Predestination Versus Freewill
- Thread starter Matt23
- Start date
-
Christian Chat is a moderated online Christian community allowing Christians around the world to fellowship with each other in real time chat via webcam, voice, and text, with the Christian Chat app. You can also start or participate in a Bible-based discussion here in the Christian Chat Forums, where members can also share with each other their own videos, pictures, or favorite Christian music.
If you are a Christian and need encouragement and fellowship, we're here for you! If you are not a Christian but interested in knowing more about Jesus our Lord, you're also welcome! Want to know what the Bible says, and how you can apply it to your life? Join us!
To make new Christian friends now around the world, click here to join Christian Chat.
Gotcha. I kinda figured that was it but didn't want to assume.
I always looked at the issue of predestination/foreknowledge like this: Suppose I'm standing on a mountain overlooking a valley. A single train track runs across the valley. I see two trains enter the valley from opposite ends, heading towards each other. I say "if those trains don't stop they will run into each other". The trains don't stop and do eventually run into each other.
Does the fact that I knew before it happened that the trains would collide then mean that I caused or predestined them to collide? Or did I just foresee their destiny based upon the observation of what they were going to do?
I always looked at the issue of predestination/foreknowledge like this: Suppose I'm standing on a mountain overlooking a valley. A single train track runs across the valley. I see two trains enter the valley from opposite ends, heading towards each other. I say "if those trains don't stop they will run into each other". The trains don't stop and do eventually run into each other.
Does the fact that I knew before it happened that the trains would collide then mean that I caused or predestined them to collide? Or did I just foresee their destiny based upon the observation of what they were going to do?
S
And if you foresaw the trains far enough in advance, maybe you build a fork in the tracks? Maybe the trains collide and it affects the passengers but not the end plan of humanity to a large extent. God being emotionally attached to each passenger knows their eternal state whether saved or unsaved, maybe He intervenes on behalf of one or the other to oversleep and miss the train altogether.
Or the train engineers could see the oncoming train and each take as extreme measures as possible to prevent a crash. The free will debate gets polluted with all manner of foolishness (not calling the train crash analogy foolish at all, it was a good one 
) when people try to minimize elements of our precarious positions if and when we are living aside from the will of God. Personally, I prefer the term self will The fall of all creation was premised upon Adam and Eve allowing their pride of life to override their loyalty to God, Whom they knew personally. They chose self will over God's will. Yes, God allowed it. Does God want bots or people who freely choose Him? Some say we are already the former. I say God desires we be the latter.
) when people try to minimize elements of our precarious positions if and when we are living aside from the will of God. Personally, I prefer the term self will The fall of all creation was premised upon Adam and Eve allowing their pride of life to override their loyalty to God, Whom they knew personally. They chose self will over God's will. Yes, God allowed it. Does God want bots or people who freely choose Him? Some say we are already the former. I say God desires we be the latter.
S
I don't normally answer a question with another question, but trying to answer yours will turn into an all day debate. I will say that in my mind, neither side has a slam dunk argument based on the fact that imo there is not sufficient knowledge on the subject. It would be a shortcut to ask you what is it about Calvinism that without a doubt untangles the answer of predestination?
God has direct control over all people in that He uses His perfect knowledge of people to manoeuvre their will according to His good pleasure.
All men are naturally doomed. He chooses whom He will save from among them.
True as seen above.
Give your Scriptures. This is not so.
That is incorrect. God does not 'programme' people. He alters their thinking with their cooperation
This is where you go wrong
God is not omnibenevolent in the sense of finally setting His love on all men. He chooses whom He will love as opposed to those to whom
He shows benevolence,.
Neither. God is consciously all powerful and His all powerfulness is by controlled by His consciousness of each matter.
Only to those who are ignorant,
God the Son temporarily kept His omniscience from affecting His manward side. His human free will WAS His manward side. Thus on the human side it was affected along with His omniscience,
He veiled both His omniscience and His omnipotence on His manward side except as He obtained them from the Father,.
God controls our free will as described in 1. He is not therefore responsible for our subsidiary actions meanwhile.
Last edited:
S
The free will debate gets polluted with all manner of foolishness (not calling the train crash analogy foolish at all, it was a good one ) when people try to minimize elements of our precarious positions if and when we are living aside from the will of God.
) when people try to minimize elements of our precarious positions if and when we are living aside from the will of God.
Personally, I prefer the term self will The fall of all creation was premised upon Adam and Eve allowing their pride of life to override their loyalty to God, Whom they knew personally. They chose self will over God's will. Yes, God allowed it. Does God want bots or people who freely choose Him? Some say we are already the former. I say God desires we be the latter.
The fall of all creation was premised upon Adam and Eve allowing their pride of life to override their loyalty to God, Whom they knew personally. They chose self will over God's will. Yes, God allowed it. Does God want bots or people who freely choose Him? Some say we are already the former. I say God desires we be the latter.
Last edited:
There seems to be a great deal of variance I do not necessarily see it as a bad thing, even though some people point at our differences and say it is not possible for us to all be talking about the same God (that is a favorite ploy of atheists)... but of course, they are wrong The fact that we each have a unique relationship with God should be well understood from our own human relationships, whereby even within the confines of a single family with shared values and group experiences and the same parents etc, siblings will have different views and experiences and beliefs about their parents
Exactly, not to mention that there are so many "whosoever may" in Scriptures; we are told to choose whom we will serve; all are invited to the wedding supper, Christ died for all and invites each person to respond personally to the good news of the kingdom
I do not necessarily see it as a bad thing, even though some people point at our differences and say it is not possible for us to all be talking about the same God (that is a favorite ploy of atheists)... but of course, they are wrong The fact that we each have a unique relationship with God should be well understood from our own human relationships, whereby even within the confines of a single family with shared values and group experiences and the same parents etc, siblings will have different views and experiences and beliefs about their parents Exactly, not to mention that there are so many "whosoever may" in Scriptures; we are told to choose whom we will serve; all are invited to the wedding supper, Christ died for all and invites each person to respond personally to the good news of the kingdom
There seems to be a great deal of variance I do not necessarily see it as a bad thing, even though some people point at our differences and say it is not possible for us to all be talking about the same God (that is a favorite ploy of atheists)... but of course, they are wrong The fact that we each have a unique relationship with God should be well understood from our own human relationships, whereby even within the confines of a single family with shared values and group experiences and the same parents etc, siblings will have different views and experiences and beliefs about their parents
I do not necessarily see it as a bad thing, even though some people point at our differences and say it is not possible for us to all be talking about the same God (that is a favorite ploy of atheists)... but of course, they are wrong The fact that we each have a unique relationship with God should be well understood from our own human relationships, whereby even within the confines of a single family with shared values and group experiences and the same parents etc, siblings will have different views and experiences and beliefs about their parents
True we are all struggling to understand God.
Exactly, not to mention that there are so many "whosoever may" in Scriptures; we are told to choose whom we will serve; all are invited to the wedding supper, Christ died for all and invites each person to respond personally to the good news of the kingdom
But in the end all depends on God's choosing us before the foundation of the world (EPH 1.3-4).
D
I don't look to untangle. God is infinite and perfect. I'm not. Instead I look to see the all-I'm-ever-going-to-get-out-of-understanding-God-for-now for answers.
TULIP fits that bill. Do I understand how it works? Of course not, but that goes back to "God is infinite and perfect. I'm not." TULIP fits into the parameters of the whole Bible. Arminius missed most of what the Bible says.
I can go so far as to tell you about where I get my views on Predestination though. Romans 1 - 11.
Soooo, what is missing? What am I getting wrong? What are the Arminians getting wrong? If you're a neitherist, surely you can define either what we're getting right and wrong.
TULIP fits that bill. Do I understand how it works? Of course not, but that goes back to "God is infinite and perfect. I'm not." TULIP fits into the parameters of the whole Bible. Arminius missed most of what the Bible says.
I can go so far as to tell you about where I get my views on Predestination though. Romans 1 - 11.
Soooo, what is missing? What am I getting wrong? What are the Arminians getting wrong? If you're a neitherist, surely you can define either what we're getting right and wrong.
S
Fair enough, you've found your answers in TULIP. But you're asking me to assess the pros and cons of both Calvinism and Arminianism. I've taken that nature walk before and although it's quite scenic, the destination (no pun) sucks. I thought it might be easier to pole vault to the sucky destination by having you state how TULIP fits the bill specifically. That way we can fast forward to the part where neither of us convinces the other.