Does man have a freewill ?

[fhansen]

The redeemed are not sinless. . .but justice regarding their sin has been satisfied, and they are not subject to the justice of damnation.

And with that understanding there's no reason for a believer to refrain froim any sin whatsoever-no reason to leave our lives of sin; sinlessness/unrightouesness has been, absurdly, eliminated as a requiremnet for entrance into heaven even though Scripture says just the opposite:12-15Gal 5:19-21 & 6:7-10, Rom 2:7 6:21-23 & 8:12-14, Rev 21:6-8 & 22:12-15 Heb 12:14, 1 John 3, etc

In truth, Christianity is about being forgiven of sin, turning from that sin and turning to God, now established in a relationship which empowers us to live a life pleasing to Him. Without such a life, we won't be seeing Him. And yet righteousness is not forced upon us; as you say, believers aren't sinless, at least not perfectly so. The church faced this matter centuries ago and understood that persistence in wanton sin so grevious as to amount to a turning away from God and love of Him and neighbor will certainly ruin our relationship with God-and our prospect for an eternal destiny with Him. Sin can and will lead to anyone's death. Being made alive in Crhsit intrinsically involves being dead to sin. Otherwise we'd be mocking God and the sacrifice of His Son.

 

[fhansen]

Who made that rule?

If I made some android that could only "choose" to kill people, I would be directly blameworthy for their deaths, and not the android. If I made an android who could choose between killing people or not killing people then they would be blameworthy.

 

[Clare73]

And with that understanding there's no reason for a believer to refrain froim any sin whatsoever-no reason to leave our lives of sin;

Wow!

If love of God is not the reason, you're not born again, not saved and are wasting your time trying to earn salvation.

 

[Clare73]

If I made some android that could only "choose" to kill people, I would be directly blameworthy for their deaths, and not the android. If I made an android who could choose between killing people or not killing people then they would be blameworthy.

So that's your rule. . .

Then God is responsible for Pharaoh's condemnation, because God hardened his heart so that he could not repent of his rebellion.

 

[fhansen]

If love of God is not the reason, you're not born again and are not saved.

Love of God, and neighbor is, itself, a gift of grace that comes with justification. IOW, you seem to be implying here that we're not strictly imputed to be righteous, but actually made righteous as well, capable of overcoming sin. And, with your reply, you also seem to be implying that we must be righteous even though you also maintain that we'll still sin. Now, as love excludes sin and therefore causes righteousness by its nature, why do you think that believers still sin?

Your whole point was that believers do overcome sin- because they love-after defending imputed rigthteousness as justfying them without regard to sin, not only past but present and future sin as well. If a person is just without regard to acting justly (which contradicts 1 John 3:7-8 as well as Is 5:20), then it would not matter whether or not they love, whether or not they overcome sin.

 

[fhansen]

So that's your rule. . .

Then God is responsible for Pharaoh's condemnation, because God hardened his heart so that he could not repent of his rebellion.

The meaning is more nuanced; if Pharaoh didn't also participate in hardening his own heart, which he did acording to Scripture, then, of course God would be directly responsible, not Pharaoh.

 

[fhansen]

You evaded and rabbit trailed away from my point with scripture.

I’ll translate: you have no response.

 

[bling]

Will does not have to be free. Luther wrote a book with the title, "The Bondage of the Will," for example, written in response to works of Erasmus which championed the notion of free will.

I was thinking about how it is defined in philosophy classes.

 

[bling]

The will of man isnt free, its a slave to sin, and its not free from Gods control, I dont need a dictionary to know that

The actions of a slave can be controlled by the master, but not the thoughts of the slave.

 

[Brightfame52]

Man naturally can do no spiritual good, because naturally we are evil. Jesus speaking to some men, said Matt 7:11

If ye then, being evil, know how to give good gifts unto your children, how much more shall your Father which is in heaven give good things to them that ask him?

Being evil we are naturally spiritually corrupt, therefore a corrupt tree cannot bring forth good fruit Matt 7:17-18

Even so every good tree bringeth forth good fruit; but a corrupt tree bringeth forth evil fruit.

A good tree cannot bring forth evil fruit, neither can a corrupt tree bring forth good fruit.

Faith and repentance are good fruit, so a corrupt evil tree/person as we are by nature, cant [inability] bring those things forth.

 

[Brightfame52]

The actions of a slave can be controlled by the master, but not the thoughts of the slave.

