Incapacitation of the will

[jonathan.borland]

Article 2: Denial:
We deny that Adam’s sin resulted in the incapacitation of any person’s free will or rendered any person guilty before he has personally sinned. While no sinner is remotely capable of achieving salvation through his own effort, we deny that any sinner is saved apart from a free response to the Holy Spirit’s drawing through the Gospel.

There seems to be some controversy here on both parts of the first sentence. Here I wonder only about the first part. Doesn't incapacitation of the will simply mean that man cannot choose anything, not even evil, since his will is without capacity or disabled? If that's what it means, and it sounds like it is, why wouldn't everyone deny this? Appreciate your thoughts on this.

 

[agedman]

There seems to be some controversy here on both parts of the first sentence. Here I wonder only about the first part. Doesn't incapacitation of the will simply mean that man cannot choose anything, not even evil, since his will is without capacity or disabled? If that's what it means, and it sounds like it is, why wouldn't everyone deny this? Appreciate your thoughts on this.

I will be the first to state that Palegian view (as I have come to understand it) does not support that man is "born in sin, in sin my mother conceived me."

The Palegian view furthers that a person is basically born "tabula rasa" which means "blank slat." That until a person actually commits a sin, they are sinless.

In this, there are those who would hold that some have actually lived sinless and that righteousness can be attained through moral authority.

The typical views (both Armenian and Calvinistic) hold that man's original will is part of the fallen nature. How much the will is fallen is part of the contention between the Arminian and Calvinist. But because it is fallen the nature of man obliges that the will of man will ultimately not choose what is righteous without the direct intervention of God.

The typical SB church holds that a person may sin, but is not held as sinful until they have become aware and accountable. They term this thinking as "the age of accountability."

The short answer to the question you asked is that there is no incapacity of the will other than the capacity of the fallen will to chose righteousness.

 

[Tom Butler]

Romans 8:7-8 gives us some useful insight into our fallen nature:

7 Because the carnal mind is enmity against God: for it is not subject to the law of God, neither indeed can be.
8 So then they that are in the flesh cannot please God.

 

[jonathan.borland]

Where does the denial talk about man seeking God? It talks about man having the ability to choose evil. If he hasn't that capacity, he can't be guilty of sin. That's what the first sentence of the denial is about, isn't it?

 

[jonathan.borland]

Romans 8:7-8 gives us some useful insight into our fallen nature:

Are the mind and the will the same thing? The will is the capacity to decide. If our will is incapacitated, then we can't choose evil or good, someone else is choosing for us, and we can't be guilty of sin. Who says we have no ability to decide to sin? Isn't that heretical? If we have the ability to make decisions, then we can be held accountable for those decisions, and if we don't, we can't.

 

[Iconoclast]

Are the mind and the will the same thing? The will is the capacity to decide. If our will is incapacitated, then we can't choose evil or good, someone else is choosing for us, and we can't be guilty of sin. Who says we have no ability to decide to sin? Isn't that heretical? If we have the ability to make decisions, then we can be held accountable for those decisions, and if we don't, we can't.

Jonathan,
i really do not like to use examples like this,but...let me offer this to help remove an obstacle....

Some people who are physically blind.....have an eye, an optic nerve , and a brain. Some trauma takes place and althought they have all the parts, they do not work as they were intended anymore. the impulses are not transmitted from outside the eye, to into the optic nerve, and the rods and cones.....[i am not an optomitrist although I play one on the BB}
They would need to be healed by God for that to happen.

{ i am not talking about all blind people, or some who have surgery, or any other garbage, do not think of possible alternatives to debate and deflect from the point} I just use that image from scripture...Jesus healing blind eyes...physically and spiritually.
Tom made reference to this with the two verses in romans 8....in the fall we were spiritually incapacitated and dead...not just wounded, needing a little more information.

 

[jonathan.borland]

The statement allows for the inculpability of those incapable of moral action. Is this wrong? It says everyone inherits a nature and environment inclined toward sin and that everyone capable of moral action will sin and be held accountable for their sin. Sounds like a good summary of Gen 8:21: the intention of every man's heart is evil. Is this wrong? Seems to me this is the likeliest explanation of the longstanding Baptist belief in the so-called age of accountability.

 

[Iconoclast]

The statement allows for the inculpability of those incapable of moral action. Is this wrong? It says everyone inherits a nature and environment inclined toward sin and that everyone capable of moral action will sin and be held accountable for their sin. Sounds like a good summary of Gen 8:21: the intention of every man's heart is evil. Is this wrong? Seems to me this is the likeliest explanation of the longstanding Baptist belief in the so-called age of accountability.

