ECT What is your definition of free will?

[oatmeal]

I am glad to see believers being thoughtful enough to define their terms

 

[chrysostom]

I am glad to see believers being thoughtful enough to define their terms

so why wouldn't you use the dictionary?

you are free to do that you know

 

[oatmeal]

so why wouldn't you use the dictionary?

you are free to do that you know

dictionaries usually concern themselves with single words, not two word terms.

My unabridged dictionary does have the following: free and independent choice; voluntary decision.

that is sums up what I think from a secular source.

However, it seems from my OP that God has somewhat to say about free will as well. See my scripture references.

choose you this day who you will serve.

you have to exercise your free will to choose to serve God.

Note all those who reject God and His son for an example of those who do not choose to serve God. That is their free will decision to not acknowledge God, choose salvation and then serve God, they will lose out

 

[ttruscott]

Hi and who has " free will " no one !!

Buying a car , house , clothes IS NOT FREE WILL !!

#1 , The angels in heaven had Free Will !

#2 , Adam and Eve had Free Will !

#3, Lucifer had Free Will !!

All fell because they made BAD Choices !!

The reason we do not have so-called Free Will , is because we are dead in Trespasses and sin !!

dan p

Very excellent and I agree but the holy elect angels in heaven still have free will as they have never sinned, eh?

peace, Ted

 

[ttruscott]

Yes

How does a person learn to desire something?

Experience and social maturity?

 

[ttruscott]

Romans 1:20

This verse can't be believed within the reality of world history that no one has ever been found to have discovered YHWH's (not: some random god) divinity and power by the study of nature.

In fact, the far largest religions have studied nature for eons and have concluded that they are god, not YHWH, that is, the Hindus and the Buddhists. Scientific materialism is famous for using the scientific study of all things natural to denigrate the belief in YHWH.

So this verse is proven by history to never have been fulfilled on earth.

But it has been fulfilled since no man has an excuse. The only way this verse can have been fulfilled is if For since the creation of the world His invisible attributes are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even His eternal power and Godhead, so that they are without excuse, since means from the time that and the things that are made refers to the creation of the physical universe where we know people existed, saw the creation and praised GOD for HIS greatness, Job 38:7, proving that the spirits were created before the physical universe.

Since someone was there, it is a small step of faith to accept that we were all there and praised HIS glory but then repressed that memory because we loved sin more than the truth as the rest of Rom 1 tells us over and over.

Since there is no scriptural constraint against believing we saw the creation and absolutely no proof that there was any universal witness from nature to YHWH on earth, and never happened on earth any time, any where (unless the whole world is involved in the greatest conspiracy of silence ever imagined), I contend we all saw HIS divinity and power by watching the creation of the physical universe before our very eyes and every knee did bow and every voice did sing HIS praise so that all sinners are without excuse.

Peace, Ted

 

[Squeaky]

so why wouldn't you use the dictionary?

you are free to do that you know

I said
That's a funny thing about dictionaries. The wisdom changes in each one. We start out with websters, and funk and wagnal. But when we turn to the bible we must change because they carnal dictionaries don't have what it takes. So we turn to strongs and nelsons for a deeper understanding. But when one receives the revelations of Jesus Christ it seems to go about as deep as it can go.
I talk to the Holy Spirit every day. But when I looked up the definition of the Holy Spirit in a dictionary it says "A buff of wind".
And that is really shallow. Especially sense I talk to Him daily.

 

[oatmeal]

Experience and social maturity?

How about a hungry baby? That would be somewhat instinctual

 

[oatmeal]

This verse can't be believed within the reality of world history that no one has ever been found to have discovered YHWH's (not: some random god) divinity and power by the study of nature.

In fact, the far largest religions have studied nature for eons and have concluded that they are god, not YHWH, that is, the Hindus and the Buddhists. Scientific materialism is famous for using the scientific study of all things natural to denigrate the belief in YHWH.

So this verse is proven by history to never have been fulfilled on earth.

But it has been fulfilled since no man has an excuse. The only way this verse can have been fulfilled is if For since the creation of the world His invisible attributes are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even His eternal power and Godhead, so that they are without excuse, since means from the time that and the things that are made refers to the creation of the physical universe where we know people existed, saw the creation and praised GOD for HIS greatness, Job 38:7, proving that the spirits were created before the physical universe.

Since someone was there, it is a small step of faith to accept that we were all there and praised HIS glory but then repressed that memory because we loved sin more than the truth as the rest of Rom 1 tells us over and over.

Since there is no scriptural constraint against believing we saw the creation and absolutely no proof that there was any universal witness from nature to YHWH on earth, and never happened on earth any time, any where (unless the whole world is involved in the greatest conspiracy of silence ever imagined), I contend we all saw HIS divinity and power by watching the creation of the physical universe before our very eyes and every knee did bow and every voice did sing HIS praise so that all sinners are without excuse.

Peace, Ted

So are you saying that Romans 1:20 is in error?

You better tell God that.

 

[Puppet]

And therefore, will does not need to be examined further as free or not, there is simply 'will'.

We have will, the ability to choose. This however does not deflate predestination.
Predestination is the part which we cannot control- our will is guided by predestination from our inability to choose our disposition and surroundings we learn from.

Essentially, free will and predestination coexist- predestination is simply bigger because it is not something controlled by us individually, but rather by God with all humanity.

God did not sovereignly choose you so that the idea of him choosing you might merely bounce around in your brain. He chose you for worship. The ultimate purpose of predestination is praise! You have been chosen for this goal: the proclamation of his excellencies and your extravagantly affectionate and inexpressibly joyful delight in them (cf. 1 Peter 1:8)

 

[nikolai_42]

People choose to use drugs in most circumstances.

If they knew what the results of their choices were, they would have knowingly relinquished some of their freedom to choose.

Hence, God, who wants people to make right decisions, does not condone willful drunkenness and druggedness. Ephesians 4:18, Galatians 5:20, witchcraft is pharmekeia

Men are bound internally. Their will is internal. It may be acted upon by outside agents, but when we speak of being in bondage to sin, we are talking about something that is already inborn. In that sense, at least, it doesn't matter whether we believe in original sin or that we are simply born with a tendency to sin - either way, the enemy is within.

So when you speak of those who choose (initially) to take drugs, you are dealing with a (largely) external influence. The drug has no hold on the potential user because he has not taken the drug yet. However, even then, there may be other internal influences driving him to take it. So even at that point, his will is not really free (because he is being "made" to want the drug).

Compare that to Adam's situation. Before he took the fruit and ate, it had no sway over him. After, it ruled his life. The same with Eve. And that fall directly affected every man who came after him. Even in the Garden, Adam and Eve were influenced by the serpent. The will is not naturally good. It is formed by lusts and desires and other influences that don't necessarily originate from us. Free will is really not free.

 

[Nick M]

The definition of freewill is in its exercise.

What do you mean? Your desire is shown by what you do?

 

[Cross Reference]

Men are bound internally. Their will is internal. It may be acted upon by outside agents, but when we speak of being in bondage to sin, we are talking about something that is already inborn.

That is not a true statement of the facts. We are bound to vanity, the venue for sin. Had Adam not transgressed, the venue, "vanity," would have been lifted from man thus eliminating the only path to the soul of man Satan was given. That was the hope of God for Adam (Rom. 8:20 KJV) for his overcoming-dying to self, was the only way to prove "sinless" Adam's allegiance.

 

[nikolai_42]

That is not a true statement of the facts. We are bound to vanity, the venue for sin. Had Adam not transgressed, the venue, "vanity," would have been lifted from man thus eliminating the only path to the soul of man Satan was given. That was the hope of God for Adam (Rom. 8:20 KJV) for his overcoming-dying to self, was the only way to prove "sinless" Adam's allegiance.

I'm not sure what you mean. Vanity is not a venue, it's a characteristic - a state of affairs. It isn't a path, it is a result.

 

[Cross Reference]

What do you mean? Your desire is shown by what you do?

Won't that be the way man will be judged ___ irrespective of what he believes himself to be in Christ, if he is wrong?

 

[Cross Reference]

I'm not sure what you mean. Vanity is not a venue, it's a characteristic - a state of affairs. It isn't a path, it is a result.

Gen.4:7 KJV speaks of it as the venue.

 

[nikolai_42]

Gen.4:7 KJV speaks of it as the venue.

Sorry...don't see it.

 

[Cross Reference]

Sorry...don't see it.

What do you see you disagree with? What is God saying to Cain?

 

[nikolai_42]

What do you see you disagree with? What is God saying to Cain?

There's a tricky subject-object relationship there that has even many commentators disagreeing wildly. But I don't think it changes the original issue. That is, if Cain doesn't "do well", he has sinned. I think the seeming separation here is just a literary matter - or even has to do with the subject-object ambiguity. But if we agree that anything that is not of faith IS sin, then Cain sinned even before he killed his brother. Sin was already there. It may have been trying to take further dominion (and here may be a distinction between the thought and the action) but sin was already there. He hated his brother without a cause (I John 3:15). The seed of that was already there whether he knew it or not. Sin was already in his heart. The question is whether he could overcome it or not. There is at issue here, I think, the degree to which sin has flowered. Not whether it is there already or not. It is internal.

 

[Cross Reference]

There's a tricky subject-object relationship there that has even many commentators disagreeing wildly. But I don't think it changes the original issue. That is, if Cain doesn't "do well", he has sinned.

Forget the commentators!
Why assume when you can't by the words spoken by God. Was God speaking of sin or acceptance? Cain's offering was not accepted __ but was it a sin? REMEMBER, as with Adam, is "deeds" the issue __ as in "doing well" and you will be accepted..