Are Humans Free Moral Agents?

[John317]

Let's stop calling it free will then. There's nothing free about it. Do people have a choice to be born in poverty and hunger? Perhaps they have a choice non to be born to abusive parents or company of peers who only do terrible things for survival?

If there's a God, he can see through those things. The choices we make right now are very much determined by our environment. There's very little freedom involved. There's a very little free choice between not paying taxes and some jail time.

But in order for humans to be "free moral agents," and in order for us to have "free will," people don't have to be absolutely free in every sense of the word. Being a "free moral agent," and having "free will," simply means that we are responsible for our choices and for our acts and our words, no matter what our circumstances. I may be in jail and have only a Bible to read, and maybe I was convicted of a crime I didn't commit, but I am still in control of my reactions to those facts. I still choose how I will respond to what has happened to me. Will I be angry and decide to kill someone? Will I become bitter toward God? Will I become filled with hate and seek revenge? Or will I become more like Christ? I am free to choose. In that sense, I am a free moral agent.

Was not Christ a free moral agent, even while nailed to the cross?

[miz3]

John317,

It is not my intention to break any rules of the forum. However, to one my earlier posts you stated that my statements "came from Satan".

If my statements came from Satan by implication you are saying that my "voice" is the "voice of Satan".

It is because of this that I made the statement that you object to so much that you threaten me with censure.

[doug yowell]

The problem I see with using this as a qualifier is that the text does not say anything about Jesus Christ. It uses the term "God". Now if we have other "Biblical" texts that allow us to state that Jesus Christ was also involved with the Father then we have more latitude. Unless we have other texts that qualify the original text in the clearest of tones then I believe the text stands as it is!!!!!!!!!!

Thus, taking the text cited alone "Jesus Christ" is not a correct qualifier. If we have other texts that are clearly related then we can use it as a correct qualifier.

That was my point. Since we do have other texts that clearly state that it was the Son of God that did the creating then, when discussing the creation and specifics of who, it would be appropriate to substitute Jesus for God without messing up the truth of the text.Just because it has not been stated in the original text does not mean that further Biblical light cannot be used to clarify it's broader meaning. God's way of teaching is stated to be "here a little,there a little".No one passage stands alone.

[miz3]

Doug,

You are correct in what you just said. However, I have noticed that there is a pervasive and free use of such latitude when none should be given. I have also seen some huge leaps in logic that do not support the facts because our preconceived notions do not allow us to accept the texts as they are written by "Holy men of God" who directed by the Holy Spirit!!!!!!!

Where do those preconceived notions come from could be many things. I do notice, however, some clear preconceptions that obviously come from:

1. Ellen White-------and are used pervasively as unstated or stated qualifiers.

2. SDA Dogma------As stated in SDA publications and from the pulpit.

3. Non SDA sources-------pagan philosophies, eastern religions, the "Love Gospel" that permeates Christianity today (including SDA), etc.

4. Political Correctness.

5. Loyalty to an entity that freed them from a destructive lifestyle.

6. Other things not thought of that could be on this list.

[Musicman1228]

This discussion has set me on logic stream of consciousness. Here it is:

We have been told by the proponents of the gospel according to Paul that we have been set free from sin and death because we have been 'set free' from the Law. "Where there is no Law, there is no violation" - Rom. 4:15 (and other pursuant theology).

Therefore, if there is no longer any Law of God (read 10 Commandments) we cannot be in violation of that Law because we are not under Law if we accept Jesus Christ as our personal savior by faith through grace.

Hence, any choices that we make based on ‘free moral agency’ are now moot and of none effect in relationship to our ultimate eternal state (life or death), because no further choices are necessary for us to make in the accomplishing of our salvation; this is because it has all been done for us by the sacrifice of Jesus Christ on the cross, thus providing salvation as a free gift of grace. Choose once, saved forever.

IF this is the case (and most Christian believe it to be true) then no further choices are possible (not just not necessary) which sets the believing Christian FREE from having to make those tough decisions that demonstrate the fitness of their character for eternal life. Under these conditions ALL Christians must be saved – God has no choice but to accept them into His Kingdom. The above description is defined as the ‘new’ Covenant.

Now comes the interesting part:

Since these believers are 'Set Free' and are no longer subject to the 'rules of engagement' as defined in the 'old' Covenant they cannot be and are not considered by God to be ‘bondservants’, because a bondservant is a slave (unpaid servant) to his/her Master. A bondservant of Jesus Christ recognizes that their life debt for sin cannot be paid on their own, unless they want to undergo the second death and never live again (a wholly unsatisfactory outcome for most). Therefore, they have placed themselves in ‘bond-servitude’ to Jesus Christ, who at that moment becomes their Master and who now holds complete sway over their lives because He paid their life debt; He owns them (Rev. 5:9-10). The only requirement that the Master sets for the bondservant is that in order to demonstrate their love for their Master they must keep (be obedient to) His Commandments (John 14:15, Rev. 12:17). Both sides of this contract are held accountable to perform based on the LAWFUL Commandments of God the Father. This is the Covenant (contract) and the gospel of the Kingdom of Heaven (Matt. 24:14).

Yet Jesus Christ is not the kind of Master that forces anyone to do anything against their own ‘free will’ which He gave humanity at Creation. At any time these bondservants can choose to give up their bond-service and become ‘set free’ from the burden of that Covenant/contract. ONLY bondservants of Jesus Christ come under the protection of the Covenant which states that the sacrifice of Jesus Christ (and God the Father) on the cross paid the penalty for their sin of disobedience to the Law/Commandments of God.

If a person willing chooses to be ‘set free’ from the Law/Covenant then God is no longer responsible to pay the penalty for their life debt, and the death of Jesus Christ as penalty payment for them no longer applies to them. To be ‘set free’ from the Law means that a person is also set free from the provision of the Law that protects them by paying for their life debt, thus sentencing them to eternal death under the very Law that they chose to be out from under.

Under Common Law ‘interest’ must be demonstrated by payment or other valuable consideration such as service for service. Without this payment or other valuable consideration there is no ‘interest’ established for any property.

God established the Law/Covenant/10 Commandments to protect the interest of those who would be in His Kingdom, the Kingdom of Heaven. That interest is confirmed by the payment of the penalty of the life debt incurred by the progenitors of the Kingdom of Heaven, Adam and Eve, the debt of whom was passed down to all who would be in the Kingdom.

If you choose to be ‘set free’ from the Law you also choose to be set free from any ‘interest’ in the Kingdom of Heaven. Without the ‘interest’ from either side of the contract/Covenant you cannot enter the Kingdom of Heaven, and you therefore have no opportunity for salvation. It is ONLY those in that are in the Kingdom of Heaven that come under the protection of the Law, the obedience to which is the only payment they can make short of their own deaths.

The result in the belief in the gospel of Paul which states “Where there is no Law there is no violation” invalidates and abrogates the terms of the Covenant of the Kingdom of Heaven, thus eliminating that believer from membership in that Kingdom, and removing from them any possibility of salvation.

[miz3]

Ellen White had no trouble stating blatantly that humans are "free moral agents". In fact she states such many times.

Why then is the Bible so silent about using this term since it is so vital to know one way or the other whether humans are "free moral agents" or "NOT free moral agents"? You would think that its vital importance would require that the Bible would be clear about the fact that humans are "free moral agents" just as Ellen White is clear and unambiguous. In fact the Bible is not just unclear it is absolutely SILENT about using the term!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

The Bible besides being silent about the term does give so many texts that talk about the humans slavery to sin and inability to do anything let alone humans having even the smallest of ability to have "free moral agency" or "free choice" in regard to Salvation.

[Gerr]

The strongest evidence for the existence of free moral agency is the fact that a sinner can choose to follow God inspite of all the powers of hell, his hormones, inherited and cultivated tendencies arrayed against him, or someone created perfect could choose to do wrong.

