Can Calvinism reconcile God ordaining Adam to sin, and still allow Adam to have a free will?

[Dave L]

It might have helped somewhat to have that "first reply" actually be based on the Scriptures instead of the London Baptist Convention.

You can cut to the chase and know what the scriptures say if the creed you use is reliable.

 

[Hammster]

But as I very clearly presented
much earlier, foreknowledge is not for loving, it is having knowledge of prior to this time.

I didn’t say foreknowledge. I said foreknowing. Those are different things. It says those He foreknew. It doesn’t say those He foreknew would believe or follow or anything like that. The contrast is, depart from Me, I never knew you.

 

[Hammster]

Isn't that what I have been saying all along? That through His foreknowledge He knew who was and is going to receive Christ as Saviour?

Like I said above, it’s not saying that He knew the actions of people in advance. It that He actually foreknew people.

 

[Dr. Jack]

I didn’t say foreknowledge. I said foreknowing. Those are different things. It says those He foreknew. It doesn’t say those He foreknew would believe or follow or anything like that. The contrast is, depart from Me, I never knew you.

I'll go back and find the post which I addressed this already. You said foreknew meant to forelove ... but the Greek does not support an interpretation, and neither does the context.

 

[Hammster]

I'll go back and find the post which I addressed this already. You said foreknew meant to forelove ... but the Greek does not support an interpretation, and neither does the context.

The context determines the usage.

 

[Dr. Jack]

The context determines the usage.

The English "foreknew" only appears once in Scripture

11:2 God hath not cast away his people which he foreknew. Wot ye not what the scripture saith of Elias? how he maketh intercession to God against Israel saying, Romans

The text clearly indicates Israelites are the subject.

The English "foreknow" also only appears once in Scripture,

8:29 For whom he did foreknow, he also did predestinate to be conformed to the image of his Son, that he might be the firstborn among many brethren. Romans

Just so you don't have to take my word for it, I'll present what Strongs says.

G4267
Greek: προγινώσκω Transliteration: proginōskō Pronunciation: prog-in-oce'-ko Definition: From G4253 and G1097; to know beforehand that is foresee: - foreknow (ordain) know (before). KJV Usage: foreknow (2x), foreordain (1x), know (1x), know before (1x).

G4253
pro: before
Original Word: πρό
Part of Speech: Preposition
Transliteration: pro
Phonetic Spelling: (pro)
Definition: before
Usage: (a) of place: before, in front of, (b) of time: before, earlier than.

G1097
ginóskó: to come to know, recognize, perceive
Original Word: γινώσκω
Part of Speech: Verb
Transliteration: ginóskó
Phonetic Spelling: (ghin-oce'-ko)
Definition: to come to know, recognize, perceive
Usage: I am taking in knowledge, come to know, learn; aor: I ascertained, realized.

Here it is in the Greek:
ὅτι οὓς προέγνω, καὶ προώρισε συμμόρφους τῆς εἰκόνος τοῦ υἱοῦ αὐτοῦ, εἰς τὸ εἶναι αὐτὸν πρωτότοκον ἐν πολλοῖς ἀδελφοῖς· ΠΡΟΣ ΡΩΜΑΙΟΥΣ 8:29
(It is the third word in the text.)

What Calvinism does is to take a longer form of the same stem for "know" gnó, meaning to have intimate relationship with

and apply it to the text of Romans 8.

Here is that form in Matthew 1 ...

καὶ οὐκ ἐγίνωσκεν αὐτὴν ἕως οὗ ἔτεκε τὸν υἱόν αὐτῆς τὸν πρωτότοκον· καὶ ἐκάλεσε τὸ ὄνομα αὐτοῦ ἸΗΣΟΥΝ. ΚΑΤΑ ΜΑΤΘΑΙΟΝ 1:25

Again, it is the third word.

The problem is that context determines the meaning of the word. The only time the English "knew" from the Greek ἐγίνωσκεν means an intimate relationship is in direct relationship to having sex for reproduction within the direct text.

Calvinism tries to use the aspect of "love" in intimacy, to say that προέγνω (I foreknow ... the prefix προ [meaning before, or previous] + εγν [know] + ω [singular indicative for "I" ... together meaning "I know before", or I foreknow), means "I for-loved" ... but that isn't what it means at all.

 

[Hammster]

The English "foreknew" only appears once in Scripture

11:2 God hath not cast away his people which he foreknew. Wot ye not what the scripture saith of Elias? how he maketh intercession to God against Israel saying, Romans

The text clearly indicates Israelites are the subject.

