Evidence for God from Science

RickD wrote:

What I meant by implications wrt secured salvation is that the belief sort of forces you into either Calvinism or Pelaginaism/Antinomianism (here I go again with all those isms) and since I believe in some measure of free will, I reject both (and by extension, secured salvation, but let's not go there again, shall we?).

Byblos, from what I know about Pelagianism and Antinomianism, I reject both as well. However, as you know, I believe in assurance of salvation, for the true child of God.

Then that pretty much leaves you in Danny's camp with Calvinism. I knew you two would find a way to agree.

Byblos wrote:

RickD wrote:

What I meant by implications wrt secured salvation is that the belief sort of forces you into either Calvinism or Pelaginaism/Antinomianism (here I go again with all those isms) and since I believe in some measure of free will, I reject both (and by extension, secured salvation, but let's not go there again, shall we?).

Byblos, from what I know about Pelagianism and Antinomianism, I reject both as well. However, as you know, I believe in assurance of salvation, for the true child of God.

Then that pretty much leaves you in Danny's camp with Calvinism. I knew you two would find a way to agree.

I'm not sure what you mean here. From what I've read about Calvinism, I disagree with a lot of it. Calvinism's "predestination", is not what I believe biblical predestination is. Byblos, since you know more about Calvinism, than I do, could you please post a link to TULIP, that you believe is an accurate description of it. Then I can show you where I disagree with it. As I understand Calvinism and Arminianism, there are things in each that I agree, and disagree with.

CeT-To wrote:

DannyM wrote:

CeT-To wrote:Yeah... i'm not so sure about absolute free will either. Though one wonders what the essence of the sinful nature is..

It's man's inherent need to act on all his desires.

Where does this inherent need come from?

The Fall

domokunrox wrote:God created us to act freely is Free will, Danny.

I’m glad you see the compatibility, Dom.

Unless you define "act freely" as predestined. Which isn't acting freely.

Then you need to show me that we aren’t acting freely. Dom, to act freely involves making choices. But the very meaning of ’choice’ involves causal determination. Now, can you demonstrate that choices being causally determined are not true choices? A choice, by definition, entails being “free”. By His sovereign decree, God gave you a will that would freely come to Christ.

Liberty and Determinism do not co-exist as the same time and same sense.

Please define liberty, Dom.

The only conclusion we can come up with is that our choices are not the same sense of God's prophecies and omniscient property.

So our choices are independent from God, and God’s will and decree is waiting in the wings to act on our choices?

I propose that God has another property of his knowledge that is different and better then omniscience

Sorry, Dom, What? Explain this other property of God’s knowledge that is different from and better than knowledge. The very definition of omniscience rules out your own statement.

so that he can know us. This knowledge he has would not violate the free will that he obviously has designed us to be able to exercise.

This is all just meaningless, Dom. If God knows, then it is set. Fixed. You’re claiming an absolute free will while simultaneously affirming (or at least not making a solid argument against) God’s foreknowledge.

1 John 1:9 God is fair and just (Sovereign Ruler); believers are predestined (We have to be called) God chooses, however unbelievers are in hell due their own choice (freewill). God knows everything, you cannot fool, trick, nor deceive Him. He gives us the freewill choice to choose... whatever that choice may be good or bad, to accept His son or deny, He already knows. Not to say He chooses for us because He doesn't, He just knows which choice we are going to choose. What parent doesn't know their own children, at least better than anyone else?

Gods plan for salvation was predestined through His Son Jesus, and His will (desire) for us to all accept Him. If we accept Him we have in part become part of what has been predestined.

Man is a free moral agent (Rev. 22:17). If man were not a free moral agent, God would be entirely responsible for all sin, the effects of sin, rebellion, sickness, and the damnation of men, demons, and angles. Man has no choice about coming into the world but after he is here and old enough to be responsible, he is held accountable for his salvation or damnation (Mk. 16:15-16, Lk. 13:3, 5). Man has his own will to exercise in this matter (Jn. 3:16, 6:37, 7:17, Rev. 22:17). It is God’s will that all men who “will” to be, shall be saved (1 Tim. 2:4, 2 Pet. 3:9, Rev. 22:17). Promises are given to men upon the basis of their choice (Mt. 16:24-25, Mk. 3:35, 16:16, Jn. 3:16, 5:40, 7:17, 9:31, 12:26). In over 4,000 scriptures where “choose”, “will”, and other words expressing will power are used, not one suggests that God forces any man to accept Him and do His will. Man’s relationship with God is entirely on a voluntary basis (Mk. 16:16, Jn. 3:16, 7:17, 1 Pet. 5:2). No man recognizing that endless decisions are necessary to daily life can deny the fact of free acts and conduct, for he knows he has freedom of action-moral action-concerning right and wrong, and that he is responsible to God for his every act. If one can deny these facts, he can deny his very existence and prove it on the same basis he tries to prove that he is not a free moral agent. That he is and that he is free to choose his own destiny and daily moral actions are facts known to sane beings. Note some prophesies in (Heb. 10:26-39). Also, why fear and tremble if there is absolutely no possibility of a fall and a failure (Phil. 2:12, 1 Cor. 9:27, 10:12-14, Heb. 6:4-9, 10:26-39, 2 Pet. 2:20-22)? Suppose one will not obey in working out His own salvation, will God continue to work in him when man refuses to permit Him? Man’s power to will and to do as he pleases should not be puzzling. Such power comes from God but the use of it lies with man. One, who will not use this power to work out His salvation, will be held responsible. All men posses the power but all do not use it (Jn. 3:16-20, Mk. 16:15-16, 1 Jn. 1:9, Rev. 22:17)

zacchaeus wrote:1 John 1:9 God is fair and just (Sovereign Ruler); believers are predestined (We have to be called) God chooses, however unbelievers are in hell due their own choice (freewill).

Thank you zac for a nice post. However, I'm still not getting the following:
You said: "believers are predestined (We have to be called)". I suppose that everybody is being called otherwise it would not be fair IMO. Then you said that "God choosses". I wonder whether this is fair. What God chooses? People who would go to Heaven? This cannot be, since it would not be fair either. Does He choose people who choose Him? For me this is the only solution I can see now to the problem of free will.

nice to see you post zac

This cannot be, since it would not be fair either. Does He choose people who choose Him? For me this is the only solution I can see now to the problem of free will.

yes Hana, that would be indeed the right position, else if God pre chooses only some then it would contradict with John 3:16

1over137 wrote:

zacchaeus wrote:1 John 1:9 God is fair and just (Sovereign Ruler); believers are predestined (We have to be called) God chooses, however unbelievers are in hell due their own choice (freewill).

Thank you zac for a nice post. However, I'm still not getting the following:
You said: "believers are predestined (We have to be called)". I suppose that everybody is being called otherwise it would not be fair IMO. Then you said that "God choosses". I wonder whether this is fair. What God chooses? People who would go to Heaven? This cannot be, since it would not be fair either. Does He choose people who choose Him? For me this is the only solution I can see now to the problem of free will.

This is the $1,000,000 question in this thread. Some say predestination is God choosing who He will save. And some say predestination is God having foreknowledge of who will choose Christ. There are Christians on both sides.

I have a further problem neo. Christians say that it is the Holy Spirit who helps us to open our hearts. Let's see what for example Calvin wrote in Commentary on Romans 1:16 (page 42):

"... At the same time, as he works not effectually in all, but only where the Spirit, the inward Teacher, illuminates the heart, he subjoins, 'To every one who believes'."

Now get back to my problem. God chooses people. He chooses people who chooses Him, otherwise it would be in contradiction with John 3:16 (neo's interpretation). But who chooses God? Romans 1:16 (Calvin's interpretation) indicates that people who are illuminated (chosen by God) chooses God. So, in the end we are in a bad cycle. God chooses people who He chooses, which is again in contradiction with John 3:16 (neo's interpretation).

Either neo's interpretation of John 3:16 is wrong or Calvin's interpretation of Romans 1:16 and the presumption that HS must help us is wrong. Is there someone who knows Hebrew or old Greek? How those verses are in those languages? What is the task of the Holy Spirit really?

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.

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

I do not fully understand you dom. Sorry.

domokunrox wrote: It is up to God weather I find myself in a world which I am predestined;

I suppose that what would God want is you being in the world where you would end up in Heaven. And He would want everybody to end up in such a world. (Btw, why are we speaking about many worlds?)

domokunrox wrote: but it is up to me weather I am predestined in the world in which I find myself.

This I do not understand. How can it be up to you?

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

What this sentence says about free will?

by 1over137 » Mon Nov 07, 2011 7:15 pm

I have a further problem neo. Christians say that it is the Holy Spirit who helps us to open our hearts. Let's see what for example Calvin wrote in Commentary on Romans 1:16 (page 42):

"... At the same time, as he works not effectually in all, but only where the Spirit, the inward Teacher, illuminates the heart, he subjoins, 'To every one who believes'."

Now get back to my problem. God chooses people. He chooses people who chooses Him, otherwise it would be in contradiction with John 3:16 (neo's interpretation). But who chooses God? Romans 1:16 (Calvin's interpretation) indicates that people who are illuminated (chosen by God) chooses God. So, in the end we are in a bad cycle. God chooses people who He chooses, which is again in contradiction with John 3:16 (neo's interpretation).

Either neo's interpretation of John 3:16 is wrong or Calvin's interpretation of Romans 1:16 and the presumption that HS must help us is wrong. Is there someone who knows Hebrew or old Greek? How those verses are in those languages? What is the task of the Holy Spirit really?

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 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.

what I think most have done is, that they are either for total free will or total determinism. I maintained from the start that they both have to go hand in hand, God's will and our. Because Omniscience and the gift of free will have to have a balance to co-exist. Otherwise one overrides the other. I do not know if someone took my point seriously but I fail to see it any other way. If everything is fixed, God is unfair, if everything depends on us, that cancel's out God's plan. UNless they both work out at the same time, the problem remains.

When I previously wrote that God sees our actions and then does something, it was called "God of contingencies". But I beg to differ from this, I was simply saying that Gift of free will and God's omniscience are both true, exist and both are in effect at the same time. Unless there is a balance, one can not simply prevail over the other as some hold. I respect their view but I disagree on a few things.

neo-x wrote:If everything is fixed, God is unfair, if everything depends on us, that cancel's out God's plan.

Agreement.

by 1over137 » Mon Nov 07, 2011 8:53 pm

neo-x wrote:
If everything is fixed, God is unfair, if everything depends on us, that cancel's out God's plan.

Agreement.

So God has to be Omniscient while maintaining free will at the same time and this would certainly not make him the "God of contingencies".