- Mar 23, 2003
- 6,684
- 249
- 54
- Faith
- Calvinist
- Marital Status
- Married
- Politics
- US-Republican
An election of Grace.
Romans 11:4-8 GB
(4) But what saith the answer of God to him? I have reserved unto myself seven thousand men, which have not bowed the knee to Baal.
(5) Euen so then at this present time is there a remnant according to the election of grace.
(6) And if it be of grace, it is no more of works: or else were grace no more grace: but if it be of works, it is no more grace: or else were work no more work.
(7) What then? Israel hath not obtained that he sought: but the election hath obteined it, and the rest have been hardened,
(8) According as it is written, God hath given them the spirit of slumber: eyes that they should not see, and ears that they should not hear unto this day.
The very elegance and majesty of Gods sovereignty in election is set before us in these verses. It begins "I have reserved." The context of Pauls discussion here is the setting forth of a plausible question in his epistle Has God cast away his people? God forbid! He has not cast away his people who he knew before. I have reserved unto myself the Scriptures declare. Paul brings forth for us a particular example from the days of Elijah the prophet. God has kept a remnant who are said to be of an election of grace of a people he foreknew. It must be understood that when Paul speaks of "his people" that he is speaking of the physical descendants of Abraham. He says, "I also am an Israelite, of the seed of Abraham, of the tribe of Benjamin." Paul has made a clear identification as a physical descendant. So, we must accept that the elect, this people he foreknew, are physical descendants of Abraham as well as spiritual descendants.
We assert that these people are a people reserved by God and kept for himself that they will not fall away into idolatry. So, when we read that God has kept them, we understand that, at least in part, God has kept them from bowing the knee to Baal.
And, thanks to my friend Calvinist Dark Lord, we know that even the very structure of the sentence supports this interpretation of Scripture:
The word translated as 'reserved' is katevlipon, which is first and third person aorist indicative active of kataleivpw, which Moulton defines as follows:
to leave behind;
at death, Mar. 12.19; to relinquish, let remain, Mar. 14.52; to quit, depart from, forsake, Mat. 4.13;16.4; to neglect, Ac. 6.2; to leave alone, or without assistance, Lu. 10.40; to reserve, Ro. 11.4.
Moulton, Anylitical Greek Lexicon, 1978 ed, p.217
- So, just what is God "Leaving them behind from"?
- How is God "relinquishing " them?
- You mean that God is really "departing from" or "forsaking" them?
- Is God actually "neglecting" them?
- Has God "Left them alone" or left them "without assistance"?
This begs the questions of:
- Who they are being kept by...and
- What they are being kept from...or if you prefer, reserved.
Now what are they being reserved from? Bowing the knee to Baal of course, that's what the text SAYS.
The verb is active, the subject...God...is performing the action.
BUT
the passage is ALSO using a reflexive pronoun "to Myself", or "For Myself" in some translations. So, God has kept, or 'reserved' these 7000 men for His own purposes.
The Arminians really have no appeal to the grammar of the passage.
However, in charity, we are willing to entertain the non-Calvinist interpretation of this passage, even if there is absolutely no reason to interpret it this way other than the non-Calvinist must force this reading on the passage to be consistent with his theology. It has been explicitly asserted that Gods choice of them, his "election of grace," is based on their "demonstration of faith." "God said He will leave all the knees that have not bowed." "God spared them because of their behavior." Very good! In charity, we will freely grant the interpretation and examine its implications in light of Scripture.
First of all, if we say that this election of grace is nothing more than God will leave the 7000 in the state in which He found them, what exactly is this election accomplishing. Certainly not their eternal salvation. After all, if God is merely leaving them how he found them, then there is nothing which will prevent them from falling away into complete apostasy like the rest of the nation of Israel. After all, the non-Calvinist is adamant:
It is not: I have kept, etc.. That is not the meaning of the passage nor the word.
Therefore, it is impossible for this election of grace to be a grace which prevents the 7000 from sinning against God.
Now, it might be asserted that God is electing to spare them from the sword of Hazael and from the sword of Jehu and from Elisha. I do suppose that this is what must be meant by election. After all, there was no guarantee that the 7000 would not fall into the same idolatry as the rest of Israel. Remember, "it is not I have kept." Sadly, that is not much of a people for God. They might be faithful and they might not. Still, God had to elect someone to keep a people for himself, lest the original accusation to which Paul is responding would be true and God would truly be casting away his people. So, I guess that these were the ones who were most obedient to God. Perhaps, the non-Calvinist will assert that God knew that these 7000 would remain faithful and never bow their knee to Baal and so he elects to call them his own.
