Predestination

[PujolsNonRoidHomerHitter]

As I read more and more of the Bible with the thought of predestination in the forefront of my mind, I've begun to realize that this is how God seems to have been working the whole time.

I was an advocate of free will, but it just seems that God works through predestination all throughout the Bible.

Now I know this is a hot topic for debate, but I'm just throwing in my proverbial "two cents" here.

question: can a circle be a rectangle? can a rectangle be a circle?

go cards

 

[Rick Otto]

question: can a circle be a rectangle? can a rectangle be a circle?

go cards

In a certain sense, in a highly specified context that allows for that amount of redefinition, yes, but at the cost of redefining sense to equate with nonsense. Your question answered in the positive would advocate nonsense, in the negative, it could advocate rigid oversimplification.

When rhetoric descends into nonsense, chaos usualy rules at least for a time.
I don't fear nonsense or chaos, and they offer temporary relief from the monotony of order and equanimity, but they are only sometimes nice places to visit... nowhere you'd wanna live, tho.

 

[Rick Otto]

Again, as in my statement about "God's obligation," you have missed my point. It is an oxymoron to suggest that God is obligated or culpable to his creation for anything.

...And so obvious, one would think. It isn't "fair" that God would be free to do as He perfectly wills with what He creates?
So we judge & condemn God for His having created evil.

Or we imagine that He surrenders part of His omnipotence to each of us, a piece of His omniscience - forgetting somehow what He already knows we will do, or grounding Himself from the area of the future where His omnipresence is, so He won't be there to see it.

To admit He already knows every second of our individual futures, as omniscience would imply, admits His position of sovereign control of every moment of our lives.

Sovereign control is not manic control-freaking by micromanagement. God can allow some things to happen... passive, yes but still a control position. God allowing evil for His good purpose is 'fair' as far as fair applies. God decides, man abides.

 

[Rick Otto]

There is no mercy if God chose certain individuals to be lost before they even existed, before they ever did anything.

Sure there is. He chose everyone to be 'lost', then He had mercy on those He chose to place in Christ, also before creating.
You can't cherry pick His decisions for criticism as if they don't exist in context with all His other decisions.

God condemned them to eternal torment without them ever being given any kind of chance or hope.

Well, I don't buy the eternal torment theory either, but it's beside the point of it being God's decision to make, regardless. We have no more power over life and death than God allows. Jesus told that to Pontius Pilate and it's still true.

If God chose them to be lost and they can do nothing about it, it would have been better had they never been born.

Better to have loved and lost than never to have loved at all.

 

[jmacvols]

Answering a question with another question. If you read what I wrote, that is not what I meant. You are missing the point of the nature of God's character and will.

I have already asked the question before, but no one seems to want to answer it. All through the bible God made promises, since He cannot lie, He must keep His promises. God is a perfectly Holy God so He cannot lie, so when He promised to save the obedient and punish the disobedient..He will do as He promises.

When did I say anything about Calvinism? Others might be looking through that lense in this thread but I have not claimed to have done this.

Again, as in my statement about "God's obligation," you have missed my point. It is an oxymoron to suggest that God is obligated or culpable to his creation for anything.

So you're saying God can lie, that God does not have to keep any promises he made.

When did I mention that I thought there was a contradiction in the Bible?

Even if you think there is no evidence to support man being born with a sinful nature, you must admit that he is born with the propensity and desire to sin. This is what he follows - his immediate desire. It takes grace from God for his inclination to change.

This is your opinion, man has the ability to do what is right as much as the ability to do what is wrong.

You will notice that in Genesis 8:21 that God acknowledges that man's inclination is towards evil from the very beginning. God chose to exact the ultimate punishment on mankind and withhold grace to change the inclination, before the covenant with Noah.

Gen 8:21 - And the LORD smelled a sweet savour; and the LORD said in his heart, I will not again curse the ground any more for man's sake; for the imagination of man's heart is evil from his youth; neither will I again smite any more every thing living, as I have done.

This verse says "from his youth" NOT from his birth, so men are not born sinners. Furthermore this verse does not even remotely hint that men are "totally depraved" and can only do evil.

Gen 4:7 - If thou doest well, shalt thou not be accepted? and if thou doest not well, sin lieth at the door. And unto thee [shall be] his desire, and thou shalt rule over him.

God Himself shows that men have the ability to well, so again, men are not 'depraved' as to be able to do only evil.

What? How do you get this interpretation from this verse? It seems to me to be talking about the breath of life within man and living things.

Everyman had an eternal spirit that God made and put in him.

Wow, I am sorry, but this seems like wishful thinking on your part. Even if this interpretation is correct, using the term "free will" means nothing in this context if God's plan prevails. But still, you are making it seem like that God knows man's plans and chooses to make it God's own instead of the other way around. This causes all sorts of problems.

If man had no free will, he could not make his own plans to begin with.
"A man’s heart plans his way, but the LORD directs his steps." If man had no free will, the first part of this verse would be false. Because God works His plans out does not detract one whit from man's ability to plan "his way", man can devise a plan that he can exercise. If man had no free will he could only plan what God wants him to plan, he would only have God's plan and plan God's way, he would be in essence a preprogrammed robot. As I stated in my last post, God does not control what man plans, man has the free will to plan his own plans, but God does control how plans get worked out. God does not choose to control every minute thing man does.

Even if God does not actively "create evil," if he is omnipotent, omniscient, and sovereign over creation, he still ordains evil and uses it according to his purpose. He is the first cause while sinful men are the secondary and culpable causes.

If God ordained evil them he is not a Holy God. You cannot have it both ways, God both ordaining evil and being perfectly Holy at the same time. Evil cannot be attributed to God in anyway, Hab 1:13.

Still, your interpretation strikes me as wishful thinking and of someone who just cannot bear the thought that God's plan is not always discernable, and when it is, is not always rational by human standards and philosophy. There is too much of a focus on the love and mercy of God for the creation and not enough on the perfectly just and holy character of the Creator. It is all about God, not us.

No wishful thinking to it, God does not ordain evil no matter how much your theology tries to make Him do such.

Again, this strikes me as human reasoning using a secular philosophy of "how the world works" rather than an obedience to the revelation that is in Scripture.

Before it was "wishful thinking" now you say "human reasoning". If we back up to your post, all you did was post some verses and then "assume" those verses say what you think they do. You offered no explanation or proof at all. You even posted a verse about casting lots which has nothing to do with a "sinful nature' or man being depraved. Here you offered no rebuttal to my "human reasoning' at all. You continue to try and attribute evil to God and you lose your argument right there.

 

[jmacvols]

Just did.

Sorry, but you didn't. Again from Acts 2 show just one example of someone being told there was nothing they can do to be saved. In Acts 2 Peter did not tell them there was nothing they could do, he commanded them to repent and be baptized. The eunuch, the jailer were not told there was nothing for them to do to be saved. So just WHO was told there was nothing they could do to be saved?

You put words into the scripture that is not there.

False accusation.

Men who have not been born of the Spirit cannot be taught of God for they do not understand the things of God.

This simply is not to be found in the bible. All thru the book of Acts people were taught the word of God. In Acts 2 Peter taught them the word of God and when they heard it, it pricked them in their hearts. Acts 2:37 - "Now when they heard this, they were pricked in their heart". These people were in a lost state, yet while still lost they "heard", which carries the idea of comprehending/understanding. Their understanding of what Peter preached to them (God's word) brought about contrition in their heart.

Men cannot save themselves no matter how hard they try. For men are not saved by works. They are saved by Grace through faith that is not of themselves but a gift of God.

This is pure Calvinism, the bible teaches otherwise. You say they are saved by grace through faith. Faith itself is a work. Men cannot save themselves apart from the word of God, yet in Acts 2:40, if they did as Peter commanded, then in that sense they could, as Peter said "save yourselves".

 

[jmacvols]

Sure there is. He chose everyone to be 'lost', then He had mercy on those He chose to place in Christ, also before creating.
You can't cherry pick His decisions for criticism as if they don't exist in context with all His other decisions.

This is found nowhere in the bible. In Eph 1:4 before the world began, God chose those "in Him'" to be saved, so before the world began God did not chose everyone to be lost.

Well, I don't buy the eternal torment theory either, but it's beside the point of it being God's decision to make, regardless. We have no more power over life and death than God allows. Jesus told that to Pontius Pilate and it's still true.

The bible says it is eternal so it is fact not theory. But my point is that nowhere in the bible did God decide before the world began that certain individuals would be lost and certain individuals would be saved.

Better to have loved and lost than never to have loved at all.

??

 

[Tzaousios]

So you're saying God can lie, that God does not have to keep any promises he made.

No I did not say that. Take off the anti-Calvinist blinders. I am not a Calvinist.

What I was saying, however, is that it is rediculous to suggest that God is culpable even in the hypothetical. From revelation we can tell that God acts according to his nature, which is perfectly just and loving. Where did I say that he is evil?

This is your opinion, man has the ability to do what is right as much as the ability to do what is wrong.

And this is your opinion, as well as a humanistic philosophical reasoning that you are reading into Scripture as to how the human will functions.

Gen 8:21 - And the LORD smelled a sweet savour; and the LORD said in his heart, I will not again curse the ground any more for man's sake; for the imagination of man's heart is evil from his youth; neither will I again smite any more every thing living, as I have done.

This verse says "from his youth" NOT from his birth, so men are not born sinners. Furthermore this verse does not even remotely hint that men are "totally depraved" and can only do evil.

