How Free Will Turns the Gospel into Law and Grace into Works.

Stephen Douglas said:

It seems to me that we may be over-intellectualizing this potter and clay issue. How is the reference to the potter making his own choice to form any vessel isolated from Paul's declaration that God will have mercy on whom He will have mercy? Paul, as a good teacher, anticipated the reaction of the student. He understood that for God to hate a fetus within a womb for the sake of election sounds like God has predetermined all things and Paul is preemptively asking the question "who can resist His will?" That is an obvious question isn't it. To which Paul replies "Who are you oh man to reply against God?" This is very similar to what God said to Job (Job 38:4-11) Then Paul gives the example of the potter. This is all related isn't it? Why excavate the potter passage and place it in the context of 2 Timothy? Common use? Special purposes? The point is that the potter makes the choice not the clay. Who is the clay to reply to the potter?

The point has been raised that this 9th chapter of Romans is not pertaining to salvation in which I would agree in some sense. But it isn't focusing only on the Jewish people either. It is describing the sovereign nature of God. God makes choices outside of a person's ability to understand. You either trust God or you don't. This is the central message of this passage and Paul will continue to deal with the specific issue of the Israelites in the following chapters. This 9th chapter is explicitly concerning the nature of God and everyone can learn from it.

Doug

Click to expand...

Keep in mind the context: Paul is addressing a huge very significant issue within the Church itself and Paul is best prepared to address the issue. We today might not have an issue with two denominations in a town (Jewish and Gentile), but this is hugely significant just prior to sever persecution coming upon the Christians (Jewish and Gentile) and later all the Jews and Christians (seen as a sect of the Jews). They have to get along if they will soon need to flee together and live together.

Paul did not establish the church in Rome and if he had this issue might have been resolved much earlier before they grow to multiple locations and sizable.

The Jews (and even the Jewish Christians) as you would expect felt they were special and they were special, born as biblically described “God’s chosen and God’s children”, in contrast to the common Gentiles. There is lots of scripture to show the Jewish people being considered superior to Gentiles.

When Paul uses the potter analogy it is not like Jerimiah use of the potter’s analogy, since Jerimiah is talking about the clay in the potter’s hands and Paul is talking about the completed vessel leaving the shop. Both pots leaving the shop would have the potter’s mark on them and thus good for what they were intended to be used for. That fits the idea of common and special vessels.

I did not come up with some unique way to interpret τιμὴν and ἀτιμίαν, since most translates now seem to use common and special vessels, but what I was showing with 2 Tim. 2: 20 is why most later translators switched from honorable and dishonorable to special and common since that is the way Paul used it other places. Paul also shows a common or if you like dishonorable vessel can become honorable or special.

I agree with you in that salvation is part of this discussion, but like we might agree salvation does not matter if you were born special or common, but I would add: after you leave the potter’s shop (are born into what ever condition you are born into) you can change (2 Tim. 2:20). If you allow yourself to be damaged and unworthy of the Potter’s mark than destruction awaits you.

Jan001 said:

Man definitely has the ability to please God through the exercise of his "free will" with the help of God's Holy Spirit of Grace.

Click to expand...

Now, we are getting somewhere! Surely man is able to please God through the exercise of the Holy Spirit that is indwelling within those who have chosen Christ. But read this!!! Man must be able to make that decision first. If there is none good and none righteous and none who seeks after God?....If all have sinned and the wages of a single sin is death because he who has committed a single sin has committed them all?...Then man is left without hope, is he not? Or is there some special scripture passages that negates others?

This is the scriptural truth that your posts have been avoiding. How is carnal man able to make the righteous choice to turn every human decision over to something that is sensually undetectable when he is dead in his sins? Does not Paul explicitly express this frustration in Romans 7:13-25? Is Romans 8:7-8 not clear when Paul declares that the carnal mind CANNOT obey the commandments?

Jan001 said:

Ephesians 5:8-11
for once you were darkness, but now you are light in the Lord; walk as children of light 9 (for the fruit of light is found in all that is good and right and true), 10 and try to learn what is pleasing to the Lord. 11 Take no part in the unfruitful works of darkness, but instead expose them.

Click to expand...

This, among many of the passages that you present is concerning those whose hearts have been changed by the Spirit of God to love Christ. These are people who ARE capable of making righteous decisions. I have never disputed that "born of the Spirit" followers of Christ had no will to freely choose. Yet, you continue to publish these types of examples.

Jan001 said:

Romans 8:1-9
There is therefore now no condemnation for those who are in Christ Jesus. 2 For the law of the Spirit of life in Christ Jesus has set me free from the law of sin and death. 3 For God has done what the law, weakened by the flesh, could not do: sending his own Son in the likeness of sinful flesh and for sin, he condemned sin in the flesh, 4 in order that the just requirement of the law might be fulfilled in us, who walk not according to the flesh but according to the Spirit. 5 For those who live according to the flesh set their minds on the things of the flesh, but those who live according to the Spirit set their minds on the things of the Spirit. 6

Click to expand...

Jan001 said:

To set the mind on the flesh is death, but to set the mind on the Spirit is life and peace. 7 For the mind that is set on the flesh is hostile to God; it does not submit to God’s law, indeed it cannot; 8 and those who are in the flesh cannot please God. 9 But you are not in the flesh, you are in the Spirit, if in fact the Spirit of God dwells in you. Any one who does not have the Spirit of Christ does not belong to him.

​

Click to expand...

I have no idea what you are proposing by submitting these types of scriptural examples?? What mind do you think is set upon the flesh? What do you think that the carnal mind is? Do people choose to have this type of mind? How does this type of mind make a choice not to be carnally minded? Does not Paul say that this mind CANNOT obey the commandments of God? How does any of this passage defend the notion of the "free will" of man???​

Jan001 said:

Free will

Click to expand...

Jan001 said:

: whatever a man sows, that he will also reap.

Click to expand...

This is a spiritual law of the universe and does not support the notion of "free will" in the least. When a man makes a decision he reaps the consequences of that decision. This law is applicable to those who are lost and to those who have been saved by God's plan of redemption. It has nothing to do with man's ability to choose but rather the consequences of choices.

I am baffled by your constant submission of scripture passages that prove no point except that God commands obedience from His people. Surely He does but has not man, and the nation of Israel, proven time and time again that they can never be obedient with their choices? It is only through the divine imputation of God's Holy Spirit that men may make choices to please God. I didn't say it. God said it right there in Romans 8!!!

Yes, God knows everything. Yes, He certainly does. He knew that Adam would choose sin and He knows that there is none good and that there could never be anyone who was able to adhere to His commandments. Yet, God continued to show His people the bar of perfection. God continued to show His people how disabled that they were. They needed a Savior. Christ died as a sacrifice for the sins of the world but not everyone benefits from that sacrifice. Only the ones whose hearts and desires had been changed by God were capable of choosing righteously. Thus, we go from being slaves of sin to slaves of Christ but slaves nonetheless. Because the Bible tells me so.

Doug

bling said:

Keep in mind the context: Paul is addressing a huge very significant issue within the Church itself and Paul is best prepared to address the issue. We today might not have an issue with two denominations in a town (Jewish and Gentile), but this is hugely significant just prior to sever persecution coming upon the Christians (Jewish and Gentile) and later all the Jews and Christians (seen as a sect of the Jews). They have to get along if they will soon need to flee together and live together.

Paul did not establish the church in Rome and if he had this issue might have been resolved much earlier before they grow to multiple locations and sizable.

The Jews (and even the Jewish Christians) as you would expect felt they were special and they were special, born as biblically described “God’s chosen and God’s children”, in contrast to the common Gentiles. There is lots of scripture to show the Jewish people being considered superior to Gentiles.

When Paul uses the potter analogy it is not like Jerimiah use of the potter’s analogy, since Jerimiah is talking about the clay in the potter’s hands and Paul is talking about the completed vessel leaving the shop. Both pots leaving the shop would have the potter’s mark on them and thus good for what they were intended to be used for. That fits the idea of common and special vessels.

I did not come up with some unique way to interpret τιμὴν and ἀτιμίαν, since most translates now seem to use common and special vessels, but what I was showing with 2 Tim. 2: 20 is why most later translators switched from honorable and dishonorable to special and common since that is the way Paul used it other places. Paul also shows a common or if you like dishonorable vessel can become honorable or special.

I agree with you in that salvation is part of this discussion, but like we might agree salvation does not matter if you were born special or common, but I would add: after you leave the potter’s shop (are born into what ever condition you are born into) you can change (2 Tim. 2:20). If you allow yourself to be damaged and unworthy of the Potter’s mark than destruction awaits you.

Click to expand...

But you must agree with the force of this passage that the lump of clay has no privilege to claim "foul" when the potter makes choices for this same lump of clay. It is the potter who brings usefulness to a lump. He does so how he pleases in the way that God is sovereign in His choices to "have mercy upon whom He will have mercy and harden whom He will harden". This passage seems to be much less about the clay than it is about the freedom of the potter to form something out of the formless in any way that he pleases. And this passage is concerning less about salvation than it is describing the very nature of God. The context of the subject matter concerning Israel does not change that. It seems to me that this entire chapter is explaining the nature of God Himself and not so much concerning common or dishonorable vessels.

Doug

Stephen Douglas said:

But you must agree with the force of this passage that the lump of clay has no privilege to claim "foul" when the potter makes choices for this same lump of clay. It is the potter who brings usefulness to a lump. He does so how he pleases in the way that God is sovereign in His choices to "have mercy upon whom He will have mercy and harden whom He will harden". This passage seems to be much less about the clay than it is about the freedom of the potter to form something out of the formless in any way that he pleases. And this passage is concerning less about salvation than it is describing the very nature of God. The context of the subject matter concerning Israel does not change that. It seems to me that this entire chapter is explaining the nature of God Himself and not so much concerning common or dishonorable vessels.

Doug

Click to expand...

The Lump of clay is not complaining it has not been born yet, but the wash bowl (gentiles) can complaining about not being a vase to hold the incense in the temple (the Jews). God the potter can take the same lump of clay (human flesh) and make a Gentile (something common) or a Jew (someone made for a special purpose).
The wash bowl (Gentile) has no reason to complain to the Potter God about being made lowly compared to being born (made) a child of God (Jew) since when it comes to that which really matters (salvation) it does not matter if you were born Jew or Gentile, both have problems.

bling said:

The Lump of clay is not complaining it has not been born yet, but the wash bowl (gentiles) can complaining about not being a vase to hold the incense in the temple (the Jews). God the potter can take the same lump of clay (human flesh) and make a Gentile (something common) or a Jew (someone made for a special purpose).
The wash bowl (Gentile) has no reason to complain to the Potter God about being made lowly compared to being born (made) a child of God (Jew) since when it comes to that which really matters (salvation) it does not matter if you were born Jew or Gentile, both have problems.

Click to expand...

Not so much of a problem for the common vessel that gives thanks to the potter for being formed into anything that the potter pleases. This really gets down to the issue of faith. No one may accuse God of unfairness because God is good. If God chooses Jacob and does not choose Esau (so that election may stand) He does so as a God of love and justice. We may not understand this but faith surpasses understanding. Just as Jesus told Peter that John’s ultimate destiny had no bearing on Peter, we also must trust that God is good even if He seems to bless others more than ourselves. God has given us life and to those that praise Him while enduring trials, God grants eternal life.

I see this entire chapter as having a much greater bearing than can be confined to the Jew and Gentile issue. This is Paul expressing the sovereign nature of God. The Jew and Gentile contrast is an example of how God makes divine choices. And yes, in the end they both have problems as do we all. Problems that are eradicated by the shed blood of Christ.

Doug

Stephen Douglas said:

Not so much of a problem for the common vessel that gives thanks to the potter for being formed into anything that the potter pleases. This really gets down to the issue of faith. No one may accuse God of unfairness because God is good. If God chooses Jacob and does not choose Esau (so that election may stand) He does so as a God of love and justice. We may not understand this but faith surpasses understanding. Just as Jesus told Peter that John’s ultimate destiny had no bearing on Peter, we also must trust that God is good even if He seems to bless others more than ourselves. God has given us life and to those that praise Him while enduring trials, God grants eternal life.

I see this entire chapter as having a much greater bearing than can be confined to the Jew and Gentile issue. This is Paul expressing the sovereign nature of God. The Jew and Gentile contrast is an example of how God makes divine choices. And yes, in the end they both have problems as do we all. Problems that are eradicated by the shed blood of Christ.

Doug

Click to expand...

The added responsibility for the special vessels would make the free will choice to humbly accept God’s forgiveness equally difficult with the common vessels.

Do you know for certain Esau was not part of the saved elect and if so how? God could not work with the disposition given Esau prior to birth which God would hate, since Esau had a lot of good qualities that Isaac picked up on. Esau repented of his murderous hatred for Jacob before he died. Just because Esau’s descendants were really bad and God cured them, most of Jacob’s descendants were really bad and God cursed them.

Peter seemingly miss understood Jesus’ answer, but if it is better for you to die early then that is when you want to die and if some live longer carrying on the work, so what?

The “problem” of humbly accepting God’s forgiveness as pure charity is not “eradicated” by Christ’s shed blood, but it is made easier for everyone.

bling said:

The added responsibility for the special vessels would make the free will choice to humbly accept God’s forgiveness equally difficult with the common vessels.

Click to expand...

I cannot follow the intention of this statement. Can you restate in other words?

bling said:

Do you know for certain Esau was not part of the saved elect and if so how? God could not work with the disposition given Esau prior to birth which God would hate, since Esau had a lot of good qualities that Isaac picked up on. Esau repented of his murderous hatred for Jacob before he died. Just because Esau’s descendants were really bad and God cured them, most of Jacob’s descendants were really bad and God cursed them.

Click to expand...

I have no certainty about anyone's eventual election status including that of Adolf Hitler, Sister Theresa or Pontius Pilate. God knows. What I do know is that Paul intentionally inserted this phrase into his exposition of God's sovereign and decretive will.
…...……………………………………………..

(for the children not yet being born, nor having done any good or evil, that the purpose of God according to election might stand, not of works but of Him who calls)

As it is written, “Jacob I have loved, but Esau I have hated.” Romans 9:11,13
…………………………………………………..

Interesting that Paul would emphasize that point isn't it? Not only does Paul emphasize this condition but does so with a purpose. He mentions the situation of innocence of the twin. He mentions that God's disposition toward this one twin is not based on anything that the twin has done. Yet for reasons undisclosed Paul labors to point out that God calling is not based on any work. Now, if you want to maintain that God's posture toward Esau was only a temporary condition then I would have to ask why Paul would have stated this in the way that he has chosen? Why even mention that neither of the fetuses had opportunity to do good or evil? The reason should be obvious. Paul wanted every Jew and Gentile to know that you don't question the Creator of the universe. God made a choice to love one of the fetuses while hating the other on some basis that is not disclosed. And ultimately Paul will follow up with....
………………………………………………..

God says to Moses, “I will have mercy on whomever I will have mercy, and I will have compassion on whomever I will have compassion.” So then it is not of him who wills, nor of him who runs, but of God who shows mercy. Romans 9:15-16
……………………………………………...

What do the good qualities of Esau have to do with God's sovereign will to show mercy....or not? Paul is explicitly revealing that God makes decisions based on the good pleasure of His will (Ephesians 1:9). I know that is rather vague but that is all that He gives us and it is all that He gave Job. Faith = Trust. To interpret this intention by Paul as anything other than an emphasis on God's divine will to choose His own is hard to grasp because ultimately God is omniscient. We cannot get around that.

bling said:

Peter seemingly miss understood Jesus’ answer, but if it is better for you to die early then that is when you want to die and if some live longer carrying on the work, so what?

Click to expand...

So what? Is this not just another example of the Divine making decisions that may be hard to understand or that may seem unfair. I mention this incident with Peter to illustrate that God's intentional will is not predicated upon our acceptance or understanding of any situation. Neither has God left the inheritance of Christ up to the weakness of the flesh to choose righteously. The natural mind is at enmity with God and is not even subject to God's law, why? Because the natural mind is incapable of doing such. Romans 8:7

bling said:

The “problem” of humbly accepting God’s forgiveness as pure charity is not “eradicated” by Christ’s shed blood, but it is made easier for everyone.

Click to expand...

Are you saying that the sacrifice upon the Cross is not a necessity for the justification of man? It only makes it easier for man to submit his will to Christ? If so, this is going to be a very long conversation.

Doug

This:

That person was most definitely saved, but this other person was most definitely not saved...?

God Bless!

Stephen Douglas said:

I cannot follow the intention of this statement. Can you restate in other words?

Click to expand...

All mature adults are all equally made to fulfill the one main objective, accepting or rejecting the Creator’s charity (forgiveness). So, adults were born into an exalted position in life (like the Jews), but failed the special responsibilities, had just as hard of a time accepting God’s charity as the Gentiles.

Stephen Douglas said:

I have no certainty about anyone's eventual election status including that of Adolf Hitler, Sister Theresa or Pontius Pilate. God knows. What I do know is that Paul intentionally inserted this phrase into his exposition of God's sovereign and decretive will.
…...……………………………………………..

