Is there really a conflict between Freedom and Sovereignty, if rightly defined?

[agedman]

1) God has exhaustive foreknowledge, meaning He knows the future exhaustively.

2) Knowing the future fixes the future, thus the description of the doctrine as exhaustive determinism, God predestines whatsoever comes to pass.

3) God predestines and thus causes, using primary, secondary or whatever causes our each and every sin.

Van, you were doing good until #3.

The Scripture specifically states that God does not tempt any person to do evil. But you knew this.

You also know full well that man is completely evil already in their unregenerate state. There is no need for God to predestine anyone to evil nor "cause" anyone to sin.

Does God use evil people? Yes - but he doesn't determine them to be evil, that is already a part of the heathen's nature.

Does God cause the believer to sin? NO!

Paul addressed this very issue in his own life as related in the following verses from Romans:

21I find then the principle that evil is present in me, the one who wants to do good. 22 For I joyfully concur with the law of God in the inner man, 23 but I see a different law in the members of my body, waging war against the law of my mind and making me a prisoner of the law of sin which is in my members.24 Wretched man that I am! Who will set me free from the body of this death? 25 Thanks be to God through Jesus Christ our Lord! So then, on the one hand I myself with my mind am serving the law of God, but on the other, with my flesh the law of sin.



Therefore there is now no condemnation for those who are in Christ Jesus.
​

4) God is the author of sin, and therefore to punish us for what He caused demonstrates His glory.

Calvinism 101

Would you please show from which creed or statement of faith from which this statement comes?

This is important! It is a heretical to teach that "God is the author of sin."

Perhaps you might start a thread on the Baptist Confession of Faith (1689) and discuss "Part 3" of that document.

Please NOTE: This is a BAPTIST statement of faith, and has been used in numerous BAPTIST churches for 330+ years.

Please NOTE: This is document holds certain views labeled as Calvinist, yet does NOT support Calvinism in total. Just as some may hold Arminian views and not hold all that Arminianism originally taught. (examples: pedobaptism, loss of salvation once truly saved, and other such issues)

Highlight what part of that document states "God is the author of Sin."

Van, this is important, because some folks may not see that you were using extreme terms in which you really don't actually hold - at least not that I have seen.

 

[Herald]

Van, you were doing good until #3.

The Scripture specifically states that God does not tempt any person to do evil. But you knew this.

You also know full well that man is completely evil already in their unregenerate state. There is no need for God to predestine anyone to evil nor "cause" anyone to sin.

Does God use evil people? Yes - but he doesn't determine them to be evil, that is already a part of the heathen's nature.

Does God cause the believer to sin? NO!

Paul addressed this very issue in his own life as related in the following verses from Romans:

21I find then the principle that evil is present in me, the one who wants to do good. 22 For I joyfully concur with the law of God in the inner man, 23 but I see a different law in the members of my body, waging war against the law of my mind and making me a prisoner of the law of sin which is in my members.24 Wretched man that I am! Who will set me free from the body of this death? 25 Thanks be to God through Jesus Christ our Lord! So then, on the one hand I myself with my mind am serving the law of God, but on the other, with my flesh the law of sin.



Therefore there is now no condemnation for those who are in Christ Jesus.
​

Would you please show from which creed or statement of faith from which this statement comes?

This is important! It is a heretical to teach that "God is the author of sin."

Perhaps you might start a thread on the Baptist Confession of Faith (1689) and discuss "Part 3" of that document.

Please NOTE: This is a BAPTIST statement of faith, and has been used in numerous BAPTIST churches for 330+ years.

Please NOTE: This is document holds certain views labeled as Calvinist, yet does NOT support Calvinism in total. Just as some may hold Arminian views and not hold all that Arminianism originally taught. (examples: pedobaptism, loss of salvation once truly saved, and other such issues)

Highlight what part of that document states "God is the author of Sin."

Van, this is important, because some folks may not see that you were using extreme terms in which you really don't actually hold - at least not that I have seen.

You are going to be accused of not using Scripture and teaching doctrines of men even though you did use Scripture properly.

 

[agedman]

I probably dont have the vocabulary to best explain my position - however from what i read in the Bible there is an obvious tension between choice and a calling of some sort ; therefore I can only accept this tension and best try to explain it with what little human knowledge i have.

The "tension" you sense is that which is created through the presence of the NEW creation that is in you.

Such started at the first impulse of Godly conviction in which you experience in salvation.

Van would have you consider that such tension is YOUR freedom of choice expressions.

However, examine your own life and you will come to understand that the Godly conviction that brought you to salvation was completely different that the "sorrow of this world" expressed by many heathen who are "caught."

Now, some create a humanistic partial grace of God that they refer as "prevenient (or in modern terms preceding) grace." This is some extension of God in which the person becomes self aware and can then make a free choice for God or rejection of that salvation.

However, please know that there is literally NO Scriptural support for such thinking.

And, that when one examines the Scriptures without prejudicial views, that Salvation from the first impulse of Godly conviction to the final Glorification is TOTALLY of God through Christ.

The believer stands as "accepted in the beloved" not through ANY self work of "acceptance" or "prayer of faith" but because God extended "unmerited favor" to that person. That person may cry out even as the young man before Christ "Lord, I believe, Help Thou my unbelief!"

"For with the Heart man believes, and with the mouth confession is made."

Startling that some would consider that some "man work" must take place when the Scripture clearly states: "WE are HIS workmanship, CREATED in Christ Jesus..."

 

[agedman]

Don't worry van. I'm not a Calvinist :thumbs:

There are a number of folks who are not full 100% followers of John Calvin. But there are also a great number of folks who hold typical Baptist views from "The Baptist Confession (1689)" and just don't know it.

Perhaps you may disagree with certain areas that these Baptists set down, but at least you will have a bit better understanding of the historical Baptist line of reasoning.

I realize that much of the thinking of the modern Baptist church has been (in my view sadly) gradually modified since the mid 1830's and that lead to strong division (creating the SB) and eventually contributed to the War of Northern Aggression.

But, it is a very good exercise of wise discernment to know what came before, too.

 

[Herald]

Chapter 3 of the 1689 Second London Baptist Confession of Faith is titled "Of God's Decree". Paragraph 1 reads:

God hath decreed in himself, from all eternity, by the most wise and holy counsel of his own will, freely and unchangeably, all things, whatsoever comes to pass; yet so as thereby is God neither the author of sin nor hath fellowship with any therein; nor is violence offered to the will of the creature, nor yet is the liberty or contingency of second causes taken away, but rather established; in which appears his wisdom in disposing all things, and power and faithfulness in accomplishing his decree.

( Isaiah 46:10; Ephesians 1:11; Hebrews 6:17; Romans 9:15, 18; James 1:13; 1 John 1:5; Acts 4:27, 28; John 19:11; Numbers 23:19; Ephesians 1:3-5 )

Sam Waldron comments,

"The most common objection raised by the teaching of the Confession regarding God's decree is this. Does this not make God the author of sin? If it does not, then on what basis does the Confession assert that though God ordains all things, yet he is not the author of sin?

The Confession denies, of course, that God is the author of sin, even though he decrees it. It justifies this denial on the basis of what it calls 'the liberty or contingency of second causes'. God is not the author of sin, in other words, just because he does by his own immediate causation bring it to pass. It is the responsibility of the second causes who willing engage it. This is illustrated by the case of God's decreeing that David should sinfully number Israel (2 Sam. 24:1; 1 Chron. 21:1). From the latter passage we learn that this decree was not carried out by the Holy Spirit moving David, but by Satan.

Another thought which helps to alleviate this problem may be gleaned from the passages which speak of God's decree of sinful actions (Gen. 50:20; 2 Sam. 24:1; Acts 2:23). In each of these passages it is clear that God's rationale in decreeing the sin was completely pure. In the first and third his motive is graciously redemptive. In the second it is justly retributive."

Waldron, Sam. "A Modern Exposition 1689 Baptist Confession of Faith." Evangelical Press, 2013.

Both the Confession, and Dr. Waldron's exposition, use scripture as their source of authority on explaining God's decree and His use of sin for His purposes.

 

[Gorship]

The "tension" you sense is that which is created through the presence of the NEW creation that is in you.

Such started at the first impulse of Godly conviction in which you experience in salvation.

Van would have you consider that such tension is YOUR freedom of choice expressions.

However, examine your own life and you will come to understand that the Godly conviction that brought you to salvation was completely different that the "sorrow of this world" expressed by many heathen who are "caught."

Now, some create a humanistic partial grace of God that they refer as "prevenient (or in modern terms preceding) grace." This is some extension of God in which the person becomes self aware and can then make a free choice for God or rejection of that salvation.

However, please know that there is literally NO Scriptural support for such thinking.

And, that when one examines the Scriptures without prejudicial views, that Salvation from the first impulse of Godly conviction to the final Glorification is TOTALLY of God through Christ.

The believer stands as "accepted in the beloved" not through ANY self work of "acceptance" or "prayer of faith" but because God extended "unmerited favor" to that person. That person may cry out even as the young man before Christ "Lord, I believe, Help Thou my unbelief!"

"For with the Heart man believes, and with the mouth confession is made."

Startling that some would consider that some "man work" must take place when the Scripture clearly states: "WE are HIS workmanship, CREATED in Christ Jesus..."

I feel like my tension lies in the fact that through all the OT and NT the common thread (along with the coming of Christ) is that God wants all His people to come to saving knowledge of Him through Christ.

"Joshua 24:15

King James Version (KJV)

15 And if it seem evil unto you to serve the Lord, choose you this day whom ye will serve; 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 ye dwell: but as for me and my house, we will serve the Lord."

"2 Peter 3:9

King James Version (KJV)

9 The Lord is not slack concerning his promise, as some men count slackness; but is longsuffering to us-ward, not willing that any should perish, but that all should come to repentance."

"Acts 16:30-31
30 And brought them out, and said, Sirs, what must I do to be saved?

31 And they said, Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ, and thou shalt be saved, and thy house."

I feel we see the sorrow in Paul in trying to get Agrippa saved

" Acts 26:28-29
28 Then Agrippa said unto Paul, Almost thou persuadest me to be a Christian.

29 And Paul said, I would to God, that not only thou, but also all that hear me this day, were both almost, and altogether such as I am, except these bonds."

"John 3:16

King James Version (KJV)

16 For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life"
(I know the member 'The archangel' posted that the greek disagrees with the idea of whosoever; however I respectfully disagree with his position - after reviewing even his own arguments - i still agree that the KJV scholars best represented the view of the original writings for the English readers)

All through the OT, we see God having to punish Sin and sending out prophets to scream to the people to come to the God of Israel - this would be redundant if they were already predestined (I understand you disagree with me and probably say something along the lines of 'God does as he sees fit', and I can't argue with that - I just don't think God needs to be redundant for Redundancy sake)

Then we get to the NT and see Jesus preaching to the masses and bringing miracles to the people ; showing people that He is God and they turn away. I think if God truly loved the world as that quote from John 3:16 says He would have just made them all believe if that was His wish, but that's not love. No when we reach the bottom and realize we need to reach up and grasp the only hand that can pull us out, and understand that sacrifice do we understand love ; or have a family that has taught us rightly, or come to some point where we had to say, God is whom I will serve. Then we take our place as those who are saved - and the predestined promise for those who accept Gods free gift is an elect position in Gods kingdom ; not of our own work, but by Gods grace lest we should try and boast about it. No one gets a gift on Christmas and opens it and every body thanks him for opening the gift. No we all turn to the gift giver in thanks, That's why I dont think the Free will positional is man centered but it is so amazingly God centered, and there is a gift for everyone if they would simply receive it and lay hold if it. (Eph 2:8)

thats my lengthy position. Im sure it needs ironing to be as sophisticated as many of the awesome conversations that I read on here. However, I cannot deny what I read in scripture :godisgood::jesus:

 

[Benjamin]

Ben,

"It must be nice" to ignore the truth and be so consumed cynical attributes.

That pattern allows for the lack of any valuable constructive posts in which Scriptures are used to edify and enhance the understanding of those who read the threads.

But lets play along with your "deterministic" thinking and see how it plays out.

Here are some rhetorical questions in which you could answer in the negative if you are determined:

Did God determine for His son to die on the Cross from the beginning of the creation?

Did God not speak specifically of this in terms such as "crushing" and "bruising?"

Did God determine to save Noah and his family when he also determined to destroy the world in a flood?

Did God determine that Abraham would be the father of two nations?

Did God determine that David would survive the encounter with the giant, be kept safe from all evil attempts to kill him and that God's only begotten Son would also be known as the Son of David?

Did God determine that Mary would be the mother of Jesus?

Did God determine that He was well pleased with Christ?

Did God determine just who would come to Him in the statement "all the Father gives me will come to me...."

Did God determine that Stephen would be stoned and Saul would become Paul who wrote a great number of letters to the churches?

Did God determine who would go to blind Paul while he waited in Damascus?

Did God determine that the Apostle John would out live all the other apostles and die of natural causes in Ephesus?

Did God determine that one day Christ will return at a time that only the Father knows?

Did God determine to save you?

Now, showing that the use of "determinism" (or any derivative) refutes the use of the word in the above questions, then there is perhaps more to be discussed.

If not - well perhaps the above quoted post is using a term that is under some definition that is uncommon, archaic, or merely a figment of the imagination.

I knew it, …you got a serious case of Determinism on the brain, you see everywhere and in everything!

God is Providentially Sovereign in the world and managed these things according to His will, in creation He also Sovereignly bestowed moral freedom upon His creatures and righteously judges them thereby as well demonstrating they have true volition – Poof! - goes your fallacious deterministically imagined reasoning which you believe supports the manmade soteriological view of the Determinists who attempts to claim that God is Deterministically Sovereign and predetermines the outcomes of His forthcoming judgment on His creatures who supposedly have predetermined wills.

 

[DrJamesAch]

And here we go again with the citations of creeds and commentaries.

Look, the Bible shows very clearly and simply that He DOES NOT DETERMINE EVERYTHING. I gave several examples FROM THE BIBLE, not a CREED, or a catechism, or a confession (which I have already shown to be faulty in another thread "Major Contradiction in the 1686 Confession"), or commentary, but from the BIBLE:

If God determines ALL THINGS, EVERY THING, then He is ultimately the author of confusion, but 1 Cor 14:33 makes it clear that He is NOT.

If God Determines ALL THINGS and EVERY THING, then He is ultimately the cause of all the temptations that men face, yet James 1:13 says that He is NOT.

If God determines ALL THINGS and EVERY THING, then EVERY THING that He "decrees" would come to pass. 1 Samuel 23:1-14 shows clearly that it did NOT. God clearly said that Saul would "come down" when David asked-HE DID NOT, Saul "FORBARE".

If God determines ALL THINGS and EVERY THING, then He would have had it IN HIS MIND to cause Judah to sin, but Jeremiah 32:35 says that He did NOT.

There are TONS of references like this in the Bible that determinists avoid and cling to their proof texts like, "God declared all things from the beginning to the end". It says DECLARED, not FORCED ALL THINGS TO HAPPEN.

Folks need to learn to interpret passage in light of the passages that are CLEAR on a subject. The law of non contradiction shows that 2 things that are different can not both be equally true at the same time. The Bible can not say "He declares ALL THINGS from the beginning to the end" and that interpreted to mean that He determines all things, and then in another passage of Scripture, as in the four examples above that show He does not.

Instead of dealing with either an apparent contradiction in the Bible, or a conflict with ones belief system, Calvinists simply ignore and avoid the obvious verses and resort back to a confession or creed as an authority on the interpretation of deterministic sovereignty and then use humanistic reasoning to avoid the plain, ordinary and obvious verses in the Bible that are clearly in conflict with their system.

 

[agedman]

I feel like my tension lies in the fact that through all the OT and NT the common thread (along with the coming of Christ) is that God wants all His people to come to saving knowledge of Him through Christ.

VERY good! You are right. God does and WILL have ALL HIS people come to a saving knowledge of Him.

That is Scripture. "All the Father Gives me WILL come ..."

"Joshua 24:15

King James Version (KJV)

15 And if it seem evil unto you to serve the Lord, choose you this day whom ye will serve; 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 ye dwell: but as for me and my house, we will serve the Lord."

"2 Peter 3:9

King James Version (KJV)

9 The Lord is not slack concerning his promise, as some men count slackness; but is longsuffering to us-ward, not willing that any should perish, but that all should come to repentance."

"Acts 16:30-31
30 And brought them out, and said, Sirs, what must I do to be saved?

31 And they said, Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ, and thou shalt be saved, and thy house."

I feel we see the sorrow in Paul in trying to get Agrippa saved

" Acts 26:28-29
28 Then Agrippa said unto Paul, Almost thou persuadest me to be a Christian.

29 And Paul said, I would to God, that not only thou, but also all that hear me this day, were both almost, and altogether such as I am, except these bonds."

"John 3:16

King James Version (KJV)

16 For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life"
(I know the member 'The archangel' posted that the greek disagrees with the idea of whosoever; however I respectfully disagree with his position - after reviewing even his own arguments - i still agree that the KJV scholars best represented the view of the original writings for the English readers)

All these are GREAT verses - but be very careful that you do not appoint the unregenerate heathen as saved into these verses. I agree that when one as Agrippa is not saved there is a bit of sadness. But also, it shows that persuasion does NOT bring salvation. Mental acceptance does not bring salvation. Salvation is given not an acquired skill.

For instance: Archangel gave a great Greek translation work of John 3:16. Historically, "whosoever" did NOT mean what the modern definition casts. In that, and with the appropriate Greek that Archangel so wonderfully worked to show, the verse is directed specifically to believers.

Perhaps you will want to PM him and visit with him personally and test his work for yourself.

All through the OT, we see God having to punish Sin and sending out prophets to scream to the people to come to the God of Israel - this would be redundant if they were already predestined (I understand you disagree with me and probably say something along the lines of 'God does as he sees fit', and I can't argue with that - I just don't think God needs to be redundant for Redundancy sake)

No one is stating that corporate Israel of the OT were saved. If you look carefully, you will see that just as in the time following Christ, INDIVIDUALS are saved. God has always dealt with individuals and then to the mass.

The ONLY time that there will be a corporate salvation is when the verse, "They shall look upon Him whom they pierced..." and at that point "All Israel will be saved."

Then we get to the NT and see Jesus preaching to the masses and bringing miracles to the people ; showing people that He is God and they turn away. I think if God truly loved the world as that quote from John 3:16 says He would have just made them all believe if that was His wish, but that's not love. No when we reach the bottom and realize we need to reach up and grasp the only hand that can pull us out, and understand that sacrifice do we understand love ; or have a family that has taught us rightly, or come to some point where we had to say, God is whom I will serve. Then we take our place as those who are saved - and the predestined promise for those who accept Gods free gift is an elect position in Gods kingdom ; not of our own work, but by Gods grace lest we should try and boast about it. No one gets a gift on Christmas and opens it and every body thanks him for opening the gift. No we all turn to the gift giver in thanks, That's why I dont think the Free will positional is man centered but it is so amazingly God centered, and there is a gift for everyone if they would simply receive it and lay hold if it. (Eph 2:8)

That God so loved the world does not negate that God is just and the justifier. Remember the Scriptures, "He came to His own and His own received Him not" is NOT an indication of ownership but of identification.

Jesus was a Jew and came to Jews, but they (the majority) did not receive him, but as many as did "He gave the right to become children of God, even to those who believe in His name, 13 who were born, not of blood nor of the will of the flesh nor of the will of man, but of God.

Now I know it is the fancy for some to present salvation in terms such as "reach the bottom and realize we need to reach up and grasp the only hand that can pull us out,..." BUT the fact is that just is not found in Scripture. Look throughout the NT and you will find not one condition of conversion in which that is true.

The Scripture is CLEARLY stating that impossibility in contrasting those saved versus those who are unregenerate:

10 For to us (the saved) God revealed them through the Spirit; for the Spirit searches all things, even the depths of God. 11 For who among men knows the thoughts of a man except the spirit of the man which is in him? Even so the thoughts of God no one knows except the Spirit of God.(this agrees with such verses as "my thoughts are far above...")12 Now we have received, not the spirit of the world, but the Spirit who is from God, so that we may know the things freely given to us by God, 13 which things we also speak, not in words taught by human wisdom, but in those taught by the Spirit, combining spiritual thoughts with spiritual words. (agrees with verses such as, "For the sorrow that is according to the will of God produces a repentance without regret, leading to salvation, but the sorrow of the world produces death.")
14 But a natural man does not accept the things of the Spirit of God, for they are foolishness to him; and he cannot understand them, because they are spiritually appraised. 15 But he who is spiritual appraises all things, yet he himself is appraised by no one.

​

Do you see how this Scripture totally discounts the thinking that you stated? There is NO man centered salvation.




NOW, it is important that those who have gone through great trauma and are now saved do NOT discount that experience. That is part of the purpose and plan of God in which that person will be effective in the ministry.

Some, like the believing thief find that salvation comes to them at the "cross." And what a testimony to others that experience can bring.

Some, like the Saul find that salvation comes to them on the road of doing.

Some, like the centurion find that salvation comes following great natural and perhaps personal disasters.

Some, like young preacher Timothy find salvation comes during educational time at a mother (aunt, grandmother, father, grandfather, ...) knees.

BUT ALL salvation from the first impulse of Godly conviction to the final glorification is by God through Christ.

For HE IS "the author and finisher..."




I want to add a personal note.

I want you to continue to grow in understanding and wisdom of God. Do not take this post as being critical, but of showing how even the ability of man to "reach up" is given by God, and is part of Salvation.

 

[jonathanD]

Van,

Can you explain, in your view, how exhaustive foreknowledge and libertarian freedom can coexist?

 

[DrJamesAch]

Van,

Can you explain, in your view, how exhaustive foreknowledge and libertarian freedom can coexist?

It's pretty simple, the 2 don't depend on each other. Exhaustive foreknowledge is simply another term for omniscience, and what God knows does not determine how men respond. You are turning God's knowledge into an independent force and turning knowledge into something that is prescriptive and proscriptive instead of knowledge being descriptive of what God knows and adding an attribute to knowledge that defies its definition. Knowledge means to KNOW, not to DETERMINE.

Furthermore, the concept of "exhaustive knowledge" was developed to refute open theism and that's not the issue here.

 

[agedman]

I knew it, …you got a serious case of Determinism on the brain, you see everywhere and in everything!

God is Providentially Sovereign in the world and managed these things according to His will, in creation He also Sovereignly bestowed moral freedom upon His creatures and righteously judges them thereby as well demonstrating they have true volition – Poof! - goes your fallacious deterministically imagined reasoning which you believe supports the manmade soteriological view of the Determinists who attempts to claim that God is Deterministically Sovereign and predetermines the outcomes of His forthcoming judgment on His creatures who supposedly have predetermined wills.

It isn't like Scripture after Scripture documents the above view as incorrect.

To continue as if "Poof!" it is valid is just adding further discredit to the post.

I ask for a respond using YOUR TERM "deterministic," but it is evidently apparent you missed that part of the post.

I in NO WAY stated agreement nor even hinted of that YOUR idiom for it isn't.

For the record - "deterministic" is YOUR WORD which I used in the post and which you are incapable of responding but make vain attempts to detract.

YOUR DESIGNATION is wrong and seeks to only inflame, and demean.

Is that the real intent of your heart?

 

[jonathanD]

It's pretty simple, the 2 don't depend on each other. Exhaustive foreknowledge is simply another term for omniscience, and what God knows does not determine how men respond. You are turning God's knowledge into an independent force and turning knowledge into something that is prescriptive and proscriptive instead of knowledge being descriptive of what God knows and adding an attribute to knowledge that defies its definition. Knowledge means to KNOW, not to DETERMINE.

Furthermore, the concept of "exhaustive knowledge" was developed to refute open theism and that's not the issue here.

None of that explains how a libertarian choice (contra-causal) is possible if the future is fully known. How can a man pick differently than what God knows he will pick? If he is unable to pick one of his options, his freedom is not contra-causal or libertarian.

 

[DrJamesAch]

None of that explains how a libertarian choice (contra-causal) is possible if the future is fully known. How can a man pick differently than what God knows he will pick? If he is unable to pick one of his options, his freedom is not contra-causal or libertarian.

It doesn't have to explain how it's possible because the 2 are not dependent on each other. You are still equating the foreknowledge of God as a FORCE. It isn't. Just because God knows you will pick something does't mean He made you pick it. And, I gave a clear example from the Bible that shows an answer God gave to David that DID NOT COME TO PASS. God was telling David what was true and what He knew for that moment, and then David's decision ALTERED THE COURSE OF EVENTS.

David's Question: 1 Samuel 23:11-14

" Will the men of Keilah deliver me up into his hand? will Saul come down, as thy servant hath heard? O Lord God of Israel, I beseech thee, tell thy servant. And the Lord said, He will come down. Then said David, Will the men of Keilah deliver me and my men into the hand of Saul? And the Lord said, They will deliver thee up."

David asked if Saul would deliver him up, and if he would come down. The Lord said , HE WILL. Now what happened?

"Then David and his men, which were about six hundred, arose and departed out of Keilah, and went whithersoever they could go. And it was told Saul that David was escaped from Keilah; and he forbare to go forth."

God said Saul would deliver David up. HE DIDN'T. God said that Saul WILL COME DOWN. HE DIDN'T.

 

[jonathanD]

I'm asking you to explain how it is possible. I've said nothing about causation. I'm asking if a man can do contrary to what God knows he will do. If he can't, his freedom is not contra-causal.

Your example is answerable, but it will derail the thread. Can you answer the above question?

 

[agedman]

And here we go again with the citations of creeds and commentaries.

When used appropriately, that is not a problem. Do you not cite in your work the work of others? I don't know any higher educational institution training that does not emphasize this as both right and proper.

For you to attempt to disparage it is not showing a credit to your own education.

Look, the Bible shows very clearly and simply that He DOES NOT DETERMINE EVERYTHING. I gave several examples FROM THE BIBLE, not a CREED, or a catechism, or a confession (which I have already shown to be faulty in another thread "Major Contradiction in the 1686 Confession"), or commentary, but from the BIBLE:

Going strictly from memory, I do tend to think your view was soundly refuted. But, then at my age, I don't put much stock in my memory. However, let's go on to the rest of the post.

If God determines ALL THINGS, EVERY THING, then He is ultimately the author of confusion, but 1 Cor 14:33 makes it clear that He is NOT.

If God Determines ALL THINGS and EVERY THING, then He is ultimately the cause of all the temptations that men face, yet James 1:13 says that He is NOT.

If God determines ALL THINGS and EVERY THING, then EVERY THING that He "decrees" would come to pass. 1 Samuel 23:1-14 shows clearly that it did NOT. God clearly said that Saul would "come down" when David asked-HE DID NOT, Saul "FORBARE".

If God determines ALL THINGS and EVERY THING, then He would have had it IN HIS MIND to cause Judah to sin, but Jeremiah 32:35 says that He did NOT.

There are TONS of references like this in the Bible that determinists avoid and cling to their proof texts like, "God declared all things from the beginning to the end". It says DECLARED, not FORCED ALL THINGS TO HAPPEN.

James, I am writing to you as one who I take to be educated.

You have taken "determine" and attempted to refute Scriptures.

What God declares will happen, happens in spite and despite any human effort to the contrary. All first year Bible students know that principle.

What God decrees will happen, happens in spite and despite any human effort to the contrary. All first year Bible students know that principle.

Attempts at presenting "deterministic" thinking in this post is unwarranted because the poster's view is "deterministically" biased.

THAT is an accurate use of the word determine. Such a word is not accurate in the way YOU determine to position the word.

Folks need to learn to interpret passage in light of the passages that are CLEAR on a subject. The law of non contradiction shows that 2 things that are different can not both be equally true at the same time. The Bible can not say "He declares ALL THINGS from the beginning to the end" and that interpreted to mean that He determines all things, and then in another passage of Scripture, as in the four examples above that show He does not.

Oops, you changed words!!!!

You used DECREE which is Scriptural, and then tried to make it fit the word "determine."

Perhaps, it is intentional, perhaps not.

Instead of dealing with either an apparent contradiction in the Bible, or a conflict with ones belief system, Calvinists simply ignore and avoid the obvious verses and resort back to a confession or creed as an authority on the interpretation of deterministic sovereignty and then use humanistic reasoning to avoid the plain, ordinary and obvious verses in the Bible that are clearly in conflict with their system.

Some folks just can't have a gentlemanly conversation without "resorting" to labels and myth.

Jumping on the bandwagon that has broken down is not the way to fix the problem of the wagon.

If you are going to refute a view, than speak to that view and the errors.

Quite trying to bolster your argument by demeaning and implications that have no place.

For example: IF I took the above quote and replaced "calvinist" with "all non-calvinists" would it be supportive of what I was attempting to communicate, OR would it merely be an attempt to inflame emotions and garner and "amen choir?"

I have encouraged you to leave off all this labeling and bickering such as this last paragraph.

James, it really is beneath your educational level.

Argue your point; make Scriptures your focus; link to any documents you consider important for the reader to gather more understanding.

Let your speech always be with grace, as though seasoned with salt, so that you will know how you should respond to each person.

​

To often some of the BB folks apply so much seasoning that it ruins the tasteful offering they desire to present.

 

[Benjamin]

It isn't like Scripture after Scripture documents the above view as incorrect.

To continue as if "Poof!" it is valid is just adding further discredit to the post.

I ask for a respond using YOUR TERM "deterministic," but it is evidently apparent you missed that part of the post.

I in NO WAY stated agreement nor even hinted of that YOUR idiom for it isn't.

For the record - "deterministic" is YOUR WORD which I used in the post and which you are incapable of responding but make vain attempts to detract.

YOUR DESIGNATION is wrong and seeks to only inflame, and demean.

Is that the real intent of your heart?

Typical Calvinist/Determinist/DoG, whatever they want to call themselves, trying to avoid having his position being defined by a clear term to avoid being pinned on it.

According to the "whatever/your" position for God to be Sovereign he must have determined all things:

1) Necessarily God has fore determined everything that will happen
2) God has determined X
3) Therefore it is necessary that X will happen

X = man’s choices
X = evil

Simple enough?

 

[agedman]

It doesn't have to explain how it's possible because the 2 are not dependent on each other. You are still equating the foreknowledge of God as a FORCE. It isn't. Just because God knows you will pick something does't mean He made you pick it. And, I gave a clear example from the Bible that shows an answer God gave to David that DID NOT COME TO PASS. God was telling David what was true and what He knew for that moment, and then David's decision ALTERED THE COURSE OF EVENTS.

David's Question: 1 Samuel 23:11-14

" Will the men of Keilah deliver me up into his hand? will Saul come down, as thy servant hath heard? O Lord God of Israel, I beseech thee, tell thy servant. And the Lord said, He will come down. Then said David, Will the men of Keilah deliver me and my men into the hand of Saul? And the Lord said, They will deliver thee up."

David asked if Saul would deliver him up, and if he would come down. The Lord said , HE WILL. Now what happened?

"Then David and his men, which were about six hundred, arose and departed out of Keilah, and went whithersoever they could go. And it was told Saul that David was escaped from Keilah; and he forbare to go forth."

God said Saul would deliver David up. HE DIDN'T. God said that Saul WILL COME DOWN. HE DIDN'T.

OH MY!!!!!

Did Herod send a squad of men to Bethlehem to kill the baby Jesus?

Did they succeed?

Would they have succeeded if Joseph had not been warned?

This is the SAME situation with David. Dave was warned and took action against the plotting of evil folks.

You are attempting to use this illustration to prove what the illustration CANNOT prove!!!!!


If your going to support your view, then use Scripture that actually does show God's decrees are unmet because of human interference.

Show (in this case) that God's foreknowledge did not prevent the capture and death of David, just as it did not prevent the death of the Baby Jesus.

The Scriptures do not contradict each other is correct.

And principle is built upon Scripture balanced with other Scripture.

 

[Gorship]

1/2

All these are GREAT verses - but be very careful that you do not appoint the unregenerate heathen as saved into these verses. I agree that when one as Agrippa is not saved there is a bit of sadness. But also, it shows that persuasion does NOT bring salvation. Mental acceptance does not bring salvation. Salvation is given not an acquired skill.

I didn't try to imply that at all. I thought I was quite adamant that the person has to physically respond (back to my gift analogy. This also discredits the false notion that it is man centered)

For instance: Archangel gave a great Greek translation work of John 3:16. Historically, "whosoever" did NOT mean what the modern definition casts. In that, and with the appropriate Greek that Archangel so wonderfully worked to show, the verse is directed specifically to believers.

I disagree with this. As stated before even with the redefinitions (if I were to even accept them) For 'to him that believes' still doesnt put a restriction on who - or how many that accounts for therefore the rendition Whosoever is a much cleaner and still 100% accurate word to use.

Perhaps you will want to PM him and visit with him personally and test his work for yourself.

Not 100% necessary, im sure hes a great guy, but I would just be starting a debate over pm which I am probably not sharp enough to combat in

No one is stating that corporate Israel of the OT were saved. If you look carefully, you will see that just as in the time following Christ, INDIVIDUALS are saved. God has always dealt with individuals and then to the mass.

The ONLY time that there will be a corporate salvation is when the verse, "They shall look upon Him whom they pierced..." and at that point "All Israel will be saved."

not sure where this corperate stuff comes from I really didnt address it... perhaps your referring to the OT open air and prophets. I don't disagree that God deals on an individual level... so i think...we're good here... (maybe im missing something)

That God so loved the world does not negate that God is just and the justifier. Remember the Scriptures, "He came to His own and His own received Him not" is NOT an indication of ownership but of identification.

Yes? Where are you going with this...

Jesus was a Jew and came to Jews, but they (the majority) did not receive him, but as many as did "He gave the right to become children of God, even to those who believe in His name, 13 who were born, not of blood nor of the will of the flesh nor of the will of man, but of God.

Yes. If we receive Christ, or believe on his name, we will be allowed to be Children of God.. i'm with yah.. I dont consider this a calvinist pigeon hole though. This involves an action of receiving, (remember my christmas story!)
or even believing. As for the birthing thing, 2 Ideas jump to my forethought, either 1) since we are all Gods children (Gasp! just wait!) but some choose to reject Him therefore putting them out of the family they would still have been knitted in the whom by God, but never came into the fold. or 2) its speaking of being Born again. Maybe both? Not sure, not a scholar.

Now I know it is the fancy for some to present salvation in terms such as "reach the bottom and realize we need to reach up and grasp the only hand that can pull us out,..." BUT the fact is that just is not found in Scripture. Look throughout the NT and you will find not one condition of conversion in which that is true.

Say whaat?

"Acts 16:30-31
30 And brought them out, and said, Sirs, what must I do to be saved?

31 And they said, Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ, and thou shalt be saved, and thy house."

I feel like your ignoring my scriptures :tear:

The Scripture is CLEARLY stating that impossibility in contrasting those saved versus those who are unregenerate:

10 For to us (the saved) God revealed them through the Spirit; for the Spirit searches all things, even the depths of God. 11 For who among men knows the thoughts of a man except the spirit of the man which is in him? Even so the thoughts of God no one knows except the Spirit of God.(this agrees with such verses as "my thoughts are far above...")12 Now we have received, not the spirit of the world, but the Spirit who is from God, so that we may know the things freely given to us by God, 13 which things we also speak, not in words taught by human wisdom, but in those taught by the Spirit, combining spiritual thoughts with spiritual words. (agrees with verses such as, "For the sorrow that is according to the will of God produces a repentance without regret, leading to salvation, but the sorrow of the world produces death.")
14 But a natural man does not accept the things of the Spirit of God, for they are foolishness to him; and he cannot understand them, because they are spiritually appraised. 15 But he who is spiritual appraises all things, yet he himself is appraised by no one.

​

What an odd verse to choose..

Do you see how this Scripture totally discounts the thinking that you stated? There is NO man centered salvation.

Nope. lets get rid of all your fancy shmancy stuffs.. i mean i love ya but it makes my reading hard.

1 Corinthians 2

King James Version (KJV)

2 And I, brethren, when I came to you, came not with excellency of speech or of wisdom, declaring unto you the testimony of God.

2 For I determined not to know any thing among you, save Jesus Christ, and him crucified.

3 And I was with you in weakness, and in fear, and in much trembling.

Alright Paul, your at the corinthians, and you were scared

4 And my speech and my preaching was not with enticing words of man's wisdom, but in demonstration of the Spirit and of power:

5 That your faith should not stand in the wisdom of men, but in the power of God.

Amen - not our wisdom but God

6 Howbeit we speak wisdom among them that are perfect: yet not the wisdom of this world, nor of the princes of this world, that come to nought:

7 But we speak the wisdom of God in a mystery, even the hidden wisdom, which God ordained before the world unto our glory:

our glory?! in His wisdom.. How amazing is it that we are blessed for searching the Hidden things of God that have been around before the world

8 Which none of the princes of this world knew: for had they known it, they would not have crucified the Lord of glory.

If there is a man I can look to and say "That guy loved Jesus", Listen to Paul here! Wow!

9 But as it is written, Eye hath not seen, nor ear heard, neither have entered into the heart of man, the things which God hath prepared for them that love him.

10 But God hath revealed them unto us by his Spirit: for the Spirit searcheth all things, yea, the deep things of God.

What has God prepared for me? Because I desire to glorify Him, he prepares things for me? and you? Why!? How are we to know these things. (vs 10) by His spirit.. Amazing! Amen Paul!

11 For what man knoweth the things of a man, save the spirit of man which is in him? even so the things of God knoweth no man, but the Spirit of God.

12 Now we have received, not the spirit of the world, but the spirit which is of God; that we might know the things that are freely given to us of God.

Amazing stuff isnt it? Scripture is awesome. God's Spirit, given to us... so that we may know all the things God has for us.. unbelievable.

13 Which things also we speak, not in the words which man's wisdom teacheth, but which the Holy Ghost teacheth; comparing spiritual things with spiritual.

14 But the natural man receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God: for they are foolishness unto him: neither can he know them, because they are spiritually discerned.

Of course they are! Try going up to an unsaved person and telling them God has stuff for them but its not riches or fame, Its the Wisdom and the salvation of God.. Unless they have recieved Gods gift it will seem down right insane!

15 But he that is spiritual judgeth all things, yet he himself is judged of no man.

16 For who hath known the mind of the Lord, that he may instruct him? but we have the mind of Christ.

Imagine being in corinth and reading this... talk about a kidney punch if your living the life they were living in.. What can we judge in our lives that God would have us be a bit wiser about?

Whale, that was fun. Still not seeing it though my good friend. I maxed out the first post so this is 1/2

 

[Gorship]

2/2

NOW, it is important that those who have gone through great trauma and are now saved do NOT discount that experience. That is part of the purpose and plan of God in which that person will be effective in the ministry.

Some, like the believing thief find that salvation comes to them at the "cross." And what a testimony to others that experience can bring.

Some, like the Saul find that salvation comes to them on the road of doing.

Some, like the centurion find that salvation comes following great natural and perhaps personal disasters.

Some, like young preacher Timothy find salvation comes during educational time at a mother (aunt, grandmother, father, grandfather, ...) knees.

Everyone goes through their own journey - you bet.

BUT ALL salvation from the first impulse of Godly conviction to the final glorification is by God through Christ.

For HE IS "the author and finisher..."

Well.. I dont think we save ourselves... Again, we dont thank ourselves for opening the gift, we thank the gift giver. No one will ever be saved without the help and work of the Holy spirit I do agree with that - I cannot say however that man plays no part. Man at some point has to choose whom they will serve, and God desires all to be saved.

I want to add a personal note.

I want you to continue to grow in understanding and wisdom of God. Do not take this post as being critical, but of showing how even the ability of man to "reach up" is given by God, and is part of Salvation.

See heres the tension.

The ability to be saved is given by God yes.
But a man has to reach.

God desires all men to be saved
But man can reject God

God desires all men to be saved
therefore being consistent God wouldn't Damn people on a whim.

God has authored a perfect way to escape damnation, for those who will put their faith in Christ and allow their heart to become repentant to themselves and to seek the things of God.

The tension of free-will and Gods will sticks in my brain :thumbs:

after all this thinking i need a nap :sleeping_2: