Election

The doctrine of election in no way casts a shadow of a character of God, but rather it just bursts forth with the fullness of the glory of his grace. I mean, to this day, I'm still amazed by grace, that a God who is as holy as God is would ensure the salvation of a single person amazes me, because I don't think he owed salvation to anybody, and I know he didn't owe it to me. And I know that I couldn't have been further away in my heart from the things of God than I was the night I met Christ. So far as Christian testimonies go, few are as dramatic as that of the Apostle Paul. But even for those of us with less dramatic stories of finding faith in Christ, we will have had something in common with Paul. At the time of his conversion, Paul's heart could not have been further from the things of God. So what then can change sinful man's heart? What can bring him back to God? Welcome back to renewing your mind, thanks for being here. This week we've been looking at the doctrine of election, specifically in an exploration of the Westminster Confession of Faith, a statement of biblical Christianity that has helped generations of Christians understand and defend what they believe. And while we only have a limited amount of time here to dive into these key subjects, you can explore the Westminster Confession more fully with the e-book of doctors' roles, truths we confess. Simply call us with a donation at 800-435-4343 or give a gift online at renewingyourmind.org to receive yours today. But in the meantime, here's Dr. Sproul. As we come to the last section of chapter three, section eight, we get to the what I call so what part of the doctrine? What differences it make? And that's what's being answered here in this last segment, begins by saying, the doctrine of this high mystery of predestination, let me just stop there. Two words jump out at me by the Westminster Divine, that the doctrine of predestination is, first of all, acknowledged to be a mystery, that there are elements to the doctrine of predestination that in this world, in this life, we do not yet understand. God has been pleased to reveal some of it, but obviously not all of it. So it remains to some degree at least shrouded in mystery. Now that's no reason for us to then pass it off as irrelevant or insignificant, because though the Bible does not reveal all there is to know, presumably, about the doctrine of predestination, it certainly does make it clear that there is such a thing as predestination. The term predestination was not invented by Martin Luther or John Calvin or by St. Augustine, but it is right there in the text of sacred scripture, not to mention the word predestination, but also the word election, and the term elect is found abundantly throughout scripture. So as I said at the beginning, if we're going to be biblical in our theology, it's not a question of whether we have a doctrine of predestination. We have to have a doctrine of predestination. The question is, is our doctrine of predestination the correct one, the biblical one, because obviously there is a biblical doctrine of election of predestination? Now it mentions the fact that mystery attends this doctrine, but even that term is qualified by the adjective high. It's not just any garden variety mystery that is associated with the doctrine of election, but this is a high mystery. Not that the mystery is more mysterious than all other mysteries, but that is a mystery that attains a high and holy and very important and significant doctrine. Mystery yes, but it's a high mystery. This is not one of the insignificant details of the Bible. Of course, I don't believe there are any insignificant details of the biblical revelation, but it can't just simply be dismissed as a technical point for scholars to deliberate only. But the doctrine of this high mystery of predestination is to be handled with special prudence and care. A couple things I want to say about that. This is almost verbatim drawn from the institutes of the Christian religion by John Calvin, Calvin who's so famous for his Calvinism and for his doctrine of predestination and election was perhaps more vocal on this point than any of the reformers that the doctrine of predestination is so weighty and in many ways so difficult and can create so much confusion and bitterness and contentiousness in the church that it has to be handled in such a way that it is characterized by profound wisdom. It's not to be dealt with flippantly, it's not to be dealt with superficially, it's not to be dealt with bitterly or contentiously, but it is to be dealt with as the confession says with the special prudence and care. This doctrine demands not just ordinary wisdom and ordinary care, but a special care. We have to be very careful with it and very wise with it. But some have taken that to mean that since it is a high mystery and since to deal with it requires special care and special prudence, the safest thing to do is don't deal with it at all. But notice that it says before we talk about special prudence and care that this high mystery is to be dealt with. It is to be dealt with, it's biblical, it's at the heart. In fact, Martin Luther called the doctrine of election the core ecclesia, the heart of the church so that it's a core doctrine of the Christian faith, a central doctrine of the biblical revelation and therefore it is to be dealt with, but recognizing that it's a mystery and recognizing that it is to be dealt with with a special care and a special prudence. But men attending the will of God revealed in his word and yielding obedience thereunto. When I wrote my book chosen by God, I went out of my way at the beginning of the book to say to the reader that this is a difficult doctrine, one that people stumble over and struggle with sometimes for many years and often are led into a different direction from the classic position and so on. And so I was very almost patronizing in the early parts of the book trying to acknowledge the difficulty of it. And I even confessed that I was a Christian five years before I finally was dragged kicking and screaming against my will to submit to the biblical doctrine. And I'll mention more about that anecdotally in just a moment. But towards the latter part of the book, after