Why does the natural person reject the preaching of the cross as foolishness?

[SoteriologyA1]

@Josheb,
Appreciate the thorough response—especially the points on Christ’s impeccability and the necessity of correct Christology for a correct soteriology. Definitely agree that sin is not a "thing" in itself but an absence of righteousness, and that it corrupts beyond just moral inclination, affecting the whole person—spiritually, cognitively, and even physically.

That said, I’d be curious to hear your thoughts on this: If post-Fall humanity is physically corrupted "cellularly" in a way that affects thought, reason, and will, then how does responsibility work?

• If man after Adam "cannot" think rightly due to a natural faculty difference, wouldn’t that suggest a faculty-based inability, not just a moral one?
• If sin’s corruption includes an unavoidable cognitive distortion, then in what way can fallen man be blameworthy for failing to think and act rightly when that very ability has been affected by design?

This isn’t an argument against Total Depravity, but rather a clarification—how do you balance the idea that man is truly responsible for rejecting God if his natural faculties (not just his will) have been sovereignly corrupted before he ever makes a choice?

 

[Josheb]

If post-Fall humanity is physically corrupted "cellularly" in a way that affects thought, reason, and will, then how does responsibility work?

Whether corrupted by one man's disobedience or not, whether so corrupted such that death will come to all men because all men will sin (is that not the implication of Romans 5?), the fact remains that every single individual will fail to live up to God's glory AND fail to live up to and by his or her own standards. Even if God were to measure every human by some standard specific to every single individual all would still fail.

Romans 2:14-16
For when Gentiles who do not have the Law do instinctively the things of the Law, these, not having the Law, are a law to themselves, in that they show the work of the Law written in their hearts, their conscience bearing witness and their thoughts alternately accusing or else defending them, on the day when, according to my gospel, God will judge the secrets of men through Christ Jesus.

The standards of God are written into creation. You know that gravity exists. It is a "law" of creation. It cannot be escaped. While it is true that gravity on earth is different than that of the moon or Mars and, floating in space, an object as small as a human appears affected by gravity very little but remove an object as large as Jupiter from this solar system and observe what happens to the other seven planets . Do that next to a black hole and see what happens. Likewise, the magnetics of this planet are part of the design features of the earth, part of Genesis 1:1. Birds and butterflies(circum-)navigate the globe knowledgeable of this field to which humans are largely oblivious but, again, cannot escape. The same is true of morality, although few theologians ever consider the matter that way. When the history of humanity is surveyed three absolutes (atheists prefer to call them universals because they do not believe in absolutes ) become apparent:

1. Humans are social
2. Humans are moral
3. Humans are spiritual

In the entire history of humanity (at least as far back as we can go) there is zero evidence of a hermit culture. Hermits are the extreme, not the statistical or normative norm. Psychologically, humans literally go nuts if left in isolation and it does not take long for that to happen. Those with the means to do so often commit suicide. The same applies to morality. There is no amoral culture. Humans always and everywhere codified conduct and, while there is some degree of diversity, they codify conduct along the exact same lines. It proves the same with spirituality. There are no atheist cultures in human history. Humans ALWAYS worship something or someone larger than themselves. It might be a tree or a rock instead of a deity to ten, but humans are inescapably spiritual.

So, we see the design aspects of creation are written into humanity in diverse ways. We cannot escape them. We try, but we abjectly fail. And it would be that way even if the Bible were never written for us to understand it from God's perspective.

I will also suggest that instead of the word "responsible," what you mean is "culpable." When humans act responsibly there is never need for accountability. Being accountable is matter of knowing who is culpable and how. From the perspective of the Bible (and classic, orthodox Christianity) humans caused sin to enter the world (not God, and not Satan). Not only did one human cause sin to enter the world, but humans have been constantly busy maintaining its presence. Every single one of us is culpable for that. The responsibility is ours alone and every individual who has ever lived will called to account for his/her portion of the ongoing corruption of God's creation.

Ignorance is not an excuse.

Just today an agent from the state department of taxation dropped by my place of business. I wasn't there so, after retrieving the contact information, I called and spoke to another agent who explained to me the requirements of the law and the expectations for my (business') conduct. I am energetically willing to do what is right and will gladly provide what I owe AND make amends. I'd like not to have to pay any penalty but it's likely I will. I am responsible even though I had no idea there were laws pertaining to my lapse. Blessedly, by the grace of God , I found this out when I did because the expense is not much, and I can easily afford the tax(es) and whatever penalty ensues. That is not true of sin. The wages of sin is death and ignorance of the law is no more and excuse than ignorance of the gospel. It is by grace that we are saved.

Romans 9:18-22
So then He has mercy on whom He desires, and He hardens whom He desires. You will say to me then, "Why does He still find fault? For who resists His will?" On the contrary, who are you, O man, who answers back to God? The thing molded will not say to the molder, "Why did you make me like this," will it? Or does not the potter have a right over the clay, to make from the same lump one vessel for honorable use and another for common use? What if God, although willing to demonstrate His wrath and to make His power known, endured with much patience vessels of wrath prepared for destruction?

Of course, Paul was writing specifically about the matter of Israel and the receipt of the gospel among Paul's kinsmen but the exact same principles apply today. The sinful clay can protest all it likes but it has no right, no authority, no power, no voice to do so..... except that which the Potter gives it. Paul took the rhetorical approach because the reality is the second anyone raises a fist to God, He says, "Into the fiery lake with you, fool! I let you draw breath and pump blood for a single lifetime when I could have spoken you out of existence before you were born," and the screeching screams of protest get muffled while one gulps fury and wrath - the results of sin. "I'm not responsible! I'm not responsible!"

It is utter nonsense.

It is a telltale sign of hubris, and hubris is sin.

 

[Josheb]

• If man after Adam "cannot" think rightly due to a natural faculty difference, wouldn’t that suggest a faculty-based inability, not just a moral one?

Absolutely. All Christendom agrees humans are incapable of saving themselves. That has never been a point of dispute. The points of dispute arise because we do not all agree on why that is the case, how it is we do get saved, and to what degree the sinful human contributes to his salvation. Even the Pelagian Provisionist reports there is a moment during which God has worked in the individual's life to correctly hear, understand, believe, and act on the gospel presentation. The Provisionist says there remains an ability to hear and it is the nature of the gospel to be heard, but the Provisionist does NOT preclude the agency of God in salvation. No sinner saves himself. He cannot do so.

Keep in mind we're talking about salvation.

Scripture diversely and repeatedly speaks about a human's ability to behave as a moral creature but it always does so in the context of works never being able to reach God. This is logically necessary so even if we did not have the Bible to tell us we would necessarily understand the finite can NEVER reach the Infinite. It is ALWAYS God who must do the work of reaching humans. Jesus once told a man "No one is good, except God alone," but God himself declared some "blameless." That is not the same as good, but it is a measure of difference from the vast majority of humanity.

Ten people died and found themselves standing before the pearly gates awaiting entrance into heaven. St. Peter came out and told the group to have a seat and in a brief while Jesus himself would come out and let them know who was going to enter. However, it seemed to those awaiting that the time was not brief and as the time endured, they began to talk among themselves, recounting the stories of each person's life. As they did so they measured each other against one another and as the last person was telling his story Jesus showed up. The goodest among those waiting walked up to Jesus and said, "Hello, Lord. We have been waiting a long time and during that time we have recounted to each other how we lived our lives and ranked ourselves accordingly. The first person in the line lived the best life and the one at the other end lived the worst of us by comparison. If you would simply tell us where the dividing line is we will then instantly know who gets into heaven and who does not, without further delay."

Jesus replied, "That is impressive, but you have made a huge mistake." "How so?" said the man and all other standing in line.

"All of you erred because you do not get compared to each other. You get compared to me, and all of you fail. Now, come, come join me at my table for I am about to hold a feast and in spite of yourselves all of you are invited. It is for moments like this that each of you were chosen."​

It is by grace that we are saved. It is not of ourselves so no one can boast. The only thing anyone brings to his salvation is the sin from which he is being saved. Every single human who has ever lived, lived only because God graciously saw fit not to eradicate humanity at Genesis 3:6-7. Every human who has ever drawn breath has done so solely because God saw fit to allow it when He could have ended the existence of humanity at any time. He flooded the planet and spared eight to prove that fact.

Isaiah 53:6
All of us like sheep have gone astray, each of us has turned to his own way; but the LORD has caused the iniquity of us all to fall on him.

I went astray of my own accord because I was corrupted by sin. Going astray, I turned to my own way, my own corrupt corrupted way. God di not make me do that. All have sinned and fall short of the glory of God AND those He has saved are justified as a gift by His grace through the redemption, which is in Christ Jesu, whom God displayed publicly as a [t]propitiation

By the grace of God we, having been responsible, accountable, and culpable for our own lack of righteousness, faithlessness, and disobedience..... have been saved by grace. He is responsible for our salvation! He is responsible for our salvation because being, responsible for our sin, we cannot be responsible for our salvation.

 

[Josheb]

.

• If sin’s corruption includes an unavoidable cognitive distortion, then in what way can fallen man be blameworthy for failing to think and act rightly when that very ability has been affected by design?

Because despite the corruption of their heart and minds they know the truth. Read Romans 1:18-32. That which is known about God is evident to all such that none are without excuse. Even though all know God, His power evident in creation, they neither honor or give thanks to Him. Not seeing fit to acknowledge Him God gave every single one of us over to a depraved mind and our lusts. Paul replicates what is recounted at the end of Gensis three.

If it is disobedience that you want, then I will give you over to it. By grace I will do so rather than end your life this minute. Enjoy yourselves.

It is apportioned to man to live once and then face judgment and every single human lives in the time, the locale, and the circumstance God decided. We do not have a life to prove whether or not we can do good. We have a life to prove we cannot do good sufficient for salvation. And when the blunt reality of that is realized the fiery lake will be a relief in comparison to an eternity cognizant of one's own futility and hubris. If God is going to be called despotic then let it be because He let us live, not because He saw fit to judge sin and save some.

Isaiah 29:16
You turn things around! Shall the potter be considered as equal with the clay, That what is made would say to its maker, "He did not make me"; Or what is formed say to him who formed it, "He has no understanding"?

