tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6789188.post3299967217773841364..comments2024-03-27T17:15:37.606-04:00Comments on Triablogue: Batteries includedRyanhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17809283662428917799noreply@blogger.comBlogger2125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6789188.post-79555898845992263942016-06-05T11:57:36.137-04:002016-06-05T11:57:36.137-04:00In Reformed theology, there's spiritual inabil...In Reformed theology, there's spiritual inability. That has reference to an inability due to original sin. Yes, Edwards distinguishes between natural and moral inability. He says even the unregenerate retain the former kind of freedom. <br /><br />However, I'm referring to predestination. In Reformed theology, it's impossible to act contrary to what God has decreed. That operates at a different level. stevehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16547070544928321788noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6789188.post-57183531710129763252016-06-05T05:11:37.763-04:002016-06-05T05:11:37.763-04:00"To make one brief point: it's not merely..."To make one brief point: it's not merely that the reprobate are "morally unable to obey the command"; rather, due to predestination, it's metaphysically impossible."<br /><br />Are you talking about the reprobate being metaphysically unable to believe in Christ? I have read many writers who would say differently, Edwards/Van Til/Frame have made points that the reprobate are morally unable to believe but they are not metaphysically incapable. I would have to dig out a sermon by Edwards where he was making the point that the command to believe is not like the command to walk for a paraplegic. <br /><br />Unless I am not understanding this brief point. Could you comment more on this please. Thanks.<br /><br />Peter<br />Peterhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05993599903032999202noreply@blogger.com