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!
Where do you get these questions from? Who argues from such points?
Some here seemto imply that we have free will enough remianing to amke the decision for jesus by just hearing the gospel, or else by applying some kind of internal faith towards him!
basically those who deny original Sin grab hold of this and run...
For he and Eve were perfect moral agents, no sin natures, perfect conditions , yet still sinned against God!
So free will by itself insufficient to save us, correct?
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.
You really misunderstand the scriptures!
bad fruit had to come from within Adam and Eve, so that shows that we are corrupt sinners, for they had to choose to become that, while we are born that!
And paul was adressing the morlistic jew, who thought himself right with god due to being born a jew, under the law, paul point is that even pagans have the Conscious and can do good works, but NEITHER can get right with god by just that!
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.
Jesus is God in human form, so it was IMPOSSIBLE for him to ever sin!
And Adam freely chose to sin, so if HE could not resisit doing that, how much more are we who are by very natures sinners do any better, be able to chose freely jesus?
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:
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.
15. Tempted like as we are, yet without sin. Christ is able to understand our weaknesses and miseries, for He Himself has experienced these very things. To imagine that since Jesus could not sin, He could not suffer is to miss the point of the passage. Temptation can be, and is, a reality apart from sin. God cannot be tempted with evil (Jas1:13), yet God is tempted by men (Heb3:9, Acts15:10). Christ was tempted; He did not sin; He can understand and intercede. Yet beyond the explicit statements of this passage, He who is God was made like sinful man (Rom8:3). But He could not sin (impeccable); and, indeed, He need not sin to be human. Before he sinned, Adam was human, and probably "more" human than after his fall; for that was not how God had created him. One needs not sin to be human, nor does one even need to possess the potential to sin. The glorified saint will never again be able to sin, yet he remains human. Christ's temptation was real, for temptation exist apart from yielding to it through sin. Indeed, the temptation is greater in duration and intensity when one does not take the "easy" way out by sinning. If man's temptation is greater when he endures it, surely Christ's was great since He had no alternative but to endure it. He has suffered, or endured, the temptation (Heb2:18). James Freerkson, Th.D. King James Bible Commentary.
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.....
For he and Eve were perfect moral agents, no sin natures, perfect conditions , yet still sinned against God!
So free will by itself insufficient to save us, correct?
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.....
Which tells us that even despite created morally upright, with no sin nature, perfect conditions, Adam still freely chose to sin, and means NONE of us can resisit those temptations as jesus did, as NONE of us are God like He was/is!
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.
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.