Predestination

[Montalban]

yes i am , we are made in God's image

I agree, but you must agree that we're not God therefore there's limitations between our will, and his.

If God knew He would sin and on top of that fact God decided NOT to prevent Adam from sinning , then you have a problem with your thinking.

That doesn't make sense

Jesus is the Lamb slain from the foundation of the world , that is correct God planned Christs death before Adam sinned .

Where do you get that idea from?

seems like you wish to quibble when God's sovereignty is on view just as Paul knew you would ;

[19] You will say to me then, "Why does he still find fault? For who can resist his will?"

How and why can Paul ask such a thing ?

Then you're stating that God makes people sin.

 

[BRISH]

Wow

This was a BIG can opened.

I can't say that I fully grasp the concept, but I definately grasp what the debates are about. I'm checking out of my own thread at this point and I apologize for the eruption of thoughts. I had no idea this was a hot topic on here.

Thanks to everyone who did their best to explain and give scripture to my requests!

God Bless Us All!!!

 

[Montalban]

Wow

This was a BIG can opened.

I can't say that I fully grasp the concept, but I definately grasp what the debates are about. I'm checking out of my own thread at this point and I apologize for the eruption of thoughts. I had no idea this was a hot topic on here.

Thanks to everyone who did their best to explain and give scripture to my requests!

God Bless Us All!!!

The issue is how does one reconcile God's all powerful nature with our freedom to choose.

God gave us a gift - out of his love - to freely choose him. I for one continually disappoint myself in the choices I make. But they're my choices. If not how could I be held responsible for something not of my choosing?

 

[Hammster]

That frankly doesn't make sense. You're comparing God's will to ours.



It was not inevitable that Adam would sin. He chose to. If Jesus was preordained to save us then Adam must have had to sin. If he did so, then how can he bear guilt for something he had to do?

All God would have had to do to keep Adam from sinning would be to NOT give a law. Yet, He gave one. No law, no law breaking.

 

[Montalban]

The idea of predestination is very Islamic - they have a belief in a god who arbitrarily chooses whom he wishes - even rejecting (if he wants) a pious man.

 

[Hammster]

The idea of predestination is very Islamic - they have a belief in a god who arbitrarily chooses whom he wishes - even rejecting (if he wants) a pious man.

You make it seem as though people are clamoring to get into heaven, and the Calvinist view is that God will only let some in. Gross misunderstanding of the reformed view. It has been explained on here pretty clearly, yet you prefer the straw-man arguments. I can never figure out why people do that.

 

[bricklayer]

A free-will is a will free to act according to its nature.

It is our nature to be subject.

It is God's nature to be sovereign.

Human-free-will DOES NOT EQUAL human-sovereign-will.

God can no more be subject to human-free-will than a triangle can be round.

We can make such statements, but that does not make it so.

When I say that Jesus Christ is Lord, I mean Jesus Christ is Sovereign.

What do you mean?

 

[Albion]

The idea of predestination is very Islamic - they have a belief in a god who arbitrarily chooses whom he wishes - even rejecting (if he wants) a pious man.

If he chooses whom he wills after seeing how they lived their lives, it wouldn't be Predestination as Christians believe it. There might be some other term for it.

 

[cygnusx1]

If he chooses whom he wills after seeing how they lived their lives, it wouldn't be Predestination as Christians believe it. There might be some other term for it.

yes ... that would be POSTdestination based upon merit , a concept thought up by the father of lies in order to swell men in their pride .

 

[Tamara224]

The biggest problem with the predestination vs. free will debate is that it's a false dichotomy based on anthropomorphizing God.

The whole debate us inextricably bound to the notion of time.

God isn't subject to time. There is no pre or post, no past, present or future for God. All times are 'now' for Him.

Not only that but we should be careful lest our understanding of "omniscience" is limited. Knowing ALL things, means ALL things. Not just what has happened or what will happen but what would have happened and what could happen. Infinite possibilities and God knows them all.

the idea that choice and predestination go against each other is untrue and unbiblical , the idea that we need a free will in order to choose is also untrue and unbiblical.

Not to mention illogical. It's a non-sequitur.

It doesn't follow that because God knows what we will choose that we didn't make the choice.

A choice is an internal decision, a thought process. Do I take the red pill or the blue? hehe If it is not forced, then it is "free". (There is no such thing as truly "free will" for human beings - only God's choices are completely free from limitations).

It makes no difference who knows what choice you made or when they obtain that knowledge. It is no more lessening one's ability to choose to know the choice before it is made than to know it after it is made.

Even if we ourselves knew our own choices before we made them, it wouldn't change the fact that we made those choices freely. Just because I know (or think I know) that I will choose the blue pill doesn't mean that I was not able to choose the red pill.

I know that I chose not to eat breakfast yesterday. Does that mean that yesterday I didn't actually have that choice? Of course not. Neither does knowing that I will not eat breakfast tomorrow mean that I couldn't if I wanted to.

And for God, it's all the same - since time is meaningless to Him. Before, after, during... God knows ALL things, sees ALL things.



I have a very difficult time understanding why this has been such a major topic of debate for so long. I would like to know who it was that decided the two are incompatible and slap him (I'm positive it was a man, ). Metaphorically speaking, of course. I wouldn't actually hit anyone.

 

[Montalban]

You make it seem as though people are clamoring to get into heaven, and the Calvinist view is that God will only let some in. Gross misunderstanding of the reformed view. .

That is the Calvinistic view. Perhaps you're thinking of Arminianism?

 

[Hammster]

The biggest problem with the predestination vs. free will debate is that it's a false dichotomy based on anthropomorphizing God.



The whole debate us inextricably bound to the notion of time.



God isn't subject to time. There is no pre or post, no past, present or future for God. All times are 'now' for Him.



Not only that but we should be careful lest our understanding of "omniscience" is limited. Knowing ALL things, means ALL things. Not just what has happened or what will happen but what would have happened and what could happen. Infinite possibilities and God knows them all.









Not to mention illogical. It's a non-sequitur.



It doesn't follow that because God knows what we will choose that we didn't make the choice.



A choice is an internal decision, a thought process. Do I take the red pill or the blue? hehe If it is not forced, then it is "free". (There is no such thing as truly "free will" for human beings - only God's choices are completely free from limitations).



It makes no difference who knows what choice you made or when they obtain that knowledge. It is no more lessening one's ability to choose to know the choice before it is made than to know it after it is made.



Even if we ourselves knew our own choices before we made them, it wouldn't change the fact that we made those choices freely. Just because I know (or think I know) that I will choose the blue pill doesn't mean that I was not able to choose the red pill.



I know that I chose not to eat breakfast yesterday. Does that mean that yesterday I didn't actually have that choice? Of course not. Neither does knowing that I will not eat breakfast tomorrow mean that I couldn't if I wanted to.



And for God, it's all the same - since time is meaningless to Him. Before, after, during... God knows ALL things, sees ALL things.







I have a very difficult time understanding why this has been such a major topic of debate for so long. I would like to know who it was that decided the two are incompatible and slap him (I'm positive it was a man, ). Metaphorically speaking, of course. I wouldn't actually hit anyone.

It isn't an issue about time. It is an issue about the degree in which God is sovereign in our lives.

 

[Montalban]

It isn't an issue about time. It is an issue about the degree in which God is sovereign in our lives.

It is in fact about time, because God is not bound by linear time, so knows the beginning, the middle, and the end of time.

He knows all. Does he actually force people down a particular path because of it? That would be against free-will

 

[Hammster]

That is the Calvinistic view. Perhaps you're thinking of Arminianism?

The Calvinist view is that nobody is clamoring to get into heaven. And happy to be in that state.

 

[Hammster]

It is in fact about time, because God is not bound by linear time, so knows the beginning, the middle, and the end of time.



He knows all. Does he actually force people down a particular path because of it? That would be against free-will

And where do you find in scripture that God can't or won't do that?

 

[Montalban]

And where do you find in scripture that God can't or won't do that?

Firstly, I don't follow a "I have to prove something only from Scripture" belief

Secondly, I've already addressed this, if God forces us, then it's not 'free will'. It's not a free choice.

I suppose you thought that the former Peoples' Democratic Republic of Germany was actually democratic?

 

[Tamara224]

It isn't an issue about time. It is an issue about the degree in which God is sovereign in our lives.

Of course it's an issue about time. The prefix "pre" in predestination makes it, by definition, a time issue.

That is not to say that it isn't also an issue of God's sovereignty.


Some things are both/and, not either/or.

 

[Tamara224]

It is in fact about time, because God is not bound by linear time, so knows the beginning, the middle, and the end of time.

He knows all. Does he actually force people down a particular path because of it? That would be against free-will

Because of what? His foreknowledge? That's a very linear way of looking at it.

Maybe God forces people down certain paths because He wants certain results to happen.

I don't view God as being reactive but active. He doesn't react in the past to what He knows will happen in the future. He acts at all times to bring about His purposes.

For example (the ultimate example) Pharaoh... God hardened Pharaoh's heart because God wanted to judge Egypt and Egypt's false gods, and He wanted a big demonstration to reveal Himself to Israel and cement them together as a people.

I'm not sure what you mean by "that would be against free-will"... It seems that your underlying assumption is that God gave us some sort of constitution wherein He granted us certain "rights" that He is bound to not violate. What makes you believe that is the case?

I understand you don't necessarily feel the need to support your ideas with Scripture. But I have to wonder where you find support for your ideas if not Scripture?

 

[Hammster]

Firstly, I don't follow a "I have to prove something only from Scripture" belief



Secondly, I've already addressed this, if God forces us, then it's not 'free will'. It's not a free choice.



I suppose you thought that the former Peoples' Democratic Republic of Germany was actually democratic?

The choice is free. What isn't a free choice for man is receiving a new heart. With the new heart man freely chooses God because ir os what he most desires. And God, in His Sovereignty, and because He is gracious and merciful, chooses to save some.

 

[Montalban]

Because of what? His foreknowledge? That's a very linear way of looking at it.

Maybe God forces people down certain paths because He wants certain results to happen.

If God did this, then we don't have free will. We're all automatons.

For example (the ultimate example) Pharaoh... God hardened Pharaoh's heart because God wanted to judge Egypt and Egypt's false gods, and He wanted a big demonstration to reveal Himself to Israel and cement them together as a people.

God didn't harden Pharoh's heart.

That is simply a way of trying to explain how Pharoah distanced himself from God's love.

God is always the same, always loving. He doesn't sit there plotting an ends to man like a director - or much the same way as the Greeks held Zeus, and Moslems hold al-Lah.

God is love (1 John 4:8). He does not change (Hebrews 13:8). He never angers. He eternally loves. When we refer to God's anger it is how we react to His love. We describe it as anger as an anthropomorphism - using a human characteristic to describe God.
"God is the sun of justice, as it is written, who shines rays of goodness on simply everyone. The soul develops according it its free will into either wax because of its love for God or into mud because of its love of matter. Thus just as by nature the mud is dried out by the sun and wax is automatically softened, so also every soul which loves matter and the world and has fixed its mind from God is hardened as mud according to its free will and by itself advances to its perdition, as did Pharaoh.* However, every soul which loves God is softened as wax, and receiving divine impressions and characters it becomes 'the dwelling place of God in the Spirit'
- St. Maximus the Confessor, Chapters on Knowledge 1:12 (quoted in Carlton, C (1999) "The Truth: What Every Roman Catholic Should Know about the Orthodox Church", (Regina Orthodox Press), pp94-5)

This refers to the Old Testament passages where God is said to have hardened Pharaoh’s heart.