Does Philemon 1:14 Prove Mans Will Is Free... From God?

Sketo

Active member
Any consistent theologian who uses the term "freedom" usually is referring to the fact that while God sovereignly ordains all that comes to pass, yet man's "free choice" (voluntary) is compatible with God's sovereign decree. In other words the will is free from external coercion but not free from necessity. There is no biblical warrant to use the phrase "free will", since the Bible never affirms or uses this term in the sense that the will is free from God!

You might ask - what about those “translations” of Philemon 1:14 that use the phrase “free will”... like...

But I didn't want to do anything without your consent, so that your good deed might not be out of obligation, but of your own free will. - Philemon 1:14 CSB

So when some theologians (or translations) use the word "free" they may be misusing or importing philosophical language from outside the Bible, but anyone who is consistent with the Text means "voluntary" when they say "free", but NEVER affirm they are free from God in any sense. For to affirm that God sovereignly brings our choices to pass and then also say man is free FROM GOD, is self-contradictory. So I repeat, many of those whom I read seem to equate the word freedom with the meaning "voluntary". If any mean "free from God" they are confused.

ESV
but I preferred to do nothing without your consent in order that your goodness might not be by compulsion but of your own accord (voluntary). - Philemon 1:14

NKJV
But without your consent I wanted to do nothing, that your good deed might not be by compulsion, as it were, but voluntary.

ISV
Yet I did not want to do anything without your consent, so that your good deed might not be something forced, but voluntary.

P.S. - Note neither “voluntary” option in Philemon 1:14 is an option of sin!
 

CrowCross

Active member
I think free-will can be broken down into two categories ..
1) Do I have the freedom to choose the red shirt over the blue shirt.
2) Do I freely choose Jesus or does He choose me.

What do I think? I think our history has already occurred for God...but not for us.
 

PeanutGallery

Active member
1) Do we have the freedom to believe or reject the gospel?

That is the bottom line; answer that, and everything else falls in place.
 

e v e

Active member
Any consistent theologian who uses the term "freedom" usually is referring to the fact that while God sovereignly ordains all that comes to pass, yet man's "free choice" (voluntary) is compatible with God's sovereign decree. In other words the will is free from external coercion but not free from necessity. There is no biblical warrant to use the phrase "free will", since the Bible never affirms or uses this term in the sense that the will is free from God!

You might ask - what about those “translations” of Philemon 1:14 that use the phrase “free will”... like...

But I didn't want to do anything without your consent, so that your good deed might not be out of obligation, but of your own free will. - Philemon 1:14 CSB

So when some theologians (or translations) use the word "free" they may be misusing or importing philosophical language from outside the Bible, but anyone who is consistent with the Text means "voluntary" when they say "free", but NEVER affirm they are free from God in any sense. For to affirm that God sovereignly brings our choices to pass and then also say man is free FROM GOD, is self-contradictory. So I repeat, many of those whom I read seem to equate the word freedom with the meaning "voluntary". If any mean "free from God" they are confused.

ESV
but I preferred to do nothing without your consent in order that your goodness might not be by compulsion but of your own accord (voluntary). - Philemon 1:14

NKJV
But without your consent I wanted to do nothing, that your good deed might not be by compulsion, as it were, but voluntary.

ISV
Yet I did not want to do anything without your consent, so that your good deed might not be something forced, but voluntary.

P.S. - Note neither “voluntary” option in Philemon 1:14 is an option of sin!
necessity is a greek philosophy concept. not His.
 

TomFL

Well-known member
Any consistent theologian who uses the term "freedom" usually is referring to the fact that while God sovereignly ordains all that comes to pass, yet man's "free choice" (voluntary) is compatible with God's sovereign decree. In other words the will is free from external coercion but not free from necessity. There is no biblical warrant to use the phrase "free will", since the Bible never affirms or uses this term in the sense that the will is free from God!

You might ask - what about those “translations” of Philemon 1:14 that use the phrase “free will”... like...

But I didn't want to do anything without your consent, so that your good deed might not be out of obligation, but of your own free will. - Philemon 1:14 CSB

So when some theologians (or translations) use the word "free" they may be misusing or importing philosophical language from outside the Bible, but anyone who is consistent with the Text means "voluntary" when they say "free", but NEVER affirm they are free from God in any sense. For to affirm that God sovereignly brings our choices to pass and then also say man is free FROM GOD, is self-contradictory. So I repeat, many of those whom I read seem to equate the word freedom with the meaning "voluntary". If any mean "free from God" they are confused.

