• Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.

Does 1 Peter 2:8 prove predestination implicitly?

faceofbear

Veteran
Aug 3, 2009
1,380
99
Texas
✟24,739.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
In Relationship
Politics
US-Others
I started reading your post but only got this far because there is a deep problem here. You are using your errant, finite "logic" to determine what is logical for an inerrant, infinite being. There is an infinite difference between an finite and an infinite being. Have you ever stop to think that maybe God has a few more logical options at His disposal that you might not know about? Just saying.
Already answered that question in the same post if only you kept reading.

Proverbs 18:13
If one gives an answer before he hears, it is his folly and shame. (ESV)

But my yes's can't be no and my no's be yes. God can certainly operate outside of logic, but when reading or perceiving anything you are using logic. To understand the Bible at all, you must use logic, because without logic, you cannot build a rational thought nor see what the Bible is trying to say. And I certainly don't think God designed the Bible to be illogical and irrational to the minds of men, since it was written for men. And as someone's pointed out before, Jesus is the word, logos, where we get our word logic from. The whole universe is bound by logic because God chose to operate within logic, or so it seems.

As I've said, it is possible I am completely wrong.

But tell me (JM ignore this unless you want to read another analogy): If I offer you a bowl with an apple or an orange and you pick the apple, did you reject the orange? Or did the orange reject you? If God picks you to be saved and doesn't pick me, He has elected me to reprobation. Not because I resisted Him, but because He did not choose me, nor provide me any grace not to sin, nor any grace to be saved. Thus I cannot be saved but by God who has absolutely decreed not to save me and I am nothing but a inanimate branch to be burned.
 
Upvote 0

JM

Confessional Free Catholic
Site Supporter
Jun 26, 2004
17,475
3,732
Canada
✟874,855.00
Country
Canada
Gender
Male
Faith
Protestant
Marital Status
Married
Politics
CA-Others
But tell me (JM ignore this unless you want to read another analogy): If I offer you a bowl with an apple or an orange and you pick the apple, did you reject the orange? Or did the orange reject you? If God picks you to be saved and doesn't pick me, He has elected me to reprobation. Not because I resisted Him, but because He did not choose me, nor provide me any grace not to sin, nor any grace to be saved. Thus I cannot be saved but by God who has absolutely decreed not to save me and I am nothing but a inanimate branch to be burned.
I did not. You've failed to read and understand what I've posted. Not everyone is offered a bowl of oranges or apples or whatever other fruit or lotto ticket you want to use. In fact, people can't even see the bowl, they do not know there is fruit.

Dead people cannot accept (insert fruit or whatever Face what's to use here) because they are dead. God does not owe anyone anything. I quoted Romans to your "it's not fair!" argument using the context Paul gave.

j
 
Upvote 0

JM

Confessional Free Catholic
Site Supporter
Jun 26, 2004
17,475
3,732
Canada
✟874,855.00
Country
Canada
Gender
Male
Faith
Protestant
Marital Status
Married
Politics
CA-Others
This might be useful.

The Meaning of "FOREKNEW" in Romans 8:29

This is from the Appendix of the book "The Five Points of Calvinism: Defined, Defended, Documented" by David N. Steele and Curtis C. Thomas.

THE MEANING OF “FOREKNEW” IN ROMANS 8:29

"For whom He foreknew, He also predestined to be conformed to the image of His Son, that He might be the firstborn among many brethren. Moreover whom He predestined, these He also called; whom He called, these He also justified; and whom He justified, these He also glorified." Romans 8:29,30

Broadly speaking there have been two general views as to the meaning and use of the word “foreknew” in Romans 8:29. One class of commentators (the Arminians) maintain that Paul is saying that God predestined to salvation those whom He foreknew would respond to His offer of grace (i.e., those whom He saw would of their own free will repent of their sins and believe the gospel). Godet, in commenting on Romans 8:29, asks the question: “In what respect did God thus foreknow them?” and answers that they were “foreknown as sure to fulfill the conditions of salvation, viz. faith; so: foreknown as His by faith.” 1 The word "foreknew” is thus understood by Arminians to mean that God knew beforehand which sinners would believe, etc., and on the basis of this knowledge He predestined them unto salvation.
The other class of commentators (the Calvinists) reject the above view on two grounds. First, because the Arminians’ interpretation is not in keeping with the meaning of Paul’s language and second, because it is out of harmony with the system of doctrine taught in the rest of the Scriptures. Calvinists contend that the passage teaches that God set His heart upon (i.e., foreknew) certain individuals; these He predestined or marked out to be saved. Notice that the text does not say that God knew SOMETHING ABOUT particular individuals (that they would do this or that), but it states that God knew the individuals THEMSELVES – those whom He knew He predestined to be made like Christ. The word “foreknew” as used here is thus understood to be equivalent to “foreloved” – those who were the objects of God’s love, He marked out for salvation.

The questions raised by the two opposing interpretations are these: Did God look down through time and see that certain individuals would believe and thus predestine them unto salvation on the basis of this foreseen faith? Or did God set His heart on certain individuals and because of His love for them predestine that they should be called and given faith in Christ by the Holy Spirit and thus be saved? In other words, is the individual’s faith the cause or the result of God’s predestination?

