few doctrines of the Scriptures have been as greatly misunderstood and consequently as greatly abused and perverted as these two doctrines, yet the Scriptures set them forth in a relative simplicity; why then are they so misunderstood and abused, if this be the case? The truth is that these doctrines strike at the very root of man’s pride and vanity, and when rightly understood and accepted, leave no room whatsoever for man to rejoice or take pride in his own doings and accomplishments. For this reason, man in his natural pride and vanity, rejects them, or else so far modifies them as to make them acceptable to his proud mind.

Abraham Booth well says of election:

"But what is the reason of this tragical outcry against it? If I be not greatly deceived, it is as follows. This doctrine lays the axe at the root of all our boasted moral excellence. This doctrine, in its native consequences, demolishes every subterfuge of human pride; as it leaves not the shadow of a difference between one man and another, why the Deity should regard and save this person rather than that; but teaches all who know and all who embrace it, to rest in that memorable maxim; EVEN SO, FATHER, FOR SO IT SEEMED GOOD IN THY SIGHT; resolving the whole into divine grace and divine sovereignty."—The Reign of Grace, p. 56. American Baptist Publication Society, Philadelphia, no date.

An elderly preacher friend of this writer, who has since gone to be with the Lord, once remarked that a person had to be converted to every doctrine of the Bible before he really accepted them, and in nothing is this so true as with the doctrines of which we now speak. This writer underwent an extended period of internal conflict before he was brought to accept this doctrine; he had no predisposition to believe in it; in fact, he was fully confirmed in his opposition to it, but he had continually made it his prayer that the Lord would give him wisdom and understanding in spiritual things, and this was the result. To this day, fleshly pride still rebels against this doctrine, but the spirit has been brought to rejoice in it, finding in it great comfort and assurance. It is because of this great internal conflict that the writer does not engage in arguments and debates with those who do not believe in these doctrines, for he believes that they are not doctrines which can be learned merely by fleshly wisdom, but are doctrines to which one must be converted, and which can only be accepted by grace. Beating another believer over the head with a Bible seldom does more than confirm him in his opposition to the doctrine so zealously put forth. This is not to say that we cannot engage in quiet and friendly discussion of these or any other doctrines of the Word; this we can and should do, but any time the discussion gets beyond friendliness and quietness, it is time to end it, for there can be no profit to either person after that point.

Some have rejected the doctrines of the decrees of God in toto, saying that it would not be just in God to put forth foreordained decrees as to what is to come to pass in time. However, Charles H. Spurgeon, in a sermon on Ephesians 1:5, has well answered this by saying:

"It is at once a doctrine of Scripture and of common sense, that whatever God does in time he predestined to do in eternity. Some men find fault with divine predestination, and challenge the justice of eternal decrees. Now, if they will please to remember that predestination is the counterfoil of history, as an architectural plan, the carrying out of which we read in the facts that happen, they may perhaps obtain a slight clue to the unreasonableness of their hostility. I never heard any one among professors wantonly and willfully find fault with God’s dealings, yet I have heard some who would even dare to call in question the equity of his counsels. If the thing itself be right, it must be right that God intended to do the thing; if you find no fault with facts, as you see them in providence, you have no ground to complain of decrees, as you find them in predestination, for the decrees and the facts are just the counterparts one of the other. Have you any reason to find fault with God, that he has been pleased to save you, and save me? Then why should you find fault because Scripture says he predetermined that he would save us? I cannot see, if the fact itself is agreeable, why the decree should be objectionable. I can see no reason why you should find fault with Gods foreordination, if you do not find fault with what does actually happen as the effect of it. Let a man but agree to acknowledge an act of providence, and I want to know how he can, except he runs in the very teeth of providence, find any fault with the predestination or intention that God made concerning that providence."—Metropolitan Tabernacle Pulpit, p. 97. Pilgrim Publication reprint, Pasadena, Texas, 1969.

