Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

The Meaning of 'foreknew' in Romans 8:29
The Five Points of Calvinism: Defined, Defended, Documented | 1963 | David N. Steele/Curtis C. Thomas

Posted on 07/17/2003 9:53:46 AM PDT by Frumanchu

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 161-180181-200201-220 ... 581-585 next last
To: xzins
I agree with you and OP about the possibility of a theology of predestination based on absolute foreknowledge. What I think its adherents fail to realize (total depravity notwithstanding)is that such a theology when played out consistently necessarily puts the ball right back in God's court regarding the choice of whether or not an individual comes to faith.

There must be a determinate causal factor in coming to faith. If it is just a random impulse or response, it is not a moral choice. The question is then whether or not it is identifiable by God. I would assume that, given God's omniscience, He would be aware of the causal factor of the faith of any particular individual. Furthermore, given His omniscience, I would presume that He knows what factors would be necessary to bring an individual to faith. The question then, given not only God's omniscience, but also His omnipotence, is why given such knowledge God does not act according to it to bring about the salvation of all individuals.

Do you see my point?

181 posted on 12/02/2003 8:36:44 AM PST by Frumanchu (mene mene tekel upharsin)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 172 | View Replies]

To: Frumanchu; P-Marlowe
such a theology when played out consistently necessarily puts the ball right back in God's court regarding the choice of whether or not an individual comes to faith.

There's a huge piece of me that gives assent to what you say. Absolute Foreknowledge assures that God knows everything at the time he sets "the world" into motion. Therefore, He begins the world knowing who will and who will not be ultimately saved.

However, then there's P-Marlowe's view about God's eternal nature; that is, God can equally inhabit the past, present, and future. And thus, P'M's comment: BTW I believe that you can pray that prayer (of salvation) now and God can STILL predestine him from the foundation of the earth.

In other words, new things can happen in the present and future because God also inhabits the past. He is "from everlasting to everlasting."

P-M makes an awesome point.

182 posted on 12/02/2003 8:48:26 AM PST by xzins (Proud to be Army!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 181 | View Replies]

To: Jean Chauvin; OrthodoxPresbyterian; P-Marlowe; drstevej
I'm not forgetting all that. It's been discussed at some length, and I agree with it, and I (among others) suggested it.

Good job, Jean, I like you best like this when you don't write books. The only books I read are from DrSteve, OP, or P-M.

And the only one of those with a "book" tendency is OP. He can't help it; it's probably genetic.
183 posted on 12/02/2003 8:55:08 AM PST by xzins (Proud to be Army!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 180 | View Replies]

To: Jean Chauvin; xzins; Frumanchu
God could have created the world differently...

We search for the right words to distill and convey the immensity of God. Your post is one of the best.

If God could have created the world differently (which He could have), then the world He did create is exactly as He wants it to be.

Those who are saved are saved because their lives wherein their salvation occurs are exactly the lives God granted them.

I found that once I began to understand the enormity of predestination, there was no turning back. It became self-evident; I saw its truth everywhere I looked.

While I trust that those who believe in Christ and follow His path are saved, I've come to see a belief in predestination as an added bonus of God's benevolence. He's given us the gift of true assurance that He's in control of everything, the good and the bad, and that nothing can hurt us forever, nothing can separate us from Him.

It's like what Dustin Hoffman, father of six, said to Warren Beatty when he was still a bachelor -- "Why do you want to deprive yourself of all this love?"

That's how I see a belief in predestination. Why deprive yourself of the comfort of knowing that God isn't your co-pilot; He's the only pilot.

184 posted on 12/02/2003 9:22:27 AM PST by Dr. Eckleburg (There are very few shades of gray.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 180 | View Replies]

To: Dr. Eckleburg; P-Marlowe
If God could have created the world differently (which He could have), then the world He did create is exactly as He wants it to be.

Since this world is not through yet, then the eternal God could, because He is eternal/timeless, go back (our perspective) and make something be incorporated in the movie that hadn't yet been there.

As if the editor of Bruce Almighty could edit it even WHILE YOU WERE WATCHING it on the screen.

