On what basis does God predestine people to salvation, and is anyone predestined to condemnation?
a passage states it a passage rules it out
Common ground
These are affirmed by more than one position, so a passage saying only this counts for none of them.
- God foreknows all things
- Salvation is by God's grace, not earned
- God is not the author of sin
- Romans 8:29-30 and Ephesians 1 quoted on predestination without stating its basis
- Some are saved and some are lost
Election to life only
LutheranThe predestination or eternal election of God, however, extends only over the godly, beloved children of God, being a cause of their salvationFormula of Concord, Epitome, XI.4 (1577)
What sets it apart: The passage says God's predestination is only to salvation and that those who perish are not passed over or ordained to it by God's decree.
Formally defined: Formula of Concord, Article XI (1577)
No early passage in the library states it yet.
Election and reprobation (double predestination)
ReformedBy the decree of God, for the manifestation of his glory, some men and angels are predestinated unto everlasting life; and others foreordained to everlasting death.Westminster Confession of Faith, 3.3 (1646)
What sets it apart: The passage says God chose some and passed by or rejected others by his own decree, not because of foreseen merit or faith.
Formally defined: Synod of Dort (1619); Westminster Confession (1646)
No early passage in the library states it yet.
Predestination according to foreseen free choice
OrthodoxBut since He foreknew the one would make a right use of their free-will, and the other a wrong, He predestinated the one, or condemned the other.Confession of Dositheus (Synod of Jerusalem), Decree 3 (1672)
What sets it apart: The passage says God predestines or chooses people because he foresees their faith, works or free response.
Formally defined: Synod of Jerusalem, Decree 3 (1672)
Earliest statement: Origen of Alexandria, c. 254
Every deciding passage, earliest first
Origen (catena heading), c. 254
Catena fragment, author uncertain: Filed under Didymus, but the catena heads it 'Of Origen'.
9 Originating from the interpretation into 'according to the foreknowledge of God.' For God, having foreseen the faith and the works of men having been perfected in them through the evangelical teaching, foreknowingly chose them in Christ before the foundation of the world, having then predestined them to be sons through the participation of the spirit of sonship; for foreknowledge is to be regarded as nothing other than a vision of things to come, which is no longer foreknowledge, but is knowledge toward the existence of those having been foreseen; even so, according to foreknowledge, they we…
- Rules out: Election and reprobation (double predestination)
- States: Predestination according to foreseen free choice
Origen of Alexandria, c. 254
We must not confuse the order of divine action: it is not that God first predestines and then calls, but that His foreknowledge precedes and undergirds both. The psalm’s words about sinners alienated from the womb are not to be read as a denial of human responsibility, but as a description of a condition that, from birth, inclines toward falsehood—yet even then, the capacity for choice remains, however dim. To imagine that infants could speak lies in unison at birth is to misunderstand both language and moral agency. But when we read Paul’s own words in Galatians, we see that his separation fr…
- Rules out: Election and reprobation (double predestination)
- States: Predestination according to foreseen free choice
Origen of Alexandria, c. 254
od, for those called according to purpose; whom He foreknew, He also predestined to be conformed to the image of His Son, so that He might be the firstborn among many brothers; and whom He predestined, He also called; and whom He called, He also justified; and whom He justified, He also glorified. Therefore, let us follow the sequence of what has been said: God justifies because He called beforehand; He would not justify those He did not call; and He calls because He predestined beforehand; He would not call those He did not predestine; and it is to Him that the beginning of the call and justi…
- Rules out: Election and reprobation (double predestination)
- States: Predestination according to foreseen free choice
Origen of Alexandria, c. 254
If someone insists these events could not have taken place, we respond that they might not have occurred, but it does not follow that if something is incapable of happening, it must either happen or fail to happen; events unfold not solely by necessity, but also as contingent possibilities, including the possibility of non-occurrence. The examination of what is possible engages both logical analysis and reflective insight, enabling one who turns inward to perceive the subtlety of arguments and grasp how even fortuitous occurrences do not obstruct the potential for something to be actual in mul…
- Rules out: Election and reprobation (double predestination)
- States: Predestination according to foreseen free choice
Origen of Alexandria, c. 254
you blessed of my Father, inherit the kingdom prepared for you from the foundation of the world,' because I was hungry and you gave me food, and what follows; but to those on the left, 'Depart from me, you cursed, into the eternal fire prepared for the devil and his angels,' because I was hungry and you gave me no food, nor what follows. Moreover, even if one were set apart for the gospel of God from the womb and had necessity imposed upon them, how could they consistently speak of subduing their body and leading into slavery if they had not yet been declared unapproved by others, and the woe…
- States: Predestination according to foreseen free choice
Diodorus of Tarsus, c. 390
Catena fragment, author uncertain: A catena fragment: the ascription rests on the catena heading and is not secure.
Whom then did God glorify here? Those whom he justified. And whom did he predestine? Those whom he foreknew, those being called according to purpose, that is, those being worthy to be called and to be conformed to Christ through their own purpose. He brings forward the great proof of the love of God, having shown through his deeds that all things work together for our good through the love of God toward us, namely, those whom he found to be called according to purpose, which he demonstrated in not sparing the only-begotten (Rom 8:31–32); for what, if even death did not overpower the Savior, si…
- Rules out: Election and reprobation (double predestination)
- States: Predestination according to foreseen free choice
Didymus the Blind, c. 398
He might pass from one [state] to another. If he had not become one in the truth, not standing in it would not have brought him reproach. And behold the doctrine: how 'God wants all men to be saved and to come to the knowledge of the truth' (1 Tim 2:4)? If no one opposes His will, how is it that some are lagging behind, despite His wanting all to be saved and to come to the knowledge of the truth—so that I may not say, the majority? If He wants [it], and if we also want [it], and a convergence of the two wills occurs, salvation happens; for no one is good against his will, no one who does not …
- Rules out: Election and reprobation (double predestination)
Didymus the Blind, c. 398
Again, concerning Esau and Jacob, the apostle, as if speaking in a dilemma, says: 'What then shall we say to this? Is there injustice with God? May it never be!' (Romans 9:14). Because he had refuted injustice, he forced us to seek how there is not injustice with God. If it were so, as those who speak of foreknowledge say, we would rather find injustice in Him. 'I loved Jacob,' He says, 'but I hated Esau' (Romans 9:13). But one is hated or loved according to things done and according to things thought. How then does foreknowledge have room? Is injustice found with God? But he, refuting this, s…
- Rules out: Predestination according to foreseen free choice
Didymus the Blind, c. 398
But did Paul speak according to foreknowledge? Foreknowledge is a theoretical viewing of what is coming to be. But according to kind, foreknowledge and knowledge are the same. They differ in time. For example, suppose I foreknow that tomorrow there will be thunder. When the thunder comes to be in the middle of the day, it is knowledge, no longer foreknowledge. And the knowledge of the thunder does not make it such, but what it is, that becomes the knowledge. Thus the known thing makes the knowledge, which does not receive the knowing from us. I use an image for the sake of the manner of forekn…
- Rules out: Predestination according to foreseen free choice
Asterius of Amasea, c. 405
For even if you do not believe, God is able from these stones to raise up children for Abraham, that is, to gather to Christ a remnant people from among the nations and the uncircumcised, upon which Abraham received the promise when God said to him, 'All the nations will be blessed in you' (Genesis 12:3). By secret foreknowledge, seeing the future, God completed the leader of the faith so that all those destined to believe later would be appointed as children in order.
- Rules out: Election and reprobation (double predestination)
- States: Predestination according to foreseen free choice