Does man have free will to choose salvation?

[jasonc]

If one is born sinless as taught by some here ,then one can say you could remain sinless and not need the cross .

The cross isnt for those that are sinless.Jesus didn't need to repent ..

 

[electedbyHim]

If one is born sinless as taught by some here ,then one can say you could remain sinless and not need the cross .

The cross isnt for those that are sinless.Jesus didn't need to repent ..

Great reply.

Thank you.

I wonder why I was not born sinless?????

 

[Fastfredy0]

Enoch obeyed God completely

I like to know a verse for that. Your verses say Enoch of transported by FAITH, nothing about OBEDIENCE.
So, you are proposing the a man has lived a sinless life? WOW! I've never heard that idea before. I wonder how many other sinless people there are ...
I guess the Bible has a boo-boo when it says "no one is righteous, no not one". Maybe suffice to put an asterisk on the verse.

 

[hawkman]

The Bible does not say he obeyed completly. The Bible does not say Enoch was sinless.

Hebrews 11:5 By faith Enoch was taken up so that he would not see death; AND HE WAS NOT FOUND BECAUSE GOD TOOK HIM UP; for prior to being taken up, he was approved as being pleasing to God.

Nothing in Hebrews 11:5 says Enoch was born sinless.

So, you are proposing the a man has lived a sinless life? WOW! I've never heard that idea before.

Either of you are welcome to list the times that Enoch disobeyed God .

Either of you are welcome to list the times that Enoch sinned .

Tag me when your lists are completed .

Hebrew 11:6 And without faith it is impossible to please Him, for he who draws near to God must believe that He is and that He is a rewarder of those who seek Him.

Where does faith come from? Is it your own faith, or a gift from God?

Are you going to derail your own thread ?

 

[Consecrated Life]

Does man have free will to choose salvation?​

If we did not then by God's own professed desire for all humanity in His Word every person ever born would be saved , or God would be a liar.

 

[Tenchi]

Yes the Arminian interpretation.

It's what the verse actually, says. Call it Arminian if you like, but it's also carefully biblical. Just to be clear: My views soteriologically are a combination of Molinism and Traditionalism.

www.reasonablefaith.org
www.soteriology101.com

So man is basically born "good".

A human being is born innocent. And, being made by God in the imago dei, an eternal soul "a little lower than the angels" (Hebrews 2:7) the human being is also extremely valuable. If this is what you mean by "good," yes, I agree they are. A newborn infant can't, of course, be assigned a moral character, however, since it is, as I've pointed out, incapable of moral thought or action.

Jeremiah 17:9 - “The heart is deceitful above all things, and desperately sick; who can understand it?”

This says nothing about the state of a newborn person.

Titus 1:15-16 - to the defiled and unbelieving, nothing is pure; but both their minds and their consciences are defiled.

This verse, too, makes no comment on the moral condition of a newborn baby.

Ecclesiastes 9:3 - Also, the hearts of the children of man are full of evil, and madness is in their hearts while they live, and after that they go to the dead.

This cannot be construed as a legitimate universal characterization of all humanity since we have instances in Scripture in the man, Job, and in Cornelius the Roman centurion, as well as in Noah "a righteous man, blameless in his time" (Genesis 6:9) and King Asa whose "heart was blameless all his days" (2 Chronicles 15:17), as well as others, who were not "full of evil" and did not have "madness is in their hearts while they live."

When Solomon wrote Ecclesiastes he was an old man and Scripture indicates that, in this season of his life, he was far gone into sin (1 Kings 11). This is, I believe, reflected clearly in Ecclesiastes in which Solomon writes in a distinctly dark, cynical and world-weary way, casting life in the sin-fouled form of his own life and experience. This is certainly the case in Ecclesiastes 9:3 ruling it out, in my view, as a source of untainted truth.

Romans 1:28-31 - And since they did not see fit to acknowledge God, God gave them up to a debased mind to do what ought not to be done. They were… foolish

This verse says nothing about the condition of a newborn person.

It would be great to see some Scripture that says man is basically good and born sinless.

This just assumes your false dichotomy rather than argues for it. In truth, it is not that Man is born either sinful or sinless, but that Man is born innocent but with a necessary, self-interested nature that is not regulated by the God and so, in due time, inevitably falls into sin. This migration into sin is as inevitable as the normal physical and intellectual maturation of a human being. But, though this maturity is a normal feature of human development, we don't therefore call a baby an adult, ignoring the obvious and significant differences between the two stages of human development. In the same way, though an innocent newborn will go on to become sinful, we don't call an innocent, newly birthed child a sinner, ignoring the obvious moral difference between a newborn and an adult - at least, I don't. And neither does God's word.

The Bible does not teach that Job was sinless at birth.

I didn't offer Job (and Cornelius, Noah and King Asa) as an example of sinlessness at birth, but as an example of a man who was not "totally depraved," as you asserted was the case for all human beings.

The Scriptures you post say nothing about being sinless. That is an assumpton on your part.

Actually, I was responding to the verses YOU posted from which you tried to assert - wrongly - that they made the case for sin-guiltiness from birth which they didn't (as I pointed out).

Sccripture has much to say how totally depraved humans are.

Yes, it does. But humans become this way progressively, over time; they are not this way - they simply (and obviously) can't be - from the moment of their birth.

Psychology teaches that man is basically good, this is not a systematic Biblical worldview.

I haven't offered anything in challenge to your assertions that are psychological. Why, then, are you putting forward this Strawman?

 

[electedbyHim]

Either of you are welcome to list the times that Enoch disobeyed God .

Either of you are welcome to list the times that Enoch sinned .

Tag me when your lists are completed .





Are you going to derail your own thread ?

Derail?

Faith has everything to do with the title of my thread.

Whered did you get your faith to choose to be saved?

 

[electedbyHim]

It's what the verse actually, says. Call it Arminian if you like, but it's also carefully biblical. Just to be clear: My views soteriologically are a combination of Molinism and Traditionalism.

www.reasonablefaith.org
www.soteriology101.com



A human being is born innocent. And, being made by God in the imago dei, an eternal soul "a little lower than the angels" (Hebrews 2:7) the human being is also extremely valuable. If this is what you mean by "good," yes, I agree they are. A newborn infant can't, of course, be assigned a moral character, however, since it is, as I've pointed out, incapable of moral thought or action.



This says nothing about the state of a newborn person.



This verse, too, makes no comment on the moral condition of a newborn baby.



This cannot be construed as a legitimate universal characterization of all humanity since we have instances in Scripture in the man, Job, and in Cornelius the Roman centurion, as well as in Noah "a righteous man, blameless in his time" (Genesis 6:9) and King Asa whose "heart was blameless all his days" (2 Chronicles 15:17), as well as others, who were not "full of evil" and did not have "madness is in their hearts while they live."

When Solomon wrote Ecclesiastes he was an old man and Scripture indicates that, in this season of his life, he was far gone into sin (1 Kings 11). This is, I believe, reflected clearly in Ecclesiastes in which Solomon writes in a distinctly dark, cynical and world-weary way, casting life in the sin-fouled form of his own life and experience. This is certainly the case in Ecclesiastes 9:3 ruling it out, in my view, as a source of untainted truth.



This verse says nothing about the condition of a newborn person.



This just assumes your false dichotomy rather than argues for it. In truth, it is not that Man is born either sinful or sinless, but that Man is born innocent but with a necessary, self-interested nature that is not regulated by the God and so, in due time, inevitably falls into sin. This migration into sin is as inevitable as the normal physical and intellectual maturation of a human being. But, though this maturity is a normal feature of human development, we don't therefore call a baby an adult, ignoring the obvious and significant differences between the two stages of human development. In the same way, though an innocent newborn will go on to become sinful, we don't call an innocent, newly birthed child a sinner, ignoring the obvious moral difference between a newborn and an adult - at least, I don't. And neither does God's word.



I didn't offer Job (and Cornelius, Noah and King Asa) as an example of sinlessness at birth, but as an example of a man who was not "totally depraved," as you asserted was the case for all human beings.



Actually, I was responding to the verses YOU posted from which you tried to assert - wrongly - that they made the case for sin-guiltiness from birth which they didn't (as I pointed out).



Yes, it does. But humans become this way progressively, over time; they are not this way - they simply (and obviously) can't be - from the moment of their birth.



I haven't offered anything in challenge to your assertions that are psychological. Why, then, are you putting forward this Strawman?

Do not know what a strawman is.

I am one of those unwise, foolish, base, weak humans God has chosen.

You see man as born sinless and good as the world does.

I see it from a Biblical perspective that man is born in sin.

So you chose to be saved?

 

[electedbyHim]

Staying on topic seems to be an issue.

Does man have free will to be saved?

 

[hawkman]

Whered did you get your faith to choose to be saved?

Through an understanding of God . Do you understand God ?

 

[Fastfredy0]

Either of you are welcome to list the times that Enoch disobeyed God .

You are welcome to list any times Fastfredy0 disobeyed God. If you can't then we can assume Fastfredy0 never disobeyed God. This is where your logic leads.

The bible says "no one is righteous, no not one". That statement shows Enoch sinned.

 

[Tenchi]

Do not know what a strawman is.

I am one of those unwise, foolish, base, weak humans God has chosen.

You see man as born sinless and good as the world does.

I see it from a Biblical perspective that man is born in sin.

So you chose to be saved?

This is all Begging the Question, employing a Strawman, and assuming a false dichotomy. These are all fallacious types of reasoning. In any case, I've already amply explained what my views are and so I don't know why you're asking your questions again here as though I haven't. It seems you're just trying to cast my views in the false dichotomy within which you've been taught to think, summarizing what I've written in the Strawman version of it you've offered here.

Regardless, I've well answered your question already. My answer isn't going to change because you ask your question again as though I haven't answered it.

 

[electedbyHim]

Through an understanding of God . Do you understand God ?

Answer a question with a question.

That is awesome.

 

[electedbyHim]

This is all Begging the Question, employing a Strawman, and assuming a false dichotomy. These are all fallacious types of reasoning. In any case, I've already amply explained what my views are and so I don't know why you're asking your questions again here as though I haven't. It seems you're just trying to cast my views in the false dichotomy within which you've been taught to think, summarizing what I've written in the Strawman version of it you've offered here.

Regardless, I've well answered your question already. My answer isn't going to change because you ask your question again as though I haven't answered it.

Not sure what you mean but no worries.

Again, I am not an exucated man.

I do not expect anyone to believe they are born in sin.

The Bible does teach it no matter what anyone says.

Back on topic.

 

[hawkman]

Whered did you get your faith to choose to be saved?

Through an understanding of God .

 

[electedbyHim]

Through an understanding of God .

Who gave you that understanding?

 

[Tenchi]

The Bible does teach it no matter what anyone says.

No, it doesn't. As I've shown.

 

[electedbyHim]

No, it doesn't. As I've shown.

No reason to go back and forth.

You have shown your opinion.

 

[electedbyHim]

Someone provide Scripture stating they are born sinless.

 

[hawkman]

Who gave you that understanding?

The Holy Spirit .