Pondering on Free Will
Some people think they can imagine a creature which was free but had no possibility of going wrong; I cannot. If a thing is free to be good it is also free to be bad. And free will is what has made evil possible. Why, then, did God give them free will? Because free will, though it makes evil possible, is also the only thing that makes possible any love or goodness of joy worth having. (48)
Now, Lewis doesn't suggest that we are able on our own to establish a right relationship with God. Specifically, he argues a case of God being like someone reaching down to save a person drowning in a river. That drowning person has a choice to refuse the help or accept it, but the actual process of being saved from the watery depths is entirely dealt with by the rescuer.
This sounds Arminian, and to the extent that it is, I perhaps should consider myself Arminian. On the other hand, I remain convinced of the perseverance of the saints and believe that God must reach out the hand of Grace for one to be able to accept it; perhaps He does so arbitrarily, more likely, I believe because he foreknows whom will accept Grace of their own accord having been offered that Grace. I believe the latter proposition can still qualify as election, although perhaps in a four-point Calvinist way rather than five point. In the future, I plan on considering Karl Barth's alternative thoughts on the subject of election, but that's too much to handle tonight.
Therefore, I have a foot in both camps, but remain convinced I should consider myself a member of the Calvinist/Reformed tradition. I do believe there is a divine mystery concerning the relationship of the sovereignty of God and free will in which both are allowed to coexist for the greatest good possible.
Join the Conversation
Re: Pondering on Free Will
Divine mysteries are something Christianity is full of, isn’t it?
Re: Pondering on Free Will
Re: Pondering on Free Will
I have your interview questions up. They will actually let you discuss this topic some more! evil grin
Re: Pondering on Free Will
I’m too much a pragmatist to define things that clearly. I’m willing to accept your viewpoint as a valid expression of things beyond our ken. There are other ways to explain it, but that will work. I would say it appears some events are clearly predetermined, but some seem not to be. My line on this could jokingly be called Agnostic Calvinism, I suppose. I don’t believe we can really comprehend, but I’m sure Calvin is on the right track.
Re: Pondering on Free Will
jtr: Heh. No, I don’t think that’s it at all. Really, to take that view, one would have to argue that Jesus wasn’t God, I would think. FWIW, I also don’t think God would have to look into the future, since the future and the past are really not distinctions that concern a Being outside of time.
Christopher: Oh, goody! Sounds fun, I will have to go look at the questions.
Ed: I like that term (“Agnostic Calvinism”)! I’d have to agree that some things seem predestined and others do not. That pretty much sums up my view as well.