Now what were the effects of this election ? (1.) Plainly the ancient election of the Jews to be God's peculiar people did not secure the salvation of every Jew individually, nor did it exclude the non-elect Gen- tiles from adequate means of salvation ; nay, the elec- tion of the Jews was intended for the benefit of the Gentiles — to restrain idolatry and diffuse spiritual truth. (2.) As to the election of the Christian Church, it does not infallibly secure the salvation of every member of the Church, nor does it conclude an}thing against the saving mercy of God being still exercised as to those who are out of the Church ; nay, the ver}"- election of Christians (who are the " salt" of the earth) is intended to bring those who are still in " the world" to Christ.
This collective election is often confounded by Cal- vinists with personal election. This is especially done in the interpretation of Paul's argument in Komans ix-xi. But a just exegesis of these chapters shows that they can be interpreted only of collective elec- tion, not of personal election (see the full examin- ation of this in Watson, Institutes, ii, 312-325). The apostle does, indeed, treat of unconditional election in this discourse, but it is of unconditional collective elec- tion.
iii. The third kind is personal election of indiriduals to be the children of God. Our Lord says, " I have chosen you out of the world." St. Peter says, " Elect according to the foreknowledge of God the Father, through sanctification of the Spirit, unto obedience and sprinkling of the blood of Jesus Christ." Then elec- tion must take place in time, and must l)e subsequent to the administration of the means of salvation. The "calling" goes before the " election," and the " sprink- ling of the blood of Christ" before that " sanctifica- tion" through which they become "the elect" of God. In a word, " the elect" are the body of true believers ; and personal election into the family of God is through personal faith. All who truly believe are elected; and all to whom the Gospel is sent have, through the grace that accompanies it, the power to believe placed within their reach ; and all such might, therefore, at- tain to the grace of personal election. The doctrine of personal election is therefore brought down to its true meaning, ylc/w;^ election cannot be eternal ; for from eternity the elect were not actually chosen out of the world, and from eternity they could not be "sanctified unto obedience." The phrases "eternal
ELECTION OF GRACE
130
ELECTION OF GRACE
election'' and "eternal decree of election" can there- fore mean only "an eternal purpose" to elect, a pur- pose formed in eternity to clioose and sanctify in time "by tlie Spirit and tlie blood of Jesus." But when Calvinists graft on this tlie doctrine that God Iiatli from cternit}' chosen in Christ unto salvation a set number of men (certain quoruiulam hominum niultitudi- neni) unto holiness and eternal life, without cause or condition except his arbitrary will, they assert a doc- trine not to be found in the Word of God. It has two parts : (1) the choosing of a determinate number of men, which cannot be increased or diminished ; (2) this choice is unconditional. Let us consider these two points.
a. As to the choosing of a determinate number of men, it is allowed by Calvinists tliat they have no express scriptural evidence for this tenet. And, (1.) As to God's etern-d purpose to elect, we know nothing except from revelation, and that declares (a) that he willeth all men to be saved ; (b) tliat Christ died for all men, in order to the salvation of all ; and (c) the decree of God is, " lie that believeth sliall l)e saved, and he that believeth not shall be damned:" and if God be un- changeable, this must have been his decree from all eternity : (d) if the fault of men's destruction lies in fkem.ielves, then the number of the elect is capable of increase and diminution. (2.) This doctrine necessarilt/ carries with it that of the unconditional reprobation of all mankind, except the elect, which cannot be recon- ciled with the moral attributes of God, i. e. with his love, wisdom, grace, compassion, justice, or sincerit}'; nor with the scriptural doctrine that God is no respect- er oj" persons ; nor witli the scriptural doctrine of the eternal salvation of infants; nor, finally, with the prop- er end of punitive justice, which is, to deter men from sin, and to add strength to the law of God.
I. As to the second branch of this doctrine, viz. that personal election is unconditional. (1.) According to this doctrine, the Church of God is constituted on the sole principle of the divine purpose, not upon the basis of faith and obedienca, which manifestly contradicts the Word of God, according to which Christ's Church is composed not merely of men, as Peter, James, and John, but of Peter, James, and John believing and obeying; while all who "believe not," and obey not, are of ''the world," not of "the chosen." (2.) This doctrine of election iviihout respect to faith contradicts the history of tlie commencement and iirst constitution of the Church of Clirist. The first disciples became sucli l)y believing; and before baptism men were re- quired to believe, so that their actual election had re- spect to faitli. (3.) Tliere is no such doctrine in Scrip- ture as the election of individuals unto faith, and it is inconsistent with several passages which speak ex- pressly of personal election, e. g. John xv, 19; 1 Pet, i, 2 ; 2 Thess. ii, 13, 14. (4.) There is another class of texts in which the term election occurs, refen-ing to believers, not personally, but as a body forming the Church of Christ, which texts, containing the word election, are ingeniously applied to the support of the doctrine of unconditional personal election, when in fact they do not contain it. Such is Eph. i, 4, 5, G. Now in regard to this text, it might he shown (a) that if personal election were contained in it, the choice spoken of is not of men merely, but of belierin/j men ; but (b) it does not contain tlie doctrine of personal election, but tliat of the cteinil purpose of (iod to con- stitute his visible Church no longer upon the ground of descent from Abraham, but on that of faith in Chrid. (o.) Finally, the Calvinistic doctrine has no stronger passage to lean upon. We conclude bj' asking, if this doctrine be true, (a) Why are we commanded "to make our election sure?" (b) Where does Scripture tell us of elect unbelievers? (c) and how can the Spirit of trutli convince sucli of sin and danger, when they are, inftct, in no danger ? . The fundamental objection made by Calvinists to