Divine Justice and the Doctrine of Election

In spite of the clarity with which Scripture addresses this topic, many professing Christians today struggle with acceptance of God’s sovereignty—especially when it comes to His electing work in salvation. Their most common protest, of course, is that the doctrine of election is unfair. But such an objection stems from a human idea of fairness rather than the objective, divine understanding of true justice. In order to appropriately address the issue of election, we must set aside all human considerations and focus on the nature of God and His righteous standard. Divine justice is where the discussion must begin.
   What is divine justice? Simply stated, it is an essential attribute of God whereby He infinitely, perfectly, and independently does exactly what He wants to do when and how He wants to do it. Because He is the standard of divine justice, by very definition, whatever He does is inherently just. As William Perkins said, many years ago, “We must not think that God doeth a thing because it is good and right, but rather is the thing good and right because God willeth and worketh it.”
   Therefore, God defines for us what justice is, because He is by nature just and righteous, and what He does reflects that nature. His free will—and nothing else—is behind His justice. This means that whatever He wills is just; and it is just, not by any external standard of justice, but simply because He wills it.
   Because the justice of God is an outflow of His character, it is not subject to fallen human assumptions of what justice should be. The Creator owes nothing to the creature, not even what He is graciously pleased to give. God does not act out of obligation or compulsion, but out of his own independent prerogative. That is what it means to be God. And because He is God, His freely determined actions are intrinsically right and perfect.
   To say that election is unfair is not only inaccurate, it fails to recognize the very essence of true fairness. That which is fair, right, and just is that which God wills to do. Thus, if God wills to choose those whom he will save, it is inherently fair for him to do so. We cannot impose our own ideas of fairness onto our understanding of God’s working. Instead, we must go to the Scriptures to see how God Himself, in his perfect righteousness, decides to act.

—John MacArthur, from his forward to Lawson’s Foundations of Grace (Reformation Trust, 2007), 8–9.

Let men therefore acknowledge that since they are born of Adam, they are depraved creatures and therefore can conceive only sinful thoughts until they are transformed by Christ’s work and are remade by His Spirit into a new life. It should not be doubted that the Lord declares the very mind of man to be depraved and altogether infected with sin, so that all the thoughts that proceed from his mind are evil. If the foundation itself has such a defect, it follows that all man’s affections are evil, and his deeds covered with the same polution. . . . For since their mind is corrupted with contempt of God, pride, self-love, and ambitious hypocrisy, all their thoughts are contaminated with the same vices. . . . The very affections of nature, which in themselves are laudable, are vitiated by original sin . . . men are born evil. It shows that as soon as they are old enough to think, they already have radically corrupt minds . . . depravity pervades all our senses. . . . God is not to be blamed for this. The origin of this disease stems from the defection of the first man, because of whom the order of the creation was subverted. . . . although all rush to do evil acts, no one is forced into this except by the direct inclination of their own hearts. When they sin, they do so because they want to sin.

—John Calvin, as quoted by Lawson in Foundations of Grace (Reformation Trust, 2007), 59.

Let us learn, therefore, not to become drunk on our foolish hopes. Rather, let us hope in God and in God’s promises, and we will never be deceived. But if we base our hopes on our own presumptuousness, God will strip everything away. This is one of our most essential doctrines, since human nature is so driven by presumptuousness. For we are so influenced by insupportable pride that God is forced to punish us harshly. We think we are so much higher than God that we ought to be more powerful than God. Consequently, seeing how inclined we are toward this vice, all the more ought we to pay heed to what Micah says here: that we must not rest content with the thought that whatever happens will happen. Rather, we must realize that so long as God’s hand is upon us, we are condemned to be miserable. For there is no other cure shy of our returning to God and founding our hopes on his promises. Therein lies our surest remedy, equal to any and all disasters that might befall us.

—John Calvin, as quoted by Lawson in The Expository Genius of John Calvin (Reformation Trust, 2007),106–107.

We want again Luthers, Calvins, Bunyans, Whitefields, men fit to mark eras, whose names breathe terror in our foemen’s ears. We have dire need of such. Whence will they come to us? They are the gift of Jesus Christ to the church, and will come in due time. He has power to give back again a golden age of preachers, and when the good old truth is one more preached by men whose lips are touched as with a live coal from off the alter, this shall be the instrument in the hand of the Spirit for bringing about a great and thorough revival of religion in the land. . . .
    I do not look for any other means of converting men beyond the simple preaching of the gospel and the opening of men’s ears to hear it. The moment the church of God shall despise the pulpit, God will despise her. It has been through the ministry that the Lord has always been pleased to receive and bless His churches.

—Charles Spurgeon, as quoted by Lawson in The Expository Genius of John Calvin (Reformation Trust, 2007),132–133.

I hang my head in shame; I have failed to read my quota of Calvin (or almost anything else) this week. So rather than read Calvin, I’m going to tell you why you should read Calvin. Oh, heck, I’m not even going to do that. I’m going to let Steve Lawson tell you as he discusses his little book the Expository Genius of John Calvin

Among the books read but not blogged last year is The Unwavering Resolve of Jonathan Edwards by Steve Lawson.

The “Great Awakening,” of which most of you are likely to have heard at least a little, was a movement that took place in the American Colonies in the early 1740s. Through the preaching of pastors and evangelists such as Jonathan Edwards and George Whitfield, thousands were led to repentance and faith in Christ. The Spirit of God was clearly at work in an extraordinary way. People being what they are, however, the movement was not without attending problems. Along with the emotions such a movement would naturally and properly incite came emotionalism. In response to that emotionalism came questions and challenges to the legitimacy of the awakening. The theologians of Yale College were divided between supporters of the movement and those who, due to the accompanying excesses, opposed it.

Jonathan Edwards supported the awakening, but recognized the reality of counterfeit revivals. In his commencement address at Yale in 1741, in which he expressed his support for the movement, he also addressed the nature of true revival. Steve Lawson writes,

In an exposition of John 4:1–6, Edwards identified five marks by which an authentic work of the Spirit is to be recognized. Such a true work, he said, “(1) raises [people’s] esteem of Jesus as Son of God and Savior of the world, (2) leads them to turn from their corruptions and lusts to the righteousness of God, (3) increases their regard for Holy Scripture, (4) establishes their minds in the objective truths of revealed religion, and (5) evokes genuine love for God and man.” Each of these, he believed, was present in the awakening. The message was published a month later under the title The Distinguishing Marks of a Work of the Spirit of God (1741) and was given wide circulation.

—Steve Lawson, The Unwavering Resolve of Jonathan Edwards (Reformation Trust, 2008), 13.

Jonathan Edwards (via Steve Lawson) on death as a sanctifying agent:

To help himself value his time, Edwards determined to keep an eye on the final hour of his life—the hour in which he would stand on the threshold of his entrance into the presence of God. In resolution 7, Edwards vowed:

7. Resolved, never to do anything, which I should be afraid to do, if it were the last hour of my life.

   This resolution was primarily intended to help Edwards in the mortification of his sin. He anticipated that asking himself whether he would engage in a particular activity if he had only one hour to live would help him steer clear of temptation. He was persuaded he would not want to pass into God’s presence after committing any sin. If he could say that he ought to avoid it at any point in his Christian walk. This perspective would restrain his sinful thoughts, activities, and words.
   Edwards often found much sanctifying value in focusing on the certainty of his death. When combating worldly thoughts, he wrote in his diary: “Sabbath morning, Sept. 1. When I am violently beset with worldly thought, for a relief, to think of death, and the doleful circumstances of it.” Thoughts of death turned his mind to eternal realities, making worldly temptations of the moment seem empty and unattractive. Living as if he was in his last hour helped him keep sinful things at a distance.
   Thoughts of death also helped Edwards keep a proper perspective on possessions. In his diary, he asked himself a probing question: “Monday, Feb.3. Let every thing have the value now which it will have upon a sick bed; and frequently, in my pursuits of whatever kind, let this question come into my mind. ‘How much shall I value this upon my death-bed?’” Edwards believed that contemplating his deathbed scene forced him to value what was most important in the present.
   Contemplating his death even helped Edwards prepare himself for death. Edwards recorded: “Friday morning, July 5. Last night, when thinking what I should wish I had done, that I had not done, if I was then to die; I thought I should wish, That I had been more importunate with God to fit me for death, and lead me into all truth, and that I might not be deceived about the state of my soul.” Though Edwards wrote these words as a teenager, in the full bloom of life, he wanted to be prepared to meet his Lord with His approval.
   Focusing upon the end of life had the effect of helping Edwards prioritize what was most important in his life. This perspective restrained his sinful thoughts, activities, and words. Further, it helped him choose the highest ends in life. Not all choices in the use of his time were between good and evil. Some of the most difficult choices were between good, better and best. Always living as if he were at the end of his life caused him to live for what is best, the glory of God.

—Steve Lawson, The Unwavering Resolve of Jonathan Edwards (Reformation Trust, 2008), 96–98.

Steve Lawson on Jonathan Edwards’ disciplined devotion to Scripture and the sweet reward it yielded:

Edwards also strictly regimented himself in the spiritual disciplines of the Christian life, such as Bible study, theological readings, meditation, prayer, and singing. Such spiritual disciplines are necessary for spiritual health; as Donald Whiney writes, they promote “intimacy with Christ and conformity (both internal and external) to Christ. For this reason, Edwards gave himself to spiritual disciplines with great diligence. We see a clear manifestation of this discipline in resolution 28:

28. Resolved, to study the Scriptures so steadily, constantly, and frequently, as that I may find, and plainly perceive myself to grow in the knowledge of the same.

. . .
   Edwards’ disciplined approach to Scripture was by no means drudgery for him. To the contrary, Bible intake delighted him because it yielded the knowledge of God.

I had then, and at other times, the greatest delight in the holy Scriptures, of any book whatsoever. Oftentimes in reading it, every word seemed to touch my heart. I felt an harmony between something in my heart, and those sweet and powerful words. I seemed often to see so much light, exhibited in every sentence, and such a refreshing ravishing food communicated, that I could not get along in reading. Used oftentimes to dwell long on one sentence, to see the wonders contained in it; and yet almost every sentence seemed to be full of wonders.

—Steve Lawson, The Unwavering Resolve of Jonathan Edwards (Reformation Trust, 2008), 113–114.