God centered knowledge = Life and Peace
Man centered knowledge = Death and Turmoil
Inherited Sin
Discussion in 'Calvinism & Arminianism Debate' started by HeirofSalvation, Jan 6, 2017.
Page 2 of 2
-
-
That is why God performed the act of mercy of expelling them from the Garden and putting the Angel at the gate to prevent them from returning, to keep them from eating of the Tree of Life in their fallen condition, which would confirm them in their fallen condition for all eternity. That is why Revelation 22 tells us that the Tree of Life will again be available for us to eat in Heaven. -
-
The "unbelief of their heart" had consequences...which Set the Stage for God's redemption through Jesus Christ our Lord...what a beautiful picture of God's Love! Like TCassidy posted earlier, it was God's mercy that Removed them from the Garden, Eternal Guilt and Shame would have been the result had they ate from the tree of Life after the fall. He kicked them out for their own good! -
Man inheriting sin when he ate of the Tree of Knowledge had to do with the way man was created which demonstrates that he was to have free will. When man freely chose to inherit the knowledge of good and evil he was also choosing to be as a God and judge between good and evil. But there is only One Judge and only One King in the kingdom and His judgment is perfect, man falls short in judgment and that is missing the mark of perfection (therein is sin).
Man, although being made in God’s image and likeness and being given the attributes of sense, reason, intellect and volition was NOT given the right to be a god. But in his pride of life and desire he freely chose to believe the lies of the Serpent that he could be as God he set himself up to be a sinner.
(Gen 3:22) And the LORD God said, Behold, the man is become as one of us, to know good and evil: and now, lest he put forth his hand, and take also of the tree of life, and eat, and live for ever:
This freedom allowed man, as designed, to freely be responsible for this sin coming onto the world. God did not determine it upon anyone as God is only Good and created His creatures that way (Gen 1:31). Of course, God knew that His creatures would make this prideful choice and in His great love for His creation (John 3:16) He had prepared the way to the Tree of LIfe even before the foundation of the world for them to be saved.
Of note, nothing changed about the attributes which include free will that man was created with except that man, through his own volition, added the attribute of knowledge of good and evil by which he would always fall short in judgment before God, his King and thereby be a sinner.
Now, man must use these same unchanging attributes whereby he willingly inherited knowledge of good and evil and must bow down to reject his own prideful judgment and must freely put forth his hand, repent of wanting to be as God, die to himself and this desire and also take of the tree of life.
(Gen 3:22) And the LORD God said, Behold, the man is become as one of us, to know good and evil: and now, lest he put forth his hand, and take also of the tree of life, and eat, and live for ever:
It is clear that man never lost his free will/volition, he wasn't redesigned to not have free will, but rather that man had gained the attribute of knowledge, freely, whereby he would undoubtedly sin as part of his new nature.
Therein (adding the attribute of knowledge in creation) we see that man did not inherit sin, or the guilt of sin but by his own doing and responsibility inherited the nature whereby he would sin. We also (“should”) see that man still possesses free will/volition as originally designed and that ALL men, in this volitional condition, have received the promise from the beginning of creation that he has the true ability to take of Tree of Life which is/was offered, Jesus Christ being the Way.
Of course, some would rather make the excuse that they have no choice but to sin and deny free will. To me, it seems they are not thankful for their gifted attributes and God’s promise of grace for whosoever will freely take their hand and accept the Tree the Life but rather refuse to freely bow down saying they have no ability to do so and will insist and complain that they have no choice in the matter and come up with a theory of determination putting the responsibility on God rather than being thankful for being designed in creation as they were. But that is another chapter.
(Rom 1:20) For the invisible things of him from the creation of the world are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even his eternal power and Godhead; so that they are without excuse:
(Rom 1:21) Because that, when they knew God, they glorified him not as God, neither were thankful; but became vain in their imaginations, and their foolish heart was darkened.
(Rom 1:22) Professing themselves to be wise, they became fools, -
HeirofSalvation Well-Known MemberSite Supporter
[
It's most likely more an issue of EMPHASIS, rather than belief..
Not that I'm trying to let you off the hook per-se...
I think humans think in categories:
You also think MOSTLY in categories, as do I.
I think your mind is trying to place my views into a category which makes sense.
I do the same to you.......Which is why I'm trying to demand a particular "Box"....like Calvinism that I can force you into....
because it's a "box" of categories I know how to think in....
Just like "Arminianism" is a "box" which makes sense...
It's a category.
Categories work....so do "generalizations".
That's just how humans think :)
I do it because I want to know who I'm talking to and who I'm debating with.
It's just human nature.
It's not pride necessarily....it's just cognition.
ANY Theology has a presuppositional back-ground........ANY THEOLOGY.
That includes Reformation Theology.
I think "Calvinism" as it manifests itself in the modern age, has little to no awareness of it's own suppositions.
Many a Calvinist on debate boards honestly BELIEVES...that they are entirely immune to, and do not hold any "Philosophical" predispositions....
Of course they do.
We all do.
Sometimes the way we read Scripture is shaped in part by our suppositional context....
I'd just LOVE to believe that we are a Tabula-Rosa, immune to all thought process and predjudice, but we aren't.
Frankly....you can't just quote rote Scripture and expect the argument to go your way.
It will never happen.
We have to know and understand our Philosophical presuppositions, and question them, and deal with them, and detect whether they are shaping our understanding of Scripture, or whether Scripture is shaping our Philosophy.
God didn't make us that way, and it's not how our minds work.
Is "Reformation Theology" bad?
It's not all bad by any means, much is quite good.
I'm picking up what you are putting down.
I don't think Adam "trusted" the Serpent...
I think his sin was more "willfull".
Eve was "deceived"...Adam was not "deceived"...
Honestly, I think that's quite meaningful in understanding why we are dead in "Adam" and not, say....Eve.
Ti 2:14
And Adam was not deceived, but the woman being deceived was in the transgression.
This concept is Hamartiologically signifigant. In my view.
We are dead in "Adam".
Adam's transgression was nothing like Eve's.
I don't think the ignorant are sinners...
We AREN'T "dead in EVE"...
We are dead in "Adam".
Adam's sin was willful, and the serpent DIDN'T deceive him. He knew better....Eve didn't.
I think Calvinism conflates the ignorant as having all sinned like Adam making no distinction between the ignorance of Eve and the example of willful disobedience of Adam. -
HeirofSalvation Well-Known MemberSite Supporter
That'll Preach.. :)
but let me put out a caveat:
"Within"
vs.
"Without"
Aren't categories which help us that much...
"Within" could collapse immediately to a state of "Original Sin" and Guilt whereupon all persons are simply irredeemably corrupt by rote nature....
"Without" means...frankly whatever anyone wants it to mean.
It's not the Prepositions which count here:
It's differentiating "nature" from "action"...
And defining what God considers to be a "sin" or not a "sin".
Sin is indeed a Personal action and it's source is truly "within"...But, what if the internalization of it is explained by our own "lusts"...
It's our OWN lusts that give way to sin...
But sin isn't those lusts itself.
Jas 1:13
Let no man say when he is tempted, I am tempted of God: for God cannot be tempted with evil, neither tempteth he any man:
Jas 1:14
But every man is tempted, when he is drawn away of his own lust, and enticed.
Jas 1:15
Then when lust hath conceived, it bringeth forth sin: and sin, when it is finished, bringeth forth death.
This passage defines sin in action for me.
It's neither a condition nor disease...nor some failing left over from Adam's fall....
It's your own lusts bearing fruit.
I think much Calvinism conflates "lusts" with "sins".
They aren't sins...
One may "lust" -sorta-for a Cinnabon....but it's only sin when they give way to that desire twice a day for 100-days straight.
There's nothing wrong with someone "lusting" for a "Cinnabon" any more than....
as I do, quite naturally...sometimes......."Lust" for my wife....
Not simply a "candle-light" dinner and a nice glass of Bordeaux feeling.........
But....it's just sometimes....LUST.
She likes that actually!
Of course she does!
Man's "lusts" aren't sinful....They are Anthropological...they just are.
It's when "lust" gives way to sin:
If I lusted after someone NOT my wife and pursued that! That, would be a whole new dimension altogether!
Lusts, however...even "willfulness" in the right context, isn't "sin" though, and I think modern Reformation-influenced Calvinism conflates it.
I think God gave mankind a strong WILL.
And it's not that it's "BAD" or even enslaved to sin.........
It's just INCREDIBLY STRONG.....It stands to reason that it would come into conflict with God's perfect will. That's what sinning actually is...
It's allowing our will to over-ride HIS.
That's disobedience.....that's sin.
It got us all understanding and considering the genuinely Biblical facet of Judicial Substitutionary Atonement....
And frankly...
The views of Atonement were a little lacking until (not surprisingly a Lawyer) started playing at Theology and brought that facet of the Scriptures to light.
He was right to...
But, it's not the only facet of the Atonement that exists.
The Anthrolpology it demands places a strain on it's Christology (namely that men are incurably horribly evil by "nature"...............But Christ was still a man...)
I do think that happens.
I don't think "Sovereignty" was ever really at issue.
I think it's a misunderstood term.
Every Orthodox view believes God is "Sovereign".
But, there's a slew of presuppositional content to what "Sovereignty" must mean imbedded in the definition. -
My two cents: We are sinners because we all share in Adam's corporate life after the fall. We are, after all, the multiplication of his life....
-
-
-
-
-
They did really taste spiritual death. physical death, an were cursed in the Fall... -
-
Page 2 of 2