My personal viewpoint (and I could be totally wrong) is that predestination and free will, although they might be contradictory, are both taught in the New Testament. I say that because the New Testament is a collection of diverse documents written by many different authors in different situations, authors that very often seem to have believed slightly different things. In fact, Martin Luther wanted the letter of James deleted from the Bible because it seemed to contradict much of the rest of the New Testament (as well as disagreeing with Luther himself, which I’d imagine was his main motive). James certainly seems to have had some issues with some things Paul was teaching. Paul certainly had issues with what Peter was doing and with the leadership of the Jerusalem church. Paul was even willing to contradict the decision of the “Jerusalem Council” in regard to eating meat sacrificed to the Roman gods. The community that produced John’s Gospel seems to have had a markedly different picture of who Jesus was and is from the communities that produced the gospels of Mark, Matthew, and Luke. There is certainly a discernible core of faith and practice in the New Testament, but there is also a great deal of diversity.
Let me ask a controversial question (to some people). What if some New Testament authors believed in predestination, while some believed in free will, while some believed in universalism? Also, I think some of them believed in the previously unnamed fourth option: salvation by works. Even Paul himself seems to vacillate between free will (Romans 10:9 and others), predestination (Ephesians 1:11 and others), universalism (Colossians 1:19-20 and others), and even the dreaded salvation by works (Romans 2:6-8 and others), which even includes the strange idea that women are saved through bearing children (1 Timothy 2:15). Is it too strange to think that the early church, spread out over the Roman Empire and quite isolated from one another, held a variety of views on this topic just as many views are held on it today? Could it be that there is no agreement on these matters in the 21st Century because there was no agreement on these matters in the 1st Century? It’s worth considering.
I believe that those who are calling for a return to the reformers see the Scriptures as a clear plate glass window that you can look through and see everything crystal clear; I simply cannot share that point of view. Maybe the Bible is less like a clear plate glass window that we can look straight through to see the will of God and maybe it is more like a stained glass window with all different shapes and colors. There are tiny bubbles in some of the pieces of glass. Some are rough, while others are smooth. Some of them don’t really seem like they should be a part of the same stained glass window, but somehow in the middle of this crazy stained glass window there is still a figure that has been formed by all the different shapes, colors, and textures; that figure is Jesus. The light shines through the stained glass window in a beautiful, inspired, and yet not so clear way. It is light enough to lead us to Jesus, though, and isn’t that really the point? If this is true, it would cramp the style of those who believe in inerrancy, but it wouldn’t negate the New Testament’s shared witness to Jesus Christ. After all, within the diversity of the New Testament there is a central message that salvation (however it is divvied out) is made possible by the actions of God through Jesus Christ and that in gratitude for this we are to love God, love neighbor, and share this good news. God can handle the details.
Again, I am not in disagreement with the Reformers or their modern devotees because I think predestination is unbiblical. I just don’t think it’s the only biblical option. Ultimately I can’t align myself with them on this topic because there isn’t even agreement within my own mind on these matters. I preach like a free-will advocate because I believe everyone should have the chance to respond to the gospel. Sometimes when I think about the people I know who just seem to have zero reaction or interest in the gospel I wonder about predestination. A lot of times I hope and pray that universalism is true because I can’t stand the thought of so many people being damned or the thought of a God who is so willing to damn them for rejecting God or even worse the thought of a God that predestined them to be damned even before God created them. I don't have all the answers, and I'm finally okay with that. I’ve simply come to trust in God without trying to have all the answers. I’ll never stop asking the question, though. That's how we grow and mature. Since I gave myself over to this trust, I’ve had a peace in my heart that I didn’t have before, and I’ll take a real peace over a false certainty any day.
Again, I am not in disagreement with the Reformers or their modern devotees because I think predestination is unbiblical. I just don’t think it’s the only biblical option. Ultimately I can’t align myself with them on this topic because there isn’t even agreement within my own mind on these matters. I preach like a free-will advocate because I believe everyone should have the chance to respond to the gospel. Sometimes when I think about the people I know who just seem to have zero reaction or interest in the gospel I wonder about predestination. A lot of times I hope and pray that universalism is true because I can’t stand the thought of so many people being damned or the thought of a God who is so willing to damn them for rejecting God or even worse the thought of a God that predestined them to be damned even before God created them. I don't have all the answers, and I'm finally okay with that. I’ve simply come to trust in God without trying to have all the answers. I’ll never stop asking the question, though. That's how we grow and mature. Since I gave myself over to this trust, I’ve had a peace in my heart that I didn’t have before, and I’ll take a real peace over a false certainty any day.
