No. 32. >> I have to admit that the talk about election or predestination or whatever you call it in Romans 9 troubles me. Does Chapter 9 teach double predestination? Would a Calvinist argue that it does? How should I teach the topic of election? Could you please comment on this for me? >>PROFESSOR DAVID I. M. LEWIS: Josh, it's funny that you should mention this because I have a friend who is a lay preacher in Wyoming. And my friend, he's not ordained and he's not Lutheran. He's sort of a Baptist tradition. And now he's kind of on his own in his own church. But he and I one summer in Wyoming once had a very strong argument over the issue of election. Now, his point of view was actually more Arminian. He was not a Calvinist that he believed in double predestination. But he thought the whole idea of election was itself unfair and therefore he didn't think that was the way God worked. So anyways, he found out as a Lutheran we believed in election. And so he challenged me on this. And I remember as we were working together driving around in a pickup, we were arguing this topic all over the place. And I remember there were a couple of times people stopped and looked at us like we were crazy. This is kind of a difficult concept to explain. And there's a lot of ways I was hoping that no such questions would be asked about Romans 9. Because I have to say, this is one of the harder parts of the epistles to the Romans when Paul is actually addressing the issue of God's sovereignty and how God actually pardons people and how he chooses one and not the other. It could very much give the impression that what is going on here is what we would call double predestination. So indeed, Josh, Romans 9 is one of the texts that a hard line Calvinist would go to to make the argument that double predestination is the way that God works. So let's look at these two extremes on the issue of election. On the hard line Calvinist side, there is the belief in double predestination. Now, it's double because it means that God has elected some for salvation and he's elected others for condemnation. If it rests in God's sovereignty, what that means is that everything he wants to happen has to happen. Why? Because God is sovereign. That means that no one God wants to save could end up not being saved. And so how do you explain the problem then that there are so many people who don't get saved? Well the double predestination Calvinists would say: Well, that's because God never intended them to be saved. Everyone God intended to be saved will be saved. In fact, he has predestined them for salvation for eternity. Those whom God does not want to be saved, will not be saved. And so coming from this idea of double predestination comes the teaching of limited atonement. That when Jesus died, he did not really die for the sins of all men. But only for those whom God had predestined for salvation. And of course, you wonder we can look at Romans thus far. And I can point out in particular Romans 5 where we see that what Paul says in Romans 5 definitely doesn't support this idea of limited atonement. Because Paul is very clear there: Adam's one act of disobedience resulted in condemnation and death for all. But Jesus' one act of obedience resulted in justification and life for all. Remember I call that objective justification in the sense that Jesus' death on the cross does cover all men. The subjective aspect comes when only those who believe in him are saved. And so notice how Romans Chapter 5 presents universal atonement. And how this reading of Romans Chapter 9 would actually be contradicting I think what Paul more clearly says in Romans 5. And so I don't believe that Romans 9 is setting up double predestination. It stresses God's sovereignty and God's right to choose. But Paul doesn't push so far to say that God is actually predestined -- predestining some for salvation and others for condemnation. Because when Paul makes his big thematic shift in 9 Verse 30, he suddenly blames the Israelites for their own falling away. Well, that's a Calvinist extreme. God elects some for salvation. Others for condemnation. Now, the Arminian point of view, this would be sort of the left wing of the Reformed tradition. The Arminians contra to the Calvinists would say we have something to do in our salvation. In the most limited sense, we're saved because we accept Jesus. And so now they would say: Why is it that some are saved and others aren't saved? Well, they would say it's not a matter of God choosing some to be saved and choosing others to be damned but it's a matter of who accepts and rejects the Gospel. So the saved are those people who accept the Gospel. And you can be an Arminian and believe God is doing most everything. But your salvation comes finally with that little part that you do when you say: I accept. I pray the sinner's prayer. I accept Jesus into my heart. I make him my Savior. That acceptance of the Gospel means I'm saved. And those who are condemned are condemned because they have rejected the Gospel. They have not accepted Jesus as their Lord and Savior. Now, at this point, Josh, we can kind of look out at the landscape of American Christianity and I think this is true especially in Wyoming, too. That there seems to be a lot more Americans who would be of the Arminian stripe than there are those who are of the pure Calvinist stripe. I've actually met. I've actually met both kinds of preachers and both kinds of Christians. But I think in our context we face more this idea that our justification depends upon us accepting the Gospel. And if we reject, then we're condemned. And now of course it's not God's sovereign choice at all. Now the choice falls completely to the individual who is confronted with the Gospel. So these are the two extremes. On the one hand it's all God's choice in the pure Calvinist camp. He decides even who goes to hell. So if he's decided you're going to go to hell, you have no choice because he's made that choice already. And if you're an Arminian now it's your choice whether you accept the Gospel or reject it. And the Lutheran take again would be somewhere in the middle. Now, here is the Lutheran response to the question: Why are some saved and not others? And it may seem very illogical. Why are some saved? Well, it's because God has saved them. And now when we confront the doctrine of election, we would actually go so far as to say: It's because God has elected them for salvation from the foundation