Freedom/Foreknowledge and Ockham's way out

JohnP, that Bible has more than just the one verse you keep quoting, Romans 9:19, which also you don't seem to understand. This verse has NOTHING to do with the doctrine of the freedom of man's will.

Do you really know what "free will" is? Your statement that "free will does not exist", is poppycock, and in clear contradiction to the nature of man, and the Word of God.

Firstly, what do we mean by "free will"? Simply put, this. "The power of directing our actions without constraint by necessity or fate". Lets go right back to the Garden of Eden in Genesis chapter 2, where we read in verses 16,17: "And the Lord God commanded the man, saying, of every tree of the garden thou shall freely eat (Hebrew, "eating thou shall eat"): but of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, thou shall not eat of it: for in the day that thou eatest thereof, though shall surely die (or, dying thou shall die). Now, if man did not possess a "free will", then it was quite pointless for God to have told all of this to Adam and Eve. If God had determined the outcome of the events, rather than just foreknown them, then surely His desire or wish that they did not eat from this tree would have been obeyed. The fact that God tells them not to eat, and then also tells them what would happen to them should they eat, clearly says to me that they had a "free choice" to make here. As it happens, when the devil lied to them and said that they would not die, and tricked them into disobeying God, he succeded in his plan, for they did disobey what the Lord had commanded them not to do.

What did Joshua mean when he said: "choose you this day whom you will serve"? (Joshua 24:15). And then goes on to say what he means by this, "whether the gods which your fathers served that were on the other side of the flood, or the gods of the Amorites, in whose land you dwell: but, as for me and my house, we will serve the Lord". What did Joshua mean by "choose", if it does not mean to "decide between alternatives"?

What did Jesus mean in John 5:40, "and you are not willing to come to me, that you might have life"? Surely Jesus saw that everyone has the choice to either follow or reject Him. In this case they had chosen not to follow Him.

You further say:

"You have stated my belief on this subject very fully. God must be the Author of sin. His decrees are followed without deviation by us whether we are saved or not. Whether we sin or not. Whatever we do we do because God has decreed it. God is Sovereign. Praise the Lord"

"God must be the author of sin"??? I ask that you seek the Lord's mercy for this statement, as this language claerly is nothing short of blasphemy. Scripture very clearly says that God CANNOT be tempted with sin, and that He does not tempt anyome Himself. And here, you are accusing God of being the "author of sin"? I this instance I must queation whether you are a saved person? I am not concerned whether or not I am banned from this board, but, to allow someone to blaspheme like this, is surely against everything this board must stand for?

 

Hello Icthus:

Where do you stand on the matter of God's foreknowledge? If you believe that the future is an object of "possible knowledge" and that God indeed knows the future, how do you reconcile the apparent logical contradiction of believing in both free will and God's foreknowledge?

 

Hi Andre, I don't see any contradiction between God's "foreknowledge" and human "free will". All things that will come to pass are a certainty, and cannot be changed. God foreknows every aspect about the future, our choices included. Just because God "foreknows" what choices we will ever make, need to, and does not mean that He as God has had to predetermine them. I must ask you about sin. Surely you cannot believe, that, because God "foreknew" that man would fall, that He actually "played a part in this fall"? This is a monstrous view to have, espacially when speaking of our Holy God. How can God be equated with sin, as some are doing on this board? What does this to to His Holiness? No, these "doctrines" I will reject as being those of demons, and have no place in the Holy Word of God

 

Hello icthus.

I see nothing in your post to get you banned but if you were I would leave as well.
I am saved by the grace of God alone. I am no better or worse than you I believe. I'm sure you are entitled to your opinion of me and I am not offended by your remarks even if you are offended by mine. All I can say is that I believe the things I say are the truth and according to scripture. I find myself out on a limb and nothing would give me greater pleasure than being orthodox. Prove me wrong with scripture please.

I'm just off to housegroup so I'll catch you later.

john.

 

Hello Icthus:

I want to be with you on not seeing a contradiction, I really do. Have you read my material in this thread about this? Can you point out an error in the logic? If you can afford to take the time, please point out exactly where the flaw in my argument is. Take the cereal example I talk about. Can you tell me exactly where the error / oversight is in my analysis?

 

I don't thing that what you say is true of God! It is, however, true of man, because man does not know what God know's, therefore man must have belief. Why would God need to have beliefs? Is he not the author of what man believes?

 

I have read your posts on this thread, and can see that your "logic" is flawed, because it is not based on the Word of God. I mean no offence by this, but that you are merely following the conclusions of the teachings of Calvinism, which I regard on this issue to be at odds with Scripture.

You are incorrect to argue, that, just because you do something that God foreknew that you would to, this removes your "free will". How is this, may I ask? So, are you saying that if you were to go out and murder someone today, or commit adultery, or mug someone, that you did not actually choose to do these acts? Can you seriously say that if you were caught in any of these things, that you would tell the police, sorry, even though I did these crimes, yet, in reality it was not me, but God caused me to do them? I am at a loss on how Calvinists have been blinded to the perfect Truth. How, in the name of logic, which you speak of, can God's "Foreknowledge" be equated with "foreordaining"? The former speaks of God knowing all things, the latter, of his causing certian events. I reject as completely unbiblical that teaching that God "causes" all things to come to pass, including our sinful actions. John Calvin in is Institutes, says that God not only foresaw the fall of man, but from eternity He actually decreed it. (lib.ii.c.1.sec.9). This, my friend, is what Paul calls, "doctrines of demons"

 

Hi Icthus:

It's pretty clear that we are worlds apart on what is meant by logic as well as on other matters. I suspect we will just have to agree to disagree.

 

If what we believe is in the Bible, then its fine. If not, then it most probably is of the devil.

 

As has already been stated "how God knows WHAT God knows is for God to Know" in fact you have to BE God to know HOW He does it.

Since Calvinists fail at "Being God" they simply "imagine" HOW He knows all in the future and how that affects choice/options/free will.

That "imagination" is not a "kind of proof" of something - except to "prove" that they are not God and "can only imagine".

Having said that - it reduces the premise of this thread to less than a flight of imagination since "working out the mechanics" of how God knows something is beyond the scope of humanity.

In Christ,

Bob

 

Then does God have "options", does He have "free will"? Does He have "choice"?

If the answer is "yes" --- then the problem is solved.

In Christ,

Bob

 

Hello icthus.

First of all I think I should say that this is probably the most interesting and most important subject up for discussion. Free will probes all aspects of God and His dealings with the world He created.
Let God deal with those that insult Him but let us talk among ourselves. I'm sure if He strikes me down He will not injure His Bride. God will decide. The things that might come up are hard and in places terrible, horrible. So what? God is true though everyman is a liar. Jaw jaw not war war. (Churchill)

Good on him. You know more about Calvin than I do. Blow me down then why do the Calvinists keep on about Adam's free will? This is why, because Pelagianism is all pervasive even among my brothers and sisters and they try to cover this by keeping to claim they keep God's hands clean from sin while they usurp the throne and give it to Adam. God is Sovereign and Calvinists don't adam & eve it. Will there be faith when He returns? They think that God can't do as He pleases which is nothing new to the Arminians.
Understand this, God is the law. He is not constrained by it! He has not bound Himself to the law He binds us to. He will not forgive His enemies! He is The Rock. What?

JOB 1:20 At this, Job got up and tore his robe and shaved his head. Then he fell to the ground in worship 21 and said: "Naked I came from my mother's womb, and naked I will depart. The LORD gave and the LORD has taken away; may the name of the LORD be praised." 22 In all this, Job did not sin by charging God with wrongdoing. (Awe not works.) God is Sovereign.
Man has no ability to take life unless the Lord God Almighty has decreed it so. To say that this is to accuse God of sinning is a sin. In all this, Job did not sin by charging God with wrongdoing. God it is that is Sovereign not man. Man is nothing God is everything. Then he fell to the ground in worship... But who are you, O man, to talk back to God?
So the madman that says, "God told me to do it." Is not altogether wrong but remains responsible for his acts. Stinks? Yea! Scripture? Yes. That's Paul's conclusion in Romans nine. That's it.

Murder: Acts 2:23 This man was handed over to you by God's set purpose and foreknowledge; and you, with the help of wicked men, put him to death by nailing him to the cross.
You say He does not do such things I only have to show you an exception to disprove you, right?
Adultery: Romans 1:24 Therefore God gave them over in the sinful desires of their hearts to sexual impurity for the degrading of their bodies with one another.
Surely in the giving over is a loosening of the restraint He has on us (free will?). But in the giving over something happens that was not so before. The goal posts have been moved by His Nibs.
You are selfrighteous. I'm not knocking you I believe all men are. I'm not trying to get my own back but I speak a bit blunt. I believe all men are selfrighteous even the saints. That is what we are, sinners, saved by God. That is not the doctrine of demons. The doctrines of demons unseats God from His throne! Beat that!
Mugging: DT 8:1 Be careful to follow every command I am giving you today, so that you may live and increase and may enter and possess the land that the LORD promised on oath to your forefathers.

Listen and hear this: that was a mugging. But everything belongs to the Lord, everything includes us. We are not our own, none of us. He is The Despot! The Ultimate Control Freak! He does as He flipping pleases. He is Sovereign. By your leave, sure! HaHa. The cross was no accident, it was not a rescue plan but it was that God wanted to strut His stuff and He strutted His stuff on the cross in a way that revealed His glory in total. For Christ to die was all this is about. The glory of God is revealed in the cross and for this to take place man had to be sinners. Shameful thing to say? Be careful blasphemy is hanging between us.

GAL 5:16 So I say, live by the Spirit, and you will not gratify the desires of the sinful nature. 17 For the sinful nature desires what is contrary to the Spirit, and the Spirit what is contrary to the sinful nature. They are in conflict with each other, so that you do not do what you want. 18 But if you are led by the Spirit, you are not under law.

What you think? You either do what the fallen nature desires or you do what the Holy Spirit wants you to do. You however do not do what you want! Beat that! Romans seven in two verses! Praise the Lord!

GAL 5:16 So I say, live by the Spirit, and you will not gratify the desires of the sinful nature.
Answer that and sinner still you are. We are saved by grace not by works.

Do you ever have pie amd mash? Can you smuggle me some?

Ex pat john.

 

Hello Bob.

DT 29:29 The secret things belong to the LORD our God, but the things revealed belong to us and to our children forever, that we may follow all the words of this law.
We are seeking that which has been revealed. Do you dare to tell us when to stop? And so you should when we are going beyond what is written. Where's your scripture? Or have you forsaken that as well?

A misquote sandwhich? Shame on you. That is a lie. That was not originally posted by me. Correct it. Page 4 posted 19 May, 2005 15:48. (The thread is getting too long to have to check back like this. If anyone can quote in this fashion it is not too much to ask for a proper reference is it?)
I would though agree with my logic. I like logic even though we cannot trust it completely but it is a damn sight better than intuition!

That is the conclusion to be reached fron Andre's words. God is the unaviodable cuprit (Andre?) but it ain't His fault either. It is He that is to blame! But who am I to talk back to God? Ain't He got the right to dispose of us as He wills? Yes or no? Answer required.

Depends on what you mean by free will don't it? Can He be tempted? Then He is not free is He? Answer required.
Can He be tempted? Then He has no choice does He? Answer required.

john.

 

If God established the principles that we humans call "Beliefs", God does not need to believe in them for them to remain beliefs for humans! It is afterall, God's prerogative to establish whatever principle he desires, he is God ya know!

It is human to believe in principles and to call them "beliefs". Of course, I think God refers to his principles in scriptures as Laws!

 

And faith is being sure or something?

john.

 

How do you know that you can't pick Corn Flakes tomorrow morning? You can (and you will) pick whatever you want to. The choice you will make is determined, but you don't know for certain what it will be until you make it, and you do get to choose.

John 6:70 - "Jesus answered them, 'Did I not choose you, the Twelve? And yet one of you is a devil.'"

Phi. 1:22 - "If I am to live in the flesh, that means fruitful labor for me. Yet which I shall choose I cannot tell."

According to Andre's logic neither of these verses is correct. The Bible just doesn't talk about choices that way.

The issue of sovereignty rises here. EX 4:21 The LORD said to Moses, "When you return to Egypt, see that you perform before Pharaoh all the wonders I have given you the power to do. But I will harden his heart so that he will not let the people go. This is no simple disobedience but the direct control of a man by God designed to show us that our will is in the hands of God alone to do with as He pleases. To sin or not is in the hands of God.

john.</font>[/QUOTE]But Scripture also asserts that Pharaoh hardened his own heart. Yes, God was the primary cause of the hardening but Pharaoh was not acting against his will. He wanted to keep the Israelites in captivity and he chose to do so, as far as was in his power.

 

A few clarifications:

When I refer to an "intuition", I am referring to a belief that I have for which I cannot articulate (yet, at least) a supporting argument. Life experience has taught me that intuitions needs to be attended to - it is not wise to dismiss them.

I believe that the Scriptures support both the notion of God's omnisicience and man's free will. I think that I have provided a fairly strong case that if these notions are given their "common sense" interpretation, there is an unavoidable contradiction in claiming that they both apply. To me this means that the meaning of the terms "foreknowledge" and free need to be re-examined and reworked or we need to bite the bullet and give up on either free will or God's foreknowledge. Perhaps the "common sense" meaning that we attach to these notions needs to be revised.

Although I accord a high degree of respect to the Scriptures, I think that application of principles of deductive logic is a valid way to "test" the workability of concepts, whether they originate in the Bible or not. If the concepts conflict logically, something needs to be changed. In the present case, this may not mean dispensing with free will or foreknowledge, it may mean trying to clarify the common sense meaning we ascribe to these terms.

I kind of suspect that I will end up believing that "the future" is not really an object of possible knowledge, even for God. I am leaning towards thinking that to say that there is "a" future, we are speaking loosely, just like we do when we say there is "a" past - the past has no real existence even though we kind of think that it has. Perhaps God can no more know about "the" future than he can know about round squares. We shall see.....

Notwithstanding the confidence that I have previously expressed in the soundness of my argument to the effect that free will and God's foreknowledge are incompatible (as these terms are normally understood), I will undertake a quick study of the "religious/philosophical" literature to see what greater minds that mine have had to say about this seeming paradox.

 

Let's get to something that has weight to it rather than this Greg Boyd garbage.... Why not discuss "The Ends For Which God Created The World" if you truly want to know the "What's" of God's knowlege... or what's MORE important, the WHY'S of God's knowledge.