There is wide disagreement among Calvinists about reprobation, which is sometimes referred to as double predestination.
Some Calvinists (though not all) hold to reprobation—which is the belief that God not only decided whom He would choose for eternal life, but also chose whom He would send to eternal damnation—while others flatly deny it.
Though Calvinists admit that this doctrine is “unpleasant” and “harsh,” they teach it because they believe a balanced view of predestination requires it (Boettner, Predestination, 112).
Below are a few quotes from Calvinists who believe and teach the doctrine of reprobation, beginning with John Calvin himself:
Whence does it happen that Adam’s fall irremediably involved so many peoples, together with their infant offspring, in eternal death unless because it so pleased God? … The decree is dreadful, I confess. Yet no one can deny that God foreknew what end man was to have before he created him, and consequently foreknew because he so ordained by his decree (Calvin, Institutes, III.xxiii.7).
[Reprobation is] God’s eternal decree that the destiny of certain men shall be everlasting death, whether one views it as God’s passing those men by with the grace of election or as the determination to damn (Engelsma, Hyper-Calvinism, 44).
From all eternity some were decreed by their sins to come into judgment or condemnation (Manton, Commentary on Jude, 128).
We believe that from all eternity God has intended to leave some of Adam’s posterity in their sins, and that the decisive factor in the life of each is to be found only in God’s will (Boettner, Predestination, 104).
By the decree of God, for the manifestation of His own glory, some men and angels are predestined unto everlasting life, and others foreordained to everlasting death (Westminster Confession of Faith, III:3).
Predestination includes two parts, namely, election and reprobation, the predetermination of both the good and the wicked to their final end, and to certain proximate ends, which are instrumental in the realization of their final destiny (Berkhof, Systematic Theology, 113).
The Reformed view makes a crucial distinction between God’s positive and negative decrees. God positively decrees the election of some, and he negatively decrees the reprobation of others (Sproul, Grace Unknown, 158).
Predestination is, by Calvinist theologians, regarded as a generic decree including under it Election and Reprobation as specific decrees: the former predestinating some human beings, without regard to their merit, to salvation, in order to the glorification of God’s sovereign grace; the later foreordaining some human beings, for their sin, to destruction, in order to the glorification of God’s retributive justice (Girardeau, Calvinism and Evangelical Arminianism, 9-10).
Most Calvinists reject double predestination or reprobation, and instead say that God did not actively choose who to send to heaven and who to send to hell, but simply chose out of everyone who was already headed to hell to save a few for heaven. In this way, He does not actively choose who will go to hell, but simply “passes over” them in His choice of who will spend eternity with Him.
From all eternity God decided to save some members of the human race and to let the rest of the human race perish. God made a choice—he chose some individuals to be saved unto everlasting blessedness in heaven, and he chose others to pass over, allowing them to suffer the consequences of their sins, eternal punishment in hell (Sproul, Grace Unknown, 141).
Though many Calvinists argue that double predestination is the only logical conclusion to the Calvinist position on God’s election of some (but not all) to receive eternal life, I am not going to belabor the point or try to refute the idea since most Calvinists claim that they do not teach or believe it… (for more on reprobation and double predestination I recommend this book: Vance: The Other Side of Calvinism, pp, 250-333).
Have you ever done much reading about double predestination or reprobation? If so, what are your thoughts on this teaching of some Calvinists? Let me know below!
If you want to read more about Calvinism, check out other posts in this blog series: Words of Calvinism and the Word of God.
If I had a box of Smarties, and chose to eat the ones that were not red, wouldn’t that be the same as saying I chose to not eat the red ones? I think saying “God chose to select some and pass over others” is the same as saying “God chose not to save some”.
I agree. It is a weak argument to say that “passing over some” is not the same as “choosing to send them” to hell.
The human race is condemned to everlasting hell for all have sinned and fallen short of the glory of God.
In choosing to save some and choosing not to save others, it would appear to be no different to reprobation (double predestination), where some were not just left alone to suffer hell, but actually decreed to go there; and nothing can stop it from happening.
That eternal destiny cannot be changed!
This of course means that prayer for certain lost people is pointless. So why bother praying?
However, if reprobation is not true, we are left with the “Elect” who have been predestined to eternal life.
In this situation the “lost” can be prayed for and God intervenes in answer to the prayers offered, and many will move out of the Kingdom of darkness and into the Kingdom of light.
God, knowing this beforehand, also designated these people as being among the Elect.
We therefore can be fervently praying for our family, our friends, our nation, and the world, that God would change the hearts of people everywhere to light up with Jesus – and we can be confident that God will answer our prayers.
The doctrine of Reprobation prevents this fr0m happening.
No one can plumb the infinite depths of God’s nature–one need only read the Book of Job to understand that folly. I am reminded of the Saducees, who thought to trap our Lord with the question about who would be married to whom in the afterlife. His response was short, and to the point–“you do err, not knowing the scriptures . . .”
Some questions are partially pointless. Paul did not trouble himself about who were the elect–he preached the Gospel to all, but to those who responded he said that they were God’s elect, chosen before the foundation of the world.
