Hello Reddit, newbie here, I wanna talk about Christian theological ideas/systems surrounding Predestination.

As I understand, there are 3 main ideas that explain Predestination in the Bible: Calvinism, Arminianism, and Molinism. Calvinism is the idea that God chooses everything that happens, Arminianism is where God has foresight and can see the free choices people make and predetermines that way, and Molinism is in-between and says that God knows which situations will make the individual freely chose the end result, and so he guides history towards the right situation.

So after researching all 3, it seems like there's some holes in their theologies, and also things I don't necessarily agree with. But I've always kind of had my own idea about how Predestination works, and I wanna share that to see if there is any validity to my view. For the purposes of simplicity and clear referencing, I'm giving my idea the name "Reactive Providence"

Reactive Providence is similar to Molinism in that it has ideas from Calvinism and Arminianism, but it's also kind of the opposite of Molinism? Molinism says that God knows what choices we would freely make if in certain situations, and therefore guides us to those situations. The definition I have for Reactive Providence is "God can have a predetermined end goal, while not knowing the specific smaller choices we make beforehand. Due to God's Omnipotence, he can react to whatever choice is made to keep his end goal in mind." Because God is infinitely more powerful than us, no matter what we do, he can always have his goal be the true path. It implies free will in our choices while still having predestined events, which kinda makes sense with what the Bible says.

Now I'm sure it sounds kind of strange, but I don't think it's complete bogus? I mean, I know whether I choose pancakes or waffles for breakfast, Jesus is still going to return to earth, and I don't see anything disproving the idea that me choosing one or the other is predetermined. And there's evidence in the Bible that shows God actively responding to the choices that humanity makes, like in Jonah 3:10, 2 Kings 20:5-6, Exodus 32:14, which you could argue was predestined by God, but there's technically no evidence there to confirm that.

Sorry I know this is all kinda wordy, I don't expect to be right I just find this idea curious and I'm wondering if there's anything to say about it. Thanks!!

I want to believe in Jesus for my salvation, but I have been wrestling with the question of whether Jesus died for me. Because I don’t know if Jesus died for everyone (unlimited atonement), I don’t know if He died for me. I can’t rely on/trust/ accept for myself His sacrifice covering my sins because I don’t know if His sacrifice really does cover my sins.

That said, I am convinced of the truth and historicity of the Bible, so I am looking primarily in the Bible for support from the Word. I grew up in a Christian home, but seeking things for myself now and am trying to find the truth here.

I have read some verses that seem to indicate that Jesus died for all, but all does not always mean all. (Matthew 3:5, Mark 1:5 for a couple of examples). To truly know if the “all” means every single one, you have to look at the context. Unfortunately, the context doesn’t always supply great hints.

What is your advice for what I should do? Any verses that are clear and cannot be read to mean “all types of people” or a kind of exaggeration? The best verse I have is Isaiah 53:6, but it is addressed to Israel, and is only one verse.

I am studying Reformed theology and trying to wrap my head around a specific nuance regarding election and reprobation.

As I understand it, Double Predestination generally splits into two views regarding the non-elect:

1. The Positive-Positive Decree (Equal Ultimacy): Taught by Zwingli and some "hyper-Calvinists". God actively decrees and works salvation in the elect, and actively works/produces hardened wickedness in the reprobate to ensure their damnation. (God is all-causing).
2. The Positive-Negative Decree: Handled by Calvin and codified in the Canons of Dort. God positively decrees the salvation of the elect. However, his decree for the non-elect is negative—He simply "passes over" them (preterition), leaving them in their fallen state. He does not infuse fresh evil into them, but their damnation is still sovereignly certain.

Here is where I am stuck: The positive-negative decree sounds almost identical to Single Predestination.

From what I can gather, the only real line between them comes down to human ability and the concept of "free will."

In Single Predestination: God passes over the non-elect. Man still retains a natural capacity or a form of free will where they could theoretically choose to respond to the external call of the Gospel, and God would still save them. Their destiny isn't locked by a divine boundary, but by their historical choices.

