For the Calvi's -- Do you hold to double predestination?

Whenever I see anything about election or predestination, it's always about election/predestined to heaven and never hell. Now, the logical conclusion would be that if one is not chosen for heaven, then he's chosen for hell. The problem is that people are not in some "neutral" state, but in a state of condemnation. So people are already on their way to hell, and God elects them to salvation.

Here's a statement from a site that says something like this.

"Calvinists do not believe that men are damned without any reference to their sin. God passing by and leaving certain men in their sin is not the same as God damning men by the sheer force of His decree."

-http://www.oldtruth.com/calvinism/avoidingconfusion.html
A good source to understand the basics of the doctrine. Of course not all Calvinists are alike, but this looks pretty good from my eyes.

 

As one of James Boice's sermons had it :It's Double Or Nothing.

 

I agree with all of the above -- the Protestant Reformed Church would too. There is no equal ultimacy relationship between election to life eternal and reprobation.

 

All people are already on their way to hell, and God elects only some of them to salvation. (please pardon the re-wording of your statement; however, it fits with the following statement)

God passing by and leaving certain men in their sin is not the same as God damning men by the sheer force of His decree.

I agree that all men are on their way to hell already. However, I need someone to further explain how, if God chose some, why did He pass the others by? Why did He choose the ones He chose, and pass by the ones He passes by?

 

Could you please explain what you think Double Predestination is first?

 

Excellent question Don....so here we go....


"We dare not forget that while God, according to the secret of his counsel, elects those who are to be saved...this same omnipotent God has made us morally responsible, so that we are lost, not because we could not be saved, but because we would not." Abraham Kuyper

Synod of Dort .... Not all, but some only, are elected, while others are passed by in the eternal decrees and these are punished "not only on account of their unbelief, but also for their other sins" (Chapter 1, Article 15).

Here is what you must know.....and this is a critical point..... those that are lost are not caused by God to disbelieve, they do that all by themselves. To ordain their end, God needs only to withhold the special grace of regeneration.

 

It is His will,in short.He has mercy on some and chooses to harden others.There is no merit in any creature who He has chosen to give eternal life. all deserve condemnation --nobody deserves eternal life. So out of His sheer mercy he graciously saves the ones of His choosing --made before the world began.God has the prerogative,the right to do with His own whatsoever He wills and no one can question His righteousness.

 

In my opinion, double predestination is heresy, I'm not talking about traditional Calvinism, just Hyper-Calvinism.

 

You are misinformed. Many Calvinists --not just from among the hyper-Calvinistic camp have believed in double predestination. James Boice,R.C.Sproul and Robert Reymond would certainly not be fairly lumped into the hyper-Calvinistic camp.

 

Like I asked Tim....tell me what you think Double Predestination is....Im asking cause Ive heard 6 different explanations of it since being on this board, none correct & Robert it gets used sometimes as a weapon against calvinists. BTW, have you ever met a real Hyper-Cal? You would know if you did!

I doubt in all sincerity if any one of us on this board could measure up to their fanatical standards....we would all be looked upon as reprobates in need of hell so dont throw that term "Hyper-Cal" around lightly.

 

Kinda like trying to buy the horse without the ears, they simply go together with the rest of the horse, it's part of the deal. You want the horse, you get the ears.

 

You realize that this statement seems to indicate that man is capable of resisting God'spower?

And this statement seems to indicate that some sinners are worse than others?

Not sure you said what you meant to say. Using statements by other calvinists on this board, the calvinist position seems to be that the lost are incapable of belief on their own, and therefore were in a state of unbelief already; not "by themselves," but due to the absence of good (God) in them.

How do you reconcile these statements with the synod of Dort statement EWF posted?

 

God directly determines through divine election to save those whom he has chosen to receive effectually grace of the Cross to their account, enables them to receive by faith, and they will get saved!

He has also predetermined what will happen to those who refuse jesus, who are sinners, as they will be condemned due to being sinners first, and rejecting jesus seconardarily...

So God determines ordains those whom will get saved, and ordains Plan for those who are condemn, but their own Sins and rejection of jesus get them into Plan, God did NOT determine them there!

 

It's the logical end to Calvinism. No other way around it.

 

It's not logical to say that they are equal. People are not "neutral" and God elects but people are guilty and God elects. God doesn't need to elect anyone to hell. They are already headed there.

 

God does not have to have to "elect/reprobate" anyone, as ALL are born sinners, and seal their own destiny by final rejection of Jesus...

He ordains the Place the lost go into, but does NOT actively send them there!

HE DOES ordain and bring to salvation thom he elected to life in Christ!

 

A newborn infant is headed to hell?

 

that's a separate subject. If you would like to speak about it that will be fine. I have my best opinion as to what the Bible teaches on the subject and will be glad to share it in another thread.