Skip to content

Add your phone number?

Optional. Nothing is sent unless you choose it.
The Historic Faith
Sign in

Jumpstarter 7 of 10

Ideas to help restart your discussion
Romans Commentary Chapters 9-16  /  Romans 9:19-23 the Potter and the Clay  /  Discussion Questions
All Questions
Question 7
Irenaeus is quoted: if we lack real power to obey or disobey, commands become irrational; how does this early Christian assumption about genuine free will confront common modern evangelical ways of speaking about grace, inability, or “God doing it all”?
Another way to ask: Irenaeus says if we can’t truly obey or disobey, God’s commands don’t make sense. How does that idea challenge common talk today about grace, human inability, or “God does it all”?

Direct Answer Based on the transcript, Irenaeus (and Bercot) confront “God doing it all” language by insisting God’s commands and warnings only make sense if humans truly can obey or disobey—meaning grace does not remove responsibility but enables a real response.

Support from Transcript:

  • Irenaeus: “If it were not in our power to do or not to do these things, what reason did the apostle have…to give us commands…?”
  • He concludes: “God has preserved the will of man free and under man's own control.”
  • Bercot extends this beyond works: “This is not merely in works, but also in faith.”
  • Origen: Scripture “emphasize[s] the freedom of the will,” condemning sin and approving righteousness.
  • Chrysostom: Paul “does not mean that everything is God's doing, for if this were so, there would be nothing to hinder all men from being saved,” since God “desires all men to be saved” (1 Tim. 2:3–4).
Discussion Follow-ups Where do you hear Christians speak as if obedience is optional because “God will do it,” and how would you rephrase that to match the transcript’s balance: “the greater part is from God,” yet we “contribute our part”?

Jumpstarter 7 of 10
Back Questions Next