The elect do not resist Him, but lost do all of the time!
-
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!
Do We Have Free-Will?
- Status
Indeed, as Calvinists hold to free will, just not in an absolute sense of the term!
Either it is the will of God that all get saved, and he gas the power to accomplish just that, or else means something else!
She will be forced to accept that God limited Himself to bow down to our own free will!
Did God intend to save all sinners by death of Christ?
Reformed1689
Well-Known Member
Well that's not entirely true. I, as a Calvinist, believe in absolute free will. But again, what does that mean is the question.
Interesting, as I am also a Calvinist, and have never read anyone who supported Libertine free will position!
Reformed1689
Well-Known Member
AGAIN it depends on what you MEAN by absolute free will.
I would see it as meaning that we still have the amount of free will Adam had when created, before he fell!
We have a choice of which path we follow and it's the path that matters for Salvation. Follow Jesus His is the only way to Salvation.
MB
Did you really believe in Calvinism or do you believe in Compatibilism?
Can you describe how your beliefs are closer to Calvinism than Compatibilism?
Try to compare to John Calvin’s Calvinism and read his work called “No Mere Permission”.
Christ intended to save all who believe in Him. Dying for the whole world gives everyone the opportunity to be saved It's mans choice to believe or not. Many choose not to.
MB
Did you really believe in Calvinism or do you believe in Compatibilism?
Can you describe how your beliefs are closer to Calvinism than Compatibilism?
Try to compare to John Calvin’s Calvinism and read his work called “No Mere Permission”.
Of course Calvin knows more than Paul. Hehehehehehehehe!
You have an active imagination that has no acquaintance with the teaching of scripture.
If you are just going to invent things,go for it.
Maybe you could write for Chick Tracts.
If you wanted to try to get into the discussion start by a word study on the word know,as distinct from Gods omniscience.
I doubt you will do so however . Found this online;
Schreiner suggests looking to the OT for the background of the term. Here for God “to know” (יָדַע, yāda˓) refers to his covenantal love in which he sets his affection on those whom he has chosen (cf. Gen. 18:19; Exod. 33:17; 1 Sam. 2:12; Ps. 18:43; Prov. 9:10; Jer. 1:5; Hos. 13:5; Amos 3:2). The parallel terms “consecrate” and “appoint” in Jer. 1:5 are noteworthy, for the text is not merely saying that God “foresaw” that Jeremiah would serve as a prophet. The point is that God had lovingly chosen him to be a prophet before he was born. With Romans 8:29, the point is that God has predestined those upon whom he has set his covenantal affection.
"Moreover, as most scholars affirm, “calling” (κλητός, klētos), must be understood as effectual. It is not merely an invitation that human beings can reject, but it is a summons that overcomes human resistance and effectually persuades them to say yes to God. This definition of “calling” is evident from Rom. 8:30, for there Paul says that “those whom he called (ἐκάλεσεν, ekalesen) he also justified.” The text does not say that “some” of those called were justified. It fuses the called and justified together so that those who have experienced calling have also inevitably received the blessing of justification. Now if all those who are called are also justified, then calling must be effectual and must create faith, for “all” those who are called are justified and justification cannot occur without faith (3:21–22, 28; 5:1). This understanding is also vindicated by 4:17, where God’s call effectually brings into existence things that did not exist (cf. also Rom. 9:24–26; 1 Cor. 1:9, 24, 26–28; Gal. 1:6, 15; 1 Thess. 2:12; 5:24; 2 Thess. 2:14; 2 Tim. 1:9). The foundational reason why all things work for believers’ good begins to emerge: God’s unstoppable purpose in calling believers to salvation cannot be frustrated, and thus he employs all things to bring about the plan he had from the beginning in the lives of believers.
Thomas R. Schreiner, vol. 6, Romans, Baker Exegetical Commentary on the New Testament (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Books, 1998), 450-51.
"Some have argued that the verb προέγνω (proegnō, he foreknew) here should be defined only in terms of God’s foreknowledge.That is, God predestined to salvation those whom he saw in advance would choose to be part of his redeemed community. This fits with Acts 26:5 and 2 Pet.3:17, where the verb προγινώσκειν clearly means “to know beforehand.” According to this understanding predestination is not ultimately based on God’s decision to save some. Instead, God has predestined to save those whom he foresaw would choose him. Such an interpretation is attractive in that it forestalls the impression that God arbitrarily saves some and not others. It is quite unlikely, however, that it accurately represents the meaning of προγινώσκειν when the reference is to God’s foreknowledge. The background of the term should be located in the OT, where for God “to know” (יָדַע, yāda˓) refers to his covenantal love in which he sets his affection on those whom he has chosen (cf. Gen. 18:19; Exod. 33:17; 1 Sam. 2:12; Ps. 18:43; Prov. 9:10; Jer. 1:5; Hos. 13:5; Amos 3:2). The parallel terms “consecrate” and “appoint” in Jer. 1:5 are noteworthy, for the text is not merely saying that God “foresaw” that Jeremiah would serve as a prophet. The point is that God had lovingly chosen him to be a prophet before he was born. Similarly, in Amos 3:2 God’s knowledge of Israel in contrast to that of the rest of the nations can scarcely be cognitional, for Yahweh had full knowledge of all nations of the earth. The intention of the text is to say that Yahweh had set his covenantal love only upon Israel. Romans 11:2 yields the same conclusion, “God has not rejected his people whom he foreknew.” The verb προέγνω here functions as the antonym to ἀπώσατο (apōsato, he rejected). In other words, the verse is saying that God has not rejected his people upon whom he set his covenantal love (cf. also Acts2:23; 1 Pet. 1:2, 20).Similarly, in Rom. 8:29 the point is that God has predestined those upon whom he has set his covenantal affection. Note that the object of the verb προέγνω is personal, “those whom” (οὕς, hous) God set his affection upon. The words προέγνω and προώρισεν (proōrisen, predestine) are therefore almost synonyms...The major objective of the text should be reiterated here. Believers are assured that everything works together for good because the God who set his covenantal love upon them, predestined them to be like his Son, called them effectually to himself, and justified them will certainly glorify them. All the sufferings and afflictions of the present era are not an obstacle to their ultimate salvation but the means by which salvation will be accomplished."
Thomas R. Schreiner, vol. 6, Romans, Baker Exegetical Commentary on the New Testament (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Books, 1998), 452.
Last edited:
Ἐγένετο ὁ πρῶτος ἄνθρωπος Ἀδὰμ εἰς ψυχὴν ζῶσαν ὁ ἔσχατος Ἀδὰμ εἰς πνεῦμα ζῳοποιοῦν 1 Cor 15:45
Does first and last mean first and last, Adam?
but the death did reign from Adam till Moses, even upon those not having sinned in the likeness of Adam's transgression, who is a type of him who is coming. Rom 5:14
and him who was made some little less than messengers we see -- Jesus -- because of the suffering of the death, with glory and honour having been crowned, that by the grace of God for every one he might taste of death. Heb 2:9
The first Adam brought, the death, in order for the last Adam to be able to suffer, the death, that through, the death, being made alive out of death, the devil and his works could be destroyed.
Seeing, then, the children have partaken of flesh and blood, he himself also in like manner did take part of the same, that through (the) death he might destroy him having the power of (the) death -- that is, the devil -- Heb 2:14
he who is doing the sin, of the devil he is, because from the beginning the devil doth sin; for this was the Son of God manifested, (as the last Adam, the son of Man} that he may break up the works of the devil; 1 John 3:8
the Son of God manifested, that he may break up the works of the devil; ='s the hope of Romans 8:20 --- for to vanity was the creation made subject -- not of its will, but because of Him who did subject it -- in hope,
The first Adam was never of his free will going to not eat of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil and not bring, the death, to man.
I have a question for those who under Greek and the grammar thereof.
Does the definite article preceding death not imply that death was an entity even before the first Adam brought it to man?
Even to the understanding of, the death, having effected something prior to it being brought to man?
How was Adam to understand or have of a concept of what, מוֹת תָּמוּת - dying thou dost die, as being?
This is a different topic. You already have a thread for this, or if not then make one.
Miss E
Active Member
Yes, lets.
I am saying that God gives humans a choice. Reject or Accept. He presents His Son to them, saying look how much I love you enough to die in your place, I offer you now Life. People will either consciously choose on their own ability to accept what God did, or to reject.
To say that God MAKES us (by, in your case, influencing a man/woman just enough to either cause them to turn from their sin and trust God or to stay lost) is making God out to be a dictator who FORCES his creation to accept/love Him. If it is HIS CHOICE that influences OUR choice, then why does He not just accept everyone? Well, then it would be fake love and not really love at all. Wouldn't you agree with those points?
timtofly
Well-Known Member
You know that free will is not a quantity??
Adam did not get several "test" to see how much free will he had.
Free will is the ability to change one's mind and will when presented with a choice.
If you have no free will, then it would be impossible to respond to this post if I told you not to. Free will cannot be objecting to this post. Objecting would come naturally. Hitting the send button would be the free will choice, because I command you not to respond. Of course I am not God, and cannot force you either way.... Since there are no consequences attached, you could quote this post many times. Adam only got one chance.
- Status