True. I hold to this. But I can't absolve God if He infallibly decreed the Fall. Adam was not free because God's decrees are irresistible. At the very appointed time he was to Fall, he had to fall.
That's why Arminianism account makes sense; God permitted Adam to Fall.
Perishing without having ever heard the gospel they end up in....
Discussion in 'Calvinism & Arminianism Debate' started by Agent47, Jan 27, 2017.
?
-
Lake of fire
6 vote(s)54.5% -
Heaven
3 vote(s)27.3% -
I don't know
2 vote(s)18.2% -
It's a mystery
0 vote(s)0.0% -
They get a second chance to receive the gospel before judgement
0 vote(s)0.0% -
I don't care
0 vote(s)0.0%
Page 8 of 10
-
I said that our view of God as planning was what?... Hint - it starts with an "a" and ends with a "nthropomorphism".
I agreed that God "decreed" Adam's sin in only one way - what was that, Einstein? (Hint, it was by creating man with the knowledge that Adam would sin and by allowing Adam the freedom to sin).
But you are right. You have been nothing if not "consistent". :Roflmao:Laugh:Roflmao -
-
I read a few of Basiger's articles challenging the traditional concept of God back in the 90's. I don't know your age, but I don't think that the position was as popular back then (but I don't know, we are always prone to measure things by our own setting). He was professor of philosophy at Roberts Wesleyan College. He wrote “The Case for Freewill Theism”. I believe that that book may help your arguments here (at least in the logic of your arguments….I know you know what you believe).
The quote that you affirm as your belief, however, was from "The Openness of God: A Biblical Challenge to the Traditional Understanding of God". This is why I hinted that you may affirm that position. Both books are well written (although I think the latter makes several unsupported assumptions...it is, though, more a collection of essays by open theists).
Mine are hard copies, but I think both are available in e-format if you are interested. -
-
It's 0716H Sunday morning. Time for fellowship.
I really appreciate your energy and approach to debate sir. I've learnt a lot.
If I don't respond in the next 8hrs, please bear with me. -
You will make it back before me. My son is going down tomorrow to talk to present himself for baptism (to be baptized next Sunday). He has been wrestling with being baptized for about 6 months (he was baptized when he was younger, but believes it was because of his friends and wants to be baptized as a believer). Have a wonderful fellowship and time of worship. I'm going to bed. :Thumbsup -
You were unambiguous in another thread; God decreed the Fall, but permitted Adam's disobedience. Look, if you are somewhat embarrassed of this,won't bring yourself to repeat it, you may change your mind.;)
Blessed Lord's Day sir -
I may not have been the most articulate, but I was not being unambiguous.
In Proverbs we read that man controls his intent, his plans, and his will. But those same passages tell us that God controls the action, how those things materialize (if they do). And God tempts no one to sin, but sin comes about when we are tempted by our own lusts, and our lusts gives birth to sin (sin is not merely an action, it is an intent).
So what I am trying to tell you is that there is nothing that occurs that is not a part of God's "decree"/ "eternal counsel"/ "eternal purpose". God's plan for Creation did not change with the Fall. The "plan" was always redemption and a New Creation. So Adam's sin was a component in God's plan (it did not fall outside of God's use in bringing about this New Creation of which Scripture speaks). But God did not "cause" Adam to sin. It is not a hard concept to grasp. God's purposes is being fulfilled, but God does not cause sin itself. -
Scripture says one must accept the gospel to be saved; not that one must reject it to be lost. That may be a difficult teaching for this topic, and even more so about baby/child unbelievers topic.
-
-
Again, you were categorical that God decreed and not permitted the Fall.
You equally denied God decreeing Adam's sin/disobedience; you insist it was permitted.
Clearly in your belief set there is a distinction between 'permitted' and 'decreed'. Attempting to obfuscate this by redefining the terms is dishonest. I know well what is a decree. I also know what is permission.
But.If you wish, we can play this game.
Did God decree Adam's Fall?
If yes,explain what it means that God decreed Adam's Fall -
-
-
-
As I said before, and will say again, the Fall was in accord with God's eternal purposes. Scripture is clear on this, so I do not see why we need to go 'round and 'round here. What part of nothing is given action without God's command or decree do you reject (what part of Lamentations 3 do you find man's opinion rather than God's Word)?
I did not redefine terms. I used Scripture to define "decree" (literally....I gave you Scripture to define the term....yet you say this is "redefining".....that alone should give you a hint of how far you are drifting into your own theological biases). Your rejection of that definition in favor of what ever "floats your boat", well, that is not my problem.
The game we are playing is tiptoeing around your view because you want to reject where your logic leads you. Calvinism looks to these things as predestined as God "decreeing" in terms of causing them to occur in time according to His plan (Beza) or inherently a part of Creation and therefore God's plan (Edwards). Arminianism affirms predestination but bases it on divine pre-knowledge, with some events necessary and others contingent...but all certain. You, however, affirm the "Open Model" as defined by Basinger. The only difference seems to be you are unwilling to admit that God cannot know the outcome of contingent future events and your logic remain intact. -
-
-
God decreed in eternity to Elect you through the gospel
- Offers His son,
- Positions you to hear the gospel
- Regenerates you
- Irresistibly draws you to him
- You are saved
- Once saved he preserves you to the grave.
You claim.He decreed Adam to Fall.How did he do it? -
Think of what you are denying by rejecting this. You are denying that Christ is the "Lamb slain before the foundation of the earth" because you are denying that God planned on the Fall before Creation.
Since you reject the Fall and the redemption of man as a part of God's purposes, how do you reconcile Psalm 22 (which was written centuries before the crucifixion) with the events of the Cross? Was it just a lucky guess on God's part? Or do you believe someone the Psalm to be pseudohistory?
Page 8 of 10