Difference between revisions of "Predestination" - New World Encyclopedia

From New World Encyclopedia
 
(54 intermediate revisions by 6 users not shown)
Line 1: Line 1:
{{Edboard}}{{Paid}}{{Approved}}{{Images OK}}{{Contracted}}{{Submitted}}{{copyedited}}
+
{{Ebcompleted}}{{2Copyedited}}{{Paid}}{{Approved}}{{Images OK}}{{Submitted}}{{copyedited}}
  
'''Predestination''' (from Latin 'praedestinare,' "fore-ordain") is a [[Religious concepts|religious idea]], under which the relationship between the beginning and [[destiny]] of the world, angels, and human beings are discussed. In particular, predestination concerns [[God]]'s decision to create and to govern [[creation (theology)|Creation]], and the extent to which God's decisions determine ahead of time what the destiny or fate of groups and individuals will be. Conflicts over this topic have concerned various religious groups, in particular Christianity. The disagreement many Christians have is between those affirming human freedom and those affirming God's sovereign rule. A view balancing divine governance with human freedom is sought in order to reconcile a divided Christianity and strengthen humanity's sense of responsibility in relation to God's work in the world.  
+
'''Predestination''' (from Latin 'praedestinare,' "fore-ordain") is a [[religion|religious]] idea especially among the [[monotheism|monotheistic]] religions, and it is usually distinguished form other kinds of [[determinism]] such as fate, [[karma]], doom, and [[science|scientific]] determinism. So, predestination concerns [[God]]'s decision to [[creation (theology)|create]] the world and to govern it, and the extent to which God's decisions determine ahead of time what the destiny of groups and individuals will be. Conflicts over this topic have concerned various schools of religion. The disagreement many Christians have especially is between those affirming God's sovereign rule and those affirming human freedom. Also, a lot of different theories have been proposed to address the difficult issue of how divine [[omnipotence]] and human [[Free Will|free will]] are compatible.
 +
{{toc}}
 +
Given the difficult nature of the tension of omnipotence and free will, a careful study of these theories, especially those suggested by [[Thomas Aquinas|St. Thomas Aquinas]] and [[Alfred North Whitehead]], could lead to a new definition of divine omnipotence, which is not so much a coercive kind of power as a profound power of love grounded on God's true desire of love. This way, omnipotence could more easily accommodate free will because love by nature cares for and recognizes others while at the same time being more effectively powerful than anything else.  
  
== Significance of the topic ==
+
==Predestination and Other Kinds of Determinism ==
  
Views on predestination do not impact human behavior on a mundane level. People make the decisions they have to make regardless of their belief as to their freedom to do so. From that point of view the matter of predestination would seem to have little practical relevance. Nonetheless, it impacts life in two ways. On a personal level it provides comfort to those who believe that all affairs are firmly in the hands of a loving and just God. On a social level views on predestination have enormous sway on society. For example, the view that the present status is the way it is meant to be, or that history is inevitably moving in one way or another, toward one's nation's triumph (imperialism, fascism, nazism), toward a classless society (communism), toward "the end of history" (democratic capitalism), or toward a religious regime of Christian, Muslim, or other provenance, have a huge impact on individual lives and the course of history.
+
Predestination usually refers to a specifically [[religion|religious]] type of [[determinism]], especially as found in [[monotheism|monotheistic]] religions such as [[Christianity]] and [[Islam]], wherever [[omnipotence]] and [[omniscience]] are attributed to [[God]]. Thus, its religious nature distinguishes it from discussions of determinism with strictly [[philosophy|philosophical]], [[history|historical]], or economic interpretations.  
  
== Predestination contrasted with other kinds of determinism ==
+
Predestination may sometimes be used to refer to other [[materialism|materialistic]], spiritualist, non-theistic or polytheistic ideas of determinism, [[destiny]], fate, doom, or [[karma]]. Such beliefs or philosophical systems may hold that any outcome is finally determined by the complex interaction of multiple, possibly immanent, possibly impersonal, possibly equal forces rather than simply by the reliance of the Creator's conscious choice.
  
Its religious nature distinguishes it from discussions of [[determinism]], [[Free Will|free will]], and other related concepts with strictly philosophical, historical, or economic interpretations.  
+
Judaism believes in that human beings have free will and are held responsible for their actions by God. This is very strong theme is the [[Torah]]. The [[paganism|pagan]] world that surrounded tended to believe in [[fate]], [[destiny]] or [[karma]]. The idea of a predestined elect was a [[Gnosticism|gnostic]] idea. It has been suggested that as Christianity expanded and found many non-Jewish adherents it absorbed and was influenced by gnostic ideas such as predestination and determinism.<ref>Hans Jonas. ''The Gnostic Religion.'' (Beacon Press, 2001. ISBN 0807058017)</ref> The same could be said of Islam.
  
In [[China|Chinese]] [[Buddhist|Buddhism]], ''predestination'' is a translation of ''yuanfen'', which does not necessarily imply the existence or involvement of a deity. ''Predestination'' in this sense takes on a very literal meaning: ''pre-'' (before) and ''destiny'' (fate), in a straightforward way indicating that some events seem bound to happen.
+
==Predestination and Omniscience==
  
''Predestination'' may sometimes be used to refer to other materialistic, spiritualist, non-theistic or polytheistic ideas of [[determinism]], ''destiny'', ''fate'', ''doom'', or [[karma]]. Such beliefs or philosophical systems may hold that any outcome is finally determined by the complex interaction of multiple, possibly immanent, possibly impersonal, possibly equal forces. Rather than simply the reliance of the Creator's conscious choice.  
+
Discussion of predestination usually involves consideration of whether [[God]] is [[Omniscience|omniscient]], [[Eternity|eternal]], or atemporal (out of the flow of time in our universe). In terms of these ideas, God may see the past, present, and future, effectively knowing the future. If God in some sense knows ahead of time what will happen, then events in the universe can be effectively predetermined from God's point of view. This divine foreknowledge is not predestination in itself, although [[Arminianism|Arminians]] and Molinists in [[Christianity]] used both interchangeably when they were trying to argue for free will's compatibility with predestination through foreknowledge. Predestination implies that God will determine ahead of time what the destiny of creatures will be.
  
Finally, of the oppositions to determinism, there are theories that claim that the cosmos asserts any outcome that is ultimately unpredictable, the working out of luck, [[chance]], or [[chaos theory|chaos]].
+
[[Judaism]] may accept the possibility that God is atemporal; some forms of Jewish theology teach this virtually as a principle of faith, while other forms of Judaism do not. Jews may use the term "omniscience" or "preordination" as a corollary of omniscience, but normally outright reject the idea of predestination.
  
All conceptions of an ordered or rational cosmos have determinism implications, as a logical consequence of the idea of predictability; but ''predestination'' usually refers to a specifically [[religion|religious]] type of [[determinism]], especially as found in the various monotheistic systems of Christianity, wherever omniscience is attributed to God, but it appears in Islam as well.
+
[[Islam]] traditionally has strong views of predestination similar to some found in Christianity. In Islam, Allah both knows and ordains whatever comes to pass.
 +
 
 +
==Christian Views==
  
==Distinguished from preordination==
+
===The New Testament===
Predestination, in the sense of '''preordination''' or '''foreordination''', is concerned with the afterlife and with the roles that are assigned to things and people in life as well. In Christian theology, often all issues of preordination correspond directly with the issues of divine providence, with emphasis on God's particular determination of events, especially those events which arise from the choices made by men and angels.  Predestination includes all of the issues of preordination, and in addition is concerned with the ultimate outcome, the final destiny of men and of angels. These or related issues may be discussed in [[monotheism|monotheistic]] religions other than [[Christianity]].
+
The word predestination is translated from the Greek verb ''proorizo'' which appears six times in the [[New Testament]] to say that [[God]] predetermines or preordains people or events for his purpose.
  
In Christianity, ideas of preordination are strong or weak in parallel with ideas of predestination. This is not the case in some other religions, which emphasize a strong difference between earthly and eternal destinies. However, in Christianity, although the two are formally distinguished, the principles which explain the relationship of God's determining will and man's free choices are the same, whether speaking of the earthly fortunes and roles to which God has preordained men, or the final status to which they are predestined.
+
#"whatever Your hand and Your purpose ''predestined'' to occur" ([[Book of Acts|Acts]] 4:27).
 +
#"For those whom He foreknew, He also ''predestined'' to become conformed to the image of His Son, so that He would be the firstborn among many brethren" ([[Epistle to the Romans|Romans]] 8:29).  
 +
#"and these whom He ''predestined'', He also called; and these whom He called, He also justified; and these whom He justified, He also glorified" (Romans 8:30).
 +
#"but we speak God's wisdom in a mystery, the hidden wisdom which God ''predestined'' before the ages to our glory" ([[1 Corinthians]] 2:7).
 +
#"In love He ''predestined'' us to adoption as sons through Jesus Christ to Himself, according to the kind intention of His will" ([[Epistle to the Ephesians|Ephesians]] 1:3-5).
 +
#"also we have obtained an inheritance, having been ''predestined'' according to His purpose who works all things after the counsel of His will" (Ephesians 1:11).
  
