Free Will or Predestination

[jpcedotal]

I think the gold medal comment was more on how the post looked, not on what it consisted of...before ya'll get too offended...sheesh

 

[Hupomone10]

Regarding your use of Webster's dictionary:
You initially wrote

Titus 2:14
14 Who gave himself for us, that he might redeem us from all iniquity, and purify unto himself a peculiar people, zealous of good works.
KJV
now take note Please that paul preached that Jesus gave Himself for us, that He MIGHT, redeem us this is talking about the same group of people "US" He died for US that He MIGHT redeem us, might means He may redeem US or it can also mean that HE may not redeem us

and then you wrote

I have already done this once But I will do it again for you>

Webster's Revised Unabridged Dictionary (1913 + 1828)

ARTFL > Webster's Dictionary > Searching for might:
Displaying 1 result(s) from the 1828 edition:

MIGHT, n. pret. of may. Had power or liberty. He might go, or might have gone.
1. It sometimes denotes was possible, implying ignorance of the fact in the speaker. Orders might have been given for the purpose.

First, instead of translating the whole phrase "gave Himself for us that He might redeem us" you singled out one single word and then proceeded to try to determine meaning by defining it by itself.

Second, instead of checking the original languages, you went to Webster's dictionary to determine your interpretation of God's Word. I forgot to tell you. Webster's dictionary is not inspired by God. So when it comes to what a word means, you're saying that I am not allowed to use concordances and the original languages dictionaries or else I'm changing God's Word, but YOU are allowed to use an uninspired dictionary written to define words 200 years later than the Bible translation you're using, and it's ok?

Interesting.

If you can't use concordances and Word dictionaries, then you can't use Webster's either. It isn't inspired and might add-to.


Thirdly,

You continue to ask what I believe 1 John 2:2 says even though I told you in the same post you were quoting the last time you asked me. Oh, I forgot. Limit it to one thought per post...

 

[Hupomone10]

Thirdly,

You continue to ask what I believe 1 John 2:2 says even though I told you in the same post you were quoting the last time you asked me. Oh, I forgot. Limit it to one thought per post...

1 John 2:2
and He Himself is the propitiation for our sins; and not for ours only, but also for those of the whole world.

I'll tell you what I think AND quote someone else.

What I think it's saying is that not only did Christ die for the recipients of John's letter who were believers, but also for the sins of the whole world. He doesn't introduce the topic or doctrine of election into it, so neither do I. And this doesn't mean that all will be saved, just like everyone doesn't accept a gift even though it's freely offered. My former work place offered me two free drinks for the company Christmas party, but I declined. The gift was offered to the whole group. I don't try to re-define things to say that the company was only offering drinks to an elect group that would have the irresistible urge to accept the drink, and that the VP knew this beforehand and thus only had to buy a certain number of drinks. I think they bought drinks enough for all, offered them to all, and those who took the gift experienced the effects of the drinks.

That's what I think. And here's what the writers of the Believer's Study Bible (good ol' Baptist Criswell's group) said:

The universal extent of the atonement of Christ is nowhere clearer than here (cf. John 1:29 "Behold, the Lamb of God who takes away the sin of the world!"), but this does not guarantee that everyone's sin is automatically forgiven. Christ's work applies only to those who believe in Him (cf. 4:15; John 5:24).

And now you know why I quote others, because they can say it in fewer words.

 

[SoulBap6]

The above post should receive a gold medal and 1st place for being the most difficult to read post I've EVER seen on these forums.

I am sorry Skala, I will try to make my responses easier to read. it sometimes is hard to decern some of the beliefs people have, and especially doctrinal issues. I try to see what they are first before saying anything, so I was giving the differences in both Doctrinal issues. I will try not to win the prize.

 

[Skala]

1 Peter 1:2
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.
KJV
Ok I have a question "according to the foreknowledge" what was it God foreknew that He based His election on ? please base this on scripture , not something Spurgeon or John Mac said. for the way i see it, here it explains that His foreknowledge was that He knew who would be sanctified through obedience and of the Blood! if a dead man can't respond to God how can one be obedient? or do we have a choice to be obedient or to be disobedient?

Well, it doesn't say that he foreknew actions.

But it does say that we are elect "according to..." the foreknowledge of God. The phrase "according to" is a phrase of causality or action. It means "by way of" or "by means of". (Check your concordance)

It does not carry the idea of passivity. If "foreknowledge" was just to simply passively or intellectually know about something, then it couldn't be said that anything happened "according" to it.

Matthew Henry says:

Foreknowledge sometimes signifies counsel, appointment, and approbation. Act_2:23, Him being delivered by the determinate counsel and foreknowledge of God. The death of Christ was not only foreseen, but fore-ordained, as 1Pe_1:20. Take it thus here; so the sense is, elect according to the counsel, ordination, and free grace of God.

The question is "how does God's knowledge relate to his sovereignty?"

I submit that the reason God knows something, or knows anything, is because He is sovereign.

 

[Skala]

I think the gold medal comment was more on how the post looked, not on what it consisted of...before ya'll get too offended...sheesh

Exactly.

 

[His_disciple3]

Well, it doesn't say that he foreknew actions.

But it does say that we are elect "according to..." the foreknowledge of God. The phrase "according to" is a phrase of causality or action. It means "by way of" or "by means of". (Check your concordance)

It does not carry the idea of passivity. If "foreknowledge" was just to simply passively or intellectually know about something, then it couldn't be said that anything happened "according" to it.

Matthew Henry says:



The question is "how does God's knowledge relate to his sovereignty?"

I submit that the reason God knows something, or knows anything, is because He is sovereign.

so I guess my next question would be where or what role does faith play in election? if it is by grace through faith that we are saved. and the calvinist god only gives the elected that measure of faith, can the elect choose to be sanctified? can the elect choose to obey? and/or can the elect choose to have the Blood applied? or does the calvinist god force them to use that faith that he has given? and if the elect are forced to use that faith, how is that faith?

now if they are not force to use that faith given by their god, and they do not have the Blood applied, doesn't this alone blow limited atonement out of the water, and if they are forced to use that faith then the Bible is wrong again according to john calvin. for it would not be through faith we are saved but through the might of god to force us to believe, and that is a calvinist definition of whosoever believeth; is it not whoever God elects/forces, so you calvinist have taken belief/faith out of the equation of it is by grace through faith that we are saved ??

then one would have to ask what does a calvinist have faith in; faith that God has saved the elect or faith that he can saved the elect, and if he has saved the elect then they are saved, so why be sanctified, why obey, and/or why have the Blood applied, they were saved before time begin. Is that not according to calvinist when The elect's name was added to the Lamb's book of Life? then one would have to ask if their names are written when elected why did Jesus have to die, for He didn't die that some would be saved He died because they were already saved???? so I guess according to salvation everything else is wrong in scripture except the few times that John calvin saw the word predestination, thus making John righteous and the Bible a lie!!!!! so I guess my next question would be who is more righteous John Calvin or Joseph Smith, but in reality if I am going to follow either one of these two, I might as well toss a coin and let my fate fall in with a toss of the coin!!


no I believe I will trust or use my faith to rely on the Grace given to me by my faith, but this can not lead me to think that I am better than anyone. for God HAS GIVEn EVERY MAN A MEASURE OF FAITH, and I do beleive that EVERY MAN means every man just in as EVERY MAN HAS SINNED means EVERY MAN HAS SINNED!!

 

[iLogos]

Just curious, how does one who does not accept predestination in regards to the elect or chosen resolve this verse?


(Eph 1:4) According as he hath chosen us in him before the foundation of the world, that we should be holy and without blame before him in love:

If you say that God knew who would come to him and elected those then it wasn't God who chose them is it? How do you get around this verse?

 

[DeaconDean]

Here again, I know nobody is going to take me serious, but here goes.