The English "foreknow" also only appears once in Scripture,

8:29 For whom he did foreknow, he also did predestinate to be conformed to the image of his Son, that he might be the firstborn among many brethren. Romans

Just so you don't have to take my word for it, I'll present what Strongs says.

G4267
Greek: προγινώσκω Transliteration: proginōskō Pronunciation: prog-in-oce'-ko Definition: From G4253 and G1097; to know beforehand that is foresee: - foreknow (ordain) know (before). KJV Usage: foreknow (2x), foreordain (1x), know (1x), know before (1x).

G4253
pro: before
Original Word: πρό
Part of Speech: Preposition
Transliteration: pro
Phonetic Spelling: (pro)
Definition: before
Usage: (a) of place: before, in front of, (b) of time: before, earlier than.

G1097
ginóskó: to come to know, recognize, perceive
Original Word: γινώσκω
Part of Speech: Verb
Transliteration: ginóskó
Phonetic Spelling: (ghin-oce'-ko)
Definition: to come to know, recognize, perceive
Usage: I am taking in knowledge, come to know, learn; aor: I ascertained, realized.

Here it is in the Greek:
ὅτι οὓς προέγνω, καὶ προώρισε συμμόρφους τῆς εἰκόνος τοῦ υἱοῦ αὐτοῦ, εἰς τὸ εἶναι αὐτὸν πρωτότοκον ἐν πολλοῖς ἀδελφοῖς· ΠΡΟΣ ΡΩΜΑΙΟΥΣ 8:29
(It is the third word in the text.)

What Calvinism does is to take a longer form of the same stem for "know" gnó, meaning to have intimate relationship with

and apply it to the text of Romans 8.

Here is that form in Matthew 1 ...

καὶ οὐκ ἐγίνωσκεν αὐτὴν ἕως οὗ ἔτεκε τὸν υἱόν αὐτῆς τὸν πρωτότοκον· καὶ ἐκάλεσε τὸ ὄνομα αὐτοῦ ἸΗΣΟΥΝ. ΚΑΤΑ ΜΑΤΘΑΙΟΝ 1:25

Again, it is the third word.

The problem is that context determines the meaning of the word. The only time the English "knew" from the Greek ἐγίνωσκεν means an intimate relationship is in direct relationship to having sex for reproduction within the direct text.

Calvinism tries to use the aspect of "love" in intimacy, to say that προέγνω (I foreknow ... the prefix προ [meaning before, or previous] + εγν [know] + ω [singular indicative for "I" ... together meaning "I know before", or I foreknow), means "I for-loved" ... but that isn't what it means at all.

I’m not sure how you think this makes your case. Yes, He knew the Israelites, as your first example shows. It doesn’t say that He knew their future actions.

Romans 8 says those He foreknew. Nothing about actions.

 

[His student]

Jesus said that he did not come to call the righteous (or the elect), but sinners (the non-elect) to repentance. He said that those who are well (implying the elect) don't need a doctor, but those who are sick (implying non-elect sinners).

I'm trying to understand where you could possibly get this. It certainly isn't anything a Calvinist would teach.

The elect are not righteous. They are sinners just like the "non-elect".

The elect are not well. They are sick and need a doctor as much as what you call the non-elect.

No one - is declared righteous until such time as he exercises saving faith and is placed in Christ and is justified before God. That's the doctrine of all evangelical Christians be they Calvinist or anti Calvinist.

If you don't understand this simple basic Calvinist doctrine - why don't you ask about it rather than lecture about it?

 

[Dr. Jack]

I’m not sure how you think this makes your case. Yes, He knew the Israelites, as your first example shows. It doesn’t say that He knew their future actions.

Romans 8 says those He foreknew. Nothing about actions.

1) Are you saying God didn't know their actions?
2) What in the text causes you to interpret the "foreknow" as "foreloved"?
3) Are there any uses of the word "foreknowledge" that support this interpretation?

1:2 Elect according to the foreknowledge of God the Father, through sanctification of the Spirit, unto obedience and sprinkling of the blood of Jesus Christ: Grace unto you, and peace, be multiplied. 1 Peter

Reformed Theology explicitly claims "Unconditional Election", but the above text explicitly states otherwise.

"Elect according to the foreknowledge of God the Father"

The use of the words, "according to" leaves no room for an "unconditional election". The condition was the "foreknowledge of God". Therefore, we must examine the word "foreknowledge".

κατὰ πρόγνωσιν Θεοῦ πατρός, ἐν ἁγιασμῷ Πνεύματος, εἰς ὑπακοὴν καὶ ῥαντισμὸν αἵματος Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ· χάρις ὑμῖν καὶ εἰρήνη πληθυνθείη. ΠΕΤΡΟΥ Α΄ 1:2

The lexical definition of the Greek word from which "foreknowledge" is rendered (πρόγνωσις) is:

G4268
Greek: πρόγνωσις Transliteration: prognōsis Pronunciation: prog'-no-sis Definition: From G4267; forethought: - foreknowledge. KJV Usage: foreknowledge (2x).

When we go to the doctor, we often want to know our "prognosis". That is the very Greek word in consideration. Allow me to illustrate its meaning.

Prior to either ourself, or the Dr. entering into the examination room to find out what our problem is, the Dr. attended med school (I hope). While in med school the Dr. learned anatomy as well as medications, and their effects to, and on the body under various conditions.

The Dr. enters the examination room with already obtained medical knowledge, as well as knowledge that pertains to medications and there effects in particular situations.

When the Dr. enters the room with this already obtained knowledge, he is able to recognize the symptom you have, and then prescribe a medication that he knows will have a particular affect.

Hence, a prognosis (πρόγνωσις = rendered foreknowledge) means that God used foreknowledge (part of His omniscience), about men to make a decision concerning "election".

What knowledge would God use to make such a decision?

 

[Hammster]

1) Are you saying God didn't know their actions?
2) What in the text causes you to interpret the "foreknow" as "foreloved"?
3) Are there any uses of the word "foreknowledge" that support this interpretation?

1. No.
2. I never said it did.
3. Romans 8:28

 

[Hammster]

Since we can copy/paste things

(II) Used of God's eternal counsel it includes all that He has considered and purposed to do prior to human history. In the language of Scripture, something foreknown is not simply that which God was aware of prior to a certain point. Rather, it is presented as that which God gave prior consent to, that which received His favorable or special recognition. Hence, this term is reserved for those matters which God favorably, deliberately and freely chose and ordained.

(A) Used of persons, to foreknow with approbation, to foreapprove or make a previous choice of, as special people (Rom 8:29; Rom 11:2).

 

[Dr. Jack]

Since we can copy/paste things

(II) Used of God's eternal counsel it includes all that He has considered and purposed to do prior to human history. In the language of Scripture, something foreknown is not simply that which God was aware of prior to a certain point. Rather, it is presented as that which God gave prior consent to, that which received His favorable or special recognition. Hence, this term is reserved for those matters which God favorably, deliberately and freely chose and ordained.

(A) Used of persons, to foreknow with approbation, to foreapprove or make a previous choice of, as special people (Rom 8:29; Rom 11:2).

Since you are using Romans 11:2 (the people foreknown are the Israelites), are you now claiming that all of the physical lineage of Israel are the "elect" and therefore "saved"?

 

[Dr. Jack]

This thread was specifically started to give Calvinists an opportunity to reconcile the sovereignty of God, and the free will of man in relation to the narrative of the Garden of Eden.

I am fully aware that some believe they have done so; I completely disagree.

The following short article was written to be as concise as possible:

Holiness and Determinism

The key doctrine of Reformed Theology is the Sovereignty of God. According to Calvinism God created paradigms in which Adam would voluntarily choose to sin, whereby all mankind would be condemned. Since, (according to Calvinism ) man voluntarily sinned, he, and he alone is culpable for his sin; but does this align with the doctrine of the holiness of God?

1:17 Every good gift and every perfect gift is from above, and cometh down from the Father of lights, with whom is no variableness, neither shadow of turning. James

This term, “with whom is no variableness, neither shadow of turning” has to do with God’s holiness.

What does this term mean?

The Old Testament Law addressed the work of the flesh. When Jesus came on the scene, He applied that same law to the thoughts of mankind.

5:27 Ye have heard that it was said by them of old time, Thou shalt not commit adultery: 5:28 But I say unto you, That whosoever looketh on a woman to lust after her hath committed adultery with her already in his heart. Matthew

1:16 Because it is written, Be ye holy; for I am holy. 1 Peter

God has Peter tell us that we are to be “holy" as He is “holy". God’s thoughts are absolutely pure.

Another aspect of God’s holiness is that He is a just God.

45:21 Tell ye, and bring them near; yea, let them take counsel together: who hath declared this from ancient time? who hath told it from that time? have not I the LORD? and there is no God else beside me; a just God and a Saviour; there is none beside me. Isaiah

23:6 Thou shalt not wrest the judgment of thy poor in his cause. 23:7 Keep thee far from a false matter; and the innocent and righteous slay thou not: for I will not justify the wicked. Exodus

God demanded just judgment. No deceit was to be tolerated. When a person deceived another person, according to God, that was an injustice. What does that mean in light of this subject?

The Genesis narrative of the Garden of Eden is that Adam was given a commandment not to eat of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil. Did God put the serpent , and Eve in the Garden with Adam? Yes.

The only way Adam could make a choice to believe God, and therefore obey God, would be to have an alternative choice. God provided that source by bringing the serpent into the equation. Does that mean that God determined the outcome of Adam’s choice, by creating a paradigm in which Adam would choose to sin? Absolutely not.

When we go to the grocery store there are thousands of items for us to choose; does that mean we have been determined to choose all of them, or any particular one item? Does the presence of an item require a determinate plan for us to use it? Again, absolutely not.

Reformed Theology believes that God placed the serpent, and Eve in the Garden of Eden as part of His paradigm to make Adam willfully choose Adam to sin, thereby not only resulting in his condemnation, but also the condemnation of his entire progeny.

In other words, (according to Calvinism) God controlled, or created a paradigm, (salted the oats, stacked the deck,) the circumstances so that Adam would willingly choose to sin.

How can the same God that says “be holy as I am holy", and commanded that His people never use any type of deception, create a paradigm, or control the circumstances in the Garden of Eden to obtain a particular result, be a “just", holy God?

The holiness of God could not allow for any such paradigm, in which the outcome of any event was predetermined, and yet was at the same time was to allow the free will choice of Adam.

Either Adam had the ability to make a choice without being controlled, or that decision was controlled; but it cannot be both.

I am not saying that God did not allow for Adam’ choice to be consciously influenced, (by either Himself or the serpent), but if Adam’s choice was made by an unconscious influence that was being controlled by God to deliberately bring about Adam’s condemnation, that would be deceit on God’s part.

That may not be a blatant visible form of coercion; but it is coercion just the same. Again, this type of behavior is totally against the holiness of God.

 

[Hammster]

Thanks @Oscarr. We’ve had a good discussion. But I think after a certain member’s recent reply, it is time for me to bug out. Tag me if you are ever in a similar discussion and I’ll see if I can join in.

God bless.

 

[Presbyterian Continuist]

Like I said above, it’s not saying that He knew the actions of people in advance. It that He actually foreknew people.

I got a better clue about that from the Amplified Bible (which I quoted previously). The extension to the meaning of forenew, is in the sense of being aware of them, rather than having a personal relationship with them. When Jesus told the hypocrites, "I never knew you", He was meaning that He never had a personal relationship or personal fellowship with them.

 

[Presbyterian Continuist]

I'm trying to understand where you could possibly get this. It certainly isn't anything a Calvinist would teach.

The elect are not righteous. They are sinners just like the "non-elect".

The elect are not well. They are sick and need a doctor as much as what you call the non-elect.

No one - is declared righteous until such time as he exercises saving faith and is placed in Christ and is justified before God. That's the doctrine of all evangelical Christians be they Calvinist or anti Calvinist.

If you don't understand this simple basic Calvinist doctrine - why don't you ask about it rather than lecture about it?

It is found in Luke 5:32.
Calvinists believe that the Elect are chosen before the foundation of the world. Therefore in their view, God sees them already as being righteous because of His foreknowledge and predestination. So, it stands to reason that Jesus would not be coming to call those who are already predestined to be the elect because they are going to come to Christ anyway.

But He said that He came to call sinners to repentance. This would, in Calvinist terms, be the reprobates. But that doesn't make sense, because the reprobates would have already been predestined to hell anyway, so although Jesus said He came to call them, in reality He knew that they wouldn't be able to respond anyway.

 

[Presbyterian Continuist]

Thanks @Oscarr. We’ve had a good discussion. But I think after a certain member’s recent reply, it is time for me to bug out. Tag me if you are ever in a similar discussion and I’ll see if I can join in.

God bless.

Thank you for our wonderful fellowship. Our discussion and debate has given me hours of pleasure. There are other threads concerning Calvinism so it will be interesting to see what happens in them. One day, when we both find ourselves in heaven, we will be able to have great fellowship with each other and the Lord and know what we need to know about all these things.

 

[His student]

It is found in Luke 5:32.

No - it isn't.

Calvinists believe that the Elect are chosen before the foundation of the world.

Absolutely.

Therefore in their view, God sees them already as being righteous because of His foreknowledge and predestination.

No - He does not. He says that He considers them children of wrath and vessels fit for judgment just as the rest of humanity.

So, it stands to reason that Jesus would not be coming to call those who are already predestined to be the elect because they are going to come to Christ anyway.

No - they are not going to come to Christ anyway. Where are you getting that? Not from a Calvinist.

"....“Everyone who calls on the name of the Lord will be saved.” How then will they call on him in whom they have not believed? And how are they to believe in him of whom they have never heard? And how are they to hear without someone preaching? And how can they preach unless they are sent? As it is written: “How beautiful are the feet of those who bring good news!...”

 

[His student]

What happens to those who are called?

Why are you not answering the question? What happens to those who are called?

Third time you’ve not addressed my post, but instead just repost your beliefs.

Stick with the passage we are discussing. What happens to those who are called?

You didn’t answer the question. This seems to be a pattern. I’m not sure what to do

I sense your frustration brother. But you aren't likely to get a straight answer. Allow me, if you will.

All those persons in this particular passage who are thus called are also justified.

Since none of us believe in universal salvation – it stands to reason that the calling listed in the passage is what is called by theologians "the effectual call” or sometimes the “irresistible call”.

This portion of the golden chain of salvation furnishes honest theologians with an undeniable truth concerning the election of certain persons to be enlightened by grace as opposed to the general preaching of the gospel to the world – which every Calvinist affirms is a sincere call, albeit it leave rebellious men without excuse their having heard it.

Wayne Grudem puts it pretty well in his systematic theology volume so I’ll just paste it here

“This powerful act of God is often referred to as effective calling to distinguish it from the general gospel invitation that goes to all people and which some people reject. This is not to say that human gospel proclamation is not involved. In fact, God’s effective calling comes through the human preaching of the gospel, because Paul says, “To this he called you through our gospel so that you may obtain the glory of our Lord Jesus Christ” (2 Thess. 2:14). Of course, there are many who hear the general call of the gospel message and do not respond. But in some cases the gospel call is made so effective by the working of the Holy Spirit in people’s hearts that they do respond; we can say that they have received “effective calling.”

“We may define effective calling as follows: Effective calling is an act of God the Father, speaking through the human proclamation of the gospel, in which he summons people to himself in such a way that they respond in saving faith. It is important that we not give the impression that people will be saved by the power of this call apart from their own willing response to the gospel (see chapter 35 on the personal faith and repentance that are necessary for conversion). Although it is true that effective calling awakens and brings forth a response from us, we must always insist that this response still has to be a voluntary, willing response in which the individual person puts his or her trust in Christ.”

As with many other Calvinistic doctrines, this is perfectly in line with the teaching of the scriptures.

 

[BABerean2]

Pulling a few verses out of context doesn’t prove anything.

How many verses does it take to show that God commands all men to repent?

How many of the verses below about repentance are taken out of context?

Mat_3:2 And saying, Repent ye: for the kingdom of heaven is at hand.

Mat_4:17 From that time Jesus began to preach, and to say, Repent: for the kingdom of heaven is at hand.

Mar_1:15 And saying, The time is fulfilled, and the kingdom of God is at hand: repent ye, and believe the gospel.

Mar_6:12 And they went out, and preached that men should repent.

Luk_13:3 I tell you, Nay: but, except ye repent, ye shall all likewise perish.

Luk_13:5 I tell you, Nay: but, except ye repent, ye shall all likewise perish.

Luk_16:30 And he said, Nay, father Abraham: but if one went unto them from the dead, they will repent.

Act_2:38 Then Peter said unto them, Repent, and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins, and ye shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost.

Act_3:19 Repent ye therefore, and be converted, that your sins may be blotted out, when the times of refreshing shall come from the presence of the Lord;

Act_8:22 Repent therefore of this thy wickedness, and pray God, if perhaps the thought of thine heart may be forgiven thee.

Act_17:30 And the times of this ignorance God winked at; but now commandeth all men every where to repent:

Act_26:20 But shewed first unto them of Damascus, and at Jerusalem, and throughout all the coasts of Judaea, and then to the Gentiles, that they should repent and turn to God, and do works meet for repentance.

Rev_2:5 Remember therefore from whence thou art fallen, and repent, and do the first works; or else I will come unto thee quickly, and will remove thy candlestick out of his place, except thou repent.

Rev_2:16 Repent; or else I will come unto thee quickly, and will fight against them with the sword of my mouth.

Rev_2:21 And I gave her space to repent of her fornication; and she repented not.

Rev_2:22 Behold, I will cast her into a bed, and them that commit adultery with her into great tribulation, except they repent of their deeds.

Rev_3:3 Remember therefore how thou hast received and heard, and hold fast, and repent. If therefore thou shalt not watch, I will come on thee as a thief, and thou shalt not know what hour I will come upon thee.


.

.