Predestination and Free Will

[tabcom]

Genesis 4: 6-7, Yahew asked Cain,’ Why are you angry and downcast? If you are doing right surely you ought hold your head high ! If not sin is crouching at the door, hungry to get you. Its desire is for you but you can still master it.

**If I rely on my free-will alone to master sin, my fate would follow that of Cain’s.

The next verse (Gen 4:9) after God instructs Cain regarding mastering sin, what does he do? He plots the murder of his brother and tries to cover it up.**

Luke 16:16, Whoever believes and is baptized, will be saved; whoever does not believe will be condemned.

**I know you really ment Mark 16:16 . . . .‘whoever’ is a very bad translation. I’ll point you to the interlinear bible for how the verse was originally written:

scripture4all.org/OnlineInterlinear/Greek_Index.htm

The content of the verse is ‘Go into the world and preach the gospel. Those that believe will be saved, those that don’t will be condemed’. It is making a distinction between the two. It is not an offer to make a choice.
**

Matt 16: 18-19 So I now say to you; you are Peter and on this Rock I will build my Church. and the gates of the underworld can never overpower it.I will give you the keys to the kingdom of heaven: whatever you bind on earth shall be bound in heaven: whatever you loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven.

I’m unclear why you cited this verse.

 

[itsjustdave1988]

**…**Catholics that believed in TULIP!

If you indeed found Catholics that assert the Calvinist TULIP theology, then they cling to heresy, at least materially.

Freedom of the will is Catholics doctrine, as is the necessity of grace as the foundation of supernatural merit.

St. Methodius of Olympus (d. AD 311): “man was made with a free-will…on account of his capacity of obeying or disobeying God.”

 

[tabcom]

Sirach 15:14 (DR) - “God made man from the beginning, and left him in the hand of his own counsel.”

**I would preface my response by reprinting the preface of my New American Bible, The New Catholic Translation, which states, “Though not included in the Hebrew Bible after the first century A.D., nor accepted by Protestants, the Book of Sirach has always been recognized by the Catholic Church as divinely inspired and canonical.”

Therefore, if you were to quote anything from the Book of Sirach to the average protestant, he would probably reject it outright.

OK… now to the verses . . .

11 Say not: “It was God’s doing that I fell away”; for what he hates he does not do.
12 Say not: “It was he who set me astray”; for he has no need of wicked man.
13 Abominable wickedness the LORD hates, he does not let it befall those who fear him.

The context of verses 11, 12, 13 are made clearer when Sirach 15:1 is added:

Sirach 15:1
He who fears the LORD will do this; he who is practiced in the law will come to wisdom.

Fear of God = Practicing the Law = Wisdom.
He who blames God for his sin is ignorate and is not practicing the Law.

When we sin, and if we blame God for our sin, we are ignorate of the Law. All sinners break the Law and are held accountable for their transgressions.

1 John 1:8 -
If we say that we have no sin, we are deceiving ourselves and the truth is not in us.

1Jo 3:4 -
Everyone who practices sin also practices lawlessness; and sin is lawlessness.

Rev 20:13 -
And the sea gave up the dead which were in it, and death and Hades gave up the dead which were in them; and they were judged, every one {of them} according to their deeds.

14 When God, in the beginning, created man, he made him subject to his own free choice.
15 If you choose you can keep the commandments; it is loyalty to do his will.
16 There are set before you fire and water; to whichever you choose, stretch forth your hand.

This verse supports:

Genesis 2:16 The LORD God commanded the man, saying, "From any tree of the garden you may eat freely;

Adam’s ability to choose was subject to only the trees that God had predestinated Adam to eat from. In other words, God pre-bound Adam within the Light (see Rom 8:29) or garden, and told him he was free to eat of any tree within the garden.

17 Before man are life and death, whichever he chooses shall be given him

Eve could not make the choice by herself. It was the serpent that sudduced her when he put God’s law into doubt when the serpent asked Eve, 'Indeed, has God said . . " (Gen 3:1)

2 Cor 11:3 But I (Paul) am afraid that, as the serpent deceived Eve by his craftiness, your minds will be led astray from the simplicity and purity {of devotion} to Christ.

And what did Eve do when God confronted her about what she did? She tried to blame it on the serpent.

Ge 3:13 -
Then the LORD God said to the woman, “What is this you have done?” And the woman said, “The serpent deceived me, and I ate.”

OK, let’s connect the dots.

Fear of God = Practicing the Law = Wisdom

Did Eve fear God when she looked at the tree? No.

Did Eve break the Law when she ate of it? Yes.

Did Eve think she was gaining wisdom when she ate of it? Yes.

Gen 3:6 -
The woman saw that the tree was . . . desirable for gaining wisdom.

Did Eve fear God when she heard Him coming? Yes.
Did Eve return to the Law? Yes.

Gen 3:8 -
When they heard the sound of the LORD God moving about in the garden at the breezy time of the day, the man and his wife hid themselves from the LORD God among the trees of the garden.

**

 

[itsjustdave1988]

If I rely on my free-will alone to master sin, my fate would follow that of Cain’s.

But Cain did not have only his free will alone. God spoke to him directly. That’s ACTUAL GRACE. He warned him that sin was crouching at his door and that he is to master sin. God did not tell him to do something that he did not also give him the help to accomplish. What we mean by free will is that despite the supernatural assistance of God, Cain disobeyed Him. Why? Because God did not FORCE him to be obedient, but instead exhorted and gave him the gifts to obey, along with the gift of free will which mean the could either obey or disobey.

 

[itsjustdave1988]

**…**Therefore, if you were to quote anything from the Book of Sirach to the average protestant, he would probably reject it outright.

Which would work out perfectly, because then I would show them that they reject the authority of Sacred Scripture. And since they cannot even recognize that which IS Scritpure, what confidence could I have that they can understand the true sense OF Scripture. For more on the untenable view of a truncated Protestant Bible, see here: How Big is Your Book of Daniel?

 

[itsjustdave1988]

OK, let’s connect the dots…

Sorry, but what you’ve posted doesn’t seem to connect anything.

Q: Is man created, by his very God-given nature, capable of voluntarily obeying or voluntarily disobeying God in a single moral act? Yes or no?

The question above does not connote that by voluntarily obeying God, we are made holy. One should answer the question above apart from any consideration of holiness or what the Church calls the “supernatural order.”

Consider this question from the view of a natural (and therefore unjustified/unholy) man…is he naturally capable of voluntarily obeying or voluntarily disobeying God in any single human act?

 

[mikeledes]

**Thank you for the questions. From what I understand of Calvinist doctrine, I’ve never actually met a Calvinist, is that they believe that if you got saved one night, then you are home free. Is that a misunderstanding on my part?

I was not familar with TULIP prior to joining this forum.

A TIPTOE THROUGH TULIP
catholic.com/thisrock/1993/9309fea1.asp**

“The debate is centered on the well-known formula TULIP. Each letter of this acronym stands for a different doctrine held by classical Calvinists . . . The doctrines are:”

Total depravity,
Unconditional election,
Limited atonement,
Irresistible grace, and
Perseverance of the saints.

As I reviewed my saved postings from an old predestination thread, I was defending Catholic Doctrine from Catholics that believed in TULIP!

I apologize if I’m annoying you with further questions, but I’m still a bit confused. So you don’t believe in TULIP? You don’t believe in free will? Do you believe that God just passes over the non-elect/reprobate, never giving them the opportunity to repent?

Thanks and God bless,
Michael

 

[Catholic_Dude]

Tabcom,

Its pretty clear at this point that you are taking us for a joy ride. The fact you brushed off my most of my post 88 is a standard indication that the Protestant being challenged has no more room to dance and twist.

The honest truth is Catholics cant take you seriously because you dont even have a foundation for us to meet you on, your nothing but shifting sand that can only tell us we are wrong with the never ending implication of “we dont get it”. Your gospel is made up as you go along and requires the same, if not greater, mental gymnastics than the average calvinist. If you cant point to a creed or theologian from which you have a foundation off of then your a heretic by definition (ie preaching a new gospel nobody has ever heard of).

Your posts are unorganized and filled with fluff. For example you commonly post a single verse, for some reason include the greek, and for an even more mind boggling reason include “definitions” at the end which were never disputed in the first place. At the end of the post you leave everyone hanging because your comments dont develop past a sentence or two.

I invite everyone to take a look at your track record. IN FACT I just went through EVERY post you made on this thread. Go through this thread and its clear most of your posts are single scripture quotes with long blocks of greek and “definitions” as filler. Hardly any of your comments are direct answers beyond a sentence or two. We beg for some fair and honest dialogue yet you keep taking us for a joy ride.

What I say are the plain and undistorted facts.
Your not fooling anyone.

 

[tabcom]

Tabcom,
. . . . The fact you brushed off my most of my post 88 . . .

OK . . . let’s start over. Please go back to post #88 and select one point that you would like a response to and resubmit it. Once that first point is satisfactory answered, we can move on to the next point.

 

[tabcom]

So you don’t believe in TULIP?

I have read A TIPTOE THROUGH TULIP twice. I agree with its author (a Catholic) that the Calvinist doctrine of TULIP is false.

You don’t believe in free will?

What I have been attempting to do within this thread, with various results, is to show that our 21st century opinion of what free-will is, has no value as an aid in studying Scripture.

Do you believe that God just passes over the non-elect/reprobate, never giving them the opportunity to repent?

Yes.

 

[guanophore]

IMHO Luke 22:42 is not a free-will verse. It is the opposite. If the Living God had no free-will to resist the commandment of His Father to die, what free-will does man have? None.

This represents a denial of the two natures of Christ, and amounts to a heresy. Jesus had both a divine nature, and a human nature. His human will was never in conflict with the divine will. To suggest it was denies his nature. Jesus said in the garden when Peter whacked off the guys ear “don’t you know I can call 12 legions of angels”. He had free will. That did not mean he was looking forward to the suffering He would endure. If there was another way to redeem mankind from himself, He would have taken that road.
tabcom;2099539:

In accordance with this definition, Eve was not acting out of free-will when she broke God’s Law.

God created (Adam and Eve), called them good, and gave them choices. The implication you are making is that God gave them commandments that they could not follow. What does that say about God.

IMHO . . . I disagree. They had a choice to eat from any tree in the garden except one

. What does that mean? They were free to choose from a variety of fruits that God provided a need for. It wasn’t until Eve was sudduced into thinking she could become like god by the serpent that she was led astray.

Listen to what you are saying! It makes no logical sense. IF you can be seduced, it is because you have choice. To be led astray, you have to be able to make choices.

God provided the need. Eve\Adam wanted more.

And how can that be, if they don’t have free will? Do cows want to be more than cows?

Eph 5:5 For this ye know, that no whoremonger, nor unclean person, nor covetous man, who is an idolater, hath any inheritance in the kingdom of Christ and of God.

All these actions require choice.

Col 3:5 Mortify therefore your members which are upon the earth; fornication, uncleanness, inordinate affection, evil concupiscence, and covetousness, which is idolatry:

Mortification is a choice. A self discipline.

It is an idolatry as evil as falling down before Baal, the golden calf, or one of the ancient pagan deities of Rome or Babylon. Paul said, “having food and raiment, let us be there with content” (I Tim. 6:8). He also said, “I have learned, in whatsoever state I am, therewith to be content.” (Phil. 4:11) Men are involved in idolatry when they refuse to be content with what they have. Sorry if I was led astray from the main point of free-will to wanting more, but I think they are related.

I think you are absolutely right on . The are related. To be an idolator, one must exercise free will.

 

[onenow1]

Hi, Tabcom
Matt 16: 18-19 So I now say to you; you are Peter and on this Rock I will build my Church. and the gates of the underworld can never overpower it.I will give you the keys to the kingdom of heaven: whatever you bind on earth shall be bound in heaven: whatever you loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven.

Just pointing out the truth of the Catholic Christian faith. Jesus appointed a prime minister, just as they did in OT. Jesus was a Jew, logic tells me it would continue. The Catholic Church, led by the Pope in apostolic succession, obeying Jesus’s command to Peter feed my sheep. And wow is there a lot of sheep to re-feed.

Eve could not make the choice by herself. It was the serpent that sudduced her when he put God’s law into doubt when the serpent asked Eve, 'Indeed, has God said . . " (Gen 3:1)

You left out: Gen 3: 2-3, And the woman said to the serpent, "We may eat of the fruit of the trees of the garden; but God said ‘You shall not eat of the fruit of the tree in the midst of the garden, neither shall you touch it, lest you die.’

Adam and Eve were fully aware of what they were doing, they made a CHOICE to believe Satan, rather then God,even though God, told them they would die.

Peace, OneNow1

 

[Catholic_Dude]

OK . . . let’s start over. Please go back to post #88 and select one point that you would like a response to and resubmit it. Once that first point is satisfactory answered, we can move on to the next point.

Ok we will go down each point:

No, God does not cause sin. He has an agent to do it for Him – the serpent.

What is your definition of “cause”?

What I mean by God causing sin is that it was His intention to do evil and He carried out that intention. Catholics believe such a notion is false, in fact such a charge against God is unthinkable…yet you believe God was directly behind that sin, sending the serpent to carry it out.

What your saying is as absurd as blaming a gun for murdering someone rather than focus on the one controlling and using the gun.

 

[tabcom]

Ok we will go down each point:

What I mean by God causing sin is that it was His intention to do evil and He carried out that intention. Catholics believe such a notion is false, in fact such a charge against God is unthinkable…

I agree with you. I’m sorry that my initial response was unclear.

 

[tabcom]

Adam and Eve were fully aware of what they were doing, they made a CHOICE to believe Satan, rather then God,even though God, told them they would die.

**As I outlined earlier and paraphrase here . . .

//////////////

Genesis 3:1- Now the serpent was more subtle than any beast of the field

• Serpent – Hebrew: Nachash - hiss; whisperer or enchanter, enchant means to charm or fascinate; to give great pleasure or delight
• Subtle – Hebrew: Aruwm - cunning; crafty; smoothness

Did Paul say Eve was led astray by her free-will?

2Co 11:3 -
But I am afraid that, as the serpent deceived Eve by his craftiness, your minds will be led astray from the simplicity and purity {of devotion} to Christ.

deceieved - Greek: exapatao (ex-ap-at-ah’-o)
to seduce wholly; beguile; delude; cheat

Merriam-Webster defines freewill as . . .
7 : acting or doing of one’s own free will without valuable consideration or legal obligation

Was Eve legally obligated to not eat from the tree? Yes.
Or, was Eve putting a value on the possession of the forbidden tree? Yes.

In accordance with this definition, Eve was not acting out of free-will when she broke God’s Law.

//////////////
**
**onenow1:**Why is it that Paul says that Eve was decieved by the serpent? Why doesn’t he say that she made a choice? I respect your opinion. However, I stand by Paul.

 

[tabcom]

(Jesus not having free-will) represents a denial of the two natures of Christ, and amounts to a heresy. Jesus had both a divine nature, and a human nature.

Yes, Jesus had a duo nature. My argument is that man has no free-will. Jesus, in the capacity of man, had no free-will to avoid his fate to die on the cross.

God created (Adam and Eve), called them good, and gave them choices.

Is this your opinion? Or are you paraphrasing Scripture? If the latter, please provide the citation.

The implication you are making is that God gave them commandments that they could not follow.

**Yes. Matt 5:28
but I say to you that everyone who looks at a woman with lust for her has already committed adultery with his heart.

Was this a commandment of God? Can anyone not break it?
**

IF you can be seduced, it is because you have choice. To be led astray, you have to be able to make choices.

**I’ve attempted to outline in Post #113 why it was not a choice or free-will that led Eve astray.

With respect to the remainder of your post #109 regarding ‘choice’: why is it the Bible does not say, “Many are called, but few choose to come?”, “who were born, by the will of man, but not of God.”, “So then do not depend on God for mercy, but on man’s free-will to turn to God?”, or “In the exercise of man’s free-will he brought forth the word of truth, so that he would be a kind of first fruits amongst men”.

I’m not trying to be rhetorical. I sincerely would like to read your response.

(see Matt 22:14, John 1:13, Rom 9:16, James 1:18. for the proper citations.)**

 

[tabcom]

What we mean by free will is that despite the supernatural assistance of God, Cain disobeyed Him.

If I understand you correctly, free-will is man’s ability to disobey God. Is this correct?

 

[tabcom]

Q: Is man created, by his very God-given nature, capable of voluntarily obeying or voluntarily disobeying God in a single moral act? Yes or no?

In order for me to understand what you mean by ‘God-given nature’, would I be correct in rephrasing the question ’ Is man through his five senses capable of voluntarily obeying or voluntarily disobeying God in a single moral act?'

 

[Pax_et_Caritas]

If I understand you correctly, free-will is man’s ability to disobey God. Is this correct?

Free will is the faculty that enables man to choose. By a use of the free will, for example, I can choose to stop at a stop sign, or, if I don’t see anyone, drive through it.

With a use of the free will, I can post this reply, or pass over it. With a use of your free will, you can respond, or not.

Free will is the faculty that enables man to act, or not act: to obey or to disobey.

This obedience is not limited to indifferent things, but applies equally to law - both human and divine. We can choose to obey the law, or not.

 

[guanophore]

**As I outlined earlier and paraphrase here . . .

Genesis 3:1- Now the serpent was more subtle than any beast of the field

• Serpent – Hebrew: Nachash - hiss; whisperer or enchanter, enchant means to charm or fascinate; to give great pleasure or delight
• Subtle – Hebrew: Aruwm - cunning; crafty; smoothness

Did Paul say Eve was led astray by her free-will? **

No, that was James that said that:

" Let no one say when he is tempted, “I am tempted by God”; for God cannot be tempted with evil and he himself tempts no one; 14 but each person is tempted when he is lured and enticed by his own desire. 15 Then desire when it has conceived gives birth to sin; and sin when it is full-grown brings forth death." James 1:13-15
tabcom;2103230:

2Co 11:3 -
But I am afraid that, as the serpent deceived Eve by his craftiness, your minds will be led astray from the simplicity and purity {of devotion} to Christ.

deceieved - Greek: exapatao (ex-ap-at-ah’-o)
to seduce wholly; beguile; delude; cheat

Was Eve legally obligated to not eat from the tree? Yes.
Or, was Eve putting a value on the possession of the forbidden tree? Yes.

In accordance with this definition, Eve was not acting out of free-will when she broke God’s Law.

I am not following this line of reasoning at all. Eve desired something over and above what she had been given. It was the desire in her that made her susceptible to beguilement. Yes, she had help, then she helped Adam to do the same. But they made choices.

Gen 3:1-3
2 And the woman said to the serpent, “We may eat of the fruit of the trees of the garden; 3 but God said, ‘You shall not eat of the fruit of the tree which is in the midst of the garden, neither shall you touch it, lest you die.’”

Both the commandment and it’s consequence were clear.

Gen 3:6-7
6 So when the woman saw that the tree was good for food, and that it was a delight to the eyes, and that the tree was to be desired to make one wise, she took of its fruit and ate; and she also gave some to her husband, and he ate."

She looked, she saw, she took, she ate. She is a free agent./COLOR]
**onenow1:**Why is it that Paul says that Eve was decieved by the serpent? Why doesn’t he say that she made a choice? I respect your opinion. However, I stand by Paul.

Ok, stand by him, but not to the exclusion of the rest of the scripture, or the context of the passage:

2 Cor 11:3-6
"I am afraid that as the serpent deceived Eve by his cunning, your thoughts will be led astray from a sincere and pure devotion to Christ. 4 For if some one comes and preaches another Jesus than the one we preached, or if you receive a different spirit from the one you received, or if you accept a different gospel from the one you accepted, you submit to it readily enough. 5 I think that I am not in the least inferior to these superlative apostles. 6 Even if I am unskilled in speaking, I am not in knowledge; in every way we have made this plain to you in all things. "

In order for people to be led astray, they must have free will. They must also have “desire” (epithumia) that is suscepti le to temptation. What Paul is saying is that people will come along and preach a false gospel, and there is a risk that his disciples isll “submit to it readily enough”. Submission requires an act of the will.