What Kind of Election is This

What kind of Election is this?

-A response to the Traditionalist view of Corporate Election

Over the last couple of hours I have had the same article sent to me from three different people. We were discussing Election and the different interpretations of the doctrine. I was explaining how the arminian view is fallacious and leaves much to be desired. Then one by one they posted the exact same link to my messages.
Link: https://soteriology101.wordpress.com/2015/03/09/the-corporate-view-of-election/

When I read through it I was amazed. As I've said before about Dr. Leighton Flowers, there were many many cross references. When I begin to read through them, many of them are simple statements that could be taken as one view or the other...

So what is my point in doing this? Well, I don't like to pick on Dr. Flowers, mess with him, or bug him in any way. I just want to respond to an article he wrote simply because it is gaining popularity and I don't want to leave any stone unturned. I have responded to Dr. Flowers before, and he was cordial and I want to be too.

Let's begin:

There is no doubt in my mind that this is Conditional Election with a new spin. THERE ARE CONDITIONS!! As much as someone might hate to call it that, it could be called exactly that. But it differs from the traditional arminian view because it is not centered around God's foreknowledge. In fact, foreknowledge was an afterthought in this article... It had the smallest section at the very end.
The main focus of the article was on what man has to do to become Elect. There is an elected plan in which man has to freely respond to the Gospel to enter into this plan and be saved. There is no individuality or freedom of God in this plan. The only freedom of God is that he elected this method rather than another, or I guess he could have chosen not to elect anything at all.

Let's respond to some things he said:

Dr. Flowers split his article between Election,
Predestination, and Foreknowledge. These three things had sub-points. Honestly, I agreed with all but a few of these points.

Under "Election" I disagreed with point 3-

"(3) Election in Christ is primarily corporate, i.e., an election of a people (Eph 1:4-5, 7, 9). The elect are called “the body of Christ” (4:12), “my church” (Mt 16:18), “a people belonging to God” (1 Pe 2:9), and the “bride” of Christ (Rev 19:7). Therefore, election is corporate and embraces individual persons only as they identify and associate themselves with the body of Christ, the true church (Eph 1:22-23; see Robert Shank, Elect in the Son, [Minneapolis: Bethany House Publishers]). This was true already of Israel in the OT (see Dt 29:18-21, note; 2Ki 21:14, note; see article on God’s Covenant with the Israelites, p. 298)."

I agree with, quite literally, the first half of prooftexting, but not the part where the individual identifies his/herself with the elect body to be elect... This was the prooftext,
"22 And he put all things under his feet and gave him as head over all things to the church, 23 which is his body, the fullness of him who fills all in all." Ephesians 1:22-23
This passage really doesn't say much about the believer associating his/herself willingly with Christ. The author quotes Ephesians 2:8-9 as a prooftext for the idea that the individual has to respond in faith, but as many scholars hotly debated the issue of the neuter in the verse, we can only assume that salvation, grace, and faith are the gifts from God. And this makes sense when you compare to Romans 8:8 and see that the natural man cannot do what is pleasing to God, which includes repentance and responding in faith.
Then the author said that this corporate view was supported by the old Testament. The author sites two verses which both had to do little with a people and the over all context had to do with judgement on his people. Plus, Romans 11:1-7 is an incredible defense against that notion.

Next was point 5-

"(5) Election to salvation in Christ is offered to all (Jn 3:16-17; 1Ti 2:4-6; Tit 2:11; Heb 2:9) but becomes actual for particular persons contingent on their repentance and faith as they accept God’s gift of salvation in Christ (Eph 2:8; 3:17; cf. Ac 20:21; Ro 1:16; 4:16). At the point of faith, the believer is incorporated into Christ’s elect body (the church) by the Holy Spirit (1 Co 12:13), thereby becoming one of the elect. Thus, there is both God’s initiative and our response in election (see Ro 8:29, note; 2 Pet 1:1-11)."

I get onto my own people for using tertiary texts often. I will do no less than that here. 1st Timothy 2:4-6 is a tertiary text that is not directly referring to salvation, but to intercession and prayer. Categories of people are presented so the context could very well be categorical instead of universal, but it deals very little with salvation anyways. Titus 2:11 is the same situation. The immediate context is established in vs 7-8 and this is a passing statement. But if you do a word study on "all" then you might find that all doesn't always mean every single last person.

John 3, yes, does deal directly with salvation, but is fallacious in being used against our view of salvation. Mostly because "whosoever believeth in him" doesn't foreshadow a free choice... It just means that whoever believes will be saved. God could still choose who will believe.

Hebrews 2:9 is also a tertiary text, because it deals with the death of Christ, not directly with the extent of free choice. But the word everyone doesn't have to mean everyone who ever lived, but could be taken as everyone who will believe or who will be saved... Easy stuff.

The passage on predestination concludes the same way as this one...

"(2) Predestination, like election, refers to the corporate body of Christ (i.e., the true spiritual church), and comprehends individuals only in association with that body through a living faith in Jesus Christ (Eph 1:5, 7, 13; cf. Ac 2:38-41; 16:31)."

Predestination refers to the corporate body? Then he uses Ephesians 1 as a prooftext.

Ephesians 1:1 Paul, an apostle of Christ Jesus by the will of God, To the saints who are in Ephesus, and are faithful[a] in Christ Jesus: 2 Grace to you and peace from God our Father and the Lord Jesus Christ. 3 Blessed be the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, who has blessed us in Christ with every spiritual blessing in the heavenly places, 4 even as he chose us in him before the foundation of the world, that we should be holy and blameless before him. In love 5 he predestined us[b] for adoption to himself as sons through Jesus Christ, according to the purpose of his will, 6 to the praise of his glorious grace, with which he has blessed us in the Beloved. 7 In him we have redemption through his blood, the forgiveness of our trespasses, according to the riches of his grace, 8 which he lavished upon us, in all wisdom and insight 9 making known[c] to us the mystery of his will, according to his purpose, which he set forth in Christ 10 as a plan for the fullness of time, to unite all things in him, things in heaven and things on earth. 11 In him we have obtained an inheritance, having been predestined according to the purpose of him who works all things according to the counsel of his will, 12 so that we who were the first to hope in Christ might be to the praise of his glory. 13 In him you also, when you heard the word of truth, the gospel of your salvation, and believed in him, were sealed with the promised Holy Spirit, 14 who is the guarantee[d] of our inheritance until we acquire possession of it,[e] to the praise of his glory.

You have to take in the whole of the passage. I like how he sited verse 13 without siting verse 14 and noticing the end of the thought... That Christ is the guarantee of our inheritance untill we acquire it, all glory to God for it. You can't have 13 without 14. Ephesians 1 does not teach corporate election.

Acts 2:38-41 just says they who believed were baptized... Nothing to do with whether there are preconditions or whether God effectually called them. Similar situation to John 3.

Acts 16:31 is a proclamation of the Gospel. Calvinists are not against proclaiming the Gospel. We believe there are two calls... The external call (goes out to all people in the world) then the effectual call (only takes effect in those who will be saved). So this is not a debunking text in the least...

The section on foreknowledge is rather short... So it really isn't worth dealing with. My goal here is accomplished. Corporate election is a car without fuel. You can push it all you want but it won't climb the hill it needs to. It is nameless and faceless, despite the claims of the author. Election is completely based on the freedom of God, nothing else.

Soli Deo Gloria!