What does this mean,and where is this in scripture???

It says everyone inherits a nature and environment inclined toward sin

Jesus said men are bound in sin,[not just slightly inclined, or they make a mistake once in awhile} that does not look like scriptural language like gen 6:5
Luke just answered vans tuli ideas, and highlighted mans responsibility along with his guilt.

Also...how is sin ...just floating around somewhere in the environment???
what does that even mean??? is it like the flu....you inhale it???or does scripture say that what comes from within the man defiles the man.The whole statement is anti biblical and they try to cover it with nice verses that do not really demonstrate what they say it does.

 

[jonathan.borland]

What does this mean,and where is this in scripture???


Jesus said men are bound in sin,[not just slightly inclined, or they make a mistake once in awhile} that does not look like scriptural language like gen 6:5
Luke just answered vans tuli ideas, and highlighted mans responsibility along with his guilt.

Also...how is sin ...just floating around somewhere in the environment???
what does that even mean??? is it like the flu....you inhale it???or does scripture say that what comes from within the man defiles the man.The whole statement is anti biblical and they try to cover it with nice verses that do not really demonstrate what they say it does.

I think the statement makes a distinction between sinful nature and sinful behavior. We are guilty of our sinful behavior, not our sinful nature. What is sinful nature if not the inclination that leads everyone capable of moral action to sin of their own free will?

 

[Iconoclast]

I think the statement makes a distinction between sinful nature and sinful behavior. We are guilty of our sinful behavior, not our sinful nature. What is sinful nature if not the inclination that leads everyone capable of moral action to sin of their own free will?

Jonathan,

We are guilty in Adam

We are righteous in Jesus

This is the heart of the gospel

Romans 3;23 and romans 5;12-21 cannot be denied...All died, all sinned...in adam
1cor15;22 even so..In Christ



14 Nevertheless death reigned from Adam to Moses, even over them that had not sinned after the similitude of Adam's transgression, [B]who is the figure of him that was to come.[/B]
the word figure is type...i think tupos...type
Who was the .....TYPE...of him who was to come.the Holy Spirit links this for us.it is not optional,but actual. There is no debate on this


even over them that had not sinned after the similitude of Adam's transgression, [

This is all mankind here jonathan.

We are guilty of our sinful behavior, not our sinful nature

it is both...in adam ...and in ourselves

 

[jonathan.borland]

What does this mean,and where is this in scripture???


Jesus said men are bound in sin,[not just slightly inclined, or they make a mistake once in awhile} that does not look like scriptural language like gen 6:5
Luke just answered vans tuli ideas, and highlighted mans responsibility along with his guilt.

Also...how is sin ...just floating around somewhere in the environment???
what does that even mean??? is it like the flu....you inhale it???or does scripture say that what comes from within the man defiles the man.The whole statement is anti biblical and they try to cover it with nice verses that do not really demonstrate what they say it does.

Nice example. Do you find the biblical example of all sheep going astray too weak or ungraphic?

 

[jonathan.borland]

It says many times we are all guilty because all have sinned. We all sin because Adam sinned.

 

[saturneptune]

Jonathan,

We are guilty in Adam

We are righteous in Jesus

This is the heart of the gospel

Romans 3;23 and romans 5;12-21 cannot be denied...All died, all sinned...in adam
1cor15;22 even so..In Christ



14 Nevertheless death reigned from Adam to Moses, even over them that had not sinned after the similitude of Adam's transgression, [B]who is the figure of him that was to come.[/B]
the word figure is type...i think tupos...type
Who was the .....TYPE...of him who was to come.the Holy Spirit links this for us.it is not optional,but actual. There is no debate on this


even over them that had not sinned after the similitude of Adam's transgression, [

This is all mankind here jonathan.



it is both...in adam ...and in ourselves

I think that is an excellent post. Although there is a classification difference between the two (original and continuing sin), we are still either in a fallen state or justified by Jesus Christ. You are better at expressing this idea than I, but the only difference I see is that original sin of Adam we are all born in affects everyone, and continuing sin is our state before regeneration. Also, another distinction is made before the law and after in Romans.

What do you see as the difference between before the law and after, and the other one, original sin and continuing. The final outcome is the same, seperation from the Lord.

 

[Iconoclast]

Nice example. Do you find the biblical example of all sheep going astray too weak or ungraphic?

Jonathan,
Remember, that I believe in a covenant death for the elect sheep...so this verse completely agrees with the verse;

24 Who his own self bare our sins in his own body on the tree, that we, being dead to sins, should live unto righteousness: by whose stripes ye were healed.
25 For ye were as sheep going astray; but are now returned unto the Shepherd and Bishop of your souls.

This is only true of the elect sheep...not lost goats..agreed??

our sins- the covenant sheep given by the Father to the Son.

-that we-should live unto righteousness...being dead to sins...goats remain alive to sin
ye were healed-sheep

-but are now returned - they belonged to Jesus [the Shepherd}by electing love , now being healed by the cross work healing them

 

[Iconoclast]

I think that is an excellent post. Although there is a classification difference between the two (original and continuing sin), we are still either in a fallen state or justified by Jesus Christ. You are better at expressing this idea than I, but the only difference I see is that original sin of Adam we are all born in affects everyone, and continuing sin is our state before regeneration. Also, another distinction is made before the law and after in Romans.

What do you see as the difference between before the law and after, and the other one, original sin and continuing. The final outcome is the same, seperation from the Lord.

Not sure if this helps...but-

Also, another distinction is made before the law and after in Romans.

What do you see as the difference between before the law and after, and the other one, original sin and continuing. The final outcome is the same, seperation from the Lord.

it would take time, but i think Paul in romans makes the case of why all men everywhere were always under law...[the ten commandments}...
but then israel in the theocracy of the OC. had the expansion of that law, in ceremonial,and judicial laws to govern the theocracy, under Moses.

So In Christ...it is the mosaic legislation that has been completed, yet we are still under then decalogue In Christ;
Wherefore, holy brethren, partakers of the heavenly calling, consider the Apostle and High Priest of our profession, Christ Jesus;

2 Who was faithful to him that appointed him, as also Moses was faithful in all his house.

3 For this man was counted worthy of more glory than Moses, inasmuch as he who hath builded the house hath more honour than the house.
4 For every house is builded by some man; but he that built all things is God.

5 And Moses verily was faithful in all his house, as a servant, for a testimony of those things which were to be spoken after;

6 But Christ as a son over his own house; whose house are we, if we hold fast the confidence and the rejoicing of the hope firm unto the end.

7 Wherefore (as the Holy Ghost saith, To day if ye will hear his voice,

8 Harden not your hearts, as in the provocation, in the day of temptation in the wilderness:


When you read Moses in verse 5...it does mean Moses, but I think it is also referring to The law in the theocracy

Moses equals OC law moral. ceremonial,and judicial....as servants..
israel was to be the covenant son...but failed to be law keepers
Ex4;22

22 And thou shalt say unto Pharaoh, Thus saith the Lord, Israel is my son, even my firstborn:
23 And I say unto thee, Let my son go, that he may serve me: and if thou refuse to let him go, behold, I will slay thy son, even thy firstborn.

Jesus is the true Son, the True law keeper, the true Servant of the Lord
Isa40-54.
We are saved by His law keeping. that is why the 10 commandments are now not external on stone, but in new hearts of flesh:

25 Then will I sprinkle clean water upon you, and ye shall be clean: from all your filthiness, and from all your idols, will I cleanse you.

26 A new heart also will I give you, and a new spirit will I put within you: and I will take away the stony heart out of your flesh, and I will give you an heart of flesh.

27 And I will put my spirit within you, and cause you to walk in my statutes, and ye shall keep my judgments, and do them.

Ye are our epistle written in our hearts, known and read of all men:

3 Forasmuch as ye are manifestly declared to be the epistle of Christ ministered by us, written not with ink, but with the Spirit of the living God; not in tables of stone, but in fleshy tables of the heart.
4 And such trust have we through Christ to God-ward:

5 Not that we are sufficient of ourselves to think any thing as of ourselves; but our sufficiency is of God;

6 Who also hath made us able ministers of the new testament; not of the letter, but of the spirit: for the letter killeth, but the spirit giveth life.

7 But if the ministration of death, written and engraven in stones, was glorious, so that the children of Israel could not stedfastly behold the face of Moses for the glory of his countenance; which glory was to be done away:

8 How shall not the ministration of the spirit be rather glorious?
9 For if the ministration of condemnation be glory, much more doth the ministration of righteousness exceed in glory.

10 For even that which was made glorious had no glory in this respect, by reason of the glory that excelleth.

11 For if that which is done away was glorious, much more that which remaineth is glorious.
12 Seeing then that we have such hope, we use great plainness of speech:

13 And not as Moses, which put a veil over his face, that the children of Israel could not stedfastly look to the end of that which is abolished:

14 But their minds were blinded: for until this day remaineth the same vail untaken away in the reading of the old testament; which vail is done away in Christ.

so..what do we have for gentiles before the cross...or today after the cross who have not even heard of all this.
as image bearers they are to be law keepers ,but yet are fallen in adam.still at times like a broken mirror still gives a distorted image..we see paul explain in romans 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

this would be the ten commandments that all before the mosaic commands were given were under....
if their was sin...there had to be law that they were breaking.

so in romans 3 we see this statement:

19 Now we know that what things soever the law saith, it saith to them who are under the law: that every mouth may be stopped, and all the world may become guilty before God.

The law...the 10 commandments still speaks as the the Lord still speaks to all men from heaven...the heavenly Zion and Jerusalem

25 See that ye refuse not him that speaketh. For if they escaped not who refused him that spake on earth, much more shall not we escape, if we turn away from him that speaketh from heaven:

in romans 3:19 all the world is guilty before God.....guilty from what??
not for not offering animal sacrifices, or keeping jewish feast days,but guilty of breaking the 10.

 

[jonathan.borland]

I have not signed the statement yet. I want to make sure I understand all of it first. This thread is an attempt in that direction.

 

[saturneptune]

Thanks for the reply.

 

[Iconoclast]

I have not signed the statement yet. I want to make sure I understand all of it first. This thread is an attempt in that direction.

Jonathan,

Take your time and study it out.....It is serious error, that will get worked out, or it will force major changes to take place.
Like when a denomination ordains sodomites as their platform..real christians must flee out of babylon...there is no doubt whatsoever on that...remember lots wife.
To be honest...what is more sad and pathetic is the larger issue that several have mentioned, that so many do not even know it is an issue...or even worse do not care!
That can also be said for any in all our churches.People are perishing all around us, we have truth, and know it is given to us as a treasure in scripture...and there are some who sinfully presume that we are not to serve, not to be witnesses, not to follow after holiness without which no one shall see the Lord. many do not know their bibles as well as they know nascar persons,or batting averages, or what is on sale this week,,,the temporal running over the eternal.

 

[Iconoclast]

Thanks for the reply.

It is a large and central topic, that I am still learning much on. I was severly rebuked years ago at a bible conference when I made a loose statement about this topic when there much controversy on it.
One of the main conference speakers almost ripped my head off at first, but then when i looked like a deer in the headlights, he calmed down, and took some time to redirect my errant thoughts and point me in the right direction. It was rough at the time, but I look back on it now as one of the best things that happened to me in that I was challenged to see the seriousness of these issues, and vowed to not make that error again, if I was going to open my mouth publicly.

 

[Tom Butler]

I think it will be helpful to read what some great theologians have written:

E. Y. Mullins:

Freedom in man does not imply exemption from the operation of influences, motives, heredity, environment. It means rather that man is not under compulsion. His actions are in the last resort determined from within. He is self-determined in what he does.
Some hold that freedom in man means ability to transcend himself and act contrary to his character. (This is the erroneous sense of free will, as believed by all Pelagians and Arminians, and as opposed by Luther and many others.) The will is thus regarded, not as an expression of what the man is in his essential charactere. It is free in the sense of being capable of choices unrelated to past choices, acquired traits, and hereditary tendencies. This is an untenable view of freedom. It makes the will a mere external attachment to man's nature rather than an expression thereof. Freedom excludes compulsion from without, it also excludes mere caprice and arbitrariness. Freedom is self-determinative. (The Christian Religion in its Doctrinal Expression pp. 258, 259)

Now, from Thomas Paul Simmons A Systematic Study of Bible Doctrine 1935:

God always acts according to His choice; He does as he pleases. So also does man. God cannot transcend Himself and act contrary to his character. Neither can man. God is ever determined to do good. Natural man is ever determined to do that which is spiritually evil. A regenerated man is determined, in the main, to do that which is is good. When he commits evil, he is, for the moment, determined to do evil. The will of God is never compelled or restrained by anything outside His own nature. The same is true of man. God never acts capriciously or arbitrarily, that is, without sufficient cause. Neither does man

In other words, we all operate freely within our natures. But not outside.

The use of the term "incapacitation" is imprecise in the A&D. And incorrect.