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!

Why should I...?

Discussion in 'Other Christian Denominations' started by mindsleeve, Jun 15, 2010.

  1. steaver

    steaver Well-Known Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Aug 25, 2004
    Messages:
    10,443
    Likes Received:
    182
    Faith:
    Non Baptist Christian
    Not sure how these questions answer my question, but I will try to give you an answer.

    Would Adam have had free will if it were not there? Adam was created with a free will and placed in the reach of a forbidden tree knowing full well Adam would disobey and die.

    Would he then not be sinning because he did not have the opportunity to sin? If the tree was not placed in his reach Adam could not have eaten of it.

    Would he be fully following God if there was no other choice? Adam would have no other choice other than to fully follow God if there was no forbidden tree presented. No choice.

    Now how about my question?

    Why do you think God put the forbidden tree in Adam's reach knowing full well Adam would disobey and partake?
     
  2. annsni

    annsni Well-Known Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    May 30, 2006
    Messages:
    20,914
    Likes Received:
    706
    Because God does not want blind followers. He gives us choices. Which will we choose? Good or evil?
     
  3. steaver

    steaver Well-Known Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Aug 25, 2004
    Messages:
    10,443
    Likes Received:
    182
    Faith:
    Non Baptist Christian
    So you believe God wanted the eyes of Adam opened to the knowledge of good and evil so He put the tree there knowing full well Adam would eat of it and learn good and evil?

    Otherwise, Adam would have remained a "blind" follower.

    I would agree with you on this point.
     
  4. steaver

    steaver Well-Known Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Aug 25, 2004
    Messages:
    10,443
    Likes Received:
    182
    Faith:
    Non Baptist Christian
    Where did our Calvin friends go???
     
  5. Dr. Walter

    Dr. Walter New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 28, 2010
    Messages:
    5,623
    Likes Received:
    2
    I personally believe in unconditional election and the absolute sovereignty of God but not at the expense of human responsbility.

    I don't believe that God set Adam up to fail.

    The Arminian believes in conditional election based upon the abuse of the foreknowledge of God wrongly interpreted as prescience and thus foreseen instead of foreordained faith. Hence, they believe that God foreknew everything in advance. Thus they are forced to admit that God foresaw the fall, millions going to hell and yet went right ahead and intentionally created man anyway with full knowledge. Therefore, God cannot be excused or exonorated from intentionally bringing sin into existence even according to the Arminian model. The Sovereign Model only declares what the Arminian model must admit - God did it intentionally.

    God is the author of sin in one sense. There could be no possibility of sin without God creating free will as there is no potential of free choice without the potential of contrary choice to God's expressed will - thus sin.

    Therefore in the creation of free will, God knowingly created the potential for sin to exist. Therefore, God is the indirect or secondary cause of sin but not the direct or efficient cause of sin. The direct or efficent cause is free will. However, God knew the end before He created free will and yet intentionally did it anyway.

    In addition, I believe the origin of sin in both Satan and Adam and Eve came through natural desires created good by God but became sin due to the particular context. Satan wanted to be like God, which no doubt began through admiration of God. Satan was the most beautful of God's created beings and there is nothing wrong in the admiration of beauty. However, when admiration for God turns into covetuousness for God's position and admiration for one's own beautry turns in to self-centered pride then sin is begotten.

    Eve was deceived into thinking she would be as God and there is nothing wrong with wanting to be like God. However, the deception consisted in believing this would be an appropriate way and an appropriate likeness when in reality it would be the usupation of God by disobedience to a direct command.

    Adam was not deceived but knew fully well that Eve had been deceived and had fallen into sin by eating the forbidden fruit. I believe that Eve was the most beautiful woman that has ever lived and she was designed to meet every desire and need of Adam. They were one flesh and one heart entertwined in the bond of love. He was made to love Eve and that was good. I believe he intentionally chose to die with Eve rather than live with God without her. So even something as good as love created by God could be turned into sin when the created became more loved than the Creator.

    By Adam's one act of obedience he made many sinners and thus acted as the representative of humanity in this test of obedience to God.

    In the fall man became totally depraved or inclined to evil by nature and his will came under the dominion of his own evil heart and thus enslaved to his own fallen nature. The will cannot be separated from the fallen heart and mind nor can it master the depraved heart and mind but is the servant expression of the depraved nature. Thus the will's freedom is confined within the compounds of the fallen nature which controls all desires and thinking so that man will not come to the light but LOVES darkness rather than light.

    The only thing that God looked down and saw in regard to fallen man was that he saw NOT ONE MAN left to his own power of choice would seek after God (Psa. 14:2-3; Rom. 2:10-11).

    God could freely choose to condemn the whole race justly or He could arbritrarily choose some unto salvation while allowing the rest to continue in their own free choice to refuse to seek God.

    The non-elect deserved hell and freely chose that over seeking God and nothing prevents their salvation but their own free choice not to seek after God and God is perfectly just in allowing them to continue in that choice.

    The elect do not deserve salvation any more than the non-elect and have no one to thank but the grace of God. There is no respect of persons in this choice by God simply because there is nothing in either that would cause God to pick one and not the other but his own free will.

    The elect are chosen TO salvation THROUGH sanctification of the Spirit and belief of the truth and so not merely the persons but the means are elected by God so that none are saved but through the preaching of the gospel.

    We do not know who the elect or non-elect are except by preaching the gospel and the elect are known (1 Thes. 1:4) by their response to the gospel as the gospel does not come to them in "word only" but in power and in the Holy Spirit (Acts 13:48).
     
    #45 Dr. Walter, Jun 21, 2010
    Last edited by a moderator: Jun 21, 2010
  6. BobRyan

    BobRyan Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 27, 2002
    Messages:
    32,913
    Likes Received:
    71
    Faith:
    Non Baptist Christian
    Even the most extreme calvinist admits to the obvious point that the Drawing of God - enables the choice that depravity disables. Thus the Arminian position is to accept the Bible teaching that God "draws ALL" John 12:32 that God places that supernatural element of "emnity" between the children of Eve and the devil.

    in Christ,

    Bob
     
  7. BobRyan

    BobRyan Well-Known Member

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

    If that is your exegesis of Rev -- then there are a few details missing.

    Because...?

    The lost condition is the sinner set apart from Christ. The saved condition is the Gal 2:20 case of "no longer I who live but Christ IN ME".

    Rev 3 describes the lost condition. Turns out there are lost people inside the church as well as outside.

    John 1 states that Christ "came to his OWN but His OWN received Him not" and in that same chapter Christ comes to the WORLD and enlightens everyone in the world.


    Thanks I will add that to my list of references for Calvinism.

    in Christ,

    Bob
     
  8. Ruiz

    Ruiz New Member

    Joined:
    Jun 9, 2010
    Messages:
    2,021
    Likes Received:
    0
    Where do you get this idea that the "set apart" is still lost? While I could perhaps agree that we could be set apart before salvation, I would also argue that only those set apart will be Christians and all those who are set apart are Christians.

    I Disagree as do most commentators that I have read (on both sides of the Arminian/Calvinist debate. I think it is clear that God is not questioning whether Laodiceans were Christians (language strongly suggests they were saved) but that they were lukewarm and turning their back on God.

    I am not sure what point you are trying to make. Yet, he was referring to National Israel. I think it is clear from the Old Testament that they would reject Jesus and Jesus would go to others who were not of his original people. That is called Sovereignty.



    This is where I scratch my head. Before I was reformed, I did not mind and even challenged myself to read Reformed literature. You seem to just want to know key words. Personally, I do not think you truly understand our belief. Even today, I prefer to read atheistic literature instead of our literature on atheism. Why? To quote my non-Reformed professor from Seminary, "Unless you know the other side just as good as your own, then you really don't know your side nor their own."
     
  9. steaver

    steaver Well-Known Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Aug 25, 2004
    Messages:
    10,443
    Likes Received:
    182
    Faith:
    Non Baptist Christian
    I'm not convinced that your statement "I don't believe that God set Adam up to fail" coinsides with the rest of your thesis.

    God knew Adam would fail by giving Adam the choice.

    This is nothing less than setting Adam up to fail.

    The question is, Why?
     
  10. steaver

    steaver Well-Known Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Aug 25, 2004
    Messages:
    10,443
    Likes Received:
    182
    Faith:
    Non Baptist Christian
    Thus, the purpose for this thread.

    Can you give me an answer from a Calvin pov?

    Why do you think God put the forbidden tree in Adam's reach knowing full well Adam would disobey and partake?
     
  11. Dr. Walter

    Dr. Walter New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 28, 2010
    Messages:
    5,623
    Likes Received:
    2
    I am not a Calvinist as I don't beleive many things Calvin believed.

    I don't charge God with sin because that contradicts the character and revealed will of God as well as the express Word of God to the contrary.

    In creating beings capable of free choice, God necessarily gave permission for sin to enter into his creation. Sin has never been the good pleasure of God but by permission only with full intent to restrain and over rule.

    God did not cause either Satan or Adam to sin. However, God did limit the circumstances and choices where they were tested by natural "good" desires placed in a context where necessarily there would be a conflict of "good" desires in regard to self-interest. The beauty of the Creature versus the beauty of God. The love for the creature versus love for God. Thus God forced a decision in a context of conflicting self-interest through ordinarily "good" desires.

    He certainly knew the outcome and did it anyway. Thus the Arminian is forced to draw the same conclusion as the Calvinist - Intentional by God.


     
  12. annsni

    annsni Well-Known Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    May 30, 2006
    Messages:
    20,914
    Likes Received:
    706
    Because He is God. Whatever God does is for His glory. Maybe that is the first question you want to ask Him when you see Him.
     
  13. Dr. Walter

    Dr. Walter New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 28, 2010
    Messages:
    5,623
    Likes Received:
    2
    Well, it was not accidental. God works "all things" according to the counsel of HIS OWN WILL (Eph. 1:11) not the will of creatures.

    His glory is the ultimate reason not the glory of man. Arminianism reverses this entirely making God subservient to man and accountable to man. Arminianism exalts the human will above the will of God.
     
  14. steaver

    steaver Well-Known Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Aug 25, 2004
    Messages:
    10,443
    Likes Received:
    182
    Faith:
    Non Baptist Christian
    You have answered correctly. No need to ask Him, He already has told us.

    Adam must fail to glorify Jesus Christ.

    Thus,

    God set Adam up to fail.

    Is this wrong or evil? Of course not. It is God's plan to teach His creatures, reveal Himself and glorify Jesus Christ.

    God did not force Adam to sin, yet God knew that giving free will and providing a temptation and a tempter would certainly cause Adam to fail.

    Thus,

    Adam is the sinner not God, but God is the cause, that cannot be denied.

    And why should it be denied? It is God's plan! Could Adam have stopped God's plan? Could Adam have NOT sinned?

    If Adam does not sin, then Jesus Christ never gets glorified.

    Think about it.
     
  15. Heavenly Pilgrim

    Heavenly Pilgrim New Member

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


    HP: The plain truth is that unconditional election and absolute sovereignty destroy any and all human responsibility and accountability.
     
  16. steaver

    steaver Well-Known Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Aug 25, 2004
    Messages:
    10,443
    Likes Received:
    182
    Faith:
    Non Baptist Christian
    Why do you think God put the forbidden tree in Adam's reach knowing full well Adam would disobey and partake?
     
  17. Heavenly Pilgrim

    Heavenly Pilgrim New Member

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


    HP: If there is no possibility of contrary choice, love is impossible to conceive of. There had to be an opportunity of contrary choice if man was going to be created with the capacity to love. Desiring to create a being capable of love and receiving love, appears to me as the reason why He chose such a test. Again, love is impossible without the possibility of contrary choice.

    By the way, that is yet another insurmountable obstacle to the notion of OSAS. It eliminates contrary choice, something love necessitates.
     
  18. steaver

    steaver Well-Known Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Aug 25, 2004
    Messages:
    10,443
    Likes Received:
    182
    Faith:
    Non Baptist Christian
    So you believe Adam could not love or know love without having a choice to sin. Adam could not have had any idea of the difference between love and hate unless he felt the results of disobedience.

    Is this what you are saying as to why God wanted Adam to fail the test?
     
  19. Heavenly Pilgrim

    Heavenly Pilgrim New Member

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

    Steaver, don’t put words into my mouth that I did not state or imply, neither was such the basis of your question to me. Re-read your question and my answer if you are having difficulty. I made it very plain.
     
  20. steaver

    steaver Well-Known Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Aug 25, 2004
    Messages:
    10,443
    Likes Received:
    182
    Faith:
    Non Baptist Christian
    Maybe it is you who did not understand my question.

    Here it is again...

    Why do you think God put the forbidden tree in Adam's reach knowing full well Adam would disobey and partake?

    Your answer was "no choice, no conceivable love".

    Thus,

    as per my question as to why God gave Adam a choice knowing full well it would cause Adam to fail,

    your answer states God gave Adam the choice, knowing Adam would fail, so Adam could conceive love.

    Where am I misrepresenting your answer?
     
Loading...