Archive | 2012/04/08

Judas was not predestined to betray Jesus, Acts 4:28

Apr8

Judas acted against God’s will when he betrayed Jesus

The kings of the earth stood up, and the rulers were gathered together against the Lord, and against his Christ. For of a truth against thy holy child Jesus, whom thou hast anointed, both Herod, and Pontius Pilate, with the Gentiles, and the people of Israel, were gathered together, For to do whatsoever thy hand and thy counsel DETERMINED BEFORE to be done. (Acts 4:26-28)

The above are words from a prayer by Peter and John, and these verses are sometimes used as an attempt to support the idea that God predestines all things, including predestination of individuals to do “evil” (and that this in effect doesn’t make it “evil” since God is always good). The sacrifice of Christ is a holy and acceptable offering to God and he didn’t force anyone to kill Jesus. This unique event cannot be used as a blanket statement throughout the entire scriptures to show that God causes people to do whatever they are busy doing including SINNING.

What was “determined before” to be done? It was the death of Jesus (the Lamb slain from the foundation of the world)! However, it does not say that God predestined anyone to make this goal come true. Peter and John expressed in their prayer that people came to do what was determined, but  it doesn’t say that God predestined/caused/forced anyone to betray and kill Jesus, because then God would be the only reason for their sin.  (You’re not guilty of something if God is the one who made you do it.) Jesus is said to have laid down his own life and we can trust his words. There was certainly no shortage of people who wanted to kill Jesus, so God did not have to bother about predestining anyone to harm him. They went after Jesus on their own accord, and this was known from the foundation of the world. It wouldn’t be hard for the Father to remove his protective hands over Jesus and let someone with the desire to kill him be successful in his attempt, and Judas was  apparently first in line to betray him which eventually lead to his death. If Judas was predestined to betray Jesus, he would end up in heaven and not hell.

 John 10:17 Therefore doth my Father love me, because I lay down my life, that I might take it again. 18No man taketh it from me, but I lay it down of myself. I have power to lay it down, and I have power to take it again. This commandment have I received of my Father.

We can read that what happened was FOREKNOWN by God, but foreknowledge is not predestination. We can read that WICKED HANDS had crucified and slayed Jesus. If God predestined people to slay Jesus, then it would have been GODLY hands who slayed him. Those are wicked who do things contrary to God’s will.  By using an event for something good doesn’t mean that God caused it to happen.

 Acts 2:23 Him, being delivered by the determinate counsel and FOREKNOWLEDGE of God, YE have taken, and BY WICKED HANDS have crucified and slain? 

We can see that it was not GOD who placed the desire to harm Jesus inside Judas but SATAN.

Joh. 13:2 And supper being ended, the devil having now put into the heart of Judas Iscariot, Simon’s son, to betray him 

Jesus asked his Father to forgive those who harmed him, but if they were predestined to do so, then what is there to forgive? Why asking the Father to forgive people for doing exactly what he caused them to do?! If Judas OBEYED the Father by betraying Jesus which he was CAUSED to do, then shouldn’t Judas be rewarded instead of punished for what he did? Instead we can read that it would have been better for Judas had he never been born.

Luke 23:34 Then said Jesus, Father, forgive them; for they know not what they do. And they parted his raiment, and cast lots

Jesus was delivered into the hands of SINFUL men, so we are not talking about innocent people who only did what they were predestined to do by God. THEY chose to sin, and we know that God doesn’t even TEMPT people. Much less force people to sin.  There is no darkness in God.

Lukas 24:7Saying, The Son of man must be delivered into the hands of sinful men, and be crucified, and the third day rise again.

The Apostle Paul “determined to sail by Ephesus” (Acts 20:16). Does that mean that the sailors on the vessel that he determined to sail on were acting under Paul’s compulsion or control? No. Paul determined to sail on a certain vessel to a certain location, but that does not mean that the vessel he determined to sail on was under his causation. When Paul sailed to Ephesus, he could say that what occurred was what was “determined before to be done” instead of something which occurred by surprise or accident. But the occurrence of what was determined before to be done did not exclude the freedom of those who participated in its occurrence. In the same way, God determined the crucifixion of Christ, but that does not mean that those who participated in His crucifixion and contributed to it were not free in what they did. What they did to Christ was not a surprise to God. What they did was what God had “determined before to be done”. In order to accomplish His purpose of slaying the Lord, God delivered Christ into the hands of those who already wanted to kill him by their free choice.

There certainly was no shortage of people who wanted to kill Jesus because of the way that He preached. Jesus said that “the world” “hateth” him, “because I testify of it, that the works thereof are EVIL” (Jn. 7:7). But the enemies of Christ were unable to kill him as long as the Father was protecting him (Matt. 4:6; Lk. 4:11; Jn. 7:30; 10:31; 10:39). The Bible says “Then they sought to take him: but no man laid hands on him, because his hour was not yet come” (Jn. 7:30).

God determined to deliver Jesus unto wicked men and God foreknew what they would do to Jesus if He did. This is because the Father knew the hostility and hatred that was already freely in their hearts. God was able to incorporate their voluntary wickedness into His plans and even turn it around and use it for good. This, it seems, God also did with Joseph’s brothers (Gen. 50:20). But this does not mean that God caused their wickedness. It is one thing to say that God “worketh all things after the counsel of his own will” (Eph. 1:11), and it is quite another thing to say, “God CAUSES all things after the counsel of his own will”. God can work with the free will choices of men to accomplish His purposes without causing all the choices of men.

Pilate said, “I have power to crucify thee, and have power to release thee” (Jn. 19:10). Pilate certainly was conscious of possessing free will. He was aware of the fact that what he was doing, he was doing by his own free volition. Responsibility or accountability presupposes free will. Men will be judged according to the free choices of their wills. Since these men were responsible for taking Jesus and for killing him, though God had determined that Jesus should be delivered unto them and slain, they still took Him and killed him by their own free choice. The Bible goes on to say

“Therefore let all the house of Israel know assuredly, that God hath made that same Jesus, whom ye have crucified, both Lord and Christ. Now when they heard this, they were pricked in their hearts, and said unto Peter and to the rest of the apostles, men and brethren, what shall we do? (Acts 2:36-37)

Apparently, Peter’s audience had not taken his previous words about the determinate counsel of God to mean that they had no free will in the matter or that they were only acting under the control of God. Otherwise, they could not have been pricked in their hearts for their action or have seen any reason why they needed to be saved for acting in such a way. But they were pricked in their hearts and sought for a way of salvation because they internally knew that what they had done was caused freely by their own wills and, therefore, they were rightly responsible and accountable for it.

Augustinus och kyrkofädernas åsikter om Fri Vilja

Apr8

De första ca 300 åren efter Jesu död

Den tidigaste kristna menade att det INTE var så att människor valde att göra det onda för att deras natur var ond/syndig, medan andra människor väljer det goda för att deras natur är god, för alla människor är av samma natur. Alla har fri vilja och kan välja mellan gott och ont. Gnostikerna satte sig emot detta och skrev till och med sina egna skrifter kända som De gnostiska skrifterna, där de använde kända namn som Maria, Thomas etc för att försöka ge stöd åt sina läror. Många av gnostikernas läror lyckades inte få fotfäste men vad gäller människans natur, fri vilja och syndens natur har falska läror tyvärr blivit accepterade och fortsätter att läras ut i våra kyrkor.

Gällande “Fri vilja” erkände John Kalvin om kyrkofädernas lära “As to the Fathers, (if their authority weighs with us,) they have the term constantly in their mouths”. Han sade “The Greek fathers above others have taught the power of the human will” och “they have not been ashamed to make use of a much more arrogant expression calling man ‘free agent’ or ‘self-manager’ just as if man had a power to govern himself”. Han sade också “The Latin fathers have always retained the word ‘free will’ as if man stood yet upright”.

Om urkyrkan var så enad i flera hundra år gällande den här läran, när skedde splittringen och vem orsakade den? Svaret är ganska uppenbart när vi ser till historien. Det var inte förrän på 400-talet som gnostiska och manikeiska influenser började infiltrera kyrkan och förgiftade den med sina läror. Augustinus anslöt sig till Kyrkan och blev biskop. Han började sedan att motarbeta det som Kyrkan alltid lärt ut om fri vilja och människans natur, och lärde ut den gnostiska synen.

John Gibb och William Montgomery sade “For nearly nine years Augustine was a Manichaean Auditor. At first he was a zealous partisan who contended publicly for his new faith, and did not hesitate to ridicule the doctrines of the Church and especially the Old Testament Scriptures”.

Märkligt nog så lärde Augustinus ut Fri vilja när han först anslöt sig till Kyrkan och debatterade mot manikeerna. Han sade “We [Christians] assert the liberty of the will, whereby our actions are rendered either moral or immoral, and keep it free from every bond of necessity, on account of the righteous judgment of God”. Samt: “The religious mind confesses and maintains that we do by our free will whatsoever we know and feel to be done by us only because we will it”. Och han sade “we sin voluntarily and not by necessity”. Men när han sedan började debattera med pelagianer så gick Augustinus tyvärr tillbaka till läran om totalt fördärv som manikéerna lärde. Beausobre märkte också denna förändring och att Augustinus försvarade Fri vilja “so long as he had to do with the Manichaeans. But when he came to dispute with the Pelagians, he changed his system. Then he denied that kind of freedom which before he had defended; and, so far as I am able to judge, his sentiments no longer differed from theirs [the Manichaeans] concerning the servitude of the will. He ascribed the servitude to the corruption which original sin brought into our nature; whereas the Manichaeans ascribed it to an evil quality, eternally inherit in matter.”

Synd var nu inte längre ett etiskt problem där människan själv hanterar sina val, utan ett metafysiskt problem där människan syndar av ren nödvändighet. De som kritiserade Augustinus för att lära ut Manekeism i stället för den sunda läran blev snart förföljda och fördömda som irrlärare när Augustinianism ernått Kyrklig auktoritet. De biskopar inom kyrkan som fortsatte att lära ut vad urkyrkan alltid lärt ut om Fri vilja och synd av val i stället för nödvändighet blev då bortdragna från sina talarstolar, fick sina ägodelar konfiskerade, och blev exkommunicerade av både kyrka och stat. Liksom Kalvinismen som kom efteråt, så använde Augustinianism politiska och statliga makter för att tysta alla former av opposition så att de nya lärorna kunde spridas som en farsot utan motstånd.

Det finns stora likheter men också några skillnader mellan Augustinianism och Gnostisism. Medan gnostikerna menade att människan natur var syndfull och fördärvad och att hon inte hade fri vilja eftersom hon var skapad av en underlägsen gud, så höll Augustinus med om att människans natur var syndfull och fördärvad och att hon inte hade fri vilja men han menade att det var Gud som gjorde det så pga Adams synd. Medan gnostikerna menade att köttet var syndfullt och att Jesus därför inte var kommen i köttet så trodde Augustinus att köttets lust var syndigt och att denna synd var ärftlig eller överförd från förälder till barn genom fysisk intimitet, och att Jesus undvek denna ärftliga åkomma genom att bli född av en jungfru. Därför höll Augustinus med gnostikerna i princip. Så Augustinianism är modifierad Manikeism eller semi-gnostisim.

De stora grundarna till den moderna kristna teologin har varit Augustinus, Luther och Kalvin. Augustinus var influerad av Manikeism och Luther och Kalvin var influerade av Augustinianskt tankesätt. Därför är det inget konstigt att Augustinus nekade till Fri vilja som Manikéerna gjorde, och Luther och Kalvin nekade till Fri vilja som Augustinus gjorde. Luther var t o m en Augustiniansk munk, och systemet med munkar och nunnor är influerat av idén att fysisk intimitet är syndigt. Luther refererade till Augustinus tretton gånger i sin bok “The Bondage of the Will” och 24 gånger i “Works of Martin Luther”. John Kalvin refererade till Augustinus tvåhundrasextiofem gånger i “Institutes on Christian Religion”. Luther försvarade sin position mot Fri vilja genom att säga “Augustinus är helt och hållet på min sida”. Kalvin sade “Let us now hear Augustine in his own words, lest Calvin be charged with being opposed to all antiquity”. Men Kalvin var förstås avvikande mot alla de äldre kyrkofäderna före Augustinus.

John Kalvin sade “all ancient theologians, with the exception of Augustine, are so confused, vacillating, and contradictory on this subject, that no certainty can be obtained from their writings”. Kalvin trodde att män som Klement av Rom, Ignatius, som personligen kände apostlarna inte förstod apostlarnas epistlar medan Augustinus, som inte kände apostlarna, uppenbarligen gjorde det. Kalvin erkände: “It may, perhaps, seem that I have greatly prejudiced my own view by confessing that all of the ecclesiastical writers, with the exception of Augustine, have spoken too ambiguously or inconsistently on this subject, that no certainty is attainable from their writings”.

Reformatorerna ämnade styra tillbaka Kyrkan till den tidiga kristendomen, men kom inte längre tillbaka än till Augustinus som ju lärde irrläror. De borde ha gått tillbaka mycket längre i tiden. Encyclopedia of Religion and Ethics säger “it is Augustine who gave us the Reformation. For the Reformation, inwardly considered, was just the ultimate triumph of Augustine’s doctrine the Reformation came, seeing that it was, on its theological side, a revival of Augustinianism”.

Gnostisism, Augustinianism, Lutheranism och Kalvinism har mycket gemensamt som vi kunnat läsa här. Det är på sätt och vis samma gamla gnostisism i nytt format. Andra läror bygger på dessa gnostiska tänkesätt, såsom “easy believism”, predestinationsläran, nödvändighet av andligt uppväckande, ovillkorlig försäkran om evigt liv, etc. Men ingen gnostisk idé har fått en sådan spridning och acceptans bland kyrkor världen över såsom idén att människan är född med en syndfull natur.

Augustinus: “As nothing else is done for children in baptism but their being incorporated into the church, that is, connected with the body and members of Christ, it follows, that when this is not done for them, they belong to perdition.” 

Det finns en uppsjö av citat från de gamla kyrkofäderna vad gäller stöd till att människan har en fri vilja

De exempel som finns här borde räcka för att visa att Fri vilja – och inte att människan syndar av nödvändighet pga sin natur – var den universella synen i den tidigaste kristenheten.

KLEMENT

Vi kan läsa i Fil 4:3 att Paulus refererar till “mina medarbetare” i att sprida evangelium, och han namnger Klement vars namn “är skriven i Livets Bok”. Historieböckerna namnger denna man såsom Klement av Rom.

“It is therefore in the power of every one, since man has been made possessed of free-will, whether he shall hear us to life, or the demons to destruction.”

 Klement sade att Fri vilja gavs för att “he who is good by his own choice is really good; but he who is made good by another under necessity is not really good, because he is not what he is by his own choice“. Klement menade också att skälet till att syndare är orsaken till Guds straff för deras olydnad är att en syndare har en möjlighet att lyda Gud. Han sade “For no other reason does God punish the sinner either in the present or in the future world, except because He knows that the sinner was able to conquer but neglected to gain the victory”.

Skälet för att en syndare är straffbar för sin synd är alltså för att en syndare har en möjlighet att INTE synda. Han säger att en syndare är straffad, inte pga brist på kapacitet utan för oaktsamhet.

IGNATIUS 

Ignatius var en lärljunge till aposteln Johannes och dog martyrdöden i Colosseum i Rom genom att bli uppäten av lejon. Han lärde att människan är syndare av val och inte av naturen.

“If anyone is truly religious, he is a man of God; but if he is irreligious, he is a man of the devil, made such, not by nature, but by his own choice.”  (The Epistle of Ignatius to the Magnesians chap 5 (Long Version)

“There is set before us life upon our observance [of God’s precepts], but death as the result of disobedience, and every one, according to the choice he makes, shall go to his own place, let us flee from death, and make choice of life.” (The Epistle of Ignatius to the Magnesians chap 5, Long Version)

IRENAEUS 

Aposteln Johannes hade även en apostel som heter Polycarpos. Polycarpos var biskop i Smyrna när Uppenbarelseboken skrevs. Kyrkan i Smyrna var en av de kyrkor i Uppenbarelseboken som Jesus inte hade någon kritik till (Upp. 2:8-11). Polycarpos var en personlig vän med Ignatius och även han dog martyrdöden i Colosseum liksom Ignatius. Polycarpos hade en trogen lärljunge som heter Irenaeus. Han vederlade gnostikerna genom att säga:

“Men are possessed with free will, and endowed with the faculty of making a choice. It is not true, therefore, that some are by nature good, and others bad.” (Against Heresies, Book IV, Chapter XXXVII)

“Man is endowed with the faculty of distinguishing good and evil; so that, without compulsion, he has the power, by his own will and choice, to perform God’s commandments.” (Against Heresies, Book IV, Chapter XXXIX)

“Man is possessed of free will from the beginning, and God is possessed of free will (in whom likeness man was created)”. Irenaeus (A Dictionary of Early Christian Beliefs by David Bercot, p. 287, Published by Hendrickson Publishers)

“This expression, ‘How often would I have gathered thy children together, and thou wouldst not,’ set forth the ancient law of human liberty, because God made man a free agent from the beginning, possessing his own soul to obey the behests of God voluntarily, and not by compulsion of God.” (The Ante-Nicene Fathers, Volume One, Published by BRCCD, p. 1117)

“Forasmuch as all men are of the same nature, having power to hold and to do that which is good, and having power again to lose it, and not to do what is right; before men of sense, (and how much more before God!) some are justly accused, and receive condign punishment, because they refuse what is just and right”. Och “Those who do not do it [good] will receive the just judgment of God, because they had not worked good when they had it in their power to do so. But if some had been made by nature bad, and others good, these latter would not be deserving of praise for being good, for they were created that way, nor would the former be reprehensible, for that is how they were made. However, all men are of the same nature. They are all able to hold fast and to go what is good. On the other hand, they have the power to cast good from them and not to do it”.

 JUSTIN MARTYREN

Justin Martyren var en evangelist och arbetade intensivt för Herren tills han också dog martyrdöden i Rom.

“We have learned from the prophets, and we hold it to be true, that punishment, chastisement, and rewards are rendered according to the merit of each man’s actions. Otherwise, if all things happen by fate, then nothing is our own power. For if it is predestined that one man be good and another man evil, then the first is not deserving of praise and the other to be blamed. Unless humans have the power of avoiding evil and choosing good by free choice, they are not accountable for their actions ‘whatever they may be’ for neither would a man be worthy of praise if he did not himself choose the good, but was merely created for that end. Likewise, if a man were created evil, he would not deserve punishment, since he was not evil of himself, being unable to do anything else than what he was made for.” Justin Martyr (First Apology Chap. 43)

 TERTULLIANUS

Tertullianus var en annan kyrkoledare och apologist och är känd för sin textskrivarproduktivitet.

“No reward can be justly bestowed, no punishment can be justly inflicted, upon him who is good or bad by necessity, and not by his own choice.”  Tertullian (Doctrine of the Will by Asa Mahan, p. 61, Published by Truth in Heart)

METODIUS

Metodius var en kristen martyr som levde nära slutet av trehundratalet.

 “Those [pagans] who decide that man does not have free will, but say that he is governed by the unavoidable necessities of fate, are guilty of impiety toward God Himself, making Him out to be the cause and author of human evils.” Methodius (The Banquet of the Ten Virgins discourse 8, chap. 16)

“The Divine Being is not by nature implicated in evils. Therefore our birth is not the cause of these things”. Methodius (The Ante-Nicene Fathers, Volume Six, Published by BRCCD, p. 696)

“possessing free will, and not by nature evil” Methodius (The Ante-Nicene Fathers, Volume Six, Published by BRCCD, p 698)

“There is nothing evil by nature, but it is by use that evil things become such. So I say, says he, that man was made with free-will, not as if there were already evil in existence, which he had the power of choosing if he wished, but on account of his capacity of obeying or disobeying God. For this was the meaning of the gift of free will? and this alone is evil, namely, disobedience”. Methodius (The Ante-Nicene Fathers, Volume Six, Published by BRCCD, p. 746)

“God did not make evil, nor is He at all in any way the author of evil; but whatever failed to keep the law, which He in all justice ordained, after being made by Him with the faculty of free-will, for the purpose of guarding and keeping it, is called evil. Now it is the gravest fault to disobey God, by overstepping the bounds of that righteousness which is consistent with free-will”. Methodius (The Ante-Nicene Fathers, Volume Six, Published by BRCCD, p. 750)

EUSEBIUSIUS

Eusebiusius var en biskop och anses vara “Kyrkohistoriens Fader” pga sina många texter om densamma. Han skrev: “On the Life of Pamphilus”, “Chronicle of Universal History”, och “On the Martyrs”.

“The Creator of all things has impressed a natural law upon the soul of every man, as an assistant and ally in his conduct, pointing out to him the right way by this law; but, by the free liberty with which he is endowed, making the choice of what is best worthy of praise and acceptance, because he has acted rightly, not by force, but from his own free-will, when he had it in his power to act otherwise, As, again, making him who chooses what is worst, deserving of blame and punishment, as having by his own motion neglected the natural law, and becoming the origin and fountain of wickedness, and misusing himself, not from any extraneous necessity, but from free will and judgment. The fault is in him who chooses, not in God. For God is has not made nature or the substance of the soul bad; for he who is good can make nothing but what is good. Everything is good which is according to nature. Every rational soul has naturally a good free-will, formed for the choice of what is good. But when a man acts wrongly, nature is not to be blamed; for what is wrong, takes place not according to nature, but contrary to nature, it being the work of choice, and not of nature!” Eusebius (The Christian Examiner, Volume One, Published by James Miller, 1824 Edition, p. 66)

“The devil in his oracles hangs all things upon fate, and taking away that which is in our power, and arises from self-motion of free will? brings this also into bondage to necessity” Eusebius (The Cause of God and Truth by John Gill, 1838 Edition, p. 502)

Episcopius

“What is plainer than that the ancient divines, for three hundred years after Christ, those at least who flourished before St. Augustine, maintained the liberty of our will, or an indifference to two contrary things, free from all internal and external necessity!” Episcopius (An Equal Check to Pharisaism and Antinomianism by John Fletcher, Volume Two, p. 209, Published by Carlton & Porter)

Pelagius, som är historiskt känd för att ha lärt ut fri vilja under samma tid som Augustinus levde, var i harmoni med urkyrkan med sin åsikt.

“In all there is free-will equally by nature”. 

Origen

“The Scriptures emphasize the freedom of the will. They condemn those who sin, and approve those who do right. We are responsible for being bad and worthy of being cast outside. For it is not the nature in us that is the cause of the evil; rather, it is the voluntary choice that works evil”. Han sade också “the heretics introduce the doctrine of different natures”. Origen (A Dictionary of Early Christian Beliefs by David Bercot, p. 289, Published by Hendrickson Publishers)

“the heretics introduce the doctrine of different natures.” Origen (A Dictionary of Early Christian Beliefs by David Bercot, p. 291, Published by Hendrickson Publishers)

Augustinus bön till Maria:

“Blessed Virgin Mary, who can worthily repay you with praise and thanksgiving for having rescued a fallen world by your generous consent? What songs of praise can our weak human nature offer in your honor, since it was through you that it has found the way to salvation? Accept then such poor thanks as we have to offer, unequal though they be to your merits. Receive our gratitude and obtain by your prayers the pardon of our sins. Take our prayers into the sanctuary of heaven and enable them to bring about our peace with God. May the sins we penitently bring before Almighty God through you be pardoned. May what we beg with confidence be granted through you. Take our offerings and grant our request; obtain pardon for what we fear, for you are the only hope of sinners. We hope to obtain the forgiveness of our sins through you. Blessed Lady, in you is our hope of reward. Holy Mary, help the miserable, strengthen the discouraged, comfort the sorrowful, pray for your people, plead for the clergy, intercede for all women consecrated to God. May all who venerate you, feel now your help and protection. Be ready to help us when we pray, and bring back to us the answers to our prayers. Make it your continual care to pray for the People of God, for you were blessed by God and were made worthy to bear the Redeemer of the world, Who lives and reigns forever.” (Saint Augustine year 430 Dictionary of Mary Catholic Book Publishing Co.: New Jersey, 1997, 1985, p. 531.)

(Denna artikel är till vissa delar översatt från en artikel av Jesse Morell, från boken “The Natural Ability of Man: A Study On Free Will & Human Nature”. Där kan man läsa fotnoter till citaten jag nämnde ovan, och du kan även läsa artikeln och fotnoter i länken: http://openairoutreach.wordpress.com/2011/04/04/did-augustine-corrupt-the-church-with-gnostic-doctrine/)