Free will and Omniscience

[Byblos]

Just sharing a link... I started reading through this today, this will take a while, lots and lots of info... maybe some would like to read through with me as well...
http://www.evangelicaloutreach.org/calvinismrefuted.htm

Dan Corner is not someone I would recommend reading, he is somewhat of a nut.

Maybe someone like Roger Olson gives a more fair critique of Calvinism without the rhetoric. I just don't know how much of his writing is online, but his book "Against Calvinism" is available on the Kindle.

I started reading Corner and couldn't get past the first few paragraphs.

[DannyM]

If I asked you what is the most important thing a human can do in this lifetime, what would your answer be? I would think it rather obvious, any decision you make before you die other than that outlined in John 3:16 is almost irrelevant.

Okay.

If God predestines the only thing you can do in your life that impacts your afterlife, but leaves you to choose everything else that's hardly a kind gesture.

Who’s deserving of a “kind gesture”, Echo?

I'd like you to explain a bit more as to how God determines "the elect".

God elects those whom He pleases, Echo.

Romans 8:28-30

And we know that in all things God works for the good of those who love him, who have been called according to his purpose.

29 For those God foreknew he also predestined to be conformed to the likeness of his Son, that he might be the firstborn among many brothers.

30 And those he predestined, he also called; those he called, he also justified; those he justified, he also glorified.

It begins with election and ends with glorification.

Calvin:

Let those roar at us who will. We wilt ever brighten forth, with all our power of language, the doctrine which we hold concerning the free election of God, seeing that it is only by it that the faithful can understand how great that goodness of God is which effectually called them to salvation…

Now, if we are not really ashamed of the Gospel, we must of necessity acknowledge what is therein openly declared: that God by His eternal goodwill (for which there was no other cause than His own purpose), appointed those whom He pleased unto salvation, rejecting all the rest; and that those whom He blessed with this free adoption to be His sons He illumines by His Holy Spirit, that they may receive the life which is offered to them in Christ; while others, continuing of their own will in unbelief, are left destitute of the light of faith, in total darkness.

http://www.the-highway.com/Calvin_sectionI.html

I've said it before, congratulations to those who win the life lottery and don't get to spend eternity in torment.

Augustine, from Calvin:

"Lest any one should say, My faith my righteousness (or anything of the kind) distinguishes me from others; meeting all such thoughts, the great teacher of the Gentiles asks, 'What hast thou that thou hast not received?' As if the apostle had said. From whom indeed couldst thou receive it, but from Him who separates thee from every other, to whom He has not given what He has given to thee?"

"Faith, therefore, from its beginning to its perfection is the gift of God. And that this gift is bestowed on some and not on others, who will deny but he who would fight against the most manifest testimonies of the Scripture? But why faith is not given to all ought not to concern the believer, who knows that all men by the sin of one came into most just condemnation. But why God delivers one from this condemnation and not another belongs to His inscrutable judgments, and 'His ways are past finding out.' And if it be investigated and inquired how it is that each receiver of faith is deemed of God worthy to receive such a gift, there are not wanting those who will say, It is by their human will. But we say that it is by grace, or Divine predestination."

"Now here, perhaps, some profane and insolent being may be inclined to say, 'Why was it not I that was predestinated to this excellent greatness?' If we should reply in the solemn appeal of the apostle, 'Nay, but who art thou, O man, that repliest against God?"

http://www.the-highway.com/Calvin_sectionI.html

Do you have a non-emotional argument against God’s election?

[DannyM]

Yeah... i'm not so sure about absolute free will either. Though one wonders what the essence of the sinful nature is..

It's man's inherent need to act on all his desires.

Where does this inherent need come from?

The Fall

no i didnt mean where it began but where in us did it come from. lol

Streuth, mate! Do you mean from within us?

[Echoside]

Who’s deserving of a “kind gesture”, Echo?

Who isn't? Do you blame the gun when someone gets shot or the person? If we have no choice but sin, I'd hardly say we are undeserving of grace through no fault of our own.

God elects those whom He pleases, Echo.

Well yes that's the whole point, why should I care about God at all then? He'll call if he wants, if he doesn't I'll live my life however I want.

Nay, but who art thou, O man, that repliest against God?"

Ah yes, we can't speak against God. I'm sure people said the same thing about Hitler. Might does make right then?

Do you have a non-emotional argument against God’s election?

I don't have an argument at all against God's election. Just clarifying the implications.

[zacchaeus]

sometimes it takes a nut... I assume a newbie that may by freewill/predestination come to this site and this particular thread would argue we are all nuts lol

I like Dan Corner personally but again was just sharing a link... I'm however, still confused. In fact in my efforts searching an answer, been talking to my best friend in the whole world and he blew up about it and hung up the phone... wonder if that was predestined or not...

[RickD]

Zacchaeus, did you look at the link I posted from the home site, about Predestination, and freewill? I posted it in the other thread. Here it is, in case you missed it. The article puts a lot into perspective, and shows that extreme beliefs on both sides, are too extreme. Predestination, and free will need to work together.
http://www.godandscience.org/doctrine/p ... ation.html

[zacchaeus]

Yes, and yes... thanks for that link. I'm going to reread it a couple times. All along even from my original post I guess my intent was to prove both or to figure the common ground of how they actually compliment each other.

Just one question?
Did God give freewill to adam or did God predestine and know what was going to happen... or did God give freewill and still know what was going to happen, if so would in fact Gods will or perfect plan change according to our will in which it then wasn't predestined... and was a Savior predestined from the get go or after the birth of initial sin (also would initial sin for a Savior be derived from the pride and fall of lucifer or the disobedience of adam)? I know this isn't just one question and its quite loaded at that... but...???

[RickD]

Did God give freewill to adam or did God predestine and know what was going to happen...

Both, IMO.

or did God give freewill and still know what was going to happen, if so would in fact Gods will or perfect plan change according to our will in which it then wasn't predestined

Yes, and God's perfect plan is part of His will. So, no, it wouldn't change. He allows our "free will", inside His plan.

. and was a Savior predestined from the get go or after the birth of initial sin

1Peter1:20

also would initial sin for a Savior be derived from the pride and fall of lucifer or the disobedience of adam)?

Certainly we inherited sin from Adam. But, Satan was the one who got the ball rolling, so to speak.

[1over137]

Did God give freewill to adam or did God predestine and know what was going to happen...

Both, IMO.

Thinking about this, well, I think when God was creating humans He put curiousity in us (Proverbs 25:2). And Eve was tempted. She was told by the serpent that "You surely will not die! For God knows that in the day you eat from it your eyes will be opened, and you will be like God, knowing good and evil. "(Gen 3:5) She could know everything. And when she saw that the tree was desirable to make one wise, she took from its fruit and ate (Gen 3:6).

So, when God was creating humans he knew they will be curious, very curious, and that one day they would sin (disobey his command). Nevertheless, Adam and Eve were not taken the free choice, otherwise it would mean that God does not love his creation, He would never think that his creation is good (Gen 1:31). What He would do with puppets?

Am I wrong or not?

[DannyM]

Who isn't? Do you blame the gun when someone gets shot or the person? If we have no choice but sin, I'd hardly say we are undeserving of grace through no fault of our own.

If God predestines the only thing you can do in your life that impacts your afterlife, but leaves you to choose everything else that's hardly a kind gesture.

This is your original statement. Now prove it is ‘unkind’. Show me the logical argument here that makes God unkind, Echo.

Well yes that's the whole point, why should I care about God at all then? He'll call if he wants, if he doesn't I'll live my life however I want.

Why *shouldn’t* you care about God? And more to the point, *when* did you ever care about God? Think about both questions here, Echo.

Ah yes, we can't speak against God. I'm sure people said the same thing about Hitler. Might does make right then?

What? And you say you aren’t offering pure emotion? God would be just in damning everyone because everyone is a sinner. Comparing God to Hitler is something you are going to need to justify, beyond mere assertion.

I don't have an argument at all against God's election. Just clarifying the implications.

Oh no, you’re ‘offended’ here, Echo. It is quite obvious. So please present your argument positing God’s injustice.

Here John Hendryx explains a fundamental Christian truth::

In our fallen state we are left with a humanity that outright does not want God. God need only leave us in our rotten condition (to our own autonomous free will) and we will all freely reject Him. Yes, God has given us a free will, to choose what we want most according to our nature. But is this really what the opposition wants - to have Him leave us to ourselves without acting to save us from our hell-bent desires? To reject God is what fallen man wants most, so those who so ardently fight to keep the autonomous free will of man, are arguing that God should leave us in our dreadful condition? This is tantamount to keeping man graceless. Unregenerate men freely and happily do not want God and love what He hates. God has not violated their free will one iota to bring them to this rebellious state of mind. But those God saves He comes to with grace and restores in them a spiritual nature which now turns and wants God. So when man is regenerated, his first thought is to embrace Christ in faith of his own free will. His renewed will has new desires and is no longer beholden to sin. His eyes are opened and he sees His true condition of bondage for the first time so he repents of trusting in himself and reaches out to the Savior knowing that He alone can save. Even though we owe God a debt we cannot repay, He is merciful. He forgives the debts of many of those who owe Him while the others He still requires payment. And they don't want God's forgiveness anyway. It is perfectly just of God to require payment of them for He is under no obligation to cancel the debt of anyone. That is what makes mercy, mercy. But those he passes over and does not give mercy, He has left them to their own free will [italics original]

http://www.monergism.com/thethreshold/a ... ewill.html

[zacchaeus]

How can freewill be freewill if our freewill aligns with predestination? If its predestined then freewill or whatever you want to call it will come to pass... So lets say I'm about to make a choice or so I think, yet the choice I will make is all planed (predestined) then did I really make that choice (freewill), or did I in fact have no choice in the matter?

Here are some thoughts I'm thinking (may not be biblical so don't take my ideas or conclusion for truth); I'm just stating them to see if we can prove them or not.

Are we saved according to us and our freewill or according to God and His perfect will (predestined or not)? How could one have a calling their life if that wasn't the plan? Do we not choose God because He chose us first? Are we all strategically place, geographically, our covering (church), etc. because God wants us there and He planed it or because we choose to out of freewill? Does He not influence us because we are hardheaded and have freewill, yet He gets His will done? Remember not "my" will or "our" will, but "Thy" or "His" will be done!!! How can we say things are divine and planed or how can we say its not a mistake that we all went to a particular church, if its our home church or if we are just visiting, if we have free will? Most say we are all here for a reason... I'd agree with the fact GOD is in control. This reminds me of another conversation I had a while ago about if we are to be Christ-like and we are to be conformed to His image, and we offer ourselves a living sacrifice, would not our freewill align with His perfect will; and when we align with His will going where He tells us and calls us then are we not in line with His original plan (that which is predestined). He says He knew us before we were in our mothers womb and the thoughts and plans He has toward us! But if we are predestined even in the sense that we are all appointed once to die (some say appointed means a specific time already planed, I say appointed applies to the fact we have to at least die once), then how could His promise be true that we could extent our lives by simply honoring and obeying our parents?

So would predestination be for the believer and not the other way around (mending the differences of a loving/non-loving God), because God doesn't want anyone to go to hell, He wants us to all be saved; but freewill allows non-believers to go to hell? Even this statement seems contradictory, so I don't know.

I don't doubt things like events etc. are predestined, like the fact we have to die, the rapture, the antichrist coming, the judgements, the second coming, battle of Armageddon, thousand year reign, satans release, then his bounding forever, death destroyed, etc. we live forever. These things will come to past... we are even told in advance, so those events are predestined. So the main question we are debating is freewill/predestination over an individual and/or both??? I still don't know... nothing makes sense anymore about anything.

[Echoside]

DannyM, I'm currently PCS'ing my base and I'm not sure when I'll be able to respond. I'll answer your questions in time though just not sure when yet

[neo-x]

DannyM wrote
neo-x wrote:
2. Does God's foreknowledge makes us do things that we do not have a choice in?


No I don’t, Bro, since we still exercise choice. I think, because of the fall and sin, there is no absolute free will.

Okay Brother Danny, now I see the difference. I think that free will is free enough that we can atleast say "yes" or "no" to God.

Since God knew that Paul would accept the call, at that time, then Paul would not have done otherwise. This is practically tautological, my Brother. And if God foreknows you will come to Christ, then it is either determined by God or it’s determined by you.

Did you notice Danny, that the first part of your statement "since we still exercise choice" contradicts with what you wrote here about Paul "Since God knew that Paul would accept the call, at that time, then Paul would not have done otherwise". So it means we only get to choose what God knows, that is precisely where I can't help but make an objection, bro. This makes free will look like, not a gift of God but some form of trick to give humans the false illusion. Either we have free will or we don't. If there is no absolute free will then choice is merely a formality which we will perform as God foreknew. I hope I made my point clear.

I think it only becomes tautological in the sense that one presupposes that God has predestined Paul and hence Paul cannot deviate, since that is what you are saying, bro, that Paul can not say no. From my side, it is not tautological at all. Because to me this sounds like a subtle override on Paul's choices.

I do not want us to go in circles but just to clear our points

Hope I made some semblance of sense.

Yes, you did, now I understand better what you are saying.

Brother, always a pleasure and never a chore.

Same here Bro,

[neo-x]

by zacchaeus on Wed Nov 09, 2011 8:55 pm

How can freewill be freewill if our freewill aligns with predestination? If its predestined then freewill or whatever you want to call it will come to pass...

...I don't doubt things like events etc. are predestined, like the fact we have to die, the rapture, the antichrist coming, the judgements, the second coming, battle of Armageddon, thousand year reign, satans release, then his bounding forever, death destroyed, etc. we live forever. These things will come to past... we are even told in advance, so those events are predestined. So the main question we are debating is freewill/predestination over an individual and/or both???

Nicely put, Zac.

[DannyM]

Did you notice Danny, that the first part of your statement "since we still exercise choice" contradicts with what you wrote here about Paul "Since God knew that Paul would accept the call, at that time, then Paul would not have done otherwise". So it means we only get to choose what God knows, that is precisely where I can't help but make an objection, bro. This makes free will look like, not a gift of God but some form of trick to give humans the false illusion. Either we have free will or we don't. If there is no absolute free will then choice is merely a formality which we will perform as God foreknew. I hope I made my point clear.

Neo, I think the problem here is that you are trying to work out a position where Paul could have done something different. But if Paul had done something different then God would have acted accordingly and brought things about according to His will. And so we have a new situation where you could again ask if Paul could have done something different. And so on and so on. You need to show that Paul’s choice wasn’t a choice, Bro. But how do you do that? To begin with, can you show me that your choices are not influenced in any way? The very meaning of the term choice involves causal determination. Can you demonstrate that choices being causally determined are not true choices?

I want to repeat from this link, my Brother, please read:

http://www.monergism.com/thethreshold/a ... ewill.html

In our fallen state we are left with a humanity that outright does not want God. God need only leave us in our rotten condition (to our own autonomous free will) and we will all freely reject Him. Yes, God has given us a free will, to choose what we want most according to our nature. But is this really what the opposition wants - to have Him leave us to ourselves without acting to save us from our hell-bent desires? To reject God is what fallen man wants most, so those who so ardently fight to keep the autonomous free will of man, are arguing that God should leave us in our dreadful condition? This is tantamount to keeping man graceless. Unregenerate men freely and happily do not want God and love what He hates. God has not violated their free will one iota to bring them to this rebellious state of mind. But those God saves He comes to with grace and restores in them a spiritual nature which now turns and wants God. So when man is regenerated, his first thought is to embrace Christ in faith of his own free will. His renewed will has new desires and is no longer beholden to sin. His eyes are opened and he sees His true condition of bondage for the first time so he repents of trusting in himself and reaches out to the Savior knowing that He alone can save. Even though we owe God a debt we cannot repay, He is merciful. He forgives the debts of many of those who owe Him while the others He still requires payment. And they don't want God's forgiveness anyway. It is perfectly just of God to require payment of them for He is under no obligation to cancel the debt of anyone. That is what makes mercy, mercy. But those he passes over and does not give mercy, He has left them to their own free will. [italics original]

Neo, do you think autonomous free will is absolutely free in the sense that it can come to God of its own volition?

I think it only becomes tautological in the sense that one presupposes that God has predestined Paul and hence Paul cannot deviate, since that is what you are saying, bro, that Paul can not say no. From my side, it is not tautological at all. Because to me this sounds like a subtle override on Paul's choices.

Then you need to prove this, Brother. How has God overridden Paul’s choice? Can you show that God has forced Paul against some counterfactual state of affairs he hypothetically might have chosen?