Mike Riccardi, in a facebook post of 9/7/26 writes:

Some theologians point to passages that teach election to service, the election of Christ, or the election of corporate entities to temporal blessing, and they argue that when Scripture speaks of election, it’s not about the election of individuals unto salvation.

But the fact that Scripture uses the terminology of election in one sense doesn’t mean that it can’t use that same terminology in other senses. In addition to vocational and corporate election, Scripture also teaches that God chooses certain individuals to receive the salvation He accomplishes in Christ.

I. Scripture explicitly connects election with salvation, with both the term and the concept appearing in salvific contexts.

1. In Ephesians 1:4, Paul states that the Father chose His people in Christ before the foundation of the world. Note, it doesn’t say that the Father chose Christ (though that’s true, 1 Peter 1:20), nor merely that He chose to save whoever believes in Christ, but that He chose “us”—a group of particular individuals. In other words, the objects of sovereign election are chosen to be united to Christ, the Mediator of their salvation.

This is when the Father “gives” His people to the Son (John 17:6), who will come to Him (John 6:37), be raised up on the last day (John 6:39), who are given eternal life (John 17:2; cf. 10:28-29), who are distinct from the world (John 17:9), and who will be with Christ forever in glory (John 17:24).

In the next verse, Ephesians 1:5, Paul says God’s purpose for choosing us in Christ is that His chosen ones would be holy and blameless before Him as adopted sons. Holiness, blamelessness, and adoption are all blessings of salvation—as are redemption (Eph 1:7, 14), forgiveness of sins (Eph 1:7), an eternal inheritance (Eph 1:11, 14), and the sealing of the Spirit (Eph 1:13). These are the fruits of “the gospel of [our] salvation,” and they start with the Father’s election.

2. In Acts 13:48, Luke narrates the conversion of the Gentiles in Pisidian Antioch by saying that “as many as had been appointed to eternal life believed.” Individuals savingly believe the Gospel because they had been appointed to eternal life by God.

3. Paul uses similar language when he tells the Thessalonians that God has “destined [them] … for obtaining salvation through our Lord Jesus Christ” (1 Thess 5:9). Destined for salvation.

4. Second Thessalonians 2:13 says what should end all controversy on the matter: “God has chosen you from the beginning for salvation.” God elects unto salvation.

5. And because Romans 9 is so clear, non-Calvinists aim to dismiss it by arguing that the election spoken of all throughout this chapter is a non-salvific election. But the context doesn’t allow for that.

a. For one, Romans 9 comes on the heels of Romans 8:28–39, where Paul links God’s foreknowledge and predestination—two words that speak of election—with several other aspects salvation. Those whom God foreknew and predestined, He also effectually called, justified and glorified. Those chosen are the ones who are regenerated, declared righteous, and finally brought to heaven to be with Christ.

b. For another, yes, there is no question that Romans 9 to 11 is about the place of Israel in God’s plans. But Paul begins this discussion about Israel by announcing his grief over their not being saved (9:1–5). Romans 9 (and 10 and 11) is about Israel’s salvation, or lack thereof: “My heart’s desire and my prayer to God for them is for their salvation” (10:1; cf. 9:30–33; 11:26).

c. God’s choice of Isaac over Ishmael (9:7–9) and Jacob over Esau (9:10–13) certainly had to do with nations and people groups and temporal blessings. But being “children of God” and “children of the promise” describes more than just earthly blessings or a special role for service. Every time Paul uses these phrases they are references to salvation (Rom 8:16, 21; Gal 4:28; Phil 2:15). Further, this election is “not because of works” (Rom 9:11), which picks up on Paul’s virtually ubiquitous polemic in favor of justification by faith alone (cf. Rom 3:28; 9:32; Gal 2:16). The language of Romans 9:6–13 is intensely salvific.

d. And 9:14–29 continues to show us that Paul has salvation in mind. There is mention of:

· vessels of wrath fitted for destruction (9:22; destruction being the opposite of salvation, cf. Phil 1:28);

· vessels of mercy prepared for glory (9:23; glory being the concomitant of salvation, cf. 8:18; 2 Tim 2:10);

· being God’s beloved people (9:25);

· being sons of the living God (9:26);

· a remnant who are saved (9:27); and

· the righteousness which is by faith rather than works (9:30–33).

II. And not only does Scripture use the terms and concepts of election in salvific contexts, it also identifies the objects of that election as particular individuals. I’ll stick to just Romans 9, because that text is probably the most disputed and because this post is already obscenely long.

1. In 9:15, Paul quotes Exodus 33:19, where God says, “I will have mercy on whom I will have mercy, and I will have compassion on whom I will have compassion.” Both relative pronouns (Gk. ὃν, “whom”) are singular, which indicates that Paul has in view particular individuals upon whom God exercises saving mercy.

2. In 9:16, Paul retains the use of the grammatical singular when he says, “So then it does not depend on the man who wills [τοῦ θέλοντος, genitive singular] or the man who runs [τοῦ τρέχοντος, genitive singular], but on God who has mercy.”

3. In 9:18, Paul sums up the argument of verses 14 to 17 and once again uses the singular relative pronoun whom: “So then He has mercy on whom [ὃν] He desires, and He hardens whom [ὃν] He desires.”

4. In 9:19, Paul represents the objection to his teaching in individual terms. He says, “You will say to me then, ‘Why does He still find fault? For who [the interrogative pronoun τίς, nominative singular masculine] resists His will?’”

5. And even through to 9:21, Paul speaks of “one [Gk. ὃ, accusative singular neuter] vessel for honorable use and another [same] for dishonorable use.”

New Testament scholar Tom Schreiner is right to conclude, “Those who say that Paul is referring only to corporate groups do not have an adequate explanation as to why Paul uses the singular again and again in Romans 9” (99).

Schreiner’s chapter, “Does Romans 9 Teach Individual Election Unto Salvation?”, is worth reading in its entirety (link in comments). If you read it, you’ll recognize two things: one, my indebtedness to Schreiner for the case made in this post; but also, that it is illegitimate to read Romans 9 as if it did not speak of election of particular individuals unto salvation.

• Schreiner’s chapter is Chapter 4 in this volume: https://www.amazon.com/Still…/dp/0801022320/ref=sr_1_1…

Questioner: Did God indeed choose whom He would save before the foundation of the world? And if He did, how are those who do not believe responsible and held accountable for their unbelief?

John MacArthur: First of all, yes, God did predestine those who were to believe before the world began, because that’s exactly what the Bible says. You were chosen before the foundation of the world. Your name is written in the Lamb’s Book of Life before the foundation of the world. Predestination is a word in Ephesians chapter 1. We were predestined to be in Christ.

So yes, we have to understand God is God, and God is the one who ordains everything. And God is not a spectator. God is the one who acts. He doesn’t react. So the Bible is crystal clear. He chose Israel: Israel, His chosen people out of all the nations of the world. And He chose His church. He tells the apostles to go into a certain city. He said, “Because I have many people in that city.” Well, the gospel hadn’t even been there, but He knew who the people were that were chosen.

So yes, God chooses. That is clear in Scripture. Secondly, sinners are responsible for their unbelief. That is clear in the Bible. Jesus says, “Why will you die? Because you don’t believe in Me.” That’s clear responsibility. So you say, “Well, how do those go together?” And I say, “I don’t know. I have no idea.” But is it possible that the mind of God is beyond mine? Or does everything have to be understandable to me? Can I leave a little room for an infinite mind that may be able to grasp things that are beyond my understanding?

So throughout all the years that I’ve taught the Bible, I can teach without hesitation that God predestines people to salvation. That’s the only way they could be saved, because they’re dead in trespasses and sin. They don’t have the power to believe or the will to believe. So the Lord has to awaken the sinner and grant him the repentance and faith to be saved. At the same time that I believe that is a sovereign work of God, I also believe that it is not apart from faith, and that the sinner must believe.

How God harmonizes those two things is beyond me. And that’s very comfortable for me. And I’ll tell you why: I don’t want a God who fits perfectly into my own understanding.

Let me give you another illustration of this. If I ask you, “Who lives your Christian life? Is it you, or is it God?”

Questioner: Both.

John MacArthur: “What do you mean? How can it be both?”

Questioner: “I’m going to work out my salvation with fear and trembling, for it’s Christ who works in me.”

John MacArthur: “Yeah, but is it Him or you? So when something good goes, it’s Him, and when something bad goes, it’s you?”

So let me ask you another question. Who wrote the book of Romans? “Paul.” Paul? “The Holy Spirit.” Are you having trouble with this question? Yeah, exactly.

So it was all the Holy Spirit. Every word was inspired by God, and it was all out of Paul’s vocabulary and Paul’s mind. Any time you step into the world of God interacting with man, you are going to have this massive apparent paradox, because the infinite cannot be reduced to the finite mind.

The good news is God has chosen His elect, and they will be saved. Also, the good news is anyone who comes to Christ to believe and repent will be saved. You don’t have to find out if you’re elect. You come. And that’s where the harmonizing comes. But every doctrine, every major doctrine in the Bible that relates between God and man, has this strange reality: this is something beyond my comprehension.

Questioner: And I think you just answered it, Pastor John, but to the person asking, “Well, how do I know if I’m one of the chosen, one of the elect, one of the predestined?” you would say, “Have you come to Christ?” Would that be your response?

John MacArthur: Yeah.

Questioner: Yellow stripes, right?

John MacArthur: Right. So the way you know you’re elect is you repent and come to Christ. And He calls sinners to come. So come.

Questioner: Love it. No, that’s so helpful. Thank you so much.

When I was a small boy growing up in Chester, England, I wanted with all my heart to be a guard outside Buckingham Palace.

This was no passing fancy. I had the uniform, made to my size. I had the belt, the tall black bearskin hat, which as a boy I called a Busby, and a real rifle, unloaded, but a real rifle all the same. And I would stand for hours outside our house, perfectly still, refusing to move a single muscle. The other boys in the neighborhood would come out and ask if I wanted to play. I would not so much as blink. I had seen the real guards outside the palace, and they did not move for anyone. Children could shout, sing, and pull faces, and those guards stood like statues. So I did the same.

Every year we visited my uncle in London, and the highlight for me was always the same. My parents and I would take the Underground across the city to reach the palace in good time for the Changing of the Guard ceremony, and I would stand with my face pressed between the palace railings, trying to get as close as I could to the action, studying every movement of the guards.

One year an American tourist who had missed the Changing of the Guard asked if she could take my photograph. I looked the part. I am, to this day, in someone’s photo album in America, a small English boy at rigid attention.

And I had a secret hope. I used to imagine that the Queen might glance out of one of those tall windows, see this devoted little guard standing there outside the palace, and be charmed. I imagined her summoning a member of staff and saying, “Would you bring that little boy and his parents in? I should like to have tea with them.”

I genuinely hoped for it. I knew when she was in residence, because the Royal Standard flag would fly over the palace. She was in there somewhere, just beyond the glass. Surely all my effort would be noticed.

It never happened. Of course it never happened.

Years later, as a teenager who had traded the dream of being a guard for the dream of playing football, I read in the Chester newspaper that the Queen was going to visit my own city. The paper printed the exact route her car would take the next morning. I knew Chester like the back of my hand, and I worked out that if I climbed a particular lamp post on a certain street, I would be above the crowds with a clear view of Her Majesty as she passed.

The next morning I climbed up and waited. And as her car came slowly down the street, for one brief moment, her eyes and mine met. I gave a small nod. And the Queen, just for a moment, nodded back.

That was it. That was the whole of my relationship with royalty: a nod from a passing car. She never wrote to me about it. It did not feature in the royal records. But for a boy who had once stood for hours in a miniature uniform, it was a moment.

I tell that story because it captures something the apostle Paul says in one of the most important verses in the whole Bible. Writing about why God saves the people He saves, Paul concludes: “So then it depends not on human will or exertion, but on God, who has mercy.” – Romans 9:16

Not on human will. Not on human exertion. Not on the man who wills, nor on the man who runs.

All my striving as a boy could never have made me royalty. I could stand still for a hundred years. I could wear the uniform, learn every detail, climb every lamp post in England, and still none of it could bridge the gap between a subject on the street and a son in the royal house. The most that striving could ever earn me was a nod from a passing car. Adoption into the family was never on offer to my effort, however sincere, however devoted.

But if I leave the picture there, I have told you only half the truth, and the smaller half at that. For at least the boy in the uniform admired his Queen. He loved the Crown and longed to serve it.

That is not what the Bible says we were.

Scripture does not describe us as wistful subjects standing politely on the street, hoping to be noticed. It describes us as rebels. We were “enemies” of God (Romans 5:10). The mind set on the flesh “is hostile to God” (Romans 8:7). We did not tip our hats to the King and hope for an invitation. We took up arms against His throne and did everything in our power to unseat Him from it.

That is what makes the doctrine of election so staggering.

If we were merely admiring subjects who failed to earn our way in, grace would be wonderful enough. But we were traitors to the Crown, and the King reached down not to reward our striving, but to rescue us from our rebellion. He did not adopt us because we wanted in. He adopted us while we were doing all we could to dethrone Him.

Yet this mercy was not cheap. The King did not pretend our treason did not matter. The Son of God bore the judgment His people deserved, rose from the dead, and brought rebels home by blood-bought grace.

And here is the gospel, better than anything my boyhood imagination could invent. The King of all kings, entirely of His own free mercy, has taken rebels who hated Him and made them His own children. He did not wait to be impressed. He did not respond to our effort, because our effort was all bent against Him. He set His love on His people before they were born, before they had done anything good or bad, “not because of works but because of him who calls” (Romans 9:11).

And He did not merely permit us to squeak into a back room of the palace. He brings us near, names us as His own, and bids us “with confidence draw near to the throne of grace” (Hebrews 4:16).

The boy in the guard’s uniform could only hope to be noticed. The rebel, by sovereign grace, is welcomed home as a son.

If you are in Christ, you did not earn your way in, and you never could have. You did not even want in until He made you willing. You were adopted by sheer sovereign mercy while you were still in rebellion against the throne, and that is not cold doctrine. It is the warmest news in the world.

The believer’s place in the family does not rest on the strength of human striving, which rises and falls. It rests on the unchanging will of the God who has mercy on whom He has mercy, granting repentance and faith to those He saves.

I never did have tea with the Queen. But by grace alone, and not by any effort of mine, the King I once resisted has adopted me as His own, brought me near through Christ, and welcomes me to dine at His table.

“So then it depends not on human will or exertion, but on God, who has mercy.” – Romans 9:16