(for the children not yet being born, nor having done any good or evil, that the purpose of God according to election might stand, not of works but of Him who calls)

As it is written, “Jacob I have loved, but Esau I have hated.” Romans 9:11,13

Click to expand...

The purpose of God “according to the election” is not specifically talking about Jacob and Esau, but the whole election process, all the way from Adam & Eve, through the Law and to Christianity. God planned out who would be born gentile, Jew, where, when, and to whom. None of what we might consider “important” really matters when it comes to salvation, like Esau and Jacob, one could be used to bring forth the Jews and Christ, but the other God could not work with for that purpose (which is the purpose of the elect.) That does not mean Esau did not later become part of the elect partly with the repenting of Jacob, Esau repents.
You can see a lot of the reason why one fetus’s “personality” would have been preferred over the other from how they turned out. Every one of my children showed different personalities in the first year and I am sure God could go back even before the first year.

Stephen Douglas said:

Interesting that Paul would emphasize that point isn't it? Not only does Paul emphasize this condition but does so with a purpose. He mentions the situation of innocence of the twin. He mentions that God's disposition toward this one twin is not based on anything that the twin has done. Yet for reasons undisclosed Paul labors to point out that God calling is not based on any work. Now, if you want to maintain that God's posture toward Esau was only a temporary condition then I would have to ask why Paul would have stated this in the way that he has chosen? Why even mention that neither of the fetuses had opportunity to do good or evil? The reason should be obvious. Paul wanted every Jew and Gentile to know that you don't question the Creator of the universe. God made a choice to love one of the fetuses while hating the other on some basis that is not disclosed. And ultimately Paul will follow up with....
………………………………………………..

God says to Moses, “I will have mercy on whomever I will have mercy, and I will have compassion on whomever I will have compassion.” So then it is not of him who wills, nor of him who runs, but of God who shows mercy. Romans 9:15-16

Click to expand...

God shows great compassion and mercy to all people at the beginning, but some are born physically handicapped, which can be seen by humans as a lack of compassion or mercy, God quits showing mercy and compassion to those who continue to refuse His help and will never accept God’s help, so they take on a lesser purpose.

Stephen Douglas said:

What do the good qualities of Esau have to do with God's sovereign will to show mercy....or not? Paul is explicitly revealing that God makes decisions based on the good pleasure of His will (Ephesians 1:9). I know that is rather vague but that is all that He gives us and it is all that He gave Job. Faith = Trust. To interpret this intention by Paul as anything other than an emphasis on God's divine will to choose His own is hard to grasp because ultimately God is omniscient. We cannot get around that.

Click to expand...

Judas when to his death without repenting, but Esau did repent of wanting to murder his brother.

We can figure out Job (Was Job not better after all this hardship than before the hardship and how was going through the hardship the only way to improve Job)?

Do you not know what pleases God and does not please God?

God’s “good pleasure” all has to do with helping willing humans fulfill their earthly objective. God is totally unselfish (That is part of Godly type Love).

Stephen Douglas said:

So what? Is this not just another example of the Divine making decisions that may be hard to understand or that may seem unfair. I mention this incident with Peter to illustrate that God's intentional will is not predicated upon our acceptance or understanding of any situation. Neither has God left the inheritance of Christ up to the weakness of the flesh to choose righteously. The natural mind is at enmity with God and is not even subject to God's law, why? Because the natural mind is incapable of doing such. Romans 8:7

Click to expand...

Some have the privilege and honor of being torture to death for the cause, while others spend their whole life helping others, some of whom may give up their lives for the cause. This might seem “unfair”, but is it. A Chinese student I teach Bible to, must return to Beijing China soon, knowing no Christians in Beijing and living in a very hostile to Christians neighborhood. He has a good chance of being discovered and winding up on the midnight bus (never to be seen again), I Love him like my own child, so what?

I agree with the idea unbelieving sinners cannot “do” anything: noble, worthy, righteous, holy, or of any value to others, but sinners can for selfish (unrighteous) reasons chose to accept pure undeserved charity. Similarly, the prodigal son coming home for an undeserved job and thus have some type of livable life, yet he did nothing noble, worthy, righteous, holy or of value to others. To wimp out and give up or be macho, hang in there, take the punishment you fully deserve is the choice left up to the prodigal son and really all those spiraling down into the pigsty of life.

Only after deciding to wimp out does the father shower you with gifts and abilities.

Stephen Douglas said:

Are you saying that the sacrifice upon the Cross is not a necessity for the justification of man? It only makes it easier for man to submit his will to Christ? If so, this is going to be a very long conversation.

Click to expand...

People were forgiven and saved before and thus without the cross, they humbly accepted God’s forgiveness as pure charity. Ro. 3:25.

I now have a much fuller comprehension of the title of this thread.

Doug

Stephen Douglas said:

Now, we are getting somewhere! Surely man is able to please God through the exercise of the Holy Spirit that is indwelling within those who have chosen Christ. But read this!!! Man must be able to make that decision first. If there is none good and none righteous and none who seeks after God?....If all have sinned and the wages of a single sin is death because he who has committed a single sin has committed them all?...Then man is left without hope, is he not? Or is there some special scripture passages that negates others? This is the scriptural truth that your posts have been avoiding.

How is carnal man able to make the righteous choice to turn every human decision over to something that is sensually undetectable when he is dead in his sins? Does not Paul explicitly express this frustration in Romans 7:13-25? Is Romans 8:7-8 not clear when Paul declares that the carnal mind CANNOT obey the commandments?

Click to expand...

In the Book of Romans, Paul is addressing the Christian Jews in Rome and he is quoting part of a passage from Isaiah 64. He is teaching that both the Israelite and Gentile nations have sinned against God and so the Christian Jews cannot continue to believe that they are superior to the Christian Gentiles. In Christ Jesus there is now no distinction between Jew and Greek/Gentile. They are equal in dignity.

Romans 10:12
For there is no distinction between Jew and Greek; the same Lord is Lord of all and bestows his riches upon all who call upon him. rsv

RE: "there is none good and none righteous and none who seeks after God"


Isaiah is saying that God works for those who wait for him. God meets him that joyfully works righteousness and He works for those that remember Him in his ways.

But the nation of Israel has sinned against God and so they are not like the person who works righteousness, who remembers God's ways. The Israelite nation has instead chosen to sin against God and therefore their seemingly righteous deeds are not righteous before God. Ezekiel 33:12-20

RE: "all have sinned"

Because Adam sinned, all his descendants inherited his sin and its consequences. Therefore "all sinned". No one could not enter into eternal life with God until after Jesus atoned for Adam's sin. Romans 5:18-19

RE: "he who has committed a single sin has committed them all"

James 2:1-11
My brethren, show no partiality as you hold the faith of our Lord Jesus Christ, the Lord of glory. 2 For if a man with gold rings and in fine clothing comes into your assembly, and a poor man in shabby clothing also comes in, 3 and you pay attention to the one who wears the fine clothing and say, “Have a seat here, please,” while you say to the poor man, “Stand there,” or, “Sit at my feet,” 4 have you not made distinctions among yourselves, and become judges with evil thoughts?
5 Listen, my beloved brethren. Has not God chosen those who are poor in the world to be rich in faith and heirs of the kingdom which he has promised to those who love him? 6 But you have dishonored the poor man. Is it not the rich who oppress you, is it not they who drag you into court? 7 Is it not they who blaspheme the honorable name which was invoked over you?
8 If you really fulfil the royal law (of Christ), according to the scripture, “You shall love your neighbor as yourself,” you do well. 9 But if you show partiality, you commit sin, and are convicted by the law as transgressors. 10 For whoever keeps the whole (royal) law but fails in one point has become guilty of all of it. 11 For he who said, “Do not commit adultery,” said also, “Do not kill.” If you do not commit adultery but do kill, you have become a transgressor of the (royal) law. 12 So speak and so act as those who are to be judged under the law of liberty. 13 For judgment is without mercy to one who has shown no mercy; yet mercy triumphs over judgment. rsv

James is warning that if a person shows partiality towards a rich man in their church assembly, he commits a sin against the royal law of Christ. Galatians 5:19-21

The remedy for sinning against this royal law of Christ is to repent and confess one's sin.

1 John 2:1-3
My little children, I am writing this to you so that you may not sin; but if any one does sin, we have an advocate with the Father, Jesus Christ the righteous; 2 and he is the expiation for our sins, and not for ours only but also for the sins of the whole world. 3 And by this we may be sure that we know him, if we keep his commandments. rsv

Luke 15:10
Just so, I tell you, there is joy before the angels of God over one sinner who repents.” rsv

2 Corinthians 7:10
For godly grief produces a repentance that leads to salvation and brings no regret, but worldly grief produces death. rsv

Revelation 2:5
Remember then from what you have fallen, repent and do the works you did at first. If not, I will come to you and remove your lampstand from its place, unless you repent. rsv

2 Timothy 2:24-26
And the Lord’s servant must not be quarrelsome but kindly to every one, an apt teacher, forbearing, 25 correcting his opponents with gentleness. God may perhaps grant that they will repent and come to know the truth, 26 and they may escape from the snare of the devil, after being captured by him to do his will. rsv

2 Peter 3:9
The Lord is not slow about his promise as some count slowness, but is forbearing toward you, not wishing that any should perish, but that all should reach repentance. rsv

RE: "Romans 7:13-25 and Romans 8:7-8, Bodies dead because of sin:

It is true that because of Adam's sin, mankind has concupiscence which is the desire/propensity to be selfish and therefore choose to sin against God's commandments.

Even though Adam lost all possibility for him and his descendants to enter into eternal life in heaven with God, God did not revoke the ability of mankind to call upon His name and be helped by Him.

Genesis 4:26
To Seth (third son of Adam) also a son was born, and he called his name Enosh. At that time men began to call upon the name of the Lord. rsv

Acts 2:21, Joel 2:32, Acts 10:34-35

Romans 7:9-17
But you are not in the flesh, you are in the Spirit, if in fact the Spirit of God dwells in you. Any one who does not have the Spirit of Christ does not belong to him. 10 But if Christ is in you, although your bodies are dead (physically mortal) because of sin, your spirits are alive because of righteousness. 11 If the Spirit of him who raised Jesus from the dead dwells in you, he who raised Christ Jesus from the dead will give life to your mortal bodies also through his Spirit which dwells in you.
12 So then, brethren, we are debtors, not to the flesh, to live according to the flesh— 13 for if you live according to the flesh you will die, but if by the Spirit you put to death the deeds of the body you will live. 14 For all who are led by the Spirit of God are sons of God. 15 For you did not receive the spirit of slavery to fall back into fear, but you have received the spirit of sonship. When we cry, “Abba! Father!” 16 it is the Spirit himself bearing witness with our spirit that we are children of God, 17 and if children, then heirs, heirs of God and fellow heirs with Christ, provided we suffer with him in order that we may also be glorified with him. rsv

Each person chooses his own destiny by his own actions. Titus 1:16


1 John 5:3
For this is the love of God, that we keep his commandments. And his commandments are not burdensome. rsv

Stephen Douglas said:

........ What do you think that the carnal mind is? Do people choose to have this type of mind? How does this type of mind make a choice not to be carnally minded? Does not Paul say that this mind CANNOT obey the commandments of God? How does any of this passage defend the notion of the "free will" of man???

Click to expand...

Carnal: pertaining to or characterized by the flesh or the body, its passions and appetites;

People use their free will, their own minds/hearts to choose for themselves whom they will serve. Joshua 24:15

In Romans 7, Paul is using exaggeration/hyperbole to lament the fact that he is a carnal, human man and that he can have difficulty in choosing to do the righteous thing in obedience to God's commandments. He is sometimes plagued by his concupiscence. All mankind is subjected to concupiscence because of Adam's sin. Concupiscence is the strong desire to do selfish things even though these things would be sins against God's commandments. Paul can use his free will to choose to do good or evil even though he is tempted to do evil.

1 Corinthians 7:2
But because of the temptation to immorality, each man should have his own wife and each woman her own husband. rsv

1 Corinthians 7:5
Do not refuse one another except perhaps by agreement for a season, that you may devote yourselves to prayer; but then come together again, lest Satan tempt you through lack of self-control. rsv

James 1:14
but each person is tempted when he is lured and enticed by his own desire. rsv

Matthew 9:4
But Jesus, knowing their thoughts, said, “Why do you think evil in your hearts? rsv

Mark 7:20-22
And he said, “What comes out of a man is what defiles a man. 21 For from within, out of the heart of man, come evil thoughts, fornication, theft, murder, adultery, 22 coveting, wickedness, deceit, licentiousness, envy, slander, pride, foolishness. rsv

Luke 6:45
The good man out of the good treasure of his heart produces good, and the evil man out of his evil treasure produces evil; for out of the abundance of the heart his mouth speaks. rsv

James 4:5-8

I thought I would bow out of this discussion based on the magnitude of the subject matter and the ineptitude of the process of typing back and forth. But I will ask the same question that I have asked time and time again with no response whatsoever.

What makes you think that man may exercise a will to make decisions freely - based totally on God's directive to make obedient choices? It seems to me that none of this discussion is being fueled by a quest to discern biblical truth but rather a quest to prove a desired point.

Ex: the potter as presented in Romans 9 does not represent God's sovereignty to make divine choices for humanity but only pertains to particular "vessels" of honor and dishonor (Jews and Gentiles). Are you kidding me?

Ex: the Romans 9 choosing of God to hate Esau while in the womb (having no opportunity to do good nor evil so that election may stand) does not represent God's nature or sovereignty to choose some and reject others but only applies to the immediate context at hand of the choosing of Gentiles to be grafted into the promises of Abraham. Are you kidding me?

Ex: Paul is just exaggerating in Romans 7 when he describes the utter frustration of making righteous choices even though the entire chapter (and chapters 5 & 6) describes a slavery to sin under the law. Are you kidding me?

Ex: the carnal mind as referenced in Romans 8 does not represent the mindset of ALL humanity but only of those who choose to embrace that mindset? Are you kidding me?

I could go on and on but it has become obvious to me that this forum is a place to reach a particular and predisposed doctrine rather than a freely offered exchange of thoughts and doubts. There is good reason that there are thousands of Christian denominations isn't there? Churches do not discuss things. They only present their viewpoint of truth and it seems to end there.

Somewhere I would like to engage in a discussion where the participants don't know it all, or don't think that they do. I know that I don't but I do have enough wisdom to know what is going on here.

Doug

Stephen Douglas said:

.....What makes you think that man may exercise a will to make decisions freely - based totally on God's directive to make obedient choices? It seems to me that none of this discussion is being fueled by a quest to discern biblical truth but rather a quest to prove a desired point.

Click to expand...

Just wondering....what makes you think that man cannot exercise his will to make decisions freely, if this is what you believe?

I won't be able to check for your reply until next week, but I am looking forward to seeing it.

Jan001 said:

Just wondering....what makes you think that man cannot exercise his will to make decisions freely, if this is what you believe?

I won't be able to check for your reply until next week, but I am looking forward to seeing it.

Click to expand...

I have submitted a question and receive a return question but that's ok with me. Allow me to be as brief as possible.

Outside of the myriad of biblical verses that I could present ( I don't because it seems that they will incur a spin on ALL of them) there is the dilemma of no human example (no not one), of the billions of people being born of a woman, exercising a free will to live a sinless life except for the perfect lamb of God as ALL have sinned and fallen short of the glory of God. I think you can see that there is a conflict between God's demands of perfect obedience (if you have offended one commandment, you have offended all of them) and mankind's utter failure to comply with this demand, as described in Romans 8, Ephesians 2, etc., etc., etc.

I will also allow you time to respond before I may expound.

Doug

Stephen Douglas said:

I have submitted a question and receive a return question but that's ok with me. Allow me to be as brief as possible.

Outside of the myriad of biblical verses that I could present ( I don't because it seems that they will incur a spin on ALL of them) there is the dilemma of no human example (no not one), of the billions of people being born of a woman, exercising a free will to live a sinless life except for the perfect lamb of God as ALL have sinned and fallen short of the glory of God. I think you can see that there is a conflict between God's demands of perfect obedience (if you have offended one commandment, you have offended all of them) and mankind's utter failure to comply with this demand, as described in Romans 8, Ephesians 2, etc., etc., etc.

I will also allow you time to respond before I may expound.

Doug

Click to expand...

Hi Doug,


It is true that God demands a person to be "pure of heart" and "made perfect" before he may see God's face but it is also true that He knows that many persons will still not be perfected at the time of their death. Jesus commands us to "strive to enter by the narrow door because many will not be able" and this ability to enter by the narrow door is dependent upon each person's own free will choices. Jesus would not command us to strive for something that is unattainable.

Luke 13:24
Strive to enter by the narrow door; for many, I tell you, will seek to enter and will not be able. rsv

Matthew 5:48
You, therefore, must be perfect, as your heavenly Father is perfect. rsv

Matthew 5:8
Blessed are the pure in heart, for they shall see God. rsv

Hebrews 12:22-24
But you have come to Mount Zion and to the city of the living God, the heavenly Jerusalem, and to innumerable angels in festal gathering, 23 and to the assembly of the first-born who are enrolled in heaven, and to a judge who is God of all, and to the spirits of just men made perfect, 24 and to Jesus, the mediator of a new covenant, and to the sprinkled blood that speaks more graciously than the blood of Abel.

Romans 12:2
Do not be conformed to this world but be transformed by the renewal of your mind, that you may prove what is the will of God, what is good and acceptable and perfect. rsv

Philippians 3:12
Not that I have already obtained this or am already perfect; but I press on to make it my own, because Christ Jesus has made me his own. rsv

1 John 5:3
For this is the love of God, that we keep his commandments. And his commandments are notburdensome. rsv

Philippians 4:13
I can do all things in him who strengthens me. rsv

So if a righteous person dies and his soul/spirit has not yet been made perfect like the "spirits of (the) just men (who have been) made perfect" who are already in Mount Zion/heavenly Jerusalem, his soul/spirit must first be cleansed "as through fire" before he is approved by Jesus to enter into Mount Zion/heavenly Jerusalem to be with God.

1 Corinthians 3:14-15
If the work which any man has built on the foundation survives, he will receive a reward. 15 If any man’s work is burned up, he will suffer loss, though he himself will be saved, but only as through fire. rsv

After death, a righteous person's soul/spirit will be purged of all his remaining unrepented sins as through fire. Catholics call this state of the purging of sins from a righteous person's soul "purgatory".

A person who is righteous at the time of his death is the person who has the Holy Spirit abiding/living within his soul/spirit at the time of his death. IOW, He has no sins on his soul that are "mortal sins". A righteous person may have "not mortal sins" on his soul at the time of his death. 1 John 5:16-17

Acts 5:32
And we are witnesses to these things, and so is the Holy Spirit whom God has given to those who obey him. rsv

John 15:5-7
I am the vine, you are the branches. He who abides in me, and I in him, he it is that bears much fruit, for apart from me you can do nothing. 6 If a man does not abide in me, he is cast forth as a branch and withers; and the branches are gathered, thrown into the fire and burned. 7 If you abide in me, and my words abide in you, ask whatever you will, and it shall be done for you. rsv

I do believe that it is possible for righteous people to die with a pure spirit/soul/heart and thereby be immediately approved by Jesus to enter into Mount Zion/heavenly Jerusalem to be with God. However, I doubt that there are many righteous people who actually do die in this perfect state of purity.

2 Timothy 4:7
I have fought the good fight, I have finished the race, I have kept the faith. rsv

It is true that God demands a person to be "pure of heart" and "made perfect" before he may see God's face but it is also true that He knows that many persons will still not be perfected at the time of their death. Jesus commands us to "strive to enter by the narrow door because many will not be able" and this ability to enter by the narrow door is dependent upon each person's own free will choices. Jesus would not command us to strive for something that is unattainable.

One thing at a time. If it were to depend upon the choosing ability of any man......NONE of us could stand. Those who have been converted by His grace still have a propensity to sin so great that we must depend on 1 John 1:9 to maintain the status of the "righteousness of God" as we are washed clean through repentance. We are not perfected by our acts or upon any good "work". In fact, the apostle Paul claims that the very best that he, as a dedicated Jew, could offer to God was as filthy rags. Romans 8 makes it clear that the only thing that lays claim to perfection is the indwelling Spirit that is given as a gift from God. The second chapter of Ephesians makes clear that those who were enemies of God are DEAD in their sins. But it is GOD, and God alone that revives this dead person unto life. Why? Read God's word through the pen of Paul......

"so that in the ages to come He might show the exceeding riches of His grace in His kindness toward us in Christ Jesus."

Read Paul's description of man's total depravity and God's monergistic act to save His people. Tell me what man does to receive this gift?

When we speak of a term found nowhere from Genesis to Revelation, namely "free will", we are applying this concept in two manners. Pre-justification and Post-justification. My previous post was dealing with Pre-justification only. That is, "does any man have the ability to make a decision to turn the will of His life over to something that is virtually undetectable by humans senses?" I think the scriptures are clear on this subject. All have sinned and fallen short of God's glory. The wages of sin is death. Any man who commits even one sin has committed them all. And the list goes on....and on.....and on...….

But you have chosen to stand on the directives given by God to man. Your whole argument stands or falls on this:

Jesus would not command us to strive for something that is unattainable.

My question to you is......WHY NOT????

Purity was not attainable by Abraham. Purity was not attainable by Joshua. Purity was not attainable by Moses. Purity was attainable by Jesus, the Christ. This is the gospel message and the very reason that we know that man CANNOT obey God. We NEED Christ because He is perfect and He stands in our place. If fallen man is capable of obedience to God then Christ died in vain for that person. I will not inundate you with scripture verses. But I will say that the myriad of scripture verses that contain directed commands by God does not come close to proving that man is capable of adhering to them.

I know this is rather direct as that is my style. I have no intention of demeaning or ridiculing your viewpoint as I will admit that it is quite curious that God would continue to give men direct commands after experiencing the fall of Adam and Eve and the murder of Abel by Cain and the entire history of men who choose not to live a "pure" life. Yes, I get it. Why does God continue to direct and give instruction such as "pray for your enemies" to men if He knows that these same men are incapable of maintaining righteousness? As I see it, it is because there is a precedent to be set. This precedent must be made manifest to all men, to all powers, to all principalities on earth and in heaven. What man could not do for himself God did (Romans 8:3-8). God alone. God gives commands to His chosen people and they reject Him. Time and time again they reject Him. But it is God who does the pursuing. It is God who is perfect in love and grace. It is God who saves His people. Anything else is a work of man so that he may boast.

Doug

Jan001 said:

Each person is free to choose for himself to do either good or evil.

2 Chronicles 30:8
Do not now be stiff-necked as your fathers were, but yield yourselves to the Lord, and come to his sanctuary, which he has sanctified for ever, and serve the Lord your God, that his fierce anger may turn away from you. rsv

Joshua 24:15
And if you be unwilling to serve the Lord, choose this day whom you will serve, whether the gods your fathers served in the region beyond the River, or the gods of the Amorites in whose land you dwell; but as for me and my house, we will serve the Lord.” rsv

Romans 6:13
Do not yield your members to sin as instruments of wickedness, but yield yourselves to God as men who have been brought from death to life, and your members to God as instruments of righteousness. rsv

Romans 6:16
Do you not know that if you yield yourselves to any one as obedient slaves, you are slaves of the one whom you obey, either of sin, which leads to death, or of obedience, which leads to righteousness? rsv

Romans 6:19
I am speaking in human terms, because of your natural limitations. For just as you once yielded your members to impurity and to greater and greater iniquity, so now yield your members to righteousness for sanctification. rsv

2 Peter 2:21
For it would have been better for them never to have known the way of righteousness than after knowing it to turn back from the holy commandment delivered to them. rsv

Click to expand...

Sounds like those verses prove we have free will.

Why?

Well, maybe I should elaborate. There is a difference between being given a will to choose and being given a will to choose “freely”. There are hundreds of federal, state and municipal laws on the books that are rendered with an expectation of public adherence. Yet, there is no one who has not exceeded the speed limit. There is no one who hasn’t jaywalked or lied in some way. Why is that? It isn’t that people are not capable of ever being compliant. It is because of an intrinsic characteristic of the human race to be inconsistent in their decision making process.

A bird with a broken wing is free to fly. And mankind is broken to the point that no one (no not one) has met God’s standard of holiness. There is none whose heart has not been polluted by selfishness and envy and pride. It isn’t that every man is utterly incapable of any act of goodness and is constantly making evil choices but the same man is utterly and hopelessly inept and incapable of “being” righteous. Why? Because of Jeremiah 17:9.

God presents His standards to mankind and the bar is not only high but you can’t miss the bar even once. Adam and Eve had only one commandment and they could not be perfect in keeping it. Joshua says that his decision was that his household would choose to serve the Lord, yet Joshua did not follow God’s command to utterly destroy the Gibeonites with devastating and far reaching consequences. God’s decretive commands are never met with a perfect response because man is incapable of perfection or the endurance to never fail.

It is God who never fails and it is God who loves perfectly. Anything less has far reaching and devastating consequences. This is what I mean when I maintain that men have been given a will to choose but not a will to choose freely. And it is because of this phenomenon that we are totally and desperately dependent on God to stand in the gap of our depravity; lest any man should boast. The fact that God gives instruction to be holy as He is holy does not indicate that we are naturally capable of holiness. It certainly does indicate that we are totally incapable of holiness and are left without hope unless God acts upon our corrupt hearts. I thank God for His intervention.

Doug

Dave L said:

Free will permeates the world as far as it concerns law. The law holds people responsible based on their ability to obey or disobey it. And free will is in play wherever laws exist.

In the Old Testament, God held Israel responsible for keeping the Ten Commandments based on free will. But a problem develops when we try to import free will and law into the New Covenant. God did away with law and free will has no place. So if we keep free will, it is at the expense of turning the gospel into law And God’s grace into works.

Jesus says whoever believes has eternal life. Naturally understood, believing is a trait of those who have eternal life. But if we keep free will, we turn this announcement into a law which in effect says whoever chooses to believe has eternal life. So we destroy the gospel and God’s grace turning them into law and works.

Other examples are the Philippian jailer who after the earthquake asked Paul “what must I do to be saved?” And Paul told him “believe on the Lord Jesus Christ and you will be saved”. Jesus says “whoever believes has eternal life”. So the jailer had eternal life and was a believer before he asked Paul for instructions. Or he would not have asked. But free will turns this into law and thinks salvation happens only after the jailer kept the law.

One more illustration is where Paul says “that if you confess with your mouth Jesus as Lord, and believe in your heart that God raised Him from the dead, you will be saved;” Romans 10:9 (NASB95). But again, a person must already believe with their heart, that is be saved, or they would not do this.

Click to expand...

I am not sure where we come to the conclusion that God did away with the law. The law was never designed to save or to take away sins, Salvation was always by faith.

"Now if perfection had been attainable through the Levitical priesthood (for under it the people received the law), what further need would there have been for another priest to arise after the order of Melchizedek, rather than one named after the order of Aaron?" - Hebrews 7:11

Did God make an oopsie here? Of course not. God knew the law wouldn't make perfection attainable. The law does a great job though at letting us know we are sinners (Romans 7). Salvation has always been solely rested upon faith (Hebrews 11).

We can say that there was a change in the law, but not an abolishment. Hence Jesus saying so, He Himself obeying the law, the beatitudes, and even the veil being torn.

You could actually argue that the law is even deeper with us than it was before.

"For by a single offering he has perfected for all time those who are being sanctified. And the Holy Spirit also bears witness to us; for after saying, "This is the covenant that I will make with them after those days, declares the Lord: I will put my laws on their hearts, and write them on their minds," then he adds, "I will remember their sins and their lawless deeds no more." Where there is forgiveness of these, there is no longer any offering for sin." Hebrews 10:14-18

I find another issue in turning faith into works just because one believes in free will. The work was accomplished in Christ. He did it all. We didn't live perfectly according to Scripture, we didn't carry the cross, we didn't receive nails in our hands and feet for the forgiveness of our sins, we didn't rise up on the third day. We put our faith into Him, that He lived perfectly fulfilling the law, He died for our sins, and He rose on the third day. This is what is accredited to us as righteousness: faith in Christ.

It would be incredible if faith was actually a work. We make decisions every single day. Even to the careers we have embedded ourselves. I'd love to work a job where the work description is just 'you believe'. It would be awesome to have a supervisor that would ask me why my work is all backed up and my reply to him is, "I believed the work would get done," and he just nods at me in affirmation and tells me what a hard worker I am. I say this with no disrespect, the idea of believing in something is a work is just silly.

You don't work to believe. You work because you already believe.