Election unto salvation may offend human reasoning…
For some reason, the subject of our study this month can cause the hackles to rise on the most moderate of men. The heart of the problem lies not in the sublime truth of Election, a doctrine which is straightforward and, in its fundamental concept, not difficult to grasp, but rather in the dilemma which this doctrine poses to the natural mind. In that seat of severely limited capacity to understand the mind and ways of God, we find it impossible to reconcile the idea of sovereign choice with the equally scriptural doctrine of man’s individual responsibility to obey the gospel. To human thinking these two principles are diametrically opposed and irreconcilable. Why should it be thought strange that we are incapable of comprehending the infinitude of the divine purpose, and of quantifying in human terms, this expression of God’s eternal majesty and glory. Our late beloved brother Mr Jack Hunter would teach individual election from Ephesians 1 and tell us, “Brethren, our minds are too small to grasp the immensity of this truth, but our hearts are big enough to believe it by faith”.
Whilst we have spoken of irreconcilable truths, it must be understood, of course, that these two principles need no reconciliation except in the puny domain of human reasoning. They sit in perfect accord in the mind of God, and every attempt to express them to the satisfaction of human logic will certainly fail. If it were possible in any way for the harmony of these two principles to be expressed in words, then surely the Holy Spirit would have done so in the Scriptures. Rather, He has deliberately set the two principles side by side so as to teach us that their ultimate harmony is beyond our present ability to grasp.
…but it is in total harmony with human responsibility
The Lord Jesus said, “All things are delivered unto me of my Father: and no man knoweth the Son, but the Father; neither knoweth any man the Father, save the Son, and he to whomsoever the Son will reveal him” (Mt 11.27). Such a verse makes a clear statement concerning the sovereign, elective will of God in relation to individuals from among the race of men. If the Son does not reveal the Father, He cannot be known. To the unbiased mind this is a crystal-clear declaration of individual election. The very next verse, however, says, “Come unto me, all ye that labour and are heavy laden, and I will give you rest”, and thus human responsibility is placed by the Spirit of God immediately alongside the truth of election. The same pattern is seen in John 6.37 where the Lord Jesus says, “All that the Father giveth me shall come to me; (divine election) and him that cometh to me I will in no wise cast out (human responsibility). The pattern is seen in practice with Lydia, “whose heart the Lord opened, (His sovereignty) that she attended unto the things which were spoken of Paul” (her responsibility). (Acts 16.14). May God grant us grace to acknowledge humbly our smallness and His greatness, and simply accept by faith that the Scriptures teach both truths with equal weight.
In relation to the salvation of the soul, election is always individual…
The Scriptures teach, unequivocally, that God has chosen certain individuals to be saved, and He has done so on the grounds of His own sovereign will in the outworking of His purpose in redemption. We can boldly assert this truth as both scriptural and unassailable. Moreover, it is not a principle that is confined to the gospel, but one that was evident in OT times as well. For example, the inspired words of Paul to the Romans are based upon God’s sovereign dealings recorded in Genesis 25.23 and Exodus 33.19: “As it is written, Jacob have I loved, but Esau have I hated. What shall we say then? Is there unrighteousness with God? God forbid. For he saith to Moses, I will have mercy on whom I will have mercy, and I will have compassion on whom I will have compassion. So then it is not of him that willeth, nor of him that runneth, but of God that sheweth mercy” (Rom 9.13-16). Which of us would dare to challenge God’s absolute right to bestow blessing upon any individual of His choice? One often hears the complaint, “But it’s not fair!”, as though the divine will should conform to our concept of what is right. Equally as often, the charge is made that if God chooses certain to be saved He must, of necessity, be consigning others to judgment. That charge might be logical, but it is absolutely unscriptural and wrong. Those who disobey the demands of the gospel consign themselves to judgment, and those who bow in obedience discover the wonderful truth that “he hath chosen us in him before the foundation of the world” (Eph 1.4).
The truth of individual election is emphatically taught in the parenthetic section of the Roman Epistle, chs. 9-11. Indeed, if we fail to see that, we miss the whole point of that part of the doctrine of the gospel. The Jew was resting upon his Scripture-based knowledge of God’s sovereign choice of the nation for blessing. As far as the Jew was concerned, God was bound by His word to pour blessing upon them and judgment upon the Gentile. The nation’s refusal to see that God’s choice of them was not in relation to the salvation of their individual souls provoked the heartfelt cry of the apostle that “my heart’s desire and prayer to God for Israel is, that they might be saved” (Rom 10.1). Paul clearly teaches that, in relation to the salvation of the soul, the elective will of a sovereign God is toward individual people.
As well as in Romans and also Ephesians 1, individual election is unequivocally stated in the preaching of Paul and Barnabas in Antioch of Pisidia. “Then Paul and Barnabas waxed bold, and said, It was necessary that the word of God should first have been spoken to you: but seeing ye put it from you, and judge yourselves unworthy of everlasting life [note the self-consignment to judgment], lo, we turn to the Gentiles. For so hath the Lord commanded us, saying, I have set thee to be a light of the Gentiles, that thou shouldest be for salvation unto the ends of the earth. And when the Gentiles heard this, they were glad, and glorified the word of the Lord: and as many as were ordained to eternal life believed” (Acts 13.46-48).
Paul’s words to the Thessalonians (2 Thess 2.13) confirm not only their individual election, but also that it was “to salvation”. The means by which God brought that purpose to fruition was “through sanctification of the Spirit and belief of the truth” (note well the “balancing” statement of 1 Thess 2.13). Individual election “to eternal life” and “to salvation” is thus a clear scriptural doctrine.
…but there is a corporate aspect in relation to Israel’s blessing as a nation
There is no doubt that Israel’s appointment to blessing over the other nations of the earth was of a corporate, collective nature. We read, “Behold, the heaven and the heaven of heavens is the Lord’s thy God, the earth also, with all that therein is. Only the Lord had a delight in thy fathers to love them, and he chose their seed after them, even you above all people, as it is this day” (Deut 10.14-15). As we have seen, this was the backdrop to Paul’s teaching of individual election to salvation (as distinct from merely external privilege) in Romans 9-11. God’s statement, “Israel is my son” (Ex 4.22), shows that their election and sonship were collective, but the NT teaches that our election and sonship are individual. Thus there is no scriptural warrant for extending the idea of corporate election to the Church. You and I are not elect because we are in the Church, we are in the Church because we are the elect of God, sovereignly, gloriously, wonderfully chosen by God to be saved by His grace! Should we not humbly and thankfully adopt the attitude of Abraham’s servant? “And the man bowed down his head, and worshipped the Lord” (Gen 24.26). Amen.