Chosen to Eternal Life? [Acts 13:48]

[webdog]

And Saul, yet breathing of threatening and slaughter to the disciples of the Lord, having gone to the chief priest, did ask from him letters to Damascus, unto the synagogues, that if he may find any being of the way, both men and women, he may bring them bound to Jerusalem.

At this time was Saul in unbelief or belief, was he an unbeliever or a believer. Once again unbeliever/believer of what?

And in the going, he came nigh to Damascus, and suddenly there shone round about him a light from the heaven, and having fallen upon the earth, he heard a voice saying to him, `Saul, Saul, why me dost thou persecute?'

At that moment was Saul an unbeliever or a believer?

And he said, `Who art thou, Lord?'

What about at that moment, an unbeliever or believer?

and the Lord said, `I am Jesus whom thou dost persecute; hard for thee at the pricks to kick;'

Jesus who? Jesus what?

trembling also, and astonished, he (Saul) said, `Lord, what dost thou wish me to do?'

What about at this moment, unbeliever or believer?

and the Lord [said] unto him, `Arise, and enter into the city, and it shall be told thee what it behoveth thee to do.' And the men who are journeying with him stood speechless, hearing indeed the voice but seeing no one, and Saul arose from the earth, and his eyes having been opened, he beheld no one, and leading him by the hand they brought him to Damascus, and he was three days without seeing, and he did neither eat nor drink.

I wonder why three days?

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.'

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; for I will shew him how many things it behoveth him for My name to suffer.'

Is Saul at this moment still blind, whatever that means, is he still in unbelief or belief?

And Ananias went away, and did enter into the house, and having put upon him [his] hands, said, `Saul, brother, the Lord hath sent me -- Jesus who did appear to thee in the way in which thou wast coming -- that thou mayest see again, and mayest be filled with the Holy Spirit.'

Once Jesus the Lord, who, what? Acts 2:36 assuredly, therefore, let all the house of Israel know, that both Lord and Christ did God make him -- this Jesus whom ye did crucify.'------Exactly when did God make Jesus both Lord and Christ?

And immediately there fell from his eyes as it were scales, he saw again also presently, and having risen, was baptized, and having received nourishment, was strengthened, and Saul was with the disciples in Damascus certain days, and immediately in the synagogues he was preaching the Christ, that he is the Son of God.

Who was he preaching the Christ, the Son of God? Why was he preaching this.

Just when did this free will kick in and save Saul?
Free will is an amazing thing, Ain't it.

Was Saul dragged into town by those he was with, or did he willingly have them guide them into town to see Anaias?

Why was his reaction different than those who were blinded in Sodom and Gamorah?

Free will is an amazing thing, ain't it!

 

[OldRegular]

Just when did this free will kick in and save Saul?
Free will is an amazing thing, Ain't it.

Never did. Salvation is all by Grace and is much more amazing, as the experience of Saul/Paul shows.

 

[OldRegular]

Yes, I think it is an amazing and awesome characteristic that God made a part of His design. Very humbling.

King David, a man after God's own heart [1 Samuel 13:14; Acts 13:22], prayed Restore unto me the joy of thy salvation. [Psalms 51:12]

It is much more humbling to know that Salvation is the work of the Triune God only!

 

[Iconoclast]

He is no more "obstinate" about his views than any one of the rest of us. Just because someone explains "how they and their scholars" see something does not make one necessarily right and the other wrong.[/QUOTE]

QF,

does not make one necessarily right and the other wrong.[

This is not high school english class where everything is equal ,and everyone is right. There are several in here, who are almost always wrong.
To coddle them is to encourage more error. A person who posts several thousand posts, full of error....is not an innocent novice. They are playing the role of false teacher.....only it is not a game or academic exercise.
There are several in here I have differences with, yet they offer a reasoned view supported by scripture.That is the best they can do.
Several others have shown themselves to be enemies of truth. You have others who have claimed as scholars those who have been rejected as heretics. By repeating the past errors...it is not going to make it right now:thumbs::thumbs:

 

[webdog]

This is not high school english class where everything is equal ,and everyone is right. There are several in here, who are almost always wrong.
To coddle them is to encourage more error. A person who posts several thousand posts, full of error....is not an innocent novice. They are playing the role of false teacher.....only it is not a game or academic exercise.

