Predestination and Foreknowledge

[Mark Corbett]

And the letters to the churches are reporting advise they were given.
It's not hard to figure out that the letters are not to you.
When paul says women should not speak in church, we don't take him seriously.

I take all of the Bible seriously.

 

[SkyWriting]

I take all of the Bible seriously.

So specifically:
You keep your women quiet until they get home to ask questions?
Are you serious?
You consider shellfish an abomination?
"These also shall be unclean unto you among the creeping things that creep upon the earth; the weasel, and the mouse, and the tortoise after his kind, and the ferret, and the chameleon, and the lizard, and the snail, and the mole."

 

[Mark Corbett]

So specifically:
You keep your women quiet until they get home to ask questions?
Are you serious?

Honestly, if you don't take the Bible seriously, why are you here on a Christian forum discussion intended for Christians? I'm not saying you're not a Christian, I'm saying I don't get your motive. Do you just want to stir up trouble?

 

[jimmyjimmy]

Most Christians sooner or later struggle with questions about predestination.

Many Christians don’t like the idea of predestination because it feels unfair. I think the problem is not with predestination itself, but with a lack of understanding about how predestination is related to foreknowledge. Once we understand what the Bible says about predestination and foreknowledge, it is easy to see how predestination is actually a good and encouraging truth which is entirely consistent with God’s justice, love, and even with our free will.

There are two Bible passages which explicitly link God’s foreknowledge with predestination. The first passage is Romans 8:29.

This passage shows us several things about predestination and foreknowledge:
1. The foreknowledge is knowledge related to people, as indicated by the phrase “those whom.”
2. This foreknowledge in some way logically precedes and leads to predestination.
3. The passage does NOT say that God predestines who will have faith.
4. The passage DOES say that God makes a destiny for us whom He foreknew, and that destiny is to become like Jesus.

The second passage which links foreknowledge and predestination is 1 Peter 1:1-2.

This passage shows us some truths similar to the truths we saw in Romans:

1. Being “elect” (which pretty much everyone agrees is the same thing as being chosen or predestined) is based on God’s foreknowledge. That’s what “according to the foreknowledge of God the Father” means.
2. The passage does NOT say that God chooses who will have faith.
3. The passage does indicate that election has to do with both sanctification and forgiveness. Sanctification is the process where we become more and more like Jesus, so this is the same thing that Paul described in Romans 8:29 using the words “to be conformed to the image of His Son”.

What Specific Foreknowledge Leads to Predestination?

The Bible does not specifically tell us. We can’t say for sure. But I think it is possible that Paul and Peter were both referring to the fact that God knew ahead of time who, given the right opportunities and circumstances and help from Him, would freely accept Jesus Christ as Lord and Savior.

In other words, I don’t think the Bible is teaching that God predetermined who would have faith in Jesus. Rather, I think the Bible is teaching that God knew ahead of time who would have faith in Jesus. Then, based on that knowledge, God made a plan (a destiny, a predestination) for these people that their sins would be forgiven and they would be transformed to become like Jesus, and they would live in glory with God forever.

When you understand predestination in this way, you immediately realize that there is nothing unfair about it. In fact, you see that it is an amazing act of love. Even though we have faith in Jesus, we never could have saved ourselves. We never could have changed ourselves from being sinful people to being people who are like Jesus. But God makes sure this happens for everyone whom He knew would be willing to accept Him.

My destiny is not in doubt, and neither is yours, if you believe in Jesus. Predestination is wonderful! Thank God for predestination! God has chosen our destination, and it’s a really good one!

What Does This Have to Do With Calvinism and Arminianism?

You don’t have to understand the terms “Calvinism” and “Arminianism”. These terms are not in the Bible. However, since many Christians use these terms, you might want to know a little about them. These terms refer to two ways of understanding how predestination works. There’s more to Calvinism and Arminianism than predestination, but predestination is an important part of the issue.

The view I just shared above has a technical name: “conditional election.” This view, which represents my best effort to understand the Bible on this issue, is consistent with Arminianism. That doesn’t mean that I am committed to the full system of beliefs which are related to Arminianism, but it does mean that I lean toward an Arminian understanding of predestination.

Calvinists understand the Bible to teach “unconditional election.” They believe that God chose ahead of time who would have saving faith and who would not, and that God’s choice had nothing at all to do with anything He knew ahead of time about what each person would do or would be like.

Since I Lean Towards Arminianism, How Do I Feel About Calvinists?

I thank God for my brothers and sisters in Christ who are Calvinists. Although we disagree on some points of doctrine, we share a common faith in our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ. We are on the same team! I have been greatly blessed by the preaching, teaching, and writing ministries of men like John Piper and Wayne Grudem, both of whom are Calvinist. For me, learning from them is like eating a fish. You eat the meat and throw out the bones. In the case of these men, I have found them serving up huge amounts of delicious, nutritious fish meat which rarely contains more than a few small bones. They are advancing the work of God, and I thank God for them. I feel the same way about less famous Calvinists I know.

It’s fine to discuss issues like this, and they are not unimportant, but I hope Christians will not divide over issues like Arminianism vs. Calvinism. Sadly, some do. I am hoping we can have a discussion that will be peaceful, respectful, and helpful, even as we may strongly disagree on some issues. I also hope that those who are relatively new to this issue will feel free to share thoughts and questions so that the discussion is not dominated by a few of us who have already thought about this a lot.

Giving Thanks Together

Finally, all of us, Calvinists and Arminians alike, should thank God for His great grace, and specifically, that He made a plan for our salvation and uses His great wisdom and power to ensure that plan succeeds.


This OP is a modified version of a post on my blog.

Foreknow = know beforehand. God knew Hs elect. That's easy to understand. To say that He chose those who chose Him makes no sense, first of all, and is not true to the text, secondly.

 

[SkyWriting]

Honestly, if you don't take the Bible seriously, why are you here on a Christian forum discussion intended for Christians? I'm not saying you're not a Christian, I'm saying I don't get your motive. Do you just want to stir up trouble?

Very good. Excellent questions! Yes, my goal is to stir up ones thinking.
It may take years. It did for me.

 

[Mark Corbett]

Foreknow = know beforehand. God knew Hs elect. That's easy to understand. To say that He chose those who chose Him makes no sense, first of all, and is not true to the text, secondly.

I agree that God knows His elect.

But why do you say it makes no sense for God to choose those whom He knew ahead of time would choose to have faith in Him? You may not agree with that, but it does make sense.

As far as it being true to the text, I think it is. It is true to all the text, the whole Bible. That's why I think it is most likely the correct interpretation. It fits with God's goodness and His desire to see all people saved. It fits with the huge emphasis that we are saved by faith and that those who have faith are the ones that are saved. It it true to the text. At least as far as I can understand it. But I'm truly open to explanations and evidence that show otherwise.

 

[DeaconDean]

Foreknow = know beforehand. God knew Hs elect. That's easy to understand. To say that He chose those who chose Him makes no sense, first of all, and is not true to the text, secondly.

I wonder how people get around the Greek word "eis"?

God Bless

Till all are one.

 

[Ron Gurley]

2 Timothy 2:15
Do your best to present yourself to God as one approved, a worker who does not need to be ashamed and who correctly handles the word of truth.

God FOREKNOWS all....omnisicent.
God irrevocabally PRE-DESTINES nothing...He has given man/angels spiritual "free will".

The Calvin T.U.L.I.P. is a complete heresy.

 

[DeaconDean]

2 Timothy 2:15
Do your best to present yourself to God as one approved, a worker who does not need to be ashamed and who correctly handles the word of truth.

God FOREKNOWS all....omnisicent.
God irrevocabally PRE-DESTINES nothing...He has given man/angels spiritual "free will".

The Calvin T.U.L.I.P. is a complete heresy.

Oh brother!

How many times on this forum has this been said.



God Bless

Till all are one.

 

[jimmyjimmy]

I agree that God knows His elect.

But why do you say it makes no sense for God to choose those whom He knew ahead of time would choose to have faith in Him? You may not agree with that, but it does make sense.

As far as it being true to the text, I think it is. It is true to all the text, the whole Bible. That's why I think it is most likely the correct interpretation. It fits with God's goodness and His desire to see all people saved. It fits with the huge emphasis that we are saved by faith and that those who have faith are the ones that are saved. It it true to the text. At least as far as I can understand it. But I'm truly open to explanations and evidence that show otherwise.

It a silly concept, and not true to the texts. God's choice means nothing if He is responding to the choice of man.

"Those" He foreknew. The text states that He knew *people*, not actions.

 

[DeaconDean]

Lets also refer to Rudolf Bultmann’s work in this area:

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.

God Bless

Till all are one.

 

[Ron Gurley]

re: "proginwskein"

Is that German beer in a big mug?

 

[DeaconDean]

re: "proginwskein"

Is that German beer in a big mug?

Let me spell it out for you since you think this is a joking matter.

Pi
Rho
Omicron
Gamma
Iota
Nu
Omega
Sigma
Kapa
Omega

Strongs Number 4267

God Bless

Till all are one.

 

[Mark Corbett]

The Calvin T.U.L.I.P. is a complete heresy.

Ron, in a way you and I agree, but in another way we don't.

I believe that Calvinism is a wrong interpretation of the Bible. We agree about that.

But I would not use the word "heresy", much less "complete heresy". Why?

If one defines "heresy" simply as an error in interpretation or any wrong belief, then Calvinism would, in my opinion, include "heresy". But words have connotations in addition to their basic meaning. The word "heresy" at the very least carries a connotation that someone who believes it is a "heretic" and should be excluded from Christian fellowship until they repent.

I certainly do not feel that way about Calvinists, as I share in the OP. I view them as brothers in Christ. Many of them are being used by God in wonderful ways to advance His Kingdom purposes, shine His light, and share His love.

