Free will. What is it?

[Eternally-Grateful]

The new birth is sovereign (Jn 3:6-8), just as you had nothing to do with your natural birth, so you have nothing to do with your spiritual birth, or anything else spiritual, because you are spiritually dead until the sovereign new birth into eternal life by the Holy Spirit (Jn 3:3-5) alone.

The new birth is given to those, who like Israel) look to the cross in faith.

We trust God. not self.

No one can boast because they laid their pride aside, and trusted someone else.. In fact, it goes against human nature to even contemplate this

you can not take John 3: 3 - 5 and seperate it from : 9-18

in fact. John 3: 18 sets it all in stone.

what seperates all mankind from one another

he who believes is not condemned (born again)

he who does not believe is condemned already )he is lost, he is dead, and needs born again)

 

[Eleanor]

The new birth is given to those, who like Israel) look to the cross in faith.

Scripture?

There is no faith apart from the new birth, for one is spiritually dead and can do nothing spiritual.

We trust God. not self.
No one can boast because they laid their pride aside, and trusted someone else.. In fact, it goes against human nature to even contemplate this
you can not take John 3: 3 - 5 and seperate it from : 9-18

n fact. John 3: 18 sets it all in stone.
what seperates all mankind from one another
he who believes is not condemned (born again)
he who does not believe is condemned already )he is lost, he is dead, and needs born again)

Which he is no more able to do that he was for his first birth.

 

[ElectedbyHim]

I always look at it this way

just because something CAN happen. does not mean it will.

I personally do not think God has ever overruled someone's free will. I think Jonah is the best answer.

I think God strengthens a persons will (hardens their heart) to lead them to freely do what he wants. or like jonah, leads them on the way.

But something tells me we will not agree on this. so....

I personally do not think God has ever overruled someone's free will. I think Jonah is the best answer.

Care to clarify?

 

[Eleanor]

Actually. No I was not alive until John 3: 10 - 18

Your right I had nothing to do with it.

God offered it. All I did was not reject it (basically nothing) because in faith I trusted him

Spiritually dead people cannot accept spiritual offers. They can't do anything spiritual.

 

[Eternally-Grateful]

Scripture?

John 3

There is no faith apart from the new birth, for one is spiritually dead and can do nothing spiritual.

Your right,

He must receive something spiritual so God can apply his gift of life

Which he is no more able to do that he was for his first birth.

I was conscious when i came to faith. Before I was born I did not exist. huge difference

 

[Eternally-Grateful]

Care to clarify?

which point?

 

[ElectedbyHim]

which point?

This quote.

I personally do not think God has ever overruled someone's free will. I think Jonah is the best answer.

How did Jonah have free will and God did not over rule it?

 

[Eleanor]

John 3

That's a dodge. . .

 

[Eternally-Grateful]

This quote.



How did Jonah have free will and God did not over rule it?

Jonah chose to walk away from God. God kept putting barriers in his way. Finally in the last attempt. God had Jonah swallowed.. Jonah could have continued to freely reject Gods will. But Jonah finally chose to repent and do what God said. So God spared him.

If God would have just overruled his will. Jonah would have left immediately.

 

[Eternally-Grateful]

That's a dodge. . .

No its not.

I have been sharing the verses in John three for a few days now.

Now if you do not agree with me, that's fine.

But do not dare tell me it is a dodge.

 

[Eternally-Grateful]

Spiritually dead people cannot accept spiritual offers. They can't do anything spiritual.

again, When a rescuer is sent, and you accept his offer of salvation. it is not spirit.

However. as Jesus said, in his case, it will make you spiritual

 

[ElectedbyHim]

Jonah chose to walk away from God. God kept putting barriers in his way. Finally in the last attempt. God had Jonah swallowed.. Jonah could have continued to freely reject Gods will. But Jonah finally chose to repent and do what God said. So God spared him.

If God would have just overruled his will. Jonah would have left immediately.

I do not agree.

Thank you for clarifying.

I can get sidetracked talking about free will.

When free will comes up in a conversation, to me, it is always about a person doing the choosing in salvation.