Secondly, if we accept the non-Calvinist contention that "God chooses faithful believers," then we are immediately presented with the problem of just how much obedience it takes to be considered faithful. Is merely obedience to only certain of the 10 Commandments enough to get it done? You see, Gods choice of these faithful 7000 waw nothing more than people who were obedient to this Command:
Exo 20:3-6 GB
(3) Thou shalt have none other Gods before me.
(4) Thou shalt make thee no graven image, neither any similitude of things that are in heaven above, neither that are in the earth beneath, nor that are in the waters under the earth.
(5) Thou shalt not bow down to them, neither serve them: for I am the Lord thy God, a jealous God, visiting the iniquity of the fathers upon the children, upon the third generation and upon the fourth of them that hate me:
(6) And showing mercy unto thousands to them that love me, and keep my commandments.
Or do you have to demonstrate obedience to all of the 10 Commandments to show that you love God? Exodus 20:6 does seem to suggest that one must keep all the commandments, not just a few. So, the critical question does seem to be, how much is enough for God to merely overlook a failing here and there. It is merely Baal that one cant bow down before, but the god of Islam is OK? The non-Calvinist all but admits to this when he says:
In other words God assesses our faith, and He sovereignly decides whether our unrighteous depraved useless sinful faith is sufficient for His divine purpose.
Far be it for me to point out the obvious self-contradiction within 4 words. Is this faith "useless" for Gods divine purpose or "sufficient" for Gods divine purpose? Oops!
Unfortunately, all of this does have one GLARINGLY fatal problem. We have done nothing but introduce works righteousness to justify this interpretation of the verse. It is the dagger in the back of this interpretation. It is impossible to introduce any kind of demonstration of faith through obedience to the Commandments of God and divorce from that obedience under the Law. This should be self-evidently obvious. Those who did not bow their knee to Baal were being obedience to an expressed Commandment of God. Unfortunately, there is no justification by the deeds of the Law. Yet, the non-Calvinist who insists upon this interpretation is convinced that God choose them because they were obedient to the Law. Romans 4:2, clearly indicates that if we achieve anything by our obedience under the Law, then we also have a reason to boast before God.
It is actually more problematic than that. Abrahams belief was accounted to him for righteousness (Romans 4:5). And, lest there is any confusion about what this righteousness entails Romans 4:7-8 cites the following from Psalms 32:
Psa 32:1-2 GB
(1) A Psalm of David to give instruction. Blessed is he whose wickedness is forgiven, and whose sin is covered.
(2) Blessed is the man, unto whom the Lord imputeth not iniquity, and in whose spirit there is no guile.
This whole line of Pauls words in Romans 4 includes the idea that this justification is not only for Abraham, but for those of us who believe in Him that raised Jesus Christ from the dead. We understand that if we "believe on the Lord Jesus Christ we will be saved." This is nothing but a pure and unabashed salvation by meritorious human works. And, those who truly believe this doctrine can look forward to only having their works reckoned as a debt owed to God.
The real irony of this position that is advocated by the non-Calvinist is that Paul himself is actively arguing against it. He says that if election is of works, it is no longer grace. I believe that Paul has made specific use of the keeping of the 7000 on account of the fact that we are told that this remnant was obedient to the command to not bow before idols, a clear work of the Law. We should be instructed that Israel did not obtain what it sought by the works of the Law. Only the elect have obtained it. The rest were hardened.
Now, if God choice of them, his "election of grace," is not based on their "demonstration of faith," and I believe that any honest examine of this scripture passage must conclude that Election cannot be turned into a meritorious human work, then we must conclude that Gods choice of them was so they would not bow the knee to Baal. When we read I have reserved unto myself seven thousand men, which have not bowed the knee to Baal, it must be, since we have eliminated Gods choice of them because they did not bow their knee, but that they would not bow their knee. God has kept them from falling away from Him into a dreadful idolatry. This is what it means to be kept by God. This is what Election must rightly be. This is why it is called an "election of grace."
