On Free Will

[ladodgers6]

Every time (and I mean every time) any discusion where Reformed theology is brought up, some sort of "but man has free will" argument arises, as if the secular humanistic view of free will is some sort of counter argument.

So my question is this. Can the natural man do anything that's spiritually good? Or to ask another way, can the natural man do anything to glorify God?

disclaimer: the questions may br modified if they aren't clear enough

I would like to clear up a misconception about the Reformed Faith view on Free will. People automatically think we deny free-will. That people are like robots they are controlled, so they cannot be responsible for what they do. They do it against their wills. Since people do not have free-wills; God is the author of sin. And so forth. The Reformed Faith does believe that sinners & believers have a free-will. Nobody forces sinners to sin against their wills; as if somebody was holding a gun to their heads, and making them sin. I will provide a excerpt from Calvin.

"...we allow that man has choice and that it is self-determined, so that if he does anything evil, it should be imputed to him and to his own voluntary choosing. We do away with coercion and force, because this contradicts the nature of the will and cannot coexist with it. We deny that choice is free, because through man's innate wickedness it is of necessity driven to what is evil and cannot seek anything but evil. And from this it is possible to deduce what a great difference there is between necessity and coercion. For we do not say that man is dragged unwillingly into sinning, but that because his will is corrupt he is held captive under the yoke of sin and therefore of necessity will in an evil way. For where there is bondage, there is necessity. But it makes a great difference whether the bondage is voluntary or coerced. We locate the necessity to sin precisely in corruption of the will, from which follows that it is self-determined.
- John Calvin from Bondage and Liberation of the Will, pg. 69-70

 

[Wordkeeper]

I would like to clear up a misconception about the Reformed Faith view on Free will. People automatically think we deny free-will. That people are like robots they are controlled, so they cannot be responsible for what they do. They do it against their wills. Since people do not have free-wills; God is the author of sin. And so forth. The Reformed Faith does believe that sinners & believers have a free-will. Nobody forces sinners to sin against their wills; as if somebody was holding a gun to their heads, and making them sin. I will provide a excerpt from Calvin.

"...we allow that man has choice and that it is self-determined, so that if he does anything evil, it should be imputed to him and to his own voluntary choosing. We do away with coercion and force, because this contradicts the nature of the will and cannot coexist with it. We deny that choice is free, because through man's innate wickedness it is of necessity driven to what is evil and cannot seek anything but evil. And from this it is possible to deduce what a great difference there is between necessity and coercion. For we do not say that man is dragged unwillingly into sinning, but that because his will is corrupt he is held captive under the yoke of sin and therefore of necessity will in an evil way. For where there is bondage, there is necessity. But it makes a great difference whether the bondage is voluntary or coerced. We locate the necessity to sin precisely in corruption of the will, from which follows that it is self-determined.
- John Calvin from Bondage and Liberation of the Will, pg. 69-70

But the text says opposite, denies "free will":

Quote
We deny that choice is free, because through man's innate wickedness it is of necessity driven to what is evil and cannot seek anything but evil.

You better read up on compatibilism.

 

[PeaceJoyLove]

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.

When I say 'see' here, it means seeing it as possible (the goal/prize) because HE said it could/would be, but not yet come to pass or in our possession...HOPE for. Once we receive it, no need to hope for it...desire fulfilled. "...when the desire cometh, it is a tree of life."

"He will fulfil the desire of them that fear him: he also will hear their cry, and will save them."

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 ...

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.

"Faith is an ever increasing truth" indeed! ...in the light...of all that God is/promises as pertaining to a kingdom whose increase that has no end! Our faith ...and the light has overcome the darkness...

The "end of our faith" cannot be possible without Love because " He that loveth not knoweth not God; for God is love." And God's love is revealed in us by faith. God's love has nothing to do with self-ish conditions that natural man attaches to it. (God loves us whether we 'know' it or not...Grace on the other hand requires faith...because without faith it is impossible to please God.

Hebrews 11:6 But without faith it is impossible to please him: for he that cometh to God must believe that he is, and that he is a rewarder of them that diligently seek him.

 

[ladodgers6]

But the text says opposite, denies "free will":

Quote
We deny that choice is free, because through man's innate wickedness it is of necessity driven to what is evil and cannot seek anything but evil.

You better read up on compatibilism.

This is precisely why, you do not understand what is written here.

 

[Wordkeeper]

This is precisely why, you do not understand what is written here.

It isn't so because you say so. You got to give reasons, if you are up to it.

 

[Jennifer Rothnie]

Not always when we consider Grace =unmerited favor and faith not works in Gods Grace brings us to salvation.
At some point we all were sinners ,and at the point of God's Grace
We believed.

Grace, xáris, is 'favor extended towards,' disposed to, inclined, leaning towards to share benefit, grace" etc.

The term 'unmerited favor' is often used of God's grace due to this verse and others like it:

"So too, at the present time there is a remnant chosen by grace. And if by grace, then it cannot be based on works; if it were, grace would no longer be grace."

Since God's favor is not based on our works, then it is 'unmerited' in that sense. However, salvific grace (as opposed to the general graces God gives to all men of Christ's death, conviction of sin, general revelation, deferring judgment, etc.) does come through faith:

"For it is by grace you have been saved, through faith--and this is not from yourselves, it is the gift of God--" Eph 2:8
What does it mean that it is by grace we have been saved, through faith, and that this is not of ourselves but is the gift of God?

"..through whom also we have obtained our introduction by faith into this grace in which we stand; and we exult in hope of the glory of God." Rom 5:2

"For in it the righteousness of God is revealed from faith for faith, as it is written, “The righteous shall live by faith.” Rom 1:17

Etc.

Faith is not a dead work of man, rather it is trust in the person and works of Christ. It is at the point of faith which we are introduced into the grace in which we now stand (Rom 5:2) as children of God, not salvific grace that introduces us to believe. (All the general graces of God, such as Christ drawing all things to Himself at the cross or the revealed gospel, do however lead us to the point where we either believe the gospel or not.)

 

[jimmyjimmy]

Grace, xáris, is 'favor extended towards,' disposed to, inclined, leaning towards to share benefit, grace" etc.

The term 'unmerited favor' is often used of God's grace due to this verse and others like it:

"So too, at the present time there is a remnant chosen by grace. And if by grace, then it cannot be based on works; if it were, grace would no longer be grace."

Since God's favor is not based on our works, then it is 'unmerited' in that sense. However, salvific grace (as opposed to the general graces God gives to all men of Christ's death, conviction of sin, general revelation, deferring judgment, etc.) does come through faith:

"For it is by grace you have been saved, through faith--and this is not from yourselves, it is the gift of God--" Eph 2:8
What does it mean that it is by grace we have been saved, through faith, and that this is not of ourselves but is the gift of God?

"..through whom also we have obtained our introduction by faith into this grace in which we stand; and we exult in hope of the glory of God." Rom 5:2

"For in it the righteousness of God is revealed from faith for faith, as it is written, “The righteous shall live by faith.” Rom 1:17

Etc.

Faith is not a dead work of man, rather it is trust in the person and works of Christ. It is at the point of faith which we are introduced into the grace in which we now stand (Rom 5:2) as children of God, not salvific grace that introduces us to believe. (All the general graces of God, such as Christ drawing all things to Himself at the cross or the revealed gospel, do however lead us to the point where we either believe the gospel or not.)

". . .and this is not from yourselves, it is the gift of God--"

Although it must be exercised, faith is a gift.

 

[Wordkeeper]

". . .and this is not from yourselves, it is the gift of God--"

Although it must be exercised, faith is a gift.

Context
Paul is telling the Gentiles that their inclusion in the group known as God's People is a gift, free, not because their track record was better than the Jews, earned.

 

[jimmyjimmy]

Context
Paul is telling the Gentiles that their inclusion in the group known as God's People is a gift, free, not because their track record was better than the Jews, earned.

Grammar. "This" is referring to faith.

 

[Wordkeeper]

Grammar. "This" is referring to faith.

Quote
The problem with that exegesis of the verse is that this is a neuter pronoun and faith is a feminine noun. While a pronoun's case is determined by its function in the sentence, it gender and number are determined by its antecedent. Therefore, this cannot be referring back to faith. But grace also is feminine, so it cannot be the antecedent of τοῦτο. So what is?

If you looks backwards for an antecedent, you will look in vain. There are neuter nouns, but they make no sense as an antecedent.

The answer is to know a little Greek! When Greek wants to refer back to a general though, perhaps a phrase, the pronoun can be in the neuter. This is not of yourselves does not refer specifically to πίστεως but rather to the entire salvific process, of which faith obviously is a part. It is the entire salvific process that is God's gracious gift and is not part of our own doing. It is a gift.

Antecedents and Faith (Eph 2:8-9) | billmounce.com

 

[jimmyjimmy]

Quote
The problem with that exegesis of the verse is that this is a neuter pronoun and faith is a feminine noun. While a pronoun's case is determined by its function in the sentence, it gender and number are determined by its antecedent. Therefore, this cannot be referring back to faith. But grace also is feminine, so it cannot be the antecedent of τοῦτο. So what is?

If you looks backwards for an antecedent, you will look in vain. There are neuter nouns, but they make no sense as an antecedent.

The answer is to know a little Greek! When Greek wants to refer back to a general though, perhaps a phrase, the pronoun can be in the neuter. This is not of yourselves does not refer specifically to πίστεως but rather to the entire salvific process, of which faith obviously is a part. It is the entire salvific process that is God's gracious gift and is not part of our own doing. It is a gift.

Antecedents and Faith (Eph 2:8-9) | billmounce.com

One can always find a way to twist even the simplest texts.

At the end of the day, your quote undermines itself and your argument. You were even kind enough to bold it for me.

 

[jimmyjimmy]

This is a good read:

God Has Allotted to Each a Measure of Faith | Desiring God

 

[ladodgers6]

But the text says opposite, denies "free will":

Quote
We deny that choice is free, because through man's innate wickedness it is of necessity driven to what is evil and cannot seek anything but evil.

You better read up on compatibilism.

It isn't so because you say so. You got to give reasons, if you are up to it.

lol.............No problem. The will is free, but the liberty is in bondage to its desire or appetite. Nobody forces sinners to sin. They sin willingly, but this will sins of 'NECESSITY'.

"...we allow that man has choice and that it is self-determined, so that if he does anything evil, it should be imputed to him and to his own voluntary choosing.

In John 3 it says that they HATE the light, but LOVE the darkness. This is their own voluntary choosing. They are not forced to make this choice. They are in bondage to what they 'LOVE' to do. So the liberty is in bondage to the desires of the flesh.

Your turn.

 

[Wordkeeper]

You write this to insult somebody, and call yourself a Christian? Where's the Love?

Nothing personal, just stating he might have a glaring handicap based on my repeated observation, is all.

 

[Wordkeeper]

lol.............No problem. The will is free, but the liberty is in bondage to its desire or appetite. Nobody forces sinners to sin. They sin willingly, but this will sins of 'NECESSITY'.

"...we allow that man has choice and that it is self-determined, so that if he does anything evil, it should be imputed to him and to his own voluntary choosing.

In John 3 it says that they HATE the light, but LOVE the darkness. This is their own voluntary choosing. They are not forced to make this choice. They are in bondage to what they 'LOVE' to do. So the liberty is in bondage to the desires of the flesh.

Your turn.

But if their natural state is to love sin, then the accountability falls on God, because everything natural is from God, there is no input from the individual.

 

[bling]

I would like to clear up a misconception about the Reformed Faith view on Free will. People automatically think we deny free-will. That people are like robots they are controlled, so they cannot be responsible for what they do. They do it against their wills. Since people do not have free-wills; God is the author of sin. And so forth. The Reformed Faith does believe that sinners & believers have a free-will. Nobody forces sinners to sin against their wills; as if somebody was holding a gun to their heads, and making them sin. I will provide a excerpt from Calvin.

"...we allow that man has choice and that it is self-determined, so that if he does anything evil, it should be imputed to him and to his own voluntary choosing. We do away with coercion and force, because this contradicts the nature of the will and cannot coexist with it. We deny that choice is free, because through man's innate wickedness it is of necessity driven to what is evil and cannot seek anything but evil. And from this it is possible to deduce what a great difference there is between necessity and coercion. For we do not say that man is dragged unwillingly into sinning, but that because his will is corrupt he is held captive under the yoke of sin and therefore of necessity will in an evil way. For where there is bondage, there is necessity. But it makes a great difference whether the bondage is voluntary or coerced. We locate the necessity to sin precisely in corruption of the will, from which follows that it is self-determined.
- John Calvin from Bondage and Liberation of the Will, pg. 69-70

It is easy to point out: a person cannot make free will choice to do all most anything, with the limits placed on man.

It is easy to see: a great deal of predestination has gone into each person’s life.

It is not possible for a nonbelieving mature adult to go on living and not sin.

Sinful nonbelieving man can feel that any one sin at any one time could have been avoid, so man can feel personally responsible for His sins. If man feels and it is true that it is impossible for man to keep from any particular sin at a particular time, then how could he be held accountable for that sin or any other sin? It would be unjust/unfair to hold someone incapable of doing otherwise accountable for a wrong.

Are you saying God changes the will of only some individuals, so they can keep from sinning and thus can feel responsible for sinning? How can that be fair and just if God can just as easily and safely change the will of everyone so they can feel responsible?

Sin is really not the problem since we all sin, but unforgiven sin is a huge problem. Sin has purpose for the unbeliever in that he should feel responsible for doing stuff that has hurt others in the past. This burden on the sinner’s conscience can be relieved only by God’s forgiveness, but it can become reduced by a hardened heart.

Man’s objective is not to “never/ever sin” since no one does that, but man’s objective is to become like God Himself in that man has a Godly type Love and thus can complete the mission statement of: Loving God (and secondly others) with all our heart, soul, mind, and energy.

This Godly type love is not instinctive to man (robotic) nor will God force it on man (Love me in heaven or go to hell). This Love has to be given as pure unconditional, unselfish, undeserved charity. The only way to get it is as Jesus taught us: “…he that is forgiven much Loves much…” so we have to of our own autonomous free will humble accept forgiveness of an unbelievable huge debt (created by sin) to automatically receive an unbelievable huge Love (Godly type Love).

Our autonomous free will choice is not choosing Christ or God, but just be willing to wimping out, giving up and surrender to our enemy God (our enemy at this time) so He can shower us with unbelievable gifts.

If we cannot make the autonomous free will choice to humbly accept God’s Love in the form of forgiveness (like a beggar receiving pure charity), how could we obtain Godly type Love as a pure charitable gift (it cannot be forced or instinctive).

 

[Wordkeeper]

"but rather to the entire salvific process, of which faith obviously is a part. It is the entire salvific process that is God's gracious gift and is not part of our own doing. It is a gift."

Which is what I posted. Paul is telling the Gentiles that they were included in the group known as God's People not because they had performed better than the Jews, but for no reason.

If a person gives you something for no reason, without you paying cash or for cutting his grass, it's a gift. Doh!

 

[jimmyjimmy]

Which is what I posted. Paul is telling the Gentiles that they were included in the group known as God's People not because they had performed better than the Jews, but for no reason.

If a person gives you something for no reason, without you paying cash or for cutting his grass, it's a gift. Doh!

According to the quote YOU posted, faith is a gift, which undermines your argument.

 

[ladodgers6]

Nothing personal, just stating he might have a glaring handicap based on my repeated observation, is all.

Now you insult him by calling him handicap? Wow, I find it odd. That people are discussing God's word, then at the other end of their mouths hurl insults. Why?

 

[ladodgers6]

But if their natural state is to love sin, then the accountability falls on God, because everything natural is from God, there is no input from the individual.

No sir or ma'am. The Fall of mankind was the result of One trespass from the One man Adam. God is not responsible for what we do. We are. Just how Calvin defines it. Its our liberty that is in bondage to sin, not because God is sovereign. This has been a misconception of free-will.