72 ms·

Double predestination, or the double decree, is the doctrine that God actively reprobates, or decrees damnation of some, as well as salvation for those whom he

by sysbin 7y ago

Double predestination, or the double decree, is the doctrine that God actively reprobates, or decrees damnation of some, as well as salvation for those whom he has elected. To answer your question, yes and I think society needs to change for the better from awareness to what you wrote. Similar how we used to think the world was flat, acknowledgement brings progress and advancement for humanity.

jlokier 7y ago
If there's double predestination of that kind, then it's meaningless to say that society needs to change, as it's all predestined anyway. I take the view that it isn't double predestined, and society, and ourselves, need to better ourselves. But to better ourselves, means giving criminals second chances, while protecting other people. After all, what you said about birth conditions and so on has some (i.e. nuanced) truth to it.
- sysbin 7y ago
  > If there's double predestination of that kind, then it's meaningless to say that society needs to change, as it's all predestined anyway. You're making an assumption regarding "meaningless" and that's arguable but off-topic. People can think everything is predestined and even use it as an awful excuse. Although, a difference exists from being educated about determinism and continuing to think everything is okay with unjust punishment compared to the current today of what's happening now with the incorrect assumption of choice exists. So I theorize there is the possibility for change because people live with the assumption of fault existing from making choice. Lastly, whether everything is predestined doesn't take away from right or wrong in the sense of people wanting to do the right thing compared to doing the wrong thing when knowing the truth. I don't believe in double predestination either, in the religious sense. Some people just get a bad deal from the shuffle. You thinking what I say has "some" nuanced truth to it makes me think you're naive and deluded.
  - jlokier 7y ago
    Thanks for "naive and deluded". That's a strong thing to say, especially in response to a comment whose subtleties you don't appear to be trying to understand. By "some", I mean that I do not think you are correct to assert predetermination or double predestination, and those are both parts of your assertion, so whatever truth ought to be taken from it by your reader, it's partial and nuanced. Since you say you don't believe in double predestination either, it appears you agree with me on that. If you believe in "simply put everything is predetermined", while not believing in double predestination and wanting people to choose a different future, I would say that is an extremely subtle and nuanced view you have there, that many would call contradictory. Boiled down, I think you are saying it's wrong to believe anyone had a choice, and you want people to make a choice. Which really sounds contradictory on the face of it. I'm not judging your ideas, and my intuition says I agree with your underlying thinking, and with your moral/ethical compass on this point, although the communication is pretty screwy.
    - sysbin 7y ago
      I don't believe in the aspect of God from the term.

by sysbin 7y ago

jlokier 7y ago

If there's double predestination of that kind, then it's meaningless to say that society needs to change, as it's all predestined anyway. I take the view that it isn't double predestined, and society, and ourselves, need to better ourselves. But to better ourselves, means giving criminals second chances, while protecting other people. After all, what you said about birth conditions and so on has some (i.e. nuanced) truth to it.

sysbin 7y ago
> If there's double predestination of that kind, then it's meaningless to say that society needs to change, as it's all predestined anyway. You're making an assumption regarding "meaningless" and that's arguable but off-topic. People can think everything is predestined and even use it as an awful excuse. Although, a difference exists from being educated about determinism and continuing to think everything is okay with unjust punishment compared to the current today of what's happening now with the incorrect assumption of choice exists. So I theorize there is the possibility for change because people live with the assumption of fault existing from making choice. Lastly, whether everything is predestined doesn't take away from right or wrong in the sense of people wanting to do the right thing compared to doing the wrong thing when knowing the truth. I don't believe in double predestination either, in the religious sense. Some people just get a bad deal from the shuffle. You thinking what I say has "some" nuanced truth to it makes me think you're naive and deluded.
- jlokier 7y ago
  Thanks for "naive and deluded". That's a strong thing to say, especially in response to a comment whose subtleties you don't appear to be trying to understand. By "some", I mean that I do not think you are correct to assert predetermination or double predestination, and those are both parts of your assertion, so whatever truth ought to be taken from it by your reader, it's partial and nuanced. Since you say you don't believe in double predestination either, it appears you agree with me on that. If you believe in "simply put everything is predetermined", while not believing in double predestination and wanting people to choose a different future, I would say that is an extremely subtle and nuanced view you have there, that many would call contradictory. Boiled down, I think you are saying it's wrong to believe anyone had a choice, and you want people to make a choice. Which really sounds contradictory on the face of it. I'm not judging your ideas, and my intuition says I agree with your underlying thinking, and with your moral/ethical compass on this point, although the communication is pretty screwy.
  - sysbin 7y ago
    I don't believe in the aspect of God from the term.