Free will or no free will?

[St Francis]

Then by extension, when God made Hitler He made the torture and death of millions of Jews. All I can say Mark is that I don't think your God is my God. And I am happy for it.

You shouldn't say things like that, bleitzel. You wouldn't if you had the fear of God.

But it does accurately reflect your position, does it not? If God has pre-ordained all our decisions, then this is the logical end of that position. The fact that it is so distasteful should make you realize that your position on free will is incorrect.

 

[Gabe]

Then by extension, when God made Hitler He made the torture and death of millions of Jews. All I can say Mark is that I don't think your God is my God. And I am happy for it.

You shouldn't say things like that, bleitzel. You wouldn't if you had the fear of God.

But it does accurately reflect your position, does it not? If God has pre-ordained all our decisions, then this is the logical end of that position. The fact that it is so distasteful should make you realize that your position on free will is incorrect.

Yes i think it does, and it is beliefs like this that expose Christianity and God to ridicule and ultimately turn many away from Christ. I have heard Atheists use the concept of predestination many times to paint a very ugly picture of God and that is not the same God that i love and worship.

I accept that God IS capable of anything He pleases and that He has predestined some people for certain tasks but to say that God controls our every thought and action is wrong simply because it would make HIM the cause of all evil in this world, in fact Beloved57 (who most will know, believes absolutely in predestination) has said in the past that he/she believes this to be the case. Every time a women is raped: Gods fault! Every time a child is molested: Gods fault! Everytime anybody sins: Gods fault. And after all is said and done, He throws the very people that He forced to sin into hell BECAUSE of their sins. If anyone believes this then that would make God (i am quoting an Atheist) an absolute sadist who makes Hitler look like a Saint in comparison.

Think about it:
Who is more evil: Satan who tempted Eve to sin or 'God' who made her sin?

God does not make me sin, if i sin it is through my own faults.

Gabriel

 

[Paidion]

Man has been created as a 'dependant being' - its too late for him to be independant. That from which man exercises 'will' or 'free will' is subject to his nature which is flesh or Spirit. He is either a slave to sin or a slave to righteousness. A slave in this argument is not free.

We need to be careful not to use a word in two different ways, and thus appear to make a point, but not actually make one.

The people who were brought from Africa and who became slaves in the U.S. were not free in the sense of being able to go where they wished, refuse to obey their masters, etc. Yet they, like everyone else, had the ability to will. To be able to will a thing, and to make one's will a reality are two different things. I can will to drive to town today, and can probably (though not certainly) be able to fulfill my will in this matter. I can will to flap my arms and fly into the sky, but I cannot carry out my will. So those who have a free will can carry out their wills in some cases and not in others.

Even the slaves in America could carry out their wills in some cases. Some of them willed to sing songs of praise to God, and they were able to make that happen. If they chose to run away (some made that happen also) they were usually caught and punished. This fact discouraged most from running away. But that did not mean that they lacked the free will to run away. Many did at the risk of cruel punishment or death.

People can choose to submit to God or rebel against God. God didn't CAUSE these choices. The person who chose was himself the cause. There are consequences to our choices as we all know. Some of them may deter us. For example, I believe we are safer NOT wearing seat belts. I can choose not to wear one. But the consequence of a heavy fine deters me from that choice. I can will not to wear a seat belt, and I can make my will reality. But I choose to wear one, not because I don't have a free will, but because I want to escape the fine. Many people do choose not to wear one in spite of the consequences. Certainly we are limited in carrying out our will, but we are not limited in willing.

When we say that we have "free will" we do NOT mean that we are physically capable of carrying out our will, that there are no constraints on our carrying out our will. By use of the term "free will", we mean that where there are choices available to us, we, ourselves, are capable of making the choice we will to make --- that no one else forces our choice upon us.

 

[St Francis]

Yup. I already said two pages ago:

...I think God can hold us in existance by his will (as he does) and still give us free will at the same time. God is a pretty nimble guy.

 

[francisdesales]

God does not make me sin, if i sin it is through my own faults.

Gabriel

Any "Christian" who believes otherwise is missing the entire point of salvation...

Regards

 

[stranger]

Yup. I already said two pages ago:

...I think God can hold us in existance by his will (as he does) and still give us free will at the same time. God is a pretty nimble guy.

OK, I 'will' to ask you two questions:
1. Have you done anything according to the flesh or fallen nature?
2. Have you walked in the Spirit and done anything according to the new nature?

I assume that both questions will be answered in the affirmative, yes and yes. It is also safe to say outside of these two 'determing natures' you are not held in existence by God - unless of course I have missed that elusive, nebulous, third category.

That a person can traverse from Spirit to flesh is not being contested, nor that through repentance a person can traverse from flesh to Spirit. But since I admit to no admixture any act or thought falls into one of two possible scenarios, namely flesh or Spirit. God is always able to 'judge' the difference.

God 'holds you in existence' in two possible states, flesh or Spirit. In each state a man finds that he is in a Master/ Slave relation. In both instances man is not the master, and yet remains responsible for what he thinks, says and does. Free will presupposes a free man, not a fallen man or redeemed man.

 

[stranger]

Paidion wrote:

We need to be careful not to use a word in two different ways, and thus appear to make a point, but not actually make one.

. . .

Even the slaves in America could carry out their wills in some cases. Some of them willed to sing songs of praise to God, and they were able to make that happen. If they chose to run away (some made that happen also) they were usually caught and punished. This fact discouraged most from running away. But that did not mean that they lacked the free will to run away. Many did at the risk of cruel punishment or death.

People can choose to submit to God or rebel against God. God didn't CAUSE these choices. The person who chose was himself the cause. . .

When we say that we have "free will" we do NOT mean that we are physically capable of carrying out our will, that there are no constraints on our carrying out our will. By use of the term "free will", we mean that where there are choices available to us, we, ourselves, are capable of making the choice we will to make --- that no one else forces our choice upon us.

Hi Paidion,

Thankyou for your reply. What is being discussed is 'how' we think about free will. I am happy to set aside 'consequence' but only to the degree that we do not depart from reality. A slave could run away from his master but in doing so can he escape his own state of nature (ie flesh or Spirit) at the time? No, beacause to escape these 'fetters' he would have to cease to be man and as far as the Christian world view goes - there is not suggestion of this.

To answer your objection directly - that I was using will or free will in two different ways - what I intended was to show by 'will/free will' does not impact the nature based argument.

People can choose to submit to God or rebel against God.

With God's help people can 'choose to submit to God' because the Spirit wages war against the flesh. If we think about Adam - yes, he made a choice to sin and in doing so initiated the Master / Slave relation for sinners. see my reply to St Francis.

God didn't CAUSE these choices. The person who chose was himself the cause.

Do you think that if the Serpent had never been allowed to enter the garden, that Adam would still have sinned?

 

[MarkT]

Then by extension, when God made Hitler He made the torture and death of millions of Jews. All I can say Mark is that I don't think your God is my God. And I am happy for it.

You shouldn't say things like that, bleitzel. You wouldn't if you had the fear of God.

But it does accurately reflect your position, does it not? If God has pre-ordained all our decisions, then this is the logical end of that position. The fact that it is so distasteful should make you realize that your position on free will is incorrect.

I see it this way. God put his wrath into Hitler so that he would be destroyed in hell. Hell is the thing to be feared bleitzel. The proverb says the wicked were made for the day of trouble. If that is true, then what can we say about it? Hitler was made for his purpose. The ones who do evil hate the light. But remember. We should resist the devil's suggestion that Hitler was somehow evil and we are not. Let's not judge anyone.

You might ask, why does God create devils? Well, maybe it's to put his wrath into them. So what? Do these men then go after false gods as well? Yes. God knows the things they do. They are the murderers, the slanderers, the haters of God. God made them. He knows who they are.

They would be vessels of wrath made for destruction.

 

[St Francis]

...God put his wrath into Hitler so that he would be destroyed in hell...

You mean from the very beginning? What kind of God would do that to a baby?

..You might ask, why does God create devils?...

I wouldn't ask that, because God did not create devils. Demons are either fallen angels who rebelled, or people who have chosen to go to hell.

 

[MarkT]

Then by extension, when God made Hitler He made the torture and death of millions of Jews. All I can say Mark is that I don't think your God is my God. And I am happy for it.

You shouldn't say things like that, bleitzel. You wouldn't if you had the fear of God.

But it does accurately reflect your position, does it not? If God has pre-ordained all our decisions, then this is the logical end of that position. The fact that it is so distasteful should make you realize that your position on free will is incorrect.

Yes i think it does, and it is beliefs like this that expose Christianity and God to ridicule and ultimately turn many away from Christ. I have heard Atheists use the concept of predestination many times to paint a very ugly picture of God and that is not the same God that i love and worship.

It's statements like this that expose the atheist in sheeps clothing. Like I said to bleitzel, if you had the fear of God, you wouldn't say such things.

Of course the atheists think God is a monster. You don't have to try and make God more appealing to them. You only have to read the Bible.

Speaking of wars, Jesus said, 'And when you hear of wars and rumors of wars, do not be alarmed; this must take place, but the end is not near.' The devil can cause all the wars he wants. Don't let it affect you. Don't worry about what the godless say. It's their job to get you off track. Disobedient children! Our job isn't to convince them that God acts and thinks like they do. We are not here to make the message more appealing to the wicked. There's a wide path and a narrow path. If you lead people on the wide path, you're not 'saving' them. The proverb is, 'There is a way which seems right to a man, but its end is the way to death.' Pr. 16:25

I accept that God IS capable of anything He pleases and that He has predestined some people for certain tasks but to say that God controls our every thought and action is wrong simply because it would make HIM the cause of all evil in this world, in fact Beloved57 (who most will know, believes absolutely in predestination) has said in the past that he/she believes this to be the case. Every time a women is raped: Gods fault! Every time a child is molested: Gods fault! Everytime anybody sins: Gods fault. And after all is said and done, He throws the very people that He forced to sin into hell BECAUSE of their sins. If anyone believes this then that would make God (i am quoting an Atheist) an absolute sadist who makes Hitler look like a Saint in comparison.

Think about it:
Who is more evil: Satan who tempted Eve to sin or 'God' who made her sin?

God does not make me sin, if i sin it is through my own faults.

Gabriel

No one is saying God makes us sin. On the contrary, it's Satan who suggests that it is OK to sin. The whole world seems to be in his power. The problem is we are evil. We are sinners. The difference is we know sin isn't OK. God puts his anger in the wicked. He makes them blind so they can't see what they are doing. He endures their hatred and laughter. God doesn't have any part in them; as Paul said, he lets them enjoy themselves. He gives them over to their passions. But it's also true that God directs our steps. If you are here, it is for his purpose. The good and the bad are captured in the net. In the end, the good are separated from the bad, and the bad are thrown into the fire.

 

[MarkT]

...God put his wrath into Hitler so that he would be destroyed in hell...

[quote:1pegjkhb]You mean from the very beginning? What kind of God would do that to a baby?

A baby? No. Forget about your human understanding. We are dealing with spirits, perhaps ancient spirits. Maybe Hitler was somebody important in heaven who followed after the Satan.

..You might ask, why does God create devils?...

I wouldn't ask that, because God did not create devils. Demons are either fallen angels who rebelled, or people who have chosen to go to hell.[/quote:1pegjkhb]

You know Judas was a devil. Jesus said so. I'm not sure I would say demons and devils are the same thing but anyways... God made Judas. He gave him life so that he would accomplish what he did. God gives life to the evil and to the good - 'for he makes his sun rise on the evil and on the good, and sends rain on the just and on the unjust.' Mt. 5:45

Judas didn't choose to go to hell anymore than Satan chooses to go to hell. The Serpent and his angels are sentenced to hell.

 

[Paidion]

Do you think that if the Serpent had never been allowed to enter the garden, that Adam would still have sinned?

I cannot say what Adam would have done, but I can say what he may have done. He may have chosen to sin at some point on his own initiative. After all, Satan himself did so. He didn't need some other evil one to tempt him. He was once a beautiful angel "Lucifer" in whom developed the ambition to be like God. He rebelled against God through his own choice.

Hell is the thing to be feared bleitzel.

No. Hell is not the thing to be feared. Sin is the thing to be feared. George MacDonald explained in Chapter one Salvation From Sin in his book The Hope of the Gospel:

The Lord never came to deliver men from the consequences of their sins while those sins remained. That would be to throw the medicine out the window while the man still lies sick! That would be to come directly against the very laws of existence! Yet men, loving their sins, and feeling nothing of their dread hatefulness, have (consistently with their low condition) constantly taken this word concerning the Lord to mean that he came to save them from the punishment of their sins. This idea (this miserable fancy rather) has terribly corrupted the preaching of the gospel. The message of the good news has not been truly delivered. Such men are unable to believe in the forgiveness of their Father in heaven, imagining Him not at liberty to forgive, or incapable of forgiving outright; not really believing Him to be God our Saviour, but a God bound (either by His own nature or by a law above Him and compulsory upon him) to exact some recompense or satisfaction for sin. Many such teachers have taught their fellows that Jesus came to take upon Himself our punishment and to save us from hell. They have represented a result of Christ's mission as the object of His mission. The object of Christ's mission was to save us from sin. One of the results is to be saved from hell. The true man does not desire the result except as a consequent on the gain of the object. The mission of Jesus was from the same source and with the same object as the punishment of our sins --- to cure our sin-sick condition. He came to work along with out punishment. He came to side with it, and set us free from our sins. No man is safe from hell until he is free from his sins. A man to whom his sins are a burden, while he may indeed sometimes feel as if he were in hell, will soon have forgotten that he ever had any other hell to think about than that of his sinful condition. For to him, his sins are hell. He would be willing to go to the other hell to be free of them. If he were free of them, hell itself would be endurable to him. For hell is God's and not the devil's. Hell is on the side of God and man, to free the child of God from the corruption of death. Not one soul will ever be redeemed from hell except by being saved from his sins, from the evil within him. If hell is necessary to save him, hell will blaze, and the worm will writhe and bite, until he takes refuge in the will of the Father. "Salvation from hell" is the concept of those for whom hell rather than evil, is the terror. But even if some poor soul seeks the Father because of dread of hell, he will be heard by the Father in his terror, and will be taught by Him to seek the greater gift --- freedom from his sins. In the greater gift, he will also receive the lesser --- escape from hell.

 

[Bubba]

This is a interesting thought in regards to whom ultimate responsibilty goes to in regards to the Fall. Being a Universalist, I have no problem with his claim. Bubba

Ultimate Responsibility, by Ken Eckerty


"Whether or not man has “free†will is really not the issue (although we try and make it the issue). The real issue is who is ultimately responsible? Modern evangelicalism tries to do everything it can to take the responsibility off of God. If we really think about it, God is the one who has “set us up†to fall. For reasons beyond our comprehension, God created man and put him in a "no-win" situation. Adam really had no chance other than to fail. How long could Adam have held out against this temptation? A day? A week? A year? Maybe ten years? Do you really think that Adam had the strength to say “no†to that temptation day after day? Do we think that somehow we would have performed better than Adam? I think not!



Most of us can’t handle the thought that we were set up by God, so we blame Satanâ€â€but mostly we blame man. We do not want to think that ultimate responsibility lies with God. If we say that all of the world’s suffering is because of man’s choice or Satan’s deception, and we fail to attribute all things as coming from God (see note), even evil (Judges 9:23; Job 2:3; Is. 45:7; Amos 3:6; Rom 11:36), then God is not totally sovereign. In other words, something happened beyond God’s control.


Arminianism teaches that God knew what would happen in the garden, but couldn’t prevent it because of man’s “free†will. If this is true and something actually happened beyond God’s control, what makes us think that something like this won’t happen again? If God had to put plan “B†into effect, what makes us think God won't resort to a plan “C†or a plan “Dâ€Â? You say, “That's just being plain ridiculous!†Yes, this is my point exactly, but this is what the “orthodox†church teaches. According to the common view, God could not stop evil from coming in and putting a stain on His creation. God wanted Adam and Eve to remain in a state of permanent bliss in the garden, but He couldn't stop sin from entering in, so He had to change His planâ€â€He had to come up with something better. This, my dear friends, is ridiculous. In our efforts to relieve God of the responsibility for evil in the world, we devise a man-made doctrine which undermines the sovereignty of God and should give every child of God a reason to question whether they can really trust God or not.



Calvinism, on the other hand, teaches that God not only knew what would happen, but wouldn’t stop it because the “fall†of man was ordained. In this case, there is an element of truth; however, the inevitable result of this view is to say then that God ordains most people to spend a conscious eternity without Him. This view is too grotesque to even dwell on it at length.



If, as a result of man’s choice, most men suffer endless torment, then God has failedâ€â€in particular, the Cross has failed. Either he can’t make it right (Arminianism) or He won’t make it right (Calvinism). Each view maligns the nature and character of God. The first says God is weak and limited by Satan and man. The second says that God is cruel, unjust, and unloving. Both are unthinkable."

 

[mondar]

The second says that God is cruel, unjust, and unloving. Both are unthinkable."

If you can present this caricature of Calvinism, can I present some unnamed people as saying God winks at sin in an unholy way?

If you think that would be a misrepresentation of what you believe, dont you think I would say that you misrepresent Calvinism as presenting God as cruel, unjust, and unloving?

 

[Paidion]

This is a interesting thought in regards to whom ultimate responsibilty goes to in regards to the Fall. Being a Universalist, I have no problem with his claim. Bubba

I, too, believe in the universal reconcilation of all to God. But I have great problems with the claim that God's sovereignty implies Him being the source of every event --- every rape and murder of little girls, every torture, etc. It makes Him the very author of sin.

God created man in His image. What does that mean? It can't mean His PHYSICAL image since God is spirit. It must be His spiritual and mental image. God has free will; thus man who was created in His image has free will. We only are responsible for our own sinful choices. To suggest that God is responsible man's sinful choices is a blasphemous demeaning of His character.

 

[Bubba]

Mondar and Paidion,
I only quoted part of what Eckerty wrote, and I am sure, if you read the whole works, this quote would not seem so harsh. His premise is that at no time did the fate of man depend on what happen in the Garden and man choices afterwards, in regard to one’s ultimate salvation. Jesus is the Lamb slain before the foundation of the earth and those He so chooses to believe in Jesus in this age will believe (the elect, the first-fruits) and those in every age who come to the knowledge of Him are due to His sovereign choice. Yet, when it is all said and done all of man will be reconciled. 1Cor. 15:20ff; “And now, Christ hath risen out of the dead -- the first-fruits of those sleeping he became,
21for since through man [is] the death, also through man [is] a rising again of the dead,
22for even as in Adam all die, so also in the Christ all shall be made alive,
23and each in his proper order, a first-fruit Christ, afterwards those who are the Christ's, in his presence,
24then -- the end, when he may deliver up the reign to God, even the Father, when he may have made useless all rule, and all authority and power --
25for it behoveth him to reign till he may have put all the enemies under his feet --
26the last enemy is done away -- death;
27for all things He did put under his feet, and, when one may say that all things have been subjected, [it is] evident that He is excepted who did subject the all things to him,
28and when the all things may be subjected to him, then the Son also himself shall be subject to Him, who did subject to him the all things, that God may be the all in all.â€Â
Mondar, I was a Calvinist for nearly 20 years and do not believe Eckerty misrepresented the Calvinist position. I then and still believe God to be totally sovereign in our lives. The “bottom line†is that no one comes to knowledge of God without first their heart being regenerated by the Holy Spirit, such is the result of the 1st Adam’s fall. Most Calvinist like I gravitated to the Infralapsarian position, because it is simply more palatable then the Supralapsarian position, but even Calvin himself struggled between the two positions as did I, because the latter is more logical if God is indeed omniscient and omnipresent as we both believe. So, we can pretend that being left in ones sins (God being passive) and being created into vessels of wrath makes it Ok to send the multitude of mankind to eternal punishment, but down deep I think even you have a problem with why God would choose to make you into a vessel of mercy (God being actively involved in the individual life for no other reason than His good pleasure) and sending another to his demise. Yes, the Calvinist God is seen as cruel, unjust and unloving, just ask any Pelagian- Arminian, who believes in freewill as the answer to the dilemma of evil and an eternal Hell. Which brings me to what you wrote Paidion; when God allowed evil to enter in to the garden was it not His decision from “the get goâ€Â, did He not know Adam and Eve would fail miserably? Is not sin insidious once it gets a “foot holdâ€Â, did He not know that? Is He surprised by the magnitude of man’s sin throughout the ages? Yes, everyone from Adam on down to us in the “here and now†makes choices in regards to behaviors, but are these choices truly free of any influences? I think not. Is man responsible for his behaviors the Bible says we are; is God responsible for setting up the whole drama in the beginning? Yes He was and evil and actual sin in each of our lives are necessary in God’s economy to bring us into purification through the work of His Son Jesus in our very lives. Will someday evil, sin and death be no more, certainly. Even those who “rape and murder little girlsâ€Â, such is the great love of God who is not the author of sin but brings the sinner like those you imagine to a relationship with Himself.
Grace, Bubba

 

[mondar]

Bubba, should not this conversation be in our debate thread?

............. Most Calvinist like I gravitated to the Infralapsarian position, because it is simply more palatable then the Supralapsarian position, but even Calvin himself struggled between the two positions as did I, because the latter is more logical if God is indeed omniscient and omnipresent as we both believe.

I am still working on that. I am not sure that I understand all the different arguments on that issue. Because I have done little work and thinking with regard to that issue I would prefer being silent about this issue. I hope those who know what this is about will cut me a break here, I am certainly not good at everything. I dont understand how the infalapsarian position works when looking at Eph 1:4.

So, we can pretend that being left in ones sins (God being passive) and being created into vessels of wrath makes it Ok to send the multitude of mankind to eternal punishment, but down deep I think even you have a problem with why God would choose to make you into a vessel of mercy (God being actively involved in the individual life for no other reason than His good pleasure) and sending another to his demise.

This might be why we differ. I do not marvel at God sending people to hell. I think it is where we all belong. I suspect we look at man in different ways. I find little value in the rebellious creature called man. I watch my culture in the USA degenerate into deeper and deeper rebellion against God. Man is a killer. He is a user and destroyer. I see people as defiant rebels who hate God and hate his standards. On the other hand, I marvel at Gods grace. I know there is nothing in me worth his efforts at redemption. I fully recognize that I am made of the same clay as the vessels of wrath. My question for God will not be "why did he make some to be vessels of wrath," but "how could he choose anyone to be a vessel of mercy."

If I look positively upon universalism, it is not on the basis of my views on the nature of God, or the nature of man, rather, I find universalism to be more consistent in its reading of certain passages of scripture. While I might view your exegesis as more consistent then Pelagianism/Arminianism, my disagreement with your exegesis is sincere. This does not mean I look down on Arminian/Pelagians. Two or three years ago, I was one.

Yes, the Calvinist God is seen as cruel, unjust and unloving, just ask any Pelagian- Arminian, who believes in freewill as the answer to the dilemma of evil and an eternal Hell.

You could add to Pelagian and Arminians, that the unregenerate, unsaved, also see the Calvinist God as unjust. Probably even Satan himself would see God as unjust. Does God really deserve to have such control over our eternal destiny? The Arminian can see God as sovereign in most area's, but suddenly when you talk about salvation, the Arminian returns to the sovereignty of man. Calvinism is the only view that breathes the "rarefied air" (J McArther) of the complete sovereignty of God.

OK, now its you and paidon's turn.

 

[Paidion]

Mondar, I was a Calvinist for nearly 20 years ...

Bubba, are you not a Calvinist even now in every respect except for your belief in the universal reconciliation of man to God? Perhaps I have misunderstood you, but you sound like a Calvinist. If you aren't can you tell us any other ways in which you differ with Calvinism?

 

[Bubba]

Paidion,
If you were to ask me that question a year and a half ago I would have said I am a 5 point Calvinist, these days I consider myself a Universalist who believes God is sovereign. I attend a Presbyterian Church, but I am being ostracized due to my new belief. It has been difficult, I am no longer asked to teach or join committees and etc. Within Reform circles, the “limited atonement†is a big deal, and I am considered a heretic, so, no I am not a Calvinist. My oldest son will no longer discuss theology with me, or read anything I suggest, which is painful; considering we once shared openly. The shining light in all this is that my Bible Study group at my house has been coming to this revelation of God’s love for all people along side me.
Grace, Bubba

 

[Bubba]

Mondar,
We agree on many things Mondar, yet I think Christendom has done God disfavour in not seeing the big picture in regards of ultimate redemption for all of mankind. Old habits and thoughts are hard to break, but I believe that with the better translations of Scripture, and an outpouring of revelation, one day many more will break away from what was once considered orthodox. I have to be careful not to get carried away; the moderators do not like this sort of discussion.
In His Grace, Bubba