Is God’s Selection Arbitrary?

Romans 7
The Believer’s Sinful Nature [/b]

14 For we know that [b]the Law is spiritual, but I am of flesh, sold into bondage to sin.[/b]
15 For what I am doing, I do not understand; for I am not practicing what I would like to do, but I am doing the very thing I hate.
16 But if I do the very thing I do not want to do, [b]I agree with the Law, confessing that the Law is good.
17 So now, no longer am I the one doing it, [b]but sin which dwells in me.[/b]

18 For I know that [b]nothing good dwells in me, that is, in my flesh[/b]; for the willing is present in me, but the doing[/b] of the good is not[/b].
19 For the good that I want, I do not do, but I practice the very evil that I do not want.
20 But if I am doing the very thing I do not want, [b]I am no longer the one doing it, but sin which dwells in me.[/b]
21 I find then the principle that evil is present in me, the one who wants to do good.

22 For I joyfully concur with the law of God in the inner man[/b],
23 but [b]I see a different law in the members of my body, waging war[/b] against the law of my mind[/b] and making me a prisoner[/b] of [b]the law of sin[/b] which is in my members.

24 Wretched man that I am! Who will [b]set me free from the body of this death?[/b]
25 Thanks be to God through Jesus Christ our Lord! So then, [b]on the one hand I myself with my mind am serving the law of God, but on the [b]other, with my flesh the law of sin.


The point remains --

In the case of Romans 7 above those wITH a sinful nature have the issue of that war going on within them even if they are saved.

in the case of Romans 3 Paul applies it to both saved and unsaved.

Adam had no such war - no such battle - no such sinful nature -- all agree to that even to this very day.

Yet he could be tempted and DID sin.

in Christ,

Bob

 

To the extent that man has choice - he has responsibility. No amount of "I should have been born on a sinless planet" complaining frees even one soul from this responsibility to exercise the choice given to him at infinite cost to Christ.

I see no way out of that.

in Christ,

Bob

 

My statement above does not say that "man is to blame for inheriting his nature". NOR does my quote above say "Man had a choice in inheriting his nature"

in Christ,

Bob

 

Clear to me. Clearly wrong.

Sin is a virus? Christ blood is the antidote? No, sin is a choice and Christ's blood pays for the penalty due to sinners.

The wages of sin is death. You know, that thing humans naturally don't want to do: die, become deceased, become room temperature, expire... and it entered the world because of Adam.

Adam was created mortal. He just didn't die because of the Tree of Life. Flesh is mortal and was never intended to be immortal. It was not fundametally altered after Adam sinned. Adam could have kept on living forever after he sinned had he kept eating from the Tree of Life. Was the tree of life the antidote for sin? No, it just kept his mortal body from corruption.

We are not born with a sinful nature, we are born into flesh that is mortal and full of lusts. These lusts are not necesarily sinful, they just are the avenue for temptation to get to us.

We do not have access to the tree of life because of Adam. Babies don't have access to it so they are subject to death, not because of some virus floating around the world. Therefore, they will die. If they die having sinned against God they will perish eternally unless they have their penalty paid for by Christ.

 

I don't think they can sin against God.

 

God's grace moves the heart that is willing. ~ Maximos the Confessor

 

God's grace moves the heart that is willing. ~ Maximos the Confessor

I can neither add nor take away from what has been said. :flower:

 

HP - you asked me to prove that man is responsible (or had a choice) for his being born with a fallen or sinful nature. You ask that I show how he can be blamed for having the nature he was born with.

My response was that your question was based on a false presmise.

My argument is that man has choice in accepting the Gospel solution or not -- NOT the man has choice in whether he is born with a sinful nature - a human nature - a fallen human nature etc.

You then respond with a "I don't care if it does not have a valid premise - just answer the point anyway" kind of response.

Makes no sense.

In Christ,

Bob

 

As I already stated the guilt that man is responsible for is the guilt of not accepting salvation -- and in doing so all other sin is rightly charged to man.

The one who chooses to drink and drive is responsible for ALL the damage done while driving "under the influence". By choosing NOT to accept salvation the sinner is in effect choosing to CLING to the sins that they have "instead".

In Christ,

Bob

 

GE
Your quote can be ambiguous; it also may not appear so. I t depends on the readers preconceptions. Like where John says, "... so that whosoever believes in Him may have eternal life. And you have come very near showing the essential moment that makes the difference. Allow me to use your words, to explain my way of seeing things,

... the first thing I would say is that it is ‘all of God’ and pure election and God's gracious predestination. God is working and placing influences upon and within man through which He creates that 'new man' by which he is enabled and desires to yield his will in obedience to the demands of grace, then willingly, without force or coercion, repents and by faith believes.

 

GE
God's grace moves the heart that is willing - First God's grace moved the heart that is then willing. It is not a case of the heart that is first willing and only then God's grace is enabled to move it. The enabling comes from God; the willingness comes from God who is first willing to through grace move upon a man's heart, then man's willingness becomes the fruit of God's Grace having been moved upon him.