A Fresh Call to Faithfulness in Our Free Will Baptist Heritage

[Armchair Apologist]

To be fair, free will is not necessarily always running away from God, disobeying His laws, or pursuing inherent sinful lusts.

I am simply going with what the scriptures tell us (Jn 3:19; Rom 3; Eph 2:1-9, etc.)

I would assert that man left to his own free will, will always run from, never towards God. Jesus said that "no man comes to me except the father draw him" (Jn 6:44) and even non-calvinists will acknowledge this. Evangelists often exhort their congregation saying "If God is dealing with you regarding your eternal soul today, there is no guarantee he will continue to deal with you tomorrow, behold now is the day of salvation!"

I think we would all be in agreement here.

Many unsaved individuals begin to seek God, obey His laws written in their conscience, and exercise rigorous restraint toward sinful lusts.

Yes, God uses our reasoning and intellect to bring us to the knowledge of the truth. I can think of my own salvation experience and see that this is true. I sat in a public High School biology class where I was convinced that the intricate design throughout nature could only happen from a sovereign creator of whom I was accountable. I tried to obey the "laws written on my conscience" and saw my complete inability to do so.

In some respects, I can understand how one could see such things as my "Seeking after God" but it seems quite clear to me that it was God who was seeking after and pursuing me! I simply couldn't outrun him! Perhaps there are those who see the very same things I have and chose instead to ignore them, to "conceal the truth in unrighteousness" and continue along their way. I have dealt with many who seemed "Really Close" but then made the ultimate decision to reject Christ and from that point onward, there was nothing I could do to convince them otherwise!

In some cases, people like Buddhists and stoics can sometimes be more ethical and ascetic than many Christians.

I would hope that you and I will both agree here that such are very much lost and are yet dead in their sins, right?

Romans 10:3 - For they being ignorant of God's righteousness, and going about to establish their own righteousness, have not submitted themselves unto the righteousness of God. I know that Paul is speaking specifically of the Jews who have rejected Christ but this simply man's sinful nature that they naturally believe they are "OK" and are thus able to merit favor with God on their own!

To say all unbelievers are worthless trash is not an effective orientation for evangelism. Compared to our holy God, all human works amount to nothing but filthy rags, but in the context of humanity, there are good morals that benefit society.

I never said any such thing! We are the Imago Dei and as such, have incredible value and worth! That there are moral restraint in our society is due to God's common grace given to all men! Total depravity does not mean man is as wicked as he could possibly be. Even Adolph Hitler had morals and principles which guided him.

Romans 2:14,15

For when the Gentiles, who have not the law, do by nature the things contained in the law, they, not having the law, are a law unto themselves,

Which shew the work of the law written in their hearts, their conscience also bearing witness, and their thoughts the mean while accusing or else excusing one another

Yes, God deals with every man through the "Work of his Creation" and the "Witness of his Conscience" and with this general revelation, man is rendered "Without excuse" without ever hearing or understanding the gospel! It is only through the special revelation of the "Written Canon of the scriptures" that a man is able to become wise unto salvation.

 

[Armchair Apologist]

You all have some great questions. Below is my response to each of the 9 questions.

1. Does “free will” apply only to salvation?​

Free Will Baptists affirm real moral agency in all areas of life. “Free will” does not mean freedom from influence, but the God‑given ability—enabled by prevenient grace—to respond to God.

Prevenient grace (grace that “goes before”) restores the sinner’s ability to respond without forcing the response. Thus, free will applies broadly, but is most emphasized in salvation because that is where Calvinism denies it.

To be fair, most biblically balanced Calvinists acknowledge both God's sovereignty and man's responsibility. There are some extreme, "hyper-Calvinist" types who are "fatalist" and deny the human responsibility aspect.

I can see certain aspects of prevenient grace at work but all men without exception are responsible to repent and believe the Gospel.

As I have stated, I believe that in certain aspects, Free-Will Baptists are more consistent than most eternal-security believing non-Calvininsts but this leaves many questions relating to forensic justification whereby one has been "Declared Righteous" through the finished work of Christ. If one has been declared righteous through Christ's finished, redemptive work, how could they ever be declared unrighteous through any thing they may have done? Are we speaking of a "Conditional Imputation" here?

3. Why would someone “alive in Christ” ever return to spiritual death and commit apostasy?​

Because regeneration does not destroy free will. Believers are truly made alive, yet still capable of choosing unbelief.

