Is Man a Free Moral Agent?

[BobRyan]

Hebrews 11 describes and uncounted multitude of saints in the OT that chose faith and were saved.

In the OT we have those who were taken directly to heaven (Enoch and Elijah) as well as Moses who we find in Matt 17 standing on an equal level with Elijah in the heavenly realm before the cross.

Galatians 1:6-11 shows that there is only and has been only - One Gospel in all of time.

Hebrews 4:1-2 shows that "We have had the gospel preached to us Just as they also" referring to the Hebrews in the wilderness for 40 years.

Galations 3:7-8 says the gospel was preached to Abraham and Christ tells us in John 8 that Abraham saw Christ's day and was glad.

Scripture tells us that Abraham and others met God face to face (Gen 18 comes to mind) and of course we know from John 1 that they could only have been seeing Christ - God the Son, not God the Father.

So that means these people were saved by Grace - born again (according to the pre-cross teaching on the holy spirit) and believers in Christ - followers of Christ - long before the cross.

They were saved under the One Gospel.

The Hebrew nation church sovereignly chosen by God as the one true church - saved by grace and taught the same gospel that "we also" have heard - yet without as many of the details filled in.

In Christ,

Bob

 

[KenH]

Okay, Yelsew. Since you are apparently rather proud of being able to exercise your "free will" to save yourself from your sins, you try to get to heaven by your "free will" and I'll use the repentance and faith that God gave me to trust in the finished work of Jesus to save me from my sins, and we'll see how it all pans out in the end.

But I do hope that you will eventually come to trust in God's power instead of your own. It will make your walk with God much more pleasant and joyful.

 

[Yelsew]

Ken,
You obviously have not read my posts, so let me repeat.

I have never! Repeat, never stated that man can save himself. I do not believe man has the remotest possibility of so doing.

Scriptures scream at man to repent! In order to be obedient, man must do something. Repent means to stop doing or turn from doing what it is man needs to repent from. God does not repent on our behalf, we must do it!

God does not study to show himself approved unto himself. We are the ones who must study to show ourselves approved, an act of our own free will. God does not make us read his Holy Word, We must read it of our own volition.

God does not make us believe, we must be persuaded in our own spirit and of our own free will to believe what the Word says.

Jesus said "...whosever believeth on Him (referring to himself) should not perish but have everlasting life..." This says that man is given the options and must as an act of free will, believe to live.

There is nothing that I can do to save myself from hell. BUT! I can receive, that is, be persuaded concerning (an act of my own free will), the Gift (Jesus) and thereby allow God, the one who saves (who acts upon my "new persuasion") to save me from hell. I do nothing but receive, He does the saving.

I am saying that God does the giving, I do the receiving. God has already done the work of saving, but I must, as an act of my free will, believe it to be so, in order for me to be saved!

You on the other hand are saying that God does the receiving and the saving, leaving nothing up to man, not even believing! Show me that in scripture!

 

[KenH]

I, also, have already explained my understanding to you. At this point all we are doing is going around in circles which, unfortunately, is about where all threads in this forum end up.

 

[npetreley]

Originally posted by Yelsew:
Remember in your high school days the friends that "persuaded" you to do things you probably would not have chosen to do on your own? Could you ever hold them responsible for what you chose to do?

You mean like how a drug pusher is punished more severely than a drug user? Yes, I seem to recall things like that. But even if you disagree, your analogy has nothing to do with the principle that, if the human will requires the power of the Holy Spirit in order to make the "right" decision, then the will is not free. You can't get around that with analogies.

 

[npetreley]

Originally posted by Yelsew:
You on the other hand are saying that God does the receiving and the saving, leaving nothing up to man, not even believing! Show me that in scripture!

Romans 9:14 What shall we say then? Is there unrighteousness with God? Certainly not! 15 For He says to Moses, "I will have mercy on whomever I will have mercy, and I will have compassion on whomever I will have compassion." 16 So then it is not of him who wills, nor of him who runs, but of God who shows mercy.

Philippians 1:29For it has been granted to you on behalf of Christ not only to believe on him, but also to suffer for him...

I showed you mine, now show me yours. Show me in scripture where it says that God leaves any of it up to man. And please spare us the eisegesis like, "God wouldn't tell man to do something without giving him the power to comply." The above is very explicit and needs no such additions. So provide a similar scripture that is equally explicit, such as "So God provided the choice and left it up to man to decide whether or not he would receive mercy."

Good luck.

 

[BobRyan]

16 So then it is not of him who wills, nor of him who runs, but of God who shows mercy.

Many stop reading here and miss the point that Paul is making. That God is having mercy on BOTH the saved and the lost.

"What if God althought willing to demonstrate his wrath... - bore with MUCH patience vessels of wrath... IN ORDER THAT He might make known the riches of His glory upon vessels of Mercy predestined beforehand to glory"

The Riches of His glory are being made manifest by the kindness and mercy - the patient gracious treatment of God toward vessels of wrath. His blessing both the "just and the unjust" makes known His Mercy and Glory - to those saints that seek to know who God IS - those that "press on to Know the Lord" SEE Him be patient and merciful to those that He knows to be lost.

In Christ,

Bob

 

[BobRyan]

Some have argued that plugging our doctrine into the future scenario to see what we are really saying about God - is not valid since our doctrines may not always fare well in that exposed light of day.

Lets try the Arminian view of the future - where you go to heaven as one of the "FEW" and find that your precious child was one of the "MANY" of Matt 7.

(There is a God, there will be a day of judgment, not everyone is going to heaven. So we would then have the following scenario that you might "expect" if the doctrines of Grace as seen in the Arminian teachings are true...)

When you go to the Lord and cry out "Oh my great God and Savior - couldn't you have done Something to spare my precious daughter from the fires of the 2nd death?"

By the doctrines of grace as taught in the Arminian model - ... God may well reply

"Why YES my child I loved them with an infinite love as Their tender Heavenly Father JUST as I loved you. I drew them to my heart of infinite love JUST as I drew you. I sent WAVE after WAVE of invitation, heart wrenching plea after plea - BUT In all this I did not force myself on them - JUST as I did not force myself on YOU.

THough I bled and DIED for them - and YES I could have FORCE both YOU and your child - but instead I Sovereignly Chose to Give you BOTH the ABILITY to see the light, to CHOOSE life or to CHOOSE your own selfish will.

And when you CHOSE against me - I CAME back with even stronger ties of love and compassion - ENABLING your choice of LIFE JUST as I did with your precious child.

And in the end - you ACCEPTED and your precious child - OUR precious child - MY precious child chose "NO".

My heart of infinte love is broken over that - but I also Sovereignly CHOOSE to enable my children to CHOOSE.

Of course the Calvinist may say of the Arminian God that we see pictured here "OH how TERRIBLE! How AWFUL" as some have said of the picture that Calvinism paints of God. -- But I know that "not many" will do so - even among Calvinists because the comparison is obvious - blatant and clear.

 

[KenH]

Originally posted by BobRyan:
"Why YES my child I loved them with an infinite love as Their tender Heavenly Father JUST as I loved you. I drew them to my heart of infinite love JUST as I drew you. I sent WAVE after WAVE of invitation, heart wrenching plea after plea - BUT In all this I did not force myself on them - JUST as I did not force myself on YOU.

THough I bled and DIED for them - and YES I could have FORCE both YOU and your child - but instead I Sovereignly Chose to Give you BOTH the ABILITY to see the light, to CHOOSE life or to CHOOSE your own selfish will.

And when you CHOSE against me - I CAME back with even stronger ties of love and compassion - ENABLING your choice of LIFE JUST as I did with your precious child.

And in the end - you ACCEPTED and your precious child - OUR precious child - MY precious child chose "NO".

My heart of infinite love is broken over that - but I also Sovereignly CHOOSE to enable my children to CHOOSE.

And you could further add in your scheme, Bob -

"My love and My drawing and punishing My Son on your daughter's behalf all failed. So I will torment her with unspeakable horrors forever and ever and ever and ever and ever and ever, while you, her daddy, enjoy my presence forever and ever and ever and ever and ever and ever because you went against your fallen nature and repented and believed. But at least she is not alone in being tormented forever and ever as I am doing the same to almost every other human being I ever created and whom I love with an unmeasurable love because they couldn't overcome their fallen nature like you did."

Tell that to your daughter, Bob. See how much good news she sees in your version of the gospel.

[ December 26, 2002, 10:24 PM: Message edited by: Ken H ]

 

[BobRyan]

Bob said - God would say
And in the end - you ACCEPTED and your precious child - OUR precious child - MY precious child chose "NO".

Ken re-translated this as "I think the Arminian view should have God saying - your child COULD not overcome her sinful nature like you did so she is not here".

Clearly there are some "unresolved issues" here Ken.

I am talking about choice and you are jumping into overcoming the sinful nature - and who "Can" and who "can't" (a very Calvinist concept - that some CAN and others CAN't do something. Now if you want to claim that some CAN choose and some CAN't choose God according to the Arminian model above - have at it).

The idea here is to try to objectively view the other side using THEIR model to show its weakness. You keep plugging Calvinism IN as IF the Arminian model was USING Calvinist principles - when in fact - it uses Arminian ones instead.

When I model the Calvinist future - I do it using Calvinist ideas/prinicples not Arminian ones.

I "could" MIX in Arminian principles into the Calvinist model by having saints in heaven begging to be "let out" since they did not choose Christ and have no intention of serving Him -

And I could also describe the lost in hell as "Still choosing Christ" while God burns them anyway - but that is a mishmash mixing in Arminian views into Calvinism. The flaws I expose in such a mishmash simply could not exist in a pure 5-pt Calvinist model and would not be as compelling to a Calvinist (I would not get the dead silence that I get with my existing Calvinist scenario) .

Try looking at the Arminian model and using Arminian principles to objectively show what you see as its flaws. See if you can get the "dead silence" response if you like.

In Christ,

Bob

[ December 26, 2002, 11:25 PM: Message edited by: BobRyan ]

 

[BobRyan]

Ken said - God would say--
I will torment her with unspeakable horrors forever and ever and ever and ever and ever and ever, while you, her daddy, enjoy my presence forever and ever and ever and ever and ever and ever ...

Speaking of mixing in Calvinist ideas with other Calvinist ideas....

Where in my Calvinist future scenario should I plug your presentation of that very Calvinist view of hell?

Does that come after "Sure If I had Cared to!" - ?

Does my choice of the words "Why Sure - IF I had Cared too" (in my Calvinist version of the future scenario) convey the Calvinist idea of sovereign choice where God is simply doing whatever he likes and man plays no part in it whatsoever?

Even in your particular brand of Calvinism - there are still some lost people. Does that describe the basis on which God's choice is made not to atone for them?

If so - do you argee with placing your verbage right after the "IF I had Cared to"?

In Christ,

Bob

 

[KenH]

Bob,

The difference in the way you and I view God is this -

You see God throwing one of those floating rings with a rope attached to it to a person drowning in the ocean and begging the person to reach out and grab it(maybe even swim a little to it) and then God will pull him in. If not, blub, blub, blub goes the person into the murky deep.

I see God jumping into the water, swimming to the person drowning in the ocean and swimming back to safety with the person safely in tow.

[ December 26, 2002, 11:43 PM: Message edited by: Ken H ]

 

[Yelsew]

Npetreley said,

I showed you mine, now show me yours. Show me in scripture where it says that God leaves any of it up to man. And please spare us the eisegesis like, "God wouldn't tell man to do something without giving him the power to comply." The above is very explicit and needs no such additions. So provide a similar scripture that is equally explicit, such as "So God provided the choice and left it up to man to decide whether or not he would receive mercy."

I think no one can get any more explicit than Jesus who does a very nice job of doing just that in his discourse with Nicodemus, a notable teacher in the land when Jesus said,

John 3:16 For this is how God loved the world: he gave his only Son, so that everyone who believes in him may not perish but may have eternal life.

So that everyone, each from all of us who exercises free will (implied) and believes (an act of the free will and Not God believing in our stead!)

John 3:17 For God sent his Son into the world not to judge the world, but so that through him the world might be saved.

The one who does the saving.

John 3:18 No one who believes in him will be judged; but whoever does not believe is judged already, because that person does not believe in the Name of God's only Son.

"no one who believes", exercises human free will and thus believes, will be judged. But, whoever does not believe (exercises free will to reject), is judged already.

John 3:19 And the judgement is this: though the light has come into the world people have preferred darkness to the light because their deeds were evil.
John 3:20 And indeed, everybody who does wrong hates the light and avoids it, to prevent his actions from being shown up;

John 3:21 but whoever does the truth comes out into the light, so that what he is doing may plainly appear as done in God.'

"Whosoever does the truth"...actions stemming from free will TO DO the truth. Please note that it is not God doing the truth here, but man!

 

[BobRyan]

Ken
I see God jumping into the water, swimming to the person drowning in the ocean and swimming back to safety with the person safely in tow.

That is close.

I see humanity (every person) drowning and unconscious in the water - unnable to grab anything or accept anything (as you do).

I then see God swim over to every person revive them and then while supporting them ask if they would like him to take them back to shore. They say "no" ... so still holding them, He asks again.
Eventually some jump at the chance to leave - while others "still see the joy in being in the water".

Calvinists see God select a "few" and not ask them anything - He just swims them back to shore.

I see Calinivists complain about my model - upset that the person in the water is given any choice at all and preferring to think of them ONLY unconscious - ignoring the fact that both models show God swim over, support and revive the person.

I see them also complain that Arminians view God as sovereignly choosing to talk to the person once revived enough to respond - and to ask them if they want to leave. "Why would anyone say no" the Calvinist sometimes asks - to which I respond - "Why did Adam choose to be drowned while standing on the shore"?

In Christ,

Bob

[ December 27, 2002, 09:06 AM: Message edited by: BobRyan ]

 

[Hardsheller]

The Gospel According to _____________

Chapter 1:

God votes for you.
The Devil votes against you.
You cast the deciding vote.

You see God never wins an Election without your vote.

Chapter 2:

The Real Trinity of Arminianism - God, The Devil and You. All wield equal power - therefore when you side with God - Good wins. When you side with the devil - Evil wins.

And oh yes - The Final Chapter

Chapter 3:

Open Theology

Since You Choose God for Salvation
And You Choose God's plan after Salvation or reject it through obedience or disobedience, nothing is ever preordained or fixed for the future. All is subject to change. All is up for grabs. God keeps all his options open cause He's got a Plan A, B, C, D, E, F, G, H, I,.....Z, AA,AB,AC,AD....AZ, ABA, ABC, ABE,....ABZ....ZZZ

Conclusion: Welcome to SimUniverse!

 

[Hardsheller]

So tell us Bob, what is it you really don't like about Calvinism?

Get down to the real objections you have.

 

[npetreley]

Originally posted by Yelsew:
]I think no one can get any more explicit than Jesus who does a very nice job of doing just that in his discourse with Nicodemus, a notable teacher in the land when Jesus said, </font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />John 3:16 For this is how God loved the world: he gave his only Son, so that everyone who believes in him may not perish but may have eternal life.

So that everyone, each from all of us who exercises free will (implied) and believes (an act of the free will and Not God believing in our stead!) </font>[/QUOTE]If (implied) and (added opinion about belief being based on free will) is the most explicit Biblical quote you can find (in other words, no quote at all), then your doctrine doesn't have much of a foundation.

 

[KenH]

Bob,

The Bible does not teach that God asks man's permission to carry out His will and purposes.

God rules man, not the other way around.

 

[BobRyan]

God sovereignly chose to Give Lucifer free will - without asking Lucifer for permission to do so.

God Sovereignly chose to give Adam free Will without asking Adam for permission to do so.

God Sovereignly chose to "Draw ALL mankind" unto Him. (something even Calvinists claim would ENABLE what depravity DISABLES).

God Sovereignly chose to "Stand outside the door of the heart and KNOCK saying that if any man HEAR His voice AND chooses to OPEN the door - that THEN Christ would come in"..

And of course - God did not ask sinful man for his "permission" to make all those sovereign choices.

What is "not to get"?

This just isn't that hard.

In Christ,

Bob

 

[BobRyan]

HS
So tell us Bob, what is it you really don't like about Calvinism?

Get down to the real objections you have.

#1. IT can't be supported by scripture (5pt Calvinism that is) as scripture states "God so loved the WORLD", Christ is "The Atoning sacrifice for Our sins and not our sins only but those of the Whole World", "God is not Willing for ANY to Perish", ...etc

#2. You have already seen my post on this thread of the Arminian "future" as predicted by the Doctrines of Grace in The Arminian model.

And now here is the Calvinist future scenario predicted by ITS doctrines of grace...

When the 5-point-Calvinist finds himself in heaven enjoying the perfect love, unity and selfless concern for others that is not possible here on this sinful earth - and then peeking over the ramparts of heaven - observes his OWN precious sweet daughter who passed the age of accountability as the MANY of Matt 7 -- now writhing in the agony of eternal roasting in hell - he may well run to his sovereign lord with the cry "Oh My Lord, my great God and Savior! Couldn't you have done Something for my precious child??"

And of course the answer will come back that Calvinism so loves to hear - "Why of course I COULD - IF I had Cared to"!

"Halelujah!" cries out the Calvinist - that IS the Gospel I was proclaiming!! Ahh that blissful eternity with calvinism's God that unfairly saved you but not your precious daughter - and you will be praising through all eternity that YOU were spared though she was not. (For it IS all about You in the end) Blessing the fact that He chose You - that it was "unfair" as you say - but it was graciously unfair IN YOUR favor - just not your precious daughter's. So just enjoy! Enjoy! Unjust Mercy - oh the Calvinist bliss.

You see the problem when the Calvinist model is not allowed the "luxury" of disregarding the fate of the lost - as in the case above?

God who arbitrarily selects out the FEW of Matt 7 and loves THEM alone - and then represents that to Calvinists as "So Loving the World". Oh the pure joy that thought must cause the calvinist mind.

All well and good for the Cavlinist position - but what about the Arminian view?

And for us Arminians - well we will just have to be content with the fact that God really DOES "So Love the World" not merely the "Few " of Matt 7 - and He is the "Atoning sacrifice for OUR sins and NOT our sins only - but for those of the WHOLE WORLD" 1John 2::2.

We will have to be content in all eternity with the God that DOES Love ALL and died for ALL and "IS not WILLING for any to perish but for ALL to come to Repentance". Somehow that will have to help us enjoy eternity too. I wonder how we will fair by comparison.

In Christ,

Bob

[ December 27, 2002, 10:59 PM: Message edited by: BobRyan ]