Predestination vs. Free Will

[juantoo3]

Kindest Regards, Luna!

Without free will we would be automotons, not free to love God or each other.

I think you've pointed towards a crucial piece of the puzzle. Love. How often we hear "G-d is Love." Love cannot be forced if it is to be genuine. Love must be willingly returned to be genuine.

 

[juantoo3]

Kindest Regards, wil!

Seems to me we are predestined to find our way back to G-d, how it all happens is free will.

We go this way and that, take the wrong path, find some vices, ignore some virtues, commit some sin, break some commandments, but eventually the house wins and we find our way back home.

(no matter how many lifetimes it takes)

Perhaps you are correct.

Perhaps I can speed the process by not taking this for granted?

 

[juantoo3]

Kindest Regards, 9Harmony!

It's been quite a while, I trust you are well!

God knows what our choices will be before we do.

Of course, this returns us to asking why G-d would create those such as satan, if He knew the choices they would make ahead of time.

I am thinking that we (collectively, the world's religions) have placed an inordinate focus on ourselves regarding this subject. G-d loves us, that much I feel I can grant. But just how far will He (let alone should He) intervene in our lives. Is not the goal and purpose for us to interject ourselves into His life?

I guess what I am trying to say, aren't we a little presumptuous believing we can sit passively by and demand G-d do for us, when the reality is that G-d is looking for us to do for Him? We must do for Him in order to show our love; to manifest, exercise and grow our love. In the process, love being what it is, we also grow to love everybody and everything that is of G-d.

Just a random thought.

 

[juantoo3]

Kindest Regards, path!

We're all chosen. And I do tend to think we all make it back to God somehow. This is God's stated will- that we all come to be in communion with Him. I don't see how our puny selves can really, in the end, thwart God's will for us. He's omnipotent- so His will will be done.

I think I agree for the most part. I guess if I may be allowed to butcher Orwell for a moment; "We are all chosen. Some are more chosen than others."

To which I would add the caveat: "Just ask 'em."

 

[mee]

Yes, but look at where they all are standing and worshipping--before the throne of God in Heaven. So how can you say they are on the Earth?

This is what Jehovah has said: "The heavens are my throne, and the earth is my footstool. Isaiah 66;1

Jehovah is in his holy temple.
Jehovah—in the heavens is his throne.
​

His own eyes behold, his own beaming eyes examine the sons of men ...psalm 11;4 yes Jehovah and Jesus can examine us humans on the earth , it is as if we are before the throne, it makes no difference that we are on the earth , we can welcome our king Jesus , and Jehovah and Jesus are looking on.
(Psalm 33:13) From the heavens Jehovah has looked, He has seen all the sons of men.
(Hebrews 4:13) And there is not a creation that is not manifest to his sight, but all things are naked and openly exposed to the eyes of him with whom we have an accounting.
(Proverbs 15:3) The eyes of Jehovah are in every place, keeping watch upon the bad ones and the good ones
(Acts 7:49) ‘The heaven is my throne, and the earth is my footstool.

 

[wil]

Perhaps I can speed the process by not taking this for granted?

to every thing there is a season....we all awaken at our own speed...and yes when we awaken....tis our choice to pursue the course...or change the channel...many prefer the recliner...gotta love free will.

 

[9Harmony]

That's pretty much my take on it, 9Harmony.

We're all chosen. And I do tend to think we all make it back to God somehow. This is God's stated will- that we all come to be in communion with Him. I don't see how our puny selves can really, in the end, thwart God's will for us. He's omnipotent- so His will will be done.

We can thwart this will temporarily in our lives and in broader ways on earth. But what we perceive to be so linear and neat and tidy- time marching along in one direction, with our choices and their consequences in similar progression- is clearly not so for God, whom we can't begin to understand, and isn't even founded on what we know to be the case in modern physics.

I think this debate is partially a result of our being stuck in incorrect understandings of time, space, cause-effect events, and how this might relate to an omnipotent, omniscient Being that exists outside all this (eternal and infinite- basically without placement in space-time). I've been reading some really interesting work by astrophysicists and it's dovetailing nicely with my long-held suspicions that much of our difficulties with interpreting the scriptures and the nature of the relationship between God and humanity, as well as Christ's gift of salvation, are a result of our mental limitations rather than real contradiction.

well said.

 

[9Harmony]

Kindest Regards, 9Harmony!

It's been quite a while, I trust you are well!



Of course, this returns us to asking why G-d would create those such as satan, if He knew the choices they would make ahead of time.

I am thinking that we (collectively, the world's religions) have placed an inordinate focus on ourselves regarding this subject. G-d loves us, that much I feel I can grant. But just how far will He (let alone should He) intervene in our lives. Is not the goal and purpose for us to interject ourselves into His life?

I guess what I am trying to say, aren't we a little presumptuous believing we can sit passively by and demand G-d do for us, when the reality is that G-d is looking for us to do for Him? We must do for Him in order to show our love; to manifest, exercise and grow our love. In the process, love being what it is, we also grow to love everybody and everything that is of G-d.

Just a random thought.

Hi Juantoo,

yes i am well, Thank you, I trust you are too.

ummm...well i'm not sure how much i can say here, i just realized i'm in the Christian section.

As a Baha'i, i view Satan as our lower nature, we all have the capacity to do evil, it depends on whether we turn towards God or away from Him.

and i agree, our words and deeds need to be in alignment. We need to act, words without action are hollow, meaningless.

And yes, Love! if we can learn to see in each face, the face of God, and love each other for the sake of God, this world would be alot nicer place. For we are all God's children, He loves us all unconditionally. that is what we should strive for. little by little, day by day.

Have a great day!

 

[cavalier]

BTW, if we go by the Good Book, the chosen are the Jews, not Christians.

Yes, the Jews were obviously God's chosen nation, but this does not mean that Gentiles cannot also be chosen. Looking at Romans 4:9-17, we see that the promise God made to Abraham was made because of Abraham's faith (faith which is a gift from God Epesians 2:8). We see also that if we have the same faith, circumcised or not, Jewish or not, we can share in the same promise and blessing.


9Is this blessing then only for the circumcised, or also for the uncircumcised? We say that faith was counted to Abraham as righteousness. 10How then was it counted to him? Was it before or after he had been circumcised? It was not after, but before he was circumcised. 11He received the sign of circumcision as a seal of the righteousness that he had by faith while he was still uncircumcised. The purpose was to make him the father of all who believe without being circumcised, so that righteousness would be counted to them as well, 12and to make him the father of the circumcised who are not merely circumcised but who also walk in the footsteps of the faith that our father Abraham had before he was circumcised.
13For the promise to Abraham and his offspring that he would be heir of the world did not come through the law but through the righteousness of faith. 14For if it is the adherents of the law who are to be the heirs, faith is null and the promise is void. 15For the law brings wrath, but where there is no law there is no transgression.

16That is why it depends on faith, in order that the promise may rest on grace and be guaranteed to all his offspring--not only to the adherent of the law but also to the one who shares the faith of Abraham, who is the father of us all, 17as it is written, "I have made you the father of many nations"--

 

[cavalier]

Many people are suggesting that it is in the nature of mankind to seek out God. This is pretty much what I believe in also, but it seems to me that this view runs contrary to the teaching of the Bible, see Romans 3:11 "'..there is no one who seeks God.'"

I also cannot get around John 6:44-45, No one can come to me unless drawn by the Father who sent me...It is written in the prophets, "And they shall all be taught by God." Everyone who has heard and learned from the Father comes to me..."

Everyone who is called will come, no one who is not called will come.

 

[cavalier]

Interesting reading, a defense of predestination by a genuine advocate of the doctrine.

An excerpt:
That brings us to our topic. Many people who reject the doctrine of unconditional election do so because it seems unjust to them. Of course, God can do nothing unjust, so election is thrown immediately out the window. They reject it because they believe it is an attack on God's justice, and thus an attack on God himself. The reason they believe it is an attack on God's justice is because they set up the wrong model in their minds. It stems from a fundamental misunderstanding of what unconditional election is.

http://teampyro.blogspot.com/2006/04/bad-thinking-and-unconditional.html

 

[Quahom1]

Many people are suggesting that it is in the nature of mankind to seek out God. This is pretty much what I believe in also, but it seems to me that this view runs contrary to the teaching of the Bible, see Romans 3:11 "'..there is no one who seeks God.'"

I also cannot get around John 6:44-45, No one can come to me unless drawn by the Father who sent me...It is written in the prophets, "And they shall all be taught by God." Everyone who has heard and learned from the Father comes to me..."

Everyone who is called will come, no one who is not called will come.

It also states that "many are called, but few are chosen". Why? They refuse to meet the criteria to be chosen. They refuse to give up what they have here (it seems so important to them that they can't let go).

my thoughts

v/r

Q

 

[Thomas]

Hi Cavalier -

The Catholic Church refutes predestination absolutely. 'God predestines no one to go to hell' the Council of Orange II (529) and Trent (1534)

BTW - the argument at: http://teampyro.blogspot.com/2006/04/bad-thinking-and-unconditional.html
is equally wrong - both models assume God chooses whom He will save, and whom He will abandon, by some arbitary process, some kind of lottery (straws, a flip of the coin, odd numbers only - who can say?) so 'less wrong' - but still poor philosophy.

The Council of Constantinople stated:
"one God and one Father from whom all things are, and one Lord Jesus Christ through whom all things are, and one Holy Spirit in whom all things are."

The last is the key:

God is omniscient and omnipresent, but He is not present as a disinterested observer, nor does his omniscience mean that he doesn't give a damn who lives and who dies.

How can God comdemn those whom He loves, even in their weakness and sin?

How can God deny the invocation of His son moments before His crucifixion, "Father forgive them, for they know not what they do?" for He did not say, "Father forgive him, and her ... and him, and that one over there, but not the others ... and certainly not him ... "

Christ in his Resurrection carried the wounds to His Father in Heaven - as a mark of his triumph over death, but also as a mark of His incorporation of our fallen humanity - look, Father, upon your Son and upon the wounds He bears for our sake - we are perfected by, through and in those wounds - wounds which He bore for all, without condition.

God is present in every moment, He seeks us out at every turn and pours His grace into every human activity towards the good, but man is not obliged to accept nor respond to God's gift (were it so, then it would not be a gift but an obligation, and man would not be free but a slave, no more, an automaton).

It is axiomatic that the Good does not will anything other than Itself.

God was present when Judas made his fateful decision, but God did not make his decision for him, nor did he over-write Judas' free choice - and in those last moments Christ forsaw what Judas was to do, but did not say 'don't do it' but rather 'do what you feel you must do'.

If we are predetermined, then the Cross is absolutely pointlesss, as is all and any human endeavour.

The Catholic Church holds that to be damned a wilful turning away from God is necessary, and such a turning away must persist, wilfully and knowingly, until the end. Man is then damned by his own free choice and determination.

Rather a God who knows what decisions we make, yet a God who never ceases trying to show us 'a better way' - it is we who actively deny the incarnation of the Divine Word in the soul, not God who ceases to speak to us.

Rather the Catholic Church speaks of a twofold Mystery - of God and of man - in which all are called to partake of our own free will in the realisation of God's eternal Glory.

God wants man to love Him because man chooses to love Him, not because man is obliged or coerced or predetermined.

That Primordial Freedom is a dignity accorded to humanity, a gift of God that transcends all creation, and even our own created nature.

Cherish your freedom then, a gift from the love of God, given to us through the love of God, lived fully in the love of God.

Thomas

 

[cavalier]

Hey Thomas

Thankyou for that, and btw good luck with your degree.

I like what you're saying and more so, how you've said it. I wonder though, how you reconcile this with the Bible verses I gave?

Also, you wrote,

but man is not obliged to accept nor respond to God's gift (were it so, then it would not be a gift but an obligation, and man would not be free but a slave, no more, an automaton).

surely though we are, and must be slaves to God's will. Whether God has predetermined everything, or wishes for us to have free will (within the rules and parameters of God's creation), we are slave to that desire.

If we are predetermined, then the Cross is absolutely pointlesss, as is all and any human endeavour.

You're second point first, why is it necessary that human endeavour have a point?

As to your first point, no the cross isn't pointless. All, including the cross is, done for the glory of God and Christ Jesus. The cross is necessary for the raising up (both physically and in a sense of his glorification) of Christ Jesus.

 

[Thomas]

OK - to tackle the questions in reverse order:

As to your first point, no the cross isn't pointless. All, including the cross is, done for the glory of God and Christ Jesus. The cross is necessary for the raising up (both physically and in a sense of his glorification) of Christ Jesus.

Yes, but for our sake - remember Jesus said "Before Abraham was, I am" (John 8:56). That is not a conditional statement.

why is it necessary that human endeavour have a point?

Because without a purpose, life is meaningless. Or put another way, this is the goal of philosophy. Man asks the querstion 'why?' and can come up with only one of two answers, there is a reason, and necessarily a reason for all things, or there is no reason at all. It is a question of faith, and it is erroneous to assume that the philosophers were not men of profound faith.

What the point of that endeavour is, is another question, and in truth each should examine his/her own life, and ask it. In my own lifre something, someone, calls. I want to know who - not what - that is.

surely though we are, and must be slaves to God's will. Whether God has predetermined everything, or wishes for us to have free will (within the rules and parameters of God's creation), we are slave to that desire.

But surely does not the evidence of the world say otherwise? Is not the evidence of the world a demonstrabnle fact that man is a slave to his own wants and desires, his apetites and his passions?

If God wanted slaves, or if slavery was the Royal Road, then love would nevver have reared its head. The master has no love for his slave, the slave has no love for his master.

Put another way: Supposing God were to furnish and absolute and irrefutable proof of His existence. Would we be free? I think not. Freedom would not be an option, there would only be necessity, and obligation. Our responses would, in effect, be 'hard wired'.

Now look again - medical science, a number of sciences, have come up with significant evidcencve to suggest that smoking, or lack of exercise, is a major contributor to poor health and a reduced life span. Have we quit smoking, and taken up exercise? No. Do we still drink and drive even though every statistic shows we place another's life in jeopardy? Yes we do (and as a motor cyclist, my favourite bugbear, people who use mobile phones while they drive).

What does this tell us? That we are slaves to our apetites and passions, even at the risk of our own lives...

... a moment's madness: have you ever considered how much time and money we in the affluent west invest in hiding from our neighbour? In cosmetics, in surgery, in cosmetic surgery, in therapy, in 'growth', in 'fitness', in a bigger house, a bigger car, a bigger whatever ... in bigger, in better, in more ... just to hide from another who we actually are, and rather present them with an image of how we would like them to think of us ...?

Are we not still clothed in the shame of Adam, hiding from each other (and ourselves)

... end of the homily for today.

... where were we ... ah yes ...

surely though we are, and must be slaves to God's will.
Not slave, but servant - and what's the difference? Love.

Whether God has predetermined everything,
He has predestined the world, certainly...

or wishes for us to have free will
which He does, demonstrably...

(within the rules and parameters of God's creation),
a necessary qualification ...

we are slave to that desire.
Yet still I call it love, because God does not coerce us, He calls us.

If we we truly to be slaves, we would surely have tasted the whip long before now...

God delights in His creature:
And out of the ground the LORD God formed every beast of the field, and every fowl of the air; and brought [them] unto Adam to see what he would call them: and whatsoever Adam called every living creature, that [was] the name thereof.
Genesis 2:19

... aside ...
Can you imagine the conversation? God: "A gir-what? a giraffe, what kind of name is giraffe?" Adam: "Well what kind of horse has a neck like that?" God: "Fair point."
Adam: "And I shall call that a mongoose." God: "So you're telling me a small furry animal with four legs, snout and tail is a species of goose?" Adam: "Yep." God: "Oh, I knew I was going to regret this."
... back to the point...

It's worth reading John 4. The discussion with the Samaritan woman at the well is profound on so many levels - least of all that the testimony of a woman carries no weight in Jewish law - women didn't testify at trials - so why bother talking to women?

It is also, by the by, the longest discourse between Christ and a single person recorded in scripture. Then why a woman? And why, for the love of all, a samaritan woman? Jews had nothing to do with samaritans.

But it is about destiny.

+++

Paul was building his congregations in faith, speaking words to strengthen their hearts in the love of God, but he was not making things up:

"neither knoweth any man the Father, save the Son, and [he] to whomsoever the Son will reveal [him]." (Matthew 11:27)

"No man can come to me, except the Father which hath sent me draw him: and I will raise him up at the last day." (John 6:44)

Now these sound pretty exclusive, and elitist, and the smug Christian can sit on his fat behind and think, "I'm saved, and you're not, fnar, fnar."

But then Jesus said:
"Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost" (Matthew 28:29)

"Go ye into all the world, and preach the gospel to every creature."
Mark 16:16-17

"And that repentance and remission of sins should be preached in his name among all nations,"
Luke 24:47

The Christian is not called to exault above the world,
we are called to a service to the world.
we are 'sent' into the world, and there is a difference between preaching, and crowing.

Now God knows it is in the nature of His creature that some will receive the word, and some will turn away, but nevertheless he will not deny even the most obdurate sinner the same chance as he offers everyone else, it is the paradox of love - and it is that, the incomprehension at the thought of a God who might love the sinner as much as the saint, that his Mercy might truly 'know no bounds', the predestinationist cannot come to terms with.

Some say Faith is blind, but then so is Love,
and in the Supernal Darkness,
Love and Faith coincide in the Ground of Being.

Thomas

 

[cavalier]

Hey Thomas

As to your first point, no the cross isn't pointless. All, including the cross is, done for the glory of God and Christ Jesus. The cross is necessary for the raising up (both physically and in a sense of his glorification) of Christ Jesus.

Yes, but for our sake - remember Jesus said "Before Abraham was, I am" (John 8:56). That is not a conditional statement.

I wonder if you would you explain your thinking a little here, I don't understand how that quote supports your point.

why is it necessary that human endeavour have a point?

Because without a purpose, life is meaningless. Or put another way, this is the goal of philosophy. Man asks the querstion 'why?' and can come up with only one of two answers, there is a reason, and necessarily a reason for all things, or there is no reason at all. It is a question of faith, and it is erroneous to assume that the philosophers were not men of profound faith.

I see now that I did not fully express my thoughts before. Those who believe in predestination would, I think, assert that human endeavour has no point in of itself, rather the point of human life is for the glory of God, not for ourselves.

If God wanted slaves, or if slavery was the Royal Road, then love would nevver have reared its head. The master has no love for his slave, the slave has no love for his master.

Fine, exchange master and slave for creator and created, many creations have no choice but to obey their creator, yet the creator still loves them. Ok, man's creations cannot yet love back, but God is a far more skilled creator, and his creations far more sophisticated than ours

Put another way: Supposing God were to furnish and absolute and irrefutable proof of His existence. Would we be free? I think not.

I have no problem with this.

Now look again - medical science, a number of sciences, have come up with significant evidcencve to suggest that smoking, or lack of exercise, is a major contributor to poor health and a reduced life span. Have we quit smoking, and taken up exercise? No. Do we still drink and drive even though every statistic shows we place another's life in jeopardy? Yes we do (and as a motor cyclist, my favourite bugbear, people who use mobile phones while they drive).

What does this tell us? That we are slaves to our apetites and passions, even at the risk of our own lives...

Indeed, because this is allowed by God. Sin is allowed because it is an essential part of God's plan.

If we we truly to be slaves, we would surely have tasted the whip long before now...

surely we have already tasted the whip, the flood, old testament destruction of cities

God delights in His creature:

I would agree

It's worth reading John 4. The discussion with the Samaritan woman at the well is profound on so many levels - least of all that the testimony of a woman carries no weight in Jewish law - women didn't testify at trials - so why bother talking to women?

It is also, by the by, the longest discourse between Christ and a single person recorded in scripture. Then why a woman? And why, for the love of all, a samaritan woman? Jews had nothing to do with samaritans.

But it is about destiny.

I don't get your point.

Now these sound pretty exclusive, and elitist, and the smug Christian can sit on his fat behind and think, "I'm saved, and you're not, fnar, fnar."

I would have to say though that from my experience of Christians who believe this doctrine, I have not known of any who are smug. In fact this would just not make sense. A predestinationist Christian cannot be smug, he or she has realised that they have not been saved because of anything they have done, it is not because of their merit or worth. They realise that the only worth they have is through working for the glory of God. It is an extremely humble stance to take.

To answer your next point, this "working for the glory of God" is the reason why those who believe in predestination are usually very evangelical.

But then Jesus said:
"Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost" (Matthew 28:29)

"Go ye into all the world, and preach the gospel to every creature."
Mark 16:16-17

"And that repentance and remission of sins should be preached in his name among all nations,"
Luke 24:47

The Christian is not called to exault above the world,
we are called to a service to the world.

Now God knows it is in the nature of His creature that some will receive the word, and some will turn away, but nevertheless he will not deny even the most obdurate sinner the same chance as he offers everyone else, it is the paradox of love - and it is that, the incomprehension at the thought of a God who might love the sinner as much as the saint, that his Mercy might truly 'know no bounds', the predestinationist cannot come to terms with.

Hold on, you're obviously a clever and knowlegable guy, so I have to wonder at what you're writing here. Why do you make out that predestinationists believe that God saves good people and not the bad ones? You must know enough to know that those who accept predestination do not believe that God closes his door on the obdurate sinner. From the Bible we know that God welcomes and uses sinners, look at Jacob who was chosen over his far more worthy brother, Esau.
Actually predestinationists believe all are equal in the sight of God, "all have sinned, and all fall short.."
Actually it is only the doctrine of free will that would support this false assertion. Under free will we are saved when we choose God, in short we are saved because we make a good decision. In this we could claim to be better than the next man who has not made that good decision.

You say there are things that the predestinationist cannot come to terms with, but it seems to me that those who profess free-will cannot come to terms with the Bible texts with which I started this thread.

 

[Thomas]

OK - to recap the Catholic position.

The cross is necessary for the raising up (both physically and in a sense of his glorification) of Christ Jesus.

Jesus said "I and my Father are one" (John 10:30) - His mission and His ministry was for the benefit of mankind, not Himself. Before the world was created Jesus was - the was the point of my reference - that is what so enraged the Jews, and that was the accusation they made against Him.

Those who believe in predestination would, I think, assert that human endeavour has no point in of itself, rather the point of human life is for the glory of God, not for ourselves.
Why does God need to demonstrate His own glory, I would reply. God is infinitely beyond anything in the created order - and by virtue of that, there is nothing in the created order that can hold a candle to the Glory of the Lord.

Participation in the Lord, which is what the Catholic believes, is something else. The divinisation of man - the Doctrine of Theosis - is how we express it.

Philosophically, if human endeavour has no point nor purpose with regard to God, there is no reason for man to know of God's existence. Why would God reveal himself to man if that revelation was pointless?

Fine, exchange master and slave for creator and created, many creations have no choice but to obey their creator, yet the creator still loves them.
I don't think so. Slavery and love are not synonymous. The slave lacks the one thing the mamster possesses - freedom - and that will ever stand between them.

Ok, man's creations cannot yet love back, but God is a far more skilled creator, and his creations far more sophisticated than ours
You've lost me here - what creations of ours?

History shows ample examples of those who love in His name, and for every saint we know, there is a countless number we don't know.

Sin is allowed because it is an essential part of God's plan.
If that were true, then the serpent in the Garden would be God, and God would be a liar, surely? If not God, then the serpent would at least be a liar on God's behalf?

God said, emphatically, 'do not eat of the tree' and yet man ate, knowingly and of his own free will, and under no illusion that he was doing anything other than disobeying his creator.

This is the source and origin of sin - it lies with man, not God.

The plan of God's salvation is because of sin ... God might subsequently utilise eveything towards the realisation of that plan, but the responsibility of the fall lies with man, not God.

surely we have already tasted the whip, the flood, old testament destruction of cities
Then why has God stopped?

But it is about destiny.
I don't get your point.

A predestinationist Christian cannot be smug, he or she has realised that they have not been saved because of anything they have done, it is not because of their merit or worth. They realise that the only worth they have is through working for the glory of God. It is an extremely humble stance to
take.

This is contradictory, surely? If they have no merit nor worth, then how can anything they do be to the glory of God? Either a man's actions have merit, or they do not. If God says 'you are chosen' and therefore subsequent to this his works have merit, then merit lies still with God, not with man's actions, and again we end up with a man whose being is, in itself, worthless.

The Catholic doctrine of Grace is clear on this point, man can accomplish nothing without the Grace of God, even Faithg in God is a Grace, and the grace of God is a gratuitous gift, but man can co-operate by his willingness, or he can resist by his obduracy.

The Parable of the Prodigal Son is not a parable of predestination.

To answer your next point, this "working for the glory of God" is the reason why those who believe in predestination are usually very evangelical.
But again, they are not working for the glory of God, God is working His own self-glorification through them? They have no choice in the matter, after all?

Hold on, you're obviously a clever and knowlegable guy, so I have to wonder at what you're writing here. Why do you make out that predestinationists believe that God saves good people and not the bad ones? You must know enough to know that those who accept predestination do not believe that God closes his door on the obdurate sinner. From the Bible we know that God welcomes and uses sinners, look at Jacob who was chosen over his far more worthy brother, Esau.

From the above I would say that 'good' or 'bad' doesn't enter into it. God chooses some people, and not others, regardless. Whether they are good or bad would appear to be immaterial and of no consequence?

(I would also question the word 'welcome' - a welcome seems very insidious to me when the welcomed has no choice in the matter...)

Actually predestinationists believe all are equal in the sight of God, "all have sinned, and all fall short.."
So do Catholics, but then Catholics are not predestinationists. If I were a predestinationist, I would say that I cannot sin - a sin is an offence against God - because some sin, and are chosen, others do not sin, and are not chosen, so the degree of sin becomes meaningless - sin does not figure in the computation of salvation.

Unless you say that by being predestined, they only sin a little but even before they are saved ... or being predestined from the womb, God made certain they could not sin to any great degree from the outset ... or being predestined they choose not to sin, which I would say is the same as the prior statement, they 'choose' not to sin because they were predetermined not to choose ... whatever way I look at it, predestination is a limitation of the one thing that sets me apart from the animals - free will.

Actually it is only the doctrine of free will that would support this false assertion. Under free will we are saved when we choose God, in short we are saved because we make a good decision.
But who makes the decision? If I make the decision, then that is the exercise of my free will, and i can equally will not to make it. If God makes the decision, then my will is not free.

You can't retro-fit the argument to say 'He is saved because he made a free decision which God predestined him to make.' One cannot be both predestined and free.

God can predict - this is something else - as Jesus told Peter he would betray him. Did Jesus set Peter up? No, but Jesus forsaw what was going to happen, and used it to his advantage to teach Peter a lesson - but He did not predetermine Peter's betrayal.

In this we could claim to be better than the next man who has not made that good decision.
Perhaps, but that is a dangerous path to walk, therein lies pride ... remember the parable of the rich man and the publican in the temple - Luke 18:10-14

but it seems to me that those who profess free-will cannot come to terms with the Bible texts with which I started this thread.
The problem with texts out of context is that one can extract a line of scripture to justify anything one likes. The Catholic position, and moreso the Jewish (to a phenomenal degree) is that any text can only be understood against the backdrop of the whole, its hermeneutic.

What need of God to sit in judgement of that which was already determined?

Why did Christ travel, preaching, teaching, if everything is a done deal?

Thomas

 

[cavalier]

Thomas

I could go through your post point by point and show all the places where you're being misleading about, or ignoring the points I'm making. You also take points out of context, and mix up threads of different arguments. There are places where you make emphatic points that I'm in agreement with. Even one place where you write about, and base an argument upon, what you would say if you believed in predsestination, the fact that no actual predestinationist would claim this appears to make no difference to you.
Reading your post, there are moments when I feel like pulling out my hair in frustration.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but it would appear that you don't believe that all is for the glory of God. If this is true then predestination isn't possible.
You also seem to work from a starting point that we have free will, As far as I am concerned however (and as much as it is an affront to my philosophical ideas of why am I here? and what am I doing?) I no see no reason to believe that this is the case.

People who believe in predestination do not do so because they think it is the best, or nicest, or most reasonable way to explain things. They believe it because they see it, based on the Bible, as being the real state of things.

 

[Quahom1]

...People who believe in predestination do not do so because they think it is the best, or nicest, or most reasonable way to explain things. They believe it because they see it, based on the Bible, as being the real state of things.

A robber enters a convenience store, pulls a gun on the store clerk and demands the cash. The clerk complies and the robber backs towards the door. At the door, the robber levels the gun at the clerk and pauses, decides, then pulls the trigger. The clerk turns sideways as the robber fires and is struck in the arm instead of the chest, and falls to the floor, while the robber flees thinking "no witnesses".

Hours later, the police view the security tape showing the robbery and the gunman firing at the clerk. At the moment the police are watching the video, it is no longer possible for the robber to change his mind about shooting the clerk (or robbing the store to begin with), however this does not mean that the police are forcing the robber to fire his gun at the clerk. He already made his own choice. The police are merely observing the results of that choice.

Similarly, God already has that video feed that the police viewed. Therefore His omniscience means that God knows our free will decisions before we make them, but in no way does it mean God forces us to make those decisions.

How can this be? God is not confined to time and space for one thing. Our time is more or less linear, not God's.

It also means that we have many choices for each and every moment of the day, that could change the entire situation, and God being infinite sees every version of reality that can result because of those choices.

The robber for example could have chosen to not rob, or not shoot, or give the money back, or go back home before going into the store.

The clerk could have chosen not to turn, or not give the money, or not opened the store that day.

Any of these choices would have altered the future outcome from what did happen, and God would have the ability to observe any of the new realities.

Biblical case in point is Paul on the road to Damascus. God said "Paul, listen to me". Paul said no. God said "ok", and gave Paul time to think about things. Paul's will, (the drive and zealousness in which he carried out his goals and purpose), God wanted left in tact. God wanted Paul on His team. But Paul's heart was a different matter. God set out to change Paul's heart. Same force of will, same drive, different purpose. Instead of persecuting Christians, God wanted Paul to win Christians. Paul originally thought he was doing the right thing, and God was quite aware of that. But God wanted Paul to come out of the darkness, and see that Christianity was not a threat to Judeasm, but rather the fulfillment of Judeasm.

After some quiet time in the dark, Paul made his choice, and his eyes opened to the truth of the matter, and the rest is "history".

my thoughts

v/r

Q

 

[BlaznFattyz]

god is indeed outside our time, matter, and space dimension, he cannot be contained in it because he is all powerful, omnipresnt, infinite, all knowing and all seeing--that is the nature of god. we on the other hand have a hard time describing or understanding god using human attributes, but like barney says, use your imagination.

we are making an unscripted reality tv show right now.

god went to heaven's blockbuster and rented it before the show was made.