makesends
Well-known member
I hear ya!I'll have to go back and reread some posts. Lots of different discussions this morning and my coffee hasn't kicked in yet I guess.
The Elect
- Thread starter The Rogue Tomato
- Start date
Johann
Well-known member
I notice we have a very learned Calvinist here-and I don't mean it in a derogatory manner.
civic
Well-known member
Johann
Well-known member
Now all we need is very astute Dispentationalists-rightly cutting straight the word of God.@makesends is very astute
civic
Well-known member
once upon a time in a land far far away
not really but 30 years ago it was my passion but not so much these days. I focus on essentials now with God, Christ, the gospel, resurrection, christian walk to name a few.
makesends
Well-known member
So they are 'in Christ' from the foundation of the world? Because we know that the elect are the elect from the foundation of the world. Ephesians 1:4 "For he chose us in him before the creation of the world..."
makesends
Well-known member
It may be axiomatic that a Calvinist can't disparage a full thought until after his second cup of coffee.@makesends is very astute
No. no one is in Christ from the foundation of the earth. That happens in time
Ephesians 1:13 (KJV 1900) — 13 In whom ye also trusted, after that ye heard the word of truth, the gospel of your salvation: in whom also after that ye believed, ye were sealed with that holy Spirit of promise,
Romans 16:7 (KJV 1900) — 7 Salute Andronicus and Junia, my kinsmen, and my fellowprisoners, who are of note among the apostles, who also were in Christ before me.
Before the foundation of the earth God determined that those who would be in Christ through faith would be chosen to be blameless and holy..............................
It's God's plan of redemption- the corporate election of the body of Christ
Johann
Well-known member
Something to ponder and reflect upon.
This here from Utley.
"He chose us" This is an aorist middle indicative which emphasized the subject's decisive choice. This focused on the Father's choice before time. God's choice must not be understood in the Islamic sense of determinism nor in the ultra Calvinistic sense of "God chooses some versus God did not choose others," but in a covenantal sense. God promised to redeem fallen mankind (cf. Gen. 3:15). God called and chose Abraham to choose all humans (cf. Gen. 12:3; Exod. 19:5-6). See Special Topic: YHWH's Eternal Redemptive Plan. God calls all in Christ (cf. John 3:16; 1 Tim. 2:4; 2 Pet. 3:9; 1 John 2:2; 4;14. God Himself elected all persons who would exercise faith in Christ. The believers' choice of trusting in Christ confirms, not determines, God's choice of them. God always takes the initiative in salvation (cf. John 6:44, 65). This text and Rom. 8:28-30; 9:1-33 are the main NT texts for the doctrine of predestination emphasized by Augustine and Calvin.
God chose believers not only to salvation (justification) but also to sanctification (cf. Col. 1:12)! This could relate to
1. our position in Christ (cf. 2 Cor. 5:21)
2. God's desire to reproduce His character in His children (cf. Eph. 2:10; Rom. 8:28-29; Gal. 4:19; 1 Thess. 4:3)
God's will for His children is both heaven one day and Christlikeness now!
The pronouns in this passage are ambiguous. Most refer to God the Father. This whole passage speaks of His love, purpose and plan to redeem fallen mankind. However, in context it is obvious that the pronouns in Eph. 1:7, 9, 13 & 14 refer to Jesus.
"in Him" This is a key concept. The Father's blessings, grace and salvation flow only through Christ (cf. John 10:7-18; 14:6). Notice the repetition of this grammatical form (locative of sphere) in Eph. 1:3, "in Christ"; Eph. 1:4, "in Him"; Eph. 1:7, "in Him"; Eph. 1:9, "in Him"; Eph. 1:10, "in Christ," "in Him"; Eph. 1:12, "in Christ" and Eph. 1:13, "in Him" (twice). These are parallel to "in the Beloved" of Eph. 1:6. Jesus is God's "yes" to fallen mankind (Karl Barth). Jesus is the elect man and all are potentially elect in Him (cf. John 3:16). All of God the Father's blessings flow through Christ.
"before the foundation of the world" This phrase is also used in Matt. 25:34; John 17:24; 1 Pet. 1:19-20 and Rev. 13:8. It shows the Triune God's redemptive activity even before Gen. 1:1. See Special Topic: Paul's Use of Kosmos at Col. 1:6. Humans are limited by their sense of time; everything to us is past, present, or future, but not to God. History for Him is eternally present.
"that we should be holy and blameless before Him" The goal of predestination is holiness, not privilege. God's call is not to a selected few of Adam's children, but to all! It is a call to be what God intended mankind to be, like Himself, i.e., Christlikeness, (cf. Rom. 8:28-30; 2 Cor. 3:18; Gal. 4:19; Eph. 4:13; 1 Thess. 3:13; 4:3; 5:23; 2 Thess. 2:13; Titus 2:14; 1 Pet. 1:15); in His image (cf. Gen. 1:26-27). To turn predestination into a theological tenet instead of a holy life is a tragedy. Often our a priori systematic theologies speak louder than biblical texts!
The term "blameless" (amĹŤmos) or "free from blemish" is used of
1. Jesus, (cf. Heb. 9:14; 1 Pet. 1:19)
2. Zacharias and Elizabeth, (cf. Luke 1:6)
3. Paul (cf. Phil 3:6)
4. all true Christians (cf. Phil. 2:15; 1 Thess. 3:13; 5:23)
See Special Topic at Col. 1:22.
God's unalterable will for every believer is not only heaven later, but Christlikeness now (cf. Rom. 8:29-30; 2 Cor. 3:18; Gal. 4:19; 1 Thess. 3:13; 4:3; 1 Pet. 1:15). Believers are to reflect God's characteristics to a lost world for the purpose of evangelism.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Eph_1:4
2) v. 4-6 We are chosen in Christ
He chose us, adopted us, character
chose us -- Both Jew and Gentile alike were included in God's eternal plan of redemption. God wanted them all. This focused on the Father's choice before time.
The term election = has to do with the people.
The term predestination = has to do with the purpose.
in him -- Those that would be saved would be "in Him". They would be people with a special relationship with Christ.
God chose a class of people - the people who accept Christ as Lord and Savior. Many will not accept Christ, but those who do accept him are given the privilege to become sons of God (Joh_1:12). - CPNIV
In Christ is one of the key expressions of Ephesians. There are two closely related lines of truth in the NT — the truth of the believer's position and the truth of his practice. - BBC
in Him -- This is a key concept. The Father's blessings, grace and salvation flow only through Christ (cf. Joh_10:7-18; Joh_14:6). Notice the repetition of this grammatical form (locative of sphere) in Eph_1:3, "in Christ"; Eph_1:4, "in Him"; Eph_1:7, "in Him"; Eph_1:9, "in Him"; Eph_1:10, "in Christ," "in Him"; Eph_1:12, "in Christ" and Eph_1:13, "in Him" (twice). These are parallel to "in the Beloved" of Eph_1:6. - Utley
before the foundation of the world -- God's selection of the plan of salvation was not an "afterthought" but it was made before the creation of this world. Those to be saved would be those "in Christ".
This phrase is also used in Mat_25:34; Joh_17:24; 1Pe_1:19-20 and Rev_13:8.
This phrase refers to eternity before the time of this world's creation. Paul is speaking from a heavenly perspective when describing God's plan to save men "in Christ."
holy ... blameless ... in love -- The character of those "in Christ" are to be people of holy character. In Christ we are holy, blameless, and loved by God.
(1) Is this description describing the character of those chosen, or
(2) how they will be "counted" when they are "in Christ."
Christians are “holy” (hagious; cf. hagiois, “saints,” Eph_1:1), that is, set apart, dedicated to God. In addition, Christians, as redeemed forgiven people, are “blameless.” This word amōmous, “ without blemish,” is used eight times in the New Testament (Eph_1:4; Eph_5:27; Php_2:15; Col_1:22; Heb_9:14; 1Pe_1:19; 2Pe_3:14; Rev_14:5). In the Septuagint it is used of sacrificial animals; only those without blemish could be offered to God.
in love -- (1) Is this referring to divine love demonstrated in God' grace. Or (2) to man's love. The other five occurrences of “in love” in Ephesians (Eph_3:17; Eph_4:2, Eph_4:15-16; Eph_5:2 Here it seems to refer to God's love for mankind.
Bible expositors are in hopeless disagreement as to whether the words "in love" qualify that which precedes or that which follows.
But somehow I know you are going to disagree.
Last edited:
makesends
Well-known member
That's not what it says. It doesn't say they would be chosen at some future point (or to emphasize the point, 'that they would become chosen'. It says he chose them from the foundation of the world. The choosing is what the term 'elect' is referring to. Not to something they become. To use your words, God determined, thus he chose (past tense).
makesends
Well-known member
Yes! And it may be relevant to the meaning of 'the Body of Christ'.
Yes, it is remarkable to me that God refers to such things as what we are predestined to, instead of how we focus on predestined to be saved. It's like God's language does not bother to separate the concept of salvation from the particulars within it. It doesn't need to. Salvation IS its particulars. WE are the ones who have to categorize.
I don't honestly think it needs to be decided —in fact, I have a rather strong tendency to think it is both.
Ha! Well, you may have a reason for that. Notice that I have said before, that my reasons for what I believe are drawn from the same words others use to describe their basis for what they believe.
My point of disagreement at the beginning of this little detour in the thread was to the notion that God does not predestine all things to fall out precisely as they do, shown up particularly in the notion by @TomL seemed to be positing, that the election of the elect did not happen in the beginning, but rather, only when one becomes "in Christ".
Johann
Well-known member
Here is my honest thought-by election I believe ta panta/pas-all are "potentially saved" but we know the vast majority won't come to the Light.
Here is Utley again-
ELECTION
Election is a wonderful doctrine. However, it is not a call to favoritism, but a call to be a channel, a tool or means of others' redemption! In the Old Testament the term was used primarily for service; in the New Testament it is used primarily for salvation which issues in service. The Bible never reconciles the seeming contradiction between God’s sovereignty and mankind's free will, but affirms them both! A good example of the biblical tension would be Romans 9 on God's sovereign choice and Romans 10 on mankind’s necessary response (cf. Rom. 10:11,13).
The key to this theological tension may be found in Eph. 1:4. Jesus is God’s elect man and all are potentially elect in Him (Karl Barth).
Jesus is God’s "yes" to fallen mankind’s need (Karl Barth). Ephesians 1:4 also helps clarify the issue by asserting that the goal of predestination is not heaven, but holiness (Christlikeness). We are often attracted to the benefits of the gospel and ignore the responsibilities! God’s call (election) is for time as well as eternity!
Doctrines come in relation to other truths, not as single, unrelated truths. A good analogy would be a constellation versus a single star. God presents truth in eastern, not western, genres. We must not remove the tension caused by dialectical (paradoxical) pairs of doctrinal truths (God as transcendent versus God as immanent. Ex.: Security vs. perseverance; Jesus as equal with the Father vs. Jesus as subservient to the Father; Christian freedom vs. Christian responsibility to a covenant partner; etc.).
The theological concept of "covenant" unites the sovereignty of God (who always takes the initiative and sets the agenda) with a mandatory initial and continuing repentant, faith response from mankind (cf. Mark 1:15; Acts 3:16,19; 20:21). Be careful of proof-texting one side of the paradox and depreciating the other! Be careful of asserting only your favorite doctrine or system of theology!
See these Special Topics
1. Special Topic: Election/Predestination and the Need for a Theological Balance
2. Special Topic: Predestination (Calvinism) vs. Human Fre Will (Arminianism)
3. Special Topic: Covenant
4. Special Topic: Eastern Literature (biblical paradoxes)
Shalom @makesends
Election is in Christ
Being in Christ happens in time
Romans 16:7–8 (ESV) — 7 Greet Andronicus and Junia, my kinsmen and my fellow prisoners. They are well known to the apostles, and they were in Christ before me. 8 Greet Ampliatus, my beloved in the Lord.
when one believes
Ephesians 1:13 (ESV) — 13 In him you also, when you heard the word of truth, the gospel of your salvation, and believed in him, were sealed with the promised Holy Spirit,
The them are believers plural- those in Christ
that is who are being addressed
Ephesians 1:1 (ESV) — 1 Paul, an apostle of Christ Jesus by the will of God, To the saints who are in Ephesus, and are faithful in Christ Jesus:
He chose believers to be holy and blameless
The text says nothing about some unconditionally preselected men to become believers.
Johann
Well-known member
Just makes sense-the Aorist point for the believer IN Christ Jesus.
Yes one was sealed in Christ when they trusted in him.
Johann
Well-known member
Amen-
PREDESTINATION (CALVINISM) VS. HUMAN FREE WILL (ARMINIANISM)
Titus 2:11 is a balance to other NT passages on election. I thought it might be theologically helpful to provide my commentary notes from Romans 8:29 and chapter 9, as well as Ephesians 1.
I. Romans 8:29 – Paul uses "foreknew" (proginōskō, "to know before") twice, here and 11:2. In 11:2 it refers to God's covenant love for Israel before time began.
Remember that the term "know" in Hebrew related to intimate, personal relationship, not to facts about someone (cf. Gen. 4:1; Jer. 1:5). Here it was included in a chain of eternal events (cf. Rom. 8:29-30). This term was linked with predestination. However, it must be stated that God's foreknowledge is not the basis of election because if that were so, then election would be based on fallen humanity's future response, which would be human performance. This term is also found in Acts 26:5; 1 Pet. 1:2,20 and 2 Pet. 3:17.
A. "foreknew" (proginĹŤskĹŤ, "to know before")
The terms "foreknow" and "predestine" are both compounds with the preposition "before" and, therefore, should be translated "to know before," "to set bounds before," or "mark off before." The definitive passages on predestination in the NT are Rom. 8:28-30; Eph. 1:13-14; and Romans 9. These texts obviously stress that God is sovereign. He is in total control of all things. There is a preset divine plan being worked out in time. However, this plan is not arbitrary or selective. It is based, not only on God's sovereignty and foreknowledge, but on His unchanging character of love, mercy, and undeserved grace. See Special Topic: YHWH's Eternal Redemptive Plan.
We must be careful of our western (American) individualism or our evangelical zeal coloring this wonderful truth. We must also guard against being polarized into the historical, theological conflicts between Augustine versus Pelegius or Calvinism versus Arminianism.
B. "predestined" (proorizĹŤ, "to set the bounds before")
Predestination is not a doctrine meant to limit God's love, grace, and mercy nor to exclude some from the gospel.
It is meant to strengthen believers by molding their worldview. God is for all mankind (cf. John 1:12; 3:16; 1 Tim. 2:4; 2 Pet. 3:9; 1 John 2:2; 4:14). God is in control of all things. Who or what can separate us from Him (cf. Rom. 8:31-39)? God views all history as present; humans are time bound. Our perspective and mental abilities are limited. There is no contradiction between God's sovereignty and mankind's free will. It is a covenantal structure. This is another example of truth given in dialectical tension. Biblical doctrines are presented from different perspectives. They often appear paradoxical. The truth is a balance between the seemingly opposite pairs. We must not remove the tension by picking one of the truths. We must not isolate any biblical truth into a compartment by itself.
It is also important to add that the goal of election is not only heaven when we die, but Christlikeness now (cf. Rom. 8:29-30; 2 Cor. 3:18; Gal. 4:19; Eph. 1:4; 2:10; 4:13; 1 Thess. 3:13; 4:3; 5:23; 2 Thess. 2:13; Titus 2:14; 1 Pet. 1:15). We were chosen to be "holy and blameless." God chooses to change us so that others may see the change and respond by faith to God in Christ. Predestination is not a personal privilege, but a covenantal responsibility. This is the major truth of the passage. This is the goal of Christianity. Holiness is God's will for every believer. God's election is to Christlikeness (cf. Eph. 1:4), not a special standing. The image of God, which was given to man in creation (cf. Gen. 1:26; 5:1,3; 9:6), is to be restored.
C. "conformed to the image of His Son"—God's ultimate goal is the restoration of the image lost in the Fall. Believers are foreordained to Christlikeness (cf. Eph. 1:4).
II. Romans 9
A. Romans 9 is one of the strongest NT passages on God's sovereignty (the other being Eph. 1:3-14), while chapter 10 states humans' free will clearly and repeatedly (cf. "everyone" Rom. 9:4; "whosoever" 9:11,13; "all" 9:12 [twice]). Paul never tries to reconcile this theological tension. They are both true! Most Bible doctrines are presented in paradoxical or dialectical pairs. Most systems of theology are logical half-truths. Augustinianism and Calvinism versus semi-Pelegianism and Arminianism have elements of truth and error. Biblical tension between doctrines is preferable to a proof-texted, dogmatic, rational, theological system that forces the Bible onto a preconceived interpretive grid.
B. This same truth (found in Rom. 9:23) is stated in Rom. 8:29-30 and Eph. 1:4,11. This chapter is the strongest expression of God's sovereignty in the NT. There can be no dispute that God is in total charge of creation and redemption. This great truth should never be softened or diminished. However, it must be balanced with God's choice of covenant as a means of relating to human creation, made in His image. It is surely true that some OT covenants, like Genesis 15, are unconditional and do not relate at all to human response, but other covenants are conditioned on human response (e.g., Eden, Noah, Moses, David). God has a plan of redemption for His creation; no human can affect this plan. God has chosen to allow individuals to participate in His plans. This opportunity for participation is a theological tension between sovereignty (Romans 9) and human free will (Romans 10).
It is not appropriate to select one biblical emphasis and ignore another. There is tension between doctrines because eastern people present truth in dialectical or tension-filled pairs. Doctrines must be held in relationship to other doctrines. Truth is a mosaic of truths.
III. Ephesians 1
A. Election is a wonderful doctrine. However, it is not a call to favoritism, but a call to be a channel, a tool, or means of others' redemption! In the OT the term was used primarily for service; in the NT it is used primarily for salvation which issues in service.
The Bible never reconciles the seeming contradiction between God's sovereignty and mankind's free will, but affirms them both! A good example of the biblical tension would be Romans 9 on God's sovereign choice and Romans 10 on mankind's necessary response (cf. 10:11,13).
The key to this theological tension may be found in 1:4. Jesus is God's elect man and all are potentially elect in Him (Karl Barth). Jesus is God's "yes" to fallen mankind's need (Karl Barth). Ephesians 1:4 also helps clarify the issue by asserting that the goal of predestination is not heaven only, but holiness (Christlikeness). We are often attracted to the benefits of the gospel and ignore the responsibilities! God's call (election) is for time as well as eternity!
Doctrines come in relation to other truths, not as single, unrelated truths. A good analogy would be a constellation versus a single star. God presents truth in eastern, not western, genres. We must not remove the tension caused by dialectical (paradoxical) pairs of doctrinal truths (God as transcendent versus God as immanent; security vs. perseverance; Jesus as equal with the Father vs. Jesus as subservient to the Father; Christian freedom vs. Christian responsibility to a covenant partner, etc).
The theological concept of "covenant" unites the sovereignty of God (who always takes the initiative and sets the agenda) with a mandatory initial and continuing repentant faith response from man. Be careful of proof-texting one side of the paradox and depreciating the other! Be careful of asserting only your favorite doctrine or system of theology.
B. "He chose us" in Eph. 1:4 is an aorist middle indicative which emphasizes the subject. This focuses on the Father's choice before time. God's choice must not be understood in the Islamic sense of determinism, nor in the ultra-Calvinistic sense as some versus others, but in the covenantal sense. God promised to redeem fallen mankind (cf. Gen. 3:15). God called and chose Abraham to choose all humans (cf. Gen. 12:3; Exod. 19:5-6). God Himself elected all persons who would exercise faith in Christ. God always takes the initiative in salvation (cf. John 6:44,65). This text and Romans 9 are the biblical basis for the doctrine of predestination emphasized by Augustine and Calvin.
God chose believers not only to salvation (justification), but also to sanctification (cf. Colossians 1: 10-12). This could relate to (1) our position in Christ (cf. 2 Cor. 5:21) or (2) God's desire to reproduce His character in His children (cf. Eph. 2:10; Rom. 8:28-29; Gal. 4:19). God's will for His children is both heaven one day and Christlikeness now!
"In Him" is a key concept of Eph. 1:4. The Father's blessings, grace, and salvation flow through Christ (cf. John 14:6). Notice the repetition of this grammatical form (locative of sphere) in Eph. 1:3, "in Christ"; 1:4, "in Him"; 1:7, "in Him"; 1:9, "in Him"; 1:10, "in Christ," "in Him"; 1:12, "in Christ" and 1:13, "in Him" (twice). Jesus is God's "yes" to fallen mankind (Karl Barth). Jesus is the elect man and all are potentially elect in Him. All of God the Father's blessings flow through Christ.
The phrase "before the foundation of the world" is also used in Matt. 25:34; John 17:24; 1 Pet. 1:19-20 and Rev. 13:8. It shows the Triune God's redemptive activity even before Gen. 1:1. Humans are limited by their sense of time; everything to us is past, present, and future, but not to God.
The goal of predestination is holiness, not privilege. God's call is not to a selected few of Adam's children, but to all! It is a call to be what God intended mankind to be, like Himself (cf. 1 Thess. 5:23; 2 Thess. 2:13); in His image (cf. Gen. 1:26-27). To turn predestination into a theological tenet instead of a holy life is a tragedy. Often our theologies speak louder than the biblical text.
The term "blameless" (amĹŤmos) or "free from blemish" is used of
1. Jesus (cf. Heb. 9:14; 1 Pet. 1:19)
2. Zacharias and Elizabeth (cf. Luke 1:6)
3. Paul (cf. Phil. 3:6)
4. all true Christians (cf. Phil. 2:15; 1 Thess. 3:13; 5:23)
God's unalterable will for every Christian is not only heaven later, but Christlikeness now (cf. Rom. 8:29-30; Gal. 4:19; 1 Pet. 1:2). Believers are to reflect God's characteristics to a lost world for the purpose of evangelism.
Grammatically the phrase "in love" in Titus 2:2 could go with either Titus 2:4 or 5. However, when this phrase is used in other places in Ephesians it always refers to human love for God (cf. Eph. 3:17; 4:2,15,16).
C. In Eph. 1:5 the phrase "He predestined us" is an aorist active participle. This Greek term is a compound of "before" and "mark off." It refers to God's predetermined redemptive plan (cf. Luke 22:22; Acts 2:23; 4:28; 17:31; Rom. 8:29-30). Predestination is one of several truths related to mankind's salvation. It is part of a theological pattern or series of related truths. It was never meant to be emphasized in isolation! Biblical truth has been given in a series of tension-filled, paradoxical pairs. Denominationalism has tended to remove the biblical tension by emphasizing only one of the dialectical truths (predestination versus human free will; security of the believer versus perseverance of the saints; original sin versus volitional sin; sinlessness versus sinning less; instantaneously declared sanctification versus progressive sanctification; faith versus works; Christian freedom versus Christian responsibility; transcendence versus immanence).
God's choice is not based on foreknowledge of human performance, but on His gracious character (cf. Eph. 1:7,9,11). He wishes that all (not just some special ones like the Gnostics or modern-day ultra-Calvinists) would be saved (cf. Ezek. 18:21-23,32; John 3:16-17; 1 Tim. 2:4; 4:10; Titus 2:11; 2 Pet. 3:9; 1 John 2:2; 4:14). God's grace (God's character) is the theological key to this passage (cf. Eph. 1:6a, 7c, 9b), as God's mercy is the key to the other passage on predestination, Romans 9-11.
Fallen mankind's only hope is the grace and mercy of God (cf. Isa. 53:6 and several other OT texts quoted in Rom. 3:9-18). It is crucial in interpreting these first theological chapters to realize that Paul emphasizes those things which are totally unrelated to human performance: predestination (Ephesians 1), grace (Ephesians 2), and God's eternal plan of redemption (mystery, Eph. 2:11- 3:13). This was to counterbalance the emphasis of the false teachers on human merit and pride.
Shalom
J.
The Rogue Tomato
Well-known member
I beg to differ.
John 6:65 And He said, “Therefore I have said to you that no one can come to Me unless it has been granted to him by My Father.”
John 6:65 He went on to say, “This is why I told you that no one can come to me unless the Father has enabled them.”
Father God has exclusive control over who comes to Jesus.
makesends
Well-known member
To me, that is an unnecessary arrangement of thought. Simple logic demands that nothing happen outside his decree.
God's chosen people, in the OT, the Children of Israel, descendants of Abraham, were particularly chosen. Special to God
There is no contradiction. No tension. Certainly not, from God's POV
One either is, or is not, elect, and that, from the foundation of the world. I see no need to go to any extent to show otherwise, just to resolve "theological tension". What needs resolved is whatever is not quite 'from' the Bible, and whatever does not answer to reason.
Why not remove the so-called 'tension'? If God sees none, why not attempt to see the facts from his POV? There is no paradox, except from our point-of-view. We need no 'key', unless that is what we mean by seeing from God's POV.
Of course! But notice how often, (and I don't mean this to the disparagement of anyone's 'truth', unless to the disparagement of everyone's 'truth'), the resolutions are often found in the extremes; for an example, consider that within the notions of God's omnipotence and aseity and transcendence, his immanence is found! He is thus elevated in our minds, (or at least in mine), to not only be the one by whom real choice is established, but at once to be the one in whose irreversible decree is found faithfulness and security and comfort and immediate help.
FWIW I find often that the things in the Bible that I don't understand by way of apparent contradictions, or by simple ignorance, are answered, at least in part, by going to some attempted concept of God's POV that is so unlike ours. The very meanings of words we naturally consider anthropomorphically, are so often different, when applied to Him, that (to me, at least) they can only begin to be understood in their extreme. For an example, the notion of "God getting mad", is never God losing his temper, (even though I read that he is 'carried along' by his wrath or that it 'consumed him'), nor is it quite like we might consider controlling our anger by tempering it with fear or humility or love, but rather, from God's POV, maybe his wrath is in its extremes understood to never contradict or work against his love in its extremes. I think we can understand his decree as 'issuing forth' (a term from our way of thinking) from his character and attributes. In God, all his attributes are him, and that, always in the extreme.
Shalom @Johann
