Can We Really Exercise Free Will?

  • Christian Chat is a moderated online Christian community allowing Christians around the world to fellowship with each other in real time chat via webcam, voice, and text, with the Christian Chat app. You can also start or participate in a Bible-based discussion here in the Christian Chat Forums, where members can also share with each other their own videos, pictures, or favorite Christian music.

    If you are a Christian and need encouragement and fellowship, we're here for you! If you are not a Christian but interested in knowing more about Jesus our Lord, you're also welcome! Want to know what the Bible says, and how you can apply it to your life? Join us!

    To make new Christian friends now around the world, click here to join Christian Chat.
I thought you were and elite, highly schooled, highly educated scholar on this thread with gazillion of hours of intense study under your hood -- all supported by other elite scholars with more study hours under their bonnets? You don't know how to find that parable, O Self-Exalted One!? Lazy much? How did you ever make it through all those many hours of study? :rolleyes:

They always gave chapter and verse. They were not lazy.
 
you to sis have a good day
I'm off drive a drive a friend to a hospital now to see if there cancer free after 2 years in remission
It's a big day for them
If my friend gets the all clear today the chances of it never coming back is 3 percent for the next year and zero percent next year.
That is good news for sure and I am glad to hear it. Is the follow-up period different per different cancers? Or is it a country by country thing? I know even here treatments can vary depending not only what city or province you are in, but also even the hospital. I am past my five-year follow-up, and am supposed to be "broken up" with my oncology team, but a procedure I had a year ago was not to my surgeon's liking and so we are hoping this next one will be the end of it. That will be Monday.
 
What we are seeing is not entirely new (natural man always wants to feel he has absolute agency), but ancient people generally had a far more fatalistic, dependency-shaped conception of agency than modern Westerners, and this seems connected to their material conditions and political structures. If you told your average farmer in bronze age Mesopotamia that if he worked hard he'd be a rich man some day, or that his opinion mattered in the governance of his nation, he would think you were making a joke. Ancient peoples, and poor people generally, probably have an easier time with the intellectual concept of total dependence on God, because they have an echo or parallel of that in their personal situations.
if God peradventure will give them repentance to the acknowledging of the truth

But you do not believe that the natural man will not come into the light, hates the light.
You think he has the ability to obey when Scripture says he does not.
Your one-liners are bereft of the even the least Bible-centric validation. They are little more than terse opinionated vacuous banter.
Alternatively, one could hear the fine exegetical treatment of @studier , who has rigorously defended the correct Biblical view of "NATURAL MAN"......

************************************************************************************************************

https://christianchat.com/threads/can-we-really-exercise-free-will.218061/post-5581086

To whoever cares:

More on the so-translated “natural man” in 1Cor2:14:

“natural” is “psuchikos”

One of the things in exegesis is to understand words and writings from the times they are written. There is still ongoing work on exegeting Paul. Much more is being considered about his use of rhetoric and his interactions with the Greek world and the Hebrew world he was tasked to be integrating. As he states in Romans, his mission is faith-obedience among the nations on behalf of the name of Jesus Christ. Simply put, he’s to bring the Gentiles to faith-obedience to the Jewish Messiah.

When Paul uses the word “psuchikos” in 1Cor2:14 he’s interacting with a word that’s been used among the Greek Philosophers for nearly 600 years as best I can see from our lexical data. Through the centuries it became used to speak of men who we might call the “scholars” among the Greeks – philosophers, morally reflective citizens.

In 1Cor2:14 Paul is comparing and contrasting these psuchikos-Greek scholars first with the teleios-mature Christian 1Cor2:6 and the pneumatikos-spiritual Christian 1Cor2:15. Paul uses both of these words – teleios-mature and pneumatikos-spiritual – basically synonymously to speak of the spiritually mature Christian who he can speak advanced Christian doctrines to. He also contrasts pneumatikos-spiritual (and thus teleios-mature) to the nepios-infant-child Christian to whom he cannot yet speak to re: these advanced Christian doctrines 1Cor3.

