Debate Review 3

3rd Night

1. Has the word of God come to you in the same way it came to the Thessalonians? (I Thess. 1:5)

2. Can you say that God loved and chose you as he did Jacob, i.e., without any regard for "any good" he had done and before he existed?

3. Can you say that God took you from the clay of mankind, to make into a vessel of mercy, not for any difference in you from others?

4. Was Isaac chosen before he was born to be a child of God?

5. Was Isaac's supernatural birth a result of a decision or act of Isaac or upon God's decision and act alone?

Has the word of God come to you in the same way?

"Knowing, brethren beloved, your election of God. For our gospel came not unto you in word only, but also in power, and in the Holy Ghost, and in much assurance; as ye know what manner of men we were among you for your sake." (I Thess. 1: 4, 5)

I asked this question because I knew that Restorationist apologists have historically taught that the word of God did not come to them in the same manner as it did to the Thessalonians. Campbellites have traditionally taught that the "word alone" was all that was required to effect regeneration and that no special operation of the Spirit was needed in addition to the word. So, when this verse was cited by our Baptist forefathers, to rebut that opinion, the Campbellites would say that this "demonstration of the Spirit" and this coming of the word in "power," was a 1st century experience only, and were allusions to miracles attending the apostolic preaching. Their idea is that no one today receives the word of God in the same manner it did to the Thessalonians. But, Bruce affirmed that the word of God had come to him in this manner. I was delighted to hear him say that for it meant he was in agreement with Baptist sentiment and against his brethren.

God loved and chose you as he did Jacob?

In answer to this question Bruce said "no." This was very telling, and marked a serious moment in the debate.

He admitted that, in the context of Romans 9, that God loved and chose Jacob, before he was born, and that this choice and love were unconditional. He just would not admit, however, that this choice and love had anything to do with Jacob's individual salvation, but only to his being made an ancestor of Jesus and to his, and his children, having some temporal advantages, of Jacob over Esau, and of Jews over Edomites. Bruce was admitting that if Romans 9 were talking about individual election to salvation, then it is unconditional as the Calvinist teaches. He was also affirming that God loved Jacob unconditionally, but loved Bruce Reeves conditionally. God chose Jacob not because of any good he did, but God chose Bruce Reeves because of good he did. Jacob's being loved and chosen by God "was not of him who willed or ran," but Bruce Reeve's being loved and chosen by God "was of Bruce who willed and ran."

Taken and Chosen Because of Difference or Unto Difference?

"Can you say that God took you from the clay of mankind, to make into a vessel of mercy, not for any difference in you from others?"

Again, Bruce confessed by saying "no." He could not say that God's choice of him, God's taking him from the common lump of clay, was not based upon any difference he himself first made. He believes that God chooses to save those who believe, by their own free will and ability, and this choice is a kind of recognition, a kind of honoring, a kind of rewarding. He has to look at the illustration of the Potter and clay and show that the Potter is "selecting" the best or superior part of the clay, a part of the clay that is different (better), but this he could not do because clay was all "the same." I also referred back to I Cor. 4: 7 and Paul's statement that all differences are owing to God's giving. People do not make themselves different, are not their own potters, are not the chief determiner of their own destinies.

Also, in Romans 9, unconditionality is indicated in these phrases:

"before they had done any good or evil"
"it is not of him who wills nor runs"
"it is of God that shows mercy"
"out of the same lump"

Was Isaac chosen before he was born to be a child of God?

Bruce said "no." He did not deny that God chose Isaac, before he was born, to be in the lineal ancestry of Christ, but nothing more. But, anyone reading the story, and the NT commentary upon it, and is honest, knows that God chose and destined Isaac before he was born to be more than just an ancestor of Jesus!

Isaac's supernatural birth a result of a decision or act of Isaac?

I had cited these words, more than once, early in the debate.

"Now we, brethren, as Isaac was, are the children of promise. But as then he that was born after the flesh persecuted him that was born after the Spirit, even so it is now." (Gal. 4: 28, 29)

The story of Isaac's being a "child of promise," or "child of God," is stated by Paul to be illustrative of Christian salvation. The miraculous birth of Isaac (Abraham and Sarah were "dead," reproductively speaking) was an type of Christian spiritual birth. So, if we can look at how and why Isaac became chosen, a child of promise, and spiritually born, we discern how and why Christians become so. Any unbiased person knows how Isaac was chosen unconditionally and that his spiritual birth resulted from the divine choice, and was miraculous and certain.