==Predestination and omniscience==
+
The predestination of people is election (''elektos'' in Greek), which means to choose. This Greek word appears 25 times in the New Testament as in Ephesians 1:4: "He ''chose'' us in Him before the foundation of the world, that we should be holy and blameless before Him."
Discussion of predestination usually involves consideration of whether God is [[Omniscience|omniscient]], [[Eternity|eternal]], or atemporal (out of the flow of time in our universe). In terms of these ideas, God may see the past, present, and future allowing God to effectively know the future. If God in some sense knows ahead of time what will happen, then events in the universe can be effectively predetermined from God's point of view.  This is not predestination in itself. Predestination implies that God will determine ahead of time what the destiny of creatures will be.
 
  
[[Judaism]] may accept the possibility that God is atemporal; some forms of Jewish theology teach this virtually as a principle of faith, while other forms of Judaism do not. Jews may use the term ''omniscience'' or ''preordination'' as a corollary of omniscience, but normally outright reject the idea of predestination.
+
At the same time, the New Testament also seems to teach that humans have [[Free Will|free will]]: "Ask and it will be given to you; seek and you will find; knock and the door will be opened to you" ([[Gospel of Matthew|Matthew]] 7:7); "If anyone does not remain in me, he is like a branch that is thrown away and withers; such branches are picked up, thrown into the fire and burned. If you remain in me and my words remain in you, ask whatever you wish, and it will be given you" ([[Gospel of John|John]] 15:6-7).
  
[[Islam]] traditionally has strong views of predestination similar to some found in Christianity. In Islam, Allah both knows and ordains whatever comes to pass.
+
===Augustine===
 +
[[Saint Augustine]]'s (354-430) view of predestination is somewhat complex, for in his earlier days as a newly converted Christian he had to address the problem of [[fatalism]] in [[Manichaeism]], of which he used to be a member. Opposing it from his new vantage-point as a Christian, he defended the existence of free will in human beings created by God. Later in life, however, he refuted the libertarian position of [[Pelagius]] by emphasizing the importance of God's sovereign [[Divine grace|grace]].  
  
==Predestination in the New Testament==
+
It was in this latter context that Augustine developed a theory of the two phases of human growth in his Anti-Pelagian treatise on "Grace and Free Will" written in 426 or 427 C.E.<ref>Augustine, [http://www.newadvent.org/fathers/1510.htm "On Grace and Free Will."] ''newadvent''. Retrieved January 16, 2008.</ref> According to this, in the first phase the human will is still "small and weak" due to the [[Human Fall]]; it is thus unable to do God's commandment. Hence, God's grace takes the initiative in its operation within us. In this initial phase God's grace is called "operating grace" ''(gratia operans),'' and it is gratuitous and even irresistible. In the second stage, however, the human will becomes "great and robust"; so, God's grace works together with us cooperatively. In the second phase, therefore, God's grace is termed "cooperating grace" ''(gratia cooperans)''. These two types of divine grace were also called by Augustine "prevenient grace" ''(gratia praeveniens)'' and "subsequent grace" ''(gratia subsequens),'' respectively. The theology of Augustine influenced both [[Catholicism]] and [[Protestantism]], but while Catholicism accepts both phases of his theory, Protestantism rejects the second phase.
"Blessed be the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, who has blessed us with every spiritual blessing in the heavenly places in Christ, just as He chose us in Him before the foundation of the world, that we would be holy and blameless before Him. In love He ''predestined'' us to adoption as sons through Jesus Christ to Himself, according to the kind intention of His will…"<br />(Ephesians 1:3-5)
 
  
"And we know that God causes all things to work together for good to those who love God, to those who are called according to His purpose. For those whom He foreknew, He also ''predestined'' to become conformed to the image of His Son, so that He would be the firstborn among many brethren; and these whom He ''predestined'', He also called; and these whom He called, He also justified; and these whom He justified, He also glorified."<br />
+
Augustine developed his doctrine of predestination during and after the Pelagian controversy. It relates especially to the first of the above-mentioned phases of human growth, when the human will is very weak in front of the almighty God. God determines the destiny of humans, even choosing a certain number of people for salvation beforehand. Augustine said: "I speak thus of those who are predestined to the kingdom of God, whose number is so certain that one can neither be added to them nor taken from them."<ref>Augustine, [http://www.newadvent.org/fathers/1513.htm "On Rebuke and Grace" Chap. 39.]''newadvent.org''. Retrieved January 17, 2008.</ref>  
(Romans 8:28-30)
 
  
"…but we speak God's wisdom in a mystery, the hidden wisdom which God ''predestined'' before the ages to our glory…" <br />
+
This does not mean that fallen humans have no free will at all; according to Augustine, they still have the ability to sin ''(posse peccare).''
(1 Corinthians 2:7)
 
  
"For truly in this city there were gathered together against Your holy servant Jesus, whom You anointed, both Herod and Pontius Pilate, along with the Gentiles and the peoples of Israel, to do whatever Your hand and Your purpose ''predestined'' to occur."'<br />
+
===Thomas Aquinas===
(Acts 4:27-28)
+
[[Thomas Aquinas|St. Thomas Aquinas]] (c.1225-1274) tried to explain the meaning of Augustine's second phase of the cooperation between God and humans through a more general theory of primary and secondary [[causation]]. According to that theory, while God as "pure act" is the primary cause of what happens, nature itself as a composite of "act" and "potency" is the secondary cause. Among all creatures, humans have the highest grade of "act." So, While God is the first agent of actualization, humans are the second agent of actualization. One possible difficulty of this model would be that there hardly exists reciprocity in the divine-human relationship because God as "pure act" is perfect and immutable, thus not being able to be acted upon by humans. However, it is notable that Thomas' philosophical conceptuality was able to secure some level of human participation in what happens centering on God's will.
  
==Cristian Views==
+
===Calvinists===
 +
Protestants took seriously Augustine's view of God's operation during the first phase of human growth, which involves predestination. Some associate the doctrine of predestination with one name, [[John Calvin]] (1509-1564). Indeed, on the spectrum of beliefs concerning predestination, [[Calvinism]] is the strongest. Calvin asserted that God's grace that leads to salvation is irresistible and given to some but not to others on the basis of God's predestining choice. Calvin reasoned further that since God is almighty, by predestining some to [[salvation]] ("election"), he is in the same act of predestining the others to hell ("reprobation"). In his own words,
  
 +
<blockquote>By predestination we mean the eternal decree of God, by which he determined with himself whatever he wished to happen with regard to every man. All are not created on equal terms, but some are preordained to eternal life, others to eternal damnation; and, accordingly, as each has been created for one or other of these ends, we say that he has been predestined to life or to death.<ref>John Calvin, [http://www.reformed.org/master/index.html?mainframe=/books/institutes/ ''Institutes of the Christian Religion'' II, 21, 5.] ''reformed.org''. Retrieved January 17, 2008.</ref>
 +
</blockquote>
  
===Augustine===
+
This is usually referred to as "double predestination." Calvin taught that God's predestining decision is based on the knowledge of His own will rather than foreknowledge of every particular person and event. Additionally, God continually acts with entire freedom, in order to bring about His will in completeness, in an unfathomable way not accessible to scrutiny; hence the freedom of the creature is not really violated.  
In his earlier days as a newly converted Christian, [[St. Augustine]] had to address the problem of [[Manichaeism|Manichaean]] [[fatalism]], of which he used to be a member. From a Christian point of view, he now had to defend the existence of [[Free Will|free will]] within human beings created by God. Later in his life, however, he had to refute the libertarian position of [[Pelagius]], by emphasizing the importance of the sovereignty of God's grace. It was in this context that Augustine developed a theory of the two phases of human growth in his Anti-Manichaean treatise on "Grace and Free Will" written in 426 or 427 A.D.<ref>Augustine, [http://www.newadvent.org/fathers/1510.htm "On Grace and Free Will."] Retrieved January 16, 2008.</ref> According to this, in the first phase the human will is still "small and weak" due to the fall, thus being unable to do God's commandment; so, God's grace takes the initiative in its operation for us. In this initial phase God's grace is called "operating grace" (''gratia operans''), and it is gratuitous and even irresistible. Based on this, Augustine established his doctrine of predestination, according to which God elects a certain number of people for salvation even before the foundation of the world. When it comes to the second phase of human growth, however, the human will now becomes "great and robust"; so, God's grace works together with us cooperatively. In the second phase, therefore, God's grace is termed "cooperating grace" (''gratia cooperans''). These two types of divine grace were also called by Augustine "prevenient grace" (''gratia praeveniens'') and "subsequent grace" (''gratia subsequens''), respectively. The theology of Augustine influenced both Catholicism and Protestantism later, but while Catholicism basically understood both phases mentioned by him, Protestantism rejected the second phase.
 
  
===Thomas Aquinas===
+
*'''Supralapsarianism'''—Some of Calvin's followers believed that God decreed both election and reprobation even before the [[Fall of Man|fall of Adam]], and that the fall happened to facilitate this divine decree. This is called "[[supralapsarianism]]" or "antelapsarianism." Calvin himself is sometimes said to have had this position, although it is disputed.
  
===Calvinists===
+
*'''Sublapsarianism'''—Less rigid than supralapsarianism was "sublapsarianism," "[[infralapsarianism]]," or "postlapsarianism," according to which God decreed election and reprobation after the fall of Adam. This position has been commonly accepted amongst Calvinists since the Synod of Dort in 1618.
  
 
==="Moderate" Calvinists===
 
==="Moderate" Calvinists===
 +
There are "moderate" Calvinists such as Millard Erickson who try to explain the possibility of cooperation between God and humans even in the context of predestination. According to Erickson, the divine-human cooperation is possible, but it is only possible in the sense that a human choice is actually made through the will of God-given human personality. Human freedom is only within the limitations of what God created it to be. So, although a human ''could'' freely choose differently, he/she ''would'' not in reality.<ref>Millard J. Erickson. ''Introducing Christian Doctrine,'' 2nd ed., (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Academic, 2001), 124-128.</ref>
  
 
===Arminians===
 
===Arminians===
 +
[[Arminianism|Arminians]] were named after Jacobus Arminius, a Dutch Reformed [[theology|theologian]] (1560-1609). According to Arminians, all humans can use their free will to choose salvation, if they want, because they all are given "prevenient grace." So, whether they choose election or reprobation is up to them. Hence it is a conditional election. It is also completely compatible with God's sovereign will because the cooperation between God and humans can be explained through divine foreknowledge. While humans are genuinely free to do anything because of their free will, God foreknows what their decisions and actions will be in the end. So, while God's plan is virtually conditional upon human decision (i.e., virtual priority of human decision), it can still be said that God wills what he foreknows will happen. Therefore, God predestines on the basis of his foreknowledge of how some will respond to his universal love. Arminianism was condemned at the Synod of Dort (1618-1619). Nonetheless, Arminian thinking maintained itself in the [[Church of England]] and the [[Methodism|Methodist]] churches.
  
 
===Molinists===
 
===Molinists===
 +
Molinists in Catholicism are equivalent to Arminians in Protestantism. They were named after [[Luis de Molina]] (1535-1600), a Jesuit theologian in Spain. Their explanation of the divine-human cooperation was very similar to that of [[Arminius]]. Molinists were strongly opposed by the conservative Dominican, Domingo Báñez (1528-1604), just as Arminians were strongly critiqued by Calvinists. It is interesting to note that Catholicism has tolerated the dispute between Molinism and the conservatism of Báñez, just as Calvinism and Arminianism have coexisted in Protestantism.
  
 
===Whiteheadians===
 
===Whiteheadians===
 +
As an Anglican, [[Alfred North Whitehead]] (1861-1947) basically had an Arminian background. His [[philosophy|philosophical]] understanding of the relationship between God and the world can be seen in his major work, ''Process and Reality,'' according to which God and each "actual entity" in the world cause each other and work together through the universal law of "dipolarity." God as well as each and every actual entity in the world has two poles: "mental" and "physical" poles. To apply the terminology of Thomas Aquinas here, the mental poles of God and each actual entity in the world are the primary and secondary causes, respectively, of what will happen. What distinguishes Whitehead from Thomas, however, is that Whitehead's God is dipolar, whereas Thomas' God merely as "pure act" is monopolar. Therefore, Whitehead's God can be acted upon by the world, whereas Thomas' God as the Unmoved Mover can't. This explains Whitehead's theory of the reciprocity of the harmonious relationship of God and the world.
  
 +
This was applied to Christian theology, and a new school of theology, called [[Process thought|process theology]], was created. Many of the process theologians or Whiteheadians such as John B. Cobb, Jr. are Methodists. According to Whiteheadians, the power of God is not coercive but rather "persuasive" in consideration of the secondary causation of human beings in the world.
  
 +
Many have criticized Whiteheadians of advocating a finite God who is not omnipotent. But, John B. Cobb, Jr. has addressed the criticism, by saying that the power of persuasion is more effective than, and superior to, the power of coercion implied in omnipotence:
  
The '''"doctrine of predestination"''' usually refers to Christian teaching concerning the final destiny of men and of angels.  As such, discussion of predestination concerns the extent to which salvation and damnation are the result of God's decisions before time as opposed to decided by men and angels for themselves. The more immediate application of the doctrine of predestination concerns the extent to which people and nations are confined by God to particular roles, compared to how much they are makers of their own destiny. Predestination is mentioned in the Bible (''[http://www.gnpcb.org/esv/search/?q=eph+1 Ephesians 1:4-6 (ESV)] for example''), and therefore all Christian theologies discuss it in some way.
+
<blockquote>He [Whitehead] emphasizes persuasion over against coercion. This is the kind of power that parents and teachers want to exercise in relation to youth. The resort to coercion reflects the failure of persuasion. Persuasion or influence empowers the one who is affected. Coercion disempowers…. Coercive power can kill and destroy, but it cannot bring life and wisdom and love into being. It is an inferior form of power.<ref>John B. Cobb, Jr., [http://www.religion-online.org/showarticle.asp?title=3361 "Process Theology and the Bible: How Science Has Changed Our View of God."] Retrieved January 17, 2008.</ref></blockquote>
  
In terms of these ultimates, with creation as the ultimate beginning, and salvation as the ultimate end, a belief system has a doctrine of predestination if it teaches:
+
God's power of persuasion comes from his eternal desire or urge for the good, i.e., "the living urge towards all possibilities, claiming the goodness of their realization," and Whitehead called it God's "Eros."<ref>Alfred North Whitehead, ''Adventures of Ideas'' (Macmillan Company, 1956), 381.</ref>
# God's decision, assignment, or declaration concerning the majority of people has been conceived '''prior''' to the outcome, and
 
# the decision is fully predictive and certain of the outcome, and not merely probable.
 
  
There are numerous ways to describe the spectrum of beliefs concerning predestination in Christian thinking.  Teaching on predestination may vary in terms of three considerations. 
+
==Jewish Views==
# Is God's predestination decision based on a knowledge of his own will? Or does it arise from a knowledge of whatever will happen?
 
# How particular is God's prior decision: Is it concerned with particular persons and events? Or is it limited to broad categories of people and things?
 
# How free is God in effecting his part in the eventual outcome?
 
  
===Predestination in Paul and Augustine===
+
Most Jews (Orthodox, Conservative, Reform, and secular) affirm that since [[free will]] exists, then by definition one's fate is not preordained. It is held as a tenet of faith that whether God is omniscient or not, nothing interferes with mankind's free will. Some Jewish theologians, both during the medieval era and today, have attempted to formulate a philosophy in which free will is preserved, while also affirming that God has knowledge of what decisions people will make in the future. Whether or not these two ideas are mutually compatible, or whether there is a contradiction between the two, is still a matter of great study and interest in [[philosophy]] today.
There is a resounding consistency in the early church fathers, regarding the freedom of human choices. This polemic was crucial in the Christian confrontation with [[Cynicism]] and some of the chief forms of [[Gnosticism]], such as [[Manichaeism]], which taught that man is by nature flawed and therefore not responsible for evil in himself or in the world. At the same time, belief in a sovereign and a predestinating God was held based upon sayings of Jesus expressing that the sitting on his right or left is reserved "for them for whom it hath been prepared of my Father" (Matthew 20:23). [[Apostle Paul]] follows this line of thought with statements that we are called "not according to our works, but according to his own purpose and grace." (2 Timothy 1:9) and the 8th and 9th chapters of Romans. This was an uneasy tension that eventually became obvious with the confrontation between [[Augustine of Hippo]] and [[Pelagius]], culminating in condemnation of Pelagianism (as interpreted by Augustine) in 417. The British monk denied predestination in order to affirm that salvation is achieved by an act of free will. The Council of Orange in 529 formally accepted Augustine's teaching.  
 