A. The meaning of “foreknew” in Romans 8:29
God has always possessed perfect knowledge of all creatures and of all events. There has never been a time when anything past, present, or future was not fully known to Him.* But it is not His knowledge of future events (of what people would do, etc.) which is referred to in Romans 8:29,30, for Paul clearly states that those whom He foreknew He predestined, He called, He justified, etc. Since all men are not predestined, called, and justified, it follows that all men were not foreknown by God in the sense spoken of in verse 29.

It is for this reason that the Arminians are forced to add some qualifying notion. They read into the passage some idea not contained in the language itself such as those whom He foreknew would believe etc., He predestined, called and justified. But according to the Biblical usage of the words “know,” “knew,” and “foreknew” there is not the least need to make such an addition, and since it is unnecessary, it is improper. When the Bible speaks of God knowing particular individuals, it often means that He has special regard for them, that they are the objects of His affection and concern. For example in Amos 3:2, God, speaking to Israel says,“You only have I known of all the families of the earth; therefore I will punish you for all your iniquities.” The Lord knows about all the families of the earth, but He knew Israel in a special way.* They were His chosen people whom He had set His heart upon. See Deuteronomy 7:7,8; 10:15. Because Israel was His in a special sense He chastised them, cf. Hebrews 12:5,6.*God, speaking to Jeremiah, said, “Before I formed you in the womb, I knew you,” (Jeremiah 1:5). The meaning here is not that God knew about Jeremiah but that He had a special regard for the prophet before He formed him in his mother’s womb. Jesus also used the word “knew” in the sense of personal, intimate awareness. “On that day many will say to me, ‘Lord, Lord, did we not prophesy in your name, and cast out demons in your name, and do many mighty works in your name?’ And then will I declare to them, ‘I never knew you; depart from me, you evildoers’ “ (Matt. 7:22,23). Our Lord cannot be understood here as saying, I knew nothing about you, for it is quite evident that He knew all too much about them – their evil character and evil works; hence, His meaning must be, I never knew you intimately nor personally, I never regarded you as the objects of my favor or love. Paul uses the word in the same way in I Corinthians 8:3, “But if one loves God, one is known by him,” and also II Timothy 2:19, “the Lord knows those who are His.” The Lord knows about all men but He only knows those “who love Him, who are called according to His purpose” (Rom 8:28) – those who are His!

Murray’s argument in favor of this meaning of “foreknew” is very good.*“It should be observed that the text says ‘whom He foreknew’; whom is the object of the verb and there is no qualifying addition.* This, of itself, shows that, unless there is some other compelling reason, the expression ‘whom he foreknew’ contains within itself the differentiation which is presupposed. If the apostle had in mind some ‘qualifying adjunct’ it would have been simple to supply it. Since he adds none we are forced to inquire if the actual terms he uses can express the differentiation implied. The usage of Scripture provides an affirmative answer. Although the term ‘foreknew’ is used seldom in the New Testament, it is altogether indefensible to ignore the meaning so frequently given to the word ‘know’ in the usage of Scripture; ‘foreknow’ merely adds the thought of ‘beforehand’ to the word ‘know’. Many times in Scripture ‘know’ has a pregnant meaning which goes beyond that of mere cognition. It is used in a sense practically synonymous with ‘love’, to set regard upon, to know with peculiar interest, delight, affection, and action (cf. Gen 18:19; Exod. 2:25; Psalm 1:6; 144:3; Jer. 1:5; Amos 3:2; Hosea 13:5; Matt 7:23; I Cor. 8:3; Gal. 4:9; II Tim. 2:19; I John 3:1).* There is no reason why this import of the word ‘know’ should not be applied to ‘foreknow’ in this passage, as also in 11:2 where it also occurs in the same kind of construction and where the thought of election is patently present (cf. 11:5,6). When this import is appreciated, then there is no reason for adding any qualifying notion and ‘whom He foreknew’ is seen to contain within itself the differentiating element required. It means ‘whom he set regard upon’ or ‘whom he knew from eternity with distinguishing affection and delight’ and is virtually equivalent to ‘whom he foreloved’. This interpretation, furthermore, is in agreement with the efficient and determining action which is so conspicuous in every other link of the chain – it is God who predestinates, it is God who calls, it is God who justifies, and it is He who glorifies. Foresight of faith would be out of accord with the determinative action which is predicated of God in these other instances and would constitute a weakening of the total emphasis at the point where we should least expect it….It is not the foresight of difference but the foreknowledge that makes difference to exist, not a foresight that recognizes existence but the foreknowledge that determines existence. It is a sovereign distinguishing love.” 2

Hodge observes that “as to know is often to approve and love, it may express the idea of peculiar affection in this case; or it may mean to select or determine upon….The usage of the word is favourable to either modification of this general idea of preferring. ‘The people which he foreknew,’ i.e., loved or selected, Rom. 11:2; ‘Who verily was foreordained (Gr. foreknown), i.e., fixed upon, chosen before the foundation of the world.’ I Peter 1:20; II Tim. 2:19; John 10:14,15; see also Acts 2:23; I Peter 1:2. The idea, therefore, obviously is, that those whom God peculiarly loved, and by thus loving, distinguished or selected from the rest of mankind; or to express both ideas in one word, those whom he elected he predestined, etc.” 3

Although God knew about all men before the world began, He did not know all men in the sense that the Bible sometimes uses the word “know,” i.e., with intimate personal awareness and love. It is in this latter sense that God** foreknew* those whom He predestined, called, and justified, as outlined in Romans 8:29,30!

B. Romans 8:29 does not refer to the foresight of faith, good works, etc.
As was pointed out above, it is unnecessary and therefore indefensible to add any qualifying notion such as faith to the verb foreknew in Romans 8:29. The Arminians make this addition, not because the language requires it, but because their theological system requires it – they do it to escape the doctrines of unconditional predestination and election. They read the notion of foreseen faith into the verse and then appeal to it in an effort to prove that predestination was based on foreseen events. Thus particular individuals are said to be saved, not because God willed that they should be saved (for He willed the salvation of everyone) but because they themselves willed to be saved. Hence salvation is make to depend ultimately on the individual’s will, not on the sovereign will of Almighty God – faith is understood to be man’s gift to God, not God’s gift to man.


 
Upvote 0

JM

Confessional Free Catholic
Site Supporter
Jun 26, 2004
17,475
3,732
Canada
✟874,855.00
Country
Canada
Gender
Male
Faith
Protestant
Marital Status
Married
Politics
CA-Others
Haldane, comparing Scripture with Scripture, clearly shows that the foreknowledge mentioned in Romans 8:29 cannot have reference to the foreseen faith, good works, or the sinner’s response to God’s call. “Faith cannot be the cause of foreknowledge, because foreknowledge is before predestination, and faith is the effect of predestination. ‘As many as were ordained to eternal life believed,’ Acts 13:48.* Neither can it be meant of the foreknowledge of good works, because these are the effects of predestination. ‘We are His workmanship, created in Christ Jesus unto good works; which God hath before ordained (or before prepared) that we should walk in them;’ Eph. 2:10. Neither can it be meant of foreknowledge of our concurrence with the external call, because our effectual calling depends not upon that concurrence, but upon God’s purpose and grace, given us in Christ Jesus before the world began, 2 Tim. 1:9. By this foreknowledge, then, is meant, as has been observed, the love of God towards those whom he predestinates to be saved through Jesus Christ. All the called of God are foreknown by Him, - that is, they are the objects of His eternal love, and their calling comes from this free love. ‘I have loved thee with an everlasting love; therefore with lovingkindness I have drawn thee,’ Jer. 31:3.” 4

Murray, in rejecting the view that “foreknew” in Romans 8:29 refers to the foresight of faith, is certainly correct in stating that “It needs to be emphasized that the rejection of this interpretation is not dictated by a predestinarian interest. Even if it were granted that ‘foreknew’ means foresight of faith, the biblical doctrine of sovereign election is not thereby eliminated or disproven. For it is certainly true that God foresees faith;* he foresees all that comes to pass.* The question would then simply be: whence proceeds this faith which God foresees? And the only biblical answer is that the faith which God foresees is the faith he himself creates (cf. John 3:3-8; 6:44;45,65; Eph. 2:8; Phil. 1:29; II Pet. 1:2). Hence his eternal foresight of faith is preconditioned by his decree to generate this faith in those whom he foresees as believing, and we are thrown back upon the differentiation which proceeds from God’s own eternal and sovereign election to faith and its consequents. The interest, therefore, is simply one of interpretation as it should be applied to this passage.* On exegetical grounds we shall have to reject the view that ‘foreknew’ refers to the foresight of faith.” 5

1 Frederic Godet, Commentary on the Epistle to the Romans, p 325.* Italics are his.
2 John Murray, The Epistle to the Romans, Vol. I, pp. 316-318.* Italics are his.
3 Charles Hodge, Commentary on the Epistle to the Romans, pp. 283, 284. Italics are his.
4 Robert Haldane, Exposition of the Epistle to the Romans, p. 397.
5 Murray, Romans, Vol. I, p. 316.


-----------------------

1. No Libertarian free will theist can consistently say that God foreknew who would be saved and then also teach that God is trying to save every man. Surely if God knows who will be saved and who won't be saved, then how could anyone argue that He is trying to save more? Certainly, it is foolish to assert that God is trying to do something which He knew never could be accomplished. Some embracing the free will or foreseen faith position charge Augustinians that preaching the gospel to the non-elect is mockery since God has not elected them. If there is any validity in that objection, then it equally applies to them as well who preach to those who God knows will never be saved. To the Augustinian, God commands that the Gospel be preached to all, because, when we indiscriminately cast forth the seed of the gospel, the Spirit germinates the seed of those He came to save (1 Thess 1:4, 5 John 6:63-65). People are not saved in a void but under the preaching of the Gospel and the Spirit brings forth life through the word of truth.

2. No Libertarian who embraces the foreseen faith position can consistently say that God foreknew which sinners would be lost and then say it is not within God's will to allow these sinners to be lost. Why did He create them? Let the libertarian freewill theist consider that question. God could have just as easily refrained from creating those that He knew would "freely" choose to go to Hell. He knew where they were going before He created them. Since He went ahead and created them with full knowledge that they would be lost, it is evidently within God's providence that some sinners actually be lost, even in the libertarian scheme. He, therefore, has some purpose in it which human beings cannot fully discern. The libertarian freewill theist can complain against the truth that God chose to allow some men a final destiny of Hell all they want, but it is as much a problem for them as for anyone. As a matter of fact, it is a problem which libertarians must face. If he faces it, he will have to admit either the error of his theology or deny foreknowledge all together. But he might say that God had to create those that perish, even against His will. This would make God subject to Fate.

3. No Libertarian freewiller can consistently say that God foreknew who would be saved and then teach that God punished Christ for the purpose of redeeming every single man that ever lived. Surely we should credit God with having as much sense as a human being. What human being would make a great but useless and needless sacrifice for persons He already knows with certainty would reject Him? Libertarians say that God punished Christ for the sins of those whom He knew would go to Hell. This theory of the atonement--although synergists do not mention this--involves the matter of Christ's suffering exclusively for the purpose of man's salvation--the substitutionary aspect. They fail to have any appreciation for the aspect of propitiation.

4. No Libertarian can consistently say that God foreknew who would be saved and then preach that God the Holy Spirit does all He can do to save every man in the world. The Holy Spirit would be wasting time and effort to endeavor to convert a man who He knew from the beginning would go to Hell. You hear Synergists talk about how the Spirit tries to get men to be saved and if they don't yield to him they will "cross the line" and offend the Spirit so that He will never try to save them again. Bottom line, the Synergist makes a finite creature out of the Divine Godhead. Can God be taken by surprise?

http://www.reformationtheology.com/2006/04/free_will_election_foreknowled.php#more
 
  • Like
Reactions: JustAsIam77
Upvote 0

faceofbear

Veteran
Aug 3, 2009
1,380
99
Texas
✟24,739.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
In Relationship
Politics
US-Others
JM the post was intended for H, and the point I was getting across through the analogy was exactly why I provided it because H was saying double predestination isn't true, but you can't have one without the other (hence the purpose of the bowl analogy). However, it looks helpful, what you've posted. I'll take a look at it when I'm off work.
 
Upvote 0

faceofbear

Veteran
Aug 3, 2009
1,380
99
Texas
✟24,739.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
In Relationship
Politics
US-Others
Peace Face.

I haven't read all you've posted yet, but I wanted to ask, are there any books that you can recommend which help with answers to the logic behind Calvinism? By that I mean, I don't want a book filled with proof texts (because I don't believe the issue is resolved with proof texts), so something which helps with the logic behind Calvinism, and if it provides some proof texts that is okay as well. I'm just looking for something more philosophically answering objections to Calvinism to understand the viewpoint more thoroughly. As helpful as reading commentaries by Gill, Pink, etc. are, I don't feel the help answer the questions behind the answer. I.E. How can God unconditionally predestine and elect people by the necessity of having Adam sin without being the author of sin and being made the only sinner?

I believe, as much as I go through it over and over in my mind, I don't understand how Calvinism can ever answer a question and that, is probably what prevents me from full on admitting I am a Calvinist. I do believe salvation is by grace alone through faith alone from Christ alone for the glory of God alone, but it makes me uncomfortable concluded that God indirectly forced man to sin by necessity and then punishes them for His deterministic decree. If that brings God glory, so be it, but I don't see how it possibly can. I do not see how God who glorifies on His love, justice, and mercy can be seen as glorious for providing no escape for the majority of population for, in a sense, God's crime.

Now, I don't know if that comes off as harsh, I don't mean it to, but it is something that concerns me gravely and I don't know how to put it more gently. I keep going over it in my mind, but I cannot see how to avoid making God a sinner and then punish man for God's sinning. I hope you see where I am coming from. I think, if you just read this and respond, you won't necessarily understand what I am saying (perhaps you will, you are intelligent), but when you take time to actually think about it, there's no other conclusion then that God sinned and punishes man for it. Call me crazy, but I just don't see how that brings glory to God in anyway, and in a sense even makes God as wicked as Satan. Unless I have a big misconception on the whole thing. However, if it is so, and it glorifies God in someway inconceivable, then I must bow to it because God is God and can do as He pleases and despite as bad as that sounds, at least He has mercy on some.

I am not wishing for any wiggle room of a libertarian freewill, I just want to avoid all instances of making God indirectly a sinner in anyway. It literally makes me nauseous and question the goodness of the God i see portrayed in the Bible.

At any rate, I believe my forum title has proved truthful in case of this post. Sorry for being so long, but if you know any good books, that'd be helpful. Thanks for your peaceable attitude and patience with me.
 
