Foreknowledge and Foreordination
beads,
Because I know that we will eventually deal with all of this and I prefer to do so in this more complete and organized fashion, I have included more information than requested.
1. To correctly understand foreknowledge and foreordination, as relating to God, there are three primary factors that necessarily must be recognized and considered:
2. First, God’s ability to foreknow and foreordain is clearly stated in the Bible. (Acts 2:23; 1Peter 1:2) God himself sets forth as proof of his Godship this ability to foreknow and foreordain events of salvation and deliverance, as well as acts of judgment and punishment, and then to bring such events to fulfillment. His chosen people are witnesses of these facts. (Isaiah 44:6-9; 48:3-8)
3. A second factor to be considered is the free will of God’s intelligent creatures. The Scriptures show that God extends to such creatures the privilege and responsibility of free choice, of exercising free moral agency (Deuteronomy 30:19, 20; Joshua 24:15), thereby making them accountable for their acts. (Genesis 2:16, 17; 3:11-19; Romans 14:10-12; Hebrews 4:13) They are thus not mere robots, or automatons. Man could not truly have been created in “God’s image” if he were not a free moral agent. Logically then, there should be no conflict between God’s foreknowledge (as well as his foreordaining) and the free moral agency of his intelligent creatures.
4. A third factor that must be considered, one sometimes overlooked, is that of God’s moral standards and qualities, including his love, wisdom, justice, honesty, impartiality, mercy, kindness and self-control. Any understanding of God’s use of any of his ‘omni’ qualities but especially of foreknowledge and foreordination must therefore harmonize with not only some of these factors but with all of them. Clearly, whatever God foreknows must inevitably come to pass, so that God is able to call “things that are not as though they were.” (Romans 4:17)
5. God has four cardinal or main qualities: love, wisdom, justice and power. Just as an artist mixes and blends primary colors to produce many shades and hues of color, God’s qualities can be mixed and blended by him with differing results. For example: love + wisdom + justice = mercy and mixed in different proportions love + wisdom + justice = jealousy. Another mixture produces God’s quality of “long-suffering” and on and on it goes. There are those who insist that everything about God is always to an absolute or infinite degree and without any limitations what so ever. They even go so far as to claim that if that is not so it would indicate imperfection or a deficiency on God's part. To easily express those ideas men also have formed words to go along with them such as: omnipotent, omniscient, omnipresent and several others also.
6. God is the Supreme Being of the universe and as such we speak of him as being infinitely powerful or "all-powerful" and infinitely wise or "all-wise" and so on. And yet, even though he is "all-powerful", he has not yet acted in an all-powerful way, that is in such a way that it required the use of all his power! Obviously to mere humans the creation of the physical universe seems to be an all-powerful act but I submit to you that it was a drop out of the ocean that is his potential power. Consider also that each and every exercise of God's power to enforce judgment and punishment has not resulted in the utter destruction of everything. That is because his exercise of power is blended with or offset by his love, wisdom and justice so that the result is just right and does not violate his other qualities and attributes, including self-control (Galatians 5:22,23), or produce any undesired consequences. Again, God’s almightiness is undeniably perfect and is infinite in capacity. (1 Chronicles 29:11, 12; Job 36:22; 37:23) Yet his perfection in strength does not require him to use his power to the full extent of his omnipotence in any or in all cases. Clearly he has not done so; if he had, not merely certain ancient cities and some nations would have been destroyed, but the entire universe would have been obliterated long ago by God’s executions of judgment, accompanied by mighty expressions of disapproval and wrath, such as at Sodom and Gomorrah and on other occasions. (Genesis 19:23-25, 29; compare Exodus 9:13-16; Jeremiah 30:23, 24) God’s exercise of his might is therefore not simply an unleashing of infinite, limitless power but is constantly governed and controlled by his purpose and, where merited, tempered by his mercy. (Nehemiah 9:31; Psalm 78:38, 39; Jeremiah 30:11; Lamentations 3:22; Ezekiel 20:17)
7. In contradiction of the beliefs held by some men, God exercises each of his qualities perfectly, but none absolutely. Even though God has the capability to carry any of his qualities out to an “absolute” or infinite or unlimited degree he always chooses not to do so. For example: God has shown himself to be perfect in long-suffering (Definition: the patient endurance of wrong or provocation, combined with a refusal to give up hope for improvement in the disturbed relationship.) and, as a result, it can rightly be said that he is the “absolute” embodiment of that quality. Yet God’s exercise of long-suffering shows that he has imposed limitations upon it, as he has repeatedly demonstrated by means of his acts of judgment and punishment, therefore, it is not “unlimited.” Yes, God's patience and long-suffering are “perfect” but there are limits to them. Why? It is because his other qualities of justice, wisdom and love require it. In other words, being limited does not equate to imperfection or deficiency. At the same time, being without limits does not equate to being perfect.
8. Perhaps it will be that you do not like my choice of long-suffering as an example. So let me provide you with another example of what I mean. Man’s free moral agency stems, in part, from the “absolute” quality of freedom possessed by God. Even though the term and idea is man-made, God, and God alone, is capable of “absolute freedom.” Although capable of “absolute freedom,” is that how God conducts himself? Absolutely not! In the Bible God has revealed himself to be not just the Law-Giver but also as the Law-Keeper. That means that he does not operate outside his stated laws, standards and principles. Therefore even though “with God all things are possible” (Matthew 19:26; Mark 14:36), God’s perfection causes him to put limitations on himself so that “God cannot lie” and “it is impossible for God to lie.” (Titus 1:2; Hebrews 6:18) So it becomes obvious that God’s perfection arises, in many ways, from his self-controlled, self-imposed limitation of his absolute, infinite characteristics and qualities. Again, being limited does not equate to imperfection or deficiency. At the same time, being without limits does not equate to being perfect regardless of the beliefs of some to the contrary. Consider this question: between the equally true statements “with God all things are possible” and “it is impossible for God to lie,” which reveals more of God’s true nature, personality and is closer to what God actually DOES DO?
9. At this point we can start to deal with these questions: Does God know everything? Or, Is God omniscient? Does God know in advance everything that people will do? Is his exercise of foreknowledge infinite, without limit or control? (Exercise should not to be confused with his ability or capacity to foreknow.) Does he foresee and foreknow all future actions of all his creatures, spirit and human? And does he foreordain such actions or even predestinate what shall be the final destiny of all his creatures, even doing so before they have come into existence?
10. Or, is God’s exercise of foreknowledge, just like his exercise of all his other infinite qualities, selective, discretionary and self-controlled, so that whatever he chooses to foresee and foreknow, he does, but what he does not choose to foresee or foreknow, he does not? And, instead of preceding their existence, does God’s determination of his creatures’ eternal destiny await his judgment of their course of life and of their proved attitude under test? The answers to these questions must necessarily come from the Scriptures themselves and the information they provide concerning God’s actions and dealings with his creatures, including what has been revealed through his Son, Christ Jesus. (1 Corinthians 2:16)
11. God answers for himself at Genesis 11:5-8 where he describes himself as directing his attention earthward, surveying the situation at Babel, and then, at that time, determining the action to be taken to break up the unrighteous project there. Similarly, only after wickedness developed at Sodom and Gomorrah, did God advised Abraham of his decision to investigate (by means of his angels) to “see whether they act altogether according to the outcry over it that has come to me, and, if not, I can get to know it.” (Genesis 18:20-22; 19:1) Please note that the reason for the investigation was not prior knowledge but rather in response “to the outcry over it that has come to me.” When God said “if not, I can get to know it,” or “If they aren't, I want to know about it," or “I am going down to see whether or not these reports are true. Then I will know” did God lie or at least misrepresent himself to Abraham? If God already “knows” as you claim, then God is a Deceiver and this whole account, including God’s promises to show mercy, is a Sham, a Deception. On other occasions God spoke of ‘becoming acquainted with Abraham,’ or ‘I have become his intimate friend,’ and after Abraham went to the point of attempting to sacrifice Isaac, God said, “For now I do know that you are God-fearing in that you have not withheld your son, your only one, from me.” (Genesis 22:11, 12; compare Galatians 4:9) KJV + Strong’s: for (3588) now (6258) I know (3045) that (3588) thou (859) fearest (3373) God. Strong’s H6258: at-taw', From H6256; at this time, . . . now. Strong’s H3045: yaw-dah', A primitive root; to know (properly to ascertain by seeing); . . . for a certainty, comprehend, . . . understand, have [understanding]. In other words God tells Abraham and us: I understand or have understanding to comprehend for a certainty ascertained by seeing at this time. That is not what I ‘hear’ you claiming is the case but it is what that scripture says.
12. There are many other examples that I could cite but these are enough for us to understand that God obviously chooses not to foreknow “everything” regardless of the fact that he has the ability to do so. The point is that God's perfection means that he has perfect self-control and can exercise his foreknowledge at his discretion and without interfering with the free will of his creatures. God is omnipotent yet he does not exercise omnipotence. God is “all-patient” yet his exercise of patience has limits. God is “all-possible” yet he says there are things impossible for him. In other words, when he wants to foreknow something he can and does, but that does not mean that he cannot control himself and therefore MUST and DOES foreknow “everything.”
13. Again, the fact that God can foreknow events is clearly stated in the Bible. (Isaiah 46:9-10; Romans 4:17) However, it is illogical and unscriptural to think that he cannot control his ability to know the future or that he is responsible for every outcome by means of his inerrant, unlimited foreknowledge. To illustrate: suppose you had very great physical strength, in fact, that you were the most powerful human on earth. Would that make you feel inclined to hug a newborn baby with all your strength? Of course not! Likewise, having the ability to know the future does not compel God to foreordain or even to simply foreknow everything. His use of foreknowledge is selective and discretionary and just as you would not want to harm the newborn baby he does not want to infringe upon the free will of his children by the uncontrolled exercise of foreknowledge.
14. The view I ‘hear’ being expressed most often is that God’s exercise of his foreknowledge is infinite and also that he does foreordain the course and destiny of all individuals and that view is known as predestinarianism and comes in innumerable variations. Its advocates reason (erroneously as shown above) that God’s divinity and perfection require that he be omniscient (infinitely all-knowing), not only respecting the past and present but also regarding the future. According to this concept, for him not to foreknow all matters in their minutest detail would evidence imperfection or deficiency. Examples such as the case of Isaac’s twin sons, Esau and Jacob, are presented as evidence of God’s foreordaining creatures before their birth (Romans 9:10-13); and texts such as Ephesians 1:4, 5 are cited as evidence that God foreknew and foreordained the future of all his creatures even before the start of creation.
15. To be correct, those beliefs would, of course, have to harmonize with all the factors previously mentioned, including the Scriptural presentation of God’s qualities, standards, and purposes, as well as his righteous ways in dealing with his creatures. That being understood, we now can properly consider the implications of such predestinarian views. Obviously the self-descriptions God provided us in the scriptures discussed above preclude predestination and any other man-made belief that God “foreknows everything” without limit! Predestination and all such beliefs are not truly based on the Bible and are teachings that slander God. (No wonder atheism is one of the world’s fastest growing religions.)
16. The first and most glaringly insurmountable problem with this concept is that it would mean that, prior to creating angels or mankind, God exercised his powers of foreknowledge and foresaw and foreknew all that would result from such creation, including the rebellion of one of his spirit sons, the subsequent rebellion of the first human pair in Eden, and all the bad consequences of such rebellion down to and beyond this present day. This would necessarily mean that all the wickedness that history has recorded (the crime and immorality, oppression and resultant suffering, lying and hypocrisy, false worship and idolatry) once existed, before creation’s beginning, only in the mind of God, in the form of his foreknowledge of the future in all of its minutest details. (That may be true of the God you worship but it is not true of the God I worship and that I find revealed in the Bible.)
17. If the Creator of mankind had in fact exercised his power to foreknow all that history has seen since man’s creation, then the full weight of (full responsibility for, knowledge carries with it responsibility) all the wickedness resulting thereafter was deliberately set in motion by God when he spoke the words: “Let us make man.” (Genesis 1:26) These facts bring into question the reasonableness and consistency of the predestinarian concept; particularly so, since the Bible clearly shows that disorder and other vile things do not originate from God’s heavenly presence but are “earthly, animal, demonic” in source. (1Corinthians 14:33; James 3:14-18)
18. The argument that God’s not foreknowing all future events and circumstances in full detail would evidence imperfection or a deficiency on his part is, in reality, an arbitrary view of perfection. Perfection, correctly defined, does not demand such an absolute, all-embracing extension, inasmuch as the perfection of anything actually depends upon its measuring up completely to the standards of excellence set by one qualified to judge its merits. Ultimately, God’s own will and good pleasure, not human opinions or concepts, are the deciding factors as to whether anything is perfect. (Deuteronomy 32:4; 2 Samuel 22:31; Isaiah 46:10)
19. Similarly, if, in certain respects, God chooses to exercise his infinite ability of foreknowledge in a selective way and to the degree that pleases him, then assuredly no human or angel can rightly say: “What are you doing?” (Job 9:12; Isaiah 45:9; Daniel 4:35) It is therefore not a question of ability, what God can foresee, foreknow, and foreordain, for “with God all things are possible.” (Matthew 19:26) The question is what God sees fit to foresee, foreknow, and foreordain, for “everything that he delighted to do he has done.” (Psalm 115:3)
20. In contradiction to the theory of predestinarianism, a number of texts point to an examination by God of a situation then current followed by a decision made on the basis of such examination. Also selective foreknowledge means that God could choose not to foreknow indiscriminately all the future acts of his creatures. This would mean that, rather than all history from creation onward being a mere rerun of what had already been foreseen and foreordained, God could with all sincerity set before the first human pair the prospect of everlasting life in an earth free from wickedness. His instructions to his first human son and daughter to act as his perfect and sinless agents in filling the earth with their offspring and making it a paradise, as well as exercising control over the animal creation, could thus be expressed as the grant of a truly loving privilege and as his genuine desire toward them—not merely as the giving of a commission that, on their part, was foredoomed, by God’s prior knowing or knowledge, to failure. God’s arranging for a test by means of “the tree of the knowledge of good and bad” and his creation of “the tree of life” in the garden of Eden also would not be meaningless or cynical acts, made so by his foreknowing that the human pair would sin and never be able to eat of “the tree of life.”
21. To offer something very desirable to another person on conditions known beforehand to be unreachable is recognized as both hypocritical and cruel. The prospect of everlasting life is presented in God’s Word as a goal for all persons, one possible to attain. After urging his listeners to ‘keep on asking and seeking’ good things from God, Jesus pointed out that a father does not give a stone or a serpent to his child that asks for bread or a fish. Showing his Father’s view of disappointing the legitimate hopes of a person, Jesus then said: “Therefore, if you, although being wicked, know how to give good gifts to your children, how much more so will your Father who is in the heavens give good things to those asking him?” (Matthew 7:7-11). In view of that the case must be that John 3:16 is a truly unconditional invitation, that is, open to any and all and also that means that God has not individually pre-determined who will or can respond to the invitation.
22. Thus, the invitations and opportunities to receive benefits and everlasting blessings set before all men by God are bona fide. (Matthew 21:22; James 1:5-6) He can in all sincerity urge men to ‘turn back from transgression and keep living,’ as he did with the people of Israel. (Ezekiel 18:23, 30-32; compare Jeremiah 29:11, 12) Logically, he could not do this, in true sincerity, if he foreknew that they were individually destined to die in wickedness. (Compare Acts 17:30, 31; 1 Timothy 2:3, 4) As God told Israel: “Look to Me and be saved, all the ends of the earth! For I am God, and there is no other.” (Isaiah 45:19-22)
23. In a similar vein, the apostle Peter writes: “The Lord is not slow about keeping His promise, like some people are, but is [simply] being patient with you, since He does not want anyone to be destroyed, but He wants everyone to repent [i.e., change their hearts and lives]” (2Peter 3:9, AUV-NT) If God already foreknew and foreordained millenniums in advance precisely which individuals would receive eternal salvation and which individuals would receive eternal destruction, it may well be asked how meaningful such ‘long-suffering (extraordinarily patient)’ (per the rendering of Amplified Bible) of God could be and how genuine his desire could be that “He wants everyone to repent.” The inspired apostle John wrote that “God is love,” and the apostle Paul states that love “hopes all things.” ([urlhttp://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=1John%204:8;%201Corinthians%2013:4-7;&version=45;49;73;]1John 4:8; 1Corinthians 13:4, 7[/url]) It is in harmony with this outstanding, divine quality that God should exercise a genuinely open, kindly attitude toward all persons, he being desirous of their gaining salvation, until they prove themselves unworthy, beyond hope (compare 2Peter 3:9 and Heb 6:4-12). Thus, the apostle Paul speaks of “the kindly quality of God [that] is trying to lead you to repentance” (Romans 2:4-6).
24. Finally if, by God’s foreknowledge, the opportunity to receive the benefits of Christ Jesus’ ransom sacrifice were already irrevocably sealed off from some, perhaps for millions of individuals, even before their birth, so that such ones could never prove worthy, it could not truly be said that the ransom was made available to ALL men (2Corinthians 5:14-15; 1Timothy 2:5-6; Hebrews 2:9). The impartiality of God is clearly no mere figure of speech. “In every nation the man that fears [God] and works righteousness is acceptable to him.” (Acts 10:34-35; Deuteronomy 10:17; Romans 2:11) The option is actually and genuinely open to all men “to seek God, if they might grope for him and really find him, although, in fact, he is not far off from each one of us” (Acts 17:26-27). Therefore there is no empty hope or conditional promise set forth in the divine exhortation at the end of the book of Revelation inviting: “Let anyone hearing say: ‘Come!’ And let anyone thirsting come; let anyone that wishes take life’s water free.” (Revelation 22:17).
25. Are there other ‘alternatives’ to predestination or to actual exercise of foreknowledge that could account for what, at first glance, seem to be acts of such? Consider: If you are married have you ever “known” what your mate was about to do or say before they actually did or said it? If you are a parent do you know what your children will say or how they will act and can you not ‘foresee’ problems before they arise? How is that so? It certainly does not have anything to do with an exercise of foreknowledge or an act of predestination. God’s wisdom and abilities to read minds, hearts and DNA (follow this link and especially note the last paragraph on page 1) greatly enhance his capabilities to ‘know’ such things so far beyond our own abilities to do so that some may have mistakenly attributed this ‘knowledge’ to an exercise of his foreknowledge and have misunderstood the result as an act of predestination. Now, consider this: if you had definite knowledge that your child was going to break the law and that an innocent person would suffer and die, in the eyes of the law, what would be your responsibility? Think about Terry Nichols. Remember God is not only the Supreme Law-Giver but also the Supreme Law-Keeper. Be very careful of what you attribute to God. Indiscriminate, unselective foreknowledge carries with it inescapable responsibility.
26. Throughout the Bible record, God’s exercise of foreknowledge and foreordination is consistently tied in with his own purposes and will and primarily to the outworking of such. “To purpose” means to set something before oneself as an aim or an object to be attained. (The Greek word pro´the·sis, translated “purpose,” means, literally, “something placed or set forth before.”) Since God’s purposes are certain of accomplishment, he can foreknow the results, the ultimate realization of his purposes, and can foreordain them as well as the steps he may see fit to take to accomplish them. (Isaiah 14:24-27) Thus, God is spoken of as ‘forming’ or ‘fashioning’ (from the Hebrew ya·tsar´, related to the word for “potter” used at Jeremiah 18:4) his purpose concerning future events or actions (2Kings 19:25; Isaiah 46:11; compare Isaiah 45:9-18). As the Great Potter, God “works out everything in conformity with the purpose of his will” (Ephesians 1:11), and ‘makes all his works cooperate together’ for the good of those loving him. (Romans 8:28) It is, therefore, specifically in connection with his own foreordained purposes that God is “Declaring the end from the beginning, And from ancient times things which have not been done,” (Isaiah 46:9-10).
27. When God created the first human pair they were perfect, and God could look upon the result of all his creative work and honestly declare it “very good” in every sense of the words (Genesis 1:31; Deuteronomy 32:4). Instead of distrustfully, unfaithfully concerning himself with what the human pair’s future actions would be, the record says that he “rested” (Genesis 2:2). He could do so since, by virtue of his almightiness and his supreme wisdom, no future action, circumstance, or contingency could possibly present an insurmountable obstacle or an irremediable problem to block the realization of his sovereign purpose (Daniel 4:35). There is, therefore, no Scriptural basis for the argument of predestinarianism that for God to refrain from exercising his powers of foreknowledge in that total and unselective way would jeopardize God’s purposes, making them “always liable to be broken through want of foresight, and [that] he must be continually putting his system to rights, as it gets out of order, through the contingence of the actions of moral agents.” Nor would selective exercise of foresight give his creatures the power to “break [God’s] measures, make him continually to change his mind, subject him to vexation, and bring him into confusion,” as predestinarians claim. (M’Clintock and Strong’s Cyclopaedia, 1894, Vol. VIII, p. 556) What example does God set? Does he, in effect, say: “Do as I say not as I do.” Or, is it the case that he is the Supreme Example of how to act and to think? Please consider: if God’s earthly servants have no real need to be “anxious about tomorrow,” it follows that their Creator, to whom mighty nations are as “a drop from a bucket,” neither had nor has such anxiety (Matthew 6:34; Isaiah 40:15) and, in response to that anxiety, require that he ‘tip the scales’ in his favor by exercising his foreknowledge in every and all cases.
