...but what of His Holiness?

[glfredrick]

I think you are reading a 'tone' or 'intent' into my words which is not present. I never called you 'stupid' or 'ignorant' and I don't believe you are either of those. I simply answered your question with scripture and when you replied saying that you agreed with that text I pointed out the parts of that quote which certainly appear to suggest we are responsible to "give ourselves" and to "obey" once enabled by God's gracious means. You then replied suggesting that I denied the need for those gracious means and I asked you to please re-read my post. I'm not sure why you are this defensive but maybe we need to just end this here and allow things to cool down.

Blessings.

Guy, please read my post more slowly and carefully.

Duoh... :tonofbricks:

 

[webdog]

Duoh... :tonofbricks:

Only a handful of people on this board would equate that to what you have accused Skan of. Bravo.

 

[Skandelon]

Originally Posted by Skandelon
Guy, the part of Paul's answer that your system doesn't seem to correctly address is where he writes, "if you offer yourselves," and "although you used to be slaves of sin, you obeyed..."

They did the offering of themselves, not God. They did the obeying, not God. Now, granted, God enabled us to offer ourselves to Him and to obey, so that we might move out of slavery to sin into slavery to righteousness. He did that by sending his Son, the apostles, the powerful gospel appeal, ambassadors of Christ, and His Church. All of these are GRACIOUS, POWERFUL works of God and there IS NO REASON to assume that some additional irresistible application of grace by the HS (which is never expounded upon in scripture) must precede these biblical means in order for them to have effect.

Certainly, because the grace of God allowed it to be.

Even you -- IF you still hold to an Arminian position -- would have to agree with that. We do no actions purely on our own without God's first allowing and enabling them. OR have you now moved left of true Arminian doctrine?

You sent this reply in about 15 seconds after I posted. I think you will notice that you didn't read it very carefully as I clearly spoke of God's enabling. Now, to that reply I could have merely said, "Duoh..." and had bricks falling, but instead I asked you nicely to read it again.

Now, please try to be cordial and not make this personal. I'm trying to be nice here. :love2:

 

[Aaron]

So, its not Adam's fault that he sinned? It sure sounds like you are arguing that Adam has as much control over whether or not he sinned as a piece of iron left outdoors has over whether or not it rusts? Is that your argument?

I like to start with the words of Christ. Can a good tree bring forth evil fruit?

 

[Skandelon]

I like to start with the words of Christ. Can a good tree bring forth evil fruit?

Now that you are saved are you considered a 'good tree' or a 'bad tree?'

 

[Aaron]

You don't understand one's union with Christ. The good that I have is all of Christ. I am a partaker of the divine nature, incorruptible and cannot sin, 1 John 3:9. Christ's part in my union with Him is the good. My part in my union with Him, is the evil.

The argument you're attempting to make is fallacious on two fronts: 1) It is devoid of an informed view of the Atonement, and 2) It ignores Christ's words.

So, back to my question. Can a good tree bring forth evil fruit?

 

[Skandelon]

So, when you sin is it because Christ didn't resist the temptation for you? By the way, I didn't make an argument, I asked a question, which you failed to answer. Are you a good tree or not?

 

[Skandelon]

Oh, and in case you haven't figured it out, this line of questions will lead us right back to that same old "peripheral issue" that you continually dismiss.

We both believe that God gives bad trees what they need to become good trees, but you just think God's enabling is irresistibly applied to a select few, while I believe that no one has any excuse for their unbelief because God has giving them all they need. Some choose to rebel despite God's love, provision and mercy making their condemnation all the more deserved.

 

[Aaron]

So, when you sin is it because Christ didn't resist the temptation for you? By the way, I didn't make an argument, I asked a question, which you failed to answer. Are you a good tree or not?

You still don't understand the believer's union with Christ. Applying your thinking to a marriage, you are insisting that either party is sometimes a male and at othertimes female.* I could ask you, since your marriage, are you a female or not?

I would take this time to warn you, that if you think any good fruit you believe you bear is anything other than Christ, then you stand in dire need of self-examination.

As I said, all I bring to my union with Christ is my sin. My righteousness was wholly accomplished 2000 years ago.

But Adam had no union with Christ. There is comparing neither his innocent nor fallen estate with those who do. So spare us your uninformed cavils.

So I ask a third time: According to Jesus, can a good tree bring forth evil fruit?

*Even after studying it, many do not see that the man and the woman become one flesh (and that has nothing to do with sex). God has joined them. They are not individuals, and have all things in common.

 

[Skandelon]

Aaron,

I think its interesting how you presume to know what I do or don't understand about a believer's union with Christ based upon my asking you a simple followup question. A question you refuse to answer.

Based upon your responses it appears that you are saying that you are a bad tree that has been united with a good tree (Christ) and all the good stuff you do is really Christ's doing and all the bad stuff you do is really your doing? Would that be accurate?

And so, when you fall into temptation it must be because Christ chose not to resist that temptation for you, right?

So I ask a third time: According to Jesus, can a good tree bring forth evil fruit?

If it does it would cease being 'good' now wouldn't it? One might say that the tree would "Fall" if it produced its first bad fruit, wouldn't they?

God called all that he created 'good.' Even Adam. And I think you should know that even Calvin acknowledges that truth. Man became evil by bearing a bad fruit (sinning), just as a tree becomes bad by bearing a bad fruit.

 

[Aaron]

Aaron,

I think its interesting how you presume to know what I do or don't understand about a believer's union with Christ based upon my asking you a simple followup question. A question you refuse to answer.

Your questions betray you, and I have answered it.

Based upon your responses it appears that you are saying that you are a bad tree that has been united with a good tree (Christ) and all the good stuff you do is really Christ's doing and all the bad stuff you do is really your doing? Would that be accurate?

No.

And so, when you fall into temptation it must be because Christ chose not to resist that temptation for you, right?

No.

You still don't get it, but even if your premises were correct, your questions are irrelevant because Adam had and has no union with Christ.

If it does it would cease being 'good' now wouldn't it?

Nope.

One might say that the tree would "Fall" if it produced its first bad fruit, wouldn't they?

Nope. One might say by the bad fruit, that the tree had fallen.

God called all that he created 'good.' Even Adam. And I think you should know that even Calvin acknowledges that truth.

As do I.

Man became evil by bearing a bad fruit (sinning), just as a tree becomes bad by bearing a bad fruit.

A tree doesn't become corrupt by reason of its bad fruit. A tree has bad fruit by reason of its corruption.

Just once, you should let the words of Christ govern your thinking. I know it will hurt your pride, and you'll have to get a new dawg, but just once....

Adam was created good. Christ said a good tree cannot bring forth evil fruit. So if Adam did bring forth evil fruit, corruption had to have set in. Now, what was the corrupting influence?

 

[Skandelon]

A tree doesn't become corrupt by reason of its bad fruit. A tree has bad fruit by reason of its corruption.

Which takes us right back around on this merry-go-round to what/who corrupted Adam. "Satan made me do it!"

Just once, you should let the words of Christ govern your thinking.

Bad fruit, Aaron.

Bad tree???

Adam was created good. Christ said a good tree cannot bring forth evil fruit. So if Adam did bring forth evil fruit, corruption had to have set in. Now, what was the corrupting influence?

Satan made him do it? :thumbsup:

 

[convicted1]

Willis,
God was in control of satan as satan went to afflict Job......God said;

He is in control of everything. I have never stated anything to the contrary. He will allow things to go so far, and when He deems to do so, He will stop it.

Willis.....God did not make satan do it...Correct? Satan only comes to kill, steal, and destroy......God allowed him to afflict Job....but not his life.....see it. God was in total control of the evil...be hind the scenes...yet God was not the author of evil....He cannot sin !

I agree with this. Satan is the one who stirs up the trouble in our life. God is not the Author of confusion/sin.

Then we have these kind of verses....what do you make of this Willis???

In 1 Samuel 16, let's start with the very first verse.

1 Samuel 16:1 And the LORD said unto Samuel, How long wilt thou mourn for Saul, seeing I have rejected him from reigning over Israel? fill thine horn with oil, and go, I will send thee to Jesse the Bethlehemite: for I have provided me a king among his sons.


Why did God reject Saul?

Here's why:

1 Samuel 15:1 Samuel also said unto Saul, The LORD sent me to anoint thee to be king over his people, over Israel: now therefore hearken thou unto the voice of the words of the LORD.

2 Thus saith the LORD of hosts, I remember that which Amalek did to Israel, how he laid wait for him in the way, when he came up from Egypt.

3 Now go and smite Amalek, and utterly destroy all that they have, and spare them not; but slay both man and woman, infant and suckling, ox and sheep, camel and ass.

Right here is where God rejected Saul as Israel's king. Although God knew this would happen all along.

9 But Saul and the people spared Agag, and the best of the sheep, and of the oxen, and of the fatlings, and the lambs, and all that was good, and would not utterly destroy them: but every thing that was vile and refuse, that they destroyed utterly.

The reason why the Spirit of the Lord left Saul was because God pushed him out as king, and gave it to David. God's providence was no longer over Saul, but was now upon David. By Saul's continual rejection of God's commands, God "nipped him in the bud". This evil spirit was used to shove Saul to the "sidelines", IOW. God is in control of ALL spirits. If He tells one to "move" they move.

 

[jonathan.borland]

I'm trying to get iconoclast's contention that ordaining evil is different than authoring it. Also, that God does not permit or allow evil but rather ordains/foreordained it. I guess that means he willed and then decreed every evil deed that ever occurred or will occur to occur. He somehow gave men a free will but only to make himself not culpable to the sins that he decreed or ordered that they commit. Is that right?

 

[jonathan.borland]

Willis.....God did not make satan do it...Correct? Satan only comes to kill, steal, and destroy......God allowed him to afflict Job....but not his life.....see it.

Wait. I thought you said that God doesn't "allow" any evil, he only ordains/decrees/predestines it.

So did God merely set the boundary and allow Satan have the power to do whatever was in his mind to do to Job, or did God actually decree/predestine every single thing for Satan to do?

God was in total control of the evil...be hind the scenes...yet God was not the author of evil....He cannot sin !

I'm glad to hear you say this, although it seems inconsistent with your expressions of God never "allowing" evil but rather "ordaining" it.

 

[jonathan.borland]

Oh, and in case you haven't figured it out, this line of questions will lead us right back to that same old "peripheral issue" that you continually dismiss.

We both believe that God gives bad trees what they need to become good trees, but you just think God's enabling is irresistibly applied to a select few, while I believe that no one has any excuse for their unbelief because God has giving them all they need. Some choose to rebel despite God's love, provision and mercy making their condemnation all the more deserved.

It's a joy to read your biblically orthodox and systematically biblically consistent views. I'm glad you're here, Skandelon!

 

[preacher4truth]

:laugh: :laugh:

There's a ditch coming around the corner.

 

[Skandelon]

It's a joy to read your biblically orthodox and systematically biblically consistent views. I'm glad you're here, Skandelon!

Thank you. :thumbsup:

 

[Skandelon]

Aaron,

Now that you have established that you really believe that Satan made Adam sin maybe you could explain what made Satan sin? Was he created corrupt?

I think your deterministic worldview falls apart here. God doesn't create people or angels with corruption. He creates them with freedom. And since you can't define, understand and systematize freedom you just can't accept the mystery of its obvious reality.

It really is very simple. Adam determined his choice and he is responsible for it, period. Satan determined his choice and he is responsible for it, period. What CAUSED or determined Adam to sin? Adam did. What CAUSED or determined Satan to sin? Satan did. What determines your sins? You do. When you fail to resist temptation its not Christ's failure, its yours. When you do resist temptation then give glory to God because he gave you all you needed to make that choice and He didn't have to do that. Just because you had the ability to reject his gracious provision doesn't mean He didn't provide it and that he shouldn't receive the glory for it.

 

[glfredrick]

Aaron,

Now that you have established that you really believe that Satan made Adam sin maybe you could explain what made Satan sin? Was he created corrupt?

I think your deterministic worldview falls apart here. God doesn't create people or angels with corruption. He creates them with freedom. And since you can't define, understand and systematize freedom you just can't accept the mystery of its obvious reality.

It really is very simple. Adam determined his choice and he is responsible for it, period. Satan determined his choice and he is responsible for it, period. What CAUSED or determined Adam to sin? Adam did. What CAUSED or determined Satan to sin? Satan did. What determines your sins? You do. When you fail to resist temptation its not Christ's failure, its yours. When you do resist temptation then give glory to God because he gave you all you needed to make that choice and He didn't have to do that. Just because you had the ability to reject his gracious provision doesn't mean He didn't provide it and that he should receive the glory for it.

I almost agree with you...

Two differences...

First, God had to allow that to happen or it would not have happened, but that does not take away the fact that choice WAS available in FREE Adam and FREE Satan.

Second, we no longer have the same freedom as did Adam. He is the cause of our separation from God and ever after Adam we are separated from God -- sin -- that only Christ can remove. Our "sins" stem from our separation but we are already separated before we commit the first act of sin that we recognize as such.