Posted on 04/25/2002 7:05:58 PM PDT by RnMomof7
FOREKNOWLEDGE:
There's More Than Meets God's Eye
"You don't believe in predestination, do you?!" Everyone who openly holds to the doctrines of grace has at one time or another heard this question asked in near hysterical tones. The very question itself implies that predestination is a doctrine dreamed up by some evil disciple of John Calvin, sitting alone in his ivory tower, devising ways of making God appear to be mean and unloving. The reality is that anyone who bows to the authority of the NT believes in predestination, whether they be Arminian or Calvinistic in their theology. The word is, after all, one which is used throughout the NT (e.g., Acts 4:28; Romans 8:29,30; 1 Corinthians 2:7; Ephesians 1:5,11).
The issue is not the existence of predestination as a Biblical doctrine. That is a given. Rather, the real issue in dispute is the basis of predestination. On what grounds has God predestined some to salvation and left others in their sin?
One position states that God's predestining work is performed on the basis of His own independent decree. Nothing outside of His own Being has impelled Him. He has made His own free and independent choice to elect those whom He wills.
There is another position that states that the electing grace of God has been bestowed upon individuals on the basis of God's foreknowledge. This has been expressed in various ways, but put simply, this means that God, in eternity past, has looked down the corridor of time and has seen who will trust Him and who will not. His choice, then, is dependent upon this foreknowledge of the decisions that will be made by each free and independent individual.
James Arminius himself put it like this:
"From this follows the fourth decree to save certain particular persons and to damn others, which decree rests upon the foreknowledge of God, but which he has known from eternity which persons should believe according to such an administration of the means serving to repentance and faith through his preceding grace and which should persevere through subsequent grace, and also who should not believe and persevere." (1)
The purpose of this paper is to demonstrate the error of the position espoused by Arminius and those who followed him in this concept of foreknowledge. I will be enumerating five specific arguments, each of which results in the concept of predestination on the basis of simple foreknowledge falling of its own weight. Taken together, the evidence is unassailable. The arguments can be clearly seen on three fronts: linguistic, biblical and philosophical.
LINGUISTIC ANALYSIS
The biblical term, proginosko, does not carry with it only the meaning of simple advance knowledge or precognition. Rather, the term also carries with it the suggestion of intimate, personal knowledge, as well as the concept of selection or to determine upon.
We must be careful from the outset that we not fall into the error of assuming that the biblical terms in view hold precisely and singularly to the meaning of the terms used in their translation. In this case, that would be an extremely faulty assumption. And yet, although this was not the case for Arminius, the idea that proginosko contains only the meaning of the English word "foreknowledge" is the foundation of much misunderstanding and error. One cannot go to a twentieth-century English dictionary and expect to accurately discover the meaning of a first-century Greek word. We must, instead, refer to those sources that will inform us concerning how the term under examination was used in the first century, both in Biblical and extrabiblical literary works.
When we do this we find that "foreknowledge" consists of not merely precognition, but speaks of a relationship with an individual in God's eternal present. Thus, the word "foreknew", as used here, is understood to be equivalent to "foreloved" - those who were the objects of God's love, he marked out for salvation. This use of the term is prevalent throughout the Scriptures. See Gen. 18:19; Ex. 2:25; Psalm 1:6; 144:3; Amos 3:2, cf. Deuteronomy 7:7,8; 10:15; Jeremiah 1:5; Hosea 13:5; Matt. 7:22,23; 1 Corinthians 8:3; Galatians 4:9; 2 Timothy 2:19; and 1 John 3:1.
To take only a few examples:
"You only have I known of all the families of the earth: therefore I will punish you for all your iniquities." -- Amos 3:2 (KJV)
Unless one wishes to jettison the doctrine of God's omniscience, one must believe that God knew all the families of the earth and furthermore, knew all about all of the families of the earth. How then, can He say "You only have I known …"? The answer must be that He knew Israel in a way that He did not know any other family. And this is indeed the case. Israel was the family that was uniquely God's. They were His chosen people. And so we see the idea of "knowing" here demonstrating both the quality of relationship and the quality of selection or determination. In fact, it is interesting to note the ways in which various translations handle the Hebrew of this verse. The RSV, ASV, and KJV all translate the verse as above, "You only have I known …" However, the NIV and the NASB both translate this verse, "You only have I chosen …"
"Before I formed you in the womb I knew you, And before you were born I consecrated you; I have appointed you a prophet to the nations." -- Jeremiah 1:5 (NASB)
Certainly, God is not merely saying that He knew "about" Jeremiah, but that He knew Jeremiah intimately and personally, He had a special regard for him while Jeremiah was yet in his mother's womb. In addition, not only was Jeremiah known, but even before he was born he was consecrated, set aside, marked out, not on the basis of anything Jeremiah did, or anything God saw. God simply says, "I did it."
Jesus uses the term in the same way when He provides this vivid description of the judgement to come:
"Many will say to Me on that day, 'Lord, Lord, did we not prophesy in Your name, and in Your name cast out demons, and in Your name perform many miracles?' And then I will declare to them, 'I never knew you; DEPART FROM ME, YOU WHO PRACTICE LAWLESSNESS.'" -- Matthew 7:22-23 (NASB)
In what way did Christ not know them? According to the text, He knew them better than they would have wanted Him too! The meaning must be that He never had a personal, intimate, loving relationship with them.
