The Fall of Man

Human history is a book containing the actions of men. That book has been authored by God. From beginning to end, the events play out as they should with men acting under impulse, desire, premeditation, coersion and other forms of will. While God has authored the book and the events within the book, He has not done so to be the person committing sin. So mysterious is the plan of God that He can ordain Christ's crucifixion and yet not participate in the act of betrayal itself. We see this mystery and acknowledge it a mystery. But acknowledge it we must for it's there in plain scripture.

 

Pastor Larry said,

Amazing! When one looks at the reported evidence, one has little choice but to conclude that Omniscient God PLANNED the fall of man for his glory. Look at the evidence, all of it from scripture.

God:
Created the earth,
Established a Book of Life before the first man was created
Established a Lamb of God that takes away the sin of the world before the first sin occurred.
Made an idyllic garden on the earth
Created man and placed him in the garden
An insurrection occurs in Heaven and Lucifer, the angel of light falls, through rebellion, bringing with him 1/3 of the heavenly host
God casts him out of heaven to the newly created earth and changes his name to Satan, and apparently lets Satan occupy the form of a beguiling serpent that speaks man's language, who has unlimited access to the idyllic garden and to God's created man.
God establishes one rule for man, and that is to not eat of certain trees in the midst of the Garden

That sets the scene, now did God do all that?

Did God unknowingly permit this potentially dangerous mix of circumstances to occur at one time in one place? Here it is, millenniums later, and we decendents of Adam have the nerve to say that God did not "invent sin"? We have the nerve to say that God did not set up the fall of man FOR HIS OWN GLORY?

The evidence provided screams loudly against any attempt to say that God did not indeed set up the fall of man!

Did God force the first man to sin? NO! but God did indeed provide the scene and all of it's ingredients in which man would sin, all the way down to man's innocence regarding sin and death, neither of which man had any experience at doing, and therefore having nothing in him that causes fear, fear of the consequences of disobedience! Man had never been spanked for disobeying and did not know what punishment or disciplinary actions were. There was nothing at all to warn man except the command of God.

By the way, what was the sin? Was it the eating of the fruit? Or was it Disobedience of God. What was the consequence of sin? For what did Jesus Atone?

 

How can any form of sin bring any "glory" to God, Who detests all sins in any from.

That God graciously redeems sinners is "to the praise of the glory of his grace." That God redeems sinners is "to demonstrate....the surpassing wealth of his grace." If men hadn't sinned, the magnitude of God's grace wouldn't be demonstrated. We wouldn't see God's grace in all it's glory if we weren't sinners.

How can God be said to have "ordained" sin, and yet not its "author"?

Because ordain has a specific theological definition as well as the Oxford English Dictionary one. It means what God puts in his plan for history, and includes both those things he determines that he will be the agent of and those things he determines that he will permit.

Just because the word "all" as does "many" in some uses depending on the context, has the meaning "the total sum of all", does NOT give anyone the right to assume that the meaning has to remain the same in every case

Yeah, but in this case the meaning of "all things" is defined in the context: things in heaven and things on earth (verse 10), the all things put under Christ's dominion: every rule and authority and power and dominion and every name that is named (verses 21-23).

 

Before fall - posse peccare, posse non peccare
After Fall - posse peccare, non posse non peccare

After salvation - posse peccare, posse non peccare

After glorification - non posse peccare

Sorry, the Angels were elected also...
Acts 2:22-23 (ESV)

God didn't have a plan or purpose for Adam to FALL? ... Yes He did....


22 “Men of Israel, hear these words: Jesus of Nazareth, the man attested to you by God with mighty works and wonders and signs that God did through him in your midst, as you yourselves know— 23 this Jesus, delivered up according to the definite plan and foreknowledge of God , you crucified and killed by the hands of lawless men. [1]

God CAUSES all things... sorry Larry but I like NASB's interpretation here...


