Calvinist Robots

[PETE_]

The image of God in man is spiritual. Man is not simply a physical being, but also a moral being with a conscience, intellect, emotion, and will.

Man has a self-consciousness and a self-determination that enables him to make choices
God is a Spirit, the human soul is a spirit. The essential attributes of a spirit are reason, conscience, and will.
Man was created in “original righteousness” also referred to as “knowledge, righteousness, and holiness.” This original righteousness and holiness was lost through the fall but is restored in Christ. Ephesians 4:24 emphasizes that the new self of the believer is “in the likeness of God (and) has been created in righteousness and holiness.” Colossians 3:10 declares that the new self is “being renewed to a true knowledge according to the image of the One who created him,” a reference to Genesis 1:26.

Enns, Paul P.: The Moody Handbook of Theology. Chicago, Ill. : Moody Press, 1997, c1989, S. 305

 

[PETE_]

Is God then The Father of the TOTALLY DEPRAVED?

In the sense that He created both Israel and all of man, yes

 

[Rick Otto]

And since there is no solid determination of their or anyone else's salvation other than their own good guessing in their own behalf and even then NO ASSURANCE for them,

100% Straw.

"These things have I written unto you that believe on the name of the Son of God: that ye may know that ye have eternal life, and that ye may believe (more intelligently) on the name of the Son of God" (1 John 5:13).
​

"Where a due balance is not preserved by preachers and teachers between the objective and subjective sides of the truth, where the latter preponderates, either a species of mysticism or a lack of assurance ensues."

"The second half of last century found many circles of professing Christians on the borders of the Slough of Despond. in many companies the full assurance of salvation was looked upon as a species of fanaticism or as carnal presumption. Unduly occupied with themselves, ill-instructed upon the "two natures" in the Christian, thousands of poor souls regarded doubts and fears, sighs and groans, as the highest evidence of a regenerate state; but those being mixed with worldly and fleshly lustings, the subjects were afraid to affirm they were children of God. To meet this situation many ill-trained evangelists and teachers sought to direct attention to Christ and His "finished work," and to get their hearers’ confidence placed upon the bare Word of God. While one evil was corrected another was committed: while the letter of Scripture was honored, the work of the Spirit was (unwittingly) dishonored. Supposing they had a remedy which was sure to work in all cases alike, a superficial work resulted, the aftermath of which we are now reaping. Thousands of souls who give no evidence of being born again are quite confident that Christ has saved them."

"The eternal security of the saints is clearly revealed in Holy Writ, but does that justify me in pressing it on the attention of a backslidden child of God?"

"And hereby we do know that we know him, if we keep his commandments" (1 John 2:3).
Is not that plain enough? A godly life is the first proof that I am a child of God.
But let us observe the solemn declaration that immediately follows.

"He that saith, I know him, and keepeth not his commandments, is a liar, and the truth is not in him" (1 John 2:4).
​

...

"But whoso keepeth his word, in him verily is the love of God perfected: hereby know we that we are in him" (1 John 2:5).
​

This stands in sharp contrast from the preceding verse. The apostle was here moved to set before us some clear scriptural evidences of spiritual faith and love, which constitute the vital difference between sheep and goats. In verse 4 it is the empty professor who says "I know Christ as my personal Savior." He has a theoretical, but not a vital knowledge of Him. He boasts that he is resting on Christ’s finished work, and is confident that he is saved; but keeps not His commandments. He is still a self-pleaser. Like Solomon’s sluggard, he is

"wiser in his own conceit than seven men that can give a reason" (Proverbs 26:16).
​

He talks boldly, but walks carelessly.
...
"Such as truly believe in Christ, and endeavor to walk in all good conscience before Him (1 John 2:3), may, without extraordinary revelation, by faith grounded upon the truth of God’s promises, and by the Spirit enabling them to discern in themselves those graces to which the promises of life are made (1 John 3:14, 18, 19, 21, 24; Hebrews 6:11-12, etc.), and bearing witness with their spirits that they are the children of God (Romans 8:16), be infallibly assured that they are in the estate of grace and shall persevere therein unto salvation (1 John 5:13; 2 Timothy 1:12)"

"Assurance is the believer’s full conviction that, through the work of Christ alone, received by faith, he is in possession of a salvation in which he will be eternally kept. And this assurance rests only upon the Scripture promises to him who believes."
​

The careful reader will perceive a considerable difference of doctrine in the two quotations given above. The former us the product of the Puritans, the latter is a fair sample of what the boasted enlightenment of the twentieth century has brought forth. The one is extracted from the Westminster Confession of Faith (the doctrinal statement of the Presbyterians), the other is taken from the "Scofield Bible." In the one, the balance of Truth is helpfully preserved; in the second, the work and witness of the Holy Spirit is altogether ignored. This example is only one out of scores we could cite, which sadly illustrates how far we have gone backward. The answer given by the Puritans is calculated to lead to heart searchings; the definition (if such it may be called) of the popular dispensationalist is likely to bolster up the deluded. This brings us to consider, more definitely, the nature of assurance.
- Studies On Saving Faith

enjoy forever!

-Rick

 

[Thekla]

Man does not live on instinct. He is a thinking feeling reasoning creature. His will is in bondage to sin because of the nature of his situation of having Adam as his federal head and thus recieving this sinfulness by imputation.

Any act that cannot be replaced by another is ineluctable; this is the character of the actions of animals. It seems you are saying that we are animals, since we act ineluctably. But this still does not answer the question of image - was the image included in what God called good, and did what is called good become evil ?

So, Christ does not have the sin of Adam imputed to him because he does not have Adam as his federal head. Sin is imputed throughthe male line and Christ's father is God, so He did not have the sin of Adam. Christ then through the work of his own obedience has defeated sin and the devil and freely chose to take our sins upon himself (he wouldn't have died involuntarily because he wasn't cursed) and by the merits of Christ's ultimate act of righteousnes sinners are given the grace of salvation by the imputed righteousness of Christ which quickens their dead spirits and allows them to trust and love God in that which we call saving faith.

How can Christ destroy through His death and resurrection what He does not have (a body of Adam).
Maybe you mean that only women are 'saved'

 

[Thekla]

The image of God in man is spiritual. Man is not simply a physical being, but also a moral being with a conscience, intellect, emotion, and will.

Man has a self-consciousness and a self-determination that enables him to make choices
God is a Spirit, the human soul is a spirit. The essential attributes of a spirit are reason, conscience, and will.
Man was created in “original righteousness” also referred to as “knowledge, righteousness, and holiness.” This original righteousness and holiness was lost through the fall but is restored in Christ. Ephesians 4:24 emphasizes that the new self of the believer is “in the likeness of God (and) has been created in righteousness and holiness.” Colossians 3:10 declares that the new self is “being renewed to a true knowledge according to the image of the One who created him,” a reference to Genesis 1:26.

Enns, Paul P.: The Moody Handbook of Theology. Chicago, Ill. : Moody Press, 1997, c1989, S. 305

This does not, as I understand it, explain why:
1. if man still has the image why he is utterly depraved
2. answer how the image of God in man is evil
3. explain how man cannot choose God
4. explain what "towards the likeness" means

 

[Rick Otto]

IS God The Father of the totally depraved?

Confusion of terms renders the question insensible.

 

[&Abel]

Confusion of terms renders the question insensible.

ya I agree, I don't believe we are TOTALLY depraved

 

[squint]

100% Straw.

Some determinists have weighed in on this already Rick, and they SAID that there is NO WAY to quantifiably determine if you or they or anyone else is AN ELECT.

NOW what YOU or I may determine may be different, and I am not speaking of YOUR determinations, which I MAY probably agree with.

"These things have I written unto you that believe on the name of the Son of God: that ye may know that ye have eternal life, and that ye may believe (more intelligently) on the name of the Son of God" (1 John 5:13).
​

"Where a due balance is not preserved by preachers and teachers between the objective and subjective sides of the truth, where the latter preponderates, either a species of mysticism or a lack of assurance ensues."

"The second half of last century found many circles of professing Christians on the borders of the Slough of Despond. in many companies the full assurance of salvation was looked upon as a species of fanaticism or as carnal presumption. Unduly occupied with themselves, ill-instructed upon the "two natures" in the Christian, thousands of poor souls regarded doubts and fears, sighs and groans, as the highest evidence of a regenerate state; but those being mixed with worldly and fleshly lustings, the subjects were afraid to affirm they were children of God. To meet this situation many ill-trained evangelists and teachers sought to direct attention to Christ and His "finished work," and to get their hearers’ confidence placed upon the bare Word of God. While one evil was corrected another was committed: while the letter of Scripture was honored, the work of the Spirit was (unwittingly) dishonored. Supposing they had a remedy which was sure to work in all cases alike, a superficial work resulted, the aftermath of which we are now reaping. Thousands of souls who give no evidence of being born again are quite confident that Christ has saved them."

"The eternal security of the saints is clearly revealed in Holy Writ, but does that justify me in pressing it on the attention of a backslidden child of God?"

Rick you do understand that the position in question CAN present that the security of the believer/saint/elect is SECURE and yet the IDENTITY of same is INDETERMINATE at the present time? And this IS the presentation of Calvinism or Reformed (as far as I know.)

Is not that plain enough? A godly life is the first proof that I am a child of God.

Oh, quite the contrary my friend. The tares can have good works as well in Calvin land, and they will still be damned. Calvin determines such works of the damned to be only SUPERFLOUS. You could look like a believer, act like a believer, speak like a believer, BUT, if God says you are not elected, it's off to the eternal smoker ya go and all the superflous works you did wouldn't make one whit of difference.

But let us observe the solemn declaration that immediately follows.

"He that saith, I know him, and keepeth not his commandments, is a liar, and the truth is not in him" (1 John 2:4).
​

...

"But whoso keepeth his word, in him verily is the love of God perfected: hereby know we that we are in him" (1 John 2:5).
​

This stands in sharp contrast from the preceding verse. The apostle was here moved to set before us some clear scriptural evidences of spiritual faith and love, which constitute the vital difference between sheep and goats. In verse 4 it is the empty professor who says "I know Christ as my personal Savior." He has a theoretical, but not a vital knowledge of Him. He boasts that he is resting on Christ’s finished work, and is confident that he is saved; but keeps not His commandments. He is still a self-pleaser. Like Solomon’s sluggard, he is

"wiser in his own conceit than seven men that can give a reason" (Proverbs 26:16).
​

He talks boldly, but walks carelessly.
...
"Such as truly believe in Christ, and endeavor to walk in all good conscience before Him (1 John 2:3), may, without extraordinary revelation, by faith grounded upon the truth of God’s promises, and by the Spirit enabling them to discern in themselves those graces to which the promises of life are made (1 John 3:14, 18, 19, 21, 24; Hebrews 6:11-12, etc.), and bearing witness with their spirits that they are the children of God (Romans 8:16), be infallibly assured that they are in the estate of grace and shall persevere therein unto salvation (1 John 5:13; 2 Timothy 1:12)"

"Assurance is the believer’s full conviction that, through the work of Christ alone, received by faith, he is in possession of a salvation in which he will be eternally kept. And this assurance rests only upon the Scripture promises to him who believes."
​

The careful reader will perceive a considerable difference of doctrine in the two quotations given above. The former us the product of the Puritans, the latter is a fair sample of what the boasted enlightenment of the twentieth century has brought forth. The one is extracted from the Westminster Confession of Faith (the doctrinal statement of the Presbyterians), the other is taken from the "Scofield Bible." In the one, the balance of Truth is helpfully preserved; in the second, the work and witness of the Holy Spirit is altogether ignored. This example is only one out of scores we could cite, which sadly illustrates how far we have gone backward. The answer given by the Puritans is calculated to lead to heart searchings; the definition (if such it may be called) of the popular dispensationalist is likely to bolster up the deluded. This brings us to consider, more definitely, the nature of assurance.
- Studies On Saving Faith

enjoy forever!

-Rick

And again I would remind you that the determinist position in general CAN play this both ways. They CAN determine the SECURITY OF THE BELIEVER without 'specific identification' of same. So there really is nothing more available than SELF assurances and the hope that P will apply to you, BUT even if you DID P, that may not mean that YOU are elect.

The ELECT in the end are SOLELY AT THE DISCRETION of Mr. Big...and the methodology of that ELECTION is not based upon anything that has the individual MERIT of the man whatsoever. It is strictly the DIVINE LOTTO. There is no way to predict in advance who's number may be pulled.

enjoy that one!

squint

 

[&Abel]

I was thinking about that Lion analogy and it really doesn't hold up

a Lion will only not eat straw because it doesn't know it can to survive

I'm not certain it wouldn't try to eat it anyways


my father has a German Shepard(really sweet dog) and it absolutely loves tomatoes, cucumbers, corn, apples etc

her stomach is not even designed to process these foods and yet this is what she seems to prefer(she even eats around the apple core like a person)

this to me is completely against its nature(but there is a factor of domestication) and yet a dog doesn't even have freewill as we do

 

[Rick Otto]

Oh man. That is a classic...HA! The genetic imputation of SIN now? lol The MALE dna is the SIN TRANSMITTER!?

