Replies

The grave dilemma with "free will" is that if such a concept were true, it would require God not to know in advance who would choose Him. Otherwise, He would be aware of a fixed future from which the "free" chooser could not deviate. If God does know, and the chooser could not deviate, then the chooser is not as "free" as he believed. Oila', predestination. It is everywhere in the Scriptures.

Only if you've got on your predestination-tinted glasses. Your first sentence is defective. The second half of it does not follow from the first. You merely assert that it does. Take a few moments to consider what the fruits of theological determinism have wrought in philosophy, science, and political economy since Calvin first took it out for a spin. It has not been a pretty picture. Attempting to immanentize the eschaton has always resulted in trouble, from Geneva up to the present day.

"Only if you've got on your predestination-tinted glasses. Your first sentence is defective. The second half of it does not follow from the first. You merely assert that it does. Take a few moments to consider what the fruits of theological determinism have wrought in philosophy, science, and political economy since Calvin first took it out for a spin. It has not been a pretty picture. Attempting to immanentize the eschaton has always resulted in trouble, from Geneva up to the present day."

An argument that seems to settle upon repugnance of the results of an outcome as being the proof that it cannot be true, is not good thinking. See post #96, then we'll visit again.