In studying these doctrines, it must be recognized in the very beginning that these are very deep, almost inscrutable doctrines, and for this reason, we can only hold to the Scriptural teachings, and we dare not go beyond these, for in nothing is the human mind less fitted to reason than in dealing with the doctrines of predestination and election. This very fact has been made a plea by some for the rejection of these doctrines, as if we were never to accept anything except we were capable of fully understanding it; others, finding no way how to reconcile the sovereignty of God with human responsibility in this matter, have chosen to repudiate Gods sovereign election. But this is to completely miss the whole point in this matter; for whether we understand, or are able to reconcile these two facts in no way determines the truth of either; we must let God be God, and give Him credit for knowing some things that we neither know nor understand. Reconciling of Scriptures is not our business; our business is simply to learn them and believe them. In actuality, reconciliation is needed only between enemies, and the Scriptures are not at enmity with themselves. Dr. Richard Fuller, in speaking of predestination and free agency, has well said that—

"I have shown that it is impossible for us to reject either of these great truths, and it is equally impossible for our minds to reconcile them. But here, as everywhere, faith must come to our aid, teaching us to repose unquestioningly upon God’s veracity; reminding us that ‘Secret things belong unto the Lord our God;’ and rebuking the arrogance which demands that our intellects shall penetrate and reconcile those thoughts of the divine mind which are as high above our thoughts as the heavens are above the earth."—Sermons, Second Series, p. 19. American Baptist Publication Society, Philadelphia, 1877.

Charles H. Spurgeon, in a sermon upon 2 Thessalonians 2:13-14, likewise says of this doctrine:

"Is it not here in Scripture? And is it not thy duty to bow before it, and meekly acknowledge what thou understandest not—to receive it as the truth even though thou couldest not understand its meaning? I will not attempt to prove the justice of God in having thus elected some and left others. It is not for me to vindicate my Master. He will speak for himself, and he does so:—‘Nay, but, O man, who art thou that repliest against God? Shall the thing formed say to him that formed it, Why bast thou made me thus? Hath not the potter power over the clay of the same lump to make one vessel unto honour and another unto dishonour?’"—The New Park Street Pulpit, Vol. I, p. 316. Zondervan Publishing House reprint, Grand Rapids, Michigan, 1963.

As foolish would it be for us to expect a tea-cup to hold the ocean, as for us to expect to be able to fully comprehend the great works and purposes of the Almighty, and it is only an unthinking conceit which will interpose one’s own ignorance as a reason to reject what the Scriptures set forth as the truth.

Without hoping to deal with this subject in anything like an exhaustive manner, we would only note three main things about this doctrine, and trust that the Spirit of God will guide our understanding into the truth as we study.

I. ELECTION AND PREDESTINATION DEFINED.

Both of these doctrines will be considered together, for election is often treated as a branch of predestination, and at other times as being equivalent to predestination. Dr. John Gill says of these two:

"The special decrees of God respecting rational creatures, commonly go under the name of predestination; though this sometimes is taken in a large sense, to express every thing that God has predetermined . . . but predestination is usually considered as consisting of two parts, and including the two branches of election and reprobation, both with respect to angels and men . . . Though sometimes predestination only respects that branch of it called election, and the predestinated signify only the elect."—Body of Divinity, Book II, chap. 2, p. 176. Turner Lassetter, Atlanta, reorgia, 1950.

(4) Still others hold that inasmuch as this doctrine is a mysterious one, that therefore it should not be preached nor taught at all. But this is not so, for no doctrine of the Scriptures can be ignored without incurring blood-guiltiness before God; it is needful that the saints be apprised of the source and cause of their salvation, lest in their pride and conceit they attempt to take that glory which belongs alone unto the Lord.

What then is election? The word simply means "to choose" and it refers to that eternal choice of unworthy men to be the objects of the Lord’s saving work in time. "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," (Eph. 1:4). The following definitions may help our understanding of the doctrines of predestination and election.

"Election is that eternal act of God, by which in his sovereign pleasure, and on account of no foreseen merit in them, he chooses certain out of the number of sinful men to be the recipients of the special grace of his Spirit, and so to be made voluntary partakers of Christ’s salvation."—A. H. Strong, Systematic Theology, p. 779. Fleming H. Revell Company, 1954.

Speaking of Predestination, Dr. J. M. Pendleton says:

"It comprehends the purpose of election, and also, as will be shown, the purpose of ‘reprobation,’ as it has been called, which, as has been well said, ‘is nothing more than withholding from some the grace which is imparted to others.’ (Hill’s Divinity, p. 561) These two purposes may be expressed thus: ‘That God chose in Christ certain persons of the fallen race of Adam, before the foundation of the world, unto eternal glory, according to his own purpose and grace, without regard to their foreseen faith and good works, or any conditions performed by them;’ and that from the rest of mankind he withheld his grace and left them to dishonor, and the just punishment of their sins."—Christian Doctrines, p. 105. American Baptist Publication Society, Philadelphia, 1878.

This doctrine is set forth in the Scriptures, not only under the terminology of "election", but also under the terms of "choose", "ordain" and "appoint", for this doctrine involves God’s sovereign determination to exercise such gifts and graces upon specific fallen men as to certainly cause them to come to the saving knowledge of His Son. because of the character of the Lord’s purposes, this accomplishment is always attributed wholly to God, and never to man. No human works, merit, or faith, either real or foreseen, can ever enter into the determination of this matter. This is clear from Romans 9:11: "For the children being not yet born, neither having done any good or evil, that the purpose of God according to election might stand, not of works, but of him that calleth." In referring to the children not being born, nor having done any good or evil, and then referring to the purposes of God according to election standing, it is clearly shown that a foreknowledge of human acts, merit or faith never enters into the matter, for if it had, here would have been the logical place to have spoken of it, yet silence reigns supreme in this instance.

Many hold to a conditional election—one conditioned upon some human response, generally faith. Indeed, some preachers have changed the statement of the old Scriptural confessions of faith that almost all Baptists used to hold that we "are elected to his grace," and have made it to read that we are "conditionally elected to this grace." This sounds good to the proud, humanistic thinking of man! But the Scriptural fact is that there is only one conditional tense is the Greek, and "elect is NEVER in that tense.

And another interesting fact that refutes the above theory about conditional election, is that in every appearance in the New Testament of the Greek word translated "elect" or "choose" when God is the one doing the electing, the verb is in the middle voice. This is very significant, as W. W. Goodwin shows.

"In the middle voice the subject is represented as acting upon himself, or in some manner which concerns himself. 1. As acting on himself . . . 2. As acting for himself or with reference to himself . . . 3. As acting on an object belonging to himself."—A Greek Grammar, Section 1242, p. 267. Ginn & Company, Boston, 1892.

Thus the cause of the election CANNOT be found in the subject, thus chosen, but is due wholly because of the determination of the One doing the choosing. THERE IS NOTHING IN THE ELECT TO MOVE GOD TO CHOOSE ANY ONE OF THEM. IT IS WHOLLY OF GRACE.

Election, being clearly said to have been eternal—i.e., before time, the world, or man came into existence, the only alternative of those who have determined—not to accept the absolute sovereignty of God in this matter is to base it upon foreseen merit of some sort in man, such as faith, goodness or serviceability; yet Romans 9:11, quoted above, as well as the fact that faith, and indeed, "every good gift", is declared to be the gift of God, voids this theory, and leaves election still a sovereign act of God without explanation from the human side of the matter. Has not God the same right that we claim for ourselves—to choose who His lifetime associates and friends shall be? Let any person begin to claim that God must deal in the very same way and degree with all mankind, and that person will immediately run into all sorts of difficulties, for God claims the sovereign right to do with His own as he wills, as did the householder in the parable in Matthew 20:15: "Is it not lawful for me to do what I will with mine own? Is thine eye evil, because I am good?" If any person is ever saved, it is more than any deserve, and if none were ever saved, there would be no ground for complaint, for all deserve only hell. In no other realm does man reason so inconsistently as he does concerning election. For instance, if the governor of a state pardons an inmate of the state prison, no one immediately begins to cry out that in order to be just, he must pardon all of the other equally guilty inmates. All realize that to pardon a criminal is an act of grace and mercy, not of justice, and that rights or desert has nothing at all to do with it; yet God’s elective purposes are exactly parallel to this.

We must remember that election is wholly of God, that it was accomplished in eternity past, that it is unto salvation, and that it includes all of the means necessary for bringing the salvation to pass, as it is written: "God chose you from the beginning unto salvation in sanctification of the Spirit and belief of the truth: whereunto he called you through our gospel, to the obtaining of the glory of our Lord Jesus Christ," (2 Thess. 2:13-14, R. V. Oxford University Press, 1908). There is thus no room left for the praise of man or his deeds or attitudes, but all glory is due unto God.

II. ELECTION DETAILED.

Election is also ascribed to Christ in the following passages: "I speak not of you all: I know whom I have chosen," (John 13:18). That this was not an election unto service is clear, because Judas Iscariot had been chosen unto service, but he was never saved, and so could not have been elected unto salvation. "Ye have not chosen me, but I have chosen you, and ordained you, that ye should go and bring forth fruit, and that your fruit should remain: that whatsoever ye shall ask of the Father in my name, he may give it you . . . If ye were of the world, the world would love his own: but because ye are not of the world, but I have chosen you out of the world, therefore the world hateth you," (John 15:16,19). Observe in these two latter verses that: (1) Christ expressly denies that the choice was made by man. (2) That this was not "unto service" as many claim election is, for the service is something that is in addition to, and grows out of, the election. (3) This election constitutes the saint of a different class than the world. (4) The world hates the saints because of their election by Christ.

It is true that a man may choose to serve God, (Josh. 24:15), yet this is never called election, for election is always and ever a divine act when it relates to salvation, which it generally does in the New Testament. Men’s choice to serve God means nothing as to their election unto salvation, for Judas Iscariot had chosen, for reasons of his own, to follow Christ, and, in a sense, to serve God, yet we are expressly told that he was never saved, and therefore was not of the elect.

Election is not only declared to be of God, but it is also "in Christ", as it is written: "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 . . ." (Eph. 1:3-4a). By this is meant that every one of the elect are comprehended in the Son of God, and find acceptance with the Father only because of Him: "To the praise of the glory of his grace, wherein he hath made us accepted in the beloved," (Eph. 1:6). It is but natural for proud and egotistical man to seek for the cause of his acceptance with God somewhere in himself—in his works, or in his faith, or perhaps in his potential service to the Lord, but such is not the source of any man’s acceptance with the Lord, for if it were, no man would be any more secure than his present faithfulness to the Lord. But because we are "accepted in the beloved," and not because of anything in ourselves, we are eternally secure, and can never be lost; our acceptance rests upon the glorious merits of Jesus Christ, and can never fail so long as He maintains His holy and spotless character. Jesus Christ Himself must first sin, before we could ever be lost, and this, of course, is a matter beyond possibility, and therefore the salvation of every true child of God is eternally settled and secure.

Election is personal, dealing, as it does, with individuals; it is true that Israel was a chosen nation, as it is written: "For Jacob my servant’s sake, and Israel mine elect, I have even called thee by thy name," (Isa. 45:4), yet by far the majority of the references to election and the elect deal, not with the nation of Israel, but rather with individual saints of God. Some have stated that election is never spoken of as having to do with salvation, but is always in reference to Israel as an elect nation, or else is an election unto service. Such a statement can only be accounted for by ignorance or prejudice, for the Scriptures declare: "But we are bound to give thanks to God alway for you, brethren beloved of the Lord, for that God chose you from the beginning unto salvation in sanctification of the Spirit and belief of the truth," (2 Thess. 2:13, R.V). For God hath not appointed us to wrath, but to obtain salvation by our Lord Jesus Christ," (1 Thess. 5:9). "And as many as were ordained to eternal life believed," (Acts 13:48). And there are numerous other passages which either explicitly or implicitly declare salvation to be the direct result of election.

This leads us to observe another thing about election, which is either not realized or else is ignored by the opponents of the Scriptural doctrine of election. Election is not the same thing as salvation. Opponents often try to make this doctrine appear absurd by saying, "Then you believe that the elect were saved from eternity past?" Election is unto salvation, for election takes place in the past eternity, but no man is saved until he is born again, the first evidences of which are repentance and faith. Election is that determination of God to bring man into circumstances and under influences that shall certainly cause him to be saved.

God’s election is an individual matter just as all of God’s dealings with men are individual; men are not saved in a block, and neither are they elected in a block. Once God’s saints are called "a chosen generation, a royal priesthood, an holy nation, a peculiar people," (1 Pet. 2:9), yet they are most often spoken of in terms which emphasize the individual election of each one by the Lord.

Election is also based on God’s foreknowledge, for it is written: "For whom he did foreknow, he also did predestinate to be conformed to the image of his Son, that he might be the firstborn among many brethren," (Rom. 8:29). Tragically, there is an abysmal ignorance of this word "foreknow", and its application, or else there is often an outright perversion of this text in order to get around its plain teaching. Before dealing with this text, perhaps it will be well to read also 1 Peter 1:2, and deal with both at once: "Elect according to the foreknowledge of God the Father, through sanctification of the Spirit, unto obedience and sprinkling of the blood of Jesus Christ."

