The Free Will of Pharaoh--- Exodus---Did he have a choice?

[redleghunter]

It's a very good question. But....one thing is we are born that way to begin with: "He called a little child to him, and placed the child among them. 3 And he said: “Truly I tell you, unless you change and become like little children, you will never enter the kingdom of heaven. 4 Therefore, whoever takes the lowly position of this child is the greatest in the kingdom of heaven." ... And isn't this universal, that we have a natural humility initially? The little child doesn't (yet) think he/she knows better than the adults or is above them.

Depends on the child. Children are inherently trustful is what Jesus was telling them. A simple faith.

I don’t think Jesus was negating our sinful nature.

 

[redleghunter]

I believe it says:
"15 I am the true vine, and my Father is the husbandman.

2 Every branch in me that beareth not fruit, he taketh it away: and every [branch] that beareth fruit, he cleanseth it, that it may bear more fruit. "

Are you wanting me to explain the metaphors of "true vine" and "husbandman"?

You've not only got me guessing what you are asking, you have me guessing what your point is.

Would you like to take this opportunity to get right to it?

What they are getting at Rick is they believe the discourse on the True Vine is teaching the apostles that they could lose their salvation.

 

[redleghunter]

Yeah, but I think it is very crucial to understand how it was done. It was not done by altering free will. And it was not done by doing something evil or wrong. On the contrary, every time God made situation better, pharaohs heart was hardened.

Oh I agree Pharaoh was operating from a will but in bondage.

 

[redleghunter]

What about John 15:1-10? Jesus is clearly warning His 11 faithful apostles about losing their salvation as a result of not abiding in Him and bearing fruit.

He actually told them their fruit would remain.

Mere hours later they abandoned Him and Peter denied Him three times.

They failed to abide in Him and according to your interpretation should have been cut off and burned.

So there is more to the story. Like verses 1-10 comforting them that they are truly abiding in Him and verse 6 is about the son of perdition. Which by the way was determined to fulfill the Scriptures.

Verse 11 Jesus tells them He spoke these things so that His Joy would be in them and that their joy would be complete. And then this:


16You did not choose Me, but I chose you. And I appointed you to go and bear fruit—fruit that will remain—so that whatever you ask the Father in My name, He will give you. 17This is My command to you: Love one another. (BSB)

It seems two things are going on here. A reminder of how they got where they did abiding in Christ and then a reassurance that He chose them and sustains them.

 

[Not David]

Scripture says different.

22 "Men of Israel, hear these words: Jesus of Nazareth, a man attested to you by God with mighty works and wonders and signs that God did through him in your midst, as you yourselves know-
23 this Jesus, delivered up according to the definite plan and foreknowledge of God, you crucified and killed by the hands of lawless men. - Acts 2:22-23

It puts the blame on them because of their actions, Jesus' sacrifice was according to the plan of God.

This is the thing, you want to see only one thing (God's plan), I see both (God's plan and the responsibility of the people who crucified him).

 

[mark kennedy]

It puts the blame on them because of their actions, Jesus' sacrifice was according to the plan of God.

This is the thing, you want to see only one thing (God's plan), I see both (God's plan and the responsibility of the people who crucified him).

The responsibility is on all of us, that much is clear, to me at any rate.

 

[DamianWarS]

That's a good one!


No trying to gain a greater understanding or your understanding of how this 'block logic' applies to the text.


I may have missed your post where you exhaustively explained it in the history of Israel.

still feels like your skirting the issue. why not take time to properly address block logic rather than just talk about it, you've successfully avoiding really talking about anything for 3 posts now and this is feeling like it is by design.

 

[BNR32FAN]

He actually told them their fruit would remain.

Mere hours later they abandoned Him and Peter denied Him three times.

They failed to abide in Him and according to your interpretation should have been cut off and burned.

So there is more to the story. Like verses 1-10 comforting them that they are truly abiding in Him and verse 6 is about the son of perdition. Which by the way was determined to fulfill the Scriptures.

Verse 11 Jesus tells them He spoke these things so that His Joy would be in them and that their joy would be complete. And then this:


16You did not choose Me, but I chose you. And I appointed you to go and bear fruit—fruit that will remain—so that whatever you ask the Father in My name, He will give you. 17This is My command to you: Love one another. (BSB)

It seems two things are going on here. A reminder of how they got where they did abiding in Christ and then a reassurance that He chose them and sustains them.

Peter didn’t fail to abide he stumbled in sin. There’s a difference. Peter also repented and devoted his life to serving God. The branch is not cut off immediately for stumbling in sin. The parable about the fig tree in Luke 13 is an accurate description of how God is patient with us in our disobedience.

“And He began telling this parable: "A man had a fig tree which had been planted in his vineyard; and he came looking for fruit on it and did not find any. And he said to the vineyard-keeper, 'Behold, for three years I have come looking for fruit on this fig tree without finding any. Cut it down! Why does it even use up the ground?' And he answered and said to him, 'Let it alone, sir, for this year too, until I dig around it and put in fertilizer; and if it bears fruit next year, fine; but if not, cut it down.'"”
‭‭Luke‬ ‭13:6-9‬ ‭NASB‬‬

This is the “more to the story” part you were referring to.

Im not going to explain this to you again. I’m sorry but we’ve had this discussion before where you kept coming up with different ways to twist the scriptures to fit your beliefs and every time I would correct you you came up with a different twist. This happened like 4 times where every time I corrected you you refused to admit the truth. So I see no point in wasting time doing it again. Sorry.

 

[Hammster]

It puts the blame on them because of their actions, Jesus' sacrifice was according to the plan of God.

This is the thing, you want to see only one thing (God's plan), I see both (God's plan and the responsibility of the people who crucified him).

I see both. But there is both. God orchestrated the crucifixion.

 

[Halbhh]

Depends on the child. Children are inherently trustful is what Jesus was telling them. A simple faith.

I don’t think Jesus was negating our sinful nature.

Yes, I doubt anyone would think that. And, humility definitely isn't the same as being sinless. But it's crucial for us to have. Hope you have time to read #251 eventually. Have a good evening.

 

[redleghunter]

Lol I guess God saying inny minny minie mo you go to heaven and you go to hell and burn for all eternity is a better way of looking at His plan? If God is controlling everything then why is it that He wants everyone to repent and be saved but not everyone will? Is it because He wants everyone to be saved but chooses to condemn some anyway? He loved the world and sent His son so the world could be saved but only allowed some to be saved and sent the rest whom He also loved to burn in the lake of fire for all eternity? It doesn’t make any sense. Why is it so hard for people to accept that God will give us the ability to overcome sin if we turn to Him for help and He has decided to let us determine our own fate? This does not in any way contradict God’s sovereignty and it’s what has been preached by the church since day one. There’s no point in spreading the gospel to all nations if only the chosen can be saved. There’s no point in telling someone to believe as Jesus did several times if they have no control over whether or not they will believe. If Calvin is right then Paul should’ve told the jailer don’t worry about it if your chosen you’ll be saved no matter what you do and if your not then you can’t be saved no matter what you do. Paul telling him to believe would be completely pointless.

No I was questioning first and second causes.

As you presented God choosing us is the second cause. Man is the first cause.

 

[redleghunter]

And the door has now been opened for the duality of wills.....

ie sovereign vs permissive will

That would be “divine schizophrenia.”

 

[redleghunter]

still feels like your skirting the issue. why not take time to properly address block logic rather than just talk about it, you've successfully avoiding really talking about anything for 3 posts now and this is feeling like it is by design.

Again where did you explain block logic and how it applies to the text? Really I may have missed the post.

 

[redleghunter]

Peter didn’t fail to abide he stumbled in sin. There’s a difference. Peter also repented and devoted his life to serving God. The branch is not cut off immediately for stumbling in sin. The parable about the fig tree in Luke 13 is an accurate description of how God is patient with us in our disobedience.

If Peter did not fail to abide then who is an example do we have of a branch thrown in fire in verse 6?

Judas?

Im not going to explain this to you again. I’m sorry but we’ve had this discussion before where you kept coming up with different ways to twist the scriptures to fit your beliefs and every time I would correct you you came up with a different twist. This happened like 4 times where every time I corrected you you refused to admit the truth. So I see no point in wasting time doing it again. Sorry.

All I’m doing is expanding the context of the text. Jesus confirms the 11 will endure.

If we want to fully expand the context then we go back to chapter 13 and continue through chapter 17.

It’s poor exegesis even to isolate 10 verses and boldly proclaim Jesus is teaching loss of salvation of branches which do produce fruit and then stop. In fact in every case in those 10 verses we have branches that fail to produce any fruit.

 

[DamianWarS]

Again where did you explain block logic and how it applies to the text? Really I may have missed the post.

you're welcome to read the first post I made regarding the subject and start over. block logic is a way of organizing information in blocks that do not have to agree with each other. It doesn't have to be dualistic but each block is organizing information based on the point it is trying to make so you may get concepts of free will (Pharaoh harden his own heart) and predestination (God hardened Pharaoh's heart) in the same text without these being reconciled. The information is somewhat fluid and can be reorganized in different ways to make a point. For example, the 2 genealogies of Christ show this.

In Exodus 7 God Harden Pharaoh's heart but in Exodus 8 Pharaoh hardens his own heart, then in 9, God hardens his heart, then Pharaoh hardens his own heart and then 10 it's back to God. There is a back and forth tension going on here with who is in control of Pharaoh and even though God wins the text shouldn't be said to champion predestination as it flips between God's will and man's will and it shows them occupying the same space.

 

[Hammster]

Maybe a little twist on this. If a man wants to do something sinful, and God prevents it, is his free will violated?

 

[BNR32FAN]

No I was questioning first and second causes.

As you presented God choosing us is the second cause. Man is the first cause.

Perhaps you misunderstood me friend. I said God first gives us the ability then we must choose to exercise that ability.

 

[Hammster]

Perhaps you misunderstood me friend. I said God first gives us the ability then we must choose to exercise that ability.

Scripture describes man as either alive or dead. Sheep or goats. Blind or seeing. Deaf or hearing.

At what stage is man when God gives us this “ability”?

 

[Rick Otto]

What they are getting at Rick is they believe the discourse on the True Vine is teaching the apostles that they could lose their salvation.

LOL, I don't know why I didn't see that right off.
I can't believe that although I've tried to with great effort many times. It's totally counterintuitive to the notion of grace & mercy in my opinion.
Just out of habit I can slip into that mode of thinking simply because the entire whirled (world) is geared that way.

 

[Rick Otto]

Scripture describes man as either alive or dead. Sheep or goats. Blind or seeing. Deaf or hearing.

At what stage is man when God gives us this “ability”?

It all happened in the same instant for me at 3&1/2 yrs. old.
I was totally content, amusing myself with my imagination, when suddenly, for no apparent reason, I was paying attention to a sermon as the priest said, "God made everything because He loves you."
Hit me like a ton of feathers. It made every single thing in and about my life make perfect sense. My first epiphany.