Double Predestination

God not only elects the saved, but wilfully damns the rest of humanity and all to portray His power and sovereignty to man and to please Himself.

 

Double Predestination is classic Calvinism though some Hyper Calvinists distort it. Not all Calvinists are Double by the way, some are Single Predestination.

The Canons of Dort which systemized the 5 points of Calvinism, the Waldensian Confession of Faith, 1689 London Baptist Confession express Double Predestination in this way

 

I'm not sure that's a totally accurate statement of the typical Calvinist position. I think it goes more like this - man, in his fallen nature, is bent toward evil and rejects God. God chooses out of his good pleasure to draw some to himself (which, as an aside, he is not *obligated* to do for any of us) and in so doing leaves the rest to their own damnation. God does not actively "damn" anyone, we damn ourselves and it is purely by his grace that God would save any of us - I think we all agree that's true whether your God is arminian or calvinist

All God has to do in order to damn someone is to leave them to their own sinful desires. If he chooses to change someone, that is his perogative as our creator - which is the entire point of Romans chapter 9 in my opinion.

I think some Calvinists try to sugar-coat this question but the bottom line is the ones he has not predestined for salvation are, by default, predestined for reprobation.

 

Of the two descriptions:

I agree more with the latter, but there is a good point in the former.

IMO, it is misleading to say God willfully damns anyone, because that gives one the impression that they start out in some state that deserves better, and God unfairly "damns" them anyway. We all start out deserving the worst, and God has mercy on some. Nobody gets worse than he deserves.

But I would add that I believe Ray does get one thing right. God is ultimately responsible for all of creation, and is also ultimately responsible for the fact that some go to eternal punishment. And I speculate that one reason why God ordered creation this way was to make known His whole character -- including wrath, righteousness, mercy and more to the vessels of His mercy.

 

I could'nt agree with you more. What you said is a simple, yet true statement, the flip side of predestined salvation is predestined reprobation, some our Calvinist buddies try to get around this, but you cannot.

It does not make God unfair or mean, because he did not have to save anyone. And those who are predestined to reprobation, are really predestined to be left in the rebrobate state that Adam, not God place them in.

He does not have save anyone. Praise God for the ones he does save!

IFBReformer

 

I agree with both you and Stratiotes. I don't think there's any way to get around this fact, and I'm not the least bit uncomfortable with it. God is God, and He has made and done all things for His own purpose according to His good pleasure. Who can argue with God?

 

No, if God decrees the election of the people of God, He must, of necessity, decree the remainder of human to Hell. You just don't like the kind of God that you have portrayed. Is anything left to chance with God? I say no. Calvinists like to sugar coat the concept so more will swallow the most bitter of all pills.

 

Who are you arguing with? As far as I can tell, we've been agreeing with you. Where we disagree is that you seem to think that it is possible for it to be "unfair" for God to send sinners to hell.

What I'm saying (and I believe most Calvinists would say) is that EVERYONE merits hell by default. The fact that God has mercy on some doesn't make the rest merit anything else.

And how is it that God saves some? It's called grace. And what is grace? UNMERITED favor. As opposed to MERITED disfavor.

 

npetreley,

You said, 'Who are you arguing with? As far as I can tell, we've been agreeing with you.'

Ray: I am not arguing with anyone; I'm setting before you and others the truth.'

You said, 'Where we disagree is that you seem to think that it is possible for it to be "unfair" for God to send sinners to hell.'

Ray: At the time of the Garden of Eden all human beings Fell/Fall in Adam. Try to jump the hurtle and understand that since the Cross and even before that, God had a plan of redemption for all who are sinners. [I John 2:2] If God were to pick and choose people for Heaven and perdition, He would be an unjust Lord. Divine Justice and the attribute of His love prohibits this kind of folly.

You said, 'What I'm saying (and I believe most Calvinists would say) is that EVERYONE
merits hell by default.'

Ray: You would be right if you were wearing a fig leaf; but God informs us through the Bible that Jesus died on the Cross to save sinners. [I Timothy 2:6] He was given as 'a ransom for all, to be testified in due time.'

You said, 'The fact that God has mercy on some doesn't make the rest merit anything else.'

Ray: Yes, Jesus has had mercy on those of us who have been saved. It is also true that His grace and mercy is open to anyone else who will believe and trust in Jesus. Not even we who are saved merit it; it is given to us as a free gift. [Ephesians 2:8-9]

God would appear with a red face, if He told us to love beyond the brethren including all of our enemies and sinners, and yet He can opt out to be partial toward some sinners, just because He allegedly decides to damn them.

You gentlemen are totally off the scope of Christian theology and spiritual wisdom. Reconsider; you will put a smile back on the face of our Lord.

And how is it that God saves some? It's called grace. And what is grace?
UNMERITED favor. As opposed to MERITED disfavor.

 

As an Arminian let me state this once and for all for the record. Calvinists please listen carefully:

GOD WOULD BE PERFECTLY JUST TO PASS OVER THE ENTIRE WORLD AND ALLOW US ALL TO PERISH IN OUR FALLENNESS.

Arminians DO NOT disagree with this!!!!!

Our objection is not that God doesn't choose to save everyone! Our objection is that God (1) calls all men to salvation through the gospel, (2) expresses a desire for all to be saved through the scripture, (3) makes it known that He (Christ) did not come to condemn the world but to save the world and that he would judge them based upon people's response to HIS words, but then secretly and effectually, without any clear explaination in scripture, only enables some to respond to that word. That reeks of injustice and insincereity and I'm sick of Calvinists throwing out the same old line that we think everyone deserves to be saved and then you avoid our real objection.

NNE DESERVES SALVATION. BUT CHRIST DIDN'T COME TO CONDEMN THE WORLD BUT TO SAVE IT, THUS EVERYONE IS OFFERED SALVATION THROUGH THE GOSPEL'S CALL

 

It is absurd to compare what God can and cannot do with what God has instructed us to do. We're not God.

As an example, Jesus told us not to speak contemptuously to one another, and yet Jesus spoke contemptuously to people many times. Jesus plainly called some people sons of the devil.

If I called you a son of the devil, would that be a contemptuous remark? Yes, unless I knew without a doubt that it was true, and I was simply speaking the truth! But unless God supernaturally reveals it to me, I don't know a son of the devil from an adopted son of God. That's why Jesus can say things like that, but I can't. So it's no wonder that Jesus simply tells us not to say such things.

The very fact that you say "decides to damn them" shows how your concept of justice comes from circular reasoning. The only way God can "decide to damn someone" is if they're not already damned. This is why you call Calvinism unjust. You view Calvinism as a situation where God looks at people whose fate is yet undecided, and then arbitrarily decides who to save and who to damn.

That's not Calvinism, though. So while you CLAIM Calvinism is unjust, it is only your perverted representation of Calvinism that is unjust. Calvinism, itself, depicts a perfectly just God.

According to Calvinism, there are only two types of people - those who are spiritually dead and will go to hell, and those who are spiritually dead and will be born again by the grace of God. And we ALL start out spiritually dead because of the sin of Adam, and God is under no obligation to save any of us. It is only by His mercy that He saves some.

Now I'll be the first to say that God is as ultimately responsible for the damnation of the wicked as He is the salvation of the elect. But you've misrepresented the process. It isn't about "here are a bunch of innocent people -- I think I'll save some of them and damn the others."

Regardless, you can disagree with Calvinism all you want. I have no problem with that. But you are incorrect to say that Calvinism "violates God's divine justice" (as you so often claim). Calvinism, properly understood and properly represented, describes a perfectly just God.

The only way you can make Calvinism "violate God's divine justice" is by shoving pieces of Arminianism into it and then concluding from the frankenstein monster you've created that God would be unjust if He behaved that way. Anyone can pervert a doctrine and then criticize the result, but the result is only as bad as the modifications you've made to it.

 

Romans 9 is often used as a proof text of double predestination by certain Calvinists. God has mercy on some and hardens others.

However, Romans 9 is actually a proof text for single predestination. Take note of Pharoah. Paul describes him as vessel fitted for destruction. Yet, God called Pharoah to repentance. If God had determined to destroy Pharoah, why preach to him to all? Why not simply announce judgment?

In his great mercy and because the blood of Christ is sufficient to cover the sins of all men, God gave Pharoah many opportunities to repent. But Pharoah was in bondage to Satan, stubbornly resisted the grace offered, was hardened by God, and ultimately died without the faith of Christ.

There is a different between predestination and foreknowledge. God unconditionally predestines the elect and knows in advance those who will stubbornly resist and be lost through their own fault.

 

But the common Calvinist interpretation of Rom. 9 ("before they were yet born and did any good or evil") as proof of this unconditional preterition (of individuals) to damnation suggests precisely that. That's why it's opposed.

 

Remember too, "many are called but few are chosen..." Read Luther's treatise on why God calls all but only elects some. The calling does not imply an intent to elect all.

I might tell my kids, "If you play ball on a busy street you will get hit by a car." The "if" does not, in any way, imply that I will let them "choose" to play in the street.

 

Stratiotes,

You are perhaps referring to Luther's answer to "Why some and not others?":

This difference is to be ascribed to man, not to the will of God, for the promises of God are universal. He will have all men to be saved. Hence it is not the fault of our Lord God, who promises salvation, but it is our fault if we are unwilling to believe it.Weimar Edition, Table Talk 4, No. 4665, Luther's Works 33, page 11.

Actually, there is much debate on whether Luther believed in double predestination or not. Here's an interesting statement on the subject from his "Preface to Romans":

In chapters 9, 10, and 11 he teaches of God’s eternal predestination—out of which originally proceeds who shall believe or not, who can or cannot get rid of sin—in order that our salvation may be taken entirely out of our hands and put in the hand of God alone. And this too is utterly necessary. For we are so weak and uncertain that if it depended on us, not even a single person would be saved; the devil would surely overpower us all. But since God is dependable—his predestination cannot fail, and no one can withstand him—we still have hope in the face of sin.
Here, now, for once we must put a stop to those wicked and high flying spirits who first apply their own reason to this matter. They begin at the top to search the abyss of divine predestination, and worry in vain about whether they are predestinated. They are bound to plunge to their own destruction, either through despair, or through throwing caution to the winds.
But you had better follow the order of this epistle. Worry first about Christ and the gospel, that you may recognize your sin and his grace. Then fight your sin, as the first eight chapters here have taught. Then, when you have reached the eighth chapter, and are under the cross and suffering, this will teach you correctly of predestination in chapters 9, 10, and 11, and how comforting it is. For in the absence of suffering and the cross and the perils of death, one cannot deal with predestination without harm and without secret anger against God. The old Adam must first die before he can tolerate this thing and drink the strong wine. Therefore beware that you do not drink wine while you are still a suckling. There is a limit, a time, and an age for every doctrine. Preface to Romans, Luther's Works, vol. 35, p. 377

 

Let me just be clear on this before I jump in the water with ya'll.

Are ya'll saying that God created and chose people for hell and eternal separation from Him just as much as He created and chose people for heaven and eternal life with Him ?

 

I love this part of the preface. IMO, it is a point very well taken.

 

John G.,

Actually, I am referring to Erasmus' question to Luther that "if" when used in scripture, "if you obey...." or "if you will..." or even a direct command "come unto me all ye..." implied ability. Luther argued that commands did not necessarily imply ability. Commands (the law) are our school master who makes sure we're paying attention to our lessons. It commands the chained man to "come" so that he can see quite clearly that it is impossible for him to obey.

pinoybaptist:

There is not total agreement among calvinists on exactly when election happened. But, the simple fact is that if some are "the elect" then it implies that the rest are "the reprobate" - there is no other way around it. Augustine coined the phrase "original sin" referring to the sin of our origins (Adam) - we are not sinners because we sin so much as we sin because we are sinners by nature/origin. Its passed down to us by our representative head (Adam) as men and righteousness is imputed to us by our representative, the second Adam, Jesus as christians. All of mankind is in one family or the other and represented by one Adam or the other. I think we all agree on that much.

 

Well, then, now, if there is such a god as one who elected some to be reprobates and to be punished eternally in hell, while he elected others to be in heaven with him eternally, then that makes that god the author and source of sin itself. If not, then he is at the very least involved in the commission of the sins for which he is going to judge the doer.

If that be so, then there is no justification for any punishment being meted out to those whom He had elected to go to hell. They were born for that very end. Therefore, such a creature has the right to point his/her fingers at that god and say,'why hast thou made me thus ?'.

Therefore, as illustration in the timely sense, if a father had a son or daughter who chooses drugs, crime, promiscuity, and freedom from parental control, and the father drives that son or daughter out of the house since he/she has become so incorrigible and beyond reform, and that son/daughter invevitably meets the demise which is the natural consequence of the lifestyle chosen, then, by association, the parent/s must be culpable.

Forgive me, Calvinists, but I have not known such a one as that in the Bible. That doctrine makes the God of the Bible a monster, and a blundering fool, or as Ray Berrian would put it, a God who does things arbitrarily without reason at all.

God's grace and designs cannot be measured in terms of humanity's mathematics or laws of if, then, else.