An argument for free will

zoidar said:

To me since God is outside time He is both in the past and in the future.

Click to expand...

Actually - God is in time as well as out of time, as it were.

I.e. - God is not only transcendent. He is also immanent.

God "fills the heavens and the earth". "In Him we live and move and have our being." "All things were created by Him and through Him and in Him all things have their being."

Putting these basic truths on the shelf while one discusses whether absolute "free" will possible is the basic reason why many people miss the fact that, at least in some way, God is intimately involved in every single thing that takes place in His creation.

It's a heady discussion to do this subject justice. But I usually make sure that the anti-predestine advocate understands going into the discussion that God is omnipresent and active in every synapse of his or her brain while they're discussing the subject.

If they get a proper view of the relationship of the omniscient, omnipresent, and providentially involved creator, and sustainer of the universe - we can at least have a fighting chance at a meaningful discussion.

If they balk at agreeing on a few basics beforehand - I usually won't give an anti predestination advocate much consideration.

If they disagree on these basics - we're probably not even effectively reading the same book.

zoidar said:

I will tell you this much. I believe in free will as you know, exactly how that goes together with God's plan, foreknowlege and allmighty will I don't have the perfect concept of, neither do I feel I have to.

Click to expand...

I pretty much agree. I am a compatibilist. I believe God is sovereign and we are responsible for our choices. I don't believe we are free simply because we can choose to sin. I consider that the opposite of freedom. But, like you, I don't know how they work together, nor do I believe I need to know. For me, I only need to know that God is sovereign, that God is love, and that God has given grace through Jesus Christ.

Compatibilism is not popular among those who feel the need to resolve the logical tension inherent in considering God's sovereignty and human choice in conjunction. And yet, I hold that compatibilism is biblical. "...work out your salvation with fear and trembling, for it is God who is at work in you, enabling you both to will and to work for his good pleasure" (Philippians 2:12c-18). Paul is saying we are responsible and yet it is God who enables us to carry out God's will.

zoidar said:

God knows what I choose, therefore what I choose must have been predestined. Really? What I choose God knows, therefore my choice determines what God knows. See the difference?

Click to expand...

Here is a pretty good argument for free will from the Bible.

"He came to HIS OWN and His OWN received Him not" John 1:11
"He is not WILLING for any to perish but for ALL to come to repentance" 2 Peter 3
"what more could I have done that I have not already done?" Isaiah 5:4
"Oh Jerusalem Jerusalem who kills the prophets... How often I WANTED... but YOU would not" Matt 23
"I STAND at the door and knock IF anyone hears My voice AND OPENS the door - I will come in" Rev 3

Rom 10
"8 But what does it say? “The word is near you, in your mouth and in your heart”—that is, the word of faith which we are preaching, 9 that if you confess with your mouth Jesus as Lord, and believe in your heart that God raised Him from the dead, you will be saved; 10 for with the heart a person believes, resulting in righteousness, and with the mouth he confesses, resulting in salvation. 11 For the Scripture says, “Whoever believes in Him will not be disappointed.”

MDC said:

You can only make choices according to your desire and nature. Mans choices work within the confines of Gods Sovereignty. This you do not believe. Your argument is for libertarian free will. An autonomous will that operates outside Gods control. This belief in essence is rooted in mans fallen nature and stems from a prideful heart that resembles no truth whatsoever

Click to expand...

Pretty presumptuous stuff

zoidar said:

I understood you as our choice within the spectrum of possible choices was decided by circumstances, upbringing, physiology etc. I believe in a free will outside of that.

Click to expand...

Good luck with that.

zoidar said:

God knows what I choose, therefore what I choose must have been predestined. Really? What I choose God knows, therefore my choice determines what God knows. See the difference?

Click to expand...

As a Calvinist and a compatibilist, I believe that the Arminian/Semi-pelagian view does damage to the omnipotence of God, and it makes His knowledge dependent on our actions. God is self-existent and all-powerful, He does not depend on us for anything. I believe that God's knowledge determines our choices, not the other way around.

zoidar said:

I believe in free will as you know...

Click to expand...

What is it free from?

All mankind has the free will to choose any path of sin they desire.

Why would God try to talk to Cain about doing good vs. evil if God was the one who forced him to be bad? Makes no sense to me. (See Genesis 4:7).

The problem with the calvinist view of sovereignty is that it is not biblical. God's will is clearly not always done in the world. If that's the case a good part of scripture would be nonsensical. God spends a lot of time pleading with his people to follow him and a lot of time punishing them for not obeying. If Their choices are really his choices, this makes zero sense.
God frees every man to make a real choice for or against following him. Our free will has limits of course, but it is not bound so much that we cannot choose good or evil in each individual situation.

Don Maurer said:

All mankind has the free will to choose any path of sin they desire.

Click to expand...

What is it free from?

Don Maurer said:

All mankind has the free will to choose any path of sin they desire.

Click to expand...

Doesn't the sinful desire precede the choice/decision to sin? And doesn't the choice/option to sin, tempt and manifest the desire that is vanity and imaginary?

AlexDTX said:

Very interesting statement. Does that mean that God made the choice for Adam to choose to eat the forbidden fruit?

Click to expand...

If you asked 95% of British Calvinists in 1646, they would have said, "No, God's election was made after the Fall." This is known as the infralapsarian position. If you ask 95% of American Calvinists today, they will say, "Yes. God even predestined the Fall." This is known as the supralapsarian position.

His student said:

You seem awfully quick to make this about Calvinism. The OP did not mention Calvinism. The concept of predestination vs. free will has nothing to do with Calvinism only. It is a biblical doctrinal debate that everything theologian of every stripe must consider if he's going to be thorough.

At any rate - that is simply not correct - not even close to correct.

In Calvinism - the predestination of everything that happens in God's creation in no way negates the free will of men.

God chooses whether or not He will allow you to make a chose. But He does not make your choices for you and force you to make them.

There is a HUGE difference.

The Westminster Confession of Faith is generally considered the best authority on Calvinistic doctrine concerning this subject.

It says many things about this subject - only one of which is the following.

"God from all eternity did by the most and holy counsel of his own will, freely and unchangeably ordain whatsoever comes to pass; yet so as thereby neither is God the author of sin; nor is violence offered to the will of the creatures, nor is the liberty or contingency of second causes taken away, but rather established."

Calvinism clearly teaches that the liberty and the will of men is in no way interfered with by God. Rather He uses the choices of men, both good and evil, among many other things, to bring to pass what He has predestined to occur.

Click to expand...

I'm sorry, but you're not quite correct in three important aspects.

First, many Continental Reformed (Dutch, German, Hungarian, etc.) and Reformed Baptists would ask, "The Westminster Confession is considered best by whom?" The Westminster contains many details that are left open in the Three Forms of Unity, and all debates aside over who may legitimately call themselves "Calvinist," the London Baptist Confession is emphatically different on the points of sacramentology and church government. Additionally, if Congregationalism still held sway in any significant numbers, they would tout their own Savoy Declaration as superior.

Second, you're correct that Calvinism nowhere ascribes to God the authorship of sin. But this is not quite the same as saying He doesn't choose whether we choose to remain in sin. Our wills remain our own--this is what is meant by the reference to secondary causes--but whether they are wills that tend toward good or evil is entirely up to God's sovereign choice to bestow the regeneration of the Holy Spirit. If He decides not to, how is that not a choice as to what we will choose?

Third, as I've stated already, the discussion will inevitably involve Calvinism, given that it is the only branch of Christian belief that comes close to denying free will. If I am more ready than most to acknowledge this elephant in the room, it is because I was a Calvinist for ten years. But the elephant is there, and it is an elephant, and I remain sympathetic with my former coreligionists even if I no longer agree with them, so I make it a personal priority to see that it is represented accurately.

Every choice/decision to sin requires that a lie must be believed.

I'm sorry, but you're not quite correct in three important aspects.

First, many Continental Reformed (Dutch, German, Hungarian, etc.) and Reformed Baptists would ask, "The Westminster Confession is considered best by whom?" The Westminster contains many details that are left open in the Three Forms of Unity, and all debates aside over who may legitimately call themselves "Calvinist," the London Baptist Confession is emphatically different on the points of sacramentology and church government. Additionally, if Congregationalism still held sway in any significant numbers, they would tout their own Savoy Declaration as superior.

Click to expand...

Read carefully what I said because it's important and you may have not read my post carefully.

His student said:

The Westminster Confession of Faith is generally considered the best authority on Calvinistic doctrine concerning this subject.

We aren't and never have been talking about the three forms of unity, sacramentology, or church government.

Click to expand...

mothcorrupteth said:

Our wills remain our own--this is what is meant by the reference to secondary causes--but whether they are wills that tend toward good or evil is entirely up to God's sovereign choice to bestow the regeneration of the Holy Spirit. If He decides not to, how is that not a choice as to what we will choose?

Click to expand...

I'm not sure what your point is here. I'm not a Calvinist. But I did claim to be and taught it for many years. I always taught sovereign election concerning who's eyes He will open (and still do).

But that has absolutely nothing to do with the post I was responding to that said that He chooses the choices we will make.

I'm not really sure why you read things into my words that are not there.

But please don't do that.

mothcorrupteth said:

Third, as I've stated already, the discussion will inevitably involve Calvinism, given that it is the only branch of Christian belief that comes close to denying free will. If I am more ready than most to acknowledge this elephant in the room, it is because I was a Calvinist for ten years. But the elephant is there, and it is an elephant, and I remain sympathetic with my former coreligionists even if I no longer agree with them,..........

Click to expand...

Which has absolutely nothing to do with your charge that I was not quite right on three points. Again.

mothcorrupteth said:

........, so I make it a personal priority to see that it is represented accurately.

Click to expand...

Me too.

I did when I was a teacher in a Reformed Church and I still do.

His student said:

Read carefully what I said because it's important and you may have not read my post carefully.

Click to expand...

I read your post carefully. However, I did not read it with the sense you apparently intended. What threw me off was your use of the word authority. But let us set aside the unpleasantness. My point stands with respect to the Three Forms. The Belgic Confession is decidedly less explicit in its articulation of double predestination.

I'm not sure what your point is here. I'm not a Calvinist. But I did claim to be and taught it for many years. I always taught sovereign election concerning who's eyes He will open (and still do).

But that has absolutely nothing to do with the post I was responding to that said that He chooses the choices we will make.

I'm not really sure why you read things into my words that are not there.

But please don't do that.

Click to expand...

I apologize, but it is simply the most natural way I see of reading your flow of thought. I said that Calvinism says that "God chooses what I choose." You then said this was wrong. Your argument for why it was wrong is was to deny that God makes our choices for us. I felt this was a misunderstanding of my statement, and I sought to correct it. At which point do you feel I misunderstood you?

Which has absolutely nothing to do with your charge that I was not quite right on three points. Again.

Click to expand...

Are we speaking the same King's English, here? I recall being specifically chastised for making the thread about Calvinism "when the OP hadn't mentioned Calvinism."

zoidar said:

God knows what I choose, therefore what I choose must have been predestined. Really? What I choose God knows, therefore my choice determines what God knows. See the difference?

Click to expand...

Why do you pray for the salvation of others, if God can do nothing against our will? The rebellious sinner will not turn from his rebellion unless an God changes him.

However, you're talking about a different kind of "free" will than what I am referring to.

zoidar said:

God knows what I choose, therefore what I choose must have been predestined. Really? What I choose God knows, therefore my choice determines what God knows. See the difference?

Click to expand...

He does not always know. "They have built the high places of Baal to burn their children in the fire as offerings to Baal--something I did not command or mention, nor did it enter my mind." (Jeremiah19:5)

For me .. GOD has always been simple. If we take the sum of all human knowledge it would not even touch God. We can't even describe Him. Him..Hes a spirit. We say GOD and then go on and on.. yet the most import part we don't understand.

God knows all.. yes I believe that. All over the word. "Where have you come from?" God asks Satan. "God called to the man, "Where are you?" he said, "Who told you that you were naked? Have you eaten from the tree that I commanded you not to eat from?" "I will go down and see if what they have done is as bad as the outcry that has reached me. If not, I will know." Things like God was grieved He made man. What? Are you not GOD? Did you not know this before you made the world? Satan.. sin was found in him.. Found. Again .. God didn't know? For it was GOD that said.. sin was found in him.

Maybe one should pray.. ask Him how this is done. Seems like allot of work grieve for GOD to do all this when He knows the answers already. For Christ to come.. to suffer.. to stand by His creation and weep.. when He already knew? For the sweet sweet Holy Spirit in the world today.. doing so much work. haha..

I think we try to live in a moment that is not real. Well God is out side of time. Where God is there is no time. We bring God here and try to answer this. This is not where He lives. So where He is.. what past future is there? We give as human people privacy... where do you think that thought.. that idea came from?