A chosen people
So you’ve persuaded me that Paul doesn’t really teach “available light,” and that “available light” creates insurmountable problems, but that leaves what is — to me — a massive problem. How can God choose to save some people and not others?
I’m no Calvinist, and I’m sure you aren’t either, but the gospel hasn’t been preached to everyone. And it seems that those who’ve never heard the gospel have no chance of salvation. How can that be?
One of the great conflicts in Protestant Christianity over the last 500 years has been between Calvinism and all other approaches — Anabaptist or Arminian. The doctrine of election is a hard one, but as you know, I think the Calvinists get it wrong. But I think most others get it wrong, too.
We learn the most about election, not from cryptic references in the New Testament, but from the Old Testament. I’ve already mentioned some of the key passages.
(Gen 18:17-19 ESV) 17 The LORD said, “Shall I hide from Abraham what I am about to do, 18 seeing that Abraham shall surely become a great and mighty nation, and all the nations of the earth shall be blessed in him? 19 For I have chosen him, that he may command his children and his household after him to keep the way of the LORD by doing righteousness and justice, so that the LORD may bring to Abraham what he has promised him.”
Why did God choose Abraham? The text just says that God chose him, expecting his descendants to do “righteousness and justice.” But it doesn’t say why God chose Abraham from among all those living on the earth. Nor does it say why just Abraham.
Is the choice arbitrary or is it simply the best choice God could have made in light of his gift of free will to man and his perfect knowledge of the future? I prefer the second alternative, but who really knows?
Much later in Jewish history, we read —
(Deu 4:37-40 ESV) 37 And because he loved your fathers and chose their offspring after them and brought you out of Egypt with his own presence, by his great power, 38 driving out before you nations greater and mightier than you, to bring you in, to give you their land for an inheritance, as it is this day, 39 know therefore today, and lay it to your heart, that the LORD is God in heaven above and on the earth beneath; there is no other. 40 Therefore you shall keep his statutes and his commandments, which I command you today, that it may go well with you and with your children after you, and that you may prolong your days in the land that the LORD your God is giving you for all time.”
— and —
(Col 3:12-13 ESV) 12 Put on then, as God’s chosen ones, holy and beloved, compassionate hearts, kindness, humility, meekness, and patience, 13 bearing with one another and, if one has a complaint against another, forgiving each other; as the Lord has forgiven you, so you also must forgive.
The passages declares that the Israelites should believe in God and obey his commands because God chose them. The choosing precedes the faith and the obedience. And yet those Israelites without faith and obedience died in the desert.
This sounds a lot like —
(Eph 1:4-6 ESV) 4 even as he chose us in him before the foundation of the world, that we should be holy and blameless before him. In love 5 he predestined us for adoption as sons through Jesus Christ, according to the purpose of his will, 6 to the praise of his glorious grace, with which he has blessed us in the Beloved.
As we discussed earlier, the Torah also says,
(Deu 7:6-8 ESV) 6 “For you are a people holy to the LORD your God. The LORD your God has chosen you to be a people for his treasured possession, out of all the peoples who are on the face of the earth. 7 It was not because you were more in number than any other people that the LORD set his love on you and chose you, for you were the fewest of all peoples, 8 but it is because the LORD loves you and is keeping the oath that he swore to your fathers, that the LORD has brought you out with a mighty hand and redeemed you from the house of slavery, from the hand of Pharaoh king of Egypt.”
The Israelites were chosen people because of God’s oath made long before. And this sounds a lot like —
(Heb 6:17 ESV) 17 So when God desired to show more convincingly to the heirs of the promise the unchangeable character of his purpose, he guaranteed it with an oath,
— and —
(1Pe 2:9 ESV) 9 But you are a chosen race, a royal priesthood, a holy nation, a people for his own possession, that you may proclaim the excellencies of him who called you out of darkness into his marvelous light.
Indeed, the idea that Israel is “chosen” by God is a major theme of Isaiah and the Psalms. Therefore, we must take the notion that Christians are “chosen” by God to mean “chosen” in much the same sense that Israel was chosen.
Obviously, God never deprived Israel of free will. Many rebelled, many died in the desert, and only a few made it to the Promised Land. And yet God’s choosing is plain.
And many Jews died when Nebuchadnezzar conquered Jerusalem and took the Judeans into captivity. And yet they were chosen — so that God preserved a faithful remnant even when they had so sinned that God gave up the Temple to destruction by unbelievers.
Why Israel? Why not the Chinese or Zulu or Belgians? I have no idea. God made the choice that suited his eternal purposes. I trust, in faith, that it was because God had no better choice available to him in light of his perfect foreknowledge.
Jay,
I am somewhat leery here about commenting, since you seem to be in the middle of your discussion and the conclusion has not been made. But being wary has rarely stopped me from writing…
As you will notice from my comments, I come from the available light POV — that God only holds us responsible for that which we know or should know. It seems to me that knowledge that is sufficient to condemn (Rom. 1:18-20) is equally sufficient to produce faith, in some matter, and faith results in salvation.
It is faith that saves. Now, I disagree with the interpretation of Ulrich Zwingli and his current followers on faith only, reducing solo fide to belief-only, as faith always has a work component, but we are saved by our faith, by belief that compels us to follow God no matter how dark the light we have is. We are not saved by great faith, or weak faith. We are saved by grace though the faith that we have. And that faith, of whatever size or variety, comes from the light that we have.
You asked if we are saved by available light then why evangelize. By preaching greater light to people drawn in by little light do we not risk losing them eternally? No. Why? Because they have responded to the Spirit in their little light. And they will respond to the Spirit in the greater light that we bring them. Salvation is not about us teaching, but about the sinner responding in faith to His God. We plant, or give greater light. We water, or encourage and edify. But it is the Spirit that gives growth, both in the numbers of those who are His and in their theosis, in the changing of those who are His to be like Him, to take on His character, His likes and dislikes, to think and act like Him.
It is not our job to convert, although it is our job to show the light. It is not our job to force individual growth, although it is our job to encourage, edify, teach and walk alongside those who walk in the journey with us. To use an old cliche, it is not our job to force the horse to drink, but lead the horse to water.
When we bring the Light of Jesus to those who have responded to little light, they respond in joy to know more about the One they served in the relative darkness. They come closer to Him. What we do when we bring the light into these eyes is not risk the salvation of those who responded in little light, but give greater light so that others might accept the calling of the Spirit and have faith in Him.
My objection to rejecting the available light theory is not that it makes God unjust because He condemns those who have not heard of Jesus. All men and women, from Adam and Eve forward, except for Jesus, have sinned, have fallen short of God’s glory, which is nothing less than perfection. No matter how “good” our neighbors think us, we are condemned because we have sinned and are not perfect. The condemnation faced by one man is on the same standard faced by another — that of falling short of God’s glory. God is no less fair, then, for restricting salvation to those who have the happy accident of hearing about Jesus and coming into His light than He is in allowing rain to fall on the atheistic farmer’s acres and keeping the believer down the road in drought.
However, in Romans 1:18-20, Paul seems to suggest that we haven’t just sinned and have been condemned, but our sin is a rejection of God whom we should have known and come to by the light, no matter how dim, we have been given. It isn’t that we are condemned by the accident of ignorantly failing God’s standards, but we are condemned because we have purposely chosen to reject God. Therefore, if the light we have from nature is sufficient for us to actively choose to reject God, and God is just, then the light must be sufficient to lead us to God. If the light is sufficient for us to only reject God, but not sufficient to lead us to Him in faith, then God is not just because He has given all men the ability to reject Him but only a few the ability to return to Him.
We will be judged by our response to the light that we have. For those who are truly His, for those whom the seed has fallen on good ground, greater light drives us to a deeper love and being in Him. On the other hand, no one is driven from God by greater light. It may be that the seed is sown on dry, hard, rocky ground, sown outside the field or sown among the thorns. It may be that these things draw people from God and they lose their belief and stop following Him in faith. But it is not a greater light, but the reality that they never had deep faith to begin with.
Veto
“And many Jews died when Nebuchadnezzar conquered Jerusalem and took the Judeans into captivity. And yet they were chosen”
What do you think would have happened to the Jews, if Paul had not told “the gentiles” they were grafted into God’s promise as well. (in my opinion)the holocaust would have been expanded to include all Jews.
If you want a child to truly hate their sibling, just convince them that mom and dad loves one, and hates the other. That is exactly what the Jewish taught. (daddy loves me and he hates you) it had to change, if any Jews were to survive. Look at what happened when one gift was valued over the other (Cain, Abel)
“Indeed, the idea that Israel is “chosen” by God is a major theme of Isaiah and the Psalms. Therefore, we must take the notion that Christians are “chosen” by God to mean “chosen” in much the same sense that Israel was chosen.”
Paul said even the grafting of gentiles were for the benefit of God’s favored children. We just happened to be the beneficiaries of the Jews loss.
Veto (and everybody else),
We need to remember that Romans 1&2 is speaking of a unique time period in the history of man. Whatever it teaches regarding the “available light” theory, it has nothing to do with us today. The time period spoken of in Romans 2 was unique and now over. Consider the following facts regarding such:
1. It was speaking of a time when the Law of Moses was still in effect and binding for the Jews.
2. The Gentiles back then (who were not amenable to the LOM) had a low unto themselves – a law written on their hearts.
3. It was a time when there were two folds of God’s sheep. Those of “the nation” (Jn 10:16; 11:51) and those other children of God who were “scattered abroad”.
4. It was a time in which God allowed “the nations” (the Gentiles), to “walk in their own ways” – as opposed to the Jews who had the oracles of God.
5. It was a time of ignorance wherein the Gentiles did not have all of the light which was shone upon the Jews. A time of ignorance which God overlooked.
However, today:
1. The law of Moses is ended. Today, there is one law for all and that is the gospel.
2. There are no more 2 folds of God’s sheep (God’s children). Today, there is only one fold with only one shepherd. The one fold today is the church, and ALL who have been saved from sin are members of the church. Outside of the church, all sinners are lost.
3. Today, God does not allow any nations to “walk in their own ways”. The Bible says — “In PAST GENERATIONS he allowed all the nations to walk in their own ways.” Acts 14:16.
4. Today, the times of ignorance are ended. The Bible says — “The times of ignorance God overlooked, BUT NOW he lcommands all people everywhere to repent.” Today, ALL will be judged by the words of Jesus whether they are ignorant of them or not because the times of ignorance are ended.
To continue applying Romans to and the “available light” theory is to ignore the above facts.
what do you all think about this?
In like Vetos thinking and reasoning.
Available Light: It is in the most simplest of thinking very much like we would all be judged according to our IQ’s. You will not and cannot obey what you don’t understand. That fits us today and for all time regardless of where you live and how much has been revealed to you.
No one argues a person with Downs Syndrome is safe regardless of how much they do we would call sin.
The next question following that is how about IQ of 50? 75? 100? and so on.
You see in each they will be judged by the amount thay can understand.
I don’t think anyone will argue against this.
For some reason we do argue if that same amount of light is available to those of higher intelligence when in both cases they would understand and obey the same as that is the best they can do.
Thankfully God will do the judging and not us!
Please excuse the typing errors as I typed this my self and by the available light given my stiff fingers.
If no one comes to the Father except through Jesus . . . his words in John 14 . . . why hypothesize on how all the people who do not know Jesus are going to be saved? I don’t believe we have reason to believe that the Apostles let this question about how God is going to treat those who never heard of Jesus to hinder their commitment to Jesus as Lord and King? It didn’t stop them from sharing the gospel with all those people who never heard of Jesus. Did the Church Fathers go down this road? They had the uninformed amongst them long before we did. Did they flirt with “Available light?” If they did, I’m certainly not aware of it.
So, why would Christians today . . . disciples of Jesus today . . . entertain the concept of “available light”? What is the motive for this? To better serve the Lord?
I went to Google and Yahoo and typed in “available light” and other phrases that included “available light” or some variant . . . and basically came up with very little, except a few results linked to Jay, Al, Leroy and someone named Jack Cottrell. Is there a discussion about “available light” that others are having that is referenced differently. Do they call it something other than “available light?”
Or are we in churches of Christ basically the only ones waisting our time with this? Just wondering.
