Featured Context of Acts 13:48

LOL, Greg Boyd is no Calvinist. He is the founder of Open Theism where he states that God does not know what humans will do, but instead constantly reacts to their actions in order to keep his plans in intact.

Boyd has moved far away from any orthodox theology and he now is applauded by all "rainbow churches" as one they can support since God, in Boyd's view is beholden to man's will being completely free.

If you think Boyd is a Calvinist then you are even less knowledgeable of theology than I already thought you were.

 

1 Tim 1:13 who before was speaking evil, and persecuting, and insulting, but I found kindness, because, being ignorant, I did it in unbelief,

And there was a certain disciple in Damascus, by name Ananias, and the Lord said unto him in a vision, 'Ananias;' and he said, 'Behold me, Lord;' and the Lord saith unto him, 'Having risen, go on unto the street that is called Straight, and seek in the house of Judas, one by name Saul of Tarsus, for, lo, he doth pray, and he saw in a vision a man, by name Ananias, coming in, and putting a hand on him, that he may see again.' And Ananias answered, 'Lord, I have heard from many about this man, how many evils he did to Thy saints in Jerusalem, and here he hath authority from the chief priests, to bind all those calling on Thy name.' Acts 9:10-14

Acts 9:15 And the Lord said unto him, 'Be going on, because a choice vessel to Me is this one, to bear My name before nations and kings -- the sons also of Israel;

Why and how did Saul become a saved man, a believer? How was Saul translated out of unbelief, unto belief? How did Saul become, of the faith, of Abraham?

When exactly did Saul the unbeliever want to become a believer?

Isn't the context ; Through hearing the word of the Lord, the ones Eph 1:4 according as He did choose us in him before the foundation of the world, for our being holy and unblemished before Him, in love, - became believers

Now relative to what I determined, What about
Acts 13:45,46 But when the Jews saw the multitudes, they were filled with envy, and spake against those things which were spoken by Paul, contradicting and blaspheming. Then Paul and Barnabas waxed bold, and said, It was necessary that the word of God should first have been spoken to you: but seeing ye put it from you, and judge yourselves unworthy of everlasting life, lo, we turn to the Gentiles.

How does that fit in?

I say then, Have they stumbled that they should fall? God forbid: but rather through their fall salvation is come unto the Gentiles, for to provoke them to jealousy. Now if the fall of them be the riches of the world, and the diminishing of them the riches of the Gentiles; how much more their fulness? Acts 11:11,12
15 For if the casting away of them be the reconciling of the world, what shall the receiving of them be, but life from the dead?
25,27 For I would not, brethren, that ye should be ignorant of this mystery, lest ye should be wise in your own conceits; that blindness in part is happened to Israel, until the fulness of the Gentiles be come in. And so all Israel shall be saved: as it is written, There shall come out of Sion the Deliverer, and shall turn away ungodliness from Jacob: For this is my covenant unto them, when I shall take away their sins.

 

You logic escapes me. You said God knows who will come to faith but then said but he gave grace to all in the "possibility" of some being saved. If God knows who will come to faith, what is the purpose of giving faith to all? Why would there be a need for extra grace in the possibility that some additional would come to the faith. He either knows or he does not know. There is no need to provide for the possibility because, as YOU said, HE ALREADY KNOWS. That is what YOU said. But then you said in essence, what if there are some that God had missed. What if God did not know? That is the only "possible" conclusion one can extract from your statement. You have become a witness against yourself.

Do you think God wondered if he missed some when he closed the doors on the ark? Or what about when Christ told the rebellious Jews in Matt 23:38, "Your house is left unto you desolate." He drew the line on their wickedness. No more would come out. No possibility. As far as God controlling sin, God does limit satan. Do you think that satan did one hair breadth more to Job than God would allow? why did satan need to ask God if he could try Job? How could Christ tell the Jews that their house is left unto them DESOLATE. He sure wasn't leaving any possibility of some coming to faith at a later date or on their death bed.

