Who are the elect of God? - gotquestions.org

Found here. Our comments in bold.
----------------------

This question and answer is not about explaining the Bible, it is to defend a particular doctrinal perspective. Calvinists/Reformists believe in something called the "doctrines of grace," a collection of five doctrines roughly represented by the acronym TULIP:

• Total Depravity
• Unconditional Election
• Limited Atonement
• Irresistible Grace
• Perseverance of the Saints

Gotquestions intends to explain the U, unconditional election. We think they fail miserably.

-------------------------

Answer

Simply put, the “elect of God” are those whom God has predestined to salvation. They are called the “elect” because that word denotes “determining beforehand,” “ordaining,” “deciding ahead of time.” Every four years in the U.S., we “elect” a President—i.e., we choose who will serve in that office. The same goes for God and those who will be saved; God chooses those who will be saved. These are the elect of God.

As it stands, the concept of God electing those who will be saved (predestination) isn’t controversial. (??? Oh, really? This has been a matter sharp dispute for five centuries!)

It is a biblical truth (John 6:44, Romans 8:28-30, Ephesians 1:4-5). (Ohhh, it's a biblical truth. We shall decide that for ourselves, thank you very much. Let's quote:

• Jn. 6:44 No-one can come to me unless the Father who sent me draws him, and I will raise him up at the last day.

This "drawing" cannot mean predestination, because later Jesus says this:

 

Jn. 12:32 But I, when I am lifted up from the earth, will draw all men to myself.

Oops. Unless gotquestions thinks "all men" are predestined to be saved, then being "drawn" is clearly not the same as being predestined.

• Ro. 8:29 For those God foreknew he also predestined to be conformed to the likeness of his Son, that he might be the firstborn among many brothers.

The careful Bible student would ask, "who are those God foreknew?" There are a couple of clues in the context. First, the reader should note that Paul was writing to Jews about Jewish things. Paul has for quite some time been discussing the Law and how it works compared to grace. This discussion of the law would make little sense to a gentile audience, but it would be very interesting to Jewish Christians. That's his target audience. This is not us.

Second, in the quoted verse Paul calls those who are predestined "brothers." The is a particular Jewish reference. The Jews carefully maintained their identity as "children of Abraham," [Or daughters {Luke 13:16} or sons {Luke 19:9}]. This distinction is made crystal clear by Paul:

Ac. 13:26 Brothers, children of Abraham, and you God-fearing Gentiles, it is to us that this message of salvation has been sent.

At that time, Gentiles were not brothers. Jews as children of Abraham were brothers. This is not us.

Third, Paul gives us the direct context as to whom he is referring:

Ro. 8:23 Not only so, but we ourselves, who have the firstfruits of the Spirit...

This is the context, "we ourselves." We know this is not every Christian, because not every Christian has received the "firstfruits of the Spirit." Only the very earliest Christians could be "firstfruits." We are not the firstfruits, so we are not predestined. This is not us.

Fourth, Paul tells us directly who God foreknew: 

Ro. 11:1-2 I ask then: Did God reject his people? By no means! I am an Israelite myself, a descendant of Abraham, from the tribe of Benjamin. 2 God did not reject his people, whom he foreknew.

Those He foreknew is the remnant of Israel. They are The Elect. 

• Ep. 1:4-5 For he chose us in him before the creation of the world to be holy and blameless in his sight. In love 5 he predestined us to be adopted as his sons through Jesus Christ, in accordance with his pleasure and will —

Once again a careful Bible student would want to ask, "who is 'us'?" Paul directly tells his readers the answer: 

Ep. 1:11-12 In him we were also chosen, having been predestined according to the plan of him who works out everything in conformity with the purpose of his will, 12 in order that we, who were the first to hope in Christ, might be for the praise of his glory.

Those who were predestined [us/we] were those who were the first to hope in Christ. Hmm. As in the "firstfruits," perhaps?

Interestingly, Paul tells us about those who are not the firstfruits in the very next verse: 

Ep. 1:13 And you also were included in Christ when you heard the word of truth, the gospel of your salvation.

Everyone else was included when they heard the Gospel. Therefore, later Christians are not predestined, because they are not among the first believers.) 

What is controversial is how and in what manner God chooses those who will be saved. Throughout church history, there have been two main views on the doctrine of election. (This is a link to another gotquestions article, which does not discuss these two main views.)

One view, which we will call the prescient or foreknowledge view, teaches that God, through His omniscience, knows those who will in the course of time choose of their own free will to place their faith and trust in Jesus Christ for their salvation. (Ok, so God knows, but still allows free choice. This makes sense to us.)

On the basis of this divine foreknowledge, God elects these individuals “before the foundation of the world” (Ephesians 1:4). (??? If God elects them, how did they choose?)

The second main view is the Augustinian view, (Unexplained terminology.)

which essentially teaches that God not only divinely elects those who will have faith in Jesus Christ, but also divinely elects to grant to these individuals the faith to believe in Christ. In other words, God’s election unto salvation is not based on a foreknowledge of an individual’s faith, but is based on the free, sovereign grace (Unexplained terminology.)

of Almighty God. (That would mean that God does not allow free choice because His foreknowledge requires Him to act. Therefore, because He knows He determines. He selects some people to be saved and the rest of mankind He sends to hell.)

The difference boils down to this: who has the ultimate choice in salvation—God or man? In the first view (the prescient view), man has control; (Gotquestions is editorializing, equating "choice" with "control." This is a Category Mistake.)

his free will is sovereign (Again, we do not accept Gotquestions' characterization. Making a choice does not speak to the issue of sovereignty.)

and becomes the determining factor in God’s election. (Well, this is a necessary outcome of choice, that the choice is connected to outcome. Basic logic.)

God can provide the way of salvation through Jesus Christ, but man must choose Christ for himself in order to make salvation real. Ultimately, this view diminishes the biblical understanding of God's sovereignty. (Still not defining terms. What is the "biblical understanding of God's sovereignty?" Would that understanding be from the perspective of Gotquestions' presentation here? Thus the "biblical view" handily plays into Gotquestions' doctrines.)

This view puts the Creator's provision of salvation at the mercy of the creature; (No, it doesn't. Choice does not make God a victim. This is preposterous.)

if God wants people in heaven, He has to hope that man will freely choose His way of salvation. (God would have to "hope?" What? Gotquestions already admitted that the opposing view included God’s foreknowledge of who would be saved, so this objection is complete nonsense. Gotquestions is doing its best to impugn the opposing view.)

In reality, the prescient view of election is no view of election at all, because God is not really choosing—He is only confirming. (It was Gotquestions who presented this theory as one view of election, but now they walk that back.)

It is man who is the ultimate chooser.

In the Augustinian view, God has control; (Actually, the necessary implication is that God is required to control by virtue of Him possessing foreknowledge. Requiring God to act puts Him at the mercy of His sovereignty, an astonishing violation of His nature.)

He is the one who, of His own sovereign will, freely chooses those whom He will save. He not only elects those whom He will save, but He actually accomplishes their salvation. Rather than simply make salvation possible, God chooses those whom He will save and then saves them. This view puts God in His proper place as Creator and Sovereign. (Editorializing again. Gotquestions has not established that this is a matter of what God's proper place is or how a doctrine can threaten that status. Nor have they defined "sovereign." 

The whole argument hinges on a misdefinition of sovereign. Sovereign does not mean control, it means rulership.)

The Augustinian view is not without problems of its own. (Refreshing honesty.)

Critics have claimed that this view robs man of his free will. If God chooses those who will be saved, then what difference does it make for man to believe? Why preach the gospel? Furthermore, if God elects according to His sovereign will, then how can we be responsible for our actions? These are all good and fair questions that need to be answered. A good passage to answer these questions is Romans 9, the most in-depth passage dealing with God’s sovereignty in election. (Indeed, good questions, which Gotquestions will not bother to answer.)

The context of the passage flows from Romans 8, which ends with a great climax of praise: “For I am convinced that ... [nothing] in all creation, will be able to separate us from the love of God that is in Christ Jesus our Lord” (Romans 8:38-39). (Our first Bible quote, finally.)

This leads Paul to consider how a Jew might respond to that statement. While Jesus came to the lost children of Israel and while the early church was largely Jewish in makeup, the gospel was spreading among the Gentiles much faster than among the Jews. In fact, most Jews saw the gospel as a stumbling block (1 Corinthians 1:23) and rejected Jesus. This would lead the average Jew to wonder if God’s plan of election has failed, since most Jews reject the message of the gospel.

Throughout Romans 9, Paul systematically shows that God’s sovereign election has been in force from the very beginning. (The reader would do well to remember that this entire passage is specifically about Israel. Then in verse 22 Paul brings in the gentiles, which he explains that God had great patience with them. 

Why He would have patience with those already chosen for destruction is not explained by Got questions.

Paul then tells us that God's election is being changed to a people who were "not my people [vs. 25].

Gotquestions is in significant error.)

He begins with a crucial statement: “For not all who are descended from Israel are Israel” (Romans 9:6). This means that not all people of ethnic Israel (that is, those descended from Abraham, Isaac and Jacob) belong to true Israel (the elect of God). Reviewing the history of Israel, Paul shows that God chose Isaac over Ishmael and Jacob over Esau. Just in case anyone thinks that God was choosing these individuals based on the faith or good works they would do in the future, he adds, “Though they [Jacob and Esau] were not yet born and had done nothing either good or bad – in order that God’s purpose of election might continue, not because of works but because of him who calls” (Romans 9:11, ESV).

At this point, one might be tempted to accuse God of acting unjustly. Paul anticipates this accusation in v. 14, stating plainly that God is not unjust in any way. “I will have mercy on whom I have mercy, and I will have compassion on whom I have compassion” (Romans 9:15). God is sovereign over His creation. He is free to choose those whom He will choose, and He is free to pass by those whom He will pass by. The creature has no right to accuse the Creator of being unjust. The very thought that the creature can stand in judgment of the Creator is absurd to Paul, and it should be so to every Christian, as well. The balance of Romans 9 substantiates this point. (This passage is not talking about "every Christian," it is specifically dealing with God's election in the history of the nation of Israel [Romans 9:3-4].)

Ephesians 1:5 tells us that God “predestined us to be adopted as his sons through Jesus Christ, in accordance with his pleasure and will.” (We have already dealt with this.)

According to this verse, the basis of our being predestined is not something that we do or will do, but is based solely on God. This predetermination is based on His sovereignty, unchanging character (Malachi 3:6), foreknowledge (Romans 8:29, 11:2), love (Ephesians 1:4-5), and plan and pleasure (Ephesians 1:5). God’s desire is that all would be saved and come to repentance (1 Timothy 2:4, 2 Peter 3:9). He offers salvation to everyone (Titus 2:11) (?? If universal predestination is true, God made no offers to anyone, He chose. He predestined. Remember, that's what the author told us.)

and has made Himself plain to everyone so that everyone is without excuse (Romans 1:19-20). (Excuses are irrelevant. If God predestined these people to be lost, they will be lost. That's the beginning and end of it. The rest of it is just play-acting.)

Both predestination and personal responsibility are true—God is completely in control, and humanity makes choices and is completely accountable for those choices. (How can we be held accountable for a choice we did not make?)

The Bible does not present these as irreconcilable truths (as theological traditions sometimes do). We learn that, if God elected those He foreknew, He both knows His creation before it exists and He determines important things about His creation. (What important things did He determine? What unimportant things did He not determine? Wouldn't non-determination of some things mean God's sovereignty is being impugned?)

If God is great enough to be the Creator of all, then He is not stumped by the mutual existence of His sovereignty and human volition, choice, and responsibility. (Nor would He be, but Gotquestions forces the equation and then needs to find work-arounds. This is what Calvinism/Reformed is obligated to do in order to maintain its doctrines.)