|
Post by Jesse Morrell on Apr 25, 2008 11:26:48 GMT -5
This is an excerpt from the newer version found at www.LibraryofTheology.com------------------------- THE EARLY CHURCH vs. THE GNOSTICSThis doctrine of ability, responsibility, and accountability was universally the doctrine of the Early Church. Clement said, “Neither praise nor condemnation, neither reward no punishments, are right if the soul does not have the power of choice and avoidance, if evil is involuntary.”101 Jerome said, “God has bestowed us with free will. We are not necessarily drawn either to virtue or vice. For when necessity rules, there is no room left either for damnation or the crown.”102 Archelaus said, “All the creatures that God made, He made very good. And He gave to every individual the sense of free will, by which standard He also instituted the law of judgment . . . And certainly whoever will, may keep the commandments. Whoever despises them and turns aside to what is contrary to them, shall yet without doubt have to face this law of judgment . . . There can be no doubt that every individual, in using his own proper power of will, may shape his course in whatever direction he pleases.”103 Tertullian said, “I find, then, that man was constituted free by God. He was master of his own will and power . . . For a law would not be imposed upon one who did not have it in his power to render that obedience which is due to law. Nor again, would the penalty of death be threatened against sin, if a contempt of the law were impossible to man in the liberty of his will . . . Man is free, with a will either for obedience or resistance.”104 The Early Church taught that free will was an essential element of our God given nature [constitution], and that we abuse that free will when we choose to sin. Irenaeus said, “Forasmuch as all men are of the same nature, having power to hold and to do that which is good, and having power again to lose it, and not to do what is right; before men of sense, (and how much more before God!) some… are justly accused, and receive condign punishment, because they refuse what is just and right.”105 Again Irenaeus said, “Those who do not do it [good] will receive the just judgment of God, because they had not work good when they had it in their power to do so. But if some had been made by nature bad, and others good, these latter would not be deserving of praise for being good, for they were created that way. Nor would the former be reprehensible, for that is how they were made. However, all men are of the same nature. They are all able to hold fast and to go what is good. On the other hand, they have the power to cast good from them and not to do it.”106 Origen said, “The Scriptures…emphasize the freedom of the will. They condemn those who sin, and approve those who do right… We are responsible for being bad and worthy of being cast outside. For it is not the nature in us that is the cause of the evil; rather, it is the voluntary choice that works evil.”107 Origen said that “the heretics [the Gnostics] introduce the doctrine of different natures.”108 The sin of Lucifer, Adam, Eve, and the rest of the world could not have occurred without free will. Sin implies free will. Sin does not imply a “sinful nature” (sin is a criminal choice, not a crippled nature). Lucifer, Adam, and Eve, were all created perfect by God, and sinned without a sinful nature because they had a free will. And the entire world has followed their example, using their free will in the same way. The universality of sin proves the universality of free will and the universality of temptation. The universality of sin does not prove the universality of a sinful nature or that sin is unavoidable. Where causation or necessity exists, neither sin nor temptation can exist. For the first three hundred years of the Church the Christian’s preached that free will was a part of our nature [constitution] and that sin was an abuse of that free will. These Christian leaders earnestly contended against the Gnostics and Manicheans who preached that we sin necessarily out of defect of our inherited nature. The Gnostics and Manicheans taught that our nature did not have any free will and we necessarily sin as a result. For that reason Jerome said, “Free will…. Let the man who condemns it, be condemned.”109 The orthodox doctrine of the Early Church was that all men inherit original ability at birth. John Calvin admitted that “The Greek fathers above others” have taught “the power of the human will.”110 And Calvin also said, “The Latin fathers have always retained the word free will…”111 Episcopius said, “What is plainer than that the ancient divines, for three hundred years after Christ, those at least who flourished before St. Augustine, maintained the liberty of our will, or an indifference to two contrary things, free from all internal and external necessity!”112 Asa Mahan said that free will “was the doctrine of the primitive church for the first four or five centuries after the Bible was written, the church which received the ‘lively oracles’ directly from the hands of some of those by whom they were written, to wit: the writers of the New Testament. It should be borne in mind here, that at the time the sacred canon was completed, the doctrine of Necessity was held by the leading sects in the Jewish Church. It was also the fundamental article of the creed of all the sects in philosophy throughout the world, as well as of all the forms of heathenism then extant. If the doctrine of Necessity, as its advocates maintain, is the doctrine taught the church by inspired apostles and the writers of the New Testament, we should not fail to find, under such circumstances, the churches planted by them, rooted and grounded in this doctrine.”113 Rather, we find that the Early Church affirmed free will while the Gnostic heretics denied it and affirmed a slaved will through a totally corrupted nature. David Bercot, a modern expert on early Christian beliefs and doctrines said, “The Early Christians didn’t believe that man is totally depraved [totally unable] and incapable of doing any good. They taught that humans are capable of obeying and loving God.”114 He went on to say, “There was a religious group, labeled as heretics by the early Christians… they taught that man is totally depraved [totally unable]… the group I’m referring to are the Gnostic’s.”115 Around the time of 370-430A.D. Gnostic and Manichean influence started to actually infiltrate the Christian Church, polluting it with their heretical doctrines. Some of the Church began to embrace and teach the doctrines of necessity and inability. Pelagius was a monk who earnestly yet meekly defended the doctrines of the Early Church, particularly the doctrine of free will. Dr Wiggers said, “All the fathers…agreed with the Pelagians, in attributing freedom of will to man in his present state.”116 Pelagius heroically refuted the Semi-Gnosticism or Semi-Manichaeism which was corrupting Christian theology. And he severely suffered persecution for his stand against the rising heresy. Pelagius said, “Those who are unwilling to correct their own way of life appear to want to correct nature itself instead.”117 He goes on to say, “And lest, on the other hand, it should be thought to be nature's fault that some have been unrighteous, I shall use the evidence of the scripture, which everywhere lay upon sinners the heavy weight of the charge of having used their own will and do not excuse them for having acted only under constraint of nature.”118 And also, “Obedience [and disobedience] results from a decision of the mind, not the substance of the body.”119 And as has been shown throughout this treatise, the Early Church Fathers prior to Pelagius taught explicitly the same things regarding sin and free will. Free will was a Christian doctrine while a crippled nature was a Gnostic heresy.
