When
Israel was a child, then I loved him, and called my son out of Egypt. As they called them, so they went from them:
they sacrificed unto Baalim, and burned incense to graven images. I taught Ephraim also to go, taking them by
their arms; but they knew not that I healed them. I drew them with cords of a man, with bands
of love: and I was to them as they that take off the yoke on their jaws, and I
laid meat unto them … And my people are bent to backsliding from Me: though
they called them to the most High, none at all would exalt Him. How shall I give thee up, Ephraim? how
shall I deliver thee, Israel? how shall I make thee as Admah? how shall I set
thee as Zeboim? mine heart is turned within me, my repentings are kindled
together (Hos. 11:1-4, 7-8).
FREE
OFFER ARGUMENT:
“This
passage says that the outward call of the gospel to the reprobate stems from
God’s love for them (vv. 1, 3). God’s
call, works, and gracious motions of His Holy Spirit are for the purpose of
lovingly drawing them to Himself (v. 4), though they rebel and never come to
Him (v. 7). The anthropomorphic language
of God’s heart and bowels turning in Him over the perishing children that He
has brought forth and loved reflects that, though for higher purposes He has
decreed to pass them over from salvation and allow them to perish wilfully in
their sin, yet, God sincerely wills, by His benevolent nature and common
mercies, their highest good.”
Another
argument from the text is based on the assumption that God is addressing the “reprobate”
in the nation, and that God is supposedly revealing a change of mind
with regard to punishing them (a reluctance or hesitation to judge them for their
refusal to repent).
(I)
As to Hosea 11: First, the “Israel”
of whom the passage speaks is the elect Israel—not the 10 tribes
outwardly, and especially not every member of the tribes head for head. That it
is the elect Israel is plain from, 1) the fact that God calls him His
“son" (v. 1) and “my people” later; and 2) that the gospel of Matthew,
finding fulfillment of verse 1 in Jesus’ coming out of Egypt. In Hosea 11, God
speaks to that Israel which is represented by and encompassed in Jesus Christ—that
is, the elect. So the first sentence of the Free Offer argument—that the
outward call of the gospel to the reprobate stems from God’s love for them—is
already erroneous. Of course, the gospel
call comes to the reprobate as well as the elect. But this is not the point of
Hosea 11.
Second, even Hosea did call
both elect and reprobate in Israel to repentance; but the promise of God that
those whom He calls will repent (vv. 10-11) indicates also that the true
call is to the elect, and that it is efficacious and irresistible—by this call,
God does and will turn His elect back to Himself.
Third, the passage indicates
the grievous effect of the sins of the elect (particularly deliberate, gross
sin of idolatry and utter disregard for God’s law) on their/our relationship
with God. God’s love never ceases; His covenant is never broken; but our enjoyment
of fellowship with Him is broken and in need of restoration, and He grieves.
Jehovah’s grief in this passage is not due to reprobate not heeding His call;
it is due to elect persisting in sin when they have every evidence of their
Father’s love in His past dealings, and when He calls them back to Him. Of
course, His grief is an anthropomorphism—I won’t get into that, but the point
is that our Heavenly Father delights in fellowship with us, delights
in our loving and grateful obedience. And this is why He calls us
to repentance.
Why would He call the reprobate
to repentance? He does, of course; but
the answer to why is different from the answer to the question why He
calls the elect to repentance. He calls the elect, because He loves
us, is grieved because of the way in which we walk, and delights
in fellowship with us. (DK, 21/08/2019)
---------------------------------------------------
(II)
(a)
[Re: the notion that Hosea 11 teaches
a desire of God for the salvation of the reprobate]
The
context of the passage in Hosea explains the text. God’s gracious will for
Ephraim is realized. Read chapter
14:4-9.
Ephraim
is not the entire population of that Old Testament tribe, or even the majority
of them. Ephraim is the elect in the
tribe. Them, God loves and desires to
save, and does save. Let Romans 9
explain: “They are not all Israel that are of Israel” (v. 6).
With
reference strictly to the text itself, it is a mystery to me that anyone who
knows the sovereign God and His grace can conclude that such a love as God
shows in the text can fail. He did not give up on the true Ephraim and gave His
Son to the cross to accomplish His redeeming love (see Hos. 13:14).
Read
Hosea 11:9: “I will not execute the
fierceness of mine anger, I will not
return to destroy Ephraim: for I am God, and not man; the Holy One in the midst
of thee: and I will not enter into the city.”
This is not a weak desire, but a divine will. At stake is His being God
not a man. One who desires to save but does not and cannot is not the God of
the Bible, or any god worth my worship. (DJE,
03/03/2018)
(b)
[Re:
the argument that this text implies a “change of heart” on God’s part]
This
argument rests on a theory of the mutability of God. Thus, those that use
this argument dissent from the official, creedal confession of the Reformed
creeds, all of which confess the immutability
of God, Westminster as well as the
strictly Reformed confessions. Article 1 of the Belgic Confession confesses that God is “immutable.” Indeed,
the unchangeableness of God is the Christian confession. They ought to
reexamine their common grace theology in light of the fact that it brings them
into open conflict with the Reformed confessions, indeed with Christian
theology. Is common grace so dear that it is allowed to forfeit for them
the Christian religion?
One
who is Reformed is not permitted to deny that God is immutable by the Reformed
creed. If one is a professing Christian, the Christian faith is at stake
for him/her.
The
Bible expressly declares that God is unchangeable in God’s own words, for
example, Malachi 3:6: “I change not.” The added words warn that the
doctrine of God’s changeableness would involve the possibility that the sons of
Jacob would be destroyed.
With regard to the text, God’s
“repentance,” Christian theologians have explained already many years ago, that
this is an “anthropomorphism,” that is, a description of God in human terms that
are understandable to us. The meaning is that although the sin of His
people was such that God would be determined to destroy them, because of His
gracious love He is determined not to destroy them. His love overcame His
threat to destroy. In reality, He never was determined to destroy.
The punishment of their sin would be suffered by the Savior. God’s
justice would be satisfied by the Redeemer. God is unchanging in His love
to the elect. (DJE, 22/08/2018)
-----------------------------------------
(III)
John Calvin (1509-1564)
[Source: Comm. On Hosea 11:8-9,
emphasis added]
If one objects and says, that this statement militates
against many others which we have observed, the answer is easy, and the
solution has already been adduced in another place, and I shall now only touch
on it briefly. When God distinctly denounces ruin on the people, the body of the people is had in
view; and in this body there was then no integrity. Inasmuch, then, as all the
Israelites had become corrupt, had departed from the worship and fear of God,
and from all piety and righteousness, and had abandoned themselves to all kinds
of wickedness, the Prophet declares that they were to perish without any
exception. But when he confines the
vengeance of God, or moderates it, he has respect to a very small number; for,
as it has been already stated, corruption had never so prevailed among the
people, but that some seed remained. Hence, when the Prophet has in view the
elect of God, he applies then these consolations, by which he mitigates their
terror, that they might understand that God, even in his extreme rigour, would
be propitious to them. Such is the way to account for this passage.
-----------------------------------------
(IV)
More to come! (DV)
Note:
For
a sermon on this passage by Rev. Carl Haak, minister of Georgetown Protestant
Reformed Church, in Hudsonville, Michigan, see the following:
Title: “The Love that Will Not Let Us Go”
Scripture
Text: Hosea 11:1-11
Date:
26th July 2015
Venue:
Limerick Reformed Fellowship (LRF), Limerick, Ireland.
Download
Link:
No comments:
Post a Comment