Examining Key Bible Passages || Understanding Reformed Theology || Part 4 of 5

This is Part 4 of a 5 Part series on the evaluation of Reformed Theology, also referred to as Calvinism. We hope you will join us for this complete series.

The tension between divine sovereignty and human free will has challenged theologians for centuries. Nowhere is this more evident than in discussions around Reformed Theology (Calvinism), where seemingly contradictory biblical passages paint a complex picture of salvation.

In this deeply engaging exploration, we move beyond theoretical frameworks to examine the actual Scripture passages that form the foundation of Reformed thought. Starting with 1 Corinthians 2:14, which describes the natural person's inability to understand spiritual things, we carefully consider whether context supports applying this to salvation or if it primarily addresses spiritual discernment for believers. The profound statements of Jesus in John 6—"no one can come to me unless the Father draws him"—receive particular attention, including analysis of the Greek term for "drawing" and how it appears elsewhere in Scripture.

We tackle passages that strongly suggest divine election (Acts 13:48, 2 Thessalonians 2:13) alongside numerous Old Testament texts commanding people to "seek the Lord" (Deuteronomy 4:28-29, Isaiah 55:6-7). The dramatic moment when Joshua tells the Israelites "you have chosen for yourselves the Lord" presents a particularly compelling case for human volition in spiritual matters. Throughout this journey, we discover Scripture affirming both God's sovereign choice and meaningful human response.

What emerges is not a simplistic either/or proposition but a beautiful theological understanding that respects both God's sovereignty and the reality of human choice. Rather than forcing Scripture into rigid systematic frameworks, perhaps we're invited to embrace how these truths coexist. For those struggling with questions of election, predestination, and free will, this episode offers balanced biblical examination that honors the full testimony of Scripture.

Chapters

• 0:00 Introduction to Bible Passage Analysis
• 10:10 Examining 1 Corinthians 2:14
• 24:15 John 6: Divine Drawing and Election
• 35:36 Timothy's Call and Divine Purpose
• 44:37 Free Will in Old Testament Scripture
• 46:22 John 17: Father Giving to the Son

Transcript

Speaker 1: 0:00

Hello and welcome to Reasoning Through the Bible. We are in the midst of a series that we're doing a special topic on Reformed Theology, also known as Calvinism. Today, this session, we're going to start going through a series of Bible passages and we're going to assume that you've been through the first two sessions that we did that gave an overview of what is Reformed theology and our evaluation of it, with things that are strong and possible weaknesses. So today, what we're going to do, what really needs to be done, which is to go through individual Bible passages and wrestle with what they're actually saying and try to dive into the meanings of each. And since there's many of these, then we're going to just see how it goes. This may run into more than one session, but again, especially if you're new to Reformed theology, you really need to listen to the first two before you get into this one. And today we're probably going to see some of the areas that Steve and I may not see eye to eye on, but we'll also see some things that we do agree on, and it's always fun to study the Word I may not see eye to eye on, but we'll also see some things that we do agree on. And so there's and it's always fun to study the Word of God. So we're going to go into a good bit of detail today.

Speaker 1: 1:14

We want to go down through a series of verses that talk about and are related to this whole concept of salvation and election and reformed theology. I want to talk about 1 Corinthians 2.14 says but a natural man does not accept the things of the Spirit of God for they are foolishness to him and he cannot understand them because they are spiritually appraised. Now, that verse, steve, is one of the ones that the Reformed theologians would use. Again, look at what it says. It says the natural man it's talking about a lost person before salvation does not accept the things of God, so they freely don't accept there's free will right there and they are foolishness to him. He cannot understand them. And that's one of the key things that the Reformed theologian would pick in total depravity is he cannot understand them. He's physically incapable of understanding spiritual concepts involved in the gospel. Why Last part of the verse? Because they are spiritually appraised. So a Reformed person would take this and say see, they're totally lost in the sense of dead and trespasses and sins, cannot understand and therefore God has to open their eyes and cause them to be regenerated in order to be saved. That's what the typically used in Reformed theology. I'll let you get your response, but mine would be this the concepts in this passage.

Speaker 1: 2:55

One of the things our English translations do that are not our friend is split verses out into individually numbered things. It helps us find things, but it doesn't help us get the context, because people come and pick verses like this and apply them in a different place than what it's really taught. This verse, the context of this entire chapter, is on the wonderful things that God, that the Holy Spirit, reveals to us, that God is revealing all these wonderful things to us. That's the context. The context is not moving us from a state of a lost person to a saved person.

Speaker 1: 3:34

The concept just I mean the context, rather is just not talking about salvation. It's talking about things that God reveals to us in the Christian life as being spiritual things that are valuable to us. Therefore, just like a lot of things in the book of Romans, things in the book of Romans are in sections, and where you get in trouble in Romans is digging down under a section, picking out a verse and then using it to build a theological concept when the section's really not talking about that? Now, if you ask the question, could you apply this to salvation? Ah yeah, maybe I mean that concept's in there somewhere, but the passage really isn't talking about salvation. Really isn't talking about salvation. The passage is talking about God revealing high truths of spirituality to us, not whether or not we can grasp fundamental concepts of lostness and savedness. It's talking about lofty things of the Holy Spirit are not discerned by the natural man. So logically I guess it could apply in a salvation sense. But that's not really the context of the passage. Your thoughts.

