Double Predestination

Jason76

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 11, 2019
Messages
465
Age
47
Gender
Male
Religious Affiliation
Unitarian
Political Affiliation
Conservative
Marital Status
Single
Acceptance of the Trinity & Nicene Creed
No
Well, supporters claim those who oppose it are "whiny people who can't accept God's sovereignty". Nonetheless, the whole idea of Double Predestination is simply contrary to God's own moral code. Well, actually I would go so far, to also put eternal hell and torturing (as in cruelty) hell in the same boat. Anyway, how do you feel about this doctrine? Is it correct? Why do you say so?

Myself, in meshing with Christian Universalist beliefs it makes sense - but otherwise is a hideous doctrine!
 

Andrew

Matt 18:15
Joined
Aug 25, 2017
Messages
6,645
Age
39
Gender
Male
Religious Affiliation
Christian
Political Affiliation
Conservative
Marital Status
Single
Acceptance of the Trinity & Nicene Creed
Yes

atpollard

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 6, 2017
Messages
2,573
Location
Florida
Gender
Male
Religious Affiliation
Baptist
Political Affiliation
Conservative
Marital Status
Married
Acceptance of the Trinity & Nicene Creed
Yes
Well, supporters claim those who oppose it are "whiny people who can't accept God's sovereignty". Nonetheless, the whole idea of Double Predestination is simply contrary to God's own moral code. Well, actually I would go so far, to also put eternal hell and torturing (as in cruelty) hell in the same boat. Anyway, how do you feel about this doctrine? Is it correct? Why do you say so?

Myself, in meshing with Christian Universalist beliefs it makes sense - but otherwise is a hideous doctrine!
Please define Double Predestination, since different folks have very different ideas about what the term means.
I can’t answer your question until you clarify your terms.
 

MennoSota

Well-known member
Joined
Sep 24, 2017
Messages
7,102
Age
53
Gender
Male
Religious Affiliation
Christian
Political Affiliation
Moderate
Marital Status
Married
I wouldn't even address the OP. He's a frequent poster at TOL, as is Doug. If you want to read pagan thinkers try to talk about God, just go there. You can see what the OP writes and realize it's best to ignore him...as well as Doug.
 

atpollard

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 6, 2017
Messages
2,573
Location
Florida
Gender
Male
Religious Affiliation
Baptist
Political Affiliation
Conservative
Marital Status
Married
Acceptance of the Trinity & Nicene Creed
Yes
Well, I can hardly spend all of my time arguing about “individual” vs “household” Covenant (baptism) with the same Lutheran, or responding to the Catholic Catechism from one Roman Catholic ... so I am willing to answer specific questions if he is willing to do the work of asking a real question.

Some “hot button” keywords with no real explanation are not going to cut it, so the ball is squarely in his court.
 

MoreCoffee

Well-known member
Valued Contributor
Joined
Jul 13, 2015
Messages
19,121
Location
Western Australia
Gender
Male
Religious Affiliation
Catholic
Political Affiliation
Moderate
Marital Status
Single
Acceptance of the Trinity & Nicene Creed
Yes
Well, supporters claim those who oppose it are "whiny people who can't accept God's sovereignty". Nonetheless, the whole idea of Double Predestination is simply contrary to God's own moral code. Well, actually I would go so far, to also put eternal hell and torturing (as in cruelty) hell in the same boat. Anyway, how do you feel about this doctrine? Is it correct? Why do you say so?

Myself, in meshing with Christian Universalist beliefs it makes sense - but otherwise is a hideous doctrine!

Single predestination - the idea that God predestines the elect to eternal bliss - is bad enough because it implies that God doesn't care about anybody who is not elect so he just ignore them until they end up in eternal torment. Double predestination - the idea that God both predestines the elect to eternal bliss and predestines the non-elect to eternal punishment in the fires of hell - is horrendously evil and makes God seem far worse than Satan. All Satan evidently wanted to accomplish is a take over of rulership of creation but with double predestination God becomes a really evil malevolent being out to destroy anybody and everybody who doesn't eternally praise him and eternally obey him. Talk about a race of robots! It's a dreadful doctrine that is unacceptable at any level.
 

