🚨 The Hidden Dualism in "Free Will" Theology 🚨

[Hazelelponi]

I am sorry you think you were forced to do everything you ever did. (no free will)

I just do not see it any other way, not saying it to be mean, just how it sounds

That's the issue isn't it?

I don't feel forced to do anything. I simply exist within the framework I was created to exist within, and believe in accordance with Scripture and with reason.

And reason says, we have no free will.

Free will and the mindset that someone cannot be punished for their actions unless they were completely unencumbered is a fallacy of faith that has finally started seeping into our society and causing it to degrade generally, just for an example.

It doesn't matter in what context a decision or choice was made, it's the fact it was made instead of doing what was right.

again, I disagree. this does not make any sense. being honest

Then consider what I said.

Societal law exists for us to follow, in order to benefit society at large right?

In the same way God's moral laws exist and they likewise are a benefit and a good to us. It doesn't matter why they were broken, what matters is that they were and God decided to judge it, as well as provide a means that seemed fully fair to God to some of escape.

Fulfilling both justice and mercy, and showing the fullness of His love.

With any ability you have you are to desire what He desires, with your whole being you're to love Him. And then, love your neighbor as yourself.

It fulfills the whole law, it's why we aren't here saving ourselves - we can't. By our very nature we are at enmity with God, and Scripture does teach us that God takes us and changes us, even as we see ourselves as choosing Him cheerfully and wholeheartedly.

We have to accept the Holy Spirits testimony of God found in Scripture over our own thinking.

 

[Eternally-Grateful]

That's the issue isn't it?

I don't feel forced to do anything. I simply exist within the framework I was created to exist within, and believe in accordance with Scripture and with reason.

I am sure you do not feel forced.

But I do not know how else to explain it.

God went behind your back without your will and made you alive..
(Again, this is how i read what you are saying)

And reason says, we have no free will.

But it does not say this. the mere fact over and over told to chose. means we have free will

Free will and the mindset that someone cannot be punished for their actions unless they were completely unencumbered is a fallacy of faith that has finally started seeping into our society and causing it to degrade generally, just for an example.

No.

The mindset is God loved everyone and everyone is guilty. so if God is truly a God of love, he will give everyone the ability or possibility to be saved.

otherwise. he can not call himself a God of love (in my mind)

It doesn't matter in what context a decision or choice was made, it's the fact it was made instead of doing what was right.

which every man woman or child whoever lived has done. and as a result. they have earned the right to be condemned by God.. and are in need of salvation.

Then consider what I said.

I have. and it makes no sense.

Societal law exists for us to follow, in order to benefit society at large right?

Yes. if you do not follow. You break the law. and must pay the penalty for that crime.

In the same way God's moral laws exist and they likewise are a benefit and a good to us. It doesn't matter why they were broken, what matters is that they were and God decided to judge it, as well as provide a means that seemed fully fair to God to some of escape.

yes. and a punishment is instituted. The wage of sin is death

Fulfilling both justice and mercy, and showing the fullness of His love.

If it is withheld from most all of mankind, then it does not really show his love no does it? Think about it.

I created you, I love you. I sent my son to die, But not for you

With any ability you have you are to desire what He desires, with your whole being you're to love Him. And then, love your neighbor as yourself.

This is after salvation yes..

It fulfills the whole law, it's why we aren't here saving ourselves - we can't. By our very nature we are at enmity with God, and Scripture does teach us that God takes us and changes us, even as we see ourselves as choosing Him cheerfully and wholeheartedly.

Yes. i was changed after I came to him and received his salvation.. after he drew me to himself. not before.

We have to accept the Holy Spirits testimony of God found in Scripture over our own thinking.

agreed. we both do

 

[Hazelelponi]

God went behind your back without your will and made you alive..
(Again, this is how i read what you are saying)

Did God get your permission to make you born? To make you whatever race you were born? Did God ask your permission about the income and education level of your parents, or any other aspects of your life?

Why is our permission required?

Are you the potter or the clay? Does God bow to your will or do you bow to His?

Nothing in Scripture indicates to me that God should have our permission for anything He does, even when it's potentially positive.

 

[Eternally-Grateful]

Did God get your permission to make you born? To make you whatever race you were born? Did God ask your permission about the income and education level of your parents, or any other aspects of your life?

Why is our permission required?

Are you the potter or the clay? Does God bow to your will or do you bow to His?

Nothing in Scripture indicates to me that God should have our permission for anything He does, even when it's potentially positive.

See moses and the bronze serpent.

it explains it better than I ever could

Did God get their permission to save them?

Did he get their permission to not save them?

Or did he give them a choice.

Do this and live, do not do it and Die.

 

[makesends]

I guess if they did not believe. they would not have trusted them, hence why as Jesus said, they are condemned already correct?

So God is unable to convince me of his truth of the gospel. is this what you are saying? God is limited?

Your challenging tone is built on a bogus notion. Wile-E-Coyote is standing off the edge of the cliff, in a cloud of dust.

It says they knew God, and thus have no excuse.

They his the truth. so like when God sent his men to Israel. they in unbelief rejected Gods men. because they hid the truth.

Stephen gave a wonderful account of this in acts 7, and they stoned him for it.. thats what happens when the truth hits you, and you do not want to see it.. You get angry and take the truth out

Sadly, very true, and irrelevant to the point.

So God is unable to convince me of his truth of the gospel. is this what you are saying? God is limited?

As above, and as before, but you haven't even begun to discourage me from believing, nor have you shown why you don't believe it, God does not answer to our constructions. He is GOD, the Almighty, and does not answer to our constructions. Let me put it like this: God does whatever he wants. He does not want to convince me, unregenerated. It's not a question of whether he CAN or not.

In fact, he CAN, and when he does so to those he has not regenerated, they will be convinced, and despair.

makesends said:
You run into a contradiction here. They "knew God", but still lived by the flesh—not the Spirit. They did not have faith. And if they did not have the mind of the Spirit, but only of the flesh, they could not understand their need, even if they had the weight of a guilty conscience.

It says they knew God, and thus have no excuse.

They his the truth. so like when God sent his men to Israel. they in unbelief rejected Gods men. because they hid the truth.

Stephen gave a wonderful account of this in acts 7, and they stoned him for it.. thats what happens when the truth hits you, and you do not want to see it.. You get angry and take the truth out

 

[Eleanor]

again, I disagree. this does not make any sense. being honest.

Free will is a philosophical notion asserted by man on the assumption that the moral responsibility of man requires that man have a free will.
Biblically, this is not so.

The Bible teaches that man is a slave to sin (Jn 8:34, Ro 7:25, 11:3, Gal 3:22),
that it is only those whom the Son makes free that are free (Jn 8:36).

In addition, the human will does not operate in a vacuum.
It is governed by the disposition, and chooses what the disposition prefers.
As long as man prefers it, his choice of it is free will.

Therefore, choosing what God operating in the disposition gives one to prefer, is free will

Never said that

Do we have a just God?
Do we have a loving God?
I have free will. and have had it since I was born.
I am sorry you think you were forced to do everything you ever did. (no free will)

If you are choosing what you prefer, you are exercising free will.

 

[makesends]

See moses and the bronze serpent.

it explains it better than I ever could

Did God get their permission to save them?

Did he get their permission to not save them?

Or did he give them a choice.

Do this and live, do not do it and Die.

You are aware that was not salvific faith, no?

 

[Eternally-Grateful]

Your challenging tone is built on a bogus notion. Wile-E-Coyote is standing off the edge of the cliff, in a cloud of dust.

lol. Now you are going to start acting this way.. wow

Sadly, very true, and irrelevant to the point.

In your mind., That is what this is about.. what you believe vs what I believe.

As above, and as before, but you haven't even begun to discourage me from believing, nor have you shown why you don't believe it,

I am sorry you feel this way.

I think I have bent over backwards to show you and others.

God does not answer to our constructions.

I never said he did.

He is GOD, the Almighty, and does not answer to our constructions. Let me put it like this: God does whatever he wants.

Yes, and what is Gods will

whoever sees and believes.

Whoever believes

God has the right to do this does he not? You keep telling me I have to do what God says. who says God does not do it this way?? Does he not have the right to do it?

He does not want to convince me, unregenerated. It's not a question of whether he CAN or not.

He does not want? or you do not want him to?

I am sorry. But this does not make sense. God wants to make you alive in sin. that makes no sense to me.

In fact, he CAN, and when he does so to those he has not regenerated, they will be convinced, and despair.

Yes. that is what happened to me, I came to the end of myself. I said yes lord. and he saved me, THEN I was born again. because I received him

again, but as many as have received him TO THEM

makesends said:
You run into a contradiction here. They "knew God", but still lived by the flesh—not the Spirit. They did not have faith. And if they did not have the mind of the Spirit, but only of the flesh, they could not understand their need, even if they had the weight of a guilty conscience.

You say they could not understand their need.

I see otherwise.

 

[makesends]

But unless John 3: 10 - 18 happen. john 3 - 8 will not happen.

it is done like the wind. when I got on my knees, I did not feel the HS come in, or save me, But I know it happened.

How did you get on your knees, when according to Ephesians 2 you were dead, and Romans 8 unable to please God? Does you giving your heart to God not please him?

And if you did not feel it then, what makes you think it depended on your getting on your knees? What makes you think the HS did not come in earlier, if you need not feel it to know it is true?

You are conflating the fellowship with the salvation.

 

[Eternally-Grateful]

You are aware that was not salvific faith, no?

Its not?

says who?

did they TRUST GOD and was SAVED

or did they NOT trust God and DIED?

He who believes is not condemned

He who does not believe is condemned already.

Be it you and me today, Or Israel in the day of Moses..

 

[Eternally-Grateful]

How did you get on your knees, when according to Ephesians 2 you were dead, and Romans 8 unable to please God? Does you giving your heart to God not please him?

ok. again, we are going in circles

I was spiritually dead. I was physically alive.

Your argument does not make sense. i could still know who i am and who god was. A dead person can not do anything, he does not even realize who he is, he is not self evident, he is nothing.

You can not have it both ways

And if you did not feel it then, what makes you think it depended on your getting on your knees? What makes you think the HS did not come in earlier, if you need not feel it to know it is true?

I DID FEEL IT

Why do you I think I called out?

are you listening to anything I say?? You were not there 40 years ago. You can not know what I felt or what I went through or what I did.

You are conflating the fellowship with the salvation.

No I am not

Your trying to pit me into your belief system, not into what I actually did or what I am saying.

 

[makesends]

ok. again, we are going in circles

I was spiritually dead. I was physically alive.

Your argument does not make sense. i could still know who i am and who god was. A dead person can not do anything, he does not even realize who he is, he is not self evident, he is nothing.

You can not have it both ways

No, and according to 1 Cor 2:14, you cannot know spiritual things. You are right about the dead, though. The spiritually dead cannot know spiritual things, nor can he do anything spiritual. You cannot have it both ways.

I DID FEEL IT

Why do you I think I called out?

are you listening to anything I say?? You were not there 40 years ago. You can not know what I felt or what I went through or what I did.

You just finished saying you did not feel it. I quote, (& note my emphasis):

But unless John 3: 10 - 18 happen. john 3 - 8 will not happen.

it is done like the wind. when I got on my knees, I did not feel the HS come in, or save me, But I know it happened.

Thus, my argument: If you did not feel it when you think it happened, what reason do you have to think it did not happen previously, when God enabled you to call out to him?

No I am not

Your trying to pit me into your belief system, not into what I actually did or what I am saying

I'm trying to reason with you.

Go all the way back to the beginning. Nothing is possible if God did not create; God created, omnisciently; Therefore, God intended everything to come about precisely as it has come about, and caused that it do so by creating; God caused that Adam should sin, and he thus caused that mankind should be born in sin, at enmity with God, and helpless to save himself. UNABLE to do anything spiritual while at enmity with God. GOD has to enable anyone to, as you are saying, call out. God has ordained that all this be so. And we do so because it is so: we live in rebellion to God, until he changes us.

But to some of us, from the beginning, he chose to show mercy, though we were his enemies. Those he has ordained to become sons of God; he raised us from death to life, and so we live according to what he has ordained for us —we do so because it is so. We are not the cause of our salvation.

 

[makesends]

Its not?

says who?

did they TRUST GOD and was SAVED

or did they NOT trust God and DIED?

He who believes is not condemned

He who does not believe is condemned already.

Be it you and me today, Or Israel in the day of Moses..

That was physical healing, according to the story.

The NT use of it shows a beautiful parallel; it does not show that those in the OT were got eternal life from their healing.

 

[makesends]

In your mind., That is what this is about.. what you believe vs what I believe.

Ok. According to rule 4.4, I will stop here, and let you show me that what I claim —that what you posted was irrelevant— is wrong. What you say here doesn't do it. The generality, of discussing what you believe vs what I believe, is not specific to the subject of the OP.

And according to rule 4.4, you need to do likewise, dealing with the claim that what you posted was irrelevant, until the matter is resolved, before proceeding with your arguments.

 

[ReverendRV]

At the core of every argument against God’s absolute sovereignty is a hidden dualism—the assumption that when something happens, it must be caused by either God or Will, but never both. This is the fundamental presupposition behind every non-Calvinist framework:

God is a cause "out of nothing"—He determines things, but only to a certain limit.
Will is a cause "out of nothing"—it determines things independently of God, even determining creature's character, preferences, and choices.

This sets up a dualistic system where God controls some things, and Will controls others. Will isn’t just human decision-making within God’s decree—it’s a separate, ultimate force that dictates what a person is and does. Will is, in effect, a second god.

So when we say God determines all things, they assume this means we are removing Will from the equation. And because their framework only allows for one ultimate force at a time, they conclude:

“If God determines everything, then Will no longer exists.”
“If Will is not the ultimate puppeteer, then God must be the puppeteer instead.”

That’s why they cry “robot!” and “puppet!”—because in their system, some thing has to be in the ultimate position of control. And ironically, they are perfectly fine with Will filling that role. They just object when it’s God.

But here’s the problem: If Will determines itself, unbound by nature, reasoning, or circumstances, then it is pure causeless self-determination—exactly what they accuse Calvinists of when we say God alone determines all things.

At the end of the day, their problem isn’t Calvinism. It’s their own dualistic framework. They assume a world where God and Will are co-determiners of history—two ultimate causes competing for control. But if that were true, then God wouldn’t be God—He’d just be another force within creation.

That’s why their system collapses when confronted with the truth that God alone is ultimate (Ephesians 1:11).

Everything—including human choices—flows from His decree, not from an independent force called Will. There is no second god. There is no co-determiner. There is only the one true God working all things for His glory.

This is basically the Euthyphro Dilemma; with Free Will replacing Morality...

Did God determine our Will, or did God discover our Will? If it's not okay for God to Learn of Morality, why is it okay for God to learn of our Free Will choices?

Special Pleading?

 

[ReverendRV]

This is basically the Euthyphro Dilemma; with Free Will replacing Morality...

Did God determine our Will, or did God discover our Will? If it's not okay for God to Learn of Morality, why is it okay for God to learn of our Free Will choices?

The Euthyphro Solution ~ by ReverendRV * October 23

Psalm 33:5 NIV; The LORD loves righteousness and justice; the earth is full of his unfailing love.

The Euthyphro Dilemma is a supposed debate between Socrates and Euthyphro, told to us by Plato; and Atheists use it to Debunk Theism. It basically asks, ‘Is Morality Good because God Decrees it to be Good, or does God recognize that Morality is Good in and of itself?’. This is like asking ‘Which came first, the Chicken or the Egg’ but instead asks ‘Which came first, Morality or God?’ The question makes us wonder if Morality exists outside of God instead of reflecting God’s Nature; ergo, there is no need for God to exist for Morality to exist. Christians use the existence of Morality to try and prove the existence of God. Atheists remove this argument from the Arena of Ideas by raising the Dilemma. ~ A big problem for the Euthyphro Dilemma is Morality as a factor. Atheists believe in Moral Relativism, IE Truth and Morality are Relative to the Individual. Here’s the issue; Morality has to be Objective for Euthyphro to even HAVE a Dilemma. If Morality is external to God, but this Morality is Arbitrary; Morality can’t be Good in and of itself! This is self-defeating in two ways. Atheists have to accept a Transcendent Objective Morality if they want to use the Euthyphro Dilemma; and secondly, Moral Relativism can’t be Good in and of itself…

If Objective Morality is Transcendent, (if it’s outside of God, then it is Transcendent); then we can still be judged, even if God doesn’t exist. We judge people based on our Consciences all the time. ~ Have you ever told a Lie? What do you call people who Lie? If someone Lied about paying you back, then they’re Liars and Thieves! We know a Lie when we hear it; and when we speak it. Thou shalt not Lie is Inherently True to all of us, not Relatively true to some of us. Have you had another God other than the God of the Bible? This violates the First Commandment; just as having your own Subjective Ethic which says you Can Lie and Steal, violates your Inherent Ethic. ~ These are only three of the Ten Commandments; if God judges you by Objective Morality, would you be innocent or guilty? Will you go to Heaven or to Hell?

The Euthyphro Dilemma is actually Evidence FOR the existence of God. Since God is Moral, he has to Hate Sin; and also has to make a way of escape. ~ For God so loved the world, he gave his only begotten Son, that whoever believes in him shall not perish but have eternal Life. Jesus Christ is the Son of God who lived a Sinless Human life and deserved his perfect record. God is pleased by Holiness, so in order to be Saved, we also need that kind of Righteousness. Jesus died in our place by shedding his blood on the Cross, but arose from the grave to newness of Life! We’re Saved by God’s Grace through Faith in the risen Jesus Christ, not by Works lest we Boast. Repent of your Sin and Confess Jesus Christ as your LORD God; then you will be Righteous, as he is Righteous. ~ Your Subjective Morality can’t exist outside of you because it’s personal, but only exists because of you. If Subjective Morality exists because of you, if God exists he could be the Source of a Subjective Morality; a Morality that is ‘because’ of him. God Objectifies Morality…

Luke 6:31 NIV; Do to others as you would have them do to you.