Question for meticulous sovereignty folks

[squint]

Indeed, Squint, if the devil deterministically caused Adam to behave as he did, then Christ would be atoning for the actions of the devil, not for those of men.

Not so. IF God has PUT THESE TWO ENTITIES into ONE BODY of flesh MANKIND would have NO WAY of dividing or discerning. In this axiom SINS WILL NOT BE COUNTED against mankind, but WILL be counted AGAINST the devil and his messengers.

Romans 9:19-21 is an excellent example of this in action of the two vessels with two separate and distinct fates, the vessels of dishonor being USED to DEMONstrate DIVINE MERCY to the vessels of HONOR.

In this case, the devil, having been atoned for, would be on his way to heaven, it seems to me.

There is not one single scripture that presents SATANIC salvation specifically NOR that atonement is for DEVILS. There are many multiple specific statements that there IS atonement for mankind and salvation for mankind and this salvation is salvation FROM the 'workings' of SIN, EVIL and DEATH which the DEVIL(s) are purveyors OF.

The biblical evidence favors the idea that Christ atoned for the actions of men, not for the actions of the devil. This implies that men do, indeed, engage in real sin (nondeterministic transgression).

Sin is OURS in particular BECAUSE it transpires in OUR bodies/minds/hearts. HOWever because of the 'existence' of TWO VESSELS in that SAME LUMP it is considerably more likely that the SIN in your LUMP is of the DEVIL than it is of GOD'S OFFSPRING.

Predeterminism says that THE VESSELS OF DISHONOR will sin because that is what THEY DO and that is what God MADE THEM to do. One does not have to SLUR and BLAME and ACCUSE our fellow man for sins that transpire IN THEIR flesh mind and heart IF we are mindful of the other party that IS involved. This is where both Calvin determinism and freewillism in their common forms breaks apart. Neither party can PIN THE TAIL on the DEVIL and both of them are insistent on only blaming and accusing our fellow man.

enjoy!

squint

 

[squint]

That which is "created"...is by logical necessity part of Creation [Creation equating to those things/elements/principles that are "created"]

This is a logical necessity...end of story.

Now you are trying to link created with creation. Creating ANTI-creation is means only that it is creatED, not creatION as a 'final product.'

Perhaps by creatION you are not referring to the final product, but the ACTION of creatING. So please clarify. If you mean the final product, then ANTI-creation is NOT creation.

Your contention is illogical...hence unintelligible.

Naw. It just means your box is flawed and you can't stretch it because if you do the little box that you put your God in won't fit under your bed.

Perhaps you can demonstrate your illogical contention in a logical formula....that would be interesting....can you do that?

Oh, we haven't got to that part yet. But when we do, if we do, you may get some more interesting observations that won't fit your HUMAN LOGIC BOX either.

enjoy!

squint

 

[squint]

According to Rom 5, Adam sinned. (And please don't tell me that the devil 'made' him do it. That wouldn't count as sin).

IF the devil IS implicated in ALL SINS which THE DEVIL would appear to be per many scriptures including 1 John 3:8 then HOW do you propose to only BLAME ADAM? It is more than likely that the devil did not make ADAM DO IT, but that the DEVIL HIMSELF in the flesh and mind of Adam DID IT. You have no measure to BLAME ONLY ADAM if the DEVIL is implicated.

Any definition of sin other than act of free will, or an act resulting from earlier sin (earlier free free will), seems unintelligible to me.

We already formatted what SIN is and it's NOT simply the cause of FREEWILL run amok.
Your formula to only blame mankind is obviously missing components that ARE involved. You 'presume' that mankind is ALONE in flesh/heart/mind when that is CLEARLY not the case. Jesus showed us all the existence of OTHER ENTITIES that are for no uncertain fact with or upon MANKIND and HE openly DIVIDED them FROM mankind. Your format makes NO MENTION of this fact other than to again blame ONLY mankind for 'allowance' when in fact the very DISobedience that all men are bound to IS OF THE DEVIL.

Until you convince me that you have an intelligible definition of Adam and his sin, I don't see why we should delve into the more complicated issues which you seem to be bringing up.

Adam and 'his sin' is you pressing ONLY ADAM into your sin box format. Any other format causes you to short circuit.

There is some logical consistency to this conclusion. Yes, I would have to agree with you that unlimited atonement negates hell.

Pertaining to mankind, YES. Pertaining to the DEVIL, NO.

It is LIKELY that sins CAN be held against the DEVIL and mankind be atoned for and completely exonerated for those actions transpiring in the flesh/mind/heart OF mankind because of the existence of TWO VESSELS in ONE LUMP. The difficulty is that when freewillers or predeterminists look at the LUMP they see ONLY one party when that is not the case.

When I read Revelation, or Mat 3, I seem to find evidence of God's wrath being poured out on mankind.

Undoubtedly. But again, mankind is NOT ALONE in these matters. There are OTHER FORCES that are going on.

Presently His patience reigns, but int that day His wrath will manifest. When I consider how heinous are the acts of men, it's hard for me to disbelieve in hell. Just my opinion.

One certainly would be foolish to ignore the facts of THE LAKE OF FIRE or God's Final Wrath.

Not sure I follow you. You seem to be saying that if hell is merely temporary, it is unnecessary for Jesus to atone - He could just let them serve their sentence.

Yep.

However, what Father wants their kids to suffer for a million years? A temporary hell doesn't obviate the atonement, by any means.

It might appear that in the limited atonement factor you have the 'punishment' is limited by the performances of man factor i.e. lessened by performance, and not lessened by the atonement itself.

You're funny. And I haven't been entirely clear on this matter. Hellfire is eternal because it is the divine physical Fire. The torment isn't eternal, however. [/quote]
I think we can both be assured that the eradication of death will be final and complete, never to be seen again. Same with sin and evil.

Without free will, there is no sin. Period. Don't tell me, "But it's the devil in us doing all the sinning." Sorry, but Scripture seems clear enough that men sin.

Problem already identified. You simply have NO DEVIL FACTOR and NO LAW OF SIN factor and prefer to wallow in blames and accusations ONLY to mankinds freewill.

None of us can really "prove" anything from Scripture.

There is ample and tangible proof that sin, evil and death exist. There is ample proof that BLAME AND ACCUSATIONS unto mankind ARISE from God's Words being put into this world, particularly Words of Law in their relation to what happened to Israel that was FOREtold well in advance of transpiring. There is empirical evidence for these observations.

Thererfore I merely address my arguments to those who hold particular assumptions. If you and I differ too much on foundational assumptions, I can't even address my arguments to you.

Whining is an anticipated and expected cop out.

Which is to say that I have no way to prove your position wrong. Nonetheless, I disagree with you, based on my current set of assumptions.

One consistent thing about 'christianity' and believers. They do use their beliefs to perpetually BLAME AND ACCUSE their fellow man, exonerate themselves in the name of Jesus, and MOST do in NO WAY love their neighbors as themselves. In this the Word itself HAS reflected what is 'really' in their own hearts. So again we have considerable empirical evidence of the produce.

Understand that for me, epistemology centers on the conscience. Currently I cannot in good conscience claim that I haven't sinned, much less that men at large haven’t sinned.

Not saying you or I haven't. I can't PINpoint in any persons mind just how invisible forces work, but they DO work and they DO NOT have to originate solely with mankind.

Clearly, that's not what I said. It's precisely what I repudiated. What I said or implied is that Adam’s conscience helped set the stage for a real act of freedom.

Uh huh. And you've nearly completely IGNORED the 'fact' that it was God Himself who BOUND ALL MEN to disobedience. And you think yourself CAPABLE of ridding yourself of what GOD has bound us all with with your own actions. And you, like nearly the balance, use your 'freewill' premise to blame and accuse your fellow man and to condemn them. You think this is something NEW in the world of believers?