Josiah

simul justus et peccator
Valued Contributor
Supporting Member
Joined
Jun 12, 2015
Messages
13,677
Gender
Male
Religious Affiliation
Lutheran
Political Affiliation
Conservative
Marital Status
Married
Acceptance of the Trinity & Nicene Creed
Yes
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r9U6fccu1vM


SINGLE predestination is solidly biblical and ecumenical (declared dogma at the Ecumenical Council of Orange). It is PURE GOSPEL, spoken only to Christians, and declared to comfort and assure. SADLY, there have been a tiny, tiny number of Christians throughout history who have replaced it with pagan, unbiblical philosophy of "fate" and/or have turned it upside down, inside out, twisted 180 degrees into a horrible concept of DOUBLE predestnation (Calvin MAY be one of these, certainly he had radical followers who did this).



Personal story. I am the youngest of 5 children, 3 of which are living. My oldest sib had no problems, the pregnancy was perfectly normal. My sister (next) had a quite problematic pregnancy (I need not go into details) and the docs advised my parents to not have any more children (advise they ignored). The next two all died a bit before birth and my mother almost died. Then I was conceived. My mother and I had exactly the same problem as my two older (now dead) brothers, the same situation repeating itself. During this time, my parents and sibs (and relatives, friends, church) were praying for ME (and Mom)... they sang to me in the womb.... they sang "Jesus Songs" to me.... they read to me.... they prepared the nursery and got everything ready for me... they LOVED me even before I was born. They did not know what I would be amazingly handsome and healthy and smart and wonderful, and it didn't matter, their love flowed from THEIR heart not my merit. After I was born, and for years thereafter, they told me of this... of their love and actions even before I was born, their unconditional and active love. When I was naughty and not nice, I never questioned their love or my position as their son and member of the family, I only realized their disapproval and because of their love, considered their instruction as loving, and my desire to be the son they called me to be was motivated by that love. That's the doctrine of election (single predestination).


It is a horrible, terrible to twist all this to be the exact opposite, about how much my parents must have hated the two sons who died before me, how they hate all other children but me, how they want most to die and see them fry in hell. Remember: the Doctrine of Election is GOSPEL, it must not be twisted into the exact opposite because the pagan Greeks understood this better than God and their "logic" says it MUST work in this opposite, hateful, terrible way or God isn't being Greek and "logical." Now, you will find SOME modern Calvinists who TRY to sound Calvinist but don't want to so horribly violate Scripture and so will teach "God ELECTS some and just passes over some" but that's not what Calvinism teaches; it would be more honest to say "I disagree with radical Calvinism on this point and stand with the historic church in supporting single predestination (the doctrine of election) and simply don't apply this to unbelievers.


Another point: The Ecumenical Council of Orange teaches SINGLE Predestination ("election") because it is solidly and unavoidably biblical. It also embraces that Christ died for ALL (as the Bible over and over again flat-out, directly states). Thus, "election" applies to faith, to those who receive the benefits of Christ's work, such is "credited to them" (to use Paul's language) by the gift of faith. Predestination (single or double) doesn't apply to the gift of Christ but to the gift of faith.



A blessed Easter Season to all....



- Josiah


.
 

MoreCoffee

Well-known member
Valued Contributor
Joined
Jul 13, 2015
Messages
19,121
Location
Western Australia
Gender
Male
Religious Affiliation
Catholic
Political Affiliation
Moderate
Marital Status
Single
Acceptance of the Trinity & Nicene Creed
Yes

Why do these guys have beards like that. It makes them look like Islamic State terrorists - except red beards are less common in the Islamic state - do these guys never bother trimming their beards or shaving?

And single predestination is terrible but not as terrible as double predestination.
 

Josiah

simul justus et peccator
Valued Contributor
Supporting Member
Joined
Jun 12, 2015
Messages
13,677
Gender
Male
Religious Affiliation
Lutheran
Political Affiliation
Conservative
Marital Status
Married
Acceptance of the Trinity & Nicene Creed
Yes
MoreCoffee


The RCC once clearly taught Election in a very Lutheran way, but since the Council of Trent, has gotten itself very confused (on this too).



Listen to this (I just clicked on the first thing google brought up, and it totally confirms my point): https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Wnf_HYTvJy0


Now, this priest says what he must, that the RCC teaches predestination (he must because the Council of Orange dogmatized that and the RCC accept that Council). And note his disagreement is clearly with CALVINISM'S Greek and DOUBLE predestination perversion. Where the good father gets himself confused a bit is by confusing foreknowledge (to know ahead of time) with predestination (to cause, to be the reason why something happens) AND he seems to link CALVINISM's perversion of predestination with OSAS (a dogma Lutherans also condemn), the doctrine of election does NOT say we are "tied to the sail and can't do a thing" it simply says we are placed on the boat and it is a sail boat, NOT a row boat. I've discussed Predestnation with several Catholic apologists and I've found no difference between the Lutheran and Catholic positions ON THIS, only that Lutherans frame all this with the Gospel whereas Catholics frame all this as "we're not Calvinists!" and a LOT of confusion with forekinowledge. Truth is, the synergism that has infected modern Catholicism like a cancer has not spread to everything; this priest is RIGHT in what modern Catholics often call "initial grace" (what Lutheran call "justification in the narrow sense."). Unlike you, Catholicism still believes what it confesses in the Creed, that the HOLY SPIRIT (not self - in any sense or to any degree) is "the Lord and GIVER of Life." God PUTS us on a SAIL BOAT (not a row boat!!!!). True, we are not lashed to it (the Calvinist heresy of OSAS) but the elect are PUT on the sailboat (predestination, not just foreknowledge). As a Catholic, he MUST affirm predestination (or he violates the Council of Orange and 1500 years of Catholicism) BUT he sure wants to sound like an Arminian Methodist or Free Will Baptist so as to distance himself from Calvin's perversions and heresies. But here's a point where Lutherans and Catholics largely AGREE, we just frame this as pure Gospel and apply it to "initial grace" (as modern Catholics call the Lutheran position) whereas Catholics have gotten themselves very confused in their desire to not sound like Calvin's perversions.


See post 7



A blessed Easter season to all...



.
 
Last edited:

MoreCoffee

Well-known member
Valued Contributor
Joined
Jul 13, 2015
Messages
19,121
Location
Western Australia
Gender
Male
Religious Affiliation
Catholic
Political Affiliation
Moderate
Marital Status
Single
Acceptance of the Trinity & Nicene Creed
Yes
On the matter of predestination all I want to say is that Calvinist Predestination is a terrible doctrine.
 

Albion

Well-known member
Valued Contributor
Joined
Sep 1, 2017
Messages
7,515
Gender
Male
Religious Affiliation
Anglican
Political Affiliation
Conservative
Marital Status
Married
Acceptance of the Trinity & Nicene Creed
Yes
Well, supporters claim those who oppose it are "whiny people who can't accept God's sovereignty". Nonetheless, the whole idea of Double Predestination is simply contrary to God's own moral code. Well, actually I would go so far, to also put eternal hell and torturing (as in cruelty) hell in the same boat. Anyway, how do you feel about this doctrine? Is it correct? Why do you say so?

Myself, in meshing with Christian Universalist beliefs it makes sense - but otherwise is a hideous doctrine!
Why point the finger at Double Predestination when it is the case that most of the non-Calvinist churches also believe in a hell?
 

MennoSota

Well-known member
Joined
Sep 24, 2017
Messages
7,102
Age
53
Gender
Male
Religious Affiliation
Christian
Political Affiliation
Moderate
Marital Status
Married
On the matter of predestination all I want to say is that Calvinist Predestination is a terrible doctrine.
Meh. You hate what God says about predestination. Nothing's changed. Go on and read your catechism for life's answers.
 

