THE DOCTRINE OF ELECTION AS THE FRUIT OF THE SEED OF ANTI-SEMITISM IN THE CHURCH
BY
Michael Colucci
August 16, 2011
THESIS STATEMENT
THE USE OF “ELECT” OR “CHOSEN” IN THE NEW TESTAMENT WITHIN THE FULL CONTEXT OF THE SCRIPTURES SUPPORTS A POSITION THAT “THE ELECT” IS A REFERENCE TO ISRAEL REDIFINING THE DOCTRINE OF ELECTION TO BE AN AFFIRMATION OF THE COVENANT OF GOD WITH ISRAEL
Introduction
A re-evaluation of the use of eklektos and kletos in the New Testament as well as the use of bachiyr in the Old Testament supports that references to “the elect” mentioned in the Gospels, Epistles, and in Revelation are references to Israel while references to “the called” are meant for those who respond to the invitation of salvation. The Doctrine of Election was championed early by those who held a great distaste for Jews[1] and therefore was biased toward Gentile Christians causing the foundation of the doctrine itself to stand upon a presupposition. While both Jewish and Gentile followers of Jesus partake in the promises and fullness of the Scriptures through Him, the everlasting covenant God made with Israel must be considered. The Doctrine of Election should be nothing more than an affirmation of God’s having chosen Israel to be His people.
The Bias
Harmony between the Old Testament and the New Testament, and what we understand to be the nature of God can be found in redefining the Doctrine of Election, which has been seen as a cornerstone doctrine of the Protestant reformation and has continued within the Church even until today. While Calvinists argue Arminians over the battle between God’s Grace and God’s Sovereignty, neither see that the doctrine itself became prominent in anti-Semitic academic and theological circles. Augustine, who has been called the Architect of the Middle Ages, also saw the Jews as being “left in the same mass of ruin because they could not believe.”[2] The ruin Augustine was referring to was “the mass of perdition” which those who did not come to faith in Christ would suffer.[3] This line of thinking effected not only the perspective of Israel but it also greatly influence Augustine’s eschatology as he needed to view all the New Testament void of Israel.[4] Even those who argue against replacement or covenant theology, which would say that because Israel rejected the Messiah the Church has now become Israel, often fail to consider that the “elect” that are mentioned in the Bible are actually those of Israel. The Doctrine of Election cannot exist outside of those who God first elected, or chose, to be His people. Were the Church to admit the bias from which the doctrine grew, recognize it as error, and begin teaching that “the elect” refer to God’s Chosen People we would gain a deeper understanding of the scriptures as fully God’s Word.
“Obviously, those passages refer to those who have found salvation in Christ.”[5] This is how a discussion on election typically starts. Wayne Grudem in Systematic Theology concurs with this and writes, “When Peter writes an epistle to hundreds of Christians in many churches in Asia Minor, he writes, ‘To God’s elect … scatter throughout Pontus, Galatia, Cappadocia, Asia and Bithynia.”[6] But was it only to Gentile Christians? Fortunately, the scriptures address this question when Paul writes concerning his ministry and Peter’s, “But contrariwise, when they saw that the gospel of the uncircumcision was committed unto me, as [the gospel] of the circumcision [was] unto Peter; (For he that wrought effectually in Peter to the apostleship of the circumcision, the same was mighty in me toward the Gentiles:)”[7] Peter’s apostleship was unto the Jewish believers, or “the circumcision.” Still, so strong is the bias to position Christians in general as “the elect” that the Open Bible (Nelson, 1985) notes that the First Epistle of Peter, which contains the verse Grudem referenced, was “addressed ‘to the strangers scattered,’ or more literally, “sojourners of the dispersion’ (1:1) This, coupled with the injunction to keep their behavior ‘honest among the Gentiles’ (2:12) give the initial appearance that the bulk of the readers are Hebrew Christians. A closer look, however, forms the opposite view that most of these believers were Gentiles.”[8] The defense given for this conclusion is no more than saying it is because who Peter describes does not sound like a Jew. However, Ezekiel would not be so quick to agree with this statement as he declares, “And he said unto me, Son of man, I send thee to the children of Israel, to a rebellious nation that hath rebelled against me: they and their fathers have transgressed against me, [even] unto this very day. For [they are] impudent children and stiffhearted.” (Ezekiel 2:3-4a) This is yet more evidence that there exists a bias that wants to position Christians as “the elect.” And even if “most” of the Christians were Gentile converts it would not change the fact that even “some” of them were Jewish Believers. As the scriptures themselves declare that “many are called, but few are chosen.”[9]
Anti-Semitism, or hatred of Israel, can be traced back to Egypt when “there arose up a new king over Egypt, which knew not Joseph.”[10] It has always been apparent and continues until today. However, the most dangerous form of anti-Semitism is that which parades itself not to be. The assumption that references to “the elect” do not refer to Israel are a form of this subtle anti-Semitism. Positioned in a positive way to believers as reinforcing their salvation, this twist on the scriptures fails to bless – or speak well of – Israel. God’s promise is to bless those who bless His people and to curse those who curse them.[11] Let us now look at where the bias caused confusion, the understanding of the word “elect.”
