What are the main differences between Traditional and Progressive?

[Byfaithalone1]

Do you have free will, yes or no.

I don't find the phrase "free will" in Scripture. However, I do find the words "believe" and "faith" and I note that these are gifts of God.

Can you change your behavior

I can do nothing. My righteousness is as filthy rags.

say can you choose to exercise 3 days a week when previously you did not exercise?

I have no innate desire to take care of my body. If I have the strength, desire and means to exercise, all were gifts of God. I can take no credit for "choosing to exercise."

Can you choose to, for example stop telling your neighbor that another neighbor is a a stupid jerk?

When left to my own devises, I will probably tell my neighbor what I think about another neighbor. If I refrain from such behavior, you can be sure it is due to the One who is living within me.

By the way when did we lose free will?

Can you show me in Scripture where this concept of "free will" was given?

BFA

 

[Moriah_Conquering_Wind]

Do you have free will, yes or no.

No. Does a faculty we could call "volition" exist? Perhaps. It bes a name given to a selection process which occurs in the mind, an invisible process whose contents, components, and processes we cannot clearly inventory and label because many of them we cannot even detect.

The problem, the actual real question here, bes not whether any of us ever engage in a selection process (i.e., making a "choice" about something) or not. For certain, we at least seem to. The REAL question bes whether we have any choice about the ultimate outcome of that process. Moriah does not believe we do. To put it more simply: we may have choices, but we get no choice about what we ultimately choose.

For starters, a matter of simple system dynamics: one cannot operate separate, apart-from and externally upon a system of which one bes an internal and integral part. One can theoretically leave the system and step outside of it or one can remain inside of it but one cannot do both simultaneously. However with the system being one's mind, one has not even the option of stepping out in the first place, to tinker from the objective view afforded only by being outside of a system viewing the whole and all its parts together. One can perhaps project the mind out there but that bes not the same as actually stepping out of one's own mind -- a feat none can accomplish (well, with the exception of the insane but now we bes makesy puns and fun with words rather than talksy serious... )

Left to our own devices, we will always choose as WE have been wired to choose, whether by birth or by long reinforcements -- neither of which, by the way, we have any choice about. Just like we have no choice about the fact that pain programs aversion and pleasure, repetition leading possibly to addiction. Wherever you draw your lines of causality you cannot deny that everything ever programmed into you from previous experiences great and small all play a part in determining the outcome of your selection process. The ONLY mitigating factor that can break the causality chain here would be God Himself, in the presence of the Holy Spirit showing you new things outside the choice box and giving you the special grace of faith and belief in Him and His word to first even want them and then to lay hold of them. Absent His influence, apart from His grace, we will inevitably choose what WE choose -- for the reasons WE choose it -- EVERY time. And that bes an hard bondage truly in which there bes no freedom whatsoever. We cannot escape choosing according to our own selves, apart from God. What freedom bes in that? None. Seeing that we have hearts what bes deceitful above all things and desperately wicked -- so saith Scripture of us ALL -- that sounds like pretty dangerous ground to be left scrabbling for purchase across.

On top of that do we get a choice about what choices we make? No, we do not. Do we even get a choice about what alternatives exist in those choices? No, we do not. That bes not freedom. That bes a clever mum taking two shirts from the closet and asking little Johnny which one he wishes to wear today, the red or the blue, so Johnny believes himself to be picking for himself when in reality the picks have already been picked (predetermined) by something (someone) else.

Then there bes the matter of how valid bes a choice in and of itself where it has no power to self-reify. We cannot choose to succeed, for example. We can choose to do certain things that we first must BELIEVE contribute toward success or increase the odds of success. But success bes a dynamic involving more than just ourselves. It involves the responses of others to our efforts. It involves the choices of others. It involves whether those others take a shine to us personally or not -- whether they willingly aid us or willingly act the saboteurs and yes, others CAN completely sabotage even the best, hardest, most skilled and creative efforts of a person to succeed. It does happen. We have no control over either the choices of others or random factors and circumstances which can make or break it. At a certain point even the most adept sorceror or sorceress must look in the mirror and admit -- even if only to himself or herself -- that s/he bes not God.

It bes all well and good to be a devout believer in oneself and the ideal that one can do anything one puts his mind to. Moriah enjoys believing those things. Those beliefs feel good. They inspire and motivate which translates into giving special energy to meet challenges as well as special graces to even want to or care about doing so. But they contain NO guarantee. And the first time you mess up or fail, those beliefs either take a swift drop-kick into proactive, persistent cognitive dissonance to maintain them, or they crumble, no two ways about it. Why? Because even a moron knows it simply cannot be TRUE that one can do whatever one puts one's mind to IF one EVER fails or screws up, period. So there bes no alternative.

And do you get a choice about THAT even? No, you do not. How free does your "free" will feel NOW Sucker? Huh-whaaa?

I don't find the phrase "free will" in Scripture. However, I do find the words "believe" and "faith" and I note that these are gifts of God.

^^ Moriah agrees with your wise answer.
Will have to take up the remaining questions later. It must attend a mandatory meeting at work and no, it gets no choice about that either.

 

[RC_NewProtestants]

I don't find the phrase "free will" in Scripture. However, I do find the words "believe" and "faith" and I note that these are gifts of God.



I can do nothing. My righteousness is as filthy rags.



I have no innate desire to take care of my body. If I have the strength, desire and means to exercise, all were gifts of God. I can take no credit for "choosing to exercise."



When left to my own devises, I will probably tell my neighbor what I think about another neighbor. If I refrain from such behavior, you can be sure it is due to the One who is living within me.



Can you show me in Scripture where this concept of "free will" was given?

BFA

I already showed you an example of scripture where Joshua set before them blessing and curses life and death asked that they choose life. Apparently you don't know what believe means or faith or trust. All of which are conscious decisions made by an individual. It appears you have bought into a lie. A lie based upon misunderstandings. You are resorting to hyper calvinism where God predetermines those to be saved and those to be tormented for eternity (as hyper calvinist do believe in eternal burning torment for the wicked who are wicked because God does not give them faith as they are totally depraved from birth).

The idea that faith is a gift is one of those confused concepts which is treated as a fact when it is not. Faith is listed as a gift of the Spirit in the same list as performing miracles. It says nothing of Faith as a gift to all Christians just as not all Christians perform miracles. To understand the misapplication better read the following article:

http://www.faithalone.org/news/y1989/89july1.html
Is Faith a Gift of God?

Ephesians 2:8 Reconsidered

by Gary L. Nebeker

From various theological quarters it has been argued that the NT teaches that saving faith is a gift of God. One of the favorite passages cited in this connection is Ephesians 2:8: "For by grace you have been saved through faith; and that not of yourselves, it is the gift of God" (NASB).


From a cursory reading of this verse, it appears that the relative pronoun that (v 8b) has faith (v 8a) as its grammatical antecedent. However, in its Greek construction that is a demonstrative pronoun with adverbial force used in an explanatory phrase. This particular construction uses a fixed neuter singular pronoun (that) which refers neither to faith, which is feminine in Greek, nor to any immediate word which follows. (See Blass, Debrunner, Funk, 132, 2.) What all this means is that the little phrase and that (kai touto in Greek) explains that salvation is of God's grace and not of human effort. Understood accordingly, Ephesians 2:8 could well be translated: "For by grace you have been saved through faith, that is to say, not of yourselves, it is the gift of God."

Moreover, there is a parallelism between not of yourselves in v 8b and not of works in v 9. This parallelism serves as a commentary to v 8a ("For by grace you have been saved through faith") which speaks of salvation in its entirety. It is difficult to see how faith, if it is the gift of God, harmonizes with not of works of v 9. We must conclude, then, that in Ephesians 2:8 salvation is the gift of God.

Not only are there exegetical probems with saving faith as a gift of God, there are theological problems as wlell.

First, there is the problem of describing faith as an infused or transmitted substance. Faith is not analogous to a current of electricity that passes through a conduit and results in a release of mechanical energy. Neither is faith to be likened to water sprinkled upon a seed planted in potted soil. These illustrations of faith confuse the instrument of salvation, faith, with the agent of salvation, the Holy Spirit. It should instead be suggested that faith is a human response, i.e., a Spirit-prompted conviction of the truth of the redemptive merits of Christ.

Second, the concept of infused faith for salvation bears a marked resemblance to the sacramentalism of the Roman Catholic Church. That is to say, faith becomes a transmitted and efficacious element which God gives to men for salvation. Again, it must be emphasized that faith is not a substance, but a human response prompted by the Holy Spirit.

Third, if faith is a gift, then men no longer bear the responsibility to believe the Gospel. The term believe becomes an equivocal expression if regeneration occurs before faith (i.e., the view of those who consider faith to be a gift of God).

Fourth and finally, an infused idea of faith engenders a less-than-balanced view of sanctification, i.e., victory in the spiritual life is viewed as a virtual guarantee. If God gives believers faith to live the Christian life, then the difficult aspects of progressive holiness commanded in Scripture tend to be soft-pedaled.
To conclude, it is inaccurate to suggest that God gives men a special gift of faith so that they may be saved and subsequently sanctified. Instead, God has sent His Holy Spirit into the world to convict men of sin and to enlighten darkened and depraved minds to the saving truths contained in Scripture (John 16:8; Rom 10:17; Eph 3:9). When one is regenerated, it is yieldedness to the filling ministry of the Holy Spirit, not infused faith, that results in good works. From Ephesians 2:8 and the collective whole of NT data, God is presented as the gracious initiator who, through His Holy Spirit, woos and wins men to Himself. Man is depicted as the responder who, in his spiritually destitute state, is convicted and enlightened by the Holy Spirit, and answers in simple faith to the promises of the Gospel. In view of such exquisite grace, it is only fitting to contend that salvation is a superlative expression of divine favor, yea, even a gift of God!

 

[Moriah_Conquering_Wind]

Can you change your behavior

Scripture does not really uphold the notion of "free will" in the modern sense, nor the notion that we can change our behavior.

Jeremiah 13:23
Can the Ethiopian change his skin, or the leopard his spots? then may ye also do good, that are accustomed to do evil.

Jeremiah 17:9
The heart is deceitful above all things, and desperately wicked: who can know it?

Matthew 6:27
Which of you by taking thought can add one cubit unto his stature?

Matthew 5:36-37
36 Neither shalt thou swear by thy head, because thou canst not make one hair white or black. 37 But let your communication be, Yea, yea; Nay, nay: for whatsoever is more than these cometh of evil.

James 4:13-15
13 Go to now, ye that say, To day or to morrow we will go into such a city, and continue there a year, and buy and sell, and get gain: 14 Whereas ye know not what shall be on the morrow. For what is your life? It is even a vapour, that appeareth for a little time, and then vanisheth away.
15 For that ye ought to say, If the Lord will, we shall live, and do this, or that.

Romans 7:14-25
14 For we know that the law is spiritual: but I am carnal, sold under sin.
15 For that which I do I allow not: for what I would, that do I not; but what I hate, that do I.
16 If then I do that which I would not, I consent unto the law that it is good.
17 Now then it is no more I that do it, but sin that dwelleth in me.
18 For I know that in me (that is, in my flesh,) dwelleth no good thing: for to will is present with me; but how to perform that which is good I find not.
19 For the good that I would I do not: but the evil which I would not, that I do.
20 Now if I do that I would not, it is no more I that do it, but sin that dwelleth in me.
21 I find then a law, that, when I would do good, evil is present with me.
22 For I delight in the law of God after the inward man:
23 But I see another law in my members, warring against the law of my mind, and bringing me into captivity to the law of sin which is in my members.
24 O wretched man that I am! who shall deliver me from the body of this death?
25 I thank God through Jesus Christ our Lord.​

Those bes but some examples; there bes others.

The question raised bes interesting in that an example follows, one of starting a new routine to which one bes not accustomed. Begging the question theoretically, of course theoretically anyone can begin a new routine ... IF. And that IF encompasses WAY more than just whether they want to or have sufficient motivation to do so, but those bes good places to begin. Without the desire, without the motivation, where shall these be obtained to provide impetus or focus? Without the facets that have enabled person X to make that selection -- including but not limited to his own proclivities both born in him and bred in him through the combination of things we call fate, luck, circumstances, grace, and the positive and negative reinforcements received throughout his life from persons of influence or power over himself as well as from Life itself as an Instructor -- how will person Y ever make the same selection?

Again we come back to the original dilemma: one may choose, but one cannot choose what one will choose. In other words one has no ability to make a choice outside of what one would choose given one's innate configuratus. Who wills the will to will what it wills? Deux ex machina? The notion of "free" will -- or even will in itself -- breaks down and becomes absurd where one realises he cannot step outside the system in order to affect the system. He bes not objectively rigging his will from without, causing it to will as HE might choose, but rather, it bes made up already of a black box full of determined, pre-determined, and indeterminate factors too innumerable to name and catalogue or to work with effectually. So while you "will" something, wiggling majestic, what exactly wills your will to will what it wills, seeing as you yourself bes trapped therein and cannot will other than YOU will?

Maybe there bes some profound reason for praying "Not my will but THINE be done." Ya think?


If we could simply will whatsoever we pleased whenever we pleased, we would never make a single mistake unless we willed to do so. The worship of will puts us on extremely dangerous and heretical ground. Everything depends upon the right action of the will? Certainly -- provided we bes talksy about GOD'S will. Of a truth everything depends upon the good and right(eous) action of HIS will. There bes only one free will in the universe. God's.

 

[Moriah_Conquering_Wind]

Can you choose to, for example stop telling your neighbor that another neighbor is a a stupid jerk?

The real question here being why don't those who believe themselves to have "free" will simply choose to do so then? Why not, if one has "free will", does one not simply choose to NOT be a donkey's hind end? (General question not personal one.) Put that free will money where that free will mouth lies.

Choose, then, will worshippers: choose to be decent instead of self-serving, self-exonerating jerkoff wastes of DNA and protoplasm. Choose to be kind instead of calloused or cruel. Choose compassion instead of indifference or dismissive hostility. Choose to live love toward someone you mysteriously cannot stand ON SIGHT even though they have never done anything to you (-- now what choice got involved in THOSE feelings, HMMM?)

No sinful behavior can be stopped on one's own steam, sorry. And in fact a relationship with Christ bes not some cheap carrot on the end of a behavioral-modification prison-camp stick called religion. Relationship with Him does change us in profound ways, but the flesh will remain the flesh until we gets new flesh. And Romans 7 makes it plain that sin resides in the flesh and in its members. That would indicate the entire physical construction of man, including the physical brain and the neurotransmitters flowing through it. And frankly, Christ bes less concerned with "perfecting" everyone's behavior and more concerned with perfection itself informing our behavior.

That perfection of which He spoke -- notably when He said "be ye therefore perfect" -- has to do with unconditional love whats no respector of persons whether they bes good or evil. Not just no discrimination against their gender, race, age, creed, etc. but no discrimination against them for being evil, either:

Matthew 5:43-48
43 Ye have heard that it hath been said, Thou shalt love thy neighbour, and hate thine enemy.
44 But I say unto you, Love your enemies, bless them that curse you, do good to them that hate you, and pray for them which despitefully use you, and persecute you;
45 That ye may be the children of your Father which is in heaven: for he maketh his sun to rise on the evil and on the good, and sendeth rain on the just and on the unjust.
46 For if ye love them which love you, what reward have ye? do not even the publicans the same?
47 And if ye salute your brethren only, what do ye more than others? do not even the publicans so?
48 Be ye therefore perfect, even as your Father which is in heaven is perfect.​

The perfection lies not in the execution but in the intent of the heart. And that intent in its genuine, true, authentic, unfeigned form can only be placed there by a direct miracle of God Himself.

If we could at any time simply choose to unilaterally and unequivocally "stop sinning right now" ...
-- we would not need a Saviour
-- we would not need forgiveness
-- He would not have spent such care on teaching us to forgive
-- He would not have emphasized that we need to keep ON forgiving

There bes only ONE "free" will in all the universe: God's.

 

[Moriah_Conquering_Wind]

By the way when did we lose free will?

Can you show me in Scripture where this concept of "free will" was given?

^^ what BFA said. It does not find the concept of "free will" in Scripture at all.

It does, however, find an interesting artifact from an obvious dispute back in the apostles' day:

Colossians 2:16-23

16 Let no man therefore judge you in meat, or in drink, or in respect of an holyday, or of the new moon, or of the sabbath days: 17 Which are a shadow of things to come; but the body is of Christ.
18 Let no man beguile you of your reward in a voluntary humility and worshipping of angels, intruding into those things which he hath not seen, vainly puffed up by his fleshly mind,
19 And not holding the Head, from which all the body by joints and bands having nourishment ministered, and knit together, increaseth with the increase of God.
20 Wherefore if ye be dead with Christ from the rudiments of the world, why, as though living in the world, are ye subject to ordinances,
21 (Touch not; taste not; handle not;
22 Which all are to perish with the using after the commandments and doctrines of men?
23 Which things have indeed a shew of wisdom in will worship, and humility, and neglecting of the body: not in any honour to the satisfying of the flesh.

Merciful God, bless the reading of Your word with its dynamic ALIVE power here and now. Open our eyes to Reality beyond the veils of illusion in this world, even as You had to open the eyes of Elijah and Elisha to see in the Spirit.

 

[sentipente]

There bes only ONE "free" will in all the universe: God's.

I don't know what that means. The fact is that, as is true of everything else in nature, God cannot do anything that His nature does not allow Him to do.

 

[Byfaithalone1]

I already showed you an example of scripture where Joshua set before them blessing and curses life and death asked that they choose life.

You cited this text:

Deuteronomy 30:19 [SIZE=+0]"I call heaven and earth to witness against you today, that I have set before you life and death, the blessing and the curse. So [SIZE=+1]choose life[/SIZE] in order that you may live, you and your descendants." [/SIZE]
​

Deuteronomy 30 provides no information regarding the use of human free will in order to accept the free gift of grace offered by Jesus Christ to those of faith. In fact, Deuteronomy 30 does not include the phrase "free will." Further, the phrase "free will" does not exist in Scripture as an identification of man's ability to choose the free gift. So, no, I cannot accept a concept that isn't even found in Scripture. I can accept that justified persons believe and have faith, as these principles are firmly grounded in Scripture.

Apparently you don't know what believe means or faith or trust.

Why do you reach that conclusion?

All of which are conscious decisions made by an individual.

I've never said that there is no human element to belief. However, I don't equate belief with obedience; I don't call it "free will" since the Scriptures don't do so; and I don't conclude that I am the author and the finisher of my own faith.

It appears you have bought into a lie.

Thanks for the judgment. That's always a great discussion starter.

A lie based upon misunderstandings. You are resorting to hyper calvinism where God predetermines those to be saved and those to be tormented for eternity.

