Do Calvinists believe man has free will after salvation?

[BrotherJoseph]

BrotherBenjamin,

This is from a post a few days ago in this thread that I never received a reply from. I have bolded in black my questions to you and hope you will answer them. Please reply if you have answers. I have answered all your questions and also all the questions of Brother Earth, Wind, and Fire.

Brother Benjamin,

If God did not purpose that sin should be in the world, can you give an intelligent reason why He arranged His creation so it would come into the world? Is not the fact that God arranged His creation and has conducted His government in such way as to admit sin into the world evidenced that He intended that it should be in the world? It is certain He could have had it otherwise if it had been His pleasure to have done so, but in some way which He has not been pleased to explain to us He has see fit to have things as they are.

Also, no man makes a machine intentionally knowing that it will be flawed, but that is what you are asserting God did with His creation if He created man knowing they would sin, but that it was not His will that they sin. If no man would do such a thing with his creation, why on the earth would it be logical that God would do such a thing?

Further, If it wasn't God's will for sin to enter in the world why did he ever put Satan in the garden? Why else was Satan in the garden?

Also, interesting to note, is the fact that God allowed the devil to deceive our mother Eve, and has allowed him to go on and will allow him for a "little season" to deceive the nations as it is written in Revelation 20:7-8, "7 And when the thousand years are expired, Satan shall be loosed out of his prison,8 And shall go out to deceive the nations which are in the four quarters of the earth" then destroy him "that through death he might destroy him that had the power of death, that is, the devil;" (Hebrews 2:14), when he could have destroyed him before he deceived any one, had it been his will to do so, proves to any sane mind that He made him for that purpose, and will continue to use him as He sees fit until HIs set time to destroy him is come.

Why, O why, must he be loosed "for a little season to deceive the nations," if it is not God's will and purpose for him to do so?

Brother Benjamin, if as you believe, God did not "want" sin to enter the world, and the devil did, and God did not "want" any man to be a sinner, and the devil wanted all men to become sinners; and God did now "want" sin mixed in any of the affairs of men in this world, and the devil wanted it mixed in all the affairs of men in this world; and God did now "want" any man to ever die, and the devil wanted all men to die, does it not look like the devil has out-generaled God in all things up to now and proved himself to be more wise and powerful than God?

And if God should get a few of us out of the devil's hands and get us into heaven, what assurance have we that we will not again become sinners and fall from our standing there and be finally lost? If it happened in the garden, why could it not happen there too? However these things cannot be because God created the devil and uses him as his own instrument and he can only work as god wills. "The Lord hath made all things for himself: yea, even the wicked for the day of evil." (Proverbs 16:4). The devil is nothing more than a pawn that will be destroyed by God in the end.

Scripture tells us "By his spirit he hath garnished the heavens; his hand hath formed the crooked serpent (Job 26:13). But that same Bible also tells us, "In that day the Lord with his sore and great and strong sword shall punish leviathan the piercing serpent, even leviathan that crooked serpent;..." (Isaiah 27:1). What do you make of these scriptures?

God willed that sin enter into the world so that He could demonstrate the highest act of love history has every seen in Christ's sacrifice, redemption of His people, grace, unconditional love, mercy. Which one of these things could have existed if sin had not entered into the world? His children know or have experienced all these things none of these things were possible to experience before the fall or if the fall had never occurred.

Brother Joe

 

[Earth Wind and Fire]

Why do you have the bad habit of attributing something to others that they haven't said or implied?

Thats not how I see it.

 

[Rippon]

Brother Benjamin,

Let me get this straight, according the doctrine you teach, per the quote you provided above from Richard Coors, Calvary was "contingently" planned by God, in other words if "plan A" doesn't work He would go with a plan "B"? No human in their right mind would go about making a machine with the foreknowledge beforehand that the machine they created would fail after it was created, but you think God made his creation with the foreknowledge that it would not work as He wanted it to (i.e. you are asserting he didn't want men to fall, but they did), but yet He went ahead and created man the way He did despite the fact He knew darn well they wouldn't function how he wanted them too and it would cost Him the crucifixions of His dear Son, what kind of God, logic, or sanity is that? No creator would create something with foreknowledge knowing the way they would make it, it wouldn't function the way they wanted it, no human creator or Divine creator, especially if it would cost them their sinless son! I guess this is the logic you must use when you reject God's predestination.