185 posted on 12/02/2003 9:28:10 AM PST by xzins (Proud to be Army!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 184 | View Replies]

To: xzins; OrthodoxPresbyterian; drstevej; Dr. Eckleburg
Since this world is not through yet, then the eternal God could, because He is eternal/timeless, go back (our perspective) and make something be incorporated in the movie that hadn't yet been there.

Again, the question stands...if such a thing occurs, why does God not bring all individuals to salvation? Consider the following:

"Woe to you, Korazin! Woe to you, Bethsaida! If the miracles that were performed in you had been performed in Tyre and Sidon, they would have repented long ago in sackcloth and ashes. But I tell you, it will be more bearable for Tyre and Sidon on the day of judgment than for you. And you, Capernaum, will you be lifted up to the skies? No, you will go down to the depths. If the miracles that were performed in you had been performed in Sodom, it would have remained to this day. But I tell you that it will be more bearable for Sodom on the day of judgment than for you." - Matt 11:21-24 (NKJV)

This line of reasoning you're following removes one of the primary objections often raised to the Calvinist position: that it is unfair or unjust for God to willfully withhold salvation from individuals when it is possible to save them.

186 posted on 12/02/2003 9:37:54 AM PST by Frumanchu (mene mene tekel upharsin)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 185 | View Replies]

To: Frumanchu
Fru, I hope you don't think you're arguing with me. I agree with you to the extent that God's absolute knowledge makes it absolutely possible for Him to absolutely be aware before creation of everyone who will be saved.

The "woe...bethsaida" verse simply demonstrates that.

Had God chosen to enact a different foreknown reality, Chorazin and Bethsaida could have been saved.

We discussed whether the current reality was the "best" of the possible choices or the ONLY choice as the best.

The bottom line is that it IS the one chosen.
187 posted on 12/02/2003 9:43:24 AM PST by xzins (Proud to be Army!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 186 | View Replies]

To: xzins
new things can happen in the present and future...

New to us, certainly.

Nothing is "new" to God.

You seem to struggle with the idea of prayer and the hope that prayer can actually change problems, life, God's attitude. A pastor probably spends a lot of time nudging people to bring their problems to God so that their prayers can be answered.

But God knows our problems; He arranged for them. He knows our prayers before they're offered; He put them on our lips.

And He created you to be the light for your flock to follow towards Him.

188 posted on 12/02/2003 9:47:38 AM PST by Dr. Eckleburg (There are very few shades of gray.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 182 | View Replies]

To: xzins; Frumanchu; Jean Chauvin
You're playing Eternal Leap-Frog with God.

While you think you and He are exchanging turns, God has already finished the game. He wins.

If God chooses to jump in and "edit" the film, that "edit" has been known and foreseen and ordained by God from the beginning of time.

Nothing is unknown to Him.

That's the "click" you struggle with. It's human nature. It's the fear of letting go. It's the ultimate sin of "pride." It's what the Snake whispered to Eve. "God doesn't really mean what He says. You can do it anyway; you're in control. Eat up."

189 posted on 12/02/2003 9:59:53 AM PST by Dr. Eckleburg (There are very few shades of gray.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 185 | View Replies]

To: Frumanchu; xzins
Fru, there are over 300 "If-Then" statements in the bible which clearly show that God responds to what men do or say or pray. If the people of Tyre and Sidon had prayed for those miracles that Jesus mentioned, then God very well may have provided the miracles that Jesus spoke of. We don't know why the "if" was not done, nor do we know why the "then" was not done. Neverthless it is clear that Jesus was speaking of the range of infinite possibilities and exhibiting his prior foreknowledge of the events surronding what and why the judgment came upon Tyre and Sidon and why God did not intervene with miracles at that time.

If there is no real "if," (if all is irrevockably and unchangeably predestined by decree) then the Bible verses which speak of "ifs and thens" are not true. They are illusory statements. But in those verses where God uses if-then statements, God's actions are clearly conditioned upon the actions of men. So, unless God was intending to mislead the readers of the Bible, the If-Then statements of God (all 300+ of them) attest to that fact.

Now the question is how do you deal with that fact?

190 posted on 12/02/2003 10:01:31 AM PST by P-Marlowe
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 186 | View Replies]

To: Dr. Eckleburg
You're playing Eternal Leap-Frog with God.

No you're attempting to view this in a perspective of "time." Whatever decisions God makes have been made from the foundation of the earth. But the scripture goes even farther than that. It states that Jesus was the lamb who was slain from before the foundation of the earth. That means that in the eternal eyes of God, that event took place before the foundation of the earth, but in our perspective it only took place 2000 years ago. But we must remember that God dwells right now at the foundation of the earth and he concurrently dwells at the end of creation. Wherever we go or wherever we have been God is there.

Now "if" God chooses to answer your prayer, then his decision to answer that prayer was made in eternity and was in fact made before the foundation of the earth. But that doesn't mean that he is not answering that prayer in response to your prayer, does it? If he answers your prayer then he is in fact responding to something that you are doing. And if you didn't make that prayer, then he wouldn't have answered it, would he?

It's not leap frog. Its eternal reality. God is here. But God is also waiting for us in the future. He is there. He is everywhere.

191 posted on 12/02/2003 10:10:59 AM PST by P-Marlowe
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 189 | View Replies]

To: xzins
ping to 191
192 posted on 12/02/2003 10:11:44 AM PST by P-Marlowe
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 191 | View Replies]

To: P-Marlowe; xzins; Frumanchu; Jean Chauvin
If-Then

The Bible is written for human beings to understand and follow. If we had no language, it would be a picture book, telling us the same things -- how to live and what God expects of us.

The greater reality is that God, creator of heaven and earth and all else for all time and beyond, knows EVERYTHING. Always has. All ways; always.

If you blink, He knows it. He fashioned your eyelids; He created the breeze that blows by your face, causing you to squint in the sunlight and BLINK.

If you stifle a sneeze, it isn't because God changed His mind. You were never going to sneeze in the first place.

God bless you (just in case).

193 posted on 12/02/2003 10:12:08 AM PST by Dr. Eckleburg (There are very few shades of gray.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 190 | View Replies]

To: P-Marlowe
Conditional statements show a cause and effect relationship. If the cause does not in actuality occur to bring about the effect, it does not follow that the cause and effect relationship itself was therefore not valid. Conditional statements DO NOT of necessity speak to the actual ability or inability of an individual to meet the condition in the first place.

Conditional statements can work for illustrative purposes as well as instructive. The verses above readily demonstrate that. The destruction of Sodom occurred hundreds of years before these statements. It was a done deal, and yet Jesus gave a conditional statement regarding something that had no possibility of happening. It was used illustratively.

If I follow your reasoning regarding conditional statements, then I must necessarily believe that it is actually possible for a man to live a completely sinless life. After all, if one perfectly keeps the Law, one has no need for a Savior.

Conditional statements in and of themselves do not comment on a particular individual's ability/inability to meet the condition. They are simple statements of fact.

194 posted on 12/02/2003 10:26:34 AM PST by Frumanchu (mene mene tekel upharsin)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 190 | View Replies]

To: Dr. Eckleburg; xzins
The Bible is written for human beings to understand and follow. If we had no language, it would be a picture book, telling us the same things -- how to live and what God expects of us.

If the Bible were true and God had decreed all that will happen exactly as it will happen, then there would be no "if-then" statements in the Bible. There would be no implication that IF we do something, such as repent, THEN God will do something, such as save us. Calvinists seem to view the "if" as evidence of the "then" rather than as a condition to the "then". But I do not think that the language of the Bible truly allows for that interpretation.

The IF-THEN statements are clear language that the actions of God in certain circumstances are truly and actually conditioned upon the actions of men where those statements are made.

If God wanted to convey some different fatalistic message, then he would not have used conditional language. That would be dishonest.

195 posted on 12/02/2003 10:30:26 AM PST by P-Marlowe
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 193 | View Replies]

To: Frumanchu; xzins
Jesus gave a conditional statement regarding something that had no possibility of happening. It was used illustratively.

Then Jesus was being dishonest. His words there have to be taken literally. If Jesus talked about "ifs" that were not possible, then there could be no "ifs" and Jesus would then have been lying about a possibility that could never have existed.

So in order to believe your interpretation, I would have to believe that Jesus was a liar. Even if it were used illustratively, it had to be taken literally. If it were not a literally true statement, then it would have to be a factually false statement. You can't get around that.

196 posted on 12/02/2003 10:36:10 AM PST by P-Marlowe
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 194 | View Replies]

To: P-Marlowe; xzins; Frumanchu
God does not respond. We respond.

You mouth the words but draw an absurd conclusion.

For whatever reasons God has desired, everything in existence has been detailed to the tiniest nano-particle from before time.

If you pray today, God has ordained that prayer and "answered" it already from before time.

That doesn't mean we shouldn't pray. Prayer is for our benefit, not God's. It's a gift from Him to help us clarify our faith and become closer to Him.

God doesn't send us post-cards or secret vibrations or psychic messages. He gives us prayer, wherein we can speak to Him and He to us.

And all the "if-thens" in the Bible are accurate, from our perspective. But nothing about God is conditional.

There's no "if" in God's vocabulary. There's only "is."

197 posted on 12/02/2003 10:44:38 AM PST by Dr. Eckleburg (There are very few shades of gray.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 191 | View Replies]

To: P-Marlowe; OrthodoxPresbyterian; xzins; drstevej
Then Jesus was being dishonest. His words there have to be taken literally. If Jesus talked about "ifs" that were not possible, then there could be no "ifs" and Jesus would then have been lying about a possibility that could never have existed. So in order to believe your interpretation, I would have to believe that Jesus was a liar. Even if it were used illustratively, it had to be taken literally. If it were not a literally true statement, then it would have to be a factually false statement. You can't get around that.

Not so, Marlowe. Conditional statements ARE statements of fact. They show cause and effect. The conditional statement is valid. IF they had seen the miracles, THEN they would have repented. The fact that they did not see the miracles does not therefore invalidate the statement. However, the event has passed. They did not see them, and time would have to be altered for them to see them and repent. Therefore, it is not possible for them to do so.

Marlowe, if gravity suddenly ceased to exist yesterday then you would have flown right off this planet as it spun.

The fact that this has no real possibility of happening does not invalidate the factual conditional statement I just made, nor does it make me a liar for stating it (illustratively I might add). You can't get around that :)

198 posted on 12/02/2003 11:01:43 AM PST by Frumanchu (mene mene tekel upharsin)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 196 | View Replies]

To: Frumanchu
Marlowe, if gravity suddenly ceased to exist yesterday then you would have flown right off this planet as it spun.

You are talking nonsense here and then you equate Jesus' statement of FACT that IF they had seen the same miracles, THEN they would have repented with your nonsensical statement of natural impossibility. I think you are trivializing what Jesus was saying there.

According to you Calviniststs, the people that Jesus was speaking to had a negative attitude towards the miracles because it was Gods perfect will that they respond negatively to the miracles. According to you Calvinists, the People of Tyre and Sidon were judged because it was God perfect will that they not repent and that they be judged. It was nothing in them, but it was what was in God. Therefore there was no "if" because the "if" that Jesus spoke of was a factual impossibility. That is dishonest. It could not be a true statement under any circumstances.

199 posted on 12/02/2003 11:19:51 AM PST by P-Marlowe
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 198 | View Replies]

To: xzins; CCWoody
And the only one of those with a "book" tendency is OP. He can't help it; it's probably genetic.

It is....

....and that reminds me -- I need to ask CCWoody if he has a "big book of OP quotations" saved to disk somewhere. It's not at all uncommon for me to be perusing a thread, begin composing a ludicrously extensive and detailed response to some posting -- and then see CCWoody save me the trouble (usually when I'm about halfway through, natch) by pasting up some old screed of mine from the dusty ages of FreeRepublic Past, thus reminding me: "oh, yeah... I already wrote a book on that subject".

What say, CCWoody? Have you, perchance, an anthology of "Uriel" and "OP" citations you've squirreled away for future reference? If so, FReepMail me for my Email address (you may have it already), I'd like a copy if you have one.

best, OP

200 posted on 12/02/2003 11:38:19 AM PST by OrthodoxPresbyterian
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 183 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 161-180181-200201-220 ... 581-585 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson