Evidence for God from Science

Brother Danny, I apologize for replying late

This is a god of contingencies, Neo. Have you noticed, Bro, that throughout this thread you have gone all round the houses trying to defend an absolute free will? To the point of making God the god of contingencies. If God is omniscient, there is nothing He cannot see. Forget middle knowledge and counterfactuals - God knows ALL there is to know.

Danny, I am afraid I may not have been good enough to make my point clear to you. I was not going for absolute free will. But somehow I fail to see how God giving us free will would make him a "God of contingencies". Either he gives free will or he doesn't.

But on a side note, do see a problem when you say, God knows everything before hand. For example, if God knows everything, since he is outside of time. He sees the future, past and present at the same time and everything happens to him in the "now - in this very moment kind of thing", as some have said. Then don't you think this makes predestination probably the most absurd word? Predestination, the very word implies time as a basic factor to cater a definition. If to God there is no time in the same sense as humans, since he is outside of it then predestination shouldn't even be a concept to God, because to God there is no future he cannot know. The future to him is now, and therefore he cannot pre-destine anyone.

I mention this because this was the answer some gave. But I say, if this is it, then it highlight what I said, even more. If God knows all then he can not go down the predestination road, can he? This would kill free will and John 3:16. Yeah sure, some things are in God's plan, he makes them happen anyway. So as I said, God's big plans always happen, but on my personal decisions, in my personal life, I always have a choice, God would never enforce his plan against my will. That is just not the God I know, bro.

Bro, do you agree that having free will means, we can change our mind regardless of God's will, any time we want?

neo-x wrote: John 3:16 does not needs my interpretation. That verse is probably the most straight forward gospel message in the the whole Bible. It speaks for it self. And that is why predestination for salvation, through election of a few, sounds absurd to me. This is the premise that Calvin brings. I know there are several different positions inside Calvinism which try to simplify or complicate the basic principle of Calvinism but over all the crux of it remains the same.

God chooses those who seek him and those who come to him are not turned away. In the end teh choice to go to God rests in our own decisions, not God's election. For even so, if God would elect any of us, he would not force us to be saved. He can only do his part and that is John 3:16, now among men, whoever does their part and receive what God did, he finds salvation.

You say neo, that God chooses those who seek Him. I'd like to ask you, which people are seeking Him? Because, once I was told that noone would be seeking God without God first drawing him to Him.

by 1over137 » Mon Nov 07, 2011 9:33 pm

neo-x wrote:
John 3:16 does not needs my interpretation. That verse is probably the most straight forward gospel message in the the whole Bible. It speaks for it self. And that is why predestination for salvation, through election of a few, sounds absurd to me. This is the premise that Calvin brings. I know there are several different positions inside Calvinism which try to simplify or complicate the basic principle of Calvinism but over all the crux of it remains the same.

God chooses those who seek him and those who come to him are not turned away. In the end teh choice to go to God rests in our own decisions, not God's election. For even so, if God would elect any of us, he would not force us to be saved. He can only do his part and that is John 3:16, now among men, whoever does their part and receive what God did, he finds salvation.


You say neo, that God chooses those who seek Him. I'd like to ask you, which people are seeking Him? Because, once I was told that noone would be seeking God without God first drawing him to Him

This notion is out of place and certainly ill worded. For example, a lot of people seek God, did God already draw them in? yeah he can, How? evangelism, direct or indirect. But this does not mean this is the only way people can find God. some can find him accidentally or by seeking him. Or else the command to proclaim the message of God is fruitless, isn't it. It would be meaning less if God already chooses those he wants to save. That is why extreme Calvinists do not find the act of proclaiming the Gospel, necessary at all. They think those who are elected for saving will be saved by the Holy spirit nonetheless.

Jesus tells us that it is the ministry of the Holy Spirit to draw us to Christ and bring us to repentance. When we are truly sorry for our sin and desire to be forgiven by God and accept salvation, we are repenting. However we get to a place where we are repenting, our repentance is, in itself, an evidence of the presence and ministry of the Holy Spirit. But it can happen in a lot of ways, none of which are exclusive as the only option, for example, God can plan to reveal himself to someone in a dream or vision or someone can ask God, regardless of knowing him personally, but still seeking him. Or you hear or read or listen to the repentance call by the tv or radio evangelism, a bible on your desk, a verse on a wall, a minister in the church or a man sitting in the bus next to you and reading his bible, anything. I see this all as the work of the Holy spirit. He draws people but not against their will, and certainly not a few. For that makes God's salvation only for a handful. In fact I think Holy spirit works through us that he can draw a lot of people but I think most do not heed his call and turn away, they get that certain feeling and then they see the world around them and choose to live it, without looking at God's invitation. In that sense, Holy spirit works for all, not for a few, which indeed would be justified to God's love and fairness.

Holy spirit, drawing someone to God:
1. can not do it against their will if they choose to walk away,
2. is not exclusive of God's plan of salvation for the world as in John 3:16
3. his intent is that all are saved, although that predestines nothing. Ultimately it is our choice to accept this work of God.

domokunrox wrote:I think I have the answer.

It is up to God weather I find myself in a world which I am predestined; but it is up to me weather I am predestined in the world in which I find myself.

This sounds like gobbledegook to me. Can you elaborate?

God assures us that ANYONE in the world who WOULD under ANY circumstances be FREELY saved IS FREELY SAVED.

Again, can you show me where God assures of all the highlighted bits above, please?

Brother Neo,

neo-x wrote:Brother Danny, I apologize for replying late

This is a god of contingencies, Neo. Have you noticed, Bro, that throughout this thread you have gone all round the houses trying to defend an absolute free will? To the point of making God the god of contingencies. If God is omniscient, there is nothing He cannot see. Forget middle knowledge and counterfactuals - God knows ALL there is to know.

Danny, I am afraid I may not have been good enough to make my point clear to you. I was not going for absolute free will. But somehow I fail to see how God giving us free will would make him a "God of contingencies". Either he gives free will or he doesn't.

But on a side note, do see a problem when you say, God knows everything before hand. For example, if God knows everything, since he is outside of time. He sees the future, past and present at the same time and everything happens to him in the "now - in this very moment kind of thing", as some have said. Then don't you think this makes predestination probably the most absurd word? Predestination, the very word implies time as a basic factor to cater a definition. If to God there is no time in the same sense as humans, since he is outside of it then predestination shouldn't even be a concept to God, because to God there is no future he cannot know. The future to him is now, and therefore he cannot pre-destine anyone.

I mention this because this was the answer some gave. But I say, if this is it, then it highlight what I said, even more. If God knows all then he can not go down the predestination road, can he? This would kill free will and John 3:16. Yeah sure, some things are in God's plan, he makes them happen anyway. So as I said, God's big plans always happen, but on my personal decisions, in my personal life, I always have a choice, God would never enforce his plan against my will. That is just not the God I know, bro.

Bro, do you agree that having free will means, we can change our mind regardless of God's will, any time we want?

If God's knowledge and decree is dependent upon the actions of human beings then this makes Him a god of contingencies. There's no two ways about it. I'll answer you fully in a bit, just trying to catch up with the posts and PMs, Brother.

If God's knowledge and decree is dependent upon the actions of human beings then this makes Him a god of contingencies. There's no two ways about it. I'll answer you fully in a bit, just trying to catch up with the posts and PMs, Brother.

No problem bro, just to clear one thing, I do see your point, but then what you are proposing as the alternative, doesn't answer my question.

please if you will, let me know of your pov on my questions, so I would more clearly know your position on this

1. do you agree that having free will means, we can change our mind regardless of God's will, any time we want?
2. Does God's foreknowledge makes us do things that we do not have a choice in?
3. How does free will and God's omniscience co-exist in your view? e.g please if would explain, could Paul have refused God's calling on the road to Damascus? if yes wouldn't this be contradictory to God's foreknowledge, and if No, then where is the free will?

Thanks for you words and time

I don't know but at some point and time our freewill aligns with His absolute and perfect will... in which case now I believe we haven't even touched on the difference in Gods permissive will and His absolute perfect will. Is it not predestined for us to choose Him? ...but then again reading through older posts got me thinking of frewill... how free is it? In order to get to heaven we have no choice in the matter but to choose Jesus Christ as Lord and Savior and ask forgiveness of our sins... ONE WAY! We don't even have a choice in that matter, and then obviously if we reject Him we know what happens. My position is the same and hasn't changed but these were just some instant questions that came to mind reading since my last post.

neo-x wrote: 1. do you agree that having free will means, we can change our mind regardless of God's will, any time we want?

No. We can go against a command of God, of course, but not His decree.

neo-x wrote:2. Does God's foreknowledge makes us do things that we do not have a choice in?

No I don’t, Bro, since we still exercise choice. I think, because of the fall and sin, there is no absolute free will. We love sin and are at enmity with God. God still allows us to freely act on our sinful and worldly desires. But by grace He has willed so that some will freely come to Christ. This, for me, is where we actually get some freedom back! We are set free from the constraints of this world and given life. We have chosen life. So, while still in a fallen state, we are alive again in Christ. So on this we see there was no true freedom of the will (uncorrupted) to begin with. Yet we are still free to make all kinds of worldly choices, in what many would intuitively call “the freedom of the will.” To deny a ‘worldly’ free will would be to argue inwards and back out the other side again.

neo-x wrote:3. How does free will and God's omniscience co-exist in your view? e.g please if would explain, could Paul have refused God's calling on the road to Damascus? if yes wouldn't this be contradictory to God's foreknowledge, and if No, then where is the free will?

Since God knew that Paul would accept the call, at that time, then Paul would not have done otherwise. This is practically tautological, my Brother. And if God foreknows you will come to Christ, then it is either determined by God or it’s determined by you.

neo-x wrote:Thanks for you words and time

Brother, always a pleasure and never a chore. Hope I made some semblance of sense.

Danny wrote:

Brother, always a pleasure and never a chore. Hope I made some semblance of sense.

Danny, it makes perfect sense to me. But, what do I know? Apparently, I don't know too much about Christianity, and how to defend myself against falsehood.

RickD wrote:Danny wrote:

Brother, always a pleasure and never a chore. Hope I made some semblance of sense.

Danny, it makes perfect sense to me. But, what do I know? Apparently, I don't know too much about Christianity, and how to defend myself against falsehood.

I didn't 'alf chuckle at that, Rick. It seems Dom disagrees with you for agreeing with me (or not openly disagreeing witrh me), but hasn't told us why, other than it's because I'm wrong. That told you, huh?

DannyM wrote:

RickD wrote:Danny wrote:

Brother, always a pleasure and never a chore. Hope I made some semblance of sense.

Danny, it makes perfect sense to me. But, what do I know? Apparently, I don't know too much about Christianity, and how to defend myself against falsehood.

I didn't 'alf chuckle at that, Rick. It seems Dom disagrees with you for agreeing with me (or not openly disagreeing witrh me), but hasn't told us why, other than it's because I'm wrong. That told you, huh?

Danny, I haven't heard anything in these threads, from you, that I disagree with. As a matter of fact, I've been talking to August, in private , and there's not a whole lot I disagree with, with what August believes. It seems there may be a HUGE misrepresentation of Calvinism, throughout Christendom. But let's keep that between us, OK?

If God's knowledge and decree is dependent upon the actions of human beings then this makes Him a god of contingencies.

"dependent" would seem to be the problem. Can God be permissive regarding the actions of humans without being dependent?

Rick,
August could probably help a lot of Calvinists out with what they think is Calvinsim.

jlay wrote:

If God's knowledge and decree is dependent upon the actions of human beings then this makes Him a god of contingencies.

"dependent" would seem to be the problem. Can God be permissive regarding the actions of humans without being dependent?

That's not my argument. Of course God is permissive without being dependent. My point is that, if acts of the will are antecedent to God’s decree, then God now depends on the creature while He could decree nothing. That's my point.

DannyM wrote: No I don’t, Bro, since we still exercise choice. I think, because of the fall and sin, there is no absolute free will. We love sin and are at enmity with God. God still allows us to freely act on our sinful and worldly desires. But by grace He has willed so that some will freely come to Christ. This, for me, is where we actually get some freedom back! We are set free from the constraints of this world and given life. We have chosen life. So, while still in a fallen state, we are alive again in Christ. So on this we see there was no true freedom of the will (uncorrupted) to begin with. Yet we are still free to make all kinds of worldly choices, in what many would intuitively call “the freedom of the will.” To deny a ‘worldly’ free will would be to argue inwards and back out the other side again.

This is the main point of contention.

"God still allows us to freely act on our sinful and worldly desires"

When you decide to sin, there is no other option than sinning? That's not a choice, there's no free act. A choice assumes alternatives.

"Yet we are still free to make all kinds of worldly choices"

So the only decisions we are allowed to make are the one's that don't matter?

Echoside wrote:

DannyM wrote: No I don’t, Bro, since we still exercise choice. I think, because of the fall and sin, there is no absolute free will. We love sin and are at enmity with God. God still allows us to freely act on our sinful and worldly desires. But by grace He has willed so that some will freely come to Christ. This, for me, is where we actually get some freedom back! We are set free from the constraints of this world and given life. We have chosen life. So, while still in a fallen state, we are alive again in Christ. So on this we see there was no true freedom of the will (uncorrupted) to begin with. Yet we are still free to make all kinds of worldly choices, in what many would intuitively call “the freedom of the will.” To deny a ‘worldly’ free will would be to argue inwards and back out the other side again.

This is the main point of contention.

"God still allows us to freely act on our sinful and worldly desires"

When you decide to sin, there is no other option than sinning? That's not a choice, there's no free act. A choice assumes alternatives.

"Yet we are still free to make all kinds of worldly choices"

So the only decisions we are allowed to make are the one's that don't matter?

Do you have a logical proof of decisions that are made without any influence?