Some words in the Bible can be somewhat ambiguous. Usually it has more to do with the modern context of the word than the author’s use. Either way, we often end up with a problem reading the Bible today. What does this word mean in it’s context?

Sometimes the problem can be huge, and can send your theology in a completely wrong direction. As a matter of fact, some cults are built entirely on a few words being misunderstood to mean something they don’t.

Today we’ll concentrate on a word that makes a big difference. If it’s understood one way, God is completely reactionary to what human beings do; and the other way, makes God the proactive initiator of salvation based on nothing in man.

That word is “foreknow”.

Foreseen Faith

There is a theological system that hangs on a doctrine of foreseen faith. That is that before creation, God looked into the future and saw who would believe in Jesus. The ones whom He saw would believe are the ones He chose to save. This, according to the subscribers of the doctrine (we’ll call the doctrine “simple foreknowledge”), is what the Bible means when it talks about “the elect”. So election is not based on God’s sovereign unconditional choice, but election is a conditional reaction to God’s foreknowledge of future events.

I’m convinced this doctrine would not exist if it weren’t for two texts:

“To those who are elect exiles of the dispersion in Pontus, Galatia, Cappadocia, Asia, and Bithynia, according to the foreknowledge of God the Father, in the sanctification of the Spirit, for obedience to Jesus Christ and for sprinkling with his blood:” -1 Peter 1:1-2

“For those whom he foreknew he also predestined to be conformed to the image of his Son, in order that he might be the firstborn among many brothers.” -Romans 8:29

In both of these texts the proponents of simple foreknowledge believe that “foreknowledge” and “foreknow” are actually shorthand for “foresee who would believe in Jesus”.

Defining Our Terms

Let’s look at the word foreknow. What does the word mean? Can it have multiple meaning? Is there a more obvious meaning in the contexts? Let’s do a little work (Though this study would be better done in the original Greek, I think the translated word is straightforward enough for those who don’t know Greek, like myself, to grasp the issues.)

Simply defined ‘fore’ means previous, and ‘know’ means have knowledge of. So the simplest definition we can conjur is ‘previously have knowledge of’. Good start.

Biblical data also shows us that ‘know’ can also have a few other connotations.

“Before I formed you in the womb I knew you, and before you were born I consecrated you.” -Jeremiah 1:5

Here the parallelism demonstrates “before I formed you in the womb” is to “before you were born” as “I knew you” is to “I consecrated you”. So we see that know can mean set aside, or consecrated.

“It was I who knew you in the wilderness, in the land of drought…” -Hosea 13:5

Here the Bible uses ‘knew’ to speak of God’s providential care for Israel in the wilderness. Know can mean ‘care for’.

“I never knew you; depart from me, you workers of lawlessness.” -Matthew 7:23

In this text Jesus certainly isn’t talking about bare knowledge, but some kind of intimate relational knowledge. It’s not that He didn’t know of the false professors that cast out demons in His name, it’s that he wasn’t their Savior by relationship. So know can also mean ‘intimate relationship’

The Bible uses this word often to portray sexual intercourse as well. “Adam knew Eve”(Genesis 4:1), “Cain knew his wife” (Genesis 4:17), “Elkanah knew Hannah his wife” (1 Samuel 1:19).

I’m comfortable collapsing all of these alternate definitions into a general concept of intimate, relational, love.

So here are the definitions we have to work with for foreknow:
1. have previous knowledge (simplest definition)
2. previously have intimate love for (more complex, but very Biblical)
3. previously see faith exercised in (not a definition of the word, but believed to be shorthand)

Working With Our Definitions

Since 1 Peter 1:1-2 simply states that election is based on foreknowledge, we’ll concentrate on Romans 8:29, since the text gives us an order, and a result. Whatever conclusion we arrive at will also apply to 1 Peter.

“For those whom he foreknew he also predestined to be conformed to the image of his Son, in order that he might be the firstborn among many brothers.” -Romans 8:29

Let’s replace the word foreknew with out definitions, and see how each one fares.

