Definition of Terms:
|
Predestination in the Early Church
The New Testament provides several passages that form the basis for the doctrine of predestination, emphasizing God’s sovereign choice in salvation.
Romans 8:29-30: “For those God foreknew he also predestined to be conformed to the image of his Son… And those he predestined, he also called; those he called, he also justified; those he justified, he also glorified.”[^1] This “golden chain” of salvation underscores God’s foreknowledge and predestination as foundational to salvation.
Ephesians 1:4-5: “For he chose us in him before the creation of the world to be holy and blameless in his sight. In love he predestined us for adoption to sonship through Jesus Christ.”[^2] This text highlights God’s pre-temporal election of believers.
John 15:16: “You did not choose me, but I chose you and appointed you so that you might go and bear fruit.”[^3] Jesus’ words affirm divine initiative in selecting individuals for a purpose.
Acts 13:48: “When the Gentiles heard this, they were glad and honored the word of the Lord; and all who were appointed for eternal life believed.”[^4] This suggests belief is tied to divine appointment.
These passages establish predestination as God’s gracious initiative, though they leave room for interpretation regarding human free will, which the early church fathers carefully navigated.
Early Church Fathers on Predestination
The church fathers, writing from the 1st to 5th centuries, developed their views on predestination in response to biblical texts and challenges like Gnostic determinism and pagan fatalism. Their teachings generally balanced divine sovereignty with human responsibility, avoiding rigid determinism.
Ignatius of Antioch (c. 35–107): In his Letter to the Ephesians, Ignatius describes believers as “predestined before the ages” for salvation, aligning with Ephesians 1:4-5.[^5] His focus was on God’s eternal plan, not on excluding others from salvation, emphasizing unity with God’s will through faith.
Justin Martyr (c. 100–165): Justin rejected deterministic philosophies in his First Apology, arguing that humans have free will to accept or reject God’s grace.[^6] He acknowledged divine foreknowledge but stressed human responsibility, citing the universal call to repentance to counter Stoic fatalism.
Irenaeus of Lyons (c. 130–202): In Against Heresies, Irenaeus opposed Gnostic claims of predetermined salvation for an elite.[^7] He affirmed God’s foreknowledge (Romans 8:29) but insisted that salvation is offered to all who freely respond, emphasizing human agency alongside divine initiative.
Origen (c. 185–254): Origen’s On First Principles proposed that God’s foreknowledge accounts for human choices, suggesting predestination is based on foreseen merit.[^8] While speculative and later controversial, this view sought to reconcile divine sovereignty with free will, avoiding absolute determinism.
Augustine of Hippo (354–430): Augustine’s later works, such as On the Predestination of the Saints, strongly emphasized divine grace as the basis for salvation, rooted in Romans 9:15-18.[^9] He argued that God predestines some to eternal life, but his focus remained on the elect, not on active reprobation of the non-elect. Augustine’s anti-Pelagian stance highlighted human dependence on grace, yet he maintained that God’s offer of salvation is universal, unlike later interpretations.
The early church fathers consistently affirmed predestination as God’s gracious choice to save, but they avoided speculating on the damnation of the non-elect. Their teachings emphasized God’s universal salvific will and human responsibility, shaped by pastoral concerns and opposition to deterministic heresies.
Double Predestination
Double predestination posits that God actively predestines some to salvation (the elect) and others to damnation (the reprobate), making both outcomes equally part of God’s eternal decree. This contrasts with single predestination, which focuses solely on the election of the saved.
The doctrine emerged prominently during the Reformation, particularly in the 16th century, though it drew on Augustine’s emphasis on divine sovereignty. Key developments include:
John Calvin (1509–1564): In his Institutes of the Christian Religion (Book III, Chapter 21), Calvin argued that God’s sovereign decree includes both election and reprobation, citing Romans 9:21-23.[^10] He viewed reprobation as a logical consequence of God’s sovereignty, though he urged humility in approaching the topic.
Theodore Beza (1519–1605): Calvin’s successor systematized double predestination, emphasizing God’s absolute decree over both salvation and damnation.[^11] This influenced Reformed theology, particularly in confessions like the Westminster Confession (1646).
Synod of Dort (1618–1619): Responding to Arminianism, the Synod affirmed that God elects some to salvation and passes over others, implying reprobation.[^12] While avoiding explicit symmetry between election and reprobation, it solidified double predestination in Reformed thought.
