Category Archives: Questions and Answers

God’s Foreknowledge and Election

Posted on by
2

Pastor John, isn’t Divine election (God’s choice to save sinners) based upon the fact that He knows everything, even the end from the beginning, and therefore knows ahead of time what man will choose? Though it is a choice made in eternity past, God simply chooses (elects) those He sees ahead of time will choose Him. Correct?

Thanks for your question. God certainly does know everything, including all the future actions of man, but the quick answer is “no,” election is not based on God’s foreknowledge of man’s choice.

Let me start by quoting two key texts:

“For those whom He foreknew, He also predestined to become conformed to the image of His Son…” – Rom. 8:29

“chosen, according to the foreknowledge of God the Father…” 1 Pet. 1: 1, 2

These two texts are often used to suggest that because predestination and election are clearly based on God’s foreknowledge (which is a true statement in itself) then man’s choice is the deciding factor. The mistake made here is not to suggest foreknowledge comes before election (it clearly does) but in mistaking the meaning of foreknowledge and how it is used in Scripture.

Assumptions and misunderstandings abound concerning the doctrine of God’s foreknowledge. If we are to come to a biblical understanding of the subject, we need to apply diligence as we allow for the Holy Spirit to lead us into His truth.

All Christians believe in election and predestination. These are biblical words. The disagreement concerns the basis or grounds of election. In this regard, there are two main views held by Christians today: Continue reading →

Understanding 1 John 2:2

Posted on by
2

You say that Christ died for His people, His sheep, His friends, for His Church and yet 1 John 2:2, speaking of Jesus, states, “He is the propitiation for our sins, and not for ours only but also for the sins of the whole world.” How do you explain that?

I can certainly see how someone would use this verse to undermine the reformed doctrine of Particular Redemption, yet Scripture, I believe, is not contradictory to itself. There is one Divine Author of Scripture and He does not contradict Himself. So how are we to understand 1 John 2:2?

I have written elsewhere about the principles of correct interpretation of scripture. There is only one correct interpretation of scripture. Though there may be many applications of a verse, it only means what it was intended to mean when it was written.

In my article entitled “Playing Marbles with Diamonds” I refer to a number of principles of biblical interpretation (hermeneutics), three of which would apply here:

1. Consider the Author – who wrote the book? (what was his background, language, culture, vocation, concerns, education, circumstance, what stage of life?)

2. Consider the Audience (why was the book written? who was the audience? what would these words have meant to its original recipients?) Continue reading →

Purgatory (1)

Posted on by
Reply

There is no doubt that Dr. R.C. Sproul is a highly trained theologian. One of the many things I appreciate about him is his ability to simplify issues without distorting them. Very few people are able to accomplish this as well as he does.

If you have ever been to a Ligonier Ministries Conference, you will know that one of the highlights is when Dr. R. C. Sproul (either alone or with an expert panel alongside him) has a Question and Answer session. Usually the questions relate to the theme of the Conference and the answers given are often extremely helpful and insightful.

In a recent CD release called “Ask R.C.” (from Ligonier Ministries), Dr. R. C. Sproul fielded questions and provided answers on a wide range of biblical and theological issues. One of the questions concerned the doctrine of purgatory and I have transcribed the verbal interchange below.

Questioner: Could you explain the Roman Catholic doctrine of purgatory and whether or not it is a truthful doctrine?

R.C. – Thank you for that. I will try to deal with that as briefly as I can and I want to be accurate with it. The doctrine of purgatory is an integral doctrine to the Roman Catholic understanding of redemption. It has been modified just in the last year or so with respect to infants, but purgatory is defined by Rome as a purging place. It is a place where the vast majority of even professing Christians go upon their death.

As recently as the Roman Catholic Catechism, the Church declares that if a person dies with any spot or blemish or stain on their soul – any impurity – instead of going directly to heaven they must first go to this place of purging which is this intermediate state between earth and heaven. And in purgatory, which is not hell, it is not a place of the punitive wrath of God, but it is a place for the corrective wrath of God (as it were), where the sanctifying process is continued through the crucible of fire (as it were).

Now in purgatory, as I said, the vast majority of people experience this time; they may be there for two weeks or they may be there for two hundred million years – in fact at the heart of the controversy in the 16th century Reformation had to do with the sale of indulgences, and on the external situation there, particularly in Germany when Tetzel was selling the indulgences to the peasants, he distorted seriously the Roman doctrine. The Roman Catholic Church has held for many, many centuries that the grace of justification is infused into a person at baptism, and that that grace of justification remains intact until or unless a person commits a mortal sin. That mortal sin is called mortal because it is so serious that it destroys the justifying grace in the soul. And so a person who commits mortal sin, in other words, has to be re-justified, brought anew into a state of grace. In the 16th century, the Council of Trent declared that the sacrament of penance is the second plank of justification for those who have made shipwreck of their souls. Continue reading →