Predestination in Aramaic?

Hello dear friends,

without switching to "theology" mode I would like only ask the Aramaic proves or questions the fact predestination.

The little what I know about it in generally:

In greek, there are no occurence of the word "predestination", only the verb predestinate (proorizo) can be found four times in the greek text.

The definitions are: 1. to determinate, 2. to elect, 3. to foreknow.
Occurence: Rom 8.29,30; Eph. 1.5,11 and in Acts 4.28.

My first question is what word uses the aramaic text for "proorizo"?

The Bible make me ever doubtful here, seeing Romans 9, Ephesians I, 1Peter and other passages Luq 22.22, Acts 2.23, 10.41, 1.29, 17.26 against free will and goodness of God.

What do tell the Aramaic text ?

cheers,
G�bor

In reply to message #0
 
Determinate, foreknow not found in lexicon, only the word "elect" but not all places I expected.

for example I found in Eph 1:11:
Nybgt0 (#3419)

Can anyone help?

In reply to message #1
 
Shlama Akhi Gabor,

Excellent question. The root word that we are concerned with is a verb: 0bg(Ga-ba), which can mean "choose, pick, elect, collect, approve, gather."

In no way does it mean 'predestined', which is a meaning that is derived possibly, but not directly, from 'elect, choosen or approved' from the above possible range of meanings. But it can also mean 'the gathered' in Ephesians 1:11, which would not have the 'predestined' meaning to it.

So this word does not support nor does it nullify the concept of Predestination. It's open to interpretation.

Do a seach on the Lexicon, using the Root option, and enter "0bg" - you'll suddenly have hundreds of verses to study!

Hope this helps!

Fk^rwbw 0ml4

Peshitta.org

In reply to message #2
 
Hello dear Paul,

my first investigation but not too succesfully
#24012 choose, gather, elect, collect, sect , part, side, party

Jn. 21.6: Cast the net on the right side of the ship
Acts. 13.17: The God of this people of Israel chose our fathers
Acts. 15.7: Men and brethren, ye know how that a good while ago God made choice among us
Acts. 15.40: And Paul chose Silas
Acts. 23.9: and the scribes that were of the Pharisees' part arose
Acts. 23.19: Then the chief captain took him by the hand, and went with him aside privately,
Jam. 2.5: Hearken, my beloved brethren, Hath not God chosen the poor of this world rich in faith
1Cor 1.27: But God hath chosen the foolish things of the world to confound the wise
2Co. 8.19 And not that only, but who was also chosen of the churches to travel with us with this grace
1Ti. 5.9: Let not a widow be taken into (katalego) the number under threescore years old
Eph 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:

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

Lamsa has here "And he marked is with love to be his from the beginning". It is correct? The verse is:
hnybcl rp4d Ky0 0xy4m (w4yb 0ynbl Nmsw

Ro 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.
0yrq Jwwhnd Ms Mdqd 0rkwb 0whn whd hrbd Frwcd Fwmdb Jwn0 M4rw Jwn0 (dy Mdqwl Nmw"

Lamsa wrote here: "He knew them in advance and he marked them". Interesting it is a little difference, "know anyone and mark" between "knowing and predestinating". (Only in case he translated well)

Ro 8:30 Moreover whom he did predestinate, them he also called: and whom he called, them he also justified: and whom he justified, them he also glorified.

I found in aramaic also M4r , foreordain.

Ac 4:28 For to do whatsoever thy hand and thy counsel determined before to be done.

Same word, M4r , foreordain.

Exo. 4.21
And the LORD said unto Moses, When thou goest to return into Egypt, see that thou do all those wonders before Pharaoh, which I have put in thine hand: but I will harden his heart, that he shall not let the people go.

It is one of biggest argue for predestination. Lamsa wrote the same here.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The Holman Dictionary give an alternate meaning of predestination, so God know the people and He can use them without limiting the free will. I'm just curious what the Aramaic said in this question. I tried to translate a few verses but I din't found anything proving.

cheers,
Gabor

In reply to message #0
 
Shalom,

It has come to my attention that the Christian doctrine of "Calvanism" has
recently
been making its way into Messianic Judaism. It is the purpose of this
article to show that so-called "Calvanism" has no part in a Jewish world
view.

"Calvanism" is actually a term which refers to all of Calvin's teachings
however it has come to be used primarily to refer to Calvin's teaching of
"predestination". After Calvin's death his followers formulated his
teachings into five basic points called "the Five Points of Calvanism"
which they compare to the five pedals of a tulip. Calvinists use the word
TULIP as a memory device for these five points by making the following
acronymn:

Total depravity of man
Unconditional election
Limited atonement
Irresistable grace
Perseverence of the Saints

In this paper we will discuss the first four of these in depth, though not
in the same order as TULIP.

