Soft Model of Libertarian Free Will

Reformedguy

Well-known member
Will you ignore scripture ?

Psalm 25:14 (KJV)
14 The secret of the LORD is with them that fear him; and he will shew them his covenant.


But

What do you imagine your unconditional election is but unexplainable partiality
That would depend on the reason for His choice which we are not told. In your conditional election stupidity. we know God is partial because He chose those who chose Him right?
 

Reformedguy

Well-known member
A falsehood

The context was given to you multiple times

and you never address the scriptural evidence behind the quote

God is shown by scripture to favor those that fear him and those that are humble

An honest approach would be to deal with the verses
In what context did he use the phrase choice meats? Let me dumb it down for you, What was he talking about when he used the phrase?
 

fltom

Well-known member
That would depend on the reason for His choice which we are not told. In your conditional election stupidity. we know God is partial because He chose those who chose Him right?
Once again you ignore scripture

Psalm 25:14 (KJV)
14 The secret of the LORD is with them that fear him; and he will shew them his covenant.

and ignore the point of the citiation you got from James White who ignored the context supplied by the one he was quoting as well as the biblical proof behind it

and no your system of unconditional election is unconditional partiality
 

Reformedguy

Well-known member
Once again you ignore scripture

Psalm 25:14 (KJV)
14 The secret of the LORD is with them that fear him; and he will shew them his covenant.

and ignore the point of the citiation you got from James White who ignored the context supplied by the one he was quoting as well as the biblical proof behind it

and no your system of unconditional election is unconditional partiality
LOL if there is no condition then how is it partiality? You need another break
 

fltom

Well-known member
In what context did he use the phrase choice meats? Let me dumb it down for you, What was he talking about when he used the phrase?
You were told multiple times

It seems I must dumb it down for you not the other way around for you are not capable of understanding that the

The context had to do with some reasons God might favor one over another

Examples

God gives grace to the Humble

Prov. 3:34 Toward the scorners he is scornful,
but to the humble he gives favor.
James 4:6 But he gives more grace. Therefore it says, “God opposes the proud but gives grace to the humble.”
1Pet. 5:5 Likewise, you who are younger, be subject to the elders. Clothe yourselves, all of you, with humility toward one another, for “God opposes the proud but gives grace to the humble.”
Matt. 23:12 Whoever exalts himself will be humbled, and whoever humbles himself will be exalted.
Psa. 138:6 For though the LORD is high, he regards the lowly,
but the haughty he knows from afar.
Luke 1:52 he has brought down the mighty from their thrones
and exalted those of humble estate;
Luke 14:11 For everyone who exalts himself will be humbled, and he who humbles himself will be exalted.”
Luke 18:14 I tell you, this man went down to his house justified, rather than the other. For everyone who exalts himself will be humbled, but the one who humbles himself will be exalted.”

God’s mercy is on those that fear him

Psa. 25:14 The friendship of the LORD is for those who fear him,
and he makes known to them his covenant.
Psa. 33:18 ¶ Behold, the eye of the LORD is on those who fear him,
on those who hope in his steadfast love,
Psa. 103:17 But the steadfast love of the LORD is from everlasting to everlasting on those who fear him,
and his righteousness to children’s children,
Psa. 118:4 Let those who fear the LORD say,
“His steadfast love endures forever.”
Psa. 147:11 but the LORD takes pleasure in those who fear him,
in those who hope in his steadfast love.
Luke 1:50 And his mercy is for those who fear him
from generation to generation.

James White ignored that as you do
 

fltom

Well-known member
LOL if there is no condition then how is it partiality? You need another break

Prove partiality necessitates a condition

Your theology is one of unconditional partiality

God unconditionally favors one over another

Just the opposite of what the scriptures above show

Sorry but it is you who are in need of a break and in need of a biblical theology
 

Reformedguy

Well-known member
You were told multiple times

It seems I must dumb it down for you not the other way around for you are not capable of understanding that the

The context had to do with some reasons God might favor one over another

Examples

God gives grace to the Humble

Prov. 3:34 Toward the scorners he is scornful,
but to the humble he gives favor.
James 4:6 But he gives more grace. Therefore it says, “God opposes the proud but gives grace to the humble.”
1Pet. 5:5 Likewise, you who are younger, be subject to the elders. Clothe yourselves, all of you, with humility toward one another, for “God opposes the proud but gives grace to the humble.”
Matt. 23:12 Whoever exalts himself will be humbled, and whoever humbles himself will be exalted.
Psa. 138:6 For though the LORD is high, he regards the lowly,
but the haughty he knows from afar.
Luke 1:52 he has brought down the mighty from their thrones
and exalted those of humble estate;
Luke 14:11 For everyone who exalts himself will be humbled, and he who humbles himself will be exalted.”
Luke 18:14 I tell you, this man went down to his house justified, rather than the other. For everyone who exalts himself will be humbled, but the one who humbles himself will be exalted.”

God’s mercy is on those that fear him

Psa. 25:14 The friendship of the LORD is for those who fear him,
and he makes known to them his covenant.
Psa. 33:18 ¶ Behold, the eye of the LORD is on those who fear him,
on those who hope in his steadfast love,
Psa. 103:17 But the steadfast love of the LORD is from everlasting to everlasting on those who fear him,
and his righteousness to children’s children,
Psa. 118:4 Let those who fear the LORD say,
“His steadfast love endures forever.”
Psa. 147:11 but the LORD takes pleasure in those who fear him,
in those who hope in his steadfast love.
Luke 1:50 And his mercy is for those who fear him
from generation to generation.

James White ignored that as you do
No, they were dealing with a specific topic. What was it? Were all listening choice meat
 

Reformedguy

Well-known member
Prove partiality necessitates a condition

Your theology is one of unconditional partiality

God unconditionally favors one over another


Just the opposite of what the scriptures above show

Sorry but it is you who are in need of a break and in need of a biblical theology
If I choose something randomly like I just close my eyes and grab something and that's my choice is that partiality?

So is yours genius. Watch. In your system how are the elect chosen? Lol
 

fltom

Well-known member
If I choose something randomly like I just close my eyes and grab something and that's my choice is that partiality?

So is yours genius. Watch. In your system how are the elect chosen? Lol
Are you saying God closes his eyes and picks randomly ?

I quoted scripture as to why God favors some

You can only quote your theology

In my system those God choses to save are those that believe

1 Corinthians 1:21 (KJV)
21 For after that in the wisdom of God the world by wisdom knew not God, it pleased God by the foolishness of preaching to save them that believe.

again I can support my view with scripture

while you can only support your view with an assumed theology
 

preacher4truth

Well-known member
Flowers choice meats election model is used in the same yet perhaps more subtle manner as @fltom's gospel, it is why God saved and chose them, because they are choice compared to others, which is obviously a complete denial of the Gospel of grace. This false gospel fails to embrace the true biblical state of all the lost. They are all; hostile toward God; Colossians 1:21; incapable of pleasing Him; Romans 8:8; mired in sin; 1 Corinthians 6:9-11; ungodly; Romans 5:6-8; dead in sin; Ephesians 2:5; detestable, disobedient; Titus 1:16; unrighteous, lacking good; Romans 3:10-18; evil doers; Colossians 1:21; evil; Matthew 7:11; darkened, alienated &c Ephesians 4:17-20.

The picture these two paint of the human condition is contrary to the true biblical state of the lost, and thus it is unbiblical, humanistic, misleading, and frankly wicked.

Tom makes the same claims, even going as far in saying (a week ago perhaps?) that persons have to be in the right type of mindset to be saved (something along those lines!) and those otherwise cannot be. That is the leaven of choice meats bleeding through his false teachings. This was possibly a response surrounding his errant take on 1 Corinthians 2:14. I've already addressed that asinine human exalting take on this at the time he made the statement under his old moniker.

Flowers has held to this deceptive, somewhat subtle works gospel, performance based election, salvation by personal achievement for years. In the debate he had with Dr. James White he admitted he was saved because he humbled himself, based upon his misusage and out of context take on James 4:6. Both teach man is saved because they've done something. This is where the false gospel of "conditional election" takes people. Nevertheless Flower's is leading many astray from the truth into a humanistic religion, drawing away disciples after himself, not after the LORD; Acts 20:29-30.

I truly do not like engaging either of these two false teachers personally, but I do feel the need to expose their errors to others generally. Those who stay in the word should be quite capable of seeing the basis of their error. Be aware that the attack in response of what I've posted will be centered on glorifying man, his "ability" in spite of the biblical indictment presented.
 
Last edited:

fltom

Well-known member
Flowers choice meats election model is used in the same yet perhaps more subtle manner as @fltom's gospel, it is why God saved and chose them, because they are choice compared to others, which is obviously a complete denial of the Gospel of grace. This false gospel fails to embrace the true biblical state of all the lost. They are all; hostile toward God; Colossians 1:21; incapable of pleasing Him; Romans 8:8; mired in sin; 1 Corinthians 6:9-11; ungodly; Romans 5:6-8; dead in sin; Ephesians 2:5; detestable, disobedient; Titus 1:16; unrighteous, lacking good; Romans 3:10-18; evil doers; Colossians 1:21; evil; Matthew 7:11; darkened, alienated &c Ephesians 4:17-20.

The picture these two paint of the human condition is contrary to the true biblical state of the lost, and thus it is unbiblical, humanistic, misleading, and frankly wicked.

Tom makes the same claims, even going as far in saying (a week ago perhaps?) that persons have to be in the right type of mindset to be saved (something like along those lines) and those otherwise cannot be. That is the leaven of choice meats bleeding through his false teachings. This was possibly a response surrounding his errant take on 1 Corinthians 2:14. I've already addressed that asinine human exalting take on this at the time he made the statement under his old moniker.

Flowers has held to this deceptive, somewhat subtle works gospel, performance based election, salvation by personal achievement for years. In the debate he had with Dr. James White he admitted he was saved because he humbled himself, based upon his misusage and out of context take on James 4:6. Both teach man is saved because they've done something. This is where the false gospel of "conditional election" takes people. Nevertheless Flower's is leading many astray from the truth into a humanistic religion, drawing away disciples after himself, not after the LORD; Acts 20:29-30.

I truly do not like engaging either of these two false teachers personally, but I do feel the need to expose their errors to others generally. Those who stay in the word should be quite capable of seeing the basis of their error. Be aware that the attack in response of what I've posted will be centered on glorifying man, his "ability" in spite of the biblical indictment presented.
Yet another falsehood

The discussion had to do with why God favors some not that any earned their salvation

For example

Psalm 25:14 (KJV)
14 The secret of the LORD is with them that fear him; and he will shew them his covenant.

God shows his covenant to those who fear him

They still needed Christ to die for them

and they still needed faith in God's covenant

The false teacher here is you as I can support my view with scripture while you rely on character assignation and ad hominem

and btw you cannot even accurately extoll what I stated two weeks ago

I spoke of those who judge based only on worldly wisdom - such will not believe spiritual truth

Those who do not so judge may believe spiritual truth

Further I gave you a challenge and a scripture to address

John 12:40 (KJV)
40 He hath blinded their eyes, and hardened their heart; that they should not see with their eyes, nor understand with their heart, and be converted, and I should heal them.

why did God blind those who had no capability to see ?

What might have happened if not so blinded ?

but you never answer it and you never will

it shows you are the false teacher here and the one who does not stay in the word
 

Simpletruther

Well-known member
The reason for the choice is the chooser

Does God have the power of choice or do you hold him determined as well?
God can choose, just as we can. However God's choices are determined by his unchanging all knowing nature.

God is not free to choose against his own knowledge and nature. He is bound by who He is, just as we are.

God is not a cosmic dice roller.
 

Simpletruther

Well-known member
Big difference between a random chance and a decision by a rational being made in the image of God

The chooser chooses option A as one of a set of possible options based upon his character, internal disposition and external forces acting upon him
And if these three items do not determine how choice, then there by definition must be a random unpredictable element tongue choice.
 

Simpletruther

Well-known member
God had a moral nature that cannot lie. In nonmoral cases God is libertarian, such as whether to create the universe or not.
Creation was not cosmic chance. God knew from everlasting He would create, it is part of God's nature to do so. There was no "freedom" for God to do anything other than what He has eternally planned.
 

Reformedguy

Well-known member
Are you saying God closes his eyes and picks randomly ?

I quoted scripture as to why God favors some

You can only quote your theology

In my system those God choses to save are those that believe

1 Corinthians 1:21 (KJV)
21 For after that in the wisdom of God the world by wisdom knew not God, it pleased God by the foolishness of preaching to save them that believe.

again I can support my view with scripture

while you can only support your view with an assumed theology
Is that what I said? Do you know what a analogy is by chance?

Where does it say God chose you because you first chose Him?

Your view is a illogical contradictory mess. I can easily show with a few questions you will run from or will not answer directly because you can't. Neither can choice meats boy thats why he no longer posts here
 

Sketo

Well-known member
So you say God is self-determined. Well, since that is the definition of libertarianism, I agree, God is libertarian.

Yes… God is “Active”. God Determined and Created when only He existed.

Colossians 1:17 “he is before all things, and in him all things hold together.”

This includes every “option” that you will ever be presented with.

God is omnipotent. Right? Why do you then say it impossible for God to make us self-determined too?

It has nothing to do with God’s Omnipotence. This is as ridiculous as if you said “God is omnipotent. Right? Why do you then say it impossible for God to make [another God like himself] too?” (Flowers has already made himself look very silly with his “omnipotent” argument… it’s just laughable now)

You did not design yourself or place yourself in a specific time or create your own circumstances or even power your own movements. Creature can not even originate something as minuscule as a “original” thought apart from what God has already created and sustains moment by moment.

Example: At the very end of this sentence is a period and I will be an external reason the “thought” of a butterfly is in your head when you get there. That “thought” was out of your control.

Acts 17:24-28 The God who made the world and everything in it, being Lord of heaven and earth, does not live in temples made by man, for “‘In him we live and move and have our being

Creature is not an “Active” being! Your “choices” do not start with you. From the moment of creation you are ONLY presented with “choices” from outside of your control that you are moment by moment “reacting” to. It is the polar opposite with God.

You do not come before anything… not even a “thought” because even your very thought is a “reaction” to something already created by something outside of your control.

The very moment before “your thought” was not a white-box that “you” chose to fill in. Your thought was a “reaction” to circumstances surrounding you and preceding “you”.

Colossians 1:17 “he is before all things, and in him all things hold together.”

So how does God creating man with self-determination give him attributes of God and make him free from God?

It’s a faulty premise that is logically impossible for all the reasons I have mentioned and it is an assumption that is brought to the Bible with zero foundational justification from the Bible.

Does it make him omnipotent? Can man then create another universe? No. Man can only self-determine the options God creates him to have.

No man can not self-determine the “options”. Man is not “Active”.

How would God creating man with self-determination mean a man could then counsel God?

That is the premise behind Open Theism’s denial of God knowing before man “self-determined” and would reverse the roles making God just another being “reacting” to creatures “creations”. I do not recommend going down this road.

No. All of your arguments are false. God creating man libertarian doesn't suddenly make him omnipotent or able to counsel God.

It can be logically demonstrated that any one Eternal, Transcendent, Ultimate attribute of God that is “given” to a created creature will negatively effect an Eternal, Transcendent, Ultimate attribute of God. Which would you like to discuss…

Ultimate Self-_____
 
Last edited:

fltom

Well-known member
Is that what I said? Do you know what a analogy is by chance?

Where does it say God chose you because you first chose Him?

Your view is a illogical contradictory mess. I can easily show with a few questions you will run from or will not answer directly because you can't. Neither can choice meats boy thats why he no longer posts here
You can't show anything at all

Just as you could not dispute the verses I posted showing why God favors some

you are not able to dispute What I stated which was

In my system those God choses to save those that believe

1 Corinthians 1:21 (KJV)
21 For after that in the wisdom of God the world by wisdom knew not God, it pleased God by the foolishness of preaching to save them that believe.

want to try to dispute that ?

Truth be told all you do is indulge in third person out of context quotes and ad hominem

and reading your views into scripture - eisegesis all the while ignoring what the harmony of the scriptures teaches;

pitting old testament against New testament and scripture against scripture
 
Top