Nanja
Well-known member
The difference is, Satan was never given understanding of the scriptures, but God's Elect have.
They were chosen to Salvation and Belief of the Truth 2Thes. 2:13.
Free Will
- Thread starter Aetheryn
- Start date
The difference is, Satan was never given understanding of the scriptures, but God's Elect have.
They were chosen to Salvation and Belief of the Truth 2Thes. 2:13.
You're stuck in man natural choices. Everyone can do that. That's part of humans. You haven't yet been born again on God's choices. Maybe later, maybe never. Maybe you have but don't know it. That's why you don't know what you're talking about concerning spiritual things of God.
He runs everything. You didn't ask the right questions. Only you and your friends ask that to trick us and God. You need to admit you're a loser.
You haven't showed us any clues in your past posts that you are. You may be now after read my posts. You're not convicted of your sin and you show you don't have a need for Jesus.
So, not only do you call God a liar, as He said that He "Did not command it, nor did it enter his mind," You're also saying that evil comes from the mind of God. You are a Fool.
No, I'm asking the right questions. You just refuse to answer them because you're a coward, puffing yourself up with your elitist "I am one of the Elect" attitude.
Trick you? No, I'm trying to make you understand what it is you're saying.
So all you can do is sputter and put forth ad hominem attacks now? [MENTION=595]Knight[/MENTION]
Sent from my Pixel XL using TheologyOnline mobile app
You don't know God.
Run to your daddy now
So you think you get to determine when I become a Christian? You are probably the most arrogant of fools I know of, Tulip. "You may be now after read[sic] my posts." Do you truly not see how arrogant you are? How your beliefs have puffed you up, how they make you feel good about yourself, you of the elect? Did you know that some of the "Elect" will not see the Kingdom of God?
You see, I became a Christian in 5th grade. I'm 23 now. I chose to submit to God, to repent of my sins. I had never even heard of the "elect." I didn't even learn about the "elect" until much, much later in my life.
Your pride will be your downfall, Tulip.
Sent from my Pixel XL using TheologyOnline mobile app
You don't get to make that claim. You DO NOT have the authority.
Sent from my Pixel XL using TheologyOnline mobile app
You've been debating hyper-Calvinists for decades, apparently.
Doubtful.
God predetermined how He would conduct His will before Creation.
Through foreknowledge, He predestined all of Creation to a fate which does not contradict His perfect will.
It doesn't mean you do not have a free will, it simply means that God's will is above yours.
The Bible clearly illustrates that people are in bondage to sin until the Lord draws them. It is as plain and repeatedly shown in scripture as can be.
But you all go and still try to differentiate foreknowledge and predestination, and otherwise perpetuate all manners of intellectual sin just to assemble a prominence of your 'free will'.
John Calvin made fair warning about the very term in these regards, teaching that it only serves to seduce a person into believing they are the masters of God's own making, which is the denial of God's sovereignty at large.
“How few are there who, when they hear free will attributed to man, do not immediately imagine that he is the master of his mind and will in such a sense, that he can of himself incline himself either to good or evil? It may be said that such dangers are removed by carefully expounding the meaning to the people. But such is the proneness of the human mind to go astray, that it will more quickly draw error from one little word, than truth from a lengthened discourse. Of this, the very term in question [free will] furnishes too strong a proof…I think the abolition of it would be of great advantage to the Church. I am unwilling to use it myself; and others, if they will take my advice, will do well to abstain from it.”
freelight
Eclectic Theosophist
A view of free will from a higher cosmic perspective.......
A view of free will from a higher cosmic perspective.......
We use the term 'free will' because of its universal and popular understanding, but a more definitive term of 'freedom of choice' may be better for discussion purposes.
What if God has really given man free will to the degree that man actually can determine his own destiny and conditions of life, even within limited circumstances, and situational-contexts....man is still free to CHOOSE. What if the freedom of choice given to each individual is actually 'sovereign' by God's own will and allowance? This does not negate or diminish the over-all universal Sovereignty of God, but allows individuals to make their own free choice in any given matter, within divine providence. This includes the ultiamtes of life and death, which 'God' has freely already pronounced in the Old Covenant...which are further confirmed in the New. - "whosover wills (chooses) let him take the water of life freely". - this invitation on earth and in the heavenly courts above...still holds as long as any sentient being can consciously choose such.
Below represents one perspective from a particular dispensational revelation, on free will, in its most libertarian quality. Such is provided for the purpose of consideration and 'contrastive discussion' of the subject at hand.
So we see,...what IF our free will, in as far as we DO have actual genuine freedom to choose,...does itself determine our condition and ultimate destiny,...whether life-enhancing or death-impending? Just consider the possible truth of it. We read more on individual free will -
Adding to my commentaries previously here with b57/Nanja and the like, it remains that man must have some degree of actual genuine freedom of choice, or he is not free, neither can he be freely response-able for his own thoughts, words and actions. Without free will, there is no moral responsibility, growth, learning, evolution, progress...no actual earning of anything. Foreknowledge or predestination does not abrogate man's freedom of choice, since all actual and potential realities are always known to God, however they unfold in time. The very fact of free will is a divine gift or grant from God, so that man can partner, co-operate and COVENANT with God,...without such, no convenantal relationship can be had, no true love-relationship is possible. No religionist denies the Ultimate Universal Sovereignty of DEITY, and this still remains even if Deity gives man individual sovereignty of free will. Such a grant clearly involves the risk of sin and all its consequences, which is soul-death. But such is a risk Love is willing to take, or more rather is inevitable wherever real freedom of choice exists.
This concept of the 'sovereignty' of the will for man, may be rather new and tremendous for those who have never thought of it this way, having emphasized the Sovereignty of God to the point where man's perogatives and powers have been so obscured. But I think its time for man to consider his own sovereignty of free-will choosing, which does NOT put aside or negate the Sovereignty of God, but proves and glorifies it! (in the provision is the power to bring to pass both life and death potentials). Herein man then bears his own responsibilities within the freedom God has given, and thus all choices are justly mediated and consequenced thru their principled operations. Thus universal law prevails (what a man sows, that also shall he reap), respecting each individual soul and how it will integrate or dis-integrate.
* A video-audio of Paper 118 (Supreme and Ultimate - Time and Space) is available here, which covers the great cosmic domain of potentials and possibilities, and the liberties of free will within divine providence. - the terms and meanings may be extensive or a bit over-reaching here for those not familiar with its terminology, yet for expanding consciousness, one can give it a trial run
A view of free will from a higher cosmic perspective.......
We use the term 'free will' because of its universal and popular understanding, but a more definitive term of 'freedom of choice' may be better for discussion purposes.
What if God has really given man free will to the degree that man actually can determine his own destiny and conditions of life, even within limited circumstances, and situational-contexts....man is still free to CHOOSE. What if the freedom of choice given to each individual is actually 'sovereign' by God's own will and allowance? This does not negate or diminish the over-all universal Sovereignty of God, but allows individuals to make their own free choice in any given matter, within divine providence. This includes the ultiamtes of life and death, which 'God' has freely already pronounced in the Old Covenant...which are further confirmed in the New. - "whosover wills (chooses) let him take the water of life freely". - this invitation on earth and in the heavenly courts above...still holds as long as any sentient being can consciously choose such.
Below represents one perspective from a particular dispensational revelation, on free will, in its most libertarian quality. Such is provided for the purpose of consideration and 'contrastive discussion' of the subject at hand.
So we see,...what IF our free will, in as far as we DO have actual genuine freedom to choose,...does itself determine our condition and ultimate destiny,...whether life-enhancing or death-impending? Just consider the possible truth of it. We read more on individual free will -
Adding to my commentaries previously here with b57/Nanja and the like, it remains that man must have some degree of actual genuine freedom of choice, or he is not free, neither can he be freely response-able for his own thoughts, words and actions. Without free will, there is no moral responsibility, growth, learning, evolution, progress...no actual earning of anything. Foreknowledge or predestination does not abrogate man's freedom of choice, since all actual and potential realities are always known to God, however they unfold in time. The very fact of free will is a divine gift or grant from God, so that man can partner, co-operate and COVENANT with God,...without such, no convenantal relationship can be had, no true love-relationship is possible. No religionist denies the Ultimate Universal Sovereignty of DEITY, and this still remains even if Deity gives man individual sovereignty of free will. Such a grant clearly involves the risk of sin and all its consequences, which is soul-death. But such is a risk Love is willing to take, or more rather is inevitable wherever real freedom of choice exists.
This concept of the 'sovereignty' of the will for man, may be rather new and tremendous for those who have never thought of it this way, having emphasized the Sovereignty of God to the point where man's perogatives and powers have been so obscured. But I think its time for man to consider his own sovereignty of free-will choosing, which does NOT put aside or negate the Sovereignty of God, but proves and glorifies it! (in the provision is the power to bring to pass both life and death potentials). Herein man then bears his own responsibilities within the freedom God has given, and thus all choices are justly mediated and consequenced thru their principled operations. Thus universal law prevails (what a man sows, that also shall he reap), respecting each individual soul and how it will integrate or dis-integrate.
* A video-audio of Paper 118 (Supreme and Ultimate - Time and Space) is available here, which covers the great cosmic domain of potentials and possibilities, and the liberties of free will within divine providence. - the terms and meanings may be extensive or a bit over-reaching here for those not familiar with its terminology, yet for expanding consciousness, one can give it a trial run
But man cannot choose to not choose. Man is forced to make a choice, and that choice is made upon the conditions of which the higher will of God has ordained.
This is the key thing to the entire matter which is not understood among most people. Calvin took a very rational route in interpreting God, and it infuriated a lot of people who were frankly offended by reason in his time- it was the 1500's, and the general consensus was either superstitious or left many things to mystery and fanaticism.
The only people who didn't quite fit that bill were those like Arminius, and they were largely former students of John Calvin. They saw an opportunity to take the doctrines and dogmas of the Reformation, twist them, and gain followers of their own.
That reason alone is why Anti-Calvinists even exist- we may have succeeded in rendering the Catholic Church obsolete, but instead people vouched to transfigure half the world into thousands of denominations.
It's also why Christianity is losing touch with the world- all for the sake of attempting to secure prominence of free will.
I read your post, and the problem is that it ultimately insinuates that God willfully restricts His own sovereignty- no matter, even, how many times it brings up His sustained sovereignty.
Calvinism explicitly ridicules that conundrum, and that is why it's so offensive to certain people :chuckle:
freelight
Eclectic Theosophist
Serious study of the subject......
Serious study of the subject......
That is fair, and thanks for considering my commentaries - however we may expound and explore free will further and debate various points therein. My stance for now favors the view of there being freedom of choice within divine providence freely granted, and this free will is of course limited within a certain range of possibilities, but it is still nevertheless genuinely present at any point in time, as long as one is conscious and can choose among different options in any given situation. And even thus, in our communications, our own creative will and consciousness is engaging and determining HOW we are responding to one another, orchestrating the language. - this is how I see our relationship with the greater cosmic consciousness, we being 'co-creators' with 'God'. The very essence and function of consciousness is 'creative' by nature, however limited individual choice and consciousness might be in any given dimension...it is still operative.
I had written earlier and share a few links on the general discussion of 'free will' universally engaged within metaphysics and philosophy since time immemorial, concerning 'determinism' and 'compatibility', and modern day innovations of this age-old debate among current academics which would shed further light and progress on the subject since medieval times. This beats the surface shallow and petty retorts filling a lot of our discussion threads, but some prefer shallow wading over deeper waters. So,...I was going to do some more extensive study in that vein, then weave it back into a theological context, using all schools of thought, - I also draw on other religious texts as you know, and nuanced revelations, spirit communications and the like, to enhance and augment knowledge on any given subject,..and still there is always room for more refined and perfect knowledge. Revelation, learning is progressive, and will always BE....as long as we are individual points of consciousness sojourning in space and time.
Free will (Stanford encyclopedia of philosophy) - few have even dived that deep into all involved in this subject,...it is quite complex.
Serious study of the subject......
That is fair, and thanks for considering my commentaries
- however we may expound and explore free will further and debate various points therein. My stance for now favors the view of there being freedom of choice within divine providence freely granted, and this free will is of course limited within a certain range of possibilities, but it is still nevertheless genuinely present at any point in time, as long as one is conscious and can choose among different options in any given situation. And even thus, in our communications, our own creative will and consciousness is engaging and determining HOW we are responding to one another, orchestrating the language. - this is how I see our relationship with the greater cosmic consciousness, we being 'co-creators' with 'God'. The very essence and function of consciousness is 'creative' by nature, however limited individual choice and consciousness might be in any given dimension...it is still operative.I had written earlier and share a few links on the general discussion of 'free will' universally engaged within metaphysics and philosophy since time immemorial, concerning 'determinism' and 'compatibility', and modern day innovations of this age-old debate among current academics which would shed further light and progress on the subject since medieval times. This beats the surface shallow and petty retorts filling a lot of our discussion threads, but some prefer shallow wading over deeper waters. So,...I was going to do some more extensive study in that vein, then weave it back into a theological context, using all schools of thought, - I also draw on other religious texts as you know, and nuanced revelations, spirit communications and the like, to enhance and augment knowledge on any given subject,..and still there is always room for more refined and perfect knowledge. Revelation, learning is progressive, and will always BE....as long as we are individual points of consciousness sojourning in space and time.
Free will (Stanford encyclopedia of philosophy) - few have even dived that deep into all involved in this subject,...it is quite complex.
Last edited:
Call me a fool and then run and cry to daddy when I call you a loser? God still does the choosing.
Your posts show it
I've debated every stripe of Calvinist you can think of. I've been kicked out of Sunday School classes. I've kicked myself out of Sunday School classes. I've said things that any third grader should understand that have stopped Calvinists dead in their tracks, quoted passages of scripture that they never knew existed, read to them things they had no idea Calvin taught, believed and did.
Not only that but when I came here I took it very seriously and was intimidated like you can't believe. As a result, I actually studied and researched and learned about what I intended to debate. And while I certainly do not consider myself to be some sort of theology expert (far from it), I definitely am no mere hack.
I'll say it again, you cannot say anything to me on the topic of Calvinism that I have seen, read or heard a trillion times before.
Now, that's obvious hyperbole so maybe you'll shock the crap out of me but if there is anything that is doubtful, that's it!
This very simply not what Calvinism teaches! This is precisely what Arminius taught! Calvinism and Arminianism are not the same thing.
It should now be apparent that while most bible-believing Christians do in fact acquiesce to some form of predestination they depart on the issue of the basis of this election. Arminians will contend that we are chosen according to foreknowledge of merit(Bettenson 268), while a Calvinist theology maintains that we are chosen "because He has willed it"(Inst. III, 23, 2). Calvin believes that if you proceed further to ask why he so willed, "you are seeking something greater and higher than God's will, which cannot be found"(Inst. III, 23, 2). from John Calvin's Doctrine of Election by Rev. Bryn MacPhail
And direct from Calvin...
"No one who wishes to be thought religious dares simply deny predestination, by which God adopts some to hope of
life, and sentences others to eternal death. But our opponents, especially those who make foreknowledge its cause,
envelop it in numerous petty objections." (Calvin, Institutes of the Christian Religion, v. 2, Book III, Ch XXI, sec. 5, p. 926, Ed. John McNeill, Westminster Press, 1960.)
life, and sentences others to eternal death. But our opponents, especially those who make foreknowledge its cause,
envelop it in numerous petty objections." (Calvin, Institutes of the Christian Religion, v. 2, Book III, Ch XXI, sec. 5, p. 926, Ed. John McNeill, Westminster Press, 1960.)
"Free will" is not the complicated concept that theologians like to turn it into. It is nothing more than having the real ability to decide to do one thing or to do something else. There has to be a choice that I make myself in real time. And the proof that God has given us such a will is the concepts of love and justice.
"Calvin's predestination is "repugnant" to the justice of God because it affirms that God has absolutely willed to save certain men without having the least regard to righteousness and obedience(Arminius 624), and is "prejudicial" to man because it has been "pre-determined" that the greater part of mankind shall fall into everlasting condemnation(Arminius 626)." (Same reference as above.)
This ability to do or to do otherwise is called the principle of alternate possibilities.
Here's a syllogism that not only demonstrates the use of the the principle of alternate possibilities but also happens to prove that you're (Calvinism's) understanding of foreknowledge (and predestination for that matter) is rationally incompatible with the idea that we have free will...
T = You answer the telephone tomorrow at 9 am
- Yesterday God infallibly believed T. [Supposition of infallible foreknowledge]
- If E occurred in the past, it is now-necessary that E occurred then. [Principle of the Necessity of the Past]
- It is now-necessary that yesterday God believed T. [1, 2]
- Necessarily, if yesterday God believed T, then T. [Definition of “infallibility”]
- If p is now-necessary, and necessarily (p → q), then q is now-necessary. [Transfer of Necessity Principle]
- So it is now-necessary that T. [3,4,5]
- If it is now-necessary that T, then you cannot do otherwise than answer the telephone tomorrow at 9 am. [Definition of “necessary”]
- Therefore, you cannot do otherwise than answer the telephone tomorrow at 9 am. [6, 7]
- If you cannot do otherwise when you do an act, you do not act freely. [Principle of Alternate Possibilities]
- Therefore, when you answer the telephone tomorrow at 9 am, you will not do it freely. [8, 9]
Well, once again, I've been doing this long enough to know that proof-texting convinces no one of anything. I'll simply respond to this by asserting the opposite contention and leaving the concepts of love, justice and righteousness to testify as witnesses to who's reading of scripture divests God of these divine attributes.
If by this you mean that I intend to argue with you about the topic, yes. Whether it's an intellectual sin, I'll let the God of justice decide.
Notice the constantly self-contradictory nature of Calvin's complaint...
He complains that people use a term that he must acknowledge that God Himself both foreknew and immutably predestined that they use. He says that the human mind is prone to go astray. Astray from what, God's eternal and immutable decree? Surely not! He then advises his audience to abstain from the use of the term free will as though they have a choice.
This is a terrific example of a larger problem. This inability to prevent self-contradiction is present in ALL irrational worldviews and is perhaps the most important warning sign that whoever is expound such self-contradictory nonsense has made a significant error. What I will never understand is why pointing out such self-contradiction seems to persuade so few that an error has been made. And I don't just mean here on TOL. I had a Sunday School teacher that displayed the same behavior. He spent one Sunday morning on the subject of the death penalty and the discussion was about justice and why it was just to execute murderers. He made outstanding arugments and expounded quite eloquently on the principles of justice. When he finished I raised my hand and simply asked him how it was possible for him to reconcile all that he had just said about what justice is with the notion that God predestined people to eternal punishment for no reason other than it pleased Him to do so, which is what he had just got through teaching maybe a month earlier. He was stunned into literal silence. He had no answer whatsoever and just sort of stared at me for what felt like a long time. When he came to, he didn't even try to answer me and just played it off and said something like "Well, we don't have time to get into all that this morning." and moved on. And that's just the sort of reaction I seem to almost always see in people. They seem to compartmentalize their minds and avoid connecting too many dots for fear of having to unravel the philosophical and theological knots that result. It's as if they don't want to have a rational worldview. Regardless of why, such behavior might, on some level, be excusable for the laymen, for the average pew-sitting Christian who has little talent for and spends little or no time thinking such things through. But there are at least two classes of people who have no excuse for such behavior; bible teachers (from Sunday School teachers on up) and those who get on the internet to debate theology.
Resting in Him,
Clete
:yawn:
@Cete was a rabble rouser in churches, but has never actually spoken to a learned theologian.
That's the only thing to gether from your post, Clete. Everything you stated just beats around the bush, with a mere declaration that Calvin is wrong.
Which is usually the case with anti-Calvinists.
What Calvin perpetuated was anathema to those who preach free will because it is destructive to every single congregation that does so- the 'free will' crowd is inherently fanatical and make up virtually all the thousands of denominations that have sprouted over the past several centuries.
You all try to say that 'God is unjust' in Sovereign Election, but yet you ignore the fact that God still nonetheless willingly created a reality in which millions of people would suffer in Hell for eternity.
It's pretty much a non-argument on yalls part, and you all are too obsessed with your free will to see it :wave2:
@Cete was a rabble rouser in churches, but has never actually spoken to a learned theologian.
That's the only thing to gether from your post, Clete. Everything you stated just beats around the bush, with a mere declaration that Calvin is wrong.
Which is usually the case with anti-Calvinists.
What Calvin perpetuated was anathema to those who preach free will because it is destructive to every single congregation that does so- the 'free will' crowd is inherently fanatical and make up virtually all the thousands of denominations that have sprouted over the past several centuries.
You all try to say that 'God is unjust' in Sovereign Election, but yet you ignore the fact that God still nonetheless willingly created a reality in which millions of people would suffer in Hell for eternity.
It's pretty much a non-argument on yalls part, and you all are too obsessed with your free will to see it :wave2: