Recently I shared (in comments) the information that my grandfather died (2007 -- not recently) rejecting Christ. A "brother in Christ" chose that opportunity of my revisiting that grief to tell me that God was a monster for failing to save my grandfather (which the "brother" took to mean that that God didn't exist). Now, who that was is irrelevant. The thought process is critical. You see, either we get to be the ones who determine the acceptable goodness and characteristics of God ... or He does. Unfortunately, the SOP -- the normal mode of operations for humans -- is the former, and it is a grave error.
Nebuchadnezzar, having endured a temporal judgment from God for his own arrogance, declared, "All the inhabitants of the earth are accounted as nothing, but He does according to His will in the host of heaven and among the inhabitants of earth; and no one can ward off His hand or say to Him, 'What have You done?'" (Dan 4:35). In our arrogance, of course, we correct Nebuchadnezzar. "Nope! We can!" When Paul wrote, "What if God, although willing to demonstrate His wrath and to make His power known, endured with much patience vessels of wrath prepared for destruction?" (Rom 9:22), he didn't find it questionable that God would will to demonstrate His wrath and make His power known on vessels of wrath prepared for destruction. That was a given. That was expected. The surprise was the twist in which God would show mercy. We've figured out today that Paul was wrong and God was wrong and the only way God could be good is if He saved everyone (à la Rob Bell's Love Wins) or, at least, tried ... although clearly if God tried and failed, that would make Him at the very least a failure. This is because we get to decide if God is good or not, not His Word. God declares, "That men may know from the rising to the setting of the sun that there is no one besides Me. I am YHWH, and there is no other, the One forming light and creating darkness, causing well-being and creating calamity; I am YHWH who does all these" (Isa 45:6-7). We say, "Nope!" God said, "You thought that I was just like you" (Psa 50:21) and He is not, and we say, "Not the god I know." Oh, and that pesky doctrine of "election"? That's all over the Bible, from Abraham and the chosen people all the way into the New Testament. You have to work hard to avoid it. But humans do just that ... to their own peril.
One of the preeminent biblical characteristics of God is justice. God will not allow sin to go unpunished (Prov 11:21; Rom 6:7). From the start that meant death (Gen 2:16-17; Rom 6:23). Today's world demands a recount, as it were. God cannot be good if He punishes sin in the way Scripture says He will. God cannot be righteous if He doesn't at least try to save everyone. Scripture claims that He was willing to demonstrate His wrath and make His power known and the world cries, "No!!" Ironically, the world's demand seems to be -- instead of "justice for all" -- "mercy for all!" As a result, the world blasphemes God for His justice and His character, and that is a dangerous place to stand. No one can stop God from doing what God will do or decry His plans and actions. You can't reject the God revealed in the Bible -- "I don't like that god" -- and consider yourself a believer in biblical terms. If you reject the things that Jesus said (like "The poor you will always have with you" (John 12:8) or "I came to give my life a ransom for many" (Mark 10:45), etc.) because they don't fit with your view, you can't be considered a Christ-follower. It is untenable that a genuine Christian would stand there in the face of all that Scripture says on who God is and who Jesus is. So I rest in the Being that Scripture defines as "God" and pray for the repentance and salvation of all who try to deface His glory.
6 comments:
“What’s wrong with God?” How about “what’s wrong with you people?!” (my favorite R.C. Sproul quote). People who fashion God according to their own imaginations and in contrast to biblical revelation are committing idolatry. God forbid I tell God how to be God!
As I would summarize the exchange, you shared that your grandfather expressed comprehension of the premise of the Gospel of grace and the free gift of salvation apart from his own efforts, and he rejected that truth. To me, that is the relevant point: he could have received the gift of salvation but did not. Even in view of “election” and the role of God’s calling in the New Birth event, your grandfather still (apparently) made the crucial decision in his heart--as each of us does one way or the other. We all have loved ones facing a Christless eternity; it is sad and painful (from our perspective), but it is absolutely just and right (from God’s perspective). It seems that we allow human sentiment to cloud our reasoning on this issue more than any other.
I am unclear about something you wrote: Would it be the view of this “brother of Christ” that your grandfather was actually spared hell--in spite of rejecting salvation--because God is not actually the monster you depicted Him to be but will save everyone? If so, was your grandfather saved against his wishes?? If he did not want Christ, it does not strike me as just and right that he receive Him just the same.
In our arrogance, we diminish the holiness of God. We forget that the initial punishment for disobedience was death. But since Adam and Eve didn't die, we try to dance around it and say it was only spiritual death (as if that's better than physical death). What we fail to see is that it was mercy on God's behalf that forestalled His hand in killing Adam and Eve and everyone between then and now. We argue that God is obligated to save more people. But our actual position should be, "why does God save anyone?" We are all rebels against the Most High. Even in our world, traitors against the leadership are executed. We've done far worse than any traitor against their government, we are traitors against the only Being that deserves absolute fealty.
Lorna, not sure how this "brother in Christ" would characterize his own view. His objection is to the biblical and repeated principle of Election whereby God chooses whom He will save.
Just to clarify: I was thinking beyond accepting/rejecting Election to, more basically, the consequences of accepting/rejecting Christ. If someone willfully rejects the free gift of salvation (after having understood it, as your grandfather apparently did), should God grant him/her Heaven just the same? (It would be merciful of Him to do so, but not right and just.) I don’t follow that commenter’s assertion that God can be faulted for failing to save your grandfather, who consciously rejected the opportunity to receive Christ. How is God a “monster” for giving those who reject Christ exactly what they desire--a Christless existence?
The idea would be that a God who sends someone to Hell because He didn't choose them (as if Him not choosing them is the cause) or because they didn't understand (as if not understanding is the cause) would be an unjust God. But, setting aside this particular person with this particular view, in general it can only be assumed that 1) if God intended for everyone to be saved and 2) not everyone is, then God failed.
Understood. But if God sends someone to Hell because THEY didn’t choose HIM, He would not be an unjust God. (That’s my point above, not to belabor it.) Why would God intend for everyone to be saved, if most of them don’t even want Him? It just strikes me that that “brother in Christ” is not thinking logically. (But then, I did not see his comment, so I can’t know for sure.)
Anyway, thanks for following along with me as far as you did! :)
Post a Comment