Predestination in the Mind

These are five posts in the blog, Created to be like God, except they are in 1-5 order instead of in reverse order of date of publication.

118. PREDESTINATION WITHIN THE HUMAN MIND - [1]

So, what?

Q. What difference does anyone’s view on predestination make as long as they know they’re saved?

A particular stance on the doctrine of predestination doesn’t matter if a person is saved. A saved person is predestined and a person who has been predestined by God to be one of the elect or called out is saved or will be saved.

The problem is that many Christian groups would find something in the above paragraph doctrinally unacceptable. To some, one must believe in the doctrine of predestination as defined by that group or else they’re not saved. To others, if one believes in predestination, they probably aren’t saved because salvation is based on what you do. To others, predestination can’t be correct because salvation is reversible if a one-time Christian were to turn their back on Jesus. Still, others have their own private interpretation of what is means to be “saved,” and it usually doesn’t include predestination.

These types of differences in interpretation are elevated in importance until they divide the church. Christians discount one another, do not accept one another into fellowship, and defend an interpretation of predestination to the point of splitting the body of Christ. Christianity is well-known in the world’s view as a divided culture whose citizens can't get along with each other.

There are many examples of interpretations of scripture that center more on “how we get to Jesus” than center on the person of Jesus. Many of these interpretations have been sacrilized to be exclusionary of anyone else who doesn’t agree. Once interpretations are elevated to doctrines, they become beacons of identity that must be defended. The doctrine of predestination is only one example.

By defending the doctrine of predestination, Christians have missed an opportunity to dig deeper into the revelation of God on this subject. “Let’s stop digging and start defending the pile of dirt we have accumulated on the surface.”

When Christians defend their interpretations to an extent that they will divide the body of Christ and retard the church’s growth into the fullness of the Lord Jesus Christ, it is nothing less than abominable. There are many pet doctrines that fall in this category, and this chaos weakens the church. We would be remiss to tread lightly on any of them.

We have met the problem, and it is us.

Surely we are all aware that we Christians have a problem. The problem is that we’re sure that we know what the problem is – and it’s not our problem. “The problem is that those people over there are the problem and they won’t admit it. Their problem is that they think we are the problem, and they can’t see that it’s their problem!” And the problem is …… everybody thinks that.

“Well, it’s not us; talk to those people over there …… they’re the ones who ……..”

You know, that’s one of the benefits of raising children – you get an idea of how the church works. “Go tell him” was what my kids used to say when it came time to quell a ruckus. Pretty typical for a maturity level that might be expected from kids under 10 years old. Shouldn’t more be expected from a 2000 year old church?

Would anyone say that God predestined Christians to think and act this way? Then, why do we do it?

Predestined for conflict and chaos?

Predestination is a topic that is very difficult to discuss in a way that brings greater clarity in our understanding. It would seem to be a topic coated with traditional thinking that has been molded into a doctrinolatry to be defended to the last church split. It joins many other doctrines that are debated among Christians with such fervor that even the cross has been chopped up to use for weapons. “You don’t know pain until you have been impaled by the brethren using a spear fashioned out of splinters from the cross of Jesus.”

What has God predestined for us – is it conflict and division and chaos? Does Paul say that we were predestined to do that? Jesus said we would have trouble in this world (John 16:33), but He didn't say that Christians should stir it up among themselves. Did Paul write in Eph. 2:10 that we were “created in Christ Jesus to argue about predestination, and, in fact, this is what God predestined us to do?” That’s ludicrous. Yet one can read in current blogs and comments sections about power shifts in denominational organizations, conventions, societies, or groups over this issue. This group of Calvinists is “in” and that group of non-Calvinists is “out” of favor. The political polarization and oppositional vilification that is so evident in Washington is increasingly showing up in the church.

Did God foreordain that Christians should take a biblical teaching that was intended for joy and peace and comfort and confidence in the Lord and make it into a doctrine that produces entropy? (There’s that word again). How many doctrines have Christians taken and used to form a graven bovine made of melted pyrites? Aaron would say, “These Christians made me do it!” This has to be a work of the “ruler of the kingdom of the air” (Eph. 2:2), not the Spirit of God.

While Christians argue over the level of detail that God used to control the universe – from “He set the plan up in the beginning and now lets it run” to “He knows when another hair on your head falls out or sticks to the hairbrush” – the world looks at it all and scoffs. As far as the world is concerned, those Christians are only arguing about their imagination, because everything is by totally random occurrence – always has been, is now, and always will be. So the world promotes the idea that everything is random, disorderly, and chaotic, which is entropy. The Christians can offer the power of the Spirit of God, producing peace and order of God through Jesus Christ, but Christians produce more chaos, themselves, by their doctrinal conflicts. Who is supposed to have the largest bandwidth to the revelation of God? Who is going to answer for this? “Talk to those guys over there” isn’t going to cut it.

Predestination gets into many areas of discussion that are humanly difficult to understand

Not only is the definition of predestination debatable, but also the level of control God exerts on the universe. Is it a control by design at the beginning of creation or a control by divine approval of every detail down to molecular movements? Does it involve a prior selection of who will be saved and who will not, with no human interference allowed? If so, then how does “free will” and “glorify God with your voluntary submission to Christ” enter in? We say we don’t judge people or their salvation, but don’t we do just that when we apply the rules of the doctrine of predestination? Can’t that approach change the doctrine of grace into a work that emphasizes not what you have through Christ, but how you got it?

The fine movement control aspect of the doctrine of predestination gets on even softer ground when it is extended beyond eternal destiny to everything that occurs in the here and now. This gets particularly viscous when the subject gets into the area of human suffering, especially when viewed at an individual person level. Did God predestine that this person be killed in this accident – a person who is doing such a wonderful work for the Lord? Did God predestine that this baby would have a birth defect, or that this person should get cancer at this particular time? Did God predestine this tornado to rip this house and not that one or that this F-5 hurricane should come ashore over this city and not that one? Did God predestine that this particular person would be so evil and do all these evil things to innocent people?

We get on thin ice either way. It’s easier to reconcile God predestining good things, but bad things are a problem to fit into that theology. Then, one could say that humans just bring these things on themselves, and, as we will discuss later, many times that is exactly what happens. But then what about those who have suffered the casualties from illness, accident, and death that seem so meaningless and random?

Perhaps we don’t have answers for some things because we don’t know who to ask the right questions. Maybe the answers are out of the range of human understanding. The disciples wanted to assess fault or blame for the man who was born blind in John 9. Who sinned, the man or his parents? Jesus said it was neither.

Predestination affects concepts in addition to “election.” One’s view of predestination also affects their view of how God works today – is it divine providence or is it randomness – is it God letting us work it out or God interceding directly – is it by the power of prayer or is prayer only psychological – are there miracles today or not – does God intervene in our lives or not -- do we need to evangelize the world or does it not matter because God has already handled it – did God foreordain everything, including the time I spilled water on myself – what is natural and what is supernatural – what is physical and what is spiritual -- and much more.

Some people might want to separate the doctrine of predestination into spiritual and physical segments and apply it only to eternal security and not to the physical realm or to those things humans can control. But that distinction really can’t be made. There are many attitudes and behaviors that some people might associate with a direct control by God, but these behaviors are actually of human origin -- we just may not be aware of it. Is it possible that we ascribe things to God that He has actually placed under our own authority – all by His design? If we are confused about what is under God’s control and what He has placed under our authority, our theology is headed for a shake-up that will be quite challenging for some people. As advances in our understanding of the human brain continue to be made through neuroscience research, we are going to find more and more functions that we have ascribed to the supernatural have actually been placed by God within the natural neural substrate of our human brain. Science has already outpaced theology in elucidating the mechanisms of God’s creation, as evidenced by the continual “6 day war” over Genesis 1. Neuroscience of the human brain is poised to outpace some of our theological doctrines expounding about how God works in mysterious ways. What if it is mysterious only because the physical mechanism hasn’t been discovered yet? How many of our biblical interpretations are we prepared to rethink? As science advances, theology entrenches and “defends the faith.” Why should science take the lead in discovery, when we have the Holy Spirit to guide us into all truth? Did God predestine science to do that?

What does predestined or predestination mean? (It isn’t simple).

Is there only one definition for “predestined?” Do we really get our functional definition of “predestination” from the scripture? If we make “predestination” into a church doctrine, have we gone too far and erroneously assigned our human meaning of “predestined” to God? Are there different levels of “predestinational control” – God takes control of the big stuff but leave the details to us? Or, do we just go on a ride and, like the Greyhound bus driver, “leave the driving to God?”

First, even in a doctrinal sense, we must admit that the meaning of “predestined” is a human attempt to understand God. God said it in His word; yes, but we have to interpret the meaning. If we are going to grow into the fullness of Christ, we will have to continue to think and challenge ourselves about the completeness of our own interpretations – even as some are so sure of themselves that they will split the body of Christ over meanings of words. “Once interpreted; always interpreted.”

Destination. “What is your destination” is a way of asking “Where are you headed?” A destination is a place or location. That raises two more questions – is it a path to a destination or is it a destination that is at the end of a path? People want to get to a particular location, so they chart a path on a map. People head out “without direction” will also get to a destination, but it could be more random than planned. “If you don’t know where you’re going, you’ll still get somewhere, but you may not like it.” People get lost all the time with GPS units. Why? Are the units inaccurate? Sometimes, but most of the time the person has made an error in the entry of the desired destination. Guess what? They end up at the destination entered into the GPS. You put in the wrong destination, you’ll get there.

“Destiny” implies a destination that is somehow controlled by fate, or karma, or mysterious powers. Darth Vader told Luke, “It is-s-s your des-tin-y.” Turns out, he was wrong; Luke had a destiny, but it wasn’t with the dark side.

It matters not how strait the gate,

How charged with punishments the scroll,

I am the master of my fate:

I am the captain of my soul.

from the poem Invictus by William Ernest Henley

We are indeed responsible for our own choices, but our choice is whether or not to place our fate in the hands of the Master and to let Jesus be the captain of our ship through the Holy Spirit. Otherwise, we might find out too late that the name of the ship we are blindly steering for ourselves is the HMS Tube City sailing into the sunset of Oblivion.

Predestination by design

If a destination is a location which is at the end of a direction of travel, then pre-destination is when that location is specified beforehand. If you travel this direction, this is the location where you will end up. If you travel another direction, you will end up at this other location. Therefore, choose your method and direction of travel wisely, because it will dictate where you will end up – your terminal destination. There is a travel guide that says, “If you take this highway 101, you will end up in a place called ABCtown. Here is a description of ABCtown. It’s quite nice. Or, if you take this highway 102, you will end up in a place called HELtown. It’s not nice; most people don’t intend to go there, but they just take the wrong highway.” Highway 101 is narrow and difficult, but Highway 102 is wide and easy. People take highway 102 even after looking at the travel guide because they just can’t believe that the destination at the end of such a nice looking road could be that bad.

So, what has been “predestined” in the above example? Two particular destinations are each associated with a specific choice of route, and the travel guide, (offered without charge ahead of time) describes the destination before the choice is made. At what point is the destination predetermined – in this example it is after the choice, not before. Which destination is reached is an outcome of the choice, which people have made. Some people don’t want a travel guide – those things are for the superstitious and wimpy. Some people don’t feel they need a travel guide because they can see the benefits of highway 102 just from looking for themselves. Some people think they can figure it out using their human common sense. All of these people choose their highway, and at that point their destination is predetermined. The destination is linked to their choice. Did someone else force the choice upon them? Did God? God published the travel guide. This was “equal opportunity.” The travel guide was available – just take one as a gift. It was an “informed choice,” because the travel guide clearly laid it all out.

Influence of personal factors. Can there be factors that heavily influence the decision between highways 101 and 102 – so much so that it increases the probability that one highway or the other would be selected? Let’s say that the person has already pigged out on French fries so much that he is obese. He thinks he might not fit on the narrow highway – the wide highway will be easier. Has his choice of highways been affected by the outcomes from lifestyle choices made in the past? Has he now predestined himself to this choice of highway?

Influence of developmental training. What if the person making the choice had been raised in a family that always valued colorful, flashy things? Wild and flashy is good – otherwise it is dull and uninteresting. Now, looming before this person is this choice between two paths – one is wide and has wild and flashy lights, at least at the entrance gate, and the other one by comparison is narrow and uninteresting. Has the person’s decision been essentially predestined by prior behavioral and developmental mental programming?

In this example, the choice itself was not predestined (as in dictated) by God, but God had given the consequences of making any of the choices – consequences to desiring worldly flashing lights, consequences to eating Fat fries, consequences to traveling down highway 102. The consequences of these historical choices have cumulative effects that will impact the choice of highway. God set the system up and told everyone how it worked. In this example, the predestination came by the design of the system and not by dictating the choice that each individual would make.

Does God force a particular selection between possible choices? Does God perform a more direct, “hands on,” type of action that forces one choice over another? Did God dispatch the “Salvation Army” to invade the “area for highway decision,” instructing the troops to grab certain people, whose names are on a list provided by God, and force them through the narrow gate onto highway 101, saying “Get on this highway 101 and don’t come back! Everybody else, it’s Highway 102 for you!”

Expanding our concept of predestination.

We should consider that predestination occurs at different levels and that God has turned the authority and responsibility for our choices over to us. There are different strengths of influence that bear upon a potential decision which can produce a predisposition toward one choice or another. Developmental preprogrammed and genetics will be a strong influence over decisions that one makes. Preconceptions could dominate a decision so strongly that they essentially determine the outcome of a decision process, because there is such a high probability that a particular choice will be made. Foreordained sounds like something specifically determined, designed, planned or set up by God, but, in a sense, all of it is.

Does God supersede human control and predestine individuals to make certain choices? Does God make certain events to happen that are purposeful interruptions of modifications to His design? at creation These types of events are certainly recorded in the Bible -- usually called miracles. Do such interventions occur today, and, if so, under what circumstances? If, and when, this happens, does this constitute a form of predestination? Is predestination, by definition, limited to those choices that affect salvation? Or, has God by design predestined the consequences of all choices that are made at the human level?

One aspect of man’s dominion over the earth is that the consequences of human decisions affect everything else on the earth. If man pollutes the earth, the earth is polluted for everything. These are the types of natural consequences that affect the human race, present and future, as well as the rest of the earth. There are also spiritual consequences of decisions that affect the process of transformation in this life as well as the eternal destiny of those making the choices.

The consequences of human choice seem to be “hard-wired” into creation. The scripture makes this clear, both in principle and in example, over and over. The consequences of choice are predestined by God. They are foreordained. Make this choice, end up here; make that choice, end up there.

The consequences of these choices affect the environment within which subsequent choices will be made. This environment will then influence the choices that are made at that time – perhaps increase the probability of a particular choice so much that it is almost predetermined or predestined.

The basis for these consequences is found in the natural laws that God set into motion at creation – particularly the laws of thermodynamics. Entropy produces cycles, and each part of a cycle is a function of the consequences from the previous part. In sociological cycles, the consequences are outcomes of human decisions. This inevitability and predictability was predestined by God to happen. And He told us about in His word.

119. PREDESTINATION WITHIN THE HUMAN MIND - [2]

Predestined consequences for us from the disobedience of Adam and the obedience of Jesus Christ

In the previous post we said that the term “predestine” (predestined, predestination) is a concept that is based on humans trying to understand the actions of an omnipotent, supreme, unlimited, creator God. As we grow in the Lord and in our understanding of the revelation of God, we must revise those concepts of God accordingly, because these concepts will always fall short and be inadequate.

Given that the above is true, what is the justification for Christians taking an interpretation of predestination and making such a final doctrine out of it that it is divisive to the body of Christ? Did God predestine that they should do that?

We said that a form of predestination occurs at many levels of control, from direct intervention by God of affairs in the physical realm to the design of the universe with the cause and effect relationship of natural laws to the assignment of consequences to human decisions.

Some definitions of terms as we will use them:

Randomness, Probability, Certainty, Providence, Promise, Covenant, Design, Prophecy, Indeterminate Process

Randomness – occurring by chance event without evidence of design or pattern or detectable cause; the outcome of present or future events cannot be predicted based on the past outcomes.

Probability – the likelihood that a certain outcome from an event will occur, based on the frequency of similar outcomes of past events; the strength of the prediction is based on the number of observations of prior events, the relative closeness in the descriptions of the outcomes, and the number of alternatives in the present of future; a 100% probability of occurrence would be a certainty.

Providence – the human impression of God carrying out His plan on earth and in our life, perhaps by initial design (predestined) or by intentional adjustments during time, or both.

Promise – a statement by God of something in the future that He will do or provide; a promise of God is absolute; some promises are conditional on human works or on obedience, but others are given unconditionally by God at the right time because of His grace and mercy.

Covenant – a binding agreement using terms having legal implications usually accompanied by evidence or downpayment; may be conditional, requiring something from both sides, may be temporary, or may be unconditional and timeless. In covenants involving God, the legal implications have to do with the standard of the righteousness of God.

Predestined – a processes set in order ahead of time so that the probability of occurrence according to design is highly likely or virtually certain, at least in the natural.

Design – planned ahead of time; all process move in a prescribed direction with outcomes exactly as the plan dictates; total balance and integration of all sub-processes or events within the whole.

Prophecy – Forthtelling the word of God; often involves telling ahead of time that which has been predestined by God to happen; the details of what will happen in the future are usually known only in the mind of God until they are revealed to a human prophet to announce, but the design of the plan that will fulfill the prophecy is usually already underway. Sometimes prophecies have more than one meaning or repetitive fulfillments at different times.

An indeterminate process – a process without evidence of pattern or cause or predictable repetition.

Observations of an indeterminate process can lead to a certain amount of “gap filling” or presumptions made by the observer based on what he thinks might be correct. But, if the prior assumptions are different between different observers, the conclusions may be quite different as well.

For example, the following two assumptions approach the indeterminate process in totally different ways – from different preconceptions.

[1] There is no pattern. It is assumed that everything related to the process is by random occurrence unless evidence is found to the contrary. (BTW, look all you want, but it won’t be there.)

[2] There is a pattern. It is assumed that the process occurs according to a pattern not yet discovered. It occurs according to a prior design as implemented by the providence of God. (Evidence for this just hasn’t been found yet, but it’s there.)

It’s like interpreting “now we see through the glass poorly” (1 Cor. 13:12) when one person says “There’s nothing to see” and another says “I will clearly see through the glass if I keep looking.” One [#1] assumes the negative; the other #[2] assumes the positive.

Neither assumption #[1] nor #[2] has natural proof behind it; and both assumptions involve a statement of faith. The first, #[1], assumes that investigations attempting to find evidence of a pattern have been thorough and complete so that it can be concluded with confidence that nothing has been missed. Therefore, a faith is expressed in the human protocol. The second, #[2], assumes that something has been missed, or not yet discovered, and when this additional information is found, a pattern from the design of God will be seen. Here, a faith is expressed in the existence and providence of God.

The first assumption would a type of ontological randomness, in that the lack of pattern is a fundamental characteristic of the process and not due to the lack of appropriate observation. The second assumption would be a type of epistemic randomness, in that the appearance of randomness would be removed by additional information.

Both negative and positive assumptions, [1] and [2], are made in a manner consistent with the respective observer’s preconception of whether or not there is a divine being in control. Their respective attitude is out of their prior conditioning of learned thought patterns which comes from the consequences of previous decisions. If a person is an atheist, you would expect that he would say that everything is random. If a person is already a believer in God, you would expect that he would say that he believes that a pattern is there but it just hasn’t been discovered yet.

Each observer looks at the data through their own filter of preconception (through a glass darkly?), and, by their prior experience and choices, they have essentially predestined themselves as to what their assumptions will be in the present. Present opinions are essentially determined by previous choices.

The Christian observer has access to a resource which the unbeliever denies for himself. As we have said before, the Christian has the operation of the Holy Spirit, who guides into all truth (John 16:13) and reveals the nature of God in concert with the creation of God (Rom. 1:20). Many Christians apparently suffer sensory overload from all this available revelation, because they seem to have trouble putting it all together. Are Christians so accustomed to fighting with one another over doctrinal interpretations that if some new information from scientific discovery becomes available, they just slip into combat mode and fight over that, too? That is not what God’s predestined design calls Christians to do.

What is our problem? Can we not handle new information? Some Christian groups act like they’ve been caught by surprise by scientific discoveries or new concepts of biblical interpretation, and their response is like the Midianites in Judges 7:22 who turned on each other with their swords. Paul said, “If you keep on biting and devouring one another, watch out or you will be destroying each other” (Gal. 5:15).

The Christian does not choose superstitious beliefs over objectivity in evaluating natural evidences; the Christian chooses love over fear (1 John 4:18). And it is up to us, as Christians and collectively as the body of Christ, to prove that this vast resource of Holy Spirit revelation makes a difference in our lives – a difference that can be seen as a testimony to others.

Because of the information retrievable through this broader bandwidth of revelation, we will choose the option of epistemic randomness, which says that a pattern will be seen when more data are discovered. This is essentially the view of Francis Collins, Head of the National Institutes of Health and previously of the Human Genome Project, who said, “When we discover something, we gain knowledge that had previously only been known in the mind of God.” (may be paraphrased)

We, therefore, have a basis for a working hypothesis about predestination by design and randomness. We know that the intelligence of God is infinitely greater than ours. It shouldn’t be surprising that …

Those things that are designed by God appear as random from a human perspective.

Saying it the other way:

That which appears random from a human perspective was by design from God’s perspective.

Therefore, we shall take the approach that the universe and everything in it was created and functions according to the plan and design of God. God, through Christ, foreordained and predestined the formation of the universe and of the earth and everything on the earth. God predestined the plan by which we would grow to be like Him – a plan that is still being carried out through a spiritual evolutionary process called transformation, renewal, and sanctification.

Still, many questions remain. How closely does God monitor things going on in the universe? Does God interrupt and make modifications in the design? Are these interjections also a part of the design or do they occur when something the design goes wrong or needs redirecting? How detailed is the predestination? Is it every molecule that moves and every string that vibrates for 13.6 billion years? How is this done? Does man have a freedom of choice, or has God already predestined what choice that each individual person will make? At what level of detail? Has God predestined what individuals would accept Christ and be saved, or has God predestined whether or not a person will go to the grocery store or how many times they will blink in the next minute? How does this predestination occur – by control of circumstances or by a remote control of the human mind? Has everything been predestined, and what happens is by God’s providence, or are there some occurrences that are allowed to be random?

Are there different forms or levels of predestination? Does God have control of the overall predestination of the eternal process while relegating responsibility of a lower level of predestination in the physical realm to humans and human choice?

What about human choices and decisions? Are human decisions made in a random manner depending on the circumstances of the moment or natural selection pressures like in evolutionary history? To what extent are human decisions predetermined by circumstances generated from the past? To what extent by action of divine intervention?

Whatever the mechanism for decision making, it involves the human brain at work.

We continuously make choices and decisions. We evaluate. We compare. We notice differences. We made “judgment calls.” Jonathan Haidt says this behavior is just part of being human (from “The Righteous Mind”).

Choices happen: Garden beginnings.

The beginning of these observations, evaluations, and choices was represented first in the Garden where Genesis 3 records the first biblical account of intelligent human mental processing. Adam’s and Eve’s (actually, “the woman” at that time) collective choice of disobedience was forever embalmed as the first recorded human decision that went wrong, but it probably wasn’t the first decision. There must have been many good decisions made before then. Adam was obedient in the Garden and took care of it and obeyed what God said to do. Adam decided what to name the animals; he didn’t decide to not do it. Maybe if Adam and Eve had been better caretakers of the Garden, they would have kept that serpent out of there.

This may be reading too much literal meaning into the Garden story, but when Eve made the first wrong decision, it must have been based on information that she had already learned. Otherwise, what historical context in Eve’s memory could the serpent have appealed to? How did Eve know what was good for food, pleasing to the eye, and desirable to gain wisdom? These are all learned responses. These are the three major categories for evaluating something to be desirable which have come down unchanged though the ages. But this knowledge bank implies that Adam and Eve had the mental resources to make correct God-pleasing decisions, they just chose to not do it. Perhaps an even finer tuned means of evaluation was added by the enlightenment gained from the tree of knowledge of good and evil, but this only wraps another layer of mental processing to the making of decisions.

What is the basis for the knowledge of good and evil? Differentiating good from evil involves a comparison. Deeds of evil bring stark contrast and distinction to deeds of goodness. But, while the interface between what is considered good and evil in a human society may be clear, the human definitions of what constitutes good and evil are relative and subject to evaluation and modification. What is considered to be “good” and “evil” in American society may be quite different today than it was a century ago, and the same changes can be seen in the church.

This is why the Law of Moses was necessary to define good behavior from bad or evil – differentiating obedience from disobedience, righteous behavior from sinful behavior, doing what was pleasing to God or unpleasing, receiving God’s blessings or His judgment.

It was the choice of Adam and Eve to be disobedient to God, but their choice gave consequences for all mankind. This was predestination to death, which was the consequence to the sin that entered through Adam – the result of which was condemnation for all men.

As Adam was disobedient, bringing sin and death as condemnation for all men, so Jesus Christ was obedient to God the Father, bringing the grace gift of righteousness and life for all men.

Just as we bear the physical consequences of Adam’s decision to sin, so we also bear the eternal consequences of Jesus’ decision to obediently go to the cross to bring justification and reconciliation to God.

Rom 5.12-21 Therefore, just as sin entered the world through one man, and death through sin, and in this way death came to all men, because all sinned— 13 for before the law was given, sin was in the world. But sin is not taken into account when there is no law. 14 Nevertheless, death reigned from the time of Adam to the time of Moses, even over those who did not sin by breaking a command, as did Adam, who was a pattern of the one to come.

15 But the gift is not like the trespass. For if the many died by the trespass of the one man, how much more did God’s grace and the gift that came by the grace of the one man, Jesus Christ, overflow to the many! 16 Again, the gift of God is not like the result of the one man’s sin: The judgment followed one sin and brought condemnation, but the gift followed many trespasses and brought justification. 17 For if, by the trespass of the one man, death reigned through that one man, how much more will those who receive God’s abundant provision of grace and of the gift of righteousness reign in life through the one man, Jesus Christ.

18 Consequently, just as the result of one trespass was condemnation for all men, so also the result of one act of righteousness was justification that brings life for all men. 19 For just as through the disobedience of the one man the many were made sinners, so also through the obedience of the one man the many will be made righteous. 20 The law was added so that the trespass might increase. But where sin increased, grace increased all the

more, 21 so that, just as sin reigned in death, so also grace might reign through righteousness to bring eternal life through Jesus Christ our Lord.

Jesus in the flesh went through the same process as we have discussed here – the mystery of both being predestined by God as to His choices and the outcome, but also given the freedom to voluntarily make that choice for Himself.

Jesus explained how He was predestined to suffer and die and rise from the dead to the ones on the road to Emmaus (Luke 24:25-27) and then to his disciples (Luke 24:44-47), which had all been decided beforehand by God (Acts 4:27-28) and prophesied again in the New Testament (John 11:49-52).

Luke 24:25 He said to them, “How foolish you are, and how slow of heart to believe all that the prophets have spoken! 26 Did not the Christ have to suffer these things and then enter his glory?” 27 And beginning with Moses and all the Prophets, he explained to them what was said in all the Scriptures concerning himself.

Luke 24:44 He said to them, “This is what I told you while I was still with you: Everything must be fulfilled that is written about me in the Law of Moses, the Prophets and the Psalms.” 45 Then he opened their minds so they could understand the Scriptures. 46 He told them, ”This is what is written: The Christ will suffer and rise from the dead on the third day, 47 and repentance and forgiveness of sins will be preached in his name to all nations, beginning at Jerusalem.

Acts 4:27 Indeed Herod and Pontius Pilate met together with the Gentiles and the people of Israel in this city to conspire against your holy servant Jesus, whom you anointed. 28 They did what your power and will had decided beforehand should happen.

John 11:49 Then one of them, named Caiaphas, who was high priest that year, spoke up, “You know nothing at all! 50 You do not realize that it is better for you that one man die for the people than that the whole nation perish.” 51 He did not say this on his own, but as high priest that year he prophesied that Jesus would die for the Jewish nation, 52 and not only for that nation but also for the scattered children of God, to bring them together and make them one.

Even with the predestination of the plan that Jesus would bring into the world, everything that Jesus did was by His choice and was voluntary. He could have had 12 legions of angels for defense (Matt 26:53).

John 12:27 “Now my heart is troubled, and what shall I say? ‘Father, save me from this hour’? No, it was for this very reason I came to this hour.”

Rom. 14:9 For this very reason, Christ died and returned to life so that he might be the Lord of both the dead and the living.

John 10:17 The reason my Father loves me is that I lay down my life— only to take it up again. 18 No one takes it from me, but I lay it down of my own accord. I have authority to lay it down and authority to take it up again. This command I received from my Father.”

Heb. 5:7 During the days of Jesus’ life on earth, he offered up prayers and petitions with loud cries and tears to the one who could save him from death, and he was heard because of his reverent submission. 8 Although he was a son, he learned obedience from what he suffered 9 and, once made perfect, he became the source of eternal salvation for all who obey him,

Phil. 2:6 Who, being in very nature God, did not consider equality with God something to

be grasped, 7 but made himself nothing, taking the very nature of a servant, being made in human likeness. 8 And being found in appearance as a man, he humbled himself and became obedient to death—even death on a cross!

In the case of Jesus, there was a predestination of the plan of God and a predestination of the action of an individual person. But it had to be that way because there was no other way and no other person who could fulfill this mission. But Jesus, by His obedience, made the plan available “for everyone who calls upon the name of the Lord” to be saved (Acts 2:21).

The choice within the human mind is whether or not to call upon the name of the Lord. The design of the rest of the plan has been predestined, and the results foreordained.

120. PREDESTINATION WITHIN THE HUMAN MIND - [3]

Mind Control - Control from without and control from within

The Spirit of the Lord came upon; and the Holy Spirit was poured out.

From a human perspective, the most significant event, between the beginning of the universe from the spark of God and when Jesus comes and claims all who are His, occurred in an instant on the Day of Pentecost as recorded in Acts 2. For the first time ever (including in the Garden), the presence of God took residence within the human heart, and the Holy Spirit of God and the human spirit would exist together, because the human spirit had been cleansed of sin through the blood of Jesus and declared to be also holy. The Spirit was poured out upon all people, and those who called on the name of the Lord would be saved (Acts 2:33).

By the predestined plan of God, designed before the creation of the universe, man, initially created in God’s image, could be given the resource and power by which he could be transformed in thought and behavior into the likeness of Jesus Christ, "the image of the invisible God" (Col. 1:16), as we were “created to be like God, in true righteousness and holiness” (Eph. 4:24). This goal is our predestination. It is our destination, previously determined by design of God, that we should be like Him.

Old Testament, pre-Pentecost. In the Old Testament, the Spirit of the Lord came upon selected people for a selected purpose – usually judges and prophets. God almost always chose to speak to a prophet who then transferred the message to the people or to the king of the nation. God spoke to His people through the environment that was external to them – blessing them with success of peace, prosperity, and victory over their enemies in conflict situations when Israel was faithful to obey His commands and not worship other gods. However, when Israel was unfaithful, usually because the leaders became corrupt, and turned to other gods, the nation was led down the wrong path of evil doing and the consequences developed because of these poor choices. God would warn the people through a prophet. God told them many times that good consequences would follow obedience and bad consequences would follow disobedience. It seems like the children of Israel made more bad choices than good ones, like Adam and Eve, but maybe, like today, negative news and bad press gained more attention than when things went right.

God spoke to His people through the circumstances created by their choices. Again, the information from God about His holiness and His expectations was environmental – from the outside. These were natural choices made by the Israelites with natural consequences. Natural consequences involve entropy and enthalpy, death by internal decay and loss of usable energy, or new energy from the outside. God provided new energy of blessings in times of obedience, and God allowed natural consequences of entropy to follow bad decisions. This back and forth produced sociological and economic and religious cycles.

God spoke to His people through oppression and bondage from their enemies who conquered them, such as Assyria and Babylonia. Paul refers to Isa. 28:11-12 when writing 1 Cor. 14:21, “Through men of strange tongues and through the lips of foreigners I will speak to this people, but even then they will not listen to me.”

Post-Pentecost. The accounts of the operation of the Holy Spirit in Luke and Acts were very similar to those described in the Old Testament– operations from the outside by the Holy Spirit falling upon, filling (taking over), or coming upon for specific purposes. The mechanisms were similar, but the purposes were different. All of these New Testament external manifestations were leading up to and were signs of the real change, which was the outpouring of the Holy Spirit into the hearts of all people, as God had promised centuries before (Acts 2:17-21).

