In my Bible time this morning I came across a passage that prompted a question in my mind that I want to pose to my Calvinist friends. It's a question I have not ever seen addressed in any debate I have ever watched or read on the topic of Calvinism, but surely someone has an answer for it. (I am assuming I just haven't come across this yet.)
For the record, the Calvinists that I know personally - my Calvinist brothers and sisters - tend to be among the most intelligent, Biblically literate, and godly people I have come across in my lifetime. Nevertheless, I have never been persuaded of key aspects of Calvinist theology, among them unconditional election, the idea that, from before time began, God chose some individuals to be saved and some not to be saved based on nothing more than His sovereign will.
This concept is stated succinctly in one of the key verses Calvinists often point to, Ephesians 1:4 - "For he chose us in him before the creation of the world to be holy and blameless in his sight."
The word "chose" here is the Greek word "exelexato", meaning to choose, elect, or select.
Among other places, this same Greek word is found in John 15:16 where Jesus says, "You did not choose me but I chose you, and appointed you so that you might go and bear fruit - fruit that will last - and so that whatever you ask in my name the Father will give you."
But this morning my attention and curiosity was caught by another use of this same word, this time in the book of James. The general context is different from Ephesians certainly: James is warning believers not to favor rich people over the poor. But note how the immediate context bears certain similarities:
James 2:5 - "Listen, my dear brothers and sisters: Has not God chosen those who are poor in the eyes of the world to be rich in faith and to inherit the kingdom he promised those who love him?"
So this raises my question: Doesn't a Calvinist have to give God's "choosing" in James 2:5 the same level of literal interpretation as God's "choosing" in Ephesians 1:4?
But I have never heard anyone - Calvinist or not - argue that the materially poor of the world have all been chosen by God according to his sovereign will to receive automatically the gift of faith and, therefore, salvation.
But why not? James says God has chosen the poor to be "rich in faith" and to "inherit the kingdom he promised", right?
My question is sincere and not meant as a "gotcha": Any Calvinists care to educate me on how and why we should differentiate between these two "choosings"?
I'm not a Calvinist but I think Calvinists would probably say this passage teaches that the poor have a special place in God's economy of salvation. In general, God tends to elect those who come from humbler backgrounds to salvation. (cf. Matt 19:24-26; 1 Cor. 1:26-28)
ReplyDeleteThe question could be turned around as well: What does God's choosing mean to an Arminian? Does it simply mean ratifying what God already knew man would choose, or does it mean something deeper?
I tend to see God's choosing as God setting the board up in such a way that it favors those who are humble, poor, and unremarkable without completely overriding human freedom (some poor people reject the grace of God and some rich people humble themselves but Jesus said that in general, it is more difficult for the rich).
I have no doubt you are right in what you suppose a Calvinist would say about the James passage, but my question would still remain - why should James' words be read rather loosely then while Ephesians (and Romans) is a cornerstone to a sweeping theological viewpoint?
ReplyDeleteI don't see the concept of "choosing" in Romans or Ephesians (or James) as necessarily regarding individual salvation. It seems to me that Paul and James are both trying to convince folks (or reassure folks) that "these too are chosen by God" - the Gentiles for Paul and the poor for James.
To this day, we look at people who are wealthy as being "blessed by God" - I think James is telling his audience to consider two things carefully: the poor are also chosen and the rich are often SOBs to you, so don't be showing favoritism to the rich.
In short, my take on Calvinism is this: it seems to me that Paul in Romans is explaining this incredible ongoing battle that he fought throughout his missionary career about God's plan to graft Gentiles into his salvation plan - and how it was always God's plan (predestined). And the Calvinists come along and make it all about individual salvation for some reason.
Hmmm...I see a difference between Ephesians 1:4 and the passage in James in that the referent in Ephesians is a specific group of people ("us", i.e. Christians), all of whom have faith, whereas the referent in James is a more general group ("those who are poor in the eyes of the world"), not all of whom have faith. I think, though, that I agree in that one could argue that in Ephesians, election is not individual election but rather election in Christ. In the OT, God doesn't choose individual Israelites; he chooses Abraham, the physical head of that people. His natural descendants and even Gentiles who became part of his "body" became elect in him. In the NT, perhaps God doesn't choose individual Christians; he chooses Christ, the spiritual head of that people. Whoever becomes part of his body by faith becomes elect in him. The main difference is that because the connection to Christ is by faith rather than natural descent, there are no second-class citizens. Jew and Gentile are on equal footing.
Delete