|
“But you are
a chosen race, a royal priesthood, a holy nation,
a people for God’s own possession.” (1 Pet. 2:9)
“You did not choose me, but I chose you and appointed you
so that you might go and bear fruit—fruit that will last—and so
that whatever you ask in my name the Father will give you.”
(John 15:16)
In the light of those two Scriptures alone it would
seem obvious God is still choosing who is to be His people.
Nevertheless there exists a strong theology within Christendom
that denies this to be true, which is called Arminianism.
Raised Catholic, I never paid much attention to the “Protestant”
battle that had erupted in the 16th century between
Calvinism and Arminianism. After I became a true follower of
Messiah in my late thirties I grew more aware of that
theological ruckus. I learned it had even come between the two
legendary Great Awakening preachers, George Whitfield and the
Wesley brothers; Whitfield taking the Calvinist view of things.
But I was never quite able to penetrate the theological fog
surrounding the dispute. Besides, it seemed to have faded into
history and was of little consequence today.
Boy, was I wrong!
A newsletter article by the Vice Chairman of the ICEJ, an
organization in the forefront of Christian Zionism, brought the Arminian viewpoint (not to be confused with the Armenian people)
roaring back like a freight train. And I suddenly realized that
this theology was like a Manchurian Candidate in our midst.
In the article this brother attacked a teaching he felt was
gaining too much acceptance among CZs known as “the Ephraimite
teaching.” That teaching, which I subscribe to wholeheartedly,
holds that there can be only one valid explanation for why
Scripture calls the Gentile followers of Christ “descendants of
Abraham” (Gal. 3:29). And that is we must be actual physical
offspring, descended no doubt from the tribes of Israel exiled
among the nations by Assyria in the eighth century BC (see 2
Kings 18:9-12; 1 Chron. 5:26).
The writer called that teaching a “fable,” and insisted that
most of the northern kingdom had been absorbed into Judah before
the invasion so that Israel no longer has any tribal
distinctions – but all are now called “the Jews.” This belief is
clearly refuted by Revelations 7:4-8 where all 12 tribes are
listed in God’s coming kingdom roundup. And outweighed by the
enormous amount of prophecy that speaks of Ephraim’s reunion
with Judah as being a catalyst for the Messianic Age (see Isa.
11:11-16; Jer. 23:5-8; Ezek 37:15-28; Hos. 1:10,11).
But in reading the article it was clear the brother’s real
problem with the Ephraimite teaching was that it promoted
“limited atonement.” Now anyone familiar with the Calvinist/Arminian
argument knows that “limited atonement” is the “L” in TULIP, the
acronym that sums up the five tenets of Calvinism. “Limited
atonement” means Jesus died for God’s elect only. While
“unlimited atonement,” which the Arminians championed, denied it
was only for a chosen few, but for all mankind. In other words,
Arminianism teaches God does not have a pre-chosen people.
Now, I ask, how can anyone be a Christian Zionist and not
believe God still has a chosen people? For if there are no
chosen people, who are the Jews? Hasn’t the family of Abraham
been a chosen people from the moment God called the patriarch
forth from Ur of the Chaldeans? And if the Jews are not still
unique to God, isn’t Christian Zionism meaningless? Because then
the Jews have no greater standing in God’s sight than any other
family on earth. And if that is true, we might as well go back
to embracing Replacement Theology because Israel is no longer
the apple of God’s eye. And Christian Zionism is little more
than a compassionate outreach to the Jews who are trying to
establish themselves again in their native land in the face of a
fierce Islamic foe, with no reference to God’s favor.
The more I study Arminianism the more I realize its tenets are
no doubt the driving force behind the Replacement Theology
espoused by so many church denominations today. It’s insistence
that God no longer has a chosen people, Jews included, is now
imbedded in the doctrinal beliefs of such Protestant
denominations as the Mennonites, Quakers, Wesleyans, Methodists,
some Baptists, Nazarenes, Congregationalists, and even the
Assemblies of God. No wonder anti-Semitism has reared its ugly
head in many of these churches blaming the Jews for all the
trouble in the Middle East, while turning a blind eye to every
Islamic atrocity. It seems their Arminian theology has more
influence on them than the facts.
At this point, I think a quick overview of the basic
disagreement between Arminianism vs. Calvinism would be helpful.
I’ll try to make it as painless as possible.
The big divide
Arminianism was founded by Jacob Arminius (1560-1609), a Dutch
theologian who taught a few decades after Geneva’s renown
Reformer, John Calvin, had fallen asleep. At first a Calvinist,
he later concluded that man’s human dignity needed to be
protected in our coming to Christ. So he countered Calvin’s
emphasis upon the total sovereignty of God with the
responsibility of man. This responsibility, he argued, could be
met by the existence of man’s “free will,” a term not found in
Scripture. (Which no doubt explains why so many of the
“Arminian” churches opposed the Charismatic Movement in the
70’s, which promoted reliance upon the Holy Spirit.)
Taken as a whole, Arminianism is a very man-centered view of
salvation. That is, it leaves man in control of his own destiny
throughout the salvation process by teaching Jesus died to give
all mankind the opportunity to be saved. By the exercise of his
free will any man can choose to accept or reject the gospel. And
he will live or die by his own decision. He only needs to rise
above his inherent sinful condition and exercise faith. But it
seems faith to Arminius was not seen so much a free gift of
grace from God, as Eph. 2:8 informs us, but as one more exercise
of man’s free will, with an assist of grace. But if that is
true it means when Jesus exclaimed, “It is finished!” – it
wasn’t. Man still needed to pony up his faith to finish the job.
Arminius also taught, that as strong as our free will is it
could still succumb to the lust of the flesh later on, so a man
could lose his salvation. That led to his belief that a
Christian can never have absolute assurance he is saved. In his
view, there was no such thing as eternal security. (Not all
Arminians subscribe to his whole playbook, however.)
Calvin had taught the complete opposite. He put the focus
totally on God and taught a salvation based completely on grace
from start to finish. That’s why his view is often called the
“Grace Doctrine.” He believed Scripture taught that mankind was
completely dead in his sin and unable to lift a finger to save
himself (a condition he termed “total depravity”). So unless God
in His mercy intervenes in our life, and gives us the grace to
be saved, our goose is cooked. Thankfully, He does intervene –
and continues to do even after we are saved so we stay saved.
But the real controversy lay in Calvin’s belief that God had
predetermined who he would save by grace, accepting the apostle
Paul’s words at face value when he said, “He chose us in Christ
before the foundation of the world” (Eph 1:4). And Jesus, who
said, “I was sent only for the lost sheep of the house of
Israel” (Matt. 15:23). Here Jesus was referring not just to the
northern kingdom of Israel, which was also called the “House of
Israel,” but to all the chosen seed of Abraham, Jew and Gentile
alike. But still a specific remnant. As the Psalmist said:
“Blessed is the nation whose God is the Lord, the people whom He
has chosen for His own inheritance.” (Ps. 33:12)
Calvin insisted this salvation of God’s elect was not
conditioned upon a man’s worthiness or willingness. Anymore than
Jacob was more deserving or more willing than Esau when God
chose him above his twin brother while both were still in the
womb, and neither “had done anything good or bad” (Rom.9:11). If
Jesus had truly died for everyone in the world, as Arminius
argued, his sacrifice must be judged an abysmal failure because
so many have died unsaved. Probably more than those saved!
Furthermore, if Jesus died for the sins of all mankind, than all
the sins of men would be paid for, and nobody should be
punished, right? And if they are, aren’t those sins being paid
for twice? No matter how you look at it, Arminianism makes no
sense.
Calvin also taught God’s grace was irresistible. That it could
never be thwarted by man’s free will. As Jesus informed us, it
is Father God who sovereignly draws us to Jesus so we can be
declared righteous and eventually saved. “All that the Father
gives me will come to me, and the one who comes to me I will not
cast out” (John 6:37)...” and I will raise him up on the last
day” (John 6:44). We are drawn to Jesus by God’s Spirit and then
given all the grace needed to get saved and walk in holiness.
“Grace and peace be multiplied to you in the knowledge of God
and of Jesus our Lord; seeing
that His divine power has granted to us everything pertaining to
life and godliness, through
the true knowledge of Him who called us by His own glory and
excellence.” (2 Pet. 1:3)
In short, it was God’s full intention through Jesus to redeem
His lost sheep, and only His lost sheep, and then bring us all
safely into the kingdom of His beloved Son. And He left nothing
to chance. As Scripture informs us: “So then it does not depend
on the man who wills or the man who runs, but on God who has
mercy” (Rom. 9:16). So we can relax and just trust that our
heavenly Father has placed our entire salvation in Jesus capable
hands. Yes, we must follow him, but God gives us the grace to do
even that.
“My sheep hear my voice, and I know them, and they follow me;
and I will give eternal life
to them, and they will never perish; and no one will snatch them
out of my hand.” (John 10:27,28)
The problem with “free will,” which is a theological brouhaha
all by itself, is that it allows man’s will to triumph over
God’s. There can only be one sovereign will in the universe, and
if it is man’s then the inmates have taken over the asylum.
Unless God is in complete charge of every event under heaven,
including who gets saved and who doesn’t, the world is in the
hands of men and all is lost. Thank God He gave us the Bible to
assure us He has everything under control.
“We know that God causes all things to work together for good to
those who love God,
and are called according to His purpose. For those He foreknew
He predestined to
become conformed to the image of His Son.” (Rom 8:28,29)
“We have obtained an inheritance, having been predestined
according to His purpose
who works all things after the counsel of His will.” (Eph. 1:11)
For those who insist this is entirely unfair of God, and want to
grant every man the right to be saved, they should read Paul’s
sobering revelation in Romans 9:16-24. (And if you want a more
in depth comparison of the Calvinism/Arminianism controversy,
visit http://www.gotquestions.org/Calvinism-vs-Arminianism.html.)
Arminianism and RT
As I said before, I am now convinced Arminianism is the driving
force behind much of today’s Replacement Theology. When you
compare the two teachings you see they have exactly the same
core belief. Both believe that with the introduction of the New
Covenant God no longer looked at the world in terms of favorite
and unfavorite people as He did with Israel in the Old
Testament. That after Jesus rose from the grave the world became
a level playing field. Now anyone and everyone could become
God’s “chosen” people just by believing in his saving sacrifice.
The eternal promise God made to Abraham was therefore annulled
and the Jew became just like every other lost person in the
world as far as God was concerned.
The only difference I see between the two theologies is that RT
only throws the Jews under the bus, while Arminianism
disenfranchises all the chosen descendants of Abraham, Jew and
non-Jew, and replaces us with whoever raises his hand. But is
that what the Bible teaches? Definitely not! Concerning the Jews
who still cling to the Old Covenant, Paul writes: “From the
standpoint of God’s choice they are beloved for the sake
of the fathers” (Rom 11:28). That doesn’t make them saved, but
it keeps them in the ballgame. And as for New Covenant
believers, Peter writes: “You are a chosen race, a royal
priesthood, a holy nation, a people for God’s own possession” (1
Pet. 2:9). Through Jesus we’re declared righteous and reckoned
among the chosen remnant of Abraham’s family.
The reason I believe Arminianism has been able to get away with
its foolish insistence that God no longer has a chosen people is
because it was only Christians talking to, and about,
Christians. Nobody ever asked, “what about the Jews, aren’t they
still God’s chosen?” Nobody asked because back then nobody cared
a fig about the Jews. Thanks to Replacement Theology,
anti-Semitism had long been in vogue in the Church and among the
Christian nations. So the Jews special status as God’s chosen
people had already been nullified, and it wasn’t until Adolf
Hitler took it to its logical conclusion that the horrifying
consequences of that teaching would be thrown up in our faces.
