Was Adam Imparted Free Will From The Beginning Of Creation?

[Kermos]

@Enoch111 @Taken @Renniks @GISMYS_7 @Backlit @Riverwalker @BARNEY BRIGHT @TLHKAJ @HisLife @Ronald Nolette @post @Wynona @Iconoclast @CharismaticLady @MatthewG @Abaxvahl @BeyondET @RLT63 @Rightglory @Bible_Patrol @Jim B @Johann @Gilligan @Behold @Pierac @n2thelight @Eternally Grateful @Titus @marks @Ernest T. Bass

Did God's Plan A Fail - Forcing God To Spontaneously Develop Plan B?​

According to the "good Adam" teaching, God had an original plan for Adam to live forever in the paradise on earth where Adam was made, and it is just termed the Good Plan until Adam ate the fruit.
I equate "spiritually alive", "upright", "perfect", "righteous" and the like with "good" for the purposes of this sidebar.

Advocating the "good Adam" precept advocates the concept of good people converting to evil people; in other words, a GOOD Adam conquering a GOOD command of God in order to convert to an EVIL Adam.

The "good Adam" precept goes with the GOOD God being surprised by the GOOD Adam destroying the GOOD God's GOOD Plan A of the GOOD Adam living forever in God's GOOD paradise, so the GOOD God in a panic abandoned the GOOD Plan A to develop a GOOD Plan B to expel the EVIL Adam from paradise into a CURSED land with the GOOD promise of a Redeemer. The GOOD Plan A stopped being GOOD Plan A, so that means GOOD Plan A converted to EVIL plan A since the GOOD Adam caused GOOD Plan A to error out.

So, the "good Adam" precept conveys that God unwittingly created everything only to have it catastrophically crumble right in front of God. By the hand of man taken away from God. With God at the mercy of man. Unmercy perhaps being a better word.

This means GOOD God produced an imperfect plan, formerly GOOD Plan A now EVIL plan A; in other words, the GOOD God's GOOD Plan A failed with a spiritually alive Adam lost to be spiritually dead; in other words , the "good Adam" precept has it that GOOD Adam thwarted GOOD God, so GOOD God was too small to preserve GOOD Plan A, so GOOD God converted to EVIL god (this is following to where the "good Adam" precept leads), and EVIL god was incapable of preserving a spiritually alive person.

See that the "good Adam" precept has man snatching the "very good" of creation right out of God's hand; not only that, the man acts self-destructively during the snatching.

The "good Adam" precept has a good man doing the action of an evil man, so that is not a good man.

The "good Adam" doctrine leads to a different god than revealed by the Word of God.

The "good Adam" precept grossly distorts good and evil. The "good Adam" precept is confusion in the knowledge of good and evil.

In conclusion, the supporters of the "good Adam" precept advocate for good people converting to evil people which is absent from the entirety of the scripture; on the other hand, the Word of God is replete with God converting evil people into good people in Christ.

Moreover, God is good, and God's Way is good. Man is evil, yet God works all things out for good for the man of God's Way.

In actuality, with God there is no plan B - God is mightier than that. God's plan for the Redemption of Mankind through the Christ succeeds and is victorious, and this is God's plan before the foundation of the world.

The original post contains the Truth (John 14:6) which shows richly in scripture, Adam was not imparted free will, and no man thereafter was imparted free will either.

 

[Johann]

SEE "APART FROM ME YOU CAN DO NOTHING" (JOHN 15:5).

4) "For without me ye can do nothing." (hoti choris emou ou dunasthe poiein ouden) "Because apart from me you all are not able to do anything," Php_1:11; Php_4:13. Therefore none should glory in the fruit he bears, except the glorying be in Christ Jesus, Gal_2:20; 1Th_5:16; Php_4:4; 1Co_1:29; 1Co_3:21-23. The idea here is one can do nothing that will glorify God, except he be a doer of the Word.

Are you a DOER of God's word?

1Co 3:11 For other foundation can no man lay than that is laid, which is Jesus Christ.
1Co 3:12 Now if any man build upon this foundation gold, silver, precious stones, wood, hay, stubble;
1Co 3:13 Every man's work shall be made manifest: for the day shall declare it, because it shall be revealed by fire; and the fire shall try every man's work of what sort it is.
1Co 3:14 If any man's work abide which he hath built thereupon, he shall receive a reward.
1Co 3:15 If any man's work shall be burned, he shall suffer loss: but he himself shall be saved; yet so as by fire.
1Co 3:16 Know ye not that ye are the temple of God, and that the Spirit of God dwelleth in you?
1Co 3:17 If any man defile the temple of God, him shall God destroy; for the temple of God is holy, which temple ye are.
1Co 3:18 Let no man deceive himself. If any man among you seemeth to be wise in this world, let him become a fool, that he may be wise.
1Co 3:19 For the wisdom of this world is foolishness with God. For it is written, He taketh the wise in their own craftiness.
1Co 3:20 And again, The Lord knoweth the thoughts of the wise, that they are vain.


Rev 20:11 And I saw a great white throne, and him that sat on it, from whose face the earth and the heaven fled away; and there was found no place for them.
Rev 20:12 And I saw the dead, small and great, stand before God; and the books were opened: and another book was opened, which is the book of life: and the dead were judged out of those things which were written in the books, according to their works.
Rev 20:13 And the sea gave up the dead which were in it; and death and hell delivered up the dead which were in them: and they were judged every man according to their works.
Rev 20:14 And death and hell were cast into the lake of fire. This is the second death.
Rev 20:15 And whosoever was not found written in the book of life was cast into the lake of fire.

Rom 2:16 In the day when God shall judge the secrets of men by Jesus Christ according to my gospel.

Let me know if you are a Calvinist--BEFORE any further discussions-

as it is, I have my hands full with a Orthodox Person who is debunking everything=our Bibles, Christ, resurrection-everything.

 

[Titus]

I wrote not of inability to make all choices, but, specifically, the Word of God says man does not choose Jesus the Only Good God with "you did not choose Me, but I chose you" (John 15:16)

Calvinism makes God guilty for every person who is lost in eternal hell.
Kermos' religion does not allow man to have any ability to turn to God and be saved.
The consequence of this is man is not culpable for being lost.
Only God is guilty for every single lost soul because we cannot choose not to go to hell.
Nor can we choose to go to heaven.
God has total control over our destiny. Therefore man only does what God ordained him to do.
In calvinism if you go to hell it is not that you chose to reject Jesus. God chose hell for you.
This is the only possibility if freewill does not exist.

In judgement day every person will give an answer for their rejection of Jesus.
But if calvinism is true man has a legitimate excuse.
When God demands we give an answer for why we rejected the gospel.
Our answer can only be, "Because Lord you did not chose me for election, Lord you did not give me the ability to choose you over my totally depraved nature that I was born with".

