Free will--a Calvinistic proposition?

[justbyfaith]

If free will in the free willers theological context is the ability to choose whether or not to obey any given command of God, you have based salvation on works.

No; we have based it on a free will decision of whether or not we will exercise faith; and according to Ephesians 2:8-9, faith and works are mutually exclusive when it comes to salvation.

 

[justbyfaith]

He will just tell us that we should be at Church right now...

If I had said that, it would have been because I wasn't at church either.

btw, I missed it today; while I never miss my daily reading of the word.

 

[justbyfaith]

No. The point is that we choose according to the greatest desire. This is always true. Now put it into the topic of free will in salvation, present your assertion, define what you think is the Calvinist assertion. Then we can debate it.

I think that my wife's desire to eat cake was greater than her desire to eat salad.

Yet, she chose salad for health reasons.

She had a motivation, not a desire, to eat salad.

 

[justbyfaith]

No that is not my contention. My contention is that it is not free, even though it freely makes choices. Does the Bible tell us that we are in bondage to sin? What is bondage to sin? And how does that affect the choices of our flesh? And how would that affect our desire to choose Christ?

I will only say to this that when the Spirit is drawing a man to Christ, he is free to make a choice (2 Corinthians 3:17).

God doesn't force the issue on him.

Psa 110:3, Thy people shall be willing in the day of thy power, in the beauties of holiness from the womb of the morning: thou hast the dew of thy youth.

 

[justbyfaith]

She would have eaten the cake except that the desire to not eat the cake was stronger.

No; there was a motivation, not a desire, to eat the salad instead of the cake.

 

[justbyfaith]

Sure you do. The author of this op has repeatedly asserted human volition and autonomous free will as the means of salvation.

I, the author of this OP, have consistently said that a person can only come to Christ when he is drawn to Christ.

 

[Arial]

The real point of interest with respect to works, is that the Calvinist refuses to accept the fact that God, in His sovereignty, is free to place conditions upon one receiving salvation.

Did He place conditions upon receiving salvation? The question is not what He can do but what did He do? If He placed conditions of receiving salvation, what are they and where do you find them in the scriptures?

In the Calvinist's view such conditions would constitute works and Paul has stated that salvation is not by works.

That is because they would be works. A condition met in order to receive salvation is something man must do and provide. If man must provide something then Christ in insufficient without man's participation.

Paul's argument of not by works is not that perfect obedience to God's law wouldn't provide for salvation. His point is that no one has ever, nor will ever, be perfectly obedient

That is not his argument at all. Yes, no one can keep the Law and so be saved through it, but neither can any work save us.
Romans 4:1-6 What then shall we say was gained by Abraham, our forefather according to the flesh? For if Abraham was justified by works, he has something to boast about, but not before God. For what does the Scripture say? "Abraham believed God and it was counted to him as righteousness. Now to the one who works, his wages are not counted as a gift but as his due. And to the one who does not work but believes in Him who justifies the ungodly, his faith is counted as righteousness,

Eph 2:8-10 For by grace you have been saved through faith. And this in not your own doing; it is the gift of God, not a result of works, so that no one may boast. For we are His workmanship, created in Christ Jesus for good works, which God prepared beforehand that we should walk in them.

Notice how closely those two passages parallel each other in language and message. And what was said to Abraham was said long before the Law.

The problem is us. God knowing that needed to provide an alternate means; He did that through the sacrifice of His Son for the sins of the world. That alternate means is precisely the gospel message.

We were redeemed by the sacrifice of His Son through faith, but that was not an alternate means. It was the fulfillment.

 

[ReverendRV]

I, the author of this OP, have consistently said that a person can only come to Christ when he is drawn to Christ.

Is this an admission you believe in the Total Inability of people to come to Christ before they are Drawn?

 

[justbyfaith]

49. Agree. Not in the habit of kicking myself.
52.Agree
54. Agree

So we see how multifaceted and far reaching into all corners and depths of the Bible the doctrines in Calvinism are. We never stop seeing a new dimension within it. And why is that? Because there is no end of the depth and discovery of the Bible on which the doctrines are based. And no constraints upon the ways of expressing those truths casting upon them the lenses of our own personal walk and discovery.

It is sad that some see that as disparity.

Calvinism is based on the acronym TULIP; not the Bible.

 

[Arial]

No; there was a motivation, not a desire, to eat the salad instead of the cake.

Splitting hairs and talking taste buds. Enough with the cake.

 

[Arial]

Calvinism is based on the acronym TULIP; not the Bible.

You have been told this before but I will tell you again. The doctrines in Calvinism came first, and then the acronym. The acronym did not produce Calvinism. And Calvinism is much more that the acronym. Some of which you probably believe yourself and some which you hopefully believe as it contains the full doctrines necessary for salvation.

 

[justbyfaith]

I can...

But go ahead and have a real Debate with someone. This is your last chance...

Your pretending that I don't have valid arguments does not make any of my arguments invalid.

 

[justbyfaith]

Splitting hairs and talking taste buds. Enough with the cake.

Enough with it, why?

Because it defeated your argument...

 

[ReverendRV]

Your pretending that I don't have valid arguments does not make any of my arguments invalid.

Name one valid Argument. I am fair...

 

[justbyfaith]

You have been told this before but I will tell you again. The doctrines in Calvinism came first, and then the acronym. The acronym did not produce Calvinism. And Calvinism is much more that the acronym. Some of which you probably believe yourself and some which you hopefully believe as it contains the full doctrines necessary for salvation.

They came up with the doctrines of Calvinism and then the acronym. It does nto change the fact that today, to depart from the acronym is considered to be a departure from Calvinism, even if such a departure is merited by the teaching of the Bible.

 

[justbyfaith]

Name one valid Argument. I am fair...

You all don't believe the same thing; and therefore there is disparity / disunity within your doctrine.

If you all agreed together, I would have more.

But if I bring up certain arguments, some of you will simply say, "that is not taught by Calvinism because I don't believe in it as a Calvinist".

 

[Arial]

Again, when we are drawn to Christ, motivation is given to receive Christ; while it may not be the strongest motivation present in the person's life.

Where does the Bible say when we are draw to Christ we are given motivation to receive Him? Scriptures please.

The motivation is equal to all others when a person is motivated to receive Christ. For one person, it may be enough for them to receive Christ (because the motivation to keep their sin is a lesser motivation. For another, the motivation to keep sin may be greater than the equal motivation to receive Christ.

God does not increase the level of motivation to receive over any kind of situation where the resistance is greater.

You need to support this. We can't be expected to just take your word for it.

 

[ReverendRV]

You all don't believe the same thing; and therefore there is disparity / disunity within your doctrine.

If you all agreed together, I would have more.

But if I bring up certain arguments, some of you will simply say, "that is not taught by Calvinism because I don't believe in it as a Calvinist".

That's not a valid Argument, because Calvinists believe the same thing about TULIP and the Solas...

Strike one...

Do you have a valid point?

 

[atpollard]

You came close but didn't quite get to the most obvious way that works can lead to salvation. That is, obey each and every law that God has issued.

Umm … that was #2 if you believe that we needed Jesus (an atonement) and #1 if you believe that Jesus was unnecessary.

 

[atpollard]

Keep in mind that while Paul said that all of sinned, he never said that no one could be free from sinning.

Yes, Paul did. So did Jesus and John.