Logical Problem with Predestination

[elopez]

It seems to me that the only purpose of predestination is to eliminate or exclude free will.

Well you're wrong, because that is definitely not the purpose of predestination. Predestination is meant to emphasize the Sovereignty of God's role in salvation. Again, predestination does not necessarily exclude free will.

As did the German religious reformer Martin Luther, Calvin denied that human beings were capable of free will after the Fall of Adam, but he went farther than Luther in elaborating a doctrine of predestination—that certain persons are elected by God to salvation, while others are rejected by him and consigned to eternal damnation.”

--Encarta Encyclopedia 2005 under Calvinism

Luther and Calvin may have denied free will, but not all of their followers do. I have seen many Calvinists claim they believe in free will. Likewise, I have seen many Calvinists argue against it. Augustine, however, said of the issue that he opposed those who, "so defend God’s grace as to deny man’s free will." I of course agree with Augustine on the issue of predestination, which is to say determinism and free will co - exist.

 

[Rick Otto]

quote=elopez; Well you're wrong, because that is definitely not the purpose of predestination. Predestination is meant to emphasize the Sovereignty of God's role in salvation. Again, predestination does not necessarily exclude free will.

Thank you, yes. It is about positive assertion, not negative reaction.
I believe rather than options (choices God makes available) compromising His sovereignity, omniscience covers all options with passive control - what God doesn't directly cause, He allows. So autonomy (freedom) in a pure or absolute sense, can only be experienced by God. All time & space (creation) is by His design & therefore under His jurisdiction, even us & our precious individual egos & personalities.
I don't mean to expressing self-loathing, it's just that the comparison of a human will to it's Creator's will is like telling me regular math is the same as algebra. It seems patently absurd. Not to be personaly harsh, but I think we romance the whole idea of our individuality being a sacred inviolable essence of who we are. But so is the content of our relationships. And the relationship of creature to Creator is defining of who we are.

Luther and Calvin may have denied free will, but not all of their followers do. I have seen many Calvinists claim they believe in free will. Likewise, I have seen many Calvinists argue against it. Augustine, however, said of the issue that he opposed those who, "so defend God’s grace as to deny man’s free will." I of course agree with Augustine on the issue of predestination, which is to say determinism and free will co - exist.

Right. Labels aways seem to develope subclassifications (lol).
In regular conversation between us finite creations, terms like free will & random accident have practical application that allow us to function interactively. The whole determinism idea is confined to the realm of ideas. It's more about structure than mechanics. It provides overview & generalities like 'sin is judgement' - when I do something bad, it's self will & when I do something good, it's God's will in me. There's nothing inherently redeeming in my self, however defined (total depravity). Gotta get saved by external intervention.
The doctrine(s) of Grace & Election are the core of the reformation in my opinion. I get called "Calvinist" because of soteriology, but I part ways with Calvin on sacramentology & ecclesiology, especialy in the area of church discipline.

 

[Dale]

Rick Otto in post #15:
<<

Here is the question: If the unsaved have no desire for religion, why is there false religion?
​

They have no desire for true religion. The desire for false religion is the desire for self righteousness, so unlike the gospel, false (self) religion makes perfect sense. In the vernacular, Bob Dylan put it this way;"Ya Gotta Serve Somebody" (the will isn't "free") >>


I'm not sure that false religion is always a desire for self-righteousness. A lot of primitive religion is barely distinguishable from magic.

Self-religion might explain why Shirley MacLaine prayed to her own Higher Self. I'm not sure it explains why the Hindus have hundreds of gods.



*

*

 

[Dale]

New Wineskin in post #16:
<< That isn't what you wrote in the OP . I am not a Calvinist . I was interested in seeing if a rational discussion was going to happen . It can't happen if the OP sets out mocking something and then makes a false pretense of wishing to be "logical" about the topic . >>

The OP wasn't intended to mock. I'm sorry it sounded that way.

I can't imagine a doctrine more depressing than predestination. For that reason, I can't imagine believing it without the strongest evidence, and I'm not seeing that evidence.

*

*

 

[BlackSepulcher]

If God predetermines everything, and He is the embodiment of good, then it is impossible for us to sin because no matter what we do, we are acting as perfect catalysts of good.

 

[New_Wineskin]

New Wineskin in post #16:
<< That isn't what you wrote in the OP . I am not a Calvinist . I was interested in seeing if a rational discussion was going to happen . It can't happen if the OP sets out mocking something and then makes a false pretense of wishing to be "logical" about the topic . >>

The OP wasn't intended to mock. I'm sorry it sounded that way.

I can't imagine a doctrine more depressing than predestination. For that reason, I can't imagine believing it without the strongest evidence, and I'm not seeing that evidence.

*

*

Ok . It does appear that you are looking at this as emotional response at what you *think* predestination is . You might want to look at what predestination people have to say is the definition ( or point to very good articles on it ) . You will never see evidence for it if you don't understand what it is . Even when you do understand it , you still may not agree with it but at least be able to acknowledge the evidence .

For me , I see more evidence of predestination than free will . Overall , I see it as a combination of the two . More accurately , I see predestination as the Lord using *His* free will to accomplish His goals .

 

[InSpiritandTruth]

The Parables contain the core of Christ's teaching.

I don't see predestination in the Parable of the Sheep and Goats.


*

*

Good day to you Dale.

I go back and forth on Predestination. Somedays I lean more that way, and other days I don't. But, I could see how one might look at the Sheep and Goats with a Predestination view.

Luke 15:4-7 “What man of you, having a hundred sheep, if he loses one of them, does not leave the ninety-nine in the wilderness, and go after the one which is lost until he finds it? And when he has found it, he lays it on his shoulders, rejoicing. And when he comes home, he calls together his friends and neighbors, saying to them, ‘Rejoice with me, for I have found my sheep which was lost!’ I say to you that likewise there will be more joy in heaven over one sinner who repents than over ninety-nine just persons who need no repentance.

Matthew 25:32-46 All the nations will be gathered before Him, and He will separate them one from another, as a shepherd divides his sheep from the goats. And He will set the sheep on His right hand, but the goats on the left. Then the King will say to those on His right hand, ‘Come, you blessed of My Father, inherit the kingdom prepared for you from the foundation of the world: for I was hungry and you gave Me food; I was thirsty and you gave Me drink; I was a stranger and you took Me in; I was naked and you clothed Me; I was sick and you visited Me; I was in prison and you came to Me.’ “Then the righteous will answer Him, saying, ‘Lord, when did we see You hungry and feed You, or thirsty and give You drink? When did we see You a stranger and take You in, or naked and clothe You? Or when did we see You sick, or in prison, and come to You?’ And the King will answer and say to them, ‘Assuredly, I say to you, inasmuch as you did it to one of the least of these My brethren, you did it to Me.’ “Then He will also say to those on the left hand, ‘Depart from Me, you cursed, into the everlasting fire prepared for the devil and his angels: for I was hungry and you gave Me no food; I was thirsty and you gave Me no drink; I was a stranger and you did not take Me in, naked and you did not clothe Me, sick and in prison and you did not visit Me.’ “Then they also will answer Him, saying, ‘Lord, when did we see You hungry or thirsty or a stranger or naked or sick or in prison, and did not minister to You?’ Then He will answer them, saying, ‘Assuredly, I say to you, inasmuch as you did not do it to one of the least of these, you did not do it to Me.’ And these will go away into everlasting punishment, but the righteous into eternal life.”

 

[shturt678]

I think that once the 'logical problem' is grasped, all will work out, i.e., Predestination, Rom.8:28, 29, "for those called to purpose; v.29 ...he foreknew he also foreordained..." v.28 has been misinterpreted by Calvin, Beza, Knox, and etc.: one call "according to purpose" and converts irresistibly and extended only to the elect, another is, "not according to purpose" and never converts and is extended to the non-elect, the reprobate. Sounds logical, however:

My end point: The call is universal and identical for all men and doesn't convert irresistibly, etc.

 

[seeingeyes]

Here is the question: If the unsaved have no desire for religion, why is there false religion?

Who says the unsaved should have no desire for religion?

 

[shturt678]

Who says the unsaved should have no desire for religion?

I think what you meant was, but correct me if I'm mistaken, "Who says the unsaved have a desire for religion? I've been in the Churches for almost 3 decades and yes, over 2 decades ago, Church people cared, having a desire for religion. Non-Christians and non-believers even cared more.

