God's will

[Forest]

The Lord is "not willing that any should perish, but that all should come to repentance." How can this verse be true, without free-will?

 

[A New Dawn]

The Lord is "not willing that any should perish, but that all should come to repentance." How can this verse be true, without free-will?

How is it true with free-will?

 

[Forest]

The Lord is "not willing that any should perish, but that all should come to repentance." How can this verse be true, without free-will?

The Lord is "not willing that any should perish".

Some will perish, which is the opposite of the will of the Lord.

The only explanation for an event that is opposite the will of the Lord would be free-will.

If there is no free-will in humanity at all, then everything that happens would be the Lord's will and none would perish.

 

[PuritanLady]

The Lord is "not willing that any should perish, but that all should come to repentance." How can this verse be true, without free-will?

Loraine Boettner puts it well in "The Reformed Faith".

The Universalistic Passages
​

Probably the most plausible defense for Arminianism is found in the universalistic passages in Scripture. Three of the most quoted are: II Peter 3:9, "Not wishing [or, KJV, not willing] that any should perish, but that all should come to repentance"; I Tim. 2:4, [God our Savior] "who would have all men to be saved, and come to the knowledge of the truth"; and I Tim. 2:5,6, "...Christ Jesus, who gave himself a ransom for all."
​

In regard to these verses we must keep in mind that, as we have said earlier, God is the absolute sovereign Ruler of heaven and earth, and we are never to think of Him as wishing or striving to do what He knows He will not do. For Him to do otherwise would be for Him to act foolishly. Since Scripture tells us that some men are going to be lost, II Peter 3:9 cannot mean that God is earnestly wishing or striving to save all individual men. For if it were His will that every individual of mankind should be saved, then not one soul could be lost. "For who hath resisted his will?" (Rom. 9:19).
​

These verses simply teach that God is benevolent, and that He does not delight in the sufferings of His creatures any more than a human father delights in the punishment that he sometimes must inflict upon his son. The word "will" is used in different senses in Scripture as in our everyday conversation. It is sometimes used in the sense of "desire" or "purpose." A righteous judge does not will (desire) that anyone should be hanged or sentenced to prison, yet he wills (pronounces sentence) that the guilty person shall be punished. In the same sense and for sufficient reasons a man may will to have a limb removed, or an eye taken out, even though he certainly does not desire it.
​

Arminians insist that in II Peter 3:9 the words "any" and "all" refer to all mankind without exception. But it is important first of all to see to whom those words were addressed. In the first verse of chapter 1, we find that the epistle is addressed not to mankind at large, but to Christians: "...to them that have obtained a like precious faith with us." And in a preceding verse (3:1), Peter had addressed those to whom he was writing as "beloved." And when we look at the verse as a whole, and not merely at the last half, we find that it is not primarily a salvation verse at all, but a second coming verse! It begins by saying that "The Lord is not slacking concerning his promise" [singular]. What promise? Verse 4 tells us: "the promise of his coming." The reference is to His second coming, when He will come for judgment, and the wicked will perish in the lake of fire. The verse has reference to a limited group. It says that the Lord is "long-suffering to us-ward," His elect, many of whom had not yet been regenerated, and who therefore had not yet come to repentance. Hence we may quite properly read verse 9 as follows: "The Lord is not slack concerning his promise as some count slackness, but is long-suffering toward us, not willing that any of us should perish, but that all of us should come to repentance."
​

In regard to I Tim. 2:4,6 "Who would have all men to be saved, and to come to the knowledge of the truth ... who gave himself a ransom for all," is used in various senses. Oftentimes it means, not all men without exception, but all men without distinction - Jews and Gentiles, bond and free, men and women, rich and poor. And in I Tim. 2:4-6 it clearly is used in that sense. Through many centuries the Jews had been, with few exceptions, the exclusive recipients of God's saving grace. They had become the most intensely nationalistic and intolerant people in the world. Instead of recognizing their position as that of God's representatives to all the people of the world, they had taken those blessings to themselves. Even the early Christians for a time were inclined to appropriate the mission of the Messiah only to themselves. The salvation of the Gentiles was a mystery that had not been known in other ages (Eph. 4:6; Col. 1:27). So rigid was the pharisaic exclusivism that the Gentiles were called unclean, common, sinners of the Gentiles, even dogs; and it was not lawful for a Jew to keep company with or have any deals with a Gentile (John 4:9, Acts 10:28, 11:3). After an orthodox Jew had been out in the marketplace where he had come in contact with Gentiles he was regarded as unclean (Mark 7:4). After Peter had preached to the Roman Centurion Cornelius and the others who were gathered at his house, he was severely taken to task by the Church in Jerusalem, and we can almost hear the gasp of wonder when, after Peter told them what had happened, they said, "Then to the Gentiles also hath God granted repentance to life" (Acts 22:15), that is, not to every individual in the world, but to Jews and Gentiles alike. Used in this sense the word "all" has no reference to individuals, but simply to mankind in general.
​

When it was said of John the Baptist that "There went out unto him all the country of Judea, and all they of Jerusalem; and they were baptized of him in the river Jordan, confessing their sins" (Mark 1:5), we know that not every individual did so respond. We read that after Peter and John had healed the lame man at the door of the temple, "all men glorified God for that which was done" (Acts 4:21). Jesus told his disciples that they would be "hated of all men" for His name's sake (Luke 21:17). And when Jesus said, "And I, if I be lifted up from the earth, will draw all men unto myself" (John 12:32), He certainly did not mean that every individual of mankind would be so drawn. What He did mean was that Jews and Gentiles, men of all nations and races, would be drawn to Him. And that is what we see is actually happening.
​

In I Cor. 15:22 we read, "For as in Adam all die, so also in Christ shall all be make alive." This verse is often quoted by Arminians to prove unlimited or universal atonement. This verse is from Paul's famous resurrection chapter, and the context makes it clear that he is not talking about life in this age, whether physical or spiritual, but about the resurrection life. Christ is the first to enter the resurrection life, then, when He comes, His people also enter into their resurrection life. And what Paul says is that at that time a glorious resurrection life will become a reality, not for all mankind, but for all those who are in Christ. And this point is illustrated by the well known fact that the race fell in Adam, who acted as its federal head and representative. What Paul says in effect this: "For as all born in Adam die, so also all born again in Christ shall be make alive." Verse 22, therefore, refers not to something past, nor to something present, but to something future; and it has no special bearing at all on the Calvinistic-Arminian controversy.
​

Two other verses that also are often quoted in defense of Arminianism are "Behold, I stand at the door, I will come in to him and will sup with him, and he with me" (Rev. 3:20); and "...he that will [KJV, whosoever will], let him take the water of life freely" (Rev. 22:17). This general invitation is extended to all men. It may be, and often is, the means that the Holy Spirit uses to arouse in certain individuals the desire for salvation as He puts forth His supernatural power to regenerate them. But these verses, taken by themselves, fail to take into consideration the truth that already has been stressed in this article, that fallen man is spiritually dead, and that as such he is as totally unable to respond to the invitation as are the fallen angels or demons. Fallen man is as dead spiritually as Lazarus was dead physically until Jesus cried with a loud voice, "Lazarus, come forth," and the Pharisee Nicodemus, "Except one be born anew [or, from above], he cannot see the kingdom of God"(John 3:3). And again, He said to the Pharisees, "why do ye not understand my speech? Even because ye cannot hear my word" (John 8:43). Apart from that divine assistance no one can hear the invitation or put forth the will to come to Christ.
​

The declaration that Christ died for "all" is made clearer by the song that the redeemed sing before the throne of the Lamb: "Thou wast slain, and didst purchase unto God with thy blood men of every tribe, and tongue, and people, and nation" (Rev. 5:9). Oftentimes the word "all" must be understood to mean all the elect, all His Church, all those whom the Father has given to the Son, as when Christ says, "All that which the Father giveth me shall come to me" (John 6:37), but not all men universally and every man individually. The redeemed host will be make up of men from all classes and conditions of life, of princes and peasants, of rich and poor, bond and free, male and female, Jews and Gentiles, men of all nations and races. That is the true universalism of Scripture.​

​

(This booklet gives permission for anyone to use the material therein at liberty)

​

 

[A New Dawn]

The Lord is "not willing that any should perish".

Some will perish, which is the opposite of the will of the Lord.

The only explanation for an event that is opposite the will of the Lord would be free-will.

If there is no free-will in humanity at all, then everything that happens would be the Lord's will and none would perish.

But if man has free-will, then many will use that free-will to not choose God, and still His will will not be accomplished.

The only way to read that verse to mean that it is God's will that all be saved (which is different from Him not willing that any should perish) is to believe in universalism.

2 Peter 3:9 The Lord is not slack concerning his promise, as some men count slackness; but is longsuffering to us-ward, not willing that any should perish, but that all should come to repentance.

The word for "willing" in that verse is boulomai in the Greek.

Greek for 1014
boulomai {boo'-lom-ahee}

TDNT Reference Root Word
TDNT - 1:629,108 middle voice of a primary verb
Part of Speech
v
Outline of Biblical Usage
1) to will deliberately, have a purpose, be minded
2) of willing as an affection, to desire

So, "willing" means desire or to purposely cause. I agree with the verse in that God doesn't desire that any should perish, or purposely cause any to perish. I don't believe that it means He will save all.

 

[Forest]

Thank you for the information...

A few things I noted in the booklet you quoted...

I don't see how it is compelling that "all" only means the elect just because the letter is addressed to believers. All the letters in the Bible are addressed to believers. It wouldn't really make sense that there should be some letters in the Bible that were addressed to unbelievers. Note that the text of the bible had to be changed to more fully support the booklet's premise...by adding "us" in several places in the verse.

Hence we may quite properly read verse 9 as follows: "The Lord is not slack concerning his promise as some count slackness, but is long-suffering toward us, not willing that any of us should perish, but that all of us should come to repentance."

This next quote...why could it not be said that He desires humanity to have free will and that desire is greater than His desire to force everyone into heaven?...also, this quote has the implication that He wants people in hell, since He has the power to save all men if He chose to. Free-will has the implication that the choices a person makes could cause that person to end up in hell.

In regard to these verses we must keep in mind that, as we have said earlier, God is the absolute sovereign Ruler of heaven and earth, and we are never to think of Him as wishing or striving to do what He knows He will not do. For Him to do otherwise would be for Him to act foolishly. Since Scripture tells us that some men are going to be lost, II Peter 3:9 cannot mean that God is earnestly wishing or striving to save all individual men. For if it were His will that every individual of mankind should be saved, then not one soul could be lost. "For who hath resisted his will?" (Rom. 9:19).

I am not trying to disagreeable, but to understand...

answers appreciated.

 

[Forest]

But if man has free-will, then many will use that free-will to not choose God, and still His will will not be accomplished.

The only way to read that verse to mean that it is God's will that all be saved (which is different from Him not willing that any should perish) is to believe in universalism.

Or to believe that He does not force His will on people. (free-will) Why could it not be the case that free-will is more important to Him, than to force His will on people?

 

[A New Dawn]

Or to believe that He does not force His will on people. (free-will) Why could it not be the case that free-will is more important to Him, than to force His will on people?

You are asking two different questions. You are asking about God saving everyone (question 1), and you are asking about free-will vs. election/irresistable grace (question 2). What is the discussion you wish to have?

I am sooooo confused.

 

[Forest]

You are asking two different questions. You are asking about God saving everyone (question 1), and you are asking about free-will vs. election/irresistable grace (question 2). What is the discussion you wish to have?

I am sooooo confused.

Question 2

 

[A New Dawn]

Just so I know, are you familiar with the Doctrines of Grace (TULIP) and the doctrine of Arminianism?

 

[Forest]

Just so I know, are you familiar with the Doctrines of Grace (TULIP) and the doctrine of Arminianism?

Yes, but to discuss all of that would be a huge discussion...

I am really wondering about this question posted a couple of posts back...

"Why could it not be the case that free-will is more important to Him, than to force His will on people? (election)"

Is it possible to make this simple for me to understand?

 

[A New Dawn]

Yes, but to discuss all of that would be a huge discussion...

I am really wondering about this question posted a couple of posts back...

"Why could it not be the case that free-will is more important to Him, than to force His will on people? (election)"

Is it possible to make this simple for me to understand?

When Adam fell, mankind didn't just become sinners, their nature changed. Their whole nature is sinful. And a sinful man cannot possible choose God. They can only continue to choose that which is sinful.

A lot of it has to do with God's sovereignty. If we are talking about His will, then we cannot be talking about our will. If we choose God because that's what we want, we are not accomplishing God's will, we are accomplishing our own will, and that is a sin.

(hopefully someone else will jump in here soon :o )

Salvation is a gift from God. It is God's choice on whom to bestow it. None of us deserve it, and that God is willing to save any of us is a direct result of His mercy.

 

[JJB]

Since Adam and Eve people have perished without coming to faith. How about Cain and his lineage? They were not saved. The world before Noah was so wicked that God decided he would contend no longer with the evil. Is God unable to save all? That makes God less than omnipotent. Consider that it is not all people that he is waiting for, only those whom He calls.

2 Peter 3:9 was written to believers. The very first verse in 2 Peter 3 is:

1Dear friends, this is now my second letter to you. I have written both of them as reminders to stimulate you to wholesome thinking. 2I want you to recall the words spoken in the past by the holy prophets and the command given by our Lord and Savior through your apostles.

 

[ksen]

Yes, but to discuss all of that would be a huge discussion...

I am really wondering about this question posted a couple of posts back...

"Why could it not be the case that free-will is more important to Him, than to force His will on people? (election)"

Is it possible to make this simple for me to understand?

First you need to define "free-will" for the discussion to actually mean anything. When you say "free-will" what do you mean?

 

[BBAS 64]

The Lord is "not willing that any should perish, but that all should come to repentance." How can this verse be true, without free-will?

Good Day, Forest

How does "free-will" become part of the text, the text is clear..

2 Peter 3:1-10



2Pe 3:1 This second epistle, beloved, I now write unto you; in both which I stir up your pure minds by way of remembrance:

**Remember this is written to Believers**


2Pe 3:2 That ye may be mindful of the words which were spoken before by the holy prophets, and of the commandment of us the apostles of the Lord and Saviour:

* believers- beloved,YE

2Pe 3:3 Knowing this first, that there shall come in the last days scoffers, walking after their own lusts,

*Un regenerate man

2Pe 3:4 And saying, Where is the promise of his coming? for since the fathers fell asleep, all things continue as they were from the beginning of the creation.

*Unregenerate Man's Charge
2Pe 3:5 For this they willingly are ignorant of, that by the word of God the heavens were of old, and the earth standing out of the water and in the water:

2Pe 3:6 Whereby the world that then was, being overflowed with water, perished:

2Pe 3:7 But the heavens and the earth, which are now, by the same word are kept in store, reserved unto fire against the day of judgment and perdition of ungodly men.

* Unbelivers rewards for thier ungodly- ness


2Pe 3:8 But, beloved, be not ignorant of this one thing, that one day is with the Lord as a thousand years, and a thousand years as one day.

*Believers
2Pe 3:9 The Lord is not slack concerning his promise, as some men count slackness; but is longsuffering to us-ward, not willing that any should perish, but that all should come to repentance.

* Believers – Charge of the ungodly in verse #4 rebuffed


2Pe 3:10 But the day of the Lord will come as a thief in the night; in the which the heavens shall pass away with a great noise, and the elements shall melt with fervent heat, the earth also and the works that are therein shall be burned up.


*Reward for Believers



Forest, in verse 9 the “us-ward” and the “all”are pronoun form, so to which noun do they refer?

Peace to u,

Bill

 

[PuritanLady]

It is also important to note, that for God to truely give man free will in the manner you are speaking of causes several problems.

1) It takes away God's total Sovereignty and makes Him only partially Sovereign (which is not possible)

2) It means that Christ didn't actually secure salvation for anyone. That man takes part in his own salvation. This leads towards man doing some "work". But Scripture states that it is NOT of ourselves, lest any man should boast.

3) This would also make faith man's act instead of given of God. Scripture states that NO man seeks after God (Romans 3:10-11). That man's heart deviseth one way, but God directs his path.

 

[Forest]

Good Day, Forest

How does "free-will" become part of the text, the text is clear..





Forest, in verse 9 the “us-ward” and the “all”are pronoun form, so to which noun do they refer?

Peace to u,

Bill

Right the text is clear...

Why make "all" become "all the elect" or "all who this letter is written to?"

 

[Forest]

It is also important to note, that for God to truely give man free will in the manner you are speaking of causes several problems.

1) It takes away God's total Sovereignty and makes Him only partially Sovereign (which is not possible)

2) It means that Christ didn't actually secure salvation for anyone. That man takes part in his own salvation. This leads towards man doing some "work". But Scripture states that it is NOT of ourselves, lest any man should boast.

3) This would also make faith man's act instead of given of God. Scripture states that NO man seeks after God (Romans 3:10-11). That man's heart deviseth one way, but God directs his path.

1) If someone has the ability to make choices, how does that take away any Sovereignty from God? He is still sovern. A person can only make choices because He allows us to.

2) If God gives something to someone, why can they not have the free will to accept it or reject it? Accepting a gift given to us by God is not something to be boastful about, it is something to be thankful for.

3) Someone can choose to accept or not, something that God offers them as a gift, and it is still an undeserved gift given by God.

Also, how can somthing be a gift if the person receiving is forced to accept it?

Thank you.

 

[JJB]

Forest,

The answer lies in rules of language. Who or what is the noun that the pronouns are referencing?


Sorry to jump in BBAS.

 

[seekingpurity047]

I would consider this too: Everytime that the word "all" is with people or whatever, it usually concerns all as in "Both jew and gentile". Not all literally meaning every single person on the face of the earth.

God's will will always prevail over ours. If it did not, this would deny scripture (see Romans 9). Nobody can resist His will, for He is all-powerful, the Almighty God.

Blessings,
Randy