What's new
  • This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn more.
  • Do not use Chrome Incognito when registering as it freezes the registration page.
  • Guest, Join Papa Zoom today for some uplifting biblical encouragement! --> Daily Verses

'Freewill' in the process of revelation

Status
Not open for further replies.

JM

Member
Joined
Mar 30, 2003
Messages
2,818
#1
Would God invade man’s supposed ‘freewill’ to prevent errors from being placed in the Holy Scripture?
 

Drew

Member
Joined
Jan 24, 2005
Messages
13,963
Gender
Male
Christian
Yes
#2
I wonder whether this question is properly framed....

I suggest that it is entirely self-consistent to propose that man has a freewill faculty that is reasonably "disentangled" from his other faculties. Let's say I have no knowledge of quantum mechanics or no knowledge of how to skate. Even without such "domain" knowledge, I can still have a faculty that allows me to recognize the need for such knowledge and freely choose to let God "download" that knowledge into me.

With regard to the Scriptures, a writer might freely choose to "open" his mind to receive the downloading of error-free scripture from God. He could then write scripture.

My view of this is based on a strong conceptual distinction between the content of the "free will" faculty and the contents of other faculties. Right now, I have absolutely no capability or faculty to perform brain surgery. However, I "know that I don't know". So if for some reason, God gave me a vision that he wanted me to be a brain surgeon and promised to miraculously give the knowledge, I could make a free will decision to let Him "download" the knowledge.

I have a similar thought about "faith". I have no capability in and of myself to have a working faith - so I agree that faith is a work of God. He must do all the work of creating such a faculty in my mind. However, I see no Biblical (or other) reason to believe that I do not have a different faculty that recognizes the need for faith and can act freely to "accept" the gift of faith (which is still a work of God).
 

JM

Member
Joined
Mar 30, 2003
Messages
2,818
#3
Drew said:
I wonder whether this question is properly framed....

I suggest that it is entirely self-consistent to propose that man has a freewill faculty that is reasonably "disentangled" from his other faculties. Let's say I have no knowledge of quantum mechanics or no knowledge of how to skate. Even without such "domain" knowledge, I can still have a faculty that allows me to recognize the need for such knowledge and freely choose to let God "download" that knowledge into me.
This is too far outside the frame of the question. The Bible is divinely inspired, how was it done without human will be violated in the process?

With regard to the Scriptures, a writer might freely choose to "open" his mind to receive the downloading of error-free scripture from God. He could then write scripture.
Would the man who is ‘downloading’ the inspired word [I object to this term but will use it for your sake Drew] be able to do so objectively without the facility of judgement on his part?

My view of this is based on a strong conceptual distinction between the content of the "free will" faculty and the contents of other faculties. Right now, I have absolutely no capability or faculty to perform brain surgery. However, I "know that I don't know". So if for some reason, God gave me a vision that he wanted me to be a brain surgeon and promised to miraculously give the knowledge, I could make a free will decision to let Him "download" the knowledge.
So, God's will for you to be a brain surgeon really has nothing to do with His will at all, it's up to you? Does God know the future in your religion? Isn't this open theism?

I have a similar thought about "faith". I have no capability in and of myself to have a working faith - so I agree that faith is a work of God. He must do all the work of creating such a faculty in my mind. However, I see no Biblical (or other) reason to believe that I do not have a different faculty that recognizes the need for faith and can act freely to "accept" the gift of faith (which is still a work of God).
If we have a truly freewill, we have no need of Grace, for if we can will to do it, it shall be done on our own without the help.

What Drew is basicly saying is this: God can’t do anything without man giving the final direction. This is not the mild form of semi- Pelagianism/Arminianism, but full fledged Pelagianism which has been historically identified as a heresy. This ancient heresy taught that man was basically good and has control of his own eternal destiny. The doctrine of original sin? Forget about it. Man is originally good, Aminians said man is fallen, but sick and not dead in sin. If we follow the Pelagian view to its logical extension efficacy of Christ's sacrifice on the cross is not needed. Thank God the Church gathered around Augustine and the father of the Pelagian heresy was condemned.

Back to the op, can man interrupt God’s dictation of the word? Once that word has been given, can it be safe guarded from error?
 

Drew

Member
Joined
Jan 24, 2005
Messages
13,963
Gender
Male
Christian
Yes
#4
JM said:
Drew said:
With regard to the Scriptures, a writer might freely choose to "open" his mind to receive the downloading of error-free scripture from God. He could then write scripture.
Would the man who is ‘downloading’ the inspired word [I object to this term but will use it for your sake Drew] be able to do so objectively without the facility of judgement on his part?
Yes, once he has freely agreed to be God's writer, he could write without applying his own judgement.

JM said:
Drew said:
My view of this is based on a strong conceptual distinction between the content of the "free will" faculty and the contents of other faculties. Right now, I have absolutely no capability or faculty to perform brain surgery. However, I "know that I don't know". So if for some reason, God gave me a vision that he wanted me to be a brain surgeon and promised to miraculously give the knowledge, I could make a free will decision to let Him "download" the knowledge.
So, God's will for you to be a brain surgeon really has nothing to do with His will at all, it's up to you? Does God know the future in your religion? Isn't this open theism?
My religion is Christianity as you and others well know. As I have argued in a recent post in another thread, God can exert influence over me to become a brain surgeon without going so far as to take away my free will in respect to the matter. I do believe in open theism - which I understand to be that God that does not know everything about the future. If you want a "scriptural" defence for that postion, I am prepared.

JM said:
Drew said:
I have a similar thought about "faith". I have no capability in and of myself to have a working faith - so I agree that faith is a work of God. He must do all the work of creating such a faculty in my mind. However, I see no Biblical (or other) reason to believe that I do not have a different faculty that recognizes the need for faith and can act freely to "accept" the gift of faith (which is still a work of God).
If we have a truly freewill, we have no need of Grace, for if we can will to do it, it shall be done on our own without the help.
Simply not correct. I have never claimed that will was fully sufficient for salvation. The work of salvation is presented to us and we can accept it or reject it. It is grace, unmerited favour, in that our debt of sin has been paid by Jesus, with us doing none of the payment. All we have to do is reach out and take the gift. To suggest that this means salvation is our work and not God's is simply not reasonable. If someone opens the door to let firefighters into a building, no one would give that man credit for the subsequent rescue - it is the firefighters who risked their lives and carried the people out.

JM said:
What Drew is basicly saying is this: God can’t do anything without man giving the final direction.
Of course, I have never said any such thing. I have said that with respect to achieving salvation, man do need to make a free will act of acceptance.

JM said:
This is not the mild form of semi- Pelagianism/Arminianism, but full fledged Pelagianism which has been historically identified as a heresy. This ancient heresy taught that man was basically good and has control of his own eternal destiny. The doctrine of original sin? Forget about it. Man is originally good, Aminians said man is fallen, but sick and not dead in sin. If we follow the Pelagian view to its logical extension efficacy of Christ's sacrifice on the cross is not needed. Thank God the Church gathered around Augustine and the father of the Pelagian heresy was condemned.
This is a simple appeal to authority. I do not know "Pelagianism" from a hole in the ground. I have written what I have written and that is all I am saying. If you want to make a case that Pelagianism is the necessary consequence of what I have actually said, by all means go nuts. I am always interested in substantive counterarguments.
 

JM

Member
Joined
Mar 30, 2003
Messages
2,818
#5
Yes, once he has freely agreed to be God's writer, he could write without applying his own judgement.
God’s plan then becomes contingent upon man’s response, if all men say no, what would God do then [since He doesn't know the future]?

My religion is Christianity as you and others well know. As I have argued in a recent post in another thread, God can exert influence over me to become a brain surgeon without going so far as to take away my free will in respect to the matter. I do believe in open theism - which I understand to be that God that does not know everything about the future. If you want a "scriptural" defence for that postion, I am prepared.
Once again, Drew has read more into the post then what is written, I’ll define the term “religion.†Dictionary.com, “1. Belief in and reverence for a supernatural power or powers regarded as creator and governor of the universe. 2. A personal or institutionalized system grounded in such belief and worship.†Synonyms for religion are creed, denomination, doctrine, persuasion, theology, etc. As for the open theism, all I can say is, "I should have know." At first I accepted your profession of faith, but your god and my God are two different Gods...

Simply not correct. I have never claimed that will was fully sufficient for salvation. The work of salvation is presented to us and we can accept it or reject it. It is grace, unmerited favour, in that our debt of sin has been paid by Jesus, with us doing none of the payment. All we have to do is reach out and take the gift. To suggest that this means salvation is our work and not God's is simply not reasonable. If someone opens the door to let firefighters into a building, no one would give that man credit for the subsequent rescue - it is the firefighters who risked their lives and carried the people out.
Well, Grace is no longer Grace when you add to it, because Grace is free and cannot be the product of merit. If you believe AND THEN Grace is given as a result of that belief...that would mean God owed you that Grace based on the act of your freewill.

Of course, I have never said any such thing. I have said that with respect to achieving salvation, man do need to make a free will act of acceptance.
But if we follow logic that's the only valid conclusion.

This is a simple appeal to authority. I do not know "Pelagianism" from a hole in the ground. I have written what I have written and that is all I am saying. If you want to make a case that Pelagianism is the necessary consequence of what I have actually said, by all means go nuts. I am always interested in substantive counterarguments.
Yes, it is an appeal to authority, the authority of the Scriptures and you are far outside the realm of what Scripture allows. If it looks like a duck, walks like a duck, quacks like a duck… Even if you have never heard of Pelagius but you hold to his teaches, that makes you a theological Pelagian. Just like the 4 point Calvinist doesn’t know his an Amyraldian, he is just that, theologically speaking. As for counterarguments, simply google "man made god" and you'll find a bring intro.

2 John 1:10, 11 If there come any unto you, and bring not this doctrine, receive him not into your house, neither bid him God speed: For he that biddeth him God speed is partaker of his evil deeds.

The line is drawn.
 
Joined
Aug 14, 2003
Messages
1,156
#6
JM said:
Would God invade man�s supposed �freewill� to prevent errors from being placed in the Holy Scripture?
It appears God has allowed printing errors, typos, etc. but he also allows and directs folks to get them cleaned up and I believe there are many King James Bibles around that are perfect and without any of the "goofs" mentioned above.

What I hold in my hands is inspired scripture - no, I am not referring to the "magical" originals - I go further than just preservation here - I mean the one I hold in my hands that you can get from Walgreen's for $3.95 . :o

Still waiting for someone to show me chapter and verse that says only the originals are inspired.

If you cannot say what you have in your hands is inspired then do not call it scripture according to II Tim. 3:16. Call it whatever you want but if it ain't inspired it ain't scripture! :o

Now let's bring it on down home here - what this means is that alot of what you folks read is not scripture. Your modern versions may contain some of God's words and verses but you cannot call your modern bibles "the word of God" - just a book that may contain some of God's words and verses. But you can't call your book, as a whole, scripture.

God bless 8-)
 

Drew

Member
Joined
Jan 24, 2005
Messages
13,963
Gender
Male
Christian
Yes
#7
JM said:
2 John 1:10, 11 If there come any unto you, and bring not this doctrine, receive him not into your house, neither bid him God speed: For he that biddeth him God speed is partaker of his evil deeds.

The line is drawn.
When someone has you on the ropes, you simply try to smear them with the "evil" brush. Let's stick to debating the issues.
 

JM

Member
Joined
Mar 30, 2003
Messages
2,818
#8
Drew said:
JM said:
2 John 1:10, 11 If there come any unto you, and bring not this doctrine, receive him not into your house, neither bid him God speed: For he that biddeth him God speed is partaker of his evil deeds.

The line is drawn.
When someone has you on the ropes, you simply try to smear them with the "evil" brush. Let's stick to debating the issues.
Drew, I’m not the only one who views open theism as heretical; it’s simply not within the realm of orthodoxy. As for having me on the ropes, fine, if your posts are about winning…but you only win in the eyes of the world and secular philosophy. Every time Scripture is quoted I know your skin crawls and so I’ll quote once again:

Isa 53:6 All we like sheep have gone astray; we have turned every one to his own way; and the LORD hath laid on him the iniquity of us all.

Rom 3:10 As it is written, There is none righteous, no, not one:

Rom 8:2 For the law of the Spirit of life in Christ Jesus hath made me free from the law of sin and death.

Rom 10:9 That if thou shalt confess with thy mouth the Lord Jesus, and shalt believe in thine heart that God hath raised him from the dead, thou shalt be saved.
 
M

MrVersatile48

Guest
#9
"All Scripture is God-breathed"

It's in 1 Peter - I have a headache right now, but I'll bring in "Questions On The Christian Faith Answered From The Bible" - by Roger Forster - on Sat

DV, that is!

Anyway, JM, God ain't impressed by your white beard icon 8-)

1 Corinthians 1:18-25 beautifully shows how infinitely superior God's strength & wisdom is to man's

1 Corinthians 1:18-25 (New International Version)
New International Version (NIV)
Copyright © 1973, 1978, 1984 by International Bible Society


Christ the Wisdom and Power of God

18For the message of the cross is foolishness to those who are perishing, but to us who are being saved it is the power of God. 19For it is written:
"I will destroy the wisdom of the wise;
the intelligence of the intelligent I will frustrate."[a]

20Where is the wise man?
Where is the scholar?
Where is the philosopher of this age?
Has not God made foolish the wisdom of the world?

21For since in the wisdom of God the world through its wisdom did not know him, God was pleased through the foolishness of what was preached to save those who believe.
22Jews demand miraculous signs and Greeks look for wisdom, 23but we preach Christ crucified: a stumbling block to Jews and foolishness to Gentiles,
24but to those whom God has called, both Jews and Greeks, Christ the power of God and the wisdom of God.

25For the foolishness of God is wiser than man's wisdom, and the weakness of God is stronger than man's strength.


Don't you think that the Almighty, All-Knowing One is right & you are wrong?

"Let God be true & all men liars"

(Ever seen the movie "Crazy Canucks"?) :wink:

All who humble themselves will be exalted.. :-D

but all who exalt themselves will be humbled" :oops:

Do search all verses quoted at http://www.BibleGateway.org

God bless all who humble themselves under His mighty hand!
Ian
 

Drew

Member
Joined
Jan 24, 2005
Messages
13,963
Gender
Male
Christian
Yes
#10
JM said:
Every time Scripture is quoted I know your skin crawls and so I’ll quote once again
Utter speculation, and untrue at that.

Isa 53:6 All we like sheep have gone astray; we have turned every one to his own way; and the LORD hath laid on him the iniquity of us all.

Rom 3:10 As it is written, There is none righteous, no, not one:

Rom 8:2 For the law of the Spirit of life in Christ Jesus hath made me free from the law of sin and death.

Rom 10:9 That if thou shalt confess with thy mouth the Lord Jesus, and shalt believe in thine heart that God hath raised him from the dead, thou shalt be saved.
When will you stop just quoting Scripture and actually explain how such texts support the Calvinist view to the exclusion of other interpretations? Why do you think that you are immune from a need to give explanation?
 

JM

Member
Joined
Mar 30, 2003
Messages
2,818
#11
Drew said:
JM said:
Every time Scripture is quoted I know your skin crawls and so I’ll quote once again
Utter speculation, and untrue at that.

Isa 53:6 All we like sheep have gone astray; we have turned every one to his own way; and the LORD hath laid on him the iniquity of us all.

Rom 3:10 As it is written, There is none righteous, no, not one:

Rom 8:2 For the law of the Spirit of life in Christ Jesus hath made me free from the law of sin and death.

Rom 10:9 That if thou shalt confess with thy mouth the Lord Jesus, and shalt believe in thine heart that God hath raised him from the dead, thou shalt be saved.
When will you stop just quoting Scripture and actually explain how such texts support the Calvinist view to the exclusion of other interpretations? Why do you think that you are immune from a need to give explanation?
2Pe 2:12 But these, as natural brute beasts, made to be taken and destroyed, speak evil of the things that they understand not; and shall utterly perish in their own corruption;
 
Joined
Jan 24, 2005
Messages
13,963
Gender
Male
Christian
Yes
#12
JM said:
Drew said:
JM said:
Every time Scripture is quoted I know your skin crawls and so I’ll quote once again
Utter speculation, and untrue at that.

Isa 53:6 All we like sheep have gone astray; we have turned every one to his own way; and the LORD hath laid on him the iniquity of us all.

Rom 3:10 As it is written, There is none righteous, no, not one:

Rom 8:2 For the law of the Spirit of life in Christ Jesus hath made me free from the law of sin and death.

Rom 10:9 That if thou shalt confess with thy mouth the Lord Jesus, and shalt believe in thine heart that God hath raised him from the dead, thou shalt be saved.
When will you stop just quoting Scripture and actually explain how such texts support the Calvinist view to the exclusion of other interpretations? Why do you think that you are immune from a need to give explanation?
2Pe 2:12 But these, as natural brute beasts, made to be taken and destroyed, speak evil of the things that they understand not; and shall utterly perish in their own corruption;
I cannot imagine how you expect readers to take you seriously. It may make you feel good to paint those who do not see things your way as evil and / or ignorant. I trust that the readers will judge the actual content and quality of your and my cases, respectively. I also ask you to consider how such rhetoric reflects on you as a person - is this how you want people to see you, as one who argues by "smear"?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.