Paul is drawing a contrast mainly between the Greek scholar and the mature-spiritual Christian who has the Spirit of God. The best of the Greek scholars does not welcome advanced Christian teaching because they think it’s nonsense. And they can’t know it because they don’t have God’s Spirit. I’ve already dealt with the grammatical structure of the language in these verses. The main issue is they think God’s wisdom is nonsense. They in their self and culturally inflated minds place their own wisdom above anything supposedly of the Jewish God. And this was also part of the problem – the cultural multitude of gods.

So, back to the issue on this and other threads on this forum re: the psuchikos-Greek scholar and the Gospel:
  • The issue here is not about the basic message of the Gospel.
  • The issue is about the best of the Greek scholars without the Spirit of God vs. men like Paul and other mature-spiritual Christians with the Spirit of God. The best of the Greeks cannot understand the advanced teachings of Christianity. Their main problem is self-inflated human wisdom makes them unreceptive to God’s wisdom which they view as nonsense. This view keeps the best of the Greeks from welcoming the advanced teachings of God’s Spirit.
  • Regarding the basics of the Gospel of Christ:
    • Paul has not been speaking of the Gospel since 1Cor2:5
    • Paul from 1Cor2:6-16 is dealing with the best of the Greeks compared to the mature-spiritual Christian with the Spirit. The best of the Greeks cannot know what the spiritually educated Christian knows.
    • Nor can the nepios-baby Christian who is still fleshly-sarkikos know these advanced Christian doctrines 1Cor3. So the issue is not basics of the Gospel, but the advanced Christians doctrines that neither the baby and still carnal Christian, nor the psuchikos-soulish Greek scholar can know.
    • To explain more of how the Bible presents the psuchikos-soulish man and why Paul is not dealing with the basics of the Gospel, we can compare him with Jude and James re; the psuchikos-soulish man:
      • Jude is summoning Christians to exert intense effort for the once-for-all delivered faith – our common salvation. The faith is all Christian doctrine having to do with our salvation.
        • In Jude1:19 he identifies the enemies as the psuchikoi-soulish men (plural of psuchikos-soulish man). Jude is speaking of these men’s condition and ungodliness and not limiting to Greek scholars but including all the soulish, ungodly.
        • A few of their characteristics are:
        • They are ungodly – irreverent towards God
        • They change God’s grace into licentiousness – no moral restraints
        • They refuse-disdain-deny-repudiate the only despotēs – the only absolute legal authority – God and/even our Lord Jesus Christ. So, according to Jude these psuchikoi-soulish men do understand the issue of who God is but they refuse Him, they disdain (loathe), deny, repudiate Him. They know who God is – they know who Jesus Christ is – they know the Gospel of Jesus Christ – they simply loathe Him.
      • James tells us more about their so-called “wisdom”. Remember this is what Paul is dealing with – the human wisdom of the Greek scholars:
        • It’s not from above
        • It’s of the earth
        • It’s psuchikos-soulish (doesn’t pertain to the Spirit)
        • It’s demonic - originates from the lower realm of spirits
FWIW, I’ve looked at this many times and I’ve read others on this forum and elsewhere who see this similarly to the way I see it. This morning, I looked again through the lexical data and the lengthy history in Greek philosophy of the mention of psuchikos. Paul is interacting with it. Jude tells us it was known well before NC times and draws from a lengthy Biblical history.
  • 1Cor2:14 is simply not about the ability to understand the foundational Gospel of Jesus Christ.
  • In fact, when we include the information from Jude, he specifically tells us these psuchikoi-soulish men do know and understand the foundational Gospel of Jesus the Christ.
  • These psuchikoi-soulish men specifically reject and loathe the authority of Jesus Christ which is to reject the foundational Gospel message that Jesus is the Christ (which is Paul’s foundational Gospel) which Jude states as being the faith we need to fight for – our common salvation – Jesus Christ is the only absolute legal authority (despotēs).
There’s just no way that I can see the deterministic interpretation of the “natural” man not being able to understand the foundational message of the Gospel of Jesus Christ. They know it and think it’s nonsense and they loathe it and Him. They think they’re wiser than the Hebrew God. That’s their issue.

There are other Scriptures that are difficult to interpret in regard to deterministic vs. non-deterministic traditions. 1Cor2:14 IMO is simply not one of them.
 
More quality exegesis from @studier .
A far cry from the lackluster treatment that the Calvinists offer.

