An Article on free will

[Kermos]

You err, not being aware of this.



The Wrong Assumption About θέλει (thelei) in 1 Timothy 2:4

You’re arguing that if God “desires” (θέλει) all men to be saved, then that must mean it happens irresistibly, and therefore, there's no need for human volition. But that’s simply not how θέλει works in Greek.



This verb is in the present active indicative, which means it expresses ongoing divine desire, not an absolute decree. If Paul had meant a determinative, irresistible will, he would have used a different grammatical structure—like an aorist or future tense with an imperative force.



Look at Matthew 23:37, where Jesus uses the same verb:



"How often I desired (ἠθέλησα) to gather your children... but you were not willing (οὐκ ἠθελήσατε)."



Notice what’s happening here: Jesus, as God, desired (θέλει) something, but people refused. That right there completely refutes the idea that God’s θέλει automatically guarantees its fulfillment without human response.



2. The Necessity of Human Response in 1 Timothy 2:4

Look at how the sentence is structured:



"Who desires all men to be saved and to come to the knowledge of the truth" (καὶ εἰς ἐπίγνωσιν ἀληθείας ἐλθεῖν).



That verb ἐλθεῖν (elthein, "to come") is in the aorist active infinitive, which means it refers to an action that the subject (humans) must do. Paul isn’t saying that God just saves people unilaterally—he’s saying God desires all to be saved by coming to the truth, and that requires volition.



This lines up exactly with what Paul says in Romans 10:14:



"How then will they call on Him in whom they have not believed? And how will they believe in Him whom they have not heard?"



Paul makes it crystal clear that belief requires hearing and responding.



If salvation were purely monergistic (God saving people without any response), Paul wouldn’t have said that people need to believe and call upon God—he would have said, “God makes them believe.”



But he doesn’t. Because the human response matters.



3. The Misuse of Philippians 2:13

I see what you’re trying to do with Philippians 2:13:



"For it is God who works in you, both to will and to work for His good pleasure."



But let’s back up a verse—because you completely ignored Philippians 2:12:



"Work out your own salvation with fear and trembling."



That’s a command—Paul is literally telling them to do something, which means they must be capable of responding.



The verb κατεργάζεσθε (katergazesthe, "work out") is a present middle imperative, which means it’s something the Philippians are actively expected to do.



Now, does Philippians 2:13 say that God is at work in them? Absolutely. But does that mean their will is irrelevant? Not at all!



If you’re saying Philippians 2:13 overrides free will, then you’d have to say Paul contradicts himself within the same paragraph. But obviously, he doesn’t. He’s showing that salvation involves both divine initiative and human response—exactly what we see in 1 Timothy 2:4.



4. The Calvinist Attempt to Redefine "All Men"

Another big problem is how Calvinists try to twist the phrase πάντας ἀνθρώπους (pántas anthrṓpous, "all men") in 1 Timothy 2:4 into meaning “all kinds of men” rather than every individual.



That doesn’t hold up for a few reasons:



The Context of 1 Timothy 2:1-2



Paul literally starts the chapter by saying:



"I urge that supplications, prayers, intercessions, and thanksgivings be made for all men (πάντων ἀνθρώπων)."



If "all men" in verse 1 means every human being, then verse 4 doesn’t suddenly change meaning.



Compare with Titus 2:11



"For the grace of God has appeared, bringing salvation to all men (πᾶσιν ἀνθρώποις)."



The phrase is the same, and here it obviously refers to everyone, not just the elect.



So if you want to argue that “all men” in 1 Timothy 2:4 only means the elect, you would have to argue that “all men” in 1 Timothy 2:1 also only means the elect—which would mean Paul is telling Timothy to only pray for the elect! That would be nonsense.





So, let’s sum this up:



θέλει (thelei, "desires") does not mean an irresistible decree—other uses of this verb (like Matthew 23:37) prove that God's desire does not override human will.



The phrase "to come to the knowledge of the truth" (εἰς ἐπίγνωσιν ἀληθείας ἐλθεῖν) requires human response, proving salvation isn’t purely monergistic.



Philippians 2:12-13 does not eliminate free will—it shows divine enablement working alongside human responsibility.



The Calvinist attempt to redefine "all men" in 1 Timothy 2:4 contradicts the immediate and broader biblical context.



If 1 Timothy 2:4 means what the Calvinist says it means, then Paul wouldn’t have structured the passage the way he did, nor would we see so many other scriptures emphasizing belief, repentance, and human response.



So, no—acknowledging human agency in 1 Timothy 2:4 does not mean man is saving himself. It means salvation requires a response to God’s grace, which is exactly what we see all throughout scripture.



Look for all the "Syn" compound words in Scripture--





συζήσομεν (syzēsomen) – "we shall live together with" (Rom 6:8)



συγκληρονόμοι (sygklēronomoi) – "joint-heirs" (Rom 8:17)



συμμόρφους (symmorphous) – "conformed together with" (Rom 8:29)



συνεργοί (synergoi) – "co-workers" (1 Cor 3:9)



συγκοινωνοί (synkoinōnoi) – "co-sharers" (2 Cor 1:7)



συνεζωοποίησεν (synezōopoiēsen) – "made alive together with" (Eph 2:5)



συνήγειρεν (synegeiren) – "raised together with" (Eph 2:6)



συμμορφούμενος (symmorphoumenos) – "being conformed together with" (Phil 3:10)



συνταφέντες (syntaphentes) – "buried together with" (Col 2:12)



συμβασιλεύσομεν (symbasileusomen) – "we will reign together with" (2 Tim 2:12)



Paul’s use of συν- compounds powerfully expresses the believer’s union with Christ in suffering, resurrection, inheritance, and kingdom participation. These verbs highlight both divine action and human participation, emphasizing the cooperative nature of salvation and sanctification.



You force your systematic theology upon me, expecting me to conform to your framework. As for human volition, I do not argue for a will independent of the Holy Spirit but rather for a sanctified thélēma and boulē, fully surrendered in Christ Jesus.



If you want to put me in the spotlight, I have no problem engaging with you. However, I’ve noticed that instead of answering questions, you simply impose yourself and your doctrine onto me. That’s not how meaningful discussion works.



Get it?



J.

An absolutely awesome event occurs about God's desire (desire=unsatisfied state), for, you see, Lord Jesus says "Jerusalem, Jerusalem, who kills the prophets and stones those who are sent to her! How often I desired to gather your children together, the way a hen gathers her chicks under her wings, and you were unwilling" (Matthew 23:37) in extremely close proximity to the timeframe of when God's desire regarding Jerusalem "to gather your children together" was satisfied as the Apostle Matthew records "And the crowds that went before him and that followed him were shouting, 'Hosanna to the Son of David! Blessed is he who comes in the name of the Lord! Hosanna in the highest!'" as Christ triumphantly rode Jerusalem (Matthew 21:9). Hallelujah, Almighty God's desire satisfied!

Do you agree, Johann, that these events are amazing and marvelous?

I do not believe your "monergistic (God saving people without any response)". I believe in Fruit of the Holy Spirit in God's people for the Word of God tells me “he who practices the Truth comes to the Light, that his works may be revealed, that they are having been worked in God” (John 3:21) of which this lovely Voice of Truth applies to us Christians believing in the Son whom the Father has sent (John 6:29), so there is response in us Christians apart from your definition and fancy word.

You wrote "But let’s back up a verse—because you completely ignored Philippians 2:12" which is untrue because God caused me to discuss this elsewhere, but you and I can cover Philippians 2:12, too:

12 So then, my beloved, just as you have always obeyed, not as in my presence only, but now much more in my absence, work out your salvation with fear and trembling; 13 it is God who is at work in you, both to will and to work for His good pleasure
(Philippians 2:12-13)
​

Paul expresses that obeyed is God who is at work in you, both to will and to work for His good pleasure.

Paul expresses that work out your salvation is God who is at work in you, both to will and to work for His good pleasure.

Paul expresses that How then will they call on Him in whom they have not believed? How will they believe in Him whom they have not heard? (Romans 10:14), two specific questions which you quoted, are answered by it is God who is at work in you, both to will and to work for His good pleasure.

If you’re saying free will overrides Philippians 2:13, then you’d have to say Paul contradicts himself within the same paragraph. But obviously, he doesn’t. He’s showing that salvation involves divine initiative working to cause the work of human response—exactly what we see in 1 Timothy 2:4.

Regarding:

1 First of all, then, I urge that entreaties and prayers, petitions and thanksgivings, be made on behalf of all men, 2 for kings and all who are in authority, so that we may lead a tranquil and quiet life in all godliness and dignity. 3 This is good and acceptable in the sight of God our Savior, 4 who desires all men to be saved and to come to the knowledge of the truth.
(1 Timothy 2:1-4)
​

just because you say "If "all men" in verse 1 means every human being, then verse 4 doesn’t suddenly change meaning" does not make your saying Truth (John 14:6) because NT Holy Scripture can contextually change a phrase's meaning in rapid progress. You see, we Christians know that all men means "all men of different types so that God's desire results in all men in the Assembly of God are chosen by God" because of (1) the intervening context between verse 1 and 4, (2) the first letter to Timothy from Paul is constrained by being a letter from believer to believer, and (3) God's glory in God's desires always arriving at God's satisfaction, that is, God's good pleasure Philippians 2:13.

To @civic and @Eternally-Grateful due to your heartfelt Like/agreement with Johann's thoughts.

Yes, let's do look at all men in:

For the grace of God has appeared, bringing salvation to all men
(Titus 2:11).
​

The letter to Titus is a letter among people sharing a common faith, not individual free-will faiths, for the faith is fully delivered into man by the work of God (John 6:29) - the faith of those chosen of God and the knowledge of the truth which is according to godliness as shown in the letter!s salutation:

1 Paul, a bond-servant of God and an apostle of Jesus Christ, for the faith of those chosen of God and the knowledge of the truth which is according to godliness, 2 in the hope of eternal life, which God, who cannot lie, promised long ages ago, 3 but at the proper time manifested, even His word, in the proclamation with which I was entrusted according to the commandment of God our Savior,
4 To Titus, my true child in a common faith: Grace and peace from God the Father and Christ Jesus our Savior
(Titus 1:1-4)
​

thus the letter is constrained to the faith of those chosen of God and the knowledge of the truth which is according to godliness.

You wrote "The phrase is the same, and here it obviously refers to everyone, not just the elect" of (Titus 2:11).

Here is the result of your heart's Titus 2:11's all men obviously refers to everyone. According to your Free-willian Philosophy, the following represents fleshly people, dead in sin, ungodly multitude, unbelievers in relation to God:

• God brought salvation to Tom, independently before Tom heard of God. if Tom of the world chooses to believe in Christ before he dies, then God must profit Tom with eternal life being saved from the wrath of God.
• God brought salvation to Nancy, independently before Nancy heard of God. if Nancy of the world chooses to believe not in Christ right until her dying thoughts, then God must punish Nancy with eternal damnation being under the wrath of God.
• The conclusion: Christ's salvation succeeded in saving Tom of the world, and Christ's salvation failed in saving Nancy of the world.

So, you free-willians believe in Christ's failure atonement since people like Nancy end up in hell while being among the all men having Christ's salvation.

And the results of your thoughts, there, have common traits with the results of your thoughts regarding 1 Timothy 2:4 as shown in post #7,200.

God’s good pleasure is the core of the matter regarding God's will in "who desires all men to be saved and to come to the knowledge of the truth" (1 Timothy 2:4) because the Holy Spirit makes clear "it is God who is at work in you, both to will and to work for His good pleasure" (Philippians 2:13).

 

[ProDeo]

I am FREE........................

Are you also free ?

@jeremiah1five @brightfame52 @Red Baker @civic @Johann @TomL @synergy @MTMattie @Jim

 

[Johann]

An absolutely awesome event occurs about God's desire (desire=unsatisfied state), for, you see, Lord Jesus says "Jerusalem, Jerusalem, who kills the prophets and stones those who are sent to her! How often I desired to gather your children together, the way a hen gathers her chicks under her wings, and you were unwilling" (Matthew 23:37) in extremely close proximity to the timeframe of when God's desire regarding Jerusalem "to gather your children together" was satisfied as the Apostle Matthew records "And the crowds that went before him and that followed him were shouting, 'Hosanna to the Son of David! Blessed is he who comes in the name of the Lord! Hosanna in the highest!'" as Christ triumphantly rode Jerusalem (Matthew 21:9). Hallelujah, Almighty God's desire satisfied!

Do you agree, Johann, that these events are amazing and marvelous?

I do not believe your "monergistic (God saving people without any response)". I believe in Fruit of the Holy Spirit in God's people for the Word of God tells me “he who practices the Truth comes to the Light, that his works may be revealed, that they are having been worked in God” (John 3:21) of which this lovely Voice of Truth applies to us Christians believing in the Son whom the Father has sent (John 6:29), so there is response in us Christians apart from your definition and fancy word.

You wrote "But let’s back up a verse—because you completely ignored Philippians 2:12" which is untrue because God caused me to discuss this elsewhere, but you and I can cover Philippians 2:12, too:

​

12 So then, my beloved, just as you have always obeyed, not as in my presence only, but now much more in my absence, work out your salvation with fear and trembling; 13 it is God who is at work in you, both to will and to work for His good pleasure​

(Philippians 2:12-13)​

​

Paul expresses that obeyed is God who is at work in you, both to will and to work for His good pleasure.

Paul expresses that work out your salvation is God who is at work in you, both to will and to work for His good pleasure.

Paul expresses that How then will they call on Him in whom they have not believed? How will they believe in Him whom they have not heard? (Romans 10:14), two specific questions which you quoted, are answered by it is God who is at work in you, both to will and to work for His good pleasure.

If you’re saying free will overrides Philippians 2:13, then you’d have to say Paul contradicts himself within the same paragraph. But obviously, he doesn’t. He’s showing that salvation involves divine initiative working to cause the work of human response—exactly what we see in 1 Timothy 2:4.

Regarding:

​

1 First of all, then, I urge that entreaties and prayers, petitions and thanksgivings, be made on behalf of all men, 2 for kings and all who are in authority, so that we may lead a tranquil and quiet life in all godliness and dignity. 3 This is good and acceptable in the sight of God our Savior, 4 who desires all men to be saved and to come to the knowledge of the truth.​

(1 Timothy 2:1-4)​

​

just because you say "If "all men" in verse 1 means every human being, then verse 4 doesn’t suddenly change meaning" does not make your saying Truth (John 14:6) because NT Holy Scripture can contextually change a phrase's meaning in rapid progress. You see, we Christians know that all men means "all men of different types so that God's desire results in all men in the Assembly of God are chosen by God" because of (1) the intervening context between verse 1 and 4, (2) the first letter to Timothy from Paul is constrained by being a letter from believer to believer, and (3) God's glory in God's desires always arriving at God's satisfaction, that is, God's good pleasure Philippians 2:13.

To @civic and @Eternally-Grateful due to your heartfelt Like/agreement with Johann's thoughts.

Yes, let's do look at all men in:

​

For the grace of God has appeared, bringing salvation to all men​

(Titus 2:11).​

​

The letter to Titus is a letter among people sharing a common faith, not individual free-will faiths, for the faith is fully delivered into man by the work of God (John 6:29) - the faith of those chosen of God and the knowledge of the truth which is according to godliness as shown in the letter!s salutation:

​

1 Paul, a bond-servant of God and an apostle of Jesus Christ, for the faith of those chosen of God and the knowledge of the truth which is according to godliness, 2 in the hope of eternal life, which God, who cannot lie, promised long ages ago, 3 but at the proper time manifested, even His word, in the proclamation with which I was entrusted according to the commandment of God our Savior,​

4 To Titus, my true child in a common faith: Grace and peace from God the Father and Christ Jesus our Savior​

(Titus 1:1-4)​

​

thus the letter is constrained to the faith of those chosen of God and the knowledge of the truth which is according to godliness.

You wrote "The phrase is the same, and here it obviously refers to everyone, not just the elect" of (Titus 2:11).

Here is the result of your heart's Titus 2:11's all men obviously refers to everyone. According to your Free-willian Philosophy, the following represents fleshly people, dead in sin, ungodly multitude, unbelievers in relation to God:

• God brought salvation to Tom, independently before Tom heard of God. if Tom of the world chooses to believe in Christ before he dies, then God must profit Tom with eternal life being saved from the wrath of God.
• God brought salvation to Nancy, independently before Nancy heard of God. if Nancy of the world chooses to believe not in Christ right until her dying thoughts, then God must punish Nancy with eternal damnation being under the wrath of God.
• The conclusion: Christ's salvation succeeded in saving Tom of the world, and Christ's salvation failed in saving Nancy of the world.

So, you free-willians believe in Christ's failure atonement since people like Nancy end up in hell while being among the all men having Christ's salvation.

And the results of your thoughts, there, have common traits with the results of your thoughts regarding 1 Timothy 2:4 as shown in post #7,200.

God’s good pleasure is the core of the matter regarding God's will in "who desires all men to be saved and to come to the knowledge of the truth" (1 Timothy 2:4) because the Holy Spirit makes clear "it is God who is at work in you, both to will and to work for His good pleasure" (Philippians 2:13).

This is data dump @Kermos and too long for me to respond.

J.

 

[GodsGrace]

Correct @GodsGrace

Predestinate -- That those saved must be conforming to the image of Christ. Eph_1:4-5, 2Th_2:13-14 God chose "the means" of our salvation, and what kind of character the saved must possess, before the foundation of the world. God predetermined what type of men would be saved, not who individually would be saved.

[Read carefully all those passages about predestination and you'll note that it is the how, the method, the who would do the saving, and not that one individual is selected indiscriminately to be saved and another rejected. God calls all men by the Gospel Mar_16:15, 2Th_2:14; Rev_22:17, those who obey and conform to the image of His Son will be saved.]

J.

Amen.
There would be no reason for the gospel message and for all the letters IF God did the choosing before time began.

The REASON for the NT is so that man may know that God wants his salvation and HOW man can obtain that salvation.

 

[GodsGrace]

@GodsGrace
I have my thoughts in place, I just have not organized it all together, and besides, truly thinking just how much I want to say. Still contemplating, plus I want to make sure I do this with a sincere, godly spirit, yet be a firm as I must be.

I want to offer an apology, for saying that I'm finish posting to you, that was not kind~when I think I should stop, then I will do so, without saying anything, that was not needed..... secondly, for calling you the prophetess from Italy, that was uncalled for. That probably cost me a chance to share a cup of cappuccino. In all sincerity, I'm sorry.

No problem RB.
We all get perturbed at times I guess.
I was a little shocked, to tell you the truth.
I cannot agree with your theology,
but I do believe you to be a nice person.
So, there's still a chance for a cappuccio!

 

[GodsGrace]

This is data dump @Kermos and too long for me to respond.

J.

Not only is it a "data dump" (nice title!) but it shows how incorrectly the reformed/calvinists read scripture.

Their idea of God having to be a weak God because He wants all men to be saved and yet all men are not saved...
shows a complete lack of understanding what salvation based on:
1. Conditions
2. Free Will

Both are throughout the NT.

Conditoins:
BELIEF
OBEDIENCE

Free Will:
COME TO ME all you who labor....

 

[GodsGrace]

If Jesus was praying for the world He would have said so, but He refused and rejected such a salvation prayer for the world, and do you want to know why? Because God has no covenant with the world.
You are infected by false Constantinian Gentile theology.

"Kosmos" is used of the Universe as a whole: Acts 17: 24 - "God that made the world and all things therein seeing that He is Lord of heaven and earth." is used of the Universe as a whole: Acts 17: 24 - "God that made the world and all things therein seeing that He is Lord of heaven and earth."
"Kosmos" is used of the earth: John 13:1; Eph. 1:4, etc., etc.- "When Jesus knew that his hour was come that He should depart out of this world unto the Father, having loved His own which were in the world He loved them unto the end." "Depart out of this world" signifies, leave this earth. "According as He hath chosen us in Him before the foundation of the world." This expression signifies, before the earth was founded-compare Job 38:4 etc.
"Kosmos" is used of the world-system: John 12:31 etc. "Now is the judgment of this world: now shall the Prince of this world be cast out"- compare Matt. 4:8 and I John 5:19, R. V.
"Kosmos" is used of the whole human race: Rom. 3: 19, etc.-"Now we know that what things soever the law saith, it saith to them who are under the law: that every mouth may be stopped, and all the world may become guilty before God."
"Kosmos" is used of humanity minus believers: John 15:18; Rom. 3:6 "If the world hate you, ye know that it hated Me before it hated you." Believers do not "hate" Christ, so that "the world" here must signify the world of unbelievers in contrast from believers who love Christ. "God forbid: for then how shall God judge the world." Here is another passage where "the world" cannot mean "you, me, and everybody," for believers will not be "judged" by God, see John 5:24. So that here, too, it must be the world of unbelievers which is in view. is used of humanity minus believers: John 15:18; Rom. 3:6 "If the world hate you, ye know that it hated Me before it hated you." Believers do not "hate" Christ, so that "the world" here must signify the world of unbelievers in contrast from believers who love Christ. "God forbid: for then how shall God judge the world." Here is another passage where "the world" cannot mean "you, me, and everybody," for believers will not be "judged" by God, see John 5:24. So that here, too, it must be the world of unbelievers which is in view.
"Kosmos" is used of Gentiles in contrast from Jews: Rom. 11:12 etc. "Now if the fall of them (Israel) be the riches of the world, and the diminishing of them (Israel) the riches of the Gentiles; how much more their (Israel's) fulness." Note how the first clause in italics is defined by the latter clause placed in italics. Here, again, "the world" cannot signify all humanity for it excludes Israel!
"Kosmos" is used of believers only: John 1:29; 3:16, 17; 6:33; 12;47; I Cor. 4:9; 2 Cor. 5:19. We leave our readers to turn to these passages, asking them to note, carefully, exactly what is said and predicated of "the world" in each place. is used of believers only: John 1:29; 3:16, 17; 6:33; 12;47; I Cor. 4:9; 2 Cor. 5:19. We leave our readers to turn to these passages, asking them to note, carefully, exactly what is said and predicated of "the world" in each place.
Thus it will be seen that "kosmos" has at least seven clearly defined different meanings in the New Testament. It may be asked, Has then God used a word thus to confuse and confound those who read the Scriptures? We answer, No! nor has He written His Word for lazy people who are too dilatory, or too busy with the things of this world, or, like Martha, so much occupied with "serving," they have no time and no heart to "search" and "study" Holy Writ! Should it be asked further, But how is a searcher of the Scriptures to know which of the above meanings the term "world" has in any given passage? The answer is: This may be ascertained by a careful study of the context, by diligently noting what is predicated of "the world" in each passage, and by prayer fully consulting other parallel passages to the one being studied. The principal subject of John 3:16 is Christ as the Gift of God.