  
Leading to this controversy, Augustine's own early writings clearly affirmed that God's predestinating grace was granted on the basis of his foreknowledge of the human desire to pursue salvation. After 396, however, his understanding began to turn increasingly toward the necessity of God granting this grace in order for the desire for salvation to be awakened.  Thus his thoughts took a more determinist direction, especially as Augustine wrestled with the implications of the writings of the Apostle Paul.  
+
[[Orthodox Judaism|Orthodox Jews]] generally affirm that God must be viewed as omnipotent, but they have varying definitions of what the word means. Thus some modern Orthodox theologians have views that are essentially the same as non-Orthodox theologians, who hold that God is simply not omnipotent, in the commonly used sense of that word.  
  
His solution was not to deny that man has freedom to choose, but to assert that on account of [[Original Sin]], human free choice is enslaved to sin (''liberum arbitrium captivatum''). The individual does not lack knowledge of what God's will is nor that it is good, but is deprived of the desire to do God's will, and subsequently freely chooses sin. The grace of God sets the person free to choose God's will (''liberum arbitrium liberatum''). God's grace acts first on the human heart, to awaken the desire to do his will, and cooperates with the individual in a process of granting prayers for the greater desire and ability to choose his will and to do it.
+
Many Chabad (Lubavitch) Jews of [[Hasidic Judaism]] affirm as infallible their [[Rabbi|rebbe]]'s teaching that God knows and controls the fate of all, yet at the same time affirm the classical Jewish belief in free will. The inherent contradiction between the two results in their belief that such a contradiction is only "apparent" due to our inherent lack of ability to understand greater truths. To most people outside of these Hasidic Jews, this position is held to be a logical contradiction, and is only sustained due to cognitive dissonance.
  
According to Augustine and Paul, the reason that this grace is given to some and withheld from others is that it is inaccessible to the human mind but nevertheless made in perfect justice. Thus God's predestination of some to salvation is evidence of his unconditional love and of others to damnation is evidence of his justice.  
+
One noted Jewish philosopher, [[Hasdai Crescas]] (c.1340-1410/1411) denied the existence of free will based upon the determinism of the universe itself. According to him, all of a person's actions are predetermined by the moment of their birth, and their judgment in the eyes of God is effectively preordained. However, in this view, the determination is not a result of God's predetermining one's fate, but rather from the view that the universe is deterministic. Crescas's views on this topic were rejected by Judaism at large. In later centuries this idea independently developed among some Chabad (Lubavitch) Jews.
  
In a real sense, all ideas of predestination are further developments of this same struggle to reconcile the idea of free will with the idea of predestinating grace; both of which are affirmed in Scripture and throughout Christian tradition.  Especially in Western Christianity, the history of this development is traced through Augustine.  
+
The staunch Calvinist Gordon H. Clark (1902-1985) made a lengthy appendix to his book ''Biblical Predestination,'' and it is a list of what he thought to be Old Testament passages on predestination.<ref>Gordon H. Clark. ''Biblical Predestination.'' (P & R Press, 1969).</ref> Generally speaking, however, [[Judaism]] has no strong doctrine of predestination; it rather has a doctrine of human free will. Clark apparently treated the Hebrew Bible with a Calvinist bias. The idea that God is omnipotent and omniscient didn't formally exist in Judaism during the ''Tanakh'' era, but rather was a later development due to the influence of neo-Platonic and neo-Aristotelian philosophy.
  
====Calvin and Arminius====
+
==Islamic Views==
  
Some associate the doctrine of predestination with one name, John Calvin. [[Calvinism]] asserts that God's grace that leads to salvation is ''irresistible'' and given to some but not to others on the basis of God's predestinating choice. Calvin reasoned further that since God is almighty, by predestinating some to salvation ("election"), he is in the same act of predestinating the others to hell ("reprobation").  
+
In [[Islam]], "predestination" is the usual English rendering of a belief that Muslims call ''al-qada wa al-qadar'' in [[Arabic language|Arabic]]. The phrase means "the divine decree and the predestination"; ''al-qadar'' derives from a root that means "to measure out." The phrase reflects a Muslim doctrine that God has measured out and foreordained the span of every person's life, and their lot of good or ill fortune.  
  
Conditional Predestination, or more commonly referred to as [[conditional election]], is a theological stance that came from the writings and teachings of [[Jacobus Arminius]]. Arminius studied under the staunch reformed scholar [[Theodore Beza]], whose views of [[Predestination (Calvinism)|election]], Jacob eventually argued, could not reconcile freedom with [[moral responsibility]].
+
When referring to the future, Muslims frequently qualify any predictions of what will come to pass with the phrase ''inshallah,'' Arabic for "if God wills." The phrase recognizes that human knowledge of the future is limited, and that all that may or may not come to pass is under the control of God. A related phrase, ''mashallah,'' indicates acceptance of what God has ordained in terms of good or ill fortune that may befall a believer. So, God is understood to be omniscient and omnipotent. There is no free will on the part of humans.
  
Arminius attempted to reconcile freedom with God's [[omniscience]]. He saw human freedom in terms of the [[Libertarianism (philosophy)|Libertarian]] philosophy: man's choice is not decided by God's choice, thus God's choice is "conditional", depending on what man chooses. [[Arminianism]] agreed that human beings cannot follow God's will except by God's grace, but goes on to assert that God's [[prevenient grace]] is given to everyone and so all have the freedom to choose to  be good and be saved. Therefore, God predestinates on the basis of foreknowledge of how some will respond to his universal love ("conditional"); hence it is possible for persons to resist God's grace. The Synod of Dort (1618-1619) and the Westminster Assembly (1647), two defining moments in the development of Protestant thought, rejected Arminianism. Nonetheless, Arminian thinking maintained itself in the Church of England and world Anglicanism and the Methodist movements, and today is the dominant Protestant view.
+
Soon, however, a dispute between Kharijites and Murji'ites started over free will, with the former affirming it and the latter denying it. Later thinkers such as [[Abu al-Hasan al-Ash'ari|Al-Ash'ari]] (874-936) searched for ways to reconcile free will and God's ''jabr,'' or divine commanding power. Al-Ash'ari developed an "acquisition" or "dual-agency" form of compatibilism, in which human free will and divine ''jabr'' were both asserted, and which became a cornerstone of the dominant Ash'ari position.<ref>Montgomery Watt. ''Free-Will and Predestination in Early Islam.'' (London: Luzac & Co., 1948); Harry Wolfson. ''The Philosophy of the Kalam.'' (Harvard University Press, 1976).</ref> In [[Shia]] Islam, Ash'ari's understanding of a higher balance toward predestination is challenged by most theologians. Free will, according to Shia doctrine, is the main factor for one's accountability in one's actions throughout life. All actions taken by one's free will are said to be counted on the [[Day of Judgment]] because they are one's own and not God's.
  
====[[Sublapsarianism]]====
+
==Creative Assessment: Omnipotence and Free Will==
Also referred to [[infralapsarianism]], Sublapsarianism holds that predestination logically coincides with the preordination of the human fall. That is, salvation in Christ is possible only as an act of saving sinners, and its glory makes worthwhile the fall and existence of sin. Calvinists now had to defend God's not being the author of sin. Augustine solved this problem by stating that evil enters God's plan when it leads to a good greater than would otherwise be possible. Calvin called it too difficult and sacred a matter for human beings to know. Infralapsarians, and here Martin Luther is a major example, often emphasize a difference between God's decree (which is inviolable and inscrutable) and his revealed will (against which man is disobedient).
 
  
The version of predestination espoused by [[John Calvin]], is sometimes referred to as "double predestination" because in it God predestines some people for salvation (i.e. Unconditional election) and some for condemnation (i.e. Reprobation). On the spectrum of beliefs concerning predestination, Calvinism is the strongest form among Christians. It teaches that God's predestinating decision is based on the knowledge of his own will rather than foreknowledge, concerning every particular person and event. Additionally, God continually acts with entire freedom, in order to bring about his will in completeness, in an unfathomable way, not accessible to scrutiny, so that the freedom of the creature is not violated.
+
[[Augustine]]'s theory that there are two phases of human growth seems to make sense. But, his assertion, in relationship to the first phase, that the number of the predestined elect is "certain" may not be acceptable to many, if it means to exclude the non-elect from [[salvation]], given [[God]] is a God of [[love]]. [[Calvinism]]'s double predestination may be similarly unacceptable to many, even though it is attractive to believe in God's [[omnipotence]]. Also, while human [[Free Will|free will]] is not entirely ignored in the Augustinian and Calvinistic doctrines of predestination, it is quite hard to comprehend.
  
====[[Supralapsarianism]]====
+
Predestination is usually associated with divine attributes such as omnipotence and [[omniscience]]. Omniscience (or foreknowledge), of course, was a key term to [[Arminianism]] and Molinism, but omnipotence seems to be more prominent than omniscience in the overall discussion of predestination. So, the apparent tension between divine omnipotence and human free will has been a major issue which many schools in the [[monotheism|monotheistic]] religions have tried to address. Many [[theology|theologian]]s and schools have suggested theories of how omnipotence and human responsibility are reconcilable and compatible, but those theories are quite difficult to comprehend as long as omnipotence has been understood to be God's unlimited power over human beings.  
Supralapsarianism is the doctrine that God's decree of predestination for salvation and reprobation logically precedes his preordination of the human fall into sin. That is, God decided to save and to damn; he then determined that the human fall into sin would accomplish his purpose. Calvin is often counted among the supralapsarians, especially by those who hold this view.
 
  
 +
But, [[Thomas Aquinas]]' [[metaphysics|metaphysical]] explanation of Augustine's second phase of human growth, in which God's "cooperative" [[Divine grace|grace]] and our "great and robust" will can work together, seems to be a good first step towards clarification. Thomas attributed [[causation]] to both God and humans, although he did not see reciprocity between the primary and secondary causations. It seems, however, that in order to secure reciprocity between God and human beings [[Alfred North Whitehead|Whitehead]] was able to make some breakthrough by applying the law of dipolarity to God as well. Of course, a usual criticism directed to Whiteheadians is that their God is no longer omnipotent. But, their response to this criticism is that the power of God is persuasive, and that it is realistically superior to the power of God as omnipotence or coercion.
  
 +
If Whiteheadians are correct in saying that persuasion is superior to coercion, then we may wish to come up with a new definition of omnipotence by saying that persuasion is omnipotence newly understood, because it is realistically even more powerful than omnipotence as understood in classical theology. This newly defined omnipotence, of course, can easily accommodate human free will. More importantly, however, it can be understood to be an essential aspect of the love of God. The mystery of love is such that while nothing is more powerful than it, it also recognizes and respects others. Although Whiteheadians do not call it omnipotence, it is an eternal and irrepressible urge for goodness on the part of God. Jürgen Moltmann defines it as "God's longing for 'his Other' and for that Other's free response to the divine love."<ref>Jürgen Moltmann. ''Trinity and the Kingdom: The Doctrine of God,'' trans. Margaret Kohl (Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 1993), 106.</ref>
  
== Jewish views ==
+
==Notes==
 +
<references/>
  
Generally speaking [[Judaism]] has no strong doctrine of predestination. The idea that God is omnipotent and omniscient didn't formally exist in Judaism during the ''Tanakh'' era, but rather was a later development due to the influence of neo-Platonic and neo-Aristotelian philosophy. Many modern Jewish thinkers in the 20th century have resolved the dialectical tension by holding that God is simply not omnipotent, in the commonly used sense of that word. These thinkers are primarily not Orthodox Jews. [[Orthodox Judaism|Orthodox Jewish]] [[rabbi]]s generally affirm that God must be viewed as [[omnipotent]], but they have varying definitions of what the word means. Thus one finds that some modern Orthodox theologians have views that are essentially the same as non-Orthodox theologians, but they use different terminology.
+
==References==
  
One noted Jewish philosopher, [[Hasdai Crescas]], resolved this dialectical tension by taking the position that free-will does not exist. Hence all of a person's actions are predetermined by the moment of their birth, and their judgment in the eyes of God is effectively preordained. However, in this view, the determination is not a result of God's predetermining one's fate, but rather from the view that the universe is deterministic. Crescas's views on this topic were rejected by Judaism at large. In later centuries this idea independently developed among some in the Chabad (Lubavitch) sect of [[Hasidic Judaism]]. Many individuals within Chabad take this view seriously, and hence effectively deny the existence of free will.
+
*Berkouwer, G.C. ''Divine Election''. Translated by Hugo Bekker. Eerdmans, 1960. ISBN 0802848133
 +
*Clark, Gordon H. ''Biblical Predestination''. P & R Press, 1969. ISBN 0875521371 
 +
*Erickson, Millard J. ''Introducing Christian Doctrine''. 2nd ed. Grand Rapids, Mich.: Baker Academic, 2001. ISBN 0801022509
 +
*Farrelly, Mark John. ''Predestination, Grace, and Free Will''. Westminster, MD: Newman Press, 1964.
 +
*Jonas, Hans. ''The Gnostic Religion.'' Beacon Press, 2001. ISBN 0807058017
 +
*Moltmann, Jürgen. ''Trinity and the Kingdom: The Doctrine of God,'' Translated by Margaret Kohl. Minneapolis, Minn.: Fortress Press, 1993. ISBN 080062825X
 +
*Watt, Montgomery. ''Free-Will and Predestination in Early Islam''. London: Luzac & Co., 1948.
 +
*Whitehead, Alfred North. ''Adventures of Ideas''. Macmillan Company, 1956.
 +
*Wolfson, Harry Austryn. ''The Philosophy of the Kalam''. Harvard University Press, 1976. ISBN 0674665805
  
However, many Chabad (Lubavitch) Jews attempt to hold ''both'' views. They affirm as infallible their [[Rabbi|rebbe]]'s teachings that God knows and controls the fate of all, yet at the same time affirms the classical Jewish belief in free will, in other words,. there is no such thing as determinism. The inherent contradiction between the two results in their belief that such contradictions are only "apparent" due to man's inherent lack of ability to understand greater truths. To most people outside of these Hasidic groups, this position is held to be a logical contradiction, and is only sustained due to cognitive dissonance.
+
==External Links==
 
+
All links retrieved November 30, 2022.
All other Jews (Orthodox, Conservative, Reform, and secular) affirm that since free will exists, then by definition one's fate is not preordained. It is held as a tenet of faith that whether God is omniscient or not, nothing interferes with mankind's free will. Some Jewish theologians, both during the medieval era and today, have attempted to formulate a philosophy in which free will is preserved, while also affirming that God has knowledge of what decisions people will make in the future. Whether or not these two ideas are mutually compatible, or whether there is a contradiction between the two, is still a matter of great study and interest in [[philosophy]] today.
 
  
== Islamic views ==
 
 
In [[Islam]], "predestination" is the usual English language rendering of a belief that Muslims call ''al-qada wa al-qadar'' in [[Arabic language|Arabic]].  The phrase means "the divine decree and the predestination"; ''al-qadar'' derives from a root that means ''to measure out''. 
 
 
The phrase reflects a Muslim doctrine that God has measured out and foreordained the span of every person's life, and their lot of good or ill fortune. When referring to the [[future]], Muslims frequently qualify any predictions of what will come to pass with the phrase ''inshallah'', Arabic for "if God wills."  The phrase recognizes that human knowledge of the future is limited, and that all that may or may not come to pass is under the control of God.  A related phrase, ''mashallah'', indicates acceptance of what God has ordained in terms of good or ill fortune that may befall a believer.
 
 
== Unificationist View ==
 
 
The Reverend [[Sun Myung Moon]] points out that controversy over predestination has caused great confusion in the religious lives of many people. He points out that the Bible fully affirms God's sovereignty and ominpotence, while simultanesouly holding undiminished human freedom and responsibility. All outcomes, whether they be in an individual’s life, or even the rise and fall of nations, comes to pass in relation to the free human response to the Will of God.
 