1. For those whom he [had previous knowledge of] he also predestined to be conformed to the image of his Son…

Ok, so we have an omniscient God who can see all things, and all people. Good. The obvious problem is that that God had previous knowledge of everyone, and since there is no delineator to narrow it down, we’d be saying that all people are predestined to be conformed to the image of Jesus. Unless we’re Universalists, this will not do. Next!

2. For those whom he [previously had intimate love for] he also predestined to be conformed to the image of his Son…

Now we see a cohesive, if not offensive, thought. It would appear, as in Matthew 7:23 that God has an intimate love for a specific group of people, that he doesn’t share with all people (depart from me I never knew you). If this is the correct understanding it would gel very well with God’s election of Israel over against all other nations, and the New Testament talk of the Church being God’s “elect”. Look what Paul says about the same predestination in Ephesians:

“In love he predestined us for adoption as sons through Jesus Christ, according to the purpose of his will…” -Ephesians 1:5

3. For those whom he [previously saw would believe in Jesus] he also predestined to be conformed to the image of his Son…

Again, unlike the first definition, we have a mostly cohesive thought. The first problem is just the simple flow of the sentence. We’re coupling a completely passive verb (observing) with an active verb (predestining) and linking them with “also”. This is not the way cause and effect is communicated. We don’t say “those whom he observed, he also did something with”, we’d say “those whom he observed, he in turn did something with.”

Secondly we’re trying to force the idea of foreseen events (personal excercise of faith) into a context of foreknown people. It doesn’t say God would know what they would do (true as that may be), it says He knew them.

The much bigger problem is that the word “foreknow” simply can’t be defined by such a loaded definition. It would have to be proven with more Biblical data, that the author was implying something so in-depth as a foreseen decision, and uses a single word for brevity. But again, there is no other Biblical data to build this doctrine. The expanded definition is built, circularly, on the very texts that require the expanded definition to give the desired result. Until it can be proven that ‘foreknow’ should actually be understood as ‘foreknow who would have faith’, it makes no sense to understand it that way. The only reason anyone would do so is because of a tradition passed down to them by a theology needing the word to have such a definition.

Definition 2 is the only one that can be used meaningfully. Now let’s try this definition in the other text, 1 Peter 1:1-2.

“To those who are elect… according to the [previous love] of God the Father…”

Perfect. We see God actively electing a people based on the love He had before the foundation of the world. Sounds very similar to:

“But God, being rich in mercy, because of the great love with which he loved us, even when we were dead in our trespasses, made us alive together with Christ— by grace you have been saved— …” -Ephesians 2:4-5

The Killer Text

I’ve demonstrated that only one definition of the word ‘foreknow’ can confidently be used in this context. Now you may ask if the actual word ‘foreknew’ is used in any other place in the new testament in a way that can support the definition I’ve concluded.

Paul, only 3 chapters later in Romans uses this exact same word in a way that makes it abundantly clear that this is the proper way to understand this word in context.

“I ask, then, has God rejected his people? By no means! For I myself am an Israelite, a descendant of Abraham, a member of the tribe of Benjamin. God has not rejected his people whom he foreknew.” -Romans 11:1-2

Paul is not talking about foreseen faith. As a matter of fact he’s talking about national Israel who largely DO NOT believe. Paul is explaining that God has not turned His back on His fore-loved people.

Now, it should be noted that while this demonstrates the meaning of the word, it’s not being used in the same context. One group He’s fore-loved and elected as His chosen people under the old covenant (and has not abandoned them now). The other group He’s fore-loved and elected for salvation in Christ. Those “who are loved by God and called to be saints…” -Romans 1:7.

Romans 11:1-2 demonstrates that Paul does not use ‘foreknew’ as shorthand for ‘foreseen faith’, but that he is speaking of unconditional electing love. He is referring to a special kind of love that God does not have for all people. He is referring to a purposed choice God made before the creation of the world to love a people because of “nothing either good or bad—in order that God’s purpose of election might continue, not because of works but because of him who calls-” -Romans 9:11

Now with this amazing fore-love in mind, let’s see what God does with these people.