The perversion of Romans 8:29 and 1 Peter 1:2 comes about by men declaring that this is a foreknowledge of men’s faith—that God elects men because He foresees that they will believe in Jesus Christ. But why should God elect them if He sees that they are going to believe anyhow? Is He like many moderns who first watch to see which way things are going, then jump on the band wagon so that it will appear that they are in agreement with everyone else? Hardly so: That this is an interpretation which these texts will not bear is obvious from the fact that this foreknowledge is not a "what"—i.e., their faith, works, attitude, or potential service—but it is of "whom"—i.e., a foreknowledge of their persons. Again, it could not be of their works or faith, for this would make Romans 8:29 antagonize with 1 Peter 1:2, where faith is shown to be an outgrowth and result of election, for God elects "unto obedience", and 2 Thessalonians 2:13, where men are chosen "unto salvation in sanctification of the Spirit and belief of the truth," R. V. In both instances, it is shown that obedience and faith are the outgrowth and result of God’s sovereign choice, and not the cause of it. See also Acts 13:48, where the same thing is set forth. Men say that God foresaw that men would believe, but the Scripture nowhere says this; on the contrary, what God saw when He looked down from heaven was a universal unbelief, disobedience and rebellion, as it is written: "God looked down from heaven upon the children of men, to see if there were any that did understand, that did seek God. Every one of them is gone back: they are altogether become filthy; there is none that doeth good, no, not one," (Ps. 53:2-3). This settles this matter for all who are subject to the Word of God. God did not elect men because He foresaw that they would believe, but He elected them because He foresaw that unless He elected them, and put forth the means to bring them to salvation, none would ever believe.

Now if this foreknowledge is not of the faith of these, then to what does this refer? In 1 Peter 1:20, this same Greek word that is here translated "foreknow" is translated "foreordained". Of this, Dr. B. H. Carroll says:

"As Peter states election, what is it? It means chosen to salvation. Who elects? God the Father. According to what does he elect? According to his foreknowledge. What does he mean by foreknowledge? The Greek word is ‘prognosis’: ‘nosis’ means knowledge, and ‘pro’ (the ‘g’ being for euphony) means before, or foreknowledge, and that word is a noun used only by Peter in the New Testament. He uses it three times, as follows: Acts 2:23; the passage here, 1 Peter 1:1, and in 1 Peter 1:20. These are the only places in the New Testament where we have the word ‘prognosis,’ foreknowledge, which means to know beforehand. But both Peter and Paul use the verb ‘prognosco,’ which means to know beforehand . . . Paul uses that word with reference to God foreknowing his people, and all the other times Peter speaks of God’s foreknowledge. Now, then, the question is: What does foreknowledge mean? . . . The New Testament use of foreknowledge was just about equivalent to predestination, and that any Greek scholar would tell him so, and that election was not based upon any foreseen goodness in man or any foreseen repentance or faith in man, but that repentance and faith proceed from election, and not election from them. So that what Paul means by foreknowledge is just about the same as predestination; that in eternity God determined and elected according to that predestination."—An Interpretation of the English Bible, Vol. 16, pp. 188-189. Broadman Press, Nashville, Tennessee, 1947.

Obviously "foreknow" involves more than mere prescience in these passages, for in Acts 2:23 God’s foreknowledge did more than merely know in advance of the crucifixion of Christ, but was actually part of the delivering force in it: "Him, being delivered by the determinate counsel and foreknowledge of God, ye have taken, and by wicked hands have crucified and slain." The other use of this word in 1 Peter 1:20, where it is rendered "foreordained" bears out the same thing, namely, that this word involves, not just prescience of a fact, but also the putting into force of the fact. God’s foreknowledge is therefore equivalent to His decreeing of that fact. His predestination is the bringing to pass of all events which are concerned with the lives of His elect ones. Thus, as someone has said, election is of persons, while predestination is of events.

"The word ‘purpose’ is often used to denote the resolve or determination of the mind to seek a particular object. But it cannot be wise for an omniscient Being to make any thing an end of action, unless it is known to be attainable; and, if it is known to be attainable, the means or mode of attaining it must also be known. Accordingly, the purpose of God, embracing both end and means, must comprehend whatever he has determined to do or to permit."—Alvah Hovey, Manual of Systematic Theology, p. 96. American Baptist Publication Society, Philadelphia, 1880.

Not only so, but while we all know what the "fore" in "foreknow means, many have not considered the Biblical use of the word "know," but have assumed that it only refers to a mental consciousness of something. The first usage of "know" in Scripture shows that it refers to entering into an intimate love union with another (See Gen. 4:1). This is the same usage in the first usage of "know" in the New Testament in Matthew 1:25. Mary also so used this word in Luke 1:34. Granted, these are used of a physical union, but they illustrate the spiritual usage, as the physical does in many instances. Thus, in "foreknowing" certain ones, God was simply entering into an intimate spiritual love relation with them in Christ, their representative, as in Ephesians 1:3-4. This foreknowledge of God the Father is therefore equivalent in meaning to what is declared of Israel in Jeremiah 31:3. "The Lord hath appeared of old unto me (or, in eternity past), Saying, Yea, I have loved thee with an everlasting love (or, I have chosen you for myself): therefore with lovingkindness have I drawn thee (or, effectual calling)." God took the initiative regarding man’s redemption before man even had an existence, and so, apart from any real or foreseen faith, works or merit of any kind. It is grace, pure grace, SOVEREIGN GRACE.

