Election being according to foreknowledge

[Iconoclast]

WD,

I agree with you when speaking of God himself.But here He is revealing to us in language suited to us.....some of the secret things now being made known to the church.....He is speaking of the multitude of sinners He has purposed to set his love upon from everlasting...

..He knows them

different from all men.

 

[webdog]

Make sure when you get to heaven you let Peter know. I am sure he will be grieved he misrepresented God.

not at all, oh snide one, since he was merely the pen the Holy Spirit used in talking with finite being bound by time in linear language our feeble minds might understand in gaining knowledge of His eternal plan.

 

[AresMan]

WD,

It is not speaking about what God knows....but WHOM...


Foreknowledge, Is actual for all of the elect.It is so because God has known and predestined each and everyone of them...individually..


For WHOM....He did Foreknow....He also did predestinate

Unbelievers are not predestined to be conformed to the Image of the Son.

That has been MY point on recent threads. 1 Peter 1:2 is similar to Romans 8:29, except that proginwskw in Peter is nominalized. It still has to do with foreknowing people, not something they would "do." It is "elect according to the foreknowing [of them] of God."

 

[webdog]

WD,

I agree with you when speaking of God himself.But here He is revealing to us in language suited to us.....some of the secret things now being made known to the church.....He is speaking of the multitude of sinners He has purposed to set his love upon from everlasting... different from all men.

I agree with most of that but the ordo salutis gained from needing a linear timeline of executed events.

 

[Revmitchell]

not at all, oh snide one, since he was merely the pen the Holy Spirit used in talking with finite being bound by time in linear language our feeble minds might understand in gaining knowledge of His eternal plan.

Well since you have surpassed all of man kind in this issue to include Peter we will all defer to you.

 

[webdog]

Well since you have surpassed all of man kind in this issue to include Peter we will all defer to you.

...says someone referring to himself as "reverend" :laugh:

 

[Iconoclast]

Wd,
I think of it this way. As God has progessively revealed His eternal purpose, It is God himself who created and revealed "time" in Genesis.

So , we know that all souls are eternal in the realm of Life...or in the second death.
We know that the scripture reveals to us that it is everlasting life,and yet we read ..in the fulness of time...God sent forth His Son...
He participates in His own creation,including time...even though the events are Decreed with certainty.

We already have won In Christ, we are perfect in Him right now.{positionally} And yet we are told:

3 Behold, what manner of love the Father hath bestowed upon us, that we should be called the sons of God: therefore the world knoweth us not, because it knew him not.

2 Beloved, now are we the sons of God, and it doth not yet appear what we shall be: but we know that, when he shall appear, we shall be like him; for we shall see him as he is.

3 And every man that hath this hope in him purifieth himself, even as he is pure.

We are here to serve and spread the gospel as part of the ordained means of salvation...to those who are outside at this time.

 

[Winman]

That has been MY point on recent threads. 1 Peter 1:2 is similar to Romans 8:29, except that proginwskw in Peter is nominalized. It still has to do with foreknowing people, not something they would "do." It is "elect according to the foreknowing [of them] of God."

And I proved this false, as foreknowledge in Acts 2:23 is speaking of an event.

Acts 2:23 Him, being delivered by the determinate counsel and foreknowledge of God, ye have taken, and by wicked hands have crucified and slain:

You could read this verse as "Him, being delivered by the foreknowledge of God, ye have taken" and it would do no violence to the verse. This is not speaking of personally knowing someone as you insist foreknowledge means. Here, foreknowledge is speaking of an event, the event of Jesus allowing himself to be taken, and the Jews taking Jesus.

God knew that Judas would betray Jesus. God knew the scribes and Pharisees would conspire against Jesus and send soldiers to take him. God foreknew all this, and allowed this so that Jesus could die for our sins.

Foreknowledge here is speaking of an event, not knowing someone personally. This refutes your narrow definition.

 

[OldRegular]

Acts 2:23 Him, being delivered by the determinate counsel and foreknowledge of God, ye have taken, and by wicked hands have crucified and slain:

You never answered the question as to what "determinate counsel" means! Want to try now?

 

[Winman]

You never answered the question as to what "determinate counsel" means! Want to try now?

Just what it says, "Him being delivered by the determinate counsel of God"

God determined that Jesus would be delivered to be crucified. That does not mean he determined or caused the Jews to crucify him. It does not say that, it says only that he was "delivered" by the determinate counsel of God.

God does not cause sin. God did not cause Judas to betray Jesus, or for the Jews to crucify him. God in his foreknowledge did know Judas and the Jews would do this, and so God determined to deliver Jesus over to them.

Amazing, foreknowledge easily answers how God could bring all these things about without being the author of sin, but Calvinists insist God did not elect persons according to foreknowledge, or that he allowed Judas and the Jews to crucify Jesus according to foreknowledge. This leaves them with no option except that God becomes the author of sin.

 

[OldRegular]

Amazing, foreknowledge easily answers how God could bring all these things about without being the author of sin, but Calvinists insist God did not elect persons according to foreknowledge, or that he allowed Judas and the Jews to crucify Jesus according to foreknowledge. This leaves them with no option except that God becomes the author of sin.

Sadly Winman you know very little about the Doctrines of Grace!

 

[Iconoclast]

Acts 2:23 Him, being delivered by the determinate counsel and foreknowledge of God, ye have taken, and by wicked hands have crucified and slain:

You could read this verse as "Him, being delivered by the foreknowledge of God, ye have taken" and it would do no violence to the verse. This is not speaking of personally knowing someone as you insist foreknowledge means. Here, foreknowledge is speaking of an event, the event of Jesus allowing himself to be taken, and the Jews taking Jesus.

Isa49...speaks of The Servant being uniquely sent for this very purpose

The Lord hath called me from the womb; from the bowels of my mother hath he made mention of my name.

2 And he hath made my mouth like a sharp sword; in the shadow of his hand hath he hid me, and made me a polished shaft; in his quiver hath he hid me;

3 And said unto me, Thou art my servant, O Israel, in whom I will be glorified.

This is an intimate knowledge...not of an event....but of the Elect Servant, the true Israel.

 

[The Archangel]

And I proved this false, as foreknowledge in Acts 2:23 is speaking of an event.

Acts 2:23 Him, being delivered by the determinate counsel and foreknowledge of God, ye have taken, and by wicked hands have crucified and slain:

You could read this verse as "Him, being delivered by the foreknowledge of God, ye have taken" and it would do no violence to the verse. This is not speaking of personally knowing someone as you insist foreknowledge means. Here, foreknowledge is speaking of an event, the event of Jesus allowing himself to be taken, and the Jews taking Jesus.

God knew that Judas would betray Jesus. God knew the scribes and Pharisees would conspire against Jesus and send soldiers to take him. God foreknew all this, and allowed this so that Jesus could die for our sins.

Foreknowledge here is speaking of an event, not knowing someone personally. This refutes your narrow definition.

Nope.

In Acts 2:23, the relative demonstrative pronoun τοῦτον finds its antecedent in verse 22's "Jesus of Nazareth" which is also, strangely enough, in the accusative case.

Therefore, v. 23 is, in fact, saying that Jesus was delivered up according to the...foreknowledge of God. "Delivered" is an adjective.

But, there's more! Notice that Peter's sentence is structured with the nominative participle "you crucified" to cover the subject and the verbal idea. The main verb of the passage is the imperative "hear" in v. 22.

So, Peter is saying, in essence: Hear this: You crucified Jesus of Nazareth. In the midst of saying this he tells us things about Jesus: 1) a man attested to you by God with mighty works and wonders and signs that God did through him in your midst, as you yourselves know; 2) delivered up according to the definite plan and foreknowledge of God. Then we get the next main verb: God raised Him up.

Here is is diagrammed a bit more simply:

Hear this:

You crucified Jesus of Nazareth.

-[Jesus]: a man attested to you by God with mighty works and wonders and signs that God did through him in your midst, as you yourselves know

-[Jesus]: delivered up according to the definite plan and foreknowledge of God​

God raised [Jesus] up
​

The text answers the question Who was delivered up? Jesus. Who delivered Him? God. Who crucified Him? Man.

So, the text is saying the Jews killed Jesus and God killed Jesus. There it is right there--The Sovereignty of God and the responsibility of man.

The Archangel

 

[Iconoclast]

Nope.

In Acts 2:23, the relative demonstrative pronoun τοῦτον finds its antecedent in verse 22's "Jesus of Nazareth" which is also, strangely enough, in the accusative case.

Therefore, v. 23 is, in fact, saying that Jesus was delivered up according to the...foreknowledge of God. "Delivered" is an adjective.

But, there's more! Notice that Peter's sentence is structured with the nominative participle "you crucified" to cover the subject and the verbal idea. The main verb of the passage is the imperative "hear" in v. 22.

So, Peter is saying, in essence: Hear this: You crucified Jesus of Nazareth. In the midst of saying this he tells us things about Jesus: 1) a man attested to you by God with mighty works and wonders and signs that God did through him in your midst, as you yourselves know; 2) delivered up according to the definite plan and foreknowledge of God. Then we get the next main verb: God raised Him up.

Here is is diagrammed a bit more simply:

Hear this:

You crucified Jesus of Nazareth.

-[Jesus]: a man attested to you by God with mighty works and wonders and signs that God did through him in your midst, as you yourselves know

-[Jesus]: delivered up according to the definite plan and foreknowledge of God​

God raised [Jesus] up
​

The text answers the question Who was delivered up? Jesus. Who delivered Him? God. Who crucified Him? Man.

So, the text is saying the Jews killed Jesus and God killed Jesus. There it is right there--The Sovereignty of God and the responsibility of man.

The Archangel

Thank you for another fine post and explanation of How God has planned and purposed the carry out his love to His people

 

[OldRegular]

Hear this:

You crucified Jesus of Nazareth.

-[Jesus]: a man attested to you by God with mighty works and wonders and signs that God did through him in your midst, as you yourselves know

-[Jesus]: delivered up according to the definite plan and foreknowledge of God​

God raised [Jesus] up
​

The text answers the question Who was delivered up? Jesus. Who delivered Him? God. Who crucified Him? Man.

So, the text is saying the Jews killed Jesus and God killed Jesus. There it is right there--The Sovereignty of God and the responsibility of man.

The Archangel

It seems to me that this is taught in John 3:16.

For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life.

 

[Iconoclast]

It seems to me that this is taught in John 3:16.

For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life.

It is.....

 

[HeirofSalvation]

WD,
It is not speaking about what God knows....but WHOM...
Foreknowledge, Is actual for all of the elect.It is so because God has known and predestined each and everyone of them...individually..
For WHOM....He did Foreknow....He also did predestinate
Unbelievers are not predestined to be conformed to the Image of the Son.

This rendering...in NO WAY contradicts Arminian Theology...I agree 100% !!! :thumbsup: Anyone who thinks it does simply doesn't understand reasonable Arminianistic or non-Calvinist Theology at all, it is Perfectly consistent with it...the problem is, that you seem to think that because it speaks of "whom" God "knows" that this somehow automatically negates the "what" that God ALSO knows...This is a false dillema as is this one:

That has been MY point on recent threads. 1 Peter 1:2 is similar to Romans 8:29, except that proginwskw in Peter is nominalized. It still has to do with foreknowing people, not something they would "do." It is "elect according to the foreknowing [of them] of God."

The portion I bolded is not a contradictory...it modifies, yes, and that serves to deepen our understanding...but it does not at all contradict. They are BOTH possibly true!!! (I do not take the mere "prescience" or "simple foreknowledge" view myself either). So I do not speak as a defender of that particular position.


As a side note: I wanted to merely quote this gem:

seeking to refute the unconditionality of God's election

God elected based on his pleasure.

And......I leave you to figure out what the problem is here........

 

[HeirofSalvation]

Hear this:
You crucified Jesus of Nazareth.
-[Jesus]: a man attested to you by God with mighty works and wonders and signs that God did through him in your midst, as you yourselves know

-[Jesus]: delivered up according to the definite plan and foreknowledge of God
God raised [Jesus] up

The text answers the question Who was delivered up? Jesus. Who delivered Him? God. Who crucified Him? Man.

So, the text is saying the Jews killed Jesus and God killed Jesus. There it is right there--The Sovereignty of God and the responsibility of man.

The Archangel

Yes...this is all true. And it doesn't demonstrate compatibilism or Calvinism at all.

God is "Sovereign" yes...
Man is "responsible" yes...
And yet...man ALSO has "free-will"...and that is what makes him responsible. Man didn't do it merely because God "determined" or "decreed" thus (although he absolutely did)...he did it because he "chose" to....They are ALL true. It is our responsibility to find a reasoned way to wrap our heads around that idea...and how what might be, at first glance, seeming contradictions, are not ACTUALLY contradictions at all, but there are reasonable explanations of this.

 

[HeirofSalvation]

Sadly Winman you know very little about the Doctrines of Grace!

And despite your passion and loud mouth.....you actually know less about them than he does.
It also is not "Sad" as all things are according to the sovereign purposes of God, are they not? If he doesn't understand them..(and he does) it is within God's Sovereign purview whether Winman be both "elect" and perfectly "sanctified" fully within proper understanding, and not yours. Is God NOT the author and "finisher"?...who art thou, oh, O.R. to reply to God? Why would you repeatedly question him and his wisdom and divine purposes? So your thinking that the determinate counsel of God is somehow mistaken or "SAD" is to be in direct rebellious defiance to God's perfect will as he has created vessels BOTH to honor and dishonor has he not? Why, then, do you resist God's perfect wisdom in determining that Winman be thus? Why are God's Sovereign decisions so "sad" to you? I would be more likely to be a Calvinist if you Calvinists didn't question and resist God's Sovereign wise counsels and his decrees so much. I don't insinuate, nor would Winman (even though I don't agree with him on all points) that God makes "sad" or foolish decisions...Calvinists regularly do.

No Theology questions God's Sovereignty more than the Calvinistic one does....Period. It is God's Sovereignty you cannot accept in your Theology, and you fight against him.

 

[psalms109:31]

Luke 10:21
At that time Jesus, full of joy through the Holy Spirit, said, “I praise you, Father, Lord of heaven and earth, because you have hidden these things from the wise and learned, and revealed them to little children. Yes, Father, for this is what you were pleased to do.

1 Corinthians 1:
20 Where is the wise person? Where is the teacher of the law? Where is the philosopher of this age? Has not God made foolish the wisdom of the world? 21 For since in the wisdom of God the world through its wisdom did not know him, God was pleased through the foolishness of what was preached to save those who believe. 22 Jews demand signs and Greeks look for wisdom, 23 but we preach Christ crucified: a stumbling block to Jews and foolishness to Gentiles, 24 but to those whom God has called, both Jews and Greeks, Christ the power of God and the wisdom of God. 25 For the foolishness of God is wiser than human wisdom, and the weakness of God is stronger than human strength.

26 Brothers and sisters, think of what you were when you were called. Not many of you were wise by human standards; not many were influential; not many were of noble birth. 27 But God chose the foolish things of the world to shame the wise; God chose the weak things of the world to shame the strong. 28 God chose the lowly things of this world and the despised things—and the things that are not—to nullify the things that are, 29 so that no one may boast before him. 30 It is because of him that you are in Christ Jesus, who has become for us wisdom from God—that is, our righteousness, holiness and redemption. 31 Therefore, as it is written: “Let the one who boasts boast in the Lord.”[Jer. 9:24]

James 1:18
He chose to give us birth through the word of truth, that we might be a kind of firstfruits of all he created.

God right now can be spending time with all those in Christ from the beginning to end and we can only look forward to this by faith. God does not need to look forward He has the end result.

Is our mothers womb the womb of Christ being born again through Him, our new creation or you believe it is the old man?