• **Notifications**: Notifications can be dismissed by clicking on the "x" on the righthand side of the notice.
  • **New Style**: You can now change style options. Click on the paintbrush at the bottom of this page.
  • **Donations**: If the Lord leads you please consider helping with monthly costs and up keep on our Forum. Click on the Donate link In the top menu bar. Thanks
  • **New Blog section**: There is now a blog section. Check it out near the Private Debates forum or click on the Blog link in the top menu bar.
  • Welcome Visitors! Join us and be blessed while fellowshipping and celebrating our Glorious Salvation In Christ Jesus.

Theology Question For Calvinist/Reformed Members

My answer to the first question is, "God created all people for the purpose of election but all disobeyed God, so it was from the self-rendered dead-in-sin from which the elect were chosen." In other words, the elect were chosen, not created separately. It's a common misconception about Reformed theology, and Calvinism more specifically. It is akin to the misguided notion God made some solely for destruction and others solely for salvation when the facts of scripture are that all were originally made good and sinless but all became not-good and sinful. All of the good and sinless could have partaken from the tree of life. None of the not-good and sinful can..... apart from God's grace. The monergist parts ways with the synergist here by believing the 1) the choice was made in eternity, not time, 2) the choice was made without considering the merits of the sinfully dead being saved from the sinfully dead state.
This presents a question I need answered so that I know from what position you are coming from when it comes to all people being created by God. Do you believe that each individual is a direct creation of God? Or do you believe that God only created the natural method of human propagation, but does not directly create each person?
 
But if you believe Adam's sin was imputed to all human individuals, couldn't I use the same sort of logic to say, "Since God imputed sin to all individual humans, and they are, as a result, sinners, then it was from God's choosing alone, and the fact that they are also self-rendered sinners is irrelevant to when and how he chose them?
No, and it is not "the same logic" at all.

Scripture is clear all have sinned and fallen short of God's glory (Isa. 53:6, Rom. 3:23) and through the one man's disobedience sin and death have come to all because all sinned (Rom. 5:12). Scripture does not place the causality on God or imputation. Adam is assigned causality, and he is assigned causality even though Eve was the first sinner! The best we could say in regards to divine causality is the structure of creation is that if a person disobeys God they then die (Gen. 2:17). What God specifically stated was "if you eat.... you will surely die," but we know from Romans five it was not that the forbidden kiwi was poisonous; it was due to the act of disobedience.

It is a design metric.

Automobile manufacturers design cars and trucks to run a certain way with certain maintenance aspects and certain prohibitions, all of which are specified by the manufacturer. For example, most cars in the US are made so they can run on 87 octane that is no more than 10% ethanol. Some cars are permitted to run with 15% ethanol. Most cars CAN run with 15% ethanol but long-term use of that much ethanol will eventually damage the motor. Alternatively, it is possible (although more financially costly) to run the auto on straight gasoline with zero ethanol, and premium gasoline usually comes with additives prolonging the life of the engine. So there are options. In this case there are several options. A person can choose, A, B, C, or D but choosing the option of poor gasoline will result in damage to the motor. The manufacturer did not cause the damage, but the manufacturer did "cause" the conditions by which that damage would occur of more effective, healthier options were not chosen. The cause of any such damage lays squarely with the one who does not follow the manufacturers original design specification and maintenance recommendations.

You can eat the fruit from any of the trees but one.

Hey! Let's go eat the fruit of that one tree from which God told us not to eat and see if what He told us would happen will happen.

The manufacturer did not impute the damage; it is a simple cause-and-effect relationship between design specifications and recommended compliance. The same sort of analogy can be made with the human diet. Eating healthy provides better quality and quantity of life (generally) and while it is possible to eat all the chocolate and drink all the soda one desires, that diet will have adverse effect. Likewise, arsenic and antifreeze CAN be ingested, but doing so is fatal. Manufacturer's design specifications. You're free to choose but you are not free to choose absent consequences.

Disobedience brings death, not God.