The produce of BLAME and ACCUSATIONS was seen in Adam almost immediately after the fall when Adam blamed both GOD and EVE, yet completely IGNORED the SERPENT. Has ANYTHING changed? No.

You assume this is likened to God saying, “I will punish you if you don’t obey me.” The resulting obedience cannot be a real act of freedom.

I deny neither the 'threat' or the 'punishment' as they are BOTH very real. Freewill will NOT eradicate the presence of INDWELLING SIN and that sin is OF THE DEVIL. Freewill is a MOOT POINT when the acknowledgement of OTHER PARTIES comes to the table. You are not free of God's Will nor are you free of Satan's will. And if you THINK you are you are surely just as deceived as any.

I don’t care how many different ways you ingeniously come up with to attack the concept of free will, there is little you can do to change my conviction that it is a non-negotiable, for reasons stated.

Blind faith to a set of blinded premises and blind faith to God are separate matters eh? You are certainly entitled to your own baby blanket and your own thumb for what it's worth. Good theological premise put's itself under serious TESTing.

Thirdly, who are you to decide the motives of the heart? Are you a mind-reader?

Was there some point to that? I do know that when THE LAW comes to the minds and hearts of mankind that SIN is produced. Does that make me a mind reader? No. It's a respect for a REAL WORKING just like 'gravity.' Don't have to have faith in gravity or be a mind reader to understand it.

You imply, where there is a threat of penalty, there cannot be sincere obedience. How do you know?

I'm sure the threat of eradication for MURDER keeps many a murderer at bay, but obviously not all of them.

Fact is, until you can read minds, you are only guessing. I disagree - see my three points just made.

Forcing people to behave under threat is a very old three card monty game that has been going on in the churches for a very long time. It keeps the pews filled with the needy looking for their temporary exoneration for what is REALLY perpetually going on inside of them that most cannot explain. So they waive the forgiveness wand over their flocks for the week, while waving the threat wand with the other hand to get them back again. A whole nuther story. A business story.

What has all this got to do with Adam? In the passage you refer to (presumably Rom 6 to 8), Paul is discussing the sinful nature, which didn’t even exist until Adam sinned. Can we get back to Adam, please?

You and I will disagree on many things. Many, you included perhaps, think that Adam only sinned when he et the infamous fruit. But of course Eve couldn't even recount the COMMAND properly when she told it to the serpent. Eve already had the WORDS OF GOD twisted in her mind before she ever got to the eating part. And Adam was right there with her and DIDN'T correct her. go figure.

Paul lays out a series of very simple premises in regards to the LAW and SIN's arousal and empowerment. As soon as the LAW is applied, THEN SIN is aroused and empowered in the flesh and mind. It was NO DIFFERENT with Adam and Eve and the LAW that God put upon Adam. That is when the DISOBEDIENCE that God Himself BOUND Adam with rose to the fore, and SIN transpired in the progression of THOUGHT, WORD and eventually DEED and it did so because of THE LAW OF SIN that Paul so nicely developed in Romans. That LAW is as sure to this day as it was IN THE GARDEN. All the freewill in the world CANNOT stop that LAW FROM transpiring in mankind anymore than FREEWILL can eradicate GRAVITY. It's just stupidity to apply FREEWILL to GRAVITY and it's just as stupid to apply freewill to THE LAW OF SIN which is IN our members and put there BY GOD.

I said that Adam was obligated to heed his conscience.

Again, I only see two possible forms of behavior.
(1) Determined behavior
(2) Non-determined behavior (what I call free will).

Your formula utterly FAILS when it comes under the LAW OF SIN. Put that in your FACTOR please. Your format only has BLAME ADAM via freewill or BLAME ADAM via predetermination. How about you get the LAW OF SIN on the table here for viewing and leave ADAM intact before you start RAILING on him?

Some of these constructs that freewillers and predestinationers have is simply pathetically SHORTSIGHTED.

If Adam’s behavior was determined, then he didn’t sin.

The LAW OF SIN was put into ACTION in the flesh/mind/heart OF Adam. The SERPENT was INVOLVED, and so WAS GOD in the construct of the entire matter.

You on the other hand just look at the "ADAM'S BLAME" factor when there was SO much more going on that Adam couldn't have countered if he wanted to.

Adam was NOT going to DEFEAT the LAW OF SIN with his BRAIN any more than Adam was going to defeat the law of gravity with his BRAIN. It's just a ridiculous posture to PIT THESE two things together. Ridiculous.

There is no such thing as sin if all behavior is determined.

You by your own freewill are NOT going to change THE LAW OF SIN. I don't care how loud you trumpet it. It's idiocy. Let's have a little respect for the subject matter and things will clear up just fine.

Therefore Adam had free will.

There is no 'therefore.' Your posture equates to a baldfaced assertion that I HAVE FREEWILL therefore GRAVITY DOESN'T EXIST.

All I can say is SURE pal! Your 'freewill' is irrelevant in this matter. Gravity WILL exist because it is a POWER that God put in place and your freewill AIN'T gonna matter.

And it's the SAME with the LAW OF SIN that we carry in our members. Your freewill will NOT change the powers that are in motion in THE LAW OF SIN because God PUT THEM there.

I’m not going to keep debating this idea with you. I see it is a non-negotiable. Anything less would be logically incoherent.

It doesn't matter to me if your 'formula' and 'assertion' makes NO SENSE. Your freewill box has simply been stretched and you are very uncomfortable with that happening.

If there was some “Presence” in Adam’s mind that deterministically caused him to behave as he did, then both Paul and God are liars to call it sin.

False equation. Paul openly stated that with his flesh HE STILL SERVED the law of sin as it is presently an INVIOLATE PRINCIPLE. (Romans 7:25) This is why we STUDY theology. Because there are VERY REAL forces at work that are delineated therein. It's NOT just a bunch of GUESSWORK.

In my view, the only time that a deterministic action may be called sin is in the case of a deterministic addiction to bad behavior originating in an earlier act of free will (an earlier transgression). Even here, however, I would only loosely use the term "sin".

I'm going to stop here until you either catch up or lock yourself away in your little freewill room and throw away the key.

enjoy!

squint

 

[JAL]

Do you think Paul was addressing infant damnation in Romans 3?

Muz

Even if you could make a cogent contextual argument to the contrary, you still have the problem of unjust suffering. If these babes haven't sinned, why does God allow them to be born into a world where they may, for example, die of starvation even before the age of accountability? Would you treat your own kids that way, if you could help it, and if they had done no wrong?

Again, we're looking for the most intelligible theory. There may be many plausible theories, but some provide a more intelligible system of justice than others. In that direction we should be trying to gravitate.

 

[JAL]

There is no room for assumption.

The question requires a Yes or No answer.

The Truth can then be arrived at...for scripture tells us that God can not lie.

That is...if you believe what He speaks.

A Yes or No answer, particularly on a book I haven't studied (and especially on a poetry book), would make me a liar. I am not infallible. I form mere opinions (see my signature). I gave you a tentative Yes which should be sufficient to germinate discussion. I then gave you some arguments which, conspicuously, you are not responding to.

 

[JAL]

Open theism SPECULATES that God doesn't know what will transpire in the future. When open theism can prove they know that God doesn't know, then they can tell me what God doesn't know.

Again, misses the nature of my arguments. I don’t need a positive proof of Open Theism. I only need to demonstrate that mainstream theism has more apparent contradictions. I think I’ve done that.

