Does not the "if" imply it is not possible to deceive the elect? Why include the "
if it were possible"? Do you think Jesus is making a rhetorical or a theological argument?
Do you understand
how influential a person's eschatology is answering this op's inquiry? Any reader of Matthew 24 who takes literally and takes seriously Jesus' statement all the events described will occur "
in this generation" necessarily understand the only elect being alluded to are those elect living in that generation. Alternatively, any reader who either ignores the "this generation" marker, or who changes its meaning to "
that generation that sees these things," is going to think Jesus is referring to an elect of some future time when those events occur. The eschatological Idealist, will, instead, see this as a comment that might apply to any elect at any time because the principles cycle or replicate throughout human history.
Perhaps more importantly...... we should never isolate one single verse, neglect all its surrounding text and make some kind of doctrinal statement based on the singled-out verse. That is
always bad exegesis. Jesus explicitly stated the days of all that mess he described would be cut short. Why?
For the sake of the elect, that's why. So I ask you (and any others) why God would cut short the days
for the sake of the elect if the elect were at risk? Is the thinking God cut short the days
because the elect might be at risk? Why then would Jesus say, "
if it were possible"? To be consistent with a real risk he should say, "
insomuch that it is possible for the elect to be deceived to follow a false Messiah and be destroyed by the coming events I describe."
Jesus is talking to the eleven!!! When Jesus states, "
Do not believe anyone who claims to be me," he is talking to people who have followed him around the country for three years, eating and sleeping, changing clothes, sharing a common purse, listening to every word Jesus has spoken. That is the inalterable context for Jesus saying, "
if anyone says to you, ‘Behold, here is the Christ..." Those eleven men do not yet know it but very soon every single one of them would abandon Jesus, feel the guilt and shame of doing so, and then see him resurrected so profoundly that on one occasion he appears so physically that they were allowed to put their hands in his wounds.
How many false messiahs do you think walked around preaching with gaping wounds in their hands, feet, and sides? How many false messiahs were that committed to their falsehoods? How many false messiahs crazy enough to mutilate themselves to legitimize their falsehoods do you think taught sound Godly truth?
NEVER base your thinking, doctrine, or practice on one verse alone.
.
Great question, so let me take another approach; another approach just a firmly couched in sound scriptural exegesis as my comments above.
@Rescued One, can you find me a place in the New Testament, where scripture explicitly reports any member of the elect was deceived into following a false messiah? How about an elect explicitly reported to have lost his or her salvation? Aside from the argument from silence nature of my question and the unavoidable speculative nature of any answer..... why do
you think New Testament scripture fails to provide even one explicit example of such an occurrence?
This next suggestion and inquiry will take some time to perform so please don't feel any need to respond immediately (or at all). Reading through the New Testament, where might we find actual explicit mention of false Christs and false prophets? Christs and prophets are not the same thing. There are many prophets in the Bible but only one Jesus. There are many anointed people, people anointed by God for the purpose of teaching and preaching, but there is only one Anointed One, only one Messiah, only one Christ. Where then does the New Testament identify the false prophets? Where then does the New Testament identify the false Christs? Once identified..... upon what basis in scripture would we say any of them were among the elect?
Here's the rub with what you'll find: In order for a person to (falsely) claim he
(or she? 
) is the Christ, he would have to either deny Jesus is the Christ or claim he is Jesus. Remember we are talking about people Jesus warned the eleven against. Jesus was not speaking directly to you or me. He was speaking to the small group of disciples gathered on the Mount of Olives that evening overlooking the temple right after Jesus had just lambasted the Pharisees. None of the eleven were going to by Bert's, Ernie's, Ricky's or Lucy's claim to be Jesus - especially if they did not have gaping wounds in their bodies. They most definitely were not going to be deceived by someone who....
- Denied the Father and the Son,
- Taught Jesus is not the Christ,
- Taught Jesus did not come from God,
- Taught Jesus did not come in the flesh.
What does scripture call those who claim such things?
Antichrists!!! How then can an antichrist deceive the eleven elect who saw Jesus face-to-face before and after the grave into thinking he, the false Christ, is the Christ?
Being in a cult is not, necessarily, the same thing as being deceived into believing a false messiah (read those parts about the Local Church)...... and the larger truth of the matter regarding falsehood is that every single poster in this forum has heard/read false teaching. It is only by the grace of God and
His work in us that we are not still deceived, and the more we prayerfully mine His word the more deceit will be removed from our knowledge, understanding, and wisdom.
. Curvy brunette who played jazz piano and liked punk clubs on the weekends. "Hey, wanna come to church with me handsome Christian guy?" I followed her right to the cult 
