@Image.
Ok. I get it, you were talking of 'freewill'[/b]and [b]foreknowledge. Pray then, where does that leave predestination?

Image123:

@5solas
i see the two i.e 'foreknowledge' and 'free will' in the scriptures, not just one. Here are some examples and demonstration of free will.
Leviticus 23:38 Beside the sabbaths of the LORD, and beside your gifts, and beside all your vows, and beside all your freewill offerings, which ye give unto the LORD.
Exodus 25:2 Speak unto the children of Israel, that they bring me an offering: of every man that giveth it willingly with his heart ye shall take my offering.
Ezra 7:13 I make a decree, that all they of the people of Israel, and of his priests and Levites, in my realm, which are minded of their own freewill to go up to Jerusalem, go with thee.
Mark 8:34 And when he had called the people unto him with his disciples also, he said unto them, Whosoever will come after me, let him deny himself, and take up his cross, and follow me
Revelation 22:17 And the Spirit and the bride say, Come. And let him that heareth say, Come. And let him that is athirst come. And whosoever will, let him take the water of life freely.
Matthew [color=#990000]22:2 The kingdom of heaven is like unto a certain king, which made a marriage for his son.
Mat 22:3 And sent forth his servants to call them that were bidden to the wedding: and [size=8pt][b]they would not come

.
Well , first of all, I thank you because I could have sworn even the word , ‘freewill’ was not in the Bible and here you have sharpened me with two references. Thank you.
However, the concept of ‘freewill’ in these passages is different from that I have been opposing.
I am in opposition to the ‘freewill’ that makes God dependent on Man for His Foreknowledge  and that which puts eternal life in Man's hands instead of God’s.
The 'freewill' in the passages above could never have decided who saw 2011 and who didn't.

—"Moreover I consider Free-will in this light: that it is a power in the human will, by which, a man may apply himself to those things which lead unto eternal salvation, or turn away from the same."—
Desiderius Erasmus of Rotterdam
The above is a typical example of the ‘freewill’ that is so false by perhaps the ‘’grandfather of ‘freewill’’’ in his book, The Freedom Of The Will,
It was soundly refuted by the reformer, Martin Luther in his book, The Bondage of the Will.
You can read Luther’s book here http://www.truecovenanter.com/truelutheran/luther_bow.html#apref and the abridged version here http://www.reformedreader.org/bow.htm

Just to slip in my favourite Luther quote from the said book,''Since God's foreknowledge is not uncertain, "free-will" is non-existent


It is fundamentally necessary and healthy for Christians to acknowledge that God foreknows nothing uncertainly, but that He foresees, purposes, and does all things according to His own immutable, eternal and infallible will. This bombshell knocks "free-will" flat, and utterly shatters it; so that those who want to assert it must either deny my bombshell, or pretend not to notice it, or find some other way of dodging it. Surely it was you, my good Erasmus, who a moment ago asserted that God is by nature just, and kindness itself? If this is true, does it not follow that He is immutably just and kind? that, as His nature remains unchanged to all eternity, so do His justice and kindness? And what is said of His justice and kindness must be said also of His knowledge, His wisdom, His goodness, His will, and the other Divine attributes. But if it is religious, godly and wholesome, to affirm these things of God, as you do, what has come over you, that now you should contradict yourself by affirming that it is irreligious, idle and vain to say that God foreknows by necessity? You insist that we should learn the immutability of God's will, while forbidding us to know the immutably of His foreknowledge! Do you suppose that He does not will what He foreknows, or that He does not foreknow what He wills? If he wills what He foreknows, His will is eternal and changeless, because His nature is so. From which it follows, by resistless logic, that all we do, however it may appear to us to be done freely and optionally, is in reality done necessarily and immutably in respect of God's will. For the will of God is effective and cannot be impeded, since power belongs to God's nature; and His wisdom is such that He cannot be deceived. Since, then His will is not impeded, what is done cannot but be done where, when, how, as far as, and by whom, He foresees and wills,




Necessarily does not mean Compulsorily


I could wish, indeed, that a better term was available for our discussion than the accepted one, necessity, which cannot accurately be used of either man's will or God's. Its meaning is too harsh, and foreign to the subject; for it suggests some sort of compulsion, and something that is against one's will, which is no part of the view under debate. This will, whether it be God's or man's does what it does, good or bad, under no compulsion, but just as it wants or pleases, as if totally free. Yet the will of God, which rules over our mutable will, is changeless and sure - as Boetius sings, "Immovable Thyself, Thou movement giv'st to all;" and our will, principally because of its corruption, can do no good of itself. The reader's understanding, therefore, must supply what the word itself fails to convey, from his knowledge of the intended signification - the immutable will of God on the one hand, and the impotence of our corrupt will on the other. Some have called it necessity of immutability, but the phrase is both grammatically and theologically defective.




The importance of knowing that God necessitates all things


I would also point out, not only how true these things are (I shall discuss that more fully from Scripture on a later page), but also how godly, reverent and necessary it is to know them. For where they are not known, there can be no faith, nor any worship of God. To lack this knowledge is really to be ignorant of God - and salvation is notoriously incompatible with such ignorance. For if you hesitate to believe, or are too proud to acknowledge, that God foreknows and wills all things, not contingently, but necessarily and immutably, how can you believe, trust and rely on His promises? When He makes promises, you ought to be out of doubt that He knows, and can and will perform, what He promises; otherwise, you will be accounting Him neither true nor faithful, which is unbelief, and the height of irreverence, and a denial of the most high God! And how can you be thus sure and certain, unless you know that certainly, infallibly, immutably and necessarily, He knows, wills and will perform what He promises? Not only should we be sure that God wills, and will execute His will, necessarily and immutably; we should glory in the fact, as Paul does in Romans 3:4 - "Let God be true, but every man a liar", and again, "Not that the word of God has failed," and in another place, "The foundation of God standeth sure, having this seal, the Lord knoweth them that are His." In Titus 1:2 he says: "Which God, that cannot lie, promised before the world began", If, then, we are taught and believe that we ought to be ignorant of the necessary foreknowledge of God and the necessity of events, Christian faith is utterly destroyed, and the promises of God and the whole gospel fall to the ground completely; for the Christian's chief and only comfort in every adversity lies in knowing that God does not lie, but brings all things to pass immutably, and that His will cannot be resisted, altered or impeded.




A will which has no power without grace is not free


You describe the power of "free-will" as small, and wholly ineffective apart from the grace of God. Agreed? Now then, I ask you: If God's grace is wanting, if it is taken away from that small power, what can it do? It is ineffective, you say, and can do nothing good. So it will not do what God or His grace wills. Why? Because we have now taken God's grace away from it, and what the grace of God does not do is not good. Hence it follows that "free-will" without God's grace is not free at all, but is the permanent prisoner and bondslave of evil, since it cannot turn itself to good. This being so, I give you full permission to enlarge the power of "free-will" as much as you like; make it angelic, make it divine, if you can! - but when you add this doleful postscript, that it is ineffective apart from God's grace, straightway you rob it of all its power. What is ineffective power but (in plain language) no power? So to say that "free-will" exists and has power, albeit ineffective power, is, in the Sophists' phrase, a contradiction in terms. It is like saying "'free-will' is something which is not free" - as if you said that fire is cold and earth hot. Fire certainly has power to heat; but if hell-fire (even) was cold and chilling instead of burning and scorching, I would not call it "fire", let alone "hot" (unless you meant to refer to an imaginary fire, or a painted one). Note, however, that if we meant by "the power of free-will" the power which makes human beings fit subjects to be caught up by the Spirit and touched by God's grace, as creatures made for eternal life or eternal death, we should have a proper definition. And I certainly acknowledge the existence of this power, this fitness, or "dispositional quality" and "passive aptitude" (as the Sophists call it), which, as everyone knows, is not given to plants or animals. As the proverb says, God did not make heaven for geese! It is a settled truth, then, even on the basis of your own testimony, that we do everything of necessity, and nothing by "free-will"; for the power of "free-will" is nil, and it does no good, nor can do, without grace. It follows, therefore, that "free-will" is obviously a term applicable only to Divine Majesty; for only He can do, and does (as the Psalmist sings) "whatever he wills in heaven and earth" [Psalms 135:6]. If "free-will" is ascribed to men, it is ascribed with no more propriety than divinity itself would be - and no blasphemy could exceed that! So it befits theologians to refrain from using the term when they want to speak of human ability, and to leave it to be applied to God only. They would do well also to take the term out of men's mouths and speech, and to claim it for their God, as if it were His own holy and awful Name. If they must at all hazards assign some power to men, let them teach that it be denoted by some other term than "free-will"; especially since we know from our own observation that the mass of men are sadly deceived and misled by this phrase. The meaning which it conveys to their minds is far removed from anything that theologians believe and discuss. The term "free-will" is too grandiose and comprehensive and fulsome. People think it means what the natural force of the phrase would require, namely, a power of freely turning in any direction, yielding to none and subject to none. If they knew that this was not so, and that the term signifies only a tiny spark of power, and that utterly ineffective in itself, since it is the devil's prisoner and slave, it would be a wonder if they did not stone us as mockers and deceivers, who say one thing and mean another - indeed, who have not yet decided what we do mean! Since, therefore, we have lost the meaning and the real reference of this glorious term, or, rather, have never grasped them (as was claimed by the Pelagians, who themselves mistook the phrase) why do we cling so tenaciously to an empty word, and endanger and delude faithful people in consequence? There is no more wisdom in so doing then there is in the modern foible of kings and potentates, who retain, or lay claim to, empty titles of kingdoms and countries, and flaunt them, while all the time they are really paupers, and anything but the possessors of those kingdoms and countries. We can tolerate their antics, for they fool nobody, but just feed themselves up - unprofitably enough - on their own vainglory. But this false idea of "free-will" is a real threat to salvation, and a delusion fraught with the most perilous consequences. If we do not want to drop this term ["free-will"] altogether - which would really be the safest and most Christian thing to do - we may still in good faith teach people to use it to credit man with "free-will" in respect, not of what is above him, but of what is below him. That is to say, man should realize that in regard to his money and possessions he has a right to use them, to do or to leave undone, according to his own "free-will" - though that very "free-will" is overruled by the free-will of God alone, according to His own pleasure. However, with regard to God, and in all that bears on salvation or damnation, he has no "free-will", but is a captive, prisoner and bondslave, either to the will of God, or to the will of Satan''.

Image123:

@5solas
i just read your replies, no qualms do take your time. Please do not infer from my post that the difference between the believer alive today and the one dead is merely a frustration of grace. Not at all. My focus wasn't even believers, believers don't frustrate God's grace as often as unbelievers. It may be in God's plan for a person to have died last year, that's accepted. But i'm also saying God may have had better plans of life for a person but he might have become careless/carefree/disobedient/not watchful causing him to be exposed.(just chipped this in, hope it doesn't take the 'focus' off the previous)

I have been using 'believer' instead of 'unbeliever' deliberately. I wanted it to be clear that it was possible for God not to give His faithful servant the grace to see this year for His own purpose.Now consider the case of His faithful servant Stephen (Acts 6:8-7:60). Judge by the features I have given before if it was His secret will that Stephen should be killed or not.

The secret will removes all merit and boasting from us and gives all that we are, to His grace.
I think I have touched on all the points you raised, to the best of my ability;over to you.

Hi, Image.
Quite an age! Whatever is happening? I thought we were having a ball? I am expecting to hear from you soon,sha.

I'll reply later in the day, God willing.

Ok,thanks.

@5solas
I'd loved to have much chance to reply and quote scripture passages but it seems i might keep postponing, so permit me to reply in bits, ouch for me though.
I asked earlier if those your 5 or 4criteria listed for the ' secret will' of God were biblical? Jesus's whole life was prophecied, how secret is that as compared to Joseph's. Psalm 81 passage i quoted showed us what God planned that was not, or what's the 'should' doing there in that passage?

@Image.
Ok. I get it, you were talking of 'freewill'and foreknowledge. Pray then, where does that leave predestination?

Sorry i didn't mean to leave out predestination. The point i was bringing out was that they(freewill and foreknowledge) were both/all(as we include predestination) included in scriptures. Scriptures mention the three, and we should not ignore any one for the other, or contradict one against the other. But rather, we should focus on rightly dividing the truth of God's Word.

'freewill' does not put eternal life in man's hand instead of God's, neither does it make God helplessly dependent on man. Freewill is given us by God to make man partners together with God in the fulfilment of His ultimate plans. God's ultimate plans will definitely be fulfilled whether man cooperates or not. But man's cooperation makes it smoother, sweeter, more accomplishing and most rewarding. It's why we're created in His image. Man's non-cooperation makes it unsavory, and will bring punishment instead of reward for man.
I'll come back to the OP next i hope, but i'm not contemplating a reply to that Luther piece. That's prof. Martin Luther, i'm just kindergaten. And by the way, he's not here to answer for himself. I'll post more later

[Quote]
I'd loved to have much chance to reply and quote scripture passages but it seems i might keep postponing, so permit me to reply in bits, ouch for me though.

[/Quote]

Ok. The floor is all yours. Just let me know when you are through.

Emmmmm, i still get reply for hia

Image123:

Emmmmm, i still get reply for hia

I am glad you've not forgotten. I am still waiting.

Thank you for your patience, i have you in mind.

Yes, thanks for your patience 5solas. Like i said, i'll relate freewill to the original post again. Freewill is our own will, what we decide, of our own volition. Like Paul says in romans, "yield yourself to God". God has created us with ability to function and make decisions on our own. But His plan/desire is a relationship despite man's fall. i picture it as a doctor-patient relationship. The doctor God wants to heal and help the patient Man. Man can cooperate and get health smoothly. He may decide he doesn't need a doctor God, and remain sick and suffer. Or in some cases, the doctor may 'doctor' the event, sedate the patient and treat him. I pray God doesn't abandon us, or we abandon God like the stubborn patient.
Now, if someone says i have a doctor God who's even paid for my treatment, and then refuses to eat, or carelessly takes in poison or overdose, he may die or harm himself. If we say what will happen will happen, God has already predestined/ordained it, grace covers everything. Then we remove our doors and burglary-proof saying it's not by power or might, watchman wakes in vain. Do you think such persons will be safe for long? Such persons cannot stand when the storm comes as compared to those who watched. His actions do not glorify God and His will but frustrate God's grace.

By Gods grace, and by personal faith in him

Image123:

Yes, thanks for your patience 5solas. Like i said, i'll relate freewill to the original post again. Freewill is our own will, what we decide, of our own volition. Like Paul says in romans, "yield yourself to God".God has created us with ability to function and make decisions on our own. But His plan/desire is a relationship despite man's fall. i picture it as a doctor-patient relationship. The doctor God wants to heal and help the patient Man. Man can cooperate and get health smoothly. He may decide he doesn't need a doctor God, and remain sick and suffer. Or in some cases, the doctor may 'doctor' the event, sedate the patient and treat him. I pray God doesn't abandon us, or we abandon God like the stubborn patient.
Now, if someone says i have a doctor God who's even paid for my treatment, and then refuses to eat, or carelessly takes in poison or overdose, he may die or harm himself. If we say what will happen will happen, God has already predestined/ordained it, grace covers everything. Then we remove our doors and burglary-proof saying it's not by power or might, watchman wakes in vain. Do you think such persons will be safe for long? Such persons cannot stand when the storm comes as compared to those who watched. His actions do not glorify God and His will but frustrate God's grace.

 
First of all Image, I must say I am surprised you did not come up with any new argument.
Secondly, you did not answer any of my outstanding questions.
Thirdly, you talk of points we agree on as though I am in disagreement.
The 'freewill' you have been talking about above, surely they did not determine our seeing 2011 or did they?