Debate Review 5

"The Scriptures teach that God's election to salvation is of a class of persons and not specific individuals."

This was the proposition affirmed by Bruce Reeves. I showed how my opponent's proposition affirmed that people were chosen "to salvation." Thus, the wording of his proposition is against his corporate and conditional view of election.

To become a member of the body of Christ = salvation. Thus, if one is chosen to salvation, then he is chosen to become a member of the body of Christ.

But, my opponent argued against his own proposition when he argued that one must become a member of the body of Christ, or saved, in order to be elected to salvation.

If one is chosen unto salvation, and salvation is the same as becoming a member of the body of Christ, then is one not chosen to become a member of the body of Christ?

Is being a "member" in the "body of Christ" the result or cause of God's choice and predetermination?

Is this "class" a saved or unsaved class? My opponent says God is choosing those who are already saved, when he says God chooses those who become members of the church. Thus, the choice is not "unto salvation," as the scriptures declare it to be. (II Thess. 2: 13) Is this not unto membership in the church, which is salvation?

I believe the scriptures show clearly that it is the result of God's choice and decree, but my opponent will say that one must first put himself into the body of Christ, by his own choice and predetermination, and then God, on that basis, will choose him and predetermine him.

The issue before us is this - why some are elected to salvation and eternal life and others are not? The question is this: Does God elect people because they believe in and obey the Lord Jesus Christ, or does God elect people in order that they shall believe in and obey Christ? Is God's choice of a sinner unconditional, or conditional? In other words, Is my believing and obeying the result of God's choice, or the cause of it? Do I credit God alone for my having believed, or do I credit myself? Do I praise God or congratulate myself?

We are not disputing whether faith and repentance are necessary for salvation. We both agree that the unbelieving and unrepentant will not be saved. The question is this: Are faith and repentance necessary causes of election, or are they the necessary effects of election?

Ephesians 1

"Blessed be the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, who hath blessed us with all spiritual blessings in heavenly places in Christ: According as he hath chosen us in him before the foundation of the world, that we should be holy and without blame before him in love: Having predestinated us unto the adoption of children by Jesus Christ to himself, according to the good pleasure of his will, To the praise of the glory of his grace, wherein he hath made us accepted in the beloved." (Ephesians 1: 3-6)

I. Individual Election

This choice of the Father was of individual persons, and not of a mere idealistic, or virtual, class, group, or corporation; it was not therefore impersonal. We do not deny the idea of a corporate or class election, in scripture, or in social life. We do deny that this passage, and others like it, when speaking of election to salvation, is corporate only, and never applies to individuals.

The absurdity of my opponent's proposition can best be illustrated by reading again the words of Paul with the interpretations of my opponent inserted.

"Blessed be the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, who hath blessed us (corporately and not individually) with all spiritual blessings in heavenly places in Christ (corporately, not individually): According as he hath chosen us (corporately, not individually) in him before the foundation of the world, that we (corporately, not individually) should be holy and without blame before him in love: Having predestinated us (corporately, not individually) unto the adoption of children by Jesus Christ to himself, according to the good pleasure of his will, To the praise of the glory of his grace, wherein he hath made us (corporately, not individually) accepted in the beloved."

As the holiness, justification, and acceptance are individual and personal, so must the election be.

II. Unconditional

A. The eternal choice of God is not of those who are already holy, for they are chosen to be holy, or "unto holiness." God is choosing the unholy for the purpose of making them holy.

B. Neither is he choosing those who are already believing, but is choosing the unbelieving for the purpose of making them into believers.

C. Neither is he choosing those already adopted, but is choosing the un-adopted for the purpose of making them adopted children.

D. Neither is he choosing those who are already without blame (justified), but choosing the guilty so that they might be thereby justified.

As Calvin put it (Inst. III.xxii.8): "The grace of God does not find men fit to be chosen but makes them fit." And Augustine said: "Man is converted not because he wills to be, but he wills to be because he is ordained to election." As J. I. Packer has observed, "Where the Arminian says 'I owe my election to my faith,' the Calvinist says 'I owe my faith to my election.'"

My opponent never addressed these arguments! He never denied that there was a contradiction in his proposition. He never responded to the arguments that I made which showed that Ephesians 1 taught an election that was unto salvation and was an election of individuals.

