Doctrine of Predestination

[crossnote]

The Book of Job is pretty difficult to take literally, and I don't believe it is meant to be. It's a well-crafted example of Jewish wisdom literature. The Satan of Job is "the satan" of Jewish theology, a member in good standing of the divine council who serves as a useful jester/agitator/irritant. For a Christian to take the Book of Job literally requires more theological ball-juggling than I care to do.

That being said, the Book of Job is extremely profound and surely divinely inspired even if it is fiction. It's a meditation on the inexplicable evil in the world and the suffering of seemingly good people. Job's well-meaning friends, who have all the wrong answers, exemplify human pride. God's speech at the end hammers home the main theme of the book: God is completely transcendent. His ways are not our ways, his thoughts are not our thoughts. He doesn't answer to us.

To take Job literally is almost the antithesis of the point the book is making. In any event, I don't see that it has any relevance to the doctrine of predestination. Calvin apparently didn't either. He didn't include Job in his commentaries, but he did rely on Job in his preaching on the themes of human suffering and God's sovereignty.

That's definitely one of the areas I depart from Calvin, his overly non-literal approach to Scripture.

 

[Dorothy Mae]

This is a philosophical argument not a Scriptural one. I believe God is moral, but at the same time (that we mortals cannot understand) does ordain moral evil. I know I am wasting my time but:

Isa_55:8 For my thoughts are not your thoughts, neither are your ways my ways, declares the LORD. 9 For as the heavens are higher than the earth, so are my ways higher than your ways and my thoughts than your thoughts.

Rom 11:33 O the depth of the riches both of the wisdom and knowledge of God! how unsearchable are his judgments, and his ways past finding out!

But to most people His ways are not past finding out. Just use human logic and philosophy and put God in your box.

It’s actually a practical argument as well as scriptural. To any who come to God must believe He is and a rewarder of those who seek Him. Now, that’s a scriptural quote. Do you now recognize it?

It is true that his ways are beyond understanding by trying to
figure them out. But they are not beyond Him explaining. Moses understood the ways of God. The Israelites only saw his deeds.

Let’s look at Isaiah 55 in full:

Seek the LORD while he may be found; call upon him while he is near; 7let the wicked forsake his way, and the unrighteous man his thoughts; let him return to the LORD, that he may have compassion on him,
and to our God, for he will abundantly pardon.
8For my thoughts are not your thoughts, neither are your ways my ways, declares the LORD.
9For as the heavens are higher than the earth, so are my ways higher than your ways
and my thoughts than your thoughts.

The ways of the Lord are past understanding for the wicked man. He tells man to seek Him. Seek and you shall find, Jesus said.

Now I do admit that many who don’t bother to seek Him will make up what they think are His ways. They do reflect human logic and philosophy and so are easy to point out as a product of human imagination. But the reality of fake dollar bills doesn’t mean there aren’t real ones. It is possible to understand Him, his reasons, deeds and, in short, ways.

But if you subscribe to Calvinism, you will never get there, I’m afraid. That’s not a prejudice. It’s the shield of believing that God does moral wrong that prevents one from understanding Him inherent in Calvinism.

 

[Dorothy Mae]

That's definitely one of the areas I depart from Calvin, his overly non-literal approach to Scripture.

Calvin was a trained lawyer, not a theologian.

 

[crossnote]

Calvin was a trained lawyer, not a theologian.

He may be a stickler for detail, but his law practice must have flopped, not taking things literal.

 

[Dorothy Mae]

He may be a stickler for detail, but his law practice must have flopped, not taking things literal.

No matter. He got a much better job, the head of government for a large city…combines a lawyers dream and fame.

 

[Niblo]

That could just as easy be Jesus telling anti-Calvinists that by rejecting predestination and election, they were basically rejecting Him. I've heard many say "I cannot love a God like that." Well if God is like that, then aren't they rejecting the true God for the "nicer, more loving, jolly old Santa Clause" god they have made up in their minds"

I don’t believe in Santa Claus. Neither do I accept that the Beloved is one who sets people up to fail.

In Revelation, Yeshua (ʿalayhi as-salām) says:

“Behold, I stand at the door and knock. If anyone hears My voice and opens the door, I will come in to him and dine with him, and he with Me” (3:20).

The message is clear, Yeshua (whom you believe to be God) never tires of offering his companionship to those who will accept him.

Note that the invitation is open to anyone. This bears repeating: It is open to anyone. To anyone. To anyone. To anyone at all; and not just to an elected few.

What is the sense in Yeshua offering, to all people, eternal companionship, with him, in Heaven, if most of the invited are – according to Calvin – predestined to burn in Hell?

