David1701 Posted December 3, 2020 Group: Royal Member Followers: 8 Topic Count: 15 Topics Per Day: 0.01 Content Count: 5,731 Content Per Day: 3.52 Reputation: 3,524 Days Won: 12 Joined: 11/27/2019 Status: Offline Share Posted December 3, 2020 14 minutes ago, Josheb said: It does not. Look at the sentence after the one put in bold face. It explicitly states, "They freely believe or disbelieve on their own." That is tacit affirmation of free will (or volitional agency or libertarian free will). But, that sentence is in the context of having, allegedly, already been enabled to believe, by "prevenient grace". He is teaching Arminian "freed will", not Pelagian "free will". Arminian "prevenient grace", if such a thing existed, would turn helpless sinners into enabled sinners. At this point, they would now have LFW, at least with regard to believing the gospel, but the Arminian at least teaches that grace is necessary to bring them to that point, which the freewiller does not. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David1701 Posted December 3, 2020 Group: Royal Member Followers: 8 Topic Count: 15 Topics Per Day: 0.01 Content Count: 5,731 Content Per Day: 3.52 Reputation: 3,524 Days Won: 12 Joined: 11/27/2019 Status: Offline Share Posted December 3, 2020 21 minutes ago, GandalfTheWise said: My observation is that many Christians use the term "free will" in the sense of "freed will" or a similar sense which requires God's intervention. That has not been my experience; in fact, such usage would be misleading. The Arminians with whom I have debated are usually very careful to avoid claiming that fallen man has "free will" and to emphasise the need for God's grace; although they stop short of the biblical need to be born again, in order to see or enter the kingdom of God, by faith in Jesus Christ. Quote One can debate the accuracy and potential ambiguity of that usage. However, I think it prudent to take care when decrying free will assuming a Pelagian definition that it will be understood as that by all when there will be those reading the statements who commonly use a different usage. One can of course then drop into a mode of arguing that everyone should adopt a common usage and which one is better or correct, but that won't change common usage different groups use. We should assume that people are speaking truthfully and accurately, unless there is reason to think otherwise. Quote The typical arminian emphasis in use of the term free will that I've commonly observed is to emphasize the universal offering of salvation to all through Christ (with some who will reject that offer) in what is ultimately a denial of reprobation. It's not only a denial of reprobation; but also a denial that all those whom the Father gave to Jesus will come to him. It is a corruption of the gospel, although not as bad as semi-Pelagianism. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GandalfTheWise Posted December 3, 2020 Group: Royal Member Followers: 24 Topic Count: 40 Topics Per Day: 0.02 Content Count: 1,459 Content Per Day: 0.59 Reputation: 2,377 Days Won: 2 Joined: 08/23/2017 Status: Offline Share Posted December 3, 2020 39 minutes ago, David1701 said: That has not been my experience; in fact, such usage would be misleading. The Arminians with whom I have debated are usually very careful to avoid claiming that fallen man has "free will" and to emphasise the need for God's grace; although they stop short of the biblical need to be born again, in order to see or enter the kingdom of God, by faith in Jesus Christ. Wowzers... The arminians I've interacted with over my life are born again Christians and would never deny the need to born again as part of salvation. I've been a Christian since the mid 70s and have spent decades worth of time in both arminian and calvinist ministries and churches. I've known hundreds of Christians in various settings and to various degrees of both viewpoints. I've not heard one deny the need for being born again. I've known some people in mainline churches that are essentially agnostic, atheist, or deist in outlook and join churches for more social and emotional reasons. Some hold to the doctrinal statements of their denomination to some degree and in some likely redefined sense they are comfortable with. In that sense, I could say I've known both arminians and calvinists who would deny the need to be born again. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David1701 Posted December 3, 2020 Group: Royal Member Followers: 8 Topic Count: 15 Topics Per Day: 0.01 Content Count: 5,731 Content Per Day: 3.52 Reputation: 3,524 Days Won: 12 Joined: 11/27/2019 Status: Offline Share Posted December 3, 2020 34 minutes ago, GandalfTheWise said: Wowzers... The arminians I've interacted with over my life are born again Christians and would never deny the need to born again as part of salvation. This is a fairly typical display of inaccurate reading, or lack of understanding (I'm unsure which). I did not say that Arminians deny the need to be born again, as part of salvation. I said that they deny the need to be born again, in order to see and enter the kingdom of God, by faith in Jesus Christ. They place faith in Jesus Christ before being born again, thus putting the cart before the horse and reversing the order given, by the Lord, to Nicodemus. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted December 4, 2020 Share Posted December 4, 2020 The false teaching of Calvism: Source: Weaknesses of Calvinism The false teaching of Pelagius: Source: Weaknesses of Pelagius The false teaching of Semi Pelagianism: Source: Pelagianism vs Semi Pelagianism Semi-pelagianism is a modification of the Pelagianism heresy. According to this position people are fallen, sinners by nature, that they are not free to equally choose God or not, but they are able to make the initial step towards believing in God. Along with semi-Pelagianism is the doctrine of prevenient grace which says that God gives grace to a person, enabling the person to freely make a choice of God. This doctrine was officially condemned by the Council of Orange in 529 A.D. The safest way to approach Biblical doctrine is to read the Bible for yourself, (a well respected and accurate translation) and sees where that leads you. For me, it has lead me away from the New Age Movement infiltrating the Charismatic Movement, away from 5-pt. Calvism, away from Pelagianism and Semi Pelagianism, to an understanding of free will. I have no one to blame but myself when I don't live up to God's expectation when a personal trial occurs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Marathoner Posted December 4, 2020 Group: Royal Member Followers: 16 Topic Count: 73 Topics Per Day: 0.05 Content Count: 10,317 Content Per Day: 7.11 Reputation: 13,350 Days Won: 99 Joined: 05/24/2020 Status: Offline Share Posted December 4, 2020 On 12/1/2020 at 4:15 PM, David1701 said: I have hardly engaged in "ceaseless argumentation"! Jesus was the meekest man on earth. I would invite you to remind yourself of how he dealt with the Pharisees (see Matt. 23, for example), or Herod ("Tell that fox Herod..."). The Lord often said things that corrected their errors and exposed their attitudes, whilst also enraging them (their fault, not His). Just imagine if Jesus came to this forum, incognito, and posted the kind of things that he sometimes said. He'd be warned, then suspended, or sent to "Mars Hill". He is our example... I will speak the truth even though I risk upsetting a dear brother whom I admire, respect, and love. I'm in agreement with your understanding of the scriptures but passion can seize us at times. It can obscure our vision and obstruct judgment. Many years ago the Lord opened my eyes to the truth, revealing how I would be seized by my passion and led astray. I prayed for wisdom that I might discern the time and the season: the time to speak (or write) and earnestly contend, and the season to remain silent. Each one of us stands or falls by the Lord: not by me, you, nor any other man. Our hands can't steady the Ark. It was a difficult lesson to learn and it took time to walk in such a way until I bore that good fruit of patience and self-control, but the Spirit of the Lord is faithful to conform us to the image of Christ from glory to glory. We are the work of His hand, not ours. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GandalfTheWise Posted December 4, 2020 Group: Royal Member Followers: 24 Topic Count: 40 Topics Per Day: 0.02 Content Count: 1,459 Content Per Day: 0.59 Reputation: 2,377 Days Won: 2 Joined: 08/23/2017 Status: Offline Share Posted December 4, 2020 6 hours ago, Josheb said: Gotcha. But the sentence, "Millard Ericsson denies free will," as stated is incorrect. Millard Erickson denied Pelagian free will. Not the same thing. I should have realized something sooner and unfortunately contributed to decreasing the signal to noise ratio on this thread because I didn't. As near as I can tell, there are effectively three (or maybe more) definitions of "free will" being used by people on this site. Free will in a Pelagian sense which is that humans are capable of coming to God on their own without His help. Free will in an Arminian sense which is that prevenient grace allows humans to freely accept or reject God's offer of salvation through Christ. Free will in a Calvinist sense which in essence is limited in scope and does not affect God's election or reprobation of particular individuals. My sense is theologians split hairs trying to carefully define the various uses various Christian groups make of the basic term free will adding adjectives such as compatible and non-compatible (which is as I understand is basically a reflection of the major Arminian/Calvinist difference of whether or not all choices are compatible with divine decree). However, as a practical matter, most Christians just use the term free will as their church or denomination uses it (which is usually some variation of either the Arminian or Calvinist definition) because they've been told that is what the term "free will" really means. That indeed is the de facto state this forum will be in because posters will just show up here using the particular definition of free will that they've been taught. Most are not aware of the different definitions being used. This of course begs the question of what the best course of action to deal with this state of affairs is to improve our communication and reduce misunderstandings, but that is for another thread. I apologize to all on here for not recognizing this sooner and contributing to a level of unhelpful noise on this thread. I was taking some comments as attacks and misrepresentations of fellow Christians. My understanding now is that they were not meant as such, but due to lack of obvious (at least to me) statement that a Pelagian definition of free will was being exclusively used rather than the more common Arminian or Calvinist ones used by most posters, I read into the statements something that was not intended. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David1701 Posted December 4, 2020 Group: Royal Member Followers: 8 Topic Count: 15 Topics Per Day: 0.01 Content Count: 5,731 Content Per Day: 3.52 Reputation: 3,524 Days Won: 12 Joined: 11/27/2019 Status: Offline Share Posted December 4, 2020 (edited) 16 hours ago, Josheb said: Gotcha. But the sentence, "Millard Ericsson denies free will," as stated is incorrect. Millard Erickson denied Pelagian free will. Not the same thing. Alright, I'll concede that, at least regarding believing the gospel. Edited December 4, 2020 by David1701 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David1701 Posted December 4, 2020 Group: Royal Member Followers: 8 Topic Count: 15 Topics Per Day: 0.01 Content Count: 5,731 Content Per Day: 3.52 Reputation: 3,524 Days Won: 12 Joined: 11/27/2019 Status: Offline Share Posted December 4, 2020 14 hours ago, Marathoner said: I will speak the truth even though I risk upsetting a dear brother whom I admire, respect, and love. I'm in agreement with your understanding of the scriptures but passion can seize us at times. It can obscure our vision and obstruct judgment. Many years ago the Lord opened my eyes to the truth, revealing how I would be seized by my passion and led astray. I prayed for wisdom that I might discern the time and the season: the time to speak (or write) and earnestly contend, and the season to remain silent. Each one of us stands or falls by the Lord: not by me, you, nor any other man. Our hands can't steady the Ark. It was a difficult lesson to learn and it took time to walk in such a way until I bore that good fruit of patience and self-control, but the Spirit of the Lord is faithful to conform us to the image of Christ from glory to glory. We are the work of His hand, not ours. I'm not upset at all; and I agree with you. My emotional constitution does not seem to be the same as most people's and some have thought that I could be on the autistic spectrum (I've sometimes wondered that myself). I took an online self-test, but the results were inconclusive. I sometimes look at some of my posts (maybe a day or two later) and think that I was over the top, but it doesn't seem that way at the time. Believe me that I pray about this, but I think that, barring a miracle, it's a permanent, if inconsistent, aspect of my personality. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alive Posted December 4, 2020 Group: Worthy Ministers Followers: 22 Topic Count: 194 Topics Per Day: 0.11 Content Count: 11,054 Content Per Day: 6.48 Reputation: 9,018 Days Won: 36 Joined: 09/12/2019 Status: Offline Birthday: 01/09/1956 Share Posted December 4, 2020 16 minutes ago, David1701 said: I'm not upset at all; and I agree with you. My emotional constitution does not seem to be the same as most people's and some have thought that I could be on the autistic spectrum (I've sometimes wondered that myself). I took an online self-test, but the results were inconclusive. I sometimes look at some of my posts (maybe a day or two later) and think that I was over the top, but it doesn't seem that way at the time. Believe me that I pray about this, but I think that, barring a miracle, it's a permanent, if inconsistent, aspect of my personality. God bless you, brother. The Lord knows these things and covers us. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts