A new spin on Predestination

[Matt Never Existed]

Heya guys, my first post here in this area. I just wanted to kinda share my own spin on how i view predestination. I don't THINK I'm a calvinist, though i guess i share that same thought as them. Well here it goes..

We all have the freewill to do anything we want. Take posting a reply to this topic as an example. God gave you the freewill to reply or not to reply. But God also somehow brought you here. God knew that when you saw this topic, you would use that freewill and come on in and read this. He knew it before you did it. Heck, He even planned for me to post this here so you COULD click on it. You could have used that freewill and NOT have come in here, and people will probably dot that, but that TOO is in God's plan because he knew that they wouldn't read this. BUT, God in no way affects your decision in this process. He doesn't FORCE you to come in, he just knew you would. And in the same way, He doesn't FORCE anyone from not reading this, he just knew that some people wouldn't.

Does that make sense? Is it any different than the 'normal' view? If anyone sees any MAJOR theological flaws in this, please tell me. Constructive criticism is more than welcomed.

 

[Rick Otto]

I don't know what you mean by "normal" or "Calvinist", but I see a major flaw in the notion of "free will", and omniscience is more than clairvoyance.

How free is free, and how are our wants determined?
If He doesn't "FORCE" mercy upon us, how can we be "free" to choose it?
I thought we are born in sin & concieved in iniquity. How much freedom does THAT afford us?

How can any future possibility be predestined & still be subject to the whims of any human will?
To say that He only saw the future denies that He created it & has sovereignity over it.
The paradox I have the most trouble transcending is Man's responsibility in the face of God's sovereignity.

 

[geebob]

God gave you the freewill to reply or not to reply. But God also somehow brought you here.

then lets consider, 5 minutes ago, it was in God's plan that I would come here and post. Now given that, 5 minutes ago, you say that I was free to not post in the future. But what would that circumstance have looked like? It was God's plan for me to post, but If I refrained from posting, then what would be the case is that God had planned for me to post and yet I refrained. unless God's plans can fail, I don't see how that could be.

 

[frumanchu]

is it not possible that God knows what factors would lead you to make the decision to post and brought those factors to bear?

 

[geebob]

of course, but it's not logically possible for me to do otherwise in such a situation. Since when have we done other than what God knows for certain that we will do.

matt is trying to present a picture where more than one option is possible for an action. Well, some things suggested aren't fully consistent with that picture.

Instead, If God knew that there were no such factors but rather that there were factors that led to a situation where I truly may post and truly may refrain, then we have a consistent picture.

 

[nobdysfool]

of course, but it's not logically possible for me to do otherwise in such a situation. Since when have we done other than what God knows for certain that we will do.

matt is trying to present a picture where more than one option is possible for an action. Well, some things suggested aren't fully consistent with that picture.

Instead, If God knew that there were no such factors but rather that there were factors that led to a situation where I truly may post and truly may refrain, then we have a consistent picture.

Or you could just consider this: You are free to choose whether to post or not post, and no matter whether you do or not, God knew exactly what you would do, before you even had the thought to do or not do it. Or even if you never saw this thread. Even if you tried to fake Him out by purposing to post, and then at the last second, after you wrote the post, delete it, He still knew you would do that. And He knew it before the possibilities even were presented to you or you became aware of them.

He already knows every choice you will ever make, not only the potential choices, but the actual choices you will make from those potential choices. And He knows it with a certainty that you can't even fathom.

 

[eldermike]

I have always considered this issue to be a question of how much of the future does God actually know. What level of detail would be necessary for God to know and manage, concerning the future? Keeping in mind that He knew every hair on my head before He created the earth itself? So here we have a glimpse of how much detail God knows of the future. Isn't free will actually a restriction based upon not knowing the future? If God knows the future what part do I play in it? Could I choose to do something that changes the future? If I can change the future then how could God know it?

I think free will is a concept that exists because we do not know the future. God knew I was going to post this. He may not see it as useful but He knew it. Also, what I posted here in no way alters the future. It could be obedience or disobedience but He still knew it. Even my disobedience is in Gods future kingdom. Hence, another reason for the cross.

Eldermike

 

[Received]

Isn't free will actually a restriction based upon not knowing the future? If God knows the future what part do I play in it? Could I choose to do something that changes the future? If I can change the future then how could God know it?

Well, not necessarily; I actually think nobodysfool summed up the solution quite well. Freedom of the will resides precisely in that: freedom of the will. There are two realms in philosophy that deal with knowledge and action: to say that one affects the other is simply not the case.

You actually do not change the future; you cause it. For what is the future but that part of time that the ontological present has not yet grasped? To say that you change the future is to say that you change something that is already actualized -- like changing the past. We cause the future with our freedom, and God knows our actions not yet actualized.

Indeed, to claim that free will -- that is, the simplistic idea of choosing on thing over another -- is valid only because we cannot know the future, we are thereby making God impotent.

 

[eldermike]

No, I don't think the restriction of not knowing the future validates free will. I think it actually invalidates it, if anything.

I think we are, at best, partially in God's will on good days. On a perfect day our choices would be perfectly in Gods will. I don't think our free will works outside of God's sovereign will. God covered my disobediance to His will (my choices) at the cross of Jesus. He knew He had to, it's up to me to understand that same reality concerning me.

When Adam chose to eat the fruit Jesus had already redeemed Him (Gen 3:14). So, yes He caused the future with His action of disobedience. Obediance works the same way, it's just easier on us.

Interesting to think about.

 

[Received]

It is. We are all in the will of God -- that is, His ordination. We may not all be in the ethical will of God, if you will; that is to say, the actions we commit He may allow to come to pass, though they are not what He desires.

 

[frumanchu]

I'm going to bookmark this post, Received. We actually agree on something!

 

[Received]

What's that? The trumpets of the apocalypse I hear?

 

[Romanbear]

Hi Everyone;
As far as predestination I would like to ask if being ordained means to be destined as another member would suggest. How is it that Christ ordained the twelve and yet Judas somehow escaped that destination. I've heard that if you are fore ordained you are predestined so naturally if you are just ordained then you should at least be destined to an end. In;
Mar 3:14 And he ordained twelve, that they should be with him, and that he might send them forth to preach,

Mar 3:15 And to have power to heal sicknesses, and to cast out devils:
Now was Judas still saved inspite of his betrail or was he damed.

As you can tell by verse 14 it's true Judas was ordained with the others disciples. and yet he was condemned;
Mat 27:3 Then Judas, which had betrayed him, when he saw that he was condemned, repented himself, and brought again the thirty pieces of silver to the chief priests and elders,
In Christ;
Romanbear

 

[nobdysfool]

Hi Everyone;
As far as predestination I would like to ask if being ordained means to be destined as another member would suggest. How is it that Christ ordained the twelve and yet Judas somehow escaped that destination. I've heard that if you are fore ordained you are predestined so naturally if you are just ordained then you should at least be destined to an end. In;
Mar 3:14 And he ordained twelve, that they should be with him, and that he might send them forth to preach,

Mar 3:15 And to have power to heal sicknesses, and to cast out devils:
Now was Judas still saved inspite of his betrail or was he damed.

As you can tell by verse 14 it's true Judas was ordained with the others disciples. and yet he was condemned;
Mat 27:3 Then Judas, which had betrayed him, when he saw that he was condemned, repented himself, and brought again the thirty pieces of silver to the chief priests and elders,
In Christ;
Romanbear

What you're missing here is that Judas was also Foreordained to betray Christ. That doesn't mean that he could not have participated in Christ's ministry beforehand, and he certainly was ordained by Christ to be one of the Twelve. But, God had also foreordained Judas to betray Christ, to fulfill prophecy. Predestination wins again! Nice try, but sorry about your luck!

 

[frumanchu]

As far as predestination I would like to ask if being ordained means to be destined as another member would suggest. How is it that Christ ordained the twelve and yet Judas somehow escaped that destination. I've heard that if you are fore ordained you are predestined so naturally if you are just ordained then you should at least be destined to an end.

It was clearly known from beforehand that Judas would betray Christ. His betrayal was foretold in the Old Testament and several times Christ affirmed the foreknowledge of Judas' action before it occurred.

When you say you've "heard that if you are fore-ordained you are predistined" I'm curious to know what context that was in. God's ordination merely conveys His sovereign consent over what will necessarily transpire. Ordination is no more a causal factor than passive observational foreknowledge. By ordaining something God is approving and wilfully allowing its occurance. Those things which God actively decrees are by their nature ordained because to say otherwise would be to have God not approving of something He Himself did. Those things which God did not actively decree are ordained by virtue of God's willingly allowing them to occur without stopping them.

Thus, while Adam's transgression in the garden was not actively decreed by God, neither did He do anything to prevent it. God was not obligated by any means to allow them to be tempted, especially remaining silent while it happened. Furthermore, in knowing before it even occurred that Adam would fall and bring condemnation upon the entire race, God was well aware of the implications of the situation...and yet did nothing to prevent it.

Adam's fall is a perfect example of God's ordination. But what we have meant for evil, God has meant for good

 

[geebob]

eldermike

What level of detail would be necessary for God to know and manage, concerning the future?

What's necessary, as in what's enough? what's the minimum? Who knows? We humans may not manage perfectly but we can do quite abit with the finite knowledge we posess. But we can be certain that God knows far more than enough to manage if he knows absolutely everything (which I believe he does) even when that involves everything that has been determined by him, everything that has been determined by his creatures and everything that is still left up in the air. As a matter of fact, management takes place in ordering the indefinite. If there is never anything indefinite, then there was never anything to manage and make definite.

Keeping in mind that He knew every hair on my head before He created the earth itself?

I wouldn't even think that he knew you'd exist prior to creation. But what you suggest in unfounded. God knows the number of the hairs on our head and that was stated in the present tense.

I think free will is a concept that exists because we do not know the future.

I absolutely love that statement. Not because I agree with it. But this link you make just goes to show me that reality as it is presented to you is one in which libertarian freedom exists since it's on the grounds of libertarian freedom that one would think the future was unknowable (not that one would would have to make that commitment, as I for one think the future can be known exhaustively).

The theological determinist of the compatabilist bent wouldn't say such a thing. To most compatibilists, they feel they are free simply because they do what they want to do or most wanted to do.





recieved

I actually think nobodysfool summed up the solution quite well.

not at all, but not all discussions are worth having with all persons.

You actually do not change the future; you cause it.

a change from the indefinite to the definite is a clear change. Also a change in vectors or in soft facts (facts whose truth value can be changed) could possibly be construed as a change in the future (and I think that is what people have in mind when speaking of changing the future).







Romanbear.

the apostles were choosen for a task, not for salvation. Read the verses you posted, they are very specific and salvation is not mentioned amongst the tasks. There salvation just like everyone else's is contingent upon belief.

 

[geebob]

fru

It was clearly known from beforehand that Judas would betray Christ. His betrayal was foretold in the Old Testament and several times Christ affirmed the foreknowledge of Judas' action before it occurred.

I don't think Judas was mentioned in the old testament at all.

At most, if there was an intended prophecy at all, it was of a task, and Judas lived a life rejecting God's grace such that he inherited it, thus Peter says, the scripture was concerning him. If he did not act in such a way as to inherit that dark task, then words would not concern him, but in light of what went on, Peter could actually say that the words of David concerned him.

Had Judas responded positively to God's grace, The gospel would have been written differently with a different betrayer.

Adam's fall is a perfect example of God's ordination.

no way. God is not the author of sin (westminster confession) and he doesn't make em to break. God is an awsome creator who made an awsome creation. The Adam was %100 on their own with the sin thing.

 

[Romanbear]

Hi Geebob;
A quote from you;

Romanbear.

the apostles were choosen for a task, not for salvation. Read the verses you posted, they are very specific and salvation is not mentioned amongst the tasks. There salvation just like everyone else's is contingent upon belief.

I'm aware of that. They were ordained for that task not predestined to it. You didn't understand why I posted it.
My Point was that the word "ORDAIN" does not mean predestination such has been argued. Another member has tried to convince me that her dictionary says it means predestined. I showed her what the word means in the Greek and in the Websters dictionary but yet she still insist.
I admit there are several dictionaries with the name Webster on them and they may not all be the same.I have four and out of that four none say what her's says. I doubt that even hers says this but is her own exageration.
In Christ;
Romanbear

 

[nobdysfool]

Hi Geebob;
A quote from you;
I'm aware of that. They were ordained for that task not predestined to it. You didn't understand why I posted it.
My Point was that the word "ORDAIN" does not mean predestination such has been argued. Another member has tried to convince me that her dictionary says it means predestined. I showed her what the word means in the Greek and in the Websters dictionary but yet she still insist.
I admit there are several dictionaries with the name Webster on them and they may not all be the same.I have four and out of that four none say what her's says. I doubt that even hers says this but is her own exageration.
In Christ;
Romanbear

I am the person you are referring to in the feminine gender, but I am a male. And you did not "prove" anything. I have produced solid evidence that the word translated as "ordain" also carries with it the meaning of Predestine, or didn't you see my post to Ben Johnson on the Election thread? You don't want to acknowledge it, because it would destroy your little man-centered "I saved me" lie. Tough. No lie can stand before the Truth.

Maybe I should post that last PM you sent to me so others could see what you're really like. Naw, on second thought, it would be wrong to make a grown man cry. Don't play games with me Romanbear. Admit when you're wrong, and quit the Calvinist-bashing.

 

[geebob]

okay, thanks for the clarification Romanbear.

BTW, what is the greek word? Not that I have any skill in that but I'd like to compare notes (that I have through the efforts of others).