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!

An honest look at "free-will" #1: Gen.3:4-6

Discussion in 'Other Christian Denominations' started by canadyjd, Feb 10, 2007.

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

    BobRyan Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 27, 2002
    Messages:
    32,913
    Likes Received:
    71
    Faith:
    Non Baptist Christian
    You seem to have answered your own question.



    Why is there a need of deception of it were true that simply suggesting the deed was sufficient?

    Adam becomes fallen - sinful and his moral character tainted by sin could not resist sin. God places "war" between humanity and the devil in Gen 3 so that against our sinful nature - we would not be at ease with Satan.

    But then He does even more "He Draws ALL mankind unto Him" John 12:32 thus enabling what depravity disables - via supernatural means.

    In Christ,

    Bob
     
  2. Heavenly Pilgrim

    Heavenly Pilgrim New Member

    Joined:
    May 7, 2006
    Messages:
    9,295
    Likes Received:
    0


    HP: I believe you answered Can… well enough. If one cannot understand that the fall was caused by sin and the sin was disobedience to a known commandment of God, and that if our Just God administers punishment for sin that it was chosen of ones own volition, deceived or not, ………….they are either willingly ignoring the truth or simply deceived.

    I totally disagree with your assessment that that sin cannot be resisted. God not only states that it can be, but that we should resist it. How many times have you read the verse concerning God’s words to Cain? Here it is once more. Ge 4:6 ¶ And the LORD said unto Cain, Why art thou wroth? and why is thy countenance fallen?
    7 If thou doest well, shalt thou not be accepted? and if thou doest not well, sin lieth at the door. And unto thee shall be his desire, and thou shalt rule over him.

    Sin is blameworthy, and as such clearly indicates the possibility of contrary choice.

    Absolutely we can become bound to sin to the point that it can be rightfully stated we will not choose differently, but if sin is still predicable to ones intents and subsequent actions, it is not that we ‘cannot do’ otherwise, but that we ‘will not’ do otherwise.

    If something cannot be resisted in an absolute sense, it ceases to be moral in nature, and sin cannot be predicated of doing that which necessity dictates. You could be rightfully held accountable for the actions that lead you to experience such a state of bondage, but morality stops where choice ends. In order to do anything moral, either blameworthy or praiseworthy, there must be the ability to do something other than what ones does under the very same set of circumstances. When you remove the possibility of contrary choice from the equation, you end up with necessitated deterministic fatalism, but not morality of any kind or degree.

    Sin is at its very foundations a moral choice of selfishness as opposed to benevolence. No choice possible? No sin can be predicated.
     
    #62 Heavenly Pilgrim, Feb 22, 2007
    Last edited by a moderator: Feb 22, 2007
  3. Heavenly Pilgrim

    Heavenly Pilgrim New Member

    Joined:
    May 7, 2006
    Messages:
    9,295
    Likes Received:
    0


    HP: We have been over your false notion that all have the opportunity of salvation. I would agree that God draws all men to Himself, yet that does not equate to all having the opportunity to hear, understand and respond to the gospel. There is not a shred of evidence in Scripture that alludes to that assumption, but quite to the contrary, specifically states that God can allow whomsoever he wills the opportunity without being a respecter of persons. All justice demands is that all have an opportunity to choose benevolence as opposed to selfishness at first light of moral agency. Once we become guilty there is nothing that demands salvation be offered. God is not under any obligation to offer any willing rebel salvation. Scripture clearly states He offers it to whomsoever He wills.

    If sin is an unavoidable consequence, in that man cannot resist sin at any point and time in their lives, they are not even moral beings. I have spoken to you enough to properly assume that when you mention God’s drawing you are referring to God offering His salvation to all in that all have an opportunity to hear and respond. If that is true, and also the fact that you say that 'what sin disabled, this universal drawing enables,' establishes the fact that no man is a moral agent until they hear and understand the gospel message. I could only hope you would see the need to re-think or re-state your position. It would appear to me to be at antipodes with Scriptures that indicate even the heathen, who have never heard the gospel message, are indeed moral agents and as such responsible for the light and knowledge they do have and their willing disobedience to that light and understanding.
     
  4. canadyjd

    canadyjd Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 13, 2005
    Messages:
    12,944
    Likes Received:
    1,661
    Faith:
    Baptist
    Then we agree. God did not tell Eve the tree was "bad".

    Apparently, merely suggesting the deed wasn't sufficient. What is more important is the nature of the deception. The deception is that we can choose good over evil according to our own human will and be "like God" when we do it.

    So, are you agreeing with me that Adam's "human will" was so tainted by the fall and sin in his life, he could not reisit sin?

    I am not sure what you are saying here. Are you saying that all human will is somehow "reset" to the "free-will" status that Adam and Eve had prior to the fall? Does that mean mankind, prior to faith in Christ, are no longer under the influence of sin? Perhaps you could provide scripture for that.

    peace to you:praying:
     
  5. canadyjd

    canadyjd Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 13, 2005
    Messages:
    12,944
    Likes Received:
    1,661
    Faith:
    Baptist


    And so, unable or unwilling to answer the questions, and rejecting what scripture says in favor of your own version of what you wish scripture said, you begin the personal attacks.

    peace to you:praying:
     
  6. Heavenly Pilgrim

    Heavenly Pilgrim New Member

    Joined:
    May 7, 2006
    Messages:
    9,295
    Likes Received:
    0


    HP: If I told you not to drink the water, for if you do you will certanly die, would I be telling you that the water is bad?
     
  7. canadyjd

    canadyjd Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 13, 2005
    Messages:
    12,944
    Likes Received:
    1,661
    Faith:
    Baptist
    I'll answer your question if you will answer mine?

    peace to you:praying:
     
  8. Heavenly Pilgrim

    Heavenly Pilgrim New Member

    Joined:
    May 7, 2006
    Messages:
    9,295
    Likes Received:
    0
    Can..., I will try my best. Which question in particular do you desire an answer?
     
  9. canadyjd

    canadyjd Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 13, 2005
    Messages:
    12,944
    Likes Received:
    1,661
    Faith:
    Baptist
    Great! If we take this one question at a time, we might begin to understand each other. I will answer your question first.

    Yes, you would be telling me the water is "bad"; poisoned in some way. I would understand that.

    Now my question. Do you believe Adam and Eve had "free-will" before the fall?

    peace to you:praying:
     
  10. Heavenly Pilgrim

    Heavenly Pilgrim New Member

    Joined:
    May 7, 2006
    Messages:
    9,295
    Likes Received:
    0


    HP: Absolutely. They were responsible moral agents.
     
  11. canadyjd

    canadyjd Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 13, 2005
    Messages:
    12,944
    Likes Received:
    1,661
    Faith:
    Baptist
    Just to be sure, I am not asking about moral agency. I asked about "free-will". I assume you believe they had free-will before the fall.

    It is your turn. Do you have another question?

    peace to you:praying:
     
  12. BobRyan

    BobRyan Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 27, 2002
    Messages:
    32,913
    Likes Received:
    71
    Faith:
    Non Baptist Christian



    Or they simply want to argue a point "no matter what the evidence that contoverts it".

    I am arguing that Apart from God man can not resist. Are you arguing that APART from God man on his own can be righteous - resist sin - do good works of the good that is within him naturally - apart from God??

    God loves ALL, convicts ALL, draws ALL - therefore He can call ALL to obedience because He is not arbitrarily or partially selecting out SOME for obedience and others for rebellion.

    God is calling ALL to obedience because may be born-again and enabled to obey through the provisions of the Gospel 1Tim 2:4.

    The drunk may not be able to choose all his actions wisely - but when choosing to GET drunk he became guilty. The sinner may choose the Gospel "exit" from his state of sinful rebellion. But in choosing NO -- he then remains entangled in rebellion as Romans 3 states. He can always choose the "gospel way of escape" (1Cor 10) but as long as he says no to it - he is enslaved according to Romans 6 and Eph 2:1-3

    In Christ,

    Bob
     
  13. BobRyan

    BobRyan Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 27, 2002
    Messages:
    32,913
    Likes Received:
    71
    Faith:
    Non Baptist Christian




    You seem to have answered your own question.

    We observe that God CONTINUES to tell us that sin results in death - as we see in Romans 6. We all "get it".

    Show me the saint that thinks "don't eat this poison or you will die" is just another way to say "this poison is not bad for you".

    Show me the bible text that says such a wild thing.

    Having nothing that makes that argument - how can you simply invent it?

    In Christ,

    bob
     
    #73 BobRyan, Feb 23, 2007
    Last edited by a moderator: Feb 23, 2007
  14. Heavenly Pilgrim

    Heavenly Pilgrim New Member

    Joined:
    May 7, 2006
    Messages:
    9,295
    Likes Received:
    0


    HP: Free will is a condition of moral agency. Moral agency cannot exist without a free will. We might stay focused for a minute and see why if at all you might have a disagreement concerning this issue.
     
  15. Heavenly Pilgrim

    Heavenly Pilgrim New Member

    Joined:
    May 7, 2006
    Messages:
    9,295
    Likes Received:
    0


    HP: The ability to resist sin or choose righteousness is a part of our moral makeup granted to us by God. It has nothing to do with being ‘apart from’ God or ‘with God.’ Remove the ability to resist sin, and you eliminate any notion of morality, in particular sin. Sin is, in and of itself, a willful choice of selfishness as opposed to benevolence. If it was not for God instilling the abilities of contrary choice, moral agency would be impossible to even conceive of. We might have been rocks or dead stumps without the ability to resist sinful impulses, but not responsible moral agents as we are. It is not that man cannot, but that man will not choose right.


    HP: What about those He promises to send a delusion to instead of conviction? Bob, God is not a respecter of persons, and some not hearing the gospel message or not having the gospel message taken to them does not make Him a respecter of persons because only some will have the opportunity to hear. The gospel message is all about grace, not fairness in the opportunity to receive the message. All God is under obligation to grant to man is to give him the abilities and understanding of His commands in some measure and a free will to choose benevolence or selfishness. When you deny that man cannot do right at first light of moral agency, you destroy the very thing that God is under obligation to grant to man if he is going to hold man morally accountable. Then to balance this false dogma of constitutional depravity you create a choice for everyman to hear ad respond to the gospel which is no where found in Scripture. The gospel is sufficient for all, and was designed in such a way as to allow for the possibility that all ‘if granted an opportunity,’ could hear the gospel and accept its conditions. You make God necessitated where He is not, and deny the very circumstances in which He is.
     
    #75 Heavenly Pilgrim, Feb 23, 2007
    Last edited by a moderator: Feb 23, 2007
  16. Gerhard Ebersoehn

    Gerhard Ebersoehn Active Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Jul 31, 2004
    Messages:
    9,025
    Likes Received:
    8
    Faith:
    Non Baptist Christian
    GE:

    Why keep on trying to cut up into pieces the one robe of the righteousness of Christ? "Without Me you cannot do anything"; "I am able, through Jesus Christ who gives me the ability".

    One thing is undeniable, no, two things, "No one comes to the Father but through Me", " No one can come to the Father unless I draw Him" (or was it it the other way round, "No one comes to Me unless the Father draws him"? Makes no difference in any case.)

    You see in this 'free-will'? I see the sovereignty of a mercifull God, overcoming the rebellious 'free' will of man.
     
  17. Heavenly Pilgrim

    Heavenly Pilgrim New Member

    Joined:
    May 7, 2006
    Messages:
    9,295
    Likes Received:
    0



    HP: Yes God is sovereign and yes He is a Merciful God, and without and apart from His mercy, sinful man has absolutely no hope. Apart from the powers and abilities God grants to man, man can indeed do nothing.

    Although all the above statements are indeed true, there are other issues at stake as well, God’s justice for one. If man is born is a state that disallows any other outcome than to be sinners and that continually, man is a sinner by necessity. If that is true, and it is also true that God punishes sin, God could not avoid being seen as completely unjust for punishing man for an inescapable necessitated state.

    To this BR adds a notion completely unsubstanciated in Scripture, i.e., somehow God is indeed just due to the notion ( that he claims exists,) that all men are granted the opportunity to hear and respond to the gospel. Does not Srcipture clearly state this is not only ‘not the case,’ but is simply not in the plans of God, as clearly stated by the following passage? “Ro 9:18 Therefore hath he mercy on whom he will have mercy, and whom he will he hardeneth.

    Moral accountability demands certain conditions, without which any thought of punishment for ‘failure to do the impossible’ is outside the purview of justice. If man is a responsible moral agent, and God is Just and punishes man for moral failure as Scripture clearly states He is and does, the following must as well be true. Man is indeed in possession of a free will at some point in time in his life. Man is endowed by his Creator with not only this ability of contrary choice, but is granted enough knowledge and light as to comprehend not only the command but the obligation to obey. Man must also be granted by his Creator the necessary abilities to choose in accordance to, or in opposition to, such light and abilities, again, if his Creator is Just in demanding obedience and punishing all infractions of His demands as Scripture informs us He is and He does.

    You are right in that man's will is indeed rebellious, but rocks are not rebellious, are they? Man must have the ability to do something other than what he does under the very same set of circumstances, but REFUSES to choose the right, in order to be seen as rebellious. If man has no ability to do anything other than what he does, i.e., sin and that continually from birth, rebellion is impossible to conceive of. Sin becomes a mere unaviodable contagion that is nothing more than a necessitated fatalistic notion resulting in God being seen as unjust for punishing man for failure to avoid the 'impossible to avoid,' a feat God Himself could not do.
     
    #77 Heavenly Pilgrim, Feb 24, 2007
    Last edited by a moderator: Feb 24, 2007
  18. Gerhard Ebersoehn

    Gerhard Ebersoehn Active Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Jul 31, 2004
    Messages:
    9,025
    Likes Received:
    8
    Faith:
    Non Baptist Christian
    GE:

    Catch a breather, friend, and stop a while argueing with yourself so hard!

    Because sin had become an unavoidable and caught already, disease that is nothing less than a fatal reality resulting in man being justly punished for failure to avoid the 'impossible to avoid' -- a feat God only could do for him.
     
  19. Heavenly Pilgrim

    Heavenly Pilgrim New Member

    Joined:
    May 7, 2006
    Messages:
    9,295
    Likes Received:
    0


    HP Sorry GE. I do not follow you here. Could you possibly explain it another way? Thanks.
     
  20. canadyjd

    canadyjd Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 13, 2005
    Messages:
    12,944
    Likes Received:
    1,661
    Faith:
    Baptist
    I really don't want to loose the focus of the Gen. 3 passage. We would do that if we changed the discussion from the specfics of the passage to a general discussion of whether man is a responsible moral agent if he doesn't have "free-will".

    Let me ask the next question. You have stated that you believe Adam and Eve had freewill before the fall. Do you believe the entrance of sin into their lives after the fall effected their freewill in anyway? If so, how?

    peace to you
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
Loading...