Speaker 2: 4:55

Well, yeah, the two verses preceding that are giving a description of a person who is saved, who has the Spirit of God and what they have, and then in verse 14, he's juxtaposing that with a person, a natural man, who is lost. So, yeah, context is king. Read and see what the context is, rather than just taking the one verse.

Speaker 1: 5:23

And again, this is where, again, I've gotten a lot of benefit over the years out of systematic theology. But what always happens in systematic theology is we, okay, here's what the concept we're going to talk about. Then we go pick a bunch of verses here and there and when you just pick a verse out of a chapter, okay, yeah, it may seem to say that until you look at the context of the chapter, you know, steve, somebody ought to start at chapter one, verse one, and do a verse-by-verse Bible study. Oh, somebody does. Next one to talk about. And these are ones again strongly used by Reformed guys John 6, 44. No one can come to me unless the Father who sent me draws him. And the next verse not far away, in that same context John 6, 65,. No one can come to me unless it has been granted to him from the Father. So, steve, I remember I said earlier I didn't listen to a whole lot of Reformed guys, but I do remember listening to RC Sproul at this point where he made a big deal about see, no one can the word can means you're not able no one can come to me unless the Father who sent me draws him.

Speaker 1: 6:37

And Sproul made a big deal about the Greek word there for draw. It was really a strong word. It really means to kind of drag. It's a strong word. That means not just a subtle influence but it's more of a really strong draw. It has to be really almost forced is what the Greek there means, according to Sproul, and I would agree. I looked up the term and he's right about the definition of the word. It is a strong term. The problem is that that same word is used when Jesus was in the temple and he said lift me up and I will draw all men to myself. So, rc, if we're going to say that in John 6, 44, the draw there is almost a forcefully drag, then we have to use it in the same sense over in Jesus, saying I'm going to forcefully drag all men to myself. But we know that's not the case. So we're reduced down to the case that it really means what it says, what the translators gave it, which he does draw all men to himself.

Speaker 1: 7:52

And I would take this verse John 6, 44 and 6, 65. It's true, no one can, we are not able. Left to ourselves. I would agree with Reformed theology in the sense that, left to ourselves, all we're going to do is go off into hell, that we will not come to God, that he has to draw us. We don't get from this limited atonement and we don't get from this particular election and we don't get from this verse that he only does some, because again, some of the same language is used when Jesus and he says all who come to me shall drink.

Speaker 1: 8:34

So as long as we're not reading this through systematic theology, glasses we can hold. Yeah, no one is able to. We do not have the ability to come to Jesus unless he draws us. Good thing, the Holy Spirit draws us Now and again. I'm not going to limit the sovereignty of God and say that he can't sovereignly decide to draw some people more than others, and that we are sometimes more obstinate in some cases than others, and some of it he has to draw a lot harder to get through my thick skull, and so I just see this. I don't think this necessarily means that all the rest of Calvinism is true.

Speaker 2: 9:19

Yeah, my response to the reformer on this would be what it doesn't say is it does not say no one will come to me, or no one will come to me unless it has been granted by the Father. So it says can? It's a conditional statement. It's just saying no one can come unless the Father draws them. Your example of Jesus saying lift me up and I'll draw all men to myself. And how is it that the man were granted him from the father? Well, he came himself and Jesus is the one that died for our sins. So anytime that you go out, you, being a believer, go out and tell someone else the gospel message. You're acting as an agent to draw that person to Jesus, and that is a method of the way. One of the methods of the way that God draws and Jesus draws people to himself is through us going out and giving the gospel message.

Speaker 1: 10:21

Okay, moving on Next verse. We're having so much fun. 1 Timothy 6.12, quote take hold of the eternal life to which you are called. And you made the good confession in the presence of many witnesses. So this is Paul speaking to Timothy, giving him advice, one-on-one. And a Reformed person would take that and say that they would say look at this, paul is telling Timothy, take hold of the eternal life to which you were called.

Speaker 1: 10:52

And a Reformed, strong, reformed person would say look, he, god, called Timothy. His call is effective. And that's one of the terms that gets thrown around in Reformed theology is the effectual call. His call is effective. When God calls somebody, it's not going to fail. And here's a quote from Lewis Berry Chafer quote there could not be failure in one instance amongst the millions who are called. Unquote. So that's the claim is that when it says here in 1 Timothy 6.12 and in other places where it talks about being called and the eternal life to which you were called that's the reason I used this quote was it's not talking about being called into ministry or being called into some particular type of service. No, he's talking about being called to eternal life.

Speaker 1: 11:49

And a reformed person would say see, that call is effective. A reformed person would say God's not going to call somebody and it failed. What God sets out to do, he's going to succeed. And I would simply reply to this my opinion that again a non-secular doesn't follow that just because Timothy was called by God, even in a strong sense that therefore all of reform teaching on particular election is true, doesn't mean limited atonement. It doesn't mean that because God called Timothy, even in a strong sense of election, doesn't negate Timothy having the ability to believe and receive and that doesn't follow that believe and receive is a good work and it doesn't follow that all these other parts of Reformed theology I would say I can hold to a strong sense of, even an effectual call, is to eternal life. That doesn't mean that all these other things follow true, and it doesn't mean that there's a problem in between God electing and my receiving, that those are somehow mutually exclusive.

