The Ability To Choose - Free Will

[Eternally-Grateful]

"Self-determinism" goes by a couple or more uses. The one use I'm referring to can mean mere 'real choice', or it can mean, as those insisting on self-determinism would have it, 'uncaused choice'. Sometimes I refer to this last kind of choice as self-deterministic, and those insisting on it as, self-determinists. I say it, as opposed to 'free-willers', to give the sense of their need to maintain their position as sole causers of their own decisions, or even as their thinking concerning their own destiny and abilities, quite apart from God's purposes.

I am sorry, Maybe I misspoke. I mean what is the self determinist interpretation of romans 9.

Is it your mindset and/or worldview that insists on this, or can you show it from Scripture?

Mistake doing whatever at all that he did, in creating or, as we like to say, in intervening. By the notions of some, what God did, by mistake went bad. Adam and Even sinned, quite apart from God causing that they do so, so he had to revert to plan B. The implications of that kind of thought are enormous and outrageous.

But to get there, Paul goes through a LOT of things showing how God works, and, as you said, from the beginning to the end.

If, for example, before Esau and Jacob had even done anything right or wrong, God had already planned to love one and hate the other, it is hard to deny what is being taught there.

See here is a perfect example

1. You say (the fatalist view) it does not matter what they did. God chose to love one and hate the other.

2. I see it (the israel view) that God did not chose Israel as a man would chose. for in mans determination. the older gets the birthright, So using mans view. Jacob would not have been the chosen one, Esau would have been. But God chose Jacob to be the one to whom would go the promises not esau

as for Jacob I loved and esau i hated.

This comes from a quote from Malachi., it is not about two babies. it is about two nations (jacob/Israel and Esau Edom)

Also. you must remember, The word hate does not mean hate as we think it. Jesus told us the following

Luke 14:26
“If anyone comes to Me and does not hate his father and mother, wife and children, brothers and sisters, yes, and his own life also, he cannot be My disciple.

in both context. The word literally means love less. God did love Jacob more than he loved esau,

there is no evidence Esau went to hell and did not have faith in God. if anything Jacob was the more sinful son.

Call it what you want, to gloss over it by pointing out the larger purpose of the chapter(s) does not render the statement merely a rhetorical path to get to the larger statement. The same applies to the figure of potter vs clay, and "Who are you, Oh man" and so on. And it just continues and continues. EVERY time I have tried to get someone to defeat the Reformed use of Romans 9, (nevermind in context of the whole book (or of the whole Bible) they cannot do it logically/ hermeneutically/ linguistically/ etcly.

again, this is the fatalist view

The Israel view sees God as the potter. and the clay became marred in the potters hand, so The potter has every right to destroy it and reform it. to make it to what he wants it to be.

Jer 18:
3 Then I went down to the potter’s house, and there he was, making something at the ]wheel. 4 And the vessel that he made of clay was marred in the hand of the potter; so he made it again into another vessel, as it seemed good to the potter to make.

5 Then the word of the Lord came to me, saying: 6 “O house of Israel, can I not do with you as this potter?” says the Lord. “Look, as the clay is in the potter’s hand, so are you in My hand, O house of Israel! 7 The instant I speak concerning a nation and concerning a kingdom, to pluck up, to pull down, and to destroy it, 8 if that nation against whom I have spoken turns from its evil, I will relent of the disaster that I thought to bring upon it. 9 And the instant I speak concerning a nation and concerning a kingdom, to build and to plant it, 10 if it does evil in My sight so that it does not obey My voice, then I will relent concerning the good with which I said I would benefit it.
11 “Now therefore, speak to the men of Judah and to the inhabitants of Jerusalem, saying, ‘Thus says the Lord: “Behold, I am fashioning a disaster and devising a plan against you. Return now every one from his evil way, and make your ways and your doings good.”


and the part quoted is not far from this

Is 29

13 Therefore the Lord said:

“Inasmuch as these people draw near with their mouths
And honor Me with their lips,
But have removed their hearts far from Me,
And their fear toward Me is taught by the commandment of men,
14 Therefore, behold, I will again do a marvelous work
Among this people,
A marvelous work and a wonder;
For the wisdom of their wise men shall perish,
And the understanding of their prudent men shall be hidden.”

15 Woe to those who seek deep to hide their counsel far from the Lord,
And their works are in the dark;
They say, “Who sees us?” and, “Who knows us?”
16 Surely you have things turned around!
Shall the potter be esteemed as the clay;
For shall the thing made say of him who made it,
“He did not make me”?
Or shall the thing formed say of him who formed it,
“He has no understanding”?

When an NT writer quotes an OT saying, You must get context from the OT..


anyway, God has been doing this to Israel. even today. and in the end, The clay mold called Israel will be completed by God and they will fulfill their purpose.

