Predestination or Free Will?
Last week, I was asked to be substitute teacher in my Sunday School class. This is not unusual - happens about 4-6 times per year... sometimes more. Originally, our Sunday School class had another "go-to" person who would teach in our instructor's ("Right Minded") absence. However, that person and his wife left our class about 4-5 years ago, and at the time, as Right Minded put it, there was nobody else left that could do it.
Funny thing - I never asked to be sub. Never really wanted to be the sub. But, not wanting to put a friend in a tough spot, I accepted. To be 100% truthful, it is one of the few things in life I truly do not look forward to doing, but do so out of a strong sense of duty.
At the heart of my personal preference to not teach is the simple fact that I know I am strongly opinionated, and my concern that this will some day put a friend in a tough spot. I thought that had actually come this past week.
A new member to the class was present last week. It so happens that this person is Calvinist, though I was unaware of that fact at the time - it would become painfully clear at the end of that class. Of note in Calvinism, is the philosophy of "the 5 points."
Of note for last Sunday in particular, was the opinion (pro and con) on predestination. (PS - that Wikipedia article actually has a really good segment on the Christian take on the subject, and lays out a lot of good pros and cons). Specifically put, the Calvinist concept of predestination is essentially that those who are and are to be saved by Christ have somehow been selected specially by God ahead of time.
I do not believe in predestination in the least, for a number of reasons. Most notably, the only way that an argument can be made for predestination is to systematically ignore and reassign the meaning of the written words contained in the scripture. Additionally, the scripture is chock-full of reference after reference after reference of Salvation being the gift of God, and being offered to all mankind, and available for us to choose of our own free will.
Simply put - God is not sitting up in Heaven, "playing with his dolls" as it were.
Of course, the Bible actually starts out with mankind's first account of free will in Genesis chapter 2. God gives man a choice, and the consequences of a poor decision:
“From any tree of the garden you may eat freely; 17 but from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil you shall not eat, for in the day that you eat from it you will surely die.”
For a more in-depth set of reasons on why I will never accept the ill-conceived concept of predestination, see this article. Also, another basic reason is that the Bible teaches the concept of "Free Will" and that no words have to be twisted to believe it - even Calvinists cannot deny the concept (only twist it).
The Basics:
At the heart of the disagreement last Sunday, were the Biblical verses from Romans 8:28-30. With my fellow student spouting the typical arguments about "the elect" and he himself 'electing' (pun intended) to misinterpret the words of the verse to read that God foreknew (argued by him to mean that God caused, instead of simply knowing ahead of time), and therefore predestined the "elect."
That very argument, while popular in certain small segments of (most) Presbyterian and (a very few) Baptist circles, is filled with holes:
1. "The elect" or "the chosen," are phrases used by Paul a lot in his epistles. It is used as another way of referring to Christians - as Paul used the terminology to replace the Jews. In fact, every scripture that references the elect and predestination is in fact talking about the Jews!
2. The Greek original word "proginosko" has a simple meaning of having known about something beforehand. There is no implication by any Greek scholars (only Calvinists) that the term means any sort of causal relationship.
3. Even the word "predestined" is not used in a context such as the Calvinists argue. Their argument comes solely from isolating the word and applying a stretched meaning of a translated word (proorizo). Instead of looking at the entire passage, which clearly talks about God causing things to work together for His perfect Will - forming a plan for Salvation of sinners (and, as part of that plan, to be conformed to the image of Christ), and eventually giving those sinners the Glory of God.
Note: This same concept is also mentioned clearly in Ephesians 1:1-10. Of the six times the word "proorizo" is written in the Greek translations of the Bible, these two passages contain half (three of the six) of the instances.
Additionally, it is worthy of note that in the literature, one of the authors talked about the concept of predestination, and stated that it (predestination) was a concept only truly understood in the "annals of God's inner circle" - whatever that is supposed to mean. It is my experience that the Bible was written that all mankind can understand it. The only people I've ever heard proclaim that certain topics in the Bible were beyond certain people were folks who were really arrogant themselves - often stemming from a classically trained background which espouses such garbage.
The Problem:
Sadly, the disagreement happened toward the end of class. We were already a few minutes past normal dismissal time, so there was not time to give an adequate rebuttal. And to do so in future Sunday School classes would be inappropriate. I would gladly debate the topic with this individual or any other. Absent that, I'll put the crux of my beliefs here.
The difference:
My fellow student claimed that my interpretation was "not what the verse says," when I pointed out that the passage does not talk about predestination in the sense that God caused all these things to happen - but rather that God set into motion His perfect plan, and set it up such that Christians (referred to by Paul as "the elect") would have an avenue (Christ Jesus) to become like Him. Therefore, let's examine the passage and see what really is:
Romans 8:28-30 -
We know that in everything God works for the good of those who love him. They are the people he called, because that was his plan. God knew them before he made the world, and he chose them to be like his Son so that Jesus would be the firstborn of many brothers and sisters. God planned for them to be like his Son; and those he planned to be like his Son, he also called; and those he called, he also made right with him; and those he made right, he also glorified.
"Foreknew:"
"For those whom He foreknew" - found in several translations. My fellow student tried to claim that the Greek word here for "foreknew" ("proegno" - root word: proginosko) not only means that God knew of these things ahead of time, but also that He predestined them to come to pass. Funny thing is, that's not the case.
"Proginosko" is used 5 times in the New Testament (Acts 26:5, II Peter 3:17, Romans 11:2, I Peter 1:20 AND Romans 8:29). The other four times, it is used in reference to man's or God's knowing that or what something was or would be - similar to the modern English phrase "you know." In those instances, it is clear that man is not omniscient. The clear implication is "to be familiar with (before now)." However, for this one time, the word takes on a different meaning? As the author of the link on the Greek word study put it: that is a very schizophrenic definition.
The very obvious verbal intent, put in modern English, would be along the lines of: "those God knew would become Christians..." There is no cause implied.
"Predestined:"
The Greek word proorizo/proorisen is used here - which has the clear meaning of God causing things to come to be. So the question is simple - what did God cause to come to be?
The only way this (or any) passage can be translated is when looked at in its entirety. God predetermining whom would be saved is a stretch and is disingenuous at best. Why? Because to assume that, one has to isolate a phrase out of the verse. The whole verse is: "God knew them before he made the world, and he chose them to be like his Son so that Jesus would be the firstborn of many brothers and sisters."
The clear and obvious meaning is that God predestined the Christians to be conformed to the image of Christ. This is the Plan of Salvation. God would make Christians to be made like Christ, and this so that Christ would be the Head of the Church.
Another way to say it is this: God did not predestine who would become a Christian. God predestined Christians to be conformed to the image of Jesus Christ.
The Elect:
Another sticking point is the use of the term "the Elect" in reference to Christians.
Paul, a trained Pharisee, knew that the Jews were referred to in Scripture as God's Elect. He (Paul) was displacing that concept (and rightly so) with the concept that Christians were now God's Elect. Use of this term in different translations of this verse and passage should be viewed in this sense. It is a failure to focus on the term "the Elect" as being descriptive of God predetermining them; rather, it is a term, familiar to Jews of the day, to refer to God's people.
Using the term "the Elect" in this passage would actually be an out-of-date translation - as the Greek word for "those" (people He knew of) is the pronoun "ous" - very literally, "those."
Romans 8:30
Again, we have to look at the focus of the entire passage, and not stop at a single word.
Verse 30 clearly draws on Verse 29 and refers to Christians as "those whom He predestined."
There is no indication of what God predestined, there is only a reference to define whom was called, justified, and glorified.
Summary on Verbage
So can we sum up who or what was predestined? Can we use scripture to prove it? Why, yes, we can! Unless Paul was schizophrenic, or otherwise in the habit of saying one thing one time and contradicting himself later, then we can summarize from II Timothy 1:9 -
"For God saved us and called us to live a holy life. He did this, not because we deserved it, but because that was his plan from before the beginning of time—to show us his grace through Christ Jesus."
So what did God predestine?
