The Highway Forums General Discussion Theology Discussion Forum Ephesians 1:4,5,11

I was wondering if perhaps someone would like to give their exigetical opinion on these versus.

Ephesians 1:4


So is this saying, God has chosen us to be holy and blameless Through Christ before the foundation of the world?

Or is this saying God has chosen us in Christ before the foundation of the world and also through Christ we should be holy and blameless?


Is this saying He predestined us to adoption through Christ?

Or That he predestined the plan of adoption?


So is this saying that God has predestinated us to salvation or predestinated the plan of salvation?

Some help here would be appriciated.

Thanks,

Dave.

Not quite sure what you mean, Dave. But the verse says that "we":

1) Were chosen in Christ
2) Before the foundation of the world
3) So that we would be holy, etc.


"Us" is clearly the object of "predestine." So God predestined "us" to adoption, just as the verse says.


Well, let me restructure in this way: "we", being predestined according to His purpose, have obtained an inheritance in Christ.

Compare Scripture with Scripture where it seems unclear. If it seems unclear to you whether we are the objects of God's choice or whether "the plan of adoption" is the object of God's choice before the founding of the worlds, compare those verses with Romans 9. Things become quite plain there and in other places where Jesus Himself describes those who are chosen (John 6:37, 39, 44, 17:6, etc) and those who are specifically kept from hearing "lest they see and hear and understand and repent, and I would heal them (Matthew 13:15)."

-Robin

Sorry, I guess I should have given an explination of why I'm asking this question.

I was trying to use this as scriptural proof for "our" election. But the person that I was talking too, was of an opinion that these versus were showing that God predestined the "plan of election" and not actually predestinating a "people" unto Himself.

I have always looked at these versus without question. But when he defended his position, it did sound reasonable. When looking at the CT, It is still hard for me to determine what exactly the focus of predestination is in this chapter.


I agree that in other places in the Bible that there is a clear understanding of election.

But I also think that it isn't harmful in any way to the reformed doctrine of election if these versus "were" indeed focused more on the "plan of election" then if they were on the "subjects of election."

Because if you think about it, God has had to have also predestined the "plan of election" through Jesus Christ as the plan of of salvation.

Wow, I'm a little confused and have been, that's why I am interested in someone being able to help me here. <img src="/forum/images/graemlins/smile.gif" alt="" />

I want to believe that this is a good text to demonstrate election of a chosen people, but if it's simply not there then I will stop using it in my defense for my reformed stance on unconditional election and instead move on to Romans and John and others.

Dave.

Dave,

So, you got bruised by that old semi-Pelagian/Arminian ploy eh? The passage CANNOT be interpreted to mean that God predestinated a "plan". Just the word "predestinate" alone forbids such an understanding. People are predestinated to an end and things are foreordained to occur, but things (non-people) are not predestinated. So, let's look at how Paul actual wrote the passage:

Ephesians 1:3-14 (KJV) "Blessed [be] the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, who hath blessed us with all spiritual blessings in heavenly [places] in Christ: According as he hath chosen us in him before the foundation of the world, that we should be holy and without blame before him in love: Having predestinated us unto the adoption of children by Jesus Christ to himself, according to the good pleasure of his will, To the praise of the glory of his grace, wherein he hath made us accepted in the beloved. In whom we have redemption through his blood, the forgiveness of sins, according to the riches of his grace; Wherein he hath abounded toward us in all wisdom and prudence; Having made known unto us the mystery of his will, according to his good pleasure which he hath purposed in himself: That in the dispensation of the fulness of times he might gather together in one all things in Christ, both which are in heaven, and which are on earth; [even] in him: 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: That we should be to the praise of his glory, who first trusted in Christ. In whom ye also [trusted], after that ye heard the word of truth, the gospel of your salvation: in whom also after that ye believed, ye were sealed with that holy Spirit of promise, Which is the earnest of our inheritance until the redemption of the purchased possession, unto the praise of his glory.

Seriously, can there be ANY doubt that Paul is addressing PEOPLE and not things or events? Paul's audience consists of believers! And it is to them that he explains the origin of their salvation, their faith, their sustenance and their glorious end. One could rightly say that Eph 1:3-13 (all one sentence in the Greek) is the "commentary" on Romans 8:29, 30.

The LORD God did not "predestinate a plan", i.e., an opportunity for salvation whereby all men are given the chance to be saved if they exercise their free-will decision to ask Jesus into their hearts. Eph 1:3-13 clearly teaches that God predestinated a people from all eternity to be holy and blameless before Him. And the means by which this would be accomplished was through the Lord Christ Who would atone for their sins and the Holy Spirit Who would indwell them and bring them infallibly to the end appointed (predestinated). If ever there was a passage of Scripture that taught not only divine predestination but also the doctrine of Sola Gratia, this passage has got to be the crème de la crème.

In His grace,

This is the same type of ploy, to plagerize from pilgrim, to speak of national election instead of individual election.

The point of the matter is this: Nothing is done without Christ in view. Period. So to decree a plan, without Christ in the plan, is nonsense and unscriptural. To decree a plan, without individuals specifically invloved in the plan is unfounded.

As far as Eph1 is concerned, there is no mention of plan at all. tHIS HAS TO BE READ INTO THE VERSES WITH EXTREME PREJUDICE.

I would ask this person exactly what he means by decreeing only a plan. How is this plan to be fulfilled? What does it entail? Make sure you point out to this person that God has the end fixed, then designs His decree to make the end happen.

I'm not sure, but I think his question comes from the "in Christ" passages. No doubt, he believes that the people are predestinated. That's obvious. So it misses the point to keep highlighting "we", "ye", etc. The question is what does it mean for the *we/ye* to be predestinated according to this passage? The answer seems to be "in Christ," whatever that means. Does the passage teach that, in retrospect, we can say that we are predestinated because we are among those people who are "in Christ"?

I'll explain (I'm not endorsing the view!): if "in Christ" means that those people are predestinated who are genuinely regenerated and joined in union with Christ by faith, for instance, then this passage says nothing about how that group of people came to that status of being joined to Christ. So, for instance, had Jim never been joined to Christ (let's pretend God's grace is resistible for a minute), then he wouldn't have been predestinated. Likewise, pretending we can choose Christ of our own free will, let's suppose Reprobate Ron trusts Christ and is joined in union with Christ--well, then even Reprobate Ron could be elect. Etc. On this view, the passage tells us who is elect, but it doesn't exclude from possibility an election both in God (God electing us) and in us (a free election of God by us--i.e., our free choice of God).

The questions, then, that (I think) Puritan wants answered, are these: what in this passage should make us think that *this passage* is referring to the election of people individually, rather than the election of Christ and those who are in Christ? And, if there is nothing that makes us choose one of these options over the other, or if this passage teaches the latter option to be the case, then what does this passage say about how we come to be in Christ? If it says nothing about that, then Ephesians 1 oughtn't to be cited in defense of individual election.

Do I make sense?

Incidentally, I affirm individual election. I'm just trying to help clarify things. I wrote this so fast, though, that I probably am far from clear. Sorry.

Valete!
John

John,

Dave can clarify and/or correct me on this if necessary, but I think what you offered is not what the issue was. From what I understand from Dave's question, the person he was talking with posited that the Ephesian passage teaches that God predestinated a plan OF salvation rather than individuals TO salvation. Thus my reply where I emphasized the pronouns, e.g., we, us, etc., assuming that the actions referred to in each highlighted portion would be noted as well. To me, it would be incredulous to try and put all that God has done for individuals in that passage as happening subsequent to one being in Christ rather than what I see as perspicuous as being prior to and causal to one being in Christ. <img src="/forum/images/graemlins/grin.gif" alt="" />

In His grace,