Month: August 2010

Hello readers, and welcome back to Deeper Waters, where we go into a quest of diving into the ocean of truth! Right now, we’re studying the Christian doctrine of God. Tonight, we continue the topic of the book of life, using the excellent work of Thomas Aquinas, the Summa Theologica, which can be read at newadvent.org. We are going to be asking tonight exactly what is recorded in this book? Is it the life of the predestined to glory only or is it all life?

For instance, who has more life than God? Does the Book of Life record that there is the God who is living? What about the natural world? Does it record that there are creatures and plant life that are living? What about those who are not elect? Does it record them and then at the moment of their death they are gone?

Aquinas says in response that election relates to something that is not natural to someone. A man is elected to military service not to put on a uniform but for an end, the end of going to war and fighting. The life of glory is that which does not belong to us by nature. Therefore, it too requires that we be elected in order to partake of it.

This would explain why Aquinas believes that the divine life is not recorded in the Book of Life. God is not elected to anything and he is alive by nature. In fact, were God elected to the divine life, then he could not be God for there would be someone that is beyond him who would be electing him to that position.

A similar case applies to the natural world, including lost human beings that are not predestined. These are creatures that have a natural life in them that is, well, natural to them. There is no need to record that in the Book. What this says however about the eternal status of animals, for instance pets, Aquinas does not explain here.

What of passages brought up such as Christ choosing the twelve but one of them, namely Judas, is a devil? Aquinas says that some people are chosen relatively but not absolutely. Judas would be an example of this. He was chosen to have some relation to the life of glory, but he was not chosen to partake of the life of glory.

Once again, how this will work out with debates such as eternal security will have to be settled by readers on their own. However, this is not a new debate and Aquinas has already been thinking in advance about Calvinist and Arminian debates before they ever came around.

What I wish to leave in conclusion is the importance that was placed on salvation however and the knowledge of God in relation to it. While we should all believe in salvation by grace through faith, let us never be lightly about it. Christ told the seventy-two to not rejoice that the demons even obeyed them, but that their names were written in Heaven.

Let us do the same.

Hello readers, as we bid you once again welcome to Deeper Waters where we continue a dive into the ocean of truth! It is our hope that you come here seeking to know the deep truths of your faith. Deeper Waters exists to get past a shallow Christianity and give a reason for the hope that lies within us. Right now, our focus has been on the doctrine of God in Christian thought. Thomas Aquinas, the great medieval theologian, has been our guide as we’ve used his Summa Theologica, which can be read for free at newadvent.org. The Book of Life is our topic for tonight as we consider whether the Book of Life is the same as predestination?

Readers might be wondering that if the Book of Life is the same as predestination, then won’t it be pointless to discuss it? After all, we did just go through the doctrine of predestination. To this, we bring up the same point that has been brought up with simplicity. While in divine simplicity, there is no difference in God in being, there is a logical difference in our understanding. In the same way, there is a logical difference. Predestination refers more to the action of God and the Book of Life refers to the knowledge of God.

The Book of Life is of course not a literal book. It is a metaphorical book meant to help us understand. We write books as a record of information often that we want to be held for future peoples. Of course, there could be some possible exceptions, but even in a fictional story, we want that story to be around for the enjoyment of people after us and many times, for their betterment.

God also has in his mind the names of those who are to receive eternal life and this is referred to as the Book of Life. Of course, Aquinas leaves open that the term can refer to a book that is meant to teach about life. In this case, the Old and New Testaments can be a book of life. A book of war could be a book that tells the names of soldiers who are to go forward and fight, or it could be a book that tells those soldiers how they are to fight.

For God, there is no need of a reminder. The book is presented not for the memory of God but for our assurance. When we see a rainbow in the sky, we do not need to stop and think that God now realizes that he said he wouldn’t flood the world again so the rain needs to stop. The rainbow is a reminder to us that the world did get flooded once and we can remember the promise that it won’t happen again. Communion is meant to remind us of the body and blood of Christ broken and shed on the cross, not for the memory of God, but so that we can get a reminder ourselves whenever we partake of the elements.

For the Book of Life, we are to remember when we hear of it that God knows us. He has written down our names as it were. As words are etched onto the pages of a book, so the knowledge of our salvation is known eternally in the mind of God and we can be sure he will bring it about.

Thus, Aquinas concludes that the Book of Life and predestination are the same, but they differ only in idea and not in actuality. Once again, while we are often caught up in soteriology and how this is brought about, the medievals seemed to be more interested in the idea that this is about the knowledge of God more than anything else.

Maybe we should get back to that knowledge of God.

We shall continue tomorrow.

Hello readers. Welcome back to Deeper Waters, the place where we dive into the ocean of truth! At the moment, we are studying the Christian doctrine of God and our guide for this has been the Summa Theologica of Thomas Aquinas. This can be read for free at newadvent.org. We’re going to wrap up our look at predestination tonight and ask the question of if our prayers can affect predestination in anyway.

Interestingly, I recall a professor of mine recently asking this question. Does it do any good to pray for the salvation of our friends? If we believe that free-will is what is involved, then how can it be that we pray that their will will be coerced in such a way that they will come to salvation? If we believe it is all in the hand of God, then we cannot pray that he will change his mind of course. If they are to be saved, they are to be saved.

Aquinas points to the Scripture where Isaac prays and the womb of Rebekkah is opened so that she may conceive. Jacob however was numbered among the predestined. Obviously, this was part of the eternal plan of God, but the eternal plan of God took into account the temporal prayers of Isaac.

This is a question we ask however not just about salvation, but about anything else. Why do we pray if God already knows the outcome? One aspect to consider is that God acts eternally knowing always what we will pray and he does take future prayers into account. For instance, suppose you receive word of a friend who has been in a car accident except the event happened yesterday. You begin praying for your friend. You’re told the next day that surgery will be required and you begin praying for the surgery. However, like the car accident, you hear all the news a day after it takes place so you pray for the success of surgery, for instance, the day after surgery.

God sees that future prayer however and takes it into account. Now Aquinas does have reasons elsewhere for why prayer can’t change the past. The point to make is that the events that God has done in the past are done knowing what you will pray in the future. They are unchanging realities, but they are not done without the input of the saints.

While our prayers cannot change the fact that someone will be saved according to Aquinas, they can affect the secondary means whereby that event will come about. This could be just a person somehow maybe having to go to a hospital and hear the message of the gospel or having a blessing such as a pregnancy or a marriage and getting to hear the good news.

My final piece of advice is that while we may differ at times on the doctrine of predestination, let’s all remember that what matters is the salvation of souls for the glory of God. I will gladly minister alongside a Calvinist, Molinist, Arminian, or anyone else provided they hold to the essentials of Christianity. I would rather lead someone to Jesus than to my particular view on soteriology. Let us pray for the salvation of the lost, but let us also pray that the laborers will be sent, and that if those laborers are to be us, we will be faithful.

We shall begin a new topic tomorrow.

Welcome back everyone to Deeper Waters, a blog where we are going on a plunge into the ocean of truth! Right now, we’re going through the Christian doctrine of God and using as our guide, the great medieval theologian Thomas Aquinas’s Summa Theologica. If you wish to join in the reading of this work, you can go and read it for free at newadvent.org. Tonight, we’re continuing our look at the doctrine of predestination and asking if the number of the predestined is certain or not.

Aquinas speaks of the different ways that something can be required for something. For instance, stones and logs can be required to build a house. However, these are required for the sake of the house and not for any good in themselves. Thus, a builder will order a number of stones and logs, but he would not likely order an exact number and expect that every item that he orders would be used.

For the good of the universe, God has pre-ordained a certain number. Aquinas tells us that all things work together for the good of the predestined. Thus, the number of reprobates does not need to be certain as they are there in the long term simply for the good of the elect in some way which will bring about the glory of God. There was some speculation in medieval thought also that the number of men who are saved is to be equal to the number of angels that fell. Aquinas reminds us that it is better to simply say that God knows the number.

When the Bible speaks of a number increasing or decreasing, Aquinas says that it is to righteousness in this life. There are some who will enjoy blessings in this life but that does not mean that they are part of the predestined. This could be a case of what Paul spoke of when he said that not all those who are Israel are indeed Israel. God can raise up from stones children of Abraham.

An objection is that there is no reason why a certain number should be saved and God does nothing without a reason, therefore there is no fixed number. Aquinas tells us that the good of one is to be done in proportion to the whole. The reason for the number of stars in the universe for instance, is based on that which will bring about the most good in the universe, something that our scientists can better tell us about today.

What of passages that speak of the gate being narrow? Aquinas seems to relegate this to a certain kind of happiness that few will experience. My thoughts on this is that Jesus is referring to those who will accept him at the time of his mission. The Bible also speaks of a great multitude in Heaven that no man can number.

My conclusion on the matter? I do believe God does know how many people will be saved and that number is there fixed, but again, this is based on my view of predestination. I cannot say for certain where I stand entirely on the issue yet, but I hope I have presented the views of Aquinas faithfully.

We shall conclude this topic tomorrow.

Welcome back readers to Deeper Waters where we are diving into the ocean of truth. We’re going through the doctrine of God right now in Christian thought. Our guide for this has been the Summa Theologica of Thomas Aquinas. This can be read for free at newadvent.org. We’re on the topic of predestination and we’re going to be asking tonight if predestination is certain or not.

For Aquinas, predestination is absolutely certain. It will happen and it will happen infallibly. However, Aquinas at the same time believes that free will enters into this. He tells us that all that we’ve said about the will of God and the divine knowledge of God must be taken into consideration when discussing the topic. In other words, Aquinas is a believer that we must have the free will of man along with the sovereignty of God together. In many discussions today, we too often take one and then deny the other. In the doctrine of Aquinas, both must be taken together.

Aquinas does say that what will happen will happen of necessity however, but the freedom of man is the contingent aspect of it happening. Contingency is used to even bring about necessary events. What Pilate and Caiaphas did in nailing Jesus to the cross was done by their own free-will, but it was also necessary for our salvation that these events would take place.

Does the Bible say someone can lose a crown? If that happens, then it would seem that predestination is not certain. Aquinas says that if the crown is predestined, then that crown is not lost. However, it could be a crown got by the merits of grace. That is a gift and if it is lost, it is given to another in its place. Men can take the place of fallen angels and Gentiles the place of Jews, according to Aquinas.

But if God can will someone to be predestined, then can he not also will that person to not be predestined? I would hope that some readers of the blog regularly through our look at the doctrine of Thomas Aquinas will think back and be able to see the problem with such an idea.

When we spoke of the will of God, we said that the only thing that God wills necessarily is himself. He does not have to will anything else. Suppose however that he wills to create a universe, which in fact he did. If that is the case, since he has willed it, he necessarily wills it. He does not have to will things necessarily, but once he wills them, he wills them necessarily. It’s a fine distinction, but it is an important one.

Aquinas thus concludes that the one who is predestined is certain to reach the goal for which they were predestined for. My personal thought on this is to immediately think of Romans 8 and the comfort such a passage gives when it tells us that we will be conformed to the likeness of Christ. It is not a maybe. It is not a hope. (Although in the biblical sense, a hope can be spoken of as a sure thing) It is a certainty.

We shall continue tomorrow.

Hello everyone and welcome back to Deeper Waters where we are diving into the ocean of truth. Tonight, we’re going to be continuing our study of the doctrine of God. Our guide for this has been the Summa Theologica of Thomas Aquinas. This can be read for free at newadvent.org. We’re looking at the doctrine of predestination in Aquinas now and we’ve seen how for Aquinas, the doctrine is more about God first than it is about salvation. Tonight, we’ll be discussing how Aquinas views the doctrine of predestination in regards to the question of if foreknowledge of merits is the cause of predestination.

What is being asked is if God saves us based on works that he knows that we are going to do in the future. Aquinas answers no. Now up front, I really don’t have a decided opinion on the topic of predestination, so at this point, I’m mainly giving Aquinas the way I see him. We must always remember that because we have great minds that we admire, that we do not have to agree with them on everything merely because they are great minds.

It is interesting how much though what Aquinas says reflects the current debate in the church on Calvinism. For instance, Aquinas says that man can be prepared for grace and this is included under predestination. If there is anything in man that is getting him to be predisposed towards God, that too is a work of grace and that is something that I do not believe we could deny. All good we have in our lives is from the grace of God, including our ability to follow Him.

Aquinas does say however that God could preordain to give someone glory because of the works that they have done. However, in order for them to do those works, they would have to be predestined prior to have the grace to even receive that glory that they have.

When asked for the reason why some are elected and some are not, Aquinas can point no further than the will of God. There are some that God elects to punishment and there are some that God elects to glory. This is the point that many of us in the debate, including myself, start to wonder. Of course, it could be that we have to resign ourselves to ignorance in some cases. In all cases, we should trust that the judge of all the Earth will do right.

When we as Christians come together to debate this issue, we must do our part to avoid views that are heretical as well. Calvinists, Arminians, and Molinists I count as Christians. My main beef normally is with those that are dogmatic on the issue to the point of seeing those that they disagree with as being less than Christians. Let us realize that even in Aquinas, we find some mystery in this doctrine as he can give no reason beyond the will of God. Is there something else in God’s will that we do not see that is the cause of election? Maybe. Are some of us colored against ideas or for ideas? We must be cautious and watch ourselves on this issue.

It’s not an easy topic and again, I can’t say I agree with Aquinas entirely yet, but I wish to simply present his view.

We shall continue tomorrow.

Hello everyone and welcome back to Deeper Waters where we are continuing our dive into the ocean of truth. We’ve been going through the doctrine of God in Christian thought and tonight we’re going to be continuing our look at the doctrine of predestination. Our path has been guided by the Summa Theologica of the Medieval theologian Thomas Aquinas. This can be read for free at newadvent.org. Tonight, we will be discussing if the predestined are elected by God.

Aquinas tells us that one reason we will an end is because we believe we have the ability or at least will have the ability to bring about an end. If you will to start going to school, it is because you believe you have the ability to finish school. If you will to marry, it is because (Or at least it should be!) you have the ability to love the person you have pledged your life to for better or for worse. (Sadly, too many couples have it be only for better.)

Thus, for some, according to Aquinas, God predestines their salvation. This is an act of election and love. It is love insofar as God wills this good to someone for their betterment. It is election insofar as it is this particular love that God happens to love.

Aquinas brings out an interesting idea on how the love of God differs in election for God in contrast to us. For us, we elect to love some people instead of others after all. I am married to one woman and in marrying that one woman, I said I would not marry other women and give a unique kind of love exclusively to her that I do not give to anyone else. Parents love their children more than they love the children of others. Friends have a unique bond of love between them that they do not give to the ordinary man on the street. Over this past month for instance, I have found out just how much some friends are supportive and I am incredibly grateful for that.

For us, the will to love does not cause good. It is because we see some good in someone instead that we are inspired to love that someone. We believe that there is something in that person that is worthy of the kind of love that we wish to give them. Based on a prior good, we offer love.

The reverse is true in the case of God. It is his will to love them that is the cause of goodness in them. God does not love us firstly because we are good. He loves us firstly because HE is good. Thus, love precedes election and election then precedes predestination. Let us remember that many times in the Bible, we are told that God does things for his name’s sake.

The love of God is not like the love we ourselves have. We love because of goods in people. God loves because of the good that is in Him. We ought to seek to mirror this love as much as possible however. The more we truly love someone, the more we will shape them into the image of God.

We shall continue tomorrow.

Hello everyone and welcome to Deeper Waters where we are continuing our dive into the ocean of truth. We’ve been studying the Christian doctrine of God and we’re on the topic of predestination. As we have seen, predestination is more about the nature of God than it is about the nature of salvation. Our guide for this has been the Summa Theologica of Thomas Aquinas which can be read at NewAdvent.org. Tonight, we’re going to be looking at the question of reprobation.

“A loving God would never send anyone to Hell.” We’ve all heard it before. There are alternatives to such an idea. The first is universalism. This was a view that was held by Origen. In the end, all would be saved. The second view is annihilationism. This is the view that the lost will not go to hell and be there for the rest of time, but rather that they will eventually be destroyed and “perish.”

These views are nothing new. They were around in the days of Aquinas. There is nothing new under the sun. In fact, the very first objection against the view that God reprobates some people is that God is a God of love. If God loves every man, then he would not reprobate anyone.

However, because God loves every man, it does not follow that God wills every good come to every man. Some men are single and some are married and strong Christians come in both forms. Paul was likely single. Peter was not. It does not follow that God loved one more than the other in that he allowed one to be in one state and another in another.

I would contend in fact that Hell is really for the good of the ones who wish to avoid God. God grants them their desire. For such people, Heaven would be Hell. We find that hard to imagine since we desire to see God, but if you live your life in hatred of God and animosity towards him, you have no desire to constantly be in his presence.

However, I also am open to an idea that Heaven and Hell more describe relations than anything else, much akin to Lewis’s view in The Great Divorce. In that case, there is one place people end up, in the manifest presence of God. To those who love God, this is Heaven. To those who do not, it is Hell. However, I see no reason to think that all will be saved and enjoy the presence of God forever regardless.

As for annihiliation, the problem with this is that too many Scriptures do speak of a reality of suffering after this life and placed alongside of the eternal life of the blessed. It is my view philosophically that God does not destroy that which is in his image for that which is in his image is good. I do not even believe he destroys the devil for the devil has some goodness in that he exists, and existence is good, and he has intelligence, and intelligence is good, and he has will, and will is good. Make no mistake about it however. He is depraved morally entirely and cannot will to do any good.

We conclude sadly that God does reprobate man. No one delights in this, or rather no one should. Let it be our charge to advance the Kingdom as much as possible to prevent this from happening.

We shall continue tomorrow.

Hello everyone and welcome back to Deeper Waters. We’re going through our look at the doctrine of God in Christian thought. Right now, we’re talking about the topic of predestination. Our guide for this has been the Summa Theologica of Saint Thomas Aquinas. This can be read for free at newadvent.org. For now, let us get to the question.

One point I’ve stated already in looking at this yesterday is that we need to look to see what we can learn more about God than other aspects of predestination. Right now, Aquinas is not interested in seeing how free-will fits in with this or with points related to a Calvinism and Arminianism debate. Instead, he’s interested in learning about the doctrine of God. Hence, in discussing that doctrine, he includes it in the doctrine of God section while most of us today would include it in salvation. Of course, it relates to salvation, but for Aquinas, it principally relates to God.

Aquinas states upfront that predestination should be seen more along the lines of foreknowledge. It is the foreknowledge of the benefits of God. Foreknowledge exists in the mind of the knower and thus it is the case that predestination is in the one who predestines and not in the predestined.

One objection is that actions cause passion. Predestination is an action of God. However, passion does not dwell in God as he is immutable. Therefore, passion must dwell in something else and that would be in the ones who are predestined. Therefore, predestination places something in the predestined.

However, Aquinas points out that actions that go out to external matter do produce passions. These would be things like cutting and warming. On the other hand, actions like understanding and willing are in the intellect and these do not produce passions as these remain solely in the agent. Predestination is in the intellect and is an act of willing and therefore it does not produce passion.

Doesn’t predestination however refer to one who exists? Augustine is quoted as saying that predestination is the destination of one who exists. Aquinas answers however that predestination can be of something that does not actually exist at that point in time even though its destination is known. This gets us back to exemplar causes in the mind of God, which is something after which something else is made.

Predestination does have an aspect of something in the thing prepared, in the sense that the patient is prepared in respect to the passion, however, the main area of predestination again lies in the agent as the agent prepares its intellect in order to act. Of course, God does not have to prepare, but that is analogical thinking for Aquinas. What we do is like what God does, but we are temporal.

As for grace, grace bears a relation to predestination. Grace is temporal and predestination being foreknowledge in the mind of God is not temporal. Predestination is meant to imply a relation to something that will be temporal, but the predestination itself is not temporal.

We shall continue tomorrow.

Hello everyone and welcome to Deeper Waters. Normally, we don’t go into secondary issues much here, but right now in looking at the doctrine of God, we’ve come to such a situation. We’re using the Summa Theologica of Thomas Aquinas as our guide which can be read at newadvent.org. This can be read for free at newadvent.org. Tonight, we’re going to start looking at predestination which is included in the doctrine of God. While we can be tempted to view this as telling us something about salvation, we should instead look to see what it can tell us about God.

Our question tonight will be if God predestines men. In this case, Aquinas refers to directing them towards an end. He uses a favorite illustration of his that he used when he gave the fifth way of an arrow heading for a target by an archer. The arrow does not have within its own nature the power to hit the target. It needs the archer to do so. For us, we are directed towards happiness to be found in the beatific vision. We cannot reach that on our own, as Aquinas explains in the very first question in the Summa. Therefore, we need God to direct us to that end.

An objection raised is that all creatures are guided by divine providence. This was covered when we discussed providence and shows us again that Aquinas is going in a specific order. One cannot come straight to this section to understand predestination in Aquinas’s view without first understanding what has come before that.

For Aquinas, animals cannot be properly said to be predestined for they do not possess the capacity to enjoy the beatific vision. For those who are wondering what this says about animals in the after-death, I really can’t say for sure. This is a question that I move back and forth on and often it can be in relation to my own experiences with animals.

But what about angels? There was never any unhappiness in them and they are not predestined. Augustine is quoted as saying that predestination is a work that shows mercy. If angels can avoid predestination, why not men?

Aquinas disputes however the idea that predestination does not apply to angels. He says that it does even though they have never been unhappy. It matters not to what an angel is predestined insofar as he is predestined. Some could be predestined to beatitude and some to misery, but it is still predestination anyway.

The interesting final objection is that predestination is a benefit given to men and man is benefited by knowing. 2 Cor. 2:12 is cited saying that we may know the things given to us by God. If all men were predestined, they would all know what they were predestined to.

Aquinas says this is not so because it would not benefit all. If some knew they were predestined, they could be lazy in their security and grow negligent. If some knew they were meant to be reprobate, they could stay there. God does not reveal our destinies even though he knows them to bring about good in those who love him and give a chance to bring about goodness in those who do not.

My position? I don’t have one firmly on this doctrine. For now, I am merely stating Aquinas’s position.

We shall continue tomorrow.