John 15:24 + 25 - Hating Christ without cause

Note. I listen to Calvinists talking about what they believe and I look to the Word to see if it aligns.
There is nothing in the verses that speak of a predetermined result. Unless you believe that all foreknowledge can know is that which God predetermines.
So if God had not predetermined something, then God would not know what was going to happen.
Nobody can accept tht conclusion, so why accept the opposite that everything God foreknows is predestined?
Whatever .... ?
 
No it doesn't speak of choice.

25 But they have done this to fulfill the word that is written in their Law, ‘They hated Me without a cause.’

They hated Him because it was prophesied that they would.

Luk 24:44 Then he said to them, “These are my words that I spoke to you while I was still with you, that everything written about me in the Law of Moses and the Prophets and the Psalms must be fulfilled.”

Choosing means deciding between alternatives. It is rational. But doing something without a reason is irrational.
I believe that is a good observation.
The reason is given. To fulfill Scripture.
 
Well said...

But Pretexts don't trump any other Verses. Verses never lose their Exegetical meaning, just because a Pretext is put on a pedestal. It would be like putting one ethnicity on a pedestal, and not allowing other ethnicities any decency...

This is really what goes on around here all he time. Pay attention; people want their Verses placed on a pedestal, and all other Verses to bow down to them like Sheaves...

This is THE reason we have our differences. The more Verses you can fit onto your Pedestal, the closer to the God's honest Truth you will be...
Ok, I will try to be more pedestaltic
 
I believe that is a good observation.
The reason is given. To fulfill Scripture.
again it is a half answer.
Also, it would be contrary to Biblical intent to say that a prophecy occured just so it could be fulfilled.
The event that is prophesied is always important to Christ and God's work.
If someone took the notion that God prophesied thru prophets simply to prove He knew the future. it would be a shallow understanding of God and prophesy.
So yes, those things that occur, having been prophesied, do prove God's ability, but they also occur to fulfill God's purpose.
 
Last edited:
again it is a half answer.
Also, it would be contrary to Biblical intent to say that a prophecy occured just so it could be fulfilled.
The event that is prophesied is always important to Christ and God's work.
If someone took the notion that God prophesied thru prophets simply to prove He knew the future. it would be a shallow understanding of God and prophesy.
So yes, those things that occur, having been prophesied, do prove God's ability, but they also occur to fulfill God's purpose.

I don't understand how this disproves the idea that the events happened because they were prophesied to happen.
 
I don't understand how this disproves the idea that the events happened because they were prophesied to happen.
Not sure what you are thinking, but the word prophesy, does not mean to make happen. It means to speak forth, it tells us truths and it foretells the future, but it does not force something to take place.
When OT prophets spoke of the coming of Christ, they were not making Him come by prophesying about Him
He was coming whether or not they prophesied
 
Not sure what you are thinking, but the word prophesy, does not mean to make happen. It means to speak forth, it tells us truths and it foretells the future, but it does not force something to take place.
When OT prophets spoke of the coming of Christ, they were not making Him come by prophesying about Him
He was coming whether or not they prophesied
Some Calvinists confound foreknowledge and determination
 
Some Calvinists confound foreknowledge and determination
So did Luke:
Act 2:23 this Jesus, delivered up according to the definite plan and foreknowledge of God, you crucified and killed by the hands of lawless men.

The word definite means: to appoint, decree, specify: - declare, determine, limit, ordain.
The word plan means: volition, that is, (objectively) advice, or (by implication) purpose: - + advise, counsel, will.
The word foreknowledge simply means to know beforehand.
 
So did Luke:
Act 2:23 this Jesus, delivered up according to the definite plan and foreknowledge of God, you crucified and killed by the hands of lawless men.

The word definite means: to appoint, decree, specify: - declare, determine, limit, ordain.
The word plan means: volition, that is, (objectively) advice, or (by implication) purpose: - + advise, counsel, will.
The word foreknowledge simply means to know beforehand.

It adds "and" for a reason, not for redundancy.

But the Pharisees and lawyers rejected the DECREE of God for themselves, not having been baptized by him. (Lk. 7:30 NKJ)

Same Greek word.
 
To say that someone did anything just because it had been prophesied is a shallow theology.
Tell that to Jesus or the gospel writers.

Mat_1:22 Now all this was done, that it might be fulfilled which was spoken of the Lord by the prophet
Mat_8:17 That it might be fulfilled which was spoken by . . .
Mat_12:17 That it might be fulfilled which was spoken by . .
Mat_13:35 That it might be fulfilled which was spoken by . . .
Mat_21:4 All this was done, that it might be fulfilled which was spoken by . . .
Luk_21:22 . . .that all things which are written may be fulfilled.
Joh_13:18 . . .but that the scripture may be fulfilled
Joh_15:25 But this cometh to pass, that the word might be fulfilled . . .
 
