Unleavened Faith

Introduction

Remember the former things of old: for I am God, and there is none else; I am God, and there is none like me, Declaring the end from the beginning, and from ancient times the things that are not yet done, saying, My counsel shall stand, and I will do all my pleasure: Calling a ravenous bird from the east, the man that executeth my counsel from a far country: yea, I have spoken it, I will also bring it to pass; I have purposed it, I will also do it.

Isaiah 46:9-11

The frame of mind brought to the study of the Bible is dependent on two main theological questions whose answers determine the main bias held or the framework through which its understanding is confined and filtered through. To approach the Bible with a more meaningful understanding and be fully outfitted as a soldier in the battle for the truth of the Scriptures it is essential to understand and answer these questions correctly.

The questions concern individual salvation and God’s foreknowledge: what does he know, when did he know it, and how does he know it? At this point, the thought that God is omniscient, knows everything, is blinding some to the truth and it is this that created the differing theologies that divide Christianity. God certainly knows all there is to know; the debates and divisions are over that which is not there to be known. How does he know what has not happened as yet, or does he? What if God does not want to know all from start to finish but wants some things to play out like a man’s thoughts and desires? Can God give things a life of their own where he has to wait to see what that life will do? Would it be limiting God to say he can or cannot do so according to his own choice?

Psalms 78:41 Yea, they turned back and tempted God, and limited the Holy One of Israel.

It is not a question of what God can or cannot do; he can do whatever he wants, however he wants, but what has God revealed concerning what he has and how he has determined things to be.

Amos 3:7 Surely the Lord GOD will do nothing, but he revealeth his secret unto his servants the prophets.

All is revealed within God’s word, nevertheless, without an open mind, the Bible remains sealed.

There are two foundational questions that must be answered correctly to understand and interpret the Scriptures correctly.

• Is individual salvation predestinated or do men have free will?
• Is history closed― completed, fixed, unchanging, or is it open running in real time?

These two questions, wittingly or unwittingly, are responsible for theological divisions within Christianity; they largely determine what you believe. Over the next few pages, an attempt will be made to explain such in a meaningful and understandable manner.

Points To Ponder

But strong meat belongeth to them that are of full age, even those who by reason of use have their senses exercised to discern both good and evil.

―Hebrews 5:14 

How the questions under consideration are answered determines whether the Bible is open and understood correctly. Again, those questions are:

• Is individual salvation predestinated or do men have free will?
• Is history closed―completed, fixed, unchanging, or is it open running in real time?

These two questions divide Christianity into four main theologies which must be discernable and understood to rightly divide the word of truth. These are foundational theologies and although there are many mix–and–match teachings, once these four are understood the rest will be easy to figure out. The four are:

The bare essence of these theologies is all that is of interest; only the essential parts needed to compare them to each other and equate them to the Scriptures.

Many are familiar with these theologies, however, Neo-Arminianism, new-Arminianism, may be unfamiliar. It is a designation made here to identify what many today refer to as being Arminian to confirm they are not Calvinistic in the doctrine of predestination, not realizing Arminianism was not against Calvinism’s predestination but only a slight modification of it. A name was needed to distinguish those that were truly against predestination and since they call themselves, naively, Arminian neo-Arminianism seemed appropriate.

Arminianism modified Calvinism by incorporating a test prior to election. Each individual was given prevenient faith, a little faith preceding election to see which way an individual leaned: toward or away from God. This test was given to all hence salvation open to all in opposition to Calvinism’s limited atonement. If you leaned toward God, you were elected and predestinated to be saved. Predestination and man’s depravity still prevailed.

Predestination theologies strongly premise their view on the supposition that if all is not predetermined by God then he would not be sovereign. It would be hard to find a more unreasoned, unbiblical, assertion. God is the Creator and sustainer of all things; how can he not be sovereign in whatever he does or chooses to do? Regardless of what he elects to do, it would be his sovereign will. He would be just as sovereign, if after creation, he sat back in an easy chair to watch what happened (Neo-Arminainism). To insist on anything else would be to limit God.

Psalms 78:41 Yea, they turned back and tempted God, and limited the Holy One of Israel.

This is a major error in the premise of predestination; God does not like to be described as limited.

Even those advocating predestination admit that their doctrine contradicts many passages of Scripture.

Any time a teaching conflicts with the obvious meaning of a passage of Scripture it is a clear sign that some part of it is in error. The Bible does not contradict itself. The clear and obvious meaning of the following verses dismisses the doctrine of Calvinism’s limited atonement.

John 3:14-17 And as Moses lifted up the serpent in the wilderness, even so must the Son of man be lifted up: ¹⁵That whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have eternal life. ¹⁶For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life. ¹⁷For God sent not his Son into the world to condemn the world; but that the world through him might be saved.

Romans 10:13 For whosoever shall call upon the name of the Lord shall be saved.

1 John 2:2 And he is the propitiation for our sins: and not for ours only, but also for the sins of the whole world.

Acts 17:30 And the times of this ignorance God winked at; but now commandeth all men every where to repent:

1 Timothy 4:10 For therefore we both labour and suffer reproach, because we trust in the living God, who is the Saviour of all men, specially of those that believe.

These verses are clear and obvious in their meaning. The atonement was made for all men everywhere, all humanity, not limited, and those that believe get the benefit. Nonetheless, with these and many other such examples, the Reformed doctrine admits the contradictions with their teaching but continues holding to limited atonement.

There are attempts to reconcile predestination and free will to achieve both. One such effort is to promote the idea that men have free will, but God’s sovereign will trumps it. If God does not approve of a free will choice, he will rewire the person so he will make the free will choice of God’s choosing. They think this preserves God’s sovereignty and man’s free will. It seems to fall short. One example given is as follows:

The 41st President of the United States of America, George H. W. Bush, reportedly hates brocolli so intensly that he simply refuses to eat it under any circumstances. There is no chance of him choosing it, not because he is a robot or a puppet, but because he hates it. If you had the power to change his tastes such that he suddenly loved brocolli, you could effectively predetermine whether or not he would ever eat it:

If you chose to leave him as he is, and not change his tastes, you would be effectively dooming him to brocolliless meals forever! You could count on the fact that he would always shun it of his own free will.

If you elected to step in and change his tastes, you would be effectively assuring that he would eat it. If he began to love it, he would seek it out of his own free will.George’s free will remains intact, and you make certain your will is done, with no contradiction.

George’s free will remains intact, and you make certain your will is done, with no contradiction.

David J. Finnamore; elevenmistrel.com

(I believe he means both God’s sovereign will and George’s free will remain intact.)

It is not sure if the author of that illustration understands what a contradiction is. It is not free will if God dictates what that free will is.

The lack of understanding of the extent and limits of free will has been a debilitating factor in understanding the issues of many of the teachings of Scripture. The idea that man has free will to do as he pleases is utterly unbiblical. Man has free will of desire, inclination, passion, aspirations, motivation, intention: likes, dislikes, loves, hatreds. He does not have freedom of action, only of the thoughts and intents of his heart.

Hebrews 4:12 For the word of God is quick, and powerful, and sharper than any twoedged sword, piercing even to the dividing asunder of soul and spirit, and of the joints and marrow, and is a discerner of the thoughts and intents of the heart.

All actions must serve God’s purpose and be within the confines of the master plan.

Matthew 10:29 Are not two sparrows sold for a farthing? and one of them shall not fall on the ground without your Father.

1 Samuel 2:3 Talk no more so exceeding proudly; let not arrogancy come out of your mouth: for the Lord is a God of knowledge, and by him actions are weighed.

Lamentations 3:37 Who is he that saith, and it cometh to pass, when the Lord commandeth it not?

The creator and sustainer of all is in control of all actions taken upon the earth. It may be that a desire is allowed to be acted upon, the Lord may use the actions desired by the thoughts and intents of the heart for his purposes, or acting upon a thought or intent may not be allowed.

James 4:13-15 Go to now, ye that say, To day or to morrow we will go into such a city, and continue there a year, and buy and sell, and get gain: ¹⁴Whereas ye know not what shall be on the morrow. For what is your life? It is even a vapour, that appeareth for a little time, and then vanisheth away. ¹⁵For that ye ought to say, If the Lord will, we shall live, and do this, or that.

It would not be difficult for the Lord to find someone with the right thoughts and intents of the heart to serve his purpose in any given circumstance.

Romans 9:17 For the scripture saith unto Pharaoh, Even for this same purpose have I raised thee up, that I might shew my power in thee, and that my name might be declared throughout all the earth.

Do you think it was hard to find a haughty-minded, lifted–up–with–pride, selfish, self-centered, self-willed, individual who regarded neither man nor God to set upon the throne? It would have been harder to find one that was not.

1 Timothy 4:15 Meditate upon these things; give thyself wholly to them; that thy profiting may appear to all.

A man’s free will desires are developed not by one mental or physical attribute (e.g., his taste buds) although they are a consideration. Free will is developed by the events, education, training, and experiences, in a man’s life. What you would choose of your own free will at five is not going to be the same at twenty, and that may not be the same at forty, fifty, sixty, etc. For God to change your free will choices is to predetermine your choice removing your free will. This is the only proper biblical understanding of free will and must be adhered to in order to maintain “rightly dividing the word of truth.”

To understand and evaluate these theologies it is essential to examine the differences in their view of history. Of the two questions: is individual salvation predestinated or do men have free will, and is history closed (i.e., completed, fixed, unchanging) or is it open running in real time? The answer to the second will solve the dilemma. These different concepts of history lead to the questions about God’s foreknowledge: what God knows, how he knows it, and when he knows it?

In the case of Calvinism and Arminianism, all is predetermined, unchangeable, history is closed, from before the foundation of the world. God’s foreknowledge is due to his having predestinated all things. This would hardly be meaningful to mankind. There is nothing men can do but follow a predetermined path; they are born, get elected or not, then they die. There were a few, some famous, gospel preachers of the Reformed religion but they were Reformed in name only; they acted and preached as if it made a difference, as non-predestinationist.

An analogy might be a road map. Predestination’s map, Reformed and Arminianism, would have but one road, one route, going from one predetermined place and event in a row to the next: point A to B to C to D to E, etc. All things are predestined, history is static, fixed, unchanging, everything is set in stone. The choices men make are not real, the options given them meaningless; everything is predetermined. That pretty much sums up what is needed to know of the doctrine of predestination. Many attempts are made to try reconciling predestination with the Bible; it would be preferred if your teaching was in accordance with and did not have to be reconciled to the Scriptures.

