hi jared,

i just today finished up lewis' perelandra, which i found extraordinarily moving (ransom's dialog with maledil as he struggles with his inadequacy/fear etc. really touched me). But in your post, macy reminds me of the green lady, for whom there is no fruit better than that which she is eating in the moment.

Jez



Heh! What an awesome insight!



Glad you liked Perelandra :-)

I've been going back and forth about whether to comment here. I'm trying to better understand your thoughts about the will, Jared. How does this idea of conforming our will to God's square with your position that we have no free will of our own? If God's in control of all and directing all, how can we say to have conformed our will to His, as you suggest here?



Not trying to attack, just trying to understand.

This is why I always try to confine the typical talk of "free will" to the area of soteriology. Because I see a clear biblical divide between the pre-Christian's fallen will and the saved's redeemed will.



If you'll recall from our previous discussion(s), I said a few times that if anyone has a "free will" it is the Christian, because he has been set free from the bondage of his sinful nature. The non-Christian's will is not free because it is in bondage to sin. But when Jesus sets it free, it is free indeed.



I'll illustrate thusly:



Prelapsarian Adam -- free will (free to sin, free not to sin)

The Fall

Descendants of Adam -- fallen will (free to sin)

Salvation

Christians -- free will (free to sin, free not to sin)



Freedom in Christ separates those who are still in bondage to sin from those who are not. Before Christ's work applied to us, however, we are by nature "objects of wrath." We do not please God, nor can we do so.



I hope that makes sense.



So in relation to this particular post, my premise is based upon the idea that Christians have a free will of sorts, because we are free in Christ to make choices that further the process of our sanctification.

It makes a lot more sense to me now. You probably said those things before but for what ever reason I didn't get it then. So the idea then is that we seem to have free will before we are saved, but in reality we cannot help but to sin. It (perfection or 'being good') is an ideal that is a lie for we are powerless to achieve it. We are perhaps more or less successful than our neighbor, but ultimately sinful beyond our control. It is only becasue God has given us grace in Christ that we have a chance to be saved from this depravity.



So the lack of free will is not an inability to make any choice, but rather a limitation on making all the right choices. Our freedom is limited by our tendancy to sin.



Do I understand it correctly? If so, perhaps we dissagree less that I thought. How this plays out in our role in our own salvation and on the status of children before God, however, are areas we would still dissagree on, I think. :-)

So the idea then is that we seem to have free will before we are saved, but in reality we cannot help but to sin. It (perfection or 'being good') is an ideal that is a lie for we are powerless to achieve it. We are perhaps more or less successful than our neighbor, but ultimately sinful beyond our control



Exactly.



It is only becasue God has given us grace in Christ that we have a chance to be saved from this depravity.



Yes, except I wouldn't say there's any "chance" at all involved. This sort of statement is appropos of a free-will soteriology. But I believe the grace in Christ has a definite effect, that is actually saves people, not that it merely provides an opportunity for them to be saved.



The difference is this . . .

What Free-Willers Say: Jesus' death on the cross makes salvation possible for anyone who chooses to believe.

What I and Others Like Me Say: Jesus' death on the cross makes salvation effectual for everyone whom God has chosen to believe.



So the lack of free will is not an inability to make any choice, but rather a limitation on making all the right choices. Our freedom is limited by our tendancy to sin.



Right. As I've said before in our discussion and in others, I don't deny the reality of the will or the reality of human choice. Only that the sinful nature is free to choose Jesus apart from Jesus setting it free to do so. In that sense, I wouldn't say it's our "tendency" to sin (although you are of course right), but our sinful nature. I'd describe that more as a bent toward sin -- an inner crookedness -- than as a tendency to sin (which seems more about behavior than nature).



How this plays out in our role in our own salvation and on the status of children before God, however, are areas we would still dissagree on, I think.



I think so too. From what I'd gathered based on our previous discussions it seems we have fundamental disagreements on the biblical notions of original sin and the extent of the atonement.