Okay, team, we continue our series in the doctrines of grace.
If we were to pose to Scripture the question, take me to the very beginning of my salvation,
! the very dawn of its unfolding, the very fountainhead of its first springs, where would
Scripture lead us? Its answer is a beginning before our beginning. It would trace the fountainhead
of our salvation to an ancient choice. What do we mean by ancient? If our thoughts could
strain to make the journey, back to the beginning of time, back when the morning stars were begotten
and the galaxies sprang forth and the sun and the moon were launched into their orbs by the
word of God's mouth, back farther still when our created world slept in the mind of the
Creator. There, we, the elect people, before we even had a created existence, were the objects
of God's loving purpose. But here, inevitably, words fail. For how could we designate a time
before time? The Apostle's phrase is simple, yet majestic. Before the foundations of the world.
Ephesians 1.4. It was then the triune God set their loving choice upon their beloved, a people who would
become the everlasting bride of the Son who would take on flesh. There is the fountainhead of our salvation,
an ancient choice and purpose of God, an ancient compact of Father, Son, and Spirit to unite
everlastingly with the people of their sovereign, gracious love. Across the pages of Scripture,
the objects of this ancient choice are called God's elect. The Apostle expresses to the Thessalonian
believers, we are bound to give thanks always for you, brothers and sisters, beloved of the Lord,
because God has, from the beginning, chosen you to salvation. 1 Thessalonians 2.13 and 14.
Spurgeon once said of this verse,
If there were no other text in the sacred word except this one, I think we should all be bound to
receive and acknowledge the truthfulness of the great and glorious doctrine of God's
ancient choice of God's life. True enough, it would suffice, but it need not, for such assertions
crowd the sacred text. From Abram chosen out of all the multitude of nations and their brimming
population, through the patriarchs and through Israel, as the psalmist exclaims in wonder,
blessed is the nation whose God is the Lord, the people whom he has chosen as his inheritance.
Psalm 33.12.
At the coming of Christ, we have his choosing of a new Israel in union with himself, the twelve.
You have not chosen me, but I have chosen you, John 15.16.
A new people of his choice, elect from every tongue, tribe, and nation, described as, quote,
chosen and destined by God the Father. 1 Peter 1.12.
Some of those elect now gathered around the heavenly throne.
Others in the midst of their earthly pilgrimage of faith.
Others still chosen, but yet to be gathered by the proclamation of the gospel.
As the apostle Paul wrote momentarily in prison as he sought to reach the ends of the earth with his gospel
proclamation, I endure everything for the sake of the elect, that they also may obtain salvation
that is in Christ Jesus, 2 Timothy 2.10.
So God chooses his elect.
The expression is really redundant, for that's precisely what elect means.
Chosen.
As to the basis of this ancient choice, we are not told what inspired or revoked it,
other than God's good pleasure expressed in the language of love.
He simply declares of Christ's bride to be,
I have loved you with an everlasting love.
Jeremiah 33.3.
Or as Moses told the Israelites,
Behold, to the Lord your God belong heaven and the heaven of heavens,
the earth and all that is in it.
Yet the Lord has set his heart in love on your fathers
and chose their offspring after them, you above all the peoples.
Deuteronomy 10.14 and 15.
Though beyond his own distinguishing love,
we are not told what his choice is based upon,
it is clearly disclosed to us what it is not based upon.
It is not based upon our worthiness.
As if the choice were somehow predictable and evident by virtue of some distinguishing quality in us,
the beloved.
As if the choice were elicited and found its source and origin in some attractiveness or excellency
or comparatively surpassing virtue of our own.
No.
The testimony of Scripture is uniform and forceful in shutting the door on that supposition.
As Moses assured Israel concerning God's choice of them,
The Lord your God has chosen you to be a people for his treasured possession
out of all the peoples who were on the face of the earth.
It was not because you were more in number than the other peoples
that the Lord set his love on you and chose you.
For you were the fewest of all the peoples.
Note bene, don't flatter yourself.
No, it was because the Lord loves you.
Deuteronomy 7.6 and 7.
It is as if Scripture knew such a supposition would naturally occur to us.
The recipients of his loving choice.
Imagining that something native to us caught the divine eye
and ensorcelled his heart and so elicited his choice.
We flatter ourselves to imagine his choice of us as somehow explicable
in virtue of our superiority, whether number or character
or some endearing attractiveness relative to others.
That the ground of God's selection of us is our blue ribbon qualities.
Bigger, better, faster, stronger, wiser, more virtuous, more faithful, more pious.
And so more worthy than the competition.
Such a notion the Scriptures soundly dispel.
Such self-congratulatory fancy is snuffed out.
Taking the very categories we naturally think might commend us to God's choice of us.
Eye-catching wisdom, power, nobility, strength.
The apostle writes to the believers in Corinth.
For consider your calling, brothers and sisters.
Not many of you were wise according to worldly standards.
Not many were powerful.
Not many were of noble birth.
But God chose what is foolish in the world to shame the wise.
God chose what is weak in the world to shame the strong.
God chose what is low and despised in the world, even the things that are not,
to bring to nothing things that are,
so that no human being might boast in the presence of God.
1 Corinthians 1, 27-29.
Spurgeon observes of this passage getting to the heart of the matter as he always does.
We select those who are best because they are most deserving.
He, God, selects those who are worst because they are least deserving.
That so his choice may be more clearly seen to be an act of grace and not of merit.
Spurgeon goes on to observe how very gracious God's choice is.
For he writes, what a fabulous thought this is.
God's choice is gracious even in its exclusion.
It does not say, Spurgeon writes, not any wise man.
It only says not many.
So that the great ones are not altogether shut out.
Isn't that marvelous?
Even gracious in his exclusion.
At least one is appreciated at this point.
The Countess of Huntington of English nobility upon reading these verses exclaimed,
Thank God for the M.
Thankfully, it does not say not any of noble birth, but not many of noble birth.
Thank God for the M.
Clearly, Scripture inscribes false over the notion that it is anything in us,
whether nobility or ignobility,
or any virtue or excellency or religious or moral exertions
or attainments that elicit God's choice.
As the Apostle insists concerning God's election,
it depends not on human will or exertion,
but on God who has mercy.
Romans 9, 16.
One vivid way Scripture rather forcefully makes this point,
excluding our imagined superior profile or fancied worthiness
and underscoring its sheer graciousness,
is by asserting that God's choice of his own
was before they had any possible worthiness at all,
for it was a choice of them before they were born.
Thus, before they could have assembled some supposedly impressive,
morally majestic, or religiously resplendent CV.
As the Apostle presses,
taking the example of the twins,
Jacob and Esau,
I mean twins,
I mean about as close as you can get,
He writes,
though they were not yet born
and had done nothing,
either good or bad,
in order that God's purpose of election might continue,
not because of works,
but because of him who calls,
she, the mother,
was told the older will serve the younger.
As it is written,
Jacob I have loved,
but Esau,
I hate it.
Romans 9,
11 through 13.
To clarify the matter,
we might frame the question this way.
What is cause,
and what effect?
Does God's choice flow from our goodness,
good works as scripture often terms it,
or do our good works flow from God's choice?
which is the cause,
which the effect?
Here again,
the scripture is crystal clear.
As the Apostle writes to the Ephesians,
even as God chose us in Christ
before the foundation of the world,
that we should be holy and blameless before him.
1-4.
That,
we should be holy,
expresses purpose.
We are chosen not from our good works,
but for good works.
Why is this so seemingly important
for scripture to clarify?
Because there is a vital principle
and purpose at stake.
The insistent principle
is what we have abundantly seen,
that God's choice of his elect
is gracious.
It is all of grace.
God's choice is according to his own free favor,
utterly unconstrained
or influenced
by anything that arises
from the objects of his choice.
There is no cause
or trigger
of God's choice
in the elect.
The ground and cause
has its source
and sustenance
entirely
and exclusively
in the heart of God
and his heart purposes.
There is in the gospel
an illuminating phrase
Jesus said of
those full of animosity
toward him
they hated me
without a cause.
John 15 25
That is,
they hated me
without there being
any cause in me
to elicit their hatred.
It arose entirely
from their own heart stance.
And so it is
with God's loving election
where we might equally say
God lovingly elected me
without a cause.
That is,
without a cause in me.
Literally in the Greek
gratuitously
or gift wise.
One might even
translate that
graciously.
They hated me
graciously.
And why
is this
of crucial significance?
That God's election
of his beloved
is a gracious choice.
grace.
Ah,
because
it is his grace
that God seeks
marvelously to display.
It is his grace
that is so praiseworthy.
As the apostle
writes to the Ephesians,
God chose us
according to the purpose
of his will
to
the praise
of his glorious
grace.
Ephesians 1.6
That is,
the unfathomable
graciousness
of his electing
choice of his people
will be the
ceaseless theme
of God's
eternal praise.
The great
non-perial display
of his glory.
And because
his electing love
is all of grace,
without a moat
of credit
going to us,
so shall
no speck
of praise
be transferred
from the creator
to the creature.
All of grace
means
none of us.
Not to us.
Not to us,
O Lord.
But to thy name
be glory.
Psalm 115.1
Thus,
there is not
a dry
morsel of credit
to energize
a breath
of self-congratulation.
So,
as the apostle
expresses it,
so that
no human being
might boast
in the presence
of God.
1 Corinthians 1.29
This
is what is
at stake
and the ultimate
purpose
behind the principle,
God's exclusive
and unrivaled
glory
with which
he will share
with none.
For as
Jehovah declares,
I am the Lord.
That is
my name.
My glory
I will give
to no
other.
Isaiah 42.8
Now,
if,
or rather
since,
this is
indeed
the testimony
of Scripture
that God
elects to salvation
those he will
passing over
others
according to
his sovereign
unconstrained
choice,
perhaps
one may
feel
what we
might call
splinters
in our
sensibilities.
Let us
acknowledge
and interrogate
some of
these splinters.
Here's
one
which has
been voiced
and
perhaps
we may
feel,
we ourselves
may feel it,
maybe even
forcefully.
if
God
chooses
some
to life
and not
others
based
alone
on his
sovereign
choice,
that
doesn't
seem
fair.
A
distinguishing
love?
A
choice
of some
and not
others?
Jacob,
have I
loved?
Esau,
have I
hated?
This is a
hard saying.
Who can
hear it?
It
certainly
cuts against
our
contemporary
notion
that
none
should get
favored
treatment.
It
rubs us
the wrong
way,
that
anyone
should get
anything
not given
to all.
Indeed,
in our
times,
this is a
sensibility
on steroids.
John Rawls,
the political
theorist,
asserts that
our liberal
democracy
here in
America
is based
on this
notion
of fairness.
But
the
scriptures
challenge
this
sensibility
and
reframe
the
relevant
issue.
they
recognize
the
objection
but
pose
a
counter
question.
As
the
apostle
states
in Romans
9,
14,
what shall
we say
then?
Is there
injustice
on God's
part?
By no
means.
For God
says to
Moses,
I will
have mercy
on whom
I will
have mercy.
and I
will have
compassion
on whom
I will
have
compassion.
That is
the
scriptures
response
to our
dis-ease
with
an
assertion
of God's
sovereign
prerogative.
He has
mercy
on whomever
he
wills.
Verse
18.
This is
the
decisive
answer.
But the
apostle
recognizes
that for
some
this
dis-ease
may not
be entirely
set to
rest
by this.
Puzzles
persist.
So he
continues.
Will you
say to
me then,
why does
God still
find fault
for who
can resist
his will?
Ah,
but this
persistent
question
fails to
recognize
whose
will
it is
we are
speaking
of.
It is
the will
of the
creator
who
as
creator
has
sovereign
rights
over his
creatures.
So as the
apostle insists,
who are
you,
O man,
to answer
back to
God?
Will
what is
molded
say to
the
molder?
Why
have
you
made
me
like
this?
Has
the
potter
no
right
over
the
clay
to
make
out
of
some,
out
of
the
same
lump,
one
vessel
for
honorable
use,
and
another
for
dishonorable
use?
Verse 20
and 21.
Notice
the
apostles
reframing
the issue
from one
of
fairness,
whatever
shape-shifting
sense that
term has,
to
justice.
Is there
injustice on
God's part
by no
means?
Verse 14.
Jesus
takes up
the same
question
and answers
it in the
same key
as the
apostle.
In his
parable of the
laborers in the
vineyard,
Matthew 20,
at day's
end,
the
master
pays
some
a day's
wage
for a
day's
work.
Good to
his pledge
to give
whatever
is right.
Verse 4.
He acts
in regard
to some
according
to strict
justice.
To others,
astonishingly,
he gives
with extravagant
generosity
a whole
day's
pay
for a
mere
hour's
work.
He acts
according
to grace.
When those
dealt with
according to
strict
justice
grumbled
and protested,
the master
replies,
Friend,
I am
doing you
no wrong.
Did you
not agree
with me
for a
denarius,
a day's
wage
for a
day's
work?
Take
what belongs
to you
and go.
I choose
to give
to this
last worker
graciously.
Am I
not allowed
to do
what I
choose
with what
belongs
to me?
Or
do you
begrudge
my
generosity?
Verse 13
through 15.
Again,
as with
the apostle,
Jesus
frames the
issue
in terms
of God's
sovereign
prerogative.
