-
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!
Did Jesus have free will?
- Thread starter webdog
- Start date
I
ILUVLIGHT
Guest
webdog;
Yes Christ had freewill and He exercised it by doing the will of the Father. He could have taken Satans offer when He was tempted but, why would He? When Satan didn't have anything to offer that wasn't already the property of God?
It was His freewill to be incarnated and be sacrificed for the sins of the world.
May Christ Shine His Light on us All;
Mike
Yes Christ had freewill and He exercised it by doing the will of the Father. He could have taken Satans offer when He was tempted but, why would He? When Satan didn't have anything to offer that wasn't already the property of God?
It was His freewill to be incarnated and be sacrificed for the sins of the world.
May Christ Shine His Light on us All;
Mike
I do not think that it is Biblically correct to say that Jesus had a "free" human will. Yes, as he was fully God and fully Man, He did indeed possess "Two Wills", the divine and the human. As indeed He had two "Personalities" (NOT two Persons), in the perfect sense, and not in contradiction. If, as some hold, that Jesus had only His divine Personality, then we have the problem with the reality of His human nature. As the human nature cannot be complete without the personality, which indeed is the "seat" of the nature. However, we must stress that this is a mystery, as Jesus is NOT two Persons. He is two natures, Divine and human, yet only one Person.
The human "will" of Jesus could not have been "free" in the sense as we know it, as Jesus Himself said, "I ALWAYS do the things that please the Father" (John 8:29). You see, "free will" gives the person the power to "decide between alternatives". But, in the Incarnate Christ, for example, it was "not possible for Him to have sinned", and NOT "possible for Him not to have sinned". For us, it is the opposite, when we resist temptation, it is because we were "able not to sin"; but with Christ, He was "not able to sin". There was not even a flicker of doubt in Jesus in doing what He came to do. Even when He prayed in the garden, He knew within Himself that His will was one with the Father. He could not have done otherwise. He did not have any choice in the Cross.
The human "will" of Jesus could not have been "free" in the sense as we know it, as Jesus Himself said, "I ALWAYS do the things that please the Father" (John 8:29). You see, "free will" gives the person the power to "decide between alternatives". But, in the Incarnate Christ, for example, it was "not possible for Him to have sinned", and NOT "possible for Him not to have sinned". For us, it is the opposite, when we resist temptation, it is because we were "able not to sin"; but with Christ, He was "not able to sin". There was not even a flicker of doubt in Jesus in doing what He came to do. Even when He prayed in the garden, He knew within Himself that His will was one with the Father. He could not have done otherwise. He did not have any choice in the Cross.
A couple of points from someone who considers himself calvinistic.
First, Jesus repeatedly said that He came to do the will of the Father. Is there a passage that said He independently, of absolute separate free will "chose" to do the will of the Father? I can't recall one.
Second, your example parallel doesn't hold. Jesus had a divine nature... His nature did not need to be changed for Him to "make the right 'free will' decisions".
I believe fully that man has a free will that because of his spiritual sin nature will always be exercised to reject the gospel.
When the Holy Spirit changes His nature, the only "natural" thing for him to do is to embrace the gospel.
D
dianetavegia
Guest
John 5:30 I can of Myself do nothing. As I hear, I judge; and My judgment is righteous, because I do not seek My own will but the will of the Father who sent Me.
Luke 22:41 And He was withdrawn from them about a stone's throw, and He knelt down and prayed, 42 saying, "Father, if it is Your will, take this cup away from Me; nevertheless not My will, but Yours, be done."
John 6:38 For I have come down from heaven, not to do My own will, but the will of Him who sent Me.
Luke 22:41 And He was withdrawn from them about a stone's throw, and He knelt down and prayed, 42 saying, "Father, if it is Your will, take this cup away from Me; nevertheless not My will, but Yours, be done."
John 6:38 For I have come down from heaven, not to do My own will, but the will of Him who sent Me.
BobRyan
Well-Known Member
A couple of points from someone who considers himself calvinistic.
Second, your example parallel doesn't hold. Jesus had a divine nature... His nature did not need to be changed for Him to "make the right 'free will' decisions".
I believe fully that man has a free will that because of his spiritual sin nature will always be exercised to reject the gospel.
</font>[/QUOTE]IF your view of limited free will is ONLY the depravity of man - then ONCE we are born again that ends.
Secondly - you would never make the argument against free will that is of the form "God knew you would choose option-A today so you have no choice".
All such arguments - argue against God having free will.
(Staying with the point of the quoted remark above)
If Jesus did not have the true choice to obey or not, then this is a meaningless passage.
I say that He had the capability to sin, BUT He also had the perfect relation with the Father (like Adam prior to the stumble, if you will) to give Him the power to resist en toto the temptations.
Free will has nothing to do with the ability to choose. Everybody has the ability to choose. Free will simply means the will is not in bondage to sin. The opposite of free will is a will bound in sin. Christ knew no sin, so His will was obviously free.
The problem is that our wills, when in our natural state, is not free, but bound in sin. We are still able to choose, but because our will is bound in sin we will always choose against God rather than for Him because the natural man is at enmity with God.
It's Interesting what Jesus said about himself in John 5:19
Joh 5:19 Then answered Jesus and said unto them, Verily, verily, I say unto you, The Son can do nothing of himself, but what he seeth the Father do: for what things soever he doeth, these also doeth the Son likewise.
If a human has a free will can he not do whatever he wills?
Jesus said he could do nothing of himself but only what he saw the Faither doing.
I would hesitate to say that Jesus had a free will as defined by this board from the evidence we find in the Gospels.
Joh 5:19 Then answered Jesus and said unto them, Verily, verily, I say unto you, The Son can do nothing of himself, but what he seeth the Father do: for what things soever he doeth, these also doeth the Son likewise.
If a human has a free will can he not do whatever he wills?
Jesus said he could do nothing of himself but only what he saw the Faither doing.
I would hesitate to say that Jesus had a free will as defined by this board from the evidence we find in the Gospels.
D
dianetavegia
Guest
Jesus ALSO said....
I believe this shows it was humanly possible for Jesus to do His own will but because He is One with the Father and came for a purpose, He, as fully man and yet fully God, yielded to the will of the Father.
J
jacob62
Guest
I totally agree Diane.
I see that an important factor has been overlooked in this discussion. Since Jesus ah His Incarnation took on the nature of a human, which was not fallen, and therefore without sin, He yet retained His divine nature, sine He is God. The Person, Jesus Christ is "unique", since He alone is the God-Man. It is wrong in my opinion, to compare Jesus with Adam before the fall, as Adman was only human.
The temptations that Jesus experienced were as real as those we do, since He was tempted like us. But, to be tempted does not mean that He would have had to have had the abilty to have given into the temptations. "Temptation" has the predominant sense of putting to the proof with the intention and the hope that the 'proved' may not turn out 'approved', but 'reprobate'; may break down under the proof; and thus the word is constantly applied to the solicitations and suggestions of Satan (Matt.iv.1; 1 Cor.vii.5; Rev.ii.10" (Professor R Trench, Synonyms of the New Testament, p.281)
If it is believed that Jesus was "able to have sinned", and that He "chose not to have sinned". Then would this also mean that His thoughts were at times "evil" by the suggestions from the devil, and He dismissed them? I am of the opinion that as Almighty God, is was not at all possible for Christ to have sinned, as His Holy Divine nature was so closely related to His human nature, that made this impossible. I do not see any difficulty with those who suggest that the temptations that Jesus faced were therefore not "real" Herein is a great mystery.
The temptations that Jesus experienced were as real as those we do, since He was tempted like us. But, to be tempted does not mean that He would have had to have had the abilty to have given into the temptations. "Temptation" has the predominant sense of putting to the proof with the intention and the hope that the 'proved' may not turn out 'approved', but 'reprobate'; may break down under the proof; and thus the word is constantly applied to the solicitations and suggestions of Satan (Matt.iv.1; 1 Cor.vii.5; Rev.ii.10" (Professor R Trench, Synonyms of the New Testament, p.281)
If it is believed that Jesus was "able to have sinned", and that He "chose not to have sinned". Then would this also mean that His thoughts were at times "evil" by the suggestions from the devil, and He dismissed them? I am of the opinion that as Almighty God, is was not at all possible for Christ to have sinned, as His Holy Divine nature was so closely related to His human nature, that made this impossible. I do not see any difficulty with those who suggest that the temptations that Jesus faced were therefore not "real" Herein is a great mystery.
BobRyan
Well-Known Member
When Jesus is in the Garden of Gethsemane He prays for the cup to pass from Him - and then adds "not MY will but THY will be done".
In your explanation above He could have said "I CAN not actually seriously consider anything but complete success here because I don't have the ABILITY to fail". The scene is "presented" in scripture as if He is making a hard decision rather than "incapable" or "unnable" to make any "other" choice.
In your explanation above He could have said "I CAN not actually seriously consider anything but complete success here because I don't have the ABILITY to fail". The scene is "presented" in scripture as if He is making a hard decision rather than "incapable" or "unnable" to make any "other" choice.
Are you suggesting that Jesus could have failed? Or, that He was struggling against the will of the Father? No to both. He knew what was ahead of Him, the great pain and agony, an in this state He, from His "human will" was calling out to the Father. However, we muct not lose sight of the fact that in the Incarnate Christ, two perfect wills were present. He also says "I always do the things that please Him (the Father)" - John 8:29. Note. "Always", not "most of the time", or "some times". Hebrews 12: 2 tells us, Who for the joy that was set before Him, endured the cross..". He knew perfectly well the reason why He came to earth. He had a Mission to acomplish, and even though the devil tried to distract Him, God's will, that of the Father, Son and Holy Spirit won the day
Wes Outwest
New Member
Can you reconcile your argument here with "slain from the foundation of the world"? </font>[/QUOTE]How does "By appointment" fit?