Yeshua said:

'Jerusalem, Jerusalem, you that kill the prophets and stone those who are sent to you! How often have I longed to gather your children together, as a hen gathers her chicks under her wings, and you refused! (Matthew 23:37; my emphasis).

Why would the Beloved (through Yeshua) say this – and why exhibit such longing, such sorrow – if the one thing preventing Him from gathering these folk together was His very own choice to deny them that privilege in the first place?

These folk were not prevented (by the Beloved) from joining with Him; they refused to do so.

Yeshua said:

'Which one of you with a hundred sheep, if he lost one, would fail to leave the ninety-nine in the desert and go after the missing one till he found it? And when he found it, would he not joyfully take it on his shoulders and then, when he got home, call together his friends and neighbours, saying to them, "Rejoice with me, I have found my sheep that was lost." In the same way, I tell you, there will be more rejoicing in Heaven over one sinner repenting than over ninety-nine upright people who have no need of repentance.’ (Luke 15:4-7).

The message is clear:

The Beloved desires that all be saved; moreover, He actively seeks out those who – by their own actions – have gone astray. Having found them – and having accepted their repentance – He delights in carrying them home; reconciled to Himself.

What sense is there in seeking out a lost sheep if this sheep is predestined to fail?

 

[Dorothy Mae]

I don’t believe in Santa Claus. Neither do I accept that the Beloved is one who sets people up to fail.

In Revelation, Yeshua (ʿalayhi as-salām) says:

“Behold, I stand at the door and knock. If anyone hears My voice and opens the door, I will come in to him and dine with him, and he with Me” (3:20).

The message is clear, Yeshua (whom you believe to be God) never tires of offering his companionship to those who will accept him.

Note that the invitation is open to anyone. This bears repeating: It is open to anyone. To anyone. To anyone. To anyone at all; and not just to an elected few.

What is the sense in Yeshua offering, to all people, eternal companionship, with him, in Heaven, if most of the invited are – according to Calvin – predestined to burn in Hell?

Yeshua said:

'Jerusalem, Jerusalem, you that kill the prophets and stone those who are sent to you! How often have I longed to gather your children together, as a hen gathers her chicks under her wings, and you refused! (Matthew 23:37; my emphasis).

Why would the Beloved (through Yeshua) say this – and why exhibit such longing, such sorrow – if the one thing preventing Him from gathering these folk together was His very own choice to deny them that privilege in the first place?

These folk were not prevented (by the Beloved) from joining with Him; they refused to do so.

Yeshua said:

'Which one of you with a hundred sheep, if he lost one, would fail to leave the ninety-nine in the desert and go after the missing one till he found it? And when he found it, would he not joyfully take it on his shoulders and then, when he got home, call together his friends and neighbours, saying to them, "Rejoice with me, I have found my sheep that was lost." In the same way, I tell you, there will be more rejoicing in Heaven over one sinner repenting than over ninety-nine upright people who have no need of repentance.’ (Luke 15:4-7).

The message is clear:

The Beloved desires that all be saved; moreover, He actively seeks out those who – by their own actions – have gone astray. Having found them – and having accepted their repentance – He delights in carrying them home; reconciled to Himself.

What sense is there in seeking out a lost sheep if this sheep is predestined to fail?

Beautifully said

 

[Niblo]

Beautifully said

Thank you, Dorothy. You're very kind.

Peace be on you.

 

[Dorothy Mae]

Thank you, Dorothy. You're very kind.

Peace be on you.

Means a lot to me, Niblo. Another poster called me “ungentle” because I challenged just opinion. I tell the truth. Some aren’t used to the truth.

 

[Niblo]

Means a lot to me, Niblo. Another poster called me “ungentle” because I challenged just opinion. I tell the truth. Some aren’t used to the truth.

Indeed.

'People will generally accept facts as truth only if the facts agree with what they already believe.' (Andy Rooney).

But only because they are predestined to behave this way!

Peace.

 

[Whatever]

I don’t believe in Santa Claus. Neither do I accept that the Beloved is one who sets people up to fail.

You don't believe in the "Beloved" anyhow. You are listed as not a Christian.

 

[Whatever]

It’s actually a practical argument as well as scriptural. To any who come to God must believe He is and a rewarder of those who seek Him. Now, that’s a scriptural quote. Do you now recognize it?

Yes, but it doesn't get into the metaphysical facts about how or why a person believes.

Romans 3: 9 What then? Are we better than they? Not at all; for we have already charged that both Jews and Greeks are all under sin; 10 as it is written,“There is none righteous, not even one;
11 There is none who understands,
There is none who seeks for God;
12 All have turned aside, together they have become useless;
There is none who does good,
There is not even one.”