Thats not true with God, God can and does control our thoughts, you underestimate the power of God

 

[Brightfame52]

I’ll translate: you have no response.

No response for your rabbit trail evasion, sure

 

[fhansen]

No response for your rabbit trail evasion, sure

Calling it a rabbit trail is just a lame excuse for not answering, because you couldn’t.

 

[Clare73]

The meaning is more nuanced; if Pharaoh didn't also participate in hardening his own heart, which he did acording to Scripture, then, of course God would be directly responsible, not Pharaoh.

All the unregenerate participate in the hardening of their hearts (Ro 1:18-20).

 

[fhansen]

All the unregenerate participate in the hardening of their hearts (Ro 1:18-20).

Yes, according to those verses they apparently do the hardening all by themselves, in fact. Either way, they have no excuse, meaning that they have just as much opportunity and reason to believe as any person out there who does believe. But they don't; they don't believe despite the help God gives them to do so; they freely will not to believe; they don't want to know God. That's why they anger and also sadden Him.

 

[Clare73]

Yes, according to those verses they apparently do the hardening all by themselves, in fact. Either way, they have no excuse, meaning that they have just as much opportunity and reason to believe as any person out there who does believe.

There is no faith apart from the sovereign (as unaccountable as the wind, Jn 3:6-8) will of the Holy Spirit in rebirth (Jn 3:3-5).

One has no more to do with their spiritual rebirth (Jn 3:3-5) than they do with their natural birth.

Rebirth is 100% an act of the Holy Spirit, based on his sovereign choice to do so (Jn 3:6-8), and based on nothing else.

 

[Spiritual Jew]

@Spiritual Jew



That men have a freewill, its not true

You have done NOTHING to prove that.

His Moral Law

Why are all people responsible to follow God's moral law with no excuse for not doing so, but at the same time most people supposedly are not able to acknowledge their sins and put their faith in Christ? That makes no sense at all.

 

[Spiritual Jew]

@Spiritual Jew



False, the unregenerate are not called to repentance, they are responsible to the Moral law of God.

Prove that with scripture. Your words mean nothing to me without scriptural support to back them up. And you need to explain how it can be that all people are expected to obey the moral law of God, but, somehow, some (most?) people are not able to acknowledge that they are lost sinners and need Jesus to save them and provide for the forgiveness of their sins. How can supposed "total depravity" keep someone from repenting of their sins and putting their faith in Christ, but not keep them from being expected to obey the moral law of God? Explain how that makes any sense.

 

[Spiritual Jew]

There is no faith apart from the sovereign (as unaccountable as the wind, Jn 3:6-8) will of the Holy Spirit in rebirth (Jn 3:3-5).

One has no more to do with their spiritual rebirth (Jn 3:3-5) than they do with their natural birth.

Rebirth is 100% an act of the Holy Spirit, based on his sovereign choice to do so (Jn 3:6-8), and based on nothing else.

This is 100% false and you have no scripture to back this up. You are badly misinterpreting John 3. Nowhere did Jesus say that man is not responsible to repent and believe before being regenerated.

Tell me, do you believe that someone is born again when they receive the Holy Spirit? If so, then explain why the disciples received the Holy Spirit AFTER having previously repented of their sins and putting their faith in Christ? They did not receive the Holy Spirit until after Christ's resurrection (John 20:28) and they certainly had repented and believed in Christ before they received the Holy Spirit. How do you reconcile that with your claim that one must be regenerated first before repenting and believing?

 

[Spiritual Jew]

False, he still did it willingly, so he is accountable

You think someone is held accountable for doing something that he couldn't help but doing? How does that make any sense? Your understanding of God is terribly flawed. God never punishes anyone for doing something that he or she couldn't help but doing. That is complete nonsense. Look at this...

Matthew 23:37 “Jerusalem, Jerusalem, you who kill the prophets and stone those sent to you, how often I have longed to gather your children together, as a hen gathers her chicks under her wings, and you were not willing. 38 Look, your house is left to you desolate.

Why did Jesus leave the house of the Jews (their temple) to be spiritually desolate? Because of them doing something they couldn't help doing? No. They didn't reject Him (not all did, but most did) because they could not accept Him, they rejected Him because they willingly chose not to. Jesus clearly implied here that He expected them to accept Him and told them what He would have done for them had they not rejected Him. The reason they rejected Him was not because they could not do so, but because they "were not willing". That puts the responsibility completely on them rather than giving them an excuse of "total depravity" or "total inability" as Calvinism does.