-
Welcome to Baptist Board, a friendly forum to discuss the Baptist Faith in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to all the features that our community has to offer.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!
Ephesians 1:4-5
- Thread starter Helen
- Start date
Again, how do you know this?
Based on my testimony, we know the "age of accountability" comes pretty fast - at least as young as 1, in some cases. (Again, not arguing from biblical grounds on this point, since there is no biblical support for viewing infants as "like Adam before he sinned" as you put it.)
(Sorry about the wasted post, folks. Novice in the room.)
Rippon, I'm actually not entirely sure what you think you prove by your long list of selected verses. That we have free will to reject Christ? Granted. That there is a place reserved for those who reject Him? Also granted. That God is Sovereign Judge? Three for three. How does any of this mitigate against my point?
Hi Wildfire . The verses I posted were to refute your contention that not a single passage in the Bible says a person is born predestined for Hell . (Actually their foreordination was long before their birth . )
And no one can choose Heaven -- it's a natural depravity/total inability thing .
And no one can choose Heaven -- it's a natural depravity/total inability thing .
That would be true if "foreknew" meant "knew their names, and what would happen to them". That is not what the word "proginosko" means, though. It means to know intimately. So there are those God knew intimately, and there are those God knew about. But those He knew intimately are a subset of those He knew about.
You can't get around this, because Jesus used the same word when He said "I never knew you" (ginosko). If foreknew meant what you WANT it to mean, then it would be impossible for Jesus never to know someone. But it is not impossible for Jesus never to have known someone intimately. </font>[/QUOTE]Thanks npetreley. Actually, you didn't argue against my point, you just made the same point I was making to Whatever, who claimed I was reading too much into the verse. My point was that in context of both the verse and the whole of Scripture, the foreknowledge mentioned is more than merely "knowing before," as Whatever implies.
When Christ says, "I never knew you," he is clearly stating that he never had a relationship with that person ("knew intimately," yes) -- not that He doesn't know who the person is. This intimate relationship is with all who come to Him (cp. John 3:16, John 6:37, Rev 3:20).
So, if that is the contextual application ... that proginosko speaks of having an initmate relationship, and if that intimate relationship is with those who come to Him, then the correct interpretation of Romans 8:29 is, as I previously stated, "for those whom He foreknew [would come to Him] ..."
Note also that nowhere in Scripture does ginosko indicate any kind of proactive "election" on God's part. If that were the case -- if man were condemned for not being known by Him, and if the only way to be known by Him is for Him to put that knowledge inside of us completely apart from our own free choice -- then that God would be a sadistic, mocking liar for repeating over and over throughout the whole of Scripture that He calls us to repent and chose to follow Him, knowing all the while that nobody has the free will to make that choice.
Perhaps that's what you meant, but it's not what you proved. You have to read an awful lot into each of those verses (especially when reading them within context and not just edited clips), to find a God who creates a man who has no choice, solely for the purpose of condemning that same man for not choosing Him.
Hello Helen. A little point here while I make a contribution to your presentation. Some scripture can now be understood much more clearly now, but not before, such as Isaiah 65:1, ”I Am sought of them that asked not for me; I am found of them that sought me not: I said, Behold me, behold me, unto a nation that was not called by my name."
The little point is Christ allows us to see much more clearly with His gospel from heaven. Have you noticed that word “predestination” in your presentation? Where did it come from? When was it injected into Holy Scripture? We find this word is reserved for Paul, just as is caught up to the Lord in the air; Through faith, the Body of Christ, and other “new, or firsts”.
Did anyone really know what the Spirit had Isaiah speak? Jesus indicates they didn’t, not even His Apostles. But in the gospel of Paul we can find “words” to latch onto that make sense of the thoughts that was given before. I have skimmed over replies here and have not noticed the Isaiah reference, but it is of election of “predestination”. I’m not saying none knew what this verse meant, but if we do it is because Christ made it understandable by revealing it to Paul.
God had a purpose, and when God has a purpose that purpose will be realized. Regardless of when we live, God in His purpose foreordained predestination. It is by the grace of God that He does so. Why? It pleased Him to choose us.
We find He does this as we live. Luke 12:32 informs, ”Fear not, little flock; for it is your Father's good pleasure to give you the kingdom.” Jesus said He came only for His own, and that “flock” is not we today.
But for His good pleasure those not of “that” flock are chosen in Ephesians 1:5, ” Having predestinated us unto the adoption of children by Jesus Christ to himself, according to the good pleasure of his will,” and according to verse 9, this mystery He purposed in Himself.
Then we see in Philippians 2:13 that both Jew and Gentile are seen as the same in the eyes of God today – ”For it is God which worketh in you both to will and to do of his good pleasure.” So even before the beginning this was His purpose. But to accomplish His purpose God had to hide from all what was foreordained. Even the elect angels knew nothing of what God purposed. The Gentiles had been set aside long ago, and now God would set aside His people. The reconciliation then began in the “unsearchable riches of Christ”.
I don’t wish to turn this into that hated word “dispensational” gospel, but if we are to understand His Word, it must be of the gospel that Christ taught Paul, and that gospel is the “dispensational” given to the heavenly Apostle Paul.
So today we find unlimited redemption offered as Christ died for all so that whosoever shall call
upon the name of the Lord shall not perish, but have everlasting life. Jesus Christ was foreordained, and God did foreknow us, and he also did predestinate us to be conformed to the image of his Son.
Christian faith, ituttut
I think this is the problem. While you may have known you were doing something "bad", was your knowledge of what you were doing that was "bad" in relation to your parents...or to God? Kids know when they do something wrong, because their parents have taught them right from wrong. They don't necessarily know that it is sin... something that separates them from God. The age of accountability happens when a person knows the "bad" things they do are more than just being bad, but they are sin.
Again, how do you know this?
Based on my testimony, we know the "age of accountability" comes pretty fast - at least as young as 1, in some cases. (Again, not arguing from biblical grounds on this point, since there is no biblical support for viewing infants as "like Adam before he sinned" as you put it.) </font>[/QUOTE]All the while (and I can remember this), I knew I was doing something bad. I had a sense of secrecy - I kept looking over my shoulder. I knew if mom came in, she would be not be pleased.
Was it "Mommy's" law you were breaking or "God's laws", and did you "KNOW" the difference??
Disobeying "Mommy/Daddy" won't "condemn" you to hell, Consciously disobeying God's law will.
I seen a 7 years preaching, and if I had only heard his message, I would have believed he had 40-50 years of studying behind him.
The age of accountability comes at different ages, and God knows when that occurs, children are much easier to save, their mind isn't cluttered up with Garbage, the Simple truth is simple to understand.
how do you know this?
The law can save as well as Jesus, providing you never "ONCE" offend it.
The law is only too "WEAK" to save "through the flesh", eliminate the flesh, (lust) the law's "WEAKNESS" is gone.
So are we now to assume that every time the Bible talks of God's "good pleasure," that this somehow proves and validates the Calvinist definitions of election and predestination? Nobody would challenge that those words do, in fact, appear in the Bible. The challenge is the completely extra-biblical interpretation that Calvin applies to those ideas.
Once again, Scripture is a single context. Paul, Peter, and others wrote in very simple Greek for the purpose of being easily understood by the readers of their times. If Paul meant (Romans 8:29), "For whom God elected, He foreknew and predestined," he would have said so. If Peter had meant (2 Peter 3:9) "For God is waiting for Himself to call all of the elect" (as Matthew Henry implies), he would have said so. If John had meant (John 3:16), "For whosoever is elected by Him will therefore believe and thus not perish," he would have said so.
The hugest problem with Calvinist doctrine is that it flies in the face of Proverbs 3:5. Calvin liked to believe in his superiority, as born out by the bloody way he dominated society in Geneva. He referred frequently to Augustine, known as "the founder of the Roman Catholic Church." (Augustine, too, was a bloody tyrant who set in motion the modern-day papacy of Rome.) Both found subtle hidden meanings of words and phrases not born out by any linquistics study, or by any other clear statements in Scripture.
I can point any Calvinist to a long list of Scriptures that say, as 2 Peter 3:9 does, that God is not willing that a single person should perish ... that He loves the whole world. Only by changing the meaning of those words can they be "mysteriously" comported to a Calvinist doctrine of "God's good pleasure."
How come no one has answer my question from back on about page 5???
If it's only appointed unto to man "ONCE" to die, why does so many suffer a "SECOND DEATH"???
I figure anyone who knows the scriptures well enough to be "Dogmatic" certainly would have much trouble answering the question.
If it's only appointed unto to man "ONCE" to die, why does so many suffer a "SECOND DEATH"???
I figure anyone who knows the scriptures well enough to be "Dogmatic" certainly would have much trouble answering the question.
"He hath chosen us before the foundation of the world...."
"Having predestinated us..."
Let me analyze this backwards, starting with the second line first:
Predestinated is Strong's Number 4309 and means, "to foreordain, appoint beforehand".
It comes from the root "Pre" <4253> which means "Before", as in a Pre-quel is a movie or book that came before.
It also comes from the root <3724> / <3725> which means "mark out, as with a territorial boundary".
So, "predestinated" = "BEFORE + MARKED (OUT)", or, roughly if you will, "Fore-marked".
So, Believers are "Fore-marked" by Almighty God "into his turf (Kingdom)" as "one of the boys (Sons)"...
having fore-marked us...
That is, BEFORE "the world" is "founded"...
Believers are ALREADY "marked" as "good guys"...
Now, "foundation" is <2602> and is about "the seed of plants and animals" and "the injection or depositing of the virile semen in the womb".
It comes from <2598> which means "to throw to the ground". That in turn comes from <906> meaning to "scatter, to throw, cast into" and "to pour, pour into of rivers; to pour out".
Thus, by "foundation" or "founding" we mean bassically "the scattering of seeds [that will sprout, representing the "impregnation" part]".
Now, here I must draw your attention to the Riddle (Parable) of the Sower (Matt 13:1-23) where spreading the Gospel is compared to the "sowing of seeds". Those seeds represent the Gospel, and when it finds "fertile soul" in the hearts and souls of 'True Believers to-be', they will grow and sprout so that those Believers will begin yielding 30, 60, and 100 measures of grain each harvest. I suspect there is a Spiritual analogy here to Almighty God's command to mankind to "be fruitful and multiply" in Beginnings (Genesis) 1:28 -- that is, perhaps a True Believer is commanded to "be fruitful" (do good works, keep God's Biddings, and spread God's Word) which leads to a (spiritual) "multiplication" of the number of Believers in the world.
As a quick double-take, recall John 7:38, which says that a Believer becomes as well-spring for rivers of life-giving water that will pour forth from him. And, now recall John 3:14, where the Messiah says that he is a well-spring of Life-Giving waters. This connects to back to <906> and, ultimately, "foundation", because <906> not only means to scatter seeds, but pour out waters. It seems our word for "[to] found" not only means "strew seeds" but "spray water", or "irrigate" if you will. Both plant and water (1 Corinthians 3:6-7).
So, I would render "He hath chosen us before the foundation of the world" as
He hath chosen us before the seeding of the world...
THIS ISN'T LEADING WHERE I THOUGHT IT WAS. I WAS THINKING THAT "BEFORE THE FOUNDATION OF THE WORLD" MEANT "BEFORE THE FOUNDATION OF THE NEW WORLD" OF BELIEF THAT BELIEVERS IN THE MESSIAH WOULD USHER IN, AND THAT THAT WORLD WOULD COME ABOUT, AS IN MATTHEW 24:14, WHEN THE WORD OF GOD HAD BEEN SOWN TO ALL THE WORLD, AND ALL THE WORLD BECAME BELIEVERS AND HENCE "LIVING STONES" IN THE SPIRITUAL TEMPLE OF THE BODY OF BELIEVERS IN THE MESSIAH. SO THEN, DUH, ANYBODY WHO BELIEVES BEFORE THAT LAST GUY TOMORROW FINALLY GETS A CLUE AND SIGNS UP... THEN DUH THEY'D ALL BE "MARKED AS BELIEVERS" BEFORE THE FOUNDING OF THE NEW WORLD THAT WILL COME ABOUT WHEN THE WORD OF GOD HAS BEEN PLANTED IN THE HEARTS OF ALL MEN....
BUT I'M NOT SURE THAT WORKS OUT. STILL I DID ALL THIS WORK, THOUGHT I'D SHARE
John 12:24
Verily, verily, I say unto you, Except a corn of wheat fall into the ground and die, it abideth alone: but if it die, it bringeth forth much fruit.
SUBDUE != GOD?????????
James 5:7
Be patient therefore, brethren, unto the coming of the Lord. Behold, the husbandman waiteth for the precious fruit of the earth, and hath long patience for it, until he receive the early and latter rain.
that is, "being fruitful").
, as in the Riddle of the Mustard Seed, to become a giant Cedar of Lebanon in that person's life,
riddle => MYSTERY
So are we now to assume that every time the Bible talks of God's "good pleasure," that this somehow proves and validates the Calvinist definitions of election and predestination? Nobody would challenge that those words do, in fact, appear in the Bible. The challenge is the completely extra-biblical interpretation that Calvin applies to those ideas.
</font>[/QUOTE]Is Calvin right, or is Calvin wrong? Who can say. We have scripture and we are allowed to see what we see. This subject has been studied and debated every since. Perhaps in sometime hence we’ll understand what at present is a little over our heads.
I agree with something’s Calvinistic, but not all. He can’t be all bad for he recognizes God’s good pleasure when he sees it, as he understands the grace of God.
This is what happens if we stray from what Christ revealed to Paul. Is there any main line church today that does not follow tradition of man, or allow tradition of the Jew into our worship down here.
Please note Wildfire I have not said I am Calvinistic, but evidently you see some Calvinistic tendencies in my post which is only natural for some of Paul's gospel shows forth. But I do not believe with all that Calvin was allowed to see in his faith. I as you are Christian and in my Christianity I would undoubtedly be called a Paulinist. I then believing the dispensational gospel that Christ gave to Paul, cannot claim to be pure Calvinist.
But does your 2 Peter 3:9 disprove scripture? If so then Peter does err in this Epistle. I’m sure this is not what you mean, but I see you more fighting “God’s good pleasure”, than Calvin. To me Peter is confirming His God of Love. It is “God’s good pleasure” to offer salvation to all. Salvation begins and ends with God.
All do not wish to “please God” and accept the Grace that He offers. In the glory of His grace He offers us salvation through faith, so we see the Love of God. Did God predestine the unsaved to H**l? I cannot find scripture that says this was in His purpose. I do find we are all Lost. The lost wish to “please” themselves for they find no “pleasure in God”.
God knows the beginning from the end and “foreknew” those that return His Love, and they are “predestined” to be like Christ as He purposed. In Matthew 25:12 Jesus says to those in the Tribulation, ”………, Verily I say unto you, I know you not." Those without the Love of God He did not “foreknow”, and they will join their own kind in the lake of fire.
Christian faith, ituttut
QUOTE]Originally posted by Me4Him:
How come no one has answer my question from back on about page 5???
If it's only appointed unto to man "ONCE" to die, why does so many suffer a "SECOND DEATH"???
I figure anyone who knows the scriptures well enough to be "Dogmatic" certainly would have much trouble answering the question. [/QUOTE]
Will this help?
”For he that is dead is freed from sin. 8. Now if we be dead with Christ, we believe that we shall also live with him: 9. Knowing that Christ being raised from the dead dieth no more; death hath no more dominion over him.For in that he died, he died unto sin once: but in that he liveth, he liveth unto God. 11. Likewise reckon ye also yourselves to be dead indeed unto sin, but alive unto God through Jesus Christ our Lord”, Romans 6:7-11. It looks to me as we died with Jesus Christ on the Cross, and alive forever more, we can now plainly see those that die “without” Christ will suffer that “second death”.
Christian faith, ituttut
How come no one has answer my question from back on about page 5???
If it's only appointed unto to man "ONCE" to die, why does so many suffer a "SECOND DEATH"???
I figure anyone who knows the scriptures well enough to be "Dogmatic" certainly would have much trouble answering the question. [/QUOTE]
Will this help?
”For he that is dead is freed from sin. 8. Now if we be dead with Christ, we believe that we shall also live with him: 9. Knowing that Christ being raised from the dead dieth no more; death hath no more dominion over him.For in that he died, he died unto sin once: but in that he liveth, he liveth unto God. 11. Likewise reckon ye also yourselves to be dead indeed unto sin, but alive unto God through Jesus Christ our Lord”, Romans 6:7-11. It looks to me as we died with Jesus Christ on the Cross, and alive forever more, we can now plainly see those that die “without” Christ will suffer that “second death”.
Christian faith, ituttut
Craigbythesea
Well-Known Member
I believe that Helen is wrong about all that she has written here. She has yanked vv. 4 and 5 right out of their context and wholly misunderstood them. Eph. 1:3-14 are in the Greek New Testament one sentence with one primary clause and a multitude of subordinate clauses. The primary clause of this Greek sentence is found in verse 3 and is translated below by the words, “Blessed be the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ,” and the remainder of the sentence is series of subordinate clauses which elaborate upon the primary clause.
The primary clause, and hence all of the subordinate clauses, belong to the genre of literature known as a doxology which is a type of eulogy. Eulogistic literature is very different from a theological presentation or treatise because its purpose is wholly different just like the eulogy delivered at Al Capone’s funeral was very different from his rap sheet. To put it in another way, a eulogy is not intended to be an objective or comprehensive statement, but a highlighting of the positive and the good that leaves out important details. And this eulogy is no exception—a whole lot of important details are left out. Therefore, people who attempt to pull out of it Christian doctrine must fill in the blanks themselves as Helen has attempted to do in her post. Personally, I take this passage for what it is, a eulogy, and I leave it at that. However, if one is going to insist upon trying to fill in the blanks, one had better start off with the Greek sentence as a whole and study its structure and the relationship, first of all, of all the clauses, and secondly, of all the words that make up each of the clauses. This is a good exercise for a third semester Greek student, but it is not an easy exercise because of the complexity of the sentence, the many prepositions in the sentence for which English has no equivalent, and the generous supply of very juicy theological terms and expressions that, unless the interpreter is exceedingly careful, are likely to sway his judgment
My suggestion, therefore, is to take the entire sentence, vv 3 -14, for what it is—a eulogy—and enjoy it for what it is—and don’t wrestle with it.
3. Blessed be the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, who hath blessed us with every spiritual blessing in the heavenly places in Christ:
4. even as he chose us in him before the foundation of the world, that we should be holy and without blemish before him in love:
5. having foreordained us unto adoption as sons through Jesus Christ unto himself, according to the good pleasure of his will,
6. to the praise of the glory of his grace, which he freely bestowed on us in the Beloved:
7. in whom we have our redemption through his blood, the forgiveness of our trepasses, according to the riches of his grace,
8. which he made to abound toward us in all wisdom and prudence,
9. making known unto us the mystery of his will, according to his good pleasure which he purposed in him
10. unto a dispensation of the fulness of the times, to sum up all things in Christ, the things in the heavens, and the things upon the earth; in him, I say,
11. in whom also we were made a heritage, having been foreordained according to the purpose of him who worketh all things after the counsel of his will;
12. to the end that we should be unto the praise of his glory, we who had before hoped in Christ:
13. in whom ye also, having heard the word of the truth, the gospel of your salvation,-- in whom, having also believed, ye were sealed with the Holy Spirit of promise,
14. which is an earnest of our inheritance, unto the redemption of God's own possession, unto the praise of his glory. (ASV)
1Co 2:14 But the natural man receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God: for they are foolishness unto him: neither can he know them, because they are spiritually discerned.Originally posted by Craigbythesea:
The primary clause, and hence all of the subordinate clauses, belong to the genre of literature known as a doxology which is a type of eulogy. Eulogistic literature is very different from a theological presentation or treatise because its purpose is wholly different just like the eulogy delivered at Al Capone’s funeral was very different from his rap sheet. To put it in another way, a eulogy is not intended to be an objective or comprehensive statement, but a highlighting of the positive and the good that leaves out important details. And this eulogy is no exception—a whole lot of important details are left out. Therefore, people who attempt to pull out of it Christian doctrine must fill in the blanks themselves as Helen has attempted to do in her post. Personally, I take this passage for what it is, a eulogy, and I leave it at that. However, if one is going to insist upon trying to fill in the blanks, one had better start off with the Greek sentence as a whole and study its structure and the relationship, first of all, of all the clauses, and secondly, of all the words that make up each of the clauses. This is a good exercise for a third semester Greek student, but it is not an easy exercise because of the complexity of the sentence, the many prepositions in the sentence for which English has no equivalent, and the generous supply of very juicy theological terms and expressions that, unless the interpreter is exceedingly careful, are likely to sway his judgment
My suggestion, therefore, is to take the entire sentence, vv 3 -14, for what it is—a eulogy—and enjoy it for what it is—and don’t wrestle with it.
[/QB]
1Co 1:17 For Christ sent me not to baptize, but to preach the gospel: not with wisdom of words, lest the cross of Christ should be made of none effect.
18 For the preaching of the cross is to them that perish foolishness; but unto us which are saved it is the power of God.
1Co 2:13 Which things also we speak, not in the words which man's wisdom teacheth, but which the Holy Ghost teacheth; comparing spiritual things with spiritual.
1Co 1:19 For it is written, I will destroy the wisdom of the wise, and will bring to nothing the understanding of the prudent.
Attempting to "prove scripture" through/by the "wisdom of this world" only proves ignorance of the scriptures.
Webdog / Me4Him,
I broke the 5th commandment, what else do you need? And even though I was not consciously aware of the literal words written in Exodus 20:12, I knew that I was wrong. I was like those "without the law" as decribed here in Romans 2:12-16 -
I broke the 5th commandment, what else do you need? And even though I was not consciously aware of the literal words written in Exodus 20:12, I knew that I was wrong. I was like those "without the law" as decribed here in Romans 2:12-16 -
My conscience bore witness to me that I was wrong, and I stood condemned. I sinned and fell short of the glory of God.