Predestination

[shad]

[

If I could never hate God. I just don't find the "personal relationship" thing as something that I can see AS personal. Never the less, if God loves us, as christianity professes, I would be a fool to hate God.

I dont want to side track the the topic but I would like to comment on this, Orion, since you have straggle understanding personal relationship with God. If you put God first in your life, you have personal relationship with Him. It is not complicated, friend.

 

[Drew]

Jeremiah 18:6
6 O house of Israel, cannot I do with you as this potter? saith the LORD.
Behold, as the clay is in the potter's hand, so are ye in mine hand, O house of Israel. KJV

This verse is one of the many reasons why we should understand that Romans 9 is about Israel and God's treatment of her. Paul knows what he is doing in using the potter metaphor. The potter metaphor, in many Old Testament passages, is always about God and Israel.

When people ignore this and import the foreign notion that the "pots" are human beings in general, they can be lead into the error of thinking that Paul is giving a doctrine of individual pre-destination in Romans 9.

He is not - He is talking about Israel.

 

[Elf]

Elf wrote:

If God knows who will love Him, then why does He have to draw them? That's an oxymoron.

Dave wrote:

I agree. I believe the only reason why we love God is because He first loved us. That is also why I don't buy into the "foreseen faith" idea. God is the author and finisher of our faith, the Bible says. If God didn't first give us faith, there would be no faith to foresee.

Dave/Elf,

The case is made that God loves those who do not know that God loves them, until they are drawn into that love. Those drawn will have to FEEL God's love as well as KNOW God loves them.

Blessings

So, it's about God loving them somewhere, and some time in eternity?
So before they can know God loves them, they have to be drawn?

So at one time in eternity God had a predetermined plan (predestination) of certain individuals, and He draws them to Himself and by doing this they come to realize God loves them? Isn't that election?

 

[Elf]

This material has nothing to do with the matter of predestination of individuals to an eternal fate. It is part of an argument about what has happened to Israel in the plans of God. More later, hopefully.

It has very much to do with it. God clearly states that he will have compassion on whom he will have compassion.

No. Just because the Romans 9 text says that he will have mercy on whom he will have mercy does not legitimize taking that very general statement and concluding that the matter at issue is the specific matter of the eternal destinies of individuals. You need to actually make the case that eternal destinies are what Paul is talking about. And in the case of Jacob and Esau, Paul tells us what the "choice" is about. And it is not that one goes to heaven and the other to hell, it is that one will serve the other (and actually that the nation of Edom will serve the nation of Israel). Why do you seem to think that Paul means something other than what he says he means?

Same with Moses and Pharoah. The mercy shown is not in respect to eternal destinies, but rather in God delivering the Jews from the clutches of Pharaoh.

Why do people insist on replacing what Paul is talking about (in respect to these 2 examples) with a theology about predestination of people to an eternal fate? Paul tells us what the "choice" is about in each case, and it is manifestly not a choice about eternal destinies.

He decided this before the foundation of the earth.Eph 1:4 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:
Eph 1:5 having foreordained us unto adoption as sons through Jesus Christ unto himself, according to the good pleasure of his will,
Eph 1:6 to the praise of the glory of his grace, which he freely bestowed on us in the Beloved:

We are not talking about that passage. We are talking about Romans 9.

We should should just read what the Bible says and not try and push it into our understanding.

I am reading what the Bible says - I suggest that it is you who is "reading stuff" into the text. As shown above, Paul tells us what God's choice is. It is me who is taking Paul at his word and you who thinks he means something other than what he says he means.

Drew,
Your questions have already been pre-considered. You ask a question that many ask.
So here is your question: Romans 9:19 You will say to me then, "Why does He still find fault?
Here is God's answer for you.Romans 9: 20 On the contrary, who are you, O man, who answers back to God? The thing molded will not say to the molder, "Why did you make me like this," will it?
21 Or does not the potter have a right over the clay, to make from the same lump one vessel for honorable use and another for common use?
22 What if God, although willing to demonstrate His wrath and to make His power known, endured with much patience vessels of wrath prepared for destruction?
23 And He did so to make known the riches of His glory upon vessels of mercy, which He prepared beforehand for glory,

This reminds me of Job's conversation with God.

Your question is nothing new under the sun, and the answer is also the same.

Is this speaking of just the Jews and their nation and peoples?
Romans 9:24 even us, whom He also called, not from among Jews only, but also from among Gentiles.

Go one and read the rest of the chapter. Whether we like it or not, the facts are there, explicitly.
Our choice, accept it of deny it. But we cant change the facts.

 

[Elf]

This verse is one of the many reasons why we should understand that Romans 9 is about Israel and God's treatment of her. Paul knows what he is doing in using the potter metaphor. The potter metaphor, in many Old Testament passages, is always about God and Israel.

No it is not about the nation of Israel and God's treatment of her. Read the rest of the chapter, that alone will prove different.

When people ignore this and import the foreign notion that the "pots" are human beings in general, they can be lead into the error of thinking that Paul is giving a doctrine of individual pre-destination in Romans 9.

He is not - He is talking about Israel.

 

[stranger]

Elf wrote:

If God knows who will love Him, then why does He have to draw them? That's an oxymoron.

Dave wrote:

I agree. I believe the only reason why we love God is because He first loved us. That is also why I don't buy into the "foreseen faith" idea. God is the author and finisher of our faith, the Bible says. If God didn't first give us faith, there would be no faith to foresee.

Dave/Elf,

The case is made that God loves those who do not know that God loves them, until they are drawn into that love. Those drawn will have to FEEL God's love as well as KNOW God loves them.

Blessings

So, it's about God loving them somewhere, and some time in eternity?
So before they can know God loves them, they have to be drawn?

So at one time in eternity God had a predetermined plan (predestination) of certain individuals, and He draws them to Himself and by doing this they come to realize God loves them? Isn't that election?

Hello Elf,'

Your question was why does God have to draw those whom He knows will love Him? Love has a drawing quality and knowledge can be disassociated from it. Loves builds up but knowledge puffs up!

An 'order of salvation' can be seen in the following:

Romans 8 (New American Standard Bible)
28 And we know that God causes all things to work together for good to those who love God, to those who are called according to His purpose.
29 For those whom He foreknew, He also predestined to become conformed to the image of His Son, so that He would be the firstborn among many brethren;
30 and these whom He predestined, He also called; and these whom He called, He also justified; and these whom He justified, He also glorified.

In this instance 'election' is not mentioned. I don't imply that 'election' nor eg 'sanctification' aren't included in the order of salvation, so called, but rather Paul didn't mention them. But notice that love is mentioned, and so is God foreknowing.... So for this reason I see that predestination, whatever else it entails, is also about the love of God.

blessings

 

[Ret]

Jeremiah 18:6
6 O house of Israel, cannot I do with you as this potter? saith the LORD.
Behold, as the clay is in the potter's hand, so are ye in mine hand, O house of Israel. KJV

This verse is one of the many reasons why we should understand that Romans 9 is about Israel and God's treatment of her. Paul knows what he is doing in using the potter metaphor. The potter metaphor, in many Old Testament passages, is always about God and Israel.

When people ignore this and import the foreign notion that the "pots" are human beings in general, they can be lead into the error of thinking that Paul is giving a doctrine of individual pre-destination in Romans 9.

He is not - He is talking about Israel.

Drew...ok, so we have different viewpoints about the matter. God will be the judge. I believe Romans chapters 1-8 is about sin and forgiveness - grace and faith -justification to all mankind in Jesus Christ.... chapters 8-11 election, God's foreknowledge, He foreordained (predestined) all mankind in the faith of Jesus Christ. Chapters 12-16 -- unites them all - bringing faith, mercy and cleansing, to God's purpose for the whole human race, as seen in His foreknowledge and election, as each (all) will stand before the judgment seat of God.

Romans 14:10
10 But why dost thou judge thy brother? or why dost thou set at nought thy brother?
for we shall all stand before the judgment seat of Christ. KJV

Colossians 3:10,11
10 And have put on the new man, which is renewed in knowledge after the
image of him that created him:
11 Where there is neither Greek nor Jew, circumcision nor uncircumcision,
Barbarian, Scythian, bond nor free: but Christ is all, and in all. KJV`

 

[Elf]

Jeremiah 18:6
6 O house of Israel, cannot I do with you as this potter? saith the LORD.
Behold, as the clay is in the potter's hand, so are ye in mine hand, O house of Israel. KJV

This verse is one of the many reasons why we should understand that Romans 9 is about Israel and God's treatment of her. Paul knows what he is doing in using the potter metaphor. The potter metaphor, in many Old Testament passages, is always about God and Israel.

When people ignore this and import the foreign notion that the "pots" are human beings in general, they can be lead into the error of thinking that Paul is giving a doctrine of individual pre-destination in Romans 9.

He is not - He is talking about Israel.

Drew...ok, so we have different viewpoints about the matter. God will be the judge. I believe Romans chapters 1-8 is about sin and forgiveness - grace and faith -justification to all mankind in Jesus Christ.... chapters 8-11 election, God's foreknowledge, He foreordained (predestined) all mankind in the faith of Jesus Christ. Chapters 12-16 -- unites them all - bringing faith, mercy and cleansing, to God's purpose for the whole human race, as seen in His foreknowledge and election, as each (all) will stand before the judgment seat of God.

Romans 14:10
10 But why dost thou judge thy brother? or why dost thou set at nought thy brother?
for we shall all stand before the judgment seat of Christ. KJV

Colossians 3:10,11
10 And have put on the new man, which is renewed in knowledge after the
image of him that created him:
11 Where there is neither Greek nor Jew, circumcision nor uncircumcision,
Barbarian, Scythian, bond nor free: but Christ is all, and in all. KJV`

Ok I see what you are saying now. And I do agree, love is a part of it.

 

[Ret]

Ok I see what you are saying now. And I do agree, love is a part of it.

Yes AND.... :amen .... 'to those who are called according to HIS PURPOSE'!

 

[joechrist]

It appears that everyone is attempting to make this topic more complicated and confusing than what it is. It comes down to a simple equation....God=omnipotent, omniscient, therefore predestination is a fact. We don't even need any of the scriptures to try and explain this.

 

[Benoni]

Great Point.

It appears that everyone is attempting to make this topic more complicated and confusing than what it is. It comes down to a simple equation....God=omnipotent, omniscient, therefore predestination is a fact. We don't even need any of the scriptures to try and explain this.

 

[Benoni]

All things are in God's complete control, if this was not so then God would be god, not God.

If God has not called you, you cannot come for all of us are dead/ dead in Adam in trespasses and sin, how can a dead carnal man come until God draws Him first.

If God calls you, you have no choice…….God is calling out a people to do His will; only His firstfruits each in the own order/arrangement/troop. This verse is pregnant with God’s plan for all humanity.

1 Corinthians 15:22-24

22For as in Adam all die, even so in Christ shall all be made alive.
23But every man in his own order: Christ the firstfruits; afterward they that are Christ's at his coming.


(order) Gk Strong’s NT:5001 tagma (tag'-mah); from NT:5021; something orderly in arrangement (a troop), i.e. (figuratively) a series or succession:

If God does not call you, you cannot come, you do not have the freewill, the choice to come.

 

[Drew]

Drew,
Your questions have already been pre-considered. You ask a question that many ask.
So here is your question: Romans 9:19 You will say to me then, "Why does He still find fault?
Here is God's answer for you.Romans 9: 20 On the contrary, who are you, O man, who answers back to God? The thing molded will not say to the molder, "Why did you make me like this," will it?
21 Or does not the potter have a right over the clay, to make from the same lump one vessel for honorable use and another for common use?
22 What if God, although willing to demonstrate His wrath and to make His power known, endured with much patience vessels of wrath prepared for destruction?
23 And He did so to make known the riches of His glory upon vessels of mercy, which He prepared beforehand for glory,

This reminds me of Job's conversation with God.

Your question is nothing new under the sun, and the answer is also the same.

Is this speaking of just the Jews and their nation and peoples?
Romans 9:24 even us, whom He also called, not from among Jews only, but also from among Gentiles.

Go one and read the rest of the chapter. Whether we like it or not, the facts are there, explicitly.
Our choice, accept it of deny it. But we cant change the facts.

The "facts" are, I suggest, not at all as you seem to think.

Chapter 9 is Paul’s argument that God hardened some Jews (most of them, actually) in order that salvation can be extended to the Gentiles. There are a lot of subtle things in this passage, so I do not want to bite off too much. But one thing, I think, is beyond dispute. And it is this: the “vessels of destruction†can only be Jews – Paul leaves us no legitimate way to see the “vessels of destruction†as all humans, whether Jew or Gentile, who have been pre-destined to loss. One simply cannot read the passage that way without ignoring and doing violence to Paul’s argument.

With that stake in the ground, the only way to read the passage as being about “pre-destination of individuals is to see God as pre-destining only Jews to ultimate loss, since the vessels of destruction are clearly only Jews. And I doubt that position has any possibility of being true.
Now to specifically address part of the passage you posted:

Some argue that the following text from Romans 9 shows that Paul is focused on the matter of election of individuals to an eternal fate:

You will say to me then, "Why does He still find fault? For who resists His will?" 20On the contrary, who are you, O man, who answers back to God? The thing molded will not say to the molder, "Why did you make me like this," will it?

The argument runs along these lines: Since Paul is referring to individuals, he intends the reader to understand that the issue is the election of individuals.

Note that in the phrase "you will say to me then, Why does he still find fault", the "me" is Paul, the person making the argument. So the “me†pronoun would be singular even if Paul were making an argument about groups. The singularity of the “me†pronoun does not, therefore, tell us anything of relevance.

Now consider the “you†in this phrase. Is this a person who is protesting his pre-destination to loss? No it is not. It is instead Paul’s imaginary opponent in his debate – the person objecting to Paul’s point about the choices God makes. It cannot be assumed to be the person protesting his own pre-destination. It could be such a person, but it could equally well be a person who disputes a point that Paul is making about pre-destination of groups.

I grant that, in verse 20, Paul appeals to a singular model where Paul invites us to imagine a single person challenging God in respect to what has befallen him. This man is no longer Paul’s imagined opponent, but clearly one who God has pre-destined to something bad.

However, this does not make the case that Paul is talking about election of individuals. We know that he uses the singular to represent plurality in other contexts. In Romans 7, he does this very thing when he use the "I" and "me" construct to demonstrate the plight of Jews (plural) under Torah. So, the use of the singular here in the “o man†/ “me†of Romans 9 is not definitive.

I suggest that Paul uses the "O man" construct as a literary device to "personalize" the objection that corporate Israel will have to its treatment. Note how this is consonant with the Israel focus suggested by the first verses of the chapter. In order to make his point accessible to the reader, Paul "puts a face" on corporate Israel by representing her by a single man, just as in Romans 7 where the “I†represents Israel as a whole.

Note also the reference to moulding and the potter and recall that Old Testament precedent repeatedly has God moulding Israel. Paul is keenly aware of this and is leveraging that precedent.

Besides, consider this allusion, from earlier in the same basic argument:

15For He says to Moses, "I WILL HAVE MERCY ON WHOM I HAVE MERCY, AND I WILL HAVE COMPASSION ON WHOM I HAVE COMPASSION."

Paul is quoting Exodus where the issue is God's showing mercy unto the Israelites as a group. If predestination of individuals is on Paul’s mind, why does he bring up an example of God being merciful to a group to make a point about election of individuals?

Furthermore, there is "group-level" election in the Jacob / Esau account where the Old Testament references make it clear that the election in view involves the Edomites (a group) being chosen by God to be sub-servient to the Israelites (another group).

Furthermore, consider the Isaiah 29text that Paul quotes from in verse 20:

The Lord says:
"These people come near to me with their mouth
and honor me with their lips,
but their hearts are far from me.
Their worship of me
is made up only of rules taught by men.

14 Therefore once more I will astound these people
with wonder upon wonder;
the wisdom of the wise will perish,
the intelligence of the intelligent will vanish."
15 Woe to those who go to great depths
to hide their plans from the LORD,
who do their work in darkness and think,
"Who sees us? Who will know?" 16 You turn things upside down,
as if the potter were thought to be like the clay!
Shall what is formed say to him who formed it,
"He did not make me"?
Can the pot say of the potter,
"He knows nothing"?

This is the very text from which the "o man" text is drawn – and clearly a pluralistic reading is intended.

 

[Drew]

Drew...ok, so we have different viewpoints about the matter. God will be the judge. I believe Romans chapters 1-8 is about sin and forgiveness - grace and faith -justification to all mankind in Jesus Christ.... chapters 8-11 election, God's foreknowledge, He foreordained (predestined) all mankind in the faith of Jesus Christ. Chapters 12-16 -- unites them all - bringing faith, mercy and cleansing, to God's purpose for the whole human race, as seen in His foreknowledge and election, as each (all) will stand before the judgment seat of God.

I do not share your view about Romans - and I believe the book is widely misunderstood in general. You overlook, I suggest, the deeply covenantal character of the book.

I believe that chapters 1 through 4 are a treatment of how God has been faithful to the covenant promise to Abrahamic covenant, dealing with the sin of the world through Jesus and creating a true "Israel" family for Abraham.

Chapters 5 to 8 describe the covenant promises that have been delivered to this true Israel - in other words, it describes the benefits that accrue to those who are members of Abraham's true world-wide family of faith. There is still a covenantal issue here - Romans 7 is about the Torah and Israel, and I do not see how that fits with your understanding.

And now for Romans 9 to 11. Far from being a treatment about the election of individuals, it is an argumena explaining how it is that Israel - to whom so promises were made - is still largely "on the outside". Paul argues that this is all part of God's plan and that the "hardening" of the Jews has had salvific effect for the world.

 

[Drew]

Is this speaking of just the Jews and their nation and peoples?
Romans 9:24 even us, whom He also called, not from among Jews only, but also from among Gentiles.

This text is telling us the purposes for which God has hardened Israel - to extend salvation to Gentiles. As such, it fits perfectly well within the context of an argument that really is an explanation (by Paul) as to how God has actually been faithful to his promises to the Jews, even though most Jews have rejected their true Messiah. The argument of chapters 9 to 11 is substantially an Israel argument. So, rhetorically, it makes no sense for Paul to insert an abstract argument about the theology of pre-destination, in the middle of it.

 

[Sinthesis]

[
Are our souls predetermined or accountable?

Why not try something easy which has no bearing on our final destination; determine if the photon is a particle or a wave. Figure it out first and you get a prize!

Just be careful not to trip over the stumbling block of the Greeks.

Would you elaborate your comments please instead of hinting?

thank you.

Scientific experiments can be performed which prove the photon is a particle. Scientific experiments can also prove that the photon is a wave. So which is it; particle or wave? The photon behaves like both, and it is a mystery which science does not fully understand, but that doesn't stop us from accepting our vision, made possible via light waves/particles.

In much the same way, the ideas of 'God's sovereignty' and 'human freewill' appear contradictory. How can God be sovereign if he does not control everything past, present and future, including our choice to sin? But, how can our sin condemn us to an eternity of infinite torment, if the very choice for us to sin was never even our's, but God's?

It seems contradictory, but just because we can't prove how both concepts of reality can coexist, it doesn't mean they don't. Perhaps we should trust that some things may just be beyond us.

 

[mondar]

Discourse on predestination.
There are some exellent explanations put forth by some on how predestination and human will work together. What I am about to say is not new, but it is not directly borrowed from anyone. The general objection is that if God predestines evil, then does this not make God evil. The answer is no, God can ordain evil, and not participate in it. A good biblical illustration is Genesis 50.

In Genesis 50 Joseph spoke to his brothers that "you intended it for evil, but God intended it for good." The crime against Joseph in selling him into slavery was ordained by God for the deliverance of many from famine. While God intended this even for good, the brothers executed this decree from an evil heart. God did not have to magically make them more evil, they were already that way. So then, God decrees evil, but does not participate in evil. In fact he judges evil. He sent the Assyrians against Israel for their discipline, but then turned around and judged Assyria for its evil. Of course the greatest example of predestination is the atonement itself. God ordained that his own Son would be taken by evil men and horribly executed in a dishonest trial. Evil men meant it for evil, but God decreed this event for the salvation of many. God does not participate in evil, but he decrees evil so that he might show his power in judgement, and his goodness in turning evil into good. The decree does not make him evil. Let me illustrate.

My daughter once had a fascination with a stereo. She crawls up to it and plays with the knobs. I could raise the stereo out of her reach. I know someday she will knock it down and destroy that stereo. Yet I chose to leave the stereo within her reach. I know her nature, I know what is going to happen here. In essence, I have decreed the destruction of that stereo. That is an evil event. But I prefer teaching my daughter obedience. Now let me ask the same question twice...

1-- Am I guilty of the destruction of the stereo?
----------- Yes, it was within my control to prevent the destruction and I chose not to for a greater good, that is the teaching of obedience to my daughter.

2-- Am I guilty or the destruction of the stereo?
---------- No, while I could have prevented its destruction, it was not destroyed by my hands. In fact I disciplined my daughter many times trying to get her not to destroy the stereo.

God knew what would happen in the fall. Yet he chose to create Satan, Adam, and Eve. God knows the path of each atom (even each photon), and he has the ability to prevent evil. Yet he allows, even arranges that evil will happen, and then brings out of the evil event his own glory. God does not magically make men evil so that they will do evil. God does not assist evil men in doing their evil. But he has decreed, even predestined that evil will happen. If this were not true, then we who suffer evil are most unfortunate. We would then be forsaken by God. But since God is also in control of evil, and has even predestined it for his own glory, then I am not forsaken, but loved. Only then can "all things work together" for them who love God. If evil is outside Gods ability to control, how can I trust that God will in the end win? No, my God is completely sovereign, even sovereign over the will of man. This does not mean God directs mans will to be evil, but he knew what was to happen, and used it for his own glory.

 

[mondar]

AN ILLUSTRATION OF GOD SOVEREIGNTY OVER THE WILL OF MAN

I want to make a 2nd post. I was thinking about Jonah. Jonah had the human will and chose to flee the presence of God. God had decreed Jonah would go to Ninevah.

Now if we assume that God does not control events, we can look for Jonah to win. In the exercise of his free will he would not end up in Ninevah. Well, you know the story, Jonah made certain choices. God made certain choices. Jonah had the ability to rebel against God, but God could choose at any time to overrule Jonah's choice. Human free will is meaningless when in the face of God's sovereign will.

Yet we will complain...
19One of you will say to me: "Then why does God still blame us? For who resists his will?" 20But who are you, O man, to talk back to God? "Shall what is formed say to him who formed it, 'Why did you make me like this?'

 

[Drew]

Deleted own post

 

[Drew]

In Genesis 50 Joseph spoke to his brothers that "you intended it for evil, but God intended it for good." The crime against Joseph in selling him into slavery was ordained by God for the deliverance of many from famine. While God intended this even for good, the brothers executed this decree from an evil heart. God did not have to magically make them more evil, they were already that way. So then, God decrees evil, but does not participate in evil. In fact he judges evil. He sent the Assyrians against Israel for their discipline, but then turned around and judged Assyria for its evil. Of course the greatest example of predestination is the atonement itself. God ordained that his own Son would be taken by evil men and horribly executed in a dishonest trial. Evil men meant it for evil, but God decreed this event for the salvation of many. God does not participate in evil, but he decrees evil so that he might show his power in judgement, and his goodness in turning evil into good. The decree does not make him evil.

Even though we disagree on a lot, I think that the above is an entirely correct view on God's relation to evil.