5. The relationship of faith to eternal election.
The fact that we are dealing with the relationship of faith to eternal election in a special section is justified by the fact that this point has been the subject of dispute from the end of the sixteenth century until our own time. We must distinguish between the relationship in which the faith of Christians stands to their eternal election, and the relationship which the Scriptures assign to faith which Christians have in time.
As far as the relationship of faith to eternal election is concerned, faith is neither to be placed before nor after election. At this point, both the later Lutherans and the Calvinists stray from the truth. The later Lutherans conceptually place faith before eternal election, claiming that God chose the persons
1685) Rom. 10:11: πας ό πιστενων επ' αντφ, ον καταιοχννϑήοεται. [“Whosoever believeth on him shall not be ashamed”]
549 > Eternal election. [English ed. ~ 485-486]
whom he had foreseen that they would remain in faith until the end (election intuitu fidei finalis). Calvinists place faith behind the eternal election by claiming that, like Christ's merit, faith belongs only to the execution of the absolute election. 1686) On the other hand, with regard to the relationship of the faith of Christians to their eternal election, it should be noted that their eternal election consists precisely in the fact that God has provided them with faith in the gospel and has thereby taken them out of the world. In other words, faith wrought by the Holy Spirit is the means of election. The eternal election did not take place absolutely or nude, but έν άγιαομω πνεύματος καί πίοτει άληϑείας "in sanctification of the Spirit and in faith of the truth." This has already been stated under the section "Concept of Eternal Election." ¶ Thus also the Formula of Concord (714, 44 [Trigl. 1077, ibid., 44 🔗]) teaches: "God in his counsel before the time of the world" (i.e., in the eternal election itself) "considered and decreed that he would create and work in us all things that pertain to our conversion" (that is, to our becoming believers) "himself by the power of his Holy Spirit through the Word." Thus Walther also wrote:1687) "We teach that God, just as in time he made us saved through faith, has decided in eternity to make the elect saved through faith, and this, according to the Word of God, the confession and our doctrine, is the council of grace. … The Calvinists teach an absolute election to salvation, and after this election has already taken place, God now decides to give faith alone to the elect. We, on the other hand, believe, teach, and confess according to Scripture and our confession that God has elected to salvation by faith."
But as for the faith which the elect have in time, it is, like all their temporal state of grace, a
1686) Formula Consensus Helvetica, can. 5; in Niemeyer, p. 731 sq.
1687) Correction etc., p. 147. Lünemann (in Meyer's Commentary): "Έν άγιασμφ πνεύματος καί πίοτει άληϑείας belongs neither alone to σωτηρίαν nor alone to εί'λατο, but to the total term εΐ'λατο εις σωτηρίαν, and indicates the means by which the election which had taken place was to be realized." The latter is not exact. The words of the text do not say how "the election that happened was to be realized," but how the eternal election was realized, was consummated (εΐλατο).
550 > Eternal election. [English ed. ~ 486-487.]
consequence and effect of their eternal election, 2 Tim. 1:9: "God has saved us and called us … according to His purpose and grace, which was given us in Jesus Christ before the world began"; Acts 13:48: "As many as were ordained unto eternal life believed." Thus the Formula of Concord (706, 8 [Trigl. 1065, ibid., 8 🔗]): "The eternal election of God … is of God's gracious will and good pleasure in Jesus Christ a cause, so that our salvation, and that which belongs to it, creates, works, helps and promotes, on which also our salvation is thus founded, so that even the gates of hell shall not be able to oppose it, as it stands, 'My sheep shall no man pluck out of my hand.' And again: 'And there were believers, as many as were ordained unto eternal life.'" Likewise Chemnitz: "The election of God follows not after our faith and righteousness, but goes before as a cause of it all." 1688)
The later Lutheran theologians, especially since Ägidius Hunnius († 1603), deviated from this doctrine. They let the faith, namely the faith held until the end or still occurring before the end (fidem finalem), precede the eternal election conceptually (notionaliter, in signo rationis), by teaching that God had chosen from eternity the men of whom he had foreseen that they had remained in faith until the end or would still come to faith before their end (electio intuitu fidei finalis, ex praevisa fide finali). They sought to gain scriptural proof by grasping Rom. 8:29 the προγινώσκειν (foreknowledge) in the sense of knowing beforehand or seeing beforehand (nudam scientiam denotans). But in order to escape the assumption that all men were elect—because God's foreknowledge extends to all men—they had to seek to gain a limitation for the statement, "Whom He did foreknow, did foresee." They gained this limitation by making a change in the object of the sentence. They dropped the object "which" (οϋς) and substituted for it: "which persevering faith he saw before or knew before" (quorum fidem finalem praescivit sive praevidit [Google] ["whose constant faith He foresaw or foreknew”]). So also by more recent Lutheran theologians, e.g., also Philippi. In order to excuse, resp. to justify this change of object, Philippi says, one must nevertheless consider the "whom" (οϋς) as
1688) Enchiridion (Milwaukee, Wis.), p. 109. In Frank IV, 336.
