Created at birth?

[TedT]

You certainly endow us with a lot more intellect than we can currently control. Has experience not taught you that we are not wise, not consistent, not strong, not dedicated, and ignorant as to the Gospel, no matter how well we know the words?

This is the Controversial Christian Theology forum and my Controversial Christian Theology is called Pr-Conception Existence and when I write about our free will and knowledge of all that is necessary to make a proper choice, not just a guess, about which reality is true, GOD's or Satan's, I am referring to our living in the heavenly reality, probably called Sheol, before the creation of the physical universe and before we chose to be sinners by our free will.

So all the corruption of our knowledge about heavenly things, all our forgetfulness about our lives before we were sown into the world and all our lowered intellectual abilities are reconciled as the results of our choosing to be sinful and suffer under the natural consequences of becoming evil.

Did his best? Do you subscribe to the notion that God could not do what it takes?

Saying God had no say in the matter implies to me that HE was outside of and not involved in our choosing at all which I can't see happening with HIS beloved children even if the story of the Garden is interpreted in this way by most theologians, sigh. I believe He was very involved and did HIS best to influence us all to accept HIM as telling the truth without going past the boundaries of a true free will decision and coercing / forcing us to choose an option by force of the proof of the truth.

This is what I wrote that you scorn...

YES, I claim he did HIS best - are you claiming HE didn't do HIS best?? What is exactly wrong with HIM doing HIS best? When Satan was thinking about sinning the unforgivable sin when he was still innocent of such an eternal decision, did not GOD love HIM? Do you think GOD did not to try to persuade him from making this decision?

What is the alternative? That GOD did not love him enough to try to talk him out of choosing a sin that would put him in hell? And if HE did, would HE not do HIS best? So if Satan still chose to sin the eternally evil sin, he must have sinned it against GOD's best work to stop him, given the constraints HE was under to not destroy Satan's free will in the process.

It seems to me that you think that all GOD had to so to save Satan from himself was to force him to make the right choice, to flex HIS muscles so doing HIS best could only mean forcing Satan to quit his rebellion before he stepped over the line and was condemned to hell. BUt that would destroy Satan's free will EXCEPT then all GOD's plans that depend upon our free will would be kaput.

I say out loud: HIS best cannot do away with our free will. Only we can wreck our free will by choosing by that free will to become a sinner under the consequence of choosing evil, our enslavement to evil.

Try to understand: God is all that is good about us. We are made to be one with him. "Apart from me you can do nothing."

Your refusal to see that this is talk to sinners, not to the innocents before the foundation of the world who were faced with the ability and necessity to make a free will decision to put their faith in HIM or against HIM...

This decision of the pre-Satanic fall of spirits created in HIS image of where to put their faith, ie, being able to put it in GOD, could not be made by sinners enslaved to sin already but only by those who had not yet chosen to be enslaved, ie, only by innocents.

Predicted? Why would God have to predict anything?

Umm, do you not know that HE sent the prophets to prophesy the future for us, predicting what will happen? Do you deny that Christ Himself did the same thing?

(Who said anyone was created reprobate? "Conceived in sin" doesn't translate into "created reprobate".)

1. IF someone was chosen to be saved then those not chosen to be saved were in fact, if not name, chosen to be damned and those people are the reprobate weeds and goats..

2. Those chosen to be saved were elected before the foundation of the world so the passing over for salvation of the reprobate also happened at this same time.

3. Therefore, IF we are all CREATED at our conception or birth as orthodoxy teaches, then people are indeed being created, not only as sinners in Adam but as reprobate with no hope of salvation.

IF we were NOT created on earth but pre-earth in the spirit world and IF our response to hearing the proclamation of the gospel to every person under heaven, Col 1:23, was the reason those who chose to by their free will to put their faith in HIM were elected to salvation and those who to by their free will rebuked HIM as a liar and therefore a false god, were passed over for salvation because this was the unforgivable sin and they were eternally evil...

then our creation had nothing to do with HIS supposed plan for us to be created evil to go to hell but our fates were self chosen by HIS support for our free will.

 

[Mark Quayle]

This is the Controversial Christian Theology forum and my Controversial Christian Theology is called Pr-Conception Existence and when I write about our free will and knowledge of all that is necessary to make a proper choice, not just a guess, about which reality is true, GOD's or Satan's, I am referring to our living in the heavenly reality, probably called Sheol, before the creation of the physical universe and before we chose to be sinners by our free will.

So all the corruption of our knowledge about heavenly things, all our forgetfulness about our lives before we were sown into the world and all our lowered intellectual abilities are reconciled as the results of our choosing to be sinful and suffer under the natural consequences of becoming evil.

What is different about Adam, merely that he was the first? And the first to sin? Why do you think we were actual freewilling beings pre-conception. You still have not explained that from a Biblical POV, nor by any means except you think it is implied somehow logically.

This is what I wrote that you scorn...

YES, I claim he did HIS best - are you claiming HE didn't do HIS best?? What is exactly wrong with HIM doing HIS best? When Satan was thinking about sinning the unforgivable sin when he was still innocent of such an eternal decision, did not GOD love HIM? Do you think GOD did not to try to persuade him from making this decision?

What is the alternative? That GOD did not love him enough to try to talk him out of choosing a sin that would put him in hell? And if HE did, would HE not do HIS best? So if Satan still chose to sin the eternally evil sin, he must have sinned it against GOD's best work to stop him, given the constraints HE was under to not destroy Satan's free will in the process.

It seems to me that you think that all GOD had to so to save Satan from himself was to force him to make the right choice, to flex HIS muscles so doing HIS best could only mean forcing Satan to quit his rebellion before he stepped over the line and was condemned to hell. BUt that would destroy Satan's free will EXCEPT then all GOD's plans that depend upon our free will would be kaput.

I say out loud: HIS best cannot do away with our free will. Only we can wreck our free will by choosing by that free will to become a sinner under the consequence of choosing evil, our enslavement to evil.

Your anthropomorphisms don't render your home-made narrative valid. God flexing his muscles? —Is anything hard for God to do? He can control anything he wants to, or he is not God —surely you will concede that point!

But why show such honor to something the Bible never mentions as such —free will? WHERE do you find pre-incarnate humans choosing to become sinners?

Your refusal to see that this is talk to sinners, not to the innocents before the foundation of the world who were faced with the ability and necessity to make a free will decision to put their faith in HIM or against HIM...

This decision of the pre-Satanic fall of spirits created in HIS image of where to put their faith, ie, being able to put it in GOD, could not be made by sinners enslaved to sin already but only by those who had not yet chosen to be enslaved, ie, only by innocents.

Do not those who are enslaved to sin continue to choose to sin? Why would they have to be innocents to choose to sin?

Umm, do you not know that HE sent the prophets to prophesy the future for us, predicting what will happen? Do you deny that Christ Himself did the same thing?

I said not that he doesn't predict, but that there is no logical necessity for it. He does so as it serves his purposes —not because he HAS to.

1. IF someone was chosen to be saved then those not chosen to be saved were in fact, if not name, chosen to be damned and those people are the reprobate weeds and goats..

2. Those chosen to be saved were elected before the foundation of the world so the passing over for salvation of the reprobate also happened at this same time.

3. Therefore, IF we are all CREATED at our conception or birth as orthodoxy teaches, then people are indeed being created, not only as sinners in Adam but as reprobate with no hope of salvation.

IF we were NOT created on earth but pre-earth in the spirit world and IF our response to hearing the proclamation of the gospel to every person under heaven, Col 1:23, was the reason those who chose to by their free will to put their faith in HIM were elected to salvation and those who to by their free will rebuked HIM as a liar and therefore a false god, were passed over for salvation because this was the unforgivable sin and they were eternally evil...

then our creation had nothing to do with HIS supposed plan for us to be created evil to go to hell but our fates were self chosen by HIS support for our free will.

What is your problem with 1, even if I do accept your narrative there. (But I don't accept your implications.)

2. Your terminology continues to demonstrate your off center POV, but ok it happened before the foundation of the world. I'm wondering how you figure there was such a thing as time, before the foundation of the world.

3. Orthodoxy doesn't say one way or the other what TIME we are created, (that is a mere implication people draw from what it does say, since they have rarely considered God's timelessness), it says, (at least as I understand it), that we had no pre-conception existence. The two are not one and the same thing. It may imply the same event contains both actions —conception and creation, but I don't find it claiming they are one and same thing. This distinction is importantly shown in the debate concerning the notion that Christ BECAME God.

You somehow continue to insist that TIME is of the essence in sequence. Cause and effect, logical sequence, perhaps, but we have every indication from scripture that time is a mere tool, and of no particular significance in God's economy, in the work of God.

Just as a side question: As a proponent of the PCE theory, what do you do with the question some ask, as to why God ever bothered with all this pain? Why were we ever given the opportunity to sin? And WHY, or HOW, were some innocent PreConception persons able to choose well while others chose sin? Do you believe that Chance reigns in this? Or are some people simply better than others. If some are better than others, How? Did God make them better than others?

You see, in spite of your differences with the run-of-the-mill Freewiller, you still come up with a view that contradicts scripture —nobody merits God's grace. And God's work is not improved by man's efforts. God owes nobody anything.

 

[TedT]

What is different about Adam, merely that he was the first? And the first to sin?

On the whole, there were two types of sin:
Eternal: rebellion against GOD himself as a liar and false god, the unforgivable sin,
and
Temporary: while accepting YHWH as GOD and thus under the election promise of salvation, some elect rebelled against HIS command for us to come out from among those now condemned but we would not.

And then the sins of the elect are typified by two people, Adam and Eve. While I accept them as real people, I also accept their fall in the garden to typify the fall of the elect in the spirit world pre-earth:

EVE: typifies the elect who had decided that once they were safe from hell by coming under the promise of salvation as HIS elect, they would rebel against that call for judgment out of love for some of these now eternally evil demons, thus becoming sinful themselves. This love is expressed by her treating the serpent in the garden as a pastor or at least a mentor, allowing him to lead her thoughts. When all those in Eve's type had chosen their sin, GOD then repeated HIS call for all HIS elect to come out from among HIS now sinful elect so they could be redeemed and sanctified.

ADAM: typifies those elect who loved one or more Eves, and though they chose to accept YHWH as their GOD, they did not have the faith to leave their loved ones to HIS tender mercy so they chose to rebel against the command to come out from among the sinful Eves so they could support them in their journey to sanctification. Thus, while Adam had no truck with the serpent, he did sin for Eve...

Because both the Adams and the Eves sinned out of love and compassion for sinners, they did not believe that their choice was sinful because how could a loving decision be sinful in the sight of the GOD who claimed to be love? Therefore they were not ashamed of their sin but thought they were doing the right thing not repudiate their friends and loved ones.

At every decision to come out that had some become sinful HIS call was repeated til the last person willing to idolize their friends and lovers over their GOD had sinned and no more sinned with them, ie, the number of sinful elect was full and finished.

Then the proof of YHWH's divinity and eternal power was given to all of creation by their witness of the creation of the physical universe, Job 38:7 with Romans 1:18-20. Then all sinners (both reprobate and elect sinners) were flung to the earth, to Sheol in the centre of the earth, to be sown into the world of mankind by the Son of Man and the devil, Matthew 13:36-39, as GOD saw fit to HIS purpose of the redemption and sanctification of the sinful elect.

Why do you think we were actual freewilling beings pre-conception. You still have not explained that from a Biblical POV, nor by any means except you think it is implied somehow logically.

1. I know GOD cannot create evil or evil people.
Light cannot create darkness.
A good tree cannot put forth rotten fruit.
A stream of life giving water cannot put forth salt or brackish water.
GOODNESS cannot bring forth evil.
Therefor Satan and his angels must have sinned by their free will repudiation of YHWH.

2. Death is the wages for sin. not a consequence of life.
Death therefore proves sinfulness.
Fetuses die in the womb, proving their sinfulness.
Therefore they must have chosen a sinful act of rebellion against GOD before their conception.

I happen to believe that God is logical and reasonable since HE claimed as much to Judah in Isaiah 1:18 “'Come now, and let us reason together,' says the Lord...

I also believe that proper doctrine is often by understanding the logic of the verses not any actual proof verse at all! This is called the leading of the Holy Spirit!

You know what I mean because this is the way some of our favourite doctrines were taught, not openly but by a hidden logic for centuries such as:
- the Deity of the Messiah,
- the teaching that the OT was NOT the end of all scripture, (as per Deuteronomy 4:2
Ye shall not add unto the word which I command you, neither shall ye diminish [ought] from it, that ye may keep the commandments of the LORD your God which I command you.),
- that God would incarnate as a man,
- that the Messiah would be an intermediary for prayer,
- nor any hint of Adamic sin before the NT.

without even getting into the words for doctrines that we use that are not in scripture: Trinity, omniscience, omnipotence, omnipresence, incarnation, rapture etc.

So, scriptural doctrine without having a precise scriptural reference is a time honoured procedure, and depends upon rightly dividing the word of truth aka the inspiration of the Holy Spirit.

 

[TedT]

God flexing his muscles? —Is anything hard for God to do? He can control anything he wants to, or he is not God —surely you will concede that point!

AGAIN???

Let's focus here... GOD cannot control the outcome of a free will decision or it is not free!!!

HE does NOT want to control our free will decisions because:
1. IF WE DO NOT SIN BY A FREE, UNCONTROLLED DECISION then we are not guilty for that sin; the person who controlled us is the one who is guilty.

2. IF we cannot choose by our free will to be HIS Bride but HE controls us to marry HIM then it is not a true marriage because we did not accept HIS proposal and a true marriage cannot be forced against our free will.

I must admit I'm getting tired of having to repeat myself over and over so many times...the metaphor of the heffalump hunt around the woozle bush is growing stronger in my mind, sigh.

I am quite willing to answer new questions but let's hold off on the repetitive questions about the answers you disagree with for a bit, ok?

 

[TedT]

Do not those who are enslaved to sin continue to choose to sin? Why would they have to be innocents to choose to sin?

They don't. They must only be innocent before their first sin.

Those enslaved to sin are indeed not innocent. They were only innocent until they chose to sin. Your logic is impeccable so why do you insist that I claim the illogical opposite when I said or implied the exact same thing as you?

GOD cannot create evil people.
Therefore all the people HE created were INNOCENT. Their creation has nothing to do with anyone later becoming enslaved by sin AFTER they chose to be sinful by their free will.

 

[TedT]

Your terminology continues to demonstrate your off center POV, but ok it happened before the foundation of the world. I'm wondering how you figure there was such a thing as time, before the foundation of the world.

Off your centre obviously...

Time measures the movement of things and change. Some have chosen the changes at the foundation of the world to be the first change ever which started time. But election and the acceptance of the Son to be the Lamb slain for the world both happened before the foundation ie the creation, of the world. Also remember, there were people created BEFORE the foundation of the world, proven by the fact that they saw that creation and praised this proof of HIS divinity and eternal power as mentioned in Job 38:7, and before this creation, foundation, of the world, they were elected to salvation or passed over for hell.

But as I have repeated so often: our creation could not be as elect unto salvation or as reprobate unto hell WITHOUT OUR TRUE FREE WILL INVOLVEMENT BY OUR SIN FOR US TO BE ADJUDICATED AS SINFUL!

You ask me a lot of questions so here's one for you: Why do you think the GOD who is loving, righteous and just thought it was loving and righteous and just to some people IF HE created them already sinful and passed over for salvation without any mens rea, ie guilty intent, with no chance to choose to sin or to choose to hate HIM???

I contend that election or reprobation by GOD's choice only with nothing from the person being involved in the decision at all is anathema to me, since it implies GOD forced some to be judged a sinners unto hell without any decision or choice to be evil at all.

Therefore I can only think that the people HE elected and reprobated must have been real people with real consecutive thoughts inside of our ordinary time.

 

[Mark Quayle]

They don't. They must only be innocent before their first sin.

Those enslaved to sin are indeed not innocent. They were only innocent until they chose to sin. Your logic is impeccable so why do you insist that I claim the illogical opposite when I said or implied the exact same thing as you?

GOD cannot create evil people.
Therefore all the people HE created were INNOCENT. Their creation has nothing to do with anyone later becoming enslaved by sin AFTER they chose to be sinful by their free will.

Perhaps because you do not claim the exact same thing as I do. I claim a form of freedom of choice. The lost, slaves to sin, WILL to sin, and choose according the what they WILL. They are free to do so. The regenerated are more free, in that we can choose to sin, and we can choose to obey. I use the term "free will" because I want people I talk with to know that I do believe in actual, responsible, choice, complete with actual, even eternal, results. But I don't like it, because generally it is used to imply something logically absurd: that choices are not caused, except (only) by the chooser.

Somehow you claim the latter, or something very close to it, in the regenerated person, that they can choose without God having also chosen. And you deny the first, that the lost choose freely according to their fallen nature.

 

[Mark Quayle]

Time measures the movement of things and change. Some have chosen the changes at the foundation of the world to be the first change ever which started time. But election and the acceptance of the Son to be the Lamb slain for the world both happened before the foundation ie the creation, of the world. Also remember, there were people created BEFORE the foundation of the world, proven by the fact that they saw that creation and praised this proof of HIS divinity and eternal power as mentioned in Job 38:7, and before this creation, foundation, of the world, they were elected to salvation or passed over for hell.

But as I have repeated so often: our creation could not be as elect unto salvation or as reprobate unto hell WITHOUT OUR TRUE FREE WILL INVOLVEMENT BY OUR SIN FOR US TO BE ADJUDICATED AS SINFUL!

Firstly: You conclude what you do because of a false presupposition. And your conclusion is not only unbiblical but illogical in that it fails to take into account the ignorance of any human mind in drawing merely logical conclusions concerning spiritual matters, i.e. you don't know what you are talking about well enough to let mere logic guide you, rather than scripture to guide you. At best, your conclusions should be speculative —not dogmatic.

Secondly: Your presupposition is false. You probably also would deny, "The command does not imply the ability to obey."

Thirdly: You contradict yourself. You would deny #2 above (I think), yet you claim the lost have no ability to truly (freely) choose.

You ask me a lot of questions so here's one for you: Why do you think the GOD who is loving, righteous and just thought it was loving and righteous and just to some people IF HE created them already sinful and passed over for salvation without any mens rea, ie guilty intent, with no chance to choose to sin or to choose to hate HIM???

I already told you that his creation of them is not synonymous with their conception. They are conceived in sin, but that doesn't mean that he did not create them, nor does it imply that he created them at an earlier TIME.

But read Romans 9; in fact, read all of Romans. It answers your 'loving, righteous, just' objection better than I can, plus it mentions, "Who are you, o man, to question God? (and no, God is not pompously shouting-down pesky objections, but rather making a logical argument) —which hails back to what I said above: You don't know what you are talking about well enough to draw a dogmatic conclusion in the matter, particularly since it is drawn on faulty logic alone, and not scripture.

I contend that election or reprobation by GOD's choice only with nothing from the person being involved in the decision at all is anathema to me, since it implies GOD forced some to be judged a sinners unto hell without any decision or choice to be evil at all.

What makes you think we aren't involved in ALL our choices? That makes no sense, and I didn't claim we weren't. My claim is only monergistic, which objects to a synergism whereby our decisions are not offered in addition to God's, producing a whole result more valid than God's choice alone. (Concerning salvation, is the usual use of the terms "monergism" and "synergism", but I use them concerning all choices and concerning all of God's work.)

Understand this logical statement and how it applies to this argument: First Cause is the cause of all results. Add the term "original" before 'cause of all results', if you wish but it changes nothing. All effects are caused, and first cause is the only non-effect.

God owes us nothing. We earn nothing. Or it is not Grace.

You want to say I imply that God forced. What —against their will?

And if your proposition of BCE is true, how is that pre-conception innocent existence still not logically the result of God causing? Like I have asked elsewhere, how does one of those beings choose God before conception and another choose sin? Do you ascribe causal ability to mere chance? It is a self-contradictory notion. Or do you claim some were somehow made better than others? If so, did God not cause that?

All PCE does is kick the can down the road. It doesn't finally explain anything. (The logic is the same as that of those who claim there is no need for first cause, because infinite regression is possible, only you haven't pursued your logic that far.)

Therefore I can only think that the people HE elected and reprobated must have been real people with real consecutive thoughts inside of our ordinary time.

True enough, in the words, but not in the implications you draw. Or rather, perhaps, I should say, the words you use as if to seal your argument are true enough: i.e. yes we are all real people with real consecutive thoughts in ordinary time, but there is no need for ordinary time Pre-conception for any soul.

 

[Mark Quayle]

AGAIN???

Let's focus here... GOD cannot control the outcome of a free will decision or it is not free!!!

You find that in Scripture for me. And please, do read Romans 9: "Who are you, o man? to be questioning God"

Again, I repeat myself, the only thing we can reasonably say that God "cannot" do is a non-thing, a self-contradictory human notion. But even that, to say that he cannot, introduces a notion that he might otherwise have thought to do it, but cannot logically do so, so he is fettered in some way. Ridiculous. God can restrain himself and scripture shows him doing so repeatedly. But we cannot restrain him. He is not tame! Hahaha!

It is only a mental construction you use to elevate ourselves to his level of operation. Or perhaps to bring him down to our level of activity. God has absolute right and logical ability to make our choices responsible and actual without the need to invoke the notions whereby 1. causal ability must be ascribed to chance, nor for 2. somehow any person be of themselves better than another apart from the work of God, or for 3. somehow there to be little first causes existing before they are conceived (which, again, hails back to 1 and 2).

HE does NOT want to control our free will decisions because:
1. IF WE DO NOT SIN BY A FREE, UNCONTROLLED DECISION then we are not guilty for that sin; the person who controlled us is the one who is guilty.

2. IF we cannot choose by our free will to be HIS Bride but HE controls us to marry HIM then it is not a true marriage because we did not accept HIS proposal and a true marriage cannot be forced against our free will.

I must admit I'm getting tired of having to repeat myself over and over so many times...the metaphor of the heffalump hunt around the woozle bush is growing stronger in my mind, sigh.

I am quite willing to answer new questions but let's hold off on the repetitive questions about the answers you disagree with for a bit, ok?

Let's see: You somehow know what God wants, and doesn't want, because your logic says he can't possibly want something we aren't capable of imagining.

1. False premise.

2. Huh? Even our earthly examples show this is false. But it is an inapplicable argument also because we did accept his proposal. And the only way we can accept his proposal is if he changes our minds (yes, still Romans).

I agree. If you have nothing new to say, and keep reasserting the same claims, unsustained, we've talked enough. I will try to answer what else you have written me, or even add a thought or two at times to object to or support some things you say to others, but, yeah. This has gone on long enough.

 

[TedT]

As a proponent of the PCE theory, what do you do with the question some ask, as to why God ever bothered with all this pain?

Why were we ever given the opportunity to sin?

AGAIN???
Last time:
OUR free will is an absolute necessity to make our guilt for sin a guilt that can result in our punishment.

OUR free will is an absolute necessity for the heavenly marriage to be a real marriage, not a BORG with Stepford wives.

And a free will must be able to choose against HIM as well as for HIM and that choice must be able to produce all the natural and legal consequences for choosing evil, ie, all the suffering of all the world.

And WHY, or HOW, were some innocent PreConception persons able to choose well while others chose sin?

GOD wanted to create a Church, a congregation of people in full loving, holy communion called a marriage with HIM in heaven BECAUSE THEY WANTED TO BE THERE WITH HIM IN THAT REALITY! They must truly want love, holiness and the heaven marriage as HE defines it.

How did HE find all the people in HIS creation who would like to live that way, after HE taught them all about it and all about the alternatives? HE asked them to make a true free will decision to accept HIM as their GOD and to accept HIS purpose for their creation.

DID HE know this would open the door to pure evil and much suffering? Yes HE did but this was the best way for HIM to 'access' the deepest part of each person's inner desires about what they wanted out of life for their own happiness, ie, by their own real choice.

If no one had ever rebelled against HIM, there would be no suffering just as HE promised...

Do you believe that Chance reigns in this?

No, of course not. Nothing I have written would lead to this conclusion. WE all chose by our own free will the FATE we wanted to bring us the greatest happiness. Chance impies a guess but we chose in light of a full discussion of the whole knowledge of the choice and the legal and natural consequences of each option according to HIM.

Or are some people simply better than others. If some are better than others, How? Did God make them better than others?

People chose what they thought would be the best for them. Some of those choices were indeed better for them than others but the people themselves were all created with a free will and an equal ability and opportunity to choose to put their faith, their unroven hope, in HIM or against HIM, able to come under HIS promise of election or to rebuke HIM as a liar and a false god. Nothing in their creation caused them to choose any option or the other by any means.

you still come up with a view that contradicts scripture —nobody merits God's grace. And God's work is not improved by man's efforts.

Not surprisingly you have again mixxed up the state of sinners which was the result of the fall, not of creation with the concept of our pre-conception existence in which we were innocents until we fell.

No SINNER merits God's grace. And God's work is not improved by a SINNER's efforts. Choosing to believe that all life, which would include the holy elect angels, must conform to these rules about the lives of sinners is too far out... AS HIS holy elect they do indeed merit HIS grace because HE promised it to them by HIS election promise of salvation if they should sin. And they constantly help HIM in HIS work with sinners.

 

[Mark Quayle]

On the whole, there were two types of sin:
Eternal: rebellion against GOD himself as a liar and false god, the unforgivable sin,
and
Temporary: while accepting YHWH as GOD and thus under the election promise of salvation, some elect rebelled against HIS command for us to come out from among those now condemned but we would not.

And then the sins of the elect are typified by two people, Adam and Eve. While I accept them as real people, I also accept their fall in the garden to typify the fall of the elect in the spirit world pre-earth:

EVE: typifies the elect who had decided that once they were safe from hell by coming under the promise of salvation as HIS elect, they would rebel against that call for judgment out of love for some of these now eternally evil demons, thus becoming sinful themselves. This love is expressed by her treating the serpent in the garden as a pastor or at least a mentor, allowing him to lead her thoughts. When all those in Eve's type had chosen their sin, GOD then repeated HIS call for all HIS elect to come out from among HIS now sinful elect so they could be redeemed and sanctified.

ADAM: typifies those elect who loved one or more Eves, and though they chose to accept YHWH as their GOD, they did not have the faith to leave their loved ones to HIS tender mercy so they chose to rebel against the command to come out from among the sinful Eves so they could support them in their journey to sanctification. Thus, while Adam had no truck with the serpent, he did sin for Eve...

Because both the Adams and the Eves sinned out of love and compassion for sinners, they did not believe that their choice was sinful because how could a loving decision be sinful in the sight of the GOD who claimed to be love? Therefore they were not ashamed of their sin but thought they were doing the right thing not repudiate their friends and loved ones.

At every decision to come out that had some become sinful HIS call was repeated til the last person willing to idolize their friends and lovers over their GOD had sinned and no more sinned with them, ie, the number of sinful elect was full and finished.

Then the proof of YHWH's divinity and eternal power was given to all of creation by their witness of the creation of the physical universe, Job 38:7 with Romans 1:18-20. Then all sinners (both reprobate and elect sinners) were flung to the earth, to Sheol in the centre of the earth, to be sown into the world of mankind by the Son of Man and the devil, Matthew 13:36-39, as GOD saw fit to HIS purpose of the redemption and sanctification of the sinful elect.


1. I know GOD cannot create evil or evil people.
Light cannot create darkness.
A good tree cannot put forth rotten fruit.
A stream of life giving water cannot put forth salt or brackish water.
GOODNESS cannot bring forth evil.
Therefor Satan and his angels must have sinned by their free will repudiation of YHWH.

2. Death is the wages for sin. not a consequence of life.
Death therefore proves sinfulness.
Fetuses die in the womb, proving their sinfulness.
Therefore they must have chosen a sinful act of rebellion against GOD before their conception.

I happen to believe that God is logical and reasonable since HE claimed as much to Judah in Isaiah 1:18 “'Come now, and let us reason together,' says the Lord...

I also believe that proper doctrine is often by understanding the logic of the verses not any actual proof verse at all! This is called the leading of the Holy Spirit!

You know what I mean because this is the way some of our favourite doctrines were taught, not openly but by a hidden logic for centuries such as:
- the Deity of the Messiah,
- the teaching that the OT was NOT the end of all scripture, (as per Deuteronomy 4:2
Ye shall not add unto the word which I command you, neither shall ye diminish [ought] from it, that ye may keep the commandments of the LORD your God which I command you.),
- that God would incarnate as a man,
- that the Messiah would be an intermediary for prayer,
- nor any hint of Adamic sin before the NT.

without even getting into the words for doctrines that we use that are not in scripture: Trinity, omniscience, omnipotence, omnipresence, incarnation, rapture etc.

So, scriptural doctrine without having a precise scriptural reference is a time honoured procedure, and depends upon rightly dividing the word of truth aka the inspiration of the Holy Spirit.

Well, this is new, or at least, not the same stuff you were saying before, but it is all of a kind, drawn by false presumptions, without Scriptural support. I.e. human reasoning. I'm not going to bother to refute. Like you said elsewhere, this has gone on long enough enough

 

[TedT]

You conclude what you do because of a false presupposition. And your conclusion is not only unbiblical but illogical in that it fails to take into account the ignorance of any human mind in drawing merely logical conclusions concerning spiritual matters, i.e. you don't know what you are talking about well enough to let mere logic guide you, rather than scripture to guide you. At best, your conclusions should be speculative —not dogmatic.

OK. You are so far superior to me your superiority blinds me and I cannot learn from you.. Goodbye and good luck...I resign.

 

[Mark Quayle]

OUR free will is an absolute necessity to make our guilt for sin a guilt that can result in our punishment.

Again —Says who?

OUR free will is an absolute necessity for the heavenly marriage to be a real marriage, not a BORG with Stepford wives.

And still again —Says who?

 

[TedT]

↑
OUR free will is an absolute necessity to make our guilt for sin a guilt that can result in our punishment.

Again —Says who?

Says everyone who understands the meaning of the words and the logic of the sentence...

↑
OUR free will is an absolute necessity for the heavenly marriage to be a real marriage, not a BORG with Stepford wives.

And still again —Says who?

Says everyone who understands the meaning of the words and the logic of the sentence...sigh.

 

[Mark Quayle]

↑
OUR free will is an absolute necessity to make our guilt for sin a guilt that can result in our punishment.
Says everyone who understands the meaning of the words and the logic of the sentence...

↑
OUR free will is an absolute necessity for the heavenly marriage to be a real marriage, not a BORG with Stepford wives.
Says everyone who understands the meaning of the words and the logic of the sentence...sigh.

If your claim is logical, then define "OUR free will".

 

[TedT]

define "OUR free will".

All FREE means is to be uncoerced and unconstrained:

When GOD set it up so HIS new creation had no coercion or constraints upon their choices, forcing them to choose anything, they had free will.

The Elements of a True Free Will Choice:
1. Free will can't be coerced:

Nothing in their created nature could FORCE them to choose love or hate, good or evil, including all genetics...

Nothing in their experience could FORCE them to choose love or hate, good or evil, including all cultural or familial experience...

Nothing in their understanding or knowledge of reality could FORCE them to choose good or evil, love or hate.

In other words, they had to be completely and truly ingenuously innocent.
[Ref: definition of ingenuous: [URL="http://www.thefreedictionary.com/ingenuousness"]ingenuousness[/URL] as: 1. Lacking in cunning, guile, worldliness; artless. 2. Openly straightforward or frank; candid.

2. Consequences must be known but not proved:
The person must understand the full consequences of their choice or it is a guess, not a true choice. “What will happen if I choose left or right, the red pill or the blue pill?” must be answered in full detail.

But "PROOF" of the nature of the consequence would compel or coerce the person to choose what was proven to be the best for them. If the answer “death here,” “life there,” was proven, which would you choose? The weight of knowledge would destroy the effect of a true ‘free will’ choice.

If it were proven you would die if you went left, are you truly free to choose to go right? No, you are forced by your knowledge to go right. Therefore they must know, but without proof, the nature of the consequences of their choice.

Only then are they following their desires, their deepest hope in the nature of reality, defining the reality they most hope to enjoy.

Peace, Ted

 

[Mark Quayle]

When GOD set it up so HIS new creation had no coercion or constraints upon their choices, forcing them to choose anything, they had free will.

Your use of the word "force" leaves me wondering what you mean to imply. If something is going to happen, whether we know it or not, and what we choose is part of how it happens, is that "force"?

The Elements of a True Free Will Choice:
1. Free will can't be coerced:

Nothing in their created nature could FORCE them to choose love or hate, good or evil, including all genetics...

Nothing in their experience could FORCE them to choose love or hate, good or evil, including all cultural or familial experience...

Nothing in their understanding or knowledge of reality could FORCE them to choose good or evil, love or hate.

In other words, they had to be completely and truly ingenuously innocent.
[Ref: definition of ingenuous: ingenuousness as: 1. Lacking in cunning, guile, worldliness; artless. 2. Openly straightforward or frank; candid.

2. Consequences must be known but not proved:
The person must understand the full consequences of their choice or it is a guess, not a true choice. “What will happen if I choose left or right, the red pill or the blue pill?” must be answered in full detail.

But "PROOF" of the nature of the consequence would compel or coerce the person to choose what was proven to be the best for them. If the answer “death here,” “life there,” was proven, which would you choose? The weight of knowledge would destroy the effect of a true ‘free will’ choice.

If it were proven you would die if you went left, are you truly free to choose to go right? No, you are forced by your knowledge to go right. Therefore they must know, but without proof, the nature of the consequences of their choice.

Only then are they following their desires, their deepest hope in the nature of reality, defining the reality they most hope to enjoy.

Peace, Ted

1) You for some reason equate "coerce" with "force". Are you saying a person with a gun to their head doesn't really choose to do as directed by the gunman? A person always chooses what they prefer, if only for the moment. The person being coerced prefers to follow the directives than to face the possible consequences of not doing so. Everybody freely chooses to do as they are most inclined to do.

Somehow you seem to claim something special about Adam, as far as the meaning of free will. I don't get it. His circumstances absolutely did bring about what he chose. When he was walking he avoided sharp rocks, I would think. When he was hungry, he chose to eat, no?

2) Likewise, when one doesn't know for sure, but still must choose, is he not freely choosing? It may be that the majority of our choices are done on the fly with guessing rather than full knowledge being taken into consideration. We don't bother to think that hard, anyway. Thinking through the consequences, after all, might cause us to do what we should do, rather than what we feel like doing!

----
In other words, you are describing a different use of the notion of free will, from what most mean by it when describing what God does in causing all things to come to pass —that is, unless you, like some others other contributors on this site, claim that for God to control all things is for God to 'force' us to do whatever we do.

If you claim that for God to control all things is to 'force' us to do whatever we do, do you deny that at least we do really choose, whether constrained or not?

 

[TedT]

Your use of the word "force" leaves me wondering what you mean to imply.

I imply that an option that a person cannot resist choosing is forced and therefore they cannot be making a free will decision.

A force means that it is the only real option open to the person. A force can only be accepted. An influence can be considered and then accepted or discounted and ignored. A coercion would be an influence that has the effect of a force by manipulating the person's best interests so strongly that they cannot but choose otherwise.

...claim that for God to control all things is for God to 'force' us to do whatever we do.

I accept that.

BUT I do not think HE controlled our free will decisions before the foundation of the world when we were asked to choose where to put our faith, in HIM or against HIM.

Only the enslaved lives of sinners that we live in this world, which are designed to bring HIS sinful elect to redemption and to sanctification, are predetermined to achieve that end the most perfect way possible given the vagaries of each person's choices to be sinful.

WE chose our eternal FATE either as HIS Bride or as HIS eternal enemy. Then HE chose the predetermined LIVES we live as sinners on earth AFTER we chose by our free will to become sinful in HIS sight.

As for a coercion being different from a force I did address that in my post about my definition of a free will under the part about the coercive nature of proof. A gun to the head is an apt example.

Everybody freely chooses to do as they are most inclined to do.

NOT so. A person created as sinful under the enslavement to the addictive power of sin has NO CHOICE BUT to act like a sinner - sin is a part of their nature. They cannot choose righteousness or to save themselves...they have no free will.