Ben's philosophy runs along the same lines as William Lane Craig. And that's not a good thing.

 

[BrotherJoseph]

They have no choice but to do so if held to logical truth. All 5 points of the TULIP are unavoidably logically dependent on and maintained through strict Determinism which result in denying human volition and thereby making God the author of sin. They may spew out compatibilism for a short time in a debate but ALWAYS revert back to Hard Determinism when their logic fails and put to the test.

More and more intellectually honest holders of the TULIP Doctrines today recognize Determinism and Human Volition as logically mutually exclusive and are turning toward the heretical views of making God the author of sin to hold to their systematic views. It is sad to say the least..

Brother Benjamin,

FYI- The person who you addressed this to (Brother Earth, Wind, and Fire) adheres to the five points of the doctrines of grace, but rejects the predestination of all things.

 

[BrotherJoseph]

Ben's philosophy runs along the same lines as William Lane Craig. And that's not a good thing.

Brother Rippon,

You have correctly stated, it is "Ben's philosophy", not the theology of the Bible. Let us see if the answers the questions I posted for him in post # 100 and #101.

 

[Earth Wind and Fire]

All right....before this gets more convoluted, do you Absoluters attribute “all our works” to God? Yes or No.

 

[BrotherJoseph]

All right....before this gets more convoluted, do you Absoluters attribute “all our works” to God? Yes or No.

Brother Steve,

I can only speak for the "absoluters" I know and none of them believes God works wickedness. I also doubt anyone on this thread would take such a position that God does such. It is already in the heart of men because of Adam. Unfortunately, absoluters are often maligned and falsely represented as believing/teaching such heresy. I challenge you to find one quote from any main stream theologian who believes God predestinated all things and also believes God is the author of sin or any confession of faith that says such. You won't find any, but you will find many quotes online from the opposition who falsely accuse us of believing such things. Most of them are also Arminian. It is all ad hominem attacks.

Now, I have answered all your questions, I have a few for you. Who is the first cause of all causes if it is not God? Are there effects without causes and if so name some? And finally, how can God according to scripture, "worketh all things after the counsel of his own will" (Ephesians 1:11), without predestinating the "all things" he is working after His will? Does anything happen that isn't worked after His will? I have answered all of your questions in each and everyone of my post, thus if you could please answer mine?

Brother Joe

 

[Earth Wind and Fire]

So to clarify, Acts of faith and obedience in a regenerate elect are wholly caused by divine predestination and not in any way or to any degree related to the believer’s own will or anything in his/her regenerated and thus changed nature? Have I summerized your position properly?

 

[BrotherJoseph]

So to clarify, Acts of faith and obedience in a regenerate elect are wholly caused by divine predestination and not in any way or to any degree related to the believer’s own will or anything in his/her regenerated and thus changed nature? Have I summerized your position properly?

Brother,

I'll let the scripture answer that.

There are two natures after regeneration. The flesh, of this Paul says after he has been regenerated, "For I know that in me (that is, in my flesh,) dwelleth no good thing: for to will is present with me; but how to perform that which is good I find not. (Romans 7:18) and "7 Because the carnal mind is enmity against God: for it is not subject to the law of God, neither indeed can be." (Romans 8:7). Scripture is clear the flesh is not changed after regeneration, "It is the spirit that quickeneth; the flesh profiteth nothing" (Romans 6:63).

The fruit of the Spirit is produced by the tree that produces the fruit (i.e. Spirit in us). Jesus laid down some simple principles, "I am the vine, ye are the branches: He that abideth in me, and I in him, the same bringeth forth much fruit: for without me ye can do nothing" (John 15:5) Regarding the will to do good, scripture is also explicit on this "For it is God which worketh in you both to will and to do of his good pleasure." (Philippians 2:13) also, "“Being confident of this very thing, that He which hath begun a good work in you will perform it until the day of Jesus Christ.” (Philippians 1:6)

“The body is dead because of sin.”(Romans 8:10) And so, the body is utterly unable to do works of righteousness either before or after regeneration - “that which is of the flesh is flesh,” -

While Jonah was in the belly of the whale, he uttered that glorious statement, "Salvation is of the Lord." And to that I submit that I know no of no other salvation. Salvation, whether it be in time or eternity, is of the Lord. There can be no exceptions. That we are saved in many ways in time, I question not, and vigorously proclaim, but no salvation is of bare creature effort. Though there are many secondary agencies involved in our being saved here in time, the ultimate source of that salvation is grace. The Apostle asked the Galatians after regeneration, “Are ye so foolish? having begun in the Spirit, are ye now made perfect by the flesh?” (Galatians 3:3) To my mind he is contending against the very idea now being advanced by todays Conditionalists that our salvation in time depends on ourselves.

God bless,

Brother Joe

 

[SovereignGrace]

Earth, Wind, & Fire, you never answered my question, and maybe you did not see it, mon ami.


Could Christ have NOT been crucified?

 

[BrotherJoseph]

Brother Earth, Wind, and Fire,

You never answered my questions that I have posted several times to you. It is frustrating between you and Brother Benjamin not answering my questions, yet if one goes back through this thread they will see I have answered all questions posed to me from both you and brother Benjamin. These questions and answers seem to be only going one way (i.e. me answering Benjamin and your questions). I will post my questions once more, but do not wish to be contentious, thus if wish to not answer my questions that is your prerogative.

Who is the first cause of all causes if it is not God? Are there effects without causes and if so name some? And finally, how can God according to scripture, "worketh all things after the counsel of his own will" (Ephesians 1:11), without predestinating the "all things" He is working after His will? Does anything happen that isn't worked after His will? When the Lord told us to pray "Thy will be done in earth, as it is in heaven.", was He instructing us to pray for something that is not answered?


Brother Joe

 

[BrotherJoseph]

No David and Bathsheba, no Solomon. Let that sink in before commenting.

No Joseph sold into slavery, Jacob and his lineage starve to death. Let that sink in before commenting.

No Christ turned over to wicked hands, no salvation. Let that sink in before commenting.

No Jacob lying to steal Esau's blessing, no lineage through Judah. Let that sink in before commenting.

None of these events, regardless how vile they appear to us, happened by happenstance.

Good post brother! :thumbsup:

 

[SovereignGrace]

So to clarify, Acts of faith and obedience in a regenerate elect are wholly caused by divine predestination and not in any way or to any degree related to the believer’s own will or anything in his/her regenerated and thus changed nature? Have I summerized your position properly?

Let me put it to you this way, by using this analogy.

You have a brand new car, with zero miles. Unless you start it, it will not run. God regenerates us and by doing so, we exercise faith repentance, both God given gifts. Unless God does this, we can not do this, being fallen creatures from the fall of Adam.

Here is something from the LBCoF of 1689:

Man, by his fall into a state of sin, has completely lost all ability of will to perform any of the spiritual good which accompanies salvation. As a natural man, he is altogether averse to spiritual good, and dead in sin. He is not able by his own strength to convert himself, or to prepare himself for conversion.

It takes God to overcome man's fall, that fall that happened in Adam. God puts a will and do in their life in accordance to His good will and pleasure.

 

[SovereignGrace]

All right....before this gets more convoluted, do you Absoluters attribute “all our works” to God? Yes or No.

The works in sinners are their own. The good works in the regenerate are due to God's effacacious work wrought upon their heart.

 

[SovereignGrace]

Good post brother! :thumbsup:

Thank you. God uses evil spirits, as seen by Saul's account, yet He is without sin in doing so.

No whale, no Jonah preaching to Ninevah. This is a picture of Christ's death, burial and resurrection.

No raising Pharaoh up to his place of power, no Jew leaves Egypt to serve God. Where he stayed until the death of Herod. And so was fulfilled what the Lord had said through the prophet: “Out of Egypt I called my son."[Matt. 2:15]

No Rahab lying, she dies in Jericho. She is part of Jesus' ancestry.

 

[Benjamin]

Brother Earth, Wind, and Fire,

You never answered my questions that I have posted several times to you. It is frustrating between you and Brother Benjamin not answering my questions, yet if one goes back through this thread they will see I have answered all questions posed to me from both you and brother Benjamin. These questions and answers seem to be only going one way (i.e. me answering Benjamin and your questions). I will post my questions once more, but do not wish to be contentious, thus if wish to not answer my questions that is your prerogative.

Who is the first cause of all causes if it is not God?
Brother Joe

Brother, I tire of false your accusation that your original question has not been answered. It has been answered thoroughly as to it ROOTS! Unfortunately your only defense to my answering your question was to fall back on logically making God the author of sin- to no surprise. Now you merely want me chase your rabbit trails - which I really don't have the time or motivation to do, especially in this forum. For the readers I will demonstrate once more that I have answered your "question" to put a rest to false accusation tactic of debating.

Brother, it also took me quite some time to bring you back to your original question (argument) and to demonstrate that I in fact did answer it, both in detail AND in short sentences. Frankly, I am a bit perplexed that while you talk about how a debate should go forward you would continue to ignore that I have taken your leading argument back to its roots and that you will use this as a point of contention in the debate rather than acknowledging the subject matter which directly deals with your reasoning.

I'm beginning to believe you must simply not be getting the answer you prefer and are avoiding going into depth about the argument you have started with.


I am not interested in spending the time to chase after new rabbit trails of the scriptural food fight proof-texting sort which I merely see not as ethical debate protocol but as smokescreen tactics when you can't seem to/or refuse follow the root argument which you present and I fully addressed already.

As per the bulk of your proof-texting (which interpretations are seemingly designed to support your idea that God can cause evil yet not be responsible for it) I answered that in general, I referred to it as the "post below" but, again, am not interested in spending the time chasing down every proof-texting rabbit trail you can come up with while you fail to acknowledge the root argument about Deterministic doctrines and the logical consequences of such doctrines leading to God being the author of sin. Seriously, what will prove to me with your proof-texting? - That God is the first cause of evil but it not responsible for it??? It may not the way you like or are used to "debating" BUT all these issues have been addressed and I have no intention of being baited to go down new rabbit trails before the acknowledgment of my counter argument which shows your opening premises to fall short of truth.

Talk about being frustrated with Rippon (The King of avoiding issues through focus on rhetoric and Ad Hominem)?! You might want to note how much detail I went into to address your opening argument:

Quote:
Originally Posted by Benjamin View Post
Perhaps you have not read my reply very carefully because I not only answered your question but I broke down your “argument” (BTW, that is what your question is, an attempt to prove a claim by providing reason for accepting it. The claim that is supported is called the conclusion to the argument and claims providing the support are called the premises. Those issues are what I focus on in a debate. It seems that you are ignoring that I have addressed them but that won't make them go away. ) into its premises while clearly addressing the first premise – “God is the first cause of all causes” - Again, to begin with the first premise I explained:

“My questions are posed in order to draw out the truth in your argument by directing you to examine the substance of your claim, or IOWs the reasoning behind your claim by which you draw your conclusion. In this case you must first deal with the origin of sin and the “Problem Of Evil” for your premise of God being the “first cause of all causes” to stand as true.”

You apparently are countering with the reasoning in the post below that God is the cause of all evil but somehow cannot be responsible for the evil because He is Holy. Let’s examine your reasoning further which I contend unavoidably equates into Hard Determinism and logically presents God as the author of (responsible for) sin:

1) Necessarily God has fore determined (is the first cause of) everything that will happen
2) God has determined (caused) X
3) Therefore it is necessary that X will happen

X = man’s choices
X = evil

The above is a simple logical truth and clearly demonstrates your first premise (and counter argument) to be false. Why? Because your reasoning unavoidably concludes that God is responsible for evil happening.

If you are truly interested in debate then you will have to at least acknowledge that I have been addressing your arguments and stop with the suggestions that I have evaded them.

I even explained that I began “answering your question” by breaking your argument down:

“So IOWs as for answering your question it must first be broken down, which the first premise poses (supposedly supported by the scripture you gave) that God is the first causes of all causes, which by any rational critical thinking skills must include evil and thereby carry down to the last details of the sins of man (by which I countered your interpretation by comparing scripture to scripture) is where I began.”

God cannot be responsible for evil, (unless you would like to go down the road of Theological Fatalism), so as for the first premise of your argument which concludes that “God is the first cause of all causes” I contend that such cannot be true because it would logically make God the author of evil. Therefore, after a previous explanation that you would have to include evil within those causes I gave you this answer:

“In consideration of the Nature of God I can without a doubt tell you that your first premise is false.”

Just in case, to make it perfectly clear that I have answered your “question” – Premise #1: NO, God is NOT the first cause of all causes. He logically cannot be any more than He can make a rock bigger than He can lift.

Now, for the second part of your “question” – Premise #2: What/who is the cause? Simply put man is held responsible in truth for being the cause of evil. But, again, I already clearly answered this in length also:

“As to your second premise, which you should probably understand is already doomed to come to a false conclusion considering your first premise, the first cause of evil was man with the help of Satan, which was made possible through the divine design of God’s creatures to have the free will/human volition to disobey God – by which each and every one will “genuinely be held responsible” for being the “cause” of except for the grace of our Loving Creator who provided the Way of salvation for ALL who love and believe the truth with that precious gift of a mind to all mankind to have the ability to reason through human volition/free will.”

BTW, it appears that below you are attempting to proclaim a compatibilist view as if the responsibility for the cause of an action can be both true and not true. My friend, Determinism and Human Volition are logically mutually exclusive and God’s judgment in the matter of the responsibility for the cause will be in truth. From the beginning God’s creation was “very good” and He had designed men with free will/human volition, the nature of God is without evil OF ANY KIND, all His ways are judgment and you should rest assured that this judgment over the responsibility for the cause of evil is done in truth:

(Deu 32:4) He is the Rock, his work is perfect: for all his ways are judgment: a God of truth and without iniquity, just and right is he.

As for your follow "questions", again, I don't have the time to take your systematic theology all the way back to creation to demonstrate free will and I certainly don't have time straighten you out on all the question begging and false dilemmas you presented in ORDER TO SUPPORT YOUR DOCTRINES OF HARD DETERMINISM WHICH ENDED IN ATTRIBUTING SIN TO A HOLY GOD... but I will post a previous written explanation below of free will/human volition from creation THAT if you use yer noodle you should be able to see why I refer to your question begging and false dilemmas in your follow up rabbit trail questions.

 

[Benjamin]

An Argument for the Non-Determinist Position of Maintaining the Nature of Human Free Will from the Beginning of the World.

In support of their systematic theology the Calvinist/Determinist insists that the nature of man, “human volition” is predestined to choose a certain way and this is controlled by “cause and effect” rather than by “influence and response” concerning his ability to consciously choose of his own free will to receive the gift of life. Any claim by the Non-Calvinist that denies a fore-determined human choice is commonly said by the Calvinist to be too narrow a definition of freedom. Yet it is they who insist human freedoms are limited and contend that otherwise the idea of free choice to receive God’s gift puts the consequences for sin in the hands of man and voids God of His Sovereignty. But, no one is denying God’s judgment in the matter of human response to His influences, further we contend that the offer is genuinely made and without the free will to choose to respond there is no truth in this judgment.

The Calvinist are making two mistakes concerning free will: (1) they are attempting to widen the definition of “free choice/volition” in a way that amounts to a freedom apart from judgment and the consequences of one’s own choice. (2) They are implying there must be an irresistible cause attached to all human freedom which narrows rather than widens the definition of “creaturely volition” and this view neglects the agent’s responsibility for his own choices while placing the responsibility for his choice on this irresistible cause.

The typical Calvinists’ argument amounts to a strawman of the Non-Calvinist definition of human volition by assuming we believe this freedom is so free as to be able to create our own world. We never claim to be free from God’s influences or providential care but only free in the way we respond, able to make our own conscious choice. I would argue that we are/were designed from creation to be able to freely respond and nothing (these attributes of sense, intellect, ability to reason, etc.) has been taken away here since creation. God didn’t take free will away from Adam and Eve in the fall, He put in front of them another choice, a second chance, a tree of life to which in love He provided the Way for all His creatures should they choose to repent and now freely put forth his hand and eat of that tree.



(Gen 3:22) And the LORD God said, Behold, the man is become as one of us, to know good and evil: and now, lest he put forth his hand, and take also of the tree of life, and eat, and live for ever:



There cannot be two gods, Only One is Perfect to judge good. Man of his own free will acquired the added attribute of judgment between good and evil and must now within this self-acquired new nature, which he alone is responsible for gaining, must turn from these desires and bow to His Creator as Lord and King. The Calvinists commonly claim the fall took away the free will Adam and Eve had, but man’s free will was not recreated. Human nature has the same ability to choose and now he must equally repent and put forth his hand freely as per his divinely designed nature and also take of the tree of life.


On the contrary to the idea that we were “recreated” to lose our attributes of reason because of the disobedience of Adam and Eve, something was added to our nature – knowledge of good and evil, and therein our troubles began. “We were responsible” then and “we are responsible” now to repent of those desires to be as God which began with Adam and Eve. God is the Ultimate Judge of good and evil, He is the King over all and will rightly judge our free choice to bow our knees in love of the truth that He is God upon which His Mercy comes through grace or I dare to say adversely if the creature sticks to the pride of life and in complaint makes an excuse while claiming that he had no choice by which he demonstrates he is unthankful for the lesser status of being and is unrepentant with lack of humility. God does not force this love on His creatures, He never did.

(Rom 1:20) For the invisible things of him from the creation of the world are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even his eternal power and Godhead; so that they are without excuse:

(Rom 1:21) Because that, when they knew God, they glorified him not as God, neither were thankful; but became vain in their imaginations, and their foolish heart was darkened.

(Rom 1:22) Professing themselves to be wise, they became fools,

(Rom 1:23) And changed the glory of the uncorruptible God into an image made like to corruptible man, and to birds, and fourfooted beasts, and creeping things.

(Rom 1:24) Wherefore God also gave them up to uncleanness through the lusts of their own hearts, to dishonour their own bodies between themselves:

(Rom 1:25) Who changed the truth of God into a lie, and worshipped and served the creature more than the Creator, who is blessed for ever. Amen.



Also, contrary to what we are often accused of, we do not dispute that God is Sovereign in the world, personally I am thankful for my miraculous divinely designed nature and I freely bow to His Kingship as my loving King. Yes, “God is Sovereign” but I distinguish between divine Sovereign control being deterministic and that of His maintaining Providential Sovereign control over the world we live in. God is Providentially Sovereign, long-sufferingly so, in which He influences “us” (divinely designed creatures with human attributes and freedoms) and judges our response to the truths we are given. In the opposition’s insistence of holding to a definition of Deterministic Sovereignty they neglect: (1) Without human volition there simply is no truth in judgment and any theology of an Only Good God crashes without maintaining this truth. (2) That our view simply provides a deeper and more precise meaning to the definition of human volition and divine sovereignty which allows for the complex natures and attributes of man and God to be maintained in truth.

Man would naturally desire all power in heaven and earth and to be as God before accepting the freedoms given him as totally free. Nothing is new about these rebellious objections to the way man was made and that he would complain about being less than free if not a god and judge of all things for himself. The Devil suggested these ideas of equality with God and to settle for nothing less as a definition of freedom and rebellion began. Man’s prideful dissatisfaction to be a lessor being was expected, prepared for and is noted in God’s word:

(Rom 9:19) Thou wilt say then unto me, Why doth he yet find fault? For who hath resisted his will?

(Rom 9:20) Nay but, O man, who art thou that repliest against God? Shall the thing formed say to him that formed it, Why hast thou made me thus?

(Rom 9:21) Hath not the potter power over the clay, of the same lump to make one vessel unto honour, and another unto dishonour?

(Rom 9:22) What if God, willing to shew his wrath, and to make his power known, endured with much longsuffering the vessels of wrath fitted to destruction:

The Calvinist commonly declare we are totally deprived from the ability to freely choose and claim any opposition to this deterministic view deprives God of His Sovereignty. As if the free will nature of man from the beginning of the creation of the world is not clearly seen or understood. The Calvinist makes excuses by asserting God’s creatures do not genuinely have the volition to answer His call of repentance and to accept His free gift of eternal life. How does this not equally compare to the disobedience of Adam and Eve? Rather such a doctrine appears as an ungrateful complaint against the nature in which man was divinely designed in. It appears as a statement made in pride that they did not choose to take God’s gift of their own free will? The unbelievers will gladly agree to this logic of the Determinist which necessarily concludes that not only good has come from God because He supposedly created some/most men only to be evil and has fore-determined that they would never have the ability to hear or respond to His offer of salvation. Can true human freedom only be defined in having the ability to create one’s own world and thereby save oneself, because that is what I hear the Calvinist saying?

True, there is no human ability to create his own world to rule over and be king of. We are not so free as to be our own judge between good and evil or to be void of the consequences from our Creator who is the Only True King, our God. We do not live in our own vacuum as our own God and Creator, this is true, but none of this redefines human freedom according because of this false premise that human volition is unacceptable as being truly free unless it is first redefined as having the characteristics of “divine” freedom to create a world and the influences in it. The entire Calvinist’s argument over divine sovereignty and true “human” freedom/volition is dependent upon that assessment.

Whosoever you are be thankful for the miraculous nature that God gave all men from the beginning for He is a God of Love and in mercy and grace from the foundation of the world He sacrifice His Only Son in the greatest of love to provide the way for all His creatures to have eternal life through Him if they will only use their God given human freedom to humbly accept Him in faith as their Lord and God. If you confess with “your” mouth the Lord Jesus and believe in “your” heart that God raised has raised Him from the dead “you’ will be saved and “you” shall know the truth and the truth shall set “you” free indeed. God gives a genuine appeal for all men to come to Him and “you” have the freedom to do so! Amen

 

[Benjamin]

The Calvinist typically insists that the human being does not have the ability to express a choice without a cause to do so, therefore he insists we are not free to make the choice. But, they are again making mistakes here: (1) they are assuming the Non-Calvinist denies the work (“influences”) of God in the world (2) they are assuming the cause is irresistible, a determination rather than an influence (3) they are assuming our definition of freedom is being compared to the divine freedom to have the ability create the world in which we live and that we respond apart from influences on our human nature which was divinely designed to have a God given mind of our own to reason with.


I am late for my workout now and have no more time for this in the near future so you can have the last word.

Thank you for the discussion. God bless.

 

[Rippon]

Ben, if you would leave out your dishonest remarks which are at the heart of your arguments, there would be a better exchange of ideas.

BrotherJoseph has never attributed sin to the Holy God.

 

[SovereignGrace]

The sooner people possess no free will the sooner they realize what the fall did to all mankind.