A Brief Defense For Unconditional Election

Part 1: Introduction to the Issue

There may not be a topic more divisive within the Protestant Church than the doctrine of election. Of course, there are many points of interest that cause division among fellow believers, but election seems to have been at the forefront for centuries. Most every Christian believes in election because it is written and discussed within the pages of Scripture. However, the difference lies in the definition and interpretation of election.

As in most disagreements, the opposing sides can be narrowed down into two primary divisions. In this case, the divisions are based on whether God’s election of people to salvation is conditional or unconditional. According to the Arminian perspective, election is conditional and is based on God’s choice of individuals to salvation based on his foreknowledge of who would receive the message of the Gospel. This view of election says that God determined his decision based on his knowledge of an individual’s free choice. The ultimate purpose for election in this view is that the will of man remain entirely free from God’s intervention.

The opposing view, or the Reformed view, asserts that God’s election is unconditional and is not based on anything God has foreseen in man, but rather on his sovereign good pleasure.[1] Rather than God and man meeting halfway with each other to orchestrate salvation, the individual is totally incapable of doing anything to save himself. Therefore, salvation is not determined based on God’s knowledge of a person’s reception of it, but rather on the will and choice of God apart from the work of man. The ultimate purpose for election from this perspective is that election exalts the sovereignty of God.

A doctrine that often gets attached to election is that of reprobation. Because reprobation is associated so closely to the doctrine of election, they are often debated congruently. In brief, reprobation is the idea that God has passed over certain individuals for the purpose of leaving them in their sin and punishing them for it. Those who believe in this doctrine assert that God’s actions display his divine attribute of justice. The opposing view counters with arguments that condemn the notion that God would pass over individuals with the argument that he purchased salvation for the whole world.

This paper will defend the doctrines of unconditional election and reprobation as the most faithful and accurate interpretations of the biblical text regarding the topic of election, and will also contend for the positive impact a knowledge of these doctrines will have on congregational worship and faithful evangelism. First, these doctrines will be examined and defended at length with the use of biblical texts and extra-biblical sources. Second, these positions will be compared with their respective objections. Finally, a critique of the application of these doctrines within the local church will be offered.

Part 2: A Defense of the Reformed Doctrine of Election

 The Reformed view of election is one that has received negative backlash within the modern evangelical movement. One of the reasons for this is the pervasiveness of the seeker sensitive movement in the west. Anything that stands in opposition to viewing God only as loving and accepting is seen antithetical to the work of these churches and this movement. However, this view of God is more harmful than helpful because it neglects certain attributes of the Lord that are made evident in Scripture. The Reformed doctrine of election is derived from the Bible and helps believers understand God as he has revealed himself to his people.

A common starting place for the doctrine of election in Scripture is found in Paul’s epistle to the Romans. This book offers an in depth look at the apostle Paul’s soteriology as it relates to the Jews as well as the Gentiles. Paul climaxes with his thoughts on election in chapters eight and nine where he makes the argument that the promises of God regarding salvation are extended to certain individuals born outside of the nation of Israel, namely those who are elect (Rom 9:6-8 ESV). God’s election includes some individuals from Jewish descent, but the apostle is making a case for the reason why certain people born of Israel have failed to be saved, and why Gentiles are able to receive the promise. The reason Paul gives in defense of his argument is that those who are receiving salvation are receiving it based on God’s foreknowledge of them (Rom 8:29).

Much debate has been had over the meaning of the word foreknowledge. For the sake of this paper, foreknowledge will be defined as God’s intimate knowledge of someone before the foundation of the world. This definition is given because a logical argument can be made for the fact that God has knowledge of each human being. If a person’s salvation hinges on God’s knowledge of them, then the logical conclusion would be that everyone would be saved. However, in Matthew 7:23, Jesus does not let individuals enter his kingdom based on his lack of knowledge of them. Because of the similar use of language, one can conclude that God’s foreknowledge of people as expressed in Romans 8 is based on a more intimate knowledge, or love, that he has for his chosen people. This idea of God’s foreknowledge being an intimate, loving knowledge of certain individuals will provide a foundation for an understanding of unconditional election.

To build on the previous argument, consideration from other Scripture texts must be examined if one wants to grasp an understanding of election from the Reformed perspective.

Ephesians 1:3-6 reads,

“Blessed be the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, who has blessed us in Christ with every spiritual blessing in the heavenly places, even as he chose us in him before the foundation of the world, that we should be holy and blameless before him. In love he predestined us for adoption to himself as sons through Jesus Christ, according to the purpose of his will, to the praise of his glorious grace, with which he has blessed us in the Beloved.”

