Chosen for Life: The Case for Divine Election - Sam Storms
This one took me a while to get through.
Trying to remember when I started this book, I have a funny feeling I picked it up just after I finished William Barclay's Letters of James and Peter, which would put it around May last year.
Obviously I haven't been reading it non-stop since then, but it is a testament to how "thinky" the book is that I had to find times when I could get my head around it, rather than being able to just pick it up at any time of day (as I do with most of what I read).
None of this is to downplay the book or make it seem dull. I did enjoy it. But I really wanted to take it in, particularly as the book has quite an interesting topic.
Sam Storms is a Calvinist, and Chosen for Life is a defense of the Calvinist doctrine of election - the belief that God chooses whom He wishes to save based completely on His own will, rather than taking any human free will into consideration (which would be called Arminianism). I wouldn't call myself either fully Arminian nor Calvinist, but in terms of election I fall much more towards the free will end of the spectrum.
I love theology. It is what I got my Bachelor degree in. But it is a topic that does require a bit more mental headspace, and as I am now a full-time teacher, I don't always have the headspace to read it. With something like a defense of election - a belief I have some issues with - I wanted to take my time and really wrestle with what Storms was saying.
In terms of explaining election, Chosen for Life is a very thorough work. Storms looks at numerous passages, quotes from some of the most well known Calvinist theologians (numbers of whom - such as John Piper and J I Packer - I greatly respect, and agree with in many other areas), and also gives his own views on why the Calvinist perspective is, to him, the correct viewpoint.
In theology, I believe it is vital to read perspectives that you disagree with, particularly since it is a field that people can become very (literally) dogmatic, and even Pharisaical about. I've had my own theology challenges by God at times, and always want to be ready to change my beliefs if I realise they don't line up with Scripture.
The strength of a doctrine like election is that it makes much of God's Sovereignty. God is in control of everything. Without His calling, a person cannot come to salvation, because we are 'totally depraved' and don't want to be saved. Calvinism tells us that God must first change our hearts to want Him, and that this is 'irresistible' - if God has called you, eventually you will respond. Although I don't agree with this entirely, I do like being challenged to remember that God is mighty - far mightier than we sometimes accredit to Him.
A weakness with the doctrine is that it creates some limits to the love of God. Storms tries to argue that God does love everyone, but is forced to clarify: "Although there is surely a sense in which God loves the non-elect, he does not love them redemptively. If he did, they would certainly be redeemed. God loves them, but not savingly, else they would certainly be saved." (page 183) This is, to me, a very unfortunate distinction that Calvinism is forced to make. Verses like John 3:16 and 1 Timothy 2:4 tell us that God desires for all people to be saved, yet by arguing that God does not love them with a 'saving' love, it is at least implicitly implied (and often explicitly stated) by Calvinists that God is therefore choosing to send the lost to hell, away from salvation. I believe that some people will end up in hell, but I don't believe that the bible in any way says that this is what God desires. Rather, the sacrifice of Jesus shows God doing everything in His power to help people avoid that fate.
To his credit, Storms engages with this controversial topic as well, admitting that some Calvinists dislike the idea of God choosing some for hell, but also arguing that, since no human is deserving of salvation, it is a demonstration of the extravagance of God's love that He would choose to save anyone. The fact that some are sent to hell is interpreted as something important to display another aspect of God's character: His wrath (p 184). I disagree with this need too. In the Bible we are told that Satan's fallen angels are already facing judgment, and if God's wrath was necessary to show, it could be poured out on them without the need to condemn others there as well. Also, it is not required for an elephant to trample someone to death in order for its power to be displayed. These are two very inadequate responses, but as this blog is primarily for reviewing books, I better restrain from getting too much deeper into my theological arguments here. Perhaps I can write something more about this on my other blog sometime (a blog I have been far more neglectful of!).
Anyhow....
Chosen for Life is a very thorough argument for the doctrine of election. If you are a Calvinist, it is sure to be a helpful resource in defending your faith. If you have some disagreements, it will still give a very clear understanding of another point of view, and maybe challenge or expand your own concept of God, which as a Christian is often a good thing.
After all, no matter how big our concept of God, it will be smaller than the true, limitless, omnipotent, omnipresent, God of love (and justice) that has revealed Himself to us through the person of Jesus.
Completed 15 March 2021.
Comments
Post a Comment