“Did I not choose you, the Twelve? And yet one of you is a devil.”
Imagine that Jesus had been ordained in the PCA. Would he be allowed to use the word elect as a verb the way he does in this sentence? Would he be guilty, if he were to do so, of contradicting the Westminster Confession by using a key theological term in a unconfessional way?
Hah!! I was just thinking the same thing when reading this exact passage on Saturday!
He chose them to be disciples (visible). He did not choose them all to enjoy all the benefits of the presence of the spirit, except sealing, infallible assurance, and perseverance.
Mark, normally your arguments are a little better than this recent penchant for prooftexting.
When Judas did miracles he did them without the presence of his Spirit? No, he didn’t have infallible assurance, but shouldn’t he have gained some assurance from being chosen by Christ? Isn’t it a fact that he refused the assurance of Christ’s lordship deciding that a retirement with 30 pieces of silver would be a more trustworthy way than what appeared to be Christ’s suicide mission?
Yeah, I know that Judas was a thief. But Peter was an instrument of Satan himself. All of the disciples sinned and were scattered.
But the question I’m addressing is quite well answered by my prooftexting. Is it or is it not Biblical to speak of election to the visible church? Is anyone who does so as a minister in the PCA guilty of “redefining” sacred Westminster terminology?
An additional note on Judas, paraphrasing Hebrews 4.2: “For good news came to us just as to Judas, but the message he heard did not benefit him, because he was not united by faith with those who listened.”
Hebrews, the book of non WCF language.