My guess is that it would be hard not to let the idea of being “chosen” inflate the heads of those convinced that it applies to them. I know it would be hard for me to chalk up my own election (if I believed in such a thing) fully to divine mystery: I suspect that deep down I’d feel pride in somehow being one of those few whom God thought He could use to bring Himself glory, no matter how much my innate uselessness was necessary to qualify me. I suppose that in the end, even if I believed I had no merit going into it, that the act of divine election itself would afford me a special status in God’s economy and be a coat of many colors difficult to wear in humility.
Speaking for myself, when I get up in morning I don’t normally say to myself, “I’m elect!” That’s really not the very first thought to pop into my head when I open my eyes. Or the second. Or the third.
In fact, I can get through the whole day without whispering that exclamation under my breath. Just between you and me, entire weeks go by at a time without consciously reflecting on my election.
When I visit the supermarket, I don’t ask myself, “I wonder if that shopper is elect or reprobate?” “I wonder if that cashier is elect or reprobate?” “I wonder if that butcher is elect or reprobate?” “I wonder if that baby in the stroller is elect or reprobate?”
The funny think about his “guess” is that, by imputing this invidious comparison to the Calvinist, Douglas is indulging in his own invidious comparison. By imputing to the Calvinist a prideful contrast between the elect and the reprobate, Douglas is drawing a prideful contrast between himself and the Calvinist. Funny how often folks are oblivious to the very fault they fault in others.
His objection also has the odd effect of suggesting that Christians should never thank God for their salvation.
The reason I don’t define myself by my election is that knowledge of my election is an inference or conclusion from other things. From faith in Christ. What Christ has done for me. How God has come into my life. That’s the focal point.
Although salvation is a consequence of election, knowledge of election is a consequence of salvation. So Christ remains front and center.
This paragraph struck me as being a lot more autobiographical than being a serious criticism of the doctrine of election. He suspects that deep down he would feel pride, I suspect that because deep down he already feels pride.
ReplyDeleteI also find this comment in the combox from another poster to be quite revealing:
Paul's apparent argument in Romans 9 that the damnation of some reveals the glory of God to the rest is a bag of baloney and I would tell Paul to his face: people are not pots to be made and smashed at will you fool! It is this passage which fired inquisitions and demeaned humanity more than any other.
I don't think I've seen such honesty coming from an arminian before. If only more arminians would exhibit such honesty and admit that they outright reject certain passages of scripture instead of trying to twist them into knots.