Only those indoctrinated into this wicked theology would not question whether this is morally right for God not to give us the ability to choose to believe the gospel of Jesus Christ.

To those not yet indoctrinated, it should be obvious that we are but robots preprogrammed to eternal life or eternal destruction if this reformed theology be true.
Calvinism makes God into a immoral monster that desires to hate some and only love a minority.
Kermos' god is sadistic.

Just as Rachael Slick has no control over her believing in the god of calvinism and now believing in atheism because of no freewill.
This proves calvinism is a religion without any assurance of ones salvation.
Kermos' cannot know if God has ordained him to the same fate as Rachael Slick. He has zero control over the spiritual choices he makes.

The overwhelming majority of calvinist that strongly believe in this false doctrine believe they are elected, loved by their god.

I've only met one calvinist that believes his god hates him and is without hope.
He used to come on this forum. He called himself Lifelong sinner.
He is a humble calvinist. I always loved His honesty. He is an outlier to this religion.

The Bible teaches freewill.
A Christian must keep himself in Gods love,
Jude 21,
- keep yourselves in the love of God, looking for the mercy of our Lord Jesus Christ unto eternal life.

And give diligence to make our calling and election sure 2Peter 1:10,
- Therefore brethren be even more diligent to make your call and election sure for if(freewill) you do these things you will never stumble.

Lest our reception of divine grace be in vain, 2Corinthians 6:1,
- We then as workers together with Him also plead with you not to receive the gift of God in vain.

These verses prove that Gods grace is not irrevocable.

More proof Calvin's teaching on grace being irrevocable is error, we have freewill to choose.
Paul taught Christians can fall from grace, Galatians 5:4,
- You have become estranged from Christ, you who attempt to be justified by law; you have fallen from grace.

Christian's can fall back from Gods favor because of our freewill.
Hebrews 12:15,
- looking carefully lest anyone fall short of the glory of God, lest any root of bitterness springing up cause trouble and this many become defiled.

Hebrews 12:15 is spoken to the undefiled i.e. the elect of God. Only the elect can become defiled as the passage warns. The lost are already defiled.

Also Calvin is in error of his teaching that Gods grace is Unconditional.

This is a quote from Sarrels in 1978, Sarrels is a five point calvinist.
" We believe that there is no warrant whatsoever for the view that John 3:16 lays down faith as a condition to be performed by the lost alien sinner in order to attain spiritual eternal life ".

Again Sarrels says:
" God, without the use of the gospel or any other human means, will, save all of His redeemed ones in every land and in every age ".

Calvinism teaches that everyone of Gods elect are saved without the gospel of Christ!!!
They have to teach this because of the logical conclusion of their error on salvation being unconditional. Sarrels includes Hindus, Muslims, Sheiks, Buddists, Atheists as saved, elected without hearing or believing the gospel.

Paul was certainly not a calvinist for he proclaimed that it is the gospel and only the gospel that is Gods power to save,
Romans 1:16,
- for I am not ashamed of the gospel of Christ for it is the power of God to salvation for everyone who believes for the jew first and also for the greek.
- for in it the righteousness of God is revealed from faith to faith as it is written, the just shall live by faith.

Paul makes himself clear that no one can be saved in another religion or unbelief as the calvinist religion teaches. Calvinism is unbiblical man made false teaching.
There is not one passage that teaches those who do not know or believe the gospel will be saved.

Paul again was not a calvinist,
2Thessalonians 1:8,
- In flaming fire taking vengeance on those who do not know God and on those who do not obey the gospel of our Lord Jesus Christ.

Paul taught we must believe in Jesus and by His gospel we are born again.
Calvinism teaches you cannot believe in Jesus(no freewill).
Therefore God does the believing for you.
This takes all responsibility off of mankind and puts the accountability on God.

1Corinthians 4:15,
- for though you might have ten thousand instructors in Christ, yet you do not have many fathers, for in Christ Jesus I have begotten you through the gospel.

A question Kermos cannot answer,

A common refrain from Calvinist's today is "You just dont understand calvinism"
Or "If you only understood, you'd believe what we believe"

The real reason so many do not understand calvinism is because calvinism is nonsense.
You cannot make sense out of nonsense.

This is because calvinism makes many scriptures unintelligible and contradictory.
Kermos, question: If God chose Jacob for salvation and rejected Esau before he was born (as calvinist's believe God does to billions today)
Then in what meaningful way does God love the world or desire that all men be saved and come to the knowledge of the truth?
1Timothy 2:3-6,
- for this is good and acceptable in the sight of God our Savior, who desires all men to be saved and to come to the knowledge of the truth.

Kermos uses "proof texts" like John 15:16 that calvinism is Biblical.
Kermos only proves he does not understand the verses he uses, for calvinism is against the Biblical gospel of Jesus Christ.

 

[Kermos]

One of the most respected debaters of reformed theology today is Matt Slick.
Matt Slicks daughter believed many many years that she like her father was elect.
She was taught from her father Matt Slick.
She still to this day interprets scripture as her dad taught her through the eyes of men like Augustine and John Calvin.
She never believed that she had the ability to believe.
...snip...

You can claim my "pride" is why I say I am elected but it proves nothing.

Rachael Slick had no "pride" thinking she choose God through free will.
Yet just like you, was convinced she had the true interpretation of the Scriptures.

Rachael is no longer a believer in God. She is now an outspoken atheist.

Since you are nothing more than a preprogrammed robot kermos.
God may do the same to you as "he" did to Rachael Slick.

Convince her she was elect, then later in life ordain that she deny her faith and be shown to be a true reprobate bound for eternal hell as the true purpose/destiny your god chose for her.


There is zero assurance of salvation in kermos' religion.

Kermos, God is controlling every thing you believe when it comes to faith in God.

You have no power no freewill to choose to be a "christian" anymore than Racael Slick has chosen to be a calvinist now turned atheist.


It's sad you are blind to your own doctrine's reality.

If God is so cruel that He does not allow anyone to be saved by there own will.
Then it must be true that anyone who thinks they are saved can be wrong because THEY HAVE NO ABILITY TO EFFECT WHAT GOD CHOOSES FOR THEM.

Your god, Kermos HATES BABIES, HATES MEN AND WOMEN BEFORE THEY WERE EVEN BORN! Creates some only for the purpose of eternal hell.

How can anyone know having no freewill no ability to give their life to God, that they are loved by this god? You cannot know because your god is full of hate for some AND THERE IS NOTHING YOU OR ANYONE CAN DO ANYTHING ABOUT IT.

Can you trust a God that may hate you Kermos? Rachael believed that she was loved by this same god that you have put your trust in.

You have no assurance that your fate will not be the same as Rachael Slick.

God may have given you strong delusion Kermos.
You may actually be hated by your god. He has blinded you so that you might be deceived.

