Jeremiah
- Thread starter ATP
- Start date
-
Welcome to Christian Forums, a Christian Forum that recognizes that all Christians are a work in progress.
You will need to register to be able to join in fellowship with Christians all over the world.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!
jaybird
Well-Known Member
- Feb 29, 2016
- 1,595
- 559
- 113
from my understanding we have free will to say no but to rejects a direct command from the All High carries severe judgment. such as when moses hit the rock when he was told to speak to it. Jews today understand this and Jeremiah would have understood it as well.
i dont think its the same is divine inspiration where you feel spiritually moved, a direct command you have to hear the voice of the Lord speaking to you.
i dont think its the same is divine inspiration where you feel spiritually moved, a direct command you have to hear the voice of the Lord speaking to you.
One first has to be saved in order to be called so of course all men who are not saved can reject the calling because they actually are never called. Romans 8:28-30
justaname
Disciple of Jesus Christ
- Mar 14, 2011
- 2,348
- 149
- 63
- Faith
- Christian
- Country
- United States
If I say, "I will not mention him, or speak any more in his name," there is in my heart as it were a burning fire shut up in my bones, and I am weary with holding it in, and I cannot. - Jeremiah 20:9
God appointed him as a prophet just as the text describes it. Think also of Jonah and Saul (Paul). All appointed or elected by God for His purpose.
Yet the subject of free will is a complex idea. We are born captive to sin. Only through the regenerating activity of the Holy Spirt are we set free from that captivity. "Free will" needs to have a definitive concept established before that question could be considered. I lean on Jonathon Edwards' definition in my understanding of free will.
A quote:
The Freedom of the Will
A glancing at the title might lead some to think that Edwards and Luther differed. This is not so, essentially. The title illustrates Edwards’ thesis that we are free to choose that which we most desire. The truth, though, according to Edwards, is that because by nature we are dead in our trespasses and sins, we desire only sin. Our natural inclination is not toward righteousness, but toward sin. All mankind, according to Edwards, are “by nature in a state of total ruin, both with respect to the moral evil of which they are the subjects, and the afflictive evil to which they are exposed, the one as the consequence and punishment of the other”.
According to Edwards, proof of original sin is easily demonstrated. Aside from the supernatural biblical proof found in Romans 1, 3, 5 and Ephesians 2, there is plenty of natural proof as well: All people sin! All of human history testifies to this. And we have more proof today, following two World Wars and one Cold War, than Edwards had in his day. Because we are free to choose that which we most desire, and because what we most desire is to destroy ourselves, it is our freedom that turns out to be our greatest enemy.
Edwards defines the will as “the mind choosing”. This is unique for the simple reason that up until this point, nobody had bothered to refine a careful definition of the will. Everyone assumed that “will” was self-defining. Our choices, according to Edwards, are not determined by the will itself but by the mind. Our choices are determined by what we think is most desirable at any given moment. But why does the mind choose one thing over another? This is where Edwards introduces the idea of “motives”. We choose one thing over another because our mind chooses what it thinks is best. John Gerstner sums up Edwards’ point well:
Your choices as a rational person are always based on various considerations or motives that are before you at the time. Those motives have a certain weight with you, and the motives for and against reading a book, for example, are weighed in the balance of your mind; the motives that outweigh all others are what you, indeed, choose to follow. You, being a rational person, will always choose what seems to you to be the right thing, the wise thing, the most advisable thing to do. If you choose not to do the right thing, the advisable thing, the thing that you are inclined to do, you would, of coarse, be insane. You would be choosing something that you did not choose. You would find something preferable that you did not prefer. But you, being a rational and sane person choose something because it seems to you the right, proper, good, advantageous thing to do.
This is precisely the point that Edwards makes with regard to motives. We choose according to that which we desire most. The problem, however, as we noted earlier, is that because the fall was total and not partial, and as a result we are all dead in our trespasses and sins desiring only sin by nature, what seems to us to be right, proper, and good is often wrong, improper, and bad. Sin has made us God-haters at the core of our souls so that we are all by nature at enmity with God. In order for us to do what God would have us to do, we need to be who God wants us to be. And in order for us to be who God wants us to be, we need new natures. And because we cannot change our own nature, no more than we can push a bus while we are riding in it, we are in need of the sovereign hand of grace to change it for us. We cannot do what pleases God because we will not do what pleases God. And the reason we will not is because we don’t want to.
http://thirdmill.org/files/english/html/th/TH.h.Tchividjian.Edwards%20and%20Free%20Will.html
God appointed him as a prophet just as the text describes it. Think also of Jonah and Saul (Paul). All appointed or elected by God for His purpose.
Yet the subject of free will is a complex idea. We are born captive to sin. Only through the regenerating activity of the Holy Spirt are we set free from that captivity. "Free will" needs to have a definitive concept established before that question could be considered. I lean on Jonathon Edwards' definition in my understanding of free will.
A quote:
The Freedom of the Will
A glancing at the title might lead some to think that Edwards and Luther differed. This is not so, essentially. The title illustrates Edwards’ thesis that we are free to choose that which we most desire. The truth, though, according to Edwards, is that because by nature we are dead in our trespasses and sins, we desire only sin. Our natural inclination is not toward righteousness, but toward sin. All mankind, according to Edwards, are “by nature in a state of total ruin, both with respect to the moral evil of which they are the subjects, and the afflictive evil to which they are exposed, the one as the consequence and punishment of the other”.
According to Edwards, proof of original sin is easily demonstrated. Aside from the supernatural biblical proof found in Romans 1, 3, 5 and Ephesians 2, there is plenty of natural proof as well: All people sin! All of human history testifies to this. And we have more proof today, following two World Wars and one Cold War, than Edwards had in his day. Because we are free to choose that which we most desire, and because what we most desire is to destroy ourselves, it is our freedom that turns out to be our greatest enemy.
Edwards defines the will as “the mind choosing”. This is unique for the simple reason that up until this point, nobody had bothered to refine a careful definition of the will. Everyone assumed that “will” was self-defining. Our choices, according to Edwards, are not determined by the will itself but by the mind. Our choices are determined by what we think is most desirable at any given moment. But why does the mind choose one thing over another? This is where Edwards introduces the idea of “motives”. We choose one thing over another because our mind chooses what it thinks is best. John Gerstner sums up Edwards’ point well:
Your choices as a rational person are always based on various considerations or motives that are before you at the time. Those motives have a certain weight with you, and the motives for and against reading a book, for example, are weighed in the balance of your mind; the motives that outweigh all others are what you, indeed, choose to follow. You, being a rational person, will always choose what seems to you to be the right thing, the wise thing, the most advisable thing to do. If you choose not to do the right thing, the advisable thing, the thing that you are inclined to do, you would, of coarse, be insane. You would be choosing something that you did not choose. You would find something preferable that you did not prefer. But you, being a rational and sane person choose something because it seems to you the right, proper, good, advantageous thing to do.
This is precisely the point that Edwards makes with regard to motives. We choose according to that which we desire most. The problem, however, as we noted earlier, is that because the fall was total and not partial, and as a result we are all dead in our trespasses and sins desiring only sin by nature, what seems to us to be right, proper, and good is often wrong, improper, and bad. Sin has made us God-haters at the core of our souls so that we are all by nature at enmity with God. In order for us to do what God would have us to do, we need to be who God wants us to be. And in order for us to be who God wants us to be, we need new natures. And because we cannot change our own nature, no more than we can push a bus while we are riding in it, we are in need of the sovereign hand of grace to change it for us. We cannot do what pleases God because we will not do what pleases God. And the reason we will not is because we don’t want to.
http://thirdmill.org/files/english/html/th/TH.h.Tchividjian.Edwards%20and%20Free%20Will.html
This is my two cents, from what I've learned over the years. Do what you will wth it...
Whenever God speaks of the elect He is speaking of the elect "corporately" and never "individually". Predestination is referring to the church as a whole. He has predestined "us" as a church to conform to the likeness of Christ Eph 1:5....BUT one must believe and come to faith FIRST, before they are a part of "the church". - ATP
Whenever God speaks of the elect He is speaking of the elect "corporately" and never "individually". Predestination is referring to the church as a whole. He has predestined "us" as a church to conform to the likeness of Christ Eph 1:5....BUT one must believe and come to faith FIRST, before they are a part of "the church". - ATP
Guess you either didn't read Romans 8 or you just don't agree with Paul, so which is it?justaname said:
ATP said:
It is best one understands what elect actually means before one tries to define it.
Predestination refers to those are already saved. We are predestined to be conformed to the image of his son just as Romans 8 says.
opcorn:The question asked by the OP was whether Jeremiah had free will to deny his calling.justaname said:
Stan asks you for a better interpretation of Romans 8 than his, dealing with free will. I don't see how you providing your interpretation as it applies to free will would be off topic.
Perhaps there is some other reason why you are reluctant?
You may have already been through this, but I've been out with pnuemonia for several weeks. I'm trying to get caught up, here.
Yeh, what she said....welcome back Barrd. Was concerned that you stopped posting so quickly. Glad to see you're back to healthy....I assume?The Barrd said:
Well... it goes without saying that you should know better, but I think that's just an excuse.justaname said:
I spent some time in the hospital, Stan...it was touch and go there for a bit. Did I ever tell you that I have COPD? I was never a heavy smoker, and I quit long ago...but second hand smoke is a mean thing. The doc told my youngest son that he didn't expect me to recover. My boy was devastated.StanJ said:
But God had other ideas.
I'm not quite back at the top of my form, just yet...but I'm getting better. And I am praising God for every new day He gives me.
Friends and family are praying for me.,,,
Similar threads
