If The Bible Warns Against Future False Christs, Then How Is The End-Times Earthly Messiah Not A Deception?

If the Bible Warns Against Future False Christs, then How Is the End-Times Earthly Messiah Not a Deception?

By Author Eli Kittim 🔎

—

False Christs & False Prophets

The New Testament warns that the end of days will be characterized by great deception. Matthew 24 tells us that many false christs will appear, saying “I am the Christ” (v. 5), and will deceive many. And many false prophets will also appear (v. 11). If they tell you “here is the Christ,” don’t believe them, for many false Christs & false prophets will perform great signs so as to deceive even the elect (vv. 23-24). In the text, Christ says (Mt 24.25-26 NRSV):

Take note, I have told you beforehand. So, if

they say to you, ‘Look! He is in the

wilderness,' do not go out. If they say, ‘Look!

He is in the inner rooms,' do not believe it.

But one may raise the question, “if the Bible warns against future false Christs, then how is the end-times earthly messiah not a deception?”

I will try to answer this question using an excerpt from my book, “The Little Book of Revelation,” chapter 11, the section entitled “THE CORPSE: A MISSING LINK IN BIBLICAL EXEGESIS,” pp. 237-238:

// However, we must challenge the reader to go further. Because if you do not understand the specific timeline of these end-time events, the biblical script will become very confusing. For example, Matthew 24:23 reads, “if anyone says to you, ‘Behold, here is the Christ,’ or ‘There He is,’ do not believe him.” Some argue that this verse exhorts us to distrust any earthly Messiah that might appear in the last days. But this is simply not true. For one thing, Christ himself appears for the first time in the last days! (Heb. 1:2, 9:26; Gal. 4:4; Eph. 1:9-10; Acts 3:20-21; Rev. 12:5). Not to mention that the Jews themselves are still awaiting the Messiah. Furthermore, Matthew’s gospel sets up the context of this exhortation in its proper chronological order. For instance, notice that Matthew first introduces Daniel’s prophecy of “the ABOMINATION OF DESOLATION . . . standing in the holy place” (Matt. 24:15) as the backdrop for this exhortation. This event is set to take place when the antichrist will take “his seat in the temple of God, displaying himself as being God” (2 Thess. 2:4).

Next, we are warned that when this event transpires, we should “flee to the mountains; . . . for then there will be a great tribulation, such as has not occurred since the beginning of the world until now, nor ever shall” (Matt. 24:16-21). But we must remember that Christ will most certainly die before the antichrist could reveal himself to the world (Matt. 24:28). Paul writes, “He [Christ] who now restrains will do so until he is taken out of the way. And then that lawless one will be revealed” (2 Thess. 2:7-8). That Christ’s arrival precedes that of the antichrist is further demonstrated in John’s gospel, Jesus says, “I will not speak much more with you, for the ruler of the world is coming, and he has nothing in Me” (14:30, cf. Dan. 9:26). Hence, “the ABOMINATION OF DESOLATION” serves as the context in which the previous exhortation was made. So during this particular time period, we are rightly urged to distrust any physical being that claims to be the Messiah.\\

—

The Day of Christ

Here’s another excerpt from “The Little Book of Revelation,” ch. 3, the section entitled “FIRST COMES CHRIST; THEN COMES THE ANTICHRIST,” p. 101:

// Christ, then, must be the first horseman of “Revelation,” whose “robe” (body) was “dipped in blood” (Rev. 19:11-13, cf. Rev. 6:2). This episode marks the first of several incidents that lead up to the cosmic apocalypse. We already know that the anticipated child born during the end-times is clearly the Messiah (Rev. 12:1-5). And more than that, we are now in a better position to understand the preceding events leading up to his foretold ascension: being “caught up” into heaven (Rev. 12:5). These include his incarnation, death and resurrection, when he “will arise” from the dead (Dan. 12:1) “to make the earth tremble” (Isa. 2:19). We are also told that the antichrist “will be revealed” during the interim in which Christ will be “taken out of the way” (2 Thess. 2:7-8). Hence, it was very much the scriptural intention to instill insight in its advocates so that they might firmly distrust those who claim “that the day of the Lord has come” (2 Thess. 2:2).\\

—

Are the Four Living Creatures of Revelation Alien, Human, or Angelic?

By Author Eli Kittim

——-

Ezekiel’s Account

In the Old Testament (OT), Ezekiel’s book describes the prophet’s “visions of God” (1.1), especially those of four living creatures. Ezekiel recounts it as follows (1.4-5 NRSV):

As I looked, a stormy wind came out of the

north: a great cloud with brightness around

it and fire flashing forth continually, and in

the middle of the fire, something like

gleaming amber. In the middle of it was

something like four living creatures. This

was their appearance: they were of human

form.

What Ezekiel saw were not actual creatures or beasts but rather figures that resembled them. He describes seeing the “likeness” or “similitude” (דְּמ֖וּת də·mūṯ) that resembled four (Heb. חַיּוֹת ḥayyōṯ) living creatures or beasts. Then, the prophet begins to describe their appearance (מַרְאֵֽיהֶ֔ן mar·’ê·hen). Ezekiel 1.5 says that they had the likeness of ’ā·ḏām (i.e. of a man or a human being). Ezekiel 1.6-7 further describes them as follows:

Each had four faces, and each of them had

four wings. Their legs were straight, and the

soles of their feet were like the sole of a

calf's foot; and they sparkled like burnished

bronze.

Ezekiel’s narrative doesn't appear to describe human beings but rather some kind of extraterrestrial (or transhuman) creatures or beasts (1.5). Furthermore, no human being has straight legs or “the sole of a calf’s foot” (v. 7). However, with regard to these physical descriptions, including their feet that “sparkled like burnished bronze,” I have tried to show elsewhere that this imagery may be associated with Jesus Christ (cf. Rev. 1.13-15). See my article, “Christ The Terminator: Half Man Half Machine”: https://eli-kittim.tumblr.com/post/653464965934661632/christ-the-terminator-half-man-half-machine

Eli of Kittim

Christ The Terminator: Half Man Half Machine

“I’ll Be Back” By Author Eli Kittim End-Time Visions of the Messiah’s Robotic Enhancements What if Jesus paid a steeper price for our sa

Ezekiel also mentions that “they had human hands” (v. 8). Then, in vv. 10-11 he says:

As for the appearance of their faces: the

four had the face of a human being, the

face of a lion on the right side, the face of

an ox on the left side, and the face of an

eagle; such were their faces.

This symbolism is reiterated in Revelation 4.6-7. As we will see, Ezekiel’s “creatures” of the tetramorph, which are depicted in animal forms, appear to be different portraits of the Messiah, even though in the Book of Revelation they seem to be completely separate from him.

The 4 living creatures are depicted as winged figures, which are archaic symbols of divinity. The lion seemingly represents Christ (Rev. 5.5), alluding to his royal stature as conqueror! The ox appears to illustrate Christ’s sacrifice. In Mt 11.28-30, Christ wants us to heed his warning so as to be equally yoked:

Come to me, all you that are weary and are

carrying heavy burdens, and I will give you

rest. Take my yoke upon you, and learn from

me; for I am gentle and humble in heart,

and you will find rest for your souls. For my

yoke is easy, and my burden is light.

The wooden yoke or beam that is typically used between a pair of oxen seems to represent the cross of Christ as well as the injunction to take up our cross and follow him, and to unite ourselves to him (Mt. 16.24). Finally, the eagle depicts the divinity of Christ (cf. Rev. 8.13).

An alternative but Christ-based model of the tetramorph is the patristic interpretation, which depicts the four living creatures as symbols of the 4 evangelists’ accounts of Christ. There are different versions but most follow the description of Epiphanius’ (310-403) account:

Matthew’s gospel portrays the man.

Mark’s gospel depicts the lion.

Luke’s gospel represents the ox.

John’s gospel symbolizes the eagle.

Notice the OT description of the four living creatures in which “all four were full of eyes all around” (Ezek. 1.18). Compare this verse with that from the New Testament (NT) concerning the Lamb of God “standing as if it had been slaughtered, having seven horns and seven eyes” (Rev. 5.6). In fact, Ezek. 1.28 clarifies and summarizes the aforesaid vision by making the following declaration:

This was the appearance of the likeness of

the glory of the Lord.

So, from a Christian perspective, this sounds very much like Christ the Lord!

——-

The Apocalyptic Vision of Revelation 4 through 6

In the NT, the four figures of Rev. 4.6 that are “full of eyes in front and behind” (cf. Ezek. 1.18) are called animals or creatures (τέσσαρα ζῷα), not angelic beings. As for the “twenty-four elders” of Rev. 4.4, they are discussed at length in my article “Who Are the Twenty-Four Elders of Revelation Chapter 4?”: https://eli-kittim.tumblr.com/post/117722359047/who-are-the-twenty-four-elders-of-revelation

The Book of Revelation gives us additional information about the function of these four “creatures” and what they actually do. Apparently, they act as models and influencers of worship (Rev. 4.8-11), while crying a triple invocation of holiness:

Day and night without ceasing they sing,

‘Holy, holy, holy, the Lord God the Almighty,

who was and is and is to come.’ And

whenever the living creatures give glory and

honor and thanks to the one who is seated

on the throne, who lives forever and ever,

the twenty-four elders fall before the one

who is seated on the throne and worship

the one who lives forever and ever; they

cast their crowns before the throne, singing,

‘You are worthy, our Lord and God, to

receive glory and honor and power, for you

created all things, and by your will they

existed and were created.’

A major difference between the Ezekiel account and the one in Revelation 4 is that, in the latter, the living creatures are completely separated and distinct from Christ!

The similarities can be explained by the principle of “expositional constancy.” This principle is based on the notion that an image or idiom is employed in the same way (consistently) throughout the Bible. The fact that the same symbols are used both for the Messiah and the living creatures suggests an intimate connection between them. Thus, the images of messianic typology in the OT seem to be related to those in the NT.

Moreover, notice that the living creatures are explicitly described as “animals” (Gk. ζῷα), not as part of the angelic host. Any inference on our part to associate them with the cherubim or any of the other orders of angels is unbiblical because it cannot be substantiated. In point of fact, no angel has ever been described as an animal (Gk. ζῷον) in the Bible! However, a living being, such as a human being, can also be defined as a creature. In fact, in his work entitled “Politics,” Aristotle says that “man is, by nature, a political animal.” Thus, the NT references to ζῷα or creatures may be allusions to human beings, and especially to the humanity of Jesus.

In the Abrahamic religions, the seraphim are considered to be heavenly beings with either two or three pairs of wings and functioning as throne guardians of God. They’re traditionally known as the burning ones who praise God night and day by means of the Trisagion liturgical hymn (i.e. Thrice Holy): “Holy, holy, holy is the Lord of hosts; the whole earth is full of his glory” (Isaiah 6:3). In Christian angelology, the seraphim are considered among the highest-ranking heavenly beings, comprising pure light, who seem to have direct communication with God. Some think that they’re an exalted order of angels aka cherubim. But despite the cherubim’s proximity to the throne of God, there are notable differences. For example, the cherubim have 4 wings whereas the seraphim have 6 wings, and the latter fly overhead whereas the former do not. Therefore, these disparate Biblical passages do not seem to depict the same phenomena or the same living creatures. For instance, in Isaiah 6.2 these celestial beings are called śə·rā·p̄îm (Seraphim), not beasts. Similarly, the cherubim are called hak·kə·ru·ḇîm (Gen. 3.24), not creatures (cf. Rev. 19.4 where the 4 living creatures are called ζῷα or “animals”). So, even though the 4 living creatures are, in some respects, reminiscent of the seraph in Isa. 6.2-3, they have vastly different depictions.

Are the Four Living Creatures UFOs?

Given that Ezekiel’s account has sometimes been interpreted as a UFO sighting, the animal-like “creatures” that are neither fully human nor decidedly angelic could therefore qualify as “aliens,” according to the Ancient astronaut theorists. This is the pseudoscientific hypothesis that intelligent, extraterrestrial beings from other planets visited the earth in prehistoric times using technologically advanced spaceships. In this instance, they’re basing their theory on various Biblical accounts, such as the one in Genesis 6.2 in which “the sons of God” made contact with human beings who gave birth to giants (called “Nephilim”). These events occurred “when the sons of God went in to the daughters of humans, who bore children to them” (Gen. 6.4).

But the Ancient astronaut theorists are especially interested in the extraordinary account of Ezekiel chapter 1. Ezekiel 1.13 seems to be suggesting some type of spacecraft propulsion, including “something like a wheel within a wheel” (v. 16), not to mention various other references to “wheels” and to *flight* (vv. 19-20), as well as “something like a dome” or a sphere on top of them (v. 22). These descriptions seem to indicate some kind of advanced alien spacecraft. Not only are the images reminiscent of a UFO but also the “creatures” themselves appear to be alien in that they’re neither human nor angelic in nature. So, the question of their origin deserves a legitimate biblical investigation.

However, Ezekiel clearly states that he had a vision (1.1), not a close encounter of the third kind. Ezekiel’s account, therefore, comprises a spiritual experience, not a physical contact with aliens. In fact, Ezekiel heard audible voices from heaven and describes the experience as “the appearance of the likeness of the glory of the Lord (1.28). As for the “creatures” themselves (based on the imagery that is used), they seem to be identified with Christ to such an extent that it is difficult to separate the two. That’s because the living creatures are the royal emissaries of Christ! As you will see, they’re part of the exclusive elite group that governs heaven. And they’re part of the glorious throne room of God. Here’s an example. In the midst of the throne——between the 4 living creatures and the 24 elders (the inner circle of God)——is Christ (5.6). Revelation 5.8-10 reads:

When he [Christ] had taken the scroll, the

four living creatures and the twenty-four

elders fell before the Lamb, each holding a

harp and golden bowls full of incense,

which are the prayers of the saints. They

sing a new song: ‘You are worthy to take the

scroll and to open its seals, for you were

slaughtered and by your blood you

ransomed for God saints from every tribe

and language and people and nation; you

have made them to be a kingdom and

priests serving our God, and they will reign

on earth.’

Notice, the text doesn’t say that by his blood Christ ransomed for God extraterrestrials from the multiverse, from every solar system, planet, and alien life form. On the contrary, it says that those that Christ redeemed “will reign on earth.”

The 4 Living Creatures Have a Surpassing Knowledge of God Which Raises Them to Divine Status

And when Christ took the book, the 4 creatures and the 24 elders prostrated themselves before the Lamb and sang a new song of praise and thanksgiving. It appears as if these holy congregations are presided over by these high-level government officials, as it were, who appear to be the highest-ranking officers or high priests in God’s inner circle. They have direct access to God. They seem to be next in rank to Christ and are, perhaps, empowered to serve as ecclesiastical authorities in his absence. The 4 living creatures are God’s elite group who lead the myriads of angels in prayer (5.14), who preside over the dissemination of prophecy, including the dispensation of judgment, as in the breaking of the 7 seals in Revelation 6.

Notice the chain of command. Christ opens the seals and the 4 living creatures, in turn, make the official proclamations. For example, during the breaking of the first seal, the first living creature summons forth, “as with a voice of thunder, ‘come’ “ (6.1). The second creature also commands “come,” in relation to the 2nd seal, the red horse (6.3). The same thing occurs with the 3rd seal (6.5). Then, in Rev. 6.6, the 4 living creatures pronounce the judgment! And, once again, the 4th seal is announced by the 4th creature (6.7). Based on their function and position, the four living creatures appear to be the highest order of celestial beings in the upper echelons of God’s government.

But it remains enigmatic why they are referred to as creatures. Given that they are the highest form of life, they might appear to us as strange and, perhaps, even terrifying creatures. Let’s not forget what God says in Exod. 33.20:

you cannot see my face; for no one shall

see me and live.

After all, God, the Son of God, and the four living creatures are all extraterrestrials. They are not human. Christ is the only extraterrestrial who becomes human in order to redeem humanity. But he, too, like Superman, “is not from this world” (Jn 18.36). The Matthew Henry Commentary on Revelation 4 says that by mentioning the many eyes of the living creatures, scripture is denoting their “sagacity, vigilance, and circumspection.” In other words, they seem to possess powers that are close to those of God!

As to the identity of the 4 creatures, John Gill’s exposition of the Bible (Rev. 4.6) mistakenly says:

the angels cannot be intended, because

these four living creatures are said to be

redeemed by the blood of Christ, and are

distinguished from angels in (Revelation

5:8-11).

Although the angels are certainly not intended to describe them, nowhere is there any evidence that the four living creatures were redeemed by the blood of Christ! But Gill’s commentary is correct in refuting the notion that the 4 creatures represent the evangelists, because “it makes John to be one of the four creatures which he saw.” John Gill’s commentary also understands the important administrative functions of the 4 living creatures with regard to Judgment. It says:

and one of them is said to give to the seven

angels the vials of wrath to pour out …

(Revelation 15:7).

John Gill’s exposition of the Bible (Rev. 4.6) correctly states that the four living creatures cannot possibly be the tribulation saints:

these four living creatures are distinguished

from the hundred and forty four thousand

on Mount Zion, in ( Revelation 14:1

Revelation 14:3).

Thus, the four living creatures are neither angels nor men.

——-

Conclusion

According to the Genesis 1 creation account, God’s focus is predominantly on the earth, not on other planets, solar systems, or galaxies. What is more, in Colossians 1.16, the author——most likely Paul, since the letter’s authenticity is still staunchly defended by many credible scholars——gives us a short briefing on “all things in heaven and on earth [that] were created, things visible and invisible, whether thrones or dominions or rulers or powers.” The only other classes of beings that are mentioned, other than humans, are the spiritual beings which have been traditionally grouped into three celestial orders (from highest to lowest): the Seraphim/Cherubim & Thrones; the Dominions/Powers; and the Principalities/Archangels & Angels. No other life forms are mentioned.

In fact, Revelation 21 shows that the destruction of the universe is associated with a recreation of “a new heaven and a new earth” (v. 1). But this is all done with humanity in mind (v. 3):

And I heard a loud voice from the throne

saying, ‘See, the home of God is among

mortals. He will dwell with them; they will be

his peoples, and God himself will be with

them.’

The text doesn’t say that all life forms will eventually unite and live on earth. It only mentions mortals (Gk. ἀνθρώπων). In fact, there’s no Biblical evidence that God created any other alien life-forms. Those who claim that Hebrews 1.2 refers to many worlds are in error because the Greek term αἰῶνας refers to ages or cycles of time, not to physical worlds. It’s a mistranslation. Moreover, Christ redeemed humans, not aliens. He himself became man (Jn 1.14; Phil. 2.7) and will one day resurrect *humans* (not extraterrestrials). God's plan of redemption (Eph. 1.7-14) is exclusively for human beings. In fact, the entire universe will be destroyed and remade so that redeemed humans (not aliens) can inhabit it, according to the text.

At any rate, God “is not from this world” (Jn 18.36), and neither are the 4 living creatures. So, although there is no evidence of physical extraterrestrials roaming around on other planets, the invisible kingdom of God is itself of extraterrestrial origin. And since the four living creatures are deeply identified with Christ, and are neither angels nor men, they might be the highest form of life ever created by God, ranking above the angelic host, second only to the Trinity!

——-

The Day After Tomorrow: The Superstorm that Will Set Off a New Ice Age

Just like the 2004 science fiction disaster film “The Day After Tomorrow,” the Bible also predicts the coming of a superstorm at the end of days that will set off catastrophic natural disasters throughout the world and lead to a new ice age!

By Author Eli Kittim

Sea Levels Rise: Floods & Tsunamis

Psalm 93.3-4 (NRSV):

The floods have lifted up, O Lord, the floods

have lifted up their voice; the floods lift up

their roaring. More majestic than the

thunders of mighty waters, more majestic

than the waves of the sea.

Great Noise: Earthquakes, Hurricanes, Whirlwinds, Storms, & Raging Fires

Isaiah 29.6:

you will be visited by the Lord of hosts with

thunder and earthquake and great noise,

with whirlwind and tempest, and the flame

of a devouring fire.

