Would you think him less gracious if that they went to Hell?

Does not God deserve our glory and honor and praise either way? Whatever God decides to do in this case, it is just and good because God is just and good

Here is the preference of my English Bible translations… hopefully in some accurate order:

1) English Standard Version (ESV) – Highly accurate yet easily readable.  Recommended by John Piper, Mark Driscoll, Joshua Harris, etc.

Specifically, see 1 Peter 1:2 and 1:20 in the TNIV (and NIV).

Christians are said to have “been chosen according to the foreknowledge of God the Father.”  Fair enough translation.  Yet when the same meaning is conveyed to be speaking of Christ a few verses later, the translaters opted to use “chosen” only, and leave out “foreknowledge“… even though the actual word in Greek both instances is explicitly foreknowledge!

Understand… I am not quibbling that the TNIV (or any other version) is taking words OUT of the Bible… as many KJV Onlyists do.  I recognize that difficulties in translating between Hebrew and English and Greek and English exist.  The problem is that the meaning of the text itself seems to be different than that of the original Greek.

Why has this been left out?  Why are the Christians said to have been “chosen according to the foreknowledge of God”, yet when speaking of Christ, the translators leave out any instance of foreknowledge of God?  While I cannot claim to know the exact reason, I think this poor translation on the part of the TNIV shows a stark theological bias away from the Reformed understanding of foreknowledge.

People like to think that foreknowledge implies God looks down the hallway of time and sees what you will do… so then he chooses you to do it!  This is the obvious Arminian perspective.  However… while such an understanding seems to work initially in verse 2… it is easy to see this would break down once verse 20 is reached.  Are we to understand then that Jesus is the Christ because the Father looked down the corridors of time, saw what Jesus would do, and then made him the Christ to redeem a people unto himself?

This understanding just doesn’t work.

I really have tried to like the TNIV … I really have.  It isn’t the worst translation available… and certainly it is more accurate than the NLT at least.  Still, in instances like this, I can’t bring myself to switch.  Not that I would ever switch away fully – but be more inclined to use it alongside my ESV as a more readable translation.  But I cannot do this if while it may clarify some language it creates a distinction between two instances of foreknowledge and choosing, when the original Greek implies actually a comparison, not a contrasting.

May the 2011 NIV keep the good of the TNIV… and lose the bad translations… and the political correctness.  (Seriously, whenever I run into “they” in the TNIV, I HAVE to consult either an ESV or NIV to see if the meaning is really plural or singular.)

*UPDATE*

I figured I should double check something… I just looked on BibleGateway.com @ the NIV rendering of 1Peter… and yes… they made the same error the TNIV did in drawing a distinction between “chosen according to the foreknowledge” and just “chosen”.

This may have come across as me just ranting against the TNIV itself… but this was because at the time I wrote this, I was reading from the TNIV rather than the NIV.  Still… the issue remains the same.  The bad translation choice used in 1 Peter by CBT muddies the truth of God’s foreknowledge, allowing for one to understand it as foresight rather than a sovereign and loving relationship with a specific group of people.

I recently received a series of questions from a good friend dealing with some issues/objections she had with Calvinism/Reformed Theology.  I truly appreciated the opportunity to share what I explicitly believe in the realm of the Doctrines of Grace with her, and humbled she came to me to know how a Calvinist deals with each of these questions.  This is a continuation of this series.

Because these questions are quite common inquires into Reformed Theology, I figured it would be profitable to the body of Christ for me to post my answers here as well.  Perhaps I will continue on beyond her questions in writing on/replying to other objections common to Calvinism.  Again, I hope this is useful to all who read this.

Question #4:
Who would be more loving – someone who chooses to be with you because that person loves you, or someone who is forced to be with you?

I am fairly familiar with this question, though in a different way: the “divine rapist” argument.  I would state this is far from a genuine description of the Calvinist argument.  I say “divine rapist” because famed apologist Norman Geisler says Calvinism turns God into a “divine rapist,” forcing himself upon people who did not choose him of their own free will.  It would seem, from this argument, that the one who chooses to love and serve the lover “of their own free will” is happier than the one who is forced by a kind of rape into the relationship.  I kindly reject this notion.

I pose another, perhaps more biblical question.

A blind man is walking toward the edge of a cliff.  You plead with him to stop… to turn around… to REPENT, as it were.  He refuses.  He continues walking.  Is it then LOVING for the man who sees the danger to say “Okay… you made your choice of your own free will… I offered love, but you didn’t take it.  Enjoy”??  Would the person, falling to his death from the edge of the cliff, say of the one who just let him make the choice to fall “well, surely THAT was the LOVING thing to do, rather than actually save me”??

Or would Pastor Mark Driscoll have been loving if he had allowed his infant daughter to exercise her will over and above his?  Please please watch.

This video concludes my main “point” of my example.

As to the notion of “free will” of the blind man… I offer this up.

<><

I recently received a series of questions from a good friend dealing with some issues/objections she had with Calvinism/Reformed Theology.  I truly appreciated the opportunity to share what I explicitly believe in the realm of the Doctrines of Grace with her, and humbled she came to me to know how a Calvinist deals with each of these questions.  This is a continuation of this series.

Because these questions are quite common inquires into Reformed Theology, I figured it would be profitable to the body of Christ for me to post my answers here as well.  Perhaps I will continue on beyond her questions in writing on/replying to other objections common to Calvinism.  Again, I hope this is useful to all who read this.

Question #3:
How does this affect your approach to ministry (ie: the homeless guy sitting on the side of the road)?

It gives me a great boldness in the presentation of the gospel.  I can firmly proclaim the truth, unwatered down, because I am assured that all the Father gives to Jesus will come to Christ; that person shall never be cast out, and that Christ will raise that person on the last day (John 6:35-44).  I have assurance that God will use my sharing the gospel to accomplish all of his purposes.  It isn’t my fault if they don’t respond to the gospel… they are not rejecting me, they are rejecting God.  I offer them the good news of Christ’s saving work to atone for sin, that if they repent and believe they will believe, they will be adopted into the family of God.  I share them the law of God – which shows their wickedness and that they are actually bad, not good.  Then I share the news of God’s glorious grace.

The gospel is just that: good news.  Not good news about me – I am not the gospel!  The gospel isn’t something that happened to me.  It happened 2,000 years ago.  The sharing of the gospel is telling the wondrous news of what CHRIST did to save sinners: his death, burial, and resurrection, atoning the sins of all who repent and believe.  Because of the Doctrines of Grace, as it were, I can proclaim this message with boldness, without fear.  Will some be turned off by the message?  Yes, because their hearts are hearts of stone.  But I know God, not I, will not allow his word to return void.  He is the one who can take my pitiful voice or words, proclaiming a “foolish” gospel, and turn their hearts of stone into hearts of flesh.

We don’t talk people into becoming Christian… we share the good news of God’s glorious grace when they are made aware of their wretchedness before a Holy God, and God does the work of bringing them to repentance and faith.

Yet there is no denying the importance of these genealogies.  It is part of what separates the Bible from fairy tales and folklore in many cases.  When you sit down to hear the story of Hansel and Gretel, there is no mistaken it is a mere fable.  These stories are set, for good reason, Once Upon A Time, In A Land Far, Far Away… (George Lucas would masterfully remix this famous opening to: “A Long Time Ago, In A Galaxy Far, Far Away…”).  It is because they have no real setting in reality.  The stories themselves exist not within reality, but only in the context of a make-believe story.

The Biblical narrative, by stark contrast, is firmly grounded in reality.  The Genealogies in Genesis, in Matthew and Luke attest to this.  It is not as if these characters, for the most part, appear out of thin air.  This is not to say that everyone in the biblical story are given a deep back story.  They aren’t.  But the core of the biblical narrative is grounded, if read plainly, in a historical reality.  Noah really did live – here is his family line, and here are his list of children and family line after him.  Jesus really existed and was born of Mary.  Here is his family tree to show the legitimacy of him being a real figure.  It gives enormous credibility to the Bible.

So don’t just read over it as fast as you can or merely ignore it.  The Holy Spirit chose to reveal it in this way for a reason, and it is therefore important.  The Bible is not a mere collection of fables and folklore.  It is truth – the most important truth to ever be conveyed in this history of the universe.

“The essence of sin is man substituting himself for God, while the essence of salvation is God substituting himself for man.  Man… puts himself where only God deserves to be;  God… puts himself where man deserves to be.”
- John Stott, The Cross of Christ.

“Learn to know Christ and him crucified.  Learn to sing to him and say, Lord you are my righteousness, I am your sin.  You took on you what was mine; yet set on me what was yours.  You became what you were not that I might become what I was not.”
- Martin Luther

“Man is alienated from God by sin and God is alienated from man by wrath.  It is in the substitutionary death of Christ that sin is overcome and wrath averted, so that God can look on man without displeasure and man can look on God without fear.  Sin is expiated and God is propitiated.”
- David Wells

<><

I recently received a series of questions from a good friend dealing with some issues/objections she had with Calvinism/Reformed Theology.  I truly appreciated the opportunity to share what I explicitly believe in the realm of the Doctrines of Grace with her, and humbled she came to me to know how a Calvinist deals with each of these questions.

Because these questions are quite common inquires into Reformed Theology, I figured it would be profitable to the body of Christ for me to post my answers here as well.  Perhaps I will continue on beyond her questions in writing on/replying to other objections common to Calvinism.  Again, I hope this is useful to all who read this.

Question #2:
How do you know Ryan Gill is a chosen one (a member of the elect)?

How do I, Ryan Gill, know I am “numbered among the elect”?  Simple:  I have responded to the Gospel call (to turn form my sin and believe/trust in Christ’s atoning work alone to save) by repentance and faith.  I do not trust in my work to save, but only in God alone to save me.  I do believe in Christ, and therefore I have eternal life (John 3:15; 6:47).  In light of John 6:44 &65, I know I CAN’T come to Christ unless the Father draws me.  I came to faith in Christ as a direct result of the Father drawing me… like a fisherman draws his net full of dead fish upon a shore.  … And this may not be very “Baptistically correct” … but I can also look toward my Baptism… for in my Baptism I was “buried with Christ in baptism, in which I was also raised with him through faith in the powerful working of God, who raised me from the dead” (Colossians 2:12).  And because of this, I also have assurance that I have been sealed with the promised Holy Spirit, a guarantee of our inheritance (Eph 1:13-14).  I know I am “chosen” because I desire the God of Scriptures… and I would hate him if I were still in my sins.

For a more articulate explanation…  this video may serve better.  It addresses a girl who texts Pastor Mark and asks, “How can I know if I am elect?”