I also am reminded of the Saducees. His response was short and to the point, “You do err, not knowing the Scriptures.”
If no one can plug the infinite depths of God’s nature, then why do Calvinists say that they alone have properly understood God’s nature?
Classical Greek philosophers, about 500 BC, formalized the concept of ‘Destiny’ through stories anthropomorphizing the idea of ‘fate’. Augustine of the early Christian era, having been schooled in Greek philosophy struggled with translating the Biblical word ‘prohorizo’.
Contrary to his earlier thoughts, on ‘prohorizo’, he espoused the Greek philosophical idea of ‘Destiny’ and used the translation of ‘prohorizo’ to mean ‘predestine’. Calvin of the reformation period of Christianity embraced Augustine’s idea of ‘predestine’ and developed the idea of salvation by predetermined destiny. Sadly this erroneous doctrine of Augustine/Calvin has stirred much heated debate over the centuries on the mechanics of salvation. Literally ‘prohorizo’ is simply a planned outline, a pre+horizon and Biblically is used to reference those who have believed in Christ. In this light the Lord Jesus Christ is not a destiny. Jesus Christ is our saviour not our destiny that has been pre+marked in eternity past. Salvation is not a status recorded in a book or a commodity handed out to those deemed chosen. Those who are saved are saved by the indwelling Spirit of Christ in those who have believed the message of Life Himself. The words ‘predestine and destiny’ are foreign concepts to Biblical thought. The context surrounding the translated English word ‘predestined’ does not support that translation. Proof text without context is pretext.
Excellent points! I am not going into the Greek philosophical roots of Calvinism much, but you have brought out one of the many connections. Thanks!
Jeremy. It’s been my, albeit limited, experience that as the Calvinist believers that I’ve associated with these past four decades have come to know the Lord Jesus closely in their walk, they have either abandoned their belief in predestination or it has faded far into the background in importance in their theology.
as a matter of fact I didn’t know for the first 30 years that they were Calvinist. And I’m talking about 75% of my Christian friends. I never heard once any of them mention Calvin, or TULIP. I only begian to look into church history and all of our sad divisions, in the last decade, because Pharasee like outsiders brought ‘circumcision’ like ideas into our sweet fellowship. And sadly they succeeded in dividing us, just as they always seem to. I suppose because I had no religious background before I was saved at 17, I suggested not listening to them from the beginning. about the temptation to be right, or the crass need to be on the winning side of an argument, but it was just too powerful a lure.
The net result was a beautiful church fellowship with a powerful testimony and presence in our community, as well as many solid families broke up. There were other factors,and I can’t lay the blame squarely on the shoulders of this doctrine, as it was only one prong of the Devils pitchfork. The Scriptures say that we are not ignorant of Satan’s devices. I completely disagree. That was written in a time when it was true, before Christians argued over how many angels can fit on the head of a pin, whether to use grape juiceor wine in the communion class, and whether women should wear doilies on their head when they pray, and a myriad of other stupid destructive timewasting ideologies designed to keep us running around with 1 foot nailed to the floor. While we engage in the never ending silly season widows and orphans remain unattended to, millions starve for the bread of life, demons remain uncast out, the lame remain sick, the dead remain unraised.
And worst of all the name of the Lord, instead of filling the earth with the knowledge of God, thru the culture shaping love between His children, is thought of as just another brand name among many religions.
This failure lies on all of our shoulders collectively as his family. May I suggest not contributing to the wedges that drive us apart by using your considerable talents to argue for him, rather than against his enemies or those who misunderstand him? Jesus said if we would lift him up he would draw men to himself and I personally believe that is what he is waiting for all of us that have a voice to do. Just sayin brother. blessings. Greg
Greg,
Yes, many Calvinists are not loudly outspoken about Calvinism, and many are inconsistent Calvinists.
That is actually why I am writing these posts. I hope to help such Calvinists see that there is another way of reading Scripture which makes sense and which honors God and the Gospel. In these posts, I am attempting to lift up the name of Jesus so that He might draw all people to Himself.
Thanks for the encouragement!
“Yet no one can deny that God foreknew what end man was to have before he created him, and consequently foreknew because he so ordained by his decree.”
Jeremy, thanks for the quotes. They will be of great help to check the completeness of the book I’m working on.
I wish to place the following opposite the above quote of Calvin: “And it repented the Lord that he had made man on the earth, and it grieved him at his heart” (KJV). So God was grieved about something He decided beforehand to do? One could add other Scripture portions. Seriously, I cannot understand how such a large part of the church over the centuries could teach that. No wonder atheists who were raised in Christian homes are so very critical about Christianity.
Genesis 6:6 brings an excellent point. Why did God create humans in the first place if he was grieved with them? Was He bored? Did he need little playthings to torture? Absolutely not! He loves us! It hurt when those he had such a close relationship with in the beginning forgot all about Him. He loves us here on Earth now just as much as those who were here before. Maybe He loved you and me so much that he endured the grief he felt then. Maybe he knew that for the world to survive to the point it is today, he had to destroy it(save one family). He knew there would be one family that still believed and that one family would help to propagate the world again, this time for good.
I suppose mine is only one side of the story, but I felt it needed to be shared.
Yes. Quite often, when I encounter atheists who grew up in the church, I ask them what “God” they rejected, and almost without fail, it is the God presented by Calvinism. So tragic.
Ooooh, a controversial topic!
How can we as humans understand God? If we are able to fit the entirety of the vastness and complexity of all God is inside of our little brains, he definitely would not be a God worthy our worship and love.
The argument boils down to this in my mind. God is omniscient, omnipresent, and omnipotent. All knowing, everywhere, and all powerful. I suppose if you disagree with any of those descriptions, you can skip to the end of my post. Now, if God is all knowing, how can it be that He doesn’t know who will and who will not spend eternity with Him? That being said; yes I do believe in predestination. How can God be who He is and not know something as simple as that?
Now for the rest. The idea of predestination can be EXTREMELY dangerous. Take for example my grandfather-in-law. He pastured a small Calvinist church congregation about 40 minutes away from where I live. He and his wife were married before he became saved and he would quite often best her to within an inch of her life. Fast forward a few years down the road, he became saved and obviously gravitated toward a denomination that catered to his past. He never beat his wife again, but he also shows absolutely no remorse and has never apologized to her because “Since I believe in predestination, this was all supposed to happen. I have nothing to feel sorry about.”
Now, I understand the original topic was about going to heaven or hell, but it could easily gravitate toward the scenario mentioned above if allowed. Another danger is becoming lax about sharing the gospel and praying. If people are going to heaven, they’ll get there somehow, right? I’ll just watch the game and drink my beer! (Thick sarcasm). Prayer would also be a HUGE waste of time because in the end it wouldn’t matter, right?
I suppose my belief is this; while God DOES know what will happen in the end, it is our job to do our best to make his kingdom come. If we don’t talk to our neighbor about Christ, someone else will and it will be their reward in heaven and not ours.
Thanks for the comment.
Would you say that there is a difference between God knowing everything that can be known, and God knowing everything that has ever and will ever happen? In other words, are there events in the future which God knows only as possible events?
“…the original topic was about going to heaven or hell.”
As a matter of interest and perhaps future discussion: The word and concept of ‘hell’ as we have been raised with in the Western world, does not appear in the Hebrew Tanakh – this is not my interpretation but a fact that can be checked. The Hebrew Ge-Hinnom had a completely different context than the image we grew up with – the rubbish dump valley outside Jerusalem. It was a place that burned day in and day out. Even bodies of people (executed criminals and strangers) were dumped there and it was a great concern to the Jew that when he died his body would be dumped there. For them it was a place of moral decline, evil and cursed.
The Greek equivalent is Gehenna. Jesus never taught that the judgment of Gehenna would take place in the afterlife. It would be in Jerusalem and in the lifetime of those He was talking to. The apostles did not preach Gehenna to the Gentiles but also applied it only to the Hebrews.
Let me end on that note as stimulation for study.
Excellent point. I have long wanted to do a series on hell. And have one all planned. But I have just never been able to get to it… Anyway, I agree with you about Gehenna and hell.
Gen 12:3 I will bless those who bless you, I will curse those who treat you with contempt, and all the peoples (clans) on earth will be blessed through you.
Joh 3:16 “For God loved the world (kosmos, humanity) in this way: He gave His One and Only Son, so that everyone who believes in Him will not perish but have eternal life.
Joh 3:17 For God did not send His Son into the world that He might judge the world, but that the world might be saved through Him.
Not really supportive of the Calvinistic predestination concept, is it?
Nope. Not at all!
The verb Progroginoskein and the noun Prognosis refers to knowledge of anticipated results based on conditions being met. What is FOREKNOWN is based on conditions being met. As in ‘a doctors prognosis, preknowldege is based upon the conditions of good hygiene, therapy, proper rest and nourishment’ etc. Foreknowledge is not determinately decreed knowledge. Prognosis is not gnosis nor epignosis. Eisegesis, reading into scripture instead of reading out of scripture, exegesis is the promotion of confusion and division.
What God foreknows (prognosis) is not a choosing nor is this foreknowledge a decree.
Excellent explanation. I will include something very similar to this in my own explanation of foreknowledge (to be posted at a later date).
Calvin and Calvinist, it seems to me, use doublethink and self-contradictory propositions, and read outside the Biblical text while using it in order to validate their theology; and, in their eagerness to glorify God, they impugn that moral character and divine nature, which they so earnestly seek to protect from the perils of sinful imaginings.
Calvin wanted to be the new Pope. You all were lied to. Horrid theology. A pastor visited Geneva and said this: “If Christ himself came to Geneva, he would be crucified. For Geneva is not a place of Christian liberty. It is ruled by a new pope [referring to Calvin], but one who burns men alive while the pope at Rome at least strangles them first.“