Oddbean new post about login | logout Without volition, there is no sin, such as animals cannot sin and those sleeping or under sufficient duress cannot sin culpably. Additionally, to cooperate with or act against grace requires volition. Volition, that is free will, is a good humans posses due to our rational nature. Therefore, in order to voluntarily cooperate with grace, we must not be totally depraved, and therefore total depravity is a false doctrine, and so the gift of sufficient volition cannot be extinguished before damnation. One may say that damnation is the final extinguishment of the grace necessary to voluntarily choose grace or to resist it.
That would be a circular argument: man must cooperate with grace and therefore if a doctrine doesn't teach the ability to cooperate then it's a false doctrine. Nowhere does Scripture teach that unregenerate man can or must "cooperate" with the grace of God. Enemies do not cooperate. We need complete rebirth (regeneration). The eating of the forbidden fruit was an act of volition which carried with it the threat of death upon the eating. "In the day that you eat of it, dying, you will die." This curse was carried out upon Adam and all his posterity (descending from him by ordinary generation). Man's will was from then forward, being cursed, bent against God. This is what it means that we are "children of wrath by nature," "enemies of God," etc. Man is completely free to choose whatever his nature desires. But the unregenerate man hates God and the things of God (again, see Romans 1 and Ephesians 2 among others). We do not "cooperate with grace" any more than Lazarus "cooperated" with the call of Christ. All he brought to the table, so to speak, was a carcass. For a fuller argument, see R. C. Sproul, [Pelagian Captivity of the Church](https://www.monergism.com/pelagian-captivity-church-0).
This is not a circular argument. It's a syllogism. Example: All men are born of a mother; Jesus is man; therefore, Jesus has a mother. This is another: to posses volition is good; cooperating with grace requires volition; therefore, to cooperate with grace one may not be totally depraved, that is lacking in all goodness. Another: cooperating with grace requires one to not be totally depraved; some men cooperate with grace; therefore, those who cooperate with grace are not and have not been totally depraved.
Our volition is cursed. To posses a cursed volition is not good.
To have any power is good. Evil is not the negative of good but its absence, so cursed volition would be less and less volition until true volition is gone. Therefore, true and absolute evil, a volition with all goodness removed, is to lock oneself away in a self-made prison, far from grace. This permanent state, that is when it is absolute, is what we call hell. We have concupiscence, true, and sin clouds and dulls the will and intellect such that it does not operate as freely as they might if pure, but this does not mean that our wills have no freedom or are fully devoid of goodness. Otherwise, man would have no power to accept the free gift of God's grace, man would have no ability to love, for love is voluntary, good, and free.
All fine and good, provided you don't claim this is the teaching of Scripture. The questions touching on good and evil are not about the having of power but the wielding of it. This conversation is about ethics, not metaphysics. Sin and righteousness are not things-in-themselves, but are ethical dispositions either toward God or against him. "In Adam's fall, we sinned all." What does it matter, what "good" is it, to "have a power" that inclines us to evil all the day long? Scripture says: > "The human heart is desperately wicked; who can know it?" Scripture says: > "...For we have already charged that all, both Jews and Greeks, are under sin, as it is written: None is righteous, no, not one; no one understands; no one seeks for God. All have turned aside; together they have become worthless; no one does good, not even one.” “Their throat is an open grave; they use their tongues to deceive.” “The venom of asps is under their lips.” “Their mouth is full of curses and bitterness.” “Their feet are swift to shed blood; in their paths are ruin and misery, and the way of peace they have not known.” “There is no fear of God before their eyes.” (Romans 3:9–18) Perhaps more to the point: God said: > "In the day that thou eatest of it, thou shalt surely die." So, now we come to it: "did God *really say* we would die?" Did he *really say* he would "put enmity" between us and the serpent where we had (freely) chosen friendship with him and enmity with God? Is there any "good" in friendship with the devil? At this point, as these debates always do, we resolve to the final question: to what authority should we turn to resolve all questions of doctrine and life? Rome says, "to the Magisterium." The Reformed say, "to the Scriptures." And never the two shall meet*. #SolaScriptura #SolaGratia #SolaFide #SolusChristus #SoliDeoGloria [What are the Five Solas?](https://www.ligonier.org/learn/articles/what-are-the-five-solas) *unless or until the Council of Trent is rescinded, for which we pray.
This reminds me of your other post in this thread, which I've linked below. I'm interested in the question of whether sin is a substance in itself, or, as you claim in line with Reformed theologians, whether it is an ethical disposition (which, I suppose, would make it an accident associated with a human person). It would seem that grace is a substance, for it is a positive gift that brings us into union with God. By grace, Christ lives within us and unites us to Himself, and thus we are able to perform works of righteousness in and through Him. "If a man loves me, he will keep my word, and my Father will love him, and we will come to him and make our home with him." (John 14:23, RSV) That indwelling of the Trinity within the human person enacts a substantial change, giving us "the new nature, created after the likeness of God in true righteousness and holiness" (Ephesians 4:24, RSV). This life in God seems to be more than a mere ethical disposition. Sin, on the other hand, would not be a substance, but a privation, because it destroys this life of God within us. Indeed, Original Sin destroyed the primordial friendship with God that Adam and Eve possessed. I agree that we'll ultimately run into the classic stand-off between Catholic and Reformed theology over the authority of the Magisterium to interpret Scripture, though I would disagree that there is no meeting point. We Catholics would certainly agree that all doctrine must accord with Scripture, but, of course, we would disagree that it is an authority that can stand on its own, without a living body to teach and interpret it. nostr:nevent1qvzqqqqqqypzpmdfdjun4mxavxk7ps0e62lal9d8uak0rj5fsgxr3ehye6j4crq9qyw8wumn8ghj7cmgwf5hxarsd9kxctnwdaehgu339e3k7mf0qy88wumn8ghj7mn0wvhxcmmv9uqzpfevd2ypyu3fr4xy74qdnjgwhh7eypt5u2jcllc59fmdrdlccva6yuju4n