Particular
Well-Known Member
What is the definition of "free will" as defined by the free will advocates on this site?
-
Welcome to Baptist Board, a friendly forum to discuss the Baptist Faith in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to all the features that our community has to offer.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!
Definition of Free Will
- Thread starter Particular
- Start date
The ability to believe in the Bible and accept the invitation of Christ.
Mat_11:28 Come unto me, all ye that labour and are heavy laden, and I will give you rest.
Luk_11:9 And I say unto you, Ask, and it shall be given you; seek, and ye shall find; knock, and it shall be opened unto you.
MB
Particular
Well-Known Member
I'm not particularly a free will advocate, but my definition would expand on the one defined previously -
freewill is "having a nature that is free to generate any desires to be fulfilled".
Most people describe freewill as our volition - our ability to choose from among our generated desires. I believe our volition is again dependent on our natures influencing our minds to prioritizing certain desires over others and we would finally and inevitably self-determine/volition to pick the desire with the highest priority to be fulfilled. It comes down to the operative natures in us again.
So, can our flesh/self-nature generate any godly desires, for instance, to obey and accept the invitation of Christ? No - hence, man in the flesh has no freewill and is a slave to sin as per my definition. On the other hand, God's nature/Spirit operative in us mortifies and overrules the flesh and gives us true freedom to desire and fulfill things pleasing to God.
Scott Downey
Well-Known Member
There is no libertarian free will for you to chose to believe in Christ.
Jesus specifically taught this,
63 It is the spirit that quickeneth; the flesh profiteth nothing: the words that I speak unto you, they are spirit, and they are life.
64 But there are some of you that believe not. For Jesus knew from the beginning who they were that believed not, and who should betray him.
65 And he said, Therefore said I unto you, that no man can come unto me, except it were given unto him of my Father.
66 From that time many of his disciples went back, and walked no more with him.
Jesus specifically taught this,
63 It is the spirit that quickeneth; the flesh profiteth nothing: the words that I speak unto you, they are spirit, and they are life.
64 But there are some of you that believe not. For Jesus knew from the beginning who they were that believed not, and who should betray him.
65 And he said, Therefore said I unto you, that no man can come unto me, except it were given unto him of my Father.
66 From that time many of his disciples went back, and walked no more with him.
And those verses are specifically for the Jews.
Mat_15:24 He answered, “I was sent only to the lost sheep of the house of Israel.”
Scott Downey
Well-Known Member
Now your changing scripture.
65 And he said, Therefore said I unto you, that no man can come unto me, except it were given unto him of my Father.
No man not no Israeli.
45 It is written in the prophets, And they shall be all taught of God. Every man therefore that hath heard, and hath learned of the Father, cometh unto me.
46 Not that any man hath seen the Father, save he which is of God, he hath seen the Father.
47 Verily, verily, I say unto you, He that believeth on me hath everlasting life.
Are you really believing that since Jesus spoke these words only to the jews about eternal life and in many other places he was only talking to the jews, that none have any meaning for all mankind? I have never heard such a private interpretation this extreme.
Scott Downey
Well-Known Member
Hey, I would like to know is this position the belief of the mods and many other baptists on this forum?
If so then a vast gulf exists that can't be bridged, and pretty much nothing is worth discussing or debating in this forum between Calvinists and arminians.
If so then a vast gulf exists that can't be bridged, and pretty much nothing is worth discussing or debating in this forum between Calvinists and arminians.
Suppose you have a Jar of cookies. You take a cookie from jar give it to your son, he now has a cookie. Now Your son decides to take all the cookies in the Jar. How many cookies does that leave you to pull from the Jar? He has taken ALL the cookies in the Jar. How many cookies are left for YOU to draw?
John 12
32“And I, if I am lifted up from the earth, will draw all men to Myself.”
Particular
Well-Known Member
Thank you. I'm not intending to debate any free will definition. I just want to see what various definitions are being used.
Particular
Well-Known Member
Here are the two definitions so far:
- The ability to believe in the Bible and accept the invitation of Christ.
- freewill is "having a nature that is free to generate any desires to be fulfilled".
- The ability to believe in the Bible and accept the invitation of Christ.
- freewill is "having a nature that is free to generate any desires to be fulfilled".
You need to mention volition.
Under Calvinism mankind has suffered a massive mental Retardation in which the person's volition is inhibited so a person is unable to come to or follow God.
There is no bible verse that teaches this. When God tells Adam and Eve the penalties this would have made the others look like rewards. There was never mention of such a brutal penalty.
Using scripture alone, as in if you can't explain and can only quote what scripture says......it is impossible to build the idea of total depravity.
Like if someone is a thief. we can say they have stolen alot of things, Took alot money, is very greedy, THEREFORE they have no capacity to give.
That ridiculous leap of logic is Calvinism.
Starting to see a pattern here. Always EX -Christians. rock-bottom, alcohol, drugs, suicidal, depressed, Where's the non-christian minding his own business then spontaneously becoming Calvinist?
Under Calvinism mankind has suffered a massive mental Retardation in which the person's volition is inhibited so a person is unable to come to or follow God.
There is no bible verse that teaches this. When God tells Adam and Eve the penalties this would have made the others look like rewards. There was never mention of such a brutal penalty.
Using scripture alone, as in if you can't explain and can only quote what scripture says......it is impossible to build the idea of total depravity.
Like if someone is a thief. we can say they have stolen alot of things, Took alot money, is very greedy, THEREFORE they have no capacity to give.
That ridiculous leap of logic is Calvinism.
Starting to see a pattern here. Always EX -Christians. rock-bottom, alcohol, drugs, suicidal, depressed, Where's the non-christian minding his own business then spontaneously becoming Calvinist?
Particular
Well-Known Member
I am not asking for your view of Calvinism I this thread. You shared your definition of free will. Thank you.
If you have more to add to your definition of free will, please do so. This thread is for free will advocates to share their definition of free will.
God ordained that write that, if you don't like it take it up with him.
You need to mention volition.
Particular
Well-Known Member
Perhaps you have nothing to add to free will. If so. Stop posting in this thread.
I define it as: The capacity to choose between two or more available options, or to refrain from choosing, unconstrained by any internal or external causal necessity.
This is essentially why I have little patience for any form of Compatibilism....but, that is not at issue here.
This is essentially why I have little patience for any form of Compatibilism....but, that is not at issue here.
Last edited:
Scott Downey
Well-Known Member
Here is what it says, all peoples, not as in each and every single human being.
John 12:32 New King James Version (NKJV)
32 And I, if I am lifted up from the earth, will draw all peoples to Myself.”
Of course this is just be an example of one verse says it like this and another says it like that, but the way it is written here is consistent with what Jesus says in John 6, and frankly going with the way your saying is inconsistent with all the other verses talking about drawing, as in calling, as it is limited to those that God calls not that God calls every single individual person.
And of course this is just another example of the extreme gulf in understanding, which will never be resolved until Christ returns. And I dont like scripture being used to nullify other scripture which is what your saying.
Scott Downey
Well-Known Member
And I still want to know is this the position of the forum here and baptists that the gospels have passed away, the things Christ taught about how the Father draws us to Him and about eternal life. Specifically becuase of the comment made the Christ said He was only sent to the lost sheep of the house of Israel? That would be a strong heresy.
And If so I want nothing to do with the forum because I have learned heretics wont inherit the kingdom of God and it is useless to even engage debate at all as they suffer under a strong delusion.
The lost sheep of the house of Israel is NOT the unbelieving jews.
Because Israel is spiritual Israel. Paul makes that clear in Romans and Galatians and includes Gentiles grafted in, but it is useless to post scriptures people will just dispute.
But here is an example.
6 But it is not that the word of God has taken no effect. For they are not all Israel who are of Israel, 7 nor are they all children because they are the seed of Abraham; but, “In Isaac your seed shall be called.” 8 That is, those who are the children of the flesh, these are not the children of God; but the children of the promise are counted as the seed.
And If so I want nothing to do with the forum because I have learned heretics wont inherit the kingdom of God and it is useless to even engage debate at all as they suffer under a strong delusion.
The lost sheep of the house of Israel is NOT the unbelieving jews.
Because Israel is spiritual Israel. Paul makes that clear in Romans and Galatians and includes Gentiles grafted in, but it is useless to post scriptures people will just dispute.
But here is an example.
6 But it is not that the word of God has taken no effect. For they are not all Israel who are of Israel, 7 nor are they all children because they are the seed of Abraham; but, “In Isaac your seed shall be called.” 8 That is, those who are the children of the flesh, these are not the children of God; but the children of the promise are counted as the seed.
Well Scott what would he have to say if he wanted ALL to actually mean ALL? and give us a scriptural example.
"And of course this is just another example of the extreme gulf in understanding, which will never be resolved until Christ returns"
There is no way you would have understood that verse to mean anything else without over the shoulder "help".
God commands ALL not to sin. Is that not as in each and every single human being?
Only an idiot would not comprehend what God desires after he commands it so. Is there anyone on earth God wants sinning?
"consistent with what Jesus says in John 6"
The part that damns is they don't believe. But what subject is not believed?
John 6
32Jesus then said to them, “Truly, truly, I say to you, it is not Moses who has given you the bread out of heaven, but it is My Father who gives you the true bread out of heaven.
The offer has been clearly MADE. The FATHER WHO GIVES YOU TRUE BREAD. Did his father actually give them true bread from heaven?
When we look at the objections what is it?
52Then the Jews began to argue with one another, saying, “How can this man give us His flesh to eat?”
Calvinist Jesus would have to AGREE with the objection.
"You Jews are right, I am not offering myself to any of you." --Calvinist Jesus.
I do believe Calvinism might be real, just not the way you think. Because there is no way anyone can be so lacking common sense without some divine intervention. Its unbelievable to me how you don't get it.
I think God likes to employ flip-side reciprocal Justice........to wrongful accusers. So if folks think everyone is totally depraved......they turn out totally deprave.
Particular
Well-Known Member
Scott, this thread is only for the definition of free will. I want to know how people define free will. Often, I think we talk around each other because we define terms differently. This is my attempt to listen and allow my brothers and sisters who believe in free will to define the term for me so I can know how they view the term. I am not looking to argue. I am trying to listen.