[Musicman1228]

The strongest evidence for the existence of free moral agency is the fact that a sinner can choose to follow God inspite of all the powers of hell, his hormones, inherited and cultivated tendencies arrayed against him, or someone created perfect could choose to do wrong.

Well said.

[miz3]

That is an assertion on your part which is not supported by the Bible!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

We have to do better than that!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[Gerr]

Who are you talking to?

[John317]

Ellen White had no trouble stating blatantly that humans are "free moral agents". In fact she states such many times.

Why then is the Bible so silent about using this term since it is so vital to know one way or the other whether humans are "free moral agents" or "NOT free moral agents"?

The concept is taught in the Bible, but it wouldn't use the same terms because they are neither Hebrew nor Greek.

In what part of the Bible would you expect the term "free moral agent" to be used?

Ellen White used the the terms because she wrote in 19th & 20th century English. That's why Christ commissioned her as His messanger, so she would speak the same language that Americans speak. It isn't necessary to translate it.

Quote:

The written testimonies are not to give new light, but to impress vividly upon the heart the truths of inspiration already revealed. Man's duty to God and to his fellow man has been distinctly specified in God's word, yet but few of you are obedient to the light given. Additional truth is not brought out; but God has through the Testimonies simplified the great truths already given and in His own chosen way brought them before the people to awaken and impress the mind with them, that all may be left without excuse. The Testimonies are not to belittle the word of God, but to exalt it and attract minds to it, that the beautiful simplicity of truth may impress all. 117 {CCh 92.1}

The Spirit was not given—nor can it ever be bestowed—to supersede the Bible; for the Scriptures explicitly state that the word of God is the standard by which all teaching and experience must be tested. Says the apostle John, "Believe not every spirit, but try the spirits whether they are of God: because many false prophets are gone out into the world." 1 John 4:1. And Isaiah declares, "To the law and to the testimony: if they speak not according to this word, it is because there is no light in them." Isaiah 8:20. 118 {CCh 92.2}

Brother J would confuse the mind by seeking to make it appear that the light God has given through the Testimonies is an addition to the Word of God, but in this he presents the matter in a false light. God has seen fit in this manner to bring the minds of His people to His word, to give them a clearer understanding of it. The word of God is sufficient to enlighten the most beclouded mind and may be understood by those who have any desire to understand it. But notwithstanding all this, some who profess to make the Word of God their study are found living in direct opposition to its plainest teachings. Then, to leave men and women without excuse, God gives plain and pointed testimonies, bringing them back to the word that they have neglected to follow. The word of God abounds in general principles for the formation of correct habits of living, and the testimonies, general and personal, have been calculated to call their attention more especially to these principles. {CCh 92.3}

I took the precious Bible and surrounded it with the several Testimonies for the Church, given for the people of God. Here, said I, the cases of nearly all are met. The sins they are to shun are pointed out. The counsel that they desire can be found here, given for other cases situated similarly to themselves. God has been pleased to give you line upon line and precept upon precept. {CCh 92.4}

But there are not many of you that really know what is contained in the Testimonies. You are not familiar with the Scriptures. If you had made God's Word your study, with a desire to reach the Bible standard and attain to Christian perfection, you would not have needed the Testimonies. It is because you have neglected to acquaint yourselves with God's inspired Book that He has sought to reach you by simple, direct testimonies, calling your attention to the words of inspiration which you had neglected to obey, and urging you to fashion your lives in accordance with its pure and elevated teachings. 119 {CCh 92.5}

[miz3]

I was talking to Gerry and musicman1228.

[phkrause]

I was talking to Gerry and musicman1228.

So why don't you post directly to them??? or at least address them so we have an idea who your posting to!!!

[phkrause]

Ellen White had no trouble stating blatantly that humans are "free moral agents". In fact she states such many times.