“For those whom he foreknew he also predestined to be conformed to the image of his Son, in order that he might be the firstborn among many brothers. And those whom he predestined he also called, and those whom he called he also justified, and those whom he justified he also glorified.” -Romans 8:29-30

God chose a people based solely on His good pleasure and love, then he guaranteed those people would never see the flames of Hell. All of salvation is the active work of the Lord, alone. Even His foreknowledge.

Balance and Mystery

There is much talk in today’s Church about being balanced. While this is a healthy idea, there are many ways to understand balance. Do we mean balance in terms of giving room to both sides of Biblical teachings, or are we recommending some idea of doctrinal agnosticism?

It’s nearly impossible to get into any kind of meaningful conversation about doctrine today without hearing something like, “People have been arguing about these things for centuries. Who are we to think we’ve figured it out.”. Is God mysterious?

“The secret things belong to the LORD our God, but the things that are revealed belong to us and to our children forever…” -Deuteronomy 29:29

While appealing to mystery is necessary when we talk about God and His ways (The secret things belong to God.), we have to be careful not to pull the mystery card prematurely. We have to look at all that the Bible tells us about a topic, so we’re sure we understand what’s being said (The things that are reveled belong to us). Then, where the Bible stops, we stop and worship the God who is beyond our comprehension.

Human Responsibility and God’s Sovereignty – the Seeming Paradox

The issue at hand is the idea that while God is sovereign, meaning that he orchestrates all events in time for His purposes, man is also held accountable for what he does or doesn’t do. This should strike us as paradoxical.

If God is making everything happen, how are we still doing anything? Or conversely, if our choices are real, and subject to God’s judgement, how can God be orchestrating those choices and events? The Bible seems to simply present both of these ideas, says they’re true, but doesn’t tell us how exactly they work together. So we’re left with an appeal to the mysterious power of God.

Human Responsibility and God’s Sovereignty in Salvation – The Misunderstanding

This correct doctrinal paradox of responsibility and sovereignty seems to have flowed over into categories today, that it was never intended for. And it appears, for the sake of political correctness, mystery is being appealed to in areas that the Bible is not mysterious.

Today’s ‘autonomous free will’ oriented Church has taken historic orthodox language and misused it to help it’s own faulty theology. A misrepresentation of the conversation is the result.

Today we find preachers teaching that since the Bible teaches that we have to come to Christ to be saved, this means that man has a free will, but the Bible also teaches that God is in control… and this is mysterious. They’ll produce verses that indicate a universal gospel call, commanding all men to come, using them as proof texts to demonstrate free will.

“Come to me, all who labor and are heavy laden, and I will give you rest.” -Matthew 11:28

“And if it is evil in your eyes to serve the LORD, choose this day whom you will serve…” -Joshua 24:15

“…And let the one who is thirsty come; let the one who desires take the water of life without price.” -Revelation 22:17

So, there is undoubtedly a free offer to all men to come to Christ. And they go on to demonstrate that God is also in control of these things:

“…having been predestined according to the purpose of him who works all things according to the counsel of his will.” -Ephesians 1:11

“For those whom he foreknew he also predestined to be conformed to the image of his Son, in order that he might be the firstborn among many brothers.” -Romans 8:29

Some will rest here, simply saying “Man has free will, and God is sovereign… we just have to deal with it.”(which is admirable, especially when we consider the more common alternative).

Usually at this point the ‘free will’ preacher will redefine predestination and election, and teach that God simply foreknew who would believe, and elected them based on their choice. Sadly, they don’t realize that they’ve actually left their original argument at this point, they’ve rejected mystery, removed God’s choice and set up man’s choice as the sole deciding factor. No more paradox… just an unbiblical doctrine of foreknown decisional salvation.

Human Responsibility and God’s Sovereignty in Salvation – All the Biblical Data

We’ve already established the parts that modern free will Christianity has right:

1. Christ has made a free offer to all men to be saved, and man must come to be saved.

2. God is in control (to varying degrees, depending on tradition), and he is working all things to the council of his will.

