Watchmanwhatofthenight's tags:
Watchmanwhatofthenight reads (1):
Who's reading Watchmanwhatofthenight (8):
The terms free will and volition are NOT synonymous. The term free will means ultimate or absolute freedom, whereas volition simply implies the power of choice.

The will is always subject to the nature of one's being. For God, His will is not absolutely free, but reflects who He is, His attributes. For example, He cannot will to be dishonest or lie. For his creation however, free will is either a state of rebellion or state of obedience.

An awareness of the difference between these terms is necessary to correctly understanding Scriptures. If one substitutes the concept of free will when only volition is meant, the meaning of the verse, the chapter, or the entire Book is altered and that is why pseudo-Christianity results.

In Him we were also chosen, having been predestined according to the plan of Him who works out everything in conformity with purpose of His will, in order that we, who were the first to hope in Christ, might be for the praise of His glory. Ephesians 1:11,12

The Biblical term for freedom of the will can only be understood by studying it from the beginning of the Bible. When you use a few isolated Scripture verses taken out of context you will teach things that do not harmonize with all the teaching of God's Word

Absolute freedom of the will can belong only to God. No law restrains God's will, because He is His own law. Since God is sovereign, no power can overcome His will. He is omnipotent. He "...worketh all things after the counsel of his own will" (Ephesians 1: 11). God's will is irresistible, fixed, and everlasting: "...For who hath resisted his will?" (Romans 9:19). It is everlasting because God does not change: "For I am the Lord, I change not..." (Mal. 3:6). The Lord Jesus Christ, the second Person of the Godhead, is the same yesterday, today, and forever (Hebrews 13:. With God there "...is no variableness, neither shadow of turning" (James 1:17). God's will cannot be changed for the better because God cannot be better. It cannot be changed for the worse because God cannot be less than He is.

God's will is subject to no one, but the will of every man is subject to God. God did not determine to save men on the basis of their will to be saved. Had He so resolved, man's will would determine God's will. But that is impossible because God's freedom indicates that He is under no compulsion outside of Himself. He acts according to the law of His being. God is unable to sin.

" who worketh all things after the counsel of his own will" (Ephesians 1: 11). "For who hath resisted his will?" (Romans 9:19) God does not change: "For I am the Lord, I change not" (Mal. 3:6)

Jesus Christ, the second Person of the Godhead, is the same yesterday, today, and forever (Hebrews 13:

God's will is subject to no one, but the will of every man is subject to God.

God did not determine to save men on the basis of their will to be saved. That would mean man's will would determine God's will. But that is impossible as is under no compulsion outside of Himself. He acts according to the law of His being. God is unablke to sin. Jesus was God. He could not sin even though he was tempted. He is God and the Second Adam. (man in his pre fallen state)

Freedom of the will is an attribute of God alone. Every creature is responsible to Him. Aa a will self-determined will, God's will is the highest freedom. The truth is that freedom in God is immutable self-determination and the freedom of the will but not so with humanity.

Adam was created in a state of uprightness. Uprightness is a higher state than innocence. "...God hath made man upright; but they have sought out many inventions" (Ecclesiastes 7:29) Adam's uprightness was righteousness and holiness in a sense, but it was not absolute. Adam's holiness, righteousness, or uprightness was mutable, because God cannot create God. Whatever God creates must be less than Himself.

Adam was created righteous, he had intellect,emotion and a will. However his will was subject to Gods will as he was not God. Adam had what is theologically called an inclined will.

Adam's will was a free will because it was self-determined but only to the extent that his will was subject to Gods will. That which is not forced from without is free but not absolutely. Adam was responsible to God. God's freedom however, is immutable, but Adam's freedom was a mutable self-determination.

Adam came into the world inclined toward God. Adam did not find himself in a position to choose either the Creator or the creature as an ultimate end. He was inclined toward the Creator. His very uprightness was God-given, and did not proceed from his own ability. In fact, Adam's mutable self-determination led to his fall, and after the fall his will was enslaved to sin.

After his fall, Adam passed from inclination toward God to inclination toward sin.He fell from a state of mutable uprightness.

Since Adam's fall, the will of every person is inclined toward sin by nature. It remains so until the Spirit of God regenerates him. Then, his will is inclined toward God by grace. The work of regeneration in an individual produces as radical a change as the fall caused in Adam. A regenerated man has been created anew in Jesus Christ: "For we are his workmanship, created in Christ Jesus unto good works..." (Ephesians 2:10). The new man "...is renewed in knowledge after the image of him that created him" (Colossians 3:10). "And you hath he quickened, who were dead..." (Ephesians 2:1). "...God ... worketh in you both to will and to do of his good pleasure" (Philippians 2:13). God gives a new heart and a new spirit (Ezek. 36:25-27).

It is not the committing of a sin that makes one a sinner. He is already a sinner before the act is committed. The Lord Jesus Christ identified sin as that which proceeds from the heart "...whosoever looketh on a woman to lust after her hath committed adultery with her already in his heart" (Matthew 5:2.
The desire that precedes the volition is sin.

A volition can change a volition, but it can never change an inclination. One choice can change another, but it cannot change the original desire. A person may choose to commit murder, and before pulling the trigger of the gun, change his mind. He has made a choice. His second choice has counteracted the first, but it did not erase the evil inclination of murder that was in his heart. The inclination can be removed only by God's grace. The power of God alone can overcome and do what man cannot do for himself.

Therefore, the potential to reverse a sinful inclination is not necessary to make a person responsible for the inclination. The only thing necessary is that he originate it. Adam originated his sinful self-inclination. Before the fall, power to self-determine evil was unnecessary to Adam's self-determining holiness, right standing with God.

In his fall, Adam did not choose between God and the creature. Adam's sin in the garden of Eden was not committed in a state of indifference, as though God was on his right and evil desire on his left. He was in a state of uprightness, inclined toward God, but by self-determination he turned from God to evil. That was not a choice between the Creator and the creature. He went from an inclination toward God to an inclination toward evil, and that was his fall.

After the fall, Adam's will was enslaved to sin and had lost its natural liberty. Moral liberty is not essential to natural liberty. A man may choose his wife, profession, home, and so forth, but he does not have the power to choose that which is spiritual. It is not necessary for a man to have spiritual ability in order for his will to act naturally.

Man's acts of will (volition) are two kinds. Actions of the soul that are manifested in physical acts. When one decides to do something and makes movement in that direction. Many follow an act of the soul when they walk the aisle, or stand before a church congregation asserting that they are following Jesus. (2) Actions of soul that occur within the soul itself. This happens when one wills to love God. It cannot be accomplished by the natural man who hates God (Romans 3:8-18; John 3:19-21).

If a person's desire to know the Lord is genuinely motivated by the Spirit of God, he does not seek the Lord in vain (Matthew 7). He who sincerely seeks the Lord gives evidence of the inworking of God's grace and God does not begin anything He cannot bring to completion.

Since the fall, man by nature can do only evil. When a person is born again, however, he has the potential to do good. Although he is strongly inclined to good, he is still tempted and sometimes does evil. In a state of glory this will no longer be the case and man will be inclined only toward good.


del.icio.us Digg reddit StumbleUpon

Comments

  • anonymous said on Jul 23, 2008....
    do u want branded hangdbag?
    pls visit
    high quality, reasonable price
    worth to have a look
  • fearing said on Jul 24, 2008....
    Thanks!  I saw you posted several others that looked interesting too.  I'll be back later today to read - work now.  
  • StupidGenius said on Jul 28, 2008....
    You make all these statements like you know them to be true but none of it has any factual basis. You take all your points from an outdated, inacurate book and then state it as fact. Sorry but that makes no sense to me at all. When I say something I want to be sure that its true and unfortunatly you can never be sure of that.
     
    Man has an illusion of freedom which is monitored, controlled and perpetuated by governments and world leaders. We are not truly free but truly free would not work in a heavily populated world.
     
    SG
  • Watchmanwhatofthenight said on Jul 28, 2008....

    Flag fearing

    Let me know if there is anything that you want to discuss!

  • Watchmanwhatofthenight said on Jul 28, 2008....

    StupidGenius

    I am using the bible as my source for this topic...do you have a problem with the bible as a source of facts???

  • StupidGenius said on Jul 28, 2008....

    Of course there is a problem when using the bible as a source of fact, even the most christian of christians knows the bible is not a reliable source, it is impossible to treat it like a text book of god as it contains no fact at all. Thats like saying Hans Christian Andersons books are factualy correct when they describe fairys etc.

    Would you consider the creationist museum an acurate and reliable guide by which to explain the earths creation?

    SG

  • lidstrom82 said on Jul 29, 2008....
    Don't worry, watchman...SG strongly states his case against religion, perhaps too strongly, and discussion can't happen on his watch because his views don't allow for the free exchange of ideas. He wants proof of God that no one but God can give him, but he's sure God doesn't exist so it effectively proves him right.

    You blatantly challenge the religious SG, yet your personal basis for atheism is a self-fulfilling prophecy? How can we take you seriously like that? Think before you speak, my friend.

    And as far as the Bible containing no fact at all, apparently the prophecy of Israel becoming an independent nation doesn't count? Come on!
  • StupidGenius said on Jul 29, 2008....
    Prophecy? after world war one I could have predicted world war 2. Its not exactly an amazing prophecy??
     
    Why do you have such a problem with my stance on religion? And why do you insist that I need to have an open mind in order to allow a free exchange of ideas?
     
    You visit a doctor because he can heal you, you dont go to the church to fix your broken leg. You go to a shop to buy your food, god dosnt throw it down to you out of the sky. I think the reverse, I think you guys need to be freed from your closed minded approach to the world, I was brought up in a christian faith, I read the bible and now I use my own brain and dictate my own life. I dont need a dusty old book to tell me how to live or what will happen to me if I live a bad life.
     
    You quit another post because you couldnt prove I wasnt god. All I want is for you to look at all the facts and dont just rely on some safe easy reasoning for existance. Its to simple to attribute everything to god.
     
    As for freedom,
     

    “Expose yourself to your deepest fear; after that, fear has no power, and the fear of freedom shrinks and vanishes. You are free.” Jim Morrison

  • Watchmanwhatofthenight said on Jul 30, 2008....

    StupidGenius

    First of all it is only natural for you to respond to the gospel the way you do because the scriptures say that the carnal man is in enmity with God. So I am not moved by your indignence to the gospel.  If I may point out, your source died of a drug over dose from a very foolish lifestlyle so he hardly counts as an athourity on anything pertaining to God. The bible says that a fool does not believe in God but  a wise man looks well to his going.

    As far as the bible as a source, any historian will tell you that Jesus Christ existed and went to trial...that is documented...fact. Also, archeaology proves many of the biblical stories...you need to do your research. Science proves God, particualrily genetics, which now show that man is born a sinner. Why dont you do do some internet research on the topic? Then maybey we can discuss some things.

    Which would you like to discuss first...science? history? or Archaeology?

  • StupidGenius said on Jul 31, 2008....

    All at once

    Science - Science proves evolution of species, natural selection and the way the earth was created (to an extent) it does nothing to prove god in any manner at all. The fact that you just said that is truly laughable.

    History - If we take history as documented evidence that is accumulated and put into order to form a picture of what happened then I don’t think you will find that much evidence of Jesus, any evidence of Jesus you do find is inconsistent and more like a fable or Chinese whisper that changes over time as it is written about. In fact allot of what has been uncovered historically put allot of doubt over the bibles accuracy i.e. the Great Flood, The locust plague, the parting of the red sea. All three of these have been explained without any need for a "God"

    Archaeology - Well you asked for this, Archaeology also uncovered Many hundreds of gods that were worshipped throughout the ages, It also, interestingly enough uncovered Gods or figures of worship that pre-date Jesus yet have the exact same story as is told in the bible, crucifixion, rebirth, miracles, disciples etc.

    Archaeology. History and science do nothing to prove god exists. I suggest you brush up before challenging any part of the above as I know it well my friend.

    SG

  • StupidGenius said on Jul 31, 2008....
    Oh and by the way, how many christian priests have been found to have problems with all kinds of things, are you saying that because someone had a drug problem that everything they ever said is rubbish? The topic of this post is about free will, the above quote is in my view an intereting take on that subject. still i love to talk about "God vs No God" so lets continue if you wish.
     
    SG
  • Watchmanwhatofthenight said on Aug 02, 2008....
     First of all not all Christians are uneducated and believe by blind faith. That is a very unscriptural notion. Jesus proved himself to Thomas when he was a sceptic and he has no problem today proving himself either. However, the problem with atheists is that most of them have at one time had some kind of encounter with religion and fell by the wayside. This was usually caused by some kind of offense. Most atheists are in actuallity really very angry at God and so they go about trying to disprove him as if somehow this compensates for ther rejection or pain they have at having been let down  by circumstances in their lives. Rather very childish really. Even if I could prove to you the existence of God you would deny it anyway because of your anger. Nevertheless, we shall proceed.
     
    Present to me your arguement. State your premise clearly and following that give supporting evidence and examples to back up your premise. Please do not ramble. Be brief and to the point.
  • StupidGenius said on Aug 02, 2008....

    Firstly, you clearly have little understanding of what it means to be Atheist. You make a sweeping generalisation about the type of people we are by saying

    "Most of them have at one time had some kind of encounter with religion and fell by the wayside. This was usually caused by some kind of offence. Most atheists are in actuality really very angry at God..."

    This is simply rubbish. An Atheists view on God is that we do not believe he exists, We do not believe he is needed in order to explain the universe, we believe science is the key to explaining the universe and we believe we are free to live without the restricting muzzle that is religion.

    Contrary to the popular religious beliefs that we believe in only helping ourselves, being greedy, being completely care free or that we don’t respect laws so commit crimes because we fear no ultimate punishment is also rubbish.

    Atheists lead normal, happy, loving, family orientated, forgiving, trusting, law abiding and compassionate lives just the same as anyone of religion.

    Take that as a preface to my argument. It is intended to make clear that we are not irresponsible monsters.

    SG

  • StupidGenius said on Aug 02, 2008....

    An improbable being

    "God" would have to be an immensely complex and intelligent being in order to create everything in this universe. If "God" is this incredibly immense intelectual/powerfull being then that means that in turn he must have been created by something even more immense, powerful and intelligent otherwise we are left with only one option and that is that he just popped into existence one day and created everything. This is the part I find arrogant. To just make an assumption that he popped into existence is crazy as there is no factual or evidential basis to make such a claim.

    It is however immensely more probable that the universe already contained the building blocks for evolution ie bacteria, water, oxygen etc and after these elements arrived on this planet (over  many millions of years) they created an environment which encouraged life to grow and evolve into the species we currently are.

    Evolution

    A man of god can say "well how can you prove evolution if our species hasn’t changed over the years" A good question but one that can be easily answered. Frozen bodies of early man indicate differences in foot size, skin toughness, muscle tone, brain size, skeletal shape and structure. All these factors are clearly linked to the way they lived. I.e. they would have to hunt for food and had no shoes so the soles of their feet were tougher etc. They had only a small understanding of the earth and a lack of education hence brain size and activity being lower. They were driven to mate out a need for survival so mating rituals were not as complex as ours are today (Bash woman on the head, take her to bed etc) if you had more children then your family/tribe was stronger and so survived longer.

    Ill leave it there for a moment to await any response you might have. I wish to keep this argument civil.

    SG

  • Watchmanwhatofthenight said on Aug 05, 2008....
    First of all, it is just plain foolish to not acknowledge GODS existence. Life is so uniquely designed and organized, that it is hardly likely that it just popped into existence.  As for evolution, it has his merit, but adaptation does not mean transforming from one species to another.

    The main premise of biology is that "life begets life," or that all cells come from pre-existing cells. Common features in all organisms are duplication of genetic information( DNA), division of DNA into cells of like kind (mitosis, meiosis, binary fission, ) and also in some species, division of cytoplasm ( the substance of the cell that  moves the cell and gives it shape)

    I have no problem with survival of the fittest, that is true, but there is no proof for change of one species into another.




     
  • StupidGenius said on Aug 06, 2008....

    Firstly don’t be so lazy. To assume that because things are so complex in our world and universe a higher being must have created it is not a valid reason for not investigating it. If you make this lazy assumption you are no better than the earliest of man who assumed that there was a god simply because they could see a bright light in the sky (Sun) and couldn’t explain why.

    Your main point about evolution of species is very simple to answer. Throughout our evolutionary history new species have been born in one of two ways. 1. The growth of a newborn creature has mutated on a molecular level to the extent that it cant be considered to be of the species it was born from (a mule is a new species, it is a hybrid of a horse and a donkey) and 2. two different species combine to create a third (New) species.

    See this source http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2005/07/0727_050727_evolution.html

    To point out another fatal error in your reply. Evolution is not the theory that life just popped into existence... I think you will find that to be a creationists argument.

    SG
  • StupidGenius said on Aug 12, 2008....
    You must be on holiday or researching this topic.. ill check back later
     
    SG

Comment on "Does mankind have a free will?"

Christian faith Christ philosophy religion (Click to add tags below)

(Separate tags using commas, for example: New York, dating, vegetarian)