Can We Really Exercise Free Will?

[Rufus]

So you are saying that we free willers have all the rights and the TULIP crowd has all the wrongs?

OK. No argument from me.

You don't read too swell, do you?

 

[Rufus]

@sawdust Thanks for attempting to answer this continued craziness.

He's referring to discussion from nearly 2 months ago in another thread and trying as usual to say he didn't receive the answer [he wants]. His presupposition as usual is Calvinistic and that Jer13:23 confirms that men are Totally Depraved and cannot do anything about it. IOW who needs context.

As I previously explained in that discussion, the context and rhetoric of Jer13:23 is speaking of a covenant people who had learned evil and it is now deeply ingrained. So, the spots & skin color are metaphor for learned evil the covenant people cannot change at this point. Jer13:25 explains that the cause is forgetting God and trusting/hoping in lies. (learning evil in 13:23).

At the end of Jer13:27 is repentance inference and appeal re: God's cleansing. When applied back to the metaphor of spots and skin color representing learned evil God speaks of cleansing that had been available.

You've captured their deeply ingrained condition well and tied in the learning from the context.

These continued proof-texted apart from context arguments are the unchangeable spots now.

I suppose the antediluvians were so wicked because they had a nurturing problem, too, heh? Their every inclination and thoughts of their hearts were wicked continually and they filled the earth with violence.

The reason the Israelites "learned evil" that became so ingrained in them was due to their inherently evil hearts! Any child reading the bible can tell you that; for the ancient Israelites were certainly influenced by the pagan nations around them. But they were influenced because that was the inclination of their hearts to begin with. Their rebellious hearts and hostility towards God began at the Exodus and continued throughout all their days. How come they just couldn't exercise their "freewill" to shun evil and sinful influences altogether?

 

[Burn1986]

Many have probably realised i don't think we can exercise free will, even think it's impossible for us to. Won't explain why i think it's an impossiblility for us yet, think it's useful for some to express why they think it exists first.

I have no doubt we have and can make choices throughout life, however, think our options are far more restricted than most realise. What do you think?

You can’t overthink it. You’re trying to understand mysteries with intellect and reason alone.

 

[cv5]

Actually the irony is that verse is saying the very opposite of what you proclaim. The Lord is saying if a man could change himself, then he should be able to learn what is good. IOW if a man can learn good, he does have some input into change within his own soul. As it is only the Lord who can teach us what is good (only God is good), the Lord is effectively saying, the people of Jeremiah's day were so bad due to their refusal to take responsibility for their sin and turn to Him, that the Lord's hands were tied in teaching them anything. Not surprising, as they were about to be transported out of the land and into exile, maximum amount of discipline Israel can face without being wiped out completely.

Correct. Jeremiah 13 is chock full of free will, volition, choices and consequences.

And super-determinists take note: the wayward Israelites knew exactly what they were doing in sinning against the command of YHVH and were without excuse.

[Jer 13:10 KJV]
10 This evil people, which refuse to hear my words, which walk in the imagination of their heart, and walk after other gods, to serve them, and to worship them, shall even be as this girdle, which is good for nothing.

[Jer 13:11 KJV] 11 For as the girdle cleaveth to the loins of a man, so have I caused to cleave unto me the whole house of Israel and the whole house of Judah, saith the LORD; that they might be unto me for a people, and for a name, and for a praise, and for a glory: but they would not hear.

Note the cynicism and WILLFUL rebellion noted here:

[Jer 13:12 KJV] 12 Therefore thou shalt speak unto them this word; Thus saith the LORD God of Israel, Every bottle shall be filled with wine: and they shall say unto thee, Do we not certainly know that every bottle shall be filled with wine?

And yes, another swing and a miss for the super-determinists. This is to be expected as their views are contrary to Biblical truth.

 

[studier]

Don't run from your own arguments. Faith doesn't come by hearing the word of God. Instead, faith comes by hearing, and hearing BY THE WORD OF GOD. You have people reaching out and appropriating salvation by audibly hearing the word of God and exercising faith. All the activity of men apart from any activity of God. But faith doesn't come apart from the activity of God. Do you also reach out and appropriate hearing for yourself? Did you do that without exercising faith?

Does God's Gospel evoke/bring about (or another word or phrase you'd use instead) Faith?

 

[studier]

People wouldn't be reading anything right it could all just be wrong. And I will never feel that way about a bible.

It's not that it's all wrong, nor is it about not being able to learn extensively from translations and the teaching of His Spirit. It's more about continuing to refine them and being able to recognize poor translations.

 

[studier]

I suppose the antediluvians were so wicked because they had a nurturing problem, too, heh? Their every inclination and thoughts of their hearts were wicked continually and they filled the earth with violence.

The reason the Israelites "learned evil" that became so ingrained in them was due to their inherently evil hearts! Any child reading the bible can tell you that; for the ancient Israelites were certainly influenced by the pagan nations around them. But they were influenced because that was the inclination of their hearts to begin with. Their rebellious hearts and hostility towards God began at the Exodus and continued throughout all their days. How come they just couldn't exercise their "freewill" to shun evil and sinful influences altogether?

Was there an Enoch? Was there a Noah? Were there people with Faith at least from Abel onward according to NC teachings? Was there a Remnant? Of course there were. In this sense there are two parallel stories coming through the Text.

Your use of Jer13 ignores context as does this response.

 

[Cameron143]

Does God's Gospel evoke/bring about (or another word or phrase you'd use instead) Faith?

The gospel yields hearing. Hearing yields faith.

 

[Rufus]

One of the most lame-brained, ill-conceived rebuttal attempts to Unconditional Election is that if God sovereignly chose people to save in eternity this would make Him unjust, unrighteous and unfair. FWers are stuck on this stupid idea that God is this cosmic version of EOE (Equal Opportunity Employer). Yet, what does Natural Revelation tell us in this regard? Does reality, as we all know it to be, comport with FWers' simple-minded complaint? Here are a few rhetorical questions for everyone's consideration. Just bear in mind that Natural Revelation is the mirror image of God's Special Revelation!

Does everyone come into this world as equally good looking, handsome, cute or attractive people? Does everyone come into this world endowed with the same degree of intelligence? Does everyone come into this world born healthy or free from life-long handicaps? Does everyone live a long life? Does everyone come into this world with the same financial status? Does everyone receive the same quality of education as eveyone else? Does everyone come into this world having caring, loving parents? Does everyone come into this world having faithful, believing parents? Was everyone born or raised in a country with as many freedoms as a handful of nations have, etc.? If any of you FWers are capable of coming up with the right answer to each question, then to be consistent with yourself, you'd have to characterize God as unrighteous, unjust and unfair because not all people were predesitined to have a high quality life in any sense of the phrase "high quality".

Of course, Special Revelation bears this truth out. Whether anyone cares to believe it or not, God did not treat Adam the same way He treated Eve. Nor did He treat Ishmael and Issac equally. Neither did he with Jacob and Esau. Nor the nations of the world for that matter. But I'm still not finished. The best follows!

On the Day of the Lord when this age ends and the eternal New Order begins for the saints, will everyone have been treated equally by Christ on Judgment Day? No! There will most certainly be different classses of saints since everyone will be rewarded for their own good deeds, or suffer loss of rewards for their own personal wrongdoings. Just as there is a hierarchy of angels in heaven, so too, there will be a heirarchy of saints, as well. (Even Jesus did not deny this fact!) God is not a left-leaning communist that ever had the notion of one-size-fits-all! God isn't a DIE (which I prefer to DEI) kinda person.

 

[Rufus]

Was there an Enoch? Was there a Noah? Were there people with Faith at least from Abel onward according to NC teachings? Was there a Remnant? Of course there were. In this sense there are two parallel stories coming through the Text.

Your use of Jer13 ignores context as does this response.

And they would equal a very tiny remnant, wouldn't they? And they were all saved by God's grace.

And your lame interpretation of Jer 13:23 begs the question big time. Israel didn't have a mere mental lapse problem, nor were they merely naive. Their hearts were utterly and inherently wicked, so it would have been perfectly natural for them to seek out the pagan version of Darkness. Israel didn't have a mere will problem. They had a huge HEART (personality) problem, which is one of the big reasons behind the unconditional New Covenant.

How's that for biblical context?

 

[studier]

The gospel yields hearing. Hearing yields faith.

OK, yields in the sense of produces I assume.

To keep this tight, Rom10 does say the Gospel yields/produces hearing. Rom10 says (you can see this if you use an interlinear or such tool):

BYZ Romans 10:17 Ἄρα (therefore) ἡ πίστις (the faith) ἐξ (from) ἀκοῆς (noun - [a] thing heard), ἡ (the) δὲ (and) ἀκοὴ (noun - [the] thing heard) διὰ (through) ῥήματος (something said, [a] spoken word/statement), θεοῦ. ([of] God)

With a little objective work this can be clear.

The Faith is specifying the faith being discussed - ultimately faith/belief in Jesus Christ

Faith in Jesus Christ is from [a] thing heard - "from" speaks of result (important for your "yield" wording) - a thing heard is a message (which will be clarified as the verse proceeds)

The thing heard is being specific again to tighten up "[a} thing/message heard" previously stated.

Through [a] spoken word/statement of/from God - the [of] is a basic translational insertion - in this case I see it as speaking of source - God is the source of the spoken word.

So, given all the context and the actual wording:

• The thing heard is God's Gospel
• That little word ἐξ (ek - from) is telling us God's [specific] Gospel results in (yields/produces/) [the specific] faith in Jesus Christ - not hearing

If you want to assert hearing is supernatural, we should look elsewhere. I understand how and why you're saying it's here. But sticking tightly to the Text, it's not clearly here and can be argued against. This Text does not say the Gospel results in/yields/produces hearing.

If we go back to Rom10:14 to pick up the hearing it's important to note not just hearing the Gospel, but also the specific statement re: hearing of/about Jesus Christ which is in the content of the Gospel. Paul is very simply saying we need to hear about Jesus Christ to believe in Jesus Christ.

It would be nice to get to complete accuracy to be rid of endless arguments.

 

[Cameron143]

OK, yields in the sense of produces I assume.

To keep this tight, Rom10 does say the Gospel yields/produces hearing. Rom10 says (you can see this if you use an interlinear or such tool):

BYZ Romans 10:17 Ἄρα (therefore) ἡ πίστις (the faith) ἐξ (from) ἀκοῆς (noun - [a] thing heard), ἡ (the) δὲ (and) ἀκοὴ (noun - [the] thing heard) διὰ (through) ῥήματος (something said, [a] spoken word/statement), θεοῦ. ([of] God)

With a little objective work this can be clear.

The Faith is specifying the faith being discussed - ultimately faith/belief in Jesus Christ

Faith in Jesus Christ is from [a] thing heard - "from" speaks of result (important for your "yield" wording) - a thing heard is a message (which will be clarified as the verse proceeds)

The thing heard is being specific again to tighten up "[a} thing/message heard" previously stated.

Through [a] spoken word/statement of/from God - the [of] is a basic translational insertion - in this case I see it as speaking of source - God is the source of the spoken word.

So, given all the context and the actual wording:

• The thing heard is God's Gospel
• That little word ἐξ (ek - from) is telling us God's [specific] Gospel results in (yields/produces/) [the specific] faith in Jesus Christ - not hearing

If you want to assert hearing is supernatural, we should look elsewhere. I understand how and why you're saying it's here. But sticking tightly to the Text, it's not clearly here and can be argued against. This Text does not say the Gospel results in/yields/produces hearing.

If we go back to Rom10:14 to pick up the hearing it's important to note not just hearing the Gospel, but also the specific statement re: hearing of/about Jesus Christ which is in the content of the Gospel. Paul is very simply saying we need to hear about Jesus Christ to believe in Jesus Christ.

It would be nice to get to complete accuracy to be rid of endless arguments.

So...someone reading the gospel to themselves could not get saved?

 

[studier]

In Heaven there will be people who were ugly and pretty on earth because they chose to accept God's gracious new covenant cleansing of their leopard spots and skin. I wonder if there will be pretty and ugly in resurrection bodies. Or since all things will be new and the old passed away, I wonder if there will even be such a thing as ugly or pretty. Is ugly, sin? Or is pretty, sin? Are they just judgments? Maybe we'll all be invisible so we can be naked and not ashamed. But then since Adam and Eve were clothed by God maybe we'll all just be clothed by God and I recall reading about white robes. God's quite a magnificent colorful artist - will we be able to choose different color robes? Didn't Joeseph have a multicolored robe? Will He be dictating everything since He dictated who would be in Heaven. Is that what we're headed for? Maybe choice is an illusion. Thanks @Rufus. You've really got me thinking about choices and what this is all about.

 

[studier]

So...someone reading the gospel to themselves could not get saved?

I suppose we'd have to get out of or logically extend Rom10:14-17 for that discussion. What do you think? I'd assuredly strive to maintain the same lesson though. The Gospel about Jesus Christ results in/yields/produces faith in Jesus Christ.

 

[Cameron143]

I suppose we'd have to get out of or logically extend Rom10:14-17 for that discussion. What do you think? I'd assuredly strive to maintain the same lesson though. The Gospel about Jesus Christ results in/yields/produces faith in Jesus Christ.

You're changing your argument. You said the verse means a thing heard. So I ask again: does this mean that someone silently reading the word of God cannot be saved?

 

[HeIsHere]

It would be nice to get to complete accuracy to be rid of endless arguments.

A true blue optimist.

There is always hope.

 

[Magenta]

A true blue optimist.

There is always hope.

Yes, we can all hope that one day they will stop arguing. We shall praise the Lord!

 

[reneweddaybyday]

Yes...

glad we agree on something ...
.

 

[reneweddaybyday]

Yes, man does nothing bout the gift, rather he receives them and that is not a work and no boasting in it. For it is God's will to believe

exactly ... why some claim it is some sort of work to receive that which God graciously gifts to mankind is beyond me ... and don't even get me started on whether faith on the part of mankind is "works" ... Romans 4 makes abundantly clear that faith ≠ works.

hope/pray all is well with you fredoheaven
.

 

[reneweddaybyday]

I know as far as studying I dont have any issues with what differnt text people use. Its always good to study the Bible. However when doing my daily reading i think it says what it says.

yeah ... for the most part, Scripture is straight forward. There are times, though, when I am reading and a word or a phrase just catches my eye ... and I want to do that deeper dive concerning the word or phrase. That's just me, though ... and it's not every time I read Scripture that results in the desire to go deeper.

I think God's infinite wisdom translated the Bible to mean exactly what they are sposed to in the language they were translated in.

Early on in my walk with the Lord, I came across these verses in Psalm 12:

Psalm 12:6-7 The words of the LORD are pure words: as silver tried in a furnace of earth, purified seven times. Thou shalt keep them, O LORD, thou shalt preserve them from this generation for ever.

These verses gave me great comfort. I knew little of Scripture, but what I did know, I kept in my heart and brought it to mind as situations came up.

No one knows all of Scripture ... doesn't matter how old we are or how long we've been studying Scripture ... there's always more to know ... whatever amount of Scripture we know, the words are pure, the words are true, the words of Scripture are kept and preserved by God for all generations. We can trust what we know in Scripture, hold to it, stand firm upon it and trust that God will keep that Word that He promised to us.

The English came from the Greek which came from the Hebrew. Hebrew might have went through 2 or three translations from anchient cuniform to what the Greeks used. If it is full of human errors from one end to the other. People wouldn't be reading anything right it could all just be wrong. And I will never feel that way about a bible.

yes, I understand, and I would appreciate it if you would consider that my objective is to bring my understanding into alignment to God's Word ... my objective is not to bring God's Word into alignment with my understanding.

As I stated in my prior post, sometimes in the English (which was translated from the Greek), we have one English word, but there may be different Greek words which were translated into the English. It's okay to look at the Greek to see which Greek word was translated into English.

I quoted John 3:16 and asked what Greek word was translated "loved" in John 3:16. The word "loved" is translated from the Greek word agapaō as opposed to phileo or eros or storge ... and maybe it doesn't matter to some that there are different words which are translated into the English word, but sometimes it really does matter. The Author of Scripture was exact in His usage of each word.

Here's another couple of verses using the word "love" ... Jesus instructing Peter after Jesus was resurrected and before He ascended into heaven:

John 21:

15 So when they had dined, Jesus saith to Simon Peter, Simon, son of Jonas, lovest thou me more than these? He saith unto him, Yea, Lord; thou knowest that I love thee. He saith unto him, Feed my lambs.

16 He saith to him again the second time, Simon, son of Jonas, lovest thou me? He saith unto him, Yea, Lord; thou knowest that I love thee. He saith unto him, Feed my sheep.

17 He saith unto him the third time, Simon, son of Jonas, lovest thou me? Peter was grieved because he said unto him the third time, Lovest thou me? And he said unto him, Lord, thou knowest all things; thou knowest that I love thee. Jesus saith unto him, Feed my sheep.

The Lord Jesus Christ asked Peter two times if Peter loved [Greek = agapaō] Him ... and one time Jesus asked Peter if he loved [Greek = phileō] Him.

Peter responded three times that he loved [Greek = phileō] Him.

Does it matter ?

If it does matter ... what is going on in these verses?

If it doesn't matter ... no point in delving deeper.
.