You must be tired from all that jumping (to conclusions that is).

No, I am not a calvinist. I do not believe in double predestination. I'm not preaching the five tulip points to you, nor have I accepted all of them.

However, I am also not pelagianist. I am firmly grounded in the gospel of Jesus Christ and I am well aware of the fact that it is a gospel of salvation by grace through faith (and not a gospel of salvation by grace PLUS works). I am concerned that yours is an example of "another gospel" as described in Galatians 1:6-9.

The idea that faith is a gift is one of those confused concepts which is treated as a fact when it is not.

According to Ephesians 2:8, it is. Tell me, friend, who is the author and the finisher of your faith?

BFA

 

[Moriah_Conquering_Wind]

I don't know what that means. The fact is that, as is true of everything else in nature, God cannot do anything that His nature does not allow Him to do.

So God bes IN nature then for you?
Hmmm.
Interesting.

Moriah sees Him as transcendent beyond nature.
Nature bes His creation.
He bes its Creator.

His nature allows Him pure freedom: omnipotence grants that.
Thanks and praise bes to Him, therefore, that His nature also bes Love.

 

[RC_NewProtestants]

Scripture does not really uphold the notion of "free will" in the modern sense, nor the notion that we can change our behavior.

Jeremiah 13:23
Can the Ethiopian change his skin, or the leopard his spots? then may ye also do good, that are accustomed to do evil.

Jeremiah 17:9
The heart is deceitful above all things, and desperately wicked: who can know it?

Matthew 6:27
Which of you by taking thought can add one cubit unto his stature?

Matthew 5:36-37
36 Neither shalt thou swear by thy head, because thou canst not make one hair white or black. 37 But let your communication be, Yea, yea; Nay, nay: for whatsoever is more than these cometh of evil.

James 4:13-15
13 Go to now, ye that say, To day or to morrow we will go into such a city, and continue there a year, and buy and sell, and get gain: 14 Whereas ye know not what shall be on the morrow. For what is your life? It is even a vapour, that appeareth for a little time, and then vanisheth away.
15 For that ye ought to say, If the Lord will, we shall live, and do this, or that.

Romans 7:14-25
14 For we know that the law is spiritual: but I am carnal, sold under sin.
15 For that which I do I allow not: for what I would, that do I not; but what I hate, that do I.
16 If then I do that which I would not, I consent unto the law that it is good.
17 Now then it is no more I that do it, but sin that dwelleth in me.
18 For I know that in me (that is, in my flesh,) dwelleth no good thing: for to will is present with me; but how to perform that which is good I find not.
19 For the good that I would I do not: but the evil which I would not, that I do.
20 Now if I do that I would not, it is no more I that do it, but sin that dwelleth in me.
21 I find then a law, that, when I would do good, evil is present with me.
22 For I delight in the law of God after the inward man:
23 But I see another law in my members, warring against the law of my mind, and bringing me into captivity to the law of sin which is in my members.
24 O wretched man that I am! who shall deliver me from the body of this death?
25 I thank God through Jesus Christ our Lord.
​

Those bes but some examples; there bes others.

No they are not examples of free will, they are about man changing himself to be other then a man with the human nature of a man. Maybe I shouldn't say human nature because that is not in the bible either but I don't play that kind of limited philosophical game.

The idea that we reject reality, i.e. we know we make choices all the time and say that because we make choices based upon our accumulated knowledge and emotions of the past that we are not in fact making choices is an absurdity. It denies reality to claim that what is real is illusion.

The hyper Calvinism when it comes down to it is a way to make one feel secure in their religion. Because they claim they have faith then they are saved. It does not matter what that faith does or what that faith claims about God the mere fact that they claim faith shows they are on God's team and saved (according to previous comments here even exercising would show that they are God's elect else they would not even care about their physical well being). They have no problem projecting a God of wrath and cruelty and justice that is far from just because their faith is the evidence that they are right with God. They can be no other then right with God because they have no other ability then to be right with God because they can't choose anything else because they are the elect of God. The reality is they can be just as wrong with God as the Pharisees yet just as certain of their special status. It is anti-intellectual nonsense in my opinion.

 

[Sophia7]

But isn't that exactly what we're doing in this thread? We're dividing people into groups and we're attaching a label to them. We're discussing the differences between "progressive SDAs" and "traditional SDAs." I agree that labels aren't always useful. However, that is basically what we're doing in this thread.

When we look at groups and make generalizations, I think that we can conclude that there is a difference in belief between progs and trads. Sophia, what do you believe is that difference?

BFA

Yes, we are doing that, and we've been doing that at CF for most of the history of the Adventist forum(s) and sub-forums. I never really liked it, though, because for most of my Adventist experience I probably wouldn't have thought of myself as completely one or the other.

