Is this genuinely what you got from what I'd written or is this discounting what I'd written by exaggerating it to ridiculousness and thereby showing its implausibility?
When I wrote about God's working through sequential processes, I obviously didn't imply that God walked through the processes Himself - He causes man to walk through them. Take it as the converse of Rom 7:17 - perhaps Gal 2:20 - as not man, but Christ in man who effectively leads him to work out His commands.
You posted (my emp)
"When God works in man to will and to do of His good pleasure - He fulfills all the conditionals that we ought to have done by our own self natures but which we didn't and deserved condemnation for - such condemnation being averted by grace alone."
What I got from this is you essentially saying man is unable to keep the conditions so God has to fulfill them for man.
At least you acknowledge there are conditions for receiving God's gracefor His saving grace is NOT unconditional.
God does not fulfill the conditions for man. God gave conditions for man to keep and man is certainly able to keep them if he so chooses. It would make no sense for God to give conditions to man if man could not keep them. If God had to fulfill them for man then God would fulfill them for all men for God desires all men be saved, (1 Tim 2:4). But all men will not be saved (Mt 7:13) and, as you have it, those lost would lost due to God failing to fulfill those conditions in them.
ivdavid said:
Php 2:12 does not focus on what you have to work but rather in what manner you are to work it out - in trembling and fear - and why so? Because it is God who is effective in us to work out the good works that He has ordained us to walk in. There is no denying that we must work fully to completion the entire process of salvation commanded of us - but what causes us to work in the first place. Our flesh or Christ in us? If it's Christ in us - it is not based on conditionals, rather it is based on free unmerited grace.
The verse does not specify the works that are to be done but it does specify that YOU not God are to work them out your own self. When people work out their salvation when they obey God so God is working in them in the sense they are doing what God said to do. You admit yourself we are to work what has been commanded us and those that do obey God's commands then God through their obedience is working in them. Again, if Christ has to first cause one to be able to work, then those lost are lost due to Christ's failure to cause them to work. Your idea puts blame and culpability on God and that is why the bible does not teach man is unable so God hs to first cause man to work.
ivdavid said:
I think you might have missed this earlier
post.
God's permissive will? Personally, I don't differentiate between a perfect and a permissive will - it implies that this permissive will is not necessarily perfect and that I cannot accept. I'd say it is God's perfect will to permit whatever He permitted and He is just in doing so since He is not the cause of any permitted evil. But here, you talk about God's permissive will to permit man to do good - then what is His perfect will here - that man not walk in His statutes and not make himself a new heart and spirit? Eze 36:27 means exactly what it literalistically means. In fact, Eze 36:26 has come about as part of the new covenant purely because man couldn't keep the Eze 18:30 form of the old covenant. This validates what I've been saying - that God, out of unmerited grace, does in us what we ought to have done ourselves.
Then you have a contradiction between Eze 36:27 all all the many, many passages where God commanded Israel to keep His commands and statutes. It makes no sense for God to coomand man to obey Him if man were unable. Again, your idea puts God at fault for the lost for failing to cause them to walk in His commands, for failing to give them a new heart and spirit. You claim God caused / forced Israel to walk in His statutes, then how do you explain all the many, many times Israel disobeyed God? Did God fail in His causing /forcingthem to walk in His statutes?
You do not understand that God's permissive will is sometimes expressed as God actively doing something when in reality He only permits it. It's a type of Hebrew idiom found in bible language. Example:
Duet 28:68 "And the LORD shall bring thee into Egypt again with ships, by the way whereof I spake unto thee, Thou shalt see it no more again: and there ye shall be sold unto your enemies for bondmen and bondwomen, and no man shall buy [you]. "
How can they actively be sold if no man buys? The NKJV recognizes this idiom and renders the verse:
"And the LORD will take you back to Egypt in ships, by the way of which I said to you, 'You shall never see it again.' And there you shall be
offered for sale to your enemies as male and female slaves, but no one will buy
you."
The NKJV does not have them actively being sold be allowed or permitted to be offered for sale.
ivdavid said:
God's ways of dealing with man is clear. He commands man to do His commandments - man has the choice to obey or disobey - man always chooses to disobey because of sin in the flesh - man is hence guilty before the just God - God further commands man to repent and believe that he may be forgiven for his transgressions - man still rejects God because of the exceeding sinfulness of sin in the flesh - God now has sovereign authority to either justly pronounce judgement upon this transgressor or He could have mercy upon him - those He does not have mercy upon, He endures with longsuffering in order to manifest His glory (in wrath) to those He wills to have mercy and compassion upon - these vessels of mercy are regenerated with a new heart and renewed spirit to love and believe in God, are granted repentance, are led to confession and forgiven, are given the adoption as sons and daughters and are preserved through sanctification unto the assured salvation of their souls - these are still commanded to obey the will of God which they now are able to do willingly because of Christ in them solely effecting their good works - these are able to rejoice in the works and righteousness of God not by way of evading their own responsibility but by owning it and being set free by unmerited grace, all by unmerited grace itself.
Man is not 'totally depraved' where he always disobeys. The bible is full of examples of those that did choose to obey and the bible does not proffer their obedience by saying God had to first enable them before they could obey. Gen 4:7 God Himselfshows Cain had within himself the ability to choose to do well, God eve tells Cain to rule over sin which would make no sense if Cain was too depraved to do so.
Again your ideas put blame and culpability on God. Zech 12:1 says God forms the spirit within man and if God formed depraved spirits within all men then God is at fault for the wrong He forced man to do by putting a depraved spirit in man. Nothing says God had to force Namaan to go and dip or that Jesus had to force the blind man togo and wash his eyes. You assume that into the texts.
ivdavid said:
Which parts of this understanding of God's process do you have issues with?
Sequence of events do matter. Given the fall of mankind into sin, we NOW say that the only way to obey God is solely by His unmerited grace working in us. But this wasn't the only option given to man - God commanded him to refrain from sinning in the first place - but sin did enter the world and this was in no way caused by God. God is now not obligated to save anyone by His unmerited grace - if all mankind were to be judged unto condemnation tomorrow, God would still be just. But that He chooses to redeem a people for Himself is by way of grace which is not at all obligatory to all or anyone.
Hence, man is not condemned for the lack of God's grace but for the sins he himself has committed. He is acquitted because of sovereign grace but condemned because of his own sins - much like the murderer who is shown mercy by a sovereign king for the transgressions he himself had committed.
The reason sovereign election is stressed upon, is to uphold 1Cor 1:29 and Gal 2:21 amongst various other such teachings.
Again, no verse says God works in man independently of man obeying God's word. God works in those that have chosen to obey His word. The bible does not teachthat God just randomlychose certain peole to work in and the rest are left to be lost. AGAIN that idea puts blame and culpability on God.
You say man is condemned for the sin he commits himself. Earlier you said man would always choose to disobey God id God did not cause man to obey. Againif God created man so depraved where is is unable to obey that would be God's fault. Your ideas put blame abd culpability on God and should therefore be rejected.
