election Archives - Page 5 of 7

One set of texts which are occasionally referenced in support of the Unconditional Election comes from the Olivet Discourse in Matthew 24. The reason these texts are cited is because they make reference to “the elect.”

And unless those days were shortened, no flesh would be saved; but for the elect’s sake those days will be shortened (Matthew 24:22).

For false christs and false prophets will rise and show great signs and wonders to deceive, if possible, even the elect (Matthew 24:24).

And He will send His angels with a great sound of a trumpet, and they will gather together His elect from the four winds, from one end of heaven to the other (Matthew 24:31).

These three texts clearly reference the elect, but we must remember that just because a Bible verse uses the word “elect,” this does not mean that the Calvinistic understanding of election is true.

One sometimes runs into Calvinists who argue that election is true because the Bible mentions election.

The question, however, is not whether or not the Bible mentions election, but rather what the Bible means when it mentions election. And when Matthew 24 refers to election, what it teaches is somewhat surprising, and in fact, seems to undermine the Calvinistic understanding of election.

Matthew 24 and Election

According to Calvinism, those who are elect are unconditionally chosen by God to receive eternal life. They are irresistibly brought by God into His family. Election occurs because a sovereign God rules and controls all.

Yet what is exceedingly strange in these texts from Matthew 24 which mention the elect, is that it appears that “even the elect” could be deceived and led astray by the false christs and false prophets that arise in the last days. If God sovereignly controls the beliefs and behaviors of His elect, then how is it that they could be deceived by false teaching? Indeed, Jesus says that God will cut short those days so that the elect will not die and will not be deceived.

To be even more specific, it is possible that when Jesus refers to “the elect” in this text, He might be specifically thinking of the Jewish elect people, so that when He refers to gathering the elect from the four winds, He is referring to gathering His people Israel back to Jerusalem from the four corners of the earth.

As a side note, it is important to recognize that when Jesus speaks about being “saved” in this passage (cf. Matthew 24:13, 22), He is not referring to justification or receiving eternal life, but to being delivered from death in this time of tribulation. The salvation in Matthew 24 is not about going to heaven when we die, but is about deliverance from physical death during times of tribulation (Wilkin, Grace New Testament Commentary, 110). Paul makes a similar statement about the Jews in Romans 11:26-27.

So when it comes to the discussion of election, Matthew 24 really doesn’t provide any new information about how one becomes elect or what interaction exists (if any) between the human and divine wills.

There is an indication that God does not sovereignly control the beliefs and behaviors of the elect, and since they themselves might be deceived by the false teaching of these last days, He intervenes to cut those days short, but other than this, there is little that this text adds to the discussion of election.

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

What does “Many are called, but few are chosen” mean in Matthew 22:14?

By Jeremy Myers

16 Comments

In a previous post we looked at the statement of Jesus in Matthew 20 that “many are called, but few are chosen.”

This post looks at the identical statement in Matthew 22:14, which also follows a parable from Jesus.

The Parable of the Wedding Feast in Matthew 22:1-14

This parable in Matthew 22:1-14 is sort of two parables in one.

In the first half of this parable (Matthew 22:1-10), a king prepared a wedding feast and invited many people to the feast. When the day of the feast arrived, the king sent out servants to remind those whom he had invited that the day had come. Such double invitations are not uncommon in honor-shame cultures, for they allow the invited guests time to look over the preparations for the feast and who else is invited so that they can decide whether or not they will attend.

In this case, all the guests decided to stay away, and provided their token excuses, which indicated their disapproval (Malina, Synoptic Gospels, 111). Also, many of them sized the servants of the king to beat them and kill them, which was a direct affront to his honor.

So the king sent out his servants again to find anybody he could who would attend his wedding feast. They gathered whomever they found, both good and bad, and brought them to participate in the joy of the king.

This first part of the parable is primarily about how Israel as God’s chosen people had been invited to participate in the party that accompanied the arrival of the Messiah. But when Jesus arrived, most of those in Israel wanted nothing to do with Jesus. So Jesus invited the sinners, tax-collectors, and prostitutes instead. The chief priests and Pharisees obviously did not like to hear this sort of message from Jesus and sought for ways to arrest and kill Him (cf. Matthew 21:45-56; 22:15).

The second half of the parable, which is almost a separate parable itself, is about a man who shows up at the feast without the proper wedding attire (Matthew 22:11-13). The king asks how the man got into the wedding without the proper clothing, and when the man is unable to provide an answer, the king has him thrown out of the wedding hall and into the darkness outside.

This seems strange to modern hearers, for what else could the king expect from people he had rounded up from the streets and back alleys? Why would a homeless man have proper wedding attire? The answer is that in such situations of the Mediterranean culture, the king would make sure to provide proper wedding clothes to all of his guests as they arrived (Malina, Synoptic Gospels, 111. Cf. also Stern, Jewish NT Commentary, 64, and Pilch, Cultural World of Jesus, 148-150).

So the king’s question to the improperly dressed man is not so much, “Why aren’t you wearing the right clothes?” but rather, “How did you get in here? If you had come in by the front gate, you would have been given proper clothing. The fact that you are wearing improper clothing indicates you came in by some other way.”

This is reminiscent of Jesus’ earlier statement that only thieves and robbers enter a sheepfold by coming over a wall (John 10:1). Everyone else comes in through the front gate. The implication is that this man who was in the feast without the proper clothes was a thief who climbed in over a wall. Most ironically, of course, is that there were likely many thieves in the wedding feast, but they had come in through the front door and so were given proper wedding attire.

For Many are Called, but Few are Chosen (Matthew 22:14)

Following the conclusion of this parable, Jesus once again makes the statement, “For many are called, but few are chosen” (Matt 22:14).

As with the previous usage of this summary conclusion in Matthew 20:16, Jesus is not saying anything one way or another about how God sovereignly chose some people to go to heaven while others go to hell.

In fact, though many read “hell” into Jesus’ statement in Matthew 22:13 about the outer darkness and the weeping and gnashing of teeth, this imagery has nothing to do with hell at all, but simply portrays the profound regret which is experienced by those who are outside the hall of the wedding feast. They are not inside, with the food, the light, and the dancing, but are in the darkness outside. The weeping and gnashing of teeth is a Middle Eastern way of expressing regret and shame. The bottom line, of course, is that there is nothing in Matthew 22:1-14 about Unconditional Election.

Many were invited to participate in the feast, but only those who showed up and came through the front door got to join in the celebration.

This sort of a statement would have been offensive to many Jews at the time, for they considered themselves to be God’s only chosen people.

Jesus is not denying their “chosenness,” but is saying that if they do not live up to the reason they were chosen by God, which is to serve others and be a blessing to the world, then God will simply choose others, such as the prostitutes, thieves, and cutpurses. And if it is argued that they are not worthy, that they are not clothed in righteousness, Jesus says, “Don’t worry. They’ll be given the proper attire as they enter into the wedding hall.”

Jesus is saying that while many people were called to participate in His Kingdom, only those who show up are “chosen” to join in the festivities (Cf. discussion in Klein, The New Chosen People, 67-69). But you have to come in the right way, which is through the front door, for only in this way will the guests be properly attired to live, serve, and function within God’s Kingdom (See Capon, Kingdom, Grace, Judgment, 464-465).

There is nothing here to portray either calling or election as some kind of irresistible decree that a person should repent and believe (Marston and Forster, God’s Strategy in Human History, 164).

Many of those who were invited (called) to the wedding resisted the invitation, and those who came were given the proper clothing so that they might be full participants in the wedding celebration of the Kingdom of God. To participate in the Kingdom, you must be wearing Kingdom clothes.

The condition of the wedding garment is given as solid interpretation [cf. Matthew 21:31, 21:43], but because he brings disobedience to the wedding, and does not have the conduct which corresponds to blessing, he cannot be a real participant. Election is fulfilled only in obedience. Hence we do not have here a static doctrine of election but a dynamic theology which is oriented to the right attitude of the elect. To receive gifts is of no avail if there is no readiness to obey. Thus the concept of election is set in living history. It demands responsibility and decision (Kittel, TDNT, II:186).

In summary then, when Jesus says in Matthew 22:14 that “many are called, but few are chosen,” He is not laying out the doctrine of Unconditional Election, but is saying that when God invites all to participate with Him in His rule and reign on earth, He does so without partiality or favoritism.

All are invited, and it does not matter who shows up first or last, all will be welcomed. Those who accept the invitation, however, must recognize that while they will be given blessings and benefits from the overabundance of God’s generosity, these blessings and benefits must be gained the right way (by entering through the front door, which is Jesus), and must be used in the service of others.

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

What does “For many are called, but few are chosen” mean? (Matthew 20:16)

By Jeremy Myers

38 Comments

At various times in Jesus’ ministry, He made the following statement:

For many are called, but few are chosen (Matthew 20:16; 22:14).

This text is a tricky passage for Calvinists to explain because on the one hand, Calvinism often equates “calling” with “election,” and here Jesus seems to indicate that not all who are “called” end up being “chosen.” So for this reason, Calvinists often talk about a “general” universal call to all people and an “effectual” call to some.

John MacArthur, for example, in his commentary on the Bible, explains Matthew 22:14 by saying this:

The call spoken of here is sometimes referred to as the “general call” (or the “external call”), a summons to repentance and faith that is inherent in the gospel message. This call extends to all who hear the gospel. “Many” hear it; “few” respond. Those who respond are the “chosen,” the elect. In the Pauline writings, the word call usually refers to God’s irresistible calling extended to the elect alone (Rom 8:30), known as the “effectual call” (or the “internal call”) (MacArthur Bible Commentary).

Due the Calvinistic understanding of Total Depravity, the general call to all people cannot be heard or heeded by any person, which is why God must then issue an “effectual” call, which is really just God specifically choosing to unilaterally redeem some people through Irresistible Grace.

Only those who are called with the effectual call of God are thus understood to be God’s elect. Given the Calvinistic system, there is no other way to understand Jesus’ words in Matthew 20:16 and 22:14.

Matthew 20:16 in Context

But once Calvinism is set aside, and the words of Jesus are reexamined in their contexts, we see that Jesus is not referring at all to the calling or election of some to eternal life. Instead, Jesus is teaching the consistent biblical message about the call and choice of God, namely, that while God desires that all people will serve Him, not all do, and so God chooses to work with those who participate with Him in what He is doing in the world.

The calling and choosing of God is not to eternal life, but to service in this world.

This explanation makes much more sense of the surrounding context of Matthew 20:16 and 22:14 than does the contrived theological distinction between a general call and an effectual call.

So what is Jesus teaching when He says that many are called but few are chosen?

To understand Jesus’ words we must begin by seeking to understand His immediately preceding statement (in Matthew 20:16), that “the last will be first, and the first last.” And this statement, of course, can only be understood in light of the parable of the workers in the vineyard that precedes it (Matthew 20:1-15).

In this parable, the owner of a vineyard must harvest his grapes. So early in the morning he goes to the marketplace where day laborers waited to get hired, and hired those he found there. He offered them a denarius for one day’s work.

It soon became obvious that those he hired would not be enough to bring in the full harvest, so he went back to see if any others had shown up for work. Indeed, there more, and so he hired these as well. He did this throughout the day until the last group hired had only one hour of work left to do before dark.

When the work was complete, the workers lined up to get paid, and the owner paid first those who had been hired last. He gave each a denarius. Seeing this, those who had worked the entire day thought that when they were paid, they would receive more. But they too received a denarius. When they complained that they had worked all day and received only one denarius when those who worked only one hour had also received a denarius, the owner told them that they were paid what they had agreed to, and it should not matter to them if he was generous with those who worked less.

Following this, Jesus makes His two statements, that the first shall be the last and the last shall be first, and that many are called but few are chosen.

What do either of these statements have to do with the point of the parable?

The Parable of the Workers in the Vineyard is not about Eternal Life

First of all, it is important to realize that this parable is not about how God makes a general call to everyone to receive eternal life, but then specially selects and chooses some to actually receive it. Such an idea is found nowhere in the parable of the workers in the vineyard and cannot be taught in any way, shape, or form from this story.

In fact, the story teaches the exact opposite. When the landowner goes to the marketplace to hire workers, He hires everyone who is there. He does this all day long, going back at the third, sixth, ninth, and eleventh hours to see if any more workers have shown up. He hires all who are there. We do not see the owner making a general calling to see if anyone wants to work, and when nobody does, he goes around specially selecting some.

No, the text pretty clearly indicates that every time the owner goes out to hire workers, he hires all the workers that he finds. The point of the parable is not that the owner calls all but selects only some; the point is the exact opposite: that he treats all equally.

But if the equal treatment of all by God is the point of this parable, why doesn’t Jesus say something to that effect in Mathew 20:16?

The reason is because Jesus is not exactly summarizing the parable, but is instead responding to the unspoken objection that most people have to this parable.