of the earth. Why are some damned? Well, it's because they have rejected God. And so if you're saved, it's God's fault. If you're damned, it's your fault. And this seems like a contradiction. It seems like this doesn't make any sense at all. Nevertheless, this is the way Scripture speaks. And I would argue this is the way Paul speaks in Romans 9, 10 and 11. It seems illogical because we're not giving a consistent answer to why some and not others. We're giving God all the credit for those who are saved. But we're putting the burden upon the sinners for those who are damned. And on the other extreme you have God making both choices. On the other extreme, it's man making both choices. And for us we're not going to give any credit for our salvation to us. All that credit goes to God who sent his Son. And now we get another aspect of the Gospel. That God has justified. God has redeemed. God has atoned. God has forgiven. God has reconciled. It's through God that we in a passive way participate in Christ's resurrection. God has given his Holy Spirit to lead us. And now we find that God also foreknew us and that God elected us. And the Lutherans would be very clear to say that this is election only of those who are saved. Not of those who are damned. It's not double predestination. But it's just predestination. And now the comfort here, the Gospel here, is that God knew you, Josh, before the foundation of the world. That he knew you and elected you for salvation. Now here I can ask how would an Arminian view election. And this is how my friend explained it to me back in Wyoming so many years ago. Is that God did not elect individuals for salvation. But in a general way he elected anyone who accepted the Gospel to be saved. But he didn't know specifically who those people would be. That's all worked out as people accept or reject the Gospel here on earth. That in a general way he elected that, you know, people would be saved. But he wasn't specific. The Calvinists are very specific. He elected who would go to heaven or who would go to hell. And the Lutheran view is he was very specific, for the saved. So that you, Josh, can comfort your people with the idea that God has elected them from eternity. And that this doctrine is supposed to be a source of comfort to the saved. How do you know that you're elect? Well, you know because you've been baptized. Because you're been justified. And what a comfort that will be to you to say that God actually foreknew you. He had you in mind. And he chose you from before the foundation of the world. Now, the problem with the Calvinist view is there's really no room for Jesus' death in this system. His death then only becomes limited atonement for those God elected. But Jesus' death here becomes everything because it's not just that God elected you. But how does he make this come to be? He makes this because he sent Jesus to die. And then when we focus on Jesus' death in light of Romans 5, we have to say Jesus died for all. Right? He did die for all. But for those who have been called to faith, what a comfort that we can tell them: But you God foreknew. God elected you. He chose you for himself in Jesus Christ. And not in a general sense but that very specific sense. Now, Josh, I have to admit that people have a lot of trouble with this. And honestly, I find that this wasn't a motif that I stressed a lot in my preaching and teaching because it seemed to cause more problems than not, especially in this American context. It would often be in one-on-one ministry when someone was very doubtful about their status before God that I would bring in this idea of their being chosen by God. And then I would find that when they were struggling with their status, am I really justified, does God really love me? When I brought in the doctrine of election, it would often solidify their hope even further and provide them with great comfort that indeed, they were God's people. And so I think especially in this American context we have to be very careful with how we use the doctrine of election in our ministry. Let me state, again, what I think Paul is doing when he talks about God's sovereignty and election here. What Paul is really doing in Romans 9 is he's trying to keep any of us from accusing God of being unfair. And the accusation is this much. We cannot accuse God of being unfair because God is God. And he can do with his creation what he chooses to do. Now, if we consider Romans 1 through 8, what he has chosen to do is to send his Son to die for the sins of all mankind that those who believe would be saved. but nevertheless, none of us as creatures have the right to question God's sovereign will. Now, if Paul had kept talking about God's sovereignty after 9:29 we might find ourselves in the double predestination camp. But what we find Paul doing in Romans 9 Verse 30 through Romans 10 and into Romans 11 is he explains Israel's rejection of the Gospel as not the result of God's sovereign choice but as a result of their rebellion and unbelief. Specifically in the time of Paul it's their dependence upon their own good works in keeping the law rather than believing in Jesus. And so it's their rejection of Jesus that has caused them to be rejected by God. Now, this really defends that Lutheran position. For those who are saved we give all the credit to God. And we even say in the doctrine of election that God foreknew and chose and selected those people for salvation. But when it comes to those who are condemned, it is that they have rejected God. It is their fault. This is a place where we as Lutherans choose to live in the paradox. And we can't force ourselves to be logical on either side because we'll find ourselves in error. We choose to live with a paradox. And basically we do this because this is the way God's Word speaks. For those who are saved, the credit goes to our God and his grace. For those who are condemned, it is because they have rejected God and his promises. And this is what's going on in the First Century AD as many national Jews, physical descendants of Abraham, have rejected Jesus Christ. And that is why God has rejected them. While many Jews and Gentiles have been called to faith. And that is why they are now God's people, the true Israel. Josh, I hope that this question explains both what Paul is doing in Romans 9 and also perhaps gives you some thoughts on how you could use the doctrine of election in your own ministry where you are in Wyoming.