As long as the issue remained an internal quarrel among
Christians it mattered not whether men chose Jesus, or Jesus
chose us. Because it didn’t affect the gospel as it was
preached. Let the theologians argue about the mechanics of that
salvation back at the shop. That’s why Whitefield could favor
Calvinism and be a first-class evangelist and the Wesley
brothers could be Arminian and be as equally effective. I even
understand Billy Graham and the Salvation Army hold Arminian
beliefs, and they were certainly no slouches at soul-winning in
their day, either.
But now things are different. The nation Israel is back on the
world stage. Replacement Theology no longer holds total sway as
it once did. And with the holy Spirit of God inspiring more and
more Christians to reach out and support the Jews and Israel,
Arminianism is suddenly found standing in the way. An historic
shackle that prevents Christians from breaking free of the
Gentile religion of Christianity to see they are Abraham’s seed.
That’s when I realized God was using Israel to flush this
theology out in the open so it can finally be seen for what it
is. One more religious doctrine of man.
The Arminian shackle
The longer the Israeli/Palestinian Conflict continues, the more
polarized Christians are becoming on the issue.
Some churches, even whole denominations, border on anti-Semitism
in their vitriolic denouncements of Israel. Their anger, they
say, is justified on behalf of “our Christian Palestinian
brothers and sisters” who are victims of Israeli oppression in
the so-called “occupied territories” (a highly inaccurate and
prejudicial term the world applies to the historic biblical
territory of Judea and Samaria). What they don’t realize, or
choose to ignore, is that the Arab Christian minority usually
cannot speak freely for fear of reprisal from the dominant
Islamic Arab majority. So they toe the party line. Or they are
themselves in the grip of Replacement Theology. Like any nation,
Israel isn’t perfect. And I’m sure there are many examples of
mistreatment. But that shouldn’t cause us to turn against Israel
and support the rise of an Islamic Palestinian terrorist state
that at the first opportunity will massacre every Jew in Israel.
And no doubt many Arab Christians.
However, other Christians from across the spectrum realize that
this is clearly God’s time “to arise and have compassion upon
Zion” (Ps. 102:13), and are pouring their money, time and
prayers into supporting Jewish Israel in every way they can.
This growing division in the Church has convinced me God is
testing the hearts of His people to see who cares for His word,
and who cares only about religious doctrine. And there’s no
question in my mind Arminianism is pure religion, a vestige of
Catholicism.
Its doctrinal dependence upon man’s “free will” is just another
way to repackage and enshrine our own self-effort and call
ourselves righteous. For if it is man’s decision to choose that
counts, then our salvation does not depend totally upon the work
Jesus accomplished on the cross, but on our acceptance of it.
This subtle switch in emphasis is a denial of the words of Jesus
who said, “You didn’t choose me, I chose you” (John 15:16). It
simply allows man to continue to sit on the throne of his carnal
pride and deny “that no good thing dwells in me, that is, in my
flesh; for [although] the willing is present in me, the doing of
the good is not” (Rom. 7:18).
But what about those, like the brother who wrote the article,
who hold Arminian beliefs and yet are Christian Zionists? How is
that possible? How do they reconcile their love and support for
Israel and the Jewish people with their belief that God has no
chosen people? (And I do not question the sincerity of their
love, nor do I believe it is based solely on humanitarian
grounds as opposed to Jews still being God’s people.) Their
stance seems completely contradictory. Either God has a chosen
people or He doesn’t.
. The loophole
The solution to this enigma, I believe, is found in their taking
refuge in another popular teaching, which I call “Separation
Theology.” This is the teaching, inspired by J.N. Darby, the
father of modern dispensationalism, which is slowly trying to
replace Replacement Theology as the correct theological response
to the question, “Who are God’s people? The Jews or the Church?”
Unlike RT which had argued the Church replaced the Jews as
God’s one and only people, ST argues God now has two peoples,
and both can lay legitimate claim to being God’s people or
“Israel.” The Jews are “physical Israel”, and the Gentile Church
simply becomes “spiritual Israel,” a term not in the Bible.
For those Arminians who cannot deny that God is on the side of
physical Israel today, Separation Theology provides a way to
support the Jewish state while still believing God has no more
chosen people. In effect, ST allows them to have their cake and
eat it too. Here’s how I believe it works (although I cannot say
for certain this is how the brother rationalizes it).
By saying Israel is separate from the Church allows one to see
God’s favor being restored to the Jews today as a continuation
of the old dispensational order. It simply represents God
settling an old account on the books to satisfy an outstanding
note He had obligated Himself to. In effect it establishes a
loophole in the Arminian theology to permit the conclusion of
the old order, while holding on to the new order as they see it
established under the New Covenant. That way, Arminians can
support the Jews – God’s other people – and still say God no
longer has a prechosen people among those being saved from among
the nations, namely those in the Church. At least that is my
admittedly unlicensed attempt to analyze this contradictory
behavior.
[Update: I have since found my theory confirmed in John Hagee’s
book, Jerusalem Countdown. Hagee, a major leader in the
Christian Zionist movement and clearly Arminian, talks about his
struggle to reconcile these two opposing beliefs, when he says,
“It is obvious that divine election is taught in Scripture...
[but] how can divine election be true if God has given to all
men free moral agency, which is the power to choose to accept or
reject God’s offer of salvation?” (pg. 145). He resolves it by
saying, “In my opinion, divine election is offered only
to the nation of Israel...”Divine election simply is not for
Gentiles” He then supports this bizarre teaching by explaining
that Romans 9-11, the chapters where Paul delves into the
principle of God’s choosing, is not written to Gentile
Christians, but to Jews only. So if you aren’t Jewish, I guess
you can just cut those chapters out of your Bible, they don’t
apply to you. Such foolishness.]
I should mention that Separation Theology usually includes the
Rapture teaching (also inspired by Darby) as God’s way of
finally separating the Church from physical Israel before
anti-Christ. In my article, “Christian Zionism and the
Pre-Tribulation Rapture” (Jerusalem Post – Christian Edition,
June 2010; also on my web site), I argued that the Rapture was
totally inconsistent with Christian support for Israel because
it was a premeditated abandonment of the Jews during their
greatest time of need. Something we promised them we’d never do
again following our abysmal failure to stand up for them during
the Holocaust.
Conclusion
As I tried to show, Arminianism with its insistence that God no
longer has a prechosen people is just another form of
Replacement Theology. When the Hebrew word “Messiah” became the
Greek word “Christ,” it started the process where Jesus (or
Yeshua) was disconnected from being the exclusive savior of
Israel. He would no longer be Israel’s “kinsman redeemer,” the
hope of Abraham’s family. As the “Christ” he was now the head of
a universal Gentile Church, a gathering of religious folks from
every nation who subscribed to an ever-changing set of man-made
doctrines that were often at great variance with Scripture. It
wasn’t long before the idea of a chosen people would be tossed
out the window through Replacement Theology. Arminius just
picked up on that belief, repackaged it, and called it
“unlimited atonement.”
Unless this Arminian doctrine is understood to be a form of
Replacement Theology in disguise, and rejected by the Church as
unbiblical, many sincere Christians will be misled in the days
ahead, and suffer the consequences. They will find themselves
either fighting against God, having chosen to stand with an
apostate Christian Church against Israel. Or, if they are for
Israel, could become confused and frightened when the Rapture
fails to materialize to whisk them away as “spiritual Israel”
before the tribulation engulfs them. Then it might be too late
to discover they were part of chosen “physical Israel” all
along. It would be much better to learn we are a part of this
unique family now. And be ready to be included in God’s total
restoration of Israel and partake of the joy of our homecoming
reunion. “Therefore the ransomed of the Lord will return, and
come with joyful shouting to Zion, with everlasting joy upon
their heads. They will find gladness and joy, and sorrow and
sighing will flee away” (Isa. 35:10).
