Defining terms shortens debate: Free Will

[renniks]

The unrepentant cannot make a free will choice - their will is enslaved to sin, not free. They must be the recipient of GOD's grace, the gift of faith, before they can be free of the enslaving addiction to sin.

Grace doesn't automatically equal getting saved. Everyone receives grace not all respond.

 

[TedT]

On the other hand, if I am asked to choose between opening door A or B, with A and B being essentially similar to each other with no apparent differences that I can detect, my choice is essentially free in that it is randomly made.

Randomness does not prove free will in that an evil will can still make random choices. Also, neither is the random choice a real or full choice because without any understanding of the consequences of each option you are choosing nothing.

I suggest that sin only accrues to rebellion, not to a random, meaningless decision.

 

[TedT]

He makes a WILLED choice concerning the Gospel, but in bondage to sin. In fact, the Gospel is foolishness to him, and the word of God stirs the rebellion in him.

He does as he wants to do, always. In that respect it can be called free. It is done willingly, and so he is without excuse.

Free? Rom 7:14 We know that the law is spiritual; but I am unspiritual, sold as a slave to sin. 15 I do not understand what I do. For what I want to do, I do not do. But what I hate, I do. 16 And if I do what I do not want to do, I admit that the law is good. 17 In that case, it is no longer I who do it, but it is sin living in me that does it.

 

[TedT]

Grace doesn't automatically equal getting saved. Everyone receives grace not all respond.

This sets up the system in which some are in hell who could have been saved except they did not respond, ie that they are forgivable but are not forgiven.

Does this not deny the unforgivable sin? Does it not also impugn HIS perfect love which is perfectly patient and never ending? Does it not impugn HIS commitment to our salvation as of a limited duration and a limited efficacy?

How can saving grace NOT save? All sinners reject HIS grace but HIS grace overrides this aspect of our evil nature against our sinful wills so HIS sinful elect can be saved.

The reprobate are offered grace not to save them but to prove to the sinful elect that they cannot be saved, that they have sinned the unforgivable sins and cannot be returned to HIM. This is the reason the judgement was postponed so that the sinful elect, the sinful good, ie, elect, seed could live with the reprobate weeds, Matt 13:27-30 so they can learn the absolute necessity of coming out from among them and touching not their evil, that is, to become holy so the judgement will not uproot them and therefore there is no more need to postpone it.

ImCo,
the only people in hell are those GOD CANNOT save because they sinned the unforgivable sin, ie they put their faith in the idea that HE was a liar and a false god and repudiated him forever by their free will and by this decision they became enslaved to evil, unable to save themselves, and outside of HIS grace because their free will decision to repudiate HIM for ever must be sacrosanct or it is not free in the least.

 

[GenemZ]

So God doesn't have the power to keep them from hell?

According to "Irresistible Grace" God would have such power..

So, if he can save the worst kinds of immoral people? And, does. Then those who end up in Hell are His responsibility under the Doctrine of TULIP. For He refused to get them saved as He did with others equally sinful and depraved.

Calvinism is a disaster where found in parts of TULIP. It takes a certain kind of deceived mind to deny its inconsistencies. Its also a real challenge to the ego of certain scholars to keep it afloat by drawing in more converts, while other walk away with their good sense still intact. J Its just like there are people who will become convinced that socialism is a good thing... Its to be found in every area of thinking, not just theology.

 

[GenemZ]

Free? Rom 7:14 We know that the law is spiritual; but I am unspiritual, sold as a slave to sin. 15 I do not understand what I do. For what I want to do, I do not do. But what I hate, I do. 16 And if I do what I do not want to do, I admit that the law is good. 17 In that case, it is no longer I who do it, but it is sin living in me that does it.

That is why Grace must isolate the person's soul's thinking from the dominating effect of the flesh while being presented the Gospel!

God's grace, in a sense, is like sobering up a drunk.

Its the same soul inside the sober or drunk body. The body dominates the soul depending on the state of the body. During the teaching of the Word of God if one is not being controlled by grace? His flesh will keep distorting what is being shown. Without grace no one could get saved. For the inebriating sin nature will keep swerving that soul off of the road to crash.

 

[renniks]

Does this not deny the unforgivable sin? Does it not also impugn HIS perfect love which is perfectly patient and never ending? Does it not impugn HIS commitment to our salvation as of a limited duration and a limited efficacy?

No, no, and no.
His perfect love can not be love if it denys most the opportunity to receive it.

 

[GenemZ]

Grace doesn't automatically equal getting saved. Everyone receives grace not all respond.

Yes... Grace places a person in a position for repentance.

For by grace the "flesh" has been restrained by God's power, thus enabling the soul to see what truth needs to be seen without the sin nature covering its eyes and ears.

The overlooked aspect....

When someone who is being given such grace to be saved, and still rejects? It can not be called sin for the flesh was being contained by grace during the time of decision. Their unbelief is called something different. It becomes like Lucifer's original decision against God. Lucifer made his choice before having become fallen. Since he rejected God from an unfallen state is was not from a sin nature. It was evil. Jesus died man's sins, not for evil.

Jesus died for our sins. He could not die for evil. To do so? Jesus would have had to reject himself while on the Cross. That was impossible.

Sin and evil are not the same thing. That needs to be better understood, or we will not be able to get a sound grip on the accountability of man before God. The accountability of all those going to the Lake of Fire. For, they are to blame for where they end up!

Calvinism has God to blame behind a wall of shrugging of shoulders, exclaiming we can not understand the sovereignty of God. That God will randomly in His righteousness choose who is going to Hell.

I believe Calvinists do not want to deal with the fact that they still have much more to know and understand. That their thinking is not as superior as they fancy it is. They dropped anchor in their own form of legalism and want to fight others who oppose, being wrongly seen as perseverance of the saints.

IMHO - grace and peace...

 

[bbbbbbb]

Randomness does not prove free will in that an evil will can still make random choices. Also, neither is the random choice a real or full choice because without any understanding of the consequences of each option you are choosing nothing.

I suggest that sin only accrues to rebellion, not to a random, meaningless decision.

I agree entirely which is why I posited this form of "decision" as the only one which might conform to some notion of being "free".

 

[GenemZ]

The only truly free will can not exist without having omniscience...

God gave us a limited domain to live in as to reflect His free will. We have a type of free will.

Since we do not possess an absolute free will like God? We do not know all things? Our wills are no more free than having, or not having, knowledge of truth for every decision we must make. That is why Jesus told us that the Truth shall set us free.

At best, a knowledgeable Christian will have free will within God ordained contained domains where the believer advances in gaining sound doctrine. For knowing truth will overlap into other areas besides the one area the Truth was learned for...

We can only grow in gaining more freedom of will as we grow in grace and knowledge of the Lord Jesus Christ = the Word of God made flesh.

 

[Bruce Leiter]

Not only does it make debate a lot less frustrating, but if terms can be defined before the argument begins, I've noticed, the debate doesn't usually continue as long.

Free Will, as usually addressed in old Reformed circles, had to do with the bondage of the will of the unregenerate --not what usually gets fought over nowadays: the ability of persons to make undirected spontaneous decisions.

Yes, the term "free will" is a poor description. No one's will is ever completely free; we're either slaves to Satan or born-again followers of Jesus.

 

[GenemZ]

Yes, the term "free will" is a poor description. No one's will is ever completely free; we're either slaves to Satan or born-again followers of Jesus.

If all born again believers in Jesus are HIS SLAVE! We are not free in that sense. Jesus said that if we want to follow him we must deny self and take up our own cross.

That means? When our preferred way of seeing things is confronted by sound teaching? Many stop following Christ. Still saved by Him. But, no longer following as we should.

 

[Clare73]

So God doesn't have the power to keep them from hell?

Does the judge down at the courthouse have the power to accuse or acquit?
Does he accuse the speeder of traffic violation because he doesn't have the power to acquit?

 

[Clare73]

If all born again believers in Jesus are HIS SLAVE! We are not free in that sense. Jesus said that if we want to follow him we must deny self and take up our own cross.

That means? When our preferred way of seeing things is confronted by sound teaching? Many stop following Christ. Still saved by Him. But, no longer following as we should.

