Predestination

[Diakoneo]

A friend of mine is really into the whole idea of predestination and such. I'm wondering what the general opinions around here are. A theologian named Clark Pinach (might be spelled wrong) has come up with this idea called "Open Theism" which goes against calvinist teachings but takes it so far as to say that , "since man has free will choices, even God does not know what we will choose." Which when boiled down to a's and b's really means that "God doesn't know everything".. So in light of open theism, which most (including myself) would call heresy.. what are your particular opinions?

 

[NicodemusPrime]

The only predestination I believe in is that we are all predestined to go to Hell if we don't accept Jesus Christ as our saviour. There are two things in this world that are certain: We will all die one day; If we are not saved we are doomed to hell.

As for open-theism, just like similar heresies it tries to put God in a little box. To try to describe God's infinite knowledge in human terms is to try to try to make a milkshake out of rocks, its impossible. Some things just aren't meant for man to know.

thats where I stand at least.

 

[costlygrace]

I agree, Nicodemus Prime! I believe that exactly where God's foreknowledge and choice and man's free will meet is beyond our comprehension. But in any case I see no Biblical justification for a claim either that man does not have freedom of the will, or that God does not have, or cannot act upon, foreknowledge from the beginning. An attempt to simply a complex issue is no excuse for the assertion of an error.

 

[Sword-In-Hand]

I heard this taught in a theology class. Well it wasn't really taught, just one of those discussions that never have an end. There is a theory called "Limited Soveriegnty". It doesn't say that God can't know all things or see all things, it is a theory based on actually "when" does God choose to look.

If you look through scripture God dwells in the present time. He didn't say He was, or He would be, He said, I am that I am. Can God see past, present and future? Sure, to not be able to would mean God has limits, but the question is, does God willfully limit Himself? It's like the question can God make a rock He can't move?

I really don't know what to make of that theory, just something to debate. But I believe God gives us a choice to be saved. Adam and Eve demonstrated free will when they willfully ate from the tree of knowledge after being told not to. Also in scripture it says God shows no partiality to any man. In my opinion if God selected who would be saved and who wouldn't that definitely shows partiality. I believe God knows what decision we will make, but He still gives us to choice. There's no way we can understand fully what God thinks, that is why He is God and we aren't.

 

[kyzar]

oooooo goodie! I've waited for a discussion like this one to pop up!!!
Im going to do two posts, this one and the one below (hopefully) they illustrate my two views on the topic... This one is the one I hold to a bit better i guess:

We a pety little humans who have little itty bitty brains. We are trying to understand a concept of God, the person who created us, its simply impossible for us to clearly identify God's thoughts, we can't do it!!!

Okay that may go against my next post, but see what you think...

 

[kyzar]

This was something that I wrote. Um, actually I wrote it yesterday, so it's still in its infant stages, so I would appreciate some constructive criticism or some agreeance if you guys agree...
It about freewill and predestination illustrated through Job...

Freewill and Predestination:

Job was a Godly man, righteous and prosperous because of his faith.1 God is all knowing, all-powerful, and all seeing, there is nothing he cannot do. Satan in powerful, but still under God's power and thus is petty.2
So one day Satan and God are talking:
"Hast thou considered my servant Job, that there is none like him in the earth, a perfect and an upright man, one that feareth God, and escheweth evil?" Job 1:8
Satan replies:
"Doth Job fear God for nought? Hast not thou made an hedge about him, and about his house, and about all that he hath on every side? thou hast blessed the work of his hands, and his substance is increased in the land. But put forth thine hand now, and touch all that he hath, and he will curse thee to thy face." Job 1:9-11

So God turns around and gives all that is Job's except his life over to Satan to prove the obedience and righteousness of Job.3 Satan plagues Job, killing his family, his livelihood his homes, giving him boils and pains and giving Job his three 'friends' to try and make Job curse God. But to no avail, Job simply does not do it, he remains God faithful and perfect servant. The book of Job shows us a clear example of free will, predestination, and the nature of God.

Firstly, man has free will, anyone who says otherwise is not a Christian and thus is condemned to hell, plain and simple. This is shown in Job, Satan would have had a field day if God had have interfered and MADE Job not curse Him, therefore it was up to Job, his freewill and his choice and decision through his faith and knowledge of God. Secondly, this example shows God's foreknowledge of Job's eventual decision and outcome. Some may say that He didn't, and while this is wrong (God is all knowing) the only ways God would be able to prove Satan wrong would be to make Job not curse Him (wrong, see above) or hope Job wouldn't curse Him. If anyone is able to accept that God has 'faith' in man then tell me. The very reason God put forth Job as an example to Satan of a perfect man3 was because HE KNEW BEFOREHAND Job would not curse Him. This proves a number of things: God's use of His foreknowledge; man's God-given fee will; and satan's stupidity (why would anyone try to make Job sin when God put Job forward as His perfect example? Obviously satan is more foolish and proud of himself than we know!!!)

We read later that 'In all this Job sinned not, nor charged God foolishly.' Job 1:22. God knew He wouldn't, and thus presented Him as someone who wouldn't curse God. Just as God knew I would become a Christian and thus made me one of the elect! 'Because whom He foreknew, He also predestined to be conformed to the image of His Son' Romans 8:29. Just like Job, God knew who would become a Christian and who would reject and curse Him, thus He has predestined us all according to the choice He gave everyone!

Now it is obvious that God knew our decision and subsequently elected us, thus it seems we need no longer preach, after all God knows what will happen, we can just sit back and watch T.V. waiting for it to happen! Not So! We don't know who the elect are! We don't know if me typing this might bring 5 people to Christ. We as mortal humans simply do not know!!! So based on this alone we should preach to the world. We should ask for God's guidance and for Him to use us for His will. Our work of preaching is not in vain after all 'whoever believes in Him shall not perish but have eternal life!' John 3:16.


1. Job... that man was perfect and upright, and one that feared God, and eschewed evil. Job 1:1.

2. ...all that he hath is in thy power; only upon himself put not forth thine hand. Job 1:12

3. ...there is none like him in the earth, a perfect and an upright man Job 1:8

 

[theseed]

Firstly, man has free will, anyone who says otherwise is not a Christian and thus is condemned to hell, plain and simple

Really? Show us in The Bible where our will is free. If you look in Romans 6 you will find that we are slaves to sin without the Spirit.

BTW, if it was really Satan, then why did God repent of his evil in the last chapter of Job.

Now it is obvious that God knew our decision and subsequently elected us, thus it seems we need no longer preach, after all God knows what will happen, we can just sit back and watch T.V. waiting for it to happen!

Congratulatoins you just refuted a fake argument. Some people call these straw men. Also, you are describing post-destination, not predestination. You are saying that we are destined after the fact instead of before.

Anybody who believes that they are saved based on thier understandingis going to hell plain and simple (Eph. 2.8-11). Knowing theology and the bible has nothing to do with salvation.

 

[BBAS 64]

A friend of mine is really into the whole idea of predestination and such. I'm wondering what the general opinions around here are. A theologian named Clark Pinach (might be spelled wrong) has come up with this idea called "Open Theism" which goes against calvinist teachings but takes it so far as to say that , "since man has free will choices, even God does not know what we will choose." Which when boiled down to a's and b's really means that "God doesn't know everything".. So in light of open theism, which most (including myself) would call heresy.. what are your particular opinions?

Good Day, Diakoneo

Eph 1:1 Paul, an apostle of Jesus Christ by the will of God, to the saints which are at Ephesus, and to the faithful in Christ Jesus: Grace be to you, and peace, from God our Father, and from the Lord Jesus Christ. Blessed be the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, who hath blessed us with all spiritual blessings in heavenly places in Christ: According as he hath chosen us in him before the foundation of the world, that we should be holy and without blame before him in love: Having predestinated us unto the adoption of children by Jesus Christ to himself, according to the good pleasure of his will, To the praise of the glory of his grace, wherein he hath made us accepted in the beloved. In whom we have redemption through his blood, the forgiveness of sins, according to the riches of his grace; Wherein he hath abounded toward us in all wisdom and prudence; Having made known unto us the mystery of his will, according to his good pleasure which he hath purposed in himself:

Predestinated::

proorizō

Thayer Definition:

1) to predetermine, decide beforehand

2) in the NT of God decreeing from eternity

3) to foreordain, appoint beforehand

Foreordaind from eternity, according to the Will of God according to His good pleasure, to be "ordained" children of adoption though Christ. To be "ordained" Holy and with out blame before Him "God".


Peace to u,

Bill

 

[rural_preacher]

Psalm 139 is one of the best passages of Scripture for refuting Open Theism. Here are some verses that speak directly to the issue.

1 O LORD, You have searched me and known me.
2You know my sitting down and my rising up;
You understand my thought afar off.
3You comprehend my path and my lying down,
And are acquainted with all my ways.
4For there is not a word on my tongue,
But behold, O LORD, You know it altogether.

16Your eyes saw my substance, being yet unformed.
And in Your book they all were written,
The days fashioned for me,
When as yet there were none of them.

Of course, there are several other passage in God's Word that directly answer the question of God's eternal omniscience. But we must also be careful to balance this with our mandate to preach the Gospel and make the Word known.

Romans 10:13-15, "For 'whoever calls on the name of the LORD shall be saved.' How then shall they call on Him in whom they have not believed? And how shall they believe in Him of whom they have not heard? And how shall they hear without a preacher? And how shall they preach unless they are sent? As it is written: 'How beautiful are the feet of those who preach the gospel of peace, Who bring glad tidings of good things!'"

 

[BBAS 64]

Good Day, Kyzar

Firstly, man has free will, anyone who says otherwise is not a Christian and thus is condemned to hell

I to believe that man has a free will and is free to continue in those thing which he is bondage to with out an external force to free him from such, he will continue and is free to do so.

He is free to make choices, but he is limted by the options he has availble to him. Slaves have choices even in bondage, those choices always lead back to Salvery and he chooses them freely and loves his condition based on his choices.

Peace to u,

Bill

 

[Crazy Liz]

A friend of mine is really into the whole idea of predestination and such. I'm wondering what the general opinions around here are. A theologian named Clark Pinach (might be spelled wrong) has come up with this idea called "Open Theism" which goes against calvinist teachings but takes it so far as to say that , "since man has free will choices, even God does not know what we will choose." Which when boiled down to a's and b's really means that "God doesn't know everything".. So in light of open theism, which most (including myself) would call heresy.. what are your particular opinions?

Read Pinnock, Sanders, Boyd and some others before making a declaration of heresy, please. They actually make a very strong biblical argument that classical theism is not biblical. There was a thread about this in one of the theology forums a couple of weeks ago, I think. Actually, there have been several over the last couple of years.

Here's the problem, according to the open theists: Our ideas about the attributes of God - omnipotence, omniscience, impassability, etc., come largely from Greek philosophy, which describes a "perfect," and therefore impersonal god. The Bible makes some statements about God that resemble these philosophies of classical theism. However, the Bible, above everything else, reveals a God who is personal. The Calvinists try to acknowledge that God is personal, while holding on to all the impersonal attributes of classical theism. It just doesn't work. A week or two ago, a Calvinist asked, in one of the theology forums, trying to support his position, "Why would God set himself up for disappointment by loving everybody when not everyone would be saved?" (IMHO, this question makes a better argument for universalism than for Calvinism! ) As I see it, risk is an indispensable part of love. All our literature, including biblical literature, supports this idea. The God of the Bible takes risks for the sake of love. The god of classical theism is unable to love.

Open theism is an attempt to resolve this problem by modifying and moderating some of the definitions of the attributes classical theists ascribe to God - particularly omniscience, and doing away with the attribute of impassability entirely. They do not go as far as the process theologians, who also modify and moderate (to an even greater degree) the attributes of both omnipotence and omniscience.

I, personally, don't hold the open theism view, but rather an incarnational, revelatory and biblical theology. In some ways it is similar, but it doesn't begin with the assumptions of theism at all, but rather with the personal nature of God as revealed to us through scripture and through Jesus Christ. However, for those who hold the incarnational view, open theism provides a helpful reflection and critique of classical theism. Open theists really are correct when they point to the fact that scriptures saying God repented outnumber those that say God never changes God's mind.

The classical answer to this assertion is that the scriptures that say God repented are anthropomorphisms. I contend they are not. Anthropomorphisms describe God as having hands, feet, eyes, and other body parts. If all the scriptures that describe God as having personality are also anthropomorphisms, the classical theists are right. God is impersonal. But reading the scriptures, we see, if nothing else, that God is personal. therefore, we cannot say that all scriptures referring to God as if God had a personality are anthropomorphisms. We need to deal with scriptures that seem to say inconsistent things about God more carefully than simply to dismiss those that refer to God repenting or otherwise acting in personal ways as anthropomorphisms.

More detail than you wanted?

 

[Crazy Liz]

I heard this taught in a theology class. Well it wasn't really taught, just one of those discussions that never have an end. There is a theory called "Limited Soveriegnty". It doesn't say that God can't know all things or see all things, it is a theory based on actually "when" does God choose to look.

That's not the same as open theism. I think it may be closer to Molinism.

 

[Crazy Liz]

The only predestination I believe in is that we are all predestined to go to Hell if we don't accept Jesus Christ as our saviour. There are two things in this world that are certain: We will all die one day; If we are not saved we are doomed to hell.

Not biblical. The word "predestination" is never used this way in scripture.

As for open-theism, just like similar heresies it tries to put God in a little box.

If you call open theism a heresy for this reason, you also have to call Calvinism a heresy.

To try to describe God's infinite knowledge in human terms is to try to try to make a milkshake out of rocks, its impossible. Some things just aren't meant for man to know.

thats where I stand at least.

I think you may be right about that

 

[Crazy Liz]

Psalm 139 is one of the best passages of Scripture for refuting Open Theism. Here are some verses that speak directly to the issue.

1 O LORD, You have searched me and known me.
2You know my sitting down and my rising up;
You understand my thought afar off.
3You comprehend my path and my lying down,
And are acquainted with all my ways.
4For there is not a word on my tongue,
But behold, O LORD, You know it altogether.

16Your eyes saw my substance, being yet unformed.
And in Your book they all were written,
The days fashioned for me,
When as yet there were none of them.

I would be very careful about making poetry the primary basis for a theological claim. It is VERY difficult to know for sure you have interpreted poetry (especially Hebrew poetry) correctly. More often than any other literary form (with the possible exception of apocalyptic literature), it also may have several levels of meaning, and be mostly figurative.

 

[rural_preacher]

I would be very careful about making poetry the primary basis for a theological claim. It is VERY difficult to know for sure you have interpreted poetry (especially Hebrew poetry) correctly. More often than any other literary form (with the possible exception of apocalyptic literature), it also may have several levels of meaning, and be mostly figurative.

Don't forget, you're talking to a Baptist...I take a very high view of God's Word.

II Timothy 3:16, 17, "All Scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness, that the man of God may be complete, thoroughly equipped for every good work."

In my hermeneutical and Hebrew studies, I have not found any interpretive challenges surrounding the verses in Psalm 139 that I quoted. I think it is save to say that those verses, as well as many other passages in God's Word, are clearly teaching that God is a Sovereign, omniscient God.

I have no desire to serve and worship a god that is anything less than sovereign.

 

[kyzar]

I was asked before If i could show that man had free will with biblical evidence. Um, lets start at the beggining: Eve, she had free will to take the fruit (God did not make her take it, she did so of her own 'free will'); Job, had the free will to curse God (if he didn't then what is the point of 3/4 of Job?); Jesus, he had free will to not go on the cross ( he prayed to God to take it from Him. He had the freedom to not take up the cross, but He put God's will before His own)... I don't think I need to illustrate free will any more than that...
I do believe that man has free will, but I also believe that our free will is in the confines of God's will...

Also my second post on this thread was something I had written a day before I posted it. I asked for some constructive criticism as it was still in its infant stages. So thank-you for your words guys, I will study some more and look at what you have said... I still hold though, that as finite beings with little minds, we find it impossible to understnad the ways and thoughts of our infinite God...

 

[NicodemusPrime]

Not biblical. The word "predestination" is never used this way in scripture.

I really didn't mean that to be literal. It think you might need to turn up the sensitivity on your sarcasm detector.

If you call open theism a heresy for this reason, you also have to call Calvinism a heresy.

Which is why I'm not a Calvinist nor did I ever claim to be.

I think you may be right about that

Thank you

 

[kyzar]

Is it possible to hold to some aspects of calvinism, some armenianism, some i dunno open theism, etc...? Cause I know I personally can't say I'm a calvanist, or an armenianist, or etc... I hold to aspects of many 'man made' views... Am I alone in this?

 

[NicodemusPrime]

Is it possible to hold to some aspects of calvinism, some armenianism, some i dunno open theism, etc...? Cause I know I personally can't say I'm a calvanist, or an armenianist, or etc... I hold to aspects of many 'man made' views... Am I alone in this?

Not all Christians fit perfectly into our little denominational moulds. You can differ slightly from the doctrine your church teaches, but it is imperative that you compare anything you hear from anybody, your pastor included, back to the scriptures.

 

[kyzar]

yeah good point... its just that everyone always seems to say 'oh yes im a calvinist and you can't be saved unless God elects you' while others say 'well im an armenian and God can't save you unless you want Him to'... Plain and simply I slighly agree with both, because the bible says both... But you get condemed by calvinists because you dont hold 100% to calvinism, and you get shot by armenianists because you dont 100% agree with them...
Fight the mould, become concious jelly!