Predestination I think not.

  • Christian Chat is a moderated online Christian community allowing Christians around the world to fellowship with each other in real time chat via webcam, voice, and text, with the Christian Chat app. You can also start or participate in a Bible-based discussion here in the Christian Chat Forums, where members can also share with each other their own videos, pictures, or favorite Christian music.

    If you are a Christian and need encouragement and fellowship, we're here for you! If you are not a Christian but interested in knowing more about Jesus our Lord, you're also welcome! Want to know what the Bible says, and how you can apply it to your life? Join us!

    To make new Christian friends now around the world, click here to join Christian Chat.

stonesoffire

Poetic Member
Nov 24, 2013
10,095
1,532
113
#41
1 Corinthians 14:33) For God is not the author of confusion, but of peace, as in all churches of the saints.

I believe in the Holy Trinity
I do not believe in the Holy Trinity
I believe Jesus is God
I do not believe Jesus is God
I believe in the Young Earth
I believe in the Old Earth
I believe Grace Only
I do not believe Grace Only
I believe we should Tithe
I do not believe we should Tithe
I believe water baptism is for salvation
I do not believe water baptism is for salvation
I believe women can not have authority over men or be Pastors/Leaders
I believe women can have authority over men or be Pastors/Leaders
I believe Once Saved Always Saved
I believe that God will never forsake us, but we can forsake Him
I believe in Predestination
I believe in Free Will
I believe the Holy Spirit is the Comforter promised to come to us and instructing us in all things
I believe the Written Word (Bible) is the Comforter sent to instruct us in all things
I believe we should observe the celebration of Foot Washing
I do not believe we should not observe the celebration of Foot Washing
I believe the New Earth will be our eternal home
I believe Heaven will be our eternal home
I believe the Ten Commandments are still in effect for the Church
I do not believe the Ten Commandments are still in effect for the Church
I believe Pre........ Post ......... A ........ millennial
I believe we must obey the Commandments of Christ
I do not believe we must obey the Commandments of Christ
I believe we should baptize "in the name of Jesus."
I believe we should baptize "in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit."

.............and on, and on, and on, and..............

SO: If God is not the Author of Confusion, why did He predestine so many people to believe so many different things, which has resulted in so very much confusion within the Church?
Well...there are physically 12 tribes in Israel and all have definite different characteristics. Yet all came from Jacob. Israel.

Could it be the same for spiritual Israel who all come through Yeshua-salvation?

Just noticed..the one thing that binds Spiritual Israel is to know that God came in flesh. Otherwise it is anti Christ. Is this not true?
 

tourist

Senior Member
Mar 13, 2014
28,444
6,842
113
64
Florida
#42
1 Corinthians 14:33) For God is not the author of confusion, but of peace, as in all churches of the saints.

I believe in the Holy Trinity
I do not believe in the Holy Trinity
I believe Jesus is God
I do not believe Jesus is God
I believe in the Young Earth
I believe in the Old Earth
I believe Grace Only
I do not believe Grace Only
I believe we should Tithe
I do not believe we should Tithe
I believe water baptism is for salvation
I do not believe water baptism is for salvation
I believe women can not have authority over men or be Pastors/Leaders
I believe women can have authority over men or be Pastors/Leaders
I believe Once Saved Always Saved
I believe that God will never forsake us, but we can forsake Him
I believe in Predestination
I believe in Free Will
I believe the Holy Spirit is the Comforter promised to come to us and instructing us in all things
I believe the Written Word (Bible) is the Comforter sent to instruct us in all things
I believe we should observe the celebration of Foot Washing
I do not believe we should not observe the celebration of Foot Washing
I believe the New Earth will be our eternal home
I believe Heaven will be our eternal home
I believe the Ten Commandments are still in effect for the Church
I do not believe the Ten Commandments are still in effect for the Church
I believe Pre........ Post ......... A ........ millennial
I believe we must obey the Commandments of Christ
I do not believe we must obey the Commandments of Christ
I believe we should baptize "in the name of Jesus."
I believe we should baptize "in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit."

.............and on, and on, and on, and..............