I believe this is what Paul is referring to when he mentions "the law of sin and death" (Rom. 8:2). Simply put, if you sin then you die.
I'm just not sure how the fact that they are self-rendered sinners means that God didn't create anyone specifically for one end of the other.
Ford Motor Company does not make cars that do not run.

They make cars that run. They also make cars that run and can be rendered unrunnable. Perhaps a better analogy would be that of an automobile collision. I recently had a car I owned totaled. The manufacturer made a fine vehicle; it was a good vehicle without defect, and it ran well. Due to a collision, the car needed repair. My insurance company decided it would be more cost effective to consider the car totaled and write me a check that I could then use as I choose, in my case to purchase another car. The insurance company could also have chosen to repair the car. The insurance company does this all day long every day. For all of the many, many, many cars damaged on any given day, the insurance company decides which ones to repair and which ones not to repair. This is an imperfect analogy, of course, because the sinfully dead disobedient do not get paid a profit for their disobedience. They suffer loss.
 
There is a lot of Scripture that seems to me to show God as VERY particular whom he creates for what uses.
I agree.

That does not mean what those verses state, or the concepts they imply, apply in all circumstances. Imo, one of the errors in the soteriological debate is that of the false dichotomy. People are only either X or only Y, and X and Y are discretely defined. Perhaps a better understanding is there are Xs and Ys but there is a lot of diversity within each category. Pharoah, for example would be an example of an individual who was a sinner - as are all humans - but his life was uniquely determined to have specific purpose and outcomes... on the "more sinful" side of the equation. Judas would be another example of the "more" sinful side. Moses and Saul of Tarsus would be examples of the "more grace" side of the equation. Jacob and Esau the same. That does not mean God hates all X people in the same way or the same degree before they are born, or that He loves all Y people in the same identical way or to the same degree before they are born. Most of us are not going to have our lives recorded in the history of the world as notable persons. Jacob and Esau, Moses and Pharoah, Paul and Saul (he was his own worst enemy ;)) are the exceptions to the rule, not the rule. God knows the plans He has for each of us, but we're not all world-changing people. To use another analogy, most of us are sheep, not shepherds and one of the biggest problems we have is mistakenly thinking we're shepherds when we're not.

Jacob, Moses, and Saul/Paul are examples of specific individuals prepared by God from birth to be who they were and do what they did and there isn't much, if any, evidence someone else could have taken their place. This is more obvious on the other side of the equation. When the 400 years of Hebrew enslavement was up the pharaoh at that time was gonna pay and suffer. He did not have any option.
And it is ultimately logical.
That is true as long as overgeneralizations, false dichotomies, false causes, and other fallacies are avoided. Logical fallacies are never logical ;).
He didn't look down to corridors of time to see that anyone would become sinful, in order to pick from the group.
I completely agree and nothing I have posted should be construed to say otherwise.
Nor did he wait to see if Adam would sin.
I completely agree and nothing I have posted should be construed to say otherwise.
I think he made each individual specifically for every use that he had in mind for them, to include their final end.
That is not much of a god.

Any god with creative faculties can make action figures that do only what they are made to do. Comparatviely speaking a God that can make a creation full of unrealized dialectics inhabited with creatures of various volitional agency AND still have His purpose accomplished is a much, much bigger, better, greater, smarter, wiser, mighty, capable God than the god of little green army or Kens and Barbies. The latter god would not correctly be called a God and s/he/it would certainly not be the God of the Bible.
I can't even imagine him picking some randomly from a group of possibles.
False dichotomy. The options are not randomness or strict determinism. Might also be a red herring or a straw man because no one argues God is "random." Strict determinism would also be an outlier view of Calvinism, not the representative view. Remember: fallacy is never logical.
  • Is God's choosing of the elect for His glory?

Agreed. God's choosing of Jacob over Esau was also to demonstrate the riches of his glory, and that, before the twins had done anything good or bad.
It is pleasing when siblings dwell together in unity ;).
I don't see how this answers the question of whether or not they are created for Christ.
False dichotomy. I did not say it answered that question. The matter of God's glory is irrelevant to who, why, how one is created in/for Christ because all people glorify God.
To me there is no escaping the simple logic: If God is First Cause, he created them.
Yep.
He did not at some later point decide to whom of those he created to show mercy.
The problem here it the anthropomorphizing of time. There is no "before," "after" or "later point" in eternity. If you and I found ourselves lost in the woods we'd have no way of knowing which way to go without a reference point and a destination or goal to be reached. We could determine east, west, north, and south by observing the rise of the sun, but if we had a compass that would be better and provide more accurate information, but we'd still need a destination. The sun and the magnetic pole are design specs. So too are the valleys and mountains, streams, rivers, lakes, etc. The woods is mostly a two-dimensional environment but the mountains and valleys, etc. do provide some degree of "up and down."

Conversely, if we awoke floating in outer space then east, west, north, and south would be meaningless. So too would sideways, up, and down. Again, we would need a point of reference in order to move with any purpose and objective. In both these cases (the woods and outer space) the point of reference exists external to us. We are not our own reference point. Thinking we are is hugely erroneous. Keep in mind this is still a three-dimensional environment.

We must add three things for this analogy to be relevant to God. The first addition is the addition of time and ten other dimensions. The second addition is God's external existence. The last addition is His being His own objective reference point.

There is no "later point" for an externally existing Creator of a 10 or 11 dimensional creation and it is profound hubris for a creature living solely within a very limited four-dimensional part of that creation to think his experience is representative of the Creator.

There is nothing logical about that.


So....

While I believe I understand your concerns, I hope you now see there are some flaws in it. Imputation, false causes, false dichotomies, strict determinism, randomness, linear temporal limits, and whatever else I cited all need to be corrected and even if I got some of my appraisal of your concerns wrong, I did not get all of it wrong.
 
I've believe that God defines what is GOOD. So, if He tells Israel to kill everyone including babies then that is good. Now, if someone said the Israel should go into Gaza and kill all the babies I would say that is not good ... unless I knew God told them to do so.
I do have one question ... do you know of a place in the Bible that says God is not the Author of Evil? ... and, what is the definition of "The Author of Evil"?
Right. God's definition of righteousness and justice is not different from ours----it is greater than ours. We only see in part----He sees all and is all and is in all.

As to scripture stating that God is not the author of evil, He cannot be its author as there is no evil in Him. He cannot be both wholly good and also some evil. He does not make people do evil things and then punish them for it. The evil they do is the evil they want to do. Evil is simply the absence of good.
 
The evil they do is the evil they want to do.
Agreed. But what determines what they want to do? One does what one will desires if possible, but one does not create one's will just like one does not create one's body.
Evil is simply the absence of good.
Agreed. Evil is not a thing; rather, the lack of a thing needed to be righteous.

He does not make people do evil things and then punish them for it.
Hmmm, I'll let the subject drop ... :)
 
No, and it is not "the same logic" at all.

Scripture is clear all have sinned and fallen short of God's glory (Isa. 53:6, Rom. 3:23) and through the one man's disobedience sin and death have come to all because all sinned (Rom. 5:12). Scripture does not place the causality on God or imputation. Adam is assigned causality, and he is assigned causality even though Eve was the first sinner! The best we could say in regards to divine causality is the structure of creation is that if a person disobeys God they then die (Gen. 2:17). What God specifically stated was "if you eat.... you will surely die," but we know from Romans five it was not that the forbidden kiwi was poisonous; it was due to the act of disobedience.

It is a design metric.

Automobile manufacturers design cars and trucks to run a certain way with certain maintenance aspects and certain prohibitions, all of which are specified by the manufacturer. For example, most cars in the US are made so they can run on 87 octane that is no more than 10% ethanol. Some cars are permitted to run with 15% ethanol. Most cars CAN run with 15% ethanol but long-term use of that much ethanol will eventually damage the motor. Alternatively, it is possible (although more financially costly) to run the auto on straight gasoline with zero ethanol, and premium gasoline usually comes with additives prolonging the life of the engine. So there are options. In this case there are several options. A person can choose, A, B, C, or D but choosing the option of poor gasoline will result in damage to the motor. The manufacturer did not cause the damage, but the manufacturer did "cause" the conditions by which that damage would occur of more effective, healthier options were not chosen. The cause of any such damage lays squarely with the one who does not follow the manufacturers original design specification and maintenance recommendations.

You can eat the fruit from any of the trees but one.
Hey! Let's go eat the fruit of that one tree from which God told us not to eat and see if what He told us would happen will happen.

The manufacturer did not impute the damage; it is a simple cause-and-effect relationship between design specifications and recommended compliance. The same sort of analogy can be made with the human diet. Eating healthy provides better quality and quantity of life (generally) and while it is possible to eat all the chocolate and drink all the soda one desires, that diet will have adverse effect. Likewise, arsenic and antifreeze CAN be ingested, but doing so is fatal. Manufacturer's design specifications. You're free to choose but you are not free to choose absent consequences.

Disobedience brings death, not God.

I believe this is what Paul is referring to when he mentions "the law of sin and death" (Rom. 8:2). Simply put, if you sin then you die.

Ford Motor Company does not make cars that do not run.

They make cars that run. They also make cars that run and can be rendered unrunnable. Perhaps a better analogy would be that of an automobile collision. I recently had a car I owned totaled. The manufacturer made a fine vehicle; it was a good vehicle without defect, and it ran well. Due to a collision, the car needed repair. My insurance company decided it would be more cost effective to consider the car totaled and write me a check that I could then use as I choose, in my case to purchase another car. The insurance company could also have chosen to repair the car. The insurance company does this all day long every day. For all of the many, many, many cars damaged on any given day, the insurance company decides which ones to repair and which ones not to repair. This is an imperfect analogy, of course, because the sinfully dead disobedient do not get paid a profit for their disobedience. They suffer loss.
All of the analogies fall short of answering the question, even though there may be elements of truth in them. But ultimately we are not talking about men but God who is other than man completely. And the question to be answered is did God create the elect for Christ or were they chosen from a pool of reprobates over time.

And while it is true that they are reprobates as they are born in Adam, only reprobates need redeeming, so Christ only redeems reprobates, it is my contention that the elect were created as reprobates (being born in Adam) they were created for the specific purpose of being given to the Son as His inheritance and bride.

And if this is true, then we must look at the hard issue of the other side. That those not redeemed were also created for the purpose of not being redeemed. Does this make God the author of their sin? Does this remove their responsibility for their sin? ANd the answer is no. Why? Because they are born in Adam and Adam made that decision of who the man of the earth would be. As a result---they do sin and they sin because they want to.

So then why did God create them? ANd here I agree with you completely because the Bible specifically tells us so. For His glory. (Ps 2; Ps 37; Prov 16:4; Romans 14:11; Philippians 2:8-11; Romans 9:19-24) It is all about God, not us. Even His creating in Christ a new creation, not in Adam but in Him, man as incorruptible and immortal, is about Him and what He is doing.
 
Don't the two things contradict each other at many places? ;)
I've got it figured out 😉

If there is one Contradiction in the Bible, Compatibalism can't be true even once. If Compatibalism can be true once, it can be true more times than you think it is...
 
Last edited:
I don't dispute anything you have said, but it is not really the thrust of the OP. Which relates to after the fall of man and the elect being created specifically for the purpose of belonging to Christ.
Clarify it for me.
 
All of the analogies fall short of answering the question, even though there may be elements of truth in them. But ultimately we are not talking about men but God who is other than man completely. And the question to be answered is did God create the elect for Christ or were they chosen from a pool of reprobates over time.

And while it is true that they are reprobates as they are born in Adam, only reprobates need redeeming, so Christ only redeems reprobates, it is my contention that the elect were created as reprobates (being born in Adam) they were created for the specific purpose of being given to the Son as His inheritance and bride.

And if this is true, then we must look at the hard issue of the other side. That those not redeemed were also created for the purpose of not being redeemed. Does this make God the author of their sin? Does this remove their responsibility for their sin? ANd the answer is no. Why? Because they are born in Adam and Adam made that decision of who the man of the earth would be. As a result---they do sin and they sin because they want to.

So then why did God create them? ANd here I agree with you completely because the Bible specifically tells us so. For His glory. (Ps 2; Ps 37; Prov 16:4; Romans 14:11; Philippians 2:8-11; Romans 9:19-24) It is all about God, not us. Even His creating in Christ a new creation, not in Adam but in Him, man as incorruptible and immortal, is about Him and what He is doing.
You broach the topics of Paternal Traducianism and Creationism. Does God Create each individual Soul separately one at a time at Conception, or is every Soul Procreated by Mankind through Adam?
 
Last edited:
Do you believe that each individual is a direct creation of God?
Yes.
Or do you believe that God only created the natural method of human propagation, but does not directly create each person?
Yes. 😁

The two are not mutually exclusive conditions. Two human zygotes can combine to procreate a human child AND God can "knit" that person together in the child's mother's womb. All humans are made in God's image but not all humans bear God's imagine identically. I would venture to say God's image is born individually and uniquely in each person. However, that image is not the same image as that in which those created in Christ possess. Those in Christ bear God's image twice, once as God first made us and then again as we are created in Christ.

Both conditions were decided in eternity (selection), but the former occurs temporally during physical procreation, or the birth due to the will and flesh of humans, while the second occurs temporally as an effect of our conversion from death to life in Christ (the right to sonship and daughtership by the will of God, not the blood or will of the flesh (Jn. 1).
 
I've got it figured out 😉

If there is one Contradiction, Compatibalism can't be true even once. If Compatibalism can be true once, it can be true more times than you think it is...
Contrariety ~ by ReverendRV * Februray 24

Proverbs 26:4-5 KJV
; Answer not a fool according to his folly, lest thou also be like unto him. ~ Answer a fool according to his folly, lest he be wise in his own conceit.

Which is it?? If a person gives an answer to a fool and honors verse 5, he is contrary to verse 4. If a person does not give a fool an answer and honors verse 4, he is contrary to verse 5. What a Contradiction! Contradictions are one of the reasons people choose to not believe in the Bible. But the Bible claims to be Inerrant, and Christians teach there are no Contradictions in the Bible. You interject, “No Contradictions in the Bible?? It is full of Contradictions and your verses are a prime example; back to back, each Contradicting the other. The Bible violates the Law of Non-Contradiction!” ~ We accept the Law of Non-Contradiction; we just assert that this Law is not broken by any verse in the Bible. Philosophically speaking, our example isn’t a Contradiction but is a Contrariety. A Contrariety is anything contrary or of opposite character; a contrary fact or statement. Being Contrary isn’t the same as being a Contradiction. In our Mind, being Contrary has negative, rebellious connotations. ~ Northern magnetic poles are both Contrary and alike…

But you ask, “What makes the claims in the Bible 'facts’?” ~ One of the best ways to show that the Bible is indeed factual is through the Dead Sea Scrolls. They are ancient copies of the Bible, found in some caves in Israel. There are two whole copies of the Book of Isaiah and one of them can be dated back to over two hundred years before the time of Christ. Because of this, we can read them and see they are essentially the same as the material we have now. But the crucial point is that the Book of Isaiah is full of prophesies of the coming of Jesus Christ! Since we have dated the material to pre-exist the time of Jesus, we can see that the Old Testament was not amended at a later date to picture him. When we read Isaiah 53, we could almost think we are reading the New Testament. ~ This chapter is just the tip of the Iceberg of examples for Jesus…

