"Free Will" is enslaved?

redleghunter said:

An interesting way you put that.

Basically in order to be free as a slave to sin, we need to be free of the curse of sin?

Click to expand...

It's possible to have varying degrees of this in these bodies, but we probably need the resurrection bodies to see what it is really like.

Michael Collum said:

A freed will is a will that is freed from sin when making choices.

Click to expand...

Interesting and useful.

When people talk about free will however, they usually mean living life as they please and choosing to be saved.

Click to expand...

Moreover, being able to take any action without constraint or consequences imposed by any other moral agent. If their choices are constrained or result in consequences imposed by another moral agent, then their will is not free.

Who was he talking to? He said.. I am speaking to you in human terms. So were still looking at this in human terms? Then how are we looking at "slaves"? Most of us, if not all don't truly know what it means to be a slave. Where..you don't question.. you just do what ever is said.

A slave to Christ is SO different. We made the choice to freely come to Him.. we freely bow. On and on..

So whats the flip side of "human terms"

"Free will & free choice are not the same."

Click to expand...

Please explain, using Scripture. Thanks.

David Cabrera said:

Satan, sin and death like the Early Church affirmed.

Click to expand...

The Ransom Theory of Atonement was espoused in the second century, but that may in part be the product of their thinking a war was going on in heaven with satan taking captives. The Ransom Theory goes along with the idea satan is virtually on an equal plain with God yet God will win in the end. It elevates satan way too much. God having to pay satan off supports the idea of satan being “equal” with God.

Also, the idea of satan taking a payment to change his behavior means satan can change and there is no scripture supporting that idea, so can satan accept Christ as His savior?

Most of the early churches according to John in Rev. 1-4 had big problems, so we cannot depend on them, while we can heavily depend on inspired scripture protected and preserved for us by the Holy Spirit. From the very poor preservation of the writings of these early church leaders suggests the Holy Spirit was not involved.

There are some excellent scholarly writings in support of the Ransom Theory that strongly show it is truly a ransom scenario and there must be a kidnapper, but none consider the unbeliever himself to be that unworthy kidnapper.

Victory over death has much more to do with the resurrection.

Another thing you can do is look at the Christ Crucified Sermons given in scripture (like Acts 2) and you will not find paying satan off or Christ’s crucifixion being the victory over death.

redleghunter said:

...So your thoughts? How free is "free will" truly if we are enslaved to either sin and death or God and righteousness?...

Click to expand...

Firstly, free will doesn’t mean that everything goes as you want. It means you can want whatever you want freely. Secondly, people can freely choose do they follow unrighteousness or righteousness.

Mathetes66 said:

Please explain, using Scripture. Thanks.

Click to expand...

One can't use scripture to define "free will" because it doesn't occur in scripture. "Free will" is a concept of Greek philosophy that was adopted by such figures as Augustine to deny the strong deterministic tone of scripture.

In Greek philosophy, free will is the liberty of a moral agent to take actions according to his personal ethics without constraints or consequences imposed by another moral agent.

That concept does not exist in scripture. But how Augustine (and Aquinas) used "free will" was not the way the Greeks used it. Scripture speaks of constrained choices and the imposition of consequences by a moral authority. Scripture speaks of making a choice of who one will serve. That's not "free will;" that's "constrained choice."

"Constrained choices" is what Augustine is calling "free will," and when put to the mat, Christians will admit that's all we mean "free will" to be.

But that's not what secular philosophers mean by "free will." In fact, most secular philosophers deny that free will exists--as they define the term. A large proportion believe that humans make choices mechanistically pre-determined by combinations of physical compulsions and circumstances. Most are "compatibilists" who speak of a range of human choices that isn't totally mechanistically deterministic but also never completely "free."

The only people who speak glibly of human "free will" are Christians, and that's out of ignorance in knowing the difference between what Augustine and Aquinas called "free will" and what the rest of the world calls "free will."

I will ask it once again to make myself plainly clear: please explain USING SCRIPTURE not humanistic philosophy or reasoning. And the request was asked of the originator of what I quoted, although people like yourself can respond also.

And if you state Augustine taught 'constrained choice,' then prove it by quoting Augustine saying that. Otherwise it is your interpretation of what YOU THINK he said & your definition based on your interpretation. Thanks.

And by the way free will IS in the Scriptures. That is why I said it the way I did. Most people, even myself, are what Jesus continually said: 'Do you not know...Have you not read...You know neither the Scriptures nor the power of God.'

Psalm 119:108 Accept, I beseech you, THE FREEWILL OFFERINGS OF MY MOUTH, O LORD & teach me your judgments.

Ezra 3:5 '...And afterward offered the continual burnt offering, both of the new moons & of all the set feasts of the LORD that were consecrated,& of every one that WILLINGLY OFFERED A FREE WILL OFFERING UNTO THE LORD.

Ezra 7:16 And all the silver & gold that you can find in all the province of Babylon, with the freewill offering of the people & of the priests, offering willingly for the house of their God which is in Jerusalem...
(see also Lev 22:21,23; 23:38; Numbers 29:39; Deut 12:6,17; 2 Chron 31:14; Ezra 8:28, etc.)

redleghunter said:

Perhaps, for clarity we should address what we are being ransomed from first.

Click to expand...

We like to blame lots of people or things for holding us captive to make it all their fault: satan, Adam & Eve, bad luck, sin, evil in the world and even God for not providing for us.

Quit blaming others, once we see: we ourselves are to blame, responsible and God wants to help us, we can accept His charity: Christ, Him crucified, God’s forgiveness and a new life, if others are to blame than God needs to take care of them and we can hold on to our pride (it is not our fault). We really do not want to give up the old man (crucify him) and be born again to a new life.

The nonbelieving sinner (all mature adults start out that way) needs to be crucified (he/she is the kidnapping criminal), that is the real “ransom payment” due the kidnapper and that is what we are told can happen to our old self.

In talking to the nonbeliever, there has to be the realization that his/her old life will be done away with (crucified) as part of the conversion process, to make sure they are willing to do that.

Christ crucified is also a kind of gift to the believer, in that it provides a way for the Christian to be fairly justly lovingly punished/disciplined for his/her sins in that we are crucified with Christ.

Does the unbelieving sinner want to be destroyed and disciplined for his sins and become new person?

The atonement process is something we participate in and experience much better than we can explain it.

Mathetes66 said:

I will ask it once again to make myself plainly clear: please explain USING SCRIPTURE not humanistic philosophy or reasoning. And the request was asked of the originator of what I quoted, although people like yourself can respond also.

And if you state Augustine taught 'constrained choice,' then prove it by quoting Augustine saying that. Otherwise it is your interpretation of what YOU THINK he said & your definition based on your interpretation. Thanks.

Click to expand...

There is no "free will" in scripture. I told you where it originally came from--which isn't scripture. I told you where Christians picked up the term--and that's not scripture either.

So I can't give you scripture for something that isn't in scripture.

However, in terms of "constrained choices:"

But if serving the Lord seems undesirable to you, then choose for yourselves this day whom you will serve, whether the gods your ancestors served beyond the Euphrates, or the gods of the Amorites, in whose land you are living. But as for me and my household, we will serve the Lord.” -- Joshua 24

Don’t you know that when you offer yourselves to someone as obedient slaves, you are slaves of the one you obey—whether you are slaves to sin, which leads to death, or to obedience, which leads to righteousness?

But thanks be to God that, though you used to be slaves to sin, you have come to obey from your heart the pattern of teaching that has now claimed your allegiance. You have been set free from sin and have become slaves to righteousness. -- Romans 6

Mathetes66 said:

I will ask it once again to make myself plainly clear: please explain USING SCRIPTURE not humanistic philosophy or reasoning. And the request was asked of the originator of what I quoted, although people like yourself can respond also.

And if you state Augustine taught 'constrained choice,' then prove it by quoting Augustine saying that. Otherwise it is your interpretation of what YOU THINK he said & your definition based on your interpretation. Thanks.

And by the way free will IS in the Scriptures. That is why I said it the way I did. Most people, even myself, are what Jesus continually said: 'Do you not know...Have you not read...You know neither the Scriptures nor the power of God.'

Psalm 119:108 Accept, I beseech you, THE FREEWILL OFFERINGS OF MY MOUTH, O LORD & teach me your judgments.

Ezra 3:5 '...And afterward offered the continual burnt offering, both of the new moons & of all the set feasts of the LORD that were consecrated,& of every one that WILLINGLY OFFERED A FREE WILL OFFERING UNTO THE LORD.

Ezra 7:16 And all the silver & gold that you can find in all the province of Babylon, with the freewill offering of the people & of the priests, offering willingly for the house of their God which is in Jerusalem...
(see also Lev 22:21,23; 23:38; Numbers 29:39; Deut 12:6,17; 2 Chron 31:14; Ezra 8:28, etc.)

Click to expand...

"Free will offering" in that context means nothing more than providing offerings that are not explicitly defined by the Mosaic Law. In other cases, God had defined what will be offered when and exactly how it is to be offered. "Free will offerings" merely means offerings other than those explicitly commanded and defined by God.

That has nothing to do with making moral choices, because the morality of making "undefined" offerings is already defined by God as a moral act. IOW, God had already said, "It's moral for you to make offerings other than those I have explicitly defined."