SO: If God is not the Author of Confusion, why did He predestine so many people to believe so many different things, which has resulted in so very much confusion within the Church?
God may not be the author of confusion yet this verse about the Tower of Babel seems confusing.

Genesis 11:1-5
But the Lord came down to see the city and the tower which the sons of men had built. And the Lord said, “Indeed the people are one and they all have one language, and this is what they begin to do; now nothing that they propose to do will be withheld from them. Come, let Us go down and there confuse their language, that they may not understand one another’s speech.”
 

Nehemiah6

Senior Member
Jul 18, 2017
8,978
2,772
113
#43
God may not be the author of confusion yet this verse about the Tower of Babel seems confusing.
Why does it seem confusing? God deliberately caused confusion at Babel (which means confusion) so that idolatry would not increase at that one location inordinately.

When the Bible says that God is not a God of confusion, it has a completely different meaning. It means that Scripture is not written to confuse people, neither are God's commandments and directives given to cause confusion. Everything is consistent and harmonious.
 

tourist

Senior Member
Mar 13, 2014
28,444
6,842
113
64
Florida
#44
Why does it seem confusing? God deliberately caused confusion at Babel (which means confusion) so that idolatry would not increase at that one location inordinately.

When the Bible says that God is not a God of confusion, it has a completely different meaning. It means that Scripture is not written to confuse people, neither are God's commandments and directives given to cause confusion. Everything is consistent and harmonious.
I absolutely believe that God is not the God of confusion because He confused the language for a reason. Scripture is certainly not written to confuse but rather to enlighten.
 

maxwel

Senior Member
Apr 18, 2013
8,587
1,802
113
#45
Lets put it more like this

Gods sovereignty

He chose Pharoah, Because he foreknew pharoah would do by his own free will what God needed him to do.


While your correct is saying foreknwoledge does not CAUSE events, It can and doea (and literally did ( cause decisions to be made. Based on gods knowing not only what will happen. But who will do what he needs to be done.

God chose Judas KNOWING he would reject him, and also would turn him in to the jews. Because that was his plan. If judas would not have done this, God would have chosen someone else.
Foreknowledge & Causality - Clarifications

Let's look at this a bit closer, and we'll start with your statement:

"God chose Judas KNOWING he would reject him."

In your example, God both CHOSE and FOREKNEW.

God both CHOSE and FOREKNEW.
But which of those words actually CAUSED anything to happen?
The information, the foreknowing, didn't CAUSE anything to happen.
It is the CHOOSING that CAUSED things to happen.


The KNOWING didn't cause anything, it's the CHOOSING that caused things... it was the CHOOSING that had causative power.

CHOOSING is an action, an active force, and it has causative power.
KNOWING has no causative power.

God could foreknow all kinds of things about Judas, but unless he CHOSE him, unless God took some kind of ACTION, then no changes were going to enter the normal causal chain of events. Nothing special was going to happen.

God had to take his foreknowing, and then use that as an informational basis for some kind of ACTION.
God had to begin a causative chain of events, and simply "knowing' does not create a causal chain.
Information doesn't have causative power.

Please listen carefully: I am NOT arguing here that God did NOT predetermine events. That's a different argument. All I'm saying is that foreknowledge does not CAUSE anything, so foreknowledge did not CAUSE events. Foreknowledge is not some kind of magical machine that creates chains of events and puts physical actions in place.
KNOWLEDGE IS CAUSALLY IMPOTENT: it doesn't actually DO anything.

Foreknowledge DOESN'T cause anything because it CANNOT cause anything.

Knowledge has no causative power.

KNOWING isn't an action.

KNOWING doesn't cause things.

You can know things, then based on that knowing you can take action... but the knowing doesn't cause anything, it's the action that causes things.
* Therefore, foreknowledge, alone, isn't proof of predeterminism.
* The Calvinist can offer other proofs, but this particular argument isn't a proof.



How This Affects Calvinism:

A. It doesn't.
My argument here doesn't really affect Calvinism at all... not at all.
It only points out that one particular defense they use isn't a good defense.
However, Calvinism does not hinge on them using this particular defense.

B. The Calvinist could argue a couple of other ways though, and those would be perfectly rational.

b1) The calvinist could say everything worked in reverse: he could say God predetermined everything, and that is how he foreknew.
Rather than saying the foreknowing caused the predetermining, he can say the predetermining caused the foreknowing.
* In this defense, the Calvinist could say God predetermined, meaning he intentionally took ACTIONS to bring certain things about.. and based on these ACTIONS, he foreknew the outcomes.
This is perfectly rational.

b2) The Calvinist could also say God foreknew everything, and based on that omniscience, he simply CHOSE to take certain actions and put certain things into place. They could say: "The forekowing didn't CAUSE anything, but based on the foreknowing, God CHOSE to actively cause things"
That's also perfectly rational.
 

stonesoffire

Poetic Member
Nov 24, 2013
10,095
1,532
113
#46
What about God knowing the end from the beginning? How would you explain this? And am not challenging.

He would have to know the choosing wouldn’t He?
 

maxwel

Senior Member
Apr 18, 2013
8,587
1,802
113
#47
What about God knowing the end from the beginning? How would you explain this? And am not challenging.
Omniscience doesn't have an "explanation", it is just part of God's nature.

Calvinists and Armenians both agree that God is omniscient, and that this omniscience includes knowledge of past, present, and future.

The way omniscience is usually defined is that "God has knowledge of all true propositions."


Note - Open Theism:
There is a theological camp called "open theism" that DOES NOT believe God has all foreknowledge.
I disagree with this, and I cannot possibly say enough things AGAINST this view.
- If Calvinism turns out to be completely correct, and I'm wrong on some things, that's fine. No big deal.
- But for Open Theism to be right, God would have to stop being God. That's a problem.
..
 

maxwel

Senior Member
Apr 18, 2013
8,587
1,802
113
#48
What about God knowing the end from the beginning? How would you explain this? And am not challenging.

He would have to know the choosing wouldn’t He?
Stonesoffire,
I may have been in a hurry and failed to answer the direct point of your post.

Let me try to restate your whole point to clarify.
1. If God has foreknowledge of all things, then God knows HOW people will choose.
2. If God knows HOW people will choose, then this implies that people are, in some way, "locked in" to God's foreknowledge, and thus God's foreknowledge CAUSES their choosing.

If you read my previous posts, I go into that in a lot of detail.
But I'll give a few more examples of how it works.


Foreknowledge: Information has no causal power


It's a well known principle we all rely on:

A. Information, in itself, has no power to CAUSE anything.
B. If it has no power to cause anything, then it still cannot CAUSE anything regardless of WHEN that information comes into existence.
C. Something (like information) which has no physical substance, no will, no volition, and no power, and which cannot CAUSE anything, simply cannot CAUSE anything. It doesn't matter WHEN that thing comes into existence; it cannot cause anything because it cannot cause anything. It has no causal abilities.
D. If a thing (like information) has no causal power AT ALL, then it still has no causal power regardless of WHEN it comes into existence. Since it has no causal power regardless of when it comes into existence, then it doesn't matter if it comes into existence after an event, or before an event... it still has no causal power.
E. If you gain knowledge of an event BEFORE the event, then that information, in itself and by itself, has no ability to cause the event... because information can never, under any circumstances, CAUSE ANYTHING.
F. Information about an event is only that, information ABOUT an event. Information ABOUT an event is not the CAUSE of an event.
(We know ABOUT lots of things, but that doesn't CAUSE the things.)



No matter how you slice it, knowledge does not cause anything.
Knowledge has no causal power.
Knowledge DOES NOT cause anything because it CANNOT cause anything.
It has no power to do anything.... information is causally impotent.

Information has no causal power.
I didn't just dream this up.
Information scientists know this, philosophers know this, all scientists RELY on this, and it's a thing we all use and count on in daily life. It's well known, and it constitutes a logical axiom... one that has plenty of proofs.
Information is causally impotent.


Examples:

1. Thumb drive:
Imagine you copy a lot of information onto a thumb drive, and lock your thumb drive in a drawer for a million years.
Even after a million years, the information on that thumb drive will not have CAUSED anything to happen.
Nothing will happen unless someone takes that information and ACTS on it.
The information itself has no causal power... it doesn't DO anything.
Information is causally impotent, and WE COUNT ON THIS DAILY!!!

Imagine if all the information in all the places it's stored could just get up, on it's own volition, and just start doing things without us!!!

But it doesn't.

We RELY, DAILY, on information being causally impotent.

2. Tech Companies.
People have privacy concerns because big tech companies collect (often steal) personal information, and then use it or sell it without our consent.
So what is the ACTUAL problem here?
People are not mad at the big tech companies because information merely exists.
People understand that the mere existence of information is safe, because information, in itself, has no power to harm us.
So what's the problem?
People are mad at big tech companies because they take the VOLITIONAL ACTION of collecting/stealing the information, and then taking the VOLITIONAL ACTION of USING that information in some way we don't sanction.

Nobody is upset because their private information simply exists.. because left to itelself, information doesn't do us any harm.
They are only upset when someone takes it and USES it without their permission.
Why?
Because information, left to itself, DOESN'T DO ANYTHING.
It must be ACTED UPON by a VOLITIONAL AGENT.

Now, imagine if your personal information actually had causative power.
What if your personal information, like your bank account number, could just get up, go out, and GIVE ITSELF TO AlL YOUR NEIGHBORS!
But it doesn't.
Information, in itself, has no power to do anything.

We RELY, DAILY, on information being causally impotent.


3. Football game:
A. Imagine there is a football game, and I learn the score 1 hour after the game. If I learn the score after the game, that doesn't cause anything to change in the game.

B. Now, what if I somehow learned the score 1 hour BEFORE the game? Well, that information doesn't CAUSE anything either. The players just played the game the same as they normally would. The fact that I have information doesn't CAUSE the players on the field to do anything.
* My knowledge of the score would only CAUSE anything if I TOOK ACTION on that information by interfering with the game.

Just imagine if sports bookies had really great information about the outcomes of some games. Let's say it's such good information that they are 100% certain of the outcomes. Now imagine if that information actually had POWER to CHANGE THE GAMES!

But it doesn't.

Information doesn't DO anything.

We RELY, DAILY, on information being causally impotent.

.
 

maxwel

Senior Member
Apr 18, 2013
8,587
1,802
113
#49
Calvinists - Relax, Take A Deep Breath:

Once again, I'm NOT trying to disprove Calvinism here.
I'm just pointing out that one particular argument is a bad argument.
It's illogical, but it's fairly compelling, and it gets stated over and over, so everyone just assumes it must be true.
It does seem compelling because the concepts of time and foreknowledge are so weird and abstract... but the argument just doesn't work.

If God, by a sovereign act of his own POWER AND WILL, ACTIVELY CAUSED all things to occur in only such a way that all things are predetermined, and man has no genuine volition of any kind...
then fine.

I'm fine with that.

I personally disagree with certain parts of that.
I think God COULD do that, and God has every RIGHT to do that... but he just didn't do things quite in that way.

But if he did, that's fine with me.
I'm fine with that.

* I am not saying that God COULD NOT, or DID NOT necessarily predetermine all things through the sovereign actions of his own will.
* I am saying that foreknowledge is not a proof for predeterminism, because knowledge has no cause power... it is not a volitional agent, and it has no power of any kind.
* But God IS a volitional agent, and he DOES have power... so if God simply chose to predetermine all things in a certain way, and then chose to cause those things to be... then fine.

I am not claiming God has no power, or right, to do whatever he pleases.
I am just showing that foreknowledge isn't a proof; foreknowledge isn't a proof that things are predetermined... it isn't a good argument.
..
 

Melach

Well-known member
Mar 28, 2019
684
441
63
#50
here is entire playlist refuting calvinist arguments.

they got many since they waste so much time coming up with different mind tricks they replaced evangelism with debates. nobody regular unsaved person cares about textual criticism or aleph b or the pelagian controversy or any words like that.

i looked into calvinism some time ago here but no matter how i looked i cant escape it but its evil to put all that on God, its not biblical. they cant really preach the gospel because you cant know if Jesus died for your audience. limited atonement. and they use that *oh you are universalist* mind trick but also that is adressed in that playlist.

i linked it if someone else is in my position who is looking into calvinism like maybe yeah but answer is NO stay away from cult of calvinism