Is Double Predestination Biblical?

[Rescued One]

The URCNA is sort of a denomination? But they actually identify as a federation, which is a voluntary association of churches united by shared confessions, church order, and mutual accountability, rather than a denomination that imposes top-down directives. They split from the CRCNA in the mid-1990s because CRCNA was sliding into theological liberalism.

Thank you. Oh my goodness!

 

[Rescued One]

Y'all are blowin' my mind! I know nuttin' --- LOL! That's okay. I may learn something after all.

 

[fastfredy0]

But He looks into the future the same as He looks into the past. It's all present.

True enough. God is outside of time. God creates time and acts in time. Outside of time there is no source of information save God Himself and as I said previously, from nothing nothing comes so from outside of time there is nothing to get information from so from outside of time God cannot look into the future to glean information, thus His source of knowledge is only Himself.
Aside: I don't think we can understand things from God's perspective in regards to being outside of time and everything is always present somehow.

What you say has the scent of open theism.

Then you're following the wrong scent.

Open theism per ChatGPT.
Open theism has a unique take on God's relationship with the future, especially compared to classical theism.
In open theism, God is understood as:

• omniscient (all-knowing),
• but the future is partly open, especially when it comes to free will decisions made by creatures.

So, how does God see the future in open theism?
Open theists believe:

• God knows everything that can be known—all possibilities, all past and present events, and everything that will definitely happen.
• But some parts of the future aren’t fixed yet—particularly human choices—because they haven't been decided.
• Therefore, God knows the future as a range of possibilities when it comes to free will decisions.

Example:
If you're choosing between coffee or tea tomorrow, God knows:

• All the outcomes and consequences of each choice,
• Everything about you and your tendencies,
• But not with absolute certainty which you’ll choose—because it's a free decision.

I'm a hard determinist. God determines ALL THINGS.

 

[makesends]

Yeah. I question this position as it doesn't seem right from my emotional stand point. On the other hand, I've thought it vital enough to mention to my son and wife to ensure they were "on board" so to speak and they are. (Aside: the other son is always on board theologically where I define "on board" as agreeing with me *giggle*)

What I read there sounded like the AI was still talking the talk (can't think of the word I need here), as in that faith plus works is incompatible with Reformed theology --not that one who believes in faith plus works, according to the Reformed, cannot be saved.

 

[fastfredy0]

How many angels can dance on the point of a needle?

Six

 

[ReverendRV]

Six

Archangels or Seraphim?

 

[fastfredy0]

-not that one who believes in faith plus works, according to the Reformed, cannot be saved.

My question to you is: Do you believe that one who depends on his works for salvation is disqualified in regards to salvation; leastwise, until he changes his mind?

 

[fastfredy0]

Archangels or Seraphim?

Good question. I suppose it depends if this is before or after they have eaten.

 

[makesends]

True enough. God is outside of time. God creates time and acts in time. Outside of time there is no source of information save God Himself and as I said previously, from nothing nothing comes so from outside of time there is nothing to get information from so from outside of time God cannot look into the future to glean information, thus His source of knowledge is only Himself.
Aside: I don't think we can understand things from God's perspective in regards to being outside of time and everything is always present somehow.

This "source of information" theme presents me with another way to look at it. You rightly say, "Outside of time there is no source of information save God Himself", but the thought then comes, that inside time the 'other sources' are not truly their own source for us, but also are 'sources from him' or even 'of him' as are the things themselves.

But as usual with us humans, we still address this from the wrong end of the spyglass. Our constructions are for us; they are children's pretend grown-up talk. Like you said, we CAN'T understand things from God's perspective. We can try, though, and there is plenty good reason to do so, knowing that everything we have said so far still falls short on facts and perspective.

 

[makesends]

Good question. I suppose it depends if this is before or after they have eaten.

There's a 'Dad-joke' in there, somewhere.

 

[fastfredy0]

But as usual with us humans, we still address this from the wrong end of the spyglass. Our constructions are for us; they are children's pretend grown-up talk. Like you said, we CAN'T understand things from God's perspective. We can try, though, and there is plenty good reason to do so, knowing that everything we have said so far still falls short on facts and perspective.

Thanks. I think you're calling us STUPID in a deep, intelligent way. *giggle*

Aside: I guess it is God would be inferior if He were to laugh when surprised seeing He can't be surprised ... or to enjoy a fond memory seeing everything is always before him. Difficult to put yourself in God shoes (seeing He is Spirit and doesn't wear shoes). God's perspective is beyond me for the most part. After agreeing 1+1=2 I get lost. *end of meandering*

 

[makesends]

My question to you is: Do you believe that one who depends on his works for salvation is disqualified in regards to salvation; leastwise, until he changes his mind?

It is a leading question. His construction of the Gospel may well not be what his heart depends on --God's mercy.

In fact, the question sounds to me to imply that those of us who have the Gospel right are somehow capable of depending on grace, as though THAT is how we are saved. Our ability to depend has nothing to do with it!

 

[DialecticSkeptic]

You can't be Supra, if you hold to our real Participation in the Original Sin.

What?

 

[Hazelelponi]

True enough. God is outside of time. God creates time and acts in time. Outside of time there is no source of information save God Himself and as I said previously, from nothing nothing comes so from outside of time there is nothing to get information from so from outside of time God cannot look into the future to glean information, thus His source of knowledge is only Himself.
Aside: I don't think we can understand things from God's perspective in regards to being outside of time and everything is always present somehow.

God entered time. He is a being, an entity, from both within and without time therefore He can freely interact inside either state.

My dumb thoughts.

 

[ReverendRV]

What?

Ken Hammrick's Doctrine of Real Participation. He said that because Levi participated with paying Tithes while in Abraham's Loins, All participated with Adam's Original Sin while in his Loins. But if we participated, this is contrary to God Electing before we have done Good or Bad. Supra has Election occurring before the Fall; no Participation. Infra has God Electing after the Fall; potentially an Election occurring after All have done Bad in Adam. But Infra doesn't fathom our potential Participation with Adam; because Election happens in Eternity Past without our Participation; even though Adam's Clay is Fallen when God Predestines and Elects Us...

 

[fastfredy0]

It is a leading question. His construction of the Gospel may well not be what his heart depends on --God's mercy.

In fact, the question sounds to me to imply that those of us who have the Gospel right are somehow capable of depending on grace, as though THAT is how we are saved. Our ability to depend has nothing to do with it!

I didn't understand your answer. I will rephrase.

In all 3 questions it is assumed the person's belief does not ever change.
Question #1 .... A person believes he must be circumcised plus have faith to be saved. Is that person currently saved?
Question #2 .... A person believes he must be water baptized plus have faith to be saved. Is that person currently saved?
Question #3 .... A person believes he must self determine to believe salvifically to be saved. Is that person currently saved?

 

[DialecticSkeptic]

I didn't understand your answer. I will rephrase.

In all 3 questions it is assumed the person's belief does not ever change.
Question #1 .... A person believes he must be circumcised plus have faith to be saved. Is that person currently saved?
Question #2 .... A person believes he must be water baptized plus have faith to be saved. Is that person currently saved?
Question #3 .... A person believes he must self determine to believe salvifically to be saved. Is that person currently saved?

Yes, if in addition to these things that he believes he also trusts in Christ alone for his salvation. Without THAT he is not currently saved.

 

[fastfredy0]

Yes, if in addition to these things that he believes he also trusts in Christ alone for his salvation. Without THAT he is not currently saved.

The 3 questions stipulate that each person did NOT trust in Christ alone.

 

[DialecticSkeptic]

The 3 questions stipulate that each person did NOT trust in Christ alone.

Then, as I said ...

 

[Arial]

God entered time. He is a being, an entity, from both within and without time therefore He can freely interact inside either state.

My dumb thoughts.

I hesitated to "like" that post because of that last sentence. Nothing dumb about the first part that I can see.