Can Predestination and Free Will Coexist?

[JonC]

You have set the bar VERY LOW for "free will" at "the ability to make choices".
When Pebbles, our Rottweiler, made the choice to "heel" or to "chase the squirrel", was she demonstrating her God given Free Will just like a person?
Could you explain how that is different from my claim "Free will" means we are not an "automaton" (Robot)?

I can help.

When Pebbles chose to heel without command, then it would be of the dog's will. Same with chasing the squirrel when faced with an alternate choice (say, a hamburger or chase the squirrel).

Free will is defined by the ability to choose ("a voluntary choice or decision").


@Silverhair did not set the bar low. He gave the actual definition of the word.


"Automation" is the use of machines or equipment to produce an item with little human imput.

The opposite of free-will is determinism which holds that we do not have the ability to make legitimate choices.

Libertarian freewill is the theory that our will is independent of causes and influences to include God, desire, human nature, etc.

Free will is the ability to choose or make a decision even if influenced by past experience, indoctrination, human nature, etc.

 

[JonC]

BTW.....the actual definition of free will is one readon why free will and predestination can coexist.

We freely exercise our will.....as Scripture states - our plans belong to us ....but at the same time God controls the outcome.


God has free will, but He also chooses based on His own nature (which is why it is impossible for God to lie).

A dog also has a free will to act or desire within its own nature. You do not have to force a dog to do what is in the dogs nature to do. And you can train a dog in such a way that it will obey out of its own free will (initially desiring a treat, later praise).

But there is a difference between God and man, and between man and a dog.


But free will is a term generally applied to human beings as a part of our psyche.

The problem is not free will but sin. Natural man freely chooses to sin because that is his nature. This is still free will.

We struggle between two natures, the Spirit and the flesh.

 

[Nolan Stengel]

He believed that there could be a middle ground between Calvinism and Arminianism.

I agree, however you have to be careful about going for the “middle ground” approach if that means you have to come up with all sorts of philosophies and speculations in order to make two contrary doctrines fit together.

I agree that God sovereignly chooses individuals to be saved and at the same time I agree that all individuals have the free will to either reject or accept salvation. I disagree with the philosophical idea that God first sees that we accept Him and that is why He chooses us. I don’t see any scripture with God’s foreknowledge working that way, in fact scripture does say that He loved Jacob and hated Esau and that was determined before they were born or did anything good or bad. Our works and choices have nothing to do with God’s election. I could stop right there and say that Calvinism is true but then I would be ignoring other clear scripture that shows us that we do have free choices. I don’t understand how they work together but I will believe both as the absolute truth.

That is probably the safe approach when dealing with the nature of God.

God Bless.

 

[JesusFan]

I agree, however you have to be careful about going for the “middle ground” approach if that means you have to come up with all sorts of philosophies and speculations in order to make two contrary doctrines fit together.

I agree that God sovereignly chooses individuals to be saved and at the same time I agree that all individuals have the free will to either reject or accept salvation. I disagree with the philosophical idea that God first sees that we accept Him and that is why He chooses us. I don’t see any scripture with God’s foreknowledge working that way, in fact scripture does say that He loved Jacob and hated Esau and that was determined before they were born or did anything good or bad. Our works and choices have nothing to do with God’s election. I could stop right there and say that Calvinism is true but then I would be ignoring other clear scripture that shows us that we do have free choices. I don’t understand how they work together but I will believe both as the absolute truth.

That is probably the safe approach when dealing with the nature of God.

God Bless.

The ultimate basis for a lost sinner becoming now saved would be due to the will and plans nd purposes of God, and we while lost state still have freedom to choose, but there were things due to our sin natures would never desire to decide to do

 

[Nolan Stengel]

The ultimate basis for a lost sinner becoming now saved would be due to the will and plans nd purposes of God, and we while lost state still have freedom to choose, but there were things due to our sin natures would never desire to decide to do

I don’t disagree with your point. I would add that there will inevitably be follow-up questions that will need answers to. Does God’s will include that all lost sinners have the opportunity to get saved? If so, has that prevenient grace been provided to everyone so they can make that decision? Can that grace be resisted? Several scriptures certainly seem to indicate yes to all of the above.

Acts 17:30
Truly, these times of ignorance God overlooked, but now commands all men everywhere to repent

John 10:32
And I, if I am lifted up from the earth, will draw all peoples to Myself

Acts 7:51
You stiff-necked and uncircumcised in heart and ears! You always resist the Holy Spirit; as your fathers did, so do you

 

[kyredneck]

Can Predestination and Free Will Coexist?​

Hundred years ago they shared the same buildings and attended each others meetings right here in ol Kentuck….

 

[37818]

Predestination and free will can absolutely coexist.

Only for the infinite God.
Isaiah 46:10, Declaring the end from the beginning, and from ancient times the things that are not yet done, saying, My counsel shall stand, and I will do all my pleasure: . . .

 

[Brightfame52]

The ultimate basis for a lost sinner becoming now saved would be due to the will and plans nd purposes of God, and we while lost state still have freedom to choose, but there were things due to our sin natures would never desire to decide to do

If you had freedom to choose, you werent lost, you werent dead, you werent under the power of darkness.

 

[JonC]

Only for the infinite God.
Isaiah 46:10, Declaring the end from the beginning, and from ancient times the things that are not yet done, saying, My counsel shall stand, and I will do all my pleasure: . . .

Yep. God tells us that our will, our decisions, our actions belong to us. We make up our minds. BUT the outcome belongs to God, He controls our steps.

A good example (one Tim Keller used) is Paul's shipwreck. Paul was not lying when he told the men that if they abandoned the ship they would all perish, even knowing that God told him none would perish. Knowing God controls the future should give us the courage to do the right thing.


And you are right....for us predestination and free will is an impossible combination. But we are unqualified for the job (of being God).

 

[JonC]

If you had freedom to choose, you werent lost, you werent dead, you werent under the power of darkness.

Exactly....and Biblical. The problem is not that we cannot choose but the evil that we choose because we were slaves to sin. We followed our own desires of the flesh. We could not choose God because we were unwilling to choose God. We chose ourselves, followed our desires, because we were under the power of darkness.

 

[Brightfame52]

Exactly....and Biblical. The problem is not that we cannot choose but the evil that we choose because we were slaves to sin. We followed our own desires of the flesh. We could not choose God because we were unwilling to choose God. We chose ourselves, followed our desires, because we were under the power of darkness.

Yes this describes our walk by nature no matter how moral or religious we be Eph 2:2-3

2 Wherein in time past ye walked according to the course of this world, according to the prince of the power of the air, the spirit that now worketh in the children of disobedience:

3 Among whom also we all had our conversation in times past in the lusts of our flesh, fulfilling the desires of the flesh and of the mind; and were by nature the children of wrath, even as others.

 

[JesusFan]

Exactly....and Biblical. The problem is not that we cannot choose but the evil that we choose because we were slaves to sin. We followed our own desires of the flesh. We could not choose God because we were unwilling to choose God. We chose ourselves, followed our desires, because we were under the power of darkness.

As Luther and Calvin both wrote about, all of us are born under bondage to the sinner human will, and we are not free to do all decisions and choices, but just the ones that we desire in the flesh to be doing.

 

[DaveXR650]

I don’t disagree with your point. I would add that there will inevitably be follow-up questions that will need answers to. Does God’s will include that all lost sinners have the opportunity to get saved? If so, has that prevenient grace been provided to everyone so they can make that decision? Can that grace be resisted? Several scriptures certainly seem to indicate yes to all of the above.

Acts 17:30
Truly, these times of ignorance God overlooked, but now commands all men everywhere to repent

John 10:32
And I, if I am lifted up from the earth, will draw all peoples to Myself

Acts 7:51
You stiff-necked and uncircumcised in heart and ears! You always resist the Holy Spirit; as your fathers did, so do you

You bring up a good point. Calvinism I guess touches on this point in that the confessions say there is a general call that goes out to everyone and I guess there is enough there to make one guilty who does not respond. But then they say that the "effectual call" is enough to overcome the will of the elect and result in salvation. In my opinion they don't leave room for any action of a person's free will that has a deciding or even a true effect on the outcome. Although I have to say that if you read sermons, even high Calvinists like Owen leave plenty of room for a person to either respond to the gospel or reject it and damn himself. It's just that the theology itself to me seems a little incomplete.

I find that a little confusing. Classic Arminianism seems to make more sense in that area in that people start out with the same inability, yet like you said, prevenient grace, which is actually stated as being enough enlightenment to allow a person to truly respond to the gospel is given to anyone who hears the gospel and thus in a sense at least, they are given a true and decisive choice in the matter of their salvation.

Like I said, I read a lot of Calvinist sermons, and they seem to preach like the Arminian view above, yet condemn the theology. Since I go on the preaching more than the theology it doesn't bother me all that much as a layman. If you are a clergyman and have to affiliate with a group I guess it could be a tough call, once you have a lot of time and education in a certain school of thought.

 

[JonC]

As Luther and Calvin both wrote about, all of us are born under bondage to the sinner human will, and we are not free to do all decisions and choices, but just the ones that we desire in the flesh to be doing.

The problem I have is with the wording. It is unbiblical to say we were not free to make our own decisions regarding good and evil.

It is not unbiblical to say that we choose evil because we follow the desires of the flesh, that a mind set on the flesh is death, and that we were slaves to sin.

The problem I have with the wording is, besides being unbiblical, that it removes human responsibility. Natural man willingly sets his mind on the flesh, willingly chooses evil. Adam is the ultimate example of "natural man". Rather than obeying God Adam chose to follow his own will. This does not mean Adam did not freely choose to follow the flesh. Same with David. He freely chose adultery.

It is impossibly for man to please God because man has set his mind on the flesh. But men were not forced to do so. They freely chose sin.

 

[Nolan Stengel]

Adam is the ultimate example of "natural man". Rather than obeying God Adam chose to follow his own will. This does not mean Adam did not freely choose to follow the flesh.

Since we are all born in Adam, it makes one wonder, was Adam a saved man at the time of his creation? If so, then he was still a saved man after he fell. That means he never lost the ability to choose between good and evil and neither did we.

 

[JesusFan]

You bring up a good point. Calvinism I guess touches on this point in that the confessions say there is a general call that goes out to everyone and I guess there is enough there to make one guilty who does not respond. But then they say that the "effectual call" is enough to overcome the will of the elect and result in salvation. In my opinion they don't leave room for any action of a person's free will that has a deciding or even a true effect on the outcome. Although I have to say that if you read sermons, even high Calvinists like Owen leave plenty of room for a person to either respond to the gospel or reject it and damn himself. It's just that the theology itself to me seems a little incomplete.

I find that a little confusing. Classic Arminianism seems to make more sense in that area in that people start out with the same inability, yet like you said, prevenient grace, which is actually stated as being enough enlightenment to allow a person to truly respond to the gospel is given to anyone who hears the gospel and thus in a sense at least, they are given a true and decisive choice in the matter of their salvation.

Like I said, I read a lot of Calvinist sermons, and they seem to preach like the Arminian view above, yet condemn the theology. Since I go on the preaching more than the theology it doesn't bother me all that much as a layman. If you are a clergyman and have to affiliate with a group I guess it could be a tough call, once you have a lot of time and education in a certain school of thought.

Calvinism teaches that due to lost sinners being in the bondage of their fallen human natures, they will have no will power and desire to even want to get saved by the grace of God if left to their own "free will choosing"

 

[JesusFan]

The problem I have is with the wording. It is unbiblical to say we were not free to make our own decisions regarding good and evil.

It is not unbiblical to say that we choose evil because we follow the desires of the flesh, that a mind set on the flesh is death, and that we were slaves to sin.

The problem I have with the wording is, besides being unbiblical, that it removes human responsibility. Natural man willingly sets his mind on the flesh, willingly chooses evil. Adam is the ultimate example of "natural man". Rather than obeying God Adam chose to follow his own will. This does not mean Adam did not freely choose to follow the flesh. Same with David. He freely chose adultery.

It is impossibly for man to please God because man has set his mind on the flesh. But men were not forced to do so. They freely chose sin.

We who are in our sin natures do not have the capacity to freely decide to receive Jesus as our Lord and savior, due to us not having the desire nor inclination to do that in and of ourselves, which in no way alleviates our accountability to God forour rejection od the Cross and person of Christ

 

[JesusFan]

Since we are all born in Adam, it makes one wonder, was Adam a saved man at the time of his creation? If so, then he was still a saved man after he fell. That means he never lost the ability to choose between good and evil and neither did we.

Adam before he fell had the sinless humanity nature, same one Jesus was born with, and the Fall caused his nature to become now fallen and spiritual dead and in bondage now to that fallen human nature

 

[37818]

Adam before he fell had the sinless humanity nature, same one Jesus was born with, and the Fall caused his nature to become now fallen and spiritual dead and in bondage now to that fallen human nature

Your argument makes no sense.

Mark 10:17-18, . . . when he was gone forth into the way, there came one running, and kneeled to him, and asked him, Good Master, what shall I do that I may inherit eternal life? And Jesus said unto him, Why callest thou me good? there is none good but one, that is, God.

 

[37818]

FYI, the knowledge of good and evil was our Creator's, who is our infinitely good God. Genesis 3:22, And the LORD God said, Behold, the man is become as one of us, to know good and evil: . . .

Romans 8:2-3, . . . For the law of the Spirit of life in Christ Jesus hath made me free from the law of sin and death. For what the law could not do, in that it was weak through the flesh, God sending his own Son in the likeness of sinful flesh, and for sin, condemned sin in the flesh: . . .

Hebrews 4:15, For we have not an high priest which cannot be touched with the feeling of our infirmities; but was in all points tempted like as we are, yet without sin.