Can We Really Exercise Free Will?

[Rufus]

Ephesians 2:8-9 clarify that grace that saves is received by “faith”.

If we need to be made alive in order to have faith then we would have to be saved in Christ before having faith. The problem is, you cannot be in Christ without faith. The TULIP interpretation flips the order that is clearly seen in the text.

This is done in order to claim that faith must be a gift from a logical perspective but the Greek shows otherwise and there is no scripture which asserts clearly that "saving faith" has its origin and is transmitted by God.

Why would Christ Jesus speak well of someone for great faith, if such faith were a gift from God?

To do so would be attributing God’s glory to man.
It is simply inconceivable that God would have Jesus praising man for something He had gifted to him.

Christ Jesus attributed the great faith to the centurion, not God. Jesus also commended the woman with the daughter with the demon; “O woman, great is your faith! Let it be to you as you desire.”

God does not make mistakes.

No, you need to be God's elect before having faith. Read the "chain of salvation" in Rom 8:29-30 some day. Notice where Justification falls in that chronological and logical chain.

 

[fredoheaven]

In John 1:10-13, Jesus was rejected by his own people; hence, this demonstrates that God can be rejected by men. But at the same time, people may respond by receiving God or Christ, which causes them to become the sons of God (the result or the effect.)

 

[Rufus]

The idea that grace exercised through faith doesn't include faith as the grace being exercised is in itself ridiculous. It's like the grace of God in giving sunshine doesn't actually include the sunshine and all that results from it.

Of course it isn't in the world of FWers, since God is merely a potential Savior and only gives everyone an opportunity to conjure up their own faith.

 

[Rufus]

In John 1:10-13, Jesus was rejected by his own people; hence, this demonstrates that God can be rejected by men. But at the same time, people may respond by receiving God or Christ, which causes them to become the sons of God (the result or the effect.)

All the uncircumcised of heart can do is reject Christ.

 

[Magenta]

This is what Studier does! If he can't perform mental feats of gymnastics to "nuance" a passage "to death", he avoids the passage. Great case in point is Jer 13:23 where to this day, he still refuses to give a straight up "yes" or "no" answer to the rhetorical question therein.

They demand to have the flesh, within which no good thing dwells, including the incurably wicked heart, they
demand this flesh be responsible for bringing forth the good fruit of faith against the very words of Jesus Christ
Himself. The # of verses they must contradict and outright deny to uphold their false doctrine boggles the mind.
But their vain man-exalting theology does demand it after all. They can do no less.

 

[cv5]

This is what Studier does! .

What the TULIP crowd does is agree with Satan that God is rigging the gaming tables and loading the dice.

But this of course is false!

 

[Rufus]

They demand to have the flesh, within which no good thing dwells, including the incurably wicked heart, they
demand this flesh be responsible for bringing forth the good fruit of faith against the very words of Jesus Christ
Himself. The # of verses they must contradict and outright deny to uphold their false doctrine boggles the mind.

Evidently, FWers unwritten motto is: Let God be a liar and every freewill human being be true!

 

[Rufus]

What the TULIP crowd does is agree with Satan that God is rigging the gaming tables and loading the dice.

But this of course is false!

Well...since you brought up dice, there is this:

Prov 16:33
33 The lot is cast into the lap,
but its every decision is from the LORD.
NIV

And since when doesn't God have every right to do whatever He wishes with what He owns? But you're so arrogant and proud that you think your life is your own and you have all kinds of rights, don't you?

 

[Cameron143]

Ephesians 2:8-9 clarify that grace that saves is received by “faith”.

If we need to be made alive in order to have faith then we would have to be saved in Christ before having faith. The problem is, you cannot be in Christ without faith. The TULIP interpretation flips the order that is clearly seen in the text.

This is done in order to claim that faith must be a gift from a logical perspective but the Greek shows otherwise and there is no scripture which asserts clearly that "saving faith" has its origin and is transmitted by God.

Why would Christ Jesus speak well of someone for great faith, if such faith were a gift from God?

To do so would be attributing God’s glory to man.
It is simply inconceivable that God would have Jesus praising man for something He had gifted to him.

Christ Jesus attributed the great faith to the centurion, not God. Jesus also commended the woman with the daughter with the demon; “O woman, great is your faith! Let it be to you as you desire.”

God does not make mistakes.


NEXT!

Don't run from your own arguments. Faith doesn't come by hearing the word of God. Instead, faith comes by hearing, and hearing BY THE WORD OF GOD. You have people reaching out and appropriating salvation by audibly hearing the word of God and exercising faith. All the activity of men apart from any activity of God. But faith doesn't come apart from the activity of God. Do you also reach out and appropriate hearing for yourself? Did you do that without exercising faith?

As far as the woman goes, the way Jesus recognizes her faith is by the exercise of it. And of course God is pleased with faith.

 

[Magenta]

Yes we can.

Look into molinism, one plausible explanation that explains both free will and predestination/sovereignity. I think it does a decent job at it. The only downside of it is that it is not specifically mentioned in the Bible and is more of a philosophical construct, but consistent within the Bible nonetheless.

Hello Slim! Molinism also promotes man's inability, though the Molinist calls it radical depravity
instead of total depravity. Same difference. It seems aimed at mollifying those who cannot control
their knee jerk reactions to the truth of man's condition. It still teaches that very aspect of our being
is affected by the fall and renders us incapable of wanting to be saved. This in lieu of total depravity.
It is God’s persistent beckoning that overcomes our wicked obstinacy.

Molinism offers ROSES: (instead of TULIP)

R Radical Depravity (instead of total depravity)

O Overcoming Grace (instead of irresistible grace)

S Sovereign election (instead of unconditional election)

E Eternal life (instead of perseverance of saints)

S Singular Redemption (instead of limited atonement)

 

[cv5]

Well...since you brought up dice, there is this:

Prov 16:33
33 The lot is cast into the lap,
but its every decision is from the LORD.
NIV

And since when doesn't God have every right to do whatever He wishes with what He owns? But you're so arrogant and proud that you think your life is your own and you have all kinds of rights, don't you?

So you are saying that we free willers have all the rights and the TULIP crowd has all the wrongs?

OK. No argument from me.

 

[Magenta]

Arminianism also teaches depravity. They use the acronym FACTS:

Freed by Grace (to Believe)
Atonement for All
Conditional Election
Total Depravity
Security in Christ

Total Depravity (Article 3)

• Humanity was created in the image of God, good and upright, but fell from its original sinless state through willful disobedience, leaving humanity sinful, separated from God, and under the sentence of divine condemnation.
• Total depravity does not mean that human beings are as bad as they could be, but that sin impacts every part of a person’s being and that people now have a sinful nature with a natural inclination toward sin, making every human being fundamentally corrupt at heart.
• Therefore, human beings are not able to think, will, nor do anything good in and of themselves, including merit favor from God, save ourselves from the judgment and condemnation of God that we deserve for our sin, or even believe the gospel.
• If anyone is to be saved, God must take the initiative. source

Still, those who believe what the Bible teaches about the condition of the unregenerate man get called
Calvinist even though the major isms teach what those with the derangement syndrome scream about.

 

[sawdust]

Are you saying that man may be saved and never believe the truth? Please clarify...

I'm saying that all of us here are saved but we are disagreeing on what is true on this topic. One of us is wrong or both of us are wrong which means one or both are not believing the truth.

 

[sawdust]

This is what Studier does! If he can't perform mental feats of gymnastics to "nuance" a passage "to death", he avoids the passage. Great case in point is Jer 13:23 where to this day, he still refuses to give a straight up "yes" or "no" answer to the rhetorical question therein.

Actually the irony is that verse is saying the very opposite of what you proclaim. The Lord is saying if a man could change himself, then he should be able to learn what is good. IOW if a man can learn good, he does have some input into change within his own soul. As it is only the Lord who can teach us what is good (only God is good), the Lord is effectively saying, the people of Jeremiah's day were so bad due to their refusal to take responsibility for their sin and turn to Him, that the Lord's hands were tied in teaching them anything. Not surprising, as they were about to be transported out of the land and into exile, maximum amount of discipline Israel can face without being wiped out completely.

 

[sawdust]

No, you need to be God's elect before having faith. Read the "chain of salvation" in Rom 8:29-30 some day. Notice where Justification falls in that chronological and logical chain.

It's a chain of glorification, not salvation. During the Incarnation, was there ever a time Christ was not saved? Yet, He was not glorified until after His ascension.

When Adam was created he was in a state of salvation but he was never given the glory we will receive in the Resurrection.

That glory is given to those whom the Lord saw Himself in relation with (foreknew) according to His plan and purpose to give eternal life to believers.

 

[Magenta]

Evidently, FWers unwritten motto is: Let God be a liar and every freewill human being be true!

