Slex

Why when the argument from evil is presented against the existence of the Christian God we take the free will in the FWD for granted? I mean there are passages in the Bible that completely rule out the existence of free will. The debate fueled between Erasmus and Luther and I think that Luther won it. I've read some other Christian writings on the Internet concerning free will but they either were in favour of the bondage of the will or those who were in favour of the free will were lacking good scriptural support. Any suggestions?

Romans, chapter 9
9:11
(For the children being not yet born, neither having done any good or evil, that the purpose of God according to election might stand, not of works, but of him that calleth

9:12
It was said unto her, The elder shall serve the younger.

9:13
As it is written, Jacob have I loved, but Esau have I hated.

9:14
What shall we say then? Is there unrighteousness with God? God forbid.

9:15
For he saith to Moses, I will have mercy on whom I will have mercy, and I will have compassion on whom I will have compassion.

9:16
So then it is not of him that willeth, nor of him that runneth, but of God that sheweth mercy.

9:17
For the scripture saith unto Pharaoh, Even for this same purpose have I raised thee up, that I might shew my power in thee, and that my name might be declared throughout all the earth.

9:18
Therefore hath he mercy on whom he will have mercy, and whom he will he hardeneth.

9:19
Thou wilt say then unto me, Why doth he yet find fault? For who hath resisted his will?

9:20
Nay but, O man, who art thou that repliest against God? Shall the thing formed say to him that formed it, Why hast thou made me thus?

9:21
Hath not the potter power over the clay, of the same lump to make one vessel unto honour, and another unto dishonour?

9:22
What if God, willing to shew his wrath, and to make his power known, endured with much longsuffering the vessels of wrath fitted to destruction:

9:23
And that he might make known the riches of his glory on the vessels of mercy, which he had afore prepared unto glory,

tronvillain

As far as I can tell, the type of "free will" most people value doesn't permit the free will defense.

Boro Nut

It might be in the US, but in Europe we stick to 2WD on our cars. 4WD is only for posers.

Boro Nut

TheDiddleyMan

Know what you mean. When I was a Christian I was a calvinist. There are a few positions in Christian. Some of them are hard to define because people (including perhaps myself) don't always know what they are talking about, and because people use them differently - not the way the terms aren't meant to be used. (If you want to get an example of the confusion that can arise, check out two books, about the debate among Christians - the first one, Chosen but Free by Norman Geisler, and The Potter's Freedom by James White, a response to that book. Norman Geisler gets nailed by White because he refuses to use terms like Unconditional Election or Irresistable Grace as the way originally meant to be used.)

Anywho, the easiest way to distinguish between positions is to separate into the two main groups of Monergism versus Synergism. Monergism (the prefix "mono") says that God is the agent in bringing about salvation. Sinners are unable to repent and believe in Him, so he must bring to believe. This includes Calvinists, and also Lutherans (note: the Lutheran position can be very confusing and contains many paradoxes, more so than the Calvinist position, which tries to work everything out logically...) In this position, man is born again before having faith.

Than their are synergists, who say that God and man are agents in bringing about salvation. Note that in saying man is an agent in salvation, it is not necessarily saying that man does works (like baptism) to "earn" salvation (which is an antichristian idea, for many), but that his faith is his choice, and once he has faith he is born again. This includes Arminians and Pelagians. The Arminian position is what most christians are today - that is, they believe that all men are born sinners, but that they also have a free will to choose or reject salvation, and that salvation is by faith alone. Pelagians teach that man are not born sinners, and that salvation is not by faith alone. There are also (as always) some in between views.

Among the Calvinists, there is also the debate about double predestination - does God predestine people to Hell? Most would say a qualified "yes". They would say that God predestines them, in that their damnation is part of his decree, but that he "passes over" them - he does not work sin in their hearts so that they disbelieve in Him and therefore go to Hell. Their disbelief is all their own fault (how they reconcile this with their belief that man is unable to believe him - which means they really have no choice at all - is beyond me, and them. They just say that their is an antinomy and move on). Now, in this position, God does harden their hearts - but he does this by removing some of his "common grace" from them, not by adding evil into their hearts. On the other hand, their are those who would say God is the direct cause of their unbelief. These people are generally hyper-calvinists - which is considered heresy. For information on double predestination, see:
<a href="http://www.fivesolas.com/dblpred.htm" target="_blank">Double predestination</a>

Anywho....that sort of sums it up. I'd write more, but I think that the above is confusing enough and I don't have time right at this moment....

James AD

Boro Nut,

You misunderstood the question! FWD means Front Wheel Drive.