Does God have totally free will?

[Aaron]

Aaron,

I have a question...not trying to start anything, just really want to understand this perspective.

Do you believe man has anything to do with the determination/development of his nature? For example, the old 'garbage in - garbage out' principle which teaches that if we choose to surround ourselves with negative influences we will be negatively influenced. Our character appears to develop over the course of a lifetime and seems to be directly affected by the choices we make. You seem to suggest that one is born with a fully developed nature (character) and is thus determined by that inborn nature to choose whatever it has be predisposed to choose. (i.e. animal instinct)

You need to learn to think biblically. Is there one born uncorrupted? Is there one born whose heart from conception is not deceitful above all and desperately wicked?

 

[Aaron]

Given your premises I do not necessarily see why he could not. Were he indeed sinless, were God to lay the sins of the world upon his shoulders....dunno what constrains the possibility if God chose to do it that way?

Moses was not divine. If Moses were our substitute, if we entered into union with Moses, we could indeed fall away not being made partakers of the divine nature.

Not FALSE...... but I have never heard the Almighty described this way. This is an adjective usually reserved for Beaches or impeccably maintained classic cars.

Then you've never read the book of Romans. convicted1's string of eminently fitting synonyms are all included in Paul's use of the term uncorruptible.

 

[Yeshua1]

You need to learn to think biblically. Is there one born uncorrupted? Is there one born whose heart from conception is not deceitful above all and desperately wicked?

Isn't the very concept of free will really not biblical, as ONLY God himself would be absolute Sovereign?

 

[HeirofSalvation]

Moses was not divine. If Moses were our substitute, if we entered into union with Moses, we could indeed fall away not being made partakers of the divine nature.


Then you've never read the book of Romans. convicted1's string of eminently fitting synonyms are all included in Paul's use of the term uncorruptible.

Moses was not divine. If Moses were our substitute,

Fine....I said "given your premises" not "given Aarons premises"

Then you've never read the book of Romans

WOW insanely arrogant...and a non-sequitor

fitting synonyms

I think I was making a commentary about whether convicted's point of view might possibly be influenced by an unconscoius perception that it is somehow more pious. Thus, I did not say it was wrong to say that. So what is it that you are arguing? You are arguing against points I never made.

 

[Skandelon]

You need to learn to think biblically. Is there one born uncorrupted? Is there one born whose heart from conception is not deceitful above all and desperately wicked?

Well, since I have to 'think biblically' I'll allow the bible answer you:

"24 Some were convinced by what he said, but others would not believe. 25 They disagreed among themselves and began to leave after Paul had made this final statement: "The Holy Spirit spoke the truth to your forefathers when he said through Isaiah the prophet: 26 " 'Go to this people and say, "You will be ever hearing but never understanding; you will be ever seeing but never perceiving." 27 For this people's heart has become calloused; they hardly hear with their ears, and they have closed their eyes. Otherwise they might see with their eyes, hear with their ears, understand with their hearts and turn, and I would heal them.' 28 "Therefore I want you to know that God's salvation has been sent to the Gentiles, and they will listen!"

What do we learn from this passage. Remember, think biblically:
1. Some were persuaded by what he said.
2. Some hearts had "become calloused" (which means they weren't born already hardened)
3. The Gentiles condition is not the same for "they will listen."

Here is another verse from the bible:

Matt. 18:3: Then he said, "I tell you the truth, unless you turn from your sins and become like little children, you will never get into the Kingdom of Heaven."

What do we learn from this verse? If we think biblically?

1. One must humble themselves, like a child, to enter the kingdom.
2. Children, though sinners, are not yet hardened by their rebellion.

 

[Aaron]

Back to your original question, is a man's nature predetermined?

Scripturally we know that you were conceived with a corrupt, desperately wicked and deceitful heart. In short, Scandal, by nature is a corrupt, desperately wicked and deceitful man. Did he choose that, or was it chosen for him?

 

[psalms109:31]

I don't believe in a free will but a sovereign will. What God wills will happen. That there is no reason to doubt His word. What He say's He will do. When He say's He will lead His people to the promise land He will even if it takes generation of people until one generation does what He wills for them. The Gardener, the Holy Spirit, the branches, the True Vine, they work as one. We are to remember we do not support the root the root supports us.

 

[Yeshua1]

Back to your original question, is a man's nature predetermined?

Scripturally we know that you were conceived with a corrupt, desperately wicked and deceitful heart. In short, Scandal, by nature is a corrupt, desperately wicked and deceitful man. Did he choose that, or was it chosen for him?

neither, Adam chose us all to be born corrupted and sinners before God when he decided to rebel/sin against god, and condemn all those to follow!

 

[webdog]

Isn't the very concept of free will really not biblical, as ONLY God himself would be absolute Sovereign?

Let me see...JesusFan, DaChaser and now he returns as Yeshua1?

 

[Skandelon]

Back to your original question, is a man's nature predetermined?

Scripturally we know that you were conceived with a corrupt, desperately wicked and deceitful heart. In short, Scandal, by nature is a corrupt, desperately wicked and deceitful man. Did he choose that, or was it chosen for him?

But even Calvinists teach that men aren't born as bad as they could be. There is a hardening process. And given the verses I presented above, which you conveniently ignored, it appears that prior to growing hardened one could hear, see, understand and turn. That while still a child they are not yet calloused by the sinfulness of the world to the point that they cannot respond to God's revelation. It is ONLY when they 'trade the truth in for a lie' and rebel over and over again in the face of God's longing to gather them (Matt. 23:37 etc) that they are 'given over' and 'become defiled.' They GROW hardened. They aren't born such.

Scripture speaks of hardened people being unable to see, hear, and understand, but 'the Gentiles will listen.' (Acts 28:28)

 

[Aaron]

But even Calvinists teach that men aren't born as bad as they could be. blah blah blah

Let's review. The topic is God's free will. My answer, there is no free will. God cannot lie. He cannot choose to lie. Neither can He deny Himself, nor corrupt himself.

Men on the otherhand are born corrupted and cannot but sin.

Your question was whether or not a man's nature was predetermined or whether it was conditioned by outward circumstances.

I cite the Scriptural appraisal of your heart and then ask whether you chose it, or whether it was chosen for you.

Can you not answer the question?

 

[Skandelon]

I did answer you, but you won't deal with the scripture I presented. I agreed that we are born corrupted, but I made the argument that only those who have grown hardened are said to be 'unable' to 'see, hear, understand , and repent. Now deal with those passages.

 

[DHK]

I'm still not sure what you mean by this statement. Did God create the mathematical realities that determined that 2+2=4, OR is 2+2=4 absolute truth, which is why God Created the mathematical ideas to express that pre-existing absolute truth?

2+2 = 4 does not have to be true. It is only true in a base ten system (and in some others).
In a base three system 2+2=11. Does that make truth relative?
No.
Remember that it is man that discovers mathematical principles.
Man called the sky blue. But the sky isn't blue; it just appears blue for that is the color it reflects. IOW, it is every color but blue for those are the colors that it has absorbed.

 

[convicted1]

I will simply disagree for now- something tells me, however, that the position you take (and those who see as you do) is as much motivated by an unconscious belief that yours is the more pious view to take, and the temptation not to take the LESS pious view is irresistible. Maybe that has something to do with it?

This has nothing to do with being pious, but by reviewing the character of God defined throughout the bible. The bible states that God can not lie. Jesus was/is God manifested in the flesh. Therefore Jesus does not have the ability to sin, and chose not to(in His flesh while on earth). Jesus could not, and can not sin.

Given your premises I do not necessarily see why he could not. Were he indeed sinless, were God to lay the sins of the world upon his shoulders....dunno what constrains the possibility if God chose to do it that way?

In Rev 5, you can read where there was a search made, and no one was found worthy to take the Book out of God the Father's right hand, but One, the Lion of the tribe of the Judah, Jesus Christ. He was also the only One able to bear our sins to the cross. In Lev 16, you can read about the scapegoat, which was a "type" of Jesus, as He bore our sins on the cross.

Yes He was, so what? Are these simply pious airs? Especially with this one.... Really????? Not FALSE...... but I have never heard the Almighty described this way. This is an adjective usually reserved for Beaches or impeccably maintained classic cars.

If Jesus was able to sin, and merely chose not to, then none of those adjectives would fit.

 

[HeirofSalvation]

Well, Convicted: I am somewhat non-commited, but my tendency is to think otherwise: I have been looking into it some and I noticed two things:
1.) This debate has apparently been raging for roughly 2k years
2.) The answer is not near as cut-and-dry as we like to make it or as anyone here is making it any way. It is an interesting quandry for sure

But I do not think the Rev. 5 passage sheds a lot of light on the topic inasmuch as he is qualified due to his HAVING LIVED sinlessly, not due to timeless perfection as far as I can make out. The question isn't his Divine nature, its his Human nature and remember he WAS 100% a man too, yet without sin. Adam was without a sin nature at least until he fell. Anyway it is an interesting quandry and although you may indeed be correct, I think it is a question that is deserving of some serious consideration. It is, as far as I can tell not NEAR as simple as we have been making it here.

 

[Winman]

But even Calvinists teach that men aren't born as bad as they could be. There is a hardening process. And given the verses I presented above, which you conveniently ignored, it appears that prior to growing hardened one could hear, see, understand and turn. That while still a child they are not yet calloused by the sinfulness of the world to the point that they cannot respond to God's revelation. It is ONLY when they 'trade the truth in for a lie' and rebel over and over again in the face of God's longing to gather them (Matt. 23:37 etc) that they are 'given over' and 'become defiled.' They GROW hardened. They aren't born such.

Scripture speaks of hardened people being unable to see, hear, and understand, but 'the Gentiles will listen.' (Acts 28:28)

Calvinists really never say anything. Whenever they say something, they will immediately contradict it. They say a man is totally depraved, but then they say he is not as bad as he could be and can do some good.

If man is utterly evil and can only obey his desires, then everything he would do would be as evil as possible. He would NEVER choose to do good when he could do evil. Of course, it is obvious that this is not true, even Calvinists must admit that unsaved men often do truly good works such as sacrificing their lives to save another person. A man will leap on a hand grenade to save his fellow soldiers, or hundreds of firemen will die as on 9/11 trying to save people.

The scriptures do not teach that man cannot choose true good.

Isa 7:16 For before the child shall know to refuse the evil, and choose the good, the land that thou abhorrest shall be forsaken of both her kings.

This verse shows that a child matures to a point where he can understand good from evil, and has the ability to refuse the evil and choose the good.

Calvinism is a theology of contradiction. They say God decrees all things that come to pass, then immediately contradict themselves and say God does not decree evil.

How can you reason with anyone who believes contradictions?

 

[Aaron]

I did answer you . . . I agreed that we are born corrupted

Then your nature is predetermined. You didn't seek it or choose it. You are corrupt and cannot but sin.

You will answer that you're not as corrupt as you could be. In an unguarded moment, you let slip the fact that when all is said and done, you believe that the reason one does not choose Christ is because he is more corrupt than you are. http://www.baptistboard.com/showthread.php?t=77596&page=3

In this thread you're arguing that the reason you are not as corrupt as he is because you don't sin as much. You've made better, more righteous choices.

. . . but I made the argument that only those who have grown hardened are said to be 'unable' to 'see, hear, understand , and repent. Now deal with those passages.

I have dealt with them numerous times. Here's one exchange from long ago: http://www.baptistboard.com/showthread.php?t=73312&page=8

 

[AresMan]

neither, Adam chose us all to be born corrupted and sinners before God when he decided to rebel/sin against god, and condemn all those to follow!

So, it's Adam's fault, and we are victims of circumstance! Poor us!

 

[Yeshua1]

calvinists say that man is able to still do good works, can still choose to do good, can be religious etc

its just that their sin natures/depravity means that man is unable to come to Christ and get saved apart from the working grace of the Lord applied towards them that enable them to be able to even want to come to Christ in order to be saved!

Depravity NOT saying man cannot do good, be law abiding etc

refers to sense of unable/unwillingly to come to jesus for salvation in and by themselves!

 

[Aaron]

More accurately, that on earth, and in reference to earthly rewards and judgments, there are good men and evil men and men of varying degrees in between. The law accounts for that, prescribing earthly punishments of varying degrees of severity in proportion to the severity of the crime.

But in reference to Heaven, and according to the law, men are either good or evil, holy or profane, corrupt or whole. The appraisal of Heaven in regard to men on earth, there is none that doeth good. There is none that seeketh after God, His kingdom, or His righteousness—all hate Christ.