"Free Will Is A Fiction"

[Tree of Life]

Bump.

 

[Maria Billingsley]

Free will is a fiction not because of God's election or predestination. Free will is a fiction because fallen, sinful man hates God and is unable to freely choose him unless God changes his heart.

If free will is fiction (not real) then we live in a world not worthy of existence. God would not waste His time on a fairy tale. He would not create "fake" relationships. He would not give His only Son to the world to die for the sins of humans that have no desire or the ability to choose Him. Think about it. God is not a puppet master.
Blessings

 

[GingerBeer]

Free will is a fiction because fallen, sinful man hates God and is unable to freely choose him unless God changes his heart.

That's a fine bit of philosophy pretending to be scripture.

 

[oldWorshipper]

Yes. And this is exactly what Luther meant in saying that free will is a fiction.

wow. so.. we have enough free will to sin.. but not enough free will to stop? hahahahahhahahahaha

 

[Tree of Life]

If free will is fiction (not real) then we live in a world not worthy of existence. God would not waste His time on a fairy tale. He would not create "fake" relationships. He would not give His only Son to the world to die for the sins of humans that have no desire or the ability to choose Him. Think about it. God is not a puppet master.
Blessings

You either did not read the OP or did not understand it.

 

[Tree of Life]

That's a fine bit of philosophy pretending to be scripture.

Romans 8:7-8 - 7 For the mind that is set on the flesh is hostile to God, for it does not submit to God’s law; indeed, it cannot. 8 Those who are in the flesh cannot please God.

Even the RCC confesses this truth in places and claims to condemn both Pelagianism and Semi-Pelagianism.

 

[Tree of Life]

wow. so.. we have enough free will to sin.. but not enough free will to stop? hahahahahhahahahaha

That's right. We need God's intervention to stop sinning.

The contrary idea is called Pelagianism and was condemned as a heresy long ago.

 

[GingerBeer]

Romans 8:7-8 - 7 For the mind that is set on the flesh is hostile to God, for it does not submit to God’s law; indeed, it cannot. 8 Those who are in the flesh cannot please God.

Even the RCC confesses this truth in places and claims to condemn both Pelagianism and Semi-Pelagianism.

What the Catholic Church says or does isn't pertinent to this discussion because Catholic teaching has a well developed view of freedom, human will, and human ability with respect to the things of God. This discussion is a very Protestant topic. It is Calvinists and Arminians who fight about free will. The matter is a hot topic of debate between various schools of thought that can be called Protestant broadly speaking. It is a philosophical dispute rather than a scripture dispute because scripture doesn't say a word about "free will" or a word about "the bondage of the will" or any variant thereof.

In scripture the existence of human will is acknowledged and the existence of human choices is acknowledged. The message that the Lord spoke was repent and believe it is imperative in tone it implies a command that the recipient may obey or disobey with consequences. In the apostolic letters there are warnings about abandoning the faith or lapsing into sins which ought to be heeded. What a reader makes of them is up to the reader. If they want to dally in philosophy and debate free will vs the bondage of the will then that is their choice but it is not what the scriptures teach Christians to do.

 

[fhansen]

This is what Martin Luther said to Erasmus in his work The Bondage of the Will. This famous book was written in response to Erasmus' The Freedom of the Will. Some might be surprised, however, by the nature of their debate.

When Reformers like Luther denied the doctrine of free will, they were not denying that man needs to choose Christ in order to be saved. For the Reformers, the will was very important in salvation. Rather, the question that they concerned themselves with was this:

Does fallen man have the freedom to live a virtuous life? It was really not a question of ontological ability, but moral ability.

Erasmus and other semi-pelagians argued that fallen man maintains some spark of goodness and is able, all on his own, to recognize God, choose God, repent of his sin, and live a virtuous life. Luther, following Augustine, rather believed that man was entirely fallen and was morally unable to recognize God or to repent of his sin. In order for man to be saved, he needed for God to miraculously save him by reaching into his heart, regenerating him, and renewing his will. Only then could man freely choose God - his will being liberated by God.

Free will is a fiction not because of God's election or predestination. Free will is a fiction because fallen, sinful man hates God and is unable to freely choose him unless God changes his heart.

No, Erasmus had it right. God's purpose is to awaken and draw that spark back into a full flame, the initial choice being to believe in and recognize his absolute need for God, reversrsing AdamsAdchoice within himself do to speak. Man can always say "no" to God, just as Adam did to begin with. He can't possibly be saved without God, and yet he can reject salvation.

 

[DamianWarS]

No they are not able to choose God. They are religious because man is essentially religious and can't live without God. Fallen man is simultaneously religious and desirous of worship, but he cannot stand to worship the true God. So he invents religions to devise ways of trying to control God or he creates false gods to worship. This explains all world religions.

how do we know your version of God is also not just a religious invention to devise ways of trying to control God?

 

[Maria Billingsley]

You either did not read the OP or did not understand it.

I understand it completely. Calvinism.
Blessings

 

[PaulCyp1]

Luther believed "that man was entirely fallen and was morally unable to recognize God or to repent of his sin. In order for man to be saved, he needed for God to miraculously save him by reaching into his heart, regenerating him, and renewing his will". Which opens the door wide to the heresy of predestination, and characterizes God as an imperfect being with the same weaknesses as human beings.

 

[mark kennedy]

That's right. We need God's intervention to stop sinning.

The contrary idea is called Pelagianism and was condemned as a heresy long ago.

I think I know what your getting at, basically our will is poisoned because of sin, under those circumstances free will is illusory. God can reveal the truth to us all day long, and does (Romans 1:18-21), but we suppress the truth in unrighteousness. At some level we chose but that goes to the hidden thoughts and motives of the human heart, how can we know it, even within ourselves. God doesn't just give you a command and demand you obey it, God wants to give you a new nature that is incapable of sinning, it's called being born again. The New Testament really doesn't spend much time on human will, it has much to say about the will of the Father, Jesus was big on that.

 

[St_Worm2]

...the heresy of predestination

The "heresy" of predestination?

Romans 8
29 Those whom He foreknew, He also predestined to become conformed to the image of His Son, so that He would be the firstborn among many brethren;
30 and these whom He predestined, He also called; and these whom He called, He also justified; and these whom He justified, He also glorified.

Ephesians 1
4 He chose us in Him before the foundation of the world, that we would be holy and blameless before Him. In love
5 He predestined us to adoption as sons through Jesus Christ to Himself, according to the kind intention of His will,
6 to the praise of the glory of His grace, which He freely bestowed on us in the Beloved.

Acts of the Apostles 13
48 When the Gentiles heard this, they began rejoicing and glorifying the word of the Lord; and as many as had been appointed to eternal life believed.​

There is also all that the Lord had to say (through the pen of St. Paul) in Romans 9:6-26, of course, as well as a number of places in both the OT & NT, so why do you consider "predestination" to be "heresy", since it is clearly a Biblical doctrine?

...characterizes God as an imperfect being with the same weaknesses as human beings.

I'm not following you here, so I am hoping that you'd elaborate a bit. How does the doctrine of predestination "characterize God as an imperfect being with the same weaknesses as human beings"?

Thanks!

--David

 

[mark kennedy]

The "heresy" of predestination?

Romans 8
29 Those whom He foreknew, He also predestined to become conformed to the image of His Son, so that He would be the firstborn among many brethren;
30 and these whom He predestined, He also called; and these whom He called, He also justified; and these whom He justified, He also glorified.

Ephesians 1
4 He chose us in Him before the foundation of the world, that we would be holy and blameless before Him. In love
5 He predestined us to adoption as sons through Jesus Christ to Himself, according to the kind intention of His will,
6 to the praise of the glory of His grace, which He freely bestowed on us in the Beloved.

Acts of the Apostles 13
48 When the Gentiles heard this, they began rejoicing and glorifying the word of the Lord; and as many as had been appointed to eternal life believed.​

There is also all that the Lord had to say (through the pen of St. Paul) in Romans 9:6-26, of course, as well as a number of places in both the OT & NT, so why do you consider "predestination" to be "heresy", since it is clearly a Biblical doctrine?

I'm not following you here, so I am hoping that you'd elaborate a bit. How does the doctrine of predestination "characterize God as an imperfect being with the same weaknesses as human beings"?

Thanks!

--David

That's not the only place Paul uses the word 'predestination':

But we speak the wisdom of God in a mystery, even the hidden wisdom, which God ordained G4309 before the world unto our glory. (1 Corinthians 2:7)
​

Whatever that is, it was predestined from before the foundation of the world, God always knew what salvation would include because it's based on his eternal nature. He knew what you would be in the resurrection, and me, and anyone who became the righteousness of God in Christ because that does not change. What did God know and when, well that's easy, everything and there was never any doubt. Calvinists are accused of heresy because we believe in God's ability to have compassion on whom he will have compassion and mercy on whom he will have mercy, so be it. I'll opt for the sovereignty of God because I wasn't out looking for God, he found me, and pretty much against my will, imposed the gospel on me with gentle but firm sovereignty. If I have to chose between God's sovereignty and my will I think I'll take my chances with God's sovereignty, it has a much better track record.

Grace and peace,
Mark

 

[tdidymas]

This is what Martin Luther said to Erasmus in his work The Bondage of the Will. This famous book was written in response to Erasmus' The Freedom of the Will. Some might be surprised, however, by the nature of their debate.

When Reformers like Luther denied the doctrine of free will, they were not denying that man needs to choose Christ in order to be saved. For the Reformers, the will was very important in salvation. Rather, the question that they concerned themselves with was this:

Does fallen man have the freedom to live a virtuous life? It was really not a question of ontological ability, but moral ability.

Erasmus and other semi-pelagians argued that fallen man maintains some spark of goodness and is able, all on his own, to recognize God, choose God, repent of his sin, and live a virtuous life. Luther, following Augustine, rather believed that man was entirely fallen and was morally unable to recognize God or to repent of his sin. In order for man to be saved, he needed for God to miraculously save him by reaching into his heart, regenerating him, and renewing his will. Only then could man freely choose God - his will being liberated by God.

Free will is a fiction not because of God's election or predestination. Free will is a fiction because fallen, sinful man hates God and is unable to freely choose him unless God changes his heart.

The reasons why people debate this subject is because Christians in general are not clear about Original Sin and its effects, and about the function of the gospel. Everywhere I see this debate, no one addresses the distinction between the natural and the spiritual natures. "Free will" is a term commonly used for a natural ability. But because of the confusion about what is spiritual in contrast to what is natural, people do not usually discern that distinction. This is why I almost never see the discussion go that direction.

The apostle Paul makes that distinction clear in 1 Cor. 2:12-16 and Rom. 8:5-9. But because people largely operate in natural thinking, they often do not understand that Paul is making such distinction in these passages, and continue to make false assumptions about the call of the gospel.

We know that regarding the spiritual nature, every person is naturally "dead" to God (Eph. 2:1 "You were dead..."), since:

1. The unregenerate person is a slave to sin and Satan: Jn 8:34 Jesus answered them, "Truly, truly, I say to you, everyone who commits sin is the slave of sin," and 2 Ti 2:26 "and they may come to their senses and escape from the snare of the devil, having been held captive by him to do his will." and 1 Jn. 5:19 "We know that we are children of God, and that the whole world is under the control of the evil one." Rom. 7:14 "For we know that the Law is spiritual, but I am of flesh, sold into bondage to sin." These statements are making it clear that every unbeliever is not able to free himself from the natural captivity of satanic reasoning regarding the spiritual nature of relationship with God.

2. The unregenerate person is not able to make any righteous choice in regard to his relationship with God: Rom. 8:8 "and those who are in the flesh cannot please God" - this is a statement of inability, and includes the inability to make a choice to believe in Christ, which is the very faith by which a Christian (a regenerate and spiritually-minded person) is justified by God. The "natural man" according to Paul's language in 1 Cor. 2:14 is an unregenerate person (someone not born again). All such people do not receive the gospel. Such people cannot receive it because it is spiritually discerned. Anyone who claims they have believed the gospel by virtue of their natural free-will simply does not understand the gravity of Paul's teaching on the sinfulness of man, nor do they discern the distinction between natural reasoning and the spiritual nature of the gospel message.

3. The unregenerate person hates God, His will, and His message: Rom. 8:7a "the mind set on the flesh is hostile toward God..." in which Paul established in the context that this mind is the mind of an unbeliever, in which his natural reasoning is not able to resolve a spiritual condition of faith that justifies him, since that faith is a spiritual matter. Gen 3:15 "And I will put enmity Between you and the woman, And between your seed and her seed..." in which all the seed of the evil one are those under his control, so God Himself has established that enmity. This makes every unbeliever a hater of God.

Therefore, given this information from the New Testament about the true spiritual condition of man, it takes an act of God to change a person's attitude toward God, His will, and His message, such that this individual has the spiritual wisdom to discern the hopelessness of his previous condition, and the hope that is in the gospel message. This is a change in the disposition of the heart. John 1:12 "But as many as received Him, to them He gave the right to become children of God, even to those who believe in His name, who were born, not of blood nor of the will of the flesh nor of the will of man, but of God." This statement indicates that we are not born again from our natural "free-will," but rather "of God," meaning it was an act of God, and an act of God's will. If a natural man (unregenerate) cannot receive the gospel, he must first be made spiritual by an act of the Holy Spirit, namely spiritual rebirth, before such a man has a will free from the bondage of hostility toward God. Then that man has the "free will" to repent and believe the gospel. After God makes a person spiritual by regeneration, that person then has the ears to hear the gospel, believes, and obeys.

So then, in order to clarify why man has "no free will" in regard to the spiritual nature, we must communicate clearly about the distinction between natural ability and spiritual ability. The reason Pelagius, Arminius, Finney, and others who hold to the "free will" theory think that they had (and have) natural ability to make righteous choices is because of this confusion and lack of distinction, and because of a lack of understanding of the true spiritual condition of man. Someone who does not have the indwelling Spirit to turn his desires toward God will remain addicted to his natural desires, and remains spiritually dead to God. When such a person hears the gospel, he does not have "ears to hear," and therefore cannot obey it (neither does he want to).

The reasoning that the gospel is offered, therefore people have a natural ability to respond favorably, is a false reasoning. The gospel is preached as an offer of life to the hearers as an accommodation. Since people have no control of their eternal destiny, it is necessary for them to trust God to save them from their plight. The accommodation of the message preached is for hearers who are still in the natural mindset (who think they have control of their life by reason of natural choice). In order for a person to obey the gospel, God grants both the faith and the repentance to obey, as the message is preached (2 Tim. 2:25). The reasoning that "if God gives a command to men, then men have the ability to obey it" was where Pelagius began his debate against Original Sin and the necessity of grace. It was the same reasoning of Finney in his (false) teaching about reaching people through their intellect, his persuasion techniques, his rejection of Total (spiritual) Depravity, and his insistence that Christians could make themselves sinlessly perfect.

The bottom line is that man has a natural "free will" that is limited to his natural desires and reasoning. But it is his spiritual nature that has him bound to sin and the will of Satan, in which he does not have the "free will" to choose obedience to the gospel message. Thus, an unregenerate person never chooses to believe, because belief in Christ requires spiritual understanding and wisdom. Anyone who believes the gospel message has been given the free grace of God by God Himself. Eph. 2:5 "even when we were dead in our transgressions, [God] made us alive together with Christ (by grace you have been saved)." Paul defines grace here as a divine act from God's loving choice to grant spiritual regeneration to a person of His choosing. Such individuals are the ones who have responded favorably to the gospel message (or who eventually will respond so).

John 5:1 "Everyone who believes that Jesus is the Christ is born of God." "Everyone who believes" is the identifier of who is born of God, IOW who has been born of God. "Is born" is a current condition, in which this faith is the result. Just as faith is the logical precedent to justification in Rom. 5:1, so also "born of God" is the logical precedent here - "is born," not "will be born." So as the gospel is preached, God supernaturally works His will in certain people of His choosing who are then freed to obey the message. Thus, grace, faith, and salvation (Eph. 2:8) is 100% the work of God.
TD

 

[trophy33]

They never really understand him for who he is and so never truly choose him.

They did.

It is impossible for those who have once been enlightened, who have tasted the heavenly gift, who have shared in the Holy Spirit, who have tasted the goodness of the word of God and the powers of the coming age and who have fallen away, to be brought back to repentance.
Heb 6:4

 

[trophy33]

That's right. We need God's intervention to stop sinning.

Why would be people guilty, then?

 

[fat wee robin]

Indeed. But fallen man is not free to choose God because he hates God. He needs God to regenerate his heart in order to freely choose him.

The people you are speaking off, were people whose hearts were not good ,were not inclined to generosity ,so they were speaking subjectively .Goodness was something they had never experienced ,so they imagined everyone was like them .

But while humanity needs Christ to climb up ,to grow and 'evolve' ,a lot of people are born with generous hearts ,which have developed by practising goodness through generations of families . No one is ever perfect enough ,but ………

Anyone who watches people from childhood can see that each one is different ,and that some are born with better intentions than others .

 

[fat wee robin]

They did.

It is impossible for those who have once been enlightened, who have tasted the heavenly gift, who have shared in the Holy Spirit, who have tasted the goodness of the word of God and the powers of the coming age and who have fallen away, to be brought back to repentance.
Heb 6:4

Yes this false idea that we are created when we are born causes so much false theology in Christianity .It is evident that many characters in the O.T. and from what Jesus says were around before .