An Example?

[Reformationist]

Hello everyone.

As is often the case, I was recently informed that man has "free will." Now, we have all probably had more discussions on this topic than we thought possible so I want to assure you that I do not intend for this to be the same type of discussion. I am truly interested in your response and so I simply ask that, for the purpose of actually discussing this topic, any who participate keep their comments controlled.

There is, for me at least, a bit of mystery surrounding the claim that man has "free will." This is in part due to the various ways in which people employ that claim.

So, in light of the fact that there may be differences in how people define "free will," I suggest that on your initial response each participant define the manner in which they understand "free will." I will start:

I believe man's will is free only to the extent that he will choose that which he most desires at the moment of choice. In fact, as a rational creature, he must choose according to his greatest desire or inclination at the moment of choice.

Now, such a claim is essential to my understanding of the desparity between the "freedom" of the will of unregenerate man vice regenerate man. I do not believe that pleasing God is ever the greatest desire of unregenerate man, therefore, it is never the driving motivation for anything he does. It is my desire that we discuss the influence that our desires hold over our will and, specifically, how our desires regulate, and even limit, our ability to choose "freely."

To facilitate my point, I would ask any who participate to think of a time when they made a choice to do something they were unwilling to do. I ask for such an example because I do not believe man is capable of choosing to do that which he is unwilling to do. Now, this may seem like a given to some of you, but it is this very contention that I am regularly told is the driving force in man's "acceptance of Christ." I am told, "Man's will is inherently free to serve and obey God in righteousness, he often just isn't willing to do so." That, to me, seems like an oxymoron, "He's able but not willing."

I would say that a person's unwillingness to do something effectively negates his ability to do it.

If you disagree with that, please provide an example of a time when you chose to do something you were unwilling to do followed by your reason for doing it.

Thank you for your participation.

God bless

[AshenK]

Hello everyone.

As is often the case, I was recently informed that man has "free will." Now, we have all probably had more discussions on this topic than we thought possible so I want to assure you that I do not intend for this to be the same type of discussion. I am truly interested in your response and so I simply ask that, for the purpose of actually discussing this topic, any who participate keep their comments controlled.

There is, for me at least, a bit of mystery surrounding the claim that man has "free will." This is in part due to the various ways in which people employ that claim.

So, in light of the fact that there may be differences in how people define "free will," I suggest that on your initial response each participant define the manner in which they understand "free will." I will start:

I believe man's will is free only to the extent that he will choose that which he most desires at the moment of choice. In fact, as a rational creature, he must choose according to his greatest desire or inclination at the moment of choice.

Now, such a claim is essential to my understanding of the desparity between the "freedom" of the will of unregenerate man vice regenerate man. I do not believe that pleasing God is ever the greatest desire of unregenerate man, therefore, it is never the driving motivation for anything he does. It is my desire that we discuss the influence that our desires hold over our will and, specifically, how our desires regulate, and even limit, our ability to choose "freely."

To facilitate my point, I would ask any who participate to think of a time when they made a choice to do something they were unwilling to do. I ask for such an example because I do not believe man is capable of choosing to do that which he is unwilling to do. Now, this may seem like a given to some of you, but it is this very contention that I am regularly told is the driving force in man's "acceptance of Christ." I am told, "Man's will is inherently free to serve and obey God in righteousness, he often just isn't willing to do so." That, to me, seems like an oxymoron, "He's able but not willing."

I would say that a person's unwillingness to do something effectively negates his ability to do it.

If you disagree with that, please provide an example of a time when you chose to do something you were unwilling to do followed by your reason for doing it.

Thank you for your participation.

God bless

God gave man authority on this earth and told us to subdue it. (Genesis 1:28) Man gave authority to satan in the garden, and came under the curse, that's why Jesus calls Satan the prince of this world. Jesus came in the form of a man through the covenant of abraham and redeemed (or restored authority) to mankind.

God's will won't come to pass simply because He wants it to. We have to let Him work through us. God forces nothing on us, and only has good things in store for us.

[Forest]

...........I believe man's will is free only to the extent that he will choose that which he most desires at the moment of choice. In fact, as a rational creature, he must choose according to his greatest desire or inclination at the moment of choice.

I don't quite understand that. I often choose to do what needs to be done rather than what I would desire to do. I would also admit that some of my choices are based on emtional rather than rational thought.

Now, such a claim is essential to my understanding of the desparity between the "freedom" of the will of unregenerate man vice regenerate man. I do not believe that pleasing God is ever the greatest desire of unregenerate man, therefore, it is never the driving motivation for anything he does. It is my desire that we discuss the influence that our desires hold over our will and, specifically, how our desires regulate, and even limit, our ability to choose "freely."

Are you talking about what Paul was saying here?...
Romans 7:21

To facilitate my point, I would ask any who participate to think of a time when they made a choice to do something they were unwilling to do. I ask for such an example because I do not believe man is capable of choosing to do that which he is unwilling to do. Now, this may seem like a given to some of you, but it is this very contention that I am regularly told is the driving force in man's "acceptance of Christ." I am told, "Man's will is inherently free to serve and obey God in righteousness, he often just isn't willing to do so." That, to me, seems like an oxymoron, "He's able but not willing."

I was 100% unwilling to take speach class, until they told me I wouldn't graduate.

Didn't I still have the ability to choose to take the class, or not?



God bless
Amen.

[Reformationist]

God gave man authority on this earth and told us to subdue it. (Genesis 1:28) Man gave authority to satan in the garden, and came under the curse, that's why Jesus calls Satan the prince of this world. Jesus came in the form of a man through the covenant of abraham and redeemed (or restored authority) to mankind.

God's will won't come to pass simply because He wants it to. We have to let Him work through us. God forces nothing on us, and only has good things in store for us.

For future respondents, this is how I'd rather you DON'T reply. I was very clear in what I was asking. If I wasn't, please ask for clarification. I'd rather this not go off on a tangent.

AshenK, if you are interested in discussing the issues you address in your post, please start a thread on it. I would ask that you don't turn this into a topic that I did not ask about.

Thank you for your consideration.

God bless

[Reformationist]

I don't quite understand that. I often choose to do what needs to be done rather than what I would desire to do.

Can you give me an example as well as your reason for choosing to do it?

I would also admit that some of my choices are based on emtional rather than rational thought.

Can you give an example of such a choice?



Are you talking about what Paul was saying here?...

Not at this point. If you feel that Scripture backs up your position then I encourage you to post it. Right now I'm just asking if anyone has a practical example of a time when they chose to do something that was not their greatest desire, or something that they were unwilling to do.

I was 100% unwilling to take speach class, until they told me I wouldn't graduate.

And this simply proves my point. You were unwilling to do something until not taking the class proved less of a desire than not graduating. So, in this scenario, you had a greater desire to graduate than you had to avoid speech class. Wouldn't you say?

Didn't I still have the ability to choose to take the class, or not?

It seems to me that that depends on what you desired more, i.e., avoiding speech class or graduating. It seems, as I said, that your desire to graduate was greater than your desire to avoid speech class, thereby rendering you unable to refrain from taking speech class. Had your desire to avoid taking a graduation requirement been greater than your desire to graduate you would have, obviously, chosen to not take speech class.

Do you agree?

God bless

[awildflowerlady]

"Man's will is inherently free to serve and obey God in righteousness, he often just isn't willing to do so."

I believe I can give you a good example of this.

When I married, some 16 years ago, I never ONCE had ANY thoughts of having children.

I never babysat nor did I seek out the baby found in the room full of people.

Within the first year of marriage I was pregnant, a "pill baby". I did not want to be, however I would not murder - so I had the baby.

From the get go I was not thrilled about it, but did it and to the best of my ability. Two years later, on the heels of a mis-carriage (again unplanned) I was pregnant with son #2. As with the first, it was something I was not thrilled about, but have made the absolute best of the situation.

I have grown to dearly love my children BUT I am VERY glad they are no longer babies, pre-teens now. I have the hardest time still, enjoying babies, but I will put on a happy face, gather up as much gumption as I can muster and give a helping hand to anyone with a baby that needs the assistance. I still do not seek out babies in crowded rooms and I will be happiest to hand off a baby to someone else's lap as soon as possible.

I would have to say that my free will to NOT have children was effected - however I would need to condition that by including that I could have NOT participated in sex or used six methods of BC at one time to prevent it from happening.

[AshenK]

For future respondents, this is how I'd rather you DON'T reply. I was very clear in what I was asking. If I wasn't, please ask for clarification. I'd rather this not go off on a tangent.

AshenK, if you are interested in discussing the issues you address in your post, please start a thread on it. I would ask that you don't turn this into a topic that I did not ask about.

Thank you for your consideration.

God bless

Sorry. I wasn't clear on what you said, so I was explaining the reason behind man's completely free will.

[Forest]

Can you give me an example as well as your reason for choosing to do it?

Many people go to work, even though they would rather not. The reason would be to keep the job.


Can you give an example of such a choice?

Getting mad at my boss and quitting my job.


And this simply proves my point. You were unwilling to do something until not taking the class proved less of a desire than not graduating. So, in this scenario, you had a greater desire to graduate than you had to avoid speech class. Wouldn't you say?

Yes, but how does that negate the ability to choose to take the other route?

Also, what is the distinction between asking...

I did something I was unwilling to do.
I did something that was impossible to do.

I'm not sure that the question isn't an oxymoron.

[Reformationist]

I believe I can give you a good example of this.

When I married, some 16 years ago, I never ONCE had ANY thoughts of having children.

I never babysat nor did I seek out the baby found in the room full of people.

Within the first year of marriage I was pregnant, a "pill baby". I did not want to be, however I would not murder - so I had the baby.

From the get go I was not thrilled about it, but did it and to the best of my ability. Two years later, on the heels of a mis-carriage (again unplanned) I was pregnant with son #2. As with the first, it was something I was not thrilled about, but have made the absolute best of the situation.

I have grown to dearly love my children BUT I am VERY glad they are no longer babies, pre-teens now. I have the hardest time still, enjoying babies, but I will put on a happy face, gather up as much gumption as I can muster and give a helping hand to anyone with a baby that needs the assistance. I still do not seek out babies in crowded rooms and I will be happiest to hand off a baby to someone else's lap as soon as possible.

I would have to say that my free will to NOT have children was effected - however I would need to condition that by including that I could have NOT participated in sex or used six methods of BC at one time to prevent it from happening.

Awildflowerlady, first, thank you for your response. I'm a bit confused though. I don't see any mention of something you chose to do that you were unwilling to do. You do mention that you'd rather have not been pregnant but you still chose to go ahead with the pregnancy instead of murdering your child. This, to me, seems a clear example of my position. You desire to not be pregnant paled in comparison to you desire to refrain from murder. Such a position I completely agree with but, as I said, it seems to only enforce my position.

At the end of your post you state, "My free will to not have children was effected - however I would need to condition that by including that I could have not participated in sex or used six methods of BC at one time to prevent it from happening." This, to me, seems to be an admission that your "free will to not have children" was, in fact, not affected by your desire to not have children. It seems as if you had a greater desire to engage in sexual relations, even at the cost of getting pregnant (something you desired not to happen), that you chose according to your greatest desire. That is, again, an example of my position.

Do you see what I'm saying or was that confusing?

Thanks,
God bless

[Reformationist]

Sorry. I wasn't clear on what you said, so I was explaining the reason behind man's completely free will.

First, I appreciate the apology and will tell you that my response was merely to keep the discussion on track. I believe that the points that you made would make for a good discussion. I just didn't want that discussion to happen here. Now, at the risk of doing exactly what I requested others not do, I will simply state that I don't see anything in your post which supports the idea that man's will is completely free. Sorry but maybe I am just not understanding how your post showed that.

God bless

[Asaph]

Reformationist, brother, I have been brought to the very place you are refering to, and I only know I was there because I blew it.

And as I stood there, suddenly in my face was my own horrid actuality.

Oh my God. That hurts so much I'm not even sure I'm going to post it!


Asaph

[Reformationist]

Many people go to work, even though they would rather not. The reason would be to keep the job.

So, in truth, they have a greater desire to keep their job than not go to work, wouldn't you say?

Getting mad at my boss and quitting my job.

In that scenario you have the option to tell your boss how you feel or bite your tongue. Clearly, you would have a greater desire to tell your boss how you feel than hold your peace. You may think better of it later, as is often the case when we are calm. However, at the moment you choose to get mad at your boss and quit, you had a greater desire to do that than control yourself and retain your job.

Yes, but how does that negate the ability to choose to take the other route?

Simply because it is our nature to seek that which we most desire. Man is a desire driven creature. This is why sinful desires exert such influence over the lives of all people, even Christians. Sin is born of the desires of man's heart (seat of reason). When man's greatest desire is to sin, he sins. I have never heard of a single instance of someone choosing to obey the Lord when they had a greater desire to disobey. It may not seem a fair question but it is definitely an important one if we wish to understand why we choose in the manner that we do. Our choices are not ambiguous ones. When we resist the devil its not because we don't ever have the desire to sin. If we had no desire to sin then resisting the devil would be rather simple, don't you think? The reason anyone resists the impulses of their sinful flesh is because the desire to please God reigns stronger.

Also, what is the distinction between asking...

I did something I was unwilling to do.
I did something that was impossible to do.

The question is not logical. If you did it then it wasn't impossible. If it's impossible, you cannot do it.

My position is that, if a person is unwilling to do something, their unwillingness makes it impossible for them to do. Now, we may not enjoy doing something. In a moment of clarity we may be able to say, "Well, I don't want to sin." Regardless, when we are tempted to sin, the reason we may not is because we have a greater desire to obey God. If that is not the case, then we submit to our flesh and sin. It is for this very reason that we are encouraged to nurture our faith, that it be the force that drives us when we are tempted.

I'm not sure that the question isn't an oxymoron.

I don't know why you think it would be an oxymoron. Can you explain?

Thanks,
God bless

[Reformationist]

Reformationist, brother, I have been brought to the very place you are refering to, and I only know I was there because I blew it.

And as I stood there, suddenly in my face was my own horrid actuality.

Oh my God. That hurts so much I'm not even sure I'm going to post it!


Asaph

Well, it seems you are clearly distraught over whatever happened and I pray that the Lord gives you peace my brother, but, I'm not sure I understand what you're talking about. :confused:

God bless

[Reformationist]

In light of something that Forest said, I would just like to offer some food for thought. He mentioned that his choices may be emotional in nature rather than rational. The problem with such a claim, if one is using it to prove the freedom of man's will, is that it is actually contrary to that position. If someone's will controlled by one's emotions then one's will is not actually free, at least not in the way that the phrase, "free will," is often employed. Either your will is truly free or it is influenced to the degree that it is controlled. The Apostle Paul touches upon this incongruity a number of times. For instance, instead of proclaiming the freedom of man's will, he acknowledges that we are slaves to whatever we submit to:

Romans 6:16
Do you not know that to whom you present yourselves slaves to obey, you are that one's slaves whom you obey, whether of sin leading to death, or of obedience leading to righteousness?

God bless

[AshenK]

Discard

[Reformationist]

Definitely wouldn't want my thread going off-topic.

I was trying to say that man's free will, started at the garden. When God gave us authority (dominion) He gave us the free will to do as we choose. Then, I was also trying to say that we can choose to let God work in our lives, or choose to let Him not work.

See, I don't think God restricts us in away or forces anything upon us. I believe we have a completely free will.

Man!!! It's posts like that that make me itch to violate my own thread request to stay on topic!! ^_^ :D ^_^

Well, maybe some other time AK. :wave:

So, on topic, can you think of an example of a time that your will was "completely free" to do something you were unwilling to do? Or a time when you acted contrary to your greatest desire?

God bless

[Asaph]

Well, it seems you are clearly distraught over whatever happened and I pray that the Lord gives you peace my brother, but, I'm not sure I understand what you're talking about. :confused:

God bless


Thank you :)

Asaph

[repoland2]

Hello everyone.

As is often the case, I was recently informed that man has "free will." Now, we have all probably had more discussions on this topic than we thought possible so I want to assure you that I do not intend for this to be the same type of discussion. I am truly interested in your response and so I simply ask that, for the purpose of actually discussing this topic, any who participate keep their comments controlled.

There is, for me at least, a bit of mystery surrounding the claim that man has "free will." This is in part due to the various ways in which people employ that claim.

So, in light of the fact that there may be differences in how people define "free will," I suggest that on your initial response each participant define the manner in which they understand "free will." I will start:

I believe man's will is free only to the extent that he will choose that which he most desires at the moment of choice. In fact, as a rational creature, he must choose according to his greatest desire or inclination at the moment of choice.

Now, such a claim is essential to my understanding of the desparity between the "freedom" of the will of unregenerate man vice regenerate man. I do not believe that pleasing God is ever the greatest desire of unregenerate man, therefore, it is never the driving motivation for anything he does. It is my desire that we discuss the influence that our desires hold over our will and, specifically, how our desires regulate, and even limit, our ability to choose "freely."

To facilitate my point, I would ask any who participate to think of a time when they made a choice to do something they were unwilling to do. I ask for such an example because I do not believe man is capable of choosing to do that which he is unwilling to do. Now, this may seem like a given to some of you, but it is this very contention that I am regularly told is the driving force in man's "acceptance of Christ." I am told, "Man's will is inherently free to serve and obey God in righteousness, he often just isn't willing to do so." That, to me, seems like an oxymoron, "He's able but not willing."

I would say that a person's unwillingness to do something effectively negates his ability to do it.

If you disagree with that, please provide an example of a time when you chose to do something you were unwilling to do followed by your reason for doing it.

Thank you for your participation.

God bless

First, I would like to explain my understanding of free will. I believe that God gave us a (for lack of a better term) God like ability to make our own choices to do as we please. I feel, however, that the Lord's main desire is for each of US, who walk with Him and Love Him as a Father, Brother and Friend, would use their free will, to follow the Lord's will. Ultimetly sacrificing their own freedom, to do the will of God.

Secondly, I disagree that Man (or Women) cannot do something if they are unwilling. There have been several accounts where my wife has asked me to do something I was DEAD set against, not only dead set against, but had JUST issued my misgivings on the subject. Trying to be an understanding and loving husband, I (in the very sense of the word) UNWILLINGLY sacrificed my own desires and beliefs, feelings, morals and ethics, to indulge her momentary need for affection. Specifically from me, and me alone. She cried out for attention in a way that, granted was immature, but I sacrificed for her, because I love her. It SURE isn't easy, but it's doable... especially when you love someone so much that you would die for them.

[Reformationist]

Thank you :)

Asaph

You're certainly welcome. If we can be of any assistance or offer any comfort please let us know.

God bless

[Reformationist]

First, I would like to explain my understanding of free will.

Thank you.

I believe that God gave us a (for lack of a better term) God like ability to make our own choices to do as we please. I feel, however, that the Lord's main desire is for each of US, who walk with Him and Love Him as a Father, Brother and Friend, would use their free will, to follow the Lord's will. Ultimetly sacrificing their own freedom, to do the will of God.

I more or less agree, except that I don't think it is quite accurate to equate the ability to make a choice to a God like ability to make a choice, for God does not contend with sin as we do so His choices are always in accord with His perfect nature. I understand that you recognize the weakness of this analogy but I just wanted to qualify my agreement.

Secondly, I disagree that Man (or Women) cannot do something if they are unwilling. There have been several accounts where my wife has asked me to do something I was DEAD set against, not only dead set against, but had JUST issued my misgivings on the subject. Trying to be an understanding and loving husband, I (in the very sense of the word) UNWILLINGLY sacrificed my own desires and beliefs, feelings, morals and ethics, to indulge her momentary need for affection. Specifically from me, and me alone. She cried out for attention in a way that, granted was immature, but I sacrificed for her, because I love her. It SURE isn't easy, but it's doable... especially when you love someone so much that you would die for them.

You see, this is the unintentional catch-22 of the question I ask. You say you were "unwilling" to do something your wife asked yet you submit that you did it. It doesn't sound like she forced you to do it so, even though you may have found it displeasing to do so, your desire to show your love for your wife overruled your desire to refrain from doing what she asked. In fact, your love for your wife is what made you willing, dispite your misgivings.

You see repoland2, you were not unwilling to do it because you did do it. If you were truly unwilling, you wouldn't have done it.

For instance, would you be willing or unwilling to forsake Christ for earthly comforts?

God bless

[Forest]

The question is not logical. If you did it then it wasn't impossible. If it's impossible, you cannot do it.

