Freedom to Choose God

by UnDisfellowshipped 774 Replies latest watchtower bible

Deputy Dog

LT
My problem is merely with your voicing a speculation as fact.
You have no idea what God was thinking beyond what is recorded in the Bible, and yet you happily jump outside those bounds. If you want to make the bible your authority, at least be gracious enough to maintain that position.
I can say the same thing about you.
In the beginning he didn't need to obtain it at all, as he was performing 100% righteous acts.
Pure speculation!
Adam, on the other hand was created "good", "perfect", "sinless", and his every activity was righteous. After Adam's creation the whole of creation was declared to be "good".
The only text you quote to support your position is Gen 1:31 "And God saw every thing that he had made, and, behold, it was very good. And the evening and the morning were the sixth day." Why would you assume that in just this one verse "Good" means morally perfect? Does that mean that the light was morally perfect? How about the dry land and the sea? Maybe the grass, herbs and trees were as well. You don't know what he was doing. Are you saying that anything was a righteous act before he ate the fruit? Here is another question from left field. What was the purpose of the law (the command not to eat the fruit) in the garden? Was it to keep Adam righteous?
Let's not make this personal, huh?
There was no call for that low shot.
Come on. I know, you think deep down, that you could have done a better job than Adam. Could we say the same about EW?
Sorry, I think you have it wrong. If you loved God with all your heart, soul and mind, you would seek out the ceremonial law in the scriptures and obey that too .
I'm sorry too, because I think YOU have it wrong.
Does loving God make one suddenly omniscient?
I guess you believe that the Holy Spirit wouldn't do His job.
But for all our rhetoric, I love ya bro
Don't apologies for vigorous debate. If we ever meet, I'll eat with you any time. D Dog
Deputy Dog

I thought your were a Clavinist?

No, I've never been one of those.

Told ya, He's a pseudo Calvinist!
LittleToe

EW:
S'ok, I was only making light with the typo thang. I just couldn't resist.
I make plenty of them myself
Why cant you answer a simply question, was Adam righteous while he sinned. Or as you put "author sin"??
Righteousness is a standard. Hence he was righteous right up to the point that he sinned.
While he was sinning and once he had finished sinning and after he had commited that first sin, he was no longer righteous. I don't understand your difficulty with that.
Do have trouble with the idea of God creating something "good" that would later turn into something bad by it's own devices? It happens with fish all the time
So Adams perfect mind could not keep him from sinning?
Correct. He made a choice...
It seems your hyper-calvinistic bent is keeping you from understanding the extent of "man's responsibility"
And his righteous activities did not include sinning correct?
Correct - that was an unrighteous action, performed by someone who previously had an exemplary record.
Further theres no proof Adam was perfect let alone righteous.
His record shows he was neither
At what point in his record? At the close of play, I agree, but prior to sinning? His record was spotless (as far as the record goes).
DDog:
I can say the same thing about you.
You might try, but I've consistently and happily stating the whole time that all I'm presenting are theological opinions.
LT wrote: In the beginning he didn't need to obtain it at all, as he was performing 100% righteous acts.
DD wrote: Pure speculation! Prove me wrong - name an unrighteous act...
Does that mean that the light was morally perfect?
Now you're just being facetious.
Everything that had morals was morally "good".
You don't know what he was doing. Are you saying that anything was a righteous act before he ate the fruit?
You know that's what I'm saying, hence my statement about breathing. I'm sticking to the record, that the story presents, my friend.
Since we have on record the clear reason for his fall into imperfection it stands to reason that previous to this there was nothing that he was doing by which he might be condemned as unrighteous. There is no neutral word for righteousness...
Here is another question from left field.
Keep 'em coming
What was the purpose of the law (the command not to eat the fruit) in the garden? Was it to keep Adam righteous?
Now there's an interesting one...
Great question!
We know that in connection with "the law" (in particular the Mosaic law) that it was there to make sin manifest. It would follow that the first law would show up sin, and so it did.
I'm still of the opinion that man wasn't created sinful, though. Other wise the statement "it was very good" would be a misnomer.
Come on. I know, you think deep down, that you could have done a better job than Adam. Could we say the same about EW?
I'm sorry to disappoint you, my friend. Neither you, I or EW could have done a better job than Adam. It was foreordained... Yet he did it, and he bears the responsibility and title for that action.
I guess you believe that the Holy Spirit wouldn't do His job.
You know fine well that I'm not saying that.
There is such a thing as progressive sanctification, though.
Don't apologies for vigorous debate. If we ever meet, I'll eat with you any time.
Likewise. I'm really enjoying this. I get to cut my teeth on this kinda stuff every Wednesday evening in live debate in fellowships.
Told ya, He's a pseudo Calvinist!
Naww, I'm not one ogf those, either.
I do play the fiddle, though - LOL.
Narkissos

I don't want to intrude into the "deep things of Jean Calvin" with my reprobate thinking, but I do look at this thread once in a while and there is a side question I wanted to ask Ross for some time: have you ever read Karl Barth? He was a breath of fresh air to me when I was subjected to Calvinist and hyper-Calvinist reasoning.
ellderwho

Why cant you answer a simply question, was Adam righteous while he sinned. Or as you put "author sin"??

Righteousness is a standard. Hence he was righteous right up to the point that he sinned.
While he was sinning and once he had finished sinning and after he had commited that first sin, he was no longer righteous. I don't understand your difficulty with that.

It does sound kinda of contradictory " Adam the righteous author of sin"
So Adams perfect mind could not keep him from sinning?
Correct. He made a choice...
It seems your hyper-calvinistic bent is keeping you from understanding the extent of "man's responsibility"
Bear with me while I try to reconcile a perfect mind making a un-perfect choice.
It makes my gears grind esspecially while thinking of why the tree was there to begin with. Thanks to DDog
His record was spotless (as far as the record goes).
Is spotless righteousness by defualt?
I ask you again, is good righteous?
Yeah, I'd have to say I'd eat with you as well being food is the international language. Probably one of the few that have actually eaten haggis
ellderwho

What was the purpose of the law (the command not to eat the fruit) in the garden? Was it to keep Adam righteous?
Now there's an interesting one...
Great question!
We know that in connection with "the law" (in particular the Mosaic law) that it was there to make sin manifest. It would follow that the first law would show up sin, and so it did.I'm still of the opinion that man wasn't created sinful, though. Other wise the statement "it was very good" would be a misnomer.
LT; does observing the law impart righteousness? Galatians 3:21
Is the Law then contrary to the promises of God? May it never be! For if a law had been given which was able to impart life, then righteousness would indeed have been based on law.
LittleToe

Didier:Strangely enough, his was the first name that came to mind on the "Hank's Ass" thread, recently. I used the names Sagan and Marx because I suspected few would know who on earth Barth was
He's on my reading list, but I've read very little of his writings (it doesn't help that I don't understand German).
From what I understand though, he was of the Lutheran denomination and effectively a Universalist-Calvinist, yes?
I have difficulties with Universalism, from a Sola-Scriptura theological perspective.
(Not that I'm of a Sola Scriptura bent, but for the sakes of this thread I'm keeping my horns pulled in )
EW:
It does sound kinda of contradictory " Adam the righteous author of sin"...
...Bear with me while I try to reconcile a perfect mind making a un-perfect choice.
Does that sound more difficult than God (with all his superlative attributes) being the author of it?
Ya pays yer money and takes yer choice...
It makes my gears grind esspecially while thinking of why the tree was there to begin with. Thanks to DDog
Yeah, I'm guessing he's on Gumby's "b*st*rd" list, for that one. HE's certainly on mine - LOL.
Is spotless righteousness by defualt?
In our case, no.
In the case of Adam, I believe so.
But you surely know me by now, in that although that's my position I wouldn't be dogmatic about it
I ask you again, is good righteous?
It's not synonymous, to my understanding, no.
I do believe that "good" should normally act righteously, though.
Yeah, I'd have to say I'd eat with you as well being food is the international language. Probably one of the few that have actually eaten haggis
One of these bright days I need to haul ass over to NY.
I passed through the airport on the way to Dallas, earlier this year, and will again in December. Unfortunately each trip is just long enough to catch the next flight.
There are a few of you guys from the North East that I'd love to see.
LT; does observing the law impart righteousness?
Definitely not, especially in our own case, and in regards to the Mosaic law which Paul speaks of.
The only one who "imparts righteousness" is God, and it's Christ's righteousness that is imparted.
Law shows up sin, when we transgress said law.
But then I never have been arguing for an imparted righteousnesss in the case of Adam.
My only statement regarding Adam's righteousness concerns when he was in a state of innocence. He didn't know bad/evil, and certainly didn't perform it... ...right up to the moment he ate the fruit salad his wife so lovingly prepared
Nonetheless the blame isn't hers, but rather his, and the responsibility rests with him. After all he had plenty more ribs
Narkissos

Ross:
he was of the Lutheran denomination and effectively a Universalist-Calvinist, yes?
He was a Swiss Calvinist, of the "neo-orthodox" kind. He gave an incredibly fresh and thorough interpretation to the whole body of Church dogmatics (especially within the Calvinist tradition) along his own dialectical and christocentrical principles. Even his tacit universalism is dialectical and christocentrical. I may be wrong, but I'm quite sure you'd love his works as far as you're interested in systematic theology.
gumby

Nonetheless the blame isn't hers, but rather his, and the responsibility rests with him.

Listen to LT, .....tryin to suck up to the ladies just before another fest......he always does that! Listen here LT, Eve's arse was as much to blame as Adam was. She heard the command not to eat of the tree just as Adam did. She was also as smart as he was, so the "she was decieved" story won't work. She also went and hid her cute little arse from Jehovah in the bushes with her hubby, so she knew what she did. She was a naughty woman! ( wished I'd known her)
Gumby
LittleToe

Didier:
On that recommendation it just jumped to the top of my list, after I finish the books I've currently got on the go.
Thanks
Gumby:Don't knock it, it works for me ya b*st*rd!!!
Beats the heck outta !!!
What I wanna know is why He came a looking for them when they were obviously busy in the bushes. I know it's usually DDog that askes these kind of penetrating questions, but I have to enquire how loving that was!

Freedom to Choose God

Share this