Is God Equal Opportunity?

In America we are obsessed with the Jeffersonian ideals of equality and that God created all men equal--this is our American way of thinking. This works fine for the government to give liberty, justice and equal rights to all, but God doesn't work that way--sorry to say. Do you think that the aborigine in Australia has the same opportunity as an American to hear the gospel? "How can they believe if they haven't heard?" says Paul in Romans 8. The clearly says in Rom. 1:20 that they are without excuse whoever they are-they have enough light in creation itself to condemn them and they also knowingly go against their own conscience, being self-condemned.

Did Sodom have the same chance as Capernaum which saw many signs and miracles? No. Did everyone at the time of Abraham in Ur have equal opportunity to respond to God's call, or did God single out him and call him in a special way as his chosen one? Evangelicals who believe in a chosen people (Israel) have a hard time admitting that God can choose individuals as well and that we are elect or chosen even before we are born. Did Esau have the same opportunity as Jacob whom God loved before he was born, while He hated Esau?

Revelation 3:20 is often quoted to say that God is standing at the door (i.e., of everyone's heart) and knocking for permission unto salvation. Let's look at the other verses in the letter to Laodicea while we quote this verse as it is often quoted out of context. Actually, Jesus says, "As many as I love I rebuke and chasten, be zealous therefore, and repent." Doesn't this mean Jesus discriminates? He is standing at the door of the church to read it in context and is addressed to the lukewarm believer who is out of fellowship--just being saved doesn't mean fellowship!  Jesus has no fellowship with unbelievers either, so the "cold" person may not refer to an unbeliever, but to a believer distancing himself from Christ. Do Christ and Belial have anything in common that they should fellowship? The believer that offends Christ is the lukewarm, complacent one. Jesus said to one inquirer, "You are not far from the Kingdom of God." Psalm 119:155 says, "Salvation is far from the wicked...." If salvation is far then how can they have equal opportunity with those to whom it is near? [A paradox!]

The "whosoever" of John 3:16 is often cited out of context as evidence that anyone can get saved. Actually, Christ said that "No one can come to the Father unless it has been granted him of the Father" (John 6:65). And "the Father draws [the wooing of the Holy Spirit] him" in John 6:44. You see, if God does woo all people the same, then the only way to get saved is by being better than someone else (But Scripture says in 1 Cor. 4:7, "Who makes you to differ? What do you have that you didn't receive?" Jonah says, "Salvation is of the Lord." This means it is not a cooperative venture where we do our best and God helps us. It's all grace and God gets all the glory. Soli Deo Gloria. This implies no merit system.

 Does anyone still not believe that the Holy Spirit doesn't take many times to sink in? The "whosoever" implies that anyone who believes will be saved but it doesn't say all can believe. "If anyone wills to do His will he shall know of the doctrine..." (John 7:17). Ultimately, our salvation is in God's hands and He chose us--we didn't choose him. ("I chose you and you didn't choose me..." as Jesus says in John 15:16.) (Cf. Eph. 1:5,11 [predestination] and Rom. 8:29-30.)   Soli Deo Gloria!

Test of Orthodoxy?

We all tend to have our favorite Bibles and maybe even translations, but it shouldn't be a test of one's orthodoxy to the faith to be partial to one translation, e.g., the Authorized King James Version. You are really only reading the true Word of God when you read the Greek, Hebrew, or Aramaic because all translations fall short. You need to realize that the Word is verbally inspired and the exact word in the original is inspired for a purpose. Settle all doctrinal issues with exegesis, or returning to the original text.

I realized the problem we have when at Bible study yesterday that someone said, "I like that translation!" just because of the choice of wording that hit his funny-bone. It is not what words impress us in the translations that are paramount, but the original text. The best translations are more difficult to read because they don't do all the work for you and call a spade a spade and don't use idioms that become obsolete and are only fashionable and current for a while. I'm not saying a young believer shouldn't read the NLT (New Living Translation), the CEV (Contemporary English Version), or other modern-day translation for example, but he must realize what he is doing and compare versions. Don't get stuck in only one version, which will take away much perspective and insight: by resorting to this one can get Bible fatigue, where it seems like you are bored with an all-to-familiar text. Variation brings challenge and new input or inspiration and illumination.

I find that my doctrines don't depend on any one translation and I can read without hesitation almost any translation; however, I know hundreds of verses by memory and I am able to compare these verses, and I already know what I believe through good Bible-teaching exposure.  I feel free to use any translation and to quote Mother Teresa of Calcutta, though I am not a Catholic. Notes of explanation should be given to the reason for a specific translation being favored: Is it more literal or easier to understand, for instance? (Not that it sounds good or catchy!)

Once you have studied what the original language or wording says you will be somewhat disillusioned about the quality of a translation and lose faith in a so-called "King-James-only" faith. In conclusion, God can speak through any translation, but we are to exercise common sense and not be ignorant about what we are doing, but not skeptical either.   Soli Deo Gloria!