A Determinist Question

[Benjamin]

Why the anger? Is that of God? Or is it of the rebellious enemy of God?

You are CONSTANTLY on this board telling us that YOUR POSITION represents God and God's Word, and yet you are SO SO SO ANGRY. That is not God. That is YOU. Can you not see it? Guess not...

Why not do what I mentioned above and start with the first verse of the Bible and we'll examine the Scriptures together to see what God has indeed said.

Question for you, because I know that the Parable of the Sower is one of the proof-texts that those holding a free will position often use. What is the seed sown?

It's nothing less than comical how you turn to strawmen like saying I'm angry and ad hominem to support your arguments... but just as fallicious none the less. I'm not interested in your circular arguments which involve neverending scriptural food fights and chase the rabbit games for each premise presented. You've clearly shown you either will not stick to a premise or don't know how and so resort to fallacy after fallacy thinking you're being logical. I tire of your tactics, but might just call you on your logic once in while for the practice.

 

[glfredrick]

It's nothing less than comical how you turn to strawmen like saying I'm angry and ad hominem to support your arguments... but just as fallicious none the less. I'm not interested in your circular arguments which involve neverending scriptural food fights and chase the rabbit games for each premise presented. You've clearly shown you either will not stick to a premise or don't know how and so resort to fallacy after fallacy thinking you're being logical. I tire of your tactics, but might just call you on your logic once in while for the practice.

Because you are...

Have you broght anything to the table or have you just attempted to intimidate me with bluster? Thought so... :wavey:

 

[Benjamin]

Because you are...

Have you broght anything to the table or have you just attempted to intimidate me with bluster? Thought so... :wavey:

Just got done refuting the argument you presented, big surprise that you must have missed that. Maybe you were too busy trying to think up arguments about how angry I am and how to divert the argument to something else.

 

[glfredrick]

Just got done refuting the argument you presented, big surprise that you must have missed that. Maybe you were too busy trying to think up arguments about how angry I am and how to divert the argument to something else.

I must have missed your refutation...

Is this it?

That explains it, it is all simply an allusion to us that what is (all things including the origins of evil) “actually” under the ultimate control of God, which is a must in order to be sovereign btw, which isn’t “fatalistic determinism” btw, because what appears to be an “absolutely” necessity to avoid theological fatalism in reality it is not actually “absolute” …it is just us rebellious types that believe things like evil being attributed to God’s nature and things like absolutes which cannot be true and can be true at the same time that is what is the problem here; it’s that darn perspective of ours that “truth” is actually “truth”. It's all in the “way” He controls all things, you see, God be can true and not true at the same time, because Truth doesn’t “actually” exist, …got it!

I see no refutation, just some blathering on. A refutation would be a series of Scriptures, properly exegeted, in context, that demonstrate where what I said was wrong, not just you telling me that I am wrong.

And, for the sake of the argument, let's take one of your phrases and examine it.

It's all in the “way” He controls all things, you see, God be can true and not true at the same time, because Truth doesn’t “actually” exist, …got it!

Becasue you do not understand what I wrote, you attack it instead. But if I presume that you are correct, I am still left without understanding what you would actually hold AS THE TRUTH to replace what I wrote.

So, what is the truth? Come out with a positive statement of your doctrine, backed up with Scripture, and share the truth. We will see it it stands or not. IF it is true, it will, and I will accept it. If not... Then you have to do some more homework. That's the way it goes.

 

[Iconoclast]

Just got done refuting the argument you presented, big surprise that you must have missed that. Maybe you were too busy trying to think up arguments about how angry I am and how to divert the argument to something else.

Sure he missed it...because you did not refute anything with this paragraph;

That explains it, it is all simply an allusion to us that what is (all things including the origins of evil) “actually” under the ultimate control of God, which is a must in order to be sovereign btw, which isn’t “fatalistic determinism” btw, because what appears to be an “absolutely” necessity to avoid theological fatalism in reality it is not actually “absolute” …it is just us rebellious types that believe things like evil being attributed to God’s nature and things like absolutes which cannot be true and can be true at the same time that is what is the problem here; it’s that darn perspective of ours that “truth” is actually “truth”. It's all in the “way” He controls all things, you see, God be can true and not true at the same time, because Truth doesn’t “actually” exist, …got it!

Because you do not understand what he or any other calvinist writer is saying...does not make it a refutation at all. it just shows you do not have a grip on the issue. This thought shows a confused and troubled soul...that cannot rest.

 

[Iconoclast]

I must have missed your refutation...

Is this it?




I see no refutation, just some blathering on. A refutation would be a series of Scriptures, properly exegeted, in context, that demonstrate where what I said was wrong, not just you telling me that I am wrong.

And, for the sake of the argument, let's take one of your phrases and examine it.



Becasue you do not understand what I wrote, you attack it instead. But if I presume that you are correct, I am still left without understanding what you would actually hold AS THE TRUTH to replace what I wrote.

So, what is the truth? Come out with a positive statement of your doctrine, backed up with Scripture, and share the truth. We will see it it stands or not. IF it is true, it will, and I will accept it. If not... Then you have to do some more homework. That's the way it goes.

Exactly....he seems to be a troubled soul:thumbsup: You might wait awhile to see a positive statement here...

 

[glfredrick]

Exactly....he seems to be a troubled soul:thumbsup: You might wait awhile to see a positive statement here...

I've been waiting weeks... I've made the call before. All I get in return is more anger. Not becoming for one who believes he holds the truth. All he has to do is proclaim it, not SPIT it at us...

 

[Benjamin]

Becasue you do not understand what I wrote, you attack it instead.

:laugh: I not only understand what you wrote but shreaded any doubt that what you wrote wasn't completely illogical for anyone who understands that T + F doesn't = T. Granted I used some some satire, a little sarcasm :laugh: but you might want to note any attack was on your argument.

 

[glfredrick]

:laugh: I not only understand what you wrote but shreaded any doubt that what you wrote wasn't completely illogical for anyone who understands that T + F doesn't = T. Granted I used some some satire, a little sarcasm :laugh: but you might want to note any attack was on your argument.

Benjamin, what you said was in essence that what I said cannot be. That was ALL you said, yet you feel that you refuted what I said. Sorry, but you will have to bring more of an argument than that, for you truly do misunderstand.

Perhaps some help... With God, there is both permissive and declarative will. There is the absence of God (evil, darkness) and the presence of God (righteousness, light). There is exhaustive foreknowledge, and of all possible actions of a free moral agent, and because of that, also and at the same time, the control in active or passive means of what transpires so as to bring about the true will of God.

Now, if you can explain to me how God can will something and yet it not come to be, while yet God remains God, then you will be on your way to refuting my position.

 

[glfredrick]

Here is a paragraph or so by John Frame. from "Determinism, Chance and Freedom" that lays out the issues clearly:
He is dealing with libertarian free will.

(1) Human intuition reveals that we choose among various alternatives, but it never reveals to us that any of our choices are absolutely uncaused. Intuition cannot prove a universal negative.

(2) Far from teaching that libertarian freedom is essential to moral responsibility, Scripture never mentions libertarian freedom.

(3) This doctrine would make it impossible for us to judge anyone’s guilt in a court of law. For to prove someone responsible for a crime and therefore guilty, the prosecution would have to take on the impossible burden of proof of showing that the decision of the accused had no cause whatsoever.

(4) Law courts, indeed, assume the opposite of libertarianism, namely that people are responsible only for actions that they are sufficiently motivated to perform. If it could be shown that an accused person committed a crime without any sufficient cause or motivation at all he would most likely be judged insane rather than guilty.

(5) Scripture contradicts libertarianism, by ascribing divine causes to human decisions (Exod. 34:24, Is. 44:28, Dan. 1:9, John 19:24, Acts 13:48, 16:14), even sinful ones (Gen. 45:5-8, Ps. 105:24, Luke 22:22, Acts 2:23-24, 3:18, 4:27-28, Rom. 9:17). In none of these (or many other) cases does divine causation eliminate human responsibility. In fact, these texts often mention human responsibility in the same context.

(6) Scripture also contradicts libertarianism by teaching that human decisions are governed by the heart (Luke 6:45), and by teaching that the human heart itself is under God’s control (Ps. 33:15, Prov. 21:1).

(7) In Scripture, the basis of human responsibility is not libertarian freedom, but (a) God’s sovereign right to evaluate the conduct of his creatures (Rom. 9:19-21), and (b) the knowledge (Luke 12:47-48, Rom. 1:18-32) and resources (Matt. 25:14-29) God has given to each person. (b) shows that in Scripture there is an important relation between responsibility and ability, but the abilities in view here do not include the absolute ability to choose opposite courses of action.

These considerations lead to the conclusion that the Bible teaches theistic determinism, one that is “soft” in James’s sense. Scripture renounces chance in the first and third senses above, but not in the second. And it teaches that human beings sometimes have moral freedom, usually have compatibilist freedom, never have libertarian freedom. Scripture may imply that we have freedom from natural causation as well. Certainly it doesn’t deny that, but I don’t know of any passage that clearly affirms it.

 

[Benjamin]

Benjamin, what you said was in essence that what I said cannot be.

Correct, T + F cannot = T. Your argument centered on T+F=T; GLF, not until:

Let me spell this out for you:

Free will should be defined as volition and this sustains the meaning that a creature has the ability to consciously choose; one can not do both, have this ability and not have this ability in any logical sense. If creaturely response is determined by causal means to have an irresistible effect on the creature then creaturely volition logically becomes void.

 

[glfredrick]

Correct, T + F cannot = T. Your argument centered on T+F=T; GLF, not until:

Let me spell this out for you:

Free will should be defined as volition and this sustains the meaning that a creature has the ability to consciously choose; one can not do both, have this ability and not have this ability in any logical sense. If creaturely response is determined by causal means to have an irresistible effect on the creature then creaturely volition logically becomes void.

Again, why the anger and the "pigs fly" stuff... Unbecoming of you and hurts rather than helps your cause. Makes you appear as an ignorant fundamentalist. Perhaps that is true...

In any case, you argue FOR free will. How free? Can we will ANYTHING?

Would you side with Rob Bell, who also argues free will, and who stipulates that the extent of our free will exists entirely into the realms of heaven and hell, and if one "wills" to leave either, he is able?

Or, would you draw a line somewher and say, "this far and no farther" for free will. Where is your line?

And, finally, does God have to obey our will? If so, are we not placing ourselves on the throne in His place? How do you reconcile our having a totally free will and yet God being God? Or do you?

 

[jbh28]

Again, why the anger and the "pigs fly" stuff... Unbecoming of you and hurts rather than helps your cause. Makes you appear as an ignorant fundamentalist. Perhaps that is true...

Some would rather post childish comments than engage in real conversation. He had nothing to refute but didn't want to admit you were right.

 

[jbh28]

:laugh: I not only understand what you wrote but shreaded any doubt that what you wrote wasn't completely illogical for anyone who understands that T + F doesn't = T. Granted I used some some satire, a little sarcasm :laugh: but you might want to note any attack was on your argument.

1. Is God in control of all events?
2. Does God know all events that will take place

 

[Benjamin]

Again, why the anger and the "pigs fly" stuff... Unbecoming of you and hurts rather than helps your cause. Makes you appear as an ignorant fundamentalist. Perhaps that is true...

In any case, you argue FOR free will. How free? Can we will ANYTHING?

Would you side with Rob Bell, who also argues free will, and who stipulates that the extent of our free will exists entirely into the realms of heaven and hell, and if one "wills" to leave either, he is able?

Or, would you draw a line somewher and say, "this far and no farther" for free will. Where is your line?

And, finally, does God have to obey our will? If so, are we not placing ourselves on the throne in His place? How do you reconcile our having a totally free will and yet God being God? Or do you?

:laugh: Glf, your accusations of anger, appearing as an ignorant fundamentalist, of being on the side of Rob Bell, and trying to sit on the throne of God...

Does not help your argument that T+F=T

Can't you understand why I said I see your tactical diversions of debate, that you think are logical, amount to being comical? Are you really this clu...NVM :laugh:

 

[Benjamin]

Some would rather post childish comments than engage in real conversation. He had nothing to refute but didn't want to admit you were right.

And your argument addresses the premise and refutes the simple logic laid out in my argument how?

 

[quantumfaith]

Nor do I... Determinism (in the fatalistic sense that it is used) is a red herring argument used against Calvinism.

Allah is a fatalistically-deterministic god. The God of the Bible created creatures in His image -- cursed by their fall into sin and in a state of separation from God -- and yet possessing free moral agency (in a limited fashion -- we DO NOT have libertarian free will as did Adam (Eve), the first and only "free man" on this earth until Christ was born a man) that brings with it culpability for sin.

God both knows and arranges all things but does not "determine" in such a fashion so as to eliminate the free moral agency of people -- something that to Him is literally child's play because of two reasons: First, He knows EXHAUSTIVELY all things, down to the quantum level movement of sub-atomic particles and guides them as He wills, and second, what He wills IS, for anything else would make God something other than God.

Now, a question back atcha... By what scenario could God WILL something and it not be? How would God reconcile that sort of issue? And, is that not precisely what those who hold that God does not control all things by the power AND authority of His will are saying?

I do not think that God "wills" something and it does NOT happen. Whatever HE wills it happens. I do think (my personal position) that things happen that were not "willed" by him. I realize that it sounds "confusing", but let me say if I can, I see a difference between "not willed" and "willed to not happen". I "semi" agree with my reformed colleagues here as to mankind's will not being completely free, being that mans will (freedom) is confined and must operate within the parameters of creation initialized by God. When I "speak" of God's Will, to me it means specific things and outcomes what WILL occur without exception, many (most) things occur in our existence (what color socks etc) occur without "necessarily" being willed by Him, although I am not saying that such "control" is beyond His capability.

 

[glfredrick]

:laugh: Glf, your accusations of anger, appearing as an ignorant fundamentalist, of being on the side of Rob Bell, and trying to sit on the throne of God...

Does not help your argument that T+F=T

Can't you understand why I said I see your tactical diversions of debate, that you think are logical, amount to being comical? Are you really this clu...NVM :laugh:

First, my argument is not T + F = T. That is YOUR strawman take on an argument that I am making that you simply do not understand or if you do understand, refuse to accept. So, your initial premise for defeating my argument is not valid.

Second, you have indeed come off -- in this thread and in multiple others -- as a VERY angry man, who can barely restrain himself from hurling invectives worthy of the devil at brothers and sisters in the Lord. This is verifiable from anyone who reads any of your posts, and is being confirmed in this thread by others.

Third, you are majoring on your strawman but ignoring the larger picture, i.e., what or whome is above God? Until you can answer that, you have not a leg upon which to stand, for it remains doubtful that you have an adequate doctrine of God upon which to build your case.

 

[glfredrick]

I do not think that God "wills" something and it does NOT happen. Whatever HE wills it happens. I do think (my personal position) that things happen that were not "willed" by him. I realize that it sounds "confusing", but let me say if I can, I see a difference between "not willed" and "willed to not happen". I "semi" agree with my reformed colleagues here as to mankind's will not being completely free, being that mans will (freedom) is confined and must operate within the parameters of creation initialized by God. When I "speak" of God's Will, to me it means specific things and outcomes what WILL occur without exception, many (most) things occur in our existence (what color socks etc) occur without "necessarily" being willed by Him, although I am not saying that such "control" is beyond His capability.

Thanks... When we consider the God of the Bible, we MUST admit what the self-revelation of the Bible tells us about God, i.e., that He is sovereign King and that no thing can come about unless or until He wills it -- whether by permissive will, in that He "allows" something to be, essentially, His absence, or whether by his declarative will He "mandates" that something will be. In either case, to set ANYTHING above God, including the will of man -- a created contingent being -- above God is to remove God from His throne, no matter how carefully or nuanced that removal may be.

 

[jbh28]

And your argument addresses the premise and refutes the simple logic laid out in my argument how?

What argument? This wasn't an argument. You never made an argument. How am I to reply to your argument if you never made one?

btw, I did see you didn't respond to the question that I laid out for you.

1. Is God in control of all events?
2. Does God know all events that will take place