But you see in your own construct of 'how God asks Himself questions' you have constrained that to an 'at that point in time' because it fits your preconception of HOW God thinks and asks Himself questions. This is part of the problem with ALL theology. We presume that GOD THINKS AND ACTS LIKE US which is assuredly NOT the case. In fact were there any presumption to be made it would be God (we pray) you DON'T think and act LIKE US or what a bloody mess we'll have on our hands in heaven

Not acceptable, because this is methodologically inappropriate theology. I charged you with the contradiction that

if God makes free decisions, each involves a transition from a state of “I DUNNO” [because I haven’t decided yet] to “I DO KNOW.”

You now respond by in essence saying, “I don’t have to answer that charge, because my Doctrine of God is beyond human understanding. We just don’t know how God thinks.” In other words, “It is all humanly unintelligible.” Thus you opt for the lesser-intelligible theory instead of the more –intelligible one. Unacceptable methodology, theologically irresponsible.

Look, if your Doctrine of God is humanly unintelligible, then, in essence, YOU DON’T HAVE ONE. All you have is, in essence, gibberish. Take a break, get yourself a real Doctrine of God, and then return to this discussion and tell us about. We’ll be glad to hear it.

Setting forth God's decision making process via some time line throws us back to the problematic presentation of 'this is HOW God makes His decisions' which of course is another guess thrown into the pile with no quantifiable methodology.

All of us are fallible. All of us, to some extent, are in a guessing game. This is precisely what obligates to choose the more-intelligible theories over the least-intelligible ones.

I point out to open theists that no believer can 'rule God' out of the wills of mankind via ANY quantifiable manner. It's simply not possible to eradicate God's Interactions within His Own creation, wills of mankind included.

Ignoratio Elenchi. Irrelevant argument. If God was so involved with Adam’s will as to rule out freedom, then divine justice, atonement, and retribution all become completely unintelligible, logically incoherent. Free will is a non-negotiable.

I cannot say to God that He DON'T know...ya know? Let's at least give Him a LITTLE credit.
enjoy!

squint

Nope. You are, in fact, depriving of Him credit, by impugning His character. A fully benevolent God, if foreknowing that Adam would sin, would instead have created someone else (let’s call him Steve) foreknown to remain holy.

You are not entitled to a theology that impugns God’s character because it contradicts the Scriptures that say, “God is love.”

 

[JAL]

Not so. IF God has PUT THESE TWO ENTITIES into ONE BODY of flesh MANKIND would have NO WAY of dividing or discerning. In this axiom SINS WILL NOT BE COUNTED against mankind, but WILL be counted AGAINST the devil and his messengers.

Sorry, your reading makes God a liar. If the devil made me do it, God is a liar for even saying that man has sinned.

Romans 9:19-21 is an excellent example of this in action of the two vessels with two separate and distinct fates, the vessels of dishonor being USED to DEMONstrate DIVINE MERCY to the vessels of HONOR.

Talk about speculating !!! Your exegesis of this verse is a huge Maybe at best.

There is not one single scripture that presents SATANIC salvation specifically NOR that atonement is for DEVILS. There are many multiple specific statements that there IS atonement for mankind and salvation for mankind and this salvation is salvation FROM the 'workings' of SIN, EVIL and DEATH which the DEVIL(s) are purveyors OF.

Yes, it is precisely my point that Christ atoned for the sins of men. God claims that men sin. He would be a liar if in fact “the devil made me do it.”

Sin is OURS in particular BECAUSE it transpires in OUR bodies/minds/hearts. HOWever because of the 'existence' of TWO VESSELS in that SAME LUMP it is considerably more likely that the SIN in your LUMP is of the DEVIL than it is of GOD'S OFFSPRING.

Misuse of language. It’s not “sin” if the devil made me do it.

Predeterminism says that THE VESSELS OF DISHONOR will sin because that is what THEY DO and that is what God MADE THEM to do. One does not have to SLUR and BLAME and ACCUSE our fellow man for sins that transpire IN THEIR flesh mind and heart IF we are mindful of the other party that IS involved. This is where both Calvin determinism and freewillism in their common forms breaks apart. Neither party can PIN THE TAIL on the DEVIL and both of them are insistent on only blaming and accusing our fellow man.

enjoy!

squint

We don’t deny that the devil sins. I can even concede that, in some cases, perhaps the devil made me do it. (In these cases I would not be guilty, except in the sense of being guilty for any sins that admitted the devil into my heart).

But your theology implies that men never sin. If the devil made us do all things, we never sinned. Baloney. The whole bible seems to disagree with you on this claim.

 

[JAL]

Freewill is a MOOT POINT when the acknowledgement of OTHER PARTIES comes to the table.

Patently false. Free will is never a moot point. On the contrary it is the crux of theodicy.

You are not free of God's Will nor are you free of Satan's will. And if you THINK you are you are surely just as deceived as any.

Few theogians would disagree with this basic idea. Adam (and every Christian) is influenced by God, the sinful nature, and the devil. The proportions of influence vary from moment to moment. However, if there is never a moment of real freedom and real sin in Adam or other men, redemptive economy becomes logically incoherent. This is a non-negotiable.

You are creating an arguably false dichotomy. You are insisting that these two influences – God the devil – are strong enough to be fully deterministic of human behavior. If that were true, the Bible would say that men don’t sin, that only the devil sins. That’s not what it says.

Who was God angry with when David sinned? The devil? Sure. The devil alone? No. He was angry at David too.

Free will is a hermeneutically indispensable axiom, in my view, and yet the rest of your post consists of more attempts to deny it. I am not sure I want to continue responding point-by-point to you on this matter. It’s beginning to get redundant.

Your next argument is the “law of sin”. Entirely moot, there was no law of sin in Adam’s day. That law came into effect when Adam sinned.

 

[squint]

Patently false. Free will is never a moot point. On the contrary it is the crux of theodicy.

Already delineated. Your formulas are vacant of many workings inclusive of which is THE LAW OF SIN and the workings of THE DEVIL.

Few theogians would disagree with this basic idea. Adam (and every Christian) is influenced by God, the sinful nature, and the devil.

You would agree then that the LAW OF SIN is inviolate as 'mankind' is only proven to have sin indwelling their flesh by following the requirements of the LAW in fleshly manner and that all the 'freewill' in the world will NOT produce any person to be FREE of the workings of SIN?

OR are you one of those who believe that via the exercise of freewill you CAN produce sinless mind and body?

The proportions of influence vary from moment to moment. However, if there is never a moment of real freedom and real sin in Adam or other men, redemptive economy becomes logically incoherent. This is a non-negotiable.

Why would you expect the LAW OF SIN to change via the theoretical freewill of man, particularly seeing how NONE have performed thereunder save GOD HIMSELF?

You are creating an arguably false dichotomy. You are insisting that these two influences – God the devil – are strong enough to be fully deterministic of human behavior.

The Law of SIN is a LAW that will not be changed by freewill. God IS involved in that working by the DELIVERANCE of the LAW and the DEVIL is involved by APPLICATION of that LAW. The workings of that LAW and the parties involved will not change BY FREEWILL of mankind in all of it's 'theories.'

If that were true, the Bible would say that men don’t sin, that only the devil sins. That’s not what it says.

Already covered this. The INDWELLING SIN that we ALL carry in our bodies IS OURS as it pertains to that being IN OUR FLESH/MINDS/HEARTS. This does NOT mean that the DEVIL is NOT involved and IF this is the CASE, then blaming of MANKIND is diminished significantly and COULD be an entirely FALSE blaming particularly if the OTHER PARTY is as in your case nearly TOTALLY IGNORED as you are supposedly FREE from the workings of EVIL in you by the 'power' of your freewill.

The LAW OF SIN will INVOKE SIN'S ACTIONS which are SPARKED to action by THE LAW. Freewill does NOT change this.

Who was God angry with when David sinned? The devil? Sure. The devil alone? No. He was angry at David too.

As previously stated IF David had the WORKS OF THE DEVIL in his flesh/mind/heart (he did) then THAT WORKING in Him which was OF SATAN was OPENLY PENALIZED by God not only in David but in others such as his infant son and wives. Even David was called a SON OF BELIAL in the O.T. and David did NOT stop the person who was terming him thus.

It's just foolish to OVERLOOK the other party, Satan.

Free will is a hermeneutically indispensable axiom, in my view, and yet the rest of your post consists of more attempts to deny it. I am not sure I want to continue responding point-by-point to you on this matter. It’s beginning to get redundant.

And again, already addressed. Freewill does not and CAN NOT eradicate the LAW OF SIN from acting because that ACTION is OF THE DEVIL. The theoretical 'freewill' of MANKIND will not STOP the resistance of THE DEVIL's actions IN mankind. Why use your freewill to be 'responsible' for THE DEVILS ACTIONS which are an automatic reaction from THE DEVIL via THE LAW? Your will does NOT control THE DEVIL'S WILL, plain and simple. The DEVIL does what he does IN mankind regardless of your attempts to make the DEVIL responsible by YOUR will.

Your next argument is the “law of sin”. Entirely moot, there was no law of sin in Adam’s day. That law came into effect when Adam sinned.

Baloney there wasn't. The LAW that was delivered to ADAM was no different than ANY LAW that was subsequently delivered. There was the INVOCATION of that LAW by God's Word...a PENALTY attached and the result was the working OF SIN in Adam which same is OF THE DEVIL as the DEVIL is IMPLICATED in that action of SIN in Adam no different than ANY SIN.

We don’t deny that the devil sins. I can even concede that, in some cases, perhaps the devil made me do it. (In these cases I would not be guilty,

Welcome to your first BLURRED LINE IN YOU! Perhaps you'd afford the SAME LUXURY to your fellow man???


enjoy!

squint

 

[JAL]

Squint, I dislike the way that you are representing me. You keep claiming that I am ignoring all these extra factors in human volition – the devil, God, and sinful nature.

Not true. I am simply reminding you that if these factors were fully deterministic in Adam, then he cannot be guilty of sin.

Again, it’s a false dichotomy – you insist on EITHER free will OR these various factors. I disagree. The devil could be attracting me to one object of desire, the sinful nature to another object of desire, and God to a third, all at the same time. Freedom, where it exists, chooses between the three. In some cases, one or more of these factors may be overwhelming and thus deterministic. But not in all cases is it so.

All the 'freewill' in the world will NOT produce any person to be FREE of the workings of SIN?

After Adam fell, in my view, every man has a sinful nature. In fact I tend to agree with Calvin (tentatively) on total depravity. The physical soul within the Christian, however, has three regions. (1) The reborn section. Formerly depraved but now deterministically holy due to the influence of the Holy Spirit. (2) The sinful nature. Deterministically sinful, although it can generally choose to abstain from the “big” sins. (3) A region of real freedom (neither depraved nor holy and thus morally neutral). Whenever we confess our sin, the Holy Spirit does a cleansing work that reestablishes this region (see 1 John 1:9).

At any moment the neutral region freely chooses whether to obey God, the sinful nature, the devil, or some other master. I postulate this region because the entire Bible implies that believers can make real choices to obey or disobey God.

All the 'freewill' in the world will NOT produce any person to be FREE of the workings of SIN? OR are you one of those who believe that via the exercise of freewill you CAN produce sinless mind and body?

No man will be entirely free from the influence of sin in this lifetime. The sinful region will keep sinning. And it will try to tempt the neutral region to sin as well. In heaven, God will reward each Christian individually, in accordance with the extent of the (freely chosen) obedience that he or she exhibited within the neutral region. (If all Christian behavior were fully deterministic, it would be silly for God to reward us in varying measures – we would all get the same reward).

I said, “There was no law of sin in Adam’s day. That law came into effect when Adam sinned”

Baloney there wasn't. The LAW that was delivered to ADAM was no different than ANY LAW that was subsequently delivered. There was the INVOCATION of that LAW by God's Word...a PENALTY attached and the result was the working OF SIN in Adam which same is OF THE DEVIL as the DEVIL is IMPLICATED in that action of SIN in Adam no different than ANY SIN.

You are getting into some very confusing areas of exegesis concerning the biblical usage of the term “law”. And you seem to possibly be conflating equivocal usages of that term, as though Scripture uses the term univocally (I would have to disagree).

I don’t intend to haggle with you over all these complicated exegetical terms. (That could take a year).

In both the OT and the NT, every command and call to obedience is, and every rebuke for disbodience, is evidence, in my view there is real freedom, at least within believers. You’re asking me to throw out an entire Bible’s worth of evidence because of some “theory” you have about “the devil made me do it” and “the law of sin.” Worse yet, in the statement above you even suggest that such a deterministic law of sin prevailed within Adam from the very start.

Deterministic behavior simply doesn’t warrant divine anger, judgment, and retribution. I ask you why David was punished and your respond:

As previously stated IF David had the WORKS OF THE DEVIL in his flesh/mind/heart (he did) then THAT WORKING in Him which was OF SATAN was OPENLY PENALIZED by God not only in David but in others such as his infant son and wives. Even David was called a SON OF BELIAL in the O.T. and David did NOT stop the person who was terming him thus.

Makes zero sense to me. If the devil made him do it, then David himself was not guilty of sin and should not have been punished. Again, for me, this dynamic is a non-negotiable. You can keep repeating your determinism until the cows come home, but it all makes zero sense.

If I force you to do something, are you to blame? Hardly. If the devil made me do it, am I guilty of sin? Hardly. Nonnegotiable. Period.

Already covered this. The INDWELLING SIN that we ALL carry in our bodies IS OURS as it pertains to that being IN OUR FLESH/MINDS/HEARTS. This does NOT mean that the DEVIL is NOT involved and IF this is the CASE, then blaming of MANKIND is diminished significantly and COULD be an entirely FALSE blaming particularly if the OTHER PARTY is as in your case nearly TOTALLY IGNORED as you are supposedly FREE from the workings of EVIL in you by the 'power' of your freewill.

Of course the devil is, as you say, “involved.” Few theologians would deny this. The question is whether he is, in all scenarios, fully deterministic. In this statement, at least, you are finally showing some compromising on rigid determinism. You here say that “the blaming of MANKIND is diminished significantly” because of the devil’s influence. That’s far more exegetically reasonable than stating something like, “In every case the devil made us do it. Men never had any blame at all.”


You will have a hard time convincing me that men have no blame. It’s like asking me to dismiss the whole Bible.


Some of you are wondering, perhaps, “Why is it that JAL uses Scripture to support his position, but when we confront with him with Scripture, he often shies away?”

Depends on the scenario. Most of my arguments are based on assumptions shared with the opponent. I use Scripture to remind him of his own assumptions. Thus I am not using it to prove something new. Having done that, I try to show him where he is drawing conclusions contradicting those assumptions.

One of those assumptions is that God is love. When posters on this thread have tried to bring me Scripture proving that He violates ordinary fairness, I responded, “There is no need for me to debate that verse with you. You shouldn’t be trying to prove a conclusion that contradicts your own assumption that God is love.”

 

[squint]

You keep claiming that I am ignoring all these extra factors in human volition – the devil, God, and sinful nature.
Not true. I am simply reminding you that if these factors were fully deterministic in Adam, then he cannot be guilty of sin.

What's your point? It would seem you are insistently looking for a way to blame ONLY Adam and all our fellow man in the process and overlook the multitude of factors in the events.

Why the compelling/over riding 'need' to blame and accuse Adam ONLY?

Again, it’s a false dichotomy – you insist on EITHER free will OR these various factors.

And you want to apply the supposed 'freewill' of Adam to STOPPING the law of sin. You want to ignore that it was God who bound all men with disobedience. And instead you simply seek to BLAME and ACCUSE only ADAM so that you have some 'BASIS' to torture people who don't 'believe like you.'

I disagree. The devil could be attracting me to one object of desire, the sinful nature to another object of desire, and God to a third, all at the same time.

That's RIGHT...you may have MANY MORE factors than what you delineate. For example God's Words could even be HARDENING the DEVIL to work resistance IN YOU.

The general point in these observations is that it is a far more complicated subject than JUST BLAMING AND ACCUSING THE 'FREEWILL' of mankind. Particularly when there are certain principles that Adam may have had little if anything to do with other than HIS FLESH AND MIND being made 'subject' to those workings.

Freedom, where it exists, chooses between the three.

Back on 'moral theology' wherein if you make a certain number of 'right choices' then you are going to avoid the fact that sin indwells your flesh and works in your flesh?

In some cases, one or more of these factors may be overwhelming and thus deterministic. But not in all cases is it so.

The general observation here is that IF there are other factors besides the theoretical 'free'will of man, which undoubtedly there ARE, and IF those factors that are NOT of theoretical 'freewill' CAN be overwhelming and deterministic which undoubtedly they ARE, then blame and accusations ONLY to the freewill of mankind is a very fuzzy form of indeterminist logic to say the best.

After Adam fell, in my view, every man has a sinful nature. In fact I tend to agree with Calvin (tentatively) on total depravity.

Whoa! Think about what you are saying. IF Adam was GOD'S son, (he was) then is GOD THE FATHER OF TOTAL DEPRAVITY? Is God's son Adam the father of total depravity? In either case your link will return to God as Adam is HIS son.

The physical soul within the Christian, however, has three regions. (1) The reborn section. Formerly depraved but now deterministically holy due to the influence of the Holy Spirit. (2) The sinful nature. Deterministically sinful, although it can generally choose to abstain from the “big” sins. (3) A region of real freedom (neither depraved nor holy and thus morally neutral). Whenever we confess our sin, the Holy Spirit does a cleansing work that reestablishes this region (see 1 John 1:9).

As if freewill is not enough to blame and accuse your fellow man? Now you divide them into multiple components that (more than likely) are used to justify yourself because 'you' are a believer and your 'actions' 'reestablish' some sector til you blow the SIN fuse again?

No man will be entirely free from the influence of sin in this lifetime. The sinful region will keep sinning.

The sinful 'region?' Sins perpetually? Is that where the DEVIL sits then? I'd really like to see your 'implication' of the DEVIL in these matters and how you then 'exonerate' yourSELF from THE DEVILS workings in ALL SIN since you ALLOW that it IS you THAT SIN?

And it will try to tempt the neutral region to sin as well. In heaven, God will reward each Christian individually, in accordance with the extent of the (freely chosen) obedience that he or she exhibited within the neutral region. (If all Christian behavior were fully deterministic, it would be silly for God to reward us in varying measures – we would all get the same reward).

Ah yes! The 'rewards' system! You and you alone SINNED LESS, therefore YOU get a bigger HAT!

Whatever happened to the attributed righteousness of Christ? Do we not ALL receive the CROWN OF LIFE as our reward? Are OTHER PEOPLE not our 'treasures?'

2 Corinthians 4:7
But we have this treasure in earthen vessels, that the excellency of the power may be of God, and not of us.

I said, “There was no law of sin in Adam’s day. That law came into effect when Adam sinned”

You are getting into some very confusing areas of exegesis concerning the biblical usage of the term “law”. And you seem to possibly be conflating equivocal usages of that term, as though Scripture uses the term univocally (I would have to disagree).

What of LAW? Was the COMMAND to Adam not A LAW? "Do NOT eat." Was that not A LAW? And did that LAW not provoke DISOBEDIENCE? With NO LAW there is no basis of provokation to lawlessness.

You can dodge this subject if you want on the basis of your desire to endlessly slice and dice the law til it is unrecognizable. In the end however SIN is TRANSGRESSION OF LAW and that is what transpired IN Adam. A 'SINFUL TRANSGRESSION' of the LAW.

More 'law' did not change the actions of provokation, only added fuel to the fires of sinful disobedience. And God did that with exacting purposes, that the presence of SIN is made beyond any sane denial.

In both the OT and the NT, every command and call to obedience is, and every rebuke for disbodience, is evidence, in my view there is real freedom, at least within believers. You’re asking me to throw out an entire Bible’s worth of evidence because of some “theory” you have about “the devil made me do it” and “the law of sin.”

There is no doubt that THE DEVIL is implicated in EVERY SIN. 1 John 3:8 and other scripture makes that case clear. You keep saying the DEVIL made YOU do it. I've said no such thing. The DEVIL does it because the DEVIL is fully involved WITH IT. It happens to transpire IN THE LUMP, THE CLAY, THE BODY. But that does not HAVE to be the origination of MAN or even the actions of man, but of the DEVIL in them. The presence of DEVILS with mankind is also a clearly established fact in the Gospels and testaments.

Worse yet, in the statement above you even suggest that such a deterministic law of sin prevailed within Adam from the very start.

Without any doubt. Sin is disobedience to THE LAW.

Romans 4:15
Because the law worketh wrath: for where no law is, there is no transgression.

Had the LAW to NOT EAT never arrived to Adam, Adam would still be here.

Deterministic behavior simply doesn’t warrant divine anger, judgment, and retribution. I ask you why David was punished and your respond:

Makes zero sense to me. If the devil made him do it, then David himself was not guilty of sin and should not have been punished.

You might consider that it was THE DEVIL in David that was punished.

It is put up by Paul in Romans 9:19-21 that in each lump called 'me,' the 'clay' there are TWO VESSELS. The VESSELS of DIShonor do receive WRATH and JUDGMENT for the DIShonorable DEEDS those VESSELS do. These 'vessels' ARE in the LUMP of ME, and of DAVID and of YOU and I. Don't really care if it makes 'sense' to YOU. It remains a FACT. And one does NOT have to read too far into the N.T. Gospels to see WHO the other VESSELS are. The ONLY other parties that Jesus SHOWED to be WITH mankind are DEVIL(s.)

Of course the devil is, as you say, “involved.” Few theologians would deny this.

Yet nearly 'all' of them will deny that working IN FAVOR of blaming and accusing our fellow man ONLY. hmmmm? Wonder why THAT IS? And you'd have to look for quite a LONG time for any of them to admit this FACT unto themselves of course. Why they'd be RUN out of the colleges and churches where they get their PAYCHECKS! Heaven forbid we speak the truths of these matters.

The question is whether he is, in all scenarios, fully deterministic.

A foreign entity (the vessel of DIShonor) that DWELLS in the LUMP of ME, the CLAY that has NO TRUTH in it, has been a liar and a murderer from the beginning and has ACCESS/habitation to mind and body of MANKIND and is involved in ALL sin could well be supposed to be what it is.

Mankind, the VESSELS OF honor is an entirely SEPARATE matter and are entirely SEPARATE vessels.

In this statement, at least, you are finally showing some compromising on rigid determinism. You here say that “the blaming of MANKIND is diminished significantly” because of the devil’s influence. That’s far more exegetically reasonable than stating something like, “In every case the devil made us do it. Men never had any blame at all.”

I'll say this again so you get it. The DEVIL didn't MAKE you do it. The DEVIL did it in YOUR FLESH/MIND AND BODY because of his IMPLICATION IN EVERY SIN.

