Was Adam imparted free will from the beginning of Creation?

[gordon777]

God commanded Adam just before He made Eve out of Adams rib, because it was not good that the man should be alone. God commands to not eat of the tree of knowledge of good and evil.

When Eve was made, the serpent speaks to her, and Eve replies to the serpent how God had said to not eat of the tree, or you die. The serpent replies she will not die, and how it is because of God knowing her eyes would be opened to be as gods.

When Eve had disobeyed God and heard the devils subtilty, she answers how the serpent beguiled her.




Genesis 2:16 And the Lord God commanded the man, saying, Of every tree of the garden thou mayest freely eat:
17 But of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, thou shalt not eat of it: for in the day that thou eatest thereof thou shalt surely die.

Genesis 2:18 And the Lord God said, It is not good that the man should be alone; I will make him an help meet for him.

Genesis 3:2 And the woman said unto the serpent, We may eat of the fruit of the trees of the garden:
3 But of the fruit of the tree which is in the midst of the garden, God hath said, Ye shall not eat of it, neither shall ye touch it, lest ye die.
4 And the serpent said unto the woman, Ye shall not surely die:
5 For God doth know that in the day ye eat thereof, then your eyes shall be opened, and ye shall be as gods, knowing good and evil.

Genesis 3:13 And the Lord God said unto the woman, What is this that thou hast done? And the woman said, The serpent beguiled me, and I did eat.




I told already how we are to not trust in a friend, and to keep our mouth from her that lies in our bosom. ( Eve)

Jesus shows this is what He came to earth to do, to set a man against his household, and they will be his enemies. To not love your family more than God. ( Adam heard Eve and took what she gave him and ate with her)

Jesus also reminds us how that is the way side, when the word of God is sown ( as God commanded Adam) then comes Satan immediately and takes the word away that was sown in their hearts.




Micah 7:5 Trust ye not in a friend, put ye not confidence in a guide: keep the doors of thy mouth from her that lieth in thy bosom.
6 For the son dishonoureth the father, the daughter riseth up against her mother, the daughter in law against her mother in law; a man's enemies are the men of his own house.

Matthew 10:35 For I am come to set a man at variance against his father, and the daughter against her mother, and the daughter in law against her mother in law.
36 And a man's foes shall be they of his own household.
37 He that loveth father or mother more than me is not worthy of me: and he that loveth son or daughter more than me is not worthy of me.

Mark 4:15 And these are they by the way side, where the word is sown; but when they have heard, Satan cometh immediately, and taketh away the word that was sown in their hearts.




Jesus gave the apostles, who show the same concern for a man, that he feared as the serpent beguiled Eve through his subtilty, so our minds should be CORRUPTED from the SIMPLICITY, that is in Christ.

They come ( as the serpent did to Eve and as Satan does to those by the way side) and preach another Jesus, than what we see the apostles are confirming about not being beguiled, and they are FALSE APOSTLES, DECEITFUL workers, pretending they are apostle of Christ, and to remember, Satan himself is transformed into an angel of light, to therefore know Satans ministers are ALSO transformed as the ministers of righteousness. ( with evil works and deceit)





2 Corinthians 11:3 But I fear, lest by any means, as the serpent beguiled Eve through his subtilty, so your minds should be corrupted from the simplicity that is in Christ.
4 For if he that cometh preacheth another Jesus, whom we have not preached, or if ye receive another spirit, which ye have not received, or another gospel, which ye have not accepted, ye might well bear with him.

2 Corinthians 11:13 For such are false apostles, deceitful workers, transforming themselves into the apostles of Christ.
14 And no marvel; for Satan himself is transformed into an angel of light.
15 Therefore it is no great thing if his ministers also be transformed as the ministers of righteousness; whose end shall be according to their works.




The apostles of the Lord continue to speak from the Lord God, how to receive His word by laying apart all of the deceit, the superfluity of naughtiness, (excesses) to receive the word able to save YOUR SOULS.

It was enough that God said Adam may eat of any tree, and the serpent we see, wants us to have EXCESSES. ( to take from the trees God said not to eat from)

This is even where the thread about not having free will is turned into empty words. If we hear and do not do, we are DECEIVING OUR OWN SELVES. ( even helping the serpent to deceive us)

But we look into Gods perfect law of liberty He showed from the beginning, ( the perfect law of liberty is FREEDOM/FREEWILL.) and continue in what God said and DO NOT BE AS ADAM AND EVE TO FORGET WHAT GOD HAD SAID, to be blessed in our deed.

But again the apostles continue to show who perishes in their OWN CORRUPTION, they riot in the day time, ( on Christianity threads) sporting themselves with THEIR OWN DECEIVING. BEGUILING UNSTABLE SOULS, covetous practises ( EXCESSES/SUPERFLUITY) CURSED children. ( children of the CURSED serpent)



James 1:21 Wherefore lay apart all filthiness and superfluity of naughtiness, and receive with meekness the engrafted word, which is able to save your souls.
22 But be ye doers of the word, and not hearers only, deceiving your own selves.
23 For if any be a hearer of the word, and not a doer, he is like unto a man beholding his natural face in a glass:
24 For he beholdeth himself, and goeth his way, and straightway forgetteth what manner of man he was.
25 But whoso looketh into the perfect law of liberty, and continueth therein, he being not a forgetful hearer, but a doer of the work, this man shall be blessed in his deed.


2 Peter 2:12 But these, as natural brute beasts, made to be taken and destroyed, speak evil of the things that they understand not; and shall utterly perish in their own corruption;
13 And shall receive the reward of unrighteousness, as they that count it pleasure to riot in the day time. Spots they are and blemishes, sporting themselves with their own deceivings while they feast with you;
14 Having eyes full of adultery, and that cannot cease from sin; beguiling unstable souls: an heart they have exercised with covetous practices; cursed children:

Genesis 3:14 And the Lord God said unto the serpent, Because thou hast done this, thou art cursed above all cattle, and above every beast of the field; upon thy belly shalt thou go, and dust shalt thou eat all the days of thy life:

 

[gordon777]

I just quoted one example of Jesus not knowing what God knows, but there are more. I don't need to make long posts for them to be effective. I provided a single point of the Son not knowing what the Father knows. I am just simply showing that this exists and it's supportive of my belief that the Son is not God. Once you realize this is the scriptural reality, you won't stop seeing it from Genesis to Revelation.

Jesus Christ gives us understanding, not limited, because He is not limited, as we see from Genesis to Revelation, as the scriptures speak of Him, of no other.

 

[Kermos]

The concept of "free will" is not explicitly mentioned in the bible, it must be understood as opposed to "natural will". So what is natural will? It's the limbic system in our brain in charge of emotions, also known as "lizard brain". These emotions are our "6F" natural reactions to a situation: - fight, flight, fear, feed, freeze, fornication. Natural will is a given, as these reactions come up NATURALLY, they don't require any effort or even awareness from you, and of course, it often turns out negatively. Free will, on the other hand, empowers you to RESPOND with the thinking part of your brain, and that's what sets us apart from animals. And unlike natural will, free will is like a muscle that must be trained, and that's the spiritual gift of discipline. If you abandon your free will and follow your feelings, you'd be subject to your natural will and unable to respond.

The natural man is the initial unconverted date of being for every person.

The Bondage Of A Man's Will​

Free-willians, in a respect, are correct that "there's no difference between self will and free will", and that respect is that both self will and free will lead to hell.
Now, instead of listening to themselves lie with things like "Free will is all through the scriptures", they need to listen to Apostolic testimony as shown below.

Peter the Apostle wrote that prior to being saved, people have a self will that brings such people under damnation with the devil according to the Apostle Peter (2 Peter 2:9-10).

Paul the Apostle wrote that after being saved, people have a will that is bound under the loving control of God according to the Apostle Paul (Philippians 2:13).

Here's Paul from the Bible, again. Overall, Paul uses free will as illusory instead of concrete in Philemon 1:14 - and this is the only occurrence of "free will" that I am aware of in the New American Standard Bible New Testament.

Free-willians do not have a free will, as described by Paul.

Free-willians do have a self will, as described by Peter.

Free-willians gleefully separate themselves from God's will and the Christ of us Christians Who says "you did not choose Me, but I chose you" (John 15:16) and "I chose you out of the world" (John 15:19). We Christians in God's Spirit have a will bound enthusiastically in joy and love to God by God for God through God, as described by Paul.

The above mentioned Apostolic testimony verbatim:

• "the Lord knows how to rescue the godly from temptation, and to keep the unrighteous under punishment for the day of judgment, and especially those who indulge the flesh in its corrupt desires and despise authority; daring, self-willed, they do not tremble when they revile angelic majesties" (2 Peter 2:9-10).
• "it is God who is at work in you, both to will and to work for His good pleasure" (Philippians 2:13).
• "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" (Philemon 1:14).

Man is saved from the wrath of God exclusively by God's grace for God's glory!

The original post contains the Truth (John 14:6) which shows richly in Scripture that Adam was not imparted free will, so no man thereafter was imparted free will.

 

[Mr. G Lee]

Was Adam imparted free will from the beginning of Creation?

The Word of God indicates no based upon both scriptural text and context.

The following is carefully presented proof establishing Adam was formed with intent not endowed with free will.

God did not create free will. . the recipe for anarchy.He created a will subject to his will mankind chose to do the will of another seen . Death came

like Jesus the Son of man our example eating the meat the disciples knew not of the daily bread of the will of God the food working in Jesus to both hear the will and empowered to finish it to the good pleasure of God .

Some murmur and say what about my will?

Philippians 2:13-14 For it is God which worketh in you both to will and to do of his good pleasure. Do all things without murmurings and disputings:

John 4:34 Jesus saith unto them, My meat is to do the will of him that sent me, and to finish his work.

 

[Kermos]

No, simply asserting that "for" is "promissory," or "prophetic," in Genesis 2:17 doesn't make it so. Commonly, "for" is a conditional term: a particular state-of-affairs is conditional upon a preceding one. In the case of Genesis 2:17, "you will surely die" is conditional upon ("for") Adam and Eve eating of the Forbidden Fruit ("in the day you eat of it"). Simply put, if they ate of the fruit, then they would die. Read naturally, in a straightforward manner, this is a simple, plain, cause-and-effect statement.

None of what you observed about the Hebrew form of "for" advances your contention that it is meant to convey a prophecy in Genesis 2:17. Replacing "for" with "when" doesn't change the fundamentally conditional nature of the term "ki." Both terms can be used in the very same conditional way. Bob may say to Sam, "When you step in the bear trap, it will break your leg." But this doesn't at all mean that Sam WILL do so. In fact, there's good reason to think, given Bob's warning that Sam WON'T put his foot in the bear trap.

Genesis 2:16-17
16 The LORD God commanded the man, saying, "From any tree of the garden you may eat freely;
17 but from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil you shall not eat, for in the day that you eat from it you will surely die."

So, according to you Kermos, God commands Adam not to eat of the Forbidden Fruit, warning him of a dire consequence should he do so, while at the same time prophesying that Adam would do so? This is like Bob saying to Sam, "Don't you ever step in that bear trap. If you do, you'll break your leg. But, you will step in the bear trap and break your leg because I'm going to make you step in it." This sounds pretty bizarre to me, but this is essentially what you think God said to Adam about the Forbidden Fruit. What's the purpose in God commanding Adam not to eat of the Forbidden Fruit, warning Adam of the awful consequences of doing so and then saying, "But you will it eat anyway because I'm going to make you eat it." This isn't at all what I see God doing in the verses above.

Let's do examine the word "for" in Genesis 2:16-17, so first the passage:

and commanded YHWH God to the man, saying "Of every tree in the garden to eat you will be eating, but of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, not eating from, when in the day you are to eat of it to die you will be dying"
(Genesis 2:16-17)
​

The English word "for" in Genesis 2:17 translates from the source Hebrew word כִּ֗י (ki) (Strong's Hebrew: 3588), and the word כִּ֗י is defined as "that", "for", "when".

The word כִּ֗י (when) is absolutely "promissory," or "prophetic," in Genesis 2:17.

The word "for" is not a conditional logic statement construct under any circumstances; on the other hand, the word "if" is a conditional logic statement construct, as in "if" this_is_true "then" do_that. The word "if" is absent from Genesis 2:16-17.

Your illegally redefined words result in your thoughts being "The LORD God asked the man, saying, 'From any tree of the garden you may eat freely; but from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil you shall not eat, if you eat from it you will surely die.'" for Genesis 2:16-17 (notice in this sentence, the word "for" in front of the word "Genesis" is not a conditional logic statement construct as your illegal linguistics claim).

You wrote "Bob may say to Sam, 'When you step in the bear trap, it will break your leg.'", yet Bob is not God, so Bob cannot use the word "when" without running the risk of being a false prophet because the word "when" expresses certainty that the event of Sam stepping in the bear trap will occur.

You also wrote "Replacing 'for' with 'when' doesn't change the fundamentally conditional nature", so let's just do this change to your example to see the absurdity of your illegal linguistics and your illogic, "Bob may say to Sam, 'For you step in the bear trap, it will break your leg.'", yet that is a senseless statement.

The word "if" is the only word out of "if", "for", and "when" that indicates a conditional logic statement for Sam in relation to the bear trap, "Bob may say to Sam, 'If you step in the bear trap, it will break your leg.'", yet this conditional logic statement does not convey ability to Sam, consider that Sam might be a paraplegic with no use of his legs.

The word "when" indicates an absolute occurrence, so the Hebrew word כִּ֗י (ki) (Strong's Hebrew: 3588) in Genesis 2:16-17 conceptually represents an event that will certainly occur; in other words, God prophesied Adam would eat from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, and it came to pass that Adam ate from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil.

When you wrote that God said to Adam "I'm going to make you eat it, then your words demonstrate your illegal injection of your thoughts into the words of others.

God Declares The Cause And Effect For Adam Eating Of The Forbidden Tree​

After Adam ate of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil (Genesis 3:6), to Adam, God said "Because you have listened to the voice of your wife, and have eaten from the tree about which I commanded you, saying, 'You shall not eat from it'; Cursed is the ground because of you; In toil you will eat of it All the days of your life. Both thorns and thistles it shall grow for you; And you will eat the plants of the field; By the sweat of your face You will eat bread, Till you return to the ground, Because from it you were taken; For you are dust, And to dust you shall return." (Genesis 3:17-19)

The word "because" inherently indicates cause in (Genesis 3:17), and the word "because" is the first word that God said to Adam in Genesis 3:17-19.

The Word of God declares the cause as being that Adam listened to the voice of his wife.

God LITERALLY stated that the CAUSE was Adam LISTENED to Adam's wife's voice; moveover, free will choice is NOT included as a CAUSE; therefore, the Apostle Paul's conveyance that Adam "not willingly" ate of the tree (Romans 8:20) is in accord with the recorded Word of God in Genesis 3:17.

You inquired "What's the purpose in God commanding Adam not to eat of the Forbidden Fruit, and I proclaim to you, just as was expressed in the original post, that Adam was a part of God's Plan of Redemption through the Christ for mankind before the foundation of the world.

More might come later, Tenchi.

The original post contains the Truth (John 14:6) which shows richly in Scripture that Adam was not imparted free will, so no man thereafter was imparted free will.

 

[Tenchi]

Let's do examine the word "for" in Genesis 2:16-17,

I already have and have shown your thinking on it to be in error.

and commanded YHWH God to the man, saying "Of every tree in the garden to eat you will be eating, but of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, not eating from, when in the day you are to eat of it to die you will be dying"
(Genesis 2:16-17)

??? Not going with this version. I work from these, instead:

Genesis 2:16-17 (ESV)
16 And the LORD God commanded the man, saying, “You may surely eat of every tree of the garden,
17 but of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil you shall not eat, for in the day that you eat of it you shall surely die.”

Genesis 2:16-17 (NASB)
16 The LORD God commanded the man, saying, "From any tree of the garden you may eat freely;
17 but from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil you shall not eat, for in the day that you eat from it you will surely die."

Genesis 2:16-17 (ASV)
16 And Jehovah God commanded the man, saying, Of every tree of the garden thou mayest freely eat:
17 but of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, thou shalt not eat of it: for in the day that thou eatest thereof thou shalt surely die.

Genesis 2:16-17 (KJV)
16 And the LORD God commanded the man, saying, Of every tree of the garden thou mayest freely eat:
17 But of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, thou shalt not eat of it: for in the day that thou eatest thereof thou shalt surely die.

Of over sixty English translations that I looked at, only six used the word "when" and only once in those six was it used alone; the rest had "because when," or "for when." The vast majority of translations used "for" or "if," not "when." Your insistence on "when" as the proper translation of "ki" flies in the face of a tidal wave of translators not using this rendering of the word. Inasmuch as these are professional translators, highly-skilled in ancient Hebrew and other biblical languages, who think "if" or "for" is a better translation, I'm not at all willing to accept your peculiar rendering, especially when it seems mainly intended to conveniently allow for your view.

The word כִּ֗י (when) is absolutely "promissory," or "prophetic," in Genesis 2:17.

You already asserted this. Simply doing so again doesn't make your mistaken assertion any more right than the first time you asserted it. A bald assertion is not an argument for itself. A huge majority of Bible translators have opted for a different rendering of the work "ki." It will take far more than your mere assertion to counter the weight of their translation choices of "if" or "for."

The word "for" is not a conditional logic statement construct under any circumstances; on the other hand, the word "if" is a conditional logic statement construct, as in "if" this_is_true "then" do_that. The word "if" is absent from Genesis 2:16-17.

Again, you're just asserting things here, not actually making a case for your view. I showed how "for" can be used in a conditional manner. It is, then, certainly a term of condition. Merely saying, "No it's not," however emphatically, doesn't change what I've pointed out in the least.

Your illegally redefined words result in your thoughts being "The LORD God asked the man, saying, 'From any tree of the garden you may eat freely; but from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil you shall not eat, if you eat from it you will surely die.'" for Genesis 2:16-17 (notice in this sentence, the word "for" in front of the word "Genesis" is not a conditional logic statement construct as your illegal linguistics claim).

It's pretty clear to folks who have a better handle on English than you appear to have (like me) that your word jumble here is way off-base. See the translations of Genesis 2:17 I offered above.

Continued below.

 

[Tenchi]

You wrote "Bob may say to Sam, 'When you step in the bear trap, it will break your leg.'", yet Bob is not God, so Bob cannot use the word "when" without running the risk of being a false prophet because the word "when" expresses certainty that the event of Sam stepping in the bear trap will occur.

This is silly. People use the word "when" all the time in a non-divine, non-prophetic way - just like in the example of Bob and Sam: When a person takes cyanide, they will die; when a man punches an angry grizzly bear in the face, the man will be hurt; when all the wings of a plane flying in the air fall off, the plane will crash. In any case, it is as certain as anything can be (that isn't divine prophecy) that, if Sam steps into the bear-trap, he will break his leg. This is all Bob meant to say, not that he was prophesying a future event in a God-like way.

You also wrote "Replacing 'for' with 'when' doesn't change the fundamentally conditional nature", so let's just do this change to your example to see the absurdity of your illegal linguistics and your illogic, "Bob may say to Sam, 'For you step in the bear trap, it will break your leg.'", yet that is a senseless statement.

But I wasn't offering with the Bob and Sam example an instance of the direct interchangeability of "when" and "for." I was using the Bob and Sam example to show an instance where "when" is used conditionally. In any case, because you seem to have a poor grasp on English, you have badly miswritten how "for" would be properly used in the above example. To employ "for" by itself in a conditional way in the sentence, you should have written it out as follows:

Bob may say to Sam, "For to step in the bear trap, will be to break your leg."

Or,

Bob may say to Sam, "For a step in the bear trap will break your leg."

Or,

Bob may say to Sam, "For stepping in the bear trap will surely break your leg."

In each of these forms of the sentence, "for" is used alone in a conditional manner. How, then, is "for" not properly synonymous with the conditional use of "when"? Your language mishap above doesn't explain.

The word "if" is the only word out of "if", "for", and "when" that indicates a conditional logic statement for Sam in relation to the bear trap, "Bob may say to Sam, 'If you step in the bear trap, it will break your leg.'", yet this conditional logic statement does not convey ability to Sam, consider that Sam might be a paraplegic with no use of his legs.

Yeah...see above.

When you wrote that God said to Adam "I'm going to make you eat it, then your words demonstrate your illegal injection of your thoughts into the words of others.

I wasn't giving a word-for-word translation of Genesis 2:17 when I added this bit. I was drawing out the necessary implication of saying that God was prophesying Adam's disobedience. If "when" was used in a prophetic way in the verse, then Adam ultimately had no choice but to disobey God. Therefore, it's appropriate to understand the verse to imply that God forced Adam to sin. Capisce?

The Word of God declares the cause as being that Adam listened to the voice of his wife.

Do you think Adam could have refused Eve when it was prophesied by God that Adam would take the Forbidden Fruit and sin?

moveover, free will choice is NOT included as a CAUSE;

Why do you think simply asserting something makes it true? By itself, an assertion is just an assertion, nothing more.

Eve was what you might call a "catalyst for choice." She provided a crossroad of decision for Adam. But Eve did not compel Adam to eat the fruit. Scripture nowhere says that she did - or even implies this. Adam took the fruit knowing full-well it was wrong to do so. Did he do so because God had prophesied Adam would? Or did Adam choose freely to sin? If the former is true, God is responsible for Adam's sin. If the latter is true, Adam is responsible for his sin. Who are you going to blame, Kermos? I'm not blaming God, that's for sure!

the Apostle Paul's conveyance that Adam "not willingly" ate of the tree (Romans 8:20) is in accord with the recorded Word of God in Genesis 3:17.

When you start messing around with one part of Scripture, inevitably you have to mess around with other parts of it. You've denied the natural, straightforward reading of Genesis 2:17 and now are denying the divine inspiration of the apostle Paul's words. Wow. It's amazing how quickly going off the rails in one instance in Scripture has led you to do so again in another.

You inquired "What's the purpose in God commanding Adam not to eat of the Forbidden Fruit, and I proclaim to you, just as was expressed in the original post, that Adam was a part of God's Plan of Redemption through the Christ for mankind before the foundation of the world.

This doesn't answer my question at all. Your answer here is facile and evasive. What point was there in God warning Adam not to do something God had ordained Adam would do? If I program a robot to kill kittens, why should I warn it not to kill them? Can't you see the problem here?

 

[Kermos]

I'm confused by your reasoning here... If Adam's will is free, then it is unconstrained in at least some of the choices Adam makes. But if Adam's will, because it comes from God and is like His will, is not truly free, one has to conclude that God's will is not free, either (Adam's will mirrors God's will, right?).

God has brought me back to continue the examination of your post #91 in this thread.

You wrote "But if Adam's will, because it comes from God and is like His will, is not truly free, one has to conclude that God's will is not free, either (Adam's will mirrors God's will, right?)."

You introduced a false dichotomy in that you slaughtered out of your reply the original post's scriptural point that God created Adam lacking attribute/characteristic which God possesses - despite God creating Adam in the image and likeness of God. Then you proceeded to attack your false dichotomy which you injected.

This other thread on this site in Theology covers the very topic of God's will as well as that God's will is not free from God.

https://christianforums.net/threads/the-unchangeableness-of-god-and-the-will-of-god.99782/

Perhaps God will bring me back again in the future.

Some people think, that like Adam illegally took of the tree (Genesis 2:16-17, Genesis 3:6), they illegally take of that which is Holy (with their "I chose Jesus") through their own innate power instead of the Power of God (1 Corinthians 1:24) causing themselves to be rewarded with being born of God (John 3:3-8) resulting in God's righteous induction of the person as a citizen in the Kingdom of God (John 15:15).

A person has one type of will, either a will in the image of Christ (Romans 8:29) for the born of God (John 3:3-8) or a will in the image of Adam for the born of flesh (Romans 5:12, 1 Corinthians 15:22) also Biblically called self-will (2 Peter 2:9-10).

The original post contains the Truth (John 14:6) which shows richly in Scripture that Adam was not imparted free will, so no man thereafter was imparted free will.

 

[Kermos]

But this view of God's will assumes a deterministic state-of-affairs - the very thing in question. In other words, you're sort of Begging the Question, here.

God can't do certain things as a necessity of His own nature: He can't lie, or entertain darkness within Himself, or do anything logically impossible (create a round square, or a married bachelor, etc.), for example. But how does this preclude all freedom of choice in God's case? Being unable to do some things, doesn't mean necessarily that I can't do anything. That I can't choose how tall I'll be, or what the color of my eyes is, doesn't mean I can't choose to eat a piece of pecan pie rather than a doughnut. Why can't this be true for God, too? And if it is true for Him, why not for Adam also?

God has brought me back to continue the examination of your post #91 in this thread.

You wrote "doesn't mean I can't choose to eat a piece of pecan pie rather than a doughnut", so you express your detachment from God.

My Lord and my God Jesus Christ controls my will to the minutest detail, even of which items I purchase at the store, and I praise Him for His loving blessing (2 Corinthians 5:14)!

The Bondage Of A Man's Will

Free-willians, in a respect, are correct that "there's no difference between self will and free will", and that respect is that both self will and free will lead to hell.
Now, instead of listening to themselves lie with things like "Free will is all through the scriptures", they need to listen to Apostolic testimony as shown below.

Peter the Apostle wrote that prior to being saved, people have a self will that brings such people under damnation with the devil according to the Apostle Peter (2 Peter 2:9-10).

Paul the Apostle wrote that after being saved, people have a will that is bound under the loving control of God according to the Apostle Paul (Philippians 2:13).

Here is Paul from the Bible, again. Overall, Paul uses free will as illusory instead of concrete in Philemon 1:14 - and this is the only occurrence of "free will" that I am aware of in the New American Standard Bible New Testament.

Free-willians do not have a free will, as described by Paul.

Free-willians do have a self will, as described by Peter.

Free-willians gleefully separate themselves from God's will and the Christ of us Christians Who says "you did not choose Me, but I chose you" (John 15:16) and "I chose you out of the world" (John 15:19). We Christians in God's Spirit have a will bound enthusiastically in joy and love to God by God for God through God, as described by Paul.

The above mentioned Apostolic testimony verbatim:

• the Lord knows how to rescue the godly from temptation, and to keep the unrighteous under punishment for the day of judgment, and especially those who indulge the flesh in its corrupt desires and despise authority; daring, self-willed, they do not tremble when they revile angelic majesties
  (2 Peter 2:9-10).
• it is God who is at work in you, both to will and to work for His good pleasure (Philippians 2:13).
• 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
  (Philemon 1:14).

We Christians are saved from the wrath of God according to God's exclusive choosing by God's grace for God's glory!

Perhaps God will bring me back again in the future.

The original post contains the Truth (John 14:6) which shows richly in Scripture that Adam was not imparted free will, so no man thereafter was imparted free will.

 

[Kermos]

I read, for instance, in the OT of God "repenting" of things a number of times, that is, changing His mind about what He had decided to do. (Genesis 6:6-7; Exodus 32:14; Judges 2:18; 1 Samuel 15:35, etc.) How is such repentance, a change of mind, possible in a God whose nature has eliminated His freedom to choose entirely? If, despite God's limits, He retained some free agency, why couldn't the same be true of Adam made in God's image?

God has brought me back to continue the examination of your post #91 in this thread.

You wrote "I read, for instance, in the OT of God repenting' of things a number of times", so I ask you, have you studied the original Hebrew text of any of those passages? God caused me to study the Old Testament passages which some English translators injected the word "repent".

Let's look at just one exemplary passage that the King James Version (KJV) translates the Hebrew word וַיִּנָּ֖חֶם (Strong's 5162 - nacham) as "repented":

And the LORD relented from the disaster that he had spoken of bringing on his people.
(Exodus 32:14, English Standard Version (ESV))
​

Behold, the word "repented" is absent from Exodus 32:14! The word "relented" is in the textual position of וַיִּנָּ֖חֶם (Strong's 5162 - nacham)!

You are reading an inaccurate translation for the Hebrew word וַיִּנָּ֖חֶם (Strong's 5162 - nacham) which accurately translates to the word "relent" meaning "sorry", not God changing as per your thoughts, but the word in Exodus 32:14 denotes "increasing compassion, forgiving" in Truth (John 14:6).

The same Hebrew root word of נָחַם (Strong's 5162 - nacham) occurs in 1 Chronicles 21:15, Jeremiah 26:13, Joel 2:13, and Jonah 3:10. In all five of these passages, the KJV used the word "repent" conjugates, so the KJV inaccurately conveys that God changes; in contrast, the ESV used the word "relent" conjugates, so the ESV accurately conveys that God is lovingly compassionate and forgiving!

The Lord God Almighty is gracious to give undeserved forgiveness! Undeserved forgiveness is called mercy.

"YHWH is compassionate and gracious, slow to anger and abounding in mercy" (Psalm 103:8).

The One True God has compassion and mercy on the persons of God's choosing. Praise be YHWH God's Holy Name! God is awesome!!!

Your inaccurate translation leads you to an inaccurate belief that God changes, yet the Word of God pronounces:

I, YHWH, do not change
(Malachi 3:6).
​

Hear the Word of YHWH!

Perhaps God will bring me back again in the future.

The original post contains the Truth (John 14:6) which shows richly in Scripture that Adam was not imparted free will, so no man thereafter was imparted free will.

 

[Corinth77777]

Was Adam imparted free will from the beginning of Creation?

The Word of God indicates no based upon both scriptural text and context.

The following is carefully presented proof establishing Adam was formed with intent not endowed with free will.

• God issued prophecy about man eating the fruit (Genesis 2:17)
  AT the time God commanded the man, Adam, not to eat of the tree
  AND the consequence of disobedience is declared - that is that death of the man would result in eating from the tree
  YET a command does not convey ability
  BUT the language contains a prophetic construct indicating assurance of occurrence - "for in the day that you eat" - the "for" is promissory
  NOT a conditional logic construct such as "if in the day that you eat"
  IN fact, the English word "for" is translated from the Hebrew word כִּ֗י (ki)
  AND the Hebrew word כִּ֗י (ki) contains the meanings of these English words "that", "for", "when" (Strong's Hebrew: 3588. כִּ֗י (ki) -- that, for, when)
  THEREFORE the word "when" fits where the word "for" resides in Genesis 2:17
  THUS the phrase "when in the day that you eat" is an accurate translation for Genesis 2:17
  SO this confirms the promissory nature, the prophecy of man eating the fruit, with the word "for"/"when" in Genesis 2:17
  AND this imposes contextual certainty indicating God's foreknowledge over the matter described in Genesis 2:17
  SO there is no free will indicated for Adam
  AND the firm fact is established
  THAT God reigns in the affairs of man (Daniel 4:34-35)
• The attribute of man being created in the image according to the likeness of God
• Attributes/Characteristics Compared And Contrasted
  • The attribute of man being created in the image according to the likeness of God
    SINCE Adam was made in the image according to the likeness of God (Genesis 1:26)
    THEN some persons of the creation (creatures) argue that specific facility was given to Adam
    IN particular God willpowering purported "free will" into man, specifically a free will into man in the likeness God's will, during the creation of Adam
    THEN Adam could not have used free will to perform evil against God
    BECAUSE God will not use willpower in order to perform evil against God's self (Psalm 5:4, Psalm 92:15, Deuteronomy 32:4)
    THEREFORE it follows that man could not use free will in order to perform evil against God
    COMPARITIVELY this point's basis conveys that Adam who was made in the likeness of God (Genesis 1:26) could not use an Adam's will created by God inside Adam which is a duplicate of God's will (likeness of God's will) because God's will won't work against God so then Adams will could not work against God and since Adam disobeyed God, it is with certainty that the attribute of Adam's will was not made a duplicate of God's will (likeness of God's will).
    1. The logical extension of free will on this basis results in man possessing expanded facilities beyond God's facilities
    2. God is Creator; on the other hand, man is creature
    3. Largely, I use free will to mean man choosing toward God, emphatically Lord Jesus Christ.
    4. Scripture does not include the mention of God endowing Adam with free will.
    5. Man's free will is a precept of man leading to worship in vain (Matthew 15:9)
  • Adam as part of God's Plan of Redemption through the Christ for mankind before the foundation of the world
    SINCE God saw creation was very good on the 6th Day (Genesis 1:31)
    AND God's Plan of Redemption through the Christ for mankind is good (Ephesians 1:1-14, Ephesians 2:13)
    AND no person can thwart God's Plan (Job 42:2)
    THEN a free will Adam could not have been roaming the Garden of Eden with the ability to choose to obey God's command not to eat of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil (Genesis 2:17)
    SINCE the only command carrying a punishment was the prohibition upon Adam against eating of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil
    THUS a free will Adam could have disrupted God's Plan of Redemption through the Christ for mankind
    SO God could not conclude with certainty by declaring everything was good on the sixth day with a free will Adam in control roaming the Garden of Eden
    THEREFORE it follows that Adam could not be endowed with the attribute of free will
  • The timeline of Adam knowing good and evil
    BEFORE Adam and Eve ate from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil
    THEN Adam and Eve knew not good and evil
    AFTER Adam and Eve ate from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil
    THEN Adam and Eve knew good and evil
    FOR the delineation is clarified when God said "Behold, the man has become like one of Us, knowing good and evil" (Genesis 3:22)
    YET based on the Word of God saying "has become" recorded in Genesis 3:22
    THEN Adam did not know good and evil before eating from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil
    SO Adam did not know good and evil when God issued the command "from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil you shall not eat, for in the day that you eat from it you will surely die!" Genesis 2:17)
    THEREFORE at the time of eating, Adam listened (perceived) and followed her word about the tree of the knowledge of good and evil
    FOR God said "Because you have listened to the voice of your wife, and have eaten from the tree about which I commanded you, saying, 'You shall not eat from it'" (Genesis 3:17)
    SO Adam listened to Eve and Adam ate from the tree prior to knowing good and evil
    AND a person does good by obeying God; on the other hand, a person does evil by disobeying God
    SO free will choosing of good or choosing of evil is not the context
    YET action is the context
    SINCE good and evil are not known to Adam prior to eating from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil
    THEREFORE it follows that Adam was not endowed with the attribute of free will
  • An inherently good Adam would have assuredly and absolutely excluded eating of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil
    BECAUSE an inherently good Adam would have acted in the good way of obedience to God's command (Genesis 2:16-17)
    WITH the good way being God's Way (John 14:6)
    YET "No one is good except God alone" (Mark 10:18)
    AND it is written "God saw all that He had made, and behold, it was very good. And there was evening and there was morning, the sixth day" (Genesis 1:31)
    NOTE in "it was very good", the word "it" is grammatically a third person singular thus referring to the entirety of creation being constructed well (good) on course with God's Plan of Redemption through the Christ for mankind before the foundation of the world (Ephesians 1:1-14, Ephesians 2:13)
    YET the word "it" is not third person plural as in "they were very good" of which a third person plural is required in order to refer to an individual such as Adam or the Devil the Serpent
    AND the Word of God specifically excludes Adam from being good with "No one is good except God alone" (Mark 10:18)
    SO the spirit of antichrist preaches that Adam with all mankind as good for any amount of time thus nullifying the need for the Savior
    BEHOLD that God saw the whole package, the complete creation, the "all" that He had made, that it was very good
    BUT God did not specify how the aggregate (all) that He had made was very good therein
    AND God did not specify any constituents of creation as being inherently good therein
    AND God creating "all that He had made" for God in Jesus Christ to come to earth to save evil man is very good
    SO with certainty, God's Plan of Redemption through the Christ for mankind before the foundation of the world is very good
  • The attribute of "joining" - marriage
    1. Lord Jesus says a topically very profound statement of "from the beginning of creation, [God] made them male and female. For this reason a man shall leave his father and mother, and the two shall become one flesh; so they are no longer two, but one flesh. What therefore God has joined together let no man separate." (Mark 10:6-9)
    2. "God has joined together" is a clear reference by Jesus to Christ and the Bride of Christ, that is, the Assembly of God
    3. "God has joined together" is a clear reference by Jesus to marriage between "male and female" (creatures both)
    4. "God has joined together" is a clear reference by Jesus to Adam and Eve, the man and the woman
    5. God does the joining, while, on the other hand, man and woman are only the joyful recipients
    6. The facility of "joining" is not attributed to man and/or woman
    7. The facility of "joining" is attributed to God
    THEREFORE God exclusively causes individuals to join into the Assembly of God.

For expanded topic coverage, please see this integral essay Almighty God's Awesome Creation In Amazing Splendor.

If anyone venture a reply to this thread, I encourage diligent care for it is written "do not add to His words or He will reprove you, and you will be proved a liar" (Proverbs 30:6).

May the Lord abound mercy and understanding and strength and grace in we His own for the Day approaches rapidly!

Is there free will without choice?
Before the fall didn't Adam use free will to name the animals.

 

[eframe]

Hi hope I am not going to break a rule or upset anyone by posting this, it's a bit overwhelming seeing how much effort it takes to prove something using the scriptures as evidence......I just assumed he had free will, how can he be held responsible if he didn't?

 

[Kermos]

That isn't what we were talking about in the last comment.


That isn't something I challenge or suggested.


I eliminated the part that's wrong so that when I said "Yes" I wasn't agreeing to something I know to be false.


Let's not mince words. Jesus' name isn't Christ. This sometimes refers to an anointing that regular Christians can have. The early Christians fully believed being a Christ was something they could attain.

Ephesians 4
11And it was He who gave some to be apostles, some to be prophets, some to be evangelists, and some to be pastors and teachers, 12to equip the saints for works of ministry and to build up the body of Christ, 13until we all reach unity in the faith and in the knowledge of the Son of God, as we mature to the full measure of the stature of Christ.

14Then we will no longer be infants, tossed about by the waves and carried around by every wind of teaching and by the clever cunning of men in their deceitful scheming. 15Instead, speaking the truth in love, we will in all things grow up into Christ Himself, who is the head. 16From Him the whole body, fitted and held together by every supporting ligament, grows and builds itself up in love through the work of each individual part.

Philippians 2
5Let this mind be in you which was also in Christ Jesus:
6Who, existing in the form of God,
did not consider equality with God
something to be grasped,
7but emptied Himself,
taking the form of a servant,
being made in human likeness.
8And being found in appearance as a man,
He humbled Himself
and became obedient to death—
even death on a cross.


Jesus isn't God.

Acts 3
13The God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, the God of our fathers, has glorified His servant Jesus.

Exodus 3
14God said to Moses, “I AM WHO I AM. This is what you are to say to the Israelites: ‘I AM has sent me to you.’ ”
15God also told Moses, “Say to the Israelites, ‘The LORD,[YHWH] the God of your fathers—the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob—has sent me to you.’ This is My name forever, and this is how I am to be remembered in every generation.

?

It's not a non-sequitur. I proved that the tree of knowledge doesn't have to be a literal tree. That follows from my original comment to you.


I agree.


You misunderstood what I said. I disagree with your general premise that Jesus is God. Jesus absolutely does not know everything God knows. See Matt 24:36 for proof.


Maybe you got it all wrong? See the below verse.

Deteuronomy 23
23Be careful to follow through on what comes from your lips, because you have freely vowed to the LORD your God with your own mouth.

You wrote "Jesus isn't God", so you believe not Jesus the Word of God "Truly, truly, I say to you, before Abraham was, I AM" (John 8:58) - this Lord and God Jesus Christ (John 20:28) says "Truly, truly" here, not "Falsely, falsely" per your conceptualization, but "Truly, truly, I say to you, before Abraham was, I AM" (John 8:58); therefore, Lord Jesus Christ is eternal I AM YHWH God!

Jesus Christ is truly Man (Luke 1:26-33) - the Son of Man, and Jesus Christ is truly God (Luke 1:34-35, John 8:58, John 20:28, John 5:18, John 10:30-31) - the Son of God.

Your citation of Acts 3:13 has the Apostle Peter referring to Jesus Christ in His capacity of truly Man, but this usage does not negate the Christ's capacity as truly God because this same Apostle Peter refers to Jesus in His capacity as truly God with "Simon Peter, a bond-servant and apostle of Jesus Christ, to those who have received a faith of the same kind as ours by the righteousness of the God of us and Savior, Jesus Christ" (2 Peter 1:1) for Jesus is the God and Savior of us Christians. Praise be to the One True God!

No Christian believes that he or she becomes a Christ, which means Messiah. There is One Messiah, and Lord Jesus Christ is Yahúwah Yahushua haMashiyach. Your citation of Ephesians 4:11-16 fails to convey that Christians believe they become a Christ. Also, your thoughts regarding Philippians 2:5-8 are out of accord with the Apostle Paul who wrote this passage about Jesus in Christ's capacity as truly Man since this same Apostle Paul wrote "looking for the blessed hope and the appearing of the glory of the great God and Savior of us, Christ Jesus" (Titus 2:13) - here is Paul referring to Jesus in Christ's capacity as truly God!

In Matthew 24:36, Jesus refers to Himself as truly Man with respect to knowing the last day; on the other hand, Lord Jesus Christ, truly God, knows all things for the disciples said to Jesus "we know that you know all things" (John 16:30, it would have been deceptive for Jesus not to rebuke them if it were not true), and only the One True God knows all things (Psalm 139:1-18).

You selectively exclusively present Scripture for Jesus as truly Man, then you lie about who Jesus is as according to your heart's treasure of "Jesus isn't God" leading to worship in vain (Matthew 15:9, Matthew 15:16-19).

Jesus is God (John 1:1-5, John 1:14; John 8:58; John 20:28).

In your self-will (2 Peter 2:9-10), you reject the Truth (John 14:6) of who Jesus says Jesus is, and He who is the Way (John 14:6) says "He who rejects Me and does not receive My sayings, has one who judges him; the word I spoke is what will judge him at the last day" (John 12:48).

A person has one type of will, either a will in the image of Christ (Romans 8:29) for the born of God (John 3:3-8) or a will in the image of Adam for the born of flesh (Romans 5:12, 1 Corinthians 15:22) also Biblically called self-will (2 Peter 2:9-10).

The original post contains the Truth (John 14:6) which shows richly in Scripture that Adam was not imparted free will, so no man thereafter was imparted free will.

 

[JLB]

Was Adam imparted free will from the beginning of Creation?

The Word of God indicates no based upon both scriptural text and context.

The following is carefully presented proof establishing Adam was formed with intent not endowed with free will.

• God issued prophecy about man eating the fruit (Genesis 2:17)
  AT the time God commanded the man, Adam, not to eat of the tree
  AND the consequence of disobedience is declared - that is that death of the man would result in eating from the tree
  YET a command does not convey ability
  BUT the language contains a prophetic construct indicating assurance of occurrence - "for in the day that you eat" - the "for" is promissory
  NOT a conditional logic construct such as "if in the day that you eat"
  IN fact, the English word "for" is translated from the Hebrew word כִּ֗י (ki)
  AND the Hebrew word כִּ֗י (ki) contains the meanings of these English words "that", "for", "when" (Strong's Hebrew: 3588. כִּ֗י (ki) -- that, for, when)
  THEREFORE the word "when" fits where the word "for" resides in Genesis 2:17
  THUS the phrase "when in the day that you eat" is an accurate translation for Genesis 2:17
  SO this confirms the promissory nature, the prophecy of man eating the fruit, with the word "for"/"when" in Genesis 2:17
  AND this imposes contextual certainty indicating God's foreknowledge over the matter described in Genesis 2:17
  SO there is no free will indicated for Adam
  AND the firm fact is established
  THAT God reigns in the affairs of man (Daniel 4:34-35)
• The attribute of man being created in the image according to the likeness of God
• Attributes/Characteristics Compared And Contrasted
  • The attribute of man being created in the image according to the likeness of God
    SINCE Adam was made in the image according to the likeness of God (Genesis 1:26)
    THEN some persons of the creation (creatures) argue that specific facility was given to Adam
    IN particular God willpowering purported "free will" into man, specifically a free will into man in the likeness God's will, during the creation of Adam
    THEN Adam could not have used free will to perform evil against God
    BECAUSE God will not use willpower in order to perform evil against God's self (Psalm 5:4, Psalm 92:15, Deuteronomy 32:4)
    THEREFORE it follows that man could not use free will in order to perform evil against God
    COMPARITIVELY this point's basis conveys that Adam who was made in the likeness of God (Genesis 1:26) could not use an Adam's will created by God inside Adam which is a duplicate of God's will (likeness of God's will) because God's will won't work against God so then Adams will could not work against God and since Adam disobeyed God, it is with certainty that the attribute of Adam's will was not made a duplicate of God's will (likeness of God's will).
    1. The logical extension of free will on this basis results in man possessing expanded facilities beyond God's facilities
    2. God is Creator; on the other hand, man is creature
    3. Largely, I use free will to mean man choosing toward God, emphatically Lord Jesus Christ.
    4. Scripture does not include the mention of God endowing Adam with free will.
    5. Man's free will is a precept of man leading to worship in vain (Matthew 15:9)
  • Adam as part of God's Plan of Redemption through the Christ for mankind before the foundation of the world
    SINCE God saw creation was very good on the 6th Day (Genesis 1:31)
    AND God's Plan of Redemption through the Christ for mankind is good (Ephesians 1:1-14, Ephesians 2:13)
    AND no person can thwart God's Plan (Job 42:2)
    THEN a free will Adam could not have been roaming the Garden of Eden with the ability to choose to obey God's command not to eat of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil (Genesis 2:17)
    SINCE the only command carrying a punishment was the prohibition upon Adam against eating of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil
    THUS a free will Adam could have disrupted God's Plan of Redemption through the Christ for mankind
    SO God could not conclude with certainty by declaring everything was good on the sixth day with a free will Adam in control roaming the Garden of Eden
    THEREFORE it follows that Adam could not be endowed with the attribute of free will
  • The timeline of Adam knowing good and evil
    BEFORE Adam and Eve ate from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil
    THEN Adam and Eve knew not good and evil
    AFTER Adam and Eve ate from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil
    THEN Adam and Eve knew good and evil
    FOR the delineation is clarified when God said "Behold, the man has become like one of Us, knowing good and evil" (Genesis 3:22)
    YET based on the Word of God saying "has become" recorded in Genesis 3:22
    THEN Adam did not know good and evil before eating from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil
    SO Adam did not know good and evil when God issued the command "from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil you shall not eat, for in the day that you eat from it you will surely die!" Genesis 2:17)
    THEREFORE at the time of eating, Adam listened (perceived) and followed her word about the tree of the knowledge of good and evil
    FOR God said "Because you have listened to the voice of your wife, and have eaten from the tree about which I commanded you, saying, 'You shall not eat from it'" (Genesis 3:17)
    SO Adam listened to Eve and Adam ate from the tree prior to knowing good and evil
    AND a person does good by obeying God; on the other hand, a person does evil by disobeying God
    SO free will choosing of good or choosing of evil is not the context
    YET action is the context
    SINCE good and evil are not known to Adam prior to eating from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil
    THEREFORE it follows that Adam was not endowed with the attribute of free will
  • An inherently good Adam would have assuredly and absolutely excluded eating of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil
    BECAUSE an inherently good Adam would have acted in the good way of obedience to God's command (Genesis 2:16-17)
    WITH the good way being God's Way (John 14:6)
    YET "No one is good except God alone" (Mark 10:18)
    AND it is written "God saw all that He had made, and behold, it was very good. And there was evening and there was morning, the sixth day" (Genesis 1:31)
    NOTE in "it was very good", the word "it" is grammatically a third person singular thus referring to the entirety of creation being constructed well (good) on course with God's Plan of Redemption through the Christ for mankind before the foundation of the world (Ephesians 1:1-14, Ephesians 2:13)
    YET the word "it" is not third person plural as in "they were very good" of which a third person plural is required in order to refer to an individual such as Adam or the Devil the Serpent
    AND the Word of God specifically excludes Adam from being good with "No one is good except God alone" (Mark 10:18)
    SO the spirit of antichrist preaches that Adam with all mankind as good for any amount of time thus nullifying the need for the Savior
    BEHOLD that God saw the whole package, the complete creation, the "all" that He had made, that it was very good
    BUT God did not specify how the aggregate (all) that He had made was very good therein
    AND God did not specify any constituents of creation as being inherently good therein
    AND God creating "all that He had made" for God in Jesus Christ to come to earth to save evil man is very good
    SO with certainty, God's Plan of Redemption through the Christ for mankind before the foundation of the world is very good
  • The attribute of "joining" - marriage
    1. Lord Jesus says a topically very profound statement of "from the beginning of creation, [God] made them male and female. For this reason a man shall leave his father and mother, and the two shall become one flesh; so they are no longer two, but one flesh. What therefore God has joined together let no man separate." (Mark 10:6-9)
    2. "God has joined together" is a clear reference by Jesus to Christ and the Bride of Christ, that is, the Assembly of God
    3. "God has joined together" is a clear reference by Jesus to marriage between "male and female" (creatures both)
    4. "God has joined together" is a clear reference by Jesus to Adam and Eve, the man and the woman
    5. God does the joining, while, on the other hand, man and woman are only the joyful recipients
    6. The facility of "joining" is not attributed to man and/or woman
    7. The facility of "joining" is attributed to God
    THEREFORE God exclusively causes individuals to join into the Assembly of God.

For expanded topic coverage, please see this integral essay Almighty God's Awesome Creation In Amazing Splendor.

If anyone venture a reply to this thread, I encourage diligent care for it is written "do not add to His words or He will reprove you, and you will be proved a liar" (Proverbs 30:6).

May the Lord abound mercy and understanding and strength and grace in we His own for the Day approaches rapidly!

Do you have any scripture that states God forced Adam or Eve or anyone else to disobey Him against their will?

 

[Kermos]

And, anyway, men sin all the time, conflicting with God's plainly-expressed will constantly and grievously. Your deterministic view requires that God ordain moral evil, that He is the One ultimately making evil people do evil things. But this would make God evil, it seems to me. In His word, though, we read things like:

Jeremiah 32:35
35 And they built the high places of Baal, which are in the valley of the son of Hinnom, to cause their sons and their daughters to pass through the fire unto Molech; which I commanded them not, neither came it into my mind, that they should do this abomination, to cause Judah to sin.

This puts a very serious crimp in the idea that God ordains all the evil of Man, it seems to me.

Anyway, it might do you some good to check out the following link:

www.soteriology101.com

God causes me to compose this fifth of five posts to continue the examination of your post #91 in this thread.

You wrote "Your deterministic view requires that God ordain moral evil, that He is the One ultimately making evil people do evil things"

You just wrote that you believe that God did not create every person everywhere in all time. Every person starts off in life as an evil person, yet, in God's blessed Plan of Redemption through the Christ from the foundation of the world, God causes man to become good in Christ, alone!

The Natural Is The First State Of Being For All Mere Mortals

The Apostle Paul identifies every man starts out as a natural man with "the spiritual is not first, but the natural; then the spiritual" (1 Corinthians 15:46).

The Apostle Paul states that man is accountable to God for man's own sin against God with "since the creation of the world His invisible attributes, His eternal power and divine nature, have been clearly seen, being understood through what has been made, so that they are without excuse" (Romans 1:20).

The Apostle Paul includes even the Gentiles in the Law "For when Gentiles who do not have the Law do instinctively the things of the Law, these, not having the Law, are a law to themselves" (Romans 2:14).

The Apostle Paul states that man is accountable to God for man's own crime against God with "we know that whatever the Law says, it speaks to those who are under the Law, so that every mouth may be closed and all the world may become accountable to God; because by the works of the Law no flesh will be justified in His sight; for through the Law [comes] the knowledge of sin" (Romans 3:19-20).

The Apostle Paul explains that the commands of God are foolishness to man with a "natural man does not receive the things of the Spirit of God, for they are foolishness to him; and he cannot understand them, because they are spiritually appraised" (1 Corinthians 2:14)

The Apostle Paul declares that man's flesh opposes the Spirit of God with "the flesh desires against the Spirit, and the Spirit against the flesh. For these are opposed to one another" (Galatians 5:17).

The Apostle Paul declares that man's flesh is hostile against God and the flesh cannot please God with "the mind of the flesh is hostile toward God; for it does not subject itself to the law of God, for it is not even able [to do so], and those who are in the flesh cannot please God" (Romans 8:7-8).

THE FIRST STATE OF MAN IS OPPOSITION TO GOD, AND THE ONLY WAY (JOHN 14:6) FOR MAN'S SALVATION IS FOR GOD TO BIRTH MAN ANEW (JOHN 3:3-8), NOT A WORK OF A CHOICE BY MAN, BUT STRICTLY THE WORK OF GOD'S CHOOSING OF PERSONS (JOHN 6:29).

God is good all the time without exception for the Christ of us Christians declares "No one is good except God alone" (Mark 10:18).

This puts a very serious crimp on your idea that God ordains all the evil of Man and that this would make God evil.

In this series of 5 posts, your presentation of Scripture exhibited:

• illogical reasoning
• illegal grammar
• false concept injection

Which are all tantamount to adding to Scripture, and you were warned in the original post:

If anyone venture a reply to this thread, I encourage diligent care for it is written "do not add to His words or He will reprove you, and you will be proved a liar" (Proverbs 30:6).
​

Thus concludes this current 5-post series examination of your post #91.

Some people think, that like Adam illegally took of the tree (Genesis 2:16-17, Genesis 3:6), they illegally take of that which is Holy (with their "I chose Jesus") through their own innate power instead of the Power of God (1 Corinthians 1:24) causing themselves to be rewarded with being born of God (John 3:3-8) resulting in God's righteous induction of the person as a citizen in the Kingdom of God (John 15:15).

A person has one type of will, either a will in the image of Christ (Romans 8:29) for the born of God (John 3:3-8) or a will in the image of Adam for the born of flesh (Romans 5:12, 1 Corinthians 15:22) also Biblically called self-will (2 Peter 2:9-10).

The original post contains the Truth (John 14:6) which shows richly in Scripture that Adam was not imparted free will, so no man thereafter was imparted free will.

 

[Tenchi]

You introduced a false dichotomy in that you slaughtered out of your reply the original post's scriptural point that God created Adam lacking attribute/characteristic which God possesses - despite God creating Adam in the image and likeness of God. Then you proceeded to attack your false dichotomy which you injected.

Actually, I was asking a (rhetorical?) question. And I never suggested a false dichotomy but a reasonable line of thinking that you were free to challenge if you wanted to.

Some people think, that like Adam illegally took of the tree (Genesis 2:16-17, Genesis 3:6), they illegally take of that which is Holy (with their "I chose Jesus") through their own innate power instead of the Power of God (1 Corinthians 1:24) causing themselves to be rewarded with being born of God (John 3:3-8) resulting in God's righteous induction of the person as a citizen in the Kingdom of God (John 15:15).

It doesn't follow that, if God must assist a person in coming to faith in Christ (John 6:44; 2 Timothy 2:25; John 16:8), that therefore they have no choice at all to make in trusting in him as Saviour and Lord.

A person has one type of will, either a will in the image of Christ (Romans 8:29) for the born of God (John 3:3-8) or a will in the image of Adam for the born of flesh (Romans 5:12, 1 Corinthians 15:22) also Biblically called self-will (2 Peter 2:9-10).

Both wills are exercised in the making of genuinely-free choices - just in different things. The human will over which God has control is able to choose to walk in accord with His will and way. The human will not yet yielded to God seeks its own will and way incorrigibly. Though the spiritually-unregenerate human will requires God's drawing, and illumination, and conviction in order to choose Christ, after God does these things in a person, they still must choose to trust in Jesus as Savior and Lord. God does not force anyone to walk in love, faith and submission to Himself. Love is not love if it is compelled, and it is this, above all, that God wants in relationship with us. (Matthew 22:36-38)

God has brought me back to continue the examination of your post #91 in this thread.

Has He? I wonder...

You wrote "doesn't mean I can't choose to eat a piece of pecan pie rather than a doughnut", so you express your detachment from God.

??? I don't see how choosing one kind of dessert over another constitutes a "detachment from God."

My Lord and my God Jesus Christ controls my will to the minutest detail, even of which items I purchase at the store, and I praise Him for His loving blessing (2 Corinthians 5:14)!

This is silly. Over and over again in the New Testament, born-again believers are commanded to do all manner of things and not do others; at other times, they are told they are ignorant of God's will and then informed of what His will is. But why, if God is controlling their will in the "minutest detail," is the New Testament necessary at all? Such control over every born-again person would not require that God produce something like the NT. His direct, detailed control makes the Bible irrelevant; for one does not need it when the Author of the Bible is controlling everything they choose to do, or not do.

 

[Kermos]

What do false prophets speak like..

Isaiah 41:22 Let them bring them forth, and shew us what shall happen: let them shew the former things, what they be, that we may consider them, and know the latter end of them; or declare us things for to come.
23 Shew the things that are to come hereafter, that we may know that ye are gods: yea, do good, or do evil, that we may be dismayed, and behold it together.
24 Behold, ye are of nothing, and your work of nought: an abomination is he that chooseth you.

A false prophet speaks confusion such as “The chosen are not chosen”. Wait a minute, you wrote just that as recorded in this post.

"God is not a God of confusion but of peace" (1 Corinthians 14:33).

You, gordon777, cannot choose God, and thinking otherwise is confusion!

The Word of God declares:

• "you did not choose Me, but I chose you" (Lord Jesus Christ, John 15:16), so God chooses people to be friends (John 15:15, the prior verse) and to believe (John 6:29) and to be born again (John 3:3-8) and for righteous works (John 3:21, John 15:5) and to repent (Matthew 11:25) and to love (John 13:34) and unto salvation (John 15:19 the same passage).
• "I chose you out of the world" (Lord Jesus Christ, John 15:19, includes salvation), so God exclusively chooses people unto salvation.
• "What I say to you I say to all" (Lord Jesus Christ, Mark 13:37 - Jesus had taken the Apostles Peter, Andrew, James, and John aside in private and said this), so all the blessings of God mentioned above are to all believers in all time.

The only way for free-willian philosophers to acheive free-will is for them to add to the Word of God, and it is written "do not add to His words or He will reprove you, and you will be proved a liar" (Proverbs 30:6).

Every person has a will, but a person's will is either one of but not both of (1) a self-will against God in evil for the natural flesh person (2 Peter 2:9-10) or (2) a will in Christ doing God's good by the Holy Spirit for the Born of God (Romans 8:29, Philippians 2:13, John 3:3-8).

The original post contains the Truth (John 14:6) which shows richly in Scripture that Adam was not imparted free will, so no man thereafter was imparted free will.

 

[GodsGrace]

Hello wonderful,

Truly, Lord Jesus "DOES" "say that God CAUSES a person to come to God", and the linguistic proof is here.

Among the Lord's preciously precise words "no one comes to the Father but through Me" (John 14:6), we find the word of through, and earlier during our correspondence about this passage, God brought to my attention that the source Greek word of δι (Strong's 1223 - dia - through, on account of, because of) includes "because of" in the definition.

The word "because" means "being the cause", so we find an equivalent phrase of being the cause of with the word through in John 14:6. Let us behold the Word of God:

​

no one comes to the Father except because of Me​

(John 14:6)​

What's the difference?
You pick words out instead of reading entire chapters.
Words can be translated in different ways,
Concepts CANNOT.

No one comes to the Father but through me.
No one comes to the Father except because of me.

Where's the difference?
There is none.

If we want to go to the Father, it will have to be
THROUGH JESUS
BECAUSE OF JESUS

It's all the same.

​

My Lord and my God's Word is absolutely exclusive. Christ alone causes salvation.

Christ's word of because inherently indicates cause in John 14:6, so your writing of "It DOES NOT say that God CAUSES a person to come to God" is woefully inaccurate.

You can think that.
That does not make it so.

Explain the difference between
John 12:32
32“And I, if I am lifted up from the earth, will draw all men to Myself.”

John 14:6
6Jesus said to him, “I am the way, and the truth, and the life; no one comes to the Father but through Me.
THROUGH Me
BECAUSE of Me
DRAWN by Me
Explain the difference.

The linguistic examination of because and through, above, demonstrates that the Author and Perfecter of the faith, Jesus Christ, the Founder of Christianity, says 1,500 years-ish before Luther and Calvin were born that God exclusively causes persons of God's choosing to come to God (John 14:6).

I still don't see where in any of the above it states that
GOD CAUSES and/or chooses, based on NOTHING, to come to God.

Because it does not state this.

Your word of "Your ideas have only been around for the past 400 years or so since Luther and Calvin" is woefully inaccurate.

Where, BEFORE, Luther and Calvin, was there the belief that free will did not exist?
Could you please give a source?


John 11:45
45Therefore many of the Jews who came to Mary, and saw what He had done, believed in Him.

They believed when they SAW WHAT JESUS HAD DONE....
This is the reason they believed.

You wrote "Allowed Him into their heart", but the concept of "Allowed" is absent John 1:12-13.

Receive means a thing that unavoidably came in from a source to a recipient - receive is not a choice like Allowed - receive just happens - just as the carefully laid out definition in the post to which you replied.

Oh my.
You receive your pay every week.
It is handed to you and you receive it.
IF you didn't want it, you just wouldn't take it.
And you wouldn't RECEIVE it.

If you RECEIVE something, it means you ACCEPTED it.
No dictionary necessary.

Well, if you do not receive the true meaning of "receive", then you fail to communicate accurately. The word "receive" is part of this passage that you brought up:

​

But as many as received Him, to them He gave the right to become children of God, to those who believe in His name, who were born, not of blood nor of the will of the flesh nor of the will of man, but of God​

(John 1:12-13).​

​

You asked "HOW was Jesus received?", and the answer is in the passage where the Apostle John wrote "born" "of God", truly "not" "of the will of man", but "born" "of God" in Truth (John 14:6).



The Word of God says:

​

he who practices the truth comes to the Light, so that his deeds may be manifested as having been wrought in God​

(Lord Jesus Christ John 3:21)​

​

You do not agree with Jesus Who says practices (John 3:21) is itself one of the deeds (John 3:21) that the Lord attributes as having been wrought in God (John 3:21).

What?
Don't understand your point.

Those THAT PRACTICE the truth
Come to the light.

You practice...
You come to the light.

Practicing comes first....
THEN you come to the light.

Christ's words here mean that I do not agree with you either, especially about Who chooses who because this discourse says who you believe God is versus Who I believe God is, for the Word of God declares:

• "you did not choose Me, but I chose you" (Lord Jesus Christ, John 15:16), so God chooses people to be friends (John 15:15, the prior verse) and to believe (John 6:29) and to be born again (John 3:3-8) and for righteous works (John 3:21, John 15:5) and to repent (Matthew 11:25) and to love (John 13:34) and unto salvation (John 15:19 the same passage).
• "I chose you out of the world" (Lord Jesus Christ, John 15:19, includes salvation), so God exclusively chooses people unto salvation.
• "What I say to you I say to all" (Lord Jesus Christ, Mark 13:37 - Jesus had taken the Apostles Peter, Andrew, James, and John aside in private and said this), so all the blessings of God mentioned above are to all believers in all time.

A person has one type of will, either a will in the image of Christ (Romans 8:29) for the born of God (John 3:3-8) or a will in the image of Adam for the born of flesh (Romans 5:12, 1 Corinthians 15:22) also Biblically called self-will (2 Peter 2:9-10).

The original post contains the Truth (John 14:6) which shows richly in Scripture that Adam was not imparted free will, so no man thereafter was imparted free will.

I chose you refers to the Apostles.
Thanks for posting all those other verses, but choosing means something different in each one.

BTW, IF you can CHOOSE something,
it means you have FREE WILL.

 

[Kermos]

God did not create free will. . the recipe for anarchy.He created a will subject to his will mankind chose to do the will of another seen . Death came

like Jesus the Son of man our example eating the meat the disciples knew not of the daily bread of the will of God the food working in Jesus to both hear the will and empowered to finish it to the good pleasure of God .

Some murmur and say what about my will?

Philippians 2:13-14 For it is God which worketh in you both to will and to do of his good pleasure. Do all things without murmurings and disputings:

John 4:34 Jesus saith unto them, My meat is to do the will of him that sent me, and to finish his work.

Praise God! Your post was a blessing for me to read, Mr. G Lee!

Man is a self-centered wretch in need of deliverance by the Savior, the love of God!

Liberating, it is really quite humbling to know that as strong of a king as I once thought I was, I am incapable of holding onto Lord Jesus on my own, I don't need to accept Lord Jesus with His work that He finished millennia before I was born, truly, He holds me in His loving embrace, I am not responsible for my believing in Jesus - rather - my Lord and God Jesus is responsible for my unwavering belief in Jesus.

My belief in Jesus is not of my doing. My belief in Jesus is the work of YHWH God (John 6:29). My God established and secures me. This is liberating.

"The king’s heart is a stream of water in the hand of YHWH; he turns it wherever he will" (Proverbs 21:1).

To God be the glory.

Peace in Christ,
Kermos

 

[Mr. G Lee]

What's the difference?
You pick words out instead of reading entire chapters.
Words can be translated in different ways,
Concepts CANNOT.

No one comes to the Father but through me.
No one comes to the Father except because of me.

Where's the difference?
There is none.

If we want to go to the Father, it will have to be
THROUGH JESUS
BECAUSE OF JESUS

It's all the same.



You can think that.
That does not make it so.

Explain the difference between
John 12:32
32“And I, if I am lifted up from the earth, will draw all men to Myself.”

John 14:6
6Jesus said to him, “I am the way, and the truth, and the life; no one comes to the Father but through Me.
THROUGH Me
BECAUSE of Me
DRAWN by Me
Explain the difference.


I still don't see where in any of the above it states that
GOD CAUSES and/or chooses, based on NOTHING, to come to God.

Because it does not state this.


Where, BEFORE, Luther and Calvin, was there the belief that free will did not exist?
Could you please give a source?


John 11:45
45Therefore many of the Jews who came to Mary, and saw what He had done, believed in Him.

They believed when they SAW WHAT JESUS HAD DONE....
This is the reason they believed.

Oh my.
You receive your pay every week.
It is handed to you and you receive it.
IF you didn't want it, you just wouldn't take it.
And you wouldn't RECEIVE it.

If you RECEIVE something, it means you ACCEPTED it.
No dictionary necessary.



What?
Don't understand your point.

Those THAT PRACTICE the truth
Come to the light.

You practice...
You come to the light.

Practicing comes first....
THEN you come to the light.


I chose you refers to the Apostles.
Thanks for posting all those other verses, but choosing means something different in each one.

BTW, IF you can CHOOSE something,
it means you have FREE WILL.

If you CHOOSE to hear and do the will of God . It is only because God works powerfully in us to both give us ear and empower those dead in their trespass to rise and perform it to His good pleasure. He gives us the breath of eternal life.

Philippians 2: 13-14 For it is God which worketh in you both to will and to do of his good pleasure. Do all things without murmurings and disputings:

Jesus empowered by the Father did the will of the Father with delight. Jonas kicked against the pricks all the way then wanted to die rather than see the results knowing God is a God of grace and mercy .

We can ask our own selves. What kind of witness to the power of God are we hoping to display ? Jonas or the Son of man< Jesus ? God simply is not served by the dying will or hands of mankind. He moves dying mankind, men cannot move the Rock