“For those whom he foreknew he also predestined to be conformed to the image of his Son, that he might be the firstborn among many brothers and sisters” — Romans 8:29
This is a hallmark verse for the Calvinist, and it’s fair to see why. If you take a casual reading of this verse, it would suggest that God predestined the salvation for the roster of those he “foreknew”. However, we need to make sure we’re including context, as well as a full understanding of the words Paul is using.
First, context. Romans 8:28–30 sits in a chapter about assurance amid suffering for believers (“those who love God” and “are called according to His purpose”). Paul reassures Roman Christians facing trials that God sovereignly works all things for their ultimate good. Verses 29–30 explain how God does this by outlining His redemptive plan for believers.
Ok, so this chapter is meant to encourage Christians and basically say “don’t worry, God’s anticipated this and God’s got this”.
Now for the words Paul chose and how they should be interpreted:
In the verse above, there are two words that are the crux of this: “foreknew” and “predestined”. Let’s flesh out those words:
Foreknew (proginosko)
I feel as if there needs to be some clarification on a few things. First, few non-Calvinists (myself included) would ever question the sovereignty of God. There’s no denying that God knows the future, and there are many instances in scripture where we can see this:
- Every prophet had knowledge of the future, given to him by God
- There are many instances of dreams given by God foretelling the future (Daniel, Joseph, etc)
- Sometimes the prophesies themselves are the catalyst to fulfill other prophesies, such as Herod killing the children in Bethlehem because of a prophecy of Jesus being the king, or Joseph’s dreams of being a great ruler being what caused him to be enslaved and relocated to a place where he would become the ruler
- Direct verses where David talks about God knowing him before he was born, etc
One of the most obvious ones in the New Testament, is how the plan for Jesus to die for our sins was already set into motion, before mankind fell:
“The precious blood of Christ, like that of a lamb without blemish or spot. He was foreknown (proginōskō) before the foundation of the world but was made manifest in the last times for the sake of you” — I Peter 1:19-20
Later in this blog you can see that Paul uses this as a theme. In Ephesians 1 and 3, Paul excitedly lets us in on a secret that even the angels and demons didn’t know: God’s plan was always to include the Gentiles:
“This mystery is that the Gentiles are fellow heirs, members of the same body, and partakers of the promise in Christ Jesus through the gospel. … the plan of the mystery hidden for ages in God, … so that through the church the manifold wisdom of God might now be made known to the rulers and authorities in the heavenly places” — Ephesians 3:6-10 (abridged)
(More on that here)
Ok so we can see that “foreknew” isn’t a word that should raise any eyebrows to a non-Calvinist. Of course God foreknew who would be saved. And we can see from several examples in history that God doesn’t just know, He actively plans and anticipates.
It’s this second word, “predestine” that seems to cause all of the controversy. Let’s focus in on that word, because I think it really is the crux to everything Paul is saying here:
Predestined (proorizō)
Calvinists believe that “predestined” essentially means an “inescapable decree” (I think most Calvinists would say that’s a fair representation of their view). God “predestines” your salvation (to Heaven and hell) and once predestined, it is entirely inescapable, or to use their verbiage “irresistible”.
However, is that a fair definition of that word?
Remember how I mentioned that it was strange that none of the early church fathers seemed to have gotten tripped up by these verses? Did you know that Origen specifically brings up this Greek word in the context of Romans and uses it to say that God doesn’t predestine believers?
First, the context: Origen is so against predestination (the leading secular view at the time), that he writes entire explanations on the book of Romans to refute it. Here is an excerpt:
“For if this [the call or initial action] were the beginning of what follows, then those introducing the absurd doctrine concerning natures (predestination) would have the most plausible case. But foreknowledge (proginōskō) is higher than predestination (proorismos). Therefore, one should not consider God’s foreknowledge to be the cause of future events”.
Did you catch that? Origen, a Greek speaker who lived less than 200 years after Paul wrote Romans, just let us know that the word “proorismos” or “predestination” wasn’t some inescapable decree. In fact, God’s knowledge superseded it. The word simply couldn’t have meant “inescapable decree”, or Origen wouldn’t have categorized it as of lower authority than “foreknew”.
We can see there is even a reference in I Corinthians where Paul uses the same word, in a much more toned down way:
But we impart a secret and hidden wisdom of God, which God decreed (same word as “predestined”: proorizō) before the ages for our glory. 8 None of the rulers of this age understood this, for if they had, they would not have crucified the Lord of glory. 9 But, as it is written, “What no eye has seen, nor ear heard nor the heart of man imagined, what God has prepared for those who love him” — I Corinthians 2:7-9
Notice how Paul makes a comparison and says (paraphrased): “God decreed secret and hidden wisdom, and the Old Testament also speaks to this when it says that God ‘prepared unimaginable things for those who love Him’”.
Finally, there is another early church, Greek-speaking church father who also clearly softens this word:
“In reply to those who argue by all possible means that a predetermination (proorizō) of God exists for the years of each person, we shall say this: … Again, if the predetermination concerning the time [of life] of each person is a fixed and unchangeable proorismos, then no one who falls ill should call upon the saints in prayer for help, and none of them should turn to doctors—for whatever God has predetermined (proorizō), that must come to pass completely.” — Anastasius (c. 700AD)
Anastasius continues by noting that this would make God the author of wars and evils (which is absurd) and that people do in practice pray and seek medical help—proving that proorismos alone does not imply something irrevocable or fatalistic. He adds the qualifiers “fixed and unchangeable” precisely because the bare word does not carry that force by itself.
Thus, I think that “inescapable decree”, and even “predestination” is an inaccurate translation for “proorizō”. “Planned for” or “anticipated” seems much more accurate. Now let’s take a look at that verse again:
“For those whom he foreknew he also planned for/anticipated to be conformed to the image of his Son, that he might be the firstborn among many brothers and sisters” — Romans 8:29
Now, let’s bring back the context once more:
This chapter is meant to encourage Christians and basically say “don’t worry, God’s anticipated this and God’s got this”.
The verse fits in perfectly with the context of the entire chapter.
Once you actually dig into this word and the context, it becomes clear why Origen, Polycarp, and the entire early church father consensus was strictly anti-predestination. They would have had a perfect translation and background for those words and they would have known that Paul was never suggesting that God pre-ordains our salvation. And, for me, this finally made it so that I can read this verse and not feel confused or feel as if there are contradictions in the bible. I hope it does the same for you.
