Objections to God's Sovereignty
Answered
by Arthur W. Pink
One of the most popular beliefs of the day is that God loves everybody, and the very fact that it is so popular with all classes ought to be enough to arouse the suspicious of those who are subject to the Word of Truth. God's love toward all His creatures is the fundamental and favorite tenet of Universalists, Unitarians, Theosophists, Christian Scientists, Spiritualists, Russellites, etc. No matter how a man may live -- in open defiance of Heaven, with no concern whatever for his soul's eternal interests, still less for God's glory, dying, perhaps with an oath on his lips -- notwithstanding, God loves him, we are told. So widely has this dogma been proclaimed, and so comforting is it to the heart which is at enmity with God, we have little hope of convincing many of their error. That God loves everybody, is, we may say, quite a modern belief. The writings of the church fathers, the Reformers or the Puritans will (we believe) be searched in vain for any such concept. Perhaps the late D.L. Moody -- Captivated by Drummond's "The Greatest Thing in the World" -- did more than anyone else in the last century to popularize this concept.
It has been customary to say God loves the sinner though He
hates his sin. But that is a meaningless distinction. What is there in a sinner
but sin? Is it not true that his "whole head is sick" and his "whole heart
faint," and that "from the sole of the foot even unto the head there is no
soundness" in him? (Isa. 1:5,6) Is it true that God loves the one who is
despising and rejecting His blessed Son? God is Light as well as Love, and
therefore His love must be a holy love. To tell the Christ-rejector that God
loves him is to cauterize his conscience as well as to afford him a sense of
security in his sins. The fact is, the love of God is a truth for the saints
only, and to present it to the enemies of God is to take the children's bread
and cast it to the dogs. With the exception of John 3:16, not once in the four
Gospels do we read of the Lord Jesus, the perfect Teacher, telling sinners that
God loves them! In the book of Acts, which records the evangelistic labors and
messages of the apostles, God's love is never referred to at all! But when we
come to the Epistles, which are addressed to the saints, we have a full
presentation of this precious truth -- God's love for His own. Let us seek to
rightly divide the Word of God and then we shall not be found taking truths
which are addressed to believers and mis-applying them to unbelievers. That
which sinners need to have brought before them is the ineffable holiness, the
exacting wrath of God. Risking the danger of being misunderstood let us say --
and we wish we could say it to every evangelist and preacher in the country --
there is far too much presenting of Christ to sinners today (by those sound in
the faith), and far too little showing sinners their need of Christ, i.e., their
absolutely ruined and lost condition, their imminent and awful danger of
suffering the wrath to come, the fearful guilt resting upon them in the sight of
God: to present Christ to those who have never been shown their need of Him,
seems to us to be guilty of casting pearls before swine.
If it be true that God loves every member of the human
family, then why did our Lord tell His disciples "He that hath My commandments,
and keepeth them, he it is that loveth Me: and he that loveth Me shall be loved
of My Father ... If a man love Me, he will keep My words: and My Father will
love him." (John 14:21,23)? Why say "he that loveth Me shall be loved of My
Father"? If the Father loves everybody? The same limitation is found in Prov.
8:17: "I love tem that love Me." Again we read, "Thou hatest all workers of
iniquity" -- not merely the works of iniquity. Here then is a flat repudiation
of present teaching that, God hates sin but loves the sinner; Scripture says,
"Thous hatest all workers of iniquity" (Psa. 5:5)! "God is angry with the wicked
every day." (Psa. 7:11) "He that believeth not the Son shall not see life, but
the wrath of God" -- not "shall abide," but even now -- "abideth on him." (John
3:36) Can God "love" the one on whom His "wrath" abides? Again, is it not
evident that the words, "The love of God which is in Christ Jesus" (Rom. 8:39)
marks a limitation, both in the sphere and objects of His love? Again, is it not
plain from the words "Jacob have I loved, but Esau have I hated" (Rom. 9:13)
that God does not love everybody? Again, it is written, "For whom the Lord
loveth He chasteneth, and scourgeth every son whom He receiveth." (Heb. 12:6)
Does not this verse teach that God's love is restricted to the members of His
own family? If He loves all men without exception, then the distinction and
limitation here mentioned is quite meaningless. Finally, we would ask, Is it
conceivable that God will love the damned in the Lake of Fire? Yet, if He loves
them now He will do so then, seeing that His love knows no change -- He is
"without variableness or shadow of turning"!
Turning now to John 3:16, it should be evident from the
passages just quoted that this verse will not bear the construction usually put
upon it, "God so loved the world." Many suppose that this means the entire human
race. But "the entire human race" includes all mankind from Adam till the close
of earth's history; it reaches backward as well as forward! Consider, then, the
history of mankind before Christ was born. Unnumbered millions lived and died
before the Savior came to the earth, lived here "having no hope and without God
in the world," and therefore passed out into an eternity of woe. If God "loved"
them, where is the slightest proof thereof? Scripture declares "Who (God) in
times past (from the tower of Babel till after Pentecost) suffered all nations
to walk in their own ways." (Acts 14:16) Scripture declaires that "And even as
they did not like to retain God in their knowledge, God gave them over to a
reprobate mind, to do those things which are not convenient." (Rom. 1:28) To
Israel God said, "You only have I known of all the families of the earth." (Amos
3:2) In view of these plain passages who will be so foolish as to insist that
God in the past loved all mankind! The same applies with equal force to the
future. Read through the book of Revelation, noting especialy chapters 8 to 19,
where we have described the judgments which will be poured out from Heaven on
this earth. Read of the fearful woes, the firghtful plagues, the vials of God's
wrath, which shall be emptied on the wicked. Finally, read the twentieth chapter
of Revelation, the great white throne judgment, and see if you can discover
there the slightest trace of love.
But the objector comes back to John 3:16 and says, "World
means world." True, but we have shown that "the world" does not mean the whole
human family. The fact is that "the world" is used in a general way. When the
brethren of Christ said "Show thyself to the world" (John 7:4), did they mean
"Shew Thyself to all mankind"? When the Pharisees said "Behold, the world is
gone after Him" (John 12:19), did they mean that "all the human family" were
flocking after Him? When the apostle wrote, "Your faith is spoken of throughout
the whole world" (Rom. 1:8), did he mean that the faith of the saints at Rome
was the subject of conversation by every man, woman, and child on earth? When
Rev. 13:3 informs us that "all the world wondered after the beast," are we to
understand that there will be no exceptions? These, and other passages which
might be quoted, show that the term "the world" often has a relative rather than
an absolute force.
Now the first thing to note in connection with John 3:16 is
that our Lord was there speaking to Nicodemis, a man who believed that God's
mercies were confined to his own nation. Christ there announced that God's love
in giving His Son had a larger object in view, that it flowed beyond the
boundary of Palestine, reaching out to "regions beyond." In other words, this
was Christ's announcement that God had a purpose of grace toward Gentiles as
well as Jews. "God so loved the world," then, signifies God's love is
international in its scope. But does this mean that God loves every individual
among the Gentiles? Not necessarily, for as we have seen, the term "world" is
general rather than specific, relative rather than absolute. The term "world" in
itself is not conclusive. To ascertain who are the objects of God's love, other
passages where His love is mentioned must be consulted.
In 2 Peter 2:5 we read of "the world of the ungodly." If
then, there is a world of the ungodly, there must also be a world of the godly.
It is the latter who are in view in the passages we shall now briefly consider.
"For the bread of God is He which cometh down from heaven, and giveth life unto
the world." (John 6:33) Now mark it well, Christ did not say, "offereth life
unto the world," but "giveth." What is the difference between the two terms?
This: a thing which is "offered" may be refused, but a thing "given,"
necessarily implies its acceptance. If it is not accepted, it si not "given," it
is simply proffered. Here, then, is a Scripture that positively states Christ
giveth life (spiritual, eternal life) "unto the world." Now He does not give
eternal life the the "world of the ungodly" for they will not have it, they do
not want it. Hence, we are obliged to understand the reference in John 6:33 as
being to "the world of the godly," i.e., God's own people.
One more: In 2 Cor. 5:19 we read, "To wit that God was in
Christ, reconciling the world unto Himself." What is meant by this is clearly
defined in the words immediately following, "not imputing their trespasses unto
them." Here again "the world" cannot mean "the world of the ungodly," for their
"trespasses" are "imputed" to them, as the judgment of the Great White Throne
will yet show. But 2 Cor. 5:19 plainly teaches there is a "world" which is
"reconciled," reconciled unto God because their trespasses are not reckoned to
their account, having been borne by their Substitute. Who then are they? Only
one answer is fairly possible -- the world of God's people!
In life manner, the "world" in John 3:16 must, in the final
analysis refer to the world of God's people. Must, we say, for there is no other
alternative solution. It cannot mean the whole human race, for one-half of the
race was already in hell when Christ came to earth. It is unfair to insist that
it means every human being now living, for every other passage in the New
Testament where God's love is mentioned, limits it to His own people -- search
and see! The objects of God's love in John 3:16 are precisely the same as the
objects of Christ's love in John 13:1: "Now before the Feast of the Passover,
when Jesus knew that His time was come, that He should depart out of this world
unto the Father, having loved His own which were in the world. He loved them
unto the end." We may admit that our interprestation of John 3:16 is no novel
one invented by us, but one almost uniformly given by the Reformers and
Puritans, and many others since then.
It is strange, yet it is true, that many who acknowledge
the sovereign rule of God over material things will cavil and quibble when we
insist that God is also sovereign in the spiritual realm. But their quarrel is
with God and not with us. We have given Scripture in support of everything
advanced in these pages, and if that will not satisfy our readers, it is idle
for us to seek to convince them. What we write now is designed for those who do
bow to the authority of Holy Writ, and for their benefit we propose to examine
several other Scriptures which have purposely been held for this
chapter.
Perhaps the one passage which has presented the greatest
difficulty to those who have seen that passage after passage in Holy Writ
plainly teaches the election of a limited number unto salvation, is 2 Peter 3:9:
"Not willing that any should perish, but that all should come to
repentence."
The first thing to be said upon the above passage is that,
like all other Scripture, it must be understood and interpreted in the light of
its context. What we have quoted in the preceding paragraph is only part of the
verse, and the last part of it at that! Surely it must be allowed by all that
the first half of the verse needs to be taken into consideration. In order to
establish what these words are supposed by many to mean, viz., that the words
"any" and "all" are to be received without any qualification, it must be shown
that the context is referring to the whole human race! If this cannot be shown,
if there is no premise to justfy this, then the conclusion also must be
unwarranted. Let us then ponder the first part of the verse.
"The Lord is not slack concerning his promise."
Note "promise" in the singular number, not "promises." What
promise is in view? The promise of salvation? Where, in all Scripture, has God
ever promised to save the whole human race! Where indeed? No, the "promise" here
referred to, is not about salvation. What then is it? The context tells
us.
"Knowing this, first, that there shall come in the last
days scoffers, walking after their own lusts, and saying, Where is the promise
of His coming?" (vv. 3,4) The context then refers to God's promise to send back
His beloved Son. But many long centuries have passed and this promise has not
yet been fulfilled. True, but long as the delay may seem to us, the interval is
short in the reckoning of God. As the proof of this we are reminded, "But,
beloved, be not ignorant of this one thing, that one day is with the Lord as a
thousand years, and a thousant years as one day." (v. 8) In God's reckoning of
time, less than two days have yet passed since He promised to send back
Christ.
But more, the delay in the Father's sending back His
beloved Son is not only due to no "slackness" on His part, but it is also
occasioned by His "longsuffering." His longsuffering to whom? The verse we are
now considering tells us: "but is longsuffering to usward." And who are the
"usward"? -- the human race, or God's own people? In the light of the context
this is not an open question upon which each of us is free to form an opinion.
The Holy Spirit has defined it. The opening verse of the chapter says, "This
second Epistle, beloved, I now write unto you." And again, the verse immediately
preceding declares, "But, beloved, be not ignorant of this one thing," etc. (v.
8) The "usward" then are the "beloved" of God. They to whom his Epistle is
addressed are "them that have obtained (not "exercised," but "obtained" as God's
sovereign gift) like precious faith with us through the righteousness of God and
our Savior Jesus Christ." (2 Peter 1:11) Therefore we say there is no room for a
doubt, a quibble or an argument -- the "usward" are the elect of God.
Let us now quote the verse as a whole: "The Lord is not
slack concerning His promise, as some men count slackness; but is long-suffering
to usward, not willing that any should perish, but that all should come to
repentence." Could anything be clearer? The "any" that God is not willing should
perish are the "usward" to who God is "longsuffering," the "beloved" of the
previous verses. 2 Peter 3:9 means, then, that God will not send back His Son
until "the fulness of the Gentiles be come in." (Rom. 11:25) God will not send
back Christ till that "people" whom He is now "taking out of the Gentiles" (Acts
15:14) are gathered in. God will not send back His Son till the Body of Christ
is complete, and that will not be till the ones whom He has elected to be saved
in this dispensation shall have been brought to Him. Thank God for His
"longsuffering to usward." Had Christ come back twenty years ago the writer had
been left behind to perish in his sins. But that could not be, so God graciously
delayed the Second Coming. For the same reason He is still delaying His advent.
His decreed purpose is that all His elect will come to repentence, and repent
they shall. The present interval of grace will not end until the last of the
"other sheep" of John 10:16 are safely folded -- then will Christ
return.
In expounding the sovereignty of God the Spirit in
Salvation we have shown that His power is irresistible, that, by His gracious
operations upon; and within them He "compels" God's elect to come to Christ. The
sovereignty of the Holy Spirit is set forth not only in John 3:8 where we are
told "The wind bloweth where it pleaseth ... so is every one that is born of the
Spirit," but is affirmed in other passages as well. In 1 Cor. 12:11 we read,
"But all these worketh that one and the selfsame Spirit, dividing to every man
severally as He will." And again, we read in Acts 16:6,7: "Now when they had
gone throughout Phrygia and the region of Galatia, and were forbidden of the
Holy Spirit to preach the Word in Asia. After they were come to Mysia, they
assayed to go to Bithynia: but the Spirit suffered them not." Thus we see how
the Holy Spirit interposes His imperial will in opposition to the determination
of the apostles.
But, it is objected against the assertion that the will and
power of the Holy Spirit are irresistible, that there are two passages, one in
the Old Testament and the other in the New, which appear to militate against
such a conclusion. God said of old "My Spirit shall not always strive with man"
(Gen. 6:3), and to the Jews Stephen declared, "Ye stiffnecked and uncircumcised
in heart and ears, ye do always resist the Holy Spirit: as your fathers did, so
do ye. Which of the prophets have not your fathers persecuted?" (Acts 7:51,52)
If then the Jews "resisted" the Holy Spirit, how can we say His power is
irresistible? The answer is found in Neh. 9:30, "Many years didst thou forbear
them, and testifiedst against them by Thy Spirit, in Thy prophets: yet would
they not give ear." It was the external operations of the Spirit which Israel
"resisted." It was the Spirit speaking by and through the prophets to which they
"would not give ear." It was not anything which the Holy Spirit wrought in them
that they "resisted" but the motives presented to them by the inspired messages
of the prophets. Perhaps it will help the reader to catch our thought better if
we compare Matt. 11:20-24: "Then began He to upbraid the cities wherein most of
His mighty works were done, because they repented not. Woe unto thee Chorazin,"
etc. Our Lord here pronounces woe upon these cities for their failure to repent
becasue of the "mighty works" (miracles) which He had done in their sight, and
not becasue of any internal operations of His grace! The same is true of Gen.
6:3. By comparing 1 Peter 3:18-20 it will be seen that it was by and through
Noah that God's Spirit "strove" with the antediluvians. the distinction noted
above was ably summarized by Andrew Fuller (another writer long deceased from
whom our moderns might learn much) thus: "There are two kinds of influences by
which God works on the minds of men. First, that which is common, and which is
effected by the ordinary use of motives presented to the mind for consideration:
Secondly, that which is special and supernatural. The one contains nothing
mysterious, anymore than the influence of our words and actions on each other;
the other is such a mystery that we know nothing of it but by its effects. The
former ought to be effectual; the latter is so." The work of the Holy Spirit
upon or towards men is always "resisted" by them; His work within is always
successful. What saith the Scriptures? This: "He which hath begun a good work IN
you, will finish it." (Phil. 1:6)
The next question to be considered is: Why preach the
Gospel to every creature? If God the Father has predestined only a limited
number to be saved, if God the Son died to effect the salvation of only those
given to Him by the Father, and if God the Spirit is seeking to quicken none
save God's elect, then what is the use of giving the Gospel to the world at
large, and where is the propriety of telling sinners that "Whosoever believeth
in Christ shall not perish but have everlasting life"?
First, it is of great importance that we should be clear
upon the nature of the Gospel itself. The Gospel is God's good news concerning
Christ and not concerning sinners: "Paul, a servant of Jesus Christ, called to
be an apostle, separated unto the Gospel of God ... concerning His Son, Jesus
Christ our Lord." (Rom. 1:1,3) God would have proclaimed far and wide the
amazing fact that His own blessed Son "became obedient unto death, even the
death of the cross." A universal testimony must be borne to the matchless worth
of the person and work of Christ. Note the word "witness" in Matt. 24:14. The
Gospel is God's "witness" unto the perfections of His Son. Mark the words of the
apostle: "For we are unto God a sweet savor of Christ, them that are saved, and
in them that perish"! (2 Cor. 2:15)
Concerning the character and contents of the Gospel, the
utmost confusion prevails today. The Gospel is not an "offer" to be bandied
around by evangelical peddlers. The Gospel is no mere invitation, but a
proclamation concerning Christ; true whether men believe it or not. No man is
asked to believe that Christ died for him in particular. The Gospel, in brief,
is this: Christ died for sinners, you are a sinner, believe in Christ, and you
shall be saved. In the Gospel, God simply announced the terms which men may be
saved (namely, repentence and faith) and, indiscriminately, all are commanded to
fulfill them.
Second, repentence and remission of sins are to be preached
in the name of the Lord Jesus "unto all the nations" (Luke 24:47), because God's
elect are "scattered abroad" (John 11:52) among all nations, and it is by the
preaching and hearing of the Gospel that they are called out of the world. The
Gospel is the means which God uses in the saving of His own chosen ones. By
nature God's elect are children of wrath "even as others"; they are lost sinners
needing a Savior, and apart from Christ there is no solution for them. Hence,
the Gospel must be believed by them before they can rejoice in the knowledge of
sins forgiven. The Gospel is God's winnowing: it separates the chaff from the
wheat, and gathers the latter into His garner.
Third, it is to be noted that God has other purposes in the
preaching of the Gospel than the salvation of His own elect. The world exists
for the elect's sake yet others have the benefit of it. So the Word is preached
for the elect's sake yet others have the benefit of an external call. The sun
shines though blind men see it not. The rain falls upon rocky mountains and
waste deserts as well as on the fruitful valleys; so also, God suffers the
Gospel to fall on the ears of the non-elect. The power of the Gospel is one of
God's agencies for holding in check the wickedness of the world. Many who are
never saved by it are reformed, their lusts are bridled, and they are restrained
from becoming worse. Moreover, the preaching of the Gospel to the non-elect is
made an admirable test of their characters. It exhibits the inveteracy of their
sin; it demonstrates that their hearts are enmity against God; it justified the
declaration of Christ that "men loved darkness rather than light, because their
deeds were evil." (John 3:19)
Finally, it is sufficient for us to know that we are bidden
to preach the Gospel to every creature. It is not for us to reason about the
consistency between this and the fact that "few are chosen." It is for us to
obey. It is a simple matter to ask questions relating to the ways of God which
no finite mind can fully fathom. We, too, might turn and remind the objector
that our Lord declared, "Verily, I say unto you, All sins shall be forgiven unto
the sons of men, and blasphemies wherewith soever they shall blaspheme. But he
that shall blaspheme against the Holy Spirit hath never forgiveness" (Mark
3:28,29), and there can be no doubt whatever but that certain of the Jews were
guilty of this very sin (see Matt. 12:24, etc.) and hence their destruction was
inevitable. Yet, notwithstanding, scarcely two months later, He commanded His
disciples to preach the Gospel to every creature. When the objector can show us
the consistency of these two things -- the fact that certain of the Jews had
committed the sin for which there is never forgiveness, and the fact that to
them the Gospel was to be preached -- we will undertake to furnish a more
safisfactory solution than the one given above to the harmony between a
universal proclamation of the Gospel and a limitation of its saving power to
those only that God has predestined to be conformed to the image of His
Son.
Once more, we say, it is not for us to reason about the
Gospel; it is our business to preach it. When God ordered Abraham to offer up
his son as a burnt offering, he might have objected that this command was
inconsistent with His promise, "In Isaac shall thy seed be called." But instead
of arguing be obeyed, and left God to harmonize His promise and His precept.
Jeremiah might have argued that God had bade him to do that which was altogether
unreasonable when He said, "Therefore thou shalt speak all these words unto
them; but they will not hearken to thee; thou shalt also call unto them; but
they will not answer thee" (Jer. 7:27), but instead, the prophet obeyed. Ezekiel
too, might have complained that the Lord was asking of him a hard thing when He
said, "Son of man, get thee unto the house of Israel, and speak with my words
unto them. For thou art not sent to a people of a strange speech and of an hard
language, but to the house of Israel; Not to many people of a strange speech and
of a hard language, whose words thou canst not understand. Surely, had I sent
thee to them, they would have hearkened unto thee. But the house of Israel will
not hearken unto thee; for they will not hearken unto me; for all the house of
Israel are impudent and hard-hearted." (Ezek. 3:4-7)
"But, O my soul, if truth so bright
Should dazzle and confound thy sight,
Yet, still His written Word obey,
And wait the great decision day." -- Watts
It has been well said, "The Gospel has lost none of its
ancient power. It is, as much today as when it was first preached, 'the power of
God unto salvation.' It needs no pity, no help, and no handmaid. It can overcome
all obstacles, and break down all barriers. No human device need be tried to
prepare the sinner to receive it, for if God has sent it no power can hinder it;
and if He has not sent it, no power can make it effectual." -- (Dr.
Bullinger)