Why then is the Bible so silent about using this term since it is so vital to know one way or the other whether humans are "free moral agents" or "NOT free moral agents"? You would think that its vital importance would require that the Bible would be clear about the fact that humans are "free moral agents" just as Ellen White is clear and unambiguous. In fact the Bible is not just unclear it is absolutely SILENT about using the term!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Exactly!!!! This is the exact reason EGW was called, or at least one of them. To help with where the Bible is a little bit to hard for some to understand. All the insight she received came directly from God. The same questions that you ask today, have been being asked for many many years miz3. And yet we ignore EGW help in these areas! Why? We can't except that God would have a woman tell us wise men a thing or two????? Well the man he asked to do this was to chicken to do it. He probably had a feeling that he'd be treated exactly like most are treating EGW.

[John317]

Yes, I was wondering the same thing. Always a good idea.

[miz3]

The concept of "free moral agency" is not in the Bible either. If it were it would be blatant and clear to all.

"Free Moral Agency" is only found in the writings of Ellen G. White.

The Bible does not need clarification by Ellen White.

The Hebrews and the Greeks all knew about the difference between "free moral agency" and/or "determinism". The Greeks especially debated such things. Because of Greek philosophy Paul may have felt that he needed to hit the concept as well as the open fact that many prominent Greeks believed in "free moral agency" and many believed in "determinism".

Paul fought against both of these philosophies because he knew from God that it was slavery to the "sinful nature" that was the problem with humans. Thus, Paul rejected both the ideas of "free moral agency" (independent human agent) and "determinism" (human element cannot be changed).

The pagan world has always set it up that humans existence has ONLY two paths possible either free moral agents or determinism. God in His Word states that both philosophies are wrong!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

That is why the true Christian position is the same as Paul's position.

Unfortunately, many well meaning Christians, either out of ignorance or because they believe that they must do something because they have failed God so badly believe in "free moral agency".

Ellen White and many in her day are part of the group that have believed honestly the wrong thing on this issue.

[John317]

"Free moral agency" has to do with moral freedom, not any other kind of freedom. It means that people can choose their motives. You can choose your reasons for doing something. For instance, you can choose to love someone or to hate them or be indifferent. You can decide whether to lie or tell the truth.

If people are not free moral agents, how do you account for the fact that epople are able to choose to leave their past behind them? How do you account for the fact that some people choose Christ and salvation and others do not?

It's true that God does give us the desire for Him, but some people reject that desire and others accept it. God doesn't make choices for us. We have to say "yes" to God. We could say no, and many do.

[John317]

Ellen White and many in her day are part of the group that have believed honestly the wrong thing on this issue.

Ellen White didn't write her personal opinions on these matters. She wrote what God had revealed to her.

Quote:

It is discouraging to me to have them pick out portions in the testimonies that please them which they construe to justify their own course of action and give the impression that that portion they accept as the voice of God, and then when other testimonies come that bring rebuke upon their course, when words are spoken that do not coincide with their opinions and judgment, they dishonor God's work by saying, "Oh, this we do not accept--it is only Sister White's opinion, and it is no better than my opinion or that of anyone else."--Letter 3, 1889. {3SM 81.3}

Quote:

In the testimonies sent to Battle Creek, I have given you the light God has given to me. In no case have I given my own judgment or opinion. I have enough to write of what has been shown me, without falling back on my own opinions. You are doing as the children of Israel did again and again. Instead of repenting before God, you reject His words, and attribute all the warnings and reproof to the messenger whom the Lord sends.--Testimony for the Battle Creek Church, pp. 50-58 (1882). {3SM 70.1}

Quote:

After the vision was given me, my husband was aroused upon the health questions. He obtained books, upon our Eastern journey, but I would not read them. My view was clear, and I did not want to read anything until I had fully completed my books. My views were written independent of books or of the opinions of others.--Manuscript 7, 1867. {3SM 282.3}

[miz3]

pkrause,

If the Bible is too hard as you say then only the smart would be saved. This is not true at all. Jesus Christ did not speak the complex secrets of the Kingdom of Heaven to only the Phd. types. He preached almost totally to the uneducated masses and even to the children who had five loaves and two fishes. He didn't think that the complex secrets were too hard for them to understand and neither do I!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! In addition God also stated in James 1:5 "if [we] lack wisdom ask the Lord." and God will give you the wisdom you need to understand.

