Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

God's Sovereignty, Paul's Conversion
Desiring God Ministries ^ | 10 March, 2008 | John Piper

Posted on 03/17/2008 8:12:36 AM PDT by Ottofire

God's Sovereignty, Paul's Conversion

March 10, 2008  |  By: John Piper
Category: Commentary

Ponder the conversion of Paul, the sovereignty of Christ, and what Paul's sins have to do with your salvation.

Paul said that God “set me apart before I was born,” and then on the Damascus road “called me by his grace” (Galatians 1:15). This means that between Paul’s birth and his call on the Damascus road he was an already-chosen but not-yet-called instrument of God (Acts 9:15; 22:14).

This means that Paul was beating and imprisoning and murdering Christians as a God-chosen, soon-to-be-made-Christian missionary.

Lord, they themselves know that in one synagogue after another I imprisoned and beat those who believed in you. And when the blood of Stephen your witness was being shed, I myself was standing by and approving and watching over the garments of those who killed him. (Acts 22:19-20)

The call on the Damascus road was apocalyptic for Paul. It was not a still small voice.

As I was on my way and drew near to Damascus, about noon a great light from heaven suddenly shone around me. And I fell to the ground and heard a voice saying to me, “Saul, Saul, why are you persecuting me?” (Acts 22:6-7)

There was no denying or escaping it. God had chosen him for this before he was born. And now he would take him. The word of Christ was sovereign. There was no negotiating.

Rise, and go into Damascus, and there you will be told all that is appointed for you to do. (Acts 22:10)

This kind of sovereign choice before he was born, and this kind of apocalyptic call on the Damascus road mean that God could have prevented Paul from beating and imprisoning and murdering Christians. He could have called him earlier.

Damascus was not Paul’s final, free will yielding to Christ after decades of futile divine effort to save him. God had a time for choosing him (before he was born) and a time for calling him (on the Damascus road). Paul yielded when God called.

Therefore the sins that God permitted between Paul’s birth and his calling were part of the plan, since God could have done Damascus sooner.

Do we have any idea what the plan for those sins might have been? Yes. They were permitted for you and me—for all who fear that they might have sinned themselves out of grace. Here’s the way Paul relates his sins to you.

Formerly I was a blasphemer, persecutor, and insolent opponent. But I received mercy . . . for this reason, that in me, as the foremost, Jesus Christ might display his perfect patience as an example to those who were to believe in him for eternal life. (1 Timothy 1:13, 16)

O how sweet are the designs of God in the sovereign salvation of hardened sinners!



TOPICS: Evangelical Christian; Theology
KEYWORDS: sovereigngrace
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-51 next last
Paul, led by his free will, freely chose God, who is a respecter of persons and the concept of choice. NOT!
1 posted on 03/17/2008 8:12:38 AM PDT by Ottofire
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: drstevej; OrthodoxPresbyterian; CCWoody; Wrigley; Gamecock; Jean Chauvin; jboot; AZhardliner; ...

GRPL “Freely choose to read this” PING!

>ducks<


2 posted on 03/17/2008 8:14:05 AM PDT by Ottofire (Psalm 18:31 For who is God, but the LORD? And who is a rock, except our God?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Ottofire

Amen!


3 posted on 03/17/2008 8:17:11 AM PDT by Gamecock (Viva La Reformacion!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Ottofire

Thanks for posting this. I’m going to send it to a friend who thinks God is finished with him.


4 posted on 03/17/2008 8:29:31 AM PDT by Wage Slave (Good fences make good neighbors. -- Robert Frost)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Ottofire

God is not a respecter of persons, which is exactly why he allows us to freely choose to obey or disobey Him. Paul still needed his sins to be washed away when he encountered Ananias in Damascus (Acts 22:16).


5 posted on 03/17/2008 10:35:32 AM PDT by jkl1122
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Ottofire
This is such a tough subject.

I was listening to RC Sproul the other night. He gave a great 'lesson' on hell. At the end of it, he said that if you aren't already a Christian, you should really take hell seriously, since God does.

I couldn't help but think to myself, "but Dr. Sproul, if they aren't regenerated already, they can't take it seriously. . .right?"

6 posted on 03/17/2008 10:51:05 AM PDT by MEGoody (Ye shall know the truth, and the truth shall make you free.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Ottofire

What a great thought to start the week with!


7 posted on 03/17/2008 11:08:30 AM PDT by oworm
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: jkl1122

>God is not a respecter of persons, which is exactly why he allows us to freely choose to obey or disobey Him. Paul still needed his sins to be washed away when he encountered Ananias in Damascus (Acts 22:16).

If God is not a respecter of persons, then why is it so important for Him to respect our free will? We are the clay and He is the potter, He shapes us according to His will, not ours.


8 posted on 03/17/2008 11:10:56 AM PDT by Ottofire (Psalm 18:31 For who is God, but the LORD? And who is a rock, except our God?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Ottofire; jkl1122

***Paul said that God “set me apart before I was born,” and then on the Damascus road “called me by his grace” (Galatians 1:15). This means that between Paul’s birth and his call on the Damascus road he was an already-chosen but not-yet-called instrument of God (Acts 9:15; 22:14). ****

And there are still some who believe Paul was not saved until he got wet. In fact, one has already showed up.


9 posted on 03/17/2008 11:27:03 AM PDT by Ruy Dias de Bivar (Only infidel blood can quench Muslim thirst-- Abdul-Jalil Nazeer al-Karouri)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Ottofire
If God is not a respecter of persons, then why is it so important for Him to respect our free will?

