Total Depravity

[sdowney717]

Total depravity cannot be exaggerated in the Bible, but it has been exaggerated by Reformed Theology and Calvinism. Total depravity does NOT mean that sinners cannot respond to the Gospel, and therefore they must be born again before they can believe. That would be putting the cart before the horse. Sinners are born again AFTER they repent and believe the Gospel. That is clear from Scripture.

Then Peter said unto them, Repent, and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins, and ye shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost. (Acts 2:38).

The gift of the Holy Spirit , well Peter was responding to the astonishment of the people regarding the gift of tongues.
Saying they too could experience that.

Acts 2:38
Then Peter said to them, “Repent, and let every one of you be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins; and you shall receive the gift of the Holy Spirit.
In Context | Full Chapter | Other Translations
Acts 10:45
And those of the circumcision who believed were astonished, as many as came with Peter, because the gift of the Holy Spirithad been poured out on the Gentiles also.
In Context | Full Chapter | Other Translations
Hebrews 2:4
God also bearing witness both with signs and wonders, with various miracles, and gifts of the Holy Spirit, according to His own will?

In context this salvation and the gifts were for 'as many as the Lord our God will call.' and no more and no less.
Acts 2:30-39New King James Version (NKJV)
30 Therefore, being a prophet, and knowing that God had sworn with an oath to him that of the fruit of his body, according to the flesh, He would raise up the Christ to sit on his throne, 31 he, foreseeing this, spoke concerning the resurrection of the Christ, that His soul was not left in Hades, nor did His flesh see corruption. 32 This Jesus God has raised up, of which we are all witnesses. 33 Therefore being exalted to the right hand of God, and having received from the Father the promise of the Holy Spirit, He poured out this which you now see and hear.

34 “For David did not ascend into the heavens, but he says himself:

‘The Lord said to my Lord,
“Sit at My right hand,
35 Till I make Your enemies Your footstool.”’

36 “Therefore let all the house of Israel know assuredly that God has made this Jesus, whom you crucified, both Lord and Christ.”

37 Now when they heard this, they were cut to the heart, and said to Peter and the rest of the apostles, “Men and brethren, what shall we do?”

38 Then Peter said to them, “Repent, and let every one of you be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins; and you shall receive the gift of the Holy Spirit.

39 For the promise is to you and to your children, and to all who are afar off, as many as the Lord our God will call.”

 

[sdowney717]

Acts 10:40-45New King James Version (NKJV)
40 Him God raised up on the third day, and showed Him openly, 41 not to all the people, but to witnesses chosen before by God, even to us who ate and drank with Him after He arose from the dead. 42 And He commanded us to preach to the people, and to testify that it is He who was ordained by God to be Judge of the living and the dead. 43 To Him all the prophets witness that, through His name, whoever believes in Him will receive remission of sins.”

The Holy Spirit Falls on the Gentiles
44 While Peter was still speaking these words, the Holy Spirit fell upon all those who heard the word.

45 And those of the circumcision who believed were astonished, as many as came with Peter, because the gift of the Holy Spirit had been poured out on the Gentiles also.

Now what was the gift of the Holy Spirit poured out, it was the gift of Tongues.

46 For they heard them speak with tongues and magnify God.

 

[sdowney717]

John 5
If you do not have His word abiding in you, then Jesus says, you will not be willing to come to Me that you may have life, verse 40.
Verse 42, Christ also knows them that do not believe in Him, as He says, YOU DO NOT HAVE THE LOVE OF GOD IN YOU.
Uhmm, that would be beforehand, before they meet the Christ of God, verse 38.

36 But I have a greater witness than John’s; for the works which the Father has given Me to finish—the very works that I do—bear witness of Me, that the Father has sent Me. 37 And the Father Himself, who sent Me, has testified of Me. You have neither heard His voice at any time, nor seen His form. 38 But you do not have His word abiding in you, because whom He sent, Him you do not believe. 39 You search the Scriptures, for in them you think you have eternal life; and these are they which testify of Me. 40 But you are not willing to come to Me that you may have life.


41 “I do not receive honor from men. 42 But I know you, that you do not have the love of God in you. 43 I have come in My Father’s name, and you do not receive Me; if another comes in his own name, him you will receive.

44 How can you believe, who receive honor from one another, and do not seek the honor that comes from the only God? 45 Do not think that I shall accuse you to the Father; there is one who accuses you—Moses, in whom you trust. 46 For if you believed Moses, you would believe Me; for he wrote about Me. 47 But if you do not believe his writings, how will you believe My words?”

Well frankly Christ is telling them they can not believe in Him, verse 44.
AND frankly, He tells them they did not believe what Moses wrote either.
And frankly, if they do not beleive what Moses wrote HOW WILL YOU BELIEVE MY WORDS? Well Christ is saying they can not, the foundation of their life is not based on the love of God within them, as recall Christ says,

But you do not have His word abiding in you, because whom He sent, Him you do not believe.

 

[Radrook]

Thank you for getting back with me on this.

You said: “…as good as God chose to make His creation” but also later say: “Even being a perfectly made creature is not enough; they were perfectly made…”, so which is it?

Is saying “…as good as God chose to make His creation” the same as saying “as good as God could make them”?

If you say: “God held back making humans as good as He could and chose to make them less than he could have made them” then this God is contrary to a totally unselfish type God and totally unselfish would be the ultimate in Love, so is that the God you worship?

Could God make beings just like Jesus from their day one or is there something that Jesus had besides being a non-created being that God could not create (instinctively) in man?

We really need to understand “man’s objective” to know if man was made as good as God could make him to fulfill his objective, so what do you see as “man’s objective? (Please do not just say: “to bring glory to God” since a tree brings glory to God by being a tree.)



I agree Adam and Eve started out uncorrupted, what is this one quality that is “less than God” which allowed them to be corrupted and why was it not given to them?



You say: “total depravity is not only about being fully evil”. So do you believe a baby even prior to birth is “fully evil”?

You say: “"totally depraved" rightfully means totally dependent…”, but animals are totally dependent on God for the air they breathe so are they “totally depraved”?

We, as mature adults, can see from the Adam & Eve story and life itself and realize we cannot of our own power be consistently obedient to God, be righteous, be holy, and/or be acceptable, but would that have to mean an innocent baby, who has not sinned yet, is evil?

Does the fact that; I cannot freely fly around the room; mean I do not have free will in other areas?

If it does mean I can still have free will then the fact I cannot keep from never sinning, would not mean I do not have free will in other areas?



The Bible does not refer to Adam and Eve’s first sin as a “fall” so why should we?


Adam and Eve sinned with the “nature” they had, so why would our “nature” have to change in order for us to sin?


We know “knowledge” of good and evil was gained for mankind through the eating of the fruit, but is knowledge itself bad to have?


Would it be “fair” for God to give a better “nature” to Adam & Eve than we have?


“Knowledge” of good and evil does provide us with lots more ways to sin and so all mature adults do sin, but is sin the problem or is unforgiven sin the problem?



That did not answer the question: Are there things God just could not do since it would be impossible to do with Adam and Eve? Ex. God could not create a being that has always existed.



Babies are for a very good reason instinctively self-desirous, so does that make them evil? And if you say yes, would the baby not even born yet also be evil? Do you think that is the way God views these humans? Jonah 4:11 And should I not have concern for the great city of Nineveh, in which there are more than a hundred and twenty thousand people who cannot tell their right hand from their left…



“Total Depravity” has to do with the child at conception due to Adam & Eve’s sinning being totally sinful (hell or purgatory bound) and continuing that way until God changes him/her. It is not just; the lacking of Loving God and others. A child has to grow to the maturity to even know to Love God and others.

Do you have to first sin to become a slave to sin or are we just born that way (which would really make it God’s fault)?

Why would it make it God's fault that Adam and Eve chose to sin and that their offspring cannot be otherwise than affected by that sin? Their decision to sin was a rebellious announcement that they wished to do things on their own. Wanted to become like God via setting moral standards and deciding for themselves what should be considered good and what should be considered evil. Once that choice was made they had to be allowed to proceed on their own in order to prove them and their satanic supporter wrong.

 

[bling]

I mean perfectly in how He formed them, not in how they were in their nature of what He used to form them. So, both things above which you quoted are referring to the same thing < talking about how well He formed them, not talking about the nature of what He used.

