From Dr. James R. White
So about thirty six years ago I wrote, and published, this little piece. It is in the back of my first full length book on the doctrines of grace, which came out, as I recall, in 1990. You will note…the passage of three and a half decades has not changed the questions, and the objections. But, I will have to say, social media has made it more likely that the level of conversation today is significantly lower than it was back then.
The Sovereign Grace of God: A Biblical Study of the Doctrines of Calvinism
Appendix C
Answers to a Few Common Objections
In this appendix we will provide short, basic answers to some of the most common objections that are raised against the Reformed perspective. The listing of questions is purposefully short, as are the answers. I do not believe that these answers will convince anyone who is looking for reasons not to believe. But they will provide help for those seeking a consistent understanding of the issues.
Q. 2 Peter 3:9 indicates that God does not want anyone to perish. Doesn’t this disprove the doctrine of election?
A. We must always apply sound rules of exegesis to the Scriptures. Peter accepted the Old Testament’s teaching about the nature of God. He knew Psalm 135:6 and Psalm 115:3, and the truth that whatever God pleases, He does. And, since we have already seen that repentance is the gift of God, could He not give repentance to anyone He chooses? Finally, the context of the passage must be consulted. 2 Peter is written to the elect, as 2 Peter 1:1 shows. In chapter 3, Peter is explaining the delay of the parousia, that is, the coming of Christ. He explains that Christ will indeed return, and that the delay is in order that God may gather His people. “He is patient with you,” Peter writes to God’s people, “not wanting anyone to perish, but everyone to come to repentance.” The “everyone” is in reference to all of God’s elect. The only reason that you are reading this book nearly 2,000 years later is because God has been patient, giving the world all this time, so that all of God’s elect could be gathered in.
Q. 1 Timothy 2:4 says that God wants all men to be saved and to come to a knowledge of the truth. Doesn’t this disprove the concept of election?
A. Again, the entire context of Scripture, as well as of the passage, must be considered. Aside from all the passages that clearly indicate God’s ability to save all men, and bring all men to a knowledge of the truth if He so desired, we again note the context of the passage. 1 Timothy 2:5 speaks of the mediatorship of Jesus Christ, and, as we saw in our examination of the atonement and intercession of Christ, this work is undertaken in behalf of God’s people. Therefore, the term “men” in verse 5 is limited to the elect of God. As John Owen noted in this regard,— What then, I pray? what will be concluded hence? Cannot Christ be a mediator between God and men, but he must be a mediator for all men? Are not the elect men? do not the children partake of flesh and blood? doth not his church consist of men? What reason is there to assert, out of an indefinite proposition, a universal conclusion? Because Christ was a mediator for men (which were true had he been so only for his apostles), shall we conclude therefore he was so for all men73? The same is to be said for verse 6, where the ransom sacrifice of Christ is mentioned. We have seen that this sacrifice was made in behalf of the people of God, not for each and every individual. Therefore, if verses five and six specifically mention the work of Christ in behalf of the elect, verse four does as well. This fits consistently with the entire teaching of Scripture. “All men” here is the same “all” that are given by the Father to the Son in John 6:37.
Q. Doesn’t the Bible exhort “whosoever will” to come?
A. Yes, it does. The Gospel message is addressed to all men. However, just who “wills” to come? We know that the natural man does not understand the things of the Spirit of God (1 Corinthians 2:14) and that no man seeks after God (Romans 3:11). We also know that the Lord Jesus said that no man is able to come to Him unless the Father draws him. So, outside of God’s initial move in regeneration, no man will “will” to come to Christ.
Q. If God has already chosen who will be saved, why share the gospel, since they will be saved whether we are involved in evangelism or not?
A. This is probably the most common objection that is voiced against the doctrine of election. There is a clear answer, but before getting to that, we should note that the question is not a proper one; that is, our questions should be based upon the teaching of the word of God, not what we can or cannot necessarily understand. Even if we did not have an answer to the question, would this necessarily mean that Ephesians 1:11 does not teach what it obviously teaches? We do have an answer though. First, we evangelize to glorify God. We do not go out to “save” anybody, since we are incapable of doing that in the first place. We share the gospel because by so doing, we bring glory to God. If that is all the reason we had, it would be sufficient. Yet there is more. We know that God has given us a great privilege to be used by Him in His work in this world. He has given to us a blessing to be able to share the gospel with men. God has decreed both the ends and the means. He has decreed to use men in sharing the gospel with His elect. Why has He done so? I do not know. I only know that His Word reveals that it is so. God has not seen fit to give us knowledge of who is, and who is not, His elect. Therefore, we share the gospel with all men, and trust God to honor the proclamation of His message by drawing the elect unto Himself. We can share boldly with all men, knowing that God is powerful to save, and as long as we seek to glorify Him, He will care for us and bless us with His Spirit.
Q. But doesn’t the“Calvinistic” view of God characterize man as nothing but a puppet or a robot?
A. While this is often asserted, I have found few who have thought through their question. What is really being said is that a sovereign God cannot produce living, responsible beings (like man). Unless man himself is autonomous, that is, absolutely free to determine his own destiny, then he is not free, but is simply a puppet or a robot. But why is this? Why can God not remain sovereign and create man in His image? There are many things that God is that we are not— God is eternal, we are not; God is omniscient, we are not; so, if God is sovereign, why must we be autonomous? The Bible tells us that God loves us, and has sent His Son to die in our place. We have been united with Christ, and we have a relationship with God through Him. Christ does not die for puppets. His blood was not shed for robots. Automatons do not enter into personal relationships. What we really see in this question is a common, human assertion: if God’s truth cannot be easily understood by the human mind, then it must not be true. Is it necessary that God reveal how He could create us as responsible beings and yet remain the sole sovereign of the universe?
Q. Do you expect me to believe in a God who would force people to be saved?
A. I don’t believe in such a God. Dead men have no ability to resist the sovereign grace of God, so how can the word “force” have any meaning? To “force” someone assumes that they are able to resist. God never forces anyone to do anything against their “will,” for those who are left in their sin are enslaved to evil and do not desire to follow after God. Those whom God regenerates are made new creatures by His work, and therefore desire His will, His purpose. They are no more “forced” to be saved than Lazarus was “forced” to come out of the tomb.
Q. Doesn’t Galatians 5:4; and Hebrews 6:4-6 teach that we can lose our salvation?
A. Galatians 5:4 is written to those who attempt to be justified by their works. They refuse God’s grace, God’s way of righteousness. It is because of this that they are said to be severed from Christ, and to have fallen from grace. These men were not Christians to begin with. There are a number of passages in Hebrews that provide “warnings” to the Church. In each instance, the entire Christian fellowship is addressed. The book of Hebrews is written to all who are a part of that fellowship— including non-believers, some
of whom were not completely convinced of the superiority of Christ over the old law, others who were simply hypocrites. The warnings that are provided are needed since we, as human beings, cannot see into the hearts of all men. We cannot assume, simply because someone sits in the pew next to us each Sunday, that they are of God’s elect. The minister of God’s people must exhort his people to examine their lives— knowing that some who sit before him are not actually followers of Jesus Christ. However, are we justified, in light of all the plain Scriptures affirming the security of the believer, to take warning passages to the Church and use them to deny that Christ will save His people? Are warning passages sufficient basis to assert that Christ can fail to do the will of the Father? Is this consistent biblical interpretation? I think not.
White, James R.. The Sovereign Grace of God: A Biblical Study of the Doctrines of Calvinism (pp. 184-188). Kindle Edition.