Does man have a freewill ?

[Rose_bud]

Not really. You said things I basically see all the time. In the final analysis, you as most, make salvation depended on what the person does.

Hi Brighfame

I literally started off by saying,

I'm not saying that it is by our own effort we attain salvation. Or that we are solely responsible for our reconciliation with God

He is the source of all good. Our responsibility is to respond to that good, by acknowledging our limitations and accept His provision.

 

[Brightfame52]

@Spiritual Jew

You are very lacking in spiritual discernment and you are unteachable

Likewise

 

[Brightfame52]

Clearly, you would not have answered the jailer's question about what he had to do to be saved the same way that Paul and Silas did.

Acts 16:29 Then he called for a light, and sprang in, and came trembling, and fell down before Paul and Silas, 30 And brought them out, and said, Sirs, what must I do to be saved? 31 And they said, Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ, and thou shalt be saved, and thy house.

Yes I would have

 

[Brightfame52]

@Rose_bud

He is the source of all good. Our responsibility is to respond to that good, by acknowledging our limitations and accept His provision.

There you go, this is typical, ultimately it depends on man, his responsibility.. Man is dead in sin from the start, and he has no responsivity to quicken himself, he is captive to sin and has no responsivity to release himself from captivity and enslavement. If Im dead and enslaved and you offer me an opportunity, what good is that ? What kinda provision is it that doesnt make me alive, or free me from slavery.

Jesus actually makes his alive and sets them free to begin with Isa 61 1

The Spirit of the Lord God is upon me; because the Lord hath anointed me to preach good tidings unto the meek; he hath sent me to bind up the brokenhearted, to proclaim liberty to the captives, and the opening of the prison to them that are bound;

Jn 8 34-36

34 Jesus answered them, Verily, verily, I say unto you, Whosoever committeth sin is the servant of sin.

35 And the servant abideth not in the house for ever: but the Son abideth ever.

36 If the Son therefore shall make you free, ye shall be free indeed.

 

[Clare73]

Yes, we are born with a natural tendency to sin, but we certainly do not sin as babies or as young children who do not even know what sin is. God's wrath is not on us as soon as we are born. That is ridiculous. We're not asked to defy all logic when interpreting scripture.

Nor do we judge the truth of Scripture by human reasoning.

We are by nature, objects of wrath (Eph 2:3). . .we are born with our nature.

You either believe Eph 2:3, or you don't.

Paul indicated that he did not become dead in sins until he knew what sin was (Romans 7:9-11).

You are misunderstanding Paul's meaning in Ro 7:9-11.

"Did not become" dead in sins means he was not aware in his own understanding of himself as being dead in sins.
His understanding changed when he knew what sin was.

 

[Rose_bud]

@Rose_bud



There you go, this is typical, ultimately it depends on man, his responsibility.. Man is dead in sin from the start, and he has no responsivity to quicken himself, he is captive to sin and has no responsivity to release himself from captivity and enslavement. If Im dead and enslaved and you offer me an opportunity, what good is that ? What kinda provision is it that doesnt make me alive, or free me from slavery.

Jesus actually makes his alive and sets them free to begin with Isa 61 1

The Spirit of the Lord God is upon me; because the Lord hath anointed me to preach good tidings unto the meek; he hath sent me to bind up the brokenhearted, to proclaim liberty to the captives, and the opening of the prison to them that are bound;

Jn 8 34-36

34 Jesus answered them, Verily, verily, I say unto you, Whosoever committeth sin is the servant of sin.

35 And the servant abideth not in the house for ever: but the Son abideth ever.

36 If the Son therefore shall make you free, ye shall be free indeed.

Let me restate. God's grace in regeneration enables us to respond, but the response itself is still a human decision.

Consider the overall context of John's Gospel and especially his purpose in how it relates to salvation. (John 20:31).The book of John presents a clear pattern of signs pointingto Him, testimony, and the progression of those who believe. If we are not able to consider the signs and words and testimony, ponder it and respond to whom it reveals then Johns gospel is meaningless to us. The pattern of the book also provides a clue as it follows a certain structure. With the sign or testimony, the reader is provided a belief story, ie how did the person/s respond? Therefore the purpose statement at the end of the book leaves the reader with that same tension. Here is the evidence. Will you believe? This speaks of choice. If you choose Him there is life.

I think you should revisit the discussion on proof texting again. As you picking up the word liberty in Isaiah and making it about no choice. This is a messianic prophecy concerning Jesus and His ministry. And He states that He is fullfilling this prophecy in Luke 4 that He is the Messiah as promised. But yet even with this confession of His identity they still couldn't grasp and rejected Him. They wanted even more proof before they would accept Him. The irony.

 

[Brightfame52]

Let me restate. God's grace in regeneration enables us to respond, but the response itself is still a human decision.

Consider the overall context of John's Gospel and especially his purpose in how it relates to salvation. (John 20:31).The book of John presents a clear pattern of signs pointingto Him, testimony, and the progression of those who believe. If we are not able to consider the signs and words and testimony, ponder it and respond to whom it reveals then Johns gospel is meaningless to us. The pattern of the book also provides a clue as it follows a certain structure. With the sign or testimony, the reader is provided a belief story, ie how did the person/s respond? Therefore the purpose statement at the end of the book leaves the reader with that same tension. Here is the evidence. Will you believe? This speaks of choice. If you choose Him there is life.

I think you should revisit the discussion on proof texting again. As you picking up the word liberty in Isaiah and making it about no choice. This is a messianic prophecy concerning Jesus and His ministry. And He states that He is fullfilling this prophecy in Luke 4 that He is the Messiah as promised. But yet even with this confession of His identity they still couldn't grasp and rejected Him. They wanted even more proof before they would accept Him. The irony.

Again, you believe as most religionist do, salvation is in the hands of man.

 

[Brightfame52]

@Clare73

We are by nature, objects of wrath (Eph 2:3). . .we are born with our nature.

That actually says nothing about being under Gods wrath for the elect, in fact while the elect are being enemies, they have been reconciled to God by His Death Rom 5:10

10 For if, when we[believers] were enemies[unbelievers], we were reconciled to God by the death of his Son, much more, being reconciled, we shall be saved by his life.

So how can unbelieving enemies, who Christ died for and reconciled to God, be under or objects of His wrath at the same time ?

 

[Clare73]

@Clare73



That actually says nothing about being under Gods wrath for the elect, in fact while the elect are being enemies, they have been reconciled to God by His Death Rom 5:10

10 For if, when we[believers] were enemies[unbelievers], we were reconciled to God by the death of his Son, much more, being reconciled, we shall be saved by his life.

So how can unbelieving enemies, who Christ died for and reconciled to God, be under or objects of His wrath at the same time ?

They are objects of wrath in time until they come to saving faith in Jesus Christ, which faith is guaranteed to the elect.

 

[Spiritual Jew]

Yes I would have

Why? That would be a lie coming from a Calvinist like you.

Why would you tell someone who may, in your view, be incapable of believing in Christ, that what they can do is believe on the Lord Jesus Christ in order to be saved? To be consistent with what you actually believe, you should tell anyone who asks you what they need to do to be saved is nothing since you don't believe man is required to do anything to be saved. Or you should tell them that they should wait and see if God gives them repentance and faith or not and, in the meantime, there's nothing they can do. That would be the honest answer from a Calvinist to the question of what someone would need to do in order to be saved.

 

[Spiritual Jew]

Nor do we judge the truth of Scripture by human reasoning.

We are by nature, objects of wrath (Eph 2:3). . .we are born with our nature.

You either believe Eph 2:3, or you don't.

Don't talk to me this way. I believe all of scripture. And you believe that you do as well. The appropriate thing to say here is that you either understand what Ephesians 2:3 is actually saying or you don't. And you don't.

That verse does NOT say we are objects of God's wrath immediately from the time we are born. That is ludicrous by any reasoning. It's not just ludicrous by human reasoning, but by God's reasoning as well because that contradicts His character. He is never angry with anyone for no reason. His wrath is on those who rebel against Him and babies and young children do not knowingly rebel against God. His wrath is on those who sin and since we sin by nature, that places His wrath on us. But, at the same time He graciously offers salvation to us (Titus 2:11).

You also think that people are dead in sins from birth, but that is not the case. Paul said he did not become dead in sins until he became aware of what sin is because of the law (Romans 7:9-11). We are all sinners by nature, but we do not sin immediately from birth and are not guilty of sin and do not become dead in sins immediately from birth. That is the most ridiculous doctrine imaginable.

You are misunderstanding Paul's meaning in Ro 7:9-11.

"Did not become" dead in sins means he was not aware in his own understanding of himself as being dead in sins.
His understanding changed when he knew what sin was.

LOL. You are twisting his words to fit your doctrine. How interesting that you didn't even bother quoting his words which contradict what you're saying. Is it too much trouble for you to actually quote the text and show exactly how you are coming to your conclusion? You think I should just take your word for it? No chance.

Romans 7:9 For I was alive without the law once: but when the commandment came, sin revived, and I died. 10 And the commandment, which was ordained to life, I found to be unto death. 11 For sin, taking occasion by the commandment, deceived me, and by it slew me.

If you take off your Calvinist glasses, you can clearly see here that Paul said he was alive before the commandment came and he died. You say he was dead in sins from birth, but that blatantly contradicts Paul saying that he was alive before he became aware of the law. He did NOT say that he was not aware of being dead in sins previous to when he became aware of the law as you are trying to claim. He said he died only after becoming aware of the law and of what sin is. He said his sin is what "slew" him and made him dead in sins and that wasn't until he became aware of what sin was.

 

[Spiritual Jew]

They are objects of wrath in time until they come to saving faith in Jesus Christ, which faith is guaranteed to the elect.

Making even newborn babies objects of God's wrath is just a horrible misrepresentation of God's character. God is love (1 John 4:8), but you turn Him into a monster and a God who is hate with some love mixed in.

 

[Spiritual Jew]

@Rose_bud



There you go, this is typical, ultimately it depends on man, his responsibility.. Man is dead in sin from the start, and he has no responsivity to quicken himself, he is captive to sin and has no responsivity to release himself from captivity and enslavement. If Im dead and enslaved and you offer me an opportunity, what good is that ? What kinda provision is it that doesnt make me alive, or free me from slavery.

Are sick people able to recognize and acknowledge that they are sick and unable to heal themselves while accepting the physician's offer to heal them?

Mark 2:16 And when the scribes and Pharisees saw him eat with publicans and sinners, they said unto his disciples, How is it that he eateth and drinketh with publicans and sinners? 17 When Jesus heard it, he saith unto them, They that are whole have no need of the physician, but they that are sick: I came not to call the righteous, but sinners to repentance.

 

[Rose_bud]

Again, you believe as most religionist do, salvation is in the hands of man.

I'm not particularly surprised that you are reading into my post meaning that you want it to mean and interpreting my words to say something it does not.

You doing this with my words, but please I appeal don't do this with Gods.

 

[Jerry N.]

I'm not particularly surprised that you are reading into my post meaning that you want it to mean and interpreting my words to say something it does not.

You doing this with my words, but please I appeal don't do this with Gods.

Salvation is a two-way process. A person is called to salvation by God, but that person can refuse. God allows a person free will, but He might knock you down and blind you with a bright light and talk to you. You still have the choice to refuse, but the pressure is pretty strong not to.

 

[Rose_bud]

Salvation is a two-way process. A person is called to salvation by God, but that person can refuse. God allows a person free will, but He might knock you down and blind you with a bright light and talk to you. You still have the choice to refuse, but the pressure is pretty strong not to.

Yes, a dynamic process whereby God is continually calling and drawing to a point of surrender. Luke let's us know that Paul was present at Stephen's stoning, heard his testimony, heard his prayer. Saw how he held fast his confession even through persecution. But the Damascus experience definitely shattered a hard heart.

 

[Jerry N.]

Yes, a dynamic process whereby God is continually calling and drawing to a point of surrender. Luke let's us know that Paul was present at Stephen's stoning, heard his testimony, heard his prayer. Saw how he held fast his confession even through persecution. But the Damascus experience definitely shattered a hard heart.

The one important difference is that Paul already loved/ feared God.

 

[Clare73]

Don't talk to me this way. I believe all of scripture. And you believe that you do as well. The appropriate thing to say here is that you either understand what Ephesians 2:3 is actually saying or you don't. And you don't.
That verse does NOT say we are objects of God's wrath immediately from the time we are born. That is ludicrous by any reasoning. It's not just ludicrous by human reasoning, but by God's reasoning as well because that contradicts His character. He is never angry with anyone for no reason. His wrath is on those who rebel against Him and babies and young children do not knowingly rebel against God. His wrath is on those who sin and since we sin by nature, that places His wrath on us. But, at the same time He graciously offers salvation to us (Titus 2:11).

You also think that people are dead in sins from birth, but that is not the case. Paul said he did not become dead in sins until he became aware of what sin is because of the law (Romans 7:9-11). We are all sinners by nature, but we do not sin immediately from birth and are not guilty of sin and do not become dead in sins immediately from birth. That is the most ridiculous doctrine imaginable.


LOL. You are twisting his words to fit your doctrine. How interesting that you didn't even bother quoting his words which contradict whatSee you're saying. Is it too much trouble for you to actually quote the text and show exactly how you are coming to your conclusion? You think I should just take your word for it? No chance.

Romans 7:9 For I was alive without the law once: but when the commandment came, sin revived, and I died. 10 And the commandment, which was ordained to life, I found to be unto death. 11 For sin, taking occasion by the commandment, deceived me, and by it slew me.

If you take off your Calvinist glasses, you can clearly see here that Paul said he was alive before the commandment came and he died. You say he was dead in sins from birth, but that blatantly contradicts Paul saying that he was alive before he became aware of the law. He did NOT say that he was not aware of being dead in sins previous to when he became aware of the law as you are trying to claim. He said he died only after becoming aware of the law and of what sin is. He said his sin is what "slew" him and made him dead in sins and that wasn't until he became aware of what sin was.

Personal denial does not a Biblical demonstration make. . .

Until you Biblically demonstrate my error, your personal views are without Biblical merit.

See posts #15 and #108.

 

[Rose_bud]

The one important difference is that Paul already loved/ feared God.

I don't know if you can call it loving God when you are a blaspheme, persecutor and violent man. Misguided "love"? But definitely something God worked with.

I think maybe Saul had a general revelation of God, knowing about Him through the law and traditions, but lacking a special revelation, which is the deeper understanding and relationship with God through Christ.
Where he "loved" God as the commandment says, he surely failed in the spirit of it, including loving his neighbor as the laws requirements.

 

[Jerry N.]

I don't know if you can call it loving God when you are a blaspheme, persecutor and violent man. Misguided "love"? But definitely something God worked with.

I think maybe Saul had a general revelation of God, knowing about Him through the law and traditions, but lacking a special revelation, which is the deeper understanding and relationship with God through Christ.
Where he "loved" God as the commandment says, he surely failed in the spirit of it, including loving his neighbor as the laws requirements.

You are absolutely right. I just meant that Paul had devoted his energy in doing what he thought God wanted. It was misguided and harmful.