Did Christ have free will?

[brianbbs67]

Did Jesus/Yeshua/whateverhisname have free will. We see him quote" the son can only do as the father has instructed". Or was he so devoted to the father it never was an issue?

So, was he locked into the doctrine? Or could he act of his will? I can see examples of both. What do you all see?

[EBA]

Since you haven't bothered to explain why you think this proves Peter doesn't have free will, i will take a guess that you think Peter's ability to change his mind negates his free will? I don't know why that would follow. I don't see how Peter's discovery that he is a coward negates his free will. It seems to suppport the fact that he does have free will.

However, I do think that there is something to be said for the fact that free will isn't all it's cracked up to be. We're all free to do all sorts of things that we would never seriously consider. There are numerous factors that can affect our ability to exercise our free will such as rage, fear, wisdom etc. Sometimes we don't see the other option, whereas sometimes we would never consider the other option.

If we are merely actors playing our roles, then there is no free will, but what about those who peak behind the curtain and see what's really going on? If anyone has free will it would be someone like Adam or Christ.

Eveyone else couild have free will, but there will would be effectively irrelevant in that their own ignoance prevents them from exercising their will effectively. When one knows all of the factors that go into making a decision, they know what decision will be made. When one knows what is the best decision to make, there is no decision to make. Then they are truly free from ignorance, foolishness, bondage, etc.

Wow, four paragraphs to answer one simple question, and you still didn’t answer it.

You actually made it sound as if I was supposed to answer a question:

Since you haven't bothered to explain why you think this proves Peter doesn't have free will,

Pardon me, but what is the “this� that I was supposed to explain?

-i will take a guess that you think Peter's ability to change his mind negates his free will?

Your guess would be wrong simply because Peter never had free will to negate.

Now let’s take your original premise and see if there is a question in there about Peter?

Sure it is. Just becuase someone knows what you're going to do beforehand doesn't negate one's free will, even if that one is you or God. They aren't mutually exclusive propositions. Jesus told Peter he would deny him, but you don't see Peter getting bent because he has no free will now, do you?

Okay there is a question there but before I answer that let me say, when you make a statement like this:

Just becuase someone knows what you're going to do beforehand doesn't negate one's free will, even if that one is you or God.

What you are really saying is that you have the ability to thwart God’s will, isn’t it?

Now, to answer your question:

Jesus told Peter he would deny him, but you don't see Peter getting bent because he has no free will now, do you?

And Peter remembered the word of Jesus, which said unto him, Before the cock crow, thou shalt deny me thrice. And he went out, and WEPT BITTERLY. (Mat 26:75)

And the second time the cock crew. And Peter called to mind the word that Jesus said unto him, Before the cock crow twice, thou shalt deny me thrice. And when he thought thereon, HE WEPT. (Mar 14:72)

And Peter went out, and WEPT BITTERLY. (Luk 22:62)

Sounds like he got pretty “bent� to me.

[shnarkle]

Wow, four paragraphs to answer one simple question, and you still didn’t answer it.

You actually made it sound as if I was supposed to answer a question:

Evidently you aren't into answering questions. Good to know you haven't got any answers. I'll keep that in mind from now on.

Just becuase someone knows what you're going to do beforehand doesn't negate one's free will, even if that one is you or God.

What you are really saying is that you have the ability to thwart God’s will, isn’t it?

Not at all. If God knows what one is going to do, it is predestined. Again, you haven't provided any reasons why these are mutually exclusive propositions. Given your previous comments, I will just move on as you've already indicated you have no answers.

Sounds like he got pretty “bent� to me.

No, bent is when one is offended because God prevented them from doing what they wanted to do. Peter wept because of what he did, not because of what God forced him to do against his will. Big difference.

[brianbbs67]

Glad to see this revived.

[ttruscott]

He says "not by will or effort". It isn't we who elect God, God elects us.

True enough but HE must have a reason, right? And if that reason is not based upon our faith, is it arbitrary ? which sends some to hell for no reason? And if we were elected because we put our faith in HIM and HIS Son before we sinned and were sent to earth, might not the injunction that election is "not by will or effort" be referring to the fulfillment our our election calling on earth as sinners, ie, what is usually called our conversion, is not by our work but by HIS gift of faith (our first faith returned to us by HIM releasing the grip sin has upon us) by HIS grace? That is, that our election has nothing to do with our works on earth after we are born in our sins does not preclude that it might have been a response to our faith pre-earth.

[ttruscott]

When one knows all of the factors that go into making a decision, they know what decision will be made. When one knows what is the best decision to make, there is no decision to make. Then they are truly free from ignorance, foolishness, bondage, etc.

You are right again. But since no one can possibly be truly free from ignorance, foolishness, bondage, etc. on earth, this is one of the reasons I reject that those enslaved to sin can have a free will.

Have you considered that
IF you know the inevitable outcome of your decision as pertaining to every option that your free will has been abrogated? If you are faced with two doors, one with a tiger waiting for his dinner and the other leading to the path to life, do you have a choice? Not if you know nothing about tigers and life. Even if you are told there is a tiger somewhere and life somewhere, do you have a choice? No, I'd say not really because all you can do is guess, ie, make an uninformed or non-educated decision about which door to choose.

But if you were told that the left door had a tiger and the right door led to life do you have a choice? Yes, you can choose to believe the person telling you this or not, to trust him or not to trust him. Putting your faith in this person or not putting your faith in this person becomes the issue and that decision you can freely make.

BUT if the person lets you peek through the doors and you see the tiger (hell) and the path out (heaven), can we say we have a free will to choose? I must answer no we do not because our knowledge has forced us to choose to go right, not left no matter what we might have been personally inclined to do before we peeked.

In other words, to make a free will decision to accept GOD at HIS word or to reject HIM as a liar, we cannot have proof of the consequences of either option or our free will would be overwhelmed by the proof and we would be forced to choose HIM no matter how much we were inclined to reject HIS claims before we saw the proof.

[marco]

If you are faced with two doors, one with a tiger waiting for his dinner and the other leading to the path to life, do you have a choice? Not if you know nothing about tigers and life.

We have a choice in the example you give. In life we regularly have such choices, for we don't know what lies ahead. We choose to be a teacher rather than a lawyer but we don't know the consequences of our choice - but that has nothing to do with the fact we choose.

We are thrown down at birth and we will eventually perish; we had no say over our birth and little over our death. But inside a wide range we are free to choose thousands of times in our life. For most that is enough to term free will.


If Christ were a man like everyone else, he too would have enjoyed free will. But he was like a man locked in a cell, unable to see the sun. I think the poor chap did not enjoy free will - at least according to the tales. He was fashioned by God to move inexorably to his crucifixion..... and cause Jews loads of trouble.

[dio9]

Did Jesus/Yeshua/whateverhisname have free will. We see him quote" the son can only do as the father has instructed". Or was he so devoted to the father it never was an issue?

So, was he locked into the doctrine? Or could he act of his will? I can see examples of both. What do you all see?

Of course he had free will , he was a man, 100% that means he had free will. We are making a mistake if we think Jesus was not completely one of us.

[EBA]

No, bent is when one is offended because God prevented them from doing what they wanted to do.

Wow, now you’re making up your own definitions.
I’m sure if you look up the word “bent� in any dictionary you will never find it defined as:

“when one is offended because God prevented them from doing what they wanted to do�

Just becuase someone knows what you're going to do beforehand doesn't negate one's free will, even if that one is you or God.

What you are really saying is that you have the ability to thwart God’s will, isn’t it?

Not at all. If God knows what one is going to do, it is predestined.

Predestined by whom?
You might want to look up the definition of “predestined� before you state something like this:

Peter wept because of what he did, not because of what God forced him to do against his will. Big difference

Yes, I bet Peter did cry about denying Christ; I’m sure he felt terrible.
However, we’re not told that; we’re told he wept because he, “-remembered the word of Jesus, which said unto him, Before the cock crow, thou shalt deny me thrice.�(26:75)

And I never said God forced Peter to do anything against his own will; and if you think I believe he did, you’re sadly mistaken.

[ttruscott]

If you are faced with two doors, one with a tiger waiting for his dinner and the other leading to the path to life, do you have a choice? Not if you know nothing about tigers and life.

We have a choice in the example you give. In life we regularly have such choices, for we don't know what lies ahead.

Sure, I do know that technically it is a choice when we choose but in this case the kind of choice resembles a GUESS more than anything else.

[marco]

Of course he had free will , he was a man, 100% that means he had free will. We are making a mistake if we think Jesus was not completely one of us.

There is no "of course" in it. He may have been an ordinary preacher with a belief conceived late in his life that he was being guided by heaven. We know how powerful preachers on a mission can be.


If we go by the surrounding mythology of angels and celestial implantations, he was a humanoid on some sort of mission to get himself killed to save the Incas, Aztecs, Chinese and some Laplanders. It makes little sense but billions subscribe to it. Given he was ordained to walk to his death, he was deprived of free will. He didn't need it. His will belonged to the Father who had made the generous donation of his son to show his love of earthlings.