Can We Really Exercise Free Will?

[Watchman22]

Rom. 7:14-21.

14 For we know that the law is spiritual: but I am carnal, sold under sin.

15 For that which I do I allow not: for what I would, that do I not; but what I hate, that do I.

16 If then I do that which I would not, I consent unto the law that it is good.

17 Now then it is no more I that do it, but sin that dwelleth in me.

18 For I know that in me (that is, in my flesh,) dwelleth no good thing: for to will is present with me; but how to perform that which is good I find not.

19 For the good that I would I do not: but the evil which I would not, that I do.

20 Now if I do that I would not, it is no more I that do it, but sin that dwelleth in me.

21 I find then a law, that, when I would do good, evil is present with.

This scripture, possibly the most intentionally overlooked in Gods word, gives a great look into the state of grace Paul is describing.

This scripture is describing a state where Paul is separated (sanctified) from his sinful nature.

With Paul describing how sanctification works, he's also giving us a look at what our situation is in Christ.

A deep dive into the original texts gives us a picture of what Paul is describing.

We have the Holy spirit, we have satan, and we have Paul. The Text uses a military term that indicates the Holy spirit and Satan are engauged in trench warfare over Paul mortal soul. Paul, a third entity in this equation is merely an onlooker, with only the "free will choice" of who to give power to, who to surrender his life to, God or Satan.

So if this thread is still about whether we have free will or not, a correct discernment of Rom.7:14-21 is required. The only real choices we have in life are who and what we surrender our lives to , which just by chance is the exact definition of what true saving faith is.

 

[Blain]

If you read what you just posted it goes in this order:

1. God approaches the person
2. Person is able to reject or accept
3. If the person accepts they are now the Chosen

Is this correct?

Basically yes, No one comes to Jesus unless the father draws them to him Jesus said this himself

 

[cv5]

Rom. 7:14-21.

14 For we know that the law is spiritual: but I am carnal, sold under sin.

15 For that which I do I allow not: for what I would, that do I not; but what I hate, that do I.

16 If then I do that which I would not, I consent unto the law that it is good.

17 Now then it is no more I that do it, but sin that dwelleth in me.

18 For I know that in me (that is, in my flesh,) dwelleth no good thing: for to will is present with me; but how to perform that which is good I find not.

19 For the good that I would I do not: but the evil which I would not, that I do.

20 Now if I do that I would not, it is no more I that do it, but sin that dwelleth in me.

21 I find then a law, that, when I would do good, evil is present with.

This scripture, possibly the most intentionally overlooked in Gods word, gives a great look into the state of grace Paul is describing.

This scripture is describing a state where Paul is separated (sanctified) from his sinful nature.

With Paul describing how sanctification works, he's also giving us a look at what our situation is in Christ.

A deep dive into the original texts gives us a picture of what Paul is describing.

We have the Holy spirit, we have satan, and we have Paul. that indicates the Holy spirit and Satan are engauged in trench warfare over Paul mortal soul. Paul, a third entity in this equation is merely an onlooker, with only the "free will choice" of who to give power to, who to surrender his life to, God or Satan.

So if this thread is still about whether we have free will or not, a correct discernment of Rom.7:14-21 is required. The only real choices we have in life are who and what we surrender our lives to , which just by chance is the exact definition of what true saving faith is.

The Text uses a military term

Please elaborate further thanks.

 

[Jordon]

Well that is not very christian of him then is it? And I am sure he cannot back up his insult either seems like a very spiteful response

yep I get them all the time here, they make out everyone else is error to, and there very good at drawing you in to be seen as a bad guy

 

[lrs68]

Basically yes, No one comes to Jesus unless the father draws them to him Jesus said this himself

But by this explanation You have provided it requires 2 steps to be Chosen.

1. Jesus approaches the person some how, way, form
2. The person accepts

If the person doesn't accept they aren't Chosen according to your explanation.

So that's no different than how I explain it but I am placed in the FW category.

But to accept Jesus once He approaches a person it takes their own will to accept.

Isn't that correct?

 

[Jordon]

Well that is not very christian of him then is it? And I am sure he cannot back up his insult either seems like a very spiteful response

It's ok I've just drove his comment out of my head

Checkout my new world record at the bullring, I'm competing in the world finals in pole position shortly ,. If I win I get a top of the range racing wheel lol

 

[Blain]

yep I get them all the time here, they make out everyone else is error to, and there very good at drawing you in to be seen as a bad guy

This is why I sometimes need a break from cc and why I have requested to be able to mod I am a mod on another christian forum and we never have this level of hate in fact we keep it pretty tight and neat over there

 

[Blain]

But by this explanation You have provided it requires 2 steps to be Chosen.

1. Jesus approaches the person some how, way, form
2. The person accepts

If the person doesn't accept they aren't Chosen according to your explanation.

So that's no different than how I explain it but I am placed in the FW category.

But to accept Jesus once He approaches a person it takes their own will to accept.

