The Highway Forums General Discussion Theology Discussion Forum Is compatibilism the only true Calvinist response?

This post is a response to posts by J_Edwards and Pilgrim. I esteem you both as brothers in Christ, and I don't want my words to venture outside the boundaries of that brotherhood. In case I do happen to venture outside those boundaries, I ask in advance for your pardon. In the spirit of iron sharpening iron, with due diligence "to preserve the unity of the Spirit in the bond of peace":

J_Edwards said: You tell me that I "fail to correctly understand what the Analogy of Faith entails". Then you give explanations for what Analogy of Scripture and Analogy of Faith are. But when I read these explanations, I don't see my failure, but my vindication.

There's a distinction between positive law and eternal law. Eternal law is God-made law. It exists everywhere, at all times, inescapably. Positive law is law that human beings impose upon other human beings. Scripture may not spell out this distinction explicitly, but an inductive reading of it makes the distinction undeniable. Given that this is the case, it looks to me like you might want to give due consideration to the following:

• I agree that the law against murder is eternal law that existed from the beginning. Even so,
• The first time in the biblical chronology that positive law is overtly prescribed or mandated by God is in the Noachian Covenant. This is a fact. I dare you to disprove it.
• The fact that the Genesis 9:6 mandate contains a penalty, retribution, to be imposed on anyone guilty of bloodshed, makes it unavoidably obvious that the mandate is positive law. Positive law without a penalty is a mere recommendation, because positive law without a penalty is positive law that can't be enforced by humans, and is therefore not really positive law at all. Again, both an inductive reading of Scripture and common sense make this unavoidably obvious.
• In answer to your question,
  Quote

  Do you really think there were no commandments regulating society prior to Moses writing them down?
  No! I don't believe this. I never claimed to believe this. In the few posts that I've made, I don't think I've even mentioned Moses. I see Genesis 9:6 as a commandment regulating society that preceded Moses. I also believe that contracts have been ubiquitous in human societies since well before the flood. Contracts, by definition, establish positive law that's imposed upon the parties to the contract. Contracts are so basic that a Bible study on Hebrew b'rit, "marriage", "treaty", "covenant", etc., leads one to the conclusion that human societies probably can't even exist without contracts.
• In answer to your question,
  Quote

  what right did God have for approaching Cain for his sin?
  God didn't need a right for approaching Cain. God is sovereign. He's only limited by the laws He imposes on Himself.
• In response to
  Quote

  the lives of Jacob and Joseph's brothers reveal they "knew" they had done wrong prior to the written law of Moses. Adam himself did not see the written law of Moses, but "knew" he had sinned both by a (1) convicted heart, and (2) the VERBAL, not written, law of God (Gen. 3:1 says, hath God said, not hath God written).
  I say: "Amen!" See! This is proof that the eternal law is pervasive. Does this prove that positive law is also pervasive? No!
• Regarding
  Quote

  The fact that Genesis 9:6 was already in effect is proven by the fact that God “appointed a sign for Cain, lest any finding him should smite him,” otherwise he would have been killed before accomplishing God’s will.
  This looks like a stretch to me. The fact that Genesis 4:23-24 (NASB) says
  Quote

  Lamech said to his wives, "Adah and Zillah, Listen to my voice, You wives of Lamech, Give heed to my speech, For I have killed a man for wounding me; And a boy for striking me; If Cain is avenged sevenfold, Then Lamech seventy-sevenfold."
  is evidence that people were probably getting away with murder generally. That this whole era from the fall to the flood was anarchic is also proven by passages like Genesis 6:5-7:
  Quote

  Then the LORD saw that the wickedness of man was great on the earth, and that every intent of the thoughts of his heart was only evil continually. The LORD was sorry that He had made man on the earth, and He was grieved in His heart. The LORD said, "I will blot out man whom I have created from the face of the land, from man to animals to creeping things and to birds of the sky; for I am sorry that I have made them."
  From the beginning God wanted people to live by their own consciences, i.e., by eternal law. He had so little regard for positive law that He put a mark on Cain to keep people from executing justice against him. I can't find any reason in Scripture to believe that Cain was special and deserved a mark, while Lamech was not special, and didn't. Since "God is not one to show partiality" (Acts 10:34; NASB), why should He prefer Cain over Lamech, or over anyone else? It doesn't make sense. What makes sense is that God wanted people to live by eternal law, and He allowed the global positive law against bloodshed only very reluctantly. He preferred a period of anarchy to show us how little regard He has for encouraging us to impose ourselves on other people non-consensually.

J_Edwards, I'm only addressing your forth point here because I don't think the others pertain. It looks to me like the others essentially set up a straw man named "Daniel Fuller" for you to throw darts at, to which I say, "Good shot!".

Pilgrim, you clearly have much more knowledge and expertise in theology than I do. I just read the Book and pray the Lord will lead me to make sense of it in a way that glorifies Him. When I check my conclusions against those of other people, I often find big differences. But our God is the Lord of all, and whatever it is He's doing, it must be good. --- Regarding what you say about the Genesis 9:6 mandate against bloodshed, the case of Cain, and the Ten Commandments being in force from creation, what I say above applies here. I don't doubt that the Ten Commandments existed as eternal law from the beginning. But that's not the same as their existence as positive law.

Regarding I know that this is the majority opinion in the English-speaking Christian community. I don't know whether I agree or not. Could you explain how, based on Scripture, you come to this conclusion?

When you say I say, "Amen!".

Thanks to both of you for responding to my posts.