God hates wicked people. “The LORD tests the righteous, but His soul hates the wicked and the one who loves violence.” (Psalm 11:5) He hates wicked people and detests their ways (Proverbs 15:9), their thoughts (Proverbs 15:26), their worship (Proverbs 15:8), their actions (Proverbs 6:16-19), all who do wrong/workers of iniquity (Psalm 5:5). He destroys those who tell lies and abhors the man of bloodshed and deceit (Psalm 5:6). He singles out as a special object of His hatred the blasphemous deeds of the Nicolaitans, those who seduced God’s peoplewith idolatry and sexual immorality. “Yet this you have: you hate the works of the Nicolaitans, which I also hate.” (Revelation 2:6)
Thank you for the inspiration! I hope you and yours are well

 

[Cameron143]

God hates wicked people. “The LORD tests the righteous, but His soul hates the wicked and the one who loves violence.” (Psalm 11:5) He hates wicked people and detests their ways (Proverbs 15:9), their thoughts (Proverbs 15:26), their worship (Proverbs 15:8), their actions (Proverbs 6:16-19), all who do wrong/workers of iniquity (Psalm 5:5). He destroys those who tell lies and abhors the man of bloodshed and deceit (Psalm 5:6). He singles out as a special object of His hatred the blasphemous deeds of the Nicolaitans, those who seduced God’s peoplewith idolatry and sexual immorality. “Yet this you have: you hate the works of the Nicolaitans, which I also hate.” (Revelation 2:6)
Thank you for the inspiration! I hope you and yours are well

This can't be right. Surely God is so loving that He is able to love what He hates.

My favorite is that God is exercising love to those He casts into the Lake of Fire.

 

[studier]

This is what Studier does! If he can't perform mental feats of gymnastics to "nuance" a passage "to death", he avoids the passage. Great case in point is Jer 13:23 where to this day, he still refuses to give a straight up "yes" or "no" answer to the rhetorical question therein.

Actually the irony is that verse is saying the very opposite of what you proclaim. The Lord is saying if a man could change himself, then he should be able to learn what is good. IOW if a man can learn good, he does have some input into change within his own soul. As it is only the Lord who can teach us what is good (only God is good), the Lord is effectively saying, the people of Jeremiah's day were so bad due to their refusal to take responsibility for their sin and turn to Him, that the Lord's hands were tied in teaching them anything. Not surprising, as they were about to be transported out of the land and into exile, maximum amount of discipline Israel can face without being wiped out completely.

@sawdust Thanks for attempting to answer this continued craziness.

He's referring to discussion from nearly 2 months ago in another thread and trying as usual to say he didn't receive the answer [he wants]. His presupposition as usual is Calvinistic and that Jer13:23 confirms that men are Totally Depraved and cannot do anything about it. IOW who needs context.

As I previously explained in that discussion, the context and rhetoric of Jer13:23 is speaking of a covenant people who had learned evil and it is now deeply ingrained. So, the spots & skin color are metaphor for learned evil the covenant people cannot change at this point. Jer13:25 explains that the cause is forgetting God and trusting/hoping in lies. (learning evil in 13:23).

At the end of Jer13:27 is repentance inference and appeal re: God's cleansing. When applied back to the metaphor of spots and skin color representing learned evil God speaks of cleansing that had been available.

You've captured their deeply ingrained condition well and tied in the learning from the context.

These continued proof-texted apart from context arguments are the unchangeable spots now.

 

[GWH]

For anyone interested in the systematic study of election, I am in the process of revamping our website to
put it in Lesson 11. <truthseekersfellowship.com>

 

[Jackson129]

I see it a little differently than you ... the versions of the Bible in use today were translated from texts which were written in languages other than English. The translators were no more perfect than the readers in our day and time ... perhaps the translators in some way, shape, or form translated the text to "make scripture mean what [they] want it to mean".

I am more interested in what God had written ... God is the Author of Scripture and He had it written by men.

And I agree that a straight reading of God's Word can lead to salvation ... that's how gracious our Father is ... and how powerful God's Word is.

Some of us want to take a deeper dive ... not in an effort to invent "ways to make scripture mean what I want it to mean. To fit my naritive" ... but in an effort to make sure "my naritive" is in line with what the Author of Scripture had written.

Did you know, Jackson129, that when we read the word "love" in Scripture, there are various Greek words for "love"?

so when we read the verse For God so loved the world that He gave His only begotten son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life (John 3:16), which Greek word is translated into the English word "loved"? ... and then there's the tense/voice/mood which we should also consider.

maybe that doesn't matter to some ... maybe that does matter to others ... and we should be gracious to whichever camp we choose not to live in ...

and maybe those to whom it doesn't matter just might learn some little nugget of truth he or she did not realize was hidden in the text ...

hope/pray you have a great and blessed day, Jackson129


Acts 17:11 These were more noble than those in Thessalonica, in that they received the word with all readiness of mind, and searched the scriptures daily, whether those things were so.
.

I know as far as studying I dont have any issues with what differnt text people use. Its always good to study the Bible. However when doing my daily reading i think it says what it says. I think God's infinite wisdom translated the Bible to mean exactly what they are sposed to in the language they were translated in. The English came from the Greek which came from the Hebrew. Hebrew might have went through 2 or three translations from anchient cuniform to what the Greeks used. If it is full of human errors from one end to the other. People wouldn't be reading anything right it could all just be wrong. And I will never feel that way about a bible.