The false charge of fatalism

JM,

I appreciate the effort but in order to see that determinism and fate are the same "fatalistic" thing, just consult Greek mythology -- Oedipus Rex. In it, Oedipus only thought that his human actions were having an effect (much as Calvinists do). In truth, what he thought to be free will was actually all scripted and choreographed before he was born.

In other words, you evangelize or pray or stay healthy because, according to God's ordination, there is really no other choice!

skypair

 

JM,

I guess the result is the same either way -- fate "rules!" No free will. Creation is merely God's version of "Greek tragedy" and Greek mythology was the true "religion" all along!

skypair

 

No, it's NOT the same.

You believe in a literal creation, right?

It's like this:

FATE - The "big bang" was bound to happen eventually based on an infinite array of impersonal mechanical possibilities. It was fated.

DETERMINISM - The whole creation was INTELLIGENTLY DESIGNED by an infinitely Wise Being known as God. It didn't just happen. It was not fate. It was determined.

DETERMINISM IS NOT UNIQUE TO CALVINISTIC THEOLOGY!! All the theologians and philosophers in history had a view of determinism. Fate vs determinism was one of the key features of the work of Plato.

No serious thinker will accuse calvinism of teaching fatalism. Buy hay, what a convenient diversion it provides. We love to stick ugly labels on people, don't we.

 

Hello JM, I understand that argument, and it's a good one.

 

I think the reasons "some" people bring up the fatalism charge in response to the Biblical teaching of election are:

1. They don't understand election.

2. They don't want to understand election because, if they did, they would have to deal with it honestly.

3. They don't believe in a Sovereign Almighty God.

4. They believe in almighty mankind.

5. They don't trust God.

I sure there maybe other reasons but, in my opinion, many of those who resort to the fatalism charge in response to the Biblical teaching of election will fall into one or more of those groups.

 

Hi JM;

Because we are to be submisive to the powers that be.

Because we have been told to not because it was predestined.

Commandments!

Hebrews 9:27 doesn't say that at all but says;
Heb 9:27 And as it is appointed unto men once to die, but after this the judgment:
This is a long way from a time of death. Then you use;
Psa 91:7 A thousand shall fall at thy side, and ten thousand at thy right hand; but it shall not come nigh thee.
This doesn't say anything about our being predestined to die at a certain time either.

Neither of these verses say anything about being ordained or appointed to Salvation.

I don't try to call people something insulting and then try to convert them to my point of view. So I'll not call Calvinism fatalism. However that doesn't mean I agree with there interpretation of what predestination really is.
I don't believe God's foreknowledge has anything to do with the out come of our lives. Predestination of the individual isn't necessary for God to accomplish His general plan on how things are suppose to be, because God created all things to be just as they are. Where we disagree is that some are predestined to Salvation yet I don't believe you can show one scripture that says so. This predestination below isn't to Salvation but after it.
Eph 1:5 Having predestinated us unto the adoption of children by Jesus Christ to himself, according to the good pleasure of his will,

So many Calvinist seem to believe that they were predestined to be saved. We just aren't saved by the predestination of God. We are saved by the Faith of Jesus Christ that doesn't mean our own faith. We are saved when we repent. Then we can put on the righteousness of Christ.

2Co 7:10 For godly sorrow worketh repentance to salvation not to be repented of: but the sorrow of the world worketh death.


The reason people call Calvinism a fatalistic view is because of an inability to show it in scripture.
Anyone can take a scripture and elaborate on it and make it appear it says something it clearly doesn't.
I know Calvinist mean well. They are sincere in there beliefs. But there meaning well and there sincerity isn't the truth of scripture.
MB

 

So, the sin I commit is determined by God, and the rejection of Christ by the reprobate are also determined. This is double predestination...hyper calvinism, and like johnp sees it, the only correct and logical conclusion to the false doctrine known as calvinism.

 

All who believe in the full omniscience of God are either fatalist or determinists.

1) If God is fully omniscient, then He knows with 100% accuracy if Bob will die tomorrow or not.
2) This beings so, there is nothing Bob could possible do to change this knowledge - whether Bob will die or not die tomorrow is either fated or determined already.
3) Thus one who believes in a fully omniscient God must accept either fatalism or determinism

So, if one wishes to fault Cism for its 'fatalism', then I fault them either for their hyprocrisy or their rejection of God's full omniscience.

 

You mean it doesn't deal with the "problem"/issue of "double-foreknowledge." In Rom 8:29-30 we see foreknowledge and predestination to heaven and not to hell. It tells that all whom God foreknows will believe, He predestines a plan for their every move, just like a parent would even to the point of cutting the rebellious child loose (1Cor 5).

No -- that twists the meaning of foreknowledge. You go from treating foreknowledge as "foresaw" to treating it as if it were predestination. He created ALL "with election in mind." It's just that most never chose God. What you just did is take the responsibility of their going to hell OFF of the non-elect and put it ON God. They don't go for anything they have or haven't done -- they go merely because God made them go.

