The Fallacy of Freewill

[Ernest T. Bass]

I think you may have understood my last post. I meant it in jest, an attempt to understand the predestine doctrine, and the mind that believes it (such as this one), through a free will light.

That being said, you did raise some points of note and I will speak on them...

EDIT: And I do sympathize with you for having wrote such a long response to such a short question, but there was no way around it. I wish you to understand because I feel this is truly an important matter, a matter that concern's God's glory and His due credit...



I am going to ignore the parts that I feel are addressed in the top bit where I express some concern of you not understanding the direction from which my last post came, and will skip to what I believe is the heart of the matter, which is really the second paragraph, which I am paraphrasing below:

How can a predestination doctrine not directly reflect the culpability of God in the lives of all the damned?
​

Interesting! I think Romans 9 has some light to shed on this matter:

10 Not only that, but Rebekah’s children were conceived at the same time by our father Isaac. 11 Yet, before the twins were born or had done anything good or bad —in order that God’s purpose in election might stand: 12 not by works but by him who calls—she was told, “The older will serve the younger.” 13 Just as it is written: “Jacob I loved, but Esau I hated.”
​

I am going to attempt to address this without getting into the hotly debated bit of scripture in verse 13. Here Paul is saying that God picks some, and some He does not pick. That's very simple (without the questions that will come to mind, that is!), right? God picks some people, He did in Israel and He did with Jacob and Esau. Esau was the rightful heir to all the land of his father, but Jacob, the second son, ended up taking it all. God wished for Jacob to be the heir and so, despite birth right, He made it so by allowing Esau to sell it to Jacob and for a bowl of porridge!

I will not have time to finish my post about Pharaoh, but I have time to start with what is said about Jacob and Esau.

First, some background on the context of Romans 9 is that Paul knew that not only had God cut off the Jews from being His chosen but that God had also graffed in the Gentiles, Rom 11:11-24. Paul knew the Jews would object to this so in Rom 9, Paul raises the objections he knew the Jews would make and he then answers those objections. Paul knew the Jews thought that since they were direct descendants of Abraham God had some obligation to choose them. So Paul uses God's choice between Jacob and Esau to prove this idea to be wrong. Paul shows we have Esau, a direct descendant of Abraham himself, the first born, the most obvious choice, but he was bypassed! Pauls' point being God does not have to choose you Jews just because you decended from Abraham just as God did not have to choose Esau who was also descended from Abraham. Paul is saying God can choose whom He wants to, He can have mercy upon whom He wants to, even the Gentiles as Paul is alluding to in Rom 9:15. (I believe in v15 Paul is prepping the Jews about the Gentiles being graffed in as he explains in full detail in Rom 11.)


Secondly, the choice between Jacob and Esau was not about salvation but about whom/what people God would use to bring the Messiah into the world through. God began this process by choosing Abraham. If God's choice of Abraham was about salvation, then did that mean all others would be lost, such as Melchisedec, Heb 7? No, for again the choice was not about salvation but the people used to bring Christ into the world. Just because God chose Abraham, Isaac, Jacob/Israel did not mean they all would be automatically saved, for they still had to obey God to be saved. A multitude of Israelites were lost due to disobedience to God, mostly because of idolatry. They disobeyed God to the point when they rejected the Messiah God rejected them, again Rom 11. Only a remnant were saved at the time Paul wrote Romans, but those lost could still be saved if they would just submit to God's will, Rom 10:1-3.

Lastly, God's choice between Jacob and Esau was not about these individuals but actually about nations, Israel and Edom. In Rom 9:12 Paul quotes Gen 25:23 "And the LORD said unto her, Two nations [are] in thy womb, and two manner of people shall be separated from thy bowels; and [the one] people shall be stronger than [the other] people; and the elder shall serve the younger." Gen 25:23 God is talking about peoples/nations nothing about the individuals Jacob and Esau. Paul in Rom 9:13 also quotes from Malachi 1:2 where again the context is about nations, not the individuals Jacob and Esau...."I have loved you, saith the LORD. Yet ye say, Wherein hast thou loved us(nation, Israel)?....The people (nation, Edom) against whom the LORD hath indignation for ever." So it was the nation Israel God loved and Edom whom God hated. Jacob's name is being used for Israel and Esau's name used for Edom which was common in the Hebrew language, Gen 36:8; Deut 5:2, etc.


Also, nowhere does the bible say God ever "hated" the individual Esau. We can discuss, if you so choose, how that the Hebrew use of 'hate' does not necessarily mean the emotional type hate we think of in our English language but carries the idea of love less or have less favor. We can discuss that God's 'hate' for Edom (Esau) was not some predetermined, capricious, unconditional 'hate', but came as a result of sin Edom committed agaisnt Israel and how God blessed Easu, [as He did Israel], when some think God hated the individual Esau.

 

[2bfoundinhim]

I only read your remark here! But it did bring to my mind Gen. 6:3's STRIVING of the Holy Spirit for 120 yrs. along beside Noah's preaching & was wondering if Drag is used.. or draw there?? Anyhow, it seem's if I recall correctly?? that most all could not be even budged, let alone dragged into the Ark.

And the Re: The Fallacy of Freewill;)

As mentioned elsewhere, perhaps we need to find several prophets (1 Cor. 14:32) using their pen to illustrate this important doctrinal subject? Such as Rev. 12's several names meaning the same spirit.

I would have to respond as such, "not on this side Jordan, No".
But then I would ask you, Did Jesus lie when He said this?
There has to be a resolving of the answer, that seems to be contradicting, huh?

Blessings

 

[Ernest T. Bass]

This is one of the best threads I've found on this subject, way to go Pard.

My two cents worth, the scripture that says:

If I be lifted up will draw all men unto me, actually says..... "Drag" instead of Draw. Definitely describes more than a gentle nudge, huh?

Blessings

Jn 6:45 explains how the drawing is done: "It is written in the prophets, And they shall be all taught of God. Every man therefore that hath heard, and hath learned of the Father, cometh unto me."

Men are taught God's word, they then hear and learn, (Rom 10:17), then they of thier own will come unto Christ. This "cometh unto me" is not forced/dragged but happens as a result of when one is taught, hears and learns of God then one chooses of his own will to come to Christ.

 

[2bfoundinhim]

Jn 6:45 explains how the drawing is done: "It is written in the prophets, And they shall be all taught of God. Every man therefore that hath heard, and hath learned of the Father, cometh unto me."

Men are taught God's word, they then hear and learn, (Rom 10:17), then they of thier own will come unto Christ. This "cometh unto me" is not forced/dragged but happens as a result of when one is taught, hears and learns of God then one chooses of his own will to come to Christ.

I have to respectfully disagree with that whole statement.

 

[former atheist]

Next, I do not see how predestination subverts God's awesome power by saying it is a limitation. It would appear to me that the limiting doctrine is that which says God sits back until a man decides that he wants Christ in his life. God doesn't wait for man, He goes and plucks them right on up and to say otherwise, would appear to me, to be a limiting view of His power. Now I am ready to be rebuked if I am wrong, so please let's discuss this!

In my opinion: Predestination subverts God’s awesome power if, by predestination doctrine teaches that a person is un-able to respond to God, unless God sets upon or forces in their will to do so.

In my viewpoint: God’s power, is so great, that by his power, by his Grace, by his mercy, by his Justice, by his Glory on High, a being such is Man: who sinned and has done great injustice to the law of God… for Man, who also thought himself great by his own measures, would then come to love God and live for Gods Will above his own Will. THIS, Most importantly, God has, in Gods GREAT GLORY, done this in Man, without forcing it upon him. This does not mean God waits for us to make a decision about him, God is very active in seeking a response from us and we who are in Christ are in part serving God in this capacity sometimes.

Again, in my viewpoint: God truly frees because God is so great that although He has the power to take away Mans Free will to bring Mankind under his Justice, under his own will, God doesn’t need to do that at all, although that perhaps could be the easiest way to eliminate Sin. Instead, God brings many under his Will, under his Law, under his Love and love for him, simply by his Glory. Simply by his Grace! God wins the hearts and minds of Man, who he does not enslave, which he does not control the Will of, although he has that power; and That, THAT is the Greatness of God. That we who might have once had hate for him, Sin against him and think of him not to even exist; could then come to love and fellowship with him, because of his grace and mercy. Furthermore, rather than simply destroy us all, God, in his perfect Justice created a provision for us all, that we might yet be redeemed by his own hand, because we need to be redeemed to be with God.

Having Free Will is both our greatest gift and our greatest stumbling block. I cannot even meet the Will for my life of my Wife, nor her mine. I think, how wise then it is that God would unite us spiritually in the body of Christ, so that our will and his will might eventually meet, wherefore the perfect will of God, in all of his wisdom, might influence our will that we might be one day one and together with God.

 

[Ernest T. Bass]

I have to respectfully disagree with that whole statement.

That is what Jn 6:45 says.

 

[Pard]

First post is for Ernest, my comical brother! :yes

I am in agreement on your first post, though I didn't want to get into this topic because it is, like I said, a hotly debated topic, and I am glad you didn't get into the finer details of whether or not Jacob and Esau is a ref. to individuals or the notion that God calls entire nations, etc. I also don't see where you post begins to discuss predestination or freewill. You merely state, and rightly so, that people will come to Jesus from all nations and not just Israel, God will make disciples of all the world, through Abraham.

Your second post. I agree with your highlighted (bold) words from John. That's where we end in agreement, though! Jesus says that you can only go to God if He draws you up to Christ (J6:44) and then in the next verse states that to been drawn you must hear, and learn, that is you must not just have the Word enter into your thought but the Word must make sense, resonate, and cause repentance, and only then can you come. And you can only learn when you have the Spirit of the Lord. If you wish to go into this discussion more, that's awesome, and I would love too, but I need to get ready for work, so it will have to wait! Patience, right? :D

 

[cyberjosh]

Hi Pard,

I appreciate the invitation for another discussion but I'm swamped as it is with new home ownership. I barely have time for my PM discussions.

Anyway, a word of advice and perhaps also a positive challenge: do what I would do. Haha. Before you think that is presumptuous, what I 'do' in most of my discussions that are complex theologically is I look at both sides and find the reconcilliation in the middle if it is to be found. Disregard of any Scripture for the sake of tidy theology is foolish, so regard both truths under discussion with reverence and accept divine paradox if it means we must admit we do not know something in order to allow God's word to speak for itself.

I believe in freewill and sovereignty, and there is a middle meeting place somewhere. The challenge is to find it.

P.S. Oh, and Elijah does have a point about how the Spirit of God strove with mankind before the Flood. Jesus lamented over Jerusalem similarly that they would not come unto him. There is a Psalm that says Israel resisted God's working in the desert. That really is just what I was saying in that there is no point in denying that the Scripture says that even God's own people resist him sometimes. At the same time God chastens those whom He loves and can indeed complete the good work He has begun in us. Food for thought.

God Bless,
~Josh

 

[Pard]

Hi Pard,

I appreciate the invitation for another discussion but I'm swamped as it is with new home ownership. I barely have time for my PM discussions.

Anyway, a word of advice and perhaps also a positive challenge: do what I would do. Haha. Before you think that is presumptuous, what I 'do' in most of my discussions that are complex theologically is I look at both sides and find the reconcilliation in the middle if it is to be found. Disregard of any Scripture for the sake of tidy theology is foolish, so regard both truths under discussion with reverence and accept divine paradox if it means we must admit we do not know something in order to allow God's word to speak for itself.

I believe in freewill and sovereignty, and there is a middle meeting place somewhere. The challenge is to find it.

P.S. Oh, and Elijah does have a point about how the Spirit of God strove with mankind before the Flood. Jesus lamented over Jerusalem similarly that they would not come unto him. There is a Psalm that says Israel resisted God's working in the desert. That really is just what I was saying in that there is no point in denying that the Scripture says that even God's own people resist him sometimes. At the same time God chastens those whom He loves and can indeed complete the good work He has begun in us. Food for thought.

God Bless,
~Josh

I must be quick, like I said, work is calling!

First, praise God! You have a home to call your own now? How awesome!

Second, it's funny, as I was writing and then reading I felt my thoughts concluding that there is a middle ground, and I have an inkling as to what it is. It's actually funny because I think it may be something I worked out already as I was running through my testimony. Going to pray and think on it, and read some of the Bible (if I have time) while I work and see what happens when I get home.

Suffice to say, for the being, that my thoughts lead me to the idea that yes, salvation is by an act and gift of God, but that, perhaps we have to act upon that gift in order to receive. I am very much open to new ideas, this only came upon me while I was working at understanding my own life towards and in Christ. Which I am still developing!

Lastly, I know Elijah has much wisdom to impart, I just wish he'd explain it more clearly, like not just "read this" but "read this here, and now this is what it means". That is all I meant, and all I ever ask of him.

 

[John O]

Hi Pard,


I believe in freewill and sovereignty, and there is a middle meeting place somewhere. The challenge is to find it.

God Bless,
~Josh

I agree with you on this Josh and I believe that one of the reasons we struggle with sovereignty is our response to the evil question. God clearly states that as per 2 Peter 3:9 The Lord is not slack concerning his promise, as some men count slackness; but is long suffering toward us, not willing that any should perish, but that all should come to repentance.

This indicates a response is required to God for salvation. When you add in

2Ti 3:15 And that from a child thou hast known the holy scriptures, which are able to make thee wise unto salvation through faith which is in Christ Jesus.

2Ti 3:16 All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness:

2Ti 3:17 That the man of God may be perfect, thoroughly furnished unto all good works.

It becomes clear that not only is a response required for salvation that to be perfected (matured) in Christ we are called to good works. (Not of man but as prompted by God)

We do not need separate divine instruction to feed the poor it is clearly stated by God that this is part of getting to know Him and we can by freewill choose to take action or not.

John O

 

[former atheist]

Jesus says that you can only go to God if He draws you up to Christ (J6:44) and then in the next verse states that to been drawn you must hear, and learn, that is you must not just have the Word enter into your thought but the Word must make sense, resonate, and cause repentance, and only then can you come. And you can only learn when you have the Spirit of the Lord. If you wish to go into this discussion more, that's awesome, and I would love too, but I need to get ready for work, so it will have to wait! Patience, right?

Jesus is speaking about those that God Gives him over for salvation rather than destruction. Specifically, anyone who comes to believe in Jesus and his sacrifice on the Cross; this is the context of the passage…

That whoever comes to Christ, will be raised the last day by Christ and anyone who comes to Christ, Christ will not drive away, and God will not take away; because their Sins, are paid for in the sacrifice of Christ Jesus on the Cross.

The passage, J6:44, is specifically in response to the grumbling Jews who, thought of Christ as a simple man, a man with a natural father and mother. Christ Jesus our Lord replied to them again with respect to the issue of salvation through the belief in Christ Jesus and his teachings that would bring about living water, that indeed no one can come to Christ for salvation unless God allows it. Christ then re-affirms that God allows it by dictating back to the grumbling Jews where it is written by the profits that God had indeed ordained salvation through Christ.

When you, as you have, take the verse out of the context in which the conversation is about salvation through Christ Jesus, it is easy for me to understand why, in a lone verse, one might think that no one has the Free Will to come to Christ unless God allows them too. However, that is not at all in the context of the passage. Rather, Christ is reaffirming that indeed we are allowed to come to Christ Jesus for our salvation because God allows Salvation through Christ Jesus our Lord. It was written so before Christ and Christ points this out in his conversation with the Grumbling Jews.

 

[Pard]

Jesus is speaking about those that God Gives him over for salvation rather than destruction. Specifically, anyone who comes to believe in Jesus and his sacrifice on the Cross; this is the context of the passage…

That whoever comes to Christ, will be raised the last day by Christ and anyone who comes to Christ, Christ will not drive away, and God will not take away; because their Sins, are paid for in the sacrifice of Christ Jesus on the Cross.

The passage, J6:44, is specifically in response to the grumbling Jews who, thought of Christ as a simple man, a man with a natural father and mother. Christ Jesus our Lord replied to them again with respect to the issue of salvation through the belief in Christ Jesus and his teachings that would bring about living water, that indeed no one can come to Christ for salvation unless God allows it. Christ then re-affirms that God allows it by dictating back to the grumbling Jews where it is written by the profits that God had indeed ordained salvation through Christ.

When you, as you have, take the verse out of the context in which the conversation is about salvation through Christ Jesus, it is easy for me to understand why, in a lone verse, one might think that no one has the Free Will to come to Christ unless God allows them too. However, that is not at all in the context of the passage. Rather, Christ is reaffirming that indeed we are allowed to come to Christ Jesus for our salvation because God allows Salvation through Christ Jesus our Lord. It was written so before Christ and Christ points this out in his conversation with the Grumbling Jews.

Wonderful! OK, until I can get a chance to actually do some real looking (as to be honest I didn't take much time to give that response) I will remove my answer and give Ernest this for an answer, as it seems that it applies just as much, logically, to his improper use of that passage as it does to mine.

Unless of course you would only apply it to the predestined believer, but you wouldn't do that, so no point in going there! I don't mean that to be rude, it's just that my general take on this whole debate has always been that both sides are very much guilty of defense of doctrine over defense of truth, and are more than willing to ignore some verses for the sake of their doctrine. That's wrong, and this comment is not meant for you, as you do seem to be very rational and agreeable, it is meant for the person who would use this type of "poor-man's rhetoric".

 

[Slider]

That's all right, Slider. [Insert joke here.]

But what I did want to get into is the origin of the freewill doctrine.

As I outlined above, freewill doctrine is a ruse. It is a lie that is designed to make God's followers glorify themselves, even if in the smallest of ways. It is a way to take credit from where it is due and lumping it on where it has NO RIGHT TO BE! No one has any right to claim that they made a decision int heir own salvation, because that means you have a right to diminish God's glory in order that your glory may be magnified! And that's wrong, because remember, the Bible is the story of God! The Bible isn't about humans, it has lots and lots and lots of humans in it, in fact there are 3237 characters in the Bible that are given a name. That doesn't include the countless "extras". But you know what, that entire Bible is about only one of them, and only about Him in part. And that one person is Jesus, and the parts that are not about Jesus are about God and God's love, and God's paving the way for Jesus. It isn't about you, me, Paul, David, Moses, Noah, or Adam. It's about Father, Son, and Holy Ghost.

Now once we understand that a) the Bible is about God and nothing else and b) freewill doctrine takes away from God's glory we can begin to wonder why a bunch of God-loving, God-fearing christians came up with the doctrine at all.

And that's where it gets interesting!!!

Erasmus of Rotterdam is the guy who really brought about this concept of freewill in a positive light during the reformation, and he is the one that many protestants turn to in order to create their own basis for freewill. He was alive at one of the most amazing times in church history, the Reformation. How I wish I could have been there to just listen to people have such debates. Imagine! Today we sit around the dinner table with relatives and talk about politics and health care reform and salt. Back then they sat around a table with relatives are argued about doctrine, theology, and what the Bible said! Glorious day, how good of a time would that be?!

Well, back to the matter at hand. Erasmus was an interesting character. He was a Catholic priest. He was Dutch. And he was a member of a group of people we now call "Renascence Humanists". Now I am sure this Erasmus character was a "nice" guy, but he is akin to the "modern church" where we have a lesbian pastor, porn stars for ushers, and the pews are filled with all manner of actively sinful and unrepentant souls. It's like going to a UU church. No one cares who you are, all you have to do is believe in Jesus. And to give them some credit, their doctrine is right on the money with their existence. They are using freewill to decide for Christ while at the same time also reasoning, with their freewill, that you can be a christian and also be in a state of habitual sin, that is be unrepentant and live an unchanged life.

This Erasmus character wasn't someone I'd want to frame my beliefs on. He was very much a proponent of the greatness of humankind. He wanted everyone to be educated in the humanities so that all humans could reach their full potential, and while this sounds great, what this means is glorifying humankind, human activity, human skills. That's wrong, wrong, and WRONG!

To quote the Cambridge Dictionary of Philosophy:

"Here, one felt no weight of the supernatural pressing on the human mind, demanding homage and allegiance. Humanity—with all its distinct capabilities, talents, worries, problems, possibilities—was the center of interest. It has been said that medieval thinkers philosophized on their knees, but, bolstered by the new studies, they dared to stand up and to rise to full stature."​

These guys were scholars who used the Bible as a way of justifying "good intentions". They enjoyed the Bible because it let them flex their minds in an very philosophical way. To paint a picture of what these guys would look like in today's world:

Imagine a hippy liberal who lives in the park across the street from UC Berkley. This person lives across the street because they are 47 years old and still going to college (colleges don't allow you to live on campus after a certain age). This guy is a "Christian" who attends a "great" church, and sit in a pew next to his Buddhist boyfriend and their Wiccan roommates. They all do as they please and they go to church so they can learn all those "great teachers" that Jesus said. To this guy the Bible is a "great" book because it teaches a lot of lessons on being nice to people, loving people, and giving. And it also is a "great" book because it speaks to the atrocity of war, the horrendous nature of the wealthy, and the foolishness of the "religious".

That is who Erasmus is akin to. Now who here would ever listen to theology from the guy I painted for you above? Seriously? I don't think anyone would listen to this guy!



This Erasmus was expanding upon the beliefs of the Catholic church. He preached indifference towards the reformation, but in regards to freewill he just couldn't leave well enough alone. He had to speak up, because freewill was such a pivotal point to what he saw as a loving God.

Luther rebuked this man in his own book "The Bondage of the Will", which he literally wrote in direct retaliation to Erasmus' book "The Freedom of the Will". Luther, in his book, correctly states that a human can only come to God when he makes a loving choice for God, and that the choice can only be made when God makes you His and allows your heart to become inclined towards His way. You are a sinful person, an enemy of God, and while you were His enemy He came to you and changed you, that you may come to Him! And Romans 5:10 puts it this way: "While we were enemies, we were reconciled to God by the death of his Son."

That is God, doing the work. You can't reconcile your own heart. Solomon said that we make a decision from our heart. And Jesus said that our heart only makes a decision for sin.

Needless to say, Luther wont he debate.

Now this is where I get such a chuckle!

My own "people", the Pentecostals, the Calvary Churches, the Assemblies of God, they all adhere to Arminianism. One of the five tenants of Arminianisn is that God allows you the freewill choice to decide for Him. And they base their belief on the foundation of the freewill doctrine as set out by Erasmus, who is a guy they would never even let into their churches! They'd see this guy from a mile away and quickly lock the doors and close the blinds and turn off all the lights, and when he knocked on the door the deacon would go "No one is here!"

I bring up Erasmus because I think it is important to realize that the freewill doctrine comes from a guy who wasn't even a christian. He sought for his glory and for the glory of humanity, not for the glory of God.

Snakes don't make anything worth profit except for their own skin, and they need to be dead

in order to make profit out of that!

I enjoyed this history lesson, but how practical is it? Clearly a lot of folks believe in free will today, and I doubt they came to that conclusion after reading Erasmus!

 

[Stan53]

Let's take one last look at the Bible on this matter, for the moment.
Paul is the premier writer on the topic of predestination, that is the absence of a freewill choice on the part of the believer before coming to salvation. He is probably the biggest writer on this topic because his coming to Christ was so dependent on this notion of predestination (that isn't to say that all the other apostles had something besides predestination, in fact you go and look. Each one came to Christ when Christ came to THEM and said COME. He didn't say "Hey wanna be me friend and come for a walk with me?" He said "COME!".).

Yes Jesus did CALL His disciples. His ministry was to them and their fellow Jews. He also said God gave them to Him. He wasn't talking about salvation. Paul does talk about salvation as His ministry was to the Gentiles. Let's see what Paul said.

OK so 'predestination' in the Bible;

Romans 8:28-30 (NIV)
28 And we know that in all things God works for the good of those who love him, who have been called according to his purpose. 29 For those God foreknew he also predestined to be conformed to the image of his Son, that he might be the firstborn among many brothers and sisters. 30 And those he predestined, he also called; those he called, he also justified; those he justified, he also glorified.
​

Q: Who did God predestine here?
A: Those He foreknew.

Q: Who was it He foreknew?
A: Those who loved Him and have been called.

Q: Who are the ones called?
A: Those

Ephesians 1:4-14 (NIV)
For he chose us in him before the creation of the world to be holy and blameless in his sight. In love 5 he predestined us for adoption to sonship through Jesus Christ, in accordance with his pleasure and will— 6 to the praise of his glorious grace, which he has freely given us in the One he loves. 7 In him we have redemption through his blood, the forgiveness of sins, in accordance with the riches of God’s grace 8 that he lavished on us. With all wisdom and understanding, 9 he made known to us the mystery of his will according to his good pleasure, which he purposed in Christ, 10 to be put into effect when the times reach their fulfilment —to bring unity to all things in heaven and on earth under Christ.
11 In him we were also chosen, having been predestined according to the plan of him who works out everything in conformity with the purpose of his will, 12 in order that we, who were the first to put our hope in Christ, might be for the praise of his glory. 13 And you also were included in Christ when you heard the message of truth, the gospel of your salvation. When you believed, you were marked in him with a seal, the promised Holy Spirit, 14 who is a deposit guaranteeing our inheritance until the redemption of those who are God’s possession—to the praise of his glory.
​

Q: Who did God predestine?
A: Paul already said in Romans 8:29, those who love Him.

Now read v13;

Q: Who was included in Christ?
A: Those who believed.

Romans 10:9-10 (NIV)
If you declare with your mouth, “Jesus is Lord,†and believe in your heart that God raised him from the dead, you will be saved. 10 For it is with your heart that you believe and are justified, and it is with your mouth that you profess your faith and are saved.

​

Q: Who is saved?
A: Those who believe and declare it.

Romans 10:11-13 (NIV)
11 As Scripture says, “Anyone who believes in him will never be put to shame.†12 For there is no difference between Jew and Gentile —the same Lord is Lord of all and richly blesses all who call on him, 13 for, “Everyone who calls on the name of the Lord will be saved.â€

​

Q: Who is saved?
A: Everyone who calls on the name of the LORD.


Finally, although not entirely, the following verse from Paul to show how he perceived the reality of freewill.

Philemon 1:14 (NASB)
but without your consent I did not want to do anything, so that your goodness would not be, in effect, by compulsion but of your own free will.

​

We are made in Gods image. That is both a physical and meta-physical image. God has freewill and in that same image, we have free will. Why would anyone think God wanted to just make a bunch of robots. God made us to follow Him and Worship Him of our OWN volition.

 

[Elijah674]

I would have to respond as such, "not on this side Jordan, No".
But then I would ask you, Did Jesus lie when He said this?
There has to be a resolving of the answer, that seems to be contradicting, huh?

Blessings

Where does Christ say that??? Even though it is truth as 'i' see it! And Peter did have a three time vision & still did not understand the vision!;)

But the point of why he did not, was that FREE WILL was & is Truth! He KNEW that Christ did not change, and that eating pork & monkeys were still unclean beasts, huh? Heb. 13:8 + Mal.3:6

--Elijah

 

[Slider]

Speaking of Paul, anyone want to comment on the amount of free will he had on the road to Damascus when Jesus knocked him blind with the holy ghost baseball bat and said, "hi Paul, it's hard to kick against the pricks, ain't it? "

 

[former atheist]

...Unless of course you would only apply it to the predestined believer, but you wouldn't do that, so no point in going there! I don't mean that to be rude, it's just that my general take on this whole debate has always been that both sides are very much guilty of defense of doctrine over defense of truth, and are more than willing to ignore some verses for the sake of their doctrine. That's wrong, and this comment is not meant for you, as you do seem to be very rational and agreeable, it is meant for the person who would use this type of "poor-man's rhetoric".

Indeed, it can be easy to fall into a trap of defending one’s own belief and/or doctrine.

I would hope however for us all, that we could look beyond our own beliefs, I included, and look more simply at what is written in the Bible in the entirety of the passage; with respect to who is being addressed in the passages and to what is being addressed. Otherwise, it is even simpler to change the entire meaning of His words to suit one’s own purposes therefore creating their own gospel.

I would have to admit, that I have a lot of experience having done so as an Atheist in my attempts to make the Bible sound contradictory to itself or when trying to show God to do evil upon the world during my debates with Christians. However, the fact of the matter is, no matter what false gospel anyone tries to create, there is only one gospel and Gods Word remains un-changed.

I look forward to continue this conversation.

 

[Ernest T. Bass]

Speaking of Paul, anyone want to comment on the amount of free will he had on the road to Damascus when Jesus knocked him blind with the holy ghost baseball bat and said, "hi Paul, it's hard to kick against the pricks, ain't it? "

Acts 26:19 "Whereupon, O king Agrippa, I was not disobedient unto the heavenly vision:"

He could have chosen to disobey.

 

[Ernest T. Bass]

First post is for Ernest, my comical brother! :yes

I am in agreement on your first post, though I didn't want to get into this topic because it is, like I said, a hotly debated topic, and I am glad you didn't get into the finer details of whether or not Jacob and Esau is a ref. to individuals or the notion that God calls entire nations, etc. I also don't see where you post begins to discuss predestination or freewill. You merely state, and rightly so, that people will come to Jesus from all nations and not just Israel, God will make disciples of all the world, through Abraham.

Your second post. I agree with your highlighted (bold) words from John. That's where we end in agreement, though! Jesus says that you can only go to God if He draws you up to Christ (J6:44) and then in the next verse states that to been drawn you must hear, and learn, that is you must not just have the Word enter into your thought but the Word must make sense, resonate, and cause repentance, and only then can you come. And you can only learn when you have the Spirit of the Lord. If you wish to go into this discussion more, that's awesome, and I would love too, but I need to get ready for work, so it will have to wait! Patience, right? :D

My point was that God's choice of Jacob over Esau had nothing to do with some random predetermination made by God as to which one would be saved or lost. The choice had nothing to do with salvation. Jacob and Esau's eternal destinies depended on whether they would choose to obey God's will or not and not based upon some arbitrary choice God made independantly of Jacob and Esau's free will.

Why did God not have mercy upon Pharaoh but had mercy upon the king of Nineveh? For Pharaoh chose to disobey and the king of Nineveh chose to obey, Jonah 3. It has to do with how the clay behaves in the potter's hands, Jer 18:8,10, if a nation obeys God by repenting or disobeys God by not repenting determines how they are fashioned.


Yes, one must be drawn, but how is the drawing done? Is it done in a capricious, unconditional manner? No, one can only be drawn by being taught, hearing and learning of God. What is the result of the drawing done through teaching, hearing and learning? Coming to Christ. The coming to Christ is not something the passage says that is passively forced upon man, but is a free will decision made by man.

Rev 22:17 " And whosoever will, let him take the water of life freely."

'Whosoever' is an open invitation to anyone, everyone
'will' is a matter of man's free will choice

 

[former atheist]

I think that there are people who easily get confused with the fact that we indeed have Free Will because of the very fact that God knows what we have already chosen beforehand. It is a paradox. What came first, the Chicken or the Egg?

The issue is, God, by Gods very nature is present, past and future. God knows already what we will do with our Free Will; even before we exercise our Free Will. Does that mean we don’t actually have Free Will? Not at all! God grants us freedom to choose, even knowing already what we will choose. Be it a hard hardening of our hearts or a warm embrace.

Therefore, when God says: “For those God foreknew he also predestined to be conformed to the image of his Son, that he might be the firstborn among many brothers and sisters.” [Romans 8:29] It does not mean to me that those, whom God foreknew and predestined to be conformed to the image of his Son, did not have Free Will.

The context of the passage Romans 8:28-30 as I understand it is as follows line by line.
28: And we know that in all things God works for the good of those who love him, who have been called according to his purpose.

So far I understand that God works for the good of those who love him, who have been Called, meaning requested to come, to Gods purpose. I think that this verse is rather clearly written. Next verse says:
29: For those God foreknew he also predestined to be conformed to the image of his Son, that he might be firstborn among many brothers and sisters.

In this next verse I understand that the word “those” is referring to the immediate previous use of the word, and that therefore it is in reference to those who love God, and who God has called or requested to come to His purpose. I also understand that God, being in all Present, past and Future; can and does know in advance who those who are to love him will be.

Therefore, when God says in this verse 29, that those who God foreknew, he also predestined, meaning, predetermined; I understand that God is saying that those who love him, loved him or will come to love him, that God knew beforehand in his creation, God has also predetermined of these people to conform to the image of his Son. This fits perfectly with what we know about salvation through Christ our Lord and with what we know about the Holy Spirit continually changing those who come to Christ internally to be more Christ-like. The next verse state:

30: And those he predestined, he also called; those he called, he also justified; those he justified, he also glorified.

With what we know about the previous two verses, we know that those he predestined are the ones who loved him of whom he will conform to the image of his Son; and they are the ones who God has called or requested to Gods own purpose for their lives.

In none of these three verses do I find anything that indicates that there isn’t a Free Will Choice to first love God and to answer his request or calling of those who love God to his own purpose. Therefore, I do not believe that a person is predestined for salvation, even if God know who will come unto salvation through Christ and who will come unto destruction. God doesn’t however predetermine our Salvation. We have the Freedom of choice to respond to Gods purpose. God does says that he predetermined that those who love him, who have come back or who have been called, really meaning the same thing, to Gods own purpose, that those people he predetermined would conform to the image of his Son. This again fits perfectly with the rest of the gospel.