Luk 12:48 But he that knew not, and did commit things worthy of stripes, shall be beaten with few [stripes]. For unto whomsoever much is given, of him shall be much required: and to whom men have committed much, of him they will ask the more.
available knowledge/ available light
Brent,
All other denominations understand available light, accept it and those I spoke to wonder why we are just now discussing this as it is so basic.
We in the COC are now discussing it because it flies against our very basic principle that we are the only ones right and all, regardless of circumstances must understand and accept everything just as we have taught and are still teaching or be lost.
If we take Luke 12:48 to mean that God deals less severely with those who have not heard the gospel and sinned compared to those who do have knowledge of the gospel but chose to follow self . . . I think we have read the scripture correctly. But if we take this, chew on it, and spit out something that says Jesus is teaching us that it is okay to leave the ignorant where they are . . . that the uninformed would be in just as good of a postion to be saved as would those that come to the knowledge of the Lord . . . I think we are not walking as a disciple of Jesus. Jesus was about empowering people with the truth so they could be one with the Father.
IMHO . . . Jesus taught that the punishment for sin is lessened for the uninformed compared to those who have knowledge of God. But it is punishment still. “He that knew not” is still beaten. In the end, those who know not God are still separated from God . . . eternally.
If we interpret something that Jesus said to be in direct conflict with the commission he gave his disciples, I think our interpretation if off. I think the “Available light” pertains to degrees of punishment and that it cannot be turned around to mean that those who know not God will be also be saved
I agree that it appears unfair to our senses to say that those who have never heard the gospel will be damned. There are a lot of people in the world that are a better person than I am, who love their neighbors better than I do, who are more sincere than I am, and on and on. I am most unworthy, and not grateful enough.
My hope is that God has a plan for those who have never heard the gospel. But I am not certain that such a second chance plan actually exists. However, I do believe that God is loving, kind, and forgiving . . . and that he has not revealed everything to us. He has revealed to us only what we need to know to serve his purposes. To that I can agree.
Brent
“IMHO . . . Jesus taught that the punishment for sin is lessened for the uninformed compared to those who have knowledge of God. But it is punishment still. “He that knew not” is still beaten. In the end, those who know not God are still separated from God . . . eternally.
If we interpret something that Jesus said to be in direct conflict with the commission he gave his disciples, I think our interpretation if off. I think the “Available light” pertains to degrees of punishment and that it cannot be turned around to mean that those who know not God will be also be saved ”
*****
Good comment. That’s the way I see it.
AJ,
I grew up going to a Baptist church and I never heard of the concept of available light.
I’m just a simple state public defender living in Missouri, but all of this talk about our doctrine of baptism as part of some sort of impetus for missions seems to still emphasize evangelizing with what we think as opposed to converting by how we live and also seems to still fail to distinguish those who worship under different brands as opposed to the truly unchurched. The prospect of friendly fire religious drone strikes continues to remain enormous.
There’s a further problem: many of the unchurched are precisely that because of the greed, bitterness, and argumentative nature of the “Christians” they see around them: some here, unlike Paul, are grimly resolved to know more among us than Christ and Him crucified. We have very little in parallel with the first century in this regard: we have the accumulated burden of nearly two thousand years of folly to reconcile. These unchurched have taken at face value the legalism that many – and not just in the Churches of Christ – insist is the “true gospel” and have rejected this ersatz so-called gospel without knowingly appreciating the real gospel. And to pile neglect upon malice, they are further disinclined to consider the real gospel from their experience or exposure to the ersatz gospel.
I’m inclined, for better or worse, to think that God will account for this; from my study of the text, I do not see him as a celestial “Prosecutor in Robes” as some seem to here. After all, Jesus is the very model of the ultimate defense advocate, and He is certainly familiar with the court He practices in and its procedure.
Pingback: Baptism/Amazing Grace: A Conversation Over Lunch, Part 7.5 (In Reply to Veto) | One In Jesus
Johnny,
That is my point. If you ask Baptist if they think and teach all others, regardless of the time they lived or circumstances they lived in, are lost and going to hell but them they will say no. They do not teach available light thinking, they live it.