Was Adam Imparted Free Will From The Beginning Of Creation?

Johann · Jun 28, 2023

Nancy said:
When a born again true Christian loves the Lord yes, at that time we surrender ALL to Him so in that sense yes, we give UP our free will to choose right or wrong as, His will is always, every time...so much better!

I was getting worried-reading your post to @Kermos till you wrote this-

Even Jesus said-"Lo! I come to DO the Father's WILL"

The believers will/boule/thelema is swallowed up in the sweet will of God and Christ Jesus and cannot operate independently, apart from Christ-but we can still make wrong choices.

Blessings
Johann.

Nancy · Jun 28, 2023

Johann said:
I was getting worried-reading your post to @Kermos till you wrote this-

Even Jesus said-"Lo! I come to DO the Father's WILL"

The believers will/boule/thelema is swallowed up in the sweet will of God and Christ Jesus and cannot operate independently, apart from Christ-but we can still make wrong choices.

Blessings
Johann.

Yes Johann, we do all make mistakes, and just knowing that He loves us anyhow and forgives us is comforting

In Him always!

Johann · Jun 28, 2023

Nancy said:
Yes Johann, we do all make mistakes, and just knowing that He loves us anyhow and forgives us is comforting
In Him always!

Always-
Shalom to you and family sister.
Johann.

Nancy · Jun 28, 2023

Johann said:
Always-
Shalom to you and family sister.
Johann.

Thank you and likewise.

Kermos · Jun 29, 2023

RLT63 said:
Just because God doesn’t change between good and evil, that doesn’t restrict man, obviously mankind can. I’ve seen people change from bad to good and vice versa. I’m sure everyone has observed this.

Basically, you are now conveying between your current post and your prior post that God did not create man with a will that is a precise duplicate of God's Will. This is precisely the point that God caused me to convey in the original post, and Lord Jesus has me here conveying to you free-willians in the following.

A person must be born again in the spirit of God in order to have a will controlled by God - a person must be born of God in order to even righteously perceive King Jesus in His Majestic Kingdom (John 3:3-8).

No Will is Free Because Every Will Is Attached To A Being

Let's examine the free-willian dearly held faith that "my free-will is uncontrolled by God" as compared to linguistics, logic, and Scripture in Truth (John 14:6).
Free-willians abstract (compartmentalize) at two different levels when free-willians think "my free-will is uncontrolled by God".

God is a Being.

You are a being.

A "will" is not a being.

A "will" is part of a being, and a "will" does not exist without a being.

Let's look at free-willian's dearly held belief that "my free-will is uncontrolled by God" from a related perspective, "this being's free-will is uncontrolled by that Being".

Free-willian foundation is the relationship that a "will" is "free" from a "being", and the relationship succeeds logically and linguistically only by including that a "will" is "free" from every "being"; therefore, that "will" must be free from the "Being" (God) as well as that "will" free from the "being" (the free-willian) as well as that "will" free from every other "being", yet a "will" must be part of a "being" resulting in a controlling relationship between the "being" and the being's "will", so the concept of a "will" free from a "being" is illogical.

The free-willian's level of abstraction fails because free-willians have grouped "will" at the same level as the group of "beings", so free-willians are comparing unrelated things, that is, a "will" and a "being"; in other words, free-willian's faulty premise results in a sinfully false conclusion.

The word "free" means "a something detached from an other something", but free-willians redefine "free" to mean "a something detached from that something's self"; therefore, free-willian's linguistics are illegal.

No Scripture states that God imparted man a free-will, in fact, the single occurrence of free-will in the New Testament is where the Apostle Paul refers to free-will as illusory (Philemon 1:14).

Now, a free-willian's "will" is not free from all beings because the free-willian's "will" is part of himself or herself. See the word "self" in the words "himself" and "herself", and "self" is key because by definition free-willians have a self-will (2 Peter 2:9-10) per the free-willian's own proclamation that the free-willian "will" is uncontrolled by God, and, here, in Scripture, we find that free-willians are out of accord with Apostolic testimony.

In Truth (John 14:6), we Christian's have a "will" controlled by the Christ of us Christians for it is written "it is God who is at work in you, both to will and to work for His good pleasure" (Philippians 2:13).

The original post contains the Truth (John 14:6) which shows richly in scripture, Adam was not imparted free will, and no man thereafter was imparted free will either.

RLT63 · Jun 29, 2023

Kermos said:
Basically, you are now conveying between your current post and your prior post that God did not create man with a will that is a precise duplicate of God's Will. This is precisely the point that God caused me to convey in the original post, and Lord Jesus has me here conveying to you free-willians in the following.

A person must be born again in the spirit of God in order to have a will controlled by God - a person must be born of God in order to even righteously perceive King Jesus in His Majestic Kingdom (John 3:3-8).

No Will is Free Because Every Will Is Attached To A Being

Let's examine the free-willian dearly held faith that "my free-will is uncontrolled by God" as compared to linguistics, logic, and Scripture in Truth (John 14:6).
Free-willians abstract (compartmentalize) at two different levels when free-willians think "my free-will is uncontrolled by God".

God is a Being.

You are a being.

A "will" is not a being.

A "will" is part of a being, and a "will" does not exist without a being.

Let's look at free-willian's dearly held belief that "my free-will is uncontrolled by God" from a related perspective, "this being's free-will is uncontrolled by that Being".

Free-willian foundation is the relationship that a "will" is "free" from a "being", and the relationship succeeds logically and linguistically only by including that a "will" is "free" from every "being"; therefore, that "will" must be free from the "Being" (God) as well as that "will" free from the "being" (the free-willian) as well as that "will" free from every other "being", yet a "will" must be part of a "being" resulting in a controlling relationship between the "being" and the being's "will", so the concept of a "will" free from a "being" is illogical.

The free-willian's level of abstraction fails because free-willians have grouped "will" at the same level as the group of "beings", so free-willians are comparing unrelated things, that is, a "will" and a "being"; in other words, free-willian's faulty premise results in a sinfully false conclusion.

The word "free" means "a something detached from an other something", but free-willians redefine "free" to mean "a something detached from that something's self"; therefore, free-willian's linguistics are illegal.

No Scripture states that God imparted man a free-will, in fact, the single occurrence of free-will in the New Testament is where the Apostle Paul refers to free-will as illusory (Philemon 1:14).

