God's choice of Isaac over Ishmael as the promised "seed" is seen as a defense of the prerogatives of God. He did not need the substitution offered by Abraham. He was perfectly capable, through the cooperating faiths of Abraham and Sarah, to bring about His purposes.

Some of the arbitrary choices of God are not as clearly understood, however. In a later time, God would impose His sovereign power over a Pharaoh of Egypt to maintain his already hardened heart. We find God explaining his motive to us in this way, "I made thee to stand, to show thee my power, and that my name may be declared throughout all the earth." (Exodus 9:16).

In another instance of the divine prerogative of choice, God selected., the nation of Israel apart from all others. Again, however, he reveals his reason, "Behold, I have taught you statutes and ordinances ... Keep therefore and do them; for this is your wisdom and your understanding in the sight of the peoples, that shall hear all these statutes, and say, Surely this great nation is a wise and understanding people. For what great nation is there, that hath a god so nigh unto them, as Jehovah our God is whensoever we call upon him? And what great nation is there, that hath statutes and ordinances so righteous as all this law, which I set before you this day?" (Deuteronomy 4:5-8). In another place God showed that His choice was to fulfil the promises made to their fathers with an oath (Deuteronomy 7:6-11). Isaiah reminded them of this unique demonstration in his day (Isaiah 43:8-12).

Since Israel benefited by being a chosen people, they could not resist the right of God to choose another nation, if it suited His purposes. In fact, it did suit His purpose, because we hear him say, ". . . it shall come to pass that, in the place where it was said unto them, Ye are not my people, it shall be said unto them, ye are the sons of the living God" (Hosea 1:10). Also, He said, "I will move them (Israel) to jealousy with those that are not a people; I will provoke them to anger with a foolish nation" (Deuteronomy 32:21b). If Israel resented this arbitrary change in the policy of God which caused them the loss of their privileged place, they were not to express that resentment. Paul argued, ". . . O man, who art thou that repliest against God? Shall the thing formed say to him that formed it, Why didst thou make me thus? Or hath not the potter a right over the clay, from the same lump to make one part a vessel unto honor, and another unto dishonor?" (Romans 9:20-21).

The arbitrary choice of God is refined, seemingly, in his pronouncement to Rebekah concerning the struggle of twins in her womb, "Two nations are in thy womb ... and the one people shall be stronger than the other people; and the elder shall serve the younger." (Genesis 25:23). Paul, the apostle, describes the unique character of this, strange choice. ". . . For the children being not yet born, neither having done anything good or bad, that the purpose of God according to election might stand, not of works, but of him that calleth, it was said unto her, The elder shall serve the younger." (Romans 9:11-12). Apparently, then, this choice was made simply to illustrate the right of God to choose.

This series of facts has led some to conclude that the sovereign power of God is so strong that man is left with no will of his own. Calvin developed this conclusion to a religious science, claiming that election of the saved was done without any act on the part of a man. This forced the companion conclusion that God condemned without hope those whom he arbitrarily assigned to condemnation. This vicious doctrine overlooks the many passages that speak of the choice of man and the need for man to be persuaded by God. If this conclusion is true, men would have the right to be outraged by the lack of justice in such a system. Paul mentions this reaction in his statement, "Thou wilt say then unto me, Why doth He still find fault? For who withstandeth His will?" (Romans 9:19). How, indeed, could God condemn those whom' he has given no chance to be saved?

Let us not lose sight of the lesson at this point. Paul's purpose is to show that we must recognize God's divine right of choice. But, he also shows us that the choices are not in any sense unjust, or as overbearing of man's will as Calvin might affirm. Rather, men in every nation have an opportunity by faith to become one of God's elect. He says so in the next chapter, "For Christ is the end of the law unto righteousness to every one that believeth . . . For the scripture saith, Whosoever believeth on him shall not be put to shame. For there is no distinction between Jew and Greek: for the same Lord is Lord of all, and is rich unto all that call upon him: for, Whosoever shall call upon the name of the Lord shall be saved." (Romans 10:4, 11-13).

After joining the ranks of God's elect by faith, that position is not maintained except by the continuance of faith. In speaking to Gentiles who became grafted in to replace the unfaithful Jews who were cut off, Paul said, ". . . glory not over the branches ... by their unbelief they were broken off, and thou standest by thy faith. Be not high minded, but fear: for if God spared not the natural branches, neither will he spare thee. Behold then the goodness and severity of God: toward them that fell, severity; but toward thee, God's goodness, if thou continue in his goodness: otherwise thou also shalt be cut off" (Romans 11:18, 20-22). Therefore, we see the severity of God is directed only at those who deserve it and the goodness of God benefits those who maintain their faith. This is a far cry from Calvin's concept of the sovereignty of God. God is sovereign, no doubt. He can make choices that are inherent in His supremacy. But, he is just in his choices. They do not prevent the choice of man, or the exercise of his will. Such a concept fits a God who is both all-powerful and just at the same time. "O the depth of the riches both of the wisdom and the knowledge of God! How unsearchable are his judgments, and his ways past tracing out!" (Romans 11:33).

Truth Magazine, XVIII:3, p. 12
November 15, 1973