Great question! This link has an excellent sumamry:
What God has predestined:
1. God predestined that His children (Christians) will be conformed to the image of Jesus.
2. God predestined that the Gospel of Christ would be a mystery until He chose to reveal it.
3. God predestined that believers in Christ Jesus would be adopted as God's very own children.
4. God predestined that believers in Christ Jesus should be to the praise of God's glory.
What God has not predestined:
- Your day-to-day life and decisions.
The biggest fundamental problem:
The single biggest problem with the concept of predestination is that if some were chosen, then others were predestined to be eternally damned. It would mean that those who would never receive salvation never had a chance to be saved. There are two main problems with this line of thinking:
a) God doesn't work that way. He is a patient and just God.
b) What about the countless scriptures that state salvation is for everybody!
Another fundamental problem:
Let's use simple logic on this one...
If God predestines who will be saved,
Then God (by default) predestines who will not be saved.
This very concept is in direct conflict with scores of scriptures... most notably, those that tell us that God is merciful, God is just, and that God wants all mankind to be saved.
Other problems:
Calvinism, by being erroneous, is a false doctrine.
Christians are not Chosen to Salvation.
John Calvin himself was a fraud.
The concept of limited atonement (only some would be chosen to be saved) is actually self-defeating.
None of the "Five Points" is actually scriptural as written by Calvin.
Calvin himself was not likely a Christian even, but a heretic!
My fellow student was a self-evident Hyper-Calvinist. That is actually worse!
Despite Calvinists' claims to the contrary, Foreknowledge, Election, and Predestination are different things, not one and the same.
More on God's predestination of a blessing for Christians.
Calvinism is no different than Romanism or Arminianism.
The point of Calvinism is to make Salvation mysterious and incomprehensible.
If predestination were true, then the other side of the coin would also be true - God would predestine people to sin. This is completely against the nature of God.
If Calvinism is true, the Jesus only died for the Elect. Some scriptures to refute that notion.
All five points of Calvinism are false.
Why it is dangerous to teach that Christ died only for a few.
Cliff's notes on why the 5-points are all wrong.
This guy agrees with me.
So does Jerry Falwell.
This is a nice 3-part video debunking the junk faith that Calvinism is.
And here is the best conversation I've ever seen for simple debunking of the tenets of Calvinism.
It's under 5 minutes in length, and full of good points!
The main, root problem:
The root of the problem with Calvinistic thinking - specifically with the notion that God predetermines who goes to Heaven (and by default, whom goes to Hell) - is pride. Those who cling to the notion that God predetermined them and others for Heaven gives them a warped sense of a "holier than thou" mindset. In most cases, this is the one thing in life they can cling to wherein they can "legitimately" feel better than another person. And that is the real root problem: the pride of wanting to be better than another for one reason or another.
General Summary:
In closing, my final issue with predestination is the inherent attitude that must be had in order to believe it. I have never met a person that believed in predestination that wasn't proud of it. They have all felt they were better than someone else for considering themselves "God's Elect." Much like the Jews, especially the Pharisees of Jesus' day, had become. This concept is clearly in stark contrast to Ephesians 2:8-10. I urge you read the whole passage (Ephesians 2:1-10).
Conclusion:
Therefore, I conclude, in the absence of scripture to the contrary, God predestined Christians to be conformed to Christ's image. God did not predetermine the individuals who would be saved.
Anything else would be uncivilized and disingenuous at best.
.
Very well thought out argument in favor of free will. I don't have the chops to respond in the same vein, although I can point you to some things my pastor has spoken about if you are interested in getting a better perspective on the other side. I do have to take issue with your summary point, though. I grew up Baptist but am now a member of an Evangelical Presbyterian church with a pastor who is also a professor at a Presbyterian Church in America seminary (basically, conservative led by very conservative). The overwhelming sense and teaching here is that being called to become a Christian is cause for extreme awe and humility, not pride. We are so weak and sinful that we can't even choose to follow Christ on our own! What feels like a decision on our part is the result of God applying his irresistable grace on our hearts, while we are still mired in sin. Only one man was given the chance to make a free choice, and because of Adam's original sin we all carry that taint and can not do anything to save ourselves. Why some are chosen and others not is one of the mysteries of the faith, but we do know for sure that it has nothing to do with our own merit.
ReplyDeleteFortunately this is something that Christians can disagree on, in love and humility, and still call each other "Brother"...
- emailed to Usagi by RB.
(evidently, blogger was eating comments, not posting them!)
Well said, some thoughts on your comment:
ReplyDeletePlease see some of the links provided, I made sure to give a fair chance to both sides of the coin.
While the call to become a Christian is certainly cause for extreme awe and humility - I have yet to see in person that actually be the case. I am certain that not every Calvinist is an egotistical person full of pride - just have yet to meet one that isn't overly proud of being "selected."
As far as the concept of "What feels like a decision on our part is the result of God applying his irresistible grace on our hearts, while we are still mired in sin. Only one man was given the chance to make a free choice..." All I can say is that simply does not line up with scripture. Too many passages (several articles linked on here point out numerous passages) contradict that mindset, and the only verses that point toward that concept are selected bits and pieces that are twisted in meaning away from the obvious intent of the passage as a whole.
I agree we cannot do anything to save ourselves - that much is clear. Where we part is that we must still freely accept the Gift. To indicate that acceptance is in any way doing something to earn the salvation is one of the points of Calvinism that is disingenuous at best.
None are "chosen" in the sense of the way you put it. However, God's plan for Salvation is what was predestined and chosen to be the vehicle by which man could be made right with Him.
Ultimately, as long as the individual believes, and asks Jesus' forgiveness, then the man-made concept of predestination is not a salvation issue either... and that does indeed make us brothers.
:)
And in a turn of interesting drama, it would seem that the individual with whom I'd disagreed in Sunday School read this post and "confronted" me. He called this post "arrogant, condescending, and rude."
ReplyDeleteI've re-read what I've written. Still cannot find the condescending part. There are parts that I could see could be taken as rude, yet were not intended that way. Not going to apologize - that would defeat the purpose (well, one of the purposes). Understand this post was never a call out of any individual, more of a commentary on my opinion on this topic.
Also, given how bent-out-of-shape my fellow student was, I must say that it surely seems like a case of "truth hurts."The fact that I included every Calvinist in my broad statement of observation, yet my fellow student took it so personally is prima faca evidence of the very pride and arrogance of which I spoke.
Sad that's the case. I know if he'd drop the pride, he would lead a much happier life. I know I have since I did. My heart goes out to him because I have indeed walked in those shoes. Just wasn't a Calvinist - was prideful in other things.
My fellow student also said that most offensive part was that I would accuse him of sin (that being arrogance) without coming to him directly. Since a scripture was not quoted, I must presume he was speaking of Matthew 18:15: "If your brother sins against you, go and tell him his fault, between you and him alone. If he listens to you, you have gained your brother."
Problem with that is that my fellow student, in his clear arrogance, never once sinned against me. It was not the place, nor the time for him to earn a rebuke from me. And readers of this blog know I am all about proper timing, but will never miss a chance for a good rebuttal!
Let's try posting again:
ReplyDeleteThanks for your follow-up. And so sorry to hear this non-essential is causing strife between the two of you! One of the biggest challenges in dealing with another Christian is knowing when and how to "correct" their theology, and when to honor their faith while allowing them to persist in confusion on certain points. I am around a lot of Catholics in St. Louis and have had to practice that skill here a lot! It must be even harder when you are in a position as teacher - I empathize with your reluctance to take that on...
Both sides of the argument have captured some brilliant theologians over the ages. I don't think we'll know the truth until we get to heaven, so someday I look forward to finishing this conversation over pints of fine Trappist ale - what, you don't think God is a Baptist, do you? ;^)
Let me know if you respond - I'm not getting the notifications and don't want to miss it.
Rich - God is certainly not a Baptist. Though it is funny in irony only that my church happens to be a Baptist church.
ReplyDeleteTrappist Ale it is. Actually sounds kinda good right now. Would have to leave my GLOCK at home for that, though. Illegal to drink and carry here in TN. :)
PS - To my other readers who might argue the Bible teaches "not to drink" needs to re-read some stuff - particularly 1 Timothy 5:23