going through all of the biblical evidence, I said, if you are Armenian and if you have looked at this and then you have rejected the classical doctrine of predestination and if you've rejected the reformed doctrine of predestination, if indeed as I believe it is the biblical doctrine of predestination, then you need to repent of it because to deny something that the Bible clearly teaches, and not just here and there, but repeatedly and manifestly, teaches, is to be disobedient to the word. And to be disobedient to the word is to sin against God. One of the things I teach my students in seminary is that theological error is rooted in sin. And that's kind of shocking to them. You remember when the only president of the United States to be forced to resign his office was Richard Nixon, and when the United States went through that upheaval of Watergate and the rest, Richard Nixon went on national television and he said to the people, finally before he resigned, [BLANK_AUDIO] He said, "I made a mistake, but I'm not a crook," some of you remember that. Right at the time that he did that, I happened to be visiting Capitol Hill and was being entertained by one of the senators at that time, and we were in an elevator going to the Senate dining room, and he looked at me and he said, "If Richard Nixon would have said, what I did was wrong, and I'm sorry, he would still be president, because there's a difference between making a mistake and doing something that you know is wrong. You know, when you give the wrong answer to a math problem, that's not necessarily completely amoral failure, but if you cheat on the math test, you've done more than make a mistake. You've done something unethical that requires repentance, and so you see the difference. But most people who deny the biblical doctrine of predestination, do it not out of an attempt to be belligerent and recalcitrant against the hearing of the Word of God, they've simply made a mistake in their thinking. However, when we make a mistake in handling the Word of God, you have to back up and say, "Why do we make a mistake?" I'm sure I make mistakes in handling the Word of God, and I know that there are two major reasons that incline me to make mistakes in interpreting the Bible. The first one is one of the basal sins of the human heart, slothfulness. When I mistake the Scriptures, it's usually because I'm lazy, and I haven't loved the Lord, my God, with all of my mind. I have looked at passages, studied a few things about it, but I haven't treated the subject exhaustively. I haven't applied my whole mind to everything that the Bible teaches about a given subject. There are many areas of the content of the Bible about which I remain ignorant, all of which is to my shame because I have not been absolutely diligent meditating in the Word day and night like I should be if I were perfectly sanctified. That's one of the main reasons for error in biblical understanding is because we haven't really done our homework, we haven't really studied the matter, the degree that we should. But even more important is not to so much the sin of sloth as the sin of pride. There's something about this doctrine that slays our pride, and we don't want to believe it because somehow it insults our understanding of God, who we think God is or should be, and we'd like to hold on to the idea that I've had something to do that contributed to my coming to faith in the first place, and to claim to that illusion that my salvation was at least in part my own doing. Because the doctrine of election rather than engendering pride makes you realize you have nothing in which to boast except in Christ and His work in your behalf. But notice that the framers of the Westminster Confession are talking here about obedience to the Word, and I said I would give you an anecdote about that. I told you already that I struggled with this doctrine for five years, rejecting it even though I had it set forth to me by some of the most brilliant people I ever met, some of the most godly people I ever met, my mentor in college who was the head of the philosophy department, and had an advanced degree in theology as well, was reformed in his theology. He explained this to me in depth, and I graduated from that college and from his influence, still an Armenian. I had a visiting professor at that college who had an international reputation as a theologian, studied the gospel of John under him, under which he explained the doctrines of grace in the gospel of John, and I was still resistant is brilliance. Then I went to Pittsburgh Seminary, and the king of the Calvinist taught there, John Gersner, who was the most brilliant theologian I've ever met anywhere in the world, and Gersner didn't convince me. That job came ultimately to Paul, the Apostle, and I was driven the Apostle Paul by Jonathan Edwards, and it was reading Edwards that finally got me through, but I had this card that I had in my study in Seminary that said, "You are required to believe, to preach, and to teach what the Bible says is true, not what you think it should say is true." That convicted me because I realized that my resistance to the doctrine of election was not exogetical, but psychological. I didn't like it, but finally, Romans 9, I tried every which way, I tried every way that our Minions tried to tell me today how to get past Romans 9. I've been there done that, and many, many ones that they haven't even thought of yet to try to get out from underneath the weight of the biblical testimony of Romans 9, and I realized I couldn't do it. And so I reluctantly acquiesced to the doctrine. I said, "All right, if that's what the Bible teaches, and that's the Word of God, there's something I'm missing here, but I have to accept this, and so I will." And two things happened after that one. God has a sense of humor and a sense of proportionate justice that I fought the doctrine so long. He made me a spokesman for it, the people who fight it their old lives, and so I've had to be on the other side of the aisle for 40 years, and put up with all of the objections that I was raising myself before and trying to be patient with people remembering that there, but for the grace of God, when I for so many years. But in any case, not only that, but it wasn't