all your post post here is directed at calvinism, where not talking about any imaginary Calvinistic person you have ringing in your head.
Can We Really Exercise Free Will?
- Thread starter LifelongLearner
- Start date
-
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.
the lords faith being expressed, the entire bible is a about the lords faith being expressed through a persons, heart,
I’m well aware that there are 3-point and 4-point Calvinists. My point is directed at the core ideas of the Calvinistic system itself as a whole, not imaginary people. Anyways, I usually come from the perspective that if I disagree with someone about a topic in the Bible, I usually quote verses to back up my position. So if your view differs from what I have stated, then feel free to share why with Scripture.
....
Right, but that doesn't prove Calvinism or a lack of free will exactly. Sure, God can stop people with a heart attack or a surprise lung failure. The Lord can do anything. Yet, at the same time, God is not willing that any should perish, but that all should come to repentance. I just believe the word "all" is referring to everyone because that is the most natural way to read that Bible. Nowhere does it say that the word "all" is referring only to the chosen few that God has hand picked to be saved while He lets the rest to burn for all eternity (as if that was something that was a part of His good will).
....
I am not presenting this as an absolute fact. Some events in Scripture are not entirely clear, and I recognize that certain passages allow room for possibilities. My secondary interpretation is that God’s question may have been directed toward Adam and Eve’s spiritual condition rather than their physical location. Still, I lean more toward this being a pre-incarnate appearance of Christ, as that explanation fits best with the many other pre-incarnate appearances of Christ found throughout the Old Testament. Plus, Jesus said, “Search the scriptures; for in them ye think ye have eternal life: and they are they which testify of me” (John 5:39 KJV), showing that all of Scripture ultimately points to Him, even in the earliest events of Genesis.
....
There is no record of Adam speaking with the serpent. There is no record of Eve speaking with God prior to eating of the fruit of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil. There is also no explicit text that says God walked and talked with Adam and Eve in the garden before the fall, though I believe it can be inferred.
I do agree with you that it is likely the pre-incarnate Christ who was in the garden with Adam and Eve. I disagree that He didn't know where they were.
Right, but you fail to see the moral problem in your belief system here. If God saves a person against their free will and that is how God saves and it is not based on any conditions within that individual, then that means God can snap His fingers and save everyone against their free will. If that is how salvation works, and God refuses to save the others by that same method, then it makes the Lord unjust. It would mean that in God's eyes, we are nothing more than little ants to be crushed or saved and there is no real love towards us. If so, then why did Jesus suffer so much? Jesus said He desired to gather Jerusalem like a hen gathers its chicks, but Jesus said that they would not let Him to do so. We know Jesus is God. So if Calvinism was true, He would never say this and He would just click His fingers and make those in Jerusalem to be mindless slave puppets to do His will.
....
My wording was imperfect. I am not saying Adam spoke with the serpent.
Eve spoke with the serpent.
You said:
Eve talked with God after the fall.
You said:
I am saying that it is a likely possibility and not a fact. Jesus said to the Father in John 17 that He desired to share in the glory that He once had with the Father. Scripture ties the glory of the Lord with knowledge. So, it makes sense that if this was a pre-incarnate form of Christ with Adam and Eve after the fall, then it is a possibility that His Omniscience was suppressed, which would explain why He was asking where they were at physically. Granted, Jesus could have asked the Father, and found out instantly.
....
When Jesus took on flesh, He set aside His glory and became of no reputation. This is never said concerning His pre-incarnate appearances.
Right. Exactly!
I am saying that if Jesus (who is God and the second person of the Trinity) was present in the garden talking with Adam and Eve, then there is the possibility that His Omniscience may have been suppressed based on John 17:5 KJV, Habakkuk 2:14 KJV; 2 Corinthians 4:6 KJV.
....
The KJV says in John 17:5 that Jesus desired to share in the glory that He once had with the Father before the world was.
Nothing is said anywhere in the New Testament that He gave up His glory in the Incarnation.
....
Like many, you conflate making choices with having a will that is free. Why? No verses tell us the will is free. Quite the opposite.
We are discussing what the Bible says of man. Not what philosophy or humanism says.
At least, Bible believers discuss what the Bible says. We have many here who do not believe what the
Bible says on this matter. They are indeed Pelagian heretics despite your assertion to the contrary.
People making mundane choices does not in any way address what the Bible teaches about man's will being enslaved to sin, blinded to the truth, unable to hear, incapable of submitting to God, a lover of darkness, refusing to come into the light, hearing the gospel as foolishness, unable to receive or comprehend the spiritual things of God, to which he is opposed and to Whom he is hostile toward while under the power and influence of the devil, as is the whole world, out of which believers have been called. Thinking your will is free simply because you can choose what colour of socks to wear or what to have for lunch, or whether to do the right or wrong things, has no bearing on the eternal fate of your soul, and mixing it in with what the Bible teaches about the estate of fallen man is a distraction from the real issue.
This is the crux of the conversation, for it is out of man's nature that he makes choices, and it is with the heart that one believes... the free will proponents essentially assert that the incurably wicked heart of the natural/unregenerated man is free to choose to believe that which he is not only opposed to, but that which he can neither receive/accept nor comprehend. They have the man with zero wisdom acting wise to do God's will when Scripture says that man cannot. And their idea of wisdom is that person choosing to believe what they hear as foolishness. They reject what Jesus said about it being impossible for a bad tree to bring forth good fruit, and there are none good, no, not one! But they reject a whole slew of Scriptures from beginning to end of the Bible, such as nothing good lives in man's flesh, and flesh serves the law of sin, and brings forth fruit unto death, all in favour of a doctrine that has zero support in the Bible, with not one verse articulating what they prefer over what is actually said. In fact they routinely contradict and deny what is explicitly stated, and really seem unable to stop ascribing to the unregenerated man qualities, characteristics, and abilities that only the regenerated person is in possession of.
Colossians 2 v 8, Romans 16 v 18, Romans 10 v 2, Proverbs 19 v 2a ~ See to it that no one takes you captive through philosophy and empty deception, which are based on human tradition and the spiritual forces of the world rather than on Christ. For such people are not serving our Lord Christ, but their own appetites. By smooth talk and flattery they deceive the hearts of the naive. For I testify about them that they are zealous for God, but not on the basis of knowledge. Zeal is no good without knowledge.
Do you believe that the heart is regenerated or born again before one can exercise faith or a belief in God?
....
If only eh God doesn't live by your moral will,.and he holds no value to human will, as it lives in the flesh,
I see this so may times here ,. You keep saying God can't save them by going against there will on the bases that you see it as unjust, but it's God's life hes saving, but it's not free tho, in unsaved, the will of mans nature in the unsaved is held captive to death and so is there soul held captive to death.
And you really should not be centralising going against human will to this imaginary Calvinism idea you have,
An unsaved person held captive to death needs saving, as there is no way such a person can save himself, what this means is a an unsaved person is held captive to death and not only that he holds his own will above God
God tells us the will of the flesh makes his holy laws weak, which means if an unsaved person holds his own will above God,.which God declares he does how can he choose to be saved, being saved is dependent on your whole life spent with God. He knows if your going to accept his will,.he knows before your born,.and your salvation is dependent on your whole life.
God has to go against the will of unsaved person to transform him, with his many ways in which he does, which has been over exhausted in this thread.
And when God says people.wont let him it means God has examined there heart and they've rejected him as the chief corner stone, which the bible also declares.
That's what the many people.did in Jerusalem at the time of his crucification,
These words you cite are his faith being expressed from a person heart,
And many will say the thing after lord has spoken in there hearts.
Theses are not grounds in which to base free will having any value as human will has no value to God, human will has corrupted all mankind it has no value to God .
And calling God unjust for going against mans will is also holding your own will above God.
And all the other scriptures you've posted is also about God going against mans will and speaking in there hearts
God never asks a question that he does not already have the answer to. And both the question and the answer Are for our benefit.
A common misapprehension of this single verse. What Jesus is referring to here is the Jewish wedding protocol "snatching of the Bride" aka the rapture.
[Mar 13:32 NKJV] 32 "But of that day and hour no one knows, not even the angels in heaven, nor the Son, but only the Father.
[Jhn 14:2 KJV] 2 In my Father's house are many mansions: if [it were] not [so], I would have told you. I go to prepare a place for you.
Personally, I don't think that Jesus was in any way inhibited or reduced during His sojourn. Yes He had a "work" to do and this included humiliation and servanthood, but this hardly affects His omnipotence or omniscience. The truth is that only Jesus alone knows (fully and completely) infinite God the Father.... because only He is likewise infinite the Son. Only the Trinity has ALL of the information. All of it. That's why Satans schemes will always fail.
[Mat 11:27 NKJV] 27 "All things have been delivered to Me by My Father, and no one knows the Son except the Father. Nor does anyone know the Father except the Son, and to whom the Son wills to reveal.
God DEFINITELY did not "save" Pharaoh because Pharaoh DEFINITELY did not want to be saved. Such is the pattern throughout the Bible from Cain onwards.....
Rahab, the Gibeonites, the Ninevites? Yea, they DEFINITELY wanted to be saved. So God saved them.
Such is the pattern throughout Scripture....
The word “glory” appears only once in Philippians 2 in the KJV, referring to the future event when every knee shall bow and every tongue shall confess that Jesus Christ is Lord to the glory of God the Father. Nowhere in this chapter is the word “glory” used to describe Christ giving up His glory at the Incarnation. He came down from Heaven, yes, but Philippians 2 does not say He surrendered His glory—it says He became a servant.
John 1:14 says,
“And the Word was made flesh, and dwelt among us, (and we beheld his glory, the glory as of the only begotten of the Father,) full of grace and truth.”
John affirms that Christ’s glory was still present and visible to those with spiritual eyes.The disciples also saw this glory during the Mount of Transfiguration, as recorded in Luke.
Luke 9:32 says,
“But Peter and they that were with him were heavy with sleep: and when they were awake, they saw his glory, and the two men that stood with him.”
The glory that Jesus shared with the Father before the world was in John 17:5 is clearly a different kind of glory. I believe this refers to Christ’s omniscience consistent with the other two verses mentioned before....
....
Yes, this generally the case with God. But the Trinity is complex. If Christ was in the garden, and His Omniscience was suppressed like during His Incarnation in the New Testament, then that means Christ would not have known where they were at (Although God the Father would have known, or Christ could have asked the Father and known instantly, etc.). However, I also hold to the possibility that God did know and that He was talking about Adam and Eve's spiritual condition.
....