years ago I listened to a sermon by Mark Driscoll in which he publicly stated his desire for Mars Hill to become the largest church in the United States. It had already been recognized at that time as the fastest growing church, and he wanted to leverage that growth into the largest congregation. Yet according to recent news releases, by January 1, 2015, Mars Hill will be no more.

I think people around the world are finally starting to wake up to the fact that when it comes to church, bigger is not always better. Of course, this doesn’t mean that smaller is better either.

Church is not about “how many” at all. It is not even about “how.”

In a culture which says “It’s all about you,” we need to reawaken to the fact that Church is all about “who.”

Who is the church about?

Jesus! He is the sole head.

Who is the church about?

People meeting together for friendship and fellowship.

Lots of people point to the description of “two or three” in Matthew 18 as the minimum requirement for church. I personally don’t think this text has anything to do with how many people are needed to “do” church, for church is not actually something we do, but is something we are.

But even if we say that church exists where there are two or three, nothing is said in Matthew 18:20 that when these two or three gather, one of them needs to stand up and give a sermon. Nothing is said that when these two or three gather, they need to sit in a circle with their bibles open on their laps, discussing a particular text or point of theology. Nothing is said about prayer or music or food.

It is best to think of church as you think of family.

Do you ever talk about going to “family”? Of course not. You are a family.

Do you ever plan regular family events? Well, sometimes. But these are rarely set in stone for all time, and you never assume that what you do in your family is what all families everywhere should be doing as well.

But even when family events are planned, true “family” most often occurs outside and away from these family events. True “family” happens as life happens. True family occurs at 4:00 in the morning when someone has a bad dream or wakes up with a stomach ache. True family occurs when memories are formed while buying celery at the supermarket. True family occurs when everybody laughs at a joke about peas on the curtains. If you tried to package and export these family events to all other families, it wouldn’t work.

How did I get onto this topic after beginning with a discussion about reconciliation and redemption of abusive leaders?

For Mark Driscoll, I hope that he does not enter into another form of Christian leadership any time soon. It’s not because he is disqualified. Far from it! He might be more qualified now then ever before. It is just that modern Christian forms of “leadership” look nothing like the leadership modeled by Jesus.

For all the fans of Mark Driscoll, I hope that rather than simply turn to another celebrity pastor or mega-gathering for their weekly fix of preaching, they see that Jesus Himself wants to lead them into the biggest adventure of a lifetime.

And as for all the critics of Mark Driscoll, I hope there is absolutely no gloating whatsoever. What happened to Mark Driscoll and Mars Hill is extremely sad, and anyone who gloats is in danger of the exact same problem.

Ultimately, I hope that western Christianity in general learns from what happened to Mark Driscoll and Mars Hill.

I hope we learn that reconciling and redeeming abusive church leaders begins with reconciling and redeeming the church itself.

The problem is not the church leaders. Church leaders are some of the victims of a church structure that functions as God never intended.

So let’s abandon our power structures, our titles, our positions, our platforms, our offering plates, and even our buildings and campuses.

Instead, let us turn to love. Love for our neighbors. Love for our enemies. Love for our family.

Let us not rush to get fallen leaders back into positions of authority. Let us not rush to get anyone into any position of authority in the “church,” for there is no authority other than Jesus Christ, and there is no church other than the family of God.

This post was part of the November 2014 Synchroblog. Here are the other contributors:

 

 

This Video Taught me What It Means to Have “Faith Like a Child”

4 Comments

Sometimes people think that “faith like a child” means living in ignorance. Children don’t know much, right? They just believe without any facts or thinking or logic. So this must be what it means to have faith like a child.

I agree that in some ways, faith like a child means taking God at His Word and just moving on.

But at the same time, God gave us brains, and desires that we use them. He invites us to reason with Him (Isa 1:18).

So if faith like a child doesn’t mean living in willful ignorance, what does it mean to have faith like a child?

This video clues you in to part of it:

I am convinced that faith like a child does not mean ignorance like a child.

No, to have faith like a child means to view life like a child.

How does a child view life?

Like the girl in the video, children have a tenderness of conscience. They are emotional.

But this doesn’t mean that to have faith like a child you need to have emotions like a child. No, it’s more than that.

Children are full of wonder and awe.

Children are creative and imaginative.

Children are playful and fun-loving.

As adults, we get bored with flowers, bugs, and sunsets. We lose delight in talking with others about nothing. We are jaded and disinterested.

Adults hold grudges, harbor fears, and stay angry.

Adults refuse to forgive. Adults remember slights.

I think one of the things that attracted people to Jesus is that He was “child-like.” Does this mean He lacked wisdom and understanding? Far from it! No, Jesus was “child-like” in that He was full of the wonder of life, the hope for humanity, and the beauty of creation. Jesus lived in awe.

And awe is contagious.

faith like a child

Do you want to have faith like a child?

