Why Ephesians 1 Doesn't Support Calvinism

This is an in-depth discussion of Ephesians 1 which shows how the Old Testament and Greco-Roman contexts inform the chapter and do not support a typical Calvinistic reading. I discuss and define terms like "grace," "election," or "predestination" in their ancient and Pauline contexts.

[@Soteriology101]

This is the type of material that needs to be taught in our seminaries and churches. Well done Joel!

[@JoelKorytko]

That's so kind of you, Leighton! Thanks!

[@dralgarza]

@@JoelKorytko Great video. I will add on to the word "grace" from the Hebrew. The word first appears in Genesis 6:8 as חן and is the very name of Noah backward, נח, and has the idea of favor/protection. "But Noah (נח) found favor/protection (חן) in the eyes of the LORD." (A Hebrew word play) The idea is like looking in a mirror, but in this case, through the eyes of the LORD. So because Noah walked with God, was righteous, and had a personal relationship with him, God gave him favor and protection. This is the foundation for the word, and the Greek does not reflect or translate correctly from the Hebrew.

[@aletheia8054]

You mean, this isn’t taught in churches and seminaries?

[@darryld.8616]

No. Horrific to claim that. God does not choose, nor predestine people based on their choice! God predestines that's why one chooses. We love God because He first loved us, speaking of those who believe.... remember? And to claim, like I know you do that God loves all equally and the same is to have an unbalanced anthropology and theology. God hates all who do iniquity! But why then does God love those who make up the bride of Christ? Simply because He "CHOSE", elected, PREDESTINED those to whom He gave salvific grace to from all eternity! And to claim God did this based on a choice man will do it twisting the true gospel! STOP IT!!!

[@aletheia8054]

@@darryld.8616 God made vessels of wrath so vessels of mercy know what grace is. Their false belief is the will of God for the vessels of mercy to know grace of truth.

[@timothyharris4246]

I am a pastor who has been on a two-year journey of de-Calvinizing my theology. I greatly appreciate resources like you and Mike Winger, who lay out scholarly objections based on the biblical texts. Thank you. Looking forward to future videos 🙂

[@Apollos2.2]

That's good to hear... What was the reason, you as a Pastor, changed your mind? For some reason I tend to think Pastors don't change their minds they much think🤔

[@timothyharris4246]

@@Apollos2.2 I’ve only been a pastor for almost 3 years. Having time to study God’s word was my main reason. Researching Calvinist arguments and comparing them against Scripture was eye-opening. Seeing the Calvinist defense for ‘regeneration precedes faith’ was shocking. I used to assume, “If MacArthur, Piper and Keller believe it, I just must not be understanding it properly.” However, upon further study, I couldn’t reconcile their answers with Scripture as a whole. As far as I can tell, Calvinism is built on proof-texting and avoids certain passages. If your interpretation of a passage doesn’t work with another passage, then one interpretation must be wrong.

[@Apollos2.2]

@timothyharris4246 100% I'm not a Pastor or trained at any seminary and wasn't ever a Calvinist but I always had this idea that God choosing some for salvation against the numerous passages talking about Him loving the whole world didn't line up. Then when I finally understood how to rightly understand Election and Predestination I ended up leaving our Calvinist leaning church. But I did find myself intimidated realizing I'm now disagreeing with RC Spoul, McArthur and many other teacher's I had looked up to for years. It's a crazy thing, but now I'm fully confident they are just wrong and I keep moving forward.

[@bobtaylor170]

​@@timothyharris4246only eisegesis can keep Calvinism going. Really, there is an inherent dishonesty to it, the dishonesty which fanaticism - not Truth, fanaticism - compels people into eventually if they want to keep The System going.

[@darrellmitchell4293]

“De-calvanizing” I love the way you phrased that. In that path myself

[@FoxRunImages]

Media quote: “Take away the theological baggage and move toward a biblical, first century understanding of what this text was trying to communicate to its audience in the circles in which it was transmitted.” - Joel Korytko

[@Hez0]

Theology develops though.

[@user-cb3hb3jv6k]

@Hez0 ​Development of theology does not imply that the apostles teaching ​was flawed or incomplete. The whole purpose of today's theology is to find out what the first century Church was teaching.

[@Christ-or-Chaos]

​@@Hez0 It takes time to try and understand an infinite GOD with a 3lb brain.

[@Hez0]

@@user-cb3hb3jv6k If what is meant by "Theological baggage" is theological development built upon necessary implications from the scriptures, then you don't throw it away, but you use it as the very lens by which to determine what was being said by the apostles.

[@user-cb3hb3jv6k]

@@Hez0 It feels like the "theological baggage" here is a certain theological system which may prevent us to see the author's original meaning or intention, just because it doesn't fit the system.

[@rosapederson722]

Paul's emphasis, "in Christ". Your views are basically how I interpret Ephesians, but you added some extra details I didn't know about. Thanks!!

[@jalapeno.tabasco]

yes, election is in Christ what Calvinist denies this?

[@jamesbarksdale978]

We don't realize how influenced we are by Lutheran/Calvinist/Reformed theology until we try to grasp a different biblical view.

[@CBALLEN]

There's only ONE GOSPEL AND JESUS CHRIST, not many variations.Any variations make it a false Gospel.

[@WilliamStrain-th4xw]

Well yeah obviously. Its where Protestantism came from..

[@monopisteuw4638]

Thank you for your unemotional, careful analysis of the text. Clearly we run a severe risk of missing the truth if we ignore the influence of the language and themes of the Old Testament. I would love to hear more on the logic of OT sacrifice. Thank you for the serious level of effort that goes into producing one these podcasts.

[@peterfox7663]

43:52 "God chooses all sorts of stuff in the old testament" Kind of Paul's point in Romans 9

[@stevenhight5036]

Really enjoyed this talk. I think Paul often gets misunderstood when he brings in Old Testament/Jewish concepts to his letters, which in turn, makes theologians come up with their own “concepts” around what Paul means when he speaks to specific topics.

[@JamesS805]

No doubt if James White saw this he’d accuse you of running off to other texts. But this context is key to understanding the text. Thanks for this, Joel!

[@djohnson3093]

James White and calvinism rely on using scripture in stand alone fashion. Calvinism, and every other false doctrine, cannot use the word of God as a whole. Otherwise, calvinism would die a slow, miserable death. If one thinks about it... Word of faith, prosperity gospel, water baptism saves, works salvation, etc. All can be "biblically proven" by scripture as long as each proof text is separated from the overall context.

[@kenfroehlich444]

@@djohnson3093you are exactly right!

[@CherylHulseapple]

The Bible is supposed to interpret itself, and White runs off to Calvin, a man who isn't in the Bible.

[@andrewtsousis3130]

Thanks mate, great presentation. I love how even at the the end of vs 12 Paul also summarizes again the whole concept of being “in Christ” by saying, “in order for that we who were the first to put out Hope in Christ”. Ie they put their Hope/belief in Christ and are therefore “in-Christ”.

[@Christ-or-Chaos]

Did you see why they believed in Christ in verse 11? There's a reason v12 starts with εἰς τὸ with an infinitive. Also, are you aware that "first to hope" is a single word that serves to differentiate between the order of hope between the writers and the readers, not how they obtained union with Christ?

[@andrewtsousis3130]

@@Christ-or-Chaos sorry, it’s definitive by Paul that” in-Christ” means those who believe in Christ. It’s that simple. Read Roman’s 16-7 Paul says Andronicus and Junica were “in-Christ” before he was. What does he mean by this? It can’t possibly be they were “in-Christ” in eternity past before Paul was, so what is it? Simple, they were believers in Christ before he was.

[@Christ-or-Chaos]

@@andrewtsousis3130 you don't need to be sorry or jump over to Romans, you just need to understand how Ephesians 1:11 flows into verse 12 and you'll be ok.

[@andrewtsousis3130]

@@Christ-or-Chaos there’s nothing else to understand, when Paul says “in Christ” he means anyone who believes in Jesus. It’s that simple, and confirmed again in vs 13. Vs 11 is defining what is predestined, and it’s the fact that anyone who believes is for the praise of His glory, and the other reference to predestined earlier, is any one who believes is adopted into Christ. Ie the “process” of adoption is what is predestined, for who? Those who believe.

[@sharonlouise9759]

Another masterpiece! Thank you for showing me all the Old Testament that can be found in these verses. This isn't something that I had considered before. And thanks for giving us lots of examples.

[@biblicaldefense]

Commenting to boost the algorithm so more people watch this.

[@Just_ben9]

Thank you for posting this, and I sincerely hope to see more like this. I recently discovered my church held calvinistic beliefs and it really through me for a spiritual loop and your videos have helped to ground me back into scripture and really understand these topics.

[@narellesimmons2701]

Thanks for your hard work! Any chance doing something on Hebrews and if salvation can be given back by not believing anymore?

[@laurabaileyferguson2824]

Thank you so much for sharing your insights! This was helpful. I hope you will continue to do more.

[@Elmarias777]

On the blood being the life, and with the purification of hyssop and blood, i see a beautiful concept drawn from the Lord’s supper/Pesach. The blood shed for us which is the new covenant, being drank and taken into us, being God cleansing us inside out. Where circumcision of flesh showed obedience to the old covenant, partaking of the Lord's supper shows our dedication to the new covenant and the inner purification which the Holy Spirit enacts in us as we strive for holiness through faith.

[@mirandashuwera3389]

Please check out pastor Jim Brown of Grace and Truth Ministries here on KZbin. He teaches from the original languages and texts, keeping in mind the ancient, First Century sayings and idioms of the Jewish community and culture. He defines almost EVERY word and has thousands of hours of study and teachings available for FREE here on KZbin and upon request on DVD. Anyone who is sincerely seeking Truth, please check him out. 🙏 ❤

[@KeriCanfield]

I absolutely love the way you break down each of the versus. Understanding the original text before all the translations helped me to understand Paul's intentions and what he was really trying to convey. Reading the bible, for someone like me, left me with so many questions and a real lack of understanding of just how powerful it is and it's true meaning. I came across your podcast as a suggestion based on something else I was watching and I was intrigued from the very beginning. I just subscribed and can't wait to watch more. I appreciate you taking the time to share your knowledge, thank you!

[@jean-claudemorin7377]

One of the best explanation of Grace…

[@primeobjective5469]

Listened to the entire thing while painting my kitchen island. Good work, & thank you.

[@happygolucky5855]

There should be a rule for everyone to read Deuteronomy, judges, hosea, romans In that order. I did and it changed my life when i was considering calvanism to be true. and now i can confidently say calvanist is not true.

[@aletheia8054]

Neither is free will

[@noybiznatch]

​@@aletheia8054You were predestined to make this comment, and my response as well... all by decree. Greetings my Borg brother.

[@aletheia8054]

@@noybiznatch yes, everything is the will of God.

[@unitedstates3068]

@@aletheia8054 "Free will" is a calvinistic byproduct boogeman. So if calvinism and freewill are both not true.... What is true Alethia? Provisionism

[@aletheia8054]

@@unitedstates3068 the Holy Spirit is the truth. The Bible literally says so.

[@bcbennet1]

Thanks for sharing your opinion Joel. After decades of studying this topic I believe I have discovered that the plain reading of this text is the actual meaning of the text. In fact, after more analysis from others who read into this text their philosophical/psychological bias such as yourself, I am convinced of this completely. I challenge you to debate or discuss this question with me publicly with a moderator where we get equal time so your listening audience can see the other side that comports to the plain meaning of not just this text in Eph. 1 but in hundreds of other texts that teach explicitly what the reformers and many of the church fathers have held to. Your view is reflected in Roman Catholic doctrine and in the cults. May the truth of his plain, clear Word, prevail!

[@edjones5046]

Out of curiosity, what do you have to offer on Ephesians 1 that any of the numerous Calvinist exegetical commentaries that are already out there don’t have? And, how can you be sure it is the plain reading?

[@bcbennet1]

Not sure what every "Calvinistic" commentary says on Eph. 1; but since no person is infallible that is irrelevent. I do know what the text says in both major manuscript traditions as well as a sufficient number of ante-nicene fathers. Therefore, the plain meaning of the text can only bring you to a "reformed" understanding of soteriology.

[@edjones5046]

@@bcbennet1 Didn’t Calvin himself lament the fact that prior to Augustine there was no ante-Nicene exposition of predestination as Augustine (who wasn’t proficient in Greek) had defined it?

[@bcbennet1]

@@edjones5046 He did lament the lack of a systematic exposition on the doctrines of grace; however he cited enough Fathers who implied such a nascent belief.

[@edjones5046]

@@bcbennet1 Ok then. So if there is no “systematic exposition” of the “doctrines of grace” prior to Augustine, but rather they are only “implied”, then that leaves the door open to subjective interpretation concerning the “doctrines of grace” prior to Augustine. So then you cannot objectively claim that you understand or possess the “plain meaning” of Ephesians 1 which can only bring one to a “reformed” (quite an anachronistic term here) understanding of soteriology. In the end, it only demonstrates that you have accepted Calvin's extreme Augustinian bias.

[@destroyingtheworksofthedev9349]

You’re right Ephesians one doesn’t support Calvinism it supports divine election, a.k.a. sovereign Grace no problem

[@DF-gu3xy]

Excellent teaching my brother. Thanks for taking the time to share your scholarly insights!

[@EnHacore1]

Thank you brother Joel for the detailed explanation on Ephesians 1. Please continue this long format on Calvinist texts

[@ryanparris1021]

Dr Michael Brown when asked by Dr Leighton Flowers re Calvinist type Election understanding among religious Jews: ‘Individual election to salvation would have been a completely foreign concept’.

[@aletheia8054]

No, it’s not. Paul was a religious Jew and he believed an individual election. And so were other apostles, and they believed in it and taught it. Not to mention, Jesus who was also a Jew. He certainly taught it.

[@ryanparris1021]

@@aletheia8054 You should check out Joel’s videos on Romans 9 and John 6.

[@warrenroby6907]

@@aletheia8054what is your basis for this claim?

[@CrestviewScott]

@@aletheia8054 That's the very thing in dispute. You're begging the question.

[@Christ-or-Chaos]

​@@aletheia8054so true!😆

[@Real_LiamOBryan]

Man, I absolutely love your videos. These are great!

[@murphyjones100]

22:18 "We need to take our theological systems... they're great...... they're ok..." 🤣I love it. Great Job Doc! More of these scripture-breakdown videos please!

[@bguptill]

Another FANTASTIC video!! In Eph 1:3-4, who is "us" referring to when it says "he chose 'us' in him." Paul identified himself in Eph 1:1 as "an apostle" ... then said God chose "us" having drawn a distinction when wishing "you" (those he is writing to) grace. Could "us" mean Paul and the other apostles - whom the letter is from? We see the "we" and "us" repeatedly used until v13-14 where he changes to "and you also." So Paul is saying "We were x, y, z... and YOU can be A, B, C as well." Also, I COMPLETELY agree that the elected ones are a GROUP election. I also completely agree that it was the plan all along!

[@dalewier9735]

No wonder you like D.A. Carson, i have his book "Commentary on the New Testament use of the Old Testament", written with G.K.Beale. I saw you on L.Flowers' channel and thank you for putting yourself on youtube. I am preaching thru Romans now, and you have saved me HOURS. BLESSINGS

[@bobthrasher8226]

Adoption would seem to be consummated at Glorification: Rom 8:23: Not only this, but we ourselves also, who have the firstfruits of the Spirit, groan inwardly as we eagerly await our ADOPTION, the redemption of our bodies (Glorification). So Paul defines adoption as Glorification.

[@DelicueMusic]

It just occurred to me that the Calvinistic interpretation is very liberal in comparison to this view. To assert that Paul is either detached or changing the language from the OT is quite odd from any Jewish lens.

[@claybrackeen8798]

I really enjoy listening to your teaching. Thank you for sharing your insights and exposition with us!

[@bguptill]

Setting a pre-path before them is also quite insightful, actually. Deu 30:19 NASB95 - 19 "I call heaven and earth to witness against you today, that I have set before you life and death, the blessing and the curse. So choose life in order that you may live, you and your descendants, Setting a choice for two potential destinations (hence pre-destination). The destinations are, as you said in your video, GROUP destinations. God decides that those who have chosen life get destination A, and those who have chosen death get destination B. God has predestined the choices themselves, not who chooses each choice. Rom 8:6, 16 NASB95 - 6 For the mind set on the flesh is death, but the mind set on the Spirit is life and peace, ... 16 The Spirit Himself testifies with our spirit that we are children of God, It would be like if I told my kids "you can have pancakes or oatmeal for breakfast, but choose the pancakes." I am the one who bought the ingredients, I am on the one who prepared both meals ahead of time. Yet, my children have a true choice. To "set your mind" as Romans 8 says means to choose. If you look at Rom 8:16 and Deu 30:19 we can conclude this about the call to salvation: I call heaven (the Spirit Himself) and earth (our spirit) to bare witness (testify) regarding the choice we make between life and death. Three times in Deuteronomy 30 it says life & death, blessing & cursing, are a choice God sets before man and commands (degrees) him to make a choice. Deu 30:11-15 NASB95 - 11 "For this commandment which I command you today is not too difficult for you, nor is it out of reach. 12 "It is not in heaven, that you should say, 'Who will go up to heaven for us to get it for us and make us hear it, that we may observe it?' 13 "Nor is it beyond the sea, that you should say, 'Who will cross the sea for us to get it for us and make us hear it, that we may observe it?' 14 "But the word is very near you, in your mouth and in your heart, that you may observe it. 15 "See, I have set before you today life and prosperity, and death and adversity; Paul interprets this choice in Romans 10 and tells us it is regarding "the righteousness based on faith" and is "the gospel we are preaching." Rom 10:6-8 NASB95 - 6 But the righteousness based on faith speaks as follows: "DO NOT SAY IN YOUR HEART, 'WHO WILL ASCEND INTO HEAVEN?' (that is, to bring Christ down), 7 or 'WHO WILL DESCEND INTO THE ABYSS?' (that is, to bring Christ up from the dead)." 8 But what does it say? "THE WORD IS NEAR YOU, IN YOUR MOUTH AND IN YOUR HEART" that is, the word of faith which we are preaching,

[@Christ-or-Chaos]

Did you read Deuteronomy 32:16-19 NASB95?? The LORD said to Moses, “Behold, you are about to lie down with your fathers; and this people will arise and play the harlot with the strange gods of the land, into the midst of which they are going, and will forsake Me and break My covenant which I have made with them. Then My anger will be kindled against them in that day, and I will forsake them and hide My face from them, and they will be consumed, and many evils and troubles will come upon them; so that they will say in that day, ‘Is it not because our God is not among us that these evils have come upon us?’ But I will surely hide My face in that day because of all the evil which they will do, for they will turn to other gods.

[@bguptill]

@@Christ-or-Chaos Yes, this has happened. Yet it was Gods plan from the beginning to bring blessing to the whole world through the descendants of Abraham by His promise. Galatians 3:8 (NASB95) The Scripture, foreseeing that God would justify the Gentiles by faith, preached the gospel beforehand to Abraham, saying, “ALL THE NATIONS WILL BE BLESSED IN YOU.” Genesis 12:3 (NASB95) And I will bless those who bless you, And the one who curses you I will curse. And in you all the families of the earth will be blessed.” Abraham believed this gospel & it was credited to him as righteousness. That credit or promise was not only to him, but to him and to his seed. Genesis 15:5-6 (NASB95) 5 And He took him outside and said, “Now look toward the heavens, and count the stars, if you are able to count them.” And He said to him, “So shall your seed be.” 6 Then he believed in the LORD; and He reckoned it to him as righteousness. Those seed were never restricted to Israel alone, but God promised from the beginning to multiply Abraham’s seed with descendants from many nations. Genesis 17:4-7 (NASB95) 4 “As for Me, behold, My covenant is with you, And you will be the father of a multitude of nations. 5 “No longer shall your name be called Abram, But your name shall be Abraham; For I have made you the father of a multitude of nations. 6 “I will make you exceedingly fruitful, and I will make nations of you, and kings will come forth from you. 7 “I will establish My covenant between Me and you and your seed after you throughout their generations for an everlasting covenant, to be God to you and to your seed after you.

[@Christ-or-Chaos]

@@bguptill no disagreement there, Good words 👍

[@devengen]

God job, Joel. It would be great if you wrote some articles based on these videos and then it might turn into a book!

[@forthegospel21]

Thanks Joel, this is awesome. Watched the whole thing! Looking forward to more teachings like this. Very educational and easy to understand and to follow.

[@disciple2858]

Oh I'm glad I saw this, I enjoy the content and now I can listen in live

[@bobthrasher8226]

I've heard that Rom 3:10-18 quotes Psalm 14:1-3 of the LXX. Is that your understanding? I would really be interested if you could elaborate some time on this. Most translations have footnotes in verses 10-18 all over the OT when it seems that it is a compact quote from PS 14 of the LXX. If this is truly a quote from ps 14 that could be important as this helps establish the context of what Paul is quoting from. LXX Psalm 14 begins: "The fool has said in his heart there is no God".

[@JoelKorytko]

It is. That is why I translate "righteousness of God" as "deliverance of God"

[@bobthrasher8226]

Isn't "eklectos" used in the LXX in translating Hebrew words that mean both "choice" (e.g. best quality) and "chosen/selected" when compared with the Masoretic text? Doesn't that suggest "eklectos" is somewhat ambiguous in this sense? At 56:30 you say that. Thanks.

[@jordandthornburg]

Yessir

[@Brian_L_A]

Yes, there is a new idea that Ephesians 1:3-12 concerns directly the Apostles. As you explained, much of it applies to Christians in general, like 1:13 shows after the Gentiles believe. Note first that verses 3-12 are all in first-person plural. While verse 13 changes to second-person plural. This indicates two groups. There are two phrases that you skipped over to save time, 1:8 which he lavished upon us, along with all wisdom and understanding. Say what you want, but Christians in general have not been lavished with all wisdom and understanding. This understanding has been giving to the Apostles, but not the believing Jews nor the Gentile Church in general. 1:12 so that we who were the first to hope in Christ, might live for the praise of his glory. Note that the "we" of verses 3-12 are those who were "the first to hope in Christ" By no stretch of the imagination can you say any believer nowadays is part of this group. In fact, even the gentiles this letter was written to are not a part of this group. In fact, Paul's prayer for the Gentile Church shows the stark contrast between them and the "us" of verses 3-12 Eph. 1:16 I have not ceased giving thanks for you as I remember you in my prayers. 17 I pray that the God of our Lord Jesus Christ, the Father of glory, may give you a spirit of wisdom and revelation as you come to know him. 18 I pray that the eyes of your heart may be enlightened, so that you may know what is the hope of his calling, what are the riches of the glory of his inheritance in the saints, Note that Paul is praying that the God "may give you a spirit of wisdom . . ." and "That your heart may be enlightened" So we can see that the Gentiles MAY have a spirit of wisdom and be enlightened. I agree that much of the blessings in verses 3-12 apply to all believers, but Paul indicates this specific group of "us" is the Apostles only where every word applies to them.

[@devengen]

Joel ... or anyone: Can you recommend a solid Bible commentary set that is fomr a NON-calvinist perspective (preferably a provisionist perspective) & that goes deep enough so that it's not simply "fluff", but not TOO deep in order that a layperson can follow it easy enough? The person looking for the commentary set has no knowledge of biblical languages.

[@peterbengtsson]

Hi Joel, Thanks for a great video! I have a question. What would you do with Galatians 1:15-16. It seems Paul was chosen even before he was born to bring the gospel to the Gentiles. It sounds like he was elect as an individual even before his birth. Thanks! "But when God, who had set me apart even from my mother’s womb and called me through His grace, was pleased to reveal His Son in me so that I might preach Him among the Gentiles ..." - Galatians 1:15-16 Christ love ✝️ Peter

[@grantcaldwell1938]

.

[@brucegolston6507]

God often sets people apart for his purposes in the womb. Not sure it's necessary for anything "to be done" with Galatians 1:15-16. It's neither a support nor a underminer of Calvinism.

[@chronoblip]

You describe Paul's election to a service, not salvation. Namely "so that I might preach Him among the Gentiles..." That passage is also about Paul specifically, however, and not something that by default speaks to a universal truth which then applies outside of Paul. If Paul was chosen to serve, that doesn't say anything about you or me by default because we aren't the subject of the passage. Biblical election is real, but how and when and to whom it applies tends to be where the distinctions arise, to put it charitably. Does that make sense?

[@peterbengtsson]

@@chronoblip yes, It does! Still if Paul was chosen for service before he was born, mustn't he also have been chosen for salvation? I mean he must be saved to be able to serve.

[@jenairothnie8796]

That's a verse I am curious on the Greek about as I read an essay that talked about the visceral aspect and vertical direction of the text - like it was an image of a young infant or even preborn infant torn from his mother and, counter to culture, handed into the care of his father (God.) It seemed like the author might have been reading too much into it, but it's also possible some of the visual metaphors get lost in translation. I don't see the verse itself as supporting Calvinism or contradicting it. It could be said of many Jewish boys were set apart by God even from youth to study the Torah and that their focus was religious. Even before the Damascus vision, there wasn't really a time in Paul/Saul's life where it could be said that he wasn't focused on God or being trained by God in some sense. But even if one takes it as God setting Paul apart for the purpose of the ministry to the Gentiles, that wouldn't mean Paul *had* to be obedient to the heavenly vision any more than God placing Esther as queen meant she *had* to go into the king and could not have potentially disobeyed. There were people set apart by God in the OT for a purpose (e.g. Saul, Eli, etc.) who nonetheless disobeyed or turned from what God wanted them to do at some point/in some way and their roles were given to others. Even Judas was set apart as a chosen disciple of Jesus, yet no one would claim that meant he was chosen for salvation and there was no chance of betrayal.

[@bigzachus]

It’s so simple and so profound. Enjoyed it very much!

[@darryld.8616]

And in the 1:05:00 mark Joel says it is the ones who are blameless who can dwell on God's holy mountain and according to Joel it's because one chooses to be In Christ choosing their allegiance to God because they have this power and ability to do good, even though no one can do good. Joel is teaching a man-centered theology here which states that it is OUR ability to have faith, it's OUR ability to choose to become IN CHRIST, it's OUR ability to then be chosen and saved. No. God chooses we cannot until the Holy Spirit grants faith then we choose.

[@breetak2]

Is this an accurate way of understanding what both Jesus and Paul said: John 14:6 says, “...I am the way and the truth and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me.” According to the plan of Him who works out everything in conformity with the purpose of His will, God chose believers in Christ to be pre-pathed (the way...through me [Jesus speaking in John 14:6]) to life (redeemed bodies through adoption to sonship) so they can come to the Father holy and blameless in His sight to the praise of His glory!

[@theepitomeministry]

I'm like 2/3 of the way through, and i just wanted to say I've really enjoyed this discussion. Thanks for sharing your thoughts!

[@AndrewKeifer]

Hey Joel, would you be interested in doing a short video on why most English translators translate προσκυνησάτωσαν from Hebrews 1:6 as "worship" and not something like "bow to" or "do obeisance to" ?

[@ChrisSimmons-xb5fm]

Can you do something on Hebrews 12 vine and branches and not believing anymore? Steve Gregg believes you can stop believing. Your thoughts?

[@EduardoBecerra_CuentaOficial]

Necesitamos estos materiales en español para latinoamericanos… Necesitamos más libros en español que descalvinicen los textos usados para afirma este error doctrinal… Saludos desde Chile 🇨🇱

[@davidhall9976]

Deuteronomy 14:2 with its statement about the Lord’s choosing of the nation for a purpose triggered a thought (which I don’t know if Joel brought this out because I have paused the video in order to get this thought out there): The individual people of the nation must logically acknowledge that their election has stemmed from their identification with their forebear Abraham who was faithful in that he believed the Lord’s promises to him. Their identification with a faithful promise believer has made them included in the elect group. Similarly, it is our identification with Jesus Christ - the faithful one who has received all of God’s promises (yes and amen!) - which includes us in the Lord’s elect group. That is, if we have believed and remain.

[@frankkronister5268]

Thank you Joel for for this in-depth understanding. However.... I have question for everyone. If the "we and us" in vs's 3-12 is Paul, the Ephesians and by extention all believers, who is the "you and your" in vs's 13 and following?

[@parickvanbideling7456]

Hey there, thanks for the awesome analysis you've made. There is just one point I have a question about: In your explanation you described "adoption" as a eschatological goal. My question is: Is it really only a eschatological term? (1) It appears that in Gal 4,1-7 Paul's point is that they have received adoption and are therefore already children of God. His use of "este huioi" (meaning: "you are children") is in present tense. Does that not mean, that the adoption has already occured? (Maybe there is sort of a similar idea in John 3 and 1.John when there is talk of "children of God" and the term: "born of God" which atleast describes the same goal of becoming a "child of God") (2) Especially in 1.John 3 (and in my opinion in Rom 8,15 vs. 8,23 as well) this seams to be a reality where present and eschaton are intertwined: In Christ the believers are already adopted and have become "children of God" yet this inherited identity has not yet been revealed or finalised in the transformation of their bodies. (3) Furthermore, in this hymn in Eph1,6 we have the statement that "which we have been given ("graced") in the Beloved" as well as in 1,7 where "we have the redemption" which are past and present tense statements. Is it not atleast plausible that Paul is also talking of a "presentic" purpose of God both with the term "adoption" as well as "holy and blameless" (ofc with a pending eschatological finalisation)? This interpretation would shift the focus from future sanctification and adoption (atleast partly) into the present. Please let me know what you think :) Thanks again for the great video, I learned plenty.

[@heathporter752]

Man I was just thinking about if you were going to do a video on Ephesians as I was reading it tonight and opened my phone and here it is. 😁😁

[@edwardwilliams7802]

Dr. Korytko, would this same Greek word and meaning of “to choose” be applied to the individuals of the OT as well? I’m thinking of Abraham, Moses, David, etc. Could this term be applied to individuals chosen by God as well? And if yes, is this term still only found in choosing for a purpose or could it be applied to choosing for individual salvation? Thank you!!

[@JoelKorytko]

Yes

[@jacobuscordier3508]

I appreciate the lack of mental gymnastics required in your process. Just proper framing of the background to the conversation.

[@Evie.Designs]

Outstanding explanation! As always, you prove your points in a very accurate and effective manner! 👍🏻😊❤️

[@mirandashuwera3389]

Doesn't it say that God is the one that puts faith/belief in our heart, in order for us to first believe?

[@davidbergeron78]

The phrase "Before the foundation of the world" seems connected to the "Book of Life" in Revelation (13:8, 17:8, 21:12,15). How do you handle our 'Names" being written in the Book? Thanks for pointing out the OT/NT connections and mentioning the Text Crit issues.

[@garfieldrobinson7837]

Well done Joel. This is really good.

[@WontonDisciple]

Joel, you are such an awesome teacher for the laypeople! Love ya, brother

[@ginovarli]

I really enjoyed this. I’ve come to view predestination as corporate. Take Romans 9 for example. If you believe in Jesus Christ, God has destined those who believe to be vessels for honor. If you don’t believe in him, God is destining all those who disbelieve for the end of vessels of wrath. Take 1 Peter 2. “They were also appointed.” Ya, if you disbelieve, you’re predestined to stumble, even if you’re a Jewish person. That’s what Romans 9 is communicating. Jews who pursue it by works are still destined for stumbling. Only those who seek it by faith are grafted into Christ who’s replacing Israel. Thus, if you’re in Jesus Christ, you’re the chosen people. That’s Romans 9 & 1 Peter 2. So obvious when it comes to Ephesians 1. Spiritual blessings. In him. Not outside of him. Not TO BE in him. Only because you’re in him, these blessings are applied to you as the covenant people of God.

[@SugoiEnglish1]

Paul says he was made an apostle by his own will? NO. By the WILL of GOD. God Wills and things happen.

[@ginovarli]

@@SugoiEnglish1 That doesn’t mean it was against his will. Take James 4:15, “Instead, you ought to say, “If the Lord wills, we will live and also do this or that” (James 4:15). There were lots of people that wanted to be apostles. Paul is saying he wasn’t self-appointed, but God appointed him. You’re so polluted by Calvinism you read determinism into it.

[@carolwilliams5337]

Even in the Old Testament, the Lord always has a remnant, those who have CHOSEN to be faithful. To the faithful, He will show himself faithful

[@Christ-or-Chaos]

Unbearably shameful that someone on his level would spend over an hour building up a narrative by inserting all those old testament citations into the text only to have everything come flying apart at the seams when he got to verse 11. It was difficult to listen to the repeted assertion that there's no reason to believe what the verse actually means, even with made up non English definitions.

[@contemplate-Matt.G]

It doesn't mean what you think it means either

[@Christ-or-Chaos]

@@contemplate-Matt.G Prove it🧁, According to Ephesians 1:11, does God predetermine a path or a people?

[@contemplate-Matt.G]

@@Christ-or-Chaos I proved it in my own post up above

[@Christ-or-Chaos]

@@contemplate-Matt.G what exactly did you type? I'm sure you're not ignorant enough to believe that assertions prove anything, Right?

[@contemplate-Matt.G]

@@Christ-or-Chaos I'd like to think I'm not ignorant. I've been a student of the Bible for thirty years now and have a published work entitled "Jacob and Esau Two Nations and the Inheritance". Not in this thread....I started a new thread on on this video. It's not exhaustive but I believe only the apostles were predestined unto a purpose as per the pronouns Paul uses from verses 3-12, verse 12 defining them as "we who were the first to hope in Christ". You don't think you are of that group I hope. Verse 13 contrasts with "you" who believe "their words" (the apostles) and are sealed "after" you believed.

[@mattleitner5194]

Thank you. I appreciate your thorough approach.

[@Prometheus_Bound]

Great comment on the authorship question. I bring up emanuenses with my Greek students. [Edit] I like that you approach holy without parroting the definition "set apart". [Edit]. I agree we need social context for interpreting words like χαρις, but is quoting Seneca who uses the Latin grātia line up completely? Does de Silva quite any Greek sources. [Edit] Eph.1:3. How do you determine when to translate spirit vs Spirit?

[@peterfox7663]

55:35 Did someone say "choice meats"? 56:19

[@brucebyrne8246]

Thank you, Joel! Please keep it up!

[@aletheia8054]

It’s an adverb at the beginning of the sentence, sir

[@walkingwithbee]

What is the "theological baggage" of the word grace 25:15 minutes in?

[@kentonletkeman7305]

I have heard that according to the Greek in Eph. 1:4 the " in Him" describes who is chosen but does not qualify who is chosen. Is this true?

[@hudsonensz2858]

A few things, it would be super cool if you could do some classes for programs like "Biblical Training" where you go through different books of the Bible and do in depths teachings on it. Also, what are your views on the Wesleyan view of entire sanctification?

[@marksincenbergs6183]

Most of the things I listened to are correct. Especially I liked the quote about the debate who are God's people. I like going step by step. But there is at least one problem with jumping to the conclusion that all those who are "in Christ" are all those who are believers (or saved). Similarly like in the Old Testament not all those from national Israel were believers. Some were, some were not, but collectively they were God's people, his nation, his chosen nation. The same is true in the New Testament. You can approach it from different directions: historically, Jesus parables, epistles, definition of "in Christ" in other places, etc. 1) Historically - Jesus selected who will be his. First, his 12 apostles, afterward 70 (maybe prophets), in Acts 1-2 there were about 120 souls. Or we can call it his church. That does not mean that others in other places were not believers, but they were not in this group "in Christ" or his people. They joined later and not all believers joined (for example, a thief on the cross). For example, in Acts 2 three thousand, later Samaritans, later gentiles. Only when specific group received Holy Ghost or anointing, they were graffed in the Israel or his chosen people. Like ephesians for example, they were disciples, they were believers when they met Paul, but they didn't become his people untill Paul laid hands on them and they received the Holy Ghost. 2) Jesus parables - he gave many parables about the kingdom (his holy nation/people) and in these parables, he showed that in the kingdom phase that is on the earth or his church, there will be both believers and nonbelievers (tares and wheat, good and bad fishes, etc.) My point, criteria for being in the kingdom (present phase) or church (assembly) do not depend on just believing. Although of course, if you want to be in the church or his holy people, you must present the fruits meet for repentance before baptism. But the problem is, fruits can be faked so that others could not notice them for a while, like for Judas' case. There are a lot more to add and I can discuss this with anybody who wants to do it in respectful manner. God bless you!

[@stevekalkbrenner482]

Great content! And you should definitely do a video on sacrifices!

[@patchlips]

Just want to say I appreciate you. I appreciate your approach and your heart. Thank you.

[@CosmicSeptic1]

I'd love lo see you break down the use of OT in Hebrews.

[@murphyjones100]

That would be awesome!

[@mirandashuwera3389]

"In Christ," may be deeper than we realize. It depends on which Greek word Paul used for "in." The Greek language is much more complex than English. We miss ALOT through translation 😕

[@michaelelam7766]

Very good teaching, sir.

[@bethanywilson7641]

I'm genuinely quite confused about what to believe here. I want to get to the bottom of this. But I don't know if it's possible in this life. I've been discussing this with a Calvinistic leaning pastor friend. How would you respond to his comments? "From the start it seems he overstates his case - and tries to force it the original words out of thier plain sense which is a common exegetical fallacy that people fall into - but will have to watch the whole to see for sure" "I guess I've been through this process doing my bachelor's and masters in theology and doing original language so I'm happy with my Exegesis - which follows top scholars of both theological persuasions. The Exegesis is clear, it's the theologising and philosophy which is debated"

[@JoelKorytko]

@@bethanywilson7641 I mean, I present exegesis. I'm not sure it's fair for him to say his position is somehow "clear" and mine is not. Of course, we have to debate these things. I am trying to give the most consistent case based on the most data that I can bring. I'm not trying to overstate anything but instead be as accurate and pinpoint precise as possible

[@bethanywilson7641]

@@JoelKorytko ​@JoelKorytko I think I said as much when I replied to him. I very much want to agree with your video but I just want to be very careful that I don't believe something because it is nice. I think for me I want to know how old this kind of interpretation is. Maybe you could point me to something talking about the thought before calvinism began? Thank you so much for all your videos

[@JoelKorytko]

@@bethanywilson7641 The early church was not Calvinistic in their beliefs. That comes mainly after Augustine in the fourth century

[@SethYoderMusic]

1:25:20 Trying to understand your interpretation here, and I think I agree with it. However, let me play the CA (Calvinist Advocate) haha! First, if I understand your interpretation correctly, those who choose to believe in Christ are predestined for these goals of adoption and the praise of His glory, now that they are in Christ through their belief. Now I'm playing the CA: Christ by Himself was not predestined to be adopted. He was already the Son by nature. Adoption is specifically for His people. So how can we who are in Christ be predestined for adoption in Him before the foundations of the world without also being predestined to believe in Him before the foundations of the world? Hope that makes sense?

[@JoelKorytko]

@@SethYoderMusic Adoption was the plan before the foundation of the world, not which individuals would be in or out. It doesn't say "he chose us in him who would believe." Also: adoption relates to glorification, which Christ did not receive (in the incarnation) until his ascension

[@soccerman1717]

53:45 Joel, is it possible that in Paul's expression of "chose US in Christ" in Ephesians 1:4 that he is referring immediately not just to ALL Believers but specifically to the believing Jews who were recipients of these Old Testament spiritual promises fully intending that in verse 13 he would include the Gentile Believers in this when they too were found to be in Christ? In other words, "The Gospel first came to us (Jews) and we believed and were found to be in Messiah, and we came to understand that all of these promises to us were actually realized in Jesus our Messiah, and now this amazing mystery has been revealed to us that YOU ALSO receive them, too, in Messiah through the same Gospel." I can't help but to see Paul dealing with the idea of something that many believed was just for the Jews until the mystery was revealed to the Apostles and prophets by the Spirit that Gentiles are partakers of those same spiritual promises in Jesus the Messiah through the Gospel. (chapter 3:4-6). Just struggling through the passage. Thank you for the work you are doing!

[@darryld.8616]

One should not claim that the word "grace" and how it is being used in the opening of chapter one means a play on words of just a greeting so that's how we are to view the definition of grace when used else where such as the next chapter, chapter 2. To claim Paul is using the word "grace" in chapter one to mean a "favorable" greeting and that is how we are to view the word grace else where when it's being used is called "illegitimate totality transfer" which is to say that since this word has this meaning here well that means it means the same the other places it's being used. This is a hermanutical fallacy. Words have there own domain where they are being used. So in chapter 1, grace, a strong favor of blessings be unto you from our LORD. Then in chapter 2 it is this grace and only this grace by which we are saved hence, solia gratie.

[@WhatYourPastorDidntTellYou]

Finally!

[@darrellmitchell4293]

Absolutely phenomenal!

[@darryld.8616]

Again Joel, in the 50 min mark Joel says, "Who is this group of people God has chosen.....?" It is not a group of people Joel! It is specific named and intimately known people who are chosen who make up the group.

[@manofthekingdom]

Very informative video. Thank you!

[@darryld.8616]

Paul teaches both that we are now children of God, thus we are adopted now, then one day we will have the adoption of our bodies. But this adoption of our bodies does not mean that we then become adopted into the family of God for we already are adopted into the family of God now.

[@billboardman8747]

Great explanation. NT Wright has a similar interpretation, Israel was chosen and elect to bring blessing to the nations, Christ is the fulfillment of Israel, and if we are in Christ we are chosen to bring Christ to the world as the body of Christ.

[@TrailRunner759]

Yeah It makes way more sense to look to the OT in order to get a proper interpretation of the NT because the early church would have been writing and thinking in those terms. To look to more recent church history for our interpretation seems unwise.

[@ValentFJ]

Enjoyed this! Thanks for taking the time to do it. Was wondering - have you looked into the view that the first 12 verses of Ephesians are about the apostles? I recently saw something on it and was surprisingly convinced. Do you have thoughts on it?

[@JoelKorytko]

I find that a bit of a stretch. Send me the info if you want

[@kentonletkeman7305]

The argument is that in Eph 1:4 the "in Christ" describes who God selected but does not qualify the group. Is this true? The group being referred to is Paul and the other apostles. He goes on to say things about this group that he later prays that the Ephesian believers would also experience. This argument is made by Nick Craig of John17apologetics on KZbin.

[@darryld.8616]

And in the 1:15:00 mark the word used for predestined is "proorizo" which is not the word Plutarch is using in his letter as Joel is claiming.

[@JoelKorytko]

It is 100% the word in Plutarch.

[@darryld.8616]

@@JoelKorytko spell proorizo in Greek please?

[@darryld.8616]

@@JoelKorytko none the less we, the people, individuals who God foreknew from eternity were chosen of the Father's own good pleasure, elected to be in Christ. We were specific named people who were chosen to become the bride of Christ. When Christ atoned for our sins interceding on our behalf before the Father, He did it not for an "us" who happens to be an arbitrary people group made up of what many misinterpret from John 3:16 to mean "whosoever" as in a nameless faceless group of the unknown no. God specifically "knew" us, individuals such as Adam "knew" his wife. You are putting the gospel upside down by claiming we choose to be In Christ all the while it is the Father's choosing who will be In the federal headship of Christ.

[@AnniEast]

How can anyone choose to be in Christ? There is no choosing involved when coming to Christ in repentance, only an acknowledgement of one's sorry state and the need of a Saviour. It is believing that Christ is that Saviour that puts you in the position from where GOD chooses to save you. You cannot put yourself in Christ by means of faith. It is God who puts you in Christ if you come to Him on His terms, which is faith. It is a gross misrepresentation by calvanist that suggests non calvanists believe they choose their final destination. The only thing we choose is to believe that God is true and every man a liar. We can then only hope and rely on the grace of God to save us. And since God is true and not a liar, we can have assurance that He will do what He promised and that is to save those who believe.

[@darryld.8616]

@@AnniEast sorry sister but we can only come to Christ if the Father draws us, and if He does, Christ will raise us up unto everlasting life. You said that God puts you in Christ if we come to Him on His terms which is faith. But the Bible says that faith is a gift, it is allotted to us and it is granted to us. So, no one has faith but it must be given by God..... Ephesians 2:8-9 NASB20 - For by grace you have been saved through faith; and this is not of yourselves, it is the gift of God; not a result of works, so that no one may boast. In the Greek, all of what is said here are gifts of God, the salvation, grace, and faith. Philippians 1:29 NASB20 - For to you it has been granted for Christ’s sake, not only to believe in Him, but also to suffer on His behalf, 2 Timothy 2:24-25 NASB20 - The Lord’s bond-servant must not be quarrelsome, but be kind to all, skillful in teaching, patient when wronged, with gentleness correcting those who are in opposition, if perhaps God may grant them repentance leading to the knowledge of the truth, Romans 12:3 NASB20 - For through the grace given to me I say to everyone among you not to think more highly of himself than he ought to think; but to think so as to have sound judgment, as God has allotted to each a measure of faith. Next, all of mankind are slaves of sin, haters if God, at enmity against God, cannot do good, cannot understand the things of God nor can subject themselves to the law of God, which of course includes obeying the gospel.... Genesis 8:21 NASB20 - The LORD smelled the soothing aroma, and the LORD said to Himself, “I will never again curse the ground on account of man, for the intent of man’s heart is evil from his youth; and I will never again destroy every living thing, as I have done. Psalm 51:5 LSB - Behold, I was brought forth in iniquity, And in sin my mother conceived me. Isaiah 64:6 NASB20 - For all of us have become like one who is unclean, And all our righteous deeds are like a filthy garment; And all of us wither like a leaf, And our wrongdoings, like the wind, take us away. Jeremiah 17:9 NKJV - “The heart is deceitful above all things, And desperately wicked; Who can know it John 3:19-20 NASB20 - “And this is the judgment, that the Light has come into the world, and people loved the darkness rather than the Light; for their deeds were evil. “For everyone who does evil hates the Light, and does not come to the Light, so that his deeds will not be exposed. John 3:27 NASB20 - John replied, “A person can receive not even one thing unless it has been given to him from heaven. Romans 3:9-18 NASB20 - What then? Are we better than they? Not at all; for we have already charged that both Jews and Greeks are all under sin; as it is written: “THERE IS NO RIGHTEOUS PERSON, NOT EVEN ONE; THERE IS NO ONE WHO UNDERSTANDS, THERE IS NO ONE WHO SEEKS OUT GOD; THEY HAVE ALL TURNED ASIDE, TOGETHER THEY HAVE BECOME CORRUPT; THERE IS NO ONE WHO DOES GOOD, THERE IS NOT EVEN ONE.” “THEIR THROAT IS AN OPEN GRAVE, WITH THEIR TONGUES THEY KEEP DECEIVING,” “THE VENOM OF ASPS IS UNDER THEIR LIPS”; “THEIR MOUTH IS FULL OF CURSING AND BITTERNESS”; “THEIR FEET ARE SWIFT TO SHED BLOOD, DESTRUCTION AND MISERY ARE IN THEIR PATHS, AND THEY HAVE NOT KNOWN THE WAY OF PEACE.” “THERE IS NO FEAR OF GOD BEFORE THEIR EYES.” Romans 5:10 LSB - For if while we were enemies we were reconciled to God through the death of His Son, much more, having been reconciled, we shall be saved by His life. Romans 8:6-8 LSB - For the mind set on the flesh is death, but the mind set on the Spirit is life and peace, because the mind set on the flesh is hostile toward God, for it does not subject itself to the law of God, for it is not even able to do so, and those who are in the flesh are not able to please God. So we cannot nor does an individual even want to come to God. All of mankind is in bondage to sin, totally depraved having no ability to come to God. For God must draw us to come to Christ, and when that happens, the Holy Spirit will regenerate that individual giving them the faith required to have full trust in Christ and what He has accomplished on our behalf. That is Bible my sister.

[@disciple2858]

Following the understanding of Father God being with a particular people such as Israel then now those in Christ Jesus. Could we also use the same line of reasoning in Genesis 6 indicating that the lineage of Seth are the Sons of God mentioned in Gen 6 : 4? Just curious because i was weighing the different views in light of scripture. Those being the fallen angels or the line of seth. If you have any material regarding the line of seth on Gen 6 i would be much appreciated. There is alot of angel material i have already viewed but the line of seth seems to have heavy implications upon us in Christ.

[@mirandashuwera3389]

I would really appreciate your opinion on Pastor Jim Brown of Grace and Truth Ministries here on KZbin. He teaches from the original languages and texts, keeping in mind the ancient, First Century sayings and idioms of the Jewish community and culture. He defines almost EVERY word in the effort to discover the truth of the scripture passage and doctrine. He has thousands of hours of study and teachings available for FREE here on KZbin and on DVD upon request. He has been teaching since his thirties and he is in his eighties now!! Please check him out and let me know what you think. 🙏❤️🙏

[@Jondoe_04]

Why didn't you deal with the idea of "according to the kind of attention of His will,"? You said that the condition of adoption and Election was faith/obedience in/to Christ, but Paul says that the reason of this choice isn't off of faith, but His will. That is similar to how Paul is an Apostles according to the will of God.

[@stephenmorrison335]

Would you say the Levitical law was put in place as a punishment for the calf? I have heard the Ante Nicene mention something along those lines. It was a way to keep them busy and away from Adultery.

[@JoelKorytko]

Nope. Strongly disagree

[@danborza3929]

Beautiful presentation

[@KevinEDF]

Thanks so much for this video! Could you recommend any non calvanist commentaries? Either old free ones or newer ones? It seems there are many calvanist commentaries out there.

[@JoelKorytko]

Biblical book?

[@KevinEDF]

I wasnt thinking of a particular book but some names that are respected that I can reference in calvanistic sections of the New testament.

[@aletheia8054]

Hendriksen

[@DelicueMusic]

Definitely want a video on Ephesians 1:7-10

[@JohnStuart-jj2di]

Paul, as is correctly stated in the video, is beginning to enumerate blessings which flow FROM salvation; those which accrue uniquely to believers upon salvation (v3). I take it that the moment in time that I am saved is the moment I become ‘in Christ’ and I receive, from that point onwards, these Spirit-mediated blessings. Therefore Paul is not describing the process of salvation itself. The ‘mechanics’ of salvation is not in view at all. Indeed, if eternal pre-selection for salvation were to be the blessing Paul intends his readers to be informed about, this would be a pre-salvation blessing, not one flowing from salvation or resulting from salvation. Therefore the context does not support the general proposition of pre-selection to salvation. (It may be a nice thing to know , if it were true, but it could never be described as a blessing which accrues FROM salvation). What then is the blessing that Paul is referring to? The blessing must be receipt of something that we did not possess prior to salvation. The blessing is “that we would be holy and blameless before him”. Paul is referring to our state/status/condition upon conversion. We perhaps take this for granted, as if there was only one possible outcome available to God for our post-conversion status. However, this is not the case. God could have returned us to innocence again or placed us in some other lesser moral category etc. Rather, the wonderful blessing is that our status is elevated far beyond what Man ever was in Adam, to be Holy and Blameless. It is a pity that in the perennial debate which surrounds this verse, the wonder of this truth is obscured! So what then does ‘chosen us’ mean? It means that God ‘made choice’ (Vine) concerning us. Who are the ‘us’? The ‘faithful in Christ’ v1. So God made a choice/decision/selection concerning the faithful in Christ. Not WHO the faithful in Christ would individually be, but WHAT they would be. If I approached you and said ‘I have chosen you’, you would rightly answer ‘what for?’, for without the answer to that question the statement is meaningless. To conclude that Paul is meaning God has chosen us to be saved is simply not in the text, nor in the context and needs to be read into the verse. Paul plainly answers the question ‘what for’ - that we should be holy and blameless before Him. God’s choice concerning us was what our status before him would be upon conversion. So, the verse could simply read - According as he hath made choice concerning the faithful in Christ Jesus, namely that we would be holy and blameless before Him. Paul includes some other information regarding this choice of our resulting status. He tells us that God made this decision ‘before the foundation of the world’. This is important because God did not need to wait until after the work of Calvary was secured before being able to make this determination. Calvary was necessary (if we can so speak) in order for God to declare Man holy and blameless. However God was able to make this determination because the ground of the choice was Christ. Such was God’s confidence in Christ and the accomplishment of Calvary that he was able to make this determination before he created anything and was a choice made within the context of the ‘eternal purpose which He purposed in Christ Jesus our Lord’ (Eph 3:11). Therefore I submit that the meaning of the verse is:- According as God has made choice concerning the faithful in Christ Jesus, this decision being grounded on Christ, who God had such full confidence in before He ever created anything, that those who come to faith in Christ should be elevated from sinners to a status of Holy and Blameless before Him. What a blessing!! When you see that the verse has nothing whatsoever to do with Calvinism, Arminianism, Provisionism or any other ’ism’, it is altogether more clear, plain, easy to understand - and a wonderful truth to appreciate.

[@marialux6892]

Can you recommend an authentic Septuagint? I bought Lancelot Breton’s but when I compare the apostles quoting Old Testament verses, they don’t match.

[@JoelKorytko]

Most translations are going to differ between a separate LXX version and an NT. Different translation committees

[@darrellmitchell4293]

What software are you using to present?

[@JoelKorytko]

Prezi

[@Cato1006]

Excellent! Thank you!

[@BarbaraMobley-yc7ui]

All need anything that's Warm + Fuzzy