Today find one Christian that cares in the sense of IIThess.2:10, please don't let me know, I'm ol' old Lutheran and probably would have "the big one," heart attack.

 

[Albion]

If God predetermines everything, and He is the embodiment of good, then it is impossible for us to sin because no matter what we do, we are acting as perfect catalysts of good.

What a theory! There is no actual connection between being selected for salvation and being sinfree. The whole idea of Christianity, no matter what your slant on it may be, is that we are saved DESPITE our unworthiness.

 

[shturt678]

What a theory! There is no actual connection between being selected for salvation and being sinfree. The whole idea of Christianity, no matter what your slant on it may be, is that we are saved DESPITE our unworthiness.

No correction intended! "we are saved" are those that God foreknew and foreordained before creation, "for those who are called ACCORDING OT PURPOSE;" During these IIThess.2:3, etc. and Rev.8:7, etc. times, may I please be on that list.

 

[BlackSepulcher]

If God predetermines everything, and He is the embodiment of good, then it is impossible for us to sin because no matter what we do, we are acting as perfect catalysts of good.

What a theory! There is no actual connection between being selected for salvation and being sinfree. The whole idea of Christianity, no matter what your slant on it may be, is that we are saved DESPITE our unworthiness.

It's a paradox of predestination. If God is perfectly good, then the finality of His creation must be good. Ergo, no action a person does can be anything other then good, because they are invoking that finality.

This is a logical problem for the doctrine of total inability. In fact, it puts the whole concept of original sin at stake.

 

[Albion]

It's a paradox of predestination. If God is perfectly good, then the finality of His creation must be good.

So...we're all good because we are all his creatures. That means that no one needs a savior. No, I don't think that's correct.

This is a logical problem for the doctrine of total inability. In fact, it puts the whole concept of original sin at stake.

As you've described it, that would be so. The problem is that you are not talking about predestination in particular. Your idea applies to Freewill or any other Christian concept of the relationship between God and Man. We all agree that God is perfectly good and that he created us, so predestination has nothing in particular to do with that.

 

[BlackSepulcher]

So...we're all good because we are all his creatures. That means that no one needs a savior. No, I don't think that's correct.

That's why predestination is wrong. The Protestant notion of it, anyhow.

 

[Albion]

That's why predestination is wrong. The Protestant notion of it, anyhow.

WHY is predestination wrong?

So far, all you've said is that God is good and we are not. That doesn't have anything to do with predestination (or freewill either, for that matter).

 

[BlackSepulcher]

WHY is predestination wrong?

So far, all you've said is that God is good and we are not. That doesn't have anything to do with predestination (or freewill either, for that matter).

It has everything to do with it, people just don't want to accept the inevitable. The God of predestination cannot make any distinction between good and evil.

 

[Albion]

It has everything to do with it, people just don't want to accept the inevitable. The God of predestination cannot make any distinction between good and evil.

How does God not making a distinction between good and evil have anything to do with predestination? Every one of us is evil in our natural state, after all.

 

[RisingSpirit]

​

Missional ministers tailor their sermons for the unconverted who might by chance be in the audience. "Missional" being a flavor of the Church Growth Movement seeker-sensitive strategy which started with Wesley and was refined by Pelagian Charles Finney.

Chemo and radiation make patients sick. And predestination, et. al., make hearers uncomfortable. Hence missional ministers beg forgiveness for believing it ...if not avoid it entirely !

Sort of like a cancer doctor who won't order chemo therapy to save patients from the discomfort of undergoing the treatment.

 

[Dale]

“As did the German religious reformer Martin Luther, Calvin denied that human beings were capable of free will after the Fall of Adam, but he went farther than Luther in elaborating a doctrine of predestination—that certain persons are elected by God to salvation, while others are rejected by him and consigned to eternal damnation.”


--Encarta Encyclopedia 2005 under Calvinism


Let us consider what this means. According to Calvin, before the Fall, Adam and Eve had free will but no understanding of the choice between good and evil. After the Fall, after their Expulsion from Eden, they had knowledge of the choice between good and evil, but no free will.

If we believe Calvin, there was never a time when anyone understood what is meant by good and evil and also had the free will to act on that choice.

I can't make any sense out of the Calvinist scheme of things.



*

*