We all ought to go to hell, right? It is no mere coincidence that BELIEVERS are the "elect" who go to heaven -- it is the PURPOSE of God! ONLY believers go to heaven and believing is NOT something God can do for you or to you. How do you conceive that God could "wire" your brain or spirit to believe and you not be better than someone else? Someway God has to "trigger" your spirit to respond from the same point that someone else doesn't, right? And Calvinists call this "irresistible grace," right?

In truth, at some point in time, God's grace is irresistible to you. That point is when YOU BELIEVE, JM. When you are convicted from God that you are a sinner and YOU turn to God. He doesn't turn to you with a special "dog whistle" only the "elect" can hear (as it seems Calvinists would have it) -- you turn to Him. YOUR choice, NOT God's. Have you turned from self to God, JM? Or were you told you didn't need to -- it's not up to you anyway -- your election is as good as your "holiness" thereafter?

In the paradigm of "foreknowledge," no. God foresaw them when they were born and throughout their lives. He let them choose to believe and it was those that He foresaw as the "elect." Or, if they didn't believe, those He foresaw as "non-elect."

As a general truth, yes. As a individual truth, no.



skypair

 

dw

All who believe in the full omniscience of God are either fatalist or determinists.

1) If God is fully omniscient, then He knows with 100% accuracy if Bob will die tomorrow or not.

2) This beings so, there is nothing Bob could possible do to change this knowledge - whether Bob will die or not die tomorrow is either FOREKNOWN AND ORDAINED -- NOT FOISTED ON ONE FOR NO APPARENT REASON.

3) Thus one who believes in a fully omniscient God must accept either fatalism or determinism

I think you will notice my revisions, d-dub. You see, Bob died for a reason. The cause wasn't God -- Bob might have been, say, a drunk driver. Or he might have been "wrong place - wrong time. Either way, God did not kill Bob. He FOREKNEW of Bob's death but didn't "pull the trigger" as one might think a Calvinist would see it (seeing as how they can't explain for our side how one gets saved :laugh: )

Ergo -- fatalism IS determinism!

skypair

 

So it seems that you agree that all who believe in the full omniscience of God are either fatalists or determinists. K, lets not see you faulting any Cists for being determinists/fatalists then

So...explain the death of all the first born in Egypt or the slaying of all people in Jericho in those terms please. Wrong place - wrong time maybe?

So then you are both a fatalist-determinist then? I am not really having a problem with the label as long as we all understand that all of us fit that category. Once that is settled, then we can move on to discussion of the things on which we really disagree.

 

Sorry -- I guess you didn't notice that I amended your words so that I could "swallow" them to some degree. I'm not sure you agreed with my revisions, however.

God ordains the CONSEQUENCES of sin and rebellion -- even if the sin belongs to someone else. It is not fatalistic to say that choices have consequences so long as we have choices.

Therefore, what you are doing is comparing situations where people had no choices with situations where they do (like salvation) and you are saying they are equal. Not true.

No. But the 2 terms, IMO, are synonymous.

skypair

 

There is a difference in fatalism of the world of which they do not refer to themselves as Children of God.

If we take all the meanings we can find in the dictionaries they will mostly support a non-Christian world view of fatalism.

Those of us who see Calvinism as a "form of fatalism". There are characteristics of its philosophy that lend itself to what I would call a modified form of the fatalism.

I would agree that Calvinism is not, in its philosophical view of the Bible, totally akin to the secular definition of "fatalism". It has it own version or definition.

I would agree that to argue from a purely secular understanding of the word is lacking in identifying the difference that the fatalistic Calvinistic Philosophy teaches.

Where as the "fatalistic Calvinistic philosophy" permits God to give blessings to a few of the many - that in and of itself - is one difference. Also, the concept of sin as the reason that all who are fatalistically damned to hell by the Calvinistic philosophy of which they - the damned - do not have any part in or say in the matter is different from the stand point that it is contrasting or comparing God with man. Because the god of "fatalistic Calvinistic philosophy" see God as hostel to the lost that are not elect or specifically picked in eternity that this is a different twist in the concept of fatalism. The Calvinist philosophy takes fatalism and modifies it to fit their philosophical theology. If you think about it to posit that God loves all, died for all, desires all to be saved then refuses to save all and only saves some of the all is a rather fatalistic view of life. If however, God - in his love - saves all who call on his Name and the ones that don't but can then the concept of any form of "fatalism" vanishes.

Secular fatalism has no hell, no God, and all end up in the same state - back to nothingness - where as "fatalistic Calvinistic philosophy" provides a worse scenario for the fatally damned who are not pick for heaven.

In this sense the "fatalistic Calvinistic philosophy" is more sever on the damned than secularistic fatalism, because secular fatalism has not hell or heaven. It all ends when it ends.

Gordon