CORPORATE ELECTION IN ROMANS 9: A REPLY TO THOMAS SCHREINER

Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society, Jun 2006 by Abasciano, Brian J

While Rom 9:30-10:21 does not call the concept of corporate election into question as Schreiner maintains, the broad internal context of Romans 9-11 does furnish support for the notion in any number of ways, some of which we have already looked at. Here, we will mention only one: Paul's olive tree metaphor (Rom 11:17-24). It demonstrates the idea of corporate election quite well. The olive tree undoubtedly represents the elect people of God (though it must be admitted that election is not Paul's main concern here). But individuals get grafted into the elect people and participate in election and its blessings by faith or get cut off from God's chosen people and their blessings because of unbelief.41 The focus of election is clearly the corporate people of God with individuals participating in election by means of their participation (through faith) in the elect group, which spans salvation history.

4. The selection of one group rather than another and the very validity of the concept of corporate election. In his final section, Schreiner argues that corporate election is no less arbitrary than Calvinistic individual election and that the typical view of corporate election is specious in that it does not hold to the election of people at all, but constitutes an abstract entity or a concept.42

a. The arbitrariness of election and Rom 9:11-12, 16. Concerning the arbitrariness of election, Schreiner essentially argues that even if corporate election is true, Rom 9:11-12, 16 would then imply that God predestines the faith of the elect group and that faith is thus the consequence of election. But this construction is suspect. Romans 9:11-12 does not actually seek to make a point about election per se, but uses the example of God's election of Jacob (with all its corporate significance) to make a statement about God's purpose in election,43 that it remains based on God's sovereign will and call rather than human works. The fulfillment of God's purpose and promises to bless the world (cf. Rom 9:4, 6-9) depends on his sovereign freedom to designate whom he chooses as his covenant people on whatever conditions he decides to establish.44 This interpretation is confirmed by the fact that Rom 9:10-13 supports the insistence of Rom 9:8 that "it is not the children of the flesh who are children of God, but the children of the promise are regarded as seed." The phrase "the children of the promise" is a rich designation that surely includes faith as a defining characteristic of those it refers to, as Romans 4, 8, Galatians 3-4, and the OT background surrounding Isaac demonstrate.45

Romans 9:16 then makes much the same point as Rom 9:11-12: God's bestowal of mercy is at his discretion rather than man's (see also III. 1 above). The verse does not address God's reasons for dispensing mercy, still less does it assert that he has no reasons that are related to people,46 but it actually argues that he has the right to do as he pleases. In the context of both Romans generally and Romans 9-11, this means that he has the right to regard those who have faith as his covenant people. The bestowal of God's mercy is "not of the one who wills nor of the one who runs, but of God who has mercy" (Rom 9:16).