Do you believe in predestination ?

[Nang]

Not on earth in mankind, you are right ...

but I am talking about BEFORE the foundation of the world when we were elected or not elected,

I know of no scripture that teaches this. The elect of God were foreknown by God in Christ & chosen to be saved on that basis alone. I Peter 1:2

before all sin, everyone was innocent (since it is rejected that GOD looked forward to see who would put their faith in HIM) and the doctrine of unconditional election necessitates an UNconditional non-election of some of these innocents, that is, innocents being passed over for election for no reason, innocents in the end being condemned to hell for no reason.

There were only two innocents created (before the birth of Jesus Christ). Adam & Eve federally represented the entire human race & they are the cause of all loss of innocence in mankind since their fall.

 

[Nang]

Okaaaaay, but who gets to define HIS omniscience, the pagan Greeks who taught us that He knows all that can be known from eternity past to eternity future which implies HE knew before their creation who would end in hell BUT CREATED THEM ANYWAY! ...a blasphemy against HIS nature of being lovingly righteous and just that the Church happily ignores because the definition is oh so holy...

...even though it is not supported by the only verse which states clearly HE Know all HIS works for the beginning of the world.

Obviously there are counter arguments against any interpretation of any verse but surely the one which removes any hint of the stink of blasphemy from our doctrine is to be preferred?

God defines His own attributes as revealed in the Holy Scriptures alone, and Scripture interprets Scripture alone.

 

[Stripe]

Then He is not totally omniscient.

Or else total knowledge of the choices men will make is a logical absurdity.

Does God know what the weather on Vulcan is?

 

[Lon]

If He "created the results," we do not have a will.

Depends how you define. There is no such thing as a completely unrestricted will. You know this as well. You rather mean 'somewhat' able to choose. You cannot flap your arms and fly (barring doing something weird while entering an airplane or helicopter). Your will is thus, not free, just somewhat able to make a choice. Again, freewill is not our 'identity.' 'Awareness' is identity and doesn't require you or I to choose.

Take for example my kids. Not one of them had a choice for parents. None of them. It does nothing at all to our relationship and in fact, makes it more meaningful and incredible.

 

[Lon]

This is true but since the beginning of the world, HE knows all HIS works, all that HE creates. Why say this if it is meaningless?

Look at the context:

Act 15:13 After they finished speaking, James replied, “Brothers, listen to me.
Act 15:14 Simeon has related how God first visited the Gentiles, to take from them a people for his name.
Act 15:15 And with this the words of the prophets agree, just as it is written,
Act 15:16 “‘After this I will return, and I will rebuild the tent of David that has fallen; I will rebuild its ruins, and I will restore it,
Act 15:17 that the remnant of mankind may seek the Lord, and all the Gentiles who are called by my name, says the Lord, who makes these things
Act 15:18 known from of old.’

Amos 9:11-12

It is genuinely 'what God knows' as far as gentiles (you and I) and when He knew it. It doesn't seem helpful to either of our positions but by implications drawn, and we have to be careful. -Lon

 

[Lon]

If my contentions are only that then so are your contentions. Prove your ideas about the meaning of any verse is absolute truth! You can't or all would have to accept that proof for that is what proof means...it can't be denied. That is why I live by faith, not proof.

It needs to be both. That's why I posted the verses. They are more important than our private assertions. I just think we have to discuss those too.
For me, this isn't an us/them debate. It is a 'what does God say and Who does He say He is discussion.' Neither of us are going to be hurt by that kind of thing and yes, we both need to look at our assumptions. Proof would certainly help. What did those disciples mean when they said He knew all things? :think: Did they really mean all (panta,pas)?

 

[Stripe]

Depends how you define.

A will is the ability to choose. If God has determined everything, the will is entirely an illusion.

freewill is not our 'identity.'

To be fair, I haven't said it is.

Take for example my kids. Not one of them had a choice for parents. None of them. It does nothing at all to our relationship and in fact, makes it more meaningful and incredible.

Sure. However, our relationship with God is one of adoption. And even as His "biological" kids — ie, Israel — we would have the choice to deny Him.

 

[Nang]

Unrepentant souls have the ability to exercise their wills, but their wills are restricted by their fallen state, to only choose to sin.

