Free Will

Actually it belongs in the Calvinist/Armenian Forum... The moderators will probably move it... You posed a question and before I answer you, to a question that has been asked on here many many, many times... What is your stand on free will?... Brother Glen

Btw... Welcome to the Baptist Board

 

I believe our new member has left some clues in some other threads.

Welcome to the BaptistBoard, Martindr.

 

Free will does not exist.
Man has a self will that is bound by a love of sin.
Man makes choices everyday.
Those choices are controlled by his selfish sin nature.
The idea of a will totally free will is the product of the carnal mind using fallen philosophical speculation.

 

Free will is a term used describe the process by which God has determined that man should choose to accept his offer of free grace or reject it (John 1:12; Luke 14:26-33; Luke 9:23; Mark 4:5-17). The choice given by God to man who is sovereign in all things is not without outside influences (Mark 4:5-17). There are at least three influences involved. First the personal and sinful nature within man himself (Romans 7:18-19). Sin can be a powerful draw and man most often allows its influence to pull him that way. Second, the world and its godless agenda (2 Peter 1:4). Man looks at the world and sees pleasure that can be difficult to walk away from. Third, the gospel Romans 1:16). The truth of God delivered by the Holy Spirit has the power to overcome the other two. As powerful as the gospel is God has determined to allow man to choose between the those influences.

At the core of the debate on this issue is the false idea that man has no ability to choose God without first being regenerated. The truth is there is not a single verse that states this it is only inferred by reformed folks. Inferred is often the same thing as eisegesis. There is not a single verse that explicitly says you have to be regenerated first. The author of the gospel of John ended his gospel with the purpose of its writing that the readers may believe. Romans 10:17 said faith is acquired by hearing the gospel. The ability to hear and understand the gospel is not tied to being regenerated first. Romans 10 covers the process by which one is saved. It begins by the need to call out to God, to recognize the need for God, the process of one being sent with the gospel, then the sent delivering the gospel, then the one to whom the gospel is delivered hearing, then the one to whom the gospel was delivered believing. No where is regeneration mentioned in all of that process.

The gospel preacher is sent, the gospel is delivered, the gospel is heard, the gospel is either believed or rejected. That entire process is ordained by God. The choice to accept or reject is ordained by God. God is not inhibited by the sin in man and He is not forced to regenerate man first nor is God forced to add an extra measure of grace beyond the gospel to influence man that man may believe.

 

Yet again not a single verse of scripture from you, no clear biblical explanation just a bombastic dig and those with whom you disagree. I wonder if you can actually use scripture without the use of someone else's article, with your own explanation to support this poor attempt.

It looks to me, from this post, that the philosophical speculation is yours.

 

This depends on how you define free will.

 

Why do you and what do you mean by Sovereign. This is a word Calvinist wish was biblical because it allows them to insert determinism. God is all mighty He is the one and only supreme being and creator of the universe. Why do Calvinist wish to degrade God and His nature by calling Him just Sovereign. He isn't a dictator that Calvinist wish He would be. He is a loving and benevolent God who is limitless in His power. God is not diminished by the Choice men have and still He maintains His highest power and rule.
I'm not justified by anything from Calvinism I consider it a false doctrine and not scriptural at all. I'm am Justified by faith in Jesus Christ.
MB

 

This is absolutely false. The word Sovereign God is used by everyone of differing theological persuasions.I disagree with calvinism. Trust me I have had my share of debates with calvinists. But if we become so anti-calvinism that we are against anything and everything they say just because a calvinist said it then we lose any true perspective. They in fact do not get everything wrong.

 

I can use scripture my friend.
This topic is carnal philosophical nonsense however.
You do not have one verse that speaks of free will.
When you find one verse that teaches it,go ahead and post it.
There was nothing bombastic here, just unfiltered truth that you do not like.

 

Still no scripture and apparently you couldn't find an article written by someone else like you usually do. You just throw out wild claims that you cannot support. We have gotten used to it from you.

 

Hello David,
Some take the term as it is used by natural men and comment on it.
The 1689 confession of faith discusses the concept which has no basis in biblical reality.

 

Again, like I said, it depends on what you mean when you say free will.

We do have free will in the sense that we can choose what we want. However, the question is what do we want? Nobody wants righteousness without a change from God.

 

I am currently driving returning from California.
I am approaching Ft.Worth so it does not lend itself to posting scripture which you will ignore anyhow.
If you want to speak on the phone while I am driving I will give you more scripture than you can process.
I find it amusing that someone who has posted on bb 45000 times and failed to offer scripture in 44940 of those posts should suggest such an idea.

 

Can God sin? Is His will free to be unholy?

 

The will of the sinner is, as @Iconoclast described it, self will. The sinner is under bondage to sin, ergo he is not free.

Sent from my Pixel 2 XL using Tapatalk

 

Free will is a fiction. We operate within the purview allowed by God. On the other end of the spectrum is total spiritual inability, where as a consequence of the Fall, the natural person, people of flesh cannot seek God or put their faith in Christ. I believe the lost have "limited spiritual ability" able to understand and respond to spiritual milk (the fundamentals of the gospel) but not able to understand spiritual solid food (meat).

This concept, limited spiritual ability, does not fit with the 'fundamental theological ideas" such as the TULIP.
Four of the five points of the TULIP are bogus, and therefore if you believe they are fundamental, there is nothing I can say.

 

Iconoclast notices that RM has offered a scriptural response. This has caused me th o pull off the road and get afresh coffee,lol.
Rm, thank you for this response which I will go over line by line, verse by verse when I get on the other side of Dallas Ft. Worth .....do not need to be slowed down more than is necessary.
Thank you also for being objective with the futile post of MB who wants to oppose himself

 

Sorry, instead of want I should have said what is according to our nature. Our wills are free to choose anything that aligns with our nature.