Despite growing up in church practically all of my life and attending Liberty where you can trip over the Bible anywhere you go, I had never seen the big deal over the Free Will vs. Predestination debate. I personally agree with Geisler’s balanced view (19). Geisler explains that this view seeks to reconcile the two theories together (19). He warns that one cannot solve the free will vs. sovereignty issue by simply denying one view over the other (Geisler 132). Both concepts are clearly evident in the Bible and thus must be dealt with. I used to believe that this concept could not be fully understood with our limited finite knowledge inherent of creation (which is true) so it didn’t matter what side you picked because you would be wrong either way. Throughout my reading of this book I have to come to realize that the choice of stance one makes on this issue is an important one. One concept that Geisler stresses through his book is that ideas have consequences (160). Good ideas lead to good consequences; bad ideas lead to bad consequences (160). A good example of this is thin ice. Just because you believe the ice is thick enough to step on does not change is thickness. Geisler discusses several of the consequences of choosing to be either an extreme Calvinist (predestination) or an extreme Armenian (free will).
Geisler discusses that the choice to believe that God predestines who will receive salvation before the beginning of time leads to a faulty thinking. Calvinism leads to a failure to accept responsibility because of the belief that all is decided in advance (Geisler 161). Nothing is your fault because you were going to have done it anyway. This line of thinking also leads to blaming God for the evil in the world (Geisler 162). If God planned every moment of history than evil had to be apart of his plan. Calvinism also lays the groundwork for universalism, in questioning why would God not plan for all to be saved (Geisler 164). A belief in a predestined life undermines a trust in the love of God and the motivation for salvation (Geisler 164). Calvinism also undermines the belief in a need for intercessorary prayer because how could our pleas change what God has already planned to happen (Geisler 165).
Geisler also discusses the consequences of choosing to believe that all decisions are left up to the free will of man. This view is often called Armenianism. Geisler explains that an extreme belief in free will leads to undermining confidence in the Bible because if the choice is ours that God cannot control all or know all (169). Also a belief in Armenianism means that false prophets cannot be tested (Geisler 170). For if nothing can be known in advance literally every prophecy is plausible. Armenianism also leads to questioning the infallibility of the Bible, undermining trust in God’s promises and the hope for an ultimate victory over evil (Geisler 171-172). Armenianism also destroys assurance in salvation and confidence in answered prayers (Geisler 174-175).
I will conclude with a quote by Geisler that I believe sums up what he tries to get across in this book and where my belief falls on this issue.
“Again, it has been shown that there is no contradiction in the coworking of sovereignty and free will. We can be assured that God is in control and that we have been given the ability to choose. We are indeed chosen but free (176).”
Geisler, Norman. Chosen But Free: A Balanced View of God’s Sovereignty and Free Will. Minneapolis Minnesota: Bethany House Publishers, 2010. Print.
Word Count: 587
