Started By
Message
re: Question about Freeze and those coaches that wear their faith so openly
Posted on 3/9/17 at 2:41 pm to UAtide11
Posted on 3/9/17 at 2:41 pm to UAtide11
UAtide11, I don't understand predestination to mean that every single event that has ever happened has been according to God's will. I mean of course you would have to say that if God exists and he is in control then everything that comes to pass (good or bad) is only happening because he is allowing it, but I think that starts to get at God's preceptive will vs his decretive will. God decrees certain things to happen and they come to pass. God also shows his will in various precepts. But these two things are not the same. I don't think most folks who believe in predestination as I laid out believe that God "wills" that people should sin or that people should perish. Of course, God allows things to transpire but I don't think that means that he actively caused the thing in question to happen. I think the traditional understanding of predestination is that God actively intercedes on behalf of his elect (i.e. those he saves) but he leaves the unbelievers in their sin and decides not to intervene. While it sounds harsh, it is not unjust in the slightest and God is the creator so he can certainly do as he pleases with his creation.
1
Posted on 3/9/17 at 3:15 pm to drm185
To be frank, I reject the notion of an intervening, personal god. I was just trying to give a reasonable argument as to how one would reconcile the seemingly contradictory tenets of omnipotence and free will.
I think the following is a cop-out.
I think your statement is 100% true, that seems to be the traditional understanding. I just don't subscribe to it.
Personally, I feel that is a way to give credit for the positive (and occasionally cite them as evidence), while insulating from the negative. I just find it hard to believe that a benevolent god would intercede help Ray Lewis win a Super Bowl or Lil' Wayne win a Grammy, but will let innocent children perish in often very cruel ways.
And the position is unassailable, because on the one hand "all things happen through god" (so he's responsible for everything) and "because man sins" (so god isn't responsible because it's humanity's fault). then you have the notion of "god works in mysterious ways" so despite being described as infinitely benevolent, you can't question objectively horrible things that happen (either because he interceded or failed to intercede).
I'll be the first to admit to my simple-mindedness, but the whole thing reeks of "This is the exact nature of existence, don't question it because it's beyond our collective understanding"
I think the following is a cop-out.
quote:
I think the traditional understanding of predestination is that God actively intercedes on behalf of his elect (i.e. those he saves) but he leaves the unbelievers in their sin and decides not to intervene.
I think your statement is 100% true, that seems to be the traditional understanding. I just don't subscribe to it.
Personally, I feel that is a way to give credit for the positive (and occasionally cite them as evidence), while insulating from the negative. I just find it hard to believe that a benevolent god would intercede help Ray Lewis win a Super Bowl or Lil' Wayne win a Grammy, but will let innocent children perish in often very cruel ways.
And the position is unassailable, because on the one hand "all things happen through god" (so he's responsible for everything) and "because man sins" (so god isn't responsible because it's humanity's fault). then you have the notion of "god works in mysterious ways" so despite being described as infinitely benevolent, you can't question objectively horrible things that happen (either because he interceded or failed to intercede).
I'll be the first to admit to my simple-mindedness, but the whole thing reeks of "This is the exact nature of existence, don't question it because it's beyond our collective understanding"
Page 1 of 1
Back to top
Follow SECRant for SEC Football News