You brought up a great point, the doctrine of election,...
Rom_9:22 What if God, willing to shew his wrath, and to make his power known, endured with much longsuffering the vessels of wrath fitted to destruction:
Rom_9:23 And that he might make known the riches of his glory on the vessels of mercy, which he had afore prepared unto glory,
2Ti_2:20 But in a great house there are not only vessels of gold and of silver, but also of wood and of earth; and some to honour, and some to dishonour.
Is the doctrine of election biblical?
Shalom
Johann
Guess I will answer this myself....
ELECTION (Gk. eklogē, “choice,” a “picking out”).
Bible Meaning. This word in the Scriptures has three distinct applications. (1) To the
divine choice of nations or communities for the possession of special privileges with
reference to the performance of special services. Thus the Jews were “a chosen nation,” “the
elect.” Thus also in the NT, bodies of Christian people, or churches, are called “the elect.”
(2)
To the divine choice of individuals to a particular office or work. Thus Cyrus was elected of
God to bring about the rebuilding of the Temple, and thus the twelve were chosen to be
apostles and Paul to be the apostle to the Gentiles.
(3) To the divine choice of individuals to
be the children of God, and therefore heirs of heaven.
It is with regard to election in this third sense that theological controversies have been
frequent and at times most fierce.
Calvinists hold that the election of individuals to salvation
is absolute, unconditional, by virtue of an eternal divine decree.
Arminians regard election as
conditional upon repentance and faith; the decree of God is that all who truly repent of their
sins and believe on the Lord Jesus Christ shall be saved.
But every responsible person
determines for himself whether or not he will repent and believe. Sufficient grace is bestowed
upon everyone to enable him to make the right decision.
The Calvinistic View.
The Westminster Confession, the standard of the Church of
Scotland and of the various Presbyterian churches of Europe and America, contains the
following statement: “God from all eternity did by the most wise and holy counsel of His
own free will freely and unchangeably ordain whatsoever comes to pass; yet so as thereby
neither is God the author of sin, nor is violence offered to the will of the creatures, nor is the
liberty or contingency of second causes taken away, but rather established. Although God
knows whatsoever may or can come to pass upon all supposed conditions, yet hath He not
decreed anything because He foresaw its future, or as that which would come to pass upon
such conditions. By the decree of God, for the manifestation of His glory some men and
angels are predestinated unto everlasting life and others foreordained to everlasting death.
These angels and men, thus predestinated and foreordained are particularly and unchangeably
designed, and their number is so certain and definite that it cannot be either increased or
diminished. Those of mankind that are predestinated unto life, God, before the foundation of
the world was laid, according to His eternal and immutable purpose, and the secret counsel
and good pleasure of His will, hath chosen in Christ unto everlasting glory, out of His mere
free grace and love, without any foresight of faith, or good works, or perseverance in either of
them, or any other thing in the creature, as conditions or causes moving Him thereto; and all
to the praise of His glorious grace. As God hath appointed the elect unto glory, so hath He, by
the eternal and most free purpose of His will, foreordained all the means thereunto.
Therefore, they who are elected, being fallen in Adam, are redeemed by Christ, are
effectually called unto faith in Christ, by His Spirit working in due season; are justified,
adopted, sanctified, and kept by His power through faith unto salvation. Neither are any other
redeemed by Christ, effectually called, justified, adopted, sanctified, and saved, but the elect
only. The rest of mankind God was pleased, according to the unsearchable counsel of His
own will, whereby He extendeth or withholdeth mercy, as He pleaseth, for the glory of His
sovereign power over His creatures, to pass by, and to ordain them to dishonor and wrath for
their sin, to the praise of His glorious justice.”
In support of this doctrine several arguments are made by Calvinistic theologians: (1)
According to the Scriptures election is not of works but of grace; and that it is not of works
means that it is not what man does that determines whether he is to be one of the elect or not.
For the descendants of Adam this life is not a probation. They stood their probation in Adam
and do not stand each one for himself. (2) The sovereignty of God in electing men to
salvation is shown by the fact that repentance and faith are gifts from God. These fruits of His
Spirit are the consequences and signs of election and not its conditions. (3) The salvation that
is of grace must be of grace throughout. The element of works or human merit must not be
introduced at any point in the plan. And that would be the case if repentance and faith were
the conditions of election. (4) The system of doctrine called Calvinistic, Augustinian, Pauline,
should not be thus designated. That though taught clearly by Paul, particularly in Rom. 8:9, it
was taught also by others of the writers of sacred Scripture, and by Christ Himself. Reference
is made to Matt. 11:25–26; Luke 4:25–27; 8:10; John 6:37, 39; etc. (5) That the sovereignty
of God is evidenced in dispensing saving grace is illustrated also in His establishing the
temporal conditions of mankind. Some are born and reared in the surroundings of
civilization, others of barbarism. And precisely so some are blessed with the light of the
gospel, while others, dwelling in pagan lands, are deprived of that light and consequently are
not saved.
This system of strict Calvinism above outlined has received various modifications by
theologians of the Calvinistic school. The General Assembly of the Presbyterian Church in
the United States of America, May 1903, adopted the following: “We believe that all who die
in infancy, and all others given by the Father to the Son who are beyond the reach of the
outward means of grace, are regenerated and saved by Christ through the Spirit, who works
when and where and how He pleases.”
The Arminian View.
The Arminian view of election has been in recent years more
generally accepted than formerly, even among denominations whose teaching has been
Calvinistic or indefinite upon this point. This view grounds itself, in opposition to Calvinism,
upon the universality of the atonement and the graciously restored freedom of the human
will. Election, accordingly, is not absolute but conditional, contingent upon the proper
acceptance of such gifts of grace as God by His Spirit and providence puts within the reach of
men. Inasmuch as this subject involves the character and method of the divine government
and the destiny of the entire race, the following should be said: (1) According to the
Arminian doctrine the purpose of God to redeem mankind was bound up with His purpose to
create. The Lamb of God was “slain from the foundation of the world” (Rev. 13:8, KJV,
NIV). God would not have permitted a race of sinners to come into existence without
provision to save them. Such provision must not be for only a part but for the whole of the
fallen race. To suppose the contrary is opposed to the divine perfections. To doom to eternal
death any number of mankind who were born in sin and without sufficient remedy would be
injustice. (2) The benefits of the atonement are universal and in part unconditional. They are
unconditional with respect to those who, through no fault of their own, are in such a mental
or moral condition as to make it impossible for them either to accept or reject Christ. A
leading denomination emphasizes the doctrine that “all children, by virtue of the
unconditional benefits of the atonement, are members of the kingdom of God.” This principle
extends to others besides children, both in heathen and Christian lands. God alone is
competent to judge the extent to which, in varying degrees, human beings are responsible,
and therefore the extent to which the unconditional benefits of the atonement may be applied.
(3) The purpose or decree of God is to save all who do not, actually or implicitly, willfully
reject the saving offices of the Lord Jesus Christ. Among those who have not heard the
gospel may exist “the spirit of faith and the purpose of righteousness.” Thus even those who
have no knowledge of the historic Christ virtually determine whether or not they will be
saved through Christ. They to whom the gospel is preached have higher advantages and more
definite responsibilities. To them, repentance toward God and faith in the Lord Jesus Christ
are the conditions of salvation. (4) Upon all men God bestows some measure of His grace,
restoring to the depraved will sufficient freedom to enable them to accept Christ and be
saved. Thus, in opposition to Calvinists, Arminians assert that not only Adam, but also his
depraved descendants are in a stage of probation.
In behalf of this doctrine the following is argued: (1) That the whole trend of the
Scriptures is to declare the responsibility of men and their actual power to choose between
life and death. (2) That the Scriptures explicitly teach that it is the will of God that all men
should be saved. Only those perish who wickedly resist His will (1 Tim. 2:4; 4:10; John 5:40;
Acts 7:51; etc.). (3) That the Scriptures declare the universality of Christ’s atonement, and in
some degree the universality of its benefits (Heb. 2:9; John 1:29; 3:16–17; 1 Cor. 15:22;
Rom. 5:18–19; and many other passages). (4) That the doctrine of unconditional election
necessarily implies that of unconditional reprobation; and that is to charge God with cruelty.
(5) That unconditional election also necessarily implies the determinate number of the elect, a
point that Calvinists hold, though they admit that they have for it no explicit teaching of
Scripture. To the contrary, the Scriptures not only generally but particularly teach that the
number of the elect can be increased or diminished. This is the purport of all those passages
in which sinners are exhorted to repent, or believers warned against becoming apostate, or to
“make certain about His calling and choosing you” (Matt. 24:4, 13; 2 Pet. 1:10; etc.). (6) That
the Scriptures never speak of impenitent and unbelieving men as elect, as in some cases it
would be proper to do if election were antecedent to repentance and faith and not conditioned
thereby. (7) That the whole theory of unconditional election is of the same tendency with
fatalism. (8) That the logic of unconditional election is opposed to true evangelism. (9) That
the essential features of the Arminian doctrine of election belong to the primitive and truly
historic doctrine of the church. Augustine was the first prominent teacher of unconditional
election, and he, regardless of the logical inconsistency, granted that reprobation is not
unconditional. This doctrine of Augustine was first formally accepted by the church in A.D.
529, in the Canons of the Council of Orange, approved by Pope Boniface II. The prominence
of unconditional election in the theory of Protestantism is due largely to the influence and
work of John Calvin, who, at the age of twenty-five, wrote his Institutes, in which he not only
set forth the Augustinian doctrine of unconditional election, but also taught unconditional
reprobation. John Wesley and his followers were responsible in a large degree for reviving
and developing the doctrine of Arminius.
The limits of this article do not permit an examination of the contested passages of
Scripture. For that, the reader should refer to works of systematic theology and to the
commentaries. E.MCC.
BIBLIOGRAPHY: R. Watson, Theological Institutes, 2 vols. (1843), 2:311–35, 370; J. Miley,
Systematic Theology, 2 vols. (1892), 2:260–63; W. R. Cannon, The Theology of John Wesley
(1946), pp. 90–106; H. H. Rowley, The Biblical Doctrine of Election (1950); J. Calvin,
Institutes of the Christian Religion, Library of Christian Classics (1960), 3:21–24; B. B.
Warfield, Biblical and Theological Studies (1952), pp. 270–333; G. C. Berkouwer, Divine
Election (1960).
Shalom
Johann
