Why is did God create us with the capacity to sin?

[CCWoody]

Reformationists, I'm not so sure that the key to unlocking the meaning of John 3:16 is the definition of "world".  I think the key to unlocking the verse is to understand the previous verses.  I say this because John 3:16 begins with the word FOR.  This should tell us that this is a continuation of a thought which was started in previous verses.

But, what do we find when we start looking at the context?  We find a reference to Moses lifting up the "serpent".  The Jews who read this gospel would certainly understand that reference.  They would understand that in His wrath the LORD sent serpents among the camp of Israel to bite and kill.  They would also understand that the Lord relented of the disaster and actually saved anybody who looked upon the serpent that was lifted up.

Hmmm!

It would seem to me that this verse is simply saying that the Lord is willing to save out of the WHOLE world ALL who look upon Him, not that He has set His dying love upon the entire world.  To make it say that the Lord has set His dying love upon the entire world would make the reference to Moses really wierd.  It should be plainly obvious a few verses later when we actually discover that all those who don't believe are already condemned.

Your friendly neighborhhod Cordial Calvinist
Woody.

 

[nobdysfool]

3rd April 2003 at 05:17 PM CCWoody said this in Post #20



Look who followed me over here.  Is the other one coming as well?

Actually, you really can't make a case that Adam was created in the image of God in that he resembled the Lord in his physical appearance.

1. Adam's physical body was made out of created dirt.
2. The LORD is Spirit.
3. The Son had to take the likeness of a servant when He was begotten in the flesh.

This means that for Adam to be the image bearer of God, he had to resemble Him in a non-physical way.  Now, I'm not saying that we don't bear some physical resemblance to the Father.

You need to understand that I do not define "image" the way many people do.  Nor do I think the Bible teaches that man is a trichotomous being.  Man is a two-part being composed of flesh and spirit to make a soul.  So, when I talk about the image of God, I am speaking about Adam's spirit.

But, getting back to the original question:  "Why did God create Adam with the ability to Sin" or something like that.

The simple answer is because it was a good thing for Him to do that.  As saints, we know that ALL His works are good.  Ahh, but then that begs the question, why is that a good thing?

And though I am still chewing on the question, here are some observations:

1. The existence of sin is actually works together with all things for out ultimate good. (Romans 8:28)
2. The affliction we suffer because of sin in this world works for us for a far more exceeding and eternal weight of glory. (2 Corinthians 4:17)
3. In what way could the LORD have created Adam both innocent and holy, instead of just innocent, and not have created a robot?  I'm not saying He couldn' have.  I'm just mulling it over.
4. In what way could the LORD have created Adam merely innocent, knowing it was only a matter of time before he rebelled, without me having to slip into supralapsarianism.

Sigh!

Your friendly neighborhhod Cordial Calvinist
Woody.

Not sure I know who the "other" you refer to is...but I digress.  Are you sure you're not making this more complicated than it has to be?  We could say that God is a spirit being and man is a physical being, but that's too simplistic, and doesn't cover all the facts.   I agree with you that man is a dichotomous being consisting of body and spirit, comprising a soul.  But I still think that the "image" of God is the way he looks (or appearance, if you will), and not a reference to His essence or state of being.  Scripture states that God said, "Let us make man in our image, after our likeness."  and it further states "So God created man in his own image, in the image of God created he him; male and female created he them."  In Genesis 2 it says, "And the LORD God formed man of the dust of the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living soul."  God
formed man out of the dust of the ground, which is clearly a reference to his physical shape, and made man live by breathing into his nostrils the breath of life (or spirit), causing man to become a living soul.  I think there is a clear indication that the image of God is a reference to God's appearance.  An image is supposed to be a representation of something else (or in this case, Someone else), and to look at an image is to comprehend what the subject of that image looks like.  To put it another way, a picture is a two-dimensional image of a three-dimensional object.

So, to return to the original question, that of reconciling between God's inability to sin and man's ability to sin, despite man being created in God's image, the answer lies in the fact that man resembles God, but is not substantially of the same essence as God, in the same way a photograph is nothing like the object being photographed, it only resembles it in a limited way.

 

 

[Reformationist]

3rd April 2003 at 02:31 PM CCWoody said this in Post #21

Reformationists, I'm not so sure that the key to unlocking the meaning of John 3:16 is the definition of "world".  I think the key to unlocking the verse is to understand the previous verses.  I say this because John 3:16 begins with the word FOR.  This should tell us that this is a continuation of a thought which was started in previous verses.

Good point Woody.  The only point I was making is that when people read that verse they so often concentrate on the word they read and make assumptions that deny the reality of the situation.  For God to "so love" the whole world it would mean that everything He does is not only aimed at bringing about redemption for all mankind but it also succeeds, which we know is not the case.  The ironic thing is that the word used that is translated as "world" is "kosmos" which has 9 different meanings, one of which is "world of believers."  So, I was just relaying that for this verse to make sense in the context of all of Scripture one must understand that "For God so loved the world" just means that God gave to His chosen exactly what they needed for redemption.  The only other alternative that I can see is that God sent His Son to die but left it at that and took no part in fulfilling His own sovereign, immutable Will.  That's just not something that I can ascribe to God.  I am just not of the mainstream Christian camp that Jesus died to provide an "opportunity" for salvation for all people.  I believe that God is efficacious in all things, first causal in each thing, and that He does not do all things for the good of all.  It is about His sovereign choice.  I am not His counselor.  I trust that whatever He chooses is the righteous thing so the Calvinistic understanding of the Gospel is not difficult for me to get on board with.  I know that it is only by the grace of God that I can see the things He has revealed to me.


May God bless you my brother,

Don

 

[CCWoody]

4th April 2003 at 09:18 AM Reformationist said this in Post #23



Good point Woody.  The only point I was making is that when people read that verse they so often concentrate on the word they read and make assumptions that deny the reality of the situation.  For God to "so love" the whole world it would mean that everything He does is not only aimed at bringing about redemption for all mankind but it also succeeds, which we know is not the case.  The ironic thing is that the word used that is translated as "world" is "kosmos" which has 9 different meanings, one of which is "world of believers."  So, I was just relaying that for this verse to make sense in the context of all of Scripture one must understand that "For God so loved the world" just means that God gave to His chosen exactly what they needed for redemption.  The only other alternative that I can see is that God sent His Son to die but left it at that and took no part in fulfilling His own sovereign, immutable Will.  That's just not something that I can ascribe to God.  I am just not of the mainstream Christian camp that Jesus died to provide an "opportunity" for salvation for all people.  I believe that God is efficacious in all things, first causal in each thing, and that He does not do all things for the good of all.  It is about His sovereign choice.  I am not His counselor.  I trust that whatever He chooses is the righteous thing so the Calvinistic understanding of the Gospel is not difficult for me to get on board with.  I know that it is only by the grace of God that I can see the things He has revealed to me.


May God bless you my brother,

Don

Yeah, we are definitely on the same page.  I even implicitly made the same point that the "world" can't mean that the Lord has set His dying love upon the whole human race, even if I didn't explicitly state it.  The context should obviously lead us to that discovery.  Sadly, many of todays Christians are lazy in this regard.  It should be self-evidently obvious to anyone claiming to be a disciple of Christ.

After all, if the Father has elected the whole Human race for salvation...
And the Son has died for the expressed purpose of redeeming the whole human race....

Then why is the Holy Spirit not pulling out all the stops to get the Word of God to the ends of the earth and to every single last person?  Why does every man not enjoy a "Road to Damascus" experience?  Why does every nation not receive a Johan?

You may find this argument interesting:   HERE!  It is long and convers 3 posts.

Your friendly neighborhhod Cordial Calvinist
Woody.

 

[bird]

4th April 2003 at 04:37 PM CCWoody said this in Post #24



Yeah, we are definitely on the same page.  I even implicitly made the same point that the "world" can't mean that the Lord has set His dying love upon the whole human race, even if I didn't explicitly state it.  The context should obviously lead us to that discovery.  Sadly, many of todays Christians are lazy in this regard.  It should be self-evidently obvious to anyone claiming to be a disciple of Christ.

After all, if the Father has elected the whole Human race for salvation...
And the Son has died for the expressed purpose of redeeming the whole human race....

Then why is the Holy Spirit not pulling out all the stops to get the Word of God to the ends of the earth and to every single last person?  Why does every man not enjoy a "Road to Damascus" experience?  Why does every nation not receive a Johan?

