Lets Talk Free Choice

  • Christian Chat is a moderated online Christian community allowing Christians around the world to fellowship with each other in real time chat via webcam, voice, and text, with the Christian Chat app. You can also start or participate in a Bible-based discussion here in the Christian Chat Forums, where members can also share with each other their own videos, pictures, or favorite Christian music.

    If you are a Christian and need encouragement and fellowship, we're here for you! If you are not a Christian but interested in knowing more about Jesus our Lord, you're also welcome! Want to know what the Bible says, and how you can apply it to your life? Join us!

    To make new Christian friends now around the world, click here to join Christian Chat.
T

theswedish

Guest
A personal take on free choice. First I must point out that there are many in this world who have their freedom to choose restricted. Some obvious examples are prisoners or those that live under the shadow of an oppressive regime. Less obvious examples are those that are bound by cultural, religious customs or simple by peer pressure. To have true freedom of choice requires much thought and carefulness in your actions, words and thought.

To explain, we go through life with conventions, norms, dictates, laws etc which we follow without much thought. What if we thought about each action, free from these bounds, using god as our compass. Would we lead the same life, would we say the same things. Jesus broke the rules, he made his own freedom of choice, in fact he went so far having a line of thought which was contrary to those of the times, and he acted on it.

Obviously we cannot lead a life where we would have true freedom of choice, because not everyone, society or government would be accepting of it and it would be a road to self sacrifice. But what if, on a daily basis, expressed our freedom of choice as in gods will. What if we picked up that discarded soda can in front of the public, what if took the pan handler home and fed him. Would your life end, probably not, would you be ostracised, doubtful. Would you know that you had a freedom to choose, and choose the right way, yes, and both you, god and the panhandler would lead a better life for it.

So exercise your freedom of choice as much as you can, just use God and Jesus to help you learn how to use it
 
May 12, 2017
2,641
65
0
Who's throwing rocks? Somehow you believe something changed when you left reformed theology. What changed? (Same question, asked differently.)

BTW, just so you know, if I throw rocks at you, feel completely safe from rocks. It's the people behind me that should be worried. I can't throw to save my own life. lol
In my experience with a legalism leaning reformed Baptists church It was constant worry of you were elected or not. The change on the outward appearance had to match the change on the inside, many rules and traditions had to be followed that were derived from misapplied confusion between the Mosaic Law and new Covenant. Because of the worry of being elected or not, I was always felt ashamed and condemned for sinning. We were never taught that God loved anyone but the elect and in fact, he doe snot really love the elect he tolerates them because of his sovereign will. Jesus was an afterthought, he simply died, that was it. Holy Spirit no such thing has him leading you or being a helper. Plenty of scare messages about hell and torture. God was a wrathful partner and could be aroused to anger and judgement on any whim. God leads and proceeds and God can and will make you fear him through intimidation, not following the rules, and skipping traditions. God was not interested in love, or relationship he wanted me as a slave. God was big, scary and did not care about me. Everything under the sun was SIN,and if God was not correcting me there would be no hope for me and I would continue sinning, because its all I know how to do. I am, will be and always a sinner first and foremost. I had to strive to please everyone in the church, all the like-minded people we associated with. I watched whole families being shunned for even having a TV.

What changed. I was introduced to a Father that truly wants me to have a loving relationship with him, that Jesus is the only way to Father and that Jesus sent us a helper, the Holy Spirit, to help me, lead me, guide me. That I was completely undeserving of this relationship, but his grace allows me access and turns me from sinner, to sin forgiven son, who still makes mistakes. That I have choice to be in relationship with this lover of my soul. His love and grace keep me from wanting to sin or go astray or be as I was. I also came to understand God loves everyone this way, despite your comments. I cannot ever go back to thinking that God only loves a few, because that is not found in the Bible or his nature, for he IS love[1 John 4]

Far too many things changed for the good, that I can go into. I think the greatest thing that changed is that I was set free from religion and abuse and insecurity and most of that God was an ogre.
 
K

kaylagrl

Guest
Quote "We are not saying a sinner cannot cry out for God's mercy! God is not stepping on the leash!"


John Calvin "
…salvation is freely offered to some while others are barred from access to it.” (John Calvin, Institutes of Christian Religion, Book 3, Chapter 21, Paragraph 5)

What does Calvin mean by this Lynn?
 
K

kaylagrl

Guest

More by Calvin,


“We call predestination God’s eternal decree, by which he compacted with himself what he willed to become of each man. For all are not created in equal condition; rather, eternal life is fore-ordained for some, eternal damnation for others.” (John Calvin, Institutes of Christian Religion, Book 3, Chapter 21, Paragraph 5)


“The very inequality of his grace proves that it is free.” (John Calvin,
Institutes of Christian Religion, Book 3, Chapter 21, Paragraph 6)


“Therefore, those whom God passes over, he condemns; and this he does for no other reason than that he wills to exclude them from the inheritance which he predestines for his own children.” (John Calvin, Institutes of Christian Religion, Book 3, Chapter 23, Paragraph 1)



“…individuals are born, who are doomed from the womb to certain death, and are to glorify him by their destruction.” (John Calvin, Institutes of Christian Religion, Book 3, Chapter 23, Paragraph 6)
 

trofimus

Senior Member
Aug 17, 2015
10,684
794
113
Quote "We are not saying a sinner cannot cry out for God's mercy! God is not stepping on the leash!"


John Calvin "
…salvation is freely offered to some while others are barred from access to it.” (John Calvin, Institutes of Christian Religion, Book 3, Chapter 21, Paragraph 5)

What does Calvin mean by this Lynn?

I have not found such sentence in the chapter... have you quoted it correctly?

Chapter 21, Institutes of the Christian Religion Book 3, John Calvin, Christian Classics books at BibleStudyTools.com

There is no word "barred", for example.
 
K

kaylagrl

Guest
Maybe you have a different translation... I edited my post and added my link.

The predestination by which God adopts some to the hope of life, and adjudges others to eternal death, no man who would be thought pious ventures simply to deny; but it is greatly caviled at, especially by those who make prescience its cause.


Heres the link I used....

http://www.reformed.org/books/institutes/books/book3/bk3ch21.html



Sooo tiny to read though.
 
K

kaylagrl

Guest
A little further on it says...

All are not created on equal terms, but some are preordained to eternal life, others to eternal damnation; and, accordingly, as each has been created for one or other of these ends, we say that he has been predestinated to life or to death.
 

Magenta

Senior Member
Jul 3, 2015
54,910
25,564
113
Also around sixteen minutes of same teaching, predestination and free will discussed :)
 

Angela53510

Senior Member
Jan 24, 2011
11,778
2,934
113
If you're into philosophical solutions (which tend to make my head spin from way-too-much-thinkingism lol) you'll like this guy. (Andrew Naselli) This is just a hint of how he takes this and it's at the end of a very logical article.

"2. Recognize that other orthodox Christians who disagree with you on this issue are not the enemy! Although some Christian leaders have embraced what I think are errant views on free will, many of them have been godly men worthy of emulation (e.g., John Wesley). So disagreeing with them on this particular issue in no way questions their devotion to Christ."

There is nothing left unearthed by the time he's done. I think he even unearthed a dust particle from 1942. (Hyperbole said with abundance of humor.) :eek:

I do hope you get to at least all the possible definitions of free will, although his handy-dandy chart made it much easier for me to understand both of our views.

Do we have free will?

Great link! I have bookmarked that site!

And, as I keep saying, there are two sides to this debate - both historical positions, well defended on both sides with Scripture, with great men of God supporting both. I happen to agree with the Reformed side, the more and more I study my Bible, but I do believe, that before I really understood the Reformed view, and was in the Arminian group by default (not knowing both sides, but having BIG doubts about Arminianism.) I was just as saved as when I changed sides.

Of course, if I had saved myself by my choices, I might not agree with the Reformed perspective. But certainly, I know many people who are Arminian, either by upbringing, training or even because that is what they feel is in the Bible, and they are just as saved as me.

But it is strange how every once and a while, we get a "Calvinists are heretics and not saved" thread on CC, but I have yet to see one saying "Arminians are not saved" or words to that effect.

I do agree that we are to respect one another, regardless of our stand on this issue, and to acknowledge that this doctrine is a difficulty issue, no matter which side we are on, and realize that some things are a mystery, and one day, God will reveal to ALL of us the total truth!
 

trofimus

Senior Member
Aug 17, 2015
10,684
794
113
The predestination by which God adopts some to the hope of life, and adjudges others to eternal death, no man who would be thought pious ventures simply to deny; but it is greatly caviled at, especially by those who make prescience its cause.


Heres the link I used....

http://www.reformed.org/books/institutes/books/book3/bk3ch21.html



Sooo tiny to read though.
Yes, this one is there.. but you quoted something different before.
 

trofimus

Senior Member
Aug 17, 2015
10,684
794
113
Great link! I have bookmarked that site!

And, as I keep saying, there are two sides to this debate - both historical positions, well defended on both sides with Scripture, with great men of God supporting both. I happen to agree with the Reformed side, the more and more I study my Bible, but I do believe, that before I really understood the Reformed view, and was in the Arminian group by default (not knowing both sides, but having BIG doubts about Arminianism.) I was just as saved as when I changed sides.

Of course, if I had saved myself by my choices, I might not agree with the Reformed perspective. But certainly, I know many people who are Arminian, either by upbringing, training or even because that is what they feel is in the Bible, and they are just as saved as me.

But it is strange how every once and a while, we get a "Calvinists are heretics and not saved" thread on CC, but I have yet to see one saying "Arminians are not saved" or words to that effect.

I do agree that we are to respect one another, regardless of our stand on this issue, and to acknowledge that this doctrine is a difficulty issue, no matter which side we are on, and realize that some things are a mystery, and one day, God will reveal to ALL of us the total truth!
Agreed, I also noticed that the "free will group" is more sharp in their claims. For example that if this or that would be true, God is a liar or worse names...

They should be much more careful in their words.
 
D

Depleted

Guest

Hi Lynn,

Maybe this is where the different beliefs within reformed theology takes place. Those I know that are in the reformed belief will say that man is so dead in his sin, he can't even respond to God. He has to be regenerated first.

In other words the one who can cry out to God for mercy is the one that's already been born again. For these reformed believers God is stepping on the leash. :)

Maybe that's not how far you go with reformed teaching, but for many of them, this is what they're saying.

One of the saddest things in reformed theology that I've come across are those who don't know if they're one of the chosen ones or not. I've asked some and they say they don't know if they are chosen.
If the reformed people you know think they can't respond, then they really haven't caught the reformed position yet. That's not on reformed theology. That's just they haven't figured it out yet.

Of course we can respond. Lazarus didn't stay in that tomb after Jesus gave him life again. He came out of it. "Responded."

What he didn't do was choose to be regenerated. Dead people don't choose.

Dead-in-sin don't choose God. They choose darkness. They choose sin. Still choice, just not the good choice. Just not the choice God had to regenerate us.

As far as not knowing if someone is chosen? Are you? Do you know yet? For sure?

I didn't for decades. For all I knew I could have been the seed on rocky soil or the seed among weeds. I was growing, but there was no proof I was going to stay growing.

And the only thing that changed over time when I walked, I kept getting hit in the face with the obvious -- God is, so where am I going to hide from him? It really came down to I can't blasphemy, so apparently he has me.
 
K

kaylagrl

Guest
Yes, this one is there.. but you quoted something different before.
Yes,but that quote is saying in more plain English what is being said in the second quote.Here they are together:


salvation is freely offered to some while others are barred from access to it.

"God adopts some to the hope of life, and adjudges others to eternal death"



A different way of saying the same thing.


 
P

pottersclay

Guest
Ok here's my definition of free choice. Potter welcome to the garden. Do what ever you want.
Now I have o warn ya if you eat of that tree over there it's not going to end well but you decide what you want to do. Your choice.
Now we all know that's not how it went down. Satan pointed out the forbidden tree. And made it into something it wasn't. A fruit that would make one wise like God.
Deception was used that day no doubt. No where in scripture do we read that eve was pondering on the no no fruit. Nor (until Satan used it as a focal point) does scripture say she was looking at the tree.
Now did the course of events happen right after God forbade them? Dunno that either.
But what we can conclude is that the first couple choose to obey God until that forked tongue sweet talker started his lies.
 

trofimus

Senior Member
Aug 17, 2015
10,684
794
113
Yes,but that quote is saying in more plain English what is being said in the second quote.Here they are together:


salvation is freely offered to some while others are barred from access to it.

"God adopts some to the hope of life, and adjudges others to eternal death"

A different way of saying the same thing.



Ok, I do not know where is the first sentence you mentioned, but nevermind.

"God adopts some to the hope of life, and adjudges others to eternal death"
- what do you think is unbiblical on this sentence? I think that all Christians hold the truth that some are adopted by God and will have the eternal life and some are not and will be judged to eternal death?
 
D

Depleted

Guest
In my experience with a legalism leaning reformed Baptists church It was constant worry of you were elected or not. The change on the outward appearance had to match the change on the inside, many rules and traditions had to be followed that were derived from misapplied confusion between the Mosaic Law and new Covenant. Because of the worry of being elected or not, I was always felt ashamed and condemned for sinning. We were never taught that God loved anyone but the elect and in fact, he doe snot really love the elect he tolerates them because of his sovereign will. Jesus was an afterthought, he simply died, that was it. Holy Spirit no such thing has him leading you or being a helper. Plenty of scare messages about hell and torture. God was a wrathful partner and could be aroused to anger and judgement on any whim. God leads and proceeds and God can and will make you fear him through intimidation, not following the rules, and skipping traditions. God was not interested in love, or relationship he wanted me as a slave. God was big, scary and did not care about me. Everything under the sun was SIN,and if God was not correcting me there would be no hope for me and I would continue sinning, because its all I know how to do. I am, will be and always a sinner first and foremost. I had to strive to please everyone in the church, all the like-minded people we associated with. I watched whole families being shunned for even having a TV.

What changed. I was introduced to a Father that truly wants me to have a loving relationship with him, that Jesus is the only way to Father and that Jesus sent us a helper, the Holy Spirit, to help me, lead me, guide me. That I was completely undeserving of this relationship, but his grace allows me access and turns me from sinner, to sin forgiven son, who still makes mistakes. That I have choice to be in relationship with this lover of my soul. His love and grace keep me from wanting to sin or go astray or be as I was. I also came to understand God loves everyone this way, despite your comments. I cannot ever go back to thinking that God only loves a few, because that is not found in the Bible or his nature, for he IS love[1 John 4]

Far too many things changed for the good, that I can go into. I think the greatest thing that changed is that I was set free from religion and abuse and insecurity and most of that God was an ogre.
Wow, so you had the same experience we had from the other end of the spectrum. We were in a look-good church too. "Just don't do that anymore" mentality. And we were all kinds of embarrassed because no one bothered telling us how to do that. (Looking back, we realize it wasn't about bothering. They just couldn't get the actions to meet the words.)

In reformed, we constantly are taught, "You can't, but God can through you." And that's not a walk-on-water thing. That's a how-do-I-stay-saved thing.

Have you ever considered it wasn't the theology, but the people? I honestly didn't know reformed could be so bad until you and Rose told these stories. I think God guided us to a good church because we were weary from being whipped around so much for so long.

And, that really isn't to say non-reformed churches are evil. I honestly, honestly think God saves us even if everybody is wrong on this one. And considering Kayla and I just agreed completely on the obedience school/dog choosing post, I'm not all that convinced we're that far apart in the theology. I'm not even sure we are apart, other than a hiccup in time of who chose first. On the timeline, that one instance is just that -- an instant. We were choosing before and choosing after, but one brief moment God changed our choice to his choice. A hiccup -- possibly shorter than that.

I've known non-reformers who totally get that God works through us, too. So I know thinking we have to do it all by ourselves isn't part of the Arminian creed, (if either camp seriously had such creeds. lol) It really does seem like we both got the bad side at one point in time, but got out of it.

I don't think that points to the theology (either side) so much as it points to some people just like the shallow end of the pool. They don't want to commit, but they'd like the eternal-vacation plan, so they compromise.

Could it not be that, instead of theology?
 
D

Depleted

Guest
Quote "We are not saying a sinner cannot cry out for God's mercy! God is not stepping on the leash!"


John Calvin "
…salvation is freely offered to some while others are barred from access to it.” (John Calvin, Institutes of Christian Religion, Book 3, Chapter 21, Paragraph 5)

What does Calvin mean by this Lynn?
We have Institutes somewhere upstairs in our study. We also have 7 bookcases of books, and not all of our books are actually in the bookcases. So, sorry. I really am not going to look up Calvin's Institutes to tell you what Calvin meant by that even if I could figure out what Calvin meant by that in context.

Why? Should I be posting a snippet of Wesley to ask you what he meant by that?

Personally, I don't even get C.S. Lewis, and he was neither Calvinist nor Arminian. lol