Featured Was Sin and Death designed by God?

God supernaturally barred Adam from access to the tree of life in Gen 3.

God supernaturally creates the Rev 20 lake of fire "punishment" -

God supernaturally creates the Rev 20 second resurrection -- that of the wicked.

God supernaturally places enmity between the seed of the woman and the seed of man.

In Col 1 - God supernaturally sustains all life - that means Lucifer as well as you and me.

It is an academic concept not found in real life - because fallen man "does not exist in the total absence of God". Rather mankind exists IN the context of God and His Gospel reach toward man.

Thus the Calvinist idea of "total inability" is never seen in some God-vacuum chamber. We see it only in the context of God reaching and even sustaining fallen humanity.

in Christ,

Bob

 

It is stated that the devil, that is Satan has the power of death. Heb 2:14

Would Adam have sinned had Satan not been in the garden with him?

and sin, when it is finished, bringeth forth death. From James 1:15

Why did Adam sin?

God had taken the woman from the man and she met up with the serpent, in the garden. This serpent. And the great dragon was cast out, that old serpent, called the Devil, and Satan, which deceiveth the whole world: Rev 12:9

But every man is tempted, when he is drawn away of his own lust, and enticed. Then when lust hath conceived, it bringeth forth sin: James 1:14 and first part of 15

Forasmuch then as the children are partakers of flesh and blood, he also himself likewise took part of the same; that through death he might destroy him that had the power of death, that is, the devil; Heb 2:14

I believe God had a plan.

Known unto God are all his works from the beginning of the world. Acts 15:18

 

I believe the record, that is the word of God, shows that the eternal God through man, a means by which to bring forth his Son, born of woman, taken from man made in the image of the eternal God is doing battle with the adversary of God.

How did the adversary of God become the adversary of God?

Man is the means subjected to the adversary, yet will also be redeemed from the adversary through a covenant of God the Father with his Son.

 

was the Cross of jesus planned and determined by God beforeor after the fall of adam?

 

i think terms like 'before or after' are linear not infinite.

 

That may be your view of the issue, but we are talking about what is POSSIBLE, because you seem to be denying even the possibility of God to enable man to freely respond... You seem to think effectual regeneration was the ONLY option for God to handle the 'natural condition' of fallen man. Is that your position? That God was just not capable, even if He wanted to, to enable a free response? God's ONLY option was to either leave men in their fallen condition OR effectually regenerate them, there was NO POSSIBLE middle ground of 'enabling' man to respond?

I'm not asking what you think scripture reveals and I'm not asking you to restate your position. I'm asking what you believe is within God's abilities in response to the fall.

 

Before. Before he created Adam who would bring death to man. BTW what death?

Why was the Son/Lamb slain before there was a man, the sin of the man or death to the man that sinned?

Is death and darkness the opposite of life and light?

What was on the earth first?

 

Regeneration was going to have to take place because Satan who has the power of death was going to bring death to everything subject to death.

For the earnest expectation of the creation eagerly waits for the revealing of the sons of God. For the creation was subjected to futility, not willingly, but because of Him who subjected it in hope; because the creation itself also will be delivered from the bondage of corruption into the glorious liberty of the children of God. For we know that the whole creation groans and labors with birth pangs together until now.

I ask again is it just the man that needs to be born again/from above?


I do not think we are going to be able to save ourselves. I think we had better put our hope in God.

 

That is pretty much what Calvinism limits God to doing. Apparently God cannot simply "draw ALL mankind" unto Himself in away that does not zaaapp them into being born again first - then asking them to choose Christ second -- no matter what Romans 10 says to the contrary.

in Christ,

Bob

 

You've answered my question. You MUST believe that God is not omnipotent in order to consistently hold to your position. I'm not saying you deny omnipotence...I know you don't. I'm saying to be consistent you'd have to deny omnipotence because you have continually argued on this thread and others that God could NOT, even if He so desired, to enabled lost men to respond freely to his appeals or commands. That is a blantant denial of God's omnipotent abilities.

Now, if you want to clarify your statements to mean, "Yes, He COULD have done it that way, but I don't believe scripture teaches that is what he does," then fine. But I have asked you in every way I know how and you have continually denied even the possibility of God choosing to do things in the way I have suggested which is a denial of omnipotence.... ' i.e. God isn't powerful enough to have done it that way.'

BTW, I never say that about Calvinism. I believe God is more than powerful enough to do it the way Calvinists suggest. In fact, hard determinism seems like a relatively simple creation as even men can created a 'robot world.' (I know you are not a hard determinist)

 

Do you hold that mankind still retained the SAME free will to choose/reject God as Adam and Eve had then?

is God bound by time, is he constrained to operate in just linear fashions, that he is some how limited Himself to be :"blind: to the Future until it actually happens, and then he reacts? that the fall was unknown to him somehow?

 

God alone has absolute free Will, for his is NOT bound/limited by His nature, fore he is perfect in all of his attributes, so he will always choose right and best, we howeve are bound.restricted by sin natures, will usually chose wrong!

 

That is simply untrue. The freedom is from OUTSIDE determination. Really you could call my believe 'self-determinism' because I believe a chooser is the determiner of his choices.

You (compatiblists) believe men are controlled by their desires, which are controlled by their nature which is controlled by God, which IMO reduces moral choice to instinct. I believe men have the capacity to choose to act in accordance with any one of their competing desires. I believe men are RESPONSE-ABLE, and thus able to respond to their environment and the revelation of God. I don't believe man's responses are pre-programmed reflexes to the prefixed environment. I believe it is more complex than that.

That is factually incorrect. It may be the way your perceive it, just as I perceive your compatiblism as nothing more than hard determinism with a couple of smokescreens added in to subtly suggest some level of separation between God and moral evil.

 

FINALLY! So, if God was ABLE to grant this and chose not to then clearly he is responsible for the decision to leave men in their disabled condition from birth. That is what I've been arguing all along. He decided the totally disabled condition of the fallen nature by NOT choosing to enable man to respond even though He could have. He sovereignly made that determination in your system and you've been attempting to avoid that fact for a while now.

I know you don't believe the scripture supports that God DID do this, and I understand what you think God did do, but that is beside the point regarding this argument. This is about God's CHOICE to leave men unable to respond while holding them response-able for their choices. And you've been acting as if God had nothing to do with man being in the condition that is unable to respond, which is impossible without denying His sovereign omnipotent abilities.