Can We Really Exercise Free Will?

[Magenta]

What is translated "natural man" is the Greek word "psuchikos."

It is a descriptive term meaning, "soulish" man.

A man being only soul and body, no regeneration, having no human spirit.

We were all at one time "psuchikos."

The natural man can not understand Bible doctrine.
All of us at one time could not understand Bible doctrine as it needs to be understood.

It is not that we did not want God.
We simply could not know God is real, but in our souls many were wishing that He were.

Having no human spirit? Regeneration does not give the natural man a human spirit... it is a
spiritual transformation that gives the natural man a new spiritual life and a new nature in Christ.

And it is exactly that the natural man does not want God. The natural
man is inherently opposed to God, hostile in his mind toward him...
a lover of darkness refusing to come into the light.
It is what the Bible teaches, despite what you claim.

 

[Magenta]

"No one can come to Me unless the Father who sent Me draws him." John 6 verse 44 The natural man does not accept the things that come from the Spirit of God. For they are foolishness to him, and he cannot understand them, because they are spiritually discerned. 1 Corinthians 2 verse 14 For the mind that is set on the flesh is hostile to God, for it does not submit to God's law; indeed, it cannot. Those who are in the flesh cannot please God. Romans 8 verse 7-8

 

[Magenta]

from Romans 5 verse 10 / John 8 verses 31b-32 / Ephesians 5 verse 8 / 1 Thessalonians 5 verse 5 / Romans 6 verse 18 / John 8 verse 36 ~ While we were God’s enemies, we were reconciled to Him through the death of His Son. “If you continue in My word, you are truly My disciples. Then you will know the truth, and the truth will set you free.” You were once darkness, but now you are light in the Lord. Walk as children of light. You are all sons of the light and sons of the day; we do not belong to the night or to the darkness. You have been set free from sin and have become slaves to righteousness. If the Son sets you free, you will be free indeed.

 

[Magenta]

from Ephesians 4 verses 17-19 ~ Gentiles walk in the futility of their thinking. They are darkened in their understanding and alienated from the life of God because of the ignorance that is in them due to the hardness of their hearts. Having lost all sense of shame, they have given themselves over to sensuality for the practice of every kind of impurity, with a craving for more.

 

[Magenta]

What Say You? ~ When Scripture says there are none good, does it mean some are good? When Scripture says we all fall short, does it mean there are some who meet God's standards? When Scripture says, "The natural man does not accept the things that come from the Spirit of God, for they are foolishness to him, and he cannot understand them, because they are spiritually discerned..." Does it mean the natural man can understand the spiritual things of God? Does it mean he really can understand the gospel message even though it is heard as foolishness to him as Scriptures say? Is the natural man gifted with wisdom even though he has no fear of God, which is the beginning of wisdom? Will the lover of darkness come into the light even though Scripture says he will not, because he suppresses the truth of God in unrighteousness and is actually defined as darkness itself, hates the light, and is a slave to sin, blinded to the truth and captive to the will of the devil, which many define as being free? Is the heart of the natural man, the stony ground which needs to be replaced, fit for receiving and growing the Seed of God's Word into faith? Will that incurably wicked heart choose of its own accord to believe? Will that bad tree bring forth the good fruit of faith even though Jesus said it was not possible?

 

[Magenta]

Despite what the un-Biblical free will doctrine promoters put forth, the natural man does not have everything he needs in order to grow the good fruit of faith from the stony ground of his incurably wicked heart which is opposed to the things of God, and he cannot change himself, being a lover of darkness who suppresses the truth in unrighteousness as a slave to sin, being inherently hostile in his mind toward God, and blinded to the truth while under the power of the evil one. Those who promote the free will of the natural man reject a plethora of Biblical truths.

 

[Magenta]

"Free will" in the Bible? ~ Freedom is something believers are called to (Galatians 5 verse 13). We need Jesus to “set us free” (Galatians 5 verse 1). If Jesus has not freed us from the bondage of sin, then we are still slaves to sin (Romans 6 verses 6-7). Freedom is found in the presence of the Spirit (2 Corinthians 3 verse 17). Only Jesus can give us true freedom (John 8 verse 36). Only through His lovingkindness can we truly make choices unfettered by a nature that is inherently hostile toward God.

 

[LifelongLearner]

Your dog and cat exercise free will. So do your kids.

No! They definitely want to exercise their will at times, which they can if it doesn't impact others too much. Hence why will exists for sure but isn't free in created beings, to be free, one must always be capable of enacting will unilaterally.

As i have said many times on my post, the only being who has that unilateral power, is the Big Guy upstairs. We are really scratch each others backists, we need to compromise as well to have a decent life.

 

[LifelongLearner]

"Free will" in the Bible? ~ Freedom is something believers are called to (Galatians 5 verse 13). We need Jesus to “set us free” (Galatians 5 verse 1). If Jesus has not freed us from the bondage of sin, then we are still slaves to sin (Romans 6 verses 6-7). Freedom is found in the presence of the Spirit (2 Corinthians 3 verse 17). Only Jesus can give us true freedom (John 8 verse 36). Only through His lovingkindness can we truly make choices unfettered by a nature that is inherently hostile toward God.

Wish i had your knowledge of scripture sweet friend, that's SO good.

 

[HeIsHere]

You seem to be confusing free will with omnipotence. I can freely desire whatever I want to desire, and no one can stop me wanting what I want. Whether I can achieve what I want, has no bearing whatever on whether my wanting itself is free.

Exactly, I can consistently affect "the outcome" is not what free will means.
I think that is called straw manning.

 

[HeIsHere]

Follow me! is only a legitimate command if the one who receives it can follow.

One cannot justly be held responsible for a command to which they cannot respond.
And God is just.

 

[LifelongLearner]

What Say You? ~ When Scripture says there are none good, does it mean some are good? When Scripture says we all fall short, does it mean there are some who meet God's standards? When Scripture says, "The natural man does not accept the things that come from the Spirit of God, for they are foolishness to him, and he cannot understand them, because they are spiritually discerned..." Does it mean the natural man can understand the spiritual things of God? Does it mean he really can understand the gospel message even though it is heard as foolishness to him as Scriptures say? Is the natural man gifted with wisdom even though he has no fear of God, which is the beginning of wisdom? Will the lover of darkness come into the light even though Scripture says he will not, because he suppresses the truth of God in unrighteousness and is actually defined as darkness itself, hates the light, and is a slave to sin, blinded to the truth and captive to the will of the devil, which many define as being free? Is the heart of the natural man, the stony ground which needs to be replaced, fit for receiving and growing the Seed of God's Word into faith? Will that incurably wicked heart choose of its own accord to believe? Will that bad tree bring forth the good fruit of faith even though Jesus said it was not possible?

This panel reminds me of the many times where experiencing something SO wonderful, beautiful etc, i thought there must be a God but didn't act on the thought.

They were beautiful moments which never led to anything, until God offered his mercy and grace. So glad he did and i feel truly alive now in such a wonderful way.

 

[HeIsHere]

A man being only soul and body, no regeneration, having no human spirit.

Do you think having "no human spirit" is the same as having a dead human spirit?

 

[LifelongLearner]

Exactly, I can consistently affect "the outcome" is not what free will means.
I think that is called straw manning.

Sorry HIH but it's obvious you haven't read enough other comments, to post an accurate one yourself . However, thanks for alerting me to that one by Paul, have quite a few to answer, haven't seen that one yet.

 

[HeIsHere]

However, unless it's something which has little impact on others, we can't enact our will without the cooperation/compliance of others.

Free will involves having full control of ALL outcomes unilaterally, last time i checked, only the Big Guy upstairs can do that. Free will is the cherry on top and his privilege, blessing us with choice and will was beyond generous of him. However, we can only enact/exercise them freely if they don't negatively affect others, as they have will too.

Seems pretty obvious to me how you have defined it.

 

[LifelongLearner]

You seem to be confusing free will with omnipotence. I can freely desire whatever I want to desire, and no one can stop me wanting what I want. Whether I can achieve what I want, has no bearing whatever on whether my wanting itself is free.

It appears you don't understand what omnipotence means, however, you can spell it at least.

What my dear, is omnipotent about having will, being able to make choices and the ability to enact will with ease, if it doesn't conflict too much with, or cause trouble for others?

However, if it does cause trouble to others, you won't be allowed to assert your will, hence why it isn't free.

 

[cv5]

It appears you don't understand what omnipotence means, however, you can spell it at least.

What my dear, is omnipotent about having will, being able to make choices and the ability to enact will with ease, if it doesn't conflict too much with, or cause trouble for others?

However, if it does cause trouble to others, you won't be allowed to assert your will, hence why it isn't free.

[Isa 1:2 KJV]
Hear, O heavens, and give ear, O earth: for the LORD hath spoken, I have nourished and brought up children, and they have rebelled against me.

[Isa 1:18 KJV]
Come now, and let us reason together, saith the LORD: though your sins be as scarlet, they shall be as white as snow; though they be red like crimson, they shall be as wool.

[Isa 1:19 KJV]
If ye be willing and obedient, ye shall eat the good of the land:

[Isa 1:20 KJV]
But if ye refuse and rebel, ye shall be devoured with the sword: for the mouth of the LORD hath spoken [it].

 

[LifelongLearner]

The only type of FW important in the Bible and for discussions of GW such as on CC is MFW,
so you were correct to say that people should define it that way when discussing salvation.

For somebody who professes free will is largely a given, you seem to think it's ok to tell people how it should be exercised GWH. i'm not being facetious, we all have our faults and you do seek to impose your beliefs, often ganging up with others. I have nearly always stood on my own two feet on my post and have been one of the most rational throughout it.

Also, Magenta uses relevant scripture to support her reasoning GWH, you seek to derail discussion which isn't in your comfort zone, or doesn't go the direction you want it too. Not saying you're a bad person but i would say you're rather weaselly.

 

[studier]

My definition of free will is a very logical one and you are wrong to say the Bible doesn't support my view. You also conflate will and free will, most people do, we have will and can make choices for sure, which i have stated many times throughout my post.

However, unless it's something which has little impact on others, we can't enact our will without the cooperation/compliance of others. Free will involves having full control of ALL outcomes unilaterally, last time i checked, only the Big Guy upstairs can do that. Free will is the cherry on top and his privilege, blessing us with choice and will was beyond generous of him. However, we can only enact/exercise them freely if they don't negatively affect others, as they have will too.

Adam and Eve are a great example of having will which isn't free, have mentioned it in an earlier comment. They had will and made their choice, however, instead of making them Gods, it got them booted out of Eden and they started dying. They had will but no control over the outcome, it's an excellent example of our will not being free.

Unless I'm misunderstanding you, according to your "logical" definition of free will, it seems one cannot freely will to drive a vehicle into a crowd of people maiming and killing many and negatively affecting the lives of many more unless they cooperate with the driver. Same could be said about use of a gun since we have so many examples of both these days.

Part of the issue about this topic of debate is this philosophical reasoning about what "free" includes which runs into the realm of absurdity and seems pointless for a discussion of Biblical things. Why enter into Greek philosophy?

For example, we know God created in kinds. We're not birds. We're not free to fly like birds. What's the point of discussing freedom to such an absurd degree? We're constrained by creation and decree. Within those limitations is there freedom, at least enough to have a discussion about that freedom apart from logical absurdity?

 

[studier]

For somebody who professes free will is largely a given, you seem to think it's ok to tell people how it should be exercised GWH. i'm not being facetious, we all have our faults and you do seek to impose your beliefs, often ganging up with others. I have nearly always stood on my own two feet on my post and have been one of the most rational throughout it.

Also, Magenta uses relevant scripture to support her reasoning GWH, you seek to derail discussion which isn't in your comfort zone, or doesn't go the direction you want it too. Not saying you're a bad person but i would say you're rather weaselly.

So, in just a few posts, I'm reading self-assertion of being logical, one of the most reasonably, judging another as being "rather weaselly in favor of another you find not weaselly.

Any room for improvement?