I'd like to share my thoughts with all of you and get your response to it. Thanks in advance.
Both Arminianism and Calvinism are defective in explaining the salvation process. These theological traditions neither recognize nor address the role Isaiah’s curse had in producing significant differences in the way Jews and Gentiles responded to the Gospel as overwhelmingly demonstrated in Scripture. Consequently, both of these traditions are wrong in that their explanations of salvation are too simple in light of Scripture.
A Simple Salvation Process for All
The salvation process is quite simple:
If you confess with your mouth the Lord Jesus and believe in your heart that God has raised Him from the dead, you will be saved. For with the heart one believes unto righteousness, and with the mouth confession is made unto salvation. For the Scripture says, “Whoever believes on Him will not be put to shame.” For there is no distinction between Jew and Greek, for the same Lord over all is rich to all who call upon Him. For “whoever calls on the name of the Lord shall be saved” (Romans 10:9-13).
Notice in Romans 11:5-10, however, the prerequisite required for Jews to follow this salvation process: election. Scripture never describes Gentiles as having this prerequisite, and the reason for this is because the Jews were handicapped by a curse that prevented them from understanding the Gospel.
Isaiah's Curse
The Jews were cursed through Isaiah, and this curse formed the basis for their peculiar path to salvation:
And He said, “Go, and tell this people:
‘Keep on hearing, but do not understand;
Keep on seeing, but do not perceive.’
“Make the heart of this people dull,
And their ears heavy,
And shut their eyes;
Lest they see with their eyes,
And hear with their ears,
And understand with their heart,
And return and be healed” (Isaiah 6:9-10).
The above curse was quoted by Jesus when describing the Jewish condition to His disciples in Matthew 13:10-17, and the curse significantly impacted the way in which Jesus communicated to the Jews: in parables only. In addition, the same curse was quoted by Paul when contrasting the Jewish and Gentile responses to the Gospel in Acts 28:17-29. Consequently, the curse rendered all Jews as damned and bereft of salvation unless God chose to break the curse on those Jews He chose for salvation, per Romans 11:5-10. Even the prophets were blinded, according to Isaiah 29:10. Fortunately, the curse had an expiration date (Isaiah 6:11-13) and expired upon the destruction of Jerusalem in AD 70.
The Electoral Process that Breaks Isaiah’s Curse on the Jews
In order for Isaiah’s curse on the Jews to be broken so they could be saved, God chose (or, elected) which of the Jews to save:
I say then, has God cast away His people? Certainly not … at this present time there is a remnant according to the election of grace … What then? Israel has not obtained what it seeks; but the elect have obtained it, and the rest were blinded (Romans 11:1-7).
In the above passage we find that all Jews were blinded from salvation and some Jews were elected unto salvation with those who were elected as comprising a remnant. This “blinding and election” action was directed toward Jews and not the Gentiles: “Israel has not obtained what it seeks; but the elect have obtained it, and the rest were blinded”. The efficacy of the blinding was based on Isaiah’s curse on the Jews: “Go and tell this people … Keep on seeing, but do not perceive … and shut their eyes; lest they see with their eyes ...”.
In addition, “election” is a process that had been going on throughout the course of Jewish history as described in Romans 9:6-13. It’s an election that was still in effect in Paul’s day as described in Romans 11:5 and chronicled by Lydia’s conversion in Acts 16:13-15. But since the curse has expired, the electoral process for Jews has been abandoned (Isaiah 29:17-24).
Significant Differences Between How Jews and Gentiles Respond to the Gospel
In light of Isaiah’s curse on the Jews and the lack of any such curse placed on the Gentiles, one would naturally expect a significant difference in the way Jews and Gentiles responded to the Gospel; and this is exactly what one finds in Scripture. The following Scriptural references demonstrate this difference:
- Acts 13:42-52
- Acts 17:1-9
- Acts 18:5-6
- Acts 22:17-21
- Acts 28:17-29
- Romans 9:30-33
- Romans 11:7-10
- Romans 11:25
The above-referenced Scriptures combined with Isaiah’s curse sufficiently establish the significant difference between the way in which Jews and Gentiles responded to the Gospel and the reason for the different responses between the two groups. And it is at this point that the fundamental flaw inherent in both theological traditions expresses itself: a complete disregard for the Jewish handicap necessitating God’s direct involvement in Jewish salvation, an involvement completely absent in Gentile salvation. As a consequence, Calvinists erroneously attribute election in every salvation instance, and Arminians attribute free will in every salvation instance; and both traditions are wrong.
Conclusion
In conclusion, the salvation process described in Scripture is more nuanced than either of the descriptions proffered by Arminianism and Calvinism. Consequently, both traditions are inharmonious with Scripture and, thus, defective. A candid review of God’s word reveals that a prerequisite for salvation existed for Jews prior to the expiration of Isaiah’s curse, and this prerequisite was discontinued after Isaiah’s curse expired (namely in AD 70). Therefore, Jews were elected for salvation prior to the curse’s expiration and were given free will in choosing salvation after the curse’s expiration. Gentiles have never had this experience. Instead, Gentiles have always enjoyed free will in their salvation experience.
Interestingly, Arminianism describes the Gentile experience at all times and describes the Jewish experience after AD 70. Calvinism describes the Jewish experience prior to AD 70 only. Because both traditions profess to describe the process of salvation for all people at all times, they are both wrong.