Can We Really Exercise Free Will?

[Cameron143]

Well, I'm not your student, which is what I just said from another angle. So you're being circular and repetitive.

Do you have any actual Scripture you'd like to begin with or any point about man's inability to choose to believe apart from God giving Him a new heart so he can believe, or some similar such thing you think critical to your point of view?

You've used the word "doctrine" - so what doctrine do you want to discuss since we began discussing the doctrine of [total} depravity of man?

The fall of man is the doctrine I've been asking about. Specifically, what changed in man as a result of sin. If you don't start with what changed, it seems inevitable to me one will never understand what is actually restored in salvation.

 

[studier]

The fall of man is the doctrine I've been asking about. Specifically, what changed in man as a result of sin. If you don't start with what changed, it seems inevitable to me one will never understand what is actually restored in salvation.

The thread is about man exercising free will.

Depravity is where our discussion began.

So, is [fallen] man unable to believe in God and/or in the Gospel apart from God first giving him a new heart, and/or God giving him something else before he can believe and what is that something else?

You can include whatever you want from the doctrine of the fall of man that applies to the doctrine of depravity. Or you can make any point from whatever doctrine you want as long as it gets us back to where we began with depravity and [free] will.

So, point one of your doctrine with Scripture is________ and it relates to depravity and [free] will in this way___________?

 

[Cameron143]

The thread is about man exercising free will.

Depravity is where our discussion began.

So, is [fallen] man unable to believe in God and/or in the Gospel apart from God first giving him a new heart, and/or God giving him something else before he can believe and what is that something else?

You can include whatever you want from the doctrine of the fall of man that applies to the doctrine of depravity. Or you can make any point from whatever doctrine you want as long as it gets us back to where we began with depravity and [free] will.

So, point one of your doctrine with Scripture is________ and it relates to depravity and [free] will in this way___________?

Do you believe you are my teacher? Because you addressed me and brought up a topic in a biased way in no way limits me to responding as I see fit. As I have no intention of preserving your misconceptions, I'm offering you a way forward for discussion. If one does not address the changes in man as a result of sin, one will never be able to deal correctly with the response of God in the restoration of man. To this point, you have given no evidence that you understand the effect of sin upon man, yet you wish me to accept your preconceptions on the matter. You have the proverbial cart before the horse. You have yet to lay any foundation for any belief.

 

[Magenta]

Do you believe you are my teacher? Because you addressed me and brought up a topic in a biased way in no way limits me to responding as I see fit. As I have no intention of preserving your misconceptions, I'm offering you a way forward for discussion. If one does not address the changes in man as a result of sin, one will never be able to deal correctly with the response of God in the restoration of man. To this point, you have given no evidence that you understand the effect of sin upon man, yet you wish me to accept your preconceptions on the matter. You have the proverbial cart before the horse. You have yet to lay any foundation for any belief.

Scripture is clear that man can neither receive nor comprehend the spiritual things of God in his inborn state so they have to
keep ignoring that because there is no way forward while admitting it and still be able to cling to their erroneous position.

In fact I have essentially seen them claim 1 Cor 2:14 means something other than what it plainly says.

 

[BillyBob]

The thread is about man exercising free will.

Depravity is where our discussion began.

So, is [fallen] man unable to believe in God and/or in the Gospel apart from God first giving him a new heart, and/or God giving him something else before he can believe and what is that something else?

You can include whatever you want from the doctrine of the fall of man that applies to the doctrine of depravity. Or you can make any point from whatever doctrine you want as long as it gets us back to where we began with depravity and [free] will.

So, point one of your doctrine with Scripture is________ and it relates to depravity and [free] will in this way___________?

It seems to me that Cameron's question does lead into the FW debate because I believe that what was lost in the fall does in fact relate to MFW!

Before the fall man was created Good! God even describes mankind as very good.
And I believe that both God and man found pleasure in each other walking and talking within the garden that God had placed him in. God also blessed man with a woman. The only thing that God ask of Adam was not to eat of the tree. And I believe that Adam had the ability to obey and please God as well as the ability to make his own bad decision.
Shortly following the fall of man, it becomes clear that man is now corrupt and his heart is opposed to God. Man is bent on doing as he pleases rather than pleasing God (his maker). Mans ability to please God is now dependent on the grace of God. So much so that Gen 6:5 says the thoughts of his heart was only evil continually.

Since our thoughts are evil continually, what must occur that enables us to approach God in a way that is pleasing to Him?

 

[GWH]

Clearly they mistakenly believe it is exclusive to Calvinism.

Not mistakenly per the three passages that were discussed. Do you have a fourth for us to consider?

 

[GWH]

That's how you show your position and discuss the Bible, by asking a question?

How about you make a point and back it with Scripture. Or how about you post what you view as an important Scripture, explain what it means to you on topic, and I'll agree or disagree and explain why.

Yes, that is what he typically does. I call it the tar-baby technique.

 

[GWH]

It seems to me that Cameron's question does lead into the FW debate because I believe that what was lost in the fall does in fact relate to MFW!

Before the fall man was created Good! God even describes mankind as very good.
And I believe that both God and man found pleasure in each other walking and talking within the garden that God had placed him in. God also blessed man with a woman. The only thing that God ask of Adam was not to eat of the tree. And I believe that Adam had the ability to obey and please God as well as the ability to make his own bad decision.
Shortly following the fall of man, it becomes clear that man is now corrupt and his heart is opposed to God. Man is bent on doing as he pleases rather than pleasing God (his maker). Mans ability to please God is now dependent on the grace of God. So much so that Gen 6:5 says the thoughts of his heart was only evil continually.

Since our thoughts are evil continually, what must occur that enables us to approach God in a way that is pleasing to Him?

It may be significant that Genesis doesn’t describe the relationship of A and E with God before they exercised their God-given MFW to ignore GW.

 

[GWH]

The fall of man is the doctrine I've been asking about. Specifically, what changed in man as a result of sin. If you don't start with what changed, it seems inevitable to me one will never understand what is actually restored in salvation.

What changed is their spiritual status of being in Eden, which is what is restored and culminates in heaven.

 

[studier]

Do you believe you are my teacher? Because you addressed me and brought up a topic in a biased way in no way limits me to responding as I see fit. As I have no intention of preserving your misconceptions, I'm offering you a way forward for discussion. If one does not address the changes in man as a result of sin, one will never be able to deal correctly with the response of God in the restoration of man. To this point, you have given no evidence that you understand the effect of sin upon man, yet you wish me to accept your preconceptions on the matter. You have the proverbial cart before the horse. You have yet to lay any foundation for any belief.

Neither of us is interested in being taught by the other.

I actually addressed you in jest and then stated in a following response to you that your view of Total Depravity is in line with the Total Depravity doctrine of Calvinism.

You and I have discussed this before and I recall your belief to be God giving a new heart to man > then man believes.

I previously pointed you to a more cooperative discussion you and I had on this topic on the Understanding God's Election thread beginning somewhere around page 551. If you're not interested in getting up to speed, then neither am I.

We do have some personal background for me to say what I said in comparing your belief to Calvinistic Total Depravity. I have also seen others make the same comparison. It really doesn't matter if you've studied Reformed theology or not for me or others to notice the comparisons of what you say you believe to another tradition of belief. If it's comparable then it's comparable.

This was the original discussion and I provided you with details of what Reformed Total Depravity is in order for us to have points and Scriptures to discuss, and compare to your beliefs in interpretations.

You prefer to say you're open to taking me through your beliefs, then start asking me questions and telling me what I need to go through to get to the topic. You presuppose I have a deficiency in some foundational doctrine and that your view is accurate.

I choose to reject your path forward. I've concluded in more detailed discussion with you that your interpretation of certain Scriptures on topic are incorrect, so it would seem to me that I'm very likely to find errors in your foundation that cause those later errors or that those later errors are such to make your foundational errors seem sound. IOW disagreement in either place seems inevitable.

Your innuendo of being my teacher continues whether or not you admit you're not such a one.

Last attempt:

I don't think 1Cor2:14 teaches that fallen man is unable to believe the foundational Gospel that Jesus is YHWH's Christ unless God first gives him a new heart.

I don't think Rom8:7-8 teach that fallen man is unable to believe the foundational Gospel that Jesus is YHWH's Christ unless God first gives him a new heart.

Agree or disagree?

Please feel free to insert your substantiating points from the doctrine of the fall of man.

 

[studier]

Yes, that is what he typically does. I call it the tar-baby technique.

click here

3 witnesses?

 

[Cameron143]

What changed is their spiritual status of being in Eden, which is what is restored and culminates in heaven.

All that changed was their spiritual status? What does that entail specifically? They weren't actually removed from a physical location? What exactly is restored to man in salvation?

 

[Magenta]

We do have some personal background for me to say what I said

Yes you are quick to condemn others and just as hasty in rationalizing and justifying any offence of your own.

 

[studier]

Since our thoughts are evil continually, what must occur that enables us to approach God in a way that is pleasing to Him?

Some would say choose to believe and not reject who He is and choose to believe and not reject His message about His Son when He sends someone or a Bible or (?) to tell you His message.

I also think believers in God but yet unbelievers in Jesus Christ doing some righteousness pleases Him and He welcomes and pursues such people as Peter learned by miracle then experience to break through his erroneous cultural beliefs Acts10:35.

 

[Cameron143]

Neither of us is interested in being taught by the other.

I actually addressed you in jest and then stated in a following response to you that your view of Total Depravity is in line with the Total Depravity doctrine of Calvinism.

You and I have discussed this before and I recall your belief to be God giving a new heart to man > then man believes.

I previously pointed you to a more cooperative discussion you and I had on this topic on the Understanding God's Election thread beginning somewhere around page 551. If you're not interested in getting up to speed, then neither am I.

We do have some personal background for me to say what I said in comparing your belief to Calvinistic Total Depravity. I have also seen others make the same comparison. It really doesn't matter if you've studied Reformed theology or not for me or others to notice the comparisons of what you say you believe to another tradition of belief. If it's comparable then it's comparable.

This was the original discussion and I provided you with details of what Reformed Total Depravity is in order for us to have points and Scriptures to discuss, and compare to your beliefs in interpretations.

You prefer to say you're open to taking me through your beliefs, then start asking me questions and telling me what I need to go through to get to the topic. You presuppose I have a deficiency in some foundational doctrine and that your view is accurate.

I choose to reject your path forward. I've concluded in more detailed discussion with you that your interpretation of certain Scriptures on topic are incorrect, so it would seem to me that I'm very likely to find errors in your foundation that cause those later errors or that those later errors are such to make your foundational errors seem sound. IOW disagreement in either place seems inevitable.

Your innuendo of being my teacher continues whether or not you admit you're not such a one.

Last attempt:

I don't think 1Cor2:14 teaches that fallen man is unable to believe the foundational Gospel that Jesus is YHWH's Christ unless God first gives him a new heart.

I don't think Rom8:7-8 teach that fallen man is unable to believe the foundational Gospel that Jesus is YHWH's Christ unless God first gives him a new heart.

Agree or disagree?

Please feel free to insert your substantiating points from the doctrine of the fall of man.

I already understand what you believe, even without any consideration of reformed theology. Thus, reformed theology and Calvinism is unnecessary to the discussion. The only reason one brings superfluous into the discussion is to in some way use it discredit another's beliefs. It also evidences bias assumed into the arguments. You may recognize this or not, but it is true. If I answer your questions directly, you will simply sort the answers according to your existing bias without ever receiving any greater understanding. At the very least, if you are truly interested in truth, you would want to understand the basis of my conclusions. As this isn't the case, my answer would only serve to cement your aforementioned biases and misconceptions. So instead, I presented you with a very real opportunity to learn. Surely something was different in the experience and actions of Adam and Eve after the fall that they never experienced or did before sin. What were these things, why did they occur, and what can we surmise from them?

 

[Magenta]

Some would say choose to believe and not reject who He is and choose to believe and not reject His message about His Son when He sends someone or a Bible or (?) to tell you His message.

Back to 1 Cor 2:14 which you deny

the natural man being UNABLE to receive or comprehend. He lacks the Spirit that enables him to receive
and comprehend the Spiritual things of God, explicitly articulated and repeatedly rejected by you.

Comprende? No, obviously not.

"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]

I already understand what you believe, even without any consideration of reformed theology. Thus, reformed theology and Calvinism is unnecessary to the discussion. The only reason one brings superfluous into the discussion is to in some way use it discredit another's beliefs. It also evidences bias assumed into the arguments. You may recognize this or not, but it is true. If I answer your questions directly, you will simply sort the answers according to your existing bias without ever receiving any greater understanding. At the very least, if you are truly interested in truth, you would want to understand the basis of my conclusions. As this isn't the case, my answer would only serve to cement your aforementioned biases and misconceptions. So instead, I presented you with a very real opportunity to learn. Surely something was different in the experience and actions of Adam and Eve after the fall that they never experienced or did before sin. What were these things, why did they occur, and what can we surmise from them?

Pelagian heretics love smearing Jehan's name everywhere.

 

[Inquisitor]

The ability to define reality.

Here is an example of reality from the modern world.

Putin controls Russia and Zelensky controls Ukraine.

Did God elect Putin and Zelensky?

Is the population of Russia living in a country that God defined by His sovereign will?

 

[Inquisitor]

Back to 1 Cor 2:14 which you deny

the natural man being UNABLE to receive or comprehend. He lacks the Spirit that enables him to receive
and comprehend the Spiritual things of God, explicitly articulated and repeatedly rejected by you.

Comprende? No, obviously not.

"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, I don't think you understand what you're talking about.

 

[GWH]

All that changed was their spiritual status? What does that entail specifically? They weren't actually removed from a physical location? What exactly is restored to man in salvation?

Yes, which entails being God’s enemies until/unless they repent and regain a right relationship/loving childship, whereupon they become bound for heaven again.