For any of the skeptics, I recommend Jack Deere's Surprised by the Power of the Spirit, which delivers a coup de grace to the cessationist viewpoint. God does speak today, especially in the third world where "power evangelism" is taking effect and people witness miracles and by and large don't doubt the supernatural. Argentina has been having such a revival that obese people have been reported to have instantly lost 30 or more pounds! They say that the West brought the knowledge of God and the third world the power of God. Soli Deo Gloria!
To bridge the gap between so-called theologians and regular "students" of the Word and make polemics palatable. Contact me @ bloggerbro@outlook.com To search title keywords: title:example or label as label:example; or enter a keyword in search engine ATTN: SITE USING COOKIES!
About Me
- Karl Broberg
- I am a born-again Christian, who is Reformed, but also charismatic, spiritually speaking. (I do not speak in tongues, but I believe glossalalia is a bona fide gift not given to all, and not as great as prophecy, for example.) I have several years of college education but only completed a two-year degree. I was raised Lutheran and confirmed, but I didn't "find Christ" until I was in the Army and responded to a Billy Graham crusade in 1973. I was mentored or discipled by the Navigators in the army and upon discharge joined several evangelical, Bible-teaching churches. I was baptized as an infant, but believe in believer baptism, of which I was a partaker after my conversion experience. I believe in the "5 Onlys" of the reformation: sola fide (faith alone); sola Scriptura (Scripture alone); soli Christo (Christ alone), sola gratia (grace alone), and soli Deo gloria (to God alone be the glory). I affirm TULIP as defended in the Reformation.. I affirm most of The Westminster Confession of Faith, especially pertaining to Providence.
Tuesday, May 10, 2011
On The Enslaved Will
Martin Luther said that the freedom of the will is a grandiose term and fit only for God. Our wills are enslaved to the old sin nature and inclined to evil. They are biased and prone to evil, not good. Luther said that man has not ceased to be man, but ceased to be good. We are only free in the sense that God doesn't force us to do evil--we do it on our own volition. St. Augustine, Bishop of Hippo, said that we are "free, but not freed." This is not a mind game, but only stressing that we don't have liberty, though we are responsible moral agents. We concur with our evil and no one forces us to do evil, which would be determinism or coercion. We are voluntary slaves to evil. God doesn't force anyone to do something he doesn't want to do. There is no outside force pulling strings.
There are many Bible verses that stress the lack of freedom to respond to Christ on our own without the wooing of the Spirit. "No one can come to Me unless the Father who sent Me draws him." "It is not of him that willeth, nor of him that runneth, but of God who showeth mercy." "Who are born not of blood, nor of the will of the flesh, nor of the will of man, but of God. " "The way of man is not in himself."
The freedom of the will so to speak is a curse, since we are free to do evil. Augustine said that we are non posse non peccare, which means we can only do evil. Luther said the will can only do evil, too.
According to Martin Luther, the will is enslaved to the old sin nature and not free. Augustine of Hippo said that the will is "free but not freed." He wasn't playing mind games but saying that we are responsible agents to God for our choices, but don't have liberty. He doesn't force us to do evil, because we do it on our own initiative. The freedom of the will is a curse because we can only do evil according to Luther. Where did free will help Esau? There are many Bible verses that show that man doesn't have free will as far as the ability to choose and come to Christ apart from grace(see John 6:44, 65), and the wooing of the Spirit. "For who can resist His will?" (Rom. 9:19). "It is not of him that willeth ...." "Who were born not of blood, nor of the will of the flesh, nor of the will of man, but of God." "For the way of man is not in himself, it is not in man that walketh to direct his steps" (Jer. 10:23).
We are biased or prone to evil, not good. Martin Luther said we have not ceased to be man, but have ceased to be good. The whole matter can be summed up in the phrase: "We don't need free will--we need wills made free!" We are inclined to evil, not good--the ability lost at the fall.
This is one of the oldest debates in Christendom. The British monk Pelagius and St. Augustine, Bishop of Hippo debated it and so did Luther and Desiderius Erasmus of Rotterdam. The prevalence of the doctrine of freedom of the will in today's church is due to the influence of the Wesleyan Arminians. Don't let anyone make you think that the bondage of the will is a new doctrine or that it is not orthodox, because it is the original doctrine defended by the church fathers and the reformers.
Soli Deo Gloria!
There are many Bible verses that stress the lack of freedom to respond to Christ on our own without the wooing of the Spirit. "No one can come to Me unless the Father who sent Me draws him." "It is not of him that willeth, nor of him that runneth, but of God who showeth mercy." "Who are born not of blood, nor of the will of the flesh, nor of the will of man, but of God. " "The way of man is not in himself."
The freedom of the will so to speak is a curse, since we are free to do evil. Augustine said that we are non posse non peccare, which means we can only do evil. Luther said the will can only do evil, too.
According to Martin Luther, the will is enslaved to the old sin nature and not free. Augustine of Hippo said that the will is "free but not freed." He wasn't playing mind games but saying that we are responsible agents to God for our choices, but don't have liberty. He doesn't force us to do evil, because we do it on our own initiative. The freedom of the will is a curse because we can only do evil according to Luther. Where did free will help Esau? There are many Bible verses that show that man doesn't have free will as far as the ability to choose and come to Christ apart from grace(see John 6:44, 65), and the wooing of the Spirit. "For who can resist His will?" (Rom. 9:19). "It is not of him that willeth ...." "Who were born not of blood, nor of the will of the flesh, nor of the will of man, but of God." "For the way of man is not in himself, it is not in man that walketh to direct his steps" (Jer. 10:23).
We are biased or prone to evil, not good. Martin Luther said we have not ceased to be man, but have ceased to be good. The whole matter can be summed up in the phrase: "We don't need free will--we need wills made free!" We are inclined to evil, not good--the ability lost at the fall.
This is one of the oldest debates in Christendom. The British monk Pelagius and St. Augustine, Bishop of Hippo debated it and so did Luther and Desiderius Erasmus of Rotterdam. The prevalence of the doctrine of freedom of the will in today's church is due to the influence of the Wesleyan Arminians. Don't let anyone make you think that the bondage of the will is a new doctrine or that it is not orthodox, because it is the original doctrine defended by the church fathers and the reformers.
Soli Deo Gloria!
Is The Will In Bondage?
According to Martin Luther, the will is enslaved to the old sin nature and not free. St. Augustine, Bishop of Hippo said that the will is "free but not freed." He wasn't playing mind games but saying that we are responsible agents to God for our choices, but don't have liberty. He doesn't force us to do evil, because we do it on our own initiative. The freedom of the will is a curse because we can only do evil according to Luther.
Where did free will help Esau? There are many Bible verses that show that man doesn't have free will as far as the ability to choose and come to Christ apart from grace and the wooing of the Spirit. "For who can resist His will?" "It is not of him that willeth ..." "Who were born not of blood, nor of the will of the flesh, nor of the will of man, but of God." "For the way of man is not in himself, it is not in man that walketh to direct his steps."
We are biased or prone to evil, not good. Martin Luther said we have not ceased to be man, but have ceased to be good. The whole matter can be summed up in the phrase: "We don't need free will--we need wills made free!" We are inclined to evil, not good--the ability lost at the fall.
This is one of the oldest debates in Christendom. Pelagius and Augustine debated it and so did Luther and Erasmus of Rotterdam. The prevalence of the doctrine of freedom of the will in today's church is due to the influence of the Wesleyan Arminians. Don't let anyone make you think that the bondage of the will is a new doctrine or that it is not orthodox, because it is the orthodox doctrine defended by the church fathers and the reformers. Soli Deo Gloria!
Where did free will help Esau? There are many Bible verses that show that man doesn't have free will as far as the ability to choose and come to Christ apart from grace and the wooing of the Spirit. "For who can resist His will?" "It is not of him that willeth ..." "Who were born not of blood, nor of the will of the flesh, nor of the will of man, but of God." "For the way of man is not in himself, it is not in man that walketh to direct his steps."
We are biased or prone to evil, not good. Martin Luther said we have not ceased to be man, but have ceased to be good. The whole matter can be summed up in the phrase: "We don't need free will--we need wills made free!" We are inclined to evil, not good--the ability lost at the fall.
This is one of the oldest debates in Christendom. Pelagius and Augustine debated it and so did Luther and Erasmus of Rotterdam. The prevalence of the doctrine of freedom of the will in today's church is due to the influence of the Wesleyan Arminians. Don't let anyone make you think that the bondage of the will is a new doctrine or that it is not orthodox, because it is the orthodox doctrine defended by the church fathers and the reformers. Soli Deo Gloria!
Does Prayer Work?...
"Prayer works," the preacher says, "so come on up and we'll pray for your needs." (A spiritual vending machine.) The objection I have is that TM works and yoga works, but we don't try them. Just because something works doesn't mean it is true, that is not the criterion. Lee Strobel says that Christianity works because it is true, it is not true because it works. We should pray, even if we don't feel we are getting from God what we want, as it were, our genie giving us our so-called "felt needs" or wants.
"We pray for the sake of praying," says Steven Brown "not for ulterior motives." I've heard it said that prayer is the goal of prayer! Someone has wisely said that we should love God even if there were no heaven and fear God even if there were no hell! Well, we should have the desire to commune with God, even if we don't get our way. God is looking for a relationship, not someone just praying for needs.
The paradigm of prayer (most clearly seen in the so-called Lord's Prayer) should always include the phrase "in Jesus' name" (it is for his sake and will that we really want to pray). Now, some preachers think their prayers are more "effectual" (James. 5:16) than others, but they are not--all Christians are righteous in God's eyes and no believer has a privileged status. Any Christian can pray without giving up and "fervently" to get his will aligned with God's. We don't change God, he changes us. You see, we are all on an equal footing in prayer--that is the beauty--God is no respecter of persons and shows no partiality.
Some say that worry works because 90 percent of what we worry about doesn't happen! Well, with that kind of logic prayer isn't as effective as worry, because I don't think anyone can say that 90 percent of their prayers were answered in the affirmative--if they are, they are not very challenging prayers. God can answer in the affirmative, negative (usually for our own good or He has something better for us) or tell us to wait. But we should never give up hope unless God clearly says "no" like he did to Paul's thorn in the flesh.
But bear this in mind: God has arranged it so that we can explain away answered prayers if we so desire--he doesn't force us to believe, but faith pleases him. Well, prayer does work, but that is not why we pray! Soli Deo Gloria!
"We pray for the sake of praying," says Steven Brown "not for ulterior motives." I've heard it said that prayer is the goal of prayer! Someone has wisely said that we should love God even if there were no heaven and fear God even if there were no hell! Well, we should have the desire to commune with God, even if we don't get our way. God is looking for a relationship, not someone just praying for needs.
The paradigm of prayer (most clearly seen in the so-called Lord's Prayer) should always include the phrase "in Jesus' name" (it is for his sake and will that we really want to pray). Now, some preachers think their prayers are more "effectual" (James. 5:16) than others, but they are not--all Christians are righteous in God's eyes and no believer has a privileged status. Any Christian can pray without giving up and "fervently" to get his will aligned with God's. We don't change God, he changes us. You see, we are all on an equal footing in prayer--that is the beauty--God is no respecter of persons and shows no partiality.
Some say that worry works because 90 percent of what we worry about doesn't happen! Well, with that kind of logic prayer isn't as effective as worry, because I don't think anyone can say that 90 percent of their prayers were answered in the affirmative--if they are, they are not very challenging prayers. God can answer in the affirmative, negative (usually for our own good or He has something better for us) or tell us to wait. But we should never give up hope unless God clearly says "no" like he did to Paul's thorn in the flesh.
But bear this in mind: God has arranged it so that we can explain away answered prayers if we so desire--he doesn't force us to believe, but faith pleases him. Well, prayer does work, but that is not why we pray! Soli Deo Gloria!
Is Science Compatible with Faith?
Science was made possible by the discovery of a rational universe, perceived by a rational mind, using rational modus operandi. Induction, deduction, experimentation, measurement, repeatability, theory, and hypothesis make science possible. The Eastern religions don't believe in a rational universe, but in Maya or that the universe is a figment of our imagination or that it isn't really real. It was the Christian worldview of fifteenth-century Europe that really got the scientific method off to its debut. Sir Francis Bacon is considered the father of the scientific method.
All of the early great scientists (Galileo, Kepler, Copernicus, Newton, Pascal, Bacon, Maxwell, et al., were all Christians). In fact, science owes its existence to Christianity. But the ironic thing is that now science seems to be thinking that religion, in general, is the "enemy" and incompatible with the scientific method. Every system of thought begins with some presupposition that cannot be proved.
All worldviews require presuppositions and so-called "natural science," as opposed to the supernatural, does too. In fact, it takes more faith to believe a naturalistic universe without any intentional design than it does to simply believe in a supreme being. The evidence is in favor of a deity but people are not willing to take the leap of faith in the direction of the faith because of moral issues, not intellectual problems. They don't believe because they don't want to believe, not because they can't. "Even though he performed many miracles there, they would [not could] not believe in him" (John 12:37, NIV).
Be sure to note that he who believes science conflicts with the Bible understands neither. Einstein said, "Religion without science is blind; science without religion is lame."
NB: SCIENTISTS WHO BELIEVE THAT SCIENCE IS THE ONLY WAY TO TRUTH OR KNOWLEDGE DON'T REALIZE THAT THERE ARE DOMAINS OUTSIDE THE PROVINCE OF SCIENCE SUCH AS ETHICS, HISTORY, AND PHILOSOPHY. THEY ARE BETTING THE FARM THAT THE ONLY WAY TO TRUTH IS SCIENTIFIC EMPIRICISM: BOTH POSITIONS REQUIRE FAITH AND ARE BASED ON SOME PRESUPPOSITION THAT CANNOT BE PROVED. Soli Deo Gloria!
All of the early great scientists (Galileo, Kepler, Copernicus, Newton, Pascal, Bacon, Maxwell, et al., were all Christians). In fact, science owes its existence to Christianity. But the ironic thing is that now science seems to be thinking that religion, in general, is the "enemy" and incompatible with the scientific method. Every system of thought begins with some presupposition that cannot be proved.
All worldviews require presuppositions and so-called "natural science," as opposed to the supernatural, does too. In fact, it takes more faith to believe a naturalistic universe without any intentional design than it does to simply believe in a supreme being. The evidence is in favor of a deity but people are not willing to take the leap of faith in the direction of the faith because of moral issues, not intellectual problems. They don't believe because they don't want to believe, not because they can't. "Even though he performed many miracles there, they would [not could] not believe in him" (John 12:37, NIV).
Be sure to note that he who believes science conflicts with the Bible understands neither. Einstein said, "Religion without science is blind; science without religion is lame."
NB: SCIENTISTS WHO BELIEVE THAT SCIENCE IS THE ONLY WAY TO TRUTH OR KNOWLEDGE DON'T REALIZE THAT THERE ARE DOMAINS OUTSIDE THE PROVINCE OF SCIENCE SUCH AS ETHICS, HISTORY, AND PHILOSOPHY. THEY ARE BETTING THE FARM THAT THE ONLY WAY TO TRUTH IS SCIENTIFIC EMPIRICISM: BOTH POSITIONS REQUIRE FAITH AND ARE BASED ON SOME PRESUPPOSITION THAT CANNOT BE PROVED. Soli Deo Gloria!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)