Was the fall necessary ?

[Clete]

Why do you want to label me as a calvinist when I said this...

"God's predestination displayed at creation and man's ability to choose coexist. It took both God and man for sin to enter the world and it took a God Man to reconcile it."

Would Calvin agree with what I said? Address what I said and don't omit it.

Yes, Calvin would have agreed and whether you call youself a Calvinist or not, the reason you believe it is because of John Calvin.

Well, actually Calvinism is little more than reformed Augustinian doctrine but the point is that it's a Calvinist doctrine, whether you consider yourself a Calvinist or not is beside the point.

And I didn't omit anything for sake of omitting it. The part I didn't quote wasn't relevant to the point I was making with my response. That point being two fold, that God does not create sin at all and that if God is just then the doctrine of original sin is false.

 

[Cntrysner]

Yes, Calvin would have agreed and whether you call youself a Calvinist or not, the reason you believe it is because of John Calvin.

Well, actually Calvinism is little more than reformed Augustinian doctrine but the point is that it's a Calvinist doctrine, whether you consider yourself a Calvinist or not is beside the point.

And I didn't omit anything for sake of omitting it. The part I didn't quote wasn't relevant to the point I was making with my response. That point being two fold, that God does not create sin at all and that if God is just then the doctrine of original sin is false.

I gave man freedom to choose, is that calvinistic? I said it takes both man and God for sin to enter the world and did not say God created sin but I did try to convey that His creation made it possible thus only by God's creation not man's is sin possible.

I thought you omitted what I said to prove your point and if I'm wrong I apologise. You will find this question mystical but do you believe as scripture says that sin is in the flesh?

 

[Jerry Shugart]

Yes, as I said, an age is made up of time.

Yes, I agree that the first age began at creation.

No, that does not mean that there was no time BEFORE those ages.

What you have is time going on but it is not in regard to an age! Why wouldn't the time which you imagine happening in the eternal state be considered an age?

 

[Jerry Shugart]

I've already answered this question. It is the Body of Christ, as a group, that is predestined. God has no idea who or how many will join that group, (unless He has some upper limit in mind (Rom. 11:25)), but whomever does has been predestined to be glorified because He has been predestined to be glorified.

That is not what the passage says:

"Blessed be the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, who hath blessed us with all spiritual blessings in heavenly places in Christ: According as he hath chosen us in him before the foundation of the world, that we should be holy and without blame before him in love" (Eph.1:3-4).​

Paul is saying that God has chosen us in the Body of Christ before the world began. It is "individuals" who are chosen in the Body:

"For by one Spirit are we all baptized into one body, whether we be Jews or Gentiles, whether we be bond or free; and have been all made to drink into one Spirit" (1 Cor.12:13).​

Again, it is "individuals" who are chosen to be members of the group which makes up the Body of Christ:

"Blessed be the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, who hath blessed us with all spiritual blessings in heavenly places in Christ: According as he hath chosen us in him before the foundation of the world, that we should be holy and without blame before him in love" (Eph.1:3-4).​

The believer inherits the spiritual blessings individually, as we read later in the same chapter:

"In whom ye also trusted, after that ye heard the word of truth, the gospel of your salvation: in whom also after that ye believed, ye were sealed with that holy Spirit of promise" (Eph.1:13).​

Different people believe at different times so they are not sealed as a "group," and since they believe at different times they are baptized into the Body of Christ at different times and not as a "group":

"For by one Spirit are we all baptized into one body, whether we be Jews or Gentiles, whether we be bond or free; and have been all made to drink into one Spirit" (1 Cor.12:13).​

Were you baptized into the Body of Christ at the same time, and in a group, as those who were baptized into the Body of Christ in the first century when this epistle was written? Of course not!

Your whole argument falls apart if you can't make it a group baptism into the Body of Christ.

 

[ttruscott]

No! The phrase "before the foundation of the world" has no meaning outside of time. If anything, that biblical phrase shows that God is in time, not out of it! Clete

PERFECT...REPS TO YOU!

 

[JudgeRightly]

What you have is time going on but it is not in regard to an age!

Yes. And?

Why is that a problem?

Why wouldn't the time which you imagine happening in the eternal state

RE: "the eternal state," an unbiblical phrase

Spoiler

The Above Proof By Proof Texts: Let's demonstrate the above proof again this time using only Bible excerpts. Those who claim that God is outside of time also frequently use the unbiblical phrase, "the eternal state." Actually, every moment is in the eternal state, including those moments before creation, all those since, and including those that will follow the New Creation. The following purely scriptural phrases show that in the "eternal state," WHO GOD WAS in eternity past differs from WHO GOD IS now and in eternity future. The differences do not include anything like an abandonment of His fundamental attributes (which are that He is Living, Personal, Relational, Good, and Loving), but rather, they are divine expressions of these attributes. For: "The Father… is Spirit" and "invisible," "from of old, from everlasting," just "like the Son of God." He "loved [the Son] before the foundation of the world." Yet "God was manifested in the flesh" for "the Word BECAME flesh," having "partaken of flesh and blood," and "coming in the likeness of men" "to be made like His brethren." So "He is the SON OF MAN," "from the seed of David," "Jesus Christ… the Son of Abraham." And "this MAN, after He had offered one sacrifice for sins forever, sat down at the right hand of God." And "He ever lives to make intercession," for "the Mediator between God and men" is "the MAN Christ Jesus." So "God… will judge the world… by the MAN whom He has ordained," and "in the regeneration… the SON OF MAN sits on the throne of His glory."​ . . .

https://kgov.com/time

be considered an age?

You have yet to establish a reason that it HAS to be considered an age.

Why is it a problem for time to be flowing prior to the beginning of the measurement of time?

 

[Cntrysner]

The use of philosophical precepts will never define the essence of scripture nor will the use of isms.

 

[Jerry Shugart]

RE: "the eternal state," an unbiblical phrase

"For thus saith the high and lofty One that inhabiteth eternity, whose name is Holy; I dwell in the high and holy place, with him also that is of a contrite and humble spirit, to revive the spirit of the humble, and to revive the heart of the contrite ones" (Isa.57:15).​

It's talking about people baptised into A GROUP. That group is called "The Body of Christ."

Yes, a group. But it is "individuals" who are chosen to be members of that group:

"Blessed be the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, who hath blessed us with all spiritual blessings in heavenly places in Christ: According as he hath chosen us in him before the foundation of the world, that we should be holy and without blame before him in love" (Eph.1:3-4).​

The believer inherits the spiritual blessings individually, as we read later in the same chapter:

"In whom ye also trusted, after that ye heard the word of truth, the gospel of your salvation: in whom also after that ye believed, ye were sealed with that holy Spirit of promise" (Eph.1:13).​

Different people believe at different times so they are not sealed as a "group," and since they believe at different times they are baptized into the Body of Christ at different times and not as a "group":

"For by one Spirit are we all baptized into one body, whether we be Jews or Gentiles, whether we be bond or free; and have been all made to drink into one Spirit" (1 Cor.12:13).​

Were you baptized into the Body of Christ at the same time, and in a group, as those who were baptized into the Body of Christ in the first century when this epistle was written? Of course not!

Your whole argument falls apart if you can't make it a group baptism into the Body of Christ.

 

[JudgeRightly]

Yes. And?

Why is that a problem?

Why is it a problem, Jerry?

RE: "the eternal state," an unbiblical phrase

Spoiler

The Above Proof By Proof Texts: Let's demonstrate the above proof again this time using only Bible excerpts. Those who claim that God is outside of time also frequently use the unbiblical phrase, "the eternal state." Actually, every moment is in the eternal state, including those moments before creation, all those since, and including those that will follow the New Creation. The following purely scriptural phrases show that in the "eternal state," WHO GOD WAS in eternity past differs from WHO GOD IS now and in eternity future. The differences do not include anything like an abandonment of His fundamental attributes (which are that He is Living, Personal, Relational, Good, and Loving), but rather, they are divine expressions of these attributes. For: "The Father… is Spirit" and "invisible," "from of old, from everlasting," just "like the Son of God." He "loved [the Son] before the foundation of the world." Yet "God was manifested in the flesh" for "the Word BECAME flesh," having "partaken of flesh and blood," and "coming in the likeness of men" "to be made like His brethren." So "He is the SON OF MAN," "from the seed of David," "Jesus Christ… the Son of Abraham." And "this MAN, after He had offered one sacrifice for sins forever, sat down at the right hand of God." And "He ever lives to make intercession," for "the Mediator between God and men" is "the MAN Christ Jesus." So "God… will judge the world… by the MAN whom He has ordained," and "in the regeneration… the SON OF MAN sits on the throne of His glory."​ . . .

https://kgov.com/time

"For thus saith the high and lofty One that inhabiteth eternity, whose name is Holy; I dwell in the high and holy place, with him also that is of a contrite and humble spirit, to revive the spirit of the humble, and to revive the heart of the contrite ones" (Isa.57:15).​

Apparently Jerry thinks that quoting scripture and underlining and bolding a phrase that nowhere near resembles the phrase he originally used to support the biblical existence of the phrase he originally used will suffice as an argument...

Jerry, the phrase, "the eternal state," is NOT a biblical statement. You will not find that phrase in the Bible.

Again:

Those who claim that God is outside of time also frequently use the unbiblical phrase, "the eternal state." Actually, every moment is in the eternal state, including those moments before creation, all those since, and including those that will follow the New Creation.

kgov.com/time

And no, the above verse does not contain the phrase, "the eternal state."

You have yet to establish a reason that it HAS to be considered an age.

Why does the time before the first age have to be an age, Jerry? (Hint: You can't answer that logically, by the way, because to have an age before the first age makes it by default the first age, which is biblically defined as the creation of the world. There is no such thing, as per scripture, therefore the only logical option (aside from reasserting one's position in opposition to God being "in time") is that time was simply not measured prior to creation.

Why is it a problem for time to be flowing prior to the beginning of the measurement of time?

Why is time 'flowing' before the creation of the world a problem, Jerry? (Hint: it's not, except that it's a problem for the doctrine that God is outside of time.)

 

[Jerry Shugart]

Apparently Jerry thinks that quoting scripture and underlining and bolding a phrase that nowhere near resembles the phrase he originally used to support the biblical existence of the phrase he originally used will suffice as an argument...

If inhabiting eternity does not speak of the eternal state then what does it mean?:

"For thus saith the high and lofty One that inhabiteth eternity, whose name is Holy; I dwell in the high and holy place, with him also that is of a contrite and humble spirit, to revive the spirit of the humble, and to revive the heart of the contrite ones" (Isa.57:15).​

Since with God there is no beginning and no ending then His existence can be said to be eternal. That cannot be said of the creation because it had a beginning and it will have an end. Where do you think those in the kingdom will go after the earthly kingdom of the Lord Jesus comes to an end?:

"But every man in his own order: Christ the firstfruits; afterward they that are Christ's at his coming. Then cometh the end, when he shall have delivered up the kingdom to God, even the Father; when he shall have put down all rule and all authority and power" (1 Cor.15:23-24).​

It's talking about people baptised into A GROUP. That group is called "The Body of Christ."

Yes, a group. But it is "individuals" who are chosen to be members of that group:

"Blessed be the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, who hath blessed us with all spiritual blessings in heavenly places in Christ: According as he hath chosen us in him before the foundation of the world, that we should be holy and without blame before him in love" (Eph.1:3-4).​

The believer inherits the spiritual blessings individually, as we read later in the same chapter:

"In whom ye also trusted, after that ye heard the word of truth, the gospel of your salvation: in whom also after that ye believed, ye were sealed with that holy Spirit of promise" (Eph.1:13).​

Different people believe at different times so they are not sealed as a "group," and since they believe at different times they are baptized into the Body of Christ at different times and not as a "group":

"For by one Spirit are we all baptized into one body, whether we be Jews or Gentiles, whether we be bond or free; and have been all made to drink into one Spirit" (1 Cor.12:13).​

Were you baptized into the Body of Christ at the same time, and in a group, as those who were baptized into the Body of Christ in the first century when this epistle was written? Of course not!

Your whole argument falls apart if you can't make it a group baptism into the Body of Christ

 

[Clete]

I gave man freedom to choose, is that calvinistic?

By itself? It depends on which Calvinist you ask.

Calvinist will very often acknowledge the ability to choose but will say that God predestined our choices. It doesn't matter to them that it's contradictory. They just call it an "antinomy" and move on.

I said it takes both man and God for sin to enter the world and did not say God created sin but I did try to convey that His creation made it possible thus only by God's creation not man's is sin possible.

This is, at best, a tautology. It doesn't say anything meaningful beyond that the world wouldn't exist if it hadn't been created.

I thought you omitted what I said to prove your point and if I'm wrong I apologise.

Forget about it. It was an understandable misunderstanding.

You will find this question mystical but do you believe as scripture says that sin is in the flesh?

I don't think I understand what you mean by the phrase. There's so often so much meaning packed into such things that one should be care about what one agrees with.

It is clear that we are born with a tendency toward sin which the bible refers to as "the flesh". It is an almost gravity like pull toward sin that Jesus was not born with. Since the bible teaches that mankind fell "in Adam" and that Jesus had a fleshly mother but no fleshly father that this tendency toward sin is passed through the father and not the mother and that, therefore all those who have fleshly fathers have inherited "the flesh."

In that sense there was indeed an "original sin" that separated Adam from God spiritually and that this condition effects all of his progeny. But the doctrine of original sin goes much further than this and consigns all to Hell because of Adam's sin and by virtue of their conception in the womb, which is unjust. The Calvinist take even one step further still and state that because of Adam's sin we are all born in a state that is completely incapable of doing anything good whatsoever, which is just utter stupidity that is the further thing from what the bible teaches. Again, I invite you to read Ezekiel 18 as proof (not that you believe in Total Depravity, but if you want proof Ezekiel 18 is it).


Clete

 

[beloved57]

The Fall of man in Adam was necessary because God had already purposed Salvation Mercy through Christ from everlasting to everlasting Ps 103:17

But the mercy of the Lord is from everlasting to everlasting upon them that fear him, and his righteousness unto children's children;

Notice its From Everlasting. This is regards to the Vessels of Mercy Paul wrote of here Rom 9:23

23 And that he might make known the riches of his glory on the vessels of mercy, which he had afore prepared unto glory,

454

 

[genuineoriginal]

I don't think you understand what the word "necessary" means.

If determinism is true then every event that occcurs is a logical necessity, by definition.

You appear to be using a different definition of necessary than I am.
I am using the first definition, you are using the second definition.

necessary required to be done, achieved, or present; needed; essential. determined, existing, or happening by natural laws or predestination; inevitable.

​

If determinism is true, then the fall is not needed and the fall is not essential for anything at all.
It is a meaningless event in the meaningless history of a meaningless universe.

If free-will is true, then the fall was necessary to prove that God gave mankind free-will.

This makes absolutely no sense whatsoever!

Care to make an attempt to prove this claim?

The fall is essential in proving that God gave mankind free-will because it shows that man has the free-will choice of obeying God or disobeying God.

Deuteronomy 30:19-20 19 I call heaven and earth to record this day against you, that I have set before you life and death, blessing and cursing: therefore choose life, that both thou and thy seed may live: 20 That thou mayest love the Lord thy God, and that thou mayest obey his voice, and that thou mayest cleave unto him: for he is thy life, and the length of thy days: that thou mayest dwell in the land which the Lord sware unto thy fathers, to Abraham, to Isaac, and to Jacob, to give them.​

 

[genuineoriginal]

Since we can imagine that with our free will no one chose to reject HIM nor chose to rebel against HIM, would not HE have been able to start the heavenly state without any suffering for sin or death? If so, then the fall was NOT necessary in the least even though it was a product of free will.

IF no one was choosing sin and the proof was necessary

If no one was choosing sin, then no proof would be necessary.

then HE would have to cause our sin and that negates our free will.

It is not God that is causing you to sin.

James 1:13-15 13 Let no man say when he is tempted, I am tempted of God: for God cannot be tempted with evil, neither tempteth he any man: 14 But every man is tempted, when he is drawn away of his own lust, and enticed. 15 Then when lust hath conceived, it bringeth forth sin: and sin, when it is finished, bringeth forth death.​

 

[genuineoriginal]

WE were chosen before the foundation of the world, Eph 1:4...and I too believe we chose at that time to accept HIS gospel proclaimed to every creature under heaven at that time as per Col 1:23.

Ephesians 1:4 4 According as he hath chosen us in him before the foundation of the world, that we should be holy and without blame before him in love:​

Many people get this wrong because they assume that the verse says, "God has chosen us" instead of understanding that the verse says, "God has chosen 'us in Him'".

From the very beginning God chose that we humans should be 'in Him' so we would be holy and without blame because of our love for Him.

 

[genuineoriginal]

We can not refuse sin because we are born in it

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.

 

[genuineoriginal]

The Bible DOES NOT DESCRIBE GOD as being outside of time.

Yep! :thumb:
There is no Biblical justification for believing that God is outside of time.

 

[Clete]

You appear to be using a different definition of necessary than I am.
I am using the first definition, you are using the second definition.

necessary required to be done, achieved, or present; needed; essential. determined, existing, or happening by natural laws or predestination; inevitable.

​

In a philosophical discussion, the second definition is more common and even your own use of it is not consistently in keeping with the first because when you talk about proving something then you're squarely inside the perview of the second definition.

Regardless, I get the point so, moving on...

If determinism is true, then the fall is not needed and the fall is not essential for anything at all.
It is a meaningless event in the meaningless history of a meaningless universe.

I'm not so sure that it would be meaningless. The fact is that we know that the fall and all it consequences happened and if we assume it was predestined then what does that say about whomever predestined it? Quite a lot, I'd say and nothing good at that!

​

The fall is essential in proving that God gave mankind free-will because it shows that man has the free-will choice of obeying God or disobeying God.

Deuteronomy 30:19-20 19 I call heaven and earth to record this day against you, that I have set before you life and death, blessing and cursing: therefore choose life, that both thou and thy seed may live: 20 That thou mayest love the Lord thy God, and that thou mayest obey his voice, and that thou mayest cleave unto him: for he is thy life, and the length of thy days: that thou mayest dwell in the land which the Lord sware unto thy fathers, to Abraham, to Isaac, and to Jacob, to give them.​

Who was He proving it to? Man either has the ability to choose or he doesn't. God already knows the answer, He doesn't need proof nor is He required to defend Himself to any of His creation.

All that is necessary (logically) is that there be an actual choice, a real alternative, a way to do or to do otherwise. There is no need for the fall itself to have ever occured at all, never mind to prove anything to anyone.

Clete

 

[Jerry Shugart]

I've already answered this question. It is the Body of Christ, as a group, that is predestined. God has no idea who or how many will join that group, (unless He has some upper limit in mind (Rom. 11:25)), but whomever does has been predestined to be glorified because He has been predestined to be glorified.

That is not what the passage says:

"Blessed be the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, who hath blessed us with all spiritual blessings in heavenly places in Christ: According as he hath chosen us in him before the foundation of the world, that we should be holy and without blame before him in love" (Eph.1:3-4).​

Paul is saying that God has chosen us in the Body of Christ before the world began. It is "individuals" who are chosen in the Body:

"For by one Spirit are we all baptized into one body, whether we be Jews or Gentiles, whether we be bond or free; and have been all made to drink into one Spirit" (1 Cor.12:13).​

Again, it is "individuals" who are chosen to be members of the group which makes up the Body of Christ:

"Blessed be the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, who hath blessed us with all spiritual blessings in heavenly places in Christ: According as he hath chosen us in him before the foundation of the world, that we should be holy and without blame before him in love" (Eph.1:3-4).​

The believer inherits the spiritual blessings individually, as we read later in the same chapter:

"In whom ye also trusted, after that ye heard the word of truth, the gospel of your salvation: in whom also after that ye believed, ye were sealed with that holy Spirit of promise" (Eph.1:13).​

Different people believe at different times so they are not sealed as a "group," and since they believe at different times they are baptized into the Body of Christ at different times and not as a "group":

"For by one Spirit are we all baptized into one body, whether we be Jews or Gentiles, whether we be bond or free; and have been all made to drink into one Spirit" (1 Cor.12:13).​

Were you baptized into the Body of Christ at the same time, and in a group, as those who were baptized into the Body of Christ in the first century when this epistle was written? Of course not!

Your whole argument falls apart if you can't make it a group baptism into the Body of Christ.

 

[Clete]

If inhabiting eternity does not speak of the eternal state then what does it mean?:

It means an infinite amount of time.

It's quite the opposite of timelessness.