Winds, Storms & Tempests

Isaiah 32.2:

Each will be like a hiding place from the

wind, a covert from the tempest, like

streams of water in a dry place, like the

shade of a great rock in a weary land.

Storms, Hurricanes & Whirling Tempests

Jeremiah 23.19:

Look, the storm of the Lord! Wrath has gone

forth, a whirling tempest; it will burst upon

the head of the wicked.

Thunder, Lightning & Whirlwinds

Zechariah 9.14:

Then the Lord will appear over them, and

his arrow go forth like lightning; the Lord

God will sound the trumpet and march forth

in the whirlwinds of the south.

Great Fear: Lunar & Solar Eclipses, Tsunamis, Sea Levels Rise

Luke 21.25-26:

There will be signs in the sun, the moon,

and the stars, and on the earth distress

among nations confused by the roaring of

the sea and the waves. People will faint

from fear and foreboding of what is coming

upon the world, for the powers of the

heavens will be shaken.

One Third of the Earth Burned Up, Impact Events, Megatsunamis, Mountains Falling Into the Sea, One Third of the Sea Life Dead, Poisoned Waters & Nuclear Winter

Revelation 8.7-12:

The first angel blew his trumpet, and there

came hail and fire, mixed with blood, and

they were hurled to the earth; and a third of

the earth was burned up, and a third of the

trees were burned up, and all green grass

was burned up. The second angel blew his

trumpet, and something like a great

mountain, burning with fire, was thrown into

the sea. A third of the sea became blood, a

third of the living creatures in the sea died,

and a third of the ships were destroyed. The

third angel blew his trumpet, and a great

star fell from heaven, blazing like a torch,

and it fell on a third of the rivers and on the

springs of water. The name of the star is

Wormwood. A third of the waters became

wormwood, and many died from the water,

because it was made bitter. The fourth

angel blew his trumpet, and a third of the

sun was struck, and a third of the moon,

and a third of the stars, so that a third of

their light was darkened; a third of the day

was kept from shining, and likewise the

night.

Impact Events: Meteors, Asteroids & Comets Hitting the Earth

Revelation 9.1:

And the fifth angel blew his trumpet, and I

saw a star that had fallen from heaven

to earth, and he was given the key

to the shaft of the bottomless pit.

One Third of Mankind Killed By War & Air pollution

Revelation 9.18:

By these three plagues a third of humankind

was killed, by the fire and smoke and sulfur

coming out of their mouths.

Thunder & Lightning, Huge Earthquakes, Disappearing Islands & Mountains due to Sea Levels Rising & Catastrophic Storms

Revelation 16.18-20:

And there came flashes of lightning,

rumblings, peals of thunder, and a violent

earthquake, such as had not occurred since

people were upon the earth, so violent was

that earthquake. The great city was split

into three parts, and the cities of the

nations fell. God remembered great Babylon

and gave her the wine-cup of the fury of his

wrath. And every island fled away, and no

mountains were to be found.

Severe Weather: Monsoons, Thunderstorms, Tornadoes & Hailstorms

Revelation 16.21:

and huge hailstones, each weighing about a

hundred pounds, dropped from heaven on

people, until they cursed God for the plague

of the hail, so fearful was that plague.

Matthew 24.21:

For then there will be a great tribulation, such

as has not occurred since the beginning of the

world until now, nor ever will again.

For more details on the prophetic markers concerning the end of days, see my essay “Are We Living in the Last Days?”: https://eli-kittim.tumblr.com/post/650991528017281025/are-we-living-in-the-last-days

Eli of Kittim

Are We Living in the Last Days?

By Author Eli Kittim Mt 24.6-14 (NRSV): And you will hear of wars and rumors of wars; see that you are not alarmed; for this

Know Thyself

By Author Eli Kittim

“Through the study of books one seeks God;

by meditation one finds him.”

(Padre Pio)

According to the Greek writer and geographer, Pausanias, the ancient Greek aphorism “Know Thyself” (γνῶθι σεαυτόν) was a maxim inscribed on the Temple of Apollo at Delphi. Throughout the centuries, people have studied the physical and metaphysical world through science and philosophy. But how can a person study himself or herself? By turning inward! In the Phaedo, one of Plato’s famous dialogues, Socrates explains that the senses are incapable of informing us about the true nature of reality, and thus are not to be trusted. One needs to look beyond the senses in order to find meaning and clarity. Socrates says to Simmias:

“Did you ever reach them [truths] with any

bodily sense? – and I speak not of these

alone, but of absolute greatness, and

health, and strength, and, in short, of the

reality or true nature of everything. Is the

truth of them ever perceived through the

bodily organs? Or rather, is not the nearest

approach to the knowledge of their several

natures made by him who so orders his

intellectual vision as to have the most exact

conception of the essence of each thing he

considers?”

Later in the Phaedo, Socrates begins to expound on what we today would call “silent meditation.” Remember, this is not India. This is 5th to 4th century BCE Greece! Gautama Buddha happens to be Plato’s contemporary. Socrates begins to describe the practice of meditation as follows:

“He who has got rid, as far as he can, of

eyes and ears and, so to speak, of the

whole body, these being in his opinion

distracting elements when they associate

with the soul hinder her from acquiring truth

and knowledge – who, if not he, is likely to

attain to the knowledge of true being?”

Over 500 years later, the Neoplatonist philosopher Plotinus would also base his entire philosophy on meditative silence. So, given that Socrates (Plato’s teacher, who coined the phrase “Know Thyself”) lived in the 5th century BCE, it is difficult to say if this contemplative practice originated in the East or the West. Let’s not forget that Plato is deeply indebted to an older mystical philosopher named Pythagoras (6th century BCE), who was probably one of the first great and well-known mystics in the west!

Plotinus follows Socrates’ advice regarding the path to self-knowledge and the philosophy of Being. He insists that the soul must discard all form, image, and thought. It is through concentration, away from the sense world, that we reach the “One” (i.e. God). And the self discovers this when it is annihilated. In other words, a person loses his/her identity during the supreme mystical union with the “One.” it’s as if the person has been “ ‘seized’ by an elemental force and swept into liberation by mystical frenzy” (Thomas Merton). Plotinus says:

“shut your eyes . . . and wake

another way of seeing, which everyone has

but few use.”

The “awakening” in the presence of the “good” is a result that is accomplished by removing multiplicity through the process of negation (which later became known as apophatic theology). That is to say, there is a detachment from the many to the One. The disciple must proceed by way of negation. Rather than positing what the One is, the practitioner gets rid of all knowledge and begins by contemplating what the One is not. This practice has been alternatively called “silence” or “stillness.” It is a way of putting away all otherness and reaching an ineffable union with the One (or God). In the mysticism of Plotinus, the student must not chase after the good but wait quietly til it appears.

Unfortunately, since the time of the Renaissance and the Age of Reason, the contemplative aspect of the Platonic tradition is no longer discussed in modern academia. Plato is often taught as a cold, rational thinker whose insights are solely derived from discursive thought. However, Plotinus thought that he was simply clarifying Plato’s teachings. According to Wikipedia:

“Plotinus was not claiming to innovate with

the Enneads [his book], but to clarify

aspects of the works of Plato that he

considered misrepresented or

misunderstood. Plotinus

does not claim to be an innovator, but

rather a communicator of a tradition.

Plotinus referred to tradition as a way to

interpret Plato's intentions. Because the

teachings of Plato were for members of the

academy rather than the general public, it

was easy for outsiders to misunderstand

Plato's meaning.”

Plotinus lived in Alexandria, Egypt in the 3rd century CE. Over 150 years earlier, another Platonic philosopher, Philo of Alexandria, had done the same:

“Philo of Alexandria had written on some

form of ‘spiritual exercises’ involving

attention (prosoche) and concentration and

by the 3rd century Plotinus had developed

meditative techniques.”

(Wikipedia)

According to Plotinus, the One is not simply an intellectual concept but rather something that can actually be experienced; an existential experience where one goes far beyond all multiplicity. The individual eventually reaches a state of tabula rasa, a blank state where everything is deleted, so to speak, while the person merges with the One. The self is dissolved, completely absorbed into the One. But in order to reach this stage, “the Proficient’s will is set always and only inward” (Enneads I.4.11). This process eventually leads to ecstasy:

“The essentially devotional nature of

Plotinus' philosophy may be further

illustrated by his concept of attaining

ecstatic union with the One (henosis).

Porphyry relates that Plotinus attained such

a union four times during the years he knew

him. This may be related to enlightenment,

liberation, and other concepts of mystical

union common to many Eastern and

Western traditions.”

(Wiki)

In Greek, Henosis is the term for mystical "union.” In Platonism, and particularly in Neoplatonism, the aim of henosis is union with the ground of being or absolute reality: the source or the One (τὸ Ἕν):

“Henosis for Plotinus was defined in his

works as a reversing of the ontological

process of consciousness via meditation

. . . toward no thought . . . and no

division (dyad) within the individual (being).

Plotinus words his teachings to reconcile

not only Plato with Aristotle but also various

World religions that he had personal

contact with during his various travels.”

(Wiki)

Plotinus, and his successor Proclus, influenced many great philosophers and theologians, such as Kant, Hegel, Kierkegaard, Husserl, Heidegger, Barth, Bultmann, and others. Plotinus’ meditation is not unlike that described in Ps. 62.5, which reads: “For God alone my soul waits in silence.” According to Wikipedia, “Plotinus' final words were: ‘Try to raise the divine in yourselves to the divine in the all.’ “ Meditation, therefore, is the method by which we not only grasp the essence of true Being, in the Platonic sense, but also how we find the sure way of salvation, in the Biblical sense:

“Be still, and know that I am God!”

(Psalm 46.10)

Calvin’s Refutations from His Own Published Work: A Critical Review by Author Eli Kittim

Excerpted from John Calvin’s Institutes of the Christian religion, Book 3, ch 23.

——-

Calvin’s god Chooses Whatever He Pleases and We Have No Right to Question his Choices

In Institutes, Book 3, ch 23, Calvin says that god chooses whatever he pleases, and we have no right to question his choices. But isn’t that tantamount to saying that “he does as he pleases” as opposed to acting according to the principles of truth and wisdom? Calvin writes:

Therefore, when it is asked why the Lord did

so, we must answer, Because he pleased.

But if you proceed farther to ask why he

pleased, you ask for something greater and

more sublime than the will of God, and

nothing such can be found. … This, I say,

will be sufficient to restrain any one who

would reverently contemplate the secret

things of God.

Yet isn’t that precisely what Calvin is doing? Inquiring into the “the secret things of God”? Calvin’s argument can be summarized as follows: men are, by nature, wicked, so if god has predestined some to eternal hellfire, why do they complain? They deserve it. He exclaims:

Accordingly, when we are accosted in such

terms as these, Why did God from the first

predestine some to death, when, as they

were not yet in existence, they could not

have merited sentence of death? let us by

way of reply ask in our turn, What do you

imagine that God owes to man, if he is

pleased to estimate him by his own nature?

As we are all vitiated by sin, we cannot but

be hateful to God, and that not from

tyrannical cruelty, but the strictest justice.

But if all whom the Lord predestines to

death are naturally liable to sentence of

death, of what injustice, pray, do they

complain?

He continues his thought that even though god condemned them to hellfire long before they were even born, or had done anything to warrant such an outcome, they nevertheless deserve it and should not complain. Calvin says:

Should all the sons of Adam come to

dispute and contend with their Creator,

because by his eternal providence they

were before their birth doomed to perpetual

destruction, when God comes to reckon

with them, what will they be able to mutter

against this defense? If all are taken from a

corrupt mass, it is not strange that all are

subject to condemnation. Let them not,

therefore, charge God with injustice, if by

his eternal judgment they are doomed to a

death to which they themselves feel that

whether they will or not they are drawn

spontaneously by their own nature.

But if this decree was foreordained by an absolutely sovereign god even before people were born and prior to having committed any transgressions, why are they held accountable for their sins? It appears to be a contradiction. Curiously enough, John Calvin,

admit[s] that by the will of God all the sons

of Adam fell into that state of wretchedness

in which they are now involved; and this is

just what I said at the first, that we must

always return to the mere pleasure of the

divine will, the cause of which is hidden in

himself.

So he admits that we all sinned “by the will of God” and that god does as he pleases, yet he concludes: who are we to question god’s decisions? But is this a proper explanation of predestination that fully justifies god’s justice, or is it rather an incoherent and unsatisfactory answer? Calvin asserts:

They again object, Were not men

predestinated by the ordination of God to

that corruption which is now held forth as

the cause of condemnation? If so, when

they perish in their corruptions they do

nothing else than suffer punishment for that

calamity, into which, by the predestination

of God, Adam fell, and dragged all his

posterity headlong with him. Is not he,

therefore, unjust in thus cruelly mocking his

creatures? … For what more

seems to be said here than just that the

power of God is such as cannot be

hindered, so that he can do whatsoever he

pleases?

Calvin says “How could he who is the Judge of the world commit any unrighteousness?” But Calvin doesn’t explain how that is so except by way of assumptions, which are based on the idea that god acts as he pleases and does as he wills. But that’s circular reasoning. It’s tantamount to saying that something is true because I assume that it is, without any proof or justification that it is true. It’s a fallacious argument. Calvin argues thusly:

It is a monstrous infatuation in men to seek

to subject that which has no bounds to the

little measure of their reason. Paul gives the

name of elect to the angels who maintained

their integrity. If their steadfastness was

owing to the good pleasure of God, the

revolt of the others proves that they were

abandoned. Of this no other cause can be

adduced than reprobation, which is hidden

in the secret counsel of God.

Reprobation, according to Calvin, is based on the notion “that not all people have been chosen but that some have not been chosen or have been passed by in God's eternal election.” But if no one deserves the merits of salvation, and if no one obeys the will of god except by god’s grace, then how is god’s election justified? Calvin’s response that it’s justified because god is just is not an explanation: it is a tautological redundancy. Calvin’s reply would be: god decided not to save everybody, and who are we to criticize him? Unfortunately, that’s not an adequate or satisfactory answer.

God’s decision to save some people is called election, and his decision not to save other people is called preterition. According to Calvinism, god chooses to bypass sinners by not granting them belief, which is equivalent, in a certain sense, to creating unbelief (by omission) in them. In other words, god chooses to save some, but not others. And it pleases him to do so.

Is this truly the love of Christ that is freely offered to all? By contrast, according to Scripture, God wishes to save everyone without exception (1 Timothy 2:4; 2 Peter 3:9; Ezekiel 18:23; Matthew 23:37). When Matthew 22.14 says, “For many are called, but few are chosen,” it clearly shows that those that are not chosen are still “called.” It doesn’t mean that god did not choose them for salvation. It means they themselves chose to decline the offer of their own accord. How can one logically argue that god wants all people to be saved but only chooses to save some of them? It is a contradiction in terms. And then to attribute this injustice and inequality to what appears to be an “arrogant” god who does as he pleases is dodging the issue.

Biblical Predestination Doesn’t Imply god’s Sovereignty But God’s Foreknowledge

Calvinists employ Ephesians 1.4-5 to prove that god clearly elected to save some (and not to save others) before the foundation of the world. But that is a misinterpretation. The entire Bible rests on God’s foreknowledge, his ability to see into the future: “declaring the end from the beginning and from ancient times things not yet done” (Isa. 46.10; cf. Jn 16.13; Rom. 1.2; Acts 2.22-23; 10.40-41). In other words, God did not choose to save some and not to save others. Rather, through his *foreknowledge* he already knew (or foreknew) who would accept and who would decline his offer. That’s why Rom. 8.29 (BLB) says, “because those whom He foreknew, He also predestined.” This explanation is consistent with God’s sovereignty and man’s free will, as well as with the justice and righteousness of God! It is reprehensible to suggest that god would choose by himself who would be eternally saved and who would be eternally condemned. That would not be a fair, just, and loving god. However, Calvin rejects prescience on account “that all events take place by his [god’s] sovereign appointment”:

If God merely foresaw human events, and

did not also arrange and dispose of them at

his pleasure, there might be room for

agitating the question, how far his

foreknowledge amounts to necessity; but

since he foresees the things which are to

happen, simply because he has decreed

that they are so to happen, it is vain to

debate about prescience, while it is clear

that all events take place by his sovereign

appointment.

So, Calvin ultimately places all responsibility and accountability on god, who has foreordained all events “by his sovereign appointment.” But if hell was prepared for the devil and his angels (Mt 25.41), and if god is held accountable for orchestrating everything, then the devil cannot be held morally responsible for all his crimes against humanity. Therefore, according to Calvinism, it would logically follow that god is ultimately responsible for evil, which would implicate himself to be ipso facto evil! There’s no way to extricate god from that logical conclusion.

god Created Evil at his Own Pleasure

In Calvin’s view, god decreed that Adam should sin. In other words, god decrees all sin, which is a sign of his omnipotence and will. How revolting! He writes:

They deny that it is ever said in distinct

terms, God decreed that Adam should

perish by his revolt. As if the same God, who

is declared in Scripture to do whatsoever he

pleases, could have made the noblest of his

creatures without any special purpose.

They say that, in accordance with free-will,

he was to be the architect of his own

fortune, that God had decreed nothing but

to treat him according to his desert. If this

frigid fiction is received, where will be the

omnipotence of God, by which, according to

his secret counsel on which every thing

depends, he rules over all?

Invariably, Calvin places the blame indirectly on god. Calvin holds to an uncompromising hard determinism position, without the slightest possibility of free will, by claiming that even god’s foreknowledge is “ordained by his decree”:

it is impossible to deny that God foreknew

what the end of man was to be before he

made him, and foreknew, because he had

so ordained by his decree.

If this isn’t an evil doctrine I don’t know what is. Calvin unabashedly declares that god created evil in the world “at his own pleasure.” He writes:

God not only foresaw the fall of the first

man, and in him the ruin of his posterity; but

also at his own pleasure arranged it.

Wasn’t Satan the one who supposedly arranged it? Hmm, now I’m not so sure … If god is the author of evil, why would he involve Satan in this script? In fact, Calvin insists that the wicked perish not because of god’s permission but because of his will. He says that “their perdition depends on the predestination of God … The first man fell because the Lord deemed it meet that he should: why he deemed it meet, we know not.” What a dreadful thing to say. It’s as if Calvin was under the inspiration of Satan, teaching “doctrines of demons” (1 Tim. 4.1 NKJV). Calvin writes:

Here they recur to the distinction between

will and permission, the object being to

prove that the wicked perish only by the

permission, but not by the will of God. But

why do we say that he permits, but just

because he wills? Nor, indeed, is there any

probability in the thing itself--viz. that man

brought death upon himself merely by the

permission, and not by the ordination of

God; as if God had not determined what he

wished the condition of the chief of his

creatures to be. I will not hesitate, therefore,

simply to confess with Augustine that the

will of God is necessity, and that every thing

is necessary which he has willed.

Calvin attempts to show that there’s no contradiction in his statement but, instead of providing logical proof, he once again resorts to circular reasoning, namely, that the accountability rests with an authoritarian god who does as he pleases:

There is nothing inconsistent with this when

we say, that God, according to the good

pleasure of his will, without any regard to

merit, elects those whom he chooses for

sons, while he rejects and reprobates

others.

Instead of admitting that this is his own wicked view of god, which certainly deserves rebuke and criticism, he suggests that this is the way god really is. In other words, he indirectly blames god by way of compliments. By insisting on god’s Sovereignty and omnipotence, he sets god up to take the blame for everything. Yet in his evasive and largely indefensible argument, he ends up justifying the seemingly “capricious” acts of god by saying that god is still just:

Wherefore, it is false and most wicked to

charge God with dispensing justice

unequally, because in this predestination he

does not observe the same course towards

all. … he is free from every accusation; just

as it belongs to the creditor to forgive the

debt to one, and exact it of another.

Conclusion

Just because God set the universe in motion doesn’t mean that every detail therein is held ipso facto to be caused by him. God could still be sovereign and yet simultaneously permit the existence of evil and free will. This is not a philosophical contradiction (see Compatibilism aka Soft determinism).

