In 1 Tim. 2:3-6, we saw that Paul clearly states that God wants everyone to be saved and come to the knowledge of the truth. This latter phrase is formulaic in the Pastoral Epistles for ‘conversion to the Christian faith.’ Therefore, we concluded that Paul was talking about salvation in these verses. And since he tells us that God wants everyone to be saved, we also concluded that unconditional election is not a biblical doctrine. Calvinism has been debunked in numerous ways throughout this website, and we can add to those arguments what Paul writes in 1 and 2 Timothy. And if in 1 Timothy, Paul clearly tells us about God’s universal salvific desire, then we must read whatever else he says in 2 Timothy about “election” or “the elect” as consistent with what he wrote in 1 Timothy. We would not expect Paul to contradict what he wrote in 1 Timothy with what he wrote in 2 Timothy. And that is how we must read 2 Timothy 2:10. In context, Paul writes,
“Remember Jesus Christ, raised from the dead, descended from David. This is my gospel, for which I am suffering even to the point of being chained like a criminal. But God’s word is not chained. Therefore I endure everything for the sake of the elect, that they too may obtain the salvation that is in Christ Jesus, with eternal glory.” (2 Tim. 2:8-10, NIV)
As discussed in our Thessalonian passages, the “elect” can be considered those to whom God sends the gospel message and who believe it. This evangelical missionary emphasis on the word “elect” is captured in the Phillips translation by the word “calling.” “Those whom God is calling” refers to the call to salvation in the gospel message, not an ‘effectual call,’ which is nowhere in the text, including the phrase “for the sake of the elect.” The Phillips translation reads,
“Remember always, as the centre of everything, Jesus Christ, a man of human ancestry, yet raised by God from the dead according to my Gospel. For preaching this I am having to endure being chained in prison as if I were some sort of a criminal. But they cannot chain the Word of God, and I can endure all these things for the sake of those whom God is calling, so that they too may receive the salvation of Jesus Christ, and its complement of glory after the world of time.” (2 Tim. 2:8-10, JBP)
Paul is using the word “elect” in a dual sense. As we saw in our studies in Thessalonians, a possible meaning is “to those whom God chooses” to send the gospel. Another sense is as a designation of those who believe in Jesus in continuity with God’s purposes in the Old Testament patriarchal history and the creation of national Israel as the elect people of God. For Paul, as a Jew, Christians are described as “the elect” in continuity with Abraham and Israel, foremost in the corporate sense, but also individually, once the person believes. Commentator Abraham Smith writes,
“Paul could endure his imprisonment and sufferings because they were in the service of the gospel. The gospel was the good news of Christ Jesus, in whom was salvation. The characterization of the beneficiaries as “the elect” was one of the terms Paul had carried over from his earlier Jewish self-understanding (e.g., Ps 105:6; Isa 42:1; 45:4; 65:9; Sir 47:22); it underpinned his claim that the salvation into which Gentiles were entering was the salvation promised to his own people by the God of Israel.”[1]
So, God promised salvation to Israel, his elect people. Can the Gentiles also be saved? Yes, God also provided salvation for the Gentiles by faith. Paul affirms that the salvation that has come to the Gentiles in Jesus Christ is from God. He does this by equating their salvation with God’s work in Jewish salvation history with his “elect” people. Therefore, Paul also designates Gentile believers as “the elect.” Hence, we may paraphrase, “I endure everything for the sake of those whom God calls by the gospel and who believe it. They, too, are now the elect people of God.” (1 Pet. 2:4-10) This does not imply any Calvinistic unconditional election. The term “elect” (“chosen”) refers to that usage we examined in the Old Testament history of salvation. Again, it refers to Abraham and Israel as the people of God. Paul views “the elect” prospectively, that is, as those people who, when they hear the gospel, believe it, and, as our study has shown, those who respond in faith are referred to as “the elect.” They respond not because they are unconditionally elected to salvation, but because they hear the gospel, or “the word of God,” and freely believe it.
Note that Paul endures suffering for the sake of the elect “that they too may obtain the salvation that is in Christ Jesus.” Does the salvation of a person who has been predestined or unconditionally elected by God and is sure to be saved depend upon Paul’s suffering? These words are incoherent with the Calvinist definitions of being predestined or elected to salvation. What does being unconditionally elected have to do with Paul’s suffering? Why would Paul endure suffering unless people were saved by hearing the gospel and not because they are predestined to salvation? The Calvinist will say, “Well, those who have been unconditionally elected have to hear the gospel for their salvation to be realised.” The problem with this reasoning is that the gospel is “good news” for all who hear it. Therefore, there is no distinction among those who hear it, that is, the unconditionally elect and the non-elect or reprobate. For as a message from God himself, it is “good news” for all. The gospel is always “good news!” But the “good news” can never be a message consistent with unconditional election, for unconditional election excludes the mass of humanity from salvation. The “good news” can never be “you may be one of those who have been unconditionally elected, or you may not.” Paul’s use of the term “elect” does not divide those who hear the gospel into two groups – the predestined and the reprobate.
Furthermore, that is why Paul writes, “…that they too may obtain the salvation that is in Christ Jesus…” Where is salvation to be found? “In Christ Jesus.” This is why they have to hear the gospel. Not that some people’s secret election may become a present reality, but that anyone, by hearing the gospel and believing it, may be saved.
