1689 London Confession

[GodsGrace]

I doesn't matter what I say. It's what scripture says.
Heck, I vote for universalism...but it's what scripture says.

Universalism wouldn't represent a just God.

According to scripture: "What must one do to be saved if they have not heard of Christ"?
If there's an answer we agree it is by faith so I can rephrase the question:
According to scripture: "What must one BELIEVE to be saved if they have not heard of Christ"?

I think I've said this many times but you're not picking it up.
I'll list what I BELIEVE scripture states: (I've posted all verses that support the following)

1. God has always revealed Himself to man - one way or another.
2. Man has the ability to seek God.
3. Man can respond to God, thus he is responsible for his response and has no excuse if he ends up in hell.
4. Man is always saved by faith.
5. Man must live a life accordingly.

So how does this look like in real life:
Man looks around him and sees that something must have created everything.
He feels this in his "heart" and understands with his conscious that he must worship this being.
He does so...exhibiting faith in this being and a solid response by obeying Him because what is right has always been known by our conscience.

That's the best I can do.
Not everyone will agree,
God, being a just God, will judge by the light that is given to each person....
after all it's GOD that gives to that person the light he has received.

Agreed... I would say DEEDS (works) are a result of faith (of trusting God) and we are rewarded.

Agreed.

Noah was saved by faith. What I was pointing that we don't know the content of His faith. For all I know God told Noah the God has blue toes and Noah believed Him and it was counted as righteousness.
Because the knowledge to the contents of faith of O.T. saints is difficult to ascertain I try to avoid it.

What do you mean by THE CONTENT OF FAITH?
It's not knowledge that is going to save us.
It's our faith --
Noah was saved because he BELIEVED God, He had FAITH in what God told him.
it doesn't matter what it was....

True... and I pointed out that NO ONE SEEKS GOD ....so my solution is we can't seek Him ... God seeks us causing us to find Him. This explains the contradiction.
There's verse saying "we are to seek God" and verses saying "no one seeks God" ...I gave my explanation to unravel the contradiction; you are welcome to give an alternate explanation.

You gave one verse....Romans 3:11
Doctrine cannot be built on one or two verses but on a complete idea that comes forward from scripture.
The Trinity, for example. It's IMPLIED in scripture, but it took early theologians to put it all together and get a teaching from all the different verses.

I posted tens of verses about how we're supposed to seek God.
If God tells us to seek Him, it means it can be done.

Acts 2:38 tell us that we are to REPENT and be baptized. Everyone of you (that were present).
If Peter said to repent, it means Jesus taught him that it's possible to repent.
In Matthew 3:17 JESUS tells us to repent.

Surely this means that we are able to repent...otherwise why would God tell us to do something He knows we cannot do?

Didn't fall on death ears. I responding with NO ONE SEEKS GOD, explained the contradiction and invited you to do so which you have not done.

I've done it FF.
You just don't like my answer.

This sort of statement gets us no where
Same back at you. There, it's a tie.

Here's what you're responding to:
You bring your theology to the bible,
You're supposed to GET your theology FROM the bible.

I read the bible before I had any teaching.
As far as I'm concerned, it's impossible to come away from reading the NT, on our own,
with the belief system you hold to.
But let's not derail.

Hmmm .... you may be right .... goggled it ... "Luke 16:19-31 has been the focus of much controversy. Some take the story of the rich man and Lazarus to be a true, historical account of events that actually occurred; others consider it a parable or allegory."
...anyways

Jesus never used names in parables.
Hades does exist.
I'm happy you looked it up.
I'm still learning and I've been at this for over 40 years.

Phew ... at least we agree we are on topic. Romans 1 and whether it gives everyone the opportunity to be saved.
Again I ask you where the Romans 1 does it

1. mention salvation or any term associated with it like "eternal life', "born again", "regenerated", "in Christ", whatever?
2. what must people who never heard of Christ believe to be saved? (saying the must "accept God" needs clarity...how does one "accept God" has found in these verses for salvation?)

I answered number 2 above. You keep asking the same question to which I've replied a few times now.
As to number 1....what difference does it make if we use the correct terminology?
First of all terminology is not known by everyone and they still could be saved.
secondly, we're talking about persons that have never heard the gospel so they don't know the terminology.
Paul and the other writers speak about being born again but don't necessarily use the above terms.
It's FAITH that saves.

Romans 1:17 speaks of the gospel. Nowhere does it have any of your words up above.

 

[GodsGrace]

What I found interesting about the Apocrypha is that Jerome, who translated the Catholic Bible into Latin creating the DEFINITIVE Bible for about 1500 years, had the EXACT SAME opinion of the Apocryphal books that later Protestants do … they contain SOME interesting information and have HISTORIC value as a research tool, but they are not inspired by God as the other books of the Bible are. I believe it was Jerome’s introduction to Kings that goes into some detail on this subject.

Thanks. Didn't know that.

 

[Fastfredy0]

Re: According to scripture: "What must one BELIEVE to be saved if they have not heard of Christ"?

That's the best I can do.
Not everyone will agree,
God, being a just God, will judge by the light that is given to each person....
after all it's GOD that gives to that person the light he has received.

You can't give scripture to answer my question. You rightly believe God is just and then insert how you feel God must act according to "what you do if you were God knowing the He is just". I leave the question at that. Thanks for your response.

It's not knowledge that is going to save us.
It's our faith --

Faith must contain knowledge by definition. Knowledge is "familiarity, awareness, or understanding gained through experience or study". One cannot be saved without some knowledge of God. Now, I am not saying knowledge alone saves us. Perhaps that's what you mean.

You gave one verse....Romans 3:11
Doctrine cannot be built on one or two verses but on a complete idea that comes forward from scripture.

Well, you've yet to explain that one verse Romans 3:11 and the apparent contradiction to your contention that we seek God. I grant that more verses is better evidence. Obviously, there is evidence to show one verse is sufficient to know things at times. Anyways, I can give more verses showing man does not seek God.

• Romans 3:12 All have turned aside; together they have become worthless; no one does good, not even one.”
• Psalm 14:2-3
• Psalm 53:2-3
• Isaiah 9:13 - granted, it seems to be only Israel in this case
• Isaiah 65:1 “I let Myself be sought by those who did not ask for Me; I let Myself be found by those who did not seek Me. I said, ‘Here am I, here am I,’ To the nation [Israel] which did not call on My Name.

....the last verse is especially pertinent. It is evidence that what I said earlier is accurate. It shows that God is the person who takes the initiative CAUSING the people start to seek Him.

... I'll stop at those examples.
To summarize IMO ...
There are verses telling us to seek God.
There are verses telling us the NO ONE SEEKS God.
Obviously, some people like you and I seek God
Solution to possible contradiction: God goes out to find us and when He does we embrace Him. Like the 99 sheep and 1 sheep was lost and depended on shepherd to go out and find it. (aside: I don't like using parables for proof but it does seem to fit).

I posted tens of verses about how we're supposed to seek God.
If God tells us to seek Him, it means it can be done.

The bible proves the your statement "if God tells us to see Him, it means it can be done". There is no bible verse saying we can do everything God asks us. You're making assumptions to try to support your theology/bias. The following are proof texts showing your premise is false:

• John 11:43 “Lazarus, come forth!” Lazarus was dead! He had no ability to come forth. First, God had to make him alive before He had the ability to come forth.
• John 13:34 A new commandment I give to you, that you love one another: just as I have loved you, you also are to love one another.
• John 15:12 “This is my commandment, that you love one another as I have loved you
• Romans 8:7-8 Because the mind set on the flesh is hostile toward God; for it does not subject itself to the law of God, for it is not even able to do so, and those who are in the flesh cannot please God.
• 1 Corinthians 15:34 “Awake to righteousness and sin not”.
• 2 Corinthians 10:5 and take every thought captive to obey Christ
• Ephesians 4:30 And grieve not the Holy Spirit of God
• Ephesians 5:20 giving thanks always and for everything to God the Father in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ,
• 1 Thessalonians 5:16 Rejoice always, 17 pray without ceasing, 18 give thanks in all circumstances; for this is the will of God in Christ Jesus for you. [Tom Constable defines without ceasing as frequently]
• Ephesians 4:1b urge you to walk in a manner worthy of the calling to which you have been called, 2 with all humility and gentleness, with patience, bearing with one another in love, 3 eager to maintain the unity of the Spirit in the bond of peace.
• 1 John 2:1 “My little children, these things I write unto you, that ye sin not”.

Acts 2:38 tell us that we are to REPENT and be baptized. Everyone of you (that were present).
If Peter said to repent, it means Jesus taught him that it's possible to repent.
In Matthew 3:17 JESUS tells us to repent. Surely this means that we are able to repent...otherwise why would God tell us to do something He knows we cannot do?

I've already shown that your assumption is incorrect and therefore cannot be used as an infallible premise. We can't do anything without God supporting it (Acts 17:28).
I like to point out the phrase "EVERYONE OF YOU" that you rightly point out "that were present". I'd like to repeat that the words "ALL" and "EVERYONE" are ambiguous and need to be qualified to make it understood. We're ALL going to church ... what is ALL referring to, my family, the town, the swimming team ... we don't know unless the ALL (or EVERYONE) is qualified.

.

I've done it FF.
You just don't like my answer.

Well, I believe I've proven with either scripture or logic that your assumptions are flawed. You think I am wrong. That's the way it goes. One or not of us is correct. We both aren't correct ... such is life.

I read the bible before I had any teaching.
As far as I'm concerned, it's impossible to come away from reading the NT, on our own,
with the belief system you hold to.

I commend you for reading the bible and seeking knowledge.
We all come to our own conclusion as to what is and isn't true. We all are fallible. We all blow it to some extent; some much more than others. We all have different abilities to understand and bias' that inhibit our understanding.
There is wisdom in numbers and enhanced ability to understand when many tackles issues ... the internet being an example of the power of many minds coming together to aid learning.
2 Peter 1:20 But understand this first of all, that no prophecy of Scripture is a matter of or comes from one’s own [personal or special] interpretation

... off to babysit 3 grand kids for 4ish days ... later

 

[GodsGrace]

Paragraph 7 claims "those things which are necessary to be known, believed and observed for salvation" are so clear that the "unlearned" can understand them by "ordinary" means.

What does this actually mean? Can a natural man understand? Is the Holy Spirit part of "ordinary means" or not?

Here's how I understand 1.7 to mean:

Not everything that we read in scripture will be equally clear to everyone.
However, what is necessary to be known for salvation is clearly set forth in one part of scripture or another.
Not only the educated, but also the uneducated, can obtain a satisfactory understanding of them.

By using ORDINARY MEANS refers to
2 Ti 3:140 you must remain faithful to the things you've been taught
2 Peter 1:9 those that don't grow are shortsighted or blind.

I don't think the above has anything to do with the NATURAL MAN understanding as in 1 cor 2:14
I'd say that , yes, the Holy Spirit is not only part of ordinary means, but part of any means of understanding God.
Natural or otherwise.

 

[GodsGrace]

Re: According to scripture: "What must one BELIEVE to be saved if they have not heard of Christ"?

You can't give scripture to answer my question. You rightly believe God is just and then insert how you feel God must act according to "what you do if you were God knowing the He is just". I leave the question at that. Thanks for your response.

I've given you plenty of scripture.
I don't go by my "feelings".

Faith must contain knowledge by definition. Knowledge is "familiarity, awareness, or understanding gained through experience or study". One cannot be saved without some knowledge of God. Now, I am not saying knowledge alone saves us. Perhaps that's what you mean.

No. That's precisely NOT what I mean.
Faith saves, not knowledge.

A person that has faith in God DOES HAVE your listed qualities that are necessary for salvation:
awareness
some type of familiarity

Well, you've yet to explain that one verse Romans 3:11 and the apparent contradiction to your contention that we seek God. I grant that more verses is better evidence. Obviously, there is evidence to show one verse is sufficient to know things at times. Anyways, I can give more verses showing man does not seek God.

• Romans 3:12 All have turned aside; together they have become worthless; no one does good, not even one.”
• Psalm 14:2-3
• Psalm 53:2-3
• Isaiah 9:13 - granted, it seems to be only Israel in this case
• Isaiah 65:1 “I let Myself be sought by those who did not ask for Me; I let Myself be found by those who did not seek Me. I said, ‘Here am I, here am I,’ To the nation [Israel] which did not call on My Name.

....the last verse is especially pertinent. It is evidence that what I said earlier is accurate. It shows that God is the person who takes the initiative CAUSING the people start to seek Him.

Yes. Israel in all cases.

... I'll stop at those examples.
To summarize IMO ...
There are verses telling us to seek God.
There are verses telling us the NO ONE SEEKS God.
Obviously, some people like you and I seek God
Solution to possible contradiction: God goes out to find us and when He does we embrace Him. Like the 99 sheep and 1 sheep was lost and depended on shepherd to go out and find it. (aside: I don't like using parables for proof but it does seem to fit).

I said at the beginning that GOD MAKES THE FIRST MOVE.
I've said before that I don't think you really read posts.

The bible proves the your statement "if God tells us to see Him, it means it can be done". There is no bible verse saying we can do everything God asks us. You're making assumptions to try to support your theology/bias. The following are proof texts showing your premise is false:

You need a bible verse for the above?
Do you ask a one year old baby to make dinner for you?
Why not?
Do you think God is dumber than you are?

• John 11:43 “Lazarus, come forth!” Lazarus was dead! He had no ability to come forth. First, God had to make him alive before He had the ability to come forth.
• John 13:34 A new commandment I give to you, that you love one another: just as I have loved you, you also are to love one another.
• John 15:12 “This is my commandment, that you love one another as I have loved you
• Romans 8:7-8 Because the mind set on the flesh is hostile toward God; for it does not subject itself to the law of God, for it is not even able to do so, and those who are in the flesh cannot please God.
• 1 Corinthians 15:34 “Awake to righteousness and sin not”.
• 2 Corinthians 10:5 and take every thought captive to obey Christ
• Ephesians 4:30 And grieve not the Holy Spirit of God
• Ephesians 5:20 giving thanks always and for everything to God the Father in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ,
• 1 Thessalonians 5:16 Rejoice always, 17 pray without ceasing, 18 give thanks in all circumstances; for this is the will of God in Christ Jesus for you. [Tom Constable defines without ceasing as frequently]
• Ephesians 4:1b urge you to walk in a manner worthy of the calling to which you have been called, 2 with all humility and gentleness, with patience, bearing with one another in love, 3 eager to maintain the unity of the Spirit in the bond of peace.
• 1 John 2:1 “My little children, these things I write unto you, that ye sin not”.

I can't go through each verse.
Pick two or three.

And please don't pick Lazarus. He was DEAD, we're ALIVE.

I've already shown that your assumption is incorrect and therefore cannot be used as an infallible premise. We can't do anything without God supporting it (Acts 17:28).

Who said otherwise?
I do believe this is the end of our discussion.

I like to point out the phrase "EVERYONE OF YOU" that you rightly point out "that were present". I'd like to repeat that the words "ALL" and "EVERYONE" are ambiguous and need to be qualified to make it understood. We're ALL going to church ... what is ALL referring to, my family, the town, the swimming team ... we don't know unless the ALL (or EVERYONE) is qualified.

Fine.

.

Well, I believe I've proven with either scripture or logic that your assumptions are flawed. You think I am wrong. That's the way it goes. One or not of us is correct. We both aren't correct ... such is life.

You could not agree.
No problem.

I commend you for reading the bible and seeking knowledge.
We all come to our own conclusion as to what is and isn't true. We all are fallible. We all blow it to some extent; some much more than others. We all have different abilities to understand and bias' that inhibit our understanding.
There is wisdom in numbers and enhanced ability to understand when many tackles issues ... the internet being an example of the power of many minds coming together to aid learning.

How does the internet aid learning?
If you want to use the internet, you better already know your theology.
I find a lot of crazy stuff on there.
I will say I don't use books anymore....
but I already have my theology so I could weed out the crazy stuff.
(or what I don't agree with because it's not what I've learned).

2 Peter 1:20 But understand this first of all, that no prophecy of Scripture is a matter of or comes from one’s own [personal or special] interpretation

... off to babysit 3 grand kids for 4ish days ... later

Have fun.
Time passes quickly.
And then they're big.

 

[atpollard]

1689 Baptist Confession of Faith (traditional)
1689 Baptist Confession of Faith (modern English)

Of Creation​

Chapter 4​

---

Paragraph 1​

In the beginning it pleased God the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit,1 for the manifestation of the glory of His eternal power,2 wisdom, and goodness, to create or make the world, and all things therein, whether visible or invisible, in the space of six days, and all very good.3

---

1 John 1:2–3; Heb. 1:2; Job 26:13
2 Rom. 1:20
3 Col. 1:16; Gen. 1:31

---

Paragraph 2​

After God had made all other creatures, He created man, male and female,4 with reasonable and immortal souls,5 rendering them fit unto that life to God for which they were created; being made after the image of God, in knowledge, righteousness, and true holiness;6 having the law of God written in their hearts,7 and power to fulfill it, and yet under a possibility of transgressing, being left to the liberty of their own will, which was subject to change.8

---

4 Gen. 1:27
5 Gen. 2:7
6 Eccles. 7:29; Gen. 1:26
7 Rom. 2:14–15
8 Gen. 3:6

---

Paragraph 3​

Besides the law written in their hearts, they received a command not to eat of the tree of knowledge of good and evil,9 which while they kept, they were happy in their communion with God, and had dominion over the creatures.10

---

9 Gen. 2:17
10 Gen. 1:26,28

(Time to take another bite of the 1689 Baptist Confession.)

 

[atpollard]

Chapter 4, Paragraph 1 ... 6 days of CREATION. No "some indefinite period", but "in the space of six days".

Do we still hold the Bible as TRUE or has SCIENCE "taught" us different?
If we hold to 6 literal days, then what do we do when observations appear to contradict Scripture?

[These are questions and issues that keep reappearing, so it might be worth talking about how we "individually" deal with them.]

 

[atpollard]

Chapter 4, Paragraph 2 ... the Baptist Confession claims that ADAM and EVE had "libertine Free Will" (the complete ability to choose either GOOD or EVIL on their own) before the fall. [Mankind was created Arminian, and only became Calvinist after the fall. ]

 

[Fastfredy0]

Do we still hold the Bible as TRUE or has SCIENCE "taught" us different?

Short Answer: God determines science. Science depends on God.

Long Story:
Science assumes the uniformity of nature (Y), but it cannot prove this principle – it is irrationally assumed. The biblical worldview (X) is the necessary precondition to render this assumption intelligible. Now, the biblical worldview in fact denies the uniformity of nature, but it affirms the doctrine of ordinary providence. That is, it is God who controls the world, and he does it in a regular manner, although he is free to deviate from his usual practice whenever he wishes. Since the biblical worldview is the necessary precondition for the assumption of any regularity in the world, it is a necessary presupposition that makes science intelligible. This does not mean that science is rational or that its theories and conclusions are true, but it means that no one can even make sense of science unless biblical principles are presupposed. The implication is that science can never disprove the Scripture or even argue against it.

If we hold to 6 literal days, then what do we do when observations appear to contradict Scripture?

Believe God. I personally follow the literal sense of scripture unless it conflicts with other verses or it is a parable. I believe in 6 literal days. I've heard science to support both theories. It's not something I dwell upon.

image of God, in knowledge, righteousness, and true holiness

Finally, someone correctly defining the phrase "image of God" which is one of the most abused phrases I know of.

Chapter 4, Paragraph 2 ... the Baptist Confession claims that ADAM and EVE had "libertine Free Will" (the complete ability to choose either GOOD or EVIL on their own) before the fall. [Mankind was created Arminian, and only became Calvinist after the fall. ]

Libertine Free Will? Libertarian Free Will is the ability to make choices without any prior prejudice, inclination, or disposition. For the will to be free it must act from a posture of neutrality, with absolutely no bias. It determines its own volitions; so as not to be dependent, in its determinations, on any cause without itself, nor determined by anything prior to its own acts. Indifference and therefore amorality belongs to Liberty in their notion of it, or that the mind, previous to the act of volition, be in equilibrio (equilibrium in uncertainty).
Atpollard ... you sure the Confession means Libertine Free Will when it talks about Free Will?
Anyways, I don't believe in Free Will of any kind. I can go into the logic to support my idea and Bible verses too if we want to go on that tangent. We've discussed it before.

 

[atpollard]

It's not something I dwell upon.

MENTAL COMPARTMENTALIZATION is a useful tool for preserving sanity and being able to function in the world.

 

[atpollard]

Anyways, I don't believe in Free Will of any kind. I can go into the logic to support my idea and Bible verses too if we want to go on that tangent. We've discussed it before.

Tread lightly ... this is Adam and Eve prior to the fall and sans a fallen nature. Are you REALLY prepared to claim that GOD MADE ADAM SIN and Adam had no free will to act otherwise? Was Adam not created "very good" after all?

It is one thing to apply those Logic Arguments as Logic Arguments and another thing to make God the FIRST CAUSE of SIN. I don't want or need to go there again ... but (yes or no) are YOU prepared to accept GOD FORCED ADAM TO SIN as the alternative to "Free Will" to a pre-Fall Adam? ADAM and GOD are the only two wills in play in that decision.

[I am a COMPATIBALIST, which means that my answer contains internal logical inconsistencies ... SO WHAT! ]

 

[atpollard]

you sure the Confession means Libertine Free Will when it talks about Free Will?

It says:

"After God had made all other creatures, He created man, male and female,4 with reasonable and immortal souls,5 rendering them fit unto that life to God for which they were created; being made after the image of God, in knowledge, righteousness, and true holiness;6 having the law of God written in their hearts,7 and power to fulfill it, and yet under a possibility of transgressing, being left to the liberty of their own will, which was subject to change.8"​

• Genesis 3:6 "So when the woman saw that the tree was good for food, that it was pleasant to the eyes, and a tree desirable to make one wise, she took of its fruit and ate. She also gave to her husband with her, and he ate."

It lists her thoughts and logical reasons for deciding (exercising the liberty to choose) to eat/disobey over not eat/obey. That appears to me to be "Eve's Will". That appears to be "Free Will" (she could have chosen either, unlike our fallen nature that views God's rules as "foolishness"). I think that would be described as "liberty", although pitting God's most cunning creation against God's most naive creation is a bit like a boxing match between 5 year old me and Mohammad Ali at his peak.

So in general, I am pretty sure the Confession means Libertine Free Will when it says "liberty of their own will". The next section will likely make it clear that WE have a FALLEN NATURE (... but that is another chapter).

 

[Fastfredy0]

MENTAL COMPARTMENTALIZATION is a useful tool

I use that tool a lot. :drool

Tread lightly ... this is Adam and Eve prior to the fall and sans a fallen nature. Are you REALLY prepared to claim that GOD MADE ADAM SIN and Adam had no free will to act otherwise? Was Adam not created "very good" after all?

Re: Tread lightly ... I freely admit that I could be wrong.

It is one thing to apply those Logic Arguments as Logic Arguments and another thing to make God the FIRST CAUSE of SIN. I don't want or need to go there again

Doh ... wrote response to other comments you read and then read this so I erased my comments.
We've discussed this before.

but (yes or no) are YOU prepared to accept GOD FORCED ADAM TO SIN as the alternative to "Free Will" to a pre-Fall Adam?

one needs to define "free will" and "forced". If you wish to stick with Libertarian Free Will definition then I present R.C. Sproul's comments:
Libertarian Free Will is the ability to make choices without any prior prejudice, inclination, or disposition.
On the surface this is very appealing. There are no elements of coercion, either internal or external, to be found in it. Below the surface, however, lurk two serious problems: one moral and the other rational.
On the one hand, if we make our choices strictly from a neutral posture, with no prior inclination, then we make choices for no reason. If we have no reason for our choices, if our choices are utterly spontaneous, then our choices have no moral significance. If a choice just happens,--it just pops out, with no rhyme or reason for it—then it cannot be judged good or bad. When God evaluates our choices, he is concerned about our motives. (consider Genesis 50:20)
The second problem this popular view faces is not so much moral as it is rational. If there is no prior inclination, desire, or bent, no prior motivation or reason for a choice, how can a choice even be made? If the will is totally neutral, why would it choose the right or the left? If is something like the problem encountered by Alice in Wonderland when she came to a fork in the road. She did not know which way to turn. She saw the grinning Cheshire cat in the tree. She asked the cat, “Which way should I turn?” The cat replied, “Where are you going?” Alice , “I don’t know.”. “Then,” replied the Cheshire cat, “it doesn’t matter.”
Consider Alice’s dilemma. Actually she had four options from which to choose. She could have taken the left fork or the right fork. She also could have chosen to return the way she had come. Or she could have stood fixed at the spot of indecision until she died there. For her to take a step in any direction, she would need some motivation or inclination to do so. Without any motivation, any prior inclination, her only real option would be to stand there and perish.
Therefore, one must reject the neutral-will (free) theory because it is irrational.
The neutral view of free will is impossible. It involves choice without desire. That is like having an effect without a cause.
It is something from nothing, which is irrational. The Bible makes it clear that we choose out of our desires. A wicked desire produces wicked choices and wicked actions. A godly desire produces godly deeds. Jesus spoke in terms of corrupt trees producing corrupt fruit. A fig tree does not yield apples and an apple tree produces no figs. So righteous choices and evil desires produce evil choices. R.C. Sproul Chosen by God https://www.ligonier.org/learn/series/chosen-by-god/what-is-free-will

Re: "Forced" ... God does not "force" us to sin. He creates a soul with a disposition to sin (possible exception Adam and Eve). Being born with a sin nature, there is no need to "force"; I will sin because I naturally follow my God determined desires. (Aside: God doesn't implant evil in us, He takes away the ability to do good which negates the idea that God creates evil.) Someday we will not be "forced" to no longer sin because God will change our nature such that we will never desire to sin.

Hey, according to Sproul no one has come up with a theodicy that satisfies Sproul, so why should I with inferior abilities be the first.
I know God is perfectly good and any explanation cannot deny this premise.

[I am a COMPATIBALIST, which means that my answer contains internal logical inconsistencies ... SO WHAT! ]

Hey, this is a superior position to take to mine in that it distances God from the thought of humans that He might do something evil. Compatibalists who study it like Sproul know this explanation has holes.
Premise 1: God determines what evil is
Premise 2: God cannot do evil
Premise 3: There is not power/authority above God to hold Him responsible for anything He does
Conclusion: God cannot sin by definition
A
Premise 1: Man is evil (depraved)
Premise 2: Man often defines evil differently than God
Conclusion: Man different definitions of evil could put God in a bad light

It lists her thoughts and logical reasons for deciding (exercising the liberty to choose) to eat/disobey over not eat/obey. That appears to me to be "Eve's Will". That appears to be "Free Will" (she could have chosen either, unlike our fallen nature that views God's rules as "foolishness"). I think that would be described as "liberty",

Hey, I'm not saying any of your incorrect. I was just saying that there are different definitions and "free will" and that the confession, as far as I know, doesn't define their use of "free will" and therefore they may not mean LIBERTARIAN Free Will. .... was Eve "at liberty" to eat the fruit? I would say she ate it because she desired it. But, where did she get her desires from ... your will cannot determine/change your desires.

Libertarian Free Will - Libertarian Free Will is the ability to make choices without any prior prejudice, inclination, or disposition. For the will to be free it must act from a posture of neutrality, with absolutely no bias. It determines its own volitions; so as not to be dependent, in its determinations, on any cause without itself, nor determined by anything prior to its own acts. Indifference and therefore amorality belongs to Liberty in their notion of it, or that the mind, previous to the act of volition, be in equilibrio (equilibrium in uncertainty).
Libertarian Free Will is amoral. Why would God cast blame for a decision that is amoral (being neither moral nor immoral)

pitting God's most cunning creation against God's most naive creation is a bit like a boxing match between 5 year old me and Mohammad Ali at his peak.

... definitely true in our current state .... unless the Holy Spirit in us takes the field, then the 5 year old conquers Mohammad Ali.... though in our current state the Holy Spirit doesn't often decide to take the field .... Job won that battle though ... I assume Paul would ... poor Peter lost and denied 3 times ... I am sure I am pummeled.... on the other hand you have 1 Corinthians 10:13 ..... changed my mind .... God determines who wins when 5 yr old fights Mohammad Ali but admittedly, God usually has Mohammad Ali to win ..... once we're glorified the 5yr old always pummels Mohammad Ali. *giggle*

So in general, I am pretty sure the Confession means Libertine Free Will when it says "liberty of their own will". The next section will likely make it clear that WE have a FALLEN NATURE (... but that is another chapter).

Cool ... interesting discussion. When we go to heaven I would rather defend your position ... the "free will position is even more easily defended than yours but falls apart with logic and scripture
... maybe with Christ as our mediator it won't be a blood bath

 

[GodsGrace]

Paragraph 7 claims "those things which are necessary to be known, believed and observed for salvation" are so clear that the "unlearned" can understand them by "ordinary" means.

What does this actually mean? Can a natural man understand? Is the Holy Spirit part of "ordinary means" or not?

I think I replied to the above.
I don't think you answered.

 

[GodsGrace]

Paragraph 9 seems like good general advice ... when one scripture seems unclear on a matter (ie. can be read two different ways), look to another scripture that is more clear.

Are there verses that appear (beyond mere first glance) to actually contradict one another so it is impossible to determine which is more "clear"?

I can't think of one...can you?
Your method (normal hermeneutics) works just fine.

 

[GodsGrace]

Paragraph 10 is the battle cry "SOLA SCRIPTURA!" codified into the Confession.
Good for them. Scripture is the ONLY final authority ... no Scripture and Tradition and no Scripture and Magisterium.

It's scripture,
Tradition,
Magesterium


Here's my question as to why it cannot be Sola Scriptura....
Take OSAS
How can we know for sure which doctrine is correct?
Some Protestants (not calvinists) believe you can never forfeit your salvation, no matter what.
Some Protestants believe you can, but in differing ways.
Without getting into the differing ways...

If each camp can provide scripture to prove either case....
what to do next?

 

[GodsGrace]

Excellent Systemic evaluation of the Bible.


I agree with it. I would tweak the statement "The Holy Scripture is the only sufficient" to say "The Holy Scripture as originally written is the only sufficient" but that might be too technical for the masses.

Those masses, they're so dumb.

So let me ask you this:

You know of a copy of the ORIGINAL SCRIPTURES?
If so, I know a lot of scholars that would like to get their hands on them.

 

[GodsGrace]

That's an article of faith.

• "Yes it appears to be a contradiction and, no, I can't explain it away, but we KNOW that the Bible cannot contradict itself, so it must not really be a contradiction."

I feel exactly the same way, but I can laugh at myself and recognize when FAITH has trumped LOGIC.

There are some contradictions in the bible, but I can't think of one that has to do with faith.
They mostly have to do with dating of an event, mixing events, numbers, quantities, and that type of thing.
I don't even call it a mistake....
I doubt Jesus gave the Beatitudes all at one time as in Matthew...
maybe he just found it easier to write out what Jesus taught in that manner.

 

[GodsGrace]

1689 Baptist Confession of Faith (traditional)
1689 Baptist Confession of Faith (modern English)

Of God and the Holy Trinity​

Chapter 2​

---

Paragraph 1​

The Lord our God is but one only living and true God;1 whose subsistence is in and of Himself,2 infinite in being and perfection; whose essence cannot be comprehended by any but Himself;3 a most pure spirit,4 invisible, without body, parts, or passions, who only hath immortality, dwelling in the light which no man can approach unto;5 who is immutable,6 immense,7 eternal,8 incomprehensible, almighty,9 every way infinite, most holy,10 most wise, most free, most absolute; working all things according to the counsel of His own immutable and most righteous will,11 for His own glory;12 most loving, gracious, merciful, long-suffering, abundant in goodness and truth, forgiving iniquity, transgression, and sin; the rewarder of them that diligently seek Him,13 and withal most just and terrible in His judgments,14 hating all sin,15 and who will by no means clear the guilty.16

---

1 1 Cor. 8:4,6; Deut. 6:4
2 Jer. 10:10; Isa. 48:12
3 Exod. 3:14
4 John 4:24
5 1 Tim. 1:17; Deut. 4:15–16
6 Mal. 3:6
7 1 Kings 8:27; Jer. 23:23
8 Ps. 90:2
9 Gen. 17:1
10 Isa. 6:3
11 Ps. 115:3; Isa. 46:10
12 Prov. 16:4; Rom. 11:36
13 Exod. 34:6–7; Heb. 11:6
14 Neh. 9:32–33
15 Ps. 5:5–6
16 Exod. 34:7; Nahum 1:2–3

---

Paragraph 2​

God, having all life,17 glory,18 goodness,19 blessedness, in and of Himself, is alone in and unto Himself all-sufficient, not standing in need of any creature which He hath made, nor deriving any glory from them,20 but only manifesting His own glory in, by, unto, and upon them; He is the alone fountain of all being, of whom, through whom, and to whom are all things,21 and He hath most sovereign dominion over all creatures, to do by them, for them, or upon them, whatsoever Himself pleases;22 in His sight all things are open and manifest,23 His knowledge is infinite, infallible, and independent upon the creature, so as nothing is to Him contingent or uncertain;24 He is most holy in all His counsels, in all His works,25 and in all His commands; to Him is due from angels and men, whatsoever worship,26 service, or obedience, as creatures they owe unto the Creator, and whatever He is further pleased to require of them.

---

17 John 5:26
18 Ps. 148:13
19 Ps. 119:68
20 Job 22:2–3
21 Rom. 11:34-36
22 Dan. 4:25,34–35
23 Heb. 4:13
24 Ezek. 11:5; Acts 15:18
25 Ps. 145:17
26 Rev. 5:12-14

---

Paragraph 3​

In this divine and infinite Being there are three subsistences, the Father, the Word or Son, and Holy Spirit,27 of one substance, power, and eternity, each having the whole divine essence, yet the essence undivided:28 the Father is of none, neither begotten nor proceeding; the Son is eternally begotten of the Father;29 the Holy Spirit proceeding from the Father and the Son;30 all infinite, without beginning, therefore but one God, who is not to be divided in nature and being, but distinguished by several peculiar relative properties and personal relations; which doctrine of the Trinity is the foundation of all our communion with God, and comfortable dependence on Him.

---

27 1 John 5:7; Matt. 28:19; 2 Cor. 13:14
28 Exod. 3:14; John 14:11; I Cor. 8:6
29 John 1:14,18
30 John 15:26; Gal. 4:6

Chapter 2 in the morning.
Sorry I got here late and you have to go over this again.
Chapter 3 will be interesting...

 

[Fastfredy0]

You know of a copy of the ORIGINAL SCRIPTURES?
If so, I know a lot of scholars that would like to get their hands on them.

There's lots of "copies" (I think over 5000) of various portions of the scriptures.
There's an area of study called Textual Criticism. See https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jCfcxfoNP7k and https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w7OSUVnfhSo (Dr. Daniel B. Wallace)
Dead Sea scrolls supposedly an excellent find .., maybe only 100 years newer than originals (my guess from memory)

Aside: I'm suspicious you actually mean "the original scripture" rather than a "copy of the original scriptures ... but I will answer the question as asked.