But we can’t simply rest here and attribute to point 1 the idea that man is free to choose, until we’ve weighed all the data. Is man free to accept or reject this offer? Jesus says no.

“No one can come to me unless the Father who sent me draws him. And I will raise him up on the last day.” -John 6:44

“…no one knows the Father except the Son and anyone to whom the Son chooses to reveal him.” -Matthew 11:27

Paul supports this idea of man’s inability to obey God and come to Christ:

“For the mind that is set on the flesh is hostile to God, for it does not submit to God’s law; indeed, it cannot. Those who are in the flesh cannot please God.” -Romans 8:7-8

“…no one can say “Jesus is Lord” except in the Holy Spirit.” -1 Corinthians 12:3

The Bible’s ACTUAL teaching is that yes, a free offer is made, but no one CAN come unless they’re first chosen, enabled, drawn, and enlightened to truth of the gospel. An inward change, by God, is necessary. And until that change occurs man is unable to come.

Is man responsible for the choice he makes concerning Jesus? Yes.

“Whoever believes in him is not condemned, but whoever does not believe is condemned already, because he has not believed in the name of the only Son of God.” -John 3:18

Is man able to actually choose Christ, apart from the electing, regenerating grace of God? No.

“This is why I told you that no one can come to me unless it is granted him by the Father.” -John 6:65

“…but you do not believe because you are not part of my flock.” -John 10:26

Conclusion

We need to clarify terms that seem to have been cross. Human responsibility to believe (clearly taught in scripture) is not the same as human ABILITY to believe (strictly taught negatively in scripture). So as far as free will… we have none. We make choices, but our will is bound to our sinful nature.

The question of how God and man work together in salvation is not a paradox. ALL of salvation is God’s doing, as man is incapable of contributing. Every part of our responsibility being fulfilled is a gift from God to His people. Man and God DO NOT work together in salvation. Man is a passive recipient of God’s free gift, then man exercises the faith he’s been gifted.

“For by grace you have been saved through faith. And this is not your own doing; it is the gift of God, not a result of works, so that no one may boast.” -Ephesians 2:8-9

The paradoxical discussion of mans’ responsibility and God’s sovereignty was never about ‘free-will’. it’s about how we can keep from being puppets, when God is the orchestrator of everything. How are we accountable, when God makes everything happen? When we correctly understand the argument we ask the obvious (Biblical) question:

“You will say to me then, “Why does he still find fault? For who can resist his will?” -Romans 9:19

The question is profound… but the answer is heavy and glorious, and should press the unbiblical concept of free will in salvation out of us, as we’re humbled like the creatures we are.

“But who are you, O man, to answer back to God? Will what is molded say to its molder, “Why have you made me like this?” Has the potter no right over the clay, to make out of the same lump one vessel for honorable use and another for dishonorable use?” -Romans 9:20-21

Here, my friends, is where we rest. In God’s right to do what He wants with what’s His. Mysterious as it all may be.

“You did not choose me, but I chose you and appointed you that you should go and bear fruit and that your fruit should abide, so that whatever you ask the Father in my name, he may give it to you.” -John 15:16

Most people in the modern Church assume that man’s free will is taught in scripture. It is often used as the foundation to build doctrines and entire theologies. It seems logical. If God made us robots, then love isn’t love, it’s just programming, right?

The Will of Man

God made the first man, Adam, neutral as far as sin goes. Adam was perfectly capable of obedience, and also able to disobey by eating of the single tree he was commanded not to. Adam, for all intents and purposes, had free will. He could choose to do good in God’s eyes, or to do evil. And he chose, in a very real way, to disobey God and eat of the forbidden fruit. In that moment all of creation fell under the curse of sin.

Adam was our representative in the Garden. In a spiritual sense we were in him. When he fell, we fell with him (Romans 5:12). We all now share in his fallen, sinful, carnal nature. what does that carnal nature look like?

“The carnal mind is enmity against God; for it is not subject to the law of God, neither indeed can be.” -Romans 8:7

“The LORD saw that the wickedness of man was great in the earth, and that every intention of the thoughts of his heart was only evil continually.” -Genesis 6:5

The fallen nature of man can not obey God’s law. The fallen heart of man is completely and only evil. Fallen man has lost all ability to do good in God’s eyes. We can do good as it compares to others, but nothing we do is actually obedient to God. Obedience to God would require perfect love toward Him in everything we do, and we are sinful at heart. No matter how hard a man tries, he can only, in the end, do evil. We are dead in trespasses and sins (Ephesians 2:1). Isaiah says even the good things we do are like filthy rags that we offer to God.

“We have all become like one who is unclean,
and all our righteous deeds are like a polluted garment…” -Isaiah 64:6

So we have wills… evil wills. And we are free to do as little or as much evil as we want. If this is what is meant by “free will”, then the Bible is on board. But the bottom line is, since the fall, we can not do good.

The Greatest Good

God’s commandment to sinful man throughout scripture is to turn back to Him and believe in Him. The entire Bible is an account of the unfaithfulness of man to do that, and God’s loving patience with the disobedient human race. The New Testament sets up the greatest good a man can accomplish: trusting in Christ for his salvation. We also see a universal call to repentance and an invitation to come.

“Come to me, all who labor and are heavy laden, and I will give you rest.” -Matthew 11:28

The Bible is clear that anyone who wants God can come to Him and be restored. But if we are only capable of evil, and all our desires are emnity against God… who wants to come to Him?

“No, not at all. For we have already charged that all, both Jews and Greeks, are under sin, as it is written:
“None is righteous, no, not one;
no one understands;
no one seeks for God.
All have turned aside; together they have become worthless;
no one does good,
not even one.”" -Romans 3:9-12

How many people seek for God? Not one. How many people do good? Not one. So how many people will take advantage of God’s offer of salvation, the greatest good we could do? Man’s hatred toward God and complete lack of desire to come to Him, renders us completely incapable. So even though a universal call is made, no one can come… don’t believe me? Jesus says:

“No one can come to me unless the Father who sent me draws him. And I will raise him up on the last day.” -John 6:44

and again

“And he said, “This is why I told you that no one can come to me unless it is granted him by the Father.”" -John 6:65

Do we have a free will in salvation? sure. The offer is made, and every single person on the planet makes their choice: it is a unanimous NO.

The Creator is Free

Man has spoken, and based on their choice, every person who ever lived is running as fast as they can straight to Hell. What hope do we have? According to the average American pastor, this kind of situation is hopeless, as God must respect our wills. Thankfully God disagrees. The Creator of wills, can change our hearts as he sees fit.

The salvation of a man begins, at least from our perspective, with God sovereignly changing that man’s heart. The process of regeneration, or being born again, is when God changes the sinful nature of man. The greatest good, the impossible feat, is then possible as we are made into new creatures.

“Jesus answered him, “Truly, truly, I say to you, unless one is born again he cannot see the kingdom of God.” -John 3:3

The Holy Spirit takes up residence in us, and without the Spirit, it is impossible to believe.

“Therefore I want you to understand that no one speaking in the Spirit of God ever says “Jesus is accursed!” and no one can say “Jesus is Lord” except in the Holy Spirit.” -1 Cor 12:3

You see, until God initiates salvation in a man, we can not come to him, because we will not come to him. God sovereignly moves upon the men and women of His choice. If God were to leave it up to us, as He does in some, we would continue to sin, and end up receiving the wrath owed to us. But Christ’s sacrificial death is applied to people who never asked for it.

“I have been found by those who did not seek me;
I have shown myself to those who did not ask for me.” -Romans 10:20

“So then he has mercy on whomever he wills, and he hardens whomever he wills.” -Romans 9:18

“All things have been handed over to me by my Father, and no one knows who the Son is except the Father, or who the Father is except the Son and anyone to whom the Son chooses to reveal him.”" -Luke 10:22

Does our will play any part?