My position is that, if a person is unwilling to do something, their unwillingness makes it impossible for them to do. Now, we may not enjoy doing something. In a moment of clarity we may be able to say, "Well, I don't want to sin." Regardless, when we are tempted to sin, the reason we may not is because we have a greater desire to obey God. If that is not the case, then we submit to our flesh and sin. It is for this very reason that we are encouraged to nurture our faith, that it be the force that drives us when we are tempted.

I don't know why you think it would be an oxymoron. Can you explain?

Thanks,
God bless

If unwillingness makes someone unable to do something, then what is the difference between unwilling and impossible? Unwilling = impossible.

It sounds to me that when you say that "someone cannot do that which they are unwilling to do" is the same as saying "someone cannot do that which they cannot do". You are right, it is illogical.

Here's a choice Reformationist...

Choose to click on this or not.

free will

How could your choice be anything other than an exercise of your free will? I don't see how you could be "unwilling" to make the choice you did not make, but rather it was just a choice driven by free will.

[Forest]

In light of something that Forest said, I would just like to offer some food for thought. He mentioned that his choices may be emotional in nature rather than rational. The problem with such a claim, if one is using it to prove the freedom of man's will, is that it is actually contrary to that position. If someone's will controlled by one's emotions then one's will is not actually free, at least not in the way that the phrase, "free will," is often employed. Either your will is truly free or it is influenced to the degree that it is controlled. The Apostle Paul touches upon this incongruity a number of times. For instance, instead of proclaiming the freedom of man's will, he acknowledges that we are slaves to whatever we submit to:

Romans 6:16
Do you not know that to whom you present yourselves slaves to obey, you are that one's slaves whom you obey, whether of sin leading to death, or of obedience leading to righteousness?

God bless

Choices are not always emotional and they are not always rational. Neither one controls all the time. No doubt our choices are inflluenced by our desires, but not controlled.

[repoland2]

I more or less agree, except that I don't think it is quite accurate to equate the ability to make a choice to a God like ability to make a choice, for God does not contend with sin as we do so His choices are always in accord with His perfect nature. I understand that you recognize the weakness of this analogy but I just wanted to qualify my agreement.


I'm not exactly sure I understand what you're saying here, can you please re-word this?


You see, this is the unintentional catch-22 of the question I ask. You say you were "unwilling" to do something your wife asked yet you submit that you did it. It doesn't sound like she forced you to do it so, even though you may have found it displeasing to do so, your desire to show your love for your wife overruled your desire to refrain from doing what she asked. In fact, your love for your wife is what made you willing, dispite your misgivings.

You see repoland2, you were not unwilling to do it because you did do it. If you were truly unwilling, you wouldn't have done it.

For instance, would you be willing or unwilling to forsake Christ for earthly comforts?

I understand what you're saying completely. I now agree with your origional statement that Men (and women) are not capable of commiting an act that they are unwilling to perform.

[Reformationist]

If unwillingness makes someone unable to do something, then what is the difference between unwilling and impossible?

In my explanation of how the desires of one's heart influence the will there is no difference. Hence, this thread.

Unwilling = impossible.

That is my contention, yes.

It sounds to me that when you say that "someone cannot do that which they are unwilling to do" is the same as saying "someone cannot do that which they cannot do". You are right, it is illogical.

That's what I'm asking. How does someone defend the notion that people can do something they are unwilling to do. At some point, for whatever reason, they must become willing to do it, else they won't.

Here's a choice Reformationist...

Choose to click on this or not.

How could your choice be anything other than an exercise of your free will?

I don't disagree that it is an exercise of my will. My position isn't purposed to deny that man's actions are in accord with his will. I am merely acknowledging that man's will is subject to man's desires when choosing. For instance, I desired to see what your spoiler said, so I clicked on it. Had I had no desire to see it, or had my desire to not look at it been stronger than my desire to see what it said, I would have refrained.

I don't see how you could be "unwilling" to make the choice you did not make, but rather it was just a choice driven by free will.

It was a choice driven by my desire to see what the spoiler said. The will is nothing more than the mind choosing. It isn't the power behind the choice. It is the choice. What is the power behind man's choices?

God bless

[Reformationist]

Choices are not always emotional and they are not always rational. Neither one controls all the time.

You speak of emotion and rationale as if they are mutually exclusive motivators. On the contrary, because of my love for God, I rationally choose to obey Him.

No doubt our choices are inflluenced by our desires, but not controlled.

Okay, so give me an example of a time you chose contrary to your greatest desire at the moment of choice and let's put this topic to bed. I've yet to see such an example. All I've seen are examples of people doing things they didn't want to do. When asked why they chose that way, they will always have a reason that exerted a greater influence over their will than did their desire to not do something. In admitting such a force they support my position, for they chose according to their strongest desire.

God bless

[repoland2]

If unwillingness makes someone unable to do something, then what is the difference between unwilling and impossible? Unwilling = impossible.

It sounds to me that when you say that "someone cannot do that which they are unwilling to do" is the same as saying "someone cannot do that which they cannot do". You are right, it is illogical.

Here's a choice Reformationist...

Choose to click on this or not.

free will

How could your choice be anything other than an exercise of your free will? I don't see how you could be "unwilling" to make the choice you did not make, but rather it was just a choice driven by free will.

He knows this, He wanted people's opinions on freewill, that's it.

[Reformationist]

I'm not exactly sure I understand what you're saying here, can you please re-word this?

Sure. I merely meant that I agreed that man, be he pre or post-Fall, has the ability to choose according to what is most pleasing to him. The problem with comparing it to a "God like ability to make choices" is that what we find most pleasing is often sinful. In light of that, I just didn't think it is entirely accurate to equate such an ability with God's ability to make choices because God never desires to sin. However, you are right that God also chooses according to what He most desires. This is a bit redundant, of course, because both the exclusive and strongest desire of God is, ultimately, righteous. :)

I understand what you're saying completely. I now agree with your origional statement that Men (and women) are not capable of commiting an act that they are unwilling to perform.

Thanks repo. I appreciate your input. :)

God bless

[repoland2]

There's always one that takes what people say the wrong way and makes a negative argument out of it.

[Forest]

That's what I'm asking. How does someone defend the notion that people can do something they are unwilling to do. At some point, for whatever reason, they must become willing to do it, else they won't.

The only way to defend that would be to define "unwilling" in a different way such as unwilling=reluctant.

[Reformationist]

The only way to defend that would be to define "unwilling" in a different way such as unwilling=reluctant.

What would be the purpose in that? :scratch:

Unwilling doesn't mean "reluctant."

God bless

[repoland2]

Sure. I merely meant that I agreed that man, be he pre or post-Fall, has the ability to choose according to what is most pleasing to him. The problem with comparing it to a "God like ability to make choices" is that what we find most pleasing is often sinful. In light of that, I just didn't think it is entirely accurate to equate such an ability with God's ability to make choices because God never desires to sin. However, you are right that God also chooses according to what He most desires. This is a bit redundant, of course, because both the exclusive and strongest desire of God is, ultimately, righteous. :)

Thanks repo. I appreciate your input. :)

God bless

Ahhh, this makes sense. I AGREE with that, and I take that back. What I meant by my statement was that we were made in God's image origionally... and with that, we have free will, which is something God CAN do. Of course, we are cursed with sin and He is sinless. However, we as humans who Love God, can make rightous choices with our free will.... does that make it any less rightous in the eyes of God if we are with sin?

[Forest]

Okay, so give me an example of a time you chose contrary to your greatest desire at the moment of choice and let's put this topic to bed. I've yet to see such an example. All I've seen are examples of people doing things they didn't want to do. When asked why they chose that way, they will always have a reason that exerted a greater influence over their will than did their desire to not do something. In admitting such a force they support my position, for they chose according to their strongest desire.

God bless

I think I agree with you here. What do you say this leads to in regard to free will?

[Forest]

There's always one that takes what people say the wrong way and makes a negative argument out of it.

:cry:

[Reformationist]

Ahhh, this makes sense. I AGREE with that, and I take that back. What I meant by my statement was that we were made in God's image origionally... and with that, we have free will, which is something God CAN do. Of course, we are cursed with sin and He is sinless. However, we as humans who Love God, can make rightous choices with our free will.... does that make it any less rightous in the eyes of God if we are with sin?

Thanks again repo. :)

God bless

[Reformationist]

I think I agree with you here. What do you say this leads to in regard to free will?

In my opinion it leads to the conclusion that man's will is not "free," as so many contend, but rather, subject to his desires.

This is why it is so important for us to continually pray and focus on the holiness of God. For when we focus on the Lord we tend to desire to be righteous, as He is righteous. Even very devout people fail to place God at the forefront on occasion and it is in those instances that they often sin, for when the desire to do contrary to what God commands becomes greater than their desire to obey Him, they, like us, sin freely.

God bless

[Forest]

In my opinion it leads to the conclusion that man's will is not "free," as so many contend, but rather, subject to his desires.

This is why it is so important for us to continually pray and focus on the holiness of God. For when we focus on the Lord we tend to desire to be righteous, as He is righteous. Even very devout people fail to place God at the forefront on occasion and it is in those instances that they often sin, for when the desire to do contrary to what God commands becomes greater than their desire to obey Him, they, like us, sin freely.

God bless

Then that begs the question, can we control our desires. If we can control, change and manipulate our desires then would you say there is free will?

[Asaph]

Well, it seems you are clearly distraught over whatever happened and I pray that the Lord gives you peace my brother, but, I'm not sure I understand what you're talking about. :confused:

God bless

I had one of those God moments that illustrates your point.

I was in conversation with a co-worker and I let stand a misconception that I should have corrected. Right at that moment God chose to reveal to me where my loyalty was, and it was not with Him. He showed me clearly that I had just sinned against Him because I wanted the approval of my co-worker over the approval of my Lord and Saviour. My "freewill" was not free at all. It was entirely in subjection to that which I had most desired at that point. Pride.

It was devastating and I was stunned that I could have done such a thing.

Asaph

[awildflowerlady]

In my opinion it leads to the conclusion that man's will is not "free," as so many contend, but rather, subject to his desires.


In taking on the simple meaning of the word will we have the following:

To decide on; choose.

To yearn for; desire: “She makes you will your own destruction”

To decree, dictate, or order.

To resolve with a forceful will; determine.

To induce or try to induce by sheer force of will: We willed the sun to come out.

To grant in a legal will; bequeath.

I would have to agree that your statement in the quote above has merit, but in due time. Will seems to be an orderly process, with a few steps before conclusion.

For will to take place, first a decision has to be made. Then the desire sets in. You may not know the desire when you first set your will, but I think desire helps to keep will on track.

It seems to me that your understanding of this allows for the interchange of words, will and desire. In reading your statement I get the feeling you are using either word to describe the action. I am not sure that is how the action takes place, as I describe above.

I think of a selfish man saying: I want that woman (oh so he has decided on one, think of Mel Brooks). Then the desire sets in until he gets her (as maybe she does not want him).

I believe it is possible to have a will based on what GOD wants, then fulfilling that will with the use of desire. Will first, then desire.

I think back to the example I gave you on having kids.

I wonder if the following situation might meet the needs you are seeking:

Back in the day, marriages were arranged. At times this happened right when daughters were born. Did her will trump this? Usually not what kind of decision process does a baby have?

A daughter following the Torah understood she was to honor her parents. (a decision that she WILL do this, however finding the desire to do so may not be there, so force could come into play)

So the daughter married whom the parents chose. Can this situation be pleasing to GOD, but against her will? It is possible. She could run away, but if her will was to please GOD to begin with, that would be against her will as well!

I could go on to describe the situation how she had to sleep with a husband she did not want to sleep with, have children she did not want to have - so on and so on.

When I describe free will as mentioned in Christianity to someone who is new to concept I use the follow example:

As a child most of us have read the "choose your own adventure" style books.

We can connect this style of writing to GOD's efforts with man.

From the day you are born, GOD had your book written, as a choose your own adventure genre. Within this book, you make your will known by choice as you progress in life. As with the written page, you come to a choice and stop to decide on something. For this decision turn to such and such page, for that, go here. The book progresses until the end when there are no more decisions to be made as a conclusion has been reached by the path you chose. You demonstrated free will within an already written book.

[Forest]

What would be the purpose in that? :scratch:

Unwilling doesn't mean "reluctant."

God bless

Since "reluctant" is one of the dictionary definitions of "unwilling", many people use the two words interchangeably.

[Asaph]

Since "reluctant" is one of the dictionary definitions of "unwilling", many people use the two words interchangeably.

I may be reluctant to say that you are wrong to equate these two words one to another, but I am definately not unwilling.

As I just proved. ;) :D :D

Asaph

[Ainesis]

If you disagree with that, please provide an example of a time when you chose to do something you were unwilling to do followed by your reason for doing it.

I was at a women's conference once and God had given me a new understanding of a portion of Scripture. As the speaker was reading, I was listening. In my thought processes as I digested what the speaker was saying, God spoke to me and corrected my understanding. It was not that my understanding was wrong, but there was more to it than I was getting.

After God explained this to me, I understood. I was thankful for Him sharing that with me as it gave me deeper understanding of that text.

After the conference, the minister was closing it out and God told me to go up to the front, ask for the microphone, and share with the attendees what He had told me. Most here don't know me, but that is completely aganist my character. In my head, I started to hear all of the reasons "Why" I should not do that; most likely everyone already knew this, so I would look stupid; people would laugh at me or disregard me; the leader may not give me the microphone and instead send me back to my chair.... The possibilities wre endless.

Let me tell you, as I was thinking of all of his, the next thing I knew, I was up in front of those people asking the leader for the microphone. I was appalled!!!! "What in the world are you doing??!!!" I screamed in my mind, but now I was up there. I began to share what God told me; and this wound up being a blessing for many people. It was a really 'different' sort of experience let me tell ya. I made no conscious decision to do this and indeed had determined that I would not, but...

I have had numerous times where I was not willing to do something and God compells me to do it anyway. In most cases, I force my will to bend towards what God wants. But in a few cases, (as stated above) it is more akin to God using my body to accomplish His purposes in spite of myself.

Now, pehaps I am just a looney toon. ^_^

[Reformationist]

Then that begs the question, can we control our desires. If we can control, change and manipulate our desires then would you say there is free will?

When the Lord deigns to regenerate a person from death in their trespasses and sin, a state in which the desires of the flesh reign supreme, to life in the Lord Jesus, our nature has a new desire, that of obeying and serving God in obedience and love. Our new nature continues to war with our old but it is this dichotomy that develops Christian character and strengthens our faith.

When we immerse ourself in prayer and in the Word we are continually strengthened and our goal becomes clearer. We desire to please God and we seek that very thing.

As for man's will being free, well, it is never truly free. We either submit ourselves as slave to righteousness in faith or we act according to a carnal nature and are slaves to our flesh.

God bless

[Reformationist]

I had one of those God moments that illustrates your point.

I was in conversation with a co-worker and I let stand a misconception that I should have corrected. Right at that moment God chose to reveal to me where my loyalty was, and it was not with Him. He showed me clearly that I had just sinned against Him because I wanted the approval of my co-worker over the approval of my Lord and Saviour. My "freewill" was not free at all. It was entirely in subjection to that which I had most desired at that point. Pride.

It was devastating and I was stunned that I could have done such a thing.

Asaph

Too true. Nicely said.

God bless

[Reformationist]

For will to take place, first a decision has to be made. Then the desire sets in. You may not know the desire when you first set your will, but I think desire helps to keep will on track.

I feel that you have this backwards. You say that a decision is made before our desire sets in yet it is the strength of our desires that determine the decision to be made. We do not choose arbitrarily. The choices we make are based on our desires and that which we desire most when choosing exerts the greatest influence.

It seems to me that your understanding of this allows for the interchange of words, will and desire. In reading your statement I get the feeling you are using either word to describe the action. I am not sure that is how the action takes place, as I describe above.

Not at all. A desire of the heart leads to a decision. When tempted by something, either good or bad, our desire to bring that to fruition is what prompts us to choose in the manner that we do.

I think of a selfish man saying: I want that woman (oh so he has decided on one, think of Mel Brooks). Then the desire sets in until he gets her (as maybe she does not want him).

I'm sorry but this makes no sense. The man saying "I want this woman" shows that a desire is already resident.

I believe it is possible to have a will based on what GOD wants, then fulfilling that will with the use of desire. Will first, then desire.

Only when we desire what God desires will we seek to act in accordance with His law. Desire first, then will.

I think back to the example I gave you on having kids.

I wonder if the following situation might meet the needs you are seeking:

Back in the day, marriages were arranged. At times this happened right when daughters were born. Did her will trump this? Usually not what kind of decision process does a baby have?

A daughter following the Torah understood she was to honor her parents. (a decision that she WILL do this, however finding the desire to do so may not be there, so force could come into play)

So the daughter married whom the parents chose. Can this situation be pleasing to GOD, but against her will? It is possible. She could run away, but if her will was to please GOD to begin with, that would be against her will as well!

Again, this does not trump my position, for her desire to do either God's will or her parents will superceded her desire to not be married to someone she did not choose to be married to. In fact, this, yet again, only reinforces my position.

I could go on to describe the situation how she had to sleep with a husband she did not want to sleep with, have children she did not want to have - so on and so on.

If these things are being committed against her will then she is not choosing to let them happen. I'm not talking about a violation of our will. I'm talking about a choice we make. Even in the scenario you offer, the woman may sublimate her desire to be free of the man's control because she desires to honor God and her parents.

When I describe free will as mentioned in Christianity to someone who is new to concept I use the follow example:

As a child most of us have read the "choose your own adventure" style books.

We can connect this style of writing to GOD's efforts with man.

From the day you are born, GOD had your book written, as a choose your own adventure genre. Within this book, you make your will known by choice as you progress in life. As with the written page, you come to a choice and stop to decide on something. For this decision turn to such and such page, for that, go here. The book progresses until the end when there are no more decisions to be made as a conclusion has been reached by the path you chose. You demonstrated free will within an already written book.

To whom did you demonstrate the freedom of your will? To God? Is it your contention that God does not know the end from the beginning? I don't deny that man makes choices from the time he is born but, again, these choices, if they are rational in nature, i.e., not reflexive, then they are based on what the person wants most. I have three children and am well aware that children are desire driven creations, to the point of sinfulness. Me, me, me, now, now, now. The pages of the book of our lives are not being written as we progress through it. They are already written.

God bless

[Reformationist]

Since "reluctant" is one of the dictionary definitions of "unwilling", many people use the two words interchangeably.

That may be true but, in this context, unwilling clearly means "not willing." If someone is not willing to do something, the only way it will get done is against their will, i.e., they are forced. In such a scenario we would no longer be talking about a choice we make but, rather, a choice that is made for us.

A lot of words have multiple meanings but, in this thread, it is quite clear that "unwilling" and "reluctant" are not synonymous.

God bless

[Reformationist]

I was at a women's conference once and God had given me a new understanding of a portion of Scripture. As the speaker was reading, I was listening. In my thought processes as I digested what the speaker was saying, God spoke to me and corrected my understanding. It was not that my understanding was wrong, but there was more to it than I was getting.

After God explained this to me, I understood. I was thankful for Him sharing that with me as it gave me deeper understanding of that text.

After the conference, the minister was closing it out and God told me to go up to the front, ask for the microphone, and share with the attendees what He had told me. Most here don't know me, but that is completely aganist my character. In my head, I started to hear all of the reasons "Why" I should not do that; most likely everyone already knew this, so I would look stupid; people would laugh at me or disregard me; the leader may not give me the microphone and instead send me back to my chair.... The possibilities wre endless.

Let me tell you, as I was thinking of all of his, the next thing I knew, I was up in front of those people asking the leader for the microphone. I was appalled!!!! "What in the world are you doing??!!!" I screamed in my mind, but now I was up there. I began to share what God told me; and this wound up being a blessing for many people. It was a really 'different' sort of experience let me tell ya. I made no conscious decision to do this and indeed had determined that I would not, but...

I have had numerous times where I was not willing to do something and God compells me to do it anyway. In most cases, I force my will to bend towards what God wants. But in a few cases, (as stated above) it is more akin to God using my body to accomplish His purposes in spite of myself.

Now, pehaps I am just a looney toon. ^_^

While that is a wonderful story of faith, it is not really applicable, because you claim you did not choose to do as God instructed. If anything, it shows the lack of man's freedom. If, on the other hand, you went up to the front because you desired to be obedient, well, that just reinforces my position. You sublimated your desire to avoid being embarrassed because of your desire to obey God. Greatest desire overruled lesser desire.

