Can Predestination and Free Will Coexist?

[Baptizo]

I'm fairly new here and have seen some recent discussion on this topic. Recently I picked up Normal Geisler's "Chosen But Free". He believed that there could be a middle ground between Calvinism and Arminianism. These are a few passages in his book.

This is not to say there are no mysteries in the Christian faith. Paul said, "Great indeed... is the mystery of godliness" (1 Tim. 3:16). But a mystery is a truth that goes beyond reason without going against reason. It is beyond our ability to comprehend, but not against our ability to apprehend. Surely the doctrines of the Trinity and of the incarnation fit into this category. We know that they are true, even if we cannot completely explain exactly how they are true. For example, we know that there are three persons and only one nature in God, but we don't fully understand how this can be so. What we do know is that it is not a contradiction; God is one in one sense (nature) and three in another sense (persons), so the law of noncontradiction is not being violated. We suggested that divine sovereignty and human freedom fall into this same category-they are a mystery. We know both are true, but we do not know exactly how they fit together. - Chosen But Free by Normal Geisler, Page 132

For the extreme sovereignty view, the ultimate question is: Who made the devil do it? Or, more precisely, who caused Lucifer to sin? If free choice is doing what one desires, and if all good desires come from God, then it follows logically that God is responsible for Lucifer's sin against God! After all, he had no evil nature to give him evil desires, and if God had given him a good desire, then Lucifer would not have rebelled. But it is contradictory to say that God ever could be against God. God is essentially good. He cannot sin (Heb. 6:18); He cannot even look with approval on sin. Habakkuk said to God: "Your eyes are too pure to look on evil; you cannot tolerate wrong" (Hab. 1:13). James reminds us that "when tempted, no one should say, 'God is tempting me.' For God cannot be tempted by evil, nor does he tempt anyone" (James 1:13). So, if for no other reason, the strong sovereignty position must be rejected because it is contradictory, and the Bible exhorts us to "avoid contradictions" (1 Tim. 6:20). Opposites cannot both be true at the same time and in the same sense. God cannot be good and not good. He cannot be for His own essential good and be against it by giving Lucifer the desire to sin against Him. In short, God cannot be for Himself and against Himself at the same time and in the same sense. - Chosen But Free by Normal Geisler, Page 33

God made only good creatures. After almost every day of Creation the Bible says, "and it was good" (Gen. 1:4, 10, 12, 18, 21, 25). And after the last day, the Bible declares, "It was very good" (1:31). Solomon added, "This only have I found: God made mankind upright..." (Eccl. 7:29). We are told explicitly that "every creature of God is good" (1 Tim. 4:4). And an absolutely good God cannot make an evil thing. Only a perfect creature can come from the hands of a perfect Creator. - Chosen But Free by Normal Geisler, Page 34

 

[kyredneck]

For the extreme sovereignty view, the ultimate question is: Who made the devil do it? Or, more precisely, who caused Lucifer to sin?

I am "extreme sovereignty view", and this is my opinion.

 

[JonC]

Predestination and free will can absolutely coexist.

I think to argue otherwise, particularly when speaking of divine predestination and human free will, is not an honest discussion (based on the fact that the mind of God is eternally above or greater than the mind of man).

The real question is not whether predestination and free will can coexist but whether they do coexist. I believe they do.

First, if God is omniscient then everything is already predestined to occur a particular way (as God knows it will occur). This woukd not limit free will.

Then comes the question not of predestination but of decree (did God actively determine that all things occur in a particular fashion?).


If God is omniscient and Creator then the answer is again "yes". An all-knowing God, by the very act of creating man, has determined that all things will occur as they will occur.

And this in no way nullifies the free will of man.


The question, then, becomes whether God decreed human actions by denying man of free-will. But this question Iis related to knowing the mind of God beyond what God has revealed of Himself to man, and therefore invalid as far as theology (the best peoole can do is speculate by relying on their own understanding).

 

[kyredneck]

Can Predestination and Free Will Coexist?

150 years ago folks were a whoooole lot more tolerant, at least here in Ky. Old School and New School Baptists and Methodists would share the same meeting houses. It seems there is no 'coexisting' anymore, there's a sickness, the quacks are consumed with CDS.

 

[DaveXR650]

I'm fairly new here and have seen some recent discussion on this topic. Recently I picked up Normal Geisler's "Chosen But Free". He believed that there could be a middle ground between Calvinism and Arminianism. These are a few passages in his book.

There must be some middle ground. I notice that non-Calvinist Baptists tend to like Charles Spurgeon and John Bunyan, who were Calvinists. Why is that? I think there are several reasons.

One is that they both accepted the normal working of a human in hearing and receiving the gospel using their rational sense as sufficient from the standpoint of the individual. Even though they believed that no one can come to Christ without the Holy Spirit they were also aware that to the individual, it will appear simply as realizing one's lost condition and deciding to come to Christ.

The second thing is that although they both had a high view of God's sovereignty they viewed the starting point of man's condition as being self induced and based discussion of reprobation and the final lostness of unsaved individuals as them being left to their own free will and giving them over to their choice of sin - not as God using his sovereignty to actively influence a person in a negative way or to not have anything to say to him as a non elect one.

The third thing would be that they put a high level of importance on the experiential aspects of salvation and actually living the Christian life rather than emphasizing the theology. I think they would have been much happier hanging out with Wesley than a modern Calvinist.

 

[JonC]

Can Predestination and Free Will Coexist?

150 years ago folks were a whoooole lot more tolerant, at least here in Ky. Old School and New School Baptists and Methodists would share the same meeting houses. It seems there is no 'coexisting' anymore, there's a sickness, the quacks are consumed with CDS.

There were always debates in the US, sometimes hostile. But these were typically limited to academia or clergy. The laity were often above the nonsense.

We have to remember that for a time (during James Arminus' life...he never saw a day that he was not within orthodox Calvinism) Arminianism was within orthodox Calvinism. But as time went by people relied more, and in a more dogmatic sence, on philosophical divisions.

I think the internet has a lot to do with the devaluation of the Christian faith and a stronger reliance on Christian philosophy. People easily read the opinions of those they respect or identify and feed themselves solely on those findings.

 

[JonC]

There must be some middle ground. I notice that non-Calvinist Baptists tend to like Charles Spurgeon and John Bunyan, who were Calvinists. Why is that? I think there are several reasons.

One is that they both accepted the normal working of a human in hearing and receiving the gospel using their rational sense as sufficient from the standpoint of the individual. Even though they believed that no one can come to Christ without the Holy Spirit they were also aware that to the individual, it will appear simply as realizing one's lost condition and deciding to come to Christ.

The second thing is that although they both had a high view of God's sovereignty they viewed the starting point of man's condition as being self induced and based discussion of reprobation and the final lostness of unsaved individuals as them being left to their own free will and giving them over to their choice of sin - not as God using his sovereignty to actively influence a person in a negative way or to not have anything to say to him as a non elect one.

The third thing would be that they put a high level of importance on the experiential aspects of salvation and actually living the Christian life rather than emphasizing the theology. I think they would have been much happier hanging out with Wesley than a modern Calvinist.

I think the reason is those men demonstrated Christ in their lives, regardless of their differences.

We see the same with Calvinists who liked, and invited Dwight Moody to speak to their congregations. Turns out many were surprised to find out Moody held free-will theology.

Today sects demonize those who do not share their view (unfortunately).

It would be very difficult today, in Western Christianity, to find Christian leaders as faithful as George Muller, John Wesley, Dwight Moody, and Charles Spurgeon.

One thing I like about Spurgeon (I am not a Calvinist) is his willingness to state that his view about predestination vs free-will is probably not entirely correct as it is limited by "the human condition" and his own mental leanings. He applauded those who opposed the view as helping overall to see the truth between extreme positions.

 

[Baptizo]

I am "extreme sovereignty view", and this is my opinion.

Thanks for your perspective. So who caused Lucifer to fall if he was originally created good? Either he had the will to fall on his own, or God caused him to fall are the only two options that would make any sense to me.

 

[JonC]

Thanks for your perspective. So who caused Lucifer to fall if he was originally created good? Either he had the will to fall on his own, or God caused him to fall are the only two options that would make any sense to me.

I think there are other less speculative examples (examples we are given more detail about in the Bible).

In Peter's sermon he lays the guilt of Jesus' murder on the Jews (granted, he tells them they acted in ignorance therefore forgiveness was possible). But he also says that this was the predetermined plan of God.

Now, I also admit Peter did not say that God was the cause of Jesus' suffering and death (this he leaves on the "wicked men', and in his first sermon many repented). So thos may not be answering your question exactly (God's plan verses a divine cause).


But we can also consider that God os not the author of evil. If evil exists, then, it is not caused by God.

 

[Baptizo]

I think there are other less speculative examples (examples we are given more detail about in the Bible).

In Peter's sermon he lays the guilt of Jesus' murder on the Jews (granted, he tells them they acted in ignorance therefore forgiveness was possible). But he also says that this was the predetermined plan of God.

Now, I also admit Peter did not say that God was the cause of Jesus' suffering and death (this he leaves on the "wicked men', and in his first sermon many repented). So thos may not be answering your question exactly (God's plan verses a divine cause).


But we can also consider that God os not the author of evil. If evil exists, then, it is not caused by God.

I did find this example helpful. Both sides will agree that it is impossible for God to entertain any evil thoughts or desires. From the Calvinist's perspective, if God ordained Adam to fall, either by proxy (Lucifer fell first) or Adam's "preprogramming", then that does not make God evil. The Arminians' perspective is that if God ordained Adam to fall by Adam's own free choice, then the blame would be placed on Adam and that does not make God evil. It's a conundrum and difficult to know which side to land on. I do recognize we can only go by what scripture reveals to us. On one hand, you want to pick the side that makes God look less evil. On the other hand, you want to avoid the side that causes you to insert man's philosophy into the text.

 

[JonC]

I did find this example helpful. Both sides will agree that it is impossible for God to entertain any evil thoughts or desires. From the Calvinist's perspective, if God ordained Adam to fall, either by proxy (Lucifer fell first) or Adam's "preprogramming", then that does not make God evil. The Arminians' perspective is that if God ordained Adam to fall by Adam's own free choice, then the blame would be placed on Adam and that does not make God evil. It's a conundrum and difficult to know which side to land on. I do recognize we can only go by what scripture reveals to us. On one hand, you want to pick the side that makes God look less evil. On the other hand, you want to avoid the side that causes you to insert man's philosophy into the text.

Another interesting issue is "ordain" vs "decree". Typically we take these as synonyms when applied to the works of God, but classic Arminianism does not.

The difference (to those who see a difference) relates to cause.

God may decree (cause) something or ordain something (not cause, but in occurring it is a part of His predetermined plan).

So to decree the fall would be to cause Adam to sin, that it should happen.

But to ordain the fall would be that in Adam's sin occurring it falls within God's greater will (God desires good, that Adam not sin, but as Creator knows Adam would of his own volition, and this works out for a greater good).

Either way it is predestined.

I'm not sure if that is a good explanation.

The difference is whether God causes everything or works out everything to His good.

 

[Alan Gross]

Can Predestination and Free Will Coexist?

Of course not.

By definition, the type and brand of the "Free Will" idea
that is in contrast to the idea of The Salvation of the Soul,
would have to have the Moral ability
and aptitude to freely "Will" the same power
to Resurrect itself from the Dead,

into an Eternal state of Everlasting Life,
at "Will", on command.

Right. On command. Like this would be "a Command Performance".

Hey. Do this. Let's see you, or anyone else,
by the same equivalent Divine Power Jesus Obtained
by His Work of Salvation Accomplished in His Virgin Birth,
through to Jesus' crucifixion, death on the cross, burial
and Glorious Resurrection from the Dead,

to Resurrect themselves from being Dead
and having no existence in the Realm of the Spirit, at all,

into an Eternal State of Everlasting Life, at "Will",
just because they feel like it,
or want to, or 'decide' to, or 'make a choice to',
or 'have faith to', or 'believe to', etc.

The idea that I get from that kind of examination,
is that "Free Will from the utter moral State of Nature which has inability,
impotent, and with total incapability to "Take on an Existence"

which is now Reckoned and Judged AS IF THEY HAD NEVER SINNED,
FROM THE MOMENT of THEIR CONCEPTION IN THEIR MOTHER'S WOMB

until their PHYSICAL DEATH
(AND HOW ON EARTH WOULD THAT HAVE EVER COME ABOUT?)

into Eternal Salvation and NOW?
They are SUPERNATURALLY PARTAKING of the DIVINE NATURE"!(???)

WHAT?, WHAT?, WHAT?

How does something that is DEAD,
then suddenly generate ON ITS OWN,
A NOW AS IF THEY HAD ALWAYS BEEN SINLESS
AS WELL AS AN INFINITELY ETERNAL SALVATION?

NOW, THAT'S THE QUESTION.

And the Answer is:

"FREE WILLING ETERNAL SALVATION DOES NOT EXIST AND NEVER HAS!"

The author in the article likes to compare things to prove his points.

How about this one, now,

THE WAY IT IS AND ALWAYS HAS BEEN
AND THE ONLY WAY IT CAN AND HAS TO BE?:

RIDDLE ME THIS:

"Can Predestination and Free Will Coexist,
WHEN "FREE WILL" DOES NOT EXIST"?

Break out your logic on that one and try it on for size.

This is a very simple introductory article on the O.P.:
Do predestination
and free will contradict one another?
W. Robert Godfrey

"Early in his career, Augustine wrote a treatise called The Freedom Of The Will, and he never retracted that despite his strong teaching on predestination. When he talked about the freedom of the will, what he really meant was that you have a genuine will that operates according to the way you want it to operate. In that sense, you could call that will free. It’s a real, choosing will that has the freedom to do what it wants.

"The... Doctrine of Total Depravity is not that we don’t have a functioning will but that we have a will that always acts in accordance with our fallen, depraved nature."

(Alan's note: No different than

"Water is Free of its own will TO FLOAT UPHILL."

Got that?

And there are other laws in the Universe besides "Free Will".

"We always "freely will" against God until we are Regenerated",

BECAUSE THE SINNER HAS NTHER WILL THAN TO WILL to SIN.

And so, one other law in Operation is The Justice of God
which Executes Judgement on all unforgiven sin.

All sinners do practice and participate in sin
and NO SIN IS GOING TO HEAVEN!

AND GOD RUNS HEAVEN!!!)

"Instead, they mean that one is perfectly free
to choose for God or against God.

"In that sense, it conflicts with the Doctrine of Predestination."

And, if we think about it, any Lost person on the street
would probably tell us, that:
"one is perfectly free to choose for God, or against God."

So, that is not exactly a hard core teaching in The Word of God,

IN FACT;
that kind of teaching is entirely foreign to the Bible
and can't found in it.

I certainly do not know of any evidence that:
"one is perfectly free to choose for God, or against God"
and I do not believe that any evidence
of that man-made philosophy exists.

It is just a pure, in-stage, bonafide, Non-Biblical, Extra-Biblical heresy.

That's what it is.

The World's most common notion of the natural,
Spiritually Dead sinner is:
"one is perfectly free to choose for God, or against God"

and, NO, Jesus' Work of Eternal Salvation
DID NOT RECREATE THE GARDEN of EDEN.

Human beings in this life are not walking around
with the same STATE of SINLESS PERFECTION
that Adam had in The Garden of Eden!(???)

who are facing the inevitability of Heaven or Hell,
BY THEM DOING one two things:

Touch "The Tree of Life",
or "The Tree of The Knowledge of Good and Evil."

So, if you want something in The Bible on it, There it is. That's it.

"one is perfectly free to choose for God, or against God"
is a Ridiculously Absurd man-made "saying"/ "Old Wives Tailtail".

"The Doctrine of Predestination,
in response to that notion of the freedom of the will, says:

“You don’t have the freedom to choose for God
because your will is in rebellion against God.

"It’s only when God heals your rebellion—when He Regenerates your heart
and sovereignly turns you back to Himself—
that you can know Him and pursue Him.”

This transcript is from a live Ask Ligonier event with W. Robert Godfrey
and has been lightly edited for readability.

 

[Baptizo]

Can Predestination and Free Will Coexist?

Of course not.

By definition, the type and brand of the "Free Will" idea
that is in contrast to the idea of The Salvation of the Soul,
would have to have the Moral ability
and aptitude to freely "Will" the same power
to Resurrect itself from the Dead,

into an Eternal state of Everlasting Life,
at "Will", on command.

Right. On command. Like this would be "a Command Performance".

Hey. Do this. Let's see you, or anyone else,
by the same equivalent Divine Power Jesus Obtained
by His Work of Salvation Accomplished in His Virgin Birth,
through to Jesus' crucifixion, death on the cross, burial
and Glorious Resurrection from the Dead,

to Resurrect themselves from being Dead
and having no existence in the Realm of the Spirit, at all,

into an Eternal State of Everlasting Life, at "Will",
just because they feel like it,
or want to, or 'decide' to, or 'make a choice to',
or 'have faith to', or 'believe to', etc.

The idea that I get from that kind of examination,
is that "Free Will from the utter moral State of Nature which has inability,
impotent, and with total incapability to "Take on an Existence"

which is now Reckoned and Judged AS IF THEY HAD NEVER SINNED,
FROM THE MOMENT of THEIR CONCEPTION IN THEIR MOTHER'S WOMB

until their PHYSICAL DEATH
(AND HOW ON EARTH WOULD THAT HAVE EVER COME ABOUT?)

into Eternal Salvation and NOW?
They are SUPERNATURALLY PARTAKING of the DIVINE NATURE"!(???)

WHAT?, WHAT?, WHAT?

How does something that is DEAD,
then suddenly generate ON ITS OWN,
A NOW AS IF THEY HAD ALWAYS BEEN SINLESS
AS WELL AS AN INFINITELY ETERNAL SALVATION?

NOW, THAT'S THE QUESTION.

And the Answer is:

"FREE WILLING ETERNAL SALVATION DOES NOT EXIST AND NEVER HAS!"

The author in the article likes to compare things to prove his points.

How about this one, now,

THE WAY IT IS AND ALWAYS HAS BEEN
AND THE ONLY WAY IT CAN AND HAS TO BE?:

RIDDLE ME THIS:

"Can Predestination and Free Will Coexist,
WHEN "FREE WILL" DOES NOT EXIST"?

Break out your logic on that one and try it on for size.

This is a very simple introductory article on the O.P.:
Do predestination
and free will contradict one another?
W. Robert Godfrey

"Early in his career, Augustine wrote a treatise called The Freedom Of The Will, and he never retracted that despite his strong teaching on predestination. When he talked about the freedom of the will, what he really meant was that you have a genuine will that operates according to the way you want it to operate. In that sense, you could call that will free. It’s a real, choosing will that has the freedom to do what it wants.

"The... Doctrine of Total Depravity is not that we don’t have a functioning will but that we have a will that always acts in accordance with our fallen, depraved nature."

(Alan's note: No different than

"Water is Free of its own will TO FLOAT UPHILL."

Got that?

And there are other laws in the Universe besides "Free Will".

"We always "freely will" against God until we are Regenerated",

BECAUSE THE SINNER HAS NTHER WILL THAN TO WILL to SIN.

And so, one other law in Operation is The Justice of God
which Executes Judgement on all unforgiven sin.

All sinners do practice and participate in sin
and NO SIN IS GOING TO HEAVEN!

AND GOD RUNS HEAVEN!!!)

"Instead, they mean that one is perfectly free
to choose for God or against God.

"In that sense, it conflicts with the Doctrine of Predestination."

And, if we think about it, any Lost person on the street
would probably tell us, that:
"one is perfectly free to choose for God, or against God."

So, that is not exactly a hard core teaching in The Word of God,

IN FACT;
that kind of teaching is entirely foreign to the Bible
and can't found in it.

I certainly do not know of any evidence that:
"one is perfectly free to choose for God, or against God"
and I do not believe that any evidence
of that man-made philosophy exists.

It is just a pure, in-stage, bonafide, Non-Biblical, Extra-Biblical heresy.

That's what it is.

The World's most common notion of the natural,
Spiritually Dead sinner is:
"one is perfectly free to choose for God, or against God"

and, NO, Jesus' Work of Eternal Salvation
DID NOT RECREATE THE GARDEN of EDEN.

Human beings in this life are not walking around
with the same STATE of SINLESS PERFECTION
that Adam had in The Garden of Eden!(???)

who are facing the inevitability of Heaven or Hell,
BY THEM DOING one two things:

Touch "The Tree of Life",
or "The Tree of The Knowledge of Good and Evil."

So, if you want something in The Bible on it, There it is. That's it.

"one is perfectly free to choose for God, or against God"
is a Ridiculously Absurd man-made "saying"/ "Old Wives Tailtail".

"The Doctrine of Predestination,
in response to that notion of the freedom of the will, says:

“You don’t have the freedom to choose for God
because your will is in rebellion against God.

"It’s only when God heals your rebellion—when He Regenerates your heart
and sovereignly turns you back to Himself—
that you can know Him and pursue Him.”

This transcript is from a live Ask Ligonier event with W. Robert Godfrey
and has been lightly edited for readability.

I get all the points you're making. I'm not denying what the scripture says. I'm trying to find a position to settle on as to why man sinned in the first place. I am willing to accept that it is a mystery rather than accepting that it was either God who willed man to sin or that man willed himself to sin. I'd rather err on the side of caution than to make an assumption that could potentially insult God's character. One thing for do know for sure is that I am able to make the choice to sin and I alone should be held responsible for it. One example I can think of is Jonah. God commanded him to travel to Nineveh to preach to the Assyrians. At first he made the choice to run away but ultimately he ended up exactly where God's will intended for him to be. If we don't want to use the term "free will", that's fine by me because it is not a term used in scripture. But what I do see in scripture is that man has choices, however those choices that can never overthrow God's sovereignty.

 

[JonC]

I look at it this way:

Scripture affirms free will as commonly defined (that human beings make choices freely).

At the same time Scripture teaches that the choices we make, in terms of turning to God apart from God working in our lives, is set on the flesh rather than the Spirit because our minds are set on the flesh.


This means that man will freely chose to disobey God.



Predestination is Biblical if God is omniscient (everything is predestined to occur as God foreknows it will occur).

God also works our everything for His good. So everything is predestined according to God's predetermined plan....His will.

Everything is ultimately predestined by God because God created man with the foreknowledge of His creation.

This means that free-will and predestination coexist as taught in Scripture (we do not have to choose one or the other, and we needn't chalk it up to "mystery"...unless we are faced with denying one of the two as they are found in Scripture.


Paul's shipwreck is a great example in Scripture of predestination and free will together.

 

[Baptizo]

I look at it this way:

Scripture affirms free will as commonly defined (that human beings make choices freely).

At the same time Scripture teaches that the choices we make, in terms of turning to God apart from God working in our lives, is set on the flesh rather than the Spirit because our minds are set on the flesh.


This means that man will freely chose to disobey God.



Predestination is Biblical if God is omniscient (everything is predestined to occur as God foreknows it will occur).

God also works our everything for His good. So everything is predestined according to God's predetermined plan....His will.

Everything is ultimately predestined by God because God created man with the foreknowledge of His creation.

This means that free-will and predestination coexist as taught in Scripture (we do not have to choose one or the other, and we needn't chalk it up to "mystery"...unless we are faced with denying one of the two as they are found in Scripture.


Paul's shipwreck is a great example in Scripture of predestination and free will together.

I haven’t yet come to a proper understanding of 1 Timothy 1:19. Either someone can make the free will choice to abandon the faith (Lost their salvation) or they were never truly saved to begin with. What are your thoughts?

 

[37818]

I haven’t yet come to a proper understanding of 1 Timothy 1:19. Either someone can make the free will choice to abandon the faith (Lost their salvation) or they were never truly saved to begin with. What are your thoughts?

God is infinite, without beginning or end. All created beings are finite, and have beginnings. Nothingness never existed. There was always God.

God has given us two types of revelation. Creation and our Bible of 66 books.

 

[37818]

Either someone can make the free will choice to abandon the faith (Lost their salvation) or they were never truly saved to begin with. What are your thoughts?

Titus 1:2, In hope of eternal life, which God, that cannot lie, promised before the world began; . . .

1 John 5:9-13, If we receive the witness of men, the witness of God is greater: for this is the witness of God which he hath testified of his Son. He that believeth on the Son of God hath the witness in himself: he that believeth not God hath made him a liar; because he believeth not the record that God gave of his Son. And this is the record, that God hath given to us eternal life, and this life is in his Son. He that hath the Son hath life; and he that hath not the Son of God hath not life. These things have I written unto you that believe on the name of the Son of God; that ye may know that ye have eternal life, and that ye may believe on the name of the Son of God.

The only way one can know one has eternal life is if it cannot be lost.

 

[Baptizo]

Titus 1:2, In hope of eternal life, which God, that cannot lie, promised before the world began; . . .

1 John 5:9-13, If we receive the witness of men, the witness of God is greater: for this is the witness of God which he hath testified of his Son. He that believeth on the Son of God hath the witness in himself: he that believeth not God hath made him a liar; because he believeth not the record that God gave of his Son. And this is the record, that God hath given to us eternal life, and this life is in his Son. He that hath the Son hath life; and he that hath not the Son of God hath not life. These things have I written unto you that believe on the name of the Son of God; that ye may know that ye have eternal life, and that ye may believe on the name of the Son of God.

The only way one can know one has eternal life is if it cannot be lost.

I agree one has eternal life and will always keep it while they are believing. I’m talking about those who decide that they don’t want it anymore and walk away from it.

 

[kyredneck]

So who caused Lucifer to fall if he was originally created good?

It's brought out in Ezekiel that he was perfect in all his ways until iniquity was found in him.

 

[JonC]

I haven’t yet come to a proper understanding of 1 Timothy 1:19. Either someone can make the free will choice to abandon the faith (Lost their salvation) or they were never truly saved to begin with. What are your thoughts?

I view the passage along the lines of Hymenaeus and Philetus.


2 Timothy 2:16–19 But avoid worldly and empty chatter, for it will lead to further ungodliness, and their talk will spread like gangrene. Among them are Hymenaeus and Philetus, men who have gone astray from the truth saying that the resurrection has already taken place, and they upset the faith of some. Nevertheless, the firm foundation of God stands, having this seal, “The Lord knows those who are His,” and, “Everyone who names the name of the Lord is to abstain from wickedness"

People can be involved in worldly things and go astray from the truth.
Nevertheless, the firm foundation of God stands, having this seal, “The Lord knows those who are His.


I do not believe one can be saved and then not saved simply because being saved points to a future judgment from which we are saved.