Election. What Does it Consist of?

True, but Paul is not talking about eternal destiny here (even though the argument does indeed eventually get to the matter of salvation)

If you chase up the Old Testament reference, you will see that the "mercy" being shown is mercy about deliverance in this world - the Jews being delivered from Egypt. We get ahead of Paul if we assume that he is talking about "life after death" issues here. As I said, Paul is heading in that direction, but we need to let him dictate the pace of his own argument.

Besides, when he does get to salvation, it is "Jew" vs "Gentile" distinction that is in play, strongly suggesting that his salvation argument is not about the election of individuals to a specific fate. I concede I have not made my case about this yet, but I hope to.

 

Romans 9 unquestionably deals with the issue of God choosing or “electing” people and nations. The chapter also deal with the matter of salvation. These themes are connected at some points where Paul writes about God’s “selection” specifically in relation to salvation. However, I do not think Paul is arguing that God generally elects individuals unto salvation (or loss).

I suggest that Paul's argument moves towards a conclusion that is about salvation at the level of nations. En route to his conclusion, Paul asserts that God has “elected” Israel, as a family, to a specific redemptive role, and this was done with the intent of making salvation available to a new family constituted by Jews and Gentiles. So on my view, the “vessels of destruction” are Jews, as a corporate entity, and their “election” is not actually in relation to salvation per se, but something else (which I will explain). The “vessels of glory” is a collective term, used to refer to a category or family of people, and while there is indeed election to salvation here, it is not at the level of individuals. So when Paul refers to these vessels of glory and writes of their “election” unto salvation (which I certainly do not deny), his real point is that, despite prevailing Jewish belief, God decided from the foundation of the world that salvation would be available to both Jew and Gentile.

This is why Paul uses “prepared in advance” language to describe this Jew plus Gentile family who are “vessels of glory”. I entirely concede that, for a westerner steeped in our 21st century culture of individualism, the first interpretation that will spring to mind (when reading the “vessels fitted for glory” text) is that individuals are pre-destined. To be frank, this is the path of least intellectual resistance and it is demonstrably incorrect when context is considered and when we drop our strong cultural pre-disposition to always think at the level of individual. What Paul is really saying here is that God’s plan always involved hardening Israel to make salvation available to the Gentiles. What God has really “decided in advance” is that the true family of God will be made up both Jews and Gentile, not that specific persons will be in it.

From the outset, I want to make it clear that I understand that some on the other side of this issue concede that not all the examples from Romans 9 are examples of pre-destination of individuals to an eternal fate (I am thinking of Jacob, Esau, and Pharoah). More specifically, I really do understand how, if Paul were really concerned with matters of individual election to salvation or loss, Paul could use examples of God making non-salvation related choices in support of a progressive argument leading from such “non eternal destiny” choices to a conclusion about election to eternal destinies. I do not believe Paul is doing this, but I fully understand how such a argument is open for him to make.

I do not see how I can present this argument faithfully in a single short post. So here, I will introduce some of the key elements of this argument to give a sense of where I am going. I intend to then elaborate in later posts.