Saved By Fear?

[Stranger]

I didn't think we were discussing will. Of course our will is different from God's will --- we agree on this. What we don't agree on is whether or not the will is free.

2 Thess. 2:13 says that God chose us from the beginning FOR SALVATION THROUGH SANCTIFICATION, by the Spirit and faith in the truth.
Calvinists make this mistake often because they come to scripture with preconceived ideas. God DID provide for salvation from the beginning, Genesis 3:15...He CHOSE the method by which we would be saved, NOT WHO would be saved. God is not a respecter of persons, He has no partiality.
Romans 2:11 If God chose WHO would be saved, He would have to be a partial God. He chooses the method, not the person.
2 Timothy 4:7 Paul says he has fought the good fight, he has finished the course, he has KEPT THE FAITH. HE kept the faith. He willed, in his free will, to keep the faith.

Another poster did not accept
Philemon verse 14...Paul clearly speaks of free will. How do YOU understand that verse?
New American Standard Bible
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.

Of course God is sovereign and has control over everything. The question becomes does He WANT to have total control over everything? Does He WANT to force us to love Him or would He rather it be freely given?

As to Romans 9:20-22
20On the contrary, who are you, O man, who answers back to God? The thing molded will not say to the molder, “Why did you make me like this,” will it? 21Or does not the potter have a right over the clay, to make from the same lump one vessel for honorable use and another for common use?22What if God, although willing to demonstrate His wrath and to make His power known, endured with much patience vessels of wrath prepared for destruction?

There's much to be said here. I don't even have the time right now.
I'm sure you're intelligent enough to know that Romans 9 was written about Israel and not about personal salvation...so why post verses from it as if it were?
Paul was speaking to believers in Rome but divided his discourse into two types of believers, Jew and Gentile. He divedes these two and explains the plan of God to them. This takes place from Romans 9:1 to Romans 11:36. The explanation of Romans in any bible version will explain this.

This is also true of those born in the O.T. times.
What Paul is speaking about here goes back to
Jeremiah 18:3-6
3Then I went down to the potter’s house, and there he was, making something on the wheel. 4But the vessel that he was making of clay was spoiled in the hand of the potter; so he remade it into another vessel, as it pleased the potter to make.

5Then the word of the LORD came to me saying, 6“Can I not, O house of Israel, deal with you as this potter does?” declares the LORD. “Behold, like the clay in the potter’s hand, so are you in My hand, O house of Israel.

Paul is speaking about Israel in Romans 9:20-22
Paul is asking a question here. What if God...?
Man always finds fault with God...
God has used the Jews as He will, to be the bearers of the Good News as He had promised to Abraham,,,but the message can no longer come from the Jews.
He will make new vessels of honor, the Gentiles, so that God's revelation can go forward. But He will wait with longsuffering for the Jews to once again become vessels of honor...as in 2 Peter 3:9
9The Lord is not slow about His promise, as some count slowness, but is patient toward you, not wishing for any to perish but for all to come to repentance.

God desires both the Jews and the Gentiles to be saved, and He will bring this about. He desires ALL to be saved.

Well, does God have free will? Is His will free?

Choice involves a will. Again, you have no definition for will. Your definition is always for free will. If someone has a will then they have free will, you say. Give the definitions for will and for free will.

You say God chose the 'method' of salvation but didn't choose the 'who' of salvation. Yet that is what (2 Thess. 2:13) says. "...brethren beloved of the Lord, because God hath from the beginning chosen you to salvation....." God definitely chose the believers. And it would be through the process of the work of the Spirit and faith that they came into this salvation. (2 Thess. 2:13) "...through sanctification of the Spirit and belief of the truth." God chose first. The Holy Spirit then worked upon the spirit of those chosen. They respond in faith. God not only chose the method of salvation, but He chose those who would be saved.

Concerning (Philemon 14), "But without thy mind would I do nothing; that thy benefit should not be as it were of necessity, but willingly." Paul is saying he wants Philemon to allow Onesimus to continue in the service of the Lord, willingly, as opposed to necessity. What would 'of necessity' mean? It means Philemon would really have no choice but agrees. Paul wants him to be of a willing mind. That is a picture of the will. Not free will. Paul wants Philemon to be willing and then adds, how important Onesimus is to him. (16) Paul wants Philemon to receive Onesimus as himself. (17) Paul wants any wrongs done by Onesimus against Philemon, to be put on Paul's account. (18) Paul promises to repay any wrong Onesimus may have done to Philemon, but then reminds Philemon how much he owes Paul. (19) All of these things Paul brings up to Philemon weigh upon Philemon's will. His will is not free. It is just his will. And Paul wants his will in this matter.

Concerning (Rom. 9:20-22), God is speaking of Israel. But He is speaking of the elect of Israel. And He is speaking of the elect being the 'children of promise'. A promise that goes back to Abrahams faith concerning Isaac, the child of promise. Chosen and named before he was born. Paul then connects that promise to the Gentiles of the Church age. (9:24) And Paul later clearly identifies we believers today as children of promise. (Gal. 4:28) So, you see then that (Rom. 9:19-24) speaks to the elect whether in Israel or the Church.