So it's not "free will" to make a "free will offering" because God has already called for it. He has simply made the choice available. And that choice is constrained--the Jews could not offer unclean animals, for instance, so it was never totally "free will."

RDKirk said:

There is no "free will" in scripture. If you think there is, then you prove it. Otherwise you're asking people to use scripture to prove something scripture never mentions.

Click to expand...

Brother, you know I love you in Jesus Christ...

It couldn’t be more plain...

Jesus) John 7:17 Anyone who chooses to do the will of God will find out whether my teaching comes from God or whether I speak on my own.

Paul) Romans 13:2 Consequently, whoever rebels against the authority is rebelling against what God has instituted, and those who do so will bring judgment on themselves.

2 parties listed in Romans with unmistakable identities and implications

The Rebel Of their own will (whoever)

God, Who can be willingly rebelled Against.

Consequence is attributed as a result of their own Will, apart from God, to do so.

Brother RD... I am certain you will suggest these verses do not mean this... but that doesn’t change what they mean.

Mathetes66 said:

And by the way free will IS in the Scriptures.

Click to expand...

In theological debate there are two meanings of "free will." They get confused quite a lot. I don't know if you know the difference, but they amount to

1) being able to choose freely, or

2) having control over what determines our choices.

It goes back to Hammster's statement about the difference between free will and free choice. The verses you cite affirm the first of the two. The second one is circular, because it means that a person decides the factors that control their decisions, which then determines the factors which control their decisions, ad infinitum.

The theological debate over free will is strictly about the second kind, though proponents of this free will usually cite evidence of the first kind to prove the existence of the second...which is kind of what you're doing in that post.

nonaeroterraqueous said:

In theological debate there are two meanings of "free will." They get confused quite a lot. I don't know if you know the difference, but they amount to

1) being able to choose freely, or

2) having control over what determines our choices.

It goes back to Hammster's statement about the difference between free will and free choice. The verses you cite affirm the first of the two. The second one is circular, because it means that a person decides the factors that control their decisions, which then determines the factors which control their decisions, ad infinitum.

The theological debate over free will is strictly about the second kind, though proponents of this free will usually cite evidence of the first kind to prove the existence of the second...which is kind of what you're doing in that post.

Click to expand...

Free Will is Subject to Law.
Anarchy is subject to No Law.

The real matter here, by your own words is “Divine Determinism”.

Did God allow us to Freely Choose, subject to Laws Of the Universe, apart from His Will?

Or... Did God allow us to Freely Choose, subject to Laws Of the Universe, Determined by His Will?

Or, Did God Determine MOST of our Choices for us, apart from any known Law?

Or, are we merely actors in a play, set forth in motion, unconsciously determined by God, Who set the play in motion?

This is the heart of the matter, No?

Do we Determine our fate, or are we Determined? If so, what level of determinism?

If not, then between the Dichotomy Of HIS desires and ours... how do we “align” with His? (Romans 4 - Romans 7)

Grip Docility said:

Brother, you know I love you in Jesus Christ...

It couldn’t be more plain...

Jesus) John 7:17 Anyone who chooses to do the will of God will find out whether my teaching comes from God or whether I speak on my own.

Paul) Romans 13:2 Consequently, whoever rebels against the authority is rebelling against what God has instituted, and those who do so will bring judgment on themselves.

2 parties listed in Romans with unmistakable identities and implications

The Rebel Of their own will (whoever)

God, Who can be willingly rebelled Against.

Consequence is attributed as a result of their own Will, apart from God, to do so.

Brother RD... I am certain you will suggest these verses do not mean this... but that doesn’t change what they mean.

Click to expand...

If you choose to do someone else's will, that's not your own free will, that is a constrained choice. Moreover, if you do not choose to do the Lord's will, you will bear terrible consequences. So your will is not free--you are forced to consider the will of another in what you choose to do.

Again, when Christians say "free will" we don't mean what the rest of the world means by "free will."

We can call it "free will" among ourselves, okay, fine, that's like identical twins making up their own language between themselves.

But when the twins talk to anyone else, they need to use the standard language everyone else is using.

RDKirk said:

If you choose to do someone else's will, that's not your own free will, that is a constrained choice. Moreover, if you do not choose to do the Lord's will, you will bear terrible consequences. So your will is not free--you are forced to consider the will of another in what you choose to do.

Again, when Christians say "free will" we don't mean what the rest of the world means by "free will."

We can call it "free will" among ourselves, okay, fine, that's like identical twins making up their own language between themselves.

But when the twins talk to anyone else, they need to use the standard language everyone else is using.

Click to expand...

Oh but it is. I am the captain of my soul!



HE is my WAR Admiral! (Exodus 14:14)