ECT The will of God vs the will of man

[genuineoriginal]

So you just chuck the Bible aside and go with your gut feeling as your argument. If you're going to resort to relativism and post-modernism as you argument, then you have just acknowledged that your argument is a philosophy and not biblical.
I have said all along that free-will is a philosophy and now you confirm it.
Thank you.

Determinism is a philosophy based on a rejection of reality.

 

[MennoSota]

No, that is not the purpose of the Law.
If the purpose of the Law is to condemn sinners, then God was evil for giving the Law to His chosen people.


I never said it does.
Grace is God looking with favor upon someone that pleases Him.


Of course having the ability to choose Snickers instead of Milky Way equals free-will.


No, it equals God giving free-will to mankind.


That is like stating that your will is never free from the laws of the country you live in.
However, free-will is the ability to choose to obey the laws of the country you live in or to choo


I find it impossible to understand how you are coming up with this kind of statement.

God giving you the free-will ability to choose whether you will love Him and whether you will obey Him does not make you god nor does it make God your slave.

God does not give you full freedom. If He did, then Jonah would have made it to Nineveh. Balaam would have cursed Israel. Hitler would have conquered the world. The will of man is not free. It cannot be free unless man is greater than God. It must always be subject under the will if God.
Free-will cannot exist.

 

[MennoSota]

Determinism is a philosophy based on a rejection of reality.

Did God determine to make the heavens and the earth from nothing? If so, am I rejecting reality by believing God determined to make the heavens and the earth from nothing?
Does God determine that all things are held together?
Colossians 1:1-2,4-5,11-22
[1]This letter is from Paul, chosen by the will of God to be an apostle of Christ Jesus, and from our brother Timothy.
[2]We are writing to God’s holy people in the city of Colosse, who are faithful brothers and sisters in Christ.May God our Father give you grace and peace.
[4]For we have heard of your faith in Christ Jesus and your love for all of God’s people,
[5]which come from your confident hope of what God has reserved for you in heaven. You have had this expectation ever since you first heard the truth of the Good News.
[11]We also pray that you will be strengthened with all his glorious power so you will have all the endurance and patience you need. May you be filled with joy,
[12]always thanking the Father. He has enabled you to share in the inheritance that belongs to his people, who live in the light.
[13]For he has rescued us from the kingdom of darkness and transferred us into the Kingdom of his dear Son,
[14]who purchased our freedom and forgave our sins.
[15]Christ is the visible image of the invisible God. He existed before anything was created and is supreme over all creation,
[16]for through him God created everything in the heavenly realms and on earth. He made the things we can see and the things we can’t see— such as thrones, kingdoms, rulers, and authorities in the unseen world. Everything was created through him and for him.
[17]He existed before anything else, and he holds all creation together.
[18]Christ is also the head of the church, which is his body. He is the beginning, supreme over all who rise from the dead. So he is first in everything.
[19]For God in all his fullness was pleased to live in Christ,
[20]and through him God reconciled everything to himself. He made peace with everything in heaven and on earth by means of Christ’s blood on the cross.
[21]This includes you who were once far away from God. You were his enemies, separated from him by your evil thoughts and actions.
[22]Yet now he has reconciled you to himself through the death of Christ in his physical body. As a result, he has brought you into his own presence, and you are holy and blameless as you stand before him without a single fault.

 

[Ask Mr. Religion]

God does not give you full freedom. If He did, then Jonah would have made it to Nineveh. Balaam would have cursed Israel. Hitler would have conquered the world. The will of man is not free. It cannot be free unless man is greater than God. It must always be subject under the will if God.
Free-will cannot exist.

Rather, free will that is freer than God's will cannot exist. For that matter, even God cannot will against His own nature.
Free will exists, that is, when free will (the liberty of spontaneity) is properly defined: choosing according to one's greatest inclinations at the moment one so chooses.

If we can say anything about what free will is not, it would be to say that libertarian free will (the liberty of indifference) does not exist.

Aforementioned embedded link is reposted here for those not willing to pay for a subscription:

Spoiler

The anti-Calvinist’s frequently heard claim: Predestination Violates Man’s Free Will

This is perhaps the single most common objection I have encountered when discussing the doctrines of grace. When I first encountered the doctrines of grace espoused by the Reformers who sought to recover the teachings of Scripture that had been obscured by Romanism, I too was once convinced that predestination destroys human freedom and reduces man to a mere puppet.

I wrestled with the concepts for quite some time, and would even consider this one of the greatest stumbling blocks I had to overcome. So I would not expect something different of the reader of my posts and what I have advocated. In a way it does not come as a surprise to me that the reader will question the practicality of predestination as it relates to human events. With that said, however, let me offer some simple comments on the legitimacy of two great biblical truths—predestination and free will. After all, both are clearly taught within Scripture, so we must find a way to reconcile these two friends.

Let me first start out by asking why one would assume that the two ideas cannot co-exist. The anti-Calvinist mentions often that the freedom of man’s will is not compatible with predestination, but unfortunately, they never attempt to definitively prove this from Scripture or reason. Naturally, I could in turn ask the anti-Calvinist how they reached such a conclusion without first establishing a basis for their position. It seems to me that they are simply arguing a priori knowledge—that is, they are arguing that their conclusion is justified independent of experience. Here I must strenuously object and insist that the two ideas are not mutually exclusive but will want to point out that both are complementary when properly understood.

Free Will Discussion

Beyond arguing against presupposing a contradiction I believe the major confusion resides with many because of a flawed assumption of what they think free will means. I have seen great men and women from both sides talk past each other because each were defining the terms differently. I am afraid we will be no different if we do not clearly define what it is we mean when we use the term free will. The anti-Calvinist reader—like countless others—define the term, free will, as the ability to choose from among various alternatives without any prior prejudices, inclinations, or dispositions. In other words, they imply that man must possess neutrality in order to be truly free.

Now on a superficial level this answer does seem to protect God’s character when we talk about sin and fairness. However, I believe that it creates more questions than answers. Consider for a moment one underlying problem that makes this position untenable. If our choices are not based on prior inclinations and come as the result of neutrality, then our choices come for no reason. Our actions would be mere spontaneous deeds conducted apart from desires, which would not carry any moral weight. They would neither be good or bad. The problem, however, is that God evaluates our choices based on our motives. God will not accept the answer that our sinful actions resulted from spontaneity or mere arbitrariness.

Two Examples

Spoiler

One clear biblical example of God’s predestinating power and man’s free will working together is when Judas betrayed his Lord. The apostle Judas acted freely when he delivered his Master to the Roman authorities for thirty pieces of silver. I do not believe anyone would argue that his actions were spontaneous, but rather, were deliberate and self-serving so “that the Scripture might be fulfilled” (John 17:12). I believe the gospel writer clearly sets forth the reality that God ordained the life, betrayal, death, and resurrection of His Son—but yet it would not have happened without the free will decisions of those involved in the betrayal and execution of Christ Jesus.

A second example can be found in the selling of Joseph into slavery by his siblings. God’s mighty hand was evident even in this wicked act. Just as Joseph told his brothers “you meant evil against me, but God meant it for good in order to bring about this present result, to preserve many people alive” (Gen 50:20). The brothers’ actions were not spontaneous or without prior inclination. Rather, their actions were premeditated, deliberate, and evil, yet God used their wickedness for a greater purpose. God’s sovereignty was upheld throughout the entire situation, as were the free will decisions of Joseph’s brothers. I would submit to the reader that this is just another example that demonstrates how God remains in control over His creation while leaving mankind with the ability to make choices according to the desires of the heart.

Another problem that I see with neutrality is that it does not correspond to reason. That is, if—as the anti-Calvinist often would claim—the will acts apart from any motive, then how can a choice even be made? What would cause someone to choose between the simplest of matters such as going left or right, stopping or starting, eating or starving? What would compel me to choose at all—if not for an inclination of some sort?

To illustrate my point consider the neutral-willed animal. Two baskets are presented before the animal, one full of wheat and the other filled with oats. Now here is the dilemma. The animal’s neutral-will would inevitably leave him paralyzed and unable to choose between the wheat and the oats. Since he has no prior inclination or disposition to eat wheat, to eat oats, to feast or to starve, he will eventually succumb to starvation. The animal is unable to choose at all; because without motive there can be no choice and without a choice to eat there will be no sustenance for his survival.

This, of course, is an unlikely scenario, but I think it clearly demonstrates the inherent problem of a neutral will. In fact, I would argue that is brings out the absurdity above when carried to its logical conclusion. Furthermore, I would insist that not only does it defy common sense, it is unbiblical. But before I give attention to the scriptural view of the will, I think it is important to first define what free will is.

Free Will Defined

Spoiler

Simply put, free will is that by which the mind chooses any thing. That sounds reasonable, does it not? Before one can choose to do anything, he must first have some idea of what he is choosing. Our mind must first accept or reject a notion before we can choose. The mind shapes our inclinations and desires, just as the reader’s mind shaped his or her desire to read this post. To put it another way, free will is the ability to choose for ourselves—according to our strongest desire at the moment. In fact, we must always choose what we most strongly desire in order to choose at all. Every choice we make, therefore, is the result of the greatest inclination at that precise moment. Again, the very fact that anyone is reading this letter is an example that their desire to read this letter was greater than their desire not to read this letter. Their choice was not spontaneous but was in fact a deliberate act following their greatest urge when the opportunity presented itself.

Now some might object and insist that we can be coerced against our wills in some extreme instances. But I think even this is going too far. I offer, for example, the outrageous scenario of a thief who wields a gun and demands your money or your life. Now granted, your options have been severely restricted, but his instrument of persuasion still cannot coerce your will. You still maintain the freedom to deliver your money to him or to stubbornly refuse, risking loss of your life. If you give over your money then your strongest inclination at that moment is to live, but you still retain the freedom to refuse and risk losing your life. This, of course, is an extreme example but it illustrates the point that we always make a choice according the strongest inclination at the moment—even in unlikely cases. Now compare this to our daily struggles against sin. The same principle applies. We as Christians have a love for God but yet when we commit sin, it is because the desire to please ourselves is greater than our love and obedience to God at that moment. How can it be otherwise? If it were so, then we would be able to claim we were forced to sin. “The Devil made me do it!” Naturally, we know this is not the case.

Every decision you and I make is made for a reason without coercion from anyone else or from God. Not even almighty God, once he has given me this faculty of choice, can make me, coerce me, force me to choose. If God forced the will it would no longer be a will. Just as if God squared the circle it would no longer be a circle.

We all choose according to the desires of our heart all the time. This is what makes us free moral agents, and it is this freedom that prevents us from being mere automatons. Let me just pause here and just state that even being an automaton or robot would in no way diminish who God is or His love for us. Just suppose for a moment that we were high functioning robots. Would that change anything? Would that imply that God’s love is not sincere? Does God need our decisions to validate His love? Absolutely not—He is unchanging and He is absolute. But here I digress.

The Will and Motives in Fallen Mankind

Now getting back to the question at hand: If we choose according to our strongest desires then what exactly are those propensities? Does man in his natural state have any inclination towards God? I would say to the reader that the apostle Paul does not seem to think so. Recall what he wrote to the Christians at Rome:

There is none righteous, not even one; there is none who understands, there is none who seeks for God; all have turned aside, together they have become useless; there is none who does good, there is not even one” (Rom 3:10–12).​

The sobering reality of this passage cannot be ignored. Paul quoted from the Psalms to demonstrate that mankind is radically depraved apart from God’s grace and mercy. We see in other biblical passages that because of this anthropological reality, one cannot come to God (John 6:44) because he does not have the desire to do so. Again, I cannot begin to stress how Scripture pictures humanity. That is, we will not seek after God because we have no desire to do so. God is not in our thoughts (Psalm 10:4), hence, we do not have the moral ability to choose the Lord apart from His calling.

I am often asked how it is that man found himself turned upside down. How exactly did we get into the dire mess in which we currently find ourselves? The answer is this: The fall of our first parents brought upon all of mankind sin and misery, including death. “Therefore, just as through one man sin entered into the world, and death through sin, and so death spread to all men, because all sinned” (Rom 5:12). This is what Reformed thinkers mean when they say man is in a desperate condition. Paul also tells us that we are dead in our trespasses and sins (Ephesians 2:1). Now, if the reader asks if there is hope—apart of God—the answer in an emphatic, no. If God does not grant the desire for repentance then no one will ever choose righteousness because natural man does not have a desire for God. Man will always freely reject Christ, because the carnal mind is at enmity with God (Romans 8:7).

No Contradictions Implied

Spoiler

At this point some might be confused with my language which appears contradictory. I argue that man has free will, but then I go on to conclude that man cannot choose God. Both statements are in fact true and to understand better this problem I point out that that man has a free will—but lacks liberty. That is to say, fallen man has not lost his ability to make choices. Rather, it just means that when given the opportunity to make those choices fallen man will choose according to the desire of his heart.

This, of course, is the problem at hand. As I have addressed above, the problem is that the desire—the agent that influences the choices—is corrupted. Fallen man is wholly inclined to evil and is in bondage to sin and therefore has no inclination or desire for righteousness. This ability to choose evil freely but inability to choose what is morally right is what is meant when we say fallen man has free will but not liberty. As you can see, we Calvinists do not deny that man has free will. We just want to qualify the term so as to ensure we use it in a biblical context.

One passage of particular importance that confirms the above is found in the statement of Jesus. In the sixth chapter of John the author writes, “No man can come to me, except the Father which hath sent me draw him” (John 6:44). The point Jesus was making was that the necessary condition under which one is eventually able to come to Christ is by the drawing—the irresistible grace of God. In other words, one cannot come to Jesus Christ without first being compelled to do so by the working of God through the power of the Holy Spirit.

Let me conclude by reiterating that the biblical concept of free will is that man retains the freedom to choose what he desires—but that his desires are wicked, self-serving and if left in an unregenerate state he will never choose Christ. The sinner cannot choose Christ, because there is no desire in his heart for God. The fall of Adam left mankind in this desperate state, and it is only through the effectual grace of our Lord, working in the hearts of men, that the unregenerate can come to a saving faith. Once God works His grace in the hearts of His chosen, their desire is changed and then they freely choose God as their personal savior. When we accepted Jesus as our Lord we only did so because the Lord first took away our stony heart and gave us a heart of flesh (Ezekiel 36:26).

AMR

 

[genuineoriginal]

God does not give you full freedom. If He did, then Jonah would have made it to Nineveh. Balaam would have cursed Israel. Hitler would have conquered the world. The will of man is not free.

I see you are trying to change the argument from "Man does not have free-will" to "Man's free will is not completely free".

That tactic does not work.

God gave mankind the free-will to choose whether to love Him or to hate Him.
God gave mankind the free-will to choose whether to obey Him or to disobey Him.

Mankind's will is free enough to make those choices.

It cannot be free unless man is greater than God.

It must always be subject under the will if God.

Mankind having free-will to make the important choices is God's will.

Free-will cannot exist.

Free-will exists because God gave it to mankind.

 

[genuineoriginal]

Did God determine to make the heavens and the earth from nothing? If so, am I rejecting reality by believing God determined to make the heavens and the earth from nothing?
Does God determine that all things are held together?

You are rejecting reality by believing that God determines whether you love Him or hate Him and whether you will obey Him or disobey Him and that you have no choice in the matter.

 

[Faither]

Mennosota .

You made it clear that you stand on the fact " God does everything for us " , that we do not have the capability to " choose Him " .

Now your saying we do have the ability to choose ? Can you explain , can't be both right ?

 

[genuineoriginal]

Rather, free will that is freer than God's will cannot exist.

Mankind cannot will the universe into existence because mankind lacks the power and ability.
God did will the universe into existence through His power and ability.

Free will exists, that is, when free will is properly defined: choosing according to one's greatest inclinations at the moment one so chooses.

What you are describing is not free-will.

Free-will is not an act of a single moment that is determined by one's greatest inclinations at that moment.

Free-will is the ability to change your inclinations over time, based on the choices you make at any given moment.

 

[Faither]

Mankind cannot will the universe into existence because mankind lacks the power and ability.
God did will the universe into existence through His power and ability.


What you are describing is not free-will.

Free-will is not an act of a single moment that is determined by one's greatest inclinations at that moment.

Free-will is the ability to change your inclinations over time, based on the choices you make at any given moment.

What if our free will only encompasses who or what we choose to serve .

 

[MennoSota]

Rather, free will that is freer than God's will cannot exist. For that matter, even God cannot will against His own nature.
Free will exists, that is, when free will (the liberty of spontaneity) is properly defined: choosing according to one's greatest inclinations at the moment one so chooses.

If we can say anything about what free will is not, it would be to say that libertarian free will (the liberty of indifference) does not exist.

Aforementioned embedded link is reposted here for those not willing to pay for a subscription:

Spoiler

The anti-Calvinist’s frequently heard claim: Predestination Violates Man’s Free Will

This is perhaps the single most common objection I have encountered when discussing the doctrines of grace. When I first encountered the doctrines of grace espoused by the Reformers who sought to recover the teachings of Scripture that had been obscured by Romanism, I too was once convinced that predestination destroys human freedom and reduces man to a mere puppet.

I wrestled with the concepts for quite some time, and would even consider this one of the greatest stumbling blocks I had to overcome. So I would not expect something different of the reader of my posts and what I have advocated. In a way it does not come as a surprise to me that the reader will question the practicality of predestination as it relates to human events. With that said, however, let me offer some simple comments on the legitimacy of two great biblical truths—predestination and free will. After all, both are clearly taught within Scripture, so we must find a way to reconcile these two friends.

Let me first start out by asking why one would assume that the two ideas cannot co-exist. The anti-Calvinist mentions often that the freedom of man’s will is not compatible with predestination, but unfortunately, they never attempt to definitively prove this from Scripture or reason. Naturally, I could in turn ask the anti-Calvinist how they reached such a conclusion without first establishing a basis for their position. It seems to me that they are simply arguing a priori knowledge—that is, they are arguing that their conclusion is justified independent of experience. Here I must strenuously object and insist that the two ideas are not mutually exclusive but will want to point out that both are complementary when properly understood.

Free Will Discussion

Beyond arguing against presupposing a contradiction I believe the major confusion resides with many because of a flawed assumption of what they think free will means. I have seen great men and women from both sides talk past each other because each were defining the terms differently. I am afraid we will be no different if we do not clearly define what it is we mean when we use the term free will. The anti-Calvinist reader—like countless others—define the term, free will, as the ability to choose from among various alternatives without any prior prejudices, inclinations, or dispositions. In other words, they imply that man must possess neutrality in order to be truly free.

Now on a superficial level this answer does seem to protect God’s character when we talk about sin and fairness. However, I believe that it creates more questions than answers. Consider for a moment one underlying problem that makes this position untenable. If our choices are not based on prior inclinations and come as the result of neutrality, then our choices come for no reason. Our actions would be mere spontaneous deeds conducted apart from desires, which would not carry any moral weight. They would neither be good or bad. The problem, however, is that God evaluates our choices based on our motives. God will not accept the answer that our sinful actions resulted from spontaneity or mere arbitrariness.

Two Examples

Spoiler

One clear biblical example of God’s predestinating power and man’s free will working together is when Judas betrayed his Lord. The apostle Judas acted freely when he delivered his Master to the Roman authorities for thirty pieces of silver. I do not believe anyone would argue that his actions were spontaneous, but rather, were deliberate and self-serving so “that the Scripture might be fulfilled” (John 17:12). I believe the gospel writer clearly sets forth the reality that God ordained the life, betrayal, death, and resurrection of His Son—but yet it would not have happened without the free will decisions of those involved in the betrayal and execution of Christ Jesus.

A second example can be found in the selling of Joseph into slavery by his siblings. God’s mighty hand was evident even in this wicked act. Just as Joseph told his brothers “you meant evil against me, but God meant it for good in order to bring about this present result, to preserve many people alive” (Gen 50:20). The brothers’ actions were not spontaneous or without prior inclination. Rather, their actions were premeditated, deliberate, and evil, yet God used their wickedness for a greater purpose. God’s sovereignty was upheld throughout the entire situation, as were the free will decisions of Joseph’s brothers. I would submit to the reader that this is just another example that demonstrates how God remains in control over His creation while leaving mankind with the ability to make choices according to the desires of the heart.

Another problem that I see with neutrality is that it does not correspond to reason. That is, if—as the anti-Calvinist often would claim—the will acts apart from any motive, then how can a choice even be made? What would cause someone to choose between the simplest of matters such as going left or right, stopping or starting, eating or starving? What would compel me to choose at all—if not for an inclination of some sort?

To illustrate my point consider the neutral-willed animal. Two baskets are presented before the animal, one full of wheat and the other filled with oats. Now here is the dilemma. The animal’s neutral-will would inevitably leave him paralyzed and unable to choose between the wheat and the oats. Since he has no prior inclination or disposition to eat wheat, to eat oats, to feast or to starve, he will eventually succumb to starvation. The animal is unable to choose at all; because without motive there can be no choice and without a choice to eat there will be no sustenance for his survival.

This, of course, is an unlikely scenario, but I think it clearly demonstrates the inherent problem of a neutral will. In fact, I would argue that is brings out the absurdity above when carried to its logical conclusion. Furthermore, I would insist that not only does it defy common sense, it is unbiblical. But before I give attention to the scriptural view of the will, I think it is important to first define what free will is.

Free Will Defined

Spoiler

Simply put, free will is that by which the mind chooses any thing. That sounds reasonable, does it not? Before one can choose to do anything, he must first have some idea of what he is choosing. Our mind must first accept or reject a notion before we can choose. The mind shapes our inclinations and desires, just as the reader’s mind shaped his or her desire to read this post. To put it another way, free will is the ability to choose for ourselves—according to our strongest desire at the moment. In fact, we must always choose what we most strongly desire in order to choose at all. Every choice we make, therefore, is the result of the greatest inclination at that precise moment. Again, the very fact that anyone is reading this letter is an example that their desire to read this letter was greater than their desire not to read this letter. Their choice was not spontaneous but was in fact a deliberate act following their greatest urge when the opportunity presented itself.

Now some might object and insist that we can be coerced against our wills in some extreme instances. But I think even this is going too far. I offer, for example, the outrageous scenario of a thief who wields a gun and demands your money or your life. Now granted, your options have been severely restricted, but his instrument of persuasion still cannot coerce your will. You still maintain the freedom to deliver your money to him or to stubbornly refuse, risking loss of your life. If you give over your money then your strongest inclination at that moment is to live, but you still retain the freedom to refuse and risk losing your life. This, of course, is an extreme example but it illustrates the point that we always make a choice according the strongest inclination at the moment—even in unlikely cases. Now compare this to our daily struggles against sin. The same principle applies. We as Christians have a love for God but yet when we commit sin, it is because the desire to please ourselves is greater than our love and obedience to God at that moment. How can it be otherwise? If it were so, then we would be able to claim we were forced to sin. “The Devil made me do it!” Naturally, we know this is not the case.

Every decision you and I make is made for a reason without coercion from anyone else or from God. Not even almighty God, once he has given me this faculty of choice, can make me, coerce me, force me to choose. If God forced the will it would no longer be a will. Just as if God squared the circle it would no longer be a circle.

We all choose according to the desires of our heart all the time. This is what makes us free moral agents, and it is this freedom that prevents us from being mere automatons. Let me just pause here and just state that even being an automaton or robot would in no way diminish who God is or His love for us. Just suppose for a moment that we were high functioning robots. Would that change anything? Would that imply that God’s love is not sincere? Does God need our decisions to validate His love? Absolutely not—He is unchanging and He is absolute. But here I digress.

The Will and Motives in Fallen Mankind

Now getting back to the question at hand: If we choose according to our strongest desires then what exactly are those propensities? Does man in his natural state have any inclination towards God? I would say to the reader that the apostle Paul does not seem to think so. Recall what he wrote to the Christians at Rome:

There is none righteous, not even one; there is none who understands, there is none who seeks for God; all have turned aside, together they have become useless; there is none who does good, there is not even one” (Rom 3:10–12).​

The sobering reality of this passage cannot be ignored. Paul quoted from the Psalms to demonstrate that mankind is radically depraved apart from God’s grace and mercy. We see in other biblical passages that because of this anthropological reality, one cannot come to God (John 6:44) because he does not have the desire to do so. Again, I cannot begin to stress how Scripture pictures humanity. That is, we will not seek after God because we have no desire to do so. God is not in our thoughts (Psalm 10:4), hence, we do not have the moral ability to choose the Lord apart from His calling.

I am often asked how it is that man found himself turned upside down. How exactly did we get into the dire mess in which we currently find ourselves? The answer is this: The fall of our first parents brought upon all of mankind sin and misery, including death. “Therefore, just as through one man sin entered into the world, and death through sin, and so death spread to all men, because all sinned” (Rom 5:12). This is what Reformed thinkers mean when they say man is in a desperate condition. Paul also tells us that we are dead in our trespasses and sins (Ephesians 2:1). Now, if the reader asks if there is hope—apart of God—the answer in an emphatic, no. If God does not grant the desire for repentance then no one will ever choose righteousness because natural man does not have a desire for God. Man will always freely reject Christ, because the carnal mind is at enmity with God (Romans 8:7).

No Contradictions Implied

Spoiler

At this point some might be confused with my language which appears contradictory. I argue that man has free will, but then I go on to conclude that man cannot choose God. Both statements are in fact true and to understand better this problem I point out that that man has a free will—but lacks liberty. That is to say, fallen man has not lost his ability to make choices. Rather, it just means that when given the opportunity to make those choices fallen man will choose according to the desire of his heart.

This, of course, is the problem at hand. As I have addressed above, the problem is that the desire—the agent that influences the choices—is corrupted. Fallen man is wholly inclined to evil and is in bondage to sin and therefore has no inclination or desire for righteousness. This ability to choose evil freely but inability to choose what is morally right is what is meant when we say fallen man has free will but not liberty. As you can see, we Calvinists do not deny that man has free will. We just want to qualify the term so as to ensure we use it in a biblical context.

One passage of particular importance that confirms the above is found in the statement of Jesus. In the sixth chapter of John the author writes, “No man can come to me, except the Father which hath sent me draw him” (John 6:44). The point Jesus was making was that the necessary condition under which one is eventually able to come to Christ is by the drawing—the irresistible grace of God. In other words, one cannot come to Jesus Christ without first being compelled to do so by the working of God through the power of the Holy Spirit.

Let me conclude by reiterating that the biblical concept of free will is that man retains the freedom to choose what he desires—but that his desires are wicked, self-serving and if left in an unregenerate state he will never choose Christ. The sinner cannot choose Christ, because there is no desire in his heart for God. The fall of Adam left mankind in this desperate state, and it is only through the effectual grace of our Lord, working in the hearts of men, that the unregenerate can come to a saving faith. Once God works His grace in the hearts of His chosen, their desire is changed and then they freely choose God as their personal savior. When we accepted Jesus as our Lord we only did so because the Lord first took away our stony heart and gave us a heart of flesh (Ezekiel 36:26).

AMR

Even this is not free of God's ordained will. We cannot act without God's approval of the act...even when that act is evil and contrary to God's holiness. All creation is held in God's hand. Everything moves by His ordination. This is what it means to be God and to be Sovereign over all that He has created. God's determination cannot be overruled by anyone. Thus, when God determines that a person will be saved...that person will be saved. That person cannot say no. It is not an option. When God hardened Pharoah's heart, Pharoah was powerless to stop God and will God to soften his heart.
Humans, who pride themselves in being independent, gnash their teeth at the prospect that God has us on a leash and controls our lives. They fight, despite the fact that God tells them very clearly that humans are either slaves to sin or slaves to righteousness.

 

[MennoSota]

I see you are trying to change the argument from "Man does not have free-will" to "Man's free will is not completely free".

That tactic does not work.

God gave mankind the free-will to choose whether to love Him or to hate Him.
God gave mankind the free-will to choose whether to obey Him or to disobey Him.

Mankind's will is free enough to make those choices.

Mankind having free-will to make the important choices is God's will.


Free-will exists because God gave it to mankind.

My argument has always been that our actions are held under the ordinance of God. Go to my first posts on the subject.
Free-will does not, never has and never will exist. Our wills are, we're and always will be held under God's ordained will.

 

[MennoSota]

You are rejecting reality by believing that God determines whether you love Him or hate Him and whether you will obey Him or disobey Him and that you have no choice in the matter.

All humans are born in rebellion to God. We all hate Him.
It is only by the gracious outreaching of God in adopting us and saving us from our selves that we can or will love God or obey Him.
Don't you realize that humans are the ISIS in God's creation? We are rebels against the Kingdom of God. We hate God by nature.
This explains why humans hate the fact that they don't have free-will.

 

[genuineoriginal]

My argument has always been that our actions are held under the ordinance of God.

Sounds like you are equivocating (using ambiguous language so as to conceal the truth or avoid committing oneself).

Free-will does not, never has and never will exist.

Mankind was created with free-will.

Our wills are, we're and always will be held under God's ordained will.

When you say, "Our wills are, were, and always will be held under God's ordained will," what do you mean by "held under", "ordained", and "God's ordained will".

 

[genuineoriginal]

All humans are born in rebellion to God. We all hate Him.

False.

It is only by the gracious outreaching of God in adopting us and saving us from our selves that we can or will love God or obey Him.

False.

We are rebels against the Kingdom of God. We hate God by nature.

False

This explains why humans hate the fact that they don't have free-will.

You are trying to trot out the false doctrine of "Original Sin"/"Total Depravity" and use that as proof that God did not give mankind free-will?

No, God did not make Adam and Eve eat from the fruit of the tree of Total Depravity.
Adam and Eve ate from the fruit of the tree of the knowledge of GOOD and evil of their own free-will.

That means that we, their descendants, are not forced into Total Depravity as you claim.
Instead we have the free-will to choose good or choose evil.

 

[genuineoriginal]

What if our free will only encompasses who or what we choose to serve .

That would include the ability to choose how much we serve, how well we serve, and whether we can change who or what we serve over time.

 

[MennoSota]

False.

False.

False

You are trying to trot out the false doctrine of "Original Sin"/"Total Depravity" and use that as proof that God did not give mankind free-will?

No, God did not make Adam and Eve eat from the fruit of the tree of Total Depravity.
Adam and Eve ate from the fruit of the tree of the knowledge of GOOD and evil of their own free-will.

That means that we, their descendants, are not forced into Total Depravity as you claim.
Instead we have the free-will to choose good or choose evil.

You deny scripture. You are a heretic. Good bye.

 

[genuineoriginal]

You deny scripture.

I do not deny scripture.
People that deny that God gave us the free-will to choose to love Him or choose to hate Him are the ones that deny scripture.

 

[Faither]

That would include the ability to choose how much we serve, how well we serve, and whether we can change who or what we serve over time.

Agreed !!
Absolutely 100% !!
That is the NT faithing life .

I would add , the more God puts opportunities in our path to perfect the surrendering of our life and will to Him , He accually does what we choose and takes more of our will .

Ultimately , the more our faith and faithing are perfected by God via our choices , it will be harder to get out of God's will , than it is to stay in it .

 

[Cross Reference]

You deny scripture. You are a heretic. Good bye.

You are a heavy duty denier of scripture! But that is your freewill to be so.

 

[Cross Reference]

I would add , the more God puts opportunities in our path to perfect the surrendering of our life and will to Him , He accually does what we choose and takes more of our will .

God doesn't give us overcoming life. He gives us life as we overcome.

Ultimately , the more our faith and faithing are perfected by God via our choices.. .. .

"Our choices"?? Exactly! By our obedience to the "choice set in God's will" which will increase our faith. God doesn't follow us. We follow Him that is, if you are born-again by which we can only learn "His ways". If you aren't then the whole thing becomes academic with no Godhead DNA in it.

Our faith is increased by our obedience, perfected in righteousness which is the Foundation of God's Throne. unless you want to believe Jesus did not have to obey to make it through to His ressurection?

Perfected = Glorified.