I believe predestination means . .

[itsjustdave1988]

**
Satan does mean adversary.
However, I disagree with your implied definition of angels.
**

**
**I disagree that you’ve properly understood what I wrote, but instead I think your attempting a strawman of some sort.

Satan and the demons who joined him are indeed fallen angels. So what precisely do you disagree with? Please quote frome what I’ve wrote, and avoid the temptation of providing your poor paraphrase of what you think I meant.**
**

**This statement appears to contradict Isa 45:7: I form the light, and create the darkness, I make well-being and create evil; I, the Lord, do all these things.
**

**
Re-read my posts above and attempt to understand me in the context I provided.

**I have already affirmed that "God wills physical evil, natural evil as well as punitive evil, per accidens, that is, as a means to a higher end of the physical order (for example, for the acquisition of a higher life), or of the moral order (for example, for punishment or for moral enlightenment)."

It is in this sense that Is 45:7 is to be understood, in light of apostolic tradition. Young’s Literal Translation gives, “Forming light, and preparing darkness, Making peace, and preparing evil, I [am] Jehovah, doing all these things.’” (Is 45:7 - Young’s literal translation).

God does indeed create physical evil, natural evil, as well a punitive evil as a means to a higher physical or moral order. However, he no more created evil angels than he created Adam and Eve evil, your novel interpretation of Scripture notwithstanding. Both men and angels became evil through a defective use of a good gift: freewill.

 

[itsjustdave1988]

See a better commentary on Is 45:7 here, by St. Thomas Aquinas…

Isaiah 45:5,7 - Whether the supreme good, God, is the cause of evil?

Isaiah 45:7 - Whether God is a cause of sin?

Moral evil, that is, evil which consists in the defect of action is always caused by the defect of the agent. In God there is no defect, but the highest perfection. Hence, the evil which consists in defect of action, or which is caused by defect of the agent, is not reduced to God as to its cause. God is the author of the evil which is penalty, but not of the evil which is fault. Consequently, Is 45:7 and like passages of Sacred Scripture refer to the evil of penalty, and not to the evil of fault.

 

[itsjustdave1988]

Tabcom,

While you are reviewing the early Church understanding of predestination, you may want to also consider the early Church understanding of the original goodness of God’s creation…

Gen 1:4 - God saw that the light was good
Gen 1:10 - The dry land and waters of the Earth are good
Gen 1:12 - The plant are good
Gen 1:18 - The sun, moon, and the stars are good
Gen 1:21 - Every living creature that moves, of every kind, are good.
Gen 1:25 - Wild animals of every kind are good.
Gen 1:30 - Indeed, everything that God had made was very good.

St. Augustine taught:

CHAP. 12.–ALL BEINGS WERE MADE GOOD, BUT NOT BEING MADE PERFECTLY GOOD, ARE LIABLE TO CORRUPTION.

All things that exist, therefore, seeing that the Creator of them all is supremely good, are themselves good. But because they are not, like their Creator, supremely and unchangeably good, their good may be diminished and increased. But for good to be diminished is an evil, although, however much it may be diminished, it is necessary, if the being is to continue, that some good should remain to constitute the being. For however small or of whatever kind the being may be, the good which makes it a being cannot be destroyed without destroying the being itself. An uncorrupted nature is justly held in esteem. But if, still further, it be incorruptible, it is undoubtedly considered of still higher value. When it is corrupted, however, its corruption is an evil, because it is deprived of some sort of good. For if it be deprived of no good, it receives no injury; but it does receive injury, therefore it is deprived of good. Therefore, so long as a being is in process of corruption, there is in it some good of which it is being deprived; and if a part of the being should remain which cannot be corrupted, this will certainly be an incorruptible being, and accordingly the process of corruption will result in the manifestation of this great good. But if it do not cease to be corrupted, neither can it cease to possess good of which corruption may deprive it. But if it should be thoroughly and completely consumed by corruption, there will then be no good left, because there will be no being. Wherefore corruption can consume the good only by consuming the being. Every being, therefore, is a good; a great good, if it can not be corrupted; a little good, if it can: but in any case, only the foolish or ignorant will deny that it is a good. And if it be wholly consumed by corruption, then the corruption itself must cease to exist, as there is no being left in which it can dwell. St. Augustine,* The Enchiridion on Faith, Hope and Love*]

 

[FCEGM]

**

That word angels does not mean what tradition thinks as some heavenly being with wings. **

Angels are beings of heaven or - if fallen - hell. But contrary to your misrepresentation, Sacred Tradition is well aware that the nature of angels of either locale is wholly spiritual and thus does not include wings.

 

[Catholic_Dude]

**God made the serpent (Gen 3:1) who is Satan (Rev 20:2) for the purpose of deceive Eve (2 Cor 11:3).

Gen 3:1
Now the serpent was more crafty than any beast of the field which the LORD God had made.

Re 20:2 -
And he laid hold of the dragon, the serpent of old, who is the devil and Satan

2Co 11:3
But I am afraid that, as the serpent deceived Eve by his craftiness, your minds will be led astray from the simplicity and purity {of devotion} to Christ.
**

Its very dangerous and irresponsible to string together various verses like what was done above. The false concept that God made Satan “for the purpose to deceive” thats simply blasphemy. One of the most important NT texts in this regard is from James 1:12 Blessed is the man who endures trial, for when he has stood the test he will receive the crown of life which God has promised to those who love him. 13 Let no one say when he is tempted, “I am tempted by God”; for God cannot be tempted with evil and he himself tempts no one; 14 but each person is tempted when he is lured and enticed by his own desire. 15 Then desire when it has conceived gives birth to sin; and sin when it is full-grown brings forth death.

 

[Michael_Francis]

You will notice that some posts have been edited and others have been deleted.

This thread will focus on the topic in question and avoid comments that are not relevent to the topic as well as labelling other poster’s comments. Any further problems with this thread will cause the thread to be deleted as well.
MF

 

[tabcom]

The false concept that God made Satan “for the purpose to deceive” thats simply blasphemy.

James 1:12 Let no one say when he is tempted, “I am tempted by God”; for God cannot be tempted with evil and he himself tempts no one

**Catholic Dude: thank you for the post.

God cannot be tempted with evil because He stands ouside of Time\Space, as Ja 1:12 points out. However, this verse fails to disprove my belief that God created Satan for the purpose of deceive first Eve and all her descendents that followed.

Another example from the Hebrew Bible, for which I could draw on dozens of examples, of God using others to do evil is Nebechanezzer. The 27th Chapter of Jeremiah tells how God uses Nebechanezzer as a sword to beat Israel into obedience.

If anyone wants to know more about who brings the sword, famine, pestilence, and the beast, google search these words, look up the bible verses, read the verses in their proper context. You will find 100% of the time that God says He did these things. Why? Because the Israelites failed to keep Gods Law and went after pagan gods. **

James 1:14 4 but each person is tempted when he is lured and enticed by his own desire.

**The English word desire is a translation from the original greek word epithumia. It is also the same word that is translated into lust. Epi- to super impose, thurmia - to heat up. Whenever we get ‘hot’ for something, our heart starts to race and we feel like we have to have whatever it is we set before our eyes. That is desire, that is lust. We also get our word thermos from the greek word thumia.

Now, in the context of this post, God does not tempt the believer. It is when the believer stands as an adversary to God, when he wants to throw out God’s Authority to fulfill the flesh, then God rebukes the believer.

I very much would like to hear someone provide scripture that explains to me clearly that God did not create Satan AND that Satan’s purpose is for something other than to deceive first Eve and then all of her decendents.

**

 

[tabcom]

God does indeed create physical evil, natural evil, as well a punitive evil as a means to a higher physical or moral order.

Yes, I agree.

However, he no more created evil angels than he created Adam and Eve evil.

**We have agreed that satan is a fallen angel. Could you please explain to me, in your own words, who created satan? **

 

[Catholic_Dude]

God cannot be tempted with evil because He stands ouside of Time\Space, as Ja 1:12 points out. However, this verse fails to disprove my belief that God created Satan for the purpose of deceive first Eve and all her descendents that followed.

God cant be tempted nor tempt because its against His nature, this has nothing to do with time/space.
And this passage does serve to disprove your belief that satan is simply God’s created hitman, if satan’s actions are simply an extention of God’s will then that means He really is the one tempting the individual.

Another example from the Hebrew Bible, for which I could draw on dozens of examples, of God using others to do evil is Nebechanezzer. The 27th Chapter of Jeremiah tells how God uses Nebechanezzer as a sword to beat Israel into obedience.

If anyone wants to know more about who brings the sword, famine, pestilence, and the beast, google search these words, look up the bible verses, read the verses in their proper context. You will find 100% of the time that God says He did these things. Why? Because the Israelites failed to keep Gods Law and went after pagan gods.

There is a serious distinction you fail to make here, there is a difference between God tempting/causing sin and God punishing sinners.

The English word desire is a translation from the original greek word epithumia. It is also the same word that is translated into lust. Epi- to super impose, thurmia - to heat up. Whenever we get ‘hot’ for something, our heart starts to race and we feel like we have to have whatever it is we set before our eyes. That is desire, that is lust. We also get our word thermos from the greek word thumia.

Now, in the context of this post, God does not tempt the believer. It is when the believer stands as an adversary to God, when he wants to throw out God’s Authority to fulfill the flesh, then God rebukes the believer.

Apart from disproving my point you seem to agree, God doesnt do the tempting. You admit this is a believer here chosing to disobey.

I very much would like to hear someone provide scripture that explains to me clearly that God did not create Satan AND that Satan’s purpose is for something other than to deceive first Eve and then all of her decendents.

Nobody denies God created Satan…the issue Catholics reject is that God created Satan evil or programmed to do evil. Satan was tossed from Heaven where nothing impure can reside, that means Satan wasnt created evil.

God being the cause of evil is totally against Christian teaching, rather such thinking is of human origin like that of the Greeks and Romans where they saw the gods as simply there to amuse themselves by treating humans as toys.

 

[itsjustdave1988]

---

It is when the believer stands as an adversary to God, when he wants to throw out God’s Authority to fulfill the flesh, then God rebukes the believer.
**

God is indeed the cause of punishment (“woe”) for those who have sinned against Him. Yet, before the fall of Adam and Eve, they had not sinned, they were “good…very good,” thus God would not have rebuked them. There’s a reason your interpretation is so contrary to apostolic tradition taught in every century of Christianity…its blatantly incorrect.**

I very much would like to hear someone provide scripture that explains to me clearly that God did not create Satan AND that Satan’s purpose is for something other than to deceive first Eve and then all of her decendents.

I’d like to hear you provide Scripture that explains to us clearly that God DID create something that was not “good…very good” as Genesis states, since it is clear testimony from Genesis that EVERYTHING God created was very good.
**

 

[Voco_proTatiano]

Dear Friends,
I posted this on another forum, and I do not think changing the words will improve what I posted:-

Predestinsation is a Newtonian concept. Science has moved on. It is clear that when God in designing the universe, built insoluable uncertainty into it. Thus though on the broad brush scale, the general outcome of a situation can be predicted to a high degree of probability, it detail, every incidence depends on the throw of the dice. This thus then is free-will. without uncertainty, free will could not exist, and can you imagine a god being stupid enought to design a universe wherein every outcome was predictable in the finest detail. One very bored god. One utterly pointless universe.
No! the unpredictability of the universe is what allowed it to come into being, and that unpredictability is that which makes it worth-while.

In short, postulating predestination presumes a pointless universe and a stupid god.

 

[itsjustdave1988]

Yes, I agree.
**We have agreed that satan is a fallen angel. Could you please explain to me, in your own words, who created satan? **

Sure…

God created everything, to include those spiritual rational beings we call “angels.” Were they originally wicked or adversarial, or very good? “God saw everything ( or ‘that which’ ) he had made, and behold, it was very good.” (Gen 1:31).