“But to all who did receive him, who believed in his name, he gave the right to become children of God, who were born, not of blood nor of the will of the flesh nor of the will of man, but of God.” -John 1:12-13

“It is the Spirit who gives life; the flesh is no help at all.” -John 6:63

“For he says to Moses, “I will have mercy on whom I have mercy, and I will have compassion on whom I have compassion.” So then it depends not on human will or exertion, but on God, who has mercy.” -Romans 9:15-16

Prior to regeneration man is incapable of, and unwilling to believe. We are altogether depraved. But God, in His mercy, saves His chosen people. He changes their hearts, justifies them, sanctifies them, and raises them to glory, all against their natural will. Are they dragged kicking and screaming? Not at all, because he replaces our unwilling hearts with willing ones.

Salvation is of the Lord, my friends. Is there free will in salvation? Yes, and it is entirely God’s.

The Sovereign Ending

So it turns out there’s this book that was written before the earth was created. It contains all the names of the people who will be saved, and excludes everyone who won’t be. Doesn’t that mean that the destinies of men are decided by God before we were even made?

While we’re talking about the end, here’s a question. When non-calvinists talk about sovereign election they use terms like “robots”, “puppets”, or the occasional vulgar, emotion-pumping analogy, “Forced love is rape, and God is not a divine rapist.”.

So here’s my question: Do we have the choice to turn from God once we’re welcomed into heaven? …Answer carefully.

If you say no, then you have a God that is doing what the Calvinist claims He’s doing here on earth, making His people love Him somehow. If that’s the case, what do you do with your programming, puppeteer, rapist claims? If you say yes we can turn away from God, then eternal life is not eternal at all, it’s conditional and at best potentially eternal based on the perseverance of your will… Your “eternal” life is proportional to your willpower.

I digress. Let’s take a look at sovereign grace and angry wrath as the Bible comes to an end.

My Top 5 Texts From Revelation

Revelation 7:4-8
“And I heard the number of the sealed, 144,000, sealed from every tribe of the sons of Israel:
12,000 from the tribe of Judah were sealed,
12,000 from the tribe of Reuben,
12,000 from the tribe of Gad,
12,000 from the tribe of Asher,
12,000 from the tribe of Naphtali,
12,000 from the tribe of Manasseh,
12,000 from the tribe of Simeon,
12,000 from the tribe of Levi,
12,000 from the tribe of Issachar,
12,000 from the tribe of Zebulun,
12,000 from the tribe of Joseph,
12,000 from the tribe of Benjamin were sealed.”

Revelation 17:8
“The beast that you saw was, and is not, and is about to rise from the bottomless pit and go to destruction. And the dwellers on earth whose names have not been written in the book of life from the foundation of the world will marvel to see the beast, because it was and is not and is to come.”

Revelation 17:17
“for God has put it into their hearts to carry out his purpose by being of one mind and handing over their royal power to the beast, until the words of God are fulfilled.”

Revelation 19:9
“And the angel said to me, “Write this: Blessed are those who are invited to the marriage supper of the Lamb.” And he said to me, “These are the true words of God.”

Revelation 13:8
“and all who dwell on earth will worship it, everyone whose name has not been written before the foundation of the world in the book of life of the Lamb who was slain.”

Other Notable Texts

Revelation 5:9-10
“And they sang a new song, saying,

“Worthy are you to take the scroll
and to open its seals,
for you were slain, and by your blood you ransomed people for God
from every tribe and language and people and nation,
and you have made them a kingdom and priests to our God,
and they shall reign on the earth.”"

Revelation 16:6
“For they have shed the blood of saints and prophets,
and you have given them blood to drink.
It is what they deserve!”"

Revelation 17:14
“They will make war on the Lamb, and the Lamb will conquer them, for he is Lord of lords and King of kings, and those with him are called and chosen and faithful.”"

Revelation 13:5
“And the beast was given a mouth uttering haughty and blasphemous words, and it was allowed to exercise authority for forty-two months.”

Revelation 13:7
“Also it was allowed to make war on the saints and to conquer them. And authority was given it over every tribe and people and language and nation,”

Revelation 13:10
“If anyone is to be taken captive,
to captivity he goes;
if anyone is to be slain with the sword,
with the sword must he be slain.”