It is the unavoidable cognitive distortion that is sin! God did not make the human mind to work that way. 1 Corinthians 15 explains much of this. God made humans corruptible, not corrupted. Gnesis 1:31 tells us everything God made in the first six days was very good. That was the last time a human was called good, btw. God made humans good. God made them naked and unashamed. He also made them sinless. The good, unashamed, sinless man that ate the forbidden kiwi in Genesis 3:6 instantly became not-good, ashamed, and sinful. As a consequence of that change, he hid.

John 3:19-20 NIV
This is the verdict: Light has come into the world, but people loved darkness instead of light because their deeds were evil. Everyone who does evil hates the light, and will not come into the light for fear that their deeds will be exposed.

Adam was "sown" corruptible, not corrupted. As 1 Corinthians 15 reports, we will be raised incorruptible and immortal - never again able to become corrupted and never again able to die. In other words, the end purpose of God concerning humanity was to create people made in His image who would be incorruptible. Sin happened and we went from being corruptible to be corrupted. That's not a problem for God because it did not disrupt His eternal plan and purpose one smidgen of an iota. Sin is, however, a huge problem form humans. Its wage is death, not eternal life.

So the inability to think rightly is a problem to be solved, but it is also merely a symptom of the larger problem. It's like having pain due to cancer. The pain can be treated but that will not cure the cause or stop the inevitable.

Isaiah 1:18
"Come now, and let us reason together," Says the LORD, "Though your sins are as scarlet, They will be as white as snow; Though they are red like crimson, They will be like wool."

God invites those incapable of reasoning to reason with Him, and He does so in spite of their inability. He can do that because it is He who gives knowledge, understanding, and wisdom and He gladly does so with those He saves. To the saints the apostle James once wrote,

James 1:5-8
But if any of you lacks wisdom, let him ask of God, who gives to all generously and without reproach, and it will be given to him. But he must ask in faith without any doubting, for the one who doubts is like the surf of the sea, driven and tossed by the wind. For that man ought not to expect that he will receive anything from the Lord, being a double-minded man, unstable in all his ways.


The problem is, as I have previously stated, no sinful sinner dead and enslaved in sin comes to God on his own. No one seeks Him. The only ones ever to do so in scripture are those in whom God is already at work.

This isn’t an argument against Total Depravity, but rather a clarification—how do you balance the idea that man is truly responsible for rejecting God if his natural faculties (not just his will) have been sovereignly corrupted before he ever makes a choice?

Unless you mean sin has sovereignly corrupted the sinner, I would reword that so as not to imply God is the one who makes people sin. Reformed Theology has made this clear in WCF 3.1.

God from all eternity did by the most wise and holy counsel of His own will, freely and unchangeably ordain whatsoever comes to pass; yet so as thereby neither is God the author of sin; nor is violence offered to the will of the creatures, nor is the liberty or contingency of second causes taken away, but rather established.​

• God ordained all things from eternity.
• God did NOT author sin
• What God ordained from eternity did no violence to the will of the creature.
• What God ordained from eternity did no violence to the contingencies of secondary causes.
• What God ordained established the above.

In other words, human volitional agency is asserted in Reformed Theology, not denied. Secondary causes are affirmed, not denied. I have suggested to you that it is better to understand the sinner's experience as one of lacking acceptance rather than knowing, willful rejection. A person cannot reject what they do not understand. Neither can they please God in that state. Nothing they do will matter salvifically. It will matter come sentencing day, but not salvifically.

It is very important to understand Jesus serves two purposes, not one. Calvary both saves and destroys. The exact same Jesus who saves is the same Jesus who sits enthroned and one day judges, meting out the just recompense for every thought, word, and deed. Among those who would otherwise be destroyed left to their own performance are some that are saved by grace.

 

[SoteriologyA1]

Whether corrupted by one man's disobedience or not, whether so corrupted such that death will come to all men because all men will sin (is that not the implication of Romans 5?), the fact remains that every single individual will fail to live up to God's glory AND fail to live up to and by his or her own standards. Even if God were to measure every human by some standard specific to every single individual all would still fail.

Romans 2:14-16
For when Gentiles who do not have the Law do instinctively the things of the Law, these, not having the Law, are a law to themselves, in that they show the work of the Law written in their hearts, their conscience bearing witness and their thoughts alternately accusing or else defending them, on the day when, according to my gospel, God will judge the secrets of men through Christ Jesus.

The standards of God are written into creation. You know that gravity exists. It is a "law" of creation. It cannot be escaped. While it is true that gravity on earth is different than that of the moon or Mars and, floating in space, an object as small as a human appears affected by gravity very little but remove an object as large as Jupiter from this solar system and observe what happens to the other seven planets . Do that next to a black hole and see what happens. Likewise, the magnetics of this planet are part of the design features of the earth, part of Genesis 1:1. Birds and butterflies(circum-)navigate the globe knowledgeable of this field to which humans are largely oblivious but, again, cannot escape. The same is true of morality, although few theologians ever consider the matter that way. When the history of humanity is surveyed three absolutes (atheists prefer to call them universals because they do not believe in absolutes ) become apparent:

1. Humans are social
2. Humans are moral
3. Humans are spiritual

In the entire history of humanity (at least as far back as we can go) there is zero evidence of a hermit culture. Hermits are the extreme, not the statistical or normative norm. Psychologically, humans literally go nuts if left in isolation and it does not take long for that to happen. Those with the means to do so often commit suicide. The same applies to morality. There is no amoral culture. Humans always and everywhere codified conduct and, while there is some degree of diversity, they codify conduct along the exact same lines. It proves the same with spirituality. There are no atheist cultures in human history. Humans ALWAYS worship something or someone larger than themselves. It might be a tree or a rock instead of a deity to ten, but humans are inescapably spiritual.

So, we see the design aspects of creation are written into humanity in diverse ways. We cannot escape them. We try, but we abjectly fail. And it would be that way even if the Bible were never written for us to understand it from God's perspective.

I will also suggest that instead of the word "responsible," what you mean is "culpable." When humans act responsibly there is never need for accountability. Being accountable is matter of knowing who is culpable and how. From the perspective of the Bible (and classic, orthodox Christianity) humans caused sin to enter the world (not God, and not Satan). Not only did one human cause sin to enter the world, but humans have been constantly busy maintaining its presence. Every single one of us is culpable for that. The responsibility is ours alone and every individual who has ever lived will called to account for his/her portion of the ongoing corruption of God's creation.

Ignorance is not an excuse.

Just today an agent from the state department of taxation dropped by my place of business. I wasn't there so, after retrieving the contact information, I called and spoke to another agent who explained to me the requirements of the law and the expectations for my (business') conduct. I am energetically willing to do what is right and will gladly provide what I owe AND make amends. I'd like not to have to pay any penalty but it's likely I will. I am responsible even though I had no idea there were laws pertaining to my lapse. Blessedly, by the grace of God , I found this out when I did because the expense is not much, and I can easily afford the tax(es) and whatever penalty ensues. That is not true of sin. The wages of sin is death and ignorance of the law is no more and excuse than ignorance of the gospel. It is by grace that we are saved.

Romans 9:18-22
So then He has mercy on whom He desires, and He hardens whom He desires. You will say to me then, "Why does He still find fault? For who resists His will?" On the contrary, who are you, O man, who answers back to God? The thing molded will not say to the molder, "Why did you make me like this," will it? Or does not the potter have a right over the clay, to make from the same lump one vessel for honorable use and another for common use? What if God, although willing to demonstrate His wrath and to make His power known, endured with much patience vessels of wrath prepared for destruction?

Of course, Paul was writing specifically about the matter of Israel and the receipt of the gospel among Paul's kinsmen but the exact same principles apply today. The sinful clay can protest all it likes but it has no right, no authority, no power, no voice to do so..... except that which the Potter gives it. Paul took the rhetorical approach because the reality is the second anyone raises a fist to God, He says, "Into the fiery lake with you, fool! I let you draw breath and pump blood for a single lifetime when I could have spoken you out of existence before you were born," and the screeching screams of protest get muffled while one gulps fury and wrath - the results of sin. "I'm not responsible! I'm not responsible!"

It is utter nonsense.

It is a telltale sign of hubris, and hubris is sin.

Appreciate the clarification, especially the distinction between responsibility and culpability. The point about universal moral awareness through general revelation (Romans 2:14-16) is well taken—man’s accountability isn’t dependent on having a copy of the Law in hand, but on the fact that he suppresses the truth he already has (Romans 1:18-21).

That said, the question still lingers: If post-Fall humanity is physically altered (to the point that thought, reason, and will are affected on a cellular level), then does culpability still function the same way as it did for Adam?

• Adam fell from a state where his faculties were fully intact. He had a clear, uncorrupted will, and yet he still sinned.
• But if post-Fall man is born with corrupted faculties, then his ability to will, reason, and perceive truth rightly has already been compromised before he ever makes a personal choice.
• Given that this corruption is by God’s sovereign decree, in what sense is he culpable for not being able to function as Adam did pre-Fall?

I fully affirm that man is guilty because he continues in sin willingly—but if his very faculties are impaired by God's design after Adam’s disobedience, then does his culpability function in exactly the same way? Or does it instead reinforce the necessity of imputed guilt, because individual responsibility alone would not fully explain why all are condemned from birth?

 

[SoteriologyA1]

Absolutely. All Christendom agrees humans are incapable of saving themselves. That has never been a point of dispute. The points of dispute arise because we do not all agree on why that is the case, how it is we do get saved, and to what degree the sinful human contributes to his salvation. Even the Pelagian Provisionist reports there is a moment during which God has worked in the individual's life to correctly hear, understand, believe, and act on the gospel presentation. The Provisionist says there remains an ability to hear and it is the nature of the gospel to be heard, but the Provisionist does NOT preclude the agency of God in salvation. No sinner saves himself. He cannot do so.

Keep in mind we're talking about salvation.

Scripture diversely and repeatedly speaks about a human's ability to behave as a moral creature but it always does so in the context of works never being able to reach God. This is logically necessary so even if we did not have the Bible to tell us we would necessarily understand the finite can NEVER reach the Infinite. It is ALWAYS God who must do the work of reaching humans. Jesus once told a man "No one is good, except God alone," but God himself declared some "blameless." That is not the same as good, but it is a measure of difference from the vast majority of humanity.

Ten people died and found themselves standing before the pearly gates awaiting entrance into heaven. St. Peter came out and told the group to have a seat and in a brief while Jesus himself would come out and let them know who was going to enter. However, it seemed to those awaiting that the time was not brief and as the time endured, they began to talk among themselves, recounting the stories of each person's life. As they did so they measured each other against one another and as the last person was telling his story Jesus showed up. The goodest among those waiting walked up to Jesus and said, "Hello, Lord. We have been waiting a long time and during that time we have recounted to each other how we lived our lives and ranked ourselves accordingly. The first person in the line lived the best life and the one at the other end lived the worst of us by comparison. If you would simply tell us where the dividing line is we will then instantly know who gets into heaven and who does not, without further delay."​

​

Jesus replied, "That is impressive, but you have made a huge mistake." "How so?" said the man and all other standing in line.​

​

"All of you erred because you do not get compared to each other. You get compared to me, and all of you fail. Now, come, come join me at my table for I am about to hold a feast and in spite of yourselves all of you are invited. It is for moments like this that each of you were chosen."​

It is by grace that we are saved. It is not of ourselves so no one can boast. The only thing anyone brings to his salvation is the sin from which he is being saved. Every single human who has ever lived, lived only because God graciously saw fit not to eradicate humanity at Genesis 3:6-7. Every human who has ever drawn breath has done so solely because God saw fit to allow it when He could have ended the existence of humanity at any time. He flooded the planet and spared eight to prove that fact.

Isaiah 53:6
All of us like sheep have gone astray, each of us has turned to his own way; but the LORD has caused the iniquity of us all to fall on him.

I went astray of my own accord because I was corrupted by sin. Going astray, I turned to my own way, my own corrupt corrupted way. God di not make me do that. All have sinned and fall short of the glory of God AND those He has saved are justified as a gift by His grace through the redemption, which is in Christ Jesu, whom God displayed publicly as a [t]propitiation

By the grace of God we, having been responsible, accountable, and culpable for our own lack of righteousness, faithlessness, and disobedience..... have been saved by grace. He is responsible for our salvation! He is responsible for our salvation because being, responsible for our sin, we cannot be responsible for our salvation.

Well put, and I appreciate the clear distinction between man's absolute inability to save himself and the universal agreement in Christendom on that fact—even though different camps debate the specifics of why and how salvation happens.

That being said, your agreement that fallen humanity has a faculty-based inability raises a key question. If man’s faculties (reason, will, perception) were sovereignly corrupted after the Fall, then:

1. In what sense is he still "going astray of his own accord" if his very ability to think rightly and perceive truth has been diminished before he ever acts?
2. If God could have left man's faculties intact (like Adam's pre-Fall) but instead decreed that all after Adam would be born unable to think rightly, doesn’t that mean their rejection of Him is determined by something outside their own conscious choice?
3. Does this not reinforce imputed guilt as necessary—because if man’s condemnation were based only on personal responsibility, then his sovereignly-determined cognitive corruption would seem to remove direct culpability?

I fully agree that salvation is entirely God’s work—but the fact that God also determined the Fall’s effects to include a faculty-level corruption raises the question of how culpability is preserved when man’s rejection of truth is bound to that divinely decreed corruption. Would love to hear how you reconcile that.

 

[SoteriologyA1]

.

Because despite the corruption of their heart and minds they know the truth. Read Romans 1:18-32. That which is known about God is evident to all such that none are without excuse. Even though all know God, His power evident in creation, they neither honor or give thanks to Him. Not seeing fit to acknowledge Him God gave every single one of us over to a depraved mind and our lusts. Paul replicates what is recounted at the end of Gensis three.

If it is disobedience that you want, then I will give you over to it. By grace I will do so rather than end your life this minute. Enjoy yourselves.

It is apportioned to man to live once and then face judgment and every single human lives in the time, the locale, and the circumstance God decided. We do not have a life to prove whether or not we can do good. We have a life to prove we cannot do good sufficient for salvation. And when the blunt reality of that is realized the fiery lake will be a relief in comparison to an eternity cognizant of one's own futility and hubris. If God is going to be called despotic then let it be because He let us live, not because He saw fit to judge sin and save some.

Isaiah 29:16
You turn things around! Shall the potter be considered as equal with the clay, That what is made would say to its maker, "He did not make me"; Or what is formed say to him who formed it, "He has no understanding"?

It is the unavoidable cognitive distortion that is sin! God did not make the human mind to work that way. 1 Corinthians 15 explains much of this. God made humans corruptible, not corrupted. Gnesis 1:31 tells us everything God made in the first six days was very good. That was the last time a human was called good, btw. God made humans good. God made them naked and unashamed. He also made them sinless. The good, unashamed, sinless man that ate the forbidden kiwi in Genesis 3:6 instantly became not-good, ashamed, and sinful. As a consequence of that change, he hid.

John 3:19-20 NIV
This is the verdict: Light has come into the world, but people loved darkness instead of light because their deeds were evil. Everyone who does evil hates the light, and will not come into the light for fear that their deeds will be exposed.

Adam was "sown" corruptible, not corrupted. As 1 Corinthians 15 reports, we will be raised incorruptible and immortal - never again able to become corrupted and never again able to die. In other words, the end purpose of God concerning humanity was to create people made in His image who would be incorruptible. Sin happened and we went from being corruptible to be corrupted. That's not a problem for God because it did not disrupt His eternal plan and purpose one smidgen of an iota. Sin is, however, a huge problem form humans. Its wage is death, not eternal life.

