Do We All have the same Kind Of Free Will as adam Had From God?

Do not confuse the state of Adam in Eden with the state of fallen Adam.

Adam in Eden had full understanding and complete freedom of choice. Neither existed after the fall. God did not "determine" Adam to fall, but it was the freedom of choice that Adam chose Eve over God.

The very point being made is that it is God who calls and God that makes us able to respond.

Until the time God works, we are made unacceptable and unrepentant by sin just as Adam - unrepentant.

Adam never approached God after he chose Eve over God. It was God that sought Adam.

Throughout the Scriptures it is God that does the choosing, never does man do the choosing. God is always making the claim on man, man does not first make the claim on God. Man is a falling dead creature. Many on the way down may hope, and scheme, and plan, even barter in hope of finding an escape, but eventually all will hit the bottom. All are dead, already.

Adam had such a wonderful chance to look the creator right in the eye, humble himself, accept responsibility and be cleansed. Just as a believer has that ability in Christ.

But Adam didn't because his fallen nature did not allow for that condition. He was trying to cover his own shame by blame and excuse. He had tasted of the heavenly and there was no ability of him to repent.

The condition of all without Christ is the inability to generate "Godly sorrow."

However, that is not the condition of one who is a believer. The believer does have Godly sorrow and does repent. It is a result of faith that God implants and the work of the Holy Spirit given by God to that believer.

God does the choosing, not man.

 

Why was it called the tree of knowledge of good and evil, if we can only know evil?

It seems like Adam and Eve would have gained knowledge of both.

 

Knowing does not equate to doing.

The knowing good and evil brought about shame. Shame in the unbeliever breeds anger, rebellion, coverup, excuse, blame and confusion.

In Eden, there was no shame. The believer that walks in Christ has no shame. In the New Heaven, there is no shame.

 

Just as a suggestion, would it not be reasonable to understand the "knowledge" as an intimate relationship to the subject?

We can see Eve understood that the tree was "good:"



Genesis 3

6And when the woman saw that the tree was good for food, and that it was pleasant to the eyes, and a tree to be desired to make one wise, she took of the fruit thereof, and did eat, and gave also unto her husband with her; and he did eat.


There was a time when Adam would "know" his wife, after having a knowledge of here, even so concerning good and evil, evil was not associated with the Garden until they came under judgment for Adam's disobedience.

God bless.

 

1. If neither of us believe we are saved independent of faith then your point is irrelevant.

2. It's not an excuse for their 'going to hell,' per se, but an excuse for their unbelief or rejection of the truth...the very point Paul addresses in Romans 1, thus the argument stands.

Exactly. And since these mysteries HAVE been explained by spiritual inspiration (i.e. scripture), there is no reason to believe that the reader/hearer couldn't understand the content of such clear revelation. Again, a readers unwillingness to accept these truths doesn't mean they don't understand them, for then they would have an excuse for rejecting them (ref to Romans 1). Just because someone chooses to trade a truth in for a lie doesn't mean then never understood the truth to begin with, it simply means they have rejected it...for which they will be held to account without any defense. If they were born unable to understand the truth wouldn't that be the best excuse of all for rejecting it? That is why Paul goes to the trouble to point out that God's revelation is 'clearly seen and understood.'...that is what makes them 'without excuse' for their rejection of it.

Correct. And what are the means the Spirit uses to teach his people? Surely you aren't suggesting it is apart from the inspired scriptures, are you? And since the words that Paul is writing in this very letter are under inspiration of the Spirit, doesn't it make since to credit Paul's teaching to the Spirit? Is that not the means God uses to discern to his church the mysteries of his Spirit. Does he not inspire chosen messengers to write it in our language with simple and understandable terms? Why suggest someone couldn't understand that revelation? Why believe that work of spiritual discernment is insufficient?

Haven't you known of theologians who can expound in detail on doctrinal truths who were never really saved, or saved long after becoming a 'theologian?' It's not about understanding, its about accepting and experiencing these truths for oneself. It seems that you define 'understanding' as something different than its actual meaning. Maybe you can offer a definition?

Well, that is not exactly what I am saying. I am saying that everyone can understand the truths of God by the means of Spiritual discernment that He has selected to use (i.e. scripture). Since the gospel and scripture as a whole IS A WORK of SPIRITUAL DISCERNMENT to mankind, one cannot claim understanding it is done 'apart from the spirit.' If you accept that Paul's letter is a Spiritual work of divine inspiration then why would you credit its being understood to those who hear it rather than to the God who inspires and discerns it to us?

 

I agree, I just believe that the work of God in calling is also his work of enabling a response. "How will they know and respond unless they hear..."

Agreed, but Calvinism claims that Adam wouldn't even be able to respond to the God who is seeking reconciliation. We both believe that God initiates reconciliation. We are disagreeing over mankind's ability to respond to that powerful gospel appeal.

 

As it would be much more than JUST the case of the Gospel being preached to people, and than they have freewill ability to actually decide for Christ or not!

The fall just does not allow us that option!

 

DaChaser,

Actually, some of both camps would deny your characterization of the gospel being somehow separated from God's enabling grace, as most scholars acknowledge the power of salvation is always accomplished through the means of His gospel, whether effectually or not.

 

How do you reconcile this with what Jesus said about the wicked giving their children good gifts?

 

I am assuming you are referring to Matthew 7:

Ask, and it shall be given you; seek, and ye shall find; knock, and it shall be opened unto you: For every one that asks receives; and he that seeks finds; and to him that knocks it shall be opened.
Or what man is there of you, whom if his son ask bread, will he give him a stone?
Or if he ask a fish, will he give him a serpent?
If ye then, being evil, know how to give good gifts unto your children, how much more shall your Father which is in heaven give good things to them that ask him? ​

However, I am not certain how this is applies to the post I made which said:

"Knowing does not equate to doing.

The knowing good and evil brought about shame. Shame in the unbeliever breeds anger, rebellion, coverup, excuse, blame and confusion.

In Eden, there was no shame. The believer that walks in Christ has no shame. In the New Heaven, there is no shame."

 

The gifts were good, not the givers.

Yet we have those who are still clamoring for the goodness of man that doesn't exist outside of Christ.

 

While it is true that knowing does not (always) equate to doing, I was showing that knowing also does lead to doing.

 

No! Man's will is in bondage to his sin nature.

 

Nevermind.

 

Do they get points with God for these "good" gifts?

 

Point jesus was making was SINCE EVEIL parents can still manage to give good gifts to their kids, as in what theyactually need, how much more will the perfect Heavenly Father grant Gift of the HS to His own :kids!"

 

To quote you "nevermind"