I submit to you that nowhere in Paul’s writings or in his thinking does he ever indicate that there is an unconditionally elected number of persons and that upon hearing the message of “good news,” experience an “effectual” or “irresistible call” that regenerates them so that they may believe. How is that coherent with all the other people who hear that same message of the “good news” of their salvation, yet God himself, not having chosen them, forbids them to be saved? How is it that the same message of “good news,” which tells all people to believe in Jesus and be saved, actually excludes the mass of humanity who can never be saved because they are not among those unconditionally elected by God? The very same message of “good news” can never be “good news” for them because God did not elect them. Therefore, in Calvinism, God speaks disingenuously and duplicitously by offering salvation in the “good news” to those he has predestined to eternal damnation. Indeed, the consistent Calvinist has no message of “good news” to bring to people. So, why does Paul have to suffer when those who are unconditionally elected cannot fail to be saved? There is no condition, including Paul’s suffering, that either promotes or thwarts the unconditionally elect from being saved. I have dealt with this problem of the disingenuousness and inconsistency of Calvinism with the message of “good news” in previous chapters. This is why I maintain that the very gospel is at stake in this controversy. Calvinism completely nullifies the gospel as “good news.” This is why I cannot avoid the conclusion that the Calvinists’ soteriology is heretical (cf. Gal. 1:6-9).
When Paul says that he endures “everything” for the sake of the elect, that they too may obtain the salvation that is in Christ Jesus, he is saying, “Although I am in chains, God’s word is not chained. The “good news” of salvation needs to go forth to all, so that those who will receive and believe it may also obtain the salvation that is in Christ Jesus, that is, those I then call “the elect.” If there were an “unconditionally elect” number of people God predetermined for salvation, Paul’s enduring suffering would add nothing to the surety of their salvation. If Paul did nothing, they would still be saved, regardless of the Calvinist’s insistence that “God works through means” that are also predetermined and, as such, are no true means at all. But as a passion to save souls that would otherwise be lost, Paul’s suffering and endurance make sense.
William Mounce presents interpretive options and his final conclusion regarding 2 Timothy 2:10. He states,
“διὰ, “for the sake of,” could mean that Paul is an encouragement or that he is making the gospel heard (cf. Phil 1:12-28). In this case ἐκλεκτούς, “elect,” may refer to the elect who have not yet been saved. διὰ could also mean that Paul is thinking of the mystical idea of filling up what is lacking in the afflictions of Christ in his (i.e., Paul’s ) body (Col 1:24; cf. G. H. P. Thompson, ExpTim 71 [1960] 187-89). In this case ἐκλεκτούς, “elect,” refers to all Christians and shows Paul’s willingness to apply OT terms for Israel to the church (Titus 1:1; cf. Rom 8:33; 16:13; Col 3:12; cf. BAGD, 242 [1b]; cf. Hendriksen, 252-54; Fee 247).”[2]
So, a legitimate interpretation is that “elect” refers to all Christians. It is crucial to see and acknowledge that Paul is applying the Old Testament terms for Israel to the church. The Calvinist soteriology is not only unnecessary but also unbiblical.
Now, we should say a word about verses 11-14. In context, they echo Paul’s sufferings and reveal some interesting implications.
11 This saying is trustworthy:
For if we died with him,
we will also live with him;
12 if we endure, we will also reign with him;
if we deny him, he will also deny us;
13 if we are faithless, he remains faithful,
for he cannot deny himself.
14 Remind them of these things,…” (2 Tim. 2:8:14a, CSB)
Abraham Smith comments,
“The last three lines (vv. 12-13) are more coordinated, but create something of a puzzle. “If we deny him, he will also deny us” directly echoes one of Jesus’ most disturbing sayings, in the form preserved in Matt. 10:33. But there was a longer, more rooted tradition in Judaism that God remained faithful to the chosen people, even when they proved faithless time and time again (v.13). It was a point that prophets like Second Isaiah and Hosea delighted in, and Paul had expressed himself clearly on the point in Rom 3:3-7, even before the lengthy exposition of Romans 9-11. The final line (v. 13) gives the reason for this confidence in classic theological terms: “He cannot deny himself.” That is to say, the God here celebrated is the one committed to God’s people (the foundational belief of Israel’s covenant theology). This is the one God, a God faithful to creation (who wants all to be saved, 1 Tim 2:4) and to the chosen ones and concerning their salvation, not arbitrary chance or blind fate. In this confidence, life can be lived confidently, whatever the suffering to be endured.
The problem is that lines three and four seem to run counter to each other: if denial of Christ brings denial by Christ in its train, how is it that unfaithfulness is not similarly punished? The answer will be partly that “denial” has a stronger tone of deliberately acting against and public renunciation, whereas “faithlessness” sounds more like failure to live up to one’s profession. But it would surely be a mistake to press for any neat distinction. The point is presumably that the two lines serve different purposes: the first to warn the casual and stiffen the resolve of the frightened, the second to comfort the broken and to give renewed hope to the despairing. However, it is of the nature of such epigrammatic summaries of Christian faith that they are open to different interpretations, intended to stimulate more than teach.”[3]
Our conclusion is that the term “elect” is a description of those who have believed, not the reason and cause of their believing. I think the exegesis provided here has proved this.
Back to Chapter 16 – The Doctrine of Election According to Scripture
Footnotes
[1] Abraham Smith, “First and Second Thessalonians,” in The New Interpreter’s Bible Commentary, vol. 10, ed. Leander E. Keck (Nashville: Abingdon Press, 2015), 427-428.
[2] William D. Mounce, Pastoral Epistles, Word Biblical Commentary. v. 46 (Nashville: Thomas Nelson Publishers, 2000), 514.
[3] Abraham Smith, “First and Second Thessalonians,” 428.
The Truth of the Gospel 