551 > Eternal election. [English ed. ~ 487-488.]
"generally suitable" for eternal election, and as such necessary quality, preceding election, he thinks of "persevering πίστις (faith)." But Scripture nowhere says that the "persevering faith" of Christians is the prerequisite for their eternal election. Rather, Scripture says the opposite. That Christians have faith in time and persevere in faith even in extreme tribulation is, according to Scripture, not a prerequisite but a consequence and effect of their election, Acts 13:48; Matt. 24:21. 22. Thus Philippi's alloeosis, which he allows himself with regard to the object "whom", is not only arbitrary, but also contrary to Scripture. And because arbitrariness prevails in this alloeosis, others substitute for "faith" good works,1689) still others love,1690) the synergists, according to the processes of the later Melanchthon, human good behavior under various names: facultas se applicandi ad gratiam, voluntas non repugnans, sed assentiens, self-decision, free self-determination, cessation of willful reluctance, lesser guilt, and so on. In order to avoid these arbitrary and contrary to Scripture additions, and at the same time to let the object "whom" (οϋς) stand as it reads, we take with Luther, the Formula of Concord, and a number of the more recent theologians "to know beforehand," προγινώοκειν, as a synonymum of "to choose," though it does not conceptually coincide with "to choose." Luther translates οϋς προέγνω: "which he provided beforehand." The Formula of Concord renders "zuvorerkennen" as "in Gnaden bedenken" [“in grace considered”]; Latin: clementer praescire, "gnädiglich zuvor wissen," Luthardt describes it as "an appropriating foreknowing." Others more recently render it as: to make one's own, to bind. ¶ This meaning is fully secured by the usage of Scripture. In Scripture προγινώοκειν, like the simplex γινώοκειν and the Hebrew יָדַ֖ע [HEBREW: Genesis 4:1], denotes not merely a knowledge of something,1691) but also such a taking note, whereby a communal relation, a
1689) So already Ambrosius to Rom. 3:29: Non ante praedestinavit, quam praesciret, sed quorum merita praescivit, eorum praemia praedestinavit. [Google] Baier-Walther III, 556.
1690) White, Ebrard.
1691) So is προγινώοκειν however Acts 26:5 and 2 Pet. 3:17 used where men stand in the subject.