The above written by A. W. Pink.

I'm sure Pink explained the world really well.

But I'm not here to talk to Pink.

I asked YOU what two particular verses meant and you reply with Pink.

If you can't reply to a question on your own, it means you don't KNOW the answer or
you don't UNDERSTAND what the answer should be.

 

[GodsGrace]

@GodsGrace ​

The Justice of God in the election of angels.​

​

1st Timothy 5:21​

“I charge thee before God, and the Lord Jesus Christ, and the elect angels, that thou observe these things without preferring one before another, doing nothing by partiality.”

I have touch on this subject many times over the past few years, now we want to start here with addressing the justice of God, starting where God started....creation of angels, and preserving some from falling, while allowing others to follow the power of their own will, and wisdom, apart from God preventing them from doing so. .

How could there possibly be any injustice in God’s electing those whom He did, when had He not done so all had inevitably perished, angels and men alike? This is neither an invention nor an inference of ours, for Scripture itself expressly declares:

Romans 9:29
“Except the Lord of Sabbaoth had left us a seed, we had been as Sodom”.

Not one of God’s rational creatures, either celestial or earthly, had ever been eternally and effectually saved apart from God's divine election of grace. Though both angels and men were created in a state of perfect holiness, yet they were mutable creatures, liable to change and fall. A truth that I have emphasized many times to make men think. Yea, inasmuch as their continuance in holiness was dependent upon the exercise of their own wills, unless God was pleased to supernaturally preserve them, their fall was certain. Why you asked: because God alone is immutable an attribute that he alone possess.

Job 4:18
“Behold, he put no trust in his servants; and his angels he charged with folly”.

The angels were perfectly holy, yet if God gave them no other assistance than that with which He had capacitated them at their creation, then no “trust” or reliance was to be placed in them, or their standing. If they were holy today, they were liable to sin as soon as God left them to themselves. If God but sent them on an errand to this world, they would fall before they returned to Heaven apart form God securing their sate in which he created them. The “folly” which God imputes to them in the above passage is their creature mutability: for them to maintain their holiness unchangeably to eternity, without the danger of losing the same, was utterly beyond their creature endowment. Therefore, for them to be immutably preserved is a grace which issues from another and higher spring than the covenant of works or creation endowment, namely, that of election grace, super-creation grace.

It was meet that God should, from the beginning, make manifest the infinite gulf which divides the creature from the Creator. God alone is immutable, without variableness or shadow of turning. Fitting was it, then, that God should withdraw His preserving hand from those whom He had created upright, so that it might appear that the highest creature of all (Satan, “the anointed cherub” Ezek. 28:14) was mutable, and would inevitably fall into sin as soon when left to the exercise of his own free will. Of God alone can it be predicated that He “cannot be tempted with evil” (James 1:13). The creature, though holy, can be tempted to sin, fall, and be irretrievably lost. The fall of Satan, then, made way for evidencing the more plainly the absolute necessity of electing grace—the imparting to the creature the image of God’s own immutable holiness, and securing the same!

Because of the mutability of the creature-state God foresaw that if all His creatures were left to the conduct of their own wills, they were in a continual hazard of falling. He, therefore, made an election of grace to remove all hazard from the case of His chosen ones. This we know from what is revealed of their history. Jude tells us of “the angels which kept not their first estate, but left their own habitation” (v. 6), and the remainder of them would, all would have done so too, if left to the mutability of their own wills. So also it proved with Adam and Eve: both of them evidenced the mutability of their wills by apostatizing. Accordingly, God foreseeing all of this from the beginning, made a “reserve” (Rom. 11:4—explained in v. 5 as “election), determining to have a remnant who should be blessed of Him and who would everlastingly bless Him in return. Election and preserving grace are never to be severed.

We will point out moving forward that divine justice is of an entirely different order and character than human justice; second that divine justice is grounded upon God’s sovereign dominion over all the works of His hands, being the exercise of His own imperial will. Third, that nothing whatever is due the creature from the Creator, not even what He is pleased to give, and that so far from God’s being under any obligation to it, it is under lasting obligations to Him. Fourth, that whatever God wills and works is right and must be reverently submitted to, yea, adored by us. Fifth, that it is impossible to charge God with injustice in His electing certain ones to be the objects of His amazing grace, since that apart from it, all had eternally perished. Much herein I'm indebted to A. W. Pink.

Very nice RB, but I have no reason to read the above.

It looks like a copy and paste to me.

PLEASE ANSWER THIS in 10 words or less:

WHAT IS JUSTICE?
WHAT IS JUST?

It's the same.

And IF you can answer it, you'll have to abandon Calvinism immediately.

See, your last paragraph does all it can to move attention away from what JUSTICE is with a lot of mumbo jumbo.

God is under no obligation to us...it states.
Really?

Then is GOD NOT A GOD OF PROMISE?
Does God BREAK His promises?
What were the Covenants for?
What is the bible for if not to show us the justice of God?

If God created us with some of His attributes,,,,and one of them is JUSTICE...
do you think that our justice is MORE moral than God's?

Is our LOVE more loving than God's?
Is our MERCY more merciful than God's?

NO.
Because man diminishes God's attributes...
man does NOT supersede them.

10 words or less RB.
It should take one minute and not more.

 

[GodsGrace]

@GodsGrace ​

The Justice of God in the election of angels.​

​

1st Timothy 5:21​

“I charge thee before God, and the Lord Jesus Christ, and the elect angels, that thou observe these things without preferring one before another, doing nothing by partiality.”

I have touch on this subject many times over the past few years, now we want to start here with addressing the justice of God, starting where God started....creation of angels, and preserving some from falling, while allowing others to follow the power of their own will, and wisdom, apart from God preventing them from doing so. .

How could there possibly be any injustice in God’s electing those whom He did, when had He not done so all had inevitably perished, angels and men alike? This is neither an invention nor an inference of ours, for Scripture itself expressly declares:

Romans 9:29
“Except the Lord of Sabbaoth had left us a seed, we had been as Sodom”.

Not one of God’s rational creatures, either celestial or earthly, had ever been eternally and effectually saved apart from God's divine election of grace. Though both angels and men were created in a state of perfect holiness, yet they were mutable creatures, liable to change and fall. A truth that I have emphasized many times to make men think. Yea, inasmuch as their continuance in holiness was dependent upon the exercise of their own wills, unless God was pleased to supernaturally preserve them, their fall was certain. Why you asked: because God alone is immutable an attribute that he alone possess.

Job 4:18
“Behold, he put no trust in his servants; and his angels he charged with folly”.

The angels were perfectly holy, yet if God gave them no other assistance than that with which He had capacitated them at their creation, then no “trust” or reliance was to be placed in them, or their standing. If they were holy today, they were liable to sin as soon as God left them to themselves. If God but sent them on an errand to this world, they would fall before they returned to Heaven apart form God securing their sate in which he created them. The “folly” which God imputes to them in the above passage is their creature mutability: for them to maintain their holiness unchangeably to eternity, without the danger of losing the same, was utterly beyond their creature endowment. Therefore, for them to be immutably preserved is a grace which issues from another and higher spring than the covenant of works or creation endowment, namely, that of election grace, super-creation grace.

It was meet that God should, from the beginning, make manifest the infinite gulf which divides the creature from the Creator. God alone is immutable, without variableness or shadow of turning. Fitting was it, then, that God should withdraw His preserving hand from those whom He had created upright, so that it might appear that the highest creature of all (Satan, “the anointed cherub” Ezek. 28:14) was mutable, and would inevitably fall into sin as soon when left to the exercise of his own free will. Of God alone can it be predicated that He “cannot be tempted with evil” (James 1:13). The creature, though holy, can be tempted to sin, fall, and be irretrievably lost. The fall of Satan, then, made way for evidencing the more plainly the absolute necessity of electing grace—the imparting to the creature the image of God’s own immutable holiness, and securing the same!

Because of the mutability of the creature-state God foresaw that if all His creatures were left to the conduct of their own wills, they were in a continual hazard of falling. He, therefore, made an election of grace to remove all hazard from the case of His chosen ones. This we know from what is revealed of their history. Jude tells us of “the angels which kept not their first estate, but left their own habitation” (v. 6), and the remainder of them would, all would have done so too, if left to the mutability of their own wills. So also it proved with Adam and Eve: both of them evidenced the mutability of their wills by apostatizing. Accordingly, God foreseeing all of this from the beginning, made a “reserve” (Rom. 11:4—explained in v. 5 as “election), determining to have a remnant who should be blessed of Him and who would everlastingly bless Him in return. Election and preserving grace are never to be severed.

We will point out moving forward that divine justice is of an entirely different order and character than human justice; second that divine justice is grounded upon God’s sovereign dominion over all the works of His hands, being the exercise of His own imperial will. Third, that nothing whatever is due the creature from the Creator, not even what He is pleased to give, and that so far from God’s being under any obligation to it, it is under lasting obligations to Him. Fourth, that whatever God wills and works is right and must be reverently submitted to, yea, adored by us. Fifth, that it is impossible to charge God with injustice in His electing certain ones to be the objects of His amazing grace, since that apart from it, all had eternally perished. Much herein I'm indebted to A. W. Pink.

And why are you posting to me about angels??

 

[GodsGrace]

John 17:6​

“I have manifested thy name unto the men which thou gavest me out of the world: thine they were, and thou gavest them me; and they have kept thy word.”

The persons given were not the Father's merely by creation; for so others are his also; nor would they be peculiarly his, for they are the son's likewise in this sense; but they are his by electing grace, which is the peculiar act of the Father in Christ, and is unto salvation by him, through the sanctification of the Spirit; these are chosen to be his peculiar people, and given to Christ as such.

Oh for goodness sake RB.
The above is speaking to THE APOSTLES.

Please read some commentaries that are not calvinist.
PLEASE stop posting this verse.

It just shows how ignorant of scripture calvinists are.

Jesus says THEY HAVE KEPT THEY WORD.
Do you mean to say that Jesus is speaking about ALL DISCIPLES??
How would Jesus be mentioning that ALL DISCIPLES have kept His word if they haven't died yet?
WHY would Jesus be speaking in the past tense regarding this?

It's just plain common sense RB.
You don't even have to know much theology.

 

[GodsGrace]

The Lord God Almighty lovingly causes God's chosen persons to will according to God's Way (John 14:6), and God lovingly causes God's chosen persons to work joyfully according to God's Way:

​

12 So then, my beloved, just as you have always obeyed, not as in my presence only, but now much more in my absence, work out your salvation with fear and trembling; 13 it is God who is at work in you, both to will and to work for His good pleasure​

(Philippians 2:12-13)​

​

Paul expresses that obeyed is God who is at work in you, both to will and to work for His good pleasure.

Paul expresses that work out your salvation is God who is at work in you, both to will and to work for His good pleasure.

The Holy Spirit inspired Paul to marvelously and beautifully write, there, about the exclusive Sovereignty of God!

Lord Jesus Christ teaches that us Christians are governed by our Father's will just like Him with "not as I will, but as You will" (Matthew 26:39), and so says the Christ, our Christian's Example (John 13:15).

According to your writing, you hold to the free-will of man separating yourself from the Will of God:

the free-will of man		The Will of God
it is not God who is at work in you, but you free-will and work for your self-pleasure (GodsGrace 2:13).		it is God who is at work in you, both to will and to work for His good pleasure (Philippians 2:13).

the love of Christ controls us Christians (2 Corinthians 5:14),

​

Kermos,
It's really cute how you go back pages and pick out little comments and then reply to them.
THIS is NOT how a conversation is had.

If you want to reply to my posts,,,then do so in a mannered way.

Otherwise, save your typing time.

 

[Johann]

I do not believe your "monergistic (God saving people without any response)". I believe in Fruit of the Holy Spirit in God's people for the Word of God tells me “he who practices the Truth comes to the Light, that his works may be revealed, that they are having been worked in God” (John 3:21) of which this lovely Voice of Truth applies to us Christians believing in the Son whom the Father has sent (John 6:29), so there is response in us Christians apart from your definition and fancy word.

You wrote "But let’s back up a verse—because you completely ignored Philippians 2:12" which is untrue because God caused me to discuss this elsewhere, but you and I can cover Philippians 2:12, too:

12 So then, my beloved, just as you have always obeyed, not as in my presence only, but now much more in my absence, work out your salvation with fear and trembling; 13 it is God who is at work in you, both to will and to work for His good pleasure
(Philippians 2:12-13)

Paul expresses that obeyed is God who is at work in you, both to will and to work for His good pleasure.

Paul expresses that work out your salvation is God who is at work in you, both to will and to work for His good pleasure.

Paul expresses that How then will they call on Him in whom they have not believed? How will they believe in Him whom they have not heard? (Romans 10:14), two specific questions which you quoted, are answered by it is God who is at work in you, both to will and to work for His good pleasure.

If you’re saying free will overrides Philippians 2:13, then you’d have to say Paul contradicts himself within the same paragraph. But obviously, he doesn’t. He’s sho

Your argument attempts to conflate Philippians 2:12-13 with a monergistic framework that eliminates genuine human response, but a proper exegesis of the passage—along with a careful look at John 3:21 and Romans 10:14—demonstrates the biblical balance between divine initiative and human responsibility.

1. Philippians 2:12-13 – Divine Work and Human Response Are Not Mutually Exclusive
Your interpretation assumes that Philippians 2:13 eliminates any autonomous human role in salvation, but Paul actually affirms both divine enablement and human cooperation in the process of sanctification.

A. The Command to “Work Out” (κατεργάζεσθε)
κατεργάζεσθε ("work out") is a present middle imperative, meaning believers are commanded to actively bring about the completion of their salvation.

A.T. Robertson states that this verb does not mean "work for" salvation but rather "bring to completion" what God has already begun (Word Pictures in the New Testament, Vol. 4, p. 444).

J.H. Moulton & Nigel Turner confirm that the middle voice here stresses personal involvement (A Grammar of New Testament Greek, Vol. 3, p. 182).

B. “For it is God Who is Working in You” (ὁ γὰρ θεὸς ἐστιν ὁ ἐνεργῶν ἐν ὑμῖν)
The present participle ἐνεργῶν ("working") describes continuous divine action, not an override of human volition.

Kenneth Wuest explains that Paul’s syntax suggests God’s empowering work does not negate but enables human responsibility (Word Studies from the Greek New Testament, Vol. 2, p. 76).

Thus, God works in believers, but believers must respond by actively working out their salvation. Your claim that divine initiative causes human response in a strictly monergistic manner does not follow from the text’s grammatical structure.

2. John 3:21 – Works Done in God Do Not Eliminate Human Will
You cite John 3:21 to argue that human response is merely the product of divine action, but a grammatical analysis proves otherwise.

A. The Key Phrase: “That His Works May Be Revealed That They Have Been Worked in God” (ἵνα φανερωθῇ αὐτοῦ τὰ ἔργα ὅτι ἐν θεῷ ἐστιν εἰργασμένα)
φανερωθῇ ("may be revealed") is an aorist subjunctive verb, showing that human works become manifest rather than being divinely predetermined apart from human response.

εἰργασμένα ("having been worked") is a perfect passive participle, meaning the actions have already been completed, but the passive voice does not exclude human participation—it simply points to God as the enabler.

B. Interpretation According to Greek Scholars
Henry Alford affirms that εἰργασμένα does not mean that God forces an individual to do good works, but rather that the believer's response aligns with God's enabling work (The Greek Testament, Vol. 1, p. 429).

Marvin R. Vincent highlights that ἐν θεῷ means "in union with God" rather than implying strict determinism (Word Studies in the New Testament, Vol. 2, p. 90).

Your argument assumes "worked in God" means solely caused by God apart from human volition, but Greek syntax and scholarship show that it denotes actions performed in alignment with God’s will rather than passively dictated by Him.

3. Romans 10:14 – Hearing and Believing as Volitional Acts
Romans 10:14 contradicts your monergistic argument because it affirms that human faith and calling upon the Lord depend on an active response to hearing the message.

A. The Structure of Paul’s Questions
Πῶς οὖν ἐπικαλέσονται ("How then will they call on Him…")

πῶς πιστεύσουσιν ("How will they believe in Him…")

πῶς ἀκούσονται ("How will they hear…")

Each of these verbs is in the future active indicative, demonstrating not a divinely predetermined sequence but a logical chain of necessary human responses.

B. Scholarly Support for Free Will in Romans 10:14
A.T. Robertson states that Paul’s logic requires active belief upon hearing the message, which presupposes volition (Word Pictures, Vol. 4, p. 396).

J.B. Lightfoot argues that the contingency in Paul’s rhetorical questions refutes strict monergism because the sequence assumes a real ability to respond or reject the gospel (Notes on the Epistles of St. Paul, p. 253).

You claim that Philippians 2:13 alone answers Romans 10:14, but the two passages function differently. Philippians 2:13 describes God’s ongoing work in believers, whereas Romans 10:14 deals with the necessity of human response to the gospel proclamation.


Your interpretation attempts to force Philippians 2:13 into a monergistic framework that contradicts the biblical witness. Proper exegesis demonstrates:

Philippians 2:12-13 affirms both divine empowerment and human responsibility (Robertson, Moulton & Turner, Wuest).

John 3:21 speaks of actions done in God, but not in a deterministic sense (Alford, Vincent).

Romans 10:14 clearly assumes human volition in the process of faith (Robertson, Lightfoot).

Monergism, in the sense of God saving people without any meaningful response from them, is not supported by the syntax of these passages.

You wrote "The phrase is the same, and here it obviously refers to everyone, not just the elect" of (Titus 2:11).

Here is the result of your heart's Titus 2:11's all men obviously refers to everyone. According to your Free-willian Philosophy, the following represents fleshly people, dead in sin, ungodly multitude, unbelievers in relation to God:

• God brought salvation to Tom, independently before Tom heard of God. if Tom of the world chooses to believe in Christ before he dies, then God must profit Tom with eternal life being saved from the wrath of God.
• God brought salvation to Nancy, independently before Nancy heard of God. if Nancy of the world chooses to believe not in Christ right until her dying thoughts, then God must punish Nancy with eternal damnation being under the wrath of God.
• The conclusion: Christ's salvation succeeded in saving Tom of the world, and Christ's salvation failed in saving Nancy of the world.

So, you free-willians believe in Christ's failure atonement since people like Nancy end up in hell while being among the all men having Christ's salvation.

And the results of your thoughts, there, have common traits with the results of your thoughts regarding 1 Timothy 2:4 as shown in post #7,200.

God’s good pleasure is the core of the matter regarding God's will in "who desires all men to be saved and to come to the knowledge of the truth" (1 Timothy 2:4) because the Holy Spirit makes clear "it is God who is at work in you, both to will and to work for His good pleasure" (Philippians 2:13).

Give it up, you are losing. And I am tired.

Your argument against Titus 2:11 assumes a deterministic framework that does not align with the grammar and exegesis of the passage. The premise that the phrase "all men" (πᾶσιν ἀνθρώποις) must refer only to the elect rather than to all humanity contradicts both the syntactical structure of the Greek and the broader Pauline usage of similar phrases. Additionally, your claim that free will implies a "failure" of Christ's atonement is a misrepresentation of biblical teaching regarding divine provision and human response.

1. Titus 2:11 – The Grace of God Has Appeared to All Men
A. Exegetical Breakdown of the Greek Text
The key phrase in question is:
Ἐπεφάνη γὰρ ἡ χάρις τοῦ Θεοῦ σωτήριος πᾶσιν ἀνθρώποις
("For the grace of God has appeared, bringing salvation to all men")

Ἐπεφάνη (epiphane) – Aorist passive indicative, meaning "has appeared" in the sense of being made manifest, not in the sense of being applied to some and not others.

ἡ χάρις τοῦ Θεοῦ (hē charis tou Theou) – "The grace of God" as the subject of the verb refers to God's universal offer of salvation rather than a selective application.

σωτήριος πᾶσιν ἀνθρώποις (sōtērios pasin anthrōpois) – "Bringing salvation to all men," where πᾶσιν ἀνθρώποις is a dative plural of extent, meaning all humanity in an unrestricted sense.

B. Scholarly Confirmation of the Universal Scope
A.T. Robertson states that πᾶσιν ἀνθρώποις denotes all men in its usual sense unless the context restricts it, which it does not here (Word Pictures in the New Testament, Vol. 4, p. 604).

J.B. Lightfoot, analyzing Paul's use of "all men," confirms that such expressions are meant to oppose exclusivism, not redefine "all" as "some" (Notes on the Epistles of St. Paul, p. 232).

Kenneth Wuest explicitly notes that "all men" refers to humanity in general, emphasizing the availability of salvation rather than an irresistible application (Word Studies from the Greek New Testament, Vol. 2, p. 88).

Your claim that "all men" must mean "only the elect" contradicts both Greek syntax and recognized scholarship.

2. The Logical Fallacy of “Failed Atonement”
You argue that free will implies Christ's atonement fails when people reject salvation. However, this argument misrepresents both the nature of atonement and the distinction between provision and application.

A. Christ’s Atonement as Provision, Not Automatic Application
The atonement is sufficient for all but efficient only for those who believe (cf. John 3:16-18).

Marvin R. Vincent affirms that in passages like 1 Timothy 2:6 ("who gave Himself as a ransom for all"), Paul presents Christ’s death as a universal provision, not a forced imposition (Word Studies in the New Testament, Vol. 3, p. 207).

Richard Trench notes that the Greek lutron (ransom) does not imply a necessary application but rather an offer made available to all (Synonyms of the New Testament, p. 142).

Your assertion that "Christ's salvation failed" if some reject it commits the fallacy of equivocation, falsely equating an offered salvation with an applied salvation.

3. 1 Timothy 2:4 – God’s Desire for All to Be Saved
You conflate Philippians 2:13 with 1 Timothy 2:4 in an attempt to make God’s will in salvation monergistic. However, the grammar of 1 Timothy 2:4 does not support determinism.

A. Greek Structure of 1 Timothy 2:4
ὃς πάντας ἀνθρώπους θέλει σωθῆναι καὶ εἰς ἐπίγνωσιν ἀληθείας ἐλθεῖν
("who desires all men to be saved and to come to the knowledge of the truth")

θέλει (thelei) – Present active indicative, meaning God actively desires this outcome but does not impose it irresistibly.

σωθῆναι (sōthēnai) – Aorist passive infinitive, indicating an intended result rather than a predetermined necessity.

πάντας ἀνθρώπους (pantas anthrōpous) – "All men," using pantas without restriction, as confirmed by Greek scholars.

B. Scholarly Affirmation of Universal Scope
A.T. Robertson states that θέλει indicates "a real but not imposed desire" (Word Pictures in the New Testament, Vol. 4, p. 569).

Henry Alford argues that πάντας in this verse cannot be redefined as "some" without doing violence to the Greek text (The Greek Testament, Vol. 3, p. 247).

Thus, 1 Timothy 2:4 teaches God's sincere desire for all to be saved, not an imposed decree of selective grace.

4. Philippians 2:13 – Does God’s Work Negate Free Will?
Your use of Philippians 2:13 assumes that God’s working eliminates human agency, but as I established earlier, the verb ἐνεργῶν (energeō) denotes divine empowerment, not coercion.

J.H. Moulton & Nigel Turner emphasize that divine energeia (working) in Pauline theology is not deterministic but enabling (A Grammar of New Testament Greek, Vol. 3, p. 202).

Kenneth Wuest affirms that this passage does not negate human choice but rather describes divine influence within willing believers (Word Studies, Vol. 2, p. 76).

Thus, Philippians 2:13 supports synergism, where God enables but does not override human response.


Your argument misrepresents the exegesis of Titus 2:11, 1 Timothy 2:4, and Philippians 2:13 by forcing deterministic presuppositions onto the text. Proper exegesis reveals:

Titus 2:11 uses "all men" in its natural sense, affirming a universal provision of grace (Robertson, Lightfoot, Wuest).

Atonement is a provision, not an imposed application, refuting the claim of “failed salvation” (Vincent, Trench).

1 Timothy 2:4 expresses God's genuine desire for all to be saved, not a hidden deterministic decree (Robertson, Alford).

Philippians 2:13 teaches divine empowerment, not coercion (Moulton & Turner, Wuest).

Your deterministic framework does not align with Greek syntax, recognized scholarship, or the full context of these passages.

Feel free to continue this discussion without "data dumping"--just you and me and learn to answer questions @Kermos

J.

 

[TomL]

Another awesome verse that glorifies the Lord God Almighty by faith and that not of yourselves, it is the gift of God (2 Thessalonians 2:8). Hallelujah!

Salvation (eternal life) is the gift not faith

Romans 6:23 (LEB) — 23 For the compensation due sin is death, but the gift of God is eternal life in Christ Jesus our Lord.

And that not of yourselves. That is, salvation does not proceed from yourselves. The word rendered that—τοῦτο—is in the neuter gender, and the word faith—πίστις—is in the feminine. The word “that,” therefore, does not refer particularly to faith, as being the gift of God, but to the salvation by grace of which he had been speaking. This is the interpretation of the passage which is the most obvious, and which is now generally conceded to be the true one; see Bloomfield1

1 Albert Barnes, Notes on the New Testament: Ephesians, Philippians & Colossians (ed. Robert Frew; London: Blackie & Son, 1884–1885), 42.

But they commonly misintepret this text, and restrict the word ‘gift’ to faith alone. But Paul is only repeating his earlier statement in other words. He does not mean that faith is the gift of God, but that salvation is given to us by God … " (from, Calvin’s Commentaries 4:145

For by grace (τῃ γαρ χαριτι [tēi gar chariti]). Explanatory reason. “By the grace” already mentioned in verse 5 and so with the article. Through faith (δια πιστεως [dia pisteōs]). This phrase he adds in repeating what he said in verse 5 to make it plainer. “Grace” is God’s part, “faith” ours. And that (και τουτο [kai touto]). Neuter, not feminine ταυτη [tautē], and so refers not to πιστις [pistis] (feminine) or to χαρις [charis] (feminine also), but to the act of being saved by grace conditioned on faith on our part. Paul shows that salvation does not have its source (ἐξ ὑμων [ex humōn], out of you) in men, but from God. Besides, it is God’s gift (δωρον [dōron]) and not the result of our work.11 A.T. Robertson, Word Pictures in the New Testament (Nashville, TN: Broadman Press, 1933), Eph 2:8.

 

[Johann]

Salvation (eternal life) is the gift not faith

Romans 6:23 (LEB) — 23 For the compensation due sin is death, but the gift of God is eternal life in Christ Jesus our Lord.

And that not of yourselves. That is, salvation does not proceed from yourselves. The word rendered that—τοῦτο—is in the neuter gender, and the word faith—πίστις—is in the feminine. The word “that,” therefore, does not refer particularly to faith, as being the gift of God, but to the salvation by grace of which he had been speaking. This is the interpretation of the passage which is the most obvious, and which is now generally conceded to be the true one; see Bloomfield1

1 Albert Barnes, Notes on the New Testament: Ephesians, Philippians & Colossians (ed. Robert Frew; London: Blackie & Son, 1884–1885), 42.

But they commonly misintepret this text, and restrict the word ‘gift’ to faith alone. But Paul is only repeating his earlier statement in other words. He does not mean that faith is the gift of God, but that salvation is given to us by God … " (from, Calvin’s Commentaries 4:145

For by grace (τῃ γαρ χαριτι [tēi gar chariti]). Explanatory reason. “By the grace” already mentioned in verse 5 and so with the article. Through faith (δια πιστεως [dia pisteōs]). This phrase he adds in repeating what he said in verse 5 to make it plainer. “Grace” is God’s part, “faith” ours. And that (και τουτο [kai touto]). Neuter, not feminine ταυτη [tautē], and so refers not to πιστις [pistis] (feminine) or to χαρις [charis] (feminine also), but to the act of being saved by grace conditioned on faith on our part. Paul shows that salvation does not have its source (ἐξ ὑμων [ex humōn], out of you) in men, but from God. Besides, it is God’s gift (δωρον [dōron]) and not the result of our work.11 A.T. Robertson, Word Pictures in the New Testament (Nashville, TN: Broadman Press, 1933), Eph 2:8.

Sterling work for God's glory bother.

J.

 

[TomL]

Here is the result of your heart's Titus 2:11's all men obviously refers to everyone. According to your Free-willian Philosophy, the following represents fleshly people, dead in sin, ungodly multitude, unbelievers in relation to God:

• God brought salvation to Tom, independently before Tom heard of God. if Tom of the world chooses to believe in Christ before he dies, then God must profit Tom with eternal life being saved from the wrath of God.
• God brought salvation to Nancy, independently before Nancy heard of God. if Nancy of the world chooses to believe not in Christ right until her dying thoughts, then God must punish Nancy with eternal damnation being under the wrath of God.
• The conclusion: Christ's salvation succeeded in saving Tom of the world, and Christ's salvation failed in saving Nancy of the world.

So, you free-willians believe in Christ's failure atonement since people like Nancy end up in hell while being among the all men having Christ's salvation.

And the results of your thoughts, there, have common traits with the results of your thoughts regarding 1 Timothy 2:4 as shown in post #7,200.

God’s good pleasure is the core of the matter regarding God's will in "who desires all men to be saved and to come to the knowledge of the truth" (1 Timothy 2:4) because the Holy Spirit makes clear "it is God who is at work in you, both to will and to work for His good pleasure" (Philippians 2:13).

You assume salvation is simply a matter of success or failure on the part of Christ.

Scripture does not

John 3:14–16 (LEB) — 14 And just as Moses lifted up the snake in the wilderness, thus it is necessary that the Son of Man be lifted up, 15 so that everyone who believes in him will have eternal life.” 16 For in this way God loved the world, so that he gave his one and only Son, in order that everyone who believes in him will not perish, but will have eternal life.

Christ's mission was to make an atonement which would be applied to those who believe.

 

[Johann]

Not only is it a "data dump" (nice title!) but it shows how incorrectly the reformed/calvinists read scripture.

Their idea of God having to be a weak God because He wants all men to be saved and yet all men are not saved...
shows a complete lack of understanding what salvation based on:
1. Conditions
2. Free Will

Both are throughout the NT.

Conditoins:
BELIEF
OBEDIENCE

Free Will:
COME TO ME all you who labor....

I appreciate Wuest’s perspective—our will ought to be entirely enveloped in the perfect will of Christ Jesus, for it is unthinkable that a believer should possess a will that operates independently of Christ and the Holy Spirit.

Shalom sorella.

J.

 

[Kermos]

We have been through that so many times. Your interpretation of the word "see" is, quite frankly, against most who study God's word, except those, of course, who like you hold to the false doctrine of Total Depravity. The general meaning there is most certainly the same as that of John 3:5 which is essentially a repeat of John 3:3 for emphasis. Both to "see" and to "enter" the kingdom signifies to partake of the kingdom, to enjoy the enjoy the benefits of being in the kingdom. The word in English is very often used in that sense as well, meaning to comprehend, to evaluate, to measure. In my own case, back in high school, I decided to accept the invitation to go skiing with some friends. I just wanted to see what all the excitement was about. That clearly did not mean I wanted to watch; but rather, I wanted to participate.

The wonderful exchange between Jesus and Nicodemus with context follows. The true Lord Jesus declares that a person cannot righteously perceive King Jesus of the Kingdom of God without God birthing the person anew in the exchange:

Speaker		Holy Scripture		Summary
Nicodemus:		"Rabbi, we see that You have come from God as a teacher; for no one can do these signs that You do unless God is with him.” (John 3:2)		I perceive that God sent you, Teacher, for the signs you do are because God is with you!
Lord Jesus:		"Truly, truly, I say to you, unless one is born from above he cannot see the Kingdom of God." (John 3:3)		One perceives Me because of the exclusive work of God inside of such a one
Nicodemus:		"How can someone be born when they are old?" "Surely they cannot enter a second time into their mother’s womb to be born!" (John 3:4)		How can I enter into this communion with God without me working in some way? Please help me understand.
Lord Jesus:		“Truly, truly, I say to you, unless one is born of water and the Spirit he cannot enter into the Kingdom of God. That which is born of the flesh is flesh, and that which is born of the Spirit is spirit. Do not be amazed that I said to you, ‘You must be born from above.’ The wind blows where it wishes and you hear the sound of it, but do not know where it comes from and where it is going; so is everyone who is born of the Spirit” (John 3:5-8)		One enters into communion with God because of the Holy Spirit. One knows not when nor how nor why the Holy Spirit works in this person here or that person there.

As the Holy Spirit makes abundantly clear, the context of John 3:2-3 is "see" as in "perceive", and the context of John 3:4-8 is "enter" as in "ingress".

Your example of "Both to "see" and to "enter" the kingdom signifies to partake of the kingdom" is a clear misrepresentation of Christ's use of the word "see" to truly include the meaning of "perceive" in John 3:3.

Again, you take what is spoken of and about the apostles and prophets who had received divine revelation from the Holy Spirit and think it applies to you. It doesn't. You buy into the false doctrine of illumination which is so easily shown to be false. That entire chapter is Paul's declaration and defense of his own divinely inspired revelation and teaching. Even here again, your adherence to the false doctrine of Augustine's Total Depravity derived from his Gnostic Manicheism has deceived you. The whole Calvinist presentation of Total Depravity and Regeneration is Gnostic to its core.

Look at your free-will eliminating the applicability to people beyond Paul of the entirety of Holy Spirit inspired Paul's writing of 1 Corinthians 2 with your "That entire chapter is Paul's declaration and defense of his own divinely inspired revelation and teaching".

 

[Red Baker]

I am FREE........................

Are you also free ?

@jeremiah1five @brightfame52 @Red Baker @civic @Johann @TomL @synergy @MTMattie @Jim

I'll pass ~ I refuse to accept that type of music as godly music that is glorifying to the Lord. Besides, I do not follow a long hair effeminate person claiming to look like Jesus Christ, I'm no friend of Sodom and Gomorrah, and all their kinfolks.......... LGBTQIA++++++++

 

[TomL]

Sterling work for God's glory bother.

J.

Thank you

 

[jeremiah1five]

Good luck my friend.

You have some strange thinking.

Gen 12, In you (literally through your seed) Shall all the families, or nations of the EARTH be blessed

next

Since the "blessings" are in context to being the seed of Abraham, all the families of the earth identifies those who are Abraham's seed, such as Ishmael and Esau, for the context is Abraham's family, Abraham's seed.
Pay attention:

3 And I will bless them that bless thee, and curse him that curseth thee: and in thee shall all families of the earth be blessed. Genesis 12:3.

"IN THEE" meaning YOUR FAMILIES, Abraham. These families would eventually be identified as Abraham's seed through Ishmael and Esau. God blessed them directly because of the covenant God has with Abraham.

IN THEE shall ALL YOUR families be blessed, Abraham.

Gentiles do not come from the loins of Abraham. Gentiles are born from the seed of Japheth and Ham. And these people are NOT "IN THEE" (Abraham.)

You got to read the context. It says, "IN THEE" (Abraham) shall all YOUR families be blessed and everyone born as seed from Abraham God did bless on behalf of Abraham. It does not refer to any one not Abraham's seed such as Gentiles because Gentiles are not seed of Abraham.

You understand, now?