 |
| Open Theism Discussion Board > Public Forums > The raging debate continues here... > Predestination, what does the word mean? | Forum Quick Jump
|
| 
cbost6421
Registered Member
Date Joined Jun 2004
Total Posts : 65
| Posted 7/6/2004 4:48 PM (GMT -6) |   | quote:
Originally posted by Lee Merrill
Hi everyone,
quote:
Chuck: Why not? In most dicitonaries/lexicons the first definition (which is Pre-limitation) is the most common...
No, the definition for "orizo" is what you are looking at. That's a root word for "proorizo," but it's not the same word. Again, what you are proposing is like this: "Incarnation" is derived from "in" and "carne", and "carne" can mean "flesh of animals," so "incarnation" means Jesus was inside creatures in some way when he came to earth.
quote:
My point is this, no-one can know exactly what Paul had in mind when He used the word ProOrizio. We weren't there, we can't take it to mean things we can't be sure of
Well, we do have to trust the scholars here. Why is that not a valid approach? That's how I learned English, too, somebody told me what the words meant. I'm sorry if this meaning of predestine repels you, but I find it encouraging, that God is in control, and made a good plan, which he can carry out, and not me or someone else, or the devil.
Chuck Responds Lee, I am looking directly at proorizio.
you cannot tell what I am looking at from your computer when my strong's lexicon is right here in front of me. I am willing to grant that there are better lexicons than strong's! But it's first definition is "limit in advance"
Chuck Responds Are not the scholars just men (and women)? Are they infallible? Of course not if everything they have done has been pre-determined by God. They look through things in spiritual glasses too. There is no way for them to tell what Paul really meant, they were reading paul's mind nor were they there for HIm to tell. So we have to take into account all definitions and use the one that best fits the MOst Holy picture of GOd. Obviously, a God who Ordains or plans sin (As Calvinists Loraine Boettner, Paul Helm say He does)is not HOly. NOt HOly enough to die on the cross either! If Calvinism were true, then Christianity is a sham, pure and simple. Because Jesus's death would come from an unholy source. This is why most of us within the free-will tradition consider it such a great blasphemy!!
1 John 2:2 specifically states that Christ not only died for our sins, but the sins of the whole world. Calvism's Limited atonment is simply not scriptural, ethical, and it denies God's justice/love/ and impartiallity.
Lee, I know the truth may be difficult for you to swallow, but what you are believeing is a lie. A lie meant to keep people like me from being Christians. I commend Calvinism for it's sticking to the Scriptures. But since it tries to deny several scriptures for or change thier explicit meanings, then its viture is little more than Greek (pagan too I might add) Philosophy trying to enter our theology.
I am sorry if I sounded harsh. You really seem like a nice guy and I don't mean this to sound harsh in anyway. I am just writing the truth here. The number of people I know that have turned away from Christ have done so for the reason that they think HE is evil, that He causes car wrecks and starvation, that He wants all wars and that the church is a bunch of Hypocrites. Without the open view, with your "control view", I'd have to say they are right...
God Bless You,
Chuck
stu.westga.edu/~cbost1/openviewtheism.html
"those who pray truly are theologians and those who are theologians pray truly"
-Evagrios The Solidary | | Back to Top | | |
 |
Lee Merrill
booted
Date Joined Jun 2001
Total Posts : 723
| Posted 7/7/2004 3:48 PM (GMT -6) | | Hi everyone,
All these threads! I could make a suit...
quote:
John: ... corporate election is seen in both testaments: Israel (as a NATION) was God's elect. However, we know that many individual Israelites, through their own rebellion became reprobate, divorced from God, and cut off. This is expressly spelled out in Romans 11...
But then election is election of individuals. You can't choose a group, and pick some, and miss others. You didn't choose the group, then. And most Israelites rebelled, so the choice of the nation didn't select even the majority of the Israelites. Again, this points to election of the nation even being election of individuals:
Romans 9:6 It is not as though God's word had failed. For not all who are descended from Israel are Israel.
quote:
John: What we disagree with about grace is that it is irresistible.
But God's choice is described not only as a choice to give grace, but a choice of the people themselves, we have "he chose us," "those appointed believed," God did not choose just the means, but also the people.
quote:
John: [Acts 13:48] can also be translated, "as many as were disposed to eternal life believed..."
Eeek! No, this is not possible, here is Strong's on "tasso":
1) to put in order, to station
1a) to place in a certain order, to arrange, to assign a place, to appoint
1a1) to assign (appoint) a thing to one
1b) to appoint, ordain, order
1b1) to appoint on one’s own responsibility or authority
1b2) to appoint mutually, i.e. agree upon
None of these meanings have the sense of "disposed to." The verb is passive, too, which means they were appointed by God, and not by themselves.
quote:
John: just as all Israel could say in their covenant that "God has chosen us out of all the nations of the earth," even so we who believe in Christ can say God has chosen us.
I believe God may choose all the Israelites for salvation, though!
Romans 11:28-29 ... as far as election is concerned, they are loved on account of the patriarchs, for God's gifts and his call are irrevocable.
Thus the election of the nation of Israel is individual election, too, they are loved "according to election," and if God's call is irrevocable, I think it will succeed.
Romans 8:30 ... those he called, he also justified ...
quote:
Sisters: We were sealed in Him "after listening to the message of truth" and "also believed", ONLY THEN were we "sealed in Him with the Holy Spirit".
But we have to take all these verses!
Ephesians 1:4 For he chose us in him before the creation of the world to be holy and blameless in his sight.
Yes, people believe, but God chooses, too, and before our choice, he chose us, thus his choice is primary, and ours depends on his:
John 15:16 You did not choose me, but I chose you...
quote:
Chuck: "proorizo"s first definition is "limit in advance"
I looked in my 1890 edition of Strong's (in the book I have), and it does have "limit in advance." So there are different Strong's, it seems. Here is the Strong's definition I have in my Online Bible software:
www.studylight.org/lex/grk/view.cgi?number=4309
Here is Friberg's definition: "decide on beforehand, determine in advance" and Thayer's definition: "in the N. T. of God decreeing from eternity," and the USB definition: "decide from the beginning or beforehand, predestine; set apart from the beginning or beforehand," and Perschbacher's definition: "to limit or mark out beforehand; to design definitely beforehand, ordain beforehand, predestine."
So you are correct, that meaning is possible, though not all dictionaries have that as a possible meaning. But let us assume that "limited in advance" is meant here:
Romans 8:29 For those God foreknew he also predestined to be conformed to the likeness of his Son...
Then we still have classic predestination, those who are "limited in advance" are called, justified, and glorified, all of them, not just some of them, and "those" designates people, not conditions, thus the limitation in advance is to which people are predestined, and not the bounds within which people choose.
"Those he limited in advance he called" cannot mean "those he specified conditions within which they could choose he called..." Because this means he called everyone, since the condition are for everyone, and justified them, and glorified them. I do hope God can actually choose everyone specifically! But I don't think you're saying that...
quote:
Obviously, a God who Ordains or plans sin (As Calvinists Loraine Boettner, Paul Helm say He does)is not Holy. ... Because Jesus's death would come from an unholy source.
But we have God saying that he clearly planned the cross:
Acts 4:28 They did what your power and will had decided beforehand should happen.
And no one faults God for giving up his Son, or Jesus for laying down his life.
quote:
Calvism's Limited atonment is simply not scriptural.
Yes, I do not subscribe to limited atonement.
quote:
... they think HE is evil, that He causes car wrecks and starvation, that He wants all wars ...
No, God does not desire evil. But he sees the good result, even of sinful actions, and desires that result.
Mark 1:12 Immediately the Spirit impelled Him to go out into the wilderness.
And this was so he would be tested by the devil, and fast 40 days, and yet all this was for a good purpose...
Luke 4:14 Jesus returned to Galilee in the power of the Spirit...
The devil just did him good, this good result was why he was driven into the wilderness.
Hebrews 2:18 Because he himself suffered when he was tempted, he is able to help those who are being tempted.