Speaker 2: 13:05

Yeah, and the word call here many times the word, the Greek word, is simply to invite. This particular Greek word means to call, to come or go somewhere. So but there's a choice that Timothy still makes here. This doesn't say anything about that effectual call, right, it just says to which you were called. Well, timothy could have either chosen to follow or not. I mean, the verse certainly doesn't exclude that it could have been something that Timothy could have chosen to come or not to come. Whenever Jesus goes into selecting his disciples, he goes to Peter with all of them. Really, he says come, follow me. Well, they have a choice. They can either follow him or they don't have to follow him. There's nothing there in the scripture that I know of that says Peter had to go and follow him. So just because the word here is used and follow him, so just because the word here is used, called, doesn't necessitate, in my opinion, that Timothy had to go. And follow.

Speaker 1: 14:12

Next verse we'll go into is 2 Timothy 3.9. Still, paul, writing to Timothy, 2 Timothy 3.9 says quote God who has saved us and called us with a holy calling, not according to our works, but according to his own purpose and grace, which was granted us in Christ Jesus from all eternity. Now a Reformed person would take that verse and say, look, it says in there that he called us. He called us, and they would say his calling is effective, it's not going to fail. And they would say they would say just read the verse. He called certain people according to his purpose and grace and he called these people in grace from eternity. Again, look at the verse not according to our works. And a Reformed person would follow up and say that belief is a work. But what it would include is not according to foreknowledge of our belief again, which is to them it's a work, but instead according to his purpose and his grace, which was granted to us from eternity. So, regardless about the foreknowledge part, the Reformed person would look at this and say, look, it's saying from eternity. He called us according to his purpose and he called us with a holy calling. And it is salvation because it talks about saved us, and so that's one of the passages that they would hold to be that, my response would be okay, that's a pretty strong verse and I would say it's possible that he even did this. From eternity, just like it says, doesn't mean particular election, doesn't mean that we don't have the ability to accept or reject, doesn't mean that we're so dead that we can't understand it Again. Just because one little piece of this is the case, it doesn't follow that all the rest of Calvinism follows. That's what's the case. It's entirely possible and I've granted the point. He does things from eternity. Why does he do it from eternity? Because he doesn't think, nor does he process things in sequence and in time. Everything he does is from eternity, everything he does. So he chose us, he determined things from eternity. He said this is so.

Speaker 1: 16:47

The New Testament, in Acts, talks about Pilate and Herod and the Jewish leaders crucifying Jesus according to the foreknowledge and predestination of God. But who did it? They did it. Who did it? The Herod did it, pilate did it. They freely chose to do it. Could have done otherwise, but it was according to the predetermined will and foreknowledge of God. So we don't necessarily take away secondary causes and we don't take away free will and we don't take the ability to understand the gospel or any of the other things so I'm right in line with that in that it doesn't say it says God has saved us.

Speaker 2: 17:32

That's a true statement that it is God who saves us and that is called us with a holy calling. And again, we've talked about that, we've just gone through all these things as far as what is the calling from God? Ok, and so I don't disagree with anything with this statement. It comes back to what theology is placed on the statement, right, and I don't think that it says what the reform theology would say, that it says that this, that God. When it says God saved us, that that means that God gave the faith to us so that we could be saved before, before, and it doesn't necessarily mean that it's an effectual call.

Speaker 1: 18:15

Another series of verses that speak of the concept of election. The next one I want to bring up is in John, chapter 17. In John 17, it's the night before Jesus died. He's in the Garden of Gethsemane and he's praying to the Father. So we have the son praying to the Father in this very passionate personal prayer, john 17. The whole chapter is a prayer and there's passages in here not going to read the whole chapter, but in John 17, he's speaking to the Father, talking about himself, and he says to all those whom you have given him, he may give eternal life. And he's talking there about giving him meaning, he's talking about himself. So to all those the Father has given Jesus, jesus may give eternal life. So to all those the Father has given Jesus, jesus may give eternal life. And he goes on to say I have manifested your name to the men whom you gave me out of the world. They were yours and you gave them to me. I do not ask on behalf of the world, but of those whom you gave me, for they are yours. And that's in John 17, verses 2 through 9.

Speaker 1: 19:26

So, steve, the reform side would say look pretty clear. The people he's talking about there are the fathers, they belong to the father and they were given to the son, and that the reason they were in Christ, so to speak, so says the reformed theologian. The reason they were in Christ, so to speak, so says the Reformed theologian, the reason they were in Christ is because the Father gave them to them. They belonged to the Father ahead of time. Quite clear in saying that they were yours and you gave them to me. I manifested your name to the man who you gave me out of the world. You have given him that he may give eternal life. So it was talking about salvation, eternal life. So to me it's a fairly strong view of election I would have. There's a major qualification to this. That's fairly glaringly obvious.

