Can We Really Exercise Free Will?

[Rufus]

My quote that you bolded,

If some are destined for evil then is it really just to judge them on something predetermined?

God wishes that all may be saved but of course there is an exception.

Unbelief in Christ.

But I agree with your whole statement. God's grace is a gift. He has made the gift open all who will accept it.

But did God purpose in eternity to save all men w/o exception? God's decretive will and his desirous will are two different things.

Also, have you ever asked yourself: Why would an omniscient God who knows all things offer his gift of grace to people He knew in eternity would never accept it? Hasn't God always known the end from the very beginning?

Another question: Why would God offer the gift of grace to people He never knew in eternity?

 

[Jackson129]

But did God purpose in eternity to save all men w/o exception? God's decretive will and his desirous will are two different things.

Also, have you ever asked yourself: Why would an omniscient God who knows all things offer his gift of grace to people He knew in eternity would never accept it? Hasn't God always known the end from the very beginning?

Another question: Why would God offer the gift of grace to people He never knew in eternity?

Simple so they had no excuse for not excepting it. They couldn't just say how could we except something you never offered.

 

[Rufus]

“For God hath concluded them all in unbelief, that he might have mercy upon all.”
‭‭Romans‬ ‭11:32‬ ‭
“For the grace of God that bringeth salvation hath appeared to all men,”
‭‭Titus‬ ‭2:11‬ ‭KJV‬‬

“And he said unto them, Go ye into all the world, and preach the gospel to every creature. He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved; but he that believeth not shall be damned.”
‭‭Mark‬ ‭16:15-16‬ ‭KJV‬‬

“For this is good and acceptable in the sight of God our Saviour; who will have all men to be saved, and to come unto the knowledge of the truth.”
‭‭1 Timothy‬ ‭2:3-4‬ ‭KJV‬‬

“The Lord is not slack concerning his promise, as some men count slackness; but is longsuffering to us-ward, not willing that any should perish, but that all should come to repentance.”
‭‭2 Peter‬ ‭3:9‬ ‭KJV‬‬

“For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life.”
‭‭John‬ ‭3:16‬ ‭KJV‬‬

“For God sent not his Son into the world to condemn the world; but that the world through him might be saved.”
‭‭John‬ ‭3:17‬ ‭

“For the Son of man is come to seek and to save that which was lost.”
‭‭Luke‬ ‭19:10‬ ‭

Gotta hand it to ya, Pilgrim, you have out-of-context interpretations down to a rocket science. Everything you have quoted you grossly misunderstand because you wilfully ignore context.

 

[lrs68]

There are unbelievers whom God makes it understood, and they dig in their heels and resist by creating lies about the Truth!

The wrath of God is being revealed from heaven against all the godlessness ​

and wickedness of men, who suppress the truth by their wickedness, since what ​

may be known about God is plain to them, because God has made it plain to them. ​

​

For since the creation of the world God’s invisible qualities—his eternal power and ​

divine nature—have been clearly seen, being understood from what has been made, ​

so that people are without excuse.​

​

For although they knew God, they neither glorified him as God nor gave thanks to him, ​

but their thinking became futile and their foolish hearts were darkened. ​

Although they claimed to be wise, they became fools​

​

​

Romans 1:18-22​

Amen!

 

[lrs68]

Are there any biblical examples where God gave understanding to someone and they didn't believe?

I am quoting people on your side of the argument making this claim but No, there's no Biblical Verses saying it.

 

[Genez]

I would actually get banned from this forum if I were to honestly tell you how you come across!

Because you would be sounding like a gang leader.

Like I said...

 

[Rufus]

Simple so they had no excuse for not excepting it. They couldn't just say how could we except something you never offered.

But God knew they would never accept it! Plus sinners have zero excuses to offer God on judgment day because they all sinned and fell short of God's glory! The only way they could have the kind of excuse you suggest is if they honestly and legitmately wanted to be saved and God rejected their desire for salvation. But where is such a scenario recorded in scripture?

This is like saying that Satan and all the fallen angels are going to have an excuse on Judgment Day since God never made any provision for them to be saved.

 

[Rufus]

Because you would be sounding like a gang leader.

Like I said...

Perhaps...but an honest one!

 

[Jackson129]

But God knew they would never accept it! Plus sinners have zero excuses to offer God on judgment day because they all sinned and fell short of God's glory! The only way they could have the kind of excuse you suggest is if they honestly and legitmately wanted to be saved and God rejected their desire for salvation. But where is such a scenario recorded in scripture?

This is like saying that Satan and all the fallen angels are going to have an excuse on Judgment Day since God never made any provision for them to be saved.

It dosent matter that God knew they wouldn't be saved he still offered it just to show his impartiality. As to leave everyone without excuse

And your angel thing makes no sense because they angels were already saved. They were in the presence of God. They chose to give that up by rebellion.

 

[Genez]

Here's my question to that how do 2 people who come to thier own conclusions about grace and what processes come to make you being saved be completely opposite? I do have a church I go to as well but for 5 years I did not. When I was first saved. I just read the Bible and tried to learn what I could. Now today I read about different reformers and I realized I agree with John Wesley the most.

If I may suggest a pastor-scholar who is our contemporary?
Many pastors have ordered his lessons for their own private study.

https://www.rbthieme.org/index.html#tabs-3

He studied and taught like I truly wish I could.
I do not have the gift to study like eight hours a day like he did from the original languages.
And, in addition. Researched and taught history lessons concerning the historical background for a passage.

He will at times teach about advances in knowledge that the Reformers did not have access to in their lifetimes.

There would be no money asked for if you should choose to order something.

 

[Genez]

Perhaps...but an honest one!

An honest CARNAL one, at that.

Peter in time needed to change his ways.
Paul in time needed to change his ways.

Rufus?

 

[Rufus]

It dosent matter that God knew they wouldn't be saved he still offered it just to show his impartiality. As to leave everyone without excuse

And your angel thing makes no sense because they angels were already saved. They were in the presence of God. They chose to give that up by rebellion.

So, God is like a village idiot who just goes through the offering motions even though he knew the outcomes in eternity? And this makes sense to you?

And what were the sinless angels saved FROM before they rebelled? Sin-free Adam, too, was in the presence of God in the Garden until he rebelled, so what is your point?

 

[Genez]

Then learn how to express yourself more coherently.

And don't lose any sleep over my church affiliations (past or present) since I came by the Doctrines of Grace honestly on my own before I even knew who Calvin was or what he taught. But...when I found out, I rejoiced in the Lord that Calvin agreed with me.

TULIP was not from Calvin.

TULIP was devised after his death by Theodore Beza and his team.

 

[Genez]

Perhaps...but an honest one!

If you want to learn from a ROUGH honest one?

Right here!

https://www.rbthieme.org/index.html#tabs-3

He was a boxer. He got a bit tough with trouble makers in the congregation.
Far from a typical gentle pastor... Yet, gentle in his desire to protect his flock.

 

[Jackson129]

So, God is like a village idiot who just goes through the offering motions even though he knew the outcomes in eternity? And this makes sense to you?

And what were the sinless angels saved FROM before they rebelled? Sin-free Adam, too, was in the presence of God in the Garden until he rebelled, so what is your point?

First I would never reference God in that manner.

Yeah it makes perfect sense. You offer it to all even the ones you know would refuse then no one has an excuse. Its pretty strait forward.

They were saved from the crap we experience in the world today as a result of sin. Death misery destruction sickness ect ect. And chose eternal damnation over the ever loving presence of God.

 

[cv5]

If you want to learn from a ROUGH honest one?

Right here!

https://www.rbthieme.org/index.html#tabs-3

He was a boxer. He got a bit tough with trouble makers in the congregation.
Far from a typical gentle pastor... Yet, gentle in his desire to protect his flock.

listening now, sounds good.

rbthieme.org/mp3/631_0026.mp3

 

[Genez]

First I would never reference God in that manner.

Yeah it makes perfect sense. You offer it to all even the ones you know would refuse then no one has an excuse. Its pretty strait forward.

They were saved from the crap we experience in the world today as a result of sin. Death misery destruction sickness ect ect. And chose eternal damnation over the ever loving presence of God.

They are not in trouble for what they are choosing for.
For they do not believe what it is they choose for.
They are in trouble for what they choose against!

 

[Rufus]

It dosent matter that God knew they wouldn't be saved he still offered it just to show his impartiality. As to leave everyone without excuse

And your angel thing makes no sense because they angels were already saved. They were in the presence of God. They chose to give that up by rebellion.

And one other thing that I nearly forgot: How could God be partial toward those who freely chose to repent and believe the gospel? Again, the ONLY way He could be partial is if He knew many wanted to be saved, yet He rejected their wishes. This scenario would constitute partiality! Anything less? NO!

Was God partial to Issac and Jacob in Rom 9?

 

[Rufus]

Jackson129 said:


First I would never reference God in that manner.

Yeah it makes perfect sense. You offer it to all even the ones you know would refuse then no one has an excuse. Its pretty strait forward.

They were saved from the crap we experience in the world today as a result of sin. Death misery destruction sickness ect ect. And chose eternal damnation over the ever loving presence of God.

Will sinners on Judgment Day have an excuse to offer God for their personal sins?

 

[reneweddaybyday]

The KJV is inserting "trusted" carrying it forward from Eph1:12. This is interpretive. It's not in the original Text. IMO and in the view of these other translators, it's not a proper insertion. I can't speak for them, but my reasoning is as follows:

1. "trusted" is not the word I'd use. Nor is it the word these other translators used. The word primarily means "hope". I know some - at least one - instills this word with the meaning of "confidence" which I'm OK with, but don't see it as necessity. Nor do others translate it that way. Hope simply denotes it's not here yet, but future (and yes, we don't hope it will come in the sense that we're uncertain, so, yes, we are certain in will come because God promised it). But "trust" is in the primary range of the word pisteuō (believe) and the word here is rooted in elpizō which primarily means "to hope". So, I and seemingly other translators don't see it appropriate to cross and confuse the two words.
2. In Eph1:12 I see Paul as referring himself and other Jews who were hoping (awaiting, expecting) the arrival of Messiah. When we're reading Paul as I showed in Eph3, he's ultimately speaking of the Jewish disciples and Apostles, et.al. who were "first hoped" in Messiah (and believed Jesus was Messiah). So, Paul is in effect distinguishing between Jews who knew of Messiah and were hoping for His coming, from Gentiles and whoever did not know of Him. So, Paul will transition in Eph1:13 into New Covenant, post-resurrection era Gospel hearing and believing, etc. IOW Paul is not carrying forward this Jewish hope and there's no need to here.

right ... the word "trusted" is more along the lines of hope (proelpizo). And, yes, I understand the reference to "we" in vs 12 as opposed to "ye" in vs 13. We = Jews who were awaiting Messiah ... "ye" = gentiles.

1. Then in Eph1:13 there are some grammatical markers that need to be interpreted and interestingly the NET, ESV, and NAS each interpret this a little bit different one another. To explain:
   1. The main aorist verb in Eph1:13 is "sealed"
   2. The two aorist participles "hearing" and "believing" are describing what was involved in the sealing and there are a few ways to interpret them as can be seen in these 3 translations:
      1. The NET looks to be making the hearing, believing, sealing all contemporaneous using and repeating "when".
      2. The ESV seems to be leaving more room for a logical flow between hearing and believing, but once heard and believed, sealing takes place.
      3. The NAS is clarifying the logical flow of the sealing taking place "after" hearing and believing but muddying the distinction between hearing and believing.

I believe there is a sequential order which to us may appear simultaneous ... in Rom 1:16 we see that the gospel of Christ is the power of God unto salvation to those who believe ...

how much time elapses between the time the person believes and salvation? ... can we even fathom it?

1. My take is that there is a logical flow between all 3 - hearing, believing, sealing - even though the timing is in God's purview and thus the logical flow could seem less pronounced in other Scriptures. The flow is this:
   1. The Jewish believers had been hoping in the arrival of their foretold Messiah. Their belief in Him is discussed elsewhere. The first-hoped is distinguishing the Jewish and Gentile akin to the Jew first then the Gentile.
   2. The flow in both the language, basic and temporal logic, and from other Scriptures is hear > believe > seal.
      1. Faith/Belief [in Jesus Christ] [results] from news (the Good News - the Gospel) Rom10:17
      2. Sealed being the primary aorist verb in Eph1:13 has the 2 attached aorist participles which structure although can denote contemporaneous commonly defaults to being sequential especially having multiple participles. This is the way I read the grammar here as I showed just above.

I understand there is a sequence which to us appears to be simultaneous. I don't think we would be able to determine the timing between each sequential step ... even with the fine instruments we have in our day and time ... which brings to my mind Heb 4:12 where God tells us ...

Hebrews 4:12 For the word of God is quick, and powerful, and sharper than any twoedged sword, piercing even to the dividing asunder of soul and spirit, and of the joints and marrow, and is a discerner of the thoughts and intents of the heart.

we do not have the capacity to divide soul from spirit ... joints and marrow ... yet God's Word is that powerful ... that fine-tuned. how awesome is that ???!!!

we sit and argue over which came first, the chicken or the egg? ... we fight about the baby because the baby wasn't birthed according to whatever "ism" we associate with???

Given all of this, I do not see any sequence here of trust > believe in Eph1:13. It may well be discussion in Eph1:12 but IMO not Eph1:13. I think Paul is distinguishing Jews who first hoped in Messiah's coming [then believed Jesus is Messiah] and Gentiles who hear the Gospel > believe Jesus is Christ > are sealed by the promised Holy Spirit.

yeah ... not a salvation issue for me ... although I will admit that not all born again ones believe the gospel the first time they hear it or read it. sometimes it takes more than one "hearing" ... or "reading" ... and I get that. we either plant or water and God gives the increase to the one who believes.

I'll also say that this fits with how I view Paul's evangelism. He had to be informing many if not most Gentiles who had not been somewhat schooled in synagogues as "God-Fearers" or proselytes about who and what "Messiah/Christ" is.

When we read Paul's actual evangelizing of Jews and Gentiles in Acts13, he makes it a point to attach and reference Psalm2, which may be one of the most succinct pieces of OC Scripture explaining who and what YHWH's Anointed/Messiah/Christ is = YWHW's KING of kings who inherits the earth and to whom all on the earth including its kings had best revere and submit to lest He be angry!

in reading through Acts, we see Paul teaching by first going into the synagogues to teach ... which reveals the deep love Paul had for his fellow Israelites (Rom 10:1). and, yes, Blessed are all they that put their trust in him.
.