You say: “whatever will we have is His doing”, so how is that not something programmed into us?
You see this life as a thing in and of itself. It is not. It is all God's doing.
Not that God can't see how we do, but I doubt that to him it makes any real difference whether he began something and let it progress, or whether he is actively, meticulously, seeing it through. Either way, the only thing that is real is so because he has established its reality. If we choose, we do because he established us, our choosing and our choice. It is real only because God is real. Where is any absolute spontaneity in that? Where is the little first cause? I see this the way I see the notion of "chance". You can call it "chance" and consider it real in your calculations, but in fact, "chance" is only a stand-in for, "I don't know". Your will is yours, and is real, and draws from God having created, one way or the other. So it is with "spontaneity". We can't calculate how "it" (whatever seems spontaneous) happens. It is not programming, but it is effected by myriad antecedent causes. We always choose what we most want at the instant of choice.
I am a believer in a “Block Universe”, but that does not eliminate the individual making autonomous free will choices.
No, of course it doesn't logically of itself deny autonomous free will choices. But it does give a point of view from which to consider the work of God.
From God’s perspective everything happened at once, He is outside of time, but we are in time (time God most likely created).
The question is what “set” the free will choice an individual made? Scientist do not believe in a god making the choices, since that is outside their realm of reasons, so it is the individual themselves make the choices.
Time is indeed a creation of God, as is very "reality", else he is not omnipotent, but subject to facts he did not cause.
Verses supporting free will
Remember that we need to establish, if possible, before claiming some verse passage promotes/supports "free will", just what free will is, and, if possible, what is implied by it. I know many Calvinists who would accept the dictionary definition that I think you would accept, yet they don't mean by it what you do. You and I both say, "real choice", but you think that means autonomy apart from GOD—"limited free will". I wonder what 'limited free will' can even MEAN! You and I both believe "responsible choice", but I think that is because of God's standard, and says nothing to our ability.
Gen. 1-3 Did Adam and Eve have free will?
No, and not even before they sinned. Nor did Lucifer.
Exodus 35:29 “All the Israelite men and women who were willing brought to the Lord
freewill offerings for all the work the Lord through Moses had commanded them to do.” Are these truly free will offerings?
That's a misuse of the verse. Maybe it wasn't you I've already discussed that with. It means voluntary, not commanded. Look up some other versions and the Hebrew Interlinear.
Jonah 3: 10 “When God saw what they did and how they turned from their evil ways, he relented and did not bring on them the destruction he had threatened.” Did the people of Nineveh change what God said he would do?
How is this not saying that God’s actions are contingent on the choices of the people?
Who planned that 'contingency'? Who established their choice? Are you implying he didn't know which route he would go before they did?
"You search the Scriptures because you think that in them you have eternal life; and it is they that bear witness about me, yet you refuse to come to me that you may have life." (
John 5:39-40). Note that Jesus does not say, "you cannot come", which the Greek does not say here, but, "you refuse to come", in order that you may have eternal life. It was their own rejection of Jesus and the Gospel, that would damn their souls, and not because they were "unable" to make the "choice" themselves.
Sure, I can demonstrate this principle many times, to include Jezebel being given ample opportunity to repent, but she would not. (Rev 2:21) That doesn't imply that she could have. As you have seen throughout your life and from science and from past history, there is only one thing that ever happens: Whatever happens. "Could have" is our speculation. "We don't know". "Should have" demonstrates their responsibility—but "should have" does not imply "could have".
Christ is God here on earth. The “whomsoever” does not mean only the elect, but lots of people, who then made the choice to accept or reject Christ. "You search the Scriptures because you think that in them you have eternal life; and it is they that bear witness about me,
yet you refuse to come to me that you may have life." (
John 5:39-40)
Sounds kinda like the Jezebel thing. They do indeed refuse. I have not said differently. They are responsible for that choice. But WHY did they refuse? "Nobody knows" doesn't mean their choices are not a result of antecedent causes.
To say: “Christ only reveals Himself to those who God have chosen to accept Him”, means God is guilty of not helping others to accept Christ.
Hardly. First, it is you who places the judgement of "GUILTY" on the matter as if it was a bad thing for him to do. He has every right, and, he has every reason. Second, as your use of "whomsoever" ("whosoever", no?), just who is that that chooses him?
By the way, I haven't done an exhaustive study of everywhere the KJV or other versions use the term, "whosoever" or "whatsoever" etc, but in John 3:16 the Greek doesn't imply that just anybody random will believe in him, nor even that it is an act of the will. Look at the Greek Interlinear.
John 15: 22 If I had not come and spoken to them, they would not be guilty of sin; but now they have no excuse for their sin.
If they have no free will, they have an excellent excuse for sinning?
Taking this verse in or even out of context, even, I see no logic in claiming it for "free will". How does the one thing imply the other in my arrangement? Did they not choose to sin? That's all it takes for them to be guilty of it.
There are all the “whosoever” verses making it contingent.
You'll have to list them. I dealt with John 3:16.
If God is only saving some and not all for some unknowable reason, while saving all is just as easy for God to do, then a God that does not save all has less Love than a God who saves all.
The reason some are not "saved" is because they are unwilling.
Again, as before. If God knew this was the scenario before creating, but created anyway, he INTENDED what his creating produced.
trendingpoliticsnews.com
