Faith without works........is Faith.

[dadof10]

Following "law" actions or not resulting in penalties is what it is, a command with a penalty for "if not." Such actions are not of faith, but of law and of fear for ones own hide.

How you and I see "rich man" in the texts will more than likely vary dramatically. Jesus for example used "the rich man" as part of the string of parables in Luke 16 (as well as in other places in the Gospels, as you note), meaning that the "rich man" has a parable construct attached, to understand.

It's not as easy as opening their checkbook or wallet to see if they are monetarily rich, as that is NOT the case to derive the status of "the rich man." To understand all parables and to understand the "identity" of the "rich man" see Mark 4:13, the parable to understand all parables and who the real players are in every parable, Gods Word, man and Satan. If any of these 3 are missing from dissections, the dissections can not compute with Jesus Directives to understand, and are therefore falsely derived.

Does "thelo" mean "choose", yes or no? Whether this is a parable or a real encounter is mute. Jesus said that whether we "want" to become perfect or not is a choice. That is the word He inspired Matthew to write. This is what you have to deal with if you are going to give a credible answer here.

 

[childeye]

It's what the word means. The word means "choose". I don't know how else to put it. To deny this is to deny that Greek words translate into English. Jesus said if you choose to be perfect...It's not me who is determined to deny the plain definition of the word Jesus used, it's you. Please tell me what thelo means if not "choose".

I think the word thelo, means desire. It's no different than saying if you want to be perfect. That's how it is translated in every bible I have ever read.

No, that's "haireō" and it's an "alternate form" of the word "thelo". The only reason I included it was to stress the meaning of "thelo". If Jesus wanted to convey "take for ones self" He would have used "haireō". Instead, He used "thelo". By the same token, if He wanted to convey lack of freewill, he would have chosen another word beside "thelo", don't you think?

I don't think Jesus was trying to convey lack of free will as you propose. I think he's just saying "if you want to be perfect". Incidentally, we're wasting our time, since we haven't even agreed on what free will means. To be clear, I have never said we don't choose or prefer one thing over another. I'm saying that the spiritual content within us determines what we prefer.

No, he doesn't "want to be perfect", that's another misreading of the text.

"The young man said to him, "All these I have observed; what do I still lack?" He asked what more he could do because he had kept the commandments "since birth". He didn't ask what must he do to be perfect, Jesus volunteers this, which is even more apparent in Mark 10 parallel. The Rich Man asks nothing, Jesus just volunteers the information

Okay, I should have said, if this man wants to be perfect. It doesn't change the fact that he went away sad as if he wanted to, but realized, it would cost him all his possessions.

"And he said to him, "Teacher, all these I have observed from my youth." And Jesus looking upon him loved him, and said to him, "You lack one thing; go, sell what you have, and give to the poor, and you will have treasure in heaven; and come, follow me."

As you can clearly see, Jesus is the One pushing this forward. He is telling all of us not to be satisfied with our spiritual journey. Always be striving for perfection, which assumes freewill.

Jesus is saying what the man lacks. He then goes on and says what to do and says he will then have treasure in heaven if he sells his earthly possessions for the sake of the poor. Then he says come follow me.
But as I see it, the lesson is about how difficult it is to part with earthly things for the sake of those without. It is the 'choice' that Love requires, that presently is my sin, which is why I brought up this scripture in the first place. Do you know why you're always assuming free will?

There is absolutely no mention of corruptibility here. You are completely missing the point. The disciples were "exceedingly amazed" because they were still under the impression that rich people were blessed by God and therefore, saved. Jesus is telling them blessings aren't monetary anymore (they never really were), and at the same time that even things that SEEM impossible, like a camel through a needle's eye, can be accomplished by God. Where is "understand why God made us corruptible" in these verses?

Indeed there is. All sin is corruption. I notice that we don't see this rich man rejoicing to sell his possessions and give the proceeds to the poor. Yet that is what Loving others as we would want to be loved requires. And this is what entering the kingdom of God is about and I know it. And we know it. So this is the scripture God has shown me that I should use to make my point, even because Jesus says this about that: With men this is impossible; but with God all things are possible. Do you assume this is about freewill?

And right in the middle of the doorway is the word "thelo" and it's meaning is choose, will, intend, desire, etc. Jesus purposely chose this word (as He does all words in Scripture) for a reason. I hope you will take your own advise and humble yourself to the Truth of what Jesus is saying, here.

Believing from the heart that Jesus is the Christ is the door.

 

[smaller]

Does "thelo" mean "choose", yes or no?

Depends on who's doing the choosing. I find it not only unlikely, but impossible, that the evil present with Paul was anything other than evil no matter what Paul chose to do. Paul described himself as the chief of sinners, AFTER salvation, 1 Tim. 1:15. And more than likely that, as a pointer to the reality of evil present and temptations of the tempter within Gal. 4:14, 2 Cor. 12:7, which is my general objection to those claiming to be legally obedient or having salvation satisfactory works. It is impossible to justify evil present or the tempter or indwelling sin. It just ain't going to happen. People just get turned into hypocritical liars when they go that direction. Jesus certainly knows what is going on within everyone, and this is exemplified here:

Hebrews 10:22
Let us draw near with a true heart in full assurance of faith, having our hearts sprinkled from an evil conscience, and our bodies washed with pure water.

Jesus knows everyone has one, so there is no use trying to cover it up. it's those who claim they don't that are not all that 'true' before God or man.

Whether this is a parable or a real encounter is mute.

There is no doubt that the "rich man" was deployed in parable fashions. I don't discount that there was a "real" rich young ruler, but that doesn't attest to the entirety of anyone's blinded heart. 2 Cor. 4:4 for example. Jesus DOES address "entities" in man that are unseen to flesh eyes.

Jesus said that whether we "want" to become perfect or not is a choice. That is the word He inspired Matthew to write. This is what you have to deal with if you are going to give a credible answer here.

No one, of their own, on their own, makes themselves Perfect. That is just vanity run amok. If Christ is in you or anyone else, He Is and Will be entirely sufficient to save all such regardless of the workings of the adversary that ALSO transpire in those same ALL. No amounts of works is going to slip that bad actor past the Cross or even less, past the Pearly Gates.

 

[childeye]

Why can't free will mean the ability to make a choice unhindered by forces that limit that choice? You're making this much too complicated.

Well that is pretty much the same definition in the dictionary. I'm not trying to make it complicated. I agree with your definition. I'm just saying free will becomes an equivocation in the moral purview. It exists by moving the goal posts.

The only time a person does not have free will is when they can not exercise that freedom of choice because of various circumstances that restrict that choice.

It's not complicated as you say. I can't help but want to know one simple thing. Do we walk freely in the Light according to our freedom of choice, or are there circumstances that restrict that choice. To elaborate, what are those circumstances that would disqualify freedom of choice? Matthew 13:4-5, Matthew 13:6-7. Matthew 13:8.
.

Romans 6 is all about laying hold by faith the unhindered freedom of choice God has given us to serve him.

So here is what your statement actually says. Romans 6 is all about laying hold by faith the unhindered freedom of choice to serve God or to serve sin. The problem with this, is that if we serve sin, it means we will become heartless abominations that recklessly hurt other people wherever we go, and it is death. That, to me, is a hindrance to freely choosing to serve sin. Hence freedom of choice is already disqualified. And I can only appreciate that, by knowing Love, which forces me to care about how I treat other people.

The evil one and his servants tell us we are powerless to choose to serve God and are doomed to obey him instead.

There is no scripture that says this. In point of fact, Romans 6 is saying that we were powerless to choose to serve God, and doomed to obey sin. Without the death of the Christ that sets us free from sin to serve God we would still be slaves to sin. The Apostle Paul is not an evil one. The evil one lies, he doesn't say, and will not say, the truth, as Paul does. Therefore, it must be concluded that the evil one, who is the accuser of men, would say that we freely choose to sin, because we can freely choose to be righteous anytime we want to. In this, we can tell that the lies of Satan are parroted by those who would seek to glorify themselves, through belief in their own ability, rather than say that the ability resides in God.

Jethro, this is why it is no small matter which way I believe. The issue is, that I feel am seeking my own glory if I say it is I, who freely chooses. And it is seeking God's glory when I say it is God and not I. Notice these scriptures.

2 Corinthians 11:13-15
13 For such are false apostles, deceitful workers, transforming themselves into the apostles of Christ.
14 And no marvel; for Satan himself is transformed into an angel of light.
15 Therefore it is no great thing if his ministers also be transformed as the ministers of righteousness; whose end shall be according to their works.
John 5:42-44.
42 But I know you, that ye have not the love of God in you.
43 I am come in my Father's name, and ye receive me not: if another shall come in his own name, him ye will receive.
44 How can ye believe, which receive honour one of another, and seek not the honour that cometh from God only?
John 7:18
He that speaketh of himself, seeketh his own glory: but he that seeketh his glory that sent him, the same is true, and no unrighteousness is in him.
Proverbs 25:27.
27 It is not good to eat much honey: so for men to search their own glory is not glory.
John 5:30
I can of mine own self do nothing: as I hear, I judge: and my judgment is just; because I seek not mine own will, but the will of the Father which hath sent me.

2 Peter 2:9-11King James Version (KJV)
9 The Lord knoweth how to deliver the godly out of temptations, and to reserve the unjust unto the day of judgment to be punished:
10 But chiefly them that walk after the flesh in the lust of uncleanness, and despise government. Presumptuous are they, self willed, they are not afraid to speak evil of dignities.

By faith we say that is not true and we surrender our members as slaves to righteousness instead. And just because God is the power that makes that possible doesn't mean we don't have free choice as to whether or not we're going to use it.

But this is what I mean by moving the goal posts. You sound like you're saying we can still fall back into sin at any time, and you're saying that it's by our free choice, now that we have been set free from sin. No mention is made of temptation and God's ability to deliver us. It's as if you are saying God has set us free, but now it's up to us, and God plays no part anymore. In my view you should leave the freewill part out of the equation. For I agree it is by faith that we walk in the Light, but God does not just leave it up to us since it is in him that we are putting our faith and not in ourselves. Moreover, this walk in the Light is not unhindered, which disqualifies free will. Ephesians 6:10-11.

 

[Jethro Bodine]

Well that is pretty much the same definition in the dictionary. I'm not trying to make it complicated. I agree with your definition. I'm just saying free will becomes an equivocation in the moral purview. It exists by moving the goal posts.

Wait, you said choice had to have the compulsion of necessity to drive it or it isn't free (that doesn't even make sense to me). I'm saying freedom alone makes the will of a person free. That's what I was showing by my 'strawberry vs. chocolate ice cream' illustration.

God moved the goal posts for us so that we can choose righteousness as a matter of our unhindered will.

Do we walk freely in the Light according to our freedom of choice, or are there circumstances that restrict that choice. To elaborate, what are those circumstances that would disqualify freedom of choice? Matthew 13:4-5, Matthew 13:6-7. Matthew 13:8.

You're looking at it wrong side. Scripture teaches us to make right moral choices based on the truth that that which used to hinder us from choosing right has been defeated by the work of Christ. This is what Romans 6 and 7 is all about. By faith we know this and proceed with confidence in that which really is true, that the enemy and the flesh that robbed us of our free choice while we were in the flesh have been defeated. You're looking at it from the angle, like smaller does, that the flesh is too big and will always be able to keep us down. That's not scriptural. The ironic thing is, it is that teaching that causes that very thinking.

So here is what your statement actually says. Romans 6 is all about laying hold by faith the unhindered freedom of choice to serve God or to serve sin. The problem with this, is that if we serve sin, it means we will become heartless abominations that recklessly hurt other people wherever we go, and it is death. That, to me, is a hindrance to freely choosing to serve sin. Hence freedom of choice is already disqualified. And I can only appreciate that, by knowing Love, which forces me to care about how I treat other people.

And so knowing love gives you the freedom to choose rightly. The truth about God's love, and his victory over sin for us, restores our freedom of choice of whether or not we are going to return that love and be righteous and love others. So much teaching in the Protestant church today is that we basically defeated in sin until we leave these bodies, but it doesn't matter anyway because salvation is so utterly disconnected from works, and if you try to do good and not just let it happen when God wants to do it you're just doing damnable works of the flesh. How absurd.

There is no scripture that says this. In point of fact, Romans 6 is saying that we were powerless to choose to serve God, and doomed to obey sin.

How are you missing this?

"Are we to continue in sin so that grace may increase? 2 May it never be! How shall we who died to sin still live in it? 3 ...Christ was raised from the dead through the glory of the Father, so we too might walk in newness of life.
6 knowing this, that our old self was crucified with Him, in order that our body of sin might be done away with, so that we would no longer be slaves to sin; 7 for he who has died is freed from sin.
10 For the death that He died, He died to sin once for all; but the life that He lives, He lives to God. 11 Even so consider yourselves to be dead to sin, but alive to God in Christ Jesus. 12 Therefore do not let sin reign in your mortal body so that you obey its lusts, 13 and do not go on presenting the members of your body to sin as instruments of unrighteousness; but present yourselves to God as those alive from the dead, and your members as instruments of righteousness to God. 14 For sin shall not be master over you" (Romans 6:1-14 NASB)

I don't see one ounce of pessimistic, compromising, 'we have little chance of acting rightoeusly' in what Paul says here about sin and the believer. I see the exact opposite. Don't get me wrong. I know it's not a cake walk.

The Apostle Paul is not an evil one. The evil one lies, he doesn't say, and will not say, the truth, as Paul does. Therefore, it must be concluded that the evil one, who is the accuser of men, would say that we freely choose to sin, because we can freely choose to be righteous anytime we want to.

How can you not see we are free to choose righteousness when we want to in the verses I posted above? Our job is to believe it. That's why he's encouraging us with this truth--so we'll act with confidence on it and say, 'sin, talk to the hand. You can't make me do what you want anymore'.

 

[Jethro Bodine]

The evil one lies, he doesn't say, and will not say, the truth, as Paul does. Therefore, it must be concluded that the evil one, who is the accuser of men, would say that we freely choose to sin, because we can freely choose to be righteous anytime we want to. In this, we can tell that the lies of Satan are parroted by those who would seek to glorify themselves, through belief in their own ability, rather than say that the ability resides in God.

Jethro, this is why it is no small matter which way I believe. The issue is, that I feel am seeking my own glory if I say it is I, who freely chooses.

You need to get over this. Claiming victory in Jesus' finished work to walk in righteousness is hardly glorying in self. We read how Paul is all about how Christ and the Holy Spirit make it possible for us to live in righteousness, not sin. We glorify God when we walk in righteousness, not self:

"5 "(H)e bears much fruit, for apart from Me you can do nothing *.
8 "My Father is glorified by this, that you bear much fruit..." (John 15:5,8 NASB)

If someone wants to take the credit for their fruit, or someone perceives the righteous, fruitful person as being self-righteous that's their problem. We should not suppress the truth because of people who do that.

You sound like you're saying we can still fall back into sin at any time, and you're saying that it's by our free choice

Yes, I'm saying that, because that's what the Bible says:
"sinning willfully after receiving the knowledge of the truth," (Hebrews 10:26 NASB)
(see http://www.blueletterbible.org/lang/lexicon/lexicon.cfm?Strongs=G1596&t=KJV )

Your previous explanation of this verse was entirely unsatisfactory.

and you're saying that it's by our free choice, now that we have been set free from sin. No mention is made of temptation and God's ability to deliver us. It's as if you are saying God has set us free, but now it's up to us, and God plays no part anymore.

No, I did not say that. As I shared, Jesus makes it clear who does the obeying, and where the power to obey comes from:

"4 "Abide in Me, and I in you. As the branch cannot * bear fruit of itself unless * it abides in the vine, so neither can you unless * you abide in Me. 5 "...apart from Me you can do nothing *. 10 "If you keep My commandments, you will abide in My love; just as I have kept My Father's commandments and abide in His love. " (John 15:4-5, 10 NASB)

this walk in the Light is not unhindered, which disqualifies free will. Ephesians 6:10-11.

If the hindrance could not be overcome, that is when free will is disqualified. But as I've shown, Paul tells us to know that righteousness is NOT hindered in the believer because sinful 'self' was crucified with Jesus on the cross: "6 knowing this, that our old self was crucified with Him, in order that our body of sin might be done away with, so that we would no longer be slaves to sin" (Romans 6:6 NASB)

3 (Y)ou have died and your life is hidden with Christ in God. 5 Therefore consider the members of your earthly body as dead to immorality, impurity, passion, evil desire, and greed, which amounts to idolatry. 7 ...in them you also once walked, when you were living in them. 8 But now you also, put them all aside: anger, wrath, malice, slander, and abusive speech from your mouth. 9 Do not lie to one another, since you laid aside the old self with its evil practices, 10 and have put on the new self..." (Colossians 3:3,5,7-10 NASB)

 

[childeye]

Wait, you said choice had to have the compulsion of necessity to drive it or it isn't free (that doesn't even make sense to me).

I meant that any moral choice is not qualified as a freewill choice if that choice is compelled by Love. It is not a self will that I glory in as my will, that actually desires and does good powered by self.

I'm saying freedom alone makes the will of a person free. That's what I was showing by my 'strawberry vs. chocolate ice cream' illustration.

To the first statement; It depends on what you mean by freedom. Help me navigate the semantics here as you post. Are you qualifying freedom as a freely made choice between God and sin? Because if you are then the word free is relative to two different things creating two different connotations for the single word freedom. Our wills are not free from God in Christ, nor would we want them to be. His Word is our Light in every moral decision we make, it is His Spirit Love that compels us. We do submit to Him even because we know we have life only in Him. But we are free from sin only as we are acknowledging His will is Life and our moral will is dependent upon His Spirit. I'm not talking about choice here when I say will, I'm saying desire. His Spirit is our moral desire that overcomes our flesh.

To your second statement: yeah I got that, but your strawberry vs. chocolate theme isn't even a moral decision. It therefore cannot involve the Spirit of Love or the Holy Spirit. I'm not teaching here that God chooses what ice cream we would like.

God moved the goal posts for us so that we can choose righteousness as a matter of our unhindered will.

Have you ever thought that God sold us to sin, to show us that we can't choose to be righteous of our own free wills? I believe that is the lesson. Romans 1:32. If I'm right, then all we would be doing is repeating the ignorance by thinking this way that you posted. It's not plausible to me that God just pushed the reset button and expects a different outcome by chance.

You're looking at it wrong side. Scripture teaches us to make right moral choices based on the truth that that which used to hinder us from choosing right has been defeated by the work of Christ.

Okay, this sounds interesting. For on my side, I think it's teaching, that that which hindered us from doing right, was the drawing away of God, not the presence of flesh. Notice I said doing right instead of choosing right? That's because I notice that scripture says that we knew what was right, but we couldn't do it. So we could choose the good but yet, not follow through. Romans 7:19. So here we have a dilemma. Is it the absence of God that causes sin, or the absence of sin that holds on to God? Do we choose God, or He choose us?

By faith we know this and proceed with confidence in that which really is true, that the enemy and the flesh that robbed us of our free choice while we were in the flesh have been defeated. You're looking at it from the angle, like smaller does, that the flesh is too big and will always be able to keep us down. That's not scriptural. The ironic thing is, it is that teaching that causes that very thinking.

By faith we know this and proceed with confidence in that which really is true, that Christ was given to us, a Spirit wherein there is life. Jn 4; 13 Hereby know we that we dwell in him, and he in us, because he hath given us of his Spirit. I don't believe that the flesh is too big and will always hold us down. I believe we would succumb to it without God's Spirit.

And so knowing love gives you the freedom to choose rightly. The truth about God's love, and his victory over sin for us, restores our freedom of choice of whether or not we are going to return that love and be righteous and love others. So much teaching in the Protestant church today is that we basically defeated in sin until we leave these bodies, but it doesn't matter anyway because salvation is so utterly disconnected from works, and if you try to do good and not just let it happen when God wants to do it you're just doing damnable works of the flesh. How absurd.

I've never heard this teaching. I only know God's Love by experiencing it living in myself, and yes it causes me to do what's right, I do testify.

How are you missing this?

"Are we to continue in sin so that grace may increase? 2 May it never be! How shall we who died to sin still live in it? 3 ...Christ was raised from the dead through the glory of the Father, so we too might walk in newness of life.
6 knowing this, that our old self was crucified with Him, in order that our body of sin might be done away with, so that we would no longer be slaves to sin; 7 for he who has died is freed from sin.
10 For the death that He died, He died to sin once for all; but the life that He lives, He lives to God. 11 Even so consider yourselves to be dead to sin, but alive to God in Christ Jesus. 12 Therefore do not let sin reign in your mortal body so that you obey its lusts, 13 and do not go on presenting the members of your body to sin as instruments of unrighteousness; but present yourselves to God as those alive from the dead, and your members as instruments of righteousness to God. 14 For sin shall not be master over you" (Romans 6:1-14 NASB)

I don't see one ounce of pessimistic, compromising, 'we have little chance of acting rightoeusly' in what Paul says here about sin and the believer. I see the exact opposite. Don't get me wrong. I know it's not a cake walk.

I think you're misunderstanding something. I said " we were powerless". I don't presently go out and do bad things, I don't yield my members to unrighteousness and then cry boo hoo, I guess God doesn't want me to be good today. I walk the walk and I'm loving it. I'm just saying, it's not me, it's God in me and I'm thankful to Him, for that reason.

How can you not see we are free to choose righteousness when we want to in the verses I posted above?

I can't because it would be an equivocation working in my mind. Otherwise, I'd just be just saying that these scriptures are saying we are free to want to sin anytime we want to, even because we can want to be righteous anytime we want to.

 

[Jethro Bodine]

Let's talk about this where the rubber meets the pavement.

Say I'm being seduced by Taylor Swift. In your doctrine, do I have the freewill to decide if I give in, or whether I resist because I know my old self has been rendered powerless and can not make me obey it's dictates?

In my doctrine it's simple. In Christ I can decide either way if I'm going to obey the Spirit, or the flesh, and God tells me to not obey the lusts of the body. That implies freewill to choose:

"(D)o not let sin reign in your mortal body so that you obey its lusts" (Romans 6:12 NASB)

That doesn't mean that freewill will not be challenged on either side. It means I ultimately do have the freewill in Christ to choose.

 

[smaller]

"(D)o not let sin reign in your mortal body so that you obey its lusts" (Romans 6:12 NASB)

That doesn't mean that freewill will not be challenged on either side. It means I ultimately do have the freewill in Christ to choose.

It has nothing to do with 'choice.' The fact is, indwelling sin does exist in the body AND it brings lust and that working isn't about to change what it does for any person's will.

This makes every person "a factual sinner" regardless of their external show.

Evil thoughts defile us. Jesus, in Matt. 15:19-20 Mark 7:21-23

And when we are not honest about this internal reality, we are made and turned into liars and hypocrites, by that same working.

 

[dadof10]

I think the word thelo, means desire. It's no different than saying if you want to be perfect. That's how it is translated in every bible I have ever read.

Let's be forthright with each other, shall we? Unless you've only read the Jubilee 2000 version, you are blowing smoke. I looked this verse up in every English language version available on biblegateway.com and this is the only version that translates "thelo" as "desire". Outside of a few far out translations, all the others have it translated (as you say above) "want to", "wish to", "thou wilt" (you will), or "you would". Also, you must find other versions authoritative, because you quote the KJV here, which translates it as "you will". The reason I took the time to do this was to demonstrate "the determination you show to turn thelo into" something other than choose. You accused me of showing "determination...to turn thelo into choose". It's not me who is not being forthright and trying to skirt the plain words of Scripture, sir. That would be you.

I don't think Jesus was trying to convey lack of free will as you propose.

Here is what I said: "By the same token, if He wanted to convey lack of freewill, he would have chosen another word beside "thelo", don't you think?" Well? Don't you think He could have found a different word if He was conveying lack of free will?

I think he's just saying "if you want to be perfect".

Me too, which assumes free will. It assumes that you have a choice as to whether you "want to" or not. This is very simple, unless you're trying to force Jesus' words into your personal theology.

Incidentally, we're wasting our time, since we haven't even agreed on what free will means. To be clear, I have never said we don't choose or prefer one thing over another. I'm saying that the spiritual content within us determines what we prefer.

Two things here. 1. You did say we don't choose (have free will) in the "moral purview", which this obviously is, and 2. You won't answer the direct question that you have been asked at least twice, do you make the decision to sin, or is it a "devil" or "tempter" within you? I agree with you that at baptism, the Holy Spirit is actually inside us, in our souls, until death. Where we disagree (I think) is that you (possibly) would say (maybe) that there is also a "satan" or something evil within us too, so that the sin we commit isn't really ours, which is what (probably) you mean by the sin belongs to "no one". Are you responsible for your sin? You have said it's not a simple yes or no question. Yes it is, if you are being straight about what you believe.

Jesus is saying what the man lacks. He then goes on and says what to do and says he will then have treasure in heaven if he sells his earthly possessions for the sake of the poor. Then he says come follow me.
But as I see it, the lesson is about how difficult it is to part with earthly things for the sake of those without. It is the 'choice' that Love requires, that presently is my sin, which is why I brought up this scripture in the first place.

Your sin? Didn't you say the sin that condemns "belongs to no one"? Would you consider "parting with earthly things for the sake of those without" in or out of the "moral purview"?

Do you know why you're always assuming free will?

Yes, because it's taught throughout scripture, by the Church and it makes common sense.

Indeed there is. All sin is corruption. I notice that we don't see this rich man rejoicing to sell his possessions and give the proceeds to the poor. Yet that is what Loving others as we would want to be loved requires.

Would you consider this the Rich man's "corruption", his sin, because he chose not to love "others as we would want to be loved"?

And this is what entering the kingdom of God is about and I know it. And we know it. So this is the scripture God has shown me that I should use to make my point, even because Jesus says this about that: With men this is impossible; but with God all things are possible. Do you assume this is about freewill?

Of course not. As I said above "...and at the same time that even things that SEEM impossible, like a camel through a needle's eye, can be accomplished by God." It was in response to the disciples being "exceedingly amazed" at Jesus' teaching that it's so hard (not impossible) for a rich man, whom they thought was blessed by God because of his wealth, to enter Heaven. The Rich man who left chose wrong because he loved "his possessions" more than obedience to God. The only thing that will change his mind, his will, is intervention of God, thus, even though it's "hard" (another word assuming a free will), God can accomplish it through the working of the Holy Spirit WITHIN THE BELIEVER. Again, we agree that God's Holy Spirit dwells within the believer, where we disagree is that there is a devil in there too, if that is indeed what you believe.

Believing from the heart that Jesus is the Christ is the door.

OK. And, as you said above "with this in mind, how shall we humble ourselves in all Truth." You seem to be holding back some of what you believe on this subject. Maybe because to just come out and say it would be unpalatable for most people who hold there is not a devil inside? Maybe you want to lead us down a path to the "ultimate truth" slowly, so we can accept it in small bites, kinda like the Mormons or Masons? I don't know for sure, but that's my assumption. I hope I'm wrong, and if I am, I apologize in advance. I just can't seem to get a straight answer out of you. Some things ARE yes or no answers and you really should have a simple answer for "is there a devil inside you who is responsible for your sin."

 

[dadof10]

Depends on who's doing the choosing.

Could you please elaborate? Jesus says TO the Rich man "If thou wilt be perfect...", if you will to be perfect. The Rich man is doing the choosing, not some "tempter" inside, not some "thorn in the flesh". The man himself.

No one, of their own, on their own, makes themselves Perfect.

Correct, no one makes themselves perfect, but we can keep God from doing it. This is a simple definition of free will. The Holy Spirit inside of us keeps prompting us to do right. Free will is simply us pushing Him away in favor of temporary self gratification.

 

[dadof10]

Let's talk about this where the rubber meets the pavement.

Say I'm being seduced by Taylor Swift. In your doctrine, do I have the freewill to decide if I give in, or whether I resist because I know my old self has been rendered powerless and can not make me obey it's dictates?

In my doctrine it's simple. In Christ I can decide either way if I'm going to obey the Spirit, or the flesh, and God tells me to not obey the lusts of the body. That implies freewill to choose:

"(D)o not let sin reign in your mortal body so that you obey its lusts" (Romans 6:12 NASB)

That doesn't mean that freewill will not be challenged on either side. It means I ultimately do have the freewill in Christ to choose.

Wow. You could have made the choice a little easier.

 

[childeye]

Let's talk about this where the rubber meets the pavement.

Say I'm being seduced by Taylor Swift. In your doctrine, do I have the freewill to decide if I give in, or whether I resist because I know my old self has been rendered powerless and can not make me obey it's dictates?

In my doctrine it's simple. In Christ I can decide either way if I'm going to obey the Spirit, or the flesh, and God tells me to not obey the lusts of the body. That implies freewill to choose:

"(D)o not let sin reign in your mortal body so that you obey its lusts" (Romans 6:12 NASB)

That doesn't mean that freewill will not be challenged on either side. It means I ultimately do have the freewill in Christ to choose.

I like your approach about where the rubber meets the pavement, but as much as I want to answer, your question is lost in semantics to me. It's a loaded question. I'd be responding to a false premise. You use the term freewill in the question, which is an equivocation to me. So whether I answer yes or no, both are only half true or half false.

But disregarding that, I will answer this way. In the doctrine I hold dear, Taylor Swift would never even try to seduce me. The second the thought was in the air, I would shine the Light, and she would love me like a brother.
"(D)o not let sin reign in your mortal body so that you obey its lusts" (Romans 6:12 NASB)
I believe this scripture is for babes.

 

[Jethro Bodine]

Wow. You could have made the choice a little easier.

 

[childeye]

Let's be forthright with each other, shall we? Unless you've only read the Jubilee 2000 version, you are blowing smoke. I looked this verse up in every English language version available on biblegateway.com and this is the only version that translates "thelo" as "desire". Outside of a few far out translations, all the others have it translated (as you say above) "want to", "wish to", "thou wilt" (you will), or "you would". Also, you must find other versions authoritative, because you quote the KJV here, which translates it as "you will". The reason I took the time to do this was to demonstrate "the determination you show to turn thelo into" something other than choose. You accused me of showing "determination...to turn thelo into choose". It's not me who is not being forthright and trying to skirt the plain words of Scripture, sir. That would be you.

dad of10, do you remember that I said I love you? I sincerely meant that. And I said it because I was greatly pleased at the work you had put forth in seeking what thelo means. I don't agree with how you have changed it into choice, but still, I admire your determination. I was not accusing you of being determined.

And when I said, let's be forthright, I meant let's put down our guards, and trust that we both desire Truth, and are eager for correction. Wherever it may fall, correction is a good thing.. I did not intend for it to be taken as me saying you have not been forthright with me. I have never believed anything bad about you. So Peace brother, I love you and I want you to love me.

 

[Obadiah]

Directed to all participants (not nescessarily directed at the above poster):

Thanks for being here, but from here on out in this thread as well as other A&T threads you are being asked politely to read, consider, and follow the Terms of Service (which can be read here) and the specific guidelines for this forum, (which can be read here as well as posted below.) Thank you for your cooperation.

Apologetics and Theology Forum specific guidelines:

Christian Theology is by definition the study of God through His word, the Bible. Apologetics goes hand in hand with theology as it is the branch of Christian theology which attempts to give a rational defense of the Christian faith. That makes the Apologetics and Theology forum unique from many of our other forums in that this is a place specifically for these types of discussions.

With this in mind, the following guidelines should be followed.

• Original posts should reference specific scripture and what it is the member wants to say or ask about that scripture.
• Subsequent responses either opposing or adding additional information should include references to specific supportive scripture relevant to the thread and offer explanation of the member's understanding of how that scripture applies.
• Opinions are plenty and have little value so please do not state positions that have no basis in scripture.
• Do not use phrases such as, “You’re wrong.” This is insulting and inappropriate and there are nicer ways to disagree without being insulting.
• Once you have made a point, refrain from flooding the forum with numerous posts making the same point over and over with nothing new to support it.
• You may ask a member questions as to what they believe on certain topics relative to the subject of the thread, but please keep in mind the member is under no obligation to answer.
• Failing to answer someone’s question doesn’t necessarily amount to an admission of error or surrender but keep in mind that in any debate if you refuse to or can not answer a reasonable question, it may weaken your position.

 

[childeye]

Two things here. 1. You did say we don't choose (have free will) in the "moral purview", which this obviously is,

You're misunderstanding me. I still am saying we don't choose (have free will) in the moral purview because we don't choose freely. I believe we have wills that choose according to the desires within us. I believe the desires within us are dependent on the spiritual content of the soul. I believe the spiritual content of the soul is dependent upon one's image of God/god.

and 2. You won't answer the direct question that you have been asked at least twice, do you make the decision to sin, or is it a "devil" or "tempter" within you?

Okay, let me try this again. Sin means a direction in separation from God. We're born in sin, and that means, because we have a false image of god in our soul, we are separated from God through a corrupt image of Him. This scripture shows that a corrupt image of god corrupts the person. Lest ye corrupt yourselves, and make you a graven image, the similitude of any figure, the likeness of male or female, Deuteronomy 4:16.

But this below, is the actual corrupt image of god that I believe was placed in mankind's soul by Satan.
4 And the serpent said unto the woman, Ye shall not surely die:
5 For God doth know that in the day ye eat thereof, then your eyes shall be opened, and ye shall be as gods, knowing good and evil.
Genesis 3:4-5.
This false image of god in the scripture above is a liar, a self serving tyrant, who keeps those beneath Him subjugated, by not allowing them what would make them His equal, through fear of death.

It is this false image of god that begets sin in both heaven and earth. This image comes out of a vanity, or the presumption of who God is, imagined by the lesser mind.
So that is why it is no one's sin. Corruption began by finding fault where there is no fault. That is what vanity does. And vanity is unavoidable for the created being that doesn't know God, which is why it began in Satan the highest Angel. Therefore I will not say sin is to be blamed on anyone, or that any person is responsible for their sin. To do so, is to believe that the false image is true.
2 Corinthians 4:4King James Version (KJV)
4 In whom the god of this world hath blinded the minds of them which believe not, lest the light of the glorious gospel of Christ, who is the image of God, should shine unto them.

 

[childeye]

I apologize. In the post above, I should have said that the false image of god planted by Satan, was planted in the mind and not in the soul. And also, I should have said that the false image of god planted in the garden, is the same god in 2 Corinthians 4:4.

 

[smaller]

Could you please elaborate? Jesus says TO the Rich man "If thou wilt be perfect...", if you will to be perfect. The Rich man is doing the choosing, not some "tempter" inside, not some "thorn in the flesh". The man himself.

Jesus very much taught that man and the tempter (or those of his family/kingdom) abide in the same place. Mark 4:15, Matt. 13:19, Luke 8:12, Luke 8:30, and every scripture where devils were cast out, too many to list.

Paul taught identically in 2 Cor. 12:7, Romans 11:8, 2 Cor. 4:4, 2 Cor. 3:14 as did John, 1 John 3:8 for brief examples. It's one of the more glaringly obvious showings of the scriptures.

Correct, no one makes themselves perfect, but we can keep God from doing it. This is a simple definition of free will. The Holy Spirit inside of us keeps prompting us to do right. Free will is simply us pushing Him away in favor of temporary self gratification.

The will of the person and the will of the tempter are not the same wills, nor does the will of man control the will of the tempter, AND even less, does such blindness on the part of christians make the tempter/indwelling sin/evil present within us legal, obedient, under Grace or SAVED BY WORKS. None of these things can happen, nor is it even possible.

When believers are SAVED, we come into CONTENTION with this internal matter and internal problem to which we were not prior aware. Some were never aware of it to begin with, before or after salvation, because they don't hear THE WORD in this regards, and probably can't. Eph. 2:2, Romans 11:32

The tables are (supposedly) turned in our behalves to recognize our prior pawnship to that working entity. That does NOT mean however that the contention of THAT OTHER WILL ever leaves the flesh, which is also "their" habitation.

Mat 6:13, Luke 13:16, Acts 26:18, Heb 2:14-15, Rev 12:10, 2 Tim 4:18

Whenever any believer thinks they are "not like other men" they have been made into a modern day Pharisee. Luke 18:11, and they are made so EXACTLY by spiritual blindness caused by the TEMPTER, the spirit of slumber/stupor that ARRIVES on cue where the Word is sown, in the HEART.

Which all points to the bottom line, that we are saved by faith in Christ and solely by His Abilities to Save. All our works are still "like" filthy rags, even after salvation.

Isaiah 64:6
But we are all as an unclean thing, and all our righteousnesses are as filthy rags; and we all do fade as a leaf; and our iniquities, like the wind, have taken us away.

And we are so, because of the above facts. I would go even further to say that any sect that does not point their "judgment" to the real adverse powers that are not man, but that all mankind in this present world suffers under, are spiritually blind, and they are even more spiritually blind when they try to "justify" the entirety of themselves, by their works, and are in fact blinded Pharisees, claiming as the Pharisee did, that they are NOT LIKE other men. Yes, unfortunately but TRUTHFULLY, we are all exactly LIKE other men when it comes to "having sin" as a present tense condition and occupation within the flesh, which same is OF THE DEVIL. 1 John 3:8.

These facts will be resisted until THE END of the devil's time, and will be resisted "in the church(s)" because this working is a present day fact in all of them. The works of Satan were addressed to all 7 of the churches of Revelation. It is unlikely "they heard" either.

Ephesians 2:
8 For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God:
9 Not of works, lest any man should boast.

 

[smaller]

A LOT of believers try to pit Paul and James against each others. They are not against each others.

The Gospel Message IS an offense to the inherent pride of mankind, and yes, even of believers who do not care to hear that they continue to be internally influenced by the tempter:

James 3
3 My brethren, be not many masters, knowing that we shall receive the greater condemnation.
2 For in many things we offend all. If any man offend not in word, the same is a perfect man, and able also to bridle the whole body.

6 And the tongue is a fire, a world of iniquity: so is the tongue among our members, that it defileth the whole body, and setteth on fire the course of nature; and it is set on fire of hell.

Here, James shows as well, that it is DEVILSH wisdom that can and does come to believers, same chapter:

14 But if ye have bitter envying and strife in your hearts, glory not, and lie not against the truth.
15 This wisdom descendeth not from above, but is earthly, sensual, devilish.
16 For where envying and strife is, there is confusion and every evil work.

We, as believers, are COMMANDED, even DEMANDED, to set aside eternal DAMNATION and CONDEMNATIONS to each others. This shall not happen, where God in Christ is, within. We all have an adversary to view that is not ourselves if we need to look at judgments, it is there to be found, very very close to home. Even standing in our shoes:

Romans 16:20
The God of peace will soon crush Satan under your feet. The grace of our Lord Jesus be with you.

1 Peter 5:8
Be sober, be vigilant; because your adversary the devil, as a roaring lion, walketh about, seeking whom he may devour: