An Israel within an Israel

Is there still an Israelwithin an Israel?

I am speaking of the reality of the people of God, the Church, the community of faith or even the "elect" I might dare to say, who still don't really knowthe Lord. There is still a faith-filled people within a faith-less people of God in the broader scope.

Might there be an elect within an elect? In the NT, the "elect" were the marked out ones by baptism and the Spirit who professed faith in Israel's Messiah. The new thing was twofold. God was doing something big in redemptive history by separating the sheep from the goats (if you will) by bringing a fundamental choice to the people of God, the Jews in the 1st Cent. The choice was this: Either repent and receive the promise of your Messiah, or enter a definitive judgment--AD 70. The second new thing was the extraordinary inclusion of the gentiles. The "elect" were these believing gentiles and the remnant of the largely apostate Jewish nation.

In other words, we have to be careful of injecting meanings to Scriptural words that they don't fully possess. Does the word elect in the NT mean a person who is "once saved, always saved?" Or does it mean a person who is a part of God's new people in the New Covenant administration?

Now, this is important.. I do believe strongly and passionately that the Bible teaches eternal security for the believer. The rub comes when we try to read hearts and peg who is truly elect and not.

The Bible doesn't teach us to go around and try to find these people. To do so, creates mayhem and great sin in a church.

Rather, God has given us the very clear and gracious covenant in which to relate and hold people accountable. Baptism, fruit, obedience and perseverance are all the ways in which we go in and come out with one another on these matters.

Any tradition that tries to peg a person's assurance on a static event in their life put their trust in something shaky. Christ is the One that we look to, in enduring trust, upon His faithfulness. We can't trust in our "incredible testimony," the card we signed, or even mere baptism without the reality in which it is all about. Paul said that circumcision or the lack thereof is nothing, but a new creation.

So, the Q. is how can we know the truly elect from the generally elect New Covenant people of God? The answer?

We don't worry about it. God is for us and our children, we have so much evidence for that, that I am not going to take the time to argue that point. "Well, what happens if I commit the unpardonable sin? Or if I'm really not the truly elect?" Don't worry..God is not a hyper-Calvinist. If you really are brazen and rebellious in your sin, your elders will come and find you out. You are not going to wake up in the morning suddenly falling out of God's favor, like He's in a bad mood one day.

No, we are the elect of God biblically. But what of all the Calvinist teaching of predestination and perseverance of the saints? I think it's wonderful. I love that and I love them. I am a Calvinist. But I do believe that the Calvinistic system can be taken too far or misunderstood to the point that it itself becomes the primary way we relate to others on the q. of their eternal security. Has God given us the glasses to see who's predestined to heaven and who's not? No. Does the truth stand then? Yes. I am comforted that I am in this persevering category because I know God is for me, and my children. I rest in grace, so I obey. I can say, with confidence that I am the elect.But I can never say that by waving anything BUT a life that obeys because of what Christ did..This means that no matter how many Calvinist books I read and write, great feats of faith that I might accomplish or anything--nothing can be a sure sign of my eternally elect status if I don't take up my election by the horns and trust God to carry me through. I hope I've made it clear that any notion of perseverance by works without faith is ridiculous and misguided.

We still have to let Scripture balance itself with its own internal witness. John 10:28 has to be harmonized with the parable of the sower, and John 15:1-6. Scripture is content to play out the longevity of a person's spiritual health in terms of organic growth. See John 15, Rom 11, and Heb 6. This doesn't mean that we can't believe in the Calvinist reading of Scripture, it's simply that the Calvinist system must be attended with a strong covenantal theology. What does that mean? It means that the doctrine of eternal security is grounded in God's objective favor towards believers and their children, not an impersonal system of random and arbitrary choosing.

We have to hold the tension between those that believe in God, thus being children of God in one sense, and those that have faith for a time, who are children of God in another sense. I believe the whole Scriptural testimony gives full credence to the Calvinist reading and the covenantal reading both. Those who truly fall away (apostasy is always a dark mystery) were children of God in a very important sense but not in the sense that persevered. I am not arguing that an apostate covenant member was a child of God in the same exact sense as one that didn't apostasize. It just doesn't do justice to Scripture's own terminology and teaching to hold that the warning passages for apostasy are for those who really weren't in the Church, or even in Christ, in some sense--see John 15 again. This is covenant language, see Ps 128 and how it speaks of wives and children. So my argument is that we have to hold the nuance~between what it means to be a child of God. When a person says elect these days, they usually mean the eternally elect person. I think we just need to speak of those that are in the church in covenantal language. It is right, proper and even mandated to speak to the collective church on a Sunday as the elect of God. We are not to narrow more than God does. And it is also okay to speak of them that are eternally elect, we are to believe that all around us are such. "Let God be true and every man a liar." Even a Calvinist has to hold the tension...God looks over some, but somehow, someway, they also choose volitionally and carefully to rebel. The person who falls from grace who had a relationship with Christ (though not saving) did so on purpose.

There are three people out there in the world therefore. The faithful covenant member, the unfaithful covenant member (who will know great judgment) and the pagan. That is my understanding of Scripture. A covenantal Calvinism is what I've found to be most consistent with the Bible.

The reality is the older covenant is still in continuity within the newer covenant. The difference is that there is much greater blessing in the new covenant and there is also much greater judgment-Heb 12:22-29.

Jesus spoke of the danger of removing the tares because of the possible destruction of the wheat.

Heb 6:1-8 speaks of those who are in more than a mere "general" covenant with God but who have been partakers of the Holy Spirit, and yet have fallen away (v.6).

In summary, we don't fear. We trust. And our trust proves itself by working out our salvation with fear and trembling. But we know that Christ is the One that is faithful, who will also do it, as Scripture says.

I know the post is long, I'm just trying to be helpful.

Blessings.