Upvote 0

JM

Confessional Free Catholic
Site Supporter
Jun 26, 2004
17,475
3,732
Canada
✟874,855.00
Country
Canada
Gender
Male
Faith
Protestant
Marital Status
Married
Politics
CA-Others
Any books on logic would do, even secular books on logic. If you google Presuppositionalism, VanTil, Gordon Clark, Scripturalism, Christian logic, etc. you'll find a wealth of info online.

The ultimate end of all things, creation, etc. is for God to bring glory to Himself. We are saved to bring glory to God by displaying His mercy, people are lost to bring glory to God by displaying His justice...all things were created with this in mind.

How is God exalted if He desires to save all and all are not saved? If He loves all and His love doesn't result in their salvation? If He died for all sins, including the sin of unbelief, and people are still lost?

I've posted to much already.

jm
 
Upvote 0

JM

Confessional Free Catholic
Site Supporter
Jun 26, 2004
17,475
3,732
Canada
✟874,855.00
Country
Canada
Gender
Male
Faith
Protestant
Marital Status
Married
Politics
CA-Others
Not Missler the Christian Zionist, alien body snatcher guy again...he's taught at Calvary Chapel for years, AOMIN.Org has already refuted the strange teaching of the Chapel (non-denom, denomination).
 
Upvote 0

daniel82

Newbie
Nov 25, 2010
256
12
✟22,927.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
Then please explain the scripture that is written and not general opinions about free will.

Other verses proving predestination (either for salvation, damnation, or life events):
Proverbs 16:9
Proverbs 20:14
Jeremiah 15:2
Jeremiah 43:11
Ezekiel 31:14
1 Corinthians 2:7
Colossians 2:22
1 Thessalonians 3:3
Romans 8:30
Ephesians 1:5,11

Im sure there are more, but that's what I've found so far.

Maybe I should use the word 'destiny' as opposed to predestination, but I see them as almost synonymous.

i guess i had the wrong definition of predestination mybad i thought it ment that no matter what u do its gonna happen not consiquences for actions if thats what it means then yes everything is predestined
ok that was wrong of me i was being rude but really those book chapter and verses are not examples of predestination pre destination is your destination being chosen or set before hand those examples you gave me or their actions being answered
you live by the gun die by the gun live by the sword die by the sword captive for captive eye for an eye what goes around comes around but you still had to choose to do it therefore for every action is a reaction thats not predestination because you can choose to do or not to do know what i mean to be or not to be that is the question
 
Upvote 0

98cwitr

Lord forgive me
Apr 20, 2006
20,020
3,474
Raleigh, NC
✟464,904.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Constitution
i guess i had the wrong definition of predestination mybad i thought it ment that no matter what u do its gonna happen not consiquences for actions if thats what it means then yes everything is predestined
ok that was wrong of me i was being rude but really those book chapter and verses are not examples of predestination pre destination is your destination being chosen or set before hand those examples you gave me or their actions being answered
you live by the gun die by the gun live by the sword die by the sword captive for captive eye for an eye what goes around comes around but you still had to choose to do it therefore for every action is a reaction thats not predestination because you can choose to do or not to do know what i mean to be or not to be that is the question

Humanistic perception is the perception of free will. Try and see it from God's POV. The lack of punctuation makes my brain hurt btw.
 
  • Like
Reactions: JM
Upvote 0

HinklesHounds

Newbie
Dec 18, 2010
22
1
Eastern Ky
✟22,649.00
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Married
  1. I ask that you read this post and instead of looking at my post as opposing and attacking your beliefs , look at exactly where and by how much we differ and where and how we are the same. And not to get hung up on the ..I'm saying to-mate-oh and your saying ta-mot-oh (actually I'm more likely to say TAMATER :0) ) And tho I do not think this post is going to change your opinion or your beliefs of this topic I do hope it at least shows you why I believe the way I do.

    If you go out to dinner with a group of friends and you want to buy their dinner but you all ready know that one of your friends wont let you pick up the bill for his part of it, but the others will gladly accept your offer .. Is it a waste of time to offer to pay for every ones? Should we say Ill pick up the check for every ones but Franks? ( the friend that will say No) Its the thought behind the offer . Your friends didn't do anything to deserve this favor (unmerited) and you really wish Frank would accept your offer as well, as a way to show the love you have for him as well as the whole group. And just because you make an offer to all doesn't make it a general offer. Each one has the choice to say, No thank you I ll pay for my own. Does not each friend have a place in you heart?
    Even tho we know God knows all. And I will agree that he knows who will be saved and who wont.(Because he knows who will believe in him and who will not in my opinion) Does not mean God has chosen some to be born to be saved and chosen some born to be lost without any hope to be saved. Now I will explain why I believe this. It means God has made a way that all could be saved if they only would believe. If you have a child and he or she turns out to be a thief and is put in prison. Does that mean you dont love them any more? Do you hate them or their actions? If our love is this great for our children . How much greater is Gods love for us? Would you sacrifice your child to save me? I think not. God made the ultimate sacrifice sending his son for us. ….
    John 3:15 That whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have eternal life.
    16 For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life.
    17 For God sent not his Son into the world to condemn the world; but that the world through him might be saved.
    18 He that believeth on him is not condemned: but he that believeth not is condemned already, because he hath not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God.
John 3:15 Explains if you believe you will not perish and you shall have eternal life.
Now whosoever is pretty plain in my opinion. And while I know you are going to say he predestined whosoever would believe , lets look at this thing John 3 :16 tells us why he did this . Because he loved the world. ( does Gods word (BIBLE) relate the word world to be believers ?). He loved the world “SO MUCH” he was willing to make a way for us. His son Jesus!
Verse 17 tells us that God didn't do this to condemn the world...(He didn't do it to predestine people to Hell he did it because if he didn't we all would go to hell) The 2nd part of this verse but that the world through him might be saved. Might... not would meaning that we have the chance or an opportunity to be saved. (if we want to revisit the heathen people on a island thing here again...Who told Noah how to build an ark surly if God can do this he is able to tell someone about Jesus.)
Verse 18 continues that if we believe we will not be condemned but if we believe not we are already condemned now while I’m sure you probably use this ALREADY in this verse to prove your point. I would ask that you consider this. He is telling us here that we are guilty , that we will be judged. Were we not part of the world before we accepted Christ? Are we not supposed to come out from among the world? If God didn't choose to give his Son for us where would we all be heading? I think the biggest problem I have with the way some use the term predestination in the Bible is the Ideal that God doesn't offer salvation to all? If you look at it like this with out Christ sacrifice we were all predestined for hell. Now if you want to argue that we were predestined to hell before God Had the forknowlege of our need for a savior ….well that is as long as it is short , how can you have 1 without the other . Does a Judge set the a sentence before he knows what will be the offence? I think what people are missing here is If you want to use the term predestination take it to the beginning .What did God know? (I do not think I know everything God does so please no quotes on this question) He knew everyone would be lost and if he didn't send Jesus we could not be saved..Agreed?). And He sent him even tho not everyone would believe. And He sent him anyway, he sent him because He loved each one of us enough that he would make that sacrifice. And while not everyone is going to go to Heaven … Is not Christ blood enough to take away the sin of the whole world? Yes !


1st John 2
1 My little children, these things write I unto you, that ye sin not. And if any man sin, we have an advocate with the Father, Jesus Christ the righteous:
2 And he is the propitiation for our sins: and not for ours only, but also for the sins of the whole world.
3 And hereby we do know that we know him, if we keep his commandments.
4 He that saith, I know him, and keepeth not his commandments, is a liar, and the truth is not in him.
5 But whoso keepeth his word, in him verily is the love of God perfected: hereby know we that we are in him.




Yes, it is enough to save all .. so you ask why aren't all saved ? Because they dont believe. If you think it is foolish to preach to the lost thinking that God might save them. If it pleases God its good enough for me. See you can get smart enough know God or his ways. You can try to use all the deduction , science , psychology, carbon dating, or what ever reasoning skills you want to try and figure out Gods ways. But if you learn of anything you will get it (or understand it ) being revealed unto you from God. That doesn't mean we cant discuss God's word but that if we get wisdom or knowledgefrom it will be given by him.
I Corinthians 1:21 For after that in the wisdom of God the world by wisdom knew not God, it pleased God by the foolishness of preaching to save them that believe.








Gods Grace is a unmerited favor. Do we deserve forgiveness? NO! Did we deserve to be given Jesus Christ? NO! We are given Gods grace and then he shows us mercy ( we deserve death but he offers us life) Now what does God expect from us to be faithful and have faith and in turn to do his will, work for him, Jesus told them he would make them fishers of men. He gives us all a job to do I believe. Does this work make us deserve his Grace or his Mercy? No, but it does show our faithfulness. we work to glorify the father not to lift up ourselves in anyway.
Now when do we receive this Grace and his promise ?(even tho he knew all along that he was going to give it to you, me, or whosoever )


Ephesians 1:13 In whom ye also trusted, after that ye heard the word of truth, the gospel of your salvation: in whom also after that ye believed, ye were sealed with that holy Spirit of promise,


As for being able to resist Gods Mercy or the call of salvation . Lets look at Luke 18:18-24
22 Now when Jesus heard these things, he said unto him, Yet lackest thou one thing: sell all that thou hast, and distribute unto the poor, and thou shalt have treasure in heaven: and come, follow me.
Now I'm sure this 1 verse will not be enough to sway you from your belief .I do hope it does at least make you think. For how can someone asking Jesus how to get eternal life and Jesus telling him as he has told us come, follow me and the ruler went away lost with out the Lord, How can this be if we are unable to resist salvation? Did we all answer Gods call and open the door the first time he knocked on our hearts door? If not then we must have resisted. See its not to say that God could not force his will. He has the power to do all things. I think he does a lot in our lives to help us along and point us in the right direction. Even put people in our paths that might witness to us. He even put Jonah in the great fish but still we have to choose to do what he wants. Just him going thru all the trouble with Jonah to get him to go to Nineveh should prove this point alone. Could Not have God just forced him to do his will from the begining?



















So in conclusion , If you ask Do I believe in predestination. Yes , I believe God predestined Jesus to Die on the Cross for our sins that we might be saved. And I'm glad that Not only God but Jesus as well loved me . So while It may not thrill your soul to hear and tell others that... They Loved me SO MUCH , it does mine. If you want to call it an emotional response , I'm OK with that for what is Love if not an emotion. I'm also Glad that God made the plan of salvation simple , that all could understand it. And while I do think That God wants us to learn of him and to seek wisdom and knowledge in his word. I'm glad that we only need to know nothing save Jesus (Son of God ,born ,crucified, risen, and coming again ) to be saved.



Sorry for all the lines in this post I wrote it in my word program . And I came to this site to draw strength from one another and to rejoice in what we have together as Christians . Not to argue about what we have and others don't. And while I do enjoy reading and commenting on some of these threads. A lot of them seem repetitive Calvins /vs the world . And not to say that I dont share some of the same beliefs and when I dont I have no problem discussing any and all of my beliefs. Nor showing the verses that make me believe the way I do. I am afraid tho I am being perceived as confrontational which is not my wish. And If I can manage it, this will be my last post on this tread and topic.
Thank you all and God Bless!
 
Upvote 0

Shulamite

My Bridegroom suffered this for ME
Oct 12, 2007
2,347
121
56
USA
✟25,625.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
This might be useful.

The Meaning of "FOREKNEW" in Romans 8:29

This is from the Appendix of the book "The Five Points of Calvinism: Defined, Defended, Documented" by David N. Steele and Curtis C. Thomas.

THE MEANING OF “FOREKNEW” IN ROMANS 8:29

"For whom He foreknew, He also predestined to be conformed to the image of His Son, that He might be the firstborn among many brethren. Moreover whom He predestined, these He also called; whom He called, these He also justified; and whom He justified, these He also glorified." Romans 8:29,30

Broadly speaking there have been two general views as to the meaning and use of the word “foreknew” in Romans 8:29. One class of commentators (the Arminians) maintain that Paul is saying that God predestined to salvation those whom He foreknew would respond to His offer of grace (i.e., those whom He saw would of their own free will repent of their sins and believe the gospel). Godet, in commenting on Romans 8:29, asks the question: “In what respect did God thus foreknow them?” and answers that they were “foreknown as sure to fulfill the conditions of salvation, viz. faith; so: foreknown as His by faith.” 1 The word "foreknew” is thus understood by Arminians to mean that God knew beforehand which sinners would believe, etc., and on the basis of this knowledge He predestined them unto salvation.
The other class of commentators (the Calvinists) reject the above view on two grounds. First, because the Arminians’ interpretation is not in keeping with the meaning of Paul’s language and second, because it is out of harmony with the system of doctrine taught in the rest of the Scriptures. Calvinists contend that the passage teaches that God set His heart upon (i.e., foreknew) certain individuals; these He predestined or marked out to be saved. Notice that the text does not say that God knew SOMETHING ABOUT particular individuals (that they would do this or that), but it states that God knew the individuals THEMSELVES – those whom He knew He predestined to be made like Christ. The word “foreknew” as used here is thus understood to be equivalent to “foreloved” – those who were the objects of God’s love, He marked out for salvation.

The questions raised by the two opposing interpretations are these: Did God look down through time and see that certain individuals would believe and thus predestine them unto salvation on the basis of this foreseen faith? Or did God set His heart on certain individuals and because of His love for them predestine that they should be called and given faith in Christ by the Holy Spirit and thus be saved? In other words, is the individual’s faith the cause or the result of God’s predestination?

A. The meaning of “foreknew” in Romans 8:29
God has always possessed perfect knowledge of all creatures and of all events. There has never been a time when anything past, present, or future was not fully known to Him.* But it is not His knowledge of future events (of what people would do, etc.) which is referred to in Romans 8:29,30, for Paul clearly states that those whom He foreknew He predestined, He called, He justified, etc. Since all men are not predestined, called, and justified, it follows that all men were not foreknown by God in the sense spoken of in verse 29.

