Predestination and Determinism

[Biblelesson]

You know it.

God hates Calvinism, because it offends the Cross of Christ and rejects the Grace of God as GOD provides it.

Calvinism is "of the Devil", and its deceived are a bane against the Body of Christ.



No, that's "Born again". as "ALL who Believe".. not "all who are elected".

John Calvin hated John 3:16, because it rejects his "doctrine of devils'..



"pre-destination" is Calvin's demonic Theology.

Calvinism is a cancer on the body of Christ.



Exaclty.

'what IF">

That is a consideration,.... that is not a declaration.

See,..... those in that discussion, one is being addressed like this..."what is it to you".. "who are you to be telling God"... and in that perspective you then read... "what IF God...

See that?
Calvinism is built on a "what if". perspective.. a "well, God could do it" "what if God decided to hurl Pluto into Jupiter"., and if He did, what is that to you ?

So that is how you read that., to get the correct understanding.

And when you read about "vessels of wrath, fitted for destruction"......that is not teaching that God chose them for that... That is teaching that when they decided to NOT BELIEVE then they became under the wrath of God that will not be removed unless they turn from their unbelief.

JOHN 3:36, is describing these WILL-FUL "stiff necked".... people.

Hebrews Chapter 6 and 10... and Acts 28:28 describe them VIVIDLY.



To be "chosen in Him" is to be birthed as "in Christ'.
That gets you "" Predestined to be conformed into the image"

See, there is a pre-destined "conforming" of a born again believer into "the image of Christ.

That's the verse.

So, Calvin rewrote "predestined to be conformed" into "predestined before you were born to be chosen to be saved", "or not".

He made that up, because He was a mentally twisted scripture rejecting devil.

Noone is pre-destined to be born again, ...yet everyone who is born again is pre-destined to be "conformed into the image of Christ".



That is God's Foreknowledge.
See, God knew what He was going to do, at all times.... because that is God's Foreknowledge.
He also knows what you are going to do, next.. @Biblelesson
God knew that Christ would come, and the Trib would come, and the 2nd Advent would come.

God always KNOWS what is going to happen next, as that is God's FORE-KNOWING... (Foreknowledge)
And Calvin falsely redefined all that as ""'pre-destined"".

See, Calvin's insanity, (Theologically) is that He re-defined "God's Foreknowledge" as "pre-destined" and that is the lie from Hell that is the core of John Calvinism, which is a extreme "doctrine of devils".



Yes, God saves us by His Grace, and His Grace is the Cross of Christ that is given to the "WORLD"... John 3:16
And God foreknew this would happen, before Jesus was Virgin Born.
So, once again, this is simply the FORE-Knowledge of God.. and that is God knowing all that is going to happen next.

The BIBLE is the same.
The BIBLE has shown YOU, that the TRIB is coming.. but that is not the BIBLE "pre-destining it".. that is the Bible REVEALING IT.

See that?

So, Calvin would say that this is the bible "pre-destining it" because He had this obsession with redefining future revelation, or "God's Foreknowledge' as "pre-destined to happen".

Ive never met a mind blinded Calvinist, who can understand correctly, that God knowing everything, is not the same as God causing Everything.

See that?

Calvin's core demonic doctrine is to change "God's Fore-knowing" into God Pre-destined.

That's the LIE of Calvinism that is its core heresy and from that lie, Calvin just kept on going and going, like a cancer that just keeps on growing.



Every Calvinist teaches that lie,.
See, every Calvinist will say that all of their family.. all of YOUR Family, is "Pre-destined", because you have to say it.

However.... once you realize that some of your family, (According to your IDOL John Calvin).... are not pre-destined to believe, then you are going to have a wake up call and the reality is going to bite you.


But till then, You'll just pretend the some of the members here are not "pre-destined elect" or their Family.... .while all of your family is pre-destined for heaven.

Uh huh...

Come on I know you're closet Calvinist, stop lying to yourself. You're predestined. You have God's foreknowledge written all over you.

 

[Biblelesson]

Fatalism and determinism are related philosophical concepts, but they have distinct differences in their implications and interpretations.

1. Determinism:Determinism is the philosophical idea that all events, including human actions and choices, are causally determined by prior events and the laws of nature. It suggests that the present state of the universe, along with the natural laws that govern it, necessarily leads to specific future events. In a deterministic worldview, the future is viewed as a logical consequence of the past and the laws of cause and effect. This concept applies to both natural events and human actions.
   Difference: Determinism is a broader and more general concept, encompassing the idea that all events are causally determined. It doesn't necessarily imply a specific belief about fate or predestination. Determinism can be compatible with the idea of free will, as some philosophers propose "compatibilism," which suggests that free will can coexist with determinism if actions align with an individual's desires and motivations.
2. Fatalism:Fatalism is the belief that all events and outcomes are predetermined and inevitable, regardless of human actions or choices. In a fatalistic view, it is futile for individuals to resist or change the course of events since they are bound to unfold as preordained. Fatalism often implies the idea of an external force or destiny that guides events in an inexorable manner.
   Difference: Fatalism is a specific subset of determinism, focusing on the inevitability of future events, typically without consideration of causality or the laws of nature. Fatalism tends to have a more fatalistic outlook, suggesting that events will unfold irrespective of human agency, choices, or actions. Unlike some interpretations of determinism, fatalism tends to reject the possibility of free will altogether.

In summary, determinism is a broader concept that suggests all events are causally determined, while fatalism is a specific subset of determinism that emphasizes the inevitability and predestination of events, often implying a lack of human control or influence over the unfolding of these events. While determinism can be compatible with free will (in the form of compatibilism), fatalism typically presents a more pessimistic view that events are fixed and beyond human intervention or choice.

Theological Determinism: This perspective holds that a divine entity or a higher power's omniscience and plan predetermine all events, including human actions.

Hard determinism is a philosophical position that asserts that free will is an illusion and that all events, including human actions and choices, are entirely determined by antecedent causes. In other words, under hard determinism, there is no room for genuine human agency or the ability to make choices that are independent of prior causes and conditions.

According to hard determinism, the state of the universe at any given moment, along with the laws of nature, logically and inevitably lead to specific outcomes in the future. This perspective denies the existence of any true alternatives and suggests that every action or decision made by an individual is the inevitable result of the sum total of their genetic makeup, past experiences, and external influences.

The proponents of hard determinism often draw on ideas from causal determinism, which posits that the world operates according to a chain of cause-and-effect relationships. They argue that even our thoughts and feelings are predetermined by physical processes in the brain and the external environment, leaving no room for genuine free will.

As a consequence of hard determinism, notions of moral responsibility and accountability become problematic. If individuals are not ultimately in control of their actions and choices, the traditional concepts of blame, punishment, and reward lose their grounding in the context of personal responsibility.

Critics of hard determinism argue that it negates the intuitive sense of agency and choice that humans experience in their everyday lives. They contend that certain complexities, such as the unpredictability of human behavior and the presence of genuine uncertainty in some systems (e.g., quantum mechanics), challenge the notion of a purely deterministic universe.

Overall, the debate between hard determinism and other philosophical perspectives on free will remains an ongoing and profound topic in philosophy and cognitive sciences, touching on fundamental questions about the nature of human existence and the limits of human autonomy.

calvinism is determinism which is fatalism.

hope this helps !!!

Yes sir the debate will go on and on. But it's still fun discussing it. I know I'm having a good time.

 

[civic]

Yes sir the debate will go on and on. But it's still fun discussing it. I know I'm having a good time.

agreed

 

[TomL]

From the snippet...

Free-willers:

They wish to be the architects of their own fortunes, the determiners of their own destinies; though why they should fancy they could do that better for themselves than God can be trusted to do it for them, it puzzles one to understand. And their confusion is fostered further by a faulty way they have of conceiving how God works.

Reality:

"Predestination and Fatalism," says Schopenhauer, "do not differ in the main. They differ only in this, that with predestination the external determination of human action proceeds from a rational Being, and with fatalism from an irrational one.

And here's why free-willers reject the reality: They do not trust God because they have a faulty way of conceiving how God works.

Um fatalism can be natural or theistic

Non Calvinists reject the Calvinist view of predestination because the bible does not teach it

 

[Biblelesson]

Predestination is unchangeable. "The foundation of God stands firm." The Lord knows who are His. It's where we get the assurance of our salvation. That's why when Paul spoke of predestination, he said, "Who shall accuse us? Who shall condemn us? Who shall separate us from the love of God? I am the Lord, and I do not change."

Paul goes on to explain that predestination initiates a golden chain of divine acts bound together in the purpose of God: “whom he did predestine, them he also called: and whom he called, them he also justified: and whom he justified, them he also glorified” Romans 8:30

But the first place Pauli uses to analyze the term “predestine” is found in 1st Corinthians 2:7. Here, Paul is describing the nature of God’s wisdom. He says, But we impart a secret and hidden wisdom of God, which God decreed before the ages for our glorification.

Paul was predestined, he tells us so in the book of Galatians.

Galatians 1:15-16 – But when he who had set me apart before I was born, and who called me by his grace, was pleased to reveal his Son to me…

 

[TomL]

Predestination is unchangeable. "The foundation of God stands firm." The Lord knows who are His. It's where we get the assurance of our salvation. That's why when Paul spoke of predestination, he said, "Who shall accuse us? Who shall condemn us? Who shall separate us from the love of God? I am the Lord, and I do not change."

Paul goes on to explain that predestination initiates a golden chain of divine acts bound together in the purpose of God: “whom he did predestine, them he also called: and whom he called, them he also justified: and whom he justified, them he also glorified” Romans 8:30

But the first place Pauli uses to analyze the term “predestine” is found in 1st Corinthians 2:7. Here, Paul is describing the nature of God’s wisdom. He says, But we impart a secret and hidden wisdom of God, which God decreed before the ages for our glorification.

Paul was predestined, he tells us so in the book of Galatians.

Galatians 1:15-16 – But when he who had set me apart before I was born, and who called me by his grace, was pleased to reveal his Son to me…

A promise to those love God and are called according to his purpose and not unconditionally select men.

Romans 8:28–30 (NASB 2020) — 28 And we know that God causes all things to work together for good to those who love God, to those who are called according to His purpose. 29 For those whom He foreknew, He also predestined to become conformed to the image of His Son, so that He would be the firstborn among many brothers and sisters; 30 and these whom He predestined, He also called; and these whom He called, He also justified; and these whom He justified, He also glorified.

 

[Presby02]

There are verses that come in between those that YOU seem to have missed the point of.

God predestined Christ and Men exercise libertine free will to choose or reject Christ is not the message of the first two chapters of Ephesians.

I leave it to you to find out what God inspired Paul to actually write.

 

[TomL]

https://berean-apologetics.community.forum/threads/predestination-and-determinism.1122/post-79213

 

[Presby02]

https://berean-apologetics.community.forum/threads/predestination-and-determinism.1122/post-79213

Ya? So?

 

[TomL]

Ya? So?

So deal with the fact of Ephesians 1

All spiritual blessings are in Christ

There is no election to salvation outside of Christ

There is no regeneration outside of Christ

That is so

 

[Presby02]

So deal with the fact of Ephesians 1

All spiritual blessings are in Christ

There is no election to salvation outside of Christ

There is no regeneration outside of Christ

That is so

There has to be if the choice is made from the foundation of the world. Your own proof text. Apparently not carefully read.

 

[TomL]

There has to be if the choice is made from the foundation of the world. Your own proof text. Apparently not carefully read.

Sorry no that is your assumption based on particular unconditional election

If it however is seen as the corporate election of believers to be holy and blameless that idea vanishes

and one no longer contradicts scripture as you have


Ephesians 1:3 (NASB 2020) — 3 Blessed be the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, who has blessed us with every spiritual blessing in the heavenly places in Christ,

 

[civic]

Sorry no that is your assumption based on particular unconditional election

If it however is seen as the corporate election of believers to be holy and blameless that idea vanishes

and one no longer contradicts scripture as you have


Ephesians 1:3 (NASB 2020) — 3 Blessed be the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, who has blessed us with every spiritual blessing in the heavenly places in Christ,

Yes and no one is in Christ until after they believe snd receive Him as the text says in 13-14.

 

[praise_yeshua]

Great snippet. Emphasis mine.

Interestingly, you've left out the fact that you believe God has predestined MOST to eternal damnation.

Add this to your "equation" and then reassess while not considering yourself. Think..... empathy.

 

[TomL]

Yes and no one is in Christ until after they believe snd receive Him as the text says in 13-14.

Yes

Calvinism grants blessing apart from Christ and is therefore unbiblical

 

[praise_yeshua]

There is the difference between Fate and Predestination. And all the language of men cannot tell the immensity of the difference.

This is a sad state of mind that people fall into sometimes, in which they do not know the difference between God and Fate. One of the most astonishing illustrations of it in all history is, no doubt, that afforded by our Cumberland Presbyterian brethren, who for a hundred years, now, have been vigorously declaring that the Westminster Confession teaches "fatalism." What they mean is that the Westminster Confession of Faith teaches that it is God who determines all that shall happen in his universe; that God has not -- to use a fine phrase of Dr. Charles Hodge's -- "given it either to necessity, or to chance, or to the caprice of man, or to the malice of Satan, to control the sequence of events and all their issues, but has kept the reins of government in his own hands." This, they say, is Fate: because (so they say) it involves "an inevitable necessity" in the falling out of events. And this doctrine of "fatality," they say -- or at least, their historian, Dr. B. W. McDonnold says for them -- is "the one supreme difficulty which it has never been possible to reconcile," and which still "stands an insuperable obstacle to a reunion" between them and "the mother church." "Whether the hard places in the Westminster Confession be justly called fatality or not," he adds, "they are too hard for us."

Now, is it not remarkable that men with hearts on fire with love to God should not know him from Fate? Of course, the reason is not far to seek. Like other men, and like the singer in the sweet hymn that begins, "I was a wandering sheep," they have a natural objection to being "controlled." They wish to be the architects of their own fortunes, the determiners of their own destinies; though why they should fancy they could do that better for themselves than God can be trusted to do it for them, it puzzles one to understand. And their confusion is fostered further by a faulty way they have of conceiving how God works. They fancy he works only by "general law." "Divine influence," they call it (rather than "him"): and they conceive this "divine influence" as a diffused force, present through the whole universe and playing on all alike, just like gravity, or light, or heat. What happens to the individual, therefore, is determined, not by the "divine influence" which plays alike on all, but by something in himself which makes him respond more or less to the "divine influence" common to all. If we conceive God's modes of operation, thus, under the analogy of a natural force, no wonder if we cannot tell him from Fate. For Fate is just Natural Force; and if Natural Force should thus govern all things that would be Fatalism.

The conception is, we see, in essence the same as that of the old Greeks. "To the Stoic, in fact," says Dr. Bigg, "God was Natural Law, and his other name was Destiny. Thus we read in the famous hymn of Cleanthes: 'Lead us, 0 Zeus, and Thou too, 0 destiny, whithersoever ye have appointed for us to go. For I will follow without hesitation. And if I refuse I shall become evil, but I shall follow all the same.' Man is himself a part of the great world-force, carried along in its all-embracing sweep, like the water-beetle in a torrent. He may struggle, or he may let himself go; but the result is the same, except that in the latter case, he embraces his doom, and so is at peace." When a man thus identifies God with mere natural law, he may obtain resignation, but he cannot attain religion. And the resignation attained may conceal beneath it the intensest bitterness of spirit. We all remember that terrible epigram of Palladas: "If caring avails anything, why, certainly, take good care; but if care is taken for you by a God, what's the use of your taking care? It's all the same whether you care or care not; the God takes care only for this -- that you shall have cares enough." That is the outcome of fatalism -- of confounding God with Natural Law.

What, now, is the real difference between this Fatalism and the Predestination taught, say, in our Confession? "Predestination and Fatalism," says Schopenhauer, "do not differ in the main. They differ only in this, that with predestination the external determination of human action proceeds from a rational Being, and with fatalism from an irrational one. But in either case the result is the same." That is to say, they differ precisely as a person differs from a machine. And yet Schopenhauer can represent this as not a radical difference! Professor William James knows better; and in his lectures on "The Varieties of Religious Experience" enlarges on the difference. It is illustrated, he says, by the difference between the chill remark of Marcus Aurelius: "If the gods care not for me or my children, there is a reason for it"; and the passionate cry of Job, "Though he slay me, yet will I trust in him!" Nor is the difference solely in emotional mood. It is precisely the difference that stretches between materialism and religion. There is, therefore, no heresy so great, no heresy that so utterly tears religion up by the roots, as the heresy that thinks of God under the analogy of natural force and forgets that he is a person.

There is a story of a little Dutch boy, which embodies very fairly the difference between God and Fate. This little boy's home was on a dyke in Holland, near a great wind-mill, whose long arms swept so close to the ground as to endanger those who carelessly strayed under them. But he was very fond of playing precisely under this mill. His anxious parents had forbidden him to go near it; and, when his stubborn will did not give way, had sought to frighten him away from it by arousing his imagination to the terror of being struck by the arms and carried up into the air to have life beaten out of him by their ceaseless strokes. One day, heedless of their warning, he strayed again under the dangerous arms, and was soon absorbed in his play there forgetful of everything but his present pleasures.

Perhaps, he was half conscious of a breeze springing up; and somewhere in the depth of his soul, he may have been obscurely aware of the danger with which he had been threatened. At any rate, suddenly, as he played, he was violently smitten from behind, and found himself swung all at once, with his head downward, up into the air; and then the blows came, swift and hard! 0 what a sinking of the heart! 0 what a horror of great darkness! It had come then! And he was gone! In his terrified writhing, he twisted himself about, and looking up, saw not the immeasureable expanse of the brazen heavens above him, but his father's face. At once, he realized, with a great revulsion, that he was not caught in the mill, but was only receiving the threatened punishment of his disobedience. He melted into tears, not of pain, but of relief and joy. In that moment, he understood the difference between falling into the grinding power of a machine and into the loving hands of a father.

Selected Shorter Writings by B. B. WARFIELD​

Are you here to defend every word of Warfield? If so, I'd be glad to deal with Warfield's mistakes here....

Warfield, like most every Calvinist I've ever meet, can't see anyone but themselves in anything. I can give you plenty of fabricated similar stories that do not benefit the Calvinist so contrarily to nature.

I mean seriously, a wind mill missing its target......... only in the imagination....

Have you experienced Joseph's dream yourself?

 

[praise_yeshua]

Predestination is unchangeable. "The foundation of God stands firm." The Lord knows who are His. It's where we get the assurance of our salvation. That's why when Paul spoke of predestination, he said, "Who shall accuse us? Who shall condemn us? Who shall separate us from the love of God? I am the Lord, and I do not change."

Were you 'ALL" born again at the same time?

 

[TomL]

Yes and no one is in Christ until after they believe snd receive Him as the text says in 13-14.

Which transpires in time

Romans 16:7 (KJV 1900) — 7 Salute Andronicus and Junia, my kinsmen, and my fellowprisoners, who are of note among the apostles, who also were in Christ before me.

 

[civic]

Which transpires in time

Romans 16:7 (KJV 1900) — 7 Salute Andronicus and Junia, my kinsmen, and my fellowprisoners, who are of note among the apostles, who also were in Christ before me.

Another passage that refutes their false view on being in Christ before salvation.

 

[Biblelesson]

Were you 'ALL" born again at the same time?

Before I answer your question first let's get straight what we're talking about. Are we talking about the best-known word in the Southern vernacular that is probably The most used pronoun In this case: y'all. A contraction of "you" and "all" is what forms "y'all" when addressing or referencing two or more people.

Or are we talking about universalism?

Let's go with what the bible says.

• John 6:44 and 65– “No one can come to me unless the Father who sent me draws him. And I will raise him up on the last day.” And he said, “This is why I told you that no one can come to me unless it is granted him by the Father.”
• John 1:12-13– But to all who did receive him, who believed in his name, he gave the right to become children of God, who were born, not of blood nor of the will of the flesh nor of the will of man, but of God.

I think we're probably talking about election.

“Election is the unchangeable purpose of God, whereby, before the foundation of the world, He hath out of mere grace, according to the sovereign good pleasure of His own will, chosen, from the whole human race, which had fallen through their own fault from their primitive state of rectitude into sin and destruction, a certain number of persons to redemption in Christ, whom He from eternity appointed the Mediator and Head of the elect, and the foundation of salvation”
Synod of Dort

God’s own pleasure and God’s own will are the basis for election, not some condition foreseen in man.