Sometimes I just shake my head and say where in the world do people get this stuff?

Shake the stuff out of your ears.
It is not a physical science statement. The spiritual reality of federal imputation corresponds to, it is not "determined by", the genetic realities.

Your literalizing tendeancy is showing, Mr. Squint.

 

[squint]

Confusion of terms renders the question insensible.

Hmmmm? Let's see.

ALL of Israel were taught by scriptures to be GODS CHILDREN. (Deut. 14:1/Psalm 82:6 and others)

Yet in Calvin land ALL are totally depraved....so...

one might ask themselves IS GOD THE FATHER OF THE TOTALLY DEPRAVED...and in Calvin land the answer is most obviously YES....

But of course they cannot face the simplicity of this 'setup' because it also obviously contains some danger to their positions.

So, instead of straightforward communications, we get the infamous DANCE...dance little sister dance.

enjoy!

squint

 

[Thekla]

Shake the stuff out of your ears.
It is not a physical science statement. The spiritual reality of federal imputation corresponds to, it is not "determined by", the genetic realities.

Your literalizing tendeancy is showing, Mr. Squint.

Yeah, but based on DD2008, I got something of the same idea -- so it could be a more common misunderstanding. The "federal headship" of Adam - this is where also it seems to arise from, at least as I read it in the context of DD2008's post. If Christ does not have the flesh of Adam, how can His resurrection restore us ?

 

[squint]

Shake the stuff out of your ears.
It is not a physical science statement. The spiritual reality of federal imputation corresponds to, it is not "determined by", the genetic realities.

Your literalizing tendeancy is showing, Mr. Squint.

Your buddy SAID that 'sin' is transmitted through the MALE...

Would you like to say that SIN transmitted through the MALE is only a metaphorical transmittal of some sort? What sort is a metaphorical male anyway? How about an allegorical male? Or better yet, a parabolical male? How about a diabolical male? Ah, that's IT!

 

[DD2008]

Your buddy SAID that 'sin' is transmitted through the MALE...

Would you like to say that SIN transmitted through the MALE is only a metaphorical transmittal of some sort? What sort is a metaphorical male anyway? How about an allegorical male? Or better yet, a parabolical male? How about a diabolical male? Ah, that's IT!

Read This:

http://www.carm.org/christianity/christian-doctrine/federal-headship

 

[squint]

Is God The Father of the totally depraved?

In the sense that He created both Israel and all of man, yes

Heh heh heh. Thank you for this. Really. That answer IS a logical extension of your position.

Even though it will leave you some other scriptural egg batter on yer face.

Any other Calvinist wanna help Pete clean up a little before we make pancakes? Or is it waffles?

 

[LittleLambofJesus]

Your buddy SAID that 'sin' is transmitted through the MALE...

Would you like to say that SIN transmitted through the MALE is only a metaphorical transmittal of some sort? What sort is a metaphorical male anyway? How about an allegorical male? Or better yet, a parabolical male? How about a diabolical male? Ah, that's IT!

Genesis 3:24 And He is driving out <ath> the 'adam and he is dwelling from east to garden of 'Eden, <ath> the cherubim and <ath> flame of the sword, the one turning himself, to guard/keep <ath> way of tree of the lives

Douay-Rheims) Genesis 3:24 And he cast out Adam: and placed before the paradise of pleasure Cherubims, and a flaming sword, turning every way, to keep the way of the tree of life.

 

[DD2008]

Yeah, but based on DD2008, I got something of the same idea -- so it could be a more common misunderstanding. The "federal headship" of Adam - this is where also it seems to arise from, at least as I read it in the context of DD2008's post. If Christ does not have the flesh of Adam, how can His resurrection restore us ?

Christ willingly took on our guilt. He died. He was buried. He was ressurected.

So we are saved through Christ's righteousness that is imputed to us by grace.

 

[squint]

Read This:

http://www.carm.org/christianity/christian-doctrine/federal-headship

I know Matt Slick and he would never say that the male transmits sin in the dna sense of the words male transmittal.

 

[&Abel]

but we have to choose to accept it

 

[LittleLambofJesus]

I know Matt Slick and he would never say that the male transmits sin in the dna sense of the words male transmittal.

Is he the same one as the owner of the Carm forum?

http://www.carm.org/apologetics/discussion-forums/authority-structure-boards

Matt Slick is the President and final authority on all matters related to CARM and the discussion boards.