This will be the last of the series on the views of election presented by Chad Owen Brand in Perspectives on Election.
<<<<<< Time for some to celebrate >>>>>>>>>>>
Okay. Welcome back. The last essay in the election series is written by Clark H. Pinnock, Professor Emeritus at McMaster Divinity College in Hamilton, Ontario. Pinnock argues for election being seen as corporate, open, and vocational. According to Dr. Pinnock, "Election is not about the destiny of individual persons for salvation or damnation but about God's calling a people who in the New Testament setting live according to the faithfulness of Jesus Christ and proclaim good news to the world" (279). In other words, election is open to all and missional.
It's interesting that Pinnock would place election in the category of ecclesiology rather than soteriology (Calvin) or Theology Proper (Barth). In other words, he maintains election is inclusive, rather than exclusive, (281). Within the common texts of election, Pinnock interprets them not as individualistic but as speaking of a "class" of people. As an example, Dr. Pinnock points out Exodus 19:5-6. Now therefore, if you (Israelites) obey my voice and keep my covenant, you shall be my treasured possession out of all the peoples. Indeed, the whole earth is mine, but you shall be for me a priestly kingdom and a holy nation... (NRSV) "Israel was not called to an exclusive salvation but to a priestly vocation intended to bring the whole world to God" (Pinnock 287).
When God does call individuals, he does so for service to others. In the Old Testament, God chose/elected Abraham, Moses, Nehemiah, David, and the Prophets for specific tasks within or for the community at large. In the New Testament, Pinnock points out Jesus chose the apostles to carry out God's mission throughout the world (294).
As you might imagine, the views of Dr. Pinnock are quickly dismissed by Ware, Reymond, and Talbott.
Now it's your turn. Any thoughts?