Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Was the fall necessary ?

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #91
    Originally posted by genuineoriginal View Post
    You appear to be hinting that only an evil god would orchestrate the fall and condemn most of humanity to eternal damnation in order to gain the praise and glory from the small remnant that were predestined for salvation.
    Such a god would be analogous to the arsonist who sets your house on fire at night, comes and gets you out of bed and out of the house and then wants praised as a hero for saving your life.

    God is proving free-will to any of us humans that needs to know that God is not forcing their decisions.
    So we couldn't know that God is good unless we sinned first?

    Is that really what you believe?

    Some people even believe that God had to prove to the angels that He gave humankind free-will.
    God made the angels the same week that He made Adam and Eve (Exodus 20:11). If anything it was one of them that "orchestrated" Adam's fall. His name was Lucifer.

    And, once again, the implication here is, in addition to God needing to prove Himself righteous to His own creation (which is blasphemy to start with), that the angels would somehow have no way of knowing that God was good until sin happened. God's goodness is not contingent upon the existence of sin!

    There are many people that have managed to convince themselves that they do not have any actual choices and that there are not any real alternatives.
    Those are the people that need God to prove to them that their choices are not meaningless.
    This doesn't follow.

    First of all God does not answer to human beings but more directly to the point, people today who stupidly think they make no choices are products of the fall. They didn't witness Adam's fall. The same bible the tells them that Adam sinned tells them that God is good. And so how would a doctrine that claims that God orchestrated the fall of Adam 6000 years ago prove to people that God is good when the fact that they make 6000 choices a day doesn't convince them that they have the ability to choose, especially when the same bible that tells them that God is good, which they don't believe, doesn't tell them that God orchestrated the fall?


    Clete
    sigpic
    "The [open view] is an attempt to provide a more Biblically faithful, rationally coherent, and practically satisfying account of God and the divine-human relationship..." - Dr. John Sanders

    Comment


    • #92
      Originally Posted by ttruscott
      then HE would have to cause our sin and that negates our free will.
      Originally posted by genuineoriginal View Post
      If no one was choosing sin, then no proof would be necessary.
      This is senseless, it does not even have a contradictory meaning but no meaning at all.


      It is not God that is causing you to sin.
      You see my word then? iF our sin was necessary and IF no one was sinning, THEN HE WOULD have had to cause us to sin, a blasphemy ...Don't you suggest we should read what is written?

      I did not write that GOD causes our sin! Throw your verses like stones elsewhere.
      I Champion GOD’s holiness:
      - GOD did not need evil so did not create evil for any reason.
      - All evil is creature-created.

      I Champion Our Free will:
      - All spirits created in HIS image had an equal ability and opportunity to choose either heaven or hell by their free will.

      Comment


      • #93
        Originally posted by genuineoriginal View Post
        If that statement is true, then the entire Bible is false.
        But, since the Bible is true, then your statement is false and we can refuse sin just like the Bible tells us we can.
        Tell me how YOU can not sin.

        Comment


        • #94
          Originally posted by Clete View Post
          So we couldn't know that God is good unless we sinned first?

          Is that really what you believe?
          What does scripture state about whether the fall has anything to do with mankind knowing what good is?

          Genesis 3:22-24
          22 And the Lord God said, Behold, the man is become as one of us, to know good and evil: and now, lest he put forth his hand, and take also of the tree of life, and eat, and live for ever:
          23 Therefore the Lord God sent him forth from the garden of Eden, to till the ground from whence he was taken.
          24 So he drove out the man; and he placed at the east of the garden of Eden Cherubims, and a flaming sword which turned every way, to keep the way of the tree of life.



          Originally posted by Clete View Post
          God made the angels the same week that He made Adam and Eve (Exodus 20:11).
          The verse is talking about the physical "heavens" (also known as the sky and outer space), not the dwelling place of God.

          Originally posted by Clete View Post
          And, once again, the implication here is, in addition to God needing to prove Himself righteous to His own creation (which is blasphemy to start with), that the angels would somehow have no way of knowing that God was good until sin happened. God's goodness is not contingent upon the existence of sin!
          Wow, so many poorly thought theological positions in such a short space.

          First, God does not "need" anything, but God often does things because He "wants" it.
          Does God need to prove Himself righteous to His own creation? No.
          Does God want to prove Himself righteous to His own creation? Yes, of course God does.

