sa SETMASONEECTON FEVERS secucnteapeentiytionen Appian Chad, cl, Ferpectheron Beton: he Views Nashville TN stan ns een OL ere, ou rowdman & Holman, 208, pp. 1-5 “Rvead them nay order ou choo “ee ra aged tn are to tre pone whem I ove ave known meal feel ves since am teres ome arog were sues vee hard mls oN : eat ever separated Them in pct ove and emsate them very much and pray that the God an Pther of our Toe des Chit wiles them cpt aa Divine Election to | | ‘Nn tothe “led and onl Severe the Lard of od, the only One whos immortality, welling in wn that Mm noe of ds sen Fea St 0 Salvation: 2a al Aen (Tn, 61-16 HESD snc ACE tesaron BRUCE A. WARE Just moments reflection reveals how diferently we commonly think within our evangelical churches from how Pal (and other bb Tal writers) thought about te doctrine of election, What is fen to tsa “controversial” and "potently dvish" doctrine tobe ignored, dt best and repulsed, a worst, was for Paul, mast nota, one ofthe Sources of his realest joy and strength. Consider Ephesians 1. Paul Fein thie leter eommendina ras to Go the Pathe forthe many Fic and wondrous blessings be has granted usin his Son (Eph. 13. Und so as not to eave us wondering just what these blessings are that he has in ming, he proceds to enumerate them in the verses that follow (ph. L414), Where does he begin his vecttion of Gas ‘wondrous blessings? What Besing tps thelist? ‘fall things te very fist blessing he extol, the one that in the apostle’ mind, constitutes the bass forthe resto the Dlssings that follow, ie the truth that God chose us in Him (Chris), before the foundation ofthe wrld[eelesato emas en auto pro katabols Iasmo], tobe boly and blameless in His sight (Eph. 14 HCSB) ‘And ath than leaving ths notion quickly (sone would drop an un eect bot pan picked uy fom the stove, instead be ad to this ‘opening thought, marveling nw that in love, God “predestined us to be dogted trough Jesus Chiat for Hime secording to is favor2 RSECTIVISCN ELECTION FIVE VWs and.wil othe praise of His glorious grace that He favored us wth in the Beloved” (Bph 15-6 HCSB). Let’ ot mss the significance here Wien Paul thinks of why God is worthy of being praise, of what God Ins done fo his people that should elit fom them dep, passionate, apd wondrous worship, to the glory of his name, for the iches of his face (Eph. 1:8), the very ist thing that comes to his ming, and flows from his pen, itis tra: Go chose us! Gol predestined us! T cannot help but wonder if people in most four churches were asked to ist the reasons Go is tobe praised—that i they wrote ‘downalf the blessings they ul think ofthat God has provided for them-—how many of ur people would inelude election on the lst And, ifitmakes thei, for bow many would election top the ist? One thing seems clear if we think one way about something and Paul (and other biblical writer) think another way about the same thing, ‘we are the ones in nee of orretion—not Paul or the Bible! Why ‘does Paul value the tat that we often fen to shun? Why does Pau lend with doctrine that many pastors wouldn't dream of preaching ‘om lest they bee controversy and risk posible church pit? What ‘id Paul ave in mind with this teaching on divine election, and why isi o important? ‘This chapter proposes fo explain and defend the position that Paula the Bible understands and presents divine sav lec tion as unconditional, individual, and infalpsaian. Justa word of ‘olanaton ofeach ofthese elements of election may be hep ‘ie are concerned with the Bibs teaching of sii election.” that election to salaton. There is no question that lection i used in other contexts and with other senses than election to sabatin, pet se But the richest sense ofthe Bibles use of election i of sinners ‘lstion to salvation. As Eau writs, “But we must always thank God for you, brothers loved by th Lor, because fom the beginning God has chosen you for salvation though sanctification by te Spirit and through bel inthe uth” 2 This, 213 HSB) tis this glorious ‘lectin to salvation we wish here to explain and defend “Unconditional lection” refers tothe claim that God's selection of those whom he would save was not based upon (not “conditioned” fn) some facto feature of thas individual’ ves, n particular. That is God's election of those whe would be saved was not conitianed on Something they would de some choice they would mak, how good for bad they might be, or anything else specifically tue aout therm in contrast to other also enslave to sin and dsering Cod’ just OVINE LECTION TO SalaTCN = 3 ‘condemnation. Rather, God elected some toe saved according tothe food pleasure of his will without respect for their indivi qual- thes, characters, actions, oF choles. His election then, was “uncon- ional ast pertains to particulars ofthe elect persons themseres, vil ti aleo clearly contioned and dependent on God's own good pleasure and wil. “indvidcal election” aserts that Gd did more than (but nt less than) choosing thatthe nation of Israel asa whole would be called out tobe his peopl ad that he did more than (but not less tha) choos ing that there would some day bea group or company of the sived including both Jee and Gees. Without doubt God did choose the ‘ation of frel to be a special nation of hi (Deut 7:5, 142), and he Aid determine that there bea "chosen race" (1 Pat. 2:9 HCSBI, bis ‘church comprising all rue believers in Jesus Chis, his bride made ‘up of those men and women