Skip to content

Add your phone number?

Optional. Nothing is sent unless you choose it.
The Historic Faith
Sign in

Jumpstarter 10 of 10

Ideas to help restart your discussion
Historic Christianity vs Calvinism  /  Lecture 6: Grace and Predestination  /  Discussion Questions
All Questions
Question 10
Finny redefines predestination as God deciding the destinations (life for the elect, destruction for the reprobate) without deciding which individuals will choose which “plane,” then argues from Romans 8 that foreknowledge comes before predestination; how does his pen-drop illustration (“foreknowledge does not imply causation”) affect the way you read Romans 8’s “golden chain,” and what would early Christians like Origen assume about God’s love, foreknowledge, and human faith in that passage?
Another way to ask: How does the idea “knowing ahead of time doesn’t cause it” change how you read Romans 8’s chain (foreknown, predestined, called, justified, glorified)? What would early Christians like Origen likely think this passage says about God’s love, foreknowledge, and human faith?

Direct Answer Finny’s pen-drop illustration is meant to separate God’s knowing from God’s causing, so Romans 8’s “foreknew” comes first without implying determinism. Using Origen, he frames foreknowledge as God knowing who would have faith and setting their destination accordingly, with God’s love placed on those foreknown.

Support from Transcript:

  • He simplifies predestination: “the destiny has already been set,” like planes “predestined…to go to one location,” but “who’s going to be on this plane versus that plane” is not predestined.
  • He states: “God hasn’t decided who is going to accept destination A versus B…But the destination has already been set.”
  • In Romans 8 he walks the “golden chain” verbs: “foreknew…predestined…called…justified…glorified,” emphasizing “Foreknew…is first.”
  • He cites Origen: foreknown are those “upon whom he had placed his love and affection because he knew what sort of persons they were.”
  • He explains: God “looks forward for who’s going to have faith,” and “Foreknowledge does not imply causation,” illustrated by the pen falling: you knew it would drop but “Did you cause it to drop? No.”
Discussion Follow-ups How does this reading change your interpretation of “called” and “justified” in the chain—are they still God’s actions while faith remains a real condition? What dangers arise if foreknowledge is treated as causation, and what dangers arise if human faith is treated as self-generated apart from grace?

Jumpstarter 10 of 10
Back Questions Done