touch points................
touch points................
The anti-Calvinist may deny predestination as we Calvinists understand it to be, but in their denial, they set about crafting a typical anti-Calvinist version of predestination.
In the anti-Calvinist view, predestination implies that God chose certain qualities or properties of persons—faith, repentance, holiness, and perseverance—with a purpose of admitting to heaven all those, whoever they might be, who possess or exhibit these qualities or properties, and consigns to eternal punishment all those who, after being favored with suitable opportunities, who fail to exhibit these personal qualities.
Note carefully here what the anti-Calvinist believes: it is man who is responsible for his own salvation, which explains why you will find this sort of abominable claim:
freelight wrote -
When we regard religion or theology in general, any religionist or spiritualist most surely acknowledges the Sovereingty of God, yet they also recognize the gift of free will given to sentient beings as well. Such liberties do not over-ride God's Sovereignty, however such freedom of choice does pertain when determining individual destinies, since each soul can respond in rejecting or accepting the call of salvation. Since this 'freedom of choice' is respected within some theologies, it doesn't have to be 'assumed' that these persons are protesting God when he rises upon his throne to maintain his sovereignty, since his sovereignty does not abrogate their free will ever, in fact it sustains it, and lets souls determine their own destiny within its provisions. The UB even claims God decreed or ordained free will. One can evaluate this claim for themselves, as philosophers have done for centuries, and a good number believed it.
Note above, the boldened text above is that which AMR responded to in my last post, but here I include the 'context' in which it was shared. See that I acknowledge the Sovereignty of God. -
I just accept that free will is included in the provision of God's will, which is motivated by love for free creative enterprise and relationship. I offer a contrastive consideration of the sovereignty of free will as espoused in the Urantia Papers (in a most libertarian sense),
where God decrees and ordains that man have freedom to choose his own destiny,
to be responsible for his own choices. A theology that denies this, denies man's freedom, and at the same time God's freedom (since man's freedom is derived from God's freedom), because in the Calvinists case, he is forcing 'God' into a predefined concept of 'sovereignty' that denies man the free agency and responsibility.
A higher cosmic perspective on the sovereignty of free will
here (from the UB)
My critique on 'preterition' holds
here (see all links).
I just added an important discourse to read and meditate upon at the end of this post
here -
A Discourse on the Immutable Decrees of God and the
Free Agency of Man
By Mrs. Cora L. V. Hatch, 1857
~*~*~
Sorry AMR,...I don't find the prospect and any measure of genuine freedom of thought and action given to man as 'abominable'. - It is the gift of God, man's freedom, and is the only thing that actually allows him to be responsible (response-enabled).
Also, the mentions of Arminian views I've made so far, are referring to 'classical Arminianism', and not necessarily any later, progressive or innovated versions of such. An excellent small article on this is
here (10 Things I Wish Everyone Knew About Arminianism, by Dr. Joseph R. Dongell) - classical arminianism agrees that 'salvation is of God', and that grace is the means by which salvation is acquired, but allowance is given for man to truly respond and interact with such grace.
