Page 4 of 26 FirstFirst 123456789101112131415 ... LastLast
Results 46 to 60 of 380

Thread: The golden chain of redemption

  1. #46

    Re: The golden chain of redemption

    Quote Originally Posted by Stew Ward's Hip View Post
    Foreknowledge and foreordained are not synonymous
    Four distinct answers emerge from this passage:
    (1) As long as the doctrine of election is in the Bible, salvation must be the gift of God alone. Predestination framed in God's foreknowledge assures us that salvation is from start to finish the work of God.

    (2) The doctrine of God's elective purpose guarantees the perpetuity of salvation. Unthinkable is the idea that one of God's elect could forfeit his salvation. Those whom He has justified He will glorify. So certain is that sequence that "glorified" is an aorist tense in Greek, meaning that glorification is already a settled issue in the mind of God (Ro 8:30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37, 38, 39). How could God lose one of His elect?

    (3) The doctrine of election assures a peculiar providence which attends the way of every believer. If God's heart is set on us in His elective purpose, we may be sure of His concern and providential intervention in our behalf (Ro 8:28).

    (4) Finally, that same personal providence bound up in election extends throughout the entire course of history. There is no runaway world. God's hand is systematically guiding the age to its intended consummation (Ro 8:21, 22). (MacDonald, W & Farstad, A. Believer's Bible Commentary: Thomas Nelson)
    Wuest commenting on proorizo writes that " The genius of the word is that of placing limitations upon someone or something beforehand, these limitations bringing that person or thing within the sphere of a certain future or destiny. These meanings are carried over into the New Testament usage of the word. Thus, the “chosen-out” ones, have had limitations put around them which bring them within the sphere of becoming God’s children by adoption (Eph 1:5-note), and of being conformed to the image of the Lord Jesus (Ro 8:29). (Wuest, K. S. Wuest's Word Studies from the Greek New Testament: Eerdmans)
    4 Answer not a fool according to his folly, lest thou also be like unto him.
    5 Answer a fool according to his folly, lest he be wise in his own conceit.

  2. #47

    Re: The golden chain of redemption

    Quote Originally Posted by Stew Ward's Hip View Post
    Foreknowledge and foreordained are not synonymous
    Here is more of the nuts and bolts, so to speak...if you find error here, feel free to indicate where it is;

    Called (2564) (kaleo) (see study of the called) can refer to an invitation, but as discussed below in this context conveys the idea of an effectual call and emphasizes God's sovereign work. God has invited us to join Him in eternity in incorruptible, sinless, glorified bodies. The aorist tense points to the fact that God effectively had called them into His kingdom and service in the past.

    Kaleo - 148x in 140v - Matt 1:21, 23, 25; 2:7, 15, 23; 4:21; 5:9, 19; 9:13; 20:8; 21:13; 22:3f, 8f, 43, 45; 23:7ff; 25:14; 27:8; Mark 1:20; 2:17; 3:31; 11:17; Luke 1:13, 31f, 35f, 59ff, 76; 2:4, 21, 23; 5:32; 6:15, 46; 7:11, 39; 8:2; 9:10; 10:39; 14:7ff, 12f, 16f, 24; 15:19, 21; 19:2, 13, 29; 20:44; 21:37; 22:3, 25; 23:33; John 1:42; 2:2; Acts 1:12, 19, 23; 3:11; 4:18; 7:58; 8:10; 9:11; 10:1; 13:1; 14:12; 15:22, 37; 24:2; 27:8, 14, 16; 28:1; Rom 4:17; 8:30; 9:7, 12, 24ff; 1 Cor 1:9; 7:15, 17f, 20ff, 24; 10:27; 15:9; Gal 1:6, 15; 5:8, 13; Eph 4:1, 4; Col 3:15; 1 Thess 2:12; 4:7; 5:24; 2 Thess 2:14; 1 Tim 6:12; 2 Tim 1:9; Heb 2:11; 3:13; 5:4; 9:15; 11:8, 18; Jas 2:23; 1 Pet 1:15; 2:9, 21; 3:6, 9; 5:10; 2 Pet 1:3; 1 John 3:1; Rev 1:9; 11:8; 12:9; 16:16; 19:9, 11, 13. NAS = call(13), called(99), calling(2), calls(7), give(1), invite(2), invited(15), invited guests(1), invites(1), name given(1), named(2), so-called(1), summoned(2).

    AND WHOM HE CALLED THESE HE ALSO JUSTIFIED
    : kai ous ekalesen (3SAAI), toutous kai edikaiosen (3SAAI): (Ro 3:22, 23, 24, 25, 26; 1Co 6:11; Titus 3:4, 5, 6, 7)

    Justified (1344) (dikaioo [word study] from dŪkaios = just, righteous) means to be declared righteous (dikaios). In simple terms, dikaios describes what is right, what conforms to what is right, the standard of what is right being defined by God not man. The moment one believes he or she is justified instantaneously as a forensic act by God in which He forgives our sins, imputes to us the righteousness of Christ and declares we are now in righteous standing before Him.
    Dikaioo - 36x in 39v - Matt 11:19; 12:37; Luke 7:29, 35; 10:29; 16:15; 18:14; Acts 13:38f; Rom 2:13; 3:4, 20, 24, 26, 28, 30; 4:2, 5; 5:1, 9; 6:7; 8:30, 33; 1 Cor 4:4; 6:11; Gal 2:16f; 3:8, 11, 24; 5:4; 1 Tim 3:16; Titus 3:7; Jas 2:21, 24f. NAS = acknowledged… justice(1), acquitted(1), freed(3), justified(24), justifier(1), justifies(2), justify(4), vindicated(3).
    Justified is in Christ and so is a truth of position. When we were justified by faith we were pronounced righteous in Christ. We are not made righteous. Stated another way, what is imputed is not, imparted. To be justified means that the believer is viewed in Christ as righteous, and is treated as such by God.

    Denny explains that in justifying us…
    God in Jesus Christ forgave our sins, and accepted us as righteous in His sight; ungodly as we had been, He put us right with Himself. In that, everything else is included. The whole argument of Romans 6-8 has been that justification and the new life of holiness in the Spirit are inseparable experiences. (Romans 8 - The Expositor's Greek Testament)

    John Murray makes the important distinction between regeneration and justification writing that…
    Regeneration is an act of God in us; justification is a judgment of God with respect to us. The distinction is like that of the distinction between the act of a surgeon and the act of a judge. The surgeon, when he removes an inward cancer, does something in us. That is not what a judge does—he gives a verdict regarding our judicial status. If we are innocent he declares accordingly. The purity of the gospel is bound up with the recognition of this distinction. If justification is confused with regeneration or sanctification, then the door is opened for the perversion of the gospel at its center. (See study on Relationship of Justified, Sanctified, Glorified) Justification is still the article of the standing or falling of the Church. (John Murray, Redemption Accomplished and Applied p. 121)

    AND WHOM HE JUSTIFIED THESE HE ALSO GLORIFIED
    : ous de edikaiosen (3SAAI), toutous kai edoxasen (3SAAI): (Ro 1:1,17,18,33, 34, 35; 5:8, 9, 10; Jn 5:24; 6:39,40; 17:22,24; 2Co 4:17; Ep 2:6; Col 3:4; 1Th 2:12; 2Th 1:10, 11, 12; 2:13,14; 2Ti 2:11; He 9:15; 1Pe 3:9; 4:13,14; 5:10)
    Glorified (1392) (doxazo from doxa = glory) means to render glorious, to cause to have splendid greatness, to clothe in splendor, to invest with dignity, to give anyone esteem or honor by putting him into an honorable position.
    The aorist tense of glorified speaks of God Who sees the end from the beginning and in whose decree and purpose all future events are comprehended and fixed.

    Once God's marvelous sequence begins with His foreknowledge of those He would call, it is carried through so inevitably that Paul in this verse speaks of us as "glorified" in the past tense. It is already an accomplished fact in the mind and purpose of God. Note that those who were foreknown will all be glorified without loss of a single one.
    Doxazo - 61x in 53v - Matt 5:16; 6:2; 9:8; 15:31; Mark 2:12; Luke 2:20; 4:15; 5:25f; 7:16; 13:13; 17:15; 18:43; 23:47; John 7:39; 8:54; 11:4; 12:16, 23, 28; 13:31f; 14:13; 15:8; 16:14; 17:1, 4f, 10; 21:19; Acts 3:13; 4:21; 11:18; 13:48; 21:20; Rom 1:21; 8:30; 11:13; 15:6, 9; 1 Cor 6:20; 12:26; 2 Cor 3:10; 9:13; Gal 1:24; 2 Thess 3:1; Heb 5:5; 1 Pet 1:8; 2:12; 4:11, 16; Rev 15:4; 18:7. NAS = full of glory(1), glorified(20), glorifies(1), glorify(19), glorifying(12), had glory(1), has… glory(1), honor(1), honored(2), magnify(1), praised(1), praising(1).
    Denny remarking on the aorist tense says it well…
    The tense in the last word (doxazo) is amazing. It is the most daring anticipation of faith that even the NT contains: the life is not to take out of it by the philosophical consideration that with God there is neither before or after. (Romans 8 - The Expositor's Greek Testament)
    4 Answer not a fool according to his folly, lest thou also be like unto him.
    5 Answer a fool according to his folly, lest he be wise in his own conceit.

  3. #48

    Re: The golden chain of redemption

    Quote Originally Posted by Stew Ward's Hip View Post
    Text doesn't say anything about setting love on anything, or securing anything.
    The apostle Paul concluded the stirring 8th chapter of Romans with the assurance that nothing in the present or the future can separate us from the love of God which is in Christ Jesus our Lord (vv.38-39). Because we are held in God's unchanging love, we can experience deeper fellowship with Him, no matter what difficulties come our way.
    4 Answer not a fool according to his folly, lest thou also be like unto him.
    5 Answer a fool according to his folly, lest he be wise in his own conceit.

  4. #49

    Re: The golden chain of redemption

    Quote Originally Posted by Daniel567 View Post
    "Firstfruits" in this passage should be placed in the context of Romans 8:18-23, which speaks of the redemption of all creation (translated as "creature" in the KJV). In fact the term "firstfruits" appears in v 23. So what it means is that the saints are the firstfruits of redemption, followed by the entire "harvest" of a redeemed creation. Of course, this is only after the New Heavens and the New Earth are brought into existence.


    The answer to this question is found in Ephesians, chapters 1 & 2, which speaks of the "dispensation of the fulness of times" which will be "to the praise of the glory of His grace".
    I think we are on the same page

  5. #50

    Re: The golden chain of redemption

    Quote Originally Posted by Stew Ward's Hip View Post
    Response is implied in foreknowledge.
    CHS ;http://www.spurgeon.org/sermons/1043.php
    Our text begins by the expression, "Whom he did foreknow, he also did predestinate," and many senses have been given to this word "foreknow" though in this case one commends itself beyond every other.

    Some have thought that it simply, means that God predestinated men whose future history ho foreknow. The text before us cannot be so understood, because the Lord foreknows the history of every man, and angel, and devil. So far as mere prescience goes, every man is foreknown, and yet no one will assert that all men are predestinated to be conformed to the image of the Lord Jesus.


    But, it is further asserted that the Lord foreknow who would exercise repentance, who would believe in Jesus, and who would persevere in a consistent life to the end. This is readily granted, but a reader must wear very powerful magnifying spectacles before he will be able to discover that sense in the text.


    Upon looking carefully at my Bible again I do not perceive such a statement.

    Where are those words which you have added, "Whom he did foreknow to repent, to believe, and to persevere in grace?" I do not find them either in the English version or in the Greek original.


    If I could so read them the passage would certainly he very easy, and would very greatly alter my doctrinal views; but, as I do not find those words there, begging your pardon, I do not believe in them.



    However wise and advisable a human interpolation may be, it has no authority with us; we bow to holy Scripture, but not to glosses which theologians may choose to put upon it. No hint is given in the text of foreseen virtue any more than of foreseen sin, and, therefore, we are driven to find another meaning for the word.


