Fanny Crosby wrote the great hymn, To God Be the Glory in 1872. I’ve always thought it was a great song but it seems Calvinism has a wee problem with the first verse:
To God be the glory, great things He hath done;
So loved He the world that He gave us His Son,
Who yielded His life an atonement for sin,
And opened the life gate that all may go in.
Do you see the word which I emphasized: “all”? Now what can the complaint be about that word? Didn’t Jesus die for the whole world’s sins (only efficacious for those who place their faith in Jesus)? Doesn’t John 3:16 say that “God so loved the word…”?
Let’s look at the version in the PCA hymnal.
To God be the glory, great things He hath done;
So loved He the world that He gave us His Son,
Who yielded His life an atonement for sin,
And opened the life gate that we may go in.
Ostensibly the song is sung by Christians so perhaps “we” would be better than “all” in that respect, but I think the point by Crosby is that ALL people have the ability to choose Jesus and the Christian faith.
Ah, but Calvinists say we do not have the ability to choose whether or not to accept the Christian gospel and place our faith in Jesus and his atoning sacrifice. Therefore only those singing, i.e., “we,” have been justified without our choosing.
But what if there is an unbeliever in the assembly who sings this song; does he think the “we” includes him?
When you get right down to it, there really isn’t much difference in which word was used so there must have been a reason for Fanny to choose “all” and I believe it is there because of passages like these:
Ezra 8:22 – “everyone who looks to him”
Ps. 86:5 – “all who call to you”
Isa. 53:6 – “We all…have gone astray…laid on him the iniquity of us all”
Joel 2:32 - “Whoever calls on the name of the Lord”
Mark 16:15-16 – “all creation” and “whoever believes”
John 1:12 – “all who received him”
John 3:16-17 – “whoever believes” and “to save the world”
John 3:36 – “whoever believes”
John 5:24 – “whoever believes”
John 6:40 - "that every one which seeth the Son, and believeth on him"
John 6:47 – “he who believes”
John 7:37-38 – “If anyone is thirsty…Whoever believes”
John 11:26 - “and whoever lives and believes in me”
John 12:26 - “whoever serves me…My Father will honor the one who serves me”
John 20:31 – “by believing you may have life”
Acts 2:38 – “every one of you”
Acts 10:34-35 - “God does not show favoritism, but accepts men from every nation who fear Him”
Acts 10:43 – “everyone who believes”
Acts 13:38-39 - “I want you to know that through Jesus the forgiveness of sins is proclaimed to you. Through him everyone who believes is justified”
Acts 16:31 – “Believe…and you will be saved.”
Acts 17:30 – “all people everywhere”
Rom. 1:16 – “salvation of everyone who believes”
Rom. 3:22 - “This righteousness from God comes through faith in Jesus Christ to all who believe.”
Rom. 5:18 - “the free gift came to all men”
Rom. 10:4 - “Christ is the end of the law so that there may be righteousness for everyone who believes.”
Rom. 10:9 – “If you confess…and believe”
Rom. 10:13 – “Everyone who calls upon the name of the Lord”
1 Cor. 1:21 – “those who believe”
1 Tim. 1:15 – Christ came to save “sinners” (re. Rom. 3:23 all have sinned)
1 Tim. 1:16 – “those who would believe”
1 Tim. 2:4-6 – “who wants all men to be saved”… “a ransom for all men”
Titus 2:11 - “For the grace of God has appeared bringing salvation to all men”
Heb. 2:9 - “might taste the death for everyone”
2 Pet. 3:9 – “not wanting anyone to perish, but everyone to come to repentance”
1 John 2:2 - “propitiation for…the whole world”
1 John 4:14 – “Savior of the world”
1 John 4:15 - "Whosoever shall confess"
1 John 5:1 – “Everyone who believes”
Rev. 22:17 – “whoever is thirsty” “whoever wishes”
The Calvinist says “all” means “all of the elect,” “everyone” means “everyone of the elect,” “all creation” means “all of the elect of creation, and “whoever of the elect who believes,” ‘the world” means “the world of the elect,” etc. They have to add to the passages to make them fit with their ideology!
So “we” becomes more specific if the only people singing are Christians (i.e., “the elect). I’d say it’s pretty “petty” to change a word because one is needed to be closer to Calvinism than the other one. Calvinism just says, “To hell with Fanny Crosby—she didn’t know what she was talking about!" On the other hand, I’d say, “If you don’t like her lyrics, don’t sing the song.”
7 comments:
Great observation!!
Well presented. Many thanks for your comments.
Amen! God's love was demonstrated by dying for all and providing the way to a wonderful salvation by believing on and trusting Him for salvation.
Also, Glenn, another great verse, John 12:32 And I, if I be lifted up from the earth, will draw all men unto me.
Thanks for the list of verses that show us that Jesus offers salvation to all.
Mtn Girl
Hi Mountain Girl!
Yeah, and I've told that to Calvinists and they say Jesus meant "all kinds of men," i.e., all kinds of people who are of the elect. They can't stand to read what it actually says.
Calvinists become irate when you discuss soteriology with them.
Yes they do
I tried to become a calvinist as a reaction to Willow Creek, which puts man at the centre of the salvation process. Never quite made it. I always knew that something didn't quite fit. It did a lot of damage in making God sovereign and remote, in a sense unknowable, the idea of abba father disappeared, and ironically you lose the sense of being under the grace of God. This is replaced by a legalistic set of dogmas, which become groupthink you have to believe to be "in".
A good friend of mine went the whole hog into calvinism for years, and I still remember phoning him after several years of lost contact and him saying he had abandonned the theology. "It has turned me and my wife into the frozen chosen". The tipping point was rejecting all as meanng some, as you point out above.
The death knell for me is the list of verses you quote from 1 Tim down to 1 John. You cannot square this with who believes or doesn't believe having been selected before the foundation of the world.
My daughter and her husband have just joined a reformed church, and this has brought all this up again. Heidelberg catechism, canons of Dordt, the whole works. Infant baptism as well. Clever intellectual arguments against every objection of qualification of reformed theology you could make. I hope their experience there will not produce the same barrenness it did with me, and seemingly many others from what I have read.
I don't think the reformers got as far away from the Roman Catholic church as they think they did, especially in church authority structures. The reformers are the protestant magisterium!
It is not that I disagree particularly with much that is in these old catechisms, a lot of it is good, it is what is left out. In particular the work of the Spirit, who takes us out of being under law and any sort of legalism.
Post a Comment