Introduction
…the traditional doctrine of
election is being reconsidered today more in terms of mission than as a strict
soteriological category… , more in terms of a corporate covenantal body than in
strict individualistic fashion and … more in terms of doxology… than timeless
eternal decree[1]
Election
The term election has been used as a synonym for predestination and although this is correct, election only describes one aspect of predestination which is God’s choosing of who will be saved, which is the elect. The opposite or negative side to election is called reprobation which involves the predestination of those who have not been elect.[2] Another definition of election originates back to the time of Augustine who believed that if a person were left to themselves they would be left to their own sin and in turn rebel against God and so not turn to God for their salvation.[3] Election was first used within scripture to describe the way that Israel had become God’s chosen nation. This nomination of Israel did not rely heavily on their excellence but rested on God’s pleasure, in that he was free to do with them as he pleased.[4]
Missiology by definition is the study of the Church’s mission in Christ and conveys the idea of being sent on a ‘mission’ or a ‘journey’ and relates to what Christ said in John 20:21:
“Jesus said to them again, “Peace be with you. As the Father has sent me, so I send you.”[5]
Whereas soteriology relates to the doctrine of salvation and reflects back to such passages as John 3:16 and John 10:10.[6]
To find eternal salvation is a personal journey, one that is made by many Christians and is a relationship between the individual and God himself.[7] An authority in the doctrine of election Lesslie Newbigin reveals how this principle has been open to the subject of ridicule and rejection among Christian scholars.[8] Newbigin looks at election within the comparison of Indian culture and states that the journey of salvation must be a matter for the individual soul and is not something to be taken for granted as a certainty.[9] This is not to say that the journey to salvation has to be undertaken alone, without guidance, but salvation is the end result that we all hope for. Newbigin states that salvation has to be completed alone but as the apostles had Jesus, referring back to John 20:21, Newbigin states that a spiritual guide could be used to help along the journey.[10] However, much like the journey to salvation, the journey to find a spiritual guide can also be a long one as the guide is not sent out by God it is for others to seek him. This relates back to Indian tradition where teachers are heavily relied upon but Newbigin stresses it is down to the autonomy of the individual to seek their own truth to salvation.[11] But the guide we find is not someone we disregard once we have learned all we have had to learn; we must treat this person as one who will share our home. This is part of how we receive God’s saving revelation.[12]
This journey of election is one of relationships which is fundamental within human life, such as the relationship between man and woman and parents and children. This shows us that these relationships along the journey are important and relates to the Biblical message that does not speak of all of “humanity” but all of the “families” of the Earth.[13] The connection between family relationships, the journey and God shows us how election is missiological rather than soteriological at this point, the soteriological view that election is a privileged status before God was an issue. Newbigin highlights, that the prophets of Israel had to also contend with and to abuse God’s love could often lead to chastisement.[14] As shown in Romans 10:12 God’s love is for all and is the Lord of all and generous to those who call upon him. If God’s love is for all why does God reveal himself to a chosen, select few?
Following on from the importance of family, journey and connections, God uses this form of election as his method of salvation because the relatedness itself is a form of salvation.[15] Through the elected person’s journey to salvation they bless those around them by bringing the good news of God’s saving grace through their words and good deeds, but the elect have no special claim on God; they have been given a responsibility to spread the gospel which can often lead to suffering and humiliation.[16] Newbigin, however, states that to be elect does not mean you are saved and the non-elect are lost. It means that the elect are incorporated into the mission of Christ Jesus and the church. Newbigin believes that instead election should be viewed as something that is historical and dynamic which has had a profound impact for those that have been chosen.[17]
Though as previously referenced there are connections from the New Testament between election and missiology. Even from the beginning within the books of the Old Testament and the time of the Pentateuch God’s people are meant to be missionary. They were chosen to be a blessing to others but, to be a missionary people, they must as a people be like the promise they carry.[18] Israel time and again had asked God why they had been chosen. The response was a simple one, it was purely a matter of God’s love and this can be seen in Deuteronomy 7:8 in particular.[19] But out of all the nations God chose Israel and God had called them for a special purpose. This is a special privilege and one that comes with service and not just for one nation but for all nations.[20] But were Israel God’s chosen elect? Wright states that Israel was to be God’s nation of holy priests, chosen for the sake of the world. This would put these elect priests with the job of missionaries to be the “light of the world” and to show the people who the “true God is.”[21] However there are also aspects within the Old Testament that give way for election to have a soteriological connection with the chosen people of Israel being God’s people. God would act to vindicate Israel from its enemies and bring them to salvation.[22] It is clear from the stories of the Old Testament the message of Israel’s election which appears to be rooted in soteriology, distinguishing between those who will be saved and to those who will not, but at the same time opening up the idea of salvation to the nations. This view of elect soteriology has some similarities to that of Sethian Gnosticism and also shares these views within Pauline Theology.[23]
Wright believed that the meaning behind election was something that was changing and believed much of this was rooted within Pauline Theology, an example of this can be seen within Galatians 2.11-21.[24] Here election can be seen ingrained in soteriology. Within this passage Peter and Paul have the disagreement on circumcision. Peter believes that because God chose the people of Israel (the elect) that the way to be saved and to join God’s chosen people is by circumcision.[25] Here we can see, from Wright’s perspective, the changing view of election from the Old Testament and soteriology to the New Testament through the faithfulness of Jesus the Messiah and missiology.[26] The definition of election changes once more with Roman 2, specifically verses 17-25. Here Israel find that their position as God’s chosen elect is undermined by their own sin, instead of being the light of the world and God’s messengers to spread his love. Israel caused the pagan nations to commit sin.[27]
The goal of election and that of the elect is to bear witness to the gospel and for those chosen to complete missions to the glory of God. Newbigin’s believes that election is a call to missions as it falls within the traditional Reformed theology that the end result of election is to the glory of God.[28] Wright believes that regardless on the view of election, God’s purpose within the subject is to root out evil in the world and did so through his chosen people of Israel.[29] Within the view of soteriology however the universal nature of salvation within Christ should not be overlooked, with some Reformed views seeing the salvation within Christ only being applicable to the elect.[30] Calvin’s view, for example, sees that the doctrine of election is placed firmly within soteriology with Calvin believing that our salvation in Christ is real and permanent, and as such Calvin’s doctrine of election follows directly from faith in Christ and soteriology.[31] Within soteriology is the divine call to salvation and the electing grace of God. Also the damnation of sinners which is a result of those that have not been saved which means that some have been passed over on salvation found in God’s decree of election.[32] However there is much discussion on this subject whether this belongs within soteriology or within the doctrine of God.[33]
The Impact on Reformed Theology
John Roxburgh as cited in Leow believes on Newbigin’s understanding of election is that, it creates a “reductionist view of the church and that of its mission” but at the same time has broadened our understanding of the mission of Israel.[34] Not having a greater understanding of the church and its mission can potentially have an activist view of the church, seeing it as reactionary and bound by social change but a more balanced view would be perhaps to see the church as a “means to an end” in its mission to spread the gospel and that of salvation.[35] The other impact on both the church and that of Reformed theology is this possibility that the doctrine of election could be based on life experience. This of course would have an impact on whether election was missiological or soteriological.[36] If election were presumed to be soteriological then the impact would be different to those who heard the gospel and so on a path to salvation to those who are either unable to hear it or refuse to hear it and thus lead to condemnation.[37] If it is a soteriological view of election that is being understood then it is not our own experience that would have an impact on our salvation but on the consideration found within scripture.[38] But if life experience has no impact on our salvation then this would also mean that the doctrine of election is determined by God’s own attitude towards humanity or specific individuals on whether they are put in the group of the elect/saved or the group of the non-elect, those meant for condemnation.[39] It is often determined that whether we are a good Christian or not is reflected upon our personal relationship with God and our connection with scripture. This does not mean however that the relationship that each individual has with God is identical, a point which is quite often contested.[40] Election can therefore be understood as an achievement to understanding the gospel and it has been suggested that from Newbigin’s perspective on election that it could reconceptualise a traditional Reformed view on the subject with the ultimate goal to the glory of God.[41] In addition although the doctrine of election has been explained throughout this essay as God having a plan for every person, some Reformed writers have also pointed out that he may also have a plan for every angel. There can be examples of this seen within 1 Tim 5:21 and Matthew 25:41.[42] Further evidence of election within missiology is highlighted by Newbiggin who believes that Christian faith grows as the mission of the church extends across the globe. The achievement of election is only complete when we have a full understanding of the gospel and the realisation of God’s perfect reign of the many diverse groups that currently exist across the globe. Newbigin believes that “election has the ultimate goal of the glory of God” with Leow stating that this offers a more positive view of God’s glory.[43]
Conclusion
In conclusion this essay has found that on the question of whether the doctrine of election is missiological or soteriological, it is believed that it is more missiological, though it can be seen that there are elements of both within the argument. It is a subject that, as Newbigin pointed out, is one of ridicule and much debate among scholars and continues to be as such. But the argument that Newbigin has made is strongly leaning towards missiology with the message that it is the journey that leads us to our salvation and the connections we make, not the privilege of being one of the elect. A soteriological impact on election with regards to the Reformed theology would change the way the church is viewed within the community. If our own life experiences have no impact on our salvation then this could surely change the way the church is viewed and how people live their lives. As John Roxborough pointed out within Leow’s study, it can create a reductionist view of the church and that of its mission.
Bibliography
Bartholomew, Craig G., The Drama of Scripture: Finding
Our Place in the Biblical Story (SPCK, 2017).
Bromiley, G.W., and T.F.
Torrance, Church Dogmatics (T&T Clark, 2004).
Burns, Dylan M., Apocalypse
of the Alien God: Platonism and the Exile of Sethian Gnosticism (University
of Pennsylvania Press, 2014).
Ferguson, Sinclair, and David
Wright, New Dictionary of Theology (Leicester: Inter-Varsity, 1988).
Leow, T.H., ‘The Elect and
Non-Elect as Historically Dynamic Categories: Lesslie Newbiggin’s
Reconceptualization of the Doctrine of Election’, Scottish Bulletin of
Evangelical Theology, 188–202.
Newbigin, Lesslie, The
Gospel in a Pluralist Society (SPCK, 1997).
Plantinga, Richard J., Thomas
R. Thompson, and Matthew D. Lundberg, An Introduction to Christian Theology
(Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2010).
Pol, Frank van der, The
Doctrine of Election in Reformed Perspective: Historical and Theological Investigations
of the Synod of Dordt 1618–1619 (Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 2018).
Ridderbos, Herman N., Paul:
An Outline of His Theology (William B. Eerdmans, 1997).
‘Soteriology, n.’, OED
Online (Oxford University Press)
<https://www.oed.com/view/Entry/185025> [accessed 18 March 2020].
Sproul, R. C., What Is
Reformed Theology?: Understanding the Basics (Baker Books, 2016).
Version, New International, NIV
Bible EBook (New International Version) (Hachette UK, 2011).
Whitford, David M., T&T
Clark Companion to Reformation Theology (Bloomsbury Publishing, 2014).
Wright, N, Paul - Fresh
Perspectives (London: SPCK, 2005).
Wright, William A., Calvin’s
Salvation in Writing:: A Confessional Academic Theology (BRILL, 2015).
[1] Richard J. Plantinga, Thomas R.
Thompson and Matthew D. Lundberg, An Introduction to Christian Theology
(Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2010), 357.
[2] R. C. Sproul, What Is
Reformed Theology?: Understanding the Basics (Baker Books, 2016).
[3] Sinclair Ferguson and David
Wright, New Dictionary of Theology (Leicester: Inter-Varsity, 1988),
528.
[4] Herman N. Ridderbos, Paul:
An Outline of His Theology (William B. Eerdmans, 1997), 344.
[5] Ferguson and Wright, New
Dictionary of Theology, 435.
[6] ‘Soteriology, n.’, OED
Online (Oxford University Press)
<https://www.oed.com/view/Entry/185025> [accessed 18 March 2020]; New
International Version, NIV Bible EBook (New International Version)
(Hachette UK, 2011).
[7] Lesslie Newbigin, The Gospel
in a Pluralist Society (SPCK, 1997), 81.
[8] T.H. Leow, ‘The Elect and
Non-Elect as Historically Dynamic Categories: Lesslie Newbiggin’s
Reconceptualization of the Doctrine of Election’, Scottish Bulletin of
Evangelical Theology, 189.
[9] Newbigin, The Gospel in a
Pluralist Society, 81.
[10] Newbigin, The Gospel in a
Pluralist Society, 81.
[11] Newbigin, The Gospel in a
Pluralist Society, 81.
[12] Newbigin, The Gospel in a
Pluralist Society, 83.
[13] Newbigin, The Gospel in a
Pluralist Society, 82.
[14] Newbigin, The Gospel in a
Pluralist Society, 85.
[15] Leow, ‘The Elect and Non-Elect
as Historically Dynamic Categories: Lesslie Newbiggin’s Reconceptualization of
the Doctrine of Election’, 190.
[16] Leow, ‘The Elect and Non-Elect
as Historically Dynamic Categories: Lesslie Newbiggin’s Reconceptualization of
the Doctrine of Election’, 190–191.
[17] Leow, ‘The Elect and Non-Elect
as Historically Dynamic Categories: Lesslie Newbiggin’s Reconceptualization of
the Doctrine of Election’, 192.
[18] Craig G. Bartholomew, The
Drama of Scripture: Finding Our Place in the Biblical Story (SPCK, 2017),
54.
[19] N Wright, Paul - Fresh Perspectives
(London: SPCK, 2005), 109.
[20] Bartholomew, The Drama of
Scripture: Finding Our Place in the Biblical Story, 65.
[21] Wright, Paul - Fresh
Perspectives, 109.
[22] Wright, Paul - Fresh
Perspectives, 110.
[23] Dylan M. Burns, Apocalypse
of the Alien God: Platonism and the Exile of Sethian Gnosticism (University
of Pennsylvania Press, 2014), 94.
[24] Wright, Paul - Fresh
Perspectives, 111.
[25] Wright, Paul - Fresh
Perspectives, 111.
[26] Wright, Paul - Fresh
Perspectives, 111.
[27] Wright, Paul - Fresh
Perspectives, 117.
[28] Leow, ‘The Elect and Non-Elect
as Historically Dynamic Categories: Lesslie Newbiggin’s Reconceptualization of
the Doctrine of Election’, 194.
[29] Wright, Paul - Fresh
Perspectives, 110.
[30] William A. Wright, Calvin’s
Salvation in Writing:: A Confessional Academic Theology (BRILL, 2015), 280.
[31] Wright, Calvin’s Salvation
in Writing, 280.
[32] Frank van der Pol, The
Doctrine of Election in Reformed Perspective: Historical and Theological
Investigations of the Synod of Dordt 1618–1619 (Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht,
2018), 229.
[33] Pol, The Doctrine of
Election in Reformed Perspective, 225.
[34] Leow, ‘The Elect and Non-Elect
as Historically Dynamic Categories: Lesslie Newbiggin’s Reconceptualization of
the Doctrine of Election’, 193.
[35] Leow, ‘The Elect and Non-Elect
as Historically Dynamic Categories: Lesslie Newbiggin’s Reconceptualization of
the Doctrine of Election’, 193.
[36] G.W. Bromiley and T.F.
Torrance, Church Dogmatics (T&T Clark, 2004), 38.
[37] Bromiley and Torrance, Church
Dogmatics, 38.
[38] Bromiley and Torrance, Church
Dogmatics, 39.
[39] Bromiley and Torrance, Church
Dogmatics, 41.
[40] Bromiley and Torrance, Church
Dogmatics, 42–43.
[41] Leow, ‘The Elect and Non-Elect
as Historically Dynamic Categories: Lesslie Newbiggin’s Reconceptualization of
the Doctrine of Election’, 195.
[42] David M. Whitford, T&T
Clark Companion to Reformation Theology (Bloomsbury Publishing, 2014), 88.
[43] Leow, ‘The Elect and Non-Elect
as Historically Dynamic Categories: Lesslie Newbiggin’s Reconceptualization of
the Doctrine of Election’, 195.
No comments:
Post a Comment