Biblical Order of Salvation

[Benefactor]

The Order of Salvation

Pre creation

• Elect / chosen according to foreknowledge

Foreknowledge is used to point to an even and individuals in the context of salvation because this salvation of course is for sinners and sinners are persons who by their faith trust in Christ, Luke 7:50, Romans 10:10. Foreknowledge sees the act of faith of the believer.

• I Peter 1: 1b who are chosen 2. according to the foreknowledge of God the Father, by the sanctifying work of the Spirit, to obey Jesus Christ and be sprinkled with His blood:
• Acts 2:23. this {Man,} delivered over by the predetermined plan and foreknowledge of God, you nailed to a cross by the hands of godless men and put {Him} to death.

The predetermined plan: For a plan to be a plan is must have been prior to its implementation. Can a plan ever not be before its implementation? The answer to this is no. Something that just happens and is not the result of a plan is spontaneous. No one would arguer that creation was not planned, thus predetermined, for those who believes in God according to scripture. Jesus was delivered over on the basis of the plan and plans are predetermined. First it was a predetermined plan as a plan is and second it was according to foreknowledge. How do we understand this additional term? If God had absolutely planed that all real events in the creation of space and time then all things are absolutely determined and foreknowledge has not place in the equation of the statement. In other words such a word is not necessary because the use of “predetermined plan” says it all. So why would God also include foreknowledge? This can be looked at two different ways. First, we must accept that for whatever reason foreknowledge plays in the predetermined plan it is part of the plan but in what sense? If God determined that you go eat at a restaurant at 8:01 AM then you will do exactly that and therefore foreknowledge is counter to need because what is fixed is know and foreknowledge is not necessary. If redundancy is necessary then the same word would have been used twice or an equivalent word with the same meaning, not one so opposite, for foreknowledge is basically the opposite of a determined plan. However, if God, within the plan, gives “freedom” for you as a person within your realm of ability to make the choice to go to a restaurant at 8:01 AM then foreknowledge is necessary. The reason it is necessary is because it was not determined that you will but that you may if you decide to. Notice the difference: One plan determines that you will and the other determines that you may and both are determined but one is assisted by foreknowledge and the other is not because it is not necessary.

If you personally design a plan to create an object that travels in one direction and it can not travel in but only one direction then foreknowledge is not necessary. If however you had the capability to design a plan where the object had at least two options that you did not control but permitted and the object had the freedom to control either or then you because you are not God would not know which the object takes until the event takes place. However, this is not the case with God. God has absolute knowledge of all real and possible outcomes and there results. If we deny that God has omniscience we then in fact deny the God of the Scripture. For man foreknowledge cannot come in to play if the design allows free choice, which to us will appear random, but could be influenced, not certain, yet unknown if the process permits true free will. Eliminate free will and there is no reason for foreknowledge.

Remember that we are human and God is God and we don’t have absolute knowledge but God does. The difference in so called logical thinking must take into account this difference.

Again what purpose does the word foreknowledge serve in such a construction unless it has meaning? The purpose of Jesus having to die is to solve a sin problem therefore a plan to accomplish this is necessary if this problem is to be solved. If all parts of the plan are fixed from eternity and no action is left to choice then it is truly a predetermined plan free of any created being having any measure of free will. If all is absolutely determined for all of creation foreknowledge is not necessary and it cannot be a synonym because foreknowledge is diametrically apposed to a known fixed result.


Pre creation salvation terms
• Plan and Purpose (election and predestination are subject to his plan and purpose)

Pre salvation words
• Hearing Truth (good news) according to the dispensation one lived or is not living in. Calling
• Conviction (the word used by the Holy Spirit) reasoning with God
• Repentance
• Faith - believe - hope
• Confession

The moment of Salvation words
• Conversion
• Saved
• Born a gain / Born from above
• Regeneration
• Justification
• Sanctification
• New creature in Christ
• New man
• Baptized into Christ
• Adoption
• Sealed

 

[The Archangel]

Benefactor,

• Elect / chosen according to foreknowledge

Foreknowledge is used to point to an even and individuals in the context of salvation because this salvation of course is for sinners and sinners are persons who by their faith trust in Christ, Luke 7:50, Romans 10:10. Foreknowledge sees the act of faith of the believer.

These verses have nothing to do with foreknowledge.

The Archangel

 

[Benefactor]

Benefactor,
These verses have nothing to do with foreknowledge.

The Archangel

Did God know the lady would believe in Christ?

 

[Dale-c]

Benefactor, you just posted a rather long post without one iota of biblical exegesis. Man's wisdom is not important here but what the Bible actually says.

 

[Havensdad]

Thank you, Mr. Kierkagaard...

Unbelief is sin. If God looked forward in time, and saw who would believe, and based His election on that, then we are elected according to our good works (not committing sin is good work). God looked forward in time, saw that you were "better" than other people, and so chose you.

"Foreknowledge" is just that: foreknowledge. Nowhere in the Bible does it say "God looked forward in time to see who would choose to believe in Him". In fact, it says the opposite: that election is not according to the "will (choice) of man, but the will of God".

 

[Benefactor]

Benefactor, you just posted a rather long post without one iota of biblical exegesis. Man's wisdom is not important here but what the Bible actually says.

Dale-c:

I am so glad you are important in your own eyes. I have ordered you a badge of recognition.

 

[Dale-c]

Dale-c:

I am so glad you are important in your own eyes. I have ordered you a badge of recognition.

I am about as important as one grain of sand over another.
However, I do appreciate biblical exegesis not your philosphy. You have only been on this board a short time and you have had an arrogant attitude that you have it figured out and calvinists are blind since you have been here.

 

[SeekingTruth]

Dale-C,

Amen

 

[The Archangel]

Did God know the lady would believe in Christ?

Benefactor,

The issue is not what you state here. What you state here requires going outside of the text for your answer.

You have asked a non-sequitur question that is in no way germane to the texts you have quoted.

Therefore, I won't answer the above question--since it doesn't deal with the issue at hand.

Luke 7:50 says: And he said to the woman, “Your faith has saved you; go in peace.” (ESV)

The entire pericope, from Luke 7:36-50 would give a much better, much fuller interpretation of this verse.

From the context it is clear she came to see Jesus with the express purpose of anointing Him. It is clear that this lady, probably a prostitute, had come under the conviction of sin some time before coming to see Jesus.

We are not told how she came to her conviction of sin; we are led to see that it has already occurred before she sought-out Jesus. It is altogether likely she had heard His preaching and had been "saved" because of it.

So, again, faith comes by hearing.

Romans 10:10 says: For with the heart one believes and is justified, and with the mouth one confesses and is saved. (ESV)

This entire passage is part of Paul's argument that the Gospel is for everyone, not just the Jews.

Nowhere in this passage does Paul even begin to suggest how one believes.

But, Paul being a "Hebrew of Hebrews" would know what the Old Testament says about the heart:

Genesis 6:5--The Lord saw that the wickedness of man was great in the earth, and that every intention of the thoughts of his heart was only evil continually.

Jeremiah 17:9--The heart is deceitful above all things, and desperately sick; who can understand it?

Paul, again because of his pedigree, would have expected any believer, either Jew or Gentile, to have been given a new heart by God:

Ezekiel 36:26--And I will give you a new heart, and a new spirit I will put within you. And I will remove the heart of stone from your flesh and give you a heart of flesh.

So, the answer from biblical theology shows that Paul expected believers to have a new, God-given heart and that new heart was expected before conversion, because a "desperately wicked" heart wouldn't know to seek after God. In fact, Paul states this plainly here:

Romans 3:11--no one understands;no one seeks for God.

Blessings,

The Archangel

 

[Winman]

"Foreknowledge" is just that: foreknowledge. Nowhere in the Bible does it say "God looked forward in time to see who would choose to believe in Him". In fact, it says the opposite: that election is not according to the "will (choice) of man, but the will of God".

Yes, election is the will of God. But God chose those who come by faith, not by works.

Rom 9:11 (For the children being not yet born, neither having done any good or evil, that the purpose of God according to election might stand, not of works, but of him that calleth; )

It explains exactly what the election is here, God chooses those who come by faith, not of works. And it clarifies this later in the chapter.

Rom 9:30 What shall we say then? That the Gentiles, which followed not after righteousness, have attained to righteousness, even the righteousness which is of faith.
31 But Israel, which followed after the law of righteousness, hath not attained to the law of righteousness.
32 Wherefore? Because they sought it not by faith, but as it were by the works of the law. For they stumbled at that stumblingstone;
33 As it is written, Behold, I lay in Sion a stumblingstone and rock of offence: and whosoever believeth on him shall not be ashamed.

Election is clearly explained in this chapter. God chose to elect those who come by faith, not the works of the law.

Rom 11:2 God hath not cast away his people which he foreknew. Wot ye not what the scripture saith of Elias? how he maketh intercession to God against Israel, saying,
3 Lord, they have killed thy prophets, and digged down thine altars; and I am left alone, and they seek my life.
4 But what saith the answer of God unto him? I have reserved to myself seven thousand men, who have not bowed the knee to the image of Baal.
5 Even so then at this present time also there is a remnant according to the election of grace.
6 And if by grace, then is it no more of works: otherwise grace is no more grace. But if it be of works, then is it no more grace: otherwise work is no more work. 7 What then? Israel hath not obtained that which he seeketh for; but the election hath obtained it, and the rest were blinded

Again, it is contrasting those who come by faith versus those who try to attain righteousness through the works of the law.

Rom 10:2 For I bear them record that they have a zeal of God, but not according to knowledge.
3 For they being ignorant of God's righteousness, and going about to establish their own righteousness, have not submitted themselves unto the righteousness of God.
4 For Christ is the end of the law for righteousness to every one that believeth.

Election is not that difficult to understand. We just had an election, and we KNEW who would win. No, we did not know if Obama or McCain would win, but we knew whoever won the electoral college would win. Why? Because according to our law whoever wins the electoral college is elected President.

And it is the same with God. He chose before time that those who would come by faith would be elected to become the sons of God.

The difference is that God knew before who would come by faith and who would not. This does not mean that God forced some men to believe and others not, it just means he knew who would believe and who would not. This is what it says in Rom 9:12. God knew Jacob would have faith and Esau would not. Therefore he could say the elder will serve the younger

Rom 9:12 It was said unto her, The elder shall serve the younger.
13 As it is written, Jacob have I loved, but Esau have I hated.
14 What shall we say then? Is there unrighteousness with God? God forbid.
15 For he saith to Moses, I will have mercy on whom I will have mercy, and I will have compassion on whom I will have compassion.
16 So then it is not of him that willeth, nor of him that runneth, but of God that sheweth mercy.

And what is meant in verses 15 and 16 is that God had determined before time to have mercy on those who believe by faith, and show wrath on those who try to attain righteousness any other way.

 

[The Archangel]

Winman,

You wrote:

The difference is that God knew before who would come by faith and who would not. This does not mean that God forced some men to believe and others not, it just means he knew who would believe and who would not. This is what it says in Rom 9:12. God knew Jacob would have faith and Esau would not. Therefore he could say the elder will serve the younger

Rom 9:12 It was said unto her, The elder shall serve the younger.
13 As it is written, Jacob have I loved, but Esau have I hated.
14 What shall we say then? Is there unrighteousness with God? God forbid.
15 For he saith to Moses, I will have mercy on whom I will have mercy, and I will have compassion on whom I will have compassion.
16 So then it is not of him that willeth, nor of him that runneth, but of God that sheweth mercy.

You have a huge textual issue here. Let me post the whole passage:

6 But it is not as though the word of God has failed. For not all who are descended from Israel belong to Israel, 7 and not all are children of Abraham because they are his offspring, but “Through Isaac shall your offspring be named.” 8 This means that it is not the children of the flesh who are the children of God, but the children of the promise are counted as offspring. 9 For this is what the promise said: “About this time next year I will return, and Sarah shall have a son.” 10 And not only so, but also when Rebekah had conceived children by one man, our forefather Isaac, 11 though they were not yet born and had done nothing either good or bad—in order that God's purpose of election might continue, not because of works but because of him who calls— 12 she was told, “The older will serve the younger.” 13 As it is written, “Jacob I loved, but Esau I hated.”

14 What shall we say then? Is there injustice on God's part? By no means! 15 For he says to Moses, “I will have mercy on whom I have mercy, and I will have compassion on whom I have compassion.” 16 So then it depends not on human will or exertion, but on God, who has mercy. 17 For the Scripture says to Pharaoh, “For this very purpose I have raised you up, that I might show my power in you, and that my name might be proclaimed in all the earth.” 18 So then he has mercy on whomever he wills, and he hardens whomever he wills. (ESV, Emphasis mine)

In no way, shape, or form does this passage conform to your statement "God knew Jacob would have faith and Esau would not."

The text is crystal clear: God chose Jacob over Esau for no other reason than He will have mercy on whom He wills. God unconditionally chose Jacob and unconditionally did not choose Esau.

Your presupposition is incorrect. I suppose you could try to make your case from a different passage, but you simply cannot make your case from this one. The text stands firmly and plainly against you.

Also, earlier in your post you used the word "Foreknew" from Romans 11. I'm not sure you know what that word means. It certainly does not mean "to know before hand" as in seeing who would believe and who wouldn't.

Blessings,

The Archangel

 

[OldRegular]

Perhaps the name of the thread should be changed to Benefactor's order of Salvation.

 

[Darrenss1]

Winman,

You wrote:



You have a huge textual issue here. Let me post the whole passage:



In no way, shape, or form does this passage conform to your statement "God knew Jacob would have faith and Esau would not."

The text is crystal clear: God chose Jacob over Esau for no other reason than He will have mercy on whom He wills. God unconditionally chose Jacob and unconditionally did not choose Esau.

Your presupposition is incorrect. I suppose you could try to make your case from a different passage, but you simply cannot make your case from this one. The text stands firmly and plainly against you.

Also, earlier in your post you used the word "Foreknew" from Romans 11. I'm not sure you know what that word means. It certainly does not mean "to know before hand" as in seeing who would believe and who wouldn't.

Blessings,

The Archangel

The problem is there is no reason to believe that Rom 9 is the same election to salvation. For example, God electing Pharoah and Egypt to be vessels of His wrath is God exercising His sovereignty over the earth, however that is not a reference to "spiritual" election to eternal life or damnation, they are not the same thing. Otherwise God must logically be electing to eternal damnation to fit the text into spiritual eternal election.

Darren

 

[grainofwheat]

We have been predestined to belong to Jesus.
Ephesians chapter 1

It is that simple and man tries to complicate everything.

 

[Darrenss1]

We have been predestined to belong to Jesus.
Ephesians chapter 1

It is that simple and man tries to complicate everything.

The greatest christian minds in the last 200 years stumbled over these great and profound truths... Its far from simplicity. Most christians are like Job trying to understand the ways of God which are above and beyond mans natural understanding. Most christians are happy to be taught from someone a simple explanation of it all, that is different then trying to work it all out from the text and uncomplicate these truths for themselves, see how simple it is then.

Darren

 

[Rippon]

The greatest christian minds in the last 200 years stumbled over these great and profound truths...

You mean the last 2,000 years the greatest Christian minds have wrestled with these truths.

 

[Rippon]

The problem is there is no reason to believe that Rom 9 is the same election to salvation. For example, God electing Pharoah and Egypt to be vessels of His wrath is God exercising His sovereignty over the earth, however that is not a reference to "spiritual" election to eternal life or damnation, they are not the same thing. Otherwise God must logically be electing to eternal damnation to fit the text into spiritual eternal election.

Darren

I never heard the term "spiritual election" before. Election is only for those bound for glory --"...objects of his mercy, whom he prepared in advance for glory'(verse23).

Reprobates are bound for eternal misery -- they are not elected. "... objects of his wrath -- prepared for destruction.'(verse 22)

There are just two categories of folks -- the elect and the damned. Romans nine brings this out very clearly.

 

[Darrenss1]

You mean the last 2,000 years the greatest Christian minds have wrestled with these truths.

If you like but I did write 200 years intentionally just as an example.

Darren

 

[Darrenss1]

I never heard the term "spiritual election" before. Election is only for those bound for glory --"...objects of his mercy, whom he prepared in advance for glory'(verse23).

Well it shouldn't be a surprise, there is the spiritual as in spirit lives beyond death and there is the natural earthly that ends at the death of the body. Look I have heard the Calvinist views on Rom ch9, I don't see it that way at all. God exalts nations and puts down, the kings hearts are in the hands of God, this is an earthly natural election for the purposes of God on the earth. That does not include election for salvation, not even close. God chose to have mercy on Abram, God chose the seed of Jacob as His special earthly people, to guide them, to give them His laws, to testify of Himself through - to make His name known, to reveal Himself to. Out of the OT crowd of the natural children of God (of Israel) were those whom chose to follow God by faith by their own free will.

Reprobates are bound for eternal misery -- they are not elected. "... objects of his wrath -- prepared for destruction.'(verse 22)

This is where I find you are completely misapplying Rom 9:21-22 to bring a specific class where it does not state. There is nothing in the whole chapter to think this refers to election for salvation. God does His will in the nations of the earth according to His judgment, mercy, good pleasure...etc That is not referring to the New Covenant through Christ.

There are just two categories of folks -- the elect and the damned. Romans nine brings this out very clearly.

Your interpretation may bring it out clearly but the text does not speak of such things. If you want to make an OT comparison of election for salvation or non election (damnation) in Rom ch9 then please show me where the Old Testament saints were regenerated in order to prove the comparison fits.

Darren

 

[Rippon]

If you like but I did write 200 years intentionally just as an example.

Darren

Your view of Historic Christian doctrine is rather limited. What happened in 1819 that was so pivital?