So the inability to think rightly is a problem to be solved, but it is also merely a symptom of the larger problem. It's like having pain due to cancer. The pain can be treated but that will not cure the cause or stop the inevitable.

Isaiah 1:18
"Come now, and let us reason together," Says the LORD, "Though your sins are as scarlet, They will be as white as snow; Though they are red like crimson, They will be like wool."

God invites those incapable of reasoning to reason with Him, and He does so in spite of their inability. He can do that because it is He who gives knowledge, understanding, and wisdom and He gladly does so with those He saves. To the saints the apostle James once wrote,

James 1:5-8
But if any of you lacks wisdom, let him ask of God, who gives to all generously and without reproach, and it will be given to him. But he must ask in faith without any doubting, for the one who doubts is like the surf of the sea, driven and tossed by the wind. For that man ought not to expect that he will receive anything from the Lord, being a double-minded man, unstable in all his ways.


The problem is, as I have previously stated, no sinful sinner dead and enslaved in sin comes to God on his own. No one seeks Him. The only ones ever to do so in scripture are those in whom God is already at work.

Unless you mean sin has sovereignly corrupted the sinner, I would reword that so as not to imply God is the one who makes people sin. Reformed Theology has made this clear in WCF 3.1.

God from all eternity did by the most wise and holy counsel of His own will, freely and unchangeably ordain whatsoever comes to pass; yet so as thereby neither is God the author of sin; nor is violence offered to the will of the creatures, nor is the liberty or contingency of second causes taken away, but rather established.​

• God ordained all things from eternity.
• God did NOT author sin
• What God ordained from eternity did no violence to the will of the creature.
• What God ordained from eternity did no violence to the contingencies of secondary causes.
• What God ordained established the above.

In other words, human volitional agency is asserted in Reformed Theology, not denied. Secondary causes are affirmed, not denied. I have suggested to you that it is better to understand the sinner's experience as one of lacking acceptance rather than knowing, willful rejection. A person cannot reject what they do not understand. Neither can they please God in that state. Nothing they do will matter salvifically. It will matter come sentencing day, but not salvifically.

It is very important to understand Jesus serves two purposes, not one. Calvary both saves and destroys. The exact same Jesus who saves is the same Jesus who sits enthroned and one day judges, meting out the just recompense for every thought, word, and deed. Among those who would otherwise be destroyed left to their own performance are some that are saved by grace.

I do want to press in on one particular distinction:

If "a person cannot reject what they do not understand," then does that not suggest that fallen man’s rejection of God is due to a lack of comprehension rather than a moral aversion? In other words:

1. If their issue is an inability to accept rather than a willful rejection, then are they truly culpable for failing to embrace what they cannot even grasp?
2. Does this not push the discussion toward a faculty-based limitation rather than a moral disposition issue, which in turn would seem to weaken the case for moral responsibility?
3. If sin’s corruption includes both cognitive distortion and moral aversion, then which is ultimately the root cause of their rejection—their inability to perceive truth rightly, or their hatred of it?

If the core problem is lack of acceptance due to an impaired cognitive state, that would seem to lean toward a natural inability that removes responsibility rather than a moral unwillingness that preserves it. But if the root issue is moral hostility toward God, then their rejection is not due to lack of comprehension but rather a willful suppression of the truth.

Would you say the fundamental problem is fallen man’s lack of ability to grasp spiritual truth, or is it his hatred for God and love for sin, despite having enough knowledge to be accountable (Romans 1:18-21)?

 

[Josheb]

...if his very faculties are impaired by God's design after Adam’s disobedience, then does his culpability function in exactly the same way?

Clarify that for me. Same way as what?

I have a question for you. What makes you think responsibility in the already-fallen state is relevant?

Or does it instead reinforce the necessity of imputed guilt, because individual responsibility alone would not fully explain why all are condemned from birth?

Self-induced guilt and imputed guilt are not mutually exclusive conditions. Furthermore, guilt is often irrelevant. Hypothetically speaking, were a human to live a life of obedience s/he would still not make it into eternal life. There are several reasons for that (at least three of which I have already broached). The first is that Jesus is the only way to that endpoint and no sinner is born believing in Jesus. The second is that whether or not s/he ever disobeys God that person still bears the mark of sin. The third is the fact s/he remains corruptible, and corruptibleness and corruptness are both prohibitive conditions. On top of that flesh and blood cannot inherit the kingdom (1 Cor. 15). It was always necessary for humans to die, face judgment, and be raised. Only those partaking in the tree of life (Jesus) receive eternal life.

Guilt is a very small portion of that.

 

[Josheb]

If their issue is an inability to accept rather than a willful rejection, then are they truly culpable for failing to embrace what they cannot even grasp?

Yes. If I drive my truck into a Jersey wall and suffer a TBI and can no longer drive, I am still culpable for that inability. And, should I ever attempt to drive thereafter, I am also still culpable for that action and any consequences thereof.

Does this not push the discussion toward a faculty-based limitation rather than a moral disposition issue, which in turn would seem to weaken the case for moral responsibility?

No, because the faculty limitations and the moral disposition are not mutually exclusive conditions.

If sin’s corruption includes both cognitive distortion and moral aversion, then which is ultimately the root cause of their rejection—their inability to perceive truth rightly, or their hatred of it?

The sinner's rejection is one of failure to accept, not a rejection where salvation in Christ is correctly understood and then denied. God does not reveal Himself fruitlessly. This is one of the many flaws in synergism. They say God makes Himself known, either through the inherent design of creation or through a special moment of prevenient grace and then - with the sinner fully knowing and understanding God - that sinner consciously accepts or rejects God. The problem with that scenario is that 1) there are then still-sinful people walking around with full knowledge of God but not saved, and 2) still-sinful people who usurped God; the finite creature overcoming the Infinite Creator. They try to get around these problems by asserting the premise God allows Himself to be subject to the decision of the sinfully dead and enslaved in the arena of salvation.

None of which is supported in scripture.

There is no moment of choice prior to regeneration. Regeneration precedes faith. Faith is a gift, a gift given to the regenerate. The individual saved by grace through faith is (re-)created in Christ to do good works.

If the core problem is lack of acceptance due to an impaired cognitive state, that would seem to lean toward a natural inability that removes responsibility rather than a moral unwillingness that preserves it.

No, it would not seem to lean thusly (as I have explained above and in the preceding posts.

But if the root issue is moral hostility toward God,

That is not the root issue. The root issue is the failure to act as God designed and purposed us to act, AND the fact we were made good and sinless but incomplete.

then their rejection is not due to lack of comprehension but rather a willful suppression of the truth.

Again, those two conditions - and all of the others I have broached - are not mutually exclusive conditions. I recommend you make an effort to stop thinking in strict dichotomies (either/or). Sin adversely affects everything, not just moral benevolence and volitional agency.

Would you say the fundamental problem is fallen man’s lack of ability to grasp spiritual truth, or is it his hatred for God and love for sin, despite having enough knowledge to be accountable (Romans 1:18-21)?

Yes.

These things are not mutually exclusive to one another. They are not alternatives to be selected while the others are discarded.

 

[Josheb]

....the fact that God also determined the Fall’s effects to include a faculty-level corruption raises the question of how culpability is preserved when man’s rejection of truth is bound to that divinely decreed corruption. Would love to hear how you reconcile that.

I believe I have already done that. I am confident that if you reflect on the content of my many posts here you will understand whatever is currently not grasped. You just got a semester's worth of Christology, hamartiology, and soteriology in two pages of posts. Take some time to think on it. Pray on it. Open your Bible to the verses I've cited (whether you realize it or not I have blown through the entire Bible from Genesis to Revelation and sampled the covenants, history, prophets, gospels, and epistolary to support these posts).
Check back with me in a week. Maybe trade posts with others here. They may be able to voice the same viewpoint(s) in different words that God is better able to fasten to your understanding.

Most of us monergists here were Arminians. We came to monergism kicking and screaming having previously accused monergists of holding to Puppet Theology or Robot Theology. It took me years to correctly fathom monergism (and I read the ECFs, Augustine, Luther, Calvin, Arminius and all the modern voices on both sides myself). Great patience and forbearance was shown me/us by our future monergistic siblings. You appear to already be much of the way there. Keep in mind some of what I have written isn't quite the party line. There'll be some diversity of thought among the monergists here, so not every monergist will agree with every word I've posted, but we're all working from the same core orthodoxy (WCF, TULIP, etc.).

 

[Josheb]

I do want to press in on one particular distinction:

If "a person cannot reject what they do not understand," then does that not suggest that fallen man’s rejection of God is due to a lack of comprehension rather than a moral aversion? In other words:

1. If their issue is an inability to accept rather than a willful rejection, then are they truly culpable for failing to embrace what they cannot even grasp?
2. Does this not push the discussion toward a faculty-based limitation rather than a moral disposition issue, which in turn would seem to weaken the case for moral responsibility?
3. If sin’s corruption includes both cognitive distortion and moral aversion, then which is ultimately the root cause of their rejection—their inability to perceive truth rightly, or their hatred of it?

If the core problem is lack of acceptance due to an impaired cognitive state, that would seem to lean toward a natural inability that removes responsibility rather than a moral unwillingness that preserves it. But if the root issue is moral hostility toward God, then their rejection is not due to lack of comprehension but rather a willful suppression of the truth.

Would you say the fundamental problem is fallen man’s lack of ability to grasp spiritual truth, or is it his hatred for God and love for sin, despite having enough knowledge to be accountable (Romans 1:18-21)?

Because these posts contain some redundancy I'm going to refer you to my prior posts. I recommend an effort be made to shed the dichotomies of either/or. God's design, sin's effects, and the "cure" of salvation are diverse in substance. The entire Bible is written about Jesus. If it took all those centuries and authors and multiple genres to communicate that reality (Christ dead, resurrected, and ascendant) then you and I can take a few days to sit and contemplate a few cyberposts . Try not to get stuck on moral states or physical disease models alone. Check back with me in a couple of days (or a week) after some of this has sunk in.


Btw, take some time and fill out your profile. Basic information will help us know from whence you come and how we might best understand your contributions (and how to respond).

 

[His clay]

Not enough information in the preaching

Mental handicap (inability to comprehend the message)

Sin nature (moral disposition of rejecting God)

Vote and explain your reasoning!