We are bond slaves, who have chosen to be owned and have driven the awl through our ear lobe against the door post to mark ourselves as forever owned by him.

 

[Clare73]

Randomness does not prove free will in that an evil will can still make random choices. Also, neither is the random choice a real or full choice because without any understanding of the consequences of each option you are choosing nothing.

I suggest that sin only accrues to rebellion, not to a random, meaningless decision.

Sin accrues to the heart.

 

[Clare73]

According to "Irresistible Grace" God would have such power..

So, if he can save the worst kinds of immoral people? And, does. Then
those who end up in Hell are His responsibility under the Doctrine of TULIP. For He refused to get them saved as He did with others equally sinful and depraved.

When did the guy who paid the fine for the sentence of his son among the group of thieves become responsible for the sentence of the remainder of the group whose fine he did not pay?

Calvinism is a disaster where found in parts of TULIP.

TULIP is not a disaster on this planet.

It takes a certain kind of deceived mind to deny its inconsistencies.

No inconsistencies in "TULIP."

Its also a real challenge to the ego of certain scholars to keep it afloat by drawing in more converts, while other walk away with their good sense still intact. J Its just like there are people who will become convinced that socialism is a good thing... Its to be found in every area of thinking, not just theology.

 

[Clare73]

No, no, and no.
His perfect love can not be love if it denys most the opportunity to receive it.

Who made that rule?
Love is not perfect if it denies justice to anyone, if it denies anyone what he is owed, what he has earned.
Perfect love requires justice.

 

[TedT]

No, no, and no.
His perfect love can not be love if it denys most the opportunity to receive it.

Yes...
but this doctrine claims that there are some in hell who could have been saved by HIS patient love but are not with no explanation about how this is not a failure of love. All HE has to do to bring them home is to wait for them to change their mind. Love has no time limits after all.

Therefore the doctrine that all can be saved but some are damned because they will not accept salvation is bogus.

As well, Christ told some demons HE totally repudiated them, that is, He is NOT waiting for them to repent, not encouraging them to repent, and designates them as people of the evil one to be destroyed in contrast to the sinful people of the kingdom.

 

[TedT]

Yes, the term "free will" is a poor description. No one's will is ever completely free; we're either slaves to Satan or born-again followers of Jesus.

You are speaking about mankind, all sinners since conception... But what about the angels before the fall? Did Satan fall by the will of GOD or by his own will? What about the angels who followed him or the ones who followed Michael and Gabriel - were they following the will of GOD or their own choice??

Only Gnostics and Sumerians accept that Satan is a projection of the will of God so I ask: "Why would GOD set up a system in which the most evil of HIS creation got to make a free will choice to join HIM or to rebuke HIM as a liar and a false god but HIS church, HIS sinful elect, HIS Bride to be, is created as sinful, as humans inheriting sinfulness, with no free will choice? Is not the foolishness of this setup apparent at face value and that's why we need thousands of sophisticated books trying to explain how it is true anyway??

 

[GenemZ]

Yes...
but this doctrine claims that there are some in hell who could have been saved by HIS patient love but are not with no explanation about how this is not a failure of love. All HE has to do to bring them home is to wait for them to change their mind. Love has no time limits after all.

Therefore the doctrine that all can be saved but some are damned because they will not accept salvation is bogus.

As well, Christ told some demons HE totally repudiated them, that is, He is NOT waiting for them to repent, not encouraging them to repent, and designates them as people of the evil one to be destroyed in contrast to the sinful people of the kingdom.

Anyone who is a coward and evil will say anything to save their life when trapped by a greater power.

The only real issue in salvation is... "Do you respect/love the Lord's character?"

God's Justice (not his love) requires it. God can not afford to be sentimental with sinners. Its how parents spoil children and produce monsters in society.

He will patiently keep revealing what is needed to know He is worthy of your respect and love.

Those who repent only after they have rejected having respect and love for Him and see the judgment, would become merely opportunists, having yet no respect and love for Him. That love and respect only comes by means of perceiving His Character (integrity = holiness) and finding it worthy. The demons never offered love and respect....