          Second, there is no blasphemy, even in the strawman argument that you created (which was a deliberate distortion of anything I may have stated).
          You need to learn what blasphemy is before accusing others of committing blasphemy through your distorted misunderstandings.

          Third, proof is often needed by God's creation, despite knowledge.
          Peter knew that he loved Jesus more than anything, until he proved that he loved his own life more by denying Jesus three times.

          Fourth, my argument is about whether the fall is necessary for proof that mankind has free-will, not about whether sin proves God is good.
          Please keep to the topic instead of trying to derail it with nonsensical statements.

          Originally posted by Clete View Post
          First of all God does not answer to human beings
          I never said He did.
          What made you think in that manner?

          Originally posted by Clete View Post
          people today who stupidly think they make no choices are products of the fall.
          The only thing that is a product of the fall is mankind knowing good and evil.
          People are not products of the fall.

          Originally posted by Clete View Post
          how would a doctrine that claims that God orchestrated the fall of Adam 6000 years ago prove to people that God is good
          Doctrines are not proof, they are merely an attempt by mankind to take what is written in the Bible and put it in a form they can accept, often despite the fact that the doctrine is contradictory to the Bible.
          Also, my argument is not about anything proving to people that God is good, merely that the fall proves that Adam had the free-will to choose to obey God or to disobey God.
          Learn to read what is written.

          _____
          The people who are supposed to be experts and who claim to understand the science are precisely the people who are blind to the evidence.
          ~ Dr Freeman Dyson

          Comment


          • #95
            Originally posted by genuineoriginal View Post
            If free-will is true, then the fall was necessary to prove that God gave mankind free-will.
            Originally posted by ttruscott View Post
            IF no one was choosing sin and the proof was necessary then HE would have to cause our sin and that negates our free will.
            Originally posted by genuineoriginal View Post
            If no one was choosing sin, then no proof would be necessary.
            Originally posted by ttruscott View Post
            This is senseless, it does not even have a contradictory meaning but no meaning at all.
            My argument is based on a cause-effect relationship.
            God gave mankind the free-will to choose whether to obey Him or disobey Him.
            The fall was caused by a free-will choice made by Adam to disobey God.
            Adam's disobedience proved that Adam had the ability to choose to disobey God.
            If Adam had not disobeyed God, then there would be no proof that Adam was created with free-will.

            A corollary argument involves whether there is a need of proof.
            If everyone obeyed God, then the entire question of whether Adam was created with free-will would not even be an issue, since there would be no difference between mankind obeying God from a free-will choice and mankind obeying God because a lack of free-will that means mankind has no ability to do otherwise.
            If there is no difference between mankind obeying God from a free-will choice or from a lack of free-will, then there is no need for any proof for or against the existence of free-will.
            If there is no need for any proof for or against the existence of free-will, then the fall would not be necessary for anything at all.
            If you find this to be senseless, it is only because of the inherent problems with the underlying assumptions of determinism.
            Somehow, people who believe in determinism think that the fall happened despite mankind having no ability to make any free-will choices, which would mean that the fall was completely unnecessary and completely devoid of all meaning.

            Through studying the Bible, I have come to the following conclusions:
            Mankind has the free-will to choose whether to obey God or disobey Him.
            Adam was created as a completely pure and untainted human who didn't even know good and evil.
            The proof that mankind has free-will is found in the act of Adam disobeying God and eating of the fruit of the knowledge of good and evil.
            This one act of disobedience from a completely pure and untainted human is known as "the fall".
            Learn to read what is written.

            _____
            The people who are supposed to be experts and who claim to understand the science are precisely the people who are blind to the evidence.
            ~ Dr Freeman Dyson

            Comment


            • #96
              Originally posted by Cntrysner View Post
              Tell me how YOU can not sin.
              That is not anywhere as important as whether you are constantly turning away from sin or not.

              You do know how to turn away from sin, don't you?
              Learn to read what is written.

              _____
              The people who are supposed to be experts and who claim to understand the science are precisely the people who are blind to the evidence.
              ~ Dr Freeman Dyson

              Comment


              • #97
                Originally posted by genuineoriginal View Post
                What does scripture state about whether the fall has anything to do with mankind knowing what good is?

                Genesis 3:22-24
                22 And the Lord God said, Behold, the man is become as one of us, to know good and evil: and now, lest he put forth his hand, and take also of the tree of life, and eat, and live for ever:
                23 Therefore the Lord God sent him forth from the garden of Eden, to till the ground from whence he was taken.
                24 So he drove out the man; and he placed at the east of the garden of Eden Cherubims, and a flaming sword which turned every way, to keep the way of the tree of life.
                I had a feeling you were going to say this. It's just so very disapointing.

                The Tree was the alternative to God, ge. It was not the only avenue available toward such knowledge. Teaching good and evil was not the purpose of the Tree, it was the alternative, it was the choice, the "otherwise" in "to do or to do otherwise".

                The offense at the tree grew into the Law. The Law is the knowledge of good and evil. The Law was given so that the offense might abound and both the Tree of the Knoweldge of Good and Evil and the Law had/have a ministry of death (Gen. 2:17 & Romans 7:9 (and elsewhere))

                The verse is talking about the physical "heavens" (also known as the sky and outer space), not the dwelling place of God.
                That's your doctrine, not the text.

                Wow, so many poorly thought theological positions in such a short space.
                Right back at ya!

                First, God does not "need" anything, but God often does things because He "wants" it.
                Does God need to prove Himself righteous to His own creation? No.
                Does God want to prove Himself righteous to His own creation? Yes, of course God does.
                So then explain how it accomplishes that goal?

                You can't because it doesn't. All you're able to do is to make the claim but when pressed to make the actual argument, it's crickets at first and then you simply repeat the claim.

                Second, there is no blasphemy, even in the strawman argument that you created (which was a deliberate distortion of anything I may have stated).
                You need to learn what blasphemy is before accusing others of committing blasphemy through your distorted misunderstandings.
                It is you who proposed that God orchestrated sin in order to prove Himself righteous, not me! It's blasphemy of the highest order whether you want to acknowledge it as such or not.

                Third, proof is often needed by God's creation, despite knowledge.
                Saying it doesn't make it so.

                Again, make the argument then! How does a doctrine that teaches that God orchestrated sin, which is not anywhere stated in the bible prove the God is righteous, when the very same bible that fallen human being learn of the fall of Adam from also states emphatically that God is righteous?

                If they don't believe it when the bible simply tells them that God is righteous (or that we have the ability to choose, which ever (its the same thing, by the way), how would an extra-biblical doctrine prove it to them? HOW???

                And even if it were explicitly biblical that God orchestrated sin (I cringe to even write those words!) why would such a biblical account be believed and accepted as proof that God is righteous if they don't believe that God is righteous based on the testimony of the very same bible?

                No matter which direction you come at this from, there is no profit whatsoever in accepting the notion that God orchestrated sin! It's just so much blasphemous nonsense!

                Peter knew that he loved Jesus more than anything, until he proved that he loved his own life more by denying Jesus three times.
                How is that relevant to the issue of God trying to prove Himself righteous to His own creation?

                God is all the time in the business of proving to us thick headed humans that we are evil and in need of a savior. That's entirely different than God deciding in advance of creation to orchestrate evil in order to prove something. He's the only thing that existed when He supposedly cooked up this scheme so who was He trying to prove it to, Himself?

                Fourth, my argument is about whether the fall is necessary for proof that mankind has free-will, not about whether sin proves God is good.
                There are at least two thing wrong here...

                First, as I have already said, all that is necessary is for there to be a real alternative from which to choose. If you can do or do otherwise then your will is free, by definition. It is not necessary for you to have ever done otherwise but only that doing so was a real possibility.

                Second, humans are not the only beings in existence with a free will. God also has a free will. Does God also need to do evil in order to prove that He has a free will? If not, then on what basis do you make the claim that is necessary for men to do evil to prove the same thing?

                Please keep to the topic instead of trying to derail it with nonsensical statements.
                I will say precisely and exactly what I want to say when I want to say it. I do not say things that are intentionally off topic but I am certainly not responsible for your ignorance and/or your inability to follow my reasoning. If you have a question then ask, otherwise, I couldn't care less what you don't want me to say.

                I never said He did.
                What made you think in that manner?
                You're premise is about God providing proof of His own righteousness, is it not? Who else other than His creation (i.e. human beings) would He be standing in the docket for?

                The only thing that is a product of the fall is mankind knowing good and evil.
                People are not products of the fall.
                What?
                Romans 5:12 Therefore, just as through one man sin entered the world, and death through sin, and thus death spread to all men, because all sinned— 13 (For until the law sin was in the world, but sin is not imputed when there is no law. 14 Nevertheless death reigned from Adam to Moses, even over those who had not sinned according to the likeness of the transgression of Adam, who is a type of Him who was to come.

                Doctrines are not proof, they are merely an attempt by mankind to take what is written in the Bible and put it in a form they can accept, often despite the fact that the doctrine is contradictory to the Bible.
                Also, my argument is not about anything proving to people that God is good, merely that the fall proves that Adam had the free-will to choose to obey God or to disobey God.
                Okay fine then make the argument. I mean, actually write out the argument that concludes with the statement, "Therefore, if Adam (or anyone else) had not fallen and evil did not exist, we could not know that we have a free will."

                Clete
                sigpic
                "The [open view] is an attempt to provide a more Biblically faithful, rationally coherent, and practically satisfying account of God and the divine-human relationship..." - Dr. John Sanders

                Comment


                • #98
                  Originally posted by genuineoriginal View Post
                  That is not anywhere as important as whether you are constantly turning away from sin or not.

                  You do know how to turn away from sin, don't you?
                  You did not answer my request. How it is that you can not sin? Don't be evasive.

                  Comment


                  • #99
                    Originally posted by Cntrysner View Post
                    You did not answer my request. How it is that you can not sin? Don't be evasive.
                    No one said that not sinning was possible.

                    The argument was that of being ABLE to turn away from sin when presented with the option to.

                    NO ONE said that doing so every time, turning away from sin, was doable.

                    People sin, saved and unsaved. Period

                    Comment


                    • Originally posted by JudgeRightly View Post
                      No one said that not sinning was possible.

                      The argument was that of being ABLE to turn away from sin when presented with the option to.

                      NO ONE said that doing so every time, turning away from sin, was doable.

                      People sin, saved and unsaved. Period
                      What difference does it make as far as in once or anytime? Tell me how you can not sin.

                      Comment


                      • Originally posted by Cntrysner View Post
                        What difference does it make as far as in once or anytime?
                        It makes a HUGE difference.

                        No one is denying that Christians sin.

                        What is being denied is that Christians DO NOT sin, and that Christians have no choice BUT to sin.

                        Tell me how you can.
                        It's called loving God. Maybe you've heard of such a thing?

                        Comment


                        • Originally posted by Clete View Post
                          I had a feeling you were going to say this.
                          If you know the truth, there is no reason to work so hard to avoid it.
                          Originally posted by Clete View Post
                          That's your doctrine, not the text.
                          The "heavens" that God created in the six days being the physical sky and outer space is the literal interpretation of the text.
                          If your doctrine teaches otherwise, then you need to reexamine your doctrine.

                          Originally posted by Clete View Post
                          It is you who proposed that God orchestrated sin in order to prove Himself righteous, not me! It's blasphemy of the highest order whether you want to acknowledge it as such or not.
                          No, that idea came entirely from your own mind, and any blasphemy you imagine that your own mind is guilty of is your concern and not mine.

                          Originally posted by Clete View Post
                          How does a doctrine that teaches that God orchestrated sin, which is not anywhere stated in the bible prove the God is righteous, when the very same bible that fallen human being learn of the fall of Adam from also states emphatically that God is righteous?
                          Since that doctrine comes from your mind and not from me, it is up to you to defend it.
                          If it is merely another strawman argument that you are creating, then you need to own up to it and abandon that line of argument.

                          Originally posted by Clete View Post
                          No matter which direction you come at this from, there is no profit whatsoever in accepting the notion that God orchestrated sin! It's just so much blasphemous nonsense!
                          I agree, which is why I keep saying you should abandon that strawman argument that you created.

                          Originally posted by Clete View Post
                          How is that relevant to the issue of God trying to prove Himself righteous to His own creation?
                          I have no idea, since "God trying to prove Himself righteous" is not my argument, it is yours, and I have no reason to do anything except condemn it as a non-Biblical argument that you came up with to divert from the truth of my argument.

                          Originally posted by Clete View Post
                          God is all the time in the business of proving to us thick headed humans that we are evil
                          No, He is not trying to prove to us that we are evil.
                          That is what the accuser (HaSatan) does.
                          Please spend a bit more time in trying to understand what the actual text of the Bible teaches and less time just going along with the doctrines of your particular denomination.

                          Originally posted by Clete View Post
                          First, as I have already said, all that is necessary is for there to be a real alternative from which to choose. If you can do or do otherwise then your will is free, by definition. It is not necessary for you to have ever done otherwise but only that doing so was a real possibility.
                          At that point, it is merely a theoretical free-will and not an actual free-will.
                          If you know anything about the scientific method, you know a theory is meaningless without any attempt to prove or disprove that theory.

                          Originally posted by Clete View Post
                          Second, humans are not the only beings in existence with a free will. God also has a free will.
                          Yes, that is the fundamental basis for "Open Theism".

                          Originally posted by Clete View Post
                          Does God also need to do evil in order to prove that He has a free will?
                          No. God proved that when He said, "Let there be light" and created the foundation of the universe ex nihilo.

                          Originally posted by Clete View Post
                          If not, then on what basis do you make the claim that is necessary for men to do evil to prove the same thing?
                          I never made that claim.
                          Please pay attention.
                          Adam had to disobey God in order to prove that mankind has the ability to disobey God.
                          Free-will is the ability that God gave mankind to allow mankind to choose whether they would obey or disobey God.

                          Originally posted by Clete View Post
                          I will say precisely and exactly what I want to say when I want to say it.
                          I have heard that before.
                          Spoiler


                          Originally posted by Clete View Post
                          I do not say things that are intentionally off topic but I am certainly not responsible for your ignorance and/or your inability to follow my reasoning.
                          You are certainly responsible for your own ignorance and your refusal to stick on topic with my argument.

                          Originally posted by Clete View Post
                          You're premise is about God providing proof of His own righteousness, is it not?
                          Nope.
                          Please pay attention.
                          My premise is that Adam disobeying God is the proof that mankind has been given the ability to make the free-will choice of whether to obey God or disobey God.
                          Learn to read what is written.

                          _____
                          The people who are supposed to be experts and who claim to understand the science are precisely the people who are blind to the evidence.
                          ~ Dr Freeman Dyson

                          Comment


                          • Originally posted by Cntrysner View Post
                            What difference does it make as far as in once or anytime? Tell me how you can not sin.
                            Sorry to jump in here but I can't resist...

                            How can it not make a difference?

                            If you do not choose to sin, is it really sin?
                            Conversely, if you think you love God but in reality you have no ability to hate Him, then is it really love?

                            If a man wants a woman to love him and puts her in a house with bars on all the doors and windows so that she cannot leave, is her presence in the house evidence of the woman's devotion or evidence of the man's mental illness?

                            Choice makes all the difference! The ability to choose is what makes a being moral. Without the ability to do otherwise then no action can be considered right or wrong. A gun going off is not a moral issue because the gun doesn't decide (i.e. choose) to go off. What sense would it make to accuse the gun of wrong doing? It's the person who chose to pull the trigger who has done something of a moral nature, not the gun. Guns kill but only people murder, the difference is choice and what a difference it is!

                            Clete
                            sigpic
                            "The [open view] is an attempt to provide a more Biblically faithful, rationally coherent, and practically satisfying account of God and the divine-human relationship..." - Dr. John Sanders

                            Comment


                            • Originally posted by Cntrysner View Post
                              You did not answer my request.
                              Why should I?
                              Your request seems to be about as important as asking how to jump the Grand Canyon with a motorcycle.
                              Originally posted by Cntrysner View Post
                              How it is that you can not sin?
                              That is unimportant.
                              What is important is what should you do when you do sin and what you should do when you feel like doing something that is a sin.
                              Originally posted by Cntrysner View Post
                              Don't be evasive.
                              Don't be obtuse.
                              Learn to read what is written.

                              _____
                              The people who are supposed to be experts and who claim to understand the science are precisely the people who are blind to the evidence.
                              ~ Dr Freeman Dyson

                              Comment


                              • Originally posted by JudgeRightly View Post
                                It makes a HUGE difference.

                                No one is denying that Christians sin.

                                What is being denied is that Christians DO NOT sin, and that Christians have no choice BUT to sin.



                                It's called loving God. Maybe you've heard of such a thing?
                                It is not that we love God it has to do with that he loved us first.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X