Predestination

[Calminian]

God makes real offer of Gospel to all, but only His own can hear and respond!

Is an offer you can't hear or know about a real offer?

If I said to you that I offered you a million dollars, whispering it thousands of miles away, would you consider that a real offer?

 

[Calminian]

You keep thinking of predestination as God predestinating someone to get saved.....

When the passage says predestined unto justification and glorification? Um, yeah. Being saved is one of the many things we're predestined to. You can't just deny a straightforward passage if it doesn't fit your theology.

 

[Calminian]

God can and does know all things, even possible outcomes, but has destined what real actually become history!

Yes, but specifically, could He know of a decision made specifically by a free agent—someone acting of libertarian freewill? Or do you consider that an irrational impossibility?

BTW, I agree with the above. All outcomes are approved by God. Everything that happens passes through his will.

And please define "possible outcomes." Do you believe there really is such a thing? Isn't there only one outcome possible?

 

[Twiceborn]

This from someone who has a man being regenerated before he believes...

If that is what he believes, he has the order right!

1. Created in Christ / Born of God / Creation of the "new man" (which is what makes us "the elect" or "the called")
2. Response to God's call / putting on the "new man"
3. Salvation

Of his own will begat he us (1) with the word of truth, that we should be a kind of firstfruits of his creatures. Wherefore, my beloved brethren, let every man be swift to hear, slow to speak, slow to wrath: For the wrath of man worketh not the righteousness of God. Wherefore lay apart all filthiness and superfluity of naughtiness, and receive with meekness the engrafted word (2), which is able to save your souls (3).

 

[atpollard]

I was talking about nano-second hair-splitting, not the order itself.

It was not nano-second hair splitting.

I will accept that "Predestined" in that verse means "Predestined to be made like Christ" which does describe Glorification on that list in Romans. An argument could also be made that it includes "sanctification", but that was not part of the list in Romans so we will set that discussion aside. The question is which of these are possible, one, both, neither?

1. Can someone be Predestined for Glorification, but not yet Called and Justified?
2. Can someone be already Called and Justified, but not yet Predestined for Glorification?

It is about the logic of any ordo salutis, not about the length of time involved.

 

[Calminian]

This from someone who has a man being regenerated before he believes...

It's one view that doesn't violate the specific and explicit order given in the text. You may disagree with the conclusion, but denying the text itself is far worse.

 

[atpollard]

Yes, but specifically, could He know of a decision made specifically by a free agent—someone acting of libertarian freewill?

Libertarian free will denies innate human corruption. Empirical evidence supports people are born with a sin nature. When did you start to teach your children to lie?

Thus God does know about the decision that a human being could and will make following his nature, and God knows the decisions a human being could but will not make if he acted contrary to his nature, and God knows that without a little help from God (like replacing a dead heart of stone with a living heart of flesh) the human being will always freely choose to follow his nature and never choose to follow the "foolish" things of the spirit. God's word will be snatched up by the WORLD, or wither on the rocky heart, or get choked out by life ... unless God first prepares the soil to receive it.

Sorry for the mixed metaphors and scrambled word pictures, but I hope you get the idea.

 

[Calminian]

Libertarian free will denies innate human corruption. Empirical evidence supports people are born with a sin nature. When did you start to teach your children to lie?

Thus God does know about the decision that a human being could and will make following his nature, and God knows the decisions a human being could but will not make if he acted contrary to his nature, and God knows that without a little help from God (like replacing a dead heart of stone with a living heart of flesh) the human being will always freely choose to follow his nature and never choose to follow the "foolish" things of the spirit. God's word will be snatched up by the WORLD, or wither on the rocky heart, or get choked out by life ... unless God first prepares the soil to receive it.

Sorry for the mixed metaphors and scrambled word pictures, but I hope you get the idea.

Okay, so that confirms my initial thought. Calvinists, like open theists, don't believe it is logically possible for God to foresee a libertarian decision. As a result, OTists deny exhaustive foreknowledge, and Calvinists deny libertarian freewill.

My view is, God can foreknow a libertarian decision. It's not a problem for him.

 

[Twiceborn]

Okay, so that confirms my initial thought. Calvinists, like open theists, don't believe it is logically possible for God to foresee a libertarian decision. As a result, OTists deny exhaustive foreknowledge, and Calvinists deny libertarian freewill.

My view is, God can foreknow a libertarian decision. It's not a problem for him.

I'm not sure that it's accurate to say that Calvinists deny libertarian free will because they believe it is logically impossible for God to foresee a libertarian decision. They deny libertarian free will because of total depravity.

