Did God predestine the Fall?

[Hammster]

Sorry, what you claim is not clear. Are you saying you believe all men on earth have 100% free will to choose or reject salvation, and that God left that all up to ma? Yes or no?

Yes and no. Man, in his natural state (which the Bible talks about, incidental) could choose to follow Christ, but he won’t. He’s such an enemy of God that he even denies His existence (see Romans 1).

If God left mankind in this state, all would rightfully end up in hell. But God has decided to save some, so He gave some new natures (born again) and with that new hearts, they freely chose to repent and believe.

 

[Hammster]

What are you suggesting, that Israel had free choice bit maybe we don't? Or..? I would think that God has allowed man to choose since the garden. Adam had a real choice it was NOT pre determined or decided, do you agree or not?

Why do you do this? I ask a straightforward question, and you go all over the place. Can you just answer whether that statement was for all of mankind, or just Israel?

 

[Hammster]

Can you point to a part of absolutely rejecting God's spirit for generations and doing so violently that suggests they were chicks wanting to be gathered by God!!? OBVIOUSLY they chose to refuse.

I guess this means that you cannot do so.

That’s all I wanted to point out.

 

[Hammster]

So we are not pre destined to be saved or damned?

We are not saved against our will. Try sticking with the immediate subject.

 

[Hammster]

Did He fix the game is the operative question. Or do all men on earth have the 100% actual, real absolutely free will that is a gift of God Almighty since the creation to man, to choose death or life, God or hell..etc? This all should be crystal clear.

Avoiding the question. Do people do that to you a lot? Is it frustrating to you?

 

[idkMyName]

Yes and no. Man, in his natural state (which the Bible talks about, incidental) could choose to follow Christ, but he won’t. He’s such an enemy of God that he even denies His existence (see Romans 1).

If God left mankind in this state, all would rightfully end up in hell. But God has decided to save some, so He gave some new natures (born again) and with that new hearts, they freely chose to repent and believe.

Hello, I'm new here, and have not read more than this page on this topic, but just wanted to add my opinion.

In John Chapter 8. Jesus told the non believing Jews they were the seed of Satan, that if they would have been Abraham's seed they would have believed Him. So the way I understand it is that these lacked the virtue that Abraham had, i.e. He believed God, that was his faith that his seed would carry throughout the generations. This has to be based on free will because otherwise we have God making the seed of Satan, and also condemning them.

Just because God knows who the elect are, does not mean that he did not predestine all who he knew would choose Him. That's just my take on it. Happy new Year

 

[mark kennedy]

There is no aspect of Calvinism that leaves man with no real free choice. So what exactly are you discussing?

I've pointed that out to him repeatedly, for some reason he doesn't get it. The whole issue with free will is what is called the noetic effects of sin, here is the proof text:

“For although they knew God, they did not honor him as God or give thanks to him, but they became futile in their thinking, and their foolish hearts were darkened.” (Rom. 1:21).
​

Paul could not be more clear that this means all of us, a brief description of the noetic effects of sin here:

Sin has affected our minds and causes our thinking to become futile apart from Christ. This effect of sin upon our minds is known in theology as the “noetic effects of sin”...Dr. Sproul reasons that “even though the mind is darkened by sin, and leads us to futility apart from being captured by the Word of God, Paul is not saying that the human faculty for thinking is destroyed by sin.” The non-Christian can know some truth. If the faculty to reason was destroyed, truth could never be known and God could not condemn people for denying it. (The Noetic Effects of Sin. Ligonier Ministries)
​

Whether mind, will or emotions, right down to a man's spirit, all are compromised by sin. The issue isn't whether or not we have the ability to reason or the power of self will, but what that means at the point of conversion. We are effectively dead spiritually, even though we are still walking around, thinking and breathing. The emphasis in the New Testament is on what we choose, not our choice, while that may seem like semantics it's a vital point of doctrine for the Calvinist. The issue at the heart of the emphasis has to be what Christ did for us and that is what is woefully absent in his posts.

What we don't know about God's purposes and perfect will is a lot, what we do know is that the righteousness of God that is by faith, is found only in Christ.

Grace and peace,
Mark

 

[mark kennedy]

Hello, I'm new here, and have not read more than this page on this topic, but just wanted to add my opinion.

In John Chapter 8. Jesus told the non believing Jews they were the seed of Satan, that if they would have been Abraham's seed they would have believed Him. So the way I understand it is that these lacked the virtue that Abraham had, i.e. He believed God, that was his faith that his seed would carry throughout the generations. This has to be based on free will because otherwise we have God making the seed of Satan, and also condemning them.

Just because God knows who the elect are, does not mean that he did not predestine all who he knew would choose Him. That's just my take on it. Happy new Year

That's exactly right, there is always an element of free will, or God couldn't condemn the wicked for rejecting the truth. The biggest problem come up when you weigh God's sovereign will and the free will you exercise to receive salvation. If I might hazard an analogy here, the first sacrifice listed in Leviticus is the burnt offering, it is completely burned to ashes. I think that's a picture of repentance, the old nature sacrificed and completely consumed. I think our old nature, even our free will is laid on that kind of an altar. It's not that it didn't exist, it's that anything tainted by sin must be consumed like the sacrifice of the burnt oblation.

Anyway, I think you have the right idea here, there's a subtle point here that requires a discerning mind. Caution is advised.

 

[dad]

Yes and no. Man, in his natural state (which the Bible talks about, incidental) could choose to follow Christ, but he won’t. He’s such an enemy of God that he even denies His existence (see Romans 1).

If God left mankind in this state, all would rightfully end up in hell. But God has decided to save some, so He gave some new natures (born again) and with that new hearts, they freely chose to repent and believe.

Still murky as can be. 'yes and no' isn't much of an answer. Can we get a yes or no? It sure seems you are saying that God respected the persons of some people and gave them some pre salvation new nature? That would be the same as choosing Himself to save only a few people and damming the rest.

 

[dad]

Why do you do this? I ask a straightforward question, and you go all over the place. Can you just answer whether that statement was for all of mankind, or just Israel?

It is for all mankind, but was delivered to Israel. Even if one needlessly disputed that, it is impossible to dispute man had choice from Genesis to Revelation.

 

[dad]

I guess this means that you cannot do so.

That’s all I wanted to point out.

To accept or refuse involves choice. Elementary.

 

[dad]

We are not saved against our will. Try sticking with the immediate subject.

The subject is whether Adam chose or was pre programmed to do what was done.

 

[dad]

Avoiding the question. Do people do that to you a lot? Is it frustrating to you?

The more you avoid the issues and obfuscate, the more it is clear what your answer to the question is.

For lurkers, here was the question
"Did He fix the game is the operative question. Or do all men on earth have the 100% actual, real absolutely free will that is a gift of God Almighty since the creation to man, to choose death or life, God or hell..etc? This all should be crystal clear."

Let me be clear, I believe we have absolute 100% free choice to receive Christ or reject Him.

 

[dad]

I've pointed that out to him repeatedly, for some reason he doesn't get it. The whole issue with free will is what is called the noetic effects of sin, here is the proof text:

“For although they knew God, they did not honor him as God or give thanks to him, but they became futile in their thinking, and their foolish hearts were darkened.” (Rom. 1:21).​

That does not apply to mankind in general. That is speaking of certain people that rejected God, and consequently had darkened hearts.
​

​

Paul could not be more clear that this means all of us, a brief description of the noetic effects of sin here:

Sin has affected our minds and causes our thinking to become futile apart from Christ. This effect of sin upon our minds is known in theology as the “noetic effects of sin”...Dr. Sproul reasons that “even though the mind is darkened by sin, and leads us to futility apart from being captured by the Word of God, Paul is not saying that the human faculty for thinking is destroyed by sin.” The non-Christian can know some truth. If the faculty to reason was destroyed, truth could never be known and God could not condemn people for denying it. (The Noetic Effects of Sin. Ligonier Ministries)​

Nothing to do with choosing to get saved, you are talking about rejectors.

​

Whether mind, will or emotions, right down to a man's spirit, all are compromised by sin.

Nothing to do with the gift of free choice man has! Even fallen man still has that gift and the gifts and calling of God are without repentance.

The issue isn't whether or not we have the ability to reason or the power of self will, but what that means at the point of conversion. We are effectively dead spiritually, even though we are still walking around, thinking and breathing.

That does not mean we still cannot choose as God asks us to do.
There would be zero point in preaching the gospel unless we had that choice.

The emphasis in the New Testament is on what we choose, not our choice, while that may seem like semantics it's a vital point of doctrine for the Calvinist. The issue at the heart of the emphasis has to be what Christ did for us and that is what is woefully absent in his posts.

Christ died to give us that choice of eternal life.

What we don't know about God's purposes and perfect will is a lot, what we do know is that the righteousness of God that is by faith, is found only in Christ.

And that is is free for anyone for the asking/choosing.

 

[mark kennedy]

That does not apply to mankind in general. That is speaking of certain people that rejected God, and consequently had darkened hearts.​

Then you missed the point of Romans opening chapters entirely, we are all guilty.

Nothing to do with choosing to get saved, you are talking about rejectors.

We are all rejectors and guilty before God. You should really be more careful how you handle such an important passage of Scripture.

Nothing to do with the gift of free choice man has! Even fallen man still has that gift and the gifts and calling of God are without repentance.

You jump from free will to the gifts and callings of God, you really should be mindful that there is something called redemption in the middle.

That does not mean we still cannot choose as God asks us to do.
There would be zero point in preaching the gospel unless we had that choice.
Christ died to give us that choice of eternal life.
And that is is free for anyone for the asking/choosing.

The gospel for you is choices, the gospel in the New Testament is the cross. To omit the cross is to omit Christ and render your choice meaningless.

 

[Hammster]

Still murky as can be. 'yes and no' isn't much of an answer. Can we get a yes or no? It sure seems you are saying that God respected the persons of some people and gave them some pre salvation new nature? That would be the same as choosing Himself to save only a few people and damming the rest.

I gave you a clear answer. Are you deliberately being difficult?

And no, God is no respecter of persons. If you read the context of that reference, you’ll find it means the opposite of what you think it means.

 

[Hammster]

It is for all mankind, but was delivered to Israel. Even if one needlessly disputed that, it is impossible to dispute man had choice from Genesis to Revelation.

So when it was delivered to Israel, how did the other nations know about it?

 

[Hammster]

To accept or refuse involves choice. Elementary.

What did they refuse to do? Look at the text. Did they refuse to come, or to gather the children in the manner of Jesus?

 

[Hammster]

The subject is whether Adam chose or was pre programmed to do what was done.

We have gone past that now. And you know that. I’m guessing you just want to play games now. It’s usually what synergists do when they know they have no biblical argument.

 

[Hammster]

The more you avoid the issues and obfuscate, the more it is clear what your answer to the question is.

For lurkers, here was the question
"Did He fix the game is the operative question. Or do all men on earth have the 100% actual, real absolutely free will that is a gift of God Almighty since the creation to man, to choose death or life, God or hell..etc? This all should be crystal clear."

Let me be clear, I believe we have absolute 100% free choice to receive Christ or reject Him.

Me, too. I’ve stated it clearly.

Did God predestine the Fall?