What is the Basis for God’s Eternal Decree?

After what seems like an eternity, we are returning to a mini-series in our overall series on Reformed Theology on the topic of the eternal decree of God. In our last post on this subject, we answered the question “What is God’s eternal decree?” The eternal decree of God is that by which God ordained everything that comes to pass — all past, present and future events are all part of God’s eternal decree, and they are unchangeably so.

In this post, we will be concerned with the question: What is the basis for God’s eternal decree? In other words, what grounds the eternal decree of God? This is an important question because when we say that God’s eternal decree covers every event — past , present and future — people begin trotting out the “F” word (“Fatalism“). That’s why some in the history of Christian doctrine developed a foreknowledge view of God’s knowledge of future events. God knows future events because, in his foreknowledge, he peers down the halls of time and sees the future. This is very different than saying that God foreordains future events, and the difference leads to radically different applications in Christian life and practice.

Here are two major problems I see with the foreknowledge view of God’s knowledge of future events:

1. It renders God as a passive observer of future events rather than as the One who sovereignly ordains their coming to pass
2. It depicts God as taking in knowledge rather than already possessing an exhaustive and complete knowledge of all things - Continue at Carl Gobelman

Does Foreknowledge Explain Election?

The term 'Election' occurs frequently in the New Testament, referring to God's choice of some for salvation. All Christians hold to a doctrine of election since it is a biblical word. The notion of God choosing some for salvation and not others is so clear throughout the entire Bible that no serious student of Scripture denies it. Contention occurs, however, when we ask what is basis of God's choice.

Two answers exist within the Christian community

The first view holds that Election has no basis whatever in man.

It is a mystery, hidden forever in God's sovereign will. Though God is not arbitrary in his decrees, nevertheless the decree of Election is a righteous one since no one deserves salvation anyway. 

This view is frequently called 'Reformed', because it was prominent during the Reformation period and is held today by those churches who identity their theology as 'Reformed.' 

The second view claims divine 'foreknowledge' as the basis for Election.

God supposedly looks into the future and notices who will accept Christ and 'elects' those. This view is normally called 'Arminian', after the Dutch pastor in the 16th century, Arminius, who invented the doctrine toward the end of the Reformation period. The meaning of foreknowledge, when used of divine decisions, it carries the connotation of 'appointed.' It therefore means something like 'foreordained' in connection with Election. It is the person who is 'foreknown', or 'appointed' to salvation, not some quality in the person.

The evidence is:  Continue at Smallings

The Justification-Sanctification Debate

Some prominent bloggers have been debating the relationship between justification and sanctification. I have suggested that part of the confusion comes when we separate what God has joined. 

 

Salvation is experienced sequentially in three dimensions but must always be understood (with deep gratitude) as one completed act of God for undeserving, helpless, powerless, ungodly sinners who are God’s enemies (Romans 5). 

The apostle Paul explained it as five completed divine actions for sinners (who could not have participated in any of them in any way).

God:

1. Foreknew: (us) (Προεγνω)
2. Predestined: (us) (Προωρισεν)
3. Called: (us) (Εκαλεσεν)
4. Justified: (us) (Εδικαιωσεν)
5. Glorified: (us) (εδοξασεν)

Some of the tension seems to come from the fact that this one-time-gift received from God by grace (Romans 8:29-30) permanently unites us to God in Christ but is experienced sequentially. Read the rest at Think Point