How was Adam able to be "tempted"?

[clmowry]

QUESTION
Does this say that “man cannot do anything good”?
ANSWER
Not exactly. It doesn’t say that man can’t do “nice” things such as feed the hungry, shelter the homeless, etc. But, it does say that unaided by the grace of God, man can not do any, for lack of a better term, supernatural good. This is essentially what the phrase “total depravity” means.

No, that I cannot agree too. A moral good is always a moral good and will be judged as such by God.

Being given (or not) the Grace of Justification or Final Persaverance doesn’t change that.

Can you agree with this?

“Human virtues acquired by education, by deliberate acts
and by a perseverance ever-renewed in repeated efforts are purified and elevated by divine grace. With God’s help, they forge
character and give facility in the practice of the good. The virtuous
man is happy to practice them.”

Chuck

 

[clmowry]

So I ask again, unaided by the grace of God, can a sinner (assume one is in a state of mortal sin) do a good (as judged on a supernatural level) work?

BTW, I’m not trying to trap you or anything…just trying to understand exactly what it is you are saying.

I think you are unnecessarily linking the ability to do good works with the means of our justification the way you ask the question.

If we splti it out:

…can a sinner (assume one is in a state of mortal sin) do a good … work?..

Yes.

…unaided by the grace of God…[how will we be] …judged on a supernatural level…?

"Justification establishes cooperation between God’s grace and man’s freedom. On man’s part it is expressed by the assent of faith to the Word of God, which invites him to conversion, and in the cooperation of charity with the prompting of the Holy Spirit who precedes and preserves his assent:

When God touches mans heart through the illumination of the Holy Spirit, man himself is not inactive while receiving that inspiration, since he could reject it; and yet, without Gods grace, he cannot by his own free will move himself toward justice in Gods sight."

Perhaps that answers your question?

Chuck

 

[djrakowski]

What does “totally depraved” mean?

As my former non-Catholic church taught it, man is ‘totally depraved’ and completely incapable of choosing to perform an objectively good and moral act unless he is moved to do so by the grace of God.

The problem is that this definition fails to measure up to reality.

For example, most of us have heard that Bill Gates has allocated vast sums of his fortune to the cause of vaccinating third-world children against devastating illnesses. Without aide from wealthy individuals and nations, the children receiving these medications could very likely have died of these illnesses. Mr. Gates, though not obviously moved by the notion of Christian charity, has saved untold lives by this act of generosity.

That, my friends, is morally good, regardless of his motivation. It is objectively good that these lives were saved, and it doesn’t matter why they were saved.

 

[Ghosty]

Okay, but yet you disagree with the statement “1. Man can do nothing but sin **without the grace of God **(total depravity according to Calvin)”.

So what can a man do that doesn’t have God’s grace?

Man can do all kinds of good without Grace, such as building a home, feeding his children, you name it. We are not “sin machines”, though we are much more prone to sinning than we were before the Fall.

What Grace does is take our actions out of the natural realm and into the supernatural. In otherwords, our actions cease being “merely the work of creatures” and become the very real work of God as well (this goes beyond actions as well, since we actually begin to LIVE with the Life of God, but that’s a distinct issue). By doing God’s work we can reap God’s fruit, which is ultimately Heaven and the Beatific Vision (direct experience of God’s very Being for all time).

Without Grace my actions may be good, but they will never be Holy, because only God is Holy. With Grace, with God sharing in my actions, my work becomes Holy and merits a Holy reward: Heaven. It’s not that our actions without Grace are evil, it’s just that they’re incapable of reaching God in the same way that laying boards side by side will never build a house; we need to move in a new dimension to have any encounter with God, and only God can provide that new range of movement by Grace. Incidently this isn’t just because of the Fall, as Adam and Eve would have required Grace before the Fall to operate in such a manner as well. The difference between them and us is that we are now even prone to failure in the natural good, the good actions proper to our nature, but we don’t completely fail in such things.

Peace and God bless!

 

[Catholic_Dude]

Man can do all kinds of good without Grace, such as building a home, feeding his children, you name it. We are not “sin machines”, though we are much more prone to sinning than we were before the Fall.

