Flesh vs Spirit

And why do some freely choose well and others freely choose poorly?

This is the major flaw of libertarian free will. It cannot answer the question "Why?"

And if a choice is free in a libertarian manner the reason for choosing the way one chooses is the EXACT same reason for choosing what he chose if he'd chosen differently.

It is utter philosophical MADNESS.

The libertarian rejects sense for nonsense.

WHY does a person choose what he chooses?

You pretend as if there is no REASON for such a choice.

This is MADNESS.

"John, why did you choose Christ?"

John- "Oh, no reason!"

That is libertarian free will.

 

No, I don't remember you ever giving an accountable answer.

 

Answer my question regarding the difference between Jack and John the Christian Arminian and the Christian Calvinist and you will have your answer regarding the difference between Jack and John the believer and the unbeliever.

 

You mean like how you can't answer why Satan freely chose to rebel against God?

We both appeal to mystery on some level Luke.

No, I teach the reason for the choice IS the chooser. The reason for the act is the actor. The reason for a determination is the determiner. To speculate as to how the free moral agent makes a choice is just as fruitless with a creature as it is with the creator. (you know the One you argue doesn't really make any choices) Neither are within our full view and complete understanding.

Uh, no.

John - "Because God graciously revealed himself to me."

No, just your perception of it from within your deterministic worldview. Step outside for while and take a breath of fresh "free" air...its much less stuffy out here. :smilewinkgrin:

 

Who holds that people make decisions without reason or cause? Who came up with this nonsensical definition?

I hardly believe Skandelon or anyone else (except perhaps Calvinists) believe this even possible.

I suspect this nonsensical definition was advanced by Calvinists in an attempt to discredit and negate free will.

God himself said men have free will.

Lev 1:3 If his offering be a burnt sacrifice of the herd, let him offer a male without blemish: he shall offer it of his own voluntary will at the door of the tabernacle of the congregation before the LORD.

Not only does God himself say man has his own free will, in this instance it is pertaining to the worship of God.

But I guess you Calvinists know more than God himself.

Talk about arrogance!

And just because we can't explain free will doesn't mean it doesn't exist. Man cannot understand gravity, but it exists.

Some folks like mustard on a hot dog, others prefer ketchup. Why? No one knows, but that doesn't mean these preferences do not exist.

A house of cards.

 

I said that in response to the statement, "those who receive Christ do so because they aren't as fallen as those who don't," so I take this respond to mean that you believe God's sense of justice is to make some more fallen than others due to the sin of Adam? I think you may be objecting to the wrong point.

He is fallible. The truth and its divine source is not.

BTW, That is my quote, not Arminius'.

 

Amen. This is why some of them and/or non cals believe some fellows were just doing some pretty righteous things, showing they are then able to come to Christ, contrary to the fact no man can, and that all are lost.

 

You are totallly hilarious. I simply cannot find the words that would be appropriate.

 

How was Adam able to hear God calling him after the fall? He was lost and not regenerated because he was hiding from when God called him.
Sure seems to me Adam was able. And so is every other man since then.

 

I completely disagree with you on this. Men come, when they are drawn and enabled. This by His Word.

 

Then explain how Adam was able to hear God although he was trying to hide from Him? When did the enabling take place?

 

It's called fallibility. The ability to choose wrongly...that is their "deficiency." The only other option is to suggest the divine message is deficient to accomplish the purpose of making the divine appeal to be reconciled.

As I've explained many times, to ask what determined them to choose wrongly is just another form of question begging because it presumes a deterministic response is needed.

 

Actually, he is right on one point Amy. Someone must be enabled to come to Jesus, but here is the question:

What means does God use to enable men to come to Christ?

Answer: THE GOSPEL.

In John 6, the gospel was being hidden from the Jews and hadn't even been sent into the rest of the world, thus the ONLY people being ENABLED were those the Father had given to the Son. The remnant of Israel (apostles) were revealed the truth, (but even they didn't really understand it all until after Christ was raised from the dead.)

The gospel is the power of God unto Salvation, but it was hidden from Israel for a time so as to accomplish the crucifixion and so as to allow for the ingrafting of the Gentiles. So, why couldn't the audience in John 6 come to Christ? I'll let Jesus answer that for us:

For this reason they could not believe, because, as Isaiah says elsewhere: "He has blinded their eyes and deadened their hearts, so they can neither see with their eyes, nor understand with their hearts, nor turn--and I would heal them." (Jn. 12:39-41).

Likewise Paul explains this very truth in Acts 28:

24 Some were convinced by what he said, but others would not believe. 25 They disagreed among themselves and began to leave after Paul had made this final statement: "The Holy Spirit spoke the truth to your forefathers when he said through Isaiah the prophet: 26 " 'Go to this people and say, "You will be ever hearing but never understanding; you will be ever seeing but never perceiving." 27 For this people's heart has become calloused; they hardly hear with their ears, and they have closed their eyes. Otherwise they might see with their eyes, hear with their ears, understand with their hearts and turn, and I would heal them.' 28 "Therefore I want you to know that God's salvation has been sent to the Gentiles, and they will listen!"

Notice the parts emboldened. It tells what Israel may have been able to do if not hardened and the Gentiles are clearly not in the same condition as it says, "they will listen." This is why Jesus speaks of their need to be enabled. You can't go to a party you haven't been invited to and the invitations were being hidden from some for a time.

 

Not if you don't presume a deterministic framework. Are God's choices random chance too? What determined him to choose you over someone else? Was he not free to pass over you?

No, I'm simply quoting the scriptures regarding the power of the gospel, the effectiveness of His truth, the surpassing riches of KNOWING him and his message.

What better remedy for an enemy of God is there than message from God appealing for reconciliation?

What better remedy for a slave is there than truth, when "the truth will set you free?"

What better remedy for dead man than a life giving message of redemption?

Yet, you PRESUME that this remedy is not applicable to most of humanity for the very reasons the remedy was sent..."because they are enemies, slaves and dead in sin." It's like saying the cure for cancer is not applicable to those with cancer.

That's a man-made doctrine created out of misunderstanding of the temporary hardening of Israel while the Gentiles were being grafted in. The message IS THE POWER, its not some secondary means. That message is so powerful that it had to be hidden in parables lest many of the Jews heard it, believed and were saved. It remained hidden until the appointed time when the Gentiles were established within the church. If Calvinists can come to understand this historical truth they will stop making this interpretive error.

Sounds like the perfect excuse for those who will be condemned.

The scripture says they perish because "they refused to love the truth and so be saved," but Aaron says, "they perish because the Holy Spirit refused to reveal to them the truth so that they might be saved." I'll go with the scripture.