[SoothingDave]

No, you twisted it a bit. I did not say that having the ability to sin or not sin made one greater than God, but the ability to act different than our nature would make us greater than God.

OK, I looked back and see I did misunderstand what you were getting at. Yes, we all act according to our natures.

I guess we are stuck on the T then.

An unsaved person acts according to his nature, which is to sin.

I simply don't agree that this is the nature. Unless you radically redefine what "sin" means, this simply isn't true. No one is comopletely sin free and no one chooses the good all of the time.

But there are actions done by the unsaved that are not sinful.

This, then, is where we are stuck. The unsaved person has just as much freedom, actual freedom, to choose good ro bad as the saved person does. But one has his will bent toward evil, the other toward goodness.

It is the freedom that is the constant.

SD

[ksen]

I simply don't agree that this is the nature. Unless you radically redefine what "sin" means, this simply isn't true. No one is comopletely sin free and no one chooses the good all of the time.

Ok, let's start here. How do you define sin?

Here is my definition:

• And he that doubteth is damned if he eat, because he eateth not of faith: for whatsoever is not of faith is sin. - Roamns 14:23

So sin is something that is done without faith. That being the case, can an Unbeliever ever do anything by faith?

But there are actions done by the unsaved that are not sinful.

Not according to Ro 14:23.

This, then, is where we are stuck. The unsaved person has just as much freedom, actual freedom, to choose good ro bad as the saved person does. But one has his will bent toward evil, the other toward goodness.

I'll grant the part of your argument that says the freedom is there. What I would say is that the will to do good, by God's standard, is not there in the Unbeliever.