Is Double Predestination Biblical?

[fastfredy0]

Double predestination is therefore asymmetric, for God's action in election is active and gracious (unto undeserved mercy), while his action in reprobation is permissive and judicial (unto deserved justice).

Well, I can agree with this definition. After God doomed (predestines) the entire human race to hell God becomes logically passive to the reprobates, but must actively intervene to save the elect.

Like ... I can drop 20 eggs and I know all eggs will hit the ground and be destroyed if I am passive. I can act and catch some eggs. Since I started the action with all the eggs I would say I actively destroyed or saved which ever eggs I choice.
Now, if you chose to ignore that I started the action with all the eggs and only consider what I did afterwards, then I would be actively involved with some and not the others.

 

[Whatever]

Theologians attempt to dilute this doctrine by suggesting that God merely "passes over" the reprobates.

I think R. C. Sproul taught this view. He sees double predestination as either:
Positive - positive
or
Positive - negative

From one of his articles:
In sharp contrast to the caricature of double predestination seen in the positive-positive schema is the classic position of Reformed theology on predestination. In this view predestination is double in that it involves both election and reprobation but is not symmetrical with respect to the mode of divine activity. A strict parallelism of operation is denied. Rather we view predestination in terms of a positive-negative relationship.
[The article ends there]

The Westminster Confession of Faith: 1643​

As God hath appointed the elect unto glory, so hath He, by the eternal and most free purpose of His will, foreordained all the means thereunto. Wherefore, they who are elected . . . are effectually called unto faith in Christ by His Spirit working in due season, are justified, adopted, sanctified, and kept by His power, through faith, unto salvation. Neither are any other redeemed by Christ, effectually called, justified, adopted, sanctified, and saved, but the elect only.


The rest of mankind God was pleased, according to the unsearchable counsel of His own will, whereby He extendeth or withholdeth mercy, as He pleaseth, for the glory of His Sovereign power over His creatures, to pass by; and to ordain them to dishonour and wrath for their sin, to the praise of His glorious justice. (Chap. III, Art. VI and VII)

Here is one of Sproul's articles:

The Reformed View of Predestination

In the Reformed view, God from all eternity decrees some to election and positively intervenes in their lives to work regeneration and faith by a monergistic wo

learn.ligonier.org

I think as somebody already mentioned, there is a difference between Infralapsarianism and supralapsarianism.

 

[fastfredy0]

The rest of mankind God was pleased, according to the unsearchable counsel of His own will, whereby He extendeth or withholdeth mercy, as He pleaseth, for the glory of His Sovereign power over His creatures, to pass by; and to ordain them to dishonour and wrath for their sin, to the praise of His glorious justice. (Chap. III, Art. VI and VII)

I have no issue with this. But it neglects to incorporate the cause of all reprobate being condemned. It considers the situation after that fact. Who/what caused them to be condemned and was that passive? I think not. God knew what would happen when He chose Adam and God chose to impute Adam's sin to all mankind. I don't call that passive. God could have created an Adam who would not sin as He is all powerful and did so with 2/3s of the angels.
Similarly, I don't think it passive that some angels are elect and others are not. Is God passive in both situations and if so do the good angels have reason to boast as their "free will" kept them in line?

 

[ReverendRV]

I think as somebody already mentioned, there is a difference between Infralapsarianism and supralapsarianism.

To me, this is the bottom line answer...

But I am wanting to go at the OP's speed. I recommended she find 'Her One' here and go slow. I knew we would intimidate and overwhelm her...

 

[Rescued One]

Are you changing your Thread? The severity of Hell doesn't have anything to do with Double Predestination...

Let Freddy answer your question, then ask him another...

I'm struggling with this topic. Double predestination does concern hell. My parents and siblings weren't Christians. That bothers me. Can't you understand?

 

[ReverendRV]

I'm struggling with this topic. Double predestination does concern hell.

How?

 

[Rescued One]

How?

How or why? I told you why. I'm not ready to believe that people are suffering for whatever. They weren't as evil as some were/are.

 

[ReverendRV]

How or why? I told you why. I'm not ready to believe that people are suffering for whatever. They weren't as evil as some were/are.

No problem. Find someone here to discuss it with...

I agree with you. I don't think God Predestined anyone to go to Hell. They stumble because they disobey the message; which is what they were Predestined for...

 

[Rescued One]

Supralapsarianism and infralapsarianism are new words in my vocabulary. So you see I'm not just sitting here choosing to be ignorant.

 

[ReverendRV]

Supralapsarianism and infralapsarianism are new words in my vocabulary. So you see I'm not just sitting here choosing to be ignorant.

One means God Chooses people before he takes consideration of the Fall; or he chooses people after he takes consideration of the Fall...

Simply speaking, does God Predestine people from an Unfallen Lump of Clay, or from a Fallen Lump of Clay?

 

[Rescued One]

Are Arminians going to hell?

 

[Rescued One]

Simply speaking, one means God Chooses people before he takes consideration of the Fall; or he chooses people after he takes consideration of the Fall...

Yes, I looked that up.

 

[ReverendRV]

Are Arminians going to hell?

No, Arminians are Christians...

 

[ReverendRV]

Yes, I looked that up.

My opinion is that if God Predestines Us from an Unfallen Lump of Clay (Adam), that's wrong (Supralapsarianism). If God Predestines from a Fallen Lump of Clay (Adam), this is right (Infralapsarianism)...

Why? Because Adam Destined All to Sin and Hell; not God. Like Dabney, you should at least admit that this is better than Supralapsarianism; even if you think it's still wrong. At least Infralapsarianism has a middle man in it's scheme to blame. Having a middle man keeps God from being Culpable; just as in the case of God sending a spirit to Cause the false prophets to Lie...

Are you here to learn, as you say? You don't have to learn from me, but people will catch on real quick if it were a pretense to argue...

 

[Rescued One]

No, Arminians are Christians...

That's a relief, even though some don't seem like it. My family of origin were anti-religion.

 

[Rescued One]

My opinion is that if God Predestines from an Unfallen Lump of Clay (Adam), that's wrong (Supralapsarianism). If God Predestines from a Fallen Lump of Clay, this is right (Infralapsarianism)...

Why? Because Adam Destined All to Sin and Hell; not God. Like Darby, you should at least admit that this is better than Supralapsarianism; even if you think it's still wrong. At least Infralapsarianism has a middle man in it's scheme to blame. Having a middle man keeps God from being Culpable; just as in the case of God sending a spirit to Cause the false prophets to Lie...

Are you here to learn, as you say? You don't have to learn from me, but people will catch on real quick if it were a pretense to argue...

I desire learning very much and hate arguing. Oh, you'd probably be surprised at how many denominations I've visited besides the cult and Catholic Mass and Eastern Orthodox.

I never thought Adam's sin was imputed. I thought the fall caused all men to become sinners, not babies.

 

[fastfredy0]

Are Arminians going to hell?

Some Reform people believe so.

I posed the following question to ChatGPT:
According to reform theology, does believing in salvation by faith + works nullify salvation?

The answer:
In Reformed theology, yes—believing in salvation by faith plus works is considered to nullify true salvation, because it undermines the doctrine of justification by faith alone (sola fide), which is a central tenet of Reformed belief.

Here's how it breaks down:​

• Salvation by grace alone through faith alone in Christ alone is a core principle of Reformed theology.
• Reformed theology teaches that justification (being declared righteous before God) is by faith alone, not by works or any human effort (cf. Ephesians 2:8–9, Romans 3:28).
• Good works are the evidence of genuine faith, not the basis for salvation.

What if someone believes in faith + works?
According to Reformed theology:

• If someone truly believes that their works contribute to their justification before God, that belief contradicts the gospel.
• The Apostle Paul heavily criticizes this idea in Galatians (e.g., Galatians 5:4 – "You are severed from Christ, you who would be justified by the law; you have fallen away from grace.")
• Therefore, such a belief is often taken to mean that the person does not truly understand or possess saving faith, since they are trusting in something other than Christ alone.

Galatians 5:2 Notice, it is I, Paul, who tells you that if you receive circumcision [as a supposed requirement of salvation], Christ will be of no benefit to you [for you will lack the faith in Christ that is necessary for salvation]. Believing in salvation other than by Christ alone is a demonstration of lack of saving faith?

 

[ReverendRV]

I desire learning very much and hate arguing. Oh, you'd probably be surprised at how many denominations I've visited besides the cult and Catholic Mass and Eastern Orthodox.

I never thought Adam's sin was imputed. I thought the fall caused all men to become sinners, not babies.

There's a difference between Imputed and Imparted. Imputation is Adam's broken record being reckoned as our record. Impartation is an Essence being handed down...

 

[fastfredy0]

Are Arminians going to hell?

More opinions

Is Salvation Nullified by the Belief of any Work is needed for Salvation?

Source: Galatians 1:6-7; Galatians 5:2-6; Galatians 3:10; James 2:10 …

Question: What is the application of these verses if one believes the source of faith is the individual rather than God. (is the verse applicable?)

R.C. Sproul: “If you trust upon anything else than Jesus Christ in addition to Jesus Christ you lose Christ, all or nothing at all. Christ does not become of less effect; he becomes of no effect if you try to add something to Him

Sproul goes on to say that he thought Arminians are saved, but barely by which he meant “as long as they don’t take their theology to its logic conclusion. They would not be Christians if they put their trust in their own righteousness”. When Sproul initially came to faith he thought it was his choice; he didn’t know of scripture that described the process.

Gill - his view of works for salvation rendered Christ unprofitable, made his death to be in vain, his sacrifice of no effect, and his righteousness useless: besides, Christ is a whole Savior, or none at all; to join anything with him and his righteousness, in the business of justification and salvation, is interpreted by him as a contempt and neglect of him, as laying him aside, and to such persons he is of no profit; and if he is not, what they have, and whatsoever they do, will be of no advantage; wealth and riches, yea, the whole world could it be gained, their works and righteousness, whatever show they make before men, God has declared shall not profit them; and trusting to these renders Christ unprofitable to them. Isaiah 55:11 So will My word be which goes out of My mouth; It will not return to Me void (useless, without result), Without accomplishing what I desire, And without succeeding in the matter for which I sent it.

All of this saving work is the gift of God’s sovereign grace. Consequently, Paul concludes, I do not nullify the grace of God; for if righteousness comes through the Law, then Christ died needlessly. In effect he was saying to Peter, “By withdrawing from fellowship with your Gentile brothers you take your stand with the Judaizers and against Christ. You nullify the grace of God by denying the need for Christ’s death, just as you did when you rebuked the Lord for declaring it was necessary for Him to suffer, be killed, and raised on the third day (see Matthew 16:21-22).

The two pillars of the gospel are the grace of God and the death of Christ, and those are the two pillars that, by its very nature, legalism destroys. The person who insists that he can earn salvation by his own efforts undermines the very foundation of Christianity and nullifies the precious death of Christ on his behalf (Galatians 2:21). John MacArthur – N.T. Commentary

Matthew-Henry: Christ will not be the Savior of any who will not own and rely upon him as their only Savior. Let us take heed to the warnings and persuasions of the apostle to steadfastness in the doctrine and liberty of the gospel. All true Christians, being taught by the Holy Spirit, wait for eternal life, the reward of righteousness, and the object of their hope, as the gift of God by faith in Christ; and not for the sake of their own works.

Tom Constable: The Galatians would be obligating themselves to obey the whole Mosaic Code if they allowed the false teachers to circumcise them. Their confidence in circumcision would reveal confidence in their own ability to earn salvation by obeying the Law. This legal approach to salvation would separate them from Christ since what He did was provide salvation as a gift. They would fall away from the grace method of salvation if they chose the law method.

Grace and legal righteousness cannot co-exist (Romans 4:4, Romans 5:11). Christ, by circumcision (Luke 2:21), undertook to obey all the law, and fulfil all righteousness for us: any, therefore, that now seeks to fulfil the law for himself in any degree for justifying righteousness, severs himself from the grace which flows from Christ's fulfilment of it, and becomes "a debtor to do the whole law" (Galatians 5:3). The decree of the Jerusalem council had said nothing so strong as this; it had merely decided that Gentile Christians were not bound to legal observances. But the Galatians, while not pretending to be so bound, imagined there was an efficacy in them to merit a higher degree of perfection (Galatians 3:3). … John 6:29 Jesus answered, “This is the work of God: that you believe [adhere to, trust in, rely on, and have faith] in the One whom He has sent.”

One who preaches righteousness through the law is compelled to deny the sufficiency and necessity of Christ's redemptive work. And by definition, to deny the sufficiency and necessity of Christ makes one a non-Christian. Vincent Cheung – Commentary on Galatians. Galatians 2:21 I do not ignore or nullify the [gracious gift of the] grace of God [His amazing, unmerited favor], for if righteousness comes through [observing] the Law, then Christ died needlessly. [His suffering and death would have had no purpose whatsoever.]”

A third consequence of seeking to be justified by circumcision or any other form of the law, is that it causes a person to become severed from Christ and thereby become fallen from grace. Severed is from katarge image (Image) , which, when followed by the preposition, means to be separated or loosed from (cf. Romans 7:2, 6). Fallen is from ehpipt image (Image), which means to lose one’s grasp on something. Simply stated, a person cannot live by both law and grace. To attempt to be justified by law is to reject the way of grace.

For a believer to start living again under the law to merit salvation is, in fact, to reject salvation by grace. John MacArthur – New Testament Commentary

Galatians 5:4 is especially clear about this incompatibility: "You who are trying to be justified by law have been alienated from Christ; you have fallen away from grace."

https://www.monergism.com/thethreshold/articles/onsite/qna/arminians.html (are Arminians saved)

https://www.monergism.com/thethreshold/articles/onsite/neo_gnostic.html (taking the idea that Arminians are not saved too far) It is Christ who saves through faith, not our soteriological knowledge. This, to my mind, is the most utterly insidious forms of "works-righteousness" that I have ever encountered. By cleverly demanding that for one to truly be saved they must achieve a solid understanding of Calvinistic soteriology is to "make the cross of Christ of none effect".

To further exacerbate their dissimulation, they dare to go even further. They dogmatically and shockingly assert that any professing Calvinist that does not concur with their Calvinistic neo-gnostic pretensions and believes that Arminians can be saved has "spoke peace to Arminians" thereby abrogating their own salvation. As one gleans their writings on this matter, one amazingly discovers that according to this chimerical premise, the most eminent saints in church history are apparently "lost"! A. A. Hodge, Spurgeon, D. Martyn-Lloyd Jones, Gordon Clark, Van Till ad infinitum, ad nauseum, are consigned to God's wrath by the unmitigated temerity of these neo-gnostics.

Faith must rise to trust, and trust that consists in entrustment to him. In faith there is the engagement of person to person in the inner movement of the whole man to receive and rest upon Christ alone for salvation. It means the abandonment of confidence in our own or any human resources in a totality act of self-commitment to Christ.

Re: “are Catholics who adhere to official Roman Catholic beliefs and practices saved?” The answer to this question is “no.” Why? Because the Roman Catholic Church teaches that one must have good works and observe the rituals of Roman Catholicism in order to be saved.

Question: “Work is defined as an activity involving mental or physical effort done in order to achieve a purpose or result. John 6:29 Jesus answered, “This is the work of God: that you believe [adhere to, trust in, rely on, and have faith] in the One whom He has sent.” Thus, faith is defined as a work of God. If one believes the cause of “saving faith” is oneself and not God, does this nullify that person’s supposed “saving faith”… R.C. Sproul said “maybe”. John 1:12 But to as many as did receive and welcome Him, He gave the authority (power, privilege, right) to become the children of God, that is, to those who believe in (adhere to, trust in, and rely on) His name— 13 Which were born, not of blood, nor of the will of the flesh, nor of the will of man, but of GOD.

 

[makesends]

You will get conflicting answers because the issue depends on what "predestination" means and involves.

And what people think is necessarily implied by "double predestination".