If our all our theology and interpretations have to be correct to have unity in Christ and work together and be used by Him we're all sunk.

Those of us who participate actively in discussion forums sometimes tend to not have enough grace. I wrote about this in another post, which you and others here may find helpful:

Grace and Truth

 

[Ron Gurley]

BRAVO YANKEE ECHO, Y'ALL

 

[Mark Corbett]

BRAVO YANKEE ECHO, Y'ALL

Until we meet again, go with God's blessing.

 

[Mark Corbett]

God's choice means nothing if He is responding to the choice of man.

Actually it means a lot.
God's choice means . . .
our sins are forgiven,
we are adopted into His family,
we receive the Holy Spirit,
our hearts are made new and transformed,
we begin a process which will end with us being just like Jesus in terms of our character,
eternal life is promised,
and we will experience His glory forever!

God's choice means all the above and much more. This is true whether His choice is based on foreknowledge of who would have faith (conditional election) or if his choice is not based on such knowledge (unconditional election).

I believe that conditional election is much more likely to be true.

 

[DeaconDean]

Actually it means a lot.
God's choice means . . .
our sins are forgiven,
we are adopted into His family,
we receive the Holy Spirit,
our hearts are made new and transformed,
we begin a process which will end with us being just like Jesus in terms of our character,
eternal life is promised,
and we will experience His glory forever!

God's choice means all the above and much more. This is true whether His choice is based on foreknowledge of who would have faith (conditional election) or if his choice is not based on such knowledge (unconditional election).

I believe that conditional election is much more likely to be true.

There is one reason why "conditional election" cannot be true.

If, and that's a big if, if God's election is based on anything other than His divine choice alone, it makes Him a respecter of persons.

If God's election is "conditional" as you say, based upon lets say for instance, "foreseen faith," then you will do something in the future, i.e.: have faith, that causes God to choose you over an individual who will not have faith.

It would be like God sitting on His throne in heaven, looking down the corridor of time, seeing that man "x" will have faith, accept and believe, elects based on that "foreknowledge", while at the same time, seeing that man "y" will not have faith, nor accept and believe, therefor does not elect.

Sorry, I just cannot accept that.

Why Arminian Conditional Election Makes God a Respecter of Persons

God Bless

Till all are one.

 

[jimmyjimmy]

Actually it means a lot.
God's choice means . . .
our sins are forgiven,
we are adopted into His family,
we receive the Holy Spirit,
our hearts are made new and transformed,
we begin a process which will end with us being just like Jesus in terms of our character,
eternal life is promised,
and we will experience His glory forever!

God's choice means all the above and much more. This is true whether His choice is based on foreknowledge of who would have faith (conditional election) or if his choice is not based on such knowledge (unconditional election).

I believe that conditional election is much more likely to be true.

I mean, to say that He is choosing, when He is simply following the choice of men, is to redefine what choice is. God isn't choosing, in your scenario. You've taken the power of choice away from Him and given it to men.

 

[Mark Corbett]

There is one reason why "conditional election" cannot be true.

If, and that's a big if, if God's election is based on anything other than His divine choice alone, it makes Him a respecter of persons.

DeaconDean, I carefully read your comment and I also read the article which you gave a link to. I think I understand your concern that if God predestines some people for salvation based on foreknowledge of their faith in Christ this would seem to make God a “respecter of persons”. The Bible says God is not a “respecter of persons” (as Acts 10:34 and other passages teach). Therefore, you conclude, conditional election cannot be true.

While I think I understand your argument, and that of the article you gave a link to, I am not persuaded by it for several reasons.

First, when the Bible speaks of God not being partial (or a “respecter of persons”) it is speaking of God not giving people special treatment because of things like wealth, education, or their position in society. In fact, the article you linked to explicitly acknowledges this:

And, most importantly, in each of these instances it means neither we nor God give special treatment to a person because of his position, merit, wealth, influence, social standing, authority or popularity.​

The Bible does not say that God never treats people differently for any reason connected with the people. In fact, there are many examples where God treats people differently based on something about them. Here are a few examples:

NIV James 4:6 But he gives us more grace. That is why Scripture says: "God opposes the proud but shows favor to the humble."

God treats people who are proud differently than He treats people who are humble. The Bible says so.

NIV James 4:2 You desire but do not have, so you kill. You covet but you cannot get what you want, so you quarrel and fight. You do not have because you do not ask God.

Based on the above verse, at least sometimes people who ask God for things get things that other people do not get because they did not ask.

In fact, throughout the Bible there are MANY examples of God treating people differently in response to something the person does or doesn’t do.

So God is “not a respecter of persons” in that He does not give preferential treatment to the rich and famous. This does not say anything at all about why he chose to predestine some people to become “conformed to the image of His Son” (Romans 8:29), but not others.

I want to explore this a little further in another comment, Lord willing.