Was the fall necessary ?

[genuineoriginal]

Accusing God of orchestrating sin is blasphemy

Then you shouldn't do it.

Again, I do not make strawman arguments.

Of course you do.

You deny positing that God orchestrated Adam's fall?

I am not the one claiming that God orchestrated Adam's fall.

What in the world are we talking about then?

We were talking about why I believe that the fall was necessary to prove to mankind that mankind has free will.

YOU brought up the issue of God's righteousness when you said the following...

"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."

Yes, I was trying to clarify your position.

it's the same issue anyway! How can you not see that?

It is not the same issue.

Free will is what makes a persons actions moral in nature and whether that person is you, me, Hitler, the Apostle John, Lucifer, or God Himself, if they have no ability to do otherwise then their action is not free and it is not right or wrong!

Further, if man does not have free will then for God to punish any action of his would be fundamentally unjust and so once again, proving man's will is free is, in essence, proving God's righteousness. It's all the exact same issue! When you are discussing free will, you are discussing morality. "Does man have a free will?" and "Is man a moral agent?" is the same question!

It seems like the fundamental basis of your belief that free-will is a moral issue has a major flaw.
In your scenario, does God have the ability to do evil?
If not, then in your scenario God does not have free-will, which means that none of us have free will in your scenario either.

No, He is not trying to prove to us that we are evil.
That is what the accuser (HaSatan) does.

That is what the law is for and it was God who gave the law.

According to that blasphemous logic, God gave the Law to make us evil.

"God might or might not have a free will. We can't know for sure until He commits an act of evil!"

That seems to sum up the argument that you claim I am making, but it is not the argument I a making.
That makes it a strawman argument.

 

[genuineoriginal]

How is it that you can show God anything?

Do you think God is blind and unable to see what we show Him?

 

[Clete]

It seems like the fundamental basis of your belief that free-will is a moral issue has a major flaw.
In your scenario, does God have the ability to do evil?
If not, then in your scenario God does not have free-will, which means that none of us have free will in your scenario either.

Of course He does!

Matthew 4:4 Then Jesus was led up by the Spirit into the wilderness to be tempted by the devil. 2 And when He had fasted forty days and forty nights, afterward He was hungry. 3 Now when the tempter came to Him, he said, “If You are the Son of God, command that these stones become bread.”

4 But He answered and said, “It is written, ‘Man shall not live by bread alone, but by every word that proceeds from the mouth of God.’ ”

5 Then the devil took Him up into the holy city, set Him on the pinnacle of the temple, 6 and said to Him, “If You are the Son of God, throw Yourself down. For it is written:

‘He shall give His angels charge over you,’

and,

‘In their hands they shall bear you up,
Lest you dash your foot against a stone.’ ”

7 Jesus said to him, “It is written again, ‘You shall not [a]tempt the Lord your God.’ ”

8 Again, the devil took Him up on an exceedingly high mountain, and showed Him all the kingdoms of the world and their glory. 9 And he said to Him, “All these things I will give You if You will fall down and worship me.”

10 Then Jesus said to him, “Away with you, Satan! For it is written, ‘You shall worship the Lord your God, and Him only you shall serve.’ ”

11 Then the devil left Him, and behold, angels came and ministered to Him.​

According to that blasphemous logic, God gave the Law to make us evil.

It isn't my logic and it can't possibly be blasphemy because all I did was quote the Apostle Paul!

That seems to sum up the argument that you claim I am making, but it is not the argument I a making.
That makes it a strawman argument.

Saying it doesn't make it so.

I could directly quote your own post were you started this whole idiotic conversation by stating the the fall of Adam was necessary for God to prove that Adam had a free will but I'm not going to.

Bottom line is that the thread is all still here for everyone to read. You and I both know what you said and this statement of yours is nothing more than a lie.

You're intentionally wasting my time. There's an easy fix for that.

 

[Cntrysner]

Do you think God is blind and unable to see what we show Him?

You can't show God anything as in cause Him to perceived a quality, emotion, or characteristic that he doesn't know and you cannot refuse sin or you would not need a savior.

 

[Cntrysner]

Why should I?
Your request seems to be about as important as asking how to jump the Grand Canyon with a motorcycle.

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.

Don't be obtuse.

When you "feel like doing something that is a sin" is sin and you can sin without knowing it.

 

[Cntrysner]

Indeed! You make a good point! Why should I ever opologize to someone who thinks everything I do was predestined by God?

Sorry, I couldn't resist. I never said and do not believe everything you do was predestined. So stop with your false accusations.