Moving on, it is now time to look at the free will theologies.

Still setting forth the idea that history is closed, complete, unchanging, Neo-Arminianism rejects predestination. God’s foreknowledge comes from his looking at the past, present, and future all at once thereby seeing history and all that happened. Individual salvation not being predestinated but just known to God who will and will not be saved as he sees history as it just happened to happen.

Neo-Arminianism’s map has many ways to go to reach the same predetermined points and events. The course taken is neither divinely determined nor guided; when the trip is over, God sees all and goes back and inserts himself and writes a book about the travels he has taken particular interest in. There are some latent problems in this view. Two considerations must be addressed and explained. If not predestinated, for God not to have knowledge of all history, it would have to exist apart from God, flowing out on its own undetermined course; how did it come into existence? History would have had to have run its course for God to see what happened. This is the “he sat back in an easy chair to watch what happened” from above.

Further, would God inserting himself into the past change the future? Would it cause men to have different free will choices changing what God had already seen? How many changes need to take place before the future God saw was no longer valid?

This led one commentator, in reference to 1 Samuel 23: 10˗13, to claim that the unchangeable foreknowledge of God can be changed.

David broke the unchangeable foreknowledge of God by escaping the city before Saul came and everything God said about that future was changed.

“The Book of Romans”, Dr. Peter S. Ruckman (2003)
ISBN 1-58026-045-4, Romans 8:29-30, pg. 333.

It would seem that neo-Arminianism’s view of history creates some unanswerable questions and, as predestination, puts limits upon God.

Open Theology has history running in real time under the control and guidance of God, directing all to his predetermined end; there would be no limits to what he could choose to do. Open Theology’s road map has the same trip to make, the same fixed predetermined events to happen, same set waypoints to reach, and it ends at the same pre-established conclusion to all things. However, it is fluid; man’s decisions and actions make a difference in how history is played out in between the predetermined events and waypoints. There is more than one road to take in reaching them. There are at least two ways of getting there; obey God and take the easy direct route, or disobey him and take the circuitous undulating treacherous route due to God’s judgment upon your disobedience. Both closed and open theology lead to the same place; it is just how you get there. Open leaves room for time and chance and God’s judgments upon and dealings with men in real time to determine and set their course on the fly.

Ecclesiastes 9:11 I returned, and saw under the sun, that the race is not to the swift, nor the battle to the strong, neither yet bread to the wise, nor yet riches to men of understanding, nor yet favour to men of skill; but time and chance happeneth to them all.

The idea that God must look down upon history to see what happen is the most lackluster God limiting view of these theologies. In Open Theology having history flow in real time, raises the Lord to heights the others cannot even imagine. Working in real time, knowing every thought and intent of men as they have them in the moment, knowing all things as they happen, having them in control, guided, and kept within his plan, God turns everything, all Satan’s devises and evil intents as well as man’s, to his purpose. He judges and passes judgment on all and records all in his books, all in real time. It is mind-boggling; man cannot fathom the depths of the wisdom and power of the Almighty.

Romans 11:33 O the depth of the riches both of the wisdom and knowledge of God! how unsearchable are his judgments, and his ways past finding out!

Daniel 4:35 And all the inhabitants of the earth are reputed as nothing: and he doeth according to his will in the army of heaven, and among the inhabitants of the earth: and none can stay his hand, or say unto him, What doest thou?

As for David’s being able to change the unchangeable foreknowledge of God, Open Theology asserts that it is no more a matter than God’s searching men’s hearts and knowing their thoughts thereby knowing what they would do in any given situation. David did not change the unchangeable foreknowledge of God; he changed the situation by leaving after being warned of God of what would happen according to the “thoughts and intents of the heart” of the men involved if he stayed.

1 Chronicles 28:9 for the Lord searcheth all hearts, and understandeth all the imaginations of the thoughts: if thou seek him, he will be found of thee; but if thou forsake him, he will cast thee off for ever.

God’s plan or blueprint is laid out with its predetermined waypoints and events. He will guide and direct all things as needed to keep all within his plan. In Open Theology there is room for time and chance, spontaneity, more importantly for God’s dealing with men and nations, raising them up and tearing them down through judging and judgment upon them. There are always at least two ways to reach the waypoints: fear God and obey or rebel and pay.

God discerners the thoughts and intents, weighs all possible actions and outcomes, and determines the course he is going to take in real time, in accordance with his criteria, keeping all within his master plan and outline. Speaking of rain, Job writes there are different reasons according to the circumstance God send it upon the eath:

Job 37:13 He causeth it to come, whether for correction, or for his land, or for mercy.

If the wrong view or bias is accepted, it will cloud and color the correct interpretation of all Scripture while the right one will open the Bible. Viewing the Bible from a perspective of predestination will read that into verses everywhere and incorporate it into all understanding and interpretations removing all personal responsibility. On the other hand, teaching that all history is just there and unchanging would lead to the acceptance of fate eliminating personal responsibility. Open Theology leaves room for God to act in the moment, to hold men responsible, to test men, to judge men, and for time and chance.

What Sayeth the Scripture

These were more noble than those in Thessalonica, in that they received the word with all readiness of mind, and searched the scriptures daily, whether those things were so.

Acts 17:11

Many concepts and teachings are based on philosophy rather than the diligent study of God’s word. Philosophy is the attempt to reason a knowledge of God and his ways without studying his revelations, precepts, or teachings in their proper context. Just read a verse and determine an interpretation that seems to fit distilled through your bias, your biblical view, without comparing scripture with scripture. However, God’s ways and thoughts are past the ability of man to fathom without his revelations and instructions.

Romans 11:33 O the depth of the riches both of the wisdom and knowledge of God! how unsearchable are his judgments, and his ways past finding out!

To privately interpret a verse is to interpret it apart from its context and apply whatever meaning fits based on the bias you bring. To properly understand a portion of Scripture, context must be maintained, not only that of the passage but the chapter, book, and the entire Bible. If any portion of Scripture fails to fit within or contradicts our theology or teaching, there is something wrong with it. A modification needs to be made or an outright rejection of it; the Bible should not be rejected or changed to make it fit.

In some instances, it is a mistake to rely on biblical understandings, interpretations, and traditions that were formed hundreds, or even thousands, of years ago without the benefit of the knowledge currently known of creation, prophecy, and history. All things are revealed within the Scriptures, but not all made known from the beginning nor have they been revealed at the same time throughout history.

Luke 24:45 Then opened he their understanding, that they might understand the scriptures,

Daniel 12:4 But thou, O Daniel, shut up the words, and seal the book, even to the time of the end: many shall run to and fro, and knowledge shall be increased.

In 1909 Charles Peguy thought that “the world changed less since Jesus Christ than in the last thirty years”, and perhaps some young doctor of philosophy in physics would now add that his science has changed more since 1909 than in all recorded time before.

Will & Ariel Durant. The Lessons of History, chapt. 1, pg. 12,
Simon & Schuster, NY, 1968, ISBN 0-671-41333-3

Civilization has made its greatest strides in the last thousand years, and in the last three centuries, man’s rate of development seems almost to have increased by geometric progression.

Vern L. Bullough, Man in Western Civilization,
Holt Rinehart & Winston, inc., (1957) (1970); ISBN:: 03-077015-7

What would these historians say today? Can it be said that those interpreting the Bible in the past had the same knowledge available now in their attempts to correctly do so?

Ephesians 3:4-5 Whereby, when ye read, ye may understand my knowledge in the mystery of Christ) ⁵Which in other ages was not made known unto the sons of men, as it is now revealed unto his holy apostles and prophets by the Spirit;

I would think that it must be asked; was everything totally revealed and understood in the past? Has not knowledge increased? Is not more known about creation than those that came before?

It does not matter how longstanding something is, many errors are longstanding. Who or how many hold to an understanding does not prove it. God has always parceled out the light of his word and knowledge in general at his scheduled rate and purpose. Many times raising a man up to be the focal point (e.g., Moses, monotheism; Paul the Church; Martin Luther and others breaking from Catholicism; Peter S. Ruckman preservation of the AV 1611). This does not mean that they were the first or only people to hold those views, right in all their views, or necessarily any godlier than anyone else.

In the next few sections, several competing theologies are going to be examined in the light of Scripture and reason.

The Potter

The word which came to Jeremiah from the Lord, saying, Arise, and go down to the potter’s house, and there I will cause thee to hear my words.

Jeremiah 18:1-10

Several passages of Scripture are used to attempt to justify predestination; Romans 9:18˗21, the similitude of the Potter is invariably used.

Romans 9:18-21 Therefore hath he mercy on whom he will have mercy, and whom he will he hardeneth. ¹⁹Thou wilt say then unto me, Why doth he yet find fault? For who hath resisted his will? ²⁰Nay but, O man, who art thou that repliest against God? Shall the thing formed say to him that formed it, Why hast thou made me thus? ²¹Hath not the potter power over the clay, of the same lump to make one vessel unto honour, and another unto dishonour?

In this passage, the potter is a similitude comparing God as the creator of man to the potter as the creator of his vessels. As the potter can choose to make one vessel honorable and another dishonorable so God can create a man thus. The question is whether this similitude is supposed to be teaching predestinated individual salvation? The precepts and general truths, established in the preceding chapters, ought to tell us that such an interpretation is automatically wrong. For the moment, these precepts and truths will be disregarded in simply comparing scripture with scripture, rightly dividing. Let us see what the conclusion of the matter will be.

That it is God’s word and not man’s must be remembered. He uses the similitude of the potter first in the Old Testament, so seeking its proper interpretation must begin in its original context and entirety to properly decipher its true biblical meaning in the new. Remember, God is not the author of confusion, the intent of both uses will be the same.

Jeremiah 18:1-10 The word which came to Jeremiah from the Lord, saying, ²Arise, and go down to the potter’s house, and there I will cause thee to hear my words. ³Then I went down to the potter’s house, and, behold, he wrought a work on the wheels. ⁴And the vessel that he made of clay was marred in the hand of the potter: so he made it again another vessel, as seemed good to the potter to make it. ⁵Then the word of the Lord came to me, saying, ⁶O house of Israel, cannot I do with you as this potter? saith the Lord. Behold, as the clay is in the potter’s hand, so are ye in mine hand, O house of Israel. ⁷At what instant I shall speak concerning a nation, and concerning a kingdom, to pluck up, and to pull down, and to destroy it; ⁸If that nation, against whom I have pronounced, turn from their evil, I will repent of the evil that I thought to do unto them. ⁹And at what instant I shall speak concerning a nation, and concerning a kingdom, to build and to plant it; ¹⁰If it do evil in my sight, that it obey not my voice, then I will repent of the good, wherewith I said I would benefit them.

In the similitude of a potter presented in the above passage, it can be easily seen that it is not an attempt to teach predestination in any form but rather just the opposite. God’s decisions are based on the choices made by man, whether to seek and obey God or to do evil. Paul did not, and neither can we, take a passage of Scripture out of its context but must rightly divide the word of truth. The context, in Jeremiah as in Romans, is the sovereignty of God over his creation, to judge and deal with it according to his will.

If we take the passage in Romans and keep it within its proper context, we see that the similitude is given in answer to three particular questions.

• Is there unrighteousness with God?
• Why does he yet find fault?
• Who can resist his will?

Looking closely, we find that these questions are being asked by those who are complaining about God not accepting their self-righteousness―that is in keeping the law they have not obtained or earned the grace of God and the assurance of salvation. By their way of thinking, if salvation is solely based on the predetermination and/or caprice of God and not on a person’s works, how can he find fault? For who can resist his will? How is he just in this? Paul’s answer is simply to point out that God is our Creator, and he could just as easily have created us for damnation as not, therefore, there is no unrighteousness in God’s judgments, which is the question in verse 14 of Romans 9.

Romans 9:14 What shall we say then? Is there unrighteousness with God? God forbid.

If we refuse to accept his salvation it is the same to God as if he had created us unto damnation; your predestinated end in such a case is the same, eternal wrath.

The similitude of the potter is not a description of God’s plan of salvation, but rather an example of our relationship to him and his sovereignty. He made us and he can do as he pleases with us; there is no unrighteousness in whatever he does. It is for us to fear him and seek that which is pleasing unto God. It is not a picture of God’s plan, but of his prerogative as the creator to choose his own plan of salvation, one that pleases him and our duty to conform. The actual plan God has elected to institute is not mentioned until the last verse of the chapter, “whosoever believeth.”

Romans 9:33 As it is written, Behold, I lay in Sion a stumblingstone and rock of offence: and whosoever believeth on him shall not be ashamed.

This also answers the proverbial question that lost sinners ask in their attempt to make themselves more just than God: you mean that God would condemn a heathen in the jungle who has never heard of Jesus Christ? The answer is if God chooses to do so, there is no unrighteousness with God; it is his prerogative, he made us, he can do whatever he wants with us. What we, as those who have trusted in God’s word, have to worry about is the other side of the coin: God is going to hold us responsible for that heathen not hearing about Jesus Christ, whether he lives in a jungle or is our neighbor. We ought to be thankful that he is “not willing that any should perish,”

Conforming

There is therefore now no condemnation to them which are in Christ Jesus, who walk not after the flesh, but after the Spirit.

Romans 8:1

One mistake often encountered when Romans 8 is under consideration is its being referenced and applied to the state of an individual Christian’s walk, whether a brother or sister is walking after the flesh or the Spirit, serving or not serving God. However, the subject of the chapter has absolutely no bearing as to whether an individual Christian is living right or not. The chapter is a summary of the seven chapters that came before it, “There is therefore.” The chapter is a summary of what salvation is and is not, as explained in the previous chapters. It compares men as a group in their natural state walking after the flesh with saved men as a group walking after the Spirit. When it talks about being in the Spirit, it is speaking of being saved: when it speaks of being after the flesh, it is speaking of being lost.

Romans 8:9 But ye are not in the flesh, but in the Spirit, if so be that the Spirit of God dwell in you. Now if any man have not the Spirit of Christ, he is none of his.

The common mistake of applying it to a saint’s personal life already clouds the understanding of the context of this chapter by putting individuals in where there are none. A Christian’s behavior and manner of living does not come into play until Romans 12. At that point, because of all that has come before (chapters 1-11) Paul states he implores each individual saint to serve God. Until Romans 12:1, the book has been a description and definition of what salvation is, is not, does, and does not include. Up till this point, Romans deals with men as sets—the set of believers as opposed to the set of non-believers—and that does not change in verses 8:29-30, which are the subject of this section.

Romans 8:5 For they that are after the flesh do mind the things of the flesh; but they that are after the Spirit the things of the Spirit.

Romans 8:14 For as many as are led by the Spirit of God, they are the sons of God.

There is nothing that points to God speaking of each and every individual that ever was or any individual, whether predestined or just known. As stated, chapter 8 is a summary of the first seven chapters.

Paul goes on to talk about the glory of salvation and the waiting for its glorious completion.

Romans 8:18-28 For I reckon that the sufferings of this present time are not worthy to be compared with the glory which shall be revealed in us. ¹⁹For the earnest expectation of the creature waiteth for the manifestation of the sons of God … ²¹Because the creature itself also shall be delivered from the bondage of corruption into the glorious liberty of the children of God … ²³And not only they, but ourselves also, which have the firstfruits of the Spirit, even we ourselves groan within ourselves, waiting for the adoption, to wit, the redemption of our body … ²⁸And we know that all things work together for good to them that love God, to them who are the called according to his purpose.

Why do all the above come into play? Because God predestinated us? No. The passage might not be referring to men conforming to anything.

All these things come into play because God predestinated himself, the Word, to be manifested in the flesh, conformed to the image of his Son, and pay for our sins. Romans 8:29 is a description of salvation, of the Word becoming flesh and our part in that predestination as a group. It might just be God, the Word, that had to be conformed to the right image.

Romans 8:29 For whom he did foreknow, he also did predestinate to be conformed to the image of his Son, that he might be the firstborn among many brethren.

John 1:14 And the Word was made flesh, and dwelt among us, (and we beheld his glory, the glory as of the only begotten of the Father,) full of grace and truth.

Hebrews 10:5 Wherefore when he cometh into the world, he saith, Sacrifice and offering thou wouldest not, but a body hast thou prepared me:

Philippians 2:7 But made himself of no reputation, and took upon him the form of a servant, and was made in the likeness of men:

Hebrews 2:9 But we see Jesus, who was made a little lower than the angels for the suffering of death, crowned with glory and honour; that he by the grace of God should taste death for every man.

The biblical definition of a son of God is one who was directly created or begotten by God in his image, which leaves out everything but Adam, angels, and Jesus Christ.

Luke 3:38 Which was the son of Enos, which was the son of Seth, which was the son of Adam, which was the son of God.

Job 38:7 When the morning stars sang together, and all the sons of God shouted for joy?

Adam and the angels were directly created by God individually with the ability to reproduce, pro-creation. The angels were not given the liberty to do so, nor were they given what Adam was given so he could—Eve. This did, as you remember, cause some problems a little later.

Matthew 22:30 For in the resurrection they neither marry, nor are given in marriage, but are as the angels of God in heaven.

Genesis 6:2 That the sons of God saw the daughters of men that they were fair; and they took them wives of all which they chose.

What is the image of the sons of God, the angels? They are indistinguishable from men.

Hebrews 13:2 Be not forgetful to entertain strangers: for thereby some have entertained angels unawares.

Man was created in the image of God; Adam was a son of God. We never lost the image; we did lose the relationship.

Genesis 5:3 And Adam lived an hundred and thirty years, and begat a son in his own likeness, after his image; and called his name Seth:

God created Adam to be in his image; Adam reproduced children in his own image, which bore his image of God.

James 3:9 Therewith bless we God, even the Father; and therewith curse we men, which are made after the similitude of God.

“Men, which are made after the similitude of God,” but either not being directly created by God were not sons of God, or God chose not to extend the relationship due to the fall. This does not change the assertions that sin had a corrupting effect on the physical form such as in the matter of blood, etc. Adam had a Spiritual birth, but not a water birth. His children had a water birth, but not a Spiritual one. Our salvation is the receiving of the spiritual birth and to be adopted and become sons of God. We do not have to be conformed to become the sons of God; we just need to be adopted.

John 1:12 But as many as received him, to them gave he power to become the sons of God, even to them that believe on his name:

This does not require conformity to another image.  We do not need to be conformed to an image; we need to “present our bodies a living sacrifice.” Any conforming we need will take place in the resurrection, when “we shall be changed.” Our spiritual bodies will bear the image of man and God as the angels.

Luke 24:39 Behold my hands and my feet, that it is I myself: handle me, and see; for a spirit hath not flesh and bones, as ye see me have.

“For whom he did foreknow”―we know that he foreknew the Word; we know that the Word had to conform to an image “a little lower than an angels,” “made in the likeness of men” to suffer death for us all. This is indisputable. Our predestination is part of the Word’s predestination. The Word as the Son of God was predestinated to have many brethren. Romans 8:29 is a complete sentence which is a trinity: subject, verb, and complete thought. Verse 30 is a sentence with its own complete thought: it picks up at the end of verse 29. The Word was predestinated to be conformed to the image of a man and to be the firstborn from the dead and to have many brethren. Verse 30 picks up with the many brethren of verse 29 and completes their predestination to certain things. The two verses make a complete reference and description of salvation in accordance with the context of the entire book of Romans up to this point.

Romans 8:29-30 For whom (The Word) he did foreknow, he also did predestinate to be conformed to the image of his Son, that (the Word) might be the firstborn among many brethren. ³⁰Moreover (the many brethren) whom he did predestinate, them he also called: and whom he called, them he also justified: and whom he justified, them he also glorified.

Four other verses use the words predestinated or foreknowledge and they all refer to the plan of salvation, not individuals. Why would we expect Romans 8:29˗30 to be any different?

Acts 2:23 Him, being delivered by the determinate counsel and foreknowledge of God, ye have taken, and by wicked hands have crucified and slain:

Ephesians 1:5 Having predestinated us unto the adoption of children by Jesus Christ to himself, according to the good pleasure of his will,

Ephesians 1:11 In whom also we have obtained an inheritance, being predestinated according to the purpose of him who worketh all things after the counsel of his own will:

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.

All these are speaking of different aspects of the predestinated plan of salvation. Christ was predestinated to make the atonement; men were predestined to be saved through the sanctification of the Spirit and blood of Jesus Christ. Those that receive salvation are predestined to be adopted and receive an inheritance as children of God. Romans 8:29˗30 is also a description of the plan of Salvation.

Rightly Dividing

The words of the Lord are pure words:
as silver tried in a furnace of earth,
purified seven times.

Psalms 12:6

“God is not the author of confusion.” In Romans 8:29 it could have been stated; “For those, he did foreknow,” if it was referring to the “them” of verse 30. He could have stated; “Conformed to the image of the Son,” and sealed the interpretation. The words God chose to use in writing his revelation were purposely selected, purified seven times, there is nothing random in his choice of them. Possibly, we should not look for an interpretation that God could have made perfectly obvious in stating it a little differently and look for one that would only exist because he stated it the way he did.

Romans 8:29 For whom he did foreknow, he also did predestinate to be conformed to the image of his Son, that he might be the firstborn among many brethren.

If you study the New Testament’s use of the terms, “his Son” compared to “the Son,” you will see that whenever the term “his Son” is used, it is always indirect reference to God or action of God in relation to Christ Jesus. Whenever the term “the Son” is used, it is in reference to everything other than God, e.g., men, Satan, demons, etc. to Christ Jesus.

John 3:16˗17 For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life. ¹⁷For God sent not his Son into the world to condemn the world; but that the world through him might be saved.

God gave, God sent … his Son

Matthew 4:3 And when the tempter came to him, he said, If thou be the Son of God, command that these stones be made bread.

The tempter … the Son

Acts 3:13 The God of Abraham, and of Isaac, and of Jacob, the God of our fathers, hath glorified his Son Jesus;

God glorified … his Son

Romans 1:4 And declared to be the Son of God with power, according to the spirit of holiness, by the resurrection from the dead:

Declared by the resurrection … the Son

1 Corinthians 1:9 God is faithful, by whom ye were called unto the fellowship of his Son Jesus Christ our Lord.

God called … his son

2 Corinthians 1:19 For the Son of God, Jesus Christ, who was preached among you by us, even by me and Silvanus and Timotheus, was not yea and nay, but in him was yea.

Paul and others preached … the Son

Galatians 4:4 But when the fulness of the time was come, God sent forth his Son, made of a woman, made under the law,

God sent … his Son

Galatians 2:20 I am crucified with Christ: nevertheless I live; yet not I, but Christ liveth in me: and the life which I now live in the flesh I live by the faith of the Son of God, who loved me, and gave himself for me.

I (Paul) … the Son

Galatians 4:6 And because ye are sons, God hath sent forth the Spirit of his Son into your hearts, crying, Abba, Father.

God sent … his Son

Ephesians 4:13 Till we all come in the unity of the faith, and of the knowledge of the Son of God, unto a perfect man, unto the measure of the stature of the fulness of Christ:

We all … the Son

1 Thessalonians 1:10 And to wait for his Son from heaven, whom he raised from the dead, even Jesus, which delivered us from the wrath to come.

God raised … his Son

1 John 5:10 He that believeth on the Son of God hath the witness in himself: he that believeth not God hath made him a liar; because he believeth not the record that God gave of his Son.

He (whoever) believeth on … the Son; God gave record of … his Son

Any of those verses could be rewritten to use the other term. The separation of the terms is purposeful, not an accident, not random. Romans 8:29 in using the term “his Son” tells us that God is performing some action related to “his Son,” and neither man nor anything else is involved. It is not man that has to be conformed; if it were the term used would have been “the Son.”

Romans 8:29 For whom he (God) did foreknow, he (God) also did predestinate to be conformed to the image of his Son, that he might be the firstborn among many brethren.

Accordingly, when the Bible speaks of God in relation to Christ Jesus, the term used is “his Son.” When speaking of man or any other in relation to Christ Jesus, the term used is “the Son.” Man is not being spoken of in Romans 8:29; man is not being predestinated, not the one conforming; God as the Word is. God sent, God raised, God spoke through, God predestinated “his Son.”

Attention to detail, keeping in context, not having an unbiblical view and corrupted bias is what is needed in studying the Scriptures.

Closing Remarks

Wherefore seeing we also are compassed about with so great a cloud of witnesses, let us lay aside every weight, and the sin which doth so easily beset us, and let us run with patience the race that is set before us,

Hebrews 12:1

In the last few pages, the two questions that divide the Church have been examined.

1. Predestination verses Free Will
2. Closed verses  Open

I have not covered all the debates and arguments for or against any of the four possible theologies that stem from the debates. They have been displayed in their basic forms to show their strengths and weaknesses. My conclusions, if not having been made known at this point, to answering the questions are these.

1. Free Will
2. Open

I do not believe the Scriptures support any other determination.

Open Theology’s assertions, that history is flowing in real time, that the future has not yet been, and that God is directing historic events to his predetermined end while along the way dealing with and judging men in real time, conforms to all Scripture. God is dealing with the hearts of men as they come into existence through God’s created system of pro-creation. All men came into this world by “time and chance.”

Ecclesiastes 9:11 but time and chance happeneth to them all.

The foreknowledge presented by Open Theology is of God’s elections, how he has chosen to do things. That they can be spoken of as future, present, or past according to God’s perspective at the time he is speaking is due to the fact that the events are written in stone, immutable. They will come to pass on time as planned, nothing in heaven or earth can prevent them. This is what Satan has been attempting to do from the beginning of his rebellion—break God’s word.

An analogy can be made to a supercomputer playing chess. At all times it knows the constraints and boundaries of play and every move the pieces can make and every change created by any possible move that happens. The computer may figure things out to three, four, or more moves ahead. It also knows every response it can make per each possible move made and the changes to possible moves they make.

God knows everything there is to know at any given time and every possibility, every possible move by six billion plus men, creature, and nature, etc. He knows all the possible moves and all his possible responses, etc. How far ahead he takes it, who knows! He knows the hearts and minds of men and their propensities, frailties, weaknesses, strengths, etc. He is also dealing with men’s hearts seeking to save.

God allows men a limited amount of free will in the moves they make. If God is not at the time purposely directing an event, man’s free will choice can make a time and chance event for someone else. As an example, I decide on my own free will to quit or retire from a job; this would make a time and chance job opening for someone else. On the other hand, God could just as easily be directing me to leave a job and create a job for someone in answer to prayer.

God’s direction, man’s free will, and time and chance, all work together under God’s guidance and control. He is not having any difficulty controlling events to suit his purposes in having mercy or judgment upon the earth and leading all things to his predetermined end. God does not have to see what has been done to know what men will do, he knows their hearts and minds. History must be open and flowing for God to deal with and attempt to change the mind and hearts of men. The God of Open Theology is much greater than those of Calvinism, Arminianism, or neo-Arminianism.

Predestination’s gospel of limited atonement and its irresistible grace is a different gospel from that of neo-Arminianism and Open Theology’s open to all conditioned on our free will choice to believe God. Anyone being saved in a Calvinistic setting is being so despite that doctrine and due to the preaching of the gospel: “believe on the Lord Jesus Christ and thou shalt be saved.”

Calvinism, even with its teaching of limited salvation, has had some great soul-winning preachers who associated themselves with the reformed doctrine but still maintained the necessity to preach the gospel to all men (e.g., C. H. Spurgeon, Reformed Baptist). As one of the old Reformed preachers is reported to have stated, the more he preached the gospel, the more people were elected. God’s sovereign will remains uncontested in the absence of individual predestination. He has chosen, elected, as his sovereign will, to save those that will believe. He will have mercy on them to salvation and those that will not believe, he will not.

One of the simplest and most poignant answers to the question of limited atonement was in an old sermon by Frederick Whitfield, first preached circa 1850s, “The Apostolic Call and Commission.”

“And they came unto Him.” Here is the evidence of our calling and election. We come because He calls. Let us not trouble ourselves with the doctrine of election. Let each one ask himself the question; Have I come to Jesus? If you have, reader, then Christ has called you, and you have heard that call. You are one of the elect, for you have come to Jesus. To ask the question; Am I one of the elect? first ask another; Have I come to Jesus? But if there are two questions in the matter of salvation, such is the perversity of the human heart, that men are certain to ask the wrong one first. Am I one of the elect? is not the first question, reader. Have I come? ask that first. Your answer to this question will be the answer—the only answer—to the other. Oh, have you come to Jesus? Have you heard His call? Are you at His feet?

“Apostolic Call and Commission”; from the book “The Word Unveiled”;
Frederick Whitfield (1829-1904)

Whether one chooses neo-Arminianism or Open Theology, as long as grace through faith is maintained, it will not change the effect on salvation, does not alter any major doctrine. The results are the same even if one must adjust his thinking on how something was done. It is the indirect that must be considered. The wrong option might be a little leaven that is trying to leaven the whole lump; which in these present days could be troublesome. Open Theology is the only one that does not limit God or create contradictions.

Psalms 78:41 Yea, they turned back and tempted God, and limited the Holy One of Israel.

It is for each one of us to take the time to diligently study God’s word and determine for ourselves what option corresponds best with Scripture. Let us not be as those who learn something the wrong way and stick to it no matter what, refusing to yield to the truth.

One error many people make is to learn something the wrong way and stick to it no matter what.

Harry Lorayne, Secrets of Mind Power (1961)

Much more could be said on the questions discussed in this study. It is hoped that enough information has been imparted to give a basic understanding of them and the importance of having the correct framework from which to study the Bible. For whatever context, with whatever bias, you approach God’s word will color the deeper study and understanding of it.

Let me present a summary of what I hope to have demonstrated up to this point.

• At this time in history, the times of the Gentiles or church age, we have liberty in Christ from the fear of condemnation―once saved, always saved.
• Biblical Christianity is unique among the world’s religions.
• That there is a true church and a false church.
• That there are biblical precepts that must be understood and followed to understand the Bible.
• Like a puzzle, the Bible pieces must be put together a little here and a little there, line upon line, precept upon precept in building our understanding and doctrines.
• That salvation by grace through faith is a two-part process; Christ Jesus died for all, but each has to come independently. This removes any supposed contradiction in God’s plan of salvation.
• That salvation is by God’s grace through our faith at any time in history.
• That you need the right biblical view: free will, by Grace through Faith, history is Open.