What do you believe is required for Salvation?

[Thinkingstuff]

I am SO saddened by the tone that this thread has taken as we proceed. Are we not brothers and sisters together in the Lord? I am seeing a lack of charity as the "debate" becomes a mud-slinging argument. Shame on those who carry forth in such a way. Let your propositions do the talking, not attacks against a man, lest we do the work of the enemy and become accusers of the brethren. We CAN have this conversation without personal attack.

On free will... I mentioned above that I did a Bible-length topical study on the issue. One has to read between the lines, so to speak, to arrive at he position that free will in any or all cases, especially salvific, is a right of humankind.

I DO see total freedom of will in the beings created in God's image before the fall. They were slaves to no one, God or sin. God granted them sovereignty over all creation as they stood next to Him in the Garden, powers we seem to no longer posses. We cannot walk and talk with God the way those sinless persons did. We cannot command creation the way they did. We also cannot choose our own salvation like they did.

When Adam chose to sin against God, he broke his freedom and willfully gave it away. All those born since are born slaves of sin. We are "redeemed" (bought back, so to speak) from this position of slavery and are in turn made "slaves of Christ our King, to whom we owe total allegiance.

The remnant of free will that we still possess cannot "save" us (by allowing us to make or not make a decision for salvation) but it is enough to make us morally culpable (responsible) for our sin. That is what the Bible says. We do not have free exercise of will to effect creation. We do not have free exercise of will to walk and talk in the presence of Holy God (He hid Moses in the cleft of the rock so as not to kill him). And, we do not have free will unto salvation, that being a work of God alone.

But, for those already up in arms about what I just wrote, there is this... God is also not "deterministic" as is often the slippery slope fallacy that is applied to this theological point. Those who argue against God's election (as if ANY of those demonstrated elected by God in the entirety of the Bible had a choice in what they ultimately did for God -- read Jonah...) often argue a logical conclusion that IF God elects and is sovereign over all things, then God has also deterministically "fixed" every possible thing and there is nothing at all that we can or should do, for nothing would or could make a difference. Arguing that way side-steps the plain revelation of Scripture, where God TELLS US that is not the truth. He allows us to operate as agents in this world, within certain bounds, but those bounds do not extent to the point where we can exercise our freedom in a way that God has not decreed. It is as simple as that. To argue otherwise is to ignore half of what the Scriptural text has to say about the issue, which is what both sides often do in these cases.

At the end of the day, we probably have to "decide" (yes) which side of the debate we are going to take. I decided a long time ago that if I had to err on one side or the other, I would err on the side of God's ultimate sovereignty. I cannot find the total expression of free will in the Scriptures that many pout forth in their theologies, and I find that free will expression to be more one of "I wish for God to act this way" than the fact that He actually does allow we humans to trump His sovereign Kingship.

Also, this seems to be the crux of humanity's issue with God. Since the temptation in the Garden, we have, in our sinful desires, wished "to be like God, knowing good and evil..." We continue to be in rebellion against God's sovereignty when we put forth theological concepts that attempt to whittle away at God by elevating human beings to god-like status, including but not limited to OUR deciding if we attain salvation.

Sorry if the concept is distasteful... God, and the writers of Scripture tell us that it is, and truly, we see it every time we get into a debate of this nature. We simply do not care to bow to God and surrender to His Kingship. God have mercy on us for our disobedience!

You have not need to apologize about anything you said in this post. In fact I agree with much of it. I've been against certain aspect of the doctrine of election as purported by some on this thread which I've mentioned specifically. Specifically what you said here seems balanced.

God is also not "deterministic" as is often the slippery slope fallacy that is applied to this theological point. Those who argue against God's election (as if ANY of those demonstrated elected by God in the entirety of the Bible had a choice in what they ultimately did for God -- read Jonah...) often argue a logical conclusion that IF God elects and is sovereign over all things, then God has also deterministically "fixed" every possible thing and there is nothing at all that we can or should do, for nothing would or could make a difference. Arguing that way side-steps the plain revelation of Scripture, where God TELLS US that is not the truth. He allows us to operate as agents in this world, within certain bounds, but those bounds do not extent to the point where we can exercise our freedom in a way that God has not decreed. It is as simple as that. To argue otherwise is to ignore half of what the Scriptural text has to say about the issue, which is what both sides often do in these cases.

 

[webdog]

I don't understand your thinking process here? Being created in the image of God is a pre-fall condition. By bibical definition "the fall" refers to that pre-fall condition having changed and that change is total depravity or that image becoming tarnished and defect.

Calvinists always say this, but it is simply not true. Note: Post fall, Genesis 9...

And for your lifeblood I will surely demand an accounting. I will demand an accounting from every animal. And from each man, too, I will demand an accounting for the life of his fellow man.

6 "Whoever sheds the blood of man,
by man shall his blood be shed;
for in the image of God
has God made man.

The price for taking a human life was death since man is made in God's image...not pre-fall man...but man.

 

[webdog]

God decreed it. Free Will is a hoax.

It is the CORNERSTONE of Arminian doctrine and it doesn't even exist.

Natural man CANNOT receive the things of the Spirit of God. Men love darkness and they will not come to the light.

Natural men are NEVER able to choose righteousness. There is no good thing in man's flesh. He can no more do right than a leopard can change his spots.

He is not free to do right. He cannot. He lacks the ability. So he really has no choice but to do what his nature tells him to do. He must be given a new nature before he can do right. That new nature comes with new life in Christ which is the new birth or regeneration. Now he does what his new nature tells him to do.

Wow...so you are telling me God decreed that Earth, wind and fire used vulgar slang making Him the author of that sin?!? Unbelievable...

FYI...saying something over and over again doesn't make it true

Can man choose? If not, man cannot be held accountable for not choosing...it's quite simple. If man has rejected something, the option to accept was also there or there is no rejection by definition. If he is not free to do right, he cannot be held accountable for doing wrong. Such a faulty view of God's perfect justice!

We've been over the "natural man", and if you fail to understand the context of Paul's writing to believers in regards to that, I don't know what to say.

 

[webdog]

There is none that understandeth- explain to me how the natural man can reason concerning spiritual matters when he is totally dead spiritually and he is utterly incapable of receiving the things of the Spirit of God and his mind CANNOT be subject unto them.

Been there, done that.

 

[Dr. Walter]

Calvinists always say this, but it is simply not true. Note: Post fall, Genesis 9...

And for your lifeblood I will surely demand an accounting. I will demand an accounting from every animal. And from each man, too, I will demand an accounting for the life of his fellow man.

6 "Whoever sheds the blood of man,
by man shall his blood be shed;
for in the image of God
has God made man.

The price for taking a human life was death since man is made in God's image...not pre-fall man...but man.

I did not say that the image of God was completely irradicated. I said it was distorted and that distortion is the sinful nature. Look at Ephesus 4:24 and Colossians 3:10 which teach that the new birth is the renewal of the image of God in man.

Jesus teaches the total depravity of man in John 3:19-20 in the clearest language possible:

19 And this is the condemnation, that light is come into the world, and men loved darkness rather than light, because their deeds were evil.20 For every one that doeth evil hateth the light, neither cometh to the light, lest his deeds should be reproved.

1. Lost men love darkenesss
2. Lost men hate the light
3. EVERY ONE of them "neither cometh to the light"

The only ones that Christ says will come to the light are those in whom God has wrought a work of grace:

21 But he that doeth truth cometh to the light, that his deeds may be made manifest, that they are wrought in God.

The Greek preposition "en" should be translated "by" and thus "they are wrought BY God" as in Philippians 2:13 - "For it is God that worketh in you both to WILL and to DO of His good pleasure."

 

[webdog]

I did not say that the image of God was completely irradicated. I said it was distorted and that distortion is the sinful nature. Look at Ephesus 4:24 and Colossians 3:10 which teach that the new birth is the renewal of the image of God in man.

Jesus teaches the total depravity of man in John 3:19-20 in the clearest language possible:

If the image of God is not completely eradicated from man, he cannot be "totally" depraved at the same time. "Total" doesn't give much wiggle room in the matter. I agree that it is distorted, hence the curse on man and the sinful nature.

19 And this is the condemnation, that light is come into the world, and men loved darkness rather than light, because their deeds were evil.20 For every one that doeth evil hateth the light, neither cometh to the light, lest his deeds should be reproved.

1. Lost men love darkenesss
2. Lost men hate the light
3. EVERY ONE of them "neither cometh to the light"

Why did you leave "...rather than the light" off of #1? If you love something over something else, you have made a choice! You have just shown us one of MANY verses proving the free agency of a moral being!

The only ones that Christ says will come to the light are those in whom God has wrought a work of grace:

21 But he that doeth truth cometh to the light, that his deeds may be made manifest, that they are wrought in God.

Actually, it says that those who live by the truth come into the light, and the whole process is a work of God. Romans 1 attests to this fact that all have been given truth to accept or reject. Those that accept the most basic truths about God will be given more.

 

[Dr. Walter]

If the image of God is not completely eradicated from man, he cannot be "totally" depraved at the same time. "Total" doesn't give much wiggle room in the matter. I agree that it is distorted, hence the curse on man and the sinful nature.

The "image of God" includes much more than we are dealing with. It conveys the idea that man is a rational, moral responsible creature with conscience unlike lower created life but like God. Man did not lose his rational and moral condition in the fall. He did not lose his moral responsibility or conscience. He did not lose his ability to make rational and emotional decisions.

The total depravity of man simply teaches that he lost his "God motive" ability behind all his decisions. Everything he chooses and/or does falls below "the glory of God." He is totally incapable of doing and/or choosing anything from a "God motive" or for the glory of God but is totally submerged in all that he does for the glory of self. All of his faculties are SELF-CENTERED and totally void of any kind of ability to do and choose anything by "God-motive."

Why did you leave "...rather than the light" off of #1? If you love something over something else, you have made a choice!

I assure you that I did not leave it out on purpose. I am happy that you point it out. Man did not lose his ability to choose. He lost his ability to choose anything out of love for God or for the glory of God. Isn't that exactly what Christ means when he uses the word "more" - he loves darkness MORE than the light. Is that what Christ means when he says "every one" in that condition WILL NOT come to the light?

Total depravity does not deny that man is free to choose according to his own desires but that he is incapable of desiring to choose anything for the glory of God.

Actually, it says that those who live by the truth come into the light, and the whole process is a work of God.

That is not what it says. It says that coming to the truth is the manifestation that it was wrought in them by God. Just look at the condition previously described by Christ in regard to "every man"!! Every man in the condition Jesus describes WILL NOT come to the light and therefore any man that does come to the light (truth) must be attributed to something else and someone else other than themselves.

Romans 1 attests to this fact that all have been given truth to accept or reject. Those that accept the most basic truths about God will be given more.

Romans 1 does not teach that at all. It says nothing about being given ability to accept or reject. It only says they have ability to discern light but then declares they all reject what they discern JUST AS JESUS SAYS in John 3:19-20. You are pitting Paul against Christ and neither teach what you are adding to their words or inferring they mean.

 

[glfredrick]

Webdog, what "good thing" is in humans that would cause merit with God?

You seem to indicate that there is such a thing. I would be interested to know what it is.

And, how does that reconcile with Isaiah, who told us:

Isa 64:6 But we are all as an unclean [thing], and all our righteousnesses [are] as filthy rags; and we all do fade as a leaf; and our iniquities, like the wind, have taken us away. 7 And [there is] none that calleth upon thy name, that stirreth up himself to take hold of thee: for thou hast hid thy face from us, and hast consumed us, because of our iniquities.

 

[Thinkingstuff]

The "image of God" includes much more than we are dealing with. It conveys the idea that man is a rational, moral responsible creature with conscience unlike lower created life but like God. Man did not lose his rational and moral condition in the fall. He did not lose his moral responsibility or conscience. He did not lose his ability to make rational and emotional decisions.

We are in agreement with this statement.

The total depravity of man simply teaches that he lost his "God motive" ability behind all his decisions. Everything he chooses and/or does falls below "the glory of God." He is totally incapable of doing and/or choosing anything from a "God motive" or for the glory of God but is totally submerged in all that he does for the glory of self. All of his faculties are SELF-CENTERED and totally void of any kind of ability to do and choose anything by "God-motive."

This is where we disagree. Your, and in this case as well Calvin's contention, is that all motivation of man is evil. I disagree as Man's image is still in God's. Man has the propensity to sin. However, this original sin hasn't erradicated God's image. Men can be motivated by good as well. Though in open rebellion against God man may display certain characteristics of God. When you look at the world. In practice this is what you see demonstrated by people. Not all decisions by man necissarily glorify themselves. Most I say would but not all. Not all faculties are self centered. And man can operate on a God motive. But not necissarily be motivated by God. And this is why we can see people at some level know they are missing God. Your view is that man does not have a propensity to sin but an inevitability and will alwasy chose sin. Not always so as can be observed. More often then not? Yes. Always? no.

I assure you that I did not leave it out on purpose. I am happy that you point it out. Man did not lose his ability to choose. He lost his ability to choose anything out of love for God or for the glory of God. Isn't that exactly what Christ means when he uses the word "more" - he loves darkness MORE than the light. Is that what Christ means when he says "every one" in that condition WILL NOT come to the light?

Not true or else the gentiles could not have been a law unto themselves.

Total depravity does not deny that man is free to choose according to his own desires but only denies that he is incapable of desiring to choose anything for the glory of God.

Which is problematic.

 

[cookinout]

Not sure if this is where I need to put this, but I have a question. Here lately I have been under conviction. . . BAD. I was saved a few years ago and my husband has just been called to preach. I feel like I sort of fell away from God, and when he announced his call it almost made me mad when everyone else was rejoicing. I know this is selfish of me and I need to learn to die to myself. Whenever there is an alter call at church, my heart jumps and at revivals I just sit there and sweat. I don't feel saved but I also don't know if all of this is stemming from emotions or people shouting or just the whole revival feeling. I have no idea whats going on. I really really thought I was saved up until recently. I have prayed and prayed and somethimes God will give me amazing peace, and sometimes conviction. I even went to the alter and prayed and asked God for peace about my salvation and begged him to save me if I wasn't saved.That Sunday I got the most amazing peace. . . . and then the conviction comes back a few weeks later. It is really starting to get to me, because I think well what if I just got saved when I went to the alter to pray and I haven't told the church? What if that is when the Lord saved me and not a few years ago? What if that was it and I need to be baptized again. I know there is a lot of emphasis put on time and place. . . but I just want to know that I know, you know? So confused.

 

[webdog]

The "image of God" includes much more than we are dealing with. It conveys the idea that man is a rational, moral responsible creature with conscience unlike lower created life but like God. Man did not lose his rational and moral condition in the fall. He did not lose his moral responsibility or conscience. He did not lose his ability to make rational and emotional decisions.

I agree with all of this...however...if he did not lose his moral responsibility, he also must not have lost his ability to make such a decision. Responsibility is made up of the ability to respond.

The total depravity of man simply teaches that he lost his "God motive" ability behind all his decisions. Everything he chooses and/or does falls below "the glory of God." He is totally incapable of doing and/or choosing anything from a "God motive" or for the glory of God but is totally submerged in all that he does for the glory of self. All of his faculties are SELF-CENTERED and totally void of any kind of ability to do and choose anything by "God-motive."

Choosing to accept the truth presented to him by God doesn't give Him glory?
Acts 17: 6From one man he made every nation of men, that they should inhabit the whole earth; and he determined the times set for them and the exact places where they should live. 27God did this so that men would seek him and perhaps reach out for him and find him, though he is not far from each one of us.

2 Thess. 2:10and with all wicked deception for(S) those who are perishing, because they refused to love the truth and so be saved.

I assure you that I did not leave it out on purpose. I am happy that you point it out. Man did not lose his ability to choose. He lost his ability to choose anything out of love for God or for the glory of God. Isn't that exactly what Christ means when he uses the word "more" - he loves darkness MORE than the light. Is that what Christ means when he says "every one" in that condition WILL NOT come to the light?

To love anything "more" than something is not totality. If man lost his ability to choose or love God, he cannot be held accountable for not choosing! Note that to love something more does not mean there is no love for the lesser.

That is not what it says. It says that coming to the truth is the manifestation that it was wrought in them by God. Just look at the condition previously described by Christ in regard to "every man"!! Every man in the condition Jesus describes WILL NOT come to the light and therefore any man that does come to the light (truth) must be attributed to something else and someone else other than themselves.

It doesn't say anything about coming to the truth. I like how the Amplified puts it...
But he who practices truth [who does what is right] comes out into the Light; so that his works may be plainly shown to be what they are--wrought with God [divinely prompted, done with God's help, in dependence upon Him]

Romans 1 does not teach that at all. It says nothing about being given ability to accept or reject. It only says they have ability to discern light but then declares they all reject what they discern JUST AS JESUS SAYS in John 3:19-20. You are pitting Paul against Christ and neither teach what you are adding to their words or inferring they mean.

Romans 1:25 states they "exchanged" the truth for a lie. God didn't do it for them...they exchanged it. To exchange anything means possession. You cannot exchange something you do not own. That is ability as plain as can be.

 

[webdog]

Webdog, what "good thing" is in humans that would cause merit with God?

You seem to indicate that there is such a thing. I would be interested to know what it is.

And, how does that reconcile with Isaiah, who told us:

Isa 64:6 But we are all as an unclean [thing], and all our righteousnesses [are] as filthy rags; and we all do fade as a leaf; and our iniquities, like the wind, have taken us away. 7 And [there is] none that calleth upon thy name, that stirreth up himself to take hold of thee: for thou hast hid thy face from us, and hast consumed us, because of our iniquities.

I've said no such thing, nor indicated anything remotely like it. We are not saved by "our" righteousness, we are saved by Christ's.

 

[webdog]

Not sure if this is where I need to put this, but I have a question. Here lately I have been under conviction. . . BAD. I was saved a few years ago and my husband has just been called to preach. I feel like I sort of fell away from God, and when he announced his call it almost made me mad when everyone else was rejoicing. I know this is selfish of me and I need to learn to die to myself. Whenever there is an alter call at church, my heart jumps and at revivals I just sit there and sweat. I don't feel saved but I also don't know if all of this is stemming from emotions or people shouting or just the whole revival feeling. I have no idea whats going on. I really really thought I was saved up until recently. I have prayed and prayed and somethimes God will give me amazing peace, and sometimes conviction. I even went to the alter and prayed and asked God for peace about my salvation and begged him to save me if I wasn't saved.That Sunday I got the most amazing peace. . . . and then the conviction comes back a few weeks later. It is really starting to get to me, because I think well what if I just got saved when I went to the alter to pray and I haven't told the church? What if that is when the Lord saved me and not a few years ago? What if that was it and I need to be baptized again. I know there is a lot of emphasis put on time and place. . . but I just want to know that I know, you know? So confused.

Welcome to the BB!

Do me a favor, could you copy this post and create a separate thread for this...this thread is at 34 pages and a moderator will be closing it soon (30 page limit). It would be good for you to have your own thread where your brother and sisters in Christ can walk you through this! :thumbs:

 

[Dr. Walter]

I agree with all of this...however...if he did not lose his moral responsibility, he also must not have lost his ability to make such a decision. Responsibility is made up of the ability to respond.

Correct! However, that does not mean his decision is not influenced by his own personal subjective condition. Total depravity does not deny the ability to choose but denies the ability to choose anything that will glorify God or deny selfishness (Rom. 8:7). This is precisely why Jesus said that no man can come to me except the Father draw him (Jn. 6:44). If man had the ability to come to Christ or choose Christ as you say then the words of Christ in John 6:44 are false and misleading.

Acts 17: 6From one man he made every nation of men, that they should inhabit the whole earth; and he determined the times set for them and the exact places where they should live. 27God did this so that men would seek him and perhaps reach out for him and find him, though he is not far from each one of us.

2 Thess. 2:10and with all wicked deception for(S) those who are perishing, because they refused to love the truth and so be saved.

Man is responsible for the fall and therefore responsible for his own inability to please God or submit to God. However, he is still responsible to please and submit to God and these texts point out that the problem does not lie with God but with man who "refused to love the truth and so be saved" and that is due to total depravity.

To love anything "more" than something is not totality. If man lost his ability to choose or love God, he cannot be held accountable for not choosing! Note that to love something more does not mean there is no love for the lesser.

Correct! However, that is not what Jesus means here. He means that the choice of fallen man is controlled or dominated by his love for sin. "More" defines the dominant factor that controlls his will. If you are given a choice between something you like "MORE" than something else you will always choose what appeals to you "MORE".

It doesn't say anything about coming to the truth. I like how the Amplified puts it...
But he who practices truth [who does what is right] comes out into the Light; so that his works may be plainly shown to be what they are--wrought with God [divinely prompted, done with God's help, in dependence upon Him]

John 3:19-21 is saying the exact same thing as John 6:44-45. In both texts Jesus denies that any man is capable of coming to Him (truth/light) unless God works in them. "wrought by God" here is "draw" by the Father in John 6:44. What you must face and deal with honestly is the fact that Jesus denies that any man is capable of coming to him EXCEPT that the Father draws him (Jn. 6:44) and that is exactly what he is saying in John 3:21 or you have Christ repudiating Christ.

Romans 1:25 states they "exchanged" the truth for a lie. God didn't do it for them...they exchanged it. To exchange anything means possession. You cannot exchange something you do not own. That is ability as plain as can be.

This text does not even give the possibility of any other response to the light they were given! He never says they "possessed" it but rather they understood it and rejected it. He never indicates that anyone ever received the light but the only response Paul gives is rejection of the light. If your philosophical opinion had weight there would not be a total exclusion of any positive reception in this text and total delcaration of only negative rejection.

 

[Luke2427]

Are you saying that God in his soveriegnty is incapable of creating people with the ability to choose with in the confines of his Divine Decree which he has ordained and appointed all events in time? Because that certainly sounds like what you are saying. It seems as though you limit God by human agency thus humans must have no agency in order for God to be completely soveriegn. I suggest that no matter what choices we make of our own agency we have not in one bit changed anything in regard to God's divine decree. No matter the infinate amount of decisions with regard to any matter humans can make it does not affect the divine decree which is saying even more about God's soveriegnty that taking away the human agent.

God can do whatever he wants to do. But he told us in no uncertain terms how he does some things soteriologically.

He told us that man is so depraved that he CANNOT receive the things of the spirit of God neither can he know them.

He told us that man is utterly depraved that his righteousness is as filthy rags.

He told us that man in his natural state does not seek after God, that he understandeth nothing, that his heart is desperately wicked deceitful above all things; that man can no more do right than a leopard can change his spots or an Ethiopian his skin.

This is what God said about the natural man. So before the natural man can understand, before he can seek after God, before he can do anything righteous he must be made something more than natural. This is regeneration.

Only until then can man do anything toward God.

 

[Luke2427]

Welcome to the BB!

Do me a favor, could you copy this post and create a separate thread for this...this thread is at 34 pages and a moderator will be closing it soon (30 page limit). It would be good for you to have your own thread where your brother and sisters in Christ can walk you through this! :thumbs:

good advice webdog! I commend you!:thumbsup:

 

[Luke2427]

Calvinists always say this, but it is simply not true. Note: Post fall, Genesis 9...

And for your lifeblood I will surely demand an accounting. I will demand an accounting from every animal. And from each man, too, I will demand an accounting for the life of his fellow man.

6 "Whoever sheds the blood of man,
by man shall his blood be shed;
for in the image of God
has God made man.

The price for taking a human life was death since man is made in God's image...not pre-fall man...but man.

On this you are correct. But it only makes man's sinfulness that much more wicked that he bears the image of Holy God and drags it every second of his life through the muck and mire of sin.

 

[Thinkingstuff]

God can do whatever he wants to do. But he told us in no uncertain terms how he does some things soteriologically.

and a choice seems to be a key element.

He told us that man is utterly depraved that his righteousness is as filthy rags.

These are two things that don't go together. Self righteousness doesn't necissitate Utterly depravity ( which I disagree with on a functional level). Men can and do make none depraved decisions all the time with out being regenerate.

He told us that man in his natural state does not seek after God

Not seeking after God and being Utterly or totally depraved aren't the same thing either.

that he understandeth nothing, that his heart is desperately wicked deceitful above all things; that man can no more do right than a leopard can change his spots or an Ethiopian his skin.

Then god is wasting his breath and our paper by requesting (that means asking man to do so). Men who aren't saved can do and have done the right thing.

This is what God said about the natural man. So before the natural man can understand, before he can seek after God, before he can do anything righteous he must be made something more than natural. This is regeneration.

There is a difference between a predisposition to sin and total depravity. I reject total depravity.

 

[Luke2427]

Wow...so you are telling me God decreed that Earth, wind and fire used vulgar slang making Him the author of that sin?!? Unbelievable...

That is exactly right as I have proven to you in a previous thread.

Nothing happens apart from the decree of God. Nothing. "For of him and through him and to him are all things to whom be glory forever and ever amen"

Joseph's brothers sold him but God sent him. God decreed it.

The heart of the king is in the hand of the Lord, as rivers of water he turneth it whithersoever He will.

God worketh all things after the counsel of his own will.

God decrees evil though he hates evil for the greater good- His highest glory and our highest happiness.

There could be no grace nor mercy displayed without evil. None that would bring him eternal glory and none in which we could rejoice forever.

Can man choose? If not, man cannot be held accountable for not choosing...it's quite simple. If man has rejected something, the option to accept was also there or there is no rejection by definition. If he is not free to do right, he cannot be held accountable for doing wrong. Such a faulty view of God's perfect justice!

This is not true, though I confess that for many years I thought this as well.

That men ought to do what they cannot do is manifestly observable in Scripture. Men ought to do good. They will be held accountable for doing good. Their works are kept in a book by which God will judge them, Scripture tells us. Yet Scripture also tells us that man's righteousness is as filthy rags and that there is none that doeth good, no not one.

And still God will hold men accountable for not doing good.

Man is responsible to God to do what he cannot do.

Man should keep the ten commandments always. But the natural man never keeps them ever. Yet they will be responsible to God for every time they lusted, every time they stole, every time they hated without a cause...

Men CANNOT keep the commandments- period. Paul taught us this is Romans 7, didn't he? But he is still responsible to God for them.

We've been over the "natural man", and if you fail to understand the context of Paul's writing to believers in regards to that, I don't know what to say.

You don't know what to say because you cannot deal with the truth of Scripture as cited above.

Just let God be God and don't try to make him answerable to man. Don't say, "God must do this or he is not just." We don't get to tell the Almighty what justice is. Let him be in total control of everything as Spurgeon said from the microscopic droplets of water that orbit a steam ship to the planets which orbit the sun and everything in between. And rejoice at the awesome power and complete Sovereign rule of God.

 

[Luke2427]

and a choice seems to be a key element.

No, it isn't unless you understand that choice when it comes to natural man simply means that he will never choose God when presented with he option. The Bible teaches that very clearly as I have pointed out.

These are two things that don't go together. Self righteousness doesn't necissitate Utterly depravity ( which I disagree with on a functional level). Men can and do make none depraved decisions all the time with out being regenerate.

This is not true at all according to Scripture. Without faith it is impossible to please God. Whether we eat or drink or whatsoever we do we are to do all for the glory of God. When man eats or drinks or does whatever for other motives than to please God and glorify him it is sin.

Nothing is pure without faith. Everything apart from faith is sin.

This is the clear teaching of Scripture.

The natural man cannot tie his shoes without it being evil and depraved. the natural man CANNOT do right any more than a leopard can change his spots and the Ethiopian his skin according to Jeremiah.

This is the Word of God.

Not seeking after God and being Utterly or totally depraved aren't the same thing either. Then god is wasting his breath and our paper by requesting (that means asking man to do so). Men who aren't saved can do and have done the right thing.

This is, again, wrong.

God tells us to do what he knows we cannot do all of the time. He tells us to keep the ten commandments. But the natural man CANNOT. The law then is a school master that brings us to Christ. God tells us to do what we cannot do so that we will see how truly depraved we are.

My 7 yr old son might act arrogant towards me at times. I may try to prove that he has no cause to be arrogant before his father. I will say to him, "Rick, go and get one of your cans of pediasure and bring it here." He will then hand it to me for me to open it for him as is the custom. I will push it away and say, "You open it," knowing that he cannot. He will try and try but not be able to and finally collapse in utter exhaustion and frustration. His arrogant comments will cease. His mouth will be stopped.

I have told him to do what he cannot to show him that he has no cause to boast before me.

God tells natural man to do thousands of things that he cannot do to prove to natural man that he is not what he thinks he is.

And the law will stop every mouth at the judgment.

There is a difference between a predisposition to sin and total depravity. I reject total depravity.

Yes there is. And the Bible teaches total depravity- not just a simple proclivity to sin.