He started with humans being less than He could have made them, but now we can become all we can be, by means of Jesus. So, He is not selfish, if He has given us His own Son and now we can be transformed into the image of Jesus > Romans 8:29. So, no I do not worship a selfish god.

So you agree God would have to be totally unselfish?

Here in is an issue you say: “He started with humans being less than He could have made them…”, if that is true than God held back something virtually arbitrarily (God would not be totally “generous” and thus less than totally Loving). My understanding would have God making man as good as man could be made to fulfill man’s objective, but man is lacking in the one thing that cannot be instinctively placed in humans, but can later be obtained by humans as a charitable gift humbly accepted as pure charity.

Romans 9 shows how God is our Potter, and He has vessels for honor and for dishonor. A vessel has a purpose. We humans can understand this, from how we create vessels for holding different things and for transporting different sorts of materials in different and specialized vessels. You can understand that you are not going to use a sewer pot for drinking water.

I have written a lengthy explanation to Ro. 9 which I would be happy to give you but it will take us off subject.

Keep in mind when studying Ro. 9: . Paul uses an ancient form of rhetoric known as diatribe (imaginary debate) asking questions and giving most of the time a strong “By no means” and then goes on to explain “why not”. Lots of support is given in every diatribe before and/or after the question for the wrong answer in support of the question itself. So what is the potter story telling us?

Also the translation you are using translates “honor and dishonor” in describing these vessels, yet Paul uses the same Greek word in 2 Tim 2: 20 translating it as special and common vessels to understand this is Common vessels and special vessels look at the same idea using the same words of Paul in 2 Tim 2: 20.

Everything leaving the Potter’s shop is good and for a good purpose like you find in a rich person’s house, the Potter would not make clay pigeons for destruction (that is not something first century potters did), but any vessel (common or special) that becomes damaged should be destroyed since it does not show well the Potter’s work, but the Potter himself did not make it that way, while he had it.

Satan is a vessel for carrying the "spirit who now works in the sons of disobedience" (Ephesians 2:2) to the flaming sewer which burns with fire and brimstone. His spirit is very nasty filth of boredom and loneliness and hurts and unforgiveness and bitterness and arguing and complaining and abusive stuff of nasty angry reacting and dominating and dictatorial drives for pleasures. That stuff does not belong in any human; yet, ones are volunteering and excusing themselves to keep on being vessels of such nasty stuff.

So, yes there are humans who are vessels of what is not God's love. They serve to help to transport it to the flaming sewer.

So, I can see how God is organized, the God of order. He has vessels for different purposes.

Everything that leaves the Potter’s shop (at our birth) is good, but some are born into a very privileged family (vessels of honor/very special) and others are born into a very low family (dishonor/ common vessels). The privileged also have more responsibility in helping others, since they have more, but the “common vessels” can change according to Paul 2 Tim. 2: 21 Those who cleanse themselves from the latter will be instruments for special purposes, made holy, useful to the Master and prepared to do any good work. The bottom line for Ro. 9 is: “it does not matter if you are born special or common (Jew or Gentile)” when it comes to salvation.

What I understand is that Adam and Eve were human in spiritual nature. And the human spiritual nature is weaker than God and can be corrupted. But, also, the human spirit can be transformed into the likeness of Jesus.

I agree “the human spiritual nature is weaker than God and can be corrupted.” So Adam and Eve had this “human spiritual nature” the same as all of us, so why did our nature have to change in order for us to sin?

Can we think of it like this: Humans instinctively have a desire to survive (this is good and gives value to life), but that would also require: self-awareness, self-preservation, and some degree of selfishness. This selfishness would go against being selfless (totally Loving like God), so did Adam and Eve instinctively have selflessness or did God hold it back from them or was it just not possible to give it to them from their creation?

Being selfless (helping others with no expectation of getting anything from it) is not human nature and if it were instinctively placed in a being it would not be this “love” by choice, but a robotic action, so how do we get this “Love”?

I said, I mean dependent. Now, though, if an unborn is infected by the spirit of sin from the baby's parents, then "the spirit who now works in the sons of disobedience" (in Ephesians 2:2) can be already infecting the baby, in the womb; and so, the baby can have started in having this wrong spirit, before birth. But if case this is so, the infection of sin has only gotten started, not matured like how older people can "become worse and worse, deceiving and being deceived" (in 2 Timothy 3:13). So, no a baby is not already fully evil. But he or she could get started if parents in sin have conceived. Right in the conception, that wrong spirit of self-involvement can get started. Then, as the person develops, there is more and more for the wrong spirit to work in.

But we have what happened, when John the Baptist was filled with the Holy Spirit, right from the womb. He could know who Jesus is, even before he was born . . . not being only about himself, but being filled with God's Holy Spirit!

So the new born child of two strong Christians is not depraved and/or “infected by the spirit of sin”?

Why was Jesus not depraved or “infected by the spirit of sin”?

Are you not placing at least some of the blame for your sinning on Adam and Eve and/or your parents and/or God?

If you can sin, your ability to sin can effect all areas, though this may not be obvious. For one sort of an example, your weakness for a wrong pleasure can moonlight as weakness making you able to suffer in various emotional torments which might not involve obvious sinning.

What I am showing and explaining is the fact that; just showing a person does not have “free will” in one area, does not disprove the idea a person has free will.

I would go on to say a mature adult has very limited use of free will, but really only needs it to make one free will choice: “to accept or reject God’s charity”.

I understand "fall" to be an image, not necessarily a perfect representation. Paul does say the Galatians fell from grace. So, I can see that people who know the Bible have derived "fall" from Paul's use of "fallen from grace", in Galatians chapter one.

So, what wording would you use, please?

When your child first “sins”, do you look upon it as a “fall” or as a transition into another phase of their life? Is it part of their maturing and growth?

With the nature they had, they were weak enough to become corrupted, so then they were of a fallen or corrupted nature which then did sin. In their human nature before the fall they were not choosing to sin. So, I consider that they were first corrupted, then they were able to choose to sin.

So who are you “blaming” for their “first corruption”?

People accuse God about this. And Paul answers this, in Romans chapter nine.

Ro. 9 is a great topic and I would love to discuss with you, but off this topic.

 

[bling]

Why would it make it God's fault that Adam and Eve chose to sin and that their offspring cannot be otherwise than affected by that sin? Their decision to sin was a rebellious announcement that they wished to do things on their own. Wanted to become like God via setting moral standards and deciding for themselves what should be considered good and what should be considered evil. Once that choice was made they had to be allowed to proceed on their own in order to prove them and their satanic supporter wrong.

If sin is the problem and God could have changed Adam and Eve so they would not sin, then God seems to be at least partly at fault for them sinning.

If never ever sinning is not man’s objective and the human objective can only be fulfilled by sinning, then God allowing Adam and Eve to sin (even though it hurts God) would not make it God’s fault. Sin is thus inevitable and necessary.

 

[Hieronymus]

Hello!

I want to ask about the doctrine of total depravity.

From reading my Bible many times, it seems like the doctrine is crystal clear.

We are corrupted in every aspect of life and we cannot save ourselves.

However, I was curious why some Christians rejected total depravity, so I searched around.

I found one Orthodox site where the author disagreed with the doctrine. What he said he believed sounds a lot like total depravity, except he denied that it was human nature. He believed that humans were inherently good and that human nature is to seek out good and be righteous and that sin is a corruption of our human nature.

He further expands on this that Jesus was fully human and fully God. In order to be fully human, he'd need to have human nature, and Jesus never sinned, so our nature is actually inherently good, but it has been severely impacted by sin.

That gave me a new perspective of the doctrine and I still hold it today.

The main question is this, could total depravity have been exaggerated in the Bible. There are verses in the Bible where the speaker or writer seems to exaggerated. "It is easier for a camel to go the eye of a needle than for a rich man to enter the kingdom."

Thoughts?

I'm totally depraved by myself.
I think every person will discover this in themselves when they're "tested beyond the breaking point."

 

[Hieronymus]

Why would it make it God's fault that Adam and Eve chose to sin and that their offspring cannot be otherwise than affected by that sin?

Because God created the whole situation, including the master tempter and liar referred to as the serpent.
Man was just put there and didn't create himself.
Of course God is responsible, and than the serpent and than man.
(of course this is just how i see it)

 

[Hank77]

Regarding the camel and needle verse, Jesus explains it two verses later in each of the accounts (Matthew 19:23-26, Mark 10:23-27, Luke 18:24-27). His explanation means that a camel cannot go through the eye of a needle.

But for God all things are possible.
There is an interesting statement in the Midrash....
"The Holy One said, Open for me a door as big as a needle's eye and I will open for you a door through which may enter tents and camels."

 

[Hank77]

What I am showing and explaining is the fact that; just showing a person does not have “free will” in one area, does not disprove the idea a person has free will.

I would go on to say a mature adult has very limited use of free will, but really only needs it to make one free will choice: “to accept or reject God’s charity”.

How would you describe the relationship between free will and a human nature that can be tempted? Adam and Eve were tempted. Jesus, as a human man with a human nature, was tempted.

 

[Radrook]

Because God created the whole situation, including the master tempter and liar referred to as the serpent.
Man was just put there and didn't create himself.
Of course God is responsible, and than the serpent and than man.
(of course this is just how i see it)

All of God's creation is perfect. .That means it had no inherent flaws.
Satan made him himself a liar tempter and murderer. He was not created as such.
The developing situation was created by their abuse of their free will.

 

[DingDing]

I'm totally depraved by myself.
I think every person will discover this in themselves when they're "tested beyond the breaking point."

Many, like Job, have been tested to this point, but what does God have to say about Job? Job passed the test! (Though not without considerable complaint on his part and eventual correction on God's part.) Have you been through such yet?

 

[com7fy8]

I agree “the human spiritual nature is weaker than God and can be corrupted.” So Adam and Eve had this “human spiritual nature” the same as all of us, so why did our nature have to change in order for us to sin?

What I mean is "the spirit who now works in the sons of disobedience" (in Ephesians 2:2) effected Adam and Eve's nature so they became able to disobey. While they were God's "very good" creation . . . I understand that God's "very good" creation could not of its own nature choose to do what is not good. However, as I consider, their nature was not immune to evil like God is > James 1:13.

And so, a point of this, as concerns how I personally understand "total depravity", is I think that we of ourselves, even if we were perfect creations like Adam and Eve, we also would not have a chance against Satan and his evil spirit. So, we all are in the same boat, needing how God alone is able to make us stable in His love. And this means becoming . . . each of us becoming . . . "one spirit with Him" (in 1 Corinthians 6:17). In oneness with God, each of us can share with God in His own strength and immunity to how evil would try to effect Him and us. In His love, we have His almighty immunity, including against fear >

"There is no fear in love; but perfect love casts out fear, because fear involves torment. But he who fears has not been made perfect in love." (1 John 4:17)

Can we think of it like this: Humans instinctively have a desire to survive (this is good and gives value to life), but that would also require: self-awareness, self-preservation, and some degree of selfishness. This selfishness would go against being selfless (totally Loving like God), so did Adam and Eve instinctively have selflessness or did God hold it back from them or was it just not possible to give it to them from their creation?

First > humans now have their self interest . . . now that humans are in sin. But Adam and Eve were not always how humans have become. And in the sin condition, humans have been slaves of "fear of death" > Hebrews 2:14-15. In "fear of death" ones are insecure and therefore not feeling taken-care-of, and so they can be mainly or only about watching out for their own selves. But in God's love, we do not have this fear; and so we can generously run our cups over to others, without feeling we will run out of resources or be unsafe (1 Peter 3:13)

Being selfless (helping others with no expectation of getting anything from it) is not human nature and if it were instinctively placed in a being it would not be this “love” by choice, but a robotic action, so how do we get this “Love”?

The Bible has not said it is robotic for God to bless us with how His love has us become. If you have been dead in sin, you already are dead; while being love-dead, we have been robots and puppets of the devil, maybe we could say. So, if God changes you to become alive in love, why accuse Him of making you a robot? This could be mixing up God and the devil; God makes alive, but the devil uses and controls and wastes people.

A thing is that God knows that if He changes a love-dead person into a really loving person, that person will appreciate this; but while the person is selfish, his or her way of filtering a message about love will have the love-dead person interpreting the message the wrong way.

