Does god predestine people to hell? (moved)

[oi_antz]

God knows all the future with absolute certainty - as He knows the past - they are "alike to God"

He demonstrates this for Peter with the rooster crowing and Peter denying Him -

The test case interconnects the time of day, the nearness of the rooster to be within hearing range, the fact that Peter will stop to notice and count, the number of times the rooster will crow and the exact number of times Peter will fail. This goes far beyond "guessing" that Peter "might make a poor choice".

If you have enough certainty of your command of the parameters, then a guess does not need imply that you should expect to be wrong. We do this all the time when we drive a car.

 

[elopez]

Omniscient means to know all there is to know. But if the future hasn't happened yet then it can't be known, only expected.

I'm only replying to this as I've recently been discussing time and how it relates to us and God, and what that exactly means, and I'm curious what others think. Apparently we can get away with replying to one another's comments as Christians in this thread as per the rules, yet we cannot have a back and forth. If you're further interested in discussing this issue, maybe another thread could be started in the theology section some place, or we can PM. In hindsight, I should just do either of those instead of replying here.

To be exact, omniscience means to know everything. To know all. To say it means, "all there is to know" seems superfluous. Also, this seems to imply the future must "exist" in order for God to know it, which does not seem to be true.

 

[oi_antz]

I'm only replying to this as I've recently been discussing time and how it relates to us and God, and what that exactly means, and I'm curious what others think. Apparently we can get away with replying to one another's comments as Christians in this thread as per the rules, yet we cannot have a back and forth. If you're further interested in discussing this issue, maybe another thread could be started in the theology section some place, or we can PM. In hindsight, I should just do either of those instead of replying here.

To be exact, omniscience means to know everything. To know all. To say it means, "all there is to know" seems superfluous. Also, this seems to imply the future must "exist" in order for God to know it, which does not seem to be true.

Thank you elopez. I accept that you think it is superfluous, but it was said that way to deliberately acknowledge (emphasise) that if the future hasn't happened, it cannot be known. There seems to be a rather common Christian belief that the future has happened, but I can not conceive of that idea, and I have not yet seen scriptures that indicate God has made it known to be true.

 

[elopez]

if the future hasn't happened, it cannot be known

Well, this is exactly the claim I said that doesn't seem to be reasonable. I find it false for two reasons.

I have not yet seen scriptures that indicate God has made it known to be true.

To which you mean you disagree with those Scriptures which may indicate the future has in a some sense real. Which is another thang. As I said I don't want to to interrupt this thread as it is not technically allowed. Maybe PM me? Or are we interested enough to start another thread?

 

[BobRyan]

If you have enough certainty of your command of the parameters, then a guess does not need imply that you should expect to be wrong. We do this all the time when we drive a car.

God is not limited by what a human can manage to do.

God can know both the future and the past with equal observation and certainty - and yet he can create and promote free will -

which is far beyond human ability to fully comprehend -. By definition God is infinite - in existence, understanding and power, mankind is not capable of any of those attributes.

IT is not surprising then when man tries to "figure out" how God does it - he comes up with "how man would do it"

 

[bling]

Are you saying then that you do not have a scriptural basis for assuming that future history has already happened?

No, God /Christ knew what Peter and Judas would do, as an example. Both Peter and Judas made some free will choices in deciding to deny Christ and betray Christ, yet there are very limited options on how Jesus/God could be certain that this would happen exactly as it did in man’s future, the options being:

1. Deity is going to make this happen, but that makes Deity responsible for sin?
   
   
2. Deity can figure out from the hearts of Peter and Judas what they will do; if that is true and Judas and Peter still have free will, it should be expressed by Deity as an “option” (since that is what it is at the time Jesus stated it) and not as a fact. If it was an action Deity was going to do in the future it would be stated one way and could change following the truism expressed in Jer. 18., but this is not Deity’s actions but Peter and Judas’ actions, so what was said they would do in man’s future has to happen with no option.
   
   
3. Since it cannot be just an intelligent guess by Deity; God either is making it happen (1) or it has already happened, from God’s perspective, and thus cannot be changed. It is not unimaginable that it has already happened in man’s future with God knowing the future like history, since time has so far been shown to be relative.
   

Do you have another option?

Since God does not have to control the future to know the future why would option one be chosen over option 3 since there is no Biblical support for 1 and it makes Deity responsible for the sin of Peter and Judas?

 

[oi_antz]

No, God /Christ knew what Peter and Judas would do, as an example. Both Peter and Judas made some free will choices in deciding to deny Christ and betray Christ, yet there are very limited options on how Jesus/God could be certain that this would happen exactly as it did in man’s future, the options being:

1. Deity is going to make this happen, but that makes Deity responsible for sin?
   
   
2. Deity can figure out from the hearts of Peter and Judas what they will do; if that is true and Judas and Peter still have free will, it should be expressed by Deity as an “option” (since that is what it is at the time Jesus stated it) and not as a fact. If it was an action Deity was going to do in the future it would be stated one way and could change following the truism expressed in Jer. 18., but this is not Deity’s actions but Peter and Judas’ actions, so what was said they would do in man’s future has to happen with no option.
   
   
3. Since it cannot be just an intelligent guess by Deity; God either is making it happen (1) or it has already happened, from God’s perspective, and thus cannot be changed. It is not unimaginable that it has already happened in man’s future with God knowing the future like history, since time has so far been shown to be relative.

Do you have another option?

Since God does not have to control the future to know the future why would option one be chosen over option 3 since there is no Biblical support for 1 and it makes Deity responsible for the sin of Peter and Judas?

I believe option 2 is closer to the situation. If it is most likely that Judas and Peter would do what they would do, then there is no reason to state it with uncertainty. If this is the only scripture you can produce to support the idea that the future has already happened, then I am satisfied. Thank you.

 

[oi_antz]

Well, this is exactly the claim I said that doesn't seem to be reasonable. I find it false for two reasons.

As I described in the PM just now, to be certain of what to expect in the future is not to necessitate that the future has happened. The word "knowledge", as I understand it, implies that the future has already happened. But I do not yet believe that to be the correct way to consider time.

 

[BobRyan]

God knows the future as He knows the past. He can view facts that man cannot - all knowing, all powerful and infinite.

But God is capable of knowing a fact about future sin without making the person commit the sin.

For limited finite man to do that - he would need to "program that person" to sin.

 

[JaapAap]

 

[Albion]

FWIW, it is not difficult to make the case that God predestines his Elect to salvation and makes no provision for the others; it is possible, but harder, to make the case that he also predestines some to Hell.

 

[bling]

I believe option 2 is closer to the situation. If it is most likely that Judas and Peter would do what they would do, then there is no reason to state it with uncertainty. If this is the only scripture you can produce to support the idea that the future has already happened, then I am satisfied. Thank you.

If as you say: "If it is most likely that Judas and Peter would do what they would do" then Jesus/God should state it as an option or they are being misleading.

 

[Hawkins]

I don't know but like I was sleepy and then this came to mind and it kinda made me courious. Well anyways we all know that god is omniscient right? So doesn't that mean our story plays out or something? It kinda be like me writing book or something and I knew the whole story before it even started. Also wouldn't this affect free will as well. This is just a curious question so yeah

Freewill is a very early concept developed among the Jews. The Essenes believe in complete predestination and thus no freewill. The Sadducees believe the opposite, that is, complete freewill with no predestination. While the Pharisees are in between, they believe that predestination is co-operated with freewill.

That being said, IMO predestination basically means God provides the chances for the saved to show themselves up as the saved in front of the angles (and other witnesses), such that the saved will be legitimately brought to Heaven under open witnessing. That is, the Pharisaic concept is more or less correct.

Alternatively speaking, our time on planet earth is short and limited. God knows who is who from the very beginning before the creation, but not the angels. God thus designed through predestination that the saved will be separated from the unsaved during their life time on earth, openly witnessed by the angels and the chosen saints as witnesses.

In a nutshell, God only needs to set forth predestination for the saved only.

 

[Hawkins]

As for why hell exists.

Logically, what makes a message (a religion) a necessity to follow instead of an option is that the message is a warning about an extremely bad consequence.

If it's not because of this extremely bad consequence, you don't need God, you don't need Jesus, you don't need a religion at all. Just live whichever way you like the rest of your life, then it will all be done!

So put it the reversed way, if Jesus is not optional it implies that a bad consequence must have made Him (the salvation message from God) a necessity to follow.

Now why an immortal soul is needed in God's design perspective? Once a human died, his body will decay. Then no one ever knows who he is, not even the angels. Only God knows. "Only God knows" however won't be a valid open witnessing for his existence. A more permanent ID is needed by each human as a witnessing to show (say, to the angels) that he is the he from the beginning till the end.

Immortal soul is a Pharisaic concept dominated the Jews at Jesus time.

God on the other hand, is completely incompatible with sin, He's trying with His best effort right now to bear with our sins. This situation will end after the Judgment Day. He will be happy again after the Final Judgment with the relief that He needs to bear with human sins no more. He will since then live happily with the angels and the saved in an eternity we refer to as Heaven.

Now what happens to the unsaved? Their immortal souls will have to go another path. God will completely ignore their existence. This state is commonly referred to as the permanent separation from God.

What happens when humans (angels alike) are put in such a state? Since God is the only source of good in this universe, without God's presence and His guidance those in such a separation will finally come to an end where all of them will become the same as the devil himself.

God has ever sworn the oath that they can never enter His rest. There won't be any grace under any name to spare them from the situation. Unless the only Jesus is put to disgrace the second time. This however won't happen.

Finally, the unquenchable fire will come as a result.

 

[BobRyan]

FWIW, it is not difficult to make the case that God predestines his Elect to salvation and makes no provision for the others; it is possible, but harder, to make the case that he also predestines some to Hell.

It is more direct to accept "God so Loved the World that HE gave His only Son..." -- and then add "yes really".

Same for "He is the atoning sacrifice for OUR sins and NOT for our sins only but for the sins of the WHOLE World" 1 John 2:2 NIV -- with a "yes really" added.

"God is not WILLING that any should perish but that ALL should come to repentance" 2Peter 3

"He came to His OWN - and His OWN received Him not" John 1:11 -- election in action

"I STAND at the door and knock - IF anyone hears My voice AND Opens the door I WILL come in" Rev 3

 

[Albion]

It is more direct to accept "God so Loved the World that HE gave His only Son..." -- and then add "yes really".

If you want to skirt the issue altogether, sure.

What I'm reading in the selection process you went though with those verses looks like a familiar mistake, which is to think that because God would rather that everyone be what he wanted for the whole human race (as was the case with Adam and Eve at creation), that this somehow means that he's going to decree it.

 

[BobRyan]

QUOTE="BobRyan, post: 68494131, member: 235244"]It is more direct to accept "God so Loved the World that HE gave His only Son..." -- and then add "yes really".

Same for "He is the atoning sacrifice for OUR sins and NOT for our sins only but for the sins of the WHOLE World" 1 John 2:2 NIV -- with a "yes really" added.

"God is not WILLING that any should perish but that ALL should come to repentance" 2Peter 3

"He came to His OWN - and His OWN received Him not" John 1:11 -- election in action

"I STAND at the door and knock - IF anyone hears My voice AND Opens the door I WILL come in" Rev 3[/QUOTE]

Which deals directly with the issue of predestination - election etc.

If you want to skirt the issue altogether, sure.

I find your logic "illusive" just then.

What I'm reading in the selection process you went though with those verses looks like a familiar mistake, which is to think that because God would rather that everyone be what he wanted for the whole human race (as was the case with Adam and Eve at creation), that this somehow means that he's going to decree it.

I don't claim that God is dictating that nobody has free will so as to go counter to the will of God.

I proved that here -

"He came to His OWN - and His OWN received Him not" John 1:11 -- election in action

 

[oi_antz]

If as you say: "If it is most likely that Judas and Peter would do what they would do" then Jesus/God should state it as an option or they are being misleading.

I don't agree with this conclusion. There is nothing misleading at all about stating it with certainty, because even though they were warned, still they chose to do it.

 

[Albion]

"He came to His OWN - and His OWN received Him not" John 1:11 -- election in action

"I STAND at the door and knock - IF anyone hears My voice AND Opens the door I WILL come in" Rev 3

Which deals directly with the issue of predestination - election etc.

Actually, no. People think these deal with--and refute--Election, but they're mistaken.

I find your logic "illusive" just then.

I noticed.

 

[BobRyan]

QUOTE="BobRyan, post: 68494255, member: 235244"]QUOTE="BobRyan, post: 68494131, member: 235244"]It is more direct to accept "God so Loved the World that HE gave His only Son..." -- and then add "yes really".

Same for "He is the atoning sacrifice for OUR sins and NOT for our sins only but for the sins of the WHOLE World" 1 John 2:2 NIV -- with a "yes really" added.

"God is not WILLING that any should perish but that ALL should come to repentance" 2Peter 3

"He came to His OWN - and His OWN received Him not" John 1:11 -- election in action

"I STAND at the door and knock - IF anyone hears My voice AND Opens the door I WILL come in" Rev 3[/QUOTE]

Which deals directly with the issue of predestination - election etc.
...

Actually, no. People think these deal with--and refute--Election, but they're mistaken.

Turns out - they do refute the meaning for election that many Calvinists choose to pour into that term by extreme inference alone.



"He came to His OWN - and His OWN received Him not" John 1:11 -- election in action