Eklektos/ Bachiyr
The Gospels are very “Jewish” books.[12] In fact, they were written by Jews and record the earthly ministry of Jesus to Israel, God’s Chosen People. Seven of the references to “the elect” in the New Testament are made by Jesus and are recorded in the gospels[13], in addition to two times where the word eklektos is translated “chosen.”[14] In the Old Testament book of Isaiah six times the term bachiyr is used and in four instances it is translated as “elect” while two times it is translated “chosen.”[15] The definition given for Strong’s reference is “chosen, choice one, chosen one, elect (of God).”[16] And Gensenius’ Lexicon equates bachiyr directly to eklektos.[17]
Jesus’ earthly ministry was focused on the nation of Israel. As He Himself declared, “But he answered and said, I am not sent but unto the lost sheep of the house of Israel.”[18] When Jesus spoke of the “elect” or “chosen” as a Jew to Jews, and even being recognized as a Rabbi[19], which is to say “teacher”, the audience would have understood that He was referencing Israel. Since the words of Christ preceded the epistles, regardless as to when the documents themselves were penned, it is His words that must be used to interpret the latter. Just as it is the words of Isaiah, referring to Israel as the “elect” that are used to interpret the words of Christ recorded in the gospels. This follows the revelation of the Trinity. God the Father revealed through His works and His word through the prophets, God the Son revealed through His works and His word directly, and God the Holy Spirit revealed through His work and the Word. The Holy Spirit would never contradict the Father or the Son as they are One. Therefore, to think that the word brought through the inspiration of the Holy Spirit, specifically the term eklektos, would mean anything other than “chosen” would be a contradiction.
The Gospels and epistles were meant to be circulated among groups of both Jewish and Gentile believers. Paul writes that the Gospel is “the power of God unto salvation to every one that believeth; to the Jew first, and also to the Greek.”[20] As we move from the Gospels to the epistles we encounter the term eklektos ten times. We will look at each instance in light of the understanding that the “elect” or “chosen” is a reference to Israel.
Jesus’ use of “elect”
We will look first at the Gospel of Mark which is believed to be the first Gospel to be written.[21] In this Gospel we see the term eklektos three times. All of the references occur in chapter 13. “And except that the Lord had shortened those days, no flesh should be saved: but for the elect's sake, whom he hath chosen, he hath shortened the days.”(13:20) “For false Christs and false prophets shall rise, and shall shew signs and wonders, to seduce, if [it were] possible, even the elect.” (13:22) “And then shall he send his angels, and shall gather together his elect from the four winds, from the uttermost part of the earth to the uttermost part of heaven.” (13:27). In each of these verses Jesus is teaching on the end times. In order to hold that these references are to Christians, one must hold to at least a post-tribulation position on the rapture. However, if you hold that Christ is speaking about Israel as God’s elect, you can account for the pre-tribulation rapture of the Church and the presence of Israel during the Great Tribulation. Taking a position on the elect as they are mentioned here also allows for Paul’s statement, “And so all Israel shall be saved.”[22] This is concurred in Matthew’s Gospel in Chapter 24 where the same three verses are repeated. In the Gospel of Luke, chapter 18 verse 7 we read, “And shall not God avenge his own elect, which cry day and night unto him, though he bear long with them?” This phrase “bear long with them” can be read as referring to the ongoing relationship that Father had with the “rebellious people” mentioned in Ezekiel.
Interestingly, the other two uses of eklektos in the Gospels are in Matthew and are translated “chosen”. “So the last shall be first, and the first last: for many be called, but few chosen.” (20:16) “For many are called, but few [are] chosen.” (22:14) If the assumption is made that Christ was referring to Israel as the elect or chosen, then each of these statements can be defended easily as there are many more gentile Christians (the called) than Jews (the chosen), and, “the last” or “the called” are first taken up in the rapture, while “the first” or “the chosen” remain until the second coming of Christ.
The use of “elect” in the Epistles
The verse in the epistles that provides the strongest support for declaring that “the elect” is a reference to Israel comes in 2 Timothy 2:10, “Therefore I endure all things for the elect's sakes, that they may also obtain the salvation which is in Christ Jesus with eternal glory.” If “the elect” are those who have obtained salvation in Christ Jesus how can Paul endure all things for the elect’s sake that they may also obtain that same salvation? Clearly he is referencing a group that has not accepted Christ.
We must remember that Paul was a Pharisee. His own discourse on his right to achieve salvation through works substantiates this statement. Found in Philipians 3:5-6, “Circumcised the eighth day, of the stock of Israel, [of] the tribe of Benjamin, an Hebrew of the Hebrews; as touching the law, a Pharisee; Concerning zeal, persecuting the church; touching the righteousness which is in the law, blameless.” In this same epistle he tells his “brethren” that they are “the circumcision.” Strong’s makes a reference to this word peritome as being “of Christians gathered from among the Jews,”[23] We begin to see a clearer picture of the terminology of the New Testament with regard to Israel. Those who are of Israel are the “elect,” while those who came to faith in Christ from Israel are the “circumcision,” and Gentile believers in Christ the “uncircumcision.” When Paul speaks of his and Peter’s apostleship he speaks of their role over those who have come to Christ. While they both evangelized Jews and Gentiles, they took prominent roles over certain groups. As we will see, Paul used his Jewishness to bridge a gap that could demonstrate that Christ was the fulfillment of the law.
“Paul, a servant of God, and an apostle of Jesus Christ, according to the faith of God's elect, and the acknowledging of the truth which is after godliness;”[24] When Paul greets Titus he makes a point to add in his salutation “according to the faith of God’s elect.” As we have built a case for the “elect” to be Israel we see confirmation in this salutation that Paul is saying that it was according to the faith of Israel –the Jews, the Chosen People – that Paul became a true servant of God. In Colossians 3:12 Paul charges that the we should act in Godly way “as the elect of God.” One way to read this is “like the elect of God” which would be an example of Paul using the conduct of Israel in everyday life as an example of how we ought to demonstrate our faith.
In Romans 11:28 we read, “As concerning the gospel, [they are] enemies for your sakes: but as touching the election, [they are] beloved for the fathers' sakes.” This verse follows Paul’s statement about all of Israel being saved. Here we see a comparison between the Gospel and the Election. The New Living Translation words this verse the following way, “Many of the people of Israel are now enemies of the Good News, and this benefits you Gentiles. Yet they are still the people he loves because he chose their ancestors Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob.” And the New International Version reads, “As far as the gospel is concerned, they are enemies on your account; but as far as election is concerned, they are loved on account of the patriarchs.”
But what of Peter’s writings? As we have seen that Peter’s apostleship was first to the circumcision we must read his epistles within the Jewish context, which is the context that Christ Himself spoke in. In 1 Peter 1:1-2 we read, “Peter, an apostle of Jesus Christ, to the strangers scattered throughout Pontus, Galatia, Cappadocia, Asia, and Bithynia, Elect according to the foreknowledge of God the Father, through sanctification of the Spirit, unto obedience and sprinkling of the blood of Jesus Christ: Grace unto you, and peace, be multiplied.” If we take the fact that Peter’s apostleship was to the circumcision we see our first hint as to whom he was speaking in verse one when he references that apostleship. Next, still in verse 1 we see a reference to “the strangers scattered.” This word “strangers” can be seen as a reference to various references in the Old Testament that referred to both Israel the people as strangers[25] as well as being interpreted “pilgrim” or “sojourner,” which are all terms that were used to refer to Israel and the Jews. Then he continues to demonstrate the progression of faith of Israel as first being the “elect” of God through to receiving the Spirit, which came by the blood of Jesus Christ. In this salutation Peter confirms the Trinity as well as confirming that it was through the Jews that the promise came. This, again, shows that the Doctrine of Election should be nothing more than an affirmation of God’s having chosen Israel, or “elected” them to be His people.
Conclusion
In conclusion, as an example of traditions of men that were taught as doctrine, we looked at the Doctrine of Election that is predominantly seen within Christian circles as being that “humans are elected to redemption in Christ and, therefore, elected unto creation and fall or humans are elected to redemption in Christ after election unto creation and fall.”[26] Careful examination of the references within scripture to the term “elect” both in the Old Testament (bachyir) and the New Testament (eklektos), coupled with recognition of an anti-Semitic bias within early Church fathers, we see that there doesn’t have to be a battle between God’s sovereignty and God’s grace. If we read the scriptures as they were intended to be, as having been written as a demonstration of the fulfillment of the Jewish faith by Jews to Jews, a harmony arises that allows us to believe that God’s invitation is for all to be saved, and that that salvation came first of and to the Jews. However, those of the “uncircumcision” can partake in that same faith and be grafted in and counted along with the elect, not because God has determine some to hell and some to salvation, but because He first chose and then called.