 
Pro-predestination passages for example include Paul's:
 
 
*"Those whom He predestined He also called; and those whom He called He also justified; and those whom He justified He also glorified." (Romans 8:30)
 
 
*"I will have mercy on whom I have mercy, and I will have compassion on whom I have compassion. So it depends not upon man’s will or exertion, but upon God’s mercy."  (Romans 9:15-16)
 
 
*"Has the potter no right over the clay, to make out of the same lump one vessel for beauty and another for menial use?" (Romans 9:21)
 
 
*It is also written that, even while they were still in their mother’s womb, God loved Jacob and hated Esau and announced their destiny, saying, “the elder will serve the younger.” (Romans 9:11-13)
 
 
Yet there is also sufficient biblical evidence to refute the doctrine of absolute predestination. For example, God warned the first human ancestors not to eat of the fruit in order to prevent their fall. It can be deduced from this that the [[human fall]] was not the outcome of God’s predestination, but rather the result of human disobedience to God’s commandment. In another verse, "the Lord was sorry that he had made man on the earth and it grieved him to his heart" (Genesis 6:6). If the human Fall were predestined by God, there would be no reason for Him to grieve over fallen human beings, who were acting in accordance with His predestination. Reverend Moon affirms universal salvation and rejects the assertion that some are predestined to hell, citing the John 3:16 passage that whoever believes in Christ shall not perish, but have eternal life. The common sense doctrine that the outcome of human undertakings is determined not by God’s predestination, but instead by human effort, is supported further by the well-known biblical verse, “Ask, and it will be given you; seek, and you will find; knock, and it will be opened to you”(Matthew 7:7).
 
 
Reverend Moon strives to reconcile these seemingly contradictory biblical statements by adopting the position that God's will is predestined, but the "when" and "how" it ultimately is accomplished depends on the free human response to God. It is only when human beings freely respond to God out of love that God can be happy, just as parents are happy when their children freely respond to their love.
 
 
Reverend Moon rejects both the infra- and supra-lapsarian positions. God must predestine his will and bring about its realization in the ways of goodness, and not in the ways of evil. Hence, his purpose of creation is good and his will to accomplish it is good. If evil acts such as Christ's crucifixion were the result of God’s predestination, then God could not be the author of goodness. If God Himself had predestined such evil outcomes, he would not have expressed regret over them as he did, for example, over the depravity of fallen human beings or over King Saul when he lapsed into faithlessness (1 Samuel 15:11).
 
 
This is believed to show the impact of Reverend Moon's perception of God's suffering. Biblical passages expressing God's grief, God's regret, or God's prophesies contingent upon human action highlight the freedom that humans often use in ways adverse to God's predestined outcome. Therefore, in Reverend Moon's view, God's will is one among many competing wills, for human beings and angels have freedom in which God will not intervene. God chooses not to control the decisions of his partners as then they would not be genuine partners. According to God's will, specific tasks and outcomes for individuals are predestined, but if the person who has been chosen to accomplish his will goes another way, in selfishness or ignorance, God must continue. The person must pay [[indemnity]] and try again, or God may choose another person to complete the task. Biblical examples that are given include when Jesus succeeded Adam, Seth succeeded Abel, Joshua succeeded Moses, and when Matthias succeeded Judas.
 
 
Thus God predestines a direct route to accomplishment conditionally, contingent upon human actions. The human portion of responsibility is extremely small when compared to God’s portion, yet for both parties, total investment is required. Since God never fails his portion of responsibility, the human response to God is the primary determinant of human history. For example, God predestined that his will could be fulfilled through Adam and Eve but they had to refrain from "eating the fruit" to accomplish control over mind and body. In the dispensation of restoration through Noah, God predestined that his will be fulfilled only after Noah exerted himself with the utmost devotion in building the Ark. God predestined that his will would only be fulfilled after fallen people completed their responsibility by believing in Jesus and following him (John 3:16 is often cited).
 
 
God predestines for people to reach perfection when they complete their responsibility. Reverend Moon further asserts that because God created humans as social beings, God's plan for an individual is conditioned by that person's nationality, ancestral line, inborn character, childhood training, and social context. Taking into account this context, God chooses central persons for particular missions that impact larger society, for example Moses and Jesus. These central figures have additional responsibility, yet they still have free will, and they are also dependent upon the free will of the people whom they are chosen to lead.
 
 
==Notes==
 
<references/>
 
 
==External Links==
 
*[http://etext.lib.virginia.edu/cgi-local/DHI/dhi.cgi?id=dv2-03 Determinism in Theology: PREDESTINATION]
 
 
*[http://www.gnpcb.org/esv/search/?q=predestin Occurrences of predestination in the Bible text (ESV)]
 
*[http://www.gnpcb.org/esv/search/?q=predestin Occurrences of predestination in the Bible text (ESV)]
 
*[http://www.theopedia.com/Predestination Theopedia: Predestination] (conservative Calvinist perspective)
 
*[http://www.theopedia.com/Predestination Theopedia: Predestination] (conservative Calvinist perspective)
*[http://www.unification.net/dp73/dp73-1-6.html Divine Principle]
+
*[http://www.unification.net/dp73/dp73-1-6.html Divine Principle: Predestination]
  
  

Latest revision as of 22:20, 30 November 2022


Predestination (from Latin 'praedestinare,' "fore-ordain") is a religious idea especially among the monotheistic religions, and it is usually distinguished form other kinds of determinism such as fate, karma, doom, and scientific determinism. So, predestination concerns God's decision to create the world and to govern it, and the extent to which God's decisions determine ahead of time what the destiny of groups and individuals will be. Conflicts over this topic have concerned various schools of religion. The disagreement many Christians have especially is between those affirming God's sovereign rule and those affirming human freedom. Also, a lot of different theories have been proposed to address the difficult issue of how divine omnipotence and human free will are compatible.

Given the difficult nature of the tension of omnipotence and free will, a careful study of these theories, especially those suggested by St. Thomas Aquinas and Alfred North Whitehead, could lead to a new definition of divine omnipotence, which is not so much a coercive kind of power as a profound power of love grounded on God's true desire of love. This way, omnipotence could more easily accommodate free will because love by nature cares for and recognizes others while at the same time being more effectively powerful than anything else.

Predestination and Other Kinds of Determinism

Predestination usually refers to a specifically religious type of determinism, especially as found in monotheistic religions such as Christianity and Islam, wherever omnipotence and omniscience are attributed to God. Thus, its religious nature distinguishes it from discussions of determinism with strictly philosophical, historical, or economic interpretations.

Predestination may sometimes be used to refer to other materialistic, spiritualist, non-theistic or polytheistic ideas of determinism, destiny, fate, doom, or karma. Such beliefs or philosophical systems may hold that any outcome is finally determined by the complex interaction of multiple, possibly immanent, possibly impersonal, possibly equal forces rather than simply by the reliance of the Creator's conscious choice.

Judaism believes in that human beings have free will and are held responsible for their actions by God. This is very strong theme is the Torah. The pagan world that surrounded tended to believe in fate, destiny or karma. The idea of a predestined elect was a gnostic idea. It has been suggested that as Christianity expanded and found many non-Jewish adherents it absorbed and was influenced by gnostic ideas such as predestination and determinism.[1] The same could be said of Islam.

Predestination and Omniscience

Discussion of predestination usually involves consideration of whether God is omniscient, eternal, or atemporal (out of the flow of time in our universe). In terms of these ideas, God may see the past, present, and future, effectively knowing the future. If God in some sense knows ahead of time what will happen, then events in the universe can be effectively predetermined from God's point of view. This divine foreknowledge is not predestination in itself, although Arminians and Molinists in Christianity used both interchangeably when they were trying to argue for free will's compatibility with predestination through foreknowledge. Predestination implies that God will determine ahead of time what the destiny of creatures will be.

Judaism may accept the possibility that God is atemporal; some forms of Jewish theology teach this virtually as a principle of faith, while other forms of Judaism do not. Jews may use the term "omniscience" or "preordination" as a corollary of omniscience, but normally outright reject the idea of predestination.

Islam traditionally has strong views of predestination similar to some found in Christianity. In Islam, Allah both knows and ordains whatever comes to pass.

Christian Views

The New Testament

The word predestination is translated from the Greek verb proorizo which appears six times in the New Testament to say that God predetermines or preordains people or events for his purpose.

  1. "whatever Your hand and Your purpose predestined to occur" (Acts 4:27).
  2. "For those whom He foreknew, He also predestined to become conformed to the image of His Son, so that He would be the firstborn among many brethren" (Romans 8:29).
  3. "and these whom He predestined, He also called; and these whom He called, He also justified; and these whom He justified, He also glorified" (Romans 8:30).
  4. "but we speak God's wisdom in a mystery, the hidden wisdom which God predestined before the ages to our glory" (1 Corinthians 2:7).
  5. "In love He predestined us to adoption as sons through Jesus Christ to Himself, according to the kind intention of His will" (Ephesians 1:3-5).
  6. "also we have obtained an inheritance, having been predestined according to His purpose who works all things after the counsel of His will" (Ephesians 1:11).

The predestination of people is election (elektos in Greek), which means to choose. This Greek word appears 25 times in the New Testament as in Ephesians 1:4: "He chose us in Him before the foundation of the world, that we should be holy and blameless before Him."