There are no Contradictions in the Bible. If it seems so, they’re either a Contrariety, Antimony or a Paradox. Because of this, we can know that Sin entered into the world through one man and Death through Sin. The wages of Sins such as Lying, Stealing, Adultery and Godlessness is Death; even an eternal Death in Hell. ~ But God so Loved the world, he sent his only Son to live a Holy, perfect Life. Jesus is this Son of God and because of his Righteous Life’s record, God was pleased with him. Jesus Willingly went to the Cross to die in the place of born again Sinner; spilling his blood as an acceptable sacrifice. He arose from the grave, was seen alive by 500 people, then ascended to his throne in Heaven as God. When you put your Faith in Jesus Christ as your Lord and Savior, you will be Forgiven and Saved; receiving the perfect record that he earned. We are Saved by God’s Grace through Faith, without Works; Repent and believe! ~ Find an Evangelical Church and give up your foolishness. Otherwise, there comes a time when the Holy Spirit will no longer strive with a Fool. God will honor the Proverb to no longer answer a Fool in his folly…

Isaiah 9:6 KJV: For unto us a child is born, unto us a son is given: and the government shall be upon his shoulder: and his name shall be called Wonderful, Counselor, The mighty God, The everlasting Father, The Prince of Peace.
 
we are not talking about men but God who is other than man completely.
Which is what I said in different words.
And the question to be answered is did God create the elect for Christ or were they chosen from a pool of reprobates over time.
All people are created. The elect are chosen from that population. This is somewhat different than the WCF, but I believe it still consistent with classic Reformed soteriology.
And while it is true that they are reprobates as they are born in Adam, only reprobates need redeeming, so Christ only redeems reprobates, it is my contention that the elect were created as reprobates (being born in Adam) they were created for the specific purpose of being given to the Son as His inheritance and bride.
That is certainly a view held by some Cals. What did Calvin teach? Have you consulted his commentaries addressing the matter of election? Can you think of a verse stating the elect are created as the elect? Can you think of a verse stating the elect are chosen?
And if this is true, then we must look at the hard issue of the other side. That those not redeemed were also created for the purpose of not being redeemed. Does this make God the author of their sin? Does this remove their responsibility for their sin? And the answer is no. Why? Because they are born in Adam and Adam made that decision of who the man of the earth would be. As a result---they do sin and they sin because they want to.
I believe I have also answered and addressed all those concerns, if not here than in many threads elsewhere. The WCF is very clear, decisive, and unequivocally so: God is not the author of sin, God did not decree anything because He foresaw it in the future, and God foreordained the elect AND all the means by which they would be the elect having fallen into the state of sin. They "are redeemed by Christ, are effectually called unto faith in Christ by His Spirit working in due season..."
So then why did God create them?
They are created for His glory. It's simply not the same means or the same glory.
And here I agree with you completely because the Bible specifically tells us so. For His glory. (Ps 2; Ps 37; Prov 16:4; Romans 14:11; Philippians 2:8-11; Romans 9:19-24) It is all about God, not us. Even His creating in Christ a new creation, not in Adam but in Him, man as incorruptible and immortal, is about Him and what He is doing.
Then that part can be removed from the list of outstanding concerns ;).
 
Agreed. But what determines what they want to do? One does what one will desires if possible, but one does not create one's will just like one does not create one's body.
In Adam we are sinners who sin.
 
All people are created. The elect are chosen from that population. This is somewhat different than the WCF, but I believe it still consistent with classic Reformed soteriology.
So God decided something after He created them instead of before He created them?
That is certainly a view held by some Cals. What did Calvin teach? Have you consulted his commentaries addressing the matter of election? Can you think of a verse stating the elect are created as the elect? Can you think of a verse stating the elect are chosen?
No. That is why I asked. I don't know that it is the Calvinist position or not and am not attempting to align my beliefs with those of Calvin. My OP has nothing to do with Calvin. I only ask it of Calvinist/Reformed because they are the ones who adopt election and predestination of the individual.
I believe I have also answered and addressed all those concerns, if not here than in many threads elsewhere. The WCF is very clear, decisive, and unequivocally so: God is not the author of sin, God did not decree anything because He foresaw it in the future, and God foreordained the elect AND all the means by which they would be the elect having fallen into the state of sin. They "are redeemed by Christ, are effectually called unto faith in Christ by His Spirit working in due season..."
Well that section of my post was not asking you to address that question----I was addressing it. And though I agree pretty much with the WCF that is not where I primarily get my information, and if I do, a verify it with scripture. I do not treat the WCF as my authority over what I believe.
 
Yes.

Yes. 😁

The two are not mutually exclusive conditions. Two human zygotes can combine to procreate a human child AND God can "knit" that person together in the child's mother's womb. All humans are made in God's image but not all humans bear God's imagine identically. I would venture to say God's image is born individually and uniquely in each person. However, that image is not the same image as that in which those created in Christ possess. Those in Christ bear God's image twice, once as God first made us and then again as we are created in Christ.

Both conditions were decided in eternity (selection), but the former occurs temporally during physical procreation, or the birth due to the will and flesh of humans, while the second occurs temporally as an effect of our conversion from death to life in Christ (the right to sonship and daughtership by the will of God, not the blood or will of the flesh (Jn. 1).
They are mutually exclusive theologically. You have God and man being co-creators of an individual human life. And then you jump to being born in Christ which has nothing to do with the question I asked. Also, I am not talking about our being created in the image and likeness of God. I am only talking about being created by God. But all men are equally created in the image and likeness of God. That is why all men are responsible to God to bear that image and likeness. Does He create each person as being unique, having differing talents and temperaments, shape and size and appearance, likes and dislikes, modes of though processes etc. Of course. But they are all made in His image and likeness, meaning they are similar to Him in many ways, and exactly like Him in no way.
 
You broach the topics of Paternal Traducianism and Creationism. Does God Create each individual Soul separately one at a time at Conception, or is every Soul Procreated by Mankind through Adam?
I am not sure. I would have to think about it. To answer would require an exact definition of the soul I would think, so that the answer matched the actual meaning of the question. I do believe that the soul and body are equally us, even though they are distinct. It is just that the body cannot live if there is no life and since it also cannot live if there is no soul (the soul is said to leave the body) then are life and soul the same thing? The soul can and does live without the body according to the Bible and my understanding of it.

So off the top of my head, I would venture to say that each soul is created and not procreated, but that soul is created in a fallen creature----Adam, and by extension all----and the progeny takes on the nature of the progenitor.
 
Clarify it for me.
I do not know how I can make it any clearer than the statement/question itself. What is it you are looking for?
 
I've got it figured out 😉

If there is one Contradiction in the Bible, Compatibalism can't be true even once. If Compatibalism can be true once, it can be true more times than you think it is...
OK. Agreed. I need an example.
 
I am not sure. I would have to think about it. To answer would require an exact definition of the soul I would think, so that the answer matched the actual meaning of the question. I do believe that the soul and body are equally us, even though they are distinct. It is just that the body cannot live if there is no life and since it also cannot live if there is no soul (the soul is said to leave the body) then are life and soul the same thing? The soul can and does live without the body according to the Bible and my understanding of it.

So off the top of my head, I would venture to say that each soul is created and not procreated, but that soul is created in a fallen creature----Adam, and by extension all----and the progeny takes on the nature of the progenitor.
Where do you see the spirit of man fitting in, as in "dividing between soul and spirit "(Heb 4:12)?

Gotta' a quick reference for the soul living after the body?
 
I am not sure. I would have to think about it. To answer would require an exact definition of the soul I would think, so that the answer matched the actual meaning of the question. I do believe that the soul and body are equally us, even though they are distinct. It is just that the body cannot live if there is no life and since it also cannot live if there is no soul (the soul is said to leave the body) then are life and soul the same thing? The soul can and does live without the body according to the Bible and my understanding of it.

So off the top of my head, I would venture to say that each soul is created and not procreated, but that soul is created in a fallen creature----Adam, and by extension all----and the progeny takes on the nature of the progenitor.
I think the Soul and spirit are synonymous. These days I believe the Soul is procreated. Ken Hamrick used to talk about "Real Participation", and used the Verse saying Levi paid Tithes while in Abraham's loins; to show our real participation in our forefathers Works. I am not full-in with this, but it has a leg to stand on. The Soul is procreated Fallen, IE Original Sin; not Created Fallen...
 
Back
Top