What is freewill?

Which brings forth the term corruptible. If the creature is introduced to a corrupt image of god to ponder, then the will is no longer free. Ironically the suggestion that it's our freedom to choose to trust or not trust is a mischaracterization of the circumstance of having to choose once the corrupt image is introduced.
I literally had hit heart eyes as I was reading, but I am curious what you mean by the underlined and emboldened statement.

Would it be fair to say that God Himself went to Deep, Self Sacrificing efforts to reestablish unto all mankind That HIS TRUE IMAGE of His very BEING is not only Trustworthy, more Trustworthy or even Most Trustworthy, but is Infinitely Trustworthy... in such a way that even our "corrupt image" is able to comprehend, if we would just Turn, of our own genuine free will, to the Bronze Serpent on the Pole?
Upvote 0

Female Athletes Sue NCAA for Allowing Transgender Competitors

No parent should want their child to suffer and die - either at the hands of an enemy combatant - or by a doctor and their child's own hand when they finally decide to end their suffering because they believe that the evil spirits won?

Why do you make it seem like I would be for either choice?
But you said being taught tolerance for LGBTs was worse than war. If your child ends her life for fear of evil spirits then she had more problems than just being exposed to her LGBT classmates.
Upvote 0

The common thread in Trump's defenders

No, we just despise him. It's his supporters we're afraid of--angry religious ideologues with guns. Taking out Trump doesn't make them go away.
Yeah but you have no fear of all those people who were looting and burning. Trespassers scare the living daylights out of you though
Upvote 0

I'm admitted to a psychiatric facility

My psychiatric meds were adjusted yesterday and I began feeling irritable and suicidal today. So, I came to the nearby mental hospital with my dad and got admitted. They gave me clonazepam, but I'm not feeling sleepy yet. (It's almost 11 PM here.) Hopefully they'll adjust my meds tomorrow and I'll be better in a few days' time.

This kind of demon does not go out except by prayer and FASTING

Fasting and prayer are often paired on special occasions, Acts 13:

2 While they were worshiping the Lord and fasting, the Holy Spirit said, “Set apart for me Barnabas and Saul for the work to which I have called them.” 3 So after they had fasted and prayed, they placed their hands on them and sent them off.
It is not just prayer but prayer and fasting to humble ourselves before an important decision. Fasting served to intensify prayer, Acts 14:

23 Paul and Barnabas appointed elders for them in each church and, with prayer and fasting, committed them to the Lord, in whom they had put their trust.
In both cases, the disciples fasted before making the crucial appointments that had long-reaching consequences. Fasting solemnizes the souls to listen to God.

On another occasion, the disciples could not cast out a demon. They brought the man to Jesus, and Jesus cast out the demon. Jesus explained their failure in Matthew 17:

21 “But this kind [of demon] does not go out except by prayer and fasting.”
Pulpit Commentary:

This verse is omitted in many good manuscripts and by the Revised Version, it being considered to have been introduced from the parallel passage of St. Mark.
The parallel account in Mark 9:29 did not mention fasting:

He replied, “This kind can come out only by prayer.”
There is no guarantee that fasting and prayer will always change an outcome. David committed adultery and murder in 2 Samuel 12:

15 Then Nathan went to his house.
And the Lord afflicted the child that Uriah’s wife bore to David, and he became sick. 16 David therefore sought God on behalf of the child. And David fasted and went in and lay all night on the ground.
In the end, the child still died.

Prayer and fasting help you focus on God more singularly and intensely. They can also improve your hearing from God. However, they do not guarantee that your prayer will come true.

The common thread in Trump's defenders

No,

what they have done is tell me what they think he was charged with.

Unlike most people. I want to know what he was actually charged with..
No one can tell you what the crime he was allegedly trying to conceal was because the jury did not have to decide
Upvote 0

The common thread in Trump's defenders

In some ways, yes, I do. In other ways, no, I don’t.
I will help you. The reason why is that fair-minded people know this sham was politically motivated and perpetrated by Trump haters who would convict him of killing Kennedy if they had the chance (I probably should not have suggested that... they will have him on the grassy knoll with witnesses). They also know that the people who are doing this to Trump would do it to them also. It has one purpose and one purpose only: to keep Trump from the WH in 24. Well, that backfired. What you see is the nation standing up to an obvious ploy and letting the liberal Democrats know what they think about it and them. They are saying "You must think we are stupid. We will save our comments until November.
Justice has a way of showing up when you least expect it.
Good luck in November...

