ECT What is Predestination?

[Desert Reign]

The problem with this particular approach to Romans 8:28-30 is that it can’t maintain the integrity of the order that Paul described the process of salvation.

Blah

Of course, this verse presents a larger problem for the Open Theists who don’t believe that God foreknew anyone really.

However, it makes a great deal of sense (without having to add qualifications that the text doesn’t add) to acknowledge that Paul is using προγινοσκω in the sense of choosing beforehand.
Those God chose beforehand, those He predestined, and then He called them. Once calling them, He then justified them, etc…

Since you seem to enjoy problems, here are some for you.
1. People don't believe you any more because you tell them that God is not in time in one breath and in the next you make an essential argument that he must have done certain things before other things. It's easy to see this and your idea of supporting it with such scientific stuff as quoting ancient Greek (I mean, wow!) doesn't help your case. It only makes it worse. If you have a simple argument that is rational to begin with, then your ancient Greek might be respected. But if your argument is already non-sensical, the ancient Greek might as well be proof of your absolute incoherence.
2. This verse only supports open theist beliefs so your statement is a plain lie meant to deceive others about the nature of open theism.
3. You contradict yourself by arguing as essential that there is an integrity to the order Paul uses but then going on to state that God first chose them and then predestined them. There is no integrity in this order. I do agree with your first assertion though.

 

[j4jesus09]

That does not explain the fact that those people acted counter to the Lord's will:

"O Jerusalem, Jerusalem, thou that killest the prophets, and stonest them which are sent unto thee, how often would I have gathered thy children together, even as a hen gathereth her chickens under her wings, and ye would not!" (Mt.23:37).

I do see what you're saying. Do you think God willingly allows us to go against Him sometimes?

 

[Jerry Shugart]

I do agree with your first assertion though.

His first assertion is what he said to me here:

The problem with this particular approach to Romans 8:28-30 is that it can’t maintain the integrity of the order that Paul described the process of salvation.​

Is that right? You do not agree with what I said about Romans 8:28-29?

 

[Jerry Shugart]

I do see what you're saying. Do you think God willingly allows us to go against Him sometimes?

That is what is meant by free will.

These people exercised their free will even though it went counter to the Lord's will:

"O Jerusalem, Jerusalem, thou that killest the prophets, and stonest them which are sent unto thee, how often would I have gathered thy children together, even as a hen gathereth her chickens under her wings, and ye would not!" (Mt.23:37).​

 

[Desert Reign]

His first assertion is what he said to me here:

The problem with this particular approach to Romans 8:28-30 is that it can’t maintain the integrity of the order that Paul described the process of salvation.​

Is that right? You do not agree with what I said about Romans 8:28-29?

Your assertion that DL quoted was this:

No, it is those who are already saved who are predestined to be conformed to the image of Christ.

This is what I was referring to. What you say here can't be right because purpose always precedes action. God purposed us to be alive in Christ before he called us.
Of course the reason why I disagree with your idea is quite different to the reason why DL disagrees with it.
I hope that clarifies.

 

[Jerry Shugart]

What you say here can't be right because purpose always precedes action. God purposed us to be alive in Christ before he called us.

Then show me where I am wrong when I said the following:

"And we know that all things work together for good to them that love God, to them who are the called according to his purpose. For whom he did foreknow, he also did predestinate to be conformed to the image of his Son, that he might be the firstborn among many brethren" (Ro.8:28-29).​

The key to the teaching of this passage depends on an understanding of the meaning of the Greek word translated "for" found at the beginning of verse twenty-nine. The word is a conjuction which ties the two verses together, and the word means "the reason why anything is said to be or be done...because...it is added to a speaker's words to show what ground he gives for his opinion" (Thayer's Greek English Lexicon).

At Romans 8:29 Paul tells us why he says that "all things work together for good" for the saved, those he describes as the called:

"And we know that all things work together for good to them that love God, to them who are the called according to his purpose. For whom he did foreknow, he also did predestinate to be conformed to the image of his Son, that he might be the firstborn among many brethren" (Ro.8:28-29).​

The reason why "all things work together for good" in regard to the saved is because the saved are predestined to be conformed to the image of the Son.

When the word "foreknown" is used it is referring to "the called" and that is in regard to those who are already saved.

 

[j4jesus09]

That is what is meant by free will.