Until and unless the Spirit of God regenerates and renews a sinner to new life through the gift of faith in Jesus Christ, the human is incapable of choosing to do right or good.

Every member of this site should read Martin Luther’s “Bondage of the Will”!

 

[Lon]

A will is the ability to choose. If God has determined everything, the will is entirely an illusion.

Of course not. Your will can only choose so much within the parameters of this physical universe. You can't eat poison and live. You can't drink and not suffer ill-effects as the consequence. There is no point talking about a freewill nor if it is illusion. It just isn't our biggest thing as people. Who cares if you chose chocolate or vanilla? Only in the flesh will that define you and we aren't a people that care about that. It doesn't matter, not at all if you ride a motorcycle or drove a Prius to work. So....none of your 'free' will decisions really define you. Rather, 'why' you choose things does AND in Christ, those are very much determined. The Lord Jesus Christ prayed "not My will but Thine!" His will just wasn't that important. What was important was the value behind all His actions (and yours).

To be fair, I haven't said it is.

....from an earlier conversation, I'm trying to make sure I'm covering this further and meaningfully.

Sure. However, our relationship with God is one of adoption. And even as His "biological" kids — ie, Israel — we would have the choice to deny Him.

Why are you clinging to this? Do you desire to change your family outcome by 'choice?' I've had one of the worst childhoods available, but I'd never trade my mother. What would my 'free will' choice have gotten me? :idunno:

 

[JudgeRightly]

Of course not. Your will can only choose so much within the parameters of this physical universe. You can't eat poison and live. You can't drink and not suffer ill-effects as the consequence.

You seem to be confusing "choice" and "ability to choose" with "consequences of a choice."

I can choose both to consume poison and to live. But the consequences of one cancels out the consequences of the other, unless by "live" I choose to take an antidote for the poison.

There is no point talking about a freewill nor if it is illusion.

So what about God, then?

Several times in the Bible it states that God has a will of His own.

A will is the ability to choose otherwise, no?

To what extent is God able to alter an outcome of a given situation?

It just isn't our biggest thing as people. Who cares if you chose chocolate or vanilla? Only in the flesh will that define you and we aren't a people that care about that. It doesn't matter, not at all if you ride a motorcycle or drove a Prius to work. So....none of your 'free' will decisions really define you. Rather, 'why' you choose things does AND in Christ, those are very much determined. The Lord Jesus Christ prayed "not My will but Thine!" His will just wasn't that important. What was important was the value behind all His actions (and yours).


....from an earlier conversation, I'm trying to make sure I'm covering this further and meaningfully.


Why are you clinging to this? Do you desire to change your family outcome by 'choice?' I've had one of the worst childhoods available, but I'd never trade my mother. What would my 'free will' choice have gotten me? :idunno:

 

[Stripe]

Of course not. Your will can only choose so much within the parameters of this physical universe.

This is unresponsive.

We have wills. We would not have them if God had predetermined everything.

That our options are limited is trivially true and irrelevant.

You can't eat poison and live, but you can choose what to eat, regardless of what any hypothetical "omniscient" being might predict.

None of your 'free' will decisions really define you.

To be fair, I haven't ever said they do.

Rather, 'why' you choose things does AND in Christ, those are very much determined. The Lord Jesus Christ prayed "not My will but Thine!" His will just wasn't that important. What was important was the value behind all His actions (and yours).

Do you think Jesus had no choice but to cede his preference to the Father?

Why are you clinging to this?

I think it's true.

Do you desire to change your family outcome by 'choice?'

No.

Why is this question relevant?

I've had one of the worst childhoods available, but I'd never trade my mother. What would my 'free will' choice have gotten me? :idunno:

We can't choose who our parents are, but we can still choose.

 

[Bright Raven]

Or else total knowledge of the choices men will make is a logical absurdity.

Does God know what the weather on Vulcan is?

you'll have to ask Spock.

 

[Lon]

You seem to be confusing "choice" and "ability to choose" with "consequences of a choice."
I can choose both to consume poison and to live. But the consequences of one cancels out the consequences of the other, unless by "live" I choose to take an antidote for the poison.

I appreciate 'seems' there. No, I wasn't confusing the two, but appreciate your attention to it (not sure if it changes much of the dialogue).

So what about God, then?

Several times in the Bible it states that God has a will of His own.

A will is the ability to choose otherwise, no?

Yes, but the only 'otherwise' for God would be against sin and its consequences. His choice does indeed count.

To what extent is God able to alter an outcome of a given situation?

Fully. I'd argue God is the only, truly free (no restraint at all) Agent.

 

[Lon]

This is unresponsive.

We have wills. We would not have them if God had predetermined everything.

Agreed. I'm saying the will has no bearing in what truly matters. Of course it'd be seen as 'unresponsive' when it negates the thing of question.

That our options are limited is trivially true and irrelevant.

Well, in the sense that I believe the will is irrelevant, I agree with you, but this isn't what you mean. You think it has something to do with relationship. I'm saying it really doesn't. Not that much. Example: I'm married today, after 30 years, not because I or my wife are perfect NOR because we have 'freewills.' Rather it is because we have submitted long ago, negating our wills, to His. The more we are 'restrained' in our wills to His will, the better and longer our marriage will last. You can argue it is a 'choice' and I agree, but as Matthew 6 says, a will serving one of two masters.

You can't eat poison and live, but you can choose what to eat, regardless of what any hypothetical "omniscient" being might predict.

Making His attributes 'hypothetical' doesn't dismiss them. Rather I gave verses that said He knows all. These verses said exactly that. Can you tell me where my reading comprehension has not served me?

To be fair, I haven't ever said they do.

Again, there is something every free-will theist grasps a hold of, as if such is a gift from God. Rather, freewill dilemma began when our spirit was at war between desire for God, and desire from our fallen state. It is important to address it because it is the context of this OP and all predestination discussions. It has to be a part of such discussions as the converse.

Do you think Jesus had no choice but to cede his preference to the Father?

Yes. He was 'tempted' as you and I, but ALWAYS did His Father's will because the Father and Son were "One."

I think it's true.

Yes, but to what consequence? Where is the need?

No.

Why is this question relevant?

My contention with all Open Theists to date, has always been with those believing choice is necessary for love and relationship.

You've agreed, essentially with me, that 'no' is the correct answer. We don't 'love because we choose' but rather 'because He first loved us.' Love begets love. The 'choice' part just isn't of much consequence. We love because He taught us to do so and be so.

We can't choose who our parents are, but we can still choose.

It isn't the choice, but the value behind the choice (or not) that is important. Or perhaps, better: It isn't our choice that's important, its His (similar to what you just said here). I believe, between you and I, we just described predetermination. My attempt is simply to show it isn't something bad. If it negates 'choice' it simply negates 'our' choice. That's a good thing.

 

[Stripe]

I'm married today, after 30 years, not because I or my wife are perfect NOR because we have 'freewills.' Rather it is because we have submitted long ago, negating our wills, to His.

Did you choose to submit?

Making His attributes 'hypothetical' doesn't dismiss them.

I wasn't. The thought experiment doesn't need God in it. Just a hypothetical omniscient being.

Yes. He was 'tempted' as you and I, but ALWAYS did His Father's will because the Father and Son were "One."

Why go through it?

Yes, but to what consequence? Where is the need?

It isn't about need; it's about a theology that lines up with reality. We live our lives making decisions as if they are ours. Why should we believe that they are predetermined? What use is there in that?

My contention with all Open Theists to date, has always been with those believing choice is necessary for love and relationship.

What's wrong with people choosing to love?

The 'choice' part just isn't of much consequence.

It's what we do.

We love because He taught us to do so and be so.

We love because He first loved us. This does not eliminate the will.

It isn't our choice that's important, its His.

When did He make this choice?

 

[Lon]

Did you choose to submit?

Right, but the ONLY choice: live or die. It is always and naught but a choice (one choice).

Why go through it?

For us. There was no reason but the redemption of man. Love.

It isn't about need; it's about a theology that lines up with reality. We live our lives making decisions as if they are ours. Why should we believe that they are predetermined? What use is there in that?

Because its an illusion we value, to be our own boss and the captain of our own fates. It is within all of us to 'live' and determine our own course, but God calls us to abandon ourselves, take up our cross, and die daily. It is a negation of self-determinism. We are not our own. We were bought with a great price.

