Did Jesus Christ Have Free Will?

[JonC]

Which is a difference without a distinction. In both cases, laws expose one's inevitable nature to sin (the way you're describing it). Hard to call it any other way.

I agree. The result is exactly the same. Adam sinned and we sin.

I guess it's a matter of how it is presented. I believe that how Paul describes the Law and Adam's transgression point to a very similar (if not identical) principle - men fall short of God's glory, this is magnified where there is a command.

That's just how I see it.

 

[Calminian]

I agree. The result is exactly the same. Adam sinned and we sin. ....

Which would imply Adam was created with a sin nature. If everything is exactly the same, there's no way around it. But this is error, similar to the pelagian error.

The truth is, Adam was created "very good" along with everything else at the completion of creation on day six. He had not yet taken of the fruit, and did not have the law engrained in his being yet. He merely had external laws given to him by God—be fruitful and multiply, tend to the Garden, do not partake of the tree of knowledge, etc. He had the intelligence to understand these commands, and had the goodness to obey them (unlike us). This changed when he partook and his eyes were opened. We now have natures to tend toward sin. We now have natures we have to fight to our death or rapture.

 

[1689Dave]

Ok my Baptist brethren after a war with my computer I'm back and I know this subject of free will, has been hashed around on the board since I joined it but in the nineteen years I've been here I don't recall ever looking at this viewpoint... Did Jesus Christ have free will?... I know that my will unless God changes it, is bound by sin, until God sets it free... Jesus Christ will was also bound, but what was it bound by?... Where would we be if Jesus Christ exercised his free will?... This topic is up for discussion... Brother Glen

Jesus is God and God does not have free will.

 

[JonC]

Which would imply Adam was created with a sin nature. If everything is exactly the same, there's no way around it. But this is error, similar to the pelagian error.

The truth is, Adam was created "very good" along with everything else at the completion of creation on day six. He had not yet taken of the fruit, and did not have the law engrained in his being yet. He merely had external laws given to him by God—be fruitful and multiply, tend to the Garden, do not partake of the tree of knowledge, etc. He had the intelligence to understand these commands, and had the goodness to obey them (unlike us). This changed when he partook and his eyes were opened. We now have natures to tend toward sin. We now have natures we have to fight to our death or rapture.

I have not found "sin nature" in the Bible. My understanding of sin is that men sin because they are carried away by their own desires, not their "nature". But I leave that up to you guys to hash out.

 

[Calminian]

I have not found "sin nature" in the Bible. My understanding of sin is that men sin because they are carried away by their own desires, not their "nature". But I leave that up to you guys to hash out.

That would be a full pelagian position. I would have figured you leaned semipelagian, but not full. Semis believe in a sin nature, a change after the fall, making obedience and faith difficult but not impossible. Arminians and Calvinists believe it's impossible apart from God's intervention. But if you outright deny the sin nature, you're in the full pelagian camp.

The doctrine of the sin nature spelled out throughout the Bible.

Jer. 17:9 The heart is deceitful above all things
and beyond cure.
Who can understand it?​

Romans 7 is a great chapter on the sin nature and Paul's struggle with it.

Rom. 7:18 For I know that good itself does not dwell in me, that is, in my sinful nature. For I have the desire to do what is good, but I cannot carry it out.

Rom. 7:25 Thanks be to God, who delivers me through Jesus Christ our Lord!
So then, I myself in my mind am a slave to God’s law, but in my sinful nature a slave to the law of sin.​

The NIV actually translates the word flesh as sin nature (which you won't agree with), but the chapter itself is all about the human nature and its propensity toward sin. It's not "very good" as it was created originally. Adam's and Paul's struggles were very different.

 

[Calminian]

That would be a full pelagian position. I would have figured you leaned semipelagian, but not full. Semis believe in a sin nature, a change after the fall, making obedience and faith difficult but not impossible. Arminians and Calvinists believe it's impossible apart from God's intervention. But if you outright deny the sin nature, you're in the full pelagian camp.

The doctrine of the sin nature spelled out throughout the Bible.

Jer. 17:9 The heart is deceitful above all things
and beyond cure.
Who can understand it?​

Romans 7 is a great chapter on the sin nature and Paul's struggle with it.

Rom. 7:18 For I know that good itself does not dwell in me, that is, in my sinful nature. For I have the desire to do what is good, but I cannot carry it out.

Rom. 7:25 Thanks be to God, who delivers me through Jesus Christ our Lord!
So then, I myself in my mind am a slave to God’s law, but in my sinful nature a slave to the law of sin.​

The NIV actually translates the word flesh as sin nature (which you won't agree with), but the chapter itself is all about the human nature and its propensity toward sin. It's not "very good" as it was created originally. Adam's and Paul's struggles were very different.

I just realized too, this may be a full hijack of this tread. May be best to pursue elsewhere.

 

[tyndale1946]

Jesus is God and God does not have free will.

Good point Dave but why didn't Jesus exercise his?... I think Kentucky gave the answer in post #13... If he did you and I would not be having this conversation right now... Just my thoughts... Brother Glen

 

[JonC]

That would be a full pelagian position. I would have figured you leaned semipelagian, but not full. Semis believe in a sin nature, a change after the fall, making obedience and faith difficult but not impossible. Arminians and Calvinists believe it's impossible apart from God's intervention. But if you outright deny the sin nature, you're in the full pelagian camp.

The doctrine of the sin nature spelled out throughout the Bible.

Jer. 17:9 The heart is deceitful above all things
and beyond cure.
Who can understand it?​

Romans 7 is a great chapter on the sin nature and Paul's struggle with it.

Rom. 7:18 For I know that good itself does not dwell in me, that is, in my sinful nature. For I have the desire to do what is good, but I cannot carry it out.

Rom. 7:25 Thanks be to God, who delivers me through Jesus Christ our Lord!
So then, I myself in my mind am a slave to God’s law, but in my sinful nature a slave to the law of sin.​

The NIV actually translates the word flesh as sin nature (which you won't agree with), but the chapter itself is all about the human nature and its propensity toward sin. It's not "very good" as it was created originally. Adam's and Paul's struggles were very different.

I never argue labels. I did at one time but when @tyndale1946 referred to me as a handsome young man I decided arguing labels was just not in my benefit. (note....that may have been a dream).

I understand that people view things differently, but in seminary I was apparently given different definitions for those terms. This was, granted, a Baptist seminary. But they taught that Pelaganism refers to the teachings of Pelagius (that man's nature was not affected by the Fall and all men are free to choose good and evil). I, obviously, would not meet that definition. They taught that Semi-Pelaganism held that man cannot choose good without God, but God makes that first move and then they can choose. I, again obviously, do not hold this position either.

The problem with using "sin nature" rather than "flesh" is the word is not "sin nature" (it is, literally, "flesh" or "body"...it is the Greek word σάρξ ). σάρξ does not translate to "sin nature" (although I know some interpret it as such).

And the problem with you using Pelaganism to express my belief - that Adam' was created less than God - is that this seems to be redefining the term. Do you have a reference we can examine to back up your definition?

Thanks.

 

[JonC]

I just realized too, this may be a full hijack of this tread. May be best to pursue elsewhere.

I started a thread here:

"Pelaganists" who believe in depravity

Please explain how you view a belief in depravity, unconditional election, particular atonement, prevailing grace, and eternal security is Semi-Plaganism and how adding the believe God created Adam with a human nature and will which is less than God, makes this "full blown Pelaganism".

Thanks and I'm looking forward to the discussion.

John

 

[1689Dave]

Good point Dave but why didn't Jesus exercise his?... I think Kentucky gave the answer in post #13... If he did you and I would not be having this conversation right now... Just my thoughts... Brother Glen

Jesus can only love. And that determined his will which was not free to do otherwise.

 

[Van]

Ok my Baptist brethren after a war with my computer I'm back and I know this subject of free will, has been hashed around on the board since I joined it but in the nineteen years I've been here I don't recall ever looking at this viewpoint... Did Jesus Christ have free will?... I know that my will unless God changes it, is bound by sin, until God sets it free... Jesus Christ will was also bound, but what was it bound by?... Where would we be if Jesus Christ exercised his free will?... This topic is up for discussion... Brother Glen

I have not read any of the posts since the OP.

Of course Jesus had free will, in that He could make autonomous choices, to either adhere to the will of the Father, or go another way. If you can only choose one way, there is no temptation to choose another way. Jesus was tempted, therefore Jesus had a sufficiently free will to be tempted. All humans desire to avoid great pain and suffering, so Jesus wanted to avoid the cross, but after praying in the Garden, He chose to drink the cup.

 

[Wesley Briggman]

Jesus is God and God does not have free will.

Having addressed the "free will" debate numerous time in previous posts, I am hoping you, or someone else, can provide a clear, concise definition of the term.

I believe God has free will in His relationship to His creation and created beings.

I believe man expresses his "own will" but it is not free because he is held accountable by God.

Who was the first created being to invoke his own/free will recorded in the Bible?

I am disappointed by the confusion of Christians having liberty in Christ and professing believers applying that liberty to civil freedoms.

2Ti 2:15 KJV - Study to shew thyself approved unto God, a workman that needeth not to be ashamed, rightly dividing the word of truth.