It is for this reason that the Arminians are forced to add some qualifying notion. They read into the passage some idea not contained in the language itself such as those whom He foreknew would believe etc., He predestined, called and justified. But according to the Biblical usage of the words “know,” “knew,” and “foreknew” there is not the least need to make such an addition, and since it is unnecessary, it is improper. When the Bible speaks of God knowing particular individuals, it often means that He has special regard for them, that they are the objects of His affection and concern. For example in Amos 3:2, God, speaking to Israel says,“You only have I known of all the families of the earth; therefore I will punish you for all your iniquities.” The Lord knows about all the families of the earth, but He knew Israel in a special way.* They were His chosen people whom He had set His heart upon. See Deuteronomy 7:7,8; 10:15. Because Israel was His in a special sense He chastised them, cf. Hebrews 12:5,6.*God, speaking to Jeremiah, said, “Before I formed you in the womb, I knew you,” (Jeremiah 1:5). The meaning here is not that God knew about Jeremiah but that He had a special regard for the prophet before He formed him in his mother’s womb. Jesus also used the word “knew” in the sense of personal, intimate awareness. “On that day many will say to me, ‘Lord, Lord, did we not prophesy in your name, and cast out demons in your name, and do many mighty works in your name?’ And then will I declare to them, ‘I never knew you; depart from me, you evildoers’ “ (Matt. 7:22,23). Our Lord cannot be understood here as saying, I knew nothing about you, for it is quite evident that He knew all too much about them – their evil character and evil works; hence, His meaning must be, I never knew you intimately nor personally, I never regarded you as the objects of my favor or love. Paul uses the word in the same way in I Corinthians 8:3, “But if one loves God, one is known by him,” and also II Timothy 2:19, “the Lord knows those who are His.” The Lord knows about all men but He only knows those “who love Him, who are called according to His purpose” (Rom 8:28) – those who are His!

Murray’s argument in favor of this meaning of “foreknew” is very good.*“It should be observed that the text says ‘whom He foreknew’; whom is the object of the verb and there is no qualifying addition.* This, of itself, shows that, unless there is some other compelling reason, the expression ‘whom he foreknew’ contains within itself the differentiation which is presupposed. If the apostle had in mind some ‘qualifying adjunct’ it would have been simple to supply it. Since he adds none we are forced to inquire if the actual terms he uses can express the differentiation implied. The usage of Scripture provides an affirmative answer. Although the term ‘foreknew’ is used seldom in the New Testament, it is altogether indefensible to ignore the meaning so frequently given to the word ‘know’ in the usage of Scripture; ‘foreknow’ merely adds the thought of ‘beforehand’ to the word ‘know’. Many times in Scripture ‘know’ has a pregnant meaning which goes beyond that of mere cognition. It is used in a sense practically synonymous with ‘love’, to set regard upon, to know with peculiar interest, delight, affection, and action (cf. Gen 18:19; Exod. 2:25; Psalm 1:6; 144:3; Jer. 1:5; Amos 3:2; Hosea 13:5; Matt 7:23; I Cor. 8:3; Gal. 4:9; II Tim. 2:19; I John 3:1).* There is no reason why this import of the word ‘know’ should not be applied to ‘foreknow’ in this passage, as also in 11:2 where it also occurs in the same kind of construction and where the thought of election is patently present (cf. 11:5,6). When this import is appreciated, then there is no reason for adding any qualifying notion and ‘whom He foreknew’ is seen to contain within itself the differentiating element required. It means ‘whom he set regard upon’ or ‘whom he knew from eternity with distinguishing affection and delight’ and is virtually equivalent to ‘whom he foreloved’. This interpretation, furthermore, is in agreement with the efficient and determining action which is so conspicuous in every other link of the chain – it is God who predestinates, it is God who calls, it is God who justifies, and it is He who glorifies. Foresight of faith would be out of accord with the determinative action which is predicated of God in these other instances and would constitute a weakening of the total emphasis at the point where we should least expect it….It is not the foresight of difference but the foreknowledge that makes difference to exist, not a foresight that recognizes existence but the foreknowledge that determines existence. It is a sovereign distinguishing love.” 2

Hodge observes that “as to know is often to approve and love, it may express the idea of peculiar affection in this case; or it may mean to select or determine upon….The usage of the word is favourable to either modification of this general idea of preferring. ‘The people which he foreknew,’ i.e., loved or selected, Rom. 11:2; ‘Who verily was foreordained (Gr. foreknown), i.e., fixed upon, chosen before the foundation of the world.’ I Peter 1:20; II Tim. 2:19; John 10:14,15; see also Acts 2:23; I Peter 1:2. The idea, therefore, obviously is, that those whom God peculiarly loved, and by thus loving, distinguished or selected from the rest of mankind; or to express both ideas in one word, those whom he elected he predestined, etc.” 3

Although God knew about all men before the world began, He did not know all men in the sense that the Bible sometimes uses the word “know,” i.e., with intimate personal awareness and love. It is in this latter sense that God** foreknew* those whom He predestined, called, and justified, as outlined in Romans 8:29,30!

B. Romans 8:29 does not refer to the foresight of faith, good works, etc.
As was pointed out above, it is unnecessary and therefore indefensible to add any qualifying notion such as faith to the verb foreknew in Romans 8:29. The Arminians make this addition, not because the language requires it, but because their theological system requires it – they do it to escape the doctrines of unconditional predestination and election. They read the notion of foreseen faith into the verse and then appeal to it in an effort to prove that predestination was based on foreseen events. Thus particular individuals are said to be saved, not because God willed that they should be saved (for He willed the salvation of everyone) but because they themselves willed to be saved. Hence salvation is make to depend ultimately on the individual’s will, not on the sovereign will of Almighty God – faith is understood to be man’s gift to God, not God’s gift to man.



Yes, and AMEN. Perfectly said. 100% agreed. :amen:
 
Upvote 0