I say diminished significantly to YOU so that you understand that you DO have to bring this party to the table of JUDGMENT and it starts IN YOUR OWN FLESH/MIND and BODY.

A man who thinks himself immune from the facts of that WORKING OF THE DEVIL is already under severe blinding. I do not blame YOU of course.

One of those assumptions is that God is love. When posters on this thread have tried to bring me Scripture proving that He violates ordinary fairness, I responded, “There is no need for me to debate that verse with you. You shouldn’t be trying to prove a conclusion that contradicts your own assumption that God is love.”

If you haven't figured it out by now JAL, I believe that ALL MANKIND are LOVED AND SAVED by our PERFECT AND JUST GOD in Christ who IS The Saviour of the WORLD and of ALL MANKIND.

Our SAME GOD is the provoker, the retributer, the wrath, the condemner, the enemy, the ULTIMATE JUDGE and final EXECUTIONER of the DEVIL AND HIS MESSENGERS who serve God's Divine Purposes WITH THEM until God is FINISHED USING them for THE GOOD and PERFECT intentions that He HAS for all mankind which is to SAVE THEM.

In this process we, all of MANKIND are all going to experience in a first hand manner ETERNAL DIVINE ATTRIBUTES of God which are MERCY, LOVE, FORGIVENESS, LONG SUFFERING and HOPE among many other things and the DEVIL is being used as our SHILL for these experiences, and in the end, "we' receive HIS ETERNAL LIFE In Him.

So IF you find ANY hatred of mankind upon me, you will have not been paying attention. I however may find you REEKING with blame, accusations and condemnation TOWARD those I am to LOVE and commanded to LOVE by God, yet I will NEVER blame you as God's child for that working OR for SIN because I know from The Word 'who' does it IN your lump.

enjoy!

squint

 

[JAL]

OK, Squint, this is starting to get a little silly. In essence you are trying to use rhetoric to discredit the Adam-centricity so strongly suggested at Rom 5. You pretend as though it is gratuitous of me to keep centralizing Adam.

What's your point? It would seem you are insistently looking for a way to blame ONLY Adam and all our fellow man in the process and overlook the multitude of factors in the events. Why the compelling/over riding 'need' to blame and accuse Adam ONLY?

In Rom 5, how many of these factors did Paul, ultimately, lay the blame on? In that chapter, Paul names one, and only one, malady for the ruin of the world – Adam’s sin. He then names one, and only one, remedy for the ruin of the world – Christ’s atonement. The first Adam was the problem, the second Adam the solution. You can’t just wave all this away. Your attempt to do so has mostly consisted of a confusing analysis of chapters other than Rom 5, such as Paul’s mention of the “law of sin” in Rom 7. You’ll have to do much better than that. You either need to show that Adam-centricity is logically self-contradictory, or demonstrate convincingly that Rom 5 doesn’t propound it. Good luck with that.

And you want to apply the supposed 'freewill' of Adam to STOPPING the law of sin.

Your notion of the “law of sin” isn’t even clearly explained, as far as I can see, much less firmly established. At this point I see no compelling reason that it is what Paul meant by “the law of sin.”

You want to ignore that it was God who bound all men with disobedience. And instead you simply seek to BLAME and ACCUSE only ADAM so that you have some 'BASIS' to torture people who don't 'believe like you.'

More determinism? That’s your interpretation of Paul’s words, “God has bound all to disobedience?” Why must you insist that your exegesis of an unclear verse is the only possible interpretation? Are you infallible? What have you done, to this point, to convincingly establish the logical necessity of that reading?

You’ll perhaps reply, “What have you done, Jal, to establish that Adam-centricity is the logically necessary reading of Rom 5?” There is an element of logical necessity in this reading, for two reasons. (1) We live in a world where even babes are often subject to substantial suffering. How do we reconcile this with, “God is love?” We must demonstrate that these babes are guilty of real sin, not the deterministic pseudo-sin posited by you. (2) Everywhere we go we see evidence of universal depravity. Saying “the devil made me do it” isn’t a sufficient explanation. Why not? Because this depravity inflicts suffering on men. If God is love, He shouldn’t permit such, unless we deserve it. So why do we all deserve to be entrenched in universal depravity?

You keep saying the DEVIL made YOU do it. I've said no such thing. The DEVIL does it because the DEVIL is fully involved WITH IT. It happens to transpire IN THE LUMP, THE CLAY, THE BODY. But that does not HAVE to be the origination of MAN or even the actions of man, but of the DEVIL in them.

Please. Clearly “the devil made me do it” is a fair summary of the demonic element in your hamartiology. This summary statement isn’t specifying precisely how he made me do it, whether by enticing my desires, or controlling my volition, or physically moving my limbs. It’s merely summarizing your insistence that, in some form or fashoin, the devil made me do it, deterministically. I’m not going to withdraw this summary statement because it is accurate enough for purposes of discussion.

The general point in these observations is that it is a far more complicated subject than JUST BLAMING AND ACCUSING THE 'FREEWILL' of mankind. Particularly when there are certain principles that Adam may have had little if anything to do with other than HIS FLESH AND MIND being made 'subject' to those workings…[You’re] back on 'moral theology' wherein if you make a certain number of 'right choices' then you are going to avoid the fact that sin indwells your flesh and works in your flesh?

I’m not avoiding the sinful principle in my flesh. In my last post, I gave you a clear definition of how the sinful nature remains in the Christian after the new birth. (I’m the first one to succeed at that, by the way, because, as the new birth is holiness, traditional theology never explained why the sinful nature persists in the Christian).

If anyone’s avoiding something, here, it’s you. You want to eradicate the doctrine of free will because it is a thorn in the side of your rather peculiar hamartiology. Deterministic hamartiology is a contradiction in terms. Your next statement is blatantly deterministic:

The general observation here is that IF there are other factors besides the theoretical 'free'will of man, which undoubtedly there ARE, and IF those factors that are NOT of theoretical 'freewill' CAN be overwhelming and deterministic which undoubtedly they ARE, then blame and accusations ONLY to the freewill of mankind is a very fuzzy form of indeterminist logic to say the best

Huh? Free will is a fuzzy indeterminism? You’re increasingly becoming incoherent.

Whoa! Think about what you are saying. IF Adam was GOD'S son, (he was) then is GOD THE FATHER OF TOTAL DEPRAVITY? Is God's son Adam the father of total depravity? In either case your link will return to God as Adam is HIS son.

No. God wasn’t the father of depravity. Satan originated it and then tempted Adam to partake (though not deterministically). Your logic is incoherent.
You suggest that, because God was Adam’s Father, He must be the source of Adam’s sin, even on my assumption that Adam acted on free will. Makes no sense, because free will is by definition that autonomy which exonerates external factors (such as God) of deterministic influence. God is not to blame for Adam’s sin, nor does my theology imply it. This is a silly objection to my theology.

As if freewill is not enough to blame and accuse your fellow man? Now you divide them into multiple components that (more than likely) are used to justify yourself because 'you' are a believer and your 'actions' 'reestablish' some sector til you blow the SIN fuse again?

Huh? The division into three components is to harmonize with all the verses of the Bible, not just the ones that suit YOU.
Within the believer, according to Scripture from Genesis to Revelation, are three elements – holiness, a sinful nature, and free will. A threefold division, naturally, is the most likely harmony with Scripture.

The sinful 'region?' Sins perpetually? Is that where the DEVIL sits then? I'd really like to see your 'implication' of the DEVIL in these matters and how you then 'exonerate' yourSELF from THE DEVILS workings in ALL SIN since you ALLOW that it IS you THAT SIN?

The devil’s role is principally to wave objects of temptation before the sinful nature’s mind’s eye. Stop pretending that you have “proven” the devil to be a continually deterministic element in man’s behavior. As a matter of fact, Paul spends much more time discussing the sinful nature than the devil – roughly two chapters of the three-chapter segment Rom 6 to 8. Therefore “the devil made me do it” isn’t easily established from Paul’s words.

Ah yes! The 'rewards' system! You and you alone SINNED LESS, therefore YOU get a bigger HAT!

Yes, the rewards system. Take a look at Hebrews 11 where it says that some believers voluntarily underwent persecution in hopes of attaining a “better resurrection” than they otherwise would have obtained. Take a look at the parables where Jesus says, “If you have been faithful with little, I will reward you with much.”

There is no doubt that THE DEVIL is implicated in EVERY SIN. 1 John 3:8 and other scripture makes that case clear.

That’s an unconvincing exegesis of the verse. I have no reason to challenge your claim that devilish influence is a factor in all our sins, although I disagree that it is fully deterministic in all cases. But that verse isn’t speaking of such. It is merely saying that those who sin are of the devil, meaning children of the devil. This is more likely a reference to the sinful nature. (Remember, that region is not yet reborn, so it is still a child of the devil, technically speaking). I read it this way, “Those who sin continually are of the devil.” I’m not saying your reading of the verse is impossible, but it doesn’t square well with the Bible as a whole.

You might consider that it was THE DEVIL in David that was punished.

Your reading is counterintuitive. If Scripture had wanted to convey that God was punishing the devil, it would likely have said little about punishing David.

Yet nearly 'all' of them will deny [the devil’s] working IN FAVOR of blaming and accusing our fellow man ONLY. hmmmm? Wonder why THAT IS? And you'd have to look for quite a LONG time for any of them to admit this FACT unto themselves of course. Why they'd be RUN out of the colleges and churches where they get their PAYCHECKS! Heaven forbid we speak the truths of these matters.

That’s just not true. Every church I’ve attended preaches regularly about the wiles of the devil and his influence in our hearts. They just don’t take it to your extreme of incessant determinism. This doctrine of “the devil made me do it” is counterintuitive because it belies the testimony of our conscience. In other words I often experience some regret because I sense that I could have freely chosen to behave more uprightly. As I recall, Paul put it like this, “Godly sorrow produces repentance.”

Thus, not only does your rigid determinism impose upon me to dismiss pretty much the whole Bible, it further imposes upon me to dismiss the testimony of my own conscience which I cannot, of course, do in good conscience. True, my conscience could be deceived, but you have done little to suade me of that.

A man who thinks himself immune from the facts of that WORKING OF THE DEVIL is already under severe blinding.

Again, no pastor that I ever resided under claimed that Christians were immune to the devil. From the start, you’ve been misrepresenting the majority-position of evangelicalism.

 

[themuzicman]

Even if you could make a cogent contextual argument to the contrary, you still have the problem of unjust suffering. If these babes haven't sinned, why does God allow them to be born into a world where they may, for example, die of starvation even before the age of accountability? Would you treat your own kids that way, if you could help it, and if they had done no wrong?

Because man has been given dominion in this world. Choice. Function. God would be violating His Own Word by interfering in this way.

Again, we're looking for the most intelligible theory. There may be many plausible theories, but some provide a more intelligible system of justice than others. In that direction we should be trying to gravitate.

I think the best theory is that God doesn't violate His own word. He has declared in creating man and giving him dominion that man would have a choice and say in how the future of that would would come about. For God to then override man's free choices would be a violation of His Word.

Thus, once we remove God from the cause of sin, mankind is the cause of all suffering. And we (corporately) bear the consequence of that sin, even if it is visited very acutely and individually at times.

That's your basic answer: Infant suffering is our fault. It is caused by us (corporately.) And because God has given us freedom and dominion, the buck stops here.

Muz

 

[MamaZ]

Because man has been given dominion in this world. Choice. Function. God would be violating His Own Word by interfering in this way.



I think the best theory is that God doesn't violate His own word. He has declared in creating man and giving him dominion that man would have a choice and say in how the future of that would would come about. For God to then override man's free choices would be a violation of His Word.

Thus, once we remove God from the cause of sin, mankind is the cause of all suffering. And we (corporately) bear the consequence of that sin, even if it is visited very acutely and individually at times.

That's your basic answer: Infant suffering is our fault. It is caused by us (corporately.) And because God has given us freedom and dominion, the buck stops here.

Muz

Man gave up his right of dominion when he fell. Now it is sin that dominates the man.

 

[themuzicman]

Man gave up his right of dominion when he fell. Now it is sin that dominates the man.

I don't necessarily see that in Scripture. I think we're still charged with filling the earth and taking dominion over it. Filling the earth is certainly a large theme in Genesis.

Muz

 

[MamaZ]

I don't necessarily see that in Scripture. I think we're still charged with filling the earth and taking dominion over it. Filling the earth is certainly a large theme in Genesis.

Muz

well from what I see in scripture and in the world today is sin ruling the very toughts of men unless one is indeed born again and Have the mind of Christ. For scripture shows us we are a slave to something. Either sin or righteousness and the only righeousness we have comes from Christ in us the Hope of glory.

 

[themuzicman]

well from what I see in scripture and in the world today is sin ruling the very toughts of men unless one is indeed born again and Have the mind of Christ. For scripture shows us we are a slave to something. Either sin or righteousness and the only righeousness we have comes from Christ in us the Hope of glory.

Different dominions. The competition for the mind and spirit is a spiritual kingdom. That's where the kingdom of God is found.

Our dominion is the physical earth, and man has been given dominion over it. The battle for the minds and spirits of men determines the future of the our dominion over the earth.

Muz

 

[beloved57]

In 'your world' God only does what YOU THINK.

God does what He reveals that He has and will do..

 

[squint]

OK, Squint, this is starting to get a little silly. In essence you are trying to use rhetoric to discredit the Adam-centricity so strongly suggested at Rom 5. You pretend as though it is gratuitous of me to keep centralizing Adam.

There is no question about your press and desire upon Adam to blame his supposed freewill. I've put up many (not even close to all) reasonings WHY that is a false measure upon Adam but in the end it won't matter to those who want to blame and accuse Adam, even condemn Adam. These will NOT find LOVE or FORGIVENESS for Adam or any other person who does not HOLD UP under their measures.

In Rom 5, how many of these factors did Paul, ultimately, lay the blame on? In that chapter, Paul names one, and only one, malady for the ruin of the world – Adam’s sin.

Paul does a much better job with the entire dynamic.

He then names one, and only one, remedy for the ruin of the world – Christ’s atonement.

Bravo! Then 'why' do you insist on BLAMING ADAM? Sins are NOT COUNTED against mankind and ADAM is inclusive of that.

The first Adam was the problem, the second Adam the solution. You can’t just wave all this away.

The second Adam is ADAM btw. And nothing is being waived away.

Your attempt to do so has mostly consisted of a confusing analysis of chapters other than Rom 5, such as Paul’s mention of the “law of sin” in Rom 7. You’ll have to do much better than that. You either need to show that Adam-centricity is logically self-contradictory, or demonstrate convincingly that Rom 5 doesn’t propound it. Good luck with that.

The difficulty in discussing ANY of these subjects is that most start with a premise, and then go about stuffing every observation back into that premise.

Scriptures provide us every reason to LOVE Adam. Adam was a MAN. Adam was God's son. God did not abandon Adam. God does not do THOSE THINGS. God LOVED Adam because God IS Love. Love does NO ILL. Love keeps NO RECORD of wrongs. Love believes ALL THINGS. Hopes in ALL THINGS...etc.

