Double Predestination

[CalledOutOne]

Sorry but I wouldn't recommend VC (the explanation is long and tedious), and especially on this topic.

What's wrong with him?

 

[Apologetic_Warrior]

What's wrong with him?

Recommend reading concerning Vincent Cheung:

Aquascum

Triablogue

Triablogue: Extra-scriptural scripturalism

Vincent Cheung has no problem with accusations of God being the author of sin, and he does not distinguish between first and secondary causes. While we do find the distinction between causes made, even in the Westminster Confession of Faith. The main problem though has nothing to do with disagreements with confessions, but not making a distinction in causality, also entails a failure to distinguish between Creator and creation. I hope this helps, if I can, I will try to help further, if needed. Thank you for asking

 

[CalledOutOne]

Recommend reading concerning Vincent Cheung:

Aquascum

Triablogue

Triablogue: Extra-scriptural scripturalism

Vincent Cheung has no problem with accusations of God being the author of sin, and he does not distinguish between first and secondary causes. While we do find the distinction between causes made, even in the Westminster Confession of Faith. The main problem though has nothing to do with disagreements with confessions, but not making a distinction in causality, also entails a failure to distinguish between Creator and creation. I hope this helps, if I can, I will try to help further, if needed. Thank you for asking

Okay, this stuff is way over my head. I've only been a Christian for about 2 years. What is this guy talking about? A Response to Vincent Cheung

 

[Verona]

I don't see how God being responsible for sin proves Christianity to be false. Ever read Vincent Cheung?

No. The Bible is sufficient. Is it not ?

Anyway... I don't believe God is the author of sin, but I do believe that He decreed sin. Big difference.

The difference being ?

God made man mutable so He might fall. Why else would He put that tree in the garden? To help man define His moral character? That's Open Theism. Was it to test man? That would mean God learnt something. He does not learn; He decrees.

"Might fall away, then decrees he falls away. Which ?

Don't limit the sovereignty and omniscience of God.

Precisely. So don't

 

[CalledOutOne]

No. The Bible is sufficient. Is it not ?


The difference being ?



"Might fall away, then decrees he falls away. Which ?


Precisely. So don't

I don't mean "might" in the sense the there was a possibility it couldn't have happened.



Here is an excerpt from one of my personal writings:

From the previous section we have found that God can ordain the wicked actions of man without God acting contrary to His character because God doesn’t inject sin into the heart, but sin is already there. But how did that sin get there? The Bible tells us that God created man upright (Ecclesiastes 7:29). God certainly didn’t create man with a sin nature.

This is where we go into the Genesis account. God created Adam perfectly in His image (Genesis 1:27). This means that God equipped man with an immortal soul, a body; He created man upright, and “very good” (Genesis 1:31).

So how did Adam fall? The answer to this question isn’t a simple one. Ecclesiastes 7:29 says, “Behold, I have found only this, that God made men upright, but they have sought out many devices.” This means that God made man good, and man changed. The Westminster Confession of 1646 says this:

Man, in his state of innocency, had freedom, and power to will and to do that which was good and well pleasing to God; but yet, mutably, so that he might fall from it.
Westminster Confession Chapter IX of Free Will

So the only question we are left with is, “is there a chance that man wouldn’t have fallen?” I don’t see how there could have been. God decreed the fall, – He didn’t force it – placed Adam in the garden, and set obstacles in Adam’s way so that he would “mutate” – so to speak – and thus fall.

“Still,” you might say, “God made man mutable so that he might fall, wouldn’t there be a possibility that he might not?” If God is perfect and God made man perfect, then how did Adam fall? The answer to this is uncertain. After studying the Scriptures, however, I have come to the conclusion that the reason Adam chose sin over God is that God was not known in full. All of the attributes of God weren’t known apart from sin coming into play.

Without sin, no one would know God’s wrath, hatred, justice, or mercy. Without sin, what would contrast His holiness? God is holy, holy, holy (Isaiah 6:3). If Adam, being made “very good”, had known God in full, then he wouldn’t have been able not to focus on God. Adam’s problem was that even though he had fellowship with God, God was not perfectly known without the fall.

 

[Verona]

I don't mean "might" in the sense the there was a possibility it couldn't have happened.



Here is an excerpt from one of my personal writings:

From the previous section we have found that God can ordain the wicked actions of man without God acting contrary to His character because God doesn’t inject sin into the heart, but sin is already there. But how did that sin get there? The Bible tells us that God created man upright (Ecclesiastes 7:29). God certainly didn’t create man with a sin nature.

This is where we go into the Genesis account. God created Adam perfectly in His image (Genesis 1:27). This means that God equipped man with an immortal soul, a body; He created man upright, and “very good” (Genesis 1:31).

So how did Adam fall? The answer to this question isn’t a simple one. Ecclesiastes 7:29 says, “Behold, I have found only this, that God made men upright, but they have sought out many devices.” This means that God made man good, and man changed. The Westminster Confession of 1646 says this:

Man, in his state of innocency, had freedom, and power to will and to do that which was good and well pleasing to God; but yet, mutably, so that he might fall from it.
Westminster Confession Chapter IX of Free Will
So the only question we are left with is, “is there a chance that man wouldn’t have fallen?” I don’t see how there could have been. God decreed the fall, – He didn’t force it – placed Adam in the garden, and set obstacles in Adam’s way so that he would “mutate” – so to speak – and thus fall.

“Still,” you might say, “God made man mutable so that he might fall, wouldn’t there be a possibility that he might not?” If God is perfect and God made man perfect, then how did Adam fall? The answer to this is uncertain. After studying the Scriptures, however, I have come to the conclusion that the reason Adam chose sin over God is that God was not known in full. All of the attributes of God weren’t known apart from sin coming into play.

Without sin, no one would know God’s wrath, hatred, justice, or mercy. Without sin, what would contrast His holiness? God is holy, holy, holy (Isaiah 6:3). If Adam, being made “very good”, had known God in full, then he wouldn’t have been able not to focus on God. Adam’s problem was that even though he had fellowship with God, God was not perfectly known without the fall.


I like it. Thanks for posting this.