Am I
not allowed
to do
what I
choose
with what
belongs
to me?
And
neither
will his
choice
ever
fall
foul
of
justice.
We
need
not
worry
here.
He
will
never
give
less
than we
are due.
Friend,
I am
doing you
no wrong.
God
will
never,
neither
can he,
fall
short
of
whatever
is
right.
Though
in his
sovereign
freedom,
he may
act
with
extraordinary
generosity
of grace.
Would
we,
from our
fairness,
sensibility,
begrudge
and deny
him such
free
generosity
to some
of his
choosing?
I don't
think so.
Another
worry has
arisen for
some.
Some have
felt such
a choice
of God's
as the
decisive
determination
in salvation
can't be
right.
For such
would be to
show
partiality.
And
scripture
assures us
God
shows
no
partiality
or
favoritism.
Or as
the old
King James
version put
it,
God
is no
respecter
of
persons.
Romans
2,
11.
Wouldn't
electing
some
and not
others
make
him
so?
While
it might
appear
choosing
some
and not
others
could be
an instance
of
favoritism,
the way
God
chooses
is
actually
the
very
opposite.
It
does not
violate
the
no
favoritism
principle,
it rather
fulfills
it.
God
in his
choosing,
we have
noticed,
does not
show
favoritism
to the
noble
over the
ignoble,
the Jew
over the
Gentile,
the morally
presentable
over the
manifestly
dissolute.
He does
not even
show
favoritism
to the
ignoble
over the
noble,
the poor
over the
wealthy,
for he
chooses
his elect
from all
of those
categories,
excluding
none.
None
of these
are conditions
for God's
choice.
In fact,
they are all
non-conditions.
His election
is non-conditional
or
unconditional
and so
shows no
partiality,
none.
As
Thomas Goodwin
tersely
answers the
objection,
as God
respects no
persons,
so he
respects no
condition upon
which he
gives salvation
to us.
Or as we
might update
the language,
as God
shows no
favoritism,
so he
favors no
condition upon
which he
gives salvation
to us.
Now,
some have
attempted to
draw out
the splinter
by proposing
that perhaps
God's
choice of
us
is
actually
based on
our choice
of him.
God
looks down
the corridors
of time
and sees,
foresees,
that we
are ones
who respond
with faith
to the good
news declared.
We believe
and accordingly
we choose
Christ and
so,
in response,
he chooses
us.
He doesn't
discriminate.
He chooses
any and all
who choose
him.
His choice
of us
is based
on our
choice
of him.
He chose
us because
we first
chose him.
Well,
that is a
way to
frame and
to describe
it.
It is,
in fact,
not an
uncommon
way,
but it
is certainly
not the
Bible's
way to
do so.
The
Bible,
unambiguously,
affirms
the
opposite.
No,
he chose
us,
sorry,
not
he chose
us
because we
first chose
him.
Rather,
we choose
him because
he first
chose us.
Or,
as the
Apostle John
expresses it,
we love
him because
he first
loved us.
1 John 4,
19.
his ancient
choice of
love was
the
wellspring
from before
the beginning.
Our love
and choice
of God
follows.
It does
not precede
God's
loving choice
of us.
Our
loving choice
of God
is the
effect
of God's
loving choice
of us,
not the
reverse.
But the
ultimate
defeater
is that
this
formulation
falls
upon
the
wrong
side
of the
great
watershed.
Whose
is the
glory
and the
right of
boasting?
Is
the
pivotal
decision
on which
our salvation
hangs
triggered
in us
or in
God?
It's
clear where
the Bible
comes down
on this
and this
proposal
falls
fatally
elsewhere.
If,
as this
proposed
scheme
would have
us believe,
election
and with
it salvation
is triggered
by our
faith,
then salvation
is ultimately
determined
by human
will and
exertion of
faith,
not on
God who
shows mercy.
And quite
apart from
Scripture
asserting
the opposite,
it depends,
quote,
not on
human will
or exertion,
but on
God who
has mercy,
Romans 9.16.
Quite apart
from that,
this
construal
would furnish
the elect
with grounds
for boasting.
For the
reason that
they are
heaven-bound
and their
twin in
every respect
is not
is because
they,
unlike their
neighbor,
her twin,
had the
good sense
to believe
that he,
in contrast
to his
unsaved
neighbor,
had the
moral virtue
to repent.
Well done,
that man.
And while
you might
not think
to boast
of your
spiritual
prowess
in relation
to God,
you certainly
would have
grounds for
such a
boast relative
to your
less
spiritually
perceptive
neighbor,
who lacked
these
salvation-securing
sagacities
and sensibilities.
Again,
well done,
that man.
Go with
the smiling
satisfaction
in the
knowledge of
your moral
and spiritual
superiority
through the
gates of
glory.
But,
of course,
this whole
way of
thinking
conspicuously
fails the
litmus test
of the
gospel of
grace.
God chose,
writes the
apostle,
that no
human being
might boast
in the
presence of
God.
1 Corinthians
1.29.
And,
that faith
and repentance
that you
propose as
your
salvation-triggering
contribution,
well,
actually,
they're gifts
of God
flowing from
election,
not
securing
election.
As the
scripture says,
Philippians 1.29,
it was
granted
to you
to believe.
Acts 11.18,
to you,
God has
granted
repentance
that leads
to life.
As the
apostle explains,
any difference
in the elect?
Well,
what do you
have that
you did not
receive?
If you
received it,
if then you
received it,
why would you
boast as if
you didn't
receive it?
1 Corinthians
4.7.
Oh,
sisters and
brothers,
do you
not feel
this
to be
so
deep in
your bones
that when
it comes
to our
salvation,
God's
grace is
all,
and we
contribute
nothing?
But,
let's
close with
one further
heart-rousing
truth
concerning
God's
electing
love.
His
ancient
choice
of his
beloved
is
immutable.
God's
calling
is
irrevocable,
writes the
apostle,
Romans 11.29.
Election
having once
pitched upon
a person,
writes John
Aerosmith,
it will
find him
out and
call him
home,
wherever he
be.
In
whatsoever
dunghills
God's
elector hid,
election
will find
them out
and bring
them home.
Isn't that
great?
I should read
that one more
time.
Election,
having once
pitched upon
a person,
it will
find him
out and
call him
home,
wherever he
be.
In
whatsoever
dunghills
God's
elector hid,
election
will find
them out
and bring
them
home.
Well,
as to the
dunghill
in which
all God's
elector
found,
the woeful
and wrathful
condition of
our lost
estate,
and what
God's
electing
love must
do to
draw them,
to draw
us out,
and to
bring us
home.
Those are
the subjects
of our
scriptural
attention
next week,
Lord willing.
Well,
we have
some time
for any
questions or
comments or
observations or
praises.
Yes,
Richard.
I would ask
you to
do me a
favor,
please.
I'm not as
good a
student as
some yet.
Could you
tell me the
scripture in
1 Corinthians
where he
says it
is granted
to you
to do
it?
Well,
that was in
Philippians
129.
Yeah,
Philippians
129.
I told you
I wasn't
that good
as
you.
Yeah,
no,
that's
all right.
And then
Acts 11,
18,
God has
granted
repentance
that leads
to life.
I see.
Yeah.
And at
the very
beginning,
the scripture
from 1
Thessalonians
that you
mentioned.
Yes,
that is,
that's the
one that we
opened up
with.
15.
Yeah,
thank you,
Elizabeth.
2.15.
I thought
it was 1
Thessalonians
2,
maybe 13
and 14.
I think
it's a
little
before
15.
Yeah,
yeah.
problem.
Yeah,
it's funny
how we
assign
blame to
God
regarding
election
and redemption
and all
that,
and justification,
and we
say he's
biased
and he's
unfair,
that it
leads to
cynicism,
but not
many
say,
how do
I get
elected?
How do
I get
to God?
It's
blaming
God.
Immediately
we put
God
in the
dock.
He's
unfair.
He's
not a
good
God.
He's
biased.
Instead
of,
where can
I find
him?
How can
I get
a hold
of this
God?
It's
because
we're
dead
in our
sins
and
trespasses.
It's
like we
can't
come to
God.
It's
like a
ship
and
you're
dead
in the
water
and they
throw you
a lifeline
but you
can't
grab
that
lifesaver
because
you're
dead.
Somebody
has to
make
you
alive
so
you
can
grab
that
lifesaver
and that's
salary.
I'm going
to start
taking notes
Raul because
that's
going to
be my
lecture
next week.
Just one
quick comment
on that
and then I'll
get the
other.
Yes,
and that's
so good.
We don't
look for
our salvation
to our
election.
because that
is hidden
with God.
We look
for our
salvation to
the Savior
that is
offered to
all.
We look to
Christ and
live.
So don't
try to find
out your
salvation
in election.
That's not
visible.
but the
Savior of
the world
has been
set forth
and we
can look
to him
all the
ends of
the earth
and live.
So that's
where we
look.
Yeah.
In any
of your
subsequent
sessions
are you
going to
be
delving
more on
the
assurance
of
grace?
You know,
just not
Yeah,
yeah,
yeah.
Our
good
brother
Tyler
is going
to be
taking up
one of
the
glorious
truths
of
the
security
of the
true
believer.
And in
that
context
per
adventure
he
might
distinguish
between
the
absolute
Gibraltar
truth
of
scripture
that
the
one
that is
in
union
with
Christ
is
in
union
with
him
forever.
He
has
eternal
life
for it
to be
eternal
life
means that
it can't
suddenly
cease
in some
sort of
crisis.
So there
is
absolutely
eternal
security
for the
one who
is in
union
with
Christ,
for
everyone
who has
an interest
in
Christ.
There is
a distinction
between
that being
the case
and
knowing
and
drawing
deep
personal
existential
comfort
that it
is
so.
Okay,
so there's
it's a
metaphysical
absolute
truth,
it's an
epistemological
what we can
know
blessing,
but it is a
blessing that
God intends
for us
as believers
to enjoy.
1 John 5,
and these
things I write
to you who
have eternal
life that
you might
know that
you have.
These things
I have
written to
you that
have Christ
that you
might know
that you
have eternal
life.
So that's
something that
he,
that's a
blessing that
he wants
us to
enjoy.
And that
we would
call
assurance.
And the
grounds of
assurance
are going
to differ
and thus
need to be
pastorally
applied.
with skill
because the
grounds of
doubt
differ.
So depending
upon your
grounds of
doubt about
your interest
in Christ,
then we
would need
to address
what,
what those,
what your
assurance should
be.
I could
make it a
little bit
more explicit
maybe for
if, for
example,
you think,
well, you
know,
I don't
know if I
am,
I don't
know if I
am indeed
Christ's.
Oh, why
do you say
that?
Well, because
I just so
persistently
live and
quite delightfully
and delectably
live for the
world, the
flesh, and
the devil.
Well, that
might be
good grounds
for having
doubt.
So I
wouldn't just
say,
well, no,
ignore those.
Here's just
a promise
of salvation.
That would
be a
pastoral
abuse.
No, it
would be,
hey, the
gospel involves
repentance.
Look to
Christ.
So if,
if rather,
like some
Scottish
Presbyterian
saint in the
Outer Hebrides
hasn't taken
the Lord's
Supper for
six years
because he
just doesn't
know if he's
worthy enough
to receive
it,
you know,
I might say,
whoa,
friend,
brother,
don't look to
yourself and
your relative
degree of
holiness or
unholiness,
look to
Christ and
his righteousness.
It's his
record, not
yours, that
gives you
access.
So you
deal with
it in a
completely,
in a different
way, but it
should be, it
should be the
privilege of
every believer.
It is the
privilege of
every believer
to have that
assurance.
Yeah.
I was going
to say,
I'm going to
this issue,
predestination
would be one
that really
reveals the
human heart
is like,
I don't
know, I
don't know
if deceitfulness
is the right
word, but
certainly a
resistance to
believing, I
think, what
scripture is
clearly saying,
particularly
because I
feel like on
this particular
issue, there
are two
common, I
feel like,
what seems
like heart
motives behind
not wanting
to believe
in election,
and it
seems like
one of them
is you
don't want
to believe
that you
are that
bad, that
you would
never believe
in Christ
or anything.
But I
feel like the
second one
tends to be
more common,
which is I
think the
idea of
believing in
a God who
chooses might
appear to so
many as
something that's
totally unfair
and unjust,
that's
the temptation
of evangelism
and people
ask, people
ask about
predestination,
we don't
want to say
the thing
that might
seem unpopular
or might
seem like
it's tempting
God to be
in a certain
way.
And I'm
just curious,
why is it
that it's so
important that
in those
moments you
sort of listen
to what
scripture has
to say
instead of
going with
the thing
that we
sort of
believe society
wants us
to think?
Because I
don't know,
I just feel
like in a
lot of
it feels
like the
human part
is going
to believe
what it
wants to.
It happens
in this
predestination
topic.
Yeah,
yeah.
Yeah,
thanks Alex.
Yeah,
this is
important.
We always
are going
to have
that dual
dynamic
of the
world
conforming
us to
its image
and that
is always
proceeding
apace
just by
being in
the world
and seeking
to be
not of
it.
And yet
it squeezes
us into
its mold.
So yes,
a lot of
how we
think about
things and
how we
feel about
things and
how we
wish things
will be
conforming
to the
world.
And in
contrast to
that,
we rather
need to
renew
our minds
through
the word,
through the
scriptures.
So we
come to
think aright,
orthodoxy,
and also
importantly,
we don't
often think
about this
as often,
that we
act aright,
orthopraxy,
but also
that we
feel aright,
orthopathy.
We ought
to,
good things
ought to
exhilarate
us.
We ought
to rejoice
in good
things.
and we
ought to
feel
praise for
things that
are worthy
of praise.
So yes,
we do
need to
have
scripture
continue to
train us
such that
our
affections,
what our
heart begins
to be trained
to incline
itself toward
with our
hearty amen
and praise
the Lord
and hallelujah
and God
be praised.
That is
something that
we do
need to
work on.
Absolutely,
Alex,
and it's
often a
challenge.
It's always
a challenge.
Yeah.
Yeah,
go ahead.
Sure.
So the
scriptural idea
of God
receiving all
glory and
salvation,
I think that's
obviously true,
but how do
we reconcile
that with
language and
parable
talents,
well done,
that would
be
true.
Does it
seem like
they would
need
attention?
How do
you find
the tension
there?
That a
commendation,
if, well,
could it not
be resolved
this way?
When God
commends us
with well
done, if we
actually are
orthodox and
orthopathic,
we will realize,
aha, why,
thank you,
but as
you and I
both know,
what do I
have that I
haven't received?
So this
just reverberates
back to
your glory,
God, because
if I were
left to my
own, why,
that talent
would be
buried in the
napkin still,
you know,
six feet under,
just like my
nature.
So, you
know, the
echo back is
with a
combination,
not to us,
O Lord, but
to thy name
be glory.
So, it's
just, that's
just how it
works if we
recognize, and
when we see
things as they
truly are,
that will be
perfectly understood
when we are
in his
presence.
Really, any
sort of
inclination to
boast really
can't occur
to a
glorified
saint in
the presence
of God.
So I
think that
that's,
we are,
what he,
we,
when he
gives us
crowns, he's
simply crowning
his gifts.
So maybe
think about it
like that.
Yeah?
Yeah.
You talk
about, like,
the,
he doesn't
choose
everybody,
and it's
like,
no,
the world
wants to
make it to
where it's
like,
everybody
has this
option to
go after
God.
And so it
made me think
about the
scripture,
many are
called,
few are
chosen.
So what's
the difference
between being
called and
being chosen?
Excellent, yeah.
So many are
called, few
are chosen.
What's the
difference between
being called and
being chosen?
What was the
question?
Well, he's
just asking,
what it says
certain ones are
chosen and
others are not,
but it says
the calling
seems to be
broader than
the choice.
What's the
difference between
being called
and being
chosen?
So, a
great question.
The scriptural
difference is
that the
call of
God goes
out to
every human
creature.
and it
is both
an invitation,
look to
the Lord,
all the
ends of
the earth
and be
saved.
So the
gospel,
the announcement
that God
has provided
a savior for
the world,
look to him
and live,
that call
goes out
to all.
It is a
universal
call.
And that
is something
that we are
invited to
respond to
and indeed
we have
an obligation
to respond
to morally.
As Paul
writes to
the Athenians,
said to
the Athenians,
God is,
in Acts 17,
God is
commanding
all people
everywhere
to repent
and to
believe.
So the
gospel call
is both an
invitation and
a command.
There's an
obligation.
But not
all answer
that call.
In fact,
we are so
self-centered
and curved
in upon
ourselves
that we're
like teflonized
against that.
So God
has to
actually go
in and
like do
an intervention,
shake us
from our
spiritual
stupor,
open our
closed eyes,
make our
hard heart
malleable,
and our
stiff neck
able to
actually turn
and look
to the
serpent
on the
rod,
on the
pole,
because we
would never
do that.
It's not
that we
could never
do that.
It's not
that our
will,
like a
weather vane,
is soldered
so it
can't turn.
It's just
that the
prevailing wind
from our
hearts are
always blowing
in the same
direction.
We prefer
the delectable
doings of
darkness.
God comes
in as
light,
but men
love darkness
rather than
light because
their deeds
are evil.
So God
has to
actually
choose
certain
people
and
change
their hearts,
regenerate
them so
they do
respond to
that gospel.
So that's
the difference.
So that,
what some
theologians
call an
inward
call.
So the
outer
call,
we all
hear with
our ears,
whatever,
I'm busy,
I'm doing
things,
versus an
inward call
that he
makes effectual
where,
oh,
this is
life.