When scriptures are viewed in the manner of LOVE, there is no FEAR. There is no BLAME and ACCUSATION available through GOD's eyes. All things will ULTIMATELY serve His Perfect Intentions regardless of ALL THINGS as we may view them.

Your notion of the “law of sin” isn’t even clearly explained, as far as I can see, much less firmly established. At this point I see no compelling reason that it is what Paul meant by “the law of sin.”

NONE of us have avoided the 'law of sin' inclusive of Adam.

More determinism? That’s your interpretation of Paul’s words, “God has bound all to disobedience?” Why must you insist that your exegesis of an unclear verse is the only possible interpretation?

The scriptures TELL US this. God did bind ALL MANKIND to disobedience. There is no getting around the fact when the fact is open for any to see. And God will distribute HIS MERCY because of that FACT. Mercy is then an OVER RIDING component. His MERCY is superior to JUDGMENT and OVER RULES judgment. Triumphs OVER judgment.

James 2:13
because judgment without mercy will be shown to anyone who has not been merciful. Mercy triumphs over judgment!

Are you infallible? What have you done, to this point, to convincingly establish the logical necessity of that reading?

God's BINDING remains a FACT. God's MERCY is a SUPERIOR COMPONENT OVER that fact. Your freewill will not revoke the absolution of the BINDING nor will your freewill bring to itself of itself the DISTRIBUTION of Superior Mercy of Him over that BINDING.

You’ll perhaps reply, “What have you done, Jal, to establish that Adam-centricity is the logically necessary reading of Rom 5?” There is an element of logical necessity in this reading, for two reasons. (1) We live in a world where even babes are often subject to substantial suffering. How do we reconcile this with, “God is love?”

God elected all of mankind to SUFFER. In the quotient of LOVE....looonnnngggg suffering is an ETERNAL CHARACTER TRAIT worthy of testing and growing.

We must demonstrate that these babes are guilty of real sin, not the deterministic pseudo-sin posited by you.

Why must you determine a BABY guilty? What cause does that serve? Make the DEVIL guilty if you need something to wail about. Leave the child alone.

If God has constructed all of mankind to contain TWO VESSELS in the flesh, which He undoubtedly HAS, then it is MERCIFUL for God at some point to TAKE THE VESSEL OF HONOR back to Himself and LEAVE the other vessel here for eventual eradication which is GOING to happen to the DEVIL and his messengers.

In this equation ALL DEATH serves God's Ultimate Purposes.

(2) Everywhere we go we see evidence of universal depravity. Saying “the devil made me do it” isn’t a sufficient explanation.

I'm going to say this one more time and if you don't get it too bad for you. You'll remain blind to the fact.

The OTHER VESSEL, the VESSEL OF DISHONOR in the FLESH of mankind is THE DEVIL. The DEVIL did not make YOU do it. The DEVIL does sin in the flesh. The VESSEL OF DIShonor does NOT make the VESSEL OF HONOR sin. Sin is a WORKING of the VESSEL of Dishonor, the DEVIL and his own. The FLESH that sins is A SLAVE TO the working of THAT VESSEL of DIShonor.

Why not? Because this depravity inflicts suffering on men. If God is love, He shouldn’t permit such, unless we deserve it. So why do we all deserve to be entrenched in universal depravity?

The VESSEL of HONOR, mankind, ALL GOD'S OFFSPRING are and REMAIN 'vessels of HONOR' whether they appear to us this way in this present life OR NOT.

Please. Clearly “the devil made me do it” is a fair summary of the demonic element in your hamartiology.

Sorry, Flip Wilson is not my measure in these matters. I write what I observe, but YOU write an entirely DIFFERENT observation and then call it MINE, presumably what Flip Wilson is whispering in your MIND...or could it be the VESSEL of Dishonor that does not let YOU hear?

I’m not avoiding the sinful principle in my flesh. In my last post, I gave you a clear definition of how the sinful nature remains in the Christian after the new birth. (I’m the first one to succeed at that, by the way, because, as the new birth is holiness, traditional theology never explained why the sinful nature persists in the Christian).

I'm not even getting into your fanciful tri-part dissection of mankind in order to justify your blame and condemnation to mankind or the exoneration of yourSELF for the component that you control and justify yourself with.

If anyone’s avoiding something, here, it’s you. You want to eradicate the doctrine of free will because it is a thorn in the side of your rather peculiar hamartiology.

Already stated that when the 'other factors' arrive on the scene of freewill which even YOU acknowledge because these other factors ARE a fact that 'freewill' does NOT control or eradicate, then it's just more fuzzy logic that is used to condemn and blame our fellow man and falsely justify SELF.

No. God wasn’t the father of depravity. Satan originated it and then tempted Adam to partake (though not deterministically). Your logic is incoherent.

Taking this up again. IF Adam was NOT totally depraved and God is not totally depraved then you have NO CAUSE against Adam, which you shouldn't!

Satan IS what Satan IS and God MADE SATAN to be what he/it is. When God is FINISHED with Satan, Satan will be DISCARDED for the temporal TOOL that he/it is. The Anti-Christ spirit did not MAKE itself that way, it was MADE that way by God.

You might ask yourself WHAT IS YOUR COMPLAINT if God loves and saves ALL MANKIND and hates and condemns all DEMONIC kind, uses them and eventually ERADICATES them. Do you HAVE a complaint? No. If the end result RESULTS in His Perfect Salvation for ALL mankind, and ALL causes of offense are put away forever, WE ALL have been SERVED a perfect portion by God.

Bottom line on this is similar to Calvinism, but a better finale. The clay really won't have a peep to say to God on these matters. Vessels of Honor will receive MERCY. Vessels of DIShonor will get smoked. Done deal.

Your reading is counterintuitive. If Scripture had wanted to convey that God was punishing the devil, it would likely have said little about punishing David.

You just are not being 'allowed' to get the picture here my friend. SATAN tempted David IN the flesh/mind/heart OF David and the result was the infliction of the entire cast of characters WHO RESIDE IN MANKIND. Was David's child VOID of the vessel of DIShonor? NO. Was David VOID of the vessel of DIShonor? No. Were the thousands whom God KILLED void of the vessel of DIShonor? No. Were David's wives who were GIVEN BY GOD INTO ADULTERY void of the VESSEL of DIShonor? NO. The 'family' of the vessels of DIShonor were PUNISHED. The ones that were KILLED made the vessels of DIShonor temporarily HOMELESS and the VESSELS OF HONOR were taken BACK to God.

Did Satan MAKE DAVID do it? No. Satan IN DAVID did it.

That’s just not true. Every church I’ve attended preaches regularly about the wiles of the devil and his influence in our hearts. They just don’t take it to your extreme of incessant determinism. This doctrine of “the devil made me do it” is counterintuitive because it belies the testimony of our conscience.

If the voices in your churches preach a partial view what do I care?

The fact REMAINS and will not sway. ALL have sin as a PRESENT TENSE condition of it's abiding in the flesh/mind/heart. All HAVE SINNED as an ACTION in thought, word or DEED of that present tense condition, and those who DO SO are OF THE DEVIL no matter how much WHITEWASH is painted on outside of the sepulchurch.

No preacher who receives their financial livelyhood from their 'flock' CAN preach these facts OR tell their flocks THE TRUTH of these matters because it OFFENDS the vessels of DIShonor in their MEMBERS.

enjoy!

squint

 

[MamaZ]

Different dominions. The competition for the mind and spirit is a spiritual kingdom. That's where the kingdom of God is found.

Our dominion is the physical earth, and man has been given dominion over it. The battle for the minds and spirits of men determines the future of the our dominion over the earth.

Muz

Earth is Gods dominion.
The earth is the LORD'S, and all it contains, The world, and those who dwell in it.