It's God's Kingdom and His Choice (Ephesians 2:1-10; COD Head 1)

Introduction

As we continue through the Canons of Dort, it is important to remember how this confession is structured. Each head of doctrine has a positive section, where the churches state what they believe, and a “rejection of errors” section, where they clarify what they do not believe. The goal is not to be reactionary or merely negative, but to confess positively what Scripture teaches about God’s grace and then explain why certain opposing views must be rejected.​

When we come to the rejections concerning election, we are really dealing with one central question: do we in any way influence God’s decision to choose us for his kingdom? The Arminian position says, in various ways, that there is something in us—our decision, our perseverance, our right use of grace—that becomes the decisive factor in God’s choice. The Canons insist instead that election is entirely of God’s grace, so that all glory belongs to him alone.

We Do Not Influence God

The first cluster of Arminian errors says that God looks ahead in history, sees who will believe, who will persevere, and then chooses those people as his elect. In that scheme, God’s choice finally rests on something in us. We make the decision for God. We are faithful enough for God’s mercy. We have made a wise choice.

But this turns God into a passive observer of history rather than the sovereign Lord who orders it. God is only watching who reacts rather than God definitively securing His people as His citizens in His kingdom.

Scripture paints a very different picture. Ephesians 2 describes us not as spiritually sick but as “dead” in trespasses and sins. We were walking according to the course of this fallen world and following the prince of the power of the air.

Dead people do not reach out to God, climb a ladder out of the sewer of sin, or give God a reason to choose them. God acts when there is nothing in us that would or could move him to love us.

When Paul says that God made us alive with Christ “even when we were dead,” he is insisting that God’s gracious choice and saving action are not responses to our initiative. Rather, God is the one who is the cause of our new life and faith.

Because of this, election cannot be based on foreseen faith, foreseen perseverance, or any foreseen quality in us. If God’s choice depended even partly on something in us, grace would no longer be grace, and we could boast that we were, in some sense, more receptive, more responsive, or more lovable than others. Instead, the biblical doctrine of unconditional election guards the truth that salvation is “not because of works but because of him who calls,” so that no flesh may boast before God.

God is Personal

A common charge against the Reformed doctrine of election is that it makes God cold, impersonal, and mechanical.  There is the accusation that God is a distant force who decrees without caring.

But Ephesians 2 shows precisely the opposite. After exposing the depth of our misery in verses 1–3, Paul turns with those rich words, “But God…” and then grounds everything that follows in God’s mercy and great love. God is not moved by our efforts to escape the sewer of sin; he is moved by his own compassion and covenant love toward his people.  This is what the Canons want us to understand.

God’s intervention is intensely personal. He does not merely offer an opportunity and wait to see what we will do with it. He takes hold of those who are content to remain in rebellion and refuses to leave them there. He makes us alive together with Christ, raises us with him, and seats us with him in the heavenly places. That is not the action of a distant bystander but of a Father who refuses to let his children live in filth and death.

The Arminian scheme, for all its concern to protect human freedom, actually makes God more indifferent. In that view, God gives the same general help t