Understanding Adam and Eve in Calvinism

[TaylorSexton]

Yet you leave out the part of OP's concern over free will.

It doesn't matter what the topic is, the question was asked directly to Calvinists specifically regarding the Calvinist system of doctrine on a Calvinist sub-forum.

 

[Kenny'sID]

What you post here just ignores everything I said.

Disagrees with, not ignores.

 

[Kenny'sID]

It doesn't matter what the topic is, the question was asked of Calvinists specifically regarding the Calvinist system of doctrine on a Calvinist sub-forum.

And certainly no one but Calvinists answered. But I see now, you want control because the rules give you that right and you chose to pick on me for some odd reason.

It's all yours.

 

[TaylorSexton]

And certainly no one but Calvinists answered. But I see now, you want control because the rules give you that right and you chose to pick on me for some odd reason.

It's all yours.

I'm not picking on you. I merely commented because you seemed to expect to somehow contribute to this thread by your semantic contention with twin1954. That is why I questioned you. Furthermore, I don't believe I ever said you couldn't post here; did I? Did I appeal to any rules? That seems to be a false assumption on your part. I was merely asking what you were expecting to contribute to this post by propagating your viewpoints although you were not addressed. You may not have been the only non-Reformed person who replied (not answered), but you were certainly the only one attempting to propagate your views.

 

[Kenny'sID]

I was merely asking what you were expecting to contribute to this post by propagating your viewpoints although you were not addressed.

Wake up man, none of the other non-Calvinists were addressed either. And I told you why several posts back. You clearly know you weren't very nice, else you wouldn't be going on like this, but that's something your going to have to settle with yourself and continuing to try to justify it, is not the way to handle it.

I gave a general thought on free will but had no idea Calvinists were so very touchy about someone disagreeing with them. I wasn't really even aware I was disagreeing with general Calvinistic views, but all that said, it was still just a simple comment, yet it's bringing on this mess?

 

[TaylorSexton]

Wake up man, none of the other non-Calvinists were addressed either. And I told you why several posts back. You clearly know you weren't very nice, else you wouldn't be going on like this, but that's something your going to have to settle with yourself and continuing to try to justify it, is not the way to handle it.
googletag.cmd.push(function() { googletag.display('div-gpt-ad-1474449713049-1'); });
I gave a general thought on free will but had no idea Calvinists were so very touchy about someone disagreeing with them. I wasn't really even aware I was disagreeing with general Calvinistic views, but all that said, it was still just a simple comment, yet it's bringing on this mess?

Calm down, brother. I just asked you a simple question, and I wasn't the only one. It seems I touched a nerve. I don't know why you think I am trying to dispute your beliefs. I have nowhere done this. I merely ask why you commented what you did, as it clearly contributed nothing to the thread, as one other brother also noted. Nobody has told you that 1) you can't believe what you believe or 2) you can't post here.

 

[Kenny'sID]

You just think I'm not calm. I needed to get your attention. You keep bringing up the fact the question was posed for Calvinists, and I told you several times why I felt comfortable answering due to all other non Calvinists answering, yet you keep bringing it up.

Clearly contributed nothing? Still goading eh? lol... OK, while we are on that, step back and take a close look at what you have contributed.

 

[TaylorSexton]

You just think I'm not calm. I needed to get your attention. You keep bringing up the fact the question was posed for Calvinists, and I told you several times why I felt comfortable answering due to all other non Calvinists answering, yet you keep bringing it up.

Clearly contributed nothing? Still goading eh? lol... OK, while we are on that, step back and take a close look at what you have contributed.

I asked the question specifically because of your interaction with twin1954. As for my contributions, I clarified one's concern and answered the OP with a citation from a Calvinist document regarding free will, which was the express concern of the OP.

 

[Kenny'sID]

We're done here.

 

[TaylorSexton]

We're done here.

Not trying to cause offense, brother. I would like to point out that my question was not alone, as twin1954 asked the same thing of you.

Again, nobody is saying you can't post here or that you are not free to believe what you wish.

 

[twin1954]

Disagrees with, not ignores.

It is obvious that you disagree. But your response in which you quoted my posts didn't disagree they ignored all that was said. I must wonder if you have even actually thought about the concept of free will and its implications.

Of course I do understand that you are not allowed to promote your views in this forum or to debate except in the place provided for that purpose. I will not press you on it unless you want to take the issue to the Debate a Calvinist section. And then I will only debate it with you if you promise to actually consider the arguments that are against and answer them.

 

[twin1954]

Do you believe in responding to others based upon some dogma, or based upon what Scripture actually reveals? The minute you make any theologian or theology the primary authority, you already have a problem.

Once more you imply a straw man in order to be able to easily cast doubt. Isn't that what Satan did to Eve?

 

[Inkfingers]

Hello, I am have recently embraced Calvinism as true. If I was in a conversation with an Arminian/inconsistent Arminian, and they said Adam had free will in the garden. How would I respond to this? Is the understanding that humans did originally have free will, but lost it in the fall? And how did God work out his plan in the garden exactly? I'd appreciate it if a more experienced Calvinist could explain their understand to me. Thank you.

Respond by explaining that it was not so.

All things happen because God foreordains them to occur, He being sovereign over ALL that occurs.

God knew, from before the Beginning, that Christ would be necessary to save a fallen humanity. THAT shows how human decisions are not free (including the decision to fall), and when people claim this is just God predicting what would happen they forget that you cannot predict a nondetermined system.

 

[sdowney717]

YHWH SAYS ?

1Pe 1:20

Who verily was foreordained before the foundation G2602of the world, but was manifest in these last times for you,

Rev 13:8

And all that dwell upon the earth shall worship him, whose names are not written in the book of life of the Lamb slain from the foundation G2602 of the world.

Rev 17:8

The beast that thou sawest was, and is not; and shall ascend out of the bottomless pit, and go into perdition: and they that dwell on the earth shall wonder, whose names were not written in the book of life from the foundation G2602 of the world, when they behold the beast that was, and is not, and yet is.

Christ and His purpose for us was foreordained by God before the foundation of the world. so the fall was predetermined.
Matthew 1:21
And she will bring forth a Son, and you shall call His name Jesus, for He will save His people from their sins.”

https://www.blueletterbible.org/lang/lexicon/lexicon.cfm?Strongs=G2602&t=KJV
He came to earth for the believers, for us, so that we would not perish but have everlasting life, for Peter says 'you', and Peter is talking to the beloved elect of God, before we were born, we were that elect since we believe. Unbelievers show themselves to not be elect, yet they might be, we don't know what God might do, He might save them.

That He chooses us first, before we love God, consider this.
Deuteronomy 30:6
And the Lord your God will circumcise your heart and the heart of your descendants, to love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul, that you may live.

 

[Kenny'sID]

It is obvious that you disagree. But your response in which you quoted my posts didn't disagree they ignored all that was said. I must wonder if you have even actually thought about the concept of free will and its implications.

Of course I do understand that you are not allowed to promote your views in this forum or to debate except in the place provided for that purpose. I will not press you on it unless you want to take the issue to the Debate a Calvinist section. And then I will only debate it with you if you promise to actually consider the arguments that are against and answer them.

No debate necessary, you have assumed you've given the issue thought and I have not, or showed your arrogance. And you have also shown you detest others views, even when they are not barging in to push those views, but trying to help with a simple question by sharing their own view. The result of that was essentially, "We don't believe that way (I had no idea, and didn't realize I was stepping into anything but a thread were someone was asking advice) so shut up or get out, or else". Not exactly passive.

Honestly, you don't seem like very nice people and I've already been given an idea of how any debate would go so, no thank you..

 

[stenerson]

Hello, I am have recently embraced Calvinism as true. If I was in a conversation with an Arminian/inconsistent Arminian, and they said Adam had free will in the garden. How would I respond to this? Is the understanding that humans did originally have free will, but lost it in the fall? And how did God work out his plan in the garden exactly? I'd appreciate it if a more experienced Calvinist could explain their understand to me. Thank you.

Adam's will was not enslaved to sin as ours is. I'm not sure if federal headship is believed by Arminians, in other words our "in Adamness." That biblical truth that declares we were in Adam's loins and in effect share in his guilt and original rebellion.
There is speculation that if Adam didn't sin then God would have simply zapped Eve and gave Adam another partner. I'm not so sure of that. It was Adams duty to protect Eve and God's honor by crushing the serpent and not letting him tempt the woman or let her partake of that crime. He stood by it seems silently and spinelessly then partook. It was Adam that plunged the race into sin. It seems to read that their eyes (including hers) were opened, not when she first ate, but after she gave to her husband and "he did eat."
Anyways, the point is that no one after that starts with a clean slate, neutral towards sin.
We are born at enmity with God, in love with darkness and sin, enslaved to sin etc.

 

[TaylorSexton]

...trying to help with a simple question by sharing their own view.

But, again, the thread didn't ask for opposing views; it asked for the (and I quote) "understanding [of] Adam and Eve in Calvinism," which, again, is why I found it curious that you would enter this thread and post something else, which is why I asked what you expected to contribute to this thread.

Furthermore, what has been said so far that makes you think we are "not very nice people"? In case you need reminding, I don't think any aggression has come from anyone here...except yourself.

You've use sarcastic nomenclature:

...are you just the on duty contribution police?

You've made false judgments (assumptions) of motive:

...you want control...

You've been somewhat aggressive with your rhetoric:

Wake up man...

You've made false judgments of character in an attempt to gain some kind of leg up on people:

...you weren't very nice...

And again:

...your going to have to settle with yourself and continuing to try to justify it...

You've apparently not read the other comments of those conversing with you:

...step back and take a close look at what you have contributed.

You've made yet a third inflammatory character remark:

...you've...showed your arrogance...

You've pretended to understand the belief of others:

...you detest others views...

And then, you draw conclusions about others' character traits based on no evidence:

...you don't seem like very nice people...

Not to mention all your sarcastic, passive-aggressive winking emoticons that follow your little jabs.

Have you ever maybe considered why Calvinists are so "touchy," even for just a second? Have you ever thought that Calvinists are without really any doubt the most attacked and hated group of believers in all the Body? Even wild-eyed snake-handlers find more acceptance into fellowship than the Calvinist, in my experience. Let me tell you, I have never been called more names, had more of my character assaulted and trampled, and been shown more disgust contempt than when my Calvinism has been brought up. I can't even go on to another general thread—one that is completely unrelated to Calvinism, mind you—without someone seeing "Calvinist" as my faith tag, proceeding to derail the thread to attack my beliefs, only to then shift blame on me for attempt to come and propagate my beliefs. To be frank, I have been shown far more charity from hardened atheists than I have my own brethren.

Have you ever been the recipient of that kind of behavior? If I ever want to bring the Old Man out of a fellow believer, most of the time all I have to do is mention that I am a Calvinist, and fellowship has almost without question been damaged or altogether demolished. That feels awful, but I am Calvinist by conviction from Scripture and the witness of the Holy Spirit—not tradition, not philosophy, not opinion—Scripture alone.

So, before you go on your next little rant about how "not nice" we Calvinists have been to you, first of all consider your own behavior in the conversation, which in this instance has been less than satisfactory, and second consider the position of your brother of sister within the body.

 

[Kenny'sID]

But, again, the thread didn't ask for opposing views; it asked for the (and I quote) "understanding [of] Adam and Eve in Calvinism," which, again, is why I found it curious that you would enter this thread and post something else, which is why I asked what you expected to contribute to this thread.

Furthermore, what has been said so far that makes you think we are "not very nice people"? In case you need reminding, I don't think any aggression has come from anyone here...except yourself.

You've use sarcastic nomenclature:



You've made false judgments (assumptions) of motive:



You've been somewhat aggressive with your rhetoric:



You've made false judgments of character in an attempt to gain some kind of leg up on people:



And again:



You've apparently not read the other comments of those conversing with you:



You've made yet a third inflammatory character remark:



You've pretended to understand the belief of others:



And then, you draw conclusions about others' character traits based on no evidence:



Not to mention all your sarcastic, passive-aggressive winking emoticons that follow your little jabs.

Have you ever maybe considered why Calvinists are so "touchy," even for just a second? Have you ever thought that Calvinists are without really any doubt the most attacked and hated group of believers in all the Body? Even wild-eyed snake-handlers find more acceptance into fellowship than the Calvinist, in my experience. Let me tell you, I have never been called more names, had more of my character assaulted and trampled, and been shown more disgust contempt than when my Calvinism has been brought up. I can't even go on to another general thread—one that is completely unrelated to Calvinism, mind you—without someone seeing "Calvinist" as my faith tag, proceeding to derail the thread to attack my beliefs, only to then shift blame on me for attempt to come and propagate my beliefs. To be frank, I have been shown far more charity from hardened atheists than I have my own brethren.

Have you ever been the recipient of that kind of behavior? If I ever want to bring the Old Man out of a fellow believer, most of the time all I have to do is mention that I am a Calvinist, and fellowship has almost without question been damaged or altogether demolished. That feels awful, but I am Calvinist by conviction from Scripture and the witness of the Holy Spirit—not tradition, not philosophy, not opinion—Scripture alone.

So, before you go on your next little rant about how "not nice" we Calvinists have been to you, first of all consider your own behavior in the conversation, which in this instance has been less than satisfactory, and second consider the position of your brother of sister within the body.

All that is pretty convincing, and it makes my earlier point, you know you were wrong, that's why you still desperately try to change the fact. Nothing there to even bother refuting, since I can see clearly what you are trying to do.

I will say how odd it was that you and most everyone agreed on the free will thing early on, and then your bash on me for my same thoughts on free will, when even you yourself agreed along with others on free will earlier. I mean this is just nutty. But it's clear you won't wake up here and see it, and will continue trying to put it off on me.

Anyway, I think I've made my point, and you can keep digging your way in deeper if you like, but you might want to consider what you represent, as well as others before you continue.

 

[TaylorSexton]

All that is pretty convincing, and it makes my earlier point, you know you were wrong, that's why you still desperately try to change the fact. Nothing there to even bother refuting, since I can see clearly what you are trying to do.

twin1954 was certainly on to something when he said you ignored his post, as this paragraph shows you completely ignored everything I just said. I provided evidence and citations of your behavior. Since you are adamant about mine, how about you provide some on me? Where have a been so "wrong"? I clearly am not aware of it. Enlighten me.

You like to say big things like "keep digging yourself deeper," and "I think I've made my point," but can you actually provide some substance behind those big words of yours? That is the question. If the fact that I keep replying (a fact, ironically, to which you've replied at least twice by now) is your best ammunition, perhaps you need a better weapon.

Perhaps the most ironic thing is that you've already told me, "We're done," yet just a single reply was all it took to set you off again. Yet, for you, it seems the fact that people here are so aggressive and "just won't drop it" is the only thing you can come up with to throw as if a missile, hoping it will strike a nerve.

 

[twin1954]

Respond by explaining that it was not so.

All things happen because God foreordains them to occur, He being sovereign over ALL that occurs.

God knew, from before the Beginning, that Christ would be necessary to save a fallen humanity. THAT shows how human decisions are not free (including the decision to fall), and when people claim this is just God predicting what would happen they forget that you cannot predict a nondetermined system.

They also forget that for Him to foresee what will happen must mean that He learns and for Him to learn means that He changes. That is open theism in a nut shell.