You and I hate every decision against Him we've ever chosen.

What's wrong with people choosing to love?

Self-centered. We have to learn to love from the Savior or it isn't.
Everything in us is trying to get back home where we belong, and that is a negation of the self we once were. It is wholly 'Other' centered.

It's what we do.

Yes, poorly.

We love because He first loved us. This does not eliminate the will.

It does. His will then is laid upon ours and ours becomes "His." Freewill/ Ourwill becomes rather Hiswill.

When did He make this choice?

Does it matter? That's my point in thread: Predetermined, predestined: doesn't matter. It is just a 'when' when the content is rather the value of His love for us. It doesn't matter if he determined or predetermined; destined or predestined, just that He did. Our wills just aren't important on that scale. Identity is subsumed in Him, because He is all we desire.

 

[ttruscott]

I know of no scripture that teaches this. The elect of God were foreknown by God in Christ & chosen to be saved on that basis alone. I Peter 1:2

I was thinking of Ephesians 1:4 For he chose us in him before the creation of the world to be holy and blameless in his sight. Chose here is not the same word chose that is the synonym for election but it's definitely the same idea.

There were only two innocents created (before the birth of Jesus Christ). Adam & Eve federally represented the entire human race & they are the cause of all loss of innocence in mankind since their fall.

Ummm, you forget the fall of Satan. Before his fall must he not have been innocent? Were the angels that rejected HIS rebellion not innocent before they chose what to do and by choosing for YHWH became righteous?

Federal headship is a fantasy to compel belief in the blasphemy that GOD creates us sinners by making us to be human and by that means to make us inherit Adam's sin unto condemnation...

IF original sin means that we inherit a sinful nature from Adam and NOT that we are guilty of our own free will decison to sin, then I cannot accept it until some questions are answered to my satisfaction...

1. Sinner only by a free will choice to sin
IF we are created as sinful without any choice to be sinful then it stands to reason that this lack of mens rea means I am not guilty of any sin / crime and should not be held accountable OR IF I am guilty, that I must have intended to sin to get a sinful nature. If I have a sinful nature from Adam then it is either Adam who is guilty of all my sins or it is GOD because HE did not have to create me a member of Adam's family!


2. Against scripture
I need to know how this doctrine doesn't contradict the doctrine so clearly laid out in Ezekiel 18:20 The soul that sinneth, it shall die. The son (US) shall not bear the iniquity of the father (ADAM), neither shall the father bear the iniquity of the son: the righteousness of the righteous shall be upon him, and the wickedness of the wicked (THOSE WHO CHOSE BY THEIR FREE WILL TO BE WICKED) shall be upon him.
Infants have no sin of their own and cannot die for Adam's sin yet they die, ie, they are paid the wages of sin, proving enough for many that they sinned pre-conception.


3. Death proves sin
Romans 6:23 For the wages of sin is death, implies death proves sin. So yes people die at all ages but they must die for their own sin, not anyone else's: Jeremiah 31:30 "But everyone will die for his own iniquity;... says it clearly.


4. Loving righteousness cannot create evil
1 John 1:5 This is the message we have heard from him and declare to you: God is light; in him there is no darkness at all. Can darkness come from light? Can stagnant foul water come from a spring of pure life giving water? Of course not and neither can dark (evil ) come from Light (loving righteousness). This foolishness is like striking a match and expecting dark to fill the room!


GOD cannot create evil people by any means including forcing them to be born without their aquiessence into Adam's sin. Orthodoxy only needs this blasphemous doctrine because they have completely accepted the hypothesis that we are created in sin on earth so there is no time for us to sin by our free will.


1 John 2:16 For everything in the world--the lust of the flesh, the lust of the eyes, and the pride of life-- comes not from the Father but from the world. To create us with a sin nature means that all these things comes from our nature as HE created it. This verse denies that very openly.

Matthew 15:19 For out of the heart come evil thoughts --murder, adultery, sexual immorality, theft, false testimony, slander. Is 'heart' another name for our created 'human nature' or 'sinful nature'? Then you know what I think...


Gal 5:16 So I say, walk by the Spirit, and you will not gratify the desires of the flesh. 17 For the flesh desires what is contrary to the Spirit, and the Spirit what is contrary to the flesh. They are in conflict with each other, so that you are not to do whatever you want. The flesh and the Spirit are contrary to each other, they are in conflict! One cannot produce the other as a fulfillment of any purpose whatsoever. How is it reasonable to think GOD creates that which HE is in conflict with...? GOD's Kingdom is not divided by the creation of evil as it would be IF HE created it: Luke 11:17 Jesus knew their thoughts and said to them: "Any kingdom divided against itself will be ruined, and a house divided against itself will fall. ...in the context that Satan will not cast out demons which must extrapolate to therefore Christ would never be involved with creating evil.


IF it is blasphemous to say Jesus cast out demons by the finger of Satan, how much more to say that HE created all human evil by creating us in Adam's evil and liable to judgement?? And this is also in the context of: Whoever is not with me is against me, and whoever does not gather with me scatters.


Gal 5:19 The acts of the flesh are obvious: sexual immorality, impurity and debauchery; 20 idolatry and witchcraft; hatred, discord, jealousy, fits of rage, selfish ambition, dissensions, factions 21 and envy; drunkenness, orgies, and the like. I warn you, as I did before, that those who live like this will not inherit the kingdom of God. If these things are outside of the Kingdom of God then GOD as the HIGH KING cannot nor would not (if HE could) ever create them or the impulse to do them or a nature that would inevitably lead to them. And does not the creation of evil create dissensions, factions within HIS Kingdom??? Duh, it suddenly creates eternal evil enemies but no dissensions or factions??? <headshake, facepalm> Put this in the context of the sinful good (elect) seed who are born / created sinful yet are sown / born as people of the kingdom, Matt 13:38 and as believers not condemned for their sins, Jn 3:18 though born / created as sinners.


I contend that before we were sown into the earth by the Son of Man, we chose to become people of the kingdom by our free will decision to accept YHWH as our GOD and HIS Son as our saviour from all sin by faith, not proof. Some chose to reject HIS claims to be our GOD and put their faith in HIM being a liar and a false god and by so doing made themselves unable to ever fulfil the purpose for their creation, unable to be redeemed as having put themselves by their free will outside of HIS saving grace and fit only to be banished to the outer darkness. Some of the elect people of the kingdom rejected HIS call for the judgement upon these reprobate and became sinful themselves, forcing the postponement of the judgement until they could be made holy, that is, in total agreement with all HIS plans, especially the judgment, Matt 13, the parable of the good seed and the tares.


Gal 5:22 But the fruit of the Spirit is love, joy, peace, forbearance, kindness, goodness, faithfulness, 23 gentleness and self-control. Against such things there is no law. 24 Those who belong to Christ Jesus have crucified the flesh with its passions and desires. THESE are the things GOD creates - wherein is there any place for sin and evil to be created?


5. HIS Bride as filthy rags
Since the wedding of the Lamb to His Bride finishes the Bible story after all evil is vanished from this reality, it would seem to be the culmination of the story, the whole reason why we were created, the purpose in fact of our creation.


I need to know how this purpose is enhanced by our being created in Adam's sin where we are sick and evil and the best we can do is filthy rags (we all know the allusion here). Orthodoxy claims HE proved HE could create innocents with a free will (ie, Adam) so there is no reason to put HIS Bride into Adam's blood line at all unless HE wanted us to be evil in HIS sight and this was HIS method. I have asked this question of orthodox believers for years and have found no reason let alone a good reason for why HE would do this.


It is as if HE could only have a perfect Bride if HE first created her as grossly sick and evil, perhaps the grosser the better. This blasphemous doctrine suggests a severe limit to HIS creative ability as if HE ran out of the power to create innocents and could only create sinners.

 

[WonderfulLordJesus]

No. Calvinist predestination, predeterminism, is a lot of lying claptrap. Here are some links to the truth about Reformed, aka deformed, theology, deformed to many people that actually understand the Holy Bible, which is very clear on these matters, clear at even a Sunday school level.

http://heresies.landmarkbiblebaptist.net/calvinism.html

https://www.soulwinning.info/fd/calvinism/beware.htm

http://www.soulwinning.info/fd/calvinism/5.htm

Jesus Christ, and Jesus Christ, alone, as well as scripture, and scripture teaching scripture, proving scripture in whole Bible context and harmony: this is what should be front and center of the Christian congregation, always. When somebody starts preaching their -ists and -isms, starts posting screens full of their confusing junk that reads like stuff copied and pasted from an encyclopedia of philosophy? When you see the pattern of a little scripture, but a lot of blather, twisting it in the wind? When they whip out some man or woman's extra-Biblical writings, writings of these also-ran religious characters, some Johnny-come-lately with their new theology, over a thousand years after the first century church, insisting on these doctrines of men they've separated themselves around? That's a cult. (Which, by the way, the apostolic church fathers calling the likes of some Calvin doctrines heresies, condemning the groups teaching them.)

Whether it's Jehovah's Witnesses with their Jesus-lite, or Calvin's factory of damned baby robots versus lucky sperm club robots, fresh from the womb, about the time these doctrines of men, cult -isms start to appear, this is when you start looking for the Exit sign. I'd be the last Protestant on earth, but, if I had to convert, I'd join the Catholics, before hanging with the lucky sperm Calvinists, hands down.

 

[Stripe]

Right, but the ONLY choice: live or die. It is always and naught but a choice (one choice).

For us. There was no reason but the redemption of man. Love.

Because its an illusion we value, to be our own boss and the captain of our own fates. It is within all of us to 'live' and determine our own course, but God calls us to abandon ourselves, take up our cross, and die daily. It is a negation of self-determinism. We are not our own. We were bought with a great price.

You and I hate every decision against Him we've ever chosen.

Self-centered. We have to learn to love from the Savior or it isn't.
Everything in us is trying to get back home where we belong, and that is a negation of the self we once were. It is wholly 'Other' centered.



Yes, poorly.


It does. His will then is laid upon ours and ours becomes "His." Freewill/ Ourwill becomes rather Hiswill.




Does it matter? That's my point in thread: Predetermined, predestined: doesn't matter. It is just a 'when' when the content is rather the value of His love for us. It doesn't matter if he determined or predetermined; destined or predestined, just that He did. Our wills just aren't important on that scale. Identity is subsumed in Him, because He is all we desire.

The premise I'm arguing against is that everything is predetermined. Yet every time I ask you about choice, you say it's a bad thing, not a nonexistent thing.

 

[Lon]

The premise in arguing against is that everything is predetermined. Yet every time I ask you about choice, you say it's a bad thing, not a nonexistent thing.

It is important to recognize that delineation between God's will and sin was the point of contact (the Fall) between doing everything in a predetermined, predestined way, and not. While it may be a part of every Open Theist's desire to conserve a sense of 'freedom' as a gift from God, the only context of 'freedom' scripture talks about is what Christ freed us to be. In this conversation we are very much interested in which group are affected by outside philosophy. We traditional Christian theologians are accused of being 'Greeks.' The Open Theist conversely, would be accused of being influenced by today's philosophies and ideals because it embraces them in theological paradigm.

For either of us, we truly want to be biblical and not pressed by ungodly cultures and so we have to look at factors driving our respective theological stances. I'm definitely willing to ask the question: Does God have to be Omniscient? I think, scripturally, He does 1) because scripture says "You know all things" a couple of times and 2) because scripture examples are replete with omniscience, given, as fact. John 16:30;21:17

1 Samuel 23:7-24:22


1 Kings 13:2 to 2 Kings 21:26
[931 to 640 BC 291 years]


Revelation 4-22

The premise in arguing against is that everything is predetermined. Yet every time I ask you about choice, you say it's a bad thing, not a nonexistent thing.

However it exists, it is 'apart from' God. I do not believe God had a hand in sin. There is a point I have to acquiesce some of what you and others believe about a 'free' will that the Serpent caused. How in a universe God created? I'm also left to guess. While I believe man and serpent somehow managed it, and it not being God's purpose, there is a logical problem. We don't have to be Greek or modern to recognize it, but I think it helps if we see the inherent problems in both the Open Theism and Deterministic paradigms. They just leave us necessarily having to trust, and necessarily with pieces missing and likely well above our paygrades to figure out. In Him -Lon