The weak foundation of free will

[standingfirminChrist]

God knows all from beginning to end. He knows man's heart. That does not mean He orchestrated man's fall, nor did He orchestrate a plan for man to refuse Him. He is not willing that any should perish. Man chooses to reject Jesus Christ by his own volition. And when one rejects Christ, one must pay the consequenses.

 

[johnp.]

How can you say He knows the beginning from the end and at the same time say He is not willing for any to go to Hell standingfirm? Do you not see your contradiction? He is willing then for those He creates to go to Hell?

john.

 

[npetreley]

Originally posted by Timtoolman:
My opinion is that man harden his heart against God first, as stated with Phaoroh, and once the heart is set against God's word is does harden it. The difference being that man harden first, or rejected the conviction of the HS and Or His word.

Right. That's your OPINION. That's not what scripture says. You've drawn a personal conclusion based on some scriptures.

However, your opinion still contradicts the premise that "God is not willing that any should perish". It doesn't matter if you qualify your premise that God doesn't harden man's heart unless he hardens his own heart first.

The fact is, you're stating that this man -- self-hardened heart or not -- still has the ability to choose to be saved without the regeneration of the Holy Spirit. So, you say, God hardens his heart in order to prevent him from exercising that choice.

Unless you state that the self-hardened heart is still capable of responding to the Gospel until God hardens his heart, your premise fails. According to your reasoning, if a self-hardened man cannot respond to the Gospel, then there is no need for God to harden his heart further.

The result is that you still have the problem of it contradicting the free will interpretation of 2 Peter 3:9. If God is not willing that any should perish, then God would not harden a man's heart if there's still a chance he may respond to the Gospel.

So you have to give up one or the other (or both). Either God's hardening is not for the purpose of blocking man's innate ability to respond, OR God is not only willing that some perish, he goes out of his way to make SURE they perish.

Pick one, or the other, or give up both. You can't have both be true.

 

[npetreley]

Originally posted by drfuss:
If man does not have a free will, then man has no choice. If man has no choice, then there is no sin. If there is no sin, then there is no need for a savior. So, why did Jesus die for our sins? Or are you suggesting that Adam is the only one that had a choice?

Perhaps the Calvinists have an easy answer to this. I would like to know it.

The answer is very simple. Man has a choice. Man simply chooses what he is inclined to choose. In his fallen state, dead in sin, man is ALWAYS inclined to reject God, so that is what he ALWAYS chooses. Nobody is forcing him to choose that. That is simply what he is inclined to do, given his state.

The only One who can change that state is God. God can turn a man's heart toward Him. Given this new inclination, man chooses God.

 

[Timtoolman]

Originally posted by johnp.:
Again you have avoided answering a straight forward question.
Did God know before He created a man where the man would end up standingfirm, Tim, yes or no please?


john.

Yes He knew what their choice would be. But a just and loving God sent His son and allowed all men the hope of life. The hope to escape death and hell. All men.

 

[Timtoolman]

Originally posted by johnp.:
How can you say He knows the beginning from the end and at the same time say He is not willing for any to go to Hell standingfirm? Do you not see your contradiction? He is willing then for those He creates to go to Hell?

john.

This goes into the book which is getting huge of "Calvinist top 1000 illogical thinking of all times." sheesssssh!

 

[Timtoolman]

Originally posted by npetreley:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by drfuss:
If man does not have a free will, then man has no choice. If man has no choice, then there is no sin. If there is no sin, then there is no need for a savior. So, why did Jesus die for our sins? Or are you suggesting that Adam is the only one that had a choice?

Perhaps the Calvinists have an easy answer to this. I would like to know it.

The answer is very simple. Man has a choice. Man simply chooses what he is inclined to choose. In his fallen state, dead in sin, man is ALWAYS inclined to reject God, so that is what he ALWAYS chooses. Nobody is forcing him to choose that. That is simply what he is inclined to do, given his state.

The only One who can change that state is God. God can turn a man's heart toward Him. Given this new inclination, man chooses God. </font>[/QUOTE]Shesssh lets define terms for the calvinist again. A choice is at least between two or it is not a choice. Topic:life or death. Man, according to calvinist, born in total inability, cnnot choose life. They have not choice, they are headed for hell. That is not a choice!

 

[Timtoolman]

Originally posted by npetreley:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by Timtoolman:
My opinion is that man harden his heart against God first, as stated with Phaoroh, and once the heart is set against God's word is does harden it. The difference being that man harden first, or rejected the conviction of the HS and Or His word.

Right. That's your OPINION. That's not what scripture says. You've drawn a personal conclusion based on some scriptures.

However, your opinion still contradicts the premise that "God is not willing that any should perish". It doesn't matter if you qualify your premise that God doesn't harden man's heart unless he hardens his own heart first.

The fact is, you're stating that this man -- self-hardened heart or not -- still has the ability to choose to be saved without the regeneration of the Holy Spirit. So, you say, God hardens his heart in order to prevent him from exercising that choice.

Unless you state that the self-hardened heart is still capable of responding to the Gospel until God hardens his heart, your premise fails. According to your reasoning, if a self-hardened man cannot respond to the Gospel, then there is no need for God to harden his heart further.

The result is that you still have the problem of it contradicting the free will interpretation of 2 Peter 3:9. If God is not willing that any should perish, then God would not harden a man's heart if there's still a chance he may respond to the Gospel.

So you have to give up one or the other (or both). Either God's hardening is not for the purpose of blocking man's innate ability to respond, OR God is not only willing that some perish, he goes out of his way to make SURE they perish.

Pick one, or the other, or give up both. You can't have both be true. </font>[/QUOTE]NOt sure how else I can say it. They had the chance they rejected the calling, conviction of the HS and preaching of the gospel. They are surpressing the truth, they don't want it. They are hardening thier hearst. As God continues to speak to them, or as they sit under more preaching it continues to harden and harden and harden. That is the rejection of the HS. They have passed their chance, just as in times when Jesus spoke in parables, blinded etc. God's word does indeed harden or soften. Last time I am answering this if you can't comprehend then I can't help you.

 

[Timtoolman]

calvinst logic so far:
man does have choice, it is either hell or......hell.

Man is totally unable to respond to God, so God hardens, blinds or speaks in parables so man may not be saved.

Man accepting a gift has done the work by recieving it making there "no such thing as a gift".

God can only be soveriegn if we feel He has "acted" in a soveriegn way. Allowing man choice is not sovereignly God so please act accordingly.

The bible teaches that it is easier for a camel to pass through the eye of a needle than a rich man too enter the kingdom of God. But God in not respector of persons!


God calls to all, draws all and desires that none should perish, however He will not offer His grace too all.

A spiritually dead person cannot understand or speak to God, yet the first spiritually dead people did just that.

Bottom line is that as a calvinist I am selected by God while the majority goes to hell. I am special. And dog gone it, I like myself! LOL

 

[webdog]

Originally posted by Timtoolman:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by npetreley:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by drfuss:
If man does not have a free will, then man has no choice. If man has no choice, then there is no sin. If there is no sin, then there is no need for a savior. So, why did Jesus die for our sins? Or are you suggesting that Adam is the only one that had a choice?

Perhaps the Calvinists have an easy answer to this. I would like to know it.

The answer is very simple. Man has a choice. Man simply chooses what he is inclined to choose. In his fallen state, dead in sin, man is ALWAYS inclined to reject God, so that is what he ALWAYS chooses. Nobody is forcing him to choose that. That is simply what he is inclined to do, given his state.

The only One who can change that state is God. God can turn a man's heart toward Him. Given this new inclination, man chooses God. </font>[/QUOTE]Shesssh lets define terms for the calvinist again. A choice is at least between two or it is not a choice. Topic:life or death. Man, according to calvinist, born in total inability, cnnot choose life. They have not choice, they are headed for hell. That is not a choice! </font>[/QUOTE]

The calvinist's love to say that "man will only choose evil" which would make it a non-choice. As you said, a choice is defined as:

Choice
CHOICE, n.

1. The act of choosing; the voluntary act of selecting or separating from two or more things that which is preferred; or the determination of the mind in preferring one thing to another; election.

The entire argument of man not having a choice, or ONLY being able to choose one thing is most definately NOT biblical.

 

[Timtoolman]

Originally posted by webdog:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by Timtoolman:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by npetreley:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by drfuss:
If man does not have a free will, then man has no choice. If man has no choice, then there is no sin. If there is no sin, then there is no need for a savior. So, why did Jesus die for our sins? Or are you suggesting that Adam is the only one that had a choice?

Perhaps the Calvinists have an easy answer to this. I would like to know it.

The answer is very simple. Man has a choice. Man simply chooses what he is inclined to choose. In his fallen state, dead in sin, man is ALWAYS inclined to reject God, so that is what he ALWAYS chooses. Nobody is forcing him to choose that. That is simply what he is inclined to do, given his state.

The only One who can change that state is God. God can turn a man's heart toward Him. Given this new inclination, man chooses God. </font>[/QUOTE]Shesssh lets define terms for the calvinist again. A choice is at least between two or it is not a choice. Topic:life or death. Man, according to calvinist, born in total inability, cnnot choose life. They have not choice, they are headed for hell. That is not a choice! </font>[/QUOTE]

The calvinist's love to say that "man will only choose evil" which would make it a non-choice. As you said, a choice is defined as:

Choice
CHOICE, n.

1. The act of choosing; the voluntary act of selecting or separating from two or more things that which is preferred; or the determination of the mind in preferring one thing to another; election.

The entire argument of man not having a choice, or ONLY being able to choose one thing is most definately NOT biblical. </font>[/QUOTE]You just have too chuckle Web. If they get to re-define all the terms and make up terms then they win. Hold em to the bible and we have conflict.

 

[Me4Him]

Timtoolman/Webdog

Between the two of you, you're doing a "good job" of "holding their feet to the fire".

The way they define "words", Clinton should ask them to define "IS".

 

[JRG39402]

whosoever - to fill the cup in full. If the cup was 6 feet or taller then whosoever would fill that entire cup. However, whosoever filled the cup of the world. Aren't you glad? You are in the world so you can be saved by grace through faith. God doesn't want to force us, even to heaven. It would be like an arranged marriage. Love is an action verb.

 

[johnp.]

Hello webdog.

The calvinist's love to say that "man will only choose evil" which would make it a non-choice. As you said, a choice is defined as:

Choice. For God has bound all men over to disobedience so that he may have mercy on them all. Rom 11:32. (Jews and Gentiles that is. The point is For God has bound all men over to disobedience...)

bind over: : to put under bonds to do something (as to appear at court) &lt;he was bound over to the grand jury&gt;
"bind over." Webster's Third New International Dictionary, Unabridged. Merriam-Webster, 2002. http://unabridged.merriam-webster.com (27 Feb. 2006).

to put under bonds to do something Something? Yes, disobedience. God is Sovereign.

For God has bound all men over to disobedience so that he may have mercy on them all.

Adam and Eve: God is Sovereign and as bound all men over to disobedience.

What are our voluntary acts man? For the sinful nature desires what is contrary to the Spirit, and the Spirit what is contrary to the sinful nature. They are in conflict with each other, so that you do not do what you want. Gal 5:17.

What are our voluntary acts?

The entire argument of man not having a choice, or ONLY being able to choose one thing is most definately NOT biblical.

What ever turns you on will be the thing you choose won't it? Do you want a glass of water or a glass of whisky?
For God has bound all men over to disobedience so that he may have mercy on them all. So we only want the disobedience and that is our responsibilty, willed in us by God.

john.

 

[johnp.]

Did God know before He created a man where the man would end up standingfirm, Tim, yes or no please?

Yes you say Tim. But I don't understand why you make a silly noise, sheesssssh!
Then if He knew those He was creating were going to Hell then logically He was willing that some perish? Why the sheesssssh!?

Yes or no Tim? Or is He bound by something.

They have not choice, they are headed for hell. That is not a choice!

No choice but willing same as us, willing for God but no choice. The sinful mind is at emnity with it's Maker because it's Maker made it so.

john.

 

[Johnv]

Did God know before He created a man where the man would end up

Since we know God is omniscient, then it must be accepted as understood that God knows everything that did, does, and will transpire. That does not in any way preclude a person's responsibility to make wise and righteous choices. If one calls that free will, that's all fine and dandy. That free will does not preclude God's omnipotence or omniscience, nor does it preclude God as being in control of all.

If it were not so, then We would not be responsible for ending up in Hell. But the fact is, if we end up in Hell, we have no one to blame but ourselves.

 

[johnp.]

Hello Tim.

calvinst logic so far:
man does have choice, it is either hell or......hell.

By predestination we mean the eternal decree of God, by which he determined with himself whatever he wished to happen with regard to every man. All are not created on equal terms, but some are preordained to eternal life, others to eternal damnation; and, accordingly, as each has been created for one or other of these ends, we say that he has been predestinated to life or to death. (John Calvin Institutes of the Christian Religion Book 3 chapter 21:5.)

There is no choice as our final destiny was decided in eternity and was not based on sin but on the Sovereign choice of The Sovereign Lord or Despot. Rom 9:11-13 Yet, before the twins were born or had done anything good or bad..."Jacob I loved, but Esau I hated."

Man is totally unable to respond to God, so God hardens, blinds or speaks in parables so man may not be saved.

Another contradiction I see. Jesus hides His words so some cannot understand Him you say? ...but to others I speak in parables, so that, " `though seeing, they may not see; though hearing, they may not understand.' Lk 8:10. I don't see how that helps you. He does not give light to some but speaks in parables so, although they hear His words they cannot grasp the meaning.

Man accepting a gift has done the work by recieving it making there "no such thing as a gift".

JN 6:28 Then they asked him, "What must we do to do the works God requires?" 29 Jesus answered, "The work of God is this: to believe in the one he has sent."

Is faith a work? If you say no then why did Jesus call it such?

God can only be soveriegn if we feel He has "acted" in a soveriegn way. Allowing man choice is not sovereignly God so please act accordingly.

For one that has a problem with the word 'election' it comes as no surprise to see you are having a problem with the word 'Sovereignty'.

The bible teaches that it is easier for a camel to pass through the eye of a needle than a rich man too enter the kingdom of God.

It does. But as He also says, "With man this is impossible." Lk 18:27. People, even the disciples, were under the illusion that a rich man was blessed by God. By the way, is it possible for a camel to pass through the eye of a needle pray tell me. Yes? Then that is easier than a rich man getting into Heaven. It is impossible with men.

But God in not respector of persons!

It says the Wife must respect her Husband, it says the Husband must love His Wife.
What's that got to do with anything? He respects Jesus doesn't He? He has respect for the Holy Spirit hasn't He? Maybe you had better revise that particular verse?

God calls to all, draws all and desires that none should perish, however He will not offer His grace too all.

Please give me the scripture where God say He does not desire any to perish. A bit slippery.

A spiritually dead person cannot understand or speak to God, yet the first spiritually dead people did just that.

Are you saying God cannot communicate with His creatures? That's what you are saying isn't it? You have your eye on man instead of God. Did God not talk with the Jews and did He not tell some of them they were the Devil's brood? Did they understand?

Bottom line is that as a calvinist I am selected by God while the majority goes to hell. I am special. And dog gone it, I like myself! LOL

I do like myself, God loves me. He called me to be His son and to be with Him forever. What is there not to like about me? I am special, Christ died for me personally. I am loved by the Lord God Almighty and a partaker of divine nature and part of a chosen nation to be a Royal Priesthood. That's me that is. Am I to be ashamed of who I am? I'm The King's Son.

majority goes to hell REV 7:9 After this I looked and there before me was a great multitude that no one could count, from every nation, tribe, people and language, standing before the throne and in front of the Lamb. They were wearing white robes and were holding palm branches in their hands. 10 And they cried out in a loud voice:

"Salvation belongs to our God,
who sits on the throne,
and to the Lamb."

john.

 

[Timtoolman]

If you don't see how that helps me JohnP then you really are not reading the post. Which I suspected.

 

[whatever]

Originally posted by Johnv:
But the fact is, if we end up in Hell, we have no one to blame but ourselves.

Who (besides maybe johnp) said otherwise? We all freely choose sin. Of course we deserve Hell. Of course we have no one to blame but ourselves.

 

[Craigbythesea]

Every single verse in the Bible that includes a command or an admonishment is a proof-text that absolutely proves that we all have a free will to obey or disobey God, and that includes the commands and admonitions to believe in Him and trust Him. Anyone who hears the gospel and chooses for whatever reason to believe it is saved; anyone who hears the gospel and chooses not to believe it, for whatever reason, is damned.