Featured World 3:16

Scripture deals with the heart of man, which is "desire".
While I tend to agree with you, and do not contend that man has no will, I see man's will being influenced by our desires...which God's word has quite a bit to say about.

Some examples are here:

Jeremiah 17:9
Matthew 15:18-19
Mark 7:20-23

Desire acts as the "motivator", or engine for the will.
Man's will is directly influenced, or "governed" by our desires, which then lead to actions.

For example:

" Let no man say when he is tempted, I am tempted of God: for God cannot be tempted with evil, neither tempteth he any man:
14 but every man is tempted, when he is drawn away of his own lust, and enticed.
15 Then when lust hath conceived, it bringeth forth sin: and sin, when it is finished, bringeth forth death." ( James 1:13-15 ).

Here we see that along comes temptation...

Man responds to that temptation because of lust.
Lust leads to enticement ( see Genesis 3:6 ).
Then, when it conceives ( a thing is formed ), it brings forth sin ( disobedience to God's will ), and when it's all said and done, it brings forth death ( separation from God ).

Then we see Romans 1:

" For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men, who hold the truth in unrighteousness;"

" And even as they did not like to retain God in [their] knowledge, God gave them over to a reprobate mind, to do those things which are not convenient;
29 being filled with all unrighteousness, fornication, wickedness, covetousness, maliciousness; full of envy, murder, debate, deceit, malignity; whisperers,
30 backbiters, haters of God, despiteful, proud, boasters, inventors of evil things, disobedient to parents,
31 without understanding, covenantbreakers, without natural affection, implacable, unmerciful:
32 who knowing the judgment of God, that they which commit such things are worthy of death, not only do the same, but have pleasure in them that do them." ( Romans 1:28-32 ).

Based on these passages, where is man's will inclined?

I think that you and I are generally in agreement with what this says, but I know of many who post on this forum that cannot seem to see the significance of these passages, and how descriptive they are in their objectivity about us as men.

They paint a very informative picture of what man's will is like, wouldn't you agree?

 

Sometimes writing something, versus face-to-face communication, leaves a lot to be desired for its lack of 3 dimensions.

I can see how someone might misunderstand that you were only trying to encourage the reader to slow down and read every word carefully, but written communication is limited to words on a page, while face-to-face interaction gives people more information with which to determine things...like body language, etc.


In other words, it's easy to misunderstand an intention on a forum, unless one learns how to write.
I'm still learning, my friend, and I've made too many mistakes to count.

 

Responding to the OP:

"World" is a contextual term, as are many terms in the Scriptures.
How it is used in the Bible is often not carefully taken into consideration when verses are isolated from the rest of what God has to say on a matter.

@Iconoclast , I think you gave a good example in your first few posts.
Please allow me to develop...

" For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life.
17 For God sent not his Son into the world to condemn the world; but that the world through him might be saved." ( John 3:16-17 ).

Without more context, here is what I see with just these verses:

God so loved the world...every single man, woman and child who ever lived.
God sent His Son into the world...to this earth.
Not to condemn the world....every single man, woman and child who ever lived.
But that the world through Him might be saved....every single man woman and child who ever lived.

There it is, and there it stands...
With no other information brought in from other things that God has to say on the matter, it is limited to what we can make of it in isolation.

 

As discerning readers of God's word, should that be enough to proceed on...the results of one or two verses?

Let's do that.
Let's take what we see in the verses above, and run with it...
God loves everyone ( the world ).

Now before we go any further...

Does God hate anyone?
Are there examples of God not loving everyone, or favoring some and not others?
To find those, we'll need to study His words a lot more than simply taking what one or two verses seem to say on any particular topic, shouldn't we?

So, when I read His word, I start to come across other things that God has to say about who He loves and who He hates...
Here are some that deal with God hating someone:

Psalms 5:5
Psalms 11:5
Romans 9:13.

Now we have a problem that, if anyone seriously seeks to let God's word speak on any given subject, they should not be content to simply accept the first thing that comes to mind.

If the "world" in John 3:16 means every single man, woman and child who ever lived, then we have a contradiction that should not be overlooked, should it?
No.
Because that contradiction could lead to ignoring what is said in the other passages, and favoring parts of what God's word says, when we should be favoring it all equally ( Matthew 4:4, Luke 4:4 ) and arriving at a consensus of it on any subject, when that subject is studied out thoroughly.



Study His words, dear reader...
All of them equally.

Don't fall for simply believing what verses say in isolation, no matter what one preacher or another has to say on the matter... whether they are "Calvinist", "Arminian" or "Traditionalist".
At the end of the day, you are the one who needs to be persuaded, and it should only be God's words ( and a thorough understanding of them ) that should be doing the persuading.

@Iconoclast :
The thread is yours again, my friend, and I thank you for the privilege of replying to your OP.

Have a good evening.

 

#4 (Again)

 

These two posts represent diametrically opposite viewpoints such that no bona fide reconciliation seems possible. How is it they emanate from the same poster?

Chapter 9: Of Free Will
1._____ God hath endued the will of man with that natural liberty and power of acting upon choice, that it is neither forced, nor by any necessity of nature determined to do good or evil.
( Matthew 17:12; James 1:14; Deuteronomy 30:19 )

2._____ Man, in his state of innocency, had freedom and power to will and to do that which was good and well-pleasing to God, but yet was unstable, so that he might fall from it.
( Ecclesiastes 7:29; Genesis 3:6 )

3._____ Man, by his fall into a state of sin, hath wholly lost all ability of will to any spiritual good accompanying salvation; so as a natural man, being altogether averse from that good, and dead in sin, is not able by his own strength to convert himself, or to prepare himself thereunto.
( Romans 5:6; Romans 8:7; Ephesians 2:1, 5; Titus 3:3-5; John 6:44 )

4._____ When God converts a sinner, and translates him into the state of grace, he freeth him from his natural bondage under sin, and by his grace alone enables him freely to will and to do that which is spiritually good; yet so as that by reason of his remaining corruptions, he doth not perfectly, nor only will, that which is good, but doth also will that which is evil.
( Colossians 1:13; John 8:36; Philippians 2:13; Romans 7:15, 18, 19, 21, 23 )

5._____ This will of man is made perfectly and immutably free to good alone in the state of glory only.
( Ephesians 4:13 )​

 

Hi back, IC,

My only point is that the 1689 LBCF embraces a concept of free will in its explanation. It doesn't explain it away. In other words, the 1689 LBCF does not square with your total denial, meaning it doesn't support your stance, but you seemed to be referencing it as though it does. Either its explanation is error-filled or your total denial is erroneous, or both.

I did consider the possibility that the blanks after the numbers are to be filled in with T or F depending on the reference verses, but that doesn't seeem to be the intent of the Confession.

Another possibility is that you did not mean to imply that it supports your stance. In any case, it doesn't.

 

Jon?
If I may ask, what was the purpose of this?