God bless

[awildflowerlady]

A desire of the heart leads to a decision

From what I am reading your suggestion that desire is first is based only on an emotional response.

Looking at things with just a logical base, you do indeed wind up with free will minus emotion aka desire.

Lt. Commander Data comes to mind. ;)

[Reformationist]

From what I am reading your suggestion that desire is first is based only on an emotional response.

I did not make any assumptions as to what the basis of the particular desire was, so far as I know.

Looking at things with just a logical base, you do indeed wind up with free will minus emotion aka desire.

Lt. Commander Data comes to mind. ;)

Sorry but I don't understand what you mean here.

Are you talking about Data from Star Trek? :scratch:

God bless

[Ainesis]

While that is a wonderful story of faith, it is not really applicable, because you claim you did not choose to do as God instructed. If anything, it shows the lack of man's freedom. If, on the other hand, you went up to the front because you desired to be obedient, well, that just reinforces my position. You sublimated your desire to avoid being embarrassed because of your desire to obey God. Greatest desire overruled lesser desire.

God bless

That is true. But desire is not synonymous with will. Neither is desire a definer of will, although it certainly can be an influencer.

I completely agree about me not doing what God asked at that time of my own free will, but I had set my will when accepting Christ to obey God. Furthr, I could have turned around at any time (again, an exercise of my will). Why didn't I? I sensed that God was doing something greater than myself; i did not want to interfere.

Regardless of what influences the will, it is still the exercise of man's will that is the deciding factor, is it not?

How does your thoughts on the relationship of desire to will affect the fact that man is still exercising a will?

[Forest]

When the Lord deigns to regenerate a person from death in their trespasses and sin, a state in which the desires of the flesh reign supreme, to life in the Lord Jesus, our nature has a new desire, that of obeying and serving God in obedience and love. Our new nature continues to war with our old but it is this dichotomy that develops Christian character and strengthens our faith.

I agree:amen:

When we immerse ourself in prayer and in the Word we are continually strengthened and our goal becomes clearer. We desire to please God and we seek that very thing.

So, immersing oneself in prayer and in the Word, changes or strengthens one's desires therefore driving choices.

As for man's will being free, well, it is never truly free. We either submit ourselves as slave to righteousness in faith or we act according to a carnal nature and are slaves to our flesh.

But I thought you were saying that we couldn't submit ourselfs to anything since our choices are controlled by our desires? How can we "submit" when choices are controlled by our greatest desire at the moment?

God bless
:amen:

[awildflowerlady]

I am speaking of the very fictional character found on Star Trek.

:)

[Reformationist]

But desire is not synonymous with will.

I am aware of that. :)

Neither is desire a definer of will, although it certainly can be an influencer.

Well, the purpose of this thread is to determine if that is true. Have you an example of a time when you acted contrary to your greatest desire? If so, why did you do so?

I completely agree about me not doing what God asked at that time of my own free will, but I had set my will when accepting Christ to obey God.

So your desire to obey God superceded your desire to not do what God asked of you? Is that what you're saying?

Furthr, I could have turned around at any time (again, an exercise of my will). Why didn't I? I sensed that God was doing something greater than myself; i did not want to interfere.

So you desired to not interfere more than you desired to turn around again, right?

Regardless of what influences the will, it is still the exercise of man's will that is the deciding factor, is it not?

Deciding factor in what? :scratch: The will does not act of its own volition. You make a decision based on your desires. Do you disagree? If so, can you provide an example of a time when you made a decision that was not predicated by a desire?

How does your thoughts on the relationship of desire to will affect the fact that man is still exercising a will?

It explains it. As I said, man is a volitional creature. Something motivates him to act and then he does. That motivator is whatsoever he desires most.

God bless

[Reformationist]

I agree:amen:

:)

So, immersing oneself in prayer and in the Word, changes or strengthens one's desires therefore driving choices.

Sure. That is why it is so important to nurture the things of God, that they may be foremost in our hearts. If that be the case, temptation to sin exerts much less control over us than it does when we do not feed our spirit with the Word. You ever have a time in your life when you were deeply involved in Christian fellowship, be it through congregation, prayer, or study of the Word? It is in those times that obeying God is much easier. We are more focused on our love for and dependency upon God. However, when we stray we become vulnerable. The love of self begins to take hold and things we would have cast off as sinful before become much more difficult to avoid.

But I thought you were saying that we couldn't submit ourselfs to anything since our choices are controlled by our desires?

We still make choices. What shapes these choices oftentimes is that to which we submit ourselves. If we desire to grow in faith, we pray for it and immerse ourselves in God's revelation. It is through this that we are often equipped to deal with future struggles. Meditating on the Word places our focus on the Lord. It helps us to understand our weaknesses and gives us strength in the face of temptation.

How can we "submit" when choices are controlled by our greatest desire at the moment?

We submit to either our flesh or the Lord because of where our desires lead us. The more time we spend in the Word the more we will desire to obey God. The less time we meditate upon Him and His Word, the less He is at the forefront of our hearts.

God bless

[Reformationist]

I am speaking of the very fictional character found on Star Trek.

:)

Ahh. I see. Sorry, not a Trekky. :)

God bless

[repoland2]

Ahh. I see. Sorry, not a Trekky. :)

God bless

Such a shame, you're missing out on loads of wisdom my friend :thumbsup: :D

[Ainesis]

I am aware of that. :)

I had a hunch you might be. :D

Well, the purpose of this thread is to determine if that is true.

Ahhhh! OK. :doh:

Have you an example of a time when you acted contrary to your greatest desire? If so, why did you do so?

Well, yes of course! As I stated earlier, there are many times when God asks me to do something that I do not want to do, but I force my will to align with His (many times anyway). Sometimes I am just stiff-necked and refuse to be obedient, but then that is what repentance is about.

Hence my point. If I desire to obey but also desire to have my way (neither am I always perfectly obedient or disobedient), then these competing desires are not determinants of my will; only factors. If they were, then my behavior would be predictable and without variation, wouldn't it?

So your desire to obey God superceded your desire to not do what God asked of you? Is that what you're saying? So you desired to not interfere more than you desired to turn around again, right?

Not really. I don't think it is a greater desire superceding as much as it is a committed denial of the desire that is not in accordance with the will of God.
Consider the following:
For the good that I would I do not: but the evil which I would not, that I do. Romans 7:19

Here Paul seems to indicate that his greater desire (as you might say) is to do good, but that desire is not enough to make this a reality in his life. What he doesn't want to do (the lesser desire) is actually what he finds himself doing.

Again, his will is not illustrated here as a prevelance of his most heartfelt desire, but a crucifixion of those desires that are opposed to God.

This seems to me to refute the position that our strongest desire is what determines our will.


Deciding factor in what? :scratch: The will does not act of its own volition. You make a decision based on your desires. Do you disagree? If so, can you provide an example of a time when you made a decision that was not predicated by a desire?

Yes, I disagree. See example above.

Thanks!

[Reformationist]

Well, yes of course! As I stated earlier, there are many times when God asks me to do something that I do not want to do, but I force my will to align with His (many times anyway).

Why do you "force your will to align to His?"

Sometimes I am just stiff-necked and refuse to be obedient, but then that is what repentance is about.

Why do you refuse to obey?

Hence my point. If I desire to obey but also desire to have my way (neither am I always perfectly obedient or disobedient), then these competing desires are not determinants of my will; only factors.

Not at all. I'm not talking about what you believe your greatest desire is when you are not faced with a choice. I'm talking about what shows itself to be your greatest desire when faced with a choice. You are faced with either obeying God or not obeying God. Why do you choose one way or the other? Is your choice arbitrary or is there a reason for the way you choose?

If they were, then my behavior would be predictable and without variation, wouldn't it?

Only if your desires always remained unchanged. They don't. For instance, I smoke. After smoking a cigarette and having my nicotine fix it is rather easy for me to say that I desire to quit. As time passes, however, my desire to quit lessens as my desire for nicotine increases. When my desire for nicotine is greater than my desire to quit, guess what I do? I smoke.

Not really. I don't think it is a greater desire superceding as much as it is a committed denial of the desire that is not in accordance with the will of God.

You have a reason for being committed to denying yourself anything that is not in accordance with the will of God, right? What is it?

Consider the following:
For the good that I would I do not: but the evil which I would not, that I do. Romans 7:19

Okay. I am intimately familiar with the battle between the nature of the believer and the sinful flesh he dwells in. This is the dichotomous friction that Paul speaks of in this passage. He knows with his mind that doing the law is good and right yet his flesh pursues sin.

Here Paul seems to indicate that his greater desire (as you might say) is to do good, but that desire is not enough to make this a reality in his life. What he doesn't want to do (the lesser desire) is actually what he finds himself doing.

That isn't what I'm talking about. Paul is expressing his knowledge that the Law of God is good and his desire to obey it. All believers can make that claim. However, when faced with temptation, if our desire to obey God is weaker than our desire to feed our flesh by giving into sin then we will give into sin.


Again, his will is not illustrated here as a prevelance of his most heartfelt desire, but a crucifixion of those desires that are opposed to God.

This seems to me to refute the position that our strongest desire is what determines our will.

I said our strongest desire when we are faced with a choice. For instance, my strongest desire in my family life is to be a godly father. Despite that acknowledgement, I am often ungodly. That is because I often respond according to my flesh. I am faced with the temptation of losing my temper or ignoring my children because I want to do something else and if I desire that more than I desire being godly then I will respond in ungodliness.

Yes, I disagree. See example above.

Sorry Ainesis, your example above clearly shows that you had a desire to obey God. Either your reason for "forcing your will to align with God's will" was because you desired to be obedient to God or there was some other reason for doing so. If there is no reason then your choice was arbitrary and is not applicable because there is no merit to your choice.


God bless

[repoland2]

Sorry Ainesis, your example above clearly shows that you had a desire to obey God. Either your reason for "forcing your will to align with God's will" was because you desired to be obedient to God or there was some other reason for doing so. If there is no reason then your choice was arbitrary and is not applicable because there is no merit to your choice.


God bless

I'm afraid I disagree with that. There have been times when I have TRULY wanted to follow God's plan, yet failed due to over riding sin. Sometimes, I just do not have the strength to follow through. I give Him credit because I would like to think that if the WISH to follow God is there, then I am half way to solving the issue, which is BETTER and CLOSER to solving the issue than not even realizing that I have an issue at all.