Isn't that correct?

yes except we are still slaves to sin before salvation and then in salvation we become willing slaves to Christ but it is not that we do not have a will we clearly do but we do not have free will which would be the abilit to save ourselves by choosing him of our own accord the drawing must come first

 

[Jordon]

This is why I sometimes need a break from cc and why I have requested to be able to mod I am a mod on another christian forum and we never have this level of hate in fact we keep it pretty tight and neat over there

I'm sure you would make a very good mod

 

[Rufus]

OH, no you got that all wrong! All doesn't mean ALL.
Check this verse out:
Rom 5:12
Therefore, just as through one man sin entered into the world, and death through sin, and so death spread to all mankind, because all sinned—

I have never stated that "universal" sounding terms are never used in the quantitative sense. The THREE-FOLD context of God's entire counsel determines when such terms should be understood in the quantitative or qualitative senses.

 

[lrs68]

yes except we are still slaves to sin before salvation and then in salvation we become willing slaves to Christ but it is not that we do not have a will we clearly do but we do not have free will which would be the abilit to save ourselves by choosing him of our own accord the drawing must come first

I never denied this viewpoint in your post but I have basically said because it does require the person to accept Jesus once He approaches them that the term Chosen is 2-fold. Jesus chose the person and the person chose to accept.

 

[Blain]

I never denied this viewpoint in your post but I have basically said because it does require the person to accept Jesus once He approaches them that the term Chosen is 2-fold. Jesus chose the person and the person chose to accept.

Well we seem to be in agreement here then the only difference is the free will thing, if we had free will we could freely choose salvation at any point no drawing required but since it require that he draws us or calls us first I do not see free will in that situation

 

[HeIsHere]

yes and all of which were not seeking salvation itself Jesus came to the women at the well not the other way around for instance the eithioian also was not seeking salvation but rather had a request to make of Jesus the paraplytic man desired healing and mary only wished to serve Jesus

Reading scripture with a western lens is not correct hermeneutics and that is what you are doing, you are putting western culture on the Biblical narrative.
3 Now there was a Pharisee, a man named Nicodemus who was a member of the Jewish ruling council. 2 He came to Jesus at night and said, “Rabbi, we know that you are a teacher who has come from God. For no one could perform the signs you are doing if God were not with him.”

He was seeking to know more it is clear, he approached Jesus.

You can follow "a narrative" or the empirical evidence, I prefer the non-Flat Stanley approach to humanity.
I am just sad you have fallen for the Flat Stanley nonsense.
I know you have been persuaded by them so let us leave it there.

 

[Rufus]

For as sharp as you are, it amazes me that you fall for this and can dupe others into it.

Rom 5:12
Therefore, just as through one man sin entered into the world, and death through sin, and so death spread to all mankind, because all sinned—

Jhn 12:32
And I, if I be lifted up from the earth, will draw all men unto me.

Rom 5:12 is a non sequitur.

My interpretation of Jn 12:32 harmonizes with the immediate context of the chapter and the rest of scripture. God gives only the elect to Christ and these are the ones who He will draw to the Son. God's grace is totally efficacious since Jesus said in Jn 17 and elsewhere that all that the Father GIVES to him, He will give eternal life. Jesus clearly desired that all the Father has given to the Son in eternity be with the Son for all eternity.

 

[Blain]

I'm sure you would make a very good mod

It is not always an easy job you get a lot of people to babysit but it is an important job

 

[Rufus]

Two things can be true at once [even when they flat out contradict each other, which is very often the case with FWT].

FTFY!

 

[Blain]

Reading scripture with a western lens is not correct hermeneutics and that is what you are doing, you are putting western culture on the Biblical narrative.
3 Now there was a Pharisee, a man named Nicodemus who was a member of the Jewish ruling council. 2 He came to Jesus at night and said, “Rabbi, we know that you are a teacher who has come from God. For no one could perform the signs you are doing if God were not with him.”

He was seeking to know more it is clear, he approached Jesus.

You can follow "a narrative" or the empirical evidence, I prefer the non-Flat Stanley approach to humanity.
I am just sad you have fallen for the Flat Stanley nonsense.
I know you have been persuaded by them so let us leave it there.

Eh? I am not sure what you mean by western lens and I have not been persuaded by anyone I came to my conclusion of m own accord and yes Nic did come to Jesus but not for salvation that is the key point he was curious but he never sought salvation salvation cannot be sought by the flesh only by the spirit

 

[Watchman22]

The Text uses a military term

Please elaborate further thanks.

Sure, it's actually in the 23rd verse where Paul uses the word antistrateuomai. The translators use the word "warring" in the English. It means to take a military expedition, or to take the field, against anyone, destroy, attack.

 

[sawdust]

Can I ask a question? id we do have free will why can we not turn to God without him first drawing us to him?

We don't have free will to turn to God unless He acts first and frees the will. This has been stated by all of us who side with free will throughout this thread.

 

[Rufus]

Wrong. The motif of the Father giving the Son the Bride has ZERO to do with Calvinism.

In fact this is but one aspect of the Jewish wedding protocol.

You reject this teaching for the same reasons you deny "draw all" and "whosoever".

Calvinists playing with fire IMO.

Deflection! We're talking about how the entire Word of God is inspired by Jesus. Do you know that Jesus is the author of the Book of Revelation (Rev 1:1)? If so, how come you don't believe what he said in Rev 5:9-10!? And don't you know that the entire NT, for that matter, is inspired by the Living Word (Jn 16:12-15)? And didn't Jesus ascribe equal authority to Moses' and the other Prophets' words as He did to his own (Lk 16:29-31)?