Calvinism Question

[FreeGrace2]

To quote Arthur W. Pink:

What is the Will? We answer, the will is the faculty of choice, the immediate cause of all action. Choice necessarily implies the refusal of one thing and the acceptance of another. The positive and the negative must both be present to the mind before there can be any choice. In every act of the will there is a preference—the desiring of one thing rather than another. Where there is no preference, but complete indifference, there is no volition. To will is to choose, and to choose is to decide between two or more alternatives. But there is something which influences the choice; something which determines the decision.

7. God's Sovereignty and the Human Will

So the "will" under direct influence of the heart, is not "free".

God Bless

Till all are one.

AW was doing alright until the last sentence of the quote above. He wants God to be that influence, apparently. So, what does he believe about sin and evil? Who influences those choices?

Those creatures to whom God has given an intellect, what determines the choice comes from the intellect, which is the mind, or heart.

So, the heart is surely free in the choices it makes.

Both believers and unbelievers can choose to do the same things. As as for evil and sin, both believers and unbelievers can surely think the same things.

If AW had simply left out that last sentence, all would be well.

 

[DeaconDean]

AW was doing alright until the last sentence of the quote above. He wants God to be that influence, apparently. So, what does he believe about sin and evil? Who influences those choices?

Those creatures to whom God has given an intellect, what determines the choice comes from the intellect, which is the mind, or heart.

So, the heart is surely free in the choices it makes.

So, if I read what you posted correctly, the heart has "intellect"?

Both believers and unbelievers can choose to do the same things. As as for evil and sin, both believers and unbelievers can surely think the same things.

If AW had simply left out that last sentence, all would be well.

But Jesus said that everything that defiles a man comes from the heart.

So until the heart is freed from its evil, the heart can only do, or be subject to the bondage to sin.

So if the heart is from where alll evil comes, and it dicates the will, how is the "will" free?

Sorry.

God Bless

Till all are one.

 

[stan1953]

I said this:
Just curious: have you 'left your sin'? Completely, or by how much? Percentage?
If eternal life is based on no sin, where does the Bible teach that man can reach sinless perfection this side of eternity?

My question was to EO, who seems to push the idea that eternal life is based on no sin. I don't think it is, but apparently EO does. So I don't need to corroborate anything. I've noticed that EO hasn't responded to my question yet. Maybe EO doesn't have a good answer or defense for his own position.

If EO doesn't believe what it seems to me he believes, then he hasn't communicated his position very well.

Ahh OK, thanks for the clarification...so how about it extraordinary?

 

[extraordinary]

I said this:
Just curious: have you 'left your sin'? Completely, or by how much? Percentage?
If eternal life is based on no sin, where does the Bible teach that man can reach sinless perfection this side of eternity?
My question was to EO, who seems to push the idea that eternal life is based on no sin. I don't think it is, but apparently EO does. So I don't need to corroborate anything. I've noticed that EO hasn't responded to my question yet. Maybe EO doesn't have a good answer or defense for his own position.
If EO doesn't believe what it seems to me he believes, then he hasn't communicated his position very well.

Yes, I do have quite a problem!
Can't quite remember if I've shown you da solution, which is 1 John 1:7--2:1
... 1,000 times or 10,000 times!
.

 

[FreeGrace2]

So, if I read what you posted correctly, the heart has "intellect"?

Sure. Why not?

From Rom 10:9,10 "heart"
kardia

1) the heart
1a) that organ in the animal body which is the centre of the circulation of the blood, and hence was regarded as the seat of physical life
1b) denotes the centre of all physical and spiritual life
2a) the vigour and sense of physical life
2b) the centre and seat of spiritual life
2b1) the soul or mind, as it is the fountain and seat of the thoughts, passions, desires, appetites, affections, purposes, endeavours
2b2) of the understanding, the faculty and seat of the intelligence
2b3) of the will and character
2b4) of the soul so far as it is affected and stirred in a bad way or good, or of the soul as the seat of the sensibilities, affections, emotions, desires, appetites, passions
1c) of the middle or central or inmost part of anything, even though inanimate

Please note 2b2 above. Yep, intelligence and intellect are basically the same thing.

But Jesus said that everything that defiles a man comes from the heart.

And Paul said that man believes from his heart. What is your point?

So until the heart is freed from its evil, the heart can only do, or be subject to the bondage to sin.

No one's heart will be "freed from evil" until one enters eternity. Where did your idea come from?

So if the heart is from where alll evil comes, and it dicates the will, how is the "will" free?

Because just as "defilement" comes from the heart, so does faith. Man freely chooses which comes out.

Paul elaborates on man's freedom in Rom 6.
v.11 we (believers) are to count ourselves dead to sin and alive to God.
v.12 command to "not let sin reign in our body" and not obey its edvil desires.
This clearly is a choice for believers to make.
v.13 command to "not offer our bodies as instruments of sin, but offer ourselves to God". Again, a choice we make.
v.14 "for sin shall not be your master". That's IF we make the right choices that Paul has just laid out.
v.16 here Paul explains the results of who we (believers) offer ourselves to as slaves to obey: either slaves to sin, or slaves to righteousness. Again, a choice we make.
v.17 Paul thanks God that the Roman believers obeyed the message they were given. Again, a choice they made.
v.18 Paul tells them they have been set free from sin and are slaves to righteousness.

However, v.11-17 still applies. Believers are free to choose who they will be slaves to. That's his point: make the right choice. Or suffer the consequences.

Sorry.

Yes, I agree. But you're forgiven.

 

[FreeGrace2]

Yes, I do have quite a problem!
Can't quite remember if I've shown you da solution, which is 1 John 1:7--2:1
... 1,000 times or 10,000 times!
.

OK, yes, the solution for sin by a believer is confession of that sin to God. Now, does that confession maintain one's saved state? Or what?

You see, I'm still not sure of your position.

 

[stan1953]

Yes, I do have quite a problem!
Can't quite remember if I've shown you da solution, which is 1 John 1:7--2:1
... 1,000 times or 10,000 times!
.

Well you haven't shown me so please do and this part of scripture says a lot so please boil it down for us dummies.

 

[extraordinary]

OK, yes, the solution for sin by a believer is confession of that sin to God.
Now, does that confession maintain one's saved state? Or what?
You see, I'm still not sure of your position.

OK, yes, how many times do I have to explain it?

IMO, 1 John 1:7--2:1 maintains the BACs righteousness.
(But you believe this is only for fellowship.)

And there are several other verses which back this up.
Remember my righteousness threads and verses?

Stan will need to read carefully and try to understand the English words.
Or, perhaps I should translate the verses into Swahili.
.

 

[stan1953]

Stan will need to read carefully and try to understand the English words.
Or, perhaps I should translate the verses into Swahili.
.

This kind of flippant smart alecky remark will just get you reported, and NOT engender you to anyone nor prove your point. I'll not report this instance but you need to qualify what exactly your opinion is of 1 John 1:7 to 2:1

IMO it says NOTHING about living a sinless life.

 

[FreeGrace2]

OK, yes, how many times do I have to explain it?

IMO, 1 John 1:7--2:1 maintains the BACs righteousness.
(But you believe this is only for fellowship.)

Since John mentions "fellowship" 4 times in the first 6 verses of 1 John, I think I am on very solid ground for my view. What specific verses indicate that confession of sin "maintains one's righteousness"?

In fact, when one believes in Christ, in addition to saving and regenerating that person, God credits righteousness TO that person. So our righteousness is imputed, on the basis of faith, not confession of sin.

Seems your view is a bit confused.

And there are several other verses which back this up.
Remember my righteousness threads and verses?

Nope.

 

[DeaconDean]

Sure. Why not?

From Rom 10:9,10 "heart"
kardia

1) the heart
1a) that organ in the animal body which is the centre of the circulation of the blood, and hence was regarded as the seat of physical life
1b) denotes the centre of all physical and spiritual life
2a) the vigour and sense of physical life
2b) the centre and seat of spiritual life
2b1) the soul or mind, as it is the fountain and seat of the thoughts, passions, desires, appetites, affections, purposes, endeavours
2b2) of the understanding, the faculty and seat of the intelligence
2b3) of the will and character
2b4) of the soul so far as it is affected and stirred in a bad way or good, or of the soul as the seat of the sensibilities, affections, emotions, desires, appetites, passions
1c) of the middle or central or inmost part of anything, even though inanimate

Please note 2b2 above. Yep, intelligence and intellect are basically the same thing.


And Paul said that man believes from his heart. What is your point?


No one's heart will be "freed from evil" until one enters eternity. Where did your idea come from?


Because just as "defilement" comes from the heart, so does faith. Man freely chooses which comes out.

Paul elaborates on man's freedom in Rom 6.
v.11 we (believers) are to count ourselves dead to sin and alive to God.
v.12 command to "not let sin reign in our body" and not obey its edvil desires.
This clearly is a choice for believers to make.
v.13 command to "not offer our bodies as instruments of sin, but offer ourselves to God". Again, a choice we make.
v.14 "for sin shall not be your master". That's IF we make the right choices that Paul has just laid out.
v.16 here Paul explains the results of who we (believers) offer ourselves to as slaves to obey: either slaves to sin, or slaves to righteousness. Again, a choice we make.
v.17 Paul thanks God that the Roman believers obeyed the message they were given. Again, a choice they made.
v.18 Paul tells them they have been set free from sin and are slaves to righteousness.

However, v.11-17 still applies. Believers are free to choose who they will be slaves to. That's his point: make the right choice. Or suffer the consequences.


Yes, I agree. But you're forgiven.

So, as you pointed out, the heart is the seat of intelligence.

Jeremiah said:

"Can the Ethiopian change his skin, or the leopard his spots? then may ye also do good, that are accustomed to do evil." -Jer. 13:23 (KJV)

So you are telling me, that it is within mans ability, to all of a sudden stop doing evil, and choose to do good, or to believe.

David said:

"Create in me a clean heart, O God; and renew a right spirit within me." -Psa. 51:10 (KJV)

Jeremiah said:

"The heart is deceitful above all things, and desperately wicked: who can know it?" -Jer. 17:9 (KJV)

Jesus said:

"O generation of vipers, how can ye, being evil, speak good things? for out of the abundance of the heart the mouth speaketh. A good man out of the good treasure of the heart bringeth forth good things: and an evil man out of the evil treasure bringeth forth evil things." -Mt. 12:34-35 (KJV)

Paul says that prior to salvation, we all were in bondage to sin.

So, how can the will be free, yet in bondage to sin, and in need of being created anew, when everything that defiles a man comes from the abundance of the heart?

Especailly when no matter the circumstance, prior to salvation, no works, no righteousness can be counted for us.

Untill the heart is free from the bondage to sin, until its created anew, its gonna direct the will to do evil. And that my friend is basic scripture 101.

1: an act of making a choice or decision; also: a choice or decision made

2: the power of choosing or determining : will

Source

So if the "will", the "volition" or the ability to make a choice and produce an act of the will, is subject to what is in the heart.

How can it be free?

The "will" can never be both soverign and servant. It cannot be both free and in bondage.

Or, as Arthur Pink states:

To will is to choose, and to choose is to decide between two or more alternatives. But there is something which influences the choice; something which determines the decision. Hence the will cannot be sovereign because it is the servant of that something. The will cannot be both sovereign and servant. It cannot be both cause and effect. The will is not causative, because, as we have said, something causes it to choose, therefore that something must be the causative agent. Choice itself is affected by certain considerations, is determined by various influences brought to bear upon the individual himself, hence, volition is the effect of these considerations and influences, and if the effect, it must be their servant; and if the will is their servant then it is not sovereign, and if the will is not sovereign, we certainly cannot predicate absolute "freedom" of it.