28. Unless you contend that God is an aberrant despot who acts hypocritically or worse (as we will shortly see) and that there are actually dual standards, one for God and one for his creatures (a position held by many advocates of predestinarianism) then God must obey his own laws and must abide by the precepts and principles that we find in the Bible and that apply also to his creatures. That means that we must be very careful of what we attribute to God in this area. I submit to you that regardless of the fact that advocates of predestinarianism claim to worship the God of the Bible the fact is that they do not worship the same God that I worship. I further submit that this does matter to God and does have an effect on our standing before God.
29. In the Bible cases are presented in which God did foreknow the course that certain groups, nations, or the majority of mankind would take, and thus he foretold the basic course of their future actions and foreordained what corresponding action he would take regarding them. However, such foreknowledge or foreordination does not deprive the individuals within such collective groups or divisions of mankind of exercising free choice as to the particular course they will follow. This can be seen from the following examples:
30. Prior to the Flood of Noah’s day, God announced his purpose to bring about this act of destruction. The Biblical account shows, however, that such divine determination was made after the conditions developed that called for such action, including violence and other badness. Additionally, God, who is able to “know the heart of the sons of mankind,” made examination and found that “every inclination of the thoughts of [mankind’s] heart was only bad all the time.” (2Chronicles 6:30; Genesis 6:5) Yet individuals, Noah and his family, gained God’s favor and escaped destruction (Genesis 6:7-8; 7:1).
31. Similarly, although God gave the nation of Israel the opportunity to become “a kingdom of priests and a holy nation” by keeping his covenant, yet some 40 years later, when the nation was at the borders of the Promised Land, God foretold that they would break his covenant and, as a nation, would be forsaken by him. This foreknowledge was not without prior basis, however, as national insubordination and rebellion already had been revealed. Hence, God said: “For I well know their inclination that they are developing today before I bring them into the land about which I have sworn.” (Exodus 19:6; Deuteronomy 31:16-18, 21; Psalms 81:10-13) The results to which such clearly demonstrated inclination would now lead in the way of increased wickedness could be foreknown by God without its making him responsible for such conditions, even as one’s foreknowing that a certain structure built of inferior materials and with shoddy workmanship will deteriorate does not make that one responsible for such deterioration. The divine rule governs that ‘what is sown is what will be reaped’ (Galatians 6:7-9 compare Hosea 10:12-13). Certain prophets delivered prophetic warnings of God’s foreordained expressions of judgment, all of which had basis in already existing conditions and heart attitudes. (Psalms 7:8-9; Proverbs 11:19; Jeremiah 11:20) Here again, however, individuals could and did respond to God’s counsel, reproof, and warnings and so merited his favor (Jeremiah 21:8-9; Ezekiel 33:1-20).
32. In addition to foreknowledge concerning classes, certain individuals are specifically involved in divine forecasts. These include Esau and Jacob (mentioned earlier), the Pharaoh of the Exodus, Samson, Solomon, Josiah, Jeremiah, Cyrus, John the Baptizer, Judas Iscariot, and God’s own Son Jesus.
33. In the cases of Samson, Jeremiah, and John the Baptizer, God exercised foreknowledge prior to their birth. This foreknowledge, however, did not specify what their final destiny would be. Rather, on the basis of such foreknowledge, Jehovah foreordained that Samson should live according to the Nazirite vow and should initiate the deliverance of Israel from the Philistines, that Jeremiah should serve as a prophet, and that John the Baptizer should do a preparatory work as a forerunner of the Messiah. (Judges 13:3-5; Jeremiah 1:5; Luke 1:13-17) While highly favored by such privileges, this did not guarantee their gaining eternal salvation or even that they would remain faithful until death (although those three did). God also foretold that one of David’s many sons would be named Solomon and he foreordained that Solomon would be used to build the temple (2Samuel 7:12-13; 1Kings 6:12; 1Chronicles 22:6-19). However, though favored in this way and even privileged to write certain books of the Holy Scriptures, Solomon nevertheless fell into apostasy in his later years (1Kings 11:9-11).
34. Likewise with Esau and Jacob, God’s foreknowledge did not fix their eternal destinies but, rather, determined, or foreordained, which of the national groups descending from the two sons would gain a dominant position over the other ([urlhttp://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Genesis%2025:23-26;&version=45;49;8;]Genesis 25:23-26[/url]). This foreseen dominance also pointed to the gaining of the right of the firstborn by Jacob, a right that brought along with it the privilege of being in the line of descent through which the Abrahamic “seed” would come (Genesis 27:29; 28:13-14). By this means God made clear that his choice of individuals for certain uses is not bound by the usual customs or procedures conforming to men’s expectations. Nor are divinely assigned privileges to be dispensed solely on the basis of works, which might allow a person to feel he has ‘earned the right’ to such privileges and that they are ‘owed to him.’ The apostle Paul stressed this point in showing why God, by undeserved kindness, could grant to the Gentile nations privileges once seemingly reserved for Israel (Romans 9:1-6, 10-13, 30-32).
35. Paul’s quotations concerning God’s ‘love for Jacob [Israel] and his hatred for Esau [Edom]’ comes from Malachi 1:2-3, written long after Jacob and Esau’s time. So the Bible does not necessarily say that God held such opinion of the twins before their birth. It is a scientifically established fact that much of a child’s general disposition and temperament is determined at the time of conception because of the genetic factors contributed by each parent (follow this link and especially note the last paragraph on page 1). That God can see such factors is self-evident. To what extent such divine insight affected God’s foreordination concerning the two boys cannot be said, but at any rate, his choice of Jacob over Esau did not of itself doom Esau or his descendants, the Edomites, to destruction. Even individuals from among the accursed Canaanites gained the privilege of association with God’s covenant people and received blessings. (Genesis 9:25-27; Joshua 9:27)
36. Similarly, God foretold nearly two centuries beforehand that he would use a conqueror named Cyrus to effect the release of the Jews from Babylon. (Isaiah 44:24-45:6) But the Persian to whom that name eventually was given in fulfillment of divine prophecy is not stated in the Bible to have become a genuine worshiper of Jehovah the God of the Jews, and secular history shows him continuing his worship of false gods.
37. On the whole these cases of foreknowledge prior to the individual’s birth are very rare and also, as shown above, cannot and do not conflict with God’s revealed qualities, attributes and announced standards. Nor is there any indication that God coerced the individuals to act against their own will. In the cases of Pharaoh, Judas Iscariot, and God’s own Son, there is no evidence that God’s foreknowledge was exercised prior to the person’s coming into existence. Within these individual cases certain principles are illustrated, bearing on God’s use of foreknowledge and foreordination.
38. One such principle is God’s testing of individuals by causing or allowing certain circumstances or events, or by causing such individuals to hear his inspired messages, the result being that they are obliged to exercise their free choice to make a decision and thus reveal a definite heart attitude, read by God. (Proverbs 15:11; 1Peter 1:6-7; Hebrews 4:12-13) According to the way the individuals respond, God can also mold them in the course they have selected of their own volition. (1Chronicles 28:9; Psalms 33:13-15; 139:1-4, 23-24) Thus, “the heart of earthling man” first inclines toward a certain way before God does the directing of the steps of such a one. (Proverbs 16:9; Psalms 51:10) Under testing, one’s heart condition can become fixed, either hardened in unrighteousness and rebellion or made firm in unbreakable devotion to God and the doing of his will. (Job 2:3-10; Jeremiah 18:11-12; Romans 2:4-11; Hebrews 3:7-15) Having reached such a point of his own choice, the end result of the individual’s course can now be foreknown and foretold with no injustice and no violation of man’s free moral agency (compare Job 34:10-12).
39. The case of faithful Abraham, already discussed above, illustrates these principles. A contrasting case is that of the unresponsive Pharaoh of the Exodus. God foreknew that Pharaoh would refuse permission for the Israelites to leave “except by a strong hand” (Exodus 3:19-20), and he foreordained the plague resulting in the death of the firstborn (Exodus 4:22-23). The apostle Paul’s discussion of God’s dealings with Pharaoh is often incorrectly understood to mean that God arbitrarily hardens the heart of individuals according to his foreordained purpose, without regard for the individual’s prior inclination, or heart attitude (Romans 9:14-18 is an example of where this misunderstanding is reflected in the renderings of almost all Bibles). Likewise, according to most translations, God advised Moses that he would “harden [Pharaoh’s] heart” (Exodus 4:21 compare Exodus 9:12; 10:1, 27). However, a few translations render the Hebrew account to read similar to Rotherham’s rendering, “let [Pharaoh’s] heart wax bold.” In support of such rendering, the appendix to Rotherham’s translation shows that in Hebrew the occasion or permission of an event is often presented as if it were the cause of the event, and that “even positive commands are occasionally to be accepted as meaning no more than permission.” Thus at Exodus 1:17 the original Hebrew text literally says that the midwives “caused the male children to live,” whereas in reality they only permitted them to live by refraining from putting them to death. After quoting Hebrew scholars M. M. Kalisch, H. F. W. Gesenius, and B. Davies in support, Rotherham states that the Hebrew sense of the texts involving Pharaoh is that “God permitted Pharaoh to harden his own heart—spared him—gave him the opportunity, the occasion, of working out the wickedness that was in him. That is all.”—The Emphasised Bible, appendix, p. 919.
40. Corroborating this understanding is the fact that the record definitely shows that Pharaoh himself “hardened his heart” (Exodus 8:15, 32). He thus exercised his own will and followed his own stubborn inclination, the results of which inclination God accurately foresaw and predicted. The repeated opportunities given him by God obliged Pharaoh to make decisions, and in doing so he became hardened in his attitude (compare Ecclesiastes 8:11-12). As the apostle Paul shows by quoting Exodus 9:16, God allowed the matter to develop in this way to the full length of ten plagues in order to make manifest his own power and cause his name to be made known earth wide (Romans 9:17-18). In his commentary on Exodus 9:16 Adam Clarke, in part, states: “Neither the Hebrew, . . . I have caused thee to stand; nor the apostle’s translation of it, Rom 9:17, . . . I have raised thee; nor that of the Septuagint, . . . on this account art thou preserved, viz., in the past plagues; can countenance that most exceptionable meaning put on the words by certain commentators, viz., “That God ordained or appointed Pharaoh from all eternity, by certain means, to this end; that he made him to exist in time; that he raised him to the throne; promoted him to that high honor and dignity; that he preserved him, and did not cut him off as yet; that he strengthened and hardened his heart; irritated, provoked, and stirred him up against his people Israel, and suffered him to go all the lengths he did go in his obstinacy and rebellion; all which was done to show in him his power in destroying him in the Red Sea. The sum of which is, that this man was raised up by God in every sense for God to show his power in his destruction.” So man speaks; thus God hath not spoken. See Henry on the place.” (Italics are mine.)
41. In his commentary on Exodus 4:21 Adam Clarke, in part, states: “Exo 4:21 - But I will harden his heart - The case of Pharaoh has given rise to many fierce controversies, and to several strange and conflicting opinions. . . . All those who have read the Scriptures with care and attention, know well that God is frequently represented in them as doing what he only permits to be done. . . . Let it be observed that there is nothing spoken here of the eternal state of the Egyptian king; nor does anything in the whole of the subsequent account authorize us to believe that God hardened his [Pharaoh’s] heart against the influences of his own grace, that he [God] might occasion him [Pharaoh] so to sin that his [God’s] justice might consign him [Pharaoh] to [adverse judgment]. This would be such an act of flagrant injustice as we could scarcely attribute to the worst of men. He who leads another into an offense that he may have a fairer pretense to punish him for it, or brings him into such circumstances that he cannot avoid committing a capital crime, and then hangs him for it, is surely the most execrable of mortals. What then should we make of the God of justice and mercy should we attribute to him a decree, the date of which is lost in eternity, by which he has determined to cut off from the possibility of salvation millions of millions of unborn souls, and leave them under a necessity of sinning, by actually hardening their hearts against the influences of his own grace and Spirit, that he may, on the pretext of justice, consign them to [adverse judgment]? Whatever may be pretended in behalf of such unqualified opinions, it must be evident to all who are not deeply prejudiced, that neither the justice nor the sovereignty of God can be magnified by them.” If it is unfair for God to predestine Pharaoh or anyone else to an unrighteous course then, by the same standard of fairness, it is also unfair for God to predestine Moses or anyone else to a righteous course! That means that some of the survivors of the Columbine shootings were sadly mistaken when they said, “God has a plan for me.” If God had an individual ‘plan’ for their life then God also had an individual ‘plan’ for Eric Harris and Dylan Klebold and God is responsible for imperfection in all its forms!