by J. D. Hall
in ePub, .mobi, .pdf & MP3 formats
HT Pulpit & Pen
This short treatise has been written for those who are the committed and sincere faithful, who have heard, perhaps for the first time, the doctrine of God’s election from the Holy Bible. I am writing this, from a pastoral perspective, for the sheep of God’s pasture, those who believe in the inerrancy, sufficiency, and inspiration of God’s Word. This treatise is irrelevant to anyone who does not hold to this belief.
Over the years, as my pastoral duties have put me in the position of an overseer of preaching ministries, I have felt the weight of my ordination, in which the laying on of hands of good and Godly men, commissioned me to do just what Paul commissioned Timothy to do – to preach the word in both good season and bad, to reprove, rebuke, and exhort and to do so with great patience and careful instruction (2 Timothy 4:2). In “good season and bad” contextually means “when it’s easy and when it’s difficult.” The reason my ordination to accomplish this task looms heavily over me is that I have seen countless numbers, over the sundry years, do precisely what the multitudes did to Jesus in John 6 when He preached to them regarding the Doctrine of Election…leave. Oh, how much easier it would have been to forget this doctrine! How easy it would have been to proclaim God’s sovereignty only in whispered tones, quiet hints, and gentle nods in Bible studies or in dark hallways. This approach would have saved me many tears and heartbreak, and no doubt, our pews would be fuller, accordingly.
But, I cannot ignore the doctrine of election; I have a charge to preach Truth. This treatise is written for those who are inclined to disappear, like the multitudes on the seashore by Capernaum, when hearing of the doctrine of election. So, I ask you, please reason with us.
Granted, reason may not be the best word to describe what I am asking of you. Reason is commonly defined as the power of the mind to think, understand, and form judgments by a process of logic. In that sense, reason is an inadequate term to describe what I am asking you to do, which is to think, understand, and form judgments, not by an appeal to logic in and of itself, but by studying the Holy Scriptures. I am asking you to reason with me in the same sense that Isaiah pleads with Israel to reason with him in Isaiah 1:18 as he says,
“Come now, let us reason together, says the Lord though your sins are like scarlet, they shall be as white as snow; though they are red like crimson, they shall become like wool. If you are willing and obedient, you shall eat the good of the land; but if you refuse and rebel, you shall be eaten by the sword; for the mouth of the Lord has spoken” (ESV)
The word is יָכַח (yakach) and means, “to prove, decide, judge, rebuke, reprove, correct, be right.” This is the definition of reason that I ask you to pursue and utilize.
I am going to warn you; this entire conversation is emotionally volatile. It is loaded with presuppositions on both sides. Years of bad, inaccurate and sinfully dishonest characterization – on both sides – make for a hard conversation. These inconsistent beliefs aside, will you reason with me?
Is it worth reasoning over the Holy Bible to determine truth? Is it worth taking a survey of the Bible to ground your beliefs, rather than relying on tradition, presupposition, emotion, or mischaracterization? My friends, we have been given the very oracles of God in the 66 Books of the Bible. As stated, I am writing this to the very sincere among those of you who profess faith in Jesus. I believe you do care about what God’s Word says. Will you reason with me?
I am asking you to read the contents of this treatise. And while I am already presuming upon that kindness, I will ask you to do one other thing. I am challenging you to make a choice. I am requesting you to (A) refute what I present to you as the Bible’s teaching of God’s sovereignty over salvation or (B) submit yourself to its teaching. The refusal to refute my reasoning, yet submitting to teaching that is in opposition to it, results in a heart of idolatry.
As I pastor and minister, my greatest fear is that many who worship on Sunday mornings are idolaters, in that they have crafted a God of their own imaginations. The perceived image of God varies from person to person, as each desires to envision Him. If our understanding of God is not intrinsically tied to Scripture alone, it is tied to something outside of Scripture, and chiefly, that is our personal preferences. A god crafted by personal preference is an idol, and not the Thrice-Holy God of Heaven.
After appealing to Scripture and without dismissing other Scriptures, if you can put down this treatise and say, “The exegesis provided here is incorrect, the doctrine presented is invalid, and the perspective is “untrue,” I will rejoice in your conviction - even while I mourn that I believe it to be in error. Yet, interpretation aside, I will rejoice that you are devoted to the Bible in its fullness. If you reject the doctrines presented herein for any reason other than the pure evidence of Scripture, I will mourn on all counts
Please, will you reason with me?
Finally, I am asking you to allow me to speak bluntly. I have strove in this treatise to follow the command of Paul to young Timothy to reprove, rebuke, and exhort with much patience and careful instruction. I must instruct carefully and precisely. The surgeon must be precise, because his trade requires him to hold life and death in his hands. The theologian-pastor must be all-the-more precise in his Scriptural instruction, for his trade requires him to hold the Scripture, in his hands, which can bring either eternal life or eternal death, depending how it is handled. Since I must be precise, there is little room for dialogue infinitely concerned with tone (although I have done my very best to season my statements with love and charity). You wish your surgeon to slice and cut with precision, and are not altogether concerned, in that moment, with bedside manner. Please give me the liberty to speak freely, without taking offense.
I do not know you, the reader, but I love you.
Will you reason with me?