"Who works all things according to the counsel
of His own will"
of His own will"
If saved…always saved
22,370 Views |
416 Replies |
Last: 1 yr ago by TheGreatEscape
God only saves those who cannot save themselves.
I'm going to leave on this note.
"Therefore, brothers, strive to make your calling and election sure. For if you practice these things you will never stumble, and in this way there will be richly provided for you an entrance into the eternal kingdom of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ."
All the rest of this is theoretical speculation and sophistry with no practical pastoral value.
No Calvinist thinks they're a tare.
"Therefore, brothers, strive to make your calling and election sure. For if you practice these things you will never stumble, and in this way there will be richly provided for you an entrance into the eternal kingdom of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ."
All the rest of this is theoretical speculation and sophistry with no practical pastoral value.
No Calvinist thinks they're a tare.
Zobel said:
I'm going to leave on this note.
"Therefore, brothers, strive to make your calling and election sure. For if you practice these things you will never stumble, and in this way there will be richly provided for you an entrance into the eternal kingdom of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ."
All the rest of this is theoretical speculation and sophistry with no practical pastoral value.
No Calvinist thinks they're a tare.
I'm working by the sheer grace of God to make my election
sure by the power of the Holy Spirit. The same Holy Spirit that regenerated me and caused me to see (see John 3).
"No Calvinist thinks they're a tare."
And they don't think their kids are either.
And they don't think their kids are either.
Agilaw said:
"No Calvinist thinks they're a tare."
And they don't think their kids are either.
Untrue. But we do believe God is merciful. We do hold fast to his promises that "If saved…always saved."
TheGreatEscape said:
Ephesians 1:4-12 (ESV)
4 "even as he chose us in him before the foundation of the world, that we should be holy and blameless before him. In love 5 He predestined us for adoption to himself as sons through Jesus Christ, according to the purpose of his will, 6 to the praise of his glorious grace, with which he has blessed us in the Beloved. 7 in him we have redemption through his blood, the forgiveness of our trespasses, according to the riches of his grace, 8 which he lavished upon us, in all wisdom and insight 9 making known to us the mystery of his will, according to his purpose, which he set forth in Christ 10 as a plan for the fullness of time, to unite all things in him, things in heaven and things on earth.
11 In him we have obtained an inheritance, having been predestined according to the purpose of him who works all things according to the counsel of his will, 12 so that we who were the first to hope in Christ might be to the praise of his glory."
Disagree. We understand the theology and reject it. That does not mean we reject the Scriptures Calvinists always bring up. We just believe that when you look at the Bible as a whole that is just part of the whole picture.Bob_Ag said:Agilaw said:
You still reframe my question and don't answer my question that is clearly posed?
Are all of your kids, close family members, and friends chosen and part of the elect?
I suppose if you answered honestly you'd say yes.
I'd then say aren't you and yours to seemingly been extremely blessed to somehow have won the spiritual lottery of eternal life in heaven.
Another item, why is it that Calvinists won't/can't have an "alter call" or something similar or ask a friend if they would like to know Jesus personally as their savior as that is doing something you can't do in your theology. But you can go on a "mission trip" to a foreign country and do that exact thing???
You also didn't answer the difficult questions I posed
See below. You know if your kids, family, and close friends are part of the elect. Why do you struggle to answer that question? Just say yes, me and my friends and close family members have all been blessed to be part of the elect
Struggle? Your question is asking if I know if people have true faith. I hope so, but I'm pretty sure it's the Spirit that bears witness, not me. That's explicitly told in Scripture.
With all due respect, I don't think you really understand the theology.
To me it is very clear in Scripture that God desires all people to be saved. And loves all people. Calvinists disagree with that theology.
We are still united in our love for Christ and for each other. I do not think anyone is going to change their mind and the Spirit is telling me that this is not glorifying God or uniting believers.
So I am done. And I thank God for all my Calvinist fellow believers.
Shalom and God bless.
No material on this site is intended to be a substitute for professional medical advice, diagnosis or treatment. See full Medical Disclaimer.
I think there's a lot to like about Calvinism. It glorifies the power and sovereignty of God more than any other belief system. They also have it right when it comes to the depravity of man. The only things man can do apart from God are wicked deeds. After all, God is all that is good. Nothing can be good without God, and therefore any of our actions or thoughts that are independent of God are therefore independent of goodness. Only with God's cooperation can man do good or be good. The same that man requires air to breathe or water to swim. It's nonsensical to think a man can be good without God's help and cooperation.
The key hang up for me, and for most I think, is the idea that God offer that goodness to everyone. According to Calvinsim, He basically picks the winners and dominates their will until they are good. He picks other losers, and He completely withholds all goodness from them. That certainly puts God in charge of everything, but it makes Him a monster. And that's even without considering the concept of hell or eternity in general. You only need to look at our earthly existence. Imagine a parent that has a dozen children. He takes his two favorite, lobotomizes them, and then treats them like royalty. The rest he throws in a locked back yard, offers them no food, water, shelter, and steps out only to beat and deride them. He teaches them nothing and watches as they devolve into violence, selfishness, oppression, and greed. Then once they are thoroughly wretched, He steps out and kills all of them. That's Calvin's God. In no universe could that God be described as loving, patient, or kind. There is no room for hope in that scenario, and there is no room for faith. Considering that love, faith, and hope are the fundamental bedrocks of the Christian faith, then a belief system that doesn't need any of those can't be correct. Some essential thing was missed, and it threw off the entire recipe.
The key hang up for me, and for most I think, is the idea that God offer that goodness to everyone. According to Calvinsim, He basically picks the winners and dominates their will until they are good. He picks other losers, and He completely withholds all goodness from them. That certainly puts God in charge of everything, but it makes Him a monster. And that's even without considering the concept of hell or eternity in general. You only need to look at our earthly existence. Imagine a parent that has a dozen children. He takes his two favorite, lobotomizes them, and then treats them like royalty. The rest he throws in a locked back yard, offers them no food, water, shelter, and steps out only to beat and deride them. He teaches them nothing and watches as they devolve into violence, selfishness, oppression, and greed. Then once they are thoroughly wretched, He steps out and kills all of them. That's Calvin's God. In no universe could that God be described as loving, patient, or kind. There is no room for hope in that scenario, and there is no room for faith. Considering that love, faith, and hope are the fundamental bedrocks of the Christian faith, then a belief system that doesn't need any of those can't be correct. Some essential thing was missed, and it threw off the entire recipe.
No material on this site is intended to be a substitute for professional medical advice, diagnosis or treatment. See full Medical Disclaimer.
dermdoc said:What claims have I made that are a misapplication of Scripture?AgLiving06 said:dermdoc said:
Disagree. Especially with only a fraction of mankind will be saved. 1 Timothy 2 3-4 and 2 Peter 3:9 say God wants every man to be saved.
Can God be thwarted?
God commands us not to sin, yet we do. Does that mean we've thwarted God?
It's a misapplication of Scripture to make the claims you do (as we've been well over).
It is clear that through faith, God wants to save all.
It's also clear that many will turn away from God.
And the only disagreement we have is that many will turn away from God and their free will trumps God's desire?
Just trying to understand what we are discussing.
Lets take 1 Timothy 2:3-4:
"This is good, and it is pleasing in the sight of God our Savior, 4 who desires all people to be saved and to come to the knowledge of the truth."
So you respond and say, "who can thwart God?"
But Paul then says this just a couple sentences later in 1 Timothy 4:
'4 Now the Spirit expressly says that in later times some will depart from the faith by devoting themselves to deceitful spirits and teachings of demons, 2 through the insincerity of liars whose consciences are seared, 3 who forbid marriage and require abstinence from foods that God created to be received with thanksgiving by those who believe and know the truth. 4 For everything created by God is good, and nothing is to be rejected if it is received with thanksgiving, 5 for it is made holy by the word of God and prayer."
---------------
So if our desire is to read Paul's letter in true context, we have a dilemma. Is Paul wrong and God is being thwarted? Or if Paul is right, is there something wrong with the logic being used?
And that's the problem with the belief that all will be eventually saved. It relies on excluding parts of Scripture (as exampled above) or it removes the necessity of faith for if in the afterlife, I realize I'm not with God then it's not really faith anymore. I know I chose poorly.
So while it's well intentioned and from a good place, we need to take heed from what Jesus tells us at the end of Matthew and "19 Go therefore and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, 20 teaching them to observe all that I have commanded you. And behold, I am with you always, to the end of the age."
Hoping for anything else is unfortunately probably just hope.
It's amazing to me now, as I used to not be a Reformed thinker, looking back at scripture, how plain and clear the text is in regards to these issues. Yet, Peter tells us in in 2 Peter that people will have have a hard time understanding it. Why? Because man will always have a desire to interject himself into God's redemptive plan. Man's pride is as old as sin itself. People are desperate for universalism.
At the end of Romans 8:28-30, Paul is speaking about our future glory. He is very clear, leaves no ambiguity in the text or in his grammar.
For reference:
BUT! Paul continues with a rhetorical question immediately after this.
Who is us? This is the key question. WHO IS US?
It is who he was just immediately talking about in verses 28-30 that God is working to redeem. He confirms that in verse 33. Why can no one bring a charge against God's elect? Because he justified them as they are in Christ and his righteousness, not ours, but his righteousness is imputed to us. He did that, not us. Who can condemn this person now? There is no condemnation for those in Christ Jesus. Us is not all of humanity, it is those who God FOREKNEW and PREDESTINED. There is no ambiguity in this text. It is continuous train of thought by Paul and these are not separate passages in separate parts of the bible.
Ok, maybe you are tired of Romans 8. Look at what Paul says in Ephesians 1.
The same language is being used and its being articulated in the clearest of grammar. Notice how Paul clearly defines who the "us" is and who the "Him" is. Once again, WHO IS US?
Taken directly from the text: It is those He chose before the world existed, to become righteous, as He predestined to adoption as Sons of Christ, to receive His Grace according to His will for His Glory.
Because of this, the "Us" now has an inheritance that was also predestined because He works all things according to His Will. (he is the creator).
Paul could not be any more clear in this text just as he was in Romans.
What does the apostle John say?
Who is Born of God? Is it all of us? Are these not the same people Paul is referring to? John is talking about the sanctification, through the Holy Spirit, of those God called.
He reiterates in His Gospel.
Although we are still sinners, we are no longer slaves to sin, but slaves to righteousness (Romans 6 15-23).
What does Jesus say?
He defines that in verse 37. "All that the Father gives to me". Those He FOREKNEW and PREDESTINED.
What will those people get? They are glorified (Romans 8).
Now we've come full circle.
Who are those that are called? Those that love God (Romans 8).
God is not a monster. He is going to save His people that love Him because God alone is sovereign and he KNOWS His people.
At the end of Romans 8:28-30, Paul is speaking about our future glory. He is very clear, leaves no ambiguity in the text or in his grammar.
For reference:
No one in this thread even responds to this text because it is so clearly outlined. Notice verse 28, "those who love God" and "those who are called to his purpose" are the SAME group. It continues to explicitly tell us, that those are whom he FOREKNEW (active verb), that he predestined to conformity in Christ. This leads to them being justified, not because they are righteous, but because He is righteous. The end result is God glorifies those he foreknew. Who are they? Those who love God.Quote:
28 And we know that for those who love God all things work together for good, for those who are called according to his purpose. 29 For those whom he foreknew he also predestined to be conformed to the image of his Son, in order that he might be the firstborn among many brothers. 30 And those whom he predestined he also called, and those whom he called he also justified, and those whom he justified he also glorified.
The Holy Bible: English Standard Version (Wheaton, IL: Crossway Bibles, 2016), Ro 8:2830.
BUT! Paul continues with a rhetorical question immediately after this.
Quote:
31 What then shall we say to these things? If God is for us, who can be against us? 32 He who did not spare his own Son but gave him up for us all, how will he not also with him graciously give us all things? 33 Who shall bring any charge against God's elect? It is God who justifies. 34 Who is to condemn? Christ Jesus is the one who diedmore than that, who was raisedwho is at the right hand of God, who indeed is interceding for us. 35 Who shall separate us from the love of Christ?
The Holy Bible: English Standard Version (Wheaton, IL: Crossway Bibles, 2016), Ro 8:3135.
Who is us? This is the key question. WHO IS US?
It is who he was just immediately talking about in verses 28-30 that God is working to redeem. He confirms that in verse 33. Why can no one bring a charge against God's elect? Because he justified them as they are in Christ and his righteousness, not ours, but his righteousness is imputed to us. He did that, not us. Who can condemn this person now? There is no condemnation for those in Christ Jesus. Us is not all of humanity, it is those who God FOREKNEW and PREDESTINED. There is no ambiguity in this text. It is continuous train of thought by Paul and these are not separate passages in separate parts of the bible.
Ok, maybe you are tired of Romans 8. Look at what Paul says in Ephesians 1.
Quote:
Spiritual Blessings in Christ
3 Blessed be the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, who has blessed us in Christ with every spiritual blessing in the heavenly places, 4 even as he chose us in him before the foundation of the world, that we should be holy and blameless before him. In love 5 he predestined us for adoption to himself as sons through Jesus Christ, according to the purpose of his will, 6 to the praise of his glorious grace, with which he has blessed us in the Beloved. 7 In him we have redemption through his blood, the forgiveness of our trespasses, according to the riches of his grace, 8 which he lavished upon us, in all wisdom and insight 9 making known to us the mystery of his will, according to his purpose, which he set forth in Christ 10 as a plan for the fullness of time, to unite all things in him, things in heaven and things on earth.
11 In him we have obtained an inheritance, having been predestined according to the purpose of him who works all things according to the counsel of his will, 12 so that we who were the first to hope in Christ might be to the praise of his glory. 13 In him you also, when you heard the word of truth, the gospel of your salvation, and believed in him, were sealed with the promised Holy Spirit, 14 who is the guarantee of our inheritance until we acquire possession of it, to the praise of his glory.
The Holy Bible: English Standard Version (Wheaton, IL: Crossway Bibles, 2016), Eph 1:314.
The same language is being used and its being articulated in the clearest of grammar. Notice how Paul clearly defines who the "us" is and who the "Him" is. Once again, WHO IS US?
Taken directly from the text: It is those He chose before the world existed, to become righteous, as He predestined to adoption as Sons of Christ, to receive His Grace according to His will for His Glory.
Because of this, the "Us" now has an inheritance that was also predestined because He works all things according to His Will. (he is the creator).
Paul could not be any more clear in this text just as he was in Romans.
What does the apostle John say?
Quote:
The reason the Son of God appeared was to destroy the works of the devil. 9 No one born of God makes a practice of sinning, for God's seed abides in him; and he cannot keep on sinning, because he has been born of God.
The Holy Bible: English Standard Version (Wheaton, IL: Crossway Bibles, 2016), 1 Jn 3:89.
Who is Born of God? Is it all of us? Are these not the same people Paul is referring to? John is talking about the sanctification, through the Holy Spirit, of those God called.
He reiterates in His Gospel.
Quote:
For sin will have no dominion over you, since you are not under law but under grace.
The Holy Bible: English Standard Version (Wheaton, IL: Crossway Bibles, 2016), Ro 6:14.
Although we are still sinners, we are no longer slaves to sin, but slaves to righteousness (Romans 6 15-23).
What does Jesus say?
Who provides the loaves? Did they not ask Him, "what must we do, to be doing the works of God?". He says, you must believe in the one He sent (have faith, not works). In verse 35, Jesus says "whoever comes to me". Who are those people?Quote:
"Truly, truly, I say to you, you are seeking me, not because you saw signs, but because you ate your fill of the loaves. 27 Do not work for the food that perishes, but for the food that endures to eternal life, which the Son of Man will give to you. For on him God the Father has set his seal." 28 Then they said to him, "What must we do, to be doing the works of God?" 29 Jesus answered them, "This is the work of God, that you believe in him whom he has sent." 30 So they said to him, "Then what sign do you do, that we may see and believe you? What work do you perform? 31 Our fathers ate the manna in the wilderness; as it is written, 'He gave them bread from heaven to eat.' " 32 Jesus then said to them, "Truly, truly, I say to you, it was not Moses who gave you the bread from heaven, but my Father gives you the true bread from heaven. 33 For the bread of God is he who comes down from heaven and gives life to the world." 34 They said to him, "Sir, give us this bread always."
35 Jesus said to them, "I am the bread of life; whoever comes to me shall not hunger, and whoever believes in me shall never thirst. 36 But I said to you that you have seen me and yet do not believe. 37 All that the Father gives me will come to me, and whoever comes to me I will never cast out. 38 For I have come down from heaven, not to do my own will but the will of him who sent me. 39 And this is the will of him who sent me, that I should lose nothing of all that he has given me, but raise it up on the last day. 40 For this is the will of my Father, that everyone who looks on the Son and believes in him should have eternal life, and I will raise him up on the last day."
The Holy Bible: English Standard Version (Wheaton, IL: Crossway Bibles, 2016), Jn 6:2640.
He defines that in verse 37. "All that the Father gives to me". Those He FOREKNEW and PREDESTINED.
What will those people get? They are glorified (Romans 8).
Now we've come full circle.
Who are those that are called? Those that love God (Romans 8).
God is not a monster. He is going to save His people that love Him because God alone is sovereign and he KNOWS His people.
Again, the promise is taking verses out of context to proof-text a theological model.
Romans is not a theological treatise on salvation, it is a pastoral epistle to a community. You only need to look a few verses before the passage to run into an immediate challenge... if what you are saying is true, why does St Paul say just before what you quoted "if you live according to the flesh you will die, but if by the Spirit you put to death the deeds of the body, you will live."
After going on a long explanation of the mystery of God's plan to save all mankind, to graft the Gentiles in from the scattered northern Tribes, and thus save all mankind AND all Israel, St Paul begins a conclusion "I appeal to you therefore, brothers, by the mercies of God, to present your bodies as a living sacrifice, holy and acceptable to God, which is your spiritual worship." This leads into a long pastoral list of things to do, how to live. The back half of Romans is how to live your life, the first half is the why. Why If? Why appeal? You can't pull three sentences out of it and take them into a vacuum. Your reading is incongruous with the whole.
But to your question based on the context, the "us all" who God gave His Son for is all mankind, the world. Why do I say this? Because just previously, St Paul explains that while we were weak, while we were still sinners, while we were enemies, while we were ungodly -- at just the right time -- Christ died for "us". Who was "us" then? The weak, the sinners, the enemies, the ungodly. You tell me who is excluded from that group? Isn't that all men?
"Christ Jesus came into the world to save sinners" - this is a trustworthy saying, as St Paul says. Didn't the Lord say "I came not to call the righteous, but sinners"? Isn't it true that this very fact is how "God proves His love for us"? Who is us? Those who were "dead in trespasses and in sins".
The Lord says Himself to Nicodemus - "the Son of Man must be be lifted up, that whoever believes in Him may have eternal life. For God so loved the world, that He gave his only Son, that whoever believes in Him should not perish but have eternal life. For God did not send His Son into the world to condemn the world, but in order that the world might be saved through Him."
And - back to St Paul - Isn't it also written that the Living God is "the savior of all mankind, especially of those who believe"? Doesn't St Paul say God our Savior is the one "who desires all people to be saved and to come to the knowledge of the truth"?
How then can you advocate that when all were sinners, He loved only some? Doesn't the Lord say "For I have no pleasure in the death of anyone"? And again "I take no pleasure in the death of the wicked, but rather that the wicked should turn from their ways and live. Turn! Turn from your evil ways! For why should you die?" Doesn't St Peter preach to sinners - "Repent, then, and turn back, so that your sins may be wiped away!" Doesn't he write to us that the Lord is patient, "He does not want anyone to be destroyed, but wants everyone to repent"?
So which sinners does God love, and which does He not? Who is not "anyone" or "everyone" and on what basis? Back to my original question - what do the scriptures say about the judgment? What separates the sheep from the goats?
Isn't it simpler to accept the words of the Lord? "I told you that you would die in your sins, for unless you have faith that I Am, you will die in your sins." Isn't that exactly what St Paul teaches when he says "you were also raised with Him through faith in the powerful working of God"?
Christ Jesus is the lover of Mankind.
Romans is not a theological treatise on salvation, it is a pastoral epistle to a community. You only need to look a few verses before the passage to run into an immediate challenge... if what you are saying is true, why does St Paul say just before what you quoted "if you live according to the flesh you will die, but if by the Spirit you put to death the deeds of the body, you will live."
After going on a long explanation of the mystery of God's plan to save all mankind, to graft the Gentiles in from the scattered northern Tribes, and thus save all mankind AND all Israel, St Paul begins a conclusion "I appeal to you therefore, brothers, by the mercies of God, to present your bodies as a living sacrifice, holy and acceptable to God, which is your spiritual worship." This leads into a long pastoral list of things to do, how to live. The back half of Romans is how to live your life, the first half is the why. Why If? Why appeal? You can't pull three sentences out of it and take them into a vacuum. Your reading is incongruous with the whole.
But to your question based on the context, the "us all" who God gave His Son for is all mankind, the world. Why do I say this? Because just previously, St Paul explains that while we were weak, while we were still sinners, while we were enemies, while we were ungodly -- at just the right time -- Christ died for "us". Who was "us" then? The weak, the sinners, the enemies, the ungodly. You tell me who is excluded from that group? Isn't that all men?
"Christ Jesus came into the world to save sinners" - this is a trustworthy saying, as St Paul says. Didn't the Lord say "I came not to call the righteous, but sinners"? Isn't it true that this very fact is how "God proves His love for us"? Who is us? Those who were "dead in trespasses and in sins".
The Lord says Himself to Nicodemus - "the Son of Man must be be lifted up, that whoever believes in Him may have eternal life. For God so loved the world, that He gave his only Son, that whoever believes in Him should not perish but have eternal life. For God did not send His Son into the world to condemn the world, but in order that the world might be saved through Him."
And - back to St Paul - Isn't it also written that the Living God is "the savior of all mankind, especially of those who believe"? Doesn't St Paul say God our Savior is the one "who desires all people to be saved and to come to the knowledge of the truth"?
How then can you advocate that when all were sinners, He loved only some? Doesn't the Lord say "For I have no pleasure in the death of anyone"? And again "I take no pleasure in the death of the wicked, but rather that the wicked should turn from their ways and live. Turn! Turn from your evil ways! For why should you die?" Doesn't St Peter preach to sinners - "Repent, then, and turn back, so that your sins may be wiped away!" Doesn't he write to us that the Lord is patient, "He does not want anyone to be destroyed, but wants everyone to repent"?
So which sinners does God love, and which does He not? Who is not "anyone" or "everyone" and on what basis? Back to my original question - what do the scriptures say about the judgment? What separates the sheep from the goats?
Isn't it simpler to accept the words of the Lord? "I told you that you would die in your sins, for unless you have faith that I Am, you will die in your sins." Isn't that exactly what St Paul teaches when he says "you were also raised with Him through faith in the powerful working of God"?
Christ Jesus is the lover of Mankind.
There is a general call for all to obey the Gospel.
And there is an effectual call for the elect.
And there is an effectual call for the elect.
Well stated.Zobel said:
Again, the promise is taking verses out of context to proof-text a theological model.
Romans is not a theological treatise on salvation, it is a pastoral epistle to a community. You only need to look a few verses before the passage to run into an immediate challenge... if what you are saying is true, why does St Paul say just before what you quoted "if you live according to the flesh you will die, but if by the Spirit you put to death the deeds of the body, you will live."
After going on a long explanation of the mystery of God's plan to save all mankind, to graft the Gentiles in from the scattered northern Tribes, and thus save all mankind AND all Israel, St Paul begins a conclusion "I appeal to you therefore, brothers, by the mercies of God, to present your bodies as a living sacrifice, holy and acceptable to God, which is your spiritual worship." This leads into a long pastoral list of things to do, how to live. The back half of Romans is how to live your life, the first half is the why. Why If? Why appeal? You can't pull three sentences out of it and take them into a vacuum. Your reading is incongruous with the whole.
But to your question based on the context, the "us all" who God gave His Son for is all mankind, the world. Why do I say this? Because just previously, St Paul explains that while we were weak, while we were still sinners, while we were enemies, while we were ungodly -- at just the right time -- Christ died for "us". Who was "us" then? The weak, the sinners, the enemies, the ungodly. You tell me who is excluded from that group? Isn't that all men?
"Christ Jesus came into the world to save sinners" - this is a trustworthy saying, as St Paul says. Didn't the Lord say "I came not to call the righteous, but sinners"? Isn't it true that this very fact is how "God proves His love for us"? Who is us? Those who were "dead in trespasses and in sins".
The Lord says Himself to Nicodemus - "the Son of Man must be be lifted up, that whoever believes in Him may have eternal life. For God so loved the world, that He gave his only Son, that whoever believes in Him should not perish but have eternal life. For God did not send His Son into the world to condemn the world, but in order that the world might be saved through Him."
And - back to St Paul - Isn't it also written that the Living God is "the savior of all mankind, especially of those who believe"? Doesn't St Paul say God our Savior is the one "who desires all people to be saved and to come to the knowledge of the truth"?
How then can you advocate that when all were sinners, He loved only some? Doesn't the Lord say "For I have no pleasure in the death of anyone"? And again "I take no pleasure in the death of the wicked, but rather that the wicked should turn from their ways and live. Turn! Turn from your evil ways! For why should you die?" Doesn't St Peter preach to sinners - "Repent, then, and turn back, so that your sins may be wiped away!" Doesn't he write to us that the Lord is patient, "He does not want anyone to be destroyed, but wants everyone to repent"?
So which sinners does God love, and which does He not? Who is not "anyone" or "everyone" and on what basis? Back to my original question - what do the scriptures say about the judgment? What separates the sheep from the goats?
Isn't it simpler to accept the words of the Lord? "I told you that you would die in your sins, for unless you have faith that I Am, you will die in your sins." Isn't that exactly what St Paul teaches when he says "you were also raised with Him through faith in the powerful working of God"?
Christ Jesus is the lover of Mankind.
Romans is a message of the Gospel. I'm not following your argument here. That verse is a statement supporting the first verse of the chapter "There is therefore now no condemnation for those who are in Christ Jesus". Who are in Christ Jesus? He explains within the context of the same passage and chapter (verses 28-30). You just criticized me for taking verses out of context for proof text but its literally the first thing you did.Quote:
Romans is not a theological treatise on salvation, it is a pastoral epistle to a community. You only need to look a few verses before the passage to run into an immediate challenge... if what you are saying is true, why does St Paul say just before what you quoted "if you live according to the flesh you will die, but if by the Spirit you put to death the deeds of the body, you will live."
You are asking about the purpose of sanctification. Are we not supposed to be transformed by the renewing of our minds to test and discern what is God's will? We can only do that through the work of the Holy Spirit. In your theology or mine, God still wants us to bear fruit to build up the body of the Church. That is the purpose of the appeal. I'm not seeing how this refutes anything or proves any incongruity in my position. God uses his saints to bring other saints into the fold.Quote:
After going on a long explanation of the mystery of God's plan to save all mankind, to graft the Gentiles in from the scattered northern Tribes, and thus save all mankind AND all Israel, St Paul begins a conclusion "I appeal to you therefore, brothers, by the mercies of God, to present your bodies as a living sacrifice, holy and acceptable to God, which is your spiritual worship." This leads into a long pastoral list of things to do, how to live. The back half of Romans is how to live your life, the first half is the why. Why If? Why appeal? You can't pull three sentences out of it and take them into a vacuum. Your reading is incongruous with the whole.
Quote:
But to your question based on the context, the "us all" who God gave His Son for is all mankind, the world. Why do I say this? Because just previously, St Paul explains that while we were weak, while we were still sinners, while we were enemies, while we were ungodly -- at just the right time -- Christ died for "us". Who was "us" then? The weak, the sinners, the enemies, the ungodly. You tell me who is excluded from that group? Isn't that all men?
I don't understand how you keep accusing me of taking things out of context.
You are referring to Romans 5.
Here's the passage below. Every verse before verse 8 (the one you are referencing) is explicitly talking about believers. Paul's epistle is being addressed to a church. But for some reason you would have me believe in verse 8, he is all of a sudden talking about all of mankind every preceding and proceeding sentence is clearly referring to believers?
Therefore, since we have been justified by faith, we[a] have peace with God through our Lord Jesus Christ. 2 Through him we have also obtained access by faith[b] into this grace in which we stand, and we[c] rejoice[d] in hope of the glory of God. 3 Not only that, but we rejoice in our sufferings, knowing that suffering produces endurance, 4 and endurance produces character, and character produces hope, 5 and hope does not put us to shame, because God's love has been poured into our hearts through the Holy Spirit who has been given to us.
6 For while we were still weak, at the right time Christ died for the ungodly. 7 For one will scarcely die for a righteous personthough perhaps for a good person one would dare even to die 8 but God shows his love for us in that while we were still sinners, Christ died for us. 9 Since, therefore, we have now been justified by his blood, much more shall we be saved by him from the wrath of God. 10 For if while we were enemies we were reconciled to God by the death of his Son, much more, now that we are reconciled, shall we be saved by his life. 11 More than that, we also rejoice in God through our Lord Jesus Christ, through whom we have now received reconciliation.
You of all people should know what Luke 5:32 is referring to.Quote:
"Christ Jesus came into the world to save sinners" - this is a trustworthy saying, as St Paul says. Didn't the Lord say "I came not to call the righteous, but sinners"? Isn't it true that this very fact is how "God proves His love for us"? Who is us? Those who were "dead in trespasses and in sins".
Universal versus limited atonement again? This verse has been refuted ad nauseum in reference to Calvinism. The world doesn't mean "all mankind" in this verse. In fact, the word world when used in the writings of John almost rarely refers to "all mankind". Just look at verse 17 and try to use the words "all mankind" in place of world.Quote:
The Lord says Himself to Nicodemus - "the Son of Man must be be lifted up, that whoever believes in Him may have eternal life. For God so loved the world, that He gave his only Son, that whoever believes in Him should not perish but have eternal life. For God did not send His Son into the world to condemn the world, but in order that the world might be saved through Him."
However, in John 17:9 where the correct interpretation of world is all mankind, He says:
9 I am praying for them. I am not praying for the world but for those whom you have given me, for they are yours.
Seems pretty clear Jesus is here for his sheep, those given to Him by the Father.
Moreover, the Greek transliteration pretty much soundly shows that the more accurate reading is "all the believing ones" and not "whoever" which isn't a word in the Greek.
"For Jacob he loved, but Esau he hated"Quote:
How then can you advocate that when all were sinners, He loved only some?
39 And this is the will of him who sent me, that I should lose nothing of all that he has given me, but raise it up on the last day. 40 For this is the will of my Father, that everyone who looks on the Son and believes in him should have eternal life, and I will raise him up on the last day."....Quote:
So which sinners does God love, and which does He not? Who is not "anyone" or "everyone" and on what basis? Back to my original question - what do the scriptures say about the judgment? What separates the sheep from the goats?
Isn't it simpler to accept the words of the Lord? "I told you that you would die in your sins, for unless you have faith that I Am, you will die in your sins." Isn't that exactly what St Paul teaches when he says "you were also raised with Him through faith in the powerful working of God"?
Christ Jesus is the lover of Mankind.
44 No one can come to me unless the Father who sent me draws him. And I will raise him up on the last day.
The Holy Bible: English Standard Version (Wheaton, IL: Crossway Bibles, 2016), Jn 6:44.
Quote:
Romans is a message of the Gospel. I'm not following your argument here
St Paul didn't sit down an write a treatise about salvation. Those existed in the ancient world, well before St Paul's time. If he did, it would have been titled "On Salvation" or "Contra free will" or whatever. He wrote a letter to the church in Rome, to give them pastoral guidance on an issue. That is important... when you're approaching the text, you need to approach it that way, not as if it were an exact exposition of the mechanism of salvation.
The chapter and verse notes weren't added until 1500 years after St Paul wrote it. They are irrelevant beyond useful ways to call specific portions of the text.Quote:
That verse is a statement supporting the first verse of the chapter
But I didn't though. I looked a little before that, and a little after, to understand where that verse fit in the context of the entire epistle. Again, this isn't a systematic theology. He was writing with a purpose. St Paul has a habit of giving a kind of abstract or executive summary in the opening words of his letters. This one begins with "Through Him and on behalf of His name, we received grace and apostleship to call all those among the Gentiles to the obedience that comes from faith. And you also are among those who are called to belong to Jesus Christ." That's a pretty good summary of the whole letter, and every piece of the letter is within that frame. That's what it is about, and that's where every exegesis should begin.Quote:
You just criticized me for taking verses out of context for proof text but its literally the first thing you did.
And you're driving a wedge between sanctification or justification and salvation, which is not found in the scriptures. Justification and salvation are fundamentally linked, both in the scriptures in general and in the writings of St Paul.Quote:
You are asking about the purpose of sanctification.
Quote:
But for some reason you would have me believe in verse 8, he is all of a sudden talking about all of mankind every preceding and proceeding sentence is clearly referring to believers?
The verse I quoted as past tense - so again, when Christ died for us, we were not believers, or faithful, or good.
I'm pretty sure it means what it said. Christ came to the world to save sinners. St Paul echoes it.Quote:
You of all people should know what Luke 5:32 is referring to.
Of course. Christ atoned for the sins of the whole world. St John the Forerunner says He is the lamb who takes away the sin of the world. St John says it explicitly: "He is the propitiation for our sins, and not for ours only but also for the sins of the whole world." And again, "love consists in this: not that we loved God, but that He loved us and sent His Son as the atoning sacrifice for our sins."Quote:
Universal versus limited atonement again?
I think you should read the Day of Atonement ritual, if you're going to talk about atonement. Christ's once-for-all atonement is understood by St Paul to be the reality behind the shadow of the former. St Matthew's gospel draws it out: Christ is both goats. St John the Forerunner's mixed metaphor above shows Him to be the paschal lamb and the goat that takes away sin; yet He is also the clean goat who is sacrificed. In this we see that Christ takes on sin, and purifies it in His holiness. This is the gospel.
That there is universal atonement, and universal resurrection, does not mean universal salvation. In the end, all will be raised to judgment; some to eternal life, some to condemnation. This is also the gospel.
I addressed this earlier in this thread. This verse isn't about people, but about nations - Israel and Edom. If your theology is pinned on St Paul misunderstanding Malachi, you should probably double check your work. You can cross check it with Obadiah 1. It is not a statement of fact that God hated Esau the person. Esau received his inheritance, and his descendants were called brothers to Israel (cf Deuteronomy 23:7)Quote:
"For Jacob he loved, but Esau he hated"
You haven't answered.
We were all dead in sin and trespasses, enemies of God when He died for us. So your idea that Christ died for some group of believers is wrong. Christ died for sinners.
Doesn't He say He takes no pleasure in anyone's death? Doesn't St Peter say He wants everyone to repent? Doesn't St Paul say He wants all mankind to be saved? And that He is the savior of all mankind?
So - which sinners did He love and which sinners did He not, and on what basis? Which part of "all mankind" that He expressly desires repentance and salvation for are you going to say He did not die for?
Calvinism is funny to me. For an outside perspective some of the absurdities of it aren't what Christians focus on in these debates, perhaps it's harder for them to see from an inside view.
In Christian vs Christian debates it usually comes down to a high value in free will and considering hell monstrous if the person plays no role in ending up there as well as the miscellaneous scripture verses you want to argue the meaning or context of.
Non believers (as well as no small shortage of Christians on this board) think hell is monstrous regardless. And most Christian teaching ends up with a sort of heaven that doesn't seem to have much if any room for free will, so it's hardly a big deal losing it here on earth.
My hiccup with Calvinism is if god is going to pick and choose his elect and drive their behavior and beliefs by hell or high water why is he so bad at it? Why are his elect not operating at with a moral compass and steadfastness that blows others away or at the very least is consistent Among each other?
One way or another Calvinist seem to have to make sense of a mankind whose behaviors align rather nicely with a independent will. Neither totally depraved or totally remade.
In Christian vs Christian debates it usually comes down to a high value in free will and considering hell monstrous if the person plays no role in ending up there as well as the miscellaneous scripture verses you want to argue the meaning or context of.
Non believers (as well as no small shortage of Christians on this board) think hell is monstrous regardless. And most Christian teaching ends up with a sort of heaven that doesn't seem to have much if any room for free will, so it's hardly a big deal losing it here on earth.
My hiccup with Calvinism is if god is going to pick and choose his elect and drive their behavior and beliefs by hell or high water why is he so bad at it? Why are his elect not operating at with a moral compass and steadfastness that blows others away or at the very least is consistent Among each other?
One way or another Calvinist seem to have to make sense of a mankind whose behaviors align rather nicely with a independent will. Neither totally depraved or totally remade.
Acts 13:48 (ESV)
48 "And when the Gentiles heard this, they began rejoicing and glorifying the word of the Lord, and as many as were appointed to eternal life believed."
It's equal to my John 3:16 verse. The participle isn't whosoever but "the ones who are believing or the believing ones. And "so"
means "in this manner" not extent.
48 "And when the Gentiles heard this, they began rejoicing and glorifying the word of the Lord, and as many as were appointed to eternal life believed."
It's equal to my John 3:16 verse. The participle isn't whosoever but "the ones who are believing or the believing ones. And "so"
means "in this manner" not extent.
I think we've both stated our positions on the other topics so I won't rehash the same arguments. I will address this one however.Zobel said:Of course. Christ atoned for the sins of the whole world. St John the Forerunner says He is the lamb who takes away the sin of the world. St John says it explicitly: "He is the propitiation for our sins, and not for ours only but also for the sins of the whole world." And again, "love consists in this: not that we loved God, but that He loved us and sent His Son as the atoning sacrifice for our sins."Quote:
Universal versus limited atonement again?
I think you should read the Day of Atonement ritual, if you're going to talk about atonement. Christ's once-for-all atonement is understood by St Paul to be the reality behind the shadow of the former. St Matthew's gospel draws it out: Christ is both goats. St John the Forerunner's mixed metaphor above shows Him to be the paschal lamb and the goat that takes away sin; yet He is also the clean goat who is sacrificed. In this we see that Christ takes on sin, and purifies it in His holiness. This is the gospel.
That there is universal atonement, and universal resurrection, does not mean universal salvation. In the end, all will be raised to judgment; some to eternal life, some to condemnation. This is also the gospel.
First, you quote 1 John 2:2 above. The meaning of this verse is defined in John 11:51-52. Its easy to look back on these verses two thousand years later and forget the context of the audience that's being addressed in the epistles.
1 John 2:2 is in reference to the prophecy, and the promise being extended the gentiles. The way you're interpreting these ambiguous verses (that you claim are explicit) would be no different than saying "Bless all nations" means that all people of the earth will be blessed by Christ. We know this to be factually untrue. Believers are given eternal life.Quote:
51 He did not say this of his own accord, but being high priest that year he prophesied that Jesus would die for the nation, 52 and not for the nation only (their sins), but also to gather into one the children of God who are scattered abroad (the world).
As for John 3:16.
16 "For God so loved the world, that he gave his only Son, that whoever believes in him should not perish but have eternal life.
The Holy Bible: English Standard Version (Wheaton, IL: Crossway Bibles, 2016), Jn 3:16.
Here's the Greek.
Houtos gar egapesen ho Theos ton kosmon, hoste ton Huion ton monogene edoken, hina pas ho pisteuon eis auton me apoletai all eche zoen aionion.
For God so loved the world, that he gave his only Son, so that the (or everyone believing) believing ones into him should not perish but have eternal life.
The second half of the verse is clearly talking about certain kinds of people, not all people. The world world cannot mean all people. The way you are trying to interpret the verse would read like this.
For God so loved all people, that he gave his only Son, so that only certain people believing in him would have eternal life.
Its a contradiction and a logical fallacy. You mention the Day of Atonement which is to atone for the sins of the people of Israel and to also cleanse the tabernacle itself. Who is the new tabernacle? Are people of Israel all people?
The word world being used here, kosmos, is used throughout the writing of John and has no less than 10 different meanings. Did you not quote John's first epistle above?
Do not love the world! What is John talking about here? He is talking about unrepentant sinners, people who live by the flesh, all the desires and objects of those people.Quote:
Do Not Love the World
15 Do not love the world or the things in the world. If anyone loves the world, the love of the Father is not in him. 16 For all that is in the worldthe desires of the flesh and the desires of the eyes and pride of lifeis not from the Father but is from the world. 17 And the world is passing away along with its desires, but whoever does the will of God abides forever.
The Holy Bible: English Standard Version (Wheaton, IL: Crossway Bibles, 2016), 1 Jn 2:1518.
Why? Because anyone who does, the love of the Father is not in him. How many times in the Gospel of John does Jesus reiterate that the Father is in him and he is in the Father? But you now want the Word of God to contradict itself?
God doesn't love those things, he condemns them.
So what is the word world referring to in John 3:16? Clearly its not talking about people, but creation. The same author goes on to talk in his Apocalypse about God redeeming not just believers, but creation which is also cursed.
I'm not arguing with your interpretation of Jacob and Esau. The point is that all throughout the Old Testament, God is not dealing with all people, but his people, a chosen nation. The concept of universalism is unfounded. Christ's sacrificial atonement was so that believers could ultimately be justified before God and into his grace. That only happens for believers, not all people. Or else, why are all not justified then if their sins are atoned for?
As Jesus himself says, "I lay down my life for my sheep". All people are not his sheep, only believers.
This is confirmed in the same Gospel from John, chapter 10.
25 Jesus answered them, "I told you, and you do not believe. The works that I do in my Father's name bear witness about me, 26 but you do not believe because you are not among my sheep. 27 My sheep hear my voice, and I know them, and they follow me.
So why did God create these evil sinners that He will never love in the first place? Why do they exist?
No material on this site is intended to be a substitute for professional medical advice, diagnosis or treatment. See full Medical Disclaimer.
Further proof the atonement was for believer's sins.
John 17, The High Priestly Prayer of Jesus.
15 I do not ask that you take them out of the world, but that you keep them from the evil one. 16 They are not of the world, just as I am not of the world. 17 Sanctify them in the truth; your word is truth. 18 As you sent me into the world, so I have sent them into the world. 19 And for their sake I consecrate myself, that they also may be sanctified in truth.
Believers are not of the world, but of the Spirit. In verse 19, who does Jesus say he consecrates himself for?
John 17, The High Priestly Prayer of Jesus.
15 I do not ask that you take them out of the world, but that you keep them from the evil one. 16 They are not of the world, just as I am not of the world. 17 Sanctify them in the truth; your word is truth. 18 As you sent me into the world, so I have sent them into the world. 19 And for their sake I consecrate myself, that they also may be sanctified in truth.
Believers are not of the world, but of the Spirit. In verse 19, who does Jesus say he consecrates himself for?
That's no different than asking why is their evil? Why does sin exist? Why do bad things happen in this world? Why does God let bad things happen in this world?ramblin_ag02 said:
So why did God create these evil sinners that He will never love in the first place? Why do they exist?
Those are loaded questions and beyond the scope of limited vs universal atonement.
I disagree. According to your theology, people have no free will. God is sovereign and has knowledge and control of all things and people. Therefore, every evil person that exists was created that way by God intentionally. Under my theology, God tolerates evil men because He loves them and wants them to repent and become good. Under your theology, evil men are created and sustained by God to be that way. So why?
To expound on your initial question to my question: in your theology, sin and evil exist because God created and sustains them. There is no other answer. God is the only being in the universe with agency, will, and power. Everything that happens is a direct result of those three things. So God is directly responsible for everything.
To expound on your initial question to my question: in your theology, sin and evil exist because God created and sustains them. There is no other answer. God is the only being in the universe with agency, will, and power. Everything that happens is a direct result of those three things. So God is directly responsible for everything.
No material on this site is intended to be a substitute for professional medical advice, diagnosis or treatment. See full Medical Disclaimer.
God did not create evil men. God created man, and man became evil through their actions. Your premise is flawed.ramblin_ag02 said:
I disagree. According to your theology, people have no free will. God is sovereign and has knowledge and control of all things and people. Therefore, every evil person that exists was created that way by God intentionally. Under my theology, God tolerates evil men because He loves them and wants them to repent and become good. Under your theology, evil men are created and sustained by God to be that way. So why?
To expound on your initial question to my question: in your theology, sin and evil exist because God created and sustains them. There is no other answer. God is the only being in the universe with agency, will, and power. Everything that happens is a direct result of those three things. So God is directly responsible for everything.
Men became evil through their actions even though they have no free will? If man has no free will then how did man become evil?Bob_Ag said:God did not create evil men. God created man, and man became evil through their actions. Your premise is flawed.ramblin_ag02 said:
I disagree. According to your theology, people have no free will. God is sovereign and has knowledge and control of all things and people. Therefore, every evil person that exists was created that way by God intentionally. Under my theology, God tolerates evil men because He loves them and wants them to repent and become good. Under your theology, evil men are created and sustained by God to be that way. So why?
To expound on your initial question to my question: in your theology, sin and evil exist because God created and sustains them. There is no other answer. God is the only being in the universe with agency, will, and power. Everything that happens is a direct result of those three things. So God is directly responsible for everything.
No material on this site is intended to be a substitute for professional medical advice, diagnosis or treatment. See full Medical Disclaimer.
I'm responding to this post. I didn't have to, but I chose to. Seems like I have free will to me.ramblin_ag02 said:Men became evil through their actions even though they have no free will? If man has no free will then how did man become evil?Bob_Ag said:God did not create evil men. God created man, and man became evil through their actions. Your premise is flawed.ramblin_ag02 said:
I disagree. According to your theology, people have no free will. God is sovereign and has knowledge and control of all things and people. Therefore, every evil person that exists was created that way by God intentionally. Under my theology, God tolerates evil men because He loves them and wants them to repent and become good. Under your theology, evil men are created and sustained by God to be that way. So why?
To expound on your initial question to my question: in your theology, sin and evil exist because God created and sustains them. There is no other answer. God is the only being in the universe with agency, will, and power. Everything that happens is a direct result of those three things. So God is directly responsible for everything.
I've just been auditing this thread, but this is counter to the whole Calvinistic argument presented...Bob_Ag said:God did not create evil men. God created man, and man became evil through their actions. Your premise is flawed.ramblin_ag02 said:
I disagree. According to your theology, people have no free will. God is sovereign and has knowledge and control of all things and people. Therefore, every evil person that exists was created that way by God intentionally. Under my theology, God tolerates evil men because He loves them and wants them to repent and become good. Under your theology, evil men are created and sustained by God to be that way. So why?
To expound on your initial question to my question: in your theology, sin and evil exist because God created and sustains them. There is no other answer. God is the only being in the universe with agency, will, and power. Everything that happens is a direct result of those three things. So God is directly responsible for everything.
So God isn't 100% sovereign over you?Bob_Ag said:I'm responding to this post. I didn't have to, but I chose to. Seems like I have free will to me.ramblin_ag02 said:Men became evil through their actions even though they have no free will? If man has no free will then how did man become evil?Bob_Ag said:God did not create evil men. God created man, and man became evil through their actions. Your premise is flawed.ramblin_ag02 said:
I disagree. According to your theology, people have no free will. God is sovereign and has knowledge and control of all things and people. Therefore, every evil person that exists was created that way by God intentionally. Under my theology, God tolerates evil men because He loves them and wants them to repent and become good. Under your theology, evil men are created and sustained by God to be that way. So why?
To expound on your initial question to my question: in your theology, sin and evil exist because God created and sustains them. There is no other answer. God is the only being in the universe with agency, will, and power. Everything that happens is a direct result of those three things. So God is directly responsible for everything.
No material on this site is intended to be a substitute for professional medical advice, diagnosis or treatment. See full Medical Disclaimer.
So God created evil men? Or did created men become evil?AggieRain said:I've just been auditing this thread, but this is counter to the whole Calvinistic argument presented...Bob_Ag said:God did not create evil men. God created man, and man became evil through their actions. Your premise is flawed.ramblin_ag02 said:
I disagree. According to your theology, people have no free will. God is sovereign and has knowledge and control of all things and people. Therefore, every evil person that exists was created that way by God intentionally. Under my theology, God tolerates evil men because He loves them and wants them to repent and become good. Under your theology, evil men are created and sustained by God to be that way. So why?
To expound on your initial question to my question: in your theology, sin and evil exist because God created and sustains them. There is no other answer. God is the only being in the universe with agency, will, and power. Everything that happens is a direct result of those three things. So God is directly responsible for everything.
Being sovereign means God has to make all my decisions for me?ramblin_ag02 said:So God isn't 100% sovereign over you?Bob_Ag said:I'm responding to this post. I didn't have to, but I chose to. Seems like I have free will to me.ramblin_ag02 said:Men became evil through their actions even though they have no free will? If man has no free will then how did man become evil?Bob_Ag said:God did not create evil men. God created man, and man became evil through their actions. Your premise is flawed.ramblin_ag02 said:
I disagree. According to your theology, people have no free will. God is sovereign and has knowledge and control of all things and people. Therefore, every evil person that exists was created that way by God intentionally. Under my theology, God tolerates evil men because He loves them and wants them to repent and become good. Under your theology, evil men are created and sustained by God to be that way. So why?
To expound on your initial question to my question: in your theology, sin and evil exist because God created and sustains them. There is no other answer. God is the only being in the universe with agency, will, and power. Everything that happens is a direct result of those three things. So God is directly responsible for everything.
Last try with the questions you are carefully avoiding. The rest is window dressing.
We were all dead in sin and trespasses, enemies of God when He died for us. So your idea that Christ died for some group of believers is wrong. Christ died for sinners.
Doesn't He say He takes no pleasure in anyone's death? Doesn't St Peter say He wants everyone to repent? Doesn't St Paul say He wants all mankind to be saved? And that He is the savior of all mankind? Doesn't St John said He was the propitiation for our sins, and not just ours but for the whole world?
So - which sinners did He love and which sinners did He not, and on what basis? Which part of "all mankind" that He expressly desires repentance and salvation for are you going to say He did not die for?
We were all dead in sin and trespasses, enemies of God when He died for us. So your idea that Christ died for some group of believers is wrong. Christ died for sinners.
Doesn't He say He takes no pleasure in anyone's death? Doesn't St Peter say He wants everyone to repent? Doesn't St Paul say He wants all mankind to be saved? And that He is the savior of all mankind? Doesn't St John said He was the propitiation for our sins, and not just ours but for the whole world?
So - which sinners did He love and which sinners did He not, and on what basis? Which part of "all mankind" that He expressly desires repentance and salvation for are you going to say He did not die for?
Imagine a judge was ruling over a case with his son who committed a crime. That's the sense in which God does not delight in the punishment of the wicked.
Yes. If you are making a decision, then He is less sovereign than otherwise. Any free will at all is a reduction in the absolute sovereignty of God. A God that makes all decisions at all times is more sovereign than a God that allows others to make decisions.Bob_Ag said:Being sovereign means God has to make all my decisions for me?ramblin_ag02 said:So God isn't 100% sovereign over you?Bob_Ag said:I'm responding to this post. I didn't have to, but I chose to. Seems like I have free will to me.ramblin_ag02 said:Men became evil through their actions even though they have no free will? If man has no free will then how did man become evil?Bob_Ag said:God did not create evil men. God created man, and man became evil through their actions. Your premise is flawed.ramblin_ag02 said:
I disagree. According to your theology, people have no free will. God is sovereign and has knowledge and control of all things and people. Therefore, every evil person that exists was created that way by God intentionally. Under my theology, God tolerates evil men because He loves them and wants them to repent and become good. Under your theology, evil men are created and sustained by God to be that way. So why?
To expound on your initial question to my question: in your theology, sin and evil exist because God created and sustains them. There is no other answer. God is the only being in the universe with agency, will, and power. Everything that happens is a direct result of those three things. So God is directly responsible for everything.
No material on this site is intended to be a substitute for professional medical advice, diagnosis or treatment. See full Medical Disclaimer.
More like, imagine an engineer that created a robot, gave it a gun, and programmed it to murder people. Then the engineer has to dismantle the robot and lament the evil it has done.TheGreatEscape said:
Imagine a judge was ruling over a case with his son who committed a crime. That's the sense in which God does not delight in the punishment of the wicked.
No material on this site is intended to be a substitute for professional medical advice, diagnosis or treatment. See full Medical Disclaimer.
Featured Stories
See All
Predictability leads to disappointment in A&M's 17-7 loss to Texas
by Olin Buchanan
27:34
4h ago
7.7k
21:58
3h ago
6.5k
Photo Gallery: No. 3 Texas 17, No. 20 Texas A&M 7
by Zoe Kelton
No. 20 Aggies finish Players Era with a 81-77 victory over Rutgers
by Luke Evangelist