I myself have been in denial about how I have been a whatever you want to say. And people would confront me, and I would be in denial, then God would change me so I am alive in love. And I am not complaining!!!

So the new born child of two strong Christians is not depraved and/or “infected by the spirit of sin”?

I consider that the child has an advantage, if the parents are mature Christians. They might pray for the child and even spend time talking with the child . . . while the child is unborn. Then the born child has their example of how to relate in love.

But, theologically, I can not make a one-size-fits-all statement about how things will be spiritually for each unborn child of a mature couple in Jesus. Usually, by the way, people have their children while they are younger couples. But I consider what Paul says in 1 Corinthians 7, about how the children of a Christian are clean. So, I am personally open about this.

Why was Jesus not depraved or “infected by the spirit of sin”?

Because Jesus is the Son of God . . . "the image of God" (2 Corinthians 4:4) with nothing but God in that image And God "cannot be tempted by evil", we have in James 1:13. So, because Jesus by nature is God, He can not be tempted by evil. His nature has almighty immunity against howsoever evil would try to effect and infect Him. And we who are in Jesus have Jesus as our new inner Person growing in us, more and more sharing with us His own almighty immunity > Galatians 4:19, 1 John 4:17.

So, this feeds into our discussion about "total depravity". We in ourselves have been human persons, not almighty with immunity against evil and sin and the dominating and dictatorial passions for pleasure and revenge and comparing and self-righteously criticizing and unforgiveness. So, we totally depend on God to change our nature so we share in nature with Jesus in us making us new creatures of love > 2 Corinthians 5:17. Because of our own human nature, especially since it already has been corrupted (Ephesians 2:2), there is no way our selfish character is going to get us to choose to become truly loving. So, yes it is depraved as well as dependent.

Are you not placing at least some of the blame for your sinning on Adam and Eve and/or your parents and/or God?

I have offered how any of us would have done no better! I would have done the same thing and therefore started the same whole mess. And I note how our Apostle Paul says "we" "were by nature children of wrath, just as the others", in Ephesians 2:3. So, from this, I see that no one of us has been any better than anyone else; and so each of us would have done the same thing, in the garden. And no one on this earth, also, then, has been somehow superior to others, so he or she has gotten oneself to choose Jesus while others haven't . . . by the way. Again, this supports, in my personal logic, that each of us totally depends on God in order to choose Jesus and at any time to choose right > also considering Philippians 2:13.

I would go on to say a mature adult has very limited use of free will, but really only needs it to make one free will choice: “to accept or reject God’s charity”.

From this, I understand you could mean that one mature in love is going to make mainly the choice to live in God's love; because the person has matured in God's love; by becoming a love person, his or her nature is limited to free willing what is loving. How well have I butchered what you mean, here, or rightly represented you?

When your child first “sins”, do you look upon it as a “fall” or as a transition into another phase of their life? Is it part of their maturing and growth?

Well, it depends on which way the child is going. There are ones who are in the process of gaining correction so they get more and more clear of sinning and are learning how to love. Others could already be getting "worse and worse" (in 2 Timothy 3:13).

A point is that we need to pray to God for how He is able to bless our children . . . whether we believe in free will or total dependence or total wickedness or whatever. Do what we need to do! God is so better able to do our children good, than we are; so trust Him for all which is possible with Him.

So who are you “blaming” for their “first corruption”?

A fair question, but I am "scratching my head" because my answer probably won't make me look good. So, let me try not to let that be a factor.

Apparently, the LORD blamed Adam, Eve, and Satan. And each got one's consequences. This is the easy-out answer, since this shows how the LORD Himself blamed

But I do understand that Adam and Eve did not have a chance against Satan. But they did get consequences. They were judged. And so I understand that I do not need to be theorizing about this. I will reap what I sow. And only God is able to make me successful in real loving, including really pleasing Him. It is not only about blame; if we stay in less than God's love, as much as we are weak in less than God's love, we are going to be messed by "the spirit who now works in the sons of disobedience" (in Ephesians 2:2). And what we need is not blaming and arguing theory, but to simply do what God's word says to do about this > trust in Jesus, if one has not (Ephesians 1:12), and seek our Father for His personal correction > Hebrews 12:4-11 < of His love's perfection > 1 John 4:17.

So, I am not blaming God, even if He could have stayed with Adam and Eve and kept that thing from happening. What did happen is a fair warning of what can happen with us, without God; and I think we all have sampled this, already, more or less. So, if we just blame and accuse God, who has us doing this . . . instead of trusting Him for all He is able to do with us, like 1 Peter 5:7 says to do?

And what else could I expect from Satan, in the matter? I'm not sure blaming is relevant. I think mainly we need to see how this is an object lesson of our need for God. Adam and Eve had been actually in personal conversation with the LORD; yet, they were able to do what they did. This can show how we need more than to have God speaking to us, and doing mighty wonders. We need how He actually changes our nature so we are with Him in His love and leading. We can not afford to be left on our own, even in perfect circumstances like in the garden.

So, who to blame and whether God is fair is not relevant. He is our only and really good resource. And Jesus says that only God is good, right? So, though creatures have been "good" in some creature way, we have not had the goodness, even in perfect circumstances like in the garden, to get ourselves to be and do the good which is possible in sharing with God.

So . . . I offer how I get what people are saying about what God would do if He was "fair". But that has not happened, has it? And the Bible gives us so much about all God is able and willing to do with us; so why throw all this out, just for the sake of a few words of arguing by ones who are not doing us anything close to as good as all which the Bible guarantees God does with His children? Have the ones arguing against God given us anything better than all which God's word guarantees to us who trust and obey Jesus? Not to my knowledge.

Ro. 9 is a great topic and I would love to discuss with you, but off this topic.

You can start a "General Theology" thread on this, maybe starting with something a little specific. And in case I don't show up but you want my input on something, just PM me in order to alert me to your thread, or write @com7fy8 and ask me a question or something.

 

[Hieronymus]

Many, like Job, have been tested to this point, but what does God have to say about Job? Job passed the test! (Though not without considerable complaint on his part and eventual correction on God's part.) Have you been through such yet?

So did he or didn't he pass the test? (because he was indeed challenging God and had to be corrected).
I think i would have committed suicide if it was me in stead of Job.
Actually, i have seriously considered suicide for a long time, but that was before i sought the Truth, it actually made me seek the Truth.
But Job seems to have been less wicked a man.
Maybe not all people turn out to be so wicked.
But perhaps it's the fear of the consequences that keep us from wicked deeds.
If there were no consequences or no awareness of it or fear for it, the world would probably be total hell.

 

[Hieronymus]

All of God's creation is perfect. .That means it had no inherent flaws.
Satan made him himself a liar tempter and murderer. He was not created as such.

Iniquity was found in him.
Who put it there? He didn't create himself.
He was a murderer from the beginning.
It is God who brings forth good and evil.

The developing situation was created by their abuse of their free will.

What is free will?
We only have our own personal will, but we didn't create ourselves.
Read Genesis 3, you'll see the serpent had to make an effort and lie about the dying to convince Eve who initially said "No, not allowed."
And eating of the tree, like the serpent said, DID open their eyes and they became like God, who confirms this.
Sorry, but i'm not gonna apologise for God in this matter.
Sure though, man did sin in Genesis 3, he broke the only 'thou shalt not' that was given, man was not innocent.
The serpent though was much more guilty.
God is righteous by definition, because He is GOD.
His Will be done.

 

[Hieronymus]

Why would it make it God's fault that Adam and Eve chose to sin

Sorry, i misread that..
"Fault" is not applicable to God, but i.m.o. everything is his responsibility, and certainly in those first days.

[edit]
Hmm... I'm not happy with how i put that in words..
It should be more like:
God is the author of that situation, since He created every factor in it.
(something like that, stretching my English i guess..)

 

[Hieronymus]

How would you describe the relationship between free will and a human nature that can be tempted? Adam and Eve were tempted.

Successfully

Jesus, as a human man with a human nature, was tempted.

Unsuccessfully.

 

[Hank77]

Successfully Unsuccessfully.

You did address the question.

 

[Hieronymus]

You didn't address the question.

Sorry..
Isn't it the personal will that can be tempted?

 

[Hank77]

Sorry..
Isn't it the personal will that can be tempted?

I think so.
How free is that will if it can be tempted and if human nature is totally depraved?