One other clear passage in this regard is 1 Corinthians 8:3:
"if anyone loves God, he is known by Him." (NASB)
Does God not know about those who do not love God? Of course He does. He is omniscient. He knows everything there is to know about everyone. So in what way does He know those who love God, that he does not know those who do not love God? The answer must be, as we have seen elsewhere, that He knows them in the sense of a relationship which does not exist between He and those who do not love Him.
This view of foreknowledge is confirmed in the article on Divine Foreknowledge by J.M. Gundry-Volf, in the Dictionary of Paul and His Letters :
"The Pauline notion of divine foreknowledge is understood by many interpreters as a knowing in the Semitic sense of acknowledging, inclining toward someone, knowledge which expresses a movement of the will reaching out to personal relationship with someone. This kind of knowing is illustrated by the meaning of the Hebrew word 'yada', 'to know' in texts such as Amos 3:2; Hosea 13:5; and Jeremiah 1:5. The Hebrew verb can come close in meaning to 'elect'. The Greek verb 'ginosko' can also have the sense of acknowledging someone as in Gal. 4:9 and 1 Cor. 8:3 in which the term is used to refer to God's 'knowledge' of human beings which is the basis for their coming to know or love God .... In Rom. 8:29, foreknowledge denotes the exercise of God's will to establish a special relationship with those whom God graciously elects before all time ... Foreknowledge as divine choice is thus the basis of predestination to glorification with Christ." (2)
Also, from the Dictionary of New Testament Theology:
"In Paul - he assumes the aspect of a personal relationship with a group of people which originates in God himself…In Rom. 11:2 the vb. expresses God's election and love of Israel ….
In Peter - 1 Peter 1:20 says that Christ was 'foreknown' or 'destined (proegnosminou) before the foundation of the world' (RSV)." (3)
One who will limit the meaning of foreknowledge to mere precognition will be hard pressed to explain what possible significance there would be in saying that the Father knew about Christ before the foundation of the world. But for Peter to be emphasizing the love relationship between the Father and the Son, it seems to me, would be extremely significant, in the light of the contextual discussion of His redemptive mission. The point that Peter seems to be making is that although the Father and the Son "knew" each other, that is, had an intimate, love relationship, before the foundation of the world, yet (see the connective "but" in v. 20) He appeared in these last times for the sake of you …" The necessary connection is between the perfect love-relationship that existed with the Father, and the sacrifice of that relationship in its face to face form in order to appear in human flesh to accomplish our redemption (Phil 2:5-8). If one wishes to limit the meaning of "foreknowledge" to simple precognition, the entire force of Peter's argument is negated.
One may examine any of the standard lexicogriphal sources, from BAGD to Kittel to Brown and one will find that what has been described above is the normal and full meaning of the term.
It is also instructive to observe how various translators have dealt with the relavent passages:
Moffatt's Translation
"For he decreed of old that those whom he predestined should share in the likeness of his Son …" (Romans 8:29).
Goodspeed's Translation
"For those whom he had marked out from the first he predestined to be made like his Son …" (Romans 8:29).
"whom God the Father has chosen and predestined …" (1 Peter 1:2).
"who indeed was foreordained before the foundation of the universe was laid …" (1 Peter 1:20).
Phillip's New Testament
"whom God the Father knew and chose long ago to be made holy by his Spirit …" (1 Peter 1:2).
"It is true that God chose him to fulfill his part beore the world was founded …" (1 Peter 1:20)
William's New Testament
"For those on whom he set his heart beforehand he marked off as His own to be made like His Son …" (Romans 8:29).
"who was foreordained …" (1 Peter 1:20).
It should be noted that none of these translators are known for being overtly Calvinistic in their theology.
In order to further support the fact that this idea of relationship and selection is indeed the meaning behind the Greek term, proginosko, let us move on to our second point.
THE OBJECTS OF GOD'S FOREKNOWLEDGE
God does not say that He foreknew the decisions that individuals would make, but rather, He foreknew the individuals themselves.
As we have seen, the common Arminian explanation of foreknowledge is that God foreknows those who would believe. That is, He foresees that some will trust in Christ and some will not, and then predestines on that basis. However, upon a close reading of Rom. 8:29 we see that this is simply not what the text says.
Let us examine this crucial passage more closely. Romans 8:29 says,
"For whom He foreknew, He also predestined to become conformed to the image of His Son, that He might be the firstborn of many brethren."
Notice who or what is foreknown. Is it a decision? Is it a quality, such as faith? No! Rather, it is a person. An individual is known. Paul is making a relational statement. God foreknows persons, not merely events or decisions.
What we find in this passage is that those to whom Paul refers to as "the called" and those who Paul says were foreknown by God, are the same ones who were predestined by God. In each link of this golden chain, we have men portrayed as the passive recipients of God's gracious action. God calls them. God predestines them. He justifies them, and He glorifies them. If every subsequent link in the chain demonstrates God's activity and man's passivity, why should we think that the very first link in the chain, God's foreknowing, would portray precisely the opposite picture?
John Murray makes this point in His commentary on Romans:
"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 exist, not a foresight that recognizes the existence but the foreknowledge that determines existence. It is a sovereign distinguishing love." (4)
And so we see that the Arminian view of God's foreknowledge in relation to predestination crumbles in the face of both the linguistics and the grammar of the most crucial passage in the discussion.
But that is not all. The case continues to build. What about the logic of the argument? As we will see, the Arminian view fails this test, as well.
ARMINIAN "FOREKNOWLEDGE" MAKES ELECTION SENSELESS
To assert that proginosko means only precognition is to strip predestination and election of any real meaning.
This conclusion seems unavoidable. If God's elective action is based upon what He already knows is going to happen …. what is there to elect? In the Arminian view, God has already seen who will trust in Him and who will not. Furthermore, He has done nothing to infringe upon the will of any individual in order to cause this trust. What then is the content of this predestination? To what is God predestining them? It cannot be salvation, since He already sees that they will be saved.
What this view does, in essence, is to make God a cosmic plagarist - He has read the book, decided He likes it, and then has simply declared Himself to be the author. In the Arminian reality, however, He has had nothing to do with the production of the book. Those who will freely trust Him are actually the ones who wrote it. And yet God comes along to take the credit. Although Paul says that God performed the actions of predestining and calling, the Arminian denies these divine actions by positing a series of future decisions in which God has had no part. If the decisions of individuals to trust Christ is foreknown, and yet, man is free, God has no real role in the process described by the apostle. The concepts of predestination and calling have no real content. They have become empty vessels that communicate no true reality.
This should become even more obvious as we see the next implication of this inadequate view of foreknowledge.
LOGIC DEMANDS A FIXED FUTURE
The denial of a real predestination provides no escape from certainty of outcome.
The stripping of predestination and election of their full force of meaning does not accomplish what the Arminian wishes. Indeed, he is left with the same difficulty. If God knows what I am going to do, whether or not the cause of my action is His preordination, then it must be certain that I will perform that action, make that decision, speak those words, etc. The Arminian, then, is faced with the same lack of freedom that he finds so abhorrent in the concepts of predestination and election. The only difference is that he has now lost not only his freedom, but also the very existence of a completely sovereign God.
Simply put, what God foreknows, must, of necessity, be as fixed as that which He has decreed. Therefore, to argue for foreknowledge over against predestination by appealing to the freedom of the will is to argue in a self-contradictory fashion. No event can be foreknown unless, in some sense, it has been predetermined. If it has not been predetermined, it would not be certain, and therefore God's foreknowledge, as the Arminian thinks of foreknowledge, would be useless since the Arminian idea of foreknowledge posits the fact that God is seeing what will actually take place. And so, the Arminian is left with an inconsistency. He must admit to the certainty of future events or forgo the foreknowledge of God, yet he also wishes to maintain the absolute freedom of the individual in regard to their decision-making process. Unfortunately for the Arminian, these two positions are logically irreconcilable.
Foreknowledge demands certainty, and certainty demands foreordination.
There is yet one additional argument against the Arminian position that needs to be addressed. It is probably the most important argument to be made.
ARMINIAN "FOREKNOWLEDGE" GLORIFYS MAN
To say that what is foreseen is someone's faith, or their decision to trust Christ, is to place the ground of our calling and election in us, making our salvation no longer of grace.
John Wesley himself has written:
"We must not think they are because he knows them. No; he knows them because they are. Just as I (if one may he allowed to compare the things of men with the deep things of God) now know the sun shines: Yet the sun does not shine because I know it, but I know it because he shines. My knowledge supposes the sun to shine; but does not in anywise cause it. In like manner, God knows that man sins; for he knows all things: Yet we do not sin because he knows it, but he knows it because we sin; and his knowledge supposes our sin, but does not in anywise cause it. In a word, God, looking on all ages, from the creation to the consummation, as a moment, and seeing at once whatever is in the hearts of all the children of men, knows everyone that does or does not believe, in every age or nation. Yet what he knows, whether faith or unbelief, is in nowise caused by his knowledge. Men are as free in believing or not believing as if he did not know it at all." (5)
Leaving aside for the moment the obvious fallacy in Wesley's argument, that being the comparison between God's relationship to his creation and Wesley's relationship to the sun (the crucial distinction being that God is the Creator and Wesley is not), let us focus on Wesley's final statement.
"Men are as free in believing or not believing as if he (God) did not know it at all."
This statement immediately brings forth the observation that although, according to Wesley, all are free, it is apparent that not all choose to trust Christ. That observation now raises a question that begs for an answer. If all are free, why do some come to Christ while others reject Him? The Arminian will certainly answer, "Because it is a matter of choice. All are free to choose however they wish." But surely that is too superficial and begs the real question. We must go deeper. Why is it that people make the choices that they do?
Although the Scripture could not be more plain in announcing the fact that there is "no one who does good, there is not even one" (Romans 3:12), and that there is "none who seeks for God" (Romans 3:11), surely the Scriptures must be wrong on this point. For if our salvation is a matter of our own choice, there must be something good within us that is causing us to seek God. The Arminian has no choice but to call Paul a liar and to deny the inspired Word of God!
Furthermore, whatever it is that exists within the person who chooses to trust Christ, must necessarily be lacking in the person who does not trust Christ. Where then, is the vaunted freedom that the Arminian is so concerned to protect? It is destroyed by his own system. What has happened to human responsibility in the Arminian scheme? It does not exist, because the Arminian view of freedom has destroyed it. There is something, whether internal or external, which causes one man to turn to Christ and another to turn away. Most importantly, where is grace? Grace is no more. I can now boast in my salvation because there is something within me that my neighbor does not possess. There is something that has enabled me to believe, when my neighbor cannot. There is no grace here. There is a salvation based on human merit and ability.
In the Arminian scheme there is something within the creative work of God that has done this. Be it a part of the man, or a part of his environment, there are forces working on his will. The result is that no man is truly free, as the Arminian wishes to believe. The only question that remains to be answered concerns who or what is impinging on the will.
The Scripture tells us that God foreloved his people. He chose them before the foundation of the world. He had mercy on them and made them alive in Christ, even while they were yet dead in trespasses and sins. He took from them their heart of stone and put within them a heart of flesh so that they might believe. The Scripture is clear. Absolute freedom of the will is a myth. Our will is controlled by something. It is controlled by our fallen nature which blinds us to the things of God and makes us unable to will to love Him, or our will has been taken by a loving Father. By His hand, He has turned us to Him. By His graciousness, He has caused us to love Him.
The Arminian really has only two choices if he is concerned with consistency. In the final portion of this paper we will examine those choices. Only one is a Biblical option, although many who were once Arminian and still refer to themselves as such have gone in the other direction.
TWO ROADS DIVERGED …
This dilemma in which the Arminian finds himself can be avoided in one of two ways. One is to submit to the Biblical teaching concerning God's ultimate sovereignty in election. The other choice, which is gaining a foothold in evangelicalism in our day, is to give up God's sovereignty all together and stake out the position of men such as Clark Pinnock and Greg Boyd. These men are moving in the direction of Process Theology and have openly denied that God has any foreknowledge whatsoever. They represent the modern version of the Socinians. At the point of foreknowledge, they are at least more consistent than Arminians. They deny that God has foreknowledge. God cannot know the free acts of free agents. This is only logical, because they see the truth in point four, above. If something is foreknown, then it must, of necessity, be certain, and therefore, not free. Pinnock, Boyd, and others, have simply followed the logic of the problem and come to the conclusion, unbiblical though it is, that God does not know what decisions and actions His free creations will make and perform. And so a redefinition must take place. Omniscience no longer is defined as God knowing all things, but rather that God knows all that can be known. Listen to Pinnock himself:
"Obviously God must know all things that can be known and know them truly. To be able to know all that can be known is a dimension of God's power….omniscience need not mean exhaustive foreknowledge of all future events. If that were its meaning, the future would be fixed and determined, much as is the past. Total knowledge of the future would imply a fixity of events. Nothing in the future would need to be decided. It also would imply that human freedom is an illusion, that we make no difference and are not responsible." (6)
"It would seriously undermine the reality of our decisions if they were known in advance, spelled out in a heavenly register and absolutely certain to happen. It would make the future fixed and certain and render illusory the sense of our making choices between real options…This implies that God learns things…If this matter of God's learning surprises anyone, be reminded that simple foreknowledge also implies that God learns from what creatures do. I am not speaking in a temporal sense now but in the sense that part of what God knows depends on what creatures do." (7)
These statements by Pinnock can be multiplied many times over with statements by other "evangelical" theologians, such as Gregory Boyd, Richard Rice, William Hasker, John Sanders, David Basinger, L.D. McCabe and Gordon Olson.
The Arminian, if he is to be consistent, must take one of two roads. One of which is the Bibilical teaching that God is completely sovereign and has complete knowledge of all things precisely because he has determined all that will come to pass. The other is to follow the path laid forth by Clark Pinnock, who followed his Arminianism out to its logical conclusion until he arrived at a God who is no longer recognizable as the all-knowing, all-powerful God of the Bible.
Both of these paths are logically consistent, but only one is both consistent and Biblical. But Arminianism and its view of foreknowledge as simple precognition is neither.
END NOTES
(1) James Arminius, The Works of James Arminius, I (London: Longman, Hurst, Rees, Orme, Brown, and Green, 1825-1828), 247-48.
(2) J.M. Gundry-Volf, "Foreknowledge, Divine," in Dictionary of Paul and His Letters, eds. Gerald F. Hawthorne, Ralph P. Martin, Daniel G. Reid (Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press, 1993), 310-11.
(3) Paul Jacobs and Hartmut Krienke, "Foreknowledge," in The New International Dictionary of Theology, vol. I, ed. Colin Brown (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan Publishing House, 1975) p. 693.
(4) John Murray, The Epistle to the Romans (Grand Rapids, MI: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., 1959), 17-18.
(5) John Wesley, "Sermon LVIII, On Predestination," in The Works of John Wesley, Vol. 6, Second Series (54-86), (Sage Digital Library Collected Works), 255-6.
(6) Clark Pinnock, The Openness of God (Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press, 1994), 121.
(7) Ibid., 123-4.
I fully agree on both statements!
.A man in bondage to sin will always choose sin. That is his nature..he is in a sense addicted to sin. We are not born in a "neutral zone" , but enemies of God ...by nature "children of wrath"
Eph 2:1 And you [hath he quickened], who were dead in trespasses and sins;
2 Wherein in time past ye walked according to the course of this world, according to the prince of the power of the air, the spirit that now worketh in the children of disobedience:
3 Among whom also we all had our conversation in times past in the lusts of our flesh, fulfilling the desires of the flesh and of the mind; and were by nature the children of wrath, even as others.
Where did that analogy originate?? It does not seem rooted in scripture??
Thanks for the ping, will read it later.
| FreeChoice Position. | Scripture | Implication | Calvinist Objection | Calvinist Implication |
| 1. - - God elects only on the basis of foreseen faith and condemns only on the basis of resistance to grace. | John 1:12 But as many as received him, to them gave he power to become the sons of God, even to them that believe on his name: Romans 8:29 For those God foreknew he also predestined Joshua 24:15 Choose for yourselves this day whom you will serve...But as for me and my household, we will serve the Lord ." Revelation 7:9 After this I looked and there before me was a great multitude that no one could count, from every nation, tribe, people and language, standing before the throne and in front of the Lamb. They were wearing white robes and were holding palm branches in their hands. |
People go to heaven or hell based on their own choices for or against Christ. God foreknew their choice. | U - - Unconditional Election means that God has elected for His own glory, in accordance with His own will and without regard for the merit of those elected, some for salvation and some to be left in their sins. | God chooses whether or not any individual will be saved. He chooses based on his own reasons which he has not revealed. |
| 2. - - Christ provided a universal opportunity by dying for all men and for every man such that ALL those who turn to him as true repentant believers are saved. | 1 John 2:2 He is the atoning sacrifice for our sins, and not only for ours but also for the sins of the whole world. Acts 17:25 And he is not served by human hands, as if he needed anything, because he himself gives all men life and breath and everything else. 26From one man he made every nation of men, that they should inhabit the whole earth; and he determined the times set for them and the exact places where they should live. 27God did this so that men would seek him and perhaps reach out for him and find him, though he is not far from each one of us. John 3:16 For God so loved the world that He gave His only begotten Son, that whoever believes in Him should not perish but have everlasting life. |
The opportunity for Salvation is available to everyone. Christ's sacrifice is sufficient to cover all sin. Everyone is allowed to come to Christ. | L - - Limited Atonement means that Christ died specifically and only for the sins of those who would ever truly believe in Him.. | Christ's sacrifice was intended only for those who were chosen ahead of time for salvation. Everyone is not allowed to come to Christ. |
| 3. - - - In accordance with the foreplanning of God, man was created with the ability to resist Divine Grace | Acts 7:50 Has not my hand made all these things?'[1] 51"You stiff-necked people, with uncircumcised hearts and ears! You are just like your fathers: You always resist the Holy Spirit! 52Was there ever a prophet your fathers did not persecute? They even killed those who predicted the coming of the Righteous One. And now you have betrayed and murdered him-- Matthew 23:37 "O Jerusalem, Jerusalem, you who kill the prophets and stone those sent to you, how often I have longed to gather your children together, as a hen gathers her chicks under her wings, but you were not willing. |
In the same way humanity has been endowed with the capacity to say "yes" to God, it has also been endowed with the capacity to resist, to say "no," to God's offer of the gospel. | I - - Irresistible Grace means that the elect are incapable of resisting the Holy Spirit's inward call to repentance and salvation | Those God chose for salvation are unable to say "no" to salvation due to God's overpowering them with his attractiveness. (Neither are the non-chosen able to say "yes." God never attempts to attract them.) |
| FreeChoice Position. | Scripture | Implication | Calvinist Objection | Calvinist Implication |
| 4. - - - Pre-regenerate Man is so depraved that foreplanned divine intervention and prevenient divine grace are necessary to bring about faith or any good deed. | John 1:4 In him was life, and that life was the light of men. 5The light shines in the darkness, but the darkness has not understood[1] it.... . 9The true light that gives light to EVERY man was coming into the world.[2] Romans 2:14 (Indeed, when Gentiles, who do not have the law, do by nature things required by the law, they are a law for themselves, even though they do not have the law, 15since they show that the requirements of the law are written on their hearts, their CONSCIENCES also bearing witness, and their thoughts now accusing, now even defending them.) |
The Spirit of Christ, based on the pure grace of God, gives enough light to every human, speaks sufficiently to each human heart, despite its inherent sinfulness, such that each person is confronted with a real, complete choice for or against God. . | T - - Total Depravity means that Natural Man is totally sinful and does not ever WANT in his own spirit to know Christ | Humanity does not have an effective conscience, nor does any man have, before regeneration, any internal capability to receive any good message from God. There is no residue of the image of God remaining in pre-regeneration man. |
| 5. - - - It is not certain from the bible that all who are truly regenerate will necessarily persevere in the faith. | John 17:12 While I was with them, I protected them and kept them safe by that name you gave me. None has been lost except the one doomed to destruction so that Scripture would be fulfilled. 2 Peter 2:20 If they have escaped the corruption of the world by knowing our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ and are again entangled in it and overcome, they are worse off at the end than they were at the beginning. |
The Christian does best who obeys Christ's direction, "Watch therefore, for you do not know what hour your Lord is coming." It is best to have oil in your lamp, as did the wise virgins. | P - - Perseverance of the Saints means that all those who are truly saved will certainly be brought to heaven and to glorification and will never be lost | Once Saved; always Saved! There is nothing that can separate you from the love of God in Christ Jesus our Lord. |
| 6. - - - The Primary aspect of God’s nature, his primary attribute, is Love. | John 17:12 While I was with them, I protected them and kept them safe by that name you gave me. None has been lost except the one doomed to destruction so that Scripture would be fulfilled. 2 Peter 2:20 If they have escaped the corruption of the world by knowing our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ and are again entangled in it and overcome, they are worse off at the end than they were at the beginning. |
The Christian does best who obeys Christ's direction, "Watch therefore, for you do not know what hour your Lord is coming." It is best to have oil in your lamp, as did the wise virgins. | P - - Perseverance of the Saints means that all those who are truly saved will certainly be brought to heaven and to glorification and will never be lost | Once Saved; always Saved! There is nothing that can separate you from the love of God in Christ Jesus our Lord. |
| FreeChoice Position. | Scripture | Implication | Calvinist Objection | Calvinist Implication |
| A. - - - The Primary aspect of God’s nature, his primary attribute, is Love. | 1 John 4:16 God is love; and he that dwelleth in love dwelleth in God, and God in him. Rom 5:8 God commendeth his LOVE toward us, in that, while we were yet sinners, Christ died for us. 1 John 4:10 Herein is love, not that we loved God, but that he loved us, and sent his Son to be the propitiation for our sins. Philippians 2:5 Have this attitude in yourselves which was also in Christ Jesus, who, although he existed in the form of God, did not regard equality with God a thing to be grasped, but emptied Himself, taking the form of a bond-servant…he humbled Himself by becoming obedient to the point of death, even death on a cross. |
All theology must understand the centrality of Love in the nature of God such that "God so loved the world that He gave His ONLY begotten Son, so that whosoever believeth in Him should not perish but have everlasting life." | G…Calvinists believe that God’s primary motive is the protection of His own GLORY and sovereignty, thus His primary attribute is Power. | All theology must understand the prerogatives and centrality of God’s sovereignty and power.. |
| 1. - - God elects only on the basis of foreseen faith and condemns only on the basis of resistance to grace. | John 1:12 But as many as received him, to them gave he power to become the sons of God, even to them that believe on his name: Romans 8:29 For those God foreknew he also predestined Joshua 24:15 Choose for yourselves this day whom you will serve...But as for me and my household, we will serve the Lord ." Revelation 7:9 After this I looked and there before me was a great multitude that no one could count, from every nation, tribe, people and language, standing before the throne and in front of the Lamb. They were wearing white robes and were holding palm branches in their hands. |
People go to heaven or hell based on their own choices for or against Christ. God foreknew their choice. | U - - Unconditional Election means that God has elected for His own glory, in accordance with His own will and without regard for the merit of those elected, some for salvation and some to be left in their sins. | God chooses whether or not any individual will be saved. He chooses based on his own reasons which he has not revealed. |
| 2. - - Christ provided a universal opportunity by dying for all men and for every man such that ALL those who turn to him as true repentant believers are saved. | 1 John 2:2 He is the atoning sacrifice for our sins, and not only for ours but also for the sins of the whole world. Acts 17:25 And he is not served by human hands, as if he needed anything, because he himself gives all men life and breath and everything else. 26From one man he made every nation of men, that they should inhabit the whole earth; and he determined the times set for them and the exact places where they should live. 27God did this so that men would seek him and perhaps reach out for him and find him, though he is not far from each one of us. John 3:16 For God so loved the world that He gave His only begotten Son, that whoever believes in Him should not perish but have everlasting life. |
The opportunity for Salvation is available to everyone. Christ's sacrifice is sufficient to cover all sin. Everyone is allowed to come to Christ. | L - - Limited Atonement means that Christ died specifically and only for the sins of those who would ever truly believe in Him.. | Christ's sacrifice was intended only for those who were chosen ahead of time for salvation. Everyone is not allowed to come to Christ. |
| 3. - - - In accordance with the foreplanning of God, man was created with the ability to resist Divine Grace | Acts 7:50 Has not my hand made all these things?'[1] 51"You stiff-necked people, with uncircumcised hearts and ears! You are just like your fathers: You always resist the Holy Spirit! 52Was there ever a prophet your fathers did not persecute? They even killed those who predicted the coming of the Righteous One. And now you have betrayed and murdered him-- Matthew 23:37 "O Jerusalem, Jerusalem, you who kill the prophets and stone those sent to you, how often I have longed to gather your children together, as a hen gathers her chicks under her wings, but you were not willing. |
In the same way humanity has been endowed with the capacity to say "yes" to God, it has also been endowed with the capacity to resist, to say "no," to God's offer of the gospel. | I - - Irresistible Grace means that the elect are incapable of resisting the Holy Spirit's inward call to repentance and salvation | Those God chose for salvation are unable to say "no" to salvation due to God's overpowering them with his attractiveness. (Neither are the non-chosen able to say "yes." God never attempts to attract them.) |
| FreeChoice Position. | Scripture | Implication | Calvinist Objection | Calvinist Implication |
| 4. - - - Pre-regenerate Man is so depraved that foreplanned divine intervention and prevenient divine grace are necessary to bring about faith or any good deed. | John 1:4 In him was life, and that life was the light of men. 5The light shines in the darkness, but the darkness has not understood[1] it.... . 9The true light that gives light to EVERY man was coming into the world.[2] Romans 2:14 (Indeed, when Gentiles, who do not have the law, do by nature things required by the law, they are a law for themselves, even though they do not have the law, 15since they show that the requirements of the law are written on their hearts, their CONSCIENCES also bearing witness, and their thoughts now accusing, now even defending them.) |
The Spirit of Christ, based on the pure grace of God, gives enough light to every human, speaks sufficiently to each human heart, despite its inherent sinfulness, such that each person is confronted with a real, complete choice for or against God. . | T - - Total Depravity means that Natural Man is totally sinful and does not ever WANT in his own spirit to know Christ | Humanity does not have an effective conscience, nor does any man have, before regeneration, any internal capability to receive any good message from God. There is no residue of the image of God remaining in pre-regeneration man. |
| 5. - - - It is not certain from the bible that all who are truly regenerate will necessarily persevere in the faith. | John 17:12 While I was with them, I protected them and kept them safe by that name you gave me. None has been lost except the one doomed to destruction so that Scripture would be fulfilled. 2 Peter 2:20 If they have escaped the corruption of the world by knowing our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ and are again entangled in it and overcome, they are worse off at the end than they were at the beginning. 1 John 1:9 If we confess our sins, He is faithful and righteous to forgive us our sins and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness. |
The Christian does best who obeys Christ's direction, "Watch therefore, for you do not know what hour your Lord is coming." It is best to have oil in your lamp, as did the wise virgins. Additionally, the Lord who demands holiness of us will out of his love empower us to follow after that holiness without which no one will see God. | P - - Perseverance of the Saints means that all those who are preselected for salvation will certainly be brought to heaven and to glorification and will never be lost | Once Saved; always Saved! There is nothing that can separate you from the love of God in Christ Jesus our Lord. |
9:18 So then, God has mercy on whom he chooses to have mercy, and he hardens whom he chooses to harden.
9:19 You will say to me then, "Why does he still find fault? For who has ever resisted his will?"
9:20 But who indeed are you-a mere human being-to talk back to God? Does what is molded say to the molder, "Why have you made me like this?"
9:21 Has the potter no right to make from the same lump of clay one vessel for special use and another for ordinary use?
9:22 But what if God, willing to demonstrate his wrath and to make known his power, has endured with much patience the objects of wrath prepared for destruction?
9:23 And what if he is willing to make known the wealth of his glory on the objects of mercy that he has prepared beforehand for glory-
9:24 even us, whom he has called, not only from the Jews but also from the Gentiles?
It seems to me that for the Arminian position to hold, verse 18 would have to read "So then, God has mercy on those who choose to have mercy given them, and He hardens those who choose to be hardened."
I think they read it I will have Mercy on those who chose me to have mercy on them... just a slight varience:>)
This says that God chooses the nation Israel over Edom in the past (Jacob over Esau) and that in the present he has chosen the Gentiles OVER Israel.....he will have mercy on whom he will have mercy.
(Wiley, Culberton) In contrast to the Calvinist view...Arminianism holds that predestination is the gracious purpose of God to save all mankind from utter ruin. It is not an arbitrary, indiscriminate act of God intended to secure the salvation of so many and no more. It includes provisionally all men in its scope, and is conditioned solely on faith in Jesus Christ. 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 (John 3:16). Election differs from predestination in this, that election implies a choice, whereas predestination does not. In Ephesians 1:4,5,11-13, it is said that God hath chosen us in him before the foundation of the world, THAT WE SHOULD BE HOLY AND WITHOUT BLAME BEFORE HIM IN LOVE. this is election. The gracious plan by which this is to be accomplished is predestination, having predestinated us unto the adoption of children by Jesus Christ to himself, according to the good pleasure of his will. thus predestination is God's general and gracious plan of saving men, by adopting them as children through Christ; election pertains to the chosen ones who are holy and blameless before Him in love. the proofs of election are not in the secret counsels of God, but in the visible fruits of holiness. the church is both predestinated and elected, the former referring to the plan of redemption as manifested in the universal call; the latter to the elect or chosen ones who have accepted the offers of mercy. The elect are chosen, not by absolute decree, but by acceptance of the conditions of the call. And as the character of the elect consists of holiness and blamelessness before Him in love, so election is by those means which make men righteous and holy. Hence our Lord says, I have chose you OUT OF the world. (John 15:19). St Paul explains it by saying, God hath from the beginning chosen you to salvation, THOROUGH SANCTIFICATION OF THE SPIRIT AND BELIEF OF THE TRUTH (2 Thess 2:13) St Peter's teaching is to the same effect, Elect according to the foreknowledge of God the Father, THROUGH SANCTIFICATION OF THE SPIRIT unto obedience and sprinkling of the blood of Jesus Christ (I Peter 1:2)
Armininian theology has generally treated the subject of election under the threefold aspect. FIRST, the election of individuals to perform some particular service. Thus Moses was chosen to lead Israel out of Egypt and Aaron to be the priest of the sanctuary. Cyrus was elected to aid in rebuilding the temple, Christ chose the twelve as apostles, and St Paul was chosen as the apostle of the Gentiles. These offices were ordained to assist others, and not to exclude them from saving grace. SECOND, the election of nations or other bodies of men to special religious privileges. Thus Israel was chosen as God's first representative of the visible Church on earth. THIRD, the election of particular individuals to be the children of God and heirs of eternal life. This Arminianism always and rightly regards as conditional upon faith in Christ, and as including ALL who believe.
I posted this over on the Predestination thread, but I would like your answer as a thoughtful Calvinist [I will omit the comment on the apparent oxymoron :-)].
Having just finished several hours of research and work in writing #963 above, I am more than a little frustrated with the (apparently) purposeful twisting of Scripture and even human reason by a Mormon in attacking the Bible. So, it is hard to credit me right now with 'sympathy' for the Mormon cause (which will be the undoubted response from the knee-jerk Calvinist defenders here to this post).Yet WM (who as we all know is an extraordinarily thoughtful Mormon) has taken aim at precisely the thought that has been troubling me for the last several days: What motivates the assembled Calvinist throng to the fever-pitch of mean-spirited argumentation here day after day? That is, what is its aim? What can it possibly accomplish (from their point of view)?
Is it to promote a Christ-like life in other believers? Clearly (as WM's thoughtful rhetorical question so clearly evidences), it is not. There is no discussion of what constitutes a Christ-like life. None. [Although the early Calvinists (such as Edwards) whom the Calvinist protagonists here purport to revere, spent much time and effort on precisely that.]
Moreover, there is no discussion whatever on the role of the Holy Spirit in impelling such a Christ-like life (which was the common ground shared so fully by Wesley and Whitefield). There is seemingly no interest whatever in that topic.
Is it to encourage others to gain salvation? Clearly not. For the Calvinist world view precludes any role for man in that process. It has been (by their lights) foreordained, so it would be a waste of time urging others to accept Christ. And to the credit of (at least) their consistency, they do not do so. For reasons of their theology, they have no interest in pointing others to Christ.
Well, then, why spit and fight and denigrate others whose "sin" in their eyes is to believe that they must make some affirmative decision to accept Christ and believe in Him and upon the New Birth seek after Him and His direction in all of life's decisions?
All I can posit is that it is somehow thought necessary to be proven "right". There seems to be an over-arching concern with bending our reason to their theological judgment. But I ask "why"? What sense does that make from their theological position?
What sense does it make for them to get so mad and rhetorically jump up and down about the structure of our theological formulations versus theirs? It would seem that, if they believed their formulations, they should have even more equanimity than we about whether we accept the others' formulations. After all, they understand that it makes no difference whatever in the 'final outcome' while we are concerned that we effectively communicate to others what we understand to be the supremely critical decision of life.
So, why do the assembled Calvinists not just ignore (what from their standpoint is viewed as) our theological failings? The only hypothesis I can devise is that they feel they will obtain some 'rewards' for "setting our formulations 'right'" (just before we go to Hell).
So, tell me. [No need to shout or hurl invective, etc.] From your eternal standpoint (or ours) what possible difference does it make whether we agree with you or not?"
Well, that's the question. What purpose is served, from the Calvinist theological perspective, by the continued agressive pursuit of the bending of our poor, over-worked Arminian wills?
So God selects those that select Him first ??Once they believe he is god then He becomes God and selects them.Sounds like a "plan" just not a scripitual one:>)))
Psa 65:4 Blessed [is the man whom] thou choosest, and causest to approach [unto thee, that] he may dwell in thy courts: we shall be satisfied with the goodness of thy house, [even] of thy holy temple.
Isa 45:4 For Jacob my servant's sake, and Israel mine elect, I have even called thee by thy name: I have surnamed thee, though thou hast not known me.
Mark 13:20; And except that the Lord had shortened those days, no flesh should be saved: but for the elect's sake, whom he hath chosen, he hath shortened the days
John 1:13 Which were born, not of blood, nor of the will of the flesh, nor of the will of man, but of God.
Jhn 6:29 Jesus answered and said unto them, This is the work of God, that ye believe on him whom he hath sent.
Jhn 6:37 All that the Father giveth me shall come to me; and him that cometh to me I will in no wise cast out.
He is sure a lucky God to have such clever , smart men select and elect Him
I like your pretty-colored fonts but I sure wish you could find a modern translation. I am not smart enough to interpret Elizabethan English built on a medieval Byzantine text. Must be my misspent youth.
Oh, and the reasoning you use to reach your conclusion makes me wonder if you also write about scroll saw work under the pseudonym "Kerry Shirts"?
Maybe you missed the second blessing :>))
Oh, and the reasoning you use to reach your conclusion makes me wonder if you also write about scroll saw work under the pseudonym "Kerry Shirts"?
Naw I only do his laundry..
You shall know the truth and the truth shall set you free....
So perhaps you will tell me why the Arminians need to toss mud at Calvin to make their doctrine look true??:>))
I am not Steve..but we know the same God :>)) *grin*
Well, it is a Plan, and very much scriptural.
Psa 65:4 Blessed [is the man whom] thou choosest, and causest to approach [unto thee, that] he may dwell in thy courts: we shall be satisfied with the goodness of thy house, [even] of thy holy temple.
Same Psa. O thou that hearest prayer unto thee shall all flesh come.
Isa 45:4 For Jacob my servant's sake, and Israel mine elect, I have even called thee by thy name: I have surnamed thee, though thou hast not known me.
That is the unconditional election of Israel as the Priest nation. No one denies unconditional election for particular activities. Christ was unconditionally elected to the the Christ (Isa.42) and Cyrus (Isa.45)
Mark 13:20; And except that the Lord had shortened those days, no flesh should be saved: but for the elect's sake, whom he hath chosen, he hath shortened the days
Yes, the elect in this case are the Jews who are part of the Elect nation of Israel.(see Matt.24:24)
John 1:13 Which were born, not of blood, nor of the will of the flesh, nor of the will of man, but of God.
That is correct, but you leave out verse 12 but as many as received him, to them gave he power to become the sons of God,even to them that believe on his name
Now, verse 13 is just saying what Eph.2:8-9 is saying that the Plan is of grace, not of works.
Jhn 6:29 Jesus answered and said unto them, This is the work of God, that ye believe on him whom he hath sent.
Amen, again context! The previous verse states They said they unto him, What shall we do, that we might work the works of God? Then the Lord answers that there is only one work you can do that God will accept and that is a nonwork (Rom.4:4-5)believe! This was the stumbling block for the Jews that it was faith that saved not works (the Law)(Rom.9:31-32), that it was only faith that would please God (Heb.11:6)
Jhn 6:37 All that the Father giveth me shall come to me; and him that cometh to me I will in no wise cast out.
Amen! Christ also went on to say, And this is the Father's will which hath sent me, that of everyone which seeth the Son and believeth on him, may have everlasting life and I will raise him up on the last day (vs.40) The Pharisses were seeing the Lord but not believing. They were not doing the Father's will and therefore were not called
He is sure a lucky God to have such clever , smart men select and elect Him
One, you are the one claiming to be specially elected by God while most everyone else has been rejected. What makes you so special?
Two, what we are is fortunate to have is a Loving God who wants all men to be saved (1Tim.2:4, 4:10, Jn.12:32, 3:16, Rom.10:13, Ezx.33:11, Jn.3:17-21 and ofcourse 2Pet.3:9)
Not willing that any should perish. So wonderful is his love towards mankind, that he would have them all to be saved, and is of his own self prepared to bestow salvation on the lost...(Calvin)
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.