|
|
|
Post by Jesse Morrell on Apr 27, 2008 13:21:05 GMT -5
These are some quotes I have collected in my research into the topic of free will.
EARLY CHURCH ON FREE WILL
“For no other reason does God punish the sinner either in the present or in the future world, except because He knows that the sinner was able to conquer but neglected to gain the victory.” Clement of Rome, mentioned in Php. 4:3, (History of Original Sin by Cowles, pg 3)
"Whatever may determine the will, if it cannot be resisted, is complied with without sin; but if one can resist it, let him not comply with it and it will not be sin." Augustine
"In all laws, warnings, rewards, punishments, etc. there is no justice, if the will is not the cause of sin." Augustine
"Their fulfillment would not have been commanded, if our will had nothing to do in it" Augustine
“The beginning of our salvation flows from the merciful God; but it is in our power to consent to his saving inspiration.” Augustine
“The religious mind… confesses… and maintains… that we do by our free will whatsoever we know and feel to be done by us only because we will it.” Augustine
“We [Christians]…assert the liberty of the will, whereby our actions are rendered either moral or immoral, and keep it free from every bond of necessity, on account of the righteous judgment of God.” Augustine
“…we sin voluntarily and not by necessity.” Augustine
"God does not demand impossibilities.” Augustine
"If there be no free will, there is nothing to be saved" Augustine
“They that would not come [to Christ], ought not to impute it to another, but only to themselves, because, when they are called, it was in the power of their free will to come.” Augustine
Prosper, a disciple of Augustine, said that those who “perish” do so because of “their voluntary iniquity.”
Prosper also said, “By no means would there be a day of judgment, if men sinned by the will or decree of God."
Felgentius, another disciple of Augustine, said, “Justice could not be said to be just if it did not find, but made man an offender. And the injustice would be still greater, if God, after having predestined a man to ruin when he stood, inflicted punishment upon him after his fall.”
"[Let us now turn our attention to other Christian writers who agree with what I am proposing. Lactantius has said] ‘It behooved for the Master and Teacher of virtue to become most like to man, that by conquering sin He might show that man is able to conquer sin.’"
"[Again Lactantius says] ‘And again, that by subduing the desires of the flesh He might teach us that it is not of necessity that one sins, but of set purpose and will.’"
"[Hilary has said that] It is only when we shall be perfect in spirit and changed in our immortal state, which blessedness has been appointed only for the pure in heart, that we shall see that which is immortal in God."
"[Again Hilary has said] ‘This Job had so effectually read these Scriptures, that was because he worshipped God purely with a mind unmixed with offences: now such worship of God is the proper work of righteousness."
"[Hilary, likewise, while expounding that passage of the psalm in which it is written, ‘Thou hast despised all those who turn aside from Thy commandments,’ says:] ‘If God were to despise sinners, He would despise indeed all men, because no man is without sin; but it is those who turn away from Him, whom they call apostates, that He despises."
"[Ambrose of Milan has said] ‘Inasmuch as the Church has been gathered out of the world, that is, out of sinful men, how can it be unpolluted when composed of such polluted material, except that, in the first place, it be washed of sins by the grace of Christ, and then, in the next place, abstain from sins through its nature of avoiding sin?’"
"[Remember that John Chrysostom has said] ‘that sin is not a substance, but a wicked act. And because it is not natural, therefore the law was given against it, and because it proceeds from the liberty of our will."
"[Remember what Xystus, bishop of Rome and martyr, has once said] ‘God has conferred upon men liberty of their own will, in order that by purity and sinlessness of life they may become like unto God?’ [and] ‘A pure mind is a holy temple for God, and a heart clean and without sin is His best altar.’ [Xystus has also said] ‘A man of chastity and without sin has receded power from God to be a son of God.’"
