praise_yeshua
Well-known member
Slander. I'm not a fool. Prove that I'm a fool or retract your slander.
Your claims of Blasphemy doesn't create fear in me. Christ Jesus is my Lord and Savior. You have no say over this.
The Elect
- Thread starter The Rogue Tomato
- Start date
Your claims of Blasphemy doesn't create fear in me. Christ Jesus is my Lord and Savior. You have no say over this.
brightfame52
Well-known member
Gods Eternal Purpose couldnt be changed by Adam, Christ in Gods Purpose was already slain for sin Rev 13:8
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 of the world.
makesends
Well-known member
Your reasoning is circular here. You are only repeating your assertion to apply it to what I said.
Again. Assertion.
You only attempt to state what I believe and to say that you disagree. Your verses are only applicable to the matter if they are interpreted through your self-deterministic POV. Even if, as you claim, it is only natural, it is still apparent that 'coming to drink' is caused by God, (and that, by design), as First Cause. You don't seem to understand, that his 'winning us' and 'wooing us' and so on, is still him doing it, and us responding by causes. I do not dispute that we will what we will. Of course we do. My point is simple: Nothing, except the actions of First Cause, happen unless they are caused to happen. Our decisions are still legitimately ours; WE make them. God does not make them FOR us. But what happens, in every detail, is nevertheless caused to happen precisely, down to the motions of the smallest physical particle and the principles by which it moves, and every detail of the metaphysical, to include the very principles by which all creation acts, exists and is sustained.
No. It's not just to SHOW his goodness, though it does that too. It is to produce precisely the members of the Body of Christ, and the Bride of Christ, bone of his bone and flesh of his flesh. We are God's Dwelling Place, and he is very particular how that looks, when we see him as he is.
If there's no value in the actions of sin, sinners, and evil, then HOW, I ask, did it happen? By free will? HOW did free will do it, if God did not cause that it be? Are there billions of little first causes trotting about the planet? Show, without circular argument, how there can be more than one first cause —that is, without assuming it.
praise_yeshua
Well-known member
"Already slain"? Then why did Christ die at Calvary?
You don't understand this metaphorical statement. Just as you don't understand the Gospel. You can. I hope you do.
praise_yeshua
Well-known member
Assertion. Explain how you've determined I've made a circular argument. I haven't. We agree that Adam was peccable. The proof is in the fact that Adam sinned. This is not a circular argument. It is a self evidence argument. Those that are complete in Christ do not sin.
Nope. Self evidence given the declaration of the Scripture. We can have a formal debate and deal with each claim relative to a organized systematic debate. Your choice.
Not apparent at all. I've given you plausible alternative that you reject.
Primary cause is relative to intent. You must deal with the "intent" of God. I know you can. Yet, you are excluding such from what you're stating as "First Cause"
Sure. God forced a choice.
I will answer the rest later.
Last edited:
brightfame52
Well-known member
Yes in the Mind and Purpose of God Christ had been slain from the foundation. The word slain in the original is a perfect passive participle, Perfect means: Action that has been completed in the past yet has results occurring in the present are expressed by the perfect tense.
You are right, I don't believe that. GOD cannot create evil people by ay means let alone by a surrogate sinner so we were created perfect andi nncoent and we sinners ARE the fall, not a consequence of it.
Since we are born with a will inclined or addicted to evil then our birth or even conception, cannot have been our creation. Period.
praise_yeshua
Well-known member
This is a different claim than what you made earlier.
You made a 1 to 1 claim. Meaning 1 action 1 result.
You now rightfully recognize that this is a 1 action with many purposes. Or a 1 to many" plan. Some things transpired according to the perfect purpose of God and some are conditional.
praise_yeshua
Well-known member
That is great observation!
Just another reason why the "Calvinist way" doesn't work. (pun intended).
You call a will addicted to evil as free but it is a false freedom. FREE means uncoerced by any force outside of our will such as an enslavement of the will to evil. Making a decision in our own favour is not a sign of freedom of our will but of self preservation...it is a right decision but still morally constrained by our sinfulness. An addict can request help but few can help themselves and the fact that we cannot save ourselves from sin makes your analogy moot.
We cannot define the spiritual by the worldly except in metaphor which is always inadequate to the job.
brightfame52
Well-known member
God created the wicked Prov 16:4
4 The Lord hath made all things for himself: yea, even the wicked for the day of evil.
praise_yeshua
Well-known member
Free to choose within constraints. Not the absense of freedom. Limited freedom. Choices have impact but they do not ALL have innate power in and of themselves. Some do. Some do not. Example....
1Co 9:5 Have we not power to lead about a sister, a wife, as well as other apostles, and as the brethren of the Lord, and Cephas?
1Co 9:6 Or I only and Barnabas, have not we power to forbear working?
This is a complicated construct and I would welcome a discussion of what "coercion" actually means. It is rare to have to have a meaningful discuss such as this. Coercion is resistible. You are treating it is inevitable.
praise_yeshua
Well-known member
You need to study the Scriptures. Not the English mistaken translations that are produced at the whims of man.
ImCo,
the definition of a free will is a will free of the coercion or constraint of any other person's will or power, so a will limited by sin is not a free will at all but a will with the appearance of freedom for those needing to accept the doublethink position of having a free will and having a limited will are the same thing...
praise_yeshua
Well-known member
This approach is untenable. Impossible. (and there is no need to make a "God can do anything" argument here. Which is contrary to His own Character. God operatings within the CONFINES of His own Character. God can not lie. God can not sin. Based upon God's declared Character, if God lied, He would commit sin. However, this does not mean that God shares what He knows in every circumstance. God does not owe us information. In fact, this is very essence of freewill. "Figure it out on your own".).......
Which is what this life is about. Having it our way. Our way is based upon our own determinations. (which includes believing lies or not. Seeking or not. Constructing our own imaginations).
There is no possible way given God's Character and the express declaration of His will to determine and prove that one action in primary cause resulted in everything that is being primarily driven by first cause. To then include the primary cause of ceded causality it is untenable to claim that first cause created everything perfectly as God intended.
In fact, we can know for certain that it didn't. God INTERVENES in humanity. When God intervenes in humanity it is mostly to the benefit of all humanity. If first cause created all things as desired, God would not have to intervene in "primary cause" to keep everything in accordance with His will.
Thusly, God must take action to prevent "secondary cause" from impacting First Cause.
Last edited:
praise_yeshua
Well-known member
You're wrong. Free Will is multifaceted. It is not limited to your characterization.
As I have said and now repeat, free will does not cede power or enablement. At times it does and at times it does not. You are oversimplifying causality.
Your only problem is no one thinks free will is absolute
Tenets of a libertarian free will
The Five Tenets of Soft Libertarianism
Ultimate responsibility (UR) Ultimate responsibility indicates the ultimate origin of decisions.
Agent causation (AC) A person is the source and origin of his choices.
The principle of alternative possibilities (AP) At crucial times, the ability to choose or refrain from choosing is genuinely available.
The reality of will-setting moments A person does not always have the ability to choose to the contrary. Certain free choices result in the loss of freedom.
The distinction between freedom of responsibility and freedom of integrity The Bible presents freedom as a permission (the freedom of responsibility) and as a power (the freedom of integrity).
Keathley, Kenneth. Salvation and Sovereignty: A Molinist Approach (p. 73). B&H Publishing Group. Kindle Edition.
AGREED!
...except that if our conception, birth, is our creation then the doctrine of being sinful by being conceived, born, in Adam denies this truth. We had no choice not to be sinful, we were coerced by our conception in Adam to be sinful, me and thee...
praise_yeshua
Well-known member
Stick around. I like the way you're actually trying to deal with this.
Issue. Adam was born at a specific state of functionality with specific innate knowledge that he did not have to LEARN........ through experience.
WE... (you and I both) are born innocent with very little innate knowledge. We begin LEARNING very soon after birth. What we LEARN.... confines US to certain actions. We learn sin from others. We even learn sin from the law.
Rom 7:7 What shall we say then? Is the law sin? God forbid. Nay, I had not known sin, but by the law: for I had not known lust, except the law had said, Thou shalt not covet.
The knowledge we consume from others leads us to sin. The same with the Gospel, the message of God in the Gospel relative to who presents the gospel.... LEADS US either to redemption or damnation.
Thusly, we are our brother's keepers. This a fact that Caan rejected. He only cared about himself. Which is another thing common in Calvinism. It is a self centered religion.
So are you a supralapsarian