The problem with you Arminians you want God to be like and THINK like you. Thank goodness He's alittle bit more complex than you. God can "plan and purpose" an event that incorporates the sin of man. The event in of itself IN GOD'S INTENTIONS are good and holy, the SAME event evil by the intentions of man. Man authors sin. God plans it. In theology it's called concurrence, or confluence. It's a great study... And Larry couldn't of been more precise. Joseph hit it on the head. What man MEANT for EVIL God MEANT IT for GOOD. SAME EVENT ... DIFFERENT INTENTIONS. Adam sinned? Yes he did. Did God DECREE IT? Yes He did. Adam meant it for evil, God meant it for the Glory of His Son.

 

I did not get these verses from a webpage or book. These are verses I've marked in my Bible in my own study into 'foreordination.' (among other things) Please read each of these verses carefully, and maybe the references I've given at the end and consider their significance prayerfully. It would be a horrid thing indeed if man was the author of Christ's salvation! Is not the root of all manmade religion- Man trying to do what he cannot?! The murder of Christ was etched in the annals of eternity long before a universe existed and it was as sure to happen as the creation, the fall, the flood, or anything else was. Consider the scriptures and let the Holy Spirit speak to you.

____________

Matthew 26:53, 54- Thinkest thou that I cannot now pray to my Father, and he shall presently give me more than twelve legions of angels? But how then shall the scriptures be fulfilled, that thus it must be?

Mark 8:31- And he began to teach them, that the Son of man must suffer many things, and be rejected of the elders, and [of] the chief priests, and scribes, and be killed, and after three days rise again.

Luke 9:22- Saying, The Son of man must suffer many things, and be rejected of the elders and chief priests and scribes, and be slain, and be raised the third day.

Luke 22:22- And truly the Son of man goeth, as it was determined: but woe unto that man by whom he is betrayed!

John 18:11- Then said Jesus unto Peter, Put up thy sword into the sheath: the cup which my Father hath given me, shall I not drink it?


Matthew 16:21; 17:22, 23; 20:18,19; 26:2, 21, 56
Mark 10:33, 34; 14:27, 28; 14:49
Luke 1:67-79; 2:35; 9:31, 44; 18:31-33
John 8:28; 12:32,33; 16:16; 19:11

 

quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Calvinist argument is that IF all sinners WERE drawn and WERE enabled to REALLY choose life ALL WOULD since choosing death is stupid.

My point is that such an argument fails at the very start - once we observe that it was SINLESS beings (not sinFUL humans) that chose death - how much MORE the likelihood that SINFUL humans that are ENABLED with choice may in some cases make the same stupid choice as the faithless angels.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

FIRST
This is a silly argument. It is like saying that a living healthy person is not the same as a sick-person-restored-to-health!!!!

The sinless, perfect, pre-fall beings IN the VERY condition in which God first MADE them where the ultimate in sinless perfection and oneness as children in the family of God.

Your "unregenerate" Adam did not NEED regeneration because HIS START was not in total depravity but in total SINLESS PERFECTION.

Even the regenerate person today is not in pure moral "SINLESS PERFECTION" since they STILL SIN where Adam did NOT!!

It is impossible to fathom how you could argue for BETTER decisions made by a SINNING Christian than by SINLESS perfect beings, purely on the basis that they are still SINNING Christians and not that much more inferior SINLESS and morally PERFECT created being - Adam!!! (or the unfallen angels or ...)

This just shows to what lengths the Calvinist argument must go to ignore the obvious.

Secondly - your argument fails because it is nevr the Arminian claim that the REGENERATE sinner finally CHOOSES eternal life or rejects eternal life. (Your answer is MIXING Calvinism in AS IF that is the Arminian position).

Again showing that Calvinism lacks objectivity when evaluating a disconfirming point against it.


In the case of my first observation -- I simply don't like the poor logic being used in the response as it argues that the INFERIOR state is moral SINLESS PERFECTION but the superior state is SINFUL Christians with SINFUL natures CONTINUING in sin as being those who could never make a bad choice!!

