As one of those who was raised in a church in the Reformed, Calvinist tradition that taught, and still teaches, the pernicious doctrine of individual election, and individual reprobation, I can testify to its profoundly unhealthy psychological effects. One either proudly looks down in those poor souls outside, or is eaten up by anxiety over possible damnation. Even worse is the damage to one’s image of God as a wrathful, dangerous, and unpredictable tyrant. Much better what I call ultra-Calvinism, the universalist doctrine of the God in the early church who has elected all creatures in Christ, and will finally brig all things into a new heavens and new earth. This was also Paul’s understanding of the end and goal in I Corinthians 15, when God will be “all and in all.”
We need to think of ‘Predestination’ from an ‘Incarnational Perspective’ as much as it is humanly possible in our short lives. Should we really ever be engaged in the divisive and arrogant prospect of determining whether someone is favored by God or not? It has always been His prerogative and, His alone. It seems blatantly clear from Jesus’ actions in the Gospels that he is healing, loving and electing those outside the perceptual understanding of the Covenant with Israel. He confronts that attitude dozens of times and demonstrates his verdict. It is not coercive, forced or deceptive ever. All the evil in this world that we can encourage, ignorantly act out, conceive of and cook up, either individually or corporately, is confronted, crushed and transformed in the Incarnation - Death - Burial - Resurrection – Ascension of Jesus. Instead of wrestling with Matthew 25:46, and harboring thoughts of eternal punishment for all those who are metaphysically outside the parameters of God’s saving grace, look more carefully at the word ‘Aionios’. [ A Better Future Now: What does Aionios Mean?] has a great article on this topic.
An Incarnational Perspective -
• Holiness of All Reality:
It emphasizes the holiness of all creation and encourages a deep reverence for life and the environment.
• Divine Immanence:
It highlights God's intimate presence within creation, emphasizing that God is actively involved in the world.
• Transformative Power:
It focuses on the transformative power of the Incarnation and how it can integrate divine presence into everyday life.
In essence, an Incarnational Perspective is about:
• Embracing the reality of God becoming human.
• Living out faith in a way that reflects Jesus' example.
• Being present with others and sharing their lives.
• Recognizing the importance of cultural context in sharing the Gospel.
• Understanding God's love and humility in becoming human.
Amen. This is very helpful. The opposite theology, the one where God predestined predetermines everything, makes me wonder why would God command us to love Him and others, if there is no moment-to-moment consent/choice/decision in that? Evangelism, and I am in recovery, tends to put way too much emphasis on a kind of One-and-Done Salvation theology. You make a decision for Jesus and you go to Heaven when you die. Predestination/Election theology is even more myopic. You don’t make a decision or consent to anything. God already did. Hmmm…? I doubt very much my beautiful wife of almost 40 years will appreciate my love for her when she finds out I have been merely a puppet on a string, without any real choice. To say nothing about how she will feel about God’s love for her with that kind of thinking. In our morning prayers we should just say, “Dear God. I love you because i pretty much have to. I have no choice.” (?) Yikes!
So it sounds like you are saying that the question of whether or not I am predestined for x or y is not really being addressed by the text. The text isn't answering that question. The text is talking about Jesus being predestined. And while that may be true, although I suspect it isn't, the question still stands concerning my own telos being for wrath or grace. What do you tell your students concerning that question?
I think what I understand you to be saying in the first post is that free will in the Christian tradition needs to be understood as consent. God needs our consent to save us. But that doesn’t really provide any clarity on the question of whether my consent was predestined or not. What appears to me to be the simplest answer is that everything is determined by God. And that doesn’t invalidate my free will because my free will is not absolutely free. The nature of a human is dependent on God, while God exists independently. So likewise our free will is dependent on God. We love because He first loved us.
Hmmm. My argument seems pretty clear. We are not predestined. Christ is predestined. (See this post.) We, freely, consent to being in Christ. (See the first post.) Putting it together, we, consenting to being in Christ, are predestinated insofar as we are found in Him.
To be sure, one doesn't have to agree with this argument. But it's not complicated to grasp.
So our “predestination” is dependent on us consenting to being in Christ? Which is to say we are not predestined and neither is our consent. I think I’m following but not convinced. Thanks for the clarifications!
Very interesting. You may be planning to get to this in a future post, but do you think we decide whether or not to be in Christ in this life and then that's it? No changing of mind in the next life? Or can we elect to be in Christ once we see the actual lay of the land in the next life?
