Does God already know who is going to be saved and who won't?

[Reformationist]

I believe that all are predestined to BE with YH'SHWH, FOREVER.

Many choose not to.

Aside from the fact that you took every one of those quotes out of context, are you actually contending that God has sovereignly ordained the predestination unto salvation of all people but it doesn't work out as He planned because the creation's choice thwarts the eternal plan of God?

YH'SHWH is LOVE.
All are CHOSEN,
but
Many choose not to be CHOSEN.

So God chooses to save everyone but man overrides God's plan to save everyone because he "chooses not to be chosen?"

Well, that's a very man sovereign idea of God's plan. I'm truly sorry that you feel that God is so impotent that He can't even bring His own desires to pass.

God bless

 

[kickingsacredcows]

So this means we don't really have free will? At least in terms of being eternally saved, I don't think God cares whether I have a Mountain Dew or a Coke right now.

This brings a dilemma to my mind. Why does God (who is a loving, caring God) create a human being when He knows that creation will not choose him and suffer eternally? Sorry if this question has been posed before.

This question HAS been posed before, and I'll be more than happy to show you where, and God's answer. The apostle Paul posed it in Romans chapter 9 in a discussion of God's sovereignty in regards to election. In verses 6-18 he lays the groundwork for his sovereign election. Here they are:

6 Not as though the word of God hath taken none effect. For they are not all Israel, which are of Israel:
7 Neither, because they are the seed of Abraham, are they all children: but, In Isaac shall thy seed be called.
8 That is, They which are the children of the flesh, these are not the children of God: but the children of the promise are counted for the seed.
9 For this is the word of promise, At this time will I come, and Sarah shall have a son.
10 And not only this; but when Rebecca also had conceived by one, even by our father Isaac;
11 (For the children being not yet born, neither having done any good or evil, that the purpose of God according to election might stand, not of works, but of him that calleth
12 It was said unto her, The elder shall serve the younger.
13 As it is written, Jacob have I loved, but Esau have I hated.
14 What shall we say then? Is there unrighteousness with God? God forbid.
15 For he saith to Moses, I will have mercy on whom I will have mercy, and I will have compassion on whom I will have compassion.
16 So then it is not of him that willeth, nor of him that runneth, but of God that sheweth mercy.
17 For the scripture saith unto Pharaoh, Even for this same purpose have I raised thee up, that I might shew my power in thee, and that my name might be declared throughout all the earth.
18 Therefore hath he mercy on whom he will have mercy, and whom he will he hardeneth.


Pay close attentin to verses 10-13. Here God has chosen Jacob, the younger brother to rule over Esau the older, and Paul quotes God-"Jacob have I loved, but Esau have I hated". Paul then asks an important question, "Is there unrighteousness with God?". On this question hinges all our faith, because if God is unrighteous we may as well chuck our bibles in the trash can and go party 'till we die. But thank God our bibles are safe from disposal and our faith is sure!

Paul answers and says "God forbid! For he saith to Moses, "I will have mercy on whom I will have mercy, and compassion on whom I will have compassion"".

Paul goes on to show that God raised up Pharoah to show His power, that His name might be declared in all the earth. Paul finishes verse 18 with this, "Therefore hath he mercy on whom he will have mercy, and whom he will he hardeneth."

There you have it. God hardens some and shows mercy to others, and all according to his will and pleasure. bless his holy name!

But the discussion isn't over yet! In verses 19-24 Paul anticipates questions and answers them. Here are those verses:

19 Thou wilt say then unto me, Why doth he yet find fault? For who hath resisted his will?
20 Nay but, O man, who art thou that repliest against God? Shall the thing formed say to him that formed it, Why hast thou made me thus?
21 Hath not the potter power over the clay, of the same lump to make one vessel unto honour, and another unto dishonour?
22 What if God, willing to shew his wrath, and to make his power known, endured with much longsuffering the vessels of wrath fitted to destruction:
23 And that he might make known the riches of his glory on the vessels of mercy, which he had afore prepared unto glory,
24 Even us, whom he hath called, not of the Jews only, but also of the Gentiles?


In verse 19 Paul asks the question that I hear a lot, "Why does God find fault? Who has resisted his will?" and variations on the theme such as "How can a righteous God pre-ordain some for mercy and some for destruction?" I've also heard the statement, "I could NEVER serve a God like THAT!", usually with a tone of disgust and contempt.

Pauls answer is beautiful, faithful and cuts to the crux of the matter-"No, but oh man, who are you that replies against God? Shall the thing formed say to him that formed it, "Why have you made me this way?"".

These verses of scripture CLEARLY show God's sovereign will in the election of those whom He choses to call.

The questions Paul asks and then answers are born of a puffed up view of man and a diminished view of God, for anyone asking those questions is in fact putting himself in a position to accurately judge the answer. This is a dangerous position for anyone to put themselves in. This is why Paul cuts to the point quickly by basically saying, "Hey man, shut up! Who do you think you are to question God?"

These verses of scripture then can be an excellent gauge of a persons faith in God, for if someone says, "Yes, I believe in God, just not THAT kind of God who would pre-ordain someone for destruction", you can be certain that the God they believe in isn't the God of Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, or Paul, because all of these believed in THAT kind of God.

I would exhort you to read this chapter over and over. Meditate in it and let the tremendous truth of God's grace towards us fill your heart and mind and trust Him to be the potter, and pay no heed to those who would call God's sovereignty into question.

 

[Reformationist]

kickingsacredcows, that was one of the most wonderful posts I've ever read on this MB. Thank you so much for putting the focus on the sovereign and righteous will of God Almighty.

God bless,
Don

 

[kickingsacredcows]

Don,

Thank you for your kind words. I've been tremendously blessed by your posts which also magnify the Lord and His greatness.

I'll look forward with anticipation to your future posts.

Your brother,

Brian

 

[AVBunyan]

Just thought of something (I'm sure you already know) - if Jesus said:

"let the dead bury their dead." Matt. 8:22

And Paul says the lost are dead, "who were dead in trespasses and sins:" - Eph. 2:1

And Paul says the lost are blinded: "But if our gospel be hid, it is hid to them that are lost:...In whom the god of this world hath blinded the minds of them which believe not, II Cor. 4:3,4

And Paul says the lost don't seek God: "there is none that seeketh after God."
Rom. 3:11

Then how can a dead man choose to jump on a "good" train from God?
Or...why would a dead man who is not seeking God (Rom. 3:11) even want to jump on God's train?

Just wondering

Ya'll have a blessed day now!

 

[Reformationist]

"For he chose us in him before the creation of the world to be holy and blameless in his sight. In love he predestined us to be adopted as his sons through Jesus Christ, in accordance with his pleasure and will-- to the praise of his glorious grace, which he has freely given us in the One he loves."

This does indeed show that God knows who will go to heaven because at the beginning of time he decided who will go to heaven and hell (double predestination).

Regards,

Richard, while I fully agree with your assesment here, I would like to point out, for those who take issue with "double predestination," that "double predestination" is NOT the view of equal ultimacy, which is that God works equally active against the salvation of some as for the salvation of others. The biblical view of double predestination is that God actively works in the lives of His elect to bring them to salvation. He does this by giving them a new heart. As for those He has not chosen, He does not work fresh evil into their hearts. Rather, He leaves them to their depravity and they follow the natural course of a fallen heart and continue, for all their days, flee from God in rebellion.

So, double predestination is that God is active in the lives of His elect, bringing them unto salvation and passive in the lives of the reprobate.

God bless

 

[Benedicta00]

Man can not choose to be choose. God chooses us, we not Him but man can walk away if he chooses or never respond when he is choosen.

There is a huge difference in saying that we choose Him or that we contribute to our own salvation because we respond, we don't do either, we are only merely capable of responding to God when he calls. God made it this way, we had no choice at all in that is what he wills for us, to respond or to reject.

 

[brian78]

Thanks for everyone's posts. I'm not sure I'm any clearer on the idea of predestination than before but I'll just give it up as something that I don't understand.

 

[Believes Gods Sovereignity]

So this means we don't really have free will? At least in terms of being eternally saved, I don't think God cares whether I have a Mountain Dew or a Coke right now.

This brings a dilemma to my mind. Why does God (who is a loving, caring God) create a human being when He knows that creation will not choose him and suffer eternally? Sorry if this question has been posed before.

See brian, he didnt create us to be seperate from him. He created us holy, but adam chose to disobey Gods orders. And now, since all of mankind is lost in sin, how can they choose something holy. "What does darkness have to do with light?"

 

[Curt]

Quote:
Well, that's a very man sovereign idea of God's plan. I'm truly sorry that you feel that God is so impotent that He can't even bring His own desires to pass.

Mans leaning to his own understanding.

The truth is that God is so omnipotent that He can give man total freewill, stand the pain He experiences from those who will choose not to believe everything about Him, and suffer all the pain of their just sentance on Himself in substitution. It was His freewill choice to do it this way.

 

[Reformationist]

Mans leaning to his own understanding.

LOL! Let me guess, you lean not on your own understanding but look to God to direct your path? Tell you what, if I'm leaning on my own understanding and that causes me to place God at the center of my understanding of the Gospel and acknowledge that He is sovereign and NOTHING is outside of His divine providential control then so be it. That's a whole lot better than living under the delusion that God sets Himself up for failure by suffering for those for whom His suffering has no effect.

The truth is that God is so omnipotent that He can give man total freewill

LOL! "So omnipotent that He can give man total freewill?" That is a complete oxymoron. If God has all power then man is not autonomous.

stand the pain He experiences from those who will choose not to believe everything about Him, and suffer all the pain of their just sentance on Himself in substitution.

Tell me something. If God has already suffered all the pain of their just sentence, what, pray tell, will they atone for when they stand before God? It would be completely incongruous for you to say that they must, once again, suffer the pain of their just sentence since God has already suffered it. Even if you take the illogical path that the suffering becomes null and void if they don't accept it you must still address the fact that Christ actually suffered for the same sins they they too must, once again, atone for on their own. Are you contending that if the creation chooses not to believe in Him then it changes history? For example, Christ actually suffered for the sins of Jim Bob but because Jim Bob chose not to accept then Christ's suffering for Jim Bob's sins becomes something that never happened? Or did Christ's suffering for Jim Bob's sins become a futile and vain effort?

It was His freewill choice to do it this way.

Freewill advocates love to use phrases like "grace of God" and "omnipotence of God" but it's very clear that you either don't know what grace and omnipotence really are or you don't mind contradicting yourself.

Is it actually your contention that God consigned Himself to be impotent in the face of your freewill? Do you believe that God is eternally disappointed because some that He wanted to save don't end up being saved? What about verses that clearly state that the Lord will lose NONE of those the Father has given Him?

God bless

 

[Curt]

Some of this is not worthy of any response. Ever since God put those two trees in The Garden man has had the freewill to choose who he will serve. After Adams fall God gave them a law to choose to obey or not. This not for thier total salvation but only to keep them from selling out totally to satan, who had lordship over thier will, until He determined it was the time for Christ to come, and return to them thier freewill to choose. And the Doctrine of predestination is spelled out as God's foreknowledge of those freewill choices. This is Bible Doctrine from Genesis to Revelation, and all your attempts to change it is only a total waste of your time, and the time of those who read your posts. Every one of your posts containing Scripture have to have your own words added to them and totally ignore all the other Scriptures that Identify who those are who will be eternally secure and how it will come about. You also have to try and seperate parts of The Bible, and claim them to be for a certain Group. God says all Scripture is for the perfection of The man of God. You have to come and post that we have to properly interpret Scripture. God says no Scripture is of any private interpretation. Your false doctrine can only be supported by more false doctrine.

 

[Reformationist]

Some of this is not worthy of any response. Ever since God put those two trees in The Garden man has had the freewill to choose who he will serve. After Adams fall God gave them a law to choose to obey or not. This not for thier total salvation but only to keep them from selling out totally to satan, who had lordship over thier will, until He determined it was the time for Christ to come, and return to them thier freewill to choose. And the Doctrine of predestination is spelled out as God's foreknowledge of those freewill choices. This is Bible Doctrine from Genesis to Revelation, and all your attempts to change it is only a total waste of your time, and the time of those who read your posts. Every one of your posts containing Scripture have to have your own words added to them and totally ignore all the other Scriptures that Identify who those are who will be eternally secure and how it will come about. You also have to try and seperate parts of The Bible, and claim them to be for a certain Group. God says all Scripture is for the perfection of The man of God. You have to come and post that we have to properly interpret Scripture. God says no Scripture is of any private interpretation. Your false doctrine can only be supported by more false doctrine.

Okay Curt. You clearly are offended and I don't want to add to that.

However, I extend you an invitation that anytime you want to pit your anthropocentric version of the Gospel against my "false doctrine" you are more than welcome. We'll see whose beliefs show the continuity of the Gospel and center on the sovereignty of the Almighty.

Until then, I pray that the Lord blesses you greatly.

God bless

 

[brian78]

Reformationist,

I think there's a passage in 1 Timothy that reads (I'm paraphrasing) "God wishes that every man would be saved."

I think someone quoted this passage earlier in a post on this thread but didn't give the book or verse for it, but they said that it gets taken out of context.

Can you explain that? It seems odd that God wants everyone to be saved but has already pre-ordained some to hell.

Thanks.

 

[Benedicta00]

See brian, he didnt create us to be seperate from him. He created us holy, but adam chose to disobey Gods orders. And now, since all of mankind is lost in sin, how can they choose something holy. "What does darkness have to do with light?"

Because we are not depraved as some would have you believe. Being dead in our trespasses means that we will die, e.g. go to hell because of our sins if we are not saved by Jesus.

We can choose something holy if God grants us the grace to. Is there any particular reason why God, if he allows all to be born in sin, why He would not also provide a way for all to be saved? Remember Adam’s sin was a free will choice, our free will was not lost, our grace was lost.

 

[Reformationist]

Reformationist,

I think there's a passage in 1 Timothy that reads (I'm paraphrasing) "God wishes that every man would be saved."

The first thing we should take note of is the preceding statement in vv. 1-2:

1 Timothy 2:1,2
Therefore I exhort first of all that supplications, prayers, intercessions, and giving of thanks be made for all men, for kings and all who are in authority, that we may lead a quiet and peaceable life in all godliness and reverence.

So the Paul's initial exhortation is not a reference to "every human being" but rather "all types of people," whatever their station in life. Then, we transition straight into vv. 3-7:

1 Timothy 2:3-7
For this is good and acceptable in the sight of God our Savior, who desires all men to be saved and to come to the knowledge of the truth. For there is one God and one Mediator between God and men, the Man Christ Jesus, who gave Himself a ransom for all, to be testified in due time, for which I was appointed a preacher and an apostle--I am speaking the truth in Christ and not lying--a teacher of the Gentiles in faith and truth.

Now, there are a few different ways to understand this. When we seek to understand Scripture we must interpret the implicit in light of the explicit. Many, who advocate the belief that Christ died for the purpose of saving every single person ever created, would say that these verses are quite explicit. However, in doing so they must either contradict themselves when understanding other Scripture, or, they must imply that Christ, at least partially, fails in achieving His goal of universal redemption. The exception to this, of course, are those that believe that Christ's purpose in obedience unto death was not to accomplish anyone's actual salvation but rather the potential salvation of everyone.

So, in keeping with the doctrines of God's sovereignty, these passages (vv. 3-7) do not purport God's sovereign ordination (decree) of the salvation of every human being. It may refer to God's general benevolence in taking no delight in the death of the wicked, or, more likely, it is a reference to God's desire that all types of people, as is referenced in vv. 1 and 2, be saved. This shows that God does not choose His elect from any single group of people.

Now, with regard to the ransom of Christ for all people, again we must ensure that we interpret with a consistant application of the scope of Christ's atonement in keeping with other passages. Therefore, when Scripture distinguishes between the group for which God died (the elect) in one area, we cannot, then, assign universal implications for His death in another area of Scripture. To do that would be to pit one portion of Scripture against another. So, the "all" in verse 6 is in keeping with vv. 1 and 4 and is a reference to all types of people. It also expresses Paul's conviction that Christ's death was sufficient in value to ransom all of humanity, yet by sovereign design and effect only God's elect are redeemed. The emphasis here, and in reformed theology is that God's intent was limited, not the value of Christ's death.

It seems odd that God wants everyone to be saved but has already pre-ordained some to hell.

Thanks.

This is pretty much what I was referring to before. The only way to get around the clear biblical fact that God has created some as "vessels of wrath PREpared for destruction" before the foundations of the earth is to disregard it altogether. If you do not disregard the clarity of God's Word in areas that clearly show some were ordained to be vessels of destruction then it is much easier to understand that there is no conflict here. Rather, we see the mercy of God in sending His Son as a substitutionary propitiation for those He has set apart unto Himself.

We have a choice when reading Scripture. Will we profess that God desires the universal salvation of His creation, over whom He is Lord, and then be forced to either acknowledge that God fails in achieving that salvation through the death of His Son or assault the clarity of Scripture in it's revelation of the sovereign, providential control of God over all created order and claim the illogical notion that God chose to be impotent in the face of His creation so that their salvation becomes the result of their making the "right choice?"

Or, will we agree that God's providence in directing the steps of His creation is so supreme that while fallen man makes freely willed choices, they are secondary in their effect and are incapable of thwarting the will of the Almighty. The very name of God as Almighty belies the notion that God sovereignly desires something to come to pass and is incapable of bringing it to pass or indifferent as to its outcome.

You see, it really boils down to whether we view our salvation as solely the product of God's grace, or a cooperative effort between God and man. Be very clear here, I'm talking about salvation, not sanctification. Sanctification is a cooperative effort between God and man. Salvation, however, is solely the result of God's merciful application of the merit of His Son upon the unworthy sinner.

We cannot enhance the glory of man in cooperating with God unto salvation without diminishing the grace and glory of God.

So, brian, in a nutshell, is God actually God. Does He bring His divine, eternal will to pass or does His creation, namely us, have the power to stop God from accomplishing whatsoever He sovereignly desires.

God bless

 

[daphndon]

Great posts Reformationist. It really is very simple: either God is sovereign or he is not. You can't have it both ways. I definitely believe, whole heartedly, in God's complete sovereignty and we should be thankful for it. We are depraved. If it was left to the will of man heaven would be empty of humans.

God bless

 

[kc5hwb]

You are correct, Daphndon.

I also believe that if God FORCED himself on us, we would all be living naked in the Garden of Eden right now. (I probably woudn't have many friends!) He gives us free will. But He knows what we will choose. God created "time" and He is not bound by it. Therefore, He can see everything at once. In one respect, those who will choose Him did so before the world was created. He can see everything, not matter when it happens.

 

[daphndon]

I also believe that if God FORCED himself on us, we would all be living naked in the Garden of Eden right now. (I probably woudn't have many friends!) He gives us free will. But He knows what we will choose. God created "time" and He is not bound by it. Therefore, He can see everything at once. In one respect, those who will choose Him did so before the world was created. He can see everything, not matter when it happens.

Could you clarify what you are saying here?

God Bless

 

[Benedicta00]

Great posts Reformationist. It really is very simple: either God is sovereign or he is not. You can't have it both ways. I definitely believe, whole heartedly, in God's complete sovereignty and we should be thankful for it. We are depraved. If it was left to the will of man heaven would be empty of humans.

God bless

But that is just the thing we aren’t depraved. We were not destroyed, we lost grace, fellowship and communion with God and sin entered the world so we are now influenced by it.

Does it make a whole lot of sense that God would have us receive the punishment and penalty of Adam when we bare NO personal guilt in the fall and not give us all a way of salvation? It is like me cutting off your legs with out your consent and condemning you for not being able to run. That is not a sovereign God, that is a sicko God that you describe.

And you also can not have it both ways; either you are born dead in sin spiritually dead and corrupt or your not. Where does this leave babies and mentally handicapped? Their dead, they can’t be both dead and not culpable of sin under your paradigm all at the same time. You would either have to condemn them or change you stand that we are all born corrupt if you believe God gives them salvtion.