# More important then Theology



## no1special18 (Mar 19, 2006)

I went and had a beer today with a fellow who wanted to "discuss doctrine with me." He is not reformed, and at the end of our conversation he openly told me that his beliefs about libertarian free will are stronger and deeper then his theological beliefs  What do you say to someone after they tell you that?


----------



## MeanieCalvinist (Mar 19, 2006)

> _Originally posted by no1special18_
> I went and had a beer today with a fellow who wanted to "discuss doctrine with me." He is not reformed, and at the end of our conversation he openly told me that his beliefs about libertarian free will are stronger and deeper then his theological beliefs  What do you say to someone after they tell you that?


----------



## MeanieCalvinist (Mar 19, 2006)

You could tell him EVERYTHING is disciplined by theology


----------



## Puritan Sailor (Mar 19, 2006)

> _Originally posted by no1special18_
> I went and had a beer today with a fellow who wanted to "discuss doctrine with me." He is not reformed, and at the end of our conversation he openly told me that his beliefs about libertarian free will are stronger and deeper then his theological beliefs  What do you say to someone after they tell you that?



Ask him to explain it. As Meanie pointed out, we are all governend by theology. The question is whether it's good theology or not, and what that theology is based on, opinions of men vs. the Word of God. But I think you would better earn his trust and understand him if you let him explain himself and just ask him some probbing questions. Let him explain what he means. Sometimes they will realize their own inconsistencies by doing that.


----------



## no1special18 (Mar 19, 2006)

As far as inconsistencies go, he told me that he realized his views were inconsistent with what I showed him in Scripture, but he is convinced that libertarian freedom is in there somewhere, and I got the impression when we left the bar that he was going to find it (I hope he really does look).


----------



## WrittenFromUtopia (Mar 19, 2006)

> _Originally posted by no1special18_
> As far as inconsistencies go, he told me that he realized his views were inconsistent with what I showed him in Scripture, but he is convinced that libertarian freedom is in there somewhere, and I got the impression when we left the bar that he was going to find it (I hope he really does look).



You can prove almost anything from Scripture if that is your intention. I wouldn't "hope" he goes trying to do so, because he probably could -- in his own mind -- prove it.


----------



## no1special18 (Mar 19, 2006)

I disagree. Maybe in their own mind they prove it, but I think when Scripture is exegeted one person is right and the other is wrong (and shown wrong) in such a way that if they claim otherwise, they are just holding to tradition.

[Edited on 3-19-2006 by no1special18]


----------



## WrittenFromUtopia (Mar 19, 2006)

> _Originally posted by no1special18_
> I disagree. Maybe in their own mind they prove it, but I think when Scripture is exegeted one person is right and the other is wrong (and shown wrong) in such a way that if they claim otherwise, they are just holding to tradition.



How do you disagree? You just said the exact same thing I did.


----------



## no1special18 (Mar 19, 2006)

I just wanted to be clear that both sides are not "proven" by scripture. One side is shown to be correct by exegesis, and the other side is shown to be wrong (unless they can provide an alternative exegesis) whether they believe it or not.

[Edited on 3-19-2006 by no1special18]


----------



## Semper Fidelis (Mar 19, 2006)

Actually I find it a little bit refreshing when somebody openly admits that they are committed to libertine free will even if they can't find it in the Scripture. At least you can hope to convince him that he ought to submit to God's Word rather than what he wishes it would say.

There are, frankly, no more stubborn "Theologians" than those who are pre-committed to libertine free will and will go through Scriptural gymnastics to contort the Scriptures to fit their mold. Their favorite phrase to use against the many Scriptures that teach otherwise is that "...well I know what that says but the overall theme of the Scriptures teaches otherwise." In other words, they can find no single verse or passage that supports their view but their pre-commitment gives them the idea that there is a theme in Scripture militating toward that idea.

If you want to see a great example of how far that pre-commitment will take some respected "teachers" in pop Evangelical circles look at http://www.aomin.org. Find Dr. White's interactions with Norm Geisler and, especially, with Dave Hunt. I'm convinced that Dave Hunt is more pelagian than semi-pelagian after reading the book he co-wrote with Dr. White.

Frankly, the best critique of libertine free will that I have read was by John Frame in _The Doctrine of God_. I don't know if he's reproduced his withering assault elsewhere but it is superb.


----------



## no1special18 (Mar 19, 2006)

I did tell the fellow that he was the most honest person I have talked to in regards to his views on free will.


----------



## WrittenFromUtopia (Mar 19, 2006)

The whole problem with the concept of absolute Free Will is that the Will or the act of the Will is not what we're concerned with or worried about -- it is what drives the Will -- namely, the heart. What our heart produces determines what our will (call it free if you want!) will choose. I know that non-Christians freely choose what they are doing, and they freely choose to reject God, because that is what their unregenerate heart produces, as far as their desires and passions are concerned. Their heart is, as a result of the Fall, corrupted by sin and desires only to transgress the Law of God that it knows and has attempted to suppress. Free Will is not a "bad" thing, that we must argue against. Augustine argued for a Free Will, after all. The real "heart" of the issue (forgive the pun), is that of the heart and what we are, by nature. Children of wrath, apart from God and without hope in this world. But God ...


----------



## no1special18 (Mar 19, 2006)

I agree fully. His contention was that if fallen man cannot equally choose to do good or evil (and Christ or not Christ) then God is not just in condemning him. That´s what he meant by free will.


----------



## MeanieCalvinist (Mar 19, 2006)

I agree with Puritansailor stated.

I also think that we need to be very patient with those to whom God has not opened their eyes to these truths. I would suggest that you do not get into a very heated discussion about these truths.(They are His truths). Remember that you were once there too.. Sinful man will always cling to a theology that has a man-centeredness to it. We by our very nature are inclined to be that way. It is through the continued proclomation/study of Gods word and work of The Holy Spirit that opens a mans eyes and ears to His truths. I will definitely be in prayer about your future conversations with this person..

In Christ,

MeanieCalvinist

[Edited on 3-19-2006 by MeanieCalvinist]


----------



## Semper Fidelis (Mar 19, 2006)

Agreed Gabe that there are fundamental issues of the understanding of the depravity or the leadings of the heart with libertinism but there are also issues of God's Sovereignty as well. If libertine free will be admitted, not only does man have no inclination but Open Theism is also true.


----------



## no1special18 (Mar 19, 2006)

I would just like to clarify that this discussion was not heated in any way. We were just both sitting down over a new castle (coke in his case) and some good food and talked about it in a very calm way. 

P.S. I made sure that my drinking a New Castle would not offend him as a brother in Christ.


----------



## Arch2k (Mar 20, 2006)

I can definately relate, as I have had recent discussions with a friend at work who is willing to defend "free will" at the expense of saying Christ is the only way to heaven.


----------



## Cuirassier (Mar 20, 2006)

> _Originally posted by no1special18_
> 
> His contention was that if fallen man cannot equally choose to do good or evil (and Christ or not Christ) then God is not just in condemning him.



Hello James,

Here is my response to this line of argument. First, this argument determines God's justice on the wrong premise. God is just in punishing sin because it is the only acceptable response by a holy God to sin. 

In fact, I would grant him (for the purpose of his argument) that man can choose good. Fine. Let's talk about evil. Does man choose evil--obviously he does--both from Scripture and our own experience tell us that "the heart is deceitful above all things, and desperately wicked: who can know it? Jeremiah 17:9

So, the fact that man will and chooses evil is all the "justification" God requires to condemn man. Whether he could have chosen good is irrelevent. 

I hear this all the time: "How could God possibly punish the guy running around in Papau New Guniea who never heard the Gospel?" Because he sinned. Pure and simple. 

If God is just in condeming a man who has sinned and never had the chance to hear the Gospel, He is no less just in condemning a man who willfully sins and (as claimed) has the ability to choose good. 

People that argue this way have their "legal economy" upside down. This seemingly harsh lattitude for punishment is not a sign of God's cruelty. That He chose, in His infinite mercy to save any one of us, is a sign of God's perfect grace.

I trust this helps, brother!

dl

[Edited on 3-20-2006 by Cuirassier]

[Edited on 3-20-2006 by Cuirassier]


----------



## no1special18 (Mar 20, 2006)

Yes it does. Thank you.

I tried to be clear that men are not condemned for *not hearing * the Gospel, but rather, as you say...




> Because he sinned. Pure and simple.


----------



## Cuirassier (Mar 20, 2006)

Excellent! - Then you're on solid Rock!

Keep us posted on how your meetings with him go!!

dl


----------



## no1special18 (Mar 20, 2006)

Will do. When we left the "Fox and the Hound" yesterday, he seemed anxious to get a hold of his former pastor, and I got the impression that he was going to get a hold of me afterward so we could talk about it more.


----------

