Election/Predestination and the Need for a Theological Balance

SPECIAL TOPIC: ELECTION/PREDESTINATION AND THE NEED FOR A THEOLOGICAL BALANCE

Opening Statement
Election is a wonderful doctrine. However, it is not a call to favoritism, but a call to be a channel, a tool, or means of others' redemption! In the Old Testament the term was used primarily for service; in the New Testament it is used primarily for salvation which issues in service. The Bible never reconciles the seeming contradiction between God's sovereignty and mankind's free will, but affirms them both! A good example of the biblical tension would be Romans 9 on God's sovereign choice and Romans 10 on mankind's necessary response (cf. Rom. 10:11,13; also note Phil. 2:12-13).
Key Text
The key to this theological tension may be found in Ephesians 1:4. Jesus is God's elect man and all are potentially elect in Him (Karl Barth). Jesus is God's "yes" to fallen mankind's need (Karl Barth). Ephesians 1:4 also helps clarify the issue by asserting that the goal of predestination is not heaven, but holiness (Christlikeness). We are often attracted to the benefits of the gospel and ignore the responsibilities! God's call (election) is for time as well as eternity!
Eastern Literature
Doctrines come in relation to other truths, not as single, unrelated truths (see SPECIAL TOPIC: EASTERN LITERATURE). A good analogy would be a constellation versus a single star. God presents truth in eastern, not western, genres. We must not remove the tension caused by dialectical (paradoxical) pairs of doctrinal truths:
1. predestination vs. human free will
2. security of the believers vs. the need for perseverance
3. original sin vs. volitional sin
4. sinlessness (perfectionism) vs. sinning less
5. initial instantaneous justification and sanctification vs. progressive sanctification
6. Christian freedom vs. Christian responsibility
7. God's transcendence vs. God's immanence
8. God as ultimately unknowable vs. God as knowable in Scripture
9. the Kingdom of God as present vs. future consummation
10. repentance as a gift of God vs. repentance as a necessary human covenantal response
11. Jesus as divine vs. Jesus as human
12. Jesus as equal to the Father vs. Jesus as subservient to the Father
Covenant
The theological concept of "covenant" unites the sovereignty of God (who always takes the initiative and sets the agenda) with a mandatory initial and continuing repentant faith response from mankind (cf. Mark 1:15; Acts 3:16,19; 20:21; see SPECIAL TOPIC: COVENANT). Be careful of proof-texting one side of the paradox and depreciating the other! Be careful of asserting only your favorite doctrine or system of theology!
Exegetical Notes
Titus 2:11 is a balance to other NT passages on election. I thought it might be theologically helpful to provide my commentary notes from Romans 8:29 and chapter 9, as well as Ephesians 1.
1. Romans 8:29 ‒ Paul uses "foreknew" (proginōskō, "to know before") twice, here and 11:2. In 11:2 it refers to God's covenant love for Israel before time began. Remember that the term "know" in Hebrew related to intimate, personal relationship, not to facts about someone (cf. Gen. 4:1; Jer. 1:5). Here it was included in a chain of eternal events (cf. Rom. 8:29-30). This term was linked with predestination. However, it must be stated that God's foreknowledge is not the basis of election because if that were so, then election would be based on fallen humanity's future response, which would be human performance. This term is also found in Acts 26:5; 1 Pet. 1:2,20 and 2 Pet. 3:17.
  1. "foreknew" (proginōskō, "to know before")
    The terms "foreknow" and "predestine" are both compounds with the PREPOSITION "before" and, therefore, should be translated "to know before," "to set bounds before," or "mark off before." The definitive passages on predestination in the NT are Rom. 8:28-30; Eph. 1:13-14; and Romans 9. These texts obviously stress that God is sovereign. He is in total control of all things. There is a preset divine plan being worked out in time. However, this plan is not arbitrary or selective. It is based, not only on God's sovereignty and foreknowledge, but on His unchanging character of love, mercy, and undeserved grace. See SPECIAL TOPIC: YHWH'S ETERNAL REDEMPTIVE PLAN.
    We must be careful of our western (American) individualism or our evangelical zeal coloring this wonderful truth. We must also guard against being polarized into the historical, theological conflicts between Augustine versus Pelegius or Calvinism versus Arminianism.
  2. "predestined" (proorizō, "to set the bounds before")
    Predestination is not a doctrine meant to limit God's love, grace, and mercy nor to exclude some from the gospel. It is meant to strengthen believers by molding their worldview. God is for all mankind (cf. John 1:12; 3:16; 1 Tim. 2:4; 2 Pet. 3:9; 1 John 2:2; 4:14). God is in control of all things. Who or what can separate us from Him (cf. Rom. 8:31-39)? God views all history as present; humans are time bound. Our perspective and mental abilities are limited. There is no contradiction between God's sovereignty and mankind's free will. It is a covenantal structure. This is another example of truth given in dialectical tension. Biblical doctrines are presented from different perspectives. They often appear paradoxical. The truth is a balance between the seemingly opposite pairs. We must not remove the tension by picking one of the truths. We must not isolate any biblical truth into a compartment by itself.