Knowing is half the battle.

[Ainesis]

[/color]Why do you "force your will to align to His?"

Because sometimes I can just be stiff-necked. I know, you just never would have had that impression about me would you? ^_^

[/color]Why do you refuse to obey?

Sheer stupidity, if I am being honest. It can be hard to resist the flesh and sometimes denying it is just a struggle, at least it can be for me.

Why do you choose one way or the other? Is your choice arbitrary or is there a reason for the way you choose?

I think the reason for my choice either way is whether or not I am decidcing to do what God wants or what I want.

Only if your desires always remained unchanged. They don't. For instance, I smoke. After smoking a cigarette and having my nicotine fix it is rather easy for me to say that I desire to quit. As time passes, however, my desire to quit lessens as my desire for nicotine increases. When my desire for nicotine is greater than my desire to quit, guess what I do? I smoke.

Or, when you refuse to deny the flesh, you smoke.

You have a reason for being committed to denying yourself anything that is not in accordance with the will of God, right? What is it?

Because I know that in me is no good thing, and that God's ways are perfect and higher than mine. He knows better than I.

Okay. I am intimately familiar with the battle between the nature of the believer and the sinful flesh he dwells in. This is the dichotomous friction that Paul speaks of in this passage. He knows with his mind that doing the law is good and right yet his flesh pursues sin.



That isn't what I'm talking about. Paul is expressing his knowledge that the Law of God is good and his desire to obey it. All believers can make that claim. However, when faced with temptation, if our desire to obey God is weaker than our desire to feed our flesh by giving into sin then we will give into sin.'

And I believe this is what Paul is saying. However, based on your comments, then Paul is not telling the truth when he says that his desire is really to do what God wants.

Paul says he wants to do what God wants and doesn't want to sin. You seem to be saying, No, Paul must have desired to sin more than obey or he would not have.

It doesn't seem to support your premise.

Also, Paul's cure for this is not to have his desire for God increase, but to be delivered from the will or nature that is against God.

I said our strongest desire when we are faced with a choice. For instance, my strongest desire in my family life is to be a godly father. Despite that acknowledgement, I am often ungodly. That is because I often respond according to my flesh. I am faced with the temptation of losing my temper or ignoring my children because I want to do something else and if I desire that more than I desire being godly then I will respond in ungodliness.

Yes, unless you deny that desire in spite of what you want, which is, I believe, what God would have us to do.

Sorry Ainesis, your example above clearly shows that you had a desire to obey God. Either your reason for "forcing your will to align with God's will" was because you desired to be obedient to God or there was some other reason for doing so. If there is no reason then your choice was arbitrary and is not applicable because there is no merit to your choice.

No, that is not really what I am saying. Yes, I do have a desire to obey God. However, that obedience is not dependent upon me having a desire to obey God more, but on a determination to deny that which is against God.

As such, it is not a matter of what is my greatest desire (for sometimes quite frankly, that is the flesh). But it is a matter of whether I will deny what I want in deference to what God says, whether I want to or not.

[Reformationist]

I'm afraid I disagree with that.

There have been times when I have TRULY wanted to follow God's plan, yet failed due to over riding sin.

I don't see what it is I've said that you're disagreeing with. All you're acknowledging is that your desire to do whatever you see as sinful was greater than your desire to obey God, even if you feel that you truly wanted to obey God at that point.

You were kind of general. Maybe I'll have a better understanding of what you are contending if you get more specific. Also, if possible, tell me why you chose to sin when you "truly wanted to follow God's plan."

Sometimes, I just do not have the strength to follow through. I give Him credit because I would like to think that if the WISH to follow God is there, then I am half way to solving the issue, which is BETTER and CLOSER to solving the issue than not even realizing that I have an issue at all.

Knowing is half the battle.

I don't know that I'd say it's "half the battle" but desiring to obey God while knowing you have a proclivity to sin is definitely helpful. One of the points of this thread is to help people realize that though we may desire to obey God, when we sin we show that, at least at that moment, our desire to serve our flesh is stronger than our desire to obey God. This, too, can be very helpful when facing temptation for I doubt any of us truly realize how often we desire to sin.

God bless

[Reformationist]

Because sometimes I can just be stiff-necked.

Um...you force your will to align with God's because you're stiff-necked? You lost me on that one. I'm not asking why you have to force your will. I'm asking why you do force your will. Why are you trying to align your will to God's will?

I know, you just never would have had that impression about me would you? ^_^

LOL! Well, I think that is a pretty common trait for all people, so I can't imagine you'd be different. :D

Sheer stupidity, if I am being honest. It can be hard to resist the flesh and sometimes denying it is just a struggle, at least it can be for me.

Ainesis, we seem to be having a communication disconnect here. I agree that it isn't wise to refuse to obey and I also agree that doing so is rather stupid. What I'm asking you is why you refuse to obey? What is it that motivates you to do so?

I think the reason for my choice either way is whether or not I am decidcing to do what God wants or what I want.

The reason for your decision is because you're deciding? Sorry but either what you say makes no sense or I'm just misunderstanding you. What causes you to decide one way or the other?

Or, when you refuse to deny the flesh, you smoke.

:scratch: :confused: :scratch: Smoking is giving into my fleshly desire for something harmful. How is that denying my flesh? You completely lost me on that one.

Because I know that in me is no good thing, and that God's ways are perfect and higher than mine. He knows better than I.

So you desire to do the will of God, correct? And isn't it this desire that motivates you to act accordingly?

And I believe this is what Paul is saying. However, based on your comments, then Paul is not telling the truth when he says that his desire is really to do what God wants.


Paul says he wants to do what God wants and doesn't want to sin. You seem to be saying, No, Paul must have desired to sin more than obey or he would not have.


It doesn't seem to support your premise.

Ainesis, do you have a desire to please God? Is that desire at the forefront of your mind when you choose to sin or does something else take precedence?


Also, Paul's cure for this is not to have his desire for God increase, but to be delivered from the will or nature that is against God.

No. Paul is speaking about being delivered from the sinfulness of his flesh. He says, "who will deliver me from this body of death?" He's speaking of the weakness of his flesh. It is this very weakness that leaves man vulnerable to temptation. When the desires of the flesh become stronger than our desire to do that which we know in our mind to be right, we sin. Most people know when they are sinning. That knowledge is often not enough to overcome the desire to sin.

I'll give you an example of a passage that actually does deal with this issue:

James 1:14,15
But each one is tempted when he is drawn away by his own desires and enticed. Then, when desire has conceived, it gives birth to sin; and sin, when it is full-grown, brings forth death.

Our desires are like the neck of our inner man. They turn our head (will) as they please.

Yes, unless you deny that desire in spite of what you want, which is, I believe, what God would have us to do.

And why would I deny it Ainesis? A decision must be predicated by a desire. If it is not then it is an arbitrary decision and not applicable. The reason I would deny that desire is because I have a desire to be a godly father and be obedient to God.

No, that is not really what I am saying. Yes, I do have a desire to obey God. However, that obedience is not dependent upon me having a desire to obey God more, but on a determination to deny that which is against God.

As such, it is not a matter of what is my greatest desire (for sometimes quite frankly, that is the flesh). But it is a matter of whether I will deny what I want in deference to what God says, whether I want to or not.

Ainesis, I'm not sure what to say. You seem to be contending that your decision to deny what you want in deference to what God says isn't predicated by a desire to please God. In fact, you seem to be denying that a decision to obey God even require a desire to obey God. That makes absolutely no sense to me. Maybe I'm just not getting what you're saying but I do appreciate the input.

God bless

[Ainesis]

Um...you force your will to align with God's because you're stiff-necked? You lost me on that one. I'm not asking why you have to force your will. I'm asking why you do force your will. Why are you trying to align your will to God's will?

Oops! Misunderstood you there. I try to align my will with God's because I recognize that His ways are better than my own. Also, this post is much longer than I want. So, since I think I address many of your questions in my response below, I will not pull out each of your comments individually. Just didn't want you to think I was ignoring you. :)

The reason for your decision is because you're deciding? Sorry but either what you say makes no sense or I'm just misunderstanding you. What causes you to decide one way or the other?

Nope. That is not what I said. I did not say that the reason for my decision is because I am deciding. I said the reason for my choice is whether I am deciding to obey God or not.


Smoking is giving into my fleshly desire for something harmful. How is that denying my flesh? You completely lost me on that one.

Yeah, you misread what I said. My comment supported exactly what you state in the first statement. Smoking is giving in to a fleshly desire for something harmful. So, when you refuse to deny the flesh of that desire, you smoke.

You seem to be saying the following: Your greatest desire -> Your will

I am saying:

aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa-> In line with God's commands -> Allow
aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa|
aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa|
Your greatest desire -
aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa|
aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa|
aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa-> Against God's commands -> Deny


What we decide to do is not the result of our greatest desire, but is the result of whether we will obey God and crucify those things that are not like Him. Even if the desire for sin is greater than any other, we must be disciplined and deny that which against God. If we want to be a disciple, we must first deny ourselves.

Look at Jesus in Gethsemene.

"And he said, Abba, Father, all things are possible unto thee; take away this cup from me: nevertheless not what I will, but what thou wilt. " Mark 14:36

You assert (I believe) that one's greatest desire determines one's will. If that is true, then Jesus' greatest desire at this moment was not to die. In this text, Jesus admits that His will at this moment was not the same as the Father's. He wanted God to take away this cup He was about to drink. Yet, He died. He denied His will in favor of what the Father's will was.

Now, you can say, "The reason He did this is because His will to obey the Father was greater than His will to be released from this death." But that is not stated in the text. Is He following His greatest desire or denying His greatest desire at that time? The text seems to indicate a denial.

We will all have strong desires to disobey at times. But God says that He always provides a way of escape out of temptation. What is that doorway? It is the power via the Spirit to deny ourselves (including our greatest desires) in favor of what God says to do.

Paul said that he buffeted his body daily. He was not simply being led by his greatest desire; In fact, he said that his greater desire was to do what God wanted. Yet, he still had to struggle against and deny that in himself that was standing up against God.

In the world, we are a slave to our greatest desires. We are led by the desires of the flesh because we have no ability in and of ourselves to do anything else but choose sin. Not so, once we are saved. Once we turn to Christ, He gives us the ability to crucify that nature so that the motivator for our decisions is not what we desire more, but what is in line with what God commands - even at the expense of what we desire. Again, I just don't see the premise that our greatest desires are determinants of our will supported in Scripture.

So you desire to do the will of God, correct? And isn't it this desire that motivates you to act accordingly?

Not always. When obedience is demanded in an area that is particularly hard, sometimes my desire to do what I want is quite simply greater than my desire to obey God. This is when I must deny.

If obedience to God was always the result of my desire to obey being greater than anything else, then what is there for me to deny? Why does God call us to deny ourselves if obedience is predicated on that being the greater desire? I simply would obey because I am fulfilling my greatest desire. The whole command then to deny is pointless.

I'll give you an example of a passage that actually does deal with this issue:

James 1:14,15
But each one is tempted when he is drawn away by his own desires and enticed. Then, when desire has conceived, it gives birth to sin; and sin, when it is full-grown, brings forth death.

Our desires are like the neck of our inner man. They turn our head (will) as they please.

I am not so sure. Look at the previous text.

James 1:12
Blessed is the man that endureth temptation: for when he is tried, he shall receive the crown of life, which the Lord hath promised to them that love him.

No one is tempted by things that are undesirable to them. In order for something to tempt you, it must appeal to a desire in you or it will not be tempting.

Yet, God says that we can "endure" temptation. The word for endure here is hupomenō which means "to stay under (behind), that is, remain; figuratively to undergo, that is, bear (trials), have fortitude, persevere: - abide, endure, (take) patient (-ly), suffer, tarry behind."

Those enduring the temptation have desires just as strong as those who succomb to it. There is no indication that the temptation of those who endure is any less strong than the temptation of those who succomb.

I would say that the key text in the Scripture you provide is not that those who fall into sin have desires; but that they allow themselves to be "drawn away" by these desires. All have desires, all are tempted, but some resist/endure and others do not. The desire (which is present for all) does not appear to be the causitive action.

And why would I deny it Ainesis? A decision must be predicated by a desire.

Based on what? Why do you assume that a decision must be predicated by a desire. Perhaps decisions can be made by the sheer force of your will, even while at odds with your desires.

Ainesis, I'm not sure what to say.

Ha! I find that hard to believe. :D

You seem to be contending that your decision to deny what you want in deference to what God says isn't predicated by a desire to please God.

Hopefully, the above has explained my position a little more clearly....or maybe not. LOL! :)

[Ainesis]

One more thing. I do believe that our desire to obey God grows over time as you suggest. I also believe that enduring temptation (rather than succombing to it) is one way in which the old sinful nature is crucified. In other words, those desires - or rather the strength of those desires - decrease as you stand against them.

So, I acknowledge the role that desire plays in choices we make; However, I don't believe that they are the determinant for these choices. I believe that in Christ we are empowered to override these desires.

[Reformationist]

Ainesis, I will try to address your latest posts but, I must say, it seems like you are purporting, or ignoring, the illogic of what you profess. I mean no offense. I honestly just do not see how someone can deny that their motivation for denying the lusts of their flesh is their greater desire to be obedient to the Lord.

I try to align my will with God's because I recognize that His ways are better than my own.



You see, this is the crux of what my confusion. You acknowledge that you recognize God's ways are better than your own. Such a qualification clearly shows that you desire to be in accord with God's ways. This, to me, is a given yet you seem to deny that your recognition and pursual of God's ways is based on your desire to make them your own. It seems rather nonsensical to me.



Nope. That is not what I said. I did not say that the reason for my decision is because I am deciding. I said the reason for my choice is whether I am deciding to obey God or not.



And why would you decide to obey God? Why would you choose to not obey God?



Yeah, you misread what I said. My comment supported exactly what you state in the first statement. Smoking is giving in to a fleshly desire for something harmful. So, when you refuse to deny the flesh of that desire, you smoke.



And why would I deny my flesh? Why would I refuse to deny my flesh?




[list]In line with God's commands -> Allow



Against God's commands -> Deny



Ainesis, how do I put this....we must have a reason for denying something that we desire. We are not robots, therefore, our actions are predicated by a motivation. If our motivation is to align our will to God's will, then the reason that we deny something that is against God's commands is because we desire to obey God.



What we decide to do is not the result of our greatest desire, but is the result of whether we will obey God and crucify those things that are not like Him.



Why would we do that? Why Ainesis? Why would we seek to obey God? What is our motivation?



Even if the desire for sin is greater than any other, we must be disciplined and deny that which against God. If we want to be a disciple, we must first deny ourselves.



But to do so we must have a reason. With the exception of reflex, we do not act without motivation. The action of our mind choosing must be prompted by something. We don't just go through life, arbitrarily making choices. For instance, when I am faced with a difficult person who is being ungodly to me, I have a choice to either respond in kind or respond in godliness. Something motivates me to choose one way or the other. I don't just flip a coin. If we recognize that it is better to respond in love and seek to do so then it is because we desire to do what we think is better. If we think it is the better approach because it is what God commands and we respond in that manner for that reason, that is synonymous with saying that we choose to respond in love because we desire to be obedient to what God has commanded.



Look at Jesus in Gethsemene.

"And he said, Abba, Father, all things are possible unto thee; take away this cup from me: nevertheless not what I will, but what thou wilt. " Mark 14:36

You assert (I believe) that one's greatest desire determines one's will. If that is true, then Jesus' greatest desire at this moment was not to die. In this text, Jesus admits that His will at this moment was not the same as the Father's. He wanted God to take away this cup He was about to drink. Yet, He died. He denied His will in favor of what the Father's will was.



Look at the end of that statement. Jesus desired that the cup of God's wrath be taken from His lips. Was that His greatest desire? Clearly not. Even in the midst of His suffering, His desire to obey God's will was paramount, "not what I will, but what thou wilt." That is very explicit.



Now, you can say, "The reason He did this is because His will to obey the Father was greater than His will to be released from this death." But that is not stated in the text. Is He following His greatest desire or denying His greatest desire at that time? The text seems to indicate a denial.



Ainesis, this is one of the clearest examples in the Bible of someone's desire to obey God superceding their desire to have their will be done. Jesus is clearly denying his desire to have the cup of wrath pass from Him because of His desire to do the will of God. Sorry, but, in my opinion, that is the worst passage in the Bible you could have picked to prove your point.



Not always. When obedience is demanded in an area that is particularly hard, sometimes my desire to do what I want is quite simply greater than my desire to obey God. This is when I must deny.



I honestly mean no disrespect but I feel like I'm beating my head against a brick wall here. Your choice to deny what you desire is predicated by something, right? It's not an arbitrary choice, right? What is it that motivates you to deny what you desire?



I am not so sure. Look at the previous text.

James 1:12
Blessed is the man that endureth temptation: for when he is tried, he shall receive the crown of life, which the Lord hath promised to them that love him.

No one is tempted by things that are undesirable to them. In order for something to tempt you, it must appeal to a desire in you or it will not be tempting.

Yet, God says that we can "endure" temptation. The word for endure here is hupomenō which means "to stay under (behind), that is, remain; figuratively to undergo, that is, bear (trials), have fortitude, persevere: - abide, endure, (take) patient (-ly), suffer, tarry behind."

Those enduring the temptation have desires just as strong as those who succomb to it. There is no indication that the temptation of those who endure is any less strong than the temptation of those who succomb.

I would say that the key text in the Scripture you provide is not that those who fall into sin have desires; but that they allow themselves to be "drawn away" by these desires. All have desires, all are tempted, but some resist/endure and others do not. The desire (which is present for all) does not appear to be the causitive action.



Ainesis, I'm not contending that desires, in and of themselves, lead to sin. Quite the contrary. I'm contending that sinful desires, if they are the strongest desires we have, lead to sin. We have a reason for denying ourselves something that appeals to us, yes? What is that reason? The causative agent in why we choose to give into a desire is in how much of ourselves we give to that desire, i.e., how much we desire it. Those that resist do so for a reason. If they desire the sin more than to do God's will then they are led away by that desire.

Based on what? Why do you assume that a decision must be predicated by a desire. Perhaps decisions can be made by the sheer force of your will, even while at odds with your desires.

The "sheer force of the will" is our desires. They are what motivates the will. People do not will anything that they do not desire. You may believe that your greatest desire is to disobey God but if, when faced with temptation, you choose to deny that desire and, instead, obey God, you had a reason for doing so. Once again, our choices are not arbitrary. We choose how we choose for a reason.

One more thing. I do believe that our desire to obey God grows over time as you suggest. I also believe that enduring temptation (rather than succombing to it) is one way in which the old sinful nature is crucified. In other words, those desires - or rather the strength of those desires - decrease as you stand against them.

So, I acknowledge the role that desire plays in choices we make; However, I don't believe that they are the determinant for these choices. I believe that in Christ we are empowered to override these desires.

Well, I appreciate your input. Your position makes absolutely no sense to me but I do appreciate all the time you've taken. I just fail to see how we can pursue obedience by denying our desires if we do not have greater desire to be obedient. It seems rather nonsensical to me.

Anyway, thanks again,
God bless

[Ainesis]

Ainesis, I will try to address your latest posts but, I must say, it seems like you are purporting, or ignoring, the illogic of what you profess. I mean no offense.
Yeah...right...LOL! :) No offense taken.
I honestly just do not see how someone can deny that their motivation for denying the lusts of their flesh is their greater desire to be obedient to the Lord.
Quite simply because we are called to obey, regardless of how we feel, not because of how we feel.
we must have a reason for denying something that we desire.
True. But that reason does not have to be based on it being the greatest desire at that time.
Look at the end of that statement. Jesus desired that the cup of God's wrath be taken from His lips. Was that His greatest desire? Clearly not. Even in the midst of His suffering, His desire to obey God's will was paramount, "not what I will, but what thou wilt." That is very explicit.
Yet, according to you, it is the greatest desire that determines the will. I stated in a previous post that desire is not a definer of the will and you said finding that out was the purpose of this thread.

http://www.christianforums.com/showthread.php?p=16704532&postcount=52

So, if the greatest desire is a definer of the will (as you suggest), then Jesus' greatest desire was to have the cup passed from Him because He acknowledges that as His will. Yet, He overrides that will/greatest desire by doing instead what God would have Him to do.
I honestly mean no disrespect but I feel like I'm beating my head against a brick wall here.
Believe me, I completely understand. ^_^
I'm not contending that desires, in and of themselves, lead to sin. Quite the contrary. I'm contending that sinful desires, if they are the strongest desires we have, lead to sin.
Yet, there is no indication in the text that those who succomb to temptation have stronger desires to sin than those who do not. The contention is that they let themselves be drawn away by their desires, whereas the others did not.

Scripture appears to say that even if the desire to sin is the strongest desire we have, we are to deny and resist those urges. Again, why would we have to deny anything if God expected obedience only when the desire to obey has become greater than the desire to sin? What are we denying?
People do not will anything that they do not desire.
This is where we disagree and this is why the communication is so difficult because you are operating from a premise that I do not share or agree with. Not your fault or mine. We are simply approaching our understanding from 2 different positions.

I believe that in sin, man is not able to do above what he desires. I believe that in salvation, man can and must.
Well, I appreciate your input. Your position makes absolutely no sense to me but I do appreciate all the time you've taken. I just fail to see how we can pursue obedience by denying our desires if we do not have greater desire to be obedient. It seems rather nonsensical to me.

Because by nature, we are rebels; which is why we have to be born again. But even after having been born again, we must weaken/crucify that old nature through denial until the spirit man is strong enough to desire by nature the things pertaining to God.

I am completely comfortable ending the dialogue if it is not progressing. If you do not mind, however, give me your understanding of the following:

"For though we walk in the flesh, we do not war after the flesh: (For the weapons of our warfare are not carnal, but mighty through God to the pulling down of strongholds; Casting down imaginations, and every high thing that exalteth itself against the knowledge of God, and bringing into captivity every thought to the obedience of Christ; And having in a readiness to revenge all disobedience, when your obedience is fulfilled." II Corinthians 10:3-6

What are we fighting against in order to obey God if in fact when we obey it is because that's our greatest desire to do so?

God Bless!

[Telrunya]

Well let's see. Making a choice that is against my nature?

I joined the US Navy when I was 18 years old. I rose quickly through the ranks and was an E-5 or petty officer 2nd class when my 4 years was up. I re- enlisted for another 3 years because I enjoyed all the travel, my job, shooting big guns and blowing things up, and the people I worked with. In short I liked the lifestyle. When my second enlistment was about up, my father asked me to come work for him and learn to take over the family business. This was very undesireable. My father had been very abusive to my brother and I growing up. I wont go into the list here of things he did, but in the entire 7 years I was in the military I only went home on leave 4 times and all of those times I stayed with my brother. I had as little contact as possible with my father over those 7 years and my brother has had no contact with him since he moved out of the house at 17. In addition to this the family business is very seasonal and has long hours for not so great pay. I had never enjoyed that work when I was growing up. I decided to give my father a second chance though. Now that I was a man there was no way I would allow him to do the things he had done to me as a child. I got out of the Navy and worked for him for 5 years. It was evident after the first six months that my father hadn't changed much at all. While he couldn't hurt me physically anymore he was still very much a manipulator and was very capable of emotional abuse. I knew what he was doing and I knew my options. I was not without skills or other avenues. I could have rejoined the Navy at anytime. Now keep in mind all this was before I was saved. I decided to keep working for him in hopes that I might be able to help him, maybe even change him. 4 and a half years later I knew that there was nothing I could do. So I turned it over to God and left. The anger and resentment of my father and the things he has done is a constant thought struggle for me and always has been. It was a choice, not a desire, to subject myself to that man again.

[Asaph]

Well let's see. Making a choice that is against my nature?

I joined the US Navy when I was 18 years old. I rose quickly through the ranks and was an E-5 or petty officer 2nd class when my 4 years was up. I re- enlisted for another 3 years because I enjoyed all the travel, my job, shooting big guns and blowing things up, and the people I worked with. In short I liked the lifestyle. When my second enlistment was about up, my father asked me to come work for him and learn to take over the family business. This was very undesireable. My father had been very abusive to my brother and I growing up. I wont go into the list here of things he did, but in the entire 7 years I was in the military I only went home on leave 4 times and all of those times I stayed with my brother. I had as little contact as possible with my father over those 7 years and my brother has had no contact with him since he moved out of the house at 17. In addition to this the family business is very seasonal and has long hours for not so great pay. I had never enjoyed that work when I was growing up. I decided to give my father a second chance though. Now that I was a man there was no way I would allow him to do the things he had done to me as a child. I got out of the Navy and worked for him for 5 years. It was evident after the first six months that my father hadn't changed much at all. While he couldn't hurt me physically anymore he was still very much a manipulator and was very capable of emotional abuse. I knew what he was doing and I knew my options. I was not without skills or other avenues. I could have rejoined the Navy at anytime. Now keep in mind all this was before I was saved. I decided to keep working for him in hopes that I might be able to help him, maybe even change him. 4 and a half years later I knew that there was nothing I could do. So I turned it over to God and left. The anger and resentment of my father and the things he has done is a constant thought struggle for me and always has been. It was a choice, not a desire, to subject myself to that man again.

But the choice you made was absolutely in line with some desire you had. Whatever that might have been is only speculation on my part, but let's say for arguements sake that your greatest desire at that point was to have a normal loving relationship with your father. You would have been willing then to make the choice to align yourself with him in this business venture in order to give that an opportunity to happen. Your desire determined your choice, not the other way around.

Asaph

[Telrunya]

But the choice you made was absolutely in line with some desire you had. Whatever that might have been is only speculation on my part, but let's say for arguements sake that your greatest desire at that point was to have a normal loving relationship with your father. You would have been willing then to make the choice to align yourself with him in this business venture in order to give that an opportunity to happen. Your desire determined your choice, not the other way around.

Asaph

Actually I had very little hope that I would ever have a loving relationship with him. Way too much water under the bridge. I can honestly say; While I may have had a desire to have a normal loving father son relationship, I knew for a certainty that would never happen.

[Reformationist]

But the choice you made was absolutely in line with some desire you had. Whatever that might have been is only speculation on my part, but let's say for arguements sake that your greatest desire at that point was to have a normal loving relationship with your father. You would have been willing then to make the choice to align yourself with him in this business venture in order to give that an opportunity to happen. Your desire determined your choice, not the other way around.

Asaph

Absolutely, 100%, without a doubt, perfectly answered.

God bless

[Reformationist]

Actually I had very little hope that I would ever have a loving relationship with him. Way too much water under the bridge. I can honestly say; While I may have had a desire to have a normal loving father son relationship, I knew for a certainty that would never happen.

I completely understand but desire and hope are two different things. It's clear that your desire to have a relationship with your father superceded your desire to not subject yourself to that same situation. And, when you felt that nothing had changed, nor would change, you no longer desired to be in that situation more than you desired to get out of it. Then what happened? You left.

God bless

[Ainesis]

Absolutely, 100%, without a doubt, perfectly answered.

According to your understanding, which I am not sure is accurate. I would love to see this assumption held up to Scripture as I think it would be shown that there a examples of people going aganist their own wills/greatest desires in order to serve God.

God Bless

[Asaph]

Actually I had very little hope that I would ever have a loving relationship with him. Way too much water under the bridge. I can honestly say; While I may have had a desire to have a normal loving father son relationship, I knew for a certainty that would never happen.

Brother, that's what sons do.

[Asaph]

According to your understanding, which I am not sure is accurate. I would love to see this assumption held up to Scripture as I think it would be shown that there a examples of people going aganist their own wills/greatest desires in order to serve God.

God Bless

If that is the case, then their greatest desire was God. What an awesome thing.

Asaph

[Ainesis]

If that is the case, then their greatest desire was God. What an awesome thing.

Asaph

Not according to the premise that the greatest desire is the determinant for your will. Is that not the premise?

And yes, it is an awesome thing for our greatest desire to be God!

[Asaph]

Not according to the premise that the greatest desire is the determinant for your will. Is that not the premise?

And yes, it is an awesome thing for our greatest desire to be God!

But you still miss the point. If you go against what you want in order to do that which you believe God has told you, your own desire is factually to serve God. That cannot be disputed. Your desire to serve God was greater than your desire to serve self.

How is it that you are not understanding this very logical and simple concept?

Are you afraid that your pride will be injured by admitting that you desire to serve God greater than you desire to serve self?

Didn't Moses do the same thing?

Asaph

[Ainesis]

But you still miss the point. If you go against what you want in order to do that which you believe God has told you, your own desire is factually to serve God. That cannot be disputed.

Why not? Because you don't think it is so? Outside of saying that it does not align with your particular understanding, you have not stated why it is indisputable. Scripture shows various examples of people putting aside their wills for God. And if will is synanymous with greatest desire (as has been supposed), then they are putting aside their greatest desire for God (at that time); not merely following another greater desire.

How is it that you are not understanding this very logical and simple concept?

Simply because I do not agree with the premise you set forth. The underlying assumption in your premise is that people do only what they want to do; and I don't see that as the case.

Are you afraid that your pride will be injured by admitting that you desire to serve God greater than you desire to serve self?

LOL! That is really silly. If that were something I had a problem with then by no means could I be a Christian.

It is my pleasure and honor to serve God, but I am at the same time honest enough to admit that doing so can be even in spite of my greatest desire at the time.

Regardless, however, of what you may think of me, that does not address the Scriptures that seem to refute the premise as you define it.

Didn't Moses do the same thing?

Moses made false accusations against others because they did not see things the way that he did? :)

[Asaph]

Why not? Because you don't think it is so? Outside of saying that it does not align with your particular understanding, you have not stated why it is indisputable. Scripture shows various examples of people putting aside their wills for God. And if will is synanymous with greatest desire (as has been supposed), then they are putting aside their greatest desire for God (at that time); not merely following another greater desire.

OK. Let's get this very straight. Are you saying that you DO NOT desire to do God's will?

If your answer to that question is that of course you have chosen God over your own selfish sinful desires, then you have proven my point beyond anything anybody with half a brain can miss understanding.

I was speaking on a level of logic I thought you had the ability to follow.

I repent.



Simply because I do not agree with the premise you set forth. The underlying assumption in your premise is that people do only what they want to do; and I don't see that as the case.

That is absolutely false. That is in fact the basis of your arguement. That you somehow have this greater capacity than most people and you actually do things that you do not really wish to do because.