-
Welcome to Baptist Board, a friendly forum to discuss the Baptist Faith in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to all the features that our community has to offer.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!
Double Double Toil and Trouble
- Thread starter Skandelon
- Start date
- Status
Im not sure what you mean by Double Predestination?
Skandelon
<b>Moderator</b>
The term “double predestination” simply means that, just as God predestines some, but not all, to eternal salvation, so he predestines others to eternal punishment; this second part of “double” predestination, God's appointment of all but the elect unto eternal destruction, is sometimes called “reprobation”; and those who are not the elect are thus called the “reprobate”. link
Jacob_Elliott
New Member
Personally I don't see how you cannot believe in reprobation but believe in predestination.
short answer: No.
Longer answer:
Such claims and presentations by the non-calvinistic thinking is incorrect and usually couched in some type of inflammatory, demeaning rhetoric.
What more is that those I have encountered have a very inaccurate view of what the modern Calvinist holds as doctrinal, and only use this term thinking they are reflecting an accurately held opposition to predestination.
When shown that they are most inaccurate, some just sulk away, some bolster about on extraneous rabbit trails, and others turn red faced and glare.
But for the BB folks who read this thread let me start by using Pharoah as an example - for it shows the statement of God.
Longer explanation:
God did not have to harden the heart of the pharaoh. That had been hardening for decades (even before Moses was born) as first his former pharaoh refused to listen to the cries of the children of Israel.
The pharaoh who was peer (or younger) than Moses continued the evil and heaped even more upon the Israeli for he took pleasure in doing so. What was once fear driven, became not only oppressive, but became an excuse for self adulation - pride, arrogance, lusting eyes, and lust of life.
So when God says, "I will harden pharaoh's heart" God didn't have to do any miraculous work done to that single individual but not repeated in all Biblical history.
Rather, God confirmed pharaoh's heart was hard. Just as He does in every person who "loved(s) the darkness rather than the Light, for their deeds were evil. For everyone who does evil hates the Light, and does not come to the Light for fear that his deeds will be exposed."
That, according to John 3, is "the judgment of God."
Humankind do not come to God because of some lack in God, rather because they desire no relationship with the light that might expose their evil.
Humankind are condemned to the second death, because they have not believed on the Lord Jesus Christ. (John 3) Again, such desire no relationship (reconciliation) with God.
Too long of an answer - one word would have sufficed.
Jacob_Elliott
New Member
As a Calvinist I would reply the Harding that took place over decades was an act of God, but better yet Rom 9:17 says thisshort answer: No.
Longer answer:
Such claims and presentations by the non-calvinistic thinking is incorrect and usually couched in some type of inflammatory, demeaning rhetoric.
What more is that those I have encountered have a very inaccurate view of what the modern Calvinist holds as doctrinal, and only use this term thinking they are reflecting an accurately held opposition to predestination.
When shown that they are most inaccurate, some just sulk away, some bolster about on extraneous rabbit trails, and others turn red faced and glare.
But for the BB folks who read this thread let me start by using Pharoah as an example - for it shows the statement of God.
Longer explanation:
God did not have to harden the heart of the pharaoh. That had been hardening for decades (even before Moses was born) as first his former pharaoh refused to listen to the cries of the children of Israel.
The pharaoh who was peer (or younger) than Moses continued the evil and heaped even more upon the Israeli for he took pleasure in doing so. What was once fear driven, became not only oppressive, but became an excuse for self adulation - pride, arrogance, lusting eyes, and lust of life.
So when God says, "I will harden pharaoh's heart" God didn't have to do any miraculous work done to that single individual but not repeated in all Biblical history.
Rather, God confirmed pharaoh's heart was hard. Just as He does in every person who "loved(s) the darkness rather than the Light, for their deeds were evil. For everyone who does evil hates the Light, and does not come to the Light for fear that his deeds will be exposed."
That, according to John 3, is "the judgment of God."
Humankind do not come to God because of some lack in God, rather because they desire no relationship with the light that might expose their evil.
Humankind are condemned to the second death, because they have not believed on the Lord Jesus Christ. (John 3) Again, such desire no relationship (reconciliation) with God.
Too long of an answer - one word would have sufficed.
Lets see, does God know everything imaginable? Arminians say yes; Calvinists say yes.
Does knowing everything imaginable mean knowing the future down to the smallest detail? Arminians say yes; Calvinists say yes.
