God's Sovereignty and Man's Will

         Lately I've been really interested in the interplay between God's sovereignty and man's free will. The majority of the time a topic like this arises, it becomes focused on Armenianism versus Calvinism. I want to go beyond that subject, important as it may be. As a friend recently mentioned, what we often understand theologically appears as a mystery when worked out in practical life. I think sometimes starting with a particular ideology in mind we lose valuable information. Holding to any particular "isms" too strictly can often stifle any new revelation that we initially think may cause conflict with our presuppositions.

         What sparked my recent interest was something mentioned in a recent sermon by my father. He mentioned we should be grateful to the saints that came before us who passed the gospel down, through generations and seasons of persecution, to us. This is very true, and I began to think it may be important to specify what we are thankful for. Too often it is easy to suppose the implication is that we should be grateful to them for our salvation. That when we stand in heaven, we will approach these people with thankfulness that they brought us salvation, that because of them we are saved. Intentionally or not, I have seen this taken by people as though we should be grateful towards them for bringing us our salvation. 

        This is where the interplay between God's sovereignty amd man's will comes in. When we think about it in light of scripture, we see that no man is responsible for our salvation. It's not brought about by works. God's grace is responsible. If that saint, or missionary had not brought the gospel to us, God's grace would have found another way. Romans 1 speaks of God's revelation of His nature through the natural world, Genesis 14 of Melchizedek, not a Jew, but a High Priest of God, Acts 10 of Cornelius, a devout servant of God, though having never been told of Him, and Acts 16, of the Macedonian Man, crying out to God for someone to reach them. This is often called Natural Theology, those who are saved by Christ's grace, which they have come upon without the use of scripture. To be fair, we should specify between salvation through grace and the total gospel. Because it is also said in Romans 10 "how can they be saved unless someone is sent"? Many theologians interpret this passage as referring to the whole and complete gospel, as given by Special Theology, through scripture. These examples prove that God's grace can find its way to anyone, whether or not they are reached by a Christian.

         I feel no need to be grateful towards any saint for bringing me knowledge of God's grace. If they had not, scripture demonstrates Grace would have found its way to me despite. What I do feel grateful for is that they were willing to bring the full gospel, which many would not know, as it comes specifically through scripture, thus fulfilling the biblical mandate. In the next life, I will not thank them saying, "because of your willingness I was saved!" It is because of God's grace I was saved. What I would say is, "thank you for your willingness, despite knowing my salvation didn't depend on you." 

         Now, let's bring it to the modern day, in our practical lives. It's been implied, through sermons and casual conversation, that when we feel the Spirit's influence to witness, and do not, that might have been their only chance. "They could die today, and you didn't share the gospel!" When I don't witness to someone, I don't feel guilty because of the implication that "because of my fear I'd risk letting someone spend eternity in hell." I feel guilty for disobeying God's conviction, for not allowing myself to be used by Him. I think it's a misguided concept that they could spend eternity in hell because you or I didn't witness to them. That person's salvation isn't determined by my obedience to God's commands, it's determined by God's grace and will, and their receptiveness to His Spirit. 

          To prove my point, if the evangelized's salvation were determinate by our obedience, God would be leaving people's salvation up to a third party's works, something that would cause a theological conflict. Salvation is between one man and God. There are numerous examples both in scripture and in our experience when someone is given numerous chances to change their ways and come to Him. He doesn't give up. He is faithful when we are unfaithful. How can their salvation, given without merit, be determined by your or my (a third party's) obedience to God's commands? If it was, it would paint a picture of a very petty, small God, who would withhold his grace to another, if His followers didn't do their duty. A picture of a God who is unable to reach someone unless we do it for Him. Luckily, salvation is determined by two things, grace and a willingness to follow Christ, and it's between the person and Christ, not a third party's obedience.

        In the end, the distinction of what we are grateful for makes it all the more beautiful. Those saints and missionaries before me went, despite the fact that they didn't have to. My salvation did not rest in their hands, yet they were willing to be God's vessels. And contrary to what may be thought, it doesn't make it easier to neglect our duty. It doesn't make light of disobedience, it just places the honor where it is due; on God. If the love of Christ compels me to share and do not, I've done wrong. But we mustn't take one person's neglect to an illogical extent, which then condemns another.  I think of the Macedonian man, crying out for someone to come to them. Natural Revelation of the truth had been given him, and yet he longed and cried out for more. The clarity and joy of the full gospel of Christ is such that it's behooves us to share such beauty with the world.