No, this is not possible. God foreordains all that is to come to pass. As a necessary consequence, God foreknows because He as foreordained. God does not foresee and then ordain. God ordains and necessarily foresees what He has ordained.
God knows all contingent events, but God’s knowledge is not itself contingent on those events, else, any notions of prophecy would be meaningless. Events occur because God decreed them, and in that sense knew them.
God’s knowledge and our knowledge are different—not just in the amount of knowledge (unlimited/limited) but in the very manner of the acquisition of knowledge. God’s creatures accrete knowledge discursively—through investigation and learning; but God knows everything at once. God knows all possible objects of knowledge because He is God; He knows all actual objects of knowledge because He is their cause.
From this it can be said that divine omniscience is divine foreknowledge—not in the Arminian sense implying God’s peered down the corridors of the future, observed the actions of man, so that His “decisions” are contingent on man’s decisions. Instead when I say foreknowledge I mean that God knows them before they occur for the express reason that He decreed them. Foreknowledge is beforehand only to God’s creatures; to God it is simply knowledge. This, orthodoxy insists, is what the Scriptures teach.
We must consider what “free” really means when speaking of a completely Sovereign God. The Scriptures speak of the divine foreknowledge of contingent events (see I Samuel 23:10-13; II Kings 13:19; Psalms 81:14,15; Isaiah 42:9; Isaiah 48:18; Jeremiah 2:2-3; Jeremiah 38:17-20; Ezekiel 3:6; Matthew 11:21). These verses have led some to conclude that God has no foreknowledge of the acts of “free” agents. These verses have also led some to conclude that mankind has no “freedom,” i.e. fatalism, despite the fact that these verses indicate that man is self-determined.
The doctrinal statements of all Christendom make it clear that God is not the author of sin. That is, we recognize 1 John 15, and James 1:13.
We also recognize that God decrees all things that come to pass according to the nature of second causes:
(1) necessarily, e.g., the motion of the planets, atomic spin, etc.;
(2) freely (as defined in my 1:1 response) -- voluntarily with no "violence being done to the will of the creature";
(3) contingently, i.e., with perfect regard to future event contingencies, as when God told David what Saul and Keilah would do to him if David remained in Keilah (1 Samuel 23:9-13).
Thus we can say in the case of Adam, that he was aware of God’s commandment at the moment he ate the forbidden fruit, that Adam possessed the capacity and power to obey God’s preceptive will, for reasons sufficient to him (his self-determined greatest inclinations at the moment) Adam wanted to eat the fruit, and Adam was not forced to eat the fruit (no violence done to his will).
Thus, because Adam acted knowingly, willingly, with freedom of spontaneity, for reasons that were sufficient to him, with no violence done to his will, Adam was a free moral agent in his act of sin.
Now was Adam totally free from the decree of God? Absolutely not.
Could Adam have done differently? Absolutely not.
Any other answer to these questions obviates the clear teachings of the Scriptures—that God works everything in conformity with His eternal purposes (Ephesians 1:11), decreed before the foundation of the world to save a multitude of sinners who would fall in Adam.
God decreed all things, with their causes and conditions in the precise order in which they will come about. Moreover, God’s foreknowledge of the future and of contingent events rests on God’s decree. Thus God foreknows all things. Note that I also reject the scientia media (mediate knowledge) approach, or any other approach that would deny human acts that are in no way determined by God, as being contrary to the Scriptures (e.g., Acts 2:23; Romans 9:16; Ephesians 1:11; Philippians 2:13).
But, back to the question, is God’s predetermination of things consistent with the “freedom” of His creatures?
Some claim we possess the liberty of indifference (“to do otherwise”, libertarian free will).
To hold to this claim one must therefore limit and/or redefine God’s omniscience, for they believe God must not know the choices persons make before they have made them in order to hold persons responsible for sin. Necessarily, this also limits God’s omnipotence, and God becomes the Survivor® God: outwitting, outplaying, and outlasting, attempting to end-run His creatures’ actions.
There is no warrant in the Scriptures to support any of these humanistic beliefs. As in humanism and paganism, persons believing in libertarian free will think original sin did not affect them and they tend to believe they have more moral powers than they actually possess, ignoring the fact that our hearts are filled with evil desires (Matt 5:19; Mark 7:21; Romans 1:24; 1 Pet 2:11). Indeed, libertarian free will (the liberty of indifference) implies we could acceptably choose to receive Christ without having a desire to receive Him, despite the clear teachings of the Scriptures to the contrary.
Therefore, Biblical free will, choosing according to our most desired inclination, accurately reflects what the process of choosing is all about. It Biblical, for the un-regenerated sinner chooses only to sin more or sin less, while the regenerated elect can choose to glorify God, which the lost (un-regenerated) can never do.
Mankind’s freedom stems from our natures, connected to our instincts and our emotions, and is determined by our intellectual considerations and character. Man’s freedom is a liberty of spontaneity, or a self-determined freedom—for we choose to do what we are most inclined to do at the moment we so choose. Unlike the notion of libertarian free will, freedom is not arbitrariness. In all rational acts underlies a ‘why’—a reason which decides the act. To be otherwise, to embrace the liberty of indifference, is to be an uncertain, incalculable, and unreliable imaginary man—which is where claims to the liberty of indifference must ultimately lead—a human will that is autonomous even unto itself!
The mind’s desire always precedes the mind’s choosing. This is precisely why libertarian free-will is impossible. It alleges a choice that is bereft of desire or want. People just choose because they can, rather than because they want. But if that were the case, either no choice would ever be made or the decision would be completely random, arbitrary and thus have no moral consequence. Even American jurisprudence assumes a motive in a given crime. It is only common sense. Yet if libertarian free-will is true, determining motive is a fool's erands. Why? Because desire is not linked in any way to choice.
Now I maintain we choose according to our desires, for we are self-determined. There is no conflict between self-determination and God's foreknowledge. It's called compatibilism.
But, some think that determinism implies no human freedom. They will maintain that if determinism is true, we just aren't free. So they deny determinism. But does such denial really mean these folks are free? It simply does not automatically follow from their denial of determinism that they are actually free.
Just as a compatibilist (me) must explain what compatibilist freedom is, why compatibilist freedom should be considered to be genuine freedom, and how we can possess this freedom if determinism is true, so do libertarians need to make an account of freedom that shows how they can possess freedom if indeterminism (the opposite of compatibilism) is true and why their incompatabilist ideas should count as any notion of genuine freedom.
Let's see if we can help these persons out.
The unsettled theist will argue his action is caused by himself. Then if he caused his own decision what event led to that decision? Is this even uncaused or caused? The person will have to argue that the event is uncaused, for to accept a cause is to accept he is not in control and therefore not "free".
Moreover the unsettled theist will argue, well, the event that caused his action must have been caused by some previous event that was also under his own control. All right, that means we have yet another event, and we must again ask what event led to that action (decision). That event must also have been caused by some other event under the unsettled theist’s control. If we keep going, this person either lands in an infinite regress, with this infinite past set of events all within his control, or else at some point something outside their control enters into the process. Infinite regress seems an absurdity – that any one choice a person makes requires an infinite past series of events that are all under his control. The second alternative is bad for libertarianism – for it clearly implies that something outside the unsettled theist’s control caused what he does. Only a compatibilist, like myself, could say that.
Scripture nowhere says that we are “free” in the sense of being outside of God’s sovereign control or of being able to make decisions that are not caused by anything.
Our Sovereign God is continually involved (never immobile) with all of His created things such that God
(1) keeps them existing and maintaining the properties with which He created them;
(2) cooperates with created things in every action, directing their distinctive properties to cause them to act as they do; and
(3) directs them to fulfill His purposes.
In other words, God is totally sovereign over all of His creation.
(2) cooperates with created things in every action, directing their distinctive properties to cause them to act as they do; and
(3) directs them to fulfill His purposes.
In other words, God is totally sovereign over all of His creation.
Absolutely nothing in God’s creation can act independently of God’s sovereignty. The Scriptures bear witness that God will always do what He has said, and God will fulfill what He has promised.
Man may claim sovereignty over his own life, but ultimately God is in control. The sovereignty of God is clearly in evidence in the Scriptures: Hebrews 1:3; Colossians 1:17; Acts 17:28; Nehemiah 9:6; 2 Peter 3:7; Job 12:23; Job 34:14-15; Job 38:32; Matthew 5:45; Matthew 6:26; Numbers 23:19; 2 Samuel 7:28; Psalms 33:14-15; Psalms 104:14; Psalms 104:29; Psalms 135:6; Psalms 139:16; Psalms 141:6; Psalms 148:8; Proverbs 16:1; Proverbs 16:33; Proverbs 20:24; Proverbs 21:1; Proverbs 30:5; John 17:17; Ephesians 1:11; Galatians 1:15; Jeremiah 1:5; 1 Corinthians 4:7.
But, we are nonetheless free in the greatest sense that any creature of God could be free: we make real willing choices, choices that have real effects. We are aware of no restraints on our will from God when we make decisions. Therefore, freedom, in the sense clearly defined in the Scriptures, is the ability to choose according to our greatest desires at the moment we so choose.
We must insist that we have the power of willing choice; otherwise we will fall into the error of fatalism and thus conclude that our choices do not matter, or that we cannot really make willing choices.
The kind of freedom that is demanded by those who deny God’s providential control of all things, a freedom that would place them outside of God’s sustaining and controlling activity, would be impossible if Christ is indeed continually carrying along things by his “word of power” (Heb. 1:3).
We all agree that God holds mankind personally responsible for their actions. Everyone agrees we will be required to give an account for our actions on Judgment Day. Yet, libertarian free will proponents fail to recognize is while responsibility presupposes accountability, accountability does not presuppose ability or freedom. Indeed, free will has absolutely nothing to do with responsibility. Instead, accountability simply presupposes one (God!) who demands accountability.
Since our Sovereign God demands accountability and since God rewards righteousness and punishes wickedness, man is accountable. Moreover, God’s judgments of reward or punishment will be according to the standards He has set for our actions. These standards, the Scriptures, clearly tell us clearly that God is Sovereign, He directs all our actions, we possess no liberty of indifference when we act because we acted exactly the way we willed to act, and we will be required to account for our actions.
“But,” some will say, “how can God judge us for our actions if we don’t possess the liberty of indifference to choose otherwise?” That such a question is even posed speaks volumes of the humanistic elements of the libertarian free-will proponent. Because some have poorly reasoned their way to the question, all the while ignoring the overwhelming contrary evidence within the Scriptures, is to put God in the Dock, and require the Sovereign God, accountable to no one, to give an account of Himself to the finite and feeble minded that have chosen to substitute humanism for proper faith that the Judge of all the earth will do right (Genesis 18:25). The same persons compound their humanistic hubris and insist that God is less than all-knowing or all-powerful, an immoveable being, incapable of preserving those in whom His Son has wrought payment for sin, and is even subject to changing His mind.
AMR
