Can We Really Exercise Free Will?

[reneweddaybyday]

yep there's many forms of skins unrelated to animals skin,, why would God need to kill an animal to make a coat.

The animal was not slain just to "make a coat". The offering of the sacrifice was to remit the sin of Adam and Eve ... without shedding of blood is no remission.

The coats provided to Adam and Eve were to cover the shame of their sin ... God offering sacrifice and covering their shame was a foreshadowing of the Lord Jesus Christ.

The fig leaves Adam and Eve made for themselves (Gen 3:7) represented their fleshly, human attempt to cover their sin and and shame. This attempt was made before God made His offering on their behalf.

The coats God made for Adam and Eve were from the first sacrifice made for sin ... the sacrifice remitted their sin ... the coats covered their shame.

He could have just hane shaved the wool of a sheep and made some special clothes., But I wonder tho in your eyes you say he killed an animal, has thought crossed your mind he our the animal to sleep for a short while

Seeing as God can form a man from dust, hmm I wonder could he create skin from dust.

My understanding is that this record in Genesis foreshadows the Lord Jesus Christ ... the Lamb Who was slain to take away the sins of the world ... the coats represent the garments of salvation.

It's ok don't answer you'll just fix it for yourself

We are discussing Scripture and I am explaining my understanding of the record in Genesis 3.

.

 

[reneweddaybyday]

There's zero evidence that Adam exercised any faith -- just like there's zero evidence that God placed enmity between Adam and the Serpent. But Adam had to have belonged to one of the two seeds mentioned in Gen 3:15. Since Adam could not logically proceed from Eve's godly seed, this leaves him with only one other option: He was the seed of the Serpent.

rolleyes ... your rendering of Scripture has satan in the genealogical line of the Lord Jesus Christ ... yeah, satan l-o-v-e-s your rendering ... smh

Luke 3:

23 And Jesus himself began to be about thirty years of age, being (as was supposed) the son of Joseph, which was the son of Heli,

24 Which was the son of Matthat, which was the son of Levi, which was the son of Melchi, which was the son of Janna, which was the son of Joseph,

25 Which was the son of Mattathias, which was the son of Amos, which was the son of Naum, which was the son of Esli, which was the son of Nagge,

26 Which was the son of Maath, which was the son of Mattathias, which was the son of Semei, which was the son of Joseph, which was the son of Juda,

27 Which was the son of Joanna, which was the son of Rhesa, which was the son of Zorobabel, which was the son of Salathiel, which was the son of Neri,

28 Which was the son of Melchi, which was the son of Addi, which was the son of Cosam, which was the son of Elmodam, which was the son of Er,

29 Which was the son of Jose, which was the son of Eliezer, which was the son of Jorim, which was the son of Matthat, which was the son of Levi,

30 Which was the son of Simeon, which was the son of Juda, which was the son of Joseph, which was the son of Jonan, which was the son of Eliakim,

31 Which was the son of Melea, which was the son of Menan, which was the son of Mattatha, which was the son of Nathan, which was the son of David,

32 Which was the son of Jesse, which was the son of Obed, which was the son of Booz, which was the son of Salmon, which was the son of Naasson,

33 Which was the son of Aminadab, which was the son of Aram, which was the son of Esrom, which was the son of Phares, which was the son of Juda,

34 Which was the son of Jacob, which was the son of Isaac, which was the son of Abraham, which was the son of Thara, which was the son of Nachor,

35 Which was the son of Saruch, which was the son of Ragau, which was the son of Phalec, which was the son of Heber, which was the son of Sala,

36 Which was the son of Cainan, which was the son of Arphaxad, which was the son of Sem, which was the son of Noe, which was the son of Lamech,

37 Which was the son of Mathusala, which was the son of Enoch, which was the son of Jared, which was the son of Maleleel, which was the son of Cainan,

38 Which was the son of Enos, which was the son of Seth, which was the son of Adam, which was the son of God.

.

 

[DJT_47]

We exercise free will constantly, but just because the ultimate outcome has already been determined by God and his foreknowledge, doesn't mean that free will has not been exercised by us. God just simply knows in advance, irrespective of our gyrations, what tfe outcome will be.

 

[BillyBob]

Regeneration does not precede faith, no where found in scripture.

Faith is not something that man can just pull out of his backpack!

Salvation is provided as a gift, and this gift requires trust, belief, and faith – all of which are merciful gifts from God Himself. They are not within the grasp of fallen mankind. That is why we say “Saved By Grace”, because it can happen no other way. Man is simply unable to do it for himself.
So when you mention trust, think of it as God's gift.

When you mention belief, think of it as God's gift.

When you mention faith, think of it as God's gift.

When you mention salvation, think of it as God's gift.

Not one of these gifts come about due to man's efforts! He does not have the ability without being renewed. That is why regeneration must come first. Without renewal how can you possibly trust, believe, and have faith in God's word?

 

[Jordon]

The animal was not slain just to "make a coat". The offering of the sacrifice was to remit the sin of Adam and Eve ... without shedding of blood is no remission.

The coats provided to Adam and Eve were to cover the shame of their sin ... God offering sacrifice and covering their shame was a foreshadowing of the Lord Jesus Christ.

The fig leaves Adam and Eve made for themselves (Gen 3:7) represented their fleshly, human attempt to cover their sin and and shame. This attempt was made before God made His offering on their behalf.

The coats God made for Adam and Eve were from the first sacrifice made for sin ... the sacrifice remitted their sin ... the coats covered their shame.





My understanding is that this record in Genesis foreshadows the Lord Jesus Christ ... the Lamb Who was slain to take away the sins of the world ... the coats represent the garments of salvation.





We are discussing Scripture and I am explaining my understanding of the record in Genesis 3.

.

no worries, you can believe what you prefer in this situation, but anyhow I'm having a break from this place, its not a place.

Take care

 

[Rufus]

Jordan?

You are coming across as a spiritual wimp.

This is what Jesus is looking for!
And, so far... you can not do this.

Then he said to them all: ​

​

“Whoever wants to be my disciple must deny themselves and take up their cross ​

daily and follow me. For whoever wants to save their life will lose it, but whoever ​

loses their life for me will save it. Luke 9:23-24​

You get personally offended and demand that what offended you personally be put to an end.

Look at what Peter had to go through!
You would have been long gone!
You can not handle it.
You want the likes of a social club.

​

From that time on Jesus began to explain to his disciples that he must go to Jerusalem and suffer ​

many things at the hands of the elders, the chief priests and the teachers of the law, and that he ​

must be killed and on the third day be raised to life.​

​

Peter took him aside and began to rebuke him. “Never, Lord!” he said. “This shall never happen to you!”​

​

Jesus turned and said to Peter, “Get behind me, Satan! You are a stumbling block to me; you do not have ​

in mind the concerns of God, but merely human concerns.” Matthew 16:21-23​

Peter took it.
You are a big wimp!

You get in the way.

You would have tried to civilized Jesus.
Try to turn him into a British gentleman.
You do it here all the time, and take personal offense.
You refuse to deny yourself and take up your cross when truth cuts you the wrong way.
You wanted everybody to get along by having truth compromised to satisfy your own way of wanting to see things done.

“Whoever wants to be my disciple must deny themselves and take up their cross ​

daily and follow me. For whoever wants to save their life will lose it, but whoever loses their life for me will save it. ​

​

​

After Jesus predicted to Peter that he would deny Him three times, was Jesus' prayer to his Father on behalf of Peter effectual or not?​

 

[Magenta]

Faith is not something that man can just pull out of his backpack!

Salvation is provided as a gift, and this gift requires trust, belief, and faith – all of which are merciful gifts from God Himself. They are not within the grasp of fallen mankind. That is why we say “Saved By Grace”, because it can happen no other way. Man is simply unable to do it for himself.
So when you mention trust, think of it as God's gift.

When you mention belief, think of it as God's gift.

When you mention faith, think of it as God's gift.

When you mention salvation, think of it as God's gift.

Not one of these gifts come about due to man's efforts! He does not have the ability without being renewed. That is why regeneration must come first. Without renewal how can you possibly trust, believe, and have faith in God's word?

She does not believe in the effectual call of God to His chosen. She chose herself, and believes others likewise need no help from God.

