"God Is No Respecter of Persons"

"The next day, as they were on their journey and approaching the city, Peter went up on the housetop about the sixth hour [i. e., noon] to pray. And he became hungry and wanted something to eat. But, while they were preparing it, he fell into a trance and saw the heavens opened and something like a great sheet descending, being let down by its four corners upon the earth. In it were all kinds of animals and reptiles and birds of the air. And there came a voice to him: 'Rise, Peter, kill and eat.' But Peter said, 'By no means, Lord, for I have never eaten anything that is common or unclean.' And the voice came to him again a second time, 'What God has made clean, do not call common.' This happened three times, and [then] the thing was taken up at once to Heaven... So Peter opened his mouth and said: 'Truly I understand that God shows no partiality, but in every nation anyone who fears Him and does what is right is acceptable to Him." 

-Acts 10:9-16, 34-35 

An argument I often get from anti-Calvinists against the doctrine of election is based on verse 34 above: "God shows no partiality." Or, in the words of the KJV, "God is no respecter of persons." The anti-Calvinist accuses the Calvinist of making out God to discriminate between individuals. 

I agree with the anti-Calvinist that election discriminates between individuals. I deny, however, that such discrimination violates the words of Peter in this passage.

Consider, for example, what Paul says in Romans 9:10-16: "When Rebekah had conceived children by one man, our forefather Isaac, though they were not yet born and had done 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 - she was told, 'The older will serve the younger.' As it is written, 'Jacob I loved but Esau I hated.' What shall we say then? Is there injustice on God's part? By no means! 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." 

Paul's exact point here is that God discriminates, but not on the basis of human characteristics. Rather, the discrimination is a sovereign act of God's electing grace. As this applies to Peter's vision it precludes the discrimination that Peter expected, that of a national supremacy of Israel, and lays the men of all nations on equal grounds in terms of ethnicity. This was such a difficult concept that Peter later reneged on this commitment (Galatians 2:12). 

The Universal Kingship of Yahweh/Christ

"All the ends of the earth shall remember and turn to the Lord, and all the families of the nations shall worship before You. For kingship belongs to the Lord, and He rules over the nations." -Psalm 22:27-28 

In the verses cited above, both uses of "Lord" in English represent Yahweh in the Hebrew, the name of the preincarnate Christ, the second Person of the Trinity. And "nations" is also translated as "Gentiles." Therefore, this is the claim of Christ to a universal kingship, not just over Israel, as is claimed by the Jews and dispensationalists, but over all nations, both Jews and Gentiles. A kingship which is already real, and which will become progressively more visibly as we approach the time of His return, as we pray in the Lord's prayer; "Thy kingdom come; Thy will be done on earth as it is in heaven (Matthew 6:10)." This is explicitly and eloquently affirmed in the Westminster Larger Catechism: "In the second petition, acknowledging ourselves and all mankind to be by nature under the dominion of sin and Satan, we pray that the kingdom of sin and Satan may be destroyed, the Gospel propagated throughout the world, the Jews called, the Gentiles brought in, [and] that He would be pleased so to exercise the kingdom of His power to al the world, as may conduce to those ends" (answer 191). 

In both the Scripture ext and in the catechism, the presumption is of a current kingdom which shall have future effects. Neither allows for a future kingdom as is assumed by the dispensationalist. Nor does either allow for a kingdom limited to a particular region of the earth, such as the political state of Israel, or even to the church as is held by amillennialists.

Eternity in Hell and the Criteria for Destruction, Contra Annihilationism

Historical Christianity has defined the destiny of the unrepentant wicked as eternity in Hell. Eternal conscious torment, or ECT for short. In contrast, some of the aberrant sects, mainly the Jehovah's Witnesses and Seventh-Day Adventists, have claimed that the wicked are sent to Hell, but are then burned up there. A doctrine known as annihilationism, because the spirits of the wicked are annihilated. This doctrine has recently found new traction in broader evangelical circles.

In support of their doctrine, these sects point to references to destruction, such as the words of Jesus in Matthew 10:28: "Do not fear those who kill the body but cannot kill the soul. Rather fear Him who can destroy both soul and body in Hell." Eternal existence, they say, is not destruction. 

However, what is key is how a word is used in the Bible, which is not necessarily the same as its use is common conversation.  

In II Peter 3:6,that apostle says that "the world that then existed was deluged with water and perished." The word translated "deluge" here is a different tense of the same verb translated destroy in Matthew 10:28, but referring to the Flood of Noah. I must ask the Jehovah's Witnesses and Seventh-Day Adventists,was the world destroyed, that is, eliminate from existence, by the Flood? And they must concede that it was not. After all, we still walk up on the same earth. Neither, then do they have grounds for climbing that the spirits of the wicked are eliminated from existence after a certain time in Hell.

Destruction, then, is tormented punishment in place of a prior freedom to act in wicked rebellion. ECT fulfills that definition.

A Witness for an Optimistic Eschatology

Eschatology is a popular topic for every radio and television preacher, for reams of books, and endless debates on every internet platform. And it is a topic which rarely produces healthy or edifying conversation. Why? Because it is titillating. The popular preachers make a lot of money by making predictions, and the more wild-eyed and frightening the more money they make. 

How do these discussions end up in such a theological rut? Well, in addition to the excitement that comes from particular interpretations, there is just bad exegesis in most cases. Biblical passages are wrenched out of context to apply to the time of Jesus's return as if there were no other events in the two-thousand years (so far) in between. And just on the basis of assumptions, not because of any reasoning or hermeneutical principles. If you get into a conversation about Matthew 24 and mention that Jesus applies it to the generation to which He was speaking (verse 34), you will be shouted down. Or if you point to His words, "the Gospel will be proclaimed throughout the whole world" (verse 14) and compare them to the words of Paul, "the hope of the Gospel that you heard, which has been proclaimed in all creation under Heaven" (Colossians 1:23), you will be decried as feeble-minded. 

Then other passages are simply not allowed into the discussion. One of which is my subject here. 

In Hebrews 1:13, that writer quotes from prehistory the words of the Father to the Son from the intra-Trinitarian covenant, "Sit at My right hand until I make your enemies a footstool for your feet." The quote is from Psalm 110:1, and is repeated in Hebrews 10:13. It is also found quoted in several other places in the New Testament. All refer to the awaited glory of Jesus before His return. 

What are some of those enemies that the Father shall subdue for the Glory of the Son? Paul gives us some prominent examples. 

Paul quotes the same verse indirectly, Psalm 110:1, in I Corinthians 15:25, and then gives the last enemy in verse 26: "He must reign until He has put all enemies under His feet. The last enemy to be destroyed is death." So death will be defeated as the last enemy before the return of Jesus. That completely eliminates the entire timeline of premillennialism, especially the dispensationalist variety. 

But Paul gives us another case which I find even sweeter to my soul. 

"Lest you be wise in your own sight, I do not want you to be unaware of this mystery, brothers: a partial hardening has come upon Israel, until the fullness of the Gentiles has come in. And in this way, all Israel will be saved, as it is written, 'The Deliverer will come from Zion, and He will banish ungodliness from Jacob; and this will be My covenant with them, when I take away their sins.' As regards the Gospel, they are enemies for your sake. But as regards elections, they are beloved for the sake of their forefathers" (Romans 11:25-28). At some point near the end of history, Paul tells us, the fullness, the majority, of Gentiles will have been converted, and then the blindness which was placed on the Jews will be lifted, so that they will be converted en masse to the Messiah whom they had rejected. 

If Jesus will return to an overwhelmingly converted world, how does that allow for the violence and persecution and unbelief described by the scary eschatology crowd? I see the two things as utterly incompatible, which is why I reject that scary eschatology. 

Anthropomorphisms for God Against Mormon Theology

One of the the doctrines that distinguish Mormons from biblical Christians is their belief that God the Father has a physical body like that of a human being. That is, they take references in the Bible literally, such as to His eyes, or arms, ears, feet. 

In contrast, biblical Christians take such references to be anthropomorphisms. That is, figures of speech in which is God is described as if He has human features, not because He does, but in order to make Him more relatable to mortal men. That is because He tells us explicitly that He is not a man: "God is not a man" (Numbers 23:29, I Samuel 15:29). Furthermore, we are told that His divine nature is invisible (Colossians 1:15, I Timothy 1:17). 

When I have denied their literal use of such anthropomorphisms in reference to God, I have had Mormons tell me that I demonstrate that I do not believe what the Bible says. 

However, anthropomorphisms in the Bible are not limited to references to God. 

"For you shall go out in joy and be led forth in peace; the mountains and the hills before you shall break forth into singing and all the trees of the field shall clap their hands" (Isaiah 55:12). Here there are anthropomorphisms of land features and trees expressing emotions like human beings. I posted the verse in a discussion group with Mormons and asked if they believe that mountains can sing or that trees have hands. Of course, they denied that they do. So then I asked, don't you believe the Bible? Then some fell silent while others turned to ridicule. None even attempted a rational distinction between this verse and the ones that they claim refer to literal body parts of God. 

Mormon exegesis falls apart under a little examination. 

The Incorruptible Seed of the Believer's Perseverance

"Having purified your souls by your obedience to the truth for a sincere brotherly love, love one another earnestly from a pure heart, since you have been born again, not of perishable seed, but of imperishable, through the living and abiding word of God." -I Peter 1:22-23 

Peter here addresses believers, not men in general. He refers to our obedience to the truth, our sincere love, our pure heart, and out having been born again. So his word choices preclude the possibility that he is talking to false professors or other hypocrites. He has in mind only true believers. I want to make that point to preclude some of the common quibbles made to the Reformed doctrine of perseverance of the saints. I am not defending the belief that every person who professes to be a Christian is guaranteed an eternity in Heaven. 

We are born again, Peter tells us, with a seed which cannot perish. The KJV uses the word "incorruptible," the same word that Paul uses in I Corinthians 15:52 for the resurrection body, because it can never again experience death. That tells us that the born again believer, from his first moments, has a spirit of the same resurrection nature as his body will be on the unknown day when our bodies rise again from the grave! 

Human Moral Inability and the Gospel

 "I know, O Lord, that the way of man is not in himself, that it is not in man who walks to direct his steps" (Jeremiah 10:23). 

I have written many times about the doctrine of total depravity. This is the doctrine of total inability, which is closely related, but distinct. Total depravity is the condition, while total inability is the result. That is, sin has affected every faculty of our humanity, the result of which is that there REMAINS no native ability in us to perform any moral good. The two things are often equated, but I am treating them separately, because I think that Scripture addresses them separately. 

It is a common error of supporters of free will that the doctrine of total inability is an invention of John Calvin, based on a misreading of the writings of Paul. I deliberately chose the verse above from Jeremiah to show that both aspects of that accusation are wrong. Total inability is an invention of neither Paul nor John Calvin. 

Rather, we see in the prophet his concern that men are unable to obey God from any ability in ourselves. As he faced the coming prospect of the exile of Judah in Babylon, he lamented that Judah could not reform himself. So, he pleaded, "correct me" (verse 24), because I cannot correct myself. That is, speaking on behalf of his people. 

As theologian John Frame has said, "Although fallen persons are capable of externally-good acts (acts that are good for society), they cannot do anything really good, I. e., pleasing to God (Romans 8:8). God, however, looks on the heart. And from His ultimate standpoint, fallen man has no goodness, in thought, word, or deed. He is, therefore, incapable of contributing anything to his salvation."

That is the connection of this doctrine to the gospel. The inability of men to display the righteous nature that God requires would naturally doom all men to eternal judgment (Hebrews 12:14), would display, not injustice on God's part, but rather hopelessness on the part of men. Instead, God established a righteousness which is by faith alone, the imputation of the perfect righteousness of a surety, an alien righteousness, granted to every sinner for whom He died on the cross, Jesus of Nazareth (Isaiah 26:12, John 6:37-39, II Corinthians 5:21).