    We find that the word "know" is frequently used in Scripture, not only for knowledge, but also for favor, love, and complacency. Our Lord Jesus Christ will say, in the judgment, concerning certain persons, "I never knew you," yet in a sense he knew them, for he knows every man; he knows the wicked as well as the righteous;


    but there the meaning is, "I never knew you in such a respect as to feel any complacency in you or any favor towards you." See also John 10:14-15, and 2 Timothy 2:19. In Romans 11:2, we read, "God hath not cast away his people which he foreknow," where the sense evidently has the idea of fore-love; and it is so to be understood here.



    Those whom the Lord looked upon with favor as he foresaw them, he has predestinated to he conformed to the image of his Son. They are, as Paul puts it in his letter to the Ephesians, "predestinated according to the purpose of him who worketh all things after the counsel of his will."
    I am anxious not to tarry over controverted matters, but to reach the subject of my sermon this morning. Here we have in the text conformity to Christ spoken of as the aim of predestination; we have, secondly, predestination as the impelling force by which this conformity is to be achieved; and we have, thirdly, the firstborn himself set before us as the ultimate end of the predestinations and of the conformity.—"that HE might be the first-born among many brethren."
    4 Answer not a fool according to his folly, lest thou also be like unto him.
    5 Answer a fool according to his folly, lest he be wise in his own conceit.

  6. #51

    Re: The golden chain of redemption

    Now watch as Wesley denies these truths here in his sermon;
    http://freewill-predestination.com/romans8.html

    Now getting back to Romans 8:29-30, in verse 29For whom he did foreknow…” Two things here: First, the word
    “For” is referring to verse 28. Second, Calvinists get hung up on the word foreknow. Foreknow or foreknew does
    not mean fore-loved, at least not the way Calvinists intend it. After all we know that God loves all of His creation
    and all the people He created. By this passage, or any passage, Paul is not saying that anyone is elected to be lost
    but rather he is pointing out in this passage the called are those who accepted the invitation, and those who accept
    this invitation are saved because of God’s plan of salvation that was predestined. Predestination is based upon
    foreknowledge of God and His plan for us based on that foreknowledge. Its object, predestination, is not salvation,
    but conformity to the image of Christ for those who freely believe.




    Henry Ironside explains Romans 8:29-30 this way:




    • Turn to your Bible and read for yourself in the only two chapters in which this word predestinate or
      predestinated is found. The first is Romans 8:29-30, the other chapter is Ephesians 1:5 and 11. You
      will note that there is no reference in these four verses to either heaven or hell but to Christ-likeness
      eventually. Nowhere are we told in scripture that God predestinated one man to be saved and another
      to be lost. Men are to be saved or lost eternally because of their attitude towards the Lord Jesus
      Christ. Predestination means that someday all the redeemed shall become just like the Lord Jesus.
      H.A. Ironside, Full Assurance (Chicago, IL: Moody Press, 1937), 93-94




    Those that God predestined means He predestined for Glory those who would accept him.


    • Whom he did predestinate, etc.—The Gentiles, whom He determined to call into his Church with the Jewish
      people, He called—He invited by the preaching of the Gospel, to believe on his Son Jesus Christ. —Adam
      Clarke’s Commentary on Romans 8:30


    Romans 8:29-30 tells us what the promise is if we believe and accept His invitation, as do many other verses in the
    Scriptures. Never does election or predestination refer to salvation, but always and only to particular benefits which
    is Christlikeness.



    • Predestination...simply means that God has predetermined that those who respond affirmatively to His call...
      will be justified...and furthermore will be glorified. All this is ‘according to His purpose’... Herschel H.
      Hobbs, Fundamentals of our Faith, (Nashville: Broadman, 1960), 94-99


    John Wesley wrote of Romans 8:29-30:
    On Predestination by John Wesley Sermon 58


    • ‘…And, First, let us look forward on the whole work of God in the salvation of man; considering it from the
      beginning, the first point, till it terminates in glory.
    • The first point is, the foreknowledge of God. God foreknew
      those in every nation, those who would believe, from the beginning of the world to the consummation of all
      things.
    • But, in order to throw light upon this dark question, it should be well observed, that when we speak of
      God’s foreknowledge, we do not speak according to the nature of things, but after the manner of men. For, if
      we speak properly, there is no such thing as either foreknowledge or afterknowledge in God. All time, or
      rather all eternity, (for the children of men,) being present to him at once, he does not know one thing in one
      point of view from everlasting to everlasting. As all time, with everything that exists therein, is present with him
      at once, so he sees at once, whatever was is, or will be, to the end of time. But observe: We must not think
      they are because he knows them. No: he knows them because they are.”<snip>
    The same errors are repeated today..
    4 Answer not a fool according to his folly, lest thou also be like unto him.
    5 Answer a fool according to his folly, lest he be wise in his own conceit.

  7. #52
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Resting in Him
    Posts
    5,788

    Re: The golden chain of redemption

    Quote Originally Posted by percho View Post
    Is this the time of the firstfruit or is it the time of all the fruit?
    Seems to me this is the time of firstfruit.


    Quote Originally Posted by percho View Post
    What are they predestined as and for what purpose?

    That is how I understand, Whom he did foreknow, he did predestine.
    They are predestined "to be conformed to the image of his Son, that he might be the firstborn among many brothers."

    And for the purpose ...

    John 17:21-23

    21 That they all may be one; as thou, Father, art in me, and I in thee, that they also may be one in us:that the world may believe that thou hast sent me.

    22 And the glory which thou gavest me I have given them; that they may be one, even as we are one:

    23 I in them, and thou in me, that they may be made perfect in one; and that the world may know that thou hast sent me, and hast loved them, as thou hast loved me.
    ***
    Lead me in Your truth and teach me,
    For You are the God of my salvation;
    On You I wait all the day.

    Psalms 25:5
    ***

  8. #53
    Join Date
    Dec 2015
    Posts
    2,501
    Blog Entries
    12

    Re: The golden chain of redemption

    Quote Originally Posted by Stew Ward's Hip View Post
    Response is implied in foreknowledge.
    Under one definition, foreknowledge as prescience, response is required. But in this case, freewill is impossible for obvious reasons.

    For example, if God knows that I will decide to skip breakfast next Sunday, then I have no choice but to skip breakfast next Sunday. If when the time comes I decide to eat my pancakes, then God didn't actually know what I would do. In order for God to have true and actual prescience of what I will do in the future, the future is as fixed as the past. If God knows what will happen in the future, the future can't be changed. Freewill is impossible. It's an unavoidable time paradox.

  9. #54
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Location
    In a place of praying hard and trusting God while battling on my knees!
    Posts
    26,630
    Blog Entries
    90

    Re: The golden chain of redemption

    Quote Originally Posted by CadyandZoe View Post
    Under one definition, foreknowledge as prescience, response is required. But in this case, freewill is impossible for obvious reasons.

    For example, if God knows that I will decide to skip breakfast next Sunday, then I have no choice but to skip breakfast next Sunday. If when the time comes I decide to eat my pancakes, then God didn't actually know what I would do. In order for God to have true and actual prescience of what I will do in the future, the future is as fixed as the past. If God knows what will happen in the future, the future can't be changed. Freewill is impossible. It's an unavoidable time paradox.
    Seems that God's foreknowledge is more on the level of "if" you will eat, not what you will eat. He provides to your needs, you decide whether or not to go to a diner and buy a $15 steak and eggs mega breakfast or spend $15 for a week of breakfast food. At the end of the week, God still provided, we fail to steward the provision and reap consequence when we go hungry in the morning. Yes, we exercised freewill and then complain to God we don't have enough money to feed ourselves

    God knew you would mismanage the provision... He's guided us in the importance of stewarding our provision, etc. Does that mean He's gonna stop you from buying that mega meal on Monday? Nope. Some can even say, He wanted you to go hungry in the morning for the rest of the week... sometimes I wonder if those who would say such a thing, are not in alignment and understanding of God's ways.

    It's NOT that He WANTED to you go hungry. Based on His foreknowledge however, He will use (ordain) your situation to mature you (predestined) in knowledge of stewardship of provision. Even at the end of that hard lesson of going hungry and then learning to steward, you still make the choice to actually act responsible (being obedient) in your new maturity with the provision He's provided.
    Slug1--out

    ~"It is one thing to speak God's name in a message but another to speak of God's standards in a message. The name of God is not removed from many a message today but the standards of God... ARE removed."~

    ~"Psalm 106:23 Therefore He said that He would destroy them, Had not Moses His chosen one stood before Him in the breach, To turn away His wrath, lest He destroy them."...
    So don't say that God never meant to destroy the Hebrews, to do so, makes God a liar.~



  10. #55
    Join Date
    Dec 2015
    Posts
    2,501
    Blog Entries
    12

    Re: The golden chain of redemption

    Quote Originally Posted by Stew Ward's Hip View Post
    Faith not required?
    This is another difference between Calvinists and Non-Calvinists. In a letter where one of the main themes is "justification by faith not works" Paul draws a straight line from "foreknew" to "glorified" without including any response from a person, including faith. So then, one could argue, contrary to those who understand faith to be part of the root cause of salvation, Calvinists understand faith to be a symptom or an effect of salvation. Thus Christians debate over the ordo salutis, i.e. the order of salvation. Does God favor a person with the Holy Spirit and thus the person responds to the gospel in faith? Or does the person respond to the gospel in faith and subsequently God favor's the penitent with the Holy Spirit? Is faith something that man brings to God, or is faith something that man takes from God?

  11. #56
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Location
    In a place of praying hard and trusting God while battling on my knees!
    Posts
    26,630
    Blog Entries
    90

    Re: The golden chain of redemption

    Quote Originally Posted by CadyandZoe View Post
    This is another difference between Calvinists and Non-Calvinists. In a letter where one of the main themes is "justification by faith not works" Paul draws a straight line from "foreknew" to "glorified" without including any response from a person, including faith. So then, one could argue, contrary to those who understand faith to be part of the root cause of salvation, Calvinists understand faith to be a symptom or an effect of salvation. Thus Christians debate over the ordo salutis, i.e. the order of salvation. Does God favor a person with the Holy Spirit and thus the person responds to the gospel in faith? Or does the person respond to the gospel in faith and subsequently God favor's the penitent with the Holy Spirit? Is faith something that man brings to God, or is faith something that man takes from God?
    Hooah, good thought and I hope is discussed per scripture or God's view, not from any interpretation or Calvin's/Arminians's view.
    Slug1--out

    ~"It is one thing to speak God's name in a message but another to speak of God's standards in a message. The name of God is not removed from many a message today but the standards of God... ARE removed."~

    ~"Psalm 106:23 Therefore He said that He would destroy them, Had not Moses His chosen one stood before Him in the breach, To turn away His wrath, lest He destroy them."...
    So don't say that God never meant to destroy the Hebrews, to do so, makes God a liar.~



  12. #57
    Join Date
    Dec 2015
    Posts
    2,501
    Blog Entries
    12

    Re: The golden chain of redemption

    Quote Originally Posted by Slug1 View Post
    Seems that God's foreknowledge is more on the level of "if" you will eat, not what you will eat. He provides to your needs, you decide whether or not to go to a diner and buy a $15 steak and eggs mega breakfast or spend $15 for a week of breakfast food. At the end of the week, God still provided, we fail to steward the provision and reap consequence when we go hungry in the morning. Yes, we exercised freewill and then complain to God we don't have enough money to feed ourselves

    God knew you would mismanage the provision... He's guided us in the importance of stewarding our provision, etc. Does that mean He's gonna stop you from buying that mega meal on Monday? Nope. Some can even say, He wanted you to go hungry in the morning for the rest of the week... I think those who would say such a thing, are not in alignment and understanding of God's ways.
    My illustration using breakfast was intended to highlight the logical implication of foreknowledge outside of a theological context. But as you know, there is more at stake than what we will have for breakfast or whether I am willing to place my trust in God for my provision.

    The issue in question is whether belief, located in a particular individual, is divinely determined (in the causal sense) or strictly inherent to the individual. Those who affirm that salvation is a gift to be received by a freewill agent, typically understand the concept of "foreknowledge" as the ability of God to know my choice to believe in advance of my actually making the choice. And the key concept here is the meaning of the verb "to know", and just as importantly are the implications of "choice." The idea that a free agent "could have done otherwise" is a key element in the libertarian argument. But in order for this to be a meaningful distinction, the possibility to do otherwise must be maintained all the way through time until the choice is actualized in that moment of time when the choice is relevant to the situation and circumstances of the moment.

    On the contrary, if God knows the outcome of the choice in advance by inspection, i.e. he saw it happen, then the presumed libertarian is not able to do otherwise as soon as God knows it. Or to put it another way, As long as the free agent can do otherwise, then God can't know it in advance, not able to know it until the choice is actually made.

  13. #58
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Canada
    Posts
    12,124

    Re: The golden chain of redemption

    Quote Originally Posted by CadyandZoe View Post
    Under one definition, foreknowledge as prescience, response is required. But in this case, freewill is impossible for obvious reasons.

    For example, if God knows that I will decide to skip breakfast next Sunday, then I have no choice but to skip breakfast next Sunday. If when the time comes I decide to eat my pancakes, then God didn't actually know what I would do. In order for God to have true and actual prescience of what I will do in the future, the future is as fixed as the past. If God knows what will happen in the future, the future can't be changed. Freewill is impossible. It's an unavoidable time paradox.
    Are you sure? What determines the future in your example: God's foreknowledge, or God's foreknowledge of your actions? The issue this paradox has always had, is that it's posited in light of God knowing your actions, but I don't see the necessary connection between foreknowledge and determination. I choose to act, and God knows that I will act in some particular way, therefore I was determined to act in accordance with God's foreknowledge, who knew that I would choose to act in some particular way? I'm not convinced, as the source of my acting is still my choice. If we posit God's foreknowledge as the source, then I think we should get rid of the term and use 'determination' instead. But then, unless God goes about intentionally determining, are we saying that He's a victim of His own qualities? And, why are we conceiving of God's foreknowledge in such a hard way? That's why I find middle knowledge attractive.

  14. #59
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Location
    In a place of praying hard and trusting God while battling on my knees!
    Posts
    26,630
    Blog Entries
    90

    Re: The golden chain of redemption

    Quote Originally Posted by CadyandZoe View Post
    not able to know it until the choice is actually made.
    Foreknowledge is God being and knowing at each moment of the person's indecision, or attempt to fool God but in the end, as you say, a choice is actually made. God knows the final choice. Its not about all the choices and indecision or even purposeful changes in decisions that are leading up to the final choice and action.

    Take Jonah. God KNEW he would resist the initial order to go speak to the people of Nineveh. So based on His foreknowledge, ordained events that would lead Jonah to obedience. Obedience isn't always happy/happy, joy/joy as we see in Jonah's attitude in being obedient. Which God knew... so He had additional lessons ordained for Jonah.
    Slug1--out

    ~"It is one thing to speak God's name in a message but another to speak of God's standards in a message. The name of God is not removed from many a message today but the standards of God... ARE removed."~

    ~"Psalm 106:23 Therefore He said that He would destroy them, Had not Moses His chosen one stood before Him in the breach, To turn away His wrath, lest He destroy them."...
    So don't say that God never meant to destroy the Hebrews, to do so, makes God a liar.~



  15. #60

    Re: The golden chain of redemption

    I'm going to try to pull back from the Calvin/Arminius debate for a while.

    I have important things to do, like catalogue my collection of belly button lint.
    Some people are offended that the Sovereign God, because He loved man so much and wanted to be in an intimate relationship with his creation, gave Man a free will to respond to God's grace, offered to all. They are offended that God is God as God chooses to be, not as they choose for God to be.

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Similar Threads

  1. The Redemption of the Nazarenes
    By keras in forum End Times Chat
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: May 19th 2014, 10:20 PM
  2. Colors of Redemption
    By LookingUp in forum Poetry
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: Feb 17th 2014, 07:04 PM
  3. Define Redemption
    By Slug1 in forum Bible Chat
    Replies: 24
    Last Post: Dec 8th 2009, 04:12 AM
  4. Chain poem
    By matthew7and1 in forum Poetry
    Replies: 15
    Last Post: Apr 3rd 2009, 05:05 AM

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •