Free Will vs. Predestination

That's not what the verse says...look it up

What verse???????????????

I haven't listened yet to those sermons….I need to do so soon!

<blockquote but those who come to Him are those who have been predestined by Him.</blockquote>

Where does it say that in the Bible?

Where does it say that in the Bible?

And those whom he predestined he also called, and those whom he called he also justified, and those whom he justified he also glorified. - Romans 8:30 (ESV)

screams We need help! Any Armenians out there? (btw we dont agree with you (Armenians) but we need help. After all, were fighting on your side. at least for now)

flinches and covers ears Please stop screaming while we are trying to discuss :) :)
Why are you screaming anyway?

Matthew 1:13 Take that! (hehehehe, now we got them!)

still screaming like a ten year old girl Yes…were stumped jk

flinches again and claps hands over ears PLEASE! :)
You're stumped!?!?!?!?! And actually that verse you posted I had nothing to do with it…I have it memorized :)

Alright…I am ending my Calvinism vs Armenians debate career…I would like to say because I have done no good at resolving the conflict, (my intent at the beginning, even though my facetious style really stirred it up more) or that I really agree with both sides and therefore cannot argue against them no longer. (but the real reason is we were beated!) jk ;)

I find this a very interesting discussion. Personally, I believe that the Calvinism vs. Arminianism question isn't very vital (It is not a "core doctrine" necessary for salvation), but I do believe it is a question that each believer should consider and think about for himself.

I personally believe that the answer is probably a mix between Calvinism and Arminianism. By that, I believe that we are not as forced as most Calvinists say we are, nor are we as free as the Arminians say we are. I think that the truth lies somewhere between the two opposites, but leaning towards the Calvinist perspective. By Calvinist, though, I would not say I am a staunch Calvinist. I think that some of the five points of Calvinism have flaws (and I generally think there is a potential problem if anyone decides to believe lockstep EVERY single thing another individual believes), but overall I think that Calvinists have a good perspective on the character of God.

What do you all think? :)

Alright...I am ending my Calvinism vs Armenians debate career...I would like to say because I have done no good at resolving the conflict, (my intent at the beginning, even though my facetious style really stirred it up more) or that I really agree with both sides and therefore cannot argue against them no longer. (but the real reason is we were beated!) jk ;)

Lol! U haven't even seen LOTR and ur talking like Gollum. :) lol

Thank you so much for that, Jimmy. I agree completely. I find myself leaning toward the Arminian position because I cannot believe that God shows partiality when the Bible says He loves the whole world. However, I know that many Arminians' view of man is too liberal. I would not say that I am a staunch Arminian at all. Like I said a couple pages back, I think that our inability to think how God thinks makes us only partially able to understand exactly how God saves us.

Before I leave, I needed to say @Carissa, I believe you are taking Romans 8:30 out of context. Take a look at the previous verse: "For whom he did FOREKNOW, he also did predestinate to be conformed to the image of his Son, that he might be the firstborn among many brethren." (emphasis mine) I take this verse to mean that foreknowledge comes before predestination. More specifically, God knew before it happened that His children-to-be would accept His gift of salvation; He therefore predestined those elect to be conformed to the image of Christ. That is my interpretation; I'd love to hear yours. :)

Oh, BTW, the verses that Noah is referring to with the phrase "whosoever will" are Mark 8:34 and Revelation 22:17. The Greek word for "will" used in these verses, "thelo" (Strong's No. 2309), is defined as "to wish, to desire, implying the simple act of volition".

I could comment on a lot that's gone on here since I've been gone, but I'll restrain myself to the comment above this one. :)

I wholeheartedly believe that whosoever wills to come to God may come; but I think that the Bible teaches that no one can will to come unless the Father allows them to will to come. I also believe completely that whoever believes may come–the Bible couldn't make this more clear. But this does not have to contradict the suggestion that God must choose a person before they choose Him. Anyone who comes to God comes by His power. It is impossible to desire to come to God if He has not moved in you to bring about this desire! All those who come are those who have been regenerated by God.

To put it briefly, all may come, but only those chosen by God will. If you think about it logically, this does not at all contradict Scripture.

P.S. If you want me to discuss another portion of this debate, go ahead and ask, and I'll do so as best as I can. :)

@Nicolas: Thanks for answering for me :) I agree completely!!!

It's a long article, but worth the read - http://www.wayoflife.org/index_files/calvins_camels.html#unique-entry-id-1313.

Hi, all! Here is a different view. One that I have pondered over and think it makes quite a bit of sense. It is written by the famous Christian theologian A.W. Tozer in his classic work, Knowledge of the Holy. I would like to know your thoughts on it. :)

"Another real problem created by the doctrine of the divine sovereignty has to do with the will of man. If God rules His universe by His sovereign decrees, how is it possible for man to exercise free choice? And if he can not exercise freedom of choice, how can he be held responsible for his conduct? Is he not a mere puppet whose actions are determined by a behind-the-scenes God who pulls the strings as it pleases Him?"

"The attempt to answer these questions has divided the Christian church neatly into two camps which have borne the names of two distinguished theologians, Jacobus Arminius and John Calvin. Most Christians are content to get into one camp or the other and deny either sovereignty to God or free will to man. It appears possible, however, to reconcile these two positions without doing violence to either, although the effort that follows may prove deficient to partisans of one camp or the other.
Here is my view: God sovereignly decreed that man should be free to exercise moral choice, and man from the beginning has fulfilled that decree by making his choice between good and evil. When he chooses to do evil, he does not thereby countervail the sovereign will of God but fulfills it, inasmuch as the eternal decree decided not which choice the man should make but that he should be free to make it. If in His absolute freedom God has willed to give man limited freedom, who is there to stay His hand or say,

“What doest thou?” Man’s will is free because God is sovereign. A God less than sovereign could not bestow moral freedom upon His creatures. He would be afraid to do so."

"Perhaps a homely illustration might help us to understand. An ocean liner leaves New York bound for Liverpool. Its destination has been determined by proper authorities. Nothing can change it. This is at least a faint picture of sovereignty.
On board the liner are several scores of passengers. These are not in chains, neither are their activities determined for them by decree. They are completely free to move about as they will. They eat, sleep, play, lounge about on the deck, read, talk, altogether as they please; but all the while the great liner is carrying them steadily onward toward a predetermined port.
Both freedom and sovereignty are present here and they do not contradict each other. So it is, I believe, with man’s freedom and the sovereignty of God. The mighty liner of God’s sovereign design keeps its steady course over the sea of history. God moves undisturbed and unhindered toward the fulfillment of those eternal purposes which He purposed in Christ Jesus before the world began. We do not know all that is included in those purposes, but enough has been disclosed to furnish us with a broad outline of things to come and to give us good hope and firm assurance of future well-being."

"We know that God will fulfill every promise made to the prophets; we know that sinners will some day be cleansed out of the earth; we know that a ransomed company will enter into the joy of God and that the righteous will shine forth in the kingdom of their Father; we know that God’s perfections will yet receive universal acclamation, that all created intelligences will own Jesus Christ Lord to the glory of God the Father, that the present imperfect order will be done away, and a new heaven and a new earth be established forever."

"Toward all this God is moving with infinite wisdom and perfect precision of action. No one can dissuade Him from His purposes; nothing turn Him aside from His plans. Since He is omniscient, there can be no unforeseen circumstances, no accidents. As He is sovereign, there can be no countermanded orders, no breakdown in authority; and as He is omnipotent, there can be no want of power to achieve His chosen ends. God is sufficient unto Himself for all these things."

"In the meanwhile things are not as smooth as this quick outline might suggest. The mystery of iniquity doth already work. Within the broad field of God’s sovereign, permissive will the deadly conflict of good with evil continues with increasing fury. God will yet have His way in the whirlwind and the storm, but the storm and the whirlwind are here, and as responsible beings we must make our choice in the present moral situation."

"Certain things have been decreed by the free determination of God, and one of these is the law of choice and consequences. God has decreed that all who willingly commit themselves to His Son Jesus Christ in the obedience of faith shall receive eternal life and become sons of God. He has also decreed that all who love darkness and continue in rebellion against the high authority of heaven shall remain in a state of spiritual alienation and suffer eternal death at last."

"Reducing the whole matter to individual terms, we arrive at some vital and highly personal conclusions. In the moral conflict now raging around us whoever is on God’s side is on the winning side and can not lose; whoever is on the other side is on the losing side and can not win. Here there is no chance, no gamble. There is freedom to choose which side we shall be on but no freedom to negotiate the results of the choice once it is made. By the mercy of God we may repent a wrong choice and alter the consequences by making a new and right choice. Beyond that we can not go."

"The whole matter of moral choice centers around Jesus Christ. Christ stated it plainly: “He that is not with me is against me,” and “No man cometh unto the Father, but by me.” The gospel message embodies three distinct elements: an announcement, a command, and a call. It announces the good news of redemption accomplished in mercy; it commands all men everywhere to repent and it calls all men to surrender to the terms of grace by believing on Jesus Christ as Lord and Saviour."

"We must all choose whether we will obey the gospel or turn away in unbelief and reject its authority. Our choice is our own, but the consequences of the choice have already been determined by the sovereign will of God, and from this there is no appeal.
The Lord descended from above, And bowed the heavens most high, And underneath His feet He cast The darkness of the sky."

Very thought-provoking quote, Jimmy. :) I actually almost completely agree with it; man does have a sort of free will, but he is only free to choose what is evil. At the creation of man, he had total free will, but the Fall brought about an inability in man to choose good without the working of God in his heart. He is free to choose anything evil, but only God can bring about the ability in man to choose the right way, the gospel. I support this view from Scripture using such verses as, "No one can come to me unless the Father who sent me draws him."

In addition, I fully believe that man is not in any way a puppet of God in his evil doings; he does them completely of his own accord. I also believe that it is the same with Christians, those who have been regenerated by the Holy Spirit; God does not force them to do good, but He radically changes their will and affections so that they have the desire to do good.

So I suppose you could say that I believe the truth of Scripture lies in between staunch Calvinism and staunch Arminianism–though, of course, leaning a bit more toward Calvinism. ;)

I used to believe that nobody would waste and hour of their time trying to convince another person of their point when they know their opponent will NOT change his/her opinion. No offence Jim-Jim, but I feel sorry for you that your (quite excellent) collection of quotes will probably be wasted on those whom you wish to correct. (that is, if your intent is to correct)

Great thoughts, Nicolas!! I agree!

Why do you seem to so dislike discussions on theology? :P It was a very helpful quotation, and I'm glad he posted it. It made me think a little more about what I believe. Please don't spoil it for me. ;P

Oh, no! I was not trying to correct! I was just trying to share a different perspective. At the college I am attending, we had to read Tozer's book and write a long essay about. I saw these paragraphs (all I had to do was cut and paste off of an online copy, so it didn't take up much of my time (In fact, it took about 5 minutes to make this post)), and I thought immediately of this thread. I said earlier that I thought that the truth was somewhere between Calvinism and Armenianism, so I thought I would show the chapter that expresses my opinion. It is not at all intended to PROVE anything, just to promote discussion and to show that the question is not black and white. :)

Great quote, Jimmy! I completely agree!

Great quote, Jimmy! I completely agree!

Ditto!

Forgot this topic existed… rubs hands together XD

What do you believe about this?

I'm on the side of predestination :)

hates the straw man title of this topic

Explain :)

Explain :)

Okay. I know this may be contrary to some people's opinions, but quite frankly, "Free Will" and "Predestination", or at least the original meanings of those words which God gave them, are both Biblical doctrines. God's word teaches both of them - quite clearly! There's no way around that God has predestined His people according to His sovereign will. If He had no control over that, He would not be fully omnipotent. There's also no way around that God has given every one of us a choice to serve Him or reject Him. If He had taken away this choice from us, then His character is greatly twisted - His love, most of all, seems suddenly limited. Love is not true love without a choice to love.

So, anyways, both are fully Biblical doctrines. Because of this, there should be no battle/debate between them. There must be some way to make sense out of both. (The real battle, if there is any, is to reconcile those who completely reject either one or the other of these Biblical doctrines. :P) Now this is a hard job. There's been a couple of attempts here on this topic to rationalize both doctrines together, which I really appreciate. Jimmy's quote at the top of this page really brings things into perspective. I would also direct your attention to Nicolas's post near the bottom of page 11, responding to mine; though it's leaning toward Calvinism, it's a very thoughtful explanation and makes sense to me. Also, leaning more towards the other side, my posts on pg. 9 explain my own position on how they correlate. Although these explanations may leave some questions, at least they begin to demonstrate that these positions can be reconciled. But God alone knows the perfect explanation, and He will reveal Himself to us fully when it comes time.

So in short, this topic should not be "Free Will vs. Predestination", it should be "Free Will and Predestination: How Do They Fit?" :)

Yayay! Someone who thinks kind of like me! x)

Yayay! Someone who thinks kind of like me! x)

Wow, I finally (kind of) agree with Dani on something? Incredible! xP JK

Yayay! Someone who thinks kind of like me! x)

Wow, I finally (kind of) agree with Dani on something? Incredible! xP JK

Shocking! facedesk

I have two question on what Matthew said. (NOT arguments, just questions!)

1. How does the idea of us not having a choice to love God limit His love and twist His character?
2. Could you explain/elaborate on your statement that "Love is not true love without a choice to love."?

Thanks. :)

THE “FIVE POINTS” OF CALVINISM

1. Total Inability or Total Depravity
   Because of the fall, man is unable of himself to savingly believe the gospel. The sinner is dead, blind, and deaf to the things of God; his heart is deceitful and desperately corrupt. His will is not free, it is in bondage to his evil nature, therefore, he will not—indeed he cannot—choose good over evil in the spiritual realm. Consequently, it takes much more than the Spirit’s assistance to bring a sinner to Christ—it takes regeneration by which the Spirit makes the sinner alive and gives him a new nature. Faith is not something man contributes to salvation but is itself a part of God’s gift of salvation—it is God’s gift to the sinner, not the sinner’s gift to God.
2. Unconditional Election
   God’s choice of certain individuals unto salvation before the foundation of the world rested solely in His own sovereign will. His choice of particular sinners was not based on any foreseen response or obedience on their part, such as faith, repentance, etc. On the contrary, God gives faith and repentance to each individual whom He selected. These acts are the result, not the cause of God’s choice. Election therefore was not determined by or conditioned upon any virtuous quality or act foreseen in man. Those whom God sovereignly elected He brings through the power of the Spirit to a willing acceptance of Christ. Thus God’s choice of the sinner, not the sinner’s choice of Christ, is the ultimate cause of salvation.
3. Particular Redemption or Limited Atonement
   Christ’s redeeming work was intended to save the elect only and actually secured salvation for them. His death was a substitutionary endurance of the penalty of sin in the place of certain specified sinners. In addition to putting away the sins of His people, Christ’s redemption secured everything necessary for their salvation, including faith which unites them to Him. The gift of faith is infallibly applied by the Spirit to all for whom Christ died, thereby guaranteeing their salvation.
4. The Efficacious Call of the Spirit or Irresistible Grace
   In addition to the outward general call to salvation which is made to everyone who hears the gospel, the Holy Spirit extends to the elect a special inward call that inevitably brings them to salvation. The external call (which is made to all without distinction) can be, and often is, rejected; whereas the internal call (which is made only to the elect) cannot be rejected; it always results in conversion. By means of this special call the Spirit irresistibly draws sinners to Christ. He is not limited in His work of applying salvation by man’s will, nor is He dependent upon man’s cooperation for success. The Spirit graciously causes the elect sinner to cooperate, to believe, to repent, to come freely and willingly to Christ. God’s grace, therefore, is invincible; it never fails to result in the salvation of those to whom it is extended.
5. Perseverance of the Saints
   All who were chosen by God, redeemed by Christ, and given faith by the Spirit are eternally saved. They are kept in faith by the power of Almighty God and thus persevere to the end.
   According to Calvinism:
   Salvation is accomplished by the almighty power of the Triune God. The Father chose a people, the Son died for them, the Holy Spirit makes Christ’s death effective by bringing the elect to faith and repentance, thereby causing them to willingly obey the gospel. The entire process (election, redemption, regeneration) is the work of God and is by grace alone. Thus God, not man, determines who will be the recipients of the gift of salvation.
   REAFFIRMED
   by the Synod of Dort
   This system of theology was reaffirmed by the Synod of Dort in 1619 as the doctrine of salvation contained in the Holy Scriptures. The system was at that time formulated into “five points” (in answer to the five points submitted by the Arminians) and has ever since been known as “the five points of Calvinism.”

THE “FIVE POINTS” OF ARMINIANISM

1. Free Will or Human Ability
   Although human nature was seriously affected by the fall, man has not been left in a state of total spiritual helplessness. God graciously enables every sinner to repent and believe, but He does so in such a manner as not to interfere with man’s freedom. Each sinner possesses a free will, and his eternal destiny depends on how he uses it. Man’s freedom consists of his ability to choose good over evil in spiritual matters; his will is not enslaved to his sinful nature. The sinner has the power to either cooperate with God’s Spirit and be regenerated or resist God’s grace and perish. The lost sinner needs the Spirit’s assistance, but he does not have to be regenerated by the Spirit before he can believe, for faith is man’s act and precedes the new birth. Faith is the sinner’s gift to God; it is man’s contribution to salvation.
2. Conditional Election
   God’s choice of certain individuals unto salvation before the foundation of the world was based upon His foreseeing that they would respond to His call. He selected only those whom He knew would of themselves freely believe the gospel. Election therefore was determined by or conditioned upon what man would do. The faith which God foresaw and upon which He based His choice was not given to the sinner by God (it was not created by the regenerating power of the Holy Spirit) but resulted solely from man’s will. It was left entirely up to man as to who would believe and therefore as to who would be elected unto salvation. God chose those whom He knew would, of their own free will, choose Christ. Thus the sinner’s choice of Christ, not God’s choice of the sinner, is the ultimate cause of salvation.
3. Universal Redemption or General Atonement
   Christ’s redeeming work made it possible for everyone to be saved but did not actually secure the salvation of anyone. Although Christ died for all men and for every man, only those who believe in Him are saved. His death enabled God to pardon sinners on the condition that they believe, but it did not actually put away anyone’s sins. Christ’s redemption becomes effective only if man chooses to accept it.
4. The Holy Spirit Can Be Effectually Resisted
   The Spirit calls inwardly all those who are called outwardly by the gospel invitation; He does all that He can to bring every sinner to salvation. But inasmuch as man is free, he can successfully resist the Spirit’s call. The Spirit cannot regenerate the sinner until he believes; faith (which is man’s contribution) precedes and makes possible the new birth. Thus, man’s free will limits the Spirit in the application of Christ’s saving work. The Holy Spirit can only draw to Christ those who allow Him to have His way with them. Until the sinner responds, the Spirit cannot give life. God’s grace, therefore, is not invincible; it can be, and often is, resisted and thwarted by man.
5. Falling from Grace
   Those who believe and are truly saved can lose their salvation by failing to keep up their faith, etc.
   All Arminians have not been agreed on this point; some have held that believers are eternally secure in Christ—that once a sinner is regenerated, he can never be lost.
   According to Arminianism:
   Salvation is accomplished through the combined efforts of God (who takes the initiative) and man (who must respond)—man’s response being the determining factor. God has provided salvation for everyone, but His provision becomes effective only for those who, of their own free will, “choose” to cooperate with Him and accept His offer of grace. At the crucial point, man’s will plays a decisive role; thus man, not God, determines who will be the recipients of the gift of salvation.
   REJECTED
   by the Synod of Dort
   This was the system of thought contained in the “Remonstrance” (though the “five points” were not originally arranged in this order). It was submitted by the Arminians to the Church of Holland in 1610 for adoption but was rejected by the Synod of Dort in 1619 on the ground that it was unscriptural.

Do you still think they agree????

Hey Anthony! :-D I know this isn't chat but it's been so long that I had to say Hi! Great to 'see' you again!

Great post too! Thanks! God bless!

Do you still think they agree????

Not Cavinism and Arminianism, but free will and predestination.

I once heard a sermon by a man who was very much a brawler, against Reformed Baptists. The sermon had a lot of false accusations. However, there was one thing–at the end–that was very necessary. He pointed out that if anyone doesn't agree with Calvinists, they are often dubbed Armenians. Honestly, I am tired of seeing this myself. If you're not a Calvinist, that doesn't make you an Armenian. Armenianism is unredeemable heresy. Most people–all true Christians–who are not Calvinists are WESLEYANS. So please, stop using the term "Armenian" for everyone who believes in free will. =)

^Good point… Though I may or may not completely agree with everything you just said.^

Armenianism is unredeemable heresy.

How do you mean that ^ ?

Otherwise, that's a very good point. I often blur that distinction. I should be more careful about it.

I'd say that those two can 'kinda' fit…but not quite. It's a little different then free will but kinda close…

I'd say that those two can 'kinda' fit...but not quite. It's a little different than free will but kinda close...

Indeed. We choose salvation of our own free will–but only after God has changed our hearts to make that possible. No native human being can choose salvation, because… "the mind that is set on the flesh is hostile to God, for it does not submit to God's law; indeed, it cannot." (Romans 8:7)

I'd say that those two can 'kinda' fit...but not quite. It's a little different than free will but kinda close...

Indeed. We choose salvation of our own free will--but only after God has changed our hearts to make that possible. No native human being can choose salvation, because... "the mind that is set on the flesh is hostile to God, for it does not submit to God's law; indeed, it cannot." (Romans 8:7)

Thank you! Exactly what I would say!

I'm on the side of predestination :)

Not going to quote your post because it's so long. :) But like they were saying, the doctrines of Calvinism and Armenianism do not agree - I did not say they did. Another better way to title this topic would be "Calvinism vs. Armenianism". But I don't like either of them. :P

Not going to quote your post because it's so long. :) But like they were saying, the doctrines of Calvinism and Armenianism do not agree - I did not say they did. Another better way to title this topic would be "Calvinism vs. Armenianism". But I don't like either of them. :P

cough *Ariminianism

Armenians are people who live in Armenia. ;)

*cough* *Ariminianism

*Arminianism ;-)

Lol, you're right; I literally had to read it four times very carefully to find what I did wrong. =p

Well, that's good to know. Because when I read Christian's comment I was like - "What? I never thought it was said like that." ;)