• **Notifications**: Notifications can be dismissed by clicking on the "x" on the righthand side of the notice.
  • **New Style**: You can now change style options. Click on the paintbrush at the bottom of this page.
  • **Donations**: If the Lord leads you please consider helping with monthly costs and up keep on our Forum. Click on the Donate link In the top menu bar. Thanks
  • **New Blog section**: There is now a blog section. Check it out near the Private Debates forum or click on the Blog link in the top menu bar.
  • Welcome Visitors! Join us and be blessed while fellowshipping and celebrating our Glorious Salvation In Christ Jesus.

Which happens first, regeneration or justification?

First, where do you ever read that "unless He had an election based on His grace alone, then none would have ever have inherited eternal life"?
Jim this is the testimony of the scriptures, where do you want to start?

Romans 3:9​

“What then? are we better than they? No, in no wise: for we have before proved both Jews and Gentiles, that they are all under sin;”

Read Romans 3:10-18 of all men by nature. God knew that all, both angels and man would sin and fall under its power and curse, a sI prove above.

And moreover, where in all of Christendom do you find any significant group claiming to have "inherited eternal life by their own power/works"?
Are you kidding me!? You just said that God knew who would love him.
That is what Peter tells us in 1 Peter 1:1-2.. God's choosing of who He will save, i.e., His election, is according to, is based upon, His foreknowledge of who will love Him (Rom 8:28-29).
All who believe that man's will is free and has power to hear, believe and repent, are the significant folks! Are you among these folks, then if the shoes fits, then wear it. Are you ready to reject man's free will? Since, after all, man in the natural state, is in bondage to sin and the devil.
 
Jim this is the testimony of the scriptures, where do you want to start?

Romans 3:9​

“What then? are we better than they? No, in no wise: for we have before proved both Jews and Gentiles, that they are all under sin;”

Read Romans 3:10-18 of all men by nature. God knew that all, both angels and man would sin and fall under its power and curse, a sI prove above.


Are you kidding me!? You just said that God knew who would love him.

All who believe that man's will is free and has power to hear, believe and repent, are the significant folks! Are you among these folks, then if the shoes fits, then wear it. Are you ready to reject man's free will? Since, after all, man in the natural state, is in bondage to sin and the devil.
I have to leave now, but I will, God willing, come back to this. Hopefully before end of day. If not, then first thing tomorrow.
 
Once again, erroneously, you make the assumption that the spirit cannot engage with the unregenerate.
I stated by using Jesus' own words, exactly the opposite of what you say I assumed. The only words of mine that were in the post were those that asked the question as to meaning. You presumed to read my mind, deflect, do not answer, and make it about me. Once again ( is this the third or fourth time you have done that) you did not answer my question of what that passage means (what Jesus means) but instead told me what I believe. So again---what did Jesus mean in John 6:63-65?
I think your problem here is that you have a really poor concept of how one comes to believe.
I have a different concept of how one comes to believe than you do. Who are you to say that it is a poor concept? The fact that you will not give your definition of those passages in John 6 would more likely indicate that your concept (that the natural man is perfectly capable of instigating regeneration by his own faith) is not supported by those scriptures or any scriptures. Instead it is just a preferred concept that is stubbornly held to. Whether it is right or wrong is something not relevant to investigate it would seem.
You think God zaps ("gifts") you with believing so that first you do not believe and then "zap" you are regenerated, and then you believe. That is simply not how one comes to believe in God.
That is not what I believe at all. I believe it is by grace that God gives me what I need and do not have, for his own glory and the glory of the Son who paid the highest price possible to purchase me for God's kingdom.
No, I do not put scripture against scripture. Rather, I put scripture against your faulty interpretation of some scripture.
When one refuses to put all the scriptures in the context together, refusing even to give the meaning of those clear portions, but instead finds one scripture in the bunch, (or from somewhere else in the Bible, related or unrelated) isolates it from context, that can be used in isolation to contradict what is clear in that which is being ignored; that is the definition of pitting scripture against scripture.
 
45. It is written in the Prophets, 'And they will all be taught by God.' Everyone who has heard and learned from the Father comes to me--

I didn't claim foreknowledge saved anyone. So I don't know why you posted that in response to my comment. But I will say that 1 Peter 1:1-2 clearly says that God's the elect are according to His foreknowledge. So given your comment, perhaps it is your understanding of elect that is in question.
It was a non answer like many of yours are.
 
45. It is written in the Prophets, 'And they will all be taught by God.' Everyone who has heard and learned from the Father comes to me--

I didn't claim foreknowledge saved anyone. So I don't know why you posted that in response to my comment. But I will say that 1 Peter 1:1-2 clearly says that
God's the elect are according to His foreknowledge. So given your comment, perhaps it is your understanding of elect that is in question.
According to his foreknowledge of whom, before the foundations of the world, he has chosen to be a son (Jn 1:13).
 
Last edited:
That is the fallacy of a fairly recent batch of theologians of the so-called Open Theism.
No, that is the usage of the Greek prognosis in the NT.
They have decided, quite apart from scripture, that God only knows the future of that which he has directly caused. It is heretical in that it denies God's perfect and complete omniscience. God's foreknowledge is simply His omniscience of the future. 1 Peter 1:1-2 clearly and absolutely says that His election is according to His foreknowledge. Romans 8:28-29 tells us that foreknowledge is of the ones who love Him.

God saves. The ones that He saves are those who love Him; those are the ones He calls. And knowing from before all creation who those will be, they are the ones "he also predestined to be conformed to the image of his Son, in order that he might be the firstborn among many brothers. And those whom he predestined he also called, and those whom he called he also justified, and those whom he justified he also glorified" (Rom 8:29-30).
 
Last edited:
Greetings prism~I would only add this for now:

God's foreknowledge is not the cause of one's condemnation ~ but is the cause of eternal life for those He elected by grace alone ~allow me to explain my understanding of this truth, in a few words.
God's perfect foreknowledge of all things, fully understood that unless He had an election based on His grace alone, then none would have ever have inherited eternal life by their own power/works, none. God alone is immutable and cannot sin, or even have a lust/desire to do so, impossible ~ all others can and will sin, even create being's spirits like angels, since no one possess immutability but God alone, an attribute that is one of many He possess that makes Him God, blessed forever.

This being said, God's foreknowledge is the reason why God had an election of grace before angels or man had done good or evil. So, Peter understood this perfectly and wrote:

1 Peter 1:2​

“Elect according to the foreknowledge of God the Father, through sanctification of the Spirit, unto obedience and sprinkling of the blood of Jesus Christ: Grace unto you, and peace, be multiplied.”

It certain was not based upon foreseen works of any kind, that is blasphemy for a few reasons. That position is a doctrine of devils.

I fully agree that foreknowledge does not damn anyone, since God in His infinite wisdom created man upright, placed him in a world that had everything to help him to live happy, contended and free of sin; the only thing God did not do, was to secure Adam and Eve in the state in which he created them, neither was He under obligation to do so, since He certainly did not work against them, nor was He their enemy in any way whatsoever~man's disobedience was his own undoing by his free will to do good, or disobey, he chose to disobey and since then we all have reaped the terrible consequences of Adam's disobedience~only the grace of God saved those who were chosen by God's own will before the foundation of the earth and secures eternal life for them through the obedience of one, JESUS CHRIST, God's only begotten Son.
Prognosis (foreknowledge) is God's foreknowledge of what he is going to do because he has decreed that he shall do it, it is not used of what man is going to do.

It is of his own decrees, of what before the worlds began he decreed that he would do.
God then acts later in time according to his (fore)knowledge of those decrees.

Before time, God decreed to elect specific persons in time to become children of God, to be born of him (Jn 1:13).
Their election in time is according to God's foreknown decree before their birth to do so; i.e., "according to God's foreknowledge."
 
Last edited:
I do not call predestination foreknowledge. That is the mistake of the Calvinist. I some cases, God's predestination is according to His foreknowledge. That is what Peter tells us in 1 Peter 1:1-2.. God's choosing of who He will save, i.e., His election, is according to, is based upon, His foreknowledge of who will love Him (Rom *:28-29).
Predestination is according to God's foreknowledge of his decree uttered before time to make that person a son of God, born of God (Jn 1:13).
 
God's foreknowledge (prognosis) is of his own decrees, of what before the worlds began he decreed that he would do.
God then acts later in time according to his (fore)knowledge of those decrees.

Prognosis (foreknowledge) is not used in reference to man's actions, only in reference to God's actions.

Before time, God decreed to elect specific persons in time to become children of God, to be born of him (Jn 1:13).
Their election in time is according to God's foreknown decree before their birth to do so; i.e., "according to God's foreknowledge."
I love the way you stated that!
 
No, that is the usage of the Greek prognosis in the NT.
No that is not the usage of the Greek pognosis in the NT.

God is omniscient. It is complete. It is perfect. It is not limited. Foreknowledge is simply His compete, perfect and unlimited omniscience of the future. It is independent of His decrees, pronouncements, etc. It is one of God's attributes.
Prognosis (foreknowledge) is God's foreknowledge of what he is going to do because he has decreed that he shall do it, it is not used of what man is going to do.

It is of his own decrees, of what before the worlds began he decreed that he would do.
God then acts later in time according to his (fore)knowledge of those decrees.
That is just not true at all. God's foreknowledge is completely independent of His decrees. Of course He foreknows what He has decreed, but His foreknowledge is not limited to that. It is complete. God tells us that the sure mark of deity is the ability to declare what is going to take place, to announce what is coming (Isa 41:21-23). This is exactly what God has done: “I am God, and there is no other; I am God, and there is no one like Me, declaring the end from the beginning, and from ancient times things which have not been done” (Isa 46:9-10). See also Isa 42:8-9; 44:7-8; 45:20-21; 48:3-7; Ps 139:4,16. In all these texts God asserts his exclusive possession of knowledge of the future.
Before time, God decreed to elect specific persons in time to become children of God, to be born of him (Jn 1:13).
Their election in time is according to God's foreknown decree before their birth to do so; i.e., "according to God's foreknowledge."
Again, that is just not true. In fact it is totally backward. The NT specifically affirms that God’s foreknowledge is a crucial factor in predestination: “For those whom He foreknew, He also predestined” (Rom 8:29). The saints are chosen “according to the foreknowledge of God the Father” (1 Pet 1:2). The death of Jesus also involved a combination of foreknowledge and predestination (Acts 2:23). See Rom 11:2; Gal 3:8. God's election, His predestination (decrees), results from His foreknowledge. From Romans 8:28 that foreknowledge is of those who love God.

John 1:12-13 says that those who received Jesus and believed him were given the right to become children of God. How does one become a child of God? By being born again of water and Spirit (John 3:5)..
 
Predestination is according to God's foreknowledge of his decree uttered before time to make that person a son of God, born of God (Jn 1:13).
Wrong. See above.
 
It is of his own decrees, of what before the worlds began he decreed that he would do.
God then acts later in time according to his (fore)knowledge of those decrees.

Before time, God decreed to elect specific persons in time to become children of God, to be born of him (Jn 1:13).
Their election in time is according to God's foreknown decree before their birth to do so; i.e., "according to God's foreknowledge."
Greetings Eleanor,

We will be very close to each other, so, I'm thinking is it even worth discussing, because this is a classic equifinality of a doctrine.

While I whole heartily agree God Is Omniscient. He knows everything; everything possible, everything actual; all events, all creatures, of the past, the present, and the future. He is perfectly acquainted with every detail in the life of every being in heaven, in earth, and under the earth. "He knoweth what is in the darkness" (Dan. 2:22). Nothing escapes His notice, nothing can be hidden from Him, nothing is forgotten by Him. Well may we say with the psalmist, "Such knowledge is too wonderful for me; it is high, I cannot attain unto it" (Ps. 139:6). His knowledge is perfect. He never errs, never changes, never overlooks anything. "Neither is there any creature that is not manifest in his sight: but all things are naked and opened unto the eyes of him with whom we have to do" (Heb. 4:13). Such is the God with whom we "have to do"!

