predestination and free will - the EO view

[Monna]

Could someone in the know explain the Eastern Orthodox view of the apparent incompatability of the doctrines of man's free will on one side and predestination on the other? Please give scriptures for arguments, and clear indication of ways in which the EO differs from either RC or protestant "solutions" to the dichotomy.

 

[icxn]

Start here (Chapter XXV) and read all the way through Chapter XXX (Concerning Prescience and Predestination).

That is not the best translation of Saint John Damascene's Exposition of the Orthodox Faith, but is good enough.

 

[ArmyMatt]

we don't believe they are incompatible. if you choose to live a life of sin, that road is predestined to end up in hell. if you choose to struggle for God and repentance, that road is predestined to heaven.

St Gregory of Nyssa's Life of Moses is another good one, especially when he talks about Pharaoh.

 

[HTacianas]

Could someone in the know explain the Eastern Orthodox view of the apparent incompatability of the doctrines of man's free will on one side and predestination on the other? Please give scriptures for arguments, and clear indication of ways in which the EO differs from either RC or protestant "solutions" to the dichotomy.

See Decree 3 of the Confession of Dositheus.

"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."

The Confession of Dositheus (Eastern Orthodox)

 

[Monna]

"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."

It doesn't sound to me that that those he has chosen have any choice of their own.

So how does "whosoever will may come" fit in? or for that matter how is "Behold, I stand at the door and knock; If anyone hears my voice and opens the door, I will come in and eat with that person, and they with me" compatible with Decree 3 of the Confession of Dositheus? Both of these verses suggest that it people have a choice.

 

[St_Worm2]

Hello @Monna, et al, I hope you all don't mind me jumping in here.

Decree 3 of the Confession of Dositheus seems to say (to me anyway) that from everlasting God, because He knew who would eventually choose Him during their lifetimes here, IOW, because He "foreknew the ones [who] would make a right use of their free-will" .. and who would not .. predestined/chose those for salvation who first chose Him, and chose to condemn those who He knew/foresaw from everlasting did not choose/rejected Him.

Simply put, Decree 3 tells us that God chooses those who choose Him, and He rejects those who reject Him, from everlasting. Here is paragraph 1 from Decree #3 of the Confession of Dositheus (please take particular note of the text in bold).

3. 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 {1 Timothy 2:4}. 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. And we understand the use of free-will thus, that the Divine and illuminating grace, and which we call preventing [or, prevenient] grace, being, as a light to those in darkness, by the Divine goodness imparted to all, to those that are willing to obey this — for it is of use only to the willing, not to the unwilling — and co-operate with it, in what it requires as necessary to salvation, there is consequently granted particular grace. This grace* co-operates with us, and enables us, and makes us to persevere in the love of God*, that is to say, in performing those good things that God would have us to do, and which His preventing grace admonishes us that we should do, justifies us, and makes us predestinated. But those who will not obey, and co-operate with grace; and, therefore, will not observe those things that God would have us perform, and that abuse in the service of Satan the free-will, which they have received of God to perform voluntarily what is good, are consigned to eternal condemnation.
​

If this is even a loose summation of the EOC's soteriological teaching concerning predestination, then it seems very compatible with what is known as the Arminian or Free Will view of salvation in the Protestant faith, as well with RC soteriology .. https://www.vatican.va/archive/ccc_css/archive/catechism/p3s1c3a2.htm
EO, RC and Protestant Arminian/Free Will soteriology all teach the prescient view of God's grace (Prevenient Grace), while Calvinism alone teaches Irresistible/Effective Grace ("Irresistible Grace" is perhaps the most misunderstood part of the Reformed, Doctrines of Grace/TULIP, just FYI).

--David


*(Just FYI, the underlined portions of Decree 3 above seem Calvinistic/Reformed, but only when they are considered by themselves/out of context)

 

[HTacianas]

It doesn't sound to me that that those he has chosen have any choice of their own.

So how does "whosoever will may come" fit in? or for that matter how is "Behold, I stand at the door and knock; If anyone hears my voice and opens the door, I will come in and eat with that person, and they with me" compatible with Decree 3 of the Confession of Dositheus? Both of these verses suggest that it people have a choice.