"[Jerome has written] `Blessed are the pure in heart; for they shall see God.' These are they whom no consciousness of sin reproves. The pure man is seen by his purity of heart; the temple of God cannot be defiled.’ [He has also said] ‘God created us with free will; we are drawn by necessity neither to virtue nor to vice; otherwise, where there is necessity there is no crown."
"Bishop Augustine also in his books on Free Will has these words: `Whatever the cause itself of volition is, if it is impossible to resist it, submission to it is not sinful; if, however, it may be resisted, let it not be submitted to, and there will be no sin. Does it, perchance, deceive the unwary man? Let him then beware that he be not deceived. Is the deception, however, so potent that it is not possible to guard against it? If such is the case, then there are no sins. For who sins in a case where precaution is quite impossible? Sin, however, is committed; precaution therefore is possible.'"
“Neither praise nor condemnation, neither reward no punishments, are right if the soul does not have the power of choice and avoidance, if evil is involuntary.” Clement, Will the Real Heretics Please Stand Up, by David Bercot, pg 71, printed by Scroll Publishings
“All the creatures that God made, He made very good. And He gave to every individual the sense of free will, by which standard He also instituted the law of judgment… And certainly whoever will, may keep the commandments. Whoever despises them and turns aside to what is contrary to them, shall yet without doubt have to face this law of judgment… There can be no doubt that every individual, in using his own proper power of will, may shape his course in whatever direction he pleases.” Archelaus, Will the Real Heretics Please Stand Up, by David Bercot, pg 71, printed by Scroll Publishings
"It is our responsibility to live righteously. God asks this of us, not as though it were dependent on Him, nor on any other, or upon fate (as some think), but as being dependent on us... We have freedom of the will and that we ourselves are the cause of our own ruin or our salvation." Origen, Will the Real Heretics Please Stand Up, by David Bercot, pg 74, printed by Scroll Publishings
Justin Martyr of the Early Church said, “Every created being is so constituted as to be capable of vice and virtue. For he can do nothing praiseworthy, if he had not the power of turning either way.” And “unless we suppose man has the power to choose the good and refuse the evil, no one can be accountable for any action whatever.” (Doctrine of the Will by Asa Mahan, p. 61, published by Truth in Heart)
Tertullian of the same century said, “No reward can be justly bestowed, no punishment can be justly inflicted, upon him who is good or bad by necessity, and not by his own choice.” (Doctrine of the Will by Asa Mahan, p. 61, published by Truth in Heart)
Origen said, “The soul does not incline to either part out of necessity, for then neither vice nor virtue could be ascribed to it; nor would its choice of virtue deserve reward; nor its declination to vice punishment.” Again, “How could God require that of man which he [man] had not power to offer Him?” (Doctrine of the Will by Asa Mahan, p. 62, published by Truth in Heart)
Augustine said, “They that would not come [to Christ], ought not to impute it to another, but only to themselves, because, when they are called, it was in the power of their free will to come.” (Doctrine of the Will by Asa Mahan, p. 63, published by Truth in Heart)
Clement of Alexandria said, “Neither promises nor apprehensions, rewards, no punishments are just if the soul has not the power of choosing and abstaining; if evil is involuntary.” (Doctrine of the Will by Asa Mahan, p. 63, published by Truth in Heart)
Jerome said, “God has bestowed us with free will. We are not necessarily drawn either to virtue or vice. For when necessity rules, there is no room left either for d**nation or the crown.” (Doctrine of the Will by Asa Mahan, p. 62, published by Truth in Heart)
Tertullian said, “In pursuance of that aspect of the association of body and soul that we now have to consider, we maintain that the puberty of the soul coincides with that of the body. Generally speaking, they both attain together this full growth at about the fourteenth year of life. The soul attains it by the suggestion of the senses, and the body attains it by the growth of the bodily members. I do not mention [the age of fourteen] because reflection begins at that age (as Asclepiades supposes). Nor do I choose it because the civil laws date the commencement of the real business of life from this age. Rather, I choose it because this was the appointed order from the very first. For after their obtaining knowledge of good and evil, Adam and Eve felt that they must cover their nakedness. Likewise, we profess to have the same discernment of good and evil from the time that we experience the same sensation of shame. Now, beginning with the aforementioned age, sex is suffused and clothed with a special sensibility. This eye gives way to lust and communicates its pleasure to another. It understands the natural relations between male and female, and it wears the fig-leaf apron to cover the shame that it still excites.” (c.160, A Dictionary of Early Christian Beliefs by David Bercot, p. 7, published by Hendrickson Publishers)
Justin Martyr said, “In the beginning, He made the human race with the power of thought and of choosing truth and doing right, so that all men are without excuse before God.” (c.160, A Dictionary of Early Christian Beliefs by David Bercot, p. 271, published by Hendrickson Publishers)
