Dictionary Article

In modern English, terms referring to the selection of a leader or representative by a group of people. An element of choice is involved, since usually there are several candidates out of whom one must be chosen.

When the verb “elect” is used theologically in the Bible, it usually has God as its subject. In the OT it is used for God’s choice of Israel to be his people (cf. Acts 13:17). Israel became God’s people, not because they decided to belong to him, but because he took the initiative and chose them. Nor did God’s choice rest on any particular virtues that his people exemplified, but rather on his promise to their forefather Abraham (Dt 7:7-8). God also chose their leaders, such as Saul and David (1 Sm 10:24; 2 Sm 6:21), apart from any popular vote by the people. The word thus indicates God’s prerogative in deciding what shall happen, independent of human choice.

The Mystery of Election

In the teaching of Augustine and Calvin, the doctrine of election is of fundamental importance. They taught that God had chosen before the creation of the world to save a number of specific individuals from sin and judgment and to give them eternal life. Those whom he chose did nothing to deserve it; their merits are no better than the rest of humankind who will be judged for their sins. But in his mercy God decided to save some; therefore, he chose them and sent Jesus to be their Savior. The Holy Spirit regenerates and brings to faith through an “effectual calling” those whom God has elected. God’s Spirit effectively persuades each of them to submit to the gospel, so they are guaranteed recipients of eternal life.

This choice by God to save some selectively may seem unjust. But God is not obliged to show mercy to anybody; he is free to show mercy as he pleases. People cannot protest that because they were not the elect, they never had a chance of being saved. They never deserved that chance anyway. But anybody who hears the gospel and responds to it with faith can know that he is one of the elect. Whoever rejects the gospel has only his own sinfulness to blame.

Many Christians reject that explanation of God’s election. They maintain that, although it appears to be logically consistent with Scripture, it makes God the prisoner of his own plan. His predestination of certain individuals to salvation commits him personally to a detailed, predetermined, unilateral course of action that reduces human action to a charade and renders it insignificant. God ceases to be a person dealing with persons.

The Augustinian and Calvinist view of election, according to its critics, also makes God out to be arbitrary in his choice of the elect. In effect, chance becomes the arbiter of human destiny rather than a holy and loving God. Those difficulties arise because, they say, the teaching of Scripture has been pressed into an artificial logical system that distorts it.

Some Christians avoid the difficulties by saying that God elects “those whom he foreknew” (Rom 8:29), that is, those whom he knew beforehand would respond to the gospel in faith. Augustine briefly held that view but eventually rejected it. Many believe that the “solution” produces even greater logical problems and undermines the sovereignty of God.

Karl Barth proposed an alternative solution. Instead of teaching that God has chosen to save some of humankind and has passed by the others or chosen to reject them, Barth has noted how Jesus is spoken of in Scripture as “the Elect One.” Jesus is the object both of God’s rejection and of his election. In him the human race was rejected and endured judgment for its sins, Barth argued, but in him also the race is chosen and appointed to salvation. It is thus in Jesus Christ that we are chosen by God (Eph 1:4). Barth’s interpretation could conceivably lead to universalism (that is, the view that all humanity will be saved), but Barth explicitly rejected that as a necessary conclusion. He insisted that a person may reject his or her calling and election. Nevertheless, difficulties remain. It has been argued that Barth’s view places too much weight on one text and also that it confuses God’s election of Jesus for service with his election to salvation of the whole human race.

The teaching of Scripture should not be overly systematized. In the words of the Westminster Confession, election is a “high mystery . . . to be handled with special prudence and care, that men attending the will of God revealed in his word, and yielding obedience thereunto, may, from the certainty of their effectual vocation, be assured of their eternal salvation” (3:8).

The same thoughts are found in the NT. God’s people are described as his “elect” or “chosen ones,” a term used by Jesus when speaking of the future time when the Son of Man will come and gather together God’s people (Mk 13:20, 27). He will vindicate them for their sufferings and for their patience in waiting for his coming (Lk 18:7). In 1 Peter 2:9, God’s people are called a “chosen [elect] nation.” This phrase was originally used of the people of Israel (Is 43:20), and it brings out the fact that the people of God in the OT and the Christian church in the NT stand in continuity with each other; the promises addressed to Israel now find fulfillment in the church.

In Romans 9–11 Paul discusses the problem of why the people of Israel as a nation have rejected the gospel, while the Gentiles have accepted it. He states that in the present time there is a “remnant” of Israel as a result of God’s gracious choice of them. This group is “the elect.” They are the chosen people who have obtained what was meant for Israel as a whole, while the greater mass of the people have failed to obtain it because they were “hardened” as a result of their sin (Rom 11:5-7).

Nevertheless, God’s choice of Israel to be his people has not been canceled. Most Jewish people have aligned themselves against the gospel, so that the Gentiles may come in and receive God’s blessings in their place; however, they still are loved by God, and God will not go back on his original calling of them (Rom 11:28). Consequently, Paul is confident that in due time there will be a general return to God by the people of Israel.

The word translated “elect” is generally found in the plural and refers either to the members of God’s people as a whole or to those in a particular local church (Rom 8:33; Col 3:12; 1 Thes 1:4; 2 Tm 2:10; Ti 1:1; 1 Pt 1:1-2; 2 Pt 1:10; Rv 17:14; cf. Rom 16:13 and 2 Jn 1:13, which have the singular form). The use of the plural may partly be explained by the fact that most of the NT letters are addressed to groups of people rather than to individuals. More probably, however, the point is that God’s election is concerned with the creation of a collective people rather than the calling of isolated individuals.

The word “election” emphasizes that membership of God’s people is due to God’s initiative, prior to all human response, made before time began (Eph 1:4; cf. Jn 15:16, 19). It is God who has called men and women to be his people, and those who respond are elect. God’s call does not depend on any virtues or merits of humankind. Indeed, he chooses the foolish things by worldly standards to shame the wise, the weak to confound the strong, and the lowly and insignificant to bring to nothing those who think that they are something (1 Cor 1:27-28). The effect of election is to leave no grounds whatever for human boasting in achievement and position. Whatever the elect are, they owe it entirely to God, and they cannot boast or compare themselves with other people.

God’s elect are a privileged people. Since they now have God to uphold them, no one can bring any accusation against them that might lead to God’s condemnation (Rom 8:33). They constitute a royal priesthood; they are God’s servants with the right of access to him (1 Pt 2:9). It is for their sake that the apostles endured hardship and suffering, so that they might enjoy future salvation and eternal glory (2 Tm 2:10).

The elect are distinguished by their faith in God (Ti 1:1), and they are called to show the character that befits God’s people (Col 3:12). They must make their calling and election sure; that is, they must show that they belong to God by the quality of their lives (2 Pt 1:10). They must continue being faithful to the One who called them (Rv 17:14).

The relationship between God’s call and human response is explained in Matthew 22:14: “For many are called, but few are chosen.” Although God calls many through the gospel, only some of those respond to the call and become his elect people. The text sheds no light on the mystery of why only some become God’s people. Certainly, when a person does respond to God’s call, it is because the gospel comes to him or her “in power and in the Holy Spirit and with full conviction” (1 Thes 1:4-5). When men and women refuse the gospel, it is because they have become hardened as a result of sin and their trust in their own works. Scripture does not go beyond that point in explanation, and neither should Christians.

“Election” can also be used of God’s choice of people to serve him. Jesus chose the 12 disciples out of the larger company of those who followed him (Lk 6:13; Acts 1:2). The same thought reappears in John’s Gospel; Jesus commented that although he chose the Twelve, one of them turned out to be a devil (Jn 6:70; 13:18). When a replacement was needed for Judas, the church prayed to Jesus and asked him to show them which of the two available candidates he would choose to fill the gap in the Twelve (Acts 1:24). Peter attributes his evangelism among the Gentiles to God’s election of him for that purpose (15:7). Similarly, Paul was an elected instrument for God’s mission to the Gentiles (9:15). The initiative in Christian mission rests with God, who elects people to serve him in particular ways.

Tyndale Open Bible Dictionary