In order to rightly interpret the Word of God, we must consider all of the appearances of a word or phrase, and interpret each one in harmony with every other one; but if we do this, then we cannot take any one of the cognates of this word "foreknow", isolate it from the other usages of it, and give it a meaning different from the others. Thus, the verb "foreknew" in Romans 8:29 cannot be made to refer to a passive prescience of man’s actions in time, when the noun and verb forms of this word in other places show that it involves an active force which accomplishes the fact so "foreknown". It seems evident to this writer that the Greek word translated "foreknew" in Romans 8:29 has the force of "foreordained" as indeed the same word is rendered in 1 Peter 1:20, and this has been the consensus of most of the great Baptist theologians of the past.

Election is not based on any human works or acts, either real or foreseen, but rather is sovereign, as it is written: "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. 9:15-16). And again., "Even so then at this present time also there is a remnant according to the election of grace. And if by grace, then is it no more of works: otherwise grace is no more grace. But if it be of works, then is it no more grace: otherwise work is no more work," (Rom. 9:5-6). And yet again: "For ye see your calling, brethren, how that not many wise men after the flesh, not many mighty, not many noble, are called: but God hath chosen the foolish things of the world to confound the wise; and God hath chosen the weak things of the world to confound the things which are mighty; and base things of the world, and things which are despised, hath God chosen, yea, and things which are not, to bring to nought things that are: that no flesh should glory in his presence," (1 Cor. 1:26 29).

Man’s unwillingness to accept the doctrine of election boils down to one thing only—he is unwilling for God to be sovereign in this matter. Once recognize God’s absolute sovereignty and one will have no problems with the doctrine of election, nor any of the related themes, for if God has the sovereign right to do with His creation as He pleases, and if He cannot do unjustly, then whatever He does will be right whether we mortals can understand the reasons for it or not. Not even the doctrine of reprobation will trouble one if God’s justice and sovereignty are once acknowledged. However, many blow up reprobation, or rejection, as it is also called, to needless proportions, overlook its connection with man’s sin, and make it an arbitrary decree to send some to hell without respect to man’s willing unbelief. J. M. Pendleton well says:

It is sometimes ignorantly claimed that this doctrine teaches that God arbitrarily sends all of the non-elect to hell "without a chance" and solely as an act of sovereignty, but such an idea overlooks the facts (1) That no one goes to hell except for actual, personal sin, and so every person in hell will be justly there. (2) That no man goes to hell except after a lifetime of sin and unbelief and rejection of the sole remedy for sin. (3) That no unbeliever can know either of his election or his non-election until the end of life, and while there is life he not only has the opportunity to repent and be saved, but even has invitations to do so extended to him. Centuries ago, John Bunyan wrote of Reprobation:

"I must mind you afresh of these particulars: 1. That eternal reprobation makes no man a sinner. 2. That the fore-knowledge of God that the reprobate would perish, makes no man a sinner. 3. That God’s infallibly determining upon the damnation of him that perisheth, makes no man a sinner. 4. God’s patience, and long-suffering, and forbearance, until the reprobate fits himself for eternal destruction, makes no man a sinner."—The Doctrine of Election And Reprobation, in The Complete Works Of John Bunyan, Vol. II, p. 285. National Foundation For Christian Education reprint, Marshallton, Delaware, 1968.

No man has a right to speak against God’s dealings with men, whatever they may be, and it is only through presumption and blasphemous conceit that any dare to do so. "Nay but, O man, who art thou that repliest against God? Shall the thing formed say to him that formed it, Why hast thou made me thus? Hath not the potter power over the clay, of the same lump to make one vessel unto honour, and another unto dishonour?" (Rom. 9:20-21). Therefore let not proud man impugn the dealings of God with man, but rather let him rejoice in the fact that God has chosen some out of the world to be His own, and let man trust in the Lord Jesus for the salvation of his soul that he may have the assurance that he is of this number, then let him humbly rejoice in this election.

Again, let it be observed that election includes all the means necessary for the calling out of the elect from the rest of the world. Those who do not believe in this doctrine often accuse those who do of inconsistency because they preach the gospel and labor for the salvation of the souls of men; in so doing, they either betray their ignorance, or else are guilty of knowing misrepresentation, for everyone who truly understands and believes this doctrine, also believes that not only did God choose certain ones to be His own in eternity, but that He also ordained the means to bring them to repentance and faith in time. Referring to Romans 8:30, Dr. J. M. Pendleton says:

"In this verse we have, if I may so call it, a golden chain of four links, and this chain reaches from eternity to eternity. The first link is predestination., and the last glorification, while the two intervening links are calling and justification. The first link has no connection with the last except through the intermediate links. That is to say, there is no way in which the purpose of God in predestination can reach its end in glorification, if calling and justification do not take place. But calling and justification are inseparable from ‘repentance toward God and faith toward our Lord Jesus Christ.’ Repentance and faith, then, not to name other things, are means through which the purpose of God in election is accomplished. God, therefore, in predestinating the salvation of his people, predestinated their repentance, and faith and all other means necessary to their salvation."—Christian Doctrines, pp. 110-111. American Baptist Publication Society, Philadelphia, l878.

If it be asked why should we preach the gospel if God has chosen men unto salvation, we let Paul answer: "God hath from the beginning chosen you to salvation through sanctification of the Spirit and belief of the truth: whereunto he called you by our gospel, to the obtaining of the glory of our Lord Jesus Christ," (2 Thess. 2:13-14). If it be factiously asked why then preach to any but the elect, we answer first that we cannot know who the elect are except by their response to the gospel, but even if we could know in advance who they are, it would not in the least relieve us of the duty to "Go ye into all the world, and preach the gospel to the whole creation," (Mark 16:15, R.V). How many elect there are, and who they are, in no way affects our responsibility to faithfully proclaim to all the world the gospel of the saving grace of God; it is God’s business to call them out by the gospel that we preach. The gospel has one of two results when it is preached: justification or judgment; thus, Paul says: "For we are unto God a sweet savour of Christ, in them that are saved, and in them that perish: to the one we are the savour of death unto death; and to the other the savour of life unto life," (2 Cor. 2: 15-16). The preaching of the gospel makes men more accountable to God for their unbelief and rejection.

III. ELECTION DETERMINED.

The question is often asked as to how a person may know that he is of the elect, but what we must all realize is that while our Lord said: "In this rejoice not, that the spirits are subject unto you; but rather rejoice because your names are written in heaven," (Luke 10:20), yet we have no way of climbing up to heaven and gazing upon that marvelous and glorious Lambs Book of Life wherein are enrolled all the saints of all ages. But if this be the case, how then can one know that he is of the elect? Not simply because he is a member of a church, for this proves nothing, as the case of Judas Iscariot reveals; neither can a man know that he is of the elect because he has sat under the preaching of the gospel and felt conviction by the Word, for Matthew 20:16 declares that "many be called, but few chosen." The gospel call stirs many hearts which are never changed and made alive by the Holy Spirit, and thus the number of the elect is much smaller than the number that have been convicted and felt called to receive the Saviour.

When we consider the references to men being called in Romans 8:30: "Moreover whom he did predestinate, them he also called: and whom he called them he also justified, and whom he justified, them he also glorified," and 1 Corinthians 1:23-24: "But we preach Christ crucified, unto the Jews a stumblingblock, and unto the Greeks foolishness; but unto them which are called, both Jews and Greeks, Christ the power of God, and the wisdom of God," and 2 Thessalonians 2:14: "Whereunto he called you by our gospel, to the obtaining of the glory of our Lord Jesus Christ," and others, then it becomes obvious that in addition to the ordinary call, which comes through preaching, and which is ineffectual more often than not, there is another call which is always to the elect only, and always eventuates in justification, and shall finally consummate in glorification. This latter call is what the old theologians called the effectual call, while the former is known as the general call; unless this distinction is made, much confusion will result, and it will be made to appear that God’s purposes often fail of their accomplishment. The effectual call, however, does not fail, being identical with regeneration, so that any person is born again when this call comes to him. This call is co-extensive with the number of those who are justified and glorified, for there is no break between, no diminution nor augmentation of persons between the calling, the justifying and the glorifying in Romans 8:30. Note the correlation between "whom" and "them" appearing three times.

No one can have the assurance of his election except in submitting to the gospel call and repenting of his sins and trusting in the atoning work of the Lord Jesus Christ, for these things are the first evidences of one’s election, as it is written: ". . . and as many as were ordained to eternal life believed," (Acts 13:48). This verse has suffered untold violence by those who disbelieve in Gods sovereign election, some attempting to make the ordination to life subsequent to the act of believing, and others challenging the meaning of the word translated "ordained".