Now you are going to try to pull the trick and say Paul is quoting an OT scripture that was talking about Israel.
Yes, he is, but here he is universalizing it - you know "Jews and Greeks."

So, how do you deal with "rewarder of those who seek Him" with "there is none who seeks for God?"

How about it is God Himself that makes people willing to come to Him?
Romans 9:16 So then it does not depend on the man who wills or the man who runs, but on God who has mercy.

Will = Greek 2309 - ethelō
to determine, by implication to wish, that is, be inclined to

Philippians 2:13 for it is God who is at work in you, both to will and to work for His good pleasure.

Hey, there is that same Greek word Greek 2309 - ethelō again.

It doesn't depend upon the man who wills, because it is God who works in you to will and work.

So yes, God is a rewarder of those who seek Him. No problem.

 

[Dorothy Mae]

Yes, but it doesn't get into the metaphysical facts about how or why a person believes.

That is beyond this simple exchange. If you don’t believe in free will, then you have your answer. If you do, it’s extremely complex.

Romans 3: 9 What then? Are we better than they? Not at all; for we have already charged that both Jews and Greeks are all under sin; 10 as it is written,“There is none righteous, not even one;
11 There is none who understands,
There is none who seeks for God;
12 All have turned aside, together they have become useless;
There is none who does good,
There is not even one.”

That was saying the Jews in general are no better as Paul wrote. I can give you lots of scripture where a person or persons sought the Lord.

Now you are going to try to pull the trick and say Paul is quoting an OT scripture that was talking about Israel.
Yes, he is, but here he is universalizing it - you know "Jews and Greeks."

Except Paul SAID THE jews aren’t better.

So, how do you deal with "rewarder of those who seek Him" with "there is none who seeks for God?"

Some seek him. The quote referred to a particular point in time, not always.

How about it is God Himself that makes people willing to come to Him?
Romans 9:16 So then it does not depend on the man who wills or the man who runs, but on God who has mercy.

Doesn’t say “God wills” but “God has mercy.”

Will = Greek 2309 - ethelō
to determine, by implication to wish, that is, be inclined to

Philippians 2:13 for it is God who is at work in you, both to will and to work for His good pleasure.

We can will refuse and many do. God wills that we do His will but that is NOT forced.

Hey, there is that same Greek word Greek 2309 - ethelō again.

It doesn't depend upon the man who wills, because it is God who works in you to will and work.

You can still refuse. “Today if you hear his voice DO NOT harden your (own) heart.

So yes, God is a rewarder of those who seek Him. No problem.

Good.

 

[Whatever]

I can give you lots of scripture where a person or persons sought the Lord.

Yes, but give me one that says a person sought the Lord "of their own free will"

That underlined part above is your presuppositional metaphysical world view being forced into the passage.

Like somebody above said:
'People will generally accept facts as truth only if the facts agree with what they already believe.' (Andy Rooney).

"what they already believe." Their preconceived beliefs about reality, the nature of man, free will etc.

I didn't start out believing what I believe now. My view changed when I decided to just accept what the Scriptures say and stop trying to make them fit into my preconceived ideas. I can explain them, they seem just as unfair to me as they do to you, but let God be God.

Isaiah 43:7 Everyone who is called by My name,
And whom I have created for My glory,
Whom I have formed, even whom I have made.”
Summary: Everyone who is called my My name I have created, formed, made for my glory.

Proverbs 16:4 The Lord has made everything for its own purpose,
Even the wicked for the day of evil.
Summary: The Lord has made, formed, created everything for it's own purpose.
Those who are called by His name for His glory
The wicked for the day of evil.

I don't try to figure out how to deny the simple message they are saying because of my prior beliefs, but simply bow down to the Sovereign God revealed to me.

 

[brightfame52]

whatever

Yes, but it is more than knowing.

Of course that's the point Im making. God knows things because He determined them and brings them to pass.

 

[brightfame52]

I assure you He does not declare people to do evil to one another. You got the wrong God.

Everything is done according to Gods causative predestination, even the evil men do to one another.

 

[Dorothy Mae]

Yes, but give me one that says a person sought the Lord "of their own free will"

Because all of scriptures is based on free will and collapses without it, it isn’t mentioned same as no one sites that without the sun we will all die. There are many points accepted as foundational that aren’t mentioned. They don’t need to be. Since there is punishment, there is free will.

That underlined part above is your presuppositional metaphysical world view being forced into the passage.

No, but at all. It assumed from Genesis.

Like somebody above said:
'People will generally accept facts as truth only if the facts agree with what they already believe.' (Andy Rooney).

"what they already believe." Their preconceived beliefs about reality, the nature of man, free will etc.

The burden of proof that there is no free choice is upon you. But, of course, you can choose to freely accept the challenge or reject it.

I didn't start out believing what I believe now. My view changed when I decided to just accept what the Scriptures say and stop trying to make them fit into my preconceived ideas. I can explain them, they seem just as unfair to me as they do to you, but let God be God.

But if you think God is a puppet master, you haven’t done so.

Isaiah 43:7 Everyone who is called by My name,
And whom I have created for My glory,
Whom I have formed, even whom I have made.”
Summary: Everyone who is called my My name I have created, formed, made for my glory.

No, there’s an “and” in there indicating they aren’t the same.

Proverbs 16:4 The Lord has made everything for its own purpose,
Even the wicked for the day of evil.
Summary: The Lord has made, formed, created everything for it's own purpose.
Those who are called by His name for His glory
The wicked for the day of evil.

If a man chooses freely to be wicked, there’s a day planned for justice for him.

I don't try to figure out how to deny the simple message they are saying because of my prior beliefs, but simply bow down to the Sovereign God revealed to me.

Pretty clear that person revelation does not trump scripture.

 

[Dorothy Mae]

Everything is done according to Gods causative predestination, even the evil men do to one another.

Nothing like anything close to this in scripture but I know it comforts a number of people. If they find they were predestined with the wicked no matter what they did, won’t be so comforting.

 

[Runner]

No matter. He got a much better job, the head of government for a large city…combines a lawyers dream and fame.

Are people on a Calvinism forum really this uninformed about John Calvin? At least take 15 minutes and read the Wikipedia entry, which is quite good: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Calvin. By any standard, Calvin was a genius. He did receive legal training, which I can tell you from personal experience will hone your critical-thinking skills like nothing else, but he never worked as a lawyer. He is the single leading figure of the Protestant Reformation and widely considered one of the handful of greatest theologians who have ever lived, and his massive Institutes of the Christian Religion is one of the handful of greatest works in Christian theology. His commentaries on the Bible are still considered among the best in Protestant Christianity.

To attempt to denigrate John Calvin or minimize his importance says more about the person who foolishly attempts it than about John Calvin.

And I say all this as someone who is not a Calvinist.

I don’t believe in Santa Claus. Neither do I accept that the Beloved is one who sets people up to fail.

In Revelation, Yeshua (ʿalayhi as-salām) says:

“Behold, I stand at the door and knock. If anyone hears My voice and opens the door, I will come in to him and dine with him, and he with Me” (3:20).

The message is clear, Yeshua (whom you believe to be God) never tires of offering his companionship to those who will accept him.

Note that the invitation is open to anyone. This bears repeating: It is open to anyone. To anyone. To anyone. To anyone at all; and not just to an elected few.

What is the sense in Yeshua offering, to all people, eternal companionship, with him, in Heaven, if most of the invited are – according to Calvin – predestined to burn in Hell?

Yeshua said:

'Jerusalem, Jerusalem, you that kill the prophets and stone those who are sent to you! How often have I longed to gather your children together, as a hen gathers her chicks under her wings, and you refused! (Matthew 23:37; my emphasis).

Why would the Beloved (through Yeshua) say this – and why exhibit such longing, such sorrow – if the one thing preventing Him from gathering these folk together was His very own choice to deny them that privilege in the first place?

These folk were not prevented (by the Beloved) from joining with Him; they refused to do so.

Yeshua said:

'Which one of you with a hundred sheep, if he lost one, would fail to leave the ninety-nine in the desert and go after the missing one till he found it? And when he found it, would he not joyfully take it on his shoulders and then, when he got home, call together his friends and neighbours, saying to them, "Rejoice with me, I have found my sheep that was lost." In the same way, I tell you, there will be more rejoicing in Heaven over one sinner repenting than over ninety-nine upright people who have no need of repentance.’ (Luke 15:4-7).

The message is clear:

The Beloved desires that all be saved; moreover, He actively seeks out those who – by their own actions – have gone astray. Having found them – and having accepted their repentance – He delights in carrying them home; reconciled to Himself.

What sense is there in seeking out a lost sheep if this sheep is predestined to fail?

Just a few points:

1. It's entirely possible, as Calvin did, to construct a coherent Bible-based Calvinist theology. There is nothing goofy or unbiblical about Calvin's theology, unappealing as it may be to you or me. It does require that many verses be ignored or "explained away," but this is true of all systematic theologies.

2. It's entirely possible - obviously - to construct a coherent Bible-based non-Calvinist theology. This requires some "creativity" with the verses on which Calvin relied.

3. You posit an entirely warm-and-fuzzy Jesus who desired that all be saved. (Revelation is not where I personally look for accurate quotations from Jesus, and Calvin never wrote a commentary on it.) The Jesus of the Gospels said things like “The mystery of the kingdom of God has been given to you, but to those on the outside everything is expressed in parables, so that, they may be ever seeing but never perceiving, and ever hearing but never understanding; otherwise they might turn and be forgiven" - in addition to plenty of other things that don't quite fit the entirely-warm-and-fuzzy model.

4. It seems pretty clear from the world he created that God had no expectation that all or anything like all would be saved. If this were true, one might have expected at least a level playing field, not one in which humans not only have to confront natural evil but are plagued by supernaturally evil forces as well. By the tenets of Christian theology, certainly the large majority of humans who have ever lived have been lost. This can't have been unanticipated by God when he created the world he did, and it can't be any surprise to him now. (As I suggested on another thread this morning, this seemingly pretty awful world may be the one that God in his perfect wisdom saw would nevertheless achieve the maximal good.) Whether we follow Calvinist or Armenian theology, we would have to acknowledge that the net result of a large percentage of souls being lost is entirely consistent with Calvinism.

5. My personal objection to Calvinism is, I believe, the most legitimate one: It turns God's creation and human existence into a pointless cartoon. I would like to believe that God is bigger, better and more creative than that. On the other hand, I am struck by the fact that it really does seem to me that some people (the elect of Calvinism?) have ears to hear and others (the non-elect?) simply don't. Hence, as unappealing as I may find Calvinism, I don't pooh-pooh it or denigrate its founder.

 

[Dorothy Mae]

Are people on a Calvinism forum really this uninformed about John Calvin? At least take 15 minutes and read the Wikipedia entry, which is quite good: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Calvin. By any standard, Calvin was a genius. He did receive legal training, which I can tell you from personal experience will hone your critical-thinking skills like nothing else, but he never worked as a lawyer. He is the single leading figure of the Protestant Reformation and widely considered one of the handful of greatest theologians who have ever lived, and his massive Institutes of the Christian Religion is one of the handful of greatest works in Christian theology. His commentaries on the Bible are still considered among the best in Protestant Christianity.

To attempt to denigrate John Calvin or minimize his importance says more about the person who foolishly attempts it than about John Calvin.

And I say all this as someone who is not a Calvinist.

Just a few points:

1. It's entirely possible, as Calvin did, to construct a coherent Bible-based Calvinist theology. There is nothing goofy or unbiblical about Calvin's theology, unappealing as it may be to you or me. It does require that many verses be ignored or "explained away," but this is true of all systematic theologies.

2. It's entirely possible - obviously - to construct a coherent Bible-based non-Calvinist theology. This requires some "creativity" with the verses on which Calvin relied.

3. You posit an entirely warm-and-fuzzy Jesus who desired that all be saved. (Revelation is not where I personally look for accurate quotations from Jesus, and Calvin never wrote a commentary on it.) The Jesus of the Gospels said things like “The mystery of the kingdom of God has been given to you, but to those on the outside everything is expressed in parables, so that, they may be ever seeing but never perceiving, and ever hearing but never understanding; otherwise they might turn and be forgiven" - in addition to plenty of other things that don't quite fit the entirely-warm-and-fuzzy model.

4. It seems pretty clear from the world he created that God had no expectation that all or anything like all would be saved. If this were true, one might have expected at least a level playing field, not one in which humans not only have to confront natural evil but are plagued by supernaturally evil forces as well. By the tenets of Christian theology, certainly the large majority of humans who have ever lived have been lost. This can't have been unanticipated by God when he created the world he did, and it can't be any surprise to him now. (As I suggested on another thread this morning, this seemingly pretty awful world may be the one that God in his perfect wisdom saw would nevertheless achieve the maximal good.) Whether we follow Calvinist or Armenian theology, we would have to acknowledge that the net result of a large percentage of souls being lost is entirely consistent with Calvinism.

5. My personal objection to Calvinism is, I believe, the most legitimate one: It turns God's creation and human existence into a pointless cartoon. I would like to believe that God is bigger, better and more creative than that. On the other hand, I am struck by the fact that it really does seem to me that some people (the elect of Calvinism?) have ears to hear and others (the non-elect?) simply don't. Hence, as unappealing as I may find Calvinism, I don't pooh-pooh it or denigrate its founder.

It was very interesting to read what people who lived under him in Geneva said.