Freewill religion is the Man of Sin !

[Levi]

People state: "if freewill is taken to be the ability of man to deny God"

That is a red hearing, anyone knows that a man may not avoid his death, that is not what is meant by freewill.

Remember this verse:

Gen 6:3

"Then the LORD said, "My Spirit will not contend with man forever, for he is mortal; his days will be a hundred and twenty years."

This is an important milestone here, God capped mans life span so that his freewill was not eternal in it's fallen state. Which would have negated the statement "if freewill is taken to be the ability of man to deny God" So we see that there is freewill at play within the parameters of the creation and its fundamental principles.

Freewill is the ability for man to:

a: agree with God and act accordingly within the parameters.

b: disagree with God and act accordingly within the parameters.

If a man could not to either of these things we could find fault with God and the finger the atheist wags would be righteous.

It is a simple as that.

"only a fool says in his heart there is no God"

 

[Eventide]

People state: "if freewill is taken to be the ability of man to deny God"

That is a red hearing, anyone knows that a man may not avoid his death, that is not what is meant by freewill.

Remember this verse:

Gen 6:3

"Then the LORD said, "My Spirit will not contend with man forever, for he is mortal; his days will be a hundred and twenty years."

This is an important milestone here, God capped mans life span so that his freewill was not eternal in it's fallen state. Which would have negated the statement "if freewill is taken to be the ability of man to deny God" So we see that there is freewill at play within the parameters of the creation and its fundamental principles.

Freewill is the ability for man to:

a: agree with God and act accordingly within the parameters.

b: disagree with God and act accordingly within the parameters.

If a man could not to either of these things we could find fault with God and the finger the atheist wags would be righteous.

It is a simple as that.

"only a fool says in his heart there is no God"

AMEN to this.. an excellent summary imo.

 

[Eventide]

Can two walk together except they be agreed ?

Freewill is the ability for man to:

a: agree with God and act accordingly within the parameters.

b: disagree with God and act accordingly within the parameters.

And this aligns perfectly with the scriptures.. Can two walk together except they be agreed ?

God doesn't force His will upon men to walk with Him.. His grace and truth is unto all and it's upon all those that believe.. who AGREE with God and His word..

Men WILLINGLY lay down their life for the Lord Jesus Christ.. because of His great love for us.. all of us.. although only those who agree with Him will walk with Him.. it's no different now than it was when He walked on this earth.. many walked with Him and many walked away from Him..

 

[childeye]

=Levi;572045]People state: "if freewill is taken to be the ability of man to deny God"

That is a red hearing, anyone knows that a man may not avoid his death, that is not what is meant by freewill.

Remember this verse:

Gen 6:3

"Then the LORD said, "My Spirit will not contend with man forever, for he is mortal; his days will be a hundred and twenty years."

This is an important milestone here, God capped mans life span so that his freewill was not eternal in it's fallen state. Which would have negated the statement "if freewill is taken to be the ability of man to deny God" So we see that there is freewill at play within the parameters of the creation and its fundamental principles.

Freewill is the ability for man to:

a: agree with God and act accordingly within the parameters.

b: disagree with God and act accordingly within the parameters

.
You have erringly labeled both sin and God as equal freedoms. An impossibility lest there be two Gods. What you deem as free choice I see as directions away and towards God wherein we are lost. Only one way is true and so in only one direction is freedom.

Levi, I must scratch my head when you say this. Is it me or you? Freewill is the ability to agree with God and act accordingly within the parameters? Yet Paul agrees with the law and says he cannot accomplish it. Either Paul is a liar or your definition needs some work. I gather this is where the parameters comes in. That term being vague can mean anything including Love which is God's Spirit and His Word in man. Hence only the Word of God in us agrees with God, for the flesh is contrary.

Then you say freewill is the ability to disagree with God and act accordingly within the parameters. Hypocrisy vs hypocrisy? For to disagree with God would be the flesh and its' sinful nature. So the moral parameters you are describing have definitive terms. And so here you have stated that men are trapped between two seperate wills wherein you picture a middle will that can do either but at the same time conclude must be one or the other. You were better off saying we are always servants to either sin or God.

If a man could not to either of these things we could find fault with God and the finger the atheist wags would be righteous.

And here is where your reasoning leads you. You applaud the atheist. How is it exactly that we could find fault with God if we could not do either of these things? I'd love to hear this.

 

[childeye]

Re: Can two walk together except they be agreed ?

And this aligns perfectly with the scriptures.. Can two walk together except they be agreed ?

God doesn't force His will upon men to walk with Him.. His grace and truth is unto all and it's upon all those that believe.. who AGREE with God and His word..

Men WILLINGLY lay down their life for the Lord Jesus Christ.. because of His great love for us.. all of us.. although only those who agree with Him will walk with Him.. it's no different now than it was when He walked on this earth.. many walked with Him and many walked away from Him..

Hypocritical reasoning. You first state two cannot walk together unless they are agreed, and then claim God never forces His will upon men to walk with Him. God does in fact require us to submit to the Truth to walk with Him, lest we die. That's what walking with Him is, life.

Your thinking regards death the surrendering of the will to not exist as a viable option. Yet I doubt people are volunteering to jump into the lake of fire. Any fool can ignore this reality and label it his freedom to do so. But as the beginning of wisdom is the fear of God it is not wisdom that disagrees with God. Moreover without His Word in our hearts we could not even see the Truth that we might agree with Him. You guys think you choose between God and sin and call it our free will.Being dead in sin, what is grace, our oppertunity to once again prove we are free?

 

[Levi]

.
You have erringly labeled both sin and God as equal freedoms. An impossibility lest there be two Gods. What you deem as free choice I see as directions away and towards God wherein we are lost. Only one way is true and so in only one direction is freedom.

Yes there are two gods a man may worship, in fact there are many so called 'gods' as paul points out.

God the Almighty creator of all things made available to us by Jesus Christ truth

or

Satan, the usurper, the ruler of this world. Lies

The two are not equal but in terms of a third party the choices are not the end results.

Its not yin and yang the both Gods bieng equal because those of us who reside in the truth know full well that the second option is to be done away with by God the almighty who is the one true God.

Levi, I must scratch my head when you say this. Is it me or you? Freewill is the ability to agree with God and act accordingly within the parameters? Yet Paul agrees with the law and says he cannot accomplish it. Either Paul is a liar or your definition needs some work. I gather this is where the parameters comes in. That term being vague can mean anything including Love which is God's Spirit and His Word in man. Hence only the Word of God in us agrees with God, for the flesh is contrary.

When taken that Paul is talking about the condition that a man finds himself in when he 'agrees' with God, i.e his hearts desire is to do what is right, he will find a law working within himself that will cause him to despise his very being.

The parameters available to a man who finds this law at work in himself is to "call upon the name of the Lord"

Paul says this: "who will save me from this wretched body of sin?" "Praise be to Jesus"

You see contrary to Calvinist doctrines, Jesus saves us from having to continue with the works of our bodies of death or 'flesh', the work of the Spirit is not just to cause you to have nice thoughts and mushy feelings but it is to cause you to become righteous in word and deed.

"mortify the deeds of the flesh": it is a commandment.

Then you say freewill is the ability to disagree with God and act accordingly within the parameters. Hypocrisy vs hypocrisy? For to disagree with God would be the flesh and its' sinful nature. So the moral parameters you are describing have definitive terms. And so here you have stated that men are trapped between two seperate wills wherein you picture a middle will that can do either but at the same time conclude must be one or the other. You were better off saying we are always servants to either sin or God.
If a man could not to either of these things we could find fault with God and the finger the atheist wags would be righteous.

Two words: 'Seared conscience'

And here is where your reasoning leads you. You applaud the atheist. How is it exactly that we could find fault with God if we could not do either of these things? I'd love to hear this.

If you cannot work out how preaching to a dead man that he is dead and will never be alive because God made him specifically to be trashed, suffered then burnt alive for all eternity does not bring forth finger pointing an 'it's all you fault not mine' attitude then I can not help you.

It is in fact your position that applauds and even encourages the atheist in his position. That is why I have had many a falling out with the graceless over miss applied election doctrine.

 

[childeye]

=Levi;572318]
The two are not equal but in terms of a third party the choices are not the end results.

What do you mean by this. How are the choices we make not the end results?

When taken that Paul is talking about the condition that a man finds himself in when he 'agrees' with God, i.e his hearts desire is to do what is right, he will find a law working within himself that will cause him to despise his very being.

The parameters available to a man who finds this law at work in himself is to "call upon the name of the Lord"

What I take from this is once a man finds he is not free in his will he must turn to God.

You see contrary to Calvinist doctrines, Jesus saves us from having to continue with the works of our bodies of death or 'flesh', the work of the Spirit is not just to cause you to have nice thoughts and mushy feelings but it is to cause you to become righteous in word and deed.

The Spirit that is mushy and gives nice thoughts to counter the bad thoughts causes us to become righteous in word and deed. It is a change in character from ungodly to Godly. That's what Love does. It is the feeling of compassion and therefore the desire to serve others in their need.

"mortify the deeds of the flesh": it is a commandment.

Follow the spirit and you will mortify the flesh.

Two words: 'Seared conscience'

I don't think this answers the question.

If you cannot work out how preaching to a dead man that he is dead and will never be alive because God made him specifically to be trashed, suffered then burnt alive for all eternity does not bring forth finger pointing an 'it's all you fault not mine' attitude then I can not help you.

This certainly doesn't answer the question.

It is in fact your position that applauds and even encourages the atheist in his position. That is why I have had many a falling out with the graceless over miss applied election doctrine.

You miss one important point in your deductions. The possibility it is no ones fault we were made sinners, but that God is disposing of vanity through the flesh of men. There by in what measure we find fault, we are at fault according to that measure. In other words God judges us by how we judge others. Our mouths condemn us and we judge ourselves unworthy of life , even as we draw lines of expectations for others we ourselves have not kept. And why? According to the belief the will is free and chooses to sin freely.
We are all flesh and all have sinned at one time. Indeed, there would be no end of sin without Christ. So it is I have said to believe a will is always free supports the pharisee mindset that all men see when in fact they are blind.

I sense you are saying the atheist casts up the fact that God says love Him or die. It does no good to skirt the issue. God says this. This is where you go for the jugular with an atheist. It's not God's fault He is the only True God. It's not His fault He is the Spirit of Love that makes a man rignteous. The atheist reasoning caves in on itself as they find themselves arguing against Love as the moral imperative. Atheists only hate religion and the false images of god that obscures the Truth. That's why they say they reject being made to worship God. But the knowledge that God is the eternal Spirit of Love cannot support the assertion that it is unfair to make one accept that Love is the only true universal motive or animas for all men unto righteousness. And this is what you should be arguing rather than election doctrine.

 

[Levi]

What do you mean by this. How are the choices we make not the end results?

This is a strange question coming from you, everyone who belongs to the truth know what the end results are and how (or who) they are caused.

What I take from this is once a man finds he is not free in his will he must turn to God.

Exactly my point, at that point a man agrees with God and His righteous tenants by which his conscience is condemning him, for Paul is speaking of the conscience in this struggle. He then calls upon the name of the Lord

The Spirit that is mushy and gives nice thoughts to counter the bad thoughts causes us to become righteous in word and deed. It is a change in character from ungodly to Godly. That's what Love does. It is the feeling of compassion and therefore the desire to serve others in their need.

This can only happen if a man agrees with God and calls upon the name of the Lord.

Follow the spirit and you will mortify the flesh.

Exactly! by this truth we can know that Paul is talking about the struggle that happens within all men who agree with God, not just the born again as has been erroneously reported.

I am living evidence of this, I knew I was sinning and I despised myself for many years until I was finally forgiven and received the gift of the Holy Spirit.

I don't think this answers the question.

It's simple, the man that disagrees with God simply ignores and fights Gods law, he suppresses his conscience until it is seared and he becomes as an animal living on the instincts of the base desires he has chosen over the truth of God and His goodness that the law was testifying to in the mans conscience.

The same law by which one who agrees with God finds he is unable to obey.

This certainly doesn't answer the question.

You miss one important point in your deductions. The possibility it is no ones fault we were made sinners

I can tell you one thing with certainty: God does not have faults.

I sense you are saying the atheist casts up the fact that God says love Him or die. It does no good to skirt the issue. God says this

No what I am saying is that the atheist concludes in his knowledge of what has been portrayed as the image of God, that God is responsible for everything and that includes the fact that they are sinners.

I maintain that God is only responsible for the possibility that existed in the beginning as He is solely responsible for the way of redemption.

A question for you:

How did the vanity get into the flesh? who is responsible for that?

 

[Eventide]

I would think that the only reason why some folks like to deny that man has any freewill is so that they can maintain that God chose them.. that they're the elect.. yada yada yada..

What other reason would there be ?

It's typically all about being 'special'..

 

[childeye]

=Levi;572345]

This is a strange question coming from you, everyone who belongs to the truth know what the end results are and how (or who) they are caused.

Yes but our choices have consequences is all I am saying.

It's simple, the man that disagrees with God simply ignores and fights Gods law, he suppresses his conscience until it is seared and he becomes as an animal living on the instincts of the base desires he has chosen over the truth of God and His goodness that the law was testifying to in the mans conscience.

Yes, and is not this man with a seared conscience decieved if he regards the end of this nagging conscience his freedom?

I can tell you one thing with certainty: God does not have faults.

So why say He failed simply because He desired to have men learn the proper values of wisdom? I'm not going to say it is wrong if God purposed that some vessels would become bywords for our edification in the process. Nor am I saying that these bywords will remain that way forever.

No what I am saying is that the atheist concludes in his knowledge of what has been portrayed as the image of God, that God is responsible for everything and that includes the fact that they are sinners.

I maintain that God is only responsible for the possibility that existed in the beginning as He is solely responsible for the way of redemption.

Respectfully, these two perspectives are identical for all intensive purposes.

A question for you:

How did the vanity get into the flesh? who is responsible for that?

Vanity: Any impetus not found to be of God resulting in creating those things that are temporal and not eternal.

Vanity began with Satan not the flesh. Satan has a pride in his own invincibility that despises acknowledging God gave him his many abilities, and so takes it as his own to lord it over others. Vanity entered in through an ignorance of God in the form of a corrupt image of god. I am refering to the character and station of the Godhead. In essence, vanity begins by finding fault in what is without fault. The haughtiness that thinks it knows better than God is one that is not built upon faith nor does it trust or believe in Holiness.

Satan desired to be God showing his ignorance of Who and What God is. Such vanity in ignorance is the belief that it is unfair of God to restrict one to any certain station under Him. This vanity then creates iniquity. A perverse sense of justice that ends in hypocritical judgment. The concept that one can disobey God and live is this vanity.

Tell the atheist this:

God looks down on the world and He sees a little boy digging in the trash for food. Upon finding a crust of bread, he jumps up rejoicing and thanking God. At the same time God sees on the earth a man coming out of his office to drive home in his new porsche, when he notices a tiny scratch on the perfectly polished finish of his car. Immediately he beats his fists in the air cursing God for his misfortune.

Now why blame God for this corruption that takes God for granted? And ask the atheist why he supposes God would want men to be thankful, contrite and humble before He gives them the keys to the universe.

 

[childeye]

=Eventide;572356]I would think that the only reason why some folks like to deny that man has any freewill is so that they can maintain that God chose them.. that they're the elect.. yada yada yada..

What other reason would there be ?

We don't want to condemn ourselves by agreeing with the devil.

 

[Eventide]

We don't want to condemn ourselves by agreeing with the devil.

I'll take that as a yes.. the only reason many deny the frewill of men is because then they can maintain that God chose them and that they're the elect.

It's all about being S P E C I A L ...

 

[childeye]

=Eventide;572444]I'll take that as a yes.. the only reason many deny the frewill of men is because then they can maintain that God chose them and that they're the elect.

It's all about being S P E C I A L ...

What's so special about not agreeing with the devil? Ya Bully.

 

[Levi]

=Levi;572345]
Yes, and is not this man with a seared conscience decieved if he regards the end of this nagging conscience his freedom?

Yes he is decieved but only because he went against the truth that his conscience was screaming at him. Im sure you can call to mind a myriad of scripture that speaks about this AND you will also note that this IS THE REASON that God hands them over to the deception.....

So why say He failed simply because He desired to have men learn the proper values of wisdom? I'm not going to say it is wrong if God purposed that some vessels would become bywords for our edification in the process. Nor am I saying that these bywords will remain that way forever.

Who said anything about God failing? Not I . God never fails, fact.

To reconcile a loving God with what we find transpiring in the world we must acurately weigh up what is written and what we know about the nature of God through the revelation given by Jesus Christ through the power of the holy Spirit.

We will then come to the full knowledge of the truth in the matter, that man has freewill and he uses it to reject God.

Any other option NEGATES salvation, as design is not salvation. You can have salvation by design but you cannot have design as salvation, make up your mind.

Respectfully, these two perspectives are identical for all intensive purposes.

No they are not, one speaks of designated purpose and the other speaks of consequences. They are two entirely different scenarios

Vanity: Any impetus not found to be of God resulting in creating those things that are temporal and not eternal.

How can something be found that is not of God if there is no freewill?

 

[Eventide]

What's so special about not agreeing with the devil?

God chose YOU didn't He ? You're the elect.. the one He chose.. along with His Son.. and let's face it, the ONLY reason you preach that men don't have freewill is so that you can claim that God chose you.. that's special.

Ya Bully.

I know you are but what am I..

 

[childeye]

=Levi;572548]Yes he is decieved but only because he went against the truth that his conscience was screaming at him. Im sure you can call to mind a myriad of scripture that speaks about this AND you will also note that this IS THE REASON that God hands them over to the deception.....

Actually. I can't say his conscience was screaming at him. I think the seared conscience is a religious one as in false piety. We all are of a defiled conscience before we see the Truth. So it isn't like we are in some middle place when we are dead in our sins already. God does hand them over to a lie so I guess they have no chance of repentance after that or are concluded into outer darkness.

Who said anything about God failing? Not I . God never fails, fact.

I was refering to atheistic mumbo jumbo.

To reconcile a loving God with what we find transpiring in the world we must acurately weigh up what is written and what we know about the nature of God through the revelation given by Jesus Christ through the power of the holy Spirit.

We will then come to the full knowledge of the truth in the matter, that man has freewill and he uses it to reject God.

I find scripture saying the exact opposite. Men were deceived with a false image of god and the Truth will set your free.

Any other option NEGATES salvation, as design is not salvation. You can have salvation by design but you cannot have design as salvation, make up your mind.

When we read the parable of the tares. It says God's enemy sowed the tares in the middle of the night. When we read the prodigal son, we note that the Father did not stop the son from leaving his house. Why? because the Father had to let the son find out for himself that things were pretty good in his Fathers house.

No they are not, one speaks of designated purpose and the other speaks of consequences. They are two entirely different scenarios

One is within the other. Faith comes before obedience. Distrust comes before disobedience.

How can something be found that is not of God if there is no freewill?

By circumstance of being created and thereby being subject to the ignorance of God. For the creation was made subject to vanity unwillingly by Him Who subjects it to hope.

 

[childeye]

=Eventide;572591]God chose YOU didn't He ? You're the elect.. the one He chose.. along with His Son..

I sure hope so, and I hope he chose you too.

and let's face it, the ONLY reason you preach that men don't have freewill is so that you can claim that God chose you.. that's special.

Actually I preach that men can only have a freewill by believing the truth and walking in it. Therefore I preach against an absolute freewill because it does not exist for those who are held captive by a lie.

I know you are but what am I..

You're a special bully.

 

[Eventide]

I sure hope so, and I hope he chose you too.

You're not sure ?

Are you aware that the scriptures tell us exactly why God chooses..?

You don't need to hope that God chose me.. because He didn't choose me.. He says that if I shall seek to save my life that I shall lose it, and that if I lose it for HIM and the gospel that I shall save it.. He also says that if any man comes after Him that they must deny themselves and take up their cross and follow Him..

Are those same verses applicable to you or are you hoping for a free pass ?

Actually I preach that men can only have a freewill by believing the truth and walking in it. Therefore I preach against an absolute freewill because it does not exist for those who are held captive by a lie.

Back to basics.. Can a person hear the gospel of God concerning His Son and then choose to believe it or reject it.. or must God allow a person to believe His gospel.. ?

You're a special bully.

I learned in the 1st grade (or thereabout) that sticks and stones may brake my bones but your namecalling can't hurt me.

 

[childeye]

=Eventide;572836]You're not sure ?

I'm sure God is good.

Are you aware that the scriptures tell us exactly why God chooses..?

I get from scripture that God chooses so men won't think they did it.

You don't need to hope that God chose me.. because He didn't choose me..

Then why ask me if I'm aware that scripture says exactly why God chooses?

He says that if I shall seek to save my life that I shall lose it, and that if I lose it for HIM and the gospel that I shall save it.. He also says that if any man comes after Him that they must deny themselves and take up their cross and follow Him..

Are those same verses applicable to you or are you hoping for a free pass ?

A trick question if you consider the Gospel the handing out of a free pass.

Back to basics.. Can a person hear the gospel of God concerning His Son and then choose to believe it or reject it.. or must God allow a person to believe His gospel.. ?

Obviously the Gospel is rejected by some and believed by others. Of course if God did not allow people to believe it they could not believe. Otherwise I must conclude that I am above what God allows, if I were to say I could believe it against His not allowing it, making myself a better peice of flesh than those who don't believe. As the Gospel by design resists the proud and pride is a blindness, your question with it's implications can only be answered yes for some and no for others.

I learned in the 1st grade (or thereabout) that sticks and stones may brake my bones but your namecalling can't hurt me.

Nor would I want to hurt you. My remarks are meant as a means of endearment.

 

[Eventide]

I'm sure God is good.

I am too, although that's not what we were discussing.. Do you typically deflect off topic ? Why would you do that ?

I thought you mentioned that you hoped that God chose you.. that's why I asked if you were not sure about THAT.. not about whether or not you're sure that God is good.

I get from scripture that God chooses so men won't think they did it.

I get from scripture that God chooses all men IN CHRIST.. not in Adam, but in Christ, the Last Adam.

Then why ask me if I'm aware that scripture says exactly why God chooses?

That's why, because God chooses us to salvation through sanctification of the Spirit and belief of the truth.. not because of anything in our Adamic nature..

A trick question if you consider the Gospel the handing out of a free pass.

If you consider the simple truth of the gospel a trick question, then I'm sorry.. and if you don't believe that these scriptures are applicable to you, then you would be the one looking to bypass what they say in simplicity and in truth.

Obviously the Gospel is rejected by some and believed by others. Of course if God did not allow people to believe it they could not believe. Otherwise I must conclude that I am above what God allows, if I were to say I could believe it against His not allowing it, making myself a better peice of flesh than those who don't believe. As the Gospel by design resists the proud and pride is a blindness, your question with it's implications can only be answered yes for some and no for others.

I agree.. for some people who believe that God chose them and that they're the elect unconditionally and that they couldn't resist the gospel.. then of course these ones must answer no.. everyone else in Christendom would answer yes. Correct me if I'm wrong, although there's only one group in Christendom who would say that men can't believe the gospel of God unless He allows it.. want to guess what group that would be ?

Nor would I want to hurt you. My remarks are meant as a means of endearment.

How endearing..