Free Will

Part Two:

I agree.

At issue is the understood conclusion from Scripture and its many declarations about man's will and "dead-in-sins" condition, that man has no ability or desire to choose God without first being regenerated.
One takes passages like Acts of the Apostles 16:14, notices that God opened Lydia's heart so that she listened intently to the words that Paul had to say, and understands that it happens that way for all of His people.

As I see it, inference is not the problem...
Understanding of the very words on the page, is.

What's more, I maintain that the charge of eisegesis is false... since Mr. Mitchell is either unable or unwilling to tell the reader what the words of Romans 1:18-32, Romans 3:10-18, and John 3:14-21, among many other passages, actually say in his own words.

Line by line, precept upon precept and "verse by verse".

That he is either unwilling or unable to break down passages like John 6:32-40 and 1 Corinthians 2:9-16 verse by verse, and let the reader see how he comes to his understanding of them, perplexes me...
Instead, he claims that their meaning cannot be understood contextually, apart from bringing that understanding in and developing it from other passages outside of them.

Since it is something that I've come to do naturally ( at first with great difficulty, and then progressively getting easier the more time that I put into my studies ) over years, I see no reason not to allow my brothers and sisters the opportunity to examine me before every word of Scripture.
It also puzzles me that he is unwilling to do so.
To me, it is the singular best way to get everything out into the open and let the readers decide who they think is understanding the Scriptures properly, and according to the very words written on the pages.

Therefore, I patiently await the day that my request will be answered.

Finally, I agree that there is not a single verse that explicitly says that a person has to be regenerated first.
It is a composite built upon many passages, and no one "proof text" goes all the way to explaining many matters of doctrine.

I agree.
But Scripture also tells us the reason why men believe, and why they do not.

John 10:26 is one of the reasons why they do not.
John 8:43-47 is another.
Acts of the Apostles 13:8b is one of the reasons they do, as well as John 6:44, John 6:65, John 17:2, John 6:29 and Psalms 65:4.

I disagree.

The passage does not say that faith is acquired by hearing the Gospel...
It says that faith is by hearing, and hearing by the word of God.

Faith being "acquired" is, to me, reading something into the passage that is not strictly on the page.
Faith comes by hearing.

Who hears God's word, if all men reject them apart from the new birth?

Those that have ears to hear ( Matthew 11:15 ).
Those that are "of" God ( John 8:47 ).

I disagree.

According to 1 Corinthians 1:18 as well as 1 Corinthians 2:14, natural ( i.e. not-born again ) people do not receive, or welcome the things of the Spirit of God.
Those things include His words....because they are foolishness to those who are not spiritual and do not have the mind of Christ.

Romans 10 covers the process by which a saved person, chosen "in Him" before the foundation of the world ( Ephesians 1:4 ), is made aware of their salvation...
By the word of God.

But the "process" is not developed in Romans 10...
It is developed in Romans 8 and Romans 9.

What's more, in Romans 10:20 we see that those that "find" God weren't really looking for Him when He "found" them.

 

Part Three:

It is believed because the target person is elect and already saved.
It is rejected because the target person is of "them that are perishing", the lost:

" For the preaching of the cross is to them that perish foolishness; but unto us which are saved it is the power of God." ( 1 Corinthians 1:18 ).

In addition, one must be "of God" to "hear" God's words ( John 8:43-47 ).
Those that are not "of God" will not welcome the words of God.

They reject them out of habit.

The only process ordained by God, in the matter of salvation, is the salvation of His elect.

He sends a preacher, they hear the words, and they believe those words.
The words of Scripture, not the words of men.

I agree that God is not inhibited by the sin in man...
He graciously opens the heart, so that we can then listen to the words that are spoken from Scripture ( Acts of the Apostles 16:14 ), just as He did for Lydia.

As far as an "extra measure of grace", there is none.
It is either of grace, or of works ( Romans 11:5-6 ).

His grace is what opens the hearts and minds to anything other then rejecting His words.
Just as the Pharisees did, and just as all men do when the Gospel is preached and they think it is foolishness and walk away.

We as sinful men need all the help that we can get to come to grips with our sinful condition and our need of a Saviour.
Without His Spirit to do the work, we as rebellious men would only reject His words and continue in our sins...

Right up until our deaths and being cast into Hell.

His grace is all sufficient, and all powerful.
He is the one who makes a person born again.
Their reception of Him is because they are born again:

" He was in the world, and the world was made by him, and the world knew him not.
11 He came unto his own, and his own received him not.
12 But as many as received him, to them gave he power to become the sons of God, [even] to them that believe on his name:
13 which were born, not of blood, nor of the will of the flesh, nor of the will of man, but of God." ( John 1:10-13 ).

The reason they received Him and believed on His name, was because they were born of God.
It had nothing to do with their will, other men's will, or even their bloodline.

" Whosoever believeth that Jesus is the Christ is born of God: and every one that loveth him that begat loveth him also that is begotten of him." ( 1 John 5:1 ).
The verse above does not say that whosoever believes that Jesus is the Christ becomes born again...
It says that whosoever believes that Jesus is the Christ IS born of God.


With all due respect to the esteemed Mr. Mitchell, I have to disagree.
The new birth takes place first.

"Free will" isn't free, it is enslaved by sin.

God does not make all men's wills to be free when the Gospel is preached,
He opens the hearts of His people so that they will listen intently to the words, spiritually.

Just like He did for Lydia.


May God bless you all.

 

Thank you for that!... I agree and the Apostle Paul even emphasizes that thought in Romans 7... Brother Glen

Romans 7:14 For we know that the law is spiritual: but I am carnal, sold under sin.

7:15 For that which I do I allow not: for what I would, that do I not; but what I hate, that do I.

7:16 If then I do that which I would not, I consent unto the law that it is good.

7:17 Now then it is no more I that do it, but sin that dwelleth in me.

7:18 For I know that in me (that is, in my flesh,) dwelleth no good thing: for to will is present with me; but how to perform that which is good I find not.

7:19 For the good that I would I do not: but the evil which I would not, that I do.

7:20 Now if I do that I would not, it is no more I that do it, but sin that dwelleth in me.

7:21 I find then a law, that, when I would do good, evil is present with me.

7:22 For I delight in the law of God after the inward man:

7:23 But I see another law in my members, warring against the law of my mind, and bringing me into captivity to the law of sin which is in my members.

7:24 O wretched man that I am! who shall deliver me from the body of this death?

7:25 I thank God through Jesus Christ our Lord. So then with the mind I myself serve the law of God; but with the flesh the law of sin.

 

No, Peter does not make that claim at all.
I walked you through what Peter very clearly said. You are just dismissing the text to hold to a claim that Peter never makes, but you need in order for your faulty teaching to remain propped up.

I very clearly explained how Peter state's "you", which is connected to verse 1 of chapter 1 and therefore the all is also connected to verse 1 of chapter 1.

The fact that you refuse to read all of Peter's letter in its context and butcher his letter through faulty hermeneutics is entirely your problem, not mine. I have done my job, now you do yours or admit that you don't know what you are talking about.

 

While in our old nature, separated from God due to the consequence of our sin nature, we could do nothing that was pleasing or acceptable to God. Therefore, in the spiritual sense, we could not act in contradiction to our nature.

As a born-again believer, child of God, we can and should strive to live a life worthy of His name. However, due to the influence of our sin nature, which we still have, we can and do act in contradiction to our nature as a child of God. Our loving heavenly Father chastises us when we need it to bring us back into fellowship if we neglect seeking forgiveness.

[2Co 5:17 KJV] 17 Therefore if any man [be] in Christ, [he is] a new[G2537] (a new kind, unprecedented, novel, uncommon, unheard of) creature:[G2937] (individual things, beings, a creature, a creation) old things are passed away; behold, all things are become new.

I believe our "new creature" status is "a new kind, unprecedented, novel, uncommon, unheard of". God has not yet revealed to human eyes what we look like as His new creation!

[1Jo 3:2 KJV] 2 Beloved, now are we the sons of God, and it doth not yet appear what we shall be: but we know that, when he shall appear, we shall be like him; for we shall see him as he is.

[Heb 12:7-8 KJV] 7 If ye endure chastening, God dealeth with you as with sons; for what son is he whom the father chasteneth not? 8 But if ye be without chastisement, whereof all are partakers, then are ye bastards, and not sons.

 

Well its contradictory and inconsistent to claim we cannot respond to God because of our nature but then once we get a new nature to say we can act inconsistent with that.

 

Now you are arguing semantics. The Bible clearly shows that us lowly humans can make choices and that we are able to make either. If you wish to come up with some separate concept “free will” and say we don’t have it. So be it. As Calvinists love to point out, the words “free will” do not appear consecutively in the Bible.

So, if you want to discuss the Greek classical concept of will and how our will is merely an echo of the demiurge, that’s fine. It doesn’t have anything to do with the Bible.

 

2 Peter 3:9 The Lord is not slack concerning His promise, as some count slackness, but is longsuffering toward us, not willing that any should perish but that all should come to repentance.

While the opening paragraph of the 2 Peter may say it is written "to those who have obtained faith" it does not mean it is not written for the unsaved, either. If we take that approach, we'd have to divorce ourselves from pretty much all of the gospels and the first half of the book of Acts, because they apply to a Jewish audience. We'd have to throw out the Beatitudes and the parables because they were written to the Jews.

Please see this post:
Where Is Free Will?

Yes, but you just said this book was written to believers, to those who have obtained faith, (or people that have already repented.) Why would Peter say that God doesn't want anyone who has obtained faith to perish? Surely they are saved and in no danger to perish! Why would believers need to repent to avoid perishing?

So, you clearly have zero clue what Peter is talking about. You have twisted one verse so that it is wrongly interpreted and applied. You need to stop your abuse of God's word and repent.

 

Very simply, Peter is extending "you" to all who will "obtain a faith of equal standing."
Just as the judgment of the flood did not happen until the Ark was finished, so the judgment of fire will not happen until the last person obtains faith. God is not willing that any person destined to obtain faith would perish in the fire of his judgment.
It's all right there. It's slapping you in the face. Yet, in your foolishness, you refuse to acknowledge it. Instead, you look for a loophole and an excuse.
So be it.
I'm done explaining this passage. Live with your hermeneutical error if you must.

 

Not so fast, after salvation we still have the old nature as well.

 

It depends on how you are defining "nature". If by nature you mean that both the old man and the new man (Ephesians 4:22-24) have some sort of dualistic existence within a believer, I would emphatically state "NO!". We have the Spirit of Christ (Romans 8:9). However, if by "nature" you mean the residual effects of the old man that wage war in our minds, tempting us to sin, then I would say "yes". Romans 12:2 tells us to "be transformed by the renewing of your mind". Paul uses similar language back in Ephesians 4:22-24: "22 that, in reference to your former manner of life, you lay aside the old self, which is being corrupted in accordance with the lusts of deceit, 23 and that you be renewed in the spirit of your mind, 24 and put on the new self, which in the likeness of God has been created in righteousness and holiness of the truth." The last gasp of the old man (our former sin nature) is in our minds and physical body (to the extent that our physical bodies will experience corruption). Lastly, in Romans 7:14-25, Paul writes about the conflict the believer faces with sin. In this passage, it seems that he is talking about two natures. But even here he offers clarity in verse 18 which reads, "For I know that nothing good dwells in me, that is, in my flesh; for the willing is present in me, but the doing of the good is not." The flesh (which I believe is synonymous with the mind) is that last fertile battleground in which we fight against sin.

I apologize if this was too much of a rabbit trail to the discussion.

 

It's written to believers.

The unsaved do not hear the words of God ( John 8:47 ).

Every epistle and every word of God is written to the "spiritual man".

The "natural man" does not receive the things of the Spirit of God.
They are foolishness to them ( again, 1 Corinthians 2:14-16 ).

The preaching of the cross is, to them that perish ( the lost ), foolishness.
To us which are saved, it is the power of God ( again, 1 Corinthians 1:18 ).

It is.

Read the words again, ITL.

Peter is not writing to the unsaved.
He is writing to the saved...to those who have obtained faith.

The words of God were not written for those He does not love...they were written for His people.
Those words are for you, if you've believed on Christ for the forgiveness of your sins.

Great and exceedingly rich promises of an eternal fellowship with Him.

 

Yes this is what I mean.

 

Doc Martin?!?

 

Yup

 

No, the only thing you 'walked" me through was your personal calvinist opinion. Again, who does "all" leave out ?

And did Jesus refuse to save anyone who asked Him to save him ?

Was Trump POTUS-elect before the 2016 election ?

Sure, there are some pre-selected elect, such Moses, jeremiah, the apostles, etc. but every other Christian has to BE elected, with Jesus having the sole "electoral vote".

I had parents who tirelessly presented the Gospel to me, but without being the least bit overbearing about it, until finally I chose to fully believe it & abide by it. I never felt that I had been "predestined" to receive it. I know others who were equally presented with the Gospel by someone, but who chose to ignore it, as I'd done for years.

And again, if everyone is "predestined", with co chance to change one's status, why preach? Why have Bibles, churches, etc? Why bother to worship?

Your version of the "electoral process" falls flat on its snoot.

 

There's PLENTY of biblical foundation.

Moses didn't wanna be a spokesman for the Israelis, & kept makingt excuses, which God countered, til finally God told Moses to go. And He told Jeremiah that if he failed to repeat His words for Jerry to take to the people, God would punish him. Jesus made His power obvious to Paul. So again, God made "an offer he couldn't refuse" to His chosen spokesmen. They were not robots; they coulda chosen to have defied God, as Jonah did.

 

This is just so wrong, that I cannot let it stand.

God does not turn away from sin. He looks upon sin every instance of our existence. He deals constantly with the sinful and the accuser of the redeemed. He knows even the very core values of that "father of all lies."

"Your problem is you just have no truth."

Not certain why you want to rant about the God I want. Perhaps your exuberance drives you beyond that which is Scripturally foundational. So just a little about the God I don't just want, but that I actually have and serve:

Revelation 4:11
Ephesians 3:9
Colossians 1:6
Hebrews 3:4
John 1:9
Hebrews 4:13
Hebrews 1:2
Jeremiah 10:16
Jeremiah 51:19
Colossians 1:15
Isaiah 42:5​

My God may certainly be mocked by inappropriate remarks, but He has authority to bring rebuke to that which He desires to rebuke, set aside that which has become unuseful, remove the light, and leave one to their own imaginations, have mercy upon whom He chooses, leave condemned that which He does not...

I love Him because He FIRST loved me.
Before I knew anything about Him, He died for me,.
Before I was born, He had the form I would take and the plan already established.

Can you actually post in context anyplace that states that God cannot look upon sin much less deal with the sinful, mold the sinful, use the sinful...?

 

Enormous #4.

 

Just as you do scripture you also do to my post. You misinterpret it. I didn't say God doesn't deal with the sin. I said He doesn't touch it. In that He is not part of your sin. He does not predetermine it. You still have no truth. It still stands
MB