As to the first of these two reactions to this verse, we have only to cite the words of Dr. A. T. Robertson, of whose authority as a Greek scholar no question exists, for he is known and recognized as one of the great Greek scholars of the past generation. He says:

"By no manner of legerdemain can it be made to mean those who believe were appointed.’ It was saving faith that was exercised only by those who were appointed unto eternal life, who were ranged on the side of eternal life, who were thus revealed as the subjects of God’s grace by the stand that they took on this day for the Lord."—Word Pictures In The New Testament, Vol. III, pp. 200-201. Broadman Press, Nashville, Tenn., 1930.

Furthermore, it becomes even more obvious that the King James Version renders this word rightly when we consider that almost all translators of the New Testament recognize this as the true meaning of this word, and so translate it. It is interesting to note that men often deal pretty slackly with the Scriptures when commenting upon it, often trying to force their own beliefs upon it, but when they are translating it, they are more circumspect, and seem to fear to deal as impiously with it as they do in their commentaries. Of over thirty versions consulted by this writer, only two rendered this word differently than "ordain", "appoint", "destined", "chosen", and words of like import. One of these two is the "New World Version" (Jehovah Witnesses), which is well known for its unreliability. The other version is the "Living Bible" which is acknowledged to be a paraphrase and not a translation, yet even this version, while using the word "wanted" in the text, gives, in a footnote the meaning of "were disposed to," or "ordained to". The passive sense clearly shows that the disposition was not from man, and so must have been from God, for Satan certainly would never try to dispose anyone to eternal life. We believe that these facts about Acts 13:48 speak for themselves.

That man does not have the intrinsic power to believe, and that he must be of the number of the elect before he can believe the gospel, is clear from John 10:26: "But ye believe not, because ye are not of my sheep, as I said unto you." This is a hard saying, yet we are not at liberty to reject it simply because we cannot understand it, for it does not stand alone in teaching this deep truth, for John 6:44-45 also declares: "No man can come to me, except the Father which hath sent me draw him: and I will raise him up at the last day. It is written in the prophets, And they shall be all taught of God. Every man therefore that hath heard and hath learned of the Father, cometh unto me." If the Father does not draw a person, and give him the power of faith, then that individual cannot be saved; thus, every bit of the glory for salvation belongs to the Lord and to Him alone.

Election is determined from the human standpoint by the life that one lives, and, for this reason can never be certainly known by man in this life except by holy living. Paul said of the Thessalonians: "Knowing, brethren beloved, your election of God," (1 Thess. 1:4); but how did he know this? He answers this himself in the preceding verse: "Remembering without ceasing your work of faith, and labour of love, and patience of hope in our Lord Jesus Christ, in the sight of God and our Father," (v. 3). When we realize that men are elected unto faith and obedience, and not because of them, (2 Thess. 2:13, R.V.; Acts 13:48; 1 Pet. 1:2), then we realize that where we find these, there is evidence of election. In salvation we are created "unto good works, which God hath before ordained that we should walk in them," (Eph. 2:10), so that the continual walking in good works is an evidence of one having been saved, and consequently of his being an elect person.

Election is a mysterious doctrine, yet it is a marvelous one; it is a doctrine that, while it leaves no room for pride and vanity, yet it is a great blessing to man, for it guarantees the salvation of every one of God’s elect ones. Some repudiate the doctrine of election, saying that it shows respect of persons, and leaves some without hope of salvation, but the truth is, no one can know whether he is of the elect or non-elect except by his believing or else dying in impenitence, which brings the whole matter down to the level of the individual’s faith or lack of it. Observe what Jesus says of this: "All that the Father giveth me shall come to me: and him that cometh to me I will in no wise cast out," (John 6:37). Here we are taught: (1) That only those who have been given to Christ in the covenant of redemption will come to Him. This refers, of course, to election. (2) All those who are so given will come to Christ. The salvation of all the elect is assured by the effectual calling and drawing of them. This is effectual or irresistible grace. (3) That while these things are gloriously so, yet there is also held out the hope that every one who comes to Christ in faith will be received by Him. Thus, human responsibility is emphasized, so that no one can blame God for any man being lost. Since he cannot know in advance of his non-election, and since the promise is held out of acceptance to all comers, the lost man is lost solely because of his own unbelief of God’s promise.

Election, being Gods work, and without human cause, glorifies God while humbling man, and this is the chief reason why it is so unpalatable to man. When we remember Paul’s declaration that: "I know that in me (that is, in my flesh,) dwelleth no good thing: for to will is present with me," (Rom. 7:18), then we ought to recognize that almost anything that humbles the fleshly pride, while it glorifies God, may be presumed to be true. Nothing good ever has its source in the flesh, and nothing bad (nothing truly bad in the light of the purposes of God) ever comes from God.