purified or hs Son, But more than this, Cod also elected thse individuals who make up the church, or wo consi the bride of Chris. Individual lection, then, affirms that ‘ach Individual sted person--man, woman boy, or girl—was loved tnd favored by God before the eeaion ofthe word so that God spe ‘aly chose him or her fom eonderation and ruin tobe made hisholy and blameless child (ph, 1-5), conformed to the ikeness of his Son Rom. 829), "nfalapsarian election” relates tothe question ofthe moral con~ Aiton ofthe hoe of umaruty whom God considered in hiss» fe and out of whom he selected those whom be woul save. Did {Got view all of umanity as merely) created but not yet allen ie. Tapsed! and hence, ae neither sinful nor deserving of condemnation? (Odi he vw haranity asthe total number of all who would ever lve, considered ae fle sinners, corrupted and deserving of condemn ration due to their connection to Adam and his fall into sin? One thing that al sides have agreed on through the history ofthe church (anagreement that open theism sad, chooses now to dapense with, ‘este Seritute's clear an diac teaching) shat fom "before the founéation of the world” God ad in mind exactly those whom he would save (Eph: 18 CSD; cf Mat. 25:34; 2Tim. 19; 1 Pet, 120; Rev. 138). ‘But the question hee is when Go chose “the elec” though he hod nt as of yt created the world or any of the human beings who ref “apai’ cn om he Latin sare," al rar sein hae Bon aan sr{4 ERGECTIVES RECTION FIVE EWS ‘would populate i, de choose these elect ones from the “oo!” of ‘humanity considered as una as argue by supalapsatanism) or considered as fallen (¢ argued by intalapsrianisn? The position “rdued here is that Cod considered humanity as already fallen when he chose those whom he would ave. Thats, he Toked upon the hi ‘man race in his mind’ ee a those who lve ater (ina) the fll ‘lace’ and 0 Gods election tral is an election of fos fllen and Condemned people whom he surely and certainly wil save in Christ. Iinshor, vine election isinfalapsarin Tn wat fllows, we bal consider ech ofthese three main che acteits(uncenditonal, individual, and inlapsarian) ofthe sie ‘lection taught in rite. While some attention wil e given to a historia overview of various aspects of ur dscasin, since othe fine ‘overviews exe? we wll devote mast of our attention tote Scripture’ ‘own facing on these mates, In each case postive arguments wil, be se forth defending the position argued here, ad were appron- ate the strongest and most compeling objetins wil be considered and resposes willbe gven, Throughout this discussion my hope a prayer is thatthe wonder of Ges gracious and saving election of i hers may be een more clear, tat we may cherish this doctrine as we taught, and tat God may be honored ashe ough nis election and ‘Saaton of sinners tim aloe Belong al ony and praise. Unconditional Election Dein Btn ten Ben aia tt cd at so ce a er Si el a eat “nee cad tne ey Sicha gar yi sean “omer ue Sone SSSR Ma ce bln rn 2 Sag pane nye ee Segoe ns wns Eee een nar SS eee Seiecini a oes et DIVINE BECTION TO SALVATION 5 minians, unconditional election specifically denis tht God eects ‘persons based upon his vanced knowledge, in eternity rast of their fate decision of whether to receive Christ or not when presented the gospel, Tati vine election isnot based upon or conditioned bythe “reser faith of thos who wl in time, belive in Christ. ‘At ite ear, the doctrine of unconditional election assures the believer that sation, fom beginning to end, i all of God. From Goals electing in eternity past of those whom he would save, of those ‘whom he would make “hol and blameless” (Eph. 14 HS), tothe Final pevection in olinss of those same elect persons who ar, in time, effectually called, justified, and then glorified as they ae re ‘newed into the Hkenes of Crist Rom. 8:29-90),the whole of “sala tion is rm the Loo” Jon, 29 HCSB). To God alone, then belongs allgloryand honor, and noone may boast before the Lord of any man nero contribution to his sation (1 Co. 126-81; Eph. 28-9), ori Gd’ election af those whom he wil save is cnditional— conditioned upon “forecen fith” a is often asserted and believed inthe classic Arminia traition—then tere is one ultimate ation ‘elating to our sation that we do and God specially des not do and cannot eft, For thee Arminians, while ts trae that God must ‘provide pace (prevenient grace} fr any to be enabled to belive in ‘Chris, as both Arminius and Wesley belive, yeti rains en tiely upto the individ whether he will believe. By neces, in Tight of te supposed ibertaras retin the inva Go ean= not ensure that any person will believe. God does al that he can do, butte choic, in the end, is up tous. Therefore, conditional election asserts hun choice and action ae that which fs uimately decisive Inpersonal salvation, Put dierent atts most crucial moment (he ‘moment of belief o isbele, sahation iso us, not ofthe Lord. But beause sation is from the Loi” in every respect from stato fnish andbecauee to od alone belongs al glory and boasting forthe gracious saving work he aesomplishes and applies to sinners) ee Ring, he rks of es Armia tn asa WI aca ede) L380 ar re ot Cds one ‘Sellen ea sry te nae wou rough his een es oval gare lve eros seo! eeu eee Et a donee pevee “tet renee We alo acon 1 er, cone ner i, 658 nr ey sey Schoen top th at ‘Ste andy pe ren epee) ce ing he thle Co ee num pt coer wl we re ‘Sinecovtnoltonng tne ap hn”