It was Replacement Theology that robbed us of our Abrahamic
roots and knocked us off course centuries ago. That false
teaching was reintroduced as Arminianism in the middle of the
Reformation. Now that RT has been finally exposed as a false
teaching, along comes Separation Theology to get us to believe
Jesus is the head of two different spiritual nations. But ST is
as wrong-headed as RT. The ONLY way to understand the true
identity of the Church in relation to God and Israel is to see
it as a continuation of chosen, physical Israel. That is, if you
believe in Jesus Christ, and are not born Jewish, you are
revealed to be a chosen physical descendant of Abraham from one
of the other tribes. And are therefore as physically and
spiritually included in the family of Abraham and the family of
God as any born-again Jewish believer.
But why, you might ask, couldn’t
God’s chosen people include those from other families? Why
couldn’t some be Jews and the rest true Gentiles? Because that
throws us back into Replacement Theology. If God wouldn’t
replace all the descendants of Judah, the Jews, with a Gentile
Church, why would He replace all the descendants of the other
kingdom with folks from other families? In Scripture He never
replaces an unfaithful male member of the family (which means
that person was never chosen in the first place) - with someone
from outside the family. It will always be with another
physical descendant of Abraham, as Isaac replaced Ishmael, and
Jacob replaced Esau. “For the Lord’s portion is His people;
Jacob is the allotment of His inheritance” (Deut 32:9). And
again, “He chooses our inheritance for us, the glory of Jacob
whom He loves” (Ps. 47:4).
There is a faithline within the
bloodline of Abraham’s descendants, and through our faith in
Jesus it is revealed by Scripture we are in that faithline.
“If you belong to Messiah, you
are Abraham’s seed [offspring, descendants],
heirs according to promise.” (Gal. 3:29)
“And you brethren, like Isaac,
are children of promise.” (Gal. 4:28)
“You are a chosen race, a royal
priesthood, a holy nation, a people for God’s
own possession... once you were not a people, but now you are
the people of
God.” (1 Pet. 2:9,10)
Although the Bible definitely
includes us in the family, it doesn’t come right out and tell us
how that is
possible. But there can be
only one way to adequately explain how Gentiles can
be included in the family of Abraham without falling into
Separation Theology. And that is the Ephraimite teaching which
started all the fuss. That teaching explains that we are no
doubt one of God’s prechosen physical descendents scattered
among the Gentiles when the northern tribes were exiled by
Assyria in 722 BC. The only ones, along with the Jews, who were
prophesied by Jeremiah to receive the New Covenant inaugurated
by Jesus (see Jer. 31:31; Heb.8:8). When you read that Scripture
you see there is no mention of anyone else being included. It
was for the chosen seed of Abraham, and his family only.
The answer has been staring us in the face all along. But
teachings like Arminianism, Replacement Theology, and Separation
Theology have kept us from seeing the obvious truth. It was the
prophet Hosea who told Ephraim that God had divorced them,
saying, “You are not My people, and I am not your God” (Hos.
1:9). But then he encouraged them that one day God would return
and have compassion on them again, “And I will say to those who
were not My people, you are My people” (Hos. 2:23). The very
verse Paul quoted in his letter to the Romans - and applied it
to the Gentiles coming to Jesus! (See Rom. 9:25.)
Once we remove the theological bifocals that view us as two
different peoples we can see the Bible is just one continuous
story about a covenant promise made to one man - Abraham.
And the fulfillment of that
promise made to one of his chosen descendants through the line
of King David. When we understand that we will
be ready for the grand restoration of our people, and the return
our Lord and King, Yeshua ha Mashiach.
“ ‘For behold, days are coming,’ declares the Lord, ‘when I will
restore the fortunes
of My people Israel and Judah.’ The Lord says, ‘I will also
bring them back to the land
that I gave to their forefathers and they shall possess it.’ ” (Jer.
30:3)
“And I will make them one nation in the land, on the mountains
of Israel; and one king will
be king for all of them; and they will no longer be divided into
two nations and no longer be
divided into two kingdoms.” (Ezek. 37:22)
“But now in Messiah Jesus you who formerly were far off
(a term Daniel used to
describe the scattered tribes in Dan. 7:7) have been brought
near by the blood of Messiah.
For he himself is our peace, who made both groups into
one...that he might make the two
into one new man, thus establishing peace.” (Eph. 2:13-15)
August, 2011
www.bhennessy.com |