An Article on free will

You are still running

Problem

You cannot address rebuttal

regeneration, being made alive follows believing

John 20:31 (LEB) — 31 but these things are recorded in order that you may believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God, and that by believing you may have life in his name.

and cannot address rebuttal
There is no problem, they which are in the flesh cannot please God. Thats the unregenerated, so they cannot believe, which pleases God. No sense in chasing your sound bites. One of the rules of bible study, in understanding a scripture or passage,be sure it doesnt contradict other scripture, you cant go by sound bites,but carefully compare scripture with scripture 1 Cor 2:13

13 Which things also we speak, not in the words which man's wisdom teacheth, but which the Holy Ghost teacheth; comparing spiritual things with spiritual.

I know the natural man in the flesh cannot please God from Rom 8:8 thats clear, so Jn 20:31 is to the regenerated sheep
 
@synergy
You still chasing your tail around and around in circles, for 1000th time Rom 8:8
8 So then they that are in the flesh cannot please God.
So where does this verse say those in the flesh can please God ? Duh
Rom 8:13 clearly shows that Paul is talking about regenerates, not unregenerates. That proves that verses Rom 8:1-13 is talking about regenerates. You failed miserably to prove that all unregenerates cannot please God for the 1000th time.

Therefore, your heretical theories that all unregenerates cannot please God crash and burn for the 1000th time. 🔥🔥🔥
 
Rom 8:13 clearly shows that Paul is talking about regenerates, not unregenerates. That proves that verses Rom 8:1-13 is talking about regenerates. You failed miserably for prove otherwise for the 1000th time.

Therefore, your heretical theories about unregenerates crash and burn for the 1000th time. 🔥🔥🔥
Of course he is writing believers, and they have the Spirit, and if they have the Spirit, he says they are not in the flesh but in the Spirit, for the 1000th time Rom 8:9

9 But ye[believers] are not in the flesh, but in the Spirit, if so be that the Spirit of God dwell in you. Now if any man have not the Spirit of Christ, he is none of his.

So them in the flesh in Vs 8 cannot apply to regenerated believers because they are not in the flesh for the 1001th time
 
@MTMattie

I assumed you are speaking about me.

First, what i reject, is the teaching that man is not in bondage to sin and the Devil. The scriptures are clear that no man has power (or even a desire ) to do spiritual acts pleasing to God, and in this sense his will is without question in bondage to sin/lust and to Satan.

Secondly, I stay away for the most part of name calling, a labels (free-willers), they serve very little purpose~there may be a time when we need to point one's error, by name calling pointing out the corruption of such teachings that is a blatant false teaching, but very seldom do I use name calling and labels to identify my opponents, providing scriptures and following Christ's method of addressing such people does the job and much more effective.

John 8:33​

“They answered him, We be Abraham's seed, and were never in bondage to any man: how sayest thou, Ye shall be made free?”

The Pharisees did not believe that they were ever in bondage! Amazing! They just refuse to believe the scriptures: they were in Egypt; they were by the Assyrians; and by Babylonians; and were at that very moment by Rome! How blind can one be!
Red you and I will never agree on this. So I best get out my fire retardent clothing because even though I believe and worship God and Jesus and I know without question the Holy Spirit is living in me.... I cannot get hold of the idea that free will is not.

I susppose when the prodigal son decided to go back home after living his life to the fullest it was God reeling in the fishing line?

But lets look at the scripture you quoted and lets start with John 8:31~ Using your KJV choice.

Then said Jesus to those Jews which believed on him, If ye continue in my word, then are ye my disciples indeed; (THIS IS JESUS SPEAKING IS IT NOT?)

8:32 And ye shall know the truth, and the truth shall make you free.

8:33 They answered him, We be Abraham's seed, and were never in bondage to any man: how sayest thou, Ye shall be made free?

8:34 Jesus answered them, “Most assuredly, I say to you, whoever commits sin is a slave of sin.

(Barnes comments are brief and concise and to the point.
Whosoever committeth sin ... - In this passage Jesus shows them that he did not refer to political bondage, but to the slavery of the soul to evil passions and desires.
Is the servant - Is the slave of sin. He is bound to it as a slave is to his master.

NOW Flash forward to

Romans 6:16
Do you not know that when you offer yourselves as obedient slaves, you are slaves to the one you obey, whether you are slaves to sin leading to death, or to obedience leading to righteousness? I(n otherwards once born you are a slave to something.)

Romans 6:17-18
But thanks be to God that, though you once were slaves to sin, you wholeheartedly obeyed the form of teaching to which you were committed. / You have been set free from sin and have become slaves to righteousness.

