Free Will

[Billyray]

Originally Posted by Billyray

So far we have seen Paul talk about salvation in the opening section of this chapter which is Romans 9:1-5. How about anywhere else in this chapter? Let's see. Here is the very next verse.

Romans 9:6 It is not as though God’s word had failed. For not all who are descended from Israel are Israel.

Any hint of salvation in this verse?

Sure. Verse 6 certainly hints at salvation. If you go back to Romans 2:28-29 we see what Paul meant when he said "For not all who are descended from Israel are Israel"

Romans 2:28-29
For no one is a Jew who is merely one outwardly, nor is circumcision outward and physical. But a Jew is one inwardly, and circumcision is a matter of the heart, by the Spirit, not by the letter. His praise is not from man but from God

[Billyray]

Romans 9
6 But it is not as though the word of God has failed. For not all who are descended from Israel belong to Israel,
7 and not all are children of Abraham because they are his offspring, but “Through Isaac shall your offspring be named.”
8 This means that it is not the children of the flesh who are the children of God, but the children of the promise are counted as offspring


Now let's look at the next few verses namely 6,7,8. Any hint of salvation here? Sure. In fact thus far the entire chapter up to this point has been about salvation. Next Paul is going to discuss the Sovereignty of God and will give us several examples. But it is important that we know that all up until this point Paul is speaking about salvation.

[Billyray]

Romans 9:9-13
9 For this is what the promise said: “About this time next year I will return, and Sarah shall have a son.”
10 And not only so, but also when Rebekah had conceived children by one man, our forefather Isaac,
11 though they were not yet born and had done nothing either good or bad—in order that God's purpose of election might continue, not because of works but because of him who calls—
12 she was told, “The older will serve the younger.”
13 As it is written, “Jacob I loved, but Esau I hated

First off let me reiterate that the entire chapter up to this point is speaking about salvation so when someone claims that Romans 9 and specifically this section has nothing to do with salvation that is not the case. Thus far we see that although the Jews where chosen as a race that didn't mean that all were saved rather only the children of promise were counted as offspring. Next Paul discusses God's sovereign choice.

Before we talk about this section of scripture and given the fact that salvation has been talked about all the way up to this point-- do you have any opinions about whether or not Jacob was saved? How about Esau?

[Libby]

I was just rereading the whole of Romans, Chapter 9.

No, I have no opinion about whether or not Esau and Jacob were saved.

I'm sure you do, though.

[Libby]

Billy, doesn't God (through Paul) give the reason why some are saved and some are not, in the very last verses of Romans 9?

30 What then shall we say? That the Gentiles, who did not pursue righteousness, have obtained it, a righteousness that is by faith; 31 but the people of Israel, who pursued the law as the way of righteousness, have not attained their goal.

32 Why not? Because they pursued it not by faith but as if it were by works. They stumbled over the stumbling stone. 33 As it is written:

“See, I lay in Zion a stone that causes people to stumble
and a rock that makes them fall,
and the one who believes in him will never be put to shame.”[m]

[Billyray]

Originally Posted by Libby

I was just rereading the whole of Romans, Chapter 9.

No, I have no opinion about whether or not Esau and Jacob were saved.

I'm sure you do, though.

I think that if you look at Romans 9 as a whole Paul is combining two things and showing how they work together. He start out and talks on and on about salvation and that some are saved and others are not--then goes on to show that the Jews were called out among all of the nations but just because you are Jewish i.e physical descent doesn't mean you are saves and then differentiates between the physical as compared to the spiritual Jewish descendant. He then ties this in with election and specifically states that election has nothing to do with anything that we have done as he gives us an example of the Jews. Note even if you just looked at this from the Arminian viewpoint and said that this is simply about leadership this brings up the problem that from this point of view he looks into the future to see what that person has done--but Paul specifically says that this was not based on anything that either of the twins had done--so this doesn't fit this point of view. Paul goes on to show other examples of how God sovereignly choose different people for different roles. And probably the most important section--at least from my perspective--is the fact that Paul then brings up the likely reaction when it comes to God's sovereign choice when he says a person may say "how can we resist HIS will". Paul knew that some people would see this as unfair. If this wasn't an issue then Paul would never have raised this concern--in fact it would have made no sense to do so.


But probably the best clue is found in the hall of faith in Hebrews 11--you can read the whole chapter but I provided a section below.

Hebrews 11
8 By faith Abraham obeyed when he was called to go out to a place that he was to receive as an inheritance. And he went out, not knowing where he was going. 9 By faith he went to live in the land of promise, as in a foreign land, living in tents with Isaac and Jacob, heirs with him of the same promise. 10 For he was looking forward to the city that has foundations, whose designer and builder is God. 11 By faith Sarah herself received power to conceive, even when she was past the age, since she considered him faithful who had promised. 12 Therefore from one man, and him as good as dead, were born descendants as many as the stars of heaven and as many as the innumerable grains of sand by the seashore.13 These all died in faith, not having received the things promised, but having seen them and greeted them from afar, and having acknowledged that they were strangers and exiles on the earth. 14 For people who speak thus make it clear that they are seeking a homeland. 15 If they had been thinking of that land from which they had gone out, they would have had opportunity to return. 16 But as it is, they desire a better country, that is, a heavenly one. Therefore God is not ashamed to be called their God, for he has prepared for them a city.17 By faith Abraham, when he was tested, offered up Isaac, and he who had received the promises was in the act of offering up his only son, 18 of whom it was said, “Through Isaac shall your offspring be named.” 19 He considered that God was able even to raise him from the dead, from which, figuratively speaking, he did receive him back. 20 By faith Isaac invoked future blessings on Jacob and Esau. 21 By faith Jacob, when dying, blessed each of the sons of Joseph, bowing in worship over the head of his staff. 22 By faith Joseph, at the end of his life, made mention of the exodus of the Israelites and gave directions concerning his bones.
.

[Billyray]

Originally Posted by Libby

Billy, doesn't God (through Paul) give the reason why some are saved and some are not, in the very last verses of Romans 9?

30 What then shall we say? That the Gentiles, who did not pursue righteousness, have obtained it, a righteousness that is by faith; 31 but the people of Israel, who pursued the law as the way of righteousness, have not attained their goal.

32 Why not? Because they pursued it not by faith but as if it were by works. They stumbled over the stumbling stone. 33 As it is written:

“See, I lay in Zion a stone that causes people to stumble
and a rock that makes them fall,
and the one who believes in him will never be put to shame.”[m]

Salvation is based on faith in Christ and not by our works so what Paul says is absolutely true. I think that the point Paul making is a conclusion of the entire chapter which is that the gospel is moving towards the Gentiles and that this is God's sovereign choice. This is hinted at in one of the verses you quoted when Paul says "That the Gentiles, who did not pursue righteousness, have obtained it. . ."

[Libby]

But, my point is...he is giving behavior (works based theology) vs faith (in Christ) as REASONS for being saved or not being saved. Things that people are doing or not doing.

He doesn't say it's God alone.

[Billyray]

Originally Posted by Libby

But, my point is...he is giving behavior (works based theology) vs faith (in Christ) as REASONS for being saved or not being saved. Things that people are doing or not doing.

He doesn't say it's God alone.

Sure salvation is by faith--a person is not saved until he places his faith in Christ. But where does this faith ultimately come from? God. Unregenerate individuals do not have the desire to come to Christ. However when God changes their disposition this opens up their eyes and they choose to place their faith in Christ. In both cases the individuals are choosing what they want. Predestination/election-->regeneration (born again)-->faith/repentance (salvation)-->sanctification-->death/resurrection-->eternal life with God. Arminians change the order around a bit but even they believe that man can't come to God and placed their faith in Christ without God's input to do so. So in both cases God intervenes prior to one coming to faith.

If you move on to Romans 11 Paul is still talking about salvation for the Jews. Read the following section and you can clearly see God's hand in salvation--"The elect obtained it, but the rest were hardened". If you believe that God is drawing every single person equally then you must ask yourself why does this section of scripture conflict so strongly against your belief? This is hardly a model for drawing every single person to Christ.


Romans 11
So too at the present time there is a remnant, chosen by grace. But if it is by grace, it is no longer on the basis of works; otherwise grace would no longer be grace. What then? Israel failed to obtain what it was seeking. The elect obtained it, but the rest were hardened, as it is written, “God gave them a spirit of stupor, eyes that would not see and ears that would not hear, down to this very day

[alanmolstad]

sure.....i got to bed after watching the forum for hours with no new posts...

i go to sleep and two hours later find 65 new posts?

[alanmolstad]

why wouldboth guys not be saved?

[alanmolstad]

so yes....it is as I always have said...(and James seems to also agree with me on this point too)

Man has free will and God is sovereign.

free will means what it says>
free- not a slave
will - the thinking mind...mental resolution , self-determination

[alanmolstad]

Originally Posted by Billyray

Romans 1:20 For since the creation of the world God’s invisible qualities—his eternal power and divine nature—have been clearly seen, being understood from what has been made, so that people are without excuse.

Alan I didn't quite follow your explanation. Could you explain this for me?

just look at the last par of the verse......there is your answer!


"For since the creation of the world God's invisible qualities--his eternal power and divine nature--have been clearly seen, being understood from what has been made, so that people are without excuse"

excuse?....excuse from what?









this is why when someone asks me - "Were all men called by God?" I ask them in return - "Was the universe still around? Was the earth still spinning? Was the creation still switched on?
If so, then there is no excise for not hearing the calling of God as he drew you to himself"



This is why there is no need to wait on something.
There is no need to think, "God must yet do something"
There is no justification for our delay.

Today is the day of salvation!.......not later....not after god has to do one more thing....not right after one more step....NO!

Right now its the correct moment...nothing needs to happen first!....this is the correct time!

[alanmolstad]

Originally Posted by Libby

That's correct.

Can you tell me, on what basis God chose those whom he will save? How did he decide?

no one can

[alanmolstad]

Originally Posted by Billyray

But from an Arminian point of view isn't it more accurate to say that you choose yourself?

ask an Arminian.....
i dontknow any however

[alanmolstad]

Originally Posted by James Banta

It is strange Billy, Alan teaches that all men are God's .....

You are just making stuff up......


what I have said,,,,said from the "Beginning" mind you, is that God draws all men to himself.
We know this for a fact because Christ says he draws all men and Christ could not say that unless he saw the father drawing all men.
So it is the Father here who is actually doing the drawing here, though the Son.

thus billy's idea that the son can draw all men but that don't mean it was the father's idea is a bunch of BS.

Drawing men to himself is why God sent His son into the world....

(So i think Billy's ideas about how the Trinity is in disunion is simply outside the christian faith)


So God calls men to himself, and they who come to Christ are never turned away.
this is like when a church bell rings in my town on Sunday morning.
We all hear the same bell ringing.
you cant help but hear it's sound.
The bell means that the church is calling all men to come and worship.
The church draws all men to itself.

But although all men hear the calling, not all respond.
Not everyone wants to be respond to being drawn.

All are drawn, but not all respond.
All hear, but not all listen.

No one comes without being first drawn.
All are drawn but not all come.

yet, all they who do respond and come, are welcome.
All who come are accepted, None is turned away.




any questions now James?

[Libby]

Billy - Arminians change the order around a bit but even they believe that man can't come to God and placed their faith in Christ without God's input to do so. So in both cases God intervenes prior to one coming to faith.

Arminians change the order of salvation, because it's very important that man's will and freedom to choose is not corrupted. Putting God's regeneration at the top of the list, eliminates man's responsibility to respond to God's calling...and that cannot be.

[James Banta]

Originally Posted by Libby

Arminians change the order of salvation, because it's very important that man's will and freedom to choose is not corrupted. Putting God's regeneration at the top of the list, eliminates man's responsibility to respond to God's calling...and that cannot be.

Only those that are the Father's are given to Jesus:

John 6:37
All that the Father gives Me will come to Me, and the one who comes to Me I will certainly not cast out.

Would the Father hold back any of those that are His from coming to Jesus? NO! so it is only those that are not the Father's that will be ****ed.. Did He know who those would be before the world was created? YES! yet to reveal Him Love Mercy and Justness He created all, even the rebellious.. But those that are His, those He gives to Jesus to redeem.. IHS jim

[Billyray]

Originally Posted by Libby

Arminians change the order of salvation, because it's very important that man's will and freedom to choose is not corrupted. Putting God's regeneration at the top of the list, eliminates man's responsibility to respond to God's calling...and that cannot be.

Man is still responsible for his choices so I am not sure how you say that this is eliminated. Second you also believe that man is unable to come to Christ on his own.

[Libby]

Originally Posted by Billyray

Man is still responsible for his choices so I am not sure how you say that this is eliminated. Second you also believe that man is unable to come to Christ on his own.

Billy, is man held responsible for whether or not he turns to Christ? If he is held responsible, how could it be ALL God's work? I'm not saying God is not involved. He IS, big time! He draws us, he gives us reasons to believe, he extends his grace by even giving us the opportunity to turn to him and have faith in Christ. He is involved, but our "will" has to be involved, as well, or we cannot be held responsible for turning away.

[James Banta]

Originally Posted by Libby

Billy, is man held responsible for whether or not he turns to Christ? If he is held responsible, how could it be ALL God's work? I'm not saying God is not involved. He IS, big time! He draws us, he gives us reasons to believe, he extends his grace by even giving us the opportunity to turn to him and have faith in Christ. He is involved, but our "will" has to be involved, as well, or we cannot be held responsible for turning away.

Calvinism DOESN'T TEACH that we have no will.. It teaches that God is sovereign. He is in total control while is totally aware of us and all we will ever do, and when we will do it.. Do you disagree with that? So God know if and when you would make a confession of Sin and ask Jesus to be your Lord. HE knew whether you would do that or NOT from the very beginning, as He set about in His creative process to create the world and all that is in it.. What is so wrong to say that He knows if we will accept Him. That He predestines us to either eternal life or eternal death in the Lake of Fire because of that knowledge? After all it's still your free will, and it's His sovereignty.. IHS jim

[Billyray]

Originally Posted by Libby

Billy, is man held responsible for whether or not he turns to Christ? If he is held responsible, how could it be ALL God's work? I'm not saying God is not involved. He IS, big time! He draws us, he gives us reasons to believe, he extends his grace by even giving us the opportunity to turn to him and have faith in Christ. He is involved, but our "will" has to be involved, as well, or we cannot be held responsible for turning away.

Man is responsible for the choices that he makes. God gives each of us commandments and if we break those commandments we are guilty. Man is also responsible for choosing to follow Christ or to reject Him. When you say "will" I ***ume that you mean "choices", every person makes "choices" and chooses what he wants.

[alanmolstad]

Originally Posted by James Banta

After all it's still your free will, and it's His sovereignty.. IHS jim

How come when I say that all the Calvinists gets so upset?

[Billyray]

Originally Posted by Billyray

Sure. Perhaps I missed the post where you provided your definition of free will. Could you post a concise definition (as you are defining it) for me. It would be helpful if you post your definition without all of the extra superfluous information. Thanks.

Originally Posted by alanmolstad

see post #56

OK I will look at post #56.

POST #56

Originally Posted by alanmolstad

I have already given you the definition I use.....
I have provided Text that support the way I use the term.
I have provided you with an understanding of the many Text that some Calvinists try to use to prove man is without Free Will.....and I have offered to answer any questions about things I have said...

Do you have any other questions about the Bible's concept of Free Will, or about anything I have posted?

Above is post #56. Can you point out when in this post you have defined "free will"?

Alan how can we discuss "free will" when you won't even give me a concise definition of how you are using this word. If you want we can simply use the dictionary definition. But let me know either way how you would like to define it so we can actually get on with the discussion.

[Billyray]

Originally Posted by alanmolstad

How come when I say that all the Calvinists gets so upset?

I certainly haven't gotten upset. But I am still waiting for your definition of "free will".