Now, because of the pouring out of the Spirit, the people of God did not have to be controlled by their outer circumstances, but by the leading of the Spirit of God inside them. But, this decision-making between different options was backed up a step in the thinking process within the human mind, from control by perceiving and interpreting the meaning of outer natural circumstances to a decision that could be based on the revelation of the Spirit. Now, people had an opportunity to see the overall plan of God, because the completed plan and the nature of God had been revealed through Christ who sent the Holy Spirit to guide into all truth (John 16:13). Now, the choice was even more significant than just to follow by acting in obedience to God, as in under the Old Covenant. After Pentecost, the choice was to place oneself under submission to the control of the Holy Spirit to be transformed into the likeness of Christ. One part of the decision was to accept the forgiveness of sin through the blood of Jesus and to become a new creation in Christ. The second part was to recognize the reason one had been released from the bondage of sin was so that one would be free to submit to the control of the Holy Spirit for transformation, renewal, and sanctification into the righteousness and holiness of God. Part one was the initial decision to submit; part two was a decision to submit the rest of one’s life. Part one is like accepting Jesus as Savior; part two is accepting Him as Lord.

Because of the Holy Spirit within each Christian, we have a new choice, because we are a new creation. We can choose between turning our lives over to the control of the Spirit or to the control of the flesh. To be able to make this choice was predestined by the plan of God; the authority to make the choice and which alternative is selected has been turned over to us. That authority was also predestined. Adam and Eve also had a similar choice, but theirs was between obedience and disobedience – by obedience they stayed in the Garden and lived, and by disobedience they got kicked out and died. We have this choice also, but additionally by having God within us we can grow to be like Him as the Holy Spirit expresses His DNA in us into the likeness of Jesus. God had fellowship with Adam and Eve because He was with them. God has fellowship with us because His divine nature is withinus (2 Pet. 1:4).

What part of this process has been predestined and what part is just a random occurrence?

To reemphasize something said before: Both terms, predestined and random, are humanly defined expressions made in an attempt to understand something infinitely greater than ourselves. (Yes, predestined is in the scripture, but what it means is still humanly interpreted.) When defining either term, we make a very grave mistake if we take our definitions of outcomes, based on our human perceptions of how they appear with our observation limits of 3-dimensional space and time, and assign these meanings to the operation of an eternal, omnipresent, omniscient, omnipotent God. And what is infinitely worse is when Christians will take these interpretations and deify them into a immutable doctrine that is hailed and defended even down to the splitting of groups and divorce of fellowship within the body of Christ. (Regrettably, there are many doctrines that fall into this category).

Did God predestine for the church to be divided? How could one say that? God did predestine the outcome of choices made out of pride, arrogance, selfishness, competitiveness, and idolatry? The outcome of an individual or a group who submits themselves to the control of the flesh is predestined to a process of cycling with the natural world, obeying the laws of nature which result in death, decay, destruction, and entropy.

Perhaps we can form another premise. The first one was,

What appears as random from our human perspective is part of an ordered design by God.

The second is like unto it,

What appears as predestined from our human perspective is part of an ordered design by God.

Depending on how the terms are defined – either everything is predestined and everything is random or nothing is predestined and nothing is random – all according to the design of God. We don’t have sufficient information to say more, and we may never have.

How can predestination and randomness co-exist? Because, by design, it was predestined to appear to us as random. We can’t tell the difference, so whether one believes there is randomness because there is no predestination, or God, or whether there is randomness by predestination of design of God, depends on the presupposition about God that the person has at the beginning. They will conclude the same as their preconditioning. And that is predestined.

The balance of predestination and free choice is a difficult one to understand. If you were to ask a Jewish Rabbi what the Jews think about that question, he will likely quote rabbinical writings that go back to around 1000BC and say, “All is foreknown; free will is given.” Ask him what that means, and he will repeat the phrase. Beyond that statement, a mystery hides that is too complex for human understanding.

If we have sufficiently muddled the meaning of predestination in these posts, perhaps it will at least discourage a doctrine being made out of it. But there are ways that God had predestined events to occur. God design of predestined consequence of choices still operated. And there are many ways that humans can affect their own destiny by their prior choices or by the prior choices of others. God has given man the authority over these circumstances and their formation of an environment in which subsequent choices are made.

We will talk about ways that we essentially predestine ourselves in our own minds. There are ways to change this. And there is a need for us to help one another to change, because we are all members one of another. And, if we can muddle it even further, God predestined that we should do this. As we will eventually discuss, a form of predestination is hard-wired into the neural circuitry of our natural brains. It does happen, as do the consequences following the choices that are made.

Environment will influence or even determine our choices

Humans make contrast comparisons. Our brains are configured to be particularly attentive to contrasts. We contrast differences in light intensity, in edges, and in shapes. We have neural networks designed to do that, but it is still a learned behavior. We notice different colors side by side – some colors “go together;” some colors “clash;” some colors are pleasing together; some are not; some color combinations are soothing; some are flashy and gaudy. Colors that “match” well in the eyes of those from one country or culture may be blah to people from another country. People from that country may wear local dress that is flattering to behold to one society, but appears in the “I wouldn’t be caught dead in that” category in another culture. The colors are the same, so what’s the difference? It is in a learned behavior – a learned response from prior brain programming as to what is accepted as good and what is not.

All living things have actions accompanied by natural consequences. This brings the question about predestination – how much has God predestined to happen? Has God predestined a plan and given man the power of choice, or has God also predestined those specific individuals who will choose the plan? Everything that lives has a power of choice, or at least has the presentation of a variety of alternatives. Animals exercise choices, the basis for which we call “instinct.” The difference is that humans can think of the spiritual factors related to the choice and can understand the eternal nature of the different alternatives. Everything that lives bears a physical consequence of the “choices” made. Humans bear responsibilities in the spiritual realm for eternity as well as the temporal physical realm. A plant has natural processes that will attract it to grow toward a fluorescent light, but it can grow too close until the leave get over-stimulated and burn up. Should the plant have known better? A dog may have a learned behavior of barking and chasing cars, but the dog has a high probability of bearing the consequence of that risky behavior. Just try to explain it to the dog. Alternatively, tie him up and listen to him howl. Humans also have learned behaviors, some of which will produce good results and some evil results. Some humans will choose God’s plan and some will reject it. So, what has been predestined? The plant, dog, and human follow a common principle in that each has consequences for the action they have taken. Actions in the physical world bring natural consequences according to the laws the God has set up.

Are choices random or intentional and influenced by the environment at the time?

Let’s say that we did an experiment, and put a beetle in a container made of channels in a Y-shaped maze. The beetle goes in at the bottom of the “Y” and in headed in the direction of the fork in the path. A movable wall follows the beetle as he travels down the channel to keep it from turning around and returning. The beetle approaches the split in the path, and, all other things controlled, will choose to go in one direction or the other with equal probability (i.e., random). But if we place a trail of food along one of the two paths of the Y, then the beetle will likely follow that path. That appears like a purposeful choice has been made, but the outcome is no longer random. We modified the environment. Have we predestined the choice that the beetle will make?

Let’s raise the intelligence level to that of a mouse, and do the same experiment. With enough trials, the frequency of choice between path Y-left and Y-right should be the same (i.e., random). But, now we put the scent of a cat at the end of path Y-left and the scent of cheese at the end of path Y-right. We have increased the probability of the mouse choosing the Y-right path because we have changed the circumstances or the environment. If we did enough repetitions, we would undoubtedly notice a pattern. As far as the mouse is concerned, that Y-right path about the only way the decision could turn out. The mouse has already learned what the different scents mean – either from prior developmental programming or from evolutionary pressure because all the stupid non-discriminating mice were previously eliminated by natural selection.

The decision of which corridor to take may have appeared random to the beetle and the mouse, but we influenced the decision by modifying the environment in such a way to virtually ensure that one pathway was taken and not the other. Did we “predestine” the mouse to go down path Y-right? Did we design an event that would determine its destination?

Choices made as a function of environment. So, as humans, we have a freedom of choice. But, is it a choice between unlimited possibilities, or have we significantly reduced the number possible options because of the outcomes of our own previous decisions or the decisions of others? We are obviously aware of the change in environment that decisions of those in governmental positions can make on our choices – sometimes increasing the choices, sometimes decreasing or narrowing the possibilities, sometimes creating, sometimes eliminating altogether.

Take the perpetual example of the “national debt” that is ever-increasingly rolled forward until the country comes smack against the financial wall. People talk about passing the debt to future generations like it has been from past generations. By continuing to borrow and increase the national debt, is our government predestining a negative economic outcome for future generations? What will be their freedom of choice – choices among what limitations of scope? Their possible selections may be very limited, the choices may be all unpleasant, the choices may be inevitable, but these are the choices that previous generations have passed along. Did God predestine this to happen, or did God predestine the outcome from the choices that humans have made out of their own greed and lack of self-discipline?

The influence of outcomes from decisions in the past may make a present a high probability that one a particular alternative will be chosen over other possibilities. If previous decisions were godly ones led by the Spirit, the influence on selection of alternatives will be good. The opposite influence would come from past unspiritual decisions, which would predispose for a poor choice in the present.

Some disagree about the implication of a “generational sin” or a “generational curse” because of what God said in the 10 commandments about “punishing the children for the sin of the fathers to the third and fourth generation of those who hate me” (Ex. 20:5; Deut. 5:9). But this sin pertained to the formation of physical images to represent or take the place of God – graven physical idols made to look like something in the creation – worship of the creation as a figment of human imagination instead of being submissive and obedient to the Creator. We see repeatedly when Israel becomes a nation that once idols get established in a culture, they are very difficult to get rid of. In that way, the sins of idolatry are felt for generations, because the children continue the disobedience of the parents. The second part of the verse says that constructing idols to replace God is the same as hating God. So, the punishment for the sins is their continued consequences, partly because the environment following a bad choice has been modified for a very long time. It seems that the consequences of bad choices contaminate the legacy of good choices in greater proportion than the positive effects of good choices. A fortune could have been passed from generation to generation exercising good stewardship, but it just takes one greedy person in control to squander everything for the generations to come. Paul wrote that a little leaven will spread throughout an entire lump of dough (1 Cor. 5:6).

The diagram is supposed to represent the influence of the consequences of choices made by previous generations. Person A makes a choice between red and green, which for illustration we assume the probability is 50/50. If A chooses red, the influence of his choice affects the environment of those who follow, diminishing somewhat over time. Person B of the next generation starts with an environment which favors red, so the probability that he chooses red is higher than 50%, and is 70/30 red over green. Each successive generation has a higher and higher probability of choosing red because of the cumulative influence of previous generations choosing red. Generations after D have little chance, in this illustration, of giving much consideration to a green choice. This is, in a sense, human induced predestination, when the probability of a choice approaches 100%, or a certainty. God did not force D to decide for red, but God did set up the consequences of choices, and He explained in His word and gave many examples that this would happen. The design was predestined; the application of the design of consequence to choices was applied by humans. Since this is also the way that the natural order in creation works, people are without excuse if they don’t know this (Rom. 1:20).