Predestination

[Twiceborn]

That is actually a better answer, good job (I don't mean to sound condescending, I truly appreciate the fact that you laid out a good effort/argument). Nevertheless, it is indeed just "a little stronger" (emphasis mine), as you put it. Quickly:



Because the event in question that is predestinated comes AFTER "called/justified".
The fact that that simple solution was nowhere on your radar is a testimony to the power of wearing theological lenses that colour everything we see. (And I'm aware that I also wear such lenses often)
There was logical misstep in your argument. "predestination" must, by definition, come before the particular event that is predestinated, not just before any "an event". You went from a generic "an event" to a specific one: "called/justified", as if that were the only possible thing that could ever be predestinated. However, in the passage, it wasn't the calling/justification that was predestinated, it was the conforming to the image of the son: Ro.8:29 he also did predestinate to be conformed to the image of his Son - i.e. having our body bears the physical image of Christ's body at the resurrection.
So what is predestinated is an event that does come after predestination, but one which also comes after calling/justification.

Whatever the order, predestination is never of a lost man unto salvation, but of a saved man unto obtaining a resurrection body like unto Christ's (Ro.8:29, Eph.1:5) and of being to the praise of his glory (Eph.1:11-12). Those things are not salvation.
Plus, remember that no verse ever specifically tells us when predestination (unto the adoption of our body) actually happens, so we can't just lightly place it back in eternity past.

So when laying out an order, these truths must be respected.

I'm a former Calvinist, and I know how hard it is to take off the glasses, especially after having once thought to have discovered the deeper truth of Calvinism, long enough to let the text speak for itself with defining cross-references.

You asked me to "show from the text itself that there's an order there", to which I used only the text itself to present "a good counter-argument". There is far more support for this order in addition to what can be found in the text itself though. For example:

1. Foreknown (which we all already agree comes first)
2. Predestinated (Which Ephesians 1:4 proves happened before the foundation of the world. Like I mentioned before, the only way that we could be said to have been chosen "in Christ" before the foundation of the world (an event that happens in a person's lifetime) is if God had already predestinated it to happen before the foundation of the world. And, being predestinated to be in Christ, we were predestinated to the adoption).
3. Called (Which 1 Corinthians 1:23-24 proves happens before a person receives the preaching of the gospel.)
4. Justified (which Romans 5:1 proves happens by faith)
5. Glorified (which we all already agree comes last)

 

[Yeshua1]

You asked me to "show from the text itself that there's an order there", to which I used only the text itself to present "a good counter-argument". There is far more support for this order in addition to what can be found in the text itself though. For example:

1. Foreknown (which we all already agree comes first)
2. Predestinated (Which Ephesians 1:4 proves happened before the foundation of the world. Like I mentioned before, the only way that we could be said to have been chosen "in Christ" before the foundation of the world (an event that happens in a person's lifetime) is if God had already predestinated it to happen before the foundation of the world. And, being predestinated to be in Christ, we were predestinated to the adoption).
3. Called (Which 1 Corinthians 1:23-24 proves happens before a person receives the preaching of the gospel.)
4. Justified (which Romans 5:1 proves happens by faith)
5. Glorified (which we all already agree comes last)

God foreknows the elect due to Him causing them to be chosen as the elect!
So God a;ways knew due to Him determing that they would be saved from eternity past....

 

[Calminian]

God foreknows the elect due to Him causing them to be chosen as the elect!
So God a;ways knew due to Him determing that they would be saved from eternity past....

The question I've always has is, can God only foreknow what he chooses to ordain? That's what Open Theists believe and seems to be what most Calvinists believe.

But my question is, why? Why couldn't God foreknow the choice of another agent?

You asked me to "show from the text itself that there's an order there", to which I used only the text itself to present "a good counter-argument". There is far more support for this order in addition to what can be found in the text itself though. For example:

1. Foreknown (which we all already agree comes first)
2. Predestinated (Which Ephesians 1:4 proves happened before the foundation of the world. Like I mentioned before, the only way that we could be said to have been chosen "in Christ" before the foundation of the world (an event that happens in a person's lifetime) is if God had already predestinated it to happen before the foundation of the world. And, being predestinated to be in Christ, we were predestinated to the adoption).
3. Called (Which 1 Corinthians 1:23-24 proves happens before a person receives the preaching of the gospel.)
4. Justified (which Romans 5:1 proves happens by faith)
5. Glorified (which we all already agree comes last)

I do believe you have a point on this. However this is going to work out, you can't mess with the order of events God gives. Even if I can't fully reconcile it with what I believe, that's no excuse to arbitrarily deny the order of these events in Romans 8:29-30.

 

[atpollard]

There was logical misstep in your argument. "predestination" must, by definition, come before the particular event that is predestinated, not just before any "an event". You went from a generic "an event" to a specific one: "called/justified", as if that were the only possible thing that could ever be predestinated. However, in the passage, it wasn't the calling/justification that was predestinated, it was the conforming to the image of the son: Ro.8:29 he also did predestinate to be conformed to the image of his Son - i.e. having our body bears the physical image of Christ's body at the resurrection.

Unless you believe that there is a span of time during which a man is "Called and Justified" but not yet "Predestined" (to Glorification in your posited example), then you have indeed chosen the "simultaneous" option that I listed as an alternative to there being SOME order.

On the other hand, if you do, in fact, believe that people are Called and Justified for SOME PERIOD OF TIME before they are Predestined for Glorification, then other scripture disagrees with you.

One can be Predestined for "justification/sanctification/glorification" before they hear the gospel and repent and receive the Holy Spirit, so that form of "Predestined" can precede "Called, Justified".
One cannot be saved ("Called and Justified": having heard the gospel and repented and received the Holy Spirit) and not yet be "Predestined" for Glorification.
So your proposed order is not scripturally possible except as a simultaneous event of "Foreknown, Predestined, Called, Justified, Glorified". Your imposed order is not a "logic" that I have overlooked, rather it is the view through your own personal colored glasses seeing what you theologically expect to see.

 

[Twiceborn]

The question I've always has is, can God only foreknow what he chooses to ordain? That's what Open Theists believe and seems to be what most Calvinists believe.

But my question is, why? Why couldn't God foreknow the choice of another agent?




I do believe you have a point on this. However this is going to work out, you can't mess with the order of events God gives. Even if I can't fully reconcile it with what I believe, that's no excuse to arbitrarily deny the order of these events in Romans 8:29-30.

I agree with you on this, I've never been comfortable with verses being strained to fit a theology, like a puzzle piece being wedged into a spot where it doesn't fit. Much like the typical Calvinist reading of John 3:16, where "God so loved the world (of the elect)". I also believe that it's important to strive to reconcile our beliefs as much as possible though, while taking verses at face value. It definitely keeps a person on their toes!

 

[George Antonios]

Predestinated (Which Ephesians 1:4 proves happened before the foundation of the world.

It most certainly does not. If anything it's "election" that happened before the foundation of the world, not predestination.
Are you saying that election and predestination are one and the same?
Even when it comes to election, it says: chosen us in him before the foundation of the world but we were not in him before the foundation of the world. We had a whole thread about that and no ever solved that problem in a consistent manner.
The election happens in time according to 2Th 2:13 But we are bound to give thanks alway to God for you, brethren beloved of the Lord, because God hath from the beginning chosen you to salvation through sanctification of the Spirit and belief of the truth: the criteria for the election is belief of the truth. This is a clear verse with many supporting verses. We believed in time and were chosen in time, upon the moment of belief. The before the foundation of the world part is a reference to simply God's foreknowledge, as Peter points out: 1Pe 1:2 Elect according to the foreknowledge of God the Father, through sanctification of the Spirit, unto obedience and sprinkling of the blood of Jesus Christ: Grace unto you, and peace, be multiplied. Therefore, God knew whom he would elect because they would get in Christ, he knew who, I say, since before the foundation of the world.
All is clear and simple. The only hiccup here is that a Calvinist's false sense of humility forbids him from accepting free-will, so that one mental (though unscriptural) block forces him to redraw all of the salvation scheme and reframe all the simple verses into a complex philosophical system.

 

[George Antonios]

that's no excuse to arbitrarily deny the order of these events in Romans 8:29-30.

Nothing in post #134 was arbitrary. You can disagree with it, but you cannot honestly charge it with arbitrariness.

 

[George Antonios]

Unless you believe that there is a span of time during which a man is "Called and Justified" but not yet "Predestined" (to Glorification in your posited example), then you have indeed chosen the "simultaneous" option that I listed as an alternative to there being SOME order.

On the other hand, if you do, in fact, believe that people are Called and Justified for SOME PERIOD OF TIME before they are Predestined for Glorification, then other scripture disagrees with you.

One can be Predestined for "justification/sanctification/glorification" before they hear the gospel and repent and receive the Holy Spirit, so that form of "Predestined" can precede "Called, Justified".
One cannot be saved ("Called and Justified": having heard the gospel and repented and received the Holy Spirit) and not yet be "Predestined" for Glorification.
So your proposed order is not scripturally possible except as a simultaneous event of "Foreknown, Predestined, Called, Justified, Glorified". Your imposed order is not a "logic" that I have overlooked, rather it is the view through your own personal colored glasses seeing what you theologically expect to see.

We got called by the gospel, we freely believed it, so we became elect (God having foreknown that we would), and our individual destiny was then set to inherit a body like Christ's (again, according to God's plan from the ages). That's what the scriptures simply show. I cannot divide hairs for you as to the nano-second chronology of it all, brother, nor do I know the inner workings of it all. I leave such doggedly intellectual work to my Calvinist philosopher brethren.

 

[Twiceborn]

It most certainly does not. If anything it's "election" that happened before the foundation of the world, not predestination.
Are you saying that election and predestination are one and the same?
Even when it comes to election, it says: chosen us in him before the foundation of the world but we were not in him before the foundation of the world. We had a whole thread about that and no ever solved that problem in a consistent manner.
The election happens in time according to 2Th 2:13 But we are bound to give thanks alway to God for you, brethren beloved of the Lord, because God hath from the beginning chosen you to salvation through sanctification of the Spirit and belief of the truth: the criteria for the election is belief of the truth. This is a clear verse with many supporting verses. We believed in time and were chosen in time, upon the moment of belief. The before the foundation of the world part is a reference to simply God's foreknowledge, as Peter points out: 1Pe 1:2 Elect according to the foreknowledge of God the Father, through sanctification of the Spirit, unto obedience and sprinkling of the blood of Jesus Christ: Grace unto you, and peace, be multiplied. Therefore, God knew whom he would elect because they would get in Christ, he knew who, I say, since before the foundation of the world.
All is clear and simple. The only hiccup here is that a Calvinist's false sense of humility forbids him from accepting free-will, so that one mental (though unscriptural) block forces him to redraw all of the salvation scheme and reframe all the simple verses into a complex philosophical system.

1. We become "the elect" in time, when God actually creates us in Christ.
2. Ephesians 1:4 says that God elected us in Christ before the foundation of the world. (i.e. predestinated us before the foundation of the world to be created in Christ and become "the elect" in time).
3. Being predestinated to be in Christ, at the same time predestinates us to the adoption (Ephesians 1:5 confirms this to be so. Ephesians 1:4 and 1:5 are not mutually exclusive, they're part of the same sentence!)

 

[Twiceborn]

It most certainly does not. If anything it's "election" that happened before the foundation of the world, not predestination.
Are you saying that election and predestination are one and the same?
Even when it comes to election, it says: chosen us in him before the foundation of the world but we were not in him before the foundation of the world. We had a whole thread about that and no ever solved that problem in a consistent manner.
The election happens in time according to 2Th 2:13 But we are bound to give thanks alway to God for you, brethren beloved of the Lord, because God hath from the beginning chosen you to salvation through sanctification of the Spirit and belief of the truth: the criteria for the election is belief of the truth. This is a clear verse with many supporting verses. We believed in time and were chosen in time, upon the moment of belief. The before the foundation of the world part is a reference to simply God's foreknowledge, as Peter points out: 1Pe 1:2 Elect according to the foreknowledge of God the Father, through sanctification of the Spirit, unto obedience and sprinkling of the blood of Jesus Christ: Grace unto you, and peace, be multiplied. Therefore, God knew whom he would elect because they would get in Christ, he knew who, I say, since before the foundation of the world.
All is clear and simple. The only hiccup here is that a Calvinist's false sense of humility forbids him from accepting free-will, so that one mental (though unscriptural) block forces him to redraw all of the salvation scheme and reframe all the simple verses into a complex philosophical system.

One of your mistakes here is that you are equating "salvation" (2Th 2:13) with being created in Christ.

 

[atpollard]

I leave such doggedly intellectual work to my Calvinist philosopher brethren.

Fair enough. I am largely ignorant of Eschatology because I have no real interest in parsing out all of the details. However, I do not go around challenging those that do care about Eschatology and have invested the time and effort to parse out the details that they have the details in the wrong order and then proceed to enlighten them on the correct Eschatology.

So too, Calvinist Theologians do care about the "irrelevant" (my word, not yours) details of the ordo salutis, and they have studied scriptures and invested the time ... so why tell them that they are wrong if it is not your area of passion. Is it an ESSENTIAL TRUTH? One that salvation stands or falls on. I don't think so. As Corrie Ten Boon said "God does as he pleases and he does it right well". (And I don't ever remember Him asking for my opinion on how God should do things).

 

[Calminian]

Nothing in post #134 was arbitrary. You can disagree with it, but you cannot honestly charge it with arbitrariness.

When something is written clearly like Romans 8:29-30, I believe I use the right word. You cannot get out of the sequence Paul lays out. Impossible. You have go back and rethink your theories.

My suggestion is, study the word "called." It occurs before justification and glorification. He occurs after foreknowledge and predestination.

 

[David Kent]

If I proclaim the gospel in Times Square and 1000 people hear it, were they all “called” or not? If not, then in what way were they not called?

In the parable of the Sower, the seed was scattered on all of the soils ... even those where it had no chance of growing.

They were ot called because it is you who does the calling.

 

[AustinC]

We got called by the gospel, we freely believed it, so we became elect (God having foreknown that we would), and our individual destiny was then set to inherit a body like Christ's (again, according to God's plan from the ages). That's what the scriptures simply show. I cannot divide hairs for you as to the nano-second chronology of it all, brother, nor do I know the inner workings of it all. I leave such doggedly intellectual work to my Calvinist philosopher brethren.

Wait,what!?
We freely believed and then we became elect? Our free choice caused God to elect us? Really? That's what you want us to accept as biblical truth?
I suppose I could do that if I never read my Bible and ignored any mention of the words chosen, predestined and elect. Is that what you want us to do? Do you want us to just close our eyes to scripture and believe that God doesn't elect anyone until that person first elects God? My goodness, George, why would I ever put the cart before the horse and teach that I caused God to elect me?

 

[Calminian]

We got called by the gospel....

If this is truly what called means, then the passage says, those foreknown are predestined and those predestined are called by the Gospel. That means only those are predestined hear the Gospel. That's problematic if you believe all are enlightened by the Gospel and all can hear the Gospel and make a choice.

I would suggest that that's not the actual meaning of called.

 

[Yeshua1]

The question I've always has is, can God only foreknow what he chooses to ordain? That's what Open Theists believe and seems to be what most Calvinists believe.

But my question is, why? Why couldn't God foreknow the choice of another agent?




I do believe you have a point on this. However this is going to work out, you can't mess with the order of events God gives. Even if I can't fully reconcile it with what I believe, that's no excuse to arbitrarily deny the order of these events in Romans 8:29-30.

God can and does know all things, even possible outcomes, but has destined what real actually become history!

 

[Yeshua1]

If this is truly what called means, then the passage says, those foreknown are predestined and those predestined are called by the Gospel. That means only those are predestined hear the Gospel. That's problematic if you believe all are enlightened by the Gospel and all can hear the Gospel and make a choice.

I would suggest that that's not the actual meaning of called.

God makes real offer of Gospel to all, but only His own can hear and respond!

 

[George Antonios]

Fair enough. I am largely ignorant of Eschatology because I have no real interest in parsing out all of the details. However, I do not go around challenging those that do care about Eschatology and have invested the time and effort to parse out the details that they have the details in the wrong order and then proceed to enlighten them on the correct Eschatology.

So too, Calvinist Theologians do care about the "irrelevant" (my word, not yours) details of the ordo salutis, and they have studied scriptures and invested the time ... so why tell them that they are wrong if it is not your area of passion. Is it an ESSENTIAL TRUTH? One that salvation stands or falls on. I don't think so. As Corrie Ten Boon said "God does as he pleases and he does it right well". (And I don't ever remember Him asking for my opinion on how God should do things).

I was talking about nano-second hair-splitting, not the order itself.

 

[George Antonios]

If this is truly what called means, then the passage says, those foreknown are predestined and those predestined are called by the Gospel. That means only those are predestined hear the Gospel. That's problematic if you believe all are enlightened by the Gospel and all can hear the Gospel and make a choice.

I would suggest that that's not the actual meaning of called.

You keep thinking of predestination as God predestinating someone to get saved.
It's amazing how hard it is to root this out.
A saved man gets predestinated to obtain a resurrection body like unto Christ's.
You and I thus hear very different things in "predestination".

 

[George Antonios]

George, why would I ever put the cart before the horse and teach that I caused God to elect me?

This from someone who has a man being regenerated before he believes...