“For there is no respect of persons with God.” (Acts 10; Romans 2; Ephesians 6; Colossians 3; 2 Chronicles 19)
“[God] is not willing that any should perish, but that all should come to repentance.” (2 Peter 3)
The late R.C Sproul, who left this world to go to the city made without hands, said in his fine (and probably one of the very best contemporary books) book on the doctrine of election, “Chosen,” said, once a person comes to understand and believe the doctrine of election s/he will become a flaming proclaimer of this doctrine [paraphrased]. This writer is in full agreement with Sproul. I believe God is behind the passion that some have as flaming proclaimers of this doctrine. One reason for this, we believe, is due to the propagation of this doctrine’s opposite and opposition, the false teaching of Pelageism, free will, easy-believism, free choice, “Say this prayer,” etc. This false doctrine has effected the church for many years and in order to correct this, God raises up flaming proclaimers of Election to bring things into proper balance.
In the (1500’s) fifteen hundreds the false doctrine of man’s free choice, without the initiation of God, to salvation was deemed to be heresy. Today, unfortunately, the opposite is true and Election is deemed heresy by many teachers. If you are like me, you side with those that departed lond ago. In fact, when you look at writings that have existed for hundreds and even a thousand or more years, you find most…almost all accepted the doctrine of election.
Augustine, who single-handedly, humanly speaking, battled Pelageism, and men like the Reformers, the Puritans, and the great British preachers like John Gill, C.H. Spurgeon, J.C Ryle, Martyn Lloyd Jones, Arthur W. Pink, all were dedicated believers and teachers of Election and I could make a case that C.S. Lewis was too before he passed on into Glory.
The opponents of sound doctrine will provide many arguments against the great and very foundational and fundamental doctrine of God’s free choice in salvation. These opponents use the (2) two passages we quoted above. The opponents will point out that God is no respecter of persons. They interpret this to mean God does not choose who will be saved because He does not respect a man’s person. If one approaches this passage, in the spirit of prejudice, it may sound like they are correct but they are very wrong as is their spirit of prejudice and their presupposition. The fact that God has no respect of person argues for His free will to choose whom He wills!!!
When Scripture tells us many times, in both Testaments, that God does not respect persons, He means that their is nothing in man that causes God to elect him to salvation. There exists no redeeming quality within persons that causes God to show any electing grace. it is all based in God’s free choice to love whom He wills.
Another meaning of God not being a respecter of persons is that men, women, children of age, the elderly, the physically handicapped, and persons from all nations, kindreds, tribes, and tongues will perish if they are not among God’s elect. These non-elect will face God’s hatred, indignation, anger, fury, and wrath when they face Him at the judgment. He will tell these persons, “I never knew you…” “Depart from [M]e…all workers of ininquity,” Psalm 5, Luke 13).
I am fully aware that persons among the saved have issue with the thought of children who are of age and young people suffering under God’s hatred and judgement. This is due to a few facts:
1. “Gods ways are not our ways”
2. “God’s thoughts are not our thoughts.”
3. God knows no sin and is Holy and therefore a Hater of sin in every form.
4. This may not be pleasant, but children are sinners from birth…even from conception. An objector may argue, “How can they be sinners when they have not done good or evil?” We will respond with, “Though they may not have committed sin, they are infected with the spiritual disease of sin.”
An analogy: A baby can be born with a chemical addiction or even HIV without ever voluntarily ingesting a drug or doing anything that would contract HIV. Their mother or father passed it to them just as some diseases can be genetically passed down. A baby is born in sin, with a sin nature, and was conceived in sin and is therefore a sinner. Another analogy: I am white, my wife is (1/2) half Korean, out children then are (3/4) White and (1/4) 0ne-quater Korean. The same is true in the spiritual, both mother and father are sinners, (100%) one-hundred percent, therefore, the baby, though they look it, are not innocent but (100%) one-hundred percent sinner. Jonathan Edward said about babies, if they were vipers, they would bite you in the face. Imagine if a baby, that is completely self centered, could act out his/her anger.
Psychologists are slow to label a child/teen a psychopath/sociopath because persons in this age group test widely as psychopathic, though they will not remain so, as their brains develop. A brain is not fully developed until (25) twenty five years old. Psychologist sometimes will suspect a young person to be a psychopath and will use the term, “Budding psychopath.” All children are self centered and are rash, not all perpetrate those acts that a “Budding Psychopath” would such as intentionally harming small animals or other persons. Other signs or traits is pyromania…budding psychopaths like to start fires and they tend to urinate in the bed when they should be well past that stage.
I believe or hope, in the passive sense, that the world is waking up to the danger that children can pose. Consider the past school shootings and those that are surely to happen in the future. Consider Jon Benet Ramsey’s brother, who many suspect to be her killer.
In China there were (2) two elementary school children that committed heinous crimes. In one instance, a young boy decapitated another young boy, as well as dismembering him. The crime was discovered when teachers arrived at his elementary school and found the decapitated head on a pike at the entrance to the school. Through out the day, investigators found the young victims dismembered body parts through out the school. The body parts were hidden as to cause the most shock…remember this was done by a young elementary school boy! By the way, due to China law, this boy is now free as he aged out of “child prison.” You might wonder why a young boy would do this. The answer? The boy idolized the Zodiac Killer of the (60′) Sixties. The boy even sent letters to the police taunting them!!! That is the M.O. the police gave but the theologically minded know it was due to the sin nature and the Zodiac worship was the symptom.
Another child, this time female, slit another girls throat during recess. The young victim asked the teacher if she might go inside to get something and the young murderer followed her in and simply slit her throat and went back outside to play. The reason? The victim said something the child-killer, child-killer in both senses of the word, didn’t appreciate. She too is walking free. Her where-abouts, like the boy’s, is unknown.
Some may argue, ” Yeah, but these are just kids, they didn’t really know what they were doing.” We would suggest that “not knowing what they were doing,” makes them more dangerous!!! Above we mentioned something J. Edwards said about children being young vipers. Did you know that a young viper is more dangerous than an adult viper? The young snake has not yet learned to dispense it’s toxin as an adult snake has. My point is, if “they didn’t know what they were doing,” they are far more dangerous than an adult murderer.
In 2005 there were 2, 225 children sentenced to life in prison without parole. (16%) sixteen percent of these children committed murder between the ages of (13-15) thirteen-fifteen years old!!! Most persons see children as children. Those who understand human nature, IE. Human Depravity see a potential for great danger in anyone who breathes. It is the young that join gangs, it is the young that go unsuspected of potential harm, it is the young that can get away with great crimes, depending on the judicial system. There are children that have killed while still young because they know they will not spend “hard time” in prison. There have been parents that have influenced their young children to kill also because of no hard time in prison.
God does, I believe, take great mercy on very young children that die and some of the mentally ill persons as neither understand anything about right or wrong in any actionable sense. Some believe that babies, lest they be among the elect, will not go to Heaven. This I cannot hold to. It is my position that, as it must have been God’s will or allowance that the unaccountable die, Christ took their sin nature upon Himself when He was made sin upon the Cross.
To the question, from one of our titles, Is God not willing that any should perish? B4 we answer that, let us consider some facts:
1. God is absolutely sovereign in all things or He is not sovereign at all, (Psalms 115; 135).
2. God hardens the heart of certain persons so they will NOT believe or will not make a good choice, Pharoah in Exodus, The Caananites, and others (John 12:38-41).
3. Scriptures are clear, as God loves some, He hates others.
To answer the question of God’s will in the condemnation of some and the salvation of others, let me quote the whole verse from 2 Peter 3:9, “The Lord is not slack concerning [H]is promise, as some men count slackness; but is longsuffering to us-ward, not willing that any should perish, but that all should come to repentance.” What word would you say is the most important in terms of arguing for election or rather sound doctrine? Hint, It’s emboldened. “Us-ward” is the key word for our purposes. Let’s look at that verse again and this time I’m going to insert the “us” from “us-ward” into a couple of spots for clarification. “…but is longsuffering to us-ward, not willing that any [of us] should perish, but that all [of us] should come to repentance.” As to repentance, Scripture teaches us that repentance, like faith, is a gift from God. No man has the intrinsic ability or desire to repent or to “put faith in Christ” as man has no faith, his spirit being “dead in trespasses and sin.”
We understand that it is hard to accept the truth concerning this doctrine regarding God not respecting a man’s person and all that the doctrine entails. We are familiar with the human feelings and human standards that are used when evaluating a person. We see the sweet little old lady or the nice and respectful kid and think, “How could God send them to Hell?”
Sweetness or respect or nice or friendly are not used in God’s Standard of Judgement. The One and Only Standard A Holy God uses is whether a person is “in Christ” or outside of Christ. An analogy: During the great flood or deluge, another word for flood, it mattered not if one was nice, friendly, or good by human standards; you were either in the ark or you weren’t. The same is true today, you are either in Christ or you are not and that is God’s only standard and Who do you think places you in Christ? Who was it that called the animals and Noah and his family into the ark? Who was it that closed the great door of the ark? It was and is and will always and Only be God.
Some simplistic questions one might ask themselves regarding the doctrine of election and whether or not God loves every person.
1. Since God is sovereign and His will is always done wouldn’t every person then be saved… if that was His will?
2. If Christ died for everyone, taking their sins upon Himself, would not every one be saved. I am familiar with the argument against this point but it fails.
3. Would God dispatch those He loves into a place of eternal torment, eternal suffering, where there is eternal weeping and eternal gnashing of teeth from eternal human hatred for God? Yes, even in Hell persons, young and old, will hate and curse and blame God for their torments. Man will not repent or desire to repent even then…this is how deep human depravity goes.
Godspeed.
He lighteth every man that cometh into the world
LikeLike