    It is also important to add that the goal of election is not only heaven when we die, but Christlikeness now (cf. Rom. 8:29-30; 2 Cor. 3:18; Gal. 4:19; Eph. 1:4; 2:10; 4:13; 1 Thess. 3:13; 4:3; 5:23; 2 Thess. 2:13; Titus 2:14; 1 Pet. 1:15). We were chosen to be "holy and blameless." God chooses to change us so that others may see the change and respond by faith to God in Christ. Predestination is not a personal privilege, but a covenantal responsibility. This is the major truth of the passage. This is the goal of Christianity. Holiness is God's will for every believer. God's election is to Christlikeness (cf. Eph. 1:4), not a special standing. The image of God, which was given to man in creation (cf. Gen. 1:26; 5:1,3; 9:6), is to be restored.
  3. "conformed to the image of His Son" ‒ God's ultimate goal is the restoration of the image lost in the Fall. Believers are foreordained to Christlikeness (cf. Eph. 1:4).
2. Romans 9
  1. Romans 9 is one of the strongest NT passages on God's sovereignty (the other being Eph. 1:3-14), while chapter 10 states humans' free will clearly and repeatedly (cf. "everyone" Rom. 9:4; "whosoever" 9:11,13; "all" 9:12 [twice]). Paul never tries to reconcile this theological tension. They are both true! Most Bible doctrines are presented in paradoxical or dialectical pairs. Most systems of theology are logical half-truths. Augustinianism and Calvinism versus semi-Pelegianism and Arminianism have elements of truth and error. Biblical tension between doctrines is preferable to a proof-texted, dogmatic, rational, theological system that forces the Bible onto a preconceived interpretive grid.
  2. This same truth (found in Rom. 9:23) is stated in Rom. 8:29-30 and Eph. 1:4,11. This chapter is the strongest expression of God's sovereignty in the NT. There can be no dispute that God is in total charge of creation and redemption. This great truth should never be softened or diminished. However, it must be balanced with God's choice of covenant as a means of relating to human creation, made in His image. It is surely true that some OT covenants, like Genesis 15, are unconditional and do not relate at all to human response, but other covenants are conditioned on human response (e.g., Eden, Noah, Moses, David). God has a plan of redemption for His creation; no human can affect this plan. God has chosen to allow individuals to participate in His plans. This opportunity for participation is a theological tension between sovereignty (Romans 9) and human free will (Romans 10).
    It is not appropriate to select one biblical emphasis and ignore another. There is tension between doctrines because eastern people present truth in dialectical or tension-filled pairs. Doctrines must be held in relationship to other doctrines. Truth is a mosaic of truths.
3. Ephesians 1
  1. Election is a wonderful doctrine. However, it is not a call to favoritism, but a call to be a channel, a tool, or means of others' redemption! In the OT the term was used primarily for service; in the NT it is used primarily for salvation which issues in service. The Bible never reconciles the seeming contradiction between God's sovereignty and mankind's free will, but affirms them both! A good example of the biblical tension would be Romans 9 on God's sovereign choice and Romans 10 on mankind's necessary response (cf. Rom. 10:11,13).
    The key to this theological tension may be found in Eph. 1:4. Jesus is God's elect man and all are potentially elect in Him (Karl Barth). Jesus is God's "yes" to fallen mankind's need (Karl Barth). Ephesians 1:4 also helps clarify the issue by asserting that the goal of predestination is not heaven only, but holiness (Christlikeness). We are often attracted to the benefits of the gospel and ignore the responsibilities! God's call (election) is for time as well as eternity!
    Doctrines come in relation to other truths, not as single, unrelated truths. A good analogy would be a constellation versus a single star. God presents truth in eastern, not western, genres. We must not remove the tension caused by dialectical (paradoxical) pairs of doctrinal truths (God as transcendent versus God as immanent; security vs. perseverance; Jesus as equal with the Father vs. Jesus as subservient to the Father; Christian freedom vs. Christian responsibility to a covenant partner, etc).
    The theological concept of "covenant" unites the sovereignty of God (who always takes the initiative and sets the agenda) with a mandatory initial and continuing repentant faith response from man. Be careful of proof-texting one side of the paradox and depreciating the other! Be careful of asserting only your favorite doctrine or system of theology.
  2. "He chose us" in Eph. 1:4 is an AORIST MIDDLE INDICATIVE which emphasizes the subject. This focuses on the Father's choice before time. God's choice must not be understood in the Islamic sense of determinism, nor in the ultra-Calvinistic sense as some versus others, but in the covenantal sense. God promised to redeem fallen mankind (cf. Gen. 3:15). God called and chose Abraham to choose all humans (cf. Gen. 12:3; Exod. 19:5-6). God Himself elected all persons who would exercise faith in Christ. God always takes the initiative in salvation (cf. John 6:44,65). This text and Romans 9 are the biblical basis for the doctrine of predestination emphasized by Augustine and Calvin.
    God chose believers not only to salvation (justification), but also to sanctification (cf. Colossians 1: 10-12). This could relate to (1) our position in Christ (cf. 2 Cor. 5:21) or (2) God's desire to reproduce His character in His children (cf. Eph. 2:10; Rom. 8:28-29; Gal. 4:19). God's will for His children is both heaven one day and Christlikeness now!
    "In Him" is a key concept of Eph. 1:4. The Father's blessings, grace, and salvation flow through Christ (cf. John 14:6). Notice the repetition of this grammatical form (LOCATIVE OF SPHERE) in Eph. 1:3, "in Christ"; 1:4, "in Him"; 1:7, "in Him"; 1:9, "in Him"; 1:10, "in Christ," "in Him"; 1:12, "in Christ" and 1:13, "in Him" (twice). Jesus is God's "yes" to fallen mankind (Karl Barth). Jesus is the elect man and all are potentially elect in Him. All of God the Father's blessings flow through Christ.
    The phrase "before the foundation of the world" is also used in Matt. 25:34; John 17:24; 1 Pet. 1:19-20 and Rev. 13:8. It shows the Triune God's redemptive activity even before Gen. 1:1. Humans are limited by their sense of time; everything to us is past, present, and future, but not to God.
    The goal of predestination is holiness, not privilege. God's call is not to a selected few of Adam's children, but to all! It is a call to be what God intended mankind to be, like Himself (cf. 1 Thess. 5:23; 2 Thess. 2:13); in His image (cf. Gen. 1:26-27). To turn predestination into a theological tenet instead of a holy life is a tragedy. Often our theologies speak louder than the biblical text.
    The term "blameless" (amomos) or "free from blemish" is used of
    1. Jesus (cf. Heb. 9:14; 1 Pet. 1:19)
    2. Zacharias and Elizabeth (cf. Luke 1:6)
    3. Paul (cf. Phil. 3:6)
    4. all true Christians (cf. Phil. 2:15; 1 Thess. 3:13; 5:23)
    God's unalterable will for every Christian is not only heaven later, but Christlikeness now (cf. Rom. 8:29-30; Gal. 4:19; 1 Pet. 1:2). Believers are to reflect God's characteristics to a lost world for the purpose of evangelism.
    Grammatically the phrase "in love" in Titus 2:2 could go with either Titus 2:4 or 5. However, when this phrase is used in other places in Ephesians it always refers to human love for God (cf. Eph. 3:17; 4:2,15,16).
  3. In Eph. 1:5 the phrase "He predestined us" is an AORIST ACTIVE PARTICIPLE. This Greek term is a compound of "before" and "mark off." It refers to God's predetermined redemptive plan (cf. Luke 22:22; Acts 2:23; 4:28; 17:31; Rom. 8:29-30). Predestination is one of several truths related to mankind's salvation. It is part of a theological pattern or series of related truths. It was never meant to be emphasized in isolation! Biblical truth has been given in a series of tension-filled, paradoxical pairs. Denominationalism has tended to remove the biblical tension by emphasizing only one of the dialectical truths (predestination versus human free will; security of the believer versus perseverance of the saints; original sin versus volitional sin; sinlessness versus sinning less; instantaneously declared sanctification versus progressive sanctification; faith versus works; Christian freedom versus Christian responsibility; transcendence versus immanence).
    God's choice is not based on foreknowledge of human performance, but on His gracious character (cf. Eph. 1:7,9,11). He wishes that all (not just some special ones like the Gnostics or modern-day ultra-Calvinists) would be saved (cf. Ezek. 18:21-23,32; John 3:16-17; 1 Tim. 2:4; 4:10; Titus 2:11; 2 Pet. 3:9; 1 John 2:2; 4:14). God's grace (God's character) is the theological key to this passage (cf. Eph. 1:6a, 7c, 9b), as God's mercy is the key to the other passage on predestination, Romans 9-11.
    Fallen mankind's only hope is the grace and mercy of God (cf. Isa. 53:6 and several other OT texts quoted in Rom. 3:9-18). It is crucial in interpreting these first theological chapters to realize that Paul emphasizes those things which are totally unrelated to human performance: predestination (Ephesians 1), grace (Ephesians 2), and God's eternal plan of redemption (mystery, Eph. 2:11- 3:13). This was to counterbalance the emphasis of the false teachers on human merit and pride.
Recently (2023) I have been aware of another Bible teacher who has an understanding of this theological issue that I fully agree with. His name is Steve Gregg and his website is www.narrowpath.com. I hope you will look at his teachings on Calvinism on YouTube.
1. "Calvinism Overview" (2019)
2. "Calvinism Debate" (5 lectures)
3. "God's Sovereignty and Man's Salvation" (9 lessons)

For a good discussion on the necessity of human freedom and the historical rise of Augustinian/Calvinistic predestination see

Dale Moody, The Word of Truth, pp. 337-348
also note Millard Erickson, Christian Theology, 2^nd ed., pp. 920-940
YouTube videos of Steve Gregg
1. "Calvinism Q and A"
2. "The Distinctives of Calvinism and Non-Calvinism"
3. his website is www.thenarrowpath.com