 

[Rufus]

If you are created from the dust how.are you anyone's seed? Adam was the first human a new creation.

Well, Gen 3:15 could have read if it had been God's will: "And I will put enmity between you and the man and the woman and between your seed and his..." Of course, that would have obliterated any and all allusion to the virgin birth. Have you ever pondered why God totally circumvented the natural and normally understood use of "seed" as that proceeding from man? Remember now: Scripture says nothing whatsoever positive about Adam. Everything stated about him is in negative terms,for he's constantly being contrasted with Jesus.

Since we know from other passages that Satan does indeed have his spiritual offspring in the human race, then how can we not naturally and logically surmise that Adam must have been relegated the seed of the evil one? Jesus said that Satan had nothing in Him (Jn 14:30), so why would any of the devil's children have anything in Christ?

 

[SaysWhat]

well anyway with a usernames like yours its so easy to imagine your going to say what to anything,

Well you know what, you should change your name to whatever, because thats the label im shoving on you from now on.

Mr whatever

So you couldn't forgive, and had to get one more punch in huh, you insult my username and say I should change it. Ugly indeed.

 

[reneweddaybyday]

no worries, you can believe what you prefer in this situation, but anyhow I'm having a break from this place, its not a place.

Take care

you take care as well, Jordon. remember this verse ...

1 Thessalonians 5:21 Prove all things; hold fast that which is good.

test all things ... hold fast that which is good ... cast everything else to God and let Him preserve blameless your whole spirit and soul and body,

.

 

[Magenta]

sawdust disagrees with the truth. No surprises there!

 

[reneweddaybyday]

Leviticus 19:16 Thou shalt not go up and down as a talebearer among thy people: neither shalt thou stand against the blood of thy neighbour: I am the LORD.

.

 

[Magenta]

Leviticus 19:16 Thou shalt not go up and down as a talebearer among thy people: neither shalt thou stand against the blood of thy neighbour: I am the LORD..

Mirrors

 

[Magenta]

Here where the truth is supposed to matter, people lie with impunity and are offended when the truth is told.

 

[Genez]

yep I thought you would once again go the this way and not use my invitation to say your sorry to magenta for all unpleasant remarks you've given her, instead you chose to use the invitation as a means to insult her further, I guess when the door is opened for you, you walk in and shout your garbage and walk out.

It's no wonder you've burned your bridges, and I can't see you have any left .

Anyhow I'll leave you to your madness, there's no getting through to that brain of yours

Considering the denigrating things she says about the "Free willers?"
You should be telling her to apologize.

You hypocrite!

 

[Genez]

yep I thought you would once again go the this way and not use my invitation to say your sorry to magenta for all unpleasant remarks you've given her, instead you chose to use the invitation as a means to insult her further, I guess when the door is opened for you, you walk in and shout your garbage and walk out.

Show me one Christian symbol here?

It is all paganism.

 

[Jackson129]

Well, Gen 3:15 could have read if it had been God's will: "And I will put enmity between you and the man and the woman and between your seed and his..." Of course, that would have obliterated any and all allusion to the virgin birth. Have you ever pondered why God totally circumvented the natural and normally understood use of "seed" as that proceeding from man? Remember now: Scripture says nothing whatsoever positive about Adam. Everything stated about him is in negative terms,for he's constantly being contrasted with Jesus.

Since we know from other passages that Satan does indeed have his spiritual offspring in the human race, then how can we not naturally and logically surmise that Adam must have been relegated the seed of the evil one? Jesus said that Satan had nothing in Him (Jn 14:30), so why would any of the devil's children have anything in Christ?

In the genealogies listed in Luke it calls Adam the son of God.

 

[Genez]

If you are created from the dust how.are you anyone's seed? Adam was the first human a new creation.

Rufus is like a teacher who is geared towards pleasing pot-heads.

 

[Genez]

​

​

After Jesus predicted to Peter that he would deny Him three times, was Jesus' prayer to his Father on behalf of Peter effectual or not?​

Deflection central just entered the room....

Ladies and gentlemen! Rufus is here to save the day!

 

[Genez]

Your nothing to me no more

That is a double negative.
Meaning just the opposite of what you said.

At one time I was nothing to you. But, no more.