Mere Arminianism – Part Five (Consulting the New Testament)

This continuing series is a look at C.S. Lewis’s views on Predestination and Free Will…

Consulting the New Testament

The New Testament is by no means silent on such matters, either. Though the command had repeatedly gone out, to everyone, to repent of sin and believe the gospel,[1] individuals do not, of their own decision, have the ability to obey this command. Jesus had claimed to be that which truly gives life and satisfaction – the bread of life from Heaven. The Jews then began to grumble about this – as they understood him to be the child of Joseph and an earthly mother. Jesus, however, assures them it is not worth grumbling about, because it is impossible for any person to come to Jesus, by repentance and faith, unless the Father draws him, and that person will be raised up on the last day.[2] This drawing is not a kind wooing or enticing attraction, but rather a dragging by the Father.[3] Furthermore, Jesus does not say, “No one may come to me unless the Father who sent me draws him.” Jesus says no one can come to him – denoting not merely a willingness of God to allow individuals to come to him, but rather the ability of those to come to Jesus. Without the Father dragging the individual to Jesus, no one would ever repent and believe. The ones who do not believe are not granted to do such by the Father.[4]

Elsewhere in the Gospel of John, Jesus takes on for himself the identity of “the good shepherd” who “lays his life down for the sheep.”[5] The sheep are understood to be those who repent and believe, and have been given permanently to the shepherd by the Father.[6] By contrast, Jesus explains to the Jews doubting him in that instance that they do not believe because they are not part of his flock. Sheep do not choose their shepherd; these individuals had not been given to Jesus to be part of their flock, therefore they do not follow him.

Though there are several other examples available for investigation, the writings of the Apostle Paul to the churches at Rome and Ephesus are incredibly helpful in this area of election and predestination. In the opening of Ephesians, Paul expresses his gratitude that Christ had chosen them in eternity past that they should be sanctified. Paul reminds the saints that God had lovingly predestined them “for adoption through Jesus Christ, according to the purpose of his will, to the praise of his glorious grace.”[7] In the next chapter, Paul lays out the situation any Christian has experienced. Paul declares human nature is one of spiritual death in sin, earning the distinction of “children of wrath, like the rest of mankind.”[8] A physically dead individual is by nature unresponsive; a spiritually dead person is unresponsive when it comes to spiritual things. God’s mercy is shown in bringing new life into the wicked individual, even by giving the individual faith as a gift, rather than the result of any human effort.[9]

Paul’s letter to the Romans was, by far, his most theologically thick work. It is no surprise these issues were addressed by Paul in this letter. Of particular interest is a rather lengthy passage spanning from Romans 8-11, especially the whole of Romans 9. Within this section, Paul lays out what is known commonly as “the golden chain of redemption”:

And we know that for those who love God all things work together for good, for those who are called according to his purpose. For those whom he foreknew[10] he also predestined to be conformed to the image of his Son, in order that he might be the firstborn among many brothers. And those whom he predestined he also called, and those whom he called he also justified, and those whom he justified he also glorified.[11]

Continuing in Romans 9, Paul discusses God’s sovereign choice in his purposes throughout redemptive history. God chose Jacob over Esau before either had been born or done anything good or bad. God chose to raise up Pharaoh for the very purposes of his own glory. God alone hardens some and softens other. Salvation is not a result of human effort or will – but instead on a merciful God. The relationship of God to man is that of a potter to a pot. For a human being to say, “God, you are not fair for what you have chosen to do,” is equal to a pot declaring to its maker that it should have been made a different shape, or for a different purpose.

 

…. to be continued…

---

[1] Mark 1:15

[2] John 6:44.

[3] Gk, ἕλκω. In John 21:6 & 11, the term is used to describe dragging caught fish onto the shore. There is no wooing in this action of the fishermen bringing fish to the shore – the fish do not cooperate with the action, but are dragged by the one performing the action. In Acts 16:19 and 21:30, it is used by the author to describe an angry mob grabbing Paul, and dragging him where they saw fit. That which is drawn does not cooperate with the drawer; the one drawing is performing the entire action upon the one being drawn.

[4] John 6:64-65

[5] John 10:11

[6] John 10:28-28

[7] Ephesians 1:4-6

[8] Ephesians 2:1-3

[9] Ephesians 2:8-9. Commonly this is read in a way that the salvation is not of the individual’s own doing. However, as the salvation is already of grace, it would be sloppily repetitive of Paul to state that it is a gift, when grace already implies an unearned gift. Rather Paul is indicating that while salvation is a gracious gift, even the faith itself a person possesses is a gift from God too, so that no one can boast.

[10] Foreknowledge is not foresight –knowledge concerning an individual’s future actions. Rather it is a preexisting intimate and relational knowing of the individual.

[11] Romans 8:28-30