Having faith like a child has absolutely nothing to do with not asking questions. After all, have you ever known a child who doesn’t ask LOTS of questions?

No, having faith like a child means having an “imagination” like a child.

Those who have faith like a child will hope, dream, forgive, create, trust, and love. Live life to the full. Be excited. Be adventuresome. Be tender of heart. And always ask lots and lots of questions.

So think! Reason! Question! Ask! But also imagine, dance, sing, laugh, and play! Then you will have faith like a child.

One thing that will make Jesus love you more

4 Comments

What does Jesus want you to do more than anything else?

Share this post on Facebook of course. Or Tweet about it.

Better yet, do both!

Share this on Facebook

I’m kidding!!!

I like when people share my stuff on Facebook and Twitter, but that’s not why I write.

I write:

  1. To learn what I think (I learn by organizing my thoughts through writing)
  2. To learn from you (through the comments)
  3. To pass on to other learners what I have learned from other teachers (2 Timothy 2:2)

For me, these three things are are how I measure “success.”

Thanks for reading this blog and for all you have taught me over the years!

Calvinist Quotes on Reprobation

22 Comments

reprobation double predestinationThere is wide disagreement among Calvinists about reprobation, which is sometimes referred to as double predestination.

Some Calvinists (though not all) hold to reprobation—which is the belief that God not only decided whom He would choose for eternal life, but also chose whom He would send to eternal damnation—while others flatly deny it.

Though Calvinists admit that this doctrine is “unpleasant” and “harsh,” they teach it because they believe a balanced view of predestination requires it (Boettner, Predestination, 112).

Below are a few quotes from Calvinists who believe and teach the doctrine of reprobation, beginning with John Calvin himself:

Whence does it happen that Adam’s fall irremediably involved so many peoples, together with their infant offspring, in eternal death unless because it so pleased God? … The decree is dreadful, I confess. Yet no one can deny that God foreknew what end man was to have before he created him, and consequently foreknew because he so ordained by his decree (Calvin, Institutes, III.xxiii.7).

[Reprobation is] God’s eternal decree that the destiny of certain men shall be everlasting death, whether one views it as God’s passing those men by with the grace of election or as the determination to damn (Engelsma, Hyper-Calvinism, 44).

From all eternity some were decreed by their sins to come into judgment or condemnation (Manton, Commentary on Jude, 128).

We believe that from all eternity God has intended to leave some of Adam’s posterity in their sins, and that the decisive factor in the life of each is to be found only in God’s will (Boettner, Predestination, 104).

By the decree of God, for the manifestation of His own glory, some men and angels are predestined unto everlasting life, and others foreordained to everlasting death (Westminster Confession of Faith, III:3).

reprobation double predestination

Predestination includes two parts, namely, election and reprobation, the predetermination of both the good and the wicked to their final end, and to certain proximate ends, which are instrumental in the realization of their final destiny (Berkhof, Systematic Theology, 113).

The Reformed view makes a crucial distinction between God’s positive and negative decrees. God positively decrees the election of some, and he negatively decrees the reprobation of others (Sproul, Grace Unknown, 158).

Predestination is, by Calvinist theologians, regarded as a generic decree including under it Election and Reprobation as specific decrees: the former predestinating some human beings, without regard to their merit, to salvation, in order to the glorification of God’s sovereign grace; the later foreordaining some human beings, for their sin, to destruction, in order to the glorification of God’s retributive justice (Girardeau, Calvinism and Evangelical Arminianism, 9-10).

Most Calvinists reject double predestination or reprobation, and instead say that God did not actively choose who to send to heaven and who to send to hell, but simply chose out of everyone who was already headed to hell to save a few for heaven. In this way, He does not actively choose who will go to hell, but simply “passes over” them in His choice of who will spend eternity with Him.

From all eternity God decided to save some members of the human race and to let the rest of the human race perish. God made a choice—he chose some individuals to be saved unto everlasting blessedness in heaven, and he chose others to pass over, allowing them to suffer the consequences of their sins, eternal punishment in hell (Sproul, Grace Unknown, 141).

Though many Calvinists argue that double predestination is the only logical conclusion to the Calvinist position on God’s election of some (but not all) to receive eternal life, I am not going to belabor the point or try to refute the idea since most Calvinists claim that they do not teach or believe it… (for more on reprobation and double predestination I recommend this book: Vance: The Other Side of Calvinism, pp, 250-333).

Have you ever done much reading about double predestination or reprobation? If so, what are your thoughts on this teaching of some Calvinists? Let me know below!

If you want to read more about Calvinism, check out other posts in this blog series: Words of Calvinism and the Word of God.

Advertise or Donate

Search (and you Shall Find)

Get Books by Jeremy Myers

Books by Jeremy Myers

Schedule Jeremy for an interview

Click here to Contact Me!