Because He gave us the ability to choose. If God chooses who to save without any regards to their exercise of free will, then He would be a respecter of persons with regards to salvation, which is in direct contradiction to what we are taught in Acts.
10 posted on 03/17/2008 11:56:16 AM PDT by jkl1122
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: Ruy Dias de Bivar

How come you only seem to show up to badmouth the beliefs of others?


11 posted on 03/17/2008 11:56:55 AM PDT by jkl1122
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: Ottofire
I have almost made peace with the free will/determination debate. I can generally agree with a biblically sound article from the reformed corner as well as with a biblically sound article from the free will side. Scripture gives evidence for both.

I think it's all a matter of perspective. Looking at it in human terms (and how can we not) it sure seems like we have free will to make our own decisions. But if you are attempting to see things from God's position outside of time - He already knows the beginning and the end. And also, how can He be anything other than sovereign?

Yet we are still called to pray to Him and to spread the Good News to all the world. I think that means we can be an instrument that God uses for His sovereign decisions. And I am comfortable with saying yes, I was chosen in Him from the foundation of the world but I'm also comfortable with saying yes, I made a decision for Christ.

marinamuffy

12 posted on 03/17/2008 12:02:30 PM PDT by marinamuffy (I really dislike McCain but I'll crawl over broken glass to vote against Hillary or the Obamanation.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: jkl1122
God is not a respecter of persons, which is exactly why he allows us to freely choose to obey or disobey Him. Paul still needed his sins to be washed away when he encountered Ananias in Damascus (Acts 22:16).

Sorry, mankind was dead in trespasses and sin, spiritually dead bodies do not make choices. Not only this but the flesh that has not returned to the ground, by default will operate under the desires of Sin (Romans).

In this context the words of Christ, repeated in the Gospel of John are explicit - "No one comes unto me unless the Father draws Him". Thus the Lord's calling the Apostle Paul makes sense. Thus the Lord had to spiritually take out the "heart of stone" and give him a "heart of flesh" and He had to regenerate his mind to hold faith, even to the point that Paul could give the evidence of faith through his confession.

Salvation is of the Lord - it is not of man least anyone should boast.

Man thinks his confession is a big deal, but when the believer is in heaven he will see all that God has done for him and bow down and worship saying "The Lord has done it ALL!"

13 posted on 03/17/2008 12:39:04 PM PDT by sr4402
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: sr4402

I have no problem with the Scriptural teaching that God calls mankind to salvation. This in no way contradicts the responsibility of man to respond to the call and accept the gift of salvation on God’s terms. If Paul was already cleansed of his sins, then why did he need them to be washed away in baptism (Acts 22:16)?


14 posted on 03/17/2008 12:53:32 PM PDT by jkl1122
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: jkl1122

Baptism (water) is a outward sign of obedience and the inward change that takes place in Salvation.


15 posted on 03/17/2008 12:58:32 PM PDT by Originalist (Freedom prospers when religion is vibrant and the rule of law under God is acknowledged. - RWR)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: Originalist

Scripture does not teach that water baptism symbolizes an already existing salvation. Water baptism does symbolize the death, burial, and resurrection of Christ.


16 posted on 03/17/2008 1:03:43 PM PDT by jkl1122
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: marinamuffy

marinamuffy,

I actually totally agree with you. As a believer of compatabilist free will, I see that God put the taste for Him in my heart. Before being moved by the Spirit, I had no such taste for him and would continue to refuse the general call.

However, any thought that I freely chose Him without Him first taking me out of the mass of the damned is, I feel, completely unbiblical. God is the prime mover in this reaction, I was moved upon. He is the shaper of the clay, the clay has no say in its shape or its use for honor or dishonor.

I did not nor could not choose to be a wine-cup nor a chamber-pot. He chose our use and how He was going to use us.


17 posted on 03/17/2008 1:08:06 PM PDT by Ottofire (Psalm 18:31 For who is God, but the LORD? And who is a rock, except our God?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: Ottofire

Here is, I believe, the essence of “free will”.

Before he is called (elected, saved, transformed, whatever you want to call it)man has the “Free Will” to sin or not sin. Those are his choices.

After his call, man has three choices: sin, not sin, or please God.

No one who is “Dead in Sin” can please God. Only those who are free from sin’s ravages are “Free” to please God.


18 posted on 03/17/2008 3:14:54 PM PDT by irishtenor (Check out my blog at http://boompa53.blogspot.com/)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: jkl1122

***How come you only seem to show up to badmouth the beliefs of others?***

Strange, I’m not badmouthing Ottofire, only those who think they only have a corner on salvation.


19 posted on 03/17/2008 4:48:39 PM PDT by Ruy Dias de Bivar (Only infidel blood can quench Muslim thirst-- Abdul-Jalil Nazeer al-Karouri)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: irishtenor
man has the “Free Will” to sin or not sin. Those are his choices."

Not according to Romans, man's free will alone works within the range of sin: 3:10 "THERE IS NONE RIGHTEOUS, NOT EVEN ONE; THERE IS NONE WHO UNDERSTANDS, THERE IS NONE WHO SEEKS FOR GOD ; ALL HAVE TURNED ASIDE, TOGETHER THEY HAVE BECOME USELESS; THERE IS NONE WHO DOES GOOD, THERE IS NOT EVEN ONE."

Why do we not understand the part where it says "THERE IS NONE WHO SEEKS FOR GOD"?? Why do we not understand the word "NONE"??

The doctrine that man's free will can choose God is based on a misunderstanding of Sin and the Scriptures. Since this verse is in both the Old and New Testaments, why do we not believe it??

20 posted on 03/18/2008 4:11:39 AM PDT by sr4402
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-51 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson