Results 1 - 7 of 7
|
|
|||||
Results from: Answered Bible Questions, Answers, Unanswered Bible Questions, Notes Ordered by Verse | ||||||
Results | Verse | Author | ID# | |||
1 | Are those He called always chosen? | Rom 8:30 | Morant61 | 14056 | ||
Greetings Nolan! Here is an interesting concept for you to consider. The word "proginosko" is only used by Paul twice in the entire New Testament, in Rom. 8:29 and 11:2. In Rom. 11:2, the word is clearly a reference to Israel. So, why does almost every commentator consider the word in 8:29 to be a reference to individual Christians? The context makes even better sense, if Paul is talking about Israel. The Old Testament quote in Rom. 8:36 is taken from Psalm 44:22. The passage, in context, says: ************************************* Psalm 44: We have heard with our ears, O God; our fathers have told us what you did in their days, in days long ago. 2 With your hand you drove out the nations and planted our fathers; you crushed the peoples and made our fathers flourish. 3 It was not by their sword that they won the land, nor did their arm bring them victory; it was your right hand, your arm, and the light of your face, for you loved them. 4 You are my King and my God, who decrees victories for Jacob. 5 Through you we push back our enemies; through your name we trample our foes. 6 I do not trust in my bow, my sword does not bring me victory; 7 but you give us victory over our enemies, you put our adversaries to shame. 8 In God we make our boast all day long, and we will praise your name forever. Selah 9 But now you have rejected and humbled us; you no longer go out with our armies. 10 You made us retreat before the enemy, and our adversaries have plundered us. 11 You gave us up to be devoured like sheep and have scattered us among the nations. 12 You sold your people for a pittance, gaining nothing from their sale. 13 You have made us a reproach to our neighbors, the scorn and derision of those around us. 14 You have made us a byword among the nations; the peoples shake their heads at us. 15 My disgrace is before me all day long, and my face is covered with shame 16 at the taunts of those who reproach and revile me, because of the enemy, who is bent on revenge. 17 All this happened to us, though we had not forgotten you or been false to your covenant. 18 Our hearts had not turned back; our feet had not strayed from your path. 19 But you crushed us and made us a haunt for jackals and covered us over with deep darkness. 20 If we had forgotten the name of our God or spread out our hands to a foreign god, 21 would not God have discovered it, since he knows the secrets of the heart? 22 Yet for your sake we face death all day long; we are considered as sheep to be slaughtered. 23 Awake, O Lord! Why do you sleep? Rouse yourself! Do not reject us forever. 24 Why do you hide your face and forget our misery and oppression? 25 We are brought down to the dust; our bodies cling to the ground. 26 Rise up and help us; redeem us because of your unfailing love. ****************************** Isn't it interesting that this Psalm has Israel asking God not to reject them. While, Rom. 9-11 makes the argument that God hasn't rejected them. This is a good example of where I think many are guilty of approaching Romans as a collection of sayings and failing to consider the context, especially of the Old Testament quotes that Paul uses to make his arguments. The quotes give a clear indication that God's purpose in election is to work through Israel in such a way that He might have mercy on all men (Rom. 11:32). Your Brother in Christ, Tim Moran |
||||||
2 | Are those He called always chosen? | Rom 8:30 | Reformer Joe | 14066 | ||
Tim: You wrote: "The word "proginosko" is only used by Paul twice in the entire New Testament, in Rom. 8:29 and 11:2. In Rom. 11:2, the word is clearly a reference to Israel. So, why does almost every commentator consider the word in 8:29 to be a reference to individual Christians?" Maybe because most commentators understand that just becuase a word is used in one instance in one way, that doesn't mean it is bound to the same direct object in all situations. How do you reconcile Romans 8:30 with Ephesians 1:4-5,11, which definitely is NOT talking about Israel? "just as He chose us in Him before the foundation of the world, that we would be holy and blameless before Him. In love He predestined us to adoption as sons through Jesus Christ to Himself, according to the kind intention of His will...also we have obtained an inheritance, having been predestined according to His purpose who works all things after the counsel of His will" --Joe! |
||||||
3 | Are those He called always chosen? | Rom 8:30 | Morant61 | 14085 | ||
Greetings Joe! Don't get me wrong, I'm not saying the great truths of Rom. 8 don't apply to Christians. I just believe that Israel is the primary object being discussed in Rom. 1-11, especially in chapters 1-4 and 8b-11. It is a general rule of interpretation though that words are usually used by an author in a similar fashion. This is especially true when the word occurs in the same book and is used very seldom. I believe that "whom He foreknew" is a technicule term for Israel. As far as Ephesians 1 is concerned, I would just make the following points. 1) The word "proginosko" is not used in this passage. So, it really doesn't say alot about how we should interpret Romans 8. 2) I too believe in Election. Unlike Calvinists though, I believe that Election is corporate, not individual and that it takes place through faith. Therefore, anyone who believes becomes part of the elect body of Christ. 3) Finally, I believe that the Israel/Gentile problem is being addressed in Ephesians as well. Take a look at chapters 2 and 3 in particular. Could they be what Paul was talking about in Eph. 1:10? Concerning Romans 8, what did you think about the context of Ps. 44? I found in very interesting that many of the themes found in Rom. 9-11 are also found in Ps. 44. Your Brother in Christ, Tim Moran |
||||||
4 | Are those He called always chosen? | Rom 8:30 | Reformer Joe | 14089 | ||
I am not saying that the wor dis not being used in the same way. My agrgument is that one cannot conclude that the diect object is necessarily the same in every instance. Ofr example, the fact that the Greek word for "stoned" is used by Luke in Acts several times does not mean that the same person is being stoned in each situation. We see Stephen stoned. We see Paul stoned. The word is the same; the meaning is the same; the direct object is different. You write: "I believe that 'whom He foreknew' is a technicule term for Israel. " It may be a technical term, but what does it MEAN to foreknow? And are you talking about the Hebrew race when you say it refers to Israel, or the spiritual Israel which includes Gentile believers? On Ephesians, the fact that the exact word is not being used has nothing to do with the fact that Paul is obviously speaking about the same idea. The Greek word for predestined is used in both places, so obviously there is a connection. Incidentally, Peter uses the term "proginosko" twice himself, when speaking of foreknowing Christ's death in Acts 2:23. The word is linked to God's "predetermined plan." He also uses it in 1 Peter 1, when he speaks of being chosen according to the foreknowledge of God. Nothing about our role in God's choice. I am glad you believe in election. The problem is in whom you think does the electing. Calvinists believe that justification takes place through faith as well, just that regeneration occurs logically prior to that faith. Arminians have to invent the notion of "prevenient grace" in order to not fall into either the Calvinist position or the semi-Pelagian one. As far as Psalm 44, we need to be cautious in making a sweeping statement that a New Testament quote of an OT passage must refer to the specific group that it does in the original passage. For example, many Messianic prophecies come from the Psalms, where the apparent referance is to the Psalmist (e.g. David) rather than to the coming Christ. This is an interesting avenue to explore, however, as I have been keenly interested in how the Jewish peoples viewed such Psalms as messianic in nature. Later, --Joe! |
||||||
5 | Are those He called always chosen? | Rom 8:30 | Morant61 | 14101 | ||
Greetings Joe! Why does everyone keep mention Pelagianism in connection with Arminianism? They have NOTHING in common! Pelagianism teaches that man is not depraved, that there is no original sin, that man does not need atonement, and that Christ simply died to provide us with an example of how we should live. Arminians do not believe any of these things. We simply disagree on the Calvinistic understand of how election takes place and to whom it is applied. I believe that Christ is the Elect. Election refers to the corporate body of Christ. Everyone who responds to the Gospel becomes part of the Elect Body of Christ. "Prevenient Grace" simply refers to the grace of God reaching out the lost. Calvinists teach the same thing, only they say the grace of God only reaches out to certain people. Arminians say that the grace of God reaches out to all me. I really don't see what all the fuss is about myself. The Arminian position does justice to both God's Sovereignty and His grace. Salvation is fully His work. But, it is offered to all, which is what countless Scriptures plainly say. Concerning Ps. 44, look at all of the quotes in Rom. 8-11. You will find that almost everyone of them has to do with what it means to be Israel, who is a part of Israel, and God's relationship with Israel. I find that context to be a very convincing argument that Paul is using these quotes for a reason. p.s. - Are you sure about Acts 2:23? According to my text, the verb is not used here. A noun form of the word is used here though. However, Acts 26:5 uses the verb. There it simply refers to a knowledge of someone based upon a long standing relationship. 2 Peter 3:17 uses it for previous knowledge of information. This bears upon one of my concerns about Calvinism. Why take a few obscure words, which can have several meanings, and use them to explain away hundreds of clear statements in Scripture? I would be curious as to your view on this. Your Brother in Christ, Tim Moran |
||||||
6 | Are those He called always chosen? | Rom 8:30 | Reformer Joe | 14108 | ||
Tim: Semi-Pelagianism is not Pelagianism, nor is it Arminianism, as I clearly distinguished between the two in my post. Semi-Pelagianism suggests that our wills are not TOTALLY depraved, but rather just weakened, and therefore is required to cooperate with God in salvation. John Cassian, a contemporary of Augustine, was the primary proponent of this view. Some semi-Pelagians even insist that it is man who initiates salvation, and that God provides the grace to compensate for what power the human lacks in placing full saving faith in Christ. In other words, the human is not so fallen that he cannot initiate his own salvation, inviting an "assist" from the Holy Spirit. Semi-Pelagianism was condemned at the Synod of Orange in 529, even though it is pretty much the idea behind the salvation we find in modern Roman Catholicism. Arminius avoided the extremes of semi-Pelagianism by saying that God must initiate salvation (since we are indeed spiritually dead, not weakened), but that His grace is not necessarily effectual, nor is it irresistible. This is the idea of "prevenient grace" (grace that "comes before" salvation) which frees the will and enables the person to accept Christ. Of course, as you will agree, once that prevenient grace is present, it is up to the individual sinner to accept or reject that grace and "seal the deal," so to speak. Calvinists, in contrast, go further than just saying God's grace is only savingly given to some. They say that God's grace is effectual, that it accomplishes God's purpose, and that it inevitably changes the disposition of the sinner's heart so that he will willingly embrace Christ. --Joe! |
||||||
7 | Are those He called always chosen? | Rom 8:30 | Morant61 | 14120 | ||
Greetings Joe! Thanks for the info! I was not aware of John Cassian. However, there is still a wide gulf between Arminians, who believe in depravity, and John Cassian, who did not! I just view bringing in terms like semi-pelagian as strawmen. Since Arminians are not pelagian of any sort, why mess with it! In light of Calvinism, how would you understand John 6:29? Your Brother in Christ, Tim Moran |
||||||