Results 1 - 3 of 3
|
|
|||||
Results from: Answered Bible Questions, Answers, Unanswered Bible Questions, Notes Ordered by Verse | ||||||
Results | Verse | Author | ID# | |||
1 | Predestination vs free will--a thought.. | Bible general Archive 1 | Brent Douglass | 1445 | ||
I don't have any problem with your explanation of the "Biblical" meaning of the word knowledge, but it doesn't change the idea that foreknowledge came BEFORE predestination; it seems merely to divert and avoid the question. There is no one whom God does not have intimate and complete knowledge about, yet there is something (for lack of a better word) that drew God to specific people that AFFECTED God's decision to predestine us. We know from other places in Scripture that there is nothing that makes us "worthy" of his choosing (or even somehow less "unworthy" than others). Yet there is something. The question is, "What is it that God foreknew?" My understanding is that Arminius thought it to be some kind of openness to faith. It seems to me that it is more a final openness (when pressed to the wall) to the Spirit's persistent conviction of sinfulness and a resulting inner hunger and desperation for salvation. I'm not sure that this is fully accurate; nevertheless, there appears to be something that God foreknew (rather than fore-ordained) in us that came prior to his predestining us. I appreciate your study on one of the meanings used for "knowledge" in the Bible. However, your additional comments make it sound like you're trying to treat "foreknowledge" and "predestination" as virtually synonymous; I can only assume this is being done in order to avoid the idea of anything coming prior to predestination. This seems to me the equivalent of saying that Paul really meant to say, "For those whom he predestined he also predestined...; and those whom he predestined he also...." I understand that Christ himself and Paul both sometimes repeated phrases for stress. It seems bizarre, however, that he would give a deliberate sequence like, "God A'ed, then A'ed, then B'ed, then C'ed, then...." ;-) I'm confident that this is not really what you meant to suggest, but could you elaborate? |
||||||
2 | Predestination vs free will--a thought.. | Bible general Archive 1 | kalos | 1448 | ||
Sir, I do not mean to sound rude or disrespectful in the Note that follows. It is just that I find it extremely difficult to understand how your Note relates to my previous submission. It seems to me that if you have to ask, "What is it that God foreknew?", then you did not understand or did not agree with my previous explanation of the meaning of the word "foreknowledge." Of course, you have the right to disagree. I don't question that. However, if you reject the premise that foreknowledge means what my explanation says it means, then the rest of my comments would carry no weight with you either. I am unaware that I said anything whatsoever about which came first -- foreknowledge or predestination. Nor was I aware that I was diverting and avoiding the question. If I understood your Note correctly, then it seems that you agree with those who "suggest that God's election is based on His foreknowledge of certain events"; and that "He chooses those whom He sees choosing Him." Your interpretation(s) of my Note are way off. I was not saying anything with the intent of avoiding "the idea of anything coming prior to predestination." It is truly astonishing to note how many avoidances, diversions, conclusions, meanings and motives you were able to glean from my previous Note. |
||||||
3 | Predestination vs free will--a thought.. | Bible general Archive 1 | Brent Douglass | 1463 | ||
I don't feel disrespected by your reply at all. I hope mine didn't seem disrespectful to you. Argumentation through writing without "knowledge" of each other can certainly come across as bickering or condescending, and I have no desire (or position of authority, for that matter, if the desire were there) to treat you in that way. It's simply that your expanded definition of "foreknowledge" seems cyclical w/ predestination. In other words, it sounds like your suggesting that God chose (elected, selected, predestined) to foreknow some (rather than others), then predestined them further. It seems that you've basically added a new "predestined" at the beginning of the sequence. As a side note (I hope), perhaps I'm misunderstanding your perception of predestination. Are you assuming that all are predestined to conformity to Christ and that all are, therefore, foreknown? This creates significant other problems, but resolves this particular concern. However, based on what I've seen of what you've written, I doubt this is your view. I think I understand your concept of God having a certain kind of pre-existing relationship with some that he did not have with others. However, we (like all others) were at enmity with God before (and even after) he predestined us -- right up until the time of belief. Ephesians 1-2 is one of the passages that clearly indicates how our condition before God was radically and completely changed at the time of conversion. We did not have this intimate relationship with Him until that time. I'm not sure where you would be going in indicating some kind of previous level of closeness (unshared by others) prior to conception that somehow changed once we took on flesh then returned at our conversion. Can you clarify? |
||||||