Consequently, before there existed any adversary of God (aka Satan), the angels were all good angels. Just like when God first created man, God created him in original goodness. Genesis tells us that everything God created was very good, thus we have the basis for believing it by the authority of God’s Word. Nonetheless, that didn’t mean God created his angels or man such that they could not sin. It merely means that originally, all of His created beings were “very good.”

Before there was ever moral evil (sin) for God to rebuke, there would be no need for penalty. Thus, in the beginning, before the fall of angels or man, there was no evil of penalty which Isaiah and Amos later refer to. That would be created by God only after the “original sin” of God’s created beings.

Sacred Scripture does not give much details regarding the fall of angels, other than we know of their fall. Nonetheless, Scripture does teach us that the “pillar and foundation of truth” is the Church, and since the advent of Christ that pillar of truth has consistently affirmed that the Devil and the other demons are spiritual or angelic creatures created by God in original goodness, and that they became evil by a defect of their own sinful act. Once that sin occurred, the angels were punished by God, and fell from his grace. “Fall” presumes a once elevated state.

With the word “ho”, the Greek word “diabolos” is normally understood as their chief, as in Matt 24:41 “the Devil and his angels,” also commonly called Lucifer or Satan. As for Satan and the other demons, they became God’s adversary (“Satan”) t**hrough a defect of their own deliberate sin, a fallen being who was originally an elevated “very good” being.

 

[itsjustdave1988]

…Predestinsation is a Newtonian concept.

That’s absurd, as the concept of predestination pre-dates Newton.

 

[Voco_proTatiano]

That’s absurd, as the concept of predestination pre-dates Newton.

Dear Friend,
Clearly my shorthand has confused you.
No, I clearly did not mean that Newton invented predestination.
What I was abbrieviating was that the concepts of space and time, as defined by Newton were necessary for predestination to exist.
The concept that with the position and velocity of every particle in the universe being known, the ultimate development of the universe could be predicted. Modern science now understands this concept to be false.
Newtonian science has no room for creation nor miracles. Modern science is repleat thereof. Neither the transistor nor the LASER could exist according to Newtonian science.
Modern science REQUIRES INSOLUABLE UNCERTAINTY in order to exist. Thus predestination, which denies this requirement, is in conflict with modern science, whereas it is in full accordance with Newtonian science.
I hope that clears up my abbrieviated shorthand.

 

[tdgesq]

Thus though on the broad brush scale, the general outcome of a situation can be predicted to a high degree of probability, it detail, every incidence depends on the throw of the dice. This thus then is free-will. without uncertainty, free will could not exist . . .

I hope you are not equating free will with a random throw of the dice.

 

[itsjustdave1988]

Dear Friend,
Clearly my shorthand has confused you.

Thanks for clarifying. However, predestination is not based upon Newton’s understanding of space and time, nor any other scientific postulate “of the day,” it is based upon the supernatural revelation of God, who created space and time, and exists beyond space and time, and is not bound by the postulates of modern science, Newtonian or otherwise.

Modern science REQUIRES INSOLUABLE UNCERTAINTY in order to exist.

Supernatural beings are not governed by natural science. Modern science does not even attempt to credibly explain that which is supernatural, that supernatural essence which pre-existed nature (the natural behavior of the universe), so I don’t see how your argument has any relevance in this discussion. The nature of God, His knowledge and ability to foreordain what his choices will be are simply not the object of modern science.

Thus predestination, which denies this requirement, is in conflict with modern science"

Predestination comes from the Latin, which means “being foreordained.” Even though I do not have foreknowledge in the perfect, God-like sense, I do have the ability to foreordain that I will not allow my child will not eat the supper I prepared for him if he doesn’t clean his room. I don’t need Newtonian physics or modern physics to do so, nor does any such postulates come into conflict with my authority to do so. I don’t even need to be a supernatural omnipotent being to be able foreordain.

Consequently, God, as a supernatural and ominipotent being is even more far removed from the postulates of modern science than I am in his ability to foreordain what his future choices will be. Thus, what he supernaturally “foreordains” can neither be in conflict with nor properly discerned through the principles and postulates of modern science.

God’s ability to foreordain is beyond the study of natural science. Nor can we know what a being which exists outside of time-space can know, or foreknow through natural science. You are more likely to discover the existence of angels with a microscope than properly discern the nature of God’s predestination through modern science.

 

[Voco_proTatiano]

I hope you are not equating free will with a random throw of the dice.

The answer has to be ‘yes’, and ‘no’.
The ultimate decision has a degree of randomness, but we can influence the probability of the outcome of the random event, from near certainty to near impossibility.
The uncertainty, though, however small, still exists.

 

[Voco_proTatiano]

Thanks for clarifying. However, predestination is not based upon Newton’s understanding of space and time, nor any other scientific postulate “of the day,” it is based upon the supernatural revelation of God, who created space and time, and exists beyond space and time, and is not bound by the postulates of modern science, Newtonian or otherwise.
Supernatural beings are not governed by natural science. Modern science does not even attempt to credibly explain that which is supernatural, that supernatural essence which pre-existed nature (the natural behavior of the universe), so I don’t see how your argument has any relevance in this discussion. The nature of God, His knowledge and ability to foreordain what his choices will be are simply not the object of modern science.

It is clear from the universe that God has created, that the nature of that universe is entirely in accord with God’s will. How could it be otherwise?
The uncertaity which God built into the system might have been omitted, but that would have been a very different universe.
I say might, rather than could, because, without the uncertainty, this universe could not have come into existance, no tautology intended.
I am further convinced that though in theory of divinity, God is ‘all-seeing’ and ‘all knowing’, with that sight and knowledge unlimited by space and time, yet that God has chosen that the universe designed, hide the possibility, and that God has chosen not to defeat that hidden-ness, for so to do would defeat entirely the purpose of the universe, and negate free-will.
It would thus be an entirely pointless creation.
Would God cheat in a game of solitaire, (patience)?
Again, it would be utterly pointless.

Predestination comes from the Latin, which means “being foreordained.” Even though I do not have foreknowledge in the perfect, God-like sense, I do have the ability to foreordain that I will not allow my child will not eat the supper I prepared for him if he doesn’t clean his room. I don’t need Newtonian physics or modern physics to do so, nor does any such postulates come into conflict with my authority to do so. I don’t even need to be a supernatural omnipotent being to be able foreordain.

What you call foreordaining, is a broad-brush intent to bias a probability, and that is allowed. To imagine that you are instigating a certainty is in error, for whenever you predict the future, you should always add: “God willing”, or “Insha Allah”.

Consequently, God, as a supernatural and ominipotent being is even more far removed from the postulates of modern science than I am in his ability to foreordain what his future choices will be. Thus, what he supernaturally “foreordains” can neither be in conflict with nor properly discerned through the principles and postulates of modern science.

God’s ability to foreordain is beyond the study of natural science. Nor can we know what a being which exists outside of time-space can know, or foreknow through natural science. You are more likely to discover the existence of angels with a microscope than properly discern the nature of God’s predestination through modern science.

Broad-brush guidance, yes, but detailed control, no.

 

[stillwater]

Wrong . Job 42: 12 states:

And the Lord blessed the latter end of Job more than his beginning. And he had fourteen thousand sheep, and six thousand camels, and a thousand yoke of oxen, and a thousand she-asses.

did god ask job if that is what he wanted? why did he let the devil torture job only to prove that he will remain faithful to him? what’s the point? isn’t he supposed to be all-knowing? why does he need to prove the devil wrong when he knows he will win the bet?

 

[tabcom]

**ItsjustDave1988 . . .

Thank you for your insightful posts.

Is there anything in my "I believe predestination means . . . " manifesto that you find that may contradict Church teaching?

It is my humble attempt to put into my own words, without biblical citations, what my study of predestination means to me.**