I guess one big difference that I see, in general, is that Traditional Adventists view their beliefs as more static; many of them think that the pillars of Adventism should be beyond doubt or questioning, especially by other Adventists. Progressives, I think, are less likely to equate Adventist doctrine with "the truth" and more open to discussing different beliefs without feeling that their whole belief system or they personally are being attacked if others disagree with them.

 

[Moriah_Conquering_Wind]

You cited this text:

Deuteronomy 30:19 "I call heaven and earth to witness against you today, that I have set before you life and death, the blessing and the curse. So choose life in order that you may live, you and your descendants."
​

Deuteronomy 30 provides no information regarding the use of human free will in order to accept the free gift of grace offered by Jesus Christ to those of faith. In fact, Deuteronomy 30 does not include the phrase "free will." Further, the phrase "free will" does not exist in Scripture as an identification of man's ability to choose the free gift. So, no, I cannot accept a concept that isn't even found in Scripture. I can accept that justified persons believe and have faith, as these principles are firmly grounded in Scripture.

The idea that "free will" bes the means by which a human being comes to faith in Christ, indeed comes to Christ at all, bes one of those confused concepts which bes treated as a fact when it bes not one.

I've never said that there is no human element to belief. However, I don't equate belief with obedience; I don't call it "free will" since the Scriptures don't do so; and I don't conclude that I am the author and the finisher of my own faith.

Amen to that. And add to it that obedience does not come through any process of "free will" either. It comes from walking IN the Spirit rather than the flesh, which only those GIVEN the Holy Spirit by God CAN do, and that ONLY as a result of Him causing them to do so. Scripture makes it clear in Philippians 2:13 (that most people stop at verse 12 being half the problem we bes seesy here now) that even the good works we do as children of God have all been prepared by Him for us to walk in. We have no part in it but to take part in it when He places us in it. We can refuse and rebel, but that bes not "free will". That bes back into bondage to the law of sin in our members.

I am firmly grounded in the gospel of Jesus Christ and I am well aware of the fact that it is a gospel of salvation by grace through faith (and not a gospel of salvation by grace PLUS works). I am concerned that yours is an example of "another gospel" as described in Galatians 1:6-9.

Moriah notices by the way that the "another gospel" you cited, Galatians 1:6-9, bes very specifically described therein, so no guessing as to what Paul meant bes necessary. Very clearly he meant the addition of meritorious human effort into the equation. If we bes looksy for locating a LIE in this discussion, there lies the LIE.
Attributing even PART of the soteriological dispensation of God to reliance upon the "free will choice" of a SINNER with a deceitful and desperately wicked heart who cannot, apart from God, desire or want or yearn or "will" or "choose" the things of God in the first place, constitutes tainting and adulterating the pure Gospel of grace with the stinking dung of meritorious human effort

According to Ephesians 2:8, it [faith] is [a gift]. Tell me, friend, who is the author and the finisher of your faith?

^ inserts in [...] for clarity.

Not only bes faith a gift but so bes every other component necessary for salvation, INCLUDING those observed as and considered to be human responses to God's overtures of love!! Check it out.

It ALL comes from God, make no mistake!
Be not deceived in this regard. Contrary to popular theological errors all predicated upon the illusion and vanity of human "volition", we do not create faith in ourselves. We do not "choose" to repent, and we do not even "choose" to obey God nor on our own to do "good works."

1. Faith itself bes a gift from God. Ephesians 2:8-9
   .
2. We do not "decide" to repent but must be called to it by God: Matthew 9:13, Mark 2:17
   .
3. Even being called TO repentance, it still must be GRANTED to us by / from God: Acts 11:18, Romans 2:4, 2 Timothy 2:25
   .
4. Any and all desire or intent to "obey" God? Nope, not your own doing either. Comes from Him as well. Philippians 2:13
   .
5. What, you say faith without works bes dead and we must work out our own salvation? Maybe you didn't read the fine print, human. Even the very "good works" one does in service to God bes a gift FROM HIM!!! Philippians 2:13, Ephesians 2:10

 

[RC_NewProtestants]

I missed this earlier my comments in red:

You cited this text:

Deuteronomy 30:19 [SIZE=+0]"I call heaven and earth to witness against you today, that I have set before you life and death, the blessing and the curse. So [SIZE=+1]choose life[/SIZE] in order that you may live, you and your descendants." [/SIZE]
​

Deuteronomy 30 provides no information regarding the use of human free will in order to accept the free gift of grace offered by Jesus Christ to those of faith. In fact, Deuteronomy 30 does not include the phrase "free will." Further, the phrase "free will" does not exist in Scripture as an identification of man's ability to choose the free gift. So, no, I cannot accept a concept that isn't even found in Scripture. I can accept that justified persons believe and have faith, as these principles are firmly grounded in Scripture.

