And he answered them, “To you it has been given to know the secrets of the kingdom of heaven, but to them it has not been given. - Mt 13.11
I don't know what an Arminian makes of it but please feel free to enlighten me.
Technorati Tags: Calvinism, Kingdom of God
11 comments:
You don't need to be a calvinist to believe that it is by God's grace that he has made himself known to those who believe.
geoff - true, but what do you say about the others to whom it has not been given?
Simple answer: their hearing was not mixed with faith (Hebrews 4:2)
I'll have to add to SLW's comment that Jesus did not say, "...but to them it will never be given." They've not received it yet, but that does not preclude them from receiving it some time in the future.
The Arminian smiles about other verses, e.g.:
But the Pharisees and the authorities on the law did not accept God's purpose (or counsel) for themselves (Luke 7:30).
So both smile at each other.
Unlike some of my contemporaries, I think thinkers from both sides of the election issue will be able to see and to enter the Kingdom of God. And I suppose, much to my dismay, that there is even space for those in the middle that think these two views are like railroad tracks running in parallel with both views being true.
Anyway, good banter. What I think both sides agreed to is that the Kingdom is a secret unless revealed by God.
Man is partial and holds men's personages in admiration. His affections are conditional and he treats others with partiality whether he admits it or not.
But to claim that God shows the ultimate partiality alters the entire foundation of theology which then alters everything else. Sure man twists God's Word and adds his own slant, and yes man doesn't carry out the Great Commission with the fervor and sacrifice that he should.
But God Himself has offered salvation to every sinner and can never be accused of special treatment in the most eternal of all issues, eternal life. Christ's sacrifice can never be minimized as a "members only" expression of love, it was the single most expansive expression of divine love that God Himself would or ever could demonstrate to all and each created being called mankind.
If we get to heaven and God's plan was revealed as Calvinistic then we Arminians made a expansive mistake.
If God reveals His offering was universal then the Calvinits made much more than a mistake, their theology cut out most of humanity. God cannot love the world equally if He offers no less than eternal life to some and not to others.
He could do that but He would not be impartial and the cross would have been for Him and not us.
Rick - sorry but this argument is not up to par with your usual persuasiveness. It's not clear how you see the doctrine of election is "cutting" anyone out.
My point was if salvation was only offered to a "few" then not only has God shown preferential love, He decided to be diminutive in His divine orthopraxy.
So He is a redemptive respector of persons and has left "cut out" an overwhelming part of lost human history. And God didn't even provide for the redemption for the greater part of the human world, not because He couldn't, but because He didn't want to.
That goes against the "not willing that any should perish" teaching as well as others. If all three of my children disobeyed me and became stranded and I had the ability to save them all, I certainly would. That would make my love more expansive than God's and we know that isn't true.
Rick - I think you just proved your own point wrong. You said that, "If God reveals His offering was universal then the Calvinits made much more than a mistake, their theology cut out most of humanity." In your argument the Calvinist is wrong and proven so by God, therefore God did not cut anyone out.
That leaves that you think that the Calvinist cut someone out. I trust you know that this is a perversion of the doctrine and shame on you (I say that nicely) for presenting it. I could use perversions of Arminianism but that would only prove perversions wrong not Arminianism. You either do not understand Calvinism or you misrepresented it.
No proper Calvinist would choose to not represent the Gospel to an unbeliever. In fact, Calvinists would claim that their understanding of Calvinism makes them more likely to evangelize than Arminians.
You mention your children. Calvinists would evangelize all three but trust God to 'convert' and 'keep' them.
Bottom line, I missed the greater error you point to. Be careful because Calvinists think Arminians create the greater error.
But now the real bottom line, this post wasn't about this at all. I just thought Calvinists would find solace in "but to them it has not been given" phrase. I didn't intend this as a proof text for a given position.
Rick - you missed my perspective. I wasn't saying anyone wouldn't attempt to evangelize their own children, my perspective was that if I would save all my children but God would severely limit his salvation it misrepresents the universal love of God.
And my "cut out" metaphor was in theology and thereby focus, not in reality.
Post a Comment