God has provided salvation whereby Jews and Gentiles will be saved. The invitation is to all, and provision has been made for all. But all will not be saved. Why? Because they reject that salvation. Why? Because God does not open their eyes to it. Why? Because they are not of God and will never be of God.

And how did you come to the Saviour? On your own? You figured it out. You saw logically that it was the thing to do? Did God open your eyes, or did you just come on your own accord?

Stranger

 

[Dcopymope]

and they all come out of teh woodwork like flies to a kill.

Christ is not beneath me and teh bible is not above Him as you so put it,

Never said it was above him. The Bible from start to finish is HIS testimony, and that testimony is not beneath you.

 

[GodsGrace]

Well, does God have free will? Is His will free?

Choice involves a will. Again, you have no definition for will. Your definition is always for free will. If someone has a will then they have free will, you say. Give the definitions for will and for free will.

You say God chose the 'method' of salvation but didn't choose the 'who' of salvation. Yet that is what (2 Thess. 2:13) says. "...brethren beloved of the Lord, because God hath from the beginning chosen you to salvation....." God definitely chose the believers. And it would be through the process of the work of the Spirit and faith that they came into this salvation. (2 Thess. 2:13) "...through sanctification of the Spirit and belief of the truth." God chose first. The Holy Spirit then worked upon the spirit of those chosen. They respond in faith. God not only chose the method of salvation, but He chose those who would be saved.

Concerning (Philemon 14), "But without thy mind would I do nothing; that thy benefit should not be as it were of necessity, but willingly." Paul is saying he wants Philemon to allow Onesimus to continue in the service of the Lord, willingly, as opposed to necessity. What would 'of necessity' mean? It means Philemon would really have no choice but agrees. Paul wants him to be of a willing mind. That is a picture of the will. Not free will. Paul wants Philemon to be willing and then adds, how important Onesimus is to him. (16) Paul wants Philemon to receive Onesimus as himself. (17) Paul wants any wrongs done by Onesimus against Philemon, to be put on Paul's account. (18) Paul promises to repay any wrong Onesimus may have done to Philemon, but then reminds Philemon how much he owes Paul. (19) All of these things Paul brings up to Philemon weigh upon Philemon's will. His will is not free. It is just his will. And Paul wants his will in this matter.

Concerning (Rom. 9:20-22), God is speaking of Israel. But He is speaking of the elect of Israel. And He is speaking of the elect being the 'children of promise'. A promise that goes back to Abrahams faith concerning Isaac, the child of promise. Chosen and named before he was born. Paul then connects that promise to the Gentiles of the Church age. (9:24) And Paul later clearly identifies we believers today as children of promise. (Gal. 4:28) So, you see then that (Rom. 9:19-24) speaks to the elect whether in Israel or the Church.

God has provided salvation whereby Jews and Gentiles will be saved. The invitation is to all, and provision has been made for all. But all will not be saved. Why? Because they reject that salvation. Why? Because God does not open their eyes to it. Why? Because they are not of God and will never be of God.

And how did you come to the Saviour? On your own? You figured it out. You saw logically that it was the thing to do? Did God open your eyes, or did you just come on your own accord?

Stranger

Maybe the Westminster Confession of the Reformed Presbyterian Church will help...

Chapter 9 - Of Free Will.
Section 1.) God hath endued the will of man with that natural liberty, that it is neither forced, nor by any absolute necessity of nature determined, to good or evil.(1)
(1) Mt 17:12; Jas 1:14; Dt 30:19.
------------------------------------
Section 2.) Man, in his state of innocency, had freedom and power to will and to do that which was good and well-pleasing to God;(1) but yet, mutably, so that he might fall from it.(2)
(1) Ecclesiastes 7:29; Ge 1:26. (2) Ge 2:16,17; Ge 3:6.
------------------------------------
Section 3.) Man, by his fall into a state of sin, hath wholly lost all ability of will to any spiritual good accompanying salvation;(1) so as, a natural man, being altogether averse from that good,(2) and dead in sin,(3) is not able, by his own strength, to convert himself, or to prepare himself thereunto.(4)
(1) Ro 5:6; Ro 8:7; Jn 15:5. (2) Ro 3:10,12. (3) Eph 2:1,5; Col 2:13. (4) Jn 6:44,65; Eph 2:2,3,4,5; 1Co 2:14; Tit 3:3,4,5.
------------------------------------
Section 4.) When God converts a sinner, and translates him into the state of grace, He freeth him from his natural bondage under sin,(1) and by His grace alone, enables him freely to will and to do that which is spiritually good;(2) yet so as that, by reason of his remaining corruption, he doth not perfectly nor only will that which is good, but doth also will that which is evil.(3)
(1) Col 1:13; Jn 8:34,36. (2) Php 2:13; Ro 6:18,22. (3) Gal 5:17; Ro 7:15,18,19,21,23.
------------------------------------
Section 5.) The will of man is made perfectly and immutably free to do good alone in the state of glory only.

