Featured doesn't the fall of Adam show that free will by itself cannot provide salvation?

Where do you get these questions from? Who argues from such points?

 

If by original sin you mean we carry the guilt of Adam then I am with them and deny such an idea. We need to remember that when the gospel is preached God works through that. It is not just thrown out there by itself. We cannot come to faith without the gospel and in it the working of God.

 

Well, I'll tell you what Adam and Eve prove, they prove that the nature does not control the will as many Calvinists teach here. Calvinists claim that the will is enslaved by the nature, therefore a sinner cannot believe the gospel, but must be regenerated and given a new nature before they can believe.

But if this were so, then Adam and Eve could not have sinned, because they were created with a "very good" nature. Satan was "perfect" when he was created, so again, if this teaching is true, then Satan could not have sinned.

This is a false teaching. All men have free will and can decide to obey or disobey any command. It is the will that determines the nature, not the other way around as Calvinism falsely teaches.

Look at the Gentiles, Paul said "by nature" they DO the things contained in the law. The law is good, just, and holy, so "by nature" these Gentiles were doing GOOD. This destroys the false teaching of Total Inability.

Rom 2:14 For when the Gentiles, which have not the law, do by nature the things contained in the law, these, having not the law, are a law unto themselves:
15 Which shew the work of the law written in their hearts, their conscience also bearing witness, and their thoughts the mean while accusing or else excusing one another; )

Calvinism teaches that all men can do is sin, Paul said the Gentiles by nature do the things contained in the law, which are GOOD.

 

Now you are talking out of both sides of your mouth. If the will is enslaved to the nature, they could not choose to sin.

This is the very reason Calvinists say Jesus could not sin, because he had a perfect nature. But you contradict yourselves with Adam and Eve and say they could.

Make up your mind, is the will enslaved to the nature or not? You can't have it both ways.

 

Your argument is that Jesus could not sin because he had a perfect nature, but if this is true, Satan, the fallen angels, and Adam and Eve could not sin, because they were all created VERY GOOD.

This shows this teaching that the nature controls the will is a fallacy.

Besides that, Jesus plainly implied he could sin.

Jhn 8:55 Yet ye have not known him; but I know him: and if I should say, I know him not, I shall be a liar like unto you: but I know him, and keep his saying.

Jesus said "if" he denied that he knew his Father he would be a liar. "If" is a word that denotes possibility, so this verse implies Jesus could have lied if he chose to do so. Of course, Jesus never committed any sin. Nevertheless, this verse implies he had the ability to do so. He had free will.

But you can't claim that Jesus could not sin because he had a good nature and then say Adam and Eve could sin. That is a contradiction, they were created with a "very good" nature.

Calvinism talks out of both sides of their mouth.

 

I agree Calvinist cannot have it both ways, however, there is no way Jesus, being truly God, could ever choose to sin. God simply cannot do any unrighteousness, and thank God that He cannot! :thumbsup:

 

If Jesus did not have the ability to sin, the being led of the Spirit into the wilderness to be tempted of Satan would be absolutely meaningless.

Mat 4:1 Then was Jesus led up of the Spirit into the wilderness to be tempted of the devil.

Jesus is God, but Jesus became flesh and took on the nature of the seed of Abraham (not Adam). He could feel our infirmities and was tempted in all points as we are yet without sin.

Jesus had to defeat Satan as a man to redeem men. He had to live like a believer, by trusting and obeying God's word. He had no advantage over us.

Heb 2:14 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;
15 And deliver them who through fear of death were all their lifetime subject to bondage.
16 For verily he took not on him the nature of angels; but he took on him the seed of Abraham.
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.

Jesus is God, but Jesus also was 100% human. To deny he came in the flesh is the spirit of anitchrist. We are specifically warned of this error. This is Gnosticism.

1 Jhn 4:1 Beloved, believe not every spirit, but try the spirits whether they are of God: because many false prophets are gone out into the world.
2 Hereby know ye the Spirit of God: Every spirit that confesseth that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh is of God:
3 And every spirit that confesseth not that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh is not of God: and this is that spirit of antichrist, whereof ye have heard that it should come; and even now already is it in the world.

 

Yes, Calvinists claim that the will is enslaved by the nature. They will say a sinner has free will, but his nature will always choose to sin.

A Calvinist will say Jesus could not sin because he had a perfect nature. He had free will, but his nature will always choose righteousness.

It this theory were true, then it would have been impossible for Satan, the fallen angels, and Adam and Eve to sin, because they all had "very good" natures when they were created. They had free will, but their nature would always choose righteousness.

This is how they use the scripture about trees, a good tree can only bear good fruit, and a corrupt tree can only bear corrupt fruit.

But they completely ignore that Jesus showed men have both the option and ability to choose which kind of tree they are.

Mat 12:33 Either make the tree good, and his fruit good; or else make the tree corrupt, and his fruit corrupt: for the tree is known by his fruit.

The words "either make" and "or else make" show man has both option and ability to choose which kind of tree he is. Calvinists will never show you this verse because it destroys their doctrine.

A half truth is a total lie.

 

Why would you see it as meaningless if Jesus could not sin? The Scripture tells us the reason and meaning for the being led into the wilderness to be tempted, and you even gave the answer, so "He could feel our infirmities and was tempted in all points as we are". Whether Jesus could sin or not has nothing to do with the lesson about temptation. Feeling temptation is Jesus' human part, as is ours. Feeling temptation is not wrong, Adam felt temptation and he had no sin nature, but Adam was fully human and no part Divine so Adam was able to give in and sin. Adam did not have to sin, but he had no Divine nature to prevent him from sinning. Jesus could not sin, just as we will not have any ability to sin when we receive our glorified human bodies in the future. We will then be as Jesus in this regard. The following is a commentary that I believe explains this very well.....

 

Correct....

 

So you think the Holy Spirit led Jesus into the wilderness to feel temptation? You do not believe it was a test of obedience?

As far as being able to sin, Jesus implied he could sin;

Jhn 8:55 Yet ye have not known him; but I know him: and if I should say, I know him not, I shall be a liar like unto you: but I know him, and keep his saying.

Jesus said IF (denoting possibility) he were to deny he knew his Father that he would be a liar. Why imply the impossible?

Arguing that God cannot sin is not a valid argument, God cannot die, yet Jesus died on the cross. So Jesus was able to do some things God in heaven cannot do. Jesus could be tempted, God in heaven cannot. How can it be called temptation if it is impossible to sin?

No, the scriptures say Jesus was obedient. It is not that temptation simply bounced off of him, he had to struggle against sin and resist it just like we do.

Heb 12:3 For consider him that endured such contradiction of sinners against himself, lest ye be wearied and faint in your minds.
4 Ye have not yet resisted unto blood, striving against sin.

Scripture says Jesus endured against sin, he resisted it, he strove against it. Temptation did not simply bounce off of him.

 

Most Calvinists (Iconoclast for one) say the will is enslaved by the nature. The sinner is free to choose, but he will always choose according to his nature, thus he will always choose sin.

Calvinists also argue Jesus could not sin because he had a perfect nature, so he always willed to do good.

If this theory were true, then Satan, the fallen angels, and Adam and Eve could not have possibly sinned, no matter how much they were tempted, as they all were created "very good". When tempted they would always choose to do right if this theory is true. Obviously it is a complete fallacy.

Calvinism talks out of both side of it's mouth and constantly contradicts itself.

 

Do you understand the implications of your pov here? You are believing that Jesus Christ, God in the flesh, could have failed to stay sinless, thus, failing just as a created human being fails.

Jesus Christ is eternal, He took on the flesh that He could be a perfect sinless sacrifice for His creation. You really don't want to tell people your God could have failed Himself.

Don't let an "if" throw you off course from the full counsel of God's Word. The Eternal God Jesus Christ able to sin?? I would prayerfully reconsider that pov.

 

I believe what the scriptures say. Jesus became flesh. Not like flesh, but actually "the same" flesh. He could die, God cannot. He could be temtped, God cannot. He was subject to the same infirmities and temptations we are, yet he never sinned.

Heb 2:14 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;
15 And deliver them who through fear of death were all their lifetime subject to bondage.
16 For verily he took not on him the nature of angels; but he took on him the seed of Abraham.
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.
18 For in that he himself hath suffered being tempted, he is able to succour them that are tempted.

Jesus took part of "the same" flesh and blood as us. He took on the nature of the seed of Abraham, not Adam as many falsely teach.

He was made like his brethren the Jews "in all things".

He was subject to the very same weaknesses and temptations as us.

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.

As I said, God cannot die, but Jesus could die, and it was through death that he destroyed him who had the power of death, the devil. (Heb 2:14)

The scriptures warn of those who deny Jesus came in the flesh, this is that spirit of antichrist.

1 Jhn 4:1 Beloved, believe not every spirit, but try the spirits whether they are of God: because many false prophets are gone out into the world.
2 Hereby know ye the Spirit of God: Every spirit that confesseth that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh is of God:
3 And every spirit that confesseth not that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh is not of God: and this is that spirit of antichrist, whereof ye have heard that it should come; and even now already is it in the world.

I realize the implications of my view, do you realize the implications of yours?