Again, take off the anti-Calvinist blinders. I am not a Calvinist. I never said that man was born with an evil nature.

But still, you have to admit that his nature and capacity for willing and acting is so damaged that needs divine grace, right?

Gen 4:7 - If thou doest well, shalt thou not be accepted? and if thou doest not well, sin lieth at the door. And unto thee [shall be] his desire, and thou shalt rule over him.

God Himself shows that men have the ability to well, so again, men are not 'depraved' as to be able to do only evil.

If the whole point of the concept of sin is for man to want to ignore God and act in a fashion that he believes is autonomous, why would he even want to do any spiritual good?

This verse, as well as others in which God reveals his will, it is just that, a revelation of his will. This sets the standard whether man has the ability to obey or not. It is a decree of God's prescriptive will. I would argue that he cannot obey without the aid of divine grace.

If man had no free will, he could not make his own plans to begin with. "A man’s heart plans his way, but the LORD directs his steps." If man had no free will, the first part of this verse would be false. Because God works His plans out does not detract one whit from man's ability to plan "his way", man can devise a plan that he can exercise. If man had no free will he could only plan what God wants him to plan, he would only have God's plan and plan God's way, he would be in essence a preprogrammed robot.

The robot trope is tired and old and you know this very well. It does not lend credibility to your argument and only indicates the histrionics with which you approach this topic.

I never denied that man had the ability to exercise his will. Where I disagree is how it seems that you are defining "free will." The concept that man has the intrinsic ability, apart from the effects of sin and temporality, to rise above all conditions and influences and act independently towards the good is one that is appropriated from pagan, Neoplatonic philosophy. It is also a trickle-down product of the conditions of Western societies whose people believe in total freedom in the political realm. It is quite foreign to the Judaic roots from which the Bible was written and from which Paul understood human nature when he wrote about the will.

If God ordained evil them he is not a Holy God. You cannot have it both ways, God both ordaining evil and being perfectly Holy at the same time. Evil cannot be attributed to God in anyway, Hab 1:13.

More histrionics and emotionalism. If God cannot deal with and control evil, then he is not omnipotent or omniscient or sovereign over his creation. Are familiar with primary and secondary causes?

Genesis 50:20
20 But as for you, you meant evil against me; but God meant it for good, in order to bring it about as it is this day, to save many people alive.

No wishful thinking to it, God does not ordain evil no matter how much your theology tries to make Him do such.

Again, take off the anti-Calvinist blinders.

Before it was "wishful thinking" now you say "human reasoning". If we back up to your post, all you did was post some verses and then "assume" those verses say what you think they do. You offered no explanation or proof at all. You even posted a verse about casting lots which has nothing to do with a "sinful nature' or man being depraved. Here you offered no rebuttal to my "human reasoning' at all. You continue to try and attribute evil to God and you lose your argument right there.

Again, take off the anti-Calvinist blinders. I did not say that man was born with a sinful nature. But it has been damaged severely, to the extent that it needs the aid of God to reorient the will. This was the point of me posting those verses, not to back up your hated shibboleth of "total depravity."

I have not attributed evil to God. Again, take off the anti-Calvinist blinders. Do not slander me like that.

 

[Tzaousios]

This is found nowhere in the bible. In Eph 1:4 before the world began, God chose those "in Him'" to be saved, so before the world began God did not chose everyone to be lost.

In light of this comment, how do you interpret this verse:

Romans 11:32

32 For God has committed them all to disobedience, that He might have mercy on all.

 

[heymikey80]

This is pure Calvinism, the bible teaches otherwise. You say they are saved by grace through faith. Faith itself is a work. Men cannot save themselves apart from the word of God, yet in Acts 2:40, if they did as Peter commanded, then in that sense they could, as Peter said "save yourselves".

Now to the one who works, his wages are not counted as a gift but as his due. 5And to the one who does not work but believes in him who justifies the ungodly, his faith is counted as righteousness Rom 4:4-5
​

Paul differentiates between works and faith. His assertion shows a categorical difference between the two.

Whether faith could be treated as a work or not under any conceivable case is irrelevant. It cannot be treated as such in Paul's view. It cannot be "quid pro quo" to get anywhere.

Yeah, we humans generally want to shift to "a law we can do". But that is not at all what Paul in particular, and the Gospel in general, describes.

YouTube - A New Law

 

[MamaZ]

How can a man by his own free will save himself?

 

[PT Calvinist]

That's illogical.

Salvation is a Gift that has already been given...As you know..all we gotta do is receive it...

In essence..no it's not illogical.

 

[Rick Otto]

Salvation is a Gift that has already been given...As you know..all we gotta do is receive it...

In essence..no it's not illogical.

Something already given still needs to be recieved?
Fascinating.

Pretzel logic maybe, but not at all rational in any sense of the word.