On the contrary, if you have no ability to do otherwise, you never sin at all. There is no morality in a world without free will.

Again, I believe we have the ability to choose and no amount of effort on your part will change my mind.

The only reason Paul's statements make sense is in the context of free will. There exists within men a dual nature, one that desires to do one thing and another that chooses to do otherwise. In other words, Paul's statements here acknowledge the choice and that his flesh is what chooses badly.

Rom 7:17 Now then it is no more I that do it, but sin that dwelleth in me.
Rom 7:18 For I know that in me (that is, in my flesh,) dwelleth no good thing: for to will is present with me; but how to perform that which is good I find not.
Rom 7:19 For the good that I would I do not: but the evil which I would not, that I do.
Rom 7:20 Now if I do that I would not, it is no more I that do it, but sin that dwelleth in me.

Now we are getting somewhere. Tell me more about the difference between the two natures. What are their sources?

One is in Paul's flesh and can do no good thing and the other is will to do good and his will he can't perform. If this will is free will then it seems his free will is bound which does not indicate his will is free at all.

Now if you want to say that this doesn't reflect the God you believe in then simply making the claim isn't good enough. You invoke the concept of justice, which is an excellent start! Why is it so difficult to simply start with justice as your primary premise in the first place? There is no biblical or rational reason to insist that God predestined anyone's sin. It just flat out is not taught in the bible - period and there is no other (i.e. rational) reason to insist on it either so why cling to it? Isn't it obvious that moral actions must be chosen? Isn't that much clear even to children?

We have a choice! God did not predestine man's sin for if he had done so Christ would have failed.

How can God be just if He punishes people who perform the very actions that He predestined that they would perform? Indeed, the god of Calvinism is more unjust even than that! Calvinism teaches that people were predestined for either Heaven or Hell based on nothing at all! That it was a completely arbitrary selection of their god's that had nothing to do with the person's actions or beliefs.

By what definition of justice could such a god every be called just?

The calvinistic god you keep harping on, and I don't blame you, is unjust. God of the bible created the possibility to sin by giving us choice thus the tree of knowledge of good and evil. God did not force sin on man or create sin nor not give man choice. Sin entered the world by man's choice not God's. You can not blame God because he gave man choice and you can not blame him for creating us in the flesh. We can't resist the flesh because it is part of us and we can't escape it by our own power.

 

[Cntrysner]

I think want needs to be clarified is... is there a difference between choice and free will and if so what is it.?

 

[Cntrysner]

Rom 6:17 But God be thanked, that ye were the servants of sin, but ye have obeyed from the heart that form of doctrine which was delivered you.
Rom 6:18 Being then made free from sin, ye became the servants of righteousness.

Let's thank God. We were servants by His choice/will both of sin and righteousness. What is a servant, it is one that performs duties for their master by what the master declares as His will not by any other means can a servant be. If not a servant then a prodigal son by choice but still a son in the sense that God will not deny us as sons and daughters until the last moment of death, the true Father of us all will not deny us even when we deny Him. Paul is saying we should obey what is delivered and not referring to himself as the originator of his gospel . To obey is not free will if you want the righteousness of God which we must have through obedience to Christ and His finished work.

One can not say by their free will they obey, no. To obey is by choice to accept another's will or testament. Paul is using obey as the key word to be free from sin.

Paul placed himself and all men, past, present and future, in immediate context in the above verses reaching a conclusion and saying thank God that we were servants to sin, not by our will as a servant to sin. What is Paul saying here in reference to "servants of sin" and thanking God for it? Would you thank God that anyone would choose to be a servant of sin?, no , who would?

Who wants to be a servant and give up your will to another when it comes to your household, your wife, and your children, that's what is being demanded to be a true servant in life. Set your course with a definite finish in mind and choose this day who to serve, your will or the will of the Lord.

15 And if it seem evil unto you to serve the Lord, choose you this day whom ye will serve; whether the gods which your fathers served that were on the other side of the flood, or the gods of the Amorites, in whose land ye dwell: but as for me and my house, we will serve the Lord.

Is your will the will of the Lord? What do you own to make a will? If it was given to you, you are just passing it on. Declare to God what you made on your own and state your will as in I will.

 

[Cntrysner]

In this thread I have ask multiple times...tell me how you can not sin... and in every case no one even tried. I wonder why but I see a loss of concept or it is denial. What has been offer is man has the power to refuse sin. If the thought of it, and in context it is their sin they thought about doing, they don't realize it's too late. Sin entered in when they conceived their sin by thought. Sin is more than the physical act, sin enters in when it is coveted or desired. It so far it is this that they have said... I can refuse to sin.... but their sin has already occurred as soon as they conceived their thought is a sinful act yet they say they refused it.

 

[Clete]

Sorry, I couldn't resist. I never said and do not believe everything you do was predestined. So stop with your false accusations.

I'm responding to your own words. I don't make things up as I go. I'm not trying to accuse you of anything. I'm just responding to what you said.

Again, I believe we have the ability to choose and no amount of effort on your part will change my mind.

What you claim to believe seems at odds with your own words. Clearly I've misunderstood something.

Rom 7:17 Now then it is no more I that do it, but sin that dwelleth in me.
Rom 7:18 For I know that in me (that is, in my flesh,) dwelleth no good thing: for to will is present with me; but how to perform that which is good I find not.
Rom 7:19 For the good that I would I do not: but the evil which I would not, that I do.
Rom 7:20 Now if I do that I would not, it is no more I that do it, but sin that dwelleth in me.

Now we are getting somewhere. Tell me more about the difference between the two natures. What are their sources?

Why don't you tell me. You're obviously driving somewhere so let's just get there already.

One is in Paul's flesh and can do no good thing and the other is will to do good and his will he can't perform. If this will is free will then it seems his free will is bound which does not indicate his will is free at all.

This seems to be taking the passage way too woodenly literal or at the very least in a way that seems way to mystical.

Do you really believe that Paul never did anything good, because that's what your logic here would seem to suggest.
It isn't that he CAN'T do right at all, it's that he doesn't do so consistently. Paul's desire is to be perfect in his condition in the flesh just as he has been declared righteous in his position in Christ. But there is some attribute of the yet unredeemed human condition, that Paul refers to as "the flesh", that draws us like gravity toward sin. Our job, as Christians, is to focus not on what we do but rather on the biblical facts concerning Christ, our position in Him and His righteousness which has been imputed to us by grace, not by our doing but by faith in that work which was done for us because where we fail in our flesh because of unfaithfulness, Christ's faithfulness triumphs, for we are hidden in Him and He cannot deny Himself (II Timothy 2:13). We, therefore, press on toward that day when we shall shed this carnal flesh and instead of being "gravitationally" pulled down toward Hell, we will soar on wings as eagles.

We have a choice! God did not predestine man's sin for if he had done so Christ would have failed.

That's an interesting statement! (Really! That's not sarcasm.)

Please explain why the doctrine of predestination would mean that Christ would have failed.

The calvinistic god you keep harping on, and I don't blame you, is unjust. God of the bible created the possibility to sin by giving us choice thus the tree of knowledge of good and evil. God did not force sin on man or create sin nor not give man choice. Sin entered the world by man's choice not God's. You can not blame God because he gave man choice and you can not blame him for creating us in the flesh. We can't resist the flesh because it is part of us and we can't escape it by our own power.

Well, alright then, I agree so long as you don't take it too far and say that we, in our flesh are completely unable to do anything good whatsoever. This would be sort of a back door entry into the doctrine of total depravity and its just not biblical. Completely unsaved people who don't know God and don't even like God and certainly do not make any effort at all to live by the Spirit, do good things all the time (Matthew 7:11 and elsewhere) and so do we(I Corinthians 3). We also sin as they do and by the same power. The primary difference is that we're forgiven and they aren't; we're saved and await rewards in heaven and they have no such hope.

Clete

 

[Shasta]

Very good on every point

 

[Clete]

In this thread I have ask multiple times...tell me how you can not sin... and in every case no one even tried. I wonder why but I see a loss of concept or it is denial. What has been offer is man has the power to refuse sin. If the thought of it, and in context it is their sin they thought about doing, they don't realize it's too late. Sin entered in when they conceived their sin by thought. Sin is more than the physical act, sin enters in when it is coveted or desired. It so far it is this that they have said... I can refuse to sin.... but their sin has already occurred as soon as they conceived their thought is a sinful act yet they say they refused it.

This is just flatly wrong - period.

First of all, you say that it is sin as soon as we covet something. This make zero sense because coveting is a sin! So, yes indeed, sin enters as soon as sin enters. In other words, you've said nothing with that comment.

Now, that is not to say that there aren't sinful thoughts, there absolutely are, but sin does not enter the moment we are tempted. Do you think Jesus refused to turn those rocks into bread because He didn't want to eat?

Sin is a choice, as is doing rightly. You don't sin by getting out of bed in the morning and continuing to breath and blink your eyes. Sin is avoided by reckoning ourselves dead to sin and alive to Christ and by setting our minds on things above and putting on love, which is the bond of perfection. That's what both Romans 6 and Colossians 3 is all about.

Romans 6:5 For if we have been united together in the likeness of His death, certainly we also shall be in the likeness of His resurrection, 6 knowing this, that our old man was crucified with Him, that the body of sin might be done away with, that we should no longer be slaves of sin. 7 For he who has died has been freed from sin. 8 Now if we died with Christ, we believe that we shall also live with Him, 9 knowing that Christ, having been raised from the dead, dies no more. Death no longer has dominion over Him. 10 For the death that He died, He died to sin once for all; but the life that He lives, He lives to God. 11 Likewise you also, reckon yourselves to be dead indeed to sin, but alive to God in Christ Jesus our Lord.

12 Therefore do not let sin reign in your mortal body, that you should obey it in its lusts. 13 And do not present your members as instruments of unrighteousness to sin, but present yourselves to God as being alive from the dead, and your members as instruments of righteousness to God. 14 For sin shall not have dominion over you, for you are not under law but under grace.​

How can anyone read that passage and and think that it's impossible to avoid sin?!

Clete

 

[genuineoriginal]

It isn't my logic and it can't possibly be blasphemy because all I did was quote the Apostle Paul!

Your logic is blasphemous, despite twisting Paul's words to make it seem like you are only agreeing with what you claim he said.
Peter warned against twisting Paul's words.

2 Peter 3:16 16 As also in all his epistles, speaking in them of these things; in which are some things hard to be understood, which they that are unlearned and unstable wrest, as they do also the other scriptures, unto their own destruction.​

Saying it doesn't make it so.

Then you should stop saying things that aren't true.

I could directly quote your own post were you started this whole idiotic conversation by stating the the fall of Adam was necessary for God to prove that Adam had a free will but I'm not going to.

Yes, the fall of man is necessary because it gives mankind the proof that God gave mankind free will.
The fall of man was not orchestrated by God in order to give mankind that proof, but it is used by God for the proof that some people seem to need.

Bottom line is that the thread is all still here for everyone to read.

Yes, everyone can see how you misunderstood what I said because of your own agenda, despite my repeated attempts to correct your misunderstanding.

You're intentionally wasting my time. There's an easy fix for that.

Liar.
I am not wasting your time.
That is your own doing.
If you think your choice to argue against the truth is wasting your time, stop doing it.

 

[genuineoriginal]

You can't show God anything as in cause Him to perceived a quality, emotion, or characteristic that he doesn't know and you cannot refuse sin or you would not need a savior.

You can't show anything to an unliving, unmoving, unfeeling, unperceiving god such as the Greek Philosophers imagined god would be.

However, the scriptures say that our God is a living God.

 

[genuineoriginal]

What is a servant, it is one that performs duties for their master by what the master declares as His will.
To obey is not free will.
One can not say by their free will they obey, no.
To obey is by choice to accept another's will or testament.

To choose to obey when you are free to choose otherwise is free will.

Exodus 21:2-5 2 If thou buy an Hebrew servant, six years he shall serve: and in the seventh he shall go out free for nothing. 3 If he came in by himself, he shall go out by himself: if he were married, then his wife shall go out with him. 4 If his master have given him a wife, and she have born him sons or daughters; the wife and her children shall be her master's, and he shall go out by himself. 5 And if the servant shall plainly say, I love my master, my wife, and my children; I will not go out free:​

 

[genuineoriginal]

In this thread I have ask multiple times...tell me how you can not sin... and in every case no one even tried. I wonder why but I see a loss of concept or it is denial. What has been offer is man has the power to refuse sin. If the thought of it, and in context it is their sin they thought about doing, they don't realize it's too late.

Romans 6:16 16 Know ye not, that to whom ye yield yourselves servants to obey, his servants ye are to whom ye obey; whether of sin unto death, or of obedience unto righteousness?​

Sin entered in when they conceived their sin by thought.

You seem to be assuming that every temptation results in sin.

 

[Cntrysner]

I'm responding to your own words. I don't make things up as I go. I'm not trying to accuse you of anything. I'm just responding to what you said.

What you claim to believe seems at odds with your own words. Clearly I've misunderstood something.

Why don't you tell me. You're obviously driving somewhere so let's just get there already.

This seems to be taking the passage way too woodenly literal or at the very least in a way that seems way to mystical.

I've seen several post talking about how man can refuse sin and not mention Christ at all so I was forcing the issue until proper recognition was given.

Rom 7:17 Now then it is no more I that do it, but sin that dwelleth in me.
Rom 7:18 For I know that in me (that is, in my flesh,) dwelleth no good thing: for to will is present with me; but how to perform that which is good I find not.
Rom 7:19 For the good that I would I do not: but the evil which I would not, that I do.
Rom 7:20 Now if I do that I would not, it is no more I that do it, but sin that dwelleth in me.
Rom 7:21 I find then a law, that, when I would do good, evil is present with me.

I see no problem taking these verses literally. Paul is explaining the nature of the unregenerate man and how he cannot will himself to do good.

What do you find mystical about them?

Do you really believe that Paul never did anything good, because that's what your logic here would seem to suggest.

It matters how you look at the definition of good. For good to really be good it has to be a perfect good not tainted with sin. People can do good things sometimes but if tainted with just a pinch of pride, lust, creed, self righteousness, and etc, it is not good.

Paul wants us to see our sin to bring us to Christ. If we say we have no sin, at anytime, we deceive ourselves because there is none good, at anytime, but God.

It isn't that he CAN'T do right at all, it's that he doesn't do so consistently. Paul's desire is to be perfect in his condition in the flesh just as he has been declared righteous in his position in Christ. But there is some attribute of the yet unredeemed human condition, that Paul refers to as "the flesh", that draws us like gravity toward sin. Our job, as Christians, is to focus not on what we do but rather on the biblical facts concerning Christ, our position in Him and His righteousness which has been imputed to us by grace, not by our doing but by faith in that work which was done for us because where we fail in our flesh because of unfaithfulness, Christ's faithfulness triumphs, for we are hidden in Him and He cannot deny Himself (II Timothy 2:13). We, therefore, press on toward that day when we shall shed this carnal flesh and instead of being "gravitationally" pulled down toward Hell, we will soar on wings as eagles.

I believe Paul is saying that in the flesh he can't do right at all, other than that...Amen and Amen.

Here's a scripture where Paul tells us how the sin nature is removed. It's a spiritual operation of God when we choose to believe that Christ took away our sin. We still live with sin and it has to be surgically removed in a sense. When this operation occurs only then are we freed from sin.

Col 2:11 In whom also ye are circumcised with the circumcision made without hands, in putting off the body of the sins of the flesh by the circumcision of Christ:

That's an interesting statement! (Really! That's not sarcasm.)

Please explain why the doctrine of predestination would mean that Christ would have failed.

That just popped out.., I haven't researched it yet but it sounds good.

Well, alright then, I agree so long as you don't take it too far and say that we, in our flesh are completely unable to do anything good whatsoever. This would be sort of a back door entry into the doctrine of total depravity and its just not biblical. Completely unsaved people who don't know God and don't even like God and certainly do not make any effort at all to live by the Spirit, do good things all the time (Matthew 7:11 and elsewhere) and so do we(I Corinthians 3). We also sin as they do and by the same power. The primary difference is that we're forgiven and they aren't; we're saved and await rewards in heaven and they have no such hope.

I guess it's all about the definition of good, mine is like God good. There was once a good under the law but it isn't anymore, it changed from faith to faith.

 

[genuineoriginal]

I've seen several post talking about how man can refuse sin and not mention Christ at all so I was forcing the issue until proper recognition was given.

Maybe you missed the Old Testament which also talked about men refusing sin without giving any credit to Christ for it?

 

[Cntrysner]

You can't show anything to an unliving, unmoving, unfeeling, unperceiving god such as the Greek Philosophers imagined god would be.

However, the scriptures say that our God is a living God.

He is a loving God that will change the natural man who is dead in sin into a living man if we choose His will/testament.

 

[Cntrysner]

To choose to obey when you are free to choose otherwise is free will.

Exodus 21:2-5 2 If thou buy an Hebrew servant, six years he shall serve: and in the seventh he shall go out free for nothing. 3 If he came in by himself, he shall go out by himself: if he were married, then his wife shall go out with him. 4 If his master have given him a wife, and she have born him sons or daughters; the wife and her children shall be her master's, and he shall go out by himself. 5 And if the servant shall plainly say, I love my master, my wife, and my children; I will not go out free:​

I see a loving master (God) giving gifts to a servant that did His will and if the servant loves God because God loved him first (gifts) he will choose not to be free.

If you choose to obey the masters will it is not your will but the masters and in the above scriptures you quoted it is best to not choose to be free but love the master, accept His gifts, and submit to His will. Who would choose to be a prodigal? Choose to be a son and inherit the masters will.