Was Divine Election Conditional, Unconditional or Both? Perhaps Jacob Arminius and John Calvin are wrong
- Thread starter Alfred Persson
- Start date
-
Desire to be a vessel of honor unto the Lord Jesus Christ?
Join For His Glory for a discussion on how
https://christianforums.net/threads/a-vessel-of-honor.110278/
-
Taking the time to pray? Christ is the answer in times of need
https://christianforums.net/threads/psalm-70-1-save-me-o-god-lord-help-me-now.108509/
-
Incorrect, I exposed his flawed presupposition, the false premise upon which Calvinism stands, and falls a great fall.
God foreknew us before we existed, before we did good or bad. The "unfallen version" of us, not the fallen version that existed after the fall.
PS: Therefore, neither does reprobation exist. Truly a doctrine of darkness, not a ray of God's light in it.
Frankly, I don't see why Calvin & crew are held in awe by so many, they lived before the invention of the zipper. We've learned a lot since then.
Last edited:
My friend, the only thing that you exposed, was that you do not understand Unconditional Election from the word of God.
Iconoclast's exegesis of the word was on point.
A claim isn't proof. Where's the beef (proof)? Iconoclast's eisegesis sprang from his flawed presupposition God foreknew everyone as they exist after the fall.
BUT scripture is clear, that is incorrect. We are elect according to God's knowledge of us BEFORE we did good or bad, in other words, as we would have been if the Fall never happened:
1 Peter, an apostle of Jesus Christ, To the pilgrims of the Dispersion in Pontus, Galatia, Cappadocia, Asia, and Bithynia,
2 elect according to the foreknowledge of God the Father (1 Pet. 1:1-2 NKJ)
(for the children not yet being born, nor having done any good or evil, that the purpose of God according to election might stand, not of works but of Him who calls), (Rom. 9:11 NKJ)
Because you don't know the power of God, or the infinitude of His Being, you (Calvin, Arminius, Iconoclast) PRESUME He acts in time, that His foreknowledge happened in spacetime.
But it didn't. It happened before creation, in His Omniscient Mind---before the "bubble of spacetime" existed.
Advanced Physics simplified:
Spacetime is like a bubble surrounded by the infinite ocean of essence that is God. The air in our bubble the dimensional separation from God. Our earthly realm is also separated from the heavenly realm for finite creatures, the TELEIOS (1 Cor. 13:10) where the Complete Revelation of God exists, all the dimensions of it. Our spacetime lacks some of the dimensions of God's revelation, hence Paul calls it "the partial" or MEROS.
Therefore, our physical realm is "less substantial" than the "heavenly realm"(New heavens new earth) ; When the Telios comes, the Meros will dissolve into non existence like adulthood dissolves childhood:
10 but when that which is complete (teleios) has come, then that which is partial (meros) will be done away with.
11 When I was a child, I spoke as a child, I felt as a child, I thought as a child. Now that I have become a man, I have put away childish things. (1 Cor. 13:10-11 RPTE)
10 But the day of the Lord will come as a thief in the night; in which the heavens will pass away with a great noise, and the elements will be dissolved with fervent heat, and the earth and the works that are in it will be burned up.
11 Therefore since all these things will be destroyed like this, what kind of people ought you to be in holy living and godliness,
12 looking for and earnestly desiring the coming of the day of God, which will cause the burning heavens to be dissolved, and the elements will melt with fervent heat?
13 But, according to his promise, we look for new heavens and a new earth, in which righteousness dwells. (2 Pet. 3:10-13 RPTE)
Last edited:
I have revisited this thread and cannot seem to find that post. Please provide post #
Thank you.
#16. Here is the relevant portion:
Not I will show briefly why you are wrong, totally wrong on this. Here is what is known as the golden chain of redemption, it is unbreakable;
I will highlight the difference for you and others. { let's see what is foreknown}
29 For whom he did foreknow, he also did predestinate to be conformed to the image of his Son, that he might be the firstborn among many brethren.
30 Moreover whom he did predestinate, them he also called: and whom he called, them he also justified: and whom he justified, them he also glorified.
Clearly we can see what is in view....WHOM/THEM.
It speaks of the sinners who were dead in sin.
It does not have any reference to what they will, or will not do.
God is not a passive spectator, waiting to learn what the dead sinner will do.
He see's them as lost, dead, and alienated from the life of God, eph2.
Foreknowledge is of the person, WHOM not the events, or actions.
ie, it does not say WHAT He did foreknow as you suggest.
Can you see that in this text Alfred ?
It does NOT speak of sinners dead in sin, confirmation bias is reading that into the text.
Its not there.
God foreknew everything BEFORE creation, and then God predestined the Elect to be conformed to the image of His son, in this realm.
So Iconoclast's eisegesis begs the question: 1)when did God foreknow ; 2) what did He foreknow exactly.
Peter says God foreknew people, and cites the names of a few:
1 Peter, an apostle of Jesus Christ, To the pilgrims of the Dispersion in Pontus, Galatia, Cappadocia, Asia, and Bithynia,
2 elect according to the foreknowledge of God the Father, (1 Pet. 1:1-2 NKJ)
Paul expressly denies Election had anything to do with sin or what People did After they are born:
(for the children not yet being born, nor having done any good or evil, that the purpose of God according to election might stand, not of works but of Him who calls), (Rom. 9:11 NKJ)
Therefore, as intelligent beings do not elect or select disregarding their knowledge of the person, neither did God. He selected these people because of something in them not found in the "nonElect". What was it? It can't be a good or bad work. So, what isn't a "work" that God would appreciate in a person:
9 But as it is written: "Eye has not seen, nor ear heard, Nor have entered into the heart of man The things which God has prepared for those who love Him." (1 Cor. 2:9 NKJ)
The logical paradox is cleared up when we permit what is implied, exist. There are TWO versions in view, the "unfallen version" of us that existed in the foreknowledge of God before creation, and the "fallen version" that came into existence because of Adam's sin, but is predestined to be conformed to the image of His Son.
We are saved by grace, not works. "Through faith" in Jesus.
But God predestined the Elect would be saved, because in His Omniscient Foreknowledge He saw them, and when they became aware of God, who He is and everything about Him---His impeccable goodness, experiencing His love for them, they loved Him back, of their own free will.
They are the children of God, the apple of His eye. Nothing will harm them eternally, He made sure of that. This fallen realm, satan and all its evil, will have no victory over them, no sting will remain.
Last edited:
I do not respond to fairytales.
That is all you offer. You still ignore the truth that was presented. 
You are unable to understand it. Sorry for that. Get well soon.My posts stand as written.
THE QUESTION OF FOREKNOWLEDGE443
What of foreknowledge? Divine election based on foreseen faith is election by foreknowledge [mere prescience]. What is the biblical teaching concerning the foreknowledge of God? The biblical usage must determine the exact significance of the term.
Divine foreknowledge is not mere prescience [to know beforehand] or omniscience [to know all things, including those things that are only contingent], but necessarily involves the reality of decree or predestination.
It is not merely contingent knowledge, but refers to whom or what God has rendered certain and therefore foreknows in a certain and intimate sense.
Note must be taken that it is not merely what God knows, but also whom he knows.
Foreknowledge then necessarily implies a personal or intimate relationship when used of persons.
Divine election, it is asserted by some, is based upon the foreknowledge of God (cf. Rom. 8:29; 11:2; 1 Pet. 1:2; Acts 2:23), that is, God foresaw what was going to happen and laid his plans accordingly. It may be answered that:
• foreknowledge is not synonymous with omniscience. It is concerned, not with contingency, but with certainty (Acts 15:18; Rom. 8:29–30), and thus implies a knowledge of what has been rendered certain.
• Acts 2:23 would make foreknowledge dependent upon God’s “determinate counsel” by the grammatical construction which combines both together as one thought with “foreknowledge” referring to and enforcing the previous term.444
443 For a thorough discussion of predestination and foreknowledge, see Appendix 1. 444“ ...th/| w`risme,nh| boulh/| kai. prognw,sei tou/ qeou/...” The construction is that of the combined use of the articular and anarthrous connected with a single definite article and the co– ordinate conjunction kai,, both substantives being of the same case and number. The second term, “foreknowledge,” thus refers to and further enforces the first, i.e., “determinate counsel”. 167
• foreknowledge is related to the Old Testament term “to know”445 and implies an intimate knowledge of and relation to its object (Cf. Gen. 4:1; Amos 3:2). The passages in the New Testament (Rom. 8:29; 11:2; 1 Pet. 1:2) all speak of persons who are foreknown, implying much more than mere prescience or omniscience—implying a relationship that is both certain and intimate.446 The only example of things being foreknown is clearly based on Divine determination (Acts 15:18).447
• To base God’s eternal purpose on mere foreknowledge [mere prescience or omniscience], i.e., that he saw what was going to occur and laid his plans accordingly, would make God relative to the impersonal, amoral force of fate, chance or luck; would rob him of his omnipotence and make him finite; would take Divine election from its proper biblical, causative context of Divine love; fragment the eternal redemptive purpose, and rob election of its comforting and encouraging character.448 The one who would base Divine election on foresight would in reality be the true fatalist or determinist.
What of foreknowledge? Divine election based on foreseen faith is election by foreknowledge [mere prescience]. What is the biblical teaching concerning the foreknowledge of God? The biblical usage must determine the exact significance of the term.
Divine foreknowledge is not mere prescience [to know beforehand] or omniscience [to know all things, including those things that are only contingent], but necessarily involves the reality of decree or predestination.
It is not merely contingent knowledge, but refers to whom or what God has rendered certain and therefore foreknows in a certain and intimate sense.
Note must be taken that it is not merely what God knows, but also whom he knows.
Foreknowledge then necessarily implies a personal or intimate relationship when used of persons.
Divine election, it is asserted by some, is based upon the foreknowledge of God (cf. Rom. 8:29; 11:2; 1 Pet. 1:2; Acts 2:23), that is, God foresaw what was going to happen and laid his plans accordingly. It may be answered that:
• foreknowledge is not synonymous with omniscience. It is concerned, not with contingency, but with certainty (Acts 15:18; Rom. 8:29–30), and thus implies a knowledge of what has been rendered certain.
• Acts 2:23 would make foreknowledge dependent upon God’s “determinate counsel” by the grammatical construction which combines both together as one thought with “foreknowledge” referring to and enforcing the previous term.444
443 For a thorough discussion of predestination and foreknowledge, see Appendix 1. 444“ ...th/| w`risme,nh| boulh/| kai. prognw,sei tou/ qeou/...” The construction is that of the combined use of the articular and anarthrous connected with a single definite article and the co– ordinate conjunction kai,, both substantives being of the same case and number. The second term, “foreknowledge,” thus refers to and further enforces the first, i.e., “determinate counsel”. 167
• foreknowledge is related to the Old Testament term “to know”445 and implies an intimate knowledge of and relation to its object (Cf. Gen. 4:1; Amos 3:2). The passages in the New Testament (Rom. 8:29; 11:2; 1 Pet. 1:2) all speak of persons who are foreknown, implying much more than mere prescience or omniscience—implying a relationship that is both certain and intimate.446 The only example of things being foreknown is clearly based on Divine determination (Acts 15:18).447
• To base God’s eternal purpose on mere foreknowledge [mere prescience or omniscience], i.e., that he saw what was going to occur and laid his plans accordingly, would make God relative to the impersonal, amoral force of fate, chance or luck; would rob him of his omnipotence and make him finite; would take Divine election from its proper biblical, causative context of Divine love; fragment the eternal redemptive purpose, and rob election of its comforting and encouraging character.448 The one who would base Divine election on foresight would in reality be the true fatalist or determinist.
Decree Precedes Foreknowledge
Another thing to which we desire to call particular attention is that the first two passages quoted above show plainly and teach implicitly that God's "foreknowledge" is not causative, that instead, something is His own sovereign decree. Christ was "delivered by the (1) determinate counsel and (2) foreknowledge of God" (Acts 2:23). His "counsel" or decree was the ground of His foreknowledge. So again in Rom. 8:29. That verse opens with the word "for," which tells us to look back to what immediately precedes. What, then, does the previous verse say? This, "all things work together for good to them . . . who are the called according to His purpose." Thus God's "foreknowledge" is based upon His "purpose" or decree (see Psalm 2:7).
God foreknows what will be because He has decreed what shall be. It is therefore a reversing of the order of Scripture, a putting of the cart before the horse, to affirm that God elects because He foreknows people. Truth is, He "foreknows" because He has elected. This removes the ground, or cause of election from outside the creatures and places it in God's own sovereign will. God purposed in Himself to elect a certain people, not because of anything good in them or from them, either actual or foreseen, but solely out of His own mere pleasure. As to why He chose the ones He did, we do not know, and can only say, "Even so, Father, for so it seemed good in Thy sight." The plain truth of Rom. 8:29 is that God, before the foundation of the world, singled out certain sinners and appointed them unto salvation (II Thess. 2:13). This is clear from the concluding words of the verse:
Another thing to which we desire to call particular attention is that the first two passages quoted above show plainly and teach implicitly that God's "foreknowledge" is not causative, that instead, something is His own sovereign decree. Christ was "delivered by the (1) determinate counsel and (2) foreknowledge of God" (Acts 2:23). His "counsel" or decree was the ground of His foreknowledge. So again in Rom. 8:29. That verse opens with the word "for," which tells us to look back to what immediately precedes. What, then, does the previous verse say? This, "all things work together for good to them . . . who are the called according to His purpose." Thus God's "foreknowledge" is based upon His "purpose" or decree (see Psalm 2:7).
God foreknows what will be because He has decreed what shall be. It is therefore a reversing of the order of Scripture, a putting of the cart before the horse, to affirm that God elects because He foreknows people. Truth is, He "foreknows" because He has elected. This removes the ground, or cause of election from outside the creatures and places it in God's own sovereign will. God purposed in Himself to elect a certain people, not because of anything good in them or from them, either actual or foreseen, but solely out of His own mere pleasure. As to why He chose the ones He did, we do not know, and can only say, "Even so, Father, for so it seemed good in Thy sight." The plain truth of Rom. 8:29 is that God, before the foundation of the world, singled out certain sinners and appointed them unto salvation (II Thess. 2:13). This is clear from the concluding words of the verse:
WHY NOT FORESEEN FAITH?
There are at least seven reasons why Divine election to salvation cannot be based on foreseen faith or human prerogative:
• Such a view is decidedly unbiblical, and derives from a rationalistic approach to the Scriptures that calls into question the nature and prerogative of God.
• To ground Divine election in foreseen faith is tantamount to saying that salvation is by works [human ability, self–determination] and not by grace (Rom. 11:5–6), as such faith would necessarily be meritorious.
• It reverses regeneration and faith, making “faith” [works, mere human trust] the cause, and regeneration the Divine response.442 Such a view presupposes that man
is not depraved or sinful by nature (Rom. 1:18–32; 3:9–18; 8:7–8; 9:16), that he possesses plenary ability to understand the Gospel (1 Cor. 2:14) and can savingly come to Christ apart from the regenerating grace of God (John 3:3, 5, 8; 6:37; 44; 65; Acts 11:18; 13:48; 16:14; 18:27; Eph. 2:4–5; Heb. 12:2).
• It denies the imputation of Adam’s sin and its consequences—moral and intellectual depravity. It denies that true, saving faith is the gift of God and makes faith synonymous with mere human trust or self–determination (Eph. 2:1–10).
• It denies that sinners are satanically–blinded so they cannot believe the Gospel (2 Cor. 4:4–7).
• This view takes Divine election, and thus all of salvation, out of the context of the eternal redemptive purpose and fragments the scriptural teaching of the infallibility of the redemption of sinners. Divine election would lose the very reason for its great encouragement and assurance.
• To base Divine election to salvation on foreseen faith would in reality render such an election absolutely unnecessary. God would have had no need to “choose” anyone, but merely to accept those whom he foresaw were willing!
I said your false teaching and false ideas were rebellion against revealed truth....saying it in different ways is never going to make error.............-truth.
There are at least seven reasons why Divine election to salvation cannot be based on foreseen faith or human prerogative:
• Such a view is decidedly unbiblical, and derives from a rationalistic approach to the Scriptures that calls into question the nature and prerogative of God.
• To ground Divine election in foreseen faith is tantamount to saying that salvation is by works [human ability, self–determination] and not by grace (Rom. 11:5–6), as such faith would necessarily be meritorious.
• It reverses regeneration and faith, making “faith” [works, mere human trust] the cause, and regeneration the Divine response.442 Such a view presupposes that man
is not depraved or sinful by nature (Rom. 1:18–32; 3:9–18; 8:7–8; 9:16), that he possesses plenary ability to understand the Gospel (1 Cor. 2:14) and can savingly come to Christ apart from the regenerating grace of God (John 3:3, 5, 8; 6:37; 44; 65; Acts 11:18; 13:48; 16:14; 18:27; Eph. 2:4–5; Heb. 12:2).
• It denies the imputation of Adam’s sin and its consequences—moral and intellectual depravity. It denies that true, saving faith is the gift of God and makes faith synonymous with mere human trust or self–determination (Eph. 2:1–10).
• It denies that sinners are satanically–blinded so they cannot believe the Gospel (2 Cor. 4:4–7).
• This view takes Divine election, and thus all of salvation, out of the context of the eternal redemptive purpose and fragments the scriptural teaching of the infallibility of the redemption of sinners. Divine election would lose the very reason for its great encouragement and assurance.
• To base Divine election to salvation on foreseen faith would in reality render such an election absolutely unnecessary. God would have had no need to “choose” anyone, but merely to accept those whom he foresaw were willing!
SO! And Paul did not use the phrase be born from above in any one place in scripture??? Does that mean it is not necessary??
No one said that was rebellion. You are posting verses in an thinly veiled effort to cover your false teaching.
I said your false teaching and false ideas were rebellion against revealed truth....saying it in different ways is never going to make error.............-truth.
I'll rephrase, but forgive my use of linear expressions as time didn't exist when this happened. Before God created there was ONLY God. He decided to create intelligent creatures with free will, to share life with. He knew that would go horribly wrong, satan would lead a rebellion that would include humans.
But He also knew the vast majority of them would love to share eternity with Him, because of who He is, and what He is.
God could choose not to create, but then the vast majority of intelligent life He would love to share eternity with, wouldn't come into existence.
You ask: "Why not just create them, leave satan and sinners out?"
Because they would be robots, and any love they return an abomination, mere programming:
For more, go here:
I do no see this in Scripture. The only free will humans have is to sin.
This is not Biblical in anyway. Unbelievers are incapable of loving or seeking the Lord.
Romans 3:10-18 as it is written, “THERE IS NONE RIGHTEOUS, NOT EVEN ONE; THERE IS NONE WHO UNDERSTANDS, THERE IS NONE WHO SEEKS FOR GOD; ALL HAVE TURNED ASIDE, TOGETHER THEY HAVE BECOME WORTHLESS; THERE IS NONE WHO DOES GOOD, THERE IS NOT EVEN ONE.” “THEIR THROAT IS AN OPEN TOMB, WITH THEIR TONGUES THEY KEEP DECEIVING,” “THE POISON OF ASPS IS UNDER THEIR LIPS”; “WHOSE MOUTH IS FULL OF CURSING AND BITTERNESS”; “THEIR FEET ARE SWIFT TO SHED BLOOD, DESTRUCTION AND MISERY ARE IN THEIR PATHS, AND THE PATH OF PEACE THEY HAVE NOT KNOWN.” THERE IS NO FEAR OF GOD BEFORE THEIR EYES.”
Robots?
You are arguing against Arminius, not me. Foreseen faith is an Arminian premise I reject, for many of the same reasons you do.
Calvinists cannot see my argument because confirmation bias won't permit it. Learning Calvinism is built upon presumption that is wrong according to the scriptures, is too hard to accept.
Citing reams of material on foreknowledge is evasion, buried deep within (hoping no one would notice) is the statement God elected according to His foreknowledge of the person.
As God didn't elect according to "foreseen faith" (which exists only in the fallen version that is alive through Adam and bears his sin), then what did He foreknow?
He foreknew people before they were born, or did good or bad. God foreknew these people before the foundation of the world, in His Omniscience. Unfallen versions.
What did God know about them that compelled Him to ordain all things will work for their good?
We are saved by undeserved kindness (grace), not as a reward for a work.
What isn't a "work"? "Love" is not a work, its something that "happens" on its own. It follows, those God foreknew loved Him, these He predestined won't be lost in the fallen realm:
28 And we know that all things work together for good to those who love God, to those who are the called according to His purpose.
29 For whom He foreknew, He also predestined to be conformed to the image of His Son, that He might be the firstborn among many brethren. (Rom. 8:28-29 NKJ)
They are the reason why God created, so these who loved Him would come into existence:
But as it is written: "Eye has not seen, nor ear heard, Nor have entered into the heart of man The things which God has prepared for those who love Him." (1 Cor. 2:9 NKJ)
God wants to live in them, and have them in Him, as He reveals wonderous things to us, and we in turn do great things to express our love for Him, under the LORDSHIP of Christ our Saviour:
"that they all may be one, as You, Father, are in Me, and I in You; that they also may be one in Us, that the world may believe that You sent Me. (Jn. 17:21 NKJ)
Last edited:
Calvinists believe in total depravity, and claim free will is too diminished to choose to live with God.
I find that absurd. Everywhere God commands we use our free will to choose life. He wouldn't do that if Calvinists were right.
YOU HAVE CONSISTENTLY BROKEN TOS RULES AND MODERATOR ACTION WILL BE TAKEN.I do not respond to fairytales.
YOU DO NOT FOLLOW MODERATOR RULES FOR THE FORUM, STATING SOURCE IS ONE.
MAKING PERSONAL COMMENTS IS ANOTHER.
REPLYING TO A MODERATOR ON AN OPEN THREAD IS ANOTHER.
THE ABOVE APPLIES TO ALL ON THIS THREAD.
FOLLOW TOS RULES OR BANNING WILL FOLLOW.
DO NOT REPLY TO THIS POST IN THIS THREAD.
IF NECESSARY USE TALK WITH STAFF.