Is God's knowledge perfect, never mistaken or inaccurate? Arminians say yes; Calvinists say yes.
If God knows what you will think, decide, feel before you think, decide, feel, then are your thoughts, decisions, and emotions predestined? Arminians say no; Calvinists say yes.
Thus all Calvinists actually believe we were saved or damned from all eternity for all eternity and nothing we do will alter that predestined outcome.
To hide this fact, Calvinist play word games, change the subject and claim those presenting the obvious do not know what they are talking about. If the fall made it impossible to seek God and trust in Christ, then every fallen person was condemned to damnation before the world was, or God did not know the effect of the fall. If God alters certain pre-chosen people, making them come irresistibly to Christ, then everyone not pre-chosen was damned by God's curse of the fall.
In the movie, War Games, the closing thought is "the only winning move is not to play." With Calvinism, the only winning move is to hide, deny and run away from the actual doctrine. How else could Skandelon not know what each and every Calvinist on the BB believes?
Does knowing everything imaginable mean knowing the future down to the smallest detail? Arminians say yes; Calvinists say yes.
Is God's knowledge perfect, never mistaken or inaccurate? Arminians say yes; Calvinists say yes.
If God knows what you will think, decide, feel before you think, decide, feel, then are your thoughts, decisions, and emotions predestined? Arminians say no; Calvinists say yes.
Thus all Calvinists actually believe we were saved or damned from all eternity for all eternity and nothing we do will alter that predestined outcome.
To hide this fact, Calvinist play word games, change the subject and claim those presenting the obvious do not know what they are talking about. If the fall made it impossible to seek God and trust in Christ, then every fallen person was condemned to damnation before the world was, or God did not know the effect of the fall. If God alters certain pre-chosen people, making them come irresistibly to Christ, then everyone not pre-chosen was damned by God's curse of the fall.
In the movie, War Games, the closing thought is "the only winning move is not to play." With Calvinism, the only winning move is to hide, deny and run away from the actual doctrine. How else could Skandelon not know what each and every Calvinist on the BB believes?
Last edited by a moderator:
preacher4truth
Active Member
Most kids learn about the essence of sovereignty of election via the simplistic method of being chosen (or not) in simple games such as kickball. Some run off and mewl and cry unfair ('not just') and many threads and arguments against this are raised. It becomes an obsession to some to rail against this evident truth.
We see the same things mewled against incessantly in Christendom. That God chooses some and not others is the milk of the Word. Some simply don't like this truth or attribute of God. I accept this fact and love and worship God in its truth.
We see the same things mewled against incessantly in Christendom. That God chooses some and not others is the milk of the Word. Some simply don't like this truth or attribute of God. I accept this fact and love and worship God in its truth.
:thumbsup:
Jacob_Elliott
New Member
Yeah, quit crying you big babies, hell is no worse than not getting picked for kickball.
Jacob_Elliott
New Member
Very nice! Would you mind if I use this quote giving credit to your username?
Sapper Woody
Well-Known Member
short answer: No.
Longer answer:
Such claims and presentations by the non-calvinistic thinking is incorrect and usually couched in some type of inflammatory, demeaning rhetoric.
What more is that those I have encountered have a very inaccurate view of what the modern Calvinist holds as doctrinal, and only use this term thinking they are reflecting an accurately held opposition to predestination.
When shown that they are most inaccurate, some just sulk away, some bolster about on extraneous rabbit trails, and others turn red faced and glare.
But for the BB folks who read this thread let me start by using Pharoah as an example - for it shows the statement of God.
Longer explanation:
God did not have to harden the heart of the pharaoh. That had been hardening for decades (even before Moses was born) as first his former pharaoh refused to listen to the cries of the children of Israel.
The pharaoh who was peer (or younger) than Moses continued the evil and heaped even more upon the Israeli for he took pleasure in doing so. What was once fear driven, became not only oppressive, but became an excuse for self adulation - pride, arrogance, lusting eyes, and lust of life.
So when God says, "I will harden pharaoh's heart" God didn't have to do any miraculous work done to that single individual but not repeated in all Biblical history.
Rather, God confirmed pharaoh's heart was hard. Just as He does in every person who "loved(s) the darkness rather than the Light, for their deeds were evil. For everyone who does evil hates the Light, and does not come to the Light for fear that his deeds will be exposed."
That, according to John 3, is "the judgment of God."
Humankind do not come to God because of some lack in God, rather because they desire no relationship with the light that might expose their evil.
Humankind are condemned to the second death, because they have not believed on the Lord Jesus Christ. (John 3) Again, such desire no relationship (reconciliation) with God.
Too long of an answer - one word would have sufficed.
This really doesn't answer the question though. You said "no", but the longer explanation didn't reinforce your no. Didn't God have to predestine that Pharaoh would choose to harden his own heart?
I sincerely don't understand how one can believe in the predestination of the elect without believing in the predestination of the non-elect.
To take the kickball illustration, those chosen for the team are chosen because they are stronger, faster, and more agile than those not chosen. Are you suggesting that thus is how God chooses the elect? "These will be the righteous, so I will choose them". If so, you're kind of back in the Armenian camp, saying that God allows us to predestine ourselves.
To be honest, Calvinism has long confused me, and honestly thus far, no one debating on thus board has been able to help me understand it. It always seems to come back to circular reasoning or Armenianism in disguise.
Jacob_Elliott
New Member
To answer your questions most Calvinist I know including myself believe in both predestination and election, I agree with you they would have to believe in both, and that was a good point about the dodgeball illustration. That's the difference between Calvinism and Arminianism as I understand it, Calvinist teach that God elects us and Arminians teach God elects us after we have elected our selves, which I personally see as salvation by works, but that's just my opinion. To disagree I would say Arminianism is calvanism in disguise but I suppose I am biased.
Edit: Calvinist teach that God elects us based upon nothing that we have or will do(else you fall into salvation by works).
One false argument of Calvinism is that the non elect DESERVE to go to hell. But if Unconditional Election is true, then that is false. Men go to hell not because of any sin they have committed, but because God always hated them.
Rom 9:11 (For the children being not yet born, neither having done any good or evil, that the purpose of God according to election might stand, not of works, but of him that calleth; )
12 It was said unto her, The elder shall serve the younger.
13 As it is written, Jacob have I loved, but Esau have I hated.
All good Calvinists will tell you God hated Esau. But why? Verse 11 says he had not done any evil. So God hated Esau and determined he would go to hell (according to Calvinism), not because Esau deserved to go to hell, but simply because God always hated him.
This would apply to all the non elect as well.
Most Calvinists cannot connect the dots, but this is what their doctrine teaches.
Rom 9:11 (For the children being not yet born, neither having done any good or evil, that the purpose of God according to election might stand, not of works, but of him that calleth; )
12 It was said unto her, The elder shall serve the younger.
13 As it is written, Jacob have I loved, but Esau have I hated.
All good Calvinists will tell you God hated Esau. But why? Verse 11 says he had not done any evil. So God hated Esau and determined he would go to hell (according to Calvinism), not because Esau deserved to go to hell, but simply because God always hated him.
This would apply to all the non elect as well.
Most Calvinists cannot connect the dots, but this is what their doctrine teaches.
Sapper Woody
Well-Known Member
I have always heard, and believed, that man cannot just decide to get saved. That he has to be drawn by the holy spirit and convicted in order to be saved. But the caveat to this is at this point, that person has to decide to accept this gift, not by doing anything, but really by ceasing to do anything. To stop trying, and allow God to complete His work. From what I understand, this agrees with Calvinism so far.
But I believe that this opportunity to "give up" and let God do His work is given to every man at some point in his lifetime, and then that person is faced with a choice. Either keep doing things your own way, or simply let God do what He wants. I think that this places me in the Armenian camp.
I personally think that there has to be a choice, for I believe that God will not force Himself on anyone.
In short, I believe that man cannot come to God of his own volition, but that God will not force Himself on anyone. Not sure where that falls with the Cal/Arm debate. From what I read on here, I would guess that I lean more towards Arm.
Edited to ask: is there a difference between "Armenian" and "non-Cal"? I see several people say non-Cal instead of Arm.
Last edited by a moderator:
Sapper Woody said:
Yes, most Arminians (but not all) believe a person can lose salvation. Most non Calvinists believe in eternal security.
I am a non Calvinist myself, because I do not believe you can lose your salvation. However, I do not believe in Perseverance of the Saints, I believe in Preservation of the Saints, which is quite different.
I believe that a Christian is born again of incorruptible seed, the Holy Spirit, and cannot possibly fall away in unbelief. I am not persevering, I am preserved. HUGE difference.
When you see folks say they are non Cals, they are usually telling you they believe in eternal security, most Arminians do not believe this way.
- Status