In the Theological Dictionary of the New Testament, Rudolf Bultmann’s work in this area, he says:

In the NT, “proginwskein” is referred to God. His foreknowledge, however, is an election or foreordination of His people (Rom. 8:29; 11:2) or Christ (1 Pet. 1:20) (> ginwskw, 698, 706). In Pastor Hermae, mandata, 4, 3, 4 it simply means God’s foreknowledge (cf. prognwstv in 2 Cl. 9:9). On the basis of prophecy the word “proginwskein” can be used of believers in 2 Pet. 3:17, also as Pastor Hermae, similitudines, 7,5 > eklegw. Another possible meaning in Greek is that of knowing earlier, i.e., than the time speaking (cf. Demosthenes of Athens, 29, 58; Aristotle, Rhetorica, II, 21, p. 1394b, 11; Josephus, Bella Judiacum, 6,8). This is found in Acts 26:5, where the meaning is strengthened by the addition of “anwqen.” In Justin God’s “proginwskein” is Hid foreknowledge (Apol. I, 28, 2 etc.) and the “proegnwsmenoi” are believers (Apol. I, 45, 1 etc.). The polemic against determinism, however, shows that the OT view has been abandoned (Dial., 140, 4). As One who simply knows beforehand, God is called “prognwstv” in Apol., I, 44, 11 etc. as is also Christ in Dial., 35, 7; 82, 1. There is also reference to prophetic foreknowledge in Apol., I, 43, 1; 49, 6 etc. Tatian, of Syria, in Oratio ad Graecos, 19, 3, speaks of Apollo in the same terms, so that what we have here is the Greek understanding."

Theological Dictionary of the New Testament, Edited by: Gerhard Kittel, Translated by: Geoffery W. Bromiley, Vol. V, “prognwskein”, p. 457, Rudolph Bultmann commenting.

Keeping this in mind, according to “The New Analytical Greek Lexicon” by Wesley J. Perschbacker, editor, “proginwskw” is in the future tense. And it can be translated as meaning “to know beforehand, to be previously acquainted with; (Acts 26:5; 2 Pet. 3:17) to determine on beforehand, to foreordain; (1 Pet. 1:20) in the NT, from the Hebrew, “to know, to appoint as the subjects of future privileges, (Rom. 8:29; 11:2).

In each usage of the word “proginwskw” in the NT, in only two instances is the word used in reference to acts done by individuals.

In Acts 2:23, we read:

“Him, being delivered by the determinate counsel and foreknowledge of God, ye have taken, and by wicked hands have crucified and slain.”

-Acts 2:23 (KJV)​

Furthermore, in 1 Pet. 1:20, we read:

“Who verily was foreordained before the foundation of the world, but was manifest in these last times for you,”

-1 Pet. 1:20 (KJV)​

And although there are two different words used in these verses, the meaning of each one is identical. In Acts 2:23, Peter is testifying of how the mob had delivered Jesus into the hands of the Romans to be crucified. And in 1 Pet. 1:20, Peter is relating how the Savior was manifested to provide the atonement. The reference in Acts 2:23 is of particular notice because it draws the foundation of its truth from the beginning of the Bible.

The means God ordains to bring about the salvation of the elect in the same sense as when they come to salvation, varies from one person to the next. For one person it may be as simple as witnessing and presenting the Gospel and what Jesus Christ did for them to bring them to saving grace. And in others, it may take something as drastic as the loss of a loved one or perhaps the loss of ones freedom to bring them to saving grace. The means to which each one comes to the grace of God is different with each person, and not all will come at the same time. That is the essence of predestination.

God predestinated, chose, called the elect before the foundation of the world, then God “foreseen, foreordained” the means to bring us to where we would be saved and as a consequence, we will ultimately be conformed to the image of His Son.

Predestination is the results of God’s choosing, calling, electing us to be His before this world came into existence without any “foreknowledge” or “foreseen” faith or believing or works done on our part that would merit His grace, or love. Furthermore, because He predestinated us, He also foreordained the means (Jesus Christ) by which the elect came to saving faith and grace without respect as to when in the individual’s life that they would come to Him.

Predestination is God saying your mine, foreordination is God saying I’ve made the way possible. It never, never says when this is to happen, just that it will. For some, it happens early, for some a little later on, and still others, even later, but ultimately, God has not lost a single one.

