Free will and God's will

[Magenta]

Yes. Some actual study would help him. It is apparent he has not studied this and is not well read on any given subject or doctrine.

You choose to believe that. Moreover, you want to.

 

[preacher4truth]

CALVINISM AND DETERMINISM OR FATALISM
It is at times alleged that Calvinism is synonymous with determinism or fatalism. Actually, these two perspectives are diametrically opposed. The former is nothing more or less than the biblical teaching expounded and systematized; the latter is pagan or secular and humanistic. Calvinism views all things as in the purpose and personal control of the sovereign, just, gracious and loving, triune God of Scripture;

determinism is the alleged working of an impersonal, amoral force without purpose or ultimate meaning. Only a gross biblical ignorance, an extreme religious prejudice, or a mental ineptness could confuse the two.
It is the Arminian or Pelagian—the one who believes in “free will”—who is the fatalist. If God only foresaw what would be and then laid his plans accordingly, then three things might logically follow: First, God himself is necessarily relative to [contained within] his own creation and is not the first or final cause and determiner. He is necessarily limited.


Second, the ultimate cause or determination must be chance, fate or luck—some impersonal, amoral force that ultimately determines the issues in the moral and spiritual spheres.


Third, there exists some mysterious dualism and so, an equal power opposed to God within the universe. Such dualism or fatalism—an idea of a limited “god” and ultimate chance—does not square with Scripture, which reveals and declares God to be God and not less than God in the physical, moral and spiritual spheres.

Yes eg does not know what fatalism is, he's made his own definition and it is based around repudiation of the fact God has both elected and predestined all whom He would save. This is the biblical truth. He sees this as unfair and he disapproves of God doing this or being God. So in order to combat this, he drew up his own plans, submitted his own God criteria that he likes and can live with, and turns a blind eye to many biblical truths. Now he's all comfy and has his god under control. Domesticated and all but eg is happy to dictate to God how he should act.

Wonder who is really god here?

 

[preacher4truth]

I do not know if you are new here or not. But I am going to warn you right now. This kind of nonsense will not be tolerated.

if you want to discuss things, we will discuss things, You want to slam people with these silly arrogant attacks, i will put you with a few of your brothers.

I suggest you all look at grandpa and the way he discusses things, He leads to your view of predestination. Yet you never see him attack or bully people.

You all should be ashamed.

I have to head to bed, If you want to repost to my response in a more humble, brotherly non judgmental way. I will respond to you in kind.

The arrogance here is in your anger about your need to study.

You do need to study.

You need to study Bible.

You need help studying the Bible.

When the target is hit it gives itself away as in your above. Humility would accept what icon said concerning you, but instead you threaten and react in callow and angry fashion which is status quo.

When is the last time you you've actually studied, (besides reading your Bible) a book you've actually read which challenged your gospel, theology, interpretations, or do you just know everything already?

 

[SovereignGrace]

“Do not lay a hand on the boy,” he said. “Do not do anything to him. Now I know that you fear God, because you have not withheld from me your son, your only son.”[Genesis 22:12]


Here is a verse that open theists love to use to prove that God does not know all things, that He does not have exhaustive foreknowledge. I preached a sermon last month, and used this passage for a Christmas sermon. As I did some further studying, I came to find out that the words 'Now I know' does not mean that He didn't know beforehand if Abraham would actually sacrifice his only promised child, but that it also mean to 'be acquainted with'. It is the same word used in Genesis 22:12 that is used in Isaiah 53:3 when it said 'He was acquainted with our grief.' Yada is the Hebrew word used in Genesis 22:12 and also Isaiah 53:3.

By Abraham being willing to sacrifice his only promised son(Ishmael was his son, too, but not the promised child), God became acquainted with Abraham's grief, knowing that later He would offer up His only Child to die in our stead.

 

[preacher4truth]

“Do not lay a hand on the boy,” he said. “Do not do anything to him. Now I know that you fear God, because you have not withheld from me your son, your only son.”[Genesis 22:12]


Here is a verse that open theists love to use to prove that God does not know all things, that He does not have exhaustive foreknowledge. I preached a sermon last month, and used this passage for a Christmas sermon. As I did some further studying, I came to find out that the words 'Now I know' does not mean that He didn't know beforehand if Abraham would actually sacrifice his only promised child, but that it also mean to 'be acquainted with'. It is the same word used in Genesis 22:12 that is used in Isaiah 53:3 when it said 'He was acquainted with our grief.' Yada is the Hebrew word used in Genesis 22:12 and also Isaiah 53:3.

By Abraham being willing to sacrifice his only promised son(Ishmael was his son, too, but not the promised child), God became acquainted with Abraham's grief, knowing that later He would offer up His only Child to die in our stead.

You must spread some Reputation around before giving it to SovereignGrace again.


Good stuff thanks! Here is how one will respond: "I just believe my Bible. It says "Now I know." You are adding to Bible. I have the pure word of God and need no one to teach me." Something along those lines. Proud ignorance rules the day.

 

[SovereignGrace]

You must spread some Reputation around before giving it to SovereignGrace again.


Good stuff thanks! Here is how one will respond: "I just believe my Bible. It says "Now I know." You are adding to Bible. I have the pure word of God and need no one to teach me." Something along those lines. Proud ignorance rules the day.

I came across that wonderful nugget of truth while studying that sermon. And yes, I got it from a commentary. But I also looked into it myself to see if that commentary was correct. It was either from my Matthew Henry or Matthew Poole commentary I found that. But look up the Hebrew word yada and see if it does not also mean acquainted/acquaintance.

 

[Magenta]

CALVINISM AND DETERMINISM OR FATALISM
It is at times alleged that Calvinism is synonymous with determinism or fatalism. Actually, these two perspectives are diametrically opposed. The former is nothing more or less than the biblical teaching expounded and systematized; the latter is pagan or secular and humanistic. Calvinism views all things as in the purpose and personal control of the sovereign, just, gracious and loving, triune God of Scripture;

determinism is the alleged working of an impersonal, amoral force without purpose or ultimate meaning. Only a gross biblical ignorance, an extreme religious prejudice, or a mental ineptness could confuse the two.

It is the Arminian or Pelagian—the one who believes in “free will”—who is the fatalist. If God only foresaw what would be and then laid his plans accordingly, then three things might logically follow: First, God himself is necessarily relative to [contained within] his own creation and is not the first or final cause and determiner. He is necessarily limited.

Second, the ultimate cause or determination must be chance, fate or luck—some impersonal, amoral force that ultimately determines the issues in the moral and spiritual spheres.

Third, there exists some mysterious dualism and so, an equal power opposed to God within the universe. Such dualism or fatalism—an idea of a limited “god” and ultimate chance—does not square with Scripture, which reveals and declares God to be God and not less than God in the physical, moral and spiritual spheres.

I know, I know, you don't have any choice but to deny the obvious, and be grossly ignorant, mentally inept, and extremely religiously prejudiced Well, those are your words, after all.

But you really ought not to blame it all on God. Sure He knew you
would be that way, but that is not an excuse. You have a choice.

Oh, sorry, according to you and your beliefs, you do not.

Maybe you need to take that mindset to others. You know, since people oppose your view, it is only because God has ordained it to be so. He wants people to point out where they think you are wrong and how your theology is flawed and your understanding of God's character lacking to tell us that He does not give the option to choose to some but then will turn around and torture them forever after for not making a choice that was never presented to them in the first place. The God I know is truly good, and loving, and freely offers salvation to all, not a select few. Will all accept? Apparently not. Why? Pride.

For the record? I am neither Armenian nor Pelagian, nor do I promote the idea of free will. I have spoken of self will since before I ever got to this site. Self will is plastered all over the Bible, the sins of man born of the lusts of the flesh, and the pride of life. I am sorry if you cannot see it.

 

[Stunnedbygrace]

With God, all things are possible. I have not seen anyone deny that God draws us. The way some people talk, even you here, you make it out like some think they did it all themselves. I am surprised that you cannot see coming to believe as a process. I have seen the way you grapple with things and how excited you become when you understand something that someone has been saying for a long time, and adopt some of that belief to augment what you already believe into a greater understanding. You did not just suddenly decide to see it in a new way, nor did you suddenly decide out of the blue that it all made sense, nor did you suddenly decide you would believe what had been being said to you all along, when you had been overlooking it and glazing over it and not understanding it for so long. Somewhere along the line you started surrendering what you thought you already knew to embrace new "information" that expanded your world view, because you finally saw the truth in what was presented.

See that word surrender? You had to surrender your opposition and resistance to what you had been hearing all along before you could accept and integrate the new. Jim earlier was testifying (I love you, Jimbone) and said he did nothing, but he had surrendered. That act of surrendering our self will (not free will) is what is required, and what some are very cognizant of doing in the act of repenting of their rebellion against God, and coming to believe. None of which negates God's part in it! He draws us. He reveals Himself. He loves us with a love that blows our mind and puny ideas of what love is, out of the water. We love, because He first loved us. He offers the precious gift of forgiveness.

Jesus started His earthly ministry with a call to repentance and belief. Why would He go around inviting/exhorting people to do that, if He was going to do it for us? Rhetorical question, by the way.

Actually...no, it doesn't look to me like they think they did it all themselves...
It appears to me that they think they did a small PART of it themselves.

But, I remember a long ago conversation in which EG told me the faith came from himself. We went round and round where I tried to understand how "by grace through faith and that not of yourselves so no man can boast," could be understood so differently.

He looked at it as the "that" part of "that not of yourselves" - was referring to the grace. But it made no sense to me because it seemed unlikely that any man would think the grace of God came from within his own self. But it DID seem possible that a man might think the FAITH part came from himself.

Do you agree that the "that not of yourselves" refers to the word faith rather than to the word grace in the verse?

And if so, how do you reconcile in your mind that your faith was a gift, yet say you chose with your own self will to believe God existed? Doesn't to believe= to have faith?

Have I just confused you and made you need another piece of purple cake?

 

[Stunnedbygrace]

oh my gosh its 3 a.m. here...how did that happen...? That's usually what time I get UP, not when I go to sleep!!

 

[EllyCox]

The inconsistency of having free will and yet having God already know which course out lives will take, lies only (I believe) in the fact that we are trying to see God through our own understanding.
God is not constrained to TIME, as we are. As I've once heard it put, try to imagine our lives as a river (representing time), flowing through a twisting canyon. We're on a raft (representing the present) in the river and we can't see what's ahead, around the bend. Another raft (representing the future) is following an hour behind us and we can't see them and they can't see us. God is overhead, in a helicopter. We can see Him and the raft an hour behind us can see Him, and He can see both of us. But we (the two rafts, present and future) can't see each other.
See, God is God and He's not constrained to time as we are. He may be seeing, not only what will be happening ten years from now, but what is happening today and what was happening 500 years ago all at the same time!

 

[Nehemiah6]

He looked at it as the "that" part of "that not of yourselves" - was referring to the grace. But it made no sense to me because it seemed unlikely that any man would think the grace of God came from within his own self. But it DID seem possible that a man might think the FAITH part came from himself... Do you agree that the "that not of yourselves" refers to the word faith rather than to the word grace in the verse?

No it does not. While Paul was constantly facing those who believed that they could be justified by the works of the Law, mankind in general believes that men can earn they way to Heaven, Paradise, Nirvana, what have you, by their good deeds.

We know that the gift of God is eternal life (Rom 6:23) which is in fact salvation, and what we are told in Ephesians 2:8,9 is that salvation is God's GIFT by His grace to those who believe the Gospel. Or as others Scriptures have it, we are justified by grace through faith, and the Gospel is the "seed" from which faith is generated.

As to faith, we are clearly told that faith cometh by hearing and hearing by the Word of God (the Gospel). So it is the Gospel which generates faith in the non-believer while the Holy Spirit works on his heart and soul. To claim that God selectively gives "the gift of faith" to some, and does not give it to others has no foundation in Scripture. It is purely a man-made doctrine.

Note: There is a spiritual gift of faith given to BELIEVERS, but that has no bearing on this matter.

 

[eternally-gratefull]

eternally-gratefull



The only nonsense is you trying to dictate to God what he can and cannot do​

.

Not sure what you are talking about...


You all should be ashamed.
Not sure who grandpa is...the only cyber bully here...seems to be you

The only one dictating what God can or can not do is you my friend. God is free to do whatever he chooses. If he chooses to deal with his creation based on free will because he loves them and wants a RELATIOSNHSIP with them., then that is his choice to make, not yours.

You seem to have determined he has no choice to do anyth9ing he desires.

And I am not the one telling people they need to study, or they need to read the bibe.

Your view of fatalism is not according to the defenition of the word. It is calvanism attempt to get rid of a stain on their doctrine or whatever.

FATE-also said is the belief that one FATE is predetermined. PERIOD!

 

[eternally-gratefull]

I can't stand it this is a crock,especially after reading what you posted to Eternally Grateful,this is an "atheist" point of view of yours,now God is perfect,but you try to "define him" as perfect "your way" it's like saying "well God can't make his own decisions once he has a mind to do it he has to do it" which is more B O L O G N A,God has changed his mind a fare few times in the bible or as the term is coined "repented".
When the people of Israel made and worshipped a golden calf and his anger was "waxed hot" he told Moses "let me alone so that I might consume them in my wrath and make of thee a great nation" but Moses "reflected" God's knowledge back to him in that it would be foolish and so God"repented"(changed his mind) of what he sought to do to the Israelites,God makes his decisions,"Not us" he isn't God by "our definition" he's God because "he is" or can one forget what he also told Moses "I am that I am" "our definition" doesn't mean even a hill of beans.

As I said earlier. What is it about a group of people who think they have to bully everyone else to their point of view? Do they think they will win any converts?

 

[eternally-gratefull]

you'll be fine,you're just a little steamed from some remarks and "college drivel" from some,it happens everyone just take some time to cool off and come on back later.

I am sick of a group of people who act the way they do. Cooling off is not going to help much, because I will come back and they will continue to do it.,

It appears to be the way they feel they have to argue with people to make their point. I do not care for bullies, even if they are my brothers in Christ.

 

[eternally-gratefull]

Yes. Some actual study would help him. It is apparent he has not studied this and is not well read on any given subject or doctrine.

Yep. Attack attack Attack. That is all you know how to do is it not?

Someone disagrees with you and they need to study.


And you call yourself a man of God?

 

[eternally-gratefull]

You choose to believe that. Moreover, you want to.

Its all he has. Thats what makes it so laughable.

he can not see his own pride and arrogance. Then gets mad when people call him out for it.

 

[eternally-gratefull]

Actually...no, it doesn't look to me like they think they did it all themselves...
It appears to me that they think they did a small PART of it themselves.

But, I remember a long ago conversation in which EG told me the faith came from himself. We went round and round where I tried to understand how "by grace through faith and that not of yourselves so no man can boast," could be understood so differently.

EG has never stated this. Faith comes from God I have always maintained this.

He looked at it as the "that" part of "that not of yourselves" - was referring to the grace. But it made no sense to me because it seemed unlikely that any man would think the grace of God came from within his own self. But it DID seem possible that a man might think the FAITH part came from himself.

Do you agree that the "that not of yourselves" refers to the word faith rather than to the word grace in the verse?

And if so, how do you reconcile in your mind that your faith was a gift, yet say you chose with your own self will to believe God existed? Doesn't to believe= to have faith?

Have I just confused you and made you need another piece of purple cake?

Not of yourselves referees to the word work.

If it referred to the word faith, It would say for by Grace we have been saved by grace, NOT of yourselves. Not through faith or works, lest anyone should boast.


It is the WORK OF GOD that one believes in him.

I have posted this thousands of times, Yet you still think I said it comes from myself.

I am dumbfounded.

 

[John146]

hello JN 146, enjoy this;
Anthropomorphism

• /
• Our Library /
• Dictionaries /
• Quick Reference Dictionary /
• Anthropomorphism

Share Tweet Save

Dictionaries - Baker's Evangelical Dictionary of Biblical Theology - Anthropomorphism
Anthropomorphism(Gk. anthropos [a[nqrwpo"] [human] + morphe [morfhv] [form]). Assignment of human attributes to nonhuman things. Biblical anthropomorphisms are used primarily in reference to God, who is neither visible ( John 1:18 ) nor human ( Num 23:19 ; 1 Sam 15:29 ). They are also used to assign human characteristics to angels ( Gen 16:7 ;18:1-19:1 ), Satan ( 1 Chron 21:1 ; Luke 13:16 ), and demons ( Luke 8:32 ). Evil is also personified, depicted as slaying ( Psalm 34:21 ) and pursuing ( Pr 13:21 ). Infrequently, human qualities are attributed to animals ( Nu 22:28-30 ) or vegetation ( Jud 9:7-15 ).
The use of human terminology to talk about God is necessary when we, in our limitations, wish to express truths about the Deity who by his very nature cannot be described or known. From biblical times to the present, people have felt compelled to explain what God is like, and no expressions other than human terms are able to convey any semblance of meaning to the indescribable. Thus, in Genesis alone God creates ( 1:1 ), moves ( 1:2 ), speaks ( 1:3 ), sees ( 1:4 ), divides ( 1:4 ), places ( 1:17 ), blesses ( 1:22 ), plants ( 2:8 ), walks ( 3:8 ), shuts ( 7:16 ), smells ( 8:21 ), descends ( 11:5 ), scatters ( 11:8 ), hears ( 21:17 ), tests ( 22:1 ), and judges ( 30:6 ).
Perhaps the most profound anthropomorphism is the depiction of God establishing a covenant, for the making of covenants is a very human activity. God enters into an agreement (covenant) with Israel at Sinai ( Exod 19:5-6 ), an outgrowth of an earlier covenant he had made with Abraham ( Gen 17:1-18 ). Later, this agreement is transformed into a new covenant through Jesus Christ ( Matt 26:26-29 ). Theologically, the legal compact initiated by God becomes the instrument through which he established an intimate and personal relationship with the people, both collectively and individually. Without anthropomorphic expressions, this theological reality would remain virtually inexplicable.
Anthropomorphisms also attribute human form and shape to God. God redeems Israel from Egyptian bondage with an outstretched arm ( Exod 6:6 ). Moses and his companions see God, and they eat and drink with him ( Exod 24:10-11 ). Other texts refer to the back, face, mouth, lips, ears, eyes, hand, and finger of God. The expression, "the Lord's anger burned" ( Exod 4:14 ) is interesting. A literal translation of the Hebrew is "the nose of the Lord burned."
Indirect anthropomorphic expressions also appear, such as the sword and arrows of the Lord and the throne and footstool of God.
Akin to anthropomorphisms are anthropopathisms (Gk. anthropos [a [nqrwpo"] + pathos [pavqo"] [passion]), used to refer to God's emotions. God is a jealous God ( Exod 20:5 ) who hates ( Am 5:21 ) and becomes angry ( Jer 7:20 ), but he also loves ( Exod 20:6 ) and is pleased ( Deu 28:63 ).
Anthropomorphisms and anthropopathisms are figures of speech that transmit theological truths about God to humankind. Only when taken literally are they misconstrued. Taken as metaphorical expressions, they provide by analogy a conceptual framework by which the God who is beyond our comprehension becomes a persona person whom we can love. In the New Testament the analogy becomes reality in the mystery of the incarnation ( John 1:1-18 ).
Keith N. Schoville
Bibliography. J. Barr, HBD, p. 32; E. W. Bullinger, Figures of Speech Used in the Bible; M. Eliade, ed., The Encyclopedia of Religion, vol. 1; W. E. Miles, ed., Mercer Dictionary of the Bible.

What a slick way to ignore the clear meaning of Scripture. God's nature can be described and known. Search the Scriptures. You're saying the following should not be taking at face value, but a figure of speech?

9 Who can tell if God will turn and repent, and turn away from his fierce anger, that we perish not?
10 And God saw their works, that they turned from their evil way; and God repented of the evil, that he had said that he would do unto them; and he did it not.
God said He would destroy Nineveh in forty days. (not really, figure of speech, we shouldn't take God so serious)
God did not destroy Nineveh. (not really, just a figure of speech because this passage cannot be comprehended by man)

Seriously?

 

[John146]

“Do not lay a hand on the boy,” he said. “Do not do anything to him. Now I know that you fear God, because you have not withheld from me your son, your only son.”[Genesis 22:12]


Here is a verse that open theists love to use to prove that God does not know all things, that He does not have exhaustive foreknowledge. I preached a sermon last month, and used this passage for a Christmas sermon. As I did some further studying, I came to find out that the words 'Now I know' does not mean that He didn't know beforehand if Abraham would actually sacrifice his only promised child, but that it also mean to 'be acquainted with'. It is the same word used in Genesis 22:12 that is used in Isaiah 53:3 when it said 'He was acquainted with our grief.' Yada is the Hebrew word used in Genesis 22:12 and also Isaiah 53:3.

By Abraham being willing to sacrifice his only promised son(Ishmael was his son, too, but not the promised child), God became acquainted with Abraham's grief, knowing that later He would offer up His only Child to die in our stead.

God was not "acquainted" with our sorrows until He took on a body of flesh. God never knew what it was like to be punched in the face, spitted on, hungry, thirsty, mocked, etc...but now that He has become flesh, He fully knows the feelings of our infirmities and being made perfect, He became the author of eternal salvation. Praise the Lord! What a Saviour!

 

[TMS]

We all agree
God is Love.

Love is never forced.
God is more than able to force and make things happen any way He likes. But that doesn't mean He does. He could have forced satan to think differently and done it without satan even knowing it, and this problem called sin and evil would never have started. But God didn't because He is love and love is never forced.
There are things in the word/bible that seem to portray God as forceful but like many things i just have to trust that God is love and choose to have faith anyway. The questions we have will all be answered.
God has left some questions there as hooks to hang our doubts on if we choose to disbelieve. He gives us a way to not believe if we so choose. It wouldn't take faith if God answered all our questions and made it impossible to not believe His existance.
To sum it up, i see a God that can control all things, but allows us to have control of our lives, and if we understand who God is we will by faith let God take control (surrender of self).