Love you blog and your podcasts. I believe that The Father wants everyone created to come and know him through his Son. I have never believed in the doctrine of election and really can’t reconcile The Father intentionally choosing some to be in his presence and some not.

I believe that the doctrine of election was created because man was not able to live in the mystery of some who come to follow him and some who do not follow him.

God’s love is available to all, His Spirit pursues all and only some respond – that is the mystery to me.

Love to all.

Tim

Off topic, yes, but I’m hung up reconciling, say, 1 John 5:13 with, um, Matthew 5:3.

Good post and comments … I’m learning … gradually.

When Paul uses the term elect, he is using a term that would have normally been applied to Israel the people. Also election is a category that not only has a dimension of purpose and in the OT the purpose of the election usually extended to the non-elect as well. (Think about the election of Abraham in Gen 12. He was elected to a be a blessing to all. We see this same theme in Romans 11 and dozens of other places.)

Election is the calling of a particular people to be particular agents of God’s purpose for the good of all people.

When we read Ephesians with our individual Reformed blinders on those passages about election seem out of place in the larger themes of the letter. But in the context of the Jewish notion of an elect people the argument that you all are now the elect people of God together acting as agents of grace in the world precisely fits with the rest of the letter.

My three sentences.

God is loving and gracious.
God has consistently set apart a people to live as an example of righteousness and as a blessing to the whole world.
If you are in Christ you are part of the elect, blessed to be a blessing to others, saved to proclaim salvation, made alive that you might live in the world as ambassador for the gospel.

As for the portion of the Westminster Confession you quote, I see nothing to object to there at all. The Catholic Church does believe and teach in predestination. Although this is predestination of a very particular kind, and there are many warnings around this teaching, where God allows us to act freely in this life but He also knows our eternal destiny because He is outside of time. Definitely this is a mystery, not to be treated as a soluble problem.

One more point, or quibble really, please don’t see obedience as despair. It’s far from it. Obedience can be delightful because, when it’s love that motivates you, you want to serve and are grateful for any chance to do so. I know I’ve read that theme in your writings in relation to scripturally defined works. We Catholics see serving the Church as a service to Jesus. You don’t have to agree to see the parallel.

We need to leave our individualistic lenses aside more when talking of election in my opinion.

Great question about Paul’s use of predestination in Ephesians. I think you should pursue that sooner than later. I believe Paul’s use of predestination there has more to do with ecclesiology than soteriology. I believe he is showing how God’s grand redemptive plan involves creating one new, redeemed humanity under the head of, or “in Chirst”, the representative of the new humanity. I believe he is speaking of a predestined, elect people (corporate group) and not about predestined individuals either for damnation or individual salvation.

What do you think Paul is getting at in Ephesians?

This doesn’t come up during evangelism, of course. It only comes up afterward.

The mystery is in God’s motives for picking us and, apparently, not picking others, or even picking others to become examples of what not to do. Or in who falls into the category of “God didn’t pick that person.” Best to never speculate and just preach the gospel to everyone, just in case.

“[the doctrine of election] is understood only as a mystery, so quit explaining it.”

To paraphrase the above: “i don’t really know.”

*i chuckle*