Can We Really Exercise Free Will?

[Cameron143]

Admittedly butting in. I think it's clear that @GWH does study Scripture and has for some time. I do and have as well. Though you don't seem to post and talk through much Scripture, it seems you also have been reading it for some time.

The issue with these traditions is that to deal with them we have to understand the arguments they're making. When we do, we also have a sense of when someone's conclusions are comparable to a system. Like you & "T" at minimum.

So, if your desired starting point is your own interpretation or if it's TULIP verses as a starting point to agree or disagree with, either works. When you begin laying out your interpretation from Scripture, in all likelihood we will encounter verses TULIP uses to substantiate their view.

This isn't that tough a process.

You are the one dealing in tradition. I'm trying to deal with doctrine. I have pleaded with you to discuss the Bible. Your only interest is Calvin.

 

[studier]

My beliefs have nothing to do with TULIP. You have characterized them as so, however. It's incumbent on you to then show my beliefs. As you don't know what I actually believe and why, you cannot do so. Yet you still use the pejorative TULIP, which I purposefully distance myself from for the reasons given. You are not actually interested in what the Bible teaches; only classifying people in groups. That way, rather than deal with what scripture teaches, you can divide people. This is very disingenuous in my opinion. If you want to know what Calvin taught, study Calvin. If you want to know what I believe, study the Bible.

You're a nut.

Didn't I say "If you want to lay out your understanding from the fall onward, please feel free"? Yes, I did.

Didn't you just say "If you want to understand my position, I'm glad to show it to you." Yes, you did.

OK, Cameron, please show me your position FROM your study of the Bible.

Let's you and I and anyone else who cares to learn Scripture see what Cameron teaches and how Cameron responds to agreement or disagreement using and discussing Scripture in context.

 

[Cameron143]

You're a nut.

Didn't I say "If you want to lay out your understanding from the fall onward, please feel free"? Yes, I did.

Didn't you just say "If you want to understand my position, I'm glad to show it to you." Yes, you did.

OK, Cameron, please show me your position FROM your study of the Bible.

Let's you and I and anyone else who cares to learn Scripture see what Cameron teaches and how Cameron responds to agreement or disagreement using and discussing Scripture in context.

I asked you a question already: what was true of man before the fall that wasn't true after the fall?

 

[Magenta]

I asked you a question already: what was true of man before the fall that wasn't true after the fall?

They have now switched from trash-talking Rufus to trash talking you.

Or probably switched is not the right word... they've just included you.

 

[Magenta]

I asked you a question already: what was true of man before the fall that wasn't true after the fall?

I have asked a similar question and do not believe I have ever gotten an answer when I asked if Adam was just as much in need of being born again as we are...

And of course it goes along with all of this to say how surprising it is when people claim that Adam was perfect .. when obviously he was not since he sinned. We are perfected in Christ.

 

[studier]

You are the one dealing in tradition. I'm trying to deal with doctrine. I have pleaded with you to discuss the Bible. Your only interest is Calvin.

Actually, I'm not dealing in tradition but with tradition.

Actually, again, I find Calvin and other traditions uninteresting and if not for their being pushed on these threads, I would not be looking at them again or any longer.

Actually, again, I walked away from all such studies of traditions decades ago.

Now, due to these threads, I find myself having purchased a book on the corporate view of election which I'm about halfway through and seems to mostly fit my current view of election which is not individualistic as is Calvinism as argued for here.

As for your pleading, I've already responded to this. Bring in a Scripture and let's get started. Wherever you want to start. We'll open it to a few others to get some additional perspectives and maybe ask @GWH to moderate the mutual respect aspect. I'm too used to dealing with Rufus.

 

[Pilgrimshope]

Safer and probably more productive place to redeem time.

Mmhm less of a circle for sure ….and those darn tulips always sprout when the time comes …..of course as long as the seed is viable


“And he said, So is the kingdom of God, as if a man should cast seed into the ground; and should sleep, and rise night and day, and the seed should spring and grow up, he knoweth not how.

For the earth bringeth forth fruit of herself;

first the blade,

then the ear,

after that the full corn in the ear.”
‭‭Mark‬ ‭4:26-28‬ ‭

were all at different parts of a process

 

[Cameron143]

They have now switched from trash-talking Rufus to trash talking you.

Or probably switched is not the right word... they've just included you.

All without asking anything about biblical doctrine.

 

[Cameron143]

Actually, I'm not dealing in tradition but with tradition.

Actually, again, I find Calvin and other traditions uninteresting and if not for their being pushed on these threads, I would not be looking at them again or any longer.

Actually, again, I walked away from all such studies of traditions decades ago.

Now, due to these threads, I find myself having purchased a book on the corporate view of election which I'm about halfway through and seems to mostly fit my current view of election which is not individualistic as is Calvinism as argued for here.

As for your pleading, I've already responded to this. Bring in a Scripture and let's get started. Wherever you want to start. We'll open it to a few others to get some additional perspectives and maybe ask @GWH to moderate the mutual respect aspect. I'm too used to dealing with Rufus.

Simply answer the question I asked.

 

[Magenta]

Simply answer the question I asked.

Here are some verses to consider. Meanwhile they have ZERO that articulate the free will of the yet unregenerate.

There are even more verses you could use but they simply cannot all fit on one panel...

Man is deceitful (Jeremiah 17 verse 9), full of evil (Mark 7 verses 21-23), loves darkness rather than light (John 3 verse 19), cannot come to God on his own (John 6 verse 44), does not seek for God (Romans 3 verses 10-12), is helpless and ungodly (Romans 5 verse 6), nothing good dwells in his flesh(Romans 7 verse 18), is a slave of sin (Romans 6 verse 20; John 8 verse 34; 2 Timothy 2 verse 26), cannot receive spiritual things (1 Corinthians 2 verse 14), is dead in his sins (Ephesians 2 verse 1), is by nature a child of wrath (Ephesians 2 verse 3), is at enmity with God (Ephesians 2 verse 15), hostile to God and cannot submit to God's law (Romans 8 verse 7). Therefore we rightfully conclude in accordance with the conditions described of the natural man in Scripture that his inherent inclination is to reject God. Thanks be to God, Who appoints people to believe (Acts 13 verse 48), chooses who is to be holy and blameless (Ephesians 1 verse 4), predestines us to adoption (Ephesians 1 verse 5), calls according to His purpose (2 Timothy 1 verse 9), chooses us for salvation (2 Thessalonians 2 verse 13), leads us to and grants us repentance (Romans 2 verse 4; 2 Timothy 2 verses 24-25), grants the act of believing (Philippians 1 verse 29), works faith in the believer (John 6 verses 28-29), causes us to be born again (1 Peter 1 verse 3), born again not by our will but by His will (John 1 verses 12-13), draws people to Himself (John 6 verse 44), grants that we come to Jesus (John 6 verse 65), predestines us to salvation (Romans 8 verses 29- 30), and circumcises our heart (Romans 2 verse 29), all according to His purpose (Ephesians 1 verse 11).

 

[studier]

Didn't you just say "If you want to understand my position, I'm glad to show it to you." Yes, you did.

You are the one dealing in tradition. I'm trying to deal with doctrine. I have pleaded with you to discuss the Bible.

I asked you a question already: what was true of man before the fall that wasn't true after the fall?

That's how you show your position and discuss the Bible, by asking a question?

How about you make a point and back it with Scripture. Or how about you post what you view as an important Scripture, explain what it means to you on topic, and I'll agree or disagree and explain why.

 

[studier]

Mmhm less of a circle for sure ….and those darn tulips always sprout when the time comes …..of course as long as the seed is viable


“And he said, So is the kingdom of God, as if a man should cast seed into the ground; and should sleep, and rise night and day, and the seed should spring and grow up, he knoweth not how.

For the earth bringeth forth fruit of herself;

first the blade,

then the ear,

after that the full corn in the ear.”
‭‭Mark‬ ‭4:26-28‬ ‭

were all at different parts of a process

Some tulip process it seems and some daisy (look up the satirical acronym for Arminianism), some (choose other traditions/acronyms), some just plain old grain vs. darnel. I wonder if the grain metaphor was based upon something useable and beneficial and profitable vs. these flowers that fall...

 

[Magenta]

Some tulip process it seems and some daisy (look up the satirical acronym for Arminianism), some (choose other traditions/acronyms), some just plain old grain vs. darnel. I wonder if the grain metaphor was based upon something useable and beneficial and profitable vs. these flowers that fall...

Perhaps it has something to do with the vain philosophical free will position exalting man over God when God says flesh is as the grass.

Wheat is life supporting. Tares belong to the enemy of life. Perhaps that has some bearing as well.

 

[Mem]

You're worshipping a flower.

This is funny.

 

[Cameron143]

That's how you show your position and discuss the Bible, by asking a question?

How about you make a point and back it with Scripture. Or how about you post what you view as an important Scripture, explain what it means to you on topic, and I'll agree or disagree and explain why.

Are you a teacher? How do you open up someone inside their own assumptions?

 

[studier]

Are you a teacher? How do you open up someone inside their own assumptions?

Are you assuming you're my teacher?

 

[Cameron143]

Are you assuming you're my teacher?

Nope. You don't seem to be a student. What I am doing is pointing you in a direction for consideration so you can draw your own conclusions. Perhaps you haven't considered all that is to be considered.

 

[Pilgrimshope]

Some tulip process it seems and some daisy (look up the satirical acronym for Arminianism), some (choose other traditions/acronyms), some just plain old grain vs. darnel. I wonder if the grain metaphor was based upon something useable and beneficial and profitable vs. these flowers that fall...

Yeah the seed is the word , the gospel

“The sower soweth the word.

And these are they by the way side, where the word is sown; but when they have heard, Satan cometh immediately, and taketh away the word that was sown in their hearts.

And these are they likewise which are sown on stony ground; who, when they have heard the word, immediately receive it with gladness; and have no root in themselves, and so endure but for a time: afterward, when affliction or persecution ariseth for the word's sake, immediately they are offended.

And these are they which are sown among thorns; such as hear the word, and the cares of this world, and the deceitfulness of riches, and the lusts of other things entering in, choke the word, and it becometh unfruitful.

And these are they which are sown on good ground; such as hear the word, and receive it, and bring forth fruit,

some thirtyfold,

some sixty,

and some an hundred.”
‭‭Mark‬ ‭4:14-20‬ ‭KJV‬‬

note everyone doesn’t yeild the same amount of fruit . But the word is what produces the fruit as it abodes in our hearts and minds it’s like a seed , if we don’t reject it but instead receive it and persevere the fruit will come tbisbis what he promised remember ?

“Seek ye the LORD while he may be found, call ye upon him while he is near: let the wicked forsake his way, and the unrighteous man his thoughts: and let him return unto the LORD,


and he will have mercy upon him; and to our God, for he will abundantly pardon.

For as the rain cometh down, and the snow from heaven, and returneth not thither, but watereth the earth, and maketh it bring forth and bud, that it may give seed to the sower, and bread to the eater:


so shall my word be that goeth forth out of my mouth: it shall not return unto me void, but it shall accomplish that which I please, and it shall prosper in the thing whereto I sent it.”
‭‭Isaiah‬ ‭55:6-7, 10-11‬ ‭KJV‬‬

If we let his word into our hearts believing it will change us and produce fruit with our perseverance and patience but the power to save us is the gospel the word of god.

Some believe for a short time but they lost friends or popularity or they get made fun of some hear and they let Satan snatch it away from thier hesrt si they don’t keep it others are more concerned with riches and the cares of earthly life and it causes the word to bear no fruit others here it and believe and apply it and they bear fruit believing

“But that on the good ground are they, which in an honest and good heart, having heard the word, keep it, and bring forth fruit with patience.”
‭‭Luke‬ ‭8:15‬ ‭KJV‬‬

Viable seed is the most important part which is the word of God promising believers salvation

“being born again, not of corruptible seed, but of incorruptible, by the word of God, which liveth and abideth for ever. But the word of the Lord endureth for ever. And this is the word which by the gospel is preached unto you.”
‭‭1 Peter‬ ‭1:23, 25‬ ‭KJV‬‬


Corrupt bad seed (not gods word but claiming to be )planted on a heart causes the fruit to rot

 

[studier]

Nope. You don't seem to be a student. What I am doing is pointing you in a direction for consideration so you can draw your own conclusions. Perhaps you haven't considered all that is to be considered.

Well, I'm not your student, which is what I just said from another angle. So you're being circular and repetitive.

Do you have any actual Scripture you'd like to begin with or any point about man's inability to choose to believe apart from God giving Him a new heart so he can believe, or some similar such thing you think critical to your point of view?

You've used the word "doctrine" - so what doctrine do you want to discuss since we began discussing the doctrine of [total} depravity of man?

 

[reneweddaybyday]

Very strange answer to my question.

we'll have to see if you will you answer the question ... or just bloviate some more ...

Where in Scripture does God reveal that Adam will be thrown in the lake of fire?

Since you ducked my question altogether, I have to conclude that you don't know the answer. Maybe God couldn't figure out what to do with Adam. Maybe God figured, "Two are company and three's a crowd, so Adam wasn't explicitly designated as being anyone's seed. Maybe the Lord just left Adam to figure it out for himself.

God provided the offering for the sin of Adam and Eve as well as the covering for the shame Adam and Eve experienced due to their fall:

Genesis 3:21 Unto Adam also and to his wife did the LORD God make coats of skins, and clothed them.

Adam was not excluded.

Was the offering by God insufficient?

Furthermore, your question to me is an argument from silence! I could just as easily ask: Where in scripture is it revealed that Adam made it into the Pearly Gates? It's best to stick with what is revealed in the Word.

Genesis 3:21 Unto Adam also and to his wife did the LORD God make coats of skins, and clothed them.

please note, this verse occurs after the verse which you claim provides "strong evidence that only Eve was the godly one" (your post 2346)

And what clearly is revealed in Gen 3:15 is that God ordained that the entire world would consist of two spiritual seeds: The children of God and the children of the devil (1Jn 3:12; Jn 8:44).

Genesis 3:15 And I will put enmity between thee and the woman, and between thy seed and her seed; it shall bruise thy head, and thou shalt bruise his heel.

the seed [singular] of the woman is the Lord Jesus Christ ...

And since Adam was excluded from God's decree to the Serpent, did not descend from Eve as all HER godly seed would, and Adam would not be the one who would "seed" Eve's godly line, then it seems that there's only one option left.

you exclude Adam from Gen 3:21 ... so your conclusion concerning Adam is faulty.
.
.