Please try and deal with the context. The context was free will and the ability to choose. Of course Deut. is not about the grace of Jesus Christ offered by Grace. They was no Jesus Christ incarnation at that time. You are playing games

Why do you reach that conclusion?

From you abundant misuse of and out of context statements.



I've never said that there is no human element to belief. However, I don't equate belief with obedience; I don't call it "free will" since the Scriptures don't do so; and I don't conclude that I am the author and the finisher of my own faith.

I never equated belief with obedience either again you show that you don't pay attention and just run ahead inserting your chosen meaning into my words despite the context of my statements.


You must be tired from all that jumping (to conclusions that is).

That is funny most of what you say I say I have never said yet I am jumping to conclusions.

No, I am not a calvinist. I do not believe in double predestination. I'm not preaching the five tulip points to you, nor have I accepted all of them.

You have been teaching total depravity and Predestination, Which points of tulip don't you accept then, since you say you are not hypercalvinistic.


Total Depravity (also known as Total Inability and Original Sin)
Unconditional Election
Limited Atonement (also known as Particular Atonement)
Irresistible Grace
Perseverance of the Saints (also known as Once Saved Always Saved)

However, I am also not pelagianist. I am firmly grounded in the gospel of Jesus Christ and I am well aware of the fact that it is a gospel of salvation by grace through faith (and not a gospel of salvation by grace PLUS works). I am concerned that yours is an example of "another gospel" as described in Galatians 1:6-9.

Again I have never said anything about grace plus works.


According to Ephesians 2:8, it is. Tell me, friend, who is the author and the finisher of your faith?

8 For by grace you have been saved through faith; and that not of yourselves, it is the gift of God;

The subject is salvation not Faith, Oh that is right I posted an article. But apparently you could not bother to read that.

BFA

 

[Moriah_Conquering_Wind]

No they are not examples of free will, they are about man changing himself to be other then a man with the human nature of a man.

The definitions, or rather, explanations and examples of "free will" you have offered so far certainly seem to fall into this category, though.

The idea that we reject reality, i.e. we know we make choices all the time and say that because we make choices based upon our accumulated knowledge and emotions of the past that we are not in fact making choices is an absurdity. It denies reality to claim that what is real is illusion.

You have 2 or 3 times now attempted to label the awareness of causality and the illusory nature of "free will" in the human selection process as "reject[ing] reality". But your labeling of it as such, along with your implied assertion therein and therewith that this awareness constitutes such, does not, and cannot, make it so. This bes merely a tiresome ruse to pretend to establish your POV as the more "sane" or "reasonable" and dismiss the "opposing" POV out of hand as "absurd" and "unreal". Playing such a weak hand reveals desperation, but not skill. As we say in cyberspace ... FAIL.

Disagree all you want -- explain and expound your POV, and produce your reasons and arguments -- but kindly do not waste either daimonizomai's time again or your own by such pathetic attempts to insult its intelligence in this fashion. Do you really imagine anyone here bes dim enough to fall for such a ruse? Now THAT bes indeed absurd.

The hyper Calvinism when it comes down to it is a way to make one feel secure in their religion. Because they claim they have faith then they are saved. It does not matter what that faith does or what that faith claims about God the mere fact that they claim faith shows they are on God's team and saved (according to previous comments here even exercising would show that they are God's elect else they would not even care about their physical well being). They have no problem projecting a God of wrath and cruelty and justice that is far from just because their faith is the evidence that they are right with God. They can be no other then right with God because they have no other ability then to be right with God because they can't choose anything else because they are the elect of God. The reality is they can be just as wrong with God as the Pharisees yet just as certain of their special status. It is anti-intellectual nonsense in my opinion.

Daimonizomai does not know this "they" to whom you address this tirade. It does not reflect anything having to do with either how Moriah thinks or why. Faith bes never a "secure" thing because Moriah must experience it operating (it speaks for itself here only) to know God has indeed placed this gift within, and Moriah's personal experience of it bes fraught with all manner of uncertainties owing to its condition. Moriah has no acquaintance whatsoever with the attitudes it highlighted in your quote above in blue. You reference someone else's comments as if Moriah needs to answer for those but (1) you completely wrangle and misinterpret those comments as far as it can tell; and (2) Moriah cannot answer for someone else's perceptions, beliefs and experiences. It has enough difficulty sorting out its own. As for the portion in red, you have completely left Moriah's building so to speak. Moriah does not even remotely believe in any projected monstrous God putting wrath and cruelty for justice. If you had ever spent even a millisecond noticing anything Moriah has to share, you would never address such a comment to this one. It not only does not believe in such a God but it actively and constantly wars against those concepts. Moriah believes in the Ultimate Reconciliation of ALL God's fallen creation to be a done deal in Christ -- not yet manifest in our experience but to be revealed in due time, as scripture states. Finally and overall, Moriah does not believe in Calvinism at all, "hyper" or non-hyper. It does not believe that God predestines some arbitrarily to be saved and others to be lost. It believes God has predestined ALL to be saved IN Christ, period. Those that experience the blessing of coming to faith in this lifetime bes the Firstfruits of a greater harvest to come and will have the glorious privilege of playing a part in that, but we all stand equally condemned in our sin before God and equally helpless and dependent upon Christ for reconciliation with God, no matter whether we experience faith in this lifetime or not. God's mercy does not expire when we do. It endures forever.