Josiah

simul justus et peccator
Valued Contributor
Supporting Member
Joined
Jun 12, 2015
Messages
13,677
Gender
Male
Religious Affiliation
Lutheran
Political Affiliation
Conservative
Marital Status
Married
Acceptance of the Trinity & Nicene Creed
Yes
Meh. You hate what God says about predestination


Nope, LOVE what God says. Hate what the pagan Greeks said and still a very few radical Calvinists say.


See post 7




.
 

MennoSota

Well-known member
Joined
Sep 24, 2017
Messages
7,102
Age
53
Gender
Male
Religious Affiliation
Christian
Political Affiliation
Moderate
Marital Status
Married
Nope, LOVE what God says. Hate what the pagan Greeks said and still a very few radical Calvinists say.


See post 7




.
Jo, we've been over you incapacity to understand in other threads. Keep ignoring the Bible. Just go to your Concord for your opinion.
 

MennoSota

Well-known member
Joined
Sep 24, 2017
Messages
7,102
Age
53
Gender
Male
Religious Affiliation
Christian
Political Affiliation
Moderate
Marital Status
Married
Nope, LOVE what God says. Hate what the pagan Greeks said and still a very few radical Calvinists say.


See post 7




.
No, you hate what God says and love your Concord as the primary source of your faith.
If you loved what God says, you would love predestination.
 

Josiah

simul justus et peccator
Valued Contributor
Supporting Member
Joined
Jun 12, 2015
Messages
13,677
Gender
Male
Religious Affiliation
Lutheran
Political Affiliation
Conservative
Marital Status
Married
Acceptance of the Trinity & Nicene Creed
Yes
Please define Double Predestination


The Calvinist definition. From the Westminster Confession:


"By the decree of God, for the manifestation of his glory, some men and angels are predestinated unto everlasting life, and others foreordained to everlasting death."




Notes:

1. "Predestine" or "forordained" means "to cause, to be responsible for." Note the word "foreknow"is avoided equally in both cases, that word means to know ahead of time but not cause or be responsible for.

2. This is equally placed on two things: Those who will have everlasting life and those who have everlasting death. BOTH. Thus "double"

3. God is gloried by those who enter heaven and also by those who fry eternally in hell. Some are given heaven and most hell because these both "manifest his glory."


That's the Calvinist definition.


For "Election" or "SINGLE Predestination" see post # 7.







MennoSota said:
If you loved what God says, you would love predestination.


I do. Just not the horrible, terrible perversion and heresy of a very few radical Calvinists, what is typically known as DOUBLE predestination.






.
 
Last edited:

Andrew

Matt 18:15
Joined
Aug 25, 2017
Messages
6,645
Age
39
Gender
Male
Religious Affiliation
Christian
Political Affiliation
Conservative
Marital Status
Single
Acceptance of the Trinity & Nicene Creed
Yes
The Calvinist definition. From the Westminster Confession:


"By the decree of God, for the manifestation of his glory, some men and angels are predestinated unto everlasting life, and others foreordained to everlasting death."




Notes:

1. "Predestine" or "forordained" means "to cause, to be responsible for." Note the word "foreknow"is avoided equally in both cases, that word means to know ahead of time but not cause or be responsible for.

2. This is equally placed on two things: Those who will have everlasting life and those who have everlasting death. BOTH. Thus "double"

3. God is gloried by those who enter heaven and also by those who fry eternally in hell. Some are given heaven and most hell because these both "manifest his glory."


That's the Calvinist definition.


For "Election" or "SINGLE Predestination" see post # 7.










I do. Just not the horrible, terrible perversion and heresy of a very few radical Calvinists, what is typically known as DOUBLE predestination.






.
Single Predestination = Double Predestination
You can't have two dying plants and only water one without damning the other
 

Josiah

simul justus et peccator
Valued Contributor
Supporting Member
Joined
Jun 12, 2015
Messages
13,677
Gender
Male
Religious Affiliation
Lutheran
Political Affiliation
Conservative
Marital Status
Married
Acceptance of the Trinity & Nicene Creed
Yes
Single Predestination = Double Predestination


Wrong.


See post #7.


My beautiful wife and I can be tools of God in His creation of a child - without KILLING anyone or desiring anyone to eternally fry in hell.


AT MOST, one could "logically" argue (without a single Scripture to support it) that God simply does NOTHING - either way - regarding those who do not receieve faith. This is sometimes called "passing over" but that indicates some active role and such is NOT indicated by single predestination, even that is not a "logical" argument. That God does/feels/decides/causes NOTHING in the case of some is a possible "logical" argument but is NOT stated anywhere in Scripture or by the Council of Orange. The Calvinist/Greek idea of DOUBLE predestination is that God equally desired AND caused AND is gloried by the few that end up in heaven and also equally by most that fry in hell. The second part is not Biblical or logical. And is contrary to orthodox Christianity. It's a pagan GREEK idea. The "pious opinion" that God does/feels/decides/causes NOTHING in the case of those who end up in hell is a pious opinion I could accept (but do not hold) because it seem possible but is nowhere found in Scripture, Councils and Creeds or in the faith of the church. But the Calvinist dogma is contrary to Scripture, not logical and horrible. Again, see post # 7.



.
 
Last edited:

atpollard

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 6, 2017
Messages
2,573
Location
Florida
Gender
Male
Religious Affiliation
Baptist
Political Affiliation
Conservative
Marital Status
Married
Acceptance of the Trinity & Nicene Creed
Yes
Now, you will find SOME modern Calvinists who TRY to sound Calvinist but don't want to so horribly violate Scripture and so will teach "God ELECTS some and just passes over some" but that's not what Calvinism teaches; it would be more honest to say "I disagree with radical Calvinism on this point and stand with the historic church in supporting single predestination (the doctrine of election) and simply don't apply this to unbelievers.
The Westminster Confession of Faith offers none of what you call “Calvinism” Double Predestination ...

I. All those whom God hath predestinated unto life, and those only, he is pleased, in his appointed and accepted time, effectually to call,[1] by his Word and Spirit,[2] out of that state of sin and death, in which they are by nature to grace and salvation, by Jesus Christ;[3] enlightening their minds spiritually and savingly to understand the things of God,[4] taking away their heart of stone, and giving unto them an heart of flesh;[5] renewing their wills, and, by his almighty power, determining them to that which is good,[6] and effectually drawing them to Jesus Christ:[7] yet so, as they come most freely, being made willing by his grace.[8]

II. This effectual call is of God's free and special grace alone, not from anything at all foreseen in man,[9] who is altogether passive therein, until, being quickened and renewed by the Holy Spirit,[10] he is thereby enabled to answer this call, and to embrace the grace offered and conveyed in it.[11]

III. Elect infants, dying in infancy, are regenerated, and saved by Christ, through the Spirit,[12] who works when, and where, and how he pleases:[13] so also are all other elect persons who are incapable of being outwardly called by the ministry of the Word.[14]

IV. Others, not elected, although they may be called by the ministry of the Word,[15] and may have some common operations of the Spirit,[16] yet they never truly come unto Christ, and therefore cannot be saved:[17] much less can men, not professing the Christian religion, be saved in any other way whatsoever, be they never so diligent to frame their lives according to the light of nature, and the laws of that religion they do profess.[18] And to assert and maintain that they may, is very pernicious, and to be detested.[19]


... so these “modern Calvinists” date back to 1646.
 

MoreCoffee

Well-known member
Valued Contributor
Joined
Jul 13, 2015
Messages
19,121
Location
Western Australia
Gender
Male
Religious Affiliation
Catholic
Political Affiliation
Moderate
Marital Status
Single
Acceptance of the Trinity & Nicene Creed
Yes
Is this yet another Calvinist Vs Lutheran endless battle to the death in theology?
 
Top Bottom