1. Welcome to Baptist Board, a friendly forum to discuss the Baptist Faith in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to all the features that our community has to offer.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!

A Biblical and Logical Defense for Libertarian Free Will

Discussion in 'Baptist Theology & Bible Study' started by Skandelon, Jan 28, 2011.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Skandelon

    Skandelon <b>Moderator</b>

    Joined:
    Jan 19, 2003
    Messages:
    9,638
    Likes Received:
    1
    You keep attaching the word determining to the word influence which is confusing the matter because it presumes your position....(that influences are determinative) Remove that word and you'll have the sin nature influencing you when you sin rather than determining you to sin. See the difference?
     
  2. Andy T.

    Andy T. Active Member

    Joined:
    Apr 8, 2005
    Messages:
    3,147
    Likes Received:
    0
    Skand, quick question. One of your arguments against C is that God is essentially the author of sin because God is the one who 'sets the rules' and allows/ordains/determines that man is born with a sin nature. However, I'm not sure your position escapes the same charge - because you also believe we are born with a sin nature, right (albeit to a different degree)? Before we are able to do or know anything right or wrong, we all have this sin nature that "influences" us to sin? And God is the one who set those rules in place, right? If not, is our sin nature just a cosmic accident? So the question for you is - who is responsible for little innocent babies being born with a sin nature?
     
  3. psalms109:31

    psalms109:31 Active Member

    Joined:
    Jun 5, 2006
    Messages:
    3,602
    Likes Received:
    6
    Responsible

    We are responsible for our sin nature. Sin came from our self and God gives us over to our own evil desire.

    God created us perfect, just like He did with King Tyre, and Satan until wickedness was found in them.

    Where we disagree with is just as He gives us over to our own evil desire. He will give us over to Jesus whoever turns to Him our only hope for salvation.

    If God wanted us to only go down one road and we only can go that way then He would of only provided one road from the beginning instead He gave us two through His word.

    It is His will to give us these two direction, so man can only blame themselves where they end up.

    Like I tell everyone, if man does nothing with His word, God does nothing. God has made the first move by His word, what are you going to do with it?
     
  4. Benjamin

    Benjamin Well-Known Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Oct 6, 2004
    Messages:
    8,423
    Likes Received:
    1,160
    Faith:
    Baptist
    If I may give my 2 cents:


    How do we know what is right or wrong, good or evil? Knowledge. Knowledge makes us want to be as gods (Gen 3:22) and to judge between good and evil, BUT there is only One that is Good, perfect in judgment. Man falls short and this is by his own doing while in disobedience.


    In Adam, we all “chose” to sin and this influence is through “our” judgment because of “our” knowledge.


    Yes God did, after man, through Adam, chose to be disobedient. (Not that God didn't know man would make this choice, mind you)


    No, it was a choice that had consequences.


    Man (and woman), all of us.
     
  5. glfredrick

    glfredrick New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 5, 2010
    Messages:
    4,996
    Likes Received:
    2
    Factoring infinity in mathematics and seeing an actual infinity (apart from God, that is) in the cosmos are two different things. Numbers are just that, and like words, semantics can set the stage for things that are impossible in the real world.


    Is a triangle always 180*? Depends on which form of mathematics is applied to figuring the area. It can be both less than and more than if factored differently, which you well know.
     
  6. glfredrick

    glfredrick New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 5, 2010
    Messages:
    4,996
    Likes Received:
    2
    Sort of, but not a dichotomy as you've described it. Making it an either/or dichotomy leads to a deterministic God and that is not true. We cannot press logic that far, for we are told otherwise in the Revelation from God.

    We can have choices, but the choices are primarily limited to moral issues, and they will tend to go in line with our nature. We cannot use the dichotomy between choice/no choice to eliminate all the Scriptures say about the choice that we do have -- but that choice is not LFW in any sense, for our choices are all bounded by constraints.

    Illustrated mathematically, we know that pi is calculated to an (potential) infinity, but we can also say that we will limit our choice of the number of places factored to 100, or 10, or 2, then work within those parameters, which is both typical and normal in virtually every instance pi is used. In 2nd grade terms, we "round up" and settle on an answer that is not completely truthful, but that works in a pragmatic sense.
     
  7. glfredrick

    glfredrick New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 5, 2010
    Messages:
    4,996
    Likes Received:
    2

    I would say that our new nature changes the parameters of our choices. The Bible says that we are either "slaves to sin" or "slaves to Christ." In both, there are circumstances apart from us that dictate limits in choice. We don't have LFW once we become born again any more than we had before. But, yes, we are freed from our former chains, and they are replace with new chains that are oriented godward. Praise God for that!
     
  8. Andy T.

    Andy T. Active Member

    Joined:
    Apr 8, 2005
    Messages:
    3,147
    Likes Received:
    0
    How is a newborn baby responsible for the nature they are born with?
     
  9. glfredrick

    glfredrick New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 5, 2010
    Messages:
    4,996
    Likes Received:
    2
    Because God said so...

    THAT is why the gospel is truly "good news." Softening the position, theologically, because one feels bad about the "bad news" is not the way to address the issue of our culpability for sin and our position as apart from the kingdom of God by birth.
     
  10. webdog

    webdog Active Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Mar 31, 2005
    Messages:
    24,696
    Likes Received:
    2
    They cannot be...and God does not say so.
     
  11. psalms109:31

    psalms109:31 Active Member

    Joined:
    Jun 5, 2006
    Messages:
    3,602
    Likes Received:
    6
    Repent

    We worry about things we can't even comprehend what God would do about infants that only know how to trust in their parents to do what is right before God with them. If you want to see yourself, just look at your children they could be a reflection of you.

    The point is what we are going to do with what God gave us repent turn to Jesus (righteousness) or continue on our merry way to destruction.

    God is just and He will deal with these infants, mental retarded, senile or whoever and the normal Joe justly.

    Are we going to bury the things given to us by God and the message Christ sent out His disciple's to do or to continue to disciple and send other out with the same message and use our God given gifts to extend His Kingdom?
     
    #111 psalms109:31, Feb 4, 2011
    Last edited by a moderator: Feb 4, 2011
  12. Skandelon

    Skandelon <b>Moderator</b>

    Joined:
    Jan 19, 2003
    Messages:
    9,638
    Likes Received:
    1
    :applause: Thanks Ben. Couldn't have said it better myself!
     
  13. Benjamin

    Benjamin Well-Known Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Oct 6, 2004
    Messages:
    8,423
    Likes Received:
    1,160
    Faith:
    Baptist
    A new born baby will acquire knowledge (through Adam’s deed) and in this knowledge he/she will make judgments, and in these judgments he/she will fall short. In my view it is not that the baby is born a sinner but born with the nature to sin. This is where accountability comes in, for without creaturely accountability there could be no justice in God’s righteous judgment. Deut 32:4.
     
  14. Andy T.

    Andy T. Active Member

    Joined:
    Apr 8, 2005
    Messages:
    3,147
    Likes Received:
    0
    Who gives man his sin nature? What fault did we do to inherit a nature that "influences" us to sin?

    You see, there is not much difference between what you and Skand believe and what Skand tries to pin on C's. In Skand's view, C theology makes God into a violent blackmailer - giving man no choice but to sin (because God judged man in Adam's sin to allow the sin nature to affect mankind). But your view is not much better - God is more like a corrupt briber - he judge's Adam's sin by allowing the sin nature to propagate, "influencing" man to sin.

    So according to Skand's reasoning, your theology makes God into a corrupt briber. Now I don't believe this, but I'm just showing the consistency with Skand's argument against Calvinism. Since we both have theologies that make God out to be a monster (one a blackmailer, the other a briber), maybe we should just abandon all orthodoxy and embrace full-orbed open theism to absolve God altogether.
     
    #114 Andy T., Feb 4, 2011
    Last edited by a moderator: Feb 4, 2011
  15. Skandelon

    Skandelon <b>Moderator</b>

    Joined:
    Jan 19, 2003
    Messages:
    9,638
    Likes Received:
    1
    It is a result of the fall. That result must have been something determined by God. Adam was our representative so when he sinned we all sinned and fell under the curse of the law.

    There is not near as much difference between Arminianism and Calvinism as most people think. Most people just aren't very familiar with true Arminianism. We affirm the doctrine of Original Sin, we just don't believe everyone is born hardened as the dogma of Total Depravity suggests.
     
  16. quantumfaith

    quantumfaith Active Member

    Joined:
    Jan 26, 2010
    Messages:
    6,890
    Likes Received:
    1
    Andy T,

    No disrespect intended, but that is precisely true, if one holds that God purposefully, willfully and intentionally created mankind for the purpose of sinning, then yes, it does make God out to be something other than what many of us see God to be throughout the pages of scripture. Sovereign--yes, but also loving, kind, merciful, just, righteous, holy and so on. When one feels that God "needed" to create sinners in order to display either His wrath or for His glory, that is a human assumption that God needs something, making Him as deterministic as us. (BTW, this is the same "complaint" that Cals have of us non-cals that we assume things. )
     
  17. psalms109:31

    psalms109:31 Active Member

    Joined:
    Jun 5, 2006
    Messages:
    3,602
    Likes Received:
    6
    Reflection

    Actual it is us who worship the creation over the creator. We did it to ourselves when it wasn't created in us but found. He created us perfect in His likeness.

    So it came from ourselves, and now through Jesus we can see God, by getting to know His Son through the word about Him and the words from Him.

    We can continue to be given over to our own evil desire or we can turn to Jesus and God will also give us over to that also.

    I don't believe He inclined us to go no direction, but we through His word was provided two roads not one.

    We are saved not by our choice, but the choice of God to save those who trust in His Son, and condemn those who don't. I do not want to see God through man view of God, but through Jesus the only way to see the Father, the Fathers reflection
     
    #117 psalms109:31, Feb 4, 2011
    Last edited by a moderator: Feb 4, 2011
  18. Skandelon

    Skandelon <b>Moderator</b>

    Joined:
    Jan 19, 2003
    Messages:
    9,638
    Likes Received:
    1
    Good point. Allow me to add, we don't believe the Calvinistic view of God is unjust because he condemns certain people to hell. We believe the Calvinistic view of God is unjust because He offers a pardon to all mankind while only granted a few of them the ability to receive it, all the while expressing a desire for all to come to repentance and a frustration for those who remain unwilling.

    It is deceptive to offer someone a gift you fully know they cannot willingly receive. Especially if you, the giver, are the one who determines the receivers natural abilities. A message of reconciliation sent for every creature certainly implies the ability for every creature to willingly accept it and a doctrine, such a Calvinism, that teaches they can't certainly makes one question if that type of offer can be truly genuine.
     
  19. Andy T.

    Andy T. Active Member

    Joined:
    Apr 8, 2005
    Messages:
    3,147
    Likes Received:
    0
    I never said that God "needed" to create sinners. Maybe some believe that, I do not.

    By your reasoning, our choices are between a blackmailer and a briber. Or open theism. Take your pick.
     
  20. quantumfaith

    quantumfaith Active Member

    Joined:
    Jan 26, 2010
    Messages:
    6,890
    Likes Received:
    1


    That is a totally erroneous assertion Andy. I think you are quite wise and intelligent enough to know that.
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
Loading...