Replies

I would argue that Adam, before the fall, had free will. Yes?

I am sorry I should have narrowed it to after the fall. Adam being made in the image of God had free will. That Free will is now bound by that sin.

Thus, I would have to make a slight variation, and argue that until God's resistible grace was given, mans will was not free, it was bound by sin and unable to choose Christ.

But if the man was bound how could he reach out an take that grace? Didn't he need to be freed first?

The entire sense of the word Justice seems to require it.

You are describing justice as man describes justice. Like a small child yelling "it is not fair"

The problem is if God does what is fair all men will be damned to hell, for that is what we all deserve. THAT is justice. There is NONE righteous no not one.

We all deserve hell. The wonder is that God saves any. The Arminian theology makes God a debtor to man.

Man has the choice and God is then forced to abide by the choice of man..who is god in this situation?

Do you allow God the same free will that you give to men? Can He determine what is just or must he wait for man to tell him?

Is it Mercy if man earns salvation by a correct choice?

Sure, I could trot out the Arminian support passages. Like when Jesus says "O Jerusalem, Jerusalem, who kills the prophets and stones those who are sent to her! How often I wanted to gather your children together, the way a hen gathers her chicks under her wings, and you were unwilling." (Matthew 23:37)

That was Jesus the Savior weeping that all will not be saved.That was not Jesus the judge that we have yet to see.

As the Savior Jesus was willing to save all men(His blood was suffuicent to save all men.) But Jesus came here to do the will of the Father.

Jhn 6:38 For I came down from heaven, not to do mine own will, but the will of him that sent me.

The Father elects, Christ redeems, and the Holy Spirit applies redemptive grace to sinners.

But if the man was bound how could he reach out an take that grace? Didn't he need to be freed first?

Yes, through the moving of the Holy Spirit on his heart, the quickening. My understanding is that this is the restoring of the person to the free will that Adam had.

Man has the choice and God is then forced to abide by the choice of man..who is god in this situation?

Good argument. But I see it as a gift. God offers a gift. Some accept it, some don't. Does this make the gift-receivers god-like, or make God their debtor? I don't think so. For a Christian, the Gift was already offered and accepted, there is no debt. God is not "forced to abide" by the choice of the gift receiver, rather, the would-be gift-receiver is forced to choose between life and death. As Moses said, we should "choose life"

Do you allow God the same free will that you give to men? Can He determine what is just or must he wait for man to tell him?

God has determined what is just. He has since told us what our choices are. God is the God of Justice, and all our sense of Justice comes from Him. We cannot fully understand God, nor His justice. But we can read the choices written for us in His word.

Is it Mercy if man earns salvation by a correct choice?

What earns? Man is totally depraved, God quickens him, calls him, grants him the ability to make a choice to believe. If he believes, if he accepts the incredible free gift then he is saved. Not by works, not by offerings he makes, not even by obedience, just faith. The leap of faith is not a work. A choice is not a work.

As the Savior Jesus was willing to save all men(His blood was suffuicent to save all men.) But Jesus came here to do the will of the Father.

Jhn 6:38 For I came down from heaven, not to do mine own will, but the will of him that sent me.

The Father elects, Christ redeems, and the Holy Spirit applies redemptive grace to sinners.

That's interesting. I hadn't run across that yet, thanks for bringing it up. Of course, I immediately saw where the Father and the Son were willing two different things - an internally conflicted God? I'll have to think about that, though, I'm not dismissing it.

Here is an interesting passage:
Deuteronomy 18
18 'I will raise up a prophet from among their countrymen like you, and I will put My words in his mouth, and he shall speak to them all that I command him.
19 'It shall come about that whoever will not listen to My words which he shall speak in My name, I Myself will require it of him.

Emphasis mine, of course, but seems to indicate to me an act of will. If the plan was to use the words the the Prophet (Jesus) to only save the elect, then wouldn't it have made more sense to write it: 'It shall come about that whoever I do not choose to listen to My words which he shall speak in My name, I Myself will require it of him.