We see in Percho's quote of Acts 13:45,45 the same drawing the line, the limiting of sin. They conclude the statement of Christ to those Jews, the kindgom shall be taken from you (predestined, to limit in advance) and given to a nation bring forth the fruit thereof. The Holy Spirit removed. It follows that, "seeing ye put it from you, and JUDGE YOURSELVES unworthy of everlasting life, lo we turn to the gentiles. The kingdom taken,the kingdom given.

You said in the previous sentence that "if God foreordained who would be saved, then it logically follows that we could not resist his invitation to salvation. Then it is not an invitation but a summons that we are unable to ignore."

You are the one saying it is an invitation. Did Paul resist? Did the apostles resist? It is rather that only those predestined to eternal salvation can come to his command. Why in the world would we, who are GIVEN eyes to see and ears to hear the gospel of the kingdom, want to ignore it? Thank God is was a summons if you want to call it that.

 

Great topic as this is often misconstrued to support false doctrine.

The Greek word translated "appointed" in the OP version of the verse, refers to an agreement by mutual consent. Since another Greek word (also translated as "appointed" refers to a unilateral assignment, some claim it was God who had "appointed" them unilaterally. Utter nonsense.

They had received direction from Paul as to the Good News, and as many as agreed with and took that direction for eternal life, believed.

TLB
When the Gentiles heard this, they were very glad and rejoiced in Paul’s message; and as many as wanted eternal life, believed.​

For example say someone is "placed" under authority and then gives direction to others. He has accepted the arrangement established by another. See Luke 7:8

Romans 13:1 teaches that the governing authorities have been "established" by God, but note they are governing which shows their agreement with the arrangement.

In Acts 22:10 Paul is sent to Damascus, as he has agreed to do what the Lord has arranged.

In all the "passive" arrangements the participant agrees with the direction given and participates.

Acts 13:48, Yet the Gentiles hearing this rejoiced and glorified the word of the Lord, and as many as were in agreement with the arrangement into everlasting life believed. ​

Thus not a scintilla of support for unilateral individual election prior to belief.

 

You are looking at this through your calvinist glasses. God knowing is not God causing as your theology requires. All have the possibility of being saved it is just your theology that denies that. Under your theology what was the requirement of Christ going to the cross, remember God according to you had already picked out all those that would be saved and rejected all the rest so faith in Christ has nothing to do with it in calvinism.

I note that you want God to determine all things but you have to modify your language so as to try to distance God the logical outcome of your theology. Anything that happens has to be decreed by your version of God or else He is not God. So when you say God limits satan it is still the sin that God decreed to happen so you have God working against Himself. You hold to a very confused theology.

So we see in Acts 13:45 that by your theology God had these Jews contradicting, blaspheming, and opposing the things spoken by Paul. So here again we have God working against Himself. Or perhaps we have the Jews choosing to blaspheme and oppose Paul via their free will just as the text indicates. I note you even quote Act 13:46 "since you reject it, and judge yourselves unworthy of everlasting life" those are people making free will choices well that is unless you think God decreed that they should do this which again shows God working against Himself since He desires all to come to repentance and be saved.

God knowing who will trust in His son for salvation is not Him causing them to trust in His son. That is the error of your theology. You continue to read into the text what you need to find to support your view. Did Paul or the Apostles or any Christian for that matter resist? Well of course not that is why we are followers of Christ Jesus. But the problem for you is to show where everyone that heard the gospel had been determine to either accept or to reject the message. If you say that God had determined all those that rejected the message to reject the message then once again you have God working against Himself.

That is the only options left for you, either God determined all those that would reject His son or man has a free will and chose to reject His son.

 

Barnes states this, regarding the word translated as "ordained."
And as many as were ordained - ὅσοι ἦσαν τεταγμένοι hosoi ēsan tetagmenoi. Syriac, "Who were destined," or constituted. Vulgate, "As many as were foreordained (quotquot erant praeordinati) to eternal life believed." There has been much difference of opinion in regard to this expression. One class of commentators has supposed that it refers to the doctrine of election - to God's ordaining people to eternal life, and another class to their being disposed themselves to embrace the gospel - to those among them who did not reject and despise the gospel, but who were disposed and inclined to embrace it. The main inquiry is, what is the meaning of the word rendered "ordained"? The word is used only eight times in the New Testament: Matthew 28:16, "Into a mountain where Jesus had appointed them"; that is, previously appointed - before his death; Luke 7:8, "For I also am a man set under authority"; appointed, or designated as a soldier, to be under the authority of another; Acts 15:2, "They determined that Paul and Barnabas, etc., should go to Jerusalem"; Acts 22:10, "It shall be told thee of all things which are appointed for thee to do"; Acts 23:23, "And when they appointed him a day," etc.: Romans 13:1, "the powers that be are ordained of God; 1 Corinthians 16:15, They have addicted themselves to the ministry of saints." The word τάσσω tassō, properly means "to place" - that is, to place in a certain rank or order. Its meaning is derived from arranging or disposing a body of soldiers in regular military order. In the places which have been mentioned above, the word is used to denote the following things:

(1) To command, or to designate, Matthew 28:16; Acts 22:10; Acts 28:23.

(2) to institute, constitute, or appoint, Romans 13:1; compare 2 Samuel 8:11; 1 Samuel 22:7.

(3) to determine, to take counsel, to resolve, Acts 15:2.

(4) to subject to the authority of another, Luke 7:8.

(5) to addict to; to devote to, 1 Corinthians 16:15. The meaning may be thus expressed:

(1) The word is never used to denote an internal disposition or inclination arising from one's own self. It does not mean that they disposed themselves to embrace eternal life.

(2) it has uniformly the notion of an ordering, disposing, or arranging from without; that is, from some other source than the individual himself; as of a soldier, who is arranged or classified according to the will of the proper officer. In relation to these persons it means, therefore, that they were disposed or inclined to this from some other source than themselves.

(3) it does not properly refer to an eternal decree, or directly to the doctrine of election - though that may be inferred from it; but it refers to their being then in fact disposed to embrace eternal life. They were then inclined by an influence from without themselves, or so disposed as to embrace eternal life. That this was done by the influence of the Holy Spirit is clear from all parts of the New Testament, Titus 3:5-6; John 1:13. It was not a disposition or arrangement originating with themselves, but with God.

(4) this implies the doctrine of election. It was, in fact, that doctrine expressed in an act. It was nothing but God's disposing them to embrace eternal life. And that he does this according to a plan in his own mind a plan which is unchangeable as he himself is unchangeable is clear from the Scriptures. Compare Acts 18:10; Romans 8:28-30; Romans 9:15-16, Romans 9:21, Romans 9:23; Ephesians 1:4-5, Ephesians 1:11. The meaning may be expressed in few words - who were then disposed, and in good earnest determined, to embrace eternal life, by the operation of the grace of God upon their hearts.

Acts 13:48 Commentaries: When the Gentiles heard this, they began rejoicing and glorifying the word of the Lord; and as many as had been appointed to eternal life believed.

 

Brother Silverhair,

Let's try again so I can better understand.

First, let take you statement one part at a time. You said someone believing is not determined by the Father knowing.

How does God know who will accept his Son as their savior? Did he do it by looking into the future?

 

Acts 13:46,48 Then Paul and Barnabas waxed bold, and said, It was necessary that the word of God should first have been spoken to you: but seeing ye put it from you, and judge yourselves unworthy of everlasting life, lo, we turn to the Gentiles.
And when the Gentiles heard this, they were glad, and glorified the word of the Lord: and as many as were ordained to eternal life believed.

Rom 11:11,12 I say then, Have they stumbled that they should fall? God forbid: but rather through their fall salvation is come unto the Gentiles, for to provoke them to jealousy. Now if the fall of them be the riches of the world, and the diminishing of them the riches of the Gentiles; how much more their fulness?

Are these two passages speaking of the same event? Is not Paul describing in the Romans passage what took place in the Acts passage.

After all it is Christmas; Matt 1:21 And she shall bring forth a son, and thou shalt call his name JESUS: for he shall save his people from their sins.

Does Jesus save them from their sins or do the people save themselves from their sins by their response to Jesus?

 

You do realize that God is omniscient. He can and does know all things without having to cause all things. God is sovereign and in His sovereignty has given man a free will by which he can accept or reject the gospel message. That is why man can hear and believe the message and be saved by the grace of God.

 

Then you must believe that the future is fixed so that God can look into it. Is that correct?