Source

Sorry, it just don't add up.

God Bless

Till all are one.

 

[DeaconDean]

You know, the definition you gave:

1) the heart
1a) that organ in the animal body which is the centre of the circulation of the blood, and hence was regarded as the seat of physical life
1b) denotes the centre of all physical and spiritual life
2a) the vigour and sense of physical life
2b) the centre and seat of spiritual life
2b1) the soul or mind, as it is the fountain and seat of the thoughts, passions, desires, appetites, affections, purposes, endeavours
2b2) of the understanding, the faculty and seat of the intelligence
2b3) of the will and character
2b4) of the soul so far as it is affected and stirred in a bad way or good, or of the soul as the seat of the sensibilities, affections, emotions, desires, appetites, passions
1c) of the middle or central or inmost part of anything, even though inanimate

Is, technically correct.

But before, in times before, the definition given, and the context in which it is used, indicates that the "heart" acts "involuntarily:

A.involuntary, Pl.Lg.733d, Ph.1.561; “ἀ. καρδίας κίνησις, ἔκκρισις” Gal.2.610, Aët.13.56. Adv. -τως Asclep Cypr. ap. Porph.Abst.4.15, Plu.2.631c, S.E.P.1.19.

II. not according to one's wish or will, “τὰ ἀ.” Zeno Stoic.1.53; “τύχη” Phld.Mort.33. cf. Ph.2.392, Plu.2.599b.

Henry George Liddell. Robert Scott. A Greek-English Lexicon. revised and augmented throughout by. Sir Henry Stuart Jones. with the assistance of. Roderick McKenzie. Oxford. Clarendon Press. 1940.

So here again, the heart may the seat of intelligence, but until it is created anew, it is evil, and the actual "will", the "volition" is evil also, therefore, it is not "free".

Sorry.

God Bless

Till all are one.

 

[FreeGrace2]

So, as you pointed out, the heart is the seat of intelligence.

Yes.

Jeremiah said:

"Can the Ethiopian change his skin, or the leopard his spots? then may ye also do good, that are accustomed to do evil." -Jer. 13:23 (KJV)

So you are telling me, that it is within mans ability, to all of a sudden stop doing evil, and choose to do good, or to believe.

What does the inability of a leopard changing his spots with people believing?

Jer is about those "accustomed to do evil" changing their pattern of behavior. Nothing here about inability to believe. Your assumption is denied.

David said:

"Create in me a clean heart, O God; and renew a right spirit within me." -Psa. 51:10 (KJV)

Why would or could David even pray this prayer if he wasn't able to "change his own spot"? Thanks for refuting your own point by Scripture.

Neither the Ethiopian nor the leopard WANTS to change their color/spots. But David DID want to change his heart. He wanted forgiveness (clean) of his heart, because of the sin he committed.

If your theory were correct, David shouldn't have been able to pray that prayer.

Jeremiah said:

"The heart is deceitful above all things, and desperately wicked: who can know it?" -Jer. 17:9 (KJV)

Yep, it sure is.

Jesus said:

"O generation of vipers, how can ye, being evil, speak good things? for out of the abundance of the heart the mouth speaketh. A good man out of the good treasure of the heart bringeth forth good things: and an evil man out of the evil treasure bringeth forth evil things." -Mt. 12:34-35 (KJV)

Yep, again.

Paul says that prior to salvation, we all were in bondage to sin.

Sure. He also clearly indicated that man chooses to whom he "presents himself to obey"; whether as slaves to sin OR as slaves to righteousness. Rom 6:16.

So, how can the will be free, yet in bondage to sin, and in need of being created anew, when everything that defiles a man comes from the abundance of the heart?

All you've done here is mix up different verses to try to defend your position. None of the verses above have the same context.

Especailly when no matter the circumstance, prior to salvation, no works, no righteousness can be counted for us.

This is simply irrelevant.

Untill the heart is free from the bondage to sin, until its created anew, its gonna direct the will to do evil. And that my friend is basic scripture 101.

Actually, Basics 101 teaches that even believers CAN BE in bondage to sin. And even those in bondage certainly CAN want to be freed of that bondage.

Does it make any sense to think that anyone in any kind of bondage is happy with that situation? Of course not!! Paul noted as such when he said this:
1 Corinthians 7:21
Were you a slave when you were called? Don’t let it trouble you—although if you can gain your freedom, do so.

So if the "will", the "volition" or the ability to make a choice and produce an act of the will, is subject to what is in the heart.

This is an erroneous assumption, not supported by Scripture.

How can it be free?

Because gave man the freedom of thought. As demonstrated by the obvious FACT that slaves certainly can and do want their freedom.

The "will" can never be both soverign and servant. It cannot be both free and in bondage.

Of course the will isn't sovereign. Nor is it a servant.

Or, as Arthur Pink states:

Source

Sorry, it just don't add up.

I agree. Not much of what AW wrote did add up.

I believe the main point is that even slaves in bondage CAN and DO want their freedom.

Seems RT believes that those in bondage DON'T want any freedom. That's the error.

 

[FreeGrace2]

You know, the definition you gave:

Is, technically correct.

Sorry.

Again, you are forgiven.

 

[EmSw]

So, as you pointed out, the heart is the seat of intelligence.

Jeremiah said:

"Can the Ethiopian change his skin, or the leopard his spots? then may ye also do good, that are accustomed to do evil." -Jer. 13:23 (KJV)

Perhaps you didn't read the Jeremiah passage very well. Notice it says:

'...then may ye also do good, that are accustomed to do evil.'

Those who are accustomed to do evil, MAY ALSO DO GOOD!

So you are telling me, that it is within mans ability, to all of a sudden stop doing evil, and choose to do good, or to believe.

Of course. What makes you think man can't stop doing evil? I just gave you the passage from Jeremiah which says man can do good who are accustomed to evil.

Can't the unsaved man, if confronted with temptation to commit adultery, choose to stop this evil and do good? If the unsaved man cannot choose other than evil, every time he gets mad at someone, he couldn't stop murdering them.

What would stop him from murdering the man he hates?

With your scenario, the unsaved could not tell the truth, but lie with every word.
With your scenario, the unsaved would steal every chance he gets.
With your scenario, the unsaved would fornicate with every women he lusts after.
With your scenario, the unsaved would hate everyone but himself, including his wife and children.

Is this what you really believe Deacon?

David said:

"Create in me a clean heart, O God; and renew a right spirit within me." -Psa. 51:10 (KJV)

Now I must ask...
1. How could David, with an unclean, filthy, degenerate heart, ASK God to create in him a new heart?
2. Can the unregenerate heart ask God for such a thing?
3. How could David respond to God in his youth with an unregenerate heart?
4. How could David write the inspired word of God with an unregenerate heart?
5. How was David chosen by God with an unregenerate heart?
6. How did David become king of Israel with an unregenerate heart?

I am afraid your assumption the unregenerate can only do evil and can't believe is proven wrong in David's life. Please answer these 6 questions within your belief system.

Untill the heart is free from the bondage to sin, until its created anew, its gonna direct the will to do evil. And that my friend is basic scripture 101.

I will believe this when you tell us how this applies to David's life.

So if the "will", the "volition" or the ability to make a choice and produce an act of the will, is subject to what is in the heart.

How can it be free?

The "will" can never be both soverign and servant. It cannot be both free and in bondage.

I have shown you David's will was free to choose good, despite having an unregenerate heart. You are going to have to change your thinking on this, or say David was a myth.

 

[DeaconDean]

What does the inability of a leopard changing his spots with people believing?

So, if a leopard cannot change its spots, you tell me that an unbeliever is able to become a believer just from "free will"?

Jer is about those "accustomed to do evil" changing their pattern of behavior. Nothing here about inability to believe. Your assumption is denied.

Wrong.

John Gill comments:

then may ye also do good, that are accustomed to do evil[SIZE=+1]; signifying that they were naturally sinners, as blackness is natural to the Ethiopian, and spots to the leopard; and were from their birth and infancy such, and had been so long habituated to sin, by custom founded upon nature, that there was no hope of them; they were obstinate in sin, bent upon it, and incorrigible in it; and this is another reason given why the above calamities came upon them. The metaphors used in this text fitly express the state and condition of men by nature; they are like the Ethiopian or blackamoor; very black, both with original and actual sin; very guilty, and very uncomely; and their blackness is natural to them; they have it from their parents, and by birth; it is with them from their infancy, and youth upwards; and very hard and difficult to be removed; it cannot be washed off by ceremonial ablutions, moral duties, evangelical ordinances, or outward humiliations; yea, it is impossible to be removed but by the grace of God and blood of Christ. Their sins are aptly compared to the leopard's spots, which are many and natural, and difficult to get clear off. What is figuratively expressed in the above metaphors is more plainly signified by being "accustomed" or "taught to do evil" {t}; which denotes a series and course of sinning; a settled habit and custom in it, founded on nature, and arising from it; which a man learns and acquires naturally, and of himself, whereby he becomes void of fear and shame; and there is a good deal of difficulty, and indeed a moral impossibility, that such persons should "do good": nothing short of the powerful and efficacious grace of God can put a man into a state and capacity of doing good aright, from right principles to right ends, and of continuing in it; for there is no good in such men; nor have they any true notion of doing good, nor inclination to it, nor any ability to perform it: in order to it, it is absolutely necessary that they should first be made good men by the grace of God; that they should be regenerated and quickened by the Spirit of God; that they should be created in Christ Jesus unto good works, and have faith in him; all which is by the grace of God, and not of themselves.[/SIZE]

Source

Why would or could David even pray this prayer if he wasn't able to "change his own spot"? Thanks for refuting your own point by Scripture.

Hahaha.

Where does it say David changed his own spot?

Neither the Ethiopian nor the leopard WANTS to change their color/spots. But David DID want to change his heart. He wanted forgiveness (clean) of his heart, because of the sin he committed.

Again, see comments by Gill.

If your theory were correct, David shouldn't have been able to pray that prayer.

Yea, yea.

Being King of Israel, he had to be anointed, and being anointed also meant, just as Saul, David had the Spirit upon him.

So I say King David was led, by the Spirit to pray the prayer in Psa. 51.

Sure. He also clearly indicated that man chooses to whom he "presents himself to obey"; whether as slaves to sin OR as slaves to righteousness. Rom 6:16.

But again, what were they prior to salvation?

All you've done here is mix up different verses to try to defend your position. None of the verses above have the same context.

Hahaha.

It does show that the "will" is subject to the heart, therefore it is not "free".

This is simply irrelevant.

How so?

Aren't you the big advocate that ,man, by reson of his God given ability to choose, cann all of a sudden stop doing evil and good good?

Actually, Basics 101 teaches that even believers CAN BE in bondage to sin. And even those in bondage certainly CAN want to be freed of that bondage.

According to scripture, you shall know the truth and the truth shall set you free. Free from what?

The bondage to sin.

If your still in bondage to sin, your not saved to begin with.

Does it make any sense to think that anyone in any kind of bondage is happy with that situation? Of course not!! Paul noted as such when he said this:
1 Corinthians 7:21
Were you a slave when you were called? Don’t let it trouble you—although if you can gain your freedom, do so.

Wow! Talk about taking text out of context!?!

If your an indentured servant, seek not to be free, for while your a servant, you can be a witness for Jesus. But if you can gain freedom, from servitude, do so.

John Gill.

This is an erroneous assumption, not supported by Scripture.

Actually, it is. As shown, the "will" is involuntary. It is governed by the heart.

Because gave man the freedom of thought. As demonstrated by the obvious FACT that slaves certainly can and do want their freedom.

They may think about it, they may want it, but that does not change the fact that they are slaves.

Of course the will isn't sovereign. Nor is it a servant.

Wrong. as shown previously.

I agree. Not much of what AW wrote did add up.

But yet you have offered no evidence in support of your notions.

Nor have you disproven mine.

I believe the main point is that even slaves in bondage CAN and DO want their freedom.

Seems RT believes that those in bondage DON'T want any freedom. That's the error.

Again, just because they may want their freedom, wants don't change a thing.

That is of the master.

God Bless

Till all are one.

 

[DeaconDean]

Perhaps you didn't read the Jeremiah passage very well. Notice it says:

'...then may ye also do good, that are accustomed to do evil.'

Those who are accustomed to do evil, MAY ALSO DO GOOD!



Of course. What makes you think man can't stop doing evil? I just gave you the passage from Jeremiah which says man can do good who are accustomed to evil.

Can't the unsaved man, if confronted with temptation to commit adultery, choose to stop this evil and do good? If the unsaved man cannot choose other than evil, every time he gets mad at someone, he couldn't stop murdering them.

What would stop him from murdering the man he hates?

With your scenario, the unsaved could not tell the truth, but lie with every word.
With your scenario, the unsaved would steal every chance he gets.
With your scenario, the unsaved would fornicate with every women he lusts after.
With your scenario, the unsaved would hate everyone but himself, including his wife and children.

Is this what you really believe Deacon?



Now I must ask...
1. How could David, with an unclean, filthy, degenerate heart, ASK God to create in him a new heart?
2. Can the unregenerate heart ask God for such a thing?
3. How could David respond to God in his youth with an unregenerate heart?
4. How could David write the inspired word of God with an unregenerate heart?
5. How was David chosen by God with an unregenerate heart?
6. How did David become king of Israel with an unregenerate heart?

I am afraid your assumption the unregenerate can only do evil and can't believe is proven wrong in David's life. Please answer these 6 questions within your belief system.



I will believe this when you tell us how this applies to David's life.



I have shown you David's will was free to choose good, despite having an unregenerate heart. You are going to have to change your thinking on this, or say David was a myth.

This from a person who don't know the difference between regeneration and sanctification?

God Bless

Till all are one.

 

[EmSw]

But before, in times before, the definition given, and the context in which it is used, indicates that the "heart" acts "involuntarily:

So are your saying people act like 'stupid apes' which cannot control how they act?
You sure make God's creation a farce; maybe you should give God a little more credit with His creation.

A person who cannot control his actions is said to be insane. So God created a world of insane inhabitants. I'm sure God is laughing at this nonsense.

So here again, the heart may the seat of intelligence, but until it is created anew, it is evil, and the actual "will", the "volition" is evil also, therefore, it is not "free".

Sorry.

God Bless

Till all are one.

Isn't it true, that a new heart is also evil? Isn't is also unclean (see David and his unclean heart)? If not, please tell me how it is those with new hearts choose to act wickedly. Aren't they under the bondage of sin, if they choose to commit sin?

 

[EmSw]

This from a person who don't know the difference between regeneration and sanctification?

God Bless

Till all are one.

Now that you have your mocking out of the way, would you care to answer the questions?

 

[EmSw]

Again, see comments by Gill.

Gill sure adds a lot of commentary which isn't even in the passage. Nothing is said of being regenerated. What he won't say is what the passage actually says -

'...then may ye also do good, that are accustomed to do evil...'

I don't need any outside, natural help to understand this. But of course, man wants to change what doesn't fit his theology. He will cleverly explain it in a fashion which delights his heart.

I am wondering why Israel needed regeneration to do good. Aren't they God's chosen people? Haven't they been under the hand of God for many years, and in Jeremiah's time, God hadn't regenerated them yet?