In the case of the 2nd observation - I point out that the response fails to even address the Arminian scenario of ALL mankind ENABLED to choose with some choosing the new birth and some choosing sin and rebellion. It is one thing to give a bad answer to a disconfirming point against Calvinism - it is another not to even address the Arminian challenge but instead mix Calvinism into the scenario being evaluated.

In Christ,

Bob

 

Indeed - it is UNQUALFIED "ALL".

Calvinism needs to insert "qualifiers" so that the ALL of John 12 becomes the "FEW" of Matt 7.

An impossible reduction if one sticks with exegesis in John 12.

This is the “all” the “unqualified all” scope of John 12. Christ does not say “only some of those who love their life will lose it”. Christ does not say “only some of those who discount their life in this world will keep it”. Christ does not say “for some of you – serving Me will mean following Me – for WHERE I am there a few of my servants will be also”. Christ does not say “The Father will honor some of those who serve Me”. Nor does He say “some of you will be allowed to choose to Serve Me”.

The statement above works as an all inclusive showing that to EVERYONE the call goes out and ANYONE may choose to serve, to honor, to follow Christ.

By Contrast – Christ shows that the message about being celebate is NOT for all mankind or even all of His followers. Matt 19:11

Christ is not using a slippery marketing tactic to make it “Appear” that He is more generous than He really is. He does not say “I draw at least one of every KIND of human” – though for some this is what they want Christ to be saying here. Rather the statement is framed in a way that fits the Arminian model perfectly. It must be “edited” to make it Calvinist.

33 But He was saying this to indicate the kind of death by which He was to die.
34 The crowd then answered Him, ""We have heard out of the Law that the Christ is to remain forever; and how can You say, "The Son of Man must be lifted up'? Who is this Son of Man?''
35 So Jesus said to them, "" For a little while longer the Light is among you. Walk while you have the Light, so that darkness will not overtake you; he who walks in the darkness does not know where he goes.
36 ""While you have the Light, believe in the Light, so that you may become sons of Light.'' These things Jesus spoke, and He went away and hid Himself from them.
37 But though He had performed so many signs before them, yet they were not believing in Him.
38 This was to fulfill the word of Isaiah the prophet which he spoke: "" LORD, WHO HAS BELIEVED OUR REPORT? AND TO WHOM HAS THE ARM OF THE LORD BEEN REVEALED?''
39 For this reason they could not believe, for Isaiah said again,
40 "" HE HAS BLINDED THEIR EYES AND HE HARDENED THEIR HEART, SO THAT THEY WOULD NOT SEE WITH THEIR EYES AND PERCEIVE WITH THEIR HEART, AND BE CONVERTED AND I HEAL THEM.''
41 These things Isaiah said because he saw His glory, and he spoke of Him.
42 Nevertheless many even of the rulers believed in Him, but because of the Pharisees they were not confessing Him, for fear that they would be put out of the synagogue;
43 for they loved the approval of men rather than the approval of God.

The World wide – unlimited scope of Christ’s work is manifest “to save the world”.

</font>[/QUOTE]In Christ,

Bob

 

Yes, the fall caused God to be grieved. At the same time, it was a necessary step in God's plan to redeem the world and bring glory to himself through redemption.

Answer me this: If mankind hadn't fallen, would there have been redemption to glorify God's grace?

I didn't give it my own definition. I gave you the theological definition, which is, BTW, also found in my Oxford English Dictionary--one that is, I'll admit, a little larger than most (two huge volumes, comes with it's own magnifying glass for reading):

Before the world was created, God settled the course of the history of the universe, and the settled course of the history of the universe includes sin, although not by God's direct agency, but by his permission.

Answer me this: Do you agree that God settled the course of history before he created?

I know what it is in Greek. So God accomplishes "all created beings" according to the counsel of his will? Is that what you're saying the verse means?

And in the context of verses 20-23, would you say that "all things" means only created beings there as well?

Or does it refer to more than that, including the rule of evil, etc?

 

quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
There is no way that any serious Christian can believe, that God in any way "ordered" the fall of man for His "glory". God was not "glorified" by the fall of man, but rather it caused Him great pain, as does our sins.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

#1. It was not necessary to redeem a sinless world.

#2. IF mankind had never sinned then God would never need to die for the sins of the World.

#3. The wise man learns by instruction the fool learns by experience. Without the fall of mankind and the 6000 years of sin and suffering - we would have been learning "by instruction" about the Love of God as well as "by experience" in enjoying His workmanship. But we would not know evil and suffering as they really are.

It is not "God" that would be "unknown" but rather "evil and suffering".

Each of your children are "told" that you love them - now must each of them see you sacrifice a limb or donate an organ "to prove it" - or can they simply "get the point" without that suffering?

In Christ,

Bob

 

On the other hand - a Calvinist God can simply "zap into the mind" whatever he wishes people to "know" or think. No need at all "In Calvinism" for the fall of mankind.

 

Fish,
Read and understand what is said before you form an opinion. If God ordained the cross, the fall HAD to of happened. That's why I put that part of the verse in BOLD. But you decided to start typing and bypass thinking.


Then why would He punish us for simply carrying out His plans and wishes?
Why do you think Paul anticipated your question?
Romans 9:19-20 19 You will say to me then, "Why does he still find fault? For who can resist his will?" 20 But who are you, O man, to answer back to God? Will what is molded say to its molder, "Why have you made me like this?"

You, like Larry, quote the story of Joseph, where his brothers tried to murder him, but God, who had plans for Joseph's life that did not include his murder, saved him, and then used him for His glory. Where, in the entire account do you read that it was God who planned that Joseph' brothers murder him?

First of all, you are adding to scripture... it doesn't say God protected Joseph so he wouldn't get killed by his brothers... Second of all Joseph equates THE EVIL INTENT of his brothers with IT being good from God... Read, think , then reply.. but God meant IT for good, The IT is referring to the EVIL that his brothers did... God meant IT (evil acts of brothers).. he PLANNED IT for good.

Again you let your feelings blind you from Biblical truth... Does God then plan murder?

But they would not listen to the voice of their father, for IT WAS THE WILL of the LORD to put them to death.

 

Makes me want to dance! It means that you have understood the message icthus. You have responded as Paul expects now accept the fact. "Who are you to talk back to God?" He punishes us for simply carrying out His plans and wishes.
Dare you say He cannot?

john.

 

Makes me want to dance! It means that you have understood the message icthus. You have responded as Paul expects now accept the fact. "Who are you to talk back to God?" He punishes us for simply carrying out His plans and wishes.
Dare you say He cannot?

john. </font>[/QUOTE]What an asinine comment. God tells us that through our belief in him, we are his children and that we are to call him FATHER.

If you treated your children badly when they carry out your plans and wishes, how long do you think they would be your spiritual children? Obviously you cannot disconnect them from their physical lineage, but by your conduct toward them you can and will sever all spiritual ties with them. They will want nothing more to do with you!

What you say is Counter to what the scriptures tell us about God!

 

Yes I know you speak back to God Wes. The point is aimed at icthus because he has received the message.
The message is supposed to arrest you, "Why does He still blame us?"
Cause He does and that's the only answer He gives us and that is the way the cookie crumbles. He says He has the right and He tells us to shut our mouths. It's a warning.

john.

 

Ephesians 2:7 gives us this purpose for redemption:

I don't think that creatures would know the surpassing wealth of God's grace without the demonstration of redemption.

I'd say that children whose parents are called upon to sacrifice for them understand the infinite depth of their parents love in a way that children whose parents aren't called to sacrifice don't.