ESV
but I preferred to do nothing without your consent in order that your goodness might not be by compulsion but of your own accord (voluntary). - Philemon 1:14

NKJV
But without your consent I wanted to do nothing, that your good deed might not be by compulsion, as it were, but voluntary.

ISV
Yet I did not want to do anything without your consent, so that your good deed might not be something forced, but voluntary.

P.S. - Note neither “voluntary” option in Philemon 1:14 is an option of sin!
Look free will up you will find voluntary among other things as a meaning

BTW it appears you do not know what freedom is and you have given a definition for Calvinist compatibilism

And in compatibilism man's desires are determined by God

There is no such thing as what the man wants there is only the wants determined by God

BTW so you believe Satan fell and Adam fell because God causally determined it ?

So God determined the fall so he could determine the redemption of some as well as the damnation of others

all without man ever making a free action

Great view of God you have there - Not

BTW no one claims man is totally free from God so that is not a factor in a soft libertarian free will
 
Last edited:

Sketo

Active member
Look free will up you will find voluntary among other things as a meaning

BTW it appears you do not know what freedom is and you have given a definition for Calvinist compatibilism

And in compatibilism man's desires are determined by God

There is no such thing as what the man wants there is only the wants determined by God
Your “NEUTRAL STRAWMAN” is showing!
BTW so you believe Satan fell and Adam fell because God causally determined it ?
Why would Lucifers, or Adams “nature”, before he fell, permit sin as an option?

In SLF-ism Gods “nature” does not allow sin as an option in the final “set of options” available for the “Will” to choose from!

Are you saying God create Lucifer, and Adam with a “nature”, different than Gods “nature”... a “nature” that allows sin into the “set of options” available for the will to choose from?

Does this mean that, in SLF-ism, God is the first cause of Lucifers first sin?
BTW no one claims man is totally free from God so that is not a factor in a soft libertarian free will
No... SLF-ism claims the “Will” is totally free from God! Hence the phrase “free will”... not “free man”!
 

TomFL

Well-known member
Your “NEUTRAL STRAWMAN” is showing!

Actually it is your imagination which is showing as I never mentioned anything about neutral



Look free will up you will find voluntary among other things as a meaning

BTW it appears you do not know what freedom is and you have given a definition for Calvinist compatibilism

And in compatibilism man's desires are determined by God

There is no such thing as what the man wants there is only the wants determined by God

And you failed to correct your confusion between compatibilism and freedom

Compatibilism offer only an illusion of freedom not true freedom


Why would Lucifers, or Adams “nature”, before he fell, permit sin as an option?
Ask God

He created I didn't


In SLF-ism Gods “nature” does not allow sin as an option in the final “set of options” available for the “Will” to choose from!
??????????

God's nature ?

Job 34:10–12 —ESV
“¶ “Therefore, hear me, you men of understanding: far be it from God that he should do wickedness, and from the Almighty that he should do wrong.
For according to the work of a man he will repay him, and according to his ways he will make it befall him.
Of a truth, God will not do wickedly, and the Almighty will not pervert justice.”



Are you saying God create Lucifer, and Adam with a “nature”, different than Gods “nature”... a “nature” that allows sin into the “set of options” available for the will to choose from?

Does this mean that, in SLF-ism, God is the first cause of Lucifers first sin?

No... SLF-ism claims the “Will” is totally free from God! Hence the phrase “free will”... not “free man”!

No just the opposite

However in Calvinist God must be the first cause

So Lucifer sinned ,Adam rebelled, man fell, refuses to believe because God determines it

That is the reductio ad absurdem of theistic determinism

Finally it is simply untrue the will is totally free from God

It seems you really do not know what a soft libertarian free will holds
 

TomFL

Well-known member
But I know now what it doesn’t hold...
It's doubtful

Actually it is your imagination which is showing as I never mentioned anything about neutral



Look free will up you will find voluntary among other things as a meaning

BTW it appears you do not know what freedom is and you have given a definition for Calvinist compatibilism

And in compatibilism man's desires are determined by God

There is no such thing as what the man wants there is only the wants determined by God

And you failed to correct your confusion between compatibilism and freedom

Compatibilism offer only an illusion of freedom not true freedom
 

JDS

Member
Any consistent theologian who uses the term "freedom" usually is referring to the fact that while God sovereignly ordains all that comes to pass, yet man's "free choice" (voluntary) is compatible with God's sovereign decree. In other words the will is free from external coercion but not free from necessity. There is no biblical warrant to use the phrase "free will", since the Bible never affirms or uses this term in the sense that the will is free from God!
Here is a Calvinist insisting on having the terminology, "free will" appear in scripture, which it does, while teaching non scriptural doctrines with made up words and phrases that nowhere appears in the Bible. Like sovereign election, sovereign grace, irresistible grace, unconditional salvation, total depravity, limited atonement, the sovereignty of God, faith is the gift of God, salvation is by faith through grace, original sin, determinism, hopelessness of humanity and other such like doctrines like bondage of the will, being saved in order to believe and absolute nonsense that people with intelligence, reason, logic, experience, and will would know immediately are not true.

Here is a fact; if sinners do not have the will to be saved then they will not be saved. Jesus said it like this to a bunch of sinners;

36 But I have greater witness than that of John: for the works (miracles) which the Father hath given me to finish, the same works that I do, bear witness of me, that the Father hath sent me.

37 And the Father himself, which hath sent me, hath borne witness of me. Ye have neither heard his voice at any time, nor seen his shape.
38 And ye have not his word abiding in you: for whom he hath sent, him ye believe not.
39 Search the scriptures; for in them ye think ye have eternal life: and they are they which testify of me.
40 And ye will not come to me, that ye might have life.

43 I am come in my Father's name, and ye receive me not: if another shall come in his own name, him ye will receive.


45 Do not think that I will accuse you to the Father: there is one that accuseth you, even Moses, in whom ye trust.
46 For had ye believed Moses, ye would have believed me; for he wrote of me.
47 But if ye believe not his writings, how shall ye believe my words?

This is not a God that is making the posters argument about the will. Jesus is actually saying these Jewish rulers have all the evidence that heaven can produce to persuade these men to believe he is the son of God and can give them eternal life and who was predicted in their writings and law for 1500 years. They have no excuse for not believing and this generation of Jews committed the unpardonable sin, which is a national sin which caused God to blind them so the people could not be saved as one people as he had intended, but only as a remnant. One must come through the door when the door is open.

What I have quoted above is a rebuke of these Jews who had complained about Jesus healing an impotent man on the Sabbath day. Please read what he said to them that day.

19 Then answered Jesus and said unto them, Verily, verily, I say unto you, The Son can do nothing of himself, but what he seeth the Father do: for what things soever he doeth, these also doeth the Son likewise.
20 For the Father loveth the Son, and sheweth him all things that himself doeth: and he will shew him greater works than these, that ye may marvel.
21 For as the Father raiseth up the dead, and quickeneth them; even so the Son quickeneth whom he will.

The question is, who is the son willing to quicken? It is a crucial question. Are we told?

22 For the Father judgeth no man, but hath committed all judgment unto the Son:
23 That all men should honour the Son, even as they honour the Father. He that honoureth not the Son honoureth not the Father which hath sent him.

Here it is;

24 Verily, verily, I say unto you, He that heareth my word, and believeth on him that sent me, hath everlasting life, and shall not come into condemnation; but is passed from death unto life.

Who sent him? Does he say? Yes, here is the answer

30 I can of mine own self do nothing: as I hear, I judge: and my judgment is just; because I seek not mine own will, but the will of the Father which hath sent me.

Here is the deal. What sane man would spend all this time attempting to convince men whom he himself has already decided to not save and then render them guilty because they would not do what is required to be saved, and according to the text, it is to believe the Father and his testimony from heaven about his Son, to believe the works that he did, the miracles, the testimony of John the Baptist, and the scriptures. Four things. What else could he do to convince them?

Calvinism teaches that we cannot believe a word in John 5. Not one word. These men to whom Jesus Christ was speaking were the elect of God. They were elect because they were born of Abraham and Isaac and Jacob through the flesh. That did not mean they have eternal life. It means they have a bloodline that God has chosen for his purpose of redeeming them first, and then the world by a different bloodline, that of his Son Jesus Christ. God is going to give all of his own, Israel, to his son if they will just believe in him. Those who do believes will have eternal life because it is his life, the Spirit who dwells in him, who will dwell in their bodies after he is crucified and pays the sin debt and rises from the dead.

This passage says sinners must believe the Father to be saved. Calvinism does not.
 

TomFL

Well-known member
Here is a Calvinist insisting on having the terminology, "free will" appear in scripture, which it does, while teaching non scriptural doctrines with made up words and phrases that nowhere appears in the Bible. Like sovereign election, sovereign grace, irresistible grace, unconditional salvation,

Kind of a hoot isn't it
 

brightfame52

Well-known member
sketo

There is no biblical warrant to use the phrase "free will", since the Bible never affirms or uses this term in the sense that the will is free from God!

Absolutely correct. In fact James alludes to this and calls it sin James 4 13-17

Go to now, ye that say, To day or to morrow we will go into such a city, and continue there a year, and buy and sell, and get gain:

whereas ye know not what shall be on the morrow. For what is your life? It is even a vapour, that appeareth for a little time, and then vanisheth away.

For that ye ought to say, If the Lord will, we shall live, and do this, or that.

But now ye rejoice in your boastings: all such rejoicing is evil

Therefore to him that knoweth to do good, and doeth it not, to him it is sin.

Mans will is never free from the Sovereign will of God in our life !
 

brightfame52

Well-known member
Here is a Calvinist insisting on having the terminology, "free will" appear in scripture, which it does, while teaching non scriptural doctrines with made up words and phrases that nowhere appears in the Bible. Like sovereign election, sovereign grace, irresistible grace, unconditional salvation, total depravity, limited atonement, the sovereignty of God, faith is the gift of God, salvation is by faith through grace, original sin, determinism, hopelessness of humanity and other such like doctrines like bondage of the will, being saved in order to believe and absolute nonsense that people with intelligence, reason, logic, experience, and will would know immediately are not true.

Here is a fact; if sinners do not have the will to be saved then they will not be saved. Jesus said it like this to a bunch of sinners;

36 But I have greater witness than that of John: for the works (miracles) which the Father hath given me to finish, the same works that I do, bear witness of me, that the Father hath sent me.

37 And the Father himself, which hath sent me, hath borne witness of me. Ye have neither heard his voice at any time, nor seen his shape.
38 And ye have not his word abiding in you: for whom he hath sent, him ye believe not.
39 Search the scriptures; for in them ye think ye have eternal life: and they are they which testify of me.
40 And ye will not come to me, that ye might have life.

43 I am come in my Father's name, and ye receive me not: if another shall come in his own name, him ye will receive.


45 Do not think that I will accuse you to the Father: there is one that accuseth you, even Moses, in whom ye trust.
46 For had ye believed Moses, ye would have believed me; for he wrote of me.
47 But if ye believe not his writings, how shall ye believe my words?

This is not a God that is making the posters argument about the will. Jesus is actually saying these Jewish rulers have all the evidence that heaven can produce to persuade these men to believe he is the son of God and can give them eternal life and who was predicted in their writings and law for 1500 years. They have no excuse for not believing and this generation of Jews committed the unpardonable sin, which is a national sin which caused God to blind them so the people could not be saved as one people as he had intended, but only as a remnant. One must come through the door when the door is open.

What I have quoted above is a rebuke of these Jews who had complained about Jesus healing an impotent man on the Sabbath day. Please read what he said to them that day.

19 Then answered Jesus and said unto them, Verily, verily, I say unto you, The Son can do nothing of himself, but what he seeth the Father do: for what things soever he doeth, these also doeth the Son likewise.
20 For the Father loveth the Son, and sheweth him all things that himself doeth: and he will shew him greater works than these, that ye may marvel.
21 For as the Father raiseth up the dead, and quickeneth them; even so the Son quickeneth whom he will.

The question is, who is the son willing to quicken? It is a crucial question. Are we told?

22 For the Father judgeth no man, but hath committed all judgment unto the Son:
23 That all men should honour the Son, even as they honour the Father. He that honoureth not the Son honoureth not the Father which hath sent him.

Here it is;

24 Verily, verily, I say unto you, He that heareth my word, and believeth on him that sent me, hath everlasting life, and shall not come into condemnation; but is passed from death unto life.

Who sent him? Does he say? Yes, here is the answer

30 I can of mine own self do nothing: as I hear, I judge: and my judgment is just; because I seek not mine own will, but the will of the Father which hath sent me.

Here is the deal. What sane man would spend all this time attempting to convince men whom he himself has already decided to not save and then render them guilty because they would not do what is required to be saved, and according to the text, it is to believe the Father and his testimony from heaven about his Son, to believe the works that he did, the miracles, the testimony of John the Baptist, and the scriptures. Four things. What else could he do to convince them?

Calvinism teaches that we cannot believe a word in John 5. Not one word. These men to whom Jesus Christ was speaking were the elect of God. They were elect because they were born of Abraham and Isaac and Jacob through the flesh. That did not mean they have eternal life. It means they have a bloodline that God has chosen for his purpose of redeeming them first, and then the world by a different bloodline, that of his Son Jesus Christ. God is going to give all of his own, Israel, to his son if they will just believe in him. Those who do believes will have eternal life because it is his life, the Spirit who dwells in him, who will dwell in their bodies after he is crucified and pays the sin debt and rises from the dead.

This passage says sinners must believe the Father to be saved. Calvinism does not.
So wheres the verse that says man has a freewill ? I have been studying scripture over 40yrs, and have never seen a scripture stating man has a freewill, not even alluding to !
 

TomFL

Well-known member
1) Do we have the freedom to believe or reject the gospel?

That is the bottom line; answer that, and everything else falls in place.
Yes


"
sketo

There is no biblical warrant to use the phrase "free will", since the Bible never affirms or uses this term in the sense that the will is free from God!
That's rather funny when the bible itself uses the term

Absolutely correct. In fact James alludes to this and calls it sin James 4 13-17

Go to now, ye that say, To day or to morrow we will go into such a city, and continue there a year, and buy and sell, and get gain:

whereas ye know not what shall be on the morrow. For what is your life? It is even a vapour, that appeareth for a little time, and then vanisheth away.

For that ye ought to say, If the Lord will, we shall live, and do this, or that.

But now ye rejoice in your boastings: all such rejoicing is evil

Therefore to him that knoweth to do good, and doeth it not, to him it is sin.

Mans will is never free from the Sovereign will of God in our life !
The bible says nothing at all about free will being sin

Nothing
 

brightfame52

Well-known member
Yes


"

That's rather funny when the bible itself uses the term


The bible says nothing at all about free will being sin

Nothing
I have never seen one scripture that says man has a freewill. You have opportunity now to show me one I may have overlooked.
 

TomFL

Well-known member
I have never seen one scripture that says man has a freewill. You have opportunity now to show me one I may have overlooked.
Philem. 1:14 —NASB
“but without your consent I did not want to do anything, that your goodness should not be as it were by compulsion, but of your own free will.”
 

brightfame52

Well-known member
Philem. 1:14 —NASB
“but without your consent I did not want to do anything, that your goodness should not be as it were by compulsion, but of your own free will.”
Dude that verse doesn't say man has a freewill. Its just talking about man voluntarily doing something. Man has that ability !
 

TomFL

Well-known member
Dude that verse doesn't say man has a freewill. Its just talking about man voluntarily doing something. Man has that ability !

You did read ?

Philem. 1:14 —NASB
“but without your consent I did not want to do anything, that your goodness should not be as it were by compulsion, but of your own free will.”
 

Theo1689

Well-known member
You did read ?

Philem. 1:14 —NASB
“but without your consent I did not want to do anything, that your goodness should not be as it were by compulsion, but of your own free will.”

Yes, but that simply means, "uncoerced", or as that very verse says, "not ... by compulsion".
It does NOT say "libertarian free will, independent of God".
 

TomFL

Well-known member
Yes, but that simply means, "uncoerced", or as that very verse says, "not ... by compulsion".
It does NOT say "libertarian free will, independent of God".

First this was the comment

I have never seen one scripture that says man has a freewill.

Why are you trying to change it

and as for the rest


Newsflash that is a definition of free will



the power of acting without the constraint of necessity or fate; the ability to act at one's own discretion.

free′ will′. n. 1. free and independent choice; voluntary decision.

Definition of freewill

(Entry 1 of 2)
: VOLUNTARY

Synonyms & Antonyms for freewill


Synonyms: Adjective

 
Top