I'm very much aware that some pseudo Bible teachers pervert His foreknowledge to set aside His unconditional election unto eternal life.

When the blessed subject of divine foreordination is expounded, when God’s eternal choice of certain ones to be conformed to the image of His Son is set forth, the enemy sends along someone to argue that election is based upon the foreknowledge of God. This foreknowledge is interpreted to mean that God foresaw certain ones who would be more pliable than others and they would respond more readily to the strivings of the Spirit. So, because God knew they would believe, He predestinated them unto salvation. It is a perversion of God's word. It repudiates the truth of total depravity, for it argues that there is something good in some men. It takes away the independency of God, for it makes His decrees rest upon what He discovers in the creature, as if many have some good, power to love and serve God, apart from God causing them to do so.

It completely turns things upside down, for in saying God foresaw certain sinners who would believe in Christ, and because of this He predestinated them unto salvation, is the very reverse of the truth. Scripture affirms that God, in His sovereignty, singled out certain ones to be recipients of His distinguishing favors (Acts 13:48); therefore He determined to bestow upon them the gift of faith. False theology makes God’s foreknowledge of our believing the cause of His election to salvation. However, God’s election is the cause, and our believing in Christ the effect.

It should, however, be pointed out that God’s knowledge, or His cognition of the future, considered simply in themselves, does not mean His foreknowledge has nothing to do with his decrees as not the causative~as I said above, God knew that unless he had an election by grace, before anyone had done any good or evil, then no one would have ever come to love, serve God by their own power when left to themselves, none, including the angels.

God's foreknowledge and His decrees are not one and the same, even though they may be very close~God did not decree the wicked to do evil, but knew that he would, base on his infinite knowledge of all things, and knowing that He alone is immutable, an attribute that he alone possess~as I said above: "God Is Omniscient. He knows everything; everything possible, everything actual; all events, all creatures, of the past, the present, and the future, nothing can escape his perfect knowledge, not one single thing, impossible.
 
Last edited:
I'm very much aware that some pseudo Bible teachers pervert His foreknowledge to set aside His unconditional election unto eternal life.

When the blessed subject of divine foreordination is expounded, when God’s eternal choice of certain ones to be conformed to the image of His Son is set forth, the enemy sends along someone to argue that election is based upon the foreknowledge of God. This foreknowledge is interpreted to mean that God foresaw certain ones who would be more pliable than others and they would respond more readily to the strivings of the Spirit. So, because God knew they would believe, He predestinated them unto salvation. It is a perversion of God's word. It repudiates the truth of total depravity, for it argues that there is something good in some men. It takes away the independency of God, for it makes His decrees rest upon what He discovers in the creature, as if many have some good, power to love and serve God, apart from God causing them to do so.
Yes, it does repudiate the truth of total depravity, and that because total depravity is not truth. Arguing against total depravity is not an argument that there is something good in some men. It is arguing something that even the Reformed Theology as finally come to admit and that is that not everything in all men is all bad. Free will does not take away the independency of God. The independency of God does not preclude Him from responding. That God answers one's prayer does not demand that God has caused, decreed, one to pray.
It completely turns things upside down, for in saying God foresaw certain sinners who would believe in Christ, and because of this He predestinated them unto salvation, is the very reverse of the truth. Scripture affirms that God, in His sovereignty, singled out certain ones to be recipients of His distinguishing favors (Acts 13:48); therefore He determined to bestow upon them the gift of faith. False theology makes God’s foreknowledge of our believing the cause of His election to salvation. However, God’s election is the cause, and our believing in Christ the effect.
It has not turned things upside down. It has affirmed the truth of God's word. It has denied Reformed Theology's asinine theological determinism.
It should, however, be pointed out that God’s knowledge, or His cognition of the future, considered simply in themselves, does not mean His foreknowledge has nothing to do with his decrees as not the causative~as I said above, God knew that unless he had an election by grace, before anyone had done any good or evil, then no one would have ever come to love, serve God by their own power when left to themselves, none, including the angels.
Here you have invented your own, nonbiblical, definition and the utility of God's foreknowledge.
God's foreknowledge and His decrees and not one and the same, even though they may be very close~God did not decree the wicked to do evil, but knew that he would, base on his infinite knowledge of all things, and knowing that He alone is immutable, an attribute that he alone possess~as I said above: "God Is Omniscient. He knows everything; everything possible, everything actual; all events, all creatures, of the past, the present, and the future, nothing can escape his perfect knowledge, not one single thing, impossible.
You have asserted that God did not decree that the wicked to do evil, but you have demanded through Total Depravity that all are wicked and can only do evil, unless and until God intervenes; that is, God has decreed that all are wicked, until He intervenes, and His intervening is decreed. Please tell me how that is not God decreeing the wicked to do evil.
 
Yes, it does repudiate the truth of total depravity, and that because total depravity is not truth. Arguing against total depravity is not an argument that there is something good in some men. It is arguing something that even the Reformed Theology as finally come to admit and that is that not everything in all men is all bad.
Good morning Jim,

I'm gong to forbear of addressing total depravity now, since it is not the subject of the thread, which we truly need to get back to.

A short note: I'm not of the Reformed community of believers, even though I do appreciate much of what they have to say on many subjects, even if I might disagree a little here and a little there. I'm a Particular Baptist, if a name must be given to me, and we have never been part of the Reformed church, for there was nothing to reform among the old line Baptist, (though much to be learn for sure) we were never part of Rome, never. That being said, there are godly men who were and are, part of the reformed faith of believers.
 
Good morning Jim,

I'm gong to forbear of addressing total depravity now, since it is not the subject of the thread, which we truly need to get back to.

A short note: I'm not of the Reformed community of believers, even though I do appreciate much of what they have to say on many subjects, even if I might disagree a little here and a little there. I'm a Particular Baptist, if a name must be given to me, and we have never been part of the Reformed church, for there was nothing to reform among the old line Baptist, (though much to be learn for sure) we were never part of Rome, never. That being said, there are godly men who were and are, part of the reformed faith of believers.
I wouldn't dispute any of that. But I must say that much, if not most, of what you present is very much aligned with the reformed community of believers.

And let me say here, and I think you know, that I do not hold that those of the reformed theology are not godly men. I do not hold that being wrong constitutes being ungodly. And I thank God for that, simply because there are none that are not wrong in something. Even me, imagine that.

I can understand that you would hesitate addressing total depravity now since it is not the subject of the thread. However, I contend that your views concerning the subject of the thread are tied absolutely to your adherence to total depravity. The base driver in your views on this subject is your adherence to total depravity. It is not a few silvery threads tying it together; rather it is a double set of leg irons.
 
I wouldn't dispute any of that. But I must say that much, if not most, of what you present is very much aligned with the reformed community of believers.

And let me say here, and I think you know, that I do not hold that those of the reformed theology are not godly men. I do not hold that being wrong constitutes being ungodly. And I thank God for that, simply because there are none that are not wrong in something. Even me, imagine that.

I can understand that you would hesitate addressing total depravity now since it is not the subject of the thread. However, I contend that your views concerning the subject of the thread are tied absolutely to your adherence to total depravity. The base driver in your views on this subject is your adherence to total depravity. It is not a few silvery threads tying it together; rather it is a double set of leg irons.
Are you aware that the doctrine in total depravity is not uniquely a Reformed view? It is one of the foundational doctrines of traditional Christianity. The T in the doctrine is simply to make an acronym. It is the doctrine of original sin----the result of Adam's fall that affects all humanity. This has been a foundational doctrine of Christianity from the beginning.
 
Are you aware that the doctrine in total depravity is not uniquely a Reformed view? It is one of the foundational doctrines of traditional Christianity. The T in the doctrine is simply to make an acronym. It is the doctrine of original sin----the result of Adam's fall that affects all humanity. This has been a foundational doctrine of Christianity from the beginning.
Neither Total Depravity nor Original Sin are foundational doctrines of Christianity from the beginning.
 
Neither Total Depravity nor Original Sin are foundational doctrines of Christianity from the beginning.
Jim, please read a little of church history, and see if this is not so.
 
Back
Top