God's Will

[Seth]

What would be the point of such a fruitless enterprise? :o)

To show how God works THROUGH man.

[Seth]

I don't see that. I would consider that, in some cases, an assumption based in systematic theology.

The freedom we are offered is way more(to mee) than freedom from sin. It is freedom to walk as John 3:5-8. The wind blows where it wills and you hear the sound of it, but you do not kno where it is going to or from whence it comes- SO IT IS with everyone who is born of the Spirit.

The consequence of freedom from sin is not the limit or the sum definition of freedom anywhere I can read.

Romans 6:18
You have been set free from sin and have become slaves to righteousness.

[Seth]

My whole point with the Adam and Eve response is that folks tend to say that the very fact that man has choices is proof positive in itself that man's will is free. We know from examples in the Bible where God uses man's choices to perform his own plan, that such an idea is not necessarily the case. Even if we can't see the purpose behind God giving a choice, then influencing the choice, doesn't mean it isn't happening. An example of a choice is not an automatic example of free will.

[micah7:9]

"The reason I think there is a stewardship of freedom is because the scriptures use that language. A study of the words freedom and liberty, stewardship and discipleship- indicates to me that freedom is an important element of relationships in general, with God in particualr, and as sons, stewards and disciples in application. :o)" EW

I can see and understand what you say, but how can there be a "is a stewardship of freedom" without the influence of the Holy Spirit? And if that influence is there would that not be the cause for the will of doing right? And if so then it is not I, but Christ?

I believe (imo) it is the Lords Will who causes the effect of my choices and I have and had many choices. I, as a man, His creation, was given a will. That will is not a "free" will it needs an igniter or cause to make a choice.
In Genesis man was charged not to eat of the fruit and until the Lord caused/allowed the woman to "see" it was all fine, the woman then chose freely to eat and give to the man. Without the Lord giving the charge not to eat, man's will was not his will but the Creator's Will, but the Lord caused a reason where the woman had to make a choice...she saw. This was HIS Will that the woman made a choice not her free will but from a caused situation that the Lord willed. Man's will is to sin it's his nature...man is carnal.

As you know I find the entire debate of man having a free will un- biblical.  :2c:

[Tony N]

I don't see that. I would consider that, in some cases, an assumption based in systematic theology.

The freedom we are offered is way more(to mee) than freedom from sin. It is freedom to walk as John 3:5-8. The wind blows where it wills and you hear the sound of it, but you do not kno where it is going to or from whence it comes- SO IT IS with everyone who is born of the Spirit.

The consequence of freedom from sin is not the limit or the sum definition of freedom anywhere I can read.

God made you write the above.  :laughing7:

[dajomaco]

So the Lord God formed out of the ground every wild animal and every bird of the sky, and brought each to the man to see what he would call it.
And whatever the man called a living creature, that was its name.

Adam had free will in the Garden.
God allowed Adam to name every creature.

Adam named Eve.

We have free will in name only.

How do you know God didn't influence Adam to name the creatures what he wanted them to be named?

We have to take God at his word.
What effect would naming a creature have on that creature?   Nothing

God agreed with himself that whatever Adam called the creature, was the creatures name.
This simple plan was the start of a relationship.

God allowed Adam's opinion of God's creation.
God said his creation was GOOD.

Adam named Eve GOOD.

Adam ate from the tree and knew the difference between Good and Evil.
Can we go back to the garden and call God GOOD
without the tree of knowledge and good and evil.

Yes when we eat from the tree of life.
Everything that is eternal is good.
Every good thing is eternal.

We will agree with God that God is Good.

[Seth]

We have to take God at his word.
What effect would naming a creature have on that creature?   Nothing

I have to challenge you on that. Your question doesn't have to do with what it actually says in God's word. It just has to do with you not knowing what the point would be of God influencing Adam. As I said before, God has established in the OT his willingness to influence choices and that shows how God executes his plans through mankind.

God agreed with himself that whatever Adam called the creature, was the creatures name.
This simple plan was the start of a relationship.

God allowed Adam's opinion of God's creation.

You still cannot prove that God didn't influence Adam. That shows that an example of God giving a choice is not proof positive that the choice was executed by free will.

[micah7:9]

We have to take God at his word.
What effect would naming a creature have on that creature?   Nothing

I have to challenge you on that. Your question doesn't have to do with what it actually says in God's word. It just has to do with you not knowing what the point would be of God influencing Adam. As I said before, God has established in the OT his willingness to influence choices and that shows how God executes his plans through mankind.

God agreed with himself that whatever Adam called the creature, was the creatures name.
This simple plan was the start of a relationship.

God allowed Adam's opinion of God's creation.

You still cannot prove that God didn't influence Adam. That shows that an example of God giving a choice is not proof positive that the choice was executed by free will.

Well said.

[dajomaco]

We have to take God at his word.
What effect would naming a creature have on that creature?   Nothing

I have to challenge you on that. Your question doesn't have to do with what it actually says in God's word. It just has to do with you not knowing what the point would be of God influencing Adam. As I said before, God has established in the OT his willingness to influence choices and that shows how God executes his plans through mankind.

God agreed with himself that whatever Adam called the creature, was the creatures name.
This simple plan was the start of a relationship.

God allowed Adam's opinion of God's creation.

You still cannot prove that God didn't influence Adam. That shows that an example of God giving a choice is not proof positive that the choice was executed by free will.

The difference is the tree of knowledge of good and evil.

There was no reason for God to influence Adam in regard to naming creatures.

[Seth]

How can you know that unless you are God himself??

[gregoryfl]

I am not against the term 'freewill' per se, but it depends on how that word is being used. I look at choice in this way:

The only way a 'choice' (the result of the will choosing something) is ever made, whether consciously or not, is that the will, which may be likened to a metal object laying on the ground, must have at least one choosable thing placed near it. This may be likened to a magnet. The moment the magnet (the choosable thing) begins to pull the metal object (the will) toward itself, not only are you on the way to making a choice, but also, at the very moment it moves, it is instantly a slave of that magnet.

If you put another magnet on the other side, slightly stronger than the first, it will begin to pull the metal object away from the first magnet, toward itself. The metal object (the will) will be attracted toward the magnet (choosable thing) that has the greater pull. In either case, the only way a choice (the meeting of the metal object with the magnet) can occur is for that metal object to be a slave to the magnet.

The way freewill is often understood is that the will is free to move in one direction or another without any pull whatsoever. It would be like putting that metal object on the ground and putting two pieces of wood (choosable things) on opposite sides. In this case, there is no pull, and hence, no movement at all of the metal object, and thus, no choice being made.

A choice, as I understand it, inherently involves the enslavement of the will at any given moment to whatever it is attracted to, or is pulling on it the greatest, at any given moment. In this case, the will is indeed free to go in either direction, but the only way it can actually GO in any direction is to become a slave of what it is attracted to...as someone here pointed out from Paul...

Now, being freed from Sin, you are enslaved to Righteousness."
(Rom 6:18)

Ronen

[micah7:9]

Which leads me to understand man has the free choice but that choice is only considered if there is a cause. He does not have a free will, for free will MUST have a cause. The magnet in the example is the cause, without that pull a choice can not be made. For man, the creation, to have free will the ignition of that freedom MUST come from someplace, a cause, to have the effect of choice. Again my  :2c:

CLV(i) 17 and He is before all, and all has its cohesion in Him."

[saintwalee]

In the original post, I was speaking specifically about God's will  of Salvation; that it is His will , not ours.

Isa 43:11  I, even I, am the LORD; and beside me there is no saviour.
Isa 43:12  I have declared, and have saved, and I have shewed, when there was no strange god among you: therefore ye are my witnesses, saith the LORD, that I am God.
Isa 43:13  Yea, before the day was I am he; and there is none that can deliver out of my hand: I will work, and who shall let it? ...
Isa 43:25  I, even I, am he that blotteth out thy transgressions for mine own sake, and will not remember thy sins.

I guess that should put to rest the idea of free will.

In regard to our free will, and whether we can do anything of ourselves, or if our every action or even every thought is also God's will, is another matter.

Scriptures shows us the following regarding choice:

1Co_13:11  When I was a child, I spake as a child, I understood as a child, I thought as a child: but when I became a man, I put away childish things.

2Co_10:5  Casting down imaginations, and every high thing that exalteth itself against the knowledge of God, and bringing into captivity every thought to the obedience of Christ;

Php 1:22  But if I live in the flesh, this is the fruit of my labour: yet what I shall choose I wot not.

From EW's Reply; " I kno my position is unpopular on this, and I never claim to have the paradox completely fathomed. However, as I see it, the heart of man chooses to be "in the flesh" OR "in the spirit". IMO on some level man has a will that can choose between flesh and spirit, or the exhortations of the scriptures are play writing. That's just my opinion, but thats how I see it. A lot of interpretation and allegorizing has to be done with the simple language of scripture for it to be otherwise."

I beleive that the spirit has freewill of righteousness and to worship God, that is what the spirit does. Also, the flesh has freewill to do unrighteousness, that is what it does. But I think Eagle's Way gets to the "heart" of the matter; "IMO on some leve man has a will that can choose".

The flesh either surrenders to the will of the flesh, or to the will of the spirit. I think that "choice" is everyone's point of decision, from Adam and Eve to everyone that ever lived, lives or will live. (in stating this, I am, at this point, appointing the decision to the flesh)

One aspect that could be looked at is the Soul. For the spirit is of God, and the body of Flesh, but the Soul is the marriage of the two. And in Genesis, it states: Gen 2:24  Therefore shall a man leave his father and his mother, and shall cleave unto his wife: and they shall be one flesh.

Afore, God breathed into Adam and Adam became a living soul; both the Spirit of God, and the Body of Adam; as one soul. Is that where the battle is? Is that where the choices are made? As the flesch is completely selfish, will it only yield (surrender) to the will of the spirit when it is to the flesh's advantage? What advantage then would the flesh have as to surrender to the will of the spirit? What about the only thing the flesh could never have, eternal life?

Gen 3:22  And the LORD God said, Behold, the man is become as one of us, to know good and evil: and now, lest he put forth his hand, and take also of the tree of life, and eat, and live for ever:
Gen 3:23  Therefore the LORD God sent him forth from the garden of Eden, to till the ground from whence he was taken.
Gen 3:24  So he drove out the man; and he placed at the east of the garden of Eden Cherubims, and a flaming sword which turned every way, to keep the way of the tree of life.

I think therefore, that God work's his perfect will through man, by creating in man the ultimate desire, that which he could not obtain on his own.

Is it a choice, or is it just drama, and we all are just playing a role? For me, I favor the former. I think God works with his children, allowing free will within a set boundry, or parameters to allow for growth unto maturity. Our salvation is His alone, but we grow; from the play pen, to the house, to school unto all of the world. Our parameters grow and the choices we make grow as well.

I loved all the replies. There was a lot of good meat there.

[micah7:9]

I liked what you said, still the quagmire, "I think God works with his children, allowing free will within a set boundry, ..."

I believe and it is my humble opinion that much would be set at rest were we to use FREE CHOICE rather than Free will. Where in the Bible was free will given or established? Other than theology and religion I find no evidence of a free will. For me the Bible proves man has free choices, but to have free will, then what ever man does he does without the Will of the Creator, which in my opinion, leaves the Lord God Creator out of the equation and man in Genesis 3 was totally on his own and The Maker never had the entire situation in hand in the first place.

[saintwalee]

 :iagree:

Although it appears that "choice" and "will" are closely related, however, God is in control and imo, it is His will to allow us to make choices, within the parameters he sets for us.

[Seth]

We haven't really even examined closely the implications of gods fore knowledge and man's choices and how that considerably narrows the parameters of man's apparent free agency

[saintwalee]

We haven't really even examined closely the implications of gods fore knowledge and man's choices and how that considerably narrows the parameters of man's apparent free agency

That is deep, Seth!

I think we could look at the first parameter set, not allowing man to eat from the tree of life. That limited man to a temporal existence.

[Seth]

Consider Paul's conversion. God knew exactly when and where that would happen. What if Paul decided to exercise free will and drink some bad milk that day and stay home? No big deal right? Small actions not influenced by God? Would Jesus improvise and appear before him at his home? If so, then that would have been predetermined, because what God foreknows cannot happen any other way. None of Paul's choices escape the predetermination of God's perfect foreknowledge.

Jeremiah 10
O LORD, I know that the way of man is not in himself: it is not in man that walketh to direct his steps.

[saintwalee]

Consider Paul's conversion. God knew exactly when and where that would happen. What if Paul decided to exercise free will and drink some bad milk that day and stay home? No big deal right? Small actions not influenced by God? Would Jesus improvise and appear before him at his home? If so, then that would have been predetermined, because what God foreknows cannot happen any other way. None of Paul's choices escape the predetermination of God's perfect foreknowledge.

Jeremiah 10
O LORD, I know that the way of man is not in himself: it is not in man that walketh to direct his steps.

:iagree: "...the predetermination of God's perfect foreknowledge."

God encompasses all things, including past, present and future!

[Seth]

 :thumbsup:

[joeteekay]

:iagree:

Although it appears that "choice" and "will" are closely related, however, God is in control and imo, it is His will to allow us to make choices, within the parameters he sets for us.

That's the way I see it too. :myahoo:

[eaglesway]

Consider Paul's conversion. God knew exactly when and where that would happen. What if Paul decided to exercise free will and drink some bad milk that day and stay home? No big deal right? Small actions not influenced by God? Would Jesus improvise and appear before him at his home? If so, then that would have been predetermined, because what God foreknows cannot happen any other way. None of Paul's choices escape the predetermination of God's perfect foreknowledge.

Jeremiah 10
O LORD, I know that the way of man is not in himself: it is not in man that walketh to direct his steps.

I entirely agree that God was in total control of Paul's conversion. My conversion was quite the same. I had an explosive experience with the Holy Spirit and saw Christ crucified and received a call to follow Him. I ran for about a year until I yielded to the call, and that was by grace as well. None of this interferes with the idea of stewardship over choices God allows us to make in situations He places us in. Arguments such as these are misdirected in terms of what I have expressed, in my opinion. They do not speak to the idea that God sets parameters in which we are allowed the freedom to obey or not, or sometimes even, to choose whether we will obey in one way or another, as we learn to walk with God, as we learn discipleship and stewardship.

Also, the parable of the unrighteous steward speaks to this. Jesus is saying, "This is the way, walk ye therein". If we choose to exercise a stewardship He has given us in self indulgent ways, "He that has not, even that which he has shall be taken away". These simple lessons require choices and the exercise of will and the exhortation is meant to lead us in the way of Christ. Therefore we are urged, "Let no one among you esteem themselves more highly than he ought, for to each one is given the measure of faith(Rom 12), and "Let each of you use his/her special gift in serving one another and thus be good stewards of the many faceted grace of God."

There is an alternative presented there. One can choose to serve theirself with their gifts, seeking the praise of men or wielding authority in a heavy handed manner. The accountability for these choices is clear.

Some will say, "God controled your unrighteous use of your gifts, and God controlled the righteous use another disciple exercized. I am not convinced of this, because the accountability for failure would be baseless and the reward for overcoming a play on words with no substance. Therefore I believe that the simple language of scripture is direct and true. Salvation is given freely by God's choice. Gifts are given freely by God's choice. God teaches His friends and His servants by allowing them to exercize grace BOTH in character and in anointing.

God has chosen us, and the appointed times of our salvation and reconciliation. Walk in the narrow way(between the easy answers and polar extremes).

But really, I do not want to belabor the point. I think we have all spoken well for our respective viewpoints, and as I said before, I believe there are legitimate elements of all these truths in the whole counsel of God.

Ultimately, whether my view is correct or the other view is correct- God is ultimately causing all things to work together for good to those who love God and are called according to His purpose, which is the reconciliation of all. In the meantime, while we await the parting of the veil until we know as we are known, we are exhorted to work out our own salvation with fear and trembling. :o)

[Seth]

Some will say, "God controled your unrighteous use of your gifts, and God controlled the righteous use another disciple exercized. I am not convinced of this, because the accountability for failure would be baseless and the reward for overcoming a play on words with no substance.

Paul addressed this in Romans 9:

Romans 9
19 You will say to me then, "Why does He still find fault? For who resists His will?" 20 On the contrary, who are you, O man, who answers back to God? The thing molded will not say to the molder, "Why did you make me like this," will it? 21 Or does not the potter have a right over the clay, to make from the same lump one vessel [l]for honorable use and another for common use? 22 What if God, although willing to demonstrate His wrath and to make His power known, endured with much patience vessels of wrath prepared for destruction? 23 And He did so to make known the riches of His glory upon vessels of mercy, which He prepared beforehand for glory, 24 even us, whom He also called, not from among Jews only, but also from among Gentiles.

It reminds me of how Jesus exhorted his Jewish brothers according to the flesh to believe in him. But God blinded them and then they killed him. Why the exhortation if God blinded them? Why would the church even bother to preach to the synagogues if it was known that God was blinding Israel to bring the Gentiles in? If they believed, then Jesus would not have been able to be murdered for their sins.

I believe it is because God is demonstrating something as he says in the passage above. I believe the church preached to Israel even though they were sovereignly blinded by God in order to show the character of Christ in the rejection.

[eaglesway]

Of course I understand all of what you are saying. There are hundreds of verses on the matter. You are applying it in a way I do not see. God is not controlling our every choice in my opinion. He intervenes routinely in our lives, of course. He intervenes in history and exalts and abases whom He wills for His own inscrutable reasons, as Paul said. Somehow you see this as a doctrinal clarity that God never gives us any parameters of freedom with which to teach us and mature us as sons/stewards/disciples.

I do not see it at all in so blanket a way that you do, and I do not see the authroity in that verse for an idea opposing discipleship and stewardship.

What about the parable of the talents? What kind of an exercise in futility would that exhortation be in the scenario you are expressing :o)

There are too many verses being ignored in this view, so I don't agree with it. It requires to much wrestling with clear verses to invalidate what they teach and exhort for me to be comfortable with it.

I believe God is intimately involved in all our choices good and ill. And I also believe He gives us some rope in order to teach us. To me it is simple and obvious- at least at the present time ;o)

[Seth]

I do not see it at all in so blanket a way that you do, and I do not see the authroity in that verse for an idea opposing discipleship and stewardship.

Nor do I, but I don't see discipleship and stewardship opposing the Romans 8:29 process either.

What about the parable of the talents? What kind of an exercise in futility would that exhortation be in the scenario you are expressing :o) There are too many verses being ignored in this view, so I don't agree with it. It requires to much wrestling with clear verses to invalidate what they teach and exhort for me to be comfortable with it.

I am happy to address any scripture. I don't believe I am ignoring any of them, but my explanation is here: Exhortations are there for God to demonstrate his will through man. God exhorted to Pharoah, let my people go. So the question the church was asking was, if Israel was not believing, just how Pharoah was disobeying, why does God punish. For, who resists his will?

The answer, is that God does so to demonstrate things. He exhorted Pharoah to let his people go in order to demonstrate his wrath and make his power known through Pharoah's disobedience. This is Paul's reasoning here. And he is applying it to Israel to answer the objection: If God exhorts, but his will cannot be resisted, how can he hold anyone accountable? Answer: to demonstrate.

The whole question of accountability in the face of God's sovereignty, Paul is addressing that question right there in Romans 9, specifically.