Somebody had to pick up that torch.
Must have been the same torch Democrats used to burn churches and crosses within my lifetime.
Upvote 0

What is freewill?

The major confusion of the matter comes when the idea that we are not Gifted with "Free Will" is insisted by any party that enters the discussion. The very term is chopped, torn apart and philosophized to a point that it takes volumes of communication to distinguish. It shouldn't be this way.

To properly convey the term under those conditions, I must then Qualify that God Blessed Mankind with Self Sovereignty, which he did in Genesis 1:28. However, it is much simpler to say Free Will, which is supposed to mean that God Created creation with the ability to act in Agency apart from His Will. This is neat and clean, as it follows the very narrative of scripture. However, once this narrative gets challenged, one can find themselves writing out phrases like Individual Autonomous Libertarian Free Moral Agency... just to cover their point, literarily speaking to essentially plow past theosophical chatter that denies that God provides such things.

Individual - a single human being as distinct from a group, class, or family.
Autonomous - having the right or power of self-government
Libertarian - a person who believes in the doctrine that human beings possess free will.
Free - enjoying personal freedom : not subject to the control or domination of another
Moral - a person's standards of behavior or beliefs concerning what is and is not acceptable for them to do.
Agency - action or intervention, especially such as to produce a particular effect.

If it requires the writing of these words "Individual Autonomous Libertarian Free Moral Agency" to suggest that we have "Free Will", or else complete attempt after attempt will be made to "REDEFINE" the simple term "Free Will" so that man made doctrines are protected... there seems to be a visceral manifestation of unintended cognitive dissonance that keeps trying to strong arm a very elementary matter of scripture that is reinforced from the word "In" of Genesis to the Closing word of Revelation.

All this to say, I never intend to assume anything in discussion, but do my best to see where the source of intense complication and confusion is coming from in any discussion.

My preferred method of communication is to simply say a word and it is understood to be what it actually is. Which sometimes happens in theological discussions and sometimes doesn't. :p
Thank you for this effort. I think the image of God that one holds to be true defines the terms. When it's an unknown certainty yet to be realized (or never fully realized as an eternal revelation), then it's a matter of faith. If I assume the will God originally gave Adam when he breathed life into him was a free will, then I believe it must begin in faith for God to be a trustworthy image.

To elaborate; It's not logical to infer that the creature was given the autonomy to decide the trustworthiness/untrustworthiness of the Creator, nor even ponder the question, because it's not logical that the Creator is created in the imagery of the creature.

Which brings forth the term corruptible. If the creature in a state of faith is introduced to the idea we choose God, then a corrupt image of god is being introduced as a false premise to ponder, and the will is no longer free. Ironically the suggestion that it's our freedom to choose to trust or not trust is a mischaracterization of the circumstance of having to choose in response to the corrupt image being introduced.
Upvote 0

Female Athletes Sue NCAA for Allowing Transgender Competitors

Well, there is some difference. If I had a choice between seeing my child taught tolerance for LGBT people versus seeing her blown to bloody shreds by an enemy drone, I'm afraid I would have to make a different choice than you would.
No parent should want their child to suffer and die - either at the hands of an enemy combatant - or by a doctor and their child's own hand when they finally decide to end their suffering because they believe that the evil spirits won?

Why do you make it seem like I would be for either choice?
Upvote 0

The common thread in Trump's defenders

No,

what they have done is tell me what they think he was charged with.

Unlike most people. I want to know what he was actually charged with..
Here's a copy of the indictment so you can read the charges yourself:

Here's a link to the pertinent legal statute:

Here's the wikipedia page describing the case:

Here are a whole bunch of other documents from the case:

Now you know what he's been charged with.
Upvote 0

Female Athletes Sue NCAA for Allowing Transgender Competitors

Except they are targeting children - trying to spread their delusion - and it leads to nothing but their own suffering and destruction.

This is no different than war - except most people don't recognize it as such and often support it - so its worse.
Well, there is some difference. If I had a choice between seeing my child taught tolerance for LGBT people versus seeing her blown to bloody shreds by an enemy drone, I'm afraid I would have to make a different choice than you would.
Upvote 0

If you believe the Blessed Virgin Mary sinned...

"All our justices as the rag of a menstruous woman" [Isaias 64:6]. "Our Justices" are works of the Jewish law, the Jewish sacrifices, sacraments, and cleansing ceremonies. Without good works there can be no Salvation. It seems that when you left the Church you left God behind, or found a more likeable god. Citing this verse to mean every work of charity is a "rag of a menstruous woman" illustrates why St. Peter warned of "private interpretation". [2 Peter 1:20] The verse means that works without the grace of God are not meritorious. Merit remains even with a prevenient grace or actual grace. As I've mentioned before, without the justification found in our Baptism every act is an act of deprivation and is without merit,

True, because it's built into the Protestant paradigm. "Once Saved Always Save", "Bible Alone", "Faith Alone" are categorical examples of the majority of Protestants fail the "True Faith"

True.

What? Are you denying Scripture? St. Paul explicitly states that faith does not stand alone but with the obedience to the faith of Christ. [Romans 1:5;16:26].

I addressed Isaias 64:6 above. Without St. Paul's obedience of faith, there is no work that merits. However obedience to faith moves us to the baptismal founts of the Catholic Church.

Once again, another out of context quote from the bible.The verse does not make your point that somehow works cannot be meritorious falls flat. God's works in our creation is does not merit us. However, failing obedience to His grace in good works fails faith. Mankind has free will, nothing 'makes' us do works of charity, we do so out of our obedience to love of Christ.

JoeT
Through him and for his name's sake, we received grace and apostleship to call people from among all the Gentiles to the obedience that comes from faith

What does the phrase "the obedience that comes from faith" mean? This phrase can be interpreted in one of two ways. The first way is to say it refers to the obedience that faith produces or is its result. The second way is to say the phrase means "unto obedience, the very nature of which is faith" or "faith, which is obedience." The Gospel message is not a suggestion. It is a command to repent and have faith - faith in Jesus Christ as Lord and Savior. It is propositional. We either obey the command of the Gospel or we disobey. What does obedience result in? Faith.

I think both interpretations have merit. Certainly, as James points out in his epistle, faith should and must produce obedience the fruit of that which is good works. "Faith" without obedience is dead faith. True saving faith always results in obedience. We are still sinners and will not always obey but we will intend to obey and be gradually sanctified into increasing obedience. Where does that obedience come from - it comes from faith. Faith gives birth to obedience. Faith precedes obedience.

It is also true that our obedience to the Gospel results in faith. The Gospel is a command, a proposition. If we are obedient to that command we respond in faith. This is not commenting on the source of faith. While we do exercise faith, our faith is itself a gift of God's grace.

The first interpretation does not say that obedience is required for salvation. Paul negated that argument when he wrote:

For by grace you have been saved through faith; and that not of yourselves, it is the gift of God; not as a result of works, so that no one may boast. (Ephesians 2:8-9)

This makes clear that salvation is "through faith" and "not as a result of works." How then can anyone say good works are a requirement for salvation? There is no other possible way to understand this verse than to conclude that works have no part in salvation!

Then what about James?

What use is it, my brethren, if someone says he has faith but he has no works? Can that faith save him? If a brother or sister is without clothing and in need of daily food, and one of you says to them, “Go in peace, be warmed and be filled,” and yet you do not give them what is necessary for their body, what use is that? Even so faith, if it has no works, is dead, being by itself. (James 2:14-17)

Some people use these verses to argue that salvation requires works. We first must understand that Scripture does not contradict itself. God does not say salvation cannot be the result of works then turn around and say salvation requires works! God is not of two minds and God certainly does not contradict Himself. So how do we reconcile what Paul wrote with what James wrote?

James answers the question for us. He contrasts two types of faith. One type of faith is "dead faith." It is an empty faith. It is the faith of someone who might have intellectually agreed with the Gospel but never surrendered their will to the Gospel. The Gospel is more than just a set of facts to be believed. Part of the Gospel is acknowledging that Jesus is Lord and what that implies. If you say Jesus is Lord but do nothing to obey him, your statement is a lie. You do not truly see him as your Lord. If I say I believe that walking in front of a speeding car will kill me and that I have no desire to die but walk in front of a speeding car then I am either out of my mind or did not truly believe walking in front of a speeding car would kill me. The same if I said that drinking poison would kill me then drink poison. In obeying the Gospel we do more than acknowledge Jesus is Lord, we surrender ourselves to his lordship. That is why Jesus said that whoever would follow him must talk up his cross daily. If you just mouth the words acknowledging Jesus is Lord but make no commitment of the will to follow him as Lord, then you don't have saving faith. That is what James calls "dead faith." It is not genuine faith and so it cannot save you.

Salvation is by faith alone but it does not leave us alone (or as James puts it in verse 17 "being by itself") God is not interested in just freeing us from the penalty of sin but freeing us from the power of sin. He wants to make us like Jesus. Jesus was free from the penalty of sin because sin had no power over him. In freeing us from the power of sin, God begins the work of sanctification in our lives by which sin gradually loses its power over us as we cooperate with his grace. To us, this cooperation is a choice but at the same time, it is done by the power of God's grace as He changes us. Sanctification does not begin until after we receive salvation.

If sanctification preceded salvation then salvation would be dependent on works and Paul made it clear that works have no part in salvation. God doesn't wait until we have cleaned up our act before deciding whether or not to save us.

but God shows his love for us in that while we were still sinners, Christ died for us. (Romans 5:8)

No, Christ died for us while we were sinners. Jesus didn't die just to make salvation possible for us. He died to actually save us. Revelation tells us that God's elect had their names written in the Book of Life before the foundations of the world. God chose to save you before He even created you. It is not that God could foresee your choices and act beforehand as a result of them. God knows the future because God wills the future. He foreordains events.

It is God who saves us. We don't save ourselves. God gives us faith and then the grace to obey Him. He does not merely forgive us but changes us. If we say we have faith but our lives show no sign of faith, then we have a dead faith and that is exactly what James addresses. There were people in his time as well as today who call themselves Christians but there is no evidence to support that claim. Such Christians give Christianity a bad name as non-believers meet such people and then conclude Christians are just a bunch of hypocrites who talk the talk but don't walk the walk. There is no friction between what Paul wrote and what James wrote. Salvation is not the result of works. We are saved before we have any good works (our works are as filthy rags). After we are saved, we walk in good works God has prepared beforehand for us.

For we are His workmanship, created in Christ Jesus for good works, which God prepared beforehand so that we would walk in them.
(Ephesians 2:10)

This verse comes right after Paul writes that salvation comes by faith and not by works. Good works come from God who has prepared them for us beforehand. Why would works be required for salvation if God prepared them beforehand for us? How would that be a test of our worthiness? We are His workmanship, created in Christ Jesus for good works.

Note the order. God gives us grace which produces faith which saves us and then He sanctifies us through good works He has prepared beforehand for us.

If we say that we have no sin, we are deceiving ourselves and the truth is not in us. (1 John 1:8)

James could have made a similar statement (and does but in more words) by saying,

If we say we have faith, but have not works, we are deceiving ourselves and our faith is dead.

There are two kinds of faith, wrote James, real faith that results in good works and dead faith that is alone without any good works. Real faith, wrote Paul, is the result of faith (given to us by grace) and not as the result of works that no man may boast.
Upvote 0

The common thread in Trump's defenders

Perhaps you have less faith in the justice system because Mr. Trump was tried and convicted in NY, but many millions of us have regained a little...just a little more faith in the justice system.

We still have two Supreme Court justices who have taken millions in patronage money and who can now add probable treason to their battered, tattered curriculum vitae. Ginny Thomas conspired with the 1/6 insurrectionists--you think her husband was too busy counting his expensive gifts to know? Mrs. Alito, over 70 years old, managed to put that flag upside down on the garage--and her husband backed in and out of the driveway for 11 days and never noticed? And the beach house conspiracy theory flag as well? The Chief Justice unveiled an ethics plan, custom made for justices to arrogantly ignore, dripping with undeserved entitlement. Of course the Chief Justice's wife had made $8 million in ten years as a headhunter for Washington firms trying cases before the Supreme Court. Can't you just hear them? "Mrs. Roberts is our very favorite headhunter, and that's why she's 'earned' $800,000 a year in commissions from all of us."

And then we have Justice Cannon, Trump's appointee and apparent puppet. The case that's so slam-dunk most defendants would try to cut a deal and plead guilty has been battered into oblivion, but her marching orders are obviously to schedule it sometime in 2030? 2040? Who knows?

Along with the historic racial and economic biases in many states--Texas probably leads the hall of shame in this one, executing convicts with IQs of 60 whose only crime was being framed by shrewder, smarter murderers.

But for once, we can believe in justice again. The real picture of Donald Trump is unfolding, thanks to the diligence of the NY justice system.

A man with a phony university who bilked thousands of students hoping to improve their careers. $25 million judgment only covered some of their losses.

A man who owned a business that consistently overappraised assets to get loans and minimized them to avoid taxes. Judgment $450 billion.

A man who sexually assaulted a woman, and when she took him to court, destroyed her reputation with vicious lies. Judgment $83 million.

A man who concealed his promiscuous sexual activity with porn stars and playmates because he wanted to win an election. Judgment, guilty on 34 counts.

They have a long record of wins because he has a long record of dishonesty, fraud, promiscuity, etc.

Pro Publica found yesterday that many of his employees promised never to testify against him due to NDA's. One is now making $60K a month. Another is making $3 million a year.

I agree that the NY trial was the most inconsequential of the bunch, but they deserve a ton of credit for running the gauntlet of overpaid lawyers and hundreds of motions and getting something done.

I would venture to guess that he has now been held accountable for perhaps 10% of his misdeeds through the years. May he be held accountable for much more in the future.
When they use the court of law to go against their enemies, yet they get away scott free with everything, then there can be no faith in the american justice system.
Upvote 0

The common thread in Trump's defenders

Actually, Judge Merchan made 3 monetary donations totaling $35 to decmocratic causes, one entitled, "Stop Republicans". I don't care what an ethics committee ruled. This absolutely calls into question the impartiality of the judge. CNN reported on it in April 2023.

The political donations are undoubtedly small, but they nevertheless raise questions about Merchan’s impartiality as he has come under attack by the former president as a “Trump-hating judge.”
“While the amounts here are minimal, it’s surprising that a sitting judge would make political donations of any size to a partisan candidate or cause,” said Elie Honig, a senior CNN legal analyst and former federal prosecutor.
Would a different judge have handled things differently? Perhaps. Perhaps not. We'll never know since the trial proceeded with the clearly biased judge.



The timing of this case is highly suspect. We're talking about a trial that should have been for a misdemeanor that occurred more than 8 years ago. But that wouldn't fly, because the statute of limitations had expired. So, Bragg, who famously bragged during his campaign that he had sued the Trump administration more than 100 times, decided to amp up the charges to the lowest possible felony so that the statute of limitations wouldn't apply and so that Democrats could coin the new phrase, "Convicted Felon Donald Trump." In that respect, Bragg delivered on his campaign promise and cemented himself in the history books.

And for what? I think this Tweet sums up the way many Americans feel about the verdict.

View attachment 349536

The machinations that were necessary to arrive at this conviction are not lost on most people. And in a populace that already had a historically low trust in the US justice system, this will only serve to further impugn the legitimacy of that system. Worse still for Democrats, there is now a large swath of the population that feels that THEY have been cheated by the justice system and can now empathize with Trump.
And I was called a troll.

Thank you for this post. It explains alot..

But I doubt they will hear..
Upvote 0

Filter

Forum statistics

Threads
5,843,706
Messages
64,839,009
Members
273,861
Latest member
chiamaka madunatu