Don't forget to answer Percho's question?

Thanks

 

Don't want to give you too many questions so I don't get confused.

How do you justify saying God is omniscient and knows all things but needs to give grace to all in case there is a "possibility"? It would seem then that He would not know all things otherwise he would not need to give grace to all

If he knows all things, would he not also know all the "possibilities"?

If there are "possibilities" then would He not stand in doubt of his own omniscience? Does that sound logical to you?

 

I see folks are making arguments from speculation. For example God is "all knowing" which might mean God knows everything, past, present and future. So He could not not know the time of His returning according to that interpretation. And of course God could not "remember no more forever" our sins.

The problem with arguing about human speculation is no body is enlightened, only confused at a higher level.

 

That's the way I look at it too. But I have to admit that there is the possibility that God could be outside time as we know it. If what God sees is simply the truly free choices of everyone unfolding in a truly free or even random way, sometimes without even influence from God himself - then God may be acting when He chooses as simply a seer and when He sees something that He chooses to intervene in He does and His will is done when and where He wants it done.

Even among Calvinists, there is a wide range of belief in just how far God goes in determining each event. That's why we get into these debates as to whether God allows evil, ordains evil, causes evil, or observes and checks evil as He sees fit. It seems logical to say that once God states something will happen He is also declaring that it must happen. But is that necessarily true. If God can really "see" the future then it may be possible for Him to observe the future like we as humans can observe the present, with total accuracy, yet not necessarily intervening, except where He wants to, according to His wisdom. Van beat me to the post above but he is right, it's speculation.

 

Why would I think that the future is fixed that is a calvinist idea. Does God have a plan for humanity, YES. We see this all the way from Genesis to Revelation. The salvation of those that freely trust in Him.

 

NO

In application yes, the Jews had hardened their hearts to the gospel message which is what we see in the Jews of today but a time is coming when they will receive their Messiah.

After all it is Christmas; Matt 1:21 And she shall bring forth a son, and thou shalt call his name JESUS: for he shall save his people from their sins.

Does Jesus save them from their sins, YES
or do the people save themselves from their sins by their response to Jesus? NO

Mans' response to Jesus will determine whether God saves them.

 

God is omniscient but I did not say He "needs" to give grace I said He does give grace. Why would you think He would not do so? God knowing all possible outcomes still does not require that He determine the outcome which is the position that you seem to be driving toward. But have you looked at the whole picture here? If God determines all those that will be saved He has also determined all those that will be lost as He has excluded them from the possibility of being saved. That is the logical outcome of determinism.

Do you not think that God loves His creation?
Eze_33:11 "Say to them, 'As I live!' declares the Lord GOD, 'I take no pleasure in the death of the wicked, but rather that the wicked turn from his way and live.
1Ti 2:3 This is good and acceptable in the sight of God our Savior,
1Ti 2:4 who desires all men to be saved and to come to the knowledge of the truth.

Your logic is flawed as you are starting from the position that God causes people to believe. As I said before God knowing who will trust in His son is not Him causing them to do so. God provides the means for people to know Him but man still has to respond.

 

God gave a mathematical principle which says. If A=B and B=C then A=C. Not only is it a mathematical equation, it is a truth.

The search of the scriptures is the search for truth.

I then ask, does the future change independently of God or does he direct it?

Isaiah 46:10. Knowing the end from the beginning, and from ancient times the things that are not yet done, saying my counsel shall stand, and I will do all my pleasure

The equation is also a proof of logic. Remember the equation before you answer.

As for me, I freely believed in Christ, because he gave me a new heart and a new spirit that Christ put in me himself. Ezekiel 36:26-27

What I am asking are very important questions to me in my search for truth that is in Christ.

Lastly, you said God gave grace to all men in case there were "possibilities". Again, if God knows all the possibilities, why does he need to give grace to all men? If he knows all the "possibilities" then is he waiting to see which one will happen? If he is waiting, then he does not know.

 

Both to DaveXR650 and Silverhair,

There has to be a certain fixing of the future, otherwise prophesy, which is a fixed declaration of God, could not exist. The bible is, as they say, chocked full of prophesy.

It is like the equation, as given by God.