Do Calvinists believe man has free will after salvation?

[BrotherJoseph]

I KNOW/ have perfect foreknowledge of the results of die roles with certainty because I happen to know physical laws, and....well, I'm a cheater who personally weighted the die...

Every time I call a 7....a seven appears....

But, does my KNOWLEDGE predestine the 7?
Is my knowledge causal?
Does my knowledge of future events pre-determine them????

NO, the fact that I'm a cheater who weighted the DIE was the causal, pre-determining factor...............not knowledge.

Scripture teaches God controls even the roll of dice, "
33 The dice are thrown into the lap, but their every decision is from the Lord" Proverbs 16:33

God is the first cause of all causes, if he isn't, who is?

Brother Joe

 

[JonC]

The mind of man plans his way,
But the Lord directs his steps. Proverbs 16:9

 

[Van]

Hi Inspector Javerts, here is what I said, the second time:

Calvinism teaches God's knowledge of the future presupposes the future is predestined.

Does this say his knowledge causes the predestination? Nope. Thus with a totally predestined future, God can know it perfectly. Before you attack me, at least determine what I said.

Thus, I presented the view of Calvinism correctly. And it is bogus.

Next, you offer up a gratuitous insult, probably because I hold your view to also be bogus. Fair enough.

Lets say we are playing with loaded dice. I know they are loaded, you do not. You think when you bet a 6 will come up, you have an actual opportunity, a 6 may come up. But, it turns out its a seven. I win. If, I know what will happen with 100% certainty, then only that one outcome can occur. It is predestined. How it is predestined does not matter. The outcome is certain. For you to jump up and down saying it was not my knowledge but the loaded dice is irrelevant. You had no chance to win.
Now lets say an Evangelist happens by and presents the gospel. I know with 100% certainty you will reject it. He could do a dandy job. You could be open to God. A choir could arrive in a bus and sing "just as I am." You still reject it. It does not matter why, brain tumor, God had hardened your heart, you were unwilling to trust in something other than yourself. None of it matters. You had no opportunity to trust in Jesus.

Pointing to a mysterious difference between certainty and necessity does not resolve your problem. A rose by any other name would smell as sweet. If the future is known with 100% certainty, that one outcome is predestined by something (lets call it necessity - ) and therefore all we do is exercise our non-choice in accordance with whatever predestined it.

 

[Van]

The mind of man plans his way,
But the Lord directs his steps. Proverbs 16:9

Exactly, spot on! We operate within the purview God allows. If the Lord allows us to fulfill our plans, or make decisions which result in alternate outcomes, then those autonomous choices are in accordance with His step direction.

Exhaustive determinism is unbiblical. The verse does not read, the mind of man plans exactly what God predestined would be planned, and therefore God has already directed his steps. Not how it reads.

 

[Inspector Javert]

Brother Inspector, it is not just some Calvinists who assert that God's will determines the future, it is the Bible. "...of him who worketh all things after the counsel of his own will:" (Ephesians 1:11)

Brother Joe

Yes, I've read the verse, the whole Bible even.....I believe it, and yet, alas, I'm not a Calvinist.

 

[Inspector Javert]

Hi Inspector Javerts, here is what I said, the second time: Does this say his knowledge causes the predestination? Nope.

You are saying the knowledge implies necessity, that is wrong.

Next, you offer up a gratuitous insult, probably because I hold your view to also be bogus.

I admit, I was rude, and for that, I owe you an apology....
I get tired of people insisting that certainty implies necessity even when they've been shown otherwise.
I've read you make that same suggestion many times and it's grated on me.

But, I am sorry I was rude.

If, I know what will happen with 100% certainty, then only that one outcome can occur.

No, that is not true, I'm sorry, but please do some research into that matter.

If there were any causal matter, namely, the loaded dice in this situation, the seven can only come up because the dice are loaded. That is so whether you know it or if NNE knows it. It is a rote fact of the laws of nature.

How it is predestined does not matter.

It very much does.

The outcome is certain.

Certainty does not imply necessity.
If it were necessary for that roll to be a seven than it would be a seven in every possible world.
If there is a possible world wherein nobody loaded that dice....(and that is possible) than, by definition, it is not necessary that those dice rolls were a seven. That's what necessity actually means.

If, for instance you have omniscience and know all things, including all future events, than any die roll results, you will know it.....
but your knowledge of it is causally effete, it doesn't render anything necessary.
If the die roll were different, what follows from Van's Omniscience is simply that he would know it....not that it couldn't be otherwise.

For you to jump up and down saying it was not my knowledge but the loaded dice is irrelevant.

It's very relevant.
Because your foreknowledge about the loaded dice caused nothing....the loading of the dice was causal there and rendered it certain. That would have been the case whether you knew it or not.
Neither of us could have known it and it would still be the 7.

Thus, again, it was the loading of the dice not the foreknowledge of it which rendered the outcome "pre-destined".

Now lets say an Evangelist happens by and presents the gospel. I know with 100% certainty you will reject it. He could do a dandy job. You could be open to God. A choir could arrive in a bus and sing "just as I am." You still reject it. It does not matter why, brain tumor, God had hardened your heart, you were unwilling to trust in something other than yourself. None of it matters. You had no opportunity to trust in Jesus.

I had every opportunity.
Your foreknowledge rendered nothing certain whatsoever.
My choice to reject the gospel was the only thing that made the choice reality.
Had I chosen well, what follows is that you would know how I would choose, if I choose foolishly, what follows is that you would know that particular choice.
Your knowledge of the event is causally effete.

Pointing to a mysterious difference between certainty and necessity

It's not mysterious, it just is.
They are different concepts and they are not synonymous.

A rose by any other name would smell as sweet.

One is a rose, the other is a tulip.

If the future is known with 100% certainty, that one outcome is predestined by something

You are using the word "predestined" as synonymous with "caused". I wouldn't do that, but what you really mean is that if something is foreknown or certain than it is rendered necessary, that is simply false.

What if no one knows it?
What does that change?

That's not I.J.'s personal opinion.
It's just fact.

(lets call it necessity -

Let's not.
"Necessity" means it could not, in any possible world, have been otherwise.
Knowing something beforehand is simply irrelevant to whether or not something is rendered necessary.

The results are the results, and will be the results even if no one knows them!

 

[Benjamin]

Scripture teaches God controls even the roll of dice, "
33 The dice are thrown into the lap, but their every decision is from the Lord" Proverbs 16:33

God is the first cause of all causes, if he isn't, who is?

Brother Joe

Is God the first cause of the sinful acts of man??? (Seems your reasoning meant to uphold Calvinism/Determinism is flawed. )

By whose will does sin happen, or IOWs what is first cause of the temptation to sin?

Is man’s will to sin free/volitional or has this choice been predetermined by God?

By your conclusion above: Is it then your interpretation of Proverbs 16:33 that God "controls" man's decisions to make him sin??? Is that what you are implying here?!

(Jas 1:13) Let no man say when he is tempted, I am tempted of God: for God cannot be tempted with evil, neither tempteth he any man:

 

[SovereignGrace]

Who's nature is in charge when a Christian sin's?

Paul laid that out in Romans 7:

but I see another law at work in me, waging war against the law of my mind and making me a prisoner of the law of sin at work within me. What a wretched man I am! Who will rescue me from this body that is subject to death? Thanks be to God, who delivers me through Jesus Christ our Lord! So then, I myself in my mind am a slave to God’s law, but in my sinful nature a slave to the law of sin.


The flesh is still ensnared in sin, yet the soul is been set free from sin. That is why Christians struggle at times in their walk with God.

 

[SovereignGrace]

Free does not mean absolutely no restraints. It means the ability to make a choice between two or more options based on reason.

And we will always choose that which is most pleasing.

 

[SovereignGrace]

All persons make choices...that is not the issue.

The issue is the will, not choice.

Bingo! :thumbsup::applause:

 

[BrotherJoseph]

Is God the first cause of the sinful acts of man??? (Seems your reasoning meant to uphold Calvinism/Determinism is flawed. )

By whose will does sin happen, or IOWs what is first cause of the temptation to sin?

Is man’s will to sin free/volitional or has this choice been predetermined by God?

By your conclusion above: Is it then your interpretation of Proverbs 16:33 that God "controls" man's decisions to make him sin??? Is that what you are implying here?!

(Jas 1:13) Let no man say when he is tempted, I am tempted of God: for God cannot be tempted with evil, neither tempteth he any man:

Brother Benjamin,

You answered my post that contained a question of "God is the first cause of all causes, if he is not, who is?", by not answering my question, but rather posing me a list questions? What kind of answer is that? Answer my question that I posed first, then I will be glad to answer each and everyone of your questions! Fair enough?

Brother Joe

 

[Van]

If, I know what will happen with 100% certainty, then only that one outcome can occur.

No, that is not true, I'm sorry, but please do some research into that matter.

Here we have it in a nutshell. If I know something will happen with 100% certainty, then something has predestined that one outcome. It does not matter what. Certainty of the future by logical necessity requires predestination of that future.

Bottom line, I did not say knowledge of the future with certainty causes predestination, I said Calvinism teaches knowledge of the future with 100% certainty presumes that future was predestined by something.

No amount of jabberwocky will change reality.

 

[Benjamin]

Brother Benjamin,

You answered my post that contained a question of "God is the first cause of all causes, if he is not, who is?", by not answering my question, but rather posing me a list questions? What kind of answer is that? Answer my question that I posed first, then I will be glad to answer each and everyone of your questions! Fair enough?

Brother Joe

Brother,

Jesus often gave a question back when asked a question because He wanted His audience to go away, to use their own God given mind gifted from the beginning of creation with sense, reason and intellect – human volition, by which they will genuinely be held responsible for the condition of our hearts. Jesus wanted us to stop and think about our perception of God and question our own doctrinal beliefs about God’s Nature and what His plans are.

My questions are posed in order to draw out the truth in your argument by directing you to examine the substance of your claim, or IOWs the reasoning behind your claim by which you draw your conclusion. In this case you must first deal with the origin of sin and the “Problem Of Evil” for your premise of God being the “first cause of all causes” to stand as true.

Your interpretations, which I will submit are merely designed to conform to systematic doctrines of Calvinism/Determinism are meaningless unless YOU FIRST address the origins of sin/evil regarding your question.

So IOWs as for answering your question it must first be broken down, which the first premise poses (supposedly supported by the scripture you gave) that God is the first causes of all causes, which by any rational critical thinking skills must include evil and thereby carry down to the last details of the sins of man (by which I countered your interpretation by comparing scripture to scripture) is where I began.

In consideration of the Nature of God I can without a doubt tell you that your first premise is false. As to your second premise, which you should probably understand is already doomed to come to a false conclusion considering your first premise, the first cause of evil was man with the help of Satan, which was made possible through the divine design of God’s creatures to have the free will/human volition to disobey God – by which each and every one will “genuinely be held responsible” for being the “cause” of except for the grace of our Loving Creator who provided the Way of salvation for ALL who love and believe the truth with that precious gift of a mind to all mankind to have the ability to reason through human volition/free will.

With that these scriptures come to mind:

(Rom 1:16) For I am not ashamed of the gospel of Christ: for it is the power of God unto salvation to every one that believeth; to the Jew first, and also to the Greek.

(Rom 1:17) For therein is the righteousness of God revealed from faith to faith: as it is written, The just shall live by faith.

(Rom 1:18) For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men, who hold the truth in unrighteousness;

(Rom 1:19) Because that which may be known of God is manifest in them; for God hath shewed it unto them.

(Rom 1:20) For the invisible things of him from the creation of the world are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even his eternal power and Godhead; so that they are without excuse:

(Rom 1:21) Because that, when they knew God, they glorified him not as God, neither were thankful; but became vain in their imaginations, and their foolish heart was darkened.

(Rom 1:22) Professing themselves to be wise, they became fools,


Brother, I consider creation a genuine loving gift to all men which includes the ability to understand God's Omnibenevolent Nature to hold true with His design of human volitional creatures while His other attributes of Omnipotence and Omniscience do also hold true...and I m thankful for it.

 

[InTheLight]

And we will always choose that which is most pleasing.

Always?

The soldier that falls on a grenade that lands in the foxhole?

The young unwed mother that decides not to get an abortion?

The person that becomes an organ donor for another person?

In your view, these people are making the pleasing choice?

I could go on and on with more examples.

 

[convicted1]

In those scenarios, ITL, those people chose to die in the stead of their fellow soldier, preserve life, to save life by donating an organ such as a kidney, etc.

 

[Inspector Javert]

Here we have it in a nutshell. If I know something will happen with 100% certainty, then something has predestined that one outcome.

No, that is simply not true.
It could just as easily be predestined by absolutely nothing.

What Will occur must not be necessary to occur.
If something different were to occur, than what follows is that you would know otherwise.
Foreknowledge of an event changes absolutely nothing.

Certainty of the future by logical necessity requires predestination of that future.

You're wrong, and any expert on those topics could tell you that.
Read some of the great thinkers on that topic and you will find that that assumption of yours is patently false.

"Certainty" of something is an epistemic reality about an individual subjects knowledge of something. It does not imply necessity.
Necessity means that it could not possibly have been otherwise.

I am "CERTAIN" that the Earth is round....
That doesn't mean that God couldn't have designed it differently.
That doesn't mean that it was "predestined" to be created that way.

It just means that God chose to do it that way.

Logical priority isn't temporal priority.
Foreknowledge of a future event is temporally prior to the event but subsequent logically.
You are failing to grasp the difference.
Certainty is logically posterior to the truth value of a future event.
The occurrence will be the occurrence whether anyone knows about it or everyone does. It changes nothing.

Bottom line, I did not say knowledge of the future with certainty causes predestination, I said Calvinism teaches knowledge of the future with 100% certainty presumes that future was predestined by something.

Not all of them.
There are different specie of Calvinist.
And, if you agree with them, than you are as mistaken as they are.

No amount of jabberwocky will change reality.

Now you are being gratuitously insulting.

Just because you can't or don't understand what is being said, doesn't make it "jabberwocky" or nonsense.
It isn't "jabberwocky" to someone who knows what they are talking about.

 

[SovereignGrace]

Always?

The soldier that falls on a grenade that lands in the foxhole?

The young unwed mother that decides not to get an abortion?

The person that becomes an organ donor for another person?

In your view, these people are making the pleasing choice?

I could go on and on with more examples.

The thing 'most pleasing' may not be very desirable, but given the choice of one or the alternative, they choose the better of the two options.

The soldier would not want to see his fellow soldiers die, so he falls upon the grenade for them.

The unwed mother would rather birth the child than murder it by abortion.

I do not want to die, but when the Lord calls me home, I want my organs to be used to save others, seeing I will have no further need of them.

As already stated, people will gladly give up an organ, kidney, to save a family member's life.

 

[Inspector Javert]

In those scenarios, ITL, those people chose to die in the stead of their fellow soldier, preserve life, to save life by donating an organ such as a kidney, etc.

As you see I.T.L.....

The idea that compatabilists have that everyone "chooses" according to their greatest desire at the time is a non-disprovable assumption.

You can't prove otherwise, because they will simply fall back on the man who jumped on the grenade's desire to be lauded for it into perpetuity, or the single mother who bravely raises the child into her selfish desire not to deal with the phsychological ramifications of the decision to abort.....

They are betting the ranch on a non-disprovable assumption.

It's an implausible one, but they'll stick with it.

Even if you unloaded every example in your database, they'll argue otherwise.

It's a losing proposition to argue that way.

Granted, their explanations are ad hoc implausible and counter-intuitive....
But they don't care.

They'll stick to their guns at the same time your man jumps on a grenade to save his friends.

Because...you can't "prove" them wrong, despite how insane the proposition is..............
and yes, the propostions that everyone "chooses" according only to their "greatest desire" is ad-hoc and stupid, but you'll never convince them otherwise, there's no point in arguing from that angle.

 

[convicted1]

If someone puts a gun to your face and demands your wallet, you'll hand it over. Granted, Brothet, you don't desire to lose your money, but you'd desire to live moreso than having your face blown off and still losing your wallet...

Your money or your kids? You don't want to lose either, but your money you'd give up in lieu of your kids...

I know these are hypotheticals, but I hope you understand my points I made...

Sent from my BNTV400 using Tapatalk

 

[convicted1]

I did my clinicals in 2000. One of the hospitals was Thomas Memorial in South Charleston, WVa. It was named after a soldier whose last name was 'Thomas'. I know...durrrr. He died by falling upon a grenade thrown in amongst his troops. He died to save them.

Sure, he probably never desired to die, but his desire for them not to die was more than his desire to live. Here's the link to the hospital. I could not find a link for his act, but I'll keep digging.

https://www.thomaswv.org/about_promise.asp

Sent from my BNTV400 using Tapatalk