Free will makes God appear impotent.

[old regular]

Our Hope arises from the freeness of Grace, not the freedom of man's will!!!!

 

[convicted1]

Our Hope arises from the freeness of Grace, not the freedom of man's will!!!!

Amen Brother Mike, amen!!


I am still planning on being at Mt. Moriah in september, if you're there and good Lord willing....

 

[convicted1]

In John 6, Jesus plainly stated,


"And Jesus said to them, `I am the bread of the life; he who is coming unto me may not hunger, and he who is believing in me may not thirst -- at any time; but I said to you, that ye also have seen me, and ye believe not; all that the Father doth give to me will come unto me; and him who is coming unto me, I may in no wise cast without, because I have come down out of the heaven, not that I may do my will, but the will of Him who sent me. `And this is the will of the Father who sent me, that all that He hath given to me I may not lose of it, but may raise it up in the last day; and this is the will of Him who sent me, that every one who is beholding the Son, and is believing in him, may have life age-during, and I will raise him up in the last day.' The Jews, therefore, were murmuring at him, because he said, `I am the bread that came down out of the heaven;' and they said, `Is not this Jesus, the son of Joseph, whose father and mother we have known? how then saith this one -- Out of the heaven I have come down?' Jesus answered, therefore, and said to them, `Murmur not one with another; no one is able to come unto me, if the Father who sent me may not draw him, and I will raise him up in the last day; it is having been written in the prophets, And they shall be all taught of God; every one therefore who heard from the Father, and learned, cometh to me;" (YLT...vss 35-45)


In vs 37, Jesus stated that all the Father gave Him WILL come...not come if they choose to, or come when they want to, &c. When He beckons them, they WILL come. He then went on to say that no one is able....you know, have the ability...to come unto Him unless He first draws them. That sure break free will into itty bitty pieces....


Now, let's back up a few verses and read what Jesus had already told them.....


"They said therefore unto him, `What may we do that we may work the works of God?' Jesus answered and said to them, This is the work of God, that ye may believe in him whom He did send.' They said therefore to him, `What sign, then, dost thou, that we may see and may believe thee? what dost thou work?" (YLT...vss 28-30)

The work of God is to cause us to become believers, to have faith in Him....


but as many as did receive him to them he gave authority to become sons of God -- to those believing in his name, who -- not of blood nor of a will of flesh, nor of a will of man but -- of God were begotten.

Romans 9:16 so, then -- not of him who is willing, nor of him who is running, but of God who is doing kindness:


2 Thess. 2:13 And we -- we ought to give thanks to God always for you, brethren, beloved by the Lord, that God did choose you from the beginning to salvation, in sanctification of the Spirit, and belief of the truth,
(John 1:12-13 YLT)


All of these show that salvation starts and ends with God...

 

[Reformed]

And even as they loved each other deeply, this is where Wesley and Whitefield were divided. You summarized it well in when you said, "...are free to do so, but they are not free not to do so."

Unfortunately the popular definition of free will is I will come to God when I'm good and ready to. I won't come a minute too soon nor a minute too late but I will come on my terms and in my timing. That doesn't fit the classic definition.

I recall a lengthy discussion during a class at one of those free will institutions surrounding the call of Esther to intervene against the decree brought upon the Jews in Susa. Mordecai sent word to Esther.

"For if you remain silent at this time, relief and deliverance will arise for the Jews from another place and you and your father's house will perish. And who knows whether you have not attained royalty for such a time as this?"
Esther 4:14 NAS77

Picture if you will a dialogue between Wesley and Whitefield. Wesley gets the first line "...if you remain silent at this time..." Wesley would insist Esther could make a choice. She could speak to the king or she could remain silent. The preceding verse is what he would call prevenient grace - the grace that precedes the response.

Then Mordecai told them to reply to Esther, "Do not imagine that you in the king's palace can escape any more than all the Jews.
Esther 4:13 NAS77

Esther's unlikely rise to favor and position in the palace is akin to the call. It was nothing short of Providence that took her there and nothing of her own merit.

Whitefield would have the final word and insist the final sentence in verse 14 was the effectual call. He would insist Esther was compelled to respond to her position because of Providence. Her rise to favor was not for Esther's vanity but for her - and subsequently her people's redemption.

Brother, you need to post on this genre more often. I appreciate the interaction. We may be -- and forgive me if I place ourselves in the category of these men -- a Wesley and a Whitfield respectively, but your posts are thoughtful and lacking causticity.

 

[convicted1]

Christ preached man is not free in any sense until He sets them free (see John 8), yet we have experts who know more than He (who preach error) and say man is free in his will. To at least one of these even a canine is free and has faith.

There need be no wondering as to who is correct, yet, some do just that as if they are schooling the Son of God.

:applause::applause::applause::applause:

 

[convicted1]

Brother Rob, Wes' problem stems from not holding to the "Federal Headship" theology. All that are born naturally into this world, Adam is their fountainhead. All who are born Spiritually, Jesus Christ, the last Adam, is their Fountainhead. It's just that simple.....



Here comes Wes' "nun uh" in 5, 4, 3.......

 

[Reformed]

Brother Rob, Wes' problem stems from not holding to the "Federal Headship" theology. All that are born naturally into this world, Adam is their fountainhead. All who are born Spiritually, Jesus Christ, the last Adam, is their Fountainhead. It's just that simple.....



Here comes Wes' "nun uh" in 5, 4, 3.......

Fountainhead? I never quite heard it put that way.

As you said when you referenced 'Federal Headship', Adam acted as our federal head. The form of the word 'federal' in this sense is archaic in nature. It pertains to a compact or treaty. When Adam sinned he did so as our fair and just representative. He acted as mankind's representative, and his action had binding consequence on his posterity.

It works the same way in representative governments. In the United States political system the electorate votes representatives and senators to Congress. These elected officials vote to pass laws. These laws are binding on citizens of the country even if the citizens disagree with the law. Adam did the exact same thing to us. Although we did not vote for Adam (he was created by God), Adam was our lawful representative before God.

 

[convicted1]

Fountainhead? I never quite heard it put that way.

As you said when you referenced 'Federal Headship', Adam acted as our federal head. The form of the word 'federal' in this sense is archaic in nature. It pertains to a compact or treaty. When Adam sinned he did so as our fair and just representative. He acted as mankind's representative, and his action had binding consequence on his posterity.

It works the same way in representative governments. In the United States political system the electorate votes representatives and senators to Congress. These elected officials vote to pass laws. These laws are binding on citizens of the country even if the citizens disagree with the law. Adam did the exact same thing to us. Although we did not vote for Adam (he was created by God), Adam was our lawful representative before God.

Maybe fountainhead wasn't an ideal choice, but it's late at night for me, so cut a Brother a break...:laugh:

Very solid post, Brother Herald, but the philosphy barbs will start in 5, 4, 3.....

 

[Winman]

Brother Rob, Wes' problem stems from not holding to the "Federal Headship" theology. All that are born naturally into this world, Adam is their fountainhead. All who are born Spiritually, Jesus Christ, the last Adam, is their Fountainhead. It's just that simple.....

Here comes Wes' "nun uh" in 5, 4, 3.......

Oh, you better believe it. A. H. Strong, a famous Calvinist objected to this theory;

..It impugns the justice of God by implying: (a) that God holds men responsible for the violation of a covenant which they had no part in establishing...We not only never authorized Adam to make such a covenant, but there is no evidence that he ever made one at all. It is not even certain that Adam knew he should have posterity... (b) that upon the basis of this covenant God accounts men as sinners who are not sinners... (c) That, after accounting men to be sinners who are not sinners, God makes them sinners by immediately creating each human soul with a corrupt nature such as will correspond to his decree. This is not only to assume a false view of the origin of the soul, but also to make God directly the author of sin...

http://www.gospeltruth.net/menbornsinners/mbs03.htm

As A. H. Strong wrote, we did not "vote" for Adam to be our federal head as we vote for our President or members of Congress to represent us.

There is not one word in the Bible that supports that Adam was our federal head.

But worst of all, this theory makes God unjust and the author of sin.

Nice theory Willis.

No, the Bible says that the son shall not bear the iniquity of the father, or vice versa, but every man shall die for his own sin.

Eze 18:20 The soul that sinneth, it shall die. The son shall not bear the iniquity of the father, neither shall the father bear the iniquity of the son: the righteousness of the righteous shall be upon him, and the wickedness of the wicked shall be upon him.

Unbelievable, you believe an horrible "theory" that makes God the author of sin and is not found anywhere in the Bible, and completely reject the direct word of God.

 

[convicted1]

So....you take A.H. Strong's words for the gospel, a Calvinist, but when other Calvinists' disagree with you, they're wrong...



The very example of cherry pickin'.....

 

[Winman]

In John 6, Jesus plainly stated,


"And Jesus said to them, `I am the bread of the life; he who is coming unto me may not hunger, and he who is believing in me may not thirst -- at any time; but I said to you, that ye also have seen me, and ye believe not; all that the Father doth give to me will come unto me; and him who is coming unto me, I may in no wise cast without, because I have come down out of the heaven, not that I may do my will, but the will of Him who sent me. `And this is the will of the Father who sent me, that all that He hath given to me I may not lose of it, but may raise it up in the last day; and this is the will of Him who sent me, that every one who is beholding the Son, and is believing in him, may have life age-during, and I will raise him up in the last day.' The Jews, therefore, were murmuring at him, because he said, `I am the bread that came down out of the heaven;' and they said, `Is not this Jesus, the son of Joseph, whose father and mother we have known? how then saith this one -- Out of the heaven I have come down?' Jesus answered, therefore, and said to them, `Murmur not one with another; no one is able to come unto me, if the Father who sent me may not draw him, and I will raise him up in the last day; it is having been written in the prophets, And they shall be all taught of God; every one therefore who heard from the Father, and learned, cometh to me;" (YLT...vss 35-45)


In vs 37, Jesus stated that all the Father gave Him WILL come...not come if they choose to, or come when they want to, &c. When He beckons them, they WILL come. He then went on to say that no one is able....you know, have the ability...to come unto Him unless He first draws them. That sure break free will into itty bitty pieces....


Now, let's back up a few verses and read what Jesus had already told them.....


"They said therefore unto him, `What may we do that we may work the works of God?' Jesus answered and said to them, This is the work of God, that ye may believe in him whom He did send.' They said therefore to him, `What sign, then, dost thou, that we may see and may believe thee? what dost thou work?" (YLT...vss 28-30)

The work of God is to cause us to become believers, to have faith in Him....


but as many as did receive him to them he gave authority to become sons of God -- to those believing in his name, who -- not of blood nor of a will of flesh, nor of a will of man but -- of God were begotten.

Romans 9:16 so, then -- not of him who is willing, nor of him who is running, but of God who is doing kindness:


2 Thess. 2:13 And we -- we ought to give thanks to God always for you, brethren, beloved by the Lord, that God did choose you from the beginning to salvation, in sanctification of the Spirit, and belief of the truth,
(John 1:12-13 YLT)


All of these show that salvation starts and ends with God...

Unbelievable. The people did not ask Jesus what God's work is, they asked Jesus what work THEY must do to do the works of God.

Jhn 6:28 Then said they unto him, What shall we do, that we might work the works of God?
29 Jesus answered and said unto them, This is the work of God, that ye believe on him whom he hath sent.

And Jesus directly answered them and told them the work of God is to believe on him. He was telling these people this is what God wanted THEM to do.

They were not asking what work God does, and Jesus was not telling them that God caused them to believe.

You are outright butchering the scriptures now.

 

[Winman]

So....you take A.H. Strong's words for the gospel, a Calvinist, but when other Calvinists' disagree with you, they're wrong...

The very example of cherry pickin'.....

Even Calvinists are right on occasion, or rather RARE occasion.

Willis, you USED to know that Original Sin was wrong for the same reasons that A.H. Strong objected to here. It has God holding men accountable for an agreement they never made.

Look, I didn't vote for Obama, but when I participated in our election process, I agreed to support whoever won. So, by participating in the election I chose Barack Obama to be my President.

But I never voted for Adam, and neither did you. And if you asked me if I want him to be my representative, I would say no.

Now Jesus is another story, I voted for him, I chose him to be my representative on the cross and die for me.

No, I represented myself when I chose to knowingly and willfully sin. I became a sinner by my own choice.

But beside the fact that I NEVER agreed for Adam to be my representative in the garden, this theory is horrible because it makes God the AUTHOR of sin.

If you want to believe that, that is your choice, but I sure wouldn't want to stand before God and explain this theory to him.

 

[quantumfaith]

I am Extremely grateful that God has provided the grace for me to be a synergist.

 

[convicted1]

I am Extremely grateful that God has provided the grace for me to be a synergist.

You are one of the most graceful posters on here, Brother Dave. I truly mean that. You can hold your own, but you do it without ad hominems. I truly respect you, and I pray you take no offense towards me. I love you....


:thumbs::jesus::godisgood::wavey:

 

[convicted1]

Unless you put you hand out to shake hands with God and say "put'r there", then God can't...not won't...can't save you is horrible doctrine....

 

[Earth Wind and Fire]

Unless you put you hand out to shake hands with God and say "put'r there", then God can't...not won't...can't save you is horrible doctrine....

And 'Bingo ' was his name oh.....:laugh:

 

[Earth Wind and Fire]

You are one of the most graceful posters on here, Brother Dave. I truly mean that. You can hold your own, but you do it without ad hominems. I truly respect you, and I pray you take no offense towards me. I love you....


:thumbs::jesus::godisgood::wavey:

Dave is a sincerely good guy.....glad you noticed!

 

[Earth Wind and Fire]

Brother, you need to post on this genre more often. I appreciate the interaction. We may be -- and forgive me if I place ourselves in the category of these men -- a Wesley and a Whitfield respectively, but your posts are thoughtful and lacking causticity.

Thats because he looks at it from both sides.:godisgood:

 

[Winman]

Unless you put you hand out to shake hands with God and say "put'r there", then God can't...not won't...can't save you is horrible doctrine....

You do believe that man has to at least listen to the gospel to be saved don't you? Or is the man listening saving himself?

You are getting so extreme, pretty soon you will object if the man is even present when he gets saved.

 

[convicted1]

Once...if ever...you figure out God's sovereignity and man's responsibilty, you'll figure this out. Until then, you'll remain in the gross errors you're mired in....