Calvanist thinking goes something like this:

God is ultimately soverign and all powerful while man is totally depraved.
As a result man cannot resist God. Since all men are not saved, but the
"elect" are saved, God has only willed certain men to be saved, while
others he has willed to be demned. If the all powerful irresistable God
has called a man to be saved, then he will be saved. By contrast if the
all powerful irresistable God has not called a man to be saved, then that
man will never (and can never) be saved.

OK now lets show the fault in the "TULIP logic":

LIMITED ATONEMENT AND IRRESISTABLE GRACE

The Calvinist concept of God's soveregnty is that he is irresistable. That
no man could ever resist the will of God. This is based on a flawed
interprtetation of Romans 9 as well as misunderstanding the key termes in
the KJV "foreknown", "predestined" and "elect". We will discuss each of
these in depth under another heading. However the scriptures plainly
teach that man can and has at times resisted the will of God. A prime
example appears in Acts 7:51:

"...You men are always resisting the Ruach HaKodesh."

If in fact the will of God cannot be resisted by man, then all men would be
saved. This is because the scriptures tell us that ALL men have been
called by Him to salvation:

...by the righteousness of one
the free gift came upon all men
unto the justification of life.
(Rom. 5:18)

...our God and Saviour;
who will have all men to be saved,...
(1Tim. 2:3-4)

...not willing that any should perish,
but that all should come to repentance.
(2Pt. 3:9)

In fact it seems that these three verses, coupled with the concept of
"limited atonement" (i.e. that only some men will be saved) actually
disproves Calvanism. Since God has willed all men to be saved, yet only
some of them will be saved, it stands to reason that some of these men
resist his will and are damned by their own choice.

UNCONDITIONAL ELECTION: WHO ARE "THE ELECT"?

One major problem with Calvanist thinking is that it is deeply rooted in
Replacement Theology. One key term that is central to Calvanism is "the
Elect". But what is the difference between the "Elect" and the "Chosen"?
None at all. The KJV translates the same Hebrew and Greek words as
"Chosen" or "Elect" depending on the mood of the translator, or more likey
so as to imply that the "Elect" is the "Church". For example if you
compare 1Pt. 2:9 with Is. 43:20 and Deut. 10:15 you swill see that the
"Elect" of 1Pt. 2:9 is drawnd from Tanak passages about the "Chosen" people
Israel in Is. 43:20f and Deut. 10:15.

Now if we are good Bereans (Acts 17) we will check the scriptures, the
Tanak to see what Paul and other "New Testament writers" are saying. If we
do so we will see that clearly the term "Elect/Chosen" refers not to "the
Christian Church" but to Israel (Deut. 7:6; 10:15; 14:2; Is. 41:8-9;
42:1;43:20f; 45:4; 65:9, 22 & Ps. 135:4).

Now the misunderstanding of the Elect as the Christian Church has created a
problem in logic that has helped to support Calvanism. By must Christian
theology the Christian Church is made up of all believers in Jesus Christ.
But this seems to conflict. If the term "the Elect" refers to the
Christian Church then it implies not that they chose God, but that God
chose them. The Calvinist resolution is that God chose a certain class of
people who would choose God because God predestined them to do so. Thus
they are the "Elect" because God chose them to be those who would choose
him. The real resolution is that replacement theology is wrong in the
first place. The term "Elect/Chosen" is a euphamism for Israel and not the
Christian Church at all.

UNDERSTANDING ROMANS 9

A keystone to Calvanist thinking is Romans 9. Since Calvanists has so
misunderstood this chapter we will cover it in detail.

The topic of Romans 9 is to reasuer Paul's readers. He has just told them
that God has predestined believers to be conformed to the image of the Son
(which in no way indicates the doctrine of predestination as explained
above). He has just been telling them about the promise of redemption.
But what good is that promise. Did he not make promises to Israel? In
Romans 9 thru 11 Paul will explain that YHWH will indeed be faithful in
keeping his promises to Israel. However this has cause Paul to cover a
paranthetical thought.
This thought is to explain to his readers that God had the right to Choose
Israel.
Notice the term "Election" in 9:11 refers to Israel NOT the Christian Church.

In the next few verses Paul will justify God's right to make Israel his
chosen people.

In Rom. 9:11-16 Paul cites Gen. 25:23 and Mal. 1:2-3 to express that God
chose to have his chosen linage to pass through Jacob rather than Esau. It
must be noted that this resulted from Esau selling his birthright to Jacob
of his own freewill (Gen. 25:24-34). God "hated" Esau for not cherishing
his birthright.

In Rom. 9:17-18 Paul refers to God's sovergnty when he hardened Pharaoh's
heart.
Paul here quotes Ex. 9:16 and is referring to the material in Ex. 9:15-17.
The Calvanist misunderstanding here comes from a lack of understsnding the
idiom
Biblical Hebrew. Ex. 4:21 & 9:16 are examples of a common Hebrew idiom in
which
an active verb is used to express not the doing of a thing, but permision
to do it.
Another example of this idiom is found in Jer. 4:10:

Lord YHWH, surely you have greatly
decieved this people,

Meaning not that YHWH decieved them but that he ALLOWED them to be decieved.
(other examples of this idiom: Mt. 6:13a; 2Thes. 2:11; Rom. 1:24-26; Zech.
1:10b).

In the case of Pharaoh we have a man who was not a believer (Ex. 5:2) and
who hardenened his own heart (Ex. 8:11, 15, 28; 9:7). Paul simply refer to
this story to show that God had the soveregn right to allow Pharaoh to
harden his own heart of his own freewill. He did this because he had made
Israel his Chosen people not Israel. The point of the story here is that
God chose to reveal himself to Israel, typified by Moses, while allowing
Egypt (typified by Pharoah) to harden their hearts. This is because he
made Israel his Chosen, not Egypt.

Finally in Rom. 9:19-23 Paul recounts the parable of the potter and the
clay. This is a common parable in Jewish literature. It also appears in
Is. 29:16; 45:9; Jer. 18:1-10 and Wisdom 12:12, 20; 15:7). In this parable
the potter is God and the clay is mankind. The point of the parable is
that God is soveregn over mankind and therefore has the right to make the
Jews his chosen people. This is revealed as the meaning of the parable in
Rom. 9:24.

Some important points about this parable overall. Jeremiah reminds us that
God responds to our freewill in exercising soveregnty over us (Jer. 18:8,
10) and actually condemns those who ascribe this to fate/predestination by
stating that we have a freewill (Jer. 18:12) a point Paul also seems to
agree with in speaking of allegorical vessals in 2Tim. 2:20-21.

Thus the purpose of Romans 9 is to justify God's right to choose the Jewish
people as his Chosen people (Elect) and NOT to teach the Calavanist concept
of predestionation and an Elect Christian Church.

WHAT ARE "FOREKNOWLEDGE" "FOREORDAINED" AND "PREDESTINATION" MENTONED IN
THE KJV?

There are two words which are translated three ways in the KJV these are
Strong's Greek number 4309 Translated "predestined" and Strongs's Greek
number 4267 translated "foreknow/foreknew" in Rom. 8:29 and 11:2 but as
"foreordained" in 1Pt. 1:20.
(this word appears in Acts 2:23; 15:18 = Amos 9:11-12; Rom. 8:29; 11:2 &
1Pt. 1:20)

First we will address the issue of "foreknowledge". Judaism mainatins this
concept as the Mishna says:

All things are foreknown,
but freewill is given.
- m.Avot 3:16

Foreknowledge is simply the concept that God foreknows the future, and does
not require that he predestine the future.

Next is the word "foreordain" in 1Pt. 1:20. As we have already shown this
same word is elsewhere translated simply as "foreknow".

Finally we reach the keyword "predestined" This word appears five times in
the KJV. However in none of its usages does it actually refer to the
doctrine of "predestination" as understood in Calvanism.

Rom. 8:29-30 says only that believers are predestined to be
conformed to the image of the Son, not that they were predestined
to believe.

Eph. 1:5, 11 says only that beleivers are predestined to have a life
in the world to come.

These passages in the KJV use the word "predestined" but do not at all
teach the concept of "predestination".

It should be noted that the Aramaic of these passages actually has the
phrase "marked from before" which implies only marking and not
predestination.

THE TOTAL DEPRAVITY OF MAN OR FREEWILL?

The Calvanist concept of the total depravity of man is largely rooted in a
misunderstanding of Jn. 6:44, 64-65 which states:

No man can come to me
unless the Father who sent me draws him.

While this is true, Calvansists have totally ignored a whole series of
other passages which tell us that God has called all men to him:

...by the righteousness of one
the free gift came upon all men
unto the justification of life.
(Rom. 5:18)

...our God and Saviour;
who will have all men to be saved,...
(1Tim. 2:3-4)

...not willing that any should perish,
but that all should come to repentance.
(2Pt. 3:9)

The trick is that they must respond by their own freewill.

TORAH AS FREEDOM

It remains to be said that the doctrine of predestination is toally
counter-Torah. Freewill is an important element of Torah as well as
freedom/liberty. Without freewill there is no real freedom/liberty. The
Tank tells us:

So shall I keep your Torah continually forever and ever,
And I will walk in freedom: for I seek your precepts.
(Psalm 119:44-45)

As well as by Ya'akov HaTzadik (James the Just) who called the Torah "the
Torah of freedom" (James 1:25; 2:12).

Yeshua said:

... if you continue in my word,
then are you my disciples indeed.
And you shall know the truth,
and the truth shall make you free.
(John 8:31-32)

With Ps. 119:142:

...your Torah is truth.

SO the Torah makes one free. Freedom requires freewill. Freewill is
constantly reflected in the Torah. The following are just a few examples:

Gen. 2:16 - Adam could FREELY eat of any tree in the garden except
one. Adam CHOSE to eat that fruit as well anyway.

Ex. 5:2; 8:11, 15, 28; 9:7 - God allowed Pharaoh to harden his heart
(see expaination of idiom under Rom. 9 above)

Lev. 1:3 - Freewill offerings

Num. 13-14 Ten of the 12 spies and the majority of the people
chose not to ener the promised land. God yielded to their choice.

Deut. 11:26-28; 28:1; 30:15 - God has set two choices before us,
giving us the choice to follow his Torah or rebel against it.

PAGAN ORIGINS OF PREDESTINATION

It is important also to cover the pagan origins of the Calvanist doctrine
of predestination.
According to the World Book Encyclopedia:

A belief in some form of predestination is found...
in the ancient religions of Greece, China, India and Egypt.
(Vol. 15 p. 659; 1975 edition)

The Greeks and Romans believed that reality was weaved out by three
goddesses called "fates" who spun out mens lives like thread. The ancient
Scandanavians believed this also calling them "norns". Predestination is
in fact the Helenistic phylosphy called "Fatelism".

This doctrine was first introduced into Christianity by the Catholic writer
Augustine (354-430 C.E.) (ibid vol. 15 p. 659) and was later expounded by
another Catholic writer Thomas Aquinas (1226-1274 C.E.) (ibid).
Protsetants initially rejected the doctrine unitil it was reintroduced by
John Calvin (1509-1564 C.E.) (ibid).

Thus this pagan doctrine made its way from Paganism into Catholicism and
eventually into Protestantism. Now it seems to be raising its pagan head
in Messianic circles as well.

OTHER PROBLEMS WITH CALVANISM

Calvanism teaches a God who creates faulty humans and then punishes them
for being exactly what he forced them to be by his own irresistable will.

Calvanism makes God ultimately guilty of every sin ever committed. By
Calvanist thinking it would seem to be unjust to punish any person for any
crime or sin since they were only following the irrestable will of God.

Ask a Calvinist: "Do you believe in predestination because you chose to of
your own freewill?"

In closing I quote to passages, one from the Mishna the other from the "New
Testament":

All things are foreknown,
but FREEWILL is given.
- m.Avot 3:16

...that your goodness should not be as it were by compulsion,
but of your own FREEWILL.
- Phil. 1:14 New American Standard

James Trimm

In reply to message #5
 
Shlama Akhi James,

Without discussing theology too much, I must say that the concepts that are contained within 'Calvinism' and, in particular, the Protestant understanding of 'Predestination' is quite alien to Semitic thought, including Jewish, Muslim and 'Semitic Christian' viewpoints.

From my understanding, this view (rejection of 'Predestination') is also held by the other ancient non-Semitic based churches, including the Roman Catholic and Greek Orthodox.

Fk^rwbw 0ml4

Peshitta.org

In reply to message #5
 

>
>One major problem with Calvanist thinking
>is that it is deeply
>rooted in
>Replacement Theology. .....................................
>
The real resolution is
>that replacement theology is wrong
>in the
>first place. The term "Elect/Chosen"
>is a euphamism for Israel
>and not the
>Christian Church at all.

Hi James...I have been very greatful for the depth of information that you have provided for people such as myself on this site. it has been tremendous to be able to draw on your knowledge on the subjects discussed on this forum. And although I am not a calvinist and try to avoid theological differences on this forum I find that I am drawn to disagree with your assertion that "replacement theology is wrong".
I may be wrong.(have been many times before!) but I sincerely believe it to be true.

all the best....michael

p.s. if you are interested i have been influenced by aricles such as the following

https://www.preteristarchive.com/PartialPreterism/jordan-james_pp_01.html

I would be fascinated to get your angle on this ....its definitely a difficult topic for me. michael_parnell@poyntons.com.au

In reply to message #5
 
Hello dear James,

thank you a lot for this info.

P.S. I hope your book arriving soon... I would like read the whole !!!

of course, it remains a few doubts, but enough for theology now