At the same time, the New Testament also seems to teach that humans have free will: "Ask and it will be given to you; seek and you will find; knock and the door will be opened to you" (Matthew 7:7); "If anyone does not remain in me, he is like a branch that is thrown away and withers; such branches are picked up, thrown into the fire and burned. If you remain in me and my words remain in you, ask whatever you wish, and it will be given you" (John 15:6-7).

Augustine

Saint Augustine's (354-430) view of predestination is somewhat complex, for in his earlier days as a newly converted Christian he had to address the problem of fatalism in Manichaeism, of which he used to be a member. Opposing it from his new vantage-point as a Christian, he defended the existence of free will in human beings created by God. Later in life, however, he refuted the libertarian position of Pelagius by emphasizing the importance of God's sovereign grace.

It was in this latter context that Augustine developed a theory of the two phases of human growth in his Anti-Pelagian treatise on "Grace and Free Will" written in 426 or 427 C.E.[2] According to this, in the first phase the human will is still "small and weak" due to the Human Fall; it is thus unable to do God's commandment. Hence, God's grace takes the initiative in its operation within us. In this initial phase God's grace is called "operating grace" (gratia operans), and it is gratuitous and even irresistible. In the second stage, however, the human will becomes "great and robust"; so, God's grace works together with us cooperatively. In the second phase, therefore, God's grace is termed "cooperating grace" (gratia cooperans). These two types of divine grace were also called by Augustine "prevenient grace" (gratia praeveniens) and "subsequent grace" (gratia subsequens), respectively. The theology of Augustine influenced both Catholicism and Protestantism, but while Catholicism accepts both phases of his theory, Protestantism rejects the second phase.

Augustine developed his doctrine of predestination during and after the Pelagian controversy. It relates especially to the first of the above-mentioned phases of human growth, when the human will is very weak in front of the almighty God. God determines the destiny of humans, even choosing a certain number of people for salvation beforehand. Augustine said: "I speak thus of those who are predestined to the kingdom of God, whose number is so certain that one can neither be added to them nor taken from them."[3]

This does not mean that fallen humans have no free will at all; according to Augustine, they still have the ability to sin (posse peccare).

Thomas Aquinas

St. Thomas Aquinas (c.1225-1274) tried to explain the meaning of Augustine's second phase of the cooperation between God and humans through a more general theory of primary and secondary causation. According to that theory, while God as "pure act" is the primary cause of what happens, nature itself as a composite of "act" and "potency" is the secondary cause. Among all creatures, humans have the highest grade of "act." So, While God is the first agent of actualization, humans are the second agent of actualization. One possible difficulty of this model would be that there hardly exists reciprocity in the divine-human relationship because God as "pure act" is perfect and immutable, thus not being able to be acted upon by humans. However, it is notable that Thomas' philosophical conceptuality was able to secure some level of human participation in what happens centering on God's will.

Calvinists

Protestants took seriously Augustine's view of God's operation during the first phase of human growth, which involves predestination. Some associate the doctrine of predestination with one name, John Calvin (1509-1564). Indeed, on the spectrum of beliefs concerning predestination, Calvinism is the strongest. Calvin asserted that God's grace that leads to salvation is irresistible and given to some but not to others on the basis of God's predestining choice. Calvin reasoned further that since God is almighty, by predestining some to salvation ("election"), he is in the same act of predestining the others to hell ("reprobation"). In his own words,

By predestination we mean the eternal decree of God, by which he determined with himself whatever he wished to happen with regard to every man. All are not created on equal terms, but some are preordained to eternal life, others to eternal damnation; and, accordingly, as each has been created for one or other of these ends, we say that he has been predestined to life or to death.[4]

This is usually referred to as "double predestination." Calvin taught that God's predestining decision is based on the knowledge of His own will rather than foreknowledge of every particular person and event. Additionally, God continually acts with entire freedom, in order to bring about His will in completeness, in an unfathomable way not accessible to scrutiny; hence the freedom of the creature is not really violated.

  • Supralapsarianism—Some of Calvin's followers believed that God decreed both election and reprobation even before the fall of Adam, and that the fall happened to facilitate this divine decree. This is called "supralapsarianism" or "antelapsarianism." Calvin himself is sometimes said to have had this position, although it is disputed.
  • Sublapsarianism—Less rigid than supralapsarianism was "sublapsarianism," "infralapsarianism," or "postlapsarianism," according to which God decreed election and reprobation after the fall of Adam. This position has been commonly accepted amongst Calvinists since the Synod of Dort in 1618.

"Moderate" Calvinists

There are "moderate" Calvinists such as Millard Erickson who try to explain the possibility of cooperation between God and humans even in the context of predestination. According to Erickson, the divine-human cooperation is possible, but it is only possible in the sense that a human choice is actually made through the will of God-given human personality. Human freedom is only within the limitations of what God created it to be. So, although a human could freely choose differently, he/she would not in reality.[5]

Arminians

Arminians were named after Jacobus Arminius, a Dutch Reformed theologian (1560-1609). According to Arminians, all humans can use their free will to choose salvation, if they want, because they all are given "prevenient grace." So, whether they choose election or reprobation is up to them. Hence it is a conditional election. It is also completely compatible with God's sovereign will because the cooperation between God and humans can be explained through divine foreknowledge. While humans are genuinely free to do anything because of their free will, God foreknows what their decisions and actions will be in the end. So, while God's plan is virtually conditional upon human decision (i.e., virtual priority of human decision), it can still be said that God wills what he foreknows will happen. Therefore, God predestines on the basis of his foreknowledge of how some will respond to his universal love. Arminianism was condemned at the Synod of Dort (1618-1619). Nonetheless, Arminian thinking maintained itself in the Church of England and the Methodist churches.

Molinists

Molinists in Catholicism are equivalent to Arminians in Protestantism. They were named after Luis de Molina (1535-1600), a Jesuit theologian in Spain. Their explanation of the divine-human cooperation was very similar to that of Arminius. Molinists were strongly opposed by the conservative Dominican, Domingo Báñez (1528-1604), just as Arminians were strongly critiqued by Calvinists. It is interesting to note that Catholicism has tolerated the dispute between Molinism and the conservatism of Báñez, just as Calvinism and Arminianism have coexisted in Protestantism.

Whiteheadians

As an Anglican, Alfred North Whitehead (1861-1947) basically had an Arminian background. His philosophical understanding of the relationship between God and the world can be seen in his major work, Process and Reality, according to which God and each "actual entity" in the world cause each other and work together through the universal law of "dipolarity." God as well as each and every actual entity in the world has two poles: "mental" and "physical" poles. To apply the terminology of Thomas Aquinas here, the mental poles of God and each actual entity in the world are the primary and secondary causes, respectively, of what will happen. What distinguishes Whitehead from Thomas, however, is that Whitehead's God is dipolar, whereas Thomas' God merely as "pure act" is monopolar. Therefore, Whitehead's God can be acted upon by the world, whereas Thomas' God as the Unmoved Mover can't. This explains Whitehead's theory of the reciprocity of the harmonious relationship of God and the world.

This was applied to Christian theology, and a new school of theology, called process theology, was created. Many of the process theologians or Whiteheadians such as John B. Cobb, Jr. are Methodists. According to Whiteheadians, the power of God is not coercive but rather "persuasive" in consideration of the secondary causation of human beings in the world.

Many have criticized Whiteheadians of advocating a finite God who is not omnipotent. But, John B. Cobb, Jr. has addressed the criticism, by saying that the power of persuasion is more effective than, and superior to, the power of coercion implied in omnipotence:

He [Whitehead] emphasizes persuasion over against coercion. This is the kind of power that parents and teachers want to exercise in relation to youth. The resort to coercion reflects the failure of persuasion. Persuasion or influence empowers the one who is affected. Coercion disempowers…. Coercive power can kill and destroy, but it cannot bring life and wisdom and love into being. It is an inferior form of power.[6]

God's power of persuasion comes from his eternal desire or urge for the good, i.e., "the living urge towards all possibilities, claiming the goodness of their realization," and Whitehead called it God's "Eros."[7]

Jewish Views

Most Jews (Orthodox, Conservative, Reform, and secular) affirm that since free will exists, then by definition one's fate is not preordained. It is held as a tenet of faith that whether God is omniscient or not, nothing interferes with mankind's free will. Some Jewish theologians, both during the medieval era and today, have attempted to formulate a philosophy in which free will is preserved, while also affirming that God has knowledge of what decisions people will make in the future. Whether or not these two ideas are mutually compatible, or whether there is a contradiction between the two, is still a matter of great study and interest in philosophy today.