I will always see it that way, no one denies we make choices as humans, but when it comes to Soteriology, we do not.

 

[Arial]

then he caused him.

Cause: The reason why something happens.

Intend: To have in mind; plan; to design for a specific purpose; to have in mind for a particular use.

What caused Adam to sin?

But if he ordained Adam to sin and cause the fall of mankind.

then he instituted it.

Institute: To establish, organize, or introduce; to initiate; begin.

God did all those things before he created our world or anything in it. But is it God who did sin? Or was it Adam? Was it God who made Adam sin or did Adam do that all by himself. You are back to presenting your arguments as though, if we, post fall, do not have free will, then we have no will. Or that if Adam made his choice untainted by sin as he did, then it is God who made him sin. (Which again would be no will.)

No, he knew. it does not mean he ordained or caused it.

You mean the very first man outwitted God? Just because God ordained that man would fall, and for his purposes (are you arguing with God about his purposes, if they aren't what you like?) it does not follow that Adam, who had a mind of his own, who had a will, is not the one who sinned. Look at the cross. Try and align that with your way of thinking. Scripture tells us plainly that it was God's will for Jesus to go to the cross (for his purposes). ANd yet those who sent him to the cross were held accountable for their evil and judged for it. God ordained it. Did he make those evil men do what they did?

this is very troubling you would even ask

Why do you think I ask? 1. Because I expected you to give me an answer to your statement that God did not intend Adam to fall. You say Adam did that all on his own. Which is what everyone else has been saying all along. But you do it as a false equivalency. "If Adam fell on his own then God did not intend him to fall."

point 1. You are wrong. they resisted grace, Because it is by the grace of God God would even come to them.

1. The grace was God ever making a covenant with them in the first place. They loved the covenant relationship, even when they broke it. They were disobedient. That is not resisting grace. Grace is unearned favor. That is what grace is and what it means. Grace can never be earned and it cannot be resisted. Does it rain on the just and the unjust alike? That is grace, also known as common grace. The grace that saves is uncommon grace because in salvation it is poured out on the elect only.

Point 2. It always remains. the question is, the person offered grace, what will you do with it?

Grace is never something that is offered. God's grace can only be given or withheld. You present an impotent and badly disappointed God, even though his Son laid down is life that saving grace might come.

3. Grace is not irresistable. it is not in the bible

John 3 is a perfect example of it.

I would recommend just using the term grace.. It will lead to alot less confusion

I will be sure to pass your recommendation on to Calvin and the other Reformers.

 

[Arial]

Again, if it was irresistible. everyone would be saved.

thats why I would rather just say Grace (unmerited favor) the grace of God that brings salvation to the world

The term Irresistible Grace comes from the TULIP, which is dealing with the need and means of salvation. It is not randomly placed where it is. It follows the T and the U follows the T, the L follows the T and the U etc. It is systematic. It could be expressed this way: Since T is true, T=U=L=I=P. Or, If Total Depravity is true then the means must be by (Unconditional) Election, and if Election is the means, then the Atonement must be for only the elect, and if the atonement is for the elect only, then the grace that saves must be irresistible. And if this grace does what it is meant to do (irresisible) then it must follow that the elect will Persevere.

You can't try and argue against the doctrine as given by changing the meaning and usage of any of it, not even "grace". So what you would rather do is irrelevant. It just leads to unproductive conversations and always, always, missing the point or understanding what anyone says to you about it----because you have painted them into a corner, and evidently, covered your ears, and shut your eyes.

 

[Eternally-Grateful]

I do not agree.

What did God do to overrule Jonahs will?

Thank you for clarifying.

I can get sidetracked talking about free will.

When free will comes up in a conversation, to me, it is always about a person doing the choosing in salvation.

I do not see this

I will always see it that way, no one denies we make choices as humans, but when it comes to Soteriology, we do not.

So God does not give us an option? Why?

 

[Eleanor]

No its not.

I have been sharing the verses in John three for a few days now.

What verse? Which actually demonstrates your assertion.

That's the dodge.

 

[Eleanor]

again, When a rescuer is sent, and you accept his offer of salvation.

Salvation of what (body or spirit)?

it is not spirit.

What is not spirit?

We are rescued by rebirth (spiritual rebirth, Jn 3:3-5).

Rescued from what? (spiritual death)

Rescued by whom? (the Holy Spirit)

However. as Jesus said, in his case, it will make you spiritual

That is not a Biblical use of "spiritual," and is not what "spiritual" means in the NT.

Not enough Biblical understanding on board of "human spirit" and "spiritual."

 

[ElectedbyHim]

What did God do to overrule Jonahs will?

I do not see this

So God does not give us an option? Why?

What did God do to overrule Jonahs will?

All I see in the book of Jonah is God's sovereignty, providence and His will being done and a rebellious human that God had chosen, but did it the way God ordained it anyhow.

The spiritually dead cannot choose salvation.

Their minds are set on the flesh, death and hostile towards the God.
Romans 8:5 For those who are according to the flesh set their minds on the things of the flesh, but those who are according to the Spirit, the things of the Spirit.
Romans 8:6 For the mind set on the flesh is death, but the mind set on the Spirit is life and peace,
Rom 8:7 because the mind set on the flesh is hostile toward God; for it does not subject itself to the law of God, for it is not even able to do so,
Romans 8:8 and those who are in the flesh cannot please God.

The unregenerate love sin and hate the light of truth.
John 3:19 "This is the judgment, that the Light has come into the world, and men loved the darkness rather than the Light, for their deeds were evil.
John 3:20 "For everyone who does evil hates the Light, and does not come to the Light for fear that his deeds will be exposed.

Unregenerate man cannot understand the Spiritual things of God.
1 Corinthians 2:14 But a natural man does not accept the things of the Spirit of God, for they are foolishness to him; and he cannot understand them, because they are spiritually appraised.

The unregenerate are children of the devil.
John 8:44 "You are of your father the devil, and you want to do the desires of your father. He was a murderer from the beginning, and does not stand in the truth because there is no truth in him. Whenever he speaks a lie, he speaks from his own nature, for he is a liar and the father of lies.

The preaching of the cross is foolishness to them.
1 Corinthians 1:18 For the word of the cross is foolishness to those who are perishing, but to us who are being saved it is the power of God.

Now with all this in mind, how can the spiritually dead (unregenerate) person has no will or want to seek God, his will is bent on sin.

In fact, Paul tells us their is no one good, no not one. No one seeks God.

God elects those that He will draw to his son, and give them the new birth to believe.

 

[makesends]

Again, if it (grace) was irresistible. everyone would be saved.

That doesn't follow. That would only be true if God intended to (and did) regenerate everyone. But he has an 'elect only' policy. God can be seen throughout Scripture, History, Science and Logic to be very particular. So far, every verse/passage I have seen brought to bear by those who disagree with Reformed Theology in this, turn out to be not what they thought, or even very strong support for salvation intended ONLY for the elect.

thats why I would rather just say Grace (unmerited favor) the grace of God that brings salvation to the world

makesends said:
Maybe, then we could also drop the term, "free", from freewill, since freewill is only used in the Bible concerning voluntary deeds, as opposed to required deeds. (For example, voluntary offerings as opposed to required offerings.)

But Irresistible Grace refers only to Regeneration.

This is one of the issues at the core of our disagreements, though it is not itself THE core of it.

You use these commonly used human terms, human concepts:
1. What can happen
2. God overruling someone's will
3. A person's will 'is what it is', and God works with and around it.

The Calvinistic person (whether actually a Calvinist or Reformed—and I claim neither) works from:
3. God is what he is, default fact (sovereign), and he is thus the basis by which all other fact and principle exists.
2. God needn't overrule anyone's will. He is not about them, he does not exist for them. Instead, they are about him, no matter what they think and do. They exist and do what they do for HIS purposes, whether they mean to or not.
1. Nothing can happen except by God's purposes. The notion of "possibility" is only about the future, and it is only our human notion. God already has that in hand. Only one thing is possible in any single consideration.

Notice that our options from which to choose are only that—options from which to choose. In fact, only the one chosen ever happens. We have no evidence that anything else 'could have been' chosen. Even in the Bible references to the hypothetical —(for eg, "If you had done (chosen, wanted, obeyed etc) 'this or that', then I would have done (been, said, rewarded etc) 'something or other'...")— do not indicate that anything could have happened, but to demonstrate various abstracts, such as what should have been chosen, or principles concerning what results follow which choices, and so on.

To be fair in representing the Reformed and Calvinist, not all of them put things the way I have there. That is my own way of saying it, but that is the basic difference.

The CORE of the difference between what are commonly called 'freewillers' and Calvinist/Reformed is in Point-of-View: Humano-centrism vs God-centrism, (to some degree dealt with in points #3 above).

once again, I have issue with this.

If nothing can happen besides Gods purpose.. than the fall of mankind is by Gods purpose. Evil is By Gods purpose.

Yep. It all serves God's purpose. Do you know why he created man? Was Eden the pinnacle of God's purpose for man? If there had been no evil, we would not become the people we will be in Heaven.

I know that there are some things God does purpose./ but i do not think every action of every person who ever lived only does what God purposes.

The system would be incoherent, if God, knowing what would result, created anyway, then decided that was a mistake? Again, two wills. (1. Command) : We all disobey, some always, some often, (2. 'Decree') : but everything we do, good or bad, God INTENDED to happen, for his purposes.

God is omniscient, He not only knows what will happen. he knows what could happen if just a few things change, ie, he knows all possibilities. thatss why he can do what he needs to do. and chose people he knows will do his will. and put them in place or power to do such.

You assume that there is such a thing as "what could happen" and "possibilities". But even if there were such a thing, (though I say those are only our guesses), there is no reason he would chose only people he knows will do his will (obey him), to put into places of power etc. —everyone, obedient or not, he uses for the choices THEY make, whether good or bad, to accomplish his ends (decree). We know, for example, from explicit Scriptural statement, that everybody in power was put there, not by accident, but by God.

I believe God is sovereign

I also believe he is a God of love.

Through Gods love, he has the ability to set aside his sovereignty, in order to serve those he loved.

I think a huge difference is where we focus.

I (we) focus on Gods love, and place Gods sovereignty in that bubble ( but actually all of Gods characteristics are of equal value and can not operate without the other. they are in harmony)

While others mostly focus on his sovereignty and try to make everything fit within this context.

FWIW I don't focus on his sovereignty as much as on his being Default Fact. He is the beginning of everything else, and he had no beginning. (This is such an important and necessary distinction between him and his creation that Pantheism / New Age / etc have gone so far as to think that God is everything and everything is God. They are wrong, and what they conclude is not a necessary conclusion of his Immanence.) Sovereignty and many other things are necessary implications or even necessary to a proper definition of God. Thus, it is self-contradictory to say that Sovereign God can give up his sovereignty. And no, I'm not saying he can't. I'm saying it is a logical self-contradiction, like saying that he can (or can't) make a rock too big for him to pick up. The fact we can put words together like that, and like the poetic sound of them, doesn't make it a cogent notion.

One of the problems with focusing on his love is that it depends on not just subjective notions, but subjective feelings, that we bring into the mix of reason as if they were facts. We draw axioms from what WE think love is, and arrange everything else by that.

"God is love", we hear, and we think, "Ooooh that's nice—God is LOVE!", as if we had a valid comprehension of the matter. We draw our implications (inferences) and conclusions, and so we have limited what he means. We even assume it must mean that he respects and honors us.

 

[fastfredy0]

During the time period of Israel until Christ almost no Gentile was saved as shown in the following verses:
Ephesians 2:12 remember that you were at that time separated from Christ, alienated from the commonwealth of Israel and strangers to the covenants of promise, having no hope and without God in the world. Also see Amos 3:2; Acts 14:16--"You only (Israel) have I known of all the families of the earth".
This is statisical proof that man's will in regards to salvation is not free to self determines one's salvation. Free willyism is thus shown to be an illegitimate concept.