Justin Martyr said, “Let some suppose, from what has been said by us, that we say that whatever occurs happens by a fatal necessity, because it is foretold as known beforehand, this too we explain. We have learned from the prophets, and we hold it to be true, that punishments, chastisements, and good rewards, are rendered according to the merit of each man’s actions. Now, if this is not so, but all things happen by fate, then neither is anything at all in our own power. For if it is predetermined that this man will be good, and this other man will be evil, neither is the first one meritorious nor the latter man to be blamed. And again, unless the human race has the power of avoiding evil and choosing good by free choice, they are not accountable for their actions.” (c.160, A Dictionary of Early Christian Beliefs by David Bercot, p. 271, published by Hendrickson Publishers)
Justin Martyr said, “I have proved in what has been said that those who were foreknown to be unrighteous, whether men or angels, are not made wicked by God’s fault. Rather, each man is what he will appear to be through his own fault.” (c.160, A Dictionary of Early Christian Beliefs by David Bercot, p. 286, published by Hendrickson Publishers)
Tatian said, “We were not created to die. Rather, we die by our own fault. Our free will has destroyed us. We who were free have become slaves. We have been sold through sin. Nothing evil has been created by God. We ourselves have manifested wickedness. But we, who have manifested it, are able again to reject it.” (c.160, A Dictionary of Early Christian Beliefs by David Bercot, p. 286, published by Hendrickson Publishers)
Melito said, “There is, therefore, nothing to hinder you from changing your evil manner to life, because you are a free man.” (c.170, A Dictionary of Early Christian Beliefs by David Bercot, p. 286, published by Hendrickson Publishers)
Theophilus said, “If, on the other hand, he would turn to the things of death, disobeying God, he would himself be the cause of death to himself. For God made man free, and with power of himself.” (c.180, A Dictionary of Early Christian Beliefs by David Bercot, p. 286, published by Hendrickson Publishers)
Irenaeus said, “But man, being endowed with reason, and in this respect similar to God, having been made free in his will, and with power over himself, is himself his own cause that sometimes he becomes wheat, and sometimes chaff.” (c.180, A Dictionary of Early Christian Beliefs by David Bercot, p. 286, published by Hendrickson Publishers)
Irenaeus said, “’Let your light so shine before men, that they may see your good deeds’…And ‘Why call me, Lord, Lord, and do not do the things that I say?’…All such passages demonstrate the independent will of man…For it is in man’s power to disobey God and to forfeit what is good.” (c.180, A Dictionary of Early Christian Beliefs by David Bercot, p. 287, published by Hendrickson Publishers)
Clement of Alexandria said, “We…have believed and are saved by voluntary choice.” (c.195, A Dictionary of Early Christian Beliefs by David Bercot, p. 287, published by Hendrickson Publishers)
Clement of Alexandria said, “Each one of us who sins with his own free will, chooses punishment. So the blame lies with him who chooses. God is without blame.” (c.195, A Dictionary of Early Christian Beliefs by David Bercot, p. 287, published by Hendrickson Publishers)
Clement of Alexandria said, “To obey or not is in our own power, provided we do not have the excuse of ignorance.” (c.195, A Dictionary of Early Christian Beliefs by David Bercot, p. 287, published by Hendrickson Publishers)
Tertullian said, “I find, then, that man was constituted free by God. He was master of his own will and power…For a law would not be imposed upon one who did not have it in his power to render that obedience which is due to law. Nor again, would the penalty of death be threatened against sin, if a contempt of the law were impossible to man in the liberty of his will…Man is free, with a will either for obedience or resistance. (c.207, A Dictionary of Early Christian Beliefs by David Bercot, p. 288, published by Hendrickson Publishers)
“All the Fathers…agreed with the Pelagians in attributing free will to man.” Dr Wiggers (The Doctrine of the Will by Asa Mahan, pg 60)
John Calvin admitted that “The Greek fathers above others” have taught “the power of the human will.” (An Equal Check to Pharsaism and Antinomianism by John Fletcher, Volume Two, pg 202, Published by Carlton & Porter
And Calvin also said, “The Latin fathers have always retained the word free will…” (Doctrine of the Will by Asa Mahan, pg 60, published by Truth in Heart)
“What is plainer than that the ancient divines, for three hundred years after Christ, those at least who flourished before St. Augustine, maintained the liberty of our will, or an indifference to two contrary things, free from all internal and external necessity!” Episcopius (An Equal Check to Pharisaism and Antinomianism by John Fletcher, Volume Two, pg 209, Published by Carlton & Porter)
Asa Mahan said that free will “was the doctrine of the primitive church for the first four or five centuries after the Bible was written, the church which received the ‘lively oracles’ directly from the hands of some of those by whom they were written, to wit: the writers of the New Testament. It should be borne in mind here, that at the time the sacred canon was completed, the doctrine of Necessity was held by the leading sects in the Jewish Church. It was also the fundamental article of the creed of all the sects in philosophy throughout the world, as well as of all the forms of heathenism then extant. If the doctrine of Necessity, as its advocates maintain, is the doctrine taught the church by inspired apostles and the writers of the New Testament, we should not fail to find, under such circumstances, the churches planted by them, rooted and grounded in this doctrine.” (Doctrine of the Will by Asa Mahan, pg 59, published by Truth in Heart) Rather, we find that the Early Church affirmed free will while the Gnostic heretics denied it and affirmed a slaved will through a totally corrupted nature.
David Bercot, an expert on early Christian beliefs said, “The Early Christians didn’t believe that man is totally depraved [totally unable] and incapable of doing any good. They taught that humans are capable of obeying and loving God.” (Will the Real Heretics Please Stand Up, pg 64, published by Scroll Publishings)
David Bercot also said, “There was a religious group, labeled as heretics by the early Christians… they taught that man is totally depraved [totally unable]… the group I’m referring to are the Gnostics.” (Will the Real Heretics Please Stand Up, pg 66, published by Scroll Publishings)
|
|
|
Post by Jesse Morrell on May 1, 2008 15:38:32 GMT -5
"Where there is no freedom of choice there can be neither sin nor righteousness, because it is of the nature of both that they be voluntary." A. W. Tozer (Signposts, A Collection of Saying From A. W. Tozer, Published by Victor Books, p. 22)
"Where there is no moral knowledge or where there is no voluntary choice, the act is not sinful; it cannot be, for sin is the transgression of the law and transgression must be voluntary." A. W. Tozer (Signposts, A Collection of Saying From A. W. Tozer, Published by Victor Books, p. 22)
|
|
watchman
New Member
Galatians 5:6
Posts: 1
|
Post by watchman on Nov 22, 2008 3:42:25 GMT -5
Wow, sure alot to read! I am currently studying Moral Government and have known about your site for some time now through a friend of mine, so I figured I would come over and see if I could gather some resources... and WOW... way more than I expected. I will be printing out this whole thread probably and reading through it with a highlighter. Question for you though: Who would you say has the most sound moral government teachings? I have seen pratney and conn but find many errors and was wondering if maybe there was some more biblical teachings on God's Moral Government.
Thanks for your hard work.
watchman
|
|
|
Post by Jesse Morrell on Nov 22, 2008 11:11:35 GMT -5
Watchman, Be sure to check out www.LibraryofTheology.com for resources on Moral Government theology. I have written three booklets on MGT. One is this one, "Free Will & Conscience". Another is "The Vicarious Atonement", and another is "The Fall of Mankind". These can all be found in PDF form at www.LibraryofTheology.comI really like Winkie Pratney and Harry Conn, from what I have heard. I also really like Gordon Olson and Charles Finney. You can also find some teachings on Moral Government at my YouTube page: www.youtube.com/user/JesseMorrellAnd you might also enjoy our radio show: www.RefiningFireRadio.com
|
|
|
Post by kerygmata on Nov 27, 2008 2:55:34 GMT -5
|
|
doug
New Member
Posts: 17
|
Post by doug on Feb 11, 2009 16:49:40 GMT -5
Hi Jesse and group, I was inspired by a recent youtube update from Jesse that had some quotes from early church Fathers(ante-nicene). Back in the early 90s I read through the fathers and compiled most of what they had to say concerning free-will versus fate and the implications on morality, rewards and punishments. Here is the study below. I used Eerdman's set and did not include page numbers, which are available on request for your favorite quotes. cheers.
Church Fathers On Free Will: Contrary to Augustine’s Original Sin
Justin Martyr: Dialogue with Trypho: “But yet, since He knew it would be good, He created both angels and men free to do that which is righteous…” “…that God, wishing men and angels to follow His will, resolved to created them free to do righteousness; possessing reason, that they may know by whom they are created…” First Apology- “But lest some suppose, from what has been said by us, that we say that whatever happens, happens by a fatal necessity, because it is foretold as known beforehand, this too we explain. We have learned from the prophets, and we hold it to be true, that punishments, and chastisements, and good rewards, are rendered according to the merit of each man’s actions. Since if it be not so, but all things happen by fate, neither is anything at all in our own power. For if it be fated that this man, eg., be good, and this other evil, neither is the former meritorious nor the latter to be blamed. And again, unless the human race have the power of avoiding evil and choosing good by free choice, they are not accountable for their actions, of whatever kind they be. But that it is by free choice they both walk uprightly and stumble, we thus demonstrate. We see the same man making a transition to opposite things. Now if it had been fated that he were to be either good or bad, he could never have been capable of both the opposites, nor of so many transitions. But not even would some be good and others bad, since we thus make fate the cause of evil, and exhibit her as acting in opposition to herself; or that which has already been stated would seem to be true, that neither virtue nor vice is anything, but that things are only reckoned good or evil by opinion; which as the true word shows, is the greatest impiety and wickedness. But this we assert is inevitable fate, that they who choose the good have worthy rewards, and they who choose the opposite have their merited rewards. For not like other things, as trees and quadrupeds, which cannot act by choice, did God make men: for neither would he be worthy of reward or praise did he not of himself choose the good, but were created for this end (made so): nor, if he were evil, would he be worthy of punishment, nor being evil of himself, but being able to be nothing else than what he was made.” Second Apology- “But neither do we affirm that it is by fate that men do what they do, or suffer what they suffer, but that each man by free choice acts rightly or sins;…But since God in the beginning made the race of angels and men with free-will, they will justly suffer in eternal fire the punishments of whatever sins they have committed. And this is the nature of all that is made, to be capable of vice and virtue. For neither would any of them be praiseworthy unless there were power to turn to both virtue and vice. And this is shown also by those men…Even the Stoic philosophers, in their doctrine of morals…”
Irenaeus, Against Heresies: “This expression of our Lord, “How often would I have gathered thy children together, and thou wouldst not,” set forth the ancient law of human liberty, because God made man a free agent from the beginning, possessing his own power, even as he does his own soul, to obey the behests of God voluntarily, and not by compulsion of God. For there is no coercion with God, but a good will towards us is present with Him continually. And therefore does He give good counsel to all. And in man, as well as in angels, He has placed the power of choice (for angels are rational beings.)……God therefore has given that which is good, as the apostle tells us in this Epistle, and they who work it shall receive glory and honor, because they have done that which is good when they had it in their power not to do it; but those who did it not shall receive the just judgment of God, because they did not work good when they had it in their power to do so. But if some had been made by nature bad, and others good, these latter would not be deserving praise for being good, for such were they created; nor would the former be reprehensible, for thus they were made originally. But since all men are of the same nature, able both to hold fast and to do what is good; and, on the other hand, having also the power to cast it from them and not to do it……Thus it would come to pass, that their being good would be of no consequence, because they were so by nature rather than by will, and are possessors of good spontaneously, not by choice; and for this reason they would not understand this fact, that good is a comely thing, nor would they take pleasure in it…or what credit is it (good) to those who have not aimed at it?...(ch. Xli paragraph 2) …justly does the Scripture always term those who remain in a state of apostasy “sons of the devil”…For the word “Son”, as one before me has observed, has a two-fold meaning: one is a son in the order of nature, because he was born a son; the other, in that he was made so, is reputed a son, although there be a difference between being born so and being made so. For the first is indeed born from the person referred to; but the second is mad so by him, whether as respects his creation or by the teaching of his doctrine. For when any person has been taught from the mouth of another, he is termed the son of him who instructs him, and the latter is called his father. According to nature, then- that is, according to creation, so to speak- we are all sons of God, because we have all been created by God. But with respect to obedience and doctrine we are not all the sons of God;…those who do not believe…are sons and angels of the devil, because they do the works of the devil……those sons who disobey their fathers, being disinherited, are still their sons in the course of nature, but by law are disinherited…Same way it is with God…Wherefore they cannot receive His inheritance: As David says, “Sinners are alienated from the womb; their anger is after the likeness of a serpent (Ps lviii 3, 4)”…And inasmuch as they were not by nature so created by God, but had power also to act rightly, the same person said to them giving them good counsel:”
Tatian the Syrian [AD110-172]- “Our free-will has destroyed us; we who were free have become slaves; we have been sold through sin. Nothing evil has been created by God; we ourselves have manifested wickedness; but we, who have manifested it, are able again to reject it.”… “(angels and men were) made free to act as it please, not having the nature of good, which again is with God alone, but is brought to perfection in men through their freedom of choice, in order that the bad man may be justly punished, having become depraved through his own fault, but the just man be deservedly praised for his virtuous deeds, since in the exercise of his free choice he refrained from transgressing the will of God. Such is the constitution of things in reference to angels and men.”
Clement of Alexandria: Miscellanies – “And neither praise nor censures, neither rewards nor punishments, are right, when the soul has not the power of inclination and disinclination, but evil is involuntary.” “Mistake is a sin (falling short of the mark) contrary to calculation; and voluntary sin is crime; and crime is voluntary wickedness…Mistake is the involuntary action of another towards me, while a crime alone is voluntary, whether my act or another’s.” “And the entire peculiarity and difference of belief and unbelief will not fall under either praise or censure, if we reflect rightly, since there attaches to it the antecedent natural necessity (or fate) proceeding from the Almighty. And if we are pulled like inanimate things by the puppet-strings of natural powers, willingness and unwillingness, and impulse, which is the antecedent of both, are mere redundancies.” “Wherefore voluntary actions are judged. But should one examine each one of the passions, he will find them irrational impulses. What is involuntary is not matter for judgment. But this is two-fold- what is done in ignorance, and what is done through necessity.”
Tertullian Against Marcion- “…power of his will. This, his state was confirmed even by the very law which God then imposed upon him. For a law would not be imposed upon one who had it not in his power to render that obedience which is due to law; nor again, would the penalty of death be threatened against sin, if a contempt of the law were impossible to man in the liberty of his will.” “But the reward neither of good nor of evil could be paid to the man who should be found to have been either good or evil through necessity and not choice.”
Origen, De Principiis- For this is to say that we are like pieces of wood, or stones, which have no motion in themselves, but receive the causes of their motions from without. Now such an assertion is neither true nor becoming, and is invented only that the freedom of the will be denied…And if any one were to refer the causes of our faults to the natural disorder of the body, such a theory is proved to be contrary to the reason of all teaching.” “And now, to confirm the deductions of reason by the authority of Scripture in that it is our own doing whether we live rightly or not, and that we are not compelled, either by those causes which come to us from without, or, as some think, by the presence of fate (quotes Micah 6:8, Deut 30:15, Isaiah 1:19, 20 and other passages)…and in issuing certain other commands, -conveys no other meaning than this, that it is in our own power to observe what is commanded. And therefore we are rightly rendered liable to condemnation if we transgress those commandments which we are able to keep.” “Let us observe also, that the Apostle Paul addresses us as having power over our own will, and as possessing in ourselves the causes either of our salvation or of our ruin:[Romans 2:4-10]. You will find also innumerable other passages in Holy Scripture, which manifestly show that we possess freedom of will.” “…these passages chiefly that the heretics rely, asserting…that in no way can a soul which is of an evil nature become good, or one which is of a virtuous nature be made bad.” “If , then, God promises to do this, and if, before He takes away the stony heart, we are unable to remove it from ourselves, it follows that it is not in our power, but in God’s only, to cast away wickedness. And again, if it is not in our doing to form within us a heart of flesh, but the work of God alone, it will not be in our power to live virtuously, but it will in everything appear to be a work of divine grace. Such are the assertions of those who wish to prove from the authority of Holy Scripture that nothing lies in our own power.” “And in this way also does the word of God promise to bestow instruction by taking away the stony heart, ie., by the removal of wickedness, that so men may be able to walk in the divine precepts, and observe the commandments of the law.”
Hippolytus: Refutation of All Heresies- “Since man has free will, a law has been defined for his guidance by the Deity, not without answering a good purpose. For if man did not possess the power to will and not to will, why should a law be established? For a law will not be laid down for an animal devoid of reason, but a bridle and a whip; whereas to man has been given a precept and penalty to perform.”
Archelaus: The Disputation with Manes- (Manes taught there are two natures) “For all the creatures that God made, He made very good; and He gave to every individual the sense of free-will, in accordance with which standard He also instituted the law of judgment. To sin is ours, and that we sin not is God’s gift, as our will is constituted to choose either to sin or not to sin.”
Methodius: Banquet of the Ten Virgins - “For the seed, which, so to speak, partakes of a divine creative power, is not to be thought guilty of the incentives of incontinence; and art always works up the matter submitted to it; and nothing is to be considered as evil in itself, but becomes so by the act of those who used it in such a way; for when properly and purely made use of, it comes out pure, but if disgracefully and improperly, then it becomes disgraceful.” “If, then, any are evil, they are evil in accordance with the wants and desires of their minds, and not by necessity…If birth leads one on to kill a man, and to stain his hands with murder, and the law forbids this, punishing criminals, and by threats restrains the decrees of destiny…then the law is in opposition to destiny…Hence, law is hostile to destiny.” “Either, then, there is destiny and there was no need of laws; or there are laws and they are not in accordance with destiny…” “If it is better to be righteous than to be unrighteous, why is not man made so at once from his birth? But if afterwards he is tempered by instruction and laws, that he may become better, he is so tempered as possessing free-will, and not by nature evil. If the evil are evil in accordance with destiny, by the decrees of Providence, they are not blameworthy and deserving of the punishment which is inflicted by the laws, since they live according to their own nature, and are not capable of being changed. And, again, if the good, living according to their own proper nature, are praiseworthy, their natal destiny being the cause of their goodness; yet the wicked, living according to their own proper nature, are not blamable in the eye of a righteous judge. For, if we must speak plainly, he who lives according to the nature which belongs to him, in no way sins. For he did not make himself thus, but fate; and he lives according to its motion, being urged on by unavoidable necessity. Then no one is bad. But some men are bad; and vice is blameworthy, and hostile to God, as reason has shown. But virtue is loveable and praiseworthy, God having appointed a law for the punishment of the wicked.” Concerning Free Will - “Now, it has been already shown that he who acts is not evil according to his being, but in accordance with his evil doing. Because there is nothing evil by nature, but it is by use that evil things become such. So I say, says he, that man was made with a free-will, not as if there were already evil in existence, which he had the power of choosing if he wished, but on account of his capacity of obeying or disobeying God. For this was the meaning of the gift of free-will. And man after his creation receives a commandment from God; and from this at once rises evil, for he does not obey the divine command; and this alone is evil, namely, disobedience, which had a beginning. For man received power, and enslaved himself, not because he was overpowered by the irresistible tendencies of his nature…” “so I do not think that God, while He urges on man to obey His commands, deprives him of the power of purposing and withholding obedience.” “But you will be sure to ask whence arose this disobedience. It is clearly recorded in Holy Scripture, by which I am enabled to say that man was not made by God in this condition, but that he has come to it by some teaching. For man did not receive such a nature as this…Now one says in Holy Write, that “man has learnt evil.” (Jeremiah 13:23) I say, then, that disobedience to God is taught…He, then, who teaches evil is the Serpent…Evil is disobedience to the commandments of God.” Discourse on the Resurrection- “God did not make evil, nor is He at all in any way the author of evil; but whatever failed to keep the law, which He in all justice ordained, after being made by Him with the faculty of free will, for the purpose of guarding and keeping it, is called evil. Now it is the gravest fault to disobey God, by overstepping the bounds of that righteousness which is consistent with free will.” “He says that it is in our own power to do, or to avoid doing, evil; since otherwise we should not be punished for doing evil, nor be rewarded for doing well.”
Lactantius, The Divine Institutes- “For if it is virtue in the midst of the impetuosity of anger to restrain and check oneself, which they cannot deny, then he who is without anger is without virtue. If it is a virtue to control the lust of the body, he must be free from virtue who has no lust which he may regulate…For nothing can be born vicious; but if we make a bad use of the affections they become vices, if we use them well they become virtues. Then it must be shown that the causes of the affections, and not the affections themselves, must be moderated…For sensual desire, if it does not wander from its lawful object, although it be ardent, yet is without fault. But if it desires an unlawful object, although it be moderate, yet it is a great vice.” “For they (passions implanted by nature) are not evil of themselves, since God has reasonably implanted them in us; but inasmuch as they are plainly good by nature,- for they are given us for the protection of life,- they become evil by their use.”
Theodotus, Excerpts- “Since the movement of the soul is self-originated, the grace of God demands from it what the soul possesses, willingness as its contribution to salvation.”
Clement, Clementine Homilies- “he who is good by his own choice is really good; but he who is made good by another by necessity is not really good, because he is not what he is by his own choice.” Recognitions- “Yet, to come directly to the point, we say absolutely that there is no evil in substance. But if this be so, then the Creator of substance is vainly blamed.” “…question you should have asked is, What is evil? –a substance, an accident, or an act?{Peter to Simon Magus}” “yea, even in vain do the judges of the world administer laws and punish those who do amiss, for they had it not in their power not to sin;” “To this Simon (Magus) answered: “Was not He able to make us all such that we should be good, and that we should not have it in our power to do otherwise?” Peter answered: “This also is an absurd question. For if He had made us of an unchangeable nature and incapable of being moved away from good, we should not be really good, because we could not be aught else;”
Bardesan- “For, if any one should not of his own will do that which is good or that which is evil, his justification and his condemnation would rest simply with that Fortune to which he is subjected.” “ “Those things,” said Avida to him, “which thou hast said, are very good; but, lo! The commands which have been given to men are severe, and they cannot perform them.” “This,” said Bardesan, “is the saying of one who has not the will to do that which is right; nay, more, of him who has already yielded obedience and submission to his foe. For men have not been commanded to do anything but that which they are able to do. For the commandments set before us are only two, and they are such as are compatible with freedom and consistent with equity.” “it will be evident, that for those things which are not in our own hands, but which we have from nature, we are in no wise condemned, nor are we in any wise justified; but by those things which we do in the exercises of our personal freedom, if they be right we are justified and entitled to praise, and if they be wrong we are condemned and subjected to blame.”
The Apology of Aristides- “and if moreover it happen to die in childhood, they give thanks to God the more, as for one who has passed through the world without sins.”
We have fourteen of the early Fathers, cited in a near-exhaustive overview on the teaching concerning free-will and its relationship to moral law and virtue. Although these writers were able to show the teaching from Scripture, it is apparent that they held this teaching to be founded in reason and inferred from nature. They understood well the distinction between what we learn from God through his works and through His Word.
|
|
|
Post by tjcxjonz on Dec 29, 2010 13:18:02 GMT -5
Well Jesse you are very verbose to say the least. Don't like to hear your self talk do you? Yes as you say men are accountable for what they know, but do you know what God's set purpose for each man is? "And for Your lifeblood I will surely demand an accounting. I will demand an accounting from every animal. And from EACH man, too, I will demand an accounting for the life of his fellow man." From your picture I think you are in the category of "each man too" and I also think you might be capable of giving to God the demand he requires from each man. Which man is it that has God stated this oath too, and does a man, every other man that is, disobey a law if he refuses to comply to this demand?
|
|
|
Post by veritas77 on Jan 22, 2011 21:44:21 GMT -5
Hi Jesse, I wanted to thank you for being a bold witness in these deceptive times where Truth is laughed at, rather hated. God bless you in truth. -VERITAS77 btw, hi 2 me. lol, -Jesse (also). A quick shout out to all who share REVELATION 21:8 to a world not found in Christ upon taking the last breathe of life. That is to say the gospel is the good news for those who live4truth. Amen.
|
|