Decision VS Free-Will

[cygnusx1]

Cygnusx1,


A theological blunder relative to scripture, but it is quite consistant with other definitions within reformed theology.

If this is so, then God cannot be a Trinity of Three Persons. He is of necessity thus making God without a will at all. It fits the predestined theory as well. Man then also sinned of necessity through his nature, His nature before the fall was no different than after the fall. If man is sin, then he cannot even DO sin since he IS sin.
Eliminates the need for an Incarnated Christ since it cannot be corrected.

First Christ cannot assume man's nature for the purpose to correct that nature which would make Christ sin

Secondly, Christ's human nature would be in conflict with the Divine which also aligns with reformed theology. In conflict of necessity, Christ could NEVER live a perfect life free of sin, since He is sin. He becomes totally meaningless to man.

Christ could not have a will by which He lived that perfect life and became our example. His Prayer in the Garden debunks this whole theory and did so as well almost 1700 years ago in the 6th Ecumenical Council which declared that Christ had two wills, one Divine and one Human will.

Which is why man has a nature but he is also a person. We are consubstantial with each other in our natures, it is what makes us human beings. But we do not live or act through our natures, but through our Persons. It is what distinquishes each of us from the other. Which is why the will is an essential part of man's existance. Why we can have a relationship with another Being, namely God Himself.

cut to the chase , either God can sin or He cannot , so which is it .

 

[Rightglory]

cygnusx1,

cut to the chase , either God can sin or He cannot , so which is it .

But that is not what I was replying to. It was the second clause.

Regarding the first, NO.

Does that mean you really don't understand the difference?

 

[cygnusx1]

cygnusx1,

But that is not what I was replying to. It was the second clause.

Regarding the first, NO.

Does that mean you really don't understand the difference?

so God cannot sin .

He acts according to His nature ; Holy

 

[depthdeception]

cut to the chase , either God can sin or He cannot , so which is it .

It's neither, as both Rightglory and myself have pointed out. That which God does is holy, not because it is in alignment with an external NOR internal standard, but because "that which God does is holy." Even if God were to murder, rape, and deceive all of humanity, the same could not properly be thought of as sin because, again, that which God does is holy; the holiness of God's actions is not derived.

Furthermore, we must understand that the concept of "sin" is really only intelligible as a concept in that it is spoken of as the diminution of God's good--apart from this context, the notion of sin ceases to have rhetorical, much less substantival, reality.

Therefore, to ask if God "can or cannot sin" is, again, as intelligible as asking whether or not God can cease to exist. The answer is neither yes or no because the question, fundamentally, is asked out of absolute philosophical error and is on the level of queries about God and lifting huge rocks...

 

[depthdeception]

Which is why man has a nature but he is also a person. We are consubstantial with each other in our natures, it is what makes us human beings. But we do not live or act through our natures, but through our Persons. It is what distinquishes each of us from the other. Which is why the will is an essential part of man's existance. Why we can have a relationship with another Being, namely God Himself.

Outstanding!

 

[Rightglory]

Cygnus,

so God cannot sin .

He acts according to His nature ; Holy

He is HOLY, He does not need to act HOLY. He is also LOVE, He does not need to act Love. He acts out of His Person. Natures do not act. If they did we and God would not need a will. God acted in His creation. He willed it to be. He chose it to be, not out of necessity. He acts in this universe through His Providence, not His nature. It is actually called His uncreated energies.

It is why I Pet 1:4 tells us that we as humans can share in that Divine nature, not become that Divine Nature, but to be holy, love, justice, mercy. These are all things man must aspire to, to follow the example of Christ, our model, to be perfect as He is perfect. Not possible if we act according to our nature, or that we do not have a will that makes us different from one another, namely our person.

That is where your theology falls apart. If by nature, all things God does is of necessity. He cannot choose to do anything. This is why man also does not act by his nature, His nature is mortal. Man acts through his person. It is what distinquishes us for one another. We are all the very same in nature. If we could act through our natures, then every single sin of all men would be the same. But the fact is we cannot act through our natures. Our mortal nature is not our will. It influeces our will to act, we act through our Person.

 

[cygnusx1]

i said according to His nature and then see arguments against things i didn't even say .

God cannot sin .

God cannot lie .

fallen man acts according to his fallen nature , ie , he sins

 

[Rightglory]

cygnusx1,

i said according to His nature and then see arguments against things i didn't even say .
God cannot sin .
God cannot lie .
fallen man acts according to his fallen nature , ie , he sins

obviously you still do not understand the theology. Man does not sin according to his nature. He sins according to his desire, his will. If you don't believe that, then of necessity you believe man has a free will. They are exclusive. Nature does not cause man to sin, it influences him to sin. The cause is man's determinative will.

 

[bibleblevr]

I'm not arguing that we have the same self-will as God. As I mentioned earlier, our self-will is qualified by its derivation; we self-will insofar as we are not God. That human self-will is not essentially identical to God's, however, is by no means the grounds to conclude that the one annihilates the other, or, at the very least, that the two are somehow in opposition to each other.

lets clear something up, what is your definition of "self-will"? it is quite difficult to understand your arguments or to argue against them, if we don't have an agreed upon definition.

 

[bibleblevr]

i said according to His nature and then see arguments against things i didn't even say .

God cannot sin .

God cannot lie .

fallen man acts according to his fallen nature , ie , he sins

God can not sin because what ever he does is holy, like the others on this thread were saying. However, I think another point needs to be made. That is, the definition of "Holy" is set in stone, and will never move. This is simply because God is unchanging, therefore, so is "holy". If you are asking if God can do something unholy, then the answer is no, he doesn't change.