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!

The Nature of the Will

Discussion in 'Other Christian Denominations' started by Heavenly Pilgrim, Dec 2, 2011.

Top Posters
Page 3 of 5
  1. Heavenly Pilgrim

    Heavenly Pilgrim New Member

    Joined:
    May 7, 2006
    Messages:
    9,295
    Likes Received:
    0
    HP: Let me help Biblicist with illustrating what he denotes as 'freedom' and 'choice' using his above stated positions. Freedom is to Biblicist as stink is to a dead carcass. The smell of rotten flesh rises 'freely' from the carcass. Stink rising in the air is the 'free expression' of the dead carcass according to Biblicist. 'Chioce' is illustrated by the carcass chooing to 'freely' allow the stink to rise.

    Now I am not certain why anyone would see the 'free actions' of the carcass as blameworthy or why anyone could see it just to punish such a carcass for the smell it 'freely' emanates, but who knows? God's ways are higher than our ways, right Biblicist?:)
     
    #41 Heavenly Pilgrim, Dec 4, 2011
    Last edited by a moderator: Dec 4, 2011
  2. The Biblicist

    The Biblicist Well-Known Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Nov 13, 2011
    Messages:
    16,008
    Likes Received:
    481
    Sorry, but that is not an appropriate explanation for my position. Just because the intent of the heart is continually wicked does not mean the heart (seat of intellectual/emotional desires) does not determine between alternative choices. It only means that the choice will always be in keeping with its own desire.

    What you are trying to do is neutralize and gut such texts as Romans 3:10-18; 7:15-20; 8:7; 1 Cor. 2:14; Jn. 10:26-28; etc.
     
    #42 The Biblicist, Dec 4, 2011
  3. Heavenly Pilgrim

    Heavenly Pilgrim New Member

    Joined:
    May 7, 2006
    Messages:
    9,295
    Likes Received:
    0
    What determines desire?
     
    #43 Heavenly Pilgrim, Dec 4, 2011
  4. The Biblicist

    The Biblicist Well-Known Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Nov 13, 2011
    Messages:
    16,008
    Likes Received:
    481
    The "intent" of the heart! The only righteous "intent" is whatsoever you say or do, eat or drink DO ALL FOR THE GLORY OF GOD.

    Sin is coming SHORT of that intent "the glory of God" as the heart intent behind all desires and decisions.

    The "intent" of the lost man is NEVER for the glory of God and thus SIN resides at the very basis of the heart's desires.
     
    #44 The Biblicist, Dec 4, 2011
  5. Heavenly Pilgrim

    Heavenly Pilgrim New Member

    Joined:
    May 7, 2006
    Messages:
    9,295
    Likes Received:
    0
    What determines the intent of the heart?
     
    #45 Heavenly Pilgrim, Dec 4, 2011
  6. The Biblicist

    The Biblicist Well-Known Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Nov 13, 2011
    Messages:
    16,008
    Likes Received:
    481
    The very idea of "intent" refers to the deepest aspect or ROOT of the human nature or base line underlying source behind all desires and choices and actions. If the "intent" is sin, then the very core of man's nature is sinful and if the ROOT of the human nature is sin then so are the branches and fruit - total depravity.

    The ROOT is the product of the SEED from which it came! Man reproduces after his own kind. That nature is a product of the fall of Adam and the death principle/seed passed down through the reproduction process.
     
    #46 The Biblicist, Dec 4, 2011
  7. Heavenly Pilgrim

    Heavenly Pilgrim New Member

    Joined:
    May 7, 2006
    Messages:
    9,295
    Likes Received:
    0
    Just as the stink freely comes from the carcass, sin in man comes from his root, the seed from which he came. Man has absolutely as much control over his sin as the dead carcass has over the stink that 'freely' arises from it. My illustration stands vindicated.

    When are you going to explain to us the source of the angels sin, and fit that in with your theory concerning God's fixed nature?
     
    #47 Heavenly Pilgrim, Dec 4, 2011
  8. The Biblicist

    The Biblicist Well-Known Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Nov 13, 2011
    Messages:
    16,008
    Likes Received:
    481
    You are a very irrational and confused person who simply refuses to apply common sense to any aspect of this issue. Instead your Bible is human reasoning and human philosphy.

    Jesus very clearly tells you if the root is evil so are the branches and the root of human nature /heart is MOTIVE/INTENT for all that you think, act and do. Jesus clearly states that the heart is the souce of all evil (Mt. 15).

    That is precisely why Jesus told a young man SEEKING eternal life that there is "none good but one and that is God" (Mt. 19:17).

    That is precisely why Paul said there "is NONE THAT DOETH GOOD, NO, NOT ONE" (Rom. 3:11)
     
    #48 The Biblicist, Dec 4, 2011
  9. Heavenly Pilgrim

    Heavenly Pilgrim New Member

    Joined:
    May 7, 2006
    Messages:
    9,295
    Likes Received:
    0
    Biblicist, you live and breath man made philosophical positions. You assume them behind every text you quote.

    Take the texts you just quoted. Not one of them states or implies what you assume philosophically from them, i.e. all men are sinners necessitated by the nature they are born with. That is not stated or assumed by any text you have set forth. You are approaching the texts from a decidedly Calvinistic philosophical position, a presupposition, not from the Word of God itself.

    PS: Don't forget to address the questions concerning the fall of angels.:thumbs:
     
    #49 Heavenly Pilgrim, Dec 4, 2011
    Last edited by a moderator: Dec 4, 2011
  10. The Biblicist

    The Biblicist Well-Known Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Nov 13, 2011
    Messages:
    16,008
    Likes Received:
    481
    Look at every post you have made in the past ten posts! NO SCRIPTURE to support anything you say. Look at my posts! My statements always backed up with SCRIPTURE.

    Look at your response in this post - NO SCRIPTURES - No alternative interpretations provided of the scriptures I gave! JUST YOUR PERSONAL OPINION!

    Wake up and smell the roses! You are the one guilty of the very thing you are charging me.
     
    #50 The Biblicist, Dec 4, 2011
  11. Heavenly Pilgrim

    Heavenly Pilgrim New Member

    Joined:
    May 7, 2006
    Messages:
    9,295
    Likes Received:
    0
    How about them angels Biblicist?
     
    #51 Heavenly Pilgrim, Dec 4, 2011
  12. Heavenly Pilgrim

    Heavenly Pilgrim New Member

    Joined:
    May 7, 2006
    Messages:
    9,295
    Likes Received:
    0
    Let me remind the listener why I ask about the angels. It has been the philosophically held notion by Biblicist that God can only act according to his Self. He then postulates that because God can only act according to the dictates of self, fallen man can only act according to the dictates of his self as well, necessitating every intent or act of man as sinful. He ties Adams sin to his posterity, claiming that due to Adams' fallen nature, we inherit that nature and are sinners from birth. He also believes that the reason all sin is directly due to their nature, and necessitated so. (shown in the resent posts above.)

    If we follow his logic that all must act in a necessitated fashion due to their self, he has two big problems. First, he must deny Adam a self, for if his self was holy according to his stated philosophical position, it would have been impossible for Adam to form intents contrary to his nature. If his self was sinful it was God that is to blame.

    In the same vein of thought, I bring up the angels in their pure state before the fall of many of them. If his philosphical position of God and then man only being able to act according to the dictates of their self, what was the state of the fallen angels 'self' prior to their fall?

    Is it any wonder why he has such a problem answering a direct question concerning the state of the pre-fall 'self' of angels? I feel his discomfort in answering the question, but the truth stands at direct antipodes with his stated position of God' self, which lies at the very core of his philosophy affecting greatly his theology.
     
    #52 Heavenly Pilgrim, Dec 4, 2011
    Last edited by a moderator: Dec 4, 2011
  13. Jerry Shugart

    Jerry Shugart New Member

    Joined:
    Nov 12, 2003
    Messages:
    952
    Likes Received:
    0
    Biblicist, you like to quote verses and then put your own spin on those verses. But when you are presented with verses that directly CONTRADICT your spin you do not even attempt to defend your position.

    Why should anyone believe that a person comes out of the womb in a state described as being dead in sin since the Lord Jesus is made like us IN EVERY WAY:

    "For this reason he had to be made like his brothers in every way, in order that he might become a merciful and faithful high priest in service to God, and that he might make atonement for* the sins of the people" (Heb.2:17).
     
    #53 Jerry Shugart, Dec 4, 2011
    Last edited by a moderator: Dec 4, 2011
  14. Jerry Shugart

    Jerry Shugart New Member

    Joined:
    Nov 12, 2003
    Messages:
    952
    Likes Received:
    0
    Excellent point, Heavenly Pilgrim!
     
    #54 Jerry Shugart, Dec 4, 2011
  15. quantumfaith

    quantumfaith Active Member

    Joined:
    Jan 26, 2010
    Messages:
    6,890
    Likes Received:
    1
    HP, I am on the same page as to the "reductio ad infinitum" with regard to "cause" of evil. There are however, some reformers on this board (and elsewhere) who will go the extra step and with honestly claim God is the cause. (proximate cause I think is the description).

    What say you as to the "intent"?
     
    #55 quantumfaith, Dec 5, 2011
  16. quantumfaith

    quantumfaith Active Member

    Joined:
    Jan 26, 2010
    Messages:
    6,890
    Likes Received:
    1
    I am convinced that Adam was created free, innocent and imperfect (unequal to God).
     
    #56 quantumfaith, Dec 5, 2011
  17. The Biblicist

    The Biblicist Well-Known Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Nov 13, 2011
    Messages:
    16,008
    Likes Received:
    481
    Wrong again! I made a distinct difference between God and unfallen Adam and God and fallen Adam. Only God and fallen Adam had immutable natures. So the principle of only can act according to immutable nature only applies to God and fallen man or fallen angels.

    Unfallen man was not created with an immutable nature but created innocent of sin with a mutable nature that could become immutably righteous or immutably evil based upon INITIAL choice when tested.

    So you cannot follow my logic because you can't even present it correctly.
     
    #57 The Biblicist, Dec 5, 2011
  18. The Biblicist

    The Biblicist Well-Known Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Nov 13, 2011
    Messages:
    16,008
    Likes Received:
    481
    First, He was not like his brethren in EVERY WAY because He was God in addition to being man.

    You choose your translation to support your heresy but I will stick to the KJV

    Heb. 2:17 Wherefore in all things it behoved him to be made like unto his brethren, that he might be a merciful and faithful high priest in things pertaining to God, to make reconciliation for the sins of the people.


    Second, He was not made like his brethren in EVERY WAY because he was made without sin, did no sin, IN HIM WAS NO SIN and he knew no sin:


    1. He knew no sin - 2Co 5:21 For he hath made him to be sin for us, who knew no sin; that we might be made the righteousness of God in him.

    2. IN him there was no sin - 1Jo 3:5 And ye know that he was manifested to take away our sins; and in him is no sin.


    3. He did no sin. - 1Pe 2:22 Who did no sin, neither was guile found in his mouth:

    4. without sin - Heb 4:15 For we have not an high priest which cannot be touched with the feeling of our infirmities; but was in all points tempted like as we are, yet without sin.



    So he was not made like his brethren in EVERY POINT without exception:
     
    #58 The Biblicist, Dec 5, 2011
  19. The Biblicist

    The Biblicist Well-Known Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Nov 13, 2011
    Messages:
    16,008
    Likes Received:
    481
    :thumbs::thumbs::thumbs::thumbs
     
    #59 The Biblicist, Dec 5, 2011
  20. The Biblicist

    The Biblicist Well-Known Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Nov 13, 2011
    Messages:
    16,008
    Likes Received:
    481
    Unless, God created man and angels as RESPONSIBLE agents of free will?
     
    #60 The Biblicist, Dec 5, 2011
(You must log in or sign up to post here.)
Page 3 of 5
Loading...