On occasion, option #1 might be applicable. Not everyone is able to pick up everything the first go around. However, in relation to the verse quoted in the title, this option is not applicable, for it is assumed in the passage that the person has heard the whole gospel.

The second does not apply in the sense of what we often call a mental handicap (being retarded, having a form of dementia, downs syndrome, etc). Again, the passage partly quoted in the title assumes that the person had heard the whole gospel, comprehends it, but rejects it as foolishness.

The third is closest to the reasoning in the passage. People hear the gospel, but they reject it due to a sinful disposition of the mind and affections. To some, Jesus was just a criminal, nailed to a tree. He died in weakness, and he had no glory, at least in the Greek mindset. There's nothing glorious about dying on cross in Greek culture. Why would one trust in a dead criminal? For some of the Jews, Jesus was just a blasphemer. He was born to parents who were unmarried when he was conceived, and he proclaimed himself to be God (i.e. made himself equal with God with various statement he made).

God has intentionally countered the wisdom of the world with what it views as foolishness. And the passage makes it clear, the how and why this tactic was taken.

But God chose what is foolish in the world to shame the wise; God chose what is weak in the world to shame the strong;
28 God chose what is low and despised in the world, even things that are not, to bring to nothing things that are,
29 so that no human being might boast in the presence of God.
(1Co 1:27-29 ESV)

The gospel humbles the pride of men. The weak, foolish, low, despised, and not (the very things the prideful look down upon) become the overcoming power of God. Thus, human boasting is removed. But it profoundly involves being humbled by the gospel.

Thus, the prerequisite for properly perceiving the "message of the cross" is radical humility; but with the eyes of pride the "message of the cross" will appear as foolishness.

 

[ReverendRV]

Not enough information in the preaching

Mental handicap (inability to comprehend the message)

Sin nature (moral disposition of rejecting God)

Vote and explain your reasoning!

3) An Original Sin Nature...

Fallen Man is at Enmity with God...


That is what God thinks about the World. We are in the devil's Camp...

 

[ReverendRV]

3) An Original Sin Nature...

Fallen Man is at Enmity with God...


This is what God thinks about the World. We are in the devil's Camp...

The Shield of Faith ~ by ReverendRV * November 10

Ephesians 6:16 NIV; In addition to all this, take up the shield of faith, with which you can extinguish all the flaming arrows of the evil one.

Some Bible Translations tell us that the Shield of Faith can extinguish all the flaming arrows of the evil ‘Day’. This is acceptable because elsewhere we are told to redeem the time for the days are evil. “Why are the days evil?” Biblically speaking there is a trinity of evil; Satan, the World and our very own Hearts. Jeremiah the Prophet said that the Heart is deceitful above all things (even the Devil) and desperately wicked. “My heart is deceitful above all things?? Then who could know it?” ~ There is only one way to know, compare it to the Truth; here’s a quiz. Have you ever Lied? What do you call someone who Lies to you? Have you ever Stolen anything, even if it was small? What do you call someone who Steals from you? Are you starting to know your heart a little better? Have you ever committed Murder? Jesus said that if you Hate someone you’ve Murdered them in your ‘Heart’. Have you ever wished someone were dead? These were just three of the Ten Commandments, think about that. If God judged you by his standard, would you be guilty? Murderers go to the electric chair and Sinners go to a fiery eternal Hell…

Satan is the Evil One. He is the Father of Lies, that Serpent of old. He entered into the world and uttered the first Lie ever told. When you Lie, you are of your Father the Devil. God gave Adam Dominion in the Garden of Eden but Adam gave it away to Satan by coming under the headship of the devil’s Lie; “Thou shalt surely not die but you will become like God”. Satan is now the king of the world and you are his Minion, following him blindly to his doom; and to your doom. The Wages of Sin is death and since Satan was the first Sinner, God created the Lake of Fire for the Fallen Angels. If you stay in line with him you will march right off the cliff with him into a Hell that was not created for you. What you need is a Shield which can extinguish Satan’s flaming arrows when you get out of his line. ~ Go to the Armory of God…

Faith is only a shield when it’s placed in something worthy. Faith is the Gift of God; just as the Armor of God is God’s gift to his Saints. We are Saved from Sin, Satan and Hell by God’s Grace through Faith in the Risen Lord Jesus Christ; the Son of God! We can never earn Salvation because Jesus earned it for us by living a Sinless life. He shed his blood on the Cross as an Atonement to appease the Wrath of God for the Sin of the world; and he arose bodily from the grave alive. Repent of your Sins, Confess Jesus Christ as your Lord God; and go to a Church that preaches the Bible and goes out to find the Lost. ~ Are you feeling the flames of Hell? Now’s the time to step out of line. Satan isn’t watching you so closely since you’re in his camp; GO! Run to Jesus as fast as you can! Fiery darts are flying over you! Raise the Shield of Faith over your head and never look back. Now, put on the whole armor of God; make your Stand…

Psalm 61:3 NIV; For you have been my refuge, a strong tower against the foe

 

[Josheb]

Just checking in (since it's been a week),

Would you say the fundamental problem is fallen man’s lack of ability to grasp spiritual truth, or is it his hatred for God and love for sin, despite having enough knowledge to be accountable (Romans 1:18-21)?

Yes.

Was what I've posted given any more thought?