Speaker 2: 20:21

But your thoughts before I Well he's talking here about his disciples or his apostles, isn't that the context that's here? Yeah, the immediate context are the 12. Right? So as we talk about that and look at that, can you extrapolate out of that, that, therefore, that all people, particular people, are called for salvation? I think here he's talking about the specific apostles that were called and were given to him for eternal life. Now he called 12 apostles. One of them for sure was not to have salvation. He's the one, judas Iscariot, who betrayed him. So I think, when you put it back into the context that he's talking about the specific disciples or apostles there, that the statement stands on its own. I don't necessarily know if you can now extrapolate that out to say see, therefore he calls everyone else and to salvation exclusive of the other people he doesn't call. I don't know if you can go to that case.

Speaker 1: 21:36

And I would have the same same question, the same concern. I do think, though, there, that in this very limited sense, I think he's fairly clear, and I think in this limited sense of the 12, or you could even say the 11, that these were of the Father and that they were the fathers that were given to the Son and Jesus revealed himself to them. And all these things are true in a very strong sense. I would just agree with you. It doesn't necessarily follow, although it could, and then still again, like we said before, it still doesn't mean just because you have a strong view of election doesn't mean all these other points of Reformed theology follow and that, therefore, regeneration before faith. That just doesn't follow. Now the next passage. I think the reason I put this one next is because I don't think it falls under the same limitations.

Speaker 1: 22:29

John, chapter 6, verse 37 and 39,. Jesus is speaking in the temple, mount to the crowd, the Jewish leaders, the crowd, everybody, not merely the 12. And he says this quote all that the Father gives me will come to me, and the one who comes to me I will certainly not cast out All that he has given me. I lose nothing but raise it up on the last day. Now, to me, steve, that's a fairly strong explanation of it's two. It's a universal claim. It's done on the Temple Mount to everyone, not just the 12. And he's saying all that the Father gives me will come to me.

Speaker 1: 23:14

So there's no doubt here about what the Reformed guys call effectual call. All of them will come and I'm going to lose nothing, and all the one that comes to me I will not cast out. So again, that even limits the people that say well, we can choose to leave God afterwards. All that he has given me, I lose nothing, but raise it up on the last day. So it would seem like the logic here is fairly tight and fairly bulletproof, in the sense that everyone that the Father gives me will come to me, they're not going to lose, not one, and that the one who comes to me I'm not going to cast out. So it would seem to be an assurity of salvation for all that the father gives me and that there's human beings out there that are the fathers that are given to the son for salvation. What would you say?

Speaker 2: 24:16

Right before that in the verses he says I'm the bread of life. Right before that in the verses, he says I'm the bread of life and who comes to me will not hunger and he who believes in me will never thirst. And he says but I say to you that you have seen me and yet don't believe. And then he goes on these verses that you just quoted here, that all the father that gives to me. So again in this statement where he says all the ones that the father does give to him will come to him. I think it's in conjunction with him coming for salvation of the world to be the satisfactory sacrifice. It's consistent with all those who are going to be drawn to him. So, that said, all the father that gives me. Is this saying, in your opinion, is this saying that there is only the ones that the father call? Or is this saying that all the father that calls and there could be some outside of what the father calls that could also have salvation?

Speaker 1: 25:21

Logically in the sentence it's the second one of what you just said, right, logically in the sentence, it doesn't say that the only ones that come to me are the ones that the Father had previously and now again, but the logic of what it does say is fairly certain. The Father has some human beings, again, but the logic of what it does say is fairly certain. The Father has some human beings. He gives them to the Son. All the one he gives are going to be Christians and they will get eternal life and they will not lose it. And I just think that's a strong view of election that holds true. And okay, are you going to say there's other people that Father does not own that are going to come? Well, it doesn't say that's not going to happen, but it doesn't say it is either. And again, what I kept saying all along is it doesn't follow that necessarily all these other things. Therefore, we don't have free will and therefore regeneration before faith, those are the things that don't follow.

Speaker 2: 26:20

And I think if you keep reading in verse 40, it supports what we just talked about, that it doesn't necessarily say that there's a limited amount in those verses of what the Father calls. Because in verse 40, he says for this is the will of my Father that everyone who beholds the Son and believes in him will have eternal life, and I myself will raise him up on the last day. So that verse there to me opens it up again to anyone or whoever believes on him will have salvation. So are there specific ones possibly that the Father calls and that those for sure are the ones that are going to become believers in Jesus Christ? Yes, but I don't think it excludes other people outside of that Right right.

Speaker 1: 27:13

Next verse, I want to bring up John 15, 16. This is Jesus again speaking, quote 16, this is Jesus again speaking, quote you did not choose me, but I chose you and appointed you that you would go and bear fruit close quote. So the Reformed guy would say look, it's right there. You didn't choose, I chose you, you did not choose me. And so a Reformed theologian would look at that and say how can you then come up and say we do choose God, we do receive God, when it says right there, we didn't. And I would merely point out again, as we said all along, context is king. Where is this? It's in the upper room discourse. Who is he talking to? He's talking to the 12.

Speaker 1: 27:58

And we've said from the very beginning God can choose individual people for a purpose. And he did choose these people. And again you're probably going to put words in your mouth. Steve Doesn't mean they couldn't walk away. He chose Judas. But again, at least from the general concept of can God choose individual people for a purpose and salvation, and does he sometimes do that? And the answer is yes. It's not a categorical statement either for universal election or against universal election. It's a case that's saying in some cases, he will reach down and choose some people and use them for a purpose, including salvation.

Speaker 2: 28:46

Well, and this particular verse though I wouldn't say that it's noted for salvation it's just saying I chose you. You didn't choose me. I chose you and appointed you that you would go and bear fruit. So the purpose is for them to go and bear fruit. Maybe you're saying that, well, you bear fruit from your salvation, you're saved, and then from that you go and bear fruit. But I think here, in this particular one, one is talking to his apostles in the upper room and that, in this particular verse, is saying that you're going to go and bear fruit.

Speaker 1: 29:25

Next verse, acts 13, 48, says as many as had been appointed to eternal life believed. And this is in the context of an evangelistic message that the apostle was giving I believe it was Paul, he had gone out, he had preached and the message there was some of them were saved. And the comment by the author of Acts, luke, divine, inspired word of God as many as had been appointed to eternal life believed. Who was the ones that believed? The ones that believed were the ones that had already been, had been appointed to eternal life, believed. So this would be a fairly strong support of election from eternity, because the natural reading of the passage is that the apostle goes out and gives an evangelistic message to a bunch of lost people and all the ones that had already been appointed to eternal life. Those are the ones that believe.

Speaker 1: 30:32

And the answer our last issue that we had with the previous verse could it be that other people were saved? Well, this verse would strongly imply otherwise, in the sense that who are the ones that believed? Well, the ones that were appointed, those believed.

Speaker 1: 30:52

And no one else is what it strongly implies, so I would take it to be a strong support of election in the sense that it does. At the very minimum. It talks about some being appointed to eternal life and them being the ones that believe. So your response.

Speaker 2: 31:07

Well, this is in relation to the Gentiles, right, that he's going out and he's giving this word to the Gentiles and it says the rejoicing and glorifying for the word of the Lord that they're hearing and as many has been appointed to have the eternal life. Now, you said it. You said does this mean that this is the case in every single instance? I don't say that this says that this is saying here that in this particular case of the Gentiles, when they heard, in this context of what he's talking about, of the Gentiles, when they heard in this context of what he's talking about, had eternal life and believed, can you extrapolate that out to now, every single person in the world is appointed and only the ones that are appointed are going to have eternal life? I don't know. I don't think that you can take that out of that.

Speaker 1: 31:55

What I don't think you can get from. This is what we were talking about a minute ago with the other verse, which is there's other people that weren't appointed to eternal life. They believed too. Well, no, I don't think you can get that. I think that it's strongly implying otherwise. It's strongly implying that the ones that believe were the ones that were appointed to eternal life. Now, my response would be this Look at what it's saying. Who believed? The ones that were appointed to eternal life? It's not saying God caused the belief. It's saying God appointed them to eternal life.

Speaker 1: 32:37

I've held, from the beginning, a strong view of election. I also have a strong view of belief, and if we add the other verses to it, we're going to see that belief's not a righteous work, it's done by the individual. Back to Ephesians 1, verses 12 and 13,. I think it was who believed. They believed, they believed the people, the individual, lost people out there believed. It's as strong of a support for the belief of the lost person prior to regeneration, or at least at the point of regeneration, not regeneration prior to faith. It's a strong support for the fact that we can accept or reject, strong support for the fact that we can accept or reject. Now, god had appointed them and I would even say his appointing is sure and it's going to happen. So I can take a strong view of election and also take a strong view of human free will. Because we focus, we put on our Calvinist glasses and say we focus on the part about being appointed to eternal life and we miss the other half of what it's saying who believed? They believed Belief by the self. It's not saying God believed them or God instilled faith into them. No, they believed. They believed it was their faith. They did it. You have a strong support for the belief and receiving of belief by the lost person. It's both true that we can have a strong election and a strong human free will.

Speaker 1: 34:20

So, moving on, the next one, romans 9. And before we get to Romans 9, we're not going to exegete the entire passage here's what I would suggest, outside of this study, for those of you that are really really strong on Romans 9. Take and do a search on the word Israel in Romans, chapters 9, 10, 11. Start at the end and work backwards and look at every instance of the word Israel in Romans 9, 10, and 11. And what you'll find if you do that start at the end and work backwards at the end of chapter 11. And the reason I tell you that is because the very first one is the one that throws everybody a curveball, and they miss not everybody, but a lot of people misinterpret who Israel is throughout the entire rest of the three chapters, and what you'll find is I forget exactly how many times the word Israel is used in those three chapters it's 10 or 11. Every instance it's talking about ethnic Israel. Every single one it's talking about ethnic Israel, every single one. And if you take the church and merge it into all those instances in Romans 9, 10, and 11, then the passages make no sense. So you've got three passages worth of things where, if you take it to mean saved Christians and not ethnic Israel, then the sentences are gibberish. They make no sense. That one passage up at the beginning that says it's not Israel who are all Israel are not of Israel is the one throws everybody a curveball.

Speaker 1: 35:52

Another question for another day. We'll get into exegeting Romans 9 when we get to it. The one I want to read is Romans 9, 11, because this is talking specifically about God electing and choosing. So let me just read this one verse Romans 9, 11, quote for, though the twins were not yet born and had not done anything good or bad, so that God's purpose, according to his choice, would stand, not because of works, but because of him who calls so? First of all, steve, we'll do this and it'll cause a controversy, but we'll deal with it when we get to Romans.

Speaker 1: 36:34

There's more than one election, and even people like Shedd and people like Norman Geisler and people like Lewis Barry Chafer have a sense in their theology books that there's an election of saved people in the church age and there's a different type of election for the nation of Israel, and that Romans 9, 10, 11 are talking about an election of Israel. We'll deal with that when we get to Romans. Separate and apart from that is just whether or not God chooses some and not others, and that's what I want to talk about here. So Romans 9, 11, in the sense of does God elect some and not others? That's the question here.

Speaker 1: 37:22

It's talking about these two sons that were born. The twins had not yet done anything good or bad. He chose one of them so that God's purpose, according to his choice, would stand, not because of works, because of him who calls so what it's saying there to me fairly straightforwardly whatever the purpose he called them, it's saying he called one of them, not the other, not based on anything they would do in the future, but solely because of his purpose. So to me, regardless of what the election was for, it's a strong view of election, is it not?

Speaker 2: 38:02

For a purpose and again, as I've noted before, when we see election or choice or chosen, the question should be for what? And in this case the purpose was that Jacob who became Israel, the Jacob who became Israel, was going to keep the statutes and ordinances and from him the Messiah was going to come, and so there's a purpose behind that particular selection that he made. So, yes, I agree that that the Bible does talk about God choosing and selecting on his own volition for certain purposes and, as I've stated before, I don't think that you can necessarily then extrapolate that to the purpose of salvation Right right and I would agree.

Speaker 1: 38:54

And the real answer is that it's not talking about salvation, so that later, for my Reformed friends, when it's talking about is there therefore sin in God? May it not be. We can take the strong sense of the word, yes, the claim God's not fair, he's dealing with that question and we can take the typical Calvinist response and say you're off base simply because it's not talking about salvation. But the question Paul is answering, the hypothetical that Paul is responding to, is indeed God's not fair, but it's not talking about salvation. It's talking about selecting one of these for a purpose, not salvation. Moving on 2 Thessalonians 2.13, quote writing to a church quote God has chosen you from the beginning for salvation, unquote. So is it not the case there, steve, that he's speaking to a group of Christians and he's talking about salvation? And he's talking about he chose you from the beginning and in a biblical concept, the beginning is the beginning from eternity. From the beginning, he chose you for salvation.

Speaker 2: 40:11

Yes, and this is the one verse that I think does have a strong indication. There, in the verse itself, the Greek word selected for chosen is aetero, and that's the only time that this is used in these verses that we've talked about here, and that particular Greek word means to take for oneself, and in the BDAG description down there, someone for something, and in the vines there it says it's used in the middle voice in the sense of taking for oneself or choosing. So, yes, this particular usage here in 2 Thessalonians has a strong indication that this was a selection for salvation right From the beginning. For salvation Does it necessarily say from the beginning of what? Is it the beginning of the foundation of the world or before the foundation of the world? It doesn't say that, and it is one verse out of the ones that we've talked about as far as other type of indication. So again, do we take this one verse and build a whole theology around it, or do we take it in its context of the other verses as well? Right, right.

Speaker 1: 41:38

Moving on, I have a few more to do. I want to look at Luke 10, 22. It says this quote no one knows who the Son is except the Father and who the Father is except the Son and anyone to whom the Son wills to reveal him. Unquote. So if we just look at that verse, it seems to be saying that again, no one categorical statement. No one knows the Son, that's Jesus, except the Father and who the Father wills to reveal him. So it would seem there that the only way people can come to know Jesus and therefore be in Christ that we said before, is if the Father, at least the Son, rather reveals himself to them. So is it not the case that the son would then have a select group of people of which he would reveal him? Can we take this and end up holding to particular election and all the other parts of Calvinism?

Speaker 2: 42:42

This is the context of them going out and witnessing to the Gentiles or the others, and Jesus is rejoicing that the Holy Spirit is there. So does God reveal himself to mankind? Yes, he's come and dwelt among them in the form of Jesus, who was fully man and fully God. So, yes, anyone to whom the Son wills to reveal himself. The question is does he will for everyone, or are there only specific people that he wills?

Speaker 1: 43:20

Right, right, exactly. What I want to do now is I had a bunch of these and we're already going fairly long. It's getting where I believe it's a little repetitive. I want to do now what I don't think happens a lot and I know it doesn't happen a lot in Reformed circles is to go to what the Scriptures say about the human ability to respond to God.

Speaker 1: 43:44

There is a series of places in the scriptures where it speaks about lost people responding to the gospel. First one I have here is Deuteronomy, chapter 4, verse 28 and 29. It says this quote there you will serve gods. This is talking God is speaking to the nation Israel before they go into the land of Canaan. Speaking to the nation Israel, before they go into the land of Canaan there you will serve God's, the work of man's hands, wood and stone, which neither see nor hear, nor eat or smell. But from there you will seek the Lord, your God, and you will find him if you search for him with all your heart and all your soul.

Speaker 1: 44:28

So right there in that verse, god is saying you're going to go off, you're going to be disobedient, you're going to worship idols. Of all things, you're going to worship idols. And once you get there, if you seek me, you're going to find me and I'm going to bless you. That's basically what he's saying right From there. You will seek the Lord, your God, and you will find him if you search for him. Now we had a language scholar I've seen recently that said that should say when you find him or when you search for him. But nevertheless it's talking there about disobedient people that are idol worshipers of all things, seeking God and finding Him and it's guaranteed it's going to happen. So, steve, does this not say that lost people can seek the Lord and find Him?

Speaker 2: 45:27

Yeah, I think that this is only one of several, several verses throughout Scripture that do say that, and I think again that we've got to take these just like what you're doing here. We've got to take these in combination with what these other Scriptures say to get a narrative over all of what God is talking about in the scripture.

Speaker 1: 45:52

More of these passages. There's a good handful of them. Jeremiah 33.3, quote call to me and I will answer you and will tell you great and hidden things that you have not known. So notice there call to me and I will answer Jeremiah. If you remember his context, jeremiah is speaking to a people that had been so disobedient that it's right before right at the Babylonian captivity they had been worshiping idols for years, had accepted even worship of Molech and things like this, to the point that God was judging them for their disobedience and non-belief. They were a people under judgment and therefore he says call to me and I will answer you. Obviously, lost people. God says call to me, I will answer you. So why would he command them to call if they couldn't do it? The strong implication, in fact, it's a command too right. And so it says that they will Call to me and I will answer you. Is that not free will of a lost person to seek God?

Speaker 2: 47:01

It is. And other places in the prophets he tells the people in general return to me so that I will return to you. So once again, there's many, many scripture verses that are out there where God is wanting the people to give a free will, response to him and have a relationship with him.

Speaker 1: 47:25

Next verse in the line showing free will Isaiah 55, verses 6 and 7, quote Seek the Lord while he may be found. Call upon him while he is near. Let the wicked forsake his way and the unrighteous man his thoughts, and let him return to the Lord, and he will have compassion on him and be our God, for he will abundantly pardon. So again, this is Isaiah. So it's speaking to a disobedient people and he's speaking to let the unrighteous man seek me. He's saying let him return to the Lord and God will have compassion on him and he will abundantly pardon him. Pardon from what? Pardon from sin. Seek the Lord while he may be found. He's ordering them to do it. It's the equivalent of the New Testament command to repent Again over and over. Seek the Lord and he will be found. He says this to wicked, lost people, saying look for me and I'll find you. We do have free will because God says we do.

Speaker 1: 48:35

Next one Joshua 24, verses 22 to 24. This is Joshua speaking to the people in Israel as before Joshua was dying. Quote Joshua said to the people you are witnesses against yourselves that you have chosen for yourselves the Lord to serve him. And they said we are witnesses Now, therefore, put away the foreign gods which are in your midst and incline your hearts to the Lord, the God of Israel. The people said to Joshua we will serve the Lord, our God, and we will obey his voice. Unquote. Now, steve, I'm reminded of that. He's clearly telling these people seek the Lord. And he said no, you're not. He says we're going to do it, we're going to seek the Lord. So he's commanding them to do it and they're agreeing. And it says you have chosen for yourselves to follow him. I'm reminded, steve, I ran into a guy that was a double predestinarian one time and he was all of this you know, those are the ones that choose to be damned and choose to be.

Speaker 1: 49:44

God chooses them to be damned and God chooses them to be elect. And he had mentioned AW Pink, who was a double predestinarian, and I said look, joshua. I quoted this verse to him and I asked him are you going to believe Pink or are you going to believe Joshua? And he said well, I believe Pink. And so, okay, let's have lunch. I mean, what else are you going to do? And so, okay, let's have lunch. I mean, what else are you going to do?

Speaker 2: 50:09

He's clearly saying you have chosen for yourselves the divine-inspired inerrant word of God is saying you have chosen for yourselves the Lord. I think this is the conundrum with the Reformed theology is that the majority of their texts that they use are in the New Testament and when you get to these texts that are in the Old Testament that clearly, over and over and over again, are requests, pleas, commands for people to follow God, the one and true God, that they don't go to these verses and look at these verses. So I know that you've got many other ones we're going to look at here. This is a conundrum for the Reformed theology.

Speaker 1: 50:55

I think it's a conundrum for the theology, but not the Word of God. Moving on Deuteronomy 30, verses 19 and 20. And before we get into that, really look at the context here. He had just spent a couple of chapters where he was saying if you obey, I will give you all these blessings. If you disobey, I will give you all these cursings. If you obey, or if you disobey, then he says this I call heaven and earth to witness against you today that I have set before you life and death, blessing and curse. Therefore, choose life that you and your offspring may live loving the Lord, your God, obeying his voice and holding fast to him. Unquote.

Speaker 1: 51:45

So here is Moses speaking the divine words of God, saying if you obey you'll be blessed, if you disobey, you'll be cursed. Choose life, and it's in the concept of life and death. You see, I've said before life and death. Choose life. So, steve, I don't know other way to do it. We could say, okay, moses is dealing with human things. Maybe you could say that. But why are we damned? Why are we lost before God? Because we don't follow his commands, we don't follow his law, we sin and don't want to follow his law. He says choose. Are we not able to?

Speaker 2: 52:25

choose. We absolutely are able to choose, and that's what's set before them.

Speaker 1: 52:32

Lest we think it's only an Old Testament thing, look at the New Testament, 1 Corinthians 737, quote. But he who stands firm in his heart, being under no constraint, but has authority over his own will and has decided this in his own heart to keep his own virgin daughter, unquote. Now I'll admit up front that's not a verse talking about salvation. It's not a verse talking about salvation, it's not. But it is a verse talking about humans doing good godly things, good moral things, and it's talking to believers in a church saying this, and it's very clearly saying we have the free will. This is where places like the Westminster Confession, thomas Aquinas, other theologians, schaeffer, geisler, all these guys get this idea that we do indeed, as human beings, have free will. We're made in the image of God. We did not lose the image of God when we were unsaved, and so human beings have the image of God and we're not a machine. God didn't go in and just reprogram the machine. We have a free will, we have authority over our own will, and it is just not the case that that goes away when we're lost completely. We have authority over our own will and that's why those theologians I just mentioned would say that he persuades us, but it's our choice.

Speaker 1: 54:04

Again, moving on John 7, 17. If anyone is willing to do his will, his God's will, he will know of the teaching, whether it is of God. Now here it's really interesting. Again, jesus is saying to the people if anyone is willing to do God's will, this person will know the teaching, whether my teachings are true, whether it is of God. Now think of this, think of the implications of this. Jesus spoke this in the temple to everyone, the crowd, the Pharisees, everybody. And it would make no sense at all to say if anyone is willing to do God's will, he will know whether my words are true. But no one can be willing, therefore nobody's ever going to know. I mean, that's what the Reformed people would have to say on that verse, because no one's willing in Reformed theology, therefore nobody's going to know whether Jesus's words are true. That's exactly what they say. Jesus is telling the crowd everyone if you're willing, you're going to know whether my words are true.

Speaker 1: 55:16

And the entire debate in Reformed theology is we can't will to know whether it's true, we can't will. It's a spiritually discerned thing. So they would say that Jesus is saying there if anyone's willing to know whether my words are true, then you'll know. But you really can't know because you can't be willing. So you have to then be regenerated before you'll know whether my words are true. And that's exactly the opposite of the meaning of John 7, 17. He's telling the crowd if you're willing, then you'll know. That's what he's saying. I don't know how you can. It's an odd theology that takes the plain meaning of that sentence and flips it and says well, it really means just the exact opposite of what it says.

Speaker 2: 56:07

That really means just the exact opposite of what it says. Yeah, I'm reminded of Jesus whenever he is praying and he's about to go. It's in his final week and he looks across at Jerusalem and says oh Jerusalem, jerusalem, the city that killed the prophets. How often that I wanted to take you under my wing like a hand, and protect you under my wing like the chicks. Right, he says, but you wouldn't permit it, you wouldn't allow it, and so he lays their choice back on them. Now, this isn't talking about salvation. It is talking about as far as a choice as to who he was, but he does lay it back on them. He wanted to take them under his wing, but he lays the blame back on them as far as a choice.

Speaker 1: 56:56

I'll wrap up by saying to our friends if you've been listening to all of this, really just interested in this reformed debate, then I would encourage you. I'll repeat what we said at the very beginning what we really do is what's more valuable than all these discussions is good, solid Bible exegesis. That's what everybody needs the trained theologians and the average church member and that's what we normally do. Please come back and listen to our regular programs. We talk about all of this but we do it in the context of the passages as we go through them, and it gets a little tedious doing this and we're just we were. I'll repeat what I said.

Speaker 1: 57:36

I'm kind of afraid we'll lose some audience here because we spend all this time going through the theology. But I think, steve, it's important because people have these questions. Our normal thing is what we do is verse-by-verse Bible study, and I'll wrap up with one final verse. Proverbs 8, 17 says those who diligently seek me will find me, and I think that's a true statement that we can say, just like Jesus would say, or just like God would say to the masses if you diligently seek him, you will find him, and we'll let God worry about the things on the other side of heaven and we worry about what we're responsible for, which is seeking him and finding him, and repenting and following him.

Speaker 2: 58:24

Find all of our resources on our resource page on reasoningthroughthebiblecom. Also, go and look at all of our teachings, of the books that we're going through, and there, as you pointed out, glenn, that is our bread and butter, verse by verse. This is what we've been felt called to do and we encourage you to go and do that and study with us as we reason through the Bible. Thank you so much for watching and listening, as always. May God bless you.