Now, a free-willian's "will" is not free from all beings because the free-willian's "will" is part of himself or herself. See the word "self" in the words "himself" and "herself", and "self" is key because by definition free-willians have a self-will (2 Peter 2:9-10) per the free-willian's own proclamation that the free-willian "will" is uncontrolled by God, and, here, in Scripture, we find that free-willians are out of accord with Apostolic testimony.

In Truth (John 14:6), we Christian's have a "will" controlled by the Christ of us Christians for it is written "it is God who is at work in you, both to will and to work for His good pleasure" (Philippians 2:13).

The original post contains the Truth (John 14:6) which shows richly in scripture, Adam was not imparted free will, and no man thereafter was imparted free will either.

Are you just making this stuff up?

Johann · Jun 29, 2023

RLT63 said:
Are you just making this stuff up?

He is partly right-partly in error.
Johann.

RLT63 · Jun 29, 2023

Johann said:
He is partly right-partly in error.
Johann.

Nice Avatar

Johann · Jun 29, 2023

RLT63 said:
Nice Avatar

Yes, Ol' Rocky-I was a boxer in my hay day-but it is the story line that I can identify with.
Johann.

Titus · Jun 29, 2023

Kermos said:
. This is precisely the point that God caused me to convey in the original post, and Lord Jesus has me here conveying to you free-willians in the following.

The only way someone can be speaking for God is if they teach exactly what the Holy Spirit teaches.
Kermos teaches against the Holy Spirit's revelation to mankind.
We know the Spirit revealed God gave man freewill ability to choose God or to live for self.

Kermos' religion has God predetermining who will believe in Jesus, give up their carnal sinful lifestyle and submit themselves to God.

Therefore Kermos is teaching all who do not give their life to Jesus is Gods will.
God therefore is guilty for all that do not believe in Jesus. Its Gods will that is controlling man.

Kermos said:
Let's look at free-willian's dearly held belief that "my free-will is uncontrolled by God" from a related perspective, "this being's free-will is uncontrolled by that Being

Kermos taught above that Gods created beings(mankind) are controlled by God.
Therefore all who do not obey the gospel are controlled by God to rebel.

Kermos said:
No Scripture states that God imparted man a free-will, in fact, the single occurrence of free-will in the New Testament is where the Apostle Paul refers to free-will as illusory (Philemon 1:14).

Kermos' supposed proof text, Philemon 1:14
Supposedly Paul teaches freewill is an illusion according to Kermos.

That's Kermos' claim now where is the evidence? Where is the explanation to Paul supposedly claiming this in the book of Philemon?

Nowhere does Paul say anything about freewill being only imagination!!!!

Kermos said:
See the word "self" in the words "himself" and "herself", and "self" is key because by definition free-willians have a self-will (2 Peter 2:9-10) per the free-willian's own proclamation that the free-willian "will" is uncontrolled by God,

More of Kermos' personal word definition.
Self-will is a persons will. Freewill can also be self-will. They are not different ideas that are incompatible with each other as Kermos wants everyone to believe.
Kermos does not know what he is talking about.

2Peter 2:9-10 does not teach no freewill.
Nor does it teach self-will is not freewill.

His proof text verses do not back up his theology.
He see's things in the text that is not there.

Kermos said:
that the free-willian "will" is uncontrolled by God,

Kermos is teaching we are controlled by God.
FORCED
Adam had no free will so who caused, controlled, forced him to sin?

Kermos' religion takes the blame off of Adam and puts it on the one who has complete Sovereignty(in the calvinist sense of the word) over Adam's choices.

Kermos' answer is Eve gave Adam the fruit and Adam listened to his wife.

That is not an answer to WHY Adam listened to his wife
That is not an answer to HOW IT IS NOT Gods fault if Adam has no freewill choice.

Kermos' theology is illogical gobbledygook.

Kermos has yet to explain how Adam is at fault for his sin when he did not choose to commit sin(no freewill abilty)
Who is the cause for Adam's choice to go against God?
Eve has no ability to choose of her own freewill either in Kermos' religious views.

Johann · Jun 29, 2023

Titus said:
The only way someone can be speaking for God is if they teach exactly what the Holy Spirit teaches.
Kermos teaches against the Holy Spirit's revelation to mankind.
We know the Spirit revealed God gave man freewill ability to choose God or to live for self.

Kermos' religion has God predetermining who will believe in Jesus, give up their carnal sinful lifestyle and submit themselves to God.

Therefore Kermos is teaching all who do not give their life to Jesus is Gods will.
God therefore is guilty for all that do not believe in Jesus. Its Gods will that is controlling man.

Kermos taught above that Gods created beings(mankind) are controlled by God.
Therefore all who do not obey the gospel are controlled by God to rebel.

Kermos' supposed proof text, Philemon 1:14
Supposedly Paul teaches freewill is an illusion according to Kermos.

That's Kermos' claim now where is the evidence? Where is the explanation to Paul supposedly claiming this in the book of Philemon?

Nowhere does Paul say anything about freewill being only imagination!!!!

More of Kermos' personal word definition.
Self-will is a persons will. Freewill can also be self-will. They are not different ideas that are incompatible with each other as Kermos wants everyone to believe.
Kermos does not know what he is talking about.

2Peter 2:9-10 does not teach no freewill.
Nor does it teach self-will is not freewill.

His proof text verses do not back up his theology.
He see's things in the text that is not there.

Kermos is teaching we are controlled by God.
FORCED
Adam had no free will so who caused, controlled, forced him to sin?

Kermos' religion takes the blame off of Adam and puts it on the one who has complete Sovereignty(in the calvinist sense of the word) over Adam's choices.

Kermos' answer is Eve gave Adam the fruit and Adam listened to his wife.

That is not an answer to WHY Adam listened to his wife
That is not an answer to HOW IT IS NOT Gods fault if Adam has no freewill choice.

Kermos' theology is illogical gobbledygook.

Kermos has yet to explain how Adam is at fault for his sin when he did not choose to commit sin(no freewill abilty)
Who is the cause for Adam's choice to go against God?
Eve has no ability to choose of her own freewill either in Kermos' religious views.

You have made a good case-irrefutable.
Johann.

Kermos · Jun 29, 2023

Titus said:
Kermos do you not understand what figurative means?
I never said mountains or trees share a will, lol

Kermos that is why the writing in Romans 8:20 is figurative.

Figurative: not willingly means: not of it's own fault. That is the literal meaning. Creation has no will that is why this is figurative language.

Quote me where I said the trees can become the children of God?
Stop making stuff up about me Kermos!!!!!
Kermos likes to use strawman arguments.

I have been explaining Romans 8:20
Romans 8:21 is where the words children of God are introduced.

Since you now go to the next verse I will use both verses 20-21 to prove your interpretation is error.

Verse 21,
- because the creation(Kermos wants us to believe this is Adam not ktisis which is the creation of God
- because the creation itself also will be delivered from the bondage of corruption into the glorious liberty of the children of God

Kermos made up that I taught creation can become the children of God, lol

Paul has two subjects he is speaking of in verse 21,
Creation which has been subjected by God to decay,corruptible,not of it's own fault but because if the sin of Adam.
1) Creation
2)children of God

Paul is speaking of how Adam's sin caused himself to become corruptible, Gods punishment
Paul is also speaking of of creation and how it too was subjected to corruption, caused by Adam's sin.

Paul in verse 21 shows when the corruptible i.e. lost man,
becomes saved i.e. the children of God, they will no longer be under subjection, bondage
But set free, the corruptible man will become incorruptible(children of God)

Paul says in verse 21 that not only will the children of God be set free, delivered, liberated from decay, corruption.
Also will the creation be delivered from the bondage of corruption.
2Corinthians 3:17,
- Now the Lord is the Spirit and where the Spirit of the Lord is, there is LIBERTY

Paul uses the corruption, bondage of man that was caused by Adam's sin,
And shows in verses 20-21 that also this change occured with nature caused by Gods punishment

As verse 20 shows nature(creation) was subjected to futility, corruption
Verse 21 shows as men are saved(children of God they are delivered from this bondage of corruption by being transformed into incorruptible(not subject to decay)
Creation also just as the children of God will no longer be subject to corruption, decay.

Kermos is desperate. Why else would he make stuff up about what I am saying?
Can't his argument itself show he is teaching truth?

Now Kermos has lied about me again!!!
Kermos claims I taught the boy willingly raped His sister!

I have been saying the opposite the entire debate!

That has been Kermos' position not mine!
Kermos has intentionally misrepresented me!
Kermos realized he is wrong so he has jumped ship, lol
I will not allow his deceitful dishonesty go unexposed!

Here is what I really have been saying,

Kermos is guilty of what he accuses me of believing!!!

This word defining is used by calvinists all the time.
Calvinist have their meaning of a word and if you do not go by their rules you are wrong.
You will be accursed of not knowing what you are saying.

Kermos needs to lean that unwanted also means unwilling!!!!!

Unwilling definition: the quality of not wanting to do something. Cambridge dictionary

Then, since neither mountains nor trees share a will, then Paul is referring specifically to people with the word "creature" (or "creation") in Romans 8:20-21, and, according to Greek grammar, the verb phrase "was subjected" and the prepositional phrase "to futility" in Romans 8:20 must be associated with "creature" in Romans 8:20, so you confusedly think that those phrases are associated with God. Just look at item 1 below.

Nowhere in Romans 8:20-22 does Paul state that he was writing figuratively, so you confusedly change Paul's writing with no grounds. Paul was writing Spiritually, so Paul does include Adam in Romans 8:20-22!

Then you confusedly changed Paul's words from "not willingly" to "not at fault" when you vividly wrote "not willingly means: not of it's own fault" in your quoted post (proof link). In Romans 8:20, the Greek word for "willingly" is ἑκοῦσα (Strong's 1635 - hekón - properly, willing; "unforced, of one's own will, voluntary" (J. Thayer), i.e. acting on one's own accord. The root (hek-) emphasizes intentional, deliberate action (choice)), so, as shown in item 6 below with respect to Paul writing "the children of God" in specific reference to the word "creature" (meaning persons) in Romans 8:21, this means Adam's will was not involved with eating of tree forbidden as food thus subjecting creation to futility per Paul in Romans 8:20.

Not only that, but when you wrote "not willingly means: not of it's own fault" in your quoted post (proof link), then you confusedly think that Adam was not at fault for subjecting creation to futility, yet the Word of God says different than you for the Word says "Because you have listened to the voice of your wife, and have eaten from the tree about which I commanded you, saying, ‘You shall not eat from it’; Cursed is the ground because of you" (Genesis 3:17). Notice that Adam is part of creation, yrt you confusedly exclude Adam from being part of creation throughout your writings.

No place in Scripture states that man's created with a free will to choose toward God; therefore, you are adding free will to choose toward God into the scripture.

You illegally and illegitimately redefine words as is demonstrated in this post, and you fail to justify your changes that break Scripture (and "the Scripture cannot be broken" (John 10:35)).

This is Spiritual Truth (John 14:6), yet what you post, what you call "reasoning holds up in the real world", is confusion according to Spiritual Truth (John 14:6)!

continued to post 1,913

Kermos · Jun 29, 2023

continued from post 1,912

You elicit several more counts of confusion about the creation account:

You literally add your thoughts into the Apostle Paul's writing in your paragraph as copied and pasted here:

For the creature(creation) was made subject(by God) to vanity(frailty, lack of vigor) not willingly(not through it's own fault)( it being creation) but by reason of Him(God) who hath subjected the same in hope(in hope meaning God did not intend for the frailty of creation that God subjected it to, to remain this way) (the word of Titus not of the Apostle Paul in Romans 8:20, proof link))

You demonstrated your confused deception because the Apostle Paul truly wrote:

For the creature was made subject to vanity, not willingly, but by reason of Him who hath subjected the same in hope.
(the word of the Apostle Paul, Romans 8:20)
The Greek word inflections for the noun "creature" and the adjective "willingly" grammatically require that "not willingly" modifies "creature" specifically, not God per your thoughts (see your word "intend"), but truly Adam as per the Apostle Paul. The words "the" and "creature" and "willingly" are the only words in Romans 8:20 that are Nominative and Feminine and Singular which means that "the", "creature", "not", and "willingly" must be associated together; therefore, "the creature" "not willingly" ate of the tree forbidden as food subjecting creation to vanity yet God supplies the hope in Christ to the creatures because of the Greek grammar used by the Apostle Paul. By the way, the word "Him", for God, is Accusative and Masculine and Singular, so "Him" is not associated with "willingly", per Greek as per the Apostle Paul.
Adam was the only creature with a prohibition command with a contingent punishment for violation (Genesis 2:16-17), not the birds of the air (Genesis 1:20-22), so the birds as part of creation could not subject the creation to futility which shows your confusion that Paul referred to "creation" as a whole instead of Adam as "creature" in Romans 8:20-22 (see where you wrote "Paul is speaking here figuratively not literally. Creature is not Adam but creation itself" in proof link), so only man could do the deed of eating of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil leading to punishment, and Adam not of his will ate of the tree forbidden as food for the Word of God clearly declares that the cause of Adam eating of the tree was Adam listened to Eve (Genesis 3:17).
The "will" is the facility within a person to make choices, but you confusedly reverse the definition when you wrote "Unwilling is still a choice" (proof link) in your vain attempt to "prove" that a person's choice drives the person's "will" - your thoughts are backwards about "will" and "choice".
You hold contradictory thoughts as being true simultaneously in your mind, your thoughts which oppose each other are:
- In a prior post of yours, you wrote:
  
  People unwilling do things they know is wrong all the time! (proof link)
- In another post of yours, you wrote:
  
  YOU CANNOT FORCE ANYONE TO DO ANYTHING AGAINST THEIR WILL. (proof link)
Titus, those thoughts of yours are irreconcilable opposites, so that is confusion.
When you wrote "Paul is speaking here figuratively not literally. Creature is not Adam but creation itself" (proof link) about Romans 8:20-22, then you confusedly conveyed that you think the mountains of creation share a "will" (see "not willingly" in Romans 8:20) as well as the trees of creation can become the children of God (see "the children of God" in Romans 8:21), yet I proclaim to you that Paul certainly constrains "creation" or "creature" in Romans 8:20-21 to persons.
The Greek word inflections for the noun "creature" and the adjective "willingly" grammatically require that "not willingly" modifies "creature" specifically, not God per your thoughts (see your word "intend"), but truly Adam as per the Apostle Paul. The words "the" and "creature" and "willingly" are the only words in Romans 8:20 that are Nominative and Feminine and Singular which means that "the", "creature", "not", and "willingly" must be associated together; therefore, "the creature" "not willingly" ate of the tree forbidden as food subjecting creation to vanity yet God supplies the hope in Christ to the creatures because of the Greek grammar used by the Apostle Paul. By the way, the word "Him", for God, is Accusative and Masculine and Singular, so "Him" is not associated with "willingly", per Greek as per the Apostle Paul.
You clearly confuse "unwilling" versus "unwanted" because "will" and "want"/desire are two different things, so your confusion is endemic to your writings. Your example of that son raping his sister shows he was willing to rape his sister, but he performed his unwanted action of raping his sister because he thought it would save his mother from being shot by the assailant (proof link).
You confuse "unwilling" and "not willing". You confusedly mix "unwilling" in your illegal semantic and self-contradictory sense of a person doing something against the person's will (see your example of the South African woman (proof link)) contrasted with "not willingly" in the definitive sense of a person doing something not based upon the person's will (see God's Word in Genesis 3:17 and the Apostle Paul's writing in Romans 8:20-23). In Romans 8:20-22, "not willingly" means not of the will, and choice is of the will; therefore, Adam not of his will ate of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil according to the Word of God (Genesis 3:17), so Adam did not choose to eat of the tree forbidden as food (Romans 8:20-22)!.

You wrote (proof link:

You are proving you dont understand what you are teaching.
He did not rape his sister willingly!!!!
Kermos you are a very confused man!

Definition of unwilling: loath, reluctant, obstinate
Synonyms: coerced, forced, involuntary, unintentional

You are the one confused by word definition not me Kermos!

Look at the synonyms for "unwilling" and see "forced", yet you wrote "YOU CANNOT FORCE ANYONE TO DO ANYTHING AGAINST THEIR WILL" (proof link); therefore, you have a self contradiction with respect to your example of that son who raped his sister because that son either (1) was forced to rape his sister or (2) willingly raped his sister. But as your thoughts stand right not, you hold contradictory thoughts as being true in your mind which is confusion.

"God is not a God of confusion but of peace" (1 Corinthians 14:33).

The original post contains the Truth (John 14:6) which shows richly in scripture that Adam was not imparted free will, and no man thereafter was imparted free will either.

Ezra · Jun 29, 2023

Kermos said:
our lack of scripture citation says it all. Adam did not have free will.

what do you call it when given specific instructions. with out means to keep from breaking specifics God told Him the one tree you dont eat off of.. what did the serpent say? hath God said Adam made the decision to Eat.. did God say no you dont Adam . no he gave the instructions expecting adam to keep them

Ezra · Jun 29, 2023

Kermos said:
continued from post 1,912

You elicit several more counts of confusion about the creation account:

You literally add your thoughts into the Apostle Paul's writing in your paragraph as copied and pasted here:

For the creature(creation) was made subject(by God) to vanity(frailty, lack of vigor) not willingly(not through it's own fault)( it being creation) but by reason of Him(God) who hath subjected the same in hope(in hope meaning God did not intend for the frailty of creation that God subjected it to, to remain this way) (the word of Titus not of the Apostle Paul in Romans 8:20, proof link))
You demonstrated your confused deception because the Apostle Paul truly wrote:

For the creature was made subject to vanity, not willingly, but by reason of Him who hath subjected the same in hope.
(the word of the Apostle Paul, Romans 8:20)

The Greek word inflections for the noun "creature" and the adjective "willingly" grammatically require that "not willingly" modifies "creature" specifically, not God per your thoughts (see your word "intend"), but truly Adam as per the Apostle Paul. The words "the" and "creature" and "willingly" are the only words in Romans 8:20 that are Nominative and Feminine and Singular which means that "the", "creature", "not", and "willingly" must be associated together; therefore, "the creature" "not willingly" ate of the tree forbidden as food subjecting creation to vanity yet God supplies the hope in Christ to the creatures because of the Greek grammar used by the Apostle Paul. By the way, the word "Him", for God, is Accusative and Masculine and Singular, so "Him" is not associated with "willingly", per Greek as per the Apostle Paul.

Adam was the only creature with a prohibition command with a contingent punishment for violation (Genesis 2:16-17), not the birds of the air (Genesis 1:20-22), so the birds as part of creation could not subject the creation to futility which shows your confusion that Paul referred to "creation" as a whole instead of Adam as "creature" in Romans 8:20-22 (see where you wrote "Paul is speaking here figuratively not literally. Creature is not Adam but creation itself" in proof link), so only man could do the deed of eating of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil leading to punishment, and Adam not of his will ate of the tree forbidden as food for the Word of God clearly declares that the cause of Adam eating of the tree was Adam listened to Eve (Genesis 3:17).

The "will" is the facility within a person to make choices, but you confusedly reverse the definition when you wrote "Unwilling is still a choice" (proof link) in your vain attempt to "prove" that a person's choice drives the person's "will" - your thoughts are backwards about "will" and "choice".

You hold contradictory thoughts as being true simultaneously in your mind, your thoughts which oppose each other are:

In a prior post of yours, you wrote:

People unwilling do things they know is wrong all the time! (proof link)

In another post of yours, you wrote:

YOU CANNOT FORCE ANYONE TO DO ANYTHING AGAINST THEIR WILL. (proof link)

Titus, those thoughts of yours are irreconcilable opposites, so that is confusion.

When you wrote "Paul is speaking here figuratively not literally. Creature is not Adam but creation itself" (proof link) about Romans 8:20-22, then you confusedly conveyed that you think the mountains of creation share a "will" (see "not willingly" in Romans 8:20) as well as the trees of creation can become the children of God (see "the children of God" in Romans 8:21), yet I proclaim to you that Paul certainly constrains "creation" or "creature" in Romans 8:20-21 to persons.

The Greek word inflections for the noun "creature" and the adjective "willingly" grammatically require that "not willingly" modifies "creature" specifically, not God per your thoughts (see your word "intend"), but truly Adam as per the Apostle Paul. The words "the" and "creature" and "willingly" are the only words in Romans 8:20 that are Nominative and Feminine and Singular which means that "the", "creature", "not", and "willingly" must be associated together; therefore, "the creature" "not willingly" ate of the tree forbidden as food subjecting creation to vanity yet God supplies the hope in Christ to the creatures because of the Greek grammar used by the Apostle Paul. By the way, the word "Him", for God, is Accusative and Masculine and Singular, so "Him" is not associated with "willingly", per Greek as per the Apostle Paul.

You clearly confuse "unwilling" versus "unwanted" because "will" and "want"/desire are two different things, so your confusion is endemic to your writings. Your example of that son raping his sister shows he was willing to rape his sister, but he performed his unwanted action of raping his sister because he thought it would save his mother from being shot by the assailant (proof link).

You confuse "unwilling" and "not willing". You confusedly mix "unwilling" in your illegal semantic and self-contradictory sense of a person doing something against the person's will (see your example of the South African woman (proof link)) contrasted with "not willingly" in the definitive sense of a person doing something not based upon the person's will (see God's Word in Genesis 3:17 and the Apostle Paul's writing in Romans 8:20-23). In Romans 8:20-22, "not willingly" means not of the will, and choice is of the will; therefore, Adam not of his will ate of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil according to the Word of God (Genesis 3:17), so Adam did not choose to eat of the tree forbidden as food (Romans 8:20-22)!.

You wrote (proof link:

You are proving you dont understand what you are teaching.
He did not rape his sister willingly!!!!
Kermos you are a very confused man!

Definition of unwilling: loath, reluctant, obstinate
Synonyms: coerced, forced, involuntary, unintentional

You are the one confused by word definition not me Kermos!

Look at the synonyms for "unwilling" and see "forced", yet you wrote "YOU CANNOT FORCE ANYONE TO DO ANYTHING AGAINST THEIR WILL" (proof link); therefore, you have a self contradiction with respect to your example of that son who raped his sister because that son either (1) was forced to rape his sister or (2) willingly raped his sister. But as your thoughts stand right not, you hold contradictory thoughts as being true in your mind which is confusion.

"God is not a God of confusion but of peace" (1 Corinthians 14:33).

The original post contains the Truth (John 14:6) which shows richly in scripture that Adam was not imparted free will, and no man thereafter was imparted free will either.

your copying and pasting this right? besides your pushing Calvinism

Kermos · Jul 1, 2023

Nancy said:
Also, calling those of us who subscribe to the doctrine of free will "freewillians" is tantamount to calling Calvinists "robots", neither is very respectful.

"Free-willians gleefully separate themselves from God's will.."

"Gleefully, huh. That is so wrong! I mean, seriously? C'mon Kermos. But what many of us "freewillies" see a lot of? the Calvinists "gleefully" accept the large majority of humankind burning in flames that never extinguish, through no fault of their own because they were created for this very purpose, in order, of course...so God will get the glory for such a horrid end for those who had no chance to even become born again ...?! That's really cold and well, just strange and counterproductive. That is, since He wishes ALL PEOPLE to be saved...
choice to submitt all to Christ.
I wonder. Why is it that God only chastises those He loves?? There has to be a reason to be chastised and that would be sin. I sure do know a lot of "Armenians" who get "chastised", including myself (big time lol) That question goes out to all who think they are sinless and perfect as well. Just my take.

Hello Nancy,

I rearranged your post in order to first respond to the point that seems to be most contentious for you, so please pardon me on this, but I am keeping your whole post without snipping anything out.

First, the original post includes:

Largely, I use free will to mean man choosing toward God, emphatically Lord Jesus Christ.

With that being written, I attached the suffix "ian" to "free-will" to arrive at the word "free-willian". It is tremendously more concise to write "free-willian" as opposed to repeatedly write "a person that thinks the person chose Jesus unto being saved from the wrath of God".

Calvinist, Arminian, those don't appear in Scripture, but both "free-will" and the suffix -ian appear in Scripture.

The term "free-willian" conveys very specifically included in it's denotation "a person that thinks the person chose Jesus unto being saved from the wrath of God".

Now, Nancy, if a person says that God does not control the person, then the person thinks that God's Will does not control the person's will.

When the person gleefully says "I chose Jesus, and now Jesus has to save me" (and this is considered a gleeful event in free-willian circles), then the person thinks that the person says this without God doing anything inside of the free-willian.

The word "glee", as God has me use the word, is accurate.