Are you saying we should all put you on ignore?

 

[Iconoclast]

Are you saying we should all put you on ignore?

WebDog my friend,
You can put me on ignore if that makes you happy:wavey:
When I asked you two or three times for imput on something, you did not offer it, so basically you are ignoring me anyhow:laugh:

 

[Iconoclast]

Winman

One reason I rarely pay any attention to Icon's posts is that all he does is parrot others

.

I plead guilty here.I know when I read or listen to someone who knows more than I do, and I present as much of that as I can.

If I wanted to hear what Reformed preachers of the past thought, I could build a Reformed library or listen to Sermon Audio as he does.

I plead guilty as charged here,Winman:laugh:

I prefer to discuss scripture with someone who speaks for themselves. Anybody can parrot someone else, that does not make one a scholar.

This we can call shared ignorance.What value is it ,to repeat errors that have been exposed in times past already

Look, I am sure I err at times, but I always post scripture and explain my own interpretation of that scripture.

We all have a degree of error.You do post scripture{sort of}, you offer your ideas.....but....then you go off attacking the historic faith as if none of those men had a bible , or read it.

I have on occasions quoted Barnes, or Gill, or Spurgeon, but that is usually to show that my own personal interpretations are not "off the wall". In fact, these scholars are often very close how I personally interpret scripture

.

Yes...we have seen you do this.However many times we explain that you are misunderstanding the quote you are using...which is where i contend that you ignore correction:thumbsup:

I am of the belief that all believers have the Holy Spirit and with prayer can come to understand scripture.

Yes...the Spirit opens truth to believers.

I simply like to think for myself, and I enjoy speaking with others who can think for themselves. I do not appreciate parrots.

This is why you are at this point unteachable. You despise those God has given to the church. Your aversion to some of the most learned teachers limits your biblical comprehension. Go back and read most of your posts...you will see it for yourself.

 

[Winman]

Winman
.

I plead guilty here.I know when I read or listen to someone who knows more than I do, and I present as much of that as I can.

Well, apparently everyone knows more than you do, because all you do is post creeds or the writings of others. You never question them. You may disagree, but I will explain why I believe faith precedes regeneration, because no man can be spiritually alive until all his sins are forgiven, and we are justified by faith. This is called logic and plain old common sense. How do you respond? A bunch of dead scholars said regeneration precedes faith, so that makes it so. It doesn't matter to you that it doesn't make sense, these guys are smart, so they must be right.

I plead guilty as charged here,Winman:laugh:

Guilty of letting others do your thinking for you. I call that LAZY.

This we can call shared ignorance.What value is it ,to repeat errors that have been exposed in times past already

If you would ever examine what others say you would see they are not ignorant. Galileo was called a heretic when he said the earth was a sphere, because all of the so-called scholars of the day said the earth was flat.

We all have a degree of error.You do post scripture{sort of}, you offer your ideas.....but....then you go off attacking the historic faith as if none of those men had a bible , or read it.

And many of these men were FORCED to agree with doctrine. You didn't dare disagree with Calvin back in Geneva, or you would be toasted. If you disagreed with the Catholic church you were a dead man. It is no wonder they all agreed, you weren't allowed to think for yourself.
.

Yes...we have seen you do this.However many times we explain that you are misunderstanding the quote you are using...which is where i contend that you ignore correction:thumbsup:

I explain using my God-given common sense. No man can be spiritually alive until his sins are forgiven, why can't you understand this? Because you mindlessly accept the writings of men who were forced to conform to doctrine.

Yes...the Spirit opens truth to believers.

And I am a believer, not a parrot.

This is why you are at this point unteachable. You despise those God has given to the church. Your aversion to some of the most learned teachers limits your biblical comprehension. Go back and read most of your posts...you will see it for yourself.

I do not despise these men, I read what they have to say and compare it with scripture on the subject. If it makes sense I listen, if it contradicts scripture I do not. I think for myself.

Why don't you explain to me how a person can be spiritually alive before their sins are forgiven in your own words. I don't want to see a creed, or the writings of some "scholar", I want to see how YOU explain this. Tell me how this works.

Yes, explain in your own words just how this works. You have probably never given it a serious thought.

 

[quantumfaith]

Never did. Salvation is all by Grace and is much more amazing, as the experience of Saul/Paul shows.

Yes you are correct, salvation is because of, and simply because of the grace of God. Saul/Paul's experience was wonderful and transforming. Although his experience was his, not mine and not yours ( I am assuming.....a dangerous thing for a mathematician.)

 

[quantumfaith]

He is no more "obstinate" about his views than any one of the rest of us. Just because someone explains "how they and their scholars" see something does not make one necessarily right and the other wrong.[/QUOTE]

QF,



This is not high school english class where everything is equal ,and everyone is right. There are several in here, who are almost always wrong.
To coddle them is to encourage more error. A person who posts several thousand posts, full of error....is not an innocent novice. They are playing the role of false teacher.....only it is not a game or academic exercise.
There are several in here I have differences with, yet they offer a reasoned view supported by scripture.That is the best they can do.
Several others have shown themselves to be enemies of truth. You have others who have claimed as scholars those who have been rejected as heretics. By repeating the past errors...it is not going to make it right now:thumbs::thumbs:

I will not "DECLARE" your position(s) to be wrong, rather I will say that I often disagree with your assessment. You consistently state when you "think" someone is in error, but you see, you simply think that and you think you prove that. I am glad to see you at least framed it as "playing the role". That is a big step forward in being more cordial. Admittedly, yours and mine....threshold for "false teacher" is different. If there are in fact false teachers, then I know you should confidence in your system that God has a purpose for them to be present and continue, otherwise, gentle teaching on your part and acknowledgement that God is quite capable of handling it would be prudent......I think.

 

[HeirofSalvation]

Acts 13:48. 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.

Some on this forum insist that election is the decision of man and God rubber stamps man’s choice! The above Scripture demonstrates that this doctrine is completely false. It is God who ordains or appoints individuals to eternal life.

This Scripture...simply at face value simply does not, in fact, do that. One could hold an alternative or more Arminianistic Theology and have no problem with this passage at all. To an Arm....the statement "as many as were ordained to eternal life believed" is still perfectly consistent with their Theology. It is even perfectly consistent with a Simple Foreknowledge View as well. You seem to assume it isn't. If someone had a SFV (for instance) this verse merely states a tautology. Think about it for example, from SFV perspective which you are lambasting here:

1.) God knows all who will believe
2.) All those who will believe are granted eternal life
3.) All those who will believe are ordained to eternal life
4.) some believed...therefore we can assume they were ordained to eternal life as well

here is your tautology:

those who believe are ordained, those who were ordained believed....

This statement could be understood to be simply tautologous to numerous alternate Theologies. You are assuming what the basis of ordination is...this verse is silent on it. I do not personally take a SFV myself...but why is it, that some seem unable to distinguish between a verse which is merely consistent with a certain dogma as believing it "proves" the dogma?

No one has to use Greek arguments to re-define or deny what it says in English....What it says in English fails to prove the contention in the OP.

 

[Van]

The word translated ordained or appointed is tasso.

“Tasso appears in various forms eight times in the New Testament. Below is a list of the various English words used to translate the various forms of the root Greek word transliterated “tasso.”

Matthew 28:16 – “designated” (NASB); “told” (NIV); “directed” (ESV, HCSB); “appointed” (NKJV, YLT);
Luke 7:8 – “placed” (NASB, HCSB, NKJV and YLT); omitted (NIV); “set” (ESV);
Acts 13:48 – “appointed” (NASB, NIV, ESV, HCSB, NKJV and YLT);
Acts 15:2 – “determined” (NASB, NKJV); “appointed” (NIV, ESV); “arranged” (HCSB, YLT);
Acts 22:10 – “appointed” (NASB, ESV, NKJV, YLT); “assigned” (NIV, HCSB);
Acts 28:23 – “set” (NASB); “arranged” (NIV, HCSB); “appointed” (ESV, NKJV, YLT);
Romans 13:1 – “established” (NASB, NIV); “instituted” (ESV, HCSB); “appointed” (NKJV, YLT);
1 Corinthians 16:15 - "devoted themselves" (NASB, NIV, ESV, HCSB, NKJV); set themselves (YLT);

If we sum up the various English words used to translate the forms of “tasso” here is the result:

appointed nineteen times,
designated one time,
told one time
directed two times,
set two times
placed three times
determined two times
arranged four times
assigned four times
established two times
instituted two times
devoted themselves two times
set themselves one time.

From this we can conclude that most modern translations agree that “appointed” best translates the idea being conveyed by the use of the various forms of the Greek “tasso.”

To appoint, therefore, is the result of someone in authority or otherwise respected telling someone willing what to do. This is the meaning in every case where the term is used in the New Testament. Now lets look at all the verses using the NASB translation choices.

In Matthew 28:16, scripture says the disciples proceeded to the mountain which Jesus had designated. The word translated designated is the Greek term that means appoint. Jesus had told the disciples where to go, and when they responded by accepting the direction then they had been "appointed."

In Luke 7:8, scripture says, "For I also am a man placed under authority...." The word translated as placed is the Greek term that means appoint. When the officer accepted the direction of His superiors, he was appointed under authority.

In Acts 13:48, scripture says "... and as many as had been appointed to eternal life believed." The word translated "had been appointed" is the Greek term that means appoint. Paul had presented the gospel of Christ to the Gentiles and as many as received the gospel and took direction from Paul to eternal life, believed. As many as accepted Paul's direction, and therefore were appointed to eternal life, believed.

In Acts 15:2, scripture says "...the brethren determined that Paul and Barnabas and some others should go...." The word translated as determined is the Greek term that means appoint. When Paul and Barnabas and the others accepted the direction to go, they had been appointed.

In Acts 22:10, scripture says "... and there you will be told of all that has been appointed for you to do." The word translated as appointed is the Greek term that means appoint. When Ananias received direction as to what to tell Paul, then he agreed to his "appointment."

In Acts 28:23, scripture says, "And when they had set a day for Paul...." The word translated as set is the Greek term that means appoint. A group of Jews made an arrangement with Paul to meet on a certain day, thus they made an appointment by mutual consent.

In Romans 13:1, scripture says, "...for there is no authority except from God, and those which exist are established by God." The word translated established is the Greek term that means appoint. God has said that government be established and provided rules and so the authorities that govern according to God have accepted the "appointment." As a side note, based on the meaning of the word, only that governance that is consistent with God's directions can be considered appointed by God.

In 1 Corinthians 16:15, scripture says, "...and that they have devoted themselves to ministry...." The word translated "devoted themselves" is the Greek term that means appoint. This version of the root word seems to indicate they told themselves what to do and then complied rather than receiving direction from someone else. But in any even, the word still carries with it, even in this form, the idea of entering an arrangement and the result is said to be appointed.

 

[percho]

Never did. Salvation is all by Grace and is much more amazing, as the experience of Saul/Paul shows.

Amen Brother, Paul could not resist grace. Jesus translated Paul from ignorant unbelief unto belief gave him the Holy Spirit and Paul who did not believe Jesus of Nazareth was the Messiah began to immediately preach Jesus as the resurrected Son of God, the Messiah, both Lord and Christ.

 

[percho]

I know no Greek.

Interlinear: Scripture4all.org : Hearing yet the nations rejoiced and glorified the word of the Lord and they believe whoever were having been set (ordained) into life.

The elect (sheep) are believers even though they may have lived most of their life in unbelief. Until they are called they are blind.

 

[Van]

Those that were appointed by agreeing with Paul's gospel message believed. The word of the Lord was spread throughout the whole region.
(Now I know the Calvinists will claim God just regenerated a whole bunch of His chosen to make it appear to be a great awakening, but the Gentile field was not actually white for the harvest. God just made it look that way to deceive those pesky free willers.)

 

[webdog]

I just read this in my devotions. First, Paul and Barnabas were talking to Jews. The book is written to Jews.

Second, the key to this understanding lies in verse 47 "For this is what the Lord has commanded us: 'I have appointed you as a light for the Gentiles, to bring salvation to the ends of the earth.'"

The "appointed" in verse 48 are those mentioned in 47. The gentiles who rejoiced in 48 are those who were appointed to eternal life and who believed.

To read a deterministic understanding into this text is silly.

 

[Van]

Yes, silly and without regard for what the verse actually says. Calvinists read tasso as tithēmi, a mutual agreement as a unilateral action. Paul was unilaterally assigned as a light unto the Gentiles, but those who took Paul's direction to eternal life (i.e. the gospel) were appointed by mutual agreement, and therefore believed.

 

[OldRegular]

Icon

I believe that all those who are among the redeemed should study and try to understand what God is telling us in His Word. Scripture tells us:

2 Timothy 2:15 Study to shew thyself approved unto God, a workman that needeth not to be ashamed, rightly dividing the word of truth.

Study is essential. God is not going to open our skull and give us infallible understanding of His Word. We also read the following:

2 Peter 1:20 Knowing this first, that no prophecy of the scripture is of any private interpretation.

This passage is interpreted by many to mean that the Holy Spirit must be instrumental in our understanding of Scripture. That interpretation is consistent with the teaching of Jesus Christ about the Holy Spirit.

John 14:26 But the Comforter, which is the Holy Ghost, whom the Father will send in my name, he shall teach you all things, and bring all things to your remembrance, whatsoever I have said unto you.

Now it is obvious to all on this Board that different people understand some Scripture differently. The Holy Spirit is not confused so that means that some of us are wrong.

I also believe that some people have a better understanding of certain Scripture than others, perhaps because they study more, are more receptive to the Holy spirit; I don't know.

It is both arrogant and foolish for anyone to believe they the sole arbiter of what Scripture teaches. I am not ashamed to use the writings of others, where appropriate, to amplify my understanding. Obviously there is more error published about the teaching of the Bible than truth so one must use discernment.

I use Gill, Spurgeon, Clarke on occasion, Dagg, Carroll, among others. Sometimes my understanding of difficult Scripture is improved. Other times I cannot accept what these Old Saints teach, but they are always beneficial to me. [I should note that I also read Mohler and MacArthur.]

My point once again in this long post is that there is no one on this Forum who cannot learn from the teaching of other Christians. To denigrate that teaching is silly, and arrogant. No one is the sole conduit for the guidance of the Holy Spirit.

So hang in there brother and don't let them beat you down!:thumbs::thumbs::thumbs::thumbs:

 

[HeirofSalvation]

I just read this in my devotions. First, Paul and Barnabas were talking to Jews. The book is written to Jews.

Second, the key to this understanding lies in verse 47 "For this is what the Lord has commanded us: 'I have appointed you as a light for the Gentiles, to bring salvation to the ends of the earth.'"

The "appointed" in verse 48 are those mentioned in 47. The gentiles who rejoiced in 48 are those who were appointed to eternal life and who believed.

To read a deterministic understanding into this text is silly.

This sounds like a vaguely...oh, what's the word???..."Biblical", I think? :thumbs::wavey: exposition of this passage. Almost like you took the context at face value and are expositing it for what it states...could you elaborate?

 

[AresMan]

Yet another thread where the Calvinist misrepresentation of a verse is presented yet again. The word translated appointed or ordained means an arrangement by mutual consent. It is not the word used for a unilateral assignment. Thus the many that were appointed were those who took Paul's direction, not God's assignment, and His direction was whoever believes in Him shall not perish. So those that took that direction believed.

All this effort to make this seem like something only a person well studied in Greek could comprehend is simply an effort to disenfranchise opponents of false doctrine.

Van, the English that you read clearly expresses what the Greek means: "As many as were ordained/appointed to eternal life believed."

While at first glance, it is true that τεταγμένοι can be either middle participle (reflexive) or a passive participle (receptive), it is clarified as a passive participle by the auxiliary ἦσαν ("were"). It enforces grammatically that these people (the "as many as") were NOT both the doers and receivers of the action ("ordain"/"appoint"/"dispose"), but only the receivers of the action.
This resulting "periphrastic construction" means both that they were passive in the ordaining AND that this happened before the aorist ἐπίστευσαν ("believed"). This IS important, and you cannot wish it away.

The periphrastic construction to clarify a passive vs middle participle (which are spelled the same) is similar to a problem in the Spanish language with the imperfect tense of a verb. With the simple active indicative, first, second, and third person conjugations are spelled differently so that personal pronouns are optional. However, the imperfect tense spells first and third person singular conjugations the same way.

For example:

[yo] hablaba = "I was speaking"
[tu] hablabas = "You were speaking" (singular, informal)
[el/ella] hablaba = "He/she/it was speaking"
[usted] hablaba = "You were speaking" (singular, formal)

In Spanish, simply to say "hablaba" is ambiguous because it could be I or he/she/it/you. Including the pronoun clarifies who the actor is.

In a similar vein, the periphrastic construction of adding the auxiliary ἦσαν clarifies to the reader that τεταγμένοι is passive voice NOT middle voice.


Now, concerning your contention that τάσσω means "an arrangement by mutual consent," let's look at another passage where the word is used in a similar conjugation:

Rom 13:1 Let every soul be subject unto the higher powers. For there is no power but of God: the powers that be are ordained of God.

The word for "ordained" is τεταγμέναι, which is almost like the form found in Acts 13:28, but is a perfect participle that could be middle or passive voice. Would anyone seriously even begin to suggest that Paul was saying that the authorities in these offices made "an arrangement by mutual consent" with God? No! That would turn the point of this statement completely on its head. Paul is telling the Roman citizens to submit to their authorities because GOD ordained/appointed these offices for this very purpose.

Let's try another:

Act 17:26 And hath made of one blood all nations of men for to dwell on all the face of the earth, and hath determined the times before appointed, and the bounds of their habitation;

The word here is προστεταγμένους, which is also a perfect passive or middle. The language is unmistakable that the "times" didn't appoint themselves or make a pact with God, but just as God "determined" the times (in the past), He also "appointed" when they would be fulfilled.

Moving on...

Act 22:10 And I said, What shall I do, Lord? And the Lord said unto me, Arise, and go into Damascus; and there it shall be told thee of all things which are appointed for thee to do.

The word is τέτακταί, which is a perfect indicative passive or middle. Now, could you honestly suggest that Paul made "an arrangement by mutual consent" about his tasks ahead of him at the moment of his conversion on the road to Damascus? The fact that it is a perfect tense would mean that the task was appointed even before Paul's conversion. It is clear that God unilaterally appointed Paul's tasks beforehand.


To grant your "mutual consent," that is a minor shade of meaning, that, of course, can only be expressed by context:

Act 28:22 But we desire to hear of thee what thou thinkest: for as concerning this sect, we know that every where it is spoken against.
Act 28:23 And when they had appointed him a day, there came many to him into his lodging; to whom he expounded and testified the kingdom of God, persuading them concerning Jesus, both out of the law of Moses, and out of the prophets, from morning till evening.

It can be inferred that the day that they had mutually consented with Paul on the day if they is understood as inclusive rather than exclusive.