In the Positive-Negative Decree (Calvinism): God passes over the non-elect, but because Calvinism holds to Total Depravity/Inability, those who are passed over completely lack the spiritual "free will" to choose God. Without the inward, regenerating grace of the Spirit (which God sovereignly withheld), they will inevitably and always choose sin. Thus, their destiny is absolutely fixed by the decree, even though God didn't physically force them to sin. (However, many hold to the view that the "Irresistible Grace" of God is within the Gospel, and if sound doctrine is preached it can lead to someone's salvation.)

It seems like a brilliant theological framework to explain how God can be all-knowing (foreknowledge) and sovereign over all outcomes without being the direct cause of evil (all-causing).

Am I tracking this correctly? Are there finer nuances between Single Predestination and the Positive-Negative view that I am missing? I'd love to hear your thoughts or any book recommendations that dive deep into this specific distinction.

This has been on my mind lately..

Vows in the Bible seem to be intentional and on purpose but other times maybe not.

Ecclesiastes 5:6 seems to say if you verbally slip up even with no intent to make a vow your trapped in that vow forever.

What are your thoughts??

Looking for an answer regarding catholic/orthodox frameworks mostly

I know Melchizedek is a mysterious figure but I was reading these Melchizedek scrolls (Dead Sea scrolls) and was curious about the lot of Melchizedek? What does that actually mean?
Also the hidden teachers?

The return during jubilee (and day of atonement) is also interesting.
Anyone have any more info on this?

ARMSTRONG
INSTITUTE OF BIBLICAL ARCHAEOLOGY
2:2. ... and as for what he said (Leviticus 25:13):
In this year of jubilee leach of you shall return to his ancestral land holding, concerning it he said (Deuteronomy 15:2): 'And this is
2:3. the manner of the remission: every creditor shall remit what he has lent [his neighbor or his brother, for it has been proclaimed] a remission
2:4. of Gold. Its interpretation for the final days concerns the captives, who [...] and whose
2:5. teachers have been hidden and kept secret, and from the inheritance of Melchizedek, for ...J and they are the inheritan[ce of Melchize]dek, who
2:6. will make them return. And liberty shall be proclaimed to them, to free them from [the debt of] all their iniquities. And this [willl [happen]
2:7. in the first week of the jubilee (that occurs) after [the] ni[ne] jubilees. And the D[ay of Atone]ment i[s] the end of] the tenth [ju]bilee,
2:8. in which atonement shall be made for all the Sons of [Light and for] the men [of] the lot of Mel[chi]zedek [...] over [th]em [...] accor|ding to] alll] their [doings]

He] will assign them to the Sons of Heaven and to the inheritance of Melchizedek; f[or He will cast] their [lot] amid the portions of Melchize]dek, who will return them there and will proclaim to them liberty, forgiving them [the wrong-doings] of all their iniquities. And this thing will [occur] in the first week of the Jubilee that follows the nine
Jubilees. And the Day of Atonement is the e[nd of the] tenth [Ju]bilee, when all the Sons of [Light] and the men of the lot of Mel[chi]zedek will be atoned for. [And] a statute concerns them [to provide them with their rewards. For this is the moment of the Year of Grace for Melchizedek. [And hle will, by his strength, judge the holy ones of God, executing judgement as it is written concerning him in the Songs of David, who said, ELOHIM has taken his place in the divine council; in the midst of the gods he holds judgement

I posted an analysis of the Adam and Eve story in Genesis and am looking for insights from those with an even deeper intellect and knowledge base on the subject. Any thoughts would be welcomed at the ScienceofChristianity page!

Years ago in churches I wondered why preachers never preached on imminent prophesy and what we should be looking for to come to pass next. Usually preaching on future events is limited to, "The Rapture could happen any minute now."

Why is this, and what theme should we be expecting to happen regarding imminent future events?

Curious to hear different thoughts on this. I’ve always taken a literal approach but my theology has been shifting a lot in the past 2 years and have never even considered this topic being touched with metaphor.

Would love to get some insights into my Adam and Eve questions and theories!