Free Will, Predeterminism and Predestination

[Dorothy Mae]

Hebrews explains it detail.

Please quote it because Jesus said if we don’t forgive, God won’t forgive us. Couldn’t be clearer.

 

[Dorothy Mae]

No, Frank being chosen on the basis of faith in Christ, not works, is not in dispute. And Stan being chosen to go to hell is a misuse of the word 'elect'. I only see 'election' being used in scripture when speaking of saved, born again people. But if I missed a case where that is not so, I will change my view on that.

If some (majority) are not chosen as the elect by God arbitrarily before they were born, then they are chosen for hell. In your view God unjustly chooses most for hell.

 

[Dorothy Mae]

I do not believe God is cruel. What I believe is God is able to exercise his free will without hindrance despite him allowing us to have a measure of free will. I personally don't believe God exercises the free will to send people to hell who would have otherwise been saved if he's just had mercy on them. That's where I'm at on that.

You’re completely missing why He has mercy and forgives some. Our part you leave out.

 

[Dorothy Mae]

Actually, I'm coming to the more correct understanding that our will stops at the border of God's will. We're like rats in a maze. It's easily observable that we are not free to do whatever we want. We can only exercise our free will within the boundaries that God has allowed us to do that. For example, I can not decide on my own that I will be a saved person. That can only happen, if it will happen, when God opens up that part of the rat maze to this miserable rat. And he did that...when he decided to do that, not me.

Let me ask you, is God’s will done on the earth? If our will stops at His will, then His will must always be done, right? Is this what we see?

 

[jasonc]

Does God simply create and just not allow us to on our own create our own traps ?

We willed these sufferings we go through ,Satan isn't allowed or others to harm us.

God isn't in control of man?

He didn't actually mean I raise nations and kings ?


I'm not quite reformed but arminist will as I have seen it tell the abortion doctor while he goes to abort that baby Jesus loved them and not say more at all.

For if you have not believed God is already condemned you .

 

[Jethro Bodine]

Let me ask you, is God’s will done on the earth? If our will stops at His will, then His will must always be done, right? Is this what we see?

Sometimes his will is done, sometimes it is not. But our will ends when and where his will is done.

 

[Jethro Bodine]

You’re completely missing why He has mercy and forgives some. Our part you leave out.

No, I did not leave out our part. I said we are elected on the basis of our faith.

 

[Jethro Bodine]

If some (majority) are not chosen as the elect by God arbitrarily before they were born, then they are chosen for hell. In your view God unjustly chooses most for hell.

No the argument goes that all men are already hell bound, having been turned over to that condemnation in Adam. The elect are those who are chosen for salvation and delivered from that fate--chosen/elected on the basis of their faith, not their works. God determined right from the foundation of the world that faith will determine the lineage through which His mercy is given. The plan and method and purpose is what is predetermined, not who is predetermined to receive mercy, though in his foreknowledge he already knows who will choose to receive that mercy when given the opportunity as he makes it available according to his will, not ours.

 

[Dorothy Mae]

No the argument goes that all men are already hell bound, having been turned over to that condemnation in Adam. The elect are those who are chosen for salvation and delivered from that fate--chosen/elected on the basis of their faith, not their works. God determined right from the foundation of the world that faith will determine the lineage through which His mercy is given. The plan and method and purpose is what is predetermined, not who is predetermined to receive mercy, though in his foreknowledge he already knows who will choose to receive that mercy when given the opportunity as he makes it available according to his will, not ours.

Yes I’m familiar with this explanation. It avoids the obvious cruelty of determining before conception that some are predestined for hell or if you prefer, some are predestined to have no possibility of escaping hell through no choice of their own. Salvation is for only a few lucky ones and the rest are doomed and neither God not these special ones care. It’s more cruel than Putin who has no special ones he protects but treats all Ukrainians the same, civilian and military.

 

[Dorothy Mae]

No, I did not leave out our part. I said we are elected on the basis of our faith.

Ah so everyone can have faith and become elected? That’s not what you said. We can’t have faith before the foundation of the world, btw, so that cannot be a reason you believe as you do.

 

[Dorothy Mae]

. But our will ends when and where his will is done.

Sometimes or always?

 

[Jethro Bodine]

Ah so everyone can have faith and become elected? That’s not what you said.

The debate about election is whether or not God purposely selects some people to be given saving faith while denying everyone else saving faith. I personally don't think that's what election means, though the element of God's sovereignty is certainly present in election. For it is clear that no one is saved apart from God first giving them saving faith, at the time and place of His choosing, and that he does in fact deny some people the power of saving faith at one point or another.

We can’t have faith before the foundation of the world, btw, so that cannot be a reason you believe as you do.

I never said people have faith before they are created. That surely is not what it means to be elected on the basis of faith. The purpose of election is that people would be chosen by God on the basis of their faith, not on the basis of their works. That's the point of election. It's a works vs. grace/faith theology, not a 'God makes some people believers, and makes other people unbelievers' theology. Pay particular attention to the emboldened parts in the passage below where Paul talks about what God's purpose in election means.

Romans 9:10-18
10...Rebecca’s children were conceived by one man, our father Isaac. 11Yet before the twins were born or had done anything good or bad, in order that God’s plan of election might stand, 12not by works but by Him who calls, she was told, “The older will serve the younger.”d 13So it is written: “Jacob I loved, but Esau I hated.”e

14What then shall we say? Is God unjust? Certainly not! 15For He says to Moses:

“I will have mercy on whom I have mercy, and I will have compassion on whom I have compassion.”

16So then, it does not depend on man’s desire or effort, but on God’s mercy. 17For the Scripture says to Pharaoh: “I raised you up for this very purpose, that I might display My power in you, and that My name might be proclaimed in all the earth.” 18Therefore God has mercy on whom He wants to have mercy, and He hardens whom He wants to harden.

So you can see here that the idea of election is that salvation is by the merciful calling of God through faith, not the effort of works, or even the desire to be saved. That's the point Paul is making. And it fits in nicely with the context of his discourse. But instead election has been pigeon-holed as a theology of God sovereignly deciding before the creation of the world who is going to be saved and who is not going to be saved apart from any consideration of what the individual wants.

While there is an element of God's sovereignty in the 'who, when, and where' of salvation the point is election through God's calling of faith is the plan for how to be saved, not works, and that plan was established in Christ before the foundation of the world. Salvation by faith, not works is what was decided before the foundation of the world, not who would purposely be made to be a believer and be saved and who would purposely not be made a believer and be lost.

 

[rstrats]

But instead election has been pigeon-holed as a theology of God sovereignly deciding before the creation of the world who is going to be saved and who is not going to be saved apart from any consideration of what the individual wants.

But my question had to do with "knowing" and not with "deciding".

 

[Jethro Bodine]

But my question had to do with "knowing" and not with "deciding".

God's foreknowledge of knowing who the elect are is made clear by these verses.

Romans 8:29
29For those God foreknew

1 Peter 1:1-2
To the elect who are exiles of the Dispersion throughout Pontus, Galatia, Cappadocia, Asia, and Bithynia, chosen 2according to the foreknowledge of God the Father

He knows ahead of time who will receive and retain the word of the gospel. And he knows ahead of time who won't, yet he creates them anyway, patiently bearing with them in order to "show His wrath and make His power known" and to "make the riches of His glory known" to those who would.

 

[Jethro Bodine]

If you were holy and blameless you wouldn’t cackle at others like that. I actually understand your thinking quite well. You think how you behave to others doesn’t matter.

It does matter. You can tell if a person is born again or not by what behavior they are characterized by.

Hence you laugh at them when they don’t agree with this theology.

Actually, I was laughing out loud at the fact that you did not understand what I said and that it went right over your head. But that's okay. It's frustrating, but it happens. It's when someone doesn't agree with me and is defying easily understood truth (I'm not saying that's the case with you) I laugh at what they believe, not them personally. There are many laughable doctrines in the church today. At least what you say has some sanity about it.

 

[Jethro Bodine]

No, sanctified means set apart when referring to people. Holy refers to behavior. Jesus said without holiness shall no man see God. If every born again person is automatically holy, this makes no sense.

It probably makes no sense to you because you're not acknowledging that the word 'sanctified' has several meanings and applications in scripture.

Strong’s Definitions [?](Strong’s Definitions Legend)
ἁγιάζω hagiázō, hag-ee-ad'-zo; from G40; to make holy, i.e. (ceremonially) purify or consecrate; (mentally) to venerate:—hallow, be holy, sanctify.

G37 - hagiazō - Strong's Greek Lexicon (kjv)

G37 - ἁγιάζω hagiázō, hag-ee-ad'-zo; from ; to make holy, i.e. (ceremonially) purify or consecrate; (mentally) to venerate:—hallow, be holy, sanctify.

www.blueletterbible.org

Scroll through all the verses listed at the bottom of the page where the word is used in the Bible and see how a particular meaning of the word is being used in one place and another particular meaning of the same word is being used in another place. But, fundamentally, 'hagiazo' means to be set apart for God, and being made clean for that purpose.

I found that the best way to understand what it means is to see how vessels were 'set apart, and cleaned' for the special purpose of service to God in the temple and were to be distinguished from common vessels that were not set apart for service to God, and that a set part, clean vessel of God was not to be used for common purposes or else it would be defiled.

'Sanctification' is the word we use for, both, being set apart for a divine purpose, and the cleansing associated with being set apart. At salvation we are set apart (sanctified) to God for his use, and also made clean and being made clean (sanctified) for his use. It's both, something that has already happened, and something that is presently happening.

 

[Dorothy Mae]

It probably makes no sense to you because you're not acknowledging that the word 'sanctified' has several meanings and applications in scripture.

Strong’s Definitions [?](Strong’s Definitions Legend)
ἁγιάζω hagiázō, hag-ee-ad'-zo; from G40; to make holy, i.e. (ceremonially) purify or consecrate; (mentally) to venerate:—hallow, be holy, sanctify.

G37 - hagiazō - Strong's Greek Lexicon (kjv)

G37 - ἁγιάζω hagiázō, hag-ee-ad'-zo; from ; to make holy, i.e. (ceremonially) purify or consecrate; (mentally) to venerate:—hallow, be holy, sanctify.

www.blueletterbible.org

Scroll through all the verses listed at the bottom of the page where the word is used in the Bible and see how a particular meaning of the word is being used in one place and another particular meaning of the same word is being used in another place. But, fundamentally, 'hagiazo' means to be set apart for God, and being made clean for that purpose.

I found that the best way to understand what it means is to see how vessels were 'set apart, and cleaned' for the special purpose of service to God in the temple and were to be distinguished from common vessels that were not set apart for service to God, and that a set part, clean vessel of God was not to be used for common purposes or else it would be defiled.

'Sanctification' is the word we use for, both, being set apart for a divine purpose, and the cleansing associated with being set apart. At salvation we are set apart (sanctified) to God for his use, and also made clean and being made clean (sanctified) for his use. It's both, something that has already happened, and something that is presently happening.

OK, but if the life does not actually engage in DOING the commandments of God, then the vessel was never sanctified. I suspect you see this as an automatic matter with no effort on the part of the believer and no denying themselves, but the scripture speaks of the christian life that refused to surrender and obey Christ as being wood, hay and stubble that is burned up. No sanctification occurred in that man. There will be those who appear before Christ having done more or less nothing at all and have nothing to show for all that was given them. All of what they did was burned up.

For those who have no wish to deny themselves, this sounds like works salvation but it is not even addressing salvation. It is being the good soil that yielded a crop pleasing to the Master. None of that is determined by God's sovereignty but by our sovereignty. God does not make us do his will.

Stop saying it makes no sense to me. It makes no sense to anyone. I understand it perfectly and you embrace two absolutely incompatible positions by turning off your mind. It happens. Reformed theology does this to a man and I have seen this over and over again.

 

[Dorothy Mae]

It does matter. You can tell if a person is born again or not by what behavior they are characterized by.

correct

Actually, I was laughing out loud at the fact that you did not understand what I said and that it went right over your head.

No, you were laughing at me and I understand your position much better than you do. You do not see the problems in your theology and have actually embraced incompatible points and are comfortable with that nonsense. That is, you have turned off your reason in order to embrace the idea that Gods will overrides our will or our will stops its freedom where God's will is met which has to mean God has his will done all the time which is totally nonsense. I am very sure you will not say that you do His will all the time. Or do you say that God's will overrides your will and your will ends where God's will begins and so you do His will all the time? If you did you would not have laughed AT someone who does not agree with you and insist their understanding is inferior. That challenged your pride I am sure.

But that's okay. It's frustrating, but it happens. It's when someone doesn't agree with me and is defying easily understood truth (I'm not saying that's the case with you) I laugh at what they believe, not them personally. There are many laughable doctrines in the church today. At least what you say has some sanity about it.

You ought to stop laughing. Only the demonic world uses laughter to put a man down. Jesus never did this to those who disagreed with him or even understood less. God's will is that you stop laughing at people who disagree with you. It is demeaning.

 

[Dorothy Mae]

The debate about election is whether or not God purposely selects some people to be given saving faith while denying everyone else saving faith.

God does not give man saving faith. That is no where in scripture. Jesus taught men to have faith and was critical of the disciples when they did not have enough faith. He never told God to give them faith. He never preached to men to ask God to give them faith so they could believe.

I personally don't think that's what election means, though the element of God's sovereignty is certainly present in election. For it is clear that no one is saved apart from God first giving them saving faith, at the time and place of His choosing, and that he does in fact deny some people the power of saving faith at one point or another.

I thought you wrote "election" is not in the Bible. Is not at all clear that no one is saved without God doing it all by giving them faith. No one in the Bible hinted at this nor was it preached. Faith is something we choose, not we are given.

I never said people have faith before they are created. That surely is not what it means to be elected on the basis of faith. The purpose of election is that people would be chosen by God on the basis of their faith, not on the basis of their works. That's the point of election. It's a works vs. grace/faith theology, not a 'God makes some people believers, and makes other people unbelievers' theology. Pay particular attention to the emboldened parts in the passage below where Paul talks about what God's purpose in election means.

Romans 9:10-18
10...Rebecca’s children were conceived by one man, our father Isaac. 11Yet before the twins were born or had done anything good or bad, in order that God’s plan of election might stand, 12not by works but by Him who calls, she was told, “The older will serve the younger.”d 13So it is written: “Jacob I loved, but Esau I hated.”e

God loved the man Esau and made a covenant with him giving him land that Jacob was not to take. God loved the man. This is a reference to the people who came from that man. The plan of election as it were, is the salvation that came to the world through the descendants of Jacob. That is the reference, not that Jacob was going to heaven and Esau to hell before birth. What a horrible idea!

14What then shall we say? Is God unjust? Certainly not! 15For He says to Moses:

“I will have mercy on whom I have mercy, and I will have compassion on whom I have compassion.”

AH, who does God have compassion and mercy upon. Well, one group is those who are merciful. Blessed are the merciful for they shall receive mercy. So it does not depend upon the whims of God but our behavior. Those are the people he has mercy upon, not a predetermined bunch regardless of how they life.

16So then, it does not depend on man’s desire or effort, but on God’s mercy. 17For the Scripture says to Pharaoh: “I raised you up for this very purpose, that I might display My power in you, and that My name might be proclaimed in all the earth.” 18Therefore God has mercy on whom He wants to have mercy, and He hardens whom He wants to harden.

Where is salvation in that verse? Pharaoh was raised up so that God might show himself to the world. No salvation there. Does God regularly do this? No, only once in human history. And "harden" is best thought of as strengthen. Daniel and his friends "hardened their hearts" so that they would not commit sin. This is also hardening. Wouldn't some of us like that kind of hardening? Does it have to do with salvation? No, not at all.

So you can see here that the idea of election is that salvation is by the merciful calling of God through faith, not the effort of works, or even the desire to be saved.

Not at all. The jailor asked Paul was must he do to be saved. The crowd asked Peter what they must do to be saved. The soldiers came to John the B and asked what they should do. Of course desired to be saved plays a major role. The desire to be saved is actually the beginning and required. It is not passively done to us as you believe. And no, faith is not dropped into us, lucky creatures, while we sleep.

That's the point Paul is making. And it fits in nicely with the context of his discourse. But instead election has been pigeon-holed as a theology of God sovereignly deciding before the creation of the world who is going to be saved and who is not going to be saved apart from any consideration of what the individual wants.

When and what God decides can be understood when one generally comes to understand the ways of God but no theology in the world will explain it as it requires relationship with God Himself.

While there is an element of God's sovereignty in the 'who, when, and where' of salvation the point is election through God's calling of faith is the plan for how to be saved, not works, and that plan was established in Christ before the foundation of the world. Salvation by faith, not works is what was decided before the foundation of the world, not who would purposely be made to be a believer and be saved and who would purposely not be made a believer and be lost.

Well, this is saying anything much worth saying. No one disagrees that God decided the salvation plan beforehand. I think this "element of God's sovereignty" is not something you have accurately described. Your description lacks coherence. His ways do not fit into a simple description but they make complete and wonderful sense as well as having all the morally delightful attributes.

 

[Jethro Bodine]

I think this "element of God's sovereignty" is not something you have accurately described.

I think I did when I talked about the fact that no one can be saved until God allows it.

Acts 16:14
14Among those listening was a woman named Lydia, a dealer in purple cloth from the city of Thyatira, who was a worshiper of God. The Lord opened her heart to respond to Paul’s message.

Until God does this you got nothing. No power of one's will can be exercised until God allows it.