My previous article examined the language of “election” in the New Testament in relation to the believer’s salvation, arguing that God has elected individual believers in Christ from eternity past by His foreknowing their faith unto the end of eternal life. This article treats the language of election more broadly. The first portion of this second article concerns the believer’s election as well, focusing particularly on the topics of individual election, Israel, and the elect in the last days, and the last portion turns to the language of election in relation to Jesus, the angels/messengers, the apostles, the fathers, and human choice. We learn, through the course of these two articles, that the language of election in the New Testament is often salvific in nature but not always and that it usually refers to God’s actions but sometimes refers to man’s actions.
The Election of Individuals and Israel
Implicit in my previous article is the affirmation of the doctrine of individual election: that is, God has elected the believer unto eternal life as an individual, not simply as some member of a corporate body. Robert E. Picirilli states plainly that election is “personal and individual.”[1] Hence, each of the passages I considered in that article concern either individuals or a group of individuals. For example, as we considered, Paul stated that God chose (exelexato) us (Ephesians 1:4). Likewise, Peter addressed his letter to the elect (eklektois) sojourners (1 Peter 1:1; cf. 2:4), whom he proceeded to describe as a chosen (eklekton) race (1 Peter 2:9, quoting Deuteronomy 7:6 and 14:2). In addition to these examples, Paul mentioned the individual Rufus who was chosen (eklekton) in the Lord (Romans 16:13). Again, John referred to the individual sister who was elect (eklektēs, 2 John 13).[2]
Passages concerning the election of Israel also relate to the doctrine of individual election. In Romans, Paul wrote that God has foreknown His people Israel (11:2) and chosen a remnant “according to the election [eklogēn] of grace” (11:5) so that the elect (eklogē) have obtained what they were seeking (11:7), namely, the righteousness of God, by grace.[3] This passage, consistent with the passages I examined in the previous article, moves logically from divine foreknowledge to divine election. God elects those Israelites to comprise the remnant of His gracious election according to His foreknowledge of their individual choices.
Election is not according simply to one’s corporate or national identity; it must include personal assent. For this reason, F. Leroy Forlines, who spent considerable space examining questions concerning Israel’s election, concluded that Paul “appeal[ed] to the Jews to see that election is individual, not corporate.”[4] God elects those individuals whom He foreknows will love Him (8:28–29). Thus, we see that election is personal and individual.
Election and the Last Days
The New Testament also discusses the elect amid the last days. For example, in the Olivet Discourse, Jesus stated that the days of the Abomination of Desolation will be cut short for the sake of the elect (eklektous) (Matthew 24:22; Mark 13:20) but that false Christs and false prophets will attempt to mislead the elect (eklektous) (Matthew 24:24; Mark 13:22; cf. Revelation 12:17; 13:14). He then shifted to discussing the Second Coming and explained that He would send forth His angels to gather the elect (eklektous) from across the world (Matthew 24:31; Mark 13:27).
Additionally, John described those who are with the Lamb, against whom the beast makes war, as called (klētoi) and chosen (eklektoi) and faithful (pistoi) (Revelation 17:14; cf. 12:17). In the end, Jesus taught, God will give justice to the elect (eklektōn) (Luke 18:7).[5] These passages teach us that God shows mercy on behalf of the elect, false Christs and prophets attempt to mislead the elect, the beast wars with the elect, and Jesus will gather the elect and show justice to them. We see then that God cares for His elect.
The Election of Jesus and Angels/Messengers
In addition to using the language of “election” in relation to salvation, the New Testament also uses it more broadly, not referring to salvation per se but rather to some task or role or purpose. For example, it states plainly that Jesus is elect. The Gospel of Luke records that, during the Transfiguration, the Father elected (eklelegmenos) the Son and that, consequently, we should listen to Him (9:35; cf. 23:35).
Clearly, the election of Jesus differs from the election of the believer because the former is the election of Christ whereas the latter is election in Christ. At the same time, even this type of election is not absent human agency because, later in the Gospel, Luke recounts how Jesus chose, in the Garden of Gethsemane, not to follow His own will: “Father, if You are willing, take away this cup from Me. Yet not the will of Me but of You be done” (22:42).[6] The Father’s election did not unconditionally cause Jesus to submit His will to the Father’s; rather, said Forlines, Jesus chose to subordinate Himself to the Father.[7] Again, the concepts of divine election and human agency are not mutually exclusive.
