For Calvinists: Do you skip evangelizing because God chooses?

[preacher4truth]

Well, spread some around. I know you're good at spreading it...err...oops?

Uh, Joe, is that you?

 

[shrume]

We are not accountable for Adam's sin, but because of Adam's sin, we are sinners.

More full blown Pelagianism.

What I believe is not "full blown Pelagianism".

Pelagianism is the belief that original sin did not taint human nature and that mortal will is still capable of choosing good or evil without special divine aid.

^^^ https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pelagianism

I believe that original sin DID taint human nature, which is why all men sin, and need salvation.

But people CAN choose to do good.

Gen 3:
22) And the LORD God said, Behold, the man is become as one of us, to know good and evil: and now, lest he put forth his hand, and take also of the tree of life, and eat, and live for ever:

Deut 30:
15) See, I have set before thee this day life and good, and death and evil;
...
17) But if thine heart turn away, so that thou wilt not hear, but shalt be drawn away, and worship other gods, and serve them;
...
19) I call heaven and earth to record this day against you, that I have set before you life and death, blessing and cursing: therefore choose life, that both thou and thy seed may live:

Ps 34:
14) Depart from evil, and do good; seek peace, and pursue it.

Prov 15:
3) The eyes of the LORD are in every place, beholding the evil and the good.

Isa 7:
15) Butter and honey shall he eat, that he may know to refuse the evil, and choose the good.

Rom 12:
21) Be not overcome of evil, but overcome evil with good.

There are dozens more.

 

[SovereignGrace]

Please read all the verses right before that it's talking about spiritual death and spiritual life. Well unless you think you are never going to die and live forever on this earth
Romans 6:22-23
22 But now being made free from sin, and become servants to God, ye have your fruit unto holiness, and the end everlasting life.
23 For the wages of sin is death; but the gift of God is eternal life through Jesus Christ our Lord.

Sissy, I did a 6-8 month study on that great book called Romans, so I know what it says. Granted, it does not make me the final authority on it.

Now, the Christ was sinless. How was that He died?

 

[Jackson123]

But how do you believe? Is it something you drum up in yourself? Or does God choose to give it to you?

True story! And an experience!

I went to Baptist Sunday School as a child, memorized lots of Scripture, including John 3:16. But not the context.

I drifted away from God, became an atheist, then agnostic, stumbling into the New Age movement, which was terrible! Then, there was a revival in the area I lived. People were witnessing to me everywhere I turned. I was sorely tempted to lie and say I was saved, just so they would leave me alone. Lots of Scriptures preached to me, not a bad thing! And lots of amazing testimonies. About people that were completely hostile to the gospel, woke up in the middle of the night saved!

And yet, they and I ended up in Arminian churches. I was taught, over and over, that I could lose my salvation, which makes sense if I am the one who made it all happen, by my choice or free will. I was also taught to evangelize the lost, which was as good thing! But not in the way that I say a sinner's prayer, put the "Get Out of Hell Free" card in my back pocket.

I don't remember what I was taught from the Bible in those churches, but I denied my own coming to Christ. The Baptist Churches I went to, all taught eternal security. Which really only makes sense if God is the one who saves. Because if I chose to be saved, then I can also choose to lose my salvation, by walking away from God.

So, how was I saved? Well, after all those people telling me I needed Christ, and why, my future husband sat me down and told me I needed to repent of my sins. That was the part of the gospel everyone who was witnessing to me forgot to tell me.Because, they were using the carrot, not the stick. And that is an incomplete gospel.

My husband (forgive me for calling him that, but after 37 years of marriage, it is hard to remember a time when we weren't married!) told me about various people in the Bible who sinned and needed to repent. Like King David, and Mary Magdelene and Paul. It finally hit me, what the gospel was! I was too proud to admit my need for Jesus, until God spoke to me. He told me to follow him, and that he was the Saviour of the World! (Read John 3:16)

I did not save myself. I was evil. I couldn't bring myself to believe I was answerable to God! I wasn't free to choose or believe! But, when I heard that voice, I KNEW Jesus was God, and my Saviour. There was no "choice" to follow. No choice to believe and obey! It was just part of God saving me. Nothing I could do, and everything that God did do!

So many years off track in churches that really didn't know the Bible! Whose pastors had a year or two of Bible college after high school graduation, with no original languages, theology or hermeneutics. It was very sad!

But, I was moving towards a Reformed viewpoint, because God was leading me. Part of that was reading the Bible faithfully and studying it all those years. Part of it was reading what the Reformed viewpoint was. I thought the bottom had dropped out of my life, when I read that God saved us, and then we believed and repented! I had never heard that! (Well, I probably had, but it made no sense to me at that time!)

But the real reason I became Reformed besides studying the Bible, was simply because I knew I could never, ever have saved myself. I was pretty wicked! I ran in the wrong crowds, drank too much, and never acknowledged the evil in my heart and life. But, despite me, God saved me, totally and completely of his will! And yes, I pray for the lost and I share the gospel, as much as I am able.

Please pray for my sister, Michele. We had a great talk this week about God. (I've been witnessing to her since I was saved, 37 years ago!) But this time,. She got interested in listening to audio Bibles. So, I recommended to her some apps, I know that the Word of God is powerful! And I pray God will reveal himself to her in Jesus Christ, and he will save her!

Sorry to be so long again!

Thank for your testimony Angela it is nice testimony. I know you are born again Christian, the way you talk show it.

I believe no matter what you position whether predestination or free will, as long as you believe in Jesus, you are save.

In this matter we are different I believe salvation by faith, and faith come from hearing, than after hearing the word whosoever believe in Him will be save, our free will decide to believe or not. When I am young, my mentor teach me about predestination, that what he believe. Abou 15 years a go my friend invite me to go witnessing with him and his friend. We went once a week door to door. One day we meet a young lady, she was Christian but not anymore. She say she do not believe that no matter what you do as long you elect you save. That is not fair for her. I was question that teaching before but not serious, after that experience I am seriously study, and now I believe in free will.

we are different in this part. But I believe you are true christian

 

[1ofthem]

Sissy, I did a 6-8 month study on that great book called Romans, so I know what it says. Granted, it does not make me the final authority on it.

Now, the Christ was sinless. How was that He died?

He laid down his life...No one took it from him but he laid it down to atone for our sins...


But yeah, you can continue to look at it that way too if you want...He died even though he never sinned...hmm...that's saying a lot isn't it...I think I may have said that in an earlier post everyone will physically die whether they sin or not.

But seriously, Jesus took on the sins of the whole world and then gave up his life for us so that whosoever will believe in him will be saved.

 

[Angela53510]

I don't think English is the problem here...

Just seems like some folks need to open up their eyes...and quit getting hung up on one or two words...Just Read the whole Bible in context because it don't contradict its self...Just saying...

But it's nice to know that you are so concerned about learning English..

This is just rich! And the second time you have said it! And yet, not once have I seen you quote the Bible, with the address, just some vague references, out of context.

I have read the Bible in English over 50 times. From cover to cover, including the Levitical laws in Leviticus and the geneololgies in 1 Chronicles. Every word! I have read the whole Bible completely in French. And almost the whole NT in Greek, and some of the OT in Hebrew. In many different translations and in the original languages.

I've also studied and studied. I've read commentaries I disagree with. (On many topics!). I've read commentaries I agree with. I've done word studies and book studies. I've done topical studies. And I have never read Calvin, although it is a goal, I have a free copy on my Kindle, although I decided I want to read the original French, instead. Provided the French is not too obscure, like the KJV English.

And the more I read, the more Reformed I get. I think Muzunga said "consistent." The Reformed view is consistent, and in context.

Do you know what context is? It's is reading the verse in light of the surrounding verses. And the surrounding verses in light of the chapter. And the chapter in light of the book. And the book in light of the Testament. And the Testament in light of the whole Bible. And the whole Bible in light of Jesus Christ!

You don't seem to know the Bible at all.

My advice is to read it with an open heart and mind. Instead of just reading the verses you want to read, and missing the in between parts. I'm not talking about not reading, but rather not listening to all the words, just the ones you want to confirm what you already believe.

And when you have read it over 50 times, like I have, come back and tell us what God has said to you. I know God lead me away from the surface nonsense of Arminianism into a deep understanding of his character, and who he is. That is a good place to start Instead of yourself and free will! And just as a little challenge, feel free to quote the verses that have "free will" in them. Those words certainly do not come up in a Bible search!

 

[1ofthem]

Well, spread some around. I know you're good at spreading it...err...oops?

LOL...I gave you a rep. for that....cause that's the truth if I ever heard it...but just like this Calvinism stuff we may disagree on what the it ​that's being spread really means...jk..lol

 

[preacher4truth]

I don't claim to be an expert on calvinism,just heard what I said here on this site from a member,I suppose I may check into your verse though,thanks.

Yes, read and meditate upon that passage brother.

 

[1ofthem]

This is just rich! And the second time you have said it! And yet, not once have I seen you quote the Bible, with the address, just some vague references, out of context.

I have read the Bible in English over 50 times. From cover to cover, including the Levitical laws in Leviticus and the geneololgies in 1 Chronicles. Every word! I have read the whole Bible completely in French. And almost the whole NT in Greek, and some of the OT in Hebrew. In many different translations and in the original languages.

I've also studied and studied. I've read commentaries I disagree with. (On many topics!). I've read commentaries I agree with. I've done word studies and book studies. I've done topical studies. And I have never read Calvin, although it is a goal, I have a free copy on my Kindle, although I decided I want to read the original French, instead. Provided the French is not too obscure, like the KJV English.

And the more I read, the more Reformed I get. I think Muzunga said "consistent." The Reformed view is consistent, and in context.

Do you know what context is? It's is reading the verse in light of the surrounding verses. And the surrounding verses in light of the chapter. And the chapter in light of the book. And the book in light of the Testament. And the Testament in light of the whole Bible. And the whole Bible in light of Jesus Christ!

You don't seem to know the Bible at all.

My advice is to read it with an open heart and mind. Instead of just reading the verses you want to read, and missing the in between parts. I'm not talking about not reading, but rather not listening to all the words, just the ones you want to confirm what you already believe.

And when you have read it over 50 times, like I have, come back and tell us what God has said to you. I know God lead me away from the surface nonsense of Arminianism into a deep understanding of his character, and who he is. That is a good place to start Instead of yourself and free will! And just as a little challenge, feel free to quote the verses that have "free will" in them. Those words certainly do not come up in a Bible search!

This all boils down to what you think, your opinion, and interpretation of scripture...I've read the Bible and studied it and to make a long story short...I go by what I read. Not your opinion or interpretation of what it says and you don't have to go by mine...We are all going to be judged in the the end so I'm not judging you. I'm posting my view and interpretation and you are free to do the same.

Just to be clear though I am not Arminian and I am also not a Calvinist, as you can very well tell.

 

[SovereignGrace]

He laid down his life...No one took it from him but he laid it down to atone for our sins...

Correct. But that doesn't answer my question.

Jesus took on the sins of the whole world

And there's what I was looking for. When the Christ was in the garden of Gethsamane, He prayed three times to let this cup pass from Him. What was in that cup that caused Him to pray three times to let it pass from Him, if it was His Father's will?


In the hand of the Lord is a cup full of foaming wine mixed with spices; he pours it out, and all the wicked of the earth drink it down to its very dregs.[Psalm 75:8] Our sins, and conversely His wrath, was in that cup. When the Christ drank of that most bitter cup, He knew that His Father would have to distance(turn His back on Him) Himself from His own Son. It was after He ingested this cup, He was then throttled and killed.

As it says God made him who had no sin to be sin for us, so that in him we might become the righteousness of God.[2 Cor. 5:21] Notice, Paul said God made Him 'to be sin', not a symbol of sin, but sin itself. When He ingested our sins, our sins were imputed to Him, and He stood before God as a guilty sinner. When He stood before God, God saw Him as if it were you or I. He treated His Son no differently. That's because we can read He who did not spare his own Son, but gave him up for us all—how will he not also, along with him, graciously give us all things?[Rom. 8:32] This shows God's justice in that even when His son stood in our place, God spared Him not.

Now, everything the Christ did, He did for His sheep. When He lived the sinless life, He lived it in their stead. When He died, He died in their place. When He rose from the grave, He rose for them so that they could live again, as Romans 4:25 says, He was delivered over to death for our sins and was raised to life for our justification. Everything the Christ is, His sheep are. God now sees His elect with the imputed righteousness of the Christ. He sees them as if they had lived the perfect life, as if they have never sinned. God sees us through His Son.

That's why I will defend Calvinism to my death. Everything the Christ did, He did for His sheep. If He lived, died and rose for everybody w/o exception, then everybody w/o exception will be saved. You can not hold to a universal atonement and not be a universalist and remain consistent in your theology.

 

[1ofthem]

Correct. But that doesn't answer my question.



And there's what I was looking for. When the Christ was in the garden of Gethsamane, He prayed three times to let this cup pass from Him. What was in that cup that caused Him to pray three times to let it pass from Him, if it was His Father's will?


In the hand of the Lord is a cup full of foaming wine mixed with spices; he pours it out, and all the wicked of the earth drink it down to its very dregs.[Psalm 75:8] Our sins, and conversely His wrath, was in that cup. When the Christ drank of that most bitter cup, He knew that His Father would have to distance(turn His back on Him) Himself from Him. It was after He ingested this cup, He was then throttled and killed.

As it says God made him who had no sin to be sin for us, so that in him we might become the righteousness of God.[2 Cor. 5:21] Notice, Paul said God made Him 'to be sin', not a symbol of sin, but sin itself. When He ingested our sins, our sins were imputed to Him, and He stood before God as a guilty sinner. When He stood before God, God saw Him as if it were you or I. He treated His Son no differently. That's because we can read He who did not spare his own Son, but gave him up for us all—how will he not also, along with him, graciously give us all things?[Rom. 8:32] This shows God's justice in that even when He son stood in our place, God spared Him not.

Now, everything the Christ did, He did for His sheep. When He lived the sinless life, He lived it in their stead. When He died, He died in their place. When He rose from the grave, He rose for them so that they could live again, as Romans 4:25 says, He was delivered over to death for our sins and was raised to life for our justification. Everything the Christ is, His sheep are. God now sees His elect with the imputed righteousness of the Christ. He sees them as if they had lived the perfect life, as if they have never sinned. God sees us through His Son.

That's why I will defend Calvinism to my death. Everything the Christ did, He did for His sheep. If He lived, died and rose for everybody w/o exception, then everybody w/o exception will be saved. You can not hold to a universal atonement and not be a universalist and remain consistent in your theology.

To be honest I'm tired...I've been on here too long today...so I haven't read this post yet...I will read it tomorrow. I can tell you took a long time posting it so I want to read it when I can actually give it some attention and focus on it.

So I promise I will read it tomorrow and try to reply back.

 

[Angela53510]

Anyone who places their faith in the Lord Jesus Christ is counted worthy of salvation.

God does not determine who will place their faith in Christ. He wants all to choose to do so (1 Tim 2:4; 2 Pet 3:9).

Hmm! So where does it say God wants us to chose him? My Bible says the opposite.

"You did not choose me, but I chose you and appointed you to go and bear fruit, fruit that remains, so that whatever you ask the Father in my name he will give you." John 15:16

I'm still waiting for someone to post the verses that say, "free will." I can't seem to find them in any version on Biblegateway.com.

 

[SovereignGrace]

Uh, Joe, is that you?

Is that you, Hoss?

Well, don't get mad!!

 

[Angela53510]

1. Angela, as always, I want to point out that I respect you, and appreciate you, before moving on to pick at something you've said.

You are my friend, as well as my sister in the Lord, and it's appropriate to be respectful of, and appreciate for, the brethren.


2. I'm not going to attack Calvinism here, I'm just going to nitpick a few points of logic...
and how, in this particular debate, we often use straw men without realizing it.


3. Although your testimony is moving, and powerful, and we SHOULD be using our personal testimonies in both our witnessing and our counseling... that does not mean some PARTICULAR POINT of your testimony makes a good PROOF for some particular little thing.

This isn't a matter of appreciating your testimony... this is a matter of logic, and whether or not some particular point of your testimony supports some particular point of this debate.

We all need to be careful of this...
myself included.


4. The point:
The final conclusion to your testimony, though very powerful and meaningful, makes a couple of logical errors in its "application" to this debate.
This is not to say I don't appreciate your testimony... this is just a matter of logical application to a particular debate point.

The issue:
When you state the reason you became reformed is because "I knew I never could have ever saved myself," ... although this is an important tenant of the christian faith, it cannot be applied, in this context, to this debate.

Why?
Because the other side of the debate ALSO believes the same thing.
It's like saying you became reformed because you believe in wearing socks and shoes...
but if you looked more closely, you'd see the other side also wears socks and shoes.

In this particular debate, your point carries no weight of logical necessity.

You don't have to be reformed to believe you cannot save yourself.
Most christians, who are evangelical, all believe the same.
Logical necessity cannot uphold the point "I became Reformed because of ABC" when the other side also believes in ABC.
This is a straw man.

It is a straw man, and a fair sized presumption, to assume the other side does NOT believe God alone saves them.
This is a classic straw man in this centuries old debate.

I know you are an honest person, and you don't intentionally set up straw men... but in theology, we all hear the straw men, and we sometimes have the straw men beaten into us... and we often use them without even thinking about it.

What the other side actually believes... dealing with the straw man:
Regarding this point about the other side believing the same thing: It is certain that, in traditional Arminianism, people DO believe they can lose their salvation... implying they "keep" their own salvation, and thereby implying they esentially "earn" their own salvation.

However, in the modern era, this is NOT what most "non calvinists" believe at all. And most people labeled as "Arminian" are NOT Arminian... this is just a label thrown on them.
I know VERY FEW evangelicals who actually hold to the Arminian view that they can lose their salvation. Labeling all non-calvinists as Arminian is a huge error, and is itself an act of setting up another straw man.




Conclusion: what has happened here?

1. By using a traditional straw man about the "other side's" beliefs, we create one particular distinction which DOES NOT REALLY EXIST, and then, on the grounds of this straw man distinction, we can easily claim "logical necessity" as the reason for choosing sides.

2. However, all of this is built not upon reality, but upon a straw man.

3. I am not accusing Angela of anything intentional or unethical. I think we use a plethora of straw men, CONTINUALLY, on BOTH SIDES of the Calvinist/Arminian debate... and we hear them so often we use them without thinking.

4. Let everyone take notice: if a good Christian woman like Angela, who is highly intelligent, and highly educated, and of good character, can make an occasional logical slip regarding these traditional straw men... then I think the rest of us are apt to do far worse, and we should be very careful in our reasoning.

I appreciate your carefully constructed rebuttal of what I wrote. However, I think I might not have been clear enough about what I wrote.

I mean, I could never have saved myself by reaching out to God, and asking him to save me. I was just too wicked and evil to believe in Christ. I wanted my own will, my own wretched lifestyle.

I mean that I did not save myself by saying a sinner's prayer, by believing and then repenting. Instead, God saved me, based on his election, and certainly in spite of me!

Arminians believe we can choose. I did not choose! God chose me! As far as what Arminians believe, I'm just sharing what I was taught in church and meetings for the 15 years I attended Arminian churches. And if people don't believe that anymore, well I apologize. I just remember how many appeals from the pulpit I heard to "choose Jesus!" As if I had a choice!

God saved me! I didn't save myself. And my husband is still Arminian and he lives his life in fear, of doing something wrong, and losing his salvation. Like many others I know from those kinds of churches.

Again, I apologize if I was not clear. I barely know what a straw man is, let alone perpetuate or create one! LOL

 

[Laish]

Is that you, Hoss?

Well, don't get mad!!

I thought he was talking about this Joe

You know uncle Joe lol
Blessing
Bill

 

[SovereignGrace]

I thought he was talking about this Joe

You know uncle Joe lol
Blessing
Bill

Oh my...Petticoat Junction. I wasn't for sure which Joe, so I guessed Little Joe from Bonanza.

 

[Laish]

Oh my...Petticoat Junction. I wasn't for sure which Joe, so I guessed Little Joe from Bonanza.

Well it could be this guy too

Blessings
Bill

 

[maxwel]

I appreciate your carefully constructed rebuttal of what I wrote. However, I think I might not have been clear enough about what I wrote.

I mean, I could never have saved myself by reaching out to God, and asking him to save me. I was just too wicked and evil to believe in Christ. I wanted my own will, my own wretched lifestyle.

I mean that I did not save myself by saying a sinner's prayer, by believing and then repenting. Instead, God saved me, based on his election, and certainly in spite of me!

Arminians believe we can choose. I did not choose! God chose me! As far as what Arminians believe, I'm just sharing what I was taught in church and meetings for the 15 years I attended Arminian churches. And if people don't believe that anymore, well I apologize. I just remember how many appeals from the pulpit I heard to "choose Jesus!" As if I had a choice!

God saved me! I didn't save myself. And my husband is still Arminian and he lives his life in fear, of doing something wrong, and losing his salvation. Like many others I know from those kinds of churches.

Again, I apologize if I was not clear. I barely know what a straw man is, let alone perpetuate or create one! LOL

Angela,
almost everything that is commonly said, in normal conversation, regarding the Calvinist/Arminian issue, is just thoroughly steeped in straw men... on both sides.

I certainly wasn't trying to accuse you of anything.
I just think both sides do a poor job of accurately assessing the other side.

I grew up being taught Calvinists were herectics of the absolute worst, and most damnable kind!
And now... I disagree with them a bit... but I quite like them.
: )



Alright, back to the discussion....



1. First of all, people who are not Calvinists aren't automatically Arminian, although that's the label Calvinist apply to anyone who isn't a Calvinist.
Most evangelicals, who are called "Arminian" by Calvinists, DO believe salvation is permanent and eternal, and kept entirely and only by God.

There are some churches which believe you can lose your salvation, but I don't think they are in the majority.

Also, please keep in mind, most evangelicals don't even know what an Arminian is... not until a Calvinist calls them by this name.
And at least 1/2 of what the Calvinist means by this term, is in most cases, incorrect.

(This isn't to say Calvinism is right or wrong... I'm just clearing up some labeling errors.)


2. However, the two camps do have some very major difference over a tiny handful of very small but important points.

ODDLY ENOUGH:
- Both camps believe God is at work in them PRIOR to salvation.
- Both camps believe no one can come to God unless he draws them.
- Both camps believe (for the most part) that salvation is permanent, and eternal, and kept only by God.
- Both camps believe they cannot, and do not, save themselves... despite accusations to the contrary.

So what are the actual differences?

There are a number of small, controversial, and hotly debated issues which are really pretty intricate and nuanced.

- One of the major issues is about the precise millisecond regeneration occurs.
Does regeneration occur a millisecond before accepting christ, or a millisecond after?
This is really the issue we're talking about.
It's pretty intricate, and pretty nuanced.

Here we can get into a long discussion about all the intricacies of prevenient grace.... but when it's all said and done, it's a pretty small and nuanced thing.

- There are some other issues, but the one above is probably the main one.


3. Now, I'm not about to ridicule my good Calvinist brothers because they believe regeneration occurs the millisecond before accepting Christ, and I believe it occurs the millisecond after.

I believe it's a serious theological issue.
I believe it should be studied, and it's a serious thing.
But when it comes to the saved brethren who are beloved of God... I am not personally going to cast any of them off over the disagreement of a millisecond.
: )


4. All of this said, I would still make the point that we should be careful of using personal subjective experiences to support controversial areas of theology.

Huh?

Like this:

A. If you say that you were wicked, and would never have chosen God, and he chose you, and moved in you, and called you to himself, and changed you so that you could accept Christ, and so you KNOW calvinism must be the correct view, well... we can't say you didn't experience this experience during conversion... but it's certainly very subjective.

B. Another Christian can say he was quietly reading the bible, and felt convicted of sin, and knelt down and CHOSE to give his life to christ... and that is his recollection of his own subjective experience.


The two conversion experiences, at least subjectively, were very different.
So do we want to use them as a basis for doctrine?

The subjective experience of your conversion is VERY important for witnessing and counseling.
The subjective experience of your conversion is VERY important for your own life, and spiritual growth.
However, it's probably not put to the best use as the source for intricate points of theology.
Since everyone's conversion experience is different... this just doesn't work reliably.


I like and respect Angela very much.
However, if this were a real debate, and I was an adversary... this would be a weak spot, where her argument could be attacked.


We need to be very cautious about bringing subjective experiences into debate...
even if they are completely valid in other domains.

 

[UnderGrace]

Free will is not a biblical concept is has its origin in Greek philosophy

When people speak about free will I do not think they really understand the concept in its entirety from the philosophical perspective and how it has been debated by various philosophers like Locke, Mill and Hobbes

I do believe that the scripture indicates choice which is different than free will.

Hmm! So where does it say God wants us to chose him? My Bible says the opposite.

"You did not choose me, but I chose you and appointed you to go and bear fruit, fruit that remains, so that whatever you ask the Father in my name he will give you." John 15:16

I'm still waiting for someone to post the verses that say, "free will." I can't seem to find them in any version on Biblegateway.com.

 

[Depleted]

I believe you are confusing "creation" and "creature",no creature is any comparison of God,I was speaking on things that God has made in heaven and so forth,not creatures.

The only thing God did not create was God.