These people exercised their free will even though it went counter to the Lord's will:

"O Jerusalem, Jerusalem, thou that killest the prophets, and stonest them which are sent unto thee, how often would I have gathered thy children together, even as a hen gathereth her chickens under her wings, and ye would not!" (Mt.23:37).​

Yes, there are many cases where it seems God let's man roll right on along, but there are many cases where seems He doesn't. Do we pick and choose only the cases where God doesn't intervene? And then again what life has God not worked out according to His plan? Are we expressing freewill or doing what comes naturally, or instinctively in our minds? Meaning when a thought occurs we can reason with our thoughts and make a decision. Now the question is where do thoughts come from and how do the occur? There are so many things the bible reveals about a man that shows we are a slave either to righteousness or unrighteousness. A slave.

 

[Desert Reign]

The reason why "all things work together for good" in regard to the saved is because the saved are predestined to be conformed to the image of the Son.

I think I can agree with that. But what you said before,

No, it is those who are already saved who are predestined to be conformed to the image of Christ.

sounds like you mean God saved them and then he predestined that they would be conformed to the image of his son. That is not the order. He planned (or purposed) that they would be conformed to his son before he called them. He didn't call them and then formulate a plan that they should be conformed to the likeness of his son. When he called them he already knew that those called were being called to that very purpose. The purpose had to exist first. That is why Paul says that this applies to those who are called on purpose.

When the word "foreknown" is used it is referring to "the called" and that is in regard to those who are already saved.

Again, the prefix 'fore' here (pro in Greek) just means that something happened before something else. Of coure he didn't know them individually but he knew them beforehand because he knew that some would respond to his call. So, he knew beforehand that some would respond to his call and this as yet undefined group was known to him beforehand as those who would respond. It's really quite simple, as someone else on the forum has said most beautifully - it's like an airline who sells tickets on a scheduled flight. He knows the flight will take place, he knows there will be people on it. He gets the flight ready for them so that they are comfortable, have food and drink. He knows exactly what is in store for them. But he doesn't know beforehand who is going to be on the flight.

 

[Jerry Shugart]

Yes, there are many cases where it seems God let's man roll right on along, but there are many cases where seems He doesn't. Do we pick and choose only the cases where God doesn't intervene?

My original remarks were in regard to what you said here:

If a person reads the entire bible with prayer you can't help but see that God somehow ended up running the entire show to the very detail!!

I just cannot believe that is true because sometimes people act contrary to the will of the Lord.

 

[Jerry Shugart]

sounds like you mean God saved them and then he predestined that they would be conformed to the image of his son.

I might have expressed my thoughts in an unclear manner but that is not what I meant. Let us look at this passage again:

"And we know that all things work together for good to them that love God, to them who are the called according to his purpose. For whom he did foreknow, he also did predestinate to be conformed to the image of his Son, that he might be the firstborn among many brethren" (Ro.8:28-29).​

Here Paul is saying that all things work together for good to those saved (them that love God, the called) and the reason he can say that is because it has been determined beforehand that the saved will be conformed to the image of the Son. And that will happen when the saints are caught up to meet the Lord Jesus in the air and will put on glorious bodies just like His (Phil.3:21).

Do you agree with that?

 

[j4jesus09]

My original remarks were in regard to what you said here:



I just cannot believe that is true because sometimes people act contrary to the will of the Lord.

I understand. And you are right we do act against God because there is not only our God at work only but another entity. I think that is where the rubber meets the road. Because of the very special but limited freedom God gives us the adversary fights against God's truth, the word of Jesus and it corrupts mankind so that we don't walk in the truth. So you no longer have just God but another source of knowledge that corrupts the hearts, minds, and spirit of people. It doesn't scare God though. He can work it all out for good like Romans tells us. Blessings

 

[StanJ]

StanJ, you have to import the notion of God choosing those who will choose His Son into that passage.
If you look at the lexical meaning of προγινοσκω you can see that it can mean both know beforehand and choose beforehand. The former makes the passage rather meaningless because both Calvinists and Arminians affirm that God knows everyone beforehand. And so if you want to use that definition then you most follow the logic all the way through the passage. God knows everyone, predestined everyone, called everyone, justified everyone and glorified everyone. Seen this way and you have universalism.
Of course, this verse presents a larger problem for the Open Theists who don’t believe that God foreknew anyone really.
However, it makes a great deal of sense (without having to add qualifications that the text doesn’t add) to acknowledge that Paul is using προγινοσκω in the sense of choosing beforehand.
Those God chose beforehand, those He predestined, and then He called them. Once calling them, He then justified them, etc…

