Predestination, fate, freedom?

[MoreCoffee]

Which is it?

Is the world running on predestination?

Is the world running on fate?

Is the world running on freedom?

If you have a preferred answer and some theology behind it then please answer and explain, passages from holy scripture will be deeply appreciated.

 

[psalms 91]

We are predestined by the choices we make that God knows beforehand. Predestination and foreknowledge go hand in hand

 

[Rens]

He knows what's in your heart and knows who will love Him or reject Him, but it's all nice theories, yet Whales got saved because one man laid his life down and prayed the whole day. Were they all of a sudden all predestined or do people get lost because I don't lay my life down in prayer? Better not, better pray everyone gets saved. 1 Timothy.

 

[Josiah]

Is the world running on predestination?

No.

Is the world running on fate?

No.

Is the world running on freedom?

Within sin, sorta.





.

 

[Ackbach]

I think Romans 9:10-24 and Ephesians 1:4-12 pretty much nail down predestination and election as biblical concepts. My favorite analogy is Shakespeare and Macbeth. In the story, Macbeth kills the king in order to usurp the throne. In the context of the story, is Macbeth guilty of killing the king? Certainly. He did it. Is Shakespeare guilty of killing the king? No, Shakespeare didn't kill anyone, he's just writing a story. Could Macbeth have done otherwise? No, because that's how Shakespeare wrote the story. In a similar fashion, we are guilty for our sins, not God. But God foreordained everything that happens (and therefore, of course, knows everything that is going to happen). We are responsible for our sin, and God is sovereign over all creation. In the same way as there is a category difference between Shakespeare and Macbeth, there is a category difference between God and us, so that God is not the author of sin, even though He foreordains it to happen.

A lot of the time, this discussion revolves around the concept of free will - a very tired expression if ever there was one. What is it? There are a number of possible definitions.

1. The ability to do whatever you want. In this case, no one has free will. I could want to assassinate the US President all I want (I don't - this is hypothetical), but I'd never be able to get past the sniper on the roof. Or I could want to be an Olympic athlete all I want, but that doesn't mean I can be one. Incidentally, this is a great reason why the "You can be whatever you want" message at graduations is so tiresome and untrue.

2. The ability to please God. This is my favorite definition. In this case, the unsaved person does not have it (because he's spiritually dead), and the saved person (the person regenerated by the Holy Spirit) does have it.

3. The ability to choose God. This is related to the previous one. I mention it because this is what people usually mean by free will. Again, dead people can't do things.

 

[ImaginaryDay2]

Again, dead people can't do things.

'Dead' people do many things. I've been witness to 'dead' people who have modeled better marriages than some believers, I see them go to grocery stores, many are my close personal friends. If you mean that they cannot 'save' themselves, you'd be right. Only the Spirit of God can lead them and give the gift of faith. It is not of our own merits. But the 'tired expression' about being "filthy rags" (or, "filthy menstrual pads", as you said in another thread) just gets old. I know that you didn't mention any of that in this thread, but I'll jump the gun here. Scripture does not say that "God so despised his filthy rags that he gave...". He "...loved the world...". That's all of us. If some of us would like to believe it just means a select few, and the rest burn, then it makes God out to be a tyrant.
So... We may not be 'able', but God is 'able' to save whom he pleases. Even that rotten filthy rag next door. Or us.

 

[Josiah]

I think Romans 9:10-24 and Ephesians 1:4-12 pretty much nail down predestination and election as biblical concepts. My favorite analogy is Shakespeare and Macbeth. In the story, Macbeth kills the king in order to usurp the throne. In the context of the story, is Macbeth guilty of killing the king? Certainly. He did it. Is Shakespeare guilty of killing the king? No, Shakespeare didn't kill anyone, he's just writing a story. Could Macbeth have done otherwise? No, because that's how Shakespeare wrote the story. In a similar fashion, we are guilty for our sins, not God. But God foreordained everything that happens (and therefore, of course, knows everything that is going to happen). We are responsible for our sin, and God is sovereign over all creation. In the same way as there is a category difference between Shakespeare and Macbeth, there is a category difference between God and us, so that God is not the author of sin, even though He foreordains it to happen.

A lot of the time, this discussion revolves around the concept of free will - a very tired expression if ever there was one. What is it? There are a number of possible definitions.

1. The ability to do whatever you want. In this case, no one has free will. I could want to assassinate the US President all I want (I don't - this is hypothetical), but I'd never be able to get past the sniper on the roof. Or I could want to be an Olympic athlete all I want, but that doesn't mean I can be one. Incidentally, this is a great reason why the "You can be whatever you want" message at graduations is so tiresome and untrue.

2. The ability to please God. This is my favorite definition. In this case, the unsaved person does not have it (because he's spiritually dead), and the saved person (the person regenerated by the Holy Spirit) does have it.

3. The ability to choose God. This is related to the previous one. I mention it because this is what people usually mean by free will. Again, dead people can't do things.

IF the subject is justification (narrow), then I'm largely in agreement with you here. I reject the uber-Calvinistic idea of "double-predestination" but I accept the concept of election.

IF the subject is simply everything in the universe, then I think there IS a (limited) role for choice (as well as chaos and determination) - just depends what aspect is being addressed. IF I'm standing on the planet Earth and let go of a ball, the laws of physics pretty much determine it will fall. If this happens far enough away from the center of the Earth, it might not. But what I WANT it to do probably has little influence either way. Depends on the subject being discussed.




- Josiah

 

[Ackbach]

'Dead' people do many things.

But not with pure motives. Dead people cannot please God. There are many passages showing that.

I've been witness to 'dead' people who have modeled better marriages than some believers,...

Might need to define "better" here, but unbelievers can undeniably behave better than believers outwardly. This goes back to the C. S. Lewis quotes about Christianity and its nature. If you work your way into salvation, Christians should always be the best people. If you must be saved because you can't work your way into salvation (which is real Christianity), then you'd expect lots of broken, sinful people to be Christians, and they still carry around baggage.

...I see them go to grocery stores, many are my close personal friends. If you mean that they cannot 'save' themselves, you'd be right. Only the Spirit of God can lead them and give the gift of faith. It is not of our own merits.

Right, I agree.

But the 'tired expression' about being "filthy rags" (or, "filthy menstrual pads", as you said in another thread) just gets old.

It's not a "tired expression", it's Scripture. I don't view Scripture as "tired".

I know that you didn't mention any of that in this thread, but I'll jump the gun here. Scripture does not say that "God so despised his filthy rags that he gave...". He "...loved the world...". That's all of us.

The Reformed exegesis of John 3:16 shows another interpretation that harmonizes better with other passages such as John 17.

If some of us would like to believe it just means a select few, and the rest burn, then it makes God out to be a tyrant.

False dichotomy. Read Romans 9.

So... We may not be 'able', but God is 'able' to save whom he pleases. Even that rotten filthy rag next door. Or us.

The Isaiah passage does not say that people are filthy rags, but that our righteousness is filthy rags. That is, it says that even the works we do that we think are the best, are as filthy rags in God's sight. Your thoughts here don't seem to apply to what I said.

 

[MoreCoffee]

Speaking of God's love - For God so loved the world that he gave his only-begotten Son, so that all who believe in him may not perish, but may have eternal life - does God's love endure forever?

 

[ImaginaryDay2]

But not with pure motives. Dead people cannot please God. There are many passages showing that.

The problem is we can't question a person's motives, as we don't know them. I can act with pure motives, the same as you, the same as a 'dead' man. Our motives can also be 'impure'. Belonging to Christ and having his righteousness changes nothing in regard to motives.

Might need to define "better" here, but unbelievers can undeniably behave better than believers outwardly. This goes back to the C. S. Lewis quotes about Christianity and its nature. If you work your way into salvation, Christians should always be the best people. If you must be saved because you can't work your way into salvation (which is real Christianity), then you'd expect lots of broken, sinful people to be Christians, and they still carry around baggage.

I would be referring to more than outward behavior. It would be more in reference to having a better moral compass than some believers. The idea of unbelievers having any type of moral compass may not sit well with some (again, suggesting some sort of inherent 'righteousness'), but it's what I've seen from experience. One has to have it inwardly to display it outwardly. It may not be a God given morality, but it is developed nonetheless.

It's not a "tired expression", it's Scripture. I don't view Scripture as "tired".

Then neither is free will a 'tired' expression. But leaving that alone for a moment - if we hammer home enough that our "righteousness is as filthy rags" (thank you for the correction on this), how do you believe this will translate? Often, I hear that "I'm just a poor sinner saved by grace...". That's the state that some believe we will be in, perpetually, until we die. But we are more than 'poor sinners'. We are the righteousness of Christ. If I had to pick one identifying mark over the other, I'd choose the second. But the former perpetuates a type of wallowing self-pity that is very unbecoming. I believe that it has its roots in 'filthy rags' theology, and not in righteousness.

The Reformed exegesis of John 3:16 shows another interpretation that harmonizes better with other passages such as John 17.

Can you explain a bit?

The Isaiah passage does not say that people are filthy rags, but that our righteousness is filthy rags. That is, it says that even the works we do that we think are the best, are as filthy rags in God's sight. Your thoughts here don't seem to apply to what I said.

That's not what I read. Isiah is pleading before God for his mercy - to rescue Israel and to "not be angry beyond measure". How is it that a prophets' prayer for Israel has been misappropriated so poorly as to make it a cornerstone of baptist doctrine?

 

[visionary]

Is seeing a tidal wave coming to shore, predestining all those on the shore of being wiped out? There is a predestination of the wave coming to shore, the other things that can occur because of it are not predestined because people can make choices that will ultimately be their salvation .

 

[MoreCoffee]

Is seeing a tidal wave coming to shore, predestining all those on the shore of being wiped out? There is a predestination of the wave coming to shore, the other things that can occur because of it are not predestined because people can make choices that will ultimately be their salvation .

Does God cause the tidal wave?

 

[Josiah]

When Christians speak of "predestination" they are speaking of JUSTIFICATION (narrow), not the Greek philosophy of fate. It affirms what Jesus said, "You did not choose me but I chose you." It affirms what Paul related in all the Scriptures about "election." Unlike Calvinists, Lutherans usually use the word "election" to speak of this truth, not because the word "predestined" is wrong (Scripture on occasion uses that term although usually "elect") but to distance this biblical teaching in justification (narrow) from the pagan Greek philosophy of fate (which I reject).

 

[MoreCoffee]

When Christians speak of "predestination" they are speaking of JUSTIFICATION (narrow), not the Greek philosophy of fate. It affirms what Jesus said, "You did not choose me but I chose you." It affirms what Paul related in all the Scriptures about "election." Unlike Calvinists, Lutherans usually use the word "election" to speak of this truth, not because the word "predestined" is wrong (Scripture on occasion uses that term although usually "elect") but to distance this biblical teaching in justification (narrow) from the pagan Greek philosophy of fate (which I reject).

Yes, you are correct brother [MENTION=13]Josiah[/MENTION], predestination differs from fate and both differ from libertarian human freedom which appears to imply either godlessness or deism of some kind.

 

[MoreCoffee]

Is seeing a tidal wave coming to shore, predestining all those on the shore of being wiped out? There is a predestination of the wave coming to shore, the other things that can occur because of it are not predestined because people can make choices that will ultimately be their salvation .

I found this video about tidal waves. I like it. It is interesting.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vx8ZMkWL8hw

 

[Ackbach]

Does God cause the tidal wave?

Yes. Isaiah 45:7.

 

[MoreCoffee]

Yes. Isaiah 45:7.

In your preferred bible how does that verse read?

 

[Ackbach]

In your preferred bible how does that verse read?

In the ESV, Is. 45:7 reads "I form light and create darkness, I make well-being and create calamity, I am the Lord, who does all these things."

 

[ImaginaryDay2]

In the ESV, Is. 45:7 reads "I form light and create darkness, I make well-being and create calamity, I am the Lord, who does all these things."

John Piper has been noted to say that this would include God having providence over every speck of dust that floats in the air, controlling its every movement. Would you agree with 'predestination' to that degree? If I can dig up the clip, I will. Might take some time, though.

 

[MoreCoffee]

In the ESV, Is. 45:7 reads "I form light and create darkness, I make well-being and create calamity, I am the Lord, who does all these things."

It reads thus in the ASV - I form the light, and create darkness; I make peace, and create evil. I am Jehovah, that doeth all these things. [Isaiah 45:7]