SELECTED BIBLIOGRAPHY
Allen, M.. 2009. Jonathan Edwards and the lapsarian debate. Scottish Journal of Theology 62, no. 3, (August 1): 299-315. http://www.proquest.com/ (accessed August 15, 2011).
Blue Letter Bible. "Dictionary and Word Search". Blue Letter Bible. 1996-2011. 7 May 2011.
Elwell, Walter A., ed. Evangelical Dictionary of Theology (Baker Reference Library). 2 ed. Grand Rapids, Mich.: Baker Academic, 2001.
Erickson, Millard J. Christian Theology. 2 ed. Grand Rapids, Mich.: Baker Academic, 1998.
Gonzalez, Justo L. The Story of Christianity: Volume 2: The Reformation to the Present Day. 2 Rev Upd ed. New York: HarperOne, 2010.
Grudem, Wayne. Systematic Theology. Grand Rapids, Mich.: Zondervan, 1994
Richards, Lawrence O. Encyclopedia of Bible Words. Grand Rapids, Mich.: Zondervan, 1991.
Schurer, Emil. A History of the Jewish People in the Time of Jesus Christ (5 volume set). Peabody, Mass.: Hendrickson Publishers, 1994.
Strobel, Lee. The Case for Christ: A Journalist's Personal Investigation of the Evidence for Jesus. Grand Rapids, MI.: Zondervan, 1998.
Zacharias, Ravi, and Norman Geisler, eds. Who Made God?: And Answers to Over 100 Other Tough Questions of Faith. Edited by Ravi Zacharias and Norman L. Geisler. Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 2003.
[1] Calvin, who is given credit for his explanation of the Doctrine of Election was quoted as referring to Jews as “rotten and unbending stiffneckedness deserves that they be oppressed unendingly and without measure or end and that they die in their misery without the pity of anyone.” Excerpt from "Ad Quaelstiones et Objecta Juaei Cuiusdam Responsio," by John Calvin; The Jew in Christian Theology, Gerhard Falk, McFarland and Company, Inc., Jefferson, NC and London, 1931. http://www.yashanet.com/library/fathers.htm accessed 7/8/2011
[2] Documents of the Christian Church, p 62.
[3] Documents of the Christian Church, 62
[4] In “Three Views on the Millennium and Beyond” (Zondervan, 1999) Augustine’s disposition to read scripture from a purely spiritual view and how it affected his view of the millennium is discussed. This view is in line with covenant theology, which was a backbone in church/state polity. It is also used to explain how the promises of the Old Testament are passed on to the Church.
[5] Quoted from a http://www.hccentral.com/delect.html regarding to an article on election. Cited here as an example of the accepted interpretation and bias.
[6] Grudem, Wayne. Systematic Theology. (Grand Rapids, Mich.: Zondervan, 1994), 672
[7] Galatians 2:7-8
[8] Open Bible, p1232
[9] Matthew 20:16 & 14 both make this statement. Within the context of this paper it is seen as a reference to “the called” being whole of those who respond to the Gospel and “the chosen” as meaning Israel, or Jewish believers. Support for this is found in Deuteronomy 7:6, 14:2 and Daniel 11:15.
[10] Exodus 1:8
[11] Genesis 12:3
[12] In a conversation with a local Rabbi he defended a position that, at the very least, the synoptic Gospels were not only Jewish, but friendly towards Jews. Apparently, rabbinical students will often study the New Testament as they form their defense of Judaism.
[13] Mark 13:20, 22, 27; Luke 18:7; Matthew 24:22, 24,31
[14] Matt 20:16; Matt 22:14
[15] “elect”: Isaiah 42:1; 45:4; 65:9, 65:22; “chosen”: Isaiah 43:20; 65:15
[17] Ibid.
[18] Matthew 15:24
[19] John 1:38, 49;3:2; 6:25
[20] Romans 1:16
[21] Strobel, Lee. The Case For Christ. Zondervan (1998) p 32
[22] Romans 11:26
[24] Titus 1:1
[25] Genesis 15:13, Exodus 22:21
[26] Allen, M.. 2009. Jonathan Edwards and the lapsarian debate. Scottish Journal of Theology 62, no. 3, (August 1)p 300