 

[OzSpen]

John 10:30…

A close translation of the expression under study here would be ‘I’m much like my Father and we work together’ as in internal and external characteristics and goals… my thoughts (as I also listen to my Father and know was he wants, pretty much and I do it), and even the inflections, voice, words and mannerisms and facial expressions.

Nice invention, but it's not what the text states in Greek, in context and throughout the NT.

 

[OzSpen]

Gooday again,

Well this is not so straight forward of a question..can be tough to lay down in words
The spirit works in my spirit nature, of Christ, my carnal nature is not always wanting to compy

Gooday again...
When I want to understand a new scripture or the context of a passage of scripture, I speak to the spirit of Christ and truth within my heart.

Since I can usually control my carnal will by my spirit (will) I allow the spirit of Christ to work within me. It works with and in my mind. We are commanded as believers to study scripture diligently, with care and patience. We also need to be in the right mind and setting!

The spirit works in my carnal mind and uses good old logic and reasoning, original language meaning etc, to interpret scripture in the way the spirit wants the outcome, not the outcome that originates from my own selfish theories or my own religious convictions.

This spirit work and outcome can take a second, to many years. I cannot control when I get the ‘light bulb’ effect. Meantime, because I sometimes lack patience, I fall back into my carnal mind and spurt out a near correct answer that is basically useless.

Yes, the spirit actually corrects the context and meaning if I’m willing to listen and be patient. I’m still waiting today on answers to many areas of scripture I cannot completely grasp today.

So, any sudden insights by me or another does not necessarily mean that it is spirit of Christ and Truth sanctioned.

So, when you see an issue believing someone who claims that the spirit is guiding them and their conclusion clearly shows contradictions for whatever reason or area- grammar, historical perspective etc, you know to take it with a grain of salt.

If you are a mature believer, you will tell something is or can be genuine or not. At least you will check it out through prayer and due diligence on your part.

Bless you,

APAK

That sounds awfully subjective to me.

 

[APAK]

That sounds awfully subjective to me.

Copy that...

 

[Stranger]

Maybe the Westminster Confession of the Reformed Presbyterian Church will help...

Chapter 9 - Of Free Will.
Section 1.) God hath endued the will of man with that natural liberty, that it is neither forced, nor by any absolute necessity of nature determined, to good or evil.(1)
(1) Mt 17:12; Jas 1:14; Dt 30:19.
------------------------------------
Section 2.) Man, in his state of innocency, had freedom and power to will and to do that which was good and well-pleasing to God;(1) but yet, mutably, so that he might fall from it.(2)
(1) Ecclesiastes 7:29; Ge 1:26. (2) Ge 2:16,17; Ge 3:6.
------------------------------------
Section 3.) Man, by his fall into a state of sin, hath wholly lost all ability of will to any spiritual good accompanying salvation;(1) so as, a natural man, being altogether averse from that good,(2) and dead in sin,(3) is not able, by his own strength, to convert himself, or to prepare himself thereunto.(4)
(1) Ro 5:6; Ro 8:7; Jn 15:5. (2) Ro 3:10,12. (3) Eph 2:1,5; Col 2:13. (4) Jn 6:44,65; Eph 2:2,3,4,5; 1Co 2:14; Tit 3:3,4,5.
------------------------------------
Section 4.) When God converts a sinner, and translates him into the state of grace, He freeth him from his natural bondage under sin,(1) and by His grace alone, enables him freely to will and to do that which is spiritually good;(2) yet so as that, by reason of his remaining corruption, he doth not perfectly nor only will that which is good, but doth also will that which is evil.(3)
(1) Col 1:13; Jn 8:34,36. (2) Php 2:13; Ro 6:18,22. (3) Gal 5:17; Ro 7:15,18,19,21,23.
------------------------------------
Section 5.) The will of man is made perfectly and immutably free to do good alone in the state of glory only.

Why should it help? Seems it is in disagreement with you.

Do you look for others who are in agreement with you? Or do you try and discern the Word of God?

Stranger

 

[OzSpen]

Copy that...

 

[Jun2u]

Did Adam and Eve, although spiritually dead, respond to God using their free will?

Whether Adam and Eve could respond to God is irrelevant. There is no Scripture that states as to the timing when they became spiritually dead, before or after they were banished from the Garden. The nature of this thread is does man have a free will to choose for God as a fallen man?

For instance, here comes God and starts to make a dialogue with unsaved Oz (just an example don’t go crazy on me). Can Oz have the ability to correspond with God? Most certainly. Oz is an intelligent person just like Adam because Adam was created as an adult and not as a child. In fact, Adam was created “good” and full of wisdom, that he did not need God’s guidance to name every animal in the garden.

As Adam had a free will history tells us he chose to rebel. Who had the greater sin, Adam or Eve? Most people would probably choose Eve but I say it is Adam who had the greater sin because he ate knowing it was a sin whilst Eve was enticed by the serpent.

I apologize for choosing you as my example, I was thinking perhaps it might give you an awakening.

To God Be The Glory

 

[OzSpen]

Whether Adam and Eve could respond to God is irrelevant. There is no Scripture that states as to the timing when they became spiritually dead, before or after they were banished from the Garden. The nature of this thread is does man have a free will to choose for God as a fallen man?

Jun,

Not so! We are told exactly when Adam & Eve became spiritually dead:

15The Lord God took the man and put him in the Garden of Eden to work it and take care of it. 16And the Lord God commanded the man, “You are free to eat from any tree in the garden; 17but you must not eat from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, for when you eat from it you will certainly die" (Gen 2:15-17 NIV).​

The day that they ate from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil in the garden, they certainly died spiritually. It could not have been physical death for them on that day because they didn't drop dead immediately.

Eating led to spiritual death.

Oz

 

[Dcopymope]

Whether Adam and Eve could respond to God is irrelevant. There is no Scripture that states as to the timing when they became spiritually dead, before or after they were banished from the Garden. The nature of this thread is does man have a free will to choose for God as a fallen man?

For instance, here comes God and starts to make a dialogue with unsaved Oz (just an example don’t go crazy on me). Can Oz have the ability to correspond with God? Most certainly. Oz is an intelligent person just like Adam because Adam was created as an adult and not as a child. In fact, Adam was created “good” and full of wisdom, that he did not need God’s guidance to name every animal in the garden.

As Adam had a free will history tells us he chose to rebel. Who had the greater sin, Adam or Eve? Most people would probably choose Eve but I say it is Adam who had the greater sin because he ate knowing it was a sin whilst Eve was enticed by the serpent.

I apologize for choosing you as my example, I was thinking perhaps it might give you an awakening.

To God Be The Glory

I don't even think it matters if Adam knew it was a sin or not. He may not have been enticed by the serpent, but he was certainly enticed by Eve. Both were enticed when it comes down to it no matter how you want to look at it.

Jun,

Not so! We are told exactly when Adam & Eve became spiritually dead:

15The Lord God took the man and put him in the Garden of Eden to work it and take care of it. 16And the Lord God commanded the man, “You are free to eat from any tree in the garden; 17but you must not eat from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, for when you eat from it you will certainly die" (Gen 2:15-17 NIV).​

The day that they ate from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil in the garden, they certainly died spiritually. It could not have been physical death for them on that day because they didn't drop dead immediately.

Eating led to spiritual death.

Oz

Interesting observation, although this is still like going out of the way only to lead to the same conclusion, which is death. Saying its referring to spiritual death doesn't really change anything.

 

[OzSpen]

Interesting observation, although this is still like going out of the way only to lead to the same conclusion, which is death. Saying its referring to spiritual death doesn't really change anything.

Dc,

I'm not going out of my way. I'm making a reference to verses in Genesis 2:15-17 (NIV) that say specifically that Adam and Eve did not suffer physical death when they sinned. They didn't drop dead when they ate. If it wasn't physical - as it wasn't - it has to be spiritual death.

If there is no 'healing' of the spiritual death problem through Jesus' salvation, there are eternal consequences.

Saying that it refers to spiritual deal changes EVERYTHING because there is no point in Christ's death and resurrection if it were required only to deal with physical death (see 1 Cor 15:20-22).

Oz

 

[GodsGrace]

I don't even think it matters if Adam knew it was a sin or not. He may not have been enticed by the serpent, but he was certainly enticed by Eve. Both were enticed when it comes down to it no matter how you want to look at it.

Interesting observation, although this is still like going out of the way only to lead to the same conclusion, which is death. Saying its referring to spiritual death doesn't really change anything.

Hi D
Two things,,,
First, the death was spiritual. They didn't die when they ate the fruit. They still were alive, so the death had to be spiritual even if it didn't specifically say it in so many words.

Adam and Eve are the opposite of us.
We're born spiritually dead and become alive at salvation.
They were born spiritually alive and became dead.

Second, Adam was responsible for the fall as is stated in Romans 5:12, because HE made the covenant with God, not Eve. (The Edenic covenant)

 

[GodsGrace]

Why should it help? Seems it is in disagreement with you.

Do you look for others who are in agreement with you? Or do you try and discern the Word of God?

Stranger

Stranger, I know the Westminster Confession doesn't agree with me. It's reformed for goodness sake!

It sounds to me to be somewhat confusing and not very clear. Look at this:
Chapter 10.

Of Effectual Calling.
I. All those whom God hath predestinated unto life, and those only, he is pleased, in his appointed and accepted time, effectually to call, by his Word and Spirit, out of that state of sin and death in which they are by nature, to grace and salvation by Jesus Christ: enlightening their minds, spiritually and savingly, to understand the things of God, taking away their heart of stone, and giving unto them an heart of flesh; renewing their wills, and by his almighty power determining them to that which is good; and effectually drawing them to Jesus Christ; yet so as they come most freely, being made willing by his grace. (?????)

II. This effectual call is of God's free and special grace alone, not from any thing at all foreseen in man, who is altogether passive therein, until, being quickened and renewed by the Holy Spirit, he is thereby enabled to answer this call, and to embrace the grace offered and conveyed in it.

III. Elect infants, dying in infancy, are regenerated and saved by Christ through the Spirit, who worketh when, and where, and how he pleaseth. So also are all other elect persons who are incapable of being outwardly called by the ministry of the Word. (too bad for infants who are not elected. They go straight to hell)

IV. Others, not elected, although they may be called by the ministry of the Word, and may have some common operations of the Spirit, (I thought they were totally depraved)yet they never truly come to Christ, and therefore can not be saved: much less can men, not professing the Christian religion, be saved in any other way whatsoever, be they never so diligent to frame their lives according to the light of nature, and the law of that religion they do profess; and to assert and maintain that they may is without warrant of the Word of God.


So how does the above match up with John 3:16 or
2 Timothy 2:11-12
2 John 1:9
1 John 4:15
1 John 5:13
1 John 3:3
2 Peter 3:9
Hebrews 12:25
1 Timothy 4:10
Romans 10:13

and sooooo many more.

 

[twinc]

Stranger, I know the Westminster Confession doesn't agree with me. It's reformed for goodness sake!

It sounds to me to be somewhat confusing and not very clear. Look at this:
Chapter 10.

Of Effectual Calling.
I. All those whom God hath predestinated unto life, and those only, he is pleased, in his appointed and accepted time, effectually to call, by his Word and Spirit, out of that state of sin and death in which they are by nature, to grace and salvation by Jesus Christ: enlightening their minds, spiritually and savingly, to understand the things of God, taking away their heart of stone, and giving unto them an heart of flesh; renewing their wills, and by his almighty power determining them to that which is good; and effectually drawing them to Jesus Christ; yet so as they come most freely, being made willing by his grace. (?????)

II. This effectual call is of God's free and special grace alone, not from any thing at all foreseen in man, who is altogether passive therein, until, being quickened and renewed by the Holy Spirit, he is thereby enabled to answer this call, and to embrace the grace offered and conveyed in it.

III. Elect infants, dying in infancy, are regenerated and saved by Christ through the Spirit, who worketh when, and where, and how he pleaseth. So also are all other elect persons who are incapable of being outwardly called by the ministry of the Word. (too bad for infants who are not elected. They go straight to hell)

IV. Others, not elected, although they may be called by the ministry of the Word, and may have some common operations of the Spirit, (I thought they were totally depraved)yet they never truly come to Christ, and therefore can not be saved: much less can men, not professing the Christian religion, be saved in any other way whatsoever, be they never so diligent to frame their lives according to the light of nature, and the law of that religion they do profess; and to assert and maintain that they may is without warrant of the Word of God.


So how does the above match up with John 3:16 or
2 Timothy 2:11-12
2 John 1:9
1 John 4:15
1 John 5:13
1 John 3:3
2 Peter 3:9
Hebrews 12:25
1 Timothy 4:10
Romans 10:13

and sooooo many more.

it matches with Christ saying 'I have come not to judge the world but to save it' and 'I have come to the lost sheep and to call not the just but sinners to repentance imho - twinc

 

[GodsGrace]

it matches with Christ saying 'I have come not to judge the world but to save it' and 'I have come to the lost sheep and to call not the just but sinners to repentance imho - twinc

It doesn't sound like that at all !
Are you also a calvanist?

 

[Stranger]

Stranger, I know the Westminster Confession doesn't agree with me. It's reformed for goodness sake!

It sounds to me to be somewhat confusing and not very clear. Look at this:
Chapter 10.

Of Effectual Calling.
I. All those whom God hath predestinated unto life, and those only, he is pleased, in his appointed and accepted time, effectually to call, by his Word and Spirit, out of that state of sin and death in which they are by nature, to grace and salvation by Jesus Christ: enlightening their minds, spiritually and savingly, to understand the things of God, taking away their heart of stone, and giving unto them an heart of flesh; renewing their wills, and by his almighty power determining them to that which is good; and effectually drawing them to Jesus Christ; yet so as they come most freely, being made willing by his grace. (?????)

II. This effectual call is of God's free and special grace alone, not from any thing at all foreseen in man, who is altogether passive therein, until, being quickened and renewed by the Holy Spirit, he is thereby enabled to answer this call, and to embrace the grace offered and conveyed in it.

III. Elect infants, dying in infancy, are regenerated and saved by Christ through the Spirit, who worketh when, and where, and how he pleaseth. So also are all other elect persons who are incapable of being outwardly called by the ministry of the Word. (too bad for infants who are not elected. They go straight to hell)

IV. Others, not elected, although they may be called by the ministry of the Word, and may have some common operations of the Spirit, (I thought they were totally depraved)yet they never truly come to Christ, and therefore can not be saved: much less can men, not professing the Christian religion, be saved in any other way whatsoever, be they never so diligent to frame their lives according to the light of nature, and the law of that religion they do profess; and to assert and maintain that they may is without warrant of the Word of God.


So how does the above match up with John 3:16 or
2 Timothy 2:11-12
2 John 1:9
1 John 4:15
1 John 5:13
1 John 3:3
2 Peter 3:9
Hebrews 12:25
1 Timothy 4:10
Romans 10:13

and sooooo many more.

Sorry, I don't understand. You said maybe this will help and gave the Westminster Confession. I could not see how it would help you. Thus I questioned it. Now you say, it is confusing and not very clear. Well, why did you present it?

I am not going to try and defend the Westminster Confession or Calvinism for that matter. I am talking about what I understand in the Scripture.

Perhaps you should go back to my post #441 and just answer that.

Stranger

 

[GodsGrace]

Well, does God have free will? Is His will free?

Choice involves a will. Again, you have no definition for will. Your definition is always for free will. If someone has a will then they have free will, you say. Give the definitions for will and for free will.

I've done this Stranger. You just don't accept it.
To will is to want or to desire. The question is: Is it free? You say only God's will is free and ours is not. To me this is important because 3 theories of calvin depend on our NOT having free will and this is just not true, because we do will and our will is free to choose.
Total Depravity takes away our free will
Uncondition Election takes away our free will
Irresistible grace takes away our free will

So, as you can see, calvinism removes free will from man.
I assert that WE DO HAVE free will, thus disproving calvinism.

You say we cannot have free will because of outside influences. Right. We have outside influences. God can influence us and satan could influence us. We can still choose whom to obey.



WILL
noun
1.
the faculty of conscious and especially ofdeliberate action; the power of control themind has over its own actions:
the freedom of the will.
2.
power of choosing one's own actions:
to have a strong or a weak will.
3.
the act or process of using or asserting one'schoice; volition:
My hands are obedient to my will.
4.
wish or desire:
to submit against one's will.
5.
purpose or determination, often hearty orstubborn determination; willfulness:
to have the will to succeed.
6.
the wish or purpose as carried out, or to becarried out:
to work one's will.
7.
disposition, whether good or ill, towardanother.
verb (used with object), willed, willing.
9.
to decide, bring about, or attempt to effect orbring about by an act of the will:
He can walk if he wills it.
10.
to purpose, determine on, or elect, by an act ofwill:
If he wills success, he can find it.
11.
to give or dispose of (property) by a will ortestament; bequeath or devise.
12.
to influence by exerting control over someone'simpulses and actions:
She was willed to walk the tightrope by thehypnotist.
verb (used without object), willed,willing.
13.
to exercise the will:
To will is not enough, one must do.
14.
to decide or determine:
Others debate, but the king wills.
Idioms
15.
at will,

1. at one's discretion or pleasure; as onedesires:
   to wander at will through the countryside.
2. at one's disposal or command.

I've said that only God can do some of the above. WE cannot will to fly.
But, as shown, to will also brings choice with it.
We can stop speaking to this...
Do you believe man is totally depraved, or do you believe man is in a fallen state but has the capability to hear the words of God naturally?

You say God chose the 'method' of salvation but didn't choose the 'who' of salvation. Yet that is what (2 Thess. 2:13) says. "...brethren beloved of the Lord, because God hath from the beginning chosen you to salvation....." God definitely chose the believers. And it would be through the process of the work of the Spirit and faith that they came into this salvation. (2 Thess. 2:13) "...through sanctification of the Spirit and belief of the truth." God chose first. The Holy Spirit then worked upon the spirit of those chosen. They respond in faith. God not only chose the method of salvation, but He chose those who would be saved.

2 Thessalonians 2:13 is speaking to a method. You, believing that God chooses whom He will save, see every scripture unclearly. I'm sorry to say that, but here's what must be decided.
WHAT IS THE NATURE OF GOD?
DOES GOD FOREKNOWING CAUSE THE ACTION?
I believe God is a God of love and gives everyone the chance to be saved.
I've given many verses, they will do us no service.
I believe God is a God of justice. How is He a just God if HE decides who will go to hell based on NOTHING?

Just because God is omniscient, does this mean He CAUSES things to happen?
I believe it DOES NOT. God knows everything that is going to happen. He sees throughout time. He knows what one will choose. This DOES NOT force that person to choose. The choice still belongs to the person. God only KNOWS what the person will choose.

Throughout the OT and the NT it is apparent that we have the choice to serve God or not to serve Him, to choose Him or not to choose Him.
John 3:16 covers it all.

Concerning (Philemon 14), "But without thy mind would I do nothing; that thy benefit should not be as it were of necessity, but willingly." Paul is saying he wants Philemon to allow Onesimus to continue in the service of the Lord, willingly, as opposed to necessity. What would 'of necessity' mean? It means Philemon would really have no choice but agrees. Paul wants him to be of a willing mind. That is a picture of the will. Not free will. Paul wants Philemon to be willing and then adds, how important Onesimus is to him. (16) Paul wants Philemon to receive Onesimus as himself. (17) Paul wants any wrongs done by Onesimus against Philemon, to be put on Paul's account. (18) Paul promises to repay any wrong Onesimus may have done to Philemon, but then reminds Philemon how much he owes Paul. (19) All of these things Paul brings up to Philemon weigh upon Philemon's will. His will is not free. It is just his will. And Paul wants his will in this matter.

Paul is asking P a favor. He says in verse 8 that he could have ordered P, commanded him to take back O, because he became a "child" of Paul.
But Paul is not commanding P because he wants P to do a good deed WILLINGLY, that is, P has to be willing to do this good deed. If I'm willing to do a favor for you, it means I also could have chosen NOT to do the favor for you. I am WILLING to do it.

You see Stranger, English lessons only become necessary when we don't understand scripture correctly. If we just read what is plainly written, English lessons or discussion I should say, are not necessary because the work of God is simple to understand until someone (J Calvin and others) twist the words around and then all these discussions become necessary.

Concerning (Rom. 9:20-22), God is speaking of Israel. But He is speaking of the elect of Israel. And He is speaking of the elect being the 'children of promise'. A promise that goes back to Abrahams faith concerning Isaac, the child of promise. Chosen and named before he was born. Paul then connects that promise to the Gentiles of the Church age. (9:24) And Paul later clearly identifies we believers today as children of promise. (Gal. 4:28) So, you see then that (Rom. 9:19-24) speaks to the elect whether in Israel or the Church.

No. God KNEW Esau would not serve Israel. God acted accordingly to serve His own purpose. He did not cause Esau to reject his calling to be the leader, God KNEW beforehand that Esau would do this and so He said the older will serve the younger.

God has provided salvation whereby Jews and Gentiles will be saved. The invitation is to all, and provision has been made for all. But all will not be saved. Why? Because they reject that salvation. Why? Because God does not open their eyes to it. Why? Because they are not of God and will never be of God.

God does not purposefully open someone's eyes?
John 3:16 WHOEVER BELIEVES WILL BE SAVED.
What a mean God you serve!!

And how did you come to the Saviour? On your own? You figured it out. You saw logically that it was the thing to do? Did God open your eyes, or did you just come on your own accord?

Stranger

God lets Himself be known to all. Again Romans 1:19-20
From the beginning of time God has revealed Himself to man. ALL MEN. There is no partiality with God. Romans 2:11

It's up to each man to decide if he will follow God or if he will follow satan.
Romans 5:1 We are justified by OUR faith.

 

[Dcopymope]

Hi D
Two things,,,
First, the death was spiritual. They didn't die when they ate the fruit. They still were alive, so the death had to be spiritual even if it didn't specifically say it in so many words.

Adam and Eve are the opposite of us.
We're born spiritually dead and become alive at salvation.
They were born spiritually alive and became dead.

Now that I really think about it, I don't see why it would have to say "spiritual death" since the "spiritual death" isn't technically supposed to occur until the "second death" in the very end, where both the body and the spirit will be destroyed.

(Matthew 10:28) "And fear not them which kill the body, but are not able to kill the soul: but rather fear him which is able to destroy both soul and body in hell."

But assuming they really became "spiritually dead" the moment they ate from the tree, if this is really the case, then all God would have to do to make them "alive" again is to grant them access to the tree of life. This isn't what happened of course, but if he did, then all would have been fine, would it not? Or is this assumption wrong as well, and the spirit in fact never actually dies until the time appointed for it to die per the scriptures for the wicked? These are some of the reasons why I don't believe God was referring to "spiritual death" at all, but strictly to the death of the flesh. The spirit that dies will be decided on judgement day.

 

[Stranger]

I've done this Stranger. You just don't accept it.
To will is to want or to desire. The question is: Is it free? You say only God's will is free and ours is not. To me this is important because 3 theories of calvin depend on our NOT having free will and this is just not true, because we do will and our will is free to choose.
Total Depravity takes away our free will
Uncondition Election takes away our free will
Irresistible grace takes away our free will

So, as you can see, calvinism removes free will from man.
I assert that WE DO HAVE free will, thus disproving calvinism.

You say we cannot have free will because of outside influences. Right. We have outside influences. God can influence us and satan could influence us. We can still choose whom to obey.

I've said that only God can do some of the above. WE cannot will to fly.
But, as shown, to will also brings choice with it.
We can stop speaking to this...
Do you believe man is totally depraved, or do you believe man is in a fallen state but has the capability to hear the words of God naturally?


2 Thessalonians 2:13 is speaking to a method. You, believing that God chooses whom He will save, see every scripture unclearly. I'm sorry to say that, but here's what must be decided.
WHAT IS THE NATURE OF GOD?
DOES GOD FOREKNOWING CAUSE THE ACTION?
I believe God is a God of love and gives everyone the chance to be saved.
I've given many verses, they will do us no service.
I believe God is a God of justice. How is He a just God if HE decides who will go to hell based on NOTHING?

Just because God is omniscient, does this mean He CAUSES things to happen?
I believe it DOES NOT. God knows everything that is going to happen. He sees throughout time. He knows what one will choose. This DOES NOT force that person to choose. The choice still belongs to the person. God only KNOWS what the person will choose.

Throughout the OT and the NT it is apparent that we have the choice to serve God or not to serve Him, to choose Him or not to choose Him.
John 3:16 covers it all.


Paul is asking P a favor. He says in verse 8 that he could have ordered P, commanded him to take back O, because he became a "child" of Paul.
But Paul is not commanding P because he wants P to do a good deed WILLINGLY, that is, P has to be willing to do this good deed. If I'm willing to do a favor for you, it means I also could have chosen NOT to do the favor for you. I am WILLING to do it.

You see Stranger, English lessons only become necessary when we don't understand scripture correctly. If we just read what is plainly written, English lessons or discussion I should say, are not necessary because the work of God is simple to understand until someone (J Calvin and others) twist the words around and then all these discussions become necessary.


No. God KNEW Esau would not serve Israel. God acted accordingly to serve His own purpose. He did not cause Esau to reject his calling to be the leader, God KNEW beforehand that Esau would do this and so He said the older will serve the younger.


God does not purposefully open someone's eyes?
John 3:16 WHOEVER BELIEVES WILL BE SAVED.
What a mean God you serve!!


God lets Himself be known to all. Again Romans 1:19-20
From the beginning of time God has revealed Himself to man. ALL MEN. There is no partiality with God. Romans 2:11

It's up to each man to decide if he will follow God or if he will follow satan.
Romans 5:1 We are justified by OUR faith.

You give a definition of 'will' but not 'free will'. You are simply telling me that mans will is free.

The distinction between God's will and ours is not just that He has the power to do as He wants. It is that nothing influences His will. He acts always in accordance to His will. That is 'free will'.

Concerning (2 Thess. 2:13), yes a method is being described. The method by which God chose you is described. Paul could have easily said, "God hath from the beginning saved you through sanctification of the Spirit and belief of the truth." But he didn't. He said, "God hath from the beginning chosen you to salvation through sanctification of the Spirit and belief of the truth:".

You say I see Scripture unclearly because I believe God chooses who will be saved. I don't deny we all have our bias's. But, I think I can say this is not true for me in this case concerning the doctrine of election. How do I know? As a youth I was never part of a denomination that held or taught election. My parents had no idea of it to teach it. I write all through my Bibles notes and thoughts I have. And I keep my old Bibles. (what else can you do with them?) Going back to the first Bible I had when I was a youthful youth, I have notes asking questions about 'God choosing' when I came across verses that indicated He did. I didn't have answers, but in my Bible reading I had the question.

So, concerning Jacob and Esau, (Rom. 9:11-13) is clear that God chose before Jacob or Esau did anything. (For the children being not yet born,neither having done any good or evil, that the purpose of God according to election might stand, not of works, but of him that calleth. You want to say God is choosing here because He looks into the future and knows Esau will reject Him. But, that is not 'the purpose of God according to election' that (Rom. 9:11) describes. Did God know Esau would reject Him? Of course He did. But God did not choose on that basis. To look ahead and see Esau reject Him and so He rejects Esau is to choose on the basis of Esau rejecting Him. God's choice however is based simply and only on 'him that calleth'. (Rom. 9:11)

Consider this. (2 Timothy 2:19) "Nevertheless the foundation of God standeth sure, having this seal, The Lord knoweth them that are his...." God knows who His people are before they are born. And it is for His glory and the glory of Jesus Christ, and His people that this whole working of creation and salvation is being worked out. Adam and Eve were two of God's people, His elect. When Adam fell, all of God's people who were to be born of Adam and Eve, went down in the fall. Due to the fall, something else is introduced...another seed line. Not of God. It is a seed line of the devil and the flesh. But, God knows those who are his...even though they may not know it till they come to Him in faith. Esau rejects God because of who he is. He is not of God. And God knows him. The elect, the people of God will believe God because of who they are. Not because God forced them. They simply need to be given what to believe. So, God's love, and longsuffering, and righteousness are involved in saving His people who went down in the fall. It is just that not all are His people. There is no unjustness in God in rejecting Esau, or not choosing Esau.

You say because I believe the doctrine of election that I serve a mean God. I assure you the God I serve, Who is the same as you serve, is full of love and longsuffering and righteousness.

So God did not open your eyes to see Christ and the need for salvation? How did you have eyes to see and ears to hear? If God doesn't do it, who can or will? See (Matt. 16:17) "...for flesh and blood hath not revealed it unto thee, but my Father which is in heaven."

Stranger