The Calvinist god is not fair. He does as he pleases. He creates evil and chooses who will be saved and who will be lost. He is neither trustworthy nor does he equally offer unconditional love to all! In fact, this view is more in line with the capricious gods of Greek mythology than with the immutable God of the Bible.

Calvin’s deity is surprisingly similar to the god of the Gnostics, who was responsible for all instances of falsehood and evil in the world! This is the dark side of a pagan god who doesn’t seem to act according to the principles of truth and wisdom but according to personal whims. With this god, you could end up in hell in a heartbeat, through no fault of your own. Therefore, Calvin’s god is more like Satan!

This is certainly NOT the loving, trustworthy, and righteous God of the Bible in whom “There is no evil” whatsoever (Ps 92.15 NLT; Jas. 1.13). Calvin’s god is not “the God of truth” (Isa. 65.16; cf. Jn 17.17), who “never lies” (Tit. 1.1-2), and who is all-good, sans evil (cf. Ps 106.1; 135.3; Nah. 1.7; Mk 10.18). Calvin’s theology does not square well with the NT notion “that God is light and in him there is no darkness at all” (1 Jn 1.5 NRSV)!

Thus, Calvin’s argument is not only fallacious, unsound, and unbiblical, but also completely disingenuous. For if “life and death are fixed by an eternal and immutable decree of God,” including the prearrangement of sin “at his own pleasure,” as Calvin asserts, then “to charge God with dispensing justice unequally” is certainly a valid criticism! Calvin harshly accused his critics of promulgating blasphemies, but little did he realize the greater blasphemies and abominations that he himself was uttering! A case in point is that he makes God the author of sin!

——-

What is Predestination?

By Bible Researcher, Eli Kittim

——-

Introduction

Predestination is the doctrine that all events in the universe have been willed by God (i.e. fatalism). It is a form of theological determinism, which presupposes that all history is pre-ordained or predestined to occur. It is based on the absolute sovereignty of God (aka omnipotence). However, there seems to be a paradox in which God’s will appears to be incompatible with human free-will.

The concept of predestination is found only several times in the Bible. It is, however, a very popular doctrine as it is commonly held by many different churches and denominations. But it’s also the seven-headed dragon of soteriology because of its forbidding controversy, which arises when we ask the question, “on what basis does God make his choice?” Not to mention, how do you tell people God loves them and that Jesus died for you?

If we study both the Old and New Testaments, especially in the original Biblical languages, we will come to realize that predestination doesn’t seem to be based on God’s sovereignty but rather on his “foreknowledge.” This is the *Prescience* view of Predestination, namely, that the decision of salvation and/or condemnation is ultimately based on an individual’s free choice!

——-

Free Will

John MacArthur argues that the salvation “offer is always unlimited, otherwise why would we be told to go into all the world and preach the gospel to every creature?” He went on to say, “The offer is always unlimited or man couldn’t be condemned for rejecting it.”

Let’s take a look at the Old Testament. Isaiah 65.12 (ESV) employs the Hebrew term וּמָנִ֨יתִי (ū·mā·nî·ṯî) to mean “I will destine,” which is derived from the word מָנָה (manah) and means to “appoint” or “reckon.” But on what basis does God make his choice of predestination to damnation (aka the doctrine of reprobation)? God says:

I will destine [or predestine] you to the

sword, and all of you shall bow down to the

slaughter, because, when I called, you did

not answer; when I spoke, you did not listen,

but you did what was evil in my eyes and

chose what I did not delight in.

It’s important to note that those who are condemned to damnation are predestined to go there because when God called them, they didn’t respond to his call. When God tried to enlighten them, they “did not listen,“ but instead “did what was evil” in his sight. In fact, they did what God disapproved of! That’s a far cry from claiming, as the Calvinists do, that God willed it all along. Notice that God’s predestination for the reprobates is not based on his will for them not to be saved, but rather because they themselves had sinned. This is an explicit textual reference which indicates that it was something God “did not delight in.” So, it’s not as if God predestined reprobates to hell based on his sovereign will, as Calvinism would have us believe, but rather because they themselves chose to “forsake the LORD” (Isa. 65.11).

The New Testament offers a similar explanation of God’s official verdict pertaining to the doctrine of reprobation, namely, that condemnation depends on human will, not on God’s will. John 3.16 (NIV) reads:

For God so loved the world that he gave his

one and only Son, that whoever believes in

him shall not perish but have eternal life.

Notice, it doesn’t say that only a limited few can believe and be saved by Jesus. Rather, it says “whoever believes in him [ἵνα πᾶς ὁ πιστεύων εἰς αὐτὸν] shall not perish but have eternal life.” That is, anyone who believes in Jesus will not be condemned but will be saved, and will therefore be reckoned as one of the elect. Verse 17 says:

For God did not send his Son into the world

to condemn the world, but to save the world

through him.

Once again, there’s a clear distinction between the individual and the world as a whole, as well as a contrast between condemning and saving the world, and we are told that the Son was sent to save the entire world. The next verse (v. 18) explains that condemnation itself ultimately lies not with God but with our own personal choices and decisions. “Whoever does not believe stands condemned already” (i.e. is predestined to condemnation):

Whoever believes in him is not condemned,

but whoever does not believe stands

condemned already because they have not

believed in the name of God’s one and only

Son.

Verse 19 puts this dilemma in its proper perspective and gives us the judicial verdict, as it were, that we are ultimately responsible for our actions:

This is the verdict: Light has come into the

world, but people loved darkness instead of

light because their deeds were evil.

This conclusion can be easily illustrated. In Rev. 3.20 (KJV), does Christ imply that man’s free will doesn’t really matter at all? Does he say?:

Behold, I stand at the door. Don’t worry, I

won’t bother knocking on the door. Your

your response is unnecessary. You don’t

even have to open the door. I will break it

down and force my way inside.

Is that what he says? No. He says:

Behold, I stand at the door, and knock: if

any man hear my voice, and open the door,

I will come in to him, and will sup with him,

and he with me.

God respects our free will. Notice the condition that is set before us: someone has to open the door, which is equivalent to granting Christ permission to come in and become a part of them. But the choice ultimately rests with us, not with God. Unless we say yes, nothing happens. We must answer the call (cf. Isa. 65.12) and respond in the affirmative, just as Mary did in the gospel of Luke (1.38 NASB):

‘may it be done to me according to your

word.’

Similarly, Mt. 22.14 clearly shows that those that are not chosen are nevertheless “called”:

‘For many are called, but few are chosen.’

What is more, according to the Biblical text, anyone can become a member of God’s family. Just because God already “foreknows” who will accept and who will reject his invitation doesn’t mean that people are held unaccountable. For Christ doesn’t only take away the sin of the elect, but of the entire world (Jn 1.29 NKJV):

Behold! The Lamb of God who takes away

the sin of the world!

First John 2.2 reads:

And He Himself is the propitiation for our

sins, and not for ours only but also for the

whole world.

In a similar fashion, Rev 22.17 (KJ) says:

Come. And let him that is athirst come. And

whosoever will, let him take the water of life

freely [δωρεάν].

That doesn’t sound to me like a “predestined” election in which only a select few will receive the water of life, but rather a proclamation that salvation is “freely” (δωρεάν) offered to anyone who desires it. Moreover, in 2 Pet. 3.9 (ESV), we are told that “The Lord” doesn’t want to condemn anyone at all:

[he’s] not wishing that any should perish,

but that all should reach repentance.

Is this biblical reference compatible with Calvin’s views? Definitely not! Calvin suggests that God is the author of sin and the only one who ultimately decides on who will repent and who will perish.

Unlimited Atonement

There seems to be a comparison and contrast between the “vessels of wrath prepared for destruction” (in Rom. 9.22), and the “vessels of mercy, which he has prepared beforehand for glory” (v. 23). But we cannot jump to any conclusions because the text doesn’t explicitly say that both classes of people are predestined either to election or condemnation by the sovereign will of God. Furthermore, the terms that are used, here, are not the same as the ones used for predestination elsewhere in the Bible. For example, the Greek term often used for “predestination” is προορίζω or proorizó (cf. Acts 4.28; Rom. 1.4; 8.29; Eph. 1.5, 11). However, the Greek word used in Rom. 9.22 is καταρτίζω (katartizó), which means to complete or prepare (not predestine). It could simply refer to the remainder of the population that will miss out on salvation. it doesn’t necessarily follow that these are predestined (κατηρτισμένα) to destruction.

The next verse employs the term προητοίμασεν (prepared) to refer to the elect, or the “vessels of mercy, which he has prepared beforehand for glory.” But caution is advised. The term used is proētoimasen (prepared), not proorizó (predestined). This expression can refer to that portion of the population that God adopted into his family and nourished into maturity. The text is unclear as to whether the term “prepared” suggests that God coerced them into “election” by overriding their free will, while they were kicking and screaming. Besides, their personal choice may have been *foreknown* and acknowledged from the foundation of the world. It still doesn’t prove predestination, as defined by Augustine and Calvin.

If, in fact, God predestined some to salvation and some to perdition, so that Jesus didn’t die for all people but only for a limited few, then it wouldn’t make any sense for the New Testament to say that Christ “gave himself a ransom for all.” Nor would God contradict himself by saying that “he desires everyone to be saved.” First Timothy 2.3-6 (NRSV) reads:

This is right and is acceptable in the sight of

God our Savior, who desires everyone to be

saved and to come to the knowledge of the

truth. For there is one God; there is also one

mediator between God and humankind,

Christ Jesus, himself human, who gave

himself a ransom for all [not for some].

Notice that Christ’s atonement potentially covers even sinners who are not yet part of the “elect.” In the following verse, observe what the text says. There were apostates who denied “the Lord who bought them.” This means that Christ’s atonement is not “limited”; it covers them, as well. Second Peter 2.1 (NKJV) reads:

But there were also false prophets among

the people, even as there will be false

teachers among you, who will secretly bring

in destructive heresies, even denying the

Lord who bought them, and bring on

themselves swift destruction.

Prescience (Foreknowledge)

The Greek term that is typically used for predestination is also used in Rom. 1.4 (ESV), namely, the term ὁρισθέντος (from ὁρίζω), which carries the meaning of “determining beforehand,” “appointing,” or “designating.” However, notice that, here, this term is translated as “declared”:

and was declared to be the Son of God in

power according to the Spirit of holiness by

his resurrection from the dead, Jesus Christ

our Lord.

But was Jesus Christ predestined to be the Son of God? No. He already was the Son of God. Nevertheless, what he would perform in the future was “declared” beforehand, or announced in advance. This verse, then, demonstrates that the word “foreknown” would be a more accurate term than “predestined”!

Similarly, Rom. 8.29 (ESV) tells us that those he “foreknew” (προέγνω), the same God προώρισεν (from προορίζω), that is, foreordained, predetermined, or pre-appointed beforehand. And Rom. 8.30 goes on to say that those he προώρισεν (predetermined) were the same that God also called, justified, and glorified. Verse 29 says:

For those whom he foreknew he also

predestined to be conformed to the image

of his Son.

Notice that God’s *foreknowledge* temporally precedes predestination. If God actually chose to save some and not to save others before the foundation of the world, then his foreknowledge would be irrelevant. But since it is on this basis that God predestines, it doesn’t sound as if predestination is chosen on the basis of God’s sovereign will.

Conclusion

Acts 4.28 does say that God’s will προώρισεν (predetermined beforehand) what will happen. But it doesn’t necessarily follow that everything that has occurred in human history is based on the will of God (i.e. fatalism). And we don’t know to what extent God influences reality. So, we cannot jump to any conclusions that God is behind everything that happens. Why? Because with absolute responsibility comes absolute blame. Is God responsible for murder, or rape, or genocide? I think not! So, we are on safer ground if we acknowledge that God “foreknew” what would happen and declared it beforehand (cf. Isa. 46.10). This notion would be far more consistent with the Bible than placing the full blame for everything that has ever occurred in the world on God. This seems to be the Achilles' heel of Calvinism.

Ephesians 1.5 is another controversial verse. The Greek term used is προορίσας (from προορίζω), meaning “foreordain,” “predetermine,” or “pre-approve beforehand.” The verse reads:

he predestined us for adoption to himself as

sons through Jesus Christ, according to the

purpose of his will.

But what exactly does the term “will” mean, here? Does it refer to God’s choice to save only a limited few and no one else, or to his overall plan of salvation that includes all people? It seems as if God saved those who answered his invitation, as it were, which would explain why he has “foreknown” them and predestined them for glory. I think that the latter explanation seems far more compatible with the Bible by a preponderance of the evidence.

Finally, let’s look at Ephesians 1.11. The Greek term that is used is προορισθέντες (from proorizó), meaning to “predetermine” or “foreordain beforehand.” The verse says that we have been predestined according to his purpose. Granted, it does say that all things work according to God’s will. However, to be fair, we don’t know exactly how that works, and so we can’t offer premature assumptions and presuppositions, especially when they contradict other passages in the Bible.

It would be utterly foolish to suppose that the God of the universe does not affect, influence, or sustain his creation. The fact that he created the universe obviously implies that he had a purpose for it. So, I’m not discounting the notion that all things are, in a certain sense, guided by his ultimate purpose. However, I take issue with those thinkers who take it to the extreme and portray the deity as an authoritarian and capricious God who bypasses the principles of truth and wisdom and intervenes by forcibly coercing man's free will. That type of God is inconsistent with the infinitely wise, holy, true, and good God of the Bible. That is precisely why “Arminius taught that Calvinist predestination and unconditional election made God the author of evil” (Wiki)!

——-