“And now I am no more in the world, but these are in the world, and I come to thee. Holy Father, keep through thine own name those whom thou hast given me, that they may be one, as we are”

-John. 17:11 (KJV)​

The reference to "foreknow" absolutely cannot be in reference to any "foreseen " faith in us, or "foreseen" works done by us, otherwise, our election is because of reward for "foreseen" faith or works, or both.

In essence, God shows respect to one and elects because they will have faith and believe, or God shows respect to one and elects because of some foreseen works we will do, while showing no respect to another because of a lack of foreseen faith or works in another.

This is the Arminian perspective.

This simply cannot be.

"Of a truth I perceive that God is no respecter of persons:" -Acts 10:34 (KJV)

God Bless

Till all are one.

 

[His_disciple3]

Just curious, how does one who does not accept predestination in regards to the elect or chosen resolve this verse?


(Eph 1:4) According as he hath chosen us in him before the foundation of the world, that we should be holy and without blame before him in love:

If you say that God knew who would come to him and elected those then it wasn't God who chose them is it? How do you get around this verse?

you can't take one verse out of scriptures and make a doctrine, Peter said it was by His foreknowledge not free-willed people. To do the will of God is to believe on the Son. no man cometh to the father but through Jesus Christ, nothing about election here, If I be lifted up I will Draw ALL MEN unto me. He died not olny for ours sins but for the sins of the Whole World ! Jesus died for us says Paul one of the chosen that we might be saved, or that we would be saved. it is by grace through faith that we are saved , Again nothing about election here, if truth was revealed here the elect are the Jews, the chosen nation of God, the nation called out to be His nation, whoever blesses Israel will be blessed whoever curses them will be cursed. So if a sovereign God says that I am going to have mercy on who believes in my Son, and as peter says By sanctication by obedience and By the Blood this is the ones that by His fore knowledge He has has mercy on who are you to say that a Sovereign God can't decide whom to have mercy on, By faith Given From God I believe In Jesus the Christ this is what God has elected me by, my Faith In The Son, the Way the truth and the Life nothing about. are we elected then saved as the scriptures says or are we saved as we are elected as John calvin says, Paul said that He died that I would be saved or might be saved, not He died because I have been saved . you have to mixed your verse with all other scriptures contradictive scriptures are the way false doctrines are founded ! the verse you reference top me just talks about why He has elected those to keep them Holy nothing about how , but peter explains how by His foreknowledge of who will receive the Blood>

 

[Skala]

so I guess my next question would be where or what role does faith play in election?

Rom 8:30 "whom he predestined, he called, and whom he called, he justified.."

According to Paul, the reason we are justified is because we were predestined. (not that we were predestined because we were justified). Remember, Paul says justification is by faith, which means that all the called have faith, and are justified. And the called are called based on being predestined. Not vice versa.

Thus to answer your question "What role does faith play in election?", the role faith plays is that it's the result of being elected, not the cause of it.

All of salvation is by free, unearned grace,and it started in eternity past with election/predestination.

 

[iLogos]

you can't take one verse out of scriptures and make a doctrine, Peter said it was by His foreknowledge not free-willed people. To do the will of God is to believe on the Son. no man cometh to the father but through Jesus Christ, nothing about election here, If I be lifted up I will Draw ALL MEN unto me. He died not olny for ours sins but for the sins of the Whole World ! Jesus died for us says Paul one of the chosen that we might be saved, or that we would be saved. it is by grace through faith that we are saved , Again nothing about election here, if truth was revealed here the elect are the Jews, the chosen nation of God, the nation called out to be His nation, whoever blesses Israel will be blessed whoever curses them will be cursed. So if a sovereign God says that I am going to have mercy on who believes in my Son, and as peter says By sanctication by obedience and By the Blood this is the ones that by His fore knowledge He has has mercy on who are you to say that a Sovereign God can't decide whom to have mercy on, By faith Given From God I believe In Jesus the Christ this is what God has elected me by, my Faith In The Son, the Way the truth and the Life nothing about. are we elected then saved as the scriptures says or are we saved as we are elected as John calvin says, Paul said that He died that I would be saved or might be saved, not He died because I have been saved . you have to mixed your verse with all other scriptures contradictive scriptures are the way false doctrines are founded ! the verse you reference top me just talks about why He has elected those to keep them Holy nothing about how , but peter explains how by His foreknowledge of who will receive the Blood>

So your view is the chosen in Eph 1:4 are the Jews? Then your view is God chooses some for special things and others is by chance?

 

[His_disciple3]

So your view is the chosen in Eph 1:4 are the Jews? Then your view is God chooses some for special things and others is by chance?[/quote
twist what you can, I don't think that faith is by chance, if that is the way you see it then that is the way you see it, I listen to a great message from John Mac. today a part of series called the gospel according to Paul. Does anybody know if John mac has dropped from being a calvinist, because he said this morning that Salvation was a Gift from God and one could receive this gift or one could refuse this gift? that really surprised me!

 

[iLogos]

So your view is the chosen in Eph 1:4 are the Jews? Then your view is God chooses some for special things and others is by chance?[/quote
twist what you can, I don't think that faith is by chance, if that is the way you see it then that is the way you see it, I listen to a great message from John Mac. today a part of series called the gospel according to Paul. Does anybody know if John mac has dropped from being a calvinist, because he said this morning that Salvation was a Gift from God and one could receive this gift or one could refuse this gift? that really surprised me!

I'm not trying to twist any thing around I assure you. I am trying to understand you and your view. No I do not think faith is by chance, nothing is I believe by chance and God is always in complete control. Sorry, I am not a Calvinist nor do I know who John Mac is. I am merely a Christian believer who studies to shy thyself approved.

 

[iLogos]

So your view is the chosen in Eph 1:4 are the Jews? Then your view is God chooses some for special things and others is by chance?

twist what you can, I don't think that faith is by chance, if that is the way you see it then that is the way you see it, I listen to a great message from John Mac. today a part of series called the gospel according to Paul. Does anybody know if John mac has dropped from being a calvinist, because he said this morning that Salvation was a Gift from God and one could receive this gift or one could refuse this gift? that really surprised me!

I'm not trying to twist any thing around I assure you. I am trying to understand you and your view. No I do not think faith is by chance, nothing is I believe by chance and God is always in complete control. Sorry, I am not a Calvinist nor do I know who John Mac is. I am merely a Christian believer who studies to show thyself approved. If I happen to align with some Calvinist views it is not intentional, it is simply by what I get from the Bible directly.

So are you ready to answer my question now?

Do you believe God only chose the Jews and the rest is by chance should they accept or not?

 

[His_disciple3]

I'm not trying to twist any thing around I assure you. I am trying to understand you and your view. No I do not think faith is by chance, nothing is I believe by chance and God is always in complete control. Sorry, I am not a Calvinist nor do I know who John Mac is. I am merely a Christian believer who studies to show thyself approved. If I happen to align with some Calvinist views it is not intentional, it is simply by what I get from the Bible directly.

So are you ready to answer my question now?

Do you believe God only chose the Jews and the rest is by chance should they accept or not?

no He chose the Jews, then when they rejected His Son, He allowed the Gentiles to be grafted in, but Take note if He cut off the natural branch He can also cut off the wild one. so if elect means what calvin says it does then calvin again is right and the bible is wrong!, if the elect can be cut off and another elected in, however they can be cut off also then so much for being saved when you are elected!

 

[Hammster]

no He chose the Jews, then when they rejected His Son, He allowed the Gentiles to be grafted in, but Take note if He cut off the natural branch He can also cut off the wild one. so if elect means what calvin says it does then calvin again is right and the bible is wrong!, if the elect can be cut off and another elected in, however they can be cut off also then so much for being saved when you are elected!

You ought to check out the thread on propitiation. Its all about one of your pet verses, 1John 2:2.

 

[iLogos]

no He chose the Jews, then when they rejected His Son, He allowed the Gentiles to be grafted in, but Take note if He cut off the natural branch He can also cut off the wild one. so if elect means what calvin says it does then calvin again is right and the bible is wrong!, if the elect can be cut off and another elected in, however they can be cut off also then so much for being saved when you are elected!

Can we put aside Calvin for a minute? I'm not Calvin one of his relatives or even a Calvinist. I'm just a Christian who has been reading the bible for a long time and love the Lord. I'm trying to have a discussion with you, not about Calvin, but about *your* views.

So if I understand you correctly, you do believe God does chose people or at least he use to, like the Jews, but since they rejected him, he grafted the rest of the nations (gentiles) in. Where I am having a little trouble following you is what are the gentiles, whoever by chance accepts the Lord is suddenly elected or do you place less emphasis on the term elect? Do you think God called every one? Or just some?

 

[His_disciple3]

Rom 8:30 "whom he predestined, he called, and whom he called, he justified.."

According to Paul, the reason we are justified is because we were predestined. (not that we were predestined because we were justified). Remember, Paul says justification is by faith, which means that all the called have faith, and are justified. And the called are called based on being predestined. Not vice versa.

Thus to answer your question "What role does faith play in election?", the role faith plays is that it's the result of being elected, not the cause of it.

All of salvation is by free, unearned grace,and it started in eternity past with election/predestination.

was it by chance then, you failed to post the verse before your verse which mentions foreknowledge, thus taking your verse out of content, and that is how we make man made doctrine:

Romans 8:29-30
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.
30 Moreover whom he did predestinate, them he also called: and whom he called, them he also justified: and whom he justified, them he also glorified.
KJV

I am reminded here of the ones that thought they were saved But Jesus said depart from me I never knew you. even though they had done great works In His name, He never knew them, so who would be created that the Lord would never know, so this is referring to His sheep, the ones that he knew, so if verse 30 is saying what you are saying it is saying, then they were saved before they were predestinated, so then the Bible is wrong when paul said that He died that some would/might be redeemed,it should say that He died for the ones that were redeemed, if we are to make calvinism a biblical doctrine that is?? which to me we have to say too many times that other verses don't mean what they say, and words don't mean what they normally mean in order to get calvinism from scriptures, but scripture did warn us that there would be man made doctrines and false prophets ( that would change the Word of God), but I think it told us to stay away from them not preach them!!

 

[Hammster]

was it by chance then, you failed to post the verse before your verse which mentions foreknowledge, thus taking your verse out of content, and that is how we make man made doctrine:

Romans 8:29-30
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.
30 Moreover whom he did predestinate, them he also called: and whom he called, them he also justified: and whom he justified, them he also glorified.
KJV

I am reminded here of the ones that thought they were saved But Jesus said depart from me I never knew you. even though they had done great works In His name, He never knew them, so who would be created that the Lord would never know, so this is referring to His sheep, the ones that he knew, so if verse 30 is saying what you are saying it is saying, then they were saved before they were predestinated, so then the Bible is wrong when paul said that He died that some would/might be redeemed,it should say that He died for the ones that were redeemed, if we are to make calvinism a biblical doctrine that is?? which to me we have to say too many times that other verses don't mean what they say, and words don't mean what they normally mean in order to get calvinism from scriptures, but scripture did warn us that there would be man made doctrines and false prophets ( that would change the Word of God), but I think it told us to stay away from them not preach them!!

Even it is talking about those He foresaw would believe (which is different than foreknowing, but we'll roll with it), it still presents a problem for you. Stick with me and see if you can follow this argument.

If foreknew meant that He foreknew who would believe, then it is still limiting. Why? Because those He foreknew would be saved He predestined to be saved (which is oxymoronical in itself), and those are the ones He called. However, if those are the ones He called, how can you say that those He didn't call wouldn't have been saved if they had been called? Or do you believe in two calls, one external and one internal?

So although you view of God seems all warm and fuzzy (God just wants to try really really hard to save everyone), when you actually have to defend what scripture really teaches, it just falls apart.

No need to respond. This was for those following along, not for you. You dismissed it as soon as you saw who UT was from.