Double predestination represents an innovation, as it extends Augustine’s theology into a more systematic and symmetrical framework, explicitly articulating God’s active role in reprobation, which the early church fathers largely avoided.
Double Predestination: Innovation and Patristic Disagreement
Double predestination diverges significantly from the early church fathers’ teachings, which the fathers likely would have rejected for several reasons:
Lack of Explicit Reprobation in Patristic Thought: The church fathers, including Augustine, focused on God’s election of the saved, not active reprobation. Ignatius, Justin, Irenaeus, and Origen emphasized God’s universal salvific will, citing texts like 1 Timothy 2:4 (“God desires all people to be saved”).[^13] Augustine, even in his strongest assertions of divine grace, stopped short of claiming God predestines the reprobate with the same intent as the elect, focusing instead on human sin as the cause of damnation.[^14] Double predestination’s symmetrical decree would likely have been seen as overly speculative and contrary to their emphasis on God’s universal offer.
Emphasis on Human Responsibility: The fathers, particularly Justin and Irenaeus, stressed free will to counter deterministic heresies.[^15] Double predestination’s implication that God decrees damnation independently of human choice would have conflicted with their view that humans freely reject God’s grace, as seen in their interpretations of John 3:18 (“Whoever does not believe stands condemned already because they have not believed”).[^16]
Pastoral Sensitivity: The early church prioritized encouraging repentance and faith, avoiding doctrines that could lead to despair or complacency. Double predestination’s focus on inevitable reprobation could undermine this, as it risks portraying God as arbitrary, a concern foreign to the fathers’ pastoral theology.[^17]
Theological Innovation: While Augustine’s later works provided a foundation, double predestination’s systematization by Calvin and Beza introduced a rigidity absent in early Christianity. The fathers’ reluctance to speculate on the mechanics of reprobation reflects their focus on mystery and humility, as seen in Origen’s caution against over-defining divine decrees.[^18] The Synod of Dort’s formalization further distanced the doctrine from patristic thought, which avoided such definitive pronouncements.
The early church fathers would likely have viewed double predestination as an overreach, conflicting with their balanced approach to divine sovereignty and human agency, as well as their commitment to God’s universal love and justice.
Theological Downfalls of Double Predestination
Double predestination faces significant theological and pastoral challenges, many of which underscore its divergence from early Christian thought:
Conflict with God’s Universal Love: The doctrine risks portraying God as arbitrary, contradicting biblical affirmations of God’s desire for all to be saved (1 Timothy 2:4; 2 Peter 3:9).[^19] The fathers, such as Irenaeus, emphasized God’s impartial love, which double predestination undermines by suggesting God actively wills damnation.[^20]
Diminishing Human Responsibility: By asserting God’s active reprobation, the doctrine weakens human accountability, clashing with the patristic insistence on free will, as seen in Justin’s and Origen’s writings.[^21] This could lead to fatalism, a concern the fathers addressed in opposing Gnosticism.
Pastoral Harm: Double predestination can foster despair among believers questioning their election or complacency among those presuming it, contrary to the fathers’ encouragement of active faith and repentance.[^22] Ignatius and others focused on uniting believers in hope, not dividing them by predetermined fates.
Speculative Overreach: The symmetrical decree of election and reprobation lacks clear biblical mandate, as Romans 9 emphasizes election without necessitating active reprobation.[^23] The fathers, particularly Origen, avoided such speculation, prioritizing scriptural humility over systematic precision.
Departure from Patristic Consensus: The early church’s focus on God’s universal call and human response, as articulated by Irenaeus and Justin, contrasts sharply with double predestination’s deterministic framework, marking it as a Reformation-era innovation rather than a continuation of patristic theology.[^24]
Conclusion
The early church fathers, grounded in biblical texts like Romans 8 and Ephesians 1, understood predestination as God’s gracious election of believers, balanced with human responsibility and God’s universal salvific will. Figures like Ignatius, Justin, Irenaeus, Origen, and Augustine emphasized divine initiative without endorsing active reprobation. Double predestination, developed by Calvin and formalized in Reformed theology, innovates by asserting God’s equal decree of salvation and damnation, a step the fathers likely would have rejected as speculative, contrary to God’s universal love, and pastorally harmful. The theological downfalls of double predestination—its potential to distort God’s character, undermine human responsibility, and depart from patristic consensus—highlight its divergence from early Christian thought, underscoring the enduring tension between divine sovereignty and human agency in Christian theology.
Footnotes
[^1]: Romans 8:29-30 – The “golden chain” links God’s foreknowledge to glorification. [^2]: Ephesians 1:4-5 – God’s pre-temporal choice for adoption through Christ. [^3]: John 15:16 – Jesus’ selection of disciples for a purpose. [^4]: Acts 13:48 – Belief tied to divine appointment. [^5]: Ignatius, Letter to the Ephesians – Believers predestined before the ages. [^6]: Justin, First Apology – Free will counters deterministic philosophies. [^7]: Irenaeus, Against Heresies – Opposes Gnostic determinism, affirms universal salvation offer. [^8]: Origen, On First Principles – Predestination based on foreseen merit. [^9]: Augustine, On the Predestination of the Saints – Divine grace as the basis for election. [^10]: Calvin, Institutes, Book III, Chapter 21 – Election and reprobation as God’s decree. [^11]: Beza’s systematization – Further developed Calvin’s double predestination. [^12]: Synod of Dort – Affirmed election and implied reprobation. [^13]: 1 Timothy 2:4 – God desires all to be saved. [^14]: Augustine’s focus on election – Avoided active reprobation. [^15]: Justin and Irenaeus on free will – Countered determinism with human responsibility. [^16]: John 3:18 – Condemnation due to human unbelief. [^17]: Pastoral concerns – Fathers prioritized encouragement over despair. [^18]: Origen’s caution – Avoided over-defining divine decrees. [^19]: 1 Timothy 2:4; 2 Peter 3:9 – God’s universal salvific will. [^20]: Irenaeus on God’s love – Emphasized impartial divine love. [^21]: Justin and Origen on free will – Human accountability central to patristic thought. [^22]: Pastoral harm – Double predestination risks despair or complacency. [^23]: Romans 9 – Focuses on election, not active reprobation. [^24]: Patristic consensus – Universal call contrasts with double predestination.
Bible Verses:
Romans 8:29-30: “For those God foreknew he also predestined to be conformed to the image of his Son… And those he predestined, he also called; those he called, he also justified; those he justified, he also glorified.”[^1] This “golden chain” of salvation underscores God’s foreknowledge and predestination as foundational to salvation.
Ephesians 1:4-5: “For he chose us in him before the creation of the world to be holy and blameless in his sight. In love he predestined us for adoption to sonship through Jesus Christ.”[^2] This text highlights God’s pre-temporal election of believers.
John 15:16: “You did not choose me, but I chose you and appointed you so that you might go and bear fruit.”[^3] Jesus’ words affirm divine initiative in selecting individuals for a purpose.
Acts 13:48: “When the Gentiles heard this, they were glad and honored the word of the Lord; and all who were appointed for eternal life believed.”[^4] This suggests belief is tied to divine appointment.
Church Father Quotes:
Augustine of Hippo (354-430 A.D.)
“But those who do not belong to the number of the predestined . . . are judged most justly according to their deserts. For either they lie under sin which they contracted originally by their generation and go forth [from this life] with that hereditary debt which was not forgiven by regeneration [baptism], or [if it was forgiven by regeneration] they have added others besides through free choice: choice, I say, free; but not freed. . . . Or they receive God’s grace, but they are temporal and do not persevere; they abandon it and are abandoned. For by free will, since they have not received the gift of perseverance, they are sent away in God’s just and hidden judgment.” –Admonition and Grace 13 [A.D. 426]
Prosper of Aquitaine (390-455 A.D.)
“Just as good works are to be referred to Him that inspires them, God, so too evil works are to be referred to those who are sinning. For sinners have not been abandoned by God so that they might themselves abandon God; rather, they have abandoned and have been changed from good to evil by their own will; and consequently, although they may have been reborn, although they may have been justified, they are not, however, predestined by Him who foreknew what kind of persons they would be.” –Responses on Behalf of Augustine to the Articles of Objections Raised by his Calumniators in Gaul, 3 (Written in 431 A.D.)
“It is a detestable and abominable opinion that makes God the author of any kind of evil will or evil action. His predestination is never outside His goodness, never outside His justice. Plainly He predestined His judgment, in which recompense will be made to each one for what he has done, whether good or whether evil. But if it were by God’s will that men sin, there would be no future judgment at all.” –Resposes on Behalf of Augustine to the Articles of Objections Raised by the Vincentianists, chap 10 (Written 431 A.D.)
“Since there can be no doubt that perseverance to the end is a gift of God, -which, it is clear, that some from the very fact that they have not persevered, never had, – it is in no way a calumniation of God to say that these were not given what was given to others; rather, it is to be confessed both that He gave mercifully what He did give, and He withheld justly what He did not give, so that, although the cause of a man’s falling away originates in free choice, the cause of his standing firm is a gift from God. If falling away is done by human effort, standing firm is accomplished by means of a divine gift.” –Responses on Behalf of Augustine to the Articles of Objections Raised by his Calumniators in Gaul, 7 (Written in 431 A.D.)
“Again, whoever says that God does not will all men to be saved, but only the certain number of the predestined, is saying a harsher thing than ought to be said of the inscrutable depth of the grace of God, who both wills that all should be saved and come to a knowledge of the truth, and fulfills the proposal of His will in those whom, when He foreknew them, He predestined, when He predestined them, He called, when He called them, He justified, and, when He justified them, He glorified. And thus, those who are saved are saved because God willed them to be saved, and those who perish do perish because they deserved to perish.” –Responses on Behalf of Augustine to the Articles of Objections Raised by his Calumniators in Gaul, 8 (Written in 431 A.D.)
“These, however, of whom it is said: ‘They have gone forth from us, but they were not of us. For if they had been of us, they would surely have remained with us’ went forth voluntarily and voluntarily they fell. And because it was foreknown that they would fall, they were not predestined. But they would have been
predestined if they were going to return and remain in holiness and truth. And consequently, God’s predestination is the cause of the standing firm of many, but for no one is the cause of their falling.” –Resposes on Behalf of Augustine to the Articles of Objections Raised by the Vincentianists, chap 12 (Written 431 A.D.)
Theodoret of Cyr (393-458 A.D.)
“Those whom He predestined, those also did He call; and those whom He called, those also did He justify; and those whom He justified, those also did He glorify (1). Those whose resolve He foreknew, He predestined from the beginning. Predestining them, He did also call them. Calling them, He justified them by Baptism; and justifying them, He glorified them, calling them sons and bestowing on them the grace of the Holy Spirit. But no one would say that His foreknowledge is the cause of this: for His foreknowledge does not accomplish such things as these. Rather, God, since He is God, does see from afar those things that are going to be. . .” –Interpretation of the Fourteen Epistles of Paul [On Rom. 8:30]
Fulgentius of Ruspe (467-527 A.D.)
“The grace of God unto faith and the beginning of a will to do good is given us, and help is accorded the will itself, so that what good it wills, that good may be done; for God, who created man, did Himself will, by His predestination, to give to those whom He prepared, both the gift of illumination for believing and the gift of perseverance for perfecting and remaining constant, and the gift of glorification for reigning,-God, who does not bring to perfection of deed anyone whom he has not prepared beforehand in His eternal and unchangeable will. The Apostle bears witness to the reality of this predestination.” –Letter Of Fulgence And Fourteen Other African Bishops Exiled In Sardinia, to Various Of Their Brethren 2240 [17, 67]
“The evil are not predestined to do evil, drawn away and enticed by their own concupiscence (3); rather, they are predestined to this: that, against their will, they suffer justly. For the term predestination does not express some compulsory necessity (4) of the human will, but it foretells the eternal disposition, merciful and just, of a future divine operation. The Church, however, sings to God of mercy and judgment (5), to God, whose predestination is operative in man in such a way that by a hidden though not unjust resolution of His will, He may either award a gratuitous mercy to the wretched or weigh out due justice to the unrighteous.” –To Monimus (post A. D. 512 el ante A. D. 523) [1, 7, 1]
“He foretold and promised a reward for the enjoyment of the righteous; He did not promise, however, but only foretold a torment for the punishment of the unrighteous. But neither did He predestine the wicked to the losing of righteousness as He predestined the saints to the receiving of that same righteousness, because the merciful and just Lord was able gratuitously to free whomever He wished from depravity. He was never the perpetrator of depravity, because no one ever was depraved except insofar as he withdrew from God. Nor did God predestine any to withdraw from Him, although the divine knowledge foresaw who would so withdraw.” To Monimus (post A. D. 512 el ante A. D. 523) [1, 25, 4]