 

[RC_NewProtestants]

The definitions, or rather, explanations and examples of "free will" you have offered so far certainly seem to fall into this category, though.

You have 2 or 3 times now attempted to label the awareness of causality and the illusory nature of "free will" in the human selection process as "reject[ing] reality". But your labeling of it as such, along with your implied assertion therein and therewith that this awareness constitutes such, does not, and cannot, make it so. This bes merely a tiresome ruse to pretend to establish your POV as the more "sane" or "reasonable" and dismiss the "opposing" POV out of hand as "absurd" and "unreal". Playing such a weak hand reveals desperation, but not skill. As we say in cyberspace ... FAIL.

Disagree all you want -- explain and expound your POV, and produce your reasons and arguments -- but kindly do not waste either daimonizomai's time again or your own by such pathetic attempts to insult its intelligence in this fashion. Do you really imagine anyone here bes dim enough to fall for such a ruse? Now THAT bes indeed absurd.

So the choice to not insult someone or exercise is to your demon possessed mind the same as changing man's human nature. Reality is what it is whether you like it or not. You are asserting that reality is illusion. I will continue to assert that such a concept is incorrect. No matter how much you pretend that you are insulted because I don't accept your belief that illusion is reality.

You can always avoid reading my posts if you don't want to waste your time because you can't see past your illusions. That is OK by me. Maybe your demon does not like to see truth so it thinks logic is a waste of time or maybe you are only imagining that you are demon possessed and you don't want to take responsibility for your imaginings. So that you prefer to live in the life of illusion rather then reality, I don't know but in any case if you don't find the interaction to your liking then don't read it and don't respond.

I will submit that through this thread I have determined that the no free will argument is probably related to the idea that portrays God as an irrational being that punished the innocent to pay the penalty for the guilty. That is Penal/substitutionary atonement theory. It is an attempt to say that the moral influence theory of the atonement cannot possibly be right. Because if people are not free to choose something they can not be influenced to God. God can only compel man by His Power, at least those He is willing to compel. As Paul says:

(2 Cor 5:14 NIV) For Christ's love compels us, because we are convinced that one died for all, and therefore all died.

(Rom 2:4 NIV) Or do you show contempt for the riches of his kindness, tolerance and patience, not realizing that God's kindness leads you toward repentance?

So the argument is that Love and kindness, cannot compel or convince, certainly not if man has no free will. So to counter a rational view of God there are those who submit that God simply forces by his irresistible force people without free will to have faith in Him. Some feel that He only forces the elect into this faith the rest subject for eternal torment and others that He causes all into this faith at some point and universal salvation. If the latter however is true why even argue with anyone about it the ultimate salvation is the same. And if the former then there is no reason to argue either because God will do it, either save you or not save as He desires whether any human agrees or disagrees with God. Over all the problem is how these ideas paint God.

 

[moicherie]

Lurk mode off

The idea that because certains words are not in the bible (free will) that the concept is not in the bible is ridiculous. We forget the bible writers did not speak or write in English.... e.g try looking for the actual words sexual intercourse in the bible, you won't find it either.
So you all married people exercising your free will to have sexual intercourse better stop since such words are not biblical!

Lurk mode on

 

[sentipente]

Well said, moicherie. Trying to create theology on the basis of English words is an exercise in futility.

 

[StormyOne]

Well said, moicherie. Trying to create theology on the basis of English words is an exercise in futility.

and what does that say about all the theologies that have been created based on english words/translations...... scary thought indeed....

 

[moicherie]

and what does that say about all the theologies that have been created based on english words/translations...... scary thought indeed....

very scary and arrogant, the same attitude that seems to think Jesus, a first century Palestinian Jew was a white dude in a white nightie looking like a Californian hippy

 

[Byfaithalone1]

Lurk mode off

The idea that because certains words are not in the bible (free will) that the concept is not in the bible is ridiculous. We forget the bible writers did not speak or write in English.... e.g try looking for the actual words sexual intercourse in the bible, you won't find it either.
So you all married people exercising your free will to have sexual intercourse better stop since such words are not biblical!

Lurk mode on

Fair enough. However, a careful review of my posts will reveal that I've asked several times for Scriptural support to verify not only the use of the exact phrase, but also the use of the concept that is often meant by the phrase. I've received neither. Why should I believe a concept that has no Scriptural basis?

BFA