RB... YOU DO NOT TEACH IT LIKE THIS.

I know of no better example then this to prove that free will is in every man, because these chose to learn.
 
Of course he is writing believers, and they have the Spirit, and if they have the Spirit, he says they are not in the flesh but in the Spirit, for the 1000th time Rom 8:9

9 But ye[believers] are not in the flesh, but in the Spirit, if so be that the Spirit of God dwell in you. Now if any man have not the Spirit of Christ, he is none of his.

So them in the flesh in Vs 8 cannot apply to regenerated believers because they are not in the flesh for the 1001th time
So you spat on verse 13 in order to appease your calvinist mindset. Got it!

Verse 9 is again talking about regenerates who have chosen to be in the Spirit and not in the flesh. That perfectly aligns with verse 13.
 
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 Will
1. 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 Will
6. 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.

The loving Potter, my Lord and God Jesus Christ, controls me (2 Corinthians 5:14), God's vessel of mercy (Romans 9:18-23), to write "No Word of God states man was imparted free-will, so free-will is a conjured concept of the traditions of men (Matthew 15:9)".

But you and @GodsGrace (due to your heartfelt Like of Johann's post) reply with the non-Word of God Jewish people as your pillar of truth.

You quoted your pillar of truth:

"“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?”"
Rambam (Maimonides), Hilkhot Teshuvah 5:1

The Truth (John 14:6) declares:

A good tree cannot produce bad fruit, nor can a bad tree produce good fruit. Every tree that does not bear good fruit is cut down and thrown into the fire. So then, you will know them by their fruits.
(Matthew 7:18-20)

The Truth (John 14:6) is that being good is a Fruit of the Holy Spirit of God in us believers:

But the fruit of the Spirit is love, joy, peace, patience, kindness, good, faith, gentleness, self-control; against such things there is no law.
(Galatians 5:22-23)

The Truth (John 14:6) declares that "No one is good except God alone" (Mark 10:18).

Thus, the ability to do good lies solely in God for the Christ of us Christians says
he who practices the Truth comes to the Light, that his works may be revealed, that they are having been worked in God” (The Word of God, John 3:21).

You trust Maimonides of the 12th century.

I trust Jesus.

You wrote you are here "for truth" (proof post #7,481), but you skipped the Truth (John 14:6) that your heart's "Titus 2:11 all men obviously refers to everyone" (proof post #7,281) leads to the following situation for fleshly people, dead in sin, ungodly multitude, unbelievers in relation to God according to your Free-willian Philosophy:
  • 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.
 
@Jim

Jim, it does not come down to what you or I think, or any other person, but truly what does God say about man in the flesh, apart from being spiritual, or being born again, all the same.
Of course it comes down to what you or I think. As I have said before, anything you or I post beyond simply quoting scripture is nothing more that what you or I think. Therefore nearly everything that you have posted in your reply here is quite simply what you think. I may be true or it may be false, but it is not God's word, it is what you think. Therefore nearly everything that you posted in the reply comes down, not to what God says, but what you think.

And with that I will continue.
Jim, again forget about Calvinism, Reformed theology, and let us address scriptures just as I do with you and others, without calling you and others "hyper Arminians" pushing Arminian Theology. What saith the word of God, which is God's testimony of the truth.
Fair enough.
The typical Calvinist, even John Calvin and Jonathan Edwards, seldom differentiate clearly between regeneration and conversion. and your family of followers never do.
That is not quite true. most of "my family" does not agree with your definition of conversion. Your usage of the word conversion is mostly what I would call sanctification. Regeneration is an event that happens in a single moment, but its effects are meant to be eternal. It is the beginning point for a process that lasts throughout this life and reaches perfection in heaven. This process is usually called sanctification.
Jim, when God's word speak of those in the flesh, of the flesh in particular, it is speaking of those not yet born again, and if not born again, than all that makes up that person, or, who that person is..... is corrupt if that is all he is, again, by not being born of God ~ according to God's testimony, than there is no good thing that can come from such a person that is pleasing to God, impossible Jim, regardless what you think and other think, that is the word of God, that's no tmy opinion. We have provided scriptures many times above form such places as Romans 8, etc.
That is not always true. Paul often spoke about the regenerate living "in the flesh". For example, the phrase "in the flesh" occurs some 36 times in the KJV NT and nearly all of those times it is speaking about the regenerate, the saint. Consider Gal_2:20 I am crucified with Christ: nevertheless I live; yet not I, but Christ liveth in me: and the life which I now live in the flesh I live by the faith of the Son of God, who loved me, and gave himself for me. Clearly Paul is not speaking of himself in his not yet born again life; rather he is speaking as he "lived on the earth surrounded by the cares and anxieties of this life" in his regenerated state.

Therefore, so much of what you claim for one who is "in the flesh" is simply not true.
Jim the carnal mind, or "man's spirit", is at enmity against God, but you say it is not, you are bearing false witness to the word of God, or to God's testimony of what is the truth! Jim, do you know the difference bewtween an enemy, and one that is at enmity against a person? I know you do, you just refuse to admit it To be at enmity is to be at constant war, unable to reconcile, and neither desire to do so. Much worse than Israel and Hezbollah. Only God' mercy and power can cause this to happen, nothing shor tof thsi will work.
All that tells me is that you do not really know and understand what the spirit of man is. Paul says in Romans 8:7 that it is the carnal mind is enmity against God. Man's spirit is not simply man's carnal mind.
Jim the spirit in man is much more than just damaged, it is in bondage to sin and its master, the devil himself. A greater power than the devil must open up the prison doors to free such a person.
Here again, you are giving your own definition of what it means to be "in bondage". You deny that the slave, the one in bondage, could possibly even want to be free. That is false. In some cases that might be true; however, that is not generally true either in the physical sense or in the spiritual sense. All the major religions of the world, from time beginning until now, are expressions of man's desire and attempts to free himself from such bondage. It is just that only in the religion of God of the Bible is that a possibility.

Jim, no one has ever said he flesh is change​

Well yes, you do say the flesh is changed. You do so because you have your own, not necessarily biblical, definition of the spirit of man. Is the mind of a man his spirit? If so, then why does God, in the New Covenant, indicate that man is given a new heart, not a new mind. You need to be very careful how you use the words "mind", "heart", "conscience" etc., when speaking of man as flesh or as spirit,

More later.

 
So you spat on verse 13 in order to appease your calvinist mindset. Got it!

Verse 9 is again talking about regenerates who have chosen to be in the Spirit and not in the flesh. That perfectly aligns with verse 13.
Are the regenerated with the Spirit, in the flesh according to Pauls statement in Rom 8:9 Yes or no
 
You wrote you are here "for truth" (proof post #7,481), but you skipped the Truth (John 14:6) that your heart's "Titus 2:11 all men obviously refers to everyone" (proof post #7,281) leads to the following situation for fleshly people, dead in sin, ungodly multitude, unbelievers in relation to God according to your Free-willian Philosophy:
  • 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.
Your claim: “No Word of God states man was imparted free will” — Refuted by Direct Scriptural Witnesses
Your assertion collapses under the weight of multiple verses that directly affirm the reality of human choice, often placed within divine warnings and commands.

To say the phrase "free will" is not used, is a category error akin to denying the Trinity because the term is not explicitly stated—while the concept is everywhere present.


Deuteronomy 30:19
“I call heaven and earth to record this day against you, that I have set before you life and death, blessing and cursing: therefore choose life, that both thou and thy seed may live.”
→ The imperative “choose” (בָּחַר) cannot be read as rhetorical or empty, for it lies at the very heart of covenantal responsibility.

Joshua 24:15
“And if it seem evil unto you to serve the LORD, choose you this day whom ye will serve…”
→ This classic appeal presupposes the moral agency of man. If men could not choose, this would be deceitful rhetoric.

Proverbs 1:29
“For that they hated knowledge, and did not choose the fear of the LORD.”
→ Their condemnation lies not in inability but refusal—a voluntary rejection of God’s offer.

Isaiah 1:19–20
“If ye be willing and obedient, ye shall eat the good of the land: But if ye refuse and rebel…”
→ “If ye be willing” (תֹּאב֔וּ) affirms volitional responsiveness. God's call is not manipulative coercion.

John 5:40
“And ye will not come to me, that ye might have life.”
→ Not “cannot” in this verse, but “will not”—the problem lies in refusal, not total incapacity.

→ Cf. Luke 13:34, Romans 2:4–5, Revelation 22:17

Conflating Spiritual Inability with Deterministic Fatalism—An Unwarranted Leap
It is true that man cannot save himself (John 6:44), but that is not the same as saying man is incapable of responding to grace. Grace is not irresistible by nature; it is resistible as seen in:

Acts 7:51 – “Ye do always resist the Holy Ghost...”

Matthew 23:37 – “...and ye would not!”

The biblical picture is not one of an automaton being forced into salvation, but of a responsive relationship—God initiates, convicts, draws, enlightens, but man must not harden his heart (Hebrews 3:7–8).

Justice Presupposes Moral Agency
A deterministic scheme that denies real human volition renders God unjust, for how can God righteously judge actions that man had no control over?

Romans 2:6–7
“Who will render to every man according to his deeds…”
→ There can be no rendering “according to deeds” if those deeds were pre-programmed and unavoidable.

Ezekiel 18:20–24
The entire logic of this chapter depends upon moral responsibility and the ability of the wicked to turn. “If the wicked will turn from all his sins... he shall surely live.” (v.21)

→ God explicitly says “Have I any pleasure at all that the wicked should die... and not that he should return and live?” (v.23)

The fatalistic interpretation misrepresents God's justice by making men passive instruments rather than volitional responders.

Free Will Is Not a Rejection of the Spirit's Work but an Affirmation of Grace-Enabled Response
The fruit of the Spirit (Galatians 5:22–23) comes after one has believed. But the Scriptures are clear that the gospel must first be believed:

Acts 16:31
“Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ, and thou shalt be saved…”

Faith is the condition, not the consequence, of salvation. It is not a fruit of the Spirit; it is a response to the Spirit's convicting and illuminating work.

→ See Romans 10:9–10, John 3:16, 1 John 5:1
→ “Whosoever believeth that Jesus is the Christ is born of God…” – Note the present participle and perfect tense interaction in Greek, indicating that faith precedes regeneration grammatically and logically (cf. Daniel B. Wallace, GGBB, pp. 568–572).

Maimonides Quoted Not as a “Pillar” but as Historical Witness to Human Volition in Jewish Thought -The appeal to Maimonides (Rambam) is not to supplant Scripture with human tradition, but to demonstrate that the belief in human moral agency was not invented by 12th-century theologians—it was anchored in the Jewish understanding of Torah and covenant.

→ Jesus Himself appealed to the reasonableness of God’s justice (Matt 23:37, John 5:40)—just as Maimonides echoed in Hilkhot Teshuvah.

Your protest against “tradition” falls flat when the tradition in question reflects the very moral reasoning used by prophets, apostles, and the Messiah Himself.

Mischaracterizing the Scope of Christ’s Atonement
Your argument made here follows a limited atonement logic: that if Christ died for all, yet not all are saved, then His atonement failed.

But Scripture is replete with statements affirming that:

Christ died for all (2 Cor 5:14–15)

Christ is the propitiation for the whole world (1 John 2:2)

Christ tasted death for every man (Heb 2:9)

The distinction lies not in efficacy, but application—His atonement is sufficient for all but only effective for those who believe (John 3:16–18, Acts 13:46).

→ As John Wesley said: “God's sovereignty is not His tyranny. He offers grace to all, but forces grace on none.”

Summary of Errors in the Original Post
Misstatement Correction
Free will is absent from Scripture Scripture repeatedly commands choice and condemns refusal (Deut 30:19, John 5:40)
Citing Maimonides is trusting man, not God Maimonides is cited historically, not as final authority
Salvation “failing” proves free will false Salvation is offered universally, applied conditionally upon faith (Acts 10:43)
Fruit of the Spirit proves no man can choose good Fruit comes after belief, not before. Belief is not a “fruit” (Acts 16:31, John 1:12)
No one is good (Mark 10:18), so none can believe But God commands belief—thus He must expect a response (John 3:16, Acts 17:30)

You stand refuted @Kermos and try not to shun the Pauline epistles.

J.
 
Jim, when Paul said no good thing is in his flesh, he meant spiritually speaking that a man can do to please God, please be honest and try to be reasonable~our teaching on man in his natural state of having only the flesh, without God's Spirit, is according to God's testimony, where he moved Paul to write:

Romans 7:18​

“For I know that in me (that is, in my flesh,) dwelleth no good thing: for to will is present with me; but how to perform that which is good I find not.”

Philippians 3:3​

“For we are the circumcision, which worship God in the spirit, and rejoice in Christ Jesus, and have no confidence in the flesh.”

You and others have too much confidence in your flesh~we rejoice in Jesus Christ who by himself secured eternal life for us IN HIS FLESH, the only one who in his flesh please God.
And once again, you have inserted your own thinking and your own version of what God means here. If one has lived his entire life and has disobeyed God only once, then God has said, in James 2:10, that one is accountable for the whole law even if he has fail in only one point in the law. That does not mean that God has indicted him for each and every item and command in the law. It does not mean that God has condemned his every thought and action. That is your thinking, not God's word. It only means that in that one act of disobedience, perfection has been lost and only in perfection is one not accountable for the law, the whole law. It says nothing about anything else about the one who committed that one act of disobedience. It says nothing about God's view and consideration of the rest of the acts of obedience.
 
Back
Top Bottom