SermonIndex Audio Sermons
Image Map
Discussion Forum : Scriptures and Doctrine : Free will

Print Thread (PDF)

Goto page ( Previous Page 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 Next Page )
PosterThread









 Re:

Logic, I was way off on this one.

Quote:
b: ....The soul no longer has an excuse for choosing sin....
L: The soul never did have an excuse.....

I should not have said "no longer" like that because if we had an excuse for our sin then why did Jesus die for what was already excused? That was a huge mistake, I apologize.
The soul has [b]no excuse[/b] for sin that is why the soul that sins will die.

 2008/11/17 19:21









 Re:

I think we can agree on this one.

Quote:
b: The flesh....can be beaten and made into a slave of the soul through the power of the Holy Spirit.
L: Rom 6:16 ....the flesh along with the soul should be slaves of obedience unto righteousness.

Agreed. The soul should not have to be beaten like a dumb animal though. The soul should become a willing slave in love but the flesh must be forced by this willing soul. I would reword that to be more clear.[color=0000CC]*[/color] It seems like we agree though.

[color=0000CC]*would reword what I originally said[/color]

 2008/11/17 19:31









 Re:

20. (The Law)

Quote:
b: The law was given but contained only shadows of the true knowledge of good.
L: The law was given because of transgressions(Gal 3:19). The law was given for the reason of making unlawful affections to be evidently unlawful. We do not know how to be good or do good without Christ to show us by His Spirit. The Law made that fact that evident within us. In other words, the Law exists so that our unlawful affections would be evidently more wicked in contrast to the specific commandments.

I agree the Law reveals sin in transgressors but to the faithful it contains foreshadowing of what is good. David understood that the sacrifices were symbolic because of his faith. I don't think we disagree much here.

 2008/11/17 20:22









 Re:

I think we agree here even though on the surface it could sound like we don't.

Quote:
b: the soul had become wounded, lost, undiscerning.
L: Not wounded, but rebellious, disobedient, blind, lost, undiscerning...ect...

b: The will of the soul healed by faith is free.
L: Not healed, but shown how not to follow the lusts of the flesh.

b: Now a man's wounded soul can be healed and live according to the power of God's Word.
L: Not wounded soul, but rebellious, disobedient soul can submit to HIM.

b: The knowledge of good was obscured and lost in man's sinfulness.
L: The knowledge of good is obscured because they do not know God to show them what is good. Not because of sinfulness.

Do you see what was going on here? Predestination is true and real according to the scripture. However free will is given to man to choose good or evil. From our perspective we freely choose. Before he made each individual he knew every single one of their decisions that they would make with the free will that he gave them. So we can recognize the limits of our will and glorify God. For instance, we didn't freely choose to have a will but were made with it without being asked first. I think that might be why some people are able to go back and forth on here so much because they won't acknowledge BOTH to be true. Predestination according to God's foreknowledge AND the human ability to make decisions aka free will. They are both real. There are some things we don't understand - specifically how the all-knowing God was able to give life and free will to dust and make us in his own image.

So in the first three items there's a theme.
according to God's power: wounds and healing
according to our will: rebellion and obedience

See how they are both talking about the same thing with two different focuses? We are saying the same things here. I'm not denying the will.

The fourth set is interesting because were are reversed here. This makes it a good example. I was pointing to man's sinfulness according to our will. You were pointing to the knowledge of God which comes only from God. That is according to God's power. On any of these four we could go in circles forever because knowledge of God was lost through sin and sin results from not having knowledge of God. It's not the same as the chicken and the egg thing though because sin is our fault alone even though God made us in the first place. It's really a slippery slope rather than a circle.

Let their way be dark and slippery - Psalm 35:6
Surely You set them in slippery places;You cast them down to destruction. - Psalm 73:18
...their way will be like slippery paths to them,They will be driven away into the gloom and fall down in it - Jer 23:12

I wanted to explain everything up to this point in detail because it seemed that we could agree on a lot of these.

 2008/11/17 20:36









 Re:

Hi Logic, once you read these can we clear them out of the way since all that's left now are items which are much closer to the heart of the disagreement? If you strongly disagree with any of it let me know but if we can put them aside then I think we've gotten somewhere and can move on to the rest. Thank you - Ben

 2008/11/17 20:57
Logic
Member



Joined: 2005/7/17
Posts: 1791


 Re:

Quote:
benjoseph wrote:
I was going to ask you what your real first name is and when all I saw was your email and you weren't online I googled your email. But I had a really bad feeling in my conscience that I shouldn't have been doing that because it would be like learning about you behind your back. I feel really bad about it and totally embarrassed of myself. Will you forgive me for doing that?

Oh, don't worry about it, I wouldn't have minded.
I don't see anything wrong about learning about someone behindvtheir back to be wrong.

Quote:
Sorry if I'm making a big deal out of it but I really felt I had to apologize in my conscience.

That is one thing I mentioned, ones conscience can be wrong or unlearned.

Quote:
So in the first three items there's a theme.
according to God's power: wounds and healing
according to our will: rebellion and obedience

See how they are both talking about the same thing with two different focuses? We are saying the same things here. I'm not denying the will.

The fourth set is interesting because were are reversed here. This makes it a good example. I was pointing to man's sinfulness according to our will. You were pointing to the knowledge of God which comes only from God.

Romans1:17-18 & psalm 19:1-3
The knowledge of God is given to all mankind from the begining.

Quote:
That is according to God's power. On any of these four we could go in circles forever because knowledge of God was lost through sin and sin results from not having knowledge of God.

The knowledge of God was forsaken by choice, not lost because of sin.

Quote:
It's not the same as the chicken and the egg thing though because sin is our fault alone even though God made us in the first place. It's really a slippery slope rather than a circle.

What do you mean, "sin is our fault, even though God made us".
Sorry is this question seem superfulous, but I've learned that some people have very outlandish theology/doctrines and not to take what they say at face value.

Quote:
Let their way be dark and slippery - Psalm 35:6
Surely You set them in slippery places;You cast them down to destruction. - Psalm 73:18
...their way will be like slippery paths to them,They will be driven away into the gloom and fall down in it - Jer 23:12

What do you think these verse are telling us?

Quote:
I wanted to explain everything up to this point in detail because it seemed that we could agree on a lot of these.

Other that these few questions, So far, so good

 2008/11/18 12:33Profile









 Re:

Hi Logic,
Thank you for comforting me.

Quote:
The knowledge of God was forsaken by choice, not lost because of sin.

Maybe this one was not as helpful an example as I first thought. I agree it was a choice. This is getting into inheritance which was not the reason I brought it up with the other three. But read the next one because that was the point.
Quote:
What do you mean, "sin is our fault, even though God made us"

I'm emphasizing that sin is willed or chosen even though I have not been able to fathom how God could actually know everything beforehand yet still create free will in man. I think that it seems like a paradox to me because I am the creation and not the creator.
Quote:
Quote:
Let their way be dark and slippery - Psalm 35:6
Surely You set them in slippery places;You cast them down to destruction. - Psalm 73:18
...their way will be like slippery paths to them,They will be driven away into the gloom and fall down in it - Jer 23:12

What do you think these verse are telling us?


I think the pharaoh's heart would be a good example of the slippery slope analogy. On the other hand those who go the other way grow stronger in love. For those who sin it becomes easier and easier for them to sin. That's a slippery slope leading to destruction. They choose it themselves but God made them knowing they would choose sin and that's what the 'angle' of those verses is. God's omniscience and this terrifying punishment. Sin becomes both crime and punishment to the sinner. But the repentant and willing are given good works that have been prepared for them. Again I'm not denying the will in the slightest. It's like Balthasar was saying that we can't just throw out half the bible because it seems to contradict our favorite parts. The paradox points to our weakness and God's awesome power and wisdom: Jesus Christ. It's not some silly zen paradox that means nothing or is just a lingual mishap. It's there and without true faith it becomes a stumbling block. I stumbled all over it. We have to turn to Jesus, not our own minds.

 2008/11/18 14:02
Logic
Member



Joined: 2005/7/17
Posts: 1791


 Re:

Quote:
benjoseph wrote:
Quote:
The knowledge of God was forsaken by choice, not lost because of sin.

I'm emphasizing that sin is willed or chosen even though I have not been able to fathom how God could actually know everything beforehand yet still create free will in man. I think that it seems like a paradox to me because I am the creation and not the creator.

The best way to explain this is:
God has knowledge of the different free choices that all mankind would make if we were put into any given situation.
For example, Given God's knowledge of me and these exact circumstances of my life in this "possible world as my choices have been", God knows that in certain situations I will repent. My choice might very well be not to repent in different situations that a different "possible world as if I have made different choices in" would cause; God knows what my choices will be in all other situations in all other "possible created words" as well.

Since each choice we make might be different in a different situation there are a wide variety of different scenarios that God knows. Together all these choices come within a seemingly infinite number of possible worlds. There are possible created worlds where I freely choose to repent and other possible worlds where circumstances are different and perhaps I choose not to repent. My repentance and unrepentance effects other's repentance &/or unrepentance as well as theirs effecting mine and even others as well.

According to the theology known as Molinism, God knew exactly what would happen and what we would freely choose in this world as he does in other possible created word scenarios. God created this world out of a seemingly infinite possible number other world scenarios; and with this world in which we are in, the most possible souls repent with the least amount of judgment and accountability for those who do not.

So, God created this world out of all of his possibilities. You could say that God predestined and foreknew all that would happen in the sense that God created a world in which all possible choices were known by him in advance and all mankind was created/born for such a time and place. In this way, the Molinist would claim to have the best of all possible created world scenarios by combining several very important theological themes that often seem to contradict one another:
1 - Human beings have the freedom of choice.
2 - God foreknows all these choices.
3 - God created the world in which the most possible souls repent with the least amount of accountability and judgment for those who don't repent.

The questions arise:
why would a loving God create those He knows will not repent?
If God did not create those who He knows will not repent, that alteration of this optimum amount of repented would change the circumstances to where it would cause more to not repent as the other alternative worlds.

If God knew men would not repent, why did God create them?
I will give an example to answer this one.
My intention is to invite & to dine with my whole neighborhood to my favorite restaurant.
I know that most will not come and dine with me, however, that does not change my intention to do so.
As it is with God for intending to create those who will not repent.

Then, come the questions:
Why would I intend on inviting those who I know will not show up?
It is because I love them, the invitation proves my love for them. Furthermore, if I don't invite those who I know will not come, it will cause some that I know who will come to deny my invitation.
Or
Why would God intend on creating those who He knows will not repent?
It is because HE loves them anyway, the invitation of the Cross of Christ to repent proves His love for them. Furthermore, if HE didn't create those that HE knows will not repent, it will cause some that HE knows who will repent to not repent .
Just as in real life, God will use the death of a person(saved or not) to cause another to come to Him.
Or, as I mentioned above, If God didn't create them, it would cause more to not repent as the other alternative worlds.

The most common objection to this Molinism is the “grounding objection.” Basically, can a choice be truly free if it is known ahead of time? In other words, no one (God included) can know my choice of vanilla or chocolate until I make the choice. If a choice is determined ahead of time, then it is not free.
This is a false assumption, the knowledge of another's choice does not take the options away from the one choosing, nor does it stop the freedom to choose. God is not the One who determines a man's choices just because He knows them.

Quote:
Quote:
Jer 23:12, Psalm 73:18, Psalm 35:6
What do you think these verse are telling us?

I think the pharaoh's heart would be a good example of the slippery slope analogy. On the other hand those who go the other way grow stronger in love. For those who sin it becomes easier and easier for them to sin. That's a slippery slope leading to destruction. They choose it themselves but God made them knowing they would choose sin and that's what the 'angle' of those verses is. God's omniscience and this terrifying punishment. Sin becomes both crime and punishment to the sinner. But the repentant and willing are given good works that have been prepared for them. Again I'm not denying the will in the slightest. It's like Balthasar was saying that we can't just throw out half the bible because it seems to contradict our favorite parts. The paradox points to our weakness and God's awesome power and wisdom: Jesus Christ. It's not some silly zen paradox that means nothing or is just a lingual mishap. It's there and without true faith it becomes a stumbling block. I stumbled all over it. We have to turn to Jesus, not our own minds.

You have impressed me with this.
I say amen!

 2008/11/18 15:52Profile









 Re:

I agree that God's motivation, even his Being, is Love. And I agree with your response to the "grounding objection". Concerning this Molinism: I don't want to discuss God's thought process or decision making process prior to creation unless we're sticking to scripture. I understand the motive may be to debunk accusations against God being loving but it seems very high-reaching and possibly inappropriate. However, if you want to, we could look at scripture concerning God's purpose in creation in another thread.

Let's return to the nature and condition of man before and after Adam's sin. I have a couple questions but first:

I definitely do not believe that God punishes babies or little children.

Here are the questions:

1. Why didn't you want to acknowledge the distinction between the soul and the spirit?

2. Since Jesus came in the likeness of sinful flesh, are you willing to accept that man's non-sentient flesh is sinful?

You can organize your response however you like of course but I wasn't able to get past these two points by reading what we've said so far.

 2008/11/18 17:23
Logic
Member



Joined: 2005/7/17
Posts: 1791


 Re:

Quote:
benjoseph wrote:

1. Why didn't you want to acknowledge the distinction between the soul and the spirit?

We can not distinguish the two even though there is a difference.
There is no place in Scripture that tells &/or shows us the difference between the two accept for these:
Physical death, spirit for body - [b]Eccl 12:7[/b] [color=990000]then shall the dust return to the earth as it was: and the spirit shall return unto God who gave it.[/color]
[b]James 2:26[/b] [color=990000]as the body without the spirit is dead, so faith without works is dead also.[/color]
[b]Matthew 10:28[/b] [color=990000]fear not them which kill the body, but are not able to kill the soul: but rather fear him which is able to destroy both soul and body in hell.[/color]
All we know is that when he spirit leaves the body, it dies. And the sould can be dammed with the body.

However, which one does what, we don't know
If you do know & could tell me with hard, scriptural evidence, then please do, but if not, then don't make a distinction between the soul & spirit of man.

My only GUESS would be that our spirit is or makes up our attitude, emotions, moral concience, likes & dislikes or preferences; and it works in conjunction with the soul, which makes our intelect and the animal sentient principle only.

The spirit is rational, the soul is not.
However, Inhave no scriptural back-up for my guesses which I gleened from the Strongs concordance dictionary.

If you want to continue with these as the differences, then okay, but remember that they are unfounded.
Quote:
2. Since Jesus came in the likeness of sinful flesh, are you willing to accept that man's non-sentient flesh is sinful?

Yes, that is true, but, what do you mean by "sinful"?
The flesh us not "sinful" in & of it's self, but, it's what we choose to do with our flesh that makes it sinful.

One must know that jesus had the exact kind of flesh we have now.
Romans 8:3, Phil 2:7-8

 2008/11/18 19:07Profile





©2002-2020 SermonIndex.net
Promoting Genuine Biblical Revival.
Affiliate Disclosure | Privacy Policy