What Grace does is take our actions out of the natural realm and into the supernatural. In otherwords, our actions cease being “merely the work of creatures” and become the very real work of God as well (this goes beyond actions as well, since we actually begin to LIVE with the Life of God, but that’s a distinct issue). By doing God’s work we can reap God’s fruit, which is ultimately Heaven and the Beatific Vision (direct experience of God’s very Being for all time).

Without Grace my actions may be good, but they will never be Holy, because only God is Holy. With Grace, with God sharing in my actions, my work becomes Holy and merits a Holy reward: Heaven. It’s not that our actions without Grace are evil, it’s just that they’re incapable of reaching God in the same way that laying boards side by side will never build a house; we need to move in a new dimension to have any encounter with God, and only God can provide that new range of movement by Grace. Incidently this isn’t just because of the Fall, as Adam and Eve would have required Grace before the Fall to operate in such a manner as well. The difference between them and us is that we are now even prone to failure in the natural good, the good actions proper to our nature, but we don’t completely fail in such things.

Peace and God bless!

But isnt all good enabled by grace in the first place? Even those who dont know the one true God who chose good do it because it “feels right”. I see this “feeling” part of the longing for God and includes at the very least prevenient grace pulling them to fuller communion with God. St Paul talks about the law being written on the heart and following conscience in regards to the Gentiles (cf Rom 2:14ff). This doesnt mean there isnt a higher degree of good, which is only possible when your intent is to do God’s will and you are in full communion through the Sacraments. I cant see how there is a “neutral” realm in all this, especially if it leaves your only “options” to be “natural good” and “actual sin”.

 

[Ghosty]

But isnt all good enabled by grace in the first place? Even those who dont know the one true God who chose good do it because it “feels right”. I see this “feeling” part of the longing for God and includes at the very least prevenient grace pulling them to fuller communion with God. St Paul talks about the law being written on the heart and following conscience in regards to the Gentiles (cf Rom 2:14ff). This doesnt mean there isnt a higher degree of good, which is only possible when your intent is to do God’s will and you are in full communion through the Sacraments. I cant see how there is a “neutral” realm in all this, especially if it leaves your only “options” to be “natural good” and “actual sin”.

The fact that the law is “written on our heart” actually points to this being natural, not to it being Grace. In making us God imprints a sense of good in us, and this doesn’t require any Grace to operate in general, though after the Fall it requires Grace to operate perfectly and at all times.

Prevenient Grace is simply the impulsion by God for us to do some good that we wouldn’t otherwise do, whether because we are damaged by the Fall, or because it’s a good that is beyond our natural capacity (such as supernaturally turning to God). We all naturally have the impulsion to do some good, even if it’s the good of eating and taking care of ourselves (and this is indeed a good, since we ourselves are a gift from God that deserves as much care and respect as any other human).

St. Thomas Aquinas puts out ability to do good this way in the Summa:

Man’s nature may be looked at in two ways: first, in its integrity, as it was in our first parent before sin; secondly, as it is corrupted in us after the sin of our first parent. Now in both states human nature needs the help of God as First Mover, to do or wish any good whatsoever, as stated above (1). But in the state of integrity, as regards the sufficiency of the operative power, man by his natural endowments could wish and do the good proportionate to his nature, such as the good of acquired virtue; but not surpassing good, as the good of infused virtue. But in the state of corrupt nature, man falls short of what he could do by his nature, so that he is unable to fulfil it by his own

natural powers. Yet because human nature is not altogether corrupted by sin, so as to be shorn of every natural good, even in the state of corrupted nature it can, by virtue of its natural endowments, work some particular good, as to build dwellings, plant vineyards, and the like; yet it cannot do all the good natural to it, so as to fall short in nothing; just as a sick man can of himself make some movements, yet he cannot be perfectly moved with the movements of one in health, unless by the help of medicine he be cured.

newadvent.org/summa/2109.htm#2

So Adam and Eve could have, without any difficulty, performed all natural good works, but they couldn’t have done any supernatural good works (such as Loving God with Charity, as opposed to loving Him in a human way) without Grace. After the Fall we can still do some natural good work, but it varies from person to person, and no one can do ALL the good work the incorrupt human nature could (we all have foibles and “pet temptations”). After the Fall I might be intemperate and you might be quick to anger, but I can still easily keep my peace of mind and you might not go overboard with alcohol (both good things), so we do some good but no one is completely good the way we should be.

