Where Is Free Will?

[Iconoclast]

Don't let the door hit ya where the good Lord split ya.

Another gracious post from RM.

 

[Wesley Briggman]

Jonah clearly exercised his free will. In return, God clearly allowed Jonah to face the consequences of his disobedient decision. The longsuffering of God gave Jonah time to repent. Or, do you think it took God three days and nights to "drag" Jonah out of the whale's belly?

I think God had His reason for the three day period of Jonah's entombment in the belly of the fish. Who is to question Him and demand an answer?

Did God grant Jonah free will? If so, why wouldn't He honor the exercise of it by Jonah?

God does not "allow" those who are disobedient to Him to face the consequences of their sins, He demands it.

 

[Iconoclast]

The way you talk I think you believe that every Calvinist who passionately defends Scripture are cage-stage Calvinists.

Rm...just pronounces fatwas that are not to be questioned. If he says you are cage stage that settles it,lol

 

[Squire Robertsson]

David and others, I would ask you to start from the position that the person sitting opposite you

• is a brother/sister in Christ.
• loves the Lord and His Word.
• is seeking as best they can to understand the Scripture.
• and if Scripture was as clear as either of you say it is you'd both be in agreement.
• but it isn't. So we have this forum.

 

[Wesley Briggman]

What verse(s) are you asserting that says Paul was dragged against his will to be saved and do the will of God?

What verse(s) are you asserting that says Paul was dragged against his will to be saved and do the will of God?

My post was a question, not a statement. I did not say Saul was dragged by Jesus. I will say Saul had no intention of going into the city to regain his sight. Here again, God did not acknowledge Saul's so called freewill and compelled Saul to do something his will by giving him no way out that was a better option.

Maybe I should have made it a statement.

Has God not revealed to you what He has done in your life to bring you to repentance and salvation?

Psa 40:2 KJV - He brought me up also out of an horrible pit, out of the miry clay, and set my feet upon a rock, [and] established my goings.

What!!! He established my goings without my freewill?

Praise God, I can give Him the glory for what He has done for me to convince me I am one of His chosen.

 

[Iconoclast]

Brother, we most certainly can and have offered scriptural support for our position. We have no desire to "produce" any one verse upon which we hang our doctrine. Those who disagree with our position have the luxury of redefining words and contexts to fix the passage into their theological box.

Hello Pastor Bob,
Hope all is going well with you
I am glad that you look to offer scriptural support.
When we speak with a padeobaptist we say you do not have a verse that teaches this position or teaching.[infant baptism]
Of course they seek to defend their position using verses speaking of households.
Looks like the verses you offer are like that.
We do that with other doctrines.
That being said there is not one free will verse.
What we see is verses mentioning choose, whosoever, all men, etc.
The objection is that they do not teach that men are free. Everyone agrees men choose but that is not the title of the thread.
To understand the verses correctly is not putting them in a box, rather it is to display them accurately.
Thanks for offering good verses however.

 

[Reformed1689]

• is a brother/sister in Christ.

• loves the Lord and His Word.

Agree

 

[Pastor_Bob]

Of course you would take that attitude. Unfortunately words mean things. It is a pity you won't be honest about that.

I assure you, my dear brother, I have never been intentionally dishonest now or at any other time on this forum. The day that happens, I'll sign off for good. This enjoyable pastime is a nice distraction at times, but it's certainly not worth one's testimony.

It is obvious that we are not on the same page here. When I said I was not going to get into a debate about the definition of a single word, you took it as me trying to make the word mean something else. There can be no doubt that the word "draw" here literally means "to drag." That was never in question. My position is that the context here, based upon the passages I offered, does not mean "to drag" but rather to "invite" or "enable."

If you look at verse 44 it is not an invitation. It is a dragging a drawing. Much like drawing blood. Do you just invite the blood to come? No you are forcefully taking it.

I disagree. The context of verse 44 is an invitation. It is restated in verse 65.

It actually doesn't even really go along with this topic.

It does indeed. It affirms that the call is not irresistible as in "dragging" someone to salvation.

You are cherry picking verses that really have no bearing on the subject and you ignore verses that clearly imply more than just an invitation.

There are many more cherries that I could have picked, all of which support the position you asked me to explain. I am not ignoring any verses; I am explaining them in context as I understand them.

"A man is attracted by that which he delights in. Show green herbage to a sheep, he is drawn by it: show nuts to a child, and he is drawn by them. They run wherever the person runs who shows these things: they run after him, but they are not forced to follow; they run, through the desire they feel to get the things they delight in. So God draws man: he shows him his wants-he shows the Saviour whom he has provided for him: the man feels himself a lost sinner; and, through the desire which he finds to escape hell, and get to heaven, he comes unto Christ, that he may be justified by his blood. Unless God thus draw, no man will ever come to Christ; because none could, without this drawing, ever feel the need of a Saviour." (Adam Clarke - Commentary on John 6:44)

 

[Reformed1689]

I assure you, my dear brother, I have never been intentionally dishonest now or at any other time on this forum. The day that happens, I'll sign off for good. This enjoyable pastime is a nice distraction at times, but it's certainly not worth one's testimony.

It is obvious that we are not on the same page here. When I said I was not going to get into a debate about the definition of a single word, you took it as me trying to make the word mean something else. There can be no doubt that the word "draw" here literally means "to drag." That was never in question. My position is that the context here, based upon the passages I offered, does not mean "to drag" but rather to "invite" or "enable."


I disagree. The context of verse 44 is an invitation. It is restated in verse 65.


It does indeed. It affirms that the call is not irresistible as in "dragging" someone to salvation.

There are many more cherries that I could have picked, all of which support the position you asked me to explain. I am not ignoring any verses; I am explaining them in context as I understand them.

"A man is attracted by that which he delights in. Show green herbage to a sheep, he is drawn by it: show nuts to a child, and he is drawn by them. They run wherever the person runs who shows these things: they run after him, but they are not forced to follow; they run, through the desire they feel to get the things they delight in. So God draws man: he shows him his wants-he shows the Saviour whom he has provided for him: the man feels himself a lost sinner; and, through the desire which he finds to escape hell, and get to heaven, he comes unto Christ, that he may be justified by his blood. Unless God thus draw, no man will ever come to Christ; because none could, without this drawing, ever feel the need of a Saviour." (Adam Clarke - Commentary on John 6:44)

Here's the main problem. Christ is nobody's desire without something. Their natural state does not and cannot desire Christ.

 

[Pastor_Bob]

Hello Pastor Bob,
Hope all is going well with you

All is well, my friend. We had a great spring break and was able to fly out to PA and visit our youngest daughter and her husband. Thank you for your kind well-wishes.

I am glad that you look to offer scriptural support.
When we speak with a padeobaptist we say you do not have a verse that teaches this position or teaching.[infant baptism]
Of course they seek to defend their position using verses speaking of households.
Looks like the verses you offer are like that.
We do that with other doctrines.
That being said there is not one free will verse.
What we see is verses mentioning choose, whosoever, all men, etc.
The objection is that they do not teach that men are free. Everyone agrees men choose but that is not the title of the thread.
To understand the verses correctly is not putting them in a box, rather it is to display them accurately.
Thanks for offering good verses however.

Thank you for the gentle reminder, brother. I do try to offer passages that, in my opinion, clearly teach the positions that I hold. If I didn't believe them, I would never give them as proof texts.

 

[Reynolds]

I give you the same challenge I gave In the Light. Apparently you do not want to take the challenge because it blows your theory out of the water.

What challenge was that?

 

[Reformed1689]

What challenge was that?

Where Is Free Will?

 

[Reynolds]

Here's the main problem. Christ is nobody's desire without something. Their natural state does not and cannot desire Christ.

The main problem is you seem to assume a call is irresistible.

 

[Reformed1689]

The main problem is you seem to assume a call is irresistible.

I don't assume anything. Scripture tells us this.

 

[Reynolds]

Where Is Free Will?

I already asked you to define "free will." Calvin believed in "free will." Define and I shall respond.

 

[Reynolds]

I don't assume anything. Scripture tells us this.

It does not.

 

[Reformed1689]

I already asked you to define "free will." Calvin believed in "free will." Define and I shall respond.

Essentially freedom to choose what you desire. Obviously, it is much more nuanced than that but that is the basic principle.

 

[Reynolds]

Essentially freedom to choose what you desire. Obviously, it is much more nuanced than that but that is the basic principle.

Freedom to choose what we want has traditionally been embraced by Calvinists. Lack of ability is the point in question. Both you and I agree we have no ability except God "draw" us. Our only point of difference is to whether or not the "draw" is "resistable."
I have the freedom of will to go run a marathon tomorrow. Problem is, I don't have the ability. Same with the sinner, freedom to choose God, but no ability until The Spirit draws.

 

[loDebar]

Essentially freedom to choose what you desire. Obviously, it is much more nuanced than that but that is the basic principle.

That is not Calvin, He says free will includes the power to exercise a choice. We cant save ourselves is the proof, but that is not free will. The desire alone to make a choice is free will, That is why you get such a offensive rebuttal in this conversation.

The absence of free choice is a lie of the devil to once again blame God for your sin

 

[Reformed1689]

That is not Calvin, He says free will includes the power to exercise a choice. We cant save ourselves is the proof, but that is not free will. The desire alone to make a choice is free will, That is why you get such a offensive rebuttal in this conversation.

The absence of free choice is a lie of the devil to once again blame God for your sin

You realize I affirm the freedom to make a choice, right?