Similarly, the apostles described Jesus as elect, with Matthew describing Him as God’s chosen (hēretisa) Servant (Matthew 12:18, quoting Isaiah 42:1) and Peter describing Him as the elect (eklekton) cornerstone (1 Peter 2:6, quoting Isaiah 28:16). God chose Jesus to be the costly cornerstone in Zion, the final fulfillment of the Servant Songs. Hence, we see also that God elected Jesus to provide justice, righteousness, salvation, and intercession.
Additionally, Paul taught that (at least some of) the angels/messengers are elect when he charged Timothy, in the presence of God, Christ, and the elect (eklektōn) angels/messengers, to maintain the principles he had given him (1 Timothy 5:21). Whether this word refers to angelic messengers or human messengers may be the subject of some debate; while the immediate context refers to human elders, laborers, and witnesses (5:17–22), the broader context also includes a reference to angels (3:16). If the word refers to human messengers, then its usage is consistent with the point that humans may be elected for certain purposes without removing from them their agency. If the word refers to angelic messengers, then its usage is consistent with what we know about angels; that is, they may exercise their agency unto righteousness or wickedness (Jude 1:6; 2 Peter 2:4), and God may choose them for certain purposes (e.g., Psalm 91:11; Hebrews 1:14).[8]
So, we see that the Biblical language teaches us that both Jesus and the angels/messengers were elected, not unto salvation but rather for particular roles: Jesus as the Son, the Servant, and the Cornerstone, and the angelic or human messengers as witnesses of Paul’s charge.
The Election of the Apostles and the Fathers
The New Testament also teaches that the apostles were elected. Specifically, the Gospel of Luke records that Jesus chose twelve apostles from among His disciples (6:13, eklexamenos, “having chosen out”; cf. Acts 1:2). As with the prior example, this choosing was not salvific in nature (they were likely saved when they confessed Jesus as the Christ, e.g., Matthew 16:16). Still, this choosing was not inconsistent with human volition because the apostles had previously accepted Jesus’ invitation to follow Him in the first place (e.g., Luke 5:27; cf. Acts 1:2, 24).
To put the point differently, Luke did not state the apostles followed Jesus because He chose them but rather simply that He chose twelve apostles from among the disciples who had previously followed Him. In fact, the Gospel of John records that Jesus recognized that one of the twelve whom He had chosen (exelexamēn, “did choose”) would later choose to betray Him (6:70; 13:18; cf. 18:1–11; Luke 6:16). Thus, we see that the nature of Jesus’ electing them included choice—good choices and bad choices over time—on the part of both the apostles and Jesus.
Even so, a statement in the Gospel of John appears to challenge this point about agency. Specifically, it records Jesus telling His disciples that they did not choose (exelexasthe) Him but that He chose (exelexamēn) them (15:16). At first blush, this passage seems to suggest unconditional election. However, says F. Leroy Forlines and J. Matthew Pinson, passages recounting Jesus’ choosing of the apostles are not suitable prooftexts for the doctrine of unconditional election in relation to salvation.[9]
For one thing, they do not strictly concern that type of election. Additionally, this passage does not mean the apostles had no agency in choosing to follow Jesus in the first place (as we have seen). It means rather that the apostles did not choose themselves to be apostles; Jesus chose them. Analogously, we may apply for a position, but a manager or executive actually chooses to hire us, not we ourselves. Finally, Jesus qualified His statement so that He did not simply say He chose them, period, but that He chose them out of the world to bear fruit that would remain (15:16, 19). That is, Jesus alone, not the disciples, chose the conditions and purposes for following Him. Keeping with the previous analogy, we do not generally choose the nature of our employment; rather, our supervisors prescribe them for us.
The book of Acts also contains several usages of “election.” First, it includes additional instances of Jesus choosing apostles, namely, Mathias (exelexō, “He had chosen,” 1:24) and Saul (eklogēs, “of choice,” 9:15). Also, it includes a sermon from Paul, during his first missionary journey, in which he preached to the Israelites that God chose (exelexato) their fathers while they were in Egypt (13:17). Finally, amid the Jerusalem Council, Peter exclaimed that God chose (exelexato) him from among the apostles and elders to preach the gospel to the Gentiles (Acts 15:7). Thus, election may include choice, purpose, or role. To use Picirilli’s language, it may concern “election to particular roles of service” rather than “election to salvation.”[10] Also, the same person may receive different types of election; in Peter’s case, he was elected to be an apostle, to be redeemed, and to be a preacher to the Gentiles.
The Election of Things and People
Finally, although most New Testament instances of election refer to divine choosing, some of them refer to human choosing. Specifically, the New Testament indicates that Mary chose the good portion (Luke 10:42), that the guests chose their place of honor (14:7), that the congregation chose seven reputable men (Acts 6:5), that the apostles and elders chose some men to send a letter to the Gentiles (15:22, 25), that Paul chose Silas to join him (15:40), that Paul did not know whether to choose life or death (Philippians 1:22), and that Moses chose affliction with God’s people over pleasure with the Egyptians (Hebrews 11:25).[11]
Whereas some of these instances concern the choice of inanimate objects, others concern the choice of people. This latter type demonstrates, again, that election (in the broader, non-salvific sense) is not unconditional because these chosen men presumably had agency to reject their selection. Undoubtedly, the nature of God’s choosing and the nature of man’s choosing is distinct because God and man are distinct. But in both cases, God and man are dealing with people as such who, by virtue of their nature, have agency.
Conclusion
These two articles on election have shown us that election is the action of some being, often God, choosing someone or something for some status (e.g., redeemed) or role (e.g., witness) or purpose (e.g., worship) or something else. The New Testament teaches us that, in the case of salvation, it is personal and individual and that God cares deeply for His elect amid the last days. However, not all usages of election refer to salvation because Jesus, the angels/messengers, the apostles, and the fathers were chosen for particular roles. To the extent that Peter is a paradigm, the New Testament’s usage of election demonstrates that God has elected the redeemed in various capacities: not simply to be saved but also to follow His promptings whatever they may be. While we cannot see the future, God can, and we can trust the multiple ways in which He has elected us.
[1] Robert E. Picirilli, Grace, Faith, Free Will: Contrasting Views of Salvation; Calvinism and Arminianism (Nashville: Randall House, 2002), 51 (italics removed). Following Jack Cottrell, he cites the following as examples: Romans 8:29–30; 16:13; 2 Thessalonians 2:13; Ephesians 1:4–5, 11; and 1 Peter 1:1–2.
[2] Similarly, Peter described a woman who was elected with (syneklektē) the elect sojourners to whom he was writing (1 Peter 5:13), and John addressed his letter to the elect (eklektē) lady (2 John 1:1). However, in each of these two cases, scholars disagree about whether the elect woman is an individual or a church.
[3] Concerning the language of foreknowledge in Romans 11:2, Picirilli proposes it means “knowledge of the past” (‘knowing previously’)” (Grace, Faith, Free Will, 79), and J. Matthew Pinson holds it teaches “affectionate foreknowledge but also prescience” (40 Questions about Arminianism [Grand Rapids: Kregel Academic, 2022], 259n6).
[4] F. Leroy Forlines, The Quest for Truth: Answering Life’s Inescapable Questions (Nashville: Randall House, 2002), 365 (caps removed).
[5] The statement comes from the parable of the persistent widow, which, significantly, appears in Luke’s Gospel immediately after Jesus foretold the Second Coming.
[6] Translations represent my own unless otherwise indicated..
[7] Forlines, The Quest for Truth,92.
[8] Thanks to Kevin L. Hester for helping me think through the material in this paragraph.
[9] Forlines, The Quest for Truth,384; Pinson, 40 Questions about Arminianism, 279, 281.
[10] Picirilli, Grace, Faith, Free Will, 51.
[11] The Greek is as follows: Luke 10:42 (exelexato, “has chosen”), 14:7 (exelegonto, “they were choosing out”), Acts 6:5 (exelexanto, “they chose”), 15:22 (eklexamenous, “having chosen”), 15:25 (eklexamenois, “having chosen”), 15:40 (epilexamenos, “having chosen”), Philippians 1:22 (hairēsomai, “shall I choose”), and Hebrews 11:25 (helomenos, “having chosen”).
Recent Comments