 |  |
sphere of these blessings already indicated are in accord with, or, in harmony with, an
elective purpose.
"According as He hath chosen us." Eklego "to choose" is akin to eklektos "elect" and
ekloge "election". Later in this first chapter of Ephesians we read "being predestinated
according to the purpose" (Eph. 1: 11), which but puts the theme of election before us in
other terms. By their very nature "election" and "predestination" are words of high
import. They belong to the realm of Divine sovereignty and purpose and cannot be
denied or fail. Speculation concerning the subject has led to much strife, and has had in
some cases a deadening effect upon life and service, for an element of "fate" has been
imported that has stultified effort and paralyzed the exercise of freedom of choice.
While it is beyond the requirements of exposition to turn aside and consider these
questions in all their bearings, one feature seems called for to adjust the balance. We are
compelled to conclude from the way in which "choose", "elect" and "election" appear in
the scriptures, that this choice or election proceeds from God and cannot be altered by
man.
"Ye have not chosen Me, but I have chosen you" is the statement of the Saviour
concerning the choice of the "Twelve"; and the believers are often entitled "The Elect".
Associated with "election" is a "purpose" that must "stand" (Rom. 9: 11), and it is called
by its very nature "an election of grace" (Rom. 11: 5). The reader may at some time have
come into touch with the Calvinistic doctrine of "decrees", and faced the dreadful
consequences of this belief, which by the very relentlessness of its logic, as surely
predetermines who are to be irretrievably lost, as it predetermines the number who must
be saved. He may on the other hand have been spared this conflict, but to every mind
there must come at times concern over this great problem. If man is a moral agent, held
responsible for his actions, so that should he transgress he is held worthy of punishment,
then by all the laws of right and wrong, that man must have some measure of choice. If
he be held in bonds so tight that his very evil acts are the results of an unalterable decree,
conscience is seared and every stand of equity destroyed and both "sin" and "salvation"
become but hollow mockeries. Man would be the sport of a power indeed greater than
himself but a power who could command neither respect nor devotion. Some have faced
the facts that there appear to be two lines of teaching in the scriptures, that run side by
side but which never appear to meet, and are content to fall back upon the words of
Abraham "Shall not the Judge of all the earth do right?" One writer says:
"Rather than give a positive answer to the question, therefore, I should desire, like
Burnet, to state the arguments on both sides, and leave the conclusion to others; with
Watts, to pronounce, that since we are assured, by reason and scripture, both of human
free will and Divine foreknowledge, we may justly believe them both; and to say, with
Simeon, that Calvinists would wish scripture to contain fewer Arminian likelihoods and
Arminians fewer Calvinistic ones. There is a way of dwelling on the prescience of God
which obscures His moral attributes" (Grant).
Having said so much it becomes necessary to say a little more. The problem we are
facing can be at least presented with some measure of clearness if we set out the two