After all, does it really make sense that the only thing that’s keeping you from glutting yourself on booze and lust every moment of the day is the special Grace of God? Am I really a cold-blooded murderer at heart, but for the Grace of God?

Make sense?

Peace and God bless!

 

[Calvinator]

Man can do all kinds of good without Grace, such as building a home, feeding his children, you name it. We are not “sin machines”, though we are much more prone to sinning than we were before the Fall.

What Grace does is take our actions out of the natural realm and into the supernatural. In otherwords, our actions cease being “merely the work of creatures” and become the very real work of God as well (this goes beyond actions as well, since we actually begin to LIVE with the Life of God, but that’s a distinct issue). By doing God’s work we can reap God’s fruit, which is ultimately Heaven and the Beatific Vision (direct experience of God’s very Being for all time).

Without Grace my actions may be good, but they will never be Holy, because only God is Holy. With Grace, with God sharing in my actions, my work becomes Holy and merits a Holy reward: Heaven. It’s not that our actions without Grace are evil, it’s just that they’re incapable of reaching God in the same way that laying boards side by side will never build a house; we need to move in a new dimension to have any encounter with God, and only God can provide that new range of movement by Grace. Incidently this isn’t just because of the Fall, as Adam and Eve would have required Grace before the Fall to operate in such a manner as well. The difference between them and us is that we are now even prone to failure in the natural good, the good actions proper to our nature, but we don’t completely fail in such things.

Peace and God bless!

For the most part I agree with your above statment.

 

[Teflon93]

Am I the only one who sees this as unbelievably perverse?

I think it’s very perverse. Calvinists constantly seem to make God into some kind of tyrant resorting to sock puppetry.

Why would God need to resort to such things? If He wanted Adam and Eve out of the Garden, which He created, He could simply have said, “Go!”.

 

[Teflon93]

Let’s get away from Adam and or Eve for a moment.

Do you think God widthdraws his grace from at least “some” people as described in Romans?

If you answer yes, does this mean God caused them to sin?

If you answer no, how do you deal with the scripture?

You invert cause and effect.

We choose to sin. God withdraws His grace. It is we who have refused His gift.

Care to address the logic head on?

 

[Teflon93]

Isn’t this also very similar to what your church teaches?

Similar to what degree?

Calvin ripped off the Catholic Church; of course some things are similar.

The Catholic view of humanity, as I have demonstrated in the “Catholic Humanism” thread, is markedly different from Calvin’s.

“Sinner in the Hands of An Angry God” is not a papal encyclical, my friend.

 

[Calvinator]

You invert cause and effect.

We choose to sin. God withdraws His grace. It is we who have refused His gift.

Care to address the logic head on?

How did I invert cause and effect? I simply asked a question so I could better understand what it is you believe. You seem to want to turn everything into a debate.

You indicated in an earlier post that if God removes his grace from us He is causing us to sin…you even used the example of donating a body organ, maybe a kidney. You now seem to be saying the exact opposite. When I replied to Mike I didn’t have Adam in mind so perhaps that is where your confusion comes from, but the question still stands.

If the question isn’t plain enough, just let me know and I’ll try to re-state it.

Just to clear things up a little bit, when I spoke of God withdrawing his grace from some people I was not speaking of someone that is saved.

 

[Teflon93]

I’m not sure where you got the idea that Reformed Christians don’t believe in OBJECTIVE good and evil.

So I ask again, unaided by the grace of God, can a sinner (assume one is in a state of mortal sin) do a good (as judged on a supernatural level) work?

BTW, I’m not trying to trap you or anything…just trying to understand exactly what it is you are saying.

Yes. One need only study economics.

The person whom cares not a whit about his fellow man yet pursues his selfish economic interest in the creation of something of value does something good for society.

The worst sinner constrained by a system based on propagation of the good will do good as a function of that system.

Otherwise, why would we have laws such as laws against murder?

Civilization is a construct engineered to minimize evil and maximize good. The 9% of American atheists are constrained by the fact that 91% of Americans have built a society based on Christian principles.

Sin is movement away from God, good is movement toward God. Anything which constrains sin or fosters good will have the practical effect of promoting the general good.

This is merely stating the obvious, of course, and the irrelevant, since you see fit to fudge the line between good and “supernaturally good”, by which we mean efficacious for salvation.

If one does not sin simply because one cannot exercise their free will to sin, how will God judge them good?

Free will + grace + faith + good works + repentance from sin = “Well done, though good and faithful servant.”

 

[Teflon93]

Well it certainly doesn’t mean totally depraved, just like sola scriptura doesn’t meand sola scriptura and sola fide doesn’t mean sola fide etc etc etc.

Chuck

Funny how the heresiarchs put such importance on slogans they didn’t mean, huh?

 

[Calvinator]

I think it’s very perverse. Calvinists constantly seem to make God into some kind of tyrant resorting to sock puppetry.

Why would God need to resort to such things? If He wanted Adam and Eve out of the Garden, which He created, He could simply have said, “Go!”.

How does Reformed theology reduce God into “some kind of tyrant resorting to sock puppetry”?

 

[Calvinator]

Yes. One need only study economics.

The person whom cares not a whit about his fellow man yet pursues his selfish economic interest in the creation of something of value does something good for society.

The worst sinner constrained by a system based on propagation of the good will do good as a function of that system.

Otherwise, why would we have laws such as laws against murder?

Civilization is a construct engineered to minimize evil and maximize good. The 9% of American atheists are constrained by the fact that 91% of Americans have built a society based on Christian principles.

Sin is movement away from God, good is movement toward God. Anything which constrains sin or fosters good will have the practical effect of promoting the general good.

This is merely stating the obvious, of course, and the irrelevant, since you see fit to fudge the line between good and “supernaturally good”, by which we mean efficacious for salvation.

If one does not sin simply because one cannot exercise their free will to sin, how will God judge them good?

Free will + grace + faith + good works + repentance from sin = “Well done, though good and faithful servant.”

Who teaches that one cannot excercise their free will to sin?

 

[Teflon93]

How does Reformed theology reduce God into “some kind of tyrant resorting to sock puppetry”?

Which Reformed theology do you refer to?

A. If God willed The Fall, how is He not a tyrant?

B. If God willed The Fall, and did so by removing His grace from Adam and Eve, how are we not puppets?

If A and B, why the need for theater? Why not simply never grant us His grace? Why build the Garden?

 

[Teflon93]

Who teaches that one cannot excercise their free will to sin?

Who missed the point?

You shift frames of reference constantly.

Perhaps you could answer some questions rather than ask them.

Is your position that one cannot exercise their free will to do good?

Is your position that God withdrew His grace PRIOR to Adam and Eve’s sins?

Is your position that The Fall was God’s plan all along?

 

[Calvinator]

Who missed the point?

You shift frames of reference constantly.

Perhaps you could answer some questions rather than ask them.

Is your position that one cannot exercise their free will to do good?

Is your position that God withdrew His grace PRIOR to Adam and Eve’s sins?

Is your position that The Fall was God’s plan all along?

I didn’t ask “who missed the point” did I? You seem unwilling to engage in a discussion and more interested in polemics.

Anyway.

Sure, one can exercise their free will to do good. I guess I would distinguish between aided and unaided by God’s grace and good on the natural order and good on the supernatural order.

Is it my position that God withdrew his grace prior to Adam and Eve’s sin? No, as I stated earlier I am undecided on how the fall occured and if you actually take the time to read my posts you will see that I explained that when I responded to Mike I didn’t have Adam or Eve in mind when I started the discussion on God withdrawing his grace.

 

[Calvinator]

Which Reformed theology do you refer to?

A. If God willed The Fall, how is He not a tyrant?

B. If God willed The Fall, and did so by removing His grace from Adam and Eve, how are we not puppets?

If A and B, why the need for theater? Why not simply never grant us His grace? Why build the Garden?

You need to distinguish between God’s active will and passive will. He is sovereign so it’s not like the fall caught Him by suprise.

I’m not sure how the mechanics of the fall occured so I don’t hold that God necessarily removed his grace from Adam and Eve.

If He never granted us His grace we would all be doomed wouldn’t we?

 

[Teflon93]

You need to distinguish between God’s active will and passive will. He is sovereign so it’s not like the fall caught Him by suprise.

I’m not sure how the mechanics of the fall occured so I don’t hold that God necessarily removed his grace from Adam and Eve.

If He never granted us His grace we would all be doomed wouldn’t we?

How does Calvin distinguish between active and passive will on God’s part? It seems to me he makes no such distinction.

Omniscience doesn’t make everything God’s plan or desire. That is where double predestination is erroneous.