No I don't. Why would you say that?
I'm not talking from a doctrinal perspective, I'm talking from an exegetical perspective, and what Paul says in Rom 8:28-30.
Are you purporting that the translators of the NIV got the rendering wrong?
προγινώσκω (proginōskō), connotes ONLY foreknowledge, what WILL happen based on the indivdual's choice, NOT choosing or ordaining what an individual will do. That His foreknowledge enables God to predestine those He knows will choose His son, does not mean His foreknowledge is causal in ANY way.
There is an order in these verses, and none of them cause the next, they result in the next.
Foreknowledge in THIS context, does NOT imply knowing as in intimate carnal knowledge, or knowing as in intimate mental knowledge.

 

[Dialogos]

No I don't. Why would you say that?

Because the text says nothing whatsoever regarding God foreknowing that they would choose Him. The object of God's foreknowledge in your assertion is the fact of their future choosing. The objects of God's foreknowledge in the text are individuals, the "whom(s)" of the passage.

I'm not talking from a doctrinal perspective, I'm talking from an exegetical perspective, and what Paul says in Rom 8:28-30.

OK, so, exegetically speaking then, where in Romans 8 does it say that God foreknew that they would choose Him?

Please show me the verses where it says precisely that.

Or anywhere in the bible really where it says specifically that God chooses based on His knowing of what they would do. Can you show me, chapter and verse, where it says that?

Are you purporting that the translators of the NIV got the rendering wrong?

No, though I think the NIV has some flaws as a translation that leans toward dynamic equivalency rather than formal equivalency.

But in Romans 8:28-30 its an ok translation as long as as you allow Foreknow to be defined by its original Greek lexical meaning rather than imposing an English understanding of the word, which is what you appear to be doing.

προγινώσκω (proginōskō), connotes ONLY foreknowledge, what WILL happen based on the indivdual's choice, NOT choosing or ordaining what an individual will do.

First, I don't argue that προγινώσκω refers to God's choosing what an individual will do, I argue it refers to God's choosing of an individual.

That is much more in keeping with the grammar of the passage which tells about whom God chose not some supposed criteria about how God chose which goes totally unmentioned by Paul in the passage up for discussion.

Second, your argument that προγινώσκω "ONLY connotes what will happen based on an individual's choice" is absolutely reading a doctrinal presupposition into the text and it does so at the expense of sound lexical research on the word προγινώσκω.

Look it up in any Greek-English Lexicon and you will find something like what BDAG has as a definition.

BDAG's definition of προγινώσκω:

1. to know beforehand or in advance, have foreknowledge (of) ti, someth. (Philo, Somn. 1, 2; Jos., Vi. 106; Tat. 8, 4) affliction Hs 7:5. Abs. (Jos., Ant. 2, 86) proginw,skontej since you know this (i.e. what the context makes clear) in advance 2 Pt 3:17. Of God (Alex. Aphr., An. p. 1, 7 Br. ta. me,llonta, Fat. 30 p. 200, 29; Just.) pa,nta Hm 4, 3, 4.—Closely connected is the idea of choice that suggests foreknowledge

2. choose beforehand tina, someone Ro 8:29. to.n lao.n auvtou/ 11:2 (EWeber, D. Problem der Heilsgesch. nach Ro 9-11, 1911; THoppe, D. Idee d. Heilsgesch. b. Pls 1926; FMaier, Israel in d. Heilsgesch. nach Ro 9-11, 1929; EvDobschütz, Prädestination: StKr 106, ’35, 9-19; JMunck, Christus u. Israel: Ro 9-11, ’56; EDinkler, Prädestination bei Paulus, GDehn Festschr., ’57, 61-102; s. also on proori,zw). Pass. of Christ proegnwsme,noj pro. katabolh/j ko,smou 1 Pt 1:20.—Know from time past (Jos., Bell. 6, 8) proginw,skonte,j me a;nwqen Ac 26:5.—DELG s.v. gignw,skw. M-M. TW.

BDAG shows that definition 2 is not only possible but likely in Romans 8:29 as they list Romans 8:29 as an example of def. 2.

Furthermore, your statement that προγινώσκω only refers to God choosing based on what He knows someone will do is disproved by its usage in 1 Peter 1:20 referring to Christ being chosen (προγινώσκω) before the creation of the world and by Romans 11:2 where God's choosing of Israel is clearly in view.

Your turn,do you think the NIV has προγινώσκω wrong in 1 Peter 1:20?

That His foreknowledge enables God to predestine those He knows will choose His son, does not mean His foreknowledge is causal in ANY way.

Except that 1 Peter 1:20 disproves your attempt to limit the definition of προγινώσκω.

There is an order in these verses, and none of them cause the next, they result in the next.

I'm glad you agree. Incidentally this statement dismantles Arminianism as Arminians actually do believe that God's foreknowledge of the future actions of an individual causes God to predestine them. If you have God actively foreknowing (in the sense of intimately choosing) then God's sovereign will is the cause and you are back to Calvinism.

We Calvinists can see both the order in the passage and the fact that God is the cause, starting the chain through choosing/foreknowing (προγινώσκω).

God's choosing/foreknowing results in God's predestination. God's predestination results in God's calling. God's calling results in God's justifying and God's justifying results in God's glorifying.

Maybe you can tell Jerry that, he doesn't appear to want to hear it from me.

All you have to do is to rethink your erroneous conclusion regarding προγινώσκω.

Foreknowledge in THIS context, does NOT imply knowing as in intimate carnal knowledge, or knowing as in intimate mental knowledge.

The word προγινώσκω in this context implies choosing as just as it does in 1 Peter 1:20, and more immediately in Romans 11:2.

 

[Dialogos]

Again, the prefix 'fore' here (pro in Greek) just means that something happened before something else. Of coure he didn't know them individually but he knew them beforehand because he knew that some would respond to his call.

This doesn't make sense.

Either God knew them beforehand or He didn't.

God doesn't not know them and then know them beforehand because He knows that some will respond.

So, he knew beforehand that some would respond to his call and this as yet undefined group was known to him beforehand as those who would respond. It's really quite simple, as someone else on the forum has said most beautifully - it's like an airline who sells tickets on a scheduled flight. He knows the flight will take place, he knows there will be people on it. He gets the flight ready for them so that they are comfortable, have food and drink. He knows exactly what is in store for them. But he doesn't know beforehand who is going to be on the flight.

That's and interesting analogy. But it falls short because in your analogy the airline doesn't know who or choose who will be on a flight, they just know that a flight will be available.

In the passage, the object of God's choosing beforehand (προγινώσκω) are individuals.

 

[StanJ]

Because the text says nothing whatsoever regarding God foreknowing that they would choose Him. The object of God's foreknowledge in your assertion is the fact of their future choosing. The objects of God's foreknowledge in the text are individuals, the "whom(s)" of the passage.

I guess that depends on whether you read the whole thing IN context or not. How does one LOVE God? You can't be called unless you are one of His. God foreknew who would be one of His, not by preordaining them to be, but by their action of loving Him as expressed through accepting His Son as their savior. There is NOTHING to import, it is already there.

OK, so, exegetically speaking then, where in Romans 8 does it say that God foreknew that they would choose Him?
Please show me the verses where it says precisely that.
Or anywhere in the bible really where it says specifically that God chooses based on His knowing of what they would do. Can you show me, chapter and verse, where it says that?

I just did that above, and I would be careful of asking for EXACT wording given your own apparent POV in this case.
Try Rom 11:2 (NIV), 1 Peter 1:2 (NIV), Eph 1:11 (NIV) and Acts 2:23 (NIV) to name a few.

No, though I think the NIV has some flaws as a translation that leans toward dynamic equivalency rather than formal equivalency.

Well we sure do differ on this, because IMO dynamic/functional equivalency is far more apropos than formal. Being bilingual in French and English I can attest to formal not being always accurate or relevant.

But in Romans 8:28-30 its an ok translation as long as as you allow Foreknow to be defined by its original Greek lexical meaning rather than imposing an English understanding of the word, which is what you appear to be doing.

The tense, voice and mood of the VERB proginṓskō, conveys exactly that.
To KNOW what WILL happens given a particular scenario, which in this case is those that love and accept God.

First, I don't argue that προγινώσκω refers to God's choosing what an individual will do, I argue it refers to God's choosing of an individual.

Actually, you were, by saying it comes after predestination, which it doesn't. If it did convey a type of choosing or ordination, the word Paul would have used is ὁρίζω (horizō), however he didn't.

That is much more in keeping with the grammar of the passage which tells about whom God chose not some supposed criteria about how God chose which goes totally unmentioned by Paul in the passage up for discussion.

Asserting this doesn't MAKE it so. You have NOT shown that to be the case.
It shows us whom God "foreknew", He predestined, to be conformed to the image of His Son, not to love Him or be saved. Sadly you use eisegesis to convey an inappropriate meaning to this scripture.

Second, your argument that προγινώσκω "ONLY connotes what will happen based on an individual's choice" is absolutely reading a doctrinal presupposition into the text and it does so at the expense of sound lexical research on the word προγινώσκω.

As I have already shown above, the tense, voice, and mood, of this verb conveys the proper connotation along with the context. Nothing being READ into it other than what the Greek actually conveys and what the translators wrote. There is nothing causative about the voice here, and you have NOT shown it to be so.

Look it up in any Greek-English Lexicon and you will find something like what BDAG has as a definition.
BDAG's definition of προγινώσκω:
BDAG shows that definition 2 is not only possible but likely in Romans 8:29 as they list Romans 8:29 as an example of def. 2.

I prefer Mounce and Moo given their pre-eminence in this field. Saying "it is possible" is simply equivocal and not direct, nor does it answer the issue.

Furthermore, your statement that προγινώσκω only refers to God choosing based on what He knows someone will do is disproved by its usage in 1 Peter 1:20 referring to Christ being chosen (προγινώσκω) before the creation of the world and by Romans 11:2 where God's choosing of Israel is clearly in view.

That is not what I said...I said God predestined based on who He FOREKNEW would chose His Son. I'd appreciate you not being so equivocal.

Your turn,do you think the NIV has προγινώσκω wrong in 1 Peter 1:20?

This is the problem when those who really don't understand Greek, try and make ONE connotation fit ALL uses. The Greek word used here is προεγνωσμένου, and the tense, voice and mood is NOT the same as Rom 8:28. Regardless, it is NOT causative here either. God's plan for salvation was in place before Gen 1:1, and included both the OC and NC. God is NOT reactive, He is proactive. His plan was always contingent on His foreknowledge. He is NOT the Wizard of Oz, but he is also NOT the Puppet Master. He is our Omnipotent, Omniscient and Omnipresent God, who KNOWS all.

I'm glad you agree. Incidentally this statement dismantles Arminianism as Arminians actually do believe that God's foreknowledge of the future actions of an individual causes God to predestine them. If you have God actively foreknowing (in the sense of intimately choosing) then God's sovereign will is the cause and you are back to Calvinism.

Let's be clear here...I am NOT pushing Arminianism and I don't label myself as such. I am dealing with specific scripture so don't waster your time trying to bash something I am NOT a part of.

We Calvinists can see both the order in the passage and the fact that God is the cause, starting the chain through choosing/foreknowing (προγινώσκω).

Again I don't really care if you label yourself. I prefer to use RT for those of you that have that perspective because IMO, Jean Cauvin's past does you no good deed, nor does it convey much credulity to his teachings. Foreknowledge always comes before what God does, including choosing.

God's choosing/foreknowing results in God's predestination. God's predestination results in God's calling. God's calling results in God's justifying and God's justifying results in God's glorifying.

Again the order is Foreknowing, then choosing or deciding.

1. Foreknowledge
2. Predestining
3. Calling
4. Justifying
5. Glorifying

Maybe you can tell Jerry that, he doesn't appear to want to hear it from me.

I keep my debates compartmentalized, so as to avoid equivocation. Jerry is a big boy and can deal with his own issues. His reticence is not unique to you I can assure you.

All you have to do is to rethink your erroneous conclusion regarding προγινώσκω.
The word προγινώσκω in this context implies choosing as just as it does in 1 Peter 1:20, and more immediately in Romans 11:2.

You make the same mistake many here make in believing I am NOT firm or knowledgeable in what I opine about. I have been saved and a Biblical student for over 45 years now. If I were you I wouldn't worry about what I say, but about what you assert, especially when it comes to RT doctrine.

 

[Totton Linnet]

If Jesus was sat with you at table and said "You did not choose Me but I chose you"

Would you dispute with Him?

It is a lie to say we are saved because we loved Jesus.

 

[Jerry Shugart]

IAgain the order is Foreknowing, then choosing or deciding.

1. Foreknowledge
2. Predestining
3. Calling
4. Justifying
5. Glorifying

You have the order wrong.

"And we know that all things work together for good to them that love God, to them who are the called according to his purpose. For whom he did foreknow, he also did predestinate to be conformed to the image of his Son, that he might be the firstborn among many brethren" (Ro.8:28-29).​

The key to the teaching of this passage depends on an understanding of the meaning of the Greek word translated "for" found at the beginning of verse twenty-nine. The word is a conjuction which ties the two verses together, and the word means "the reason why anything is said to be or be done...because...it is added to a speaker's words to show what ground he gives for his opinion" (Thayer's Greek English Lexicon).

At Romans 8:29 Paul tells us why he says that "all things work together for good" for the saved, those he describes as the called:

"And we know that all things work together for good to them that love God, to them who are the called according to his purpose. For whom he did foreknow, he also did predestinate to be conformed to the image of his Son, that he might be the firstborn among many brethren" (Ro.8:28-29).​

The reason why "all things work together for good" in regard to the saved is because it was determined beforehand that they would be conformed to the image of the Son. That will happen when the Lord descends from heaven and the saved will put on bodies just like his glorious body:

"But our citizenship is in heaven. And we eagerly await a Savior from there, the Lord Jesus Christ, who, by the power that enables him to bring everything under his control, will transform our lowly bodies so that they will be like his glorious body" (Phil.3:20-21; NIV).​

 

[StanJ]

You have the order wrong.

"And we know that all things work together for good to them that love God, to them who are the called according to his purpose. For whom he did foreknow, he also did predestinate to be conformed to the image of his Son, that he might be the firstborn among many brethren" (Ro.8:28-29).
​

The key to the teaching of this passage depends on an understanding of the meaning of the Greek word translated "for" found at the beginning of verse twenty-nine. The word is a conjuction which ties the two verses together, and the word means "the reason why anything is said to be or be done...because...it is added to a speaker's words to show what ground he gives for his opinion" (Thayer's Greek English Lexicon).

At Romans 8:29 Paul tells us why he says that "all things work together for good" for the saved, those he describes as the called:

"And we know that all things work together for good to them that love God, to them who are the called according to his purpose. For whom he did foreknow, he also did predestinate to be conformed to the image of his Son, that he might be the firstborn among many brethren" (Ro.8:28-29).
​

The reason why "all things work together for good" in regard to the saved is because it was determined beforehand that they would be conformed to the image of the Son. That will happen when the Lord descends from heaven and the saved will put on bodies just like his glorious body:

"But our citizenship is in heaven. And we eagerly await a Savior from there, the Lord Jesus Christ, who, by the power that enables him to bring everything under his control, will transform our lowly bodies so that they will be like his glorious body" (Phil.3:20-21; NIV).
​

Jerry it seems you just like posting to illicit an argument.
I note with amusement you deliberately omit v30 in your diatribe.

 

[Jerry Shugart]

Jerry it seems you just like posting to illicit an argument.
I note with amusement you deliberately omit v30 in your diatribe.

Of course since you have no answer to what I said you feel like you must say something in the hope that no one will notice that you have no answer.

Some things never change!

"Moreover whom he did predestinate, them he also called: and whom he called, them he also justified: and whom he justified, them he also glorified" (Ro.8:30).​

It is the saved who are predestined to put on bodies just like the Lord Jesus' glorious bodiy.

And they were called and they were justified and they were glorified.

 

[StanJ]

Of course since you have no answer to what I said you feel like you must say something in the hope that no one will notice that you have no answer.

Some things never change!

"Moreover whom he did predestinate, them he also called: and whom he called, them he also justified: and whom he justified, them he also glorified" (Ro.8:30).
​

It is the saved who are predestined to put on bodies just like the Lord Jesus' glorious bodiy.

And they were called and they were justified and they were glorified.

You actually already had the answer which you now confirm by reading v30. THAT is the order after salvation, but like I said you like to be cantankerous.