Chosen but Free

A Balanced View of God's Sovereignty and Free Will

De: Norman L. Geisler

Narrado por: Kyle Tait

The Reformed movement has gotten younger and more outspoken since Chosen But Free was published more than ten years ago, making the topic of divine election one of utmost importance to the church today. Young Christians in particular are in constant debate over these issues, wondering what is true and how it might affect their lives.

People on both sides of the debate will want to experience a "middle-ground" book. In addition, this revision deals more directly with the personal issues involved in the debate. For example, how do our beliefs about free will affect us when it comes to perceptions of love, personal responsibility, and purpose? And how does it affect our ability to worship God?

©1999, 2001, 2010 Norman L. Geisler (P)2024 Christian Audio

A great book

This is the best book I’ve ever read on the gift of faith. It’s very thorough in the details and I think that I will need to read it more than once.

balanced

a great explanation for God's sovereignty & how He has given "free will" to us

clear thinking

much Scripture. Not caustic. very thorough. honest evaluation of all sides. a somewhat difficult read.

Very Poorly Argued

I first read this book years ago when I was fairly new to Reformed (Calvinistic) theology and remember thinking it was unpersuasive for me but I thought it was one of the best defensive a of the anti-Calvinist position. After having read more of the Reformed authors he is critiquing in this book, I wanted to reread this book to see how he handled the foundational works on Calvinistic thought. I was sorely disappointed to realize Geisler does not critique them well at all, and the numerous logical fallacies he makes in his arguments stood out to me this time.

My critiques of his specific arguments became so numerous I gave up noting them all halfway through the book, so I will only give my biggest issue with his position. Geisler never explains how he believes man’s will works. He never explains why some men chose God and some men, who have all the same knowledge as the first, reject him. He disagrees with Jonathan Edward’s that our will is determined by the influence of our desires, saying the cause of man’s choices is not determined but self-generated like God’s will. But why do men choose one action over another? What determines how their will chooses? Geisler never answers this question.

Geisler also insists that God has determined he will never coerce man, he will only woo them, and that this is a self-imposed limitation of God based on his nature. Yet the only evidence he gives for this view is a quote by C.S. Lewis; no Scriptural defense of this claim at all. He further claims that Calvinism teaches that God coerces men to salvation against their will (which it does not teach) and that God only “persuades” men, but never to the extreme that he interferes with their will. This is such an absurd position. The point of persuasion is to so convince someone of a truth they cannot deny it or to stir up such a strong desire the person feels it. The idea that God has to stop persuading someone at some point before they make a decision so their will is not overridden is to both misunderstand the human will and the purpose of persuasion. Further, he contradicts his own position later on the book when he criticizes Calvinism and the doctrine of limited atonement of making prayer for the lost unnecessary because they are already destined for heaven or hell. He claims his balanced view is the only view that makes sense of praying for lost sinners because his view is the only one that teaches “While prayer cannot change God’s nature, he can use it to implement his will to change people or things.” Hold up! God can use his will to change people? That sounds like God used his persuasion to influence a man to act contrary to his sinful will, something he claims God does not do. Geisler, through this argument, accidentally makes a stronger case for Calvinism by showing prayer for the lost only makes sense if God can actually effectually act to change a person’s heart and sovereignly bring them to repentance.

This book badly misrepresents basic Reformed doctrines, labels reformed teachers like R.C. Sproul, John Piper, and Jonathan Edward’s as “extreme,” and regularly makes logical fallacies in his arguments. I would not recommend this book.