The free will of man

[savagewind]

I don't see how a transgression can exist without some kind of law. By law I mean the Bible, because I think the bible teaches God's law (correct me if you don't agree about that otherwise we could go around in circles )

It cannot be true that the Bible is the only law. The reason being is if it were so it would cause class distinction. Those with the law (Bible) and those without it. Those understanding it and those not understanding it.

To believe it is law is also elevating Israel above mankind because without Israel there would be no Bible.

The Bible and Israel are helpers, not law. (Lawyers LOL)

 

[Onkara]

It cannot be true that the Bible is the only law. The reason being is if it were so it would cause class distinction. Those with the law (Bible) and those without it. Those understanding it and those not understanding it.

To believe it is law is also elevating Israel above mankind because without Israel there would be no Bible.

The Bible and Israel are helpers, not law. (Lawyers LOL)

I see! That is useful to know and explains why Christianity isn't limited to race, language, country or culture.

Your earlier post above made me realise I was overlooking something greater than any law with this line of questioning.

 

[Onkara]

Hi Savagewind
I stumbled on a verse which might support your friends view in the original topic, that God can stop them from acting, please let me know your opinion:

Acts 16.7 When they came to the border of Mysia, they tried to enter Bithynia, but the Spirit of Jesus would not allow them to.

 

[savagewind]

Our conscious can be affected by God to refrain from acting. Definitely. But we are talking about what a person keeps believing, not what they might do. It is my opinion that God will not physically remove a thought from a person. If the thought leads them in the wrong direction....so be it. It is the person's choice albeit the wrong one. Warnings will be sent until the warnings can no longer be sent because the person has become stuck in the mire.

Look, your house is left to you desolate. I tell you, you will not see me again until you say, 'Blessed is he who comes in the name of the Lord.'" Luke 13:35

What I think this warning means is Yahweh will leave off leading a person if they insist on believing untruth. To be believing lies is NOT blessing the Name. Is that not obvious?

I have another thread about the Nephilim. Billions of believing souls insist it means the woman of Noah's day accepted the fallen angels as husbands. Some even advertise the woman were very pleased with themselves that a son of god would marry them. That belief is hurtful. Isn't it? We should love one another. The same people who believe the woman were fornicating with demons also believe those women are not in line for a resurrection. Good thing huh? That last sentence is sarcasm.

 

[Onkara]

Thanks, that makes sense.

 

[Sleeppy]

Interesting.

In this instance it is about what a person is free to believe or not believe. I will believe what I know to be true. How do some people know what is true? By virtue of their putting themselves under God's care. They believe Yahweh will not permit them to believe something harmful. In other words, they are replacing their will with God's will. If what is true for them does not work righteousness, whose fault is it?

You believe. But that wasn't free. What's paid for is paid for. It was the will of God before anyone. The scriptures say He chose.. And deny it was the other way around. Therefore what is, was always meant to be.

You've read that the Jews are saved after their falling away and the bringing in of the rest of Mankind/Gentiles?

We like the Jews are the foreknown people. The chosen people of God.

 

[idav]

I have heard someone describe their free will choice of belief as "God would not allow me to believe as I do if it would cause any harm". To me that sounds like the person believes God is in charge of their free will. But then I think it is no longer the person's free will but God monitoring every belief the person has to believe.

What would someone need their own will for if they are trying to do the will of God?

 

[savagewind]

What would someone need their own will for if they are trying to do the will of God?

They would need their own will to be saying "I will learn the will of God to do it". "I will choose God's will over my own".

 

[idav]

They would need their own will to be saying "I will learn the will of God to do it". "I will choose God's will over my own".

Which begs the question if it was ever our will to begin with.

 

[savagewind]

I believe what we will do with our life does not belong to God but to ourselves. To live in harmony with God's will or not is ours to decide. To be considering as true that people cannot decide for themselves to obey or disobey fits under this warning imo. Colossians 2:8 See to it that no one takes you captive through hollow and deceptive philosophy, which depends on human tradition and the basic principles of this world rather than on Christ

 

[Sleeppy]

I believe what we will do with our life does not belong to God but to ourselves. To live in harmony with God's will or not is ours to decide. To be considering as true that people cannot decide for themselves to obey or disobey fits under this warning imo. Colossians 2:8 See to it that no one takes you captive through hollow and deceptive philosophy, which depends on human tradition and the basic principles of this world rather than on Christ

That 'IMO' is important, because that doesn't support your specific 'argument' at all.

John 8:38 'I -- that which I have seen with my Father do speak, and ye, therefore, that which ye have seen with your father -- ye do.'

Jesus very clearly tells them who they ARE.. At the very same time He tells them who He IS. How? The bolded. How does a tree change what it is? It doesn't. It, like us, follow rules (ex. DNA), both external and internal. Everything is either dependent on another thing, or itself is a law. Therefore, there is a source for the breaking of a law. For one, the law is not binding upon the event for whatever reason, (possibly a hierarchy of law?)

 

[savagewind]

That 'IMO' is important, because that doesn't support your specific 'argument' at all.

John 8:38 'I -- that which I have seen with my Father do speak, and ye, therefore, that which ye have seen with your father -- ye do.'

Jesus very clearly tells them who they ARE.. At the very same time He tells them who He IS. How? The bolded. How does a tree change what it is? It doesn't. It, like us, follow rules (ex. DNA), both external and internal. Everything is either dependent on another thing, or itself is a law. Therefore, there is a source for the breaking of a law. For one, the law is not binding upon the event for whatever reason, (possibly a hierarchy of law?)

I don't understand what you said except I think you said I should not have an opinion. To believe everyone is destined and does not have the choice to follow God's commands or not is hollow and human philosophy.

 

[crossfire]

What would someone need their own will for if they are trying to do the will of God?

Self-control over their fleshly desires. Freedom from being enslaved to and overcome by the flesh, and freedom to choose the spirit over the flesh. See Galatians 5.

 

[Sleeppy]

I don't understand what you said except I think you said I should not have an opinion. To believe everyone is destined and does not have the choice to follow God's commands or not is hollow and human philosophy.

Don't take offense. I didn't say you couldn't have an opinion; I said your opinion didn't have specific scriptural support. I could continue to give you specific scriptural support for my position, but I'm not sure why you couldn't understand the arguments already in place.

 

[Sunstone]

What rational grounds is there for the claim that humans have free will? Just curious.

 

[crossfire]

What rational grounds is there for the claim that humans have free will? Just curious.

We can overcome our natural impulses and work to change our own nature.

 

[savagewind]

OK free is not the right word.

Self=determining. It is not without cost. You are all right about that. :sorry1:

To be putting the all of salvation of self in the hands of the Savior means the self is no longer self-determining.

It is putting all one's dependence on someone else. It means ignoring the good advice 'be wise'. To be putting all sovereignty off of self on to someone else is what is to be avoided. I think that's what I meant.

Free will means freedom to decide for our self what to believe. It does not mean without some dependence. I depend on what is told me by the Word of God so I am not 'free'. Right!

 

[savagewind]

I thought of another way of putting it.

It is freely given to everyone to do the best for one's self that circumstances will allow. But it seems to me that some people have decided they do not want it so they give it back to the giver. Let's say the Giver is God. But they would rather think they would like God to determine all that is best for them. "God will do for me what He knows is best" so [therefore] "I do not have to worry about my self-determination".

And really there is no more need to be wise, just to be worthy will be enough because I have given what will happen to me back to The Giver, God.

It seems to me that is what some people are teaching. I am posting so they might think about that.