Jesus Christ - God Incarnate - Lamb of God ... ALWAYS the plan, or just a patch after the fall?

[Aaron]

...and/or:

14​	... Is there unrighteousness with God?... Ro 9

All the complaints against God's Sovereign Grace have their roots in these.

Precisely!

 

[Ascetic X]

kyredneck said:
...and/or:

14

... Is there unrighteousness with God?... Romans 9

All the complaints against God's Sovereign Grace have their roots in these.

Precisely!

There is no unrighteousness with God, for He does not will sin to happen.

 

[Aaron]

There is no unrighteousness with God, for He does not will sin to happen.

Arguments from foreknowledge are no shield from culpability.

In the law, one building a house was commanded to put a rail around the roof to prevent falls and the owner coming under the guilt of blood, Deuteronomy 22:8. God built Adam's house, but where was the 'rail'? God knew that a tempter would corrupt them with lie, and did nothing to keep him out. Therefore to him that knoweth to do good, and doeth it not, to him it is sin. - James 4:17.

So it doesn't matter how you slice it, the builder's 'culpable', speaking from the point of view of the flesh, which is the only point of view from which one could charge the Potter with wrongdoing to make a vessle unto dishonour.

 

[Psalty]

Arguments from foreknowledge are no shield from culpability.

In the law, one building a house was commanded to put a rail around the roof to prevent falls and the owner coming under the guilt of blood, Deuteronomy 22:8. God built Adam's house, but where was the 'rail'? God knew that a tempter would corrupt them with lie, and did nothing to keep him out. Therefore to him that knoweth to do good, and doeth it not, to him it is sin. - James 4:17.

So it doesn't matter how you slice it, the builder's 'culpable', speaking from the point of view of the flesh, which is the only point of view from which one could charge the Potter with wrongdoing to make a vessle unto dishonour.

Not if the builder grants will as a choice.

This is not a problem for non-calvinists. He is culpable for giving a choice.

This is a problem for a Calvinist that decrees all that comes to pass. He is culpable for causing sin.

You keep trying to say we are in the same camp as you when we have a completely different understanding of sovereignty of HOW God has chosen to act.

 

[Ascetic X]

Arguments from foreknowledge are no shield from culpability.

In the law, one building a house was commanded to put a rail around the roof to prevent falls and the owner coming under the guilt of blood, Deuteronomy 22:8. God built Adam's house, but where was the 'rail'? God knew that a tempter would corrupt them with lie, and did nothing to keep him out. Therefore to him that knoweth to do good, and doeth it not, to him it is sin. - James 4:17.

So it doesn't matter how you slice it, the builder's 'culpable', speaking from the point of view of the flesh, which is the only point of view from which one could charge the Potter with wrongdoing to make a vessle unto dishonour.

God does not need a shield from anything.

God knew the devil would tempt Jesus in the wilderness, and did nothing to keep him out. But allowing temptation does not mean wanting sin to happen.

You now, misapplying James 4:17, accuse God of knowing that something good (preventing temptation and sin) could be done, but He did not do it, so it was a sin of omission on God’s part.

You have degenerated from saying God wanted Adam to sin, to now distinctly implying that God Himself sinned.

You keep saying culpable. Culpable means deserving blame, or responsible for wrongdoing, often used in legal contexts to indicate guilt. It describes someone at fault for an action or omission.

So you are blaming God for the wrongdoing of not putting a rail on Adam’s house, resulting in Adam sinning…and also accusing God of sinning.

I understand clearly your allegiances.