In the first chapter of the book Norman Geisler talks of a lady who’s pastor took the idea of God’s Sovereignty so far that he concluded there was nothing he could do that was in his own control, so he took his own life. While on the opposite side of the spectrum is human free will to the point that God does not even know what man’s next move will be. There is certainly some balance to this idea. The balance where God is still omniscient, but man still has the freedom to choose his path. This view according to Geisler balances sovereignty with man’s free choice.
On a personal level, this is something that I do not truly understand. I trust that God has omniscience, omnipresence, and omnipotence, as such is sovereign. However I also know that to some extent I have the freewill to choose what to do in my life, Ephesians 2:8-9 does not say, “For it is by grace those who have been chosen have been saved” Rather it says “You”. We are finite humans grasping and trying to define, an infinite God, based on the definition of the word define, “state or describe exactly the nature, scope, or meaning of,” and “mark out the boundary or limits of” we cannot define God, God is not limited to human words or knowledge.
In describing combat stress Lt. Col. Dave Grossman describes defining stress as blind men attempting to describe and define an elephant. One blind man grabs and feels the trunk, while another the ears, yet another the legs, but all three are still unable to fully grasp the enormity of the elephant. God is so much larger than an elephant, so while man in our blindness of being finite try to reach a conclusion about an infinite God.
Another key point, that I have seemed to conclude about extreme Calvinism is that they limit God to save only those who are predestined, Christ is limited to only being able to save that God choose, but yet the Bible clearly states that Christ came to give opportunity to the whole world to believe, not just the select few who God predestined. How can man limit God to only being able to save those who are predestined if God is truly omnipotent? “Extreme Calvinism is in practice a denial of God’s omnibenevolence,” According to Geisler,
On one extreme end of the Calvinism spectrum is the Netherlands Reformed Church, which believes that predestination comes by birth through a family that is part of this church, so it does not matter how one lives his life as long as he was born into a predestined family. So in this view one does not even need to believe in the grace offered by the death of Jesus, that one needs to be saved. So in this view there are two questions that are raised, and are unable to be answered. Why are believers commanded to evangelize? Forget about even the idea of grace, who cares if “Christians” live like hell if it is already chosen who will go to heaven?
On the extreme of Arminianism, there is a denial of God’s omniscience, so that is a denial of God’s knowledge of all things. Which is wrong on the other extreme because it denies what the Bible says is true of God, and to take one point from the Bible is to take all other points, removal of one Biblical truth can lead to remove all of the other truths as well.
One other point that must be addressed is that Geisler points out that on both extremes, Calvinism and Arminianism, is that those who take the stance go further than Calvin and Arminius took their own beliefs. This is what the religious leaders of Jesus time were guilty of doing with the Law, it is leaving behind what an infinite God teaches in His Word in favor of man’s own finite opinions. Adding to the Bible in a way that Believers are commanded not to do.
In the balanced perspective it falls to the fact that while God’s omniscience knows who will believe it is still the individuals choice to believe. As shown by Geisler Acts shows that there were those who were predestined, but yet it still was the responsibility of the hearers to act on the persuasion of the words spoken by Paul. Geisler states that the Bible teaches both divine sovereignty and human responsibility through this passage. It is an offer and a response to that offer, much like the decisions humans make everyday, an offer of a candy bar from the vending machine, and a response to that offer.
Geisler points out that throughout history the stance of mainstream Christianity is that of a balanced view. It is somewhere in this area that, while feeling much like a blind man describing an elephant, I would fall. Man is given the choice, yet God also knows who will make what choice. He is indeed omniscient, but the individual still must make a choice. It is something that blows my finite mind to comprehend, but that is the beauty of serving a God who is so powerful and so great, as believers we can spend an entire life studying Him and His Word, but when we get to heaven we will still have so many unanswered questions.