Revelation 13:15
“And it was allowed to give breath to the image of the beast, so that the image of the beast might even speak and might cause those who would not worship the image of the beast to be slain.”

Now, I must admit that I had the same feelings when God sent people into my life to show me the doctrines of grace. I actually once said, “If God chooses who He wants to save, I want nothing to do with Him.”. I thank God that all of my sin is covered, including my rejection of His character. Of course, He has since mercifully revealed how beautiful it really is, and now I can’t imagine a better way for God to redeem mankind.

So why? Why did I get so upset? Why is the idea of a God who chooses certain people over others so offensive, when the Bible we read every day is crammed full of situation where God does just that? How did I go 6 years, knowing this God, yet never truly understanding how the Bible clearly says He interacts with man?

I believe all born again Christians honestly want to know the truth about God. We want the fullest understanding of how He works, so we can worship Him best, and so we’ll be most fulfilled by Him. But I also see, and have experienced, that we are only willing to examine so much. We’ll look at areas of our understanding of God that we’re comfortable with, but no further.

Most people would have no problem asking questions about spiritual gifts, for example. They could honestly listen to other opinions and compare with scripture to find the most Biblical understanding. But, generally, we’re not willing to do that with more controversial issues.

It’s Like a House

The way it worked out in my mind, when I started questioning why I reacted to reformed theology the way I did, is – it’s like a house. It starts with the foundation. All the things we learn at first, right or wrong, make up the foundation. It’s the bedrock of our salvation in many ways. Pending it’s sound, doctrinally, it should be protected. Paul makes it clear in Galatians:

“But even if we or an angel from heaven should preach to you a gospel contrary to the one we preached to you, let him be accursed.” -Galatians 1:8

So we protect those foundational truths. Next we start getting serious about Church and study, and we build our theological house. From hearing and reading scripture, we build our rooms (individual doctrines). We might start with the ‘what is tithing’ room, on to the ‘end times’ room, a ‘how we should worship’ room, etc..

If, after a room is established, we see inconsistencies, we examine them. We say, ‘Wow, this room really doesn’t look the way scripture says it should , I’d better rearrange it.’.  Sometimes it’s just a quick makeover, other times we need to completely remove the room from the house, but we’re willing to make the changes to stay faithful to God’s word.

But now, someone comes along and questions you on something. It isn’t one of  the rooms. It’s something mingled into the foundation of the house. Someone comes along and says, ‘Man is unable to come to God, on his own.’, they add, ‘Jesus only died for those he intended to save.’. Our memories are immediately filled with super dramatic readings of “God SOOOOOO loved the world… WHOOOOOSOOOOEVER believes…”. This seems to be a threat to the entire house we’ve built.

We are not willing to examine down there for scriptural accuracy, because it’s too sacred. It shakes us to the core. We shutter at the thought of what might happen to the house if those things were even looked at. When someone brings us clear scripture that shows God’s choosing grace, we think, ‘that looks like predestination, but I know everyone chooses, because I’ve always heard it. I have to explain it away.’.

Challenge Your Foundation

To all those who this is hitting home with – to all those who are angry that I would say such things, I’d like to throw down the gauntlet on the issue. Ask yourself this simple question: ‘if God wanted to show me that he elected a chosen people to salvation before the foundation of the earth, apart from anything good or bad they would do, or any decision they would make, would I be willing to believe it?’. Ask yourself, “If God were to show me that my concept of “free will” is not scripturally sound, would I be willing to let it be removed from my foundation and let that alter my house accordingly?”. I’m not asking you to agree, I’m asking you to ask yourself, “Could I believe it, if it were true?”.

If you’re willing to sacrifice anything to God, come back to scripture and let it speak in context. Allow yourself to be confronted with the innumerable texts that deal with election. Let the the scripture speak for itself. Set your traditions aside and let the Word of God break up your foundation, if necessary. Make absolutely certain that your house is built on Christ’s foundation.