That's the meaning of "without cause". Each is consigned due to their own choice. We now enter into a philosophical discussion of the difference between predestination and foreknowledge. If God in his foreknowledge knows who will freely make a choice, does that mean the choice is not their own, but that they are predestined to make that choice. It ends up a "cup half full/half empty" argument.

But the entire line of reasoning is based on God's perspective. From our perspective we still make the choices. We can choose to do good or to do evil. No one forces the choice on us.

 

[St_Worm2]

We can choose to do good or to do evil. No one forces the choice on us.

Hello @Monna, as a quick aside for you (because I already mentioned Irresistible Grace to you above), that is exactly what the Reformed doctrine of Irresistible Grace teaches. We can always choose to do either good or evil (on this side of the grave anyway), and no one forces us to choose what we do not want. Rather, we are the ones who choose to believe, and the ones who, in fact, do the believing.

--David

 

[St_Worm2]

We can always choose to do either good or evil (on this side of the grave anyway), and no one forces us to choose what we do not want.

Hello @ArmyMatt and @HTacianas, I apologize if I have asked one or both of you about this before, but what does EO theology teach us about free will on the ~other side~ of the grave (IOW, for believers living in Heaven or on the new Earth)?

Will we still be able to choose to sin/do evil if we want to, and if not, why not?

Thanks

--David

 

[ArmyMatt]

Hello @ArmyMatt and @HTacianas, I apologize if I have asked one or both of you about this before, but what does EO theology teach us about free will on the ~other side~ of the grave (IOW, for believers living in Heaven or on the new Earth)?

Will we still be able to choose to sin/do evil if we want to, and if not, why not?

Thanks

--David

it remains free, but is no longer deliberating as it only wills the good.

 

[St_Worm2]

it remains free, but is no longer deliberating as it only wills the good.

Hi Army Matt, that's exactly what we believe/teach about life in the age to come as well.

Thank you

God bless you!

--David

 

[Monna]

So, does this mean I can claim credit (or as Paul might put it, I can boast) for making the right choice? After all, by the reasoning above, God chose me because I first chose Him.
What happened to Jesus' statement that "No one comes to me unless the Father drawn Him?" (John 6:44)

 

[ArmyMatt]

So, does this mean I can claim credit (or as Paul might put it, I can boast) for making the right choice? After all, by the reasoning above, God chose me because I first chose Him.
What happened to Jesus' statement that "No one comes to me unless the Father drawn Him?" (John 6:44)

Christ's statement doesn't contradict what was said. and we can only choose God because our will has been deified by grace. so it still only originates with, and is made possible by, God.

so no, you can't take credit, since it all comes from God.

 

[St_Worm2]

...we can only choose God because our will has been deified by grace. so it still only originates with, and is made possible by, God. so no, you can't take credit, since it all comes from God.

Hello @ArmyMatt, if all have been equally deified (and thereby enabled to both believe and obey) by God's grace, then what's the difference between those who end up in Heaven, and those who end up in Hell?

Thanks!

--David

 

[ArmyMatt]

Hello @ArmyMatt, if all have been equally deified (and thereby enabled to both believe and obey) by God's grace, then what's the difference between those who end up in Heaven, and those who end up in Hell?

Thanks!

--David

for those in hell, since they don't want God's grace, the very grace He offers causes the torment. so they will seek in vain to escape the grace that is inescapable.

 

[St_Worm2]

Hello again @ArmyMatt, the way "grace" is understood by your church seems like it may be different than the way it is understood by mine (unless I am misunderstanding what you are saying, of course ). From my understanding, grace is the unmerited favor of God (well, unmerited by us anyway). Like His mercy (which is God choosing to withhold/not give us what we rightly deserve), grace is God choosing to give us what we don't deserve (on the basis of the innocence, righteousness and shed blood/death of Another).

I'd like to hear more about the EO understanding of grace, especially how it is different from both the RC and Protestant understanding of grace, but this is taking us far afield from the matter at hand. So, getting back to it, of salvation, you said:

...we can only choose God because our will has been deified by grace .. it still only originates with, and is made possible by, God .. you can't take credit, since it all comes from God.

If ~ALL~ are enabled by God's grace to believe/to do what God has commanded unto salvation .. e.g. John 6:29, then it seems to me that the difference between those who are saved, and those who are not, lies solely in the choice that a person makes ~apart~ from God's grace (not because of it). Is this not so?

IOW, since God's deifying/enabling/prevenient grace has already done it's part in saving us, what else is left that divides the saved from the unsaved other than the choice each one of us makes (1. to obey God by believing, trusting and surrendering our lives to Him or 2. to disobey Him by rejecting Him and His gracious offer of salvation instead)?

Is this basically a correct understanding of EO salvation so far? If not, please tell me where I am getting wrong.

Thanks again

--David

 

[ArmyMatt]

Hello again @ArmyMatt, the way "grace" is understood by your church seems like it may be different than the way it is understood by mine (unless I am misunderstanding what you are saying, of course ). From my understanding, grace is the unmerited favor of God (well, unmerited by us anyway). Like His mercy (which is God choosing to withhold/not give us what we rightly deserve), grace is God choosing to give us what we don't deserve (on the basis of the innocence, righteousness and shed blood/death of Another).

I'd like to hear more about the EO understanding of grace, especially how it is different from both the RC and Protestant understanding of grace, but this is taking us far afield from the matter at hand. So, getting back to it, of salvation, you said:

If ~ALL~ are enabled by God's grace to believe/to do what God has commanded unto salvation .. e.g. John 6:29, then it seems to me that the difference between those who are saved, and those who are not, lies solely in the choice that a person makes ~apart~ from God's grace (not because of it). Is this not so?

IOW, since God's deifying/enabling/prevenient grace has already done it's part in saving us, what else is left that divides the saved from the unsaved other than the choice each one of us makes (1. to obey God by believing, trusting and surrendering our lives to Him or 2. to disobey Him by rejecting Him and His gracious offer of salvation instead)?

Is this basically a correct understanding of EO salvation so far? If not, please tell me where I am getting wrong.

Thanks again

--David

grace is God's divine power/energy/glory/operation/force/action which we either commune with (heaven) or reject (hell) but cannot, not confront (judgment)

 

[St_Worm2]

grace is God's divine power/energy/glory/operation/force/action which we either commune with (heaven) or reject (hell) but cannot, not confront (judgment)

WOW, that makes God's grace sound like some kind of Divine "stuff" (if you will), so that is a very different understanding of God's grace than I have (if I am understanding you correctly about EO "grace", that is?).

That said, the EO understanding of ~the salvation of some vs the damnation of others~ seems to rest solely in the hands of the individual and the choice that they make, apart from grace, not because of grace. Is this not so? Or am I still missing something?

Thanks!

~David

 

[ArmyMatt]

WOW, that makes God's grace sound like some kind of Divine "stuff" (if you will), so if I am understanding you correctly about EO "grace", that is a very different understanding of God's grace than I have.

That said, the EO understanding of ~the salvation of some vs the damnation of others~ seems to rest solely in the hands of the individual and the choice that they make, apart from grace, not because of grace. Is this not so? Or am I still missing something?

Thanks!

~David

it's not stuff, as it's His Uncreated natural energy.

that said. it's not apart from grace per say. salvation is communion and transfiguration by grace, and damnation is the rejection of that grace.

but even our freedom to choose is a gift of God.

 

[Euodius]

Could someone in the know explain the Eastern Orthodox view of the apparent incompatability of the doctrines of man's free will on one side and predestination on the other? Please give scriptures for arguments, and clear indication of ways in which the EO differs from either RC or protestant "solutions" to the dichotomy.

I like what Army Matt has said. His is probably a better answer.

Here is a way I reconcile it.

We live in a beautifully designed universe that runs like clockwork, it has stable physical laws which result in a deterministic environment. A sophisticated machine like the computer, which is a totally deterministic system shows the deterministic nature of the universe. Cause and then effect. Consequence is real.

However, the universe is not a closed system because the spiritual exists and transcendentals do exist. The spiritual nature of man gives him some escape from determinism, he is more than just merely animated, but is given the ability to have real effects. Further, other spiritual entities do too, other realms, and of course God transcends this.

Free will is not merely a good/evil dichotomy, because many goods exist and evil is the rejection of good. Man, when purified, goes from glory to glory.

The Calvinist formulation of predestination is purely deterministic, removing grace, and removing the reality of repentance and redemption.