 

[Eternally-Grateful]

Yes; then, you conflate them. They are not the same, because God does not operate in our temporal sequence without also in his arena 'outside of' time.

"Logically" ordering, means to arrange facts, causally, in one's mind.
"Temporally" ordering, means to arrange events, in time sequence, in one's mind.

This makes no sense to me..

'Ordo salutis' is like a lot of names for technical concepts. It translates to "the order of salvation" but that translation can be taken to mean several things. "Ordo salutis" only means the order of events or causes resulting in salvation from sin, its ownership and its penalty, and in that, excluding considerations of what is called 'sanctification' (growing in maturity, walking with Christ, etc) and 'eschatology' (even, our eventual destiny of heaven).

seems complicated..

 

[Eternally-Grateful]

Can the spiritually dead hear and believe?

Yes.

if they can not. no one can be saved

Scripture says no, and you have been shown that from 1 Cor and other places.

Maybe you see it. But I do not

This is where a person runs into trouble when trying to demonstrate a belief by not using the whole counsel of God, and call it good enough, even definitively true. Yes, Jesus is quoting from Is 6, but did you read Is 6? Here is what it says:

8-10 "And I heard the voice of the Lord saying, "Whom shall I send, and who will go for us?" Then I said, "Here I am! Send me." And he said, "Go, and say to this people: "Keep on hearing, but do not understand; keep on seeing, but do not perceive. Make the heart of this people dull, and their ears heavy, and blind their eyes; lest they see with their eyes, and hear with their ears, and understand with their hearts, and turn and be healed."

You can see that as applying only to Israel, and it is a judgment pronounced on Israel, but what does the NT have to say that applies it to all people. We have Romans 1 and 2. We have 1 Cor 2:14 The natural person does not accept the things of the Spirit of God, for they are folly to him, and he cannot understand them because they are spiritually discerned." That is a clear statement that something has to happen before we can understand and accept.

Then we have Paul, telling of his conversion and the words Jesus spoke to him. Acts 26:16-18 "Now get up and stand on your feet. I have appeared to you to appoint you as a servant and as a witness of what you have seen and will see of me. I will rescue you from your own people and from the Gentiles. I am sending you to them to open their eyes and turn them from darkness to light, and from the power of Satan to God, so that they may receive forgiveness of sins and a place among those who are sanctified by faith in me."

John 12:40 He (God) has blinded their eyes and hardened their heart, lest they see with their eyes, and understand with their heart, and turn, and I would heal them. That is the same verse quoted from Is.

Don't use Scripture in a way that contradicts other scripture. Find out why the apparent contradiction exists, instead of just picking the one that suits your already existing belief.

sorry, This does not change my mind from any of the many passages I keep sharing which show otherwise.

the word of god can not contradict itself

 

[Eternally-Grateful]

Don't use Scripture in a way that contradicts other scripture. Find out why the apparent contradiction exists, instead of just picking the one that suits your already existing belief.

Amen

I did see this.

Thats why I said in my last post. You can not make scripture contradict. if they do. change your thinking, not the meaning of scripture

 

[Arial]

Amen

I did see this.

Thats why I said in my last post. You can not make scripture contradict. if they do. change your thinking, not the meaning of scripture

OK. Easy words to say. Now, since you quoted a scripture and used it in a way that contradicted the three that I gave----explain the contradiction? Can you do this? Will you do this?

And while you are at it, please address this that you have not done. It is important to the conversation.

Their sins are forgiven when they hear and believe. But they cannot believe when they hear unless they are first born again of God. Take for example those who had Jesus right in front of them, were talking to him, had witnessed his miracles, and still did not believe. Jesus told them why they did not believe. "Because you are not my sheep." He also said that all that the Father was giving him would come to him, and he would give them eternal life.

So, would you please give me your interpretation of the passages I referenced here from John 10. You can read the entire thing, within its full context there before you reply if you want to make sure of what you say it means. Doing this, would be an honest conversation with a willingness to listen and learn. A conversation carried on in good faith. As per the rules.

That is post #186 so you can quote it in your response so I will know what you are responding to.
Thanks

 

[Eleanor]

1. We were predestined from the foundation of the world to be conformed to the image of the creator. Based on Gods foreknowledge and his will

Actually, our predestination is based on his foreknowledge of his decree to elect us.

2. According to Jesus. His will is that all who see and believe (have saving faith) this is shown by jesus own words.

Agreed. . .the disagreement is about the cause of and the time of occurrence of saving faith.

 

[Eleanor]

There is the Will of God
The natural man will choose pleasure or self interest or just because.
There is so much noise in the world, all the "choices" clamoring for action and attention
If God is the one desire, a person will choose the path of God
The natural man is blown about like a leaf in the wind, choosing the advantage of pleasure or profit.
A person who is aware of the Will of God will choose the path that leads to God
Salvation confers the ability to see that difference of paths and to value the choice (Will) of God

I would say the sovereign new birth (Jn 3:3-8) confers the ability both to see and to believe, which believing is salvation (Eph 2:8-9).

 

[QVQ]

I would say the sovereign new birth (Jn 3:3-8) confers the ability both to see and to believe.

Agreed,

One caveat is that man can believe all manner of things and "see," understand the same amount.
But most of what men believe and understand has very little to do with what man chooses.
Within Providence of any time and space, a man can choose between vanilla and chocolate ice cream.
Man will not choose by belief or understanding, (ice cream makes you fat) but on self interest, expediency but Primarily by what man loves.

What I have wondered is if man can Will himself to love God?

The love of God is the gift of God

(JMHO)

 

[Arial]

Yes.

if they can not. no one can be saved

Spiritually dead people can hear and understand spiritual things? Not only is that directly opposed to what scripture says about it, but it is illogical. You have them simply hard of hearing not actually spiritually dead, and able to bring themselves to spiritual life. But Scripture says dead. D-E-A-D. And if it is hearing and understanding, (faith) that causes the new birth, then we have done the logically and naturally impossible. Birthed ourselves. Don't change scripture to fit your preferences. Take it at face value.

Why are you having so much trouble accepting the obvious?

Maybe you see it. But I do not

What do you see instead? Just to keep things on track, is 1 Cor 2:14 The natural person does not accept the things of teho Spirit of God, for they are folly to him, and he cannot understand them because they are spiritually discerned.

sorry, This does not change my mind from any of the many passages I keep sharing which show otherwise.

the word of god can not contradict itself

All of the passages you have been sharing have been soundly refuted as being used as you are using them, by everyone else posting in this thread. I gave you those passages that contradict your usage of the verse in Acts and all you have done is say it didn't change your mind. You say the word of God cannot contradict itself, and that is true. But you presented an argument used as you were using it, created a direct contradiction.

So the next step would be for you to resolve the apparent contradiction. I will give you a clue of where to start. Start with a solid doctrine of God that stays consistent throughout scripture and remains consistent in scripture interpretation. Not the doctrine of God that you have already defined in your head as to who he is. Which from what I have seen of your posts, relies heavily on who you want him to be, and who he must be if what you want to believe is true. Though I am almost convinced you are not aware of that, and probably cannot hear and understand this either. You are not alone.

And it is not really your fault, the failure to hear or see outside of the parameters already set up. It becomes like a stronghold and has been built around the church and her people for centuries now. Most have not heard anything but this free will view or had teachers and resources that even attend to sound doctrine. So those of us here who were blessed by not being brought up in it, and those, like me, who were behind the walls of that stronghold but by the grace of God, allowed him through his word, to tear them down; we aren't trying to judge you, or argue incessantly over the same ground for the "fun" of it. We are trying through God's word to dismantle the stronghold for your good and his glory. And I word that in human terms. We do the speaking of the word, God does with it when and where he desires.

Because of the above, people guess what things mean and fit it into what they already believe. People guess what the new birth is, guess what it means that we are dead in trespasses, guess what it means to be quickened to life, then guess what happens first----making sure of only one thing, that the core remains firm. And that core, in this case, is not God and who he is, but "I must have free will or God is responsible for my sins not myself. God cannot elect some and not all, because that is not fair. God cannot bring me to life before I have faith and receive him by my own free will."

 

[Eleanor]

Agreed, Thank you!
I was just considering how to reword that.
One caveat is that man can believe all manner of things and "see," understand the same amount.
But most of what men believe and understand has very little to do with what man chooses.
Within Providence of any time and space, a man can choose between vanilla and chocolate ice cream.
Man will not choose by belief or understanding, (ice cream is makes you fat) but on self interest, expediency but Primarily by what man loves.
What I have wondered is if man can Will himself to love God?

Loving God is a spiritual act,

and the unregenerate are spiritually dead, incapable of any spiritual act until the Holy Spirit sovereignly re-births them into eternal life.

Any love of God is the result of the sovereign (as unaccountable as the wind, Jn 3:6-8) new birth by the Holy Spirit (Jn 3:3-5) into eternal life.

 

[Eternally-Grateful]

Actually, our predestination is based on his foreknowledge of his decree to elect us.

Yes, based on his will

His foreknowledge of this

whoever sees and believes..

Agreed. . .the disagreement is the cause of and the time of occurrence of saving faith.

Yes.. this is the jist of the disagreement.

 

[Eleanor]

Yes, based on his will

His foreknowledge of this

whoever sees and believes..

No, his "foreknowledge" as used in the NT is of his decrees before the foundation of the world.

God's foreknowledge (prognosis) is never used in the NT of anything other than his sovereign decrees declared before the creation of the worlds regarding what he will do (Ac 2:23, 15:18., Ro 8:29; 11:2, 1Pe 1:2, 20).

 

[Eternally-Grateful]

No, his "foreknowledge" as used in the NT is of his decrees before the foundation of the world.

God's foreknowledge (prognosis) is never used in the NT of anything but his sovereign decrees declared before the creation of the worlds.

thanks, But I disagree.

God foreknew who would receive his gift of salvation, and predestined that these people would be conformed to the image of his son.

Its all over scripture.

 

[Eleanor]

thanks, But I disagree.

God foreknew who would receive his gift of salvation, and predestined that these people would be conformed to the image of his son.

That is neither the meaning nor the useage of "foreknowledge" in the NT (Ac 2:23, 15:18., Ro 8:29; 11:2, 1Pe 1:2, 20).

Its all over Scripture

Please present a few that we may examine them in context.

 

[Eternally-Grateful]

That is neither the meaning nor the useage of "foreknowledge" in the NT (Ac 2:23, 15:18., Ro 8:29; 11:2, 1Pe 1:2, 20).

sorry. This is how you see these passages, i do not.

Please present a few that we may examine them in context.

Like the ones you just gave me, which I do not see prove your point?

I gave you the passage that said what Gods will was.

he who sees and believes

they will never be lost (eternal security)

and they are given eternal life (new birth which lasts forever)

That is what God predestined.

Foreknowledge means he knew before hand who would receive and believe

The father basically said to Jesus. If you go. I will give these people to you and conform them to your image

 

[QVQ]

Loving God is a spiritual act,

Agree
And
It would take an Act of God to make me like strawberry ice cream
I possibly could be forced or force myself to eat it but nothing can make me like it.
I would have to be a different person.
So a person one day wakes up and loves God.
The God the person has mocked reviled and believed to be a fairytale
That is regeneration, an Act of God

 

[Eleanor]

sorry. This is how you see these passages, i do not.

Personal assertion without Biblical demonstration is without Biblical merit.

Like the ones you just gave me, which I do not see prove your point?
I gave you the passage that said what Gods will was.
he who sees and believes
they will never be lost (eternal security)
and they are given eternal life (new birth which lasts forever)

None of which I have disagreed with.

That is what God predestined.
Foreknowledge means he knew before hand who would receive and believe

Because he had already decreed that they would be born again and believe.

God's foreknowledge (prognosis) in the NT is used of his foreknowledge of his own works/decrees, not of man's works.

"Known to the Lord before all the ages (prognosis) are his works," (Ac 15:18, 2:23, Ro 8:29; 11:2, 1Pe 1:2, 20) .
He knows his works (e.g.; election) because he has decreed that he shall do them.

The father basically said to Jesus. If you go. I will give these people to you and conform them to your image

Precisely. . .the people he had decreed that he would give to him and conform them to his image.

 

[makesends]

makesends said:
What do you mean by 'born in the image of God'? Is that what the Bible says?

The bible says man was created in the image of God.

Are we not man and woman?

So you agree it does not say man was "born in the image of God". Good. Do you understand why that is going beyond what it does say? I'm not talking about paraphrasing; I'm talking about changing the meaning. By saying, "born in the image of God", one adopts implications that "created in the image of God" does not imply.

(Just as a parallel, the Bible does say that man is born sinful (Ps 51:5). It does not say that man was created sinful. There are many passages that say that man has an inherently sinful nature. It does not say that God created man sinful.)

 

[Arial]

Yes, based on his will

His foreknowledge of this

whoever sees and believes..

His foreknowledge of those he elects. If God has to look into the future (our perspective) to see who will choose him, he has to look and learn from what he sees, even though the whole of redemption his his plan and purpose. Does that statement bear even the slightest resemblance to God as he presents himself in the Bible?

There is more than one usage definition of "foreknowledge" in the Bible.

The word in Greek is prognosis. Here it is from Strong's:

Phonetic Spelling: (prog'-no-sis)

Definition: Foreknowledge

Meaning: foreknowledge, previous determination.

So why do you use the definition of knowing or being aware of something before its existence? On what biblical basis are you claiming it is the latter?

 

[makesends]

God created mankind in his image

A baby who is born is born in the image of God.

what does this mean?

You go from, "God created mankind in his image", to, "A baby who is born is born in the image of God." That is rather a bit of logical sloughing.

As for, "A baby who is born is born in the image of God.":

Does the same Bible that says that mankind is created in the image of God, say that a baby who is born is born in the image of God? —You yourself said in another post, that we are predestined to become conformed to the image of God. If that is so, it sounds like a future, for which we were predestined. One might conclude then, that if mankind was created in the image of God, the Elect are predestined to return to that state, which might imply that one is NOT born in the image of God.

Or, they might conclude, in a somewhat less temporal consideration, that what God created is what we will become. That would not be wrong.