Is man not really capable of seeking God?

[Fastfredy0]

Assumptions. Nothing is provable, all is assumption. Do you understand the meaning of this?

Whereas you do not define NOTHING or ALL above I clearly understand that your statement means nothing.

Biblical free will implies guilt and responsibility.

You have yet to define 'free will' let alone 'biblical free will'; therefore your statement lacks foundation.

Our assumption is we exist and chose everything we do. You chose to read and respond to this thread. No one or anything forces you to do it

This gets to the crux of the matter and is an implicit statement of what you believe is 'free will'. You seem to state that 'free will' means the one decides everything and "NO ONE OR ANYTHING FORCES YOU TO DO IT". This is in sync with text book Libertarian Free Will which states: "Libertarian Free Will is the ability to make choices without any prior prejudice, inclination, or disposition. For the will to be free it must act from a posture of neutrality, with absolutely no bias. It determines its own volitions; so as not to be dependent, in its determinations, on any cause without itself, nor determined by anything prior to its own acts. Indifference and therefore amorality belongs to Liberty in their notion of it, or that the mind, previous to the act of volition, be in equilibrio (equilibrium in uncertainty)."
Aside: but I don't want to put words in your mouth, so I again state that you have not clearly stated with "FREE WILL" is.

Love can only exist with free will, or how else is a good act valued more than an evil act

You have yet to clearly define "free will" ... so I don't want to add to the list the definition of Love which you should give too as that is rarely define and need to give meaning to your statement.

Nothing can exist without time because without time we are infinitely everywhere or nowhere.

God is eternal and exists outside of time. Thus your statement is incorrect. (If God was restricted in time then He would exist so far back in time that He would never get to the present time as time requires a beginning and God could not be eternal and have a beginning. Also, time can exist without matter and space, both of which were created by God).

To argue against free will is to make valueless the cross, love and a righteous life, God is both good and evil, and a puppet master of all.

To argue against "free will" is valueless when you refuse to define it. (But, I have nothing better to do at the moment)
After you define "free will" one can draw conclusions based on the definition.)

Free will propositions that think words can define objective and subjective reality when we exist as only linear subjective creatures are vapourware.

*giggles*

Choice is real, but my thoughts exist within my brain, molded by culture, education, age, feelings, health etc.

So, your choices are NOT free; rather, molded by culture, education, age, feelings, health etc.
You are confusing me. Again, you need to define "Free Will".

What is clear in nature is choice is manipulated to be free but focused, random but predictable.

Something cannot be "random" and "predictable". This is a contradiction and therefore irrational. Synonyms for "random" include:

indiscriminate
irregular	unpredictable
chaotic	disorderly

If choice is manipulated, it is not free. (but again, you decline to define "free will".)

 

[PeterJens]

Whereas you do not define NOTHING or ALL above I clearly understand that your statement means nothing.


You have yet to define 'free will' let alone 'biblical free will'; therefore your statement lacks foundation.



This gets to the crux of the matter and is an implicit statement of what you believe is 'free will'. You seem to state that 'free will' means the one decides everything and "NO ONE OR ANYTHING FORCES YOU TO DO IT". This is in sync with text book Libertarian Free Will which states: "Libertarian Free Will is the ability to make choices without any prior prejudice, inclination, or disposition. For the will to be free it must act from a posture of neutrality, with absolutely no bias. It determines its own volitions; so as not to be dependent, in its determinations, on any cause without itself, nor determined by anything prior to its own acts. Indifference and therefore amorality belongs to Liberty in their notion of it, or that the mind, previous to the act of volition, be in equilibrio (equilibrium in uncertainty)."
Aside: but I don't want to put words in your mouth, so I again state that you have not clearly stated with "FREE WILL" is.



You have yet to clearly define "free will" ... so I don't want to add to the list the definition of Love which you should give too as that is rarely define and need to give meaning to your statement.





God is eternal and exists outside of time. Thus your statement is incorrect. (If God was restricted in time then He would exist so far back in time that He would never get to the present time as time requires a beginning and God could not be eternal and have a beginning. Also, time can exist without matter and space, both of which were created by God).



To argue against "free will" is valueless when you refuse to define it. (But, I have nothing better to do at the moment)
After you define "free will" one can draw conclusions based on the definition.)


*giggles*



So, your choices are NOT free; rather, molded by culture, education, age, feelings, health etc.
You are confusing me. Again, you need to define "Free Will".





Something cannot be "random" and "predictable". This is a contradiction and therefore irrational. Synonyms for "random" include:

indiscriminate
irregular	unpredictable
chaotic	disorderly

If choice is manipulated, it is not free. (but again, you decline to define "free will".)

Nothing is provable is the foundation of modern philosophy. Everything is founded on our experience based reality governed by our senses. As you do not accept this, we cannot meaningfully converse.

So much of life is bounded by limits, our choice is always very focused. In the grand scheme of life and death our God given choice is about love and loyalty, hurt and revenge. But determinsts will claim even here free will does not exist.

How do you know I am right? Memory and emotion. But what if they lied? Cognitive dissonance shows its possibility but also free wills reality. Linear logic is how we create computer programs, freely, creatively.

Our imaginations only limit our opportunities. I program, I know its limitations and it's possibilities. God's highest creative act is to give us free will, a world so finely balanced we show our hearts before His throne on judgement day.

If you can aspire to his creative genius, amen, if not, God bless you

 

[PeterJens]

Irony

One cannot argue with truth. It is.
The Lord called himself, I am.

My life's search has been to describe, encompass truth as far as I can.

The idea of what is freedom and the nature of society is profound.

Democracy lifts up the sanctity of choice and expression of the group. Power and vested groups hate this, because it shows there fake motivations.

God is not outside time, he can move forward or back through it.

Time is only how we describe being in one place and not another. Without time you can do nothing. To do anything requires time and existence. Stop time and it all freezes. Our limitation is time goes only forwards, and at a defined pace. But we know this is only relative to speed. So it is weird.

 

[PeterJens]

---

Linear logic is a prison. Take a concept and express it. If you miss a point, one can be certain, but miss the greatest implications.
Genius is often seeing the concept just one step away.

Free will matters. Also emotional drives and context. Jesus addresses this all if you can but hear. Build your house upon the rock.

God bless you

 

[PeterJens]

How do I cross a road? I set up criteria of safety, go through the linear list, and then move. I choose the list, refine it, change it.

You do not cross a formula 1 race track because you will not live to make it across. Freely we choose and act. It is life's simple rule, choose well. Literally every school kid knows this.

But a theologian looks for certainty and denies the obvious. Guilt, hurt, avoidance drive such blindness. We are guilty sinners with no excuses. But in Christ we have real hope.

God bless you

 

[GodsGrace]

How do I cross a road? I set up criteria of safety, go through the linear list, and then move. I choose the list, refine it, change it.

You do not cross a formula 1 race track because you will not live to make it across. Freely we choose and act. It is life's simple rule, choose well. Literally every school kid knows this.

But a theologian looks for certainty and denies the obvious. Guilt, hurt, avoidance drive such blindness. We are guilty sinners with no excuses. But in Christ we have real hope.

God bless you

Peter, You couldn't have spoken any clearer and made a better point.
But, you'll find it very difficult to converse with Fastfredy0 because he'd rather speak about words iinstead of the ideas they represent.
He will tell you that you never describe the words Free Will and so it is impossible to speak to you.

This is a tactic he uses and so it makes it impossible to carry the conversation further.
I believe he lives in fear of Free Will...perhaps it's just easier to put all responsibility on God.
Which is rather disconcerting to me because that means that God CAUSES all sin to take place AND then holds us responsible for it.
Their belief is that God is just in sending everyone to hell and is merciful for saving just a few....
even though it is HE that causes the sin and the sinning.

How is that justice?????
Rhetorical question, of course.

In Calvinism God is neither loving, nor merciful, nor just.
In effect, they are serving a different God.

 

[Fastfredy0]

Nothing is provable is the foundation of modern philosophy. Everything is founded on our experience based reality governed by our senses. As you do not accept this, we cannot meaningfully converse.

AGREED!

 

[jaybo]

How do I cross a road? I set up criteria of safety, go through the linear list, and then move. I choose the list, refine it, change it.

You do not cross a formula 1 race track because you will not live to make it across. Freely we choose and act. It is life's simple rule, choose well. Literally every school kid knows this.

But a theologian looks for certainty and denies the obvious. Guilt, hurt, avoidance drive such blindness. We are guilty sinners with no excuses. But in Christ we have real hope.

God bless you

This makes no sense to me. How do I cross a road? I look both ways then put one foot in front of the other. Even my young grandchildren know how to do that and they haven't studied philosophy.

Anyone (with access) can cross a Formula One track by applying the same technique. Literally every school kid knows this.

I don't even understand what "a theologian looks for certainty and denies the obvious" means, nor do I understand "guilt, hurt, avoidance drive such blindness".

I am not a "guilty sinner"; I am an adopted child of God. He doesn't regard me as guilty because a man named Jesus Christ atoned for any and all of my sins.

John 3:17-18, "For God did not send his Son into the world to condemn the world, but that the world should be saved through him. The one who believes in him is not condemned.

 

[Christ_empowered]

i don't see why total depravity is such a problem -for Christians- . Adam sinned. now, we're all doomed, from the get go, unless Jesus intervenes. maybe its because of my background and such, but I thought that was Christianity 101?

 

[JLB]

i don't see why total depravity is such a problem -for Christians- . Adam sinned. now, we're all doomed, from the get go, unless Jesus intervenes. maybe its because of my background and such, but I thought that was Christianity 101?

What does total depravity mean in scripture?


Maybe we can discuss a few verses with this phrase in them.





JLB

 

[PeterJens]

This makes no sense to me. How do I cross a road? I look both ways then put one foot in front of the other. Even my young grandchildren know how to do that and they haven't studied philosophy.

Anyone (with access) can cross a Formula One track by applying the same technique. Literally every school kid knows this.

I don't even understand what "a theologian looks for certainty and denies the obvious" means, nor do I understand "guilt, hurt, avoidance drive such blindness".

I am not a "guilty sinner"; I am an adopted child of God. He doesn't regard me as guilty because a man named Jesus Christ atoned for any and all of my sins.

John 3:17-18, "For God did not send his Son into the world to condemn the world, but that the world should be saved through him. The one who believes in him is not condemned.

When people deny we have free will, the ability to choose where we go and what we do, free will is demonstrated with how we learn to cross a road. The ability and skills involved as self driving car software has found out is not simple.
You need to learn behaviour, identification of threats, vehicals etc. You then need a decision matrix through which you assess the risks and compare it to your past experience.

One simple answer is you choose to cross at a crossing with lights. The responsibility is held with the traffic regulator and the rules of the road. Except of course you still need to look. All of this involves free will.

Now some could be arguing free will is about something else other than our decisions are based in the core of who we are. But this is our experience of life, which is why we need to learn even how to move our limbs, as nothing is preset.

Take a lot of animals and most of their behaviour is hard wired into them, a simple series of behaviour patterns.
We have similar mechanisms, like fight or flight responses, which we can choose to override or rather switch off.

What a lot mean by free will is the choice to be a sinner or perfect. But most agree we are born sinners. Not because we have sinned in an obvious way at birth, but rather being separate from God is sinful rebellion, and will lead to sinful behaviour. But once we have communion with Christ, been set free, cleansed we can choose to walk on, or go back to the place of darkness and the world. This choice exists because the kingdom is based on believing in love and the Lord, and following from our hearts, freely. Implicit in this is the reality, we choose to follow.

You could argue we cannot choose life, which is true, in Christ it is a gift, and He drew us into himself. But as Jesus chose to die for us, following Him involves in choosing pain on behalf of sinful men, that they might be set free and know the truth.

Without free will, Christs love does not dwell in us, we are just vessels of Gods creation doing His bidding.
Without free will, God dominates His creation and is not its servant. Servanthood is about choosing to give up privilege and rank for the sake of others, to which we are also called. Jesus commanded us to wash one anothers feet, meeting the needs of those around and not counting ourselves superior. Again this has value only if we can chose to give up that which has been given to us, and give to other freely.

Free will is like Gods life blood, but the father of lies would rather suggest it is all about power, domination and mans failure, over which God dominates with hell. Listen to the fables of hell. Who is torturing who? Devils torturing the lost at Gods command. But scripture is clear, the lake of fire is for the enemy, and he has no power over anyone other than by Gods leave. The lake of fire destroys all except Satan and his followers, who will be tortured for all eternity.

God bless you

 

[PeterJens]

AGREED!

The difficulty with assumptions, is they dictate the conclusions one comes to in a linear logical way.
One difficulty with Newtonian and absolute philosophy is it suggests boundaries that cannot be moved or exist only because they are definitive and eternal.

We are emotional creatures and our conclusions always come from our emotional needs and expectations. If our minds work out something could become very upsetting, our minds will refuse to make us aware of it. This is the nature of sin and self belief that everything is ok and safe, even when it is not.

It is why religious discussions are actually non intellectual, and more about our coping strategies and backgrounds.
I have discovered sometimes when you start to talk about the emotional journey with Jesus, people are the same, but the way they express doctrinal ideas or packaging, very different words are used.

Are we bound by our concepts, or do the concepts reflect where we are? So to emphasis our reliance on God is fantastic, but also Jesus has faith in us and our ability to follow, which is often missed in the journey to the cross, where the journey continues with the Lord, into His ways and paths.

God bless you

 

[GodsGrace]

The difficulty with assumptions, is they dictate the conclusions one comes to in a linear logical way.
One difficulty with Newtonian and absolute philosophy is it suggests boundaries that cannot be moved or exist only because they are definitive and eternal.

We are emotional creatures and our conclusions always come from our emotional needs and expectations. If our minds work out something could become very upsetting, our minds will refuse to make us aware of it. This is the nature of sin and self belief that everything is ok and safe, even when it is not.

It is why religious discussions are actually non intellectual, and more about our coping strategies and backgrounds.
I have discovered sometimes when you start to talk about the emotional journey with Jesus, people are the same, but the way they express doctrinal ideas or packaging, very different words are used.

Are we bound by our concepts, or do the concepts reflect where we are? So to emphasis our reliance on God is fantastic, but also Jesus has faith in us and our ability to follow, which is often missed in the journey to the cross, where the journey continues with the Lord, into His ways and paths.

God bless you

Here is something I've asked Fastfredy0 and others but I never get a response....:

You mentioned above that Jesus has faith in our ability to follow Him.
True,,,or He never would expect it.
Jesus said many times that we are to follow Him.

So my question to fastfredy would be:
WHY would Jesus state that we are to follow Him if God determines all action of men?
Did God Father forget to tell God Son the method by which men get save?
That is: God does the choosing and will let men be preserved till the end.
Why the need to have faith in men to follow if it is God that determines this???

Of course fastfredy is not speaking to me and no other calvinist has ever explained this to me.

Know why?
There is NO explanation available.
Calvinism is DOA.

 

[GodsGrace]

i don't see why total depravity is such a problem -for Christians- . Adam sinned. now, we're all doomed, from the get go, unless Jesus intervenes. maybe its because of my background and such, but I thought that was Christianity 101?

CE,,,Total depravity is a problem because it is not a biblical idea.
Where in scripture does it state that we are TOTALLY DEPRAVED.
Calvinists take this to mean that we are so depraved that it is IMPOSSIBLE for man to reach out to God.
That it is impossible for man to seek God.

This is not what the bible teaches.
From the O.T. to the N.T. it teaches that man IS TO SEEK GOD and to reach out to Him.
There are so many verses...I'm sure you must know many.
In Christianity God makes the first move....
He reveals Himself to us...
and then it's up to us to respond to Him.
Calvinism denies this and puts everything on God.
It is GOD that chooses whom He will, and we don't even know why.
The God of the bible has made known to us HOW we can become saved
because the God of the bible loves His creation and wishes that all would come to know Him.

You see...the idea of total depravity is central to an unbiblical idea of God.
(Ditto for free will).

 

[Seasoned by Grace]

CE,,,Total depravity is a problem because it is not a biblical idea.
Where in scripture does it state that we are TOTALLY DEPRAVED.

wondering
Romans 3:9-12,
“There is no one righteous, not even one;
11 there is no one who understands;
there is no one who seeks God.
12 All have turned away,
they have together become worthless;
there is no one who does good,
not even one.”

Does this say depraved? --- NO !!
Does it indicate depraved? ---ABSOLUTELY !!
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

So where in the bible does it mention the "TRINITY or the RAPTURE?"

Your reasoning then means there is "NO TRINITY" and there is "NO RAPTURE" because you say it has to be mentioned "specifically" to be biblical.

God bless
Seasoned by Grace

 

[GodsGrace]

wondering
Romans 3:9-12,
“There is no one righteous, not even one;
11 there is no one who understands;
there is no one who seeks God.
12 All have turned away,
they have together become worthless;
there is no one who does good,
not even one.”

Does this say depraved? --- NO !!
Does it indicate depraved? ---ABSOLUTELY !!
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

So where in the bible does it mention the "TRINITY?"

Your reasoning then means there is NO TRINITY and so many other situations don't exist because you say it has to be mentioned "specifically" to be biblical.

God bless
Seasoned by Grace

I know what you mean.

I won't go back and read my post again...I'm 99.9% sure I said what I wanted it to say.

We are born tainted with sin.

We are NOT born TOTALLY DEPRAVED.

This is a definition of mankind that is found only in calvinist circles.
It means what I described in the other post.

Man has the capacity to seek God.
In the doctrine of TOTAL DEPRAVITY man does NOT have the capacity to seek God.

Read Romans 3:9-12 again

Being unrighteous
Not understanding
Not seeking God
Turning away from Him
Being worthless
Not doing good

Does not mean one is depraved...let alone TOTALLY DEPRAVED.
(totally meaning every part of the human soul)

Definition of depraved​

: marked by corruption or evil
a depraved attack

especially : PERVERTED
the work of depraved minds

And, let's say here that Romans is hyperbole.
(for obvious reasons)

 

[Seasoned by Grace]

Man has the capacity to seek God.
In the doctrine of TOTAL DEPRAVITY man does NOT have the capacity to seek God.

wondering

Romans 3:10-17​

​

New International Version​

​

​

10 As it is written:
“There is no one righteous, not even one;
11 there is no one who understands;
"THERE IS NO ONE WHO SEEKS GOD".
12 All have turned away,
they have together become worthless;

John 6:44​

​

New International Version​

​

​

44 “No one can "SEEK" me (Jesus) unless the Father who sent me draws them,

wondering
Your reasoning and theology doesn't work.
You need more bible knowledge to find unity and harmony in what you believe.

 

[GodsGrace]

wondering

Romans 3:10-17​

​

New International Version​

​

​

10 As it is written:
“There is no one righteous, not even one;
11 there is no one who understands;
"THERE IS NO ONE WHO SEEKS GOD".
12 All have turned away,
they have together become worthless;

John 6:44​

​

New International Version​

​

​

44 “No one can "SEEK" me (Jesus) unless the Father who sent me draws them,

wondering
Your reasoning and theology doesn't work.
You need more bible knowledge to find unity and harmony in what you believe.

LOL

I won't tell you why I'm laughing,,,but this is pretty funny.

So tell me this:

Which of my reasoning powers do not work?
How do I not find unity and harmony in what I believe?

Where is the unity lacking?

Are you saying that scripture teaches that man cannot seek God??

 

[GodsGrace]

wondering

Romans 3:10-17​

​

New International Version​

​

​

10 As it is written:
“There is no one righteous, not even one;
11 there is no one who understands;
"THERE IS NO ONE WHO SEEKS GOD".
12 All have turned away,
they have together become worthless;

John 6:44​

​

New International Version​

​

​

44 “No one can "SEEK" me (Jesus) unless the Father who sent me draws them,

wondering
Your reasoning and theology doesn't work.
You need more bible knowledge to find unity and harmony in what you believe.

BTW,,,,I don't trust the NIV.

Please use the NASB or some other version that is translated by word and not by phrase or idea.
Thanks.

 

[Seasoned by Grace]

BTW,,,,I don't trust the NIV.

Please use the NASB or some other version that is translated by word and not by phrase or idea.
Thanks.

Actually, I go back to the koine Greek language that God wrote the original text in through the original authors, which I have studied for many years.
All the translations and transliterations have been altered to fit the English language.
My favorite go-to bible is also the NASB translation in English, but I have a whole library of Greek study tools that I mostly refer to in my studies and only use the NASB for reference when talking to someone not familiar with the ORIGINAL LANGUAGE, which is much deeper, more complete, and covers a much wider fullness of meaning.

Are you saying that scripture teaches that man cannot seek God??

ABSOLUTELY
Did you read the scriptures I posted to you??
GOD SAID EVERYTHING.
All I did was repeat what God said.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
SEEK - ekzeteo
Koine Greek- The common language of the day that Jesus and all the disciples spoke
The meaning is to search out or seek diligently and earnestly, our God, with deep sincerity for His favor.
The synonyms for the word seek are anazeteo, diaginosko, dierotao, exetazo, ereunao, prosecho, andpunthanomai
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
No. I'm not showing off.
I'm merely showing you the difference between the MILK of the word and the MEAT of God's word.

Your thoughts you compare to others, but all of you are drinking the "MILK" of the word which is immaturity,
while others EAT the MEAT of the word, which is "MATURITY".
You don't have to feel bad or insulted.
Your on the road to maturity, but have much further to go than others.
It's all part of the process of learning.