Predestination. You Asked For It Here It Is.

[Calm]

That's no my assumption. That was the conclusion based on logically following the traditional assumptions to their conclusion.

This logic is based on our level of knowledge about time and cause and effect at this point in our development. We cannot conceive how God could, with nothing but himself in existence, then create a truly free willed being.

But what if our knowledge is lacking in this area and it really is possible?

Edited August 15, 2013 by calmoriah

[Calm]

I seem to remember you saying that you were going to be busy for a few days. So that is what I figured was going on. I am quite sure this thread will be going on for a while.

Everyone is being relatively civil, if persistent. So if it continues, it could stay open indefinitely...a testimony to attempting to understand others' beliefs from their POV (I hope ).

[mfbukowski]

Unless he created the potential for evil by creating free willed beings, that decided to choose evil.

I think you just totally blew your case.

If I leave a loaded gun for a toddler- or a crazy adult for that matter- where it can be taken and used for a crime, I will be held responsible for what happens. If a bartender lets someone get drunk and they drive off and kill someone, the bartender can be held liable.

We consider such judgements "just" when they are rendered by a jury, etc- yet now you are saying that God shoould not be held responsible for "creating evil" because he created the "potential" for evil!

And you also made the case for the Mormon idea of the Fall, all in one whack. You conceded that he gave them choice to eat of the tree or not eat.

He knew perfectly well what choice they would make, and left the "loaded gun" right there in the garden for them to pick up.

"OK little Jimmy, don't shoot anyone while I am gone, okay"?

How long after you turn your back will it take before you hear the shot?

Edited August 15, 2013 by mfbukowski

[djholmess]

What is so confusing for me about Calvinism is that for that belief system, it ISN'T their choice.

Bluebell, you are right that in calvinism there is a sense that it 'isn't their choice,' however only in a sense.

Let me give you a good illustration I heard once.

Imagine a father who comes home from the shops and begins to unload the bags of shopping out of his car into the house. He asks his 3 year old daughter to take her teddy into the house to play. However as he looks up he sees she is running down the drive towards the road and that a semi truck is coming!

Now from the daughter's perspective, she has seen a butterfly on the other side of the road and ignorant of the danger presented by the road she is running towards it because she wants to play with it.

What would any father do in this suitation? Say to himself, 'we'll she has free will, I don't want to coerce her choices.' Or would he drop the bags of shopping, rush down the drive and swoop his daughter into his arms and take her into the house screaming and kicking.

Again from the daughter's perspective her father seems cruel and unloving, she wanted to see the butterfly yet her father overruled her will and imposed his will on her. However years later when she is old enough to understand the dangers being hit by a semi how do you think the daughter would feel. She would see her fathers actions as loving.

So total depravity teaches that men are totally opposed to God in their sin. As a result of the fall men love their sin so much that they would never choose to trust and believe in Christ. They are not being forced to make this choice, they are simply making this choice based on the desires of their will.

God in love looks down upon his elect and lovingly regenerates them; takes out the heart is stone, puts in a heart of flesh and opens their eyes to see the glory of the gospel. Yes this is irresistable, the sinner doesn't have a choice as to whether to accept this or not. Yet once regenerated the sinner sees things as they truly are (not being blinded by their hatred of God) and they naturally respond in faith and gratitude for what God has lovingly done for them.

So the individuals choice to believe in God is their choice, unforced and uncoerced but it was not their choice as to whether to be regenerated or not. If people want to critize this for being cruel and unloving that's fine but just like the little girl I am verry happy for things to be done to me against my will by my loving father.

[Calm]

If people want to critize this for being cruel and unloving that's fine but just like the little girl I am verry happy for things to be done to me against my will by my loving father.

And when he leaves the heart of stone in the the sinner who therefore had no chance to regenerate, in essence allows the girl to follow the butterfly into the road and be destroyed while he watches her and does nothing...what is that sinner's choice? Edited August 15, 2013 by calmoriah

[djholmess]

And when he leaves the heart of stone in the the sinner who therefore had no chance to regenerate, in essence allows the girl to follow the butterfly into the road and be destroyed while he watches her and does nothing...what is that sinner's choice?

That's where the analogy breaks down. As I mentioned total depravity means that the sinner is unable to choose God. Not because he/she is being physically stopped from believing but because their wickedness and hatred for God is so strong that they cannot. Their inability is not a physical one but a moral one.

In my previous post (about 7-8 pages ago) I explained the concept of Fedral Headship, though I didn't use its title. Essentially Calvinists see in the Bible that God deals with us partly on the basis of our representative. So in Romans 5 we see that because Adam our representative sinned we all became sinners. That is how God deals with man. The flip side of the coin is that through Jesus's death and righteousness those who have Jesus as their representative may be counted righteous.

So what's is the sinners choice? They didn't choose to be born with a sinful nature. However sinners do make choices to follow their sinful desires everyday, all the time. So sinners are twice guilty. They are guilty in Adam and they are guilty in their own desires and actions. If God was just all loving then he should regenerate everyone, however, God is also just and so he must punish sin. Given that, God is under no obligation so save anyone. The just thing to do would be to punish all sinners. The wonder of redemption is that God in his grace saves anyone when none of us were deserving it.

[cdowis]

Ok. What do these living prophets say on this point, that you appear to disagree with? (I'm curious to read what they say)

You might start with the basics

http://mormon.org/be...an-of-salvation

If you have specific questions on these concepts, there is a chat function.

Edited August 15, 2013 by cdowis

[bluebell]

Bluebell, you are right that in calvinism there is a sense that it 'isn't their choice,' however only in a sense.

Let me give you a good illustration I heard once.

Imagine a father who comes home from the shops and begins to unload the bags of shopping out of his car into the house. He asks his 3 year old daughter to take her teddy into the house to play. However as he looks up he sees she is running down the drive towards the road and that a semi truck is coming!

Now from the daughter's perspective, she has seen a butterfly on the other side of the road and ignorant of the danger presented by the road she is running towards it because she wants to play with it.

What would any father do in this suitation? Say to himself, 'we'll she has free will, I don't want to coerce her choices.' Or would he drop the bags of shopping, rush down the drive and swoop his daughter into his arms and take her into the house screaming and kicking.

Again from the daughter's perspective her father seems cruel and unloving, she wanted to see the butterfly yet her father overruled her will and imposed his will on her. However years later when she is old enough to understand the dangers being hit by a semi how do you think the daughter would feel. She would see her fathers actions as loving.

So total depravity teaches that men are totally opposed to God in their sin. As a result of the fall men love their sin so much that they would never choose to trust and believe in Christ. They are not being forced to make this choice, they are simply making this choice based on the desires of their will.

God in love looks down upon his elect and lovingly regenerates them; takes out the heart is stone, puts in a heart of flesh and opens their eyes to see the glory of the gospel. Yes this is irresistable, the sinner doesn't have a choice as to whether to accept this or not. Yet once regenerated the sinner sees things as they truly are (not being blinded by their hatred of God) and they naturally respond in faith and gratitude for what God has lovingly done for them.

So the individuals choice to believe in God is their choice, unforced and uncoerced but it was not their choice as to whether to be regenerated or not. If people want to critize this for being cruel and unloving that's fine but just like the little girl I am verry happy for things to be done to me against my will by my loving father.

It's not the forced salvation that I see as cruel and unloving, but the damnation that comes from being born with a will that is incapable of choosing God.

Since it is God who made us with a will that is depraved, it seems cruel that some are punished for something they cannot change.

[bluebell]

So what's is the sinners choice? They didn't choose to be born with a sinful nature. However sinners do make choices to follow their sinful desires everyday, all the time.

Can they choose NOT to follow their sinful desires?

I thought that the concept of total depravity taught that no one is capable of choosing good, except those who God elects to save. Am I misunderstanding that?

[stemelbow]

Not your assumption? Curious. Then you must disagree with Cal because she stated:

If it's not your assumption, then how do you know that God can't create a free willed being out of nothing?

Hi, Daniel, I've already answered your questions in the very responses I've already given you. If you choose not to listen and paint my conclusion as my assumption, then so be it. I'll have to follow up your assessments with what I think, I guess. In terms of "discussing" it with you, I don't think it's happening. We're a bit stuck on a few things. I haven't gotten you to respond to my questions in many cases. And when I offer my explanations I get a response that seems to amount to, "well you're wrong because I say you're wrong" type of thing. Its somethign, but it's not really discussion as I see it.

Take care. If I were in your shoes I too would deny the logical conclusion, or I'd have to drastically change my belief system. SO I don't see what you've done as bad. Only that its not conversational, and not open. It happens.

[stemelbow]

This logic is based on our level of knowledge about time and cause and effect at this point in our development. We cannot conceive how God could, with nothing but himself in existence, then create a truly free willed being.

But what if our knowledge is lacking in this area and it really is possible?

Then it's possible. Sadly no one can logically explain, given the traditional Christian assumptions that I've mentioned, how it could be possible. So we're left to conclude it is impossible. I"m open to any way that possible can be argued though.

[stemelbow]

I think you just totally blew your case.

If I leave a loaded gun for a toddler- or a crazy adult for that matter- where it can be taken and used for a crime, I will be held responsible for what happens. If a bartender lets someone get drunk and they drive off and kill someone, the bartender can be held liable.

We consider such judgements "just" when they are rendered by a jury, etc- yet now you are saying that God shoould not be held responsible for "creating evil" because he created the "potential" for evil!

And you also made the case for the Mormon idea of the Fall, all in one whack. You conceded that he gave them choice to eat of the tree or not eat.

He knew perfectly well what choice they would make, and left the "loaded gun" right there in the garden for them to pick up.

"OK little Jimmy, don't shoot anyone while I am gone, okay"?

How long after you turn your back will it take before you hear the shot?

What is really troubling about this, given the traditional Christian assumptions, if God conceived of thsi creation and then created, knwoing full well that by creating the greatest of evils would be realized, then not only do those evils originate in His conception, but He caused them to be. If truly unable to create and not cause the evils that exist, then it would be much better not to create at all. If He didn't create at all, then there would be no evils at all. Sure He'd remain lonely for eternity, but that's too bad for Him. At least, evil wouldn't be. Much more noble to stop the cause of evil then to knowingly cause evil.

[Mola Ram Suda Ram]

Take your time, it is rare enough when we get a strong (in terms of theology, I think that is the correct term for someone who believes in all five points, etc) Calvinist on the board that we get rather excited, it will give us a chance to practice our patience as long as you are willing to come back.

You got that much right. It is a rare thing. Which is why I should not have been surpirsed that this thread ballooned to the size it is.

[Five Solas]

Can they choose NOT to follow their sinful desires?

I thought that the concept of total depravity taught that no one is capable of choosing good, except those who God elects to save. Am I misunderstanding that?

I think that’s a fair way to put it. And not to step on djholmess excellent response, but I’d submit your Bible has answered that pretty definitively as well, using the analogy of the leopard’s spots, the slave (unfree), and Paul’s blunt statement that those in the flesh cannot please God.

Can the Ethiopian change his skin or the leopard his spots? Then also you can do good who are accustomed to do evil.

-- Jeremiah 13:23

Jesus answered them, “Truly, truly, I say to you, everyone who practices sin is a slave to sin.

-- John 8:34

Those who are in the flesh cannot please God.

-- Romans 8:8

[Mola Ram Suda Ram]

Since it is God who made us with a will that is depraved, it seems cruel that some are punished for something they cannot change.

On top of that it also make God responsible for the actions of the saint as well as the sinner as he created that nature. I am not sure how one can logically claim otherwise. Edited August 15, 2013 by Mola Ram Suda Ram

[Mola Ram Suda Ram]

I think that’s a fair way to put it. And not to step on djholmess excellent response, but I’d submit your Bible has answered that pretty definitively as well, using the analogy of the leopard’s spots, the slave (unfree), and Paul’s blunt statement that those in the flesh cannot please God.

Can the Ethiopian change his skin or the leopard his spots? Then also you can do good who are accustomed to do evil.

-- Jeremiah 13:23

Jesus answered them, “Truly, truly, I say to you, everyone who practices sin is a slave to sin.

-- John 8:34

Those who are in the flesh cannot please God.

-- Romans 8:8

So those that are sinners cannot chose other wise?

[boulder257]

You got that much right. It is a rare thing. Which is why I should not have been surpirsed that this thread ballooned to the size it is.

Out of curiousity, have you ever met a Calvinist who didn't believe they were destined for heaven? I am just curious, because all of the Calvinists I have met believe they are part of the those pre-destined for heaven.

[bluebell]

I think that’s a fair way to put it. And not to step on djholmess excellent response, but I’d submit your Bible has answered that pretty definitively as well, using the analogy of the leopard’s spots, the slave (unfree), and Paul’s blunt statement that those in the flesh cannot please God.

Can the Ethiopian change his skin or the leopard his spots? Then also you can do good who are accustomed to do evil.

-- Jeremiah 13:23

Jesus answered them, “Truly, truly, I say to you, everyone who practices sin is a slave to sin.

-- John 8:34

Those who are in the flesh cannot please God.

-- Romans 8:8

I don't have an issue with those verses at all. They fit perfectly with my religious beliefs.

God cannot look upon sin with the least degree of allowance, and it is thru sin that we become enslaved by the devil. And wickedness never was happiness (or evil can never be good, in other words).

However, the difference is that I believe in the concept of free will or agency. What that means is that I believe that God wants to save all of us and that if we are a slave to sin, it is because we have chosen to follow the devil. And if we are saved, it is because we have chosen to follow Christ.

I don't believe that a just God would damn His creations, knowing that they are only depraved because He made them that way. I don't believe that anyone can deserve damnation without free will. It wouldn't be just.

[danielwoods]

I think you just totally blew your case.

If I leave a loaded gun for a toddler- or a crazy adult for that matter- where it can be taken and used for a crime, I will be held responsible for what happens. If a bartender lets someone get drunk and they drive off and kill someone, the bartender can be held liable.

We consider such judgements "just" when they are rendered by a jury, etc- yet now you are saying that God shoould not be held responsible for "creating evil" because he created the "potential" for evil!

And you also made the case for the Mormon idea of the Fall, all in one whack. You conceded that he gave them choice to eat of the tree or not eat.

He knew perfectly well what choice they would make, and left the "loaded gun" right there in the garden for them to pick up.

"OK little Jimmy, don't shoot anyone while I am gone, okay"?

How long after you turn your back will it take before you hear the shot?

both of your examples use a hampered intellect. One a drunk, the other a child.

In the cases of Angelic beings (who fell) and Adam and Eve (who fell) neither are hampered intellects. Both were created perfect. With perfect intellects. Yet, if they were both given free will (perfectly free moral agents), then God is not responsible for their moral actions.

If they were created with a perfect moral free will, coupled with a hampered intellect, I think you'd have a point.

[Stone holm]

Out of curiousity, have you ever met a Calvinist who didn't believe they were destined for heaven? I am just curious, because all of the Calvinists I have met believe they are part of the those pre-destined for heaven.

Of course, and religious activity would be primarily to assure oneself and others that your belief is correct.

[Mola Ram Suda Ram]

Out of curiousity, have you ever met a Calvinist who didn't believe they were destined for heaven? I am just curious, because all of the Calvinists I have met believe they are part of the those pre-destined for heaven.

I never once met a Calvinist who did not think they were part of the elect. After all they are elect becuase they are Calvinists.

[Mola Ram Suda Ram]

Of course, and religious activity would be primarily to assure oneself and others that your belief is correct.

I had the same thought. One thing came to my mind that I have never once understood. If I am part of the damned and there is nothing I can do of myself I am not sure why Calvinist even preach their gospel. Because preaching it wont save anyone God does it all anyway as it was predestined before anyone was born. I am not even sure why there is even a gospel or a Bible. What is the point?

[mfbukowski]

You got that much right. It is a rare thing. Which is why I should not have been surpirsed that this thread ballooned to the size it is.

It's rare for a reason, need I say more?

[mfbukowski]

Those who are in the flesh cannot please God.

-- Romans 8:8

Which means becoming saved does not please God, so we need not bother to accept Christ as our savior- is that what you are saying, according to your interpretation??

But of course as usual, I suspect you will not answer me.

[mfbukowski]

Out of curiousity, have you ever met a Calvinist who didn't believe they were destined for heaven? I am just curious, because all of the Calvinists I have met believe they are part of the those pre-destined for heaven.

Love it! Welcome!