Predestination vs Free Will

Apologetic_Warrior said:

To the first part, no, to the second part, I believe so.

I believe so, and always have.



I'm not sure what you mean by "fallen short", I think most if not everyone goes through some periods of doubt throughout their life, especially assuming they live to be older. Calvinists tend to look through a lens of sovereign grace, and so we see ourselves fallen short quite often I think, because the emphasis is on dependency on God, the focus is on God and His work done on our behalf. Only in Christ and His work and the works of the Spirit do we not fall short, that is my thinking which may not represent all Calvinist thinking, there is quite a range of diversity even within Calvinism.

Click to expand...

With reference to #179 by Misput , which is one post before yours , how would you explain whether each Jew s individually predestined to be saved or otherwise?

Neostarwcc said:

But Jesus also talked about predestination see John 15:16, John 6:37, and also see John 10:7 and John 10:14 where Jesus says that he is the gate for the sheep and whoever enters through him will be saved. He also says that he knows who his sheep are and his sheep know who he is. If our salvation isn't predestined in some way than why would God say that we didn't choose him but he chose us? I don't think Paul's statements of predestination are not meant to be taken literally and they do in fact match up with Jesus's teachings. All of Paul's teachings match up with Jesus's teachings or they never would have allowed his letters to be placed in the Bible in the first place.

Click to expand...

That depends on how you interpret words.
When you analyse words alone, and do not consider context, you can really start to believe that Jesus and the apostles spoke abt predestination of individuals when in fact they were saying that God predestined to offer redemption to the Gentiles (not individuals).

BBAS 64 said:

Good Day, romans2819

Your forget the first 10 verses in Eph 1


Eph 1:1 Paul, an apostle of Christ Jesus by the will of God, To the saints who are in Ephesus, and are faithful in Christ Jesus: Grace to you and peace from God our Father and the Lord Jesus Christ. Blessed be the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, who has blessed us in Christ with every spiritual blessing in the heavenly places, even as he chose us in him before the foundation of the world, that we should be holy and blameless before him. In love he predestined us for adoption through Jesus Christ, according to the purpose of his will, to the praise of his glorious grace, with which he has blessed us in the Beloved. In him we have redemption through his blood, the forgiveness of our trespasses, according to the riches of his grace, which he lavished upon us, in all wisdom and insight making known to us the mystery of his will, according to his purpose, which he set forth in Christ as a plan for the fullness of time, to unite all things in him, things in heaven and things on earth. In him we have obtained an inheritance, having been predestined according to the purpose of him who works all things according to the counsel of his will, so that we who were the first to hope in Christ might be to the praise of his glory. In him you also, when you heard the word of truth, the gospel of your salvation, and believed in him, were sealed with the promised Holy Spirit, who is the guarantee of our inheritance until we acquire possession of it, to the praise of his glory.


The pronouns (us, we, you, your, our) used in this text are referring to the Saints, they as saints are the passive objects of the verbs that God does, Blessed, Chose, should be, predestined, adoption, have redemption, forgiveness, make known, obtained, hope,.


You cannot just skip to verse 11 and remain faithful to the grammar and construction of the extremely long single run on sentence.



That in fact may be true , but the issue of course is the text of Eph 1-14 clearly does not teach that in anyway.

In Him,

Bill

Click to expand...

Hi Bill

I know we have exchanged mails a few times on this. But I will re-visit your first mail where you commented on the first 10 verses of Ephesians chapter 1

Ephesians 1:1-10 : To the Saints in Ephesus ... He chose us .. He predestined us...
Chapter 2:11 : Remember that you who are Gentiles by birth and called “uncircumcised” - remember that at that time you were separate from Christ, excluded from citizenship in Israel and without God in the world. But now in Christ Jesus you who were far away have been brought near by the blood of Christ.

If we connect above verses or sentences, doesnt "the Saints" = Gentiles, instead of individually selected persons ?

roman2819 said:

Hi Bill

I know we have exchanged mails a few times on this. But I will re-visit your first mail where you commented on the first 10 verses of Ephesians chapter 1

Ephesians 1:1-10 : To the Saints in Ephesus ... He chose us .. He predestined us...
Chapter 2:11 : Remember that you who are Gentiles by birth and called “uncircumcised” - remember that at that time you were separate from Christ, excluded from citizenship in Israel and without God in the world. But now in Christ Jesus you who were far away have been brought near by the blood of Christ.

If we connect above verses or sentences, doesnt "the Saints" = Gentiles, instead of individually selected persons ?

Click to expand...

Good Day, Roman

There is no doubt that there are Gentiles (you who are vs 2:11) and there are Jews with in the group of Saints.

Saints 1:1 are the us (both Jews and Gentiles) Blessed, chosen and adopted... there is a lot covered between Eph1:1 - Eph2:11. the group Saints are individual people of both Gentile and Jewish background, adopted by God to be his children.

In Him,

Bill

BBAS 64 said:

Good Day, Roman

There is no doubt that there are Gentiles (you who are vs 2:11) and there are Jews with in the group of Saints.

Saints 1:1 are the us (both Jews and Gentiles) Blessed, chosen and adopted... there is a lot covered between Eph1:1 - Eph2:11. the group Saints are individual people of both Gentile and Jewish background, adopted by God to be his children.

In Him,

Bill

Click to expand...

Eph 2:11 clearly says: "you who are Gentiles" : Why do you say there are Jews included?

In your opinion,"there is a lot covered between Eph1:1 - Eph2:11" : So what is Eph 1:11-211 saying, according to you?

roman2819 said:

Eph 2:11 clearly says: "you who are Gentiles" : Why do you say there are Jews included?

In your opinion,"there is a lot covered between Eph1:1 - Eph2:11" : So what is Eph 1:11-211 saying, according to you?

Click to expand...

Good Day, Roman2819

You may find this small intro useful.


In HIm

BBAS 64 said:

Good Day, Roman2819

You may find this small intro useful.

In HIm

Click to expand...

Are you using the video to avoid these two questions:

Eph 2:11 clearly says: "you who are Gentiles" : Why do you say there are Jews included?

In your opinion,"there is a lot covered between Eph1:1 - Eph2:11" : So what is Eph 1:11-211 saying, according to you?

What I like about the video is it does not mention predestination of individuals. It didn't even mention corporate predestination. Predestination is just a word , meaning pre-plan: God has always preplanned to offer redemption to the Jews and then the Gentiles, that is all. If people interpret in context instead of zooming in on words, there would not be any half-cooked theory or theology revolving around it.

roman2819 said:

Are you using the video to avoid these two questions:

Eph 2:11 clearly says: "you who are Gentiles" : Why do you say there are Jews included?

In your opinion,"there is a lot covered between Eph1:1 - Eph2:11" : So what is Eph 1:11-211 saying, according to you?

What I like about the video is it does not mention predestination of individuals. It didn't even mention corporate predestination. Predestination is just a word , meaning pre-plan: God has always preplanned to offer redemption to the Jews and then the Gentiles, that is all. If people interpret in context instead of zooming in on words, there would not be any half-cooked theory or theology revolving around it.

Click to expand...

Good Day, Roman

Indeed I am thought you would find it useful.

I said Jews were included as part of the Saints Eph 1:1

Therefore remember that at one time you Gentiles in the flesh, called "the uncircumcision" by what is called the circumcision, which is made in the flesh by hands--

Both Gentiles and Jews are included in verse 11


But the Gentiles are singled out in vs 12,13.. and in 14 -16 he brings them back together.

Eph 2:12 remember that you were at that time separated from Christ, alienated from the commonwealth of Israel and strangers to the covenants of promise, having no hope and without God in the world.
Eph 2:13 But now in Christ Jesus you who once were far off have been brought near by the blood of Christ.
Eph 2:14 For he himself is our peace, who has made us both one and has broken down in his flesh the dividing wall of hostility
Eph 2:15 by abolishing the law of commandments and ordinances, that he might create in himself one new man in place of the two, so making peace,
Eph 2:16 and might reconcile us both to God in one body through the cross, thereby killing the hostility.

Your understanding of the compound word used here for predestined is weak IMHO. No translation I find uses "plan" as a translation (formal translation). If the idea of the writer was to convey plan, counsel, or to purpose there are so many other words that would have been a better fit and normal to convey such an idea, and this compound word is not one of them.

Thayer Definition:
1) to predetermine, decide beforehand
2) in the NT of God decreeing from eternity
3) to foreordain, appoint beforehand
Part of Speech: verb

2 parts

Pro- Before

Horizo- ordain or appoint

Literally - foreordain

Young's translation

1:4 according as He did choose us in him before the foundation of the world, for our being holy and unblemished before Him, in love, having foreordained us to the adoption of sons through Jesus Christ to Himself, according to the good pleasure of His will,

You could say I guess he foreordained a plan and that would be true, but the text here does not say that in this context. The purpose of God that is foreordained is his adoption of his own children (us) though his Son and His choice ( of children) happened (Pre) before the foundation of the world vs 4. That choice was according to His own good pleasure in line with His own good will, and he glorifies Himself in that action.

In Him,

Bill

BBAS 64 said:

Good Day, Roman

Indeed I am thought you would find it useful.

I said Jews were included as part of the Saints Eph 1:1

Therefore remember that at one time you Gentiles in the flesh, called "the uncircumcision" by what is called the circumcision, which is made in the flesh by hands--

Both Gentiles and Jews are included in verse 11


But the Gentiles are singled out in vs 12,13.. and in 14 -16 he brings them back together.

Eph 2:12 remember that you were at that time separated from Christ, alienated from the commonwealth of Israel and strangers to the covenants of promise, having no hope and without God in the world.
Eph 2:13 But now in Christ Jesus you who once were far off have been brought near by the blood of Christ.
Eph 2:14 For he himself is our peace, who has made us both one and has broken down in his flesh the dividing wall of hostility
Eph 2:15 by abolishing the law of commandments and ordinances, that he might create in himself one new man in place of the two, so making peace,
Eph 2:16 and might reconcile us both to God in one body through the cross, thereby killing the hostility.

Your understanding of the compound word used here for predestined is weak IMHO. No translation I find uses "plan" as a translation (formal translation). If the idea of the writer was to convey plan, counsel, or to purpose there are so many other words that would have been a better fit and normal to convey such an idea, and this compound word is not one of them.

Thayer Definition:
1) to predetermine, decide beforehand
2) in the NT of God decreeing from eternity
3) to foreordain, appoint beforehand
Part of Speech: verb

2 parts

Pro- Before

Horizo- ordain or appoint

Literally - foreordain

Young's translation

1:4 according as He did choose us in him before the foundation of the world, for our being holy and unblemished before Him, in love, having foreordained us to the adoption of sons through Jesus Christ to Himself, according to the good pleasure of His will,

You could say I guess he foreordained a plan and that would be true, but the text here does not say that in this context. The purpose of God that is foreordained is his adoption of his own children (us) though his Son and His choice ( of children) happened (Pre) before the foundation of the world vs 4. That choice was according to His own good pleasure in line with His own good will, and he glorifies Himself in that action.

In Him,

Bill

Click to expand...

My earlier postings have always say that Ephesians chapters 1, 2 ,3 explained that God had predestined or pre--planned to offer redemption to the Jews and then the Gentiles, so that through Christ, both peoples could be redeemed if they repent of their sins. And the video says the same without using the word "predestination".

Did you notice the video did not say God predestine individuals? Because He never did. Hence a deep or technical analysis of predestination is unnecessary.

I repeat: 2:11 said "you who are Gentiles " . Why do you said Jews are included? What you explained is not substantiated in the Scripture. We cannot (mis)interpret Scripture according to our indulgence.

One of your earlier posts say that the pronoun "you" in 6 or 8 different verses of Ephesians is singular , hence you advocate individual predestination. That is easily refuted by 2:11, "you who ARE GentileS". You manage to get simple stuff wrong, how can we believe your speculation of 1:4?

roman2819 said:

My earlier postings have always say that Ephesians chapters 1, 2 ,3 explained that God had predestined or pre--planned to offer redemption to the Jews and then the Gentiles, so that through Christ, both peoples could be redeemed if they repent of their sins. And the video says the same without using the word "predestination".

Did you notice the video did not say God predestine individuals? Because He never did. Hence a deep or technical analysis of predestination is unnecessary.

Click to expand...

Good day, Roman

I have laid out the textual weakness, for asserting "pre-planned" as a valid interpretation. Unless of course you have something textual that I have over looked as your basis for such an interpretation.

I repeat: 2:11 said "you who are Gentiles " . Why do you said Jews are included? What you explained is not substantiated in the Scripture. We cannot (mis)interpret Scripture according to our indulgence.

Click to expand...

Again...
Therefore remember that at one time you Gentiles in the flesh, called "the uncircumcision" by what is called the circumcision, which is made in the flesh by hands--

Who are whom are the "called the circumcision"

One of your earlier posts say that the pronoun "you" in 6 or 8 different verses of Ephesians is singular , hence you advocate individual predestination. That is easily refuted by 2:11, "you who ARE GentileS". You manage to get simple stuff wrong, how can we believe your speculation of 1:4?

Click to expand...

Umm no I did not...

bbas said:

The pronouns (us, we, you, your, our) used in this text are referring to the Saints, they as saints are the passive objects of the verbs that God does, Blessed, Chose, should be, predestined, adoption, have redemption, forgiveness, make known, obtained, hope,.

Click to expand...

Do you deny that both Jews and Gentiles are described by the adj.. saints eph 1:1 ?
Are not these categories ( Jews, gentiles, circumision, and uncircumcision) applicable to singular people?

In Him,

Bill

BBAS 64 said:

Good day, Roman

I have laid out the textual weakness, for asserting "pre-planned" as a valid interpretation. Unless of course you have something textual that I have over looked as your basis for such an interpretation.



Again...
Therefore remember that at one time you Gentiles in the flesh, called "the uncircumcision" by what is called the circumcision, which is made in the flesh by hands--

Who are whom are the "called the circumcision"



Umm no I did not...



Do you deny that both Jews and Gentiles are described by the adj.. saints eph 1:1 ?
Are not these categories ( Jews, gentiles, circumision, and uncircumcision) applicable to singular people?

In Him,

Bill

Click to expand...

You were saying: "Do you deny that both Jews and Gentiles are described by the adj.. saints eph 1:1 ? Are not these categories ( Jews, gentiles, circumision, and uncircumcision) applicable to singular people?"

Your singular tenses theory doesn't even begin to make sense.at all. Well I suppose if you want to advocate individual predestination, you have to play with words.

Regarding your first question: We don't see the word "Jews" in Eph 1:1 , so what is your reason for saying that "the Saints" include Jews? You are making things up. indeed, most Bible commentaries say letter of Ephesians were written to Gentile Christians , not to Jews.

If you read in context, Eph 2:11 said: "...you who are Gentiles". It implies the Saints mean the Gentiles after all, assuming you read coherently and connect the verses. Paul called them Saints because the Gentile believers , having repented in Christ, were now regarded holy by God. This is the reason Paul applied the word Saints to Gentile Christians, NOT because God chose to save individual saints. The NIV version, instead of saying Saints, use the word "holy people".

See how contextual understanding enables me to explain everything coherently, confidently and clearly, without having to hatch wrong and false assumptions.

Neostarwcc said:

What are your opinions on predestination? Is it Biblical that God chose every single person who would come to faith in Jesus? Or do we all have freewill and every single person alive has the opportunity to find Christ? Needless to say, there are verses in the bible that support both views. So... idk which one to go with... what do you think?

Click to expand...

NEOSTARWCC:

In my book, "It Seems To Me", here is the way I answered that question:

"He knew me before the beginning of time, before I had a body, and He chose me to be His. However, He chose me only after He observed me, choosing him, in 1945/6! Yes, He loved me before I loved Him , but I had to choose Him before He chose me. He knew I would, because He knows everything, and because He looked forward in time to 1947, and saw me choosing Him!" He merely said yes, I choose you, also.

I have named my position "Ar-Calvinist". Why must we be one or the other? I believe the Calvinists and the Armenians are responsible for the greatest division in the church.

By the way, my book, "It Seems To Me" is not yet published. I am researching the publishing business right now.

Paul G West Sr said:

NEOSTARWCC:

In my book, "It Seems To Me", here is the way I answered that question:

"He knew me before the beginning of time, before I had a body, and He chose me to be His. However, He chose me only after He observed me, choosing him, in 1945/6! Yes, He loved me before I loved Him , but I had to choose Him before He chose me. He knew I would, because He knows everything, and because He looked forward in time to 1947, and saw me choosing Him!" He merely said yes, I choose you, also.

I have named my position "Ar-Calvinist". Why must we be one or the other? I believe the Calvinists and the Armenians are responsible for the greatest division in the church.

By the way, my book, "It Seems To Me" is not yet published. I am researching the publishing business right now.

Click to expand...

Here's how I understand Sovereignty and free will.

A kid, a carrot and a goat.

Two of the most conflicting doctrines of the bible for many are God’s Sovereignty and Human free will. How can both exist without robbing each other of their full force? But the Westminster and the London Baptist confessions solved this puzzle by assigning each their proper role, nearly 400 years ago.

Chapter 3; God's Eternal Decree; 1.

“God, from all eternity, did—by the most wise and holy counsel of his own will—freely and unchangeably ordain whatever comes to pass. Yet he ordered all things in such a way that he is not the author of sin, nor does he force his creatures to act against their wills; neither is the liberty or contingency of second causes taken away, but rather established.” OPC. Westminster Confession with Modern English.

In this we see God’s sovereignty. And his appointing all that comes to pass. This includes secondary causes, namely the reasons why people freely choose what they do. These too are part of God’s perfect knowledge and therefore certain to fulfill their role in the choices we make.

So with childlike understanding we can see how this works.

A kid has a wagon to which he attaches his goat. We know goats have a mind of their own, and if any creature has a free will, it is a goat. So the kid ties a carrot to his cane fishing pole and dangles it in front of the goat. The goat wants the carrot so the kid steers the goat pulling the wagon according to the direction both want. If the kid dangles the carrot to the right, the goat trots in that direction. If the kid wants to stop, he applies the wagon brakes. If he wants to start up again, he releases the brakes and dangles the carrot in front of the goat in the direction he and the goat now wants to travel.

So in this we see the kid’s sovereignty, the goat’s free will and his genuine desire to choose what the kid wants him to do, even though the motives differ. And the secondary causes the kid uses to steer the goat to his predetermined destination. The kid opens doors and closes doors by using the brake. And he directs the goat who follows most willingly according to his nature and appetites. And according to the circumstances surrounding him.

And so it is with us, God sends and controls all the secondary causes that lead us freely to choose the destination he planned for us.

Paul G West Sr said:

I had to choose Him before He chose me.

Click to expand...

Does this give room for you to "boast" or claim any credit? as in ...
1 Corinthians 1:28-30 (NIV)
God chose the lowly things of this world and the despised things—and the things that are not—to nullify the things that are, so that no one may boast before him. It is because of him that you are in Christ Jesus, who has become for us wisdom from God—that is, our righteousness, holiness and redemption.

When speaking to his inner circle of disciples, Jesus said ...
(John 15:16) "You did not choose me, but I chose you and appointed you so that you might go and bear fruit."
This could not be true, if His decision was based on a perceived (future) choice. He makes it very clear that they did NOT choose Him. (I am aware that I am not using the original language, which may have insinuated something else. However, I am limited to the language(s) I know.)

As David was inspired to say (Psalm 14: 2-3
2 The Lord looks down from heaven on all mankind
to see if there are any who understand, any who seek God.
3 All have turned away, all have become corrupt;
there is no one who does good, not even one.

That formulation does not give any room for a single person to choose God.

In John 6:44 Jesus is quoted as saying "No one can come to me unless the Father who sent me draws them," and a few translations use the expression "No one is able to ..."

Paul G West Sr., I am not challenging your argument so much as I am wanting to know how you deal with verses like this - as I feel whatever position one takes, it must be reconcilable with all relevant scriptures.

Perhaps we're basing our arguments on misplaced assumptions, or faulty logic? For the time being, and for myself, I am fully prepared to give 100% credit to God. If someone confronts you with a proposition "you can't refuse" do you still have a (real) choice? Being spiritually dead, it was impossible for me to make spiritual choices. I'm not convinced that in that state I or anyone else has "free will." It is only when we are spiritually awakened, that we even begin to have a semblance of free will, and our tendency for most or our life is one of continuous struggle to make the right choices. "Without me you can do nothing!" is how Jesus put it. I am fully convinced that He meant that literally and entirely. It includes (for me) the ability/competence to make good/right choices.

"Unless a man is born of the Spirit he cannot enter the kingdom of God." (John 3:5) There is no way you (or I) can initiate the Spirit's work of conviction of sin, opening spiritually blind eys, or spiritually deaf ears, nor spiritual "conception." As a human, you have absolutely no say in the choice of your parents, nor the moment or nature of your birth. When Gabriel came to Mary, He did not ask for her permission, or aquiescence, or if she wanted to bear the Messiah, out of wedlock. He simply told her what God had decided - the God had chosen her ... then He graciously answered her questions. What could she realistically do except say "let it be?" And Gabriel reassured Joseph.

I see no reason why my spiritual birth is any different. It is entirely God's work.

Dave L said:

So in this we see the kid’s sovereignty, the goat’s free will and his genuine desire to choose what the kid wants him to do, even though the motives differ.

Click to expand...

Nice illustration. But the goat does not display a "genuine desire to choose what the kid wants him to do" He wants to do what satisfies him, i.e. eat the carrot. The kid in fact does NOT want the goat to eat the carrot, because it it did, it wouldn't complete the journey. So he uses the goat's natural appetite to entice it to move (at least in theory). He could just as easily use a pair of dogs, or an electric prod. I doubt very much that you could get the goat to cross a bed of hot coals using a carrot dangling in front of it. Two different natural instincts would immediately cause an internal conflict, and I'm pretty sure the carrot would lose.

Try this experiment on a real goat. See how far you get. Probably not far, as goats are not stupid.

There is no one who seeks God of his or her own will. Like the goat, (or the sheep that Isaiah prefers to use), we turn aside (from the carrot dangling beyond reach) to the shrubs beside the path, that don't keep moving beyond our reach.

Monna said:

Nice illustration. But the goat does not display a "genuine desire to choose what the kid wants him to do" He wants to do what satisfies him, i.e. eat the carrot. The kid in fact does NOT want the goat to eat the carrot, because it it did, it wouldn't complete the journey. So he uses the goat's natural appetite to entice it to move (at least in theory). He could just as easily use a pair of dogs, or an electric prod. I doubt very much that you could get the goat to cross a bed of hot coals using a carrot dangling in front of it. Two different natural instincts would immediately cause an internal conflict, and I'm pretty sure the carrot would lose.

Try this experiment on a real goat. See how far you get. Probably not far, as goats are not stupid.

There is no one who seeks God of his or her own will. Like the goat, (or the sheep that Isaiah prefers to use), we turn aside (from the carrot dangling beyond reach) to the shrubs beside the path, that don't keep moving beyond our reach.

Click to expand...

Thanks for your comments. God gives us a heart to love him. So we truly want him and choose accordingly. The goat illustration only shows how God creates the reasons we base our choices on.

peregrinus2017 said:

St. John Cassian wrote:

"For how God works all things in us and yet everything can be ascribed to free will, cannot be fully grasped by the mind and reason of man."

Click to expand...

I have heard people say that same thing but the good news is that we can know from the Bible. Romans 8:29-30 is the verse that has many people confused. But if you read it in the order it is written, you can see something completely amazing.

I won't quote the whole verse but from the start until a random point.

Romans 8:29 "For those who He foreknew, He also predestined to become conformed to the image of His Son..." and the verse goes on. I highlighted these parts because they are critical.

I'll explain: God knows ALL things, and those He knew who would receive the Gospel, He predestined THOSE people to become like Jesus.

The whole doctrine of God just randomly picking people isn't even backed up by the main verse that the people who believe in it use.

I hope this helps.

I also wanted to add that, a lot of Christians have a lot of contradictions in their beliefs, but with God, there is no contradiction in Himself. If there is none there, there should be none in our "theology".

Dave L said:

Here's how I understand Sovereignty and free will.

A kid, a carrot and a goat.

Two of the most conflicting doctrines of the bible for many are God’s Sovereignty and Human free will. How can both exist without robbing each other of their full force? But the Westminster and the London Baptist confessions solved this puzzle by assigning each their proper role, nearly 400 years ago.

Chapter 3; God's Eternal Decree; 1.

“God, from all eternity, did—by the most wise and holy counsel of his own will—freely and unchangeably ordain whatever comes to pass. Yet he ordered all things in such a way that he is not the author of sin, nor does he force his creatures to act against their wills; neither is the liberty or contingency of second causes taken away, but rather established.” OPC. Westminster Confession with Modern English.

In this we see God’s sovereignty. And his appointing all that comes to pass. This includes secondary causes, namely the reasons why people freely choose what they do. These too are part of God’s perfect knowledge and therefore certain to fulfill their role in the choices we make.

So with childlike understanding we can see how this works.

A kid has a wagon to which he attaches his goat. We know goats have a mind of their own, and if any creature has a free will, it is a goat. So the kid ties a carrot to his cane fishing pole and dangles it in front of the goat. The goat wants the carrot so the kid steers the goat pulling the wagon according to the direction both want. If the kid dangles the carrot to the right, the goat trots in that direction. If the kid wants to stop, he applies the wagon brakes. If he wants to start up again, he releases the brakes and dangles the carrot in front of the goat in the direction he and the goat now wants to travel.

So in this we see the kid’s sovereignty, the goat’s free will and his genuine desire to choose what the kid wants him to do, even though the motives differ. And the secondary causes the kid uses to steer the goat to his predetermined destination. The kid opens doors and closes doors by using the brake. And he directs the goat who follows most willingly according to his nature and appetites. And according to the circumstances surrounding him.

And so it is with us, God sends and controls all the secondary causes that lead us freely to choose the destination he planned for us.

Click to expand...

You're mistaken. You have an interesting way of seeking to disconnect God, (that is God in how you consider him to be) to disconnect him from being the author of sin. Your analogy falls flat however for you start things off at home base with the goat being a goat of his own choice, thus well....he's naturally is carrying out his choices.

What you fail to mention however is that according to Calvinsitic thought God decided he wanted goats so they were created that way. Is the goat therefore carrying out his own choices? Most certainly not. He was chosen to be a goat according to you with no will in the matter whatsoever! So if there was no will in the matter whatsoever how can you and your Westminster Confession even come close to stating a God (as you define him) would not be the author of sin? Sorry not possible.

And by the way no court of law would let you get off with this type of reasoning. If you happened to create a robotic system and made it in such a way that it'd carry out great atrocities in other words you made it to be what it is you'd be viewed as the master architect behind it all FULLY RESPONSIBLE for each and every insidious thing your creation did. Sorry but there's no way you can argue that wouldn't be the case with any type of logic.

Bobber said:

You're mistaken. You have an interesting way of seeking to disconnect God, (that is God in how you consider him to be) to disconnect him from being the author of sin. Your analogy falls flat however for you start things off at home base with the goat being a goat of his own choice, thus well....he's naturally is carrying out his choices.

What you fail to mention however is that according to Calvinsitic thought God decided he wanted goats so they were created that way. Is the goat therefore carrying out his own choices? Most certainly not. He was chosen to be a goat according to you with no will in the matter whatsoever! So if there was no will in the matter whatsoever how can you and your Westminster Confession even come close to stating a God (as you define him) would not be the author of sin? Sorry not possible.

And by the way no court of law would let you get off with this type of reasoning. If you happened to create a robotic system and made it in such a way that it'd carry out great atrocities in other words you made it to be what it is you'd be viewed as the master architect behind it all FULLY RESPONSIBLE for each and every insidious thing your creation did. Sorry but there's no way you can argue that wouldn't be the case with any type of logic.

Click to expand...

You are missing the point. It is a near perfect illustration of how God controls our free choices through the circumstances he sends our way. That is, you choose exactly as he planned you would because of the reasons he provided for you to base your "free choices" on.

Dave L said:

You are missing the point. It is a near perfect illustration of how God controls our free choices through the circumstances he sends our way. That is, you choose exactly as he planned you would because of the reasons he provided for you to base your "free choices" on.

Click to expand...

You cannot back up that claim with the Bible.