Double Predestination acceptable...

[TedT]

Double predestination is not morally, or even metaphysically, acceptable.

Would it not be metaphysically acceptable if we all chose by our free will our own fates in HIM either as our GOD and Saviour OR as a liar and therefor a false god...?

The only thing wonky about predestination is the Calvinist assertion that election had to be without merit or condition found in neither the elect nor the reprobate. I suggest that rejecting this as the blasphemy of GOD's goodness it is, that it opens our thinking to accept an election by merit and a reprobation by dismerit found in each individual due to their free will choices..


IF the blasphemy of our election being without merit is rejected in favor of the idea that: those who put their faith in HIM merited election to salvation and the rejection of HIM by faith was the reason for the others being passed over for election to salvation as they were condemned on the spot. How is that not acceptable?

 

[Commando95]

That is interesting...

 

[HTacianas]

Would it not be metaphysically acceptable if we all chose by our free will our own fates in HIM either as our GOD and Saviour OR as a liar and therefor a false god...?

The only thing wonky about predestination is the Calvinist assertion that election had to be without merit or condition found in neither the elect nor the reprobate. I suggest that rejecting this as the blasphemy of GOD's goodness it is, that it opens our thinking to accept an election by merit and a reprobation by dismerit found in each individual due to their free will choices..


IF the blasphemy of our election being without merit is rejected in favor of the idea that: those who put their faith in HIM merited election to salvation and the rejection of HIM by faith was the reason for the others being passed over for election to salvation as they were condemned on the spot. How is that not acceptable?

In 1672, in response to the protestant reformation, and specifically the teachings of Calvin, a Synod was held in Jerusalem to answer the question according to the Orthodox Church. That Synod said, in part:

"We believe the most good God to have from eternity predestinated unto glory those whom He has chosen, and to have consigned unto condemnation those whom He has rejected; but not so that He would justify the one, and consign and condemn the other without cause. For that would be contrary to the nature of God, who is the common Father of all, and no respecter of persons, and would have all men to be saved, and to come to the knowledge of the truth. But since He foreknew the one would make a right use of their free-will, and the other a wrong, He predestinated the one, or condemned the other."

"But to say, as the most wicked heretics do and as is contained in the Chapter to which this answers — that God, in predestinating, or condemning, did not consider in any way the works of those predestinated, or condemned, we know to be profane and impious. For thus Scripture would be opposed to itself, since it promises the believer salvation through works, yet supposes God to be its sole author, by His sole illuminating grace, which He bestows without preceding works, to show to man the truth of divine things, and to teach him how he may co-operate with it, if he will, and do what is good and acceptable, and so obtain salvation. He takes not away the power to will — to will to obey, or not obey him."

 

[Halbhh]

Would it not be metaphysically acceptable if we all chose by our free will our own fates in HIM either as our GOD and Saviour OR as a liar and therefor a false god...?

The only thing wonky about predestination is the Calvinist assertion that election had to be without merit or condition found in neither the elect nor the reprobate. I suggest that rejecting this as the blasphemy of GOD's goodness it is, that it opens our thinking to accept an election by merit and a reprobation by dismerit found in each individual due to their free will choices..


IF the blasphemy of our election being without merit is rejected in favor of the idea that: those who put their faith in HIM merited election to salvation and the rejection of HIM by faith was the reason for the others being passed over for election to salvation as they were condemned on the spot. How is that not acceptable?

Notice how you consider the situation: "if we all chose by our free will"....

Because we choose, it's no longer predetermined before we can even choose.... "Double predestination" roughly is the idea that people are predetermined to be saved or condemned before they even come into existence, without any choice in the matter. So in double predestination, no one chooses to turn to or away from Christ, and one cannot choose. This idea contradicts a lot of the bible, in that over and over we are told to choose, and what we should chose, and that includes words from Christ telling us what is best to choose.

 

[returntosender]

What if the condemned wants Jesus as their Savior?

 

[Halbhh]

Just Listen to Christ:

14 For if you forgive other people when they sin against you, your heavenly Father will also forgive you. 15 But if you do not forgive others their sins, your Father will not forgive your sins.

And there is so much more, about what we should do -- Words He spoke to us, that we would listen and follow, and so also then when we stumble (sin), then we know we should confess and be forgiven, and by experience also learn, and continue to walk as He walked.

By our choices, with His aid.

So, any interpretation that makes predestination in Christ into a being entirely predetermined before a person even comes into existence contradicts the words of Christ and scripture in many places, in that clearly and over and over the scripture tells us what we should do, and what is required of us, and this of course then means we can choose to follow or rebel against those commandments to us.

But we are indeed predestined to be saved through Christ when we come to Him in faith, and that is indeed with the help/aid/grace of God.

But it involves us too, our listening, hearing, following, believing.

So, a command is because we are able to choose, and our choices are part of how we become His:

John 20:27 Then Jesus said to Thomas, "Put your finger here and look at My hands. Reach out your hand and put it into My side. Stop doubting and believe."

(i.e. part of 'believing' is to stop the habit (wrong) of just always doubting, endlessly...)

Would it not be metaphysically acceptable if we all chose by our free will our own fates in HIM either as our GOD and Saviour OR as a liar and therefor a false god...?

The only thing wonky about predestination is the Calvinist assertion that election had to be without merit or condition found in neither the elect nor the reprobate. I suggest that rejecting this as the blasphemy of GOD's goodness it is, that it opens our thinking to accept an election by merit and a reprobation by dismerit found in each individual due to their free will choices..


IF the blasphemy of our election being without merit is rejected in favor of the idea that: those who put their faith in HIM merited election to salvation and the rejection of HIM by faith was the reason for the others being passed over for election to salvation as they were condemned on the spot. How is that not acceptable?

 

[St_Worm2]

What if the condemned wants Jesus as their Savior?

Hello Returntosender, if someone believes/trusts Jesus as their Savior, and they willingly (happily) surrender the reins of their lives to His rule as their Lord (both in the here and now, and in eternity too, of course), then such a person would become a believer at that moment and no longer be "condemned" .. e.g. John 5:24; Romans 10:9-10.

The Lord Jesus came here to save us from our sins .. e.g. Matthew 1:21, from both the power that sin holds over us in this life, and from the penalty of our sins in the age to come (and from the "wrath" of our former "enemy", His Father, with whom we, as true believers, have now been "reconciled" )

God bless you!

--David

Romans 5
8 God demonstrates His own love toward us, in that while we were yet sinners, Christ died for us.
9 Much more then, having now been justified by His blood, we shall be saved from the wrath of God through Him.
10 For if while we were enemies we were reconciled to God through the death of His Son, much more, having been reconciled, we shall be saved by His life.
.​

 

[TedT]

But since He foreknew the one would make a right use of their free-will, and the other a wrong, He predestinated the one, or condemned the other."

Ummm, but saved by grace means that no one can make any choice that can save themselves...without grace all are doomed. Election is the promise of salvation, grace is the fulfillment of the promise, so basically when HE looks to the future all HE sees is HIS work, sigh.

Doesn't add up yet.

 

[Maria Billingsley]

Would it not be metaphysically acceptable if we all chose by our free will our own fates in HIM either as our GOD and Saviour OR as a liar and therefor a false god...?

The only thing wonky about predestination is the Calvinist assertion that election had to be without merit or condition found in neither the elect nor the reprobate. I suggest that rejecting this as the blasphemy of GOD's goodness it is, that it opens our thinking to accept an election by merit and a reprobation by dismerit found in each individual due to their free will choices..


IF the blasphemy of our election being without merit is rejected in favor of the idea that: those who put their faith in HIM merited election to salvation and the rejection of HIM by faith was the reason for the others being passed over for election to salvation as they were condemned on the spot. How is that not acceptable?

You do know that Calvinism is highly contested.

 

[TedT]

"Double predestination" roughly is the idea that people are predetermined to be saved or condemned before they even come into existence,

ImCo,
no one can be guilty if they do not sin by their free will but by another's will. Period. Therefore no one can be condemned for sin before their existence. So to be judged as sinful at conception impies most strongly that we all had a time of free will before our election (well before our conception) to heaven or hell and chose to accept HIM or to reject HIM.

 

[TedT]

What if the condemned wants Jesus as their Savior?

IF sin only accrues to a free will decision to sin, then the condemned must have sinned the unforgivable sin which means they can never want or accept Jesus ever.

The sinner is unforgivable NOT because GOD has so decided they are too evil to forgive but because they have rebuked HIM so strongly they have put themselves outside of HIS grace and mercy by forbidding HIM to ever interfere with their choices and as enslaved to sin, they cannot save themselves.

 

[St_Worm2]

The sinner is unforgivable NOT because GOD has so decided they are too evil to forgive but because they have rebuked HIM so strongly they have put themselves outside of His grace and mercy by forbidding Him to ever ~interfere~ with their choices....

Hello Ted, I thought you believed that God did NOT interfere with our free will choices (for instance, you said in your OP that "we all chose ~by our free will~ our own fates in HIM").

If/when God "interferes" with the choices that we make, can our wills be considered "free" at that point?

I'm probably misunderstanding what you are saying. If so, please let me know how.

Thanks!

God bless you!

--David

 

[Clare73]

Would it not be metaphysically acceptable if we all chose by our free will our own fates in HIM either as our GOD and Saviour OR as a liar and therefor a false god...?

The only thing wonky about predestination is the Calvinist assertion that election had to be without merit

You won't find it wonky when you finally understand that

"Salvation is the Lord's!" (Revelation 7:10), ALL of it!
His and his alone (Revelation 19:1; Psalms 37:39).
Man contributes nothing, his works of faith contribute NOTHING,
for he must have nothing about which he could boast.
(Romans 4:2; 1 Corinthians 1:29; Ephesians 2:9)

You have to get saved in order to get saved and that isn't the way it works.

I'm here to tell you that you have to receive the Holy Spirit (new birth) before you can savingly believe.

These 2 defects alone just ruin the whole thing.

And here I thought we were getting along. . .

Faith alone saves, faith's necessary works do not save.
Salvation is the Lord's! . . .And no one else's! . . .His and his alone!
So that no one can have anything about which he could boast (Romans 4:2, 1 Corinthians 1:29; Ephesians 2:9).
Man's works of faith do not save.
Those works simply demonstrate that the faith is true and, therefore, does save.




And God takes this very seriously. . .he does not yield nor give is glory to another
(Isaiah 48:11, Isaiah 42:8), including to faith's works.

Which is why Paul is so emphatic on the subject (having been caught up to the third heaven,
the throne of God, where the mind of God and Christ was revealed to him, 2 Corinthians 12:1-8)
that salvation/justification is apart from faith's works.

 

[HTacianas]

Ummm, but saved by grace means that no one can make any choice that can save themselves...without grace all are doomed. Election is the promise of salvation, grace is the fulfillment of the promise, so basically when HE looks to the future all HE sees is HIS work, sigh.

Doesn't add up yet.

Grace is not actually the fulfillment of election. Grace is that which offers us (at least adult converts) forgiveness for all previous sins. It is by God's grace that those sins are forgiven through baptism. Even those things that could not be justified under the law of Moses:

Act 13:39

“and by Him everyone who believes is justified from all things from which you could not be justified by the law of Moses.

Those who had committed those things were "the lost". Those who had strayed from the law never to return.

 

[TedT]

Hello Returntosender, if someone believes/trusts Jesus as their Savior, and they willingly (happily) surrender the reins of their lives to His rule as their Lord (both in the here and now, and in eternity too, of course), then such a person would become a believer at that moment and no longer be "condemned"

But believers who sin are never condemned but non-believers in His good name are condemned [for their sin] already, John 3:18... Does this not imply that sheep are not repentant goats and good seed are not repentant weeds? Does this not also imply that the sinful believers believed before they ever sinned?

 

[TedT]

Hello Ted, I thought you believed that God did NOT interfere with our free will choices (for instance, you said in your OP that "we all chose ~by our free will~ our own fates in HIM").

I do indeed!

If/when God "interferes" with the choices that we make, can our wills be considered "free" at that point?

GOOD eye!

This is one of the indications I accept that sinners do not have a free will here on earth, at least until we are reborn and trainable in righteousness, Heb 12:5-11. This implies that when HE interferes with our lives by grace or judgement, HE is NOT interfering with our free will but only with our sinful will, an animal of a different feather altogether.

 

[Petros2015]

Ummm, but saved by grace means that no one can make any choice that can save themselves...without grace all are doomed.

Sure - a drowning man still drowns if no one throws him a life preserver.
He also still drowns if he insists he wants a blue one rather than a yellow one, or that he doesn't really need one at all.

 

[RickReads]

Would it not be metaphysically acceptable if we all chose by our free will our own fates in HIM either as our GOD and Saviour OR as a liar and therefor a false god...?

The only thing wonky about predestination is the Calvinist assertion that election had to be without merit or condition found in neither the elect nor the reprobate. I suggest that rejecting this as the blasphemy of GOD's goodness it is, that it opens our thinking to accept an election by merit and a reprobation by dismerit found in each individual due to their free will choices..


IF the blasphemy of our election being without merit is rejected in favor of the idea that: those who put their faith in HIM merited election to salvation and the rejection of HIM by faith was the reason for the others being passed over for election to salvation as they were condemned on the spot. How is that not acceptable?

Predestination exists because of God's foreknowledge. It's about that more than anything. No one else knows.

 

[St_Worm2]

But believers who sin are never condemned but non-believers in His good name are condemned [for their sin] already, John 3:18...

Hello again Ted, are the "sins" (committed by the unsaved) the reason that the Lord Jesus gives us for their condemnation, or is it actually something else?

John 3
18 “He who believes in Him is not judged; he who does not believe has been judged already, because he has not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God”.​

Does this not imply that sheep are not repentant goats and good seed are not repentant weeds? Does this not also imply that the sinful believers believed before they ever sinned?

Q#1 - yes, it could, if taken in context with a passage like this one .. John 10:26-28.

Q#2 - no, v18 speaks of those who are presently/persistently believing (or presently, persistently not believing) in Him. The Bible does not teach the pre-existence of our souls, neither does historic/orthodox Christianity, nor does the church (though I can understand why it is so important to the existence of your particular presupposition).

The LDS are HUGE advocates of it however. Do you number yourself among them by any chance?

Thanks!

--David

 

[returntosender]

Predestination exists because of God's foreknowledge. It's about that more than anything. No one else knows.

Welcome back Rick