Thus, the stated reason for Ellen White as clarifier is wrong and should be a dead issue. The Bible itself says God will be His own clarifier (not Ellen White).

[Words deleted here by the moderator for being a personal attack and assuming to be able to read people's motives.]

If you think that I am mad or offended, I am!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! I expected more from you and this forum.

[miz3]

John317,

I know how grateful you are to God for what He has done for you in regard to former things which now are no longer present, Praise God. I am happy that your life like mine is much better than it used to be when we were wallowing in the pig troughs of the dirtiest and most vile and evil lifestyles. Mine may have been different in the particular details but it was none the less the hell hole of evil that brought not even the slimmest of good and happiness to our souls. We thought we having fun and didn't realize how miserable and unhappy we really were until God came along and changed everything. I would venture to say, that all humans would have a similar story to tell provided they are among the saved.

Having said that I do think you are wrong in regards to this issue. I do assert that you are not intentionally wrong even though I cannot really know that. It is an opinion I have formed in this brief time of interchange. Only God knows!!!!!!!!!!!! My opinion is that you want to honestly know the Truth. Again my own opinion only!

For me it is not a matter of winning an argument. Winning is not the object for me. If winning was the object I wouldn't spend my time here. I am just sharing the Truth as God has shared with me from His Word (the Bible) and I expect that God will open Truth to me by engaging in this back and forth with you and others.

Back to the discussion at hand.

As the Bible says "we are blind, naked, and poor". How can someone blind see unless someone opens their eyes for them?

As a blind one, you and I cannot even see the Light let alone know it even exists. How then can we have any capacity to do anything at all on our own?

We need to read the Bible more and do less "outside reading" that is full of errors.

[John317]

Being a free moral agent simply means that you and I are responsible for our moral choices. At some point you and I made choices that led us to respond to the urging of the Holy Spirit. We might have decided to do differently than we did. It's again like the man in the river who decides to grab on to the rope thrown to him from the shore. His choice doesn't do away with the fact that he would be dead except for the kindness of the man who threw him the rope. He earns no merit for having held on to the rope till he reached shore. But the fact is that he could have decided not to accept the rope. That decision means the difference between being forced to come ashore and deciding as a free moral agent to be brought ashore by a kind, merciful friend.

Anyone of us could decide at any time to turn our backs on God. God's grace is not irresistable. Many resist every day. We choose every day to belong to Christ.

[John317]

As the Bible says "we are blind, naked, and poor". How can someone blind see unless someone opens their eyes for them?

As a blind one, you and I cannot even see the Light let alone know it even exists. How then can we have any capacity to do anything at all on our own?

Because we can put the blinders back over our eyes, as many do.

Quote:

We need to read the Bible more and do less "outside reading" that is full of errors.

You don't know how much Bible study people are doing, just as I would not venture a wild guess as to how much you study the Bible. But I do agree with you that we all need to study the Bible more than we study anything else.

[miz3]

John317,

There are some things wrong with your analysis of the analogy.

1. God placed the life preserver all around us in the death of Jesus Christ. We did not have to reach for it. We did not have to choose it. This is what we call Justification.

2. In that case the only option "choice" the person in the water can make is to remove the preserver. He can't choose to keep it on because it is already on. The person can only REJECT!

3. God starts reeling us in to safety. This is the beginning of the Sanctification Process. Again the only thing we can do is REJECT God's work! We cannot choose to have God Sanctify us because He is already doing it. You can't choose to have what you already have!!!!!!!!!!!

This analogy is now in harmony with the Bible version of Salvation and the state of the human condition!!!!!!!!!!!

[miz3]

John317,

When I stated that all need to do more Bible Reading I was making a general statement not a specific statement about a particular person.

Of course I don't how reading a particular person does one way or the other. Again, it was a general statement.

However, when people give answers to questions and make statements about things another person can tell in general about that person's reading habits in regard to sources.

[miz3]

John317,

You can't put blinders back on when they are already on. Because they are already on that is what makes you blind. How many times did Jesus call the Jews "blind guides"!!!!!!!