The reason I bring up these verses is because Calvinists teach that God consigns people into a condition from which they will hate Him.
Here Jesus says that they saw His works and yet still hated Him, this speaks of a choice in the face of evidence
Apples and oranges. God's decree is not the same thing as Jesus' detractors not having an adequate justification for their hate. Thusly, the op appears to be making an argument built off a faulty conflation, thus committing a fairly obvious category error and/or equivocation fallacy. The op would have to demonstrate the equivalent significance or meaning of the words used (cause in one sense means the same as cause in the other sense), rather than using undefined similarity (cause and cause). As such, the opening post's verse is good, since all scripture is profitable for doctrine, but it is not good for use as an argument against Calvinism.

In short, there are different types of causation; beware equivocation. Not having an adequate judicial reason for the charge of sin, thus legitimzing the hatred of sin....This is obviously not the same as choices not having reasons or causes, nor is it the same as God's eternal design for creation.

The verse is addressing the bankruptness of their hate towards Christ; not whether God elects unconditionally or has an eternal decree. Nor does the verse eliminate the innate moral opposition of the unregenerate toward God. Rather, the verse actually demonstrates the depravity of the people who hated Christ. They had absolutely no judicial grounds for doing so. No mud that they slung ever stuck to the spotless lamb of God. The connections to John 8 and the love, hate, hearing, and truth issues are remarkable; so it seems appropriate to quote.

42 Jesus said to them, "If God were your Father, you would love me, for I came from God and I am here. I came not of my own accord, but he sent me.
43 Why do you not understand what I say? It is because you cannot bear to hear my word.
44 You are of your father the devil, and your will is to do your father's desires. He was a murderer from the beginning, and does not stand in the truth, because there is no truth in him. When he lies, he speaks out of his own character, for he is a liar and the father of lies.
45 But because I tell the truth, you do not believe me.
46 Which one of you convicts me of sin? If I tell the truth, why do you not believe me?
47 Whoever is of God hears the words of God. The reason why you do not hear them is that you are not of God." (John 8:42-47 ESV)
 
Last edited:
But the Pharisees and lawyers rejected the DECREE of God for themselves, not having been baptized by him. (Lk. 7:30 NKJ)
Here is Luke 7:30 according to the New King James
30 But the Pharisees and lawyers rejected the will of God for themselves, not having been baptized by him.

Remember, I gave the definition of 3 words from Acts 2:23
The word definite means: to appoint, decree, specify: - declare, determine, limit, ordain.
The word plan means: volition, that is, (objectively) advice, or (by implication) purpose: - + advise, counsel, will.
The word foreknowledge simply means to know beforehand.

Your word in Luke is the same word as plan above, not definite.

So, the Pharisees and Lawyers did not reject God's decree but God's plan, advice, counsel etc.
G1012
boulē
volition, that is, (objectively) advice, or (by implication) purpose: - + advise, counsel, will.

The word definite in Acts 2:23 that isn't in the Luke passage is
G3724
horizō
From G3725; to mark out or bound (“horizon”), that is, (figuratively) to appoint, decree, specify: - declare, determine, limit, ordain.
 
So did Luke:
Act 2:23 this Jesus, delivered up according to the definite plan and foreknowledge of God, you crucified and killed by the hands of lawless men.

The word definite means: to appoint, decree, specify: - declare, determine, limit, ordain.
The word plan means: volition, that is, (objectively) advice, or (by implication) purpose: - + advise, counsel, will.
The word foreknowledge simply means to know beforehand.
Nope

Luke is not stating they are the same

and your comments do not really seem to equate them
 
Apples and oranges. God's decree is not the same thing as Jesus' detractors not having an adequate justification for their hate. Thusly, the op appears to be making an argument built off a faulty conflation, thus committing a fairly obvious category error and/or equivocation fallacy. The op would have to demonstrate the equivalent significance or meaning of the words used (cause in one sense means the same as cause in the other sense), rather than using undefined similarity (cause and cause). As such, the opening post's verse is good, since all scripture is profitable for doctrine, but it is not good for use as an argument against Calvinism.

In short, there are different types of causation; beware equivocation. Not having an adequate judicial reason for the charge of sin, thus legitimzing the hatred of sin....This is obviously not the same as choices not having reasons or causes, nor is it the same as God's eternal design for creation.

The verse is addressing the bankruptness of their hate towards Christ; not whether God elects unconditionally or has an eternal decree. Nor does the verse eliminate the innate moral opposition of the unregenerate toward God. Rather, the verse actually demonstrates the depravity of the people who hated Christ. They had absolutely no judicial grounds for doing so. No mud that they slung ever stuck to the spotless lamb of God. The connections to John 8 and the love, hate, hearing, and truth issues are remarkable; so it seems appropriate to quote.

42 Jesus said to them, "If God were your Father, you would love me, for I came from God and I am here. I came not of my own accord, but he sent me.
43 Why do you not understand what I say? It is because you cannot bear to hear my word.
44 You are of your father the devil, and your will is to do your father's desires. He was a murderer from the beginning, and does not stand in the truth, because there is no truth in him. When he lies, he speaks out of his own character, for he is a liar and the father of lies.
45 But because I tell the truth, you do not believe me.
46 Which one of you convicts me of sin? If I tell the truth, why do you not believe me?
47 Whoever is of God hears the words of God. The reason why you do not hear them is that you are not of God." (John 8:42-47 ESV)
You are wandering off into defending elements of calvinism that I was not addressing. I beieve a main point was that God did not cause them to hate Him. They actually understood ideas about Him, but rebelled against what they knew.
Honestly, I had a difficult time with your post, following how it related to the cited verses and my comments
 
Apples and oranges. God's decree is not the same thing as Jesus' detractors not having an adequate justification for their hate. Thusly, the op appears to be making an argument built off a faulty conflation, thus committing a fairly obvious category error and/or equivocation fallacy. The op would have to demonstrate the equivalent significance or meaning of the words used (cause in one sense means the same as cause in the other sense), rather than using undefined similarity (cause and cause). As such, the opening post's verse is good, since all scripture is profitable for doctrine, but it is not good for use as an argument against Calvinism.

In short, there are different types of causation; beware equivocation. Not having an adequate judicial reason for the charge of sin, thus legitimzing the hatred of sin....This is obviously not the same as choices not having reasons or causes, nor is it the same as God's eternal design for creation.

The verse is addressing the bankruptness of their hate towards Christ; not whether God elects unconditionally or has an eternal decree. Nor does the verse eliminate the innate moral opposition of the unregenerate toward God. Rather, the verse actually demonstrates the depravity of the people who hated Christ. They had absolutely no judicial grounds for doing so. No mud that they slung ever stuck to the spotless lamb of God. The connections to John 8 and the love, hate, hearing, and truth issues are remarkable; so it seems appropriate to quote.
Do you deny in your theology God determined that?

or that God works to accomplish what he determines?
 
Nope

Luke is not stating they are the same

and your comments do not really seem to equate them
Again, lets look at the two passages.

Your passage
Luke 7:30 But the Pharisees and lawyers rejected the will of God for themselves, not having been baptized by him.

My passage
Act 2:23 this Jesus, delivered up according to the definite plan and foreknowledge of God, you crucified and killed by the hands of lawless men.

The word "will" in your passage and the word "plan" in my passage are the same word. But you fail to realize that the Acts passage has another word definite that the Luke passage does not. It is that word definite that makes the difference.

It is the difference from a general plan and a decreed or ordained plan.
 
Y
The reason I bring up these verses is because Calvinists teach that God consigns people into a condition from which they will hate Him.
Here Jesus says that they saw His works and yet still hated Him, this speaks of a choice in the face of evidence
Yes it was predetermined meticulously for them to do so much like it has been predetermined that I reject the false teachings of tulip. I had no choice ?
 
Yes it was predetermined meticulously for them to do so much like it has been predetermined that I reject the false teachings of tulip.

Correct.
And it constantly amazes me that our enemies think this is some sort of a "gotcha".
(Newsflash: It's not.)

I had no choice ?

So your rejection of TULIP is something you don't want to believe?
Of course it's what you chose.
 
Again, lets look at the two passages.

Your passage
Luke 7:30 But the Pharisees and lawyers rejected the will of God for themselves, not having been baptized by him.

My passage
Act 2:23 this Jesus, delivered up according to the definite plan and foreknowledge of God, you crucified and killed by the hands of lawless men.

The word "will" in your passage and the word "plan" in my passage are the same word. But you fail to realize that the Acts passage has another word definite that the Luke passage does not. It is that word definite that makes the difference.

It is the difference from a general plan and a decreed or ordained plan.
Er Luke 7:30 is not my passage

I stated

Nope

Luke is not stating they are the same

and your comments do not really seem to equate them

in reference to my original comment

fltom said:
Some Calvinists confound foreknowledge and determination

and your comment

Act 2:23 this Jesus, delivered up according to the definite plan and foreknowledge of God, you crucified and killed by the hands of lawless men.
 
Back
Top