*************************************************************************************************

https://christianchat.com/threads/can-we-really-exercise-free-will.218061/post-5568444

From the ilk of Adam Clarke:

Acts 13:48: As many as were ordained to eternal life believed – This text has been most pitifully misunderstood. Many suppose that it simply means that those in that assembly who were fore-ordained; or predestinated by God’s decree, to eternal life, believed under the influence of that decree. Now, we should be careful to examine what a word means, before we attempt to fix its meaning. Whatever τεταγμενοι may mean, which is the word we translate ordained, it is neither προτεταγμενοι nor προορισμενοι which the apostle uses, but simply τεταγμενοι, which includes no idea of pre-ordination or pre-destination of any kind. And if it even did, it would be rather hazardous to say that all those who believed at this time were such as actually persevered unto the end, and were saved unto eternal life. But, leaving all these precarious matters, what does the word τεταγμενος mean? The verb ταττω or τασσω signifies to place, set, order, appoint, dispose; hence it has been considered here as implying the disposition or readiness of mind of several persons in the congregation, such as the religious proselytes mentioned Acts 13:43, who possessed the reverse of the disposition of those Jews who spake against those things, contradicting and blaspheming, Acts 13:45. Though the word in this place has been variously translated, yet, of all the meanings ever put on it, none agrees worse with its nature and known signification than that which represents it as intending those who were predestinated to eternal life: this is no meaning of the term, and should never be applied to it. Let us, without prejudice, consider the scope of the place: the Jews contradicted and blasphemed; the religious proselytes heard attentively, and received the word of life: the one party were utterly indisposed, through their own stubbornness, to receive the Gospel; the others, destitute of prejudice and prepossession, were glad to hear that, in the order of God, the Gentiles were included in the covenant of salvation through Christ Jesus; they, therefore, in this good state and order of mind, believed. Those who seek for the plain meaning of the word will find it here: those who wish to make out a sense, not from the Greek word, its use among the best Greek writers, and the obvious sense of the evangelist, but from their own creed, may continue to puzzle themselves and others; kindle their own fire, compass themselves with sparks, and walk in the light of their own fire, and of the sparks which they have kindled; and, in consequence, lie down in sorrow, having bidden adieu to the true meaning of a passage so very simple, taken in its connection, that one must wonder how it ever came to be misunderstood and misapplied. Those who wish to see more on this verse may consult Hammond, Whitby, Schoettgen, Rosenmuller, Pearce, Sir Norton Knatchbull, and Dodd.”

I think Mr. Clark did a pretty good job here. How about you?

And there are some technical things in the language he didn't even touch on.
 
I don't think it even has a coherent definition. I can accept that certain aspects of creation are unknown or unknowable to us, but from a Biblical point of view I think free will is a human invention, and one with zero empirical and very little apodictic support.
On the contrary, there is massive Scriptural support, far greater than most will admit.
Should you CHOOSE to spend the next few weeks and months hearing and synthesizing these lectures, perhaps then you will possess enough knowledge to engage in fruitful dialogue. Soundbites in the dark are hardly useful.

 
  • Like
Reactions: HeIsHere
The philosophical concept of 'free will' really doesn't have much Biblical support, though the spiritual quality of our intent and desires renders us guilty. True freedom is in obedience to God: the alternative is bondage to sin. The whole idea that 'life has no meaning without free will' strikes me as more derivative of the hyper-individualism of American liberalism than of any demonstrated logical position. In fact, that free will, so called, is even possible has not been properly demonstrated, in my opinion. I don't think it even has a coherent definition. I can accept that certain aspects of creation are unknown or unknowable to us, but from a Biblical point of view I think free will is a human invention, and one with zero empirical and very little apodictic support.
 
  • Like
Reactions: HeIsHere
The philosophical concept of 'free will' really doesn't have much Biblical support, though the spiritual quality of our intent and desires renders us guilty. True freedom is in obedience to God: the alternative is bondage to sin. The whole idea that 'life has no meaning without free will' strikes me as more derivative of the hyper-individualism of American liberalism than of any demonstrated logical position. In fact, that free will, so called, is even possible has not been properly demonstrated, in my opinion. I don't think it even has a coherent definition. I can accept that certain aspects of creation are unknown or unknowable to us, but from a Biblical point of view I think free will is a human invention, and one with zero empirical and very little apodictic support.
You might as well start from the beginning......

 
Can anyone explain what's going on here? Thanks.
You will get the explanation by clicking on the links and spending 10 or so hours of your time to hear and understand these superb lectures. THEN by this digging and toil.....your beliefs will be founded upon the Rock.

I have listened to each and every one of those lectures AT LEAST 4 or 5 times over and over again.
I want to know......and believe me, I know. And Chronister knows. And you can know also if you are WILLING to listen.

Mat 7:25
And the rain descended, and the floods came, and the winds blew, and beat upon that house; and it fell not: for it was founded upon a rock.
 
@studier is a Calvinists' worst nightmare.....

*******************************************************************************************
https://christianchat.com/threads/can-we-really-exercise-free-will.218061/post-5569132

Acts 13:48 Explanation

Greek: ὅσοι ἦσαν τεταγμένοι εἰς ζωὴν αἰώνιον ἐπίστευσαν
  • Verb form: pluperfect periphrastic passive (ἦσαν τεταγμένοι - êsan tetagménoi)
    • Indicates a state existing in time prior to the believing event, emphasizing the person’s condition or readiness rather than a one-time act or formal decree.
    • Observation: In Luke-Acts, the pluperfect is always applied to things situated in temporal history and never to eternal decree.
    • Observation: The pluperfect periphrastic in context shows that those Gentiles had already been in a state of receptivity before Paul proclaimed the Gospel in Antioch, and this disposition persisted as they heard and responded.
Lexical and BDAG sense:
  • Τάσσω (tassō),
    • BDAG 1.b = “arrange, put in place, order”
    • Not BDAG 2 (“appoint, decree”)
  • Passive participle frequently describes state, arrangement, or disposition in Luke-Acts and the NT. This is consistent with historical Greek usage:
    • Josephus (Antiquities 18.184; War 6.100) – people “disposed for peace/battle”
    • Plutarch (Moralia 785C) – “soul being badly disposed”
    • Athenagoras, Testament of Job – elements, troops, or people “arranged/placed”
  • Observation: In Luke-Acts and the NT, tassō is never used to describe an eternal decree; it is always applied to things situated in temporal history.
Context:
  • Luke’s narrative emphasizes human responsiveness to the Gospel. Paul proclaims the Gospel to Jews and God-Fearers and proselytes in the synagogue who had been taught from the Hebrew Scriptures (Acts13:15-16 and Acts13:42-43).
  • The quotation of Isaiah 49:6 in Acts 13:47 (“I have made you a light for the Gentiles…”) frames their response as part of God’s historical plan unfolding. This suggests that the hearers were both disposed and that Luke presents the Gospel as the fulfillment of a planned historical movement, where God’s providence works through human readiness without overriding it.
Translation nuance:
  • “Disposed / ready / prepared for eternal life” captures the Greek meaning of existing arrangement/state and aligns with BDAG sense 1.b.
  • Alternatives such as “appointed,” “ordained,” or “preordained” are lexically possible, but they can give the impression of an eternal decree - something the grammar, narrative context, and BDAG’s classification do not support.
Summary:

Acts 13:48 describes Gentiles who were already arranged/disposed toward eternal life at the moment of hearing the Gospel and remained disposed after hearing it. Luke emphasizes their receptive state and situates it within the unfolding of Isaiah’s prophecy, showing how God’s providence works through human readiness rather than imposing an eternal predestining decree. The pluperfect periphrastic passive of tetagmenoi reinforces this sense of past, temporal readiness, then belief consistent with both the usage of tassō and Luke’s historical narrative and with Gospel + Spirit Conviction > Choose to Believe > Saved.
 
https://christianchat.com/threads/can-we-really-exercise-free-will.218061/post-5568093

First, a little information re: Acts13:48 to show the translation "appoint" has not always been set in stone:

Chrysostom (4th c.)
  • In his Homilies on Acts (Homily 29), he comments:
    • “Observe how he shows the Gentiles themselves also to be well-disposed (εὔθετοι) to receive the faith…”
    • Chrysostom interprets Acts 13:48 as describing those who were disposed/inclined toward eternal life, not as a decree of predestination.
Theophylact (11th c., Byzantine exegete)
  • On Acts 13:48, he paraphrases:
    • “Those who were disposed to eternal life believed.”
    • Again, focus on human readiness/disposition under God’s convicting work.
Erasmus (16th c.)
  • Rendered Acts 13:48 as:
    • “As many as were disposed to eternal life believed.”
    • He argued tassō here is in the middle/reflexive sense — “set themselves, disposed themselves.
ASV (1901) margin note
  • Even modern translations have preserved this:
    • “…as many as were ordained to eternal life believed” with a footnote: “Or, disposed.
GOD'S WORD® Translation
The people who were not Jews were pleased with what they heard and praised the Lord's word. Everyone who had been prepared for everlasting life believed.

Mace New Testament
when the Gentiles heard this, they received the word with joy, glorifying the Lord: and as many as were dispos'd to eternal life, believed.

Bauer-Danker, Greek-English Lexicon of the NT (BDAG)
[BDAG] τάσσω (tassō) (main definition headings only):
1. to bring about an order of things by arranging, arrange, put in place
2. to give instructions as to what must be done, order, fix, determine, appoint (My Note: Note how "appoint" is defined)

There are reasons to inspect the translations here, no matter how many opted for "appointed" or "ordained".

I noticed the issue some time ago because I place great value on Acts13 as the most complete and comprehensive record of Paul's missionary evangelism message we have.

There's an interesting verb structure in Acts13:48 that Luke uses. One issue is that it's calling attention to this verb tassō. In the discussion about the verse that @cv5 linked, one of the participants picked this up. IMO it's important, unusual, and the timing and parsing of this verb Luke is using is very informative.

I'll continue as I have time.
 
That is good news for sure and I am glad to hear it. Is the follow-up period different per different cancers? Or is it a country by country thing? I know even here treatments can vary depending not only what city or province you are in, but also even the hospital. I am past my five-year follow-up, and am supposed to be "broken up" with my oncology team, but a procedure I had a year ago was not to my surgeon's liking and so we are hoping this next one will be the end of it. That will be Monday.
depends I think on the cancer but 5 years here for most cancers, including my friends even tho the type of cancer he had has a zero percent chance of returning after 3 years, squamous cell type cancer, it was all removed by laser treatment to,

He's one of the success stories like you. Well done sis 😉
 
You will get the explanation by clicking on the links and spending 10 or so hours of your time to hear and understand these superb lectures. THEN by this digging and toil.....your beliefs will be founded upon the Rock.

I have listened to each and every one of those lectures AT LEAST 4 or 5 times over and over again.
I want to know......and believe me, I know. And Chronister knows. And you can know also if you are WILLING to listen.

Mat 7:25
And the rain descended, and the floods came, and the winds blew, and beat upon that house; and it fell not: for it was founded upon a rock.

Who's this Chronister?
 
Who's this Chronister?
Its up to you to find out for yourself......
More Calvinist kryptonite these passages. They have no answer.......

Mat 7:7
Ask, and it shall be given you; seek, and ye shall find; knock, and it shall be opened unto you:

Act 17:27
That they should seek the Lord, if haply they might feel after him, and find him, though he be not far from every one of us:
 
What's the gospel of Calvinist?

What's the transformed life of a Calvinist?
judging by the real Calvies students of the Calvin college, and the imaginary ones flying round in your head like @cv5 @Blue155 @Genez @HeIsHere @Bible_Highlighter


I would say there gospel is a whole lot better than you.

And that's the truth as your gospel imagines absolutely anything.


And if someone wants to be a calvin colleges student who are you to stop them.

Well the answer is your absolutely nobody, and you would mean absolutely nothing to them.
 
Its up to you to find out for yourself......
More Calvinist kryptonite these passages. They have no answer.......

Mat 7:7
Ask, and it shall be given you; seek, and ye shall find; knock, and it shall be opened unto you:

Act 17:27
That they should seek the Lord, if haply they might feel after him, and find him, though he be not far from every one of us:

I'm not a fan of Satan's sermon. Thanks for letting me know, saved me alot of time.