I showed that election is the cause of every spiritual blessing, rather than spiritual blessing being the cause or ground or reason for the divine choice. It is not that God is choosing those who are already blessed. All spiritual blessings owe their origin to God's divine intention to confer such. God has blessed us, says Paul, with every spiritual blessing, "because he has chosen us."

Is faith a spiritual blessing? Then any who have it can only thank God for it and recognize that it is the result of his eternal purpose to bestow it.

Said Charles Spurgeon:

"Then the decree of election could not have been formed upon good works. "But," say others, "God elected them on the foresight of their faith." Now, God gives faith, therefore He could not have elected them on account of faith which He foresaw. There shall be twenty beggards in the street and I determine to give one of them a shilling. Will anyone say that I determined to give that one a shilling—that I elected him to have the shilling—because I foresaw that he would have it? That would be talking nonsense."

"In like manner to say that God elected men because He foresaw they would have faith—which is salvation in the germ—would be too absurd for us to listen to for a moment. Faith is the gift of God. Every virtue comes from Him. Therefore it cannot have caused Him to elect men, because it is His gift. Election, we are sure, is absolute and altogether apart from the virtues which the saints have afterwards."

"I never knew a saint yet of any denomination who thought that God saved him because He foresaw that he would have these virtues and merits." (UNCONDITIONAL ELECTION - NO. 41-42)

My opponent argued that God chose people who first made themselves believers. This view makes election a kind of selection, a selection of the fittest, but election, in the bible, is not selection. The word selection often carries the idea of choosing the fittest, or the best, while the term election carries no such connotation. In this selection scheme of election, God is simply showing respect, or honoring, an already existing self-made character type, simply recognizing or rewarding the one who is already a self-made believer. The Father's choice of Christ was indeed a "selection" of the fittest, but the election of sinners is unlike that of the election of Christ.

My opponent is not making faith a spiritual blessing resulting from the divine decree of election, but rather an impetus moving God to choose him. Faith, in such a selection scheme of election, is not a gift of God resulting from the divine intent to confer it, as Spurgeon explained so eloquently.

My opponent will argue that God is choosing those who get themselves into Christ. But, this is blatantly false. First, such an assertion would logically imply that being "in christ" is not itself a "spiritual blessing" and does not result from the election of the Father.

First, this cannot be the case because "in Christ" is dative, not accusative or genitive; that is, "in Christ" is not the direct object of the verb "chosen," but the indirect object. Neither does "in Christ" describe the "us" who are chosen. The Greek preposition "en" is dative of sphere, denoting that the choice was made within Christ, with a view to him, as both means and end. It characterizes the context of God's choosing, not the objects of his choosing. "In Christ" modifies the verb "chosen" and not the pronoun "us."

When we read that God created all things "in Christ" (Col. 1: 16), does this mean that all things were already "in Christ" before they were created? Or does it mean that all things were created with a view to Christ? Within the sphere of Christ? By and through Christ?

Furthermore, sinners are said to be "created in Christ unto good works." (Eph. 2: 10) Will my opponent interpret this expression in the same way he interprets "chosen in Christ"? If so, he would have to interpret Paul as saying that the Lord "creates" anew, or saves, those who are already "in Christ." But, if they are already in Christ, then they are already saved, so to choose them to be saved is nonsensical.

In the New Testament, being "in Christ" is contrasted with being "in Adam." How are we "in Adam"? Is it by choice? Is there anyone who is not "in Adam"? All men are "in Adam" by sovereign divine appointment and natural birth. So, men are likewise "in Christ" by sovereign divine appointment and spiritual birth.

The direct object of the verb "chosen" is "us," but not us as already believing, already holy, already adopted, already justified from blame, or already in Christ. It is a choice to take of those outside of Christ and put them into Christ. It is a choice to take the unholy and make them holy. It is a choice to take the guilty and to justify them. It is a choice to take those who are not his children and to make them so by adoption.

My opponent never responded to all these arguments.

Besides all this, to argue that God is choosing those who make themselves believers, makes the election a failure, because none are able to believe because of the depravity of the sinner; And, if sinners are not able to believe, or to please God, then God would be acting foolishly to choose those who believe. And, if men cannot believe without God causing them to believe, or apart from God giving them faith, then obviously his choice must include giving them faith, or making them believers.

Finally, if God chooses those who make themselves believers, and chooses them upon that basis, then the choice cannot be said to be gracious, or unmerited. But, the text plainly declares the choice to be gracious, it not being a selection of the fittest, or a reward of recognition.