Hebrews warns real believers:

Hebrews 6:4–6 describes people who were:

• “enlightened,”
• “partakers of the Holy Ghost,”
• “tasted the good word of God.”

The verb “fall away” is παραπεσόντας (parapesontas)**—to apostatize. Free Will Baptists affirm that believers can truly fall from grace by willful unbelief, not by accident or weakness.

And I believe that the author of Hebrews makes the case that if one is actually "In Christ" and is able to fall from their salvation, that Christ would have to "redo" his work of redemption in order to "restore" you to salvation and that such would never happen. Therefore, there is no hope whatsoever for those who ultimately fall away and apostacize. Would this accurately reflect the Free-Will Baptist position?

4. Did God honor Jonah’s free will or Saul’s free will?​

God overruled their choices providentially, but did not annihilate their agency.

Jonah chose to flee; God disciplined him, yet Jonah still had to choose obedience (Jon. 3:3). Saul chose to persecute; Christ confronted him, yet Saul still had to respond (Acts 9:6).

Free Will Baptists affirm that God governs human choices without predetermining them.

I think we can all agree that God's sovereignty is not limited or thwarted by man's free will.

5. What is the Free Will Baptist view of World Missions and the Great Commission?​

We are strongly missions‑minded. Christ’s command is universal:

We reject the idea that people are “better off” never hearing the gospel. Romans 1:20 teaches that general revelation leaves all men without excuse, but Romans 10:14 teaches that the gospel is God’s appointed means of salvation.

Thus:

• All are accountable for the light they have.
• The gospel must be preached to all.
• No one is “excused” in a way that makes missions unnecessary.

I think we are in general agreement here. There are scriptures speaking of those having the "greater condemnation" and of the judgment being more tolearable for Sodom than those of whom Christ was preaching to.

So, you would agree that one cannot be saved outside of the message of the Gospel?

6. Regarding “saved by faith, kept by faith”—what role does regeneration play?​

Regeneration is a supernatural change, not mental assent.

Greek παλιγγενεσία (palingenesia)** = “new birth, new genesis.”

We are:

• Saved by grace through faith (Eph. 2:8).
• Kept by the power of God through faith (1 Pet. 1:5).

Faith (πίστις pistis) means trusting, obedient reliance, not mere intellectual agreement. Regeneration produces new desires, yet believers must continue trusting Christ. This ongoing faith is Spirit-enabled, not self‑generated.

I am guessing your view is similar to others who believe they could fall from grace; that such is possible yet it is difficult to define at what point such may actually occur? For others such as myself, this would just be an unregenerate person "showing his or her true colors" or simply admitting that they never actually possessed that which they actually professed. For most so-called "Ex-vangelicals" out there, I would say it is quite easy to pick out the fatal flaws in their theological understanding of their original "salvation experience" and I am being generous in saying "most" in that perhaps there may be one or two out there who may actually have a convincing argument that perhaps I am not aware?

7. Hebrews 6 and 10—are these warnings to professing Jews or true believers?​

Free Will Baptists hold that these warnings are addressed to true believers, not merely professing Jews.

Hebrews 10:29 says the person was:

• “sanctified” (ἁγιάζω hagiazō)
• by “the blood of the covenant.”

This verb is used of genuine believers (Heb. 2:11; 10:10).

Hebrews 6 describes people who were “partakers of the Holy Ghost.” This is not language for unconverted churchgoers.

Thus:

• Hebrews warns real believers against apostasy.
• Apostasy is a willful, persistent rejection of Christ and His blood.

Much of what I have stated above should suffice my understanding here. I would simply state that I agree with you about apostacy being a wilful, persistent rejection of Christ and his blood which to me, is consistent with that of an unbeliever. One could be "Playing the Game" and sincerely deceiving themselves or perhaps they may be aware of their unregenerative state and yet "playing the game" in order to deceive others. While some come to the realization of their hypocrisy and come to an actual repentance and faith (genuine conversion), others walk away as the "dog who returns to his own vomit" and repudiates the faith they once professed.

8. Difference between divine discipline and apostasy? And is conditional perseverance “dependent on us”?​

Divine discipline = God correcting His children who still possess faith, though disobedient.

Apostasy = deliberate abandonment of faith.

Conditional perseverance means:

• Believers must continue in faith (Col. 1:23).
• God enables this perseverance (Phil. 2:13).
• God keeps us through faith (1 Pet. 1:5).

Thus perseverance is synergistic: God keeps us, and we continue trusting Him. If someone is comfortable in sin with no discipline, it is evidence of no regeneration, and church discipline is appropriate.

So I guess you are "Consistently synergistic?" I would say that there is, in fact, some aspects of synergism in our sanctification (Rom 6:13-16) but that there is even a struggle here is evidence to me that regeneration has taken place. One may "Play the game" for a while but I believe that God is the one who ultimately keeps you and that such will be evident in a changed life that is becoming more and more consistent.

9. Why do we continue trusting Christ after salvation?​

Because salvation is a living relationship, not a one‑time transaction.

We continue trusting because:

• Christ is our life (Col. 3:4).
• We are commanded to abide (μένω menō) in Him (Jn. 15:4).
• We are warned not to be “moved away” from the gospel (Col. 1:23).

Faith is not a past event; it is a present posture. We were saved by faith; we live by faith (Gal. 2:20). If we cease trusting Christ, we cut ourselves off from the saving benefits of His atonement.

And to all of this, I would say "AMEN!"

 

[Ben1445]

I'm sorry, where was I inconsistent here? My apologies if I was not clear.

Based upon what I have stated, are we at least in agreement regarding these points?

So let’s recap.

I believe you meant Jonah but good point nonetheless! If you are Christ's he will not honor your "free will" to be disobedient or to bring dishonor to him!

However, when we look at Saul's conversion, do we see anything remotely pertaining to "free will" aside from God literally changing his "will?" I am certain that Paul wasn't complaining that God had violated his "free will" here!

But with Paul, he wanted to serve the Lord and didn’t know who He was. This is not, as you say against his will. It is a correction of Saul’s mistaken belief.

I believe the above answers the question for Paul. His will was already submitted to God in his own mind. It was only a matter of needing an introduction.

If you wanted

Already you believe in free will.

to exercise your "Free Will," jump off a cliff and end your life and three or four big guys came around and wrestled you to the ground, would you be upset with them for violating your "Free Will?"

They have not changed anyone’s will. Just their actions.

Perhaps at the moment but what about

after you had time to gather your thoughts and in a moment of clarity you realized

Enter again the personal decision to change one’s mind.

how stupid it would've been to end your life and despite how bad things may happen to be at the moment, you still want to live? Perhaps you would then be thankful that these men were around to prevent you from making such a dumb decision? Perhaps it is divine providence intervening on your behalf and I believe we are all grateful that God has done so regarding the manner in which each of us may have come to a saving faith in him!

I affirm that God intervenes on our behalf at times in life. Certainly Jesus providing Himself as our sacrifice is intervening on our behalf. Whether or not people can decide to accept or reject His intervention is I think the real question here.

Sometimes we give the Devil and his demons way too much credit than they actually deserve! We are capable of doing all sorts of dumb things without their assistance!

Absolutely agree here.

God would be quite merciful in having these men at the right place at the right time to stop you from doing something that was really, really dumb, right? Then again, he could've just let you exercise your "free will" and allow you to make that "leap into eternity!" We often hear in the news of similar circumstances ending either heroically or tragically. God is sovereign over both is he not?

God always has the final say. But God having the final say doesn’t mean that we are not responsible for our own decisions or would be unable to make decisions.

God is glorified when people see you singing that "New Song" that he has placed in your mouth making you a new creature and having you clothed and in your right mind!

And yet we have the ability to sin. That is not of God. That is still the will of the flesh. A will that does exist even still in a born again believer.

Now, I know you disagree with me regarding certain aspects of "Calvinism" but I'm sure you can say "AMEN!" to everything I have stated here right?

See above.

Your will was thwarted was it not?

In an arm wrestling match, you cannot say that the loser doesn’t have any will because they lack the ability to overcome.

Sir, what exactly are we arguing over here? Where have I said that we do not have a free will?

When you say “free will,” it changes the way it is read.
My take on what you have said is that if you are overpowered it is as if you don’t have free will.

Our free will is disposed to sin, we freely run from God, freely disobey his laws, and freely pursue our inherent sinful lusts! Two words change absolutely everything - But God! If you are in Christ and have received the same grace and mercy as I have, such words should not spark an argument but should lead to our rejoicing and shouting "AMEN!"

Am I right or wrong here?

Is it “But God” across the board or just for some people? Because if it is not a genuine offer of eternal life to whosoever, then there is no free will.
But I see a clear path to salvation through Jesus Christ to all men no exception. I do not say all exercise their free will and take the path that is Jesus Christ.

 

[Armchair Apologist]

So let’s recap.




I believe the above answers the question for Paul. His will was already submitted to God in his own mind. It was only a matter of needing an introduction.



Already you believe in free will.


They have not changed anyone’s will. Just their actions.




Enter again the personal decision to change one’s mind.


I affirm that God intervenes on our behalf at times in life. Certainly Jesus providing Himself as our sacrifice is intervening on our behalf. Whether or not people can decide to accept or reject His intervention is I think the real question here.


Absolutely agree here.


God always has the final say. But God having the final say doesn’t mean that we are not responsible for our own decisions or would be unable to make decisions.


And yet we have the ability to sin. That is not of God. That is still the will of the flesh. A will that does exist even still in a born again believer.


See above.

In an arm wrestling match, you cannot say that the loser doesn’t have any will because they lack the ability to overcome.


When you say “free will,” it changes the way it is read.
My take on what you have said is that if you are overpowered it is as if you don’t have free will.


Is it But God across the board or just for some people? Because if it is not a genuine offer of eternal life to whosoever, then there is no free will.
But I see a clear path to salvation through Jesus Christ to all men no exception. I do not say all exercise their free will and take the path that is Jesus Christ.

I really do not know what to say here. Not even sure I want to go down this rabbit hole!

I believe I have been quite consistent.

 

[Ben1445]

I really do not know what to say here. Not even sure I want to go down this rabbit hole!

I believe I have been quite consistent.

That is how I read what you have posted. If it doesn’t represent what you believe, correct me.

 

[Armchair Apologist]

I believe the above answers the question for Paul. His will was already submitted to God in his own mind. It was only a matter of needing an introduction.

No doubt that he was sincere but he was sincerely wrong and quite deceived. The heart is deceitful above all things and desperately wicked. Saul's actions bear this out. If you are going to say he merely acted on some "new information," then there are some serious flaws in you theology that you need to go back and revisit! I would rather give you the benefit of the doubt.

Already you believe in free will.

Never said I didn't.

They have not changed anyone’s will. Just their actions.

No, but they have been providentially hindered from doing something really stupid. No one is coerced into salvation but based upon the scenario I have outlined, salvation does come later which does, in fact lead to a change of the will and of the mind. It is something that is called repentance.

Enter again the personal decision to change one’s mind.

Are you trying to say you are saved because you "Decided" to be saved? Is this how salvation works?

I affirm that God intervenes on our behalf at times in life. Certainly Jesus providing Himself as our sacrifice is intervening on our behalf. Whether or not people can decide to accept or reject His intervention is I think the real question here.

The gospel is foolishness to them that perish. To those who are saved, it is the power of God!

Absolutely agree here.

Glad we agree on something.

God always has the final say. But God having the final say doesn’t mean that we are not responsible for our own decisions or would be unable to make decisions.

I have been speaking of man's responsibility the entire time. God is sovereign over whom he saves and all men every are commanded to repent. Both statements are true.

And yet we have the ability to sin. That is not of God. That is still the will of the flesh. A will that does exist even still in a born again believer.

Yes we do but God allowed it nonetheless. Our salvation brought about a change of heart, change of mind, and a change of affections but we still struggle with our old nature.

In an arm wrestling match, you cannot say that the loser doesn’t have any will because they lack the ability to overcome.

And I guess you could also remain self-deluded that somehow you may win one way or the other. This would be consistent with Jer 17:9 wouldn't it?

When you say “free will,” it changes the way it is read.
My take on what you have said is that if you are overpowered it is as if you don’t have free will.

Nope, will and ability are two separate things. You can have an earnest desire to visit the Andromeda Galaxy but without the ability, it will never happen.

Is it “But God” across the board or just for some people? Because if it is not a genuine offer of eternal life to whosoever, then there is no free will.
But I see a clear path to salvation through Jesus Christ to all men no exception. I do not say all exercise their free will and take the path that is Jesus Christ.

Without the "But God," we are all doomed. Plain and simple. No one seeks after God on their own.

That's about all I have to say on the matter.

 

[Ben1445]

No doubt that he was sincere but he was sincerely wrong and quite deceived. The heart is deceitful above all things and desperately wicked. Saul's actions bear this out. If you are going to say he merely acted on some "new information," then there are some serious flaws in you theology that you need to go back and revisit! I would rather give you the benefit of the doubt.

You are telling me that Saul did not desire to serve the Lord? His desire was to go against God? He woke up every morning saying what can I do that is against God?
I don’t think so.

Never said I didn't

Well, I’m glad we agree on something.

No, but they have been providentially hindered from doing something really stupid. No one is coerced into salvation but based upon the scenario I have outlined, salvation does come later which does, in fact lead to a change of the will and of the mind. It is something that is called repentance.

Does the sovereignty of God repent for you or is that something that happens in your own will when you yield to God and stop resisting. Is that wen you cease from your own works?

Are you trying to say you are saved because you "Decided" to be saved?

Now you don’t believe in free will again?

Is this how salvation works?

That isn’t how it works. It is how it is applied to each of us who receives it. We don’t decide that there will be a sacrifice for our sins. What we do decide is to obey God and come to Him represented by the Sacrifice that He has commanded us to come with, the Sacrifice that He provides.

The gospel is foolishness to them that perish.

Sure it is. That is why they perish.

To those who are saved, it is the power of God!

Amen.

Glad we agree on something.

Me too.

I have been speaking of man's responsibility the entire time. God is sovereign over whom he saves and all men ever are commanded to repent. Both statements are true.

God is sovereign over everything. That doesn’t mean that God moves every dust speck. It means He can if He desires to. God put man into the world and told man to take care of the world. God is not like modern parents who give jobs to their children and do them themselves.

When you say that God is sovereign over whom He saves, do you mean that He has not elected some to salvation?
The part that irritates me most about Calvinism is the “say a good sounding thing to hide a bad sounding thing.” If Calvinism were correct, Calvinists who present it that way are at best dishonest in white washing the truth.

If you don’t mean that there are people who God has created with the intention of choosing not to elect, and calling them without providing the way for them to come, then you don’t mean sovereign like most other Calvinists.

Yes we do but God allowed it nonetheless. Our salvation brought about a change of heart, change of mind, and a change of affections but we still struggle with our old nature.

“Today if ye will hear”. There is responsibility to yield the will before we enter into rest. Yielding the will is a decision that each must make.

And I guess you could also remain self-deluded that somehow you may win one way or the other. This would be consistent with Jer 17:9 wouldn't it?

It isn’t proper arm wrestling rules, but the way it works in the illustration is to change sides. But that would be dependent upon the Person who is going to win offering you to come to the winning side, which He has. And then it would depend on whether or not you want to keep your own side or come over to God’s side. But God does not come over and take the side of sin. We are the ones who come to God at His invitation.

Nope, will and ability are two separate things. You can have an earnest desire to visit the Andromeda Galaxy but without the ability, it will never happen.

Exactly.

So when you mock free will, because that is how I read it when you mentioned “free will,” you must allow me to have been confused by your use of quotation marks.

Without the "But God," we are all doomed. Plain and simple. No one seeks after God on their own.

No one needs to. Jesus has already come seeking to save the lost.

Who can you say started looking for God first?
God came for Adam first. Adam did not seek God.
How many times must Jesus return and be crucified for you to say that God has already sought men.
Live in the present. God has already come looking for us. So no one may say I found God without help. But I don’t know anyone but the Calvinist who thinks that anyone seriously believes that they do.
But I must add in here that I am not talking about the people who are creating their own God. I don’t mean the people who are creating their own truth. But even these people if you recognize it when they say it can realize that they are being affected by something greater than themselves, even if they call it karma or something else.

That's about all I have to say on the matter.

I still have questions if you don’t mind.
I think we use some words differently. I don’t think outside of that we disagree that much.

 

[Armchair Apologist]

I still have questions if you don’t mind.
I think we use some words differently. I don’t think outside of that we disagree that much.

I dislike arguing simply for the sake of winning an argument. I believe there is much we can learn by examining both the Calvinist and Arminian views and both force you to confront and examine truth that may be inconvenient and uncomfortable.

 

[Ben1445]

I dislike arguing simply for the sake of winning an argument. I believe there is much we can learn by examining both the Calvinist and Arminian views and both force you to confront and examine truth that may be inconvenient and uncomfortable.

I call myself neither Calvinist nor Arminian. I have problems with both sides. I see them as the ditches on either side of the road.

I don’t find the gospel uncomfortable or inconvenient.

And I am not here for a debate trophy.