Orthodox Jews generally affirm that God must be viewed as omnipotent, but they have varying definitions of what the word means. Thus some modern Orthodox theologians have views that are essentially the same as non-Orthodox theologians, who hold that God is simply not omnipotent, in the commonly used sense of that word.

Many Chabad (Lubavitch) Jews of Hasidic Judaism affirm as infallible their rebbe's teaching that God knows and controls the fate of all, yet at the same time affirm the classical Jewish belief in free will. The inherent contradiction between the two results in their belief that such a contradiction is only "apparent" due to our inherent lack of ability to understand greater truths. To most people outside of these Hasidic Jews, this position is held to be a logical contradiction, and is only sustained due to cognitive dissonance.

One noted Jewish philosopher, Hasdai Crescas (c.1340-1410/1411) denied the existence of free will based upon the determinism of the universe itself. According to him, all of a person's actions are predetermined by the moment of their birth, and their judgment in the eyes of God is effectively preordained. However, in this view, the determination is not a result of God's predetermining one's fate, but rather from the view that the universe is deterministic. Crescas's views on this topic were rejected by Judaism at large. In later centuries this idea independently developed among some Chabad (Lubavitch) Jews.

The staunch Calvinist Gordon H. Clark (1902-1985) made a lengthy appendix to his book Biblical Predestination, and it is a list of what he thought to be Old Testament passages on predestination.[8] Generally speaking, however, Judaism has no strong doctrine of predestination; it rather has a doctrine of human free will. Clark apparently treated the Hebrew Bible with a Calvinist bias. The idea that God is omnipotent and omniscient didn't formally exist in Judaism during the Tanakh era, but rather was a later development due to the influence of neo-Platonic and neo-Aristotelian philosophy.

Islamic Views

In Islam, "predestination" is the usual English rendering of a belief that Muslims call al-qada wa al-qadar in Arabic. The phrase means "the divine decree and the predestination"; al-qadar derives from a root that means "to measure out." The phrase reflects a Muslim doctrine that God has measured out and foreordained the span of every person's life, and their lot of good or ill fortune.

When referring to the future, Muslims frequently qualify any predictions of what will come to pass with the phrase inshallah, Arabic for "if God wills." The phrase recognizes that human knowledge of the future is limited, and that all that may or may not come to pass is under the control of God. A related phrase, mashallah, indicates acceptance of what God has ordained in terms of good or ill fortune that may befall a believer. So, God is understood to be omniscient and omnipotent. There is no free will on the part of humans.

Soon, however, a dispute between Kharijites and Murji'ites started over free will, with the former affirming it and the latter denying it. Later thinkers such as Al-Ash'ari (874-936) searched for ways to reconcile free will and God's jabr, or divine commanding power. Al-Ash'ari developed an "acquisition" or "dual-agency" form of compatibilism, in which human free will and divine jabr were both asserted, and which became a cornerstone of the dominant Ash'ari position.[9] In Shia Islam, Ash'ari's understanding of a higher balance toward predestination is challenged by most theologians. Free will, according to Shia doctrine, is the main factor for one's accountability in one's actions throughout life. All actions taken by one's free will are said to be counted on the Day of Judgment because they are one's own and not God's.

Creative Assessment: Omnipotence and Free Will

Augustine's theory that there are two phases of human growth seems to make sense. But, his assertion, in relationship to the first phase, that the number of the predestined elect is "certain" may not be acceptable to many, if it means to exclude the non-elect from salvation, given God is a God of love. Calvinism's double predestination may be similarly unacceptable to many, even though it is attractive to believe in God's omnipotence. Also, while human free will is not entirely ignored in the Augustinian and Calvinistic doctrines of predestination, it is quite hard to comprehend.

Predestination is usually associated with divine attributes such as omnipotence and omniscience. Omniscience (or foreknowledge), of course, was a key term to Arminianism and Molinism, but omnipotence seems to be more prominent than omniscience in the overall discussion of predestination. So, the apparent tension between divine omnipotence and human free will has been a major issue which many schools in the monotheistic religions have tried to address. Many theologians and schools have suggested theories of how omnipotence and human responsibility are reconcilable and compatible, but those theories are quite difficult to comprehend as long as omnipotence has been understood to be God's unlimited power over human beings.

But, Thomas Aquinas' metaphysical explanation of Augustine's second phase of human growth, in which God's "cooperative" grace and our "great and robust" will can work together, seems to be a good first step towards clarification. Thomas attributed causation to both God and humans, although he did not see reciprocity between the primary and secondary causations. It seems, however, that in order to secure reciprocity between God and human beings Whitehead was able to make some breakthrough by applying the law of dipolarity to God as well. Of course, a usual criticism directed to Whiteheadians is that their God is no longer omnipotent. But, their response to this criticism is that the power of God is persuasive, and that it is realistically superior to the power of God as omnipotence or coercion.

If Whiteheadians are correct in saying that persuasion is superior to coercion, then we may wish to come up with a new definition of omnipotence by saying that persuasion is omnipotence newly understood, because it is realistically even more powerful than omnipotence as understood in classical theology. This newly defined omnipotence, of course, can easily accommodate human free will. More importantly, however, it can be understood to be an essential aspect of the love of God. The mystery of love is such that while nothing is more powerful than it, it also recognizes and respects others. Although Whiteheadians do not call it omnipotence, it is an eternal and irrepressible urge for goodness on the part of God. Jürgen Moltmann defines it as "God's longing for 'his Other' and for that Other's free response to the divine love."[10]

Notes

  1. Hans Jonas. The Gnostic Religion. (Beacon Press, 2001. ISBN 0807058017)
  2. Augustine, "On Grace and Free Will." newadvent. Retrieved January 16, 2008.
  3. Augustine, "On Rebuke and Grace" Chap. 39.newadvent.org. Retrieved January 17, 2008.
  4. John Calvin, Institutes of the Christian Religion II, 21, 5. reformed.org. Retrieved January 17, 2008.
  5. Millard J. Erickson. Introducing Christian Doctrine, 2nd ed., (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Academic, 2001), 124-128.
  6. John B. Cobb, Jr., "Process Theology and the Bible: How Science Has Changed Our View of God." Retrieved January 17, 2008.
  7. Alfred North Whitehead, Adventures of Ideas (Macmillan Company, 1956), 381.
  8. Gordon H. Clark. Biblical Predestination. (P & R Press, 1969).
  9. Montgomery Watt. Free-Will and Predestination in Early Islam. (London: Luzac & Co., 1948); Harry Wolfson. The Philosophy of the Kalam. (Harvard University Press, 1976).
  10. Jürgen Moltmann. Trinity and the Kingdom: The Doctrine of God, trans. Margaret Kohl (Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 1993), 106.

References
ISBN links support NWE through referral fees

  • Berkouwer, G.C. Divine Election. Translated by Hugo Bekker. Eerdmans, 1960. ISBN 0802848133
  • Clark, Gordon H. Biblical Predestination. P & R Press, 1969. ISBN 0875521371
  • Erickson, Millard J. Introducing Christian Doctrine. 2nd ed. Grand Rapids, Mich.: Baker Academic, 2001. ISBN 0801022509
  • Farrelly, Mark John. Predestination, Grace, and Free Will. Westminster, MD: Newman Press, 1964.
  • Jonas, Hans. The Gnostic Religion. Beacon Press, 2001. ISBN 0807058017
  • Moltmann, Jürgen. Trinity and the Kingdom: The Doctrine of God, Translated by Margaret Kohl. Minneapolis, Minn.: Fortress Press, 1993. ISBN 080062825X
  • Watt, Montgomery. Free-Will and Predestination in Early Islam. London: Luzac & Co., 1948.
  • Whitehead, Alfred North. Adventures of Ideas. Macmillan Company, 1956.
  • Wolfson, Harry Austryn. The Philosophy of the Kalam. Harvard University Press, 1976. ISBN 0674665805

External Links

All links retrieved November 30, 2022.


Credits

New World Encyclopedia writers and editors rewrote and completed the Wikipedia article in accordance with New World Encyclopedia standards. This article abides by terms of the Creative Commons CC-by-sa 3.0 License (CC-by-sa), which may be used and disseminated with proper attribution. Credit is due under the terms of this license that can reference both the New World Encyclopedia contributors and the selfless volunteer contributors of the Wikimedia Foundation. To cite this article click here for a list of acceptable citing formats.The history of earlier contributions by wikipedians is accessible to researchers here:

The history of this article since it was imported to New World Encyclopedia:

Note: Some restrictions may apply to use of individual images which are separately licensed.