# Compatibilism VS. Hard Determinism



## Bryan (May 9, 2005)

Vincent Cheung Has had several blog entries on this topic lately;  Here and  Here for instance

It seems that Cheung is going against the mainstream of Calvinist thought, but his views are interesting. I'd be curious to hear others thoughts on this. Is Compatibilism consistant?

Bryan
SDG


----------



## Apologist4Him (May 12, 2005)

Yes, I believe compatibilsm is consistant with the full context of Scripture. I've found that many Arminians cannot see any significant difference between hard determinism and compatibilism (soft determinism), but I think there is a significant difference, compatibilists acknowledge and embrace both sides of the coin. 

For the _consistant_ hard determinist, I would present the following challenge: When Adam and Eve where in the Garden of eden, what purpose did it serve to command obedience and expect them to obey when they could do nothing but disobey their Creator? Not only that, but if they had no other choice, how can they be held accountable morally speaking? And not only that, but what imperfection caused them to fall into sin to begin with? Were Adam and Eve not both created "good" and pleasing in the sight of their Creator? Did either of them have knowledge of evil before the fall?


----------



## WrittenFromUtopia (May 13, 2005)

I don't see how Calvinism makes sense without compatiblism.


----------



## Colin Kelly (May 13, 2005)

> _Originally posted by WrittenFromUtopia_
> I don't see how Calvinism makes sense without compatiblism.



Most Reformed authors defend some kind of compatiblist position. Johnathan Edward's _Freedom of the Will_ is a fantastic work on the subject. I've really only found that those who try and define their positions through paradox ever reject the compatiblist position.


----------



## The Lamb (May 13, 2005)

> _Originally posted by Apologist4Him_
> Yes, I believe compatibilsm is consistant with the full context of Scripture. I've found that many Arminians cannot see any significant difference between hard determinism and compatibilism (soft determinism), but I think there is a significant difference, compatibilists acknowledge and embrace both sides of the coin.
> 
> For the _consistant_ hard determinist, I would present the following challenge: When Adam and Eve where in the Garden of eden, what purpose did it serve to command obedience and expect them to obey when they could do nothing but disobey their Creator? Not only that, but if they had no other choice, how can they be held accountable morally speaking? And not only that, but what imperfection caused them to fall into sin to begin with? Were Adam and Eve not both created "good" and pleasing in the sight of their Creator? Did either of them have knowledge of evil before the fall?




The question you asked is answered by Paul in ROmans 9. God demands obedience knowing we cannot obey perfectly. He demanded obedience to the Law for Israel, knowing they could not obey completely. 

This has been addressed in another thread. 

The issue of compat vs HD is one that has plagued people from the beginning. 

Here is an example.

I have a garden, I sit and think,"Has God purposed my garden to grow this year without water?" Well I will not water it. The garden dies.

A person is sick, a doctor prescribes medicine. The person thinks, "What if God has purposed this medicine will kill me? I wont take it, the person dies.

You would think these people are fools right? 

THis is the same "type" of responsibility spoken about in scripture. We are responsible to God and our neighbor. Everything will glorify God in the end because of His plan.


----------

