Imagine that you are a freshman at A&M and you meet a girl whom you want to marry, so you give her a cook book and tell her that these are the laws. You then tell her, "If you keep the rules for 40 to 50 years I may accept you. Would you like to get married?"

99.9 percent of us would never insult another human being by basing a relationship off of merit like that. Sadly this is how millions upon millions of people view how a relationship with God works.

The lady in above scenario will never be free in the first system. She's free if she knows her cooking is not a condition for her husbands acceptance of her. It's the same with God. Because it doesn't depend on our merit but Gods' gift and grace we do not have to live our lives trying to gain God's acceptance. A believer in Jesus already has God's acceptance.

This also means that Jesus is not competing with the other religions of the world as accepting Him is something very unique. You are accepted on the basis of His merit up front and not on the hope that your merit will be good enough in the end.

-adapted by John Lennox (without the cool English accent)

DirtDiver said:

---

This also means that Jesus is not competing with the other religions of the world as accepting Him is something very unique. You are accepted on the basis of His merit up front and not on the hope that your merit will be good enough in the end.

-adapted by John Lennox (without the cool English accent)

---

Can you expand on this? It feels sorta 'many paths to God', which I hadn't associated with Lennox (Irish, btw ).

You are accepted upon your acceptance of His merit.

Every chick I met my freshman year that I wanted to marry suffered the same fate... I went to next class/bar/party and realized there were a whole lot more women out there in college and beyond that need the privilege of meeting me.

So I am kind of like God in that sense. I love em all as long as they put their faith in.

Agree with OP. To clarifiy it is Faith first and then action. Putting our faith into action (this is love). You give love to others by doing. It is a one-two punch.

It does you no good to say you love your spouse and then you do nothing- you will end in Divorce. Need to give self away (self sacrifice). Talk is Cheap, need action (love).

Also agree with Duncan, good to date! Lots of beautiful women at A&M.

I always felt sorrry for folks that dated entire time through college and then broke up right after college.

Quote:

---

Imagine that you are a freshman at A&M and you meet a girl whom you want to marry, so you give her a cook book and tell her that these are the laws. You then tell her, "If you keep the rules for 40 to 50 years I may accept you. Would you like to get married?"

99.9 percent of us would never insult another human being by basing a relationship off of merit like that. Sadly this is how millions upon millions of people view how a relationship with God works.

The lady in above scenario will never be free in the first system. She's free if she knows her cooking is not a condition for her husbands acceptance of her. It's the same with God. Because it doesn't depend on our merit but Gods' gift and grace we do not have to live our lives trying to gain God's acceptance. A believer in Jesus already has God's acceptance.

This also means that Jesus is not competing with the other religions of the world as accepting Him is something very unique. You are accepted on the basis of His merit up front and not on the hope that your merit will be good enough in the end.

---

Dumb.

Any relationship has rules and standards for behavior in order to enter and remain in that relationship. With Christ, that relationship starts at repentance and a change in our behavior and our mindset.

Do not agree.

Our relationship to God is completely changeable only on our end. God's love is unconditionally bestowed on all mankind. Nothing we do has anything to do with it whatsoever, good or bad. His love never changes because He never changes and He is Love.

St John Chrysostom writes:

Quote:

---

Whence then are some vessels of wrath, and some of mercy? Of their own free choice. God, however, being very good, shows the same kindness to both. For it was not those in a state of salvation only to whom He showed mercy, but also Pharaoh, as far as His part went. For of the same long-suffering, both they and he had the advantage. And if he was not saved, it was quite owing to his own will: since, as for what concerns God, he had as much done for him as they who were saved.

---

St Maximos tells us:

Quote:

---

You have not yet acquired perfect love if your regard for people is still swayed by their characters for example, if, for some particular reason, you love one person and hate another, or if for the same reason you sometimes love and sometimes hate the same person.

'But I say to you,' says the Lord, 'love your enemies do good to those who hate you, and pray for those who mistreat you.' Why did He command this? To free you from hatred, irritation, anger and rancor, and to make you worthy of the supreme gift of perfect love. And you cannot attain such love if you do not imitate God and love all men equally. For God loves all men equally and wishes them 'to be saved and to come to the knowledge of the truth'.

---

God loving us as we ignore or disobey him is not a relationship.

To be in a relationship, there are rules and standards for behavior for that relationship. However, relationship is a poor word to describe this because typically relationship describes the connection between two relative equals. Covenant is a better word because it describes a connection between unequal parties.

Please find scripture to suggest that we can break ourselves from God's love by our actions.

I think you're missing my point. This seems to happen frequently between the two of us but since you're often commended for your writing and I have never received any accolades, I'm going to assume that I am at fault here.

But to your question:

Quote:

---

If we deliberately keep on sinning after we have received the knowledge of the truth, no sacrifice for sins is left, but only a fearful expectation of judgment and of raging fire that will consume the enemies of God. Anyone who rejected the law of Moses died without mercy on the testimony of two or three witnesses. How much more severely do you think someone deserves to be punished who has trampled the Son of God underfoot, who has treated as an unholy thing the blood of the covenant that sanctified them, and who has insulted the Spirit of grace? For we know him who said, "It is mine to avenge; I will repay," and again, "The Lord will judge his people." 31 It is a dreadful thing to fall into the hands of the living God.

---

Furthermore, isn't Hell essentially eternal separation from Gods love without the chance of restoration?

The most ignored word by the new age theologians: "IF"

I John 2:3

3 By this we know that we have come to know Him, if we keep His commandments. 4 The one who says, "I have come to know Him," and does not keep His commandments, is a liar, and the truth is not in him;5 but whoever keeps His word, in him the love of God has truly been perfected. By this we know that we are in Him.

Isn't it interesting that these "epiphanies" by the Lennox of the world can't simply allow God's word to speak. It makes one wonder if they just don't like the answer (truth).

I understand what you're saying. There's two steps to this. Step one is on God's half. He is love, and He does not change. He loves all men equally regardless of their actions. He loves us "with an everlasting love" (Jer 31:3). He intentionally loves us - He loves us like a bridegroom rejoicing over his bride, like a father loving his prodigal son, like the Samaritan who rescues a traveler. There is no action on our part for this - God loves us because we are created in His image, all of us, all the time, always.

St Ephraim hymns "Glory be to Him, Who never felt the need of our praising Him; yet felt the need as being kind to us, and thirsted as loving us, and asks us to give to Him, and longs to give to us. His fruit was mingled with us men, that in Him we might come near to Him, Who condescended to us. By the Fruit of His stem He grafted us into His Tree."

Based on that, how can this be true?

Quote:

---

isn't Hell essentially eternal separation from Gods love without the chance of restoration?

---

St Paul says "neither death, nor life, nor angels, nor principalities, nor things present, nor things to come, nor powers, nor height, nor depth, nor any other created thing, will be able to separate us from the love of God". This absolutely includes our own actions.

Hell is the torment of unreturned love. St Isaac of Syria writes "those who find themselves in hell will be chastised by the scourge of love. How cruel and bitter this torment of love will be! For those who understand that they have sinned against love, undergo no greater suffering than those produced by the most fearful tortures. The sorrow which takes hold of the heart, which has sinned against love, is more piercing than any other pain. It is not right to say that the sinners in hell are deprived of the love of God ... But love acts in two ways, as suffering of the reproved, and as joy in the blessed!"

The same fire that is the glory of the saints is the scourge of the sinners -- God's love. "For our God is a consuming fire."

Quote:

---

I understand what you're saying. There's two steps to this. Step one is on God's half. He is love, and He does not change. He loves all men equally regardless of their actions. He loves us "with an everlasting love" (Jer 31:3). He intentionally loves us - He loves us like a bridegroom rejoicing over his bride, like a father loving his prodigal son, like the Samaritan who rescues a traveler. There is no action on our part for this - God loves us because we are created in His image, all of us, all the time, always.

---

Wasn't that addressed to the Jews, Gods people rather than the people of the earth? I think

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

Quote:
isn't Hell essentially eternal separation from Gods love without the chance of restoration?

---

St Paul says "neither death, nor life, nor angels, nor principalities, nor things present, nor things to come, nor powers, nor height, nor depth, nor any other created thing, will be able to separate us from the love of God". This absolutely includes our own actions.

---

Who is Paul writing to, and who is the "us" in that? He is writing to and about the community of believers.

Quote:

---

Hell is the torment of unreturned love. St Isaac of Syria writes "those who find themselves in hell will be chastised by the scourge of love. How cruel and bitter this torment of love will be! For those who understand that they have sinned against love, undergo no greater suffering than those produced by the most fearful tortures. The sorrow which takes hold of the heart, which has sinned against love, is more piercing than any other pain. It is not right to say that the sinners in hell are deprived of the love of God ... But love acts in two ways, as suffering of the reproved, and as joy in the blessed!"

---

Thats an interesting quote and I like the idea of it (the torment being the suffering of fully realizing what they rejected), but I'm not so sure about source behind it.

For your first question, remember "the Gentiles are fellow heirs and fellow members of the body, and fellow partakers of the promise in Christ Jesus through the gospel" which was "in accordance with the eternal purpose which He carried out in Christ Jesus our Lord." (Eph 3:8,11).

Christ reminds us "He causes His sun to rise on the evil and the good, and sends rain on the righteous and the unrighteous."

Psalm 106:1 says "Give thanks to the Lord, for He is good; His love endures forever." There is no conditional statement on His Goodness or His love, and they are in fact one and the same.

St John writes "We love Him because He first loved us." (1 John 4:19)

St John Chrysostom says "God loves us more than a father, mother, friend, or any else could love, and even more than we are able to love ourselves."


St Maximos says

Quote:

---

But I say to you," the Lord says, "love your enemies, do good to those who hate you, pray for those who persecute you." Why did he command these things? So that he might free you from hatred, sadness, anger and grudges, and might grant you the greatest possession of all, perfect love, which is impossible to possess except by the one who loves all equally in imitation of God.

---

and

Quote:

---

God, Who is by nature good and dispassionate, loves all men equally as His handiwork. But He glorifies the virtuous man because in his will he is united to God. At the same time, in His goodness he is merciful to the sinner and by chastising him in this life brings him back to the path of virtue. Similarly, a man of good and dispassionate judgment also loves all men equally. He loves the virtuous man because of his nature and the probity of his intention; and he loves the sinner, too, because of his nature and because in his compassion he pities him for foolishly stumbling in darkness.

---

St Leo the Great says:

Quote:

---

As the world attracts us with its appearance, and abundance and variety, it is not easy to turn away from it unless in the beauty of things visible the Creator rather than the creature is loved; for, when He says, 'you shall love the Lord your God from all your heart, and from all your mind, and from all your strength' (Mt. 22:37), He wishes us in nothing to loosen ourselves from the bonds of His love. And when He links the love of our neighbor also to this command, He enjoins on us the imitation of His own goodness, that we should love what He loves and do what He does.

---

St Mark reminds us:

Quote:

---

You should continually keep in mind the great humiliation which the Lord took upon Himself in His ineffable love for us: how the divine Logos dwelt in a womb; how He took human nature upon Himself; His birth from a woman; His gradual bodily growth; the shame He suffered, the insults the vilification, ridicule and abuse; how He was scourged and spat upon, derided and mocked; the scarlet robe, the crown of thorns; His condemnation by those in power; the outcry of the unruly Jews, men of His own race, against Him: 'Away with him, away with him, crucify him' (Jn. 19:15); the cross, the nails, the lance, the drink of vinegar and gall; the scorn of the Gentiles; the derision of the passers-by who said: 'If you are the Son of God, come down from the cross and we will believe you' (cf. Mt. 27:39-42); and the rest of the sufferings which He patiently accepted for us: crucifixion; death; the three-day burial; the descent into hell. Then keep in mind all that has come from these sufferings. See to what a height of glory the Lord's human nature was raised up by God's justice through these sufferings and humiliations.

---

If He loved us enough to humble himself, "taking the form of a servant" and dying for us "while we were yet sinners" how could He "with whom is no variableness, neither shadow of turning" change and separate Himself from us?

St Symeon the New Theologian speaks of the judgment this way:

Quote:

---

In the future life the Christian is not examined if he has renounced the whole world for Christ's love, or if he has distributed his riches to the poor or if he fasted or kept vigil or prayed, or if he wept and lamented for his sins, or if he has done any other good in this life, but he is examined attentively if he has any similitude with Christ, as a son does with his father.

---

What argument do you think that I'm making?

Solo Tetherball Champ said:

---

Quote:

---

Hell is the torment of unreturned love. St Isaac of Syria writes "those who find themselves in hell will be chastised by the scourge of love. How cruel and bitter this torment of love will be! For those who understand that they have sinned against love, undergo no greater suffering than those produced by the most fearful tortures. The sorrow which takes hold of the heart, which has sinned against love, is more piercing than any other pain. It is not right to say that the sinners in hell are deprived of the love of God ... But love acts in two ways, as suffering of the reproved, and as joy in the blessed!"

---

Thats an interesting quote and I like the idea of it (the torment being the suffering of fully realizing what they rejected), but I'm not so sure about source behind it.

---

I like the idea of being fully informed and educated about something before I've been told that I am subject to the consequences for rejecting something I don't believe or understand. Do you believe that after death we are given full access and understanding of the objective realities of the afterlife with which to make a decision to accept or reject God?

For what it is worth, I've always liked the idea presented in The Inferno where there is place in hell where the virtuous pagans or those who never had a chance to hear the gospel dwell without torment, though they are eternally separated from God but not in heaven.

Now there is nothing to support such a place in scripture, but it is an idea that I find more appealing than the alternative.

And sorry bro, christian-turned-atheists don't qualify. If I was the bouncer I'd sneak you in, you're cool in my book.

That the covenant can be broken by action on man's part. I think it's a logical way to view, if you look at the relationship as a one-part thing, like a handshake as a single event. But it's important, I think, to break it down one level further and realize that one hand is always there, no matter what, always. He is always reaching for us.

Quote:

---

That the covenant can be broken by action on man's part. I think it's a logical way to view, if you look at the relationship as a one-part thing, like a handshake as a single event.

---

A covenant is an agreement between two unequal parties. We are under a covenant, whether we are willing parties to it or not.

Was the old covenant broken, hence the need for a new covenant? If so, then who broke it? If it wasn't broken, then why would we need a new covenant?

Quote:

---

But it's important, I think, to break it down one level further and realize that one hand is always there, no matter what, always. He is always reaching for us.

---

Not always - there comes a time and a place where that open hand is pulled away: death, or the end of the age of grace as foretold in the book of Revelations. Set aside the possibility of eternal torment for a moment: If hell is separation from God, How can he be reaching for us even as he has shut us out? You cannot reconcile the idea of his hand always being there based upon what is revealed to us.

And the verse I've posted in Hebrews appears to be describing this life:

"If we deliberately keep on sinning after we have received the knowledge of the truth, no sacrifice for sins is left, but only a fearful expectation of judgment and of raging fire that will consume the enemies of God. Anyone who rejected the law of Moses died without mercy on the testimony of two or three witnesses. How much more severely do you think someone deserves to be punished who has trampled the Son of God underfoot, who has treated as an unholy thing the blood of the covenant that sanctified them, and who has insulted the Spirit of grace? For we know him who said, "It is mine to avenge; I will repay," and again, "The Lord will judge his people." 31 It is a dreadful thing to fall into the hands of the living God."

There is also the matter of the unforgivable sin as well.

Eh, there is some room to discuss the nature of the NT and OT word for covenant (diatheke vs suntheke or testament vs agreement). Some people suggest that the NT authors used diatheke intentionally to show the more one-sided nature, but it's not necessarily crystal clear.

But I'm not sure that the one sided bit is any different than what I'm saying. The fact that God saves us, unilaterally, without any action on our part, seems to imply what I'm getting at... He loves us unconditionally.

Here's a bit about it I found on these words (bold emphasis mine):

Quote:

---

In the Septuagint [diatheke] is regularly used as the translation of the covenant of God (berith), rather than the apparently more available word [suntheke]. In this there is already an expression of the fact that the covenant of God does not have the character of a contract between two parties, but rather that of a one-sided grant. This corresponds with the covenant-idea in the Old Testament, in which berith, even in human relations, sometimes refers to a one-party guarantee which a more favored person gives a less favored one (cf. Josh. 9:6, 15; 1 Sam. 11:1; Ezek. 17:13). And it is most peculiarly true of the divine covenantal deed that it is a one-party guarantee. It comes not from man at all, but from God alone. This does not rule out the fact, of course, that it involves religious and ethical obligation, namely that of faith and obedience (Gen. 17:9-10), and that thus the reciprocal element is taken up in the covenant. Still, such an obligation is not always named, and there is no room to speak at all of a correlation, in the sense that each determines and holds in balance the terms of the other, between the promise of God and the human appropriation of it. It is not the idea of parity, or even that of reciprocity, but that of validity which determines the essence of the covenant-idea. God's covenant with Noah, for example, lays down no stipulations, and it has the character of a one-party guarantee. It does of course require the faith of man, but is in its fulfillment in no respect dependent on the faith, an it is validly in force for all coming generations, believing and unbelieving (cf. Gen. 9:9). And in the making of the covenant with Abraham, too, in Gen. 15, the fulfillment of the law is in symbolical form made to depend wholly upon the divine deed. Abraham is deliberately excluded he is the astonished spectator (cf. Gen. 15:12, 17). True, in the Sinaitic covenant, the stipulations which God lays down for his people sometimes take the form of actual conditions, so that the realization of the promise is conditioned by them (cf. Lev. 26:15 ff. and Deut. 31:20), but this structural change in the covenant-revelation can be explained in connection with the wider promulgation it is to extend to the whole nation of Israel of the covenant, by means of which the covenant-relationship takes on a wider and more external meaning. It comprises not merely the unconditional guarantee of God to those who walk in the faith and obedience of their father Abraham: it also lays down a special bond constituted by the offer of salvation, on the one side, and by responsibility, on the other side, for those who will not appear to manifest a oneness with their spiritual ancestor. Meanwhile, of course, the fact remains that in all the different dispensations of the covenant of grace, God's unconditional promise to Abraham constitutes its heart and kernel. Consequently, when the "new covenant" (Jer. 31:33) is announced, one thing is expressly made clear: namely, that the disposition which is indispensible for the human reception of the covenant-benefits will itself be granted as the gift of God Himself. In other words, that very thing which in the Sinaitic covenant was so plainly set down as a condition, belongs in the new covenant to the benefits promised by God in the covenant itself. The New Testament concept of [diatheke] lies quite in the line of that development, particularly as Paul thinks of it, as is evident in [Galatians 3 and 4], and in such a place as Rom. 9. That New Testament concept points to a salvation whose benefits are guaranteed by God and as a matter of fact are actually given, because in Christ and through Him the conditions of the covenant are fulfilled.

Herman Ridderbos, The Epistle of Paul to the Churches of Galatia (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1953), pp. 130-31.

---

As far as your section point, you say that hell is separation from God, but I don't agree with that at all. I completely reject that, as it is in contradiction to the teaching of the Orthodox Church and our understanding of God.

The whole structure of divine cause and effect is turned on its head by Christ. The OT has some kind of structure for expiation of sin, but these are seemingly conditional (Like what happened to Eli in 1 Samuel... "I swear to the house of Eli that the iniquity of Eli's house shall not be expiated by sacrifice or offering forever"). Christ's offering removed this conditional element, changed the guarantee forever, and extended grace to all men.

For example, Matthew 13 Christ says His reign is like a net that catches all kinds of fish, good and bad. In Luke 14, the Master tells His servant to bring in the poor, crippled, blind, and lame -- and then when the house isn't full to go out to the countryside and compel (all) people to come!

There are lots of interpretations about the unforgivable sin, but I think it is clear. The unforgivable sin is rejection of this grace. By saying that Christ is a demon or that the power of the Spirit is demonic, they reject the Father. It's the only thing that can prevent you from receiving grace: denying it.

God forgive my speculation, but I don't believe or understand everlasting judgment the way most folks seem to. I don't think we know or have any right to speculate what happens to others after death, to those outside the Church. I think we should pray for them, for all mankind, even after death.

This article is a good summary of the subject in Orthodoxy
http://www.clarion-journal.com/files/dare-we-hope-for-the-salvation-of-all-1.pdf

A brief overview:

Quote:

---

The dilemma that disturbs us is well summed up in a conversation recorded by Archimandrite Sophrony, the disciple of St Silouan of Mount Athos:

Quote:

---

It was particularly characteristic of Staretz Silouan to pray for the dead suffering in the hell of separation from God... He could not bear to think that anyone would languish in "outer darkness."

I remember a conversation between him and a certain hermit, who declared with evident satisfaction, "God will punish all atheists. They will burn in everlasting fire."

Obviously upset, the Staretz said, "Tell me, supposing you went to paradise, and there looked down and saw somebody burning in hell-firewould you feel happy?"

"It can't be helped. It would be their own fault," said the hermit. The Staretz answered him with a sorrowful countenance.

"Love could not bear that," he said. "We must pray for all."

---

Here exactly the basic problem is set before us. St Silouan appeals to divine compassion: "Love could not bear that." The hermit emphasizes human responsibility: "It would be their own fault." We are confronted by tw principles that are apparently conflicting: first, God is love; second, human beings are free.

---

Solo Tetherball Champ said:

---

For what it is worth, I've always liked the idea presented in The Inferno where there is place in hell where the virtuous pagans or those who never had a chance to hear the gospel dwell without torment, though they are eternally separated from God but not in heaven.

---

Why should that idea be liked? I suppose its better than dwelling with torment, but it also describes a system whereas the accidental circumstances of when and where you live is a factor in your lot in the afterlife.

Quote:

---

And sorry bro, christian-turned-atheists don't qualify. If I was the bouncer I'd sneak you in, you're cool in my book.

---

Its cool, I'm pretty sure we'll all end in the same place anyway.

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

Solo Tetherball Champ said:
For what it is worth, I've always liked the idea presented in The Inferno where there is place in hell where the virtuous pagans or those who never had a chance to hear the gospel dwell without torment, though they are eternally separated from God but not in heaven.

---

Why should that idea be liked? I suppose its better than dwelling with torment, but it also describes a system whereas the accidental circumstances of when and where you live is a factor in your lot in the afterlife.

---

Yeah, it does sound like Eternal Apartheid, but I don't make the rules.

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

Quote:
And sorry bro, christian-turned-atheists don't qualify. If I was the bouncer I'd sneak you in, you're cool in my book.

---

Its cool, I'm pretty sure we'll all end in the same place anyway.

---

Cryogenically frozen awaiting to be downloaded into an indestructible robot body?

Quote:

---

Can you expand on this? It feels sorta 'many paths to God', which I hadn't associated with Lennox (Irish, btw ).

---

Totally right on him being Irish, KV. (he studied in England, I believe). He was contrasting the many paths view with Christianity. I don't know of a religion other than Christianity where salvation/eternity is not earned and assurance is given up front. Millions of people believe that God is waiting for them to 'prove', 'earn', or 'merit' a relationship with Him.
In this view (that he nor I believe in) one should try their very best in service or sacrifice and can only hope at the end of their life they have done enough to be rewarded with Valhalla, heaven, all the virgins, Nirvana, etc.

God gave up the life of his only Son to pay for humanities sin. Each human that receives that gift of God on his/her own behalf is guaranteed eternity with God up front. It's assured and not hoped for. The relationship is given and not earned.

There were quite a few view expressed that I disagree with following your questions made by others. 1. Man does not ever become God. 2. Salvation is free - Although all believers should always live lives that reflect Christ, we all fail miserably and often. If salvation is ever described as Christ plus my effort, my lifestyle of loving, anything I can offer, etc.,it's no longer consistent with sound Biblical teaching and no longer Christianity.

...But when the kindness of God our Savior and His love for mankind appeared, He saved us [not we save ourselves], not on the basis of deeds which we have done in righteousness [whatever righteous deed that may be], but according to His mercy. Titus 3:5

Quote:

---

1. Man does not ever become God.

---

God made man so that man might become god. Salvation comes from deification and union to God, not from "payment" for sins and confession or "merit". Salvation isn't done, but to come. Salvation isn't a transaction, it's a transformation. We become gods by divine grace what God is by nature. This is and has always been a small-o orthodox teaching of the Christian faith, from the words of our own Lord Jesus and Holy Scripture.


As a starting point, we should examine the gospel of St John 10 and Christ's quotation of Psalm 82:6.

Quote:

---

The Jews picked up stones again to stone Him. Jesus answered them, "I showed you many good works from the Father; for which of them are you stoning Me?"

The Jews answered Him, "For a good work we do not stone You, but for blasphemy; and because You, being a man, make Yourself out to be God."

Jesus answered them, "Has it not been written in your Law, 'I SAID, YOU ARE GODS'? "If he called them gods, to whom the word of God came (and the Scripture cannot be broken), do you say of Him, whom the Father sanctified and sent into the world, 'You are blaspheming,' because I said, 'I am the Son of God'?

"If I do not do the works of My Father, do not believe Me; but if I do them, though you do not believe Me, believe the works, so that you may know and understand that the Father is in Me, and I in the Father."

---

The point of salvation, the point of being a Christian, is to be perfect, blameless, complete. This is unequivocally clear in the scriptures (Matt 5:48, Leviticus 19:2, Deuteronomy 18:13, 2 Cor 7:1, Phil 2:15, James 1:4, etc etc etc). Yet only God is perfect, blameless, complete. So to be perfect, blameless, complete, is to become sons of God, to become like Him in every way. St Paul says we work in the ministry until we all attain to "the stature of the fullness of Christ". St John says "See how great a love the Father has bestowed on us, that we would be called children of God; and such we are. For this reason the world does not know us, because it did not know Him. Beloved, now we are children of God, and it has not appeared as yet what we will be. We know that when He appears, we will be like Him, because we will see Him just as He is. And everyone who has this hope fixed on Him purifies himself, just as He is pure."

If that doesn't mean to become gods, what could it be? If we become like Him, either we are to become like gods like God -- to the fullness of stature, mind you -- or He is not God. If we share in His sonship, we share in His godhood.


St Maximos teaches that to the full extent of His humbling in His incarnation we will be exalted. As large as the distance is from God to man, man will be raised to meet Him.

So, how? Christ Himself teaches us that we are to be perfected in unity -- that we may all be one. Not in union with each other but in Him, just as He is in perfect unity with the Father (cf John 17:21-23). St Peter says we were given by His divine power "everything pertaining to life and godliness". These things are "true knowledge" and "the precious and magnificent promises", and through them we escape corruption through "partaking of the divine nature" (cf 2 Peter 1:3-4). This is our faith, in a nutshell.

Quote:

---

St Paul says "neither death, nor life, nor angels, nor principalities, nor things present, nor things to come, nor powers, nor height, nor depth, nor any other created thing, will be able to separate us from the love of God". This absolutely includes our own actions.

---

Your verse is missing something, the beginning of the verse. For I am convinced that.

This is another one of Paul's opinions and not from God. This is why Paul's epistles cannot be from God. His own opinion is in there quite a few times.

I'll take St Paul's opinion over yours.

Antinomian man, in his zeal to remove himself from the obligation of obeying Torah, will seek out
whatever pretexts he can find in order to justify eradicating the law.

I would too, but let's quote in context.

Yep, there are many we can point to that say the same thing...

There is One who is good; but if you wish to enter into life, keep the commandments." Matthew 19:17

"The Torah and the Prophets were proclaimed until John. Since then, the Good News of the kingdom of God is being proclaimed, and everyone tries forcing his way in. 17 But it is easier for heaven and earth to pass away than for a single serif of the Torah to fail.

Luke, in describing Yeshua's treatment of the Torah, has Yeshua remarking that it is easier for heaven
and earth to pass than for one tittle (serif) of the Torah to fail (Luke 16:17). The book of Luke could not have been
composed prior to the year 60CE. Thus, if we are to presume that Luke knew that the Torah had been "done away," he really needed to do a better job of explaining that, even though heaven and earth had not yet passed away at the time of his authoring his account, the law had in fact already been "taken away" many years prior.

Quote:

---

God made man so that man might become god. Salvation comes from deification and union to God, not from "payment" for sins and confession or "merit". As a starting point, we should examine the gospel of St John 10 and Christ's quotation of Psalm 82:6.

---

Starting with Psalms 82 and John 10. Who is being referred to as 'gods' in Psalm 82? What are the characteristics of these people in Psalms? Who is Jesus having a conversation with in John 10?

John 10 "If he called them (who is the them?) gods, to whom the word of God came..

Psalms 82 calls corrupt rulers, 'gods'. How would it follow that this should be interpreted as 'we all become gods?" Especially when the entirety of Scripture screams the opposite.

Being like God is not the same thing as becoming God. God made us in His likeness. He want's humanity to be holy as He is holy. Believers in God will be like God in the future in a limited number of ways such as receiving a body imperishable. However we will not be eternal, will still be created as God was not created, we will not be able to forgive sins or receive worship for ourselves. We do not have life within ourselves as He has life within Himself.

'See now that I, I am He,
And there is no god besides Me;
It is I who put to death and give life.
I have wounded and it is I who heal,
And there is no one who can deliver from My hand. Deut. 32:39


Payment for sins..
And they *sang a new song, saying, "Worthy are You to take the book and to break its seals; for You were slain, and purchased for God with Your blood men from every tribe and tongue and people and nation.

Here's the original video.