GodsGrace
Well-known member
No comment needed.
Already replied to 3 times.
An Article on free will
- Thread starter TomL
- Start date
Already replied to 3 times.
GodsGrace
Well-known member
You know....
One that believes in free will.
Absolutely do. Read the WCF
Then I'm good. LOL
LOL, Good. Enough if the dishonesty
GodsGrace
Well-known member
Presby....I DO believe I know your confessions better than you do.
Now, I have to leave.
BUT
Please post something from ANY of the confessions...I have the Westminster and the 1689 sitting on my desk.
Will reply when I get back.
You've been TRICKED again...
because, honestly P....you really do have a problem with comprehension and I'm not saying that to be mean.
Dizerner
Well-known member
Calvinists don't believe in real actually free libertarian automonous volitional decisional non-determined choice of the will.
This idea used to simply be called "free will" for thousands of years before they decided to hijack it with the literal double speak of compatibilism.
Now they have a free will is that is free to the nature that is not free, which is a complete contradiction.
Just like they hijacked sovereignty to mean divine determinism when the word just meant ultimate authority.
Terminology hijacking is quite the plague.
This idea used to simply be called "free will" for thousands of years before they decided to hijack it with the literal double speak of compatibilism.
Now they have a free will is that is free to the nature that is not free, which is a complete contradiction.
Just like they hijacked sovereignty to mean divine determinism when the word just meant ultimate authority.
Terminology hijacking is quite the plague.
Quote for the class chapter 9 section 1 since you know more than I do. Teach us
I don't have to believe in libertarian free will to believe in free will..
A contradiction I see. You say your choice is not determined but it's determined by your will right?
Johann
Well-known member
Johann
Well-known member
Your concern touches upon an old theological tension between divine sovereignty and human volition, which, though paradoxical at times, is a tension that Scripture does not attempt to erase but rather preserves throughout its narrative. While it is true that free will (as a term) is not explicitly used in the English translations of the Bible, the concept is present in both Testaments and is shown in manifold actions, commands, and covenantal choices.
1. Man’s Freedom to Choose Is Implied in the Mitzvot and Conditional Covenants
Devarim (Deuteronomy) 30:19 (OJB):
"I call Shomayim and Ha’Aretz to record this day against you, that I have set before you HaChayyim and HaMavet, HaBerachah and HaKelalah; therefore choose life, that both thou and thy zera may live."
The imperative “choose life” (uvacharta bachayyim) is unintelligible without volition. The command presumes moral agency. God appeals to man’s will and presents a conditional covenantal outcome—blessing or curse—dependent on man's choice.
2. Joshua’s Covenant Renewal Requires Deliberate Decision
Yehoshua (Joshua) 24:15 (OJB):
"And if it seem ra in your eyes to serve Hashem, choose you this day whom ye will serve… but as for me and my bais, we will serve Hashem."
This is a national call to volitional allegiance. The command to choose presupposes free will; else, the exhortation is meaningless.
3. Isaiah’s Appeal to Reason Indicates Moral Responsibility
Yesha’yahu (Isaiah) 1:18-20 (OJB):
"Come now, and let us reason together, saith Hashem… If ye be willing and obedient, ye shall eat the tov ha’aretz: But if ye refuse and rebel, ye shall be devoured with the cherev..."
The parallelism between willing/obedient and refusing/rebelling shows a dichotomy of will, with consequences contingent on the hearer’s response. This again affirms freedom to obey or disobey.
4. The Gospel Invitation Involves Personal Willingness
Mattityahu (Matthew) 23:37 OJB:
"Yerushalayim, Yerushalayim…how often would I have gathered your children together… and you were not willing!"
The Greek uses οὐκ ἠθελήσατε (you were not willing); the OJB preserves this voluntariness. Yeshua laments their rejection, not because He caused it, but because they willed it not. This statement affirms that their rejection was not due to divine determinism but willful refusal.
5. Revelation’s Invitation Presumes Free Response
Hisgalus (Revelation) 22:17 (OJB):
"And let him that is thirsty come. And whosoever will, let him take the Mayim Chayyim freely."
“Whosoever will” (ὁ θέλων in Greek) is unambiguous: the gift of eternal life is offered, and the recipient must will to receive it. This is not coercion, but invitation.
6. Cain Is Warned, Not Programmed
Bereshis (Genesis) 4:7 OJB:
"If thou doest well, shalt thou not be accepted? And if thou doest not well, chattat croucheth at the door. And unto thee shall be its teshukah, but thou must rule over it."
Cain is told to master sin, showing moral responsibility and thus moral capability. God would not warn someone who has no volitional power to act upon that warning.
7. Ezekiel’s Call to Repent Implies Free Moral Agency
Yechezkel (Ezekiel) 18:31-32 OJB:
"Cast away from you all your peysha’im... make you a lev chadash and a ruach chadashah; for why will ye die, O Bais Yisroel?... turn and live!"
Commands to make a new heart presuppose the capacity to respond. God pleads, "why will you die?" not because He has ordained their death without recourse, but because they refuse to repent.
8. John 7:17 OJB—A Willingness to Do God’s Will Is Required
Yochanan 7:17 (OJB):
"If any man willeth to do his ratzon (will), he shall have da’as of the teaching..."
The Greek θέλῃ ποιεῖν reflects deliberate choice. A person’s willingness is prior to gaining understanding. This demonstrates a synergy of divine initiative and human responsiveness.
9. Romans 10:21 (OJB)—God Holds Out His Hands to a Willfully Rebellious People
"But of Yisroel he says, Kol hayom I have stretched forth My hands unto a people disobedient and obstinate."
The gesture of stretched-out hands symbolizes divine appeal and Israel’s rejection as volitional. This verse only makes sense if Israel had the choice to accept but did not.
10. 2 Corinthians 5:20 (OJB)—Be Reconciled to God
"We appeal to you: be reconciled to Hashem!"
Reconciliation requires voluntary submission. The imperative assumes the hearer has capacity to respond, or the appeal becomes a mockery.
Conclusion from Scripture and Not Philosophy @Kermos
The absence of the phrase “free will” is irrelevant, since Scripture also never uses words like Trinity or monotheism explicitly—yet their doctrinal essence is undeniable. In contrast to deterministic theology, the Scriptures show a God who sovereignly appeals, commands, and holds accountable, which is incoherent unless man has been endowed with volitional capacity. To deny free will is to deny the meaningfulness of commands, repentance, judgment, covenantal blessings/curses, and the Gospel invitation itself.
+ Matthew 15:9, used in the claim, rebukes human traditions replacing God’s Word, yet ironically, deterministic fatalism is rooted more in Stoic and Augustinian categories than in the consistent tenor of Tanakh or Brit Chadashah.
+ Genesis 1:1 proclaims sovereignty in creation, not coercion in salvation.
+ Daniel 4:34-35 emphasizes God's governance over kings and nations, not the absence of individual agency.
Some additional info since you don't have the ability to think coherently friend----
Below is a curated selection of statements from Jewish exegetes and pre-Augustinian Christian sources affirming human volition—demonstrating that the concept of moral choice and human agency is well-attested both within Second Temple Judaism and early Christian thought, independent of later deterministic systems such as Augustinianism or Reformed theology.
Jewish Exegetical Witnesses to Free Will1. Ben Sira (Sirach) 15:11–20 – A Second Temple Jewish Text
“He himself made man in the beginning, and left him in the hand of his own counsel… If you will, you can keep the commandments… Before man is life and death, and whichever he chooses shall be given to him.”
The Hebrew of Ben Sira recovered from the Cairo Geniza matches this choice language. This affirms human moral responsibility grounded in Torah obedience.
2. Philo of Alexandria (c. 20 BCE – 50 CE) – A Hellenistic Jewish Philosopher
“The mind is free, having been born to rule and not to be ruled.” (De Posteritate Caini, §141)
“God has given man the power of voluntary motion and free choice between good and evil.” (Quis Rerum Divinarum Heres Sit, §89)
Philo defends the idea that free choice is part of being made in God’s image. He affirms a middle path: God foreknows but does not force.
3. Josephus (Antiquities 18.1.3) – First Century Jewish Historian
“The Pharisees say that some actions, but not all, are the work of fate, and some are in our own power, to be performed according to our own will.”
Josephus distinguishes the Pharisaic view (affirming free will) from the Essenes (deterministic) and Sadducees (pure free will). Rabbinic Judaism inherits the Pharisaic legacy.
4. Talmud Bavli, Berakhot 33b
“Everything is in the hands of Heaven, except the fear of Heaven.”
This oft-quoted rabbinic dictum reflects the belief that human moral response (yirat shamayim, “fear of Heaven”) is not predetermined—it is volitional.
5. Rambam (Maimonides), Hilkhot Teshuvah 5:1
“This principle is a fundamental concept and a pillar of the Torah and its commandments… If God had decreed that a person be righteous or wicked, how could He command us to do this or that?”
Maimonides (12th century) reflects a long-standing Jewish tradition that commands imply capacity—thus, free will must exist.
Pre-Augustinian Christian Witnesses to Free Will6. Justin Martyr (First Apology, ch. 43, c. 155 AD)
“We have learned from the prophets… that punishments and rewards are given according to the merit of each man’s actions. Since God in the beginning made the race of angels and men with free will, they will justly suffer in eternal fire what they have chosen.”
Justin affirms that moral choice is the basis for judgment, and man was created with libertas voluntatis.
7. Athenagoras of Athens (c. 177 AD), Supplication for the Christians
“Just as we would not be pious if we were made to be so, so neither are we wicked if wickedness is not in our power.”
He identifies piety or wickedness as morally significant only if freely chosen.
8. Irenaeus of Lyons (Against Heresies IV.37.1–4, c. 180 AD)
“For God made man free from the beginning… Man is possessed of free will from the beginning, and God is always giving good counsel to him.”
“He who is the Lord of all… has preserved the will of man free and under his own control.”
Irenaeus—who had links to Polycarp and thus to John—defends free will as foundational to God’s image in man and the justice of divine judgment.
9. Tertullian (Against Marcion, Bk. II.5, c. 207 AD)
“If man is not free, then both the commandment and the judgment of God are meaningless.”
He links commandment and judgment to freedom, which he calls a necessary presupposition for Christian ethics.
10. Origen (De Principiis, Preface, 5 and Bk. III.1.2–3, c. 220 AD)
“The soul, having a substance and life of its own, possesses the freedom of the will…”
“It is our responsibility to live uprightly or wickedly, as we please.”
Origen’s entire theodicy and understanding of salvation is built on human volition, even in pre-existent states (though his preexistence doctrine was later rejected, his free will doctrine was widely respected).
Across Second Temple Jewish literature, Rabbinic tradition, and early Church Fathers prior to Augustine, the concept of human free will is affirmed as a non-negotiable assumption of divine justice, covenant theology, Torah observance, and gospel proclamation. These witnesses show that free will is not a "conjured tradition", but an ancient, well-grounded component of biblical anthropology—held by Pharisees, early Messianic Jews, and Christians alike.
You be a good student now, see @Kermos?
See ya.
J.
civic
Well-known member
Yes indeed.
brightfame52
Well-known member
@TomL
Sure as an regenerated saved sheep, they are commanded to believe 1 Jn 3:23
And this is his commandment, That we should believe on the name of his Son Jesus Christ, and love one another, as he gave us commandment.
1 Jn 5:13
These things have I written unto you that believe on the name of the Son of God; that ye may know that ye have eternal life, and that ye may believe on the name of the Son of God.
Jesus isnt telling spiritually dead, goats, children of the devil to do something to get saved. Thats ridiculous.
Sure as an regenerated saved sheep, they are commanded to believe 1 Jn 3:23
And this is his commandment, That we should believe on the name of his Son Jesus Christ, and love one another, as he gave us commandment.
1 Jn 5:13
These things have I written unto you that believe on the name of the Son of God; that ye may know that ye have eternal life, and that ye may believe on the name of the Son of God.
Jesus isnt telling spiritually dead, goats, children of the devil to do something to get saved. Thats ridiculous.
Johann
Well-known member
It is not about what is more powerful. It is about who God is. He is, among other things, both holy and merciful.
That is another of those quirky not-quite-right translations/interpretations of the KJV.
1 John 5:13
(ASV) These things have I written unto you, that ye may know that ye have eternal life, even unto you that believe on the name of the Son of God.
(ESV) I write these things to you who believe in the name of the Son of God that you may know that you have eternal life.
(NASB) These things I have written to you who believe in the name of the Son of God, so that you may know that you have eternal life.
(NIV) I write these things to you who believe in the name of the Son of God so that you may know that you have eternal life.
(RV) These things have I written unto you, that ye may know that ye have eternal life, even unto you that believe on the name of the Son of God.
MTMattie
Well-known member
Pardon my interjection but it generally starts at a very young age, when people you know , such as me, gets their training just the same as if you were a kid in the RCC. And you grow up thinking that everyone believes this way. And scriptures are selected for any lessons... and it will be lifetime or until you start to read the bible yourself... and wonder why a member from your church, which is your boss at the time tells you
Not to read the bible without a concordance or something with explanations. (I speak from experience)
So in a way, tricked into the system might be appropriate, but then when you read something Calvin says... " his words"... while the others (the reprobate) would be “barred from access to” salvation and sentenced to “eternal death... and then you read it in the Westminster Confession of Faith which came out about 100 years after Calvin and it hits you “barred from access to” salvation, that just tells me that a loving Father would hardly bar people from salvation... would he?
If He would create people to fulfill history with the way things were programmed ( if I can use that term) from before creation until "the end"
and then just allow those people to cease to exist... because they had served there purpose... would not be so bad but then to think He would have created people to be reprobates and their ultimate goal would be damnation... as some interpret... or hell fire... as others say.... just makes no sense.
Well, I digress too much.
LOL, and if he was he would never admit it...
I agree.
MTMattie
Well-known member
Well, could be my gum infection but your sentence does not make sense to me. Might be tied to my free will non ability to read the bible properly.
One of the online mods just delete my chiming in, please. My reply #7477. Thanks.
brightfame52
Well-known member
Yes after you are saved, not before. The saved man or women is caused to cooperate.
brightfame52
Well-known member
Similar threads