552 > Eternal election. [English ed. ~ 488-489]
connecting with things or persons, a grasping of the same is established.1692) Some examples put this beyond doubt. As it is said in Deut. 7:6 is said of God's doing to the people of Israel: "You God has chosen (בָּחַ֣ר [HEBREW]) to be the people of ownership out of all peoples," so Amos 3:2 is said of the same thing: "Only you have I known (יָדַ֔עְתִּי [HEBREW]) out of all the generations of the earth." In this meaning stand γινώσκειν, יָדַ֖ע [HEBREW] and προγινώοκειν Gal. 4:9; Ps. 1:6; Rom. 11:2. Mere knowledge is excluded in these passages. Gal. 4:9 says of the heathen that in their conversion and through their conversion they were "known of God (γνωοϑέντες νπ' αντον). Object of the mere knowledge of God were the heathen also before their conversion. Pastor 1:6 says of the way of the righteousness that God knows it. That this means that God takes care of the way of the righteousness is evident from the contrast: "But the way of the wicked perishes." Also in the words Rom. 11:2, "God hath not cast away his people whom he knew before" (προέγνω), every reason for not casting them away would be lacking, if we were to understand προγινώοκειν of mere knowing, and not of accepting, choosing. Now, by allowing this assured meaning of προγινώοκειν: to know beforehand, to assume beforehand, to anticipate beforehand to hold good, we are above any change of object, and are not placed in the awkward position of looking around for a "suitable" object for προέγνω (faith, conduct, self-determination, love, works), but let οϋς, "whom," stand as an object without any change or addition. It is then expressed the thought not only fitting into the context, but also demanded by the context: "Whom God foreknew," that is, accepted as His own, He also predestined to participate in the glory of His Son. That eternal election includes predestination to eternal glory — this is precisely the comfort the apostle wants to give to Christians groaning here on earth under suffering and weakness. On the other hand, the version of the προγινώοκειν of divine foreknowledge is entirely excluded by the context. All admit that the apostle's intention in this passage is to make the suffering Christians certain of their participation in the glory of Christ.
1692) The ancients say: Nosse cum affectu et effectu, that is, a cognition, which does not merely denote a knowledge of something, but includes a loving appropriation of the object and an effect on it.
553 > Eternal election. [English ed. ~ 489]
But if the divine "foreknowledge" is understood as divine prescience, then the apostle would base the certain participation in the glory of Christ on a factor that is completely uncertain to Christians, because no Christian knows nor can know what God has known in him or of him beforehand.
Not valid is the objection, raised in ancient and modern times, that a tautology would result if προγινώσκειν were placed in the series of terms describing election. There would then come out — so it is thought — the sentence, " Whom He foreordained, them He also foreordained." So also Philippi with calling on Hunnius. To this it is to be said: This objection belongs to the thought products, which perpetuate themselves thoughtlessly from generation to generation. Even if in the prefix and the suffix the same word "decreed before" (προορίζειν) were used, so that it would be said: "Those whom he decreed before, he also decreed before", still no tautology would come out, but the best progress of thought, because the suffix: "those whom he also decreed before" has with it the objective: "that they should be like the image of his Son". It would then be stated that the predestination to the glory of the Son of God is binding with the predestination. No one could call this statement a tautology. But to this must be added that προγινώσκειν and προορίζειν, although they serve to describe one and the same divine action, are nevertheless conceptually distinct. "Which he knew beforehand," expresses the loving appropriation or acceptance of the object on the part of God. The epilogue, "whom he also determined beforehand," και προώρωεν, points to a goal-determination connected with the "knowing beforehand," which goal-determination is also immediately added in the words: "that they should be like unto the image of His Son," ονμμόρφονς (predicate accusative) τής εΐκόνος τον νίον αντον.
The doctrine of an eternal election intuitu fidei finalis has no support in Scripture. If we ask why the later Lutheran teachers carried this doctrine into the Scriptures and deviated from the doctrine of Luther and the Formula of Concord, we must say that they unconsciously or consciously endeavored to declare for human understanding why, with the universal grace of God and the same total ruin of men, there was not
554 > Eternal election. [English ed. ~ 489-490]
all men converted and saved or that the Election of Grace is not "universal". But also for this explanation the intuitu fidei finalis theory is not suitable, as long as one remains with the Christian doctrine of the origin and preservation of faith, namely with the doctrine that faith in solidum is an effect of the Holy Spirit. Only with synergistic underpinnings does the theory offer the explanation sought.1693) If, of course, one takes faith and remaining in faith out of God's hand of grace and places it decisively in man's hand, namely in man's self-determination, right conduct, lesser guilt, etc., then one has gained an explanation, but an explanation contrary to Scripture. It is the explanation of which Luther says against Erasmus: Iugulum meum petisti. [“You have seized me by the throat”]