This is
a savor
of life
to those
who are
appointed
to life,
he says
in Corinthians.
So,
does that
make some
sense?
Okay,
good.
Yes,
back.
Go ahead,
back.
many of us,
if not all
of us,
have had
people
near to
us
who
have
seemed
to show
genuine
faith
and
belief
and then
fallen away.
And it's
upsetting.
Yeah,
yeah,
yeah.
Yeah.
about
that?
you
reconcile
them?
How do
you
counsel
them
as
friends
or
family?
Yeah,
yeah,
no,
How do you think about that?
How do you reconcile that?
How do you counsel that as friends or family?
Yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah.
No, no, no, no, no, no, no.
Great question.
And that's, that topic is going to fall to, to, to, to Tyler soon.
So you're going to get, you're going to get a much fuller, you're going to get a deeper,
a broader, an all around better answer from Tyler.
But, but.
I'm going to start taking notes.
Yeah, yeah.
But I'll just say a few words because we're at, at, at time here.
Yes, it is heart rending.
I would bet it might even be so heart rending back that, that, that we're stirred to cry out
to God and his mercy, to sovereign hearts, to pray.
Maybe even to lovingly confront, to plead.
To, to, to examine ourselves to see if, if we in any way are putting a stumbling block before
these people that are so close to us physically and, and affect in, in, in, in kinship of affection.
So we find ourselves very much animated to plead to God.
And, and, and that is a good, good sign.
Because God does not simply ordain the ends.
And the ends are accomplished.
Most, many of which, most of which are these very things that maybe you are beginning to feel evidence for in your heart.
rather than feeling indifference to the fate of your friend,
you actually feel deep solicitude and a passion.
And you find yourself praying and calling on God to open eyes.
And that's a good sign.
You're beginning to see some of the very means that God ordains to use to achieve these ends
activated in your heart.
That seems to me to be great grace at work,
which would be just the sort of thing that we would notice
if God actually had saving a tent for that person.
So that tends to make us more hopeful and hopefully not then more complacent.
Oh, it looks like God's going to do it. Great.
Well, I'll go back to my comic book, but more eager.
So my sense is that the fact that you have a deep concern and a deep care,
that's a good sign that God is at work
and should be an added motivation to you to persist at it,
to persist at that good work of exhortation and warning and appeal and that.
So that's what I begin with.
Yeah, yeah.
Team, we're probably at time and we better go.
And Lord willing, we'll see you next week
where we are going to take up the question of
what does God's electing love need to overcome
in order to bring us from that dunghill back home.
So we will be looking at our condition, Lord willing.
Thank you.
I'd just like to tell you one thing.
Yeah.
This teaching is not new for me,
but it comes as a reminder at an interesting time
in my 51-year walk with the Lord.
Wow. Say more, Richard.
And that's because I'm reading a book by M. David Litwa right now
called Marcion,
The Gospel of a Holy Good God.
Ah.
And Marcion would have a much different reply
from either some of the skeptical pronouncements
that you voiced this morning,
as Devils, huh?
Yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah.
Or anything else modern, really.
Yeah.
So he would say that,
look to me,
I've loved you with an everlasting love,
from Jeremiah, for example.
Yeah, yeah, yeah.
He would say, well, that's the Creator God.
Yeah, yeah.
And we would say, yeah, that's right.
Yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah.
But then you would go on to say,
but it's not the Father of our Lord Jesus.
Yes, yes, yes, yes.
Who's saying this.
Yes, yes.
And so the love he proffers in Jeremiah there
is a tainted love.
Yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah.
Yeah, Marcionism, that early heresy,
was, it seemed to not be able to integrate
and hold together the witness of the Old Testament
and the New Testament
and failed to see that actually Jesus is
the place where we understand the Father best.
So rather than thinking that there is a contrast,
we need to integrate them
because God has supremely,
God, Jehovah, has supremely revealed himself
in his son, Hebrews 1, 3.
And that's, I think, where Marcion's approach
is just mistaken.
Luther says,
to look for God outside the face of Christ
is the devil.
So, you know, so we ought to say,
no, no, no, the best revelation
of the nature of God, the Father,
is the Son,
rather than thinking that they could be contrasted.
They need to be integrated.
I think that's where Marcion goes wrong.
Well, do you know of this scholar?
I've heard the name,
but I haven't read that book.
Yeah, yeah, yeah, I haven't read that book.
His earlier book was called,
The Evil Creator.
Ah, well, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah.
Yeah.
All right, all right.
Thank you, Richard.