2Thessalonians 2:10-11,
- and with unrighteous deception among those who perish because they did not receive the love of the truth, that they might be saved.
- and for this reason God will send them strong delusion that they should believe the lie.


Kermos, Rachael was deceived and now is deceived into believing there is no God.
What fate has your god determined for Kermos? You cannot know!

Last, Kermos I believe that Jesus Christ is God!
I believe that He was crucified on a cross by His own brethren!
I believe that He rose from the dead!
I believe that He is God in the flesh and that ONLY THROUGH HIM CAN MAN BE SAVED AND HAVE HOPE OF ETERNAL LIFE.
I Love Jesus more than I love my own father mother sister brother.
I will die for Jesus just as the apostles were martyred for him.
I am a true believer in Christ!!!!

And I chose to believe the gospel by my freewill that God gave me.

In your theology aka calvinism this is impossible!

You keep saying I'm unsaved.
Guess what Kermos?
Every time you calim I'm unsaved. You are saying UNSAVED NON-ELECT REPROBATES CAN BELIEVE IN JESUS!!!!

You forgot your religions doctrines all of a sudden?

Remember this passage?
1Corinthians 12:3,
- Therefore I make known to you that no one speaking by the Spirit of God calls Jesus accursed and no one can say Jesus is Lord except by the Holy Spirit.

Titus: I believe Jesus is Lord with all my heart.
With all my spirit.
With all my soull!

I am living proof calvinism is a false religion that teaches the doctrines of men.

Calvinism does not allow the "unregenerate as Kermos claims I am" to believe in Jesus!
Yet here I am!

Conclusion: Total depravity also means total inability to believe in Jesus.
NO FREEWILL TO CHOOSE GOD.

I am living proof this is false doctrine.
I studied my way into being a believer in Christ by my freewill.

Calvinism teaches christianity is a direct miraculous miracle done to you, that you cannot play any part in your faith.

The Bible teaches faith comes from learning through the rational minds God has given us,

Romans 10:17,
John 20:30-31,
- and truly Jesus did many other signs in the presence of His disciples which are not written in this book; but these are written that you may believe that Jesus is the Christ the Son of God and that believing you may have  life in His name.

Faith cometh by hearing and hearing by the WORD OF GOD.

This post extends post #1,720, @Titus.

Let us visit the 3 passages you presented as support for free-will, and a 4th passage you presented to disprove Christian dogma that man is depraved.

You quoted the Apostle Paul as your support that man is in control without delusional depravity in man's free-will:

and in all deceitfulness of the unrighteousness in those perishing, because the love of the truth they did not receive for their being saved, and because of this shall God send to them a working of delusion, for their believing the lie.
(2 Thessalonians 2:10-11)
​

Several key points are in 2 Thessalonians 2:10-11:

• those unrighteous persons believe a lie, and that lie is explained by Paul as "Let no one in any way deceive you, for it will not come unless the apostasy comes first, and the man of lawlessness is revealed, the son of destruction, who opposes and exalts himself above every so-called god or object of worship, so that he takes his seat in the temple of God, displaying himself as being God" (2 Thessalonians 2:3-4), and further down in this post "the man of lawlessness" (2 Thessalonians 2:3-4) is related to Free-willian philosophers regarding 1 Corinthians 12:3 thus bringing the Spiritual Truth of 2 Thessalonians 2:10-11 into sight.
• free-will is not mentioned, so free-will is not in 2 Thessalonians 2:10-11; therefore, only a delusionally depraved person adds free-will to 2 Thessalonians 2:10-11;[/i].
• human choice is not mentioned, so human choice is not in 2 Thessalonians 2:10-11; therefore, only a delusionally depraved person adds human choice to 2 Thessalonians 2:10-11.
• no intrinsic power of man is mentioned, so the intrinsic power of man is not in 2 Thessalonians 2:10-11; therefore, only a delusionally depraved person adds a intrinsic power of man to 2 Thessalonians 2:10-11.
• the word "receive" defined by example
  1. The woman received a punch to her face dislocating her septum - not by choice - but in the fury of her assailant’s surprise attack.
  2. The pedestrian received a series of traumatic injuries - not by choice - but a result of the car jumping the curb.
  3. A lover receives a love letter - not by choice - but in gladness.
  So, in 2 Thessalonians 2:10-11, the opposite of receive occurs with receive meaning a thing that unavoidably came in from a source to a recipient - receive is not a choice like accept - receive just happens to the recipient; therefore, those unrighteous persons "they did not receive" from God "the love of the truth for their being saved", yet God is the Supplier of love (1 John 4:7) and God is the truth (John 14:6).
• those unrighteous persons are explained by the Apostle Peter with "the Lord knows how to rescue the godly from temptation, and to keep the unrighteous under punishment for the day of judgment, and especially those who indulge the flesh in its corrupt desires and despise authority, daring, self-willed, they do not tremble when they revile angelic majesties" (2 Peter 2:9-10), so those unrighteous persons despise the authority of Jesus while those unrighteous persons also are daringly self-willed; therefore, you Free-willian Philosophers self-willingly say "I chose Jesus" in your despising the exclusive authority of King Jesus who says "you did not choose Me, but I chose you" (John 15:16) thus in your heart you steal the exclusive glory of God for the salvation of man.
• those unrighteous persons are in the first state of being for every person which includes "The heart is deceitful above all things, and desperately wicked: who can know it?" (Jeremiah 17:9), and it is written "Behold, His servants, He does not trust" (Job 4:18), so any variation of "I chose to believe in the Gospel of Christ" by a free-willian is not trusted by God; moreover, IN GRACIOUSNESS, GOD EXCLUSIVELY DELIVERS MAN FROM MAN'S SELF-WILLED DECEITFUL HEART BY GOD CAUSING THE NEW BIRTH OF MAN FOR THE WORD OF GOD SAYS "I WILL GIVE YOU A NEW HEART AND PUT A NEW SPIRIT WITHIN YOU; AND I WILL REMOVE THE HEART OF STONE FROM YOUR FLESH AND GIVE YOU A HEART OF FLESH" (EZEKIEL 36:26).
• the power of God is explicitly mentioned in that God sends to them a working of delusion, so the exclusive power of God is in 2 Thessalonians 2:10-11.

2 Thessalonians 2:10-11 is a proof text of the depravity of man, and 2 Thessalonians 2:10-11 is no proof text of free-will.

My brother John wrote "Beloved, do not believe every spirit, but test the spirits to see whether they are from God, because many false prophets have gone out into the world" (1 John 4:1), so we are seeing that your spirit is not from God, but we need to continue to test your spirit.

Continued to post #1,725

 

[Kermos]

continued from post #1,724, @Titus.

You quoted Paul as support for your delusional free-will. Paul wrote:

Therefore I make known to you that no one speaking by the Spirit of God says, “Jesus is accursed”; and no one can say, “Jesus is Lord,” except by the Holy Spirit.
(1 Corinthians 12:3)
​

Several key points are in 1 Corinthians 12:3:

• the word "Lord" in "Jesus is Lord" also means "Master", so Paul's writings reveal that a Christian says "Jesus is Master totally in control while I am a slave entirely dependent upon my Master" (Ephesians 2:1-10, Romans 6:22); therefore, any person who says "I chose to believe in Jesus so Jesus must provide me with salvation" such a person claims to be master over Jesus because that person thinks Jesus must comply with the person's command for salvation - Free-willian Philosophers are "the man of lawlessness" "who" "exalts himself" over Jesus (2 Thessalonians 2:3-4) WHICH SHOWS "THE LIE" IN 2 THESSALONIANS 2:10-11) IS THE FREE-WILLIAN PHILOSOPHY WICKEDLY EXALTING MAN OVER GOD AND SAVIOR JESUS CHRIST!
• free-will is not mentioned, so free-will is not in 1 Corinthians 12:3; therefore, only a delusionally depraved person adds free-will to 1 Corinthians 12:3[/i].
• human choice is not mentioned, so human choice is not in 1 Corinthians 12:3; therefore, only a delusionally depraved person adds human choice to 1 Corinthians 12:3.
• no intrinsic power of man is mentioned, so the intrinsic power of man is not in 1 Corinthians 12:3; therefore, only a delusionally depraved person adds a intrinsic power of man to 1 Corinthians 12:3.
• the power of God is explicitly mentioned in that the Holy Spirit of God causes Christians to say “Jesus is Lord", so the exclusive power of God manifests in us Christians per Paul' writing in 1 Corinthians 12:3.

1 Corinthians 12:3 is a proof text of the absolute Sovereignty of God and man's utter dependency upon God for man to testify that Jesus is Lord, THANK YOU JESUS, hallelujah, praise God! Yet 1 Corinthians 12:3 is no proof text of free-will.

You think you call Jesus "Lord" by your free-will, so your heart adulterates Paul's writing thusly:

Therefore I make known to you that no one speaking by the Spirit of God says, “Jesus is accursed”; and no one can say, “Jesus is Lord,” except by man's free-will
(the word of Titus - based on Titus' quoted explanation of 1 Corinthians 12:3).
​

The Word of God says "Not everyone who says to Me, ‘Lord, Lord,’ will enter the kingdom of heaven, but he who does the will of My Father who is in heaven will enter. Many will say to Me on that day, ‘Lord, Lord, did we not prophesy in Your name, and in Your name cast out demons, and in Your name perform many miracles?’ And then I will declare to them, ‘I never knew you; DEPART FROM ME, YOU WHO PRACTICE LAWLESSNESS.’" (Matthew 7:21-23).

A person must be born of God (John 3:3-8) in order to be controlled by God in order to say "Jesus is Lord" in Truth (John 14:6).

No Scripture states that man was imparted free-will, so any person who says "my freewill that God gave me" is not in the Truth (John 14:6).

Your spirit, under the testing to be done according to the Apostle John (1 John 4:1), your spirit practices the lawlessness of not honoring the will of the Father who says "This is my beloved Son, with whom I am well pleased; listen to Him" (Matthew 17:5), and Lord Jesus says "you did not choose Me, but I chose you" (John 15:16), yer you say "I chose to believe the gospel by my freewill that God gave me" (the word of Titus), but we need to continue to test your spirit.

You quoted John and Paul as support for you yourself controlling your faith (a.k.a. your belief) by you working in your free-will to cause yourself to choose to believe in Jesus whom the Father has sent. John wrote:

Therefore many other signs Jesus also performed in the presence of the disciples, which are not written in this book; but these have been written so that you may believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God; and that believing you may have life in His name.
(John 20:30-31)
​

And Paul wrote:

So faith comes from hearing, and hearing by the word of Christ.
(Romans 10:17)
​

Several key points are in John 20:30-31 and Romans 10:17:

• the Christ of us Christians says "This is the work of God, that you believe in Him whom He has sent" (John 6:29), so the belief/believe in John 20:30-31 and Romans 10:17 is imparted, controlled, formed into us Christians by the act of God, so anyone who says "I chose to believe the gospel by my freewill that God gave me" rejects the Word of God and does not receive the Word of God.
• free-will is not mentioned, so free-will is not in John 20:30-31 nor Romans 10:17; therefore, only a delusionally depraved person adds free-will to John 20:30-31 and/or Romans 10:17[/i].
• human choice is not mentioned, so human choice is not in John 20:30-31 nor Romans 10:17; therefore, only a delusionally depraved person adds human choice to John 20:30-31 and/or Romans 10:17.
• no intrinsic power of man is mentioned, so the intrinsic power of man is not in John 20:30-31 nor Romans 10:17; therefore, only a delusionally depraved person adds a intrinsic power of man to John 20:30-31 and/or Romans 10:17.
• the power of God is mentioned in that
• the the Apostle Paul wrote "by grace you have been saved through faith; and that not of yourselves, it is the gift of God; not as a result of works, so that no one may boast, for we are His work" (Ephesians 2:8-10), so the faith/belief/believe in John 20:30-31 and Romans 10:17 is imparted, controlled, formed into us Christians by the act of God, so anyone who says "I chose to believe the gospel by my freewill that God gave me" is adulterating Apostolic testimony about belief/faith in John 20:30-31 and/or Romans 10:17.

You with your spirit believe the lie mentioned in 2 Thessalonians 2:10-11, see 1 John 4:1.

This post shows the free-will delusion in it's wicked opposition to the Word of God!

Continued to post #1,726

 

[Kermos]

Continued from post #1,725, @Titus.

BLESSED ASSURANCE

You continue practicing your lawlessness of contempt against the Word of God by your writing of "You have no assurance" and before that "I claim God never let's go of His chosen elect" yet you claim the opposite before and after, and moving on to before that ”Kermos’ false religion has NO assurance of salvation” and before that ”Your religion has no assurance of salvation.” with ”That means God may someday do the same to you.” against the Word of God, but your deception is evident because the following Word of God was proclaimed to you in response to your previous writings:

Great is my God, Jesus Christ NEVER lets go of us, His own, for my Savior says “My sheep hear My voice, and I know them, and they follow Me; and I give eternal life to them, and they will never perish; and no one will snatch them out of My hand. My Father, who has given them to Me, is greater than all; and no one is able to snatch them out of the Father’s hand. I and the Father are one” (John 10:27-30). PRAISE JESUS! HALLELUJAH! ALL GLORY AND PRAISE AND HONOR TO MY KING! I am nothing without you, Lord Jesus.

My God never lets go of His own chosen people including me, through the calm and through the storm, Jesus my Lord never lets go!

Praise Jesus for the assurance of being saved from the wrath of God which He alone delivers the saints!

SO, YOU BEAR THE SIN OF BEARING FALSE WITNESS (EXODUS 20:16).

The original post contains the Truth (John 14:6) which shows richly in scripture, Adam was not imparted free will, and no man thereafter was imparted free will either.

 

[Titus]

Great is my God, Jesus Christ NEVER lets go of us, His own, for my Savior says “My sheep hear My voice, and I know them, and they follow Me; and I give eternal life to them, and they will never perish; and no one will snatch them out of My hand. My Father, who has given them to Me, is greater than all; and no one is able to snatch them out of the Father’s hand. I and the Father are one” (John 10:27-30). PRAISE JESUS! HALLELUJAH! ALL GLORY AND PRAISE AND HONOR TO MY KING! I am nothing without you, Lord Jesus.

My God never lets go of His own chosen people including me, through the calm and through the storm, Jesus my Lord never lets go!

Praise Jesus for the assurance of being saved from the wrath of God which He alone delivers the saints!

SO, YOU BEAR THE SIN OF BEARING FALSE WITNESS (EXODUS 20:16).

The original post contains the Truth (John 14:6) which shows richly in scripture, Adam was not imparted free will, and no man thereafter was imparted free will either.

Notice that Rachael Slick said THE EXACT SAME THINGS AS KERMOS SAYS IN THE ABOVE QUOTE!

Kermos, do you not see that your faith that you are elected is in what YOU believe and in what YOU say?

I say I'm elect. Fact I know I am.
You say your elect.

If I asked you to prove to me your elect, you would say Because I do this Because I believe these verses.

You, you, you, you!!!! It's all what you say and what you think!

Your faith is in yourself. You believe your elect because of what YOU say and do.

Your religion does not allow you to do or say anything that can change Gods Sovereign foreordained will!

You're n the same boat as Rachael Slick.
You will never know until you face God in judgement if you have been saved.
The only people who would be convinced they are elect in a religion that does not allow man to play any part in his election, is the arrogant, prideful man.

 

[Titus]

Continued from post #1,725, @Titus.

BLESSED ASSURANCE

You continue practicing your lawlessness of contempt against the Word of God by your writing of "You have no assurance" and before that "I claim God never let's go of His chosen elect" yet you claim the opposite before and after, and moving on to before that ”Kermos’ false religion has NO assurance of salvation” and before that ”Your religion has no assurance of salvation.” with ”That means God may someday do the same to you.” against the Word of God, but your deception is evident because the following Word of God was proclaimed to you in response to your previous writings:

Great is my God, Jesus Christ NEVER lets go of us, His own, for my Savior says “My sheep hear My voice, and I know them, and they follow Me; and I give eternal life to them, and they will never perish; and no one will snatch them out of My hand. My Father, who has given them to Me, is greater than all; and no one is able to snatch them out of the Father’s hand. I and the Father are one” (John 10:27-30). PRAISE JESUS! HALLELUJAH! ALL GLORY AND PRAISE AND HONOR TO MY KING! I am nothing without you, Lord Jesus.

My God never lets go of His own chosen people including me, through the calm and through the storm, Jesus my Lord never lets go!

Praise Jesus for the assurance of being saved from the wrath of God which He alone delivers the saints!

SO, YOU BEAR THE SIN OF BEARING FALSE WITNESS (EXODUS 20:16).

The original post contains the Truth (John 14:6) which shows richly in scripture, Adam was not imparted free will, and no man thereafter was imparted free will either.

Explain to me Kermos how and why one should put their trust in a god that hates His creation based on no freewill ability of the individual to choose to do right?

Why put faith in a god that may hate you and only desire that you be deceived into thinking as you do that he loves you.

btw, you think he does because you believe in Jesus.
I believe in Jesus and His word, John 5:24.

Your arguments for election always go back to YOU.
Yet Rachael Slick said the same things you say.

Fact of logic: If God really hates us, and gives us no ability to believe and repent by our freewill.
Then this god cannot be trusted in that he loves individuals that claim they are loved by him.
Just as Rachael Slick claimed she was loved by him.

What you say and believe today Kermos is not your freewill. It is your god determining for you. A god that may not yet revealed to you his hatred for you.

 

[Titus]

Kermos' religion makes God guilty for those who do not believe and go to hell because God only cherry picks certain individuals to give them faith, others He withholds faith from them.
The Bible teaches that we must do the believing and that is why we are guilty for not believing.

so the faith/belief/believe in John 20:30-31 and Romans 10:17 is imparted, controlled, formed into us Christians by the act of God, so anyone who says "I chose to believe the gospel by my freewill that God gave me" is adulterating Apostolic testimony about belief/faith in John 20:30-31 and/or Romans 10:17.

 

[Johann]

Kermos' religion makes God guilty for those who do not believe and go to hell because God only cherry picks certain individuals to give them faith, others He withholds faith from them.
The Bible teaches that we must do the believing and that is why we are guilty for not believing.

So, it looks like unconscious processes were originally conscious processes, and only became automatic once they were practiced enough--frequently and consistently in the same environmental setting--to become 'habit-like'. All my little 'action figures' have MY face on them, apparently. Environmental stimuli--which match the stored environmental representations of those experiences--activate these mini-habits or automatic-responses, which formerly were deliberately performed by conscious will.



[So far, this doesn't sound too much like something that refutes 'free will', in any traditional sense. If I intend to throw a right-arm block whenever someone throws a punch at me, and I practice this move sufficiently to where it becomes almost a reflex, then it would be very, very odd to call my use of this reflex in the future as something 'against my will', or 'unintentional'. It would be automatic and without conscious activation at the future incident, but 'stored will' is still 'will'…]



But bad habits can be learned also, and surprise me at 'awkward' moments, and addictions seem to be 'against my will' at some level…Let's continue describing the range of automatic processes, and then look more at how automatic processes relate to non-automatic, conscious control processes.

Continue-

 

[Johann]

The situations in some of these experiments are not reflective of 'free will', but that is because of the deliberate design of the experiment: normal, everyday, regular-life behavioral monitoring and control is 'manipulated away'. Thus, these situations either represent 'fantasy' scenarios, or represent only a partial component of a real-world scenario. They are essential to research this phenomena, but the vast majority of moral decisions will involve deliberative, control elements.



So, although I think the question may be correct in understanding some of these experiments as reflective of a 'coercive' situation (precluding the operation of free will, but not actually 'disproving' such), at the same time I would have to conclude that these artificial, carefully engineered, experimental situations are not remotely representative of the majority of ethical life.



So, given the testimony of the automaticity researchers themselves on the issue of volition (and its multi-faceted relationship to automaticity), I have to conclude that their conclusions about 'free will' would be in disagreement with that embodied in our question/objection. Remember, most ethical theory deals with deliberate decisions, which consider all 'inputs' (including those 'quietly suggested' by automatic process) in making a choice; and the testimony of the researchers cited above agrees that automatic process outputs can be (and in the overwhelming major of cases, are) overridden by conscious control mechanisms.



So, whereas the objection is quite probably correct that some of those situations do NOT involve free will (and hence, no responsibility), it is unwarranted to generalize from these extreme cases to the vast majority of 'relatively free' choices of real life.




The Philosophical understanding.



Philosophical and Christian/Theistic theological understandings of 'free will' actually fit nicely with this overall data. Consider four such statements (from 3 different sources):





One: "God's providence involves all of the attributes discussed in the previous section-God's power, knowledge, and goodness. It also depends in important ways on the account that is given of human freedom. There are two very different ways in which free will has been understood. According to the compatibilist conception, a human action is 'free' if the following requirements are met: (1) the immediate cause of the action is a desire, wish, or intention internal to the agent; (2) there is no external event or circumstance that compels the action to be performed; and (3) the agent could have acted differently, if she had chosen to. If these criteria are satisfied, the action comes, as we might say, 'from within'; it cannot rightly be said that the agent is forced to perform it. This is 'compatibilist' free will, because it holds that free will is compatible with deterministic causation so long as the three conditions given are satisfied…A good many philosophers and theologians are not satisfied with this way of understanding free will, because they do not think this sort of freedom is sufficient to make humans morally responsible for their actions. These philosophers and theologians insist, on the contrary, that in order for an action to be truly free, it must have been really possible, with all the antecedent conditions remaining exactly the same, for the agent to have chosen differently. One philosopher has expressed this libertarian view of free will by saying that, when a person is free with respect to performing an action, she 'has it in her power to choose to perform A or choose not to perform A. Both A and not A could actually occur; which will actually occur has not yet been determined.'" [Reason & Religious Belief, 2nd Ed, Peterson, Hasker, Reichenbach, Basinger, p.75]





Notes:



· From this definition, both compatiblist and non-compatibilist ("incompatibilist") views are consistent with automaticity. For the compatibilist, we can note that all three conditions are met. (1) Although the trigger might be the external stimulus, the actual immediate 'cause' would be the automatic (internal) process and/or activated goal. Since this is internal to the agent (including, actually, the perception of the stimulus) this condition is met. (2) No external event compels the behavior--it merely activates the process. The process might attempt to assert its results, but conscious control mechanisms can generally override it. This condition is thus met. (3) This is fairly obvious from conscious control. Given a real-world situation (instead of the extremely contrived research experiment conditions), a change of goal or motive would have determined a change of behavior. Condition three is met.



· For the incompatibilist, the well-documented ability of conscious control to inhibit or suppress behavior would satisfy this position, and the obvious fact that researchers NEVER get 100% of the non-control group to act in support of the hypothesis (smile), certainly suggests a sort of 'openness' in the system (Explanations of this openness within experimental psychology are often given in those quasi-mystical terms 'individual differences', but this offers no real explanatory improvement over 'free will' anyway.)

 

[Johann]

First, a thumbnail of a Judeo-Christian view of automaticity-looking processes, and their relationship to consciousness.





The Christian view of humanity is that people are created as individuals, and with dissoluble and defining relationships with everything else in their context--God, other people, physical reality (including their own bodies). They are a swirling mixture of individuality, physicality (i.e., their bodies exert influences upon their most-transcendental decisions, and vice-versa…e.g. placebo effects), and sociality (i.e., they are constantly aware and influenced by perceived others/Others in their experienced world).



As individuals they have individual agency, and individual character, much of which is 'borrowed' from their context, and much of which is 'shared' with others in that same context. They are like their parents, but different. They are like their friends, but different. They are like the people in their culture, but sometimes different. And they are even different within themselves! They have competing values, competing desires, competing intra-influences. And they change, reflecting sometimes conformity tendencies and sometimes reflecting contrarian tendencies.



But they are essentially social from the first design…They are internally structured after a conscious and intra-social (i.e., Trinitarian) God. They are pre-built with notions of other minds, intentionality, trust, reciprocity, and communication. They wake up in a social context, after years of abject dependency on the 'whole village'. They regulate behavior with an eye on social and communal values (expressed in 'expectations'). They learn first by mimicry, then by instruction/education, then by reflection upon social/psychological experience, and then by personal selection of a future-basis-for-learning paradigm of life/values (deliberately retaining some prior learning, and deliberately rejecting other prior learning).



They are malleable--at the core--and seem built for learning. Every new item of education or experience 'changes the mix' of virtually all past experience and education (stored in memory). This is a force for change. But they are also built for constancy--their goals and strategies work for 'coherence' and 'consistency' in their attitudes and worldview and beliefs. This is a force which resists change.



The biblical data seems to portray a 'spiral model' of character development, which could be expressed in two different ways:



1. Subjectivity creates Objectivity, which modifies existing Objectivity, which conditions subsequent Subjectivity.

2. Thinking becomes doing, doing becomes habits, habits become character, and character becomes thinking.



Both of these models mean the same thing: your current mental choices will eventually affect your future mental choices (if left 'undisturbed'). Your choices (inside, subjectivity) always flow to the outside-mind world (objectivity), and become the operating base for your future mental activity.



This spiral of 'ingressive development', so to speak, was meant for good. In a perfect world, each good choice would result in a 'better' world, and in sequence, higher leverage and easier future choices of the good. Practice makes perfect. More of good makes better. Everybody helping everybody else get better.



This "ingressive spiral", as it were, is expressed in biblical images as 'organic'. For example, tree will always be a tree, but it can be shaped in many different ways. Each new branch can be "tended" to grow in a certain direction, and the longer it grows in this direction, the more difficult it is to change that direction. The branch gets thicker and less malleable, and only minor adjustments can be made later.



In a non-perfect world, the spiral could go awry…I could respond to life with increasing callousness, increasing complacency, increasing hostility, increasing arrogance, and increasing detachment--and after a while, it would simply be 'who I was'--and I would quit apologizing for that lifestyle, and eventually, begin to value it and divinize it... This process is sometimes known as 'hardening of the heart' in scripture, and God is portrayed as intervening in human lives to 'slow' and sometimes 'interrupt' this process, before 'full automaticity' is "granted" to the aberrant agent (under principles of self-definition and self-development, in the context of moral government of the universal community--e.g. Romans 1 & 2).



But also built into the system are calls to break out of the cycle. There are those who call us to awareness, to alertness, to caution. We have friends (and institutions) who warn us of our trajectory, and encourage us to efforts of reform and renewal. We have conscience and the 'social voices inside' which almost never seem to die. They may give up on a given issue (after we repeatedly ignore them), but they will awake refreshed and enthusiastic upon the morn! There are development epochs even, that seem to biologically trigger self-review (e.g., first and second adolescence, mid-life, menopause) and cultural rituals of passage that do the same (e.g., graduations, birthdays at legal age markers, New Years). There is the gift of discontent, which when coupled with the power of the binary operator 'negation', allows anyone to visualize an alternative future, a different life, a better situation, changes that need to be made. This ability to create (in our minds) environments which do not actually exist (yet), allows the perception-behavior link to create hopes, dreams, longings, desires, needs, and eventually, perhaps even plans and subsequent actions, to change our trajectory in life, and to create an incrementally-different 'us'.



The voices and influences that beckon us to conformity are filled with contradiction. The culture has many different, competing, and contradictory sub-cultures. Social groups have sub-groups which have counterstereotypic traits. The inherent (but generally non-destructive) inconsistency in every human model, teacher, parent, hero, or 'target of mimicry' insures that we never go too long without having at least a couple of choices in our option-bag…Brainwashing--to reduce the internal 'competing factions' into one monolithic one--is an exceptionally difficult, expensive, and error-prone process. We are literally fountains of freedom, cauldrons of creativity, and nozzles of novelty--even as 'stable' as we think ourselves to be!



The bible calls humans to awareness and alertness to this cycle, encouraging us to self-examination, to reflection on values, and to commitment to the good. It recognizes that good action becomes good character, and that good actions can flow from good character (as in automaticity). Biblical injunctions to 'train up a child in the way he should go, and when he is old he will not depart from it' and 'Keep your heart with all vigilance, for from it flow the springs of life' and 'train yourself in godliness' are all indicative of the basics of 'automaticity'.

 

[Johann]

The topic of implementation intentions ("when X occurs, I will do Y") is a fascinating one, and offers great hope in this area of stereotype inhibition. Goals that include implementation plans are achieved three times more often that goals without specific plans. This being the case, I find it interesting to note that some of the NT ethical instructions are phrased in semi-implementation forms (and related situationally-specific forms, too), and many would 'suggest' a suitable implementation formula. Consider how a believer might respond (with an implementation intention) to:



· From James:

o When tempted, no one should say, “God is tempting me.”

o Religion that God our Father accepts as pure and faultless is this: to look after orphans and widows in their distress...

o My brothers, as believers in our glorious Lord Jesus Christ, don’t show favoritism. Suppose a man comes into your meeting wearing a gold ring and fine clothes, and a poor man in shabby clothes also comes in. If you show special attention to the man wearing fine clothes and say, “Here’s a good seat for you,” but say to the poor man, “You stand there” or “Sit on the floor by my feet,” have you not discriminated among yourselves and become judges with evil thoughts?

o Suppose a brother or sister is without clothes and daily food. If one of you says to him, “Go, I wish you well; keep warm and well fed,” but does nothing about his physical needs, what good is it? In the same way, faith by itself, if it is not accompanied by action, is dead.

o With the tongue we praise our Lord and Father, and with it we curse men, who have been made in God’s likeness. Out of the same mouth come praise and cursing. My brothers, this should not be

o Now listen, you who say, “Today or tomorrow we will go to this or that city, spend a year there, carry on business and make money.” Why, you do not even know what will happen tomorrow. What is your life? You are a mist that appears for a little while and then vanishes. Instead, you ought to say, “If it is the Lord’s will, we will live and do this or that.” As it is, you boast and brag. All such boasting is evil

o Is any one of you in trouble? He should pray. Is anyone happy? Let him sing songs of praise. Is any one of you sick? He should call the elders of the church to pray over him and anoint him with oil in the name of the Lord.



· From Paul:

o Share with God’s people who are in need

o Bless those who persecute you; bless and do not curse.

o Rejoice with those who rejoice; mourn with those who mourn.

o Do not be proud, but be willing to associate with people of low position

o If your enemy is hungry, feed him; if he is thirsty, give him something to drink.

o Accept him whose faith is weak, without passing judgment on disputable matters

o Instead, make up your mind not to put any stumbling block or obstacle in your brother’s way.

o So then, whenever we have opportunity, let us work for the good of all, especially for those of the family of faith.



· From John:

o If anyone has material possessions and sees his brother in need but has no pity on him, how can the love of God be in him?

o If anyone sees his brother commit a sin that does not lead to death, he should pray and God will give him life.



· From Peter:

o Do not repay evil with evil or insult with insult, but with blessing

o Always be prepared to give an answer to everyone who asks you to give the reason for the hope that you have. But do this with gentleness and respect

o Dear friends, do not be surprised at the painful trial you are suffering, as though something strange were happening to you. But rejoice that you participate in the sufferings of Christ



· From the gospels:

o “Therefore, if you are offering your gift at the altar and there remember that your brother has something against you, leave your gift there in front of the altar. First go and be reconciled to your brother; then come and offer your gift.

o If someone strikes you on one cheek, turn to him the other also. If someone takes your cloak, do not stop him from taking your tunic.





In a modern setting, this should be reflected in preaching, teaching, and bible study (application) courses. Believers should be taught to form specific implementation statements, as part of learning how to submit their lives to the law of love, and the revelation of that law in Scripture. (This principle also generalizes to non-stereotype settings as indicated by the NT passages…For example, "when I get into a trial, I will first thank God for being with me, and being in control of my life")





"If all this sounds too good to be true, well, it may be. How, for example, does the egalitarian motive or goal become automated if not by the individual's chronically pursuing it over time, consciously and intentionally? But doing so, as has been argued above, requires the awareness of possible (nonconscious) bias; knowledge of the effect of the bias on judgments (many of them quite subtle, implicit, and tacit); ability to engage in the effortful processing at the time; and the good intention to be egalitarian--all of which are problematic conditions in real life. Nevertheless, the good news is that if one can get one's egalitarian motivation to the automatic state, it may then routinely win out over the automatic stereotype--a case, if you will, of fighting automatic fire with automatic fire." (Bargh/1999, p.377f)

 

[Titus]

I will prove that Kermos does not understand the scriptures he uses.
You cannot understand Gods word if you have been taught a perverted translation through the eyes of a scripture twister like Augustine and Calvin.

I'm not saying it is impossible for men like Kermos to understand the scriptures.
I'm saying as long as he is completely close minded to the possibility that he could be wrong he cannot know the truth.

therefore, you Free-willian Philosophers self-willingly say "I chose Jesus" in your despising the exclusive authority of King Jesus who says "you did not choose Me, but I chose you" (John 15:16) thus in your heart you steal the exclusive glory of God for the salvation of man.

When I have time, I'm going to dis-prove Kermos' calvinist interpretation of John 15:16.
His above explanation of John's teaching proves he is ignorant of scripture.

 

[Johann]

I will prove that Kermos does not understand the scriptures he uses.
You cannot understand Gods word if you have been taught a perverted translation through the eyes of a scripture twister like Augustine and Calvin.

I'm not saying it is impossible for men like Kermos to understand the scriptures.
I'm saying as long as he is completely close minded to the possibility that he could be wrong he cannot know the truth.


When I have time, I'm going to dis-prove Kermos' calvinist interpretation of John 15:16.
His above explanation of John's teaching proves he is ignorant of scripture.

If I would suggest a link, would you consider it?

 

[Titus]

If I would suggest a link, would you consider it?

Go ahead, I'll consider it.

 

[Johann]

Go ahead, I'll consider it.

How Did Messiah Jesus explain His death to His disciples?

www.christian-thinktank.com

You can search this site on free will-and where @Kermos is wrong- biblically-with various links, this is a deep dive into Scriptures-try it.
Shalom
J.

 

[Titus]

This post is to expose the misuse and ignorance of the scriptures used by calvinists.
I have no personal dislike of Kermos. I'm only using Kermos' misuse of the scriptures as proof calvinist's have been led to believe a false interpretation of Gods word.
I will be explaining Jesus' words in John 15:16.
First learn how a calvinist like Kermos explains John 15:16 below,

therefore, you Free-willian Philosophers self-willingly say "I chose Jesus" in your despising the exclusive authority of King Jesus who says "you did not choose Me, but I chose you" (John 15:16) thus in your heart you steal the exclusive glory of God for the salvation of man.

If you only were raised in the reformed churches theology you would not know any better than to believe this verse is teaching mankind has no freewill to choose Jesus while lost, still dead in his sins.

Unfortunately calvinism and reformed churches are terrible Bible students
They do not read the Bible for what it says.
They only read John 15:16 through the teachings of men like John Calvin.
You cannot know Gods revealed revelation when it is filtered through the lies of a false teacher who twists the scriptures.

So what did Jesus really mean when He said you did not choose Me I chose you?
Does this prove the lost alien sinner has no freewill ability to give his life to Jesus and believe on Him?

This is simple to show what is being taught,
How do we know the correct meaning of Jesus' teaching,
CONTEXT, CONTEXT, CONTEXT

Kermos does not know the context of John 15:16.
You cannot understand the scriptures if you do not know the context!

This whole section, John chapters (13-16)
Jesus is teaching His "choosen" apostles!
The ones He would give the "keys" to the kingdom.
Then in chapter 17 (the Lords prayer) Jesus prays for Himself(vs. 1-5)
His Apostles (vs. 6-19)
And for us (vs. 20-26)

 Context really spells it out for us

conclusion: It is so so simple that the simplicity becomes a stumbling block for some...
it's hard to grasp that people want to make it complicated! But complicating the simple is how false teachers hide what should be obvious.

Now that we know the context, let's read the verse in context.

John 15:16,
- You(apostles) did not choose Me, but I chose you(apostles) and appointed you(work given to the apostles) that you should go and bear fruit and that your fruit should remain that whatever you ask the Father in My name He may give you(apostles).

If you need more evidence I am rightly dividing the word of God.
Just take the time to sit down uninterrupted if possible and read John chapters 13 through 17.
It will become obvious that Jesus chose the apostles they did not choose to be appointed as apostles!

Unfortunately Kermos is convinced only he knows the correct interpretation because he's convinced he is elect.
Hard to convince those who will only read the scriptures through the lenses of TULIP colored glasses.

Nowhere does the Bible teach we cannot chose Jesus.
God is love, He gave all the freewill to choose Him if that is our desire.

Notice that one of the apostles did not miraculously get regenerated and begin to follow Jesus.
It was his brother Andrew that went and brought him to Jesus.

John 1:41-42,
He(Andrew) first found his own brother Simon(Peter) and said to him, We have found the (Messiah which is translated the Christ)
And brought him(Peter) to Jesus, Now when Jesus looked at him, He said, You are Simon the son of Jonah. You shall be called Cephas (which is translated, a stone.

 

[Johann]

This post is to expose the misuse and ignorance of the scriptures used by calvinists.
I have no personal dislike of Kermos. I'm only using Kermos' misuse of the scriptures as proof calvinist's have been led to believe a false interpretation of Gods word.
I will be explaining Jesus' words in John 15:16.
First learn how a calvinist like Kermos explains John 15:16 below,

If you only were raised in the reformed churches theology you would not know any better than to believe this verse is teaching mankind has no freewill to choose Jesus while lost, still dead in his sins.

Unfortunately calvinism and reformed churches are terrible Bible students
They do not read the Bible for what it says.
They only read John 15:16 through the teachings of men like John Calvin.
You cannot know Gods revealed revelation when it is filtered through the lies of a false teacher who twists the scriptures.

So what did Jesus really mean when He said you did not choose Me I chose you?
Does this prove the lost alien sinner has no freewill ability to give his life to Jesus and believe on Him?

This is simple to show what is being taught,
How do we know the correct meaning of Jesus' teaching,
CONTEXT, CONTEXT, CONTEXT

Kermos does not know the context of John 15:16.
You cannot understand the scriptures if you do not know the context!

This whole section, John chapters (13-16)
Jesus is teaching His "choosen" apostles!
The ones He would give the "keys" to the kingdom.
Then in chapter 17 (the Lords prayer) Jesus prays for Himself(vs. 1-5)
His Apostles (vs. 6-19)
And for us (vs. 20-26)

 Context really spells it out for us

conclusion: It is so so simple that the simplicity becomes a stumbling block for some...
it's hard to grasp that people want to make it complicated! But complicating the simple is how false teachers hide what should be obvious.

Now that we know the context, let's read the verse in context.

John 15:16,
- You(apostles) did not choose Me, but I chose you(apostles) and appointed you(work given to the apostles) that you should go and bear fruit and that your fruit should remain that whatever you ask the Father in My name He may give you(apostles).

If you need more evidence I am rightly dividing the word of God.
Just take the time to sit down uninterrupted if possible and read John chapters 13 through 17.
It will become obvious that Jesus chose the apostles they did not chose to be appointed as apostles!

Unfortunately Kermos is convinced only he knows the correct interpretation because he's convinced he is elect.
Hard to convince those who will only read the scriptures through the lenses of TULIP colored glasses.

Nowhere does the Bible teach we cannot chose Jesus.
God is love, He gave all the freewill to choose Him if that is our desire.

Notice that one of the apostles did not miraculously get regenerated and begin to follow Jesus.
It was his brother Andrew that went and brought him to Jesus.

John 1:41-42,
He(Andrew) first found his own brother Simon(Peter) and said to him, We have found the (Messiah which is translated the Christ)
And brought him(Peter) to Jesus, Now when Jesus looked at him, He said, You are Simon the son of Jonah. You shall be called Cephas (which is translated, a stone.

The Scriptures is written to "Whomsoever"
Shalom.

 

[Titus]

The Scriptures is written to "Whomsoever"
Shalom.

Amen, amen, amen!
Revelation 22:17,
- and the Spirit and the bride say come and let him who hears say come and let him who thrists say come WHOMSOEVER desires, let him take the water of life freely