See the Word of God, the Christ of us Christians says:

"you did not choose Me, but I chose you" (Lord Jesus Christ, John 15:16), so God chooses people, not man choosing God, but truly God choosing man.
"I chose you out of the world" (Lord Jesus Christ, John 15:19, includes salvation), so God exclusively chooses people unto salvation.
"What I say to you I say to all" (Lord Jesus Christ, Mark 13:37 - Jesus had taken the Apostles Peter, Andrew, James, and John aside in private and said this), so all the glorious blessings of God mentioned above are to all believers in all time.
"All authority has been given to Me in heaven and on earth. Go therefore and make disciples of all the nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit, teaching them to observe all that I commanded you; and lo, I am with you always, even to the end of the age" (Lord Jesus Christ, Matthew 28:18-20).

Nancy said:
Hi Kermos,

"First, the end of your post, where you wrote "And I do not believe that God changes between good and evil", so, based on your premise, neither can man change between good and evil for man is made in God's likeness and image. You creed is broken."

Just because we are made in His likeness, does not say, to me, that we have the same liberty to say, take vengeance as it is God's alone.
We can forgive those who have sinned against us but we cannot do like the CC does and absolve of sin as, that is God's alone. Might be able to come up with more but for brevity's sake, I'll move on

Nancy, the point of this conversation is not "liberty" per se, but "will". Both @Johann and @RLT63 should have recognized this when they applied a "Like" to your post, signifying their agreement with you.

So, to the point of a "will".

No Will is Free Because Every Will Is Attached To A Being

Let's examine the free-willian dearly held faith that "my free-will is uncontrolled by God" as compared to linguistics, logic, and Scripture in Truth (John 14:6).
Free-willians abstract (compartmentalize) at two different levels when free-willians think "my free-will is uncontrolled by God".

God is a Being.

You are a being.

A "will" is not a being.

A "will" is part of a being, and a "will" does not exist without a being.

Let's look at free-willian's dearly held belief that "my free-will is uncontrolled by God" from a related perspective, "this being's free-will is uncontrolled by that Being".

Free-willian foundation is the relationship that a "will" is "free" from a "being", and the relationship succeeds logically and linguistically only by including that a "will" is "free" from every "being"; therefore, that "will" must be free from the "Being" (God) as well as that "will" free from the "being" (the free-willian) as well as that "will" free from every other "being", yet a "will" must be part of a "being" resulting in a controlling relationship between the "being" and the being's "will", so the concept of a "will" free from a "being" is illogical.

The free-willian's level of abstraction fails because free-willians have grouped "will" at the same level as the group of "beings", so free-willians are comparing unrelated things, that is, a "will" and a "being"; in other words, free-willian's faulty premise results in a sinfully false conclusion.

The word "free" means "a something detached from an other something", but free-willians redefine "free" to mean "a something detached from that something's self"; therefore, free-willian's linguistics are illegal.

No Scripture states that God imparted man a free-will, in fact, the single occurrence of free-will in the New Testament is where the Apostle Paul refers to free-will as illusory (Philemon 1:14).

Now, a free-willian's "will" is not free from all beings because the free-willian's "will" is part of himself or herself. See the word "self" in the words "himself" and "herself", and "self" is key because by definition free-willians have a self-will (2 Peter 2:9-10) per the free-willian's own proclamation that the free-willian "will" is uncontrolled by God, and, here, in Scripture, we find that free-willians are out of accord with Apostolic testimony.

In Truth (John 14:6), we Christian's have a "will" controlled by the Christ of us Christians for it is written "it is God who is at work in you, both to will and to work for His good pleasure" (Philippians 2:13).

continued to post 1,917

Kermos · Jul 1, 2023

continued from post 1,916

Nancy said:
12 "Therefore, my beloved, just as you have always obeyed, not only in my presence, but now even more in my absence, continue to work out your salvation with fear and trembling. 13 For it is God who works in you to will and to act on behalf of His good purpose. 14 Do everything without complaining or arguing,…"

Agreed, I added the first part of that verse because I like "...continue to work out your own salvation with fear and trembling." So it is US that must "work out your own salvation" and that is a choice IMHO

When a born again true Christian loves the Lord yes, at that time we surrender ALL to Him so in that sense yes, we give UP our free will to choose right or wrong as, His will is always, every time...so much better!

Submitting our wills over to Him will make us His children, and He loves His children.

The Christ of us Christians says "And why do you not even on your own initiative judge what is right?" (Luke 12:57), so man's will is incapable of determining the "choosing" of God unto salvation; in reality, Lord Jesus, alone, chooses us Christians unto salvation (John 15:16, John 15:19) with us being the blessed recipient of God's great work. Mere man is not superior to Jesus the Lord who says "Therefore Jesus answered and was saying to them, 'Truly, truly, I say to you, the Son can do nothing of Himself, unless it is something He sees the Father doing; for whatever the Father does, these things the Son also does in like manner'" (John 5:19) and again He mentions initiative in "I can do nothing on My own initiative. As I hear, I judge; and My judgment is just, because I do not seek My own will, but the will of Him who sent Me" (John 5:30).

The Apostle Paul is in accord with Jesus when Paul wrote Philippians 2:12-13 to Christians:

So then, my beloved, just as you have always obeyed, not as in my presence only, but now much more in my absence, work out your salvation with fear and trembling" (Philippians 2:12)
"for it is God who is at work in you, both to will and to work for His good pleasure" (Philippians 2:13)

Notice the first word, "for", in Philippians 2:13. The word "for" establishes that Philippians 2:12 content is dependent upon Philippians 2:13 content.

Paul clearly declares that the work "obeyed" and the work "work out your salvation with fear and trembling" in Philippians 2:12 depends upon causative work of God as established in Philippians 2:13.

There is nothing about Christians "that is a choice" of the Christian to "work out your salvation with fear and trembling", but we Christians "work out" our "salvation with fear and trembling" according to the work of the indwelling Holy Spirit! Praise be to God for the gift of the Holy Spirit of the Living God Jesus Christ!

The "obey" and ""work out your salvation with fear and trembling" are Fruit of the Spirit (Galatians 5:22-23).

Nancy said:
What you wrote before the quote I wrote, is something I'm not "in the know" about, as it was between yourself and @RLT63

"Free-willians do not have a free will, as described by Paul.

Free-willians do have a self will, as described by Peter."

This is a new one for me, is there any difference between "free and self will"?? Can't say as I would agree that there is.

You wrote:

This is a new one for me, is there any difference between "free and self will"?? Can't say as I would agree that there is.

Please read the below carefully, as this shows the big difference between free-will and self-will while also explaining the commonality between free-will and self-will. The Biblical quotations are crucial to read, Nancy. Please note, the links are to BibleHub and BibleGateway.

The Bondage Of A Man's Will

Free-willians, in a respect, are correct that "there's no difference between self will and free will", and that respect is that both self will and free will lead to hell.
Now, instead of listening to themselves lie with things like "Free will is all through the scriptures", they need to listen to Apostolic testimony as shown below.

Peter the Apostle wrote that prior to being saved, people have a self will that brings such people under damnation with the devil according to the Apostle Peter (2 Peter 2:9-10).

Paul the Apostle wrote that after being saved, people have a will that is bound under the loving control of God according to the Apostle Paul (Philippians 2:13).

Here's Paul from the Bible, again. Overall, Paul uses free will as illusory instead of concrete in Philemon 1:14 - and this is the only occurrence of "free will" that I am aware of in the New American Standard Bible New Testament.

Free-willians do not have a free will, as described by Paul.

Free-willians do have a self will, as described by Peter.

Free-willians gleefully separate themselves from God's will and the Christ of us Christians Who says "you did not choose Me, but I chose you" (John 15:16) and "I chose you out of the world" (John 15:19). We Christians in God's Spirit have a will bound enthusiastically in joy and love to God by God for God through God, as described by Paul.

The above mentioned Apostolic testimony verbatim:

"the Lord knows how to rescue the godly from temptation, and to keep the unrighteous under punishment for the day of judgment, and especially those who indulge the flesh in its corrupt desires and despise authority; daring, self-willed, they do not tremble when they revile angelic majesties" (2 Peter 2:9-10).
"it is God who is at work in you, both to will and to work for His good pleasure" (Philippians 2:13).
"but without your consent I did not want to do anything, so that your goodness would not be, in effect, by compulsion but of your own free will" (Philemon 1:14).

Praise Lord Jesus, I am and every Christian are saved from the wrath of God by God's grace, for God's glory! Praise be to the Living Lord Jesus Christ! HALLELUJAH!!

The original post contains the Truth (John 14:6) which shows richly in scripture, Adam was not imparted free will, and no man thereafter was imparted free will either.

Nancy · Jul 1, 2023

Kermos said:
continued from post 1,916

The Christ of us Christians says "And why do you not even on your own initiative judge what is right?" (Luke 12:57), so man's will is incapable of determining the "choosing" of God unto salvation; in reality, Lord Jesus, alone, chooses us Christians unto salvation (John 15:16, John 15:19) with us being the blessed recipient of God's great work. Mere man is not superior to Jesus the Lord who says "Therefore Jesus answered and was saying to them, 'Truly, truly, I say to you, the Son can do nothing of Himself, unless it is something He sees the Father doing; for whatever the Father does, these things the Son also does in like manner'" (John 5:19) and again He mentions initiative in "I can do nothing on My own initiative. As I hear, I judge; and My judgment is just, because I do not seek My own will, but the will of Him who sent Me" (John 5:30).

The Apostle Paul is in accord with Jesus when Paul wrote Philippians 2:12-13 to Christians:

So then, my beloved, just as you have always obeyed, not as in my presence only, but now much more in my absence, work out your salvation with fear and trembling" (Philippians 2:12)

"for it is God who is at work in you, both to will and to work for His good pleasure" (Philippians 2:13)

Notice the first word, "for", in Philippians 2:13. The word "for" establishes that Philippians 2:12 content is dependent upon Philippians 2:13 content.

Paul clearly declares that the work "obeyed" and the work "work out your salvation with fear and trembling" in Philippians 2:12 depends upon causative work of God as established in Philippians 2:13.

There is nothing about Christians "that is a choice" of the Christian to "work out your salvation with fear and trembling", but we Christians "work out" our "salvation with fear and trembling" according to the work of the indwelling Holy Spirit! Praise be to God for the gift of the Holy Spirit of the Living God Jesus Christ!

The "obey" and ""work out your salvation with fear and trembling" are Fruit of the Spirit (Galatians 5:22-23).

You wrote:

This is a new one for me, is there any difference between "free and self will"?? Can't say as I would agree that there is.

Please read the below carefully, as this shows the big difference between free-will and self-will while also explaining the commonality between free-will and self-will. The Biblical quotations are crucial to read, Nancy. Please note, the links are to BibleHub and BibleGateway.

The Bondage Of A Man's Will
Free-willians, in a respect, are correct that "there's no difference between self will and free will", and that respect is that both self will and free will lead to hell.
Now, instead of listening to themselves lie with things like "Free will is all through the scriptures", they need to listen to Apostolic testimony as shown below.

Peter the Apostle wrote that prior to being saved, people have a self will that brings such people under damnation with the devil according to the Apostle Peter (2 Peter 2:9-10).

Paul the Apostle wrote that after being saved, people have a will that is bound under the loving control of God according to the Apostle Paul (Philippians 2:13).

Here's Paul from the Bible, again. Overall, Paul uses free will as illusory instead of concrete in Philemon 1:14 - and this is the only occurrence of "free will" that I am aware of in the New American Standard Bible New Testament.

Free-willians do not have a free will, as described by Paul.

Free-willians do have a self will, as described by Peter.

Free-willians gleefully separate themselves from God's will and the Christ of us Christians Who says "you did not choose Me, but I chose you" (John 15:16) and "I chose you out of the world" (John 15:19). We Christians in God's Spirit have a will bound enthusiastically in joy and love to God by God for God through God, as described by Paul.

The above mentioned Apostolic testimony verbatim:

"the Lord knows how to rescue the godly from temptation, and to keep the unrighteous under punishment for the day of judgment, and especially those who indulge the flesh in its corrupt desires and despise authority; daring, self-willed, they do not tremble when they revile angelic majesties" (2 Peter 2:9-10).

"it is God who is at work in you, both to will and to work for His good pleasure" (Philippians 2:13).

"but without your consent I did not want to do anything, so that your goodness would not be, in effect, by compulsion but of your own free will" (Philemon 1:14).

Praise Lord Jesus, I am and every Christian are saved from the wrath of God by God's grace, for God's glory! Praise be to the Living Lord Jesus Christ! HALLELUJAH!!

The original post contains the Truth (John 14:6) which shows richly in scripture, Adam was not imparted free will, and no man thereafter was imparted free will either.

You have your talking points as all Calvinists do. And the most often used comeback to an Arminian who does not believe in your doctrine is: "You just don't understand Calvinism". Been over this and over and over it again and again. Never once has a Calvinist come close to changing my position and visa versa....And, SOOO tired of the back and forth. You do you and God will take care of the rest.
God bless and keep you.

Titus · Jul 1, 2023

Kermos said:
Then, since neither mountains nor trees share a will, then Paul is referring specifically to people with the word "creature" (or "creation") in Romans 8:20-21, and, according to Greek grammar, the verb phrase "was subjected" and the prepositional phrase "to futility" in Romans 8:20 must be associated with "creature"

Exactly it is referring to creation that you call creature.
You assume it(creation) is Adam and nothing else.

Where does Paul say Adam?
Kermos' calvinist bias is why it must be assumed it(creation) is Adam,

Subjected to futility, because of Adam's sin the creation is subjected to futility, God does this
Genesis 3:17-19
- Then to Adam God said, because you have heeded(obeyed Eve) the voice of your wife and have eaten from the tree of which I commanded you saying, You shall not eat of it,
- cursed is the ground for your sake,
- in toil you shall eat of it, all the days of your life
-both thorns and thistles it shall bring forth for you,
- and you shall eat the herb of the field,
- in the sweat of your face you shall eat bread, till you return to the ground,
For out of it you were taken, for dust you are, and to dust you shall return

Kermos said:
therefore, "the creature" "not willingly" ate of the tree forbidden as food subjecting creation to vanity yet God supplies the hope in Christ to the creatures because of the Greek grammar used by the Apostle Paul.

Kermos perverts the word of God. Nowhere in Romans 8:20 does Paul say the creation ate of the tree.
This is adding his twist on Romans 8:20. You cannot find creation eating anything in this verse.

Romans 8:20,
- For the creation was subjected to futility, not willingly, but because of God who subjected it in hope

Where is Adam eating fruit from the tree God forbade him?
Kermos is making stuff up!

Kermos said:
Nowhere in Romans 8:20-22 does Paul state that he was writing figuratively, so you confusedly change Paul's writing with no grounds.

Paul absolutely without a doubt uses figurative phrases in Romans 8:20.
This is ridiculous!!!! Paul does not have to state "I'm writing figuratively here folks"
It is understood by the context.

Kermos said:
Paul was writing Spiritually,

Obviously,
No one would argue against this.

Kermos said:
so Paul does include Adam in Romans 8:20-22!

No, you have Added to Gods word by teaching creation is Adam.
Adding Adam was eating from a tree in Romans 8:20.

This is interpreting scripture through the lenses of TULIP colored glasses.

Kermos said:
Then you confusedly changed Paul's words from "not willingly" to "not at fault" when you vividly wrote "not willingly means: not of it's own fault" in your quoted post (proof link). In Romans 8:20,

This is figurative. Paul is speaking of creation not a particular man named Adam. That is where you are inserting your biases into the text.

Kermos said:
In Romans 8:20, the Greek word for "willingly" is ἑκοῦσα (Strong's 1635 - hekón - properly, willing; "unforced, of one's own will, voluntary" (J. Thayer), i.e. acting on one's own accord. The root (hek-) emphasizes intentional, deliberate action (choice)),

Yes, and words have no meaning taken out of context.
Which is exactly what you have done with the word not, willingly.

The word pistis is Greek for faith.
It sometimes means gospel.
Other times means belief.
You cannot know the meaning of a word unless you know the context of that word being used.

Ephesians 4:5,
- One Lord, one faith(pistis), one baptism

Here the greek word pistis does not mean person belief.
Paul is using pistis to mean the gospel system by which there is only ONE.
Context matters!
Galatians 1:6-7,
- I marvel that you are turning away so soon from Him who called you in the grace of Christ to a different gospel, which is not another(Paul stated in Ephesians 4:5 there is only ONE gospel(pistis).

In Jude 3 the word faith(pistis) is used for the gospel that was once delivered.
Jude 3,
- Beloved while I was very diligent to write to you concerning our common salvation, I found it necessary to write to you exhorting you to contend earnestly for the faith(pistis, gospel) which was once for all delivered to the saints

Paul uses pistis which by greek definition to mean different things based on the CONTEXT.
Words have no meaning when the context is ignored.
Or in Kermos' case, intentionally taken out of context.

Kermos said:
this means Adam's will was not involved with eating of tree forbidden as food thus subjecting creation to futility per Paul in Romans 8:20.

Above is Kermos' wrong interpretation that Adam had no will of his own to eat of the tree which was sin.
This is the reason Kermos' interpreting the Bible proves why he is irrational and confused.
Why would any rational person accept his explanation of why Adam sinned?
It makes no sense that God would punish Adam if Adam commited sin not willingly!!!

According to Kermos Romans 8:20 has Adam eating of the tree not willingly,
So the question that Kermos needs to answer is,
Why does God punish Adam when Adam took no part in choosing to eat of the tree?
Adam according to Kermos played no part in his own actions.
Kermos' reasoning is ridiculous and this is why his position cannot be rationally explained.

Any belief that cannot hold up against scrutiny must be abandoned.

Kermos doesn't think. He just repeats the same illogical theology because he is a dyed in the wool hardcore calvinist that cannot be reasoned with.

Folks who cannot be reasoned with are a waste of time.

Matthew 7:6,
- Do not give what is holy to the dogs, nor cast your pearls before swine lest they trample them under their feet and turn and tear you in pieces

Ezra · Jul 1, 2023

Nancy said:
You have your talking points as all Calvinists do. And the most often used comeback to an Arminian who does not believe in your doctrine is: "You just don't understand Calvinism". Been over this and over and over it again and again. Never once has a Calvinist come close to changing my position and visa versa....And, SOOO tired of the back and forth. You do you and God will take care of the rest.
God bless and keep you.

its like a broken record trying to discuss Calvinism. the one word they was never taught--is wrong

Was Adam Imparted Free Will From The Beginning Of Creation?

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

No Will is Free Because Every Will Is Attached To A Being​

Well-Known Member

No Will is Free Because Every Will Is Attached To A Being​

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

No Will is Free Because Every Will Is Attached To A Being​

Well-Known Member

The Bondage Of A Man's Will​

Well-Known Member

The Bondage Of A Man's Will​

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Similar threads

No Will is Free Because Every Will Is Attached To A Being

No Will is Free Because Every Will Is Attached To A Being

No Will is Free Because Every Will Is Attached To A Being

The Bondage Of A Man's Will

The Bondage Of A Man's Will