This passage asserts that the love God has for his people is the bases for which he has chosen them for adoption to himself through Christ. The predetermination of his children, which happens before the foundation of the world, occurs only in accordance with his will for the sake of praising his glorious grace. Understanding this passage in this way can draw the conclusion that the election of individuals to salvation is not based conditionally on anything that God has foreseen in man, but rather on his love for them in accordance with his will to the praise of his glory. Election understood this way removes any claim man has of boasting in himself (Eph 2:9). The salvation of man is wholly a work of God that is planned by the father, purchased by the Son and carried out by the Holy Spirit.

As mentioned earlier, the doctrine of reprobation is often associated with election. This paper defends that the doctrine of reprobation is necessary to understand God’s election rightly. In his first epistle, the apostle Peter explains that Christ is the cornerstone by which believers have a foundation for their faith while also being a stumbling block for those who are not in Christ (1 Pet 2:4-8). At the end of verse 8, Peter adds that the reason people stumble over the stone that is Christ is because “they disobey the word, as they were destined to do” (1 Pet 2:8). The argument being made is that a person’s inability to come to God is because they were not chosen, but the responsibility of their condemnation rests on man for their disobedience.

To bring the argument full circle, Paul also speaks of reprobation in Romans 9:14-24. Here, the apostle is asserting that God is justified as the creator of all things, namely humans, to exercise his sovereignty over people and their eternal state. In verse 18, he declares that God “has mercy on whomever he wills, and he hardens whomever he wills” (Rom 9:18). Paul makes it clear in this passage that God has the right to exercise his mercy on whomever he pleases.

Part 3: Objections to the Reformed Doctrine of Election

The alternative view to the Reformed doctrine of election can be made using Scripture as well. One notable argument is Peter’s expression in 2 Peter 3:9 where he says, “The Lord is not slow to fulfill his promise as some count slowness, but is patient toward you, not wishing that any should perish, but that all should reach repentance.” At first glance, it seems like this verse is asserting that God intends for everyone to come to repentance. However, upon further examination, Peter is making an argument for God’s patience in prolonging the current period of history so that people may come to repentance. This text makes provision for the elect to heed the warnings of Peter to live according to God’s pleasure as they await Christ’s return.

Other opposing views made against the Reformed doctrine of election are based on how people feel God should act according to human standards of fairness and justice. The Arminian perspective puts a high priority on the free will of man because they insist that God would not override man’s freedom to choose whether or not to be saved. They say that God displays his sovereignty in not forcing people to be saved against their will. However, according to the many verses listed above in defense of the reformed doctrine of election, God does not operate based on human notions of fairness or justice. He has the right to do whatever he pleases because he is the potter and we are the clay (Rom 9:21).

Part 4: Application of This Doctrine

As we have seen, the apostles in the New Testament expound on the doctrine of election to provide comfort and encouragement to believers. These doctrines should impact how the local church operates in terms of its worship and its evangelism. One of the many reasons modern churches do not emphasize the Reformed doctrine of election is because of the negative perspective election has on evangelism that derives from hyper-Calvinism. The dilemma with this view is that individuals who adhere to this do not think that evangelism is necessary because of the idea that God is going to save people regardless of whether Christians evangelize to them. However, this is not the case. Scripture is clear that the only way individuals are able to receive the Gospel is to hear it declared to them (Rom 10:17).

This truth should cause church members to rejoice. Saints should whole heartedly embrace these doctrines because it exalts the love of God towards his people. It also causes God’s people to understand that he should be praised because his motivation to save sinners originates from his desire to display his attributes for the sake of his name. The truth of this should create humility in the hearts of believers and fervent worship among church congregations.

In the local church context, the Reformed doctrine of election should be taught as an encouragement to members in their evangelism. This is an encouragement because we can know for certain that God will save sinners according to his will and good pleasure. It should also be a reminder that man does not do the saving, God does. Knowing this, we can approach evangelism without the added pressure of having to be rigid with our words and actions. Rather, we can rest in the message of the Gospel which is the only thing that has the power to save. That message is what the church needs to engage the world with for the salvation of man and the glory of God.

*I have adapted and edited this material from an applied theology paper I wrote for my Systematic Theology 3 course (27080 WW) taught by Dr. Gregg Allison in the Spring of 2023 at the Southern Baptist Theological Seminary.

[1]  Wayne Grudem, Systematic Theology (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 1994), 670.