Matthew 20:16 is Jesus’ response to Objections

And what is that objection? When the vineyard owner pays those who worked only one hour the same amount that he paid those who worked all day, the natural human response is, “But that’s not fair!”

While we agree that it’s fine for the owner to be generous with those who worked only an hour, we think that if he was going to be both genera and fair, then he should also be generous to those who worked all day. Sure, they got paid what they agreed to, but if the owner is going to be generous, he should be generous to all. It’s only fair.

You see, in human ways of thinking, fairness trumps generosity. It’s okay to be generous, if you are generous equally to all.

But in God’s way of living, the values are reversed. God values both fairness and generosity, but in the Kingdom of God, generosity trumps fairness.

God’s way of acting toward others seems terribly unfair at times because He decides to be generous, loving, forgiving, gracious, and merciful to those who didn’t earn it, work for it, or deserve it.

When we cry out for justice, God cries out for forgiveness. When we remind people of their duty, God seeks to show them love. When we demand that people be held responsible, God extends more grace.

If any human business operated the way God runs His business, it would be bankrupt within a month. God hires those He shouldn’t, pays more than He can afford, and gives away all His merchandise for free.

This is what Jesus means in the first part of Matthew 20:16.

When He says “the last will be first, and the first last,” He is saying that those who are winners in the worlds eyes, turn out to be losers in God’s. Those who have it all figured out about getting ahead in this life, are way behind in God’s life. From the world’s perspective, God’s way of doing things is upside down and backwards. But Jesus is saying that once we step back and see things the way they really are, we discover that God has been right-side-up all the time, and it is we who are all turned around.

The First Shall be Last and the Last Shall be First

Jesus’ first statement in Matthew 20:16 is a statement about reversals. God does not work the way the world works. The Kingdom of God is upside down when compared to the rules and ways of men.

It is not “fair” according to worldly standards that those who enter last end up on equal footing of those who entered first. But that is how it works in God’s world. Yes, this is not “fair,” but it is generous. And in God’s world, generosity comes before fairness.

There are a wide variety of applications that this sort of truth might take in the life of the believer. Some among them include how we view those with money, position, power, prestige, and popularity. Though these may be “first” in the eyes of most, God’s eyes cannot look away from the underpaid but humble janitor in the back of the room. When all is said and done, and we stand in line to receive our “denarius” in heaven, many will be shocked to discover that we all stand equally before God.

I appreciate that it may be hard for some to come to terms with this, but in the light of the most basic and central Christian gospel, the message and achievement of Jesus and the preaching of Paul and the others, there is no reason whatever to say, for instance, that Peter or Paul, James or John, or even, dare I say, the mother of Jesus herself, is more advanced, closer to God, or has achieved more spiritual ‘growth’, than the Christians who were killed for their faith last week or last year. Remember the workers in the vineyard (Matthew 20:1-16). Those who worked all day thought they would be paid more, but those who came at the last hour were paid just the same. Is the vineyard owner not allowed to do what he likes with his own? Are we going to grumble because he is so wonderfully generous? (Wright, For All the Saints?, 27).

But the parable of the workers in the vineyard does not speak only to the equality we all share before God in the afterlife. The parable also speaks to the way we participate with God in this life.

Yes, all are on equal footing before God. And yet, inexplicably, some seem to have a greater role and purpose than others in God’s plan for this world. If the unspoken objection to the parable was “But that’s not fair!” then the unspoken objection to this statement is, “But that’s not how God works!”

God isn’t equal to all, even in His own Kingdom. Some are given greater blessings and honors than others. To this second objection, Jesus says, “Many are called, but few are chosen.”

Many are Called, but Few are Chosen

This second statement is not a contradiction of the first, but a qualification.

It explains why God, who values generosity over fairness, appears to be more generous to some than others. And this too, relies upon the reversals that become evident when comparing the Kingdom of God with the kingdoms of men. In the human world, bigger is better; more is best.

In God’s world, it is the opposite: smaller is better; less is best.

God calls and invites everyone to participate with Him in what is going on in the world, and in some ways, every person does play a part.

But in God’s way of working, He often selects and chooses a few individuals for special purposes and tasks.

And what are these special purposes and tasks for which God chooses some? To serve, suffer, and die.

God’s “choosing” is not a choice to honor, position, and power, but to suffering and service. There is no teaching here about an election until eternal life of some. Instead, Jesus is teaching that God is generous to all, and while all are called to serve Him, true service to God is not an easy thing to bear, which is why most don’t want it. Yet God does choose some to serve Him in these difficult ways.

God’s Choosing is to Service

That this is exactly what Jesus means is indicated by the following sections of Matthew 20.

First, in Matthew 20:17-19, Jesus shows what it means to be chosen by God, for Jesus Himself has been chosen. What for? To be betrayed and condemned to death. He will be given over to the Gentiles to be mocked, beaten, and crucified. This is not usually what people think of when they speak of being “chosen” by God, and yet this is the sort of thing that happens to those who are “chosen” in God’s economy.

It is being chosen to service, suffering, and death (1 Peter 2:21).

The disciples don’t quite get the connection, for they, like all of us, still look at things from the world’s perspective, and so think that being “chosen” by God refers to receiving special blessings, honor, privilege, and power.

So, in Matthew 20:20-24, two of the disciples get their mother to go ask Jesus if He will choose them to sit on His right and His left when He enters into His Kingdom. The other disciples are indignant when they hear about this, for they themselves wanted to be chosen for this special honor. Jesus, however, rebukes them all and says that this is not what it means to be given positions of greatness in God’s Kingdom. Those who are great will be last, will serve others, and will give their life for others (Matthew 20:26-28).

Though lots of people interpret Jesus’ words to mean that if someone wants to be great they must begin by serving others and then God will raise them up and make them great, this is not what Jesus is saying at all. That’s how “greatness” works in the human world. Those who are respected and revered started at the bottom and worked their way to the top. But in God’s economy, those who are great either go in the opposite direction, or simply stay at the bottom their entire lives.

Those who are “first” in God’s economy work are found at the bottom of the pecking order. The winners of “the race set before us” are last in the rat race.

Summary of the truth in Matthew 20:16

So Matthew 20:16 contains two general principles about how the Kingdom of God works. Both principles emphasize the reversals that are inherent within the Kingdom of God.

These two general principles of the Kingdom of God are that God values generosity more than fairness, and that those who are chosen for “greatness” in God’s Kingdom are chosen for service, suffering, and death, which is why not all are chosen.

From our human perspective, these principles seem backwards and upside down. In human society, we boast about equality and fairness while living lives of extreme inequality, thinking that those who are at the top deserve to be there. In Jesus’ economy, those who are at the top of the human world may actually be at the bottom in His, and those at the bottom may actually be at the top.

Furthermore, though God calls all to serve Him in His Kingdom, it is not the sort of service that has us all jumping up and down and waving our arms while we cry out “Pick me! Pick me!” No, God’s choosing is to a life of service, suffering, and death. God chooses only those who are willing to walk that hard road.

In Matthew 20:16, Jesus is saying that it is we who are upside down and backwards, and if we let Him, He will turn our world right way around for us so that we can see the truth and beauty that is God’s Kingdom.

But it will not come without pain and hardship, as well as a complete reversal of our worldly value system.

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

God Loves it When you Argue with Him (Exodus 33:19)

By Jeremy Myers

8 Comments

When discussing Calvinism with Calvinists, there are two texts that are almost always brought up in defense of God’s right to do anything He wants with people, even if it means deciding from all eternity to send billions of them to everlasting punishment in hell. These texts are Exodus 33:19 and Romans 9:20. Romans 9:20 will be considered in more detail when we look at Romans 9:10-24, but both texts are quoted here:

I will be gracious to whom I will be gracious, and I will have compassion on whom I will have compassion (Exodus 33:19).

But indeed, O man, who are you to reply against God? Will the thing formed say to him who formed it, “Why have you made me like this?” (Romans 9:20).

When quoted in the course of a discussion about Calvinism, these texts are intended to silence all opposition. Calvinists believe that their understanding of the biblical text is the only proper understanding, and if people disagree, it is because they don’t want to submit to God’s revelation of Himself in Scripture.

So when the Calvinist states what he believes the Bible teaches, and you disagree, he quotes Exodus 33:19 and Romans 9:20, implying that if you disagree with Calvinism, you disagree with God.

In other words, God has the right to do whatever He wants, and if He wants to elect some to eternal life while condemning others to eternal damnation, who are we to talk back to God?

The Calvinist is right: God is God and He can do what He likes. If God is as the Calvinist insists, then they are right: we mere humans cannot question God’s judgment or challenge His choices from eternity past to choose some for redemption and others for reprobation. For as God says in Exodus 33:19, He will be gracious to whomever He desires, and will show compassion to whomever He wants. And if this is the way God is, then, as Romans 9:20 says, who are we to argue?

Well, … I, for one, will argue.

There is a Difference between the Bible and our Understanding of the Bible

The problem, of course, is that when non-Calvinists disagree with Calvinism, they are not arguing against God; they are arguing against the Calvinistic understanding of God. The two are very different.

We must all be aware that there is a difference between what God is really like, and what we believe God is really like.

There is a difference between what the Scripture really says about God, and what we think the Scripture says about God.

No person (or system of theology) is 100% correct in their thinking about God or in their grasp of all the Bible teaches about God.

Like the Calvinist, the non-Calvinist also believes that his or her understanding of God is accurately derived from Scripture and what God has revealed about Himself on its pages and through Jesus Christ.

Therefore, the non-Calvinist has just as much right to say “Who are you, O man, to argue against God?” as does the Calvinist. And how much right is that? None at all.

The debate between Calvinism and non-Calvinism is not a debate about whether or not we believe what the Bible says, for we all believe it. No, the debate is about what it is exactly that the Bible says.

In such a debate, it is unhelpful for one side to claim that the other side doesn’t believe the Bible.

So what is God saying Exodus 33:19?

So what then is God saying about Himself in Exodus 33:19?

First, it is important to note that in the surrounding context, there is nothing anywhere about some sovereign decree of God regarding whom He has chosen from eternity past to redeem and reconcile to Himself in eternity future. People’s eternal destinies are not the subject of God’s statement in Exodus 33:19.

In the context, God has become frustrated with the sinful and rebellious ways of His people, Israel. While Moses is on Mount Sinai with God, the people have made for themselves a golden calf to worship (Exodus 32:1-6). This event sets off a minor debate between God and Moses about what God should do to the people of Israel in response to their idolatry.

Initially, God proposes that He will destroy all the people of Israel and start over with Moses (Exodus 32:9-10). But Moses disagrees and tells God that such an action will bring shame upon God’s name (Exodus 32:11-13). God agrees with what Moses says, and decides to not destroy the Israelites (Exodus 32:14).

Following this exchange, Moses returns the people of Israel, and rebukes them for their behavior (Exodus 32:15-29). They repent, and so Moses returns to speak with God and plead with Him to forgive the people (Exodus 32:30-32). God says He will forgive them, but that He will not go with them to the Promised Land because His holiness would consume them in their sin (Exodus 32:33–33:6).

Moses, however, continued to intercede with God for the people of Israel. He tells God that if God does not go with them to the Promised Land, then they should not go at all (Exodus 33:12-16). Finally, God agrees to go with the Israelites to the Promised Land, as Moses has requested (Exodus 33:17).

In response, Moses asks to see the glory of God, and when God’s glory passes in front of Moses, it is then that Moses hears God’s statement that He will be gracious to whom He wants and will show compassion upon whom He desires (Exodus 33:18-19).

Moses Argued with God!

It is extremely ironic that a verse which Calvinists use to tell people not to disagree with God is found in a context in which Moses is doing exactly that.

Furthermore, Moses is praised and blessed for doing so! Far from being a text which tells people not to talk back to God, Exodus 33:19 is a text which invites people to enter into genuine dialogue with God about His character, actions, and behavior.

Yes, God exerts His right to be gracious and compassionate to whom He wants, but He is not talking about determining people’s eternal destinies; He is talking His right to bestow blessings and favor upon certain people for certain reasons. In this case, God decided, as a result of His friendship with Moses, to bless Moses with a special revelation of Himself.

The whole context of these words, then, is not one of some despotic puppeteer, who predetermines everything and applies “might is right” principles. It is of a loving personal God, interacting with and answering the prayer of a person in faith-relationship with him, but reminding the person that God knows best how and to whom to distribute blessing (Marston and Forster, God’s Strategy in Human History, 60).

God is not a God who wants to rule with an iron fist and quell all dissent so that His people are mindless drones who do whatever He wants out of fear for the repercussions if they don’t.

Yes, God wants obedience, but He also loves it when His people engage Him in reasonable discussion and dialogue about His actions and decisions. Moses did this with God, and far from proving that Moses was a rebellious idolater who didn’t want God to be God, such intimate dialogue with God made Moses more of a friend to God.

So, far from being a God who does not want to dialogue with us about His plans and purposes, God is a God who loves to reason with us, debate with us, and even “argue” with us about how He is running the world and what decisions He is making. Exodus 33:19 does not teach us that we should not question God’s actions because “God is God and He can do what He wants.”

Far from it! Exodus 33:19 teaches exactly the opposite. It is stated at the end of a very long debate between God and Moses about God’s plans for the people of Israel. At the end of this discussion, God shows Moses that He has no desire to kill and destroy His people, for His character is centered on mercy and compassion.

God is not a deity who rules with an iron fist. He rules with mercy and compassion, and always takes into considering the input and needs of His people. This is the God revealed to Moses. This is the God revealed in Jesus. This is the God of the Bible.

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

Some Surprising Truths about God’s So-Called “Election” of Abram in Genesis 12:1-3

By Jeremy Myers

13 Comments

Though Genesis 12:1-3 does not contain the words “elect” or “chosen,” this passage is often cited as a defense of God’s Unconditional Election of some individuals for eternal life. In this text, God informs Abram that he will become the father of many nations so that through him, all people on earth might be blessed.

Genesis 12:1-3

Now the Lord had said to Abram: “Get out of your country, from your family and from your father’s house, to a land that I will show you. I will make you a great nation; I will bless you And make your name great; and you shall be a blessing. I will bless those who bless you, and I will curse him who curses you; and in you all the families of the earth shall be blessed” (Genesis 12:1-3).

In referencing this texts, Calvinists often remind the reader that Terah, Abram’s father, was an idol-worshiper (Josh 24:2), and that if God had not unconditionally intervened in Abrams’ life, Abram would have been an idol-worshiper as well.

John Calvin on Genesis 12:1-3

In fact, Abram may have been an idol-worshipper when God called him. Here, for example, is what John Calvin wrote about Genesis 12:1-3:

This calling of Abram is a signal instance of the gratuitous mercy of God. Had Abram been beforehand with God by any merit of works? Had Abram come to him, or conciliated his favor? Nay, we must ever recall to mind, (which I have before adduced from the passage in Joshua,) that he was plunged into the filth of idolatry; and now God freely stretches forth his hand to bring back the wanderer. He deigns to open his sacred mouth, that he may show to one, deceived by Satan’s wiles, the way of salvation (Calvin, Calvin’s Commentaries, I:343).

God’s “choice” of Abraham in Genesis 18:17-19

In referencing Genesis 12:1-3, Calvinists often point to Genesis 18:17-19 as proof that Abraham was divinely chosen by God because. The NIV translation of Genesis 18:17-19 says this:

Then the Lord said, “Shall I hide from Abraham what I am about to do? Abraham will surely become a great and powerful nation, and all nations on earth will be blessed through him. For I have chosen him, so that he will direct his children and his household after him to keep the way of the Lord by doing what is right and just, so that the Lord will bring about for Abraham what he has promised him” (Genesis 18:17-19, NIV).

Several things can be said about the Calvinistic interpretation of Genesis 12:1-3 and 18:17-19.

First, there is no specific reference to calling or election in these texts. Such theological concepts must be read into them. This is exactly what the NIV translators have done. Though the original Hebrew simply states that God has “known” Abraham, the NIV changes the word to “chosen.”

The NIV, following its usual theological bias, doesn’t even bother with a footnote to tell its unwary readers that it has altered “known” to “chosen” (Marston and Forster, God’s Strategy in Human History, 230).

The surrounding context of Genesis 18:18-19 reveals what it means for God to have “known” Abraham. It does not mean that from before the foundations of the world, God chose or elected Abraham. This idea is not found anywhere in the text. To the contrary, the context reveals that as a result of God calling Abram in Genesis 12, God and Abraham have become friends, so that now, in Genesis 18, God wants to consult with Abraham about what is going to happen to Sodom and Gomorrah.

The statement “I have known him” means that God has made Abraham His friend (cf. Amos 3:2; Hos 13:5; Isa 41:8; Jas 2:23).

No one, of course, would deny that God did choose Abraham, or that his friendship with Abraham was a result of his own free choice. But it is one thing to say that God’s “knowledge” of Abraham was a result of his “choice” of him; it is quite another thing to say that his knowledge of him was equivalent to his choice. It is the friendship itself, and not the choice prior to the friendship, that is the ground for God’s confiding in him (Marston and Forster, God’s Strategy in Human History, 231).

Nevertheless, despite the fact that Abram is not specifically said to be “elect” or “chosen,” the overall trajectory of the biblical account is clear: God did specifically call out Abram from all the people of the world.

Why Did God Call Abram?

Of course, notice carefully what Abram was called by God for.

Nowhere does the Bible ever say that Abram was called by God to receive eternal life. Quite to the contrary, the text explicitly says that Abram was called by God to be a blessing to the world (Genesis 12:2-3). So this is the second argument against the Calvinistic interpretation of Genesis 12:1-3. God did not “elect” Abram to give him eternal life; God elected Abram so he could serve God’s purpose of being a blessing to the world.

In support of this is the fact that Abram did not actually receive eternal life from God until many years after He was called by God to be a blessing. In the case of Abraham, his regeneration followed his election by many years (cf. Genesis 12:4; 16:16; 17:1).

God first spoke to Abram in Genesis 12, but it was not until Genesis 15 that Abram believed God. According to Paul in Romans 4:3, Abraham was justified when He believed God, which occurs in Genesis 15:6.

The so-called Unconditional Election of Abram in Genesis 15 did not immediately result in Abram receiving eternal life. This shows, even more interestingly, that Abram, as an unregenerate person, is able to hear God (Genesis 12:1-3; 13:14), see God (Genesis 12:7), respond to God (Genesis 12:4; 13:18), and teach others about God (Genesis 13:3-4).

And even though Abram made many mistakes before he was a believer, he made many of the exact same mistakes afterward (cf. Genesis 12:10-20 with 20:1-18). The entire record of Abraham’s life in Genesis disproves the Calvinistic system of theology in many ways.

There is one final point to take note of from Genesis 12. Some Calvinists argue that if God had not specially intervened in the life of Abram, Abram would have ended up as an idol worshipper, just like His father. But this is far from obvious in the text.

In fact, it is just as likely that God’s call of Abram was a response to Abram’s response to what he learned about God through general revelation. As we saw in the previous chapter about Total Depravity, the Bible teaches that God has revealed Himself to all people in numerous ways, such as through conscience and creation.

Furthermore, we saw that when people respond to this general revelation of God, God obligates Himself to provide them with further revelation. Maybe God’s special revelation of Himself to Abram is one such example in Scripture. This is speculation, of course, but so also is the Calvinist assertion that Abram knew nothing about God prior to God’s calling of him in Genesis 12.

Ultimately, the point of God’s calling of Abram in Genesis 12 and 15 has nothing whatsoever do with the election or predestination of some to receive eternal life.

Instead, God’s calling of Abram was so that he would be a blessing to the world.

God did call Abram. But it was not necessarily unconditional, nor did it have to do with Abram’s eternal life. The calling of Abram was a calling to service.

God selected Abram to be a blessing to the world.

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

When will God will gather His elect (Matthew 24:31)?

Matthew 24 and Election

What does “Many are called, but few are chosen” mean in Matthew 22:14?

The Parable of the Wedding Feast in Matthew 22:1-14

For Many are Called, but Few are Chosen (Matthew 22:14)

What does “For many are called, but few are chosen” mean? (Matthew 20:16)

Matthew 20:16 in Context

So what is Jesus teaching when He says that many are called but few are chosen?

The Parable of the Workers in the Vineyard is not about Eternal Life

Matthew 20:16 is Jesus’ response to Objections

The First Shall be Last and the Last Shall be First

Many are Called, but Few are Chosen

God’s Choosing is to Service

Summary of the truth in Matthew 20:16

God Loves it When you Argue with Him (Exodus 33:19)

There is a Difference between the Bible and our Understanding of the Bible

So what is God saying Exodus 33:19?

Moses Argued with God!

Some Surprising Truths about God’s So-Called “Election” of Abram in Genesis 12:1-3

Genesis 12:1-3

John Calvin on Genesis 12:1-3

God’s “choice” of Abraham in Genesis 18:17-19

Why Did God Call Abram?

Theological Study Archives

Bible Study Archives

Advertise or Donate

Search (and you Shall Find)

Get Books by Jeremy Myers

Schedule Jeremy for an interview

Click here to Contact Me!