long after I acquiesced to the doctrine that I began to see the sweetness of it, the loveliness of it, and how greatly it magnified God. To me, the doctrine of election in no way casts a shadow of a character of God, but rather, it just bursts forth with the fullness of the glory of His grace. I mean, to this day, I'm still amazed by grace that a God who is as holy as God is would ensure the salvation of a single person amazes me. Because I don't think he owed salvation to anybody, and I know he didn't owe it to me. And I know that I couldn't have been further away in my heart from the things of God that I was the night I met Christ. Just as the Apostle Paul was a zealous for his opposition to the church until Christ unilaterally, supernaturally, and immediately changed him on the road in Damascus. So God interrupted me in mid-stride, I wasn't seeking him, I was running from him as fast as I could, walking according to the way of this world, according to the power, the prince of the air, bitter and angry against all things religious when God and His mercy changed my heart. And again, when I began to see that it was God that salvation was of the Lord and that it wasn't me, it became I began to see it on every page of the Bible. And I wondered how I went so long missing it. And so I was encouraged here by the confession to yield obedience to what God reveals in this world. Thereunto may, from the certainty of their effectual vocation, that from the assurances of their effectual calling, be assured of their eternal election. This is, as I mentioned earlier, that one of the great practical benefits of this, as Peter says, that we are to make our election sure, because that feeds and generates confidence in us as we pursue growth in grace and in sanctification. So shall this doctrine afford a matter of praise, reverence and admiration of God, three things, that this doctrine, we understand it this way. should have an effect on us to increase our praise of God. I mean, we sing the doxology, but that we mean it. Praise God from whom all blessings flow. And the greatest blessing we have is our election. The greatest blessing we have is our being included in his family by adoption. The greatest blessing we have are all of the promises that come to us when we have faith, and that faith is a gift of God. We didn't generate it. And more and more and more, I study this doctrine of election and I see that salvation is of the Lord. The more my soul sings the praise of God, which is just the opposite of those who hate this doctrine because one of the things that they genuinely struggle with is that they think that this doctrine somehow casts a shadow on the goodness of God. There was an article on the paper about the tsunami controversy and the local minister here was talking in agreement with Rabbi Kushner, why do bad things happen to good people? You know, if he has to think about whether God ordained this terrible catastrophe, no. The first thing that defines his understanding of God is that God is a God of love. And a God of love would never ordain a tragedy like this. He said, let the insurance companies call it an act of God. Really, it's simply a natural disaster. There's nothing to do with God because God is a God of love. And he's also an impotent God. There was no control over the ocean that he made. There's no control over the wind that he controls. No control over earthquakes that shock, you know, this is just simply one of these accidents of nature. I read that and I wanted a weep right in the paper. But that's basically the theology that is the majority report in our world today. Whereas this doctrine of the eternal decrees of God should abound to our praise. What else? Reverence and admiration of God. It should increase our sense of awe. It should elevate our sense of adoration. And then what should it do to us? On the one hand, understanding this doctrine changes our attitude towards God. Elevates our praise, adoration, reverence, and so on. And respect for him. But it also, and likewise, does what? End of humility, diligence, and abundant consolation to all that sincerely obey the gospel. When we stop holding on to something that we believe entitles us to heaven, then we understand something of the biblical concept of humility, a gustous top lady understood it. There's no him that that lords this work of God more eloquently than rock of ages. That's what one of my favorite ends. And my favorite part in the hymn is when top lady writes, nothing in my hand I bring. Nothing, not one thing. As much as I studied this doctrine there, times I find myself thinking, well, at least I did this or I did that and I almost feel like I'm entitled to a place in the kingdom of God. But the more we understand the doctrine of the free grace of God, the more we're driven to our knees not only to praise him, but to break our own pride, realizing that there is nothing in us that was the grounds of God's choice of us. It should make us more diligent and give to us an abundance of consolation. That's right. This doctrine is not a doctrine of terror. It's a doctrine of consolation. It's a doctrine of comfort. It's the comfort that Paul spoke of in Romans when he came to the end of his discussion on it saying, "If God before us, who can be against us?" That's the proper response to the doctrine of election. Comfort and not terror. That's one of the recurring motifs throughout all of scripture, isn't it? Be not afraid. Do not fear for I am with you. If God is for us, who can be against us? I feel like we've just breathed through to the end of the week and there's still so much more we can explore, not just of this doctrine, but of everything spoken of in the Westminster Confession. If you'd like to continue this study on your own time, we'd like to make available to you the e-book of Dr. Sproul's "Truths We Confess." Call us today with a donation at 800-435-4343 or give a gift online at renewingyourmind.org to receive your copy. Thank you for your support. Join us tomorrow for a special episode featuring Ligonier President Chris Larson and Reformation Bible College Professor Dr. Keith Matheson as they share with us a special update from Reformation Bible College that will be Friday here on renewing your mind. (music)