Personally, I believe that God foresaw that all men would freely choose to reject Him. Not because He caused them to, not because they had no choice, simply because it was their own sinful preference.
Based on this knowledge, God chose the "foolishness of preaching" to save those who He "called" and He chose who He would call in a way to destroy the wisdom of the world that "knew Him not".
1 Corinthians 1:18-31

 

[Calminian]

I'm not sure that it's accurate to say that Calvinists deny libertarian free will because they believe it is logically impossible for God to foresee a libertarian decision. They deny libertarian free will because of total depravity.

I think you're right that it's not all. I do think some do.

But I was speaking more in regard to the agency of Adam and Satan. OTists believe God knew of the possibility of their fall, but not specifically if it would happen. Calvinists (some) believe God not only knew about it because he ordained it actively.

Both of these beliefs seem to be rooted in the idea that God cannot logically know of a libertarian decision.

 

[Calminian]

...Personally, I believe that God foresaw that all men would freely choose to reject Him. Not because He caused them to, not because they had no choice, simply because it was their own sinful preference.

Would it be fair then to say you don't believe in total depravity? Do you believe in original sin? The fall?

 

[atpollard]

Okay, so that confirms my initial thought. Calvinists, like open theists, don't believe it is logically possible for God to foresee a libertarian decision. As a result, OTists deny exhaustive foreknowledge, and Calvinists deny libertarian freewill.

My view is, God can foreknow a libertarian decision. It's not a problem for him.

So when DID you teach your children to lie?

If their will is free to choose Law or Sin with no outside influences, and you were the only outside influence shaping them in early childhood, then you must have taught them to sin. When did you do it?

 

[Calminian]

So when DID you teach your children to lie?

If their will is free to choose Law or Sin with no outside influences, and you were the only outside influence shaping them in early childhood, then you must have taught them to sin. When did you do it?

Yikes. No idea what you're talking about. You may want to articulate this argument a little better.

 

[atpollard]

But I was speaking more in regard to the agency of Adam and Satan.

It is not equivalent to compare all human beings to Adam (pre-Fall). Pre-Fall Adam did have Libertine Free Will, but his actions tainted all of his offspring with a nature corrupted by sin. That leaves us free to follow our own, tainted, free will ... which being TAINTED is not LIBERTINE.

God can and did know the outcome of Adam's Libertine Free Will choice, thus his plan from eternity past that the Son should redeem the Children of God.

 

[atpollard]

Yikes. No idea what you're talking about. You may want to articulate this argument a little better.

OK, step by step.
Do you have children?

 

[Calminian]

It is not equivalent to compare all human beings to Adam (pre-Fall). Pre-Fall Adam did have Libertine Free Will,

I agree, but I know not all calvinists do.

but his actions tainted all of his offspring with a nature corrupted by sin.

Yes, this is what all calvinists and arminians believe.

That leaves us free to follow our own, tainted, free will ... which being TAINTED is not LIBERTINE.

Again, agree. I believe in total depravity.

God can and did know the outcome of Adam's Libertine Free Will choice, thus his plan from eternity past that the Son should redeem the Children of God.

Totally agree.

 

[Calminian]

OK, step by step.
Do you have children?

Irrelevant. Make an argument.

 

[atpollard]

Irrelevant. Make an argument.

Sorry, empirical arguments are only valid if one has the empirical experience. So it was completely relevant. A non-parent will not have observed their children growing up.

So I will just drop it.

 

[Twiceborn]

Would it be fair then to say you don't believe in total depravity? Do you believe in original sin? The fall?

I believe that all men have the ability to come to Christ, but that all men choose not to.

John 3:19-20
And this is the condemnation, that light is come into the world, and men loved darkness rather than light, because their deeds were evil. For every one that doeth evil hateth the light, neither cometh to the light, lest his deeds should be reproved.

2 Thessalonians 2:10
And with all deceivableness of unrighteousness in them that perish; because they received not the love of the truth, that they might be saved.

John 5:40
And ye will not come to me, that ye might have life.

Romans 1:18-20
For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men, who hold the truth in unrighteousness; Because that which may be known of God is manifest in them; for God hath shewed it unto them. For the invisible things of him from the creation of the world are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even his eternal power and Godhead; so that they are without excuse

But, I also believe that mankind's innate love of darkness is a direct result of the fall. Adam did condemn all men by allowing sin to enter into the world.

Romans 5:12
Wherefore, as by one man sin entered into the world, and death by sin; and so death passed upon all men, for that all have sinned

 

[Calminian]

Sorry, empirical arguments are only valid if one has the empirical experience. So it was completely relevant. A non-parent will not have observed their children growing up.

So I will just drop it.

Suit yourself. I don't believe you ever had a coherent argument though. If you did you would have made it.