Blessings,
Lee
==================================================
"Even now we seem to have dim glimpses into regions
from which we receive no word to bring away" (George MacDonald) | | Back to Top | | |
|
John Earp
Registered Member
Date Joined Oct 2002
Total Posts : 1715
| Posted 7/7/2004 4:03 PM (GMT -6) | | quote:
Originally posted by Lee Merrill
Hi everyone,
All these threads! I could make a suit...
quote:
John: ... corporate election is seen in both testaments: Israel (as a NATION) was God's elect. However, we know that many individual Israelites, through their own rebellion became reprobate, divorced from God, and cut off. This is expressly spelled out in Romans 11...
But then election is election of individuals. You can't choose a group, and pick some, and miss others. You didn't choose the group, then.
Lee, what is so hard to understand about corporate election? Do you just not want to see what our point is? That's sure how it seems.
YES, God chose the GROUP, but each individual within that group had a choice to make as well, as to whether or not they would be faithful to the groups' covenant with God. God chose Israel, but as Paul said later, "not all Israel are of Israel." (Not all Israelites are truly "Israelites indeed."--see also Romans 2, which expressly states that true Jews are those who are Jews inwardly).
quote:
John: [Acts 13:48] can also be translated, "as many as were disposed to eternal life believed..."
quote:
Eeek! No, this is not possible, here is Strong's on "tasso":
1) to put in order, to station
1a) to place in a certain order, to arrange, to assign a place, to appoint
1a1) to assign (appoint) a thing to one
1b) to appoint, ordain, order
1b1) to appoint on one’s own responsibility or authority
1b2) to appoint mutually, i.e. agree upon
Here's a good summary I found of scholars who find that it is the MIDDLE voice, not the passive one, which best fits the context (both middle and passive are spelled the same in this case).
o "Were ordained to" is not the best translation of tetagmenoi. Tetagmenoi is both the middle voice and passive voice participle of tasso.
§ Means "to arrange in an orderly manner, i.e., assign or dispose (to a certain person or lot):--addict, appoint, determine, ordain, set" (Strong).
§ Adam Clarke emphasizes the verb tasso "includes no idea of pre-ordination or pre-destination of any kind. . . . [it] signifies to place, set, order, appoint, dispose; hence it has been considered here as implying the disposition or readiness of mind of several persons in the congregation, such as the religious proselytes mentioned in ver. 43, who possessed the reverse of the "disposition of those Jews who spake against those things, contradicting and blaspheming, ver. 45. . . . in this good state and order of mind, believed."
§ Robertson writes: "There is no evidence that Luke had in mind absolutum decretum of personal salvation. Paul had showed that God's plan extended to and included Gentiles. Certainly the Spirit of God does move upon the human heart to which some respond, as here, while others push him away" (Acts, p. 200).
§ As Alford writes: "The meaning of this word disposed must be determined by the context. The Jews had judged themselves unworthy of eternal life: the Gentiles, as many as were disposed to eternal life, believed. By whom so disposed, is not here declared: nor need the word be in this place further particularized. We know, that it is God who worketh in us the will to believe, and that the preparation of the heart is of him: but to find in this text pre-ordination to life asserted, is to force both word and the context to a meaning which they do not contain."
§ Shank writes: "Rotherham's rendering 'had become disposed' is fully warranted. Citing examples, Bloomfield asserts (as do others) that the passive voice of tasso often conveys the middle sense and that the passive does not neccessarily suppose an over-ruling impulse from without. The expression tassesthai may here have the sense it sometimes bears, 'to be thoroughly disposed for, or purposed for, bent on,' like the similar one euyhetos einat eis, to be fitly disposed for."
§ Bartlet writes: "ordained to eternal life. A bad rendering, as suggesting that human choice had no real part in such belief. The idea is simply that of preparedness of heart, without any thought as to how this came about. This is clear from the account of the Jews' unreadiness: they 'judged themselves unworthy' (in the same sense of Matt. xxii:8, 'The wedding is ready, but they that were bidden were not worthy'-- i.e. as making light of it, verse 5). Thus all is conceived to turn ultimately on man's choice. Like the Pharisee in Luke vii:30, the Jews 'rejected for themselves the counsel of God.' No divine 'decree' ordained the results either way. The best rendering then would be, 'were (found) disposed to eternal life, which preserves the exact shade of the verb ('to set in order, arrange, dispose' [Thayer]) and just that degree of ambiguity which belongs to the original" (J. Vernon Barrtlet, The New Century Bible: The Acts).
http://www.bibleviews.com/fivepoints.html
"The Discovery of new truth will modify old views and opinions, and there is perhaps no end to this process with finite minds in any world." Charles G. Finney, Systematic Theology.
revivaltheology.net
| | Back to Top | | |
|
Bobber
Registered Member
Date Joined Jun 2004
Total Posts : 199
| Posted 7/8/2004 1:38 PM (GMT -6) | | To John....
Thanks for the link about the Acts 13:48 verse. I wondered about that verse for many years and found quite interesting what the article had to say.... 
| | Back to Top | | |
|
Lee Merrill
booted
Date Joined Jun 2001
Total Posts : 723
| Posted 7/8/2004 3:14 PM (GMT -6) | | Hi John,
quote:
YES, God chose the GROUP, but each individual within that group had a choice to make as well...
Here is what I mean: If a politician says, I choose all Americans who choose me in the next election, then he did not choose all Americans! In any sense.
quote:
John: [Acts 13:48] can also be translated, "as many as were disposed to eternal life believed..."
Here's a good summary I found of scholars who find that it is the MIDDLE voice, not the passive one, which best fits the context (both middle and passive are spelled the same in this case).
§ Means "to arrange in an orderly manner, i.e., assign or dispose (to a certain person or lot):--addict, appoint, determine, ordain, set" (Strong).
That's not people being disposed one way or the other, though! That's God deciding, still.
§ Adam Clarke emphasizes the verb tasso "includes no idea of pre-ordination or pre-destination of any kind. . . . [it] signifies to place, set, order, appoint, dispose; hence it has been considered here as implying the disposition or readiness of mind of several persons in the congregation..."
But if the meaning includes "to place, set, order, appoint," then he can't say this word has "no idea of predestination of any kind," thus I don't think you want to take this commentator as being a good reference, if he takes such liberties.
§ Robertson writes: "There is no evidence that Luke had in mind absolutum decretum of personal salvation. Paul had showed that God's plan extended to and included Gentiles. Certainly the Spirit of God does move upon the human heart to which some respond, as here, while others push him away" (Acts, p. 200).
No evidence, though? "As many as were ...," none were left behind.
§ As Alford writes: "The meaning of this word disposed must be determined by the context. The Jews had judged themselves unworthy of eternal life: the Gentiles, as many as were disposed to eternal life, believed. By whom so disposed, is not here declared: nor need the word be in this place further particularized. We know, that it is God who worketh in us the will to believe, and that the preparation of the heart is of him: but to find in this text pre-ordination to life asserted, is to force both word and the context to a meaning which they do not contain."
"Disposed" is not the primary meaning, though. He speaks as if it was, but it's not. And he treats this as passive, not middle, and like Adam Clarke, he asserts that the word does not allow pre-ordination as a meaning, which is an overstatement.
§ Bartlet writes: "ordained to eternal life. A bad rendering, as suggesting that human choice had no real part in such belief..."
That kind of assumes the conclusion, though. I could do the same, and say his rendering is bad, because it suggests that human choice is critical in such belief.
"Disposed" is a secondary sense of this word, and "middle voice" is a (very) minority opinion, not all even of these commentators you have quoted conclude that. So if you want what is most probable here, "appointed" is the consensus (NIV, NASB, UNASB, ESV, NLT, NKJ, YLT), or "destined, ordained" (NRSV, RSV, Darby), all the major translations support the reading that implies predestination here.
There are other verses, too!
James 1:18 Of his own will he brought us forth by the word of truth... (ESV)
Ephesians 1:4 For he chose us in him before the creation of the world to be holy and blameless in his sight.
Blessings,
Lee
==================================================
"Even now we seem to have dim glimpses into regions
from which we receive no word to bring away" (George MacDonald) | | Back to Top | | |
| 32 posts in this thread.
Viewing Page : 1 2 |
| Forum Information | Currently it is Monday, November 09, 2026 12:54 PM (GMT -6)
There are a total of 97,718 posts in 6,040 threads.
In the last 3 days there were 0 new threads and 0 reply posts. View Active Threads
|
Forum powered by dotNetBB v2.42EC SP3
dotNetBB © 2000-2026 |
|
|