You may find this argument interesting:   HERE!  It is long and convers 3 posts.

Your friendly neighborhhod Cordial Calvinist
Woody.

 


  

but is that not precisely what the spirit is doing?

 

bird

 

[Allen2]

Hey to my bro Calvinists and others:
1. Where is kosmos used in the sense of "world of believers"?
2. "Everything He does is not only aimed at bringing about redem. for all mankind but it also succeeds, wh. we know is not the case". But do the Scriptures teach that everything God desires turns out successful?
a.God pleads with His straying people to return in Jer3: "Return, faithless Israel, declares the LORD, I will frown on you no longer (3:12) Quite clear from Jeremiah's cries that God's heart is broken over His people's condition and He desires their repentance.
b. However, the LORD sees only deaf ears and blind eyes and laments sadly,"I thought you would call me 'Father' and not turn away from following me (3:19). God's expectations do not always come to pass and that is not any reflection on His sovty--unless sovty is defined with POWER as its core meaning. However, Sovty for God is at its heart a governance of love and the willingness to risk our foolish use of the capacity to choose.
c.God was regretful that He ever made Adam and his descendants:"The LORD was grieved that he had made man on the earth, and his heart was filled with pain" Gen6:6. Did God fail in that He and mankind were so far from Eden? Ridiculous: success for God is NOT in every situation seeing His plan go off well, but bringing about thru Abraham's descendants a nation thru whom all the world will be blessed and there will be a new people of God in a new world despite the setbacks(indeed, as some of you have pointed out, God is creative enough to use the setbacks to advance His overall plan".
Well...I could be mistaken. Not likely; hey, jusssssst kiddddding. The reason I enjoy these discussions and debates is wisdom comes from the output of friends and bros and sisters. See ya, Al

 

[bird]

4th April 2003 at 03:18 PM Reformationist said this in Post #23



Good point Woody.  The only point I was making is that when people read that verse they so often concentrate on the word they read and make assumptions that deny the reality of the situation.  For God to "so love" the whole world it would mean that everything He does is not only aimed at bringing about redemption for all mankind but it also succeeds, which we know is not the case.  The ironic thing is that the word used that is translated as "world" is "kosmos" which has 9 different meanings, one of which is "world of believers."  So, I was just relaying that for this verse to make sense in the context of all of Scripture one must understand that "For God so loved the world" just means that God gave to His chosen exactly what they needed for redemption.  The only other alternative that I can see is that God sent His Son to die but left it at that and took no part in fulfilling His own sovereign, immutable Will.  That's just not something that I can ascribe to God.  I am just not of the mainstream Christian camp that Jesus died to provide an "opportunity" for salvation for all people.  I believe that God is efficacious in all things, first causal in each thing, and that He does not do all things for the good of all.  It is about His sovereign choice.  I am not His counselor.  I trust that whatever He chooses is the righteous thing so the Calvinistic understanding of the Gospel is not difficult for me to get on board with.  I know that it is only by the grace of God that I can see the things He has revealed to me.


May God bless you my brother,

Don

don,

 

you wrote:

 

"For God to "so love" the whole world it would mean that everything He does is not only aimed at bringing about redemption for all mankind but it also succeeds, which we know is not the case."

 

 

i was just wondering, why you are so certain this is not the case?

 

bird 

 

 

 

[rnmomof7]

3rd April 2003 at 05:31 PM CCWoody said this in Post #21

Reformationists, I'm not so sure that the key to unlocking the meaning of John 3:16 is the definition of "world".  I think the key to unlocking the verse is to understand the previous verses.  I say this because John 3:16 begins with the word FOR.  This should tell us that this is a continuation of a thought which was started in previous verses.

But, what do we find when we start looking at the context?  We find a reference to Moses lifting up the "serpent".  The Jews who read this gospel would certainly understand that reference.  They would understand that in His wrath the LORD sent serpents among the camp of Israel to bite and kill.  They would also understand that the Lord relented of the disaster and actually saved anybody who looked upon the serpent that was lifted up.

Hmmm!

It would seem to me that this verse is simply saying that the Lord is willing to save out of the WHOLE world ALL who look upon Him, not that He has set His dying love upon the entire world.  To make it say that the Lord has set His dying love upon the entire world would make the reference to Moses really wierd.  It should be plainly obvious a few verses later when we actually discover that all those who don't believe are already condemned.

Your friendly neighborhhod Cordial Calvinist
Woody.

I have to agree with ref. I think the key word is the object of the action..and that word Kosmos has a long list of meanings that have nothing to do with the totality of mankind

1) an apt and harmonious arrangement or constitution, order, government

2) ornament, decoration, adornment, i.e. the arrangement of the stars,
'the heavenly hosts', as the ornament of the heavens. 1 Pet. 3:3

3) the world, the universe

4) the circle of the earth, the earth

5) the inhabitants of the earth, men, the human family

6) the ungodly multitude; the whole mass of men alienated from God, and therefore hostile to the cause of Christ

7) world affairs, the aggregate of things earthly

a) the whole circle of earthly goods, endowments riches, advantages, pleasures, etc, which although hollow and frail and fleeting, stir desire, seduce from God and are obstacles to the cause of Christ

8) any aggregate or general collection of particulars of any sort

a) the Gentiles as contrasted to the Jews (Rom. 11:12 etc)

b) of believers only, John 1:29; 3:16; 3:17; 6:33; 12:47 1 Cor. 4:9; 2 Cor. 5:19

 

[Allen2]

It seems to me that to list the passages in John, such as 1:29;3:16,17 as places where kosmos refers to the world of believers(whatever that expression can mean) is to beg the question. If we begin by asking, when kosmos is used in Jn1:29,etc., what does it mean? The natural sense would be EVERY ONE, unless one begins with a theological axe to grind, such as limited atonement. In Jn12:47{"For I did not come to judge the world, but to save it} , Jesus clearly refers to everyone in the human race to define the desired object of His mission, unless we start with a prior committment to irresistible grace.
2. Verses using the words "all" bear on this issue:
a. In the well-known contrast between Adam and Christ in Rom 5:18, Paul writes, "just as the result of one trespass was condemnation for all men, so also the result of one act of right. was justif. for all men". Are we saying that the 1st all is universal, but the 2nd all is restricted? One what grounds?
b. When Paul tells Timothy, "...God our Savior...wants all men to be saved and to come to a knowledge of the truth", and "the living God who is the savior of all men, namely of [those who] believe" and "there has appeared God's saving grace for all men", that He only loves and desires salvation for the "elect" (1Tim.2:3-4; 1Tim.4:10;Titus 2:11)? Does it not appear that God's heart is as big as the entire world and only our foolish rejection of an accomplished salvations damns us and not some prior decree? Al

 

[rnmomof7]

6th April 2003 at 08:58 PM Allen2 said this in Post #29

It seems to me that to list the passages in John, such as 1:29;3:16,17 as places where kosmos refers to the world of believers(whatever that expression can mean) is to beg the question. If we begin by asking, when kosmos is used in Jn1:29,etc., what does it mean? The natural sense would be EVERY ONE, unless one begins with a theological axe to grind, such as limited atonement. In Jn12:47{"For I did not come to judge the world, but to save it} , Jesus clearly refers to everyone in the human race to define the desired object of His mission, unless we start with a prior committment to irresistible grace.
2. Verses using the words "all" bear on this issue:
a. In the well-known contrast between Adam and Christ in Rom 5:18, Paul writes, "just as the result of one trespass was condemnation for all men, so also the result of one act of right. was justif. for all men". Are we saying that the 1st all is universal, but the 2nd all is restricted? One what grounds?
b. When Paul tells Timothy, "...God our Savior...wants all men to be saved and to come to a knowledge of the truth", and "the living God who is the savior of all men, namely of [those who] believe" and "there has appeared God's saving grace for all men", that He only loves and desires salvation for the "elect" (1Tim.2:3-4; 1Tim.4:10;Titus 2:11)? Does it not appear that God's heart is as big as the entire world and only our foolish rejection of an accomplished salvations damns us and not some prior decree? Al

You are reading an English translation of a Greek word.. so you "natural reading" is not all that clear..

If God wants all men saved why aren't they? Why Did He cause some to be born in a time or place where they could not hear the gospel and be saved?

For your reading of the scripture to be accurate all men must be saved..there would be a universal salvation.

 

[bird]

Today at 05:42 AM rnmomof7 said this in Post #30




You are reading an English translation of a Greek word.. so you "natural reading" is not all that clear..

If God wants all men saved why aren't they? Why Did He cause some to be born in a time or place where they could not hear the gospel and be saved?

For your reading of the scripture to be accurate all men must be saved..there would be a universal salvation.

 

again, i ask, why are you so certain they are not? 

 

bird

 

[Reformationist]

Yesterday at 05:58 PM Allen2 said this in Post #29

In the well-known contrast between Adam and Christ in Rom 5:18, Paul writes, "just as the result of one trespass was condemnation for all men, so also the result of one act of right. was justif. for all men". Are we saying that the 1st all is universal, but the 2nd all is restricted? One what grounds?

Well, that is quite clear.  Look at what the "act of righteousness" resulted in: "resulting in justification of life."  So, we should ask ourselves, "What does it mean to be justified?" and "has what it means to be justified been granted to all men?"  If not, then it can not mean "all" as in "every single person."  So, what does the word "dikaiosis" [justification] mean?  From Strong's Concordance:

dikaiosis - the act of God declaring men free from guilt and acceptable to Him.

So now we must ask ourselves, "have all men been declared free from guilt and acceptable to God?"  I can't see how anyone would make this assumption.  So, if not all men have been declared "free from guilt and acceptable to God" then not all men can have been "justified unto life."  So, by obvious process of deduction, if not all men have been "justified unto life" then it can't be possible that the gift of "justification unto life" was given to all men.

On another note, the word "pas" [all], also means "some of all types."

 

Does it not appear that God's heart is as big as the entire world and only our foolish rejection of an accomplished salvations damns us and not some prior decree? Al

See, this assumption makes some pretty strong grammatical errors.  If I were to say to you, "I accomplished the payment of your mortgage/rent" it really wouldn't matter whether you rejected it or not.  What you are touching on is the issue of whether, by choice, you can lose or give back your salvation.  It has nothing to do with being saved initially.  If Jesus, by His death, accomplished your salvation (notice the tense) then you are saved.  If He did not, then there is no sacrifice that will propitiate the wrath of God for you.  Understand, I am talking about salvation, not regeneration.  There is a significant theological difference.

God bless

 

[rnmomof7]

Today at 07:26 AM bird said this in Post #31



 

again, i ask, why are you so certain they are not? 

 

bird

Do you believe that all men without exception are going to heaven?

 

[bird]

Today at 08:04 PM rnmomof7 said this in Post #33




Do you believe that all men without exception are going to heaven?

 

dear momof7,

 

i have hope for all men.   how could i not?  

 

still i ask, why are you so certain that all will not?

 

bird

 

[Allen2]

You wanted to know why all men aren't saved if this is what God desires:
a. Simply, many reject what God has provided thru Christ.
b. People will not perish because of any lack in Christ's atonement, or any lack in God's passionate desire to see them saved. We are freely invited to a relationship with God and the onus is on us. God is drawing all of us (Jn.12:32)--this drawing is NOT irresistible.
c. What troubles Calv. about this position is they understand Divine sovty as primarily power. The great theme in both testaments is that God's rule and pursuit of sinners is the story of LOVE; John does not say, "God is power", but getting to the heart of our Lord's essence says "God is Love"(IJn4:8).

 

[Allen2]

Hey Ref; re Rom.5:18b,"So also the result of one act of rtswas just. that brings life for all men", the Adam-Christ contrast is stated very compactly. Adam rebelled and ALL suffer; Christ willingly went to the cross, rt standing with God is available for all. This is a universalism of availability, but sadly not of result. Cf. also Rom.11:32, "God has consigned all men to disobedience, that he may have mercy on all." Does this really mean, in spite of appearances, "God has consigned every last human to disobedience, that he may have mercy on SOME?" What could Paul have meant when he proclaimed to the sages in Athens, "God now commands all people everywhere to repent", Acts 17:3O. Is Paul speaking of everyone or some who will without fail be equipped to repent? And what is the pt of the warning for those who could never repent even if their [eternal] lives depended on it?

You said that if Jesus accomplished your salvation, then you are saved. You can't really mean that, do you? What about a sinner's situation, PRIOR to their conversion in faith and repentance: were they already saved? Years before their baptism of repentance and acknowledgment of Christ's Lordship, were they already in rt standing with God? You're making me type too much and I are not zacktly a great turpist...Enjoying the dialogue--your favorite former Calvinist, Al

 

[CCWoody]

Today at 08:54 AM Reformationist said this in Post #32



Well, that is quite clear.  Look at what the "act of righteousness" resulted in: "resulting in justification of life."  So, we should ask ourselves, "What does it mean to be justified?" and "has what it means to be justified been granted to all men?"  If not, then it can not mean "all" as in "every single person."  So, what does the word "dikaiosis" [justification] mean?  From Strong's Concordance:

dikaiosis - the act of God declaring men free from guilt and acceptable to Him.

So now we must ask ourselves, "have all men been declared free from guilt and acceptable to God?"  I can't see how anyone would make this assumption.  So, if not all men have been declared "free from guilt and acceptable to God" then not all men can have been "justified unto life."  So, by obvious process of deduction, if not all men have been "justified unto life" then it can't be possible that the gift of "justification unto life" was given to all men.

On another note, the word "pas" [all], also means "some of all types."

Why do the non-Calvinists always stop when they find the word all?  Were all baptised into Christ's death?  Were all buried with Him?  Will all be raised in the likeness of His resurrection?

Not if one is willing to be honest with Romans 6:3-5.  How, then can we say that all men must always be all men.  Isn't it more likely that the many who were in Adam died, but the many who are in Christ will live?

But, then I preach to the choir.

Your friendly neighborhood Cordial Calvinist
Woody.

 

[CCWoody]

Today at 04:44 PM Allen2 said this in Post #36

You said that if Jesus accomplished your salvation, then you are saved. You can't really mean that, do you? What about a sinner's situation, PRIOR to their conversion in faith and repentance: were they already saved? Years before their baptism of repentance and acknowledgment of Christ's Lordship, were they already in rt standing with God?

Yes, they were already in right standing with the Lord:

• Not Ashamed of the Gospel
  Therefore do not be ashamed of the testimony of our Lord, nor of me His prisoner, but share with me in the sufferings for the gospel according to the power of God, who has saved us and called us with a holy calling, not according to our works, but according to His own purpose and grace which was given to us in Christ Jesus before time began, but has now been revealed by the appearing of our Savior Jesus Christ....

I didn't say it; I'm just repeating it.  We were saved before time began.  Please note the conspicious absence of an all.  Please note the use of the past tense verb SAVED.

Your friendly neighborhood Cordial Calvinist
Woody.

 

[rnmomof7]

Today at 05:20 PM Allen2 said this in Post #35

You wanted to know why all men aren't saved if this is what God desires:
a. Simply, many reject what God has provided thru Christ.
b. People will not perish because of any lack in Christ's atonement, or any lack in God's passionate desire to see them saved. We are freely invited to a relationship with God and the onus is on us. God is drawing all of us (Jn.12:32)--this drawing is NOT irresistible.
c. What troubles Calv. about this position is they understand Divine sovty as primarily power. The great theme in both testaments is that God's rule and pursuit of sinners is the story of LOVE; John does not say, "God is power", but getting to the heart of our Lord's essence says "God is Love"(IJn4:8).

If Jesus died for the sins of all men then all their sins are already paid for..how is it God could demand them to pay in hell for what Christ already paid for?
Is that "fair"
Who was saved at the cross anyone?

The trouble with non calvinists is they do not think through their doctrine:>)

 

[rnmomof7]

Today at 05:44 PM Allen2 said this in Post #36

You said that if Jesus accomplished your salvation, then you are saved. You can't really mean that, do you? What about a sinner's situation, PRIOR to their conversion in faith and repentance: were they already saved? Years before their baptism of repentance and acknowledgment of Christ's Lordship, were they already in rt standing with God? You're making me type too much and I are not zacktly a great turpist...Enjoying the dialogue--your favorite former Calvinist, Al

Everyone that Father intended to save was saved at the cross. Everyone that was saved at the cross will hear the gospel, repent and believe