As one of those who was raised in a church in the Reformed, Calvinist tradition that taught, and still teaches, the pernicious doctrine of individual election, and individual reprobation, I can testify to its profoundly unhealthy psychological effects. One either proudly looks down in those poor souls outside, or is eaten up by anxiety over possible damnation. Even worse is the damage to one’s image of God as a wrathful, dangerous, and unpredictable tyrant. Much better what I call ultra-Calvinism, the universalist doctrine of the God in the early church who has elected all creatures in Christ, and will finally brig all things into a new heavens and new earth. This was also Paul’s understanding of the end and goal in I Corinthians 15, when God will be “all and in all.”
We need to think of ‘Predestination’ from an ‘Incarnational Perspective’ as much as it is humanly possible in our short lives. Should we really ever be engaged in the divisive and arrogant prospect of determining whether someone is favored by God or not? It has always been His prerogative and, His alone. It seems blatantly clear from Jesus’ actions in the Gospels that he is healing, loving and electing those outside the perceptual understanding of the Covenant with Israel. He confronts that attitude dozens of times and demonstrates his verdict. It is not coercive, forced or deceptive ever. All the evil in this world that we can encourage, ignorantly act out, conceive of and cook up, either individually or corporately, is confronted, crushed and transformed in the Incarnation - Death - Burial - Resurrection – Ascension of Jesus. Instead of wrestling with Matthew 25:46, and harboring thoughts of eternal punishment for all those who are metaphysically outside the parameters of God’s saving grace, look more carefully at the word ‘Aionios’. [ A Better Future Now: What does Aionios Mean?] has a great article on this topic.
An Incarnational Perspective -
• Holiness of All Reality:
It emphasizes the holiness of all creation and encourages a deep reverence for life and the environment.
• Divine Immanence:
It highlights God's intimate presence within creation, emphasizing that God is actively involved in the world.
• Transformative Power:
It focuses on the transformative power of the Incarnation and how it can integrate divine presence into everyday life.
In essence, an Incarnational Perspective is about:
• Embracing the reality of God becoming human.
• Living out faith in a way that reflects Jesus' example.
• Being present with others and sharing their lives.
• Recognizing the importance of cultural context in sharing the Gospel.
• Understanding God's love and humility in becoming human.
Amen. This is very helpful. The opposite theology, the one where God predestined predetermines everything, makes me wonder why would God command us to love Him and others, if there is no moment-to-moment consent/choice/decision in that? Evangelism, and I am in recovery, tends to put way too much emphasis on a kind of One-and-Done Salvation theology. You make a decision for Jesus and you go to Heaven when you die. Predestination/Election theology is even more myopic. You don’t make a decision or consent to anything. God already did. Hmmm…? I doubt very much my beautiful wife of almost 40 years will appreciate my love for her when she finds out I have been merely a puppet on a string, without any real choice. To say nothing about how she will feel about God’s love for her with that kind of thinking. In our morning prayers we should just say, “Dear God. I love you because i pretty much have to. I have no choice.” (?) Yikes!
This has been so helpful, thank you for writing the series.
So it sounds like you are saying that the question of whether or not I am predestined for x or y is not really being addressed by the text. The text isn't answering that question. The text is talking about Jesus being predestined. And while that may be true, although I suspect it isn't, the question still stands concerning my own telos being for wrath or grace. What do you tell your students concerning that question?
Oh, that was answered in the first post.
I think what I understand you to be saying in the first post is that free will in the Christian tradition needs to be understood as consent. God needs our consent to save us. But that doesn’t really provide any clarity on the question of whether my consent was predestined or not. What appears to me to be the simplest answer is that everything is determined by God. And that doesn’t invalidate my free will because my free will is not absolutely free. The nature of a human is dependent on God, while God exists independently. So likewise our free will is dependent on God. We love because He first loved us.
Hmmm. My argument seems pretty clear. We are not predestined. Christ is predestined. (See this post.) We, freely, consent to being in Christ. (See the first post.) Putting it together, we, consenting to being in Christ, are predestinated insofar as we are found in Him.
To be sure, one doesn't have to agree with this argument. But it's not complicated to grasp.
So our “predestination” is dependent on us consenting to being in Christ? Which is to say we are not predestined and neither is our consent. I think I’m following but not convinced. Thanks for the clarifications!
Very interesting. You may be planning to get to this in a future post, but do you think we decide whether or not to be in Christ in this life and then that's it? No changing of mind in the next life? Or can we elect to be in Christ once we see the actual lay of the land in the next life?