On Free Will

[Aseyesee]

God exalts the humble ... which is the reverse of building a tower.

 

[PeaceJoyLove]

As you pointed out there are degrees of faith, which suggest to me all “faith” would include faith in things and people that do not save people. 1 Cor. 13:2… if I have a faith that can move mountains, but do not have love, I am nothing. Paul suggests you can have great faith, but if it is not saving faith it is worthless?

The lowliest person on earth can trust (have faith in) a benevolent Creator for help, but placing faith in God is a humbling activity.


You might be misinterpreting Eph. 2:8

I can look up genders and dust off my Greek New Testament, but here is what Barnes and Robertson have to say and they do an honest job as far as I can tell:


And that not of yourselves - That is, salvation does not proceed from yourselves. The word rendered "that" - ͂ touto - is in the neuter gender, and the word "faith" - ́ pistis - is in the feminine. The word "that," therefore, does not refer particularly to faith, as being the gift of God, but to "the salvation by grace" of which he had been speaking. This is the interpretation of the passage which is the most obvious, and which is now generally conceded to be the true one; see Bloomfield. Many critics, however, as Doddridge, Beza, Piscator, and Chrysostom, maintain that the word "that" ( ͂ touto ) refers to "faith" ( ́ pistis ); and Doddridge maintains that such a use is common in the New Testament. As a matter of grammar this opinion is certainly doubtful, if not untenable; but as a matter of theology it is a question of very little importance.



Robertson, on the topic of pronouns, wrote:

9. Gender and Number of outos. ... In general, like other adjectives, outos agrees with its substantive in gender and number, whether predicate or attributive. ... In Eph. 2:8 , ..., there is no reference to pisteos in touto, but rather to the idea of salvation in the clause before. (A. T. Robertson, A Grammar of the New Testament, p.704)


Robertson, on the topic of particles, wrote:

(ii) Kai. ... The Mere Connective ('And') ... kai tauta (frequent in ancient Greek). See in particular Eph. 2:8 , kai touto ouk ex umon, where touto refers to the whole conception, not to chariti. (A. T. Robertson, A Grammar of the New Testament, pp. 1181-1182)


Robertson, on the topic of prepositions, wrote:

(d) dia ... 3. 'Passing Between' or 'Through.' The idea of interval between leads naturally to that of passing between two objects or parts of objects. 'Through' is thus not the original meaning of dia, but is a very common one. ... The agent may also be expressed by dia. This function was also performed in the ancient Greek, through, when means or instrument was meant, the instrumental case was commonly employed. dia is thus used with inanimate and animate objects. Here, of course, the agent is conceived as coming in between the non-attainmnet and the attainment of the object in view. ... Abstract ideas are frequently so expressed, as sesosmenoi dia pisteos (Eph. 2:8 ), ... (A. T. Robertson, A Grammar of the New Testament, pp. 580-582)

The gift from God is referring to the salvation which comes by faith and not the faith itself. This you can also figure out from the next verse without the Greek.

Not that I am answering for Aseyesee, but as eye see...we each have been given a measure of faith (a seed of)...and if not exercised will never increase (and only HE can give the increase as "I" decrease). Faith is needed/required for any (one) to be accounted right in God's sight. Faith that grows(by doing/seeking to find) awakens us to the spirit within...faith exercised is an act of Love that the spirit unctions within us...if we obey its calling out from the deep.

We can say we have faith, but unless we truly can 'see' what we are hoping for, then it is not really faith, but an image of what we think it is. Trusting in 'self' is not genuine faith, nor is it exercising faith. At first we walk by faith, not sight (what we perceive with our five senses) and by that faith we HOPE for the promises of God to come and pass and bring the life more abundantly. Hope of being glorified in God, walking without sin.

Our perception of what faith is changes as we grow/process taking place within...the picture gets bigger of what God's plan and purpose is and by His grace (He freely gives if we use our seed of faith) comes to be our reality in which we walk.

 

[bling]

So faith can work without love (which makes Paul's statement not exactly true) ... and the measure of faith given is not a gift from God?and cannot save you ...

Paul is suggest if you had a huge faith without Love it would not have value for God, but that does not mean you cannot have a faith without Love.

John 12: 42 Yet at the same time many even among the leaders believed in him. But because of the Pharisees they would not openly acknowledge their faith for fear they would be put out of the synagogue; 43 for they loved human praise more than praise from God.

The word “believed” is the same Greek word “faith” one is a noun and the other is in the verb tense, so these leaders had a faith in Christ, but would not confess Christ, so I would call that faith less than a saving faith.

James 2:19 You believe that there is one God. Good! Even the demons believe that—and shudder.

The demons have less than a saving faith.

To me salvation and faith are not separate things (just as the beginning and the end of our faith are not separate things). Faith is an ever inreasing truth, just as salvation is an eternal gospel, in the light of a kingdom whose increase that has no end.

Faith is the person (express image of his person/substance) of things hoped for, my evidence of those things that are not seen yet.

I see every mature adult having a God given “faith” ability which they can have “faith in themselves to do something, faith in a person to act some particular way or even faith in their car”. Turning that faith toward God’s Love to forgive them, allows God to shower them with gifts.

The prodigal son did not go home because he “loved” the father, the prodigal son was motivated by selfish reasoning (in the hopes of just some kind of life, by accepting his father’s pure charity (which he totally did not deserve). The prodigal son did have some trust (faith) in the Father’s unconditional Love that he must have felt could just possible be extended to him.

 

[Aseyesee]

James 2:19 You believe that there is one God. Good! Even the demons believe that—and shudder.

The demons have less than a saving faith.

Faith fundamentally is for what you cannot see, whereas angels or demons have seen, have they not?

 

[TheSeabass]

John 16:13 Howbeit when he, the Spirit of truth, is come, he will guide you into all truth: for he shall not speak of himself; but whatsoever he shall hear, that shall he speak: and he will shew you things to come.

This was spoken to the apostles who were spiritual men miraculously inspired by the Holy Spirit in what to say. This has no application to anyone today.

1 John 2:27 But the anointing which ye have received of him abideth in you, and ye need not that any man teach you: but as the same anointing teacheth you of all things, and is truth, and is no lie, and even as it hath taught you, ye shall abide in him.

This 'anointing' refers to the Holy Spirit and it teaches you by the written pages of the bible. John was teaching them through this epistle he had written to them by inspiration of the HS.

".....it is clear from the last clause where the neuter pronoun and past tense are used that he is referring to the written records of the gospel. It was that which they had been taught; and it was that which was abiding in them, there being no difference whatever in the word of God dwelling in Christians and the Holy Spirit dwelling in them....Moreover, it was that original gospel which was alone sufficient for all their needs, enabling John to say, "Ye need not that any one teach you." The holy gospel has already given (note the past tense) all of the teaching that Christians will ever need.
That it is that gospel (we now call it the New Testament) of which John taught in this verse is proved by a careful reading of it:

That gospel is no lie.

It is the truth.

It taught you.

As a consequence of its teachings, you abide in him.... Furthermore, John did not teach that Christians had no need of further study. The whole passage must be understood as a plea for the all-sufficiency of the gospel as the complete and effective refutation of heresies."
" Coffman Commentary (my emp)


Those Christians John was writing to were taught by the written word, therefore they did not "need that anyone teach you". There would be no need for the first epistle of John (or any other written epistle) if the HS is gong to 'enlighten" everyone's understanding miraculously apart from the word.

Therefore John is not saying nor implying that each person has direct, miraculous communication from the HS. If this were the case, then the Holy Spirit is the author of confusion and untruths. Just look at this very forum here with all the contradicting, conflicting beliefs and doctrines. If everyone on this forum were getting their understanding miraculously directly from the HS apart from the word, look how the Holy Spirit is full of contradictions, untruths and confusion.


2 Timothy 2:15; Acts 17:11 why the need to study of God's word if the HS will simply "enlightens" one's understanding miraculously apart from the word?

Romans 7:6 But now we are delivered from the law, that being dead wherein we were held; that we should serve in newness of spirit, and not in the oldness of the letter.

2 Corinthians 3:6 Who also hath made us able ministers of the new testament; not of the letter, but of the spirit: for the letter killeth, but the spirit giveth life.

John 15:5 I am the vine, ye are the branches: He that abideth in me, and I in him, the same bringeth forth much fruit: for without me ye can do nothing.

None of these verses say anything about man getting understanding about God from anywhere other than the written word.

 

[TheSeabass]

So your "proof" is that I can't prove otherwise? That's not in the text.

Nothing in the text says those in Acts 2 were totally depraved and in need of "regeneration" in order for them to be able to understand what was preached by Peter. Since this idea is NOT in the text then it would have to be ADDED to the text, correct?

If you (or anyone else) think they were totally depraved and in need of "regeneration" so they could then understand what was being preached, then the onus is upon them to show from the scripture such was the case. Is there a particular verse in Acts 2 that says there were totally depraved and not able to understand what Peter preached?

Those in Acts 7 were spiritually dead, lost yet able to understand what Stephen preached. Obviously they did not stone Stephen killing him because they did not understand what he was saying but stoned him for they DID understand what he was saying and they did not like it.

If one can read a newspaper, a magazine, a novel, directions of any kind and understand them without an miraculous intervening of the HS, then they can in the same way able to understand the word of God when they read it without a miraculous intervening of the HS.

 

[TheSeabass]

Pelagianism - Wikipedia

Pelagianism is the belief that original sin did not taint human nature and that mortal will is still capable of choosing good or evil without special divine aid.
​

You are basically a Pelagian, are you not?

No.

I believe the bible (not Pelagius) and the bible does not teach man is born totally depraved where he can only do evil and not able to understand the bible. If man is passively born against his will where he can only do evil then there is no free will. Free will is simply having the ability to choose between 2 or more options and under the totally depravity idea there are no options to choose to do good for evil was forced upon one at birth. Hence the fact there is no original sin and no totally depravity are BIBLICAL not Pelagian.

 

[HeLeadethMe]

This was spoken to the apostles who were spiritual men miraculously inspired by the Holy Spirit in what to say. This has no application to anyone today.



This 'anointing' refers to the Holy Spirit and it teaches you by the written pages of the bible. John was teaching them through this epistle he had written to them by inspiration of the HS.

".....it is clear from the last clause where the neuter pronoun and past tense are used that he is referring to the written records of the gospel. It was that which they had been taught; and it was that which was abiding in them, there being no difference whatever in the word of God dwelling in Christians and the Holy Spirit dwelling in them....Moreover, it was that original gospel which was alone sufficient for all their needs, enabling John to say, "Ye need not that any one teach you." The holy gospel has already given (note the past tense) all of the teaching that Christians will ever need.
That it is that gospel (we now call it the New Testament) of which John taught in this verse is proved by a careful reading of it:

That gospel is no lie.

It is the truth.

It taught you.

As a consequence of its teachings, you abide in him.... Furthermore, John did not teach that Christians had no need of further study. The whole passage must be understood as a plea for the all-sufficiency of the gospel as the complete and effective refutation of heresies."
" Coffman Commentary (my emp)


Those Christians John was writing to were taught by the written word, therefore they did not "need that anyone teach you". There would be no need for the first epistle of John (or any other written epistle) if the HS is gong to 'enlighten" everyone's understanding miraculously apart from the word.

Therefore John is not saying nor implying that each person has direct, miraculous communication from the HS. If this were the case, then the Holy Spirit is the author of confusion and untruths. Just look at this very forum here with all the contradicting, conflicting beliefs and doctrines. If everyone on this forum were getting their understanding miraculously directly from the HS apart from the word, look how the Holy Spirit is full of contradictions, untruths and confusion.


2 Timothy 2:15; Acts 17:11 why the need to study of God's word if the HS will simply "enlightens" one's understanding miraculously apart from the word?



None of these verses say anything about man getting understanding about God from anywhere other than the written word.

If anyone prefers to reason away the plain teachings of God's word rather than receive it......then I am not interested in arguing. They are putting the thoughts of the carnal mind which is ENMITY WITH GOD, above His word. As for me I find His word renews my wrong thinking to come into agreement with His. Choose we this day who we will serve.

 

[Hammster]

Nothing in the text says those in Acts 2 were totally depraved and in need of "regeneration" in order for them to be able to understand what was preached by Peter. Since this idea is NOT in the text then it would have to be ADDED to the text, correct?

If you (or anyone else) think they were totally depraved and in need of "regeneration" so they could then understand what was being preached, then the onus is upon them to show from the scripture such was the case. Is there a particular verse in Acts 2 that says there were totally depraved and not able to understand what Peter preached?

Those in Acts 7 were spiritually dead, lost yet able to understand what Stephen preached. Obviously they did not stone Stephen killing him because they did not understand what he was saying but stoned him for they DID understand what he was saying and they did not like it.

If one can read a newspaper, a magazine, a novel, directions of any kind and understand them without an miraculous intervening of the HS, then they can in the same way able to understand the word of God when they read it without a miraculous intervening of the HS.

Your argument is from silence. No, it says nothing about their depravity, one way or another. I would never make an argument for that with this passage, or any other narrative. But you are saying that since it doesn't say they were depraved, we must assume that they weren't. That's an assumption you are making apart from the text.

 

[bling]

Faith fundamentally is for what you cannot see, whereas angels or demons have seen, have they not?

The Bible calls it "believe" which is the same as "faith".

 

[PeaceB]

No.

I believe the bible (not Pelagius) and the bible does not teach man is born totally depraved where he can only do evil and not able to understand the bible. If man is passively born against his will where he can only do evil then there is no free will. Free will is simply having the ability to choose between 2 or more options and under the totally depravity idea there are no options to choose to do good for evil was forced upon one at birth. Hence the fact there is no original sin and no totally depravity are BIBLICAL not Pelagian.

If someone denies original sin he is a Pelagian heretic. No mainline Christian denominations deny original sin.

What church do you attend that teaches that? Or is that a conclusion that you arrived at on your own?

 

[bling]

No.

I believe the bible (not Pelagius) and the bible does not teach man is born totally depraved where he can only do evil and not able to understand the bible. If man is passively born against his will where he can only do evil then there is no free will. Free will is simply having the ability to choose between 2 or more options and under the totally depravity idea there are no options to choose to do good for evil was forced upon one at birth. Hence the fact there is no original sin and no totally depravity are BIBLICAL not Pelagian.

Mark 10: 20 “Teacher,” he declared, “all these I have kept since I was a boy.” 21 Jesus looked at him and loved him. “One thing you lack,” he said. “Go, sell everything you have and give to the poor, and you will have treasure in heaven. Then come, follow me.” 22 At this the man’s face fell. He went away sad, because he had great wealth.

Did Jesus lie to this rich young ruler, because if this rich young ruler was “totally depraved”, there would be nothing he could do to be saved?

If the rich young ruler had been regenerated at this time would he not follow the Shepherd (Christ)?

Jesus should have said: “the one thing you lack is regeneration”, to be perfectly honest with the young man, so was Jesus being dishonest with him?
Did Jesus love all totally depraved individuals or just this one?

 

[Aseyesee]

The Bible calls it "believe" which is the same as "faith".

I guess my point is ... why do you need faith, or belief for something you have already seen.

 

[bling]

I guess my point is ... why do you need faith, or belief for something you have already seen.

There are different degrees of "faith", is what I have been saying.

 

[TheSeabass]

1 Paul, an apostle of Christ Jesus by the will of God,
To the saints who area also faithful in Christ Jesus:
2 Grace to you and peace from God our Father and the Lord Jesus Christ.
3 Blessed be the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, who has blessed us in Christ with every spiritual blessing in the heavenly places, 4 even as he chose us in him before the foundation of the world, that we should be holy and blameless before him. 5 He destined us in love to be his sons through Jesus Christ, according to the purpose of his will, 6 to the praise of his glorious grace which he freely bestowed on us in the Beloved. 7 In him we have redemption through his blood, the forgiveness of our trespasses, according to the riches of his grace 8 which he lavished upon us. 9 For he has made known to us in all wisdom and insight the mystery of his will, according to his purpose which he set forth in Christ 10 as a plan for the fulness of time, to united all things in him, things in heaven and things on earth.
11 In him, according to the purpose of him who accomplishes all things according to the counsel of his will, 12 we who first hoped in Christ have been destined and appointed to live for the praise of his glory. 13 In him you also, who have heard the word of truth, the gospel of your salvation, and have believed in him, were sealed with the promised Holy Spirit, 14 who is the guarantee of our inheritance until we acquire possession of it, to the praise of his glory.
​

As you can see, St. Paul is writing this letter to believers, and those who have been blessed "with every spiritual blessing" and those whom God has "made known . . . all his wisdom and insight the mystery of his will." The fact that Paul does not mention supernatural help in Chapter 3 does not lead to the conclusion that such help is unnecessary, because it is clear from Chapter 1 that they have already received supernatural help. Nor would Paul's silence have implied an exclusion of supernatural help, if he had written to non-believers instead.

15 For this reason, because I have heard of your faith in the Lord Jesus and your love toward all the saints, 16 I do not cease to give thanks for you, remembering you in my prayers, 17 that the God of our Lord Jesus Christ, the Father of glory, may give you a spirit of wisdom and of revelation in the knowledge of him, 18 having the eyes of your hearts enlightened, that you may know what is the hope to which he has called you, what are the riches of his glorious inheritance in the saints, 19 and what is the immeasurable greatness of his power in us who believe, according to the working of his great might 20 which he accomplished in Christ when he raised him from the dead and made him sit at his right hand in the heavenly places, 21 far above all rule and authority and power and dominion, and above every name that is named, not only in this age but also in that which is to come; 22 and he has put all things under his feet and has made him the head over all things for the church, 23 which is his body, the fulness of him who fills all in all.
​

The underlined portion above, from the Ephesians 1, also refutes your theory. Paul continues to pray that God gives them a spirit of wisdom and of revelation in the knowledge of him, and that will result in the eyes of their hearts being enlightened. It is not something that they do via their own power, but is given to them from God.

There is no indication anywhere in the bible that before those Ephesians became Christians they were totally depraved and unable to understand without God first acting upon them so they could understand. Eph 3:4 shows they could understand the Ephesian epistle (or any other epistle) without divine miraculous intervention. This passage in Eph 3 shows that the things of God's mind was inspirationally revealed to inspired men as Paul who wrote it down so we can read. So we understand the things of God's mind through reading for no again, no verse says each individual has his own personal "pipeline" with the Holy Spirit. AS I posted in an earlier post, look at al the religious confusion, contradictions and untruth posted by 1000's of individuals just on this forum alone. If all posters here are all getting their "enlightenment" directly from the HS and not the written word, then the HS should be ashamed of Himself for all the confusion, untruths and striving that He is responsible for. I can easily say "you are wrong" for the HS "enlightened" me different from what you are saying".


Therefore Paul is NOT saying in Eph 1:17-18 those Ephesians need miraculous enlightenment from the HS to be able to understand, just be able to read the written word per Eph 3:4. So man's mind is capable of understanding but the mind must have the right attitude in understanding the bible and approach the bible with an open and honest heart. Many (if not most people) approach the bible with preconceptions and have the mindset to change the bible to fit their preconceptions, hence they will never have an understanding of the bible even though they have the ability to read the words. This is one reason why you can find so many contradictions within religion or just on this forum alone. So the "spirit of wisdom and understanding" does not refer to the Holy Spirit Himself but refers to an attitude of thinking, a correct disposition in making appropriate discernments pertaining to God's word. One must have the right type of "soil" (heart) for the seed (the word of God), to grow and flourish, Luke 8:15..." they, which in an honest and good heart, having heard the word, keep it, and bring forth fruit with patience." This "honest and good" heart is the spirit of wisdom and understanding.

Paul said "For God hath not given us the spirit of fear; but of power, and of love, and of a sound mind." 2 Timothy 1:7. Again this spirit of power, love and a sound mind is not the Holy Spirit Himself but a mental, attitudinal disposition. In God giving one a spirit of wisdom and understanding and a spirit of power, love and a sound mind does not mean the individual does nothing while God does everything. The individual has a role in cooperating with God by having the correct disposition, attitude in gaining the proper wisdom, understanding, power, love and sound mind.

 

[HeLeadethMe]

God exalts the humble ... which is the reverse of building a tower.

Yes, and it is because it is Christ exalted in the person, really. He is lifted up in a person when the person humbles (lowers) themself. HE is our glory (and the lifter of our head....who is Christ..) He said if He be lifted up He will draw men to Himself.

 

[HeLeadethMe]

I guess my point is ... why do you need faith, or belief for something you have already seen.

Because faith is of the Spirit, and we always need Him.........the Israelites in the wilderness forgot the power of God even though they saw him deliver them from Egypt and through the Red Sea.......we always need to rely on Him. Where Jesus said to abide in the vine...without Him we can do nothing. So we need to abide in faith, always.

 

[jimmyjimmy]

There is no indication anywhere in the bible that before those Ephesians became Christians they were totally depraved and unable to understand without God first acting upon them so they could understand.

Unless your translation of the Bible doesn't contain John 10, you should know that your statement is untrue.

 

[TheSeabass]

If anyone prefers to reason away the plain teachings of God's word rather than receive it......then I am not interested in arguing. They are putting the thoughts of the carnal mind which is ENMITY WITH GOD, above His word. As for me I find His word renews my wrong thinking to come into agreement with His. Choose we this day who we will serve.

As I already pointed out, all the contradictions on this forum alone shows a serious flaw in the idea that people understand by miraculous enlightenment by the Holy Spirit. If posters on this forum have their understanding miraculously 'enlightened" by the HS, then they would be just as infallible as the HS in their understanding. But just look at all the fallible contradictions. Have you, or anyone else on this forum, ever changed a view on a bible topic? If so, then was the HS in error and mislead on the issue earlier? How could one even objectively tell he has been "enlightened"? He couldn't.


The whole idea of this "miraculous enlightenment" is grounded in the idea of totally depravity which the bible does not teach.

 

[TheSeabass]

Your argument is from silence. No, it says nothing about their depravity, one way or another. I would never make an argument for that with this passage, or any other narrative. But you are saying that since it doesn't say they were depraved, we must assume that they weren't. That's an assumption you are making apart from the text.

The context says nothing about total depravity at all. Therefore that idea is being assumed into the text.

If you can assume total depravity in the context of Acts 2, then what stops anyone from assuming anything into any text?

Acts 2:37 when Peter finishes speaking it says "Now when they heard this, they were pricked in their heart, and said unto Peter and to the rest of the apostles, Men and brethren, what shall we do?"

The Greek word for "heard" is akouo meaning a hearing with a view to learning, to perceive, to understand. So where does it say they could have only 'heard' if first acted upon by God?

Again, John 6:45 God draws by His word when men are "taught" "heard" and "learned". God's drawing would be useless, senseless if no one could possible understand.