About Predestination
Disclaimer: This is just my cogitations about a certain religious topic. This isn't a full consideration of the subject, and it certainly isn't something I'd want to force anyone else to subscribe to. In fact, just writing this made my head hurt. I apologize if this isn't folksy and happy, but perhaps it was predestined to be that way (or not be that way).
So here I go:
For those of you who grew up, as I did, in a religious tradition that focuses a good bit of energy upon "getting it right," and which, for the most part ignored the idea of predestination because it was one of those "theological" topics that strayed into dangerous territory anyway, and also because it was already a doctrinal hot-point for several of the "denominations" (and in my upbringing that was a code word for "den of false teachers") to which we were opposed, you may be a bit surprised to realize that to those who do believe strongly in predestination, that those of us who believe in choice -- are called "Arminians." This is not to be confused with the Armenians who live in a small nation that borders Turkey. You probably all knew this, but I did not until I was in my late 20s. Now having never studied the writings of Arminius -- although I did have a classmate named Armen who came from Armenia and whose father owned several Baskin-Robins stores -- I can't say that I like being lumped in with his disciples without having made that choice, but oh, the people who call me that don't think I have a choice.
Sorry, that was flippant, but as I told one of my friends who was (perhaps being forced to be) telling me about his new found and very heartfelt belief in predestination as the only way to acknowledge God's omnipotence, I've have (or am doomed to have) difficulties with the idea of predestination in several ways:
1) I don't buy Augustine's argument that allowing for human beings to have the choice denies God's omnipotence. (Although I grant that if he is both atemporal and omniscient, our choices are already made from his point of view.)
2) I think that Augustine's idea of the Elect (which I think was later improved upon and adapted by Calvin and others) is rooted in two oddly contradictory and yet strangely complimentary areas of priggish snobbery on his part: a) His total rejection and repugnant hatred for the life he lived before his conversion and the sinfulness he reveled in and b) A religiosity that allows for an aristocracy of spirit.
Of course, it has been a while since I've read Augustine and so I may be (or may be being forced to be) misinterpreting him.
3) The idea that God would predetermine everything seems to me to be sort of like the idea that God created the earth with a fossil record for the purpose of decoration -- it needed to be there in order to be "right" -- or for deceptive purposes -- He wanted to confound the unbelievers and make the believers have to believe in spite of the physical evidence. All of these ideas seem to limit God -- they seem to make him petty and they seem to determine him. He is all powerful and so he has to have created it all so that it is as it has always been and always will be? So he does have a limit. He can't limit himself. This line of reasoning seems like the inverse of the perverse question the reprobate are constantly asking, "If God is all powerful, can he make a rock so big that he cannot move it?" I've always answered that by saying, "If he wants to." It seems like he could also limit his omnipotence if he wanted to allow us the freedom to choose him. It really wouldn't be a limitation, it would only be a forbearance for the amount of time that humanity exists.
4) It also seems from a practical level that there would be no reason for God to create all of this -- the universe -- us, if he already had it all the way he wanted it. I guess in this I'm seeing it like an artist might see a painting. Although I do know some artists who rush through works in order to get them finished and make a few bucks, the majority of artists would tell you that the creation of the art and the participation in the art is as important as the finished piece. Now, I can't pretend to be able to understand how God thinks, but it seems a little silly to do all of this if the this doesn't have the opportunity to innovate and surprise the maker. But perhaps I think this way because I am one of the damned. Which leads me to the real reason that I oppose the idea of the elect (unless everyone is elected and fully elected when the choice to follow is made) and that is:
5) I'm convinced (I know not why) that if God chose only a few to be his elect, that I am, sadly, one of the damned who has been wasting a good bit of his life trying to fit a square peg into a round hole. I'm not certain where this idea comes from. Until I really understood the idea of predestination, I thought that it was perhaps a way that the spiritual forces of evil were trying to confound my mind and lure me away from the path of the righteous and down the road to destruction. But it is true that I am one of those people inside whom every day doubt and faith wage battle. Every day, I get up and make the existential choice to believe and to act as if I believe. And I really do believe that my ethical persona -- the way I behave to and interact with other people -- has been the better for this daily reminder.
But, perhaps the choice isn't a choice at all, perhaps it is an illusion of choice. Perhaps I am one of the elect but am predestined to doubt. Or perhaps